How does this affect Albert Pooholes?

Yes! Albert Poo Holes!

With great gifts I think you have great responsibilities as well.

Mankind -- that word should have new meaning for all of us today.

We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore.

We will be united in our common interests.

Perhaps its fate that today is the 4th of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom, not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution -- but from annihilation.

We're fighting for our right to live, to exist.

And should we win the day, the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:

"We will not go quietly into the night!

We will not vanish without a fight!

We're going to live on!

We're going to survive!"

Today, we celebrate our Independence Day!

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh let's get those ####### aliens! Let's get 'em!

I mean... um...

Ex-Ray.

Get it? Ex-Ray? Haha! Hahaha!

The judge said, "with great gifts comes great responsibilities". Isn't that a line from the first Spider-Man movie? I think the judge is confused. Elijah Dukes slings a lot of web but only the kind that impregnates foster children.

How does this affect Albert Pooholes?

Am I the only one the refers to him as Pu Pu? People at bars here look at me like I'm crazy when I scream it out after he does something good, even though I'm probably the most adamant fan around here.


(Relevence to article = -3 but just a sidenote)

Am I the only one the refers to him as Pu Pu?

Yes. Thankfully.

25 hours of cleaning zoo cages for smoking dope, do I have that right?
what was he on probation for, anybody remember?

I think it was for giving someone a "taser" at the bar...

oh wait that's Al Reyes

(when the Yanks played the Rays a couple of series back people were going like WTF? why is Reyes on the mound and not in jail? he then promptly served up a tie breaking taser .

Did the judge seriously paraphrase Uncle Ben from Spiderman?

Historically great offensive force. Hawaiian appetizer. Nope, not working for me.

I’m hoping this experience, albeit for six months … will at least set a positive turn for your future.”

"Now get out there and don't kill the mothers of your children, you big lug."

Did the judge seriously paraphrase Uncle Ben from Spiderman?

To make matters worse, he thought he was channeling the rice guy.

I think there's a 5% chance a kangaroo bearing a remarkable resemblance to a Washington Nats outfielder may be born this year. Restraining orders to follow.

Great thread for a slow Friday at work.

Maybe this will help them solve those panda fertility issues.

what was he on probation for, anybody remember?

weed possession < 20g

Mankind -- that word should have new meaning for all of us today.

"Maybe in order to understand mankind we have to look at that word itself. Mankind. Basically, it's made up of two separate words: 'mank' and 'ind.' What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind."
~ Jack Handey

I think there's a 5% chance a kangaroo bearing a remarkable resemblance to a Washington Nats outfielder may be born this year.

"The kid hits for power and keeps his glove in his pouch! What's there not to love about him?"

Maybe it was like that old Cheech and Chong movie. One of the animals ate the weed and he was cleaning up after the animals to see if he could recover it.

"The kid hits for power and keeps his glove in his pouch! What's there not to love about him?"

I call him a Dookaroo.

Anybody else have a "Raging Bull" moment when they saw the headline?

I think there's a 5% chance a kangaroo bearing a remarkable resemblance to a Washington Nats outfielder may be born this year. Restraining orders to follow.

Sure, if you can count on justice from a kangaroo court.

The judge said, "with great gifts comes great responsibilities". Isn't that a line from the first Spider-Man movie?

Allow me to geek out for a moment: This was first written by Stan Lee as "With great power there must also come - great responsibility!" in the first appearance of Spider-Man, Amazing Fantasy #15 (1962). It was then morphed into the much more poetic and "With great power comes great responsibility" in later stories. It's often noted as coming from the 2002 crap-ass Spider-Man movie, but it had appeared in many many MANY Spider-Man stories for decades previously.

Even with everything else he's done, it is most likely this phrase that will carry Stan Lee into immortality.

(I must credit Wikipedia for some help here.)

(I must credit Wikipedia for some help here.)

phew, for a second there I thought you were just a huge nerd

I disagree with the "crap-ass" review, but when I mentioned Spiderman (no hyphen, as I am not a nerd) after missing the first Spider-Man comment, I was most definitely referring to the comic book. Sam Raimi rules.

Spiderman! That nice jewish boy from Queens? His father owned that bakery I think.

Well, I think the problem was that I waited FOR TWENTY YEARS FOR THAT MOVIE and my expectations were so high there wasn't really a chance in hell it could live up.

That being said, I still think the writing was awful, and each successive film only got worse.

If the Spiderman movie was crap-ass, Stan Lee's writing is...well, what's worse than crap-ass? Crap-licious? Crap-asstical? Nothing could be crap-ass compared to Lee.

That would depend on the output (1962? 1972? 1986? 2007?) and how you judge his ideas vs. his scripts over 5 or so decades of work. He has certainly written some garbage, but do you judge Neil Young by Landing on Water or Prince by The Rainbow Children?

Even if that judgment was made about Stan Lee (and for various periods over a 50-year writing career it would be stupid to disagree) it has nothing to do with SIX WHOLE HOURS (over the course of a few years, I guess) the screenwriters couldn't manage to do a decent job with.

I liked the Spiderman movies because they got Toby McGuire. Toby is a huge douchesack and acts like one in the movie, which is precisely what's supposed to happen, becuase Peter Parker is supposed to be a tool.

That would depend on the output (1962? 1972? 1986? 2007?) and how you judge his ideas vs. his scripts over 5 or so decades of work. He has certainly written some garbage, but do you judge Neil Young by Landing on Water or Prince by The Rainbow Children?

You raise some good points; I'm not the world's #1 Stan Lee expert, or even the #1,000,000. But I judge by the Spiderman #1 etc. comics I read a couple of years ago when they were printed and distributed with the Sunday paper here. The person who wrote those wrote badly. The screenplay did what it could to smooth over the rough spots, but it couldn't help being a bit clunky if it was going to adhere to the original idea (straying from it was apparently not an option).

I'm curious to know what you found to be wanting in the movie treatment vs. the comic.

only primates could turn elijah dukes picks up gorilla poopoo into spiderman and stan lee

only primates could turn elijah dukes picks up gorilla poopoo into spiderman and stan lee

Tell it to the judge.

only primates could turn elijah dukes picks up gorilla poopoo into spiderman and stan lee

I fully expect it to morph once more into a Selig-bashing thread once the infamous "Spider-Man II MLB" weekend is retold.

This thread may be like the Borg (or Omega series Sentinels, if you want to keep it in the Marvel family), where it adapts to anything you can throw at it.

The first Spider-man issue was definitely clunky, as well as just about all of the early issues of any later popular comic. But the legendary popularity of the character that finally spawned the film did not spring fully formed from Amazing Fantasy #15. It was the growth of the character and the world he inhabited over time that made Stan Lee a groundbreaker. Real-world problems and neuroses, a life outside the superhero, emotional complexity, even a bit of current events (racial and drug issues). This stuff was all conceptually started by Lee, and whereas the heyday of the popularity was probably in the 70's/80's and Lee was most likely gone and it was Romita's baby by then (I'm enough of a nerd to know who Romita was, but not enough to know who wrote Spider-Man during what decades), it is the stuff Lee did there and with a continuing string of popular of characters tha garners him icon status.

As far as the movie, it was really the same problem I would have with any film that seems to cater rather than give the audience credit for appreciating the intelligence of complex characters. It isn't unique to Spider-Man, I again simply had a greater connection to the story after all those years.

To get deeper into it, Peter Parker may have been a dweeb (something he actually lost quite quickly in the comic, becoming just a regular guy) but it was when he was Spider-Man that he broke out, constantly smart-ass, far more confident, a talker. He was totally wooden in the films, and Parker was stiffer than he EVER was in the comic, even in the first issue. I'd have to watch the films again to really list everything I found specifically terrible, but for the first one, I'd just have to say it was just overall disappointing. The third one was simply awful. No explanation of any of the characters or villians, Sandman thrown in for.... no reason at all, Harry Osborn is evil, no he's not (and he was a GREAT character in the comics), the whole thing was just total crap.

Comics have been massively popular for decades. Hollywood decided to try and translate that to film but of course, the reasons they've been popular couldn't actually be VALID, so we'll just do it the way MOVIES should be done. Despite the success of the Spider-Man franchise (obviously not everyone holds my opinion), almost all superhero comic films have been massive failures (EXCEPTIONS I'm remembering: Hellboy, 300, Sin City, all maverick-type non-Hollywood productions). I think it's kind of a shame, but I'm not really that concerned or horrified, it's just kind of fascinating to watch them do the same things and have them fall flat time after time. I'm hoping Favreau succeeds with Iron Man, but I'm not holding my breath.

Are you saying 300 is bad? F!@# you.

Also, Kirsten Dunst is better as the redhead. Even though it's fake.

Wok, try reading. 300 is listed as an exception to failure. Not only that, I liked it. Wasn't as good as the original material, but it was one of the better adaptations of comic-book work.

The third Spider-man movie is just awful. Awful awful awful. The scene in the jazz club might be the worst scene I've ever seen on film. (Though they did destroy the building I work in, which was nice.) Dr. Octavius was the only character in the three movies I thought was interesting. Alfred Molina did a good job with the role, I thought.

Dr. Octavius was the only character in the three movies I thought was interesting.

True, and they even screwed him up. A beautiful wife? The arms are evil and he's not, sacrificing himself at the end?

almost all superhero comic films have been massive failures (EXCEPTIONS I'm remembering: Hellboy, 300, Sin City, all maverick-type non-Hollywood productions).

So you're not eagerly anticipating the Hollywood remake of the Japanese manga adapted Korean Oldboy? I'd say the first Spider-Man film was adequate to good, no more or less so than 300 or Hellboy. I was entertained, but they're nowhere near any favorite movie lists I may compose.

The basic thematic elements in most of the DC and Marvel comic books from the 60s and 70s are classic, and really hooked me. The majority of the film adaptations failed to translate what quite a few people liked about comics. Raimi at least realized that, and I thought Heroes was a fresh take on comic bookery on the (small) screen. The writers had the freedom of more than 2 hours or so to establish what makes the characters tick using classic comic book hero templates.

I'm off to try on my Jon J'onzz costume...

Clarify 'successes' and 'failures' - financial, or adapting the source material? Cause I'm pretty sure the X-Men series made barge-fuls of cash.

(EDIT: and Batman Returns)

Alfred Molina did a good job with the role, I thought.

Agree in spades. He was smugissimo yet at the same time subtle; none of that Jack Nicholson I-gotta-take-over-the-movie grandstanding. You really couldn't ask for better comic book acting.

As far as the movie, it was really the same problem I would have with any film that seems to cater rather than give the audience credit for appreciating the intelligence of complex characters. It isn't unique to Spider-Man, I again simply had a greater connection to the story after all those years.

Your whole post was well-said, Lassus; thank you for responding. If they get so far in the series as to treat the parts of it you liked, then maybe they will finally do Spidey (and Lee) justice.

300 was horrid. It might be the worst film I've seen in several years that was not was not made for cable. Other the first 5 minutes of fighting where the phalanx was intact there wasn't a single good thing about it. The X-Men movies have been pretty good; outstanding when compared to the other recent Marvel adaptations, although I have high hopes for Ironman. IMO, Mystery Men is the best of the superhero genre, but I don't think it copied a comic.

Spider Man 2 was a great movie. Easily the most compelling film of the three and one of the best of the massive spurt of comic book movies to come out. The Parker's struggles with life, and their effects on his Spider-Man alter ego gives it one of the best stories a comic book movie has had IMO. It really doesn't much bother me when they change the shape of the characters in order to make a movie, I'm not really all that attached to the comic books.

You also left Batman Begins off of the non-massive failure list.

Oh and 300 sucked. The conversation was absurd, and not in a good way like in Sin City.

300 sucked

It was, however, the slickest advertisement for National Socialism ever produced. Leni Riefenstahl wished she could make it look that heroic.

I saw a preview for a Will Smith summer blockbuster called "Hancock"--is that based on a comic book?

Also, I think "Mystery Men" was based on a graphic novel.

Oh my God. Batman Begins. Not Batman Returns. Oh my God. I am so ashamed.

I agree with Batman Begins. I especially liked the way they worked in the bat swarm from Miller's Batman Year One.

I liked the first Keaton Batman -- no robin, Jack Nicholson as the Joker, reasonable stuff. That franchise went down hill so fast after that, it was shocking.

The first two Christopher Reeves Superman movies were good adaptations, especially given the technical limitations of the time, and the difficulties of working with such a omnipotent character -- except of course for that godawful "turn back the earth -- turn back time" BS, and Gene Hackman as a comic Lex Luthor -- one of the worst performances of his career. The more recent Superman was not too bad.

The X-Man movies have been okay.

Ang Lee's Hulk was unspeakably horrible. Hell, I preferred Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno to that mess.

The first Spiderman was not too bad. The second had its moments. Here is hoping the third one kills off the franchise, if that is how it is going to go.

To be a little more clear, I was speaking of financially successful. With that being said, I guess the X-Men films have been successful, as well as the recent (and first - yay Prince) Batman movie. And believe me, I would never discard the subjective quality of these judgments regarding how good the films are or not.

HOWEVER, even if you take these against everything else, hooo-boy. Here's a Wiki list of American comic book superhero films I would deem colloquially as financial failures off the top of my head:

Batman Returns (1992)
Batman Forever (1995)
Batman & Robin (1997)
Captain America (1991)
Catwoman (2004)
Daredevil (2003)
Elektra (2005)
Ghost Rider (2007)
Howard the Duck (1986)
Hulk (2003)
Judge Dredd (1995)
Man-Thing (2005)
The Punisher (1989)
The Punisher (2004)
Red Sonja (1985)
The Rocketeer (1991)
Spawn (1997)
Superman III (1983)
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987)
Swamp Thing (1982)
The Return of Swamp Thing (1989)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret of the Ooze (1991)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III (1993)

This doesn't count the films I count as failures as films. I thought the Fantastic Four films were TERRIBLE oh god make it stop torture please I'll do anything. But even those were financial successes, and 300 absolutely had it's problems.

I just don't think Hollywood has a good superhero success rate. Then again, a majority of films made suck anyhow and are rightfully barely seen, so maybe it's no issue at all.

In terms of graphic novel to the screen -- did anyone else like the Road to Perdition? There were some scenes -- especially at the end, where Hanks shoots Newman's bodyguards, and then Newman -- which really caught the feel of a graphic novel.

I saw it (Road to Perdition), and liked it, but never read the graphic novel, so I might not be the best judge. I'd need to see it again to comment on pure quality of the film, but it had some amazingly beautiful mooments and shots. I remember the cinematography being excellent.

Batman Returns and Batman Forever were financial failures or even Ghost Rider? Or is this in terms of production cost and overall cost?

And I might be one of the few people in the world who actually liked Ang Lee's Incredible Hulk movie.

The Wolverine stand-alone movie should be interesting.

The worse thing about Spiderman to me was the casting of Kirsten Dunst.

Sin City and 300 were near pitch-perfect adaptations of Miller's (hugely varied) graphic styling.

The script for Ang Lee's Hulk left a lot to be desired, but I really liked the comic-panel transitions, and I think I get what Lee was trying to do. I need to watch it again. Is there a cut available without the Hulk-hounds?

The best Batman movie ever, btw, is Mask of the Phantasm. Subzero was damn good too, but I might edge Begins ahead of it.

Batman Returns and Batman Forever were financial failures or even Ghost Rider? Or is this in terms of production cost and overall cost?

Please keep in mind these were my colloquial judgments and do not take into account foreigns receipts or the fact that I don't actually work in the movie business. They were overall guesses. I was thinking as I was compiling that maybe some of the Batman films may have done all right. Ghost Rider seemed to vanish from the theaters faster than a flaming skeleton on a motorcycle.

I was just wondering, Batman Forever was 2nd in the box office in 1995 (behind Toy Story) and Batman Returns was 3rd in 1992 (behind Aladdin and Home Alone 2). Ghost Rider made over 100 million, which surprised me..

I'm waiting with bated breath for Watchmen next year, even if Alan Moore wants nothing to do with it.

In terms of graphic novel to the screen -- did anyone else like the Road to Perdition? There were some scenes -- especially at the end, where Hanks shoots Newman's bodyguards, and then Newman -- which really caught the feel of a graphic novel.


I didn't know Road to Perdition was a graphic novel. I'll have to see it now. I thought V is for Vendetta was a pretty reasonable adaptation. From Hell wasn't bad either. The Punisher movie (Thomas Jane, not Dolph) was a fantastic adaptation of Ennis' Welcome Back, Frank.

There are certain problems in translation that will always feel off, particularly for comics that are from long-term series. No movie will ever set enough groundwork for you to really appreciate the nature of Peter Parker's relationship with the Osbornes or Flash Thompson or MJ as it is laid out over years in the books themselves. The magic of Spider-Man in particular is something that doesn't carry the big screen.

The problem that's more blameworthy is when there's this need to make the story bigger and bigger. One villain isn't interesting enough, so we need two or three. Spider-Man 3 was particularly awful in this regard, but Batman did it too until they rebooted with Christian Bale. The other thing is that for some reason, directors can't end the movie without killing the bad guy. So each sequel develops the antagonists less effectively, and races through them, and the later movies have less meat. And then you need to add even more dramatic effect, so you start axing the good guys like in X-Men 3.

I've never seen a Spider-Man movie, and probably never will, but "With great power there must also come - great responsibility!" is a paraphrase of a much older quote, said by some dude named Jesus. His line is usually translated as "To whom much has been given, much shall be expected."

I just hope that Dukes shows restraint when the chimps taunt him.

I can't believe there's been no mention yet of The Phantom ("Slam Evil!") or Tank Girl or the original Fantastic Four (the one which Marvel buried, but of which I've seen a copy... and I'm not sure it's significantly worse than the one than the Jessica Alba "vehicle").

I've never seen a Spider-Man movie, and probably never will, but "With great power there must also come - great responsibility!" is a paraphrase of a much older quote, said by some dude named Jesus. His line is usually translated as "To whom much has been given, much shall be expected."

Stan Lee admits as much:

I heard Stan Lee speak at a college in Connecticut many, many years ago...and/or I read it later in an interview with him...where he said he enjoyed reading the Bible as Great Literature and a source of story ideas. I think he may have said at that time that the "with great power comes great responsibility" quote was adapted from what Jesus Christ says in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 12, verse 48: "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

I thought V is for Vendetta was a pretty reasonable adaptation.

I forgot that one. I really loved that comic when it first came out as part of the old "Warrior" magazine from Britain. The adaptation was about as good as you could hope for something of that scope.

I've never seen a Spider-Man movie, and probably never will, but "With great power there must also come - great responsibility!" is a paraphrase of a much older quote, said by some dude named Jesus. His line is usually translated as "To whom much has been given, much shall be expected."

If you're going to get into paraphrasing as being the same thing as saying something, this Jesus dude wasn't particularly original either.

Vortex, where is that quote from of someone remembering something Lee might have said?

The best Batman movie ever, btw, is Mask of the Phantasm.

Nah, the best Batman movie ever was this one.

-- MWE

The most interesting character in the Spiderman movies is always whatever one Bruce Campbell happened to play.

I'm one of those few that really likes BATMAN RETURNS as Tim Burton managed to smuggle an Expressionist art film, with the protagonist fighting three versions of himself, in the form of a Hollywood action blockbuster. Plot difficulties aside, it's the only superhero movie that I find interesting in cinematic terms.

Also, the fact that there were sequels to BATMAN RETURNS and BATMAN FOREVER is pretty solid evidence that they weren't financial failures. Especially since adjusted for inflation their equivalent domestic grosses were in the mid-$200 million range.

Vortex, where is that quote from of someone remembering something Lee might have said?

Sorry - I meant to include the link in the original post, and forgot!:

Quote about Stan Lee

I just hope that Dukes shows restraint when the chimps taunt him.

I think the chimps could take him. Chimps are much stronger than humans, and have claws and teeth.

I say if he beats his girlfriend again, throw him to the chimps!

And I too thought 300 was terrible.

I say if he beats his girlfriend again

when did he beat his girlfriend the first time.

17. The Good Face Posted: April 25, 2008 at 09:50 AM (#2758486)
Maybe this will help them solve those panda fertility issues.

15. Shooty misses Bill King Posted: April 25, 2008 at 09:12 AM (#2758456)
I think there's a 5% chance a kangaroo bearing a remarkable resemblance to a Washington Nats outfielder may be born this year. Restraining orders to follow.

Curious. Dukes appears to have zero problems getting women, so what makes you jump to beastiality?
So much so that you would even throw odd's on it happening.

thats some sick repressed chit right there people.

Wok, try reading. 300 is listed as an exception to failure.

Sorry, but you put Hellboy in the same sentence, and I associate hellboy with Failure.

I thought V is for Vendetta was a pretty reasonable adaptation.

That was good.

Speaking of Spider-Man, I think it's neat that the original art from Amazing Fantasy #15 (Spider-Man's first appearance) has been donated to the Library of Congress.