June 14
2008
Should Joss write Spidey?
Based on Joss's writing of Spider-Man in Astonishing X-Men, should he be given his own arc(s)? This guy thinks so.
BandofBuggered
| Printed matter
| 00:42 CET
|
36 comments total
| tags: x-men, joss whedon, spider-man
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to
log in to be able to post comments.
About
membership.
« Older
(SPOILER)
Scott Allie talks 'The Shepherd's ...
|
Warren Manser is a design genius.
Newer »
© 2002 - 2017 - WHEDONesque.com
(
e-mail)
Individual posts are copyright their respective authors
This is a non-profit, unofficial website, not affiliated with Mutant Enemy, Inc., 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers or UPN.
Plus, I enjoy my comics more when Joss is writing them.
BigLandoz | June 14, 00:55 CET
noplaceIcanbe | June 14, 01:13 CET
embers | June 14, 01:14 CET
Personally, I'd love to see him write a Cap comic. You know, Steve Rogers Captain America, the REAL Captain America.
Elf | June 14, 01:52 CET
*sobs* Captain America...I think that he could do some great plotlines and even further characterization with him. It seems like he became more of a person after the Civil War series; then again, he became kind of dead after the series as well.
Hell, I'd love to read anything Joss writes for almost any superhero. I bet he could even make me like Superman, and that takes a lot of doing, as I think the guy is kind of a weenie. In a strong, invincible, oafish kind of way, but still! I think it would be a dream come true if he could write the Goddamn Batman. I would rejoice.
Really, I would quite love to have Joss work on almost any comic out there. American Virgin would be really interesting; I would love to see him do something like Wanted, which was quite firmly in the realm of badass. Really, except for Fables (which I love, love, love), Joss would improve anything to the degree of n.
/geek out session. Sleep time.
BandofBuggered | June 14, 02:10 CET
KingofCretins | June 14, 02:52 CET
dottikin | June 14, 03:02 CET
In fact the only reason he maybe shouldn't is because he's too well suited to it i.e. it wouldn't be different enough for him, wouldn't stretch him in new directions. Batman on the other hand would IMO (especially if he went for the more procedural, detectivey Batman). Not saying i'd like to see him on it for years and years but i'd love to see a few mainline arcs from Big Purp. Or an Elseworlds, wouldn't hate that either.
Saje | June 14, 04:08 CET
daylight | June 14, 04:53 CET
[ edited by Dym on 2008-06-14 11:22 ]
Quit | June 14, 05:21 CET
Buffyfantic | June 14, 08:18 CET
But it was Embers' comment that made me think. What if they did actually tap Joss to write a Spiderman movie? Usually when a franchise reaches 4th and 5th installments, they are exceptionally bad. But if we had Joss penning the 4th installment, I bet it would have noticeably better dialog than the first 3.
Can anyone think of an example of a film that has had several installments where a 4th, 5th or even 6th movie suddenly exceeds expectations, gets great reviews and is obviously much better than the previous films? The latest Bond flick, Casino Royale, was able to do it but the credit goes to actor Daniel Craig. I can't think of an example of a writer having that kind of impact.
As the comic readers in the room know, we see comic book writers having this kind of impact all the time. I'd like to see Joss collaborate with Alan Moore and with art by Goon creator, Eric Powell.
alexreager | June 14, 08:23 CET
And I'd love to see him write a Spidey movie, too. As alexreager said above, it could be a good way to bring the franchise back on track. :)
spidermansays | June 14, 08:39 CET
andrewisfat | June 14, 09:08 CET
That said, I can't really think of many film series which boasted decent instalments after the 3rd film. I wouldn't really include film series like James Bond or Harry Potter in this sort of category, because they were always intended to be part of a much longer series and thus each film is usually judged on its own merits rather than as a trilogy followed by disappointing 4th or 5th films, or an intended standalone film which suddenly becomes a trilogy (think The Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean, which never managed to match the strength of the original films).
And there is the recent phenomenon of resurrecting old classic action film series with new films, many years later, like with Indiana Jones, Die Hard, Rambo, Rocky and Terminator. I think at least a few of those have managed to make an impact as decent follow ups to the series they originated from.
Something like Spiderman is slightly different because it seems like there is a fourth film being prepared which will follow on directly after the first three, rather than being brought back years later. The third film was a little disappointing, but I didn't think it was entirely without merit, so it would be nice if the fourth film could manage to be a brilliant film like the second was, although it is more likely that it will follow the rule of diminishing returns.
I'd definitely feel more confident of its success if the third Spiedy film had maintained the quality of the second, but I do think that it was a case of a very talented group of people making some poor decisions and ending up with a flawed film, but that there is still the potential there for them to create another great film. Having Joss script the film would definitely greatly improve the chances of delivering a satisfying film.
Razor | June 14, 12:23 CET
Part of the the problems with Spider-Man 3,and I actually really liked 3 although it wasn't as good as 1 and 2,were that Sam Raimi was forced to use Venom by the producers.Venom is a character that Raimi never cared for and never connected with but the producers made him use him because so many fans wanted Venom in a Spider-Man film.Raimi was forced to go with a character he didn't want to and re-write the script to satisfy the producers.
Raimi wanted to use Sandman and The Vulture.
[ edited by Buffyfantic on 2008-06-14 20:22 ]
Buffyfantic | June 14, 12:33 CET
Carry Ons.
Simon | June 14, 12:40 CET
'Sudden Impact' wasn't terrible and i'd agree that Star Trek had some great later instalments (in fact on some days I might even put VI as my favourite - other days it's Khaaaannnnn of course ;). And comparing 'Casino Royale' to previous Bond movies is like comparing 'Batman Begins' to the Adam West Batman IMO, apples and oranges (I still love the earlier films and always will but only on their own tongue-in-cheek, slightly jingoistic merits).
Raimi wanted to use Sandman and The Vulture.
Well, he should've got over it and taken Sandman out then.
1 and 2 were good because they had a clear throughline for Peter and the villain but 3 became muddled and rushed when it tried to tell too many stories at once (Venom, Sandman, Harry and Peter) which led to idiocies like Harry's butler telling him that Spidey didn't kill his dad just to set up an extremely obvious denouement. Much as Sandman gave us some great scenes, most of the film's issues stem from shoe-horning him in when there really wasn't room for him IMO.
Saje | June 14, 12:51 CET
tuckers brother | June 14, 13:07 CET
doyn | June 14, 13:33 CET
FaithFan | June 14, 13:42 CET
And I agree with Saje that Spiderman would not be too much of a stretch for Joss, but that something like Batman would because of his personality and methods. Plus I don't really see Bats as the humorous type, so it would be interesting to see how Joss would incorporate his trademark humor. Alfred, for one, I suspect. :)
BandofBuggered | June 14, 15:48 CET
I think the story could have coped with even any two of the three villains, say for example focusing on exploring Harry and his eventual redemption, with either of the other two villains acting as another thematically unimportant menace to service his plot.
But even such a major structural flaw wasn't, in my opinion, the only problem- a lot of the ideas weren't simply rushed and underdeveloped, but simply ridiculous. The idea of Peter exploring the dark side of his power was a classic theme which every superhero experiences, and there was a lot of potential there to explore his character in interesting ways, struggling with issues like control, power, responsibility and abiding by the law (after all, "With great power comes great responsibility").
It would have been more interesting to see him accidentally kill someone, or have to weigh personal benefit against the greater good. I'm thinking of the type of themes Joss explored with characters like Faith and even the issues Buffy experienced with leading other Potentials/slayers in seasons seven and eight, and also the issues raised in relation to Willow's magical prowess. Instead we saw Peter turn into a ridiculous character and the whole subplot treated like some sort of joke. I really didn't understand whether we were meant to see his transformation to a cheesy womaniser as his "dark side" because I had been expecting something much more interesting and dangerous.
Razor | June 14, 18:20 CET
What I liked best about Spider-Man 3 was that it finished off the Peter/Mary Jane/Harry storyline in a satisfying and emotionally resonant way. Despite the mess-ups with the villains, the strained friendship storyline still survived IMO and worked. All the same, I wasn't as pissed about any of the mess-ups in the Spider-Man franchise I'm less attatched to it than I was when they handed Brett Ratner X-Men 3, and SM feels like more of a popcorn picture overall.
I would much rather see Joss either concentrate on what he already has going on (Buffy Season 8, Dollhouse, Goners[?], maybe Angel Season 6 if I get around to reading it and like it enough to wish he was involved) or start something new (but not too huge, so it doesn't take away from those other projects).
Can't get it up for him on Spider-Man, heh.
I guess I just wished that comic book nerd fervor didn't dictate what projects open up to him and become the most appealing, which is how it seems like how it might happen the more he works with Marvel. I'm not gonna pick up Astonishing (maybe borrow some day), I wouldn't go near Spider-Man or Avengers or...well, maybe Hulk...all right, so I'm just as bad as any of 'em.
Kris | June 14, 18:40 CET
aus-mitch | June 15, 00:50 CET
I really liked the "fame going to his head" idea (it's realistic from a character perspective since a guy like Peter who'd never really had any attention would struggle to deal with it and it's also obviously a comment on celebrity culture and the fickleness of the media/public) and thought it could've worked well if they'd taken Dark-Pete more seriously. As it was, he was a buffoon and therefore not disturbing enough.
They'd already done power, control and abiding by the law in 1 and 2, that would've been re-treading the same ground IMO.
I guess I just wished that comic book nerd fervor didn't dictate what projects open up to him and become the most appealing, which is how it seems like how it might happen the more he works with Marvel.
I don't think that has much to do with it to be honest. Given how much "comic book nerd"s complain on the various fora it seems fairly clear that Marvel doesn't steer its ship based on what they think. Whichever book Joss takes (and my own suspicion is that he won't take any, certainly not as an ongoing commitment to one of the big two) there'll be people that unthinkingly hate the idea, people that unthinkingly love the idea and people that are willing to actually read it and see if he pulls it off. And all three groups will probably assume it'll be late ;).
Harry/Peter didn't quite survive the butler idiocy IMO - that's still one of the dumbest moments from the last 5 years of film - and Harry's redemption was signposted so obviously that there was absolutely no suspense as we see Spidey about to breathe his last.
Sandman was fine, didn't have any problems with him (except the silly retcon that he actually killed Uncle Ben - that works better in comics than films) and Thomas Hayden-Church gave a nice performance but there was no place for his story in the film they made IMO (or rather there was a place for it but not alongside the Venom/Dark Peter story).
Saje | June 15, 03:33 CET
crossoverman | June 15, 04:46 CET
The reader ;).
Saje | June 15, 04:56 CET
redeem147 | June 15, 07:14 CET
KingofCretins | June 15, 09:33 CET
And, to compensate for the misspellings in this thread: Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. Spider-Man. ;)
LKW | June 15, 11:54 CET
Spider-Man will always be my single favorite comic book character, and I've said for years that Joss would do an absolutely amazing Spidey. The linked panels prove this. Good God. I am in love with Joss all over again.
UnpluggedCrazy | June 15, 13:25 CET
daylight | June 16, 04:21 CET
One of the big problems I have with BND is that to get there, Peter made an agreement with Mephisto. Peter Parker doesn't make deals with the devil. He beats the devil's ass. Or at least figures out a way to escape the fight to re-group.
Just like the recent fiasco with Wonder Woman this is unacceptable behavior from the webbed one. For those that are not familiar, WW killed a bad guy because he had the power to control Superman. In multi-panel slow motion, she snapped his neck in cold blood. For me, that's the equivalent of Buffy snapping Ethan Rayne's neck. It just doesn't happen.
alexreager | June 16, 09:12 CET
Sunfire | June 16, 09:41 CET
Spidey was never the guy who won every battle. He more often than not had to compromise in one way or another. I can't believe the number of supposed Spidey fans running around like headless chickens in the wake of the marriage's end. It's like they never read the Lee/Ditko originals.
What's most bizarre of all is that so many like yourself hold up the "One More Day" storyline as the reason why you're not reading the book, and yet there has not been any reference to the storyline whatsoever (outside of a single page in-joke) since it ended (and in all likelihood, given that it went down like a ton of bricks, will never be referred to again). Every memory about the pact made in that storyline has been erased from the lead character's head. It is effectively a clean slate. It's not even the same people writing the stories. So why the headless chickening?
daylight | June 16, 16:05 CET