Homecoming Should the ASM film series have stayed dark and grounded?

[MessiahDecoy123]

While ASM1 wasn't perfect was there potential for a solid trilogy had the tone of the series remained dark and grounded?

 

[Spider2099]

While ASM1 wasn't perfect was there potential for a solid trilogy had the tone of the series remained dark and grounded?

I think the film series could have gotten lighter in tone but I liked the more "serious" tone they were going for in TASM1. The second movie felt like a Saturday morning cartoon.

 

[Stormz96]

While IMO TASM was a better film than TASM2, I don't think 'grounded' really fits spiderman. I think a more comic booky spiderman would've kick serious butt if it was handled better. The problem for me ultimately was the tonal shifts. TASM2 was on pretty shaky and uncertain ground, and it can be seen in the film's execution. It lacked the confidence needed to fully embrace that 'comic bookyness' properly, and so for many people it felt odd and tonally off. At least that's my take on it.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

I agree with Stormz, it just needs to be balanced. Spider-Man scenes felt right, but then things got too dark and blah blah. TASM had the right tone for it's world while TASM2 had for Spider-Man, if that makes any sense.

 

[The Joker]

In hindsight yes. At least it would have maintained a consistency it started.

 

[Stormz96]

I agree with Stormz, it just needs to be balanced. Spider-Man scenes felt right, but then things got too dark and blah blah. TASM had the right tone for it's world while TASM2 had for Spider-Man, if that makes any sense.

that's what I'm thinking.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Also, TASM wasn't dark, not the tone. Just a more grounded Spider-Man. That's why I voted no.

 

[ImOctavius]

Nice question. While It's true that a Spider-Man film should be coloful and cheerful, I loved "The Amazing Spider-Man" and its tone.

 

[W/ Great Power]

The tone is the underlying backbone that a film relies on. If done ineffectively, the entire film can be off balance, regardless of how good elements such as writing are.

TASM1's tone supplemented the story that was being told. That's why I defend the first movie at least in regards to it being easy to identify a central story that was being delivered.

Similarly, TASM2's tone was just as jumbled as the movie was. The main complaint was that there were too many stories being told, and the tone of the film backed that up. Serious moments followed by cheese/comic relief/whatever you want to call it, and vice versa; not to mention, with the rest of the issues of the film being factored in. Where does that leave the audience? Not knowing how to feel - and that's exactly what happened.

Part of me even tries to give Sony the benefit of the doubt that they had something entirely different planned for TASM2, tone and all. The grounded feel of TASM1 is indicative of a new aura that the company was going for. However, anything and everything related to that was thrown out for the universe expansion (or whatever they were trying to do), and that was crystal clear in TASM2.

 

[spiderman2]

I voted no but that is because I loved asm2 and I don't know what people are talking about when they say the tone is all over the place because it is not.

 

[Urich Leeds]

I think so.

The first film suffered because you could tell, tonally, that it was changed and not what was intended.

And ASM2 was lacking darkness, and wouldve benefited from darker, grittier villains.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I think both films were crippled horribly by an uneven tone, which comes down to a lack of vision. Spider-Man is street, there should always be a level of grounded reality in how the character is portrayed. There should also be a dramatic sense of scale and wonder. I've said it before and I truly believe it, Spider-Man is possibly the hardest comic character to adapt on film because of the balance required in achieving both these elements. The humorous aspects of the character need to feel organic on film, not forced or over the top. There is a difference in writing the character on film as opposed to the comics or animated series. This new series failed in that regard.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

I think so.

The first film suffered because you could tell, tonally, that it was changed and not what was intended.

And ASM2 was lacking darkness, and wouldve benefited from darker, grittier villains.

Darker villains would've been cool. Electro was too campy for my taste. If Electro was instead a pawn villain created by OsCorp throughout the whole film, that had this relentless quality to him, that would've been awesome, while the main villain being Harry and indulge way more into the Osborn legacy/turning into Green Goblin.

 

[JOE]

It doesn't matter what tone they went for. Sony stepping in and demanding they shoehorn a bunch of their ideas screws up the movie no matter what.

 

[Spider2099]

I really wonder what TASM2 was supposed to be before Orci and Kurtzman came in. It was James Vanderbilt who wrote the first draft, right?

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I don't necessarily think dark and grounded is what a Spider-Man film needs to be successful, yet I found myself liking ASM. Still do. However I'm glad they lightened things up in ASM2, at least with the Spider-Man aspect--Spider-Man needs a good balance between light and dark, but they went overboard and pushed things too far--characters like Max and Dr Kafka are prime examples. They wouldn't fit into ASM. I'm probably in the minority on this one but I enjoyed the tonal shifting that was occurring in ASM2, imo, this made it feel more like a comic book however the shift from one movie to the next was a mistake.

 

[Spider2099]

I think they could have given TASM2 a lighter tone but kept the seriousness from the first movie. In other words, not have goofy characters and villains but still allow for the movie to feel big and colorful. It's weird but with so much happening in TASM2, nothing about the movie felt "epic." It was just a lot of stuff happening, that's all.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I think they could have given TASM2 a lighter tone but kept the seriousness from the first movie. In other words, not have goofy characters and villains but still allow for the movie to feel big and colorful. It's weird but with so much happening in TASM2, nothing about the movie felt "epic." It was just a lot of stuff happening, that's all.

I agree.

 

[Spooderman]

Because a half wolverine half goomba is so grounded.

 

[ThatSpiderGuy]

Well I didn't think TASM was all that dark at all, save for the fact that mostly everything occurred at night. Therefore I can't vote

 

[Frodo]

Its really not dark. You had a talking Lizard with a Welsh accent who wanted to turn the city into Lizard minions . It was grounded to an extent but really not that much more grounded than SM1 and SM2 were. In some ways i'd say that ASM 1 was a bit more fantastical because the villains in 1 and 2 could at least be somewhat realistic , i.e, you could believe Doc Ock and Goblin could exist because they were more grounded in science tech and serum/steroids. The mutant Lizard isn't all that gritty , grounded, or dark.

I think the difference is that ASM was more serious than SM1 and SM2 which I think is a better way to describe it than dark or grounded. The Raimi films were very much in the off beat Spirit of the early comics and the Hercules and Xenia tv shows. ASM was trying to go much more for a teen drama and somewhat Nolan like serious tone I think.

 

[Fincher]

Whatever you call the different between ASM and ASM2, I think they should have stuck with what they started. It isn't really being dark since parts of the sequel were plenty dark. They could have reined in the comedy some, but mainly it's about parts of ASM2 being too over-the-top or comedy happening where it shouldn't. Spider-Man making jokes is good, but him messing around with and distracting Aleksei while he's driving a big truck through the city streets and smashing into cars makes him seem horribly irresponsible, at the very least (he might be guilty of involuntary manslaughter to look at it), never mind that he was late for graduation and Gwen's speech while he was doing all that. Then not much later, we find out that he keeps breaking up with Gwen because he's so worried about the consequences. So is he reckless or not? There's no consistency there.

The Amazing Spider-Man is "grounded" not in terms of fantasy vs. reality so much as characterization. It favors people that seem real and relatively down to earth over hammy acting and grandiosity. ASM2 does that at times, but then other times it's having Rhino yell a lot and having Electro follow the Batman Forever school of mental illness, and they come across as caricatures.

 

[OriginalMiles]

"Dark"? "Grounded"? TASM?

More like... takes itself seriously while managing to keep the spirit of Spider-Man in an accurate way.

But yeah, they should've kept the tone for TASM2.

 

[ThatSpiderGuy]

"Dark"? "Grounded"? TASM?

More like... takes itself seriously while managing to keep the spirit of Spider-Man in an accurate way.

But yeah, they should've kept the tone for TASM2.

Yes, exactly. I thought TASM2 was completely fine, minus the cheesiness of Max XD

 

[Spider2099]

Yes, exactly. I thought TASM2 was completely fine, minus the cheesiness of Max XD

There's Max Dillon, Dr. Kafka, and Aleksei Sytsevich (the Rhino). Then there were just a bunch of silly moments overall, such as Electro "vomiting" electricity on Spider-Man. Talk about "embracing the spectacle."