Down in Front: - This week, SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD.

Just listened to the whole thing. Very funny, but man you guys are cruel lol.

I personally love spidey, and the 1st one still remains my favorite superhero flick. I see what you mean about the blandness, which definitely makes repeat viewings less enjoyable. That is actually the film's main problem, I think. Not nessecarilly that it ages poorly, but it is just not meant for repeat viewings. I'm sure I can pop in my spidey DVD and show it to someone who's never seen it and they would enjoy it.

But yeah, I remember back in 2002 seeing this for the first time in the theater and how it blew me away. It's almost depressing watching it for the upteenth time now, plus with your commentary lol.

 

Next on the list - Iron Man! =P Kidding

 

Just finished the Spider-Man podcast. I still like Spider-Man, most of the complaints were a bit nitpicky but I do agree with the blandness comment.

 

You guys remember the trailer that was out before the movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN3YaybNJ2s
For some reason it's not on the DVD, but I swear that's gotta be one of the greatest trailers of the decade.

 

In the midst of commentary now. I will spare you the hypernerd diatribe but just wanted to say comment on the camp factor continually commented on. The character of Spider-Man has always been slightly comedic. The moment Parker puts on the tights he is supposed to be firing off one liners and bad jokes at rapid pace, much to the annoyance of his enemies. However nearly all attempts to bring this major aspect of the character to life fail continually throughout the film. I don't know if thats the product of the script, the direction or Maguire's acting, but its something they never really get right. I get the feeling the camp was intend as compensation to maintain a sense of humour without poor joke delivery. Granted it doesn't always work, but then again this film was never a great adaptation of the characters or their universe to begin with. I won't even start on how miscast the film is.

 

Watching that, I can't help but think how much more fitting James Franco is for the part of Spider-Man. most of what really destroys Peter Parker in the films is Tobey Maguire. I still like the films, but I hate Maguire's performance as Parker. If you look into the comic books where John Romita Jr has the pencil(figuratively speaking, obviously), Peter Parker looks more like Franco than Maguire.

That being said, I never really was fond of Maguire to begin with, sans Pleasantville. But that example might've just been a good movie to begin with, bar Maguire.

 

These films borrow mostly from the steve ditko era, though. I don't think franco would have been right for peter. He's too charming a person to pull it off (don't bring up pineapple express, that role is very different from peter.) Tobey is more of an everyman, and maybe even a slightly feminine, sub-everyman. He is a great casting choice for peter parker, I don't know why so many people have problems with him.

Now his performance in spidey 3 was a different story. He was clearly doing that one for the paycheck. Put absolutely no effort into it. Let's hope spider-man 4 is not a repeat of that.

 

I wish I could be there when you get around to The Dark Knight, there are some parts of that film I'd love to trash.

 

I thought it was funny when you said that Uncle Ben looked like a cowboy, because he was played by the actor who portrayed Shame, the cowboy-themed villain on the 1966 Batman television show. I was surprised that none of you mentioned that, given your collective depth of knowledge in all things geek and pop-culture.

 

When I'm not in the room, the average collective age drops by quite a margin. Thus, topics like '60's TV trivia are less likely to be covered.

 

Well, that makes it your job to pick up the slack.
Keep the young'ns in line, respectin' their media roots.

 

Spidey------ the only thing that got to me about this one was the mics. Mike was too close to his and (I dont know who exactly, maybe Fig) was too far away, so the sound was too low and to loud, but other then that, cool.


EDIT: "Short Circuit" would rock!

 

Wow ... really?

Really? Sure there are things you could dislike but straight up trash?

 

I take that as sarcasm.?.
It sounded like Mike was deep throating his mic. Too close man, too close. And I believe it was fig who sounded like he was in the back corner of the room.

 

I agree. (It was Brian.) One of these days I'll buy these cats headphones to wear so they'll finally pay attention to what they're doing to the waveform. As it stands, we mic check up front, and I ride the mixer the whole time, and do the best I can with it. We're better on some days more than others.

 

Honestly, I find the thought of using Justin Long as parker was a very inspiring thought from U guys. That would have worked!

Not even knowing spider man very much, this was the main part that was obvious to me; where are the "spidey one liners"!? And man I so hate Tobey McGwyre, he is whininess incarnate, and he is playing it "geeky" in absolutely every wrong way possible. Parker is supposed to be smart, not a dorky idiot. Probably, McGuire is a dorky idiot himself, it seems?

Not to mention he's ugly as sin, at least to my eyes. Maybe thats a question for Dorkman (since we have no females on this board )

I leave you with some mental ray rendered spiderman one-liners:

CLICKO (there are two more parts at http://marvelkids.marvel.com/videos/)

/Z

 

That was completely awesome.

I'd watch that kind of Spider-Man.

 

I'd do too! And I've seen many comments online to that effect. Hats off to my good friends at Blur Studios for making that for the "Marvel Kids" website.

Did you watch all 3 parts? In part 3 you see that they nail Hulk pretty well too, IMHO, in tone/style/behaviour.

For your convenience, direct links to PART2 and PART3

/Z

 

Whoa. That was way cooler than Tobey McWhiny.

 

Tobey worked for me for the first movie, but the problem I found in SM2 and the sequel is Raimi tried to keep him a nerd, whereas in the comics Parker actually becomes a bit of a stud. 1990's is when I read Spidey, he had tousled hair, no glasses, was drawn to look tall/long-legged, wore t-shirts and jeans frequently. Raimi's just trying to keep the character in the 60's (what the CRAP was that suit he wore in the beginning of SM3? Gah!) and I think he needs to let him update in that direction.

The Spidey in the Iron Man/Hulk vid is alright, but taking the goofy side of him a little too far for me. I think those are the same/similar models they used for the Ultimate Alliance games. He's a good interpretation, but the writing for him isn't as good as the comic versions.

 

Yes, trash. I find it impossible to maintain a suspension of disbelief through that movie. It seems to me like through out the movie the characters refuse to use logic and instead ask themselves "What would the audience like to see now?" to make their decisions.

 

Two movies in a row with an insufferable narrator.

I hate, hate, hate Spider-Man...and love, love, LOVE Monsters, Inc..

 

*&^#$*&%# yeah!

It's 2:45am, just officially finished my last college paper and career, and I'm definitely watching this movie right now.

Also I think that Chess short was before this in the theaters.

 

^
The chess short was in front of A Bugs Life. Monsters Inc. had the one with the birds (For the Birds).

 

I love Pixar, great call watching Monsters. I just looked at Monsters last night. Can't wait to check out what you guys said.