![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
How Super 8 Ruined The Amazing Spider-Man
Apr. 27th, 2012 10:24 amSo, rumor has it that in ASM, Uncle Bartlett isn't killed by a burglar. No. Peter gets in trouble at school, Ben has to change his work schedule to deal with it, and so later he dies in an industrial accident.
That's so stupid I can believe it. This is the production that changed Spider-Man's costume despite
1. It staying the same for fifty years.
2. Everyone liking it.
3. It looking perfectly good in live-action.
I felt like the Hulk for a second there. C'mon, let's unpack that.
First off, I don't really care too much about fidelity to the source material. That's not the issue here. If ASM wants to set itself apart from the Raimiverse and change the origin, fine (although they wouldn't have to set themselves apart if they weren't redoing the origin like a bunch of uncreative hacks walk it off, walk it off, I'm cool). I would be fine with the broad strokes changing. It worked out fine in Batman Begins for Bruce's parents to be killed at the opera instead of outside a movie. And Tobey Maguire fighting a real wrestling match was part of Raimi's deliberate retro choices for his trilogy. I'll admit, these days, a teenager trying to make a buck off superpowers would probably be a Youtube celebrity. I'd even prefer that over some Geoff Johns "mastupdating" with Peter Parker fighting in an MMA cage match or something.
What's important is being faithful to the emotions and themes of the original story. So! Peter has to be actually responsible for Uncle Ben's death, in terms of him knowingly doing the wrong thing and it directly leading to homicide. Otherwise, you break the entire concept of Spider-Man. You'd think people would get this, given one of the justifications for rebooting is how bad Spider-Man 3 was (said the people who made Spider-Man 3 so bad with executive meddling), and one of the reasons fans didn't like Spider-Man 3 was how it retconned Uncle Ben's death. Me, I still don't get why they couldn't have Sandman hurt Aunt May or Peter's dead parents to get the same emotional investment, but whatevs, not the issue.
See, if Peter's at fault, then him becoming Spider-Man is about taking on responsibility, seeking redemption, being heroic. If he's only responsible in terms of a crazy wacky happenstance that could've happened to anyone however he acted (over/under on the school trouble being Peter fighting a bully?), then him being Spider-Man is more along the lines of a mental problem. Someone will doubtlessly say "It wasn't your fault, Peter," and it actually isn't, he's just some pathetic headcase who can't get over his uncle's death and move on with his life.
This exact same thing cropped up in Super 8, part of that movie's entire hard-on for sloppy storytelling. Throughout the entire movie, we knew that the girl's dad was responsible for killing the boy's mother. He came to pay his respects at the funeral and Sheriff Kyle Chandler dragged him out into the street and arrested him. That's Coach Taylor! If he says you killed his wife, you must've fucking decapitated her.
Then it turns out that all the guy did was get drunk and call in sick to work, causing the wife to be on the scene when the accident happened. (I guess if he really wanted to prevent an accident, he would've shown up to work hungover.) And yet, it's treated as this big moment when Kyle Chandler says it wasn't his fault. Of course it wasn't his fault, you psychotic jackass, what kind of idiot would think so weeks or even months after the initial grief?
Is this like a new Robert McKee thing, Hack Writing 101? "I want a character to be blamed and have angst for something, but I don't want the audience to dislike him." "Just have it not really be his fault! That way, it looks noble that he's taking responsibility for it anyway, and we don't have to ask any tough questions about whether he really deserves forgiveness since he hasn't actually done anything wrong."
That's so stupid I can believe it. This is the production that changed Spider-Man's costume despite
1. It staying the same for fifty years.
2. Everyone liking it.
3. It looking perfectly good in live-action.
I felt like the Hulk for a second there. C'mon, let's unpack that.
First off, I don't really care too much about fidelity to the source material. That's not the issue here. If ASM wants to set itself apart from the Raimiverse and change the origin, fine (although they wouldn't have to set themselves apart if they weren't redoing the origin like a bunch of uncreative hacks walk it off, walk it off, I'm cool). I would be fine with the broad strokes changing. It worked out fine in Batman Begins for Bruce's parents to be killed at the opera instead of outside a movie. And Tobey Maguire fighting a real wrestling match was part of Raimi's deliberate retro choices for his trilogy. I'll admit, these days, a teenager trying to make a buck off superpowers would probably be a Youtube celebrity. I'd even prefer that over some Geoff Johns "mastupdating" with Peter Parker fighting in an MMA cage match or something.
What's important is being faithful to the emotions and themes of the original story. So! Peter has to be actually responsible for Uncle Ben's death, in terms of him knowingly doing the wrong thing and it directly leading to homicide. Otherwise, you break the entire concept of Spider-Man. You'd think people would get this, given one of the justifications for rebooting is how bad Spider-Man 3 was (said the people who made Spider-Man 3 so bad with executive meddling), and one of the reasons fans didn't like Spider-Man 3 was how it retconned Uncle Ben's death. Me, I still don't get why they couldn't have Sandman hurt Aunt May or Peter's dead parents to get the same emotional investment, but whatevs, not the issue.
See, if Peter's at fault, then him becoming Spider-Man is about taking on responsibility, seeking redemption, being heroic. If he's only responsible in terms of a crazy wacky happenstance that could've happened to anyone however he acted (over/under on the school trouble being Peter fighting a bully?), then him being Spider-Man is more along the lines of a mental problem. Someone will doubtlessly say "It wasn't your fault, Peter," and it actually isn't, he's just some pathetic headcase who can't get over his uncle's death and move on with his life.
This exact same thing cropped up in Super 8, part of that movie's entire hard-on for sloppy storytelling. Throughout the entire movie, we knew that the girl's dad was responsible for killing the boy's mother. He came to pay his respects at the funeral and Sheriff Kyle Chandler dragged him out into the street and arrested him. That's Coach Taylor! If he says you killed his wife, you must've fucking decapitated her.
Then it turns out that all the guy did was get drunk and call in sick to work, causing the wife to be on the scene when the accident happened. (I guess if he really wanted to prevent an accident, he would've shown up to work hungover.) And yet, it's treated as this big moment when Kyle Chandler says it wasn't his fault. Of course it wasn't his fault, you psychotic jackass, what kind of idiot would think so weeks or even months after the initial grief?
Is this like a new Robert McKee thing, Hack Writing 101? "I want a character to be blamed and have angst for something, but I don't want the audience to dislike him." "Just have it not really be his fault! That way, it looks noble that he's taking responsibility for it anyway, and we don't have to ask any tough questions about whether he really deserves forgiveness since he hasn't actually done anything wrong."
