Latest Movie News Headlines

C'mon Hollywood: Build characters before franchises!

May. 20, 2014by: Paul Shirey

We toss around the term “character development” a lot. It’s used pretty much anytime we feel we didn’t get enough from a character in a film, be it back story, personality, charisma, redemption, etc.; something was simply missing. In some instances it’s more of our personal opinion that drives this feeling, but in others, piss poor character development is plain as day. Which brings us to THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 and GODZILLA, two films that have most recently fumbled this essential aspect of storytelling, either wasting precious time for the sake of building a franchise or simply forgetting to make their characters interesting enough to warrant their return to one.

I enjoyed THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 in the same way you would enjoy riding a roller coaster; fast, loud, out-of-control, and with some exciting moments, but ultimately a fleeting experience. I didn’t get to know Peter Parker; I didn’t feel like I was in his shoes or that I learned anything about him or his struggle and anytime they got close to that, I was deviated into a villain’s half-cooked story that never really went anywhere.  The villain’s weren’t built on anything substantial that made me think there was a real dynamic going on. They just popped up so Spidey could have someone to fight, but never because it meant anything to the characters. Spider-Man had nothing invested in either Electro or Green Goblin (let alone The Rhino) that couldn’t be dismissed with a shoulder shrug. Their rivalry was the equivalent of bumping into someone in a bar.

For GODZILLA, we have a film that succeeds beautifully on so many levels, particularly with suspense, effects, sound design, as well as the best-looking GODZILLA we’ve seen to date. But, where they fail is in forcing a human connection that’s completely half-baked. Bryan Cranston is wasted, Aaron Taylor-Johnson is wooden, and Elizabeth Olsen’s role could vanish and nothing would have changed. Ken Watanabe’s role, essentially Mr. Exposition, is just as worthless. Here, we have a case of characters seemingly being interesting at first, but rarely rising to the occasion. They are all deadly serious with nary a thing particularly compelling, interesting, or mysterious about them. They are all on-the-surface placeholders. One is angry, one is determined, one is prophetic, one is scared, and so on. None of them show any of the things that make people particularly compelling. No humor, no secrets, no flaws, no charisma; they are there to do one job; they are all just reactionary characters. Now, it’s easy to say, “Well, this is a monster movie…it’s not about them,” but the problem is that we spend the first hour of the movie with them. GODZILLA is a monster movie populated with boring humans, minus Cranston, who deserved to have a much better arc than, “Yep, you were right. Now die.” 

A lot of comparisons have been made to films like JURASSIC PARK or JAWS when it comes to the “slow burn” of getting to the monsters, while meeting the humans they’re terrorizing. However, like a bad horror movie, if you don’t care about who lives or dies, what’s the film really about? If it’s just cheap thrills, fine, but if you want more than that then it begins and ends with characters. The reason films like JURASSIC PARK and JAWS can get away with the same slow build to big monsters is because the characters were interesting, flawed, and memorable; they felt like real people with real challenges, even beyond what the obvious one is. There’s a reason many people are pissed that Ian Malcolm and Alan Grant aren’t showing up in JURASSIC WORLD; they are loved characters. Can you say the same about Aaron Taylor-Johnson in a GODZILLA sequel?

As for Spidey, the problem is that they abandoned Peter Parker’s journey for a very different one; a franchise universe. Instead of saying, “Let’s make the best Spider-Man movie we could ever make,” they said, “Let’s make the best Spider-Man movie that will lead to even more Spider-Man movies.” The two are not interchangeable. Admittedly, I really like Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spider-Man; He’s terrific, but the sequel is lost in a flurry of illogical ideas, a laundry list of teases to stories that haven’t even begun, and a step backwards into a story that we thought was already resolved. They left Peter Parker blowing in the breeze. He was little more than a pawn on the franchise chessboard.

So, how do you fix this? Well, you stop making movies in order to make sequels and start making movies that are about characters. Every film should toss in the kitchen sink when it comes to a complete, all-encompassing film, rather than a serialized effort of an endless saga. If you want to rip off Marvel’s model, you’d better do it right. Even the worst of their films still feels like a self-contained piece with a slight tease during the credits that you may or may not get depending on your nerd level. For a film that’s a potential franchise starter, the focus should be whether or not it’s good enough on its own before you start lining up the next one.

Every studio wants a franchise, but beginning with that end in mind is like shooting yourself in the foot. You have to make at least ONE good film, before you bankroll five more. If the characters are good enough and people care enough to see them again then you’ve earned your way to a franchise. But, even then, the focus should be about making the best possible film each and every time, sequels be damned. While I don’t think GODZILLA set out to “franchise” the human characters, it certainly left them interchangeable. Maybe that’s fine for GODZILLA, as most of us hope to see A LOT more of him in a sequel anyway, but for Spider-Man, it all hinges on the (super) human characters.  

Not every film has to have a sequel. I know that defies the current Hollywood logic where nearly EVERY movie has to be primed for not only a follow up, but also a spinoff or prequel or the inevitable reboot. I get the business aspect of it. It’s not lost on me. But, that doesn’t excuse the sacrificial lamb of the whole mess; characters we actually give a shit about and would even want to see on the big screen again.

Source: JoBlo.com

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

8:13AM on 05/21/2014
The Amazing Spider-man 2 was perfect. It had more character development than any of the Marvel Studios movies (which I enjoy and am not bashing on), outside Iron Man 1, and Incredible Hulk. TASM2 is the best comic book movie to date. People need to get their heads out of their asses.
The Amazing Spider-man 2 was perfect. It had more character development than any of the Marvel Studios movies (which I enjoy and am not bashing on), outside Iron Man 1, and Incredible Hulk. TASM2 is the best comic book movie to date. People need to get their heads out of their asses.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:35AM on 05/21/2014
Dude were you drunk when you typed that? There was no character development at all, especially with the villains. AS2 was a mediocre film.
Dude were you drunk when you typed that? There was no character development at all, especially with the villains. AS2 was a mediocre film.
12:15PM on 05/22/2014
Good? Ok, i can see that. Perfect? Far from it. I understand opinions, but how is TASM2 the best comic movie to date? I'm genuinely curious.
Good? Ok, i can see that. Perfect? Far from it. I understand opinions, but how is TASM2 the best comic movie to date? I'm genuinely curious.
2:15AM on 05/21/2014

I totally agree.

Especially with the points about Jaws and Jurassic Park. That's the reason Spielberg is my favorite director, even in his big blockbuster films, there is a strong focus on character just as much as the spectacle. Anyway, this is one of the reasons I'm worried about Star Wars and Disney trying to rush out a new trilogy plus multiple spin-off films.
Especially with the points about Jaws and Jurassic Park. That's the reason Spielberg is my favorite director, even in his big blockbuster films, there is a strong focus on character just as much as the spectacle. Anyway, this is one of the reasons I'm worried about Star Wars and Disney trying to rush out a new trilogy plus multiple spin-off films.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:43PM on 05/20/2014

Thank God

Personally speaking, for a lot of the reasons listed above (not exclusively those though) I was not only seriously disappointed in both films, but have found them both to be the two current worst films of the year (to date). I am not going to begrudge anyone being able to overcome the issues with both films and enjoy themselves; those folks have reached a zen like I wish to comprehend one day. But back on point, the characters in both films constantly made decisions/ did things that were either
Personally speaking, for a lot of the reasons listed above (not exclusively those though) I was not only seriously disappointed in both films, but have found them both to be the two current worst films of the year (to date). I am not going to begrudge anyone being able to overcome the issues with both films and enjoy themselves; those folks have reached a zen like I wish to comprehend one day. But back on point, the characters in both films constantly made decisions/ did things that were either so illogical, even including the 'it's only a movie mindset', and/ or so far removed from any real human's reactions to events that it was impossible to care about them.

Best "C'mon Hollywood" in awhile, possibly all year. Thank you for being able to articulate these issues in such a clear headed manner, as I know I am too enraged to have even been able to attempt it!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:31PM on 05/20/2014
I haven't seen The Amazing Spiderman 2 yet, but I'm disappointed to see it on this list. I thought Marc Webb was touted as the director who understands "relationships" ? I agree that most big budget action movies are soo concerned with spectacle that we're not really invested in the characters the scene is happening around. Hollywood really needs to get back to building strong characters that we can relate to and care about so we are emotionally invested in the story more. With special effects
I haven't seen The Amazing Spiderman 2 yet, but I'm disappointed to see it on this list. I thought Marc Webb was touted as the director who understands "relationships" ? I agree that most big budget action movies are soo concerned with spectacle that we're not really invested in the characters the scene is happening around. Hollywood really needs to get back to building strong characters that we can relate to and care about so we are emotionally invested in the story more. With special effects being what they are nowadays, I'm quickly getting desensitized towards humongous confusing action sequences where cities are destroyed by Godzilla, or Transformers, or fucking aliens, or a natural disaster. You can only see a city getting blown to pieces so many times, give me a reason to give a shit.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:15AM on 05/21/2014
Spider-man was great. If you like comic book movies at all do your self a favor and see it on the big screen.
Spider-man was great. If you like comic book movies at all do your self a favor and see it on the big screen.
9:18PM on 05/20/2014
Jamie Foxx's Electro was just Jim Carrey's Riddler mixed in with Richard Pryor from Superman III. It really was a waste casting him in the part. However, X-Men: Days of Future Past is filled with character development. All the relationships explored in it are fleshed out really satisfyingly and not at the expense of some great action and spectacle. And that's the seventh entry in a franchise.
Jamie Foxx's Electro was just Jim Carrey's Riddler mixed in with Richard Pryor from Superman III. It really was a waste casting him in the part. However, X-Men: Days of Future Past is filled with character development. All the relationships explored in it are fleshed out really satisfyingly and not at the expense of some great action and spectacle. And that's the seventh entry in a franchise.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
8:58PM on 05/20/2014

Paul, thank you!

I whole-heartedly agree with each sentence you wrote!
I whole-heartedly agree with each sentence you wrote!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:22PM on 05/20/2014

completly disagree

i think that we really don't need to have character developpement to have a good movie, especially a pop corn summer blockbuster movie like amazing spiderman 2 and godzilla. Personally, i really love both movie the way they were, if you needed to see character development in amazing spider man 2, you just have to re-watch the first one to get it because the first one was mostly character development. In the case of godzilla, did you have watch a godzilla movie since the franchise began in 1955.
i think that we really don't need to have character developpement to have a good movie, especially a pop corn summer blockbuster movie like amazing spiderman 2 and godzilla. Personally, i really love both movie the way they were, if you needed to see character development in amazing spider man 2, you just have to re-watch the first one to get it because the first one was mostly character development. In the case of godzilla, did you have watch a godzilla movie since the franchise began in 1955. They never had any character developpement for the human characters and that what people expect out of a godzilla movie. they expect the human to be secondary characters with no real back story because what fans of the series want is to see godzilla destroys city and kill monsters. fans and critics alike all say that you need more character developpement and back stories for characters for a summer blockbusters to be considered great but these movies for the most part don'T need them and are better of left without any back story or character developpement because they are all about the actions and the explositions and that what most peoples that see these movies want to see, not a huge back story for every characters.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:08PM on 05/20/2014
The problem about what you said is that there's hardly any "Godzilla destroys city" minutes. Only the last one is actually shown, while the first two fights just begin, but never materialize in front of our eyes. So if this movie is not about the monster-bashing, than what is it about? The humans. And that's why Paul Shirley wrote this article.
The problem about what you said is that there's hardly any "Godzilla destroys city" minutes. Only the last one is actually shown, while the first two fights just begin, but never materialize in front of our eyes. So if this movie is not about the monster-bashing, than what is it about? The humans. And that's why Paul Shirley wrote this article.
10:36PM on 05/20/2014
The issue, at least for "Godzilla" is how little of the titular king of the monsters there is. All told, I am betting if you were to string all his scenes (including super brief appearances in the news, etc) it'd maybe, maybe add up to 40 minutes, and most of that would be from the final fight, and the only one the audience gets to see in any significant detail. Seeing as the movie is over two hours long, and there's no title character to speak of for most of that, instead we spend time with
The issue, at least for "Godzilla" is how little of the titular king of the monsters there is. All told, I am betting if you were to string all his scenes (including super brief appearances in the news, etc) it'd maybe, maybe add up to 40 minutes, and most of that would be from the final fight, and the only one the audience gets to see in any significant detail. Seeing as the movie is over two hours long, and there's no title character to speak of for most of that, instead we spend time with all these human characters, the movie wants to have characters with arcs, etc. It's clearly trying for that, but it happened to fail spectacularly there. I am not saying don't enjoy the film, that is your opinion that you are 100% entitled to, but please at least know of which you speak. Since you claim to have seen the film, then you must be aware of how little Godzilla was there, and thus making your comments (about this movie) a waste of your time writing them, and now every schmoe that'll read them as well.

As for "Amazing Spidey 2", it's far more of a full on summer popcorn film, so okay, fine. But why was the Rhino even included? What did his such brief scenes offer to the momentum of the film or story? Why wasn't Uncle Ben's killer even freaking mentioned, much less looked for (as was very much set up at the end of the first one)? All of those complainants are part of characterization, and the film introduces so many new characters, none of them, not even Peter's supposed former best friend, have any lasting personalities. So the point stands, but at least here, it's more subjective than with Godzilla.
+1
3:33PM on 05/20/2014
Franchises are all studios care about anymore. They only want big $100-$300million movies made solely for the purpose of franchising. Now, they even bankroll the marketing of teen books in hopes that it'll lead to a movie franchise one day.

Why? Because Facebook has become Hollywood's go to source for what they think the audience wants. They pay millions to Facebook for this data. And what do they see?

Also, studios are making less and less sub-$100million films every year. It seems
Franchises are all studios care about anymore. They only want big $100-$300million movies made solely for the purpose of franchising. Now, they even bankroll the marketing of teen books in hopes that it'll lead to a movie franchise one day.

Why? Because Facebook has become Hollywood's go to source for what they think the audience wants. They pay millions to Facebook for this data. And what do they see?

Also, studios are making less and less sub-$100million films every year. It seems like the budgets are either less than $10-million or more than $100million. Only a few established auteurs get to make something in-between.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:53PM on 05/20/2014

Completely Agree!

Hollywood is thinking in dollar signs. They are like a student that does the school work to complete it b/c they know the professor will give them a good grade if they at least try. The problem is that student learns little, and is no better for taking the class. Hollywood isn't in it for the art or the satisfaction of doing solid work, but simply the dollars that result. It makes me sick and I wish we could change it!
Hollywood is thinking in dollar signs. They are like a student that does the school work to complete it b/c they know the professor will give them a good grade if they at least try. The problem is that student learns little, and is no better for taking the class. Hollywood isn't in it for the art or the satisfaction of doing solid work, but simply the dollars that result. It makes me sick and I wish we could change it!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:15PM on 05/20/2014
Good points. Haven't seen Godzilla so can't comment on it. But the further away I get from ASM2 the more I realize how flawed it is. The movie was like a snapshot of Spidey/Peter Parker and only served to set up 4 other movies.

I think beyond just focusing on making one great movie, studios also need to stop announcing every plan for a franchise. ASM2 wasn't even released before they announced ASM3 & 4, plus Sinister 6 and Venom. How overloaded is that for a franchise about ONE
Good points. Haven't seen Godzilla so can't comment on it. But the further away I get from ASM2 the more I realize how flawed it is. The movie was like a snapshot of Spidey/Peter Parker and only served to set up 4 other movies.

I think beyond just focusing on making one great movie, studios also need to stop announcing every plan for a franchise. ASM2 wasn't even released before they announced ASM3 & 4, plus Sinister 6 and Venom. How overloaded is that for a franchise about ONE superhero all on his own?

The franchise game is getting to be too much. I love Marvel, but I'm starting to appreciate the one off actioners that have nothing to do with comics or franchises.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-5
1:54PM on 05/20/2014

I don't fully agree.....

I was just telling my nephew last night that I didn't feel Johnson was that bad, but he suffered from Cranston being that good. There was a noticeable dropoff in intensity when Cranston died, which made it feel like the air got sucked out of the movie. However, there was a monster on screen every 15 minutes throughout the film, so the dialog and characters never became genuinely bad (like Pacific Rim or Cloverfield). It just always felt like it could have been better.

I agree that
I was just telling my nephew last night that I didn't feel Johnson was that bad, but he suffered from Cranston being that good. There was a noticeable dropoff in intensity when Cranston died, which made it feel like the air got sucked out of the movie. However, there was a monster on screen every 15 minutes throughout the film, so the dialog and characters never became genuinely bad (like Pacific Rim or Cloverfield). It just always felt like it could have been better.

I agree that Cranston should have survived the fall. He and Watanabe would have made a great team to figure out the monsters' motivation and the best way to maneuver things to help preserve mankind. They could have even kept Johnson on his journey.....it wouldn't have been a big adjustment.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:35PM on 05/20/2014
Cranston/Watanabe teamup would have been perfect
Cranston/Watanabe teamup would have been perfect
7:22PM on 05/20/2014
Hey how about a little spoiler warning for a movie that isn't even out for a week as of yet!

Fuck!
Hey how about a little spoiler warning for a movie that isn't even out for a week as of yet!

Fuck!
1:28PM on 05/20/2014
Spider-Man 2 was on TV last weekend, and it just reminded me how much more well-put together it was than Amazing 2. Doctor Octopus was a great character, with his own proper arc, and not some random guy who suddenly turned evil.
Spider-Man 2 was on TV last weekend, and it just reminded me how much more well-put together it was than Amazing 2. Doctor Octopus was a great character, with his own proper arc, and not some random guy who suddenly turned evil.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:47PM on 05/20/2014
Funny, I also re-watched Spider-Man 2 the other day and while Doc Oc was well put together as a villain I thought the writing as a whole for Peter's character was lazy and I don't even want to get started on Harry... both movies had flaws and i'm glad ASM2 came along to show me that.
Funny, I also re-watched Spider-Man 2 the other day and while Doc Oc was well put together as a villain I thought the writing as a whole for Peter's character was lazy and I don't even want to get started on Harry... both movies had flaws and i'm glad ASM2 came along to show me that.
12:52PM on 05/20/2014
When it comes to Godzilla, I was fine with the character development for the most part, but I do wish that Cranston's character was in the film a bit more. I think that would have contributed more 'heart' to the characters and their development. But other then that I was fine with it.

When it comes to Amazing Spider Man 2, they should have made Electro the main villain and should of just had Harry just be Harry in this one and foreshadow his transition to being the Green Goblin towards the
When it comes to Godzilla, I was fine with the character development for the most part, but I do wish that Cranston's character was in the film a bit more. I think that would have contributed more 'heart' to the characters and their development. But other then that I was fine with it.

When it comes to Amazing Spider Man 2, they should have made Electro the main villain and should of just had Harry just be Harry in this one and foreshadow his transition to being the Green Goblin towards the end of the film and set up the showdown between Spider Man and Green Goblin in Amazing Spider Man 3. The way the villains were treated in the film was my biggest concern of the film.

Otherwise, really good article.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:50PM on 05/20/2014
It's hard to find a movie with good character you can root for, say Axel Foley or Indiana Jones. Audiences like them - tangible characters they can relate to. At least I do. Nowadays Hollywood just want to cash in everything they can put their hands on without investing in characters. Sad.
It's hard to find a movie with good character you can root for, say Axel Foley or Indiana Jones. Audiences like them - tangible characters they can relate to. At least I do. Nowadays Hollywood just want to cash in everything they can put their hands on without investing in characters. Sad.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
12:47PM on 05/20/2014

Good Lord...

How illustrative is that story from JAWS. It's a supporting role that gives the film a heart in that one singular speech. Quint is eternalized in one scene and now you care what happens to nearly everyone. But it wasn't a "trick." It wasn't a gimmick devised to "save a cat" or "add pathos." It was storytelling. Now, we have these cardboard cutouts of the Quint character because it worked once, and we have to listen to the gut-wrench story from someone in each film (even Godzilla) and they all
How illustrative is that story from JAWS. It's a supporting role that gives the film a heart in that one singular speech. Quint is eternalized in one scene and now you care what happens to nearly everyone. But it wasn't a "trick." It wasn't a gimmick devised to "save a cat" or "add pathos." It was storytelling. Now, we have these cardboard cutouts of the Quint character because it worked once, and we have to listen to the gut-wrench story from someone in each film (even Godzilla) and they all end up sounding as dead and lifeless as the shark's eyes in Quint's monologue. When oh when are we going to get back to telling a story before making a spectacle. Blockbusters USED to tell stories, rather than be a retail factory.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
12:43PM on 05/20/2014
I agree 100% with your assessment of ASM2. I feel like the small minority who enjoyed ASM1 at the time, but to everyone elses credit, it does not hold up quite well in repeat viewings. So, my expectations were somewhat tempered from the start. Just an underwhelming mess of half-baked ideas and franchise-building, wrapped in some admittedly solid visual effects.

While I want more focus on the characters, the people in charge have zero desire to do anything but keep the rights to these
I agree 100% with your assessment of ASM2. I feel like the small minority who enjoyed ASM1 at the time, but to everyone elses credit, it does not hold up quite well in repeat viewings. So, my expectations were somewhat tempered from the start. Just an underwhelming mess of half-baked ideas and franchise-building, wrapped in some admittedly solid visual effects.

While I want more focus on the characters, the people in charge have zero desire to do anything but keep the rights to these characters. Sony only has Spider-Man and just wants to saturate the market with characters who likely do not deserve their own movie (Venom, really? Sinister Six?). And time is not on their side, as you can see with 20th Century Fox and the Fantastic Four. They appear to have zero clue as to what makes the Fantastic Four a movie worth watching, but are rushing an edgy, grounded reboot to theaters so that the rights do not revert back to Marvel. Sony, while not on the same time frame, will still milk their one character until it is dry, characters be damned.

Fox, as much as this is odd to say, has done a better job with X-Men and their multitude of characters than Sony has with just their one.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:36PM on 05/20/2014
In Godzilla, if you're going to have a soldier who barely cares for his family-aside from making 1 phone call, why even have the family at all? They could have shown characters like the commandos from Predator or the company from Generation Kill, characters with sharp personalities and quips that are memorable. Don't pretend the family is everything and then have your main character run off on MULTIPLE suicide missions.
In Godzilla, if you're going to have a soldier who barely cares for his family-aside from making 1 phone call, why even have the family at all? They could have shown characters like the commandos from Predator or the company from Generation Kill, characters with sharp personalities and quips that are memorable. Don't pretend the family is everything and then have your main character run off on MULTIPLE suicide missions.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:35PM on 05/20/2014

Great stuff Paul!

I'm not so sure Godzilla really fits into the topic of the article here (perhaps a movie like Man of Steel would've been more relevant, but I get that Godzilla is more recent), I couldn't agree more about The Amazing Spider-Man 2. THAT is a franchise that is sacrificing movies at the present in order to focus on sequels and spin-offs in the future. TASM 2 is basically a 2 hour, $250 million commercial for the Sinister Six, and that's ridiculous. Of course, it comes at the expense of the
I'm not so sure Godzilla really fits into the topic of the article here (perhaps a movie like Man of Steel would've been more relevant, but I get that Godzilla is more recent), I couldn't agree more about The Amazing Spider-Man 2. THAT is a franchise that is sacrificing movies at the present in order to focus on sequels and spin-offs in the future. TASM 2 is basically a 2 hour, $250 million commercial for the Sinister Six, and that's ridiculous. Of course, it comes at the expense of the characters.

Not only is Peter one of the most unintentionally selfish, arrogant, douchey "heros" in ANY movie in recent memory (and who doesn't even have any semblance of a character arc), but we STILL have no idea why he and Gwen were even in love. The only reason people keep praising that romance is because the actors sold it so well. Everything about the script (courtesy of the hacks Kurtzman and the crackpot 9/11 truther Orci) lets this franchise down because they're so focused on making a shared Spidey universe.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:14PM on 05/20/2014

ummm

i agree that we need to put character first, and while i havent seen godzilla, i have to whole-heartedly disagree about spidey2. i just watched it last night, and i have to say that was by far my favorite super hero movie in a VERY long time BECAUSE of the character. that movie was a character drama about a guy and his girlfriend. kurtzman and orci are great at towing that line (see: Transformers 1). i'm sure i'll get a ton of downvotes for this comment, but spidey 2 does not even remote equate
i agree that we need to put character first, and while i havent seen godzilla, i have to whole-heartedly disagree about spidey2. i just watched it last night, and i have to say that was by far my favorite super hero movie in a VERY long time BECAUSE of the character. that movie was a character drama about a guy and his girlfriend. kurtzman and orci are great at towing that line (see: Transformers 1). i'm sure i'll get a ton of downvotes for this comment, but spidey 2 does not even remote equate to what we're talking about here.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:35PM on 05/20/2014
I enjoyed Amazing Spiderman 2, actually it's my second favorite next to the original 2, and thought they nailed Parker and Gwen, though the villains were really just card board cut outs, nowhere near, say Doc Ock in Raimi's 2....
I enjoyed Amazing Spiderman 2, actually it's my second favorite next to the original 2, and thought they nailed Parker and Gwen, though the villains were really just card board cut outs, nowhere near, say Doc Ock in Raimi's 2....
12:47PM on 05/20/2014
The Peter/Gwen stuff was fine, but their back-and-forth, will-they/won't-they went on one round too long in my opinion. And while Electro was impressive looking, all the villains were just under-served by the script.
The Peter/Gwen stuff was fine, but their back-and-forth, will-they/won't-they went on one round too long in my opinion. And while Electro was impressive looking, all the villains were just under-served by the script.
2:01PM on 05/20/2014
Completely agree with Tash. The issues go even deeper than just what happened in TASM 2 though. Had TASM 1 had the balls to stick with Peter breaking up with Gwen at the end and completely avoid having that idiotic line of "The best promises are the ones you don't keep", then we wouldn't have had to go through a bunch of scenes in the sequel devoted to the couple breaking up, coming back together as friends, breaking up again b/c Gwen's going to Europe, and then coming back together as love
Completely agree with Tash. The issues go even deeper than just what happened in TASM 2 though. Had TASM 1 had the balls to stick with Peter breaking up with Gwen at the end and completely avoid having that idiotic line of "The best promises are the ones you don't keep", then we wouldn't have had to go through a bunch of scenes in the sequel devoted to the couple breaking up, coming back together as friends, breaking up again b/c Gwen's going to Europe, and then coming back together as love interests again...only for Gwen to die. All that was just wheel-spinning and stalling when that screentime could've been devoted to something more important, like properly fleshing out Harry Osborn and Max Dillon.
+4
12:06PM on 05/20/2014
I applaud you sir, Hear Hear!
I applaud you sir, Hear Hear!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
12:04PM on 05/20/2014
I agree with most of the article, though is Alan Grant really a memorable character? Ian Malcolm sure, but because of his personality, any of the characters from Jurassic Park aren't very rounded necessarily, not like Jaws. You don't know what makes them tick, other than perhaps John Hammond. I love Jurassic Park, don't think I'm bashing it, but it can't really be held up next to Jaws in terms of characters and development. As for Godzilla, Aaron Taylor Johnson should have been more of a smart
I agree with most of the article, though is Alan Grant really a memorable character? Ian Malcolm sure, but because of his personality, any of the characters from Jurassic Park aren't very rounded necessarily, not like Jaws. You don't know what makes them tick, other than perhaps John Hammond. I love Jurassic Park, don't think I'm bashing it, but it can't really be held up next to Jaws in terms of characters and development. As for Godzilla, Aaron Taylor Johnson should have been more of a smart ass, someone similar to a John McClane-type. He was great in Kick Ass, but not sure why he has so wooden in this, though Cranston should have been the main star. His journey was established from the get go and would have played out effectively the entire movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:19PM on 05/20/2014
Yes, Alan Grant is memorable. When the first JP movie came out he was to me, a new Indiana Jones. I went nuts to get his action figure. And when I found out they left him out of The Lost World, I was dissapointed, because HE was the hero of the first film.
Yes, Alan Grant is memorable. When the first JP movie came out he was to me, a new Indiana Jones. I went nuts to get his action figure. And when I found out they left him out of The Lost World, I was dissapointed, because HE was the hero of the first film.
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!