Podcast 164 Jan 2012: What did you think?

[BD]

The first show of 2012 is up. What did you think?
The opening song is here.


Topics discussed include:
*Christopher Waltz possibly cast as Norman Osborn in ASM Movie?
*Itune reviews from the UK and the US
* Thoughts on recent Crawlspace podcast interview with Peter David. He talked about the controversial One More Day storyline.
*A fan film is being produced that will give an ending to the 1990's animated Spider-Man cartoon. It will wrap up the Mary Jane storyline.
*Review of Amazing Spider-Man # 675

[gregxb]

Just for the record, Christoph Waltz was in "Inglourious Basterds" (which you all knew) and he was awesome in it. He was critically acclaimed, and even won Best Supporting Actor at the Academy Awards for it. The guy is good.

Is he the right casting for Osborn? I'm not sure. We'll see.

I usually prefer when unknown actors are cast as well known characters, that way you see the character and not the actor. Look at most of the "Lord of the Rings" cast. At the time, most of them were unknowns. Elijah Wood, Sir Ian McKellan, Cate Blanchett, Liv Tyler, and Christopher Lee were already pretty well known, but most of the rest weren't.

That being said, I get the same overall negative vibe by this movie as you do, George. Not from the casting, but from everything else.

But George, awesome story about getting drunk with the Kingpin.

[Aziz]

My reaction about that guy to play as Norman is the same as George; "Who?", but there's where it ends

I'm with Josh about Hugo Weaving, and didn't recognize him as the villain from Matrix

I was looking forward to Spider-Man 4, but considering how I started feeling the movies campy the past few weeks I'm thrilled the Spider-Man franchise gets a reboot. I still love those movies, SM3 the most, I only won't look as seriously as I did back at the time at them

Never felt the water clone mess good for laughs

[DarkKnightJared]

Christoph Waltz as Norman--I like. I like a lot. Looking at his role in Inglorious Basterds, he was a man who you know is a really sick man, whom you never know just how much he knows or is plotting, and when he does take a matter into his own hands in the movie, it is sudden, personal, and violent--that all screams solid attributes for Norman Osborn to me.

I'm with Brad on not understanding the argument why the cast being lesser-knowns or old school guys who haven't been around is such a bad thing. I would imagine that if the big-name stars of the day were cast for this, there would be a mountainload of complaints about that. And if part of the reasoning is to keep cost down--what's so bad about that? Hopefully that just means that more money would be put to the FX.

"The Stuntman Junk Incident." I don't know if that's a good name for a band, but it'll DEFINITELY be a good name for an album.

Good episode.

[FSUSpiderFan]

I guess George is the kinda guy you either love to hate or hate to love. I'm in the second camp If only you knew you were sharing drinks with the Kingpin... You could have asked to see his laser cane.

I'm glad Bertone braved through the swine flue, clone degeneration, or technovirus to call in the show.

It was weird to hear Don miss his cue on a SCIENCE!

[Spider-Dad]

Another fine podcast from the gang. I found some of the podcast reviews very funny, including the call out on George. Sorry reviewer, I am with George on this one. He calls them as he sees them and typically has good points to back his point of view...I mean how can you argue with a dude who got drunk with the Kingpin!

Christopher Waltz is not a household name, but as stated by others is an Oscar Winner from Inglourious Basterds. For me he was the only redeeming part of that movie and could pull off Norman Osborn very well. I think this could be an excellent choice for Norman.

Brad, you mentioned Spider-Man #3 made the most money. Not so fast...according to box office receipts. This is the money trail:

- Spider-Man #1 - $403 mil
- Spider-Man #2 - $373 mil
- Spider-Man #3 - $336 mil

The franchise was going in the wrong financial direction, and the new one will not crack $300 mil. Most people I know are just not interested since it is a reboot. Avengers? Yes. Dark Knight? Yes. Spider-Man Reboot? Not so much...

Now on to the next episode!

[BD]

Brad, you mentioned Spider-Man #3 made the most money. Not so fast...according to box office receipts. This is the money trail:

- Spider-Man #1 - $403 mil
- Spider-Man #2 - $373 mil
- Spider-Man #3 - $336 mil

The franchise was going in the wrong financial direction, and the new one will not crack $300 mil. Most people I know are just not interested since it is a reboot. Avengers? Yes. Dark Knight? Yes. Spider-Man Reboot? Not so much...

Now on to the next episode!

Spider-Dad,
I'm glad you're catching up on the podcasts. But I'm going to dispute your numbers. You're only talking about US totals. I'm talking world wide.
Spider-Man #1- $821,708,551 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman.htm
Spider-Man #2- $783,766,341 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman2.htm
Spider-Man #3- $890,871,626 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman3.htm

[FSUSpiderFan]

Brad, you mentioned Spider-Man #3 made the most money. Not so fast...according to box office receipts. This is the money trail:

- Spider-Man #1 - $403 mil
- Spider-Man #2 - $373 mil
- Spider-Man #3 - $336 mil

The franchise was going in the wrong financial direction, and the new one will not crack $300 mil. Most people I know are just not interested since it is a reboot. Avengers? Yes. Dark Knight? Yes. Spider-Man Reboot? Not so much...

Now on to the next episode!

'
Yeah, I am sure Sony loves the money no matter what country it came from.

Spider-Dad,
I'm glad you're catching up on the podcasts. But I'm going to dispute your numbers. You're only talking about US totals. I'm talking world wide.
Spider-Man #1- $821,708,551 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman.htm
Spider-Man #2- $783,766,341 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman2.htm
Spider-Man #3- $890,871,626 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman3.htm

[Spider-Dad]

Spider-Dad,
I'm glad you're catching up on the podcasts. But I'm going to dispute your numbers. You're only talking about US totals. I'm talking world wide.
Spider-Man #1 - $821,708,551 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman.htm
Spider-Man #2 - $783,766,341 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman2.htm
Spider-Man #3 - $890,871,626 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman3.htm

You are correct, I was only looking at the domestic sales. Well, that will teach me in trying to challenge you!

Cheers to you. Plus the Cardinals won the season opener!