Spideyfan93
Hayley Atwell I love you!
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2010
- Messages
- 5,511
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Really think the sequel will improve and enhance ASM, or just create more tension. Watching the Raimi film on TNT again and I notice everything is so much different.
Mind you, I grew up with the Raimi films so they are intensely close to my heart and soul. They bring nostalgia too so let me explain my point of view, without bias.
Spider-Man was a risk back in the day, so this was built as a stand alone film. The pace is fast for the most part and story telling structure-wise is standard. It's standard, but executed brilliantly. There is a lot of cheese, but that is the tone and it creates a sense of adventure. As a whole, it is one of the best CBMs and it touches on all emotions.
There is an array of iconic imagery, a memorable score by Elfman, and the villain is good too. Dafoe was great as Norman and GG, even though one can argue that GG was too cheesy or dumb. The only thing I'd say that doesn't hold up is the CGI, because in several scenes it looks like a PS2 game seriously.
Spider-Man 2002 is definitely more timeless, with the exception of the CGI which could definitely pull someone out of the experience in today's day and age.
ASM on the other hand, was built in mind that there would be 2 sequels proceeding it eventually. Many questions are unanswered, even seemingly simple ones that include the likes of Uncle Bens killer and the disappearance of Dr. Ratha. However, there is a lot of great qualities and aspects of this new film. The triangular(now dualistic) family aspect of Ben, May, and Peter is just as emotional as the original if not more so. The music is incredible and memorable. The cast for the most part, seems to light up the screen and bring more gravitas in comparison to the original cast with exceptions of course.
My gripes are that Dr. Connors being underdeveloped and having ridiculously swinging motivations that happen for convenience, as well as the editing. We never truly buy the fact of why Curt wants everyone to be just like him, powerful and stronger. And editing, in terms of story telling felt choppy. It's hard to explain but if you watch both films back to back, you can see which is smoother.
Overall, Raimi's Spidey is better but ASM is really good in it's own way. I understand why many think it wasn't good but I hate when people say it "sucked," because it didn't. Many great ideas were brought to light and the potential for the sequel is incredible. Like, on a TDK/Spider-Man 2 scale. And the sequel, depending on how it does, will either enhance or damage ASM more for audiences.
Time will only tell where ASM will be culturally but it definitely won't be on Raimi's Spidey's level. Raimi's Spidey did so much for cinema and pop culture. I could go on all night but stopping here for now...
Mind you, I grew up with the Raimi films so they are intensely close to my heart and soul. They bring nostalgia too so let me explain my point of view, without bias.
Spider-Man was a risk back in the day, so this was built as a stand alone film. The pace is fast for the most part and story telling structure-wise is standard. It's standard, but executed brilliantly. There is a lot of cheese, but that is the tone and it creates a sense of adventure. As a whole, it is one of the best CBMs and it touches on all emotions.
There is an array of iconic imagery, a memorable score by Elfman, and the villain is good too. Dafoe was great as Norman and GG, even though one can argue that GG was too cheesy or dumb. The only thing I'd say that doesn't hold up is the CGI, because in several scenes it looks like a PS2 game seriously.
Spider-Man 2002 is definitely more timeless, with the exception of the CGI which could definitely pull someone out of the experience in today's day and age.
ASM on the other hand, was built in mind that there would be 2 sequels proceeding it eventually. Many questions are unanswered, even seemingly simple ones that include the likes of Uncle Bens killer and the disappearance of Dr. Ratha. However, there is a lot of great qualities and aspects of this new film. The triangular(now dualistic) family aspect of Ben, May, and Peter is just as emotional as the original if not more so. The music is incredible and memorable. The cast for the most part, seems to light up the screen and bring more gravitas in comparison to the original cast with exceptions of course.
My gripes are that Dr. Connors being underdeveloped and having ridiculously swinging motivations that happen for convenience, as well as the editing. We never truly buy the fact of why Curt wants everyone to be just like him, powerful and stronger. And editing, in terms of story telling felt choppy. It's hard to explain but if you watch both films back to back, you can see which is smoother.
Overall, Raimi's Spidey is better but ASM is really good in it's own way. I understand why many think it wasn't good but I hate when people say it "sucked," because it didn't. Many great ideas were brought to light and the potential for the sequel is incredible. Like, on a TDK/Spider-Man 2 scale. And the sequel, depending on how it does, will either enhance or damage ASM more for audiences.
Time will only tell where ASM will be culturally but it definitely won't be on Raimi's Spidey's level. Raimi's Spidey did so much for cinema and pop culture. I could go on all night but stopping here for now...
