Solid Snake

Yes, but the internet is anonymous so we all assume we're nobodies. So if you're a guy who works in it? cool. It still is asking too much though, your idea is too much. Also...if you want Secret Wars it can't be that w/o all those villains. Doom and Beyonder are fine but...we didn't like the whole idea of Secret Wars cuz of those 2. Then you got rights issues, etc etc.

I dunno. You say Star Wars fanboys and that's the worst I can think of. I think if you get someone who likes the property and can be respectful to the source (whatever that means) you'll be fine. You don't need fanboys for the directors.

Hokeyboy

"SCREW YOU, ISTVANTHEHUN! SCREW YOU UP YOUR SNOTTY BUMHOLE!!"

IstvanTheHun

I didnt realize your argument was that you didn't know the difference between a romcom director and a sci-fi/fantasy director.

RocShemp

IstvanTheHun

Well I agree, we are all anonymous,so its hard to gauge who knows what they are discussing and who is just armchair filmmaking.

I do realize that Secret Wars is a big undertaking. But, if they wrote it as a multi-part epic, it could definitely work. Nobody thought the Avengers would work, with all those characters, but Whedon pulled it off. If I was in charge of Marvel studios, I would plan to steer all the single films and the team films towards a big Secret Wars-type finale, and then blow it all up.

I agree that you dont need a fanboy to direct, but I'd rather take my chances with a fanboy than a non-fan. Case in point: when Stuart Baird directed Star Trek:Nemesis. he knew nothing about Star Trek, and they thought that kind of fresh attitude was required. the movie was a big failure, and nobody was satisfied - fanboys and nonfans equally.

But certain people have way more of an affinity for the material than most - and I'm talking true fans - who understand the crux and history of the material, not hacks like Mark Stephen Johnson (who is a capable filmmaker, but has proven himself to be unworthy of Marvel, several times unfortunately).

lol that made my day! thanks. (I dont know why I keep calling him James Garfield....i've been doing it all day!)

Nick Martin

The difference between fanboys and the filmmakers is that filmmakers are trying to condense established, pre-conceived notions of characters and events into something that would work on-screen and be its own thing (with varying results) for a larger, general mass audience, sometimes for two hours, sometimes for a franchise. Fanboys want everything and the kitchen sink thrown in regardless of how well it works when taken from one medium to another, because the source material in a fanboy's eyes is always superior, even when taking it and making a film out of it would be even more ridiculous (depending on how the core concept is) than what actually ends up on screen. It may work for them but might not work for everyone else.

And face it, there are more general audience members then there are fanboys. Compromises have to be made, again with varying results.

It's a balance, a tightrope, whatever term fits, but these movies can't please everyone.

devilshalo

He sounds like he's a fan in this interview. And you should also know that directors want their own take on things, good or bad. I think Burton proved that with his 2 Batman films, especially when it came to the look of the films.

devilshalo

The biggest comic book fanboy director that shouldn't be directing comic book movies is Mark Steven Johnson. Before Daredevil and Ghost Rider, it was Simon Birch. I think Webb has done a much better job coming from (500) Days of Summer to The Amazing Spider-man. The was some promise in the Daredevil DC, but he just can't pull it off.

Dragon Tattoo

It wasn't.

Solid Snake

Yeah. MSJ is the worst fanboy. To make it worse he's a mediocre director too.

Solid Snake

I'd also argue that setting up the Avengers is a lot easier than trying to rein Secret Wars into some type of film. God...the writers would probably want to commit suicide to make that work.

Dr. DVD

MSJ is a great argument as to why you should never let a fanboy actually make move versions of their favorite comics. Instead of making a movie for both comic book fans and non-fans, they will most likely make something closer to how they "always envisioned" it should have been when they were reading. If that's not what other people want to see, to hell with them, they're not making the movie.

While he knows how to make stuff that's amazing from an FX standpoint, James Cameron's version of Spider-Man would have been a disgrace to the character. While he was an alleged fan of the character, if you read his treatment it's obvious he was going to be presenting what he thought Spider-Man should be, not what it was, no matter how illogical or disturbing. (The scene he wrote of Spidey doing light bondage sex with Mary Jane on top of the Brooklyn Bridge is something else entirely.)

Daytripper

IstvanTheHun, meet Dragon Tattoo. He knows no other tone.

bluetoast

Tim Burton was a Batman fanboy? Didn't he say he doesn't even read comics? Plus he made the Joker kill Wayne's parents, so there's that.

Tarantino

Spoiler alert!

Tom Creo

That's a clown statement, bro.

Jules Winfield

Ok. I did. This was even worse than I thought because it was so boring. I would've been okay with even the lizard cops causing some rampage even though it was a little cheesy but this movie was so boring that it forgot to put that scene in. Peter Parker wasn't a nerd in this but I wasn't turned off by the skateboarding or him wearing a hoodie. He could have still been a nerd and still had those things. Whatever. I think the movie completely misses the essence of who Peter Parker is, an outcast nerd who's been thrust into greatness and has to learn how to deal with it. In all honesty, I felt Raimi's films got that core concept right and for me, they get all of the leeway in the world. This movie does not.

The lizard looks like shit, has a stupid plan and was boring in this movie. There is no joy in this movie. The only sort of joy comes from Stone's and Garfield's scenestogether. But this is not a romance. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a romance with a superhero type film, there's not enough scenes between the two of them to make me care. Also, plot points are dropped here and there. Bore, bore, bore. I can honestly say this is the worst Spider-man I've seen. Spider-man 3 had the Sandman transformation scene, Peter trying to be cool but can't because he's too much of a nerd deep down(which is supposed to be funny) and...I guess that's it. At least it had those things.

I await the comic book people telling me that the movie was supposed to be boring because it adapted issue number yada, yada, yada which was in fact boring. Eh. Don't care. And I liked how the pursuit of Uncle Ben was dropped. I did like that during the pursuit, he slowly turns into Spider-man but just forgetting about getting the criminal that shot your Uncle(the man who was your "real" dad, you heartless asshole)is just asinine. I'm sure the makers of the next one will say this was the plan the whole time, that he'll find his uncle's killer next time. Having Spider-man just forget about it kinda misses the point of Spider-man, no? Anyways, I've glued my asshole shut so that anyone who feels sore about my opinion can go ahead and rip me a new asshole. Gonna cleanse this shit palate i have and watch an actual good Spider-man movie and that would be either 1 or 2, smartasses.

Hokeyboy

^Obviously not a real fan.

Michael Corvin

Kevin Smith's Spoilers with Stan Lee on TAM.

Solid Snake

I hate that show. So boring.

bluetoast

I skipped to just the Stan Lee part, thought he'd talk about the movie, but his appearance was good. Turned it off after that.

B5Erik

Bingo. That is the essence of what makes Spider-Man great. He's the unlikely superhero. He gets to do all the things that Peter never could, he can be everything that Peter never could.

Yep. Raimi at least got the idea right. And his movies were fun. Spider-Man is supposed to be fun. ASM was light on the fun part.

The Peter Parker of every other version of Spider-man would have never let that go. Uncle Ben meant too much to him. And it's the realization that he could have prevented Uncle Ben's death that forges his resolve to selflessly go after the bad guys from then on. This Peter kinda, sorta, almost has that, but you never really get the sense that this is that traumatic event for which he cannot forgive himself.

I didn't think the movie was flat-out bad, but it wasn't nearly as good as it could have (and should have) been. Too many plot holes, too many things that were conveniently there for Peter

I don't get the love that this movie is getting. The director's cut of Daredevil was better than this. Significantly better.

Dragon Tattoo

Jules Winfield

But I'm wearing my Spider-man underoos right now.

shadowhawk2020

I said this before but