• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Homecoming The Amazing Spider-Man 3 General Discussion - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
You leave Kirsten Dunst alone. :argh:

I especially loved her in Spider-Man.

5mha2v.gif
I liked her MJ too.
 
I love how people try to deflect away from this unsuccessful reboot series. It's cute.
 
Although any kind of talks between Marvel and Sony could totally fall apart and nothing is in stone, I have to say the last week or so has got me more excited about Spiderman than I have been since probably 2004.
 
I used to have the biggest crush on Kirsten Dunst when I was younger
 
Although any kind of talks between Marvel and Sony could totally fall apart and nothing is in stone, I have to say the last week or so has got me more excited about Spiderman than I have been since probably 2004.


Nothing is set in stone, but this is the first time a deal has been this close to being true.
 
I agree Kirsten Dunst wasn't a very likable MJ, i wasn't fond of the direction they went with her
 
My problems with M.J. was the writing, not Kirsten
 
I agree Kirsten Dunst wasn't a very likable MJ, i wasn't fond of the direction they went with her

I actually really liked Dunst in SM1 and SM2. Sure, I disliked that she was a perpetual damsel in distress, but I liked her all the same. It was SM3 where things got bad, Dunst was totally disengaged.
 
The best part of Spider-man 3 was J. Jonah.
 
She was so damn unlikable in Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3 that I was just wanting a new love interest to come along.

The only time I didn't mind her was the first movie, but that's even a stretch considering in a lot of ways she was just "Mary Jane" in name only. :dry:
 
Unsuccessful is relative. Maybe disappointing is more apropos.

Well, whatever anyone wants to call it, it was bad enough to halt Sony's previous plan and want to come up with a new strategy. You don't do that if it meets expectations.
 
given how very little he had to do thats pretty bad

Simmons was consistently great, but the only part of SM3 I liked was Thomas Haden Church as Sandman, even with how little he was used and the dumb-as-hell retcon.
 
Simmons was consistently great, but the only part of SM3 I liked was Thomas Haden Church as Sandman, even with how little he was used and the dumb-as-hell retcon.

I HATED that retcon! :cmad:

I actually got early word before I saw the movie about it and it almost stopped me from watching the film, but I still did. I thought they nailed Sandman otherwise but damn, they didn't need to add that part. :wall:
 
I just rewatched ASM2 and you know what struck me? How badly directed it is. Everything is shot in monotonous shot/reverse shot configuration. The blocking and staging has actors standing around and talking, with little variations. Webb may have been slaved by Sony, but I doubt they told him his shot list, shot length and blocking. Which are all the director's work, despite restrictions. And all of which were terrible in this film.

Contrast that with Spider-man 3, another bad film, but the staging, blocking, and shot selection were far superior. Demonstrating in minutiae the blatant superiority of Raimi as a director.

This is not something that can be blamed on the studio, as these elements are something the director is in sole control over. For example, Fincher is considered one of the greatest in Hollywood when it comes to directing dialogue, and that talent is in display in every one of his films. Even Alien 3, a movie mutilated by studio interference. My point? Even with more freedom, I doubt ASM3 woud've been better directed. As Webb has shown himself to be a thoroughly bland and boring director on a technical level.
 
1.4 billion for 2 movies.
Plus DVD/Blu Ray sales.
Plus the inevitable TV syndication.
Sony are panicking according to the hacked emails. Not to mention they canceled TASM 4 and delayed the 3rd film by two years. The obviously aren't super happy with that 1.4billion.
 
I just rewatched ASM2 and you know what struck me? How badly directed it is. Everything is shot in monotonous shot/reverse shot configuration. The blocking and staging has actors standing around and talking, with little variations. Webb may have been slaved by Sony, but I doubt they told him his shot list, shot length and blocking. Which are all the director's work, despite restrictions. And all of which were terrible in this film.

Contrast that with Spider-man 3, another bad film, but the staging, blocking, and shot selection were far superior. Demonstrating in minutiae the blatant superiority of Raimi as a director.

This is not something that can be blamed on the studio, as these elements are something the director is in sole control over. For example, Fincher is considered one of the greatest in Hollywood when it comes to directing dialogue, and that talent is in display in every one of his films. Even Alien 3, a movie mutilated by studio interference. My point? Even with more freedom, I doubt ASM3 woud've been better directed. As Webb has shown himself to be a thoroughly bland and boring director on a technical level.
Exactly, Webb is a mediocre Action Adventure director. Maybe he is fine for cutesy rom com's but not a Spider-Man movie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"