BafflingBeerMan

Mysterion/Kenny did say that when he dies sometimes he sees Heaven and Hell, which allows for the events of that episode and the SP movie.

We just saw in this three-parter whenever Kenny dies, he immediately gets resurrected in his bed, but he does state that sometimes he is out longer (which would account for the whole season where Kenny stayed dead).

I used to frequent one of the official boards for Lost (Oceanic815.com, I believe) and before Season 2, they inserted some Easter Eggs onto the site: two fake script pages from the S2 premiere.

One of them had Jack running out of the jungle after opening the Hatch only to be chased by...himself.

The other page? Zombie Walt (with a suggestion for Zombie Vincent)

Getting a feel for the character is not the same as whether or not the character is a "forgotten hero."

The fact that the Internet has data on even the most background of characters in obscure fiction doesn't mean that those characters are well known. Doing research on a character to know who he is doesn't mean everyone knows who he is.

That beign said, Green Hornet shouldn't really be all that forgotten, considering there was a TV show centered on him in the 70s(?)

I am always thinking about this quandry. About how, us, in the audience, think that sometimes we know better or we say they would do things differently, smarter, than the characters.

My dilemma in this thinking is it caused by us simply knowing better or us being really removed from the action, being able to think about the situation from this detached viewpoint? That is, if we were truly in the thick of it would our brains even process things the same way?

This complaint about characters not acting in the "right" way came up a lot for Lost, regarding why don't the characters ask more questions? I truly think that the characters, for at least the first 3 seasons, didn't care about what the Smoke Monster was or Dharma. They just wanted off the Island. The reason why they didn't ask more questions because they were focused on getting off the Island and didn't care about anything else. "Out of sight, out of mind" in a way.

Actually, Miley Cyrus does get a lot of hate, but that has died down (and been somewhat replaced by disdain over her trying to sexualize herself) now that people have moved onto the Biebs.

As to why? It's because stars like Cyrus and Bieber aren't made, they are foisted upon the audience and sold like products. While they may or may not have talent, their existance isn't to show that talent but to sell records, concerts, and anything with their name on it. They are basically commercialized products, and much more so than ones in the past, because it has become more obvious and crass.

I don't hate Bieber or Cyrus, I find their fame amusing. But I can see why people hate upon them.

Again, see Ang Lee's Hulk movie, with its shots of moss growing, as to how something like can seem out of place and "boring" in a superhero movie, where people's expectations are for action or a constant pace. We are only now reaching the point where superhero movies are being considered "art" with Nolan's Batman films. To expect something like that in one of the first "New Age" superhero movies is saying that in hindsight it would have been great, but the audience and the filmmaker's stance was not mature enough at that point.



And how many of those movies did you just mention were based on comics? Were movies with fight scenes? Or, y'know, expected to be, hoped for, blockbusters? Those are quieter films by the very nature of their subject matter. The audience goes into those movies expecting those types of scenes. Though don't, at least at the time Spidey 1 was released, expect that in superhero movies. I like those scenes, but again, the modern (Marvel) superhero genre was just being born at that time and they had to get the big crowd-pleasing stuff right first before they could get to the smaller stuff. What is boring in one movie isn't boring in another, by such factors as story, pacing, and audience expectations.



Honestly, having read a handful of Spidey comics in my life, I don't think they changed any core parts. You say they didn't make him smart enough. He was still smart, we still saw everyone from Norman to Doc Connors marvel at his intelligence. They didn't make him into a dumb teenager. He was maybe a bit too emo, but that is also a core aspect of the character: his constant struggles to do what's right while dealing with his real life.

They touched upon each of the fundamental core tenets of Peter Parker/Spider-Man. Maybe not in full or a lot (i.e. the banter) but I doubt most people would say that the Spider-Man presented on screen is fundamentally different than the one found in the comic book.

No, but in movies they MAY be the same thing. Look at Inception, for example, a lot of people didn't like the movie because they viewed it as "too complicated." Now, before we launch into a conversation about the "dumbing down of America," sometimes superflous things added into a movie, maybe to fully flesh out a character, is not necessary and can lead to confusion and/or boredom.

Two pages though in the comics may mean anywheres betweens 30 seconds to 5 minutes in a movie, to properly setup that moment.

Honestly, that would be cool to see. But it would also run the risk of being boring. Especially since up until that point in the film (talking about the lunch room scene), we hadn't seen much "superheroy" stuff. Remember the big complaint about Ang Lee's Hulk: not enough HULK SMASH.

Have you heard of Chekhov's gun? Introducing Peter's dad may result in an undeed perversion of that if the rest of the movies don't revist him (if we assume the rest of the movies would have followed the same storylines). The audience will expect some more explanation as to how were Pete's parents. Mind you, they are involved in some major storylines in the comics. So you may even have people complaining that they need to be MORE involved in the movies. Remember all the nerdgams over the mention of Dr. Connors in the first movie, then really nothing except some cameos from him by Dylan Baker.

So basically, yeah, they left things out but I think they did a good job overall. The problem is always going to be when adapting a property, especially one with as much mythos as a comic book, is you are going to leave something out. And even if you put it in, some people will think you misrepresented it or you should have put X in.