The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 General Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 26

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think a good Superman movie needs to find the balance between MOS and Superman Returns in terms of action and story, and share some of the spirit of the first two Christopher Reeve Superman films.

But now that the sequel has Batman... I think he is going to overshadow Superman and ruin it.
 
I say leave the Reeve films in the past where they belong. MoS while not perfect is the Superman of today for me.
 
I know this is a Spidey thread but..I loved MOS. 8.5 after three viewings. Cheers to the blu ray in a couple of months.
 
Hence "the spirit" of the Reeve films.

Not sure what you mean. It seems like you're saying you want a Superman film to, at least in part, borrow from the Reeve films in tone. That's precisely what I don't want to see. I personally don't want to see a Superman film go back to those previous films for anything. Little nods here and there are fine as easter eggs, but largely I want to see Superman movies move on from the Reeve films and not be held back by them.

I see people say MoS had no charm, but I disagree. It did have it's own charm, just not the camp charm of the Reeve films.

Cheers to the blu ray in a couple of months.

There's something else for my to do list. lol
 
Last edited:
I know this is a Spidey thread but..I loved MOS. 8.5 after three viewings. Cheers to the blu ray in a couple of months.
Hehe, I wasn't crazy about it... I'd personally give it a 6.5 or a 7/10. Glad you loved it though :up:
 
But Snyder is the director, and he has a heavy influence over the script. Notice all of his movies have a lot in common... heavy action, flawed story script.

"The Director doesn't get enough credit when a movie is good and they don't get enough blame when a movie is bad." I can't remember who said this (it might have even been Sam Raimi) but I thought it tied in rather nicely to this conversation. Bottom line: the director of a film is the single biggest reason it fails or succeeds.
 
"The Director doesn't get enough credit when a movie is good and they don't get enough blame when a movie is bad." I can't remember who said this (it might have even been Sam Raimi) but I thought it tied in rather nicely to this conversation. Bottome line :the director of a film is the single biggest reason it fails or succeeds.

Depends on the circumstances, but the director usually has a lot to do with the making of a movie, and should take responsibility for the outcome of the movie. Thing is, a director has a great influence on the direction of a film, but if he is handed a poor script, there is also so much he could do. But they could look at the script and say "Add this, take that out, keep this, and change the ending to something better."
 
Speaking of blame. I don't get quite the hate that Goyer gets. I understand criticism, but people love to just bash him and overlook anything good he's had a hand in.
 
I felt like Goyer actually did a good job for the most part.
 
One thing's for sure: he can't write romance.
 
Goyer is a screenwriter, and although its his job to write a good script, he still has to do what he is told by the director (and the studio, depending on big of a role they play in the production). I put more blame on Snyder...
 
I actually dug the romance in MOS... and yeah, Rachel wasn't a good character.
 
I thought Rachel was a bigger bore than MJ in the Raimi films.
 
The romance in Man of Steel was way rushed. And the kiss...so tacked on. At least in TASM Andrew and Emma had the chemistry to pull it off.
 
Not sure I'd call the Superma/Lois dynamic in MoS a romance, but it was still an interesting character dynamic to me.
 
The romance in Man of Steel was way rushed. And the kiss...so tacked on. At least in TASM Andrew and Emma had the chemistry to pull it off.

Their chemistry was spot on. :word:

Haha alright alright. Better than SR right?


Of course, no contest. I would give SR a 4 or 5/10. Man of Steel was at least really fun.
 
Doesn't a movie need a sense of humor to be considered fun? :cwink:
 
For me Man of Steel took itself too seriously. It was pretentious. Some people make that same claim about The Dark Knight but that film is so well written that it earns its gravitas.

And I wouldn't even consider TASM a particularly fun movie. I really like it, but I don't feel like there was quite enough action and playfulness to it. Peter didn't ever get to be happy. The sequel looks like it's going to better balance drama and light-heartedness.
 
MOS wasn't that fun(I loved it though). TASM was a fun movie IMO. Every Spidey movie is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"