Will Fanboys Ever Learn?

[C. Lee]

Why waste $17 on something that only a third of critics like?

Because I've liked a lot of movies that the critics didn't, and didn't like a lot that they did.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I kind of have those feelings too. I can't wait to see it though. The important thing to me is that the Avengers film gets made so we can watch it. If it bombs I don't care so long as I like the film. It's not my money to lose if it bombs.t:

I'm also curious as to the look and feel of the next Spider-Man. As long as it's good I don't care that it's a new cast and restart to the franchise. If I like it, when it hits home video it will be sitting on my shelf with Spider-Man 1 & 2, just like I have Batman and Batman Returns next to BB and TDK. I never got the crazy increase in Raimi hate once they announced the restart, at least for his first two films.

Haha, too true. It won't matter to me. As I'm sure as hell going to see it. But people like pissed off DC fanboys or just *******s will be the ones who will be annoying and be saying, "I told you so."

The look and feel of the next Spider-Man is hard to imagine. He's not Batman who can be interpreted in many ways and feel fresh. New York will only feel like New York so many times among other elements of the locations. But we'll see. They still got the sewers for the Lizard which could potentially be awesome.

Yeah, it started happening after SM3. Now the haters could find an excuse to crawl out and bash them. And now they think the reboot will have everything that they wanted but didn't get. Boy, those boards are going to be so damn fun when it comes out.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I think the haters would be happy if the roboot is better than the Raimi films.

TIH wasn't perfect but many fans who hated Ang Lee's version embraced it.

 

[chaseter]

The only haters in the SM forums are the ones constantly bashing Raimi and his films. I have seen no one bashing the reboot or any of Garfield, Webb, or Stone's work.

 

[jmc]

Because I've liked a lot of movies that the critics didn't, and didn't like a lot that they did.

I prefer to play the odds.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

I prefer to play the odds.

I don't pay attention to critics at all. Some of the most underrated movies ever on that site are well below the percentage they should be.

 

[jmc]

That may be true in some cases but overall the collective consensus is more on the money than not. If people want to be blind to what a large group says about a film then they are more than free to potentially waste their money. Me, I'm not one to do that, if something is getting bad reviews I want to know about it coz I'd rather spend money on something that's getting good reviews. I've ignored Tron for that reason.

 

[El Payaso]

Spider-man 2 is the only Raimi movie that most fans consider to be exceptional. SM1 hasn't aged nearly as well and most comic fans acknowledge this on some level. Then you have Spider-man 3 which exposes the problems the Spider-man movies always had.

That's true. The problems with SM3 were far from forcing Venom in. As you say, it just shows that Raimi simply had nothing new to add and had to resort to his old tricks but noiw without anything else to make us swallow them smoothly.

Raimi's humour in his spider-movies was always extremely crappy. But you could bear that if you had good characters and good acting (like in SM2). But weak villiains, weak performaces and then crappy humour don't cut it. Same with the charicaturization of many characters and situation. It was too obvious that, for instance, JJ Jameson's comic relief role was not enough anymore, and you have him just for those crappy scenes with the buzzer and the photographic camera little girl.

Say what you will about Nolan but he has yet to make a movie as embarassing as Spider-man 3 and the title character actually acts like the comic counterpart. Peter Parker is socially ******ed and Spider-man is humorless. How can an adaptation be considered great when the title character is a sad shadow of their former self?

True about Nolan. And true about Peter being too much of a social ******ed person. It was okay at first, all those jokes about his awkwardness, but it got old pretty soon. Basically because there was no truth behind it, it was just an excuse to make more cheap jokes.

 

[Squaremaster316]

I think people need to realize that there are different levels of fanboy and even fanboy specialists if you will. Not every comic book fan will automatically support every comic book film.

Judging by the trailers alone, it was EASY to see that Scott Pilgram and Kick Ass had NO chance to appeal to general audiences regardless of quality. You can't convey what those films will deliver in short bursts. They both looked juvenile and silly based on the trailers and commercials. I'm a fanboy but paid to see Expendables on Friday because that film appealed to me more, regardless of any source material. I also saw and disliked Watchmen and warned off friends and family. Why do fans think that a film should be immune from backlash simply because it originates from a comic?

My fanboy focus is usually Marvel yet I did the same thing for Punisher War Zone. Saw it was crap and warned friends and family off the thing.


Spider-Reboot will underperform because a lot of fanboys feel like general audiences are going to feel... that this reboot is unnecessary and that Tobey Maguire IS Peter Parker. Can't say that fanboy and "regular" folk reaction is going to be different on that one. Sony's rights retaining reboot isn't sitting well with many at this point, trust me.

Sometimes, however, box office reflects quality. Iron Man 2 is undoubtedly a better movie than Inception cwink: @ I SEE SPIDEY) and deserves to outgross it domestically. I have no doubt that IM2 will have better DVD sales as well. It's eminently more rewatchable. Once you know the ending of Inception, it loses a lot of it's edgy appeal. I didn't see anyone posting that TDK didn't deserve its incredible box office a few years back.

Even though the vast majority of audiences and critics state that Inception out classes IM2 any day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

Nice try, Yellowjacket, a.k.a. Peabodymaster(and 3 dozen other IMDB sock puppet accounts)

 

[Loki882]

Critics are ultimately people too, and they're reviews, even the really insightful ones, are still tinged with personal opinion/bias. Also, some of them just don't understand the material (Ebert was great, but his Thor review showed that he didn't understand the character or his world).

 

[terry78]

^You kind of need that viewpoint to shock you back to reality if you let your fanboyism cloud your judgment though.

 

[Loki882]

Not if there viewpoint is just as flawed as the GA. A lot of the criticism's in Ebert's Thor review are things that SHOULD be in a Thor movie.

 

[C. Lee]

Nice try, Yellowjacket, a.k.a. Peabodymaster(and 3 dozen other IMDB sock puppet accounts)

So......you bumped a thread that no one had posted in for 3 years so that you could take a shot at someone you don't like from another site? You brought a fight from another site to the SHH.....that's called trolling.