Sunday, July 22, 2012

What Makes a True Fan?

On Facebook, a friend mentioned going to see The Amazing Spider-man and this caused an unintentional debate when a young lady named Nicole got all defensive and nasty in her comments towards me. According to Krista, Nicole is 18 years old, so she saw the first Spider-man film in 2002 as an 8 year old, which would leave a huge impression on her. I understand that. However, I don't understand her negative reaction to people who disagree with her that Hollywood should not have made a new film, or her view that only one actor could play Peter Parker. What kind of little fascist is that? To me, her arguments show a person who does not know how to have a conversation without getting defensive and even threatening violence towards me because I don't agree with her. She seems to think the entire Spider-man character begins and ends with Tobey Maguire! The character was created in 1961 and there was a film planned for the late 1980s or early 1990s. The technology wasn't there, yet, to pull off such a film, so they were wise to wait until the 2000s.

I find it annoying, though, when people put their limitations on a movie character or film. It's like their own egos have to control everything. Only Tobey Maguire can play Peter Parker?!? He didn't even resemble the Peter Parker of the comic books. Personally, I think Andrew Garfield was a far better choice and he did a fantastic job in the role. But when they are making a new Spider-man film twenty or thirty years from now, they'll have a new actor in the role. That's just the way it goes. People are just too crazy in their "ownership" of characters that aren't even theirs. For example, all the fans who claim that George Lucas "ruined" the Star Wars or Indiana Jones films for them because they didn't like the prequels or the fourth Indiana Jones movie. Get over it. He didn't make the movie for you. He made it for himself and you're just lucky to get to share in it.

Anyhow, can some young girl whose only exposure to Spider-man is the Tobey Maguire trilogy be considered a real fan? Especially if she considers the new series illegitimate and has not read a single comic book? Let's be real. She's a fan of Tobey Maguire. She probably developed a little girl crush on him when he kissed Mary Jane upside down in the rain. That's what she's really a fan about. As her comments show, she couldn't care less about the comic books (which is predominately a boy's interest anyway). Hopefully, she'll learn to control her anger issues before she gets into the adult world. The sooner she learns that Hollywood doesn't revolve around her, the better off she'll be.

Here's how the dialogue devolved (FYI, Krista and Terri are sisters, Nicole is their niece)...

Krista:
Saw the Amazing Spiderman tonight, Loved it! :) I think it was better than the other Spiderman 1 movie.

Terri:
I enjoyed it but didnt think it was as good as The Avengers. And it lost a little of it's punch because it was a remake of a movie that isn't really that old...

Me:
It's not a remake. That's like saying that "Batman Begins" is a remake of "Batman." For comic book fans, stories get told and retold, renewed, and reinterpreted, based on the writer / artist / director's ideas.

I thought Andrew Garfield was a better reflection of the Peter Parker of the comic books than Tobey Maguire was. Also, "The Amazing Spider-man" was more faithful to the comic book than the Tobey Maguire trilogy.


Krista...was the theater empty? I imagine that you're one of the few that saw "The Amazing Spider-man" on the opening weekend of "The Dark Knight Rises."

Terri:
It is a remake in the sense that it follows the story of how he became spiderman, the death of his uncle, etc etc... I enjoyed it. I just didn't enjoy it as much as I would have if there hadn't been a spiderman trilogy that was only about 10 years old.

Me:
A remake is "The Preacher's Wife" (from "A Bishop's Wife") or the new "Footloose."

Nicole:

somehow i agree with aunt Terri. Though I haven't seen it, I've been told from multiple people that if I enjoyed the first movie from the trilogy I wouldn't enjoy this movie as much as I could.

Krista:
It was a pretty sparsely populated theatre, yeah. I'm going to see the Batman movie next weekend. They weren't checking bags at this theatre... made me a little nervous when someone came in with a full backpack on his back. What kind of idiot would do that this weekend?!

I liked the first movie of the original trilogy but maybe I was just in the right mood for this one... it seemed a little less contrived in some ways? Not sure...


Me:
Nicole, that just means you're not really a fan of Spider-man. Liking one movie doesn't mean you won't like another movie. When Christopher Nolan came out with "Batman Begins" in 2005, no one accused him of "remaking" Tim Burton's "Batman." They are completely different movies and visions. People who read comic books understand the different interpretations, because story lines are constantly recycled / refreshed.

Nicole:
hey hey whoa back down. I don't need to be bashed for having an opinion on a movie I HAVEN'T SEEN YET! I'm just saying that's what I've heard from people who have seen it.
I don't know you and I don't give a crap what you think about me. Don't judge when you don't know.


Nicole:
You Have officially pissed me off

Nicole:
Spiderman is a favored movie of mine, I loved the trilogy but there can only truly be one actor for spiderman and maybe that's because I'm young but hey, it's still MY opinion. Deal with it.

Me:
I'm not "bashing" you. I'm just saying that liking one Spider-man movie doesn't mean that you'll automatically not like the new one. They are completely different movies. That's all.

Nicole:
They are obviously not completely different if they have MANY similarities and are BOTH about spiderman. And I never said I wouldn't like the new one, I was SAYING i had not yet seen it and that is what I had heard!

Me:
Did you know that there are at least 4 different "Spider-man" comic book titles? Each title has its own set of writers and artists. There are similarities and differences. If you have an insecurity problem then don't go see "Spider-man." No one's making you. No one is saying that you can't enjoy the original trilogy. You need to not get so defensive. All I was saying is that the new one is not a remake. "Footloose" was a remake.

Nicole:
I did not once mention footloose in my post and I was agreeing with my aunt. And no, I did not grow up where comics were popular so I don't CARE.
And how does an 'insecurity' problem have anything to do with the movie? Now you're just throwing low blows.
I never said anyone said I couldn't enjoy the original trilogy, I was SAYING that I had heard that I may not like the new one as much as the original.
Again, I wonder, do you know how to read...


Nicole:
And remake or not there was no need to make a new spiderman movie so soon after the original trilogy. That's also where I agree with my aunt. It takes the...excitement out of it, as it were. Same story, subtle differences, different "writers and artists" and so forth. But in general the same story.

Nicole:
Maybe I'll enjoy it, maybe I won't. But as I said before, I have NOT SEEN IT YET.

Krista:
I agree that it seems like they made it a bit early after the previous one. There are plenty of other super heroes they could've made movies about. Wonder Woman for instance.

Nicole:
A wonder woman movie would be splendid. But as things go I wouldn't pay to go see another spiderman movie. Lol.

Krista:
Well it's definitely worth seeing. Hopefully it'll come in Netflix so you can watch it. Gotta give it a chance :) I thought Tobey McGuire did a really good job too, but I liked the guy who did this one. He has a goofy smile :)

Me:
Nicole, I don't know why you're having such an emotional reaction to what I'm saying. I pointed out that "Footloose" was a remake in response to Terri calling "The Amazing Spider-man" a remake. "Footloose" is a remake because it followed the same storyline as the original with the same characters. Just because both "Spider-man" and "The Amazing Spider-man" feature the origins does not make the new one a "remake." In order for it to be a remake, the storylines has to be the same and the characters the same. This new trilogy is going to focus on Peter Parker's parents and why they disappeared. I don't remember how they explained Parker's parents in the first trilogy.

Me:
Saying that there can "only" be one actor to play Peter Parker / Spider-man is silly. Obviously, Andrew Garfield proved otherwise. He's far better as Peter Parker.

Nicole:
THat's also your opinion, everything I've posted has been an opinion of mine so really you didn't need to argue with me in the first place.

Krista:
Nicholas, everyone thinks that their "first" of something if they really like it will always be the best.

Nicole:
I prefer Peter Parker as I grew up with him as Spider man. End of story.

Nicole:
And saying that I'm not a true fan just because of my opinions was a low blow and quite a stupid one at that. What's it to be a true fan? Wearing spidey underwear? I can be a true fan in my own way and have my own opinions.

Me:
Krista, people who have an open mind don't get so hung up on things, though. I just prefer a good movie. Tobey Maguire was a poor choice and did not reflect Peter Parker of the comic books. He did a good job, but I believe Andrew nailed the role.

Krista:
It's not a matter of getting hung up on it. Movies and books cause emotional/visceral reactions.. if they're good... that's what they're _supposed_ to do. IMO there will never be a better Star Trek than Original Trek... Does that mean the acting was the best? Probably not, special effects? Probably not, but it was the First.

Nicole:
...I'm thinking of quite a few rude things to say to you, but I will not.
Saying I'm not open minded? IT's an opinion for heavens sake! Who cares!
Oh help me you better hope you never meet me.


Nicole:
Once and only once will I state this. You don't know me. Don't tell me who I am.

Nicole:
Everything you have said is your opinion but when you turn your opinions around to try and make mine seem wrong, that's pathetic.

Me:
Nicole, I never claimed to know you and based on your behavior here, I'm glad that I don't. I was addressing Terri and Krista in my posts rather than you. I guess if you think movies must be the way you want them to be, you'll soon face a lot of disappointment when you go to the movies.

Nicole:
Yup, cuz that's exactly what I meant and/or said. Movies are the way they are made and I can like them or not, or there can be a middle point.
And I agree, based on YOUR behavior, you'd better be glad you don't know me. Someone would have to hold me back from smacking you up side the face.


Nicole:
Be that you were addressing them you were talking about the things I have said or things you think about what I have said.

Nicole:
Which, when you THINK about it, is quite an immature thing to do.

Me:
Besides, Hollywood didn't think it was too soon for a new "Spider-man" trilogy because they see money-making opportunity and considering how much money it has made so far, it sounds like they know what they are doing. If people really didn't want to see a new "Spider-man" film, they wouldn't have gone to see it in theaters. It'll be interesting to see how long the "Batman" legend will lay dormant before someone else decides to offer their interpretation for the story / character.

Krista:
In any case... I think they made this movie because in the comics there was more than one origin story / series. Sometimes they do that.. remake an entire series from the beginning. Sometimes they have to if they want to shift them to modern times for instance. So both are worth seeing, though they do have some strong similarities on certain plot points.

Terri:
The real reason they redid it is because they want to tie Spiderman into the avengers and Toby Maguire is probably getting too old to play a youmg geeky teenager.;)

Nicholas I think you are taking the whole thing way too seriously. Its JUST a movie. I enjoyed it and thought he did a good job. But ...it didn't have the same impact as the first trilogy maybe because we're so used to the special effects now whereas 10 years ago it had more of an impact.


Me:
He's only supposed to be young and geeky in the first film. In the comic books, he's a photographer for the Daily Bugle and is married to Mary Jane. He did not know Mary Jane in high school. His high school girlfriend was Gwen Stacy. The new film gets all that right. Also, he had to make his own web slinger stuff. It did not just shoot out of his body. The success of the first film did usher in the age of comic book hero movies. Some were good, but a lot weren't. With the conclusion of the Batman trilogy, it looks like Superman is getting revived again and hopefully they'll do a better job with it than "Superman Returns."

Nicole:
If he says one more condescending thing i swear i will not be held accountable for my actions -.-
just shut up already, you made your point now stop arguing.


Nicole:
Oh god just drop it. For those of us who have not read the comics its a great trilogy. End of story.

Me:
Nicole...please see someone about your anger issues. I get it that you love Tobey Maguire and that his trilogy is what you're a fan of. But the Spider-man legend was created in 1961 and there are millions of fans besides you. Don't see the new film if you don't want to. No one cares. For those of us who do like Spider-man, regardless of the actor who plays him, the new movie is great. I was disappointed in the first Maguire film and I waited since the late 1980s to see a Spider-man movie on the big screen. For me, "The Amazing Spider-man" was the Spider-man movie I had been waiting more than 25 years to see.

No comments: