Comments on: The perils of coincidence

By: Kenny

Kenny — Tue, 29 May 2007 05:25:42 +0000

To Bryant: The truck said SAND on the door… so yeah, it was a sand truck, and yet another convenient coincidence. It’s one thing to be wrong but you don’t have to be such a jerk about it.

By: bryant

bryant — Sun, 27 May 2007 03:14:16 +0000

to greg about one movie cant do what comics do. thats they made three movies you FUCKING CLOWN.

By: bryant

bryant — Sun, 27 May 2007 03:09:24 +0000

one more post to ignored and bored. how dumb do you have to be? the truck wasn’t full of sand , marko turned into sand and it spread over what ever was in the truck.

By: bryant

bryant — Sun, 27 May 2007 03:06:06 +0000

is ti just me who feels the end of the dance scene gave peter motivation tget rid of the black suit? I agree with octavio on the whole real killer is sandman thing, but more than half of the “coincedences” listed are subtle or explained by the comics and as for eddie being the only one in the church, take a like inside your nearest church in the middle of night and tell me how many people are in there it aint packed i’ll say that much. i feel like fernando is the only other guy defending this movie. just because it didn’t top the 2 before it dosent mean it was a bad movie.

By: Andy Polaine

Andy Polaine — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:58:20 +0000

Aristotle said "probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities". That is, it is impossible for people to fly without aid, but once you've set up the background Peter Pan flying is believable (or perhaps I should be saying Peter Parker in this example?).

But Peter Pan and Captain Hook sitting down over a cup of tea to chat things over is possible but not probable and hence unbelievable (or at least it doesn't make for much drama).

By: Grant Cathro (screenwriter)

Grant Cathro (screenwriter) — Sun, 20 May 2007 11:41:25 +0000

And yet ... coincidence is a big part of our real lives!

Coincidences happen to everybody every day, sometimes they're so outlandish that they leave you gasping with disbelief. "You wouldn't believe it in a film!" etc.

So how does a screenwriter use coincidence? To avoid it or ignore it is bogus. I heard a great screenwriter's tip, which I'll share here. It's this. Employ coincidence, but NEVER USE IT TO HELP A CHARACTER, only to HINDER.

I liked that a lot. Hope you do too.

By: Chris Danvers

Chris Danvers — Sun, 20 May 2007 10:23:22 +0000

I just saw this and I got to say it really, really disappointed me... so many problemsâ€¦ I think coincidences sucked, but the simple things like the butler withholding info seemed idioticâ€¦ Did he ever show interest in the guyâ€™s life before?

I canâ€™t believe no one has mentioned the crane sceneâ€¦ Peter saves Gwen, then swings away! What about the crane? (Not to mentioned that the crane has zero resistance going thru the building, I thought the CGI way too cartoon-like, unbelievable)â€¦

I thought the emo Spiderman was by far the best bit if the film, but for all the wrong reasonsâ€¦ hilarious!

By: Lyndon N

Lyndon N — Tue, 15 May 2007 16:20:30 +0000

What really made the Butler scene ridiculous was the fact he even knew about the glider, I was sitting in the cinema thinking “What!? You knew your owner was the murdering psychopathetic killer named “Green Goblin” and you never once thought of informing the police of his where abouts?” Thats one f-ed up Butler.

By: James

James — Tue, 15 May 2007 12:56:47 +0000

…oh, and how did the butler know willem defoe had done himself in?? this isnt rhetorical, i just remember thinking it sounded remarkably tenuous…

By: ScreenwriterJ

ScreenwriterJ — Tue, 15 May 2007 01:04:46 +0000

Did Mary Jane really fall in love with Harry? There seemed to be something in that kiss. She did date him first, anyway, and never seemed to be that into Peter to begin with. Either way, she never explains why she didn't tell Peter the bridge break-up was a set up at the time, or later that everything she said was a lie.

This makes the ending fall flat in that the audience doesn't know if MJ still loves Peter.

By: Octavio

Octavio — Mon, 14 May 2007 23:56:00 +0000

what about the coincidence of having harry's butler, in III act, earing spider-man ask for help to harry, and having him reveling to him ( after all this time) that he knows that spider-man didn't kill his father.

but for me the biggest mistake comes from the idea of putting Sandman the real killer of uncle Ben's. The reason Spider-man existes, his drive, is the guilt of having the power to stop the thief who killed his uncle and not doing it. Again, it's about guilt. Peter Parker carries the weight of that guilt with him. That's why he is Spider-man.