Spider-Man 4-5 Movie news
- Thread starter Natrix
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
I have a feeling Vulture(Raimi wants him) is going to be in it with Lizard
Agent0028
Inebriated
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,758
- Reaction score
- 1
Not to detract from the web shooters debate but I agree that there should only be one villain. Doing two or more is just too much unless one is very minor villain without the movie delving into that villain's origin story or motives.
Bonehead15
Super Freak
I think Kraven and Electro are the best two ideas I've heard. And like I said earlier, definitely NO Carnage....please.
Please no Carnage.
He's just a poor man's Venom.
I guess you've never read a Spider-Man comic.
I guess you've never read a Spider-Man comic.
Oh, i'm quite aware of it. Just keep so much it out of the movies. Things work in comics that don't work so well on screen.
That is why I never understood the whole secret identity to protect MJ. She got kidnapped and captured lots of time before she found out who Spider-man was, or even his villians finding out.
The Mike
In the Pixels
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 30,607
- Reaction score
- 83
I would. I know there is a lot of bull^^^^ written about actresses and people end up being full of ^^^^ and would bang the ^^^^ out of them without fail. I hate Scarlett Johannsen's voice but if given the opportunity would cripple her. I hate Drew Barrymore but would definitely let her have sex with me. I think Rebecca Romjin is beyond overrated but would take a dip in that pool happily if she came around. I can't stand the chick from The House Bunny who was in all the Scary Movies but would split her in half if she asked. There are ton of actresses who I'm full of ^^^^ about and would bang taking both digital camera shots, polaroids and screaming live on the web the entire time but I can say without doubt or without bull^^^^ that I would NEVER EVER ^^^^ Kirsten Dunst. I think she is such a troll, beyond ugly and how she still has any form of a career is beyond me.
Nope. There are 20-30 actresses that would play the role better than her and are easier on the eyes matching better what MJ was in the books than what Dunst has crapped out. Personally I'd love to see Isla Fisher play her or another natural redhead...there are enough out.
Chapter 2099
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2008
- Messages
- 29,762
- Reaction score
- 24
I still wouldn't replace Kirsten for anyone in the Hollywood currently. That's my opinion and you have yours, but obviously people at the box office didn't have a problem with her as the movies in this trilogy are some of the highest grossing ever. People are always going to criticize Kirsten, just as they have Tobey and James. Are they a "perfect" match for the role? Maybe not, but they certainly rose to the occasion and more than held their own. MJ will always be Kirsten in my eyes because that's how the series began and that's how I feel it should end.
And as I said once before, if Sam wants her back (as he has said in multiple interviews,) she's doing something right.
creature4000
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2006
- Messages
- 9,586
- Reaction score
- 7
Since Spider man 1 was good, 2 was better, 3 just stunk for the most part. (They ruined Venom) 4 will be terrible!!!!
The Mike
In the Pixels
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 30,607
- Reaction score
- 83
Nothing to do with Kirsten at best MJ is a plot device and becoming more so as the franchise went on. No one wasn't going to not see the film because she was in it. Hell I hate her and went to every opening night....its like people saying I'm not going to see The Dark Knight because I hate Maggie Gylenhaal.
Holding your own and good for the part are different things. The majority of Tobey criticism was fanboy arguments that were majorily squashed after the first film. James Franco isn't a traditional Harry Osborn but for the most part did what he was supposed to as Harry was a plot device as well.
Raimi is smart, he knows that there is a definitive group that hates when actors are switched midstream. Not my first choice but I understand why she'd be back and why people want her there for continuity but if they replaced her I wouldn't shed one tear. The chemistry between her and Tobey felt forced in a lot of spot but they are some of the best comic book films done and they treated Spider-Man with respect up until part 3 IMHO. None of this really backs the Dunst IS MJ argument its more of a continuity and keeping that alive argument.
Telling it like it is Mike.
Only know one way my friend.
Check out these manips
Deckard
Super Freak
Vulture/Lizard or Vulture/Kraven could work. If you played the Spiderman 3 game, they had the sidestory with Connors as Lizard and Kraven shows up to hunt him in the Sewers. It worked rather well.
Sachiel
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 11,682
- Reaction score
- 864
*splurt*splurt*splurt*
Chapter 2099
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2008
- Messages
- 29,762
- Reaction score
- 24
Everyone, including Spider-Man himself, can be considered a plot device as long as it enhances the storyline in some way or another. I highly doubt Kirsten was chosen primarily for her ability to act as a "plot device." It's my opinion that she was chosen for her acting ability, look, and most importantly, the ability to bring MJ to life. Kirsten was chosen because she fulfills and embodies the girl-next-door persona, just as the character Mary Jane Watson does.
As far as your other comment: Of course people won't miss a film like Spider-Man because of their dislike for an actress like Kirsten because curiosity and hype will always get the best of them. However, don't you think casting directors try to anticipate such criticism while they are choosing the next Mary Jane Watson, such a "household name" in the comic book world? They're going to aim for an actress that is well-known in the entertainment industry and at the time, Kirsten was (and still is) one of those actresses. She fits the bill in many areas.
Kirsten held her own AND was good for the part for reasons described previously. Most importantly, the onscreen chemistry between Tobey and her was priceless. That's something EVERY Hollywood director dreams of. Mary Jane is Peter Parker's love interest, above all else. No chemistry = No success in that role to a large degree, especially in a movie like this. In fact, one of the most memorable scenes in SM-1 was the alleyway kiss. It wasn't a fight scene or anything like that. It was a kiss. And if that doesn't speak volumes about the two actors, I don't know what does. Can you honesty say another actress can duplicate what Kirsten and Tobey have on-screen together?
In regards to the Harry comment, I don't want to get into too much depth there, but why does James fly under the radar for his performance and yet Kirsten failed to? I very rarely hear anything about James' performance. Not that I felt there was anything wrong it in the first place, but I am curious to hear what Kirsten did so differently.
Raimi was one of (if not THE) most influential person responsible for Kirsten getting the role of Mary Jane Watson, so there's no reason for him to switch actresses in the first place because Kirsten is who he wanted for MJ. Being "smart" has very little to do with it.
Again, I definitely understand your point of view and respect it, so I don't want this to come off like I don't. As I said before, everyone has their own opinions and expressing them is what makes many of these films so great. A lot of great minds came together for films such as these and it certainly shows. Half of the fun of making a film is being able to analyze performances, plots, etc. and wondering what changes should be made in order to make the sequel even better than its predecessor (similar to what we are talking about here.) So in short, I enjoy these debates just as much as you.
tylerdurden
Super Freak
bwahahahahahahahaa!
if i was forced to, i might be able to allow kirsten dunst to have sex with me too. at least she's got a nice body.
actually i have always liked tobey and james in their roles. tobey esp. thot he brought the right mix of nerdiness and grit to parker. the problems with his character i feel are due to the screenwriters. pete doesn't at all resemble the smartass in the comic book, who uses humor against his opponents. pete's wisecracks have always been sorely missing from raimi's spiderman series.
the best spidey wisecrack i can remember is in spiderman1, when pete was facing bonesaw mcgraw in the wrestling match. "nice costume. did your husband make that for you?"
Similar threads
