By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - New Spider-Man movie to be released every year, says Sony UPDATE: not any more...

Tagged games:

jlmurph2 on 27 February 2014
pezus said:
jlmurph2 said:
brendude13 said:
I'm not exactly a fan, I didn't like the first one at all, but I don't see what the problem is.

Why does The Hobbit and The Hunger Games get a free pass?


Because they have source material with a definite ending already written. Same thing with Harry Potter and Twilight. They're not making up their own stories, they're getting them from the 100s of pages of source material. 

Doesn't change the fact that all of them stretched the material into more movies than the number of books. The Hobbit is a single, 300 page book (don't remember the exact length) stretched into 3 annual films. The HP book was split into two and The Hunger Games is doing the same I think. So has Twilight. 

Better to have two or three 2 hour movies that have detail rather than a rushed movie all packed into one skipping over important scenes. 



Around the Network
Acevil on 27 February 2014
pezus said:
jlmurph2 said:
pezus said:
jlmurph2 said:
brendude13 said:
I'm not exactly a fan, I didn't like the first one at all, but I don't see what the problem is.

Why does The Hobbit and The Hunger Games get a free pass?


Because they have source material with a definite ending already written. Same thing with Harry Potter and Twilight. They're not making up their own stories, they're getting them from the 100s of pages of source material. 

Doesn't change the fact that all of them stretched the material into more movies than the number of books. The Hobbit is a single, 300 page book (don't remember the exact length) stretched into 3 annual films. The HP book was split into two and The Hunger Games is doing the same I think. So has Twilight. 

Better to have two or three 2 hour movies that have detail rather than a rushed movie all packed into one skipping over important scenes. 

True. 

I could say the same about this Spidey universe stuff. Better to flesh it out properly instead of making ~3 movies that leave you wanting more.


However, Sony is proving the don't have the best direction with Spiderman, like Fox is with X-men. Given I look forward to Spider-man 2. The first one (remake) wasn't the best, and infact are comparable to how horrible Hulk movies have been. (Which is sad, because Hulk was one of the best parts of Avengers)



 

Augen on 27 February 2014

I love the character, but transition to film has been poor thus far. The trilogy a decade ago felt cheap and cheesy and I came to hate just about every character due to poor casting and writing. Roughly the same level as those Fantastic Four films.

The reboot was flawed, but had potential as casting was decent even if writing had issues from older films in terms of tone. I'd put it at level of first Thor film.

I think they could finally make a good Spider-Man film with pieces they have and remind me why he was my favorite character growing up. I will reserve judgement on potential sequels until I have been able to see ASM2 this year.



jlmurph2 on 27 February 2014
pezus said:
jlmurph2 said:
pezus said:
jlmurph2 said:
brendude13 said:
I'm not exactly a fan, I didn't like the first one at all, but I don't see what the problem is.

Why does The Hobbit and The Hunger Games get a free pass?


Because they have source material with a definite ending already written. Same thing with Harry Potter and Twilight. They're not making up their own stories, they're getting them from the 100s of pages of source material. 

Doesn't change the fact that all of them stretched the material into more movies than the number of books. The Hobbit is a single, 300 page book (don't remember the exact length) stretched into 3 annual films. The HP book was split into two and The Hunger Games is doing the same I think. So has Twilight. 

Better to have two or three 2 hour movies that have detail rather than a rushed movie all packed into one skipping over important scenes. 

True. 

I could say the same about this Spidey universe stuff. Better to flesh it out properly instead of making ~3 movies that leave you wanting more.

Cant really say the same because without direct source material (book) we as fans have no idea if they're just trying to milk the universe or not. With those books mentioned we know where it would be a good place to stop and start another movie.



AZWification on 27 February 2014

Hooray. This means that Activision will bring us a crappy Spiderman game every year.. Time to celebrate, guys!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network
lewis-k on 27 February 2014

just gotta milk the franchise for all its worth don't you sony



NintendoPie on 27 February 2014
007BondAgent said:


Why not?

Spiderman movies are always a box office success

Not when they are released every year. There's a thing called saturation.

Sony Pictures should look into it. (For how many years is this happening?)



think-man on 27 February 2014

It's safe that's why, Spiderman is always going to make money they don't have to worry about it being a flop cause parents will always take their children along to watch these kinds of movies.



 

How to Make friends In Dark Souls 3

Cj2i3 on 27 February 2014

Milk Spider-Man less and Resident Evil more Sony.




Oh wait, they did. Damn.



MoHasanie on 27 February 2014

That's dumb. People will get sick of it fast. Oh well, each movie will earn Sony half a billion dollars so that will certainly help their bad financial results. Why aren't they doing another James Bond movie?



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54