Will Spidey 3 be the Batman&Robin of the series?

[bushgeneration]

Schumacher's Batman&Robin was quite overcrowded with characters, so there was no character development. Bad acting. Incoherence in general. Spidey 3 runs the risk of following the same path if Raimi loses his focus on the characters rather than the spectacle. Spectacle is great if it has substance.

 

[Marvel152]

yes, Raimi only has done 2 succesful Spider-Man films, and if you've read the Q&A you would see how he plays the 3 villians, but your right this will be the Batman and Robin.




oh and yes im being sarcastic

 

[Calendar Man]

Schumacher's Batman&Robin was quite overcrowded with characters, so there was no character development. Bad acting. Incoherence in general. Spidey 3 runs the risk of following the same path if Raimi loses his focus on the characters rather than the spectacle. Spectacle is great if it has substance.

I think "Spiderman" was the Batman and Robin of the series.

 

[Shoemeister]

How dare you mention that movie. At all.

 

[The Comedian]

Having numerous characters was not the reason Batman & Robin failed. It failed because of poor direction, a terrible script, miscasting of characters, plot holes, and general ignorance by the studio. The number of chracters wasn't the problem as much as how they worked into the plot, which didn't make sense. Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy are chracters that can't co-exist because their ultimate goals cancel each other out, a world of permanent cold will kill all of the plants in the world. And also, Bane who was an intelligent strategist in the comic, was neutered into a mute, barely-functional bodyguard.

Based on the rumours and speclation we've heard, Spider-Man 3 does not have this same problem. The fourth villain (likely shocker) has no real influence in the story other than as a plot device to bring the Spider-Man day event into motion. He may be based on the Ultimate version of the character where he is simply a comic foil for Spidey (and it hopefully will give Bruce Campbell something to do!). It may not be faithful to 616, but it is faithful to the Ultimate comics, despite everyone's individual feelings on the brand.

Sandman and Green Goblin seem to be the main villain focuses of the movie, As long as they are handled tastefully, there shouldn't be a problem. I don't personally like the idea of Flint being Uncle Ben's real killer, but that has not been confirmed as fact yet. Otherwise, Church appears to be dead-on casting for Sandman.

Venom will not liekly be as big a part of this movie as some may have hoped, but from what we've heard, he does get some chracter development in the form of Brock, and the time he's in the movie, is in a big action sequence. That's more than we got with Angel or Colossus in X3!

It's too early to tell how SM-3 will handle these chracters, but condemning it now based solely on the number of villains is ludicrous. Batman and Robin could have succeeded with that number of villains, but the villains they chose and how they related to each other damned the film. I hate it when people call out "It's gonna be the next B & R" Whenever there is a large amount of characters in a film, its unfair, especially when we don't have much of the plot officially confirmed.

 

[Farren]

nah, but only because B&R is such a low bar to overcome.

 

[Dark Phantom]

I think "Spiderman" was the Batman and Robin of the series.

Wait, do you mean the first movie of the Spiderman movie series?!
I hope your joking or I just misunderstood.

This goes for everyone, never compare the greatness of SM1 to the atrocious B&R

 

[Hafssól]

Sandman = Mr. Freeze
GG2 = Poison Ivy
Venom = Bane

 

[ComicKoryn]

Batman and Robin failed because it was campy and it focused on Alfred's bizarre "I'm going to die but probably not" storyline while having nipples on the bat suits and George Clooney channeling his inner homosexual into Bruce Wayne. That coupled with Arnold Swarzhenofeugger's horrid Mr. Freeze and Alicia Silverstone being box office doom since the Clueless sugar rush faded led to the demise of the Batman franchise until Mr. Nolan revived it.

 

[War Party]

Sandman = Mr. Freeze
GG2 = Poison Ivy
Venom = Bane

How? We know nothing of the actual story.

 

[Hafssól]

How? We know nothing of the actual story.

Sarcasm

 

["_____"]

Batman and Robin failed because it was campy and it focused on Alfred's bizarre "I'm going to die but probably not" storyline while having nipples on the bat suits and George Clooney channeling his inner homosexual into Bruce Wayne. That coupled with Arnold Swarzhenofeugger's horrid Mr. Freeze and Alicia Silverstone being box office doom since the Clueless sugar rush faded led to the demise of the Batman franchise until Mr. Nolan revived it.

man i forgot how bad that movie was...what a f_cking joke

 

[The Comedian]

Sandman = Mr. Freeze
GG2 = Poison Ivy
Venom = Bane

I realize you are joking, but this statement has been made in a serious manner before.

Schwarzenegger was completely miscast as Mr. Freeze in both appearance and character. Church looks almost perfect in costume and I feel his personality will suit the chracter far better that Arnie's did with Freeze.

Although I wasn't convinced at first, I feel now that Franco has proven his worth in the role of Harry Osborn and He has real motivation for becoming GG@, unlike Ivy's in B & R.

At least Eddie Brock Venom is going to get some character development and dialogue before becoming Venom. Which is more than I can say for Bane. Even if they do go against the comics version and make him an "evil Spidey", I'd still prefer that to a treatment like Bane's.

 

[Shoemeister]

Sarcasm

It's a damn shame that sarcasm is such a lost art.
Believe me my friend, good humor falls on deaf ears around here.

 

[The Hurricane]

I think it would be closer to batman forever. Thats where everythign started going wrong

 

[SpiderB]

Wait, do you mean the first movie of the Spiderman movie series?!
I hope your joking or I just misunderstood.

This goes for everyone, never compare the greatness of SM1 to the atrocious B&R

Uh... actually I'm gonna have to agree with Calendar Man. As big a Spidey fan as I am, I have to admit the first film was a mess. Due largely to a hand-me-down script that suffered too many re-writes, unperfected and unnecessary special effects in many places, and general laziness and poor attention to detail. I remember being so hyped for that film, and was totally embarassed when I sat through it with my friends and family. I own the film, but I don't watch it. I can't watch it. It makes me cringe.

Spider-Man 2, on the other hand, was great. There were a few things I would have done differently, but overall it corrected almost every problem the first film had. It's a movie I actually really like to watch. Leaps and bounds past Spider-Man 1.

How Spider-Man 3 will turn out is anyone's guess. They're going with a very different type of villain this time (supernatural rather than realistic/human), and that could completely change the tone. Maybe it won't. Who knows. But as far as the quality of the filmmaking, I'm sure it will be on par with, if not above, SM2.

 

[War Party]

Sarcasm

Well, it did seem you were serious. There has been some rediculous things said on these boards lately and I don't know whether to take something as sarcasm or as legit. So I apologize for jumping the gun. And I'm aware of what sarcasm is.

 

[ComicKoryn]

wow, I really enjoyed Spiderman....I wouldn't even compare it to Batman and Robin. I mean c'mon, Batman and Robin was so horrible it killed Chris O'Donnell's career.....wait nevermind, that was inevitable.

 

[i-n-z-a-n-e]

NOT EVEN !! end of story with and exclamation mark !

 

[FaT_tONle]

close this thread... we won't get that crap in this franchise until SM4 at least...

 

[Dark Phantom]

Uh... actually I'm gonna have to agree with Calendar Man. As big a Spidey fan as I am, I have to admit the first film was a mess. Due largely to a hand-me-down script that suffered too many re-writes, unperfected and unnecessary special effects in many places, and general laziness and poor attention to detail. I remember being so hyped for that film, and was totally embarassed when I sat through it with my friends and family. I own the film, but I don't watch it. I can't watch it. It makes me cringe.

Spider-Man 2, on the other hand, was great. There were a few things I would have done differently, but overall it corrected almost every problem the first film had. It's a movie I actually really like to watch. Leaps and bounds past Spider-Man 1.

How Spider-Man 3 will turn out is anyone's guess. They're going with a very different type of villain this time (supernatural rather than realistic/human), and that could completely change the tone. Maybe it won't. Who knows. But as far as the quality of the filmmaking, I'm sure it will be on par with, if not above, SM2.

How can you say that? the first Spiderman movie was the best in my opinion. It was that movie that grasped my attention to comics and making Spiderman my favorite superhero. Mind you that I'm only 14 years old and saw this movie when I was 10. Although I look at it now with the knowledge of the source material I still find it to be a great adaptation despite some of the things that strayed away.

I don't understnad what was wrong. the acting, pacing, the plot, character development? It was all done respectively. Besides, it was an origin film. Some factors wouldn't come inot play until the sequel. The Green Goblin became Marvel's "Joker" for me and it blew me away. Especially at the climax and all the way to Peter's "I'm Spiderman..."

It was epic and a milestone. I loved it more than SM2, although SM2 was superior with SFX.

 

[GoldGoblin]

This movie will be nothing like B&R,since it will be an amazing movie.

 

[jusblaze21]

Spidey 3? Never. Even with all the problems X3 had, it still did'nt turn out as bad as Batman & Robin So I highley doubt Spidey 3 would. Though X3 was a dissapointment IMO.

 

[The Kid]

I want symbiotica to chime in.

 

[Ongie]

This won't be a "Batman and Robin" scenario.

I think this will be more in the realm of what "Batman 3" would have been if good ol' Tim Burton had stayed on for one more.

Same director... same feel... same stars... It makes for a better sequel.

Oh... and this one won't have bat nipples.