ParkWilliams

@siezetheidea I also don't see how the success of Matt Damon has anything to do with another actor filling in the same archetype (though a different character). That's like saying they shouldn't have made any Bond movies after Sean Connery quit because he was so popular in the role. It doesn't make sense.

@siezetheidea You're logic is greatly flawed. First of all, of course this character exemplifies the characteristics of Jason Bourne, that's kind of the point here. By defying those in control and uncovering the truth, Bourne has opened the way for others to fight the system as well. It's been obvious from the start the direction they are taking Renner's character, at least in part. It's the whole reason that it's still being called a Bourne movie regardless of Jason Bourne's absence. I really don't see the logic in claiming that it won't carry on the epic, nor that it shouldn't be released. The original trilogy is so loosely based on the novels that any complaint about it not being a proper adaptation is moot, because the film series has already broken away from that greatly.

Cautiously optimistic. The cast looks impressive, but it's hard to see story not suffer without Damon's character. He really was the driving force in the first trilogy, and he was the vehicle through which the audience experienced the film. I don't know how well they'll be able to capture that in this one, but I hope so. I'm sure it will be a half-decent action film regardless, but the first three went far beyond that.

@skid-marx I?

@skid-marx I never even noticed that. Haha. Let's try this again then:

Lennie James ---> Snatch

Batman Forever ---> Tommy Lee Jones

Pandorum ---> Dennis Quaid

Doubt

In no particular order:
-The Walking Dead
-Fringe
-Alcatraz (just started but seems extremely promising)
-Community
-Mad Men

Maybe now he'll allow the Star Wars franchise to be pried from his overly possessive fingers and let other, more talented young sci-fi filmmakers take a crack at what could have been a much, much better series.

It also says that Bone was released in 2011. No. . . no it wasn't.

@skid-marx N?

@skid-marx S?

@skid-marx R

@skid-marx S?

@skid-marx R?

@RENO-CONRINTHOS Spider-man IS an orphan. Even in his debut in Amazing Fantasy #15 he was an orphan raised by his aunt and uncle. Also, they've hinted from very early on that the reboot is drawing much of it's inspiration from the Ultimate Spiderman comic books, which are one of the furthest from the original spiderman origin. This would make sense seeing as they're starting the story with him still in high school, which is when a majority of the Ultimate comics takes place. Sam Raimi's first Spiderman film was actually very close to the early Spider-man origin story, aside from cutting some key characters (such as Gwen Stacy, who isn't introduced until Spiderman 3) the original film only makes minor changes, and Spiderman 2 is still one of the best Marvel superhero films made thus far. Spiderman 3 was the only real deal breaker in the series, and even that was still enjoyable on a surface level, despite being a pretty bad Spiderman story.

@SpaceCowboy R

Eight-Legged Freaks