Morpheus 02 wrote:
i haven't sen ASM yet...because to me, i still can't get over that they essentially remade a movie that's a few years old.
I don't get why people think that. Spider-Man has been a comic-book character for over 50 years. There have been thousands of stories told about him. The first Raimi movie was based on a variety of those stories, including the origin story, a whole extended arc about the Green Goblin and Harry Osborn, and a variation on the long-running romance arc between Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson. The Webb movie is based in part on the origin story as well, true, but everything else it draws on his different -- Peter's relationships with Gwen and George Stacy, the Curt Connors/Lizard storyline, the backstory of the death of Peter's parents. And of course they both add distinct original elements of their own. They really don't have that much in common. In fact, like I said, they complement each other. Aside from both dealing with the origin, each one includes story elements that the other chose not to utilize. ASM is more a counterpoint to Raimi's version than a copy of it.
It'd be like if the remade the Hobbit (not Asylum style) a couple years after the last movie hits theaters.
That's a terrible analogy, because The Hobbit
is based on one discrete story (plus the LOTR appendices that fill in its larger background), while these are drawing on largely different aspects of a half-century-long serial narrative. It's more like, ohh, the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes
movies, the BBC's Sherlock
, and CBS's Elementary
all coming out within a few years of each other. They're all drawing on selected pieces of a long-running canon, and have certain key elements in common (for instance, both the movies and Sherlock
have done versions of "The Final Problem" within a year of each other), but since their source material is so large and expansive and they're only drawing on fragments of it, they can hardly be said to be telling the same story.