View Full Version : Disappointing news about Spidey 3 costumes...

10-05-2005, 05:49 AM
just read this tidbit on FreezeDriedMovies.com.

Basically the costume design in Spiderman 3 is a disaster, just like Mr. Green Goblin in the first Spidey. Our scooper writes in, "If you thought the first 'Spiderman' was bad in terms of development, just wait until you see the next film. The first problem is with Venom's costume, which Spiderman wears first. Instead of being pure black, they took a bit from the comic and gave it a disgusting purple tint. In the comic the reason for the tint was to Venom stood out in the shadows, but in film there's no reason for this. Now I've actually seen the costume designs and they're terrible. The purple looks awful.

And yes it gets much, much worse. All I can say about the Hobgoblin outfit is "yikes"! He looks like a skateboarder or something."

you'd think they'd have paid attention to the moans n groans of the first movie. hopefully this isnt true.

Shadow King
10-05-2005, 06:03 AM
I am praying this isn't true.
It would be a sin to turn this movie in to the next Batman trash.
They have so much going for them with this series and can carry it a bit more, but it sounds like they are taking it too far.

Darth Waller
10-05-2005, 06:47 AM
Someone needs to leak some pictures, pronto! If they truly look like this: :sick.

I always thought the Green Goblin from the first movie looked like a Power Rangers reject.

10-05-2005, 06:51 AM
This Is Starting To Get Worse. Please, Do Not Let Them Put Nips On Spidey's Suit Like They Did Batman's. This Sounds Like Spidey Is Taking A Turn For The Worst. Raimi Would Not Do This Would He?

Darth Waller
10-05-2005, 07:22 AM
He's going to let someone remake Evil Dead, so there's no telling what he's capable of doing.

Darklord Dave
10-05-2005, 09:18 AM
One fanboy posting his reaction doesn't influence me either way. Sounds like the guy just wants to dis something.

But I kind of liked the Green Goblin costume - how do you fit the comic book costume into the real world? It would have just looked stupid, like one of those Corman Marvel movies.

10-05-2005, 10:05 AM
I hope they do Venom justice onscreen. I didn't like the GG costume in the
first movie, as it just wasn't the GG that it could have been. I understand
why it was done, and it made more "sense" being armor and all, but I'd hav loved
to see the Green Goblin known best from the comics, and that is the one I wanted.
And I'm not even a comic reader at this point - just somebody who remembers
reading them as a kid, and wanted to see that portrayal on screen.
I also watched all the spidey cartoons, and those I remember very fondly.


Bodie The Cursed
10-05-2005, 12:40 PM
Blah Blah Blah.. The Sky is falling too..

10-05-2005, 04:51 PM
Plus the fact that shooting just begun, I have no faith in that posting..

10-05-2005, 05:11 PM
Their was something wrong with the costumes in Roger Corman's Fantastic Four movie? I really (and I mean it) liked the foam rubber Doctor Doom costume better than the goofy suit used in the new version. The Thing looked fine too. I far prefer classic silly to updated silly anytime.

But I'm not going to worry about the costumes in Spiderman 3 too much. I doubt I'll ever be perfectly happy with any superhero costume they use in a live action movie. Well, I thought the old Superman costume Christopher Reeve wore was great and the suit in "Batman: Dead End" was beyond perfect. Maybe they could make me perfectly happy. But I don't think they care. Too worried about thier "artistic vision" I imagine than to worry about fanboys.

But mostly I hate the casting and that to me is a way bigger problem than the costumes. Worrying about costumes you haven't even seen is pointless. Worrying about terrible actors you have seen who have been improperly cast for roles seems reasonable. Yup, I think that's a problem for S3.

Darklord Dave
10-05-2005, 07:25 PM
Movie costumes are more about what works outside of a 2D world rather than "artistic vision."

I don't know much about Venom or how they're going to characterize him, so I don't know if Topher is a good choice or not. But if he is a dark version of Parker than it would seem like a good idea, he and Toby could be geeky brothers.

And THC is perfect for Sandman I think.

10-06-2005, 08:11 AM
I don't think your a hundred percent correct on the "artistic vision" thing Dave. It's partly about "what works" on screen, sure. That's why so many superheroes switch to bondage-wear for the movies. Black leather is easier to do and a whole lot more forgiving of the actors flaws than tight fitting cloth costumes.
Supermans new costume though isn't any more or less difficult to make work on the screen than the costume Christopher Reeve wore. But the director wanted something more "hip" and modern than the comic or first movie series version. Personally I think the new costume is about as hip as IDAK on "Lost in Space". But that's me. And at least it isn't black leather.
I think the movie F.F looked pretty darned good in costumes that are very close to comic versions. I agree every costume wouldn't transfer to motion pictures as well as these. But the director and creative design people held faith to the comics as regards the FF costumes (sadly not Doom's) and didn't dress these guys for a night at "The Ram-Rod".
Movie Spiderman himself certainly has some changes from the comic version, but overall he is awfully similar. The artists wanted to maintain his iconic design and did pretty well. I think they could have done a better job with Green goblin though by simply adding a tunic over the armor and it would have made sense in context of the character of Harry Osbourne to "change" the armors appearance and to add some insane menace to his alter ego. But that wasn't Raimi's "vision". It is about that and the desire the creative people feel to have there own impramature on the films they produce which seems perfectly reasonable. I'm just not always thrilled with the results. But as I mentioned, I'm a fanboy.

As far as the actors go, Topher Grace may do fine. I can't say as I have any reason to believe he's going to step up and suddenly demonstrate great thespic skills, but he doesn't really have to to be fine in this film. I'm sure if the role is carefully designed around his standard on screen persona it will work. Won't much resemble comic version but it doesn't have to.
Thomas Hayden Church on the other hand is a terrible ham and has great potential to do an awful job in any role he plays beyond the most over the top camp roles. I'm one of those people that thought "Sideways" would have beneftted greatly by recasting the male leads. Although he was fantastic in "Wings". Raimi's a good director, but getting anything other than a completely over the top perfomance out of this guy would be a miracle. But hey, it is a comic book movie so maybe it should be ridiculous. Who am I to judge?

10-06-2005, 08:19 AM
Hey Dave, how did I become "Freakalicious"? I'd way rather be "Freaktastic"!

10-06-2005, 08:41 AM
Hey Dave, how did I become "Freakalicious"? I'd way rather be "Freaktastic"!

Go to your profile and you will see change title :p

10-06-2005, 09:07 AM
the only reason this REALLY worries me a little about this is that if filming in fact has begun, thats the reason the costumes' specifics would start leaking out. Theyre not being kept tightly in the vault anymore cause theyre on set for many common-folk to see.
I just keep having flash-backs of the same rumors with the GG outift which most dismissed, but then the photos started showing up confirming the rumors.
But, until I see pics im gonna stay in my own world of denail cause I loved DocOc.

Darklord Dave
10-06-2005, 12:10 PM
Just a note on Topher Grace - he was very good in "In Good Company," showed far more acting chops than he has previously.

As for THC, we'll just have to disagree, I thought he was brilliant in Sideways. He can be a ham, but so can Alfred Molina and he did fine.

"Freakalicious" is a title that appears after a certain post count. You can give yourself a custom title if you want.

10-06-2005, 01:07 PM
Title change after a certain post count. Got it. More or less what I figured but I thought it was a funny title. I can't think of anything clever for a custom title though but it's nice to know I could have one. But they always seem way to revealing of your personality and I fear people I've never met know too much about me already. I reckon I will stay "Freakalicious" for while.

I do agree Alfred Molina camped it up a bit as Doc Ock and that he can be rather hammy. I did enjoy his performance though. I'm just not one of Mr. Church's fans. But he might be great in Spidey 3. The writers and director will have a lot more to do with how much I enjoy the film than the actors or the costume designers.
I'm just mad no one consulted me in pre-production on the story and casting. I know everyone wanted to see Duane Johnson as Rhino and Pete Postlethwaite (is that how he spells it?) as The Vulture. Well I did.

10-08-2005, 10:20 AM
Marvel will not let their foremost movie license go down the tubes with bad costuming. Marvel is here to stay in the movies for a while. I have feeling that neither Marvel, Sony or Raimi would try to sell a rose wrapped in a piece of poo. They want to continue to make Spidey movies & rake in the dough. The plots, charcters, action & CG is to get better with each movie, not worse.

As bad as the Green Goblin costume was, the set up for the suit & glider was shown in the movie. All and all, it really was not horrible. The GG did not keep people & comic fans from watching it or rewatching it. Based on movie sales & DVD sales.

Darklord Dave
10-08-2005, 03:20 PM
I would have to disagree that Marvel movies are bullet-proof. Fox seems especially inclined to cook the golden goose with setting release dates in stone before a script is completed. They did this with Elektra, FF and X3. Joss Whedon was approached for X3 and they told him the release date and he said it was impossible.

But as for Spidey - I have confidence in Raimi that he won't let something like costuming or casting compromise the film.

captain sack
10-08-2005, 05:10 PM
I would have to disagree that Marvel movies are bullet-proof. Fox seems especially inclined to cook the golden goose with setting release dates in stone before a script is completed. They did this with Elektra, FF and X3. Joss Whedon was approached for X3 and they told him the release date and he said it was impossible.

But as for Spidey - I have confidence in Raimi that he won't let something like costuming or casting compromise the film.

yea, elektra and blade 3 were horrible.......but based on spiderman 1 and 2, i have complete faith in the director.......and i've never read a marvel comic book, so i'm not a diehard fan who thinks the costume has to be exactly like it was in the comics.

12-02-2014, 04:08 PM
I mean the whole movie, really, was a disappointment.

Sweet Rabbit
12-02-2014, 04:42 PM
Necro post..