Trailer during avengers seemed a bit better than what I had seen
Spider-Man getting a reboot.
-
-
@Nex:
sort of like Spiderman with the whole Peter Parker being molested thing.
…wait, what? Never heard this.
-
@Syan:
…wait, what? Never heard this.
Neither had I, until I read this article: http://www.cracked.com/article_19799_5-creepy-superhero-origin-stories-movies-wisely-left-out.html
It's the very first one, and oddly, the only one I somehow did not know about.
-
Wow. That's just… out there.
-
It was a PSA thing.
-
Just like that disturbing Sonic the Hedgehog one. :ninja:
"That's no good."
-
I remember our whole 4th grade class getting that comic book as part of a sexual abuse talk from our guidance counselor. I find it odd that it's essentially a comic where a stranger in tights crawls through a boy's window to lecture him about sexual abuse.
-
I walked into gamestop the other day and saw a display for the movie game. Now I haven't been keeping up with the info on this one so I saw the promo picture for the game that had Lizard in it and wondered…
"Why is Spiderman fighting Abomination?"
Took me a second to remember Lizard...I felt like an idiot.
-
Webb's come out and said that the reason they kept Lizard's face more human-like in the film itself was so the actor could more effectively emote.
As for the game, that's The Iguana, another Spidey villain who's a Lizard rip-off and apparently part of the game for the sake of having a Lizard-like enemy even though the game takes place after the movie.
-
I think a big snout would look silly/not work on screen.
-
@Sniper:
I think a big snout would look silly/not work on screen.
And the flat-face thing they made is that much better? At least the lizard head is iconic.
-
…..No wait, that's terrible.
I quit.
-
@Thousand:
And the flat-face thing they made is that much better? At least the lizard head is iconic.
Flat-face is fine. That was his original appearance, was it not?
-
I don't know or care what Lizard's face was like in the old days. This Lizard looks like the deformed love child of Voldemort and a Ninja Turtle.
Not like this.
-
Lizard's name should be renamed into The Reptile Man or Nerfed Hulk with Scales.
Because…
That ain't no lizard. -
It is what it is, but when you have a tail, and generally the body of a lizard, and the face doesn't match, it just looks weird. We haven't seen a clear image, I believe, but he doesn't even look frightening. A lizard screaming at you is supposed to be frightening. But I haven't seen the movie (ofc) so I might be proven wrong. Just poor promotion on their part. This guy right here is terrifying.
-
Are we 100% certain that he WONT have a full lizard face throughout the course of the movie?
-
Director Marc Webb comments on the shitty Lizard Interpretation.
Basically to sum it up:
Webb felt that he should do without the snout because he was interested more in something that could relate to human emotions because he wanted to keep Rhys' performance in synch with the creature. Webb wanted him to have emotions, to have a face that can express feelings. He stated "that in a comic book, you just put that thing up there, and you can say, oh, thought bubble, whatever. But when you try to do that and make it look real, it's a different challenge, and I'm creating a movie, not a comic book. Webb felt that he "wanted to do something that felt more contemporary, and was less based in representing panels from the comics" and focus on spirit over style.
Twitch
Are we 100% certain that he WONT have a full lizard face throughout the course of the movie?
There's this image I pulled from Google Search, but take it with a grain of salt.
[hide]
[/hide]
Someone married their stepmom and then got murdered?
Sounds like he used a monkey paw to make a porno story come true.
Then the curse of the paw eventually killed him.
-
and I'm creating a movie, not a comic book.
First mistake right there. Not catering to the fans, i.e. the main demographic. Your second mistake was making the movie with the wrong mind-set. Not sticking to the established material to make your "own movie" where you ultimately end up distorting iconic characters, making a mess of the mythos and pissing everyone off in the process. Avengers was fantastic because it reveled in what it was, a comic-book movie. There's reinventing yourself and putting a spin onto things, fine but when you fixate on deviating too much you make an inferior product especially when you try and make a serious movie out of a comic book movie (it barely worked for Dark Knight). Third mistake, if you wanted to give the lizard emotions so much, how about you actually try and challenge yourself and do just that with the lizard head. Challenge your make-up team and CGI team to make it look as realistic as possible rather than taking the easy way out. Or if that's too hard, challenge the writing team to pull something off, you can give tons of emotion with just the setting and the lighting and the music and the actions of the character alone. With all that said, your fourth and biggest mistake was thinking the main problem was that the Lizard didn't have a lizard head without realizing that we may have been more forgiving if the end product didn't look like the deformed love child of Voldemort and a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle.
Nitpicking? Probably, but not a very encouraging sign.
Exacerbated by the fact that the director only has one movie to his name ( a romantic comedy at that) and he's already getting artsy.
-
Counterpoint: X-Men First Class
-
I actually had the exact same thoughts TLC, but didn't know whether I should have spoken up about it or not.
"I'm creating a movie, not a comic book?" That's an insulting line to comic book fans. Did Joss Whedon say anything like that about The Avengers? No? This is what Whedon had to say about the Avengers:
"It goes back to the very first incarnation of The Avengers, it goes to "The Ultimates" it goes to everything about it. It makes no sense, it's silly, it's ridiculous. There's a thunder god, there's a giant green "id" rage monster, there's Captain America from the 40s, there's Tony Stark who definitely doesn't get along with anybody. Ultimately these people don't belong together and the whole movie is about finding yourself from community. These people shouldn't be in the same room let alone on the same team—and that is the definition of family And finding that you not only belong together but you need each other, very much. Obviously this will be expressed through punching but it will be the heart of the film."
And That is why the Avengers is so damn successful. Because it's never ashamed of its geeky "comic-book" origins, and actually embraces them with full gusto. The Director has to go into the film with that kind of mind-frame. Otherwise, it'll fail.
-
If I was capable of caring for the hideous prawn aliens from district 9
If i was capable of caring for WALL-EI THINK I might be able to handle a lizard snout.
-
But guys
SPIDEY CRACKS JOKES!!!
-
The more I see and hear about this movie, the more I'm convinced that it's going to suck.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
in a comic book, you just put that thing up there, and you can say, oh, thought bubble, whatever. But when you try to do that and make it look real, it's a different challenge,
Yep, because that's the only way comic book artists have ever conveyed emotion from a non-human-looking entity is by just putting thought bubbles over them.
And really, this is just him admitting his own failure, that he can't make a guy with a lizard snout express emotions.
-
I think it's pretty clear that Mr. I have only one romantic comedy to my name and I clearly have never read these comics in my life and have no idea about the character nuances or the comic book mythos is pretty much the wrong guy for the job.
-
lol I said this guy sucked the moment he was announced but all people could talk about was about how Sam Raimi and Tobey Mahuire ruined Spider-Man forever and how there will finally be quips.
At least Raimi made a comic book movie, campy as it was at times.
-
@Thousand:
I think it's pretty clear that Mr. I have only one romantic comedy to my name and I clearly have never read these comics in my life and have no idea about the character nuances or the comic book mythos is pretty much the wrong guy for the job.
How can you even say he never read a comic or even understand spiderman mythos when you haven't seen his movie or know him in real life. No he just doesn't understand beccause he is making a movie and not a comic book….....
-
stated "that in a comic book, you just put that thing up there, and you can say, oh, thought bubble, whatever.
Whatever !
-
Kermit the frog can make me laugh, cry, worry, cheer, sing, and drop all suspension of disbelief… and he's a FELT HAND PUPPET.
Are you saying that as a director with CGI at your disposal, you can't get emotion out of a non human creature? You suck dude.
I mean theres also mood, lighting, music, camera work, body language…
I'm creating a movie, not a comic book.
Well, barring insanely good word of mouth, this just slipped from possible theatrical to "wait for the dvd".
I mean hey, by June 3 I can probably still see Avengers a second time. And prometheus comes out the same week. And Brave will be out a week before that. And Dark Knight two weeks later.
Yeah. One stupid ass quote from the director can go a long way.
-
Well, putting aside the look, I'm also not a fan of how they seem to be putting the Lizard in the role of standard villain rather than tragic mentor role.
-
It is interesting to note in the interview where we talks about the lizard being snoutless we never says the quote you guys are complaiming over read the articles to find out.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=59095
http://collider.com/marc-webb-amazing-spider-man-interview-spider-man/163783/
If that quote is from any early interview I would like to see the whole thing please show can you please show me a link RQ.
-
If that quote is from any early interview I would like to see the whole thing please show can you please show me a link RQ.
The "Making a movie, not a comic book" quote is here.
http://www.webcitation.org/67Q4HenJy
He also itterates in several interviews, that doing a snout is too much work… EVEN THOUGH ITS ALL CGI ANYWAY.
1996 CGI says "hi".
-
Why isn't anyone bringing up Toothless as an example? You all suck.
-
(500) days of snout editing
-
Why isn't anyone bringing up Toothless as an example? You all suck.
Because theres countless examples of fully emotive critters that are non human?
"this is a movie, not a comic" loses credibility… but "I'm not good enough to do what anyone with talent does" just makes me really think there's no reason to trust this director's talents at all.
-
"to have a face that can express feelings"
That's not a lizard dammit! It's supposed to be reptile-like. It's not supposed to to be able to make a wide smile like a human. What kind of feelings have they planned for a monster? I so hope it isn't King Kong-like. While I never gave it any thought until the Nostalgia Critic brought it up, Kong was having a lot of emotions for an ape. Sadness, happy, angry, wants to pee - it was all there.
I can already see it. It's going to make a sad face and we'll be supposed to care. Unless it turns out to be good and we do end up caring. Still …
-
Rather than focusing on putting a face to the Lizard, shouldn't he focus on getting a script that'll make us care about him? Because personally the Lizard can make the goofiest shit-eating grin he wants and I won't give a shit about him if the writing of the character isn't worth a damn.
Now excuse me while I go watch a movie with anthropomorphic toys.
Doh, if that isn't the most emotionally moving plastic T-Rex I ever saw :)
-
Sam Raimi would've taken the time to give Lady Vulture a snout.
And YOU scared him away.
-
Aren't people overreacting just a little? Sure, the comment was…not the smartest, but just because the lizard won't have a snout on him and the director spoke a poor choice of words doesn't mean this movie's gonna absolutely suck.
-
Of course it's not but…it's not a good omen. It's these small things that act as discouraging tell-tale signs, an indicator of a very unappealing mentality.
It could be that we're wrong and the director will do a competent job or that he's a hack without the first clue how to direct an action movie. We'll have to see, won't we?
-
Another gem from the link that Robby posted a page back in response to Captain Katsura's post:
There was a fair amount of research for me to do because I didn't read the comic books growing up, so of course I had a lot to brush up on.
Then why the hell are you directing a comic-book movie?
Now I'm using Wikipedia for this next bit but according to the cast section on the film's Wikipedia page:
Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy),
Denis Leary (Captain Stacy),
& Martin Sheen (Ben Parker)were quoted as either not knowing much or anything about the Spider-Man mythos outside of Sam Raimi's Film Series.
Maybe I am overly nit-picking along with Thousand Lion-Chan, but when the film's director and principle cast members aside from Garfield (said he was a spider-man fan since the age of four) and perhaps Rhys Ifans (didn't specify) possess little knowledge of the character's comic-book universe, it bodes ill for the movie.
Someone married their stepmom and then got murdered?
Sounds like he used a monkey paw to make a porno story come true.
Then the curse of the paw eventually killed him.
-
@Rogues':
Another gem from the link that Robby posted a page back in response to Captain Katsura's post:
Then why the hell are you directing a comic-book movie?
Now I'm using Wikipedia for this next bit but according to the cast section on the film's Wikipedia page:
Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy),
Denis Leary (Captain Stacy),
& Martin Sheen (Ben Parker)were quoted as either not knowing much or anything about the Spider-Man mythos outside of Sam Raimi's Film Series.
Maybe I am overly nit-picking along with Thousand Lion-Chan, but when the film's director and principle cast members aside from Garfield (said he was a spider-man fan since the age of four) and perhaps Rhys Ifans (didn't specify) possess little knowledge of the character's comic-book universe, it bodes ill for the movie.
Well does it really matter if he didn't grow up with them but he understand them and has knowledge of what makes these people who they are and what makes them great charters and what spiderman is a great series.
As long a he directs Emma Stone and Denies Leray well and like the charcters there suspose to be playing from the comic and they know have some knowledge of what they should be and how they should act.
-
It really baffles me that you can make a movie about a teen whos given superpowers from a radioactive spider, dresses up in bright red and blue spider-spandex, swings around manhattan like Tarzan using home made "web fluid" and fights a dude who has mutated into a giant reptile-man…and still claim that "youre making a movie, not a comic book"
I think a new thread title is in order.
Something snout related. -
I still don't understand why you guys are taking such offencse to that quote?
Hang in there, Kierkegaard.
