tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post8460450205988765703..comments2023-07-27T05:59:11.134-07:00Comments on Words Lines and Pictures: My First Post: A Hurtful Message to Sam RaimiAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12559709230219813047noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post-67768349120262637672007-06-13T10:42:00.000-07:002007-06-13T10:42:00.000-07:00Not to be too flippant, but I actually did get rea...Not to be too flippant, but I actually did get really angry and punch a wall. Unfortunately, I didn't punch dry wall. As in, ow.<BR/><BR/>I belong on the side of sluggish betrayal. Wrong hero in that movie!<BR/><BR/>Just FYI, I'm Beth. I got by dj sciz, as in, scissortail fly-catcher, which for some reason is my spirit guide.eirweneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17597044148890649069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post-72783939601971904512007-06-05T09:51:00.000-07:002007-06-05T09:51:00.000-07:00Aha! and I think this is where I have to disagree ...Aha! and I think this is where I have to disagree on who was betrayed and why. Comic books are not being bought by children and I'm not sure that Sam Raimi cares but no one can make an argument against SPIDERMAN being made for kids.<BR/><BR/>Not made for morons like that campy Bat-Show, in which even the owners of the character had given up.<BR/><BR/>The Spiderman movie. It's fine that it was made for kids and it shouldn't have been an issue except that we went in expecting OUR movies, which we were given in S1 and S2.<BR/><BR/>As soon as Venom was given the go ahead, you should have known something as up. No one likes Venom execpt the guys who would like making references to Kirsten Dunst's "Fun Bags". Think about that for a minute. <BR/><BR/>Venom is a character that is very popular with...THOSE GUYS...<BR/><BR/>And you're not one of them.<BR/><BR/>I mean damn. Raimi gave you Bruce Campbell. Who careas about those kids. They were that guy in Superman the Movie who commented on the coolness of the Supersuit. <BR/><BR/>Thuggish Betrayal is nipples on a Bat-Suit. This movie is just a bait and switch but it's the bait and switch that tells you that when you make a movie damn near for free, with nothing to lose, bad things can happen. Bad things to us. Not bad things to the target audience of this movie, which was not us.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12559709230219813047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post-67566466687674084202007-06-04T12:07:00.000-07:002007-06-04T12:07:00.000-07:00To follow up on what I mean by "thuggish betrayal"...To follow up on what I mean by "thuggish betrayal" - That one scene at the end where SpiderFruit and the Green Fig were fighting the SandNancy. SpiderFruit did something "cool" right after we were supposed to think he was dead (yeah, as if that wasn't predictable at all). Following the "cool" action of SpiderFruit, Sam Raimi then cut to two seven year olds watching the fight. One kid very overenthusiastically yelled out "Cool!" and then the other kid rejoined "Wicked awesome!"<BR/><BR/>Who were these kids? We'd never seen them before in the entire movie - why would we care about them at all, what they were saying, etc.? Why did they appear at that moment? The only reasonable answer is that they were insert characters used by Sam Raimi to tell us, the stupid jamokes in the audience, that now was the time to cheer because something "cool" happened. <BR/><BR/>Sam Raimi believed that people going to see this movie were actually dumb enough to require this "cue" for applause: two idiot child actors hamming it up for a completely unnecessary role. They may as well have yelled out "I love eating at McDonald's!" for all they contributed to the movie.<BR/><BR/>And it was then I realized the movie was utterly for children. There was nothing in it, nothing, for grown men to appreciate (except for Kristen Dunst's benippled funbags which got a total of 3 seconds of screentime, not worth it). <BR/><BR/>What's more, the attitude of everyone involved in the movie (Raimi, Dunst, Sandman's pecker, etc.) was that of <B>course</B> the movie was for children! Comics <B>themselves</B> are for children! Only social rejects and "nerds" would look for any deeper meaning than "it's good to beat up Sandman".<BR/><BR/>And that was the essential betrayal. That movie's central message is that comics have been, are, and will always be, as dumb as the Batman television show. And as sure as I'm a far right wing republican, I defy that message.F. Fredrick Skittyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02787943963616603331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post-80322285805670364242007-05-31T11:23:00.000-07:002007-05-31T11:23:00.000-07:00Spiderman 3 was not a thuggish betrayal.It WAS a m...Spiderman 3 was not a thuggish betrayal.<BR/><BR/>It WAS a movie that made me wonder what they left out?<BR/><BR/>Will the DVD also have the Spider Buggy with a voice done by Carlos Mencia?<BR/><BR/>Will it also have Jean DeWolfe played by Joyce DeWitt<BR/><BR/>Will it have bother Spider Women played by Eva Longoria and Nicole Kidman?<BR/><BR/>Will it have Malcolm McDowell as that old dude who tells Spiderman that he isn't the first Spiderman and that Glen Danzig is the Animal Spirit Killer here to kill the guys with Spider Powers?<BR/><BR/>The comics had all that stuff. This movie had almost everything that ever could have happened in the comics.<BR/><BR/>well..<BR/><BR/>Except for the Spectacular Emo Cookie Eating Jazz Dancer...<BR/><BR/>That shit came from no where.<BR/><BR/>TGAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12559709230219813047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7630194366723823977.post-74506767101728031672007-05-31T09:46:00.000-07:002007-05-31T09:46:00.000-07:00Well, despite Skitty's warning, I went to see this...Well, despite Skitty's warning, I went to see this and he was right on one account - my seven year old loved it as did his eight year old friend. Should I view this as a sign of waning intelligence and start preparing my kid for trade school? Who knows. I mean, I did see a heck of a lot of mouth breathing during the battle scenes.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps each film is a Spiderman of a particular decade. The first film was they Spider-Man of the 60s, the mythic era that you missed out. The second film was the Spiderman of the 70s, more self conscious, able to draw from a long history of themes and conflicts. This film is the Spiderman of the 80s, with those kinetic panel layouts that made your younger brother proclaim that Liefeld or McFarland are gods while you wonder when comic artists got to lazy to draw backgrounds.<BR/><BR/>I only hope Spiderman 4 isn't the clone saga.Heinsbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04658212129453509858noreply@blogger.com