No, Spiderman got his defining moment. The key aspects of his origin were there and maintained. Although the points regarding what was missed or gotten wrong (webshooters, et al.) are well taken, the truth is that they aren't so integral to the key elements as are the death of Uncle Ben, "great power...", wrestling and the moral of the story.
The main problem with MJ is that MJ the character in the movie is really more an amalgam of Gwen Stacy and MJ. Case in point: Goblin, the bridge, girlfriend tossed off the bridge... sound familiar? All that was missing was the "snap". So, looks are MJ, but character is Gwen.
I'm glad they didn't have the snap. Very glad.
Similar point, Kypton of the movie is a cold, "authortarian-by-council" society vs. the technological utopia of the comics of the time. I could argue comic Krypton is integral to Superman, but distilled to a nutshell, it's irrelevant. It's simply not key. However, being of my generation, my biggest beef with the movie when it came out was "where's Superboy?" Superboy was a key aspect of Superman for me.
I didn't really miss Superboy at all to be honest. With Krypton it's funny. Because watching it as a kid I didn't really see Krypton of the movies as having any negative aspect to it, it was just alien I guess. Same with the movies take on Jor-El which I didn't see as God figure or a manipulative one but rather kind of ..oh I don't know. I guess sort of like a floating head Obi-Wan or something. The wizard in the secret cave.
It was only when I got older that I began to see the movies take on Jor-El and Krypton a bit of a clearer light. I still like the whole crystaline design and I think it's a very heartfelt rendition of the goodbye/rocket launch scene (I have a soft spot for nearly any incarnation of that moment in any version of Superman). But philosophically there's something just not quite right. It's not as extreme as Byrne's Krypton where you're practically cheering for it to blow up. For me STAS had it right on the money with Krypton. You feel genuinely bad for these people who achived so much only to lose it *all* in the end.
In Hulk, we've got a concatenation of various origins (reconned, revised and televised) and no clear statement of his origins and motivations. Why? Because a very basic point was missed. Bruce, the coward, weakling turned hero for one instant in his life and was cursed to be the Hulk as a result. Why they missed this? Just a huge lack of understanding of the character.
There's a huge lack of understanding of the character in the comics as well. The Hulk movie was just long winded and pretentious garbage. My god if you can't have a little action and fun with a movie about a green monster what the heck can you have fun with? I watched that and a re-airing of the pilot for Bill Bixby series and despite all it's flaws the pilot was still the much more satisfying viewing experience. But maybe that's because I've always thought the "Hulk Smash!" version was the way to go. I thought that was interesting. A creature of anger who also has this childlike, gentle side to him that you see glimpses of just before he reverts back. I think the main thing they need to understand is that it's not Jekyl/Hyde with superpowers. The Hulk is heroic in his way but he is a superhero for whom his brain and brawn are seperated with only Banners conscience as the tether between them. The whole child abuse and MPD angle are just overkill. He becomes the Hulk because he gets mad and is loaded with gamma-rays! Who the heck can't relate to getting stress-out or mad? Do we really need the child abuse explanation for it? It always seemed pretty straightfoward to me. The price of the Hulks power is that Banner intellect receeds.
Although I wouldn't count this one as a favorite, the Fantastic Four flick was still enjoyable enough. Tying Doom's origin into theirs wasn't particularly inspired, but at least the space/explorer/cosmic rays aspects remained. Ben and Johnny's bull-baiting was there. Etc.
I still haven't watched this one. Their need do put Doom in a green trenchcoat and to that liquid metal thing with him really turned me off. I know they were afraid of Darth Vader comparrisons and I like Vader alot (to me the prequels are little more than filmed fanfic) but you know what? Screw him! Give Doom a big cape and big armor the way God and The King intended!
Another movie I particularly enjoyed was the 80's Flash Gordon. Once again, the key elements were there. Plot to destroy Earth, Flash, Dale and Zarkov zip to Mongo. Various swashbuckling and Aura eye-candy ensues, Flash overthrows Ming, unites Mongo. Yeah, lots of 80's mentality, but still, worked out.
This movie is weird but you're right it does have this strange charm to it. But it is still very weird in some respects as a Flash Gordon movie. Incidentally, Alex Ross is on record as saying this is his all time favorite film.
Captain America isn't even a movie as far as I'm concerned. That was a movie that was ashamed about being a superhero movie.
..and now we often have superhero comics that are ashamed of being superhero comics. I still think a good Cap movie is possible. I'd almost being inclined to have the first film entirely set in WW II and then end it with Cap being put in suspended animation in order to have him in modern times for the sequel where he could hook up with SHIELD and meet Sharon Carter and Sam Jones. (Okay, so I grew up on Kirby's 70's Cap run.)
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM