BE LEARY OF SPIDER-MAN NEWS

I'm still not too thrilled about this. But it's things like that that could begin to pique my interest. It would be great for Leary to get a solid role in high-profile blockbuster.

First casting news about this I'm not completely on board with. Of course the only things, stand-up aside, that I've seen Leary on are The Ref and Two If By Sea. So I've only seen Leary play Leary.

Gotta say even as a fan of Leary that this isn't the best of choices. Jim Beaver (Bobby on Supernatural) was up for the role, and would've been a much better choice at playing the surrogate father to Spidey after Uncle Ben's death. But that's how I feel based on the comics, don't know how they're playing it in the script.

Still, can't believe how a film that felt like a massive cash grab seems to be shaping up so well. I've done a 180 on the reboot since they first announced it.

Taking Rescue Me into consideration, Denis Leary has this role down. Great choice.

Denis Leary was great in...Demolition Man, but that was years ago. He should be...Perfectly cast, as a younger George Stacy

Powers Boothe was robbed.

Leary will be terrific.

Funny that he kinda looks like Dafoe.

A good actor being cast is good news to me.

sweet. always enjoy seeing him on screen.

Demolition Man, The Thomas Crown Affair and Rescue Me would like a word with you.

That being said, jamming this thing with names is starting to feel off. I love Leary, don't get me wrong but why such "heavy hitters" for what ought to be bit parts.

To generate more interest in a movie that shouldn't be happening for one thing.

But why would Captain Stacy be a bit part? For all we know, he has a lot to do in this new script.

Also, when did Denis Leary, Martin Sheen, Sally Field and Rhys Ifans become "big hitters"? These are good, well-tested actors, but not some all-star blockbuster cast. Hell, James Cromwell played Stacy Senior in SPIDER-MAN 3 for all of two minutes, and he's got an Oscar nomination and a good twenty years of scene-stealing on Leary.

Of these I've only seen Demolition Man. And if that wasn't Leary playing Leary I don't know what is.

That's why it was in quotes. Well rounded, hard working actors rounding out the smaller parts in a superhero film just seems a bit odd.

But as was just said, generating interest in a film that ought not to happen.


For sure. He's definitely come into his own as an actor. Thomas Crown Affair fleshed him out well and Rescue Me cemented him

It's really shaping up to be a good cast. Depending on which story they are telling, Capt Stacy could have a big and emotional part in this. Or it could be a totally new story.

There were a lot of mistakes made in Raimi's films, especially with Peter's storyline. Spider-Man 3 was an absolute disaster and just about makes me hungry for something different. Considering the cast that's been assembled so far, I think the reboot at least deserves attention instead of outright dismissal.

Are these mistakes you refer to logic/screenwriting mistakes or "OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE PETER IS SO MOPEY" mistakes? Because I don't want to turn this into yet another Raimi defence thread, but....I can't think of a way to finish this sentence.

Fuck it, I totally want to defend Raimi. The number of Kevin Feiges coming out of the woodwork to moan about/dismiss his Spidey films is multiplying at an alarming rate.

Oh, believe me, I despise Peter dancing on the streets with his emo haircut in Spiderman 3 as much as the next guy, but the mistakes that I mentioned there are more basic than that. As much as I liked the first two films for the spectacle, there were many mistakes in terms of screenwriting that this reboot could fix to present a truly great Spiderman movie, IMO.

The mayor of tit town is George Stacey? I'm on board. Leary is an out of left field choice for such a nice guy character. I like that. I also hope they don't shoe horn in his death in this one, and just opt to have him hang around for a few films with a fairly large role, and not just cameos, like what with happened to poor Dylan Baker. That or just take the new film series in a new direction and only have a loose continuity with the comics. I'm talking Gwen taking over the Mary Jane role type of loose continuity.

That would make me happy, and have thousands of guys screaming over the fact that the movies aren't following the comics. Even on a basic structure.

Yeah, you're so totally wrong there. Would love to hear some details of these screenwriting mistakes, though, because SPIDER-MAN 3's fuckups aside I've a feeling that they're largely going to revolve around Raimi's version of Peter not being the version you want.

And there was already a "truly great" Spider-Man movie. It's called SPIDER-MAN 2. It's the best superhero movie ever made, you should probably see it.

No point arguing with you if that's how you work, Andrew. I can already see that you're the guy who can't stand dissenting views and, instead of engaging honestly, just insists that everyone who disagrees with you is totally wrong. For the record, though, I have seen Spiderman 2, and I liked it enough, but it's in no way a masterpiece and could have used some work.

If you'd like to hear the mistakes, though, I'll have to take some time to compile a list, because from Gwen Stacy's inclusion to the handling of the storylines of other characters, it's going to be pretty massive.

Very far from the truth. Are you the guy that leaps to unfounded conclusions when someone disagrees with you?

Leary was great as the benevolent NYPD detective in The Thomas Crown Affair; bet he can pull it off here.

Wow, how engaging of you. All I'm asking is for you to expand on what you're claiming.

Here's my part: the dancing and the club fighting are completely, utterly, totally in character for Peter in SM3. It's EXACTLY how a huge dork like him would behave if he suddenly got an injection of arrogance and aggression. He wouldn't suddenly become suave or cool, just a skeevy asshole who thinks he's way hotter than he is.

Also, SPIDER-MAN 3 is littered with silly little errors. Including Gwen Stacy in a bit part isn't one of them - just because she's named "Gwen Stacy" doesn't mean Raimi or anyone else had to follow the comic-book canon, or even develop her beyond the plot device she was intended as. To claim otherwise isn't legit criticism, it's fan bitching.

Tell me more about how SPIDER-MAN 2 "needs work".

I'm being told that I'm flat-out wrong with little elaboration. I think that goes beyond simply disagreeing with someone and then engaging that opposing viewpoint honestly. It's certainly not an unfounded conclusion if it's what he has shown me and, until I see otherwise, I see no reason to believe that he's not the type who assumes that everyone who disagrees with his viewpoints simply need to See The Light.

What a piece of work. Yeah, I can tell where this conversation is going here: I'm being described by someone as supposedly enlightened as you are because you're dishonestly presenting only two possible viewpoints with little wiggle room in-between. I'm "fan bitching" because Raimi didn't follow the established canon for Stacy and not because her inclusion was ultimately pointless (I suppose if you were dying to see more shrill damsels in distress and hollow characterizations, it was a joy though) in terms of basic screenwriting and represents all of the bloat that so plagues Spiderman 3, from EDDIE BROCK RIVALRY TO VENOM TO THE SANDMAN TO GWEN STACY TO HARRY OSBORN AS THE GOBLIN... *deep breath*

Sorry Draco, but this made me scratch my head too. But if you're up to compiling that list, I'd like to see it.

Alleged basic screenwriting mistakes aside, I will unabashedly throw in my lot with the Raimi Defense Squad. Apart from the CGI, I don't even think the first Spider-Man has really aged badly. For me, the Raimi Spider-Man films are the antidote to what I think is a trend to redefine the word "hero" to mean "antihero" in recent media.

ETA:

THIS. A MILLION TIMES THIS. I thought I was the only person who had this thought about "Emo Parker." Also, those scenes made me literally laugh out loud, which rarely happens to me during films. I loved how the Saturday Night Strut was a reversal of the Bacharach scene in SM2.

She's a hot blonde who turns Peter's head and makes him act like a dick. It's not a pointless inclusion at all, given that Peter's disintegrating relationship with MJ is the central pillar of the film. If you wanted to bitch about the perfunctory Sandman/Venom team-up or Spidey letting Sandman go after his crime spree or EXPOSITION BUTLER I'd be right there with you, but to rail against Gwen's very inclusion smacks more of upset at how a beloved character was handled than any legit beef.

And shit, if you can't handle someone saying "you're wrong" during a discussion without getting grouchy about that person's poor attitude, you're probably on the wrong boards.

EDIT: You actaully edited your post to include "What a piece of work". *Really*?

An SM3's problem wasn't "bloat", as such. It was two or three drafts away from nailing the pace and dynamics and juggling act of all the plot strands, but it could've absolutely worked with the same runtime and the same characters. it just needed some serious refining of the clunkier plot points.

Not to derail the thread(although that appears to have happened already) but Superman: The Movie would like to have a word with you.

I like this casting for some reason. Romita always drew Captain Stacy like a butch version of Aunt May. Leary's face shape actually still works.

Yeah, I'm with you here. But I'd personally love to see all those deleted scenes and alternate scenes they had to see if they had actually worked in the film or not.

To be honest though, Sandman's back story and relationship with Penny is dreadful, too simple and melodramatic. The kind of written plot point that screams "please feel sorry for me!"

Before any of that he was already terrific in the underrated Monument Ave.

As far as his "Leary playing Leary" period goes, he was a genuinely scary and effective villain in Judgment Night. He riffed on his stage persona, sure. But it's still a memorable character.

If they go with the "nice guy" approach to Stacy, it will be an interesting change of pace.

A good model for the Captain Stacy character could be Frank Lundy from Dexter. Just saying...

"Spider-Man 3" was full of lazy writer tactics as it feebly attempted to juggle having too many characters. For example...

- The retcon of Sandman being the one who killed Uncle Ben, in a cheap, forced, unconvincing, sloppy attempt to give his character more weight.

- Sandman being presumed dead for a long time just to get him out of the way so the movie could waste screen time on other characters.

- Harry having amnesia just to get him out of the way so the movie could waste screen time on other characters.

- A butler who had never been more than brief, mild comic relief suddenly delivering key exposition dialog.

- Venom convincing Sandman to team up with him with all the naturalness and plausibility of a character in a laughably cheesy Saturday morning cartoon.

- Parker and Mary Jane being much more annoying together and acting stupider than they had in any of the previous movies...

- Peter inexplicably thinks it would be cool to kiss another girl as Spider-Man the way he kissed Mary Jane.

- Mary Jane whines at him incessantly with completely unwarranted paranoia as she's jealous of Gwen Stacy.

- After she's furious with him, Peter is dumb enough to think all will be forgiven if he fucking proposes.

- The excruciatingly lame scene at the end with Sandman and Harry was a travesty. The extreme close-ups on Tobey's crying face. Sandman and Spider-Man crying together as Spider-Man says he forgives him. I shuddered in fear as I thought they'd actually hug.

I thought the scenes where he was strutting down the street dancing and the scene where he dances with Gwen Stacy were some of the few scenes in the whole movie that did work and were in character. That doesn't mean the movie isn't still riddled with terrible writing choices. There are your mistakes.

And to all the people talking about not being sure if Leary can play anything other than an obnoxious, loudmouth, smartass, doesn't anyone remember "The Sandlot"? Surely I'm not the only person here who has seen that movie. I understand if people forget he was in it, though. He was only on screen for something like 5 minutes, but as the kid's busy, but well-meaning stepfather, he did a good job of playing a straight arrow, nice guy sort of character.

All this. ^

Contrivances, coincidences, bloat and dropped balls (felt like 2 movies smashed into one with missing parts and rushed others). And I liked "hip" Peter.

Just to point this out: the basic storytelling mistakes Draco mentions are in the first two films. I think it's generally accepted that SM3 is a mess, though people in the minority, like me, still thoroughly enjoy it.

On topic: I'm surprised no one has mentioned Suicide Kings as some good Leary support work. Though I haven't seen that flick in a while, I recall really liking his acting.

Yeah. Leary is the best thing about Suicide Kings. The not-very-good movie is worth watching just for him.

The scene in Judgement Night when Jeremy Piven tries to cut a deal with Leary is just about the best acting I've seen either of them do. Come to think of it, Cuba Gooding Jr. and Emilio Estevez weren't bad in that movie either. And a good soundtrack. Holy shit, now I'm gonna have to Netflix that damn movie.

Though Leary wasn't bad in The Sandlot or in... brace yourselves for this... Operation Dumbo Drop.

I was completely against this movie before seeing The Social Network; now I think that it will be well done, but aimed at a younger demographic than myself.

Waitaminnit. Stone is Gwen? Did I miss that news from before? They cast another stunner redhead as the blonde Gwen and not as MJ? Again???

Emma was born to play MJ. WTF

Good to know there's another fan of that underrated thriller on these boards.

Cheers.

(The scene you are referencing is one of the key movie moments of the 90s for me)

She's a natural blonde.