Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
ah ha! I knew my guestimate was right!Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
Originally posted by: austin316
Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
agreed. as long as the movies are making money (and in the case of spider-man, more than almost any other movie ever) they will keep making them. And tobey mcguire and kirsten dunst will continue to play their roles when they are making $20 million a film.
Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
Originally posted by: hdeck
Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
KD is only signed for 3 movies, so she would have to resign if she wanted to do them.
clarification for some, hobgoblin was orginally just a random guy that found osbourn's secret place with all his GG stuff and created the HG out of it. in total there have been 3 GG and 4/5 HG.
for the people that thought the movie was too cheesy, hate to break it to you, but the comic was pretty cheesy as well. they were trying to stay true to the canon and i think they did a pretty good job.
as far as SM3 goes, i kind of wish they would have gone a different route so we could get venom but it doesn't look likely. 3 main villains in a movie would be overkill IMO.
as far as other villains go, if you play the spiderman video games based on the movies they include side stories with the other villains. in fact, SM2 the game is pretty open-ended from what i hear (will be picking it up this week) letting you just swing around the city encountering lots of villains from the comic and then having the movie storyline slowly weaved into the game. sounds pretty interesting.
or it could be that the Mary Jane character dies in SP3?!Originally posted by: 5489
i doubt it would be a matter of KD wanting to do another film, i think it would be the director trying to get KD back to do the film. changing actors for mary jane would not look good at all. i bet KD will ask for more money than what she earns from the first 3 filmsOriginally posted by: hdeck
Originally posted by: Ludacris
Oh, someone said that part 3 will be the last movie and they are completely wrong. They already have up to Spider-Man 5 planned out already. They are going to milk this cow dry as long as they can and as long as they follow the comic books closely, they will be in good shape. So many great stories in the Spider-Man comics that they can't possibly go wrong.
The only way they could royally screw the movie up is by changing up the main actors kinda like how they did the Bat-Man movies.
KD is only signed for 3 movies, so she would have to resign if she wanted to do them.
clarification for some, hobgoblin was orginally just a random guy that found osbourn's secret place with all his GG stuff and created the HG out of it. in total there have been 3 GG and 4/5 HG.
for the people that thought the movie was too cheesy, hate to break it to you, but the comic was pretty cheesy as well. they were trying to stay true to the canon and i think they did a pretty good job.
as far as SM3 goes, i kind of wish they would have gone a different route so we could get venom but it doesn't look likely. 3 main villains in a movie would be overkill IMO.
as far as other villains go, if you play the spiderman video games based on the movies they include side stories with the other villains. in fact, SM2 the game is pretty open-ended from what i hear (will be picking it up this week) letting you just swing around the city encountering lots of villains from the comic and then having the movie storyline slowly weaved into the game. sounds pretty interesting.
I know they get married (probably will start out in Spiderman 3 as them already married and Mary Jane pregnant with possibly a miscarraige in the movie). After all, Spiderman 2 was 2 years after the first one in the plot line, so we can expect the same for Spiderman 3.Originally posted by: Ludacris
No because in the comic books, eventually MJ and Peter get married. They eventually have a kid.
Just for the record Tobe and Kristin pretty much made Spider-Man what it is today. If they changed up those two main characters, I don't know if the movie would do as well.
wow. did you even watch the movie? he doesn't use catridges (a change from the comics) but now just shoots the web from his forearms.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
If he made the web himself at home in the first movie, how could he run out of it in the second movie due to his lack of confidence (or general lack of mental strenght). As long as his "web cardridges" are filled, he should be able to shoot them.
Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX
wow. did you even watch the movie? he doesn't use catridges (a change from the comics) but now just shoots the web from his forearms.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
If he made the web himself at home in the first movie, how could he run out of it in the second movie due to his lack of confidence (or general lack of mental strenght). As long as his "web cardridges" are filled, he should be able to shoot them.
he lost the ability to do so because he was questioning if he really wanted to persue being spiderman.
it has been the same in the first spiderman movie and now the second one, the webbing comes from his forearms, he doesn't make canisters.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX
wow. did you even watch the movie? he doesn't use catridges (a change from the comics) but now just shoots the web from his forearms.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
If he made the web himself at home in the first movie, how could he run out of it in the second movie due to his lack of confidence (or general lack of mental strenght). As long as his "web cardridges" are filled, he should be able to shoot them.
he lost the ability to do so because he was questioning if he really wanted to persue being spiderman.
i watched the first one when it came out, so maybe I forgot what happened.
But I thought the web shooting ability was external to his body. So your saying its internal to his body now.
And the only thing I didn't like in the movie, was how he could lose his ability due to his confidence or whatever. I would have thought that he would always have his powers regardless of what would happen.
yeah i understood that. I just can't wrap my head around the concept that you can choose to have the powers. Once you get it, you get it. You can't lose it or choose not to have it. You can choose not to USE it..but not to HAVE it. That's my thinking anyway.Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX
it has been the same in the first spiderman movie and now the second one, the webbing comes from his forearms, he doesn't make canisters.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX
wow. did you even watch the movie? he doesn't use catridges (a change from the comics) but now just shoots the web from his forearms.Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
If he made the web himself at home in the first movie, how could he run out of it in the second movie due to his lack of confidence (or general lack of mental strenght). As long as his "web cardridges" are filled, he should be able to shoot them.
he lost the ability to do so because he was questioning if he really wanted to persue being spiderman.
i watched the first one when it came out, so maybe I forgot what happened.
But I thought the web shooting ability was external to his body. So your saying its internal to his body now.
And the only thing I didn't like in the movie, was how he could lose his ability due to his confidence or whatever. I would have thought that he would always have his powers regardless of what would happen.
it isn't due to his lack of confidence, it is due to the lack of him knowing he wants to have the powers (that is: wants to be spiderman).
remember the scene with the doctor? the doctor said it was a choice, and he could choose not to have the powers.
heh, not bad.Originally posted by: Yossarian
http://movies.yahoo.com/movies/feature/spiderman2.html
moved here because of overzealous locking mod.
Originally posted by: FreshPrince
Originally posted by: FuZoR
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
How could you say this one was cornier than the first one? C'mon, that whole wrestling scene in the first one was incredibly corny, as was the fight scene in the school. Those two scenes alone ruined the first movie for me.
What do you people consider to be good movies if you disliked this movie that much? I'm just curious, because I find it odd that some people think SM2 sucked. Are you a fan of the comics?
As for what will happen in the 3rd film. Here's my idea:
The Green Goblin will return (I know, one of the worst Spidey villains), but also there will be another villain with him. The guy who Mary Jane was going to marry (J Jonah Jameson's son) will become a villain bent on getting revenge for losing her. I think I'm wrong in this, but will he maybe become Rhino? I don't know, I was thinking that in the comics that Jameson's son turned into a villain. Anybody know?
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/j/jamesonjohn.htm
Hog Goblin is going to be a horrible villian... just a rehash of Spiderman 1
anyone else had a grin when MJ said go get em tiger... (damn im such a comic nerd)
from that link, hobgoblin is a completely different person.
Harry is Green Goblin II
they've been scolded here already (see my posts)Originally posted by: dahotboykj
THANK YOU!
It seems like damn near everyone on the web keeps thinking harry will be the Hobgoblin...he was the second damn green goblin--He even found his dad's old Green Goblin stuff, not anything resembling Hobgoblin.
Originally posted by: Ludacris
No because in the comic books, eventually MJ and Peter get married. They eventually have a kid.
Just for the record Tobe and Kristin pretty much made Spider-Man what it is today. If they changed up those two main characters, I don't know if the movie would do as well.
Originally posted by: Yossarian
http://movies.yahoo.com/movies/feature/spiderman2.html
moved here because of overzealous locking mod.
Originally posted by: blazert40
Holly Sh!t that movie rocked! I want to see it again. Great everything from the slow parts to the fast action. I give it a 10/10 for sure. Oh and not to mention that this one has a lot more funny parts, just more inline with the comics IMO.
Search this thread for "Ursula". I've already commented on her.Originally posted by: MadPeriot
The skinny girl that lived in the same apartment as Peter Parker and gave him cake, whats her story?? Seems like her role was pointless.
Originally posted by: flexy
Originally posted by: Aharami
Originally posted by: loki8481
that scene on the train was great.
yeah..just ONE example of the stupidity....the people just barely escaped certain death on the train...and as soon as the train stops EVERYONE's only focuses on spiderman and that they found his mask and wanna give it back..
Nowhere can you see that the people just barely escaped death, and, yes, the train was still on the edge about to tip over too
This movie was so corny and cheesy........incredible...
This guy lives in a cave.