STAR WARS VS SPIDER-MAN

[filmdude27]

what do think will be a better film.
spider-man or star wars. i really think spider-man will be cause i love the comic books.
and i really think star wars is over used i h8 all star wars things i no every one will be mad for me sayin this but it my opinion i just think it taken it to far makin 5 films and then still one more on the way. see proof of this lies with halloween,friday the 13th all thes sort of films ever time they made more the quality dipped. lets be honest episode one didnt live up to its hipe it was preety lame really. ok thats all frome me
ps spider-man will kick so much ass!!!!

peace!!

[Muha]

they are two completely different films. i dont think you can compare them much.

its up in the air really


the better story IMO is spiderman, but im a little concerned with the green goblin's costume, the acting, and how much CGI will be used to make spidey swing through new york. i dunno what else they could do with him besides CGI, but im getting really sick of special effects.

with star wars ep. 2... i dont like hayden christansen... he doesnt do it for me. after TPM, ive been disappointed with ep. 2 and 3... i still have hope and i think lucas is still the man... but i must admit, i am skeptical.

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

Well, if your sick of special-effects, than you might as well skip SW. As for the moves not being comparable - I dont believe that. Any movie can be compared, no matter how different they are. Personally, I think Spider-Man looks more worth my $8.00

[mattjk_17]

Both look good to me, but I'm more hyped up for Spider-Man, so that's where my £5 is going.

[yokum909]

I would have to go with SPIDERMAN...Star Wars has lost its fun and after Episode 1, I was quite dissapointed with the whole franchise

[ColinM]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dumb-Fokker-**:
Well, if your sick of special-effects, than you might as well skip SW. As for the moves not being comparable - I dont believe that. Any movie can be compared, no matter how different they are. Personally, I think Spider-Man looks more worth my $8.00</font>

Actually, I think Spiderman will use way more special FX than SW. Or it won't use it as wisely. I dunno, I didn't think TPM had too much special effects.

I can't wait for ATOC. I'll see that one over Spiderman anyday.

[This message has been edited by ColinM (edited 03-22-2002).]

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

Im sorry Colin, but Spider-Man willbe using nowhere near the same amount of effects as AOTC. There were more special-effects in the latest AOTC trailer than there will be in all of Spider-Man. (sarcasm) But seriously, there are entire scenes of CGI in SW, that might as well just have been made as an all CGI-film. (sarcasm again) I dont know, I just dont see SM having half as many effects shots as SW.

[cutman]

Star Wars will DEFINITELY have more CGI shots than Spiderman. That's not to say that Spiderman won't have many...SW will just have a lot more.

That reminds me...does everyone remember when Phantom Menace was coming out and everyone was talking about how revolutionary its special effects were? I just thought it was funny that Matrix won all of the techniacal Academy Awards that year...I wonder if Lord of the Rings:TT or Star Wars will have the better effects. Rings may benefit from the extra time plus huge amount of money brought in by Fellowship.

[jdagnese]

Spiderman looks like it'll be a lot better.

But I'm not going to write off Lucas, either.

I don't know why everyone is so sick of CGI. It may be overused as of late, but we're all getting to see things that we never got to see when we were kids.

Do you honestly think they could have made a Spidey movie back in the 70's? Admit it, we're seeing some pretty cool stuff...... Provided the emphasis is on the story first, I see no problem with it.

[kici]

I can't believe anyone is going to see Spiderman. This is Tobey Maguire we're talking about, folks. He may be a nice man but Mr. Charisma he ain't. I'll take my chances with McGregor and Samuel L. instead.

http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[dicaprio_travolta_man]

Well, lets see here we have Spider-Man vs. Star Wars EP.2, which one will be better? SW of course... IMO Spider-Man looks kind of lame and not something I am too thrilled about having come to my theatre. SW on the other hand has an awesoma trailer. Star Wars is my pick, Spider-Man could die for all I care.

[Strider]

I think AOTC will be the better film. As for Spider-Man, I'm starting to think it's going to disappoint me. But hopefully, it'll be a great film.

Strider

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kici:
I can't believe anyone is going to see Spiderman. This is Tobey Maguire we're talking about, folks. He may be a nice man but Mr. Charisma he ain't. I'll take my chances with McGregor and Samuel L. instead.

http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif</font>

Toby maguire is a good actor , but iam not going to the movie that have more famous actors , i am going to the more entertaning one , the one that do have an understood story NOT star wars, i hate it anyway ( and its a very complicated movie for me ).....

Another example , i dont think that everyone was going to see LOTR becoz of elijah woods , no they saw it becoz of the story ( and the hype http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif )...... But he turned out to be a very good actor in LOTR...

---------------------------------------------
There is something down there

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dicaprio_travolta_man:
Well, lets see here we have Spider-Man vs. Star Wars EP.2, which one will be better? SW of course... IMO Spider-Man looks kind of lame and not something I am too thrilled about having come to my theatre. SW on the other hand has an awesoma trailer. Star Wars is my pick, Spider-Man could die for all I care.</font>

Kidding meeeeeeeeee !!!!! Star wars ep.2 is exciting !!!.... it is the most dull trailer ever , i was sleeping while watching it .

But spider-man trailer is so exciting and a very good one too ..... star wars is just an over-hyped movie ...that is the only reason that makes lucas continue making it.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I'm so relieved that the majority of blowhards(nothing kinky just means shmoes obsessed with Joblo message boards)who have responded so far still have some common sense and taste.Enough to realize Spiderman will be the more entertaining film,even though Tobey and Dafoe could bring it down.


TM is allright(he was good in Ice Storm and even better in Wonder Boys),but somehow i'm having difficulty accepting him as a superheroe.For one he's not muscular enough,outside the costume,and his deadpan delivery seems out of place for someone with superhuman strength.I thought Keaton was an idiotic choice for Batman until i saw him in action,and we all know how well Batman turned out.


Dafoe i just can't take seriously as a villian.He's done some decent work(Platoon is obviously his best),but he's not at all menacing,there was this quiet,psychotic,intense persona that the GG guy projected,from what i remember in the comic books,and Dafoe seems at the very least miscast.


I'm looking foward to it,no doubt,for me it's the next must see film,before that it was,ah you already know what my obsession was before this.


I see SM doing huge numbers,maybe 200 plus,but i doubt it can beat AOTC,those fans are truly fanatical and there are tons of them,then again after the debacle that was TPM some have or are thinking of jumping ship.


Man,the cinematography in NYC should be something.I just wish they did'nt use so much CGI for SM and GG,it definitely detracts from the Human Element.

[This message has been edited by dellamorte dellamore (edited 03-23-2002).]

[kici]

Tobey.....Maguire.......sorry, no. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/frown.gif

I can't believe anyone is excited about Mr. insomnia. Anyone would have been a better choice for the title role. If Maguire's as charismatic as Elijah Woods in FOTR then Spiderman is in big trouble. Woods was the weakest part of that film. Give me Sean Bean or Viggo Mortensen playing Peter Parker, then we'll talk. Peter Parker needs to be played by someone with charisma. Maguire simply doesn't have any. Why haven't I seen a single snippet of publicity for this film?

Every time I see Maguire on screen he looks like he's half asleep. Why was he chosen to play an exciting superhero? I just don't get it. Another case of miscasting hurting a movie big time.

Just my humble opinion, of course. I'm sure it will make a ton of money.

[ColinM]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dumb-Fokker-**:
Im sorry Colin, but Spider-Man willbe using nowhere near the same amount of effects as AOTC.</font>

This is most certainly true, but I think ATOC will use it more wisely. I'm sure you will probably disagree, but I don't. In the commericals I've seen of Spiderman (I have not seen them all), both Spidey and the Green Goblin appear to be completely CGI, and not in the good way, but rather in the "obviously fake" way.

I'm a Star Wars fanboy though, so maybe my opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/wink.gif

[ColinM]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kici:
Tobey.....Maguire.......sorry, no. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/frown.gif

I can't believe anyone is excited about Mr. insomnia. Anyone would have been a better choice for the title role. If Maguire's as charismatic as Elijah Woods in FOTR then Spiderman is in big trouble. Woods was the weakest part of that film. Give me Sean Bean or Viggo Mortensen playing Peter Parker, then we'll talk. Peter Parker needs to be played by someone with charisma. Maguire simply doesn't have any. Why haven't I seen a single snippet of publicity for this film?</font>

I can't believe you found a way to bring your distaste for LOTR into this. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/wink.gif

I've seen quite a bit of advertising for this movie. It started long ago. I'm surprised you haven't seen any.

[filmdude27]

lets be honest most of you r going to say star wars cause of the hype surronding it. if you have red the spider-man comic books you will understand how much people want this film. spider-man's one of these things that never get boring i mean they have the best super villans in the world eg.venom,carniage,green goblin,docter octapus and so on. they could make so many films about spider-man because there so many people to fight. and i tell you it wouldnt get boring.

as for star wars it's getting really old, i meean peeps are takin the piss like sum fools are already quing to watch it whats the point seriously. it maybe a good film but the dip in quality in ep1 could be evidance that this film may suck ass.

peace!!

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kici:
Tobey.....Maguire.......sorry, no. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/frown.gif

I can't believe anyone is excited about Mr. insomnia. Anyone would have been a better choice for the title role. If Maguire's as charismatic as Elijah Woods in FOTR then Spiderman is in big trouble. Woods was the weakest part of that film. Give me Sean Bean or Viggo Mortensen playing Peter Parker, then we'll talk. Peter Parker needs to be played by someone with charisma. Maguire simply doesn't have any. Why haven't I seen a single snippet of publicity for this film?

Every time I see Maguire on screen he looks like he's half asleep. Why was he chosen to play an exciting superhero? I just don't get it. Another case of miscasting hurting a movie big time.

Just my humble opinion, of course. I'm sure it will make a ton of money. </font>

Kici , Woods wasnt the weakest part of the movie , he did a great job.

So i think Toby will do a great job too.
You are bashing the movie and we still have 2 more month to go.Do u bash all the movies or what ??????????

The trailer was great , so the movie might be good as well .... anyway dont go watch it, i beg u kici , i cannot take any more bashing http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif plzzzzzzzzzz

---------------------------------------------
There is something down there

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

Well, I cant really trust kici on SW or LotR, as she obviously hated LotR before it even came out, and revels in anything bad there is to say about the film. However, I disagree with you again, Colin. The CGI in SM may look more fake, but that doesnt mean it is being used less wisely. I mean, SM is supposed to give us that comic-book, "not real" feeling; personally, I am glad it isnt gonna be hyper-realistic. AOTC however, is almost all CGI. Almost all of the backrounds, alot of the characters - its just too much. I think SM will definately use it more wisely, but SW will look more realistic (although I dont think it looks that good). As for kici, and her EW comment - he was the lead in the film, he carried the film, and if he hadnt done a good job the film would have failed. I think he did an incredible job, because I never questioned that he, or any of the other characters, were acting. They just didnt seem like they were acting; their performances seemes utterly convincing. .....ok, im done with my LotR rant. I have, however, decided to go see AOTC, because every film is worth a chance. Even if it is a sequal to Final Fantasy. (sarcasm)

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dumb-Fokker-**:
Well, I cant really trust kici on SW or LotR, as she obviously hated LotR before it even came out, and revels in anything bad there is to say about the film. However, I disagree with you again, Colin. The CGI in SM may look more fake, but that doesnt mean it is being used less wisely. I mean, SM is supposed to give us that comic-book, "not real" feeling; personally, I am glad it isnt gonna be hyper-realistic. AOTC however, is almost all CGI. Almost all of the backrounds, alot of the characters - its just too much. I think SM will definately use it more wisely, but SW will look more realistic (although I dont think it looks that good). As for kici, and her EW comment - he was the lead in the film, he carried the film, and if he hadnt done a good job the film would have failed. I think he did an incredible job, because I never questioned that he, or any of the other characters, were acting. They just didnt seem like they were acting; their performances seemes utterly convincing. .....ok, im done with my LotR rant. I have, however, decided to go see AOTC, because every film is worth a chance. Even if it is a sequal to Final Fantasy. (sarcasm)</font>

like Dumb Fokker said .. star wars IS a CGI movie , when i saw the trailer i thought that if they remove the 2 or 3 real characters , it might be another final fantasy........

[ColinM]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by filmdude27:
lets be honest most of you r going to say star wars cause of the hype surronding it. if you have red the spider-man comic books you will understand how much people want this film. spider-man's one of these things that never get boring i mean they have the best super villans in the world eg.venom,carniage,green goblin,docter octapus and so on. they could make so many films about spider-man because there so many people to fight. and i tell you it wouldnt get boring.</font>

I dunno, I think the Spidey comics go through phases of boring, then not boring, then boring, then not boring. I might so far as to say that the Spiderman comic book series peaked at the death of Green Goblin (Harry, not Norman), and has jumped the shark since. (I won't, though, because I have enjoyed the comic after that as well.)

Marvel can't touch DC, if you ask me. Batman is the fucking man. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif

To say that Star Wars is a computer-generated movie, and to remove some characters would make is like the Final Fantasy movie, is a huge exaggeration that doesn't deserve much attention.

And Dumb-Fokker, we'll just have to once again agree to disagree, I guess. I don't think the balance between real and CGI is as bad as you describe it.

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by ColinM:
To say that Star Wars is a computer-generated movie, and to remove some characters would make is like the Final Fantasy movie, is a huge exaggeration that doesn't deserve much attention.</font>

that is my opinion man......All the characters are CGI......So without any Human actors , the movie will just be like Shrek , final fanatsy and all these 3d movies..Got it.

[ColinM]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Movie Hunter:
that is my opinion man......All the characters are CGI......So without any Human actors , the movie will just be like Shrek , final fanatsy and all these 3d movies..Got it.</font>

You've kind of contradicted yourself, here. If all the characters were CGI, there would be no human actors.

There are CGI characters and characters played by humans. Obviously if you removed the human characters there will only be CGI characters left, but the human characters haven't been removed.

Even if they were, the sets are not completely CGI, so it still wouldn't be completely Shrek-like.

[MixMasterMoose]

The way lucas lets his actors act they might as well be CGI.

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

Colin, watch the latest trailer. There are SEVERAL, SEVERAL scenes, which are all CGI, and every scene has a good portion of CGI involved. If the movie follows what the trailers are leading us to believe, than no - it still wont be Final Fantasy, but it will still be a CGI movie.

[Scarface98.9]

I'm more excited about SW because the trailer persuaded me more. the trailer for Spiderman seemed pretty corny, especially w/ scenes of Kirsten Dunst. but I say see both films and rant later. but TB doesn't bother me since the character Peter Parker isn't supposed to be charismatic or very interesting. its when he's Spiderman that he is full of charisma and humor. Dafoe seems like a right Norman Osborne since in human form, he's pretty decieving and greedy.

[kici]

Yes. I bash every single movie I have ever seen. chuckle. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/wink.gif No, I'm afraid I have nothing but lavish praise for Memento, Moulin Rouge, In the Bedroom, A Beautiful Mind, The Crimson Rivers, The Widow of St. Pierre, Black Hawk Down, Bridget Jones' Diary, Gosford Park (if not its director) and, as of today, Iris, a brilliant, gut wrenching film.

The only supposedly quality movie of last year that I felt failed in every respect was FOTR. It was the only one that put me to sleep--literally. That's only my opinion, of course. Why you guys are so threatened by that and feel the need to attack me personally escapes me, but it inspires me to lavish ever more articulate criticism on . http://www.joblo.com/ubb/wink.gif

I couldn't care less if anyone hates the movies I cited above. That is their opinion; it doesn't affect me. What do I care if someone hates Moulin Rouge or Iris or Bridget Jones' Diary? That is their opinion to which they are perfectly entitled. It doesn't mean that they are unintelligent. It doesn't threaten me. Think about it. How in the blazes did we get back to FOTR in this thread, anyway? Why does it always come back to that snoozefest? Liking or disliking FOTR is not a litmus test for taste or intelligence. I didn't like it. Deal with it.

That I find Tobey Maguire wholly uncharismatic is also a matter of opinion. Why does that threaten anyone? I dislike his talents. You admire his talents. So what? Opinions differ. Joblo rated "In the Bedroom" a four out of ten. I found it brilliant. However, you will notice I am not begging Jo not to review any more films. I am not hurling any personal insults his way. That's how grownups behave. I hope you all enjoy Spiderman and find it to be a most happy film experience.

[This message has been edited by kici (edited 03-23-2002).]

[This message has been edited by kici (edited 03-23-2002).]

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

No one is threatened by it, but since you never give any reasons (and if you, for some reason, decided to; read valid) for not liking the film, and you always seem to find a way to bring up, no matter what the topic, that you dont like LotR. Do you have a personal vendetta against the film, because one of its fans called you a "bitch". Look, before it even came out you said you werent gonna like it, so,......take from that what you will. Oh, and I dont see how LotR could put you to sleep and GP couldnt. But thats just me.

[kici]

FOTR's pacing was tedious. The actors were wholly unbelievable in their parts. The chase and pursuit scenes continued endlessly to the detriment of any meaningful character interaction or development. It was too long. The two little hobbits that accompained Frodo and Sam bugged the hell out of me; I wanted them to die. There were too many closeups of the ring. The idea that it was evil was reinforced over and over again ad nauseum. There were too many closeups of the hobbits' hairy feet. Legolas the archer looked like one of the Hanson brothers which caused me to flashback to "Mmmmbop" at dramatic moments. Boromir and whatshisname (Viggo Mortensen), the only characters in the film which exhibited the slightest amount of charisma, weren't offered sufficient character development. The brief, aborted "romance" between whatshisname and whatshername (Galadriel? Eowyn?--Steve Tyler's daughter) came out of nowhere, jarringly inserted into the movie to provide "a moment for the chicks," and was as quickly abandoned. Whatshername fought the dark riders in the river instead of Frodo. Sam's "death" scene made me laugh. I wanted to drive a nail through Frodo's forehead. I fell asleep during the unending battle with the trolls in the basement or wherever the hell they were and thus slept through Ian MacKellan's "death." Elijah Woods was horribly miscast.

NO MEANINGFUL CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.

Is that specific enough? Just my humble opinion, of course. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Enjoy the Two Towers. You'll have to tell me all about it because I won't be talked into seeing the sequel; I have sufficient faith that it will rake in millions without my eight dollar contribution. I hope you enjoy it. Did I mention the ending absolutely tanked?

Actually, I've also had rabid young teenaged LOTR fans tell me to "f#ck off" on-line because I didn't like it. Another sent nasty e-mails insulting me. What a wonderful movie. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif I shall remember it fondly. I never had anyone tell me to FU because I offered a negative opinion of "Gladiator." Think about it.

[Movie Hunter]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kici:
FOTR's pacing was tedious. The actors were wholly unbelievable in their parts. The chase and pursuit scenes continued endlessly to the detriment of any meaningful character interaction or development. It was too long. The two little hobbits that accompained Frodo and Sam bugged the hell out of me; I wanted them to die. There were too many closeups of the ring. The idea that it was evil was reinforced over and over again ad nauseum. There were too many closeups of the hobbits' hairy feet. Legolas the archer looked like one of the Hanson brothers which caused me to flashback to "Mmmmbop" at dramatic moments. Boromir and whatshisname (Viggo Mortensen), the only characters in the film which exhibited the slightest amount of charisma, weren't offered sufficient character development. The brief, aborted "romance" between whatshisname and whatshername (Galadriel? Eowyn?--Steve Tyler's daughter) came out of nowhere, jarringly inserted into the movie to provide "a moment for the chicks," and was as quickly abandoned. Whatshername fought the dark riders in the river instead of Frodo. Sam's "death" scene made me laugh. I wanted to drive a nail through Frodo's forehead. I fell asleep during the unending battle with the trolls in the basement or wherever the hell they were and thus slept through Ian MacKellan's "death." Elijah Woods was horribly miscast.

NO MEANINGFUL CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.

Is that specific enough? Just my humble opinion, of course. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Enjoy the Two Towers. You'll have to tell me all about it because I won't be talked into seeing the sequel; I have sufficient faith that it will rake in millions without my eight dollar contribution. I hope you enjoy it. Did I mention the ending absolutely tanked?

Actually, I've also had rabid young teenaged LOTR fans tell me to "f#ck off" on-line because I didn't like it. Another sent nasty e-mails insulting me. What a wonderful movie. http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif I shall remember it fondly. I never had anyone tell me to FU because I offered a negative opinion of "Gladiator." Think about it. </font>

OHHHHHHHH my god !!!!!!!

u should open a school about "hating movies that everbody likes".....

Anyway , it seems that u were sleeping before the movie and then u went to watch it while sleeping ..


ACTORS :
the acting was very good , not bad at all ..and was convincing.

Effects : were very great

Drama : good , ( when boromir tries to take the ring , and other stuff like Council of elrond )....

And......no i wont trouble my mind any more.

This is a Spider man thread...so plz keep it to topic.. also dumb-fokker , Dont answer her , becoz she will find alot of excuses and stuff to say about hating LOTR ( gandalf hat was funny , Dwarves are short , Frodo looked like a cartoon figure )..

P.S : i suggest u open a "Hating LOTR Club Discussion Board "



[This message has been edited by Movie Hunter (edited 03-24-2002).]

[ak]

People - Stop the talk of LOTR, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with it!

[dellamorte dellamore]

Kici,i have this feeling in my gut that you're a closet LOTR fan,it's the only explaination for you're supposed hatred of it,and your obsessive bashing of it every chance you get.

I have to admit,and don't take this the wrong way,but it's amusing,maybe even endearing,to see how much you"despise"this film.


I felt the same way,until a saw it a couple of more times,and it's brilliance finally hit me(an epiphany,allright it was only a realization),and i can't get over what was done with this film,it's majestic in every way.The one aspect that truly hit me,was the romance between Aragon and Arwen.It was a very small part of the film but more powerful than 95% of recent love stories,that focus entirely on the romantic aspect.And the music in that scene.


The film is an example of what happens when everything goes right,and their is a real passion behind the helm.I don't see how it won't clean up at the Oscars,all the other nominees will be forgotten 6 months from now,LOTR will endure for generations.

You'll come around,especially when you get a chance to check out the DVD.I recommend a surround sound system with DD 5.1 or higher to get the full effect,trust me it will blow you away.

Allright,had to get that out of the way.Now, Tobey Maguire could work because he's an unlikely superhero,he's not some buff GQ guy like Vin Diesel,there's enough of those already,he has that quiet confidence(see Keaton in Batman),he projects a certain emotional intelligence(he makes it seem like he can see below the surface),and he looks to have some chemistry with Kirsten Dunst.

I have high hopes for this,but i can see why you may have some reservations,that boyish pretty boy look TM sports does'nt appeal to everyone,but i say,just think of him as a little brother,and you may see him in a whole new light.


LOTR is the best picture of the year,it has the best special effects,set design,sound editing,art direction,supporting actor(noone is even close),editing,Director,original song,original sountrack,adapted screenplay,and if i missed anything,it deserves that one too.


I'm not kidding,this is an event,not just a film,it's so far superior to any of the other nominees,i think some people may feel embarassed if they beat out LOTR in any of the categories,because i think even the academy is'nt dumb enough not to realize the others can't compete.


Who better to win it all then PJ,an unassuming gentleman,who exhibits class,passion,a respect for the medium,and most of all an underlying humanity.

[This message has been edited by dellamorte dellamore (edited 03-24-2002).]

[bmain77]

I just can't believe that so many people dislike Toby Maguire. Sure he's not exactly Jim Carrey when it comes to enthusiasm, but the guy is a good actor. I loved his performances in Cider House Rules and Wonder Boys. And I think he makes a perfect Peter Parker. He wouldn't have been my first choice, but after thinking about it some it was a great pick.

Also why must we always create divisions between film franchises. It almost looks like a conflict between Spiderman and Star Wars is going to start, though I'm sure it won't match LOTR vs SW. All I know is that I can't wait for March to come. I couldn't be anymore geeked up than I am now for these two movies. I personally think both look very solid and since I don't have to problem with CGI that most others do I have nothing bad to say about either movie.

[Mr_Cheese]

It's hard to say... One of the biggest problems with Episode 1 stem from hightened expectations (and Jar Jar Binks)... Now, with Episode 2 coming most people expect a stinker of sorts and as such we might enjoy it that much more. Sorry but I love Star Wars and I must say that I liked Episode 1 (but not Jar Jar Binks)...

As for Spiderman... I think it will be a good movie, at least special effects wise... and who could argue with a scene featuring Kirsten Dunst in a wet shirt...

Which will be better? I will have to say neither... They will both be good movies.

Although I would clearly say Star Wars Episode 2 if it featured a lengthy scene where Jar Jar Binks was tortured to death... Mesa Jar Jar Binks... Mesa Not Liken Dat... Mesa Ahhhhhh... It brings a smile to my face.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Bmain did'nt you mean you can't wait for May to come?

[bmain77]

yeah you're right. Guess it was just wishfull thinking on my part.

[Stripes]

I would say If both were opening the same night that I would go see Star Wars. Even though TPM sucked horribly, hey it's Star Wars. I always have hope that that magic will come back. It's doubtful but there is always that chance. And I'm stoked to see Yoda Beat some ass. Don't get me wrong. I will still go see Spiderman but if they were coming out the same night tha it would beSW without a doubt. And I'm not a SW Fanboy I am a LOTR.

[Stripes]

sorry double post

[This message has been edited by Stripes (edited 03-26-2002).]

[jeo4]

Um...correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this a STAR WARS board? How the hell did LOTR and SPIDERMAN (ugh!) get posted in here? I mean, it's obvious you're looking to get a rise out of SW fans by bringing something into the forum that doesn't belong. So you decided to compare the SPIDERMAN to SW. And how LOTR got in here is beyond me. Not that I hate LOTR. In fact, it really is a phenomenal film.
Comparing these films with one another is like comparing apples and oranges. It's obvious that this forum is just a way to generate hate for SW and push SPIDERMAN, and it has no business here. If you're a STAR WARS fan, then great. This is the forum for you. If you want to start a fight or bitch about SW, go to "Rant". If you want to talk about the virtues of Spiderman or LOTR, please take it to the appropriate forum and let the fans here be fans.

[Terrell]

I mean, it's obvious you're looking to get a rise out of SW fans by bringing something into the forum that doesn't belong.

Yes, it's obvious that was his intent. I'll take both thank you, because I don't have to choose. But if I did, it's bye-bye Spider-Man.

[movieman1969]

My choice is EPISODE 2.
EPISODE 2 started out slow, but ended up a very strong film, and was consistent through out.
SPIDERMAN -**1/2 stars. Reason? The Peter Parker origin was fantastic, but when it came to the Green Goblin storyline- it just fell apart for me, and the ending reminded me of SUPERMAN 2- you get Supes and Lois together, then, in the last 2 minutes the writers come up with a flimsy way of keeping them apart.
The BIG reason I did not like SPIDEY was I never for one second thought Spidey was a real character. He was too CGI. Thumbs down.

[Kimmy]

i've seen them both but i just can't pick

[Boba Joe]

I just don't see the big deal with SPIDER-MAN. It really wasn't that good of a movie. The characters were bland and the dialogue was either complete shit or a blatant rip-off ("I'm Spider-Man" sounds a lot like Micheal Keaton's "I'm Batman" from 1989).
I got suckered into the spider-hype last May and got burned bad.
It should have been called "Peter Parker", cuz "Spider-Man" was hardly in this movie. Two thumbs WAY DOWN on this itsy bitsy
crapfest. STAR WARS all the way...like there was ever any doubt.

[Slayer16]

I loved Spiderman, but I've always been a SW fan, and have enjoyed all the movies so far (even TPM). So, I'm gonna go with Attack of the Clones.

[SenorSpielbergo]

Star Wars is MUCH MUCH MUCH better. I hated Spider-man, it is one of the most overrated and overhyped movies of this decade so far.

[mrdeeds]

This is was a bit of a close one for me, but I would have to go with AOTC hands down. I saw it 2x in the theatres and waited until DVD for Spiderman. I have to say with all the hype and general discussion, I thought I might have like Spiderman better, but I did not.

Spiderman had the better performances and I was excited and impressed by having Spidey finally brought to the big screen, but the more and more I watch AOTC, the more I like.

Lucas certainly had his work cut out for him in Ep II both trying to set up the finale for Ep III and tying in elements of the original trilogy and I believe he did a tremendous job. The only thing I was not impressed with is the stilted love connection between Padme and Anakin, which I knew had to be forced in, so I can forgive George.

Unfortunately, in the eyes of many, the entire franchise has lost lustre. I even detected a backlash at his supposed overreliance on CGI, but I feel George can really make a statement with Ep III. I am hoping for an ESB type movie that relies more on the quality of the plot and performances rather than grandiose CGI battle sequences. One can only have faith.

[clie23]

i had a better time with episode 2....but spidey was good too

[gyro_44]

I would have to pick "Star Wars" over Spidey, if for no other reason than it is Star Wars, and the last hour of "Attack of the Clones" could be the most fun I've had in a movie theater all year long.

However, the romance in "Spider-Man" is certainly leagues better than "Clones" and it is certainly a better film in many respects. However, Star Wars is Star Wars. Nuff said. :)

[xirtam]

I think I liked Star Wars better than Spiderman. In the special effects aspect, SW had WAAAAAYYY more, and of course when there was a special effect it was easy to see, but SM had a few also, and those also stuck out badly. I think, because SW is in a different world, the CG creatures, buildings, landscapes etc. were just easier to accept. SM was supposed to be real life--and real life just doesn't include CG spiders hanging from CG webs.

If you look at it from the romance angle, SM wins, because of better acting, and better dialogue, and better chemistry. There were some corny lines, but the only thing that made me accept the romance in SW was the score BOOMING in the soundtrack--if the acting/dialogue was better, the score would have been much quieter.

The stories were just too different to compare. SW is more complicated, and SM is simpler. Whichever you think is better. I think they are about equal.

SW has more of a fun factor, too, SM was going a little bit too much for the drama, SW was just a great time. So my answer stays the same; I like both movies, (both are 9/10) but I like SW better.

[mrdeeds]

I think the reason for the initial overwhelming praise and success of Spiderman is because is was highly anticipated and much awaited film and it was just new.

Many old fans and potential new fans of SW were really turned off by EP I: PM and the lustre of the original trilogy is a little tarnished. I think most SW fans and movie fans in general just have to high an expectation of any new SW film. They have to be better than perfect just to be an acceptable movie. I see it as a piece of a puzzle, but it does stand on it's own as well.

I myself very much enjoyed EP II and enjoy it the more times I've watched it which I cannot say for Spiderman. It ranks No.3 among all the films IMO.

[Ass-Spelunker]

SW TPM and AOTC (another thing that is very not Star Wars, no one calls the prequels TPM or AOTC, they say Episode 1 or 2... you dont go around calling Empire Strikes Back episode 5... of course this is mainly Lucas' fault as he didnt have a name for the first flick yet and since he wanted to push it on us, he tagged on "Episode I") both were bad movies. (AOTC being infinitely better than TPM, mainly because Lucas didn't write it alone, he had someone to bounce ideas off of, checks and balances) There is no mistake about it. I think a few things led to this, 1) Lucas had too much money, yes you'd think that would be a good thing, but when you have less money and are forced to work with what you have, you tend to be more ingenious and figure out ways to make the things you can do really good. *of course this concept also leads to a different theory... see below. 2) Lucas is not a good director, that is a simple fact. He has a great imagination, and he's a good story teller. Yet, when he try's to bring these things to the screen he does not fair too well. 3) Being away from your passion for 20 years and then returning to it changes things. you're not immersed in it, it's not your passion any longer, and you can see that in the movies. The movies were even crafted differently. In the original trilogy, it was a very motif based flick. There were distinctive themes for each character, and each of the three movies was broken down into 3 seperate acts, with 3 enviornments, it had a unique feel to it, it was Star Wars. (ANH: desert, space, jungle/space; ESB: snow/ice, bog/swamp, city/metropolitan RotJ: desert, forest, space) This is more a "hey look what we can do with special effects" thing than anything else, not to mention everything crafted in the movie was made to be marketable... podrace had video game written all over it before the scene was even over. It's very self evident. Now, I am one of the biggest Star Wars fans in existence, I have more Wars crap than most people I know, know the lines inside and out, know histories and shit. played the CCG for 7 years, I'm a fuckin Star Wars nut (saw TPM in the theater with a friend 36 times, because we wanted to see Wars back at number 1 and beat Titanic... of course I look back and want to shoot myself for doing that), but the new ones just don't hold a candle to Lucas' previous work, they don't hold a candle to much of anything. Sure they're kinda fun, and you swallow them because I mean it is Star Wars so you kind of have some acceptance, but overall... they are not good. People know this, people see this, people except this. Now Spider-Man... a character that's been around long before Star Wars, and has equally won the hearts of millions was a great movie (true, even it has some lackluster moments) but it was a far superior movie to AOTC.

I think the one thing, that truely shows us the sad state Star Wars has reached... is the lately commercial for AOTC.

"Who da man?" "YO-DA MAN" I mean, that just about sums it up. sigh...


*As for this concept, it makes you wonder... what if Lucas sucked this whole time and we were tricked into thinking he was great. What if the ONLY reason the first three were great was because he couldnt afford to fuck them up. Makes you think. ;-)

my .02
-AS

[APzombie]

Originally posted by jeo4
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this a STAR WARS board? How the hell did LOTR and SPIDERMAN (ugh!) get posted in here? I mean, it's obvious you're looking to get a rise out of SW fans by bringing something into the forum that doesn't belong. So you decided to compare the SPIDERMAN to SW. And how LOTR got in here is beyond me. Not that I hate LOTR. In fact, it really is a phenomenal film.
Comparing these films with one another is like comparing apples and oranges. It's obvious that this forum is just a way to generate hate for SW and push SPIDERMAN, and it has no business here. If you're a STAR WARS fan, then great. This is the forum for you. If you want to start a fight or bitch about SW, go to "Rant". If you want to talk about the virtues of Spiderman or LOTR, please take it to the appropriate forum and let the fans here be fans.

Agreed jeo4, this topic has got out of hand...

THREAD CLOSED