<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_12_1453211</id>
	<title><em>Spider-Man 4</em> Scrapped, Franchise Reboot Planned</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1263311940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>derGoldstein writes <i>"Yesterday we discussed which sci-fi should <a href="http://ask.slashdot.org/story/10/01/11/1629214/What-SciFi-Should-Get-the-Reboot-Treatment-Next">get the reboot treatment</a> next. If you consider <em>Spider-Man</em> as 'proper sci-fi,' then it would appear that's the answer. 'Sony Pictures decided today to <a href="http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/urgent-spider-man-4-scrapped-as-is-raimi-and-cast-out-franchise-reboot-planned/">reboot the <em>Spider-Man</em> franchise</a> after Sam Raimi pulled out of <em>Spider-Man 4</em> because he felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity. This means that <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118013607.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1">Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out</a>. There will be no <em>Spider-Man 4</em>. Instead, the studio will focus on a reboot script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast.'"</i>
Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/07/22/1332226/Sam-Raimi-To-Direct-World-of-Warcraft-Movie">other projects</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>derGoldstein writes " Yesterday we discussed which sci-fi should get the reboot treatment next .
If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi, ' then it would appear that 's the answer .
'Sony Pictures decided today to reboot the Spider-Man franchise after Sam Raimi pulled out of Spider-Man 4 because he felt he could n't make its summer release date and keep the film 's creative integrity .
This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out .
There will be no Spider-Man 4 .
Instead , the studio will focus on a reboot script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast .
' " Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>derGoldstein writes "Yesterday we discussed which sci-fi should get the reboot treatment next.
If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi,' then it would appear that's the answer.
'Sony Pictures decided today to reboot the Spider-Man franchise after Sam Raimi pulled out of Spider-Man 4 because he felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity.
This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out.
There will be no Spider-Man 4.
Instead, the studio will focus on a reboot script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast.
'"
Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740488</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263324060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because if he developed spinnerets as a result of his mutation, they'd be in his ASS.</p><p>Come on, Hollywood!  A little realism, please?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because if he developed spinnerets as a result of his mutation , they 'd be in his ASS.Come on , Hollywood !
A little realism , please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because if he developed spinnerets as a result of his mutation, they'd be in his ASS.Come on, Hollywood!
A little realism, please?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739688</id>
	<title>i think it's time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263321120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for another one of  Uwe Boll's movie master pieces. lets see how he does with spiderman 4</p><p>lol detest was the capcha for this post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for another one of Uwe Boll 's movie master pieces .
lets see how he does with spiderman 4lol detest was the capcha for this post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for another one of  Uwe Boll's movie master pieces.
lets see how he does with spiderman 4lol detest was the capcha for this post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Trent Hawkins</author>
	<datestamp>1263316200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>ah, finally. What all fans have been waiting for since the first spider man... MECHANICAL WEBSHOOTERS!</htmltext>
<tokenext>ah , finally .
What all fans have been waiting for since the first spider man... MECHANICAL WEBSHOOTERS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ah, finally.
What all fans have been waiting for since the first spider man... MECHANICAL WEBSHOOTERS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396</id>
	<title>This is not a reboot</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1263316680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the industry is starting to use the term "reboot" in place of "screw-up."  There is no reason to reboot something recently made and still successful.  Remaking the first Spider Man movie would be dull.</p><p>I know, let's reboot Avatar!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the industry is starting to use the term " reboot " in place of " screw-up .
" There is no reason to reboot something recently made and still successful .
Remaking the first Spider Man movie would be dull.I know , let 's reboot Avatar !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the industry is starting to use the term "reboot" in place of "screw-up.
"  There is no reason to reboot something recently made and still successful.
Remaking the first Spider Man movie would be dull.I know, let's reboot Avatar!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738680</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1263317640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"new goblin" had some level of appeal, but beyond that, meh...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" new goblin " had some level of appeal , but beyond that , meh.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"new goblin" had some level of appeal, but beyond that, meh...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739834</id>
	<title>Re:This rocks! I love the spiderman reboots..</title>
	<author>need4mospd</author>
	<datestamp>1263321660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've got a few more they can try...
<p>
Spiderman VII - Salvation</p><p>
Spiderman VIII - The Return of the King</p><p>
Spiderman and the Prisoner of Azkaban </p><p>
Spiderman X - Dead Man's Chest</p><p>
Spiderman XI - New Moon</p><p>
Spiderman Reloaded</p><p>
Spidermans (my favorite)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a few more they can try.. . Spiderman VII - Salvation Spiderman VIII - The Return of the King Spiderman and the Prisoner of Azkaban Spiderman X - Dead Man 's Chest Spiderman XI - New Moon Spiderman Reloaded Spidermans ( my favorite )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a few more they can try...

Spiderman VII - Salvation
Spiderman VIII - The Return of the King
Spiderman and the Prisoner of Azkaban 
Spiderman X - Dead Man's Chest
Spiderman XI - New Moon
Spiderman Reloaded
Spidermans (my favorite)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742008</id>
	<title>Too soon</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1263287160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do something new for films, like Metal Men (we have the CGI to do this now) or Doom Patrol</p><p>Or go completely nuts and do Mark Waid's "Irredeemable"</p><p>Or go even more completely nuts: The Umbrella Academy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do something new for films , like Metal Men ( we have the CGI to do this now ) or Doom PatrolOr go completely nuts and do Mark Waid 's " Irredeemable " Or go even more completely nuts : The Umbrella Academy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do something new for films, like Metal Men (we have the CGI to do this now) or Doom PatrolOr go completely nuts and do Mark Waid's "Irredeemable"Or go even more completely nuts: The Umbrella Academy</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740268</id>
	<title>Spiderwhimp</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263323340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why were the last ones so popular? Tobey Maquire's only expression was to stand and stare blankly. He's a block of wood as an actor and sucked as Spiderman. The whole character was yes he was unsure of himself as Peter Parker but he was confident and wise cracking when he was in the suit as Spiderman. The scripts were just plain goofy. The only redeeming thing were the villians. They tended to be solid to excellent. Rami did his best to cast himself as Spiderman and it just never worked. He kept trying to be funny and it didn't work. When he tried to be serious and strike emotional cords it got even worse and ironically even sillier. Is there any hope the reboot will be better? Probably not. Look at it this way, you want to see what Disney does with the character?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why were the last ones so popular ?
Tobey Maquire 's only expression was to stand and stare blankly .
He 's a block of wood as an actor and sucked as Spiderman .
The whole character was yes he was unsure of himself as Peter Parker but he was confident and wise cracking when he was in the suit as Spiderman .
The scripts were just plain goofy .
The only redeeming thing were the villians .
They tended to be solid to excellent .
Rami did his best to cast himself as Spiderman and it just never worked .
He kept trying to be funny and it did n't work .
When he tried to be serious and strike emotional cords it got even worse and ironically even sillier .
Is there any hope the reboot will be better ?
Probably not .
Look at it this way , you want to see what Disney does with the character ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why were the last ones so popular?
Tobey Maquire's only expression was to stand and stare blankly.
He's a block of wood as an actor and sucked as Spiderman.
The whole character was yes he was unsure of himself as Peter Parker but he was confident and wise cracking when he was in the suit as Spiderman.
The scripts were just plain goofy.
The only redeeming thing were the villians.
They tended to be solid to excellent.
Rami did his best to cast himself as Spiderman and it just never worked.
He kept trying to be funny and it didn't work.
When he tried to be serious and strike emotional cords it got even worse and ironically even sillier.
Is there any hope the reboot will be better?
Probably not.
Look at it this way, you want to see what Disney does with the character?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739824</id>
	<title>Stupid Stupid Stupid</title>
	<author>cptnapalm</author>
	<datestamp>1263321600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Take a well loved superhero, a good cast and great director<br>2. Let them make a couple of awesome movies<br>3. Throw away the makers of the multi-billion dollar franchise<br>4. ?<br>5. Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Take a well loved superhero , a good cast and great director2 .
Let them make a couple of awesome movies3 .
Throw away the makers of the multi-billion dollar franchise4 .
? 5. Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Take a well loved superhero, a good cast and great director2.
Let them make a couple of awesome movies3.
Throw away the makers of the multi-billion dollar franchise4.
?5. Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738756</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah.  The problem is that if they had comic book characters age appropriately, it would destroy the storylines.  An arc that takes 2 years would not be possible in a comic involving a teenager.  Gaps between arcs are a bit better.</p><p>For more info, see the disaster behind Marvel's New Universe from the mid 80s.  Having a month of real time between issues killed the entire line of comic books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
The problem is that if they had comic book characters age appropriately , it would destroy the storylines .
An arc that takes 2 years would not be possible in a comic involving a teenager .
Gaps between arcs are a bit better.For more info , see the disaster behind Marvel 's New Universe from the mid 80s .
Having a month of real time between issues killed the entire line of comic books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
The problem is that if they had comic book characters age appropriately, it would destroy the storylines.
An arc that takes 2 years would not be possible in a comic involving a teenager.
Gaps between arcs are a bit better.For more info, see the disaster behind Marvel's New Universe from the mid 80s.
Having a month of real time between issues killed the entire line of comic books.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740660</id>
	<title>OMD appearance?</title>
	<author>RyoShin</author>
	<datestamp>1263324720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't read One More Day myself, but it made a huge uproar in the comics community as well as causing a huge shift in the Spider-man universe.</p><p>While I don't think it should be adapted faithfully (like it would be, anyway), it could serve as a good kick-off for a reboot without completely throwing away or disregarding the previous entries. Something bad happens, Parker makes a literal deal with the devil, boom, everything resets.</p><p>The main problem with approaching the film in this manner, though, is that the reset would have to be done within the first half hour, which would likely leave a lot of people confused who aren't familiar with the comics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't read One More Day myself , but it made a huge uproar in the comics community as well as causing a huge shift in the Spider-man universe.While I do n't think it should be adapted faithfully ( like it would be , anyway ) , it could serve as a good kick-off for a reboot without completely throwing away or disregarding the previous entries .
Something bad happens , Parker makes a literal deal with the devil , boom , everything resets.The main problem with approaching the film in this manner , though , is that the reset would have to be done within the first half hour , which would likely leave a lot of people confused who are n't familiar with the comics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't read One More Day myself, but it made a huge uproar in the comics community as well as causing a huge shift in the Spider-man universe.While I don't think it should be adapted faithfully (like it would be, anyway), it could serve as a good kick-off for a reboot without completely throwing away or disregarding the previous entries.
Something bad happens, Parker makes a literal deal with the devil, boom, everything resets.The main problem with approaching the film in this manner, though, is that the reset would have to be done within the first half hour, which would likely leave a lot of people confused who aren't familiar with the comics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738070</id>
	<title>First spider</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263315600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>on teh intarwebs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>on teh intarwebs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on teh intarwebs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742544</id>
	<title>Spider man is NOT sci fi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263289920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't care what you comic book reading morons say. It is not science fiction. Not by a long shot.<br> <br>Go pick up a real book and learn to read words with more than 5 letters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care what you comic book reading morons say .
It is not science fiction .
Not by a long shot .
Go pick up a real book and learn to read words with more than 5 letters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care what you comic book reading morons say.
It is not science fiction.
Not by a long shot.
Go pick up a real book and learn to read words with more than 5 letters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743436</id>
	<title>Re:This is not a reboot</title>
	<author>Requiem18th</author>
	<datestamp>1263294180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please do so, and this time add a sensible explanation of why every animal has usb ears/hair.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please do so , and this time add a sensible explanation of why every animal has usb ears/hair .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please do so, and this time add a sensible explanation of why every animal has usb ears/hair.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738722</id>
	<title>Re:Reward failure, punish success</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1263317760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hollywood really isn't interested in making good movies, it's interested in tie-ins.  Spiderman 3 had more characters to make action figures out of to be sold at McDonalds or Wendys or whatever.  That Spiderman 2 was a fantastic movie was rather besides the point.  I think even winning Oscars is pretty irrelevant now.  I mean, who cares about critics, Oscars are any notions of artistic or narrative value, when you can get a guy like Michael Bay to make an eyesore like Transformers 2 and have that teen and early 20s demographic run to it, despite the fact that it may actually stand as the worst big budget film ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hollywood really is n't interested in making good movies , it 's interested in tie-ins .
Spiderman 3 had more characters to make action figures out of to be sold at McDonalds or Wendys or whatever .
That Spiderman 2 was a fantastic movie was rather besides the point .
I think even winning Oscars is pretty irrelevant now .
I mean , who cares about critics , Oscars are any notions of artistic or narrative value , when you can get a guy like Michael Bay to make an eyesore like Transformers 2 and have that teen and early 20s demographic run to it , despite the fact that it may actually stand as the worst big budget film ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hollywood really isn't interested in making good movies, it's interested in tie-ins.
Spiderman 3 had more characters to make action figures out of to be sold at McDonalds or Wendys or whatever.
That Spiderman 2 was a fantastic movie was rather besides the point.
I think even winning Oscars is pretty irrelevant now.
I mean, who cares about critics, Oscars are any notions of artistic or narrative value, when you can get a guy like Michael Bay to make an eyesore like Transformers 2 and have that teen and early 20s demographic run to it, despite the fact that it may actually stand as the worst big budget film ever made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30744586</id>
	<title>sheesh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263299880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>he [Sam Raimi] felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity.</p></div></blockquote><p>So instead of listening to your experienced expert who has built up a following for the last 2 decades, you said "fuck that guy."  Brilliant, Sony. I'm sure your new movie will be excellent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>he [ Sam Raimi ] felt he could n't make its summer release date and keep the film 's creative integrity.So instead of listening to your experienced expert who has built up a following for the last 2 decades , you said " fuck that guy .
" Brilliant , Sony .
I 'm sure your new movie will be excellent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>he [Sam Raimi] felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity.So instead of listening to your experienced expert who has built up a following for the last 2 decades, you said "fuck that guy.
"  Brilliant, Sony.
I'm sure your new movie will be excellent.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738558</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes.</p><p>Now go away, or I shall taunt you again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes.Now go away , or I shall taunt you again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.Now go away, or I shall taunt you again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745112</id>
	<title>Re:Why I hate reboots. . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263302820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The recent Star Trek 'reboot' was nice in that, at least, they basically presented a brand new story."</p><p>You mean they presented an entertaining RECYCLED story.  Time travel, one dimensional villian, plot holes galore and action.  Blend and serve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The recent Star Trek 'reboot ' was nice in that , at least , they basically presented a brand new story .
" You mean they presented an entertaining RECYCLED story .
Time travel , one dimensional villian , plot holes galore and action .
Blend and serve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The recent Star Trek 'reboot' was nice in that, at least, they basically presented a brand new story.
"You mean they presented an entertaining RECYCLED story.
Time travel, one dimensional villian, plot holes galore and action.
Blend and serve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</id>
	<title>spiderman</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1263316980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first one wasn't bad, it just wasn't great. Worst casting choice was who they got to play Peter Parker. He's not a complicated character! He's a science nerd, yes. He's smart. He's also helplessly introverted. The introduction of the spiderman character to his life creates an alter ego. And this is where he cuts loose, being the irreverent, humorous wall-crawler of page and screen. That Toby McGuire guy could do mumbly and introverted but nothing else. This is not complex storytelling, folks. This is basic heroic mythmaking that goes all the way back to the paleolithic campfire. Hero good. Bad guy bad, but maybe have a beef we could sympathize with. Hero has a girl and he gets her in the end. And given the nature of the character, there should be plenty of laughs.</p><p>And for the sequels, all the stuff that was bad about the first movie was expanded upon. Spiderman 3 approached epic awful comic book movie status. Bad for the franchise but great for rifftrax.</p><p>The recent Iron Man movie was an example of how to do this. Perfectly crafted popcorn fare. Great characters, great lines, good 'splosions. Hope they don't screw the next one up.</p><p>Oh, and one quibble. So the Goblin guy from the first film had a super-serum and so became super-human. He can trade punches with super-human people because he's super-durable. I can buy that. Same goes for Goblin jr. But Doc Oc, he's just a dude with creepy robot arms. Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass, the guy they're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy. Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries. The guy's strong enough to hold up a frickin' cable car. His punch should be like from that freeway accident in Final Destination, where the log truck drops its load and this guy looks up just in time to see a 20 foot log come flying right through his windshield. We're talking a punch from a super-human should cause the head to shatter like a melon dropped from a six story building, a red mist everywhere, the now mostly headless body dropping while blood goes squirting everywhere. Ok, so that would completely screw the PG-13 rating but c'mon, seeing a podgy scientist shrug off those punches makes spiderman look lamer than Toby himself is managing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first one was n't bad , it just was n't great .
Worst casting choice was who they got to play Peter Parker .
He 's not a complicated character !
He 's a science nerd , yes .
He 's smart .
He 's also helplessly introverted .
The introduction of the spiderman character to his life creates an alter ego .
And this is where he cuts loose , being the irreverent , humorous wall-crawler of page and screen .
That Toby McGuire guy could do mumbly and introverted but nothing else .
This is not complex storytelling , folks .
This is basic heroic mythmaking that goes all the way back to the paleolithic campfire .
Hero good .
Bad guy bad , but maybe have a beef we could sympathize with .
Hero has a girl and he gets her in the end .
And given the nature of the character , there should be plenty of laughs.And for the sequels , all the stuff that was bad about the first movie was expanded upon .
Spiderman 3 approached epic awful comic book movie status .
Bad for the franchise but great for rifftrax.The recent Iron Man movie was an example of how to do this .
Perfectly crafted popcorn fare .
Great characters , great lines , good 'splosions .
Hope they do n't screw the next one up.Oh , and one quibble .
So the Goblin guy from the first film had a super-serum and so became super-human .
He can trade punches with super-human people because he 's super-durable .
I can buy that .
Same goes for Goblin jr. But Doc Oc , he 's just a dude with creepy robot arms .
Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass , the guy they 're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy .
Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries .
The guy 's strong enough to hold up a frickin ' cable car .
His punch should be like from that freeway accident in Final Destination , where the log truck drops its load and this guy looks up just in time to see a 20 foot log come flying right through his windshield .
We 're talking a punch from a super-human should cause the head to shatter like a melon dropped from a six story building , a red mist everywhere , the now mostly headless body dropping while blood goes squirting everywhere .
Ok , so that would completely screw the PG-13 rating but c'mon , seeing a podgy scientist shrug off those punches makes spiderman look lamer than Toby himself is managing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first one wasn't bad, it just wasn't great.
Worst casting choice was who they got to play Peter Parker.
He's not a complicated character!
He's a science nerd, yes.
He's smart.
He's also helplessly introverted.
The introduction of the spiderman character to his life creates an alter ego.
And this is where he cuts loose, being the irreverent, humorous wall-crawler of page and screen.
That Toby McGuire guy could do mumbly and introverted but nothing else.
This is not complex storytelling, folks.
This is basic heroic mythmaking that goes all the way back to the paleolithic campfire.
Hero good.
Bad guy bad, but maybe have a beef we could sympathize with.
Hero has a girl and he gets her in the end.
And given the nature of the character, there should be plenty of laughs.And for the sequels, all the stuff that was bad about the first movie was expanded upon.
Spiderman 3 approached epic awful comic book movie status.
Bad for the franchise but great for rifftrax.The recent Iron Man movie was an example of how to do this.
Perfectly crafted popcorn fare.
Great characters, great lines, good 'splosions.
Hope they don't screw the next one up.Oh, and one quibble.
So the Goblin guy from the first film had a super-serum and so became super-human.
He can trade punches with super-human people because he's super-durable.
I can buy that.
Same goes for Goblin jr. But Doc Oc, he's just a dude with creepy robot arms.
Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass, the guy they're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy.
Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries.
The guy's strong enough to hold up a frickin' cable car.
His punch should be like from that freeway accident in Final Destination, where the log truck drops its load and this guy looks up just in time to see a 20 foot log come flying right through his windshield.
We're talking a punch from a super-human should cause the head to shatter like a melon dropped from a six story building, a red mist everywhere, the now mostly headless body dropping while blood goes squirting everywhere.
Ok, so that would completely screw the PG-13 rating but c'mon, seeing a podgy scientist shrug off those punches makes spiderman look lamer than Toby himself is managing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745734</id>
	<title>Interest draining... ennui increasing...</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1263306240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Oh God, not high school again.  Sorry, Sony, I've lost interest.  I wonder if they'll call it Spider Man IV: The Quest for Peace?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh God , not high school again .
Sorry , Sony , I 've lost interest .
I wonder if they 'll call it Spider Man IV : The Quest for Peace ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Oh God, not high school again.
Sorry, Sony, I've lost interest.
I wonder if they'll call it Spider Man IV: The Quest for Peace?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738880</id>
	<title>Sing it with me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263318240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spiderman, Spiderman<br>Agent told him it was in the can.<br>But the suits missed the scoop<br>Now his Raimi has flown the coop<br>Lookout! There goes your Spiderman!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spiderman , SpidermanAgent told him it was in the can.But the suits missed the scoopNow his Raimi has flown the coopLookout !
There goes your Spiderman !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spiderman, SpidermanAgent told him it was in the can.But the suits missed the scoopNow his Raimi has flown the coopLookout!
There goes your Spiderman!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738858</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1263318180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years. In "reality", spider man in the comics should be in his late 60's.</p></div></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.superstupor.com/sust02132009.shtml" title="superstupor.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.superstupor.com/sust02132009.shtml</a> [superstupor.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years .
In " reality " , spider man in the comics should be in his late 60 's.http : //www.superstupor.com/sust02132009.shtml [ superstupor.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years.
In "reality", spider man in the comics should be in his late 60's.http://www.superstupor.com/sust02132009.shtml [superstupor.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738800</id>
	<title>No Maguire, no movie?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263318000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out.</p></div><p>So shouting "Show me the money!" over the phone didn't quite work this time?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out.So shouting " Show me the money !
" over the phone did n't quite work this time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out.So shouting "Show me the money!
" over the phone didn't quite work this time?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738834</id>
	<title>Re:You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>Chris Pimlott</author>
	<datestamp>1263318060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dibbuk Box (2010)</p></div><p>Ha, you're kidding me, a film based on <a href="http://redpill.dailygrail.com/wiki/Dybbuk\_box" title="dailygrail.com">an ebay auction</a> [dailygrail.com]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dibbuk Box ( 2010 ) Ha , you 're kidding me , a film based on an ebay auction [ dailygrail.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dibbuk Box (2010)Ha, you're kidding me, a film based on an ebay auction [dailygrail.com]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739854</id>
	<title>Re:Here's why Raimi walked...</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1263321720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like your post a lot.</p><p>It's an interesting take that I agree with but hadn't noticed.</p><p>Partially, it fits with the old marvel universe "personality" too.</p><p>--<br>In response to the "Octavius shouldn't take the beating" posts, I can't find anything to contradict them.  It's a hole you could drive a truck through but apparently it's never been addressed yet.</p><p>I assume spider man realizes how weak Doc Oc is and pulls his punches since spiderman doesn't want to be a murderer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like your post a lot.It 's an interesting take that I agree with but had n't noticed.Partially , it fits with the old marvel universe " personality " too.--In response to the " Octavius should n't take the beating " posts , I ca n't find anything to contradict them .
It 's a hole you could drive a truck through but apparently it 's never been addressed yet.I assume spider man realizes how weak Doc Oc is and pulls his punches since spiderman does n't want to be a murderer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like your post a lot.It's an interesting take that I agree with but hadn't noticed.Partially, it fits with the old marvel universe "personality" too.--In response to the "Octavius shouldn't take the beating" posts, I can't find anything to contradict them.
It's a hole you could drive a truck through but apparently it's never been addressed yet.I assume spider man realizes how weak Doc Oc is and pulls his punches since spiderman doesn't want to be a murderer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739788</id>
	<title>Bond reboots with every new actor</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1263321480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many times have they done what comes off as his first mission?  If the actor does more than one there always seems to be a movie where Bond and "Q" or "M" have to get to know each other</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many times have they done what comes off as his first mission ?
If the actor does more than one there always seems to be a movie where Bond and " Q " or " M " have to get to know each other</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many times have they done what comes off as his first mission?
If the actor does more than one there always seems to be a movie where Bond and "Q" or "M" have to get to know each other</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742572</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263290100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yo, have you ever actually READ Spider-man? The whole point of the thing is that Spider-man is STILL the same mumbly geek under that suit, he still has the same tortured inner life, he still has the same complex monologue going on. The suit does not change who he is, like it does with Superman. That was what made the character brilliant - it was a hero who was accessible and human, not super-human. He is an emotional creature. Which they pretty much nailed in the first two movies (the sequel especially).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yo , have you ever actually READ Spider-man ?
The whole point of the thing is that Spider-man is STILL the same mumbly geek under that suit , he still has the same tortured inner life , he still has the same complex monologue going on .
The suit does not change who he is , like it does with Superman .
That was what made the character brilliant - it was a hero who was accessible and human , not super-human .
He is an emotional creature .
Which they pretty much nailed in the first two movies ( the sequel especially ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yo, have you ever actually READ Spider-man?
The whole point of the thing is that Spider-man is STILL the same mumbly geek under that suit, he still has the same tortured inner life, he still has the same complex monologue going on.
The suit does not change who he is, like it does with Superman.
That was what made the character brilliant - it was a hero who was accessible and human, not super-human.
He is an emotional creature.
Which they pretty much nailed in the first two movies (the sequel especially).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745242</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263303420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see why... If you've ever read comics you may know that they come out once per month. However, the storyline picks up right where it left off in the last issue. In the comic storyline a month hasn't gone by like it has for us. Six months of a single storyline could follow one week in the hero's life. So, Spidey being 18-26 for 40 years seems about right. Get it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see why... If you 've ever read comics you may know that they come out once per month .
However , the storyline picks up right where it left off in the last issue .
In the comic storyline a month has n't gone by like it has for us .
Six months of a single storyline could follow one week in the hero 's life .
So , Spidey being 18-26 for 40 years seems about right .
Get it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see why... If you've ever read comics you may know that they come out once per month.
However, the storyline picks up right where it left off in the last issue.
In the comic storyline a month hasn't gone by like it has for us.
Six months of a single storyline could follow one week in the hero's life.
So, Spidey being 18-26 for 40 years seems about right.
Get it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739822</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1263321600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship. I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up."</i></p><p>So basically the butler manipulated Harry by withholding that information.  And thus the <i>true</i> villain of the Spiderman trilogy is revealed.  I bet he was the one who convinced Harry's dad it was a good idea to take his super-soldier serum.  Everyone always underestimates... The Butler!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then , at the end the family butler comes out and says " I happen to know your father died by his own hands , but I 've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship .
I hope you do n't mind that I waited several years to speak up .
" So basically the butler manipulated Harry by withholding that information .
And thus the true villain of the Spiderman trilogy is revealed .
I bet he was the one who convinced Harry 's dad it was a good idea to take his super-soldier serum .
Everyone always underestimates... The Butler !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship.
I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up.
"So basically the butler manipulated Harry by withholding that information.
And thus the true villain of the Spiderman trilogy is revealed.
I bet he was the one who convinced Harry's dad it was a good idea to take his super-soldier serum.
Everyone always underestimates... The Butler!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092</id>
	<title>Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263315660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How would they reboot it? I mean the first movie kinda takes care of the back story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How would they reboot it ?
I mean the first movie kinda takes care of the back story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would they reboot it?
I mean the first movie kinda takes care of the back story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738196</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>click2005</author>
	<datestamp>1263316020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But the first movie didn't do the film in an edgy new way... Or just find some actor who is<br>going to die so they can exploit the crap out of it.<br>Maybe they could use the 3D they did for the pocahantas/smurf movie recently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But the first movie did n't do the film in an edgy new way... Or just find some actor who isgoing to die so they can exploit the crap out of it.Maybe they could use the 3D they did for the pocahantas/smurf movie recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the first movie didn't do the film in an edgy new way... Or just find some actor who isgoing to die so they can exploit the crap out of it.Maybe they could use the 3D they did for the pocahantas/smurf movie recently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740864</id>
	<title>Re:Stretching the Imagination ...</title>
	<author>1u3hr</author>
	<datestamp>1263325440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not only would you haev to be illiterate, but ignorant of most visual media, to call Spider-Man  "proper sci-fi".<p>
Put that down to a Slashdot editor's lame attempt to segue from another article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only would you haev to be illiterate , but ignorant of most visual media , to call Spider-Man " proper sci-fi " .
Put that down to a Slashdot editor 's lame attempt to segue from another article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only would you haev to be illiterate, but ignorant of most visual media, to call Spider-Man  "proper sci-fi".
Put that down to a Slashdot editor's lame attempt to segue from another article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739778</id>
	<title>Re:"Reboot"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263321420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really wish people stop using "booting" and it's variations when not talking about ankle-tall shoes.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/boot?jss=0" title="reference.com">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/boot?jss=0</a> [reference.com]</p><p>In order to "reboot" a computer it must be "booted" in the first place, which requires having legs and feet.  "I've just changed the socks of my computer before putting in new boots", see how retarded that sounds?</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really wish people stop using " booting " and it 's variations when not talking about ankle-tall shoes .
        http : //dictionary.reference.com/browse/boot ? jss = 0 [ reference.com ] In order to " reboot " a computer it must be " booted " in the first place , which requires having legs and feet .
" I 've just changed the socks of my computer before putting in new boots " , see how retarded that sounds ?
      -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really wish people stop using "booting" and it's variations when not talking about ankle-tall shoes.
        http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/boot?jss=0 [reference.com]In order to "reboot" a computer it must be "booted" in the first place, which requires having legs and feet.
"I've just changed the socks of my computer before putting in new boots", see how retarded that sounds?
      -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742190</id>
	<title>In other news</title>
	<author>ZPWeeks</author>
	<datestamp>1263288060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Red hair dye companies' stock shares plummeted yesterday due to loss of demand from the Kirsten Dunst market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Red hair dye companies ' stock shares plummeted yesterday due to loss of demand from the Kirsten Dunst market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Red hair dye companies' stock shares plummeted yesterday due to loss of demand from the Kirsten Dunst market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738730</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1263317820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the fact that your post got modded Flamebait should give you a clue about the answer.</p><p>As for myself, I think Spider Man 3 sucked on many levels and for many different reasons (not giving Venom enough screentime and Peter Parker crying like a bitch for half of it certainly didn't help.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the fact that your post got modded Flamebait should give you a clue about the answer.As for myself , I think Spider Man 3 sucked on many levels and for many different reasons ( not giving Venom enough screentime and Peter Parker crying like a bitch for half of it certainly did n't help .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the fact that your post got modded Flamebait should give you a clue about the answer.As for myself, I think Spider Man 3 sucked on many levels and for many different reasons (not giving Venom enough screentime and Peter Parker crying like a bitch for half of it certainly didn't help.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</id>
	<title>You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263315900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.</p></div><p>Now, keep in mind that directors <i>often</i> have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swing -- but Raimi's up there with the busiest.  If you consider him as both a producer and director (from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000600/" title="imdb.com">IMDB</a> [imdb.com]):</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In Development: 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Shadow, The Familiars, Anguish, Untitled Sam Raimi Project, The Substitute, Sleeper, Evil Dead IV, Panic Attack, ArchEnemies, No Man's Land, The Transplants, Just Another Love Story, Burst 3D, Refuge, Monkey's Paw, The Given Day, The Dorm, Monster Zoo, The Wee Free Men and "The Taking"</p></div><p>And for what he's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead (2010), Dibbuk Box (2010), Warcraft (2011) and Priest (2010) where he's directing Warcraft and The Evil Dead -- two movies in sequential years.  Yeah, I'd say he's staring down a rather full plate.  I wish he would tackle some more original movies though like he did with Drag Me to Hell last year even though it wasn't the greatest, I'd rather see some originality and am happy he's washing his hands of a series that's run its course.  But of course Sony wants to milk that cash cow<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.Now , keep in mind that directors often have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swing -- but Raimi 's up there with the busiest .
If you consider him as both a producer and director ( from IMDB [ imdb.com ] ) : In Development : 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea , The Shadow , The Familiars , Anguish , Untitled Sam Raimi Project , The Substitute , Sleeper , Evil Dead IV , Panic Attack , ArchEnemies , No Man 's Land , The Transplants , Just Another Love Story , Burst 3D , Refuge , Monkey 's Paw , The Given Day , The Dorm , Monster Zoo , The Wee Free Men and " The Taking " And for what he 's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead ( 2010 ) , Dibbuk Box ( 2010 ) , Warcraft ( 2011 ) and Priest ( 2010 ) where he 's directing Warcraft and The Evil Dead -- two movies in sequential years .
Yeah , I 'd say he 's staring down a rather full plate .
I wish he would tackle some more original movies though like he did with Drag Me to Hell last year even though it was n't the greatest , I 'd rather see some originality and am happy he 's washing his hands of a series that 's run its course .
But of course Sony wants to milk that cash cow .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.Now, keep in mind that directors often have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swing -- but Raimi's up there with the busiest.
If you consider him as both a producer and director (from IMDB [imdb.com]):In Development: 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Shadow, The Familiars, Anguish, Untitled Sam Raimi Project, The Substitute, Sleeper, Evil Dead IV, Panic Attack, ArchEnemies, No Man's Land, The Transplants, Just Another Love Story, Burst 3D, Refuge, Monkey's Paw, The Given Day, The Dorm, Monster Zoo, The Wee Free Men and "The Taking"And for what he's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead (2010), Dibbuk Box (2010), Warcraft (2011) and Priest (2010) where he's directing Warcraft and The Evil Dead -- two movies in sequential years.
Yeah, I'd say he's staring down a rather full plate.
I wish he would tackle some more original movies though like he did with Drag Me to Hell last year even though it wasn't the greatest, I'd rather see some originality and am happy he's washing his hands of a series that's run its course.
But of course Sony wants to milk that cash cow ...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739302</id>
	<title>Re:This is not a reboot</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1263319680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reboot means throw away all the previous movies, actors and plot.... go back to the source material and reinterpret it in a new way</p><p>This either means they have :</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; an established actor that is demanding too much for the next episode</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; so screwed up the plot that they have painted themselves into a corner</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; run out of source material that makes sense with the established movies</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reboot means throw away all the previous movies , actors and plot.... go back to the source material and reinterpret it in a new wayThis either means they have :       an established actor that is demanding too much for the next episode       so screwed up the plot that they have painted themselves into a corner       run out of source material that makes sense with the established movies</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reboot means throw away all the previous movies, actors and plot.... go back to the source material and reinterpret it in a new wayThis either means they have :
      an established actor that is demanding too much for the next episode
      so screwed up the plot that they have painted themselves into a corner
      run out of source material that makes sense with the established movies</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739536</id>
	<title>Why I hate reboots. . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263320460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it's true that, sometimes, a character idea needs a reboot, there is a *reason* I hate reboots. . .</p><p>I hate having to slog through essentially the same story again. I want *new* stories. Not the same basic Spiderman, Superman, or Batman story 'remixed'.</p><p>The recent Star Trek 'reboot' was nice in that, at least, they basically presented a brand new story. If companies insist on rebooting things, I hope they realize they don't have to take us back through the same 2 or 3 *tired* stories all over again. I really don't care if I never see another Batman movie which has The Catwoman, The Joker, or The Penguin, ever again. I want *other* Batman stories.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it 's true that , sometimes , a character idea needs a reboot , there is a * reason * I hate reboots .
. .I hate having to slog through essentially the same story again .
I want * new * stories .
Not the same basic Spiderman , Superman , or Batman story 'remixed'.The recent Star Trek 'reboot ' was nice in that , at least , they basically presented a brand new story .
If companies insist on rebooting things , I hope they realize they do n't have to take us back through the same 2 or 3 * tired * stories all over again .
I really do n't care if I never see another Batman movie which has The Catwoman , The Joker , or The Penguin , ever again .
I want * other * Batman stories .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it's true that, sometimes, a character idea needs a reboot, there is a *reason* I hate reboots.
. .I hate having to slog through essentially the same story again.
I want *new* stories.
Not the same basic Spiderman, Superman, or Batman story 'remixed'.The recent Star Trek 'reboot' was nice in that, at least, they basically presented a brand new story.
If companies insist on rebooting things, I hope they realize they don't have to take us back through the same 2 or 3 *tired* stories all over again.
I really don't care if I never see another Batman movie which has The Catwoman, The Joker, or The Penguin, ever again.
I want *other* Batman stories.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738744</id>
	<title>Who cares</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spiderman sucked anyway</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spiderman sucked anyway</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spiderman sucked anyway</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738416</id>
	<title>Yeah..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263316740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.</p></div><p>He's too busy working on CodePlex.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.He 's too busy working on CodePlex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.He's too busy working on CodePlex.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738908</id>
	<title>Re:...why?</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1263318300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch, but his inner conflict.</i></p><p>Strangely that's why I much prefer the recent Ed Norton film.  I didn't see any inner conflict in the first one.  For a guy who is supposed to be full of barely suppressed rage and constantly wrestling with inner demons, Eric Bana's Bruce Banner sure looked placid.  It was like his solution to the whole Hulking-out problem was lots and lots of Valium.  Even when being provoked into becoming the Hulk, he didn't look like he was actually upset until he was big and green.  Norton's Bruce Banner on the other hand was shown to actually have the emotion of anger, and to have to fight to suppress it and keep himself calm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch , but his inner conflict.Strangely that 's why I much prefer the recent Ed Norton film .
I did n't see any inner conflict in the first one .
For a guy who is supposed to be full of barely suppressed rage and constantly wrestling with inner demons , Eric Bana 's Bruce Banner sure looked placid .
It was like his solution to the whole Hulking-out problem was lots and lots of Valium .
Even when being provoked into becoming the Hulk , he did n't look like he was actually upset until he was big and green .
Norton 's Bruce Banner on the other hand was shown to actually have the emotion of anger , and to have to fight to suppress it and keep himself calm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch, but his inner conflict.Strangely that's why I much prefer the recent Ed Norton film.
I didn't see any inner conflict in the first one.
For a guy who is supposed to be full of barely suppressed rage and constantly wrestling with inner demons, Eric Bana's Bruce Banner sure looked placid.
It was like his solution to the whole Hulking-out problem was lots and lots of Valium.
Even when being provoked into becoming the Hulk, he didn't look like he was actually upset until he was big and green.
Norton's Bruce Banner on the other hand was shown to actually have the emotion of anger, and to have to fight to suppress it and keep himself calm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742284</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263288420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pretty well established that guys like Spider-Man pull their punches when hitting normal(ish) people:</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man\%27s\_powers\_and\_equipment#Superhuman\_strength\_and\_durability</p><p>"When in combat, Spider-Man must pull his punches unless fighting someone of similar or greater durability and power. Otherwise, his blows would kill a normal person.[13]" (citation is Spider-Man vs. Wolverine, 1987)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty well established that guys like Spider-Man pull their punches when hitting normal ( ish ) people : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man \ % 27s \ _powers \ _and \ _equipment # Superhuman \ _strength \ _and \ _durability " When in combat , Spider-Man must pull his punches unless fighting someone of similar or greater durability and power .
Otherwise , his blows would kill a normal person .
[ 13 ] " ( citation is Spider-Man vs. Wolverine , 1987 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty well established that guys like Spider-Man pull their punches when hitting normal(ish) people:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man\%27s\_powers\_and\_equipment#Superhuman\_strength\_and\_durability"When in combat, Spider-Man must pull his punches unless fighting someone of similar or greater durability and power.
Otherwise, his blows would kill a normal person.
[13]" (citation is Spider-Man vs. Wolverine, 1987)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30744254</id>
	<title>Better as a TV Series</title>
	<author>monkeythug</author>
	<datestamp>1263298140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spidey would be better done as a TV Series than a movie.  They should do it in a similar style to Smallville.  I don't mean the prequel aspect, I just mean it should be a lot more character based, exploring how Pete deals with his new powers and how he deals with integrating his activities as Spidey into his ordinary life.  In other words it should be a lot more like the comic books dammit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spidey would be better done as a TV Series than a movie .
They should do it in a similar style to Smallville .
I do n't mean the prequel aspect , I just mean it should be a lot more character based , exploring how Pete deals with his new powers and how he deals with integrating his activities as Spidey into his ordinary life .
In other words it should be a lot more like the comic books dammit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spidey would be better done as a TV Series than a movie.
They should do it in a similar style to Smallville.
I don't mean the prequel aspect, I just mean it should be a lot more character based, exploring how Pete deals with his new powers and how he deals with integrating his activities as Spidey into his ordinary life.
In other words it should be a lot more like the comic books dammit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739656</id>
	<title>There are a couple ways</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1263321000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, if they did Spiderman 2099, that would be stellar.
<br> <br>
The thing about Spiderman is that the comics have been around for so long that it would not be difficult at all to "reboot" the series since there are so many different directions it could go in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , if they did Spiderman 2099 , that would be stellar .
The thing about Spiderman is that the comics have been around for so long that it would not be difficult at all to " reboot " the series since there are so many different directions it could go in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, if they did Spiderman 2099, that would be stellar.
The thing about Spiderman is that the comics have been around for so long that it would not be difficult at all to "reboot" the series since there are so many different directions it could go in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739236</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>jitterman</author>
	<datestamp>1263319440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I had mod points I'd get you back to 0 at least. Not sure why disagreement = negative mod.<br> <br>I gotta say I think you hit it right on the head - McGuire got a great paycheck for doing "dork" really well, but man his Spiderman persona is even outdone by the old (60's?, 70's?) Spidey cartoons. That type of wit and playful attitude was what I was hoping for in the first film but didn't get. I saw the second film too, and still wasn't impressed (also again you're right, once past the mecha-arms, it should be easy to kill Doc Oc if you can lift cars).<br> <br>I haven't seen film #3. No plans to do so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I had mod points I 'd get you back to 0 at least .
Not sure why disagreement = negative mod .
I got ta say I think you hit it right on the head - McGuire got a great paycheck for doing " dork " really well , but man his Spiderman persona is even outdone by the old ( 60 's ? , 70 's ?
) Spidey cartoons .
That type of wit and playful attitude was what I was hoping for in the first film but did n't get .
I saw the second film too , and still was n't impressed ( also again you 're right , once past the mecha-arms , it should be easy to kill Doc Oc if you can lift cars ) .
I have n't seen film # 3 .
No plans to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I had mod points I'd get you back to 0 at least.
Not sure why disagreement = negative mod.
I gotta say I think you hit it right on the head - McGuire got a great paycheck for doing "dork" really well, but man his Spiderman persona is even outdone by the old (60's?, 70's?
) Spidey cartoons.
That type of wit and playful attitude was what I was hoping for in the first film but didn't get.
I saw the second film too, and still wasn't impressed (also again you're right, once past the mecha-arms, it should be easy to kill Doc Oc if you can lift cars).
I haven't seen film #3.
No plans to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</id>
	<title>Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263316320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and these days they make it about 9.</p><p>I think it is partially the fact that they are using very young actors.</p><p>Of course, part of that is the comic book universe's problem.</p><p>Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years.  In "reality", spider man in the comics should be in his late 60's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and these days they make it about 9.I think it is partially the fact that they are using very young actors.Of course , part of that is the comic book universe 's problem.Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years .
In " reality " , spider man in the comics should be in his late 60 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and these days they make it about 9.I think it is partially the fact that they are using very young actors.Of course, part of that is the comic book universe's problem.Spider man was 18-26 for 40 years.
In "reality", spider man in the comics should be in his late 60's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739150</id>
	<title>Re:Reward failure, punish success</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263319140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Each film made near a billion dollars. Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible. So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well. Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.</p></div></blockquote><p>I thought Raimi wrote (or at least co-wrote) Spiderman 3...</p><p>Vanderbilt's the guy who was originally slated to write 4, but apparently there was infighting over the script between him and Raimi....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each film made near a billion dollars .
Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3 , which was terrible .
So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4 , and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well .
Let 's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script , and punish a much-loved and successful director.I thought Raimi wrote ( or at least co-wrote ) Spiderman 3...Vanderbilt 's the guy who was originally slated to write 4 , but apparently there was infighting over the script between him and Raimi... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each film made near a billion dollars.
Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible.
So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well.
Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.I thought Raimi wrote (or at least co-wrote) Spiderman 3...Vanderbilt's the guy who was originally slated to write 4, but apparently there was infighting over the script between him and Raimi....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738496</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or maybe it has something to do with audiences today being more finicky. They had to reboot the Bond franchise a few years ago because audiences didn't click with the old school Bond. And having seen every film, I can tell you that Casino Royale and especially QoS are *very* different from the first 18 or so films.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe it has something to do with audiences today being more finicky .
They had to reboot the Bond franchise a few years ago because audiences did n't click with the old school Bond .
And having seen every film , I can tell you that Casino Royale and especially QoS are * very * different from the first 18 or so films .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe it has something to do with audiences today being more finicky.
They had to reboot the Bond franchise a few years ago because audiences didn't click with the old school Bond.
And having seen every film, I can tell you that Casino Royale and especially QoS are *very* different from the first 18 or so films.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741590</id>
	<title>"I Hate Clones!" -Spiderman</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1263328380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many reboots / new franchises has this been for spidey in the last 20 years?<ul>
<li>Regular Marvel Earth 616 Spiderman Comics:
<ul> <li>Clones</li>
<li>"Spider-Totem" magic powers retcon</li>
<li>Mephisto reboot (Parker and Mary Jane never married)</li>
</ul></li>
<li>Spiderman 2099 Comics</li>
<li>Ultimate Spiderman Comics</li>
<li>1990's Spiderman cartoon</li>
<li>Toby MacGuire Spiderman movies</li>
<li>2000's Spectacular Spiderman cartoon</li>
</ul><p>
That doesn't count the Spiderman &amp; Amazing Friends, Spiderman cartoon, Spiderman Live action TV, Old Spiderman movies, etc.  Technically, these were all supposed to be the same spiderman as Earth 616 and the 1990s Spiderman cartoon.  Marvel's starting to dilute a main figure of their mythos.  It's like they're writing an Arthurian legend and making King Arthur an evil usurper.  Nice for a "What If?" comic, but not so much for a retelling of a well-known story.  Given how often the first Toby movie is still played on TV, I don't think a lot of people are going to pay money to go see Uncle Ben get shot again unless it's in a flashback in Spiderman 4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many reboots / new franchises has this been for spidey in the last 20 years ?
Regular Marvel Earth 616 Spiderman Comics : Clones " Spider-Totem " magic powers retcon Mephisto reboot ( Parker and Mary Jane never married ) Spiderman 2099 Comics Ultimate Spiderman Comics 1990 's Spiderman cartoon Toby MacGuire Spiderman movies 2000 's Spectacular Spiderman cartoon That does n't count the Spiderman &amp; Amazing Friends , Spiderman cartoon , Spiderman Live action TV , Old Spiderman movies , etc .
Technically , these were all supposed to be the same spiderman as Earth 616 and the 1990s Spiderman cartoon .
Marvel 's starting to dilute a main figure of their mythos .
It 's like they 're writing an Arthurian legend and making King Arthur an evil usurper .
Nice for a " What If ?
" comic , but not so much for a retelling of a well-known story .
Given how often the first Toby movie is still played on TV , I do n't think a lot of people are going to pay money to go see Uncle Ben get shot again unless it 's in a flashback in Spiderman 4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many reboots / new franchises has this been for spidey in the last 20 years?
Regular Marvel Earth 616 Spiderman Comics:
 Clones
"Spider-Totem" magic powers retcon
Mephisto reboot (Parker and Mary Jane never married)

Spiderman 2099 Comics
Ultimate Spiderman Comics
1990's Spiderman cartoon
Toby MacGuire Spiderman movies
2000's Spectacular Spiderman cartoon

That doesn't count the Spiderman &amp; Amazing Friends, Spiderman cartoon, Spiderman Live action TV, Old Spiderman movies, etc.
Technically, these were all supposed to be the same spiderman as Earth 616 and the 1990s Spiderman cartoon.
Marvel's starting to dilute a main figure of their mythos.
It's like they're writing an Arthurian legend and making King Arthur an evil usurper.
Nice for a "What If?
" comic, but not so much for a retelling of a well-known story.
Given how often the first Toby movie is still played on TV, I don't think a lot of people are going to pay money to go see Uncle Ben get shot again unless it's in a flashback in Spiderman 4.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668</id>
	<title>This rocks! I love the spiderman reboots..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm thinking that we could have Spiderman 4 - The Revenge.<br><br>Then we could have Spiderman 5 - The Final Frontier.<br><br>Of course, Spiderman VI - Jason Lives, will be a little scary.<br><br>That could be the final movie.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm thinking that we could have Spiderman 4 - The Revenge.Then we could have Spiderman 5 - The Final Frontier.Of course , Spiderman VI - Jason Lives , will be a little scary.That could be the final movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm thinking that we could have Spiderman 4 - The Revenge.Then we could have Spiderman 5 - The Final Frontier.Of course, Spiderman VI - Jason Lives, will be a little scary.That could be the final movie.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740914</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263325740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because he is shooting the webs out of the wrong location.  If you are going to go that route, go all the way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because he is shooting the webs out of the wrong location .
If you are going to go that route , go all the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because he is shooting the webs out of the wrong location.
If you are going to go that route, go all the way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738612</id>
	<title>I love it when...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they repackage the same shit over and over and over and over again. I think hollywood needs a reboot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they repackage the same shit over and over and over and over again .
I think hollywood needs a reboot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they repackage the same shit over and over and over and over again.
I think hollywood needs a reboot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739866</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>halcyon1234</author>
	<datestamp>1263321780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah, it's just that EVERYONE in the movie is super-strong.  That's why Doc Ok thought nothing of just whipping a car at Peter Parket in the cafe-- long before he knew Peter Parker was spiderman.</p><p>"How do I get their attention, without harming them, because I want to capture them. I know, THROW A CAR AT THEM! {chuck}"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , it 's just that EVERYONE in the movie is super-strong .
That 's why Doc Ok thought nothing of just whipping a car at Peter Parket in the cafe-- long before he knew Peter Parker was spiderman .
" How do I get their attention , without harming them , because I want to capture them .
I know , THROW A CAR AT THEM !
{ chuck } "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, it's just that EVERYONE in the movie is super-strong.
That's why Doc Ok thought nothing of just whipping a car at Peter Parket in the cafe-- long before he knew Peter Parker was spiderman.
"How do I get their attention, without harming them, because I want to capture them.
I know, THROW A CAR AT THEM!
{chuck}"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740330</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263323520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take out Kirsten singing (twice!) and tone down the CGI on Venom a bit, and I'm all good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take out Kirsten singing ( twice !
) and tone down the CGI on Venom a bit , and I 'm all good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take out Kirsten singing (twice!
) and tone down the CGI on Venom a bit, and I'm all good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740792</id>
	<title>Re:Reward failure, punish success</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263325260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a sam/toby/kiki spiderman 4 is as close to a sure-thing in hollywood as you can get.... the past three films have ruled the global box office, rentals, and dvd sales.</p><p>without those key people, and "rebooting" so soon after the others, the next one will tank... think gigli in a spidey suit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a sam/toby/kiki spiderman 4 is as close to a sure-thing in hollywood as you can get.... the past three films have ruled the global box office , rentals , and dvd sales.without those key people , and " rebooting " so soon after the others , the next one will tank... think gigli in a spidey suit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a sam/toby/kiki spiderman 4 is as close to a sure-thing in hollywood as you can get.... the past three films have ruled the global box office, rentals, and dvd sales.without those key people, and "rebooting" so soon after the others, the next one will tank... think gigli in a spidey suit...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739938</id>
	<title>3 was bad, really bad!</title>
	<author>yoshi\_mon</author>
	<datestamp>1263322020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why was 3 so awful?  I've seen a few comments here that talk about it but are there any movie geeks that can expound on why it was so bad?  (Not just that the screenplay was bad but why was it so bad?)</p><p>I'm not a huge Spiderman fan but I thought that at the very least the first one was a nice setup.  The second one was nothing great but did it's job.  Good popcorn movie.  The thrid, ugh, I turned it off before it was half way over.  And I've sat though all of Battlefield Earth, non-Rifftrax version!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why was 3 so awful ?
I 've seen a few comments here that talk about it but are there any movie geeks that can expound on why it was so bad ?
( Not just that the screenplay was bad but why was it so bad ?
) I 'm not a huge Spiderman fan but I thought that at the very least the first one was a nice setup .
The second one was nothing great but did it 's job .
Good popcorn movie .
The thrid , ugh , I turned it off before it was half way over .
And I 've sat though all of Battlefield Earth , non-Rifftrax version !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why was 3 so awful?
I've seen a few comments here that talk about it but are there any movie geeks that can expound on why it was so bad?
(Not just that the screenplay was bad but why was it so bad?
)I'm not a huge Spiderman fan but I thought that at the very least the first one was a nice setup.
The second one was nothing great but did it's job.
Good popcorn movie.
The thrid, ugh, I turned it off before it was half way over.
And I've sat though all of Battlefield Earth, non-Rifftrax version!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741678</id>
	<title>Re:You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1263328740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And for what he's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead (2010),</p></div><p>A reboot? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!</p><p>Or just the new tradition that the 4th movie in a series should restart the numbering cycle?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And for what he 's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead ( 2010 ) ,A reboot ?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ! Or just the new tradition that the 4th movie in a series should restart the numbering cycle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And for what he's actually got in production includes The Evil Dead (2010),A reboot?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Or just the new tradition that the 4th movie in a series should restart the numbering cycle?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739482</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>fredjh</author>
	<datestamp>1263320280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But James Bond <i>has</i> evolved over the years... and I would say the Daniel Craig Casino Royal <i>was</i> a reboot, of sorts... maybe you'd prefer "reimaging."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But James Bond has evolved over the years... and I would say the Daniel Craig Casino Royal was a reboot , of sorts... maybe you 'd prefer " reimaging .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But James Bond has evolved over the years... and I would say the Daniel Craig Casino Royal was a reboot, of sorts... maybe you'd prefer "reimaging.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738106</id>
	<title>Thank you...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263315720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another franchise killed..</p><p>At this rate they'll have almost nothing left soon.</p><p>Hollywood will end up so crap they'll make one film a year, it'll cost $88 billion to make and they'll re-do it the next year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another franchise killed..At this rate they 'll have almost nothing left soon.Hollywood will end up so crap they 'll make one film a year , it 'll cost $ 88 billion to make and they 'll re-do it the next year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another franchise killed..At this rate they'll have almost nothing left soon.Hollywood will end up so crap they'll make one film a year, it'll cost $88 billion to make and they'll re-do it the next year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740936</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1263325800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the idea is that, with the mechanical webshooter Spider-Man, Peter is using science/technology to help him in his crime-fighting, just like Batman, except with some extra physical powers.  With the biological webshooter Spider-Man in the movies, Peter doesn't use science/technology at all (except for his camera), and only his enemies do.  This portrays scientists as potentially evil, and science as a tool for evil and mayhem, rather than a tool which can be used for good or evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the idea is that , with the mechanical webshooter Spider-Man , Peter is using science/technology to help him in his crime-fighting , just like Batman , except with some extra physical powers .
With the biological webshooter Spider-Man in the movies , Peter does n't use science/technology at all ( except for his camera ) , and only his enemies do .
This portrays scientists as potentially evil , and science as a tool for evil and mayhem , rather than a tool which can be used for good or evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the idea is that, with the mechanical webshooter Spider-Man, Peter is using science/technology to help him in his crime-fighting, just like Batman, except with some extra physical powers.
With the biological webshooter Spider-Man in the movies, Peter doesn't use science/technology at all (except for his camera), and only his enemies do.
This portrays scientists as potentially evil, and science as a tool for evil and mayhem, rather than a tool which can be used for good or evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204</id>
	<title>...why?</title>
	<author>Shadowruni</author>
	<datestamp>1263316020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we could forgive them for the 3rd movie since the 2nd one rocked so hard.
<p>
It's rather annoying that so many franchises and movies are getting the reboot/rewrite treatment.  It's almost like Hollywood is afraid that most multimillon dollar investments won't turn a buck.
</p><p>
Oh,wait....
</p><p>
BTW, I thought the Batman reboot was needed but am not ashamed to say I loved the first hulk (Eric Bana not Nick Cage).  Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch, but his inner conflict.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we could forgive them for the 3rd movie since the 2nd one rocked so hard .
It 's rather annoying that so many franchises and movies are getting the reboot/rewrite treatment .
It 's almost like Hollywood is afraid that most multimillon dollar investments wo n't turn a buck .
Oh,wait... . BTW , I thought the Batman reboot was needed but am not ashamed to say I loved the first hulk ( Eric Bana not Nick Cage ) .
Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch , but his inner conflict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we could forgive them for the 3rd movie since the 2nd one rocked so hard.
It's rather annoying that so many franchises and movies are getting the reboot/rewrite treatment.
It's almost like Hollywood is afraid that most multimillon dollar investments won't turn a buck.
Oh,wait....

BTW, I thought the Batman reboot was needed but am not ashamed to say I loved the first hulk (Eric Bana not Nick Cage).
Hulk was never really about mass destruction,as awesome as it is to watch, but his inner conflict.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739780</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1263321420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More than likely, yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More than likely , yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More than likely, yes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743210</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>t0p</author>
	<datestamp>1263293280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you don't understand why people care about a story from their childhood being butchered just to make telling the story a bit quicker, you don't understand much about people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't understand why people care about a story from their childhood being butchered just to make telling the story a bit quicker , you do n't understand much about people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't understand why people care about a story from their childhood being butchered just to make telling the story a bit quicker, you don't understand much about people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738218</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1263316080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a franchise, they can't not have a new one. That's how Hollywood works now: yearly installments of something that's proven to be successful, with three-move reboots to relaunch the franchise and introduce it to new customers when the current viewership grows out of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a franchise , they ca n't not have a new one .
That 's how Hollywood works now : yearly installments of something that 's proven to be successful , with three-move reboots to relaunch the franchise and introduce it to new customers when the current viewership grows out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a franchise, they can't not have a new one.
That's how Hollywood works now: yearly installments of something that's proven to be successful, with three-move reboots to relaunch the franchise and introduce it to new customers when the current viewership grows out of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742184</id>
	<title>Re:You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>YourExperiment</author>
	<datestamp>1263288000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Untitled Sam Raimi Project sounds awesome, when's that out?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Untitled Sam Raimi Project sounds awesome , when 's that out ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Untitled Sam Raimi Project sounds awesome, when's that out?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738470</id>
	<title>Stick a fork in it, it's Dunst!</title>
	<author>Prototerm</author>
	<datestamp>1263316920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe now they'll replace that lame choice for Mary Jane with some hot babe who can pull off that whole "Face it, Tiger, you just hit the jackpot" scene (Pete's first blind date with MJ) from the early Spiderman comics. Yowza!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe now they 'll replace that lame choice for Mary Jane with some hot babe who can pull off that whole " Face it , Tiger , you just hit the jackpot " scene ( Pete 's first blind date with MJ ) from the early Spiderman comics .
Yowza !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe now they'll replace that lame choice for Mary Jane with some hot babe who can pull off that whole "Face it, Tiger, you just hit the jackpot" scene (Pete's first blind date with MJ) from the early Spiderman comics.
Yowza!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739388</id>
	<title>Re:...why?</title>
	<author>fredjh</author>
	<datestamp>1263319980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Batman movie franchise was good for the first 1 and 3/4 movies (up until Batman saw a duck on his radar screen in Batman 2), and seriously needed to die after that.</p><p>The first Hulk movie... my wife and I rented it.  We fell asleep watching it, and gave it a try the next night.  I was falling asleep again, so I started fast forwarding through a bunch of stuff.  I asked my wife if she minded, and she was like "I didn't notice."</p><p>And I LIKE Eric Bana and I <i>really</i> like Jennifer Connelly.</p><p>The Ed Norton Hulk was all about inner conflict and didn't put me to sleep.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Batman movie franchise was good for the first 1 and 3/4 movies ( up until Batman saw a duck on his radar screen in Batman 2 ) , and seriously needed to die after that.The first Hulk movie... my wife and I rented it .
We fell asleep watching it , and gave it a try the next night .
I was falling asleep again , so I started fast forwarding through a bunch of stuff .
I asked my wife if she minded , and she was like " I did n't notice .
" And I LIKE Eric Bana and I really like Jennifer Connelly.The Ed Norton Hulk was all about inner conflict and did n't put me to sleep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Batman movie franchise was good for the first 1 and 3/4 movies (up until Batman saw a duck on his radar screen in Batman 2), and seriously needed to die after that.The first Hulk movie... my wife and I rented it.
We fell asleep watching it, and gave it a try the next night.
I was falling asleep again, so I started fast forwarding through a bunch of stuff.
I asked my wife if she minded, and she was like "I didn't notice.
"And I LIKE Eric Bana and I really like Jennifer Connelly.The Ed Norton Hulk was all about inner conflict and didn't put me to sleep.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738</id>
	<title>Who cares about Tobey McGuire?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm more worried about JK Simmons! Who else could be as perfect a J Jonah Jameson?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more worried about JK Simmons !
Who else could be as perfect a J Jonah Jameson ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm more worried about JK Simmons!
Who else could be as perfect a J Jonah Jameson?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738656</id>
	<title>I feel a great...</title>
	<author>cigawoot</author>
	<datestamp>1263317580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I feel a great disturbance in the force.  As if a million voices cried out in joy, then were suddenly silent as they realized the World of Warcraft movie will come next.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel a great disturbance in the force .
As if a million voices cried out in joy , then were suddenly silent as they realized the World of Warcraft movie will come next .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel a great disturbance in the force.
As if a million voices cried out in joy, then were suddenly silent as they realized the World of Warcraft movie will come next.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739228</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1263319440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMO, Doc Ock is very hard to do realistically.  He's not any more durable than a non-super street punk, probably less because he's a science geek.  But he can dish out enough punishment with his robot arms that it would be harder for Spidey to pull his punches than it would if he was whooping a common punk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMO , Doc Ock is very hard to do realistically .
He 's not any more durable than a non-super street punk , probably less because he 's a science geek .
But he can dish out enough punishment with his robot arms that it would be harder for Spidey to pull his punches than it would if he was whooping a common punk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMO, Doc Ock is very hard to do realistically.
He's not any more durable than a non-super street punk, probably less because he's a science geek.
But he can dish out enough punishment with his robot arms that it would be harder for Spidey to pull his punches than it would if he was whooping a common punk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739864</id>
	<title>Hollywood Douchebag-Speak</title>
	<author>rudy\_wayne</author>
	<datestamp>1263321780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from the Variety article:</p><p>Star Tobey Maguire and <b>helmer</b> Sam Raimi, who were both set for big paydays for "Spider Man 4," will no longer be involved in the franchise as <b>Col</b> moves forward with a high school-aged Peter Parker <b>pic</b>, which will <b>bow theatrically</b> in summer 2012.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from the Variety article : Star Tobey Maguire and helmer Sam Raimi , who were both set for big paydays for " Spider Man 4 , " will no longer be involved in the franchise as Col moves forward with a high school-aged Peter Parker pic , which will bow theatrically in summer 2012 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from the Variety article:Star Tobey Maguire and helmer Sam Raimi, who were both set for big paydays for "Spider Man 4," will no longer be involved in the franchise as Col moves forward with a high school-aged Peter Parker pic, which will bow theatrically in summer 2012.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1263317340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you went in with low expectations, there some sequences where you could have fun. However, I can't imagine wanting to watch it a second time.</p><p>What bothered me more than the way Venom was handled, and the odd jazz sequences was how Harry knew and wanted to kill Peter, but waited for no good reason. Then he picks a random moment to try and kill Peter. They fight, and Harry develops amensia. Then at the end of the film, with no reasoning at all, the amnesia disappears and Harry wants to fight Peter again. Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship. I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up."</p><p>Kevin Smith talks about how Hollywood demands big fights and action sequences in certain portions of the script, whether they make sense or not. I'm pretty sure they screwed the entire Harry storyline just to try and keep the standard formula of action pacing.</p><p>Note, this is the same terrible writer that Sony is keeping instead of keeping Raimi, Macguire, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you went in with low expectations , there some sequences where you could have fun .
However , I ca n't imagine wanting to watch it a second time.What bothered me more than the way Venom was handled , and the odd jazz sequences was how Harry knew and wanted to kill Peter , but waited for no good reason .
Then he picks a random moment to try and kill Peter .
They fight , and Harry develops amensia .
Then at the end of the film , with no reasoning at all , the amnesia disappears and Harry wants to fight Peter again .
Then , at the end the family butler comes out and says " I happen to know your father died by his own hands , but I 've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship .
I hope you do n't mind that I waited several years to speak up .
" Kevin Smith talks about how Hollywood demands big fights and action sequences in certain portions of the script , whether they make sense or not .
I 'm pretty sure they screwed the entire Harry storyline just to try and keep the standard formula of action pacing.Note , this is the same terrible writer that Sony is keeping instead of keeping Raimi , Macguire , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you went in with low expectations, there some sequences where you could have fun.
However, I can't imagine wanting to watch it a second time.What bothered me more than the way Venom was handled, and the odd jazz sequences was how Harry knew and wanted to kill Peter, but waited for no good reason.
Then he picks a random moment to try and kill Peter.
They fight, and Harry develops amensia.
Then at the end of the film, with no reasoning at all, the amnesia disappears and Harry wants to fight Peter again.
Then, at the end the family butler comes out and says "I happen to know your father died by his own hands, but I've waited all this years and allowed you to foster notions of revenge that tore apart your friendship.
I hope you don't mind that I waited several years to speak up.
"Kevin Smith talks about how Hollywood demands big fights and action sequences in certain portions of the script, whether they make sense or not.
I'm pretty sure they screwed the entire Harry storyline just to try and keep the standard formula of action pacing.Note, this is the same terrible writer that Sony is keeping instead of keeping Raimi, Macguire, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739738</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263321300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it.</p></div><p>...and each other.</p><p>Just sayin'.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it....and each other.Just sayin' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it....and each other.Just sayin'.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738704</id>
	<title>Hollywood</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1263317700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will blame this on piracy in 5, 4, 3, 2...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will blame this on piracy in 5 , 4 , 3 , 2.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will blame this on piracy in 5, 4, 3, 2...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740616</id>
	<title>Hollywood, do us all favor</title>
	<author>postmortem</author>
	<datestamp>1263324540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And replace these thousand-times-reused-themes, effect and nonsense filled movies with something novel with more substance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And replace these thousand-times-reused-themes , effect and nonsense filled movies with something novel with more substance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And replace these thousand-times-reused-themes, effect and nonsense filled movies with something novel with more substance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743206</id>
	<title>Re:"Reboot"</title>
	<author>dbug78</author>
	<datestamp>1263293220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was more or less with you until you used the word "fucktarded."  You don't get to complain about word use anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was more or less with you until you used the word " fucktarded .
" You do n't get to complain about word use anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was more or less with you until you used the word "fucktarded.
"  You don't get to complain about word use anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1263316740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one that liked Spiderman 3?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one that liked Spiderman 3 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one that liked Spiderman 3?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743256</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares about Tobey McGuire?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263293400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>JK Rowling</htmltext>
<tokenext>JK Rowling</tokentext>
<sentencetext>JK Rowling</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508</id>
	<title>Reward failure, punish success</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1263317040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Each film made near a billion dollars. Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible. So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well. Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.</p><p>As Kevin Smith said, in Hollywood, you fail upwards.</p><p>I'm not suggesting that everything Raimi did was perfect, but when Spider-man 2 was released, many hailed it as the best superhero film of all time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Each film made near a billion dollars .
Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3 , which was terrible .
So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4 , and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well .
Let 's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script , and punish a much-loved and successful director.As Kevin Smith said , in Hollywood , you fail upwards.I 'm not suggesting that everything Raimi did was perfect , but when Spider-man 2 was released , many hailed it as the best superhero film of all time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each film made near a billion dollars.
Raimi fought with the studios over the script for 3, which was terrible.
So now the studio is forcing the same writer for 4, and gave him a contract to write future Spider-man movies as well.
Let's keep the guy who wrote a TERRIBLE script, and punish a much-loved and successful director.As Kevin Smith said, in Hollywood, you fail upwards.I'm not suggesting that everything Raimi did was perfect, but when Spider-man 2 was released, many hailed it as the best superhero film of all time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742280</id>
	<title>Re:Here's why Raimi walked...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263288420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In any case, it would have probably been the most way out there movie, really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd.</p></div><p>They cater to the under 21 crowd? I guess this explains a lot of the recent Hollywood releases. Though I though that when your IQ got that low you were nearly vegetative, how do they get to the theaters?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In any case , it would have probably been the most way out there movie , really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd.They cater to the under 21 crowd ?
I guess this explains a lot of the recent Hollywood releases .
Though I though that when your IQ got that low you were nearly vegetative , how do they get to the theaters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In any case, it would have probably been the most way out there movie, really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd.They cater to the under 21 crowd?
I guess this explains a lot of the recent Hollywood releases.
Though I though that when your IQ got that low you were nearly vegetative, how do they get to the theaters?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30749836</id>
	<title>Oh no , not another batman franchise</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1263394920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was nothing worse then to hear another actor was taking over batman's role...now we got christian bale, who did awesome for the last 2...and gave it the dark feel...more so then anything done before...however it took a full first batman rewrite to do this....<br>Just because the director could not do what he wanted (immature little boy issues I guess) he does not need to take the whole team with him! As for the rest of the actors,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...if the director is not aligned with the one paying your salary, I would think about job security...<br>(that means you Tobey...you haven't done anything worthwhile except the Spider man movies!)</p><p>I would recommend John Stavereau, who surprisingly is the director for Iron Man, I did not know this crazy actor was such a good director. Hats off to him, and I would like to see him on this project!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was nothing worse then to hear another actor was taking over batman 's role...now we got christian bale , who did awesome for the last 2...and gave it the dark feel...more so then anything done before...however it took a full first batman rewrite to do this....Just because the director could not do what he wanted ( immature little boy issues I guess ) he does not need to take the whole team with him !
As for the rest of the actors , ...if the director is not aligned with the one paying your salary , I would think about job security... ( that means you Tobey...you have n't done anything worthwhile except the Spider man movies !
) I would recommend John Stavereau , who surprisingly is the director for Iron Man , I did not know this crazy actor was such a good director .
Hats off to him , and I would like to see him on this project !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was nothing worse then to hear another actor was taking over batman's role...now we got christian bale, who did awesome for the last 2...and gave it the dark feel...more so then anything done before...however it took a full first batman rewrite to do this....Just because the director could not do what he wanted (immature little boy issues I guess) he does not need to take the whole team with him!
As for the rest of the actors, ...if the director is not aligned with the one paying your salary, I would think about job security...(that means you Tobey...you haven't done anything worthwhile except the Spider man movies!
)I would recommend John Stavereau, who surprisingly is the director for Iron Man, I did not know this crazy actor was such a good director.
Hats off to him, and I would like to see him on this project!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738806</id>
	<title>Re:You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>Conchobair</author>
	<datestamp>1263318000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bruce Campbell as Leeroy Jenkins imo.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bruce Campbell as Leeroy Jenkins imo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bruce Campbell as Leeroy Jenkins imo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940</id>
	<title>Here's why Raimi walked...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263318420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you read into these articles, Raimi walked because the studio wouldn't go along with the Vulture story, and specifically Raimi wanted John Malkovich to play the Vulture. And he wanted Anne Hathaway to be the Vultress. I am not making this up. <br> <br>
The studio told Raimi he didn't need an expensive star like Hathaway in that role, and they didn't want Malkovich and they didn't like the Vulture as the bad guy at all.<br> <br>
Now consider how Raimi has approached bad guys so far. Doc Ock? He was a good scientist, distraught over his wife's death, and the tenatcles took over his mind. Harry Osborn? Tormented by his father, instead of becoming the Hobgoblin he turns back to good. The Sandman? Just a father trying to redeem himself to his family.<br> <br>
Even Dafoe as the Green Goblin was obviously mentally ill. He was mad/evil, yes, but almost sympathetic. He really did get his company taken away by the corporate board, it really was all his genius, and the military was choosing an inferior technology due to politics. In some respects, he was kind of justified to get that pissed off.<br> <br>
Now imagine how Malkovich's Vulture would have come off? Probably just a sex freak with Anne Hathaway as the Vultress. Maybe he's bad because he was abused as a child. Maybe his mind was taken over by a Hippie played by John Cusack. So many possibilities. <br> <br>
In any case, it would have probably been the most way out there movie, really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read into these articles , Raimi walked because the studio would n't go along with the Vulture story , and specifically Raimi wanted John Malkovich to play the Vulture .
And he wanted Anne Hathaway to be the Vultress .
I am not making this up .
The studio told Raimi he did n't need an expensive star like Hathaway in that role , and they did n't want Malkovich and they did n't like the Vulture as the bad guy at all .
Now consider how Raimi has approached bad guys so far .
Doc Ock ?
He was a good scientist , distraught over his wife 's death , and the tenatcles took over his mind .
Harry Osborn ?
Tormented by his father , instead of becoming the Hobgoblin he turns back to good .
The Sandman ?
Just a father trying to redeem himself to his family .
Even Dafoe as the Green Goblin was obviously mentally ill. He was mad/evil , yes , but almost sympathetic .
He really did get his company taken away by the corporate board , it really was all his genius , and the military was choosing an inferior technology due to politics .
In some respects , he was kind of justified to get that pissed off .
Now imagine how Malkovich 's Vulture would have come off ?
Probably just a sex freak with Anne Hathaway as the Vultress .
Maybe he 's bad because he was abused as a child .
Maybe his mind was taken over by a Hippie played by John Cusack .
So many possibilities .
In any case , it would have probably been the most way out there movie , really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read into these articles, Raimi walked because the studio wouldn't go along with the Vulture story, and specifically Raimi wanted John Malkovich to play the Vulture.
And he wanted Anne Hathaway to be the Vultress.
I am not making this up.
The studio told Raimi he didn't need an expensive star like Hathaway in that role, and they didn't want Malkovich and they didn't like the Vulture as the bad guy at all.
Now consider how Raimi has approached bad guys so far.
Doc Ock?
He was a good scientist, distraught over his wife's death, and the tenatcles took over his mind.
Harry Osborn?
Tormented by his father, instead of becoming the Hobgoblin he turns back to good.
The Sandman?
Just a father trying to redeem himself to his family.
Even Dafoe as the Green Goblin was obviously mentally ill. He was mad/evil, yes, but almost sympathetic.
He really did get his company taken away by the corporate board, it really was all his genius, and the military was choosing an inferior technology due to politics.
In some respects, he was kind of justified to get that pissed off.
Now imagine how Malkovich's Vulture would have come off?
Probably just a sex freak with Anne Hathaway as the Vultress.
Maybe he's bad because he was abused as a child.
Maybe his mind was taken over by a Hippie played by John Cusack.
So many possibilities.
In any case, it would have probably been the most way out there movie, really for the hardcore comic crowd and probably would have totally lost the under 21 crowd.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738606</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Young Bond Actors?</p><p>I guess you should look up how old Roger Moore was when he made his last Bond Movie.<br>Perhaps you light like to rethink your statement then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Young Bond Actors ? I guess you should look up how old Roger Moore was when he made his last Bond Movie.Perhaps you light like to rethink your statement then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Young Bond Actors?I guess you should look up how old Roger Moore was when he made his last Bond Movie.Perhaps you light like to rethink your statement then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739434</id>
	<title>Avoiding the 4th sequil syndrome</title>
	<author>doconnor</author>
	<datestamp>1263320100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both the 4th Superman and 4th Batman movies where so soul destroyingly bad that both franchises where shut down for years before rebooting. I wasn't too impressed with Spider-man 3 and I expected the 4th movie might really bad.</p><p>Perhaps they learned from history and are trying to avoid that fate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both the 4th Superman and 4th Batman movies where so soul destroyingly bad that both franchises where shut down for years before rebooting .
I was n't too impressed with Spider-man 3 and I expected the 4th movie might really bad.Perhaps they learned from history and are trying to avoid that fate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both the 4th Superman and 4th Batman movies where so soul destroyingly bad that both franchises where shut down for years before rebooting.
I wasn't too impressed with Spider-man 3 and I expected the 4th movie might really bad.Perhaps they learned from history and are trying to avoid that fate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739232</id>
	<title>So this is the flaw in show business.</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1263319440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Off the cuff, the only series that had sufficient success with alternate actors playing key roles, I think is the Batman series.  However, I propose a solution to this exception in the amazing match-ups each movie had regarding the villian, Danny Devito as the Pengiun, Jim Carrey as the Riddler etc.  Also, it sorta helps when the blunder becomes the norm, Michael Keaton played the first and second, then Val Kilmer, then George Clooney, Christian Bale....</p><p>They did it with the Incredible Hulk, while the second release had good actors... Ed Norten, Tim Roth,  Jennifer Connelly is hotter than the both of them, plus 'Hulk' also had Sam Elliott and Nick Nolte... ultimately, 'Hulk' came first and was of sufficient quality.</p><p>They can't go and muck with super heros, and I don't know why they try.  If you attach a personality to a super hero, then in most cases that needs to stick (the exception most likely to refute this claim would be pointing out Jack Nicolson vs Heath Ledger, but you'll find that these people are not aware that Heath Ledger was technically playing a different character, Joker from the Dark Knight series rather than the classic Joker from the original Batman that Jack did so well doing.)</p><p>Spiderman has had too many movies to start swapping around actors.  If Tobey Maguire isn't spiderman, if Kirsten Dunst isn't his squeeze, no matter how much money Sony throws at the problem, a new release is likely to receive more criticism than praise; things like this need a huge time buffer, a revision or remake 20 years later sort of thing.  Sony needs to keep the key actors in a Spiderman 4, otherwise it's going to go straight to DVD and be forgotten... but maybe it'll become a cult film?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Off the cuff , the only series that had sufficient success with alternate actors playing key roles , I think is the Batman series .
However , I propose a solution to this exception in the amazing match-ups each movie had regarding the villian , Danny Devito as the Pengiun , Jim Carrey as the Riddler etc .
Also , it sorta helps when the blunder becomes the norm , Michael Keaton played the first and second , then Val Kilmer , then George Clooney , Christian Bale....They did it with the Incredible Hulk , while the second release had good actors... Ed Norten , Tim Roth , Jennifer Connelly is hotter than the both of them , plus 'Hulk ' also had Sam Elliott and Nick Nolte... ultimately , 'Hulk ' came first and was of sufficient quality.They ca n't go and muck with super heros , and I do n't know why they try .
If you attach a personality to a super hero , then in most cases that needs to stick ( the exception most likely to refute this claim would be pointing out Jack Nicolson vs Heath Ledger , but you 'll find that these people are not aware that Heath Ledger was technically playing a different character , Joker from the Dark Knight series rather than the classic Joker from the original Batman that Jack did so well doing .
) Spiderman has had too many movies to start swapping around actors .
If Tobey Maguire is n't spiderman , if Kirsten Dunst is n't his squeeze , no matter how much money Sony throws at the problem , a new release is likely to receive more criticism than praise ; things like this need a huge time buffer , a revision or remake 20 years later sort of thing .
Sony needs to keep the key actors in a Spiderman 4 , otherwise it 's going to go straight to DVD and be forgotten... but maybe it 'll become a cult film ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Off the cuff, the only series that had sufficient success with alternate actors playing key roles, I think is the Batman series.
However, I propose a solution to this exception in the amazing match-ups each movie had regarding the villian, Danny Devito as the Pengiun, Jim Carrey as the Riddler etc.
Also, it sorta helps when the blunder becomes the norm, Michael Keaton played the first and second, then Val Kilmer, then George Clooney, Christian Bale....They did it with the Incredible Hulk, while the second release had good actors... Ed Norten, Tim Roth,  Jennifer Connelly is hotter than the both of them, plus 'Hulk' also had Sam Elliott and Nick Nolte... ultimately, 'Hulk' came first and was of sufficient quality.They can't go and muck with super heros, and I don't know why they try.
If you attach a personality to a super hero, then in most cases that needs to stick (the exception most likely to refute this claim would be pointing out Jack Nicolson vs Heath Ledger, but you'll find that these people are not aware that Heath Ledger was technically playing a different character, Joker from the Dark Knight series rather than the classic Joker from the original Batman that Jack did so well doing.
)Spiderman has had too many movies to start swapping around actors.
If Tobey Maguire isn't spiderman, if Kirsten Dunst isn't his squeeze, no matter how much money Sony throws at the problem, a new release is likely to receive more criticism than praise; things like this need a huge time buffer, a revision or remake 20 years later sort of thing.
Sony needs to keep the key actors in a Spiderman 4, otherwise it's going to go straight to DVD and be forgotten... but maybe it'll become a cult film?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688</id>
	<title>"Reboot"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know if this is proper use of the term or not, and frankly I don't care. It's really fucking annoying and I wish people would stop using "reboot" in a non-shutdown-a-computer-OS-and-start-it-up-again" sense. This use of the word makes me want to stab someone in the eye.</p><p><a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reboot" title="reference.com">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reboot</a> [reference.com]</p><p><a href="http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&amp;langpair=en" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&amp;langpair=en</a> [google.com]|en&amp;q=reboot&amp;hl=en</p><p>In order to REboot a production it must be booted in the first place, correct? So I've booted my slashdot comment. And the Spider-Man franchise was booted a few years ago. See how fucktarded that sounds? Well "reboot" in this context sounds just as dumb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if this is proper use of the term or not , and frankly I do n't care .
It 's really fucking annoying and I wish people would stop using " reboot " in a non-shutdown-a-computer-OS-and-start-it-up-again " sense .
This use of the word makes me want to stab someone in the eye.http : //dictionary.reference.com/browse/reboot [ reference.com ] http : //www.google.com/dictionary ? aq = f&amp;langpair = en [ google.com ] | en&amp;q = reboot&amp;hl = enIn order to REboot a production it must be booted in the first place , correct ?
So I 've booted my slashdot comment .
And the Spider-Man franchise was booted a few years ago .
See how fucktarded that sounds ?
Well " reboot " in this context sounds just as dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if this is proper use of the term or not, and frankly I don't care.
It's really fucking annoying and I wish people would stop using "reboot" in a non-shutdown-a-computer-OS-and-start-it-up-again" sense.
This use of the word makes me want to stab someone in the eye.http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reboot [reference.com]http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&amp;langpair=en [google.com]|en&amp;q=reboot&amp;hl=enIn order to REboot a production it must be booted in the first place, correct?
So I've booted my slashdot comment.
And the Spider-Man franchise was booted a few years ago.
See how fucktarded that sounds?
Well "reboot" in this context sounds just as dumb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740234</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Jimmy King</author>
	<datestamp>1263323160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  Plus natural web shooters rather than mechanical aren't new to the Spider-Man franchise.  Spider-Man 2099 had the character develop natural web shooters rather than building mechanical ones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Plus natural web shooters rather than mechanical are n't new to the Spider-Man franchise .
Spider-Man 2099 had the character develop natural web shooters rather than building mechanical ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Plus natural web shooters rather than mechanical aren't new to the Spider-Man franchise.
Spider-Man 2099 had the character develop natural web shooters rather than building mechanical ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743840</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>pluther</author>
	<datestamp>1263296220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What bugged me more was people's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies. Since he was bitten by a spider what's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies. I'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I don't understand why people care so much.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
One of the things that make Spiderman so damn cool is that, even though he has superpowers, he uses his mind as much if not more than his fists.</p><p>
In the comic, with mechanical webshooters, Peter Parker was a technology genius who invented a useful device to augment his powers to help him fight crime.</p><p>
In the movies, Peter Parker was some schmuck who got lucky and that was it.  They took away his scientific genius, one of his most endearing attributes.  They could have taken away his costume or need for a secret identity, too.</p><p>
<i>That</i>'s why people complain about the change.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What bugged me more was people 's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies .
Since he was bitten by a spider what 's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies .
I 'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I do n't understand why people care so much .
One of the things that make Spiderman so damn cool is that , even though he has superpowers , he uses his mind as much if not more than his fists .
In the comic , with mechanical webshooters , Peter Parker was a technology genius who invented a useful device to augment his powers to help him fight crime .
In the movies , Peter Parker was some schmuck who got lucky and that was it .
They took away his scientific genius , one of his most endearing attributes .
They could have taken away his costume or need for a secret identity , too .
That 's why people complain about the change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What bugged me more was people's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies.
Since he was bitten by a spider what's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies.
I'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I don't understand why people care so much.
One of the things that make Spiderman so damn cool is that, even though he has superpowers, he uses his mind as much if not more than his fists.
In the comic, with mechanical webshooters, Peter Parker was a technology genius who invented a useful device to augment his powers to help him fight crime.
In the movies, Peter Parker was some schmuck who got lucky and that was it.
They took away his scientific genius, one of his most endearing attributes.
They could have taken away his costume or need for a secret identity, too.
That's why people complain about the change.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30748104</id>
	<title>Ultimate Reboot: Spidey goes Bollywood</title>
	<author>Dana Larsen</author>
	<datestamp>1263373800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The ultimate Spider-Man reboot would be to change the whole location to India. Base it on the four issue Spidey spin-off Pavitr Prabhakar, and do it Bollywood style!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ultimate Spider-Man reboot would be to change the whole location to India .
Base it on the four issue Spidey spin-off Pavitr Prabhakar , and do it Bollywood style !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ultimate Spider-Man reboot would be to change the whole location to India.
Base it on the four issue Spidey spin-off Pavitr Prabhakar, and do it Bollywood style!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743746</id>
	<title>Re:3 was bad, really bad!</title>
	<author>sudden.zero</author>
	<datestamp>1263295860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a huge Spiderman fan I can tell you from my perspective that the biggest problem that I had with it was that there were just too Damn many villains in one movie at one time! I mean come on Hobgoblin, Venom and Sandman. Each one of these villains could have spanned a whole feature film. Not to mention that they could have broken Venom (As intricate as his story is) into two movies! Spiderman three was a huge flop just for this fact alone much less the storyline and other reasons mentioned!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a huge Spiderman fan I can tell you from my perspective that the biggest problem that I had with it was that there were just too Damn many villains in one movie at one time !
I mean come on Hobgoblin , Venom and Sandman .
Each one of these villains could have spanned a whole feature film .
Not to mention that they could have broken Venom ( As intricate as his story is ) into two movies !
Spiderman three was a huge flop just for this fact alone much less the storyline and other reasons mentioned !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a huge Spiderman fan I can tell you from my perspective that the biggest problem that I had with it was that there were just too Damn many villains in one movie at one time!
I mean come on Hobgoblin, Venom and Sandman.
Each one of these villains could have spanned a whole feature film.
Not to mention that they could have broken Venom (As intricate as his story is) into two movies!
Spiderman three was a huge flop just for this fact alone much less the storyline and other reasons mentioned!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263319860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What bugged me more was people's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies.  Since he was bitten by a spider what's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies.  I'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I don't understand why people care so much.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What bugged me more was people 's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies .
Since he was bitten by a spider what 's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies .
I 'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I do n't understand why people care so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What bugged me more was people's reaction to the lack of mechanical webshooters from the new movies.
Since he was bitten by a spider what's wrong with acquiring it as a power in the movies.
I'm a pedantic person but this detail is so minor that I don't understand why people care so much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30780840</id>
	<title>What's with all the reboots?</title>
	<author>paragon1</author>
	<datestamp>1263580200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when does Hollywood run Windows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does Hollywood run Windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does Hollywood run Windows?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739362</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>operagost</author>
	<datestamp>1263319920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first Spider-Man movie came out in 2002.  I was already almost 30.  Nothing makes me feel older than the idea that that movie franchise is already considered so tired it needs to be rebooted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first Spider-Man movie came out in 2002 .
I was already almost 30 .
Nothing makes me feel older than the idea that that movie franchise is already considered so tired it needs to be rebooted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first Spider-Man movie came out in 2002.
I was already almost 30.
Nothing makes me feel older than the idea that that movie franchise is already considered so tired it needs to be rebooted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738444</id>
	<title>A bit dissapointing...</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1263316860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was somewhat interested in the direction that Rami was going in for #4. I'd heard talk of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulture\_(comics)" title="wikipedia.org">The Vulture</a> [wikipedia.org] played by perhaps John Malkovitch, and the Movie appearance of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black\_Cat\_(comics)" title="wikipedia.org">Black Cat</a> [wikipedia.org]. Might have been good. However the writing was on the wall with #3, the studio had too much of a say in the process and the end result suffered. Rami is a talented guy and I'm sure one of his upcoming projects is going to be a hit. The future of the Spiderman franchise is not so certain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was somewhat interested in the direction that Rami was going in for # 4 .
I 'd heard talk of The Vulture [ wikipedia.org ] played by perhaps John Malkovitch , and the Movie appearance of Black Cat [ wikipedia.org ] .
Might have been good .
However the writing was on the wall with # 3 , the studio had too much of a say in the process and the end result suffered .
Rami is a talented guy and I 'm sure one of his upcoming projects is going to be a hit .
The future of the Spiderman franchise is not so certain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was somewhat interested in the direction that Rami was going in for #4.
I'd heard talk of The Vulture [wikipedia.org] played by perhaps John Malkovitch, and the Movie appearance of Black Cat [wikipedia.org].
Might have been good.
However the writing was on the wall with #3, the studio had too much of a say in the process and the end result suffered.
Rami is a talented guy and I'm sure one of his upcoming projects is going to be a hit.
The future of the Spiderman franchise is not so certain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739330</id>
	<title>director's conception vs studio greed</title>
	<author>brunokummel</author>
	<datestamp>1263319800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry if I'm trolling, but Spider-man 3 was already kind of sucky... The idea of cramming as much villans and action in a comic book's movie, believe it or not,  is not a great idea. At least to the fans, who are expecting a little bit more than a 2 minute appearence of Venon....
<br>
Not quite sure if I made my point...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry if I 'm trolling , but Spider-man 3 was already kind of sucky... The idea of cramming as much villans and action in a comic book 's movie , believe it or not , is not a great idea .
At least to the fans , who are expecting a little bit more than a 2 minute appearence of Venon... . Not quite sure if I made my point.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry if I'm trolling, but Spider-man 3 was already kind of sucky... The idea of cramming as much villans and action in a comic book's movie, believe it or not,  is not a great idea.
At least to the fans, who are expecting a little bit more than a 2 minute appearence of Venon....

Not quite sure if I made my point...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738420</id>
	<title>Re:...why?</title>
	<author>navygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1263316740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What Nick Cage Hulk movie are you referring to? I think you mean the Ed Norton one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What Nick Cage Hulk movie are you referring to ?
I think you mean the Ed Norton one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What Nick Cage Hulk movie are you referring to?
I think you mean the Ed Norton one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122</id>
	<title>Too soon.</title>
	<author>potscott</author>
	<datestamp>1263315780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point.

I personally don't want to go see *another* Spider Man movie, reboot or sequel, for a while.  By while I mean years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point .
I personally do n't want to go see * another * Spider Man movie , reboot or sequel , for a while .
By while I mean years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point.
I personally don't want to go see *another* Spider Man movie, reboot or sequel, for a while.
By while I mean years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741028</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Necromancyr</author>
	<datestamp>1263326100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They actually have an arc in the comic about this - basically Doc Ock is falling apart because of all the pummeling he's taken over the years since he's basically a normal person.  He's in a little cocoon type thing where he can't move and his arms do everything.

He tries to take over the world, etc etc., spider-man screws it up, etc.

Semi-interesting arc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They actually have an arc in the comic about this - basically Doc Ock is falling apart because of all the pummeling he 's taken over the years since he 's basically a normal person .
He 's in a little cocoon type thing where he ca n't move and his arms do everything .
He tries to take over the world , etc etc. , spider-man screws it up , etc .
Semi-interesting arc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They actually have an arc in the comic about this - basically Doc Ock is falling apart because of all the pummeling he's taken over the years since he's basically a normal person.
He's in a little cocoon type thing where he can't move and his arms do everything.
He tries to take over the world, etc etc., spider-man screws it up, etc.
Semi-interesting arc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741324</id>
	<title>Re:Here's why Raimi walked...</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1263327360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing I like about Spider man is that villains are subtle, and the hero is not really flawed, just normal.  In this way we move from the tired formula of the tragic hero, or protagonist as Venture Bros are calling them, to the tragic antagonist.  We end up with someone that we would be better off without, that we can mostly conformably vanquish.  This to me is good.  It allows character development to occur.  If we are going to focus on the protagonist for every movie, with lower dimensional cartoon villains, then it becomes difficult to make sequels that are not just retellings of the previous movie.  Look at The Wrath of Khan.  It was a good star trek movie, in the was that many of TOS were very good, because it focused on a character outside of the normal cast. We also see that people want to see Bond, or Doctor Who for that matter, battle the interesting antagonist.  Sure they are still Superheroes, but comfortable enough with their status not to be stuck up Superheroes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing I like about Spider man is that villains are subtle , and the hero is not really flawed , just normal .
In this way we move from the tired formula of the tragic hero , or protagonist as Venture Bros are calling them , to the tragic antagonist .
We end up with someone that we would be better off without , that we can mostly conformably vanquish .
This to me is good .
It allows character development to occur .
If we are going to focus on the protagonist for every movie , with lower dimensional cartoon villains , then it becomes difficult to make sequels that are not just retellings of the previous movie .
Look at The Wrath of Khan .
It was a good star trek movie , in the was that many of TOS were very good , because it focused on a character outside of the normal cast .
We also see that people want to see Bond , or Doctor Who for that matter , battle the interesting antagonist .
Sure they are still Superheroes , but comfortable enough with their status not to be stuck up Superheroes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing I like about Spider man is that villains are subtle, and the hero is not really flawed, just normal.
In this way we move from the tired formula of the tragic hero, or protagonist as Venture Bros are calling them, to the tragic antagonist.
We end up with someone that we would be better off without, that we can mostly conformably vanquish.
This to me is good.
It allows character development to occur.
If we are going to focus on the protagonist for every movie, with lower dimensional cartoon villains, then it becomes difficult to make sequels that are not just retellings of the previous movie.
Look at The Wrath of Khan.
It was a good star trek movie, in the was that many of TOS were very good, because it focused on a character outside of the normal cast.
We also see that people want to see Bond, or Doctor Who for that matter, battle the interesting antagonist.
Sure they are still Superheroes, but comfortable enough with their status not to be stuck up Superheroes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740802</id>
	<title>Re:Reboot how?</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1263325260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It really did feel like deus ex machina.  I'll give the series a gimmie and accept that a spider bite gives him superpowers as long as they don't dig into it too much.  A super spider bite and then totally unrelated to that the kid comes up with a revolutionary invention?  That's just plain not fair!  I have ZERO superpowers.  His super enemies seem to only have one source of their powers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It really did feel like deus ex machina .
I 'll give the series a gimmie and accept that a spider bite gives him superpowers as long as they do n't dig into it too much .
A super spider bite and then totally unrelated to that the kid comes up with a revolutionary invention ?
That 's just plain not fair !
I have ZERO superpowers .
His super enemies seem to only have one source of their powers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It really did feel like deus ex machina.
I'll give the series a gimmie and accept that a spider bite gives him superpowers as long as they don't dig into it too much.
A super spider bite and then totally unrelated to that the kid comes up with a revolutionary invention?
That's just plain not fair!
I have ZERO superpowers.
His super enemies seem to only have one source of their powers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739836</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1263321660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ask Lisa Simpson or Eric Cartman. And don't argue that they are cartoons, are fiction just like Spiderman or even Bond.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask Lisa Simpson or Eric Cartman .
And do n't argue that they are cartoons , are fiction just like Spiderman or even Bond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask Lisa Simpson or Eric Cartman.
And don't argue that they are cartoons, are fiction just like Spiderman or even Bond.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738560</id>
	<title>Stretching the Imagination ...</title>
	<author>foobsr</author>
	<datestamp>1263317220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>TFS: <i>"If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi,'"</i>
<br> <br>
IMHO, it is hard to imagine this as 'Fantasy', but 'Sci-Fi"? Perhaps it is the best they scrap #4 altogether.
<br> <br>
CC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>TFS : " If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi, ' " IMHO , it is hard to imagine this as 'Fantasy ' , but 'Sci-Fi " ?
Perhaps it is the best they scrap # 4 altogether .
CC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFS: "If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi,'"
 
IMHO, it is hard to imagine this as 'Fantasy', but 'Sci-Fi"?
Perhaps it is the best they scrap #4 altogether.
CC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739442</id>
	<title>Re:"Reboot"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263320160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously? Are you so genuinely disturbed by the evolution of language and the repurposing of terms?</p><p>Interestingly, "booting" a computer came from the term "bootstrap" which ultimately has its roots in the little leather tabs on large boots, to help you put them on.  To 'pull up by your bootstraps' was used metaphorically for a long time (and still is) meaning to start and do something, by yourself and unaided by another.In the1950s it came to be used to describe the hardwired processes required to create self sustaining software processes.</p><p>So if were were to get pissed about the bootstrapping metaphor being applied to computers we could say:<br>"In order to 'bootstrap' a computer, it must have boots in the first place, correct? So I've bootstrapped my slashdot comment. And the Spider-Man franchise was bootstrapped a few years ago.  See how fucktarded that sounds? Well 'boot' in your context sounds just as dumb."</p><p>Not that the wiki links lend credibility to my argument but please see:<br>http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reboot#Etymology<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping<br>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bootstrap</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
Are you so genuinely disturbed by the evolution of language and the repurposing of terms ? Interestingly , " booting " a computer came from the term " bootstrap " which ultimately has its roots in the little leather tabs on large boots , to help you put them on .
To 'pull up by your bootstraps ' was used metaphorically for a long time ( and still is ) meaning to start and do something , by yourself and unaided by another.In the1950s it came to be used to describe the hardwired processes required to create self sustaining software processes.So if were were to get pissed about the bootstrapping metaphor being applied to computers we could say : " In order to 'bootstrap ' a computer , it must have boots in the first place , correct ?
So I 've bootstrapped my slashdot comment .
And the Spider-Man franchise was bootstrapped a few years ago .
See how fucktarded that sounds ?
Well 'boot ' in your context sounds just as dumb .
" Not that the wiki links lend credibility to my argument but please see : http : //en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reboot # Etymologyhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrappinghttp : //www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bootstrap</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
Are you so genuinely disturbed by the evolution of language and the repurposing of terms?Interestingly, "booting" a computer came from the term "bootstrap" which ultimately has its roots in the little leather tabs on large boots, to help you put them on.
To 'pull up by your bootstraps' was used metaphorically for a long time (and still is) meaning to start and do something, by yourself and unaided by another.In the1950s it came to be used to describe the hardwired processes required to create self sustaining software processes.So if were were to get pissed about the bootstrapping metaphor being applied to computers we could say:"In order to 'bootstrap' a computer, it must have boots in the first place, correct?
So I've bootstrapped my slashdot comment.
And the Spider-Man franchise was bootstrapped a few years ago.
See how fucktarded that sounds?
Well 'boot' in your context sounds just as dumb.
"Not that the wiki links lend credibility to my argument but please see:http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reboot#Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrappinghttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bootstrap</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741318</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>SuiteSisterMary</author>
	<datestamp>1263327300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The movie was take it or leave it; that said, Bryce Dallas Howard forgives all.</p><p>ALL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The movie was take it or leave it ; that said , Bryce Dallas Howard forgives all.ALL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The movie was take it or leave it; that said, Bryce Dallas Howard forgives all.ALL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738588</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1263317340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand there are two teenage boys in Kazakhstan who loved it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30767090</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263494400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would also go against the grain of the comic where Doc Oc seemed more than able to hold his own against Spider-Man time and again. Also, it would go against Spider-Man's own ethical approach to, you know, pulling his punches so he doesn't kill people...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would also go against the grain of the comic where Doc Oc seemed more than able to hold his own against Spider-Man time and again .
Also , it would go against Spider-Man 's own ethical approach to , you know , pulling his punches so he does n't kill people.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would also go against the grain of the comic where Doc Oc seemed more than able to hold his own against Spider-Man time and again.
Also, it would go against Spider-Man's own ethical approach to, you know, pulling his punches so he doesn't kill people...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739230</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263319440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sony's hearts are not *truly* klingon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sony 's hearts are not * truly * klingon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sony's hearts are not *truly* klingon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740022</id>
	<title>Re:Here's why Raimi walked...</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1263322320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Almost all of those are the same as they were in the comics, though.  It's not like Raimi decided to make them all psychologically damaged.  Well, the Sandman in the comics was just a criminal because it's what he was good at.  It's very common in comics, really.  You have two kinds of villains:  Criminals, and crazies.  Criminals are just criminals, they want cash, and they use their newfound superpowers to get it.  Or they don't even have powers, they just have cunning plans and gadgets.  Then you have the crazy ones.  Their powers made them nuts, if they weren't already.  They're the ones you see with the "blow up the city" evil schemes.  They're evil for evil's sake.  But nobody is just pure evil, without being nuts.  Look at Batman, too.  Almost every batman villain is crazy, that's why they get sent to an insane asylum, not prison.  And even the criminals, most of them are driven to crime by some sob story or other, in the comics.  The Vulture, he got screwed by his business partner.  The Penguin, he was picked on for being ugly and looking like a bird (Penguin because he wears a tux).  A sympathetic villain is hardly something Raimi invented.  It's just because, a person who wants to blow up the city is a shitty villain if his only reason is "I'M EVIL LOL".  So pretty much, he's got to be nuts.  Or, his evil plot is just Diehard subterfuge, distract the hero(es) with a bogus terror plot so you can pull a heist while they're looking the other way<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Almost all of those are the same as they were in the comics , though .
It 's not like Raimi decided to make them all psychologically damaged .
Well , the Sandman in the comics was just a criminal because it 's what he was good at .
It 's very common in comics , really .
You have two kinds of villains : Criminals , and crazies .
Criminals are just criminals , they want cash , and they use their newfound superpowers to get it .
Or they do n't even have powers , they just have cunning plans and gadgets .
Then you have the crazy ones .
Their powers made them nuts , if they were n't already .
They 're the ones you see with the " blow up the city " evil schemes .
They 're evil for evil 's sake .
But nobody is just pure evil , without being nuts .
Look at Batman , too .
Almost every batman villain is crazy , that 's why they get sent to an insane asylum , not prison .
And even the criminals , most of them are driven to crime by some sob story or other , in the comics .
The Vulture , he got screwed by his business partner .
The Penguin , he was picked on for being ugly and looking like a bird ( Penguin because he wears a tux ) .
A sympathetic villain is hardly something Raimi invented .
It 's just because , a person who wants to blow up the city is a shitty villain if his only reason is " I 'M EVIL LOL " .
So pretty much , he 's got to be nuts .
Or , his evil plot is just Diehard subterfuge , distract the hero ( es ) with a bogus terror plot so you can pull a heist while they 're looking the other way ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Almost all of those are the same as they were in the comics, though.
It's not like Raimi decided to make them all psychologically damaged.
Well, the Sandman in the comics was just a criminal because it's what he was good at.
It's very common in comics, really.
You have two kinds of villains:  Criminals, and crazies.
Criminals are just criminals, they want cash, and they use their newfound superpowers to get it.
Or they don't even have powers, they just have cunning plans and gadgets.
Then you have the crazy ones.
Their powers made them nuts, if they weren't already.
They're the ones you see with the "blow up the city" evil schemes.
They're evil for evil's sake.
But nobody is just pure evil, without being nuts.
Look at Batman, too.
Almost every batman villain is crazy, that's why they get sent to an insane asylum, not prison.
And even the criminals, most of them are driven to crime by some sob story or other, in the comics.
The Vulture, he got screwed by his business partner.
The Penguin, he was picked on for being ugly and looking like a bird (Penguin because he wears a tux).
A sympathetic villain is hardly something Raimi invented.
It's just because, a person who wants to blow up the city is a shitty villain if his only reason is "I'M EVIL LOL".
So pretty much, he's got to be nuts.
Or, his evil plot is just Diehard subterfuge, distract the hero(es) with a bogus terror plot so you can pull a heist while they're looking the other way ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738462</id>
	<title>Reboot Sony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263316920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>'Nuff Said.</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Nuff Said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Nuff Said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740322</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263323520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't really follow comics... but wasn't there some Spiderman arc where Peter Parker sort of goes on the warpath after Aunt May gets shot... and it's made more explicit that Spiderman usually pulls his punches a lot?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really follow comics... but was n't there some Spiderman arc where Peter Parker sort of goes on the warpath after Aunt May gets shot... and it 's made more explicit that Spiderman usually pulls his punches a lot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really follow comics... but wasn't there some Spiderman arc where Peter Parker sort of goes on the warpath after Aunt May gets shot... and it's made more explicit that Spiderman usually pulls his punches a lot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741366</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>IICV</author>
	<datestamp>1263327480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I vaguely remember reading that Sam Raimi did not want to include Venom in the movie at all, because he was more interested in the other aspects of Spiderman 3. However, the executives thought that Venom would make the movie more profitable, so they forced Raimi to include that plot.</p><p>Apparently, Spiderman 3 makes a lot more sense if you just cut out the parts with Venom. Not that that makes me want to watch it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I vaguely remember reading that Sam Raimi did not want to include Venom in the movie at all , because he was more interested in the other aspects of Spiderman 3 .
However , the executives thought that Venom would make the movie more profitable , so they forced Raimi to include that plot.Apparently , Spiderman 3 makes a lot more sense if you just cut out the parts with Venom .
Not that that makes me want to watch it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I vaguely remember reading that Sam Raimi did not want to include Venom in the movie at all, because he was more interested in the other aspects of Spiderman 3.
However, the executives thought that Venom would make the movie more profitable, so they forced Raimi to include that plot.Apparently, Spiderman 3 makes a lot more sense if you just cut out the parts with Venom.
Not that that makes me want to watch it again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740390</id>
	<title>Clone / Robot !!</title>
	<author>Imazalil</author>
	<datestamp>1263323760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean he was a clone / robot all along !?!?!</p><p>Or wait... he dies will be split into 4 different characters? I don't even know how the rest of that whole Superman's dead plot line played out.</p><p>Or better. 'Gasp' what a nightmare!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean he was a clone / robot all along ! ? ! ?
! Or wait... he dies will be split into 4 different characters ?
I do n't even know how the rest of that whole Superman 's dead plot line played out.Or better .
'Gasp ' what a nightmare !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean he was a clone / robot all along !?!?
!Or wait... he dies will be split into 4 different characters?
I don't even know how the rest of that whole Superman's dead plot line played out.Or better.
'Gasp' what a nightmare!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739280</id>
	<title>"Yesterday we discussed"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263319560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but we agreed on "no reboots".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but we agreed on " no reboots " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but we agreed on "no reboots".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738758</id>
	<title>Reboot really equals ..</title>
	<author>Rastl</author>
	<datestamp>1263317880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reboot means a chance to make all new merchandise for the masses!  Forget anything you already have - this new stuff is going to be SO cool!</p><p>Um, yeah.  Kinda in a cynical mood today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reboot means a chance to make all new merchandise for the masses !
Forget anything you already have - this new stuff is going to be SO cool ! Um , yeah .
Kinda in a cynical mood today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reboot means a chance to make all new merchandise for the masses!
Forget anything you already have - this new stuff is going to be SO cool!Um, yeah.
Kinda in a cynical mood today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739694</id>
	<title>Re:This rocks! I love the spiderman reboots..</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1263321120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, no, no.  After <i>Spiderman VI - Jason Lives</i>, comes <i>Spiderman vs. Alien vs. Predator</i>, in 3-D!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , no .
After Spiderman VI - Jason Lives , comes Spiderman vs. Alien vs. Predator , in 3-D !
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, no.
After Spiderman VI - Jason Lives, comes Spiderman vs. Alien vs. Predator, in 3-D!
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740336</id>
	<title>Re:spiderman</title>
	<author>Graff</author>
	<datestamp>1263323520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But Doc Oc, he's just a dude with creepy robot arms. Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass, the guy they're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy. Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries.</p></div><p>There's definitely some movie science going on here. Some of the reasoning is that since the arms are fast and strong they can act as shock absorbers, pulling Doctor Octopus back from the impact and softening the blow. There's a few nods to this in the movie, where Doc Oc uses a couple of the arms to brace himself before doing something or where the arms stabilize him when he loses his balance.</p><p>Then again Spider-Man was also depicted to be a lot stronger in the movies than he was in the comic books. Yes, he has super strength from the mutation but in the movie he approaches Superman strength and durability. In the comic books he can take a beating and lift fairly heavy objects but he lifted far more in the movies than he did in the comics, aside from a few story arcs in which his powers were boosted. They definitely inflated everyone's abilities in the name of selling box office tickets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But Doc Oc , he 's just a dude with creepy robot arms .
Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass , the guy they 're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy .
Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries.There 's definitely some movie science going on here .
Some of the reasoning is that since the arms are fast and strong they can act as shock absorbers , pulling Doctor Octopus back from the impact and softening the blow .
There 's a few nods to this in the movie , where Doc Oc uses a couple of the arms to brace himself before doing something or where the arms stabilize him when he loses his balance.Then again Spider-Man was also depicted to be a lot stronger in the movies than he was in the comic books .
Yes , he has super strength from the mutation but in the movie he approaches Superman strength and durability .
In the comic books he can take a beating and lift fairly heavy objects but he lifted far more in the movies than he did in the comics , aside from a few story arcs in which his powers were boosted .
They definitely inflated everyone 's abilities in the name of selling box office tickets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But Doc Oc, he's just a dude with creepy robot arms.
Even if those robot arms can kick eight kinds of ass, the guy they're attached to is still a flabby middle-aged science guy.
Our friendly neighborhood spiderman is super-strong and a punch from him should cause disfiguring if not immediately fatal injuries.There's definitely some movie science going on here.
Some of the reasoning is that since the arms are fast and strong they can act as shock absorbers, pulling Doctor Octopus back from the impact and softening the blow.
There's a few nods to this in the movie, where Doc Oc uses a couple of the arms to brace himself before doing something or where the arms stabilize him when he loses his balance.Then again Spider-Man was also depicted to be a lot stronger in the movies than he was in the comic books.
Yes, he has super strength from the mutation but in the movie he approaches Superman strength and durability.
In the comic books he can take a beating and lift fairly heavy objects but he lifted far more in the movies than he did in the comics, aside from a few story arcs in which his powers were boosted.
They definitely inflated everyone's abilities in the name of selling box office tickets.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739966</id>
	<title>Re:Amazing how bond could go 30+ years</title>
	<author>mbourgon</author>
	<datestamp>1263322080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real problem has nothing to do with the actors.  It's everything to do with Raimi wanting one movie, and the studio wanting a different movie.  They want to make sure their cash cow is adequately milked, whereas Raimi wants good milk.  Spidey 1 &amp; 2 worked well, though apparently the whole Venom arc in 3 was put in at the insistence of the studio.  Raimi, not liking that, did a half-assed job anyhow.</p><p>This time around, he said "I want to do X" they said "No, you'll do Y", he said "no" and they started looking for someone who would do as they were told.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real problem has nothing to do with the actors .
It 's everything to do with Raimi wanting one movie , and the studio wanting a different movie .
They want to make sure their cash cow is adequately milked , whereas Raimi wants good milk .
Spidey 1 &amp; 2 worked well , though apparently the whole Venom arc in 3 was put in at the insistence of the studio .
Raimi , not liking that , did a half-assed job anyhow.This time around , he said " I want to do X " they said " No , you 'll do Y " , he said " no " and they started looking for someone who would do as they were told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real problem has nothing to do with the actors.
It's everything to do with Raimi wanting one movie, and the studio wanting a different movie.
They want to make sure their cash cow is adequately milked, whereas Raimi wants good milk.
Spidey 1 &amp; 2 worked well, though apparently the whole Venom arc in 3 was put in at the insistence of the studio.
Raimi, not liking that, did a half-assed job anyhow.This time around, he said "I want to do X" they said "No, you'll do Y", he said "no" and they started looking for someone who would do as they were told.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739184</id>
	<title>Re:You Have No Idea</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1263319260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now, keep in mind that directors often have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swing</p></div></blockquote><p>Indeed.  And at any given time only a portion of those multiple projects actually require significant personal attention at any given time.  The rest, maybe a couple of hours a week or month.  (Much of it just reviewing what other people are doing, E.G. supervisory/management work.)<br>
&nbsp; <br>Seriously, why do some people (like the story submitter) not understand multitasking?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , keep in mind that directors often have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swingIndeed .
And at any given time only a portion of those multiple projects actually require significant personal attention at any given time .
The rest , maybe a couple of hours a week or month .
( Much of it just reviewing what other people are doing , E.G .
supervisory/management work .
)   Seriously , why do some people ( like the story submitter ) not understand multitasking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, keep in mind that directors often have multiple projects that are in some form of production -- either stalled or pending development or in full swingIndeed.
And at any given time only a portion of those multiple projects actually require significant personal attention at any given time.
The rest, maybe a couple of hours a week or month.
(Much of it just reviewing what other people are doing, E.G.
supervisory/management work.
)
  Seriously, why do some people (like the story submitter) not understand multitasking?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30752672</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1263406500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point.</p><p>I personally don't want to go see *another* Spider Man movie, reboot or sequel, for a while.  By while I mean years.</p></div><p>I agree. The real advantage to a reboot is that they can benefit from hindsight. They can look back at what worked and what didn't, update it for today's generation, and give it a new look and feel that either wasn't possible before, or that the director chose to ignore.</p><p>The only way this film can benefit right now, is if they feel that the current franchise has gone too far in the wrong direction. (See the discussion about making it grittier in other comments). This move will not "unjump" any sharks, and it will not replenish the pool of good ideas that was depleted by the last three films.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point.I personally do n't want to go see * another * Spider Man movie , reboot or sequel , for a while .
By while I mean years.I agree .
The real advantage to a reboot is that they can benefit from hindsight .
They can look back at what worked and what did n't , update it for today 's generation , and give it a new look and feel that either was n't possible before , or that the director chose to ignore.The only way this film can benefit right now , is if they feel that the current franchise has gone too far in the wrong direction .
( See the discussion about making it grittier in other comments ) .
This move will not " unjump " any sharks , and it will not replenish the pool of good ideas that was depleted by the last three films .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should probably leave well enough alone at this point.I personally don't want to go see *another* Spider Man movie, reboot or sequel, for a while.
By while I mean years.I agree.
The real advantage to a reboot is that they can benefit from hindsight.
They can look back at what worked and what didn't, update it for today's generation, and give it a new look and feel that either wasn't possible before, or that the director chose to ignore.The only way this film can benefit right now, is if they feel that the current franchise has gone too far in the wrong direction.
(See the discussion about making it grittier in other comments).
This move will not "unjump" any sharks, and it will not replenish the pool of good ideas that was depleted by the last three films.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738734</id>
	<title>Re:Too soon.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263317820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>dude you have very shitty taste in film. some would say you're doubly stupid for admitting to being so low brow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>dude you have very shitty taste in film .
some would say you 're doubly stupid for admitting to being so low brow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dude you have very shitty taste in film.
some would say you're doubly stupid for admitting to being so low brow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30750700</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares about Tobey McGuire?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263398880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hugh Laurie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Laurie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Laurie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738130</id>
	<title>Comic Stories</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1263315780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's something slightly disturbing about have 50 years of source material, most of it better than anything Hollywood has done with their superhero licenses, going unused and instead choosing to "reboot" a perfectly good series.  If the Spider-man franchise had planned ahead, they could have inserted the Jean DeWolfe (it's been a looooong time since I read this series and I may have the spelling wrong) character -- a New York detective, pretty and likeable enough but a bit rough and tumble who has a slight crush on Spider-man.  Give us some emotional investment into some returning characters like her, then introduce the Sin-Eater plot.</p><p>"Forgive me father, for you have sinned."  BOOOM!  (headshot...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's something slightly disturbing about have 50 years of source material , most of it better than anything Hollywood has done with their superhero licenses , going unused and instead choosing to " reboot " a perfectly good series .
If the Spider-man franchise had planned ahead , they could have inserted the Jean DeWolfe ( it 's been a looooong time since I read this series and I may have the spelling wrong ) character -- a New York detective , pretty and likeable enough but a bit rough and tumble who has a slight crush on Spider-man .
Give us some emotional investment into some returning characters like her , then introduce the Sin-Eater plot .
" Forgive me father , for you have sinned .
" BOOOM !
( headshot... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's something slightly disturbing about have 50 years of source material, most of it better than anything Hollywood has done with their superhero licenses, going unused and instead choosing to "reboot" a perfectly good series.
If the Spider-man franchise had planned ahead, they could have inserted the Jean DeWolfe (it's been a looooong time since I read this series and I may have the spelling wrong) character -- a New York detective, pretty and likeable enough but a bit rough and tumble who has a slight crush on Spider-man.
Give us some emotional investment into some returning characters like her, then introduce the Sin-Eater plot.
"Forgive me father, for you have sinned.
"  BOOOM!
(headshot...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739360</id>
	<title>Re:"Reboot"</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1263319920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reboot (Fiction) : discard much or even all previous continuity in the series and start anew with fresh ideas.</p><p>The term originates from its use in computer science. After a computer is rebooted, nothing (except non-volatile storage, such as on a disk drive) of the computer's previous operating session has any bearing on its new session.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reboot ( Fiction ) : discard much or even all previous continuity in the series and start anew with fresh ideas.The term originates from its use in computer science .
After a computer is rebooted , nothing ( except non-volatile storage , such as on a disk drive ) of the computer 's previous operating session has any bearing on its new session .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reboot (Fiction) : discard much or even all previous continuity in the series and start anew with fresh ideas.The term originates from its use in computer science.
After a computer is rebooted, nothing (except non-volatile storage, such as on a disk drive) of the computer's previous operating session has any bearing on its new session.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738652</id>
	<title>Re:...why?</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1263317520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Batman reboot was probably the most successful I've ever seen.  Mind you, each time they make a sequel, they risk screwing the pooch.  Spiderman 3 was certainly the weakest of the three, but still, I didn't think it was that bad, but who knows, Spiderman 4 might have been a gawdawful mess.  I have the same fears for Batman, which took a franchise that had been completely fucked up from the moment they picked Michael Keaton to play Bruce Wayne/Batman, and had only gone down hill from there, and transformed it into something completely different, and in a way, far more in line with the original conception.  If the third movie sucks, then they've taken a wondrous thing and turned it to shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Batman reboot was probably the most successful I 've ever seen .
Mind you , each time they make a sequel , they risk screwing the pooch .
Spiderman 3 was certainly the weakest of the three , but still , I did n't think it was that bad , but who knows , Spiderman 4 might have been a gawdawful mess .
I have the same fears for Batman , which took a franchise that had been completely fucked up from the moment they picked Michael Keaton to play Bruce Wayne/Batman , and had only gone down hill from there , and transformed it into something completely different , and in a way , far more in line with the original conception .
If the third movie sucks , then they 've taken a wondrous thing and turned it to shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Batman reboot was probably the most successful I've ever seen.
Mind you, each time they make a sequel, they risk screwing the pooch.
Spiderman 3 was certainly the weakest of the three, but still, I didn't think it was that bad, but who knows, Spiderman 4 might have been a gawdawful mess.
I have the same fears for Batman, which took a franchise that had been completely fucked up from the moment they picked Michael Keaton to play Bruce Wayne/Batman, and had only gone down hill from there, and transformed it into something completely different, and in a way, far more in line with the original conception.
If the third movie sucks, then they've taken a wondrous thing and turned it to shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30746678</id>
	<title>Hollywood's cleaned your clock</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1263314100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who the F cares if it's a reboot, you're still gonna watch it....in the theater....likely under 3D. And pay double for it.
<br>
<br>
The studio's figured out, the majority of folks will see it (it's branding folks!), <i>then complain about it</i> on places like Rotten Tomatoes and forget about it as Transformers 3 comes to the screen the following month. Since critics are now <b>the</b> advertising system (bought out like technology or political "journalists" aka. bloggers), there's no stopping the studios. So:
<ul>
<li>They still make &gt;$200M.</li><li>SM consumer products still rolls forward</li><li>The brand is strong enough for a few stupid storylines in order for a really <i>decent</i> story to come out around SpiderMan 7</li><li>Studio stays cash full via blueray and online downloads--the long tail in effect...</li>
</ul><p>
Reboots in the production pipeline are now the norm folks.... And yaw'll will still go and see it. Even if the fanboys boycott.... Lucas was right, create new fans with the same "stuff", the old fans will always be fans. That means the same characters, stories, etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who the F cares if it 's a reboot , you 're still gon na watch it....in the theater....likely under 3D .
And pay double for it .
The studio 's figured out , the majority of folks will see it ( it 's branding folks !
) , then complain about it on places like Rotten Tomatoes and forget about it as Transformers 3 comes to the screen the following month .
Since critics are now the advertising system ( bought out like technology or political " journalists " aka .
bloggers ) , there 's no stopping the studios .
So : They still make &gt; $ 200M.SM consumer products still rolls forwardThe brand is strong enough for a few stupid storylines in order for a really decent story to come out around SpiderMan 7Studio stays cash full via blueray and online downloads--the long tail in effect.. . Reboots in the production pipeline are now the norm folks.... And yaw 'll will still go and see it .
Even if the fanboys boycott.... Lucas was right , create new fans with the same " stuff " , the old fans will always be fans .
That means the same characters , stories , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who the F cares if it's a reboot, you're still gonna watch it....in the theater....likely under 3D.
And pay double for it.
The studio's figured out, the majority of folks will see it (it's branding folks!
), then complain about it on places like Rotten Tomatoes and forget about it as Transformers 3 comes to the screen the following month.
Since critics are now the advertising system (bought out like technology or political "journalists" aka.
bloggers), there's no stopping the studios.
So:

They still make &gt;$200M.SM consumer products still rolls forwardThe brand is strong enough for a few stupid storylines in order for a really decent story to come out around SpiderMan 7Studio stays cash full via blueray and online downloads--the long tail in effect...

Reboots in the production pipeline are now the norm folks.... And yaw'll will still go and see it.
Even if the fanboys boycott.... Lucas was right, create new fans with the same "stuff", the old fans will always be fans.
That means the same characters, stories, etc...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30767090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30750700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30752672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_12_1453211_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739354
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740488
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743840
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740936
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740914
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740802
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740234
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738596
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741366
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739780
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738588
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30752672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739302
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30745242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739482
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30750700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30743746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30741028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30742284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30767090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30739228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_12_1453211.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30738560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_12_1453211.30740864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
