come anticipate spiderman 2 with this cool guy

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

so i'm pretty fucking excited about this movie! ebert and roeper pretty much started hyperventilating when they reviewed it on sunday (not that i really trust them but DAMN did ebert get off on a tear: "this is the best superhero movie since superman!" and later "this is the best superhero movie ever!" dude was PUMPED!) and the trailers have been singularly awesome and doc ock looks wicked and frankly i need a good summer movie this year or i give up.

also i keep cracking myself up thinking about how my friend pronounces it Spiderman, like it's somebody's last name (à la J. Peterman).

let's get psyched up together.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 04:41 (twenty-two years ago)

like "Harvey Birdman, esq"??

― vahid (vahid), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 05:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I think I might well go with friends opening night, emo Spiderman or not. Essentially I want to see Alfred Molina kick some ass.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 06:05 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm pretty eagerly anticipating it just cause it seems like it might be the only good movie the whole summer. :(

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 06:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I just watched the first Spider-Man for the second time, and it still thrilled me like the comics did when I was 13. I am incredibly excited for the new one, and if Ebert was going off, that makes it better then I expected.

― Camtron (Cameron), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 06:26 (twenty-two years ago)

also i keep cracking myself up thinking about how my friend pronounces it Spiderman, like it's somebody's last name (à la J. Peterman).

jon stewart busted this one out on the daily show before the first movie! quote went something like "it's hollywood- you're SPIH-der-min now," and it cracks me up every time i see the billboards for this one!

― .rob (rgeary), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 06:48 (twenty-two years ago)

i like that it's emo spiderman! why not?!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:17 (twenty-two years ago)

S1ocki, which summer bustblockers have you seen & been let down by so far? For my money, the 3rd Harry Potter is THE SHT so far, but I am ultrapsyched for SM2, even if the stupid 3-minute preview prior to Azkaban offered THE ENTIRE PLOT OF THE MOVIE you idiot bastards YOU DON'T NEED TO "SELL" SPIDER-MAN 2!!!

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:30 (twenty-two years ago)

i thought harry potter was pretty good but it had a really rushed feeling to it that kind of put me off. riddick was sort of entertainingly retarded. uhh what else have i seen? what else has come out so far? my brain is sort of blocked right now

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)

From the trailers, this looks like it should be a lot of fun. It did make me wonder exactly how high Kirsten Dunst was when the movie was filmed, though.

― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

boy does the terminal look like a turd! even though i'll probably end up seeing it, stupid me. seems like such a wasted premise, it could have been the ultimate ballard non-adaptation!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

My parents almost combined their last names (Snyder & Coleman) to Snyderman, and were going to name me Peter Parker Snyderman. True story.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Ebert didn't like the first one, so that really piqued my interest when he started raving about #2.

― Huk-El (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)

hahahaha and dodgeball totally creamed the terminal at the box office!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

As well it should! Tom Hanks as Balki is not good cinema.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I am quivering with anticipation for Spiderman2, though I must confess now it's mostly to see lovely Alfred Molina out-act everyone else. Especially James Franco, who just makes me a bit twitchy whenever he's supposed to be "emotional."

― Jocelyn (Jocelyn), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Dodgeball was weird. I'm not sure if I get it or not.

― Huk-El (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:51 (twenty-two years ago)

I liked it, but mostly because of Jason Bateman.

― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 13:53 (twenty-two years ago)

The Spiderman franchise so far is doing extremely well with the casting of villains.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 14:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Ebert didn't like the first one, so that really piqued my interest when he started raving about #2.

Well, just call me 'Bert', because I have a feeling I'll really like this!

― I am not a mandible (Barima), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 14:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Jason Bateman in Dodgeball was possibly the most unsettling thing about the movie for me.

― Huk-El (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 14:20 (twenty-two years ago)

spiderman india!

― teeny (teeny), Wednesday, 23 June 2004 14:39 (twenty-two years ago)

This sucked mondo ass. Predictable, boring, Raimi doesn't give a fuck about any shot where characters speak to each other, not enough Dunst, the Spidey leaping-from-building-to-building CGI still looks like a bad videogame, lame plot, Tobey Maguire can't act, Alfred Molina wasn't very good or scary, they never really bothered to explain why his arms were inherently evil. Very slow and tedious, the audience I was with got restless. (Not to mention my mistake for seeing this the very first day it came out - screaming children, cellphones, teenagers showing up five minutes into it and not figuring out why they can't find eight seats together.

Best part - the Evil Dead homages (is it homage when the films are by the same director?) of Doc Ock waking up. Other good parts: um, Kirsten Dunst was OK. Most disappointing: way too much of Vern Schillinger's character.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:26 (twenty-one years ago)

SHUT UP ITS GONNA BE GOOD ITS GONNA BE GOOD

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:27 (twenty-one years ago)

ITS GONNA BE GOOD

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I liked it. I thought there was too much Dunst, though.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:27 (twenty-one years ago)

ITS GONNA BE GREAT

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Kirsten Dunst was the worst part!!

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Exactly! How is stumbling around stoned acting?

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Alfred Molina wasn't very good or scary

Don't tell me this.

You already saw it, Nicole? Oh wait, midnight showing last night?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:29 (twenty-one years ago)

stop making with the hate with the dunst lady who i like so much

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:29 (twenty-one years ago)

"I thought there was too much Dunst, though."

*Gets up, runs to nearest theatre*

― Scott CE (Scott CE), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:32 (twenty-one years ago)

scott knows what time it is.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:32 (twenty-one years ago)

it's dunst time

― captain obvious returns (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:35 (twenty-one years ago)

jerkin time

― ¥¤±²£¢Ð¼æ®ª«¶Þ÷³¹ß½Ø×©§¾¿¥¤±²£¢Ð¼æ®ª«¶Þ÷³¹ß½Ø×©§¾¿¥¤±²£¢Ð¼æ®ª«¶Þ÷³¹ß½Ø×©§¾¿ (ex , Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:35 (twenty-one years ago)

jon wait until it comes out on dvd ok?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:36 (twenty-one years ago)

or not!

― p.w. herman (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:37 (twenty-one years ago)

saw it last night, going to see it again tonight. it's pretty awful but i thought it was alot better than the first. two things i loved alot: the evil dead thing as noted, and the 'raindrops keep fallin on my head' sequence when parker revels in his back to geekhood, esp. him watching the cop cars go by and thinking 'aw that's too bad. gee this is a good hot dog.' and ESP. the freeze frame shot of triumph after his pedophile prof. gives him a compliment. hilarious. and enough to make me wonder if raimi et. al were aware of the ridiculous overblownness of other parts (the fucking 'passion of the spidey' scene where the subway passengers treat him like jesus vedder or something - wtf). more lifts from 'greatest american hero', which are ALWAYS welcome, and tobey maguire's facial expressions when he runs, strains, stops trains were great stuff too. better than catwoman!

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:42 (twenty-one years ago)

according to hoberman the exteriors of the villain's lair are actually of anthology film archives!!

man what's the deal with catwoman? i mean, there's no chance in hell i'll see it, but: why was it made?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I forgot to say anything about the Passion of the Spidey. Oh man that was great/awful. "Don't worry, we won't tell nobody!"

I was halfway kidding about Dunst. It was great to see her two stories tall and everything, but she wasn't very good. Did ANYONE buy her as a celebrated thespian who zonks out halfway through her performance looking into the audience? Wouldn't that shit get you fired?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:50 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm guessing so there will be a new camp classic -- why else cast Sharon Stone?

x-post

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Does anyone really go out to create a camp classic? I mean, in the case of Showgirls, clearly it's a very thin line...

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:52 (twenty-one years ago)

catwoman coulda been so good!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh come on.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:53 (twenty-one years ago)

well why not?! i love the catwoman stuff in batman 2!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:53 (twenty-one years ago)

god i hate halle berry

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:53 (twenty-one years ago)

o god dunst on broadway was incredibly fucking hilarious too. loudest guffaws of the night.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:54 (twenty-one years ago)

I loved the catwoman stuff in batman 2 as well, but everything about the catwoman movie almost seems like they set out to make it awful.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:55 (twenty-one years ago)

oh, that was just me in the back yelling "guffaw!"

xpost

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:56 (twenty-one years ago)

man TWO of the trailers before spidey deuce featured people hissing like cats at animals - catwoman and some fucking tim allen thing. maybe the fucking polar express'll have some person hiss like a cat at an animal and momus can write an essay about it.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:57 (twenty-one years ago)

spoiler, possibly (but who cares when it comes to a comic book movie, plot twists DO NOT EXIST) -
What was up with the women-folk coming on to Spidey? I can understand why they'd establish that theme, but then they did nothing with it. The poor emaciated Italian girl have him milk and cake, for what? So he could shack up with Broadway Blondie?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:57 (twenty-one years ago)

gave him

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:58 (twenty-one years ago)

wow this is sounding like some dick powell movie!

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:59 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah leonicole, what i meant was that a cat woman movie had the potential to be good, a catwoman movie in general, not this one really. i think halle coulda been good too. but that fucking costume! and the fact that it seems to be set in a daredevil-style shitty fake gotham

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 19:59 (twenty-one years ago)

omg

http://roswell.tobaccodocuments.org/images/dick_powell_camel.jpg

powell now stars in the soap opera invitation to lung cancer

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:00 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah the landlord's daughter bringing him chocolate cake and milk came sorta out of nowhere and went nowhere. as near as i can figure they decided spidey had had a really tough time of it lately and thought he deserved a break today so they had the landlord's daughter bring him some chocolate cake and milk.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:02 (twenty-one years ago)

(the fucking 'passion of the spidey' scene where the subway passengers treat him like jesus vedder or something - wtf).

"wtf"? uhhh...he's a SUPERHERO?!

I can't imagine why you would go see it if you weren't expecting anything hegeographic to happen. That's the whole thing with Spiderman!

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:02 (twenty-one years ago)

there's a landlord's daughter in this movie? va-va-voom

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:03 (twenty-one years ago)

ok when spidey stole his suit off of jameson's wall and left a note saying 'what up jj' or whatever did anyone else think 'wait a sec, aren't you supposed to be in a hurry to go save mj? do you really have the time to be writing stupid notes?'

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:04 (twenty-one years ago)

he's a superhero, I think.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Perhaps he has an inkstamp that uses everytime he has to flee.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

The landlord's daughter got robbed, she would have been much better for Peter than MJ.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

It wasn't even chocolate cake! It was yellow.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

no way roxy - 'superheroes are but gods amongst mere mortals' is some dc shit, marvel's all us weekly 'superheroes - they're just like us!' with the emo shit and crap.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:06 (twenty-one years ago)

You're just hating fun now!

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:07 (twenty-one years ago)

Perhaps he has an inkstamp that uses everytime he has to flee.
-- Ned Raggett (ne...) (webmail), June 30th, 2004 2:05 PM. (Ned) (later) (link)

K THX BYE --SPIDEY

― amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:07 (twenty-one years ago)

If I were Spidey, I'd have gone for JJ's assistant who was flirting with me while refusing to give me money.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:07 (twenty-one years ago)

That pissed me off too, Milo. I was like "Damn, a brother has to lose his girl, be in imminent danger of his friend finding out he killed his dad, live with the guilt that he killed his uncle and can't have his fucking chocolate cake? What's this yellow-assed SHIT?!" Then my boyfriend elbowed me and said "it's a movie, I think."

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:08 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah like u bigshots never heard that "phil spiderman" joke from friends 5 years ago!

― prima fassy (mwah), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:08 (twenty-one years ago)

no way roxy - 'superheroes are but gods amongst mere mortals' is some dc shit, marvel's all us weekly 'superheroes - they're just like us!' with the emo shit and crap.
-- cinniblount

Uh, yeah, kind of like the whole "Gods: They're Just Like Us" with all the Jesus/New Testament shit and crap.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:09 (twenty-one years ago)

milo i think he does in the comic or something. o god spidey delivers pizza in this too, that wasn't as cool as it sounds although he shoots one slice with his web and i thought 'god it would suck to get that slice'

― cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:09 (twenty-one years ago)

phil spiderman?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:12 (twenty-one years ago)

The opening credits were disappointing, too. I can usually count on them to be good, even if the rest sucks (cf. Dawn of the Dead)

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

I liked the credits.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

This entire movie would have been better if JJ shaved his head and made Peter Parker his bitch.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:14 (twenty-one years ago)

well why not?! i love the catwoman stuff in batman 2!

if batman 2 had been ALL catwoman stuff (i.e., delete everything with the penguin and christopher walken), it would have been the greatest film evah!

so is this movie more ditko spiderman or romita spiderman?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

What's the difference?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 20:41 (twenty-one years ago)

well, ditko (the original spiderman artist, until about issue 30 or whatever) tended to emphasize the angst-ridden side of peter parker and the lonely responsibility of being spiderman. typical stan lee stuff. (ditko was also a major ayn rand devotee, which might have had something to do with the uniqueness of his take on the character) whereas romita (and most of the later artists, not that i've paid much attention to most of them) took a much more conventional, straightforward, soap opera-ish approach to the series. i'm sure plenty of more dedicated marvel fans could explain this much better than i can.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:01 (twenty-one years ago)

You people are complete mentalists; the Catwoman movie is going to be ridiculously amazing.

― VengaDan Perry's Libido (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:09 (twenty-one years ago)

On the one hand, Raimi going for an NYC that ignores Jonah's anti-Spidey crap is interesting, but not necessarily a change for the more interesting (this is in reference to the 1st one with the "Leave Spidey ALONE" cheesescene). I still want to see this, but my optimism for this vs my indifference to the first is still baffling me.

Dan Perry, always posting from the dick.

― Barima Spiderman (Barima), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:10 (twenty-one years ago)

How to cool (?) Dan's Halle lust -- note that besides willingly letting herself be embraced by Fred Durst, she appeared earlier this month with Susan Lucci and a Wal-Mart board member at a Wal-Mart shareholders meeting, resulting in this photograph:

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/06/30/business/30WAL.jpg

Then again, perhaps this will change nothing.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:41 (twenty-one years ago)

I've noticed lots of anti-Spidey crap in both of 'em (more in the second, though).

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Apparently Ebert called it the greatest comic book movie ever made or somesuch? Can someone corroborate that testimony?

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Wednesday, 30 June 2004 21:49 (twenty-one years ago)

OH MY GOD THAT IS THE GREATEST PHOTOGRAPH EVER!!!!

Absurd and gorgeous! HALLE I KISS YOU

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 1 July 2004 00:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Bless you sir. :-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 1 July 2004 00:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Most disappointing: way too much of Vern Schillinger's character.

-- miloauckerman (suspectdevic...), June 30th, 2004.

I loved this character in the first one.

― theodore fogelsanger, Thursday, 1 July 2004 02:25 (twenty-one years ago)

i saw this. it was pretty awesome, barring one or two windy speeches. i didn't connect very deeply with the "human theme" of duty/sacrifice that the critics are getting all excited over (maybe if i was younger...?) but i still enjoyed the heck out of it. tobey is really cute, especially in a montage scene which i will not spoil for anyone.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 02:52 (twenty-one years ago)

I liked it quite a bit. I agree about the pointlessness of the landlord's daughter, and I was a bit pissed at Doc Ock's repentence at the end. NOT ENOUGH MJ. There is no such thing as too much Kirsten Dunst, especially as a redhead.

amateurist OTM re: the montage (if it's the one I think it is.) It was quite funny.

― Ian c=====8 (orion), Thursday, 1 July 2004 03:55 (twenty-one years ago)

the montage rocks all. saw it again: it's awesome.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:01 (twenty-one years ago)

dunst was in it A LOT man, what do you want? a "mary jane" movie?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:32 (twenty-one years ago)

haha. That wasn't an entirely sincere complaint. But she is going to have my babies someday. :X

― Ian c=====8 (orion), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:42 (twenty-one years ago)

Is there anyone left at ILX who doesn't have a celeb-crush on Dunst?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:54 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't think calum's mentioned her.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:55 (twenty-one years ago)

nor ned, but ned never talks about this stuff.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 04:55 (twenty-one years ago)

just saw this; it was a bit cheesy in parts, but i'm just such a sucker for the emo-bits that i ate it all up completely, even the admittedly silly uncle-ben part... tobey is adorable in it, and the goofy bits (aunt may getting hurled around like a yoyo) were funny and entertaining. i thought they did a tremendous job with doctor octopus.

― dave k, Thursday, 1 July 2004 05:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Underwhelmed. I liked the swinging through town bits more in the first one. Looked to fake this time. Doc Ock was better for me than Willem DF in the first. Can't stand to look at him.

GEE, WONDER WHAT PART III IS GOING TO BE ABOUT? SURPRISING NEW/OLD VILLAIN?

― Skottie, Thursday, 1 July 2004 05:48 (twenty-one years ago)

I made that Bob Spiderman joke on some "let's name Mark C" or someone thread months ago, how sad

― Andrew Blood Thames (Andrew Thames), Thursday, 1 July 2004 05:52 (twenty-one years ago)

'dunst was in it A LOT man, what do you want? a "mary jane" movie? '

yes.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 1 July 2004 07:37 (twenty-one years ago)

I enjoyed it a hell of a lot. I was surprised by how funny it was, the first half or so is chock-full of laugh out loud moments (my favorites being the Bruce Campbell cameo and every scene with Jameson). I also liked the total disregard for logic (e.g., the sun-energy thing pulling huge chunks of metal off the walls, but somehow not effecting Doc Ock, who has GIANT FUCKING METAL ARMS, but hey, it's a comic book).
I think the bad guy is Spidey III will be MJ's jilted astronaut fiance. "The Groom" or "The Anonymous Astronaut" or something.

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Thursday, 1 July 2004 12:40 (twenty-one years ago)

So long as he doesn't turn into the Man-Wolf like the comics.

Actually, that would be cool as hell!

― R.I.M.A. (Barima), Thursday, 1 July 2004 12:48 (twenty-one years ago)

I love the aforementioned montage. Also, one goofy bit I liked was when he hurts himself and then sets off the car alarm. For some reason that got me! Who knows.

And yeah, the Campbell cameo was the first of two times I laughed out loud.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 1 July 2004 12:53 (twenty-one years ago)

I can't imagine why you would go see it if you weren't expecting anything hegeographic to happen. That's the whole thing with Spiderman!

Do you mean hagiographic? I expected a little hero worship, but more little boys looking up at the sky saying "Wow, Spiderman!" and asking for his autorgraph as opposed to the heavy shit Aunt May laid on Peter about how kids needed Spidey as a role model to survive. WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN etc.

That was lame, and the whole identity reveal in the train was lame, because there's no way all those people would be able to keep their mouths shut, even if he saved their lives. Breaking the illusion of the secret identity also felt totally wrong and contrived, particularly since its only purpose was to set up the overwrought messianic sequence.

Aside from those moments, though, the movie was fantastic-- best comic book movie I've ever seen.

― Laura E (laurae55), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:05 (twenty-one years ago)

YES! Thank you, Laura, I don't think I've EVER spelled that word correctly in my life.

Re: the identity reveal/the train passengers -- so you're saying it's lame cause it's not possible? Haha!! It's a comic book movie, I think.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, sure, the movie itself is full of thrilling improbabilities/impossibilities, but I suppose I'm more willing to suspend my disbelief for Spidey's badass acrobatics than for a scene that is so transparent in its attempt to yank the heartstrings that it seems manipulative and hollow. Explosions are inherently wicked cool, but if you're gonna try to make my heart swell in my chest, you need to at least attempt subtlety/craft/some level of realism so I can buy into it emotionally.

This is the same reason why most action movies are awesome, and most romantic comedies suck.

― Laura E (laurae55), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:23 (twenty-one years ago)

NA they spent like three minutes basically TELLING us who the villain would be in the next one did you miss it?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:26 (twenty-one years ago)

I WURST YOKING!

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

I definitely need to see this again sometime this weekend.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

I thought the villain introduction was pretty obvious, but can I see how some people might interpret it as a dawning realization of his father's misdeeds, rather than a portent of personal evil. Am I wrong? Did anyone else see that as a possible reading (although it is certainly false)?

― Laura E (laurae55), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:33 (twenty-one years ago)

I saw it as a callback/homage to a kind of classic action movie foreshadow-y ending as far as the obviousness of it goes.

And yeah, I can totally see how someone might interpret it that way -- he seemed kind of appalled and scared, facially.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Isn't that Franco's standard facial expression?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:38 (twenty-one years ago)

he's weak, he's always been weak, but now he finally see the truth about parker. blllllaaaaaaaaaaaargggh.

― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:39 (twenty-one years ago)

I thought the villain introduction was pretty obvious

i don't think obviousness is really a disadvantage here. it was very true to the comic-book form.

franco seems sort of constipated, acting-wise, like he's always looking over his shoulder (figuratively duh). i thought the scene where he

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

discovers spiderman's identity was too rushed. although some of the reaction shots were good, taken individually.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:42 (twenty-one years ago)

he's afraid of the ghost of James Dean

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

I love Franco, no matter what, because of Freaks and Geeks.

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

But yeah, he's not really much of an actor.

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

dude's a looker though

― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:45 (twenty-one years ago)

cheekbones like whoa

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:45 (twenty-one years ago)

"pretty like a girl"

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:46 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah work those scare quotes

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:47 (twenty-one years ago)

My characterization of the villain introduction as obvious wasn't meant to be a criticism. It was in response to:

they spent like three minutes basically TELLING us who the villain would be in the next one did you miss it?

In the context of a comic book movie, I think such obviousness is laudable.

― Laura E (laurae55), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:47 (twenty-one years ago)

scare quotes?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

"scare quotes?"

― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

like that

― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I know what they are, I'm just wondering WTF amateurist is talking about here. That line is a quote.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:51 (twenty-one years ago)

i did not know that

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 18:56 (twenty-one years ago)

The Salon review was a real cold shower but I still want to see this.

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:16 (twenty-one years ago)

You keep talking about Franco and I can only think of Spain's Fave Dictator.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:18 (twenty-one years ago)

"fave"

― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:18 (twenty-one years ago)

vs. fava

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:19 (twenty-one years ago)

ather than a portent of personal evil. Am I wrong? Did anyone else see that as a possible reading (although it is certainly false)? OBVIOUSLY HE'S THE NEW VILLAIN!!!! But not out of hate for Peter/Spidey, out of envy and jealousy.

― Skottie, Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Skottie, how is it possible that you copied and pasted my post without reading it? Yes, *obviously*.

― Laura E (laurae55), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

The Salon review was the most OTM they've been in a long time.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:41 (twenty-one years ago)

that review was like watching my ice cream cone topple.

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 1 July 2004 20:44 (twenty-one years ago)

I read that as "ice cream cone nipple".

― Madonna To Thread (Barima), Thursday, 1 July 2004 21:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Harry discovering Peter's ID and becoming the next Goblin was done pretty well in the books, hope it works here.

― R.I.M.A. (Barima), Thursday, 1 July 2004 21:23 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm skeptical of the Salon review because it was written by someone who was clearly not a fan of the first film. I'm gonna be wary of any critiques of the sequel from anyone who didn't like the 1st one, which I thought was pretty spectacular and significantly above average for a summer blockbuster. I'm still filled with nerdy anticipation for seeing the new one, which I hope to soon.

― theodore fogelsanger, Thursday, 1 July 2004 22:45 (twenty-one years ago)

salon = rockist

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 1 July 2004 22:47 (twenty-one years ago)

looking forward.

― cºzen (Cozen), Thursday, 1 July 2004 23:20 (twenty-one years ago)

good point, theodore. I forgot they didn't like the first movie.

The only thing I didn't like about the first movie was Parker's bullshit refusal of Kirsten Dunst sex action, sorry, I mean Mary-Jane's devotion. Plus it sounded like he was coming out to her ("there's so much I want to tell you...being your friend is ALL I can be...")

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:05 (twenty-one years ago)

actually continued Parker/Watson drama might really infuriate me in the sequel. Still wanna see it.

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:06 (twenty-one years ago)

I kind of liked the first one. The Spidey-action still bothered me a lot, but the characters and their interaction weren't as lazy and overblown.

The only superhero movies I've liked were Hellboy and Batman, neither of which take the traditional superhero love/honor/integrity/FREEDOM BS too seriously. This one is so freakin' earnest.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:15 (twenty-one years ago)

the series of unfortunate events trailer made it look like the Addams Family.

― keith m (keithmcl), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:20 (twenty-one years ago)

omg i forgot about the preview for "national treasure"!!!!!

i am too amazed to say anything, perhaps NA can take over?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:44 (twenty-one years ago)

The main problem with the first one was that the CGI fight scenes looked like absolute ass. I liked it well enough, then it went up in my estimation after Daredevil, and back down after Hulk and X2.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:45 (twenty-one years ago)

this new one, for all its faults, sort of craps all over x-men and hulk.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:46 (twenty-one years ago)

National Treasure already revealed as Come anticipate Goonies 2 with me.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Cage should do a sequel to Leaving Las Vegas for the money. You know, slowly rot away...

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 2 July 2004 00:58 (twenty-one years ago)

nic cage's career is so weird. it's like, the more prestige he has, the more he expends it on really disposable stuff.

his best performance is still valley girl

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Wild at Heart

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:18 (twenty-one years ago)

halle berry seems to be going the same route.

although she's always stunk, so i don't really care.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Cage peaked with Captain Corelli's Mandolin, it's been downhill ever since.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:20 (twenty-one years ago)

are you fucking kidding me?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Maybe.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 2 July 2004 01:24 (twenty-one years ago)

three weeks pass...

FINALLY saw Spiderman 2 today. Random Thoughts:
I wasn't too hot on the first one, but this was fun.
The happy-go-lucky ubernerd "raindrops" sequence does own the movie. Also the played up for comedy Parker clumsiness stuff in general (the broom closet in the beginning haw HAW), and the "oh shit, my webs aren't working AAAAAAAAH!!!!"*splat* stuff.
I appreciated the fact that Dylan Baker from Happiness played his professor. I will NEVER be able to see that guy in a movie without thinking of Bill Maplewood.
Anyone else think Alfred Molina looked like an even fatter headed version of Stephen Fry who played Oscar Wilde in Wilde? Maybe I just thought of that because of the whole "Importance of Being Earnest" thing.
I noticed the yellow cake thing, I should've known you guys would go off about that. Maybe the frosting was chocolate and that's what she meant?
I still think the JJ character is funny. The Hal Sparks in the elevator thing was grebt.
And the train car passion thing wasn't bad until the goofy part where they all tried to protect Spidey. I was satisfied with the way Doc Ock smashed them all to the sides forthwith. For the most part the CGI action does still look like a lame ass video game cutscene. Shame about that, but how else would you do those scenes?
Also, I seem to have missed Bruce Campbell, which part was he in?

― AaronHz (AaronHz), Monday, 26 July 2004 03:17 (twenty-one years ago)

we saw this in the middle of nowhere Ohio when our car broke down, for $2.50, and I still felt totally ripped off afterward. I haven't read any of the previous posts, but briefly, this was one of the most emo action movies I've ever seen. The message is totally convaluted, the acting is bad, even the spcial effects looked lame. Dud.

but i agree with Aaron, the "Peter Parker is a dweeb" scenes were pretty funny

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Monday, 26 July 2004 03:51 (twenty-one years ago)

FWIW I do not have a crush on Kirsten Dunst at all

I think the landlord's daughter scene was just bad editing. I'm sure it went somehwere at one point, but someone wisely cut this endless film down from it's original length. They just did a bad job. It still could have ended about six times

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Monday, 26 July 2004 03:58 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah KD is not that hot to me either...weird because I like Maggie Gyllenhaal who is (kinda) similar looking.

― AaronHz (AaronHz), Monday, 26 July 2004 04:03 (twenty-one years ago)

(Bruce Campbell was the usher when Peter Parker tries to get into the play after it has started)

― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Monday, 26 July 2004 13:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Haha they shoulda replaced T McG and KD with the Gyllenhaals

― fcussen (Burger), Monday, 26 July 2004 13:15 (twenty-one years ago)

i think kirsten dunst was a great choice for MJ, and not just because i find her tasty.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Monday, 26 July 2004 13:33 (twenty-one years ago)

I still like it quite a bit, the haters make it more likeable somehow.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Monday, 26 July 2004 13:34 (twenty-one years ago)

I hope they make 7 of these films with Bruce Campbell as every single villain.

― fcussen (Burger), Monday, 26 July 2004 13:35 (twenty-one years ago)

(Bruce Campbell was the usher when Peter Parker tries to get into the play after it has started)
oh shit! haha! Didn't recognize him/wasn't looking for him. That part was hilarious! That it was BC doing it makes it even better in retrospect.

Haha they shoulda replaced T McG and KD with the Gyllenhaals
Has there ever been a film where brother and sister IRL had to play lovers? That would be fuckin weird.

― AaronHz (AaronHz), Monday, 26 July 2004 17:29 (twenty-one years ago)

I quite liked this, it was fun. Was Kirsten Dunst's hair not a slightly more pleasant shade of red in the previous one?

Not enough Octavius. Also is the point of Aunt May that you just keep hoping that she dies really violently?

― Fergal (Ferg), Monday, 26 July 2004 17:47 (twenty-one years ago)

So... no one else spent the whole film in tears?

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:16 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.zoloft.com/

― amateur!st (amateurist), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Ok. It wasn't me though - it was the guy next to me, in his dreams.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:27 (twenty-one years ago)

i cried at the first Spiderman, but it was because i had just been turned down by a girl i really really liked. i was pissed at peter parker.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:31 (twenty-one years ago)

She turned you down for Spiderman?

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:33 (twenty-one years ago)

I think that ought to have been easier to take than some rejection scenarios.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:35 (twenty-one years ago)

OTM

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:36 (twenty-one years ago)

god taht pissed me off. i was like, "you take a good thing when you're offered it you stupid web-crawling fuck!"

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:37 (twenty-one years ago)

I wasn't expecting her to find out it was him in this film. It all happened a bit too suddenly. It was too much and the script couldn't carry it. The whole ending of the film was a bit of a mess really. And what was that awful indie rock over the end credits? It totally spoiled the mood.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:39 (twenty-one years ago)

Peter Parker has zero personality in these movies. It's hard to tell what MJ sees in him - though she's no firecracker herself.

― morris pavilion (samjeff), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Also I'm starting to get really rockistly anti-CGI. I don't know if it was just that the effects in this film weren't up to much, or that the technology just hasn't advanced enough or what, but in the big action sequences involving death-defying stunts and destruction I just found myself turning off because I knew it hardly happened in any physical sense at all.

I didn't expect this to matter, but it did. Somehow, even unconsciously, when I see a huge thing happening on screen, part of the marvel is the knowing at the back of my mind that Hollywood in all its might has somehow contrived to make huge things happen in real life. I've been on the set of a huge multi-million production and I'll never forget the feeling of awe at the sheer scale of the sets and at the thousands of extras. I know Spiderman 2 must still have used lots of stuntmen, wire work and explosions, but that just wasn't the feel I got off it. It just felt coated in CGI goo.

Still, the central story hit me like a emotional juggernaut so it's a minor complaint really.

I totally disagree with Morris. His compeletely unique screen personality is the reason I got so affected by the whole thing.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, it could also have been the music.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 19:53 (twenty-one years ago)

revive!

On FT pete compared it to superman 2 as both lose their powers but here its far better plotted. The period where he loses his spider powers -- or supresses them (the burden of his relationship to MJ and having killed his best friend's father and not having told his aunt abt the way his uncle died) -- the whole bad patch was really wonderful to watch and i thought really well done (and sweetned by the 'raindrops...' sequence), and it made his renaissance at the end all the more satisfying (I can't think of another comic bk adaptation where the hero is put through such a trial, and actually abt a million times better than superman 2 but I can't really stand superman as a comic bk hero anyway, he's too perfect). It also has an edge over say, the batman movies in the way that his enemies don't come across as one dimensional.

I really liked the sequence in the train too -- obv someone has been paying attn to 'unbreakable' as far as breaking certain conventions in comic bks go -- same with spiderman and MJ getting together in the end.

Having said all that it doesn't make me want to watch the third movie. Its all set up too neatly, and everything seems to have been resolved really.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Monday, 9 August 2004 15:30 (twenty-one years ago)

actually I thought the CGI in this was v. well done (esp. the fighting on the sides of the train) (poss. CGI works better with the zoomed turned to 'REALLY zoomed out'). I'm not sure it didn't affect my appreciation of the (awesome) film.

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 9 August 2004 15:48 (twenty-one years ago)

'it's all set up too neatly' => yeah, maybe, but makes me interested in how thr going to make such obviousness work in interesting ways... i.e. this neatness can't translate 1:1 into the next film else as you said everything wd 'seem to have been resolved really'. and who pays for THAT?

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 9 August 2004 15:50 (twenty-one years ago)

i liked this movie, but please, no more reviews fawning over the "mature, adult themes" of the film. i feel like this what we get for a generation of directors and critics having gone to film school.

― |a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 17:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Thanks for reviving this thread, if only to remind me that there was a recent Hollywood film I didn't much like. Manchurian Candidate and Collateral are both still awesome.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 9 August 2004 17:40 (twenty-one years ago)

like all that very well-meaning and accurate "see, there can be serious themes about [x] in a work of popular entertainment" teaching led to directors and screenwriters who sort of underline the serious themes in their popular movies in a way just muted enough for reviewers to feel clever enough for building a review around them.

― |a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 17:42 (twenty-one years ago)

in the sentence above, I'd like to change my emphasis to 'PAYS', please.

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:25 (twenty-one years ago)

amateurist you are so otm it's ridiculous

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:30 (twenty-one years ago)

also i kinda liked it too but honestly this was one of the most poorly-plotted films i've seen in a long time

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:30 (twenty-one years ago)

explain that.

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Jaymc careful, you are making me not want to see Manchurian Candidate.

― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah plz explain bcz I am comparing it to other comic bk adaptations.

And in a comic bk the hero is put through all the complicated human stuff otherwise life might be easy really. The enemy is always defeated in the end.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:42 (twenty-one years ago)

X-2 is the best comic book movie of the last few years, no matter how many people on here hate it.

― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Jaymc careful, you are making me not want to see Manchurian Candidate.

Why?

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, because I liked Collateral?

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:50 (twenty-one years ago)

yes.

― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 18:52 (twenty-one years ago)

I will get round to watching x-2 one of these days.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

julio do you mind if if wait to explain what i mean until the antibiotics kick in and my head is a little clearer? i don't think i can really articulate myself well enough right now...

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh no! I can mail you some amazing painkillers!

― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:05 (twenty-one years ago)

woops sorry s1ocki didn't mean to sound all demanding, just curious. take care.

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:12 (twenty-one years ago)

oh no it's cool i just felt guilty!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:14 (twenty-one years ago)

I will get round to watching x-2 one of these days.

Do it tonight!

― The guy who saw it three times in the theater (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 19:19 (twenty-one years ago)

four weeks pass...

ok I FINALLY saw this on Friday night:

the cake bothered me. she promises chocolate and brings yellow. whut up?

the metal arms not being sucked into the sun thing bugged me, as did all the women in the beginning's necklaces being yanked off, but somehow, it left their earrings. also didn't get mj's ring, though it nearly sucked her in with the chains.

I don't care, however, because I now have a big fat crush on James Franco and I want to bear his brilliantly cheekboned children.

― luna (luna.c), Tuesday, 7 September 2004 22:39 (twenty-one years ago)

five months pass...

Watched this instead of the Super Bowl. *blah*

I can't wait to see Maguire and Dunst play real people again. Who don't go around articulating their "arcs" every other scene.

Rosemary Harris is so good she actually acted in a couple scenes of this tripe.

Superman 2 >>>>>>>>>>>> Spider-man 2

mostly cuz HACKMAN & STAMP KICK ASS.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 7 February 2005 20:02 (twenty-one years ago)

daniel desario!

― cozen (Cozen), Monday, 7 February 2005 20:04 (twenty-one years ago)

eight years pass...

That scene with Hal Sparks in the elevator,where Hal is understandably a bit excited to be in this summer blockbuster that everyone's gonna see and he's got a little jump in his step. That kind of scene won't happen going forward because actors, especially "I'm usually not asked to do big movies like this!" actors like Sparks was at the time, can't get excited about blockbusters in a post-monoculture America, because they know it's all relative now. You used to see actors like that look really happy to have a small, cute scene in something like this -- they looked like actors in their first commercial, but that's much less likely now.

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:09 (twelve years ago)

lol we really need to use this thread for the 2nd andrew garfield spidey movie

― some dude, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:11 (twelve years ago)

thought that's what this was for! lol

― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:16 (twelve years ago)

first post more evidence that Roger E was oft clueless

― playwright Greg Marlowe, secretly in love with Mary (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:19 (twelve years ago)

if Sony doesn't release a new Spidey movie every two years or something -- something quite restricting -- the Spider-Man films belong to Marvel/Disney under their new partnership. That's why these new ones are put together like a cramming fourth grader trying to get his homework done at 6AM before the bus.

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:22 (twelve years ago)

cunga's post is just bizarre btw, what the hell kind of special new kind of hollywood disillusionment could have set in JUST since 2004 that small-time actors would no longer get excited about scoring a role in a big tentpole summer movie?

― some dude, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:23 (twelve years ago)

the breakdown of monoculture -- the idea that there are summer blockbusters that everyone talks about, even if they don't watch those kinds of movies. That's eroding even though these movies make a ton of money. Being on a national TV commercial means less if none of your friends watch TV, as I've heard a bunch of actor-friends confess. Hal Sparks already had a TV show but he still had a "Oh wow I'm in Spider-Man 2" look on his face -- that probably doesn't happen now

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:35 (twelve years ago)

try harder

― maven with rockabilly glasses (Matt P), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:37 (twelve years ago)

The movie also has Jim Norton, future talk-soup host Joel McHale. It's Late Night w Conan stand-ups circa 1998.

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:37 (twelve years ago)

I think he means there's one of these motherfuckers every 2 weeks now

― playwright Greg Marlowe, secretly in love with Mary (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 01:59 (twelve years ago)

i really have no idea how some recent equivalent like The Avengers is 'less talked about' than Spiderman 2 was nine years ago. when people talk about the death of the monoculture (which i think has been greatly exaggerated but anyway), they don't mean it just happened, they mean it happened a good while ago.

― some dude, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:08 (twelve years ago)

happened awhile ago but there's been some drop-offs in the last eight years, and its death continues. and 2004 has been discussed on ILX elsewhere as being a year when traditional breakthroughs were still possible e.g. Kanye, Arcade Fire.

"Avengers" is a movie that's gigantic, and proves my point wrong in some ways, but then how many Avengers actors besides Downey and Johansson can most people name? Recognition is more relative now.

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:44 (twelve years ago)

Mark Ruffalo was the Hulk, I forgot

― Cunga, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:46 (twelve years ago)

and 2004 has been discussed on ILX elsewhere as being a year when traditional breakthroughs were still possible e.g. Kanye, Arcade Fire.

sounds like 2004 has a lot to pay for

― i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:48 (twelve years ago)

but then how many Avengers actors besides Downey and Johansson can most people name

lol wat

― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:50 (twelve years ago)

obscure little known actor

http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/2012/12/jackson/Samuel-L-Jackson-featured.jpg

― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:51 (twelve years ago)

time was when giants of the cinema like Alfred Molina and Kirsten Dunst could open any movie, with or without a big name franchise attached

― some dude, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:55 (twelve years ago)

Somehow I think the dumbasses of tomorrow will find a way to be as excited about their career potential as Hal Sparks was in Spider-Man 2

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 02:57 (twelve years ago)

i think a less dubious statement than "comedians can't get it up for bit roles after the death of the monoculture in the mid-00's" to derive from Hal Sparks in Spider-Man 2 is "wow, Sam Raimi was relatively down for a goofy, meaningless interlude than most blockbuster directors". Unless you can point to some relatively joyless bit parts from stand-ups of late.

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 03:09 (twelve years ago)

comedians can't get it up for bit roles

having a good fluffer v underrated

― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 03:10 (twelve years ago)

esp after the death of the monoculture

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 03:10 (twelve years ago)

really amazing how Joss Whedon managed to create a lucrative blockbuster with relative unknowns like Jeremy Renner, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Chris Evans.

― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 03:13 (twelve years ago)

when we see Amy Schumer rotely do a double-take in Thor 2 WE'LL be the ones who look stupid

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 03:21 (twelve years ago)

You people are complete mentalists; the Catwoman movie is going to be ridiculously amazing.
― VengaDan Perry's Libido (Dan Perry), Wednesday, June 30, 2004 5:09 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 13:11 (twelve years ago)

FWIW I think Cunga is sort of on to something but da croupier gets us closer to the mark - this is about directors with distinctive styles being allowed to do these huge blockbusters and still slip in personal touches, moments that don't hit the requisite story beats, a favored kind of shot they just like to do in every movie, whatever. Raimi on Spider-Man and Peter Jackson on LOTR, versus Raimi on Oz The Great and Powerful, or whatever (haven't seen the Hobbit film, wonder how that compares). The recent Marvel movies have been to varying degrees streamlined entertainment juggernauts but somewhat bereft of particular personal touches - they live or die on the actors and the number of good jokes packed into the script, but the directors are interchangeable nonentities.

I don't know if this is a permanent new normal or just a kind of momentary oversaturation of CGI-smashes-CGI films (where I agree with Morbs) that means that even movies I haven't seen I sort of figure are just full of blonde guys running around and dodging a bad-looking CGI troll monster that's swinging a club at them. Wrath of the Titans was the last realllly faceless one of these that I let myself go see and it's sort of colored everything that's come out since to the point that I haven't even bothered with Pacific Rim even though I'm pretty sure I'd like it. I guess something like the buddy-cop stuff in Iron Man 3 does speak to some kind of signature theme stuff coming through...

― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 13:25 (twelve years ago)

But yeah Hal Sparks I dunno about, I think I was just like "hey it's that guy from all those VH1 shows, cute scene, good gag." The cake girl is way more WTF (and great) and the first thing that would be cut today, to be replaced by a scene where Doc Ock releases his CGI Octo-Bots to destroy Midtown.

― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 13:27 (twelve years ago)

managed to create a lucrative blockbuster with relative unknowns like Jeremy Renner

the average moviegoer sure as fuck can't name him, doubt Chris Evans either

― playwright Greg Marlowe, secretly in love with Mary (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 13:28 (twelve years ago)

how many Avengers actors besides Downey and Johansson can most people name?

The Avengers Blu-Ray (and DVD?) cover doesn't even have Johansson on it, which is some bullshit.

As far as Spiderman 2, didn't see the first reboot, won't see this one. The photos of Electro look really lousy.

― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 15:27 (twelve years ago)

The reboot is discussed here: Spider-Man 4 (reboot thread) -- aka The Amazing Spider-Man , and is as lousy and faceless as they come.

― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 16:05 (twelve years ago)

I guess something like the buddy-cop stuff in Iron Man 3 does speak to some kind of signature theme stuff coming through...

That essence which is Shane Black.

― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 16:10 (twelve years ago)

the average moviegoer sure as fuck can't name him, doubt Chris Evans either

Is Evans the one played by Captain America?

― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 16:44 (twelve years ago)

The idea that people are nostalgic for the innocence, personality and whimsy of Iraq War-era cinema...goddamn, that's awesome

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 16:55 (twelve years ago)

There was that feeling, around the Bush/Kerry election, where you could reach out to everyone at once....

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 16:56 (twelve years ago)

whut up?

― luna (luna.c), Tuesday, 7 September 2004 22:39

― am0n, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:03 (twelve years ago)

It's like noticing the random, dated references to Tom Green and Chris Kirkpatrick on "The Real Slim Shady" and deciding that America was more into cultural subversion back then, rather than that Eminem got away with some random-ass shit.

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:07 (twelve years ago)

tom green is still a strange person.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:09 (twelve years ago)

the fire of 2004 has not died in him

― da croupier, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:10 (twelve years ago)

rip torn also everstrange

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:11 (twelve years ago)

most dated line in "the real slim shady"

― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:15 (twelve years ago)

whut up?

― luna (luna.c), Tuesday, 7 September 2004 22:39

― am0n, Tuesday, July 23, 2013 1:03 PM (25 minutes ago) Bookmark

― i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:29 (twelve years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.