There was one scene that made me laugh in the first movie that was intentionally funny, it was when Spidey was trying to shoot his web on command for the first time. It wasn't wisecracking, but it was funny.
Spider-Man getting a reboot.
-
-
I didn't like the Raimi Spiderman movies. At all. (I liked part 2 in the theatre, the first time I saw it.) Considering I'm a fan of Raimi's (Army of Darkness, Hercules, Xena, Jack of All trades) its kind of odd… but I disliked a LOT of things about them.
Reboot can only go up far as I'm concerned.
And failing that, we've got 26 episodes of Spectacular which is going to just be my default Spidey I think.
-
You mean like,
"Are you in or are you out?"
"You're the one who's out! Out of his mind!"We're really going to put that in the same square as "You think I'm a cop? In this red and blue spandex? Really?"
Yes.
Not every joke has to land to make you a wisecraker. A wisecraker is someone who makes opportunistic jokes. Just because u didn't like it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Don't be a zoro. -
Kinda cool.
[hide]
[/hide] -
If only i could put my finger on who he reminds me of.
Wasn't there a sitcom about talking dinosaur puppets that kind of looked like this iteration of the lizard?
-
You mean Disney's Dinosaurs?
-
Spiderman meets the Sinclairs.
The crossover you never expected!
-
@Rogues':
!
The Image on the Left is a Fake, Fan-Made Poster for the Movie that actually looks pretty damn Awesome
Seems to similar to the design of Godzilla from the 97/98 American film.
-
Reminds me more of the Goombas from the Mario Bros. live action movie. The face anyway.
-
-
The Lizard looks fine to me. So they're going for a more "half-man, half-reptile" look than just straight-up "anthropomorphic lizard." No big deal. I get the feeling Spidey himself will really be the star of the show this time around anyway.
-
That's…not the clip I'd have chosen to put online first. Paints a real dull pic of Pete.
-
Yeah, I really don't give a shit what the Lizard looks like. I mean, I've never liked him for how he looked, just the premise. And at hindsight, the premise looks like it's being fulfilled. Peter has a mentor who is being transformed and change in a manner similar to Peter, but for the worse.
I'm alright with this.
-
Yeah, I really don't give a shit what the Lizard looks like. I mean, I've never liked him for how he looked, just the premise. And at hindsight, the premise looks like it's being fulfilled. Peter has a mentor who is being transformed and change in a manner similar to Peter, but for the worse.
I'm alright with this.
but why make Connors evil though? That doesn't even make any sense.
-
The only issue I have with the movie so far is that…we haven't even had the movies in theaters yet, and yet we know that the cops are going to know who Spider-Man really is.
It took the original Spider-Man movies two movies until an entire train of people learned who Spider-Man was, and THERE I thought it was ridiculous (bullshit, at least 30% of that train is telling who Spider-Man is). Now the cops know? I don't know where they're going to go with that.
but why make Connors evil though? That doesn't even make any sense.
They're making Connors evil? I thought he was just indulging himself in his own experiment, which turns him into the Lizard, where as beast he goes berserk.
Either way, maybe Spidey is supposed to convince him otherwise? Maybe this isn't a case of hero taking down the bad guy as much as it is the hero trying to protect the bad guy and make him realize what he should be fighting for.
shrug
I haven't seen the movie yet. I don't know.
-
They could be going with more of a split personality angle, though. The lizard is an intelligent being with berserk rage and if influences Conners.
-
but why make Connors evil though? That doesn't even make any sense.
Why doesn't it make sense?
-
Why doesn't it make sense?
Because… Connors... isn't evil? He was actually doing the Lizardman experiments to benefit mankind, it just went horribly wrong.
Granted, movie wise they could make it work, by having the lizard genes making him "crazy", but that'd probably lead to the crappy "redemption by death" thing I hate so much.
I'm not 100% Lizardman is evil in this, the previews just kinda make it seem like he's going crazy.
-
Just because the comics did it a certain way doesn't mean the movie should follow suit.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
But if you want to go all comic booky... Connors ate his son and lost his humanity not that long ago so now he IS completely evil.
-
Just because the comics did it a certain way doesn't mean the movie should follow suit.
but.. I agreed and said that it could work…
But if you want to go all comic booky… Connors ate his son and lost his humanity not that long ago so now he IS completely evil.
The same Marvel that had the Blob eat wasp? Yeah, I'm not surprised at all.
-
but.. I agreed and said that it could work…
I know, my statement was kind of supposed to be more general, but it comes off a bit angry because the "it's different, now it sucks!" thing comes up often in these kinds of threads.
The same Marvel that had the Blob eat wasp? Yeah, I'm not surprised at all.
Not comparable situations. Blob eating the Wasp was shock value gore written by a hack. Shed, the Spider-Man story, was a terrifically written story full of heartbreak and an ultimately tragic end to a tragic character. The ultimate subversion of the "redemption by death" thing you just mentioned. Instead of a final heroic deed, the monster inside of him consumes him.
-
So that's what became of Connor? How sad.
-
Marvel and DC really do like to fuck their characters.
-
If it's as well written as Kaiolino says, then I don't mind.
Comic books are a continuous medium. You have to create drama at the sacrifice of SOMETHING sometimes. However, that something has to be chosen wisely.
-
Yeah, I really don't give a shit what the Lizard looks like. I mean, I've never liked him for how he looked, just the premise
I'm perfectly okay with the idea of altering the Lizards design for the movie; the problem is that they altered into something that doesn't look fearsome and shocking, but something that looks goofy and out of place. I mean, they have everything else down; the tail, the clawed, lizard-like "hands", the physique - but the face is a green human with no nose. It sticks out like a halloween mask to me. The only reason I can think of why they wouldn't go "all the way" with the design is the same reason Green Goblins costume became an armor - it's not as "out there" for all the non-comic geeks.
-
I can't see how a crocodile like beast is 'out there', but meh.
I think they want him to still be able to talk while he's in his beast form, so they want a human like face.
Yeah, I hate the idea of that, but I can live with it. I'll hold my judgement until I see the movie.
-
I don't like this version of Lizard either. Don't know if it was mentioned yet but apparently they used the first Lizard that appeared in the comics as influence.
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/5/51884/2107109-lizard_prep.jpg
Or it's just coincidence.
-
It could even be based of the oooold cartoon.
-
It could even be based of the oooold cartoon.
I hope "I rule the swamps; tomorrow the world!" will become a catch phrase of the Lizard in this movie lol
-
I hope "I rule the swamps; tomorrow the world!" will become a catch phrase of the Lizard in this movie lol
I believe we have a new thread title.
-
Official poster
-
Siiiiiiigh.
Start and the feet and look upwards; Lizardman, Lizardman, Lizardman…bald human with green skin. -
I think I'd prefer this, to be honest.
-
I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you guys are incredibly pissed. Maybe I'm being soft because I have faith in this movie, but it seems to be a more realistic take than his whole face forming the long mouth/stout of a lizard. Maybe it doens't look the most terrifying, however if it gets vicious in the movie, who knows, maybe it'll be amazing.
Then again, maybe I'm being easy judging.
-
http://content6.flixster.com/rtmovie/88/12/88120_gal.jpg
Official poster
Well I thought it would look dumber, it's actually pretty good.
-
-
I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you guys are incredibly pissed. Maybe I'm being soft because I have faith in this movie, but it seems to be a more realistic take than his whole face forming the long mouth/stout of a lizard.
By simply injecting lizard cells into himself he grows a new arm, a tail, gets covered in scales, and gets velociraptor legs. Realistic went out the window long ago. As he is now, he just looks…off. Like they didn't know whether they wanted to go all out reptile, or just scaly voldemort.
After having learned that Connors and lizard are the same actor, I'm pretty sure that it's for Mo-Cap reasons. -
New trailer:
-
That trailer has convinced me: this movie is going to be awesome.
-
I hope this doesn't turn out like Green Lantern. The trailers were awesome, but the movie itself….ehhhhhhh notsomuch.
-
Now that's what I'm talkin about!
-
Finally a good quip
-
What do you guys think of this: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=59101
-
I think it will be a good movie, but a few points uneasy me about it. I don't know if it caught anyone else's eye, but the city looks very colorful and many of the places. I mean, we get a shot of spider-man shoting his web in mid air, and the city below him is so dark-blue and the lights of cars are so bright; and the same of some tower-thingy that Spider-man is looking down from. And there was another scene with a first-person view. I know these are small details, mostly in the look of the film, but I noticed them, and not in a good way.
Otherwise it's just a few things with the entire cast, the many plots they seem to be running and so on and the feel of the movie, the vibe. I loved Spider-man 2. I loved Tobey Mcguire in it. Sure, he wasn't the Spidey apparently in the comics, always making jokes, but I tire of jokes and cockyness. I felt for the Peter potrayed by Tobey. There was goodness in his eyes.
-
What do you guys think of this: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=59101
Well… Depending on whether or not there is a good reason for Peter's parents' acts, I would be inclined to overlook the small difference in the origin. it doesn't change THAT much, and if it adds to the plot, I'm all for it. Just don't make it bllsht like in the 2003 Hulk, and i'm perfectly happy with a little tweaking here and there.
-
Well… Depending on whether or not there is a good reason for Peter's parents' acts, I would be inclined to overlook the small difference in the origin. it doesn't change THAT much, and if it adds to the plot, I'm all for it. Just don't make it bllsht like in the 2003 Hulk, and i'm perfectly happy with a little tweaking here and there.
What was the bs in the 2003 hulk?
-
Well, the father, the changing of the backstory, the ending was bs, it was generally a bad movie with a really bad plot
-
Are you talking about all the abuse stuff? Because that was actually in the comics. It was added in later during the comic's run, sort of like Spiderman with the whole Peter Parker being molested thing. It was still a terrible movie yes, but Ang Lee didn't create that backstory.
-
Banner being beaten by his dad was a core part of Peter David's seminal run no less.