caligulathegod

But it's not that at all. It's like a gingerbread White House. It looks pretty close, but the bushes are made from candy, as are the windows. There's icing instead of paint, the walls are gingerbread color, not white, and if you look closely, there's nothing in the oval office. It's a completely different medium replicating the White House, and is accepted as being a gingerbread representation of the White House. No one gets mad because one can't host a state dinner in it.

A movie will never be able to exactly replicate 40 years of comic continuity, nor all the characters in exactly the same way. They have 2 hours to tell the story, so some things, events, and even characters must be simplified and condensed. They don't have to insure that the villain will make it to next year's issue. A comic book movie isn't even required to adapt a particular storyline, but just the basic characters and premise. Changing, say, webshooters isn't a huge deal. He's still a superhero swinging on webs, but they don't have to explain why this guy doesn't already have a job with 3M, or can afford to machine these precise devices. It's just part of the adaptation process. It's simplification, not dumbing down.

It's not just comic books, though. Every subject has its fanatic fans that can't understand the adaptation process. Dune, Lord of the Rings, James Bond, and many, many others all have fanatics that don't want movies made of "their" stories, they want books-on-tape acted out word for word. Even then, they'll bitch over casting and why Legalas isn't wearing brown boots.

redrum

wow @ that unfinished trailer.

movie is gonna be amazing.

fumanstan

Eh, I don't think there's been that many complaints, and if any they aren't really specific to "fanboy" type whines. The main one from the trailer simply seems to be alluding to Sandman's involvement in killing Uncle Ben. That's a stretch regardless of being a comic book fan, given the plot of the first film.

Corvin

Word. That retcon is weak sauce.

caligulathegod

The Sandman/Ben Parker thing broke way back in July. They never did show the crime, so it's not exactly a retcon. It doesn't matter what the comic book says. The comics change their stories all the time, anyway. Storywise, it works because it puts Peter in a dark place and makes it more personal. They haven't gone wrong yet, so I'm willing to wait and see how they do it.

http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryList...=197373&nbc1=1

Patman

Remember when they made Jack Napier the killer of Bruce Wayne's parents in Batman? And later in Batman Begins they made another guy the killer of Wayne's parents.

Anubis2005X

True, but Batman Begins isn't a prequel or a sequel to Batman. It doesn't fit in that storyline.

EDIT: And thanks for that unfinished trailer, nice to see what Venom is gonna look like...

Patman

Well, on my first viewing of Batman, I was confused because I had always known that it was Joe Chill who shot Wayne's parents, and the Napier retcon didn't sit well with me at the time. I guess it's deja vu all over again.

DonnachaOne

My friend Danny made this.

caligulathegod

We all seem to misunderstand what a retcon is. Retcon is not an alteration in the original material when adapting to a different medium. Retcon is when something in the same medium (and continuity) is stated to be one way then it is later changed as though it was always that way. Jack Napier killing Batman's parents was not a retcon because it was not established in a previous movie. A retcon would have been if in Batman Forever they then said Riddler killed Batman's parents. Batman Begins doesn't count because it's a whole new continuity.

I thought it was kind of wonky, too, when I heard about Sandman and his relationship to the guy who killed Ben Parker, but we actually never saw the crime. How do we know what happened? After Spider-Man 1 and especially Spider-Man 2, I trust Sam Raimi enough to tell this story.

Patman

For film purposes, it's a retcon (Napier/Chills). It's Batman, but not Batman. It's Bond, but not Bond. Blah blah.

DVD Josh

Now that is the kind of trailer that gets folks lining up to see this one 2, 3 times. Venom looks like shit right now (needs to be MUCH bigger), but I like the direction they are going with him. So we are looking at least at a Spidey 4 sometime in 2010. I would think that defeating Venom would probably end the franchise, although a battle vs. the Sinister Six would be pretty cool.

Nesbit

Liked the trailer. Screwing with who killed Ben is a big mistake IMHO. The killer being the robber that Peter selfishly let go is essential to the character and what turned him into Spiderman.

Giantrobo

As long as we get more wet t-shirt or braless Mary-Jane shots I'll be happy no matter who killed Uncle Ben.

I'll miss his rice.

MASAMUNE2

thank you, Webster

caligulathegod

There's really no need to be smart ass. It's simply an alteration when they change something in one medium to another, not retroactive continuity. You can't call the first movie in a series a retcon. There has to be some continuity in the first place for it to be retroactive. If they changed the comic book to suit the movie (which they do all the time-Kryptonite, Superman's ability to fly, Jimmy Olsen all came from the radio show), then THAT would be retcon because it's already established history. The Spider-Man 3 thing is a retcon in the sense that it explains something that we didn't witness or understand before. We don't know if it has changed anything yet.

Kal-El

whotony

the previous post is blank unless i look at it quoted


ok its there now

caligulathegod

I can't see the image hotlinked. Here they are again.

whotony

kal el images seem tocome and go

MASAMUNE2

great concept... 2 diff versions

caligulathegod

He hotlinked them from Comingsoon. I don't see them, either. hopefully the imageshack ones are showing up.

I love the detail of the back spider being different for each pic.

Jackskeleton

I'm still looking for that damn changing one.

Simpson Purist

The trailer looks amazing, though I don't get the whole "Sandman killed Uncle Ben" thing, maybe he was the one who ordered Ben's killing.

Anubis2005X

I can see it now...right before Peter Parker goes completely dark by avenging his Uncle, Sandman gets blown away. The camera pans behind Sandman to a gigantic shotgun and then rises up to reveal the face of none other than Aunt May as she whispers "For Ben..."

I just keep telling myself "don't worry, it's Raimi, ain't gonna happen..."