The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board
Trivial Pursuits => Arts & Entertainment => Topic started by: pmcd9 on March 24, 2005, 05:25:57 am
-
I just read this story (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=794&ncid=790&e=10&u=/eo/20050323/en_movies_eo/16178) telling that Thomas Hayden Church has signed on as a villian in the next Spiderman movie. Mums the word on which villian he is to play. In my opinion it's a no brainer that Spidey's next foe should be The Lizard, but there is already an actor playing that role as introduced in the last movie. According to the Story...
When news of Church's casting hit the Web Tuesday, Spidey fans began spinning the possibilities of which foe he might play.
Chief on the wish list is Venom, Spider-Man's alien alter ego who emerges when Parker's new experimental suit goes haywire.
Other hotly rumored rogues include: Sandman, Electro, Scorpion, Carnage and Hobgoblin.
I hope it's not Venom. So far they have basically told the story from the beginning, it wouldn't make sense to jump 30 years ahead, at least it doesn't make sense to me. Oddly though, the other villian thats highest on my list behind The Lizard would have to be The Vulture and he's not even mentioned in the story. Sandman, Electro*, and Scorpion** are all second rate villians that Spidey can beat without trying. He can beat all three of those guys together without breaking a sweat. Carnage is a poor mans Venom and Hobgoblin is a poor mans Green Goblin so there's no way it will be any of them.
So who do you think it will be?
~Paul
* Might as well throw in the Shocker while your at it.
**Actually Scorpion is pretty tough, but he's too tied up with Jameson's all consuming hatred of Spiderman and the movie version of the Jameson character is not as evil or insane as the print version.
-
Good on Thomas Hayden Church. I was hoping his scene-stealing performance in Sideways would get him more work. He was the funniest thing on Wings.
-
I was hoping his scene-stealing performance in Sideways would get him more work.
I totally agree, he was great in Sideways, funny as all get out.
He was the funniest thing on Wings.
Everything about Wings was funny so that's really saying a lot.
~Paul
-
Hmmm, I dunno. It seemed pretty obvious that Hobgoblin was going to be there, but since he sucks, no sweat there. I actually really like Venom, and it would match up with the cartoon backstory if Jameson's son brought back the moon rock that would hold the symbiote that would attach to Eddie Brock. But the Lizard would be cool too, but the backstory seems a bit too close to Dr. Octopus (well-meaning scientist goes nuts) for them to bring him into the mix.
Whatever. If Spiderman 2 is any indication, 3 should be awesome, although, of course, past performance does not indicate, etc.
-
So why exactly hasn't anyone mentioned Mysterio?
-
Oh yeah Mysterio. I meant to mention Mysterio, but forgot. He's a great villian and Hollywood could really have a ball with his particular "powers." I was gonna say though that I didn't think they would hire a name star to play a character whose head is basically a huge crystal ball. Ya gotta admit, Mysterio's costume is righteously lame.
~Paul
-
I dunno, how is it less likely than a role where he's buried beneath lizard makeup or replaced by a CGI symbiote thing?
-
I dunno, how is it less likely than a role where he's buried beneath lizard makeup or replaced by a CGI symbiote thing?
Venom often "unmasks" when no innocents are around which could be a selling point for whoever they get to play the part. Supposedly the reason Spidey spent so much of 2 with his mask off was that Toby pitched a fit about not getting enough credit for the part since people could see him emote or tell him apart from the CGI.
He doesn't look like Eddie Brock at all. Plus that's a two-movie storyline right there, kind of like they're doing w/ Dark Phoenix in X-Men. I think that 3 could include Peter pissing off Eddie and finding the symbiote but Venom would have to wait until 4 to appear. And there's no Carnage without Venom.
I think Scorpion is too much like Doc Oc for the masses what with the prehensile cybernetic body part. He's not old enough to play Vulture and that would make the Aunt May sexual tension extra creepy. Guys like Shocker and Hydro just seem so low-rent for the movie.
The best suggestion I've heard thus far is Kraven, assuming he can do the accent.
-
KRAVEN THE MOTHERFUCKIN' HUNTER!
pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease make it Kraven the hunter.
Apparently there are 2 bad guys in this one and Black cat will likey show up.
They keep using Rhino and the Shocker in the videogames and I think that's where they'll stay.
Kraven is just the best in my humble opinion and although I would love to see a sandman, the cg would be fairly ridiculous and he's no more than a thug for storyline.
As much as I love the vulture, he's crap. "Oooh look at you, you fly and you're old. Please stop robbing the city."
Venom has story, mysterio would have a pretty good story to tell, hobgoblin would be interesting, but how about Scorpion? He's pretty cool, it would bring Jameson into the big picture and it would be a real fight worth watching.
So my vote is for scorpion and / or Kraven.
Whatever it is, it ought to be pretty neat. Maybe they could bring back Doc Ock and do that storyline where Aunt May marries him!
-
Expectations are high because the first movie was the best superhero movie ever until the second one topped it.*
I don't care who the villian is, I trust all the wonderful souls in Los Angeles who are responsibility for bringing us our entertainment. Bless you entertainment industry.
~Paul
*My opinion may be colored by the fact that I love Spiderman way more than any other superhero.
-
the second movie was absolutely terrible. the first one was all right, though.
-
Erggh, I actually wasn't that big a fan of the first one, but the second one blew my mind.
WHOA! Some people like certain movies, and other people don't!
-
If it were Mysterio they'd definitely redo the costume so you could see his eyes, like they did with Green Goblin. His PowerRanger mask had eye-holes that opened.
Rules for Superhero Movies
1. Don't show the villain's origin story. Often in the books they're just bad guys with a weird angle. There's no need to meet Doc Ock's wife or to see DaFoe with his shirt off.
2. Don't kill the villain. They never kill them in the books, but Batman killed the Joker in movie 1. Problematic.
3. Stop having the villain kidnap the hero's family or girlfriend. 8 million people in New York and Aunt May and Mary Jane are always the ones that get it.
4. Don't film the Fantastic Four. They're just silly looking in real life.
I enjoyed both X-Men movies and both Spiderman movies, although the second was a bit angsty. I am hellaciously looking forward to Sin City in April and Batman Begins sometime thereafter. Scarecrow is the villain in Batman. How cool is that?
-
A lot of people have been saying Sandman. I'm sure they could find some way to make him a formidable enemy.
I'm already worried that this movie will be introducing too much. Black Cat, new villain, unresolved Hobgoblin threads, possible beginning of Venom storyline...not to mention 3 is where series tend to start going bad. And really, how many Spiderman movies do we need?
-
I fear that they'd mess up Black Cat in the same way they did Elektra (ie forgetting she was in the villains section of the trading cards)
Also Kraven is his own backstory. Hunter seeking challenging prey. There, I just explained it in 2 seconds.
-
Speaking of Sandman, where the hell is Gaiman's Sandman movie?
Anyway, yeah, the whole killing the villain off is weak. I'd love to see a superhero franchise that doesn't feel the need to bring in a new villain for each film - how many damn stories have there been in comics where the hero squares off against his ARCH NEMESIS?
Also, I think Spider-Man 2 was one of the best superhero/comic book films EVER.
And I liked the X-Men movies. Heck, I even kinda sorta liked the Daredevil movie (Elektra sucked, though).
I'm really looking forward to Sin City, though. I think it's the first time someone has attempted to adapt a comic book SHOT FOR SHOT. They didn't have a script or storyboards on set - everyone just got a copy of the comics. Awesome.
-
I'm really looking forward to Sin City, though. I think it's the first time someone has attempted to adapt a comic book SHOT FOR SHOT. They didn't have a script or storyboards on set - everyone just got a copy of the comics. Awesome.
Shit, really? That's amazing. I'm really looking forward to that.
I also read last night an interview with the dude helming the Watchmen movie (it's here (http://www.chud.com)), and it seems like he's really taking it seriously.
-
Speaking of Sandman, where the hell is Gaiman's Sandman movie?
Hopefully tied to a rights dispute at the bottom of some ocean. That project would be infinitely fuckupable, and I'd rather they left it alone. HellBoy, sure. But not Sandman. Shit, look what they did to Constantine.
-
As I recall, there's been a fairly decent Sandman script proposed and kicking around for some time. Of course, there have also been decent Hellblazer and I, ***** movie scripts written, so that doesn't mean much.
-
Yeah, as long as they get Gaiman to write the script I think it could be really good. Get the guy without a human name who directed "The Cell" to direct it. That movie was pretty much Sandman without Gaiman's good writing anyway.
-
I found the Cell kind of contrived, but I don't want to badmouth it because it was also balls-out beautiful. I kept wanting her to hook the comatose little kid (from the opening sequence) up to the serial killer so that the kid's nightmare could battle the killer's darker persona.
This would all happen while the kid and the child-persona played four square in another room.
And of course that would be going on while Jennifer Lopez silently undressed herself while floating weightless.
-
Yeah, as long as they get Gaiman to write the script I think it could be really good. Get the guy without a human name who directed "The Cell" to direct it. That movie was pretty much Sandman without Gaiman's good writing anyway.
He had a movie at Sundance that I missed. Mirror Mask? Hopefully it'll get a bigger release. I haven't heard anything about it though.
-
-Good call on the Fantastic 4 thing. They were not made for film.
-Everyone involved owes the world an apology for Daredevil.
I watched Benicio Del Toro's interview on Conan O'Brien about Sin City and they showed an actual clip of the movie and it looked kinda crappy. They made the previews so mind blowing but if it's just going to be cheesy acting and silly costumes peppered with action scenes it's going to be a huge disappointment. I'll wait for a review before I see it.
I would like them to just once do a batman movie that a human being can sit through.
-
I would like them to just once do a batman movie that a human being can sit through.
I resent that with every fiber of my being! The original Batman movie was genius!! Anyone who says differently incurs my incalculable netwrath. What with flames and bombs made of name-calling and the like.
And that applies to any other movies starring Adam West and Burt Ward as well!
-
I would like them to just once do a batman movie that a human being can sit through.
I resent that with every fiber of my being! The original Batman movie was genius!! Anyone who says differently incurs my incalculable netwrath. What with flames and bombs made of name-calling and the like.
And that applies to any other movies starring Adam West and Burt Ward as well!
Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb.
-
god that was classic.
-
I watched Benicio Del Toro's interview on Conan O'Brien about Sin City and they showed an actual clip of the movie and it looked kinda crappy. They made the previews so mind blowing but if it's just going to be cheesy acting and silly costumes peppered with action scenes it's going to be a huge disappointment. I'll wait for a review before I see it.
Yeah, I think Sin City looks pretty crappy too. The visuals in the trailer leave me feeling kind of empty, like Sky Captain did. It seems like the movie is too caught up in literally translating the comic to screen panel by panel to have any life or soul of its own. It's the movie equivalent of a stuffed and mounted bear. Looks like a bear, feels like a bear, but nothing inside.
-
I watched Benicio Del Toro's interview on Conan O'Brien about Sin City and they showed an actual clip of the movie and it looked kinda crappy. They made the previews so mind blowing but if it's just going to be cheesy acting and silly costumes peppered with action scenes it's going to be a huge disappointment. I'll wait for a review before I see it.
Yeah, I think Sin City looks pretty crappy too. The visuals in the trailer leave me feeling kind of empty, like Sky Captain did. It seems like the movie is too caught up in literally translating the comic to screen panel by panel to have any life or soul of its own. It's the movie equivalent of a stuffed and mounted bear. Looks like a bear, feels like a bear, but nothing inside.
I haven't seen the trailer or Sky Captain. However, I do think I'm familiar with the phenomenon you're describing. It's a disease which video game developers and blockbuster movie producers are especially prone to -- graphicsitis.
Pretty graphics are nice, but they don't substitute for good gameplay/story.
A for instance from the game side. Several years ago I was given a copy of Unreal. At the time I played Doom II every day (still do occasionally...) I was absolutely floored by the quality of the graphics in Unreal, which were pretty darn whizzy when it came out. I played the game through, but I didn't replay it. I continued to play Doom II over and over and over. Why, when Doom II obviously looked like crap compared to Unreal (or Quake, or QuakeII or any of the thousands of FPS that came after)?
Because Doom II played well. It was more FUN. See also Civ II, Dungeon Master, etc etc...
A movie example: What Dreams May Come -- beautifully photographed. Story was crap.
I'm not trying to denigrate the importance of the visual in multi-media projects. I just think that too many folks think that good graphics forgive a multitude of sins. And that's just not true.
Thankfully Onstad does not fall into this trap. No one could complain about the quality of the writing in Achewood. It's clever, subtle and sophisticated. Nor could you say that the graphics are overly slick. They are deceptively simple, but amenable to close analysis.
I think that's one of the most appealing things about the strip. Onstad has found an admirable balance between the visual and the verbal. Both are vital to the humor and neither overpowers the other.
Well, I've rambled from Doom II to overly pretentious (yet fawning) criticism of a comic strip, so it's time to end this thang.
-
Yeah, I played the crap out of Doom II. And Quake II. And now Half-Life 2.
There's something about 2.
Oh, and I've played GTA: Vice City all the way through twice. And I always leave it installed because I find driving around a Miami-esque city while listening to 80s music very relaxing.
And if I get tired of relaxing I can always start shooting pedestrians and try to take out as many cops that show up as possible.
I hope the cops are more of a challenge to kill in San Andreas.
-
I watched Benicio Del Toro's interview on Conan O'Brien about Sin City and they showed an actual clip of the movie and it looked kinda crappy.
Sorry, son, but Sin City is probably going to fuck*ng kick ass, or at the very least be a strikingly above-average comic book movie peppered with terrific scenes. If you were to pick a comic book to slavishly adapt - with the constant and complete input of the creator - into film, you could do one hell of a lot worse than Sin City. It's one of those comics that always pops up on that perennial favorite of the idea-bankrupt Features & Lifestyle Editor, the "Comics Aren't Just For Kids" List. There is a good reason for this; you are not a child, go and check it out.
And. They got Mickey Rourke - Hank fuck*ng Chinaski - to play Marv. Have you seen Marv? It is goddamned incredible. You're going to enjoy his character.
-
I like the look of Sin City. Best trailer I've seen for a film, ever.
But we'll see...
-
I like Jessica Alba.
-
I watched Benicio Del Toro's interview on Conan O'Brien about Sin City and they showed an actual clip of the movie and it looked kinda crappy. They made the previews so mind blowing but if it's just going to be cheesy acting and silly costumes peppered with action scenes it's going to be a huge disappointment. I'll wait for a review before I see it.
Yeah, I think Sin City looks pretty crappy too. The visuals in the trailer leave me feeling kind of empty, like Sky Captain did. It seems like the movie is too caught up in literally translating the comic to screen panel by panel to have any life or soul of its own. It's the movie equivalent of a stuffed and mounted bear. Looks like a bear, feels like a bear, but nothing inside.
I think this might be the first time in history that fanboys will complain that a movie was too close to the book.
And don't forget Doom 3. It taxes any system to get a decent framerate but was getting ratings of 3.5-6.0 (out of 10) in all the reviews I saw.
-
I think fans suck Frank Miller's dick far too much.
He's not a god, his Sin City is not really particularly great or groundbreaking and why the hell should he have any idea how to do a movie?
All we really know about this movie is that it's got an okay story.
The acting isn't looking great. So, it's got cool visuals.
What makes this better than a Sky Captain or Road to Perdition or Constantine?
I'll judge it when I see it. But I'm not holding out any hope. Hopefully we've all learned not to hold out hope for these comicbook movies.
-
Robert Rodrigez directed Sin City. I think that guy's great. I thought fuck*ng Spy Kids was cool*. Desperado was one of the greatest action movies I've ever seen. It was a perfect balance between the comedic and the sincerely badass. Hell I'm not even sure that movie had a story. Once Upon a Time in Mexico wasn't a great movie, but you get what I'm saying. They guy has talent.
Quentin Tarantino is listed as guest director. A friend told me that he actually paid to be allowed to direct one scene in the movie. He's apparently a Frank Miller fan boy. That sounds weird to me, but whatever floats your dinghy.
As for the comics themselves, the original Sin City (Marv's story) was wonderfully constructed noir. It wasn't A Tale of Two Cities, but it didn't assume to be. Even the premise is unassuming. Marv doesn't go on a revenge spree because they 'killed the woman he loved.' No. She was a girl who was nice to him once. He goes through the whole thing because she was nice to him. There's a lot to be said for a slightly retarded badass.
This is not a Great Movie(tm). The books were good and they don't seemed to have fucked that up. If it rings hollow, I'll be a bit disappointed. But it looks to have the excitement and spirit that would make it a 'classic' on the level of Die Hard and Desperado. That may night be a stratospheric level, but we all adore a comic strip where a cat is about to start a business rolling doobies with office equipment.
On to great writing. Director Paul Greengrass is currently determining how faithful he can be to Alan Moore's Watchmen (http://imdb.com/title/tt0409459/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9d2F0Y2htZW58aHRtbD0xfG5tPW9u;fc=1;ft=20;fm=1) and still make a good movie.
* The Pedro Picasso does not advocate fuck*ng spy kids. That's just wrong.
-
He's not a god, his Sin City is not really particularly great or groundbreaking and why the hell should he have any idea how to do a movie?
Well the movie is pretty much the comic panel by panel, I hear. I'm sure it was pretty easy just to copy it exactly.
That's the thing though. It's going to just be a moving comic book, which is a lot different than a movie. I think that's what I've been trying to say about it.
-
Rodriguez scored Kill Bill, Vol. 2 for $1, as a favour to Quentin.
QT wanted to play around with HD digital cameras and shooting, so he directed one SHOT (not even one scene - just one shot that lasts about four seconds of screen time - it's an in-joke too because it's a typical Tarantino shot) for the low low price of $1.
Evidently QT wasn't impressed with the HD cameras and plans to stick with film.
The Sin City trailer is the most impressive trailer I've ever seen. The clips I've seen from the film on talk shows and such look awful. So I guess I'll have to see the whole film to see whether I like it or not.
I never read the Sin City graphic novels but I really liked "The Dark Knight Returns" and "Batman: Year One" so hopefully the story and characters won't suck.
-
Also, if I were going to be making a movie version of The Dark Knight Returns (and I'd love to do that) I'd cast Sydney Pollack as Batman. He has just the right balance of warmth and menace.
-
I think that guy's great. I thought fuck*ng Spy Kids was cool*.
Seconded. What a pleasant surprise that movie was -- normally kid movies are meh at best. Spy Kids was intelligent and fun.
-
Just watched Sin City this evening (Thank you promo tickets).
Surprisingly enough, everybody is right...
-It does kick ass.
-People will complain it sticks to the comic too close.
-The acting is at times atrocious.
-It may just be the best comic to movie yet.
My comclusion is, it's impossible to stay that true to the comic especially the text without it sounding totally cheesy. Having a great narrative that resonates in the reader's head is one thing, having someone say it out loud believably is another.
I read "The big Fat Kill" in Subway immediately before entering the theatre and they actually have it word for word in most parts. The shots are directly from the book and it's mind-blowing.
I liked it. I'm glad it was free, but I liked it.
This may be the comicbook movie I'm willing to buy and watch several times.
People who liked Sin City books will like it. People who've never read a Sin City book will like it. It will meet most people's expectations, it may surpass others' but overall I don't think it's more that a 3ish out of five.
It sure beats other comicbook movies.
-
I liked it. I'm glad it was free, but I liked it.
All things in life are better when free. I've never been the kind to think something like money is better when hard earned. I'll take free money anyday, and spend my precious time doing other shit. If only other people saw it this way.
I know nothing of Sin City, but the promos have made me somewhat excited for it. Not being much of a comic book person, I couldn't care less whether a comic book movie follows the original text closely or not, as long as it makes a good movie. A three out of five star movie that kicks ass is fine by me.
That, and Jessica Alba looks godamned fuck*ng hot in the posters.
I also don't care whether a movie follows a book I love closely or not, as long as it makes a good movie.
I am excited for the new Batman. I liked the Tim Burton ones OK (did when I first saw them, but they haven't aged terribly well). I always wanted to get into Batman a bit more, and I enjoyed the Animated Series (the one before the most recent one). Jough, are the two graphic novels you mentioned a good place to start, or should I start with something more traditional?
-
HOLY fuck*ng SHIT.
Yeah, I got a last-minute invite to see this bitch tonight too and OH MY GOD.
I found the story itself a little lacking, but I don't know how you can say that the acting is atrocious. The acting was very good, especially some of the obvious homages to various noir films. Clive Owen especially was channeling Mitchum in "Out of the Past" and Mickey Rourke shall be banished from Hollywood no more after this film. Hot damn was he good.
Of course, the scantily clad females were all fine "actresses" too. Yummy.
I missed half the movie, though, just being dazed by the sheer AUDACITY and EXUBERANCE of the fuck*ng visuals. Sweet Jesus Freewheelin' Christ on a stick!
-
It doesn't take a film student or an actor or a critic to see the terribly delivered lines thoughout, especially the garbage from Josh Hartnett. That should have been removed altogether.
I love Benicio Del Toro but he stank.
-
YOU TAKE THAT BACK ABOUT BENICIO!
-
No no no no no no NO NO NO!
I'm with Jough re. Benicio and I haven't even seen it. but he is one of the handful of actors around at the moment, no, ever, who have impressed me the most, and made me miss acting.
-
This is what I'm saying. I love the guy, I think he does great work but he really didn't seem to be feeling that character. I kept just hoping that he would suddenly turn it on and it would be like "oh yeah!" and he would start being awesome the way I know he is but it just didn't happen.
This is why I noted it because it was so unusual.
-
I hope it's not Venom. So far they have basically told the story from the beginning, it wouldn't make sense to jump 30 years ahead, at least it doesn't make sense to me. Oddly though, the other villian thats highest on my list behind The Lizard would have to be The Vulture and he's not even mentioned in the story. Sandman, Electro*, and Scorpion** are all second rate villians that Spidey can beat without trying. He can beat all three of those guys together without breaking a sweat. Carnage is a poor mans Venom and Hobgoblin is a poor mans Green Goblin so there's no way it will be any of them.
I apologise for this obscene bit of thread necromancy but I randomly read Paul's first post and couldn't stop laughing when compared to the actual movie. Really shows the disconnect between the people making movies and the comic fanbase.
-
It's still not as off-base as Spidey trading away his marriage to the Fake Devil from Outer Space.
I know I've ranted about this before but... good Lord... so bad. So badly written.
-
Yeah I guess maybe it's wrong to blame the movie guys, I guess the entire editorial staff basically misunderstand their fan base.
'Misunderstand' was substituted for 'have nothing but contempt for' because I'm trying hard not to be that guy.
Spiderman 4 villian: Joe Quesada.
-
I'm still holding out for the 60's cartoon-style (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clc6KDrBfPo) Electro - even back when I saw this show when I was a kid, I knew that dude was just preposterous. Perposterous!
-
I apologise for this obscene bit of thread necromancy but I randomly read Paul's first post and couldn't stop laughing when compared to the actual movie. Really shows the disconnect between the people making movies and the comic fanbase.
Yeah Spiderman 3 sucked sweaty balls. Not so much that they used rank villans, but they totally revamped Peter Parker's personality. The Peter Parker I grew up reading would have never behaved like that. They turned him into an asshole.
I FINALLY quit reading Spiderman in disgust when we discovered that he was a clone. When his long dead parents showed up I got weak in the knees, but when it was discovered that Mary Jane was married to a clone, that was the knock out punch for me.
So I'm pretty unfazed to learn that he and Mary Jane are getting a divorce. I mean why not.
Oh well, at least I've got the first 25 years of the magazine and the first two movies.
-
They're not getting divorced, though.
That would at least make sense with Spidey's hard-luck semi-realistic personal life.
The Fake Devil From Outer Space magically erased their marriage from ever happening at all as the price exacted for giving Spider-Man's terminally-ill 130 year old aunt alive for another year or two.
The Fake Devil From Outer Space didn't want his soul... he wanted to UNDERMINE THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE! WOOOOOOO!
Like, seriously. The clone stuff was lame as hell but at least it followed the basic rules of prior Spidey stories, hanging out with mad scientists all the time and fightin' em and whatnot.
What happened this time around violated BOTH the street-levelness of Spider-Man's usual battles as a common-man kinda hero who mostly battled thieves and science-freaks and dudes on hoverboards... AND the fact that his whole deal was about taking responsibility for his actions.
In one fell swoop, he was both completely childishly ridiculously irresponsible AND dealing with a cosmic being who generally pretends to be the devil while fighting the fuckin' Silver Surfer and...
Yeah.
As poorly executed as the clone thing was, oh man. Oh man.
-
But wasn't he not a clone in the end? I thought in the end it turned out it was all (and by all I mean the last 30 goddamn years) a plot by Norman Obsorne and making him think he was a clone was just a huge fake-out?
The above is basically why I don't read superhero comics with ongoing continuity by the way. Though I did kind of like the Scarlet Spider, though on reflection basically because they took Peter Parker and gave him (more) angst, so basically I like the scarlet spider because he's more like batman.
-
Seriously, this is why Ultimate Spiderman sells. Sometimes people just want their character back from all of the convoluted continuity mess.