 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
with the movie or the DVD extras.First of all, the story was so formulaic, it was inexcusable. If I were 12 and had never seen a superhero flick before, maybe I would like it. Maybe.
Second, as far as the extras are concerned, do we REALLY need to see a Spiderman blooper reel? Pure throwaway.
Follow Ups:
As such, it was as one would expect-better than others in fact. If you want deeper drama, watch "Gone with the Wind".
As for the extras, of the 100 or so DVDs I've bought in the last year, there have only been 2 with extras that my wife and I found interesting(kareoke on Shrek, and outtakes on Blade 2).
Anyone who expects wonders from, or pays more for, extras is a fool.
enjoy,
Jack
I thought (my first mistake) from all the positive reviews that it would at least rise above sheer mediocrity. Even the first few Superman and Batman movies went against the grain a little bit and provided something more than the pure shlock and cliche of this movie. This was like skipping ahead to "Batman Forever" or "Superman 4"As far as the extras, there was not enough to justify a two DVD package. It was obviously thrown together in haphazard fashion.
I wasn't expecting high drama, and I'm no fool, thanks---that's why I RENTED it. And, I purposely waited to see it on DVD so I wouldn't have to pay more than 4 bucks to watch it.
what the people who are loyal to the book(s) feel about the movie and they give it fairly high praise.If you haven't read a comic book religiously, it's tough to get a proper handle on things. Unfortunately, I don't read Spiderman, but books like The Sandman, Punisher, Swamp Thing and Silver Surfer are very familiar to me and I'm sure my critique of these movies would hold a bit more weight when compared to somebody who hasn't read them at all.
Take care, Chris
I read Spiderman comics as a kid, and I know the background very well. That's not what my rant is about. My point is that they didn't even try to take the idea of Spiderman to another level---which is what a good movie is supposed to do.The storylines in the early Superman and Batman movies were true to the original vision, yet they took some chances outside the basic story everybody knew.
Spiderman was structured with an assembly line script---it moves along like it was put together by a kiddie-tested focus group. I see nothing wrong in disliking that kind of movie, even one with origins in a comic book.
I see it as a rudementary introduction for what is sure to become a franchise marque.As I said, I'm not up on Spiderman, but I thought the first third of the movie did an interesting job of painting a picture of Peter Parker as a high schooler. I got a good sense of who he was and what his family life was like. We saw Mary Jane develop and as I understand it, she plays a major role in Spidey's life up until a point. Granted, only 35-45 minutes worth, but it rendered a valid picture for me.
I thought that there was good interplay in the middle with Harry (?), Peter, MJ and Auntie, along with Dr. Osbourne and the newpaper editor was funny. This lead up to a battle that didn't surprise anyone, but it's a good vs. evil thing and it is what it is. At the end, he can't come to grips with his feelings and letting them be known to MJ. Obviously, there will be Spidey II coming the year after next, so the story moves on.
Take care, Chris
A comic book based movie that has a formulaic plot? The Horror!I trust my barber,
Tom §.
I didn't do any of the extras. I enjoyed it, but it's not the best comic book movie I've even seen, such as SPAWN or even Dolph in THE PUNISHER, which I liked a lot.All in all, I've spent $17 on worse.
Chris
i was at the video store today and saw a glimpse of it on their screen.can i judge a movie in 30 seconds? lol, you bet i can!!
i'm saying 'no' to spiderman.
Saw it in the theater and enjoyed it alot. I thought it was one of the better comic book adaptations to hit the screen in a long while. Tobey Mcquire as was a casting coups. I don't find Kirsten Dunst attractive though...to each his own.I liked the extras myself. The interviews with the artists were interesting (John Byrne was my favorite spiderman artist). My kids had fun reading through the villians gallery and the HBO special was fun to watch.
Rob
It's the storyline that was weak---can you get more predictable? Even the final battle was by-the-book.I do happen to find Dunst attractive---the one part of the movie I thoroughly enjoyed viewing :)
And one more thing:
Why, why, why did they cover up Dafoe's purely evil face with that stupid mask?
The back-story of Spiderman is known to almost everyone in the US. The movie really could not deviate from that. And of course the bad guy gets it in the end. The Green Goblin died at least once in the comic only to comeback in various incarnations.Again, the mask was unavoidable as it is the visual center of the Green Goblin character. I liked the touch of making it part of the military suit rather than just a mask as in the comic. I admit it does make some scenes hard to watch. The whole section of him tempting Spiderman into becoming his partner suffers because all he can do is geture and nod his head. The permanent scowl of the mask also robs the menace from his threats to the newspapar editor. Not much can be done acout this. The same was true of Batman and more recently, Cyclops in the X-men movie.....with out the expressivness of a whole face, the emotion of any given scene suffers.
Ms. Dunst has a very nice figure (some nice exposure of it in 'Bring It On'), but her face does not complete the picture in my eyes. She is a decent acctress though.
Thanks,
Rob
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
