Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jan 6, 2010 0:11:16 GMT -5
You mean villains must be totally and unsympathetic at all? What's wrong with a baddie that is bad for what he/she does, but at the same time you could feel some sort of sympathy for them, if not enough obviously to excuse what they did, i.e. kill a ton of people? I mean take that Green Goblin fella. He seems to be a guy who used his brains (and ruthlessness) to become a self-made billionaire industry tycoon. Then he loses that military contract which his livelyhood the company loses, and even when they did get said contract back (killing the competition is cheating if you ask me), the guy still loses his company by corporate politicking. Can't blame him (but I do that green gas) for why he went nutty. I was more complaining about the way they turned Otto Octavius into a nice guy who was doing evil things because his mechanical arms were brainwashing him. Seriously? Doc Ock is supposed to be an asshole. Some villains are awesome because you love to hate them. They don't need to be involved in a sob story. Same goes for Sandman and his dying kid.
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 6, 2010 0:12:54 GMT -5
You mean villains must be totally and unsympathetic at all? What's wrong with a baddie that is bad for what he/she does, but at the same time you could feel some sort of sympathy for them, if not enough obviously to excuse what they did, i.e. kill a ton of people? I mean take that Green Goblin fella. He seems to be a guy who used his brains (and ruthlessness) to become a self-made billionaire industry tycoon. Then he loses that military contract which his livelyhood the company loses, and even when they did get said contract back (killing the competition is cheating if you ask me), the guy still loses his company by corporate politicking. Can't blame him (but I do that green gas) for why he went nutty. I was more complaining about the way they turned Otto Octavius into a nice guy who was doing evil things because his mechanical arms were brainwashing him. Seriously? Doc Ock is supposed to be an asshole. Some villains are awesome because you love to hate them. They don't need to be involved in a sob story. Same goes for Sandman and his dying kid. That one really grated me too. I'm surprised they didn't have Venom pull out a roll of pictures of his alien wife and kids from his wallet and give Spidey a similar sob story.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Jan 6, 2010 0:18:04 GMT -5
When the producers don't try to force villains in the movie, they actually turn out well. Key lesson, don't force a villain the director doesn't like into the movie, and don't try to force three into a movie unless there's a team involved. The only superhero movie I can think of that has been able to put 3 or more villains in the movie and have it work, was Superman 2. You had the single hero, and 4 villains in Zod, Non, Ursa, and Lex Luthor. But that was helped by them being set up in the first movie.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jan 6, 2010 0:26:30 GMT -5
Plus Ursa and Non were more like sidekicks than full fledged villains.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 6, 2010 0:47:59 GMT -5
You mean villains must be totally and unsympathetic at all? What's wrong with a baddie that is bad for what he/she does, but at the same time you could feel some sort of sympathy for them, if not enough obviously to excuse what they did, i.e. kill a ton of people? I mean take that Green Goblin fella. He seems to be a guy who used his brains (and ruthlessness) to become a self-made billionaire industry tycoon. Then he loses that military contract which his livelyhood the company loses, and even when they did get said contract back (killing the competition is cheating if you ask me), the guy still loses his company by corporate politicking. Can't blame him (but I do that green gas) for why he went nutty. I was more complaining about the way they turned Otto Octavius into a nice guy who was doing evil things because his mechanical arms were brainwashing him. Seriously? Doc Ock is supposed to be an asshole. To be fair, Ock wasn't always an asshole. He had the typical bad upbringing and was forced to push everyone who cared about him away for some reason or another. I thought Sandman was a lot worse. They gave us no reason to care about the guy throughout, then threw that bit in at the end to make us feel sorry for him.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 6, 2010 0:53:54 GMT -5
Sandman in SM3 was horribly underdeveloped, one of many such plotlines that each could have made for a decent picture. Instead all get thrown into the blender, and we get this.
I think Raimi wanted a different sort of villain for ole Spidey to duke out with. A baddie that really is an anti-hero. Yeah a crook who made a deadly mistake or two he regrets, but imagine if that lifelong inner-city slum trash (no offense) suddenly got those God-like powers?
I would like to believe he would assert himself, no longer be a victim of fate or his environment or whatever. Maybe trash those mobsters he worked for previously to put food on the table. Or something.
It could have worked folks. Just not the way SM3 did.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jan 6, 2010 1:02:59 GMT -5
Hell you coulda took Sandman completely outta the movie and the plot wouldn't have been affected THAT much.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 6, 2010 1:04:22 GMT -5
Sandman in SM3 was horribly underdeveloped, one of many such plotlines that each could have made for a decent picture. Instead all get thrown into the blender, and we get this. I think Raimi wanted a different sort of villain for ole Spidey to duke out with. A baddie that really is an anti-hero. Yeah a crook who made a deadly mistake or two he regrets, but imagine if that lifelong inner-city slum trash (no offense) suddenly got those God-like powers? I would like to believe he would assert himself, no longer be a victim of fate or his environment or whatever. Maybe trash those mobsters he worked for previously to put food on the table. Or something. It could have worked folks. Just not the way SM3 did. Probably, but then they forced him to throw Venom in and it all went down the tubes.
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Jan 6, 2010 3:14:44 GMT -5
You mean villains must be totally and unsympathetic at all? What's wrong with a baddie that is bad for what he/she does, but at the same time you could feel some sort of sympathy for them, if not enough obviously to excuse what they did, i.e. kill a ton of people? I mean take that Green Goblin fella. He seems to be a guy who used his brains (and ruthlessness) to become a self-made billionaire industry tycoon. Then he loses that military contract which his livelyhood the company loses, and even when they did get said contract back (killing the competition is cheating if you ask me), the guy still loses his company by corporate politicking. Can't blame him (but I do that green gas) for why he went nutty. I was more complaining about the way they turned Otto Octavius into a nice guy who was doing evil things because his mechanical arms were brainwashing him. Seriously? Doc Ock is supposed to be an asshole. Some villains are awesome because you love to hate them. They don't need to be involved in a sob story. Same goes for Sandman and his dying kid. Sandman has been a sympathetic villain for awhile. He's pretty much been one of the few villians that Spidey tries to help actually go straight *The others being Al Kravennoff and Puma*.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 6, 2010 3:17:34 GMT -5
I loved back in the day when Sandman got reformed and ended up a member of the Avengers.
Such a nice touch, I mean we don't have that many baddies-turned-goodies in that universe. Maybe Black Widow and Hawkeye, but who else?
But then some new writers wanted to go edgy, so Sandman is a villain again. Why? No really, why?
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Jan 6, 2010 3:43:41 GMT -5
But then some new writers wanted to go edgy, so Sandman is a villain again. Why? No really, why? There just revisiting an old plot point. Back in the day Sandy used to team with the Wizard alot till he went straight, Wizard not wanting to lose a valuable tool mind controlled him. While Spidey was able to break this left him a bit loopy. Now he has a habit of becoming schizophrenic every now and then and manifest Sand duplicates that can take over his mind. In a Sandman arc that coming pretty soon after Gauntlet it's going to be about Spidey bringing him back to normal.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Emoticon Man, TF Fan on Jan 6, 2010 9:30:12 GMT -5
Sandman has been sympathetic since the 80s. Him being sympathetic in the movies was to be expected. And, personally, I thought his portrayal was awesome.
And two more baddies-turned-goodies are fellow Avengers Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, and Swordsman. Wonder Man and Vision might count, too, if you don't mind counting baddies who were coerced into being baddies.
|
|
Grendel
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
But ... why is all the rum gone?
Posts: 17,593
|
Post by Grendel on Jan 6, 2010 10:28:01 GMT -5
As long as they get it right this time, I don't have a problem with a delay. Rushing films out to make some deadline can often lead to subpar efforts.
|
|
|
Post by Solid Stryk-Dizzle on Jan 6, 2010 16:49:29 GMT -5
I can't forgive Raimi for the s***ty job he did on 3. No excuses for him.
Forced villain or not, you're in charge of a multi-million dollar franchise. Don't be a baby about it, Do your damn job and put out the best movie you can.
|
|
|
Post by Maidpool w/ Cleaning Action on Jan 6, 2010 17:00:21 GMT -5
The only person in the cast I don't care for is Dunst, and I never have.
|
|
|
Post by Maidpool w/ Cleaning Action on Jan 6, 2010 17:04:59 GMT -5
When the producers don't try to force villains in the movie, they actually turn out well. Key lesson, don't force a villain the director doesn't like into the movie, and don't try to force three into a movie unless there's a team involved. The only superhero movie I can think of that has been able to put 3 or more villains in the movie and have it work, was Superman 2. You had the single hero, and 4 villains in Zod, Non, Ursa, and Lex Luthor. But that was helped by them being set up in the first movie. Batman Begins had Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, Carmine Falcone, Flass and Earle (Rutger Hauer as a corporate villain). The Dark Knight had a whole slew of villains. Joker, Scarecrow for a cameo, Gamble, Two Face, Lau, the two corrupt cops, Maroni.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Woodrow on Jan 6, 2010 17:07:51 GMT -5
The only person in the cast I don't care for is Dunst, and I never have. Yeah please get rid of Dunst for the fourth movie. If you have someone like Elizabeth Banks in the movies like they do why not have Betty as the love interest for one movie?
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 6, 2010 17:34:17 GMT -5
The only superhero movie I can think of that has been able to put 3 or more villains in the movie and have it work, was Superman 2. You had the single hero, and 4 villains in Zod, Non, Ursa, and Lex Luthor. But that was helped by them being set up in the first movie. Batman Begins had Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, Carmine Falcone, Flass and Earle (Rutger Hauer as a corporate villain). The Dark Knight had a whole slew of villains. Joker, Scarecrow for a cameo, Gamble, Two Face, Lau, the two corrupt cops, Maroni. I think it's getting a bit semantic to include all the minor characters and sidekicks when people are talking about the villains of the movies. I really only consider main characters, characters with a significant role, when talking about the villains of a movie. Most are going to have some sort of subordinates (or people we treat as such) who don't actually do much to actually challenge the hero. Like in The Dark Knight, I'd only count Two-Face and Joker (and Two-Face was really just thrown in in the last half hour). Lau was a business partner, but he didn't have much of a role in the movie. The corrupt cops weren't the focus. I can't forgive Raimi for the s***ty job he did on 3. No excuses for him. Forced villain or not, you're in charge of a multi-million dollar franchise. Don't be a baby about it, Do your damn job and put out the best movie you can. Honestly, I think he did the best he could when they had him add two major plot points (Venom and Gwen Stacy love triangle) when he already had a plot and villains. There's only so much you can do when they want to add more and more to a summer popcorn flick. And it's not he's the only director who has made a bad movie.
|
|
Goldenbane
Hank Scorpio
THE G.D. Goldenbane
Posts: 7,331
|
Post by Goldenbane on Jan 6, 2010 18:01:04 GMT -5
Get rid of Dunst and Macguire. Dunst's name is pretty accurate to her attitude...DUNCE! Really didn't like her in 2 or 3.
Macguire just pisses me off. I swear he believes he has to get 99% face time in each movie. I want to see Spiderman...full costume...mask on...doing his thing. I don't want to see damn ugly Tobie's stupid fat face. I think if you add all three movies together, Spiderman...in full undamaged costume with mask on...for a grand total of maybe 30 minutes. That really sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Solid Stryk-Dizzle on Jan 6, 2010 18:04:33 GMT -5
I can't forgive Raimi for the s***ty job he did on 3. No excuses for him. Forced villain or not, you're in charge of a multi-million dollar franchise. Don't be a baby about it, Do your damn job and put out the best movie you can. Honestly, I think he did the best he could when they had him add two major plot points (Venom and Gwen Stacy love triangle) when he already had a plot and villains. There's only so much you can do when they want to add more and more to a summer popcorn flick. And it's not he's the only director who has made a bad movie. He said himself that he half-assed the movie because of the studio butting in. He should've just got over his boner for Sandman and Vulture and did the best with what he was given.
|
|