©KAW;20908501 said:
You can't even admit that the dance scene was cheesy, that's why you're blind to the film's mediocrity. It's no wonder why you think SM3 is awesome.
The dance scene is cheesy. I already said it whent on for too long, what part of that don't you understand?
No, what I don't want is the subject matters that should be taken seriously turning into nothing but unwanted cheese, that's how a movie like Batman & Robin was made. It's a sign that the director doesn't know what should be taken seriously and what should be light-hearted/humor within the context of the film.
LOL, you're actually comparing Batman & Robin to ifilms? You have every right to think that, but I can't tell you how many people disagree with you. Spider-Man get extrmely positive reviews, Spider-Man 2 got critical acclaim, and Spider-Man 3 got mixed reviews. Now, if you still don't get this, then clearly you're just being your usual self. Raimi threw some of his humour in there, what's wrong with that? He was acclaimed for Spider-Man 2 for knowing how to tell a great story while throwing in new ideas. Hell, he didn't even bring a lot of his usual attributues to the SPider-Man films in order to tell a good story.
When Peter Parker is engulfed by the symbiote, the last thing I'm thinking and want to see him doing is--turning into Fred Astaire or Jim Carrey in the movie THE MASK (that's unwanted cheese). Dancing like a chimp on Speed. I don't want to see the Daily Bugle talking about GREEN MEANIE and CHRISTMAS MEAT, after Green Goblin just killed several Oscorp members (in a cartoonish Evil Dead cheese-fest of a way I might add).
So, you don't want there to be any mild jokes at all? You want a dark and serious over tone with blood and people shivering. PICK UP A DAMN COMIC BOOK. JJJ struts out of his office rambling on and on in the old comics. That can come off as cheesy, but it works. Thanks for proving my point once more. You're a typical bandwagon fan who thinks he knows what he's talking about, when he truly doesn't. You have the right to hate his movies, but to act like YOU know what's best for a Spider-Man movie when you've clearly proven you don't, you shouldn't comment. Why? Because people won't take you serious.
Btw, Evil Dead has a massive following and has influenced people.
Raimi handles subject matters horribly, he executes most scenes with the mind of a ******ed child. Where I think Spider-Man should be more serious/mature is in terms of his villains and key moments that should be dramatic. This isn't a giant comic book with comic codes pending, you have a PG-13 rating, giving you access to form more mature material in a live action medium. Meaning, you don't have to include the Spider-Mobile (which is cheesy) because it was in the comics. There's no need to go R-rated now that the juvenile and mediocre director is gone. Then again, he's still a cheesy director with an R-rating (...Evil Dead). I don't have a problem with humor/light-hearted antics, as long as they're placed in the right context of the film, and not overly done specifically to cater ONLY to children.
I didn't see any Spider-Mobile in the movie. Why? Because that would have come off as corny. The crew knew better than to add that in the movie and if if they were approached about it, do you actually think they would do that? I bet you're also saying the Green Goblin's costume should have been different. First off, they couldn't do it due to budget issues and second, you do understand that Stan Lee INTENDED for the Green Goblin to look goofy, right? That's who that era of comics were. That's what sam Raimi's Spider-man films were somewhat based off of and they were praised.
Now, yeah, you don't have to include these things, but if that's what the director wants to do, then so be it.
and you speak of Sam Raimi as if you know how to be a director. You're just another internet fanboy that claims to know the movie buisness. You know no more than I do a about the movie buisness. Pick up a camera, learn how to direct, get involved with a movie buisness and then actually say something. Throwing your words out like they are fact about the movie buisness while typing in your own home is funny and pathetic.
And how do you know the humour was meant for children? Let me guess, you think Peter hurting his back was cheesy, right? There are PLENTY of moments in the comics these days that come off as cheesy. There's a reason the film was critically acclaimed. There's a reason John Romtia Sr, John Romita Jr, and plenty of other artists and writers loved the first 2 movies. Why? Because they stayed faithful with some things while doing a new twist on it. It's called interpretation of the character. Doesn't mean you have to like it, but you shouldn't throw your words around like they are fact and think that you know this or that. You don't.
So what if Sam Raimi wanted it to be as light as the comics? What's the big deal? isn't that what fanboys want? And yeah, you could go mature, but why not stick to the comics? The film felt mature enough. And once again, if it bothers you, so be it, but stop being hypocritical.
My ovrall point is this, yes, you can say that you don't need evertyhing from the comics, but the stuff that was adapted fit into that world that Sam created. it's just that simple. Now, whether you liked it or not is all you and I can't change that and I have no right to try.
You don't have the tools or the intellect to piss me off, don't flatter yourself.
So says the guy who gets banned from a search engine.
I'm done here, man. Seriously, it's a waist of time. Tell me how you would do a Spider-Man film though. I'm actually very curious and not in a mean way.
t:
