You are off your rocker if you think this movie is going to be on the level of Spider- Man 3. No Spider-man movie will even come close to any of Nolan's Batman movies. There is like a little group of people that are so HUNG up about the aesthetics and it's crap. I mean Book constantly change artists and from one story arc to another can look vastly different. When the first pictures of Heath's Joker came out it was the same thing, until people actually saw the performance in action and people shut up because after it finally being beaten over their head they realize what you get in story and performance completely out weighs the utterly insignificance of the aesthetics. I mean the Mask and overall costume from Batman and Robin was actually fairly accurate to the comic counterpart... do we really want to revisit that people? Bane's biggest strength is not his arms, it's his brain and his psychology. Tom Hardy is ripped and will be intimidating physically but he also has the talent to you know... act!
Seriously like I assume that people that are so caught up int he aesthetics of things are young to middle teenagers, take offense to that if you want but you people need to get real and seriously understand what matters in all of story telling and in acting and performing. Do we really want to see someone like Brock Lesnar or The Rock or John Cena or whatever talentless meathead in this movie simply because he has thick arms? I would say the answer to that establishes who I do and don't take seriously. Professional Wrestlers can hardly even act in the realm of WRESTLING. Let alone give any sort of real emotion to convey, and it's over! Look I enjoy the Rock, especially in Fast Five but I would NEVER in a million years think of casting him based solely on his physique. Again you aren't building (or in this case, filming) the drawing, you use it as a guideline but the most important thing to remember as an artist is to capture the FEELING of the work, not the shallow surface horse crap.
Spider-man 3 was crap because they deviated too far from character and exposition and in place gave us the horrible dance numbers, terribly cliche emo Peter Parker, and a half assed Venom and they couldnt even convey the emotion of Eddie Brock asking god to kill him, NOT PETER PARKER, correctly. Like one of the most beautifully twisted parts of Venom was Brock asking for death, and they screwed that up. To even think for a second that this movie is going to suffer what Spider-man 3 did... that's just ignorant and clearly you didn't come to that assessment with any sort of logic.
Like seriously, I hate doing this kind of stuff. But seriously people need to take their head out of their rear ends and try to understand what matters more in great story telling. This is an adaptation and all things considered Nolan has been far more respectful to the source material than any other adaptation... cept maybe short of Watchmen ( and look how successful that was). I just don't understand what you people want. People all day long will harp all over Shumacher's pair of flicks and some will jump all over Burton's pair and then when someone takes a reasonable and mature approach to the material there are still nay sayers, it's ridiculous. For the record I actually find a lot of fun and entertainment from watching the first Four Bat movies, I am not nearly as harsh and certainly don't LOATHE them like a lot of people do... but Nolan's movies aren't just great comic book movies, they are simply great FILMS. That's the kind of attitude you have to take when making these kind of movies. You are making a MOVIE and it has to be approached like it. Not under the mindset that "it's a comic book movie so we are allowed to be ridiculous." It actually pisses me off when people just make a joke and mockery of the comic book genre as if the standards are lower, but when I see people suggest professional wrestlers for a movie of this caliber.... it kind of gives some credence to the lowered standard idea.
Log in to comment