Re: Spider-Man 2

Maybe you are right but this version of spiderman is clearly a fantasy world. Dorkman says it best "if you dont buy the world this wont work for you".

As for some of the nitpick :
Doc ock would want to kill or get revenge on spiderman because he blames him for turning him into the monster he has become and/or ruining his experiment.

The science stuff is kind of weak but again this is a fantasy world. Batman begins has its microwave machine that would just kill anyone it was near (we are mostly water, along with the silly premise that some how the microwaves would ONLY target water.) Spiderman can have its controlled fusion.

Peter did not tell harry about his father because the green goblins dying request was "dont tell harry"

Spiderman is a role model because of his moral code not because of his super powers. Like it or not a lot of kids have sports figures as role models. Thats completely understandable and something kids do.

Last edited by Twig24 (2011-01-25 16:14:20)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

The fusion reaction has its own rules that the movie sets up and it follows those rules pretty well. You guys have pointed this out in other podcasts before and am suprised of how much a tear you guys go on about it.

Spiderman 1 also intos itself by saying: "this is a story about .." It might as well have said "once apon a time". It is clearly a fairy tale/fantasy genre.

There are three major parts of story telling IMO
Plot
Theme
Character

The main strength of this movie compared to ironman and others is its theme about the personal/emotional toll of being a superhero. The plot does a very good job of connecting most of the actions in the film to its theme.

This is a big problem i have with ironman. Ironman has a virtualy non existant theme. If it does have a theme it is about privatization of war and is very very impersonal with cardboard cutout villans (Doc ock is very human and a empathetic villian.).  Without strong themes all you have is a story with nothing to really say.


I really should have just typed stuff out while i re listened to the podcast. These miandering thoughs are my attempt to add to the discussion. sorry about the orginazation

Last edited by Twig24 (2011-01-25 15:34:27)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

I just think the fusion thing is dumb because it's absurdly inefficient, if you have to have a guy standing there at all times to keep it from going haywire. What if he has to pee?

Also:

Twig24 wrote:

Peter did not tell harry about his father because the green goblins dying request was "dont tell harry"

Fuck him. He killed a bunch of people and tried to kill more, including children, and seriously fucked up his son in general and his most important relationships specifically. Fuck him and his dying request in the eye.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

DorkmanScott wrote:


Twig24 wrote:

Peter did not tell harry about his father because the green goblins dying request was "dont tell harry"

Fuck him. He killed a bunch of people and tried to kill more, including children, and seriously fucked up his son in general and his most important relationships specifically. Fuck him and his dying request in the eye.

That is actually a very good point, albeit one that could have been made less aggressively big_smile

Peter Parker is a bit of a douchebag, he should have told Harry.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

I just think the fusion thing is dumb because it's absurdly inefficient, if you have to have a guy standing there at all times to keep it from going haywire. What if he has to pee?

Its also never said that someone would have to stay there the whole time. That is an inference that you are putting in the movie that is never really said. The experement is never truly succesful.  Maybe once the reaction stabilizes it doesnt need maintenece like that. who knows? Acting like someone will always have to stand there is very nitpicky. It really doesnt matter its just a plot device and it follows the rules the movie sets for it pretty much the whole time. Light sabers and death stars are kind of stupid too. Again this is a fantasy movie


As for the goblin. Peter had seen norman as a father figure. Im just making the point that it wasnt an accident that he never told harry. It was a very intentional. Agree or disagree it is written that way to serve the character

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

Fantasy my ass. They're running around midtown. If it's in Metropolis, you have more leeway, but the fact that the Nolanverse's Gotham is more realistic than Raimi's New York City doesn't help Spiderman's cause.

And yes, sure, the decision to set Marvel in real world settings was made decades before Raimi ever touched Spiderman, but that's the state of affairs, like it or not.

Re: Spider-Man 2

I just dont think becasue a movie is set in a real world location it cant be a fantasy film.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

DorkmanScott wrote:

Fuck him. He killed a bunch of people and tried to kill more, including children, and seriously fucked up his son in general and his most important relationships specifically. Fuck him and his dying request in the eye.

Ooh, this is awkward... I don't know how to say this, but this seems like the right moment. Michael, you're directly descended from notorious cannibal Klaus "Babyfood" Scott, who ate 17 babies and also raped them. Also, no one knows that but you and me.

Phew! I'm glad I got that off my chest. I hope this doesn't color our friendship. Hey, see you for pizza on Saturday!

Warning: I'm probably rewriting this post as you read it.

Zarban's House of Commentaries

Re: Spider-Man 2

300 takes place in a real world location and time. it is still fantasy. Location is not always the primary indicator of what genre you are in.

It is also listed in imdb as fantasy. I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Last edited by Twig24 (2011-01-25 19:06:46)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

It's not an absolute, but it is one factor that can either go towards your favor or against it.

It's one consideration stacked up with a million others that have to be considered in aggregate. And it's the filmmakers' responsibility to strike a balance that conveys a convincing believability to the audience.

And it's something I doubt Raimi considered at all, let alone considered with any success.

Re: Spider-Man 2

Most of Rami's movies are silly fantasy horror hybrids. Rami was probably chosen for that very reason.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

lol brian didn't like spider-man 2 lol

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

The advantage comic books, and to an even greater extent animation, has over live action is the ability have the characters and the world fit together perfectly (when done right, naturally). You can even change the look of the world within a scene to reflect a change in tone- the Teen Titans TV series went very dark in the 4th season and it worked much better then you would have expected. Live action SF also has this kind of advantage when not set on modern Earth, as you can mold the world so that the plot, characters, and politics make sense.

When trying to make something fit into the "real" world, you almost get an uncanny valley effect. It can be over come, but they fail so much I almost wish they wouldn't try.

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

I think you guys were criticizing this movie out of context. You would never try to evaluate the princess bride this way.

The movie tries to tie in theme and character through the plot constantly. I understood the and recognized the world we were in immideately. All 3 of the Marvell studios releases dont even bother with this. Ironman 1& 2, the incredible hulk have virtually no theme and if they do the creators put almost no effort into tying the theme into the details of the movies. Thats why most people like this movie and think it succeeds.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

It depends on your definition of 'fantasy'. Willow, Krull, Dragonslayer, Dragonheart etc are all 'fantasy' films.

Spider-Man was bit by a radioactive spider which edges it more into 'sci-fi' in my opinion. If it had a dragon it would be 'fantasy'. A dragon and was set a few hundred years ago.

What does IMDB know? big_smile

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

I just brought up the IMDB stuff because the characters act like fantasy/fary tale characters in willow, star wars or the princess bride.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

I was asking about that on...Hellboy? Maybe? I think?

Define "fantasy," and then variations of genre fantasy.

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

Hmmm.. good question.

sci fi fantasy - starwars spiderman most comic movies that involve supernatural elements.

horror fantasy - evil dead series

tolkeen fantasy - lotr, willow, dragonheart, stuff like that.

fantasy generally means taking place in some kind of alternate reality. At least that would be my best description.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

Under that definition, all fiction would qualify as fantasy.

Which it is, it's just a useless definition when trying to use the term to differentiate genres.

Re: Spider-Man 2

So respond to this statement: Spider-Man 2 and Lord of the Rings are both fantasy, and thus the same kind of movie.

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

Eh, ultimately, it's just an exercise in labeling. We have to remember that whenever we humans create categories and assign things to them, it's just an artificial construction that we invented. The lines in the sand that we draw are more arbitrary than not.

It applies to film genres just as much to the question of whether or not Pluto is a "planet." Draw your lines in the sand all you like, but the stuff at the edges is always going to be fuzzy.

Much like the question, "What's the single greatest film of all time?" is meaningless and using the "perfect movie" criteria is a superior measurement, the better measurement is to simply ask whether a movie succeeds at being believable or not. And for me at least, Lord of the Rings does while Spiderman 2 does not.

Last edited by Brian (2011-01-25 22:52:56)

Re: Spider-Man 2

They are not because while Lord of the Rings takes place that never existed (Middle Earth), in a time that never existed (?), and with species that never existed (Orcs, Hobbits, Viggo), Spider Man 2 takes place here and now, with fantastical elements (super powers, wonky science) added to familiar settings (New York) and species (humans).

Eddie Doty

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

If one film (LotR) is more true than the other (SM2) its not because of settings or even premise, but on the relationships and motivations of the characters.

Eddie Doty

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Spider-Man 2

Right, the real heart of believability is human behavior. Do the characters behave in such a way that feels true?

The perfect comparison is the original and prequel Star Wars trilogies. Exact same fantastical settings and one grips you while the other bludgeons you.

You can get away with a lot if your characters act like human beings (even if their elves or mutants or aliens).

Re: Spider-Man 2

Down in Front wrote:

So respond to this statement: Spider-Man 2 and Lord of the Rings are both fantasy, and thus the same kind of movie.

silence of the lambs and the Ring are both horror and thus the same kind of movie.

both are good movies but would you try to evaluate them the same way? or scream?


fantasy generally indicates a reality that could not possibly exist. Maybe that is a better definition. The bourne identity is not fantasy but it is fiction. Batman begins is not really fantasy because that character could exist in a place and time according to our laws of nature.

again im just kind of spitballing at a definition.

Really the main point im trying to make is that this movie is far more similar to the princess bride

Better analogy

spiderman = the princess bride

Batman = lotr

Thumbs up Thumbs down