Amazing Spider-Man (12) vs Green Lantern (11): who's more Disappointing?

[ChrisIII]

Given Martin Campbell's previous credits(Bond and Zorro, mainly), I wonder how he'd do with a post-Nolan Batman movie. The old Zorro stuff was part of the inspiration for Batman, after all, and I think the Batman Nolan trilogy has some Bond influence as well.

[Karl O'Neill]

I'll always state how well Reynolds played Hal Jordan. The only problem was he didn't have much to work with.

[Fast]

I'll always state how well Reynolds played Hal Jordan. The only problem was he didn't have much to work with.

Yeah Reynolds was not the problem with the movie.

[Jared]

But oh, his daddy died in a Hot Shots esque parody death sequence?

LOL! He really did! I knew it reminded me of something when I saw GL! Reynolds was a problem in the sense that Hal is basically introduced as a 'Ryan Reynolds Romantic Comedy Character', which didn't help him.

I maintain that ASM should have simply recast the roles they needed (they could almost certainly keep JJ and the actor of Connors) and done a loose sequel about the Lizard, and maybe throw in stuff about Parker's parents if you they really want to. Having to remake the origin story from a wildly successful movie just ten years later is a huge cross for ASM to bear. I haven't actually seen ASM yet, but I expect the repeated material to be the weakest element. Plus, they apparently leave out Harry Osbourne entirely, in order to avoid being even more similar to the original.

[Fast]

LOL! He really did! I knew it reminded me of something when I saw GL! Reynolds was a problem in the sense that Hal is basically introduced as a 'Ryan Reynolds Romantic Comedy Character', which didn't help him.

I maintain that ASM should have simply recast the roles they needed (they could almost certainly keep JJ and the actor of Connors) and done a loose sequel about the Lizard, and maybe throw in stuff about Parker's parents if you they really want to. Having to remake the origin story from a wildly successful movie just ten years later is a huge cross for ASM to bear.

Eh there had to be some sort of reboot since after Spider-man 3 the franchise was written in quite a corner. That said I can't think of a comic book movie where roles were just recasted that turned out to be amazing. It did not work for Superman Returns, Batman and Hulk (while the quality may not be bad on some of those none of those were smashes).

The origin probably is necessary to build on properly

[Darrell D.]

Haven't seen ASM yet (going this weekend), but it would have to be Attack of the Killer Tomatoes bad to match the shittiness of GL.

[Pauly T]

I can't believe this thread is serious. GL is hacky pap. ASM is a note-perfect Peter Parker character study.

I can't imagine how ASM would have been any different/better if it had been made by Marvel Studios. It is that good. It blows Raimi's Spider-Man out of the water. The negative reviews seem to stem from people who think Spidey begins and ends with Sam Raimi. Raimi's Spider-Man is like Burton's Batman. ASM is Spider-Man Begins. It. Is. That. Good.

[Karl O'Neill]

I don't think these kind of threads are ever serious.

Again, its the insecure fans who want to provoke people.

It wasn't enough that the OP didn't like Spiderman, he had to try lower it to GL to make his point.

[Jared]

Eh there had to be some sort of reboot since after Spider-man 3 the franchise was written in quite a corner.

I don't think so. Harry Osbourne is dead, but Peter is still Spider-Man, he's seemingly still with MJ. The Sandman killed his dead stuff is best left unmentioned again. Is there some reason Spidey 4 couldn't have started with Kurt Connors doing an experiment that turns him into the Lizard?

That said I can't think of a comic book movie where roles were just recasted that turned out to be amazing. It did not work for Superman Returns, Batman and Hulk (while the quality may not be bad on some of those none of those were smashes).

I'd say it worked all right with the move from Batman Returns to Batman Forever. It wasn't until Batman and Robin that the series was so derailed only a reboot could fix it.

But more importantly, it's worked repeatedly for James Bond. I know, he's not a comic character, but I don't see why the principle should be any different.

The origin probably is necessary to build on properly[/QUOTE]

[Groot]

This thread is worse than either film.
I hate that it even exist.
It's like asking what was worse between Punisher: War Zone and Iron Man 2. IM2 might have been far from perfect but it wasn't a steaming pile of shit.
The Amazing Spider-Man really isn't that bad a film. If this had been the starting point for Spider-Mans cinematic career instead of Raimis everyone would love it, but because they decided to relaunch the franchise so soon it seems like people are disproportionately harsh.
There is no fucking way this should be classed anywhere near that treacherously awful film Green Lantern.
Green Lantern did everything wrong, all that the ASM did was not exceed expectations.

[Fast]

I don't think so. Harry Osbourne is dead, but Peter is still Spider-Man, he's seemingly still with MJ. The Sandman killed his dead stuff is best left unmentioned again. Is there some reason Spidey 4 couldn't have started with Kurt Connors doing an experiment that turns him into the Lizard?

I meant that both Peter and MJ were so thoroughly unlikable after that 3rd movie. All the other love interests had been used up in cameos (but enough screen time to be important enough that they couldn't be ignored). Yes a 4th could be made with the plot of Lizard but lacking the great character moments of Garfield and Stone. They could've just ignored the first three but that is still a quasi-reboot like Norton Hulk. The only difference is whether or not we believe the origin should be told again and I oscillate between not caring and preferring the redone origin and then other people who just hate all origin stories (I think they are the best part and I don't et why people hate them).

[Lancerman]

This thread is worse than either film.
I hate that it even exist.
It's like asking what was worse between Punisher: War Zone and Iron Man 2. IM2 might have been far from perfect but it wasn't a steaming pile of shit.
The Amazing Spider-Man really isn't that bad a film. If this had been the starting point for Spider-Mans cinematic career instead of Raimis everyone would love it, but because they decided to relaunch the franchise so soon it seems like people are disproportionately harsh.
There is no fucking way this should be classed anywhere near that treacherously awful film Green Lantern.
Green Lantern did everything wrong, all that the ASM did was not exceed expectations.

Punisher Warzone was an awesome movie. It was pure gratuitious B movie violence. It was an amazing Punisher movie. If you didn't like it you just really on't like the character. Iron Man was a subpar Iron Man film that was all over the place and spent too much time setting up another movie.

[Groot]

Punisher Warzone was an awesome movie. It was pure gratuitious B movie violence. It was an amazing Punisher movie. If you didn't like it you just really on't like the character. Iron Man was a subpar Iron Man film that was all over the place and spent too much time setting up another movie.

Sorry, but according to this widget I have you have shit taste.

It wasn't a b movie or a grindhouse film, it was a shitty movie that was incompetently put together and never really knew what it was trying to do. I'm sure Robert Rodriguez could make an amazing Punisher movie in the vain which you feel Lexi Alexander attempted, or even the guys that did Hobo with a Shotgun, but this, this was just a piece of crap and anyone with a modicum of sense realizes this.
The Punisher is actually one of my favourite Marvel characters and it is exactly because of this that I hated the movie.

Rucka is currently doing an amazing 616 Punisher that would be good if adapted and Ennis's MAX rendition, which Alexander completely destroyed, would be ideal.
You could take elements from Tyger, Born and the first arc of his MAX run and make something that could rival Nolans Batman efforts if anyone treated the material with any respect whatsoever.
I wont argue that Iron Man 2 was much too distracted but every single performance in that film was better than anything offered in P:WZ. Despite being a busy movie I can enjoy it. War Zone just gets worse with any additional viewing.

Also get on point, are you seriously going to argue that Green Lantern and the Amazing Spider-Man are comparable in quality?

[OrpheusTelos]

Having finally seen Amazing Spider-man....I'm not sure how this can even be a comparison. One is a pretty good movie that people are ticked off about being a reboot (too much like the original) while the other pretty much killed any change of Warner Brother adapting any non-Batman/Superman DC film.

[kalorama]

I don't think so. Harry Osbourne is dead, but Peter is still Spider-Man, he's seemingly still with MJ. The Sandman killed his dead stuff is best left unmentioned again. Is there some reason Spidey 4 couldn't have started with Kurt Connors doing an experiment that turns him into the Lizard?

No, but that wasn't really the corner they'd painted themselves into.

Raimi and Co. focused an inordinate amount of the films' foundation on the Peter/MJ relationship. Them getting together/breaking up/getting back together was basically the emotional spine in every film, and by the time we get to the end of the 3rd one (with the death of Harry) it seemed to have settled into a stable comfort level. They couldn't just keep doing it. (And didn't Dunst say at one point that she was done anyway?) And while they could have ditched MJ altogether, because she was so ingrained in the fabric of Peter's story, that could have really upset the apple cart. Basically, the Pete/MJ angle felt like it had run its course. But it was such a central element of the trilogy that trying to move the existing franchise in a different direction would have been tricky. A movie that de-emphasized the romance would have had a different tone and different feel than the first three. So if they were going to go there, why not start with a clean slate? That way everyone comes into it knowing it's a new status quo as opposed to trying to refocus the previous one and having people come in expecting one thing and getting something different.