Jamie Foxx Is Spider-Man 2's Electro

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

Jamie Foxx Is Spider-Man 2's Electro

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> Jamie Foxx Is Spider-Man 2's Electro

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Jamie Foxx Is Spider-Man 2's Electro - 4/12/2012 12:00:00 PM

Empire Admin

Posts: 26334
Joined: 29/6/2005

Post your comments on this article

Post #: 1

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that.... - 4/12/2012 12:00:00 PM

Porter

Posts: 99
Joined: 13/12/2005

...Spider-man has all the worst arch-enemies. Electro? Bloody hell.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 2

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that.... - 4/12/2012 12:01:32 PM

Porter

Posts: 99
Joined: 13/12/2005

...Spider-man has all the worst arch-enemies. Electro? Bloody hell. If you're gonna use Jamie Foxx, then why not get him to reprise Django? He looks fucking dangerous. "I like the way you die, Spider-boy"

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 3

- 4/12/2012 1:05:43 PM

dunstabledoug

Posts: 63
Joined: 17/2/2006

Jamie Foxx is the new Kick-Ass..???!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 4

RE: - 4/12/2012 2:40:23 PM

Frank Castle

Posts: 2671
Joined: 14/10/2005
From: Parts Unknown

so much for a decent new franchise

_____________________________

" guys its ok, he just wanted his machette back"!!

(in reply to dunstabledoug)

Post #: 5

RE: RE: - 4/12/2012 3:29:32 PM

theoriginalcynic

Posts: 6517
Joined: 10/4/2007

The first one wasn't that decent. It was a three star movie but in many ways disappointing.

(in reply to Frank Castle)

Post #: 6

Foxx is Electro - 4/12/2012 4:32:24 PM

Macavity

Posts: 419
Joined: 14/4/2006

Fantastic news! Hoping Foxx brings some of the edge and attitude on display in the Django trailers. Ifans was fine but the franchise needs a shot in the arm to continue. Looking forward to what Foxx brings!

(in reply to theoriginalcynic)

Post #: 7

RE: Foxx is Electro - 4/12/2012 5:41:24 PM

jobloffski

Posts: 1837
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

Pleasantly surprised enough with the first one. Better, more believable Peter Parker, less annoying romance, lower budget showed a bit, though. Good reset after 3 made the series untenable, not least by removing the central motivation for the existence of spider man in the first place by making peter NOT responsible for the death of Uncle Ben

Nothing wrong with Electro as a villain, not now the effects to do what the character actually does are possible.

But Foxx? Jury out, but there's enough evidence for actors being able to pretend to be the person they're playing better than initial net outrage believes, so, screw it, Bring it on.

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to Macavity)

Post #: 8

Can't wait! - 4/12/2012 5:46:17 PM

dannyfletch

Posts: 585
Joined: 25/5/2008
From: Bromley

I really enjoyed the new reboot so am looking forward to this next installment.
Jamie Foxx seems to suit the part of Electro and I'm sure he will make for a pretty decent bad guy.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 9

RE: Foxx is Electro - 4/12/2012 5:52:15 PM

directorscut

Posts: 9843
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

lower budget showed a bit, though.

Film had a budget of $230 million, which when you take into account the huge salaries for Maguire, Dunst and Raimi, means in most likely had more money spent on production than Spider-Man 3 ($258 million).

_____________________________

Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to jobloffski)

Post #: 10

RE: Foxx is Electro - 4/12/2012 7:03:22 PM

jobloffski

Posts: 1837
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

lower budget showed a bit, though.

Film had a budget of $230 million, which when you take into account the huge salaries for Maguire, Dunst and Raimi, means in most likely had more money spent on production than Spider-Man 3 ($258 million).

Oh, I sit corrected. Well, in that case some of the effects where expensively not very good then, mistaken by me for budgetary compromises. Still, like the film and looking forward to the next one.

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to directorscut)

Post #: 11

- 4/12/2012 7:10:33 PM

sweetladybrick

Posts: 129
Joined: 20/12/2008

He does have some pretty ropey sounding villains. I was never a big fan of the idea of Electro- there was a particularly nasty dispatch for Sandman in James Cameron's intended version of Spiderman involving him. How about aiming for a villain that doesn't have a personal connection to Parker, that isn't a good man corrupted? How about just someone who's a bit of a prick to start with? No more pathos; bring on the Scorpion or some other idiot monster. There's nothing wrong with bad guys that aren't conflicted, but that's all we get in these movies now.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 12