Homecoming The Amazing Spider-Man 3 General Discussion - Part 8

[UltimateWebhead]

I think people are treating it like some special circumstance.

I'm not so sure about that. It really doesn't change the manner in which Sony has been handling their films or how we perceive them. It's given us the further evidence/proof to criticize them on how they're planning these films--like painting a bulls-eye on a target. Sony was already in a bad spot, now it's pushed to the point of meltdown.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

I'm gonna write him up a note this weekend. But, off the top of my head, some possible talking points are: - We're doing something different - it's time to celebrate the bad guys for once.
-We're inspired by the classic team/mission of movies: Dirty Dozen, Magnificent Seven, Guns of Navarone. We want that spirit, that SWAGGER.
- If the Spider-Man franchiseis the Beatles, then we're the Sex Pistols.
-Flint Marco is gonna steal the show.
-The character is pure id - the anarchic enthusiast of the team. A chance to have FUN while celebrating being bad.
-Tom embodies that anarchy, that triumphant nihilism - we've seen him tap into that spirit before in roles like Bronson, but now we have the chance to crank the volume up to ELEVEN.
-He's gonna storm through London at the end like God-f***ing-zilla. That is not purple prose. He'sgoing to be AS TALL AS A SKYSCRAPER in the third act of the movie. What does Dr. Strange have? Magic tricks? [frick] you, magic tricks - we've got a skyscraper Tom Hardy knocking down buildings!!!!

This is so metal. I'm sure people familiar with the Whedonverse know exactly who's the inspiration for this version of Sandman. It makes sense since both of them have turned on their fellow bad guys and played the hero more than once.

Do it, Goddard!

 

[OriginalMiles]

Dane DeForhead

You lookin' for trouble?

 

[Stormz96]

I'm not defending Sony here, just Goddard: I don't see anything wrong with a giant Sandman. He's gone supersized in the comics. And Goddard was just joking around in most of the email, the guy has a sense of humor.

 

[Eddie]

 

[spider-neil]

I know the superhero genre is a genre all to itself but they are still MOVIES. Even though they star colourful heroes they can be as deep, as nuanced, as complex as movie like Fight Club, or Drive or No Country for old Men. I am sick to death of the notion that because they are CBM they have to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Look at Goddard, he makes Cabin in the Woods, a subversive movie that turns the horror genre on its head. I was very much looking forward to his contribution but it turns out the guy is a complete HACK. Doesn't anyone want to make the definitive Spider-Man movie? Doesn't anyne want to make the Blade Runner of the superhero genre with Spider-Man as the lead? I'm so sick of this juvenile bull**** that threatens to bury Spider-Man under a pile of utter mediocrity when Spider-Man has 50 years or history, one of the best supporting casts in comicdom and one of the best rogues galleries in comicdom. There is no ****ing excuse for this crap. Get lost Goddard if that email is a taste of the drivel you wish to inflict on Marvel's flagship character.

This Sony summit can't come soon enough.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

We've seen super-sized Sandman before in different iterations--I'm not sure why it carries a bad stigma.

 

[SlamAdams]

I'm not so sure about that. It really doesn't change the manner in which Sony has been handling their films or how we perceive them. It's given us the further evidence/proof to criticize them on how they're planning these films--like painting a bulls-eye on a target. Sony was already in a bad spot, now it's pushed to the point of meltdown.

I am. People are much more intent on criticizing the producers as some kind of heartless uncaring non-fans, but I guarantee that the producers of ASM2 aren't acting any different than the producers of Spider-Man 1. This is simply how the sausage gets made. Stuffy suits with different priorities than the fans. The question "Is anyone there who cares enough to make a good Spider-Man?" doesn't make sense any other way. Of course there is because no one wants their product to fail.

 

[SlamAdams]

I'm not defending Sony here, just Goddard: I don't see anything wrong with a giant Sandman. He's gone supersized in the comics. And Goddard was just joking around in most of the email, the guy has a sense of humor.

Agreed. I think Sony has just hit a point of no return now that the Marvel negotiations have been let out of the bag.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I am. People are much more intent on criticizing the producers as some kind of heartless uncaring non-fans, but I guarantee that the producers of ASM2 aren't acting any different than the producers of Spider-Man 1. This is simply how the sausage gets made. Stuffy suits with different priorities than the fans.

Heartless, uncaring non-fans? No. I'm sure they are fans of the character to a degree, I mean, you may not know it by watching the movies but fans nonetheless. And they're just doing their job--trying to make money for the studio. However, they're doing a poor job making money and putting out quality Spidey films. I think we deserve better. And you know, people respond to the quality part with their wallets but based on the info in the emails, it appears Sony doesn't want to recognize that fact.

 

[Eddie]

One thing that's important to remember here is that we have another e-mail saying Goddard was specifically hired to do a Sinister Six film but when he actually submitted something concrete it had turned into more of a Spider-Man and the Sinister Six film (which at least one Sony exec wasn't happy about). Also, this e-mail was in regards to luring Tom Hardy in, and that didn't happen. This e-mail does worry me, but I don't know that it's completely indicative of what Goddard could do under a sane production team.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

I know the superhero genre is a genre all to itself but they are still MOVIES. Even though they star colourful heroes they can be as deep, as nuanced, as complex as movie like Fight Club, or Drive or No Country for old Men. I am sick to death of the notion that because they are CBM they have to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Look at Goddard, he makes Cabin in the Woods, a subversive movie that turns the horror genre on its head. I was very much looking forward to his contribution but it turns out the guy is a complete HACK. Doesn't anyone want to make the definitive Spider-Man movie? Doesn't anyne want to make the Blade Runner of the superhero genre with Spider-Man as the lead? I'm so sick of this juvenile bull**** that threatens to bury Spider-Man under a pile of utter mediocrity when Spider-Man has 50 years or history, one of the best supporting casts in comicdom and one of the best rogues galleries in comicdom. There is no ****ing excuse for this crap. Get lost Goddard if that email is a taste of the drivel you wish to inflict on Marvel's flagship character.

This Sony summit can't come soon enough.

How do you know his emails about Cabin in the Woods didn't look equally ridiculous?

 

[Stormz96]

One thing that's important to remember here is that we have another e-mail saying Goddard was specifically hired to do a Sinister Six film but when he actually submitted something concrete it had turned into more of a Spider-Man and the Sinister Six film (which at least one Sony exec wasn't happy about). Also, this e-mail was in regards to luring Tom Hardy in, and that didn't happen. This e-mail does worry me, but I don't know that it's completely indicative of what Goddard could do under a sane production team.

Goddard's proven that he can take crazy ideas and make them work on screen, so the e-mail doesn't turn me off of him as a director or writer in any way. The creative process starts with brainstorming ideas after all.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

Well, I do agree but there's a way to have more than one villain and make it al work. They should start with one already established villain for Spidey and then begin to introduce some of the 'bigger' villains or A-listers prior to them becoming an actual villain. I'd like to see them slowly build up the world around Peter and Spider-Man and get away from having the pre-villain introduced, turn into a villain, hate Spidey, battle Spidey, get defeated by Spidey, all in one movie.

Just like Spectacular Spider-Man!


There's that phrase again.

A Goddard/Whedon directed/prodcued Spider-Man movie??

Uh, yes, please.

*just not at Sony*

Yes, of course under Marvel Studios creative control.

I'm not defending Sony here, just Goddard: I don't see anything wrong with a giant Sandman. He's gone supersized in the comics. And Goddard was just joking around in most of the email, the guy has a sense of humor.

That is what I'm hoping.

Look at Goddard, he makes Cabin in the Woods, a subversive movie that turns the horror genre on its head. I was very much looking forward to his contribution but it turns out the guy is a complete HACK. Doesn't anyone want to make the definitive Spider-Man movie? Doesn't anyne want to make the Blade Runner of the superhero genre with Spider-Man as the lead? I'm so sick of this juvenile bull**** that threatens to bury Spider-Man under a pile of utter mediocrity when Spider-Man has 50 years or history, one of the best supporting casts in comicdom and one of the best rogues galleries in comicdom. There is no ****ing excuse for this crap. Get lost Goddard if that email is a taste of the drivel you wish to inflict on Marvel's flagship character.

This Sony summit can't come soon enough.

I for one am waiting for the definitive Spider-Man. Not that it has to be so heavy like Fight Club. I think Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy are perfect tone for Spidey. Humor, witty banter, and pathos.

I hope most of that Goddard stuff was a joke. If he collaborates with Joss Whedon, who has had quite a hand in shaping the current MCU, I think we'll be in good hands, I hope.

 

[Stormz96]

How do you know his emails about Cabin in the Woods didn't look equally ridiculous?

I'm sure if someone saw the idea of 'every horror monster running around in a lab killing people' on paper, they would've thought it was ridiculous. We really don't know how the final product would've turned out

 

[spider-neil]

I remember reading the hype for SM2 and thinking 'can a Spider-Man movie be that' good' (I thought SM1 was 'okay'). I saw SM2 and was completely blown away, blown away like I was blown away when I saw T2 for the first time. The story telling, the pacing, the development of the villain which climaxes with arguably the greatest CBM action sequence ever.

Can't we get back to that level of care and love and RESPECT for the titular character? Even Raimi himself didn't want to take the SM movies seriously after SM2. I'm not talking about the 'characters' because I like the characters, I am talking about the story telling. A 100 foot Sandman sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I shudder to think what the rest of S6 is going to be like. For pity sake hire a director of distinction that wont attempt this bull****.

 

[harryoscop]

Today ladies & gentleman.. Drew Goddard has shown his true colors.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I remember reading the hype for SM2 and thinking 'can a Spider-Man movie be that' good' (I thought SM1 was 'okay'). I saw SM2 and was completely blown away, blown away like I was blown away when I saw T2 for the first time. The story telling, the pacing, the development of the villain which climaxes with arguably the greatest CBM action sequence ever.

Can't we get back to that level of care and love and RESPECT for the titular character? Even Raimi himself didn't want to take the SM movies seriously after SM2. I'm not talking about the 'characters' because I like the characters, I am talking about the story telling. A 100 foot Sandman sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I shudder to think what the rest of S6 is going to be like. For pity sake hire a director of distinction that wont attempt this bull****.

Out of all the ideas I've heard/seen in these emails, that one is the least problematic. It's just that we've seen it before in SM3 and it wasn't received so well. But...it has worked in other iterations.

 

[SlamAdams]

Heartless, uncaring non-fans? No. I'm sure they are fans of the character to a degree, I mean, you may not know it by watching the movies but fans nonetheless. And they're just doing their job--trying to make money for the studio. However, they're doing a poor job making money and putting out quality Spidey films. I think we deserve better. And you know, people respond to the quality part with their wallets but based on the info in the emails, it appears Sony doesn't want to recognize that fact.

The "deserve' thing is also weird to me. I don't think anyone deserves much if anything from a movie studio.

Producers rarely recognize their faults. They look at trends, they crunch numbers, they work off of archaic quality assurance techniques, and then act like *******s when it doesn't work out. Because by the book, they didn't do anything wrong. Its how it always has been, good movies and bad. I don't think what Sony (or Fox for that matter) are out to purposefully make bad movies, or give them the time and energy they need to be good, or whatever other fan theory is filling up these forums. Its just cognitive dissonance to Kevin Fiege who is the ultimate outlier, who basically kickstarted a niche blockbuster studio because he is a fan.

 

[Stormz96]

A David Fincher marvel movie would be boss.

 

[spider-neil]

Out of all the ideas I've heard/seen in these emails, that one is the least problematic. It's just that we've seen it before in SM3 and it wasn't received so well. But...it has worked in other iterations.

I thought S6 was going to 'human' like villains so you could get across the drama and conflict through acting. Basically the Magnificent Seven/Usual Suspects of the comic book genre, but oh no, it's going to be played like a joke. Why am I not surprised.

 

[spider-neil]

A David Fincher marvel movie would be boss.

 

[SlamAdams]

I thought S6 was going to 'human' like villains so you could get across the drama and conflict through acting. Basically the Magnificent Seven/Usual Suspects of the comic book genre, but oh no, it's going to be played like a joke. Why am I not surprised.

The same email literally named dropped Magnificent Seven. Why has so much changed just because Sandman uses his powers.

 

[harryoscop]

You know what? giant Sandman actually doesn't sound too bad.

 

[spider-neil]

It's so funny when I saw a franchise I could care less about struggle, like when X-Men was all over the place after Wolverine: Origins, or Transformers but when I see something dear to be struggle it cuts me to the core and there is no franchise I care more about than Spider-Man and he seems to be in the hands of people who are intent on destroying him and turning him into a laughing stock (if he isn't already).

Spider-Man can EASILY be fixed with the right people in charge but it looks like you are going to have to have a Batman and Robin (a financial and critical disaster which ASM2 was not) before the people in charge wise up and give the movie to a director with a vision (a vision that doesn't involve 100 foot sandman).