Spider-Man: No Way Home.

[bazzabear]

I've been considering this but I kind of feel they won't have aged well. I mean most of them weren't even great in the first place. Only one I'd really want to see again is Spiderman 2.

I dunno. The first one had a couple of good points.

 

[chroniclard]

Maguire's Spider Man 1 and 2 were brilliant, the less said about 3 the better. Far better than either of the Tom Holland films.

Legit this. Those are the two best Spider Man films. I liked the others as well but those are far and way the best.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Yeah, those are my favourites as well although the wife disagrees. I think women warm towards Tom more as he's more conventionally attractive and his nerdy side isn't as serious.

 

[kakarott]

Maguire was just too dorky looking, put me off. Garfield somewhat matched the 90s cartoon Peter Parker which is why I preferred him over Maguire.

And that dance in part 3 was so cringe.

 

[Shamikebab]

I dunno. The first one had a couple of good points.

The first 1/2 of the very first one was great. The second half was pretty pants imo. The second one was good...the third was abomination.

 

[SPG]

Let's be honest.... All of them have been bad unless your < 22 years age. In which case I will tell you the cartoon is much better.

 

[bazzabear]

The first 1/2 of the very first one was great. The second half was pretty pants imo. The second one was good...the third was abomination.

I think you might have missed my point. Along with Kirsten's.

 

[theone8181]

I think you might have missed my point. Along with Kirsten's.

I got your point(s).

 

[Malevolence]

And that dance in part 3 was so cringe.

Yet strangely, not as 'cringe' as somebody who isn't a tweenage valley girl using that word in that context.

 

[Greboth]

I wasn't really looking forward to phase 4 but after catching Chang Chi the other day and this trailer I'm quite looking forward to it now.

Though I stand by my initial concern for this film, that it's going to do a Spiderman 3 with too many bad guys to make a cohesive story. Though for this they don't need to do the origin of any of them so that'll save some time.

 

[MissChief]

Is Willem Defoe playing Norman Osborne again?

It looks like he is according to IMDB which is great news.

 

[PlacidCasual]

Though I stand by my initial concern for this film, that it's going to do a Spiderman 3 with too many bad guys to make a cohesive story. Though for this they don't need to do the origin of any of them so that'll save some time.

I hope the defining difference is that because Maguire and Garfield have already been well introduced you're not required to set up the other protaganists backstories. They are just bad guys and we know their motivations.

 

[kakarott]

I wasn't really looking forward to phase 4 but after catching Chang Chi the other day and this trailer I'm quite looking forward to it now.

Though I stand by my initial concern for this film, that it's going to do a Spiderman 3 with too many bad guys to make a cohesive story. Though for this they don't need to do the origin of any of them so that'll save some time.

I hope it's 3 hours long.

 

[kakarott]

Can't keep up with the amount of TV Spots dropping.

 

[SixTwoSix]

I hope it's 3 hours long.

Just personal opinion but i'd take 90 minutes of well written story, action and characters over 3 hours of a movie being drawn for the sake of it.

 

[kakarott]

Just personal opinion but i'd take 90 minutes of well written story, action and characters over 3 hours of a movie being drawn for the sake of it.

There's no way you can conclude that film in 90 mins with multiple characters and build their story to an extent.

 

[SixTwoSix]

There's no way you can conclude that film in 90 mins with multiple characters and build their story to an extent.

I agree and it was a comment on movies in general, just because a film might be long doesn't mean its good quality. TV shows especially pad out so much inane content these days just to seem like there's more to them.

 

[Shamikebab]

I agree and it was a comment on movies in general, just because a film might be long doesn't mean its good quality. TV shows especially pad out so much inane content these days just to seem like there's more to them.

I think it's the complete opposite actually. Shows used to be 20-24 episodes a season with so much filler it was unreal, now I don't think there is a single show that long?

 

[SixTwoSix]

I think it's the complete opposite actually. Shows used to be 20-24 episodes a season with so much filler it was unreal, now I don't think there is a single show that long?

Yeah most runs are 10/12 episodes these days, I just mean that within that run time, whether it's 6 eps, 12 or 24, there is a horrid amount of padding just to hit a runtime or episode count.

I think as I get older and value my time more I have less patience for content for the sake of it. I'm also acutely more aware of it with my limited viewing time these days.

EDIT: One of the strengths of Mandalorian was the episodes were as long as they needed to be to tell the stories, anything from 30 minutes to 45 iirc

 

[VincentHanna]

Yeah most runs are 10/12 episodes these days, I just mean that within that run time, whether it's 6 eps, 12 or 24, there is a horrid amount of padding just to hit a runtime or episode count.

I think as I get older and value my time more I have less patience for content for the sake of it. I'm also acutely more aware of it with my limited viewing time these days.

EDIT: One of the strengths of Mandalorian was the episodes were as long as they needed to be to tell the stories, anything from 30 minutes to 45 iirc

That's the benefit of any show that's on a streaming service to be honest.

Mandalorian wasn't the first show to have different length episodes.