SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING starring Tom Holland (7/28/17) 3 3

[1Cool]

Saw it today with wife and daughter. Daughter loved it and wife thought it was great.  I thought it was good but definitely not ground breaking.  Spidey continuously gets beaten up way too much and the teen spidey was very irritating to me but I'm old.  I did like it better then the last two Sony Spidey movie and it definitely had a Marvel vibe but I'd only give it a B- since I'd probably not watch it again.

[Bosco685]

8 hours ago, Jaylam said:

If I remember correctly, it was Dafoe himself that nixed the goblin mask. He said he wouldn't play the part if that is what he had to wear... too corney or something like that. Because of this they redesigned it to be more "high tech" which I think looked even more ridiculous. 

Perfect timing on this topic, as The Hollywood Reporter brought it up the previous week.

'Spider-Man': Willem Dafoe's Original Green Goblin Mask Was Amazing

Quote

The animatronics were so good, even the crew commented during one test on how creepy it was.

 

The initial Goblin mask was stunning in that the range of emotion that could be shown on the face was outstanding. In fact, the animatronics were so good, even the crew commented during one test on how creepy it was. It appears the actor's mouth would have been seamlessly worked into it.

 

Still, the one drawback to the mask having all those moving pieces is that it looks like the shoulder-mounted rig was extremely uncomfortable to wear and took some time to apply.

 

According to Amalgamated Dynamics, director Sam Raimi opted not to use the articulated mask before an actor was cast in the role, so the crew began working on the piece that would end up being used in the film.

 

"Because we did not know who would play the Goblin, James Kagel, Steve Koch and Greg Smith sculpted two sizes in hopes that one would fit whoever was cast. Luckily, not only did the smaller, sleeker version fit, but it resembled Willem Dafoe, who won the part," according to Amalgamated Dynamics.

They even posted a video of the secondary masks being carved and finalized.

 

[Bosco685]

China Delays Release of 'Spider-Man: Homecoming,' 'Valerian'

Quote

The move suggests that China's media regulators have reinstated their infamous blackout on Hollywood film imports during the lucrative summer movie-going season.

 

Spider-Man: Homecoming's worldwide box-office dominance is missing one major piece of the global puzzle: China.

 

So far in 2017, most major Hollywood tentpoles have opened in China day-and-date with North America, or just shortly after their U.S. debut. But sources in Beijing say Sony's Spider-Man: Homecoming has yet to be given an official release date, which means it is unlikely to open in the world's second-largest film market until at least August.

 

The same goes for 20th Century Fox’s War for The Planet of the Apes, opening in North America on Friday, and Luc Besson's Valerian, set for a North American debut on July 21. Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, meanwhile, isn't expected to open in China until early September, well after its July 19 U.S. bow. 

 

The delays could cost Hollywood millions. In an increasingly integrated — and still piracy-vulnerable — global entertainment landscape, late release dates have been known to erode box office significantly.

[Beardown]

A group of us went and LOVED it.    

Thought the Vulture was fantastic and loved how they tied in Civil War and the Avengers to help tell the story.

[fantastic_four]

On 7/11/2017 at 7:46 AM, fantastic_four said:

The best superhero films are, in order, Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins, Logan, and X-Men: First Class

OK, I haven't thought about this for a while, but "First Class" isn't one of the best five superhero films.  Iron Man is fifth on that list, and Avengers is ahead of First Class.

[Jaylam]

7 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Perfect timing on this topic, as The Hollywood Reporter brought it up the previous week.

'Spider-Man': Willem Dafoe's Original Green Goblin Mask Was Amazing

They even posted a video of the secondary masks being carved and finalized.

 

Yeah, this story seems a little different than the one I heard years ago. 

I just watched a little clip of the bridge battle, I forgot how well Dafoe owned the part, just the sound of his sadistic voice really captured the essence of what I always imagined the Green Goblin to be so it was easy to overlook the weakness in the design of the costume and mask.

[Bobbyusc]

6 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

OK, I haven't thought about this for a while, but "First Class" isn't one of the best five superhero films.  Iron Man is fifth on that list, and Avengers is ahead of First Class.

Off topic....  You wouldnt add Blade in there?

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, Bobbyusc said:

Off topic....  You wouldnt add Blade in there?

Not over X-Men: First Class. Although I did appreciate both movies. But with Matthew Vaughn as director, he pulled off so many wins in that movie. Including a Kevin Bacon villain I would have never guessed at working so well.

[Bosco685]

[piper]

I took the kids to see it again today. 

[Jaylam]

 After watching "Homecoming" I just felt there was a little something missing, but I just couldn't put my finger on it.... until I watched a few clips of Tobey McGuire's Spider-man. The difference was I found myself rooting for Tobey's Spider-man, but I just couldn't muster that same feeling for Tom Holland's rendition. If anything I felt more sympathy for Toomes and understood his character and motivations better. Of course it helped that Keaton rocked the part, but I'm not so sure Holland has reached that level of maturity in his acting and it really showed in scenes when they were together.

[fantastic_four]

14 hours ago, Bobbyusc said:

21 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

OK, I haven't thought about this for a while, but "First Class" isn't one of the best five superhero films.  Iron Man is fifth on that list, and Avengers is ahead of First Class.

Off topic....  You wouldnt add Blade in there?

Not even in the top ten.  MAYBE in the top 20, but it has been so long since I saw "Blade" I'd probably have to watch it again to place it.

[fantastic_four]

4 hours ago, Jaylam said:

 After watching "Homecoming" I just felt there was a little something missing, but I just couldn't put my finger on it.... until I watched a few clips of Tobey McGuire's Spider-man. The difference was I found myself rooting for Tobey's Spider-man, but I just couldn't muster that same feeling for Tom Holland's rendition. If anything I felt more sympathy for Toomes and understood his character and motivations better. Of course it helped that Keaton rocked the part, but I'm not so sure Holland has reached that level of maturity in his acting and it really showed in scenes when they were together.

McGuire was a more introspective Stan Lee Peter Parker whereas Holland was a more modernized, it's-cool-to-be-a-nerd Peter Parker with a Brian Bendis quick wit.  The old Peter was more relatable because he was quiet in his normal life, but became jokey in the suit because he felt anonymous and freer.  Bendis made Peter far more personable out of the suit, and that made him more interesting to listen to but less relatable.

I listened to a Holland interview on "The Nerdist" podcast this week, and he says he had never read the comic before landing the role, and when he did, he mostly drew his performance from Peter as depicted in Ultimate Spider-Man because in his words it was "more modernized."

[piper]

I've always been a big fan of Bendis' USM run.  If you don't modernize characters for the times, they die off.

[fantastic_four]

7 minutes ago, piper said:

I've always been a big fan of Bendis' USM run.  If you don't modernize characters for the times, they die off.

Same.  Bendis is a MUCH better writer than Stan Lee was.  Lee was an incredible creator of characters and innovated the entire superhero genre with that strength in a way we're still vividly feeling today, and his dialogue was superb, but his plots were awful, and his story ideas were often super-campy.

To be fair, that's probably more of a result of the much-vaunted "Marvel Method" where Stan let the artist do most of the plots with him editing them after the fact.  Writing is better if it's all centralized with one person.  Impossible to say what Stan was capable of if he spread himself less thin and wrote less titles but did all the writing for the ones he worked on.

[Crimebuster]

1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

Bendis is a MUCH better writer than Stan Lee was.

 

There is no universe in which this is true. 

[fantastic_four]

5 minutes ago, Crimebuster said:

1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

Bendis is a MUCH better writer than Stan Lee was.

There is no universe in which this is true. 

I'm going to guess you mentally stripped all context out of that comment in the exact same way you stripped it out of what you chose to quote from my original post.  Or if you think Stan was an amazing plotter, I'm eager to hear why.

[piper]

28 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

35 minutes ago, Crimebuster said:

1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

Bendis is a MUCH better writer than Stan Lee was.

There is no universe in which this is true. 

I'm going to guess you mentally stripped all context out of that comment in the exact same way you stripped it out of what you chose to quote from my original post.  Or if you think Stan was an amazing plotter, I'm eager to hear why.

I'm amazed at Stan's ability to manage/lead the operation, create new characters, edit stories, and market marvel.  I believe his writing suffered as a result.  How couldn't it?  I mean he was burning the candle at both ends...

I also believe his stories were a product of his time.  Of course, they were campy.   It was the 1960's!

I think that because Bendis focused on writing, the quality of the writing product was better. 

[fantastic_four]

4 minutes ago, piper said:

I also believe his stories were a product of his time.  Of course, they were campy.   It was the 1960's!

Or more specifically, they were a product of the state comic books were in at that time, i.e. geared towards children.  Stan's big contribution was that he wanted to gear them towards children AND adults.  It was the youth of the medium, because certainly the elements of writing he wasn't good at had been well-developed centuries prior to the 1960s, it's just that comic books were looked at as the slums of the overall writing world.   They still are to a great extent, but it draws far better writers today than it did before Stan changed everything.

[piper]

7 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

20 minutes ago, piper said:

I also believe his stories were a product of his time.  Of course, they were campy.   It was the 1960's!

Or more specifically, they were a product of the state comic books were in at that time, i.e. geared towards children.  Stan's big contribution was that he wanted to gear them towards children AND adults.  It was the youth of the medium, because certainly the elements of writing he wasn't good at had been well-developed centuries prior to the 1960s, it's just that comic books were looked at as the slums of the overall writing world.   They still are to a great extent, but it draws far better writers today than it did before Stan changed everything

1

That's right.  Stan changed the perception of comics books!  I loved reading his old soapbox columns about visiting universities and delivering a talk or seeing young adults reading ASM, FF, etc.

As for the quality of current comic book writers, they are fantastic.  There are many modern day writers who write in multi-mediums (e.g. Neil Gaiman, Joe Hill, etc.).  That doesn't even include those who write for Hollywood.  I don't think there's the same stigma that there used to be.