|
Rewatching the first Spiderman right now because of this conversation and I must say that the whole "person walking in off the street to wrestle what I assume is a professional" just does not seem realistic at all.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:40 |
|
|
Madkal posted:Rewatching the first Spiderman right now because of this conversation and I must say that the whole "person walking in off the street to wrestle what I assume is a professional" just does not seem realistic at all. It was an actual thing you could do in the 80s. And when UFC started they let pretty much anyone compete.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:He died saving the city from his own hubris and would've survived if his arms, which represent the hubris, weren't literally weighing him down. It's good imo. Yeah I don't disagree that it fits, I just don't feel like it had to happen that way to have a good ending ^^^ isn't the only requirement to be a wrestler is doing cocaine
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:25
|
|
|
site posted:Yeah I don't disagree that it fits, I just don't feel like it had to happen that way to have a good ending The way I see it, Raimi killed Octavius for two reasons. 1) This is a movie, not a comic book. You don't know if you're going to get another chance to tell this story, so you'd better do whatever you wanted to do with this possible one shot you get. So if you really want to emphasize the price of his hubris by killing him, you'd better damned well do it. 2) If you do get another movie and you didn't kill him, Octavius is going to be like a big ol' albatross around its neck. If you don't put him in the movie, everyone's going to be asking where he is and why, if he's redeemed, he's not helping. If you do put him in the movie, he's going to be a needless distraction from the current storyline.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:The way I see it, Raimi killed Octavius for two reasons. Well to 1, if raimi wanted to have ock die that's fine but again I don't think a story about him necessitates him dying just because well it's a movie For 2 I don't really buy that at all because I find the notion that if a guy survives then end of a movie and had his story completed them he must appear in the next film kinda ridiculous. He could just be in jail or whatever. Civil war had Zemo survive, although he wasn't redeemed, and no one was clamoring for him to show up in iw. No one complains vulture isn't in Holland Spidey 2. And ngl in a movie with Harry osborn goblin, sandman, AND venom if ock showed up in a bit part that would be the least of 3s problems lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
site posted:For 2 I don't really buy that at all because I find the notion that if a guy survives then end of a movie and had his story completed them he must appear in the next film kinda ridiculous. He could just be in jail or whatever. Civil war had Zemo survive, although he wasn't redeemed, and no one was clamoring for him to show up in iw. No one complains vulture isn't in Holland Spidey 2. And ngl in a movie with Harry osborn goblin, sandman, AND venom if ock showed up in a bit part that would be the least of 3s problems lol Spider-Man 2 existed in a much smaller world than Civil War, though. By that point in the MCU, we had come to accept that the world is chock full of heroes and villains and they've all got their own things going on, so we can kind of infer good reasons for them not to be constantly stepping on each others' toes. Raimi wouldn't have had to include Octavius, but if he hadn't wanted to, he would have needed to at least address why, which he might just not have felt inclined to do. Maybe he felt like he'd told the story he had wanted to tell, and wanted to have the character exit on that note.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
site posted:Well to 1, if raimi wanted to have ock die that's fine but again I don't think a story about him necessitates him dying just because well it's a movie Doc Ock was really, really, well received at the time though. He was (and probably still is) one of the greatest page to screen translations of a villain. Zemo and Vulture were no where near as well received though they are good villains. Plus, they are part of a shared universe which Spider-Man 2 was not, in a shared universe you know you're getting many more films and TV shows down the line so it's okay to have a few on the bench. A point of comparison would be Ledger's Joker, he would have certainly been back in some form had Ledger not have died, and if he wasn't, people would have been furious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
Things I have forgotten about Spiderman 1: How dark the robbers death was Green Goblin turning people into vaporizing skeletons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:00
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Spider-Man 2 existed in a much smaller world than Civil War, though. By that point in the MCU, we had come to accept that the world is chock full of heroes and villains and they've all got their own things going on, so we can kind of infer good reasons for them not to be constantly stepping on each others' toes. Raimi wouldn't have had to include Octavius, but if he hadn't wanted to, he would have needed to at least address why, which he might just not have felt inclined to do. Maybe he felt like he'd told the story he had wanted to tell, and wanted to have the character exit on that note. I don't understand, if 2 had ended with say ock being able to solve the explosion problem and then turning himself into the police, why would 3 have to address him still being incarcerated. How does that service the story Karloff posted:Doc Ock was really, really, well received at the time though. He was (and probably still is) one of the greatest page to screen translations of a villain. Zemo and Vulture were no where near as well received though they are good villains. Plus, they are part of a shared universe which Spider-Man 2 was not, in a shared universe you know you're getting many more films and TV shows down the line so it's okay to have a few on the bench. Tbh Im not following the he was popular therefore he has to show up or the "well it's a shared universe" what does it matter if one is a shared universe. I think I'm missing what the actual argument there is And I disagree on the ledger joker comparison because ocks story was definitely over at the end of 2 but dark knight ends with joker being captured but it was not The End of the Joker, at least that's how I felt about it. But also that's my personal feeling on that one and not in any way definitive site fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Dec 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
site posted:I don't understand, if 2 had ended with say ock being able to solve the explain problem and then turning himself into the police, why would 3 have to address him still being incarcerated. How does that service the story Because his popularity would have meant that the fans/corporate suits would have put pressure on Raimi to include him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:04
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Things I have forgotten about Spiderman 1: Yeah, I reckon Spider-Man (2002) is the darkest and most violent of the Spider-Man films. Even moreso than the first Amazing which held itself as dark but wasn't really. When Spider-Man (2002) was released in the UK it caused minor controversy because it was rated a 12 which at the time meant younger kids could not go see it. The BBFC defended their decision saying they considered it for a 15 and that it was one of the most violent films they had seen that was aimed at a child audience. Their particular point of concern was the final fight between the Goblin and Spider-Man. There's a lot of nasty details in it; when Spider-Man is trying to hold up the cable car you can see his blood on the cable as it slips out of his hands because he's squeezing it so hard. The Goblin truly beats the poo poo out of Spider-Man in a way that comes off as pretty sadistic, and the Goblin's death is quite grim, being impaled through the groin and all. Shortly after the 12 rating was disbanded for cinemas (remained on home video) and the 12A rating was introduced specifically for cinema and Spider-Man was swiftly rereleased, that meant that younger kids could get taken in as long as they had an adult with them. But it also meant foolish parents would take their very young kids in to any 12A assuming that it was "for children". I worked at a cinema when The Woman in Black came out, and there were loads of angry parents shouting at underpaid cinema workers because their kid got scared by the movie with Harry Potter in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
maybe they could have pressured him to include ock instead of the x-games goblin
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Because his popularity would have meant that the fans/corporate suits would have put pressure on Raimi to include him. Didn't raimi already go all out with all the other poo poo because he knew it was the last one I feel like "the suits would want a line about ock being in jail" is moving away from an argument to why he has to die pretty significantly E: sorry about all the slow posts and editing I'm phone posting site fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Dec 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
He doesn't have to die, but that's the choice they went with, I just personally dispute that it was bad one. Having villains die is no more or less a cliche than having them go to jail, they both seem to happen an equal amount. Magneto didn't die in the X-Men films of the same era, nor did Kingpin in the Daredevil film from the same era, nor did Dr. Doom from The Fantastic Four films, nor did Lex Luthor in Superman Returns. If anything them going to jail was more of a cliche at that point. But, just because something is a "cliche" doesn't mean it's bad. Nothing can be 100% original. It's how those tropes are used and combined which matters. As such, Ock's death is justified thematically and dramatically. He's a tragic villain, and he achieved redemption in his last moments by giving his life to save the city that he endangered. He finally did what he couldn't do before, and took responsibility for his actions. Why would having him go to jail - like most of the other villains of the super-hero films of the early 2000s - be the better choice? site posted:
Because in a shared universe the audience implicitly understands there's gonna be reams more content down the road; multiple films, crossovers and Disney + shows. Back when the original Spider-Man trilogy was made that's not really how sequels worked, you made a few until the audience lost interest - that's what happened with the previous Batman and Superman films. Because of that there may have been more pressure to bring back an acclaimed villain, because the audience would be aware that there's a limited amount of time to see those villains. And they were right to think that, Raimi's films lasted for one more film. In comparison, the Vulture is part of an interconnected web of films that lean on cameos and guest appearances as part of their appeal, the audience won't be expecting him back immediately but instead down the line. And once again they're right to think that, Vulture wasn't in Infinity War or Far From Home, but he is in Morbius (we think). Karloff fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Dec 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:27
|
|
|
Good thing I never said it was a bad ending then Personally I think it feels wrong because, in my estimation of the character of which I will felt admit I have not read a lot of older Spidey, it is anathema to Peter to let someone even self sacrifice at the cost of their lives and that it is important to him to save villains because there is the hope of redemption in the future. That's why he's the marvel universes greatest hero(or one of the reasons anyways). If I'm wrong on that point please eat me alive about it at least that's a cogent angle of attack ^^^ Tbh none of the shared universe edit is a convincing argument, to me site fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Dec 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:36
|
|
|
Marvel Studios news coming up at... some point in the next two and a half hours. Disney said earlier that there were 10 Marvel Studios series coming to Disney+ over the next couple years, though I think that's only two more than they've announced to date. https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disney-investor-day-2020/
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
site posted:^^^ Tbh none of the shared universe edit is a convincing argument, to me Well, I think it is. So we are at an impasse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2020 23:44
|
|
|
site posted:Didn't raimi already go all out with all the other poo poo because he knew it was the last one The conventional wisdom is that the third one is a mess because of studio interference. Raimi wanted to make a movie with Sandman and Harry as the villains, and the studio insisted he include Venom because, well, the kids like Venom. Raimi was a good soldier and did what he was asked to, but clearly didn't work all that hard to make the pieces fit together. Raimi was also, iirc, developing a fourth movie with Vulture when Sony decided to reboot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Evil AI arms that infect a man's brain is a lovely metaphor for hubris.Madkal posted:Rewatching the first Spiderman right now because of this conversation and I must say that the whole "person walking in off the street to wrestle what I assume is a professional" just does not seem realistic at all. That is the genesis of pro wrestling. It would have been decades out of date even when Stan Lee was writing the original comics though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 00:10
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Evil AI arms that infect a man's brain is a lovely metaphor for hubris. Were he to survive, it'd probably be some Connors kind of deal where he's scarred/traumatized from the arms and develops a compulsion to reactivate them. You have him assisting Pete from behind bars and then tease his fall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
Okay but why are the prosthetic arms programmed to be evil, necessitating an inhibitor chip to begin with Like, why would an arm have goals and motivations of any kind
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:Okay but why are the prosthetic arms programmed to be evil, necessitating an inhibitor chip to begin with They weren’t evil, they were just maniacally focused on completing the task for which they were created by any means necessary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
All this got me thinking about how much these movies kill their villains and out of all 23 current MCU films, the only villains that survive the movie they're introduced in are
*And those guys were side villains, the movies always made sure to kill another villain! edit: okay I guess no one died in Ant-Man and the Wasp but I can't even remember who the villain in that was really. Scott's probation officer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:23
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:All this got me thinking about how much these movies kill their villains and out of all 23 current MCU films, the only surviving villains are Ant-Man in the Wasp didn't really have a villain, it had Sonny Burch who was more of an obstacle. Also Scott's probation officer Jimmy Woo is gonna be in WandaVision!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:edit: okay I guess no one died in Ant-Man and the Wasp but I can't even remember who the villain in that was really. Scott's probation officer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:26
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:All this got me thinking about how much these movies kill their villains and out of all 23 current MCU films, the only villains that survive the movie they're introduced in are You missed Zemo, Red Skull (kinda), Arnim Zola and (to be pedantic) Thanos. I think generally the newer movies are more likely to spare the villain. Caecilius in Dr Strange isn't dead either, he's zombified or something. There's also the Winter Soldier if you want to count him (he's pretty much still a villain at the end of that movie) and a few minor villains like Klaw and Crossbones. Fangz fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Dec 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
Arist posted:Ant-Man in the Wasp didn't really have a villain, it had Sonny Burch who was more of an obstacle. Also Scott's probation officer Jimmy Woo is gonna be in WandaVision!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:38
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:We're getting another Ant-Man so I wouldn't be shocked if Ghost showed up again Maybe but I doubt it'll be as an antagonistic force.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337196091201253379?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
New trailer for WandaVision, too: https://twitter.com/MarvelStudios/status/1337195626245844994
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
The Falcon and The Winter Soldier comes out in March Loki comes out in May
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
Huh. Did they announce America before? She's cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The Falcon and The Winter Soldier comes out in March So... it doesn't spoil Black Widow after all?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
Here's a trailer for Loki https://twitter.com/MarvelStudios/status/1337197005211365379?s=20 I don't remember Owen Wilson's casting being mentioned but I could have missed it I also have absolutely no idea what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
I think this is the first official word on Captain Marvel 2? No mention of Spider-Man. https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337198933169348613?s=20 A LOT of stuff got announced (this is just the new stuff)- https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337199620703850498?s=20 https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337199700382978049?s=20 https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337199777939935234?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
Oh poo poo we have Kang https://twitter.com/Disney/status/1337200221017808900?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
They gonna do Fantastic 4. They gonna try it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
Wait they're loving doing Secret Invasion?????
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
also Christian Bale's role in Thor: Love and Thunder is going to be Gorr The God Butcher
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:40 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/MarvelStudios/status/1337200479063994368?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 02:02
|
|