The Amazing Spider-Man What Raimi Really Messed Up!

[DACMAN]

i said the studio should think that its for the masses and not the director. but i didnt say it shouldnt be for the masses.

WTF dude. the studio is making the movie for money. Raimi is a director. a painter a creator we could say. why should an artist do something for other people?thats horrible. he should do something he would love and if people like then they do.
thats why the studio needs to be on the same page with the director. always.

Because Raimi isn't making a movie for himself his making a movie for us. He isn't given 250 million dollars to "paint a picture" for himself. He makes movies so that we can watch them and make him and the studio millions of dollars.

Why should an artist do something for other people? Because he isn't paying 250 million dollars to have the movie made. The movie isn't for him, it's for us. He isn't just handed that money and told to "have fun!" He is expected to turn out a product that people will want to see. It's called capitalism.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

Brand New Day

ok, thanks!

 

[omid17]

Because Raimi isn't making a movie for himself his making a movie for us. He isn't given 250 million dollars to "paint a picture" for himself. He makes movies so that we can watch them and make him and the studio millions of dollars.

Why should an artist do something for other people? Because he isn't paying 250 million dollars to have the movie made. The movie isn't for him, it's for us. He isn't just handed that money and told to "have fun!" He is expected to turn out a product that people will want to see. It's called capitalism.

well said

 

[snakeinthegear]

whats BND?

An unforgiving travesty that makes the clone saga look like pulitzer prize material.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ That's not fact. OMD was terrible, but, IMO, BND really brought something great.

 

[snakeinthegear]

Never said it was a fact but imo both OMD and BND are relentless pieces of witten rubbish that spit in the faces of long time fans.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ I''l admit, as i said, OMD was a pile of crap, but I feel as hough BND gave us back the Spidey we all knew and loved.

 

[DACMAN]

The Spidey me and my friends "know and loved" was married to Mary Jane. They gave us the Spider-Man Joey Q loved.

 

[Gamma Ray]

quips is the least of raimi's spidey problems.

qft x 1000.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

The Spidey me and my friends "know and loved" was married to Mary Jane. They gave us the Spider-Man Joey Q loved.

Well, tbh, that can be debated. I mean, I LOOOVED the marriage, but I didn't mind seeing Peter being single again. The ending of the marriage was executed poorly, I might add. If it had to end, they could have ended it better.

 

[TheVileOne]

Steve Ditko is suing Marvel? News to me.

 

[DACMAN]

Steve Ditko is suing Marvel? News to me.

Kurby's family is. Ditko isn't....yet...

 

[wattabrownsound]

Spidey doesn't crack enough jokes like in The Spectacular Spider-man. Also, I don't like how he kills off/makes it looks like he killed off Doc Ock and Venom. They are two of Spidey's major villains and shouldn't be knocked off after their first appearance. Raimi should have had a supervillain prison in the Spidey movies. Venom and Sandman were messed up. Harry shouldn't have become the New Goblin. Raimi stopped having the villains named in the third movie.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I've said this lord knows how many times, but anywho:

My main gripe with Raimi is how he misunderstands the character of Spider-man and Peter Parker.

Peter especially in his early years, became a different person in the Spider-man suit. Just like Bruce Wayne becomes a different person in the Batman suit. As Spider-man, Peter finally gets an outlet to express the confidence he doesn't have as Peter Parker. This is why Spider-man is a jabber mouth when he's fighting his enemies. That, and because Peter has said that he thinks he'd go crazy from the fear of battle if he didn't run his mouth to distract himself.

The cocky attitude and quips are essential to Spider-man's character. Having Spider-man remain a near mute as he did in Raimi's movies is just as wrong for the character of Spider-man as it would be to have Batman cracking witty one liners.

By basically eliminating this aspect of the character, Raimi failed to show us Peter's confident side, and he eliminated an essential part of the duality of the character. Spider-man is an outlet for Peter. Spider-man is the persona that allows Peter to be everything he wants to be, but is too afraid to try and become as Peter Parker.

And it also removes a reason for people to believe that Peter is not Spider-man, because Spider-man is much more vocal and boisterous then Peter.

(I also have major gripes with how Raimi has destroyed MJ's character as well, and basically excluded Spidey's supporting cast)

 

[DACMAN]

I can agree with that. I never thought Kirsten made a good MJ all together. Check out this chick that was almost cast as MJ...

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001860/

this link is where it says she was almost cast. couple sentences down.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0145487/trivia


She looks SOOOOO much more like MJ.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Why...why wasn't she cast!?

 

[DACMAN]

She actually looks like MJ doesn't she?

She wasn't cast because Sam wanted Tobey, and Tobey wanted Kirsten.

 

[omid17]

Evan Rachel Wood would have been an awesome choice for MJ too

 

[zeptron]

^Since the first movie had Peter and MJ graduating from high school she would have been too young at the time.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I can agree with that. I never thought Kirsten made a good MJ all together. Check out this chick that was almost cast as MJ...

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001860/

this link is where it says she was almost cast. couple sentences down.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0145487/trivia


She looks SOOOOO much more like MJ.

I was always neutral on Kirsten. She wasn't my ideal choice, but honestly, even if they got a perfect comic look alike for MJ, it wouldn't have mattered, because they wrote the character so horrendous. That's why I don't bash her too much. The fault is with the writers who stripped MJ of her charm and personality, not Kirsten.

 

[bullets]

I can agree with that. I never thought Kirsten made a good MJ all together. Check out this chick that was almost cast as MJ...

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001860/

this link is where it says she was almost cast. couple sentences down.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0145487/trivia


She looks SOOOOO much more like MJ.

She is hot but i've seen her in alot of other things and don't think she would necessarily be right for the role. I think Dunst and Maguire have good chemistry. However I don't think I would of cast either of them initially if it was my choice.

 

[omid17]

^Since the first movie had Peter and MJ graduating from high school she would have been too young at the time.

true

 

[Dcknight]

Because Raimi isn't making a movie for himself his making a movie for us. He isn't given 250 million dollars to "paint a picture" for himself. He makes movies so that we can watch them and make him and the studio millions of dollars.

Why should an artist do something for other people? Because he isn't paying 250 million dollars to have the movie made. The movie isn't for him, it's for us. He isn't just handed that money and told to "have fun!" He is expected to turn out a product that people will want to see. It's called capitalism.

Hum... Didn't the Dark knight made a lot of millions?
And didn't Christopher Nolan had all the right to do what he wanted for this movie? He even made the joker perma white and that is for a lot of Joker fans, a shame. But after all, the idea became more and more accepted, and now we are looking at heath's joker like one of the best ever.

I know it can be boring to always hear the dark knight as an exemple, but it is the best out of it yet.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Hum... Didn't the Dark knight made a lot of millions?
And didn't Christopher Nolan had all the right to do what he wanted for this movie? He even made the joker perma white and that is for a lot of Joker fans, a shame. But after all, the idea became more and more accepted, and now we are looking at heath's joker like one of the best ever.

I know it can be boring to always hear the dark knight as an exemple, but it is the best out of it yet.

This I agree with. Every director should put their own personal spin on it. Then we get to see their artistic ideas and creativity, the little things they add to the mythos that make the movie more enjoyable.

If the director doesn't, then we start getting cookie-cutter movies like the Superhero movies FOX makes that follow the same generic formula and have little imagination or spirit to them.

However, I'm all for creative license, but the director should NEVER, change the core of the character or the mythos he's dealing with. Raimi did that, and in both cases (Spidey's personality and MJ's personality) he made a change that made the characters much more dull and bland. In fact, he made them more "cookie-cutter" superhero sterotypes. Spidey is now the strong silent hero and MJ is little more then the basic damsel in distress.

That was horrible, and something I'm not going to forgive him for.

(p.s. Nolan took away the Perma-white, he didn't make Joker perma-white, just had to throw that little correction in t

 

[Kent]

I was just thinking what this franchise needs is a scientist who means well but is transformed by his experiment gone wrong....

Apparently being an jackass hasn't gone out of style yet.