THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN post release discussion - Page 25

Yeah, that's some motherfuckin' infringement right there.

I think you have a point there.  https://www.google.com/search?q=ultimate+spider+man+electro&safe=off&hl=en&rlz=1C1SNNT_enUS397&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=KnxvUZy9CYOm8ATPsoGIDw&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQsAQ&biw=1304&bih=683

But, would I be wrong in assuming the "hooded costume" for Black Lightning was kind of a one-off?  I'm not very familiar with the character, but doing an image search, the only time I found him hooded was on that particular cover, wearing what appears to be a striped track suit.  Maybe he was undercover.  I may be wrong, and I'm sure someone will tell me if I am.  :)

Obviously this can't be the case, because that cartoon is AWFUL, and Spectacular Spiderman is much better.

 

Speaking of which I think that shows Electro design is the best one that still kind of spirtually honors the orginial look.

Whats wrong with the Ultimate Spiderman cartoon? Is there something wrong with me, that I really enjoy it?

The tone is just too juvenile - Spider-Man should be a goofball at times sure, but this show goes too far. It seems to have an ADD mentality. It seems like we're not supposed to take any of it seriously - like there's no real stakes. I think a superhero show can and should be fun, but there also should be some drama and tension. U S-M is just interested in setting up unfunny gags, with a quick 'learn to work together' lesson at the end.

 

Spider-Man never needed a motorcycle to get around - it seems like they're just trying to sell a toy.

 

The late, great Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon had much better action, and was much, much closer to the source material.

Edited by grubstreeter - 4/18/13 at 8:24am

I was talking about the cartoon. It isn't a bad cartoon at all. It is very juvenile at times but still pretty well made.

I've only seen snippets of Ultimate cartoon honestly, but from what I have seen it has put me off.  It doesn't help that I'm a butt hurt Spectacular fan. 

The biggest problem with Spider-Man villains when it comes to film adaptations is that they're just not terribly cinematic. They're either boring sub-1950's atomic monster characters or "only in a comic book" types with arbitrary powers and hideously designed costumes.

I mean honestly, Green Goblin? Even Raimi's attempts to justify an unjustifiable concept fell flat once DaFoe showed up in what still stands as one of the worst supervillain costumes ever seen in the post-2000 superhero boom.

The thing that I think film makers miss about Spiderman's villains is that they are supposed to be absurd. I mean come on, Dr Octopus? Really? And Norman Osborn was so fucking crazy he thought dressing up as a Green Goblin would made him look like a BadAss.

 

"Man" (he thought to himself) "when I fly over Times Square on my little Goblin Glider and toss some Pumpkin Bombs around, the Chicks are gonna get WET!"

An important reminder: The Joker's gimmick is that he's an EVIL CLOWN.

An EVIL CLOWN.

EVIL. CLOWN.

Are you trying to give me nightmares?

 

Can't sleep, clowns will eat me. 

And his whole look is infinitely more relatable, pliable, and culturally transitive than a guy in a generic rubber monster costume on a jet glider. The Joker's chosen look has some psychological and philosophical credibility (which is more about him being a "wild card" than "evil clown") as it relates to what he's about and the universe he occupies and it carries well to film. Green Goblin? Not so much.
Edited by JacknifeJohnny - 4/19/13 at 10:53pm

The problem with this is that it isn't really true (though I do believe that Raimi was well aware that the Green Goblin is ridiculous, but never managed the balancing act) Yeah, of course these characters are silly, but superhero comics are soap operas for boys and we're meant to view the Green Goblin and assorted characters as a legitimate threat. This is no easy task for the people behind the Spider-Man films.
Edited by JacknifeJohnny - 4/19/13 at 11:19pm

Ahem....