Badmovies.org Forum

Just got back from seeing Spider-man and I have one word for it...WOW!!!!
I was a fan of the comic for years and this was very faithful to the comic
I mean there were a few changes but in my opinion it was like right out of the comic. And William Defoe as the Goblin was perfect. What he did for the Goblin was what Jack Nickelson did for the Joker

As for the Hulk preview...well it was too short but it looks promising

Spider-Man is THE best comic adaption ever. Sam Raimi has once again proven his genious. This is the only movie ever to truly capture the look and feel of a comic. The colorful, disproportionate look of New York from the comic was depicted perfectly. I felt like a little kid again, feeling as though I should yell, "Look out, Spidey!" more than once. And of course Bruce Campbell turns in a great cameo. Scooby-Doo, though, looks like it will hurt like a b***h.

           For "Spider-Man 2(or;Returns)",Sam Raimi needs to get into the complexed relationships and emotional depth that made the comic books so compelling(which the movie lacked,but I still enjoyed it,anyway),and "definitely"needs Doctor Octopus as the villain,since he's the main culprit who makes a major impact in Peter Parker/Spider-man's life(ala The Joker in "Batman"),and would be a much worthy rival for Spider-Man to battle,as the Green Goblin turned out to be. Nicolas Cage would be an absolute must to play Doc Oc,and can openly match Tobey Maguire as a worthy on-screen opponent.
         And,then,with Part 3,Raimi would "absolutely" have to have Venom as the villain in that one,since no other villain after Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus can easily follow in their footsteps.

Okay, first off, there was a lot of relationship development and emotional complexity. A little too much, I thought. And Nick Cage? Why must he be bandied about to be in every single freaking comic book movie in development?! He's a decent actor, but come on! He's scrawny and he looks half dead! He just does not have the qualities needed in a hero. And Venom...I'd like to see him on the big screen, but fitting the entire symbiote story (a reasonably faithful rendition, anyway) into one movie would be absolutely impossible. Doc Ock and Lizard will be in Spidey 2, so no more villain suggestions please.

I saw it last night too. Man was it ever awesome. I prolly thought it was awesome because I've never been a huge fan of the comics, so I woulden't know if it was faithful to the comic or not but I thought it was an amazing movie and that sam raimi is still my #1 fav director ever. And the Bruce Campbell cameo was great, and stan lee was in there for a millisecond. If you blinked you could've missed it.

-Dan

Everyone mentions Bruce Campbell but did anyone notice Sam Rami's son Ted?  Remember him...he played Joxer in Zena. I kept looking for others from the Hercules and Zena series to make and apperance.

Lucy Lawless was the punk chick in the part where they were talking to people and what they think of Spidey. And where was Stan Lee?

If you blinked you missed him. It was when The Goblin first attacked. I saw him went and turned to my son to tell him who it was and that fast he was gone

yeah he just yells when the green goblin attacks. its a really quick one. And I noticed Ted in there too. But I completely forgot about it when I posted.

-Dan

Stan Lee had a longer role in the original cut.  He tries to sell Peter Parker a pair of sunglasses that the X-Men wear.  Raimi said that it will be on the DVD.  And yes, Spider-Man does indeed RULE!!!!!

The guy who played Xerxes was in the cemetary scene at the end.

 I'd have to agree that Spider-man, in fact, kicked ass. There were a few *slighty* cheezy lines, but it's a comic book. The Goblin outfit looked kinda stupid too I thought, though Willam Dafoe did a good job. As for number 2 villians, I think there was a throwaway line for spiders changing their colors, which may mean Venom at some point, though not the straight comic version, which makes sense. Eddie Brock was, I believe, also mentioned.

J.R. how do you know it will be Ock and the Lizard for part deux?

Just to clear something up:
Ted is Sam's brother, not son.

Thanks for the clear up.

Another cool part was that Peter Parker got fired by Dr. Connors as mentioned in the throwaway line between Harry and him.  Dr. Connors! That's the freakin' Lizard.  I don't think many people noticed it, but little things like that push this movie far above average.  Plus, many definite Raimi lines, like when Norman Osbourne complains that the steel's "cold" (what other director would have that line?), Peter complaining that Flash Thompson "is such a jerk" and Peter complaining that Bruce Campbell's character got his name wrong  (I agree, "The Human Spider" does have a nice ring to it).  Raimi admits that he worked on the script and it shows even though he got no credit for it.  It's about time Raimi became an A-List director (I think it should have happened after the first Evil Dead) and for those who are worried he's losing his roots, he has mentioned repeatedly that after Spider-Man 2 he would like to work on Evil Dead 4.  After two unbelieveable duds (I don't know if he had to sell out that much to get respect) it's amazing to see him back in form.  He's been my favourite director since I was 13, and I don't think I'll ever have to hear "Sam who?" ever again.  Great movie!

To me what killed the Batman series of movies is when they started putting in 2 villians instead of just one. I mean Batman Returns could have been a great movie if it was just Catwoman and Batman. But the bogged it down with the Penguin. PLEASE IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS GOOD DON'T DO IT TO SPIDERMAN.

I can see it working though with Lizard and Doc Oc. THey're both scientists. With catwoman and Penguin those characters had really nothing.

They need to do a Vemon movie and then a Carnage film. U can't do both of those 2 in the same movie (well u could but the movie would be hella-long)

Both Sam Raimi and Kirsten Dunst have said Doc Ock and The Lizard ar ein part 2.

I'm with you chris! A huge portion of the congratulations goes to Sam. He put some truely insane visuals in this movie.Everybody did an awesome job acting. Is it just me, or did you guys get creeped out by Willem Dafoe? You could tell he wasn't all there! Can't wait to buy this movie! Hell, I might go see it again!

I've already arranged to see it twice more, and who knows if it's around long enough (which it probably will be judging from it's record breaking opening) I'll probably see it again.  It's a true theater film, not saying it won't be good on DVD, just you don't get the same thrill as seeing it on the big screen.  The audience I saw it with was absolutely mesmerized and when it ended we all broke into applause.  It's not often you get a blockbuster that's this satisfying, and once again, hats off to Raimi for exceeding the hype and making a damn good film that will be remembered as the best superhero film of all time (until the sequel).

Yes, for a comic book adaption SPIDER-MAN suceeds in being what it really is: a comic book. And with that, director Sam Raimi does a good job at making a 2 hour comic book film that is fun. Good job, Sam.

I also enjoyed Bruce Campbell's cameo as the wrestling ringmaster who creates the name Spider-Man after hearing the original name was "The Human Spider". I thought it would have been alot funnier if Bruce played one of the wrestlers dressed as Ash complete with chainsaw in hand. And Ted Raimi's quick two scene cameo was funny as well.

What was funny about the whole deal was that I encountered a couple of strangers who were talking about how JASON X sucked and I got into it. I also told then how SPIDER-MAN was and that "If it's from the same director of EVIL DEAD, then it's gona' be good" they just looked at me and one of them said "What's EVIL DEAD?" Jesus, get with the times man!

Also, I watched "Ebert and Roper" last night and Roper gave SPIDER-MAN a thumbs up, but Ebert gave it a thumbs down. What is interesting about this is that Ebert gave SPIDER-MAN 2 1/2 stars on his review at Chicago Sun Times! Ebert, make up your mind.

As for JASON X, I will not visit THAT film anytime soon.

EXCELLENT!!! This film far surpasses all other comic to film movies!! I plan on seeing this one again and again!! The only thing I didn't like was the CGI fights, like the ones used in Blade 2, but the only time it really bothered me was when he was fighting the guys who were robbing the armored car. Willem Dafoe and Tobey Maguire were supurb and Dunst did a reasonably good job as MJ. Any one else smile at the "Tiger" comment? As for all the villians we would like to see, why not wait for the live action TV series due out soon! I believe CNN said it was due in 2003, along with a live action X-Men: Evolution. Now let's just HOPE that Daredevil, Hulk, and Iron Fist will follow in Spidey's footsteps and Marvel will put out great films rather than their usual crap like X-Men and Punisher!

        Roger Ebert is an absolute moron who definitely needs to not only retire,but stick his thumb straight up where the sun don't shine,for he should be dropping over once he's heard that "Spider-Man" made over $114 million already!!!(Insert loud sounds of James Cameron[whose "Titanic" will deservingly be de-throned in no time]and
Quentin Tarantino self-kicking their own butts).
        Ebert has obviously suffered from over-viewing(of soooo many movies)burnout,with all the crapola he gives thumbs-up to("Dark City","Deep Blue Sea","Final Destination"),and what he tried to pull off after Gene(Siskel) died(with all the mediocre critics who guested just to make himself look good)has reall backfired in his face!!Retire,Roger,retire!
          As for "Spider-Man",may Sam inspire many dream dreaming youths to pursue their dreams with a massive passion,and make 10 to 12 more Spidey sequels,as well(maybe they can even have Spidey fight RoboJason). .And.....George Lucas have better be looking out very closely at "Spider-Man"'s well-deserved success,for if Spidey knocks out "Star Wars;Episode 2" flat downward,Lucas will quickly end up on the Albert Pyun/Jim Wynorski/Fred Olen Ray league in an awfully quick time.

Ebert has been slipping for the last five years or so. After Siskel died he doesn't seem to have lost all sense. Losing one's true love will do that. He gave utter crap like The Cell and Episode 1 big thumbs up, based entirely on the special effects. Then he complains that other movies rely too heavily on special effects. Huh?

I agree that Ebert has become a bit too "Godlike" with his reviews, but I am happy that he got Roeper as his co-host.  Siskel used to keep Ebert in line when he would give a great movie thumbs down and Roeper is carrying on the tradition.  My favourite was when Ebert gave "Just Visiting" a thumbs up and Roeper looked at him in all seriousness and asked "Are you kidding?" and then proceeded to critisize Ebert himself.  Reading Ebert's print review, he had no intention of liking this film.  He liked all the relationships and characters in the film, but failed it because of the bad CGI.  Does anyone remember how bad a lot of people thought the green-screen in Superman was?  I will grant that some of the CGI was fakey, like Peter Parker jumping across the buildings, but by the next shot you don't care.  It's a fun filled movie and it's action scenes (another thing being heavily critisized) are fast and furious and yes, "Spider-Man does not move like a human being".  That's the friggin point.  And Ebert's critisism of the ending.  What more did Raimi have to do?  The scene takes place in a graveyard,  Harry just called Peter his best friend after saying he'll make Spider-Man pay (he becomes the Green Goblin 2) and Peter's voice over says that everyone he cares about dies.  So why on earth does Ebert not understand why Peter turns his back on Mary Jane?  Perhaps Raimi shoud have had Peter say into the camera, "Listen you fat old geezer, the reason I'm not going with Mary Jane is that I chose to save the world over personal gratification and that actually makes me more admirable.  Oh yeah, and you suck the big one." and then fade to black.

Ebert is just mad because nobody  loved the story he wrote that became a movie called Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls. I too think he should retire giving Kissing Jessica Stern a thumbs up that was a crappy movie nobody didn't want to see. The next villain I think should be in Spider-Man 3 is The Scorpion now that be good showing how The Scorpion was transform from a small time crook into a super-villain by Dr. Conners and J. Jonah Jameson.

In my opinion, Ebert considers himself the "elegant critic" which is defined as one who goes for the higher up films. I wouldn't say THE PATRIOT or JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKES BACK are "great" or "good" films at all, but Ebert does. Hell, he even gives RE-ANIMATOR and THE RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD three stars!

But then again, he hated THE BEYOND claiming that Lucio Fulci was "the Italian version of Herschell Gordon Lewis" (I think not) as well as saying both ZOMBIE and DON'T TORTURE A DUCKING are the same film (Jesus Roger, do your research). And he called RE-ANIMATOR a classic in being "trashy". How wrong is this guy?

And yet, it's his own opinion and I respect that. Sure, he has his own flaws when it comes to determining a film, but it was neat to see him argue with his old pal Gene Siskel. And now with Roper on Ebert's show, they argue and do a hell of a good job at it prompting not only film criticism but argumentive battles that entertain me. Ebert does a good job at times, but as my dad said "Roper is more hip, Ebert is old fashioned." How true, how true.

I have a soft spot in my heart for the late great Gene Siskel, he had more of sense of humor about himself than Ebert appears to (though Ebert does like Giant Monsters).  My favorite Siskel review was for Anaconda...

"I give this movie thumbs up for Jon Voight and the snake, how's THAT for film criticism."  Siskel's goofy grin was so bright they probably didn't need studio lighting that day.

Siskel was great.  His love for films showed emensely, and unlike Ebert, it looked like he really enjoyed movies, that he had the greatest job in the world.  Granted, he was very biased against horror films (Evil Dead 2 being a routine horror movie.  C'mon Gene!).  He also had the best reactions when Roger gave a bad review.  My favourites were when Roger gave Copland a bad review and Gene looked into the camera and said "Wow" and when Roger was either nitpicking or giving unworthy praise, Gene would angrily say "C'mon Roger!".  On the day he died I was working at a video store and when a customer told me he died I laughed and told him he was wrong, Gene had successfully recovered from the brain tumor.  Later, another customer told me and I still refused to believe it.  He recovered, they just got their facts mixed up!  Eventually, I saw it on the news, only to prove everyone wrong, and unfortunately, I was the wrong one.  I was really suprised at just how depressed everyone was when he died.  I thought I was the only one who grew up loving the Siskel and Ebert show, but everyone watched the show.  It really shows how much Gene loved his work when the doctors told him to take it easy and he insisted on going back to work.  It's weird that a film critic had such a big fan base, almost a celebrity himself, and I never realized it until he died.  And who didn't love whenever the dynamic duo showed up on any talk show.  They were hillarious.  Roeper is a damn good reaplacement, but everyone I know misses Gene emensely.  And he would have loved Spider-Man!

I remember when Deanzilla came out, Siskel was doing the show via phone from his hospital room!  His comment on Mayor Ebert and his assistant Gene "Now that's petty"

Ebert was disappointed that Mayor Ebert didn't get stomped.  He really wanted to be stomped.

              So,Roger Ebert hated "The Beyond",eh?!  What a f'ing fraidy cat!!! And for him calling Lucio Fulci "the Italian Herschell Gordon Lewis" is a real compliment to the much missed Maestro.
                 It just makes me wonder on how Ebert will be able to handle viewing (for reviewing sakes)"Blood Feast 2"....
                   Other than that:hope he likes "Spider-Man 2" better than he did Part One(which i highly doubt he will).

Steven, your a cool guy!

I have a question? Since it's all been but confirmed that Doc Ock and the Lizard will be in the second Spiderman, who do you think should play them?
As for Doc Ock I have no idea as of yet but for the Lizard I feel Tim Curry could pull off that role like it was second nature. What are your thoughts?