Lane's Favorite Directors

Lane

Alright fine, ya sold me. lol!

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

Quality over quantity, Lois. Quality over Quantity.

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

Yeah but with Marvel releasing 2 movies for every one of DC's, that doesn't help things... -_-

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

The 00's might have been Marvel's decade, but DC will reign supreme in this decade, believe me :D

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

Wonder Woman and Justice League now please. That's all I ask.

I'd even take them before a new Superman movie... just to see something new. :)

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Lane

"a Wonder Woman movie"... God I hope so (squeals like a little school girl)! XD

I can agree with you on this, Supes. - The Green Lantern is one movie I'm really looking forward to! :) (mainly because its DC and we really need to start whooping Marvel's ass here).

Someone said on youtube about how Marvel keeps kicking DC's ass and all I could say was "they may be kicking ass but half their movies suck" :P

Plus, The Dark Knight kind of kicked Marvel's ass all by itself. Go Bats! ^_^

And thanks...... that Daveactor really gets on my nerves. He really is an actor, for sure. All talk and nothin' else. Its people like that who make me not want to say anything at all cuz they're only interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. When people can talk to me reasonably (like you) then I'm down for whatever yo, lol.

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

And all of that leading into a kick ass JLA movie :D

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Dan

Ok, we can agree to disagree :D. I do like how we can have civilized discussions on here, unlike how some people behave on this site. You're definitely one of the better, new people to join us.

My other big hope is for The Green Lantern. Reynolds is such a perfect fit for a comic book type movie, and I'm sure he'll do Hal Jordan justice. It's a trippy concept, going with a Lantern movie, as he's a galactic police officer of sorts, and his universe is populated by strange creatures, but if they pull it off, it'll make for a great comic book Sci-Fi movie :)

Plus, if it's as successful as they feel it will be (since they are prepping the sequel as we speak), it may lead into a Flash movie, and possibly a Wonder Woman movie :D

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

Well, that's the other thing I can't get past... Its not for sure but Lizard might've been in SM4 had Raimi stuck with it, so I feel the reboot isn't so much an apology but more of a "slap in the face" to the work Sam was doing with the next film. Plus, the fact that we saw Connors in the other films as a different actor and now its changed for the reboot doesn't impress me. I'm just against "full re-castings," period.

Also, I might add that I don't know how they're gonna replace J. Jonah. Believe it or not, that is one of my biggest concerns about the reboot. I don't care who they cast there is NO one (and I mean no one) who will be able to play that role better than J.K. Simmons ----- No one. And since he hasn't been confirmed to appear and there's been no news on the character at ALL, that's a really bad sign. The new reboot just looks too "Spectacular Spider-man" or whatever that newest cartoon was with Peter all tall and retardedly skinny looking which I'm not a fan of.

I respect your opinion, but I really have no high hopes for this reboot. While I feel it'll make money simply because its Spider-man and will have that name attached to the film, I just don't think it'll be as successful as Raimi's version was (and he brought in a LOT of money for that studio just with the first film alone). I'm actually kind of hoping it bombs and that its not the surprise hit The Karate Kid reboot was just so that evil part of me can say "You got exactly what you deserved, Sony."

Now, please revert all movie rights back to Marvel. End comment. :P

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

I did find that odd, as well. Why continue to hint at a certain villain, and never give it to us? Ah well.

I don't hold the same feelings over the reboot, and actually look forward to it, since I enjoyed (500) Days of Summer, and find that Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield are not only better actors then Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, but easier on the eyes as well. Plus they are giving us Lizard right off the bat, so it's like an apology in my eyes for only teasing about him before.

And while I felt Superman Returns wasn't bad (Routh made an honorable attempt), I'm really psyched for this re-do as well with the team up of Zack Snyder and Christopher Nolan. Like Nolan's Batman trilogy, I feel this will be the Superman we've always wanted :D

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

I heard someone say in a comment on an IGN article about SM3 or 4 that his vision for the "first" Spider-man trilogy was to have Dr. Connors turn into The Lizard by the third film and have him be the main villian there. And that there was also a missed opportunity in SM2 to show the symbiote in space while introducing John Jameson. I agree with both those points. Personally, it made no sense to me how Raimi introduced Connors in #2 without having him mutate by #3... because then it was rumored that his character would've been brought back for #4 but then... he wasn't going to be the main villian even then?

That was really the only thing I didn't understand. Raimi has said in the past that The Lizard was always not only one of his, but fans favorite characters as well. So to not make him one of the first villians didn't seem like he knew how he wanted to show that transformation happen (or maybe wasn't ready?) Either way, had that idea happened for the 3rd film over the 15 minute Venom as Brock screen time, I think it would've cemented those films as not only one of the best comic book trilogies, but one of the best ones of all-time. So in that sense, I do blame Raimi for not making that happen. But the rest was all on Sony. I can see why he would've been hesitant to work with them again as he has expressed his views on studio interference in the past. Ironic that during a time when he was trying to avoid it the most, the studio still burned him.

As for @CBF, I read his comments on that SM4 article and he seems to have a different view than me calling Raimi "selfish" about who he wanted or didn't want in the SM films. In my opinion, the only thing he's selfish of is not wanting anyone but himself to have total control over a project that HE's directing. Which to me, is completely understandable. I can't fault him for not wanting to involve the studio after what they did with Spider-man 3.

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

TheREALsupes
I suppose. I'm not as passionate on the subject as some (@CBF and yourself), but I can see why as fans you guys would be up in arms over how that all went down. From the bit I do know of Spiderman with watching TAS, Venom was a cool character, sure (although Carnage is cooler), but his entire presence in Spiderman 3 was pretty lame. I'll admit, I too was swept up by the idea of that villain being in the movie, but then when I saw it, and everyone was acting like whiney little bitches (the dance sequence was groan inducing), and them retconning the 1st movie in turn ruining it for me, it brought the whole series down for me. I see that the 3rd was ruined by politics, and that's a shame. As I said, #2 remains decent, and I can watch it without seeing the other two and it works by itself.

And Bruce Willis can do almost anything and I'll like it. Yippie Ki-yay, motherf*ckers!

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

And that's really the only downside to suspense films... knowing what's gonna happen and not being surprised when you see it again.

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Lane

Well, as I said, I love Unbreakable, too, and that one never gets old for me. :)

Not to mention I'm in love with Bruce Willis, lmao.

Really, you never heard about any of that? The story goes that Sam Raimi never wanted Venom in Spider-man 3 but the studio forced his hand because they knew he was the villian who "the fans wanted the most." However, Raimi was unfamiliar with Venom's character and didn't believe he'd be able to translate him well on screen because of it (which he was right and the studio didn't listen). He was originally JUST gonna go with Sandman, Harry as the New Goblin, and/or another lesser villian for the film to be introduced near the end as the set-up to be the main one in the 4th film, but because the studio was unsure of where the series would go after the 3rd film, assuming it to be the last, they pushed to have Venom in the film, so Raimi was basically forced to put a character in his own movie who he didn't even want to begin with at the last minute. And with all that pressure, he was set-up and expected to fail.

Now, tell me... if you were Raimi, would you want to work with Sony again after that? When he declared he couldn't release SM4 in time because of a "lack of creative ideas" or something to that effect, the studio fired him and moved the release date for the reboot up a year earlier than what Raimi's version would've been. After everything that happened with Spider-man 3, doesn't that seem a little suspect as sending a big "F you" to Raimi?

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

I enjoyed Army of Darkness because of Bruce Campbell. He knows the right amount of campy-ness to get the biggest laughs out of me, and the undead thing was always hilarious in that series, so I'll give you that.

I'm not fully aware of the politics behind the Spiderman movies, but #2 was decent.

The Sixth Sense was good the 1st time I watched it. After I knew the twist, it quickly lost its charm for me. Maybe M Night will recover one day, but it's not this year, that's for sure.

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

Raimi gave me Spider-man (something I'd been waiting for for too long a time). That was really all I needed. I had seen Evil Dead and Army of Darkness, but not really til after he went from cult horror director status to big-time movie director. The way he brought Spider-man to the screen was exactly the way I had envisioned it should be. And when I found out he was a huge fan of the character himself, it meant that much more to me that he'd put that much time, effort, and dedication into something he loved and knew others loved too who wanted to see the movie get done just as much as him. I'm really not excited about this reboot. I'm still bitter about the new cast and the fact that the studio hung Raimi out to dry after it was THIER FAULT Spider-man 3 failed with the fans.

It was kind of the same thing that happened with Superman Returns... the "let's all blame the director" excuse cuz we know we can get away with it doesn't fly with me. I don't put up with that BS. I love Singer almost as much as Raimi so I wasn't about to tolerate any of that crap from the greedy people playing the blame game.

As for M. Night, you can't deny that when he first started out, The Sixth Sense was a major accomplishment and something that had never been done before. The guy had a style all his own and he used that to get ahead. Unfortunately, that hasn't really worked to his advantage, but it doesn't mean he can't make a comeback someday. And I'm sure when he does, he'll hit the ball out of the park with his next best thing.

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

Whether their movies were good or not, I still didn't care for their styles, really. We all have our picks and chooses, and those two just don't do it for me.

2 years agoby @dan1Flag

Lane

Raimi and Shyamalan are both good directors regardless of how people feel about a movie(s) of theirs. Raimi got slammed for Spider-man 3 when it wasn't even his fault and M. Night is hit and miss. I love Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, enjoyed Signs, Lady in the Water, and haven't seen the rest. One bad movie doesn't make you bad and being remembered for your worst doesn't make you terrible, either. People may hate on their movies, but they'll always remember the ones they accomplished something on.

2 years agoby @lane1Flag

Dan

Hmmm... Raimi...nah. M Night, ugh... the rest, yep, I agree with that.

2 years agoby @dan1Flag