The Nerd Thread (comics, movies, anime, cartoons, video games, lore, fun stuff, ect.)

@Just Wayne

@Lord WyrmSpawN

@SleepySteve

@Spidey10
I think this might be a tad overreaction

@Just Wayne
X-Men was pretty bad and Spiderman was silly.

So just like the dark age of superheroes around the 90s and early 2000s. Remember Batman & Robin, Steel, Catwoman, Daredevil, Ang Lee’s Hulk, Spawn, and many other famously bad superhero movies? Before Sam Raimi’s Spider-man, X-men, and the Dark Knight and after 70s Superman and 80s Batman? Superheores movies used to be seen as nothing but bombs at one point in the past. It is happening all over again!

Now that I think more I think the main things I didn’t like in the Raimi Spiderman movies were Tobey Maguire and especially Kirsten Dunst. I can’t stand her and their interactions are painful.
The rest of the cast is amazing, at least until Topher Grace in the Third one. I’ve heard Raimi cast him out of spite because he didn’t like Venom.
I wouldn’t be opposed to him returning in some future movie, and I loved Maguire in No Way Home. Not Dunst though.

@Spidey10
Huh. I never thought about that.

Raimi has admitted in his interviews/director commentary that he’s not a fan of Venom. Raimi grew up with the Silver Age of comics, and that’s reflected in his choice of cast in movies. He’s was even planning on using the Vulture at some point, either in his original Spiderman 3 draft or as the main villain in Spiderman 4.

Venom was introduced after he was already an adult, so he never felt the same appeal to him the same way he did Peter’s older villains. Which, alongside executive mandates forcing Venom in against his protests, is a large contributor to Venom’s lackluster portrayal in 3.

@Dustcan
Venom was forced into Spider-Man 3 at the behest of Avi Arad, because he wanted to court younger Spider-Man fans.

This is the same Avi Arad that’s pushing those garbage “Spider-Man-minus-Spider-Man” movies, and would’ve also produced The Super Mario Bros. Movie had Nintendo kept talking to Sony instead of going over to Universal/Illumination instead.

Venom 2’s failings were was mostly that it failed to capture what made the first one mostly work. And that’s because the first one mostly worked on accident.

Venom 1 worked because Tom Hardy was taking the piss out of everything. The rest of the cast was trying to have a serious movie, meanwhile Hardy is basically walking around with a lampshade on his head being a clown. That scene where he takes a dip in the lobster tank? That’s only there because Hardy walked on set, saw the tank, and told the director “I’m getting in that thing. That okay?” The stage crew had to reinforce the tank to let him do it. But it ended up making the scene work in spite of itself.

Likewise, everyone knows Venom 1 would’ve been better if it was rated R, but again managed without it by adding the cheese.

Venom 2 failed on both of those point. Now everyone is acting with a bit of irony, which only served to blur the acting instead of having a standout performer. And whereas Venom 1 could’ve been rated R, 2 should’ve been. I was suprised with how much brutality they Carnage managed to get away with, but he was still gimped by tiptoeing around him being a slasher movie villain instead of embracing it.

@Spidey10
That was a sorepoint yeah lol

apart from the jail interview at the start and the big battle at the end they hardly got any screentime together. Which is a shame, i liked both characters.

Also admittedly the films runtime being shorter then the 1st movie doesn’t help either.

And Kraven’s upcoming film doesn’t look to be fixing that. Synopsis says he’s supposed to be an animal activist instead of a big game hunter.

Sony really wants to finally get that Sinister Six film they’ve been trying to make for almost 20 years, but they refuse to have any of their villains protagonists be villains.