You are not logged in. Please login or register.
I say all this with mad love for Brian. It just tickles me to no end to see one of the most even tempered people I know get all mad and lose his shit over...Spider Man 2? I get the hate for Prequels and Matrix sequels, because there's a huge sense of letdown and opportunism, but Spider Man 2 is a fart in the night. You wake up with sheets smelling, but by the time you get out of the shower and air it out, it's gone.
As I said on the commentary, Spiderman 2 is to me what Pan's Labyrinth is to Cloe and Dorkman. The only reason it reaches so deeply into my soul is because it is so universally hailed as some colossal achievement, as if this were the cinematic equivalent to MLK Jr.'s shining city on the hill.
Were the rest of the world to consider this a fart in the wind, I would be content to regard it with the same indifference. But they don't and I don't understand why.
I try really hard to fathom things. And I do not fathom that.
But it's just personal opinion, Brian. You are getting pissed off because a lot of people disagree with you, it seems a bit petty. You don't like it, other people do. It doesn't mean you're wrong, it doesn't mean they're wrong.
And if I'm honest, I resent the idea that because lots of people disagree with you, something is wrong with that.....
(sorry if that sounds angry, that is not my intention, just joining in the conversation)
Last edited by Jimmy B (2011-01-26 01:35:54)
Dude, your forehead must have a huge bruise from repeated smackings of the back of your hand while breathlessly screaming, "Mr. Beauregaurd, I do not underSTAND!"
People like weird shit. Sometimes a bunch of people like weird shit. Case closed. Twilight. Dances With Wolves. Kesha. It usually doesn't last long. Let it go, my son.
Oh please. Everybody feels that way about everything (generally).
I'm no worse a person for voicing the opinion.
You went beyond voicing an opinion. You repeatedly stated you could not even fathom how any right minded person could feel opposite of yours. You sounded like a house Republican.
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
You see, I was going to say that but since Eddie knows Brian, I thought I'll let him do it 
(not the Republican part)
"House" is a proper noun in this instance.
But you're right. I totally crossed some imaginary line that you've laid down. I'll stop having strong opinions about movies now.
EDIT: And for the record, I totally wrote this with a big grin on my face. LOOOOVE YOU! 
Last edited by Brian (2011-01-26 01:49:35)
*giggle*
I like this thread.
Brian, just say "I'm sorry for not being able to articulate my hatred" like a House Democrat would and let's be done with it.
Again, I love my boy. But Spider Man 2 is like some kind of hidden trigger film that unlocks his secret government training and turns him into an unreasonable hate engine.
I'll close this out by saying that three or four things probably REALLY pissed him off, to the point where he started hunting inequities that probably also exist in some of his favorite films if he examined them with the same scrutiny.
When all you have is a hammer, everything start to looks like a nail.
Listen, I just want this to be over. So how about I just agree to a nice big round of tax cuts for everyone!*
But seriously, that shit is just unreasonably bananas. Way more bananas than usual. That's all I'm saying.
*And by everyone, I mean just the rich.
You know that South Park episode where Butters doesn't want to tap dance because the last time he did like eight people died? And then he finally dances again and even more people end up dead, to his horror?
That's like where I'm at having done STAR TREK and now this. Next time Brian tells me he hates a movie I think I'll just agree with him and back out of the room.
In retrospect, I regret not having been part of either Spiderman commentary - I didn't boycott them or anything, I just wasn't available either time. As a person who dislikes superhero comics in general, I never particularly cared for Spiderman (although the theme song from the '60's cartoon still rocks) and yet I really enjoyed the first Spiderman, and pretty much the second one as well. (Sure, the wheels came off the Spiderwagon on the third lap, but they had two good turns before then.)
I don't get the dislike for the Spiderman flicks that my fellow DIF'ers all seem to share (in WILDLY varying degrees). Those movies were the first to say, hey lookie, costume hero movies don't have to be camp, they can actually be pretty okay, and even have characters in them that you can relate to.
Obviously you have to accept the goofball idea that being bitten by a radioactive spider makes you into some kinda spider-man instead of a guy with a mildly radioactive bump on his wrist, but okay, one piece of magic, go on. That ain't nothing compared to what X-Men asks you to buy.
And there wouldn't have been any X-Men movies anyway - at least not as sophisticated as the ones we got - if Spiderman hadn't already raised the bar for men-in-tights flicks and shown they could have plots and characters just like "real" movies do.
So yeah, putting the inhibitor chip there was a dumb design, but otherwise I thought S2 was pretty good stuff myself.
Last edited by Trey (2011-01-26 02:01:17)
And there wouldn't have been any X-Men movies anyway - at least not as sophisticated as the ones we got - if Spiderman hadn't already raised the bar for men-in-tights flicks and shown they could have plots and characters just like "real" movies do.
Strike that, reverse it.
X-MEN = 2000
SPIDER-MAN = 2002
Buh? The X-Men movies came before Spiderman. And they were WAY more grounded than the Spiderman movies were. Seriously, Raimi's movies aren't campy? That's the shit I'm talking about! How are they not campy! AGH!
YOU ARE RIGHT OH HEY LOOK AT THE TIME I'LL JUST BE GOING
Fair enough on the which-came-first argument, I stand corrected and withdraw that comment.
I assume that came from the way I equate X-men and Spiderman pretty much. They're all movies that I had no reason to like going in, based on things that I cared not about. But they entertained me, and surprised me at how good they were. Go figure.
Buh? The X-Men movies came before Spiderman. And they were WAY more grounded than the Spiderman movies were. Seriously, Raimi's movies aren't campy? That's the shit I'm talking about! How are they not campy! AGH!
LOUD!!!NOISES!!1!!!one!!!
I think everyone is forgetting the 1989 Punisher movie starring Dolph Lundgren....
Nobody? No? I'll get my coat.
Pffft. Blade's a vampire movie. Everyone knows that.
Duh.
fcw wrote:Yeah, by plot-driven, I mean that the character's decisions are not flowing from who they are, what they believe and what they need right now, but apparently arbitrarily, according to what the next scene in the story requires them to have done by then. Sure, the writer will probably have had a plot in mind when crafting the characters, but it has to seem like the characters are in charge of their own destinies for it to be character-driven to me.
Right, totally. My only contention is that plot versus character driven are not so much two equally valid sides of the same coin as one is diligent storytelling and the other is lazy storytelling.
Hmm... I'll disagree slightly. There can be great, well told stories where the characters really don't matter but the plot is complicated and well done. Rendezvous with Rama or most of Asimov's books are good examples On the flip side you can just have well done characters interacting with no real plot- I saw the touring version of 'In The Heights' last year and while my sister bitched that there was no plot, I didn't care and just enjoyed the characters.
Mind you, a perfect book/movie/play will have BOTH, but if one aspect is great you don't mind if the other is a bit weak.
Hmm... I'll disagree slightly.
Oh, please don't......
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
