TF Views

Is that what happened? Well that kinda makes sense. I liked Cheadle's performance and never had any doubts that he would do well in the part.

Sparky Prime wrote:I like the new Spider-Man costume personally. It still mostly has that classic costume look to it, and while it looks to have some of the same design ideas from the previous movies costume, it's nice to see them distinguishing it somewhat from those other films. And I think Andrew Garfield pulls off looking like Peter Parker quite well. He's already a much better choice than Toby McGuire was (who I never thought was quite right for the role).

I'll tell you what I don't like. The lines in the costume are more like segmented cuts on this costume. It makes it look like it's made up of a lot of little pieces than one big piece. While that's not explicitly a bad design choice for a superhero costume (TDK Batman's suit is explicitly made that way; they even explain it!) but I don't think it works for Spidey's suit design.

Spidey's...Spidey's a ringer, is what he is, he's a really difficult design to get right. The comic panels don't help, either--what *are* the black lines? The last movies interpreted them as being weird ridgey things on top of the costume (which I honestly didn't like at first but I got used to it) and this is almost going the opposite direction.

Oh well, I'll wait to see how it is in motion before I judge it fully. The important thing is getting the voice right and the writing right. Mostly the voice--which McGuire kind of was onto something with; and he did especially well in the video game adaptations. (I'm playing through Spider-Man 2 right now, can you tell?) But nobody can replace, in my opinion, 90s Animated Spiderman Guy.

Onslaught Six wrote:But nobody can replace, in my opinion, 90s Animated Spiderman Guy.

THE THE PIT YEAH

Handsome Spidey was the man. Man was buffer when he was in his 'nerdy Peter Parker' persona than in his superhero one! Voice actor perfectly strode the line between quipping vigilante and compassionate nerd like no Spidey before.... even Dan Gilvezan! Who... well, hadn't found his 'stride' when he played him. >_>

Honestly? Reading my X-Men trades at the mo, I imagine everyone with their 90s cartoon voices. I love throwing bits of Apocalypse and Mister Sinister into my speech.

YOU DARE DISTURB MY SACRED CHAMBERRRRRRS (it's funny 'cos Chambers is my surname)

SUMMERRRSSSSSSSS~

Onslaught Six wrote:The lines in the costume are more like segmented cuts on this costume. It makes it look like it's made up of a lot of little pieces than one big piece.

I think it makes more sense if it where made of smaller pieces actually. Consider in the comics, whenever the costume had a rip in it, Peter always just sewed up that hole. Realistically, after a while, the costume should look like a patchwork with those kinds of repairs constantly made to it. If the costume is made of smaller pieces in the first place though, it makes it a little easier to just replace that damaged section(s) and keep up the look of the overall costume.

I liked the voice acting of the 90's cartoon, but I didn't like the design for Peter Parker. Spidey is not supposed to be a big buff type super hero.

Gomess wrote:

Sparky Prime wrote:Spidey is not supposed to be a big buff type super hero.

That's what made it AWESOME. It's the most convincing update to the franchise I've ever seen, because I *knew* science nerds who looked like that in the 90s. 60s Pete was waaaaay too stereotypical by then. Cartoon Pete is still socially awkward and junk, he just happens to be more conventionally handsome. I find it really interesting, in hindsight.

Obviously, the only reason they made him buff was because it was the 90s, but it was kind of a happy accident in that it taught a lot of kids I know, from an early age, that not all nerds are skinny and wear glasses.

In doing so, the 90's cartoon placed him in a stereotype Spider-Man was originally conceived to break out of though. Super heroes are stereotypically handsome, buff, square jawed, adult characters. That's why Stan Lee made Peter Parker an average, somewhat geeky, teenage kid. He was someone young readers that comics are typically aimed at could relate to. The 90's cartoon didn't get that. Peter Parker really wasn't even all that socially awkward in that cartoon as I remember it. His only problem seemed to be remembering or getting to places on time due to his Spider-Man activities. Like I said, I enjoyed that cartoon, but it could have been better. Like the more recent Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon was. They did a great job all around on that cartoon.

Onslaught Six wrote: But nobody can replace, in my opinion, 90s Animated Spiderman Guy.

MAAARY-JAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, I agree. I loved that guy. He's in that new Shattered Dimensions game, you know? As Noir Spidey, which seems like something of a miscast, if you ask me.

Spidey wasn't nearly "buff" as much as he had some muscle on him, which is, you know, standard, right? Especially when one of his powers is super strength.

Besides, the cartoon compensated by making every enemy Spider-Man fought absolutely friggin' huge.

Was watching Hellraiser 1 and 2 with my roommate last night. *sigh* When did these movies suck so bad?! Like, I always held the first 2 Hellraiser movies in high regard. They set the bar that other horror movies had to aspire to. They weren't corny or campy like Jason, Pinhead wasn't cracking lame puns and jokes every 5 seconds like Freddy. These guys were serious, super dark, evil, nasty, serious horror movies! And in my old age, I think the super serious, grimdark tone of these movies has become its fatal flaw. I like the camp! I like some cheesy corniness! I like to have fun and be entertained while I'm watching a horror movie (any movie for that matter). Hellraiser's problem is that it takes itself TOO seriously and it never lets up.

And the gore. OMG the gore. When I was younger and hadn't seen many horror movies, I was okay with the amount of gore in these movies. But now. . . ugh. Gore isn't scary. It's just gross and it's raining buckets of it in these 2 movies. I know this sounds like an oxymoron, but I prefer horror movies with less gore. I actually found myself checking the time while watching H2, hoping that it would hurry up and end. Every cool moment that I remembered somehow wasn't cool this time out. Most everything just fell flat like a row of dominoes. I can tell you right now, I'd rather watch any installment of Friday the 13th or Evil Dead over this. It's just weird. Of all the movies I've changed or will change my mind about, I never thought Hellraiser 1 and 2 would be among them. They ranked so high in my book for so long! And don't even bother with anything beyond part 2. All the rest pretty well suck.

Well, there's my rant. I feel better now

Greek tragedy got it right the first time... what you *don't* see is scarier. Gore has never had an effect on me. Atmosphere and dialogue are what really create tension for me!