Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Turtletrekker, Jul 2, 2010.
Uncle Ben is central to Spider-Man's origin story. Why would he not be included?
At least they aren't making Ben and May useless walking corpse people like the comics keep making them.
The Untold Story, the mocking edition.
Nice. I am rather baffled by that tag line. I guess they're trying to get across the fact that they're taking a different approach to the story, but you'd think they could have found a different way to communicate that.
I still think it is a homage to Kurt Busiek's Untold Tales of Spider-Man
It's pretty simple.
The general audience has never found out why Peter is living with his aunt and uncle.
Do some people not care about why and ask why? Sure but Sony is grasping at anything.
In the next reboot Sony will capitalize on finding out how Peter arrived at his Uncles house LOL
Sony- Did you know he arrived in a Ford? No? Great!
The untold story concerns Uncle Ben's fall from grace as scandal rips away his lucrative rice business and leaves him transformed into a sad white man.
It's sort of an odd gripe to make. You could argue "everyone knows the story" of Superman, Batman and The Hulk but their first movies (one of which has two origin movies and the other an origin movie in the pipeline.)
Now, I admit, it is odd for them to make another origin movie just 10 years or so after the first one, but the way that poster puts it it seems like Spider-Man's origins should be fairly common knowledge.
Superman has been around since the 1930's and his origins are ingrained into popular culture heavily yet his origins are constantly hashed out in media forms. So, what point is that fan poster trying to make?
As pointed out just a page or so ago...it's not odd at all for hollywood to make a remake of a movie with short time of separation. Look at "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"...they started the remake a year after the originals came out. Also the Batman films will be relaunching in a couple of years after this year's "The Dark Knight Rises" so I don't know why people complain about this particular point so much. Hollywood sees cash. They're going to go after it no matter what.
If that was the case, they would have used "Untold Tale" instead of an over-used cliche.
Like I've said before, I don't have a problem with the fact that the movie is coming out, or the fact that it's another origin story. I just don't care for that tagline, that's all.
"The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" isn't a great example. The first version was a Swedish production, not a Hollywood film.
More new pics, but they're not exactly spectacular and unlikely to convert those of you who are unpersuaded of the point of this movie:
It's just so tiresome. Everyone and his dog knows who Spiderman, Superman and Batman are and where they came from. Just give it a damn rest already and make a movie that just jumps right into it.
I agree there's the risk of this being another long and tedious Batman Begins-style origin, but hopefully the fact the movie's being done in a completely different style from Raimi's Spider-Man will at least make it seem a bit surprising and fresh.
Someone should go a different route and start a Robin movie series. Do a serious take on his origin story and have Batman around, but make Robin the main character. You could eventually lead into a Nightwing movie where Batman is completely absent.
What makes you think it's 'completely' different? Both are set in the present (as opposed to, for example, a 1960s period piece), for example. The sets look reasonably similar, etc. Yeah, I see some differences but nothing that would make me think we going from (for example) Adam West Batman to Chris Nolan Batman.
For my money I don't want to see another Batman origin film either.
The James Bond films have been quite successful without origin stories and with "soft reboots" every ten years or so. These three characters are at least as established as Bond at this point. There's no reason to keep retelling the same story, other than intellectual laziness and creative bankruptcy.
Because it looks about a hundred times grittier and more realistic, and a whole lot less cartoonish.
I thought the difference in tone and style shown in the trailer was really obvious, myself. It looks more like a David Fincher movie than anything Sam Raimi would ever do.
Separate names with a comma.