DVD Talk
The Amazing Spider-Man (Webb, 2012) ó The Reviews Thread [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : The Amazing Spider-Man (Webb, 2012) ó The Reviews Thread


Pages : [1] 2

OldBoy
07-02-12, 06:53 AM
Please continue pre-release discussion here. (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/568250-spider-man-2012-marc-webb-81.html)

Movie:
"The Amazing Spider-Man" (Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Denis Leary, Rhys Ifans, Sally Field, Martin Sheen)

Release Date:
7/3/2012

Rating:
PG-13 (for sequences of action and violence throughout)

Running Time:
136min. (2h. 16m.)

Budget:
$215 million (estimated)

IMDb Synopsis:
Peter Parker finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. Curt Connors, his father's former partner.

IMDb Info and Rating:
7.8 (5,963 votes as of 7/2/12) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/)

Rotten Tomatoes:
Fresh:73 Rotten:21 (78% as of 7/3/12) (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man/)

Metacritic:
71 metascore ('Generally favorable reviews' as of 7/3/12) (http://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-amazing-spider-man)

Trailer:
<object width="720" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/56304"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/56304" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" width="720" height="349"></embed></object>

Poster Art:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/scott1598/Movie%20Posters/Amazing-Spider-Man-International-Poster-3.jpg

devilshalo
07-02-12, 08:31 AM
Eh.. maybe I should have waited to vote after seeing a final print. I'm basing it off a roughly 150 min cut that may not include some reshoots. Oh well. :shrug:

My main gripe is Connors/Lizard motivation and that it's abrupt in dealing with Uncle Ben's killer (which is never resolved). For all the talk about how Webb films relationships, I felt the weakest relationship was between Peter, Uncle Ben and Aunt May, which to me is the most important. Their guidance is what ultimately gives Peter that sense of what responsibility means, not one incident.

And why does C Thomas Howell act like his character from Southland?

kgrogers1979
07-02-12, 08:36 AM
Anyone who gives this film more than one star is a studio plant!! :)

Solid Snake
07-02-12, 10:40 AM
It obviously looks like shit.

dvdjunkie32
07-02-12, 10:51 AM
7.8 on IMDB, but most of the user reviews are pretty bad. Common complaints are that the film is boring with little action. Sounds like a rental at best for me. Sigh.

Osiris3657
07-02-12, 10:55 AM
I will report back tonight.

Jaymole
07-02-12, 11:11 AM
78% on RT after 85 reviews.

I like Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, so I think I might check this out.

Mr. Cinema
07-02-12, 11:24 AM
7.8 on IMDB, but most of the user reviews are pretty bad. Common complaints are that the film is boring with little action. Sounds like a rental at best for me. Sigh.
Sounds like comments from 12 year old kids. IMDB is the last place I'd go for user reviews.

kgrogers1979
07-02-12, 12:16 PM
I just noticed the poll options call this Spider-Man 4. That isn't accurate since this a reboot.

kgrogers1979
07-02-12, 12:17 PM
Sounds like comments from 12 year old kids. IMDB is the last place I'd go for user reviews.

Agreed. The IMDB forums are like a nightmare of being back in elementary school.

Shannon Nutt
07-02-12, 12:19 PM
Ebert gave it 3 1/2 stars. Christy Lemire (AP) gave it a thumbs up as well, as did USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, Entertainment Weekly, and Rolling Stone.

So while it may not be "great" it certainly doesn't sound like it's bad.

achau9598
07-02-12, 03:03 PM
anything post-credits?

Iron_Giant
07-02-12, 03:28 PM
anything post-credits?

I know there is something after the Credits, but I do not know what it is yet.

Heard it was a setup for the Sequel.

Superboy
07-02-12, 03:42 PM
Jesus Christ, what more could you possibly ask for from a Spider-man movie?

I mean I love Spider-man 2, but there were a ton of plot holes, and seeing Peter cry for most of the movie was just annoying. Also, the ending was such a stupid way to set up the third movie.

I like the actors better in this one. Kirsten Dunst made a terrible Mary Jane. She has the acting range of a block of wood.

kgrogers1979
07-02-12, 03:50 PM
anything post-credits?

According to some people over on the CBR forums, yes there is.

I can't confirm it, but this is what they said:

A figure hidden in shadow talks. All that can be seen of him is his cornrow haircut. Anyone that reads the comics will instantly recognize it as Norman Osborn. Apparently he is dying and is trying to find something that will save him. Ten bucks says it will be the Goblin formula... and Green Goblin will be the next villain.

Solid Snake
07-02-12, 03:52 PM
Jesus Christ, what more could you possibly ask for from a Spider-man movie?

I mean I love Spider-man 2, but there were a ton of plot holes, and seeing Peter cry for most of the movie was just annoying. Also, the ending was such a stupid way to set up the third movie.

I like the actors better in this one. Kirsten Dunst made a terrible Mary Jane. She has the acting range of a block of wood.

While I'm not a Dunst fan for the most part, she was pretty good in Melancholia. I also agree that she was a horrible MJ. Even worse is that they made that character a very stupid girl.

I also love SM2 but goddamn is it flawed as fuck. Really? You can't concentrate and you're losing your powers?! jesus, man.

RichC2
07-02-12, 03:52 PM
I didn't mind Dunst as Mary Jane. She had big hooters with hard nipples when necessary, and she can act, Raimi's spider-man films are seemingly intentionally stilted to give it a more comic book feel.

Solid Snake
07-02-12, 04:06 PM
She can act..but her character was horribly written in the films. Cliche, man. Cliche as fuck.

devilshalo
07-02-12, 04:14 PM
Wasn't that the point tho. At least she wasn't like Basinger's Vicky Vale.

Solid Snake
07-02-12, 05:32 PM
The bitch was the damsel in distress in all 3 films. Wouldn't someone ask the 3rd time, "hrmm...that's that's the 3rd time the bad guy has gotten a red head. The same one. Wonder who the fuck she is?"

devilshalo
07-02-12, 05:59 PM
Not sure how or why the change was made in the 3rd film, but originally it was to be Gwen in Venom's webbing and not MJ. I'm just saying at least she had lines and motives. Unlike Vicky Vale who just had a set of lungs to scream each time she was on camera.

Solid Snake
07-02-12, 07:00 PM
Saw this off of YT. Popular guy who edits videos, you should see his other works.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/aP_a90UvUGI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Raimi had some Grade A stuff in the uh...Original Spider-Man Trilogy but then he had some corny ass shit too.

http://geektyrant.com/storage/0999-post-images/lizardeyeposterspiderman1722012.jpeg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1341259866666

Superboy
07-02-12, 09:15 PM
Let's just put it this way:

Spider-man does not sing and dance to a jazz number.

He does not dance down a street harassing women.

The ending does not involve Harry coming to his rescue going "I'M COMING PETE! I'LL SAVE YOU OL' BUDDY OL' PAL! YOU'RE THE BESTEST FRIEND IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD!".

Jules Winfield
07-02-12, 09:44 PM
Let's just put it this way:

Spider-man does not sing and dance to a jazz number.

He does not dance down a street harassing women.

The ending does not involve Harry coming to his rescue going "I'M COMING PETE! I'LL SAVE YOU OL' BUDDY OL' PAL! YOU'RE THE BESTEST FRIEND IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD!".

I'll take that over what I've seen of the new Spiderman so far.

Dragon Tattoo
07-02-12, 09:46 PM
:lol: Oh God, that video had that cheesy scene where he jumps in front of the American Flag. I remember the audience bursting into laughter when that scene happened.

Thank God Raimi's hands can't stain this series anymore.

Jules Winfield
07-02-12, 09:46 PM
And why are we talking crap about Raimi's Spiderman movies? It sounds an awful lot like we're hoping the new one is good so let's point out every single flaw from the previous ones to make us feel better about the crap we'll soon be seeing.

Labor
07-02-12, 10:09 PM
Spider-Man 3 aside, in reality I didnt really have a problem with how Raimi approached the first 2 movies.

Its just that Tobey and Dunst were just awful, awful as Peter and Mary-Jane. Bad acting and NO chemistry. Sorry, but for me, the most important aspect of Spider-Man is Peter Parker and his interactions with his cast characters, most importantly Mary Jane.

Im glad Webb is starting with Gwen Stacy though. Emma Stone looks like she was ripped straight out of one of the original comic panels featuring her, and she and Garfield seem to already have leagues better chemistry than Tobey and Dunst ever did.

Osiris3657
07-02-12, 11:08 PM
Just got back from a screening. I liked it, it was certainly better than the last Spider-Man film. On par with the first two.

To be honest, I think from a physical standpoint Tobey Maguire is a much more convincing Peter Parker than Andrew Garfield. I thought Garfield had the mannerisms and body language of Peter Parker, but he's too much of a pretty boy to sell the "dorky nerd" aspect. Maguire has that.

I'm glad the action didn't have a bunch of 1st person views as one trailer made it seem. The action was pretty solid and the 3D was good. Reminded me of Prometheus' 3D in that it was subtle, more about giving you the sense of depth rather than having stuff thrown at you.

The script was a little too family friendly. Very corny lines at times.

Finally, I was really annoyed how Dr. Connors was able to build, by himself, a fully functioning, high tech lab in the fucking sewer...a day after he got fired by his boss. Whatever, I guess.

Anyway as stated before, I certainly think it's as good as any of the Maguire films, but I wouldn't feel comfortable saying it's significantly better than them. If we're comparing superhero movies I liked The Avengers a lot more.

Grade: B

Patman
07-03-12, 03:34 AM
"The Amazing Spider-Man" had a decent first act, a bit slow, ok mid-section, but that third act was so choppy and had terrible flow and momentum.

The script is a bit of a mess with getting from one action set piece to the next one with very little "webbing" to connect the scenes together. The script also leaves some dangling plotlines to be addressed in sequels, I guess. The after-the-first-end-credits-section scene was sort of lame, but at least you don't have to wait to the very end (no scene at the very end). Yes, it's a little on the emo side when it comes to Peter's emotions in spots.

I did appreciate the action camerawork, and the use of real stuntmen to do some of the web-swinging, though later on, it's a lot of CGI during the fight scenes between Spider-Man and the Lizard. Marc Webb's direction is not quite there for a full-blown film, and I wasn't as immersed with the 3D, as the depth of field seemed very deep with the camera lens choices, makes for somewhat boring movie-making.

I give it 2.66 stars or a grade of C+/B-, probably sleep on it for a final grade,

Labor
07-03-12, 04:35 AM
Just came back.

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone so thoroughly own this movie. By that virtue alone this is better than all of Raimi's films.

Superboy
07-03-12, 06:24 AM
If you think of Spider-man 3 as a comedy, it's a great movie. I was laughing so fucking hard during the movie, and everyone in the theater was staring at me.

I mean seriously, there's no way in hell they did any of that movie with any seriousness.

Oh, and the broadway play is fucking great. Go see it if you have the chance.

DJariya
07-03-12, 07:47 AM
Seeing this Saturday afternoon for free with the Sony Movie Cash coupon from the Spiderman BD I bought.

I know the origin story is tired, but for the record I thought the 4 1/2 minute trailer I saw looked good.

hey, can't beat seeing it for free?

jeffkjoe
07-03-12, 11:06 AM
Taking the kids, 10 and 7 to see this thing.

So I ask:

Does Lizard have any scenes where he pops out and scares us?

Osiris3657
07-03-12, 11:36 AM
Yes (but you should only be scared if you're a kid)

Cardsfan111
07-03-12, 12:54 PM
Went to a midnight screening (first time) and enjoyed the film. For those asking about a post credits scene, it actually appears a minute or so into the closing credits. After that, there's nothing else. There was a collective groan from the audience last night who stayed to the very last credit hoping for something more.

resinrats
07-03-12, 01:42 PM
According to some people over on the CBR forums, yes there is.

I can't confirm it, but this is what they said:

A figure hidden in shadow talks. All that can be seen of him is his cornrow haircut. Anyone that reads the comics will instantly recognize it as Norman Osborn. Apparently he is dying and is trying to find something that will save him. Ten bucks says it will be the Goblin formula... and Green Goblin will be the next villain.

I didn't see any cornrows. But it does sound like Osborn.

Peter goes to a Science High School. Is Flash Thompson really a science type? Would have been better just to have him at a regular school. It sure seemed like it was.

devilshalo
07-03-12, 01:56 PM
We have schools where its one campus but split into regular and AP levels. Not just classes, but the actual school is divided.

resinrats
07-03-12, 02:07 PM
There was a big sign outside of the school that said it was a science school.

Kal-El
07-03-12, 02:08 PM
Saw it last night with my friends. I was just OK with it. I liked the action sequences better in this one, I think Spidey was more spider-y when fighting. But it just didn't have that "hero moment" for me. Something along the lines of:

Superman the movie: "You've got me? who's got you?"
Batman: "I'm Batman"
Avengers: "I'm always angry"

In the same way that Green Lantern never had a similar moment.

I loved Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy. I'm really not as familiar with the Spiderman lore than most people here. Captain Stacy's death was a surprise for me.

Solid Snake
07-03-12, 02:27 PM
Taking the kids, 10 and 7 to see this thing.

So I ask:

Does Lizard have any scenes where he pops out and scares us?

I'm in now way trying to sound like an ass and am not directly aiming this at you but....they're 10 and 7.

How scared do kids get nowadays? Seems like kids are becoming "weaker" in a way.

Labor
07-03-12, 02:29 PM
lol at how divided the site reviews are.

This movie has such a better emotional core, acting and action than any of Raimi's movies. The only thing I would put over this movie from Raimi's is the depiction of Doc Ock from SM2, obviously a better villain. Otherwise everything about this slays those other ones.

Michael Corvin
07-03-12, 03:06 PM
I'm in now way trying to sound like an ass and am not directly aiming this at you but....they're 10 and 7.

How scared do kids get nowadays? Seems like kids are becoming "weaker" in a way.

7 is still pretty young(I have one turning 6 and another turning 8 soon). That's second grade. 10 is different and probably depends on the child. I saw Gremlins at 9, when it came out, and it freaked me the fuck out for weeks.

devilshalo
07-03-12, 03:16 PM
7 is still pretty young(I have one turning 6 and another turning 8 soon). That's second grade. 10 is different and probably depends on the child. I saw Gremlins at 9, when it came out, and it freaked me the fuck out for weeks.

I saw Alien at 9 and I still look away at the first face hugger scene.

Why So Blu?
07-03-12, 04:55 PM
Saw it this morning and it is my favorite of the Spiderman flicks. Part 2 was the best, but this one is much better. Tone, acting, and characterizations. In fact, this one took bits and pieces of part 2 and made it its own. Garfield is nowhere near the pussy that Toby was and Emma is hot. Great casting all the way around.

I fucked up and saw it in 2-D, though. I didn't know the film was actually shot in 3-D, so I dropped the ball on that one.

Why So Blu?
07-03-12, 04:59 PM
Went to a midnight screening (first time) and enjoyed the film. For those asking about a post credits scene, it actually appears a minute or so into the closing credits. After that, there's nothing else. There was a collective groan from the audience last night who stayed to the very last credit hoping for something more.

What was the scene?

Solid Snake
07-03-12, 05:27 PM
What was the scene?

From Wikipedia:In a scene during the end credits, Connors, in a prison cell, appears to speak with a man he knows who moments later is no longer there.

So....who was the mystery man?

rlu929s
07-03-12, 05:36 PM
Those that have seen it...would you take a 5 year old? He did fine with Avengers, although I covered covered his eyes on a couple scenes.

Why So Blu?
07-03-12, 05:37 PM
Those that have seen it...would you take a 5 year old?


Nope. It's a much darker flick.

rlu929s
07-03-12, 05:45 PM
Kind of what I thought, but wanted to make sure....Thanks!

dsa_shea
07-03-12, 06:05 PM
We saw it today and thoroughly enjoyed it. As far as the hero moment goes I don't think that there was one particular moment but then again how many teenage characters would give us that type of moment? I thought that the movie was very emotional though and I'm looking forward to the next one and seeing where they go from here.

Why So Blu?
07-03-12, 07:18 PM
I did think Stan Lee's cameo was epic.

discostu1337
07-03-12, 07:27 PM
Saw the IMAX 3D today. It was as good as I had expected it to be, and rated it 4 stars in the poll. I don't think the 3D is really worth it, and was actually surprised that most of the end of the film was displayed in IMAX. I expected that the theaters were just charging people extra for the "IMAX" name, but the end of the film looked great. I would pay to watch 60 minutes of a CG Spider-Man fly around New York in IMAX 3D.

chowderhead
07-03-12, 07:30 PM
Just got back from a screening. I liked it, it was certainly better than the last Spider-Man film. On par with the first two.

To be honest, I think from a physical standpoint Tobey Maguire is a much more convincing Peter Parker than Andrew Garfield. I thought Garfield had the mannerisms and body language of Peter Parker, but he's too much of a pretty boy to sell the "dorky nerd" aspect. Maguire has that.

I'm glad the action didn't have a bunch of 1st person views as one trailer made it seem. The action was pretty solid and the 3D was good. Reminded me of Prometheus' 3D in that it was subtle, more about giving you the sense of depth rather than having stuff thrown at you.

The script was a little too family friendly. Very corny lines at times.

Finally, I was really annoyed how Dr. Connors was able to build, by himself, a fully functioning, high tech lab in the fucking sewer...a day after he got fired by his boss. Whatever, I guess.

Anyway as stated before, I certainly think it's as good as any of the Maguire films, but I wouldn't feel comfortable saying it's significantly better than them. If we're comparing superhero movies I liked The Avengers a lot more.

Grade: B

you should google andrew garfield bed intruder. There is no going back after that showed up on youtube.

Tarantino
07-03-12, 08:14 PM
Regarding the scene after the credits...

That was not an Osborne.

That was The Jackal. He had a LOT to do with Gwen Stacey/Peter Parker in the comics.

Solid Snake
07-03-12, 08:18 PM
Is there anything to back that up? A name, physical look, certain things he said, etc?

freshticles
07-03-12, 08:32 PM
Those that have seen it...would you take a 5 year old? He did fine with Avengers, although I covered covered his eyes on a couple scenes.

I took my 5 year old, and he loved it, except it was a little past his bedtime. Those action sequences made his life, though. He was shooting fake webs all the way out of the theatre. My kid's pretty numb to movies though. He knows they're fake, and is pretty intrigued by cgi and costumes because we usually watch the making of segments on the discs.

kgrogers1979
07-03-12, 09:14 PM
Regarding the scene after the credits...

That was not an Osborne.

That was The Jackal. He had a LOT to do with Gwen Stacey/Peter Parker in the comics.

Is there anything to back that up? You are the only person that has said that its not
Norman Osborn.

Although it would be really cool if it was Miles Warren aka the Jackal. I said in the other Spider-Man thread that I would love for the next movie to be an adaption of the Death of Gwen Stacy and the third movie to be an adaption of the original 1970s Clone Saga with Warren creating clones of her and Peter.

dex14
07-03-12, 09:22 PM
In regards to the scene after the credits

It seemed pretty clear to me the person was doing a willem dafoe impression so the audience would think it was Norman...Which is kind of annoying. Does that mean whoever they cast as Osborn will being doing a Dafoe impression the whole movie?

Why So Blu?
07-03-12, 09:33 PM
Makes sense it would be Osborn. His name is all over the flick, but we never see actually see him. Guess we'll see a "real" Green Goblin next time out with the skin condition.

Tarantino
07-03-12, 09:53 PM
Is there anything to back that up? A name, physical look, certain things he said, etc?

In the shadow, it looked like he had a ton of hair. Also, it makes sense with the theme of the movie.

d2cheer
07-03-12, 10:22 PM
Is there anything to back that up? You are the only person that has said that its not
Norman Osborn.

Although it would be really cool if it was Miles Warren aka the Jackal. I said in the other Spider-Man thread that I would love for the next movie to be an adaption of the Death of Gwen Stacy and the third movie to be an adaption of the original 1970s Clone Saga with Warren creating clones of her and Peter.

I have the comics of the Death of Gwen Stacy in very good condition and had no idea how much they could be worth until I saw Comic Book Men. They had been storage for years when I saw that I dug them out. Proudly displayed now though.

I finally have figured out what my main issue with this is. This movie looks like it will do well despite the trailer that I am not fond of. So other studios may follow suit. I don't want reboots every few years. The Fantastic Four is one of my favorite comics of all time. I struggled through the movies but I liked who they picked for the cast with the exception of Reed. And now it looks like I get another one of those... ugh

stingermck
07-03-12, 10:38 PM
Just saw it in IMAX 3-D and absolutely loved it. Lots of applause at the end too. The original trilogy just feels so plain and blah now.

Mike86
07-03-12, 10:49 PM
I have the comics of the Death of Gwen Stacy in very good condition and had no idea how much they could be worth until I saw Comic Book Men. They had been storage for years when I saw that I dug them out. Proudly displayed now though.

I finally have figured out what my main issue with this is. This movie looks like it will do well despite the trailer that I am not fond of. So other studios may follow suit. I don't want reboots every few years. The Fantastic Four is one of my favorite comics of all time. I struggled through the movies but I liked who they picked for the cast with the exception of Reed. And now it looks like I get another one of those... ugh
The difference I see is that films like Fantastic Four and DareDevil weren't that great to begin with so to me if they want to reboot them it's fine. Spider-Man seems different to me as at least the first two movies were decent so a reboot wasn't totally necessary in my mind and they could have just recast the parts and carried on with a sequel or whatever. I'll still see this either way and don't think it looks that bad I just wish they would have not gone the reboot route.

trespoochies
07-03-12, 11:23 PM
I must not have the pulse on this thing. Just finished watching this with my daughter. She liked it well enough, but this movie is Raimi's first movie in sheeps clothing. For me, it just felt I was looking at an "un-Raimi"ized version of his first one, but with the added few minutes about his parents and the fact that the bad guy was Curt Conners. Andrew Garfield was okay, but it made me appreciate how much more I liked Maguire in the role. I didn't care for his social awkwardness as Peter Parker, then to do the sarcastic Spiderman when in the suit a-la Maguire. I did enjoy Emma Stone though, much more than Dunst, mostly because I've never liked Dunst. I probably won't watch this again though, and I'm sure glad I didn't see this in 3D.

Patman
07-03-12, 11:43 PM
The main disappointing thing about this movie is that I have no desire to see it again, and I enjoy most super-hero movies, and if it had some awesome cathartic moment, or overwhelmed my senses, I'd want to see it again, but I can't say I'll re-visit this movie in the short term, if at all. But I'd still give the next sequel a viewing, and hope they learned from this initial effort on the reboot.

CaptainMarvel
07-04-12, 01:33 AM
I loved it. It's not perfect (I thought the Lizard could have been done better), but it's now one of my favorite comic book movies. I thought it was definitely far better than SM 1 & 3, and it was slightly better than 2.

(And I would give 20 years of my life to be with Emma. 20 of the good years, at that... not 20 of those crappy years at the end of my life. She's batting 100% with me. )

Dragon Tattoo
07-04-12, 01:47 AM
then to do the sarcastic Spiderman when in the suit a-la Maguire.

What? Did we watch the same Raimi movies? The main complaint with Raimi's films was that they didn't translate Spidey's sarcastic, jokey personality. I struggle to recall one or two clever things he actually said while in the suit in those "movies".

My Other Self
07-04-12, 04:09 AM
Are they not movies? Why the quotes?

achau9598
07-04-12, 09:00 AM
Regarding the post-credits scene ...

It was clearly Osborn as earlier in the film there was an establishing shot of Oscorp where there was a billboard that showed him in shadows - but you could still see the wild hair. In the post-credits scene you could still see the wild hair.

shadowhawk2020
07-04-12, 10:17 AM
Just got back from a screening. I liked it, it was certainly better than the last Spider-Man film. On par with the first two.

To be honest, I think from a physical standpoint Tobey Maguire is a much more convincing Peter Parker than Andrew Garfield. I thought Garfield had the mannerisms and body language of Peter Parker, but he's too much of a pretty boy to sell the "dorky nerd" aspect. Maguire has that.

I'm glad the action didn't have a bunch of 1st person views as one trailer made it seem. The action was pretty solid and the 3D was good. Reminded me of Prometheus' 3D in that it was subtle, more about giving you the sense of depth rather than having stuff thrown at you.

The script was a little too family friendly. Very corny lines at times.

Finally, I was really annoyed how Dr. Connors was able to build, by himself, a fully functioning, high tech lab in the fucking sewer...a day after he got fired by his boss. Whatever, I guess.

Anyway as stated before, I certainly think it's as good as any of the Maguire films, but I wouldn't feel comfortable saying it's significantly better than them. If we're comparing superhero movies I liked The Avengers a lot more.

Grade: B

I know. I want more realism in my giant lizard man/spiderman flying through new york movies.

I enjoyed the movie and thought Garfield was a much better Spidey/Parker, but I had 2 big gripes.

I didn't like the way the Lizard looked, just goofy looking. And it seems like these movies can't help but add a "we can help spidey moment". Moving the cranes was as bad as the people on the bridge throwing stuff at Goblin.

Solid Snake
07-04-12, 10:18 AM
Soooooo Willem Dafoe hair is what we're talking about here?

bluetoast
07-04-12, 12:13 PM
I really enjoyed this, I thought Emma Stone was great, action sequences were well done.

But one of the nice touches was the picture of Feynman on Peter's computer.

freshticles
07-04-12, 12:47 PM
As far as the many flaws go in this movie, it still had one major advantage over the original, and that was people who can actually act without resorting to horribly embarrassing overacting. It was so refreshing to not see Tobey Maguire's dopey, confused-looking face on screen. It was also nice to hear someone who could pull off the Spider-man quips without sounding totally uncomfortable and meek. The costume looked much better on screen and the swinging and fighting special effects, although not perfect, were miles ahead of anything from the original series, especially the first movie. I liked it.

Wolf359
07-04-12, 02:08 PM
Didn't read thread for fear of spoilers, but is this worth the extra $$ for 3D?

Para Para
07-04-12, 02:09 PM
The 3D wasn't worth it IMO.

celmendo
07-04-12, 02:25 PM
Didn't read thread for fear of spoilers, but is this worth the extra $$ for 3D?

I saw it in 2D and say no. There were only a few scenes that would have been pretty great in 3D but overall not necessary. It might distract you from the CGIness of The Lizard though.

celmendo
07-04-12, 02:36 PM
Overall really liked the movie more than the Rami version. It has it's issues but I liked the casting much more. Never cared for Tobey in the role and the annoying people helping Spidey scene wasn't as cheesy. Saving the f'n kid was the most annoying thing in the movie for me but it was important to make the crane scene work.

Emma is just a great person to watch on screen. I've never found her to be less than great in all that I've seen her in and Garfield was much more how I envision Peter Parker to be in my head and sexy. The lizard wasn't the best choice in my opinion but it fell on the acceptable side of a CGI creation. Leary was surprisingly good.

It was a good remake but I can see how people would stay away since it's so close to the Rami version that wasn't that long ago.

Solid Snake
07-04-12, 04:12 PM
It's not a remake.

Why So Blu?
07-04-12, 06:01 PM
BTW, it's obvious that the mid-credit sequence would feature Norman Osborn. Since he does kill Gwen eventually in the Gwen Stacy arc of comics. I'm thinking that Osborn uses some of the Lizard's formula on himself, but instead of being turned into an actual lizard he just gets turned into an actual Green Goblin. I remember the make-up tests that were done before they settled for the shitty armor costume and those looked amazing, so I'm assuming they'll go with something similar for the next film.

It's the perfect set-up.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QEZBhL5lpqg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Quake1028
07-04-12, 06:02 PM
****1/2, second favorite movie of the year (Avengers), second favorite Spidey movie ever (Spider-Man 2). Garfield is PERFECT as Parker and a few leagues better than Tobey, who was good in his own right.

kgrogers1979
07-04-12, 06:07 PM
Regarding the credit sequence spoiler:



Rhys Ifans was interviewed and said that it is NOT Norman Osborn. It is however supposedly an employee of OsCorp.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/56771

I wonder if they would redo Doc Ock? He was an employee of OsCorp in the Ultimate universe.

anomynous
07-04-12, 06:59 PM
Regarding the credit sequence spoiler:



Rhys Ifans was interviewed and said that it is NOT Norman Osborn. It is however supposedly an employee of OsCorp.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/56771

I wonder if they would redo Doc Ock? He was an employee of OsCorp in the Ultimate universe.



No way would they do Doc Ock for both Spiderman 2s.



It's Proto-goblin, Mysterio, or maybe Elektro. I don't know. But not Doc Oc.

Fok
07-04-12, 08:00 PM
Good movie, but prefered the previous ones.

Dragon Tattoo
07-04-12, 08:04 PM
Good movie, but prefered the previous ones.

I know. They were...

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yX9rwbF3HkQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

glassdragon
07-04-12, 08:30 PM
Anyone at the uncle ben part

When he was shot and peter was yelling CALL AN AMBULANCE. Am I the only one who started hearing him say CALL THE AMBER LAMPS, CALL THE AMBER LAMPS

B5Erik
07-04-12, 08:40 PM
Meh.

The Amazing Spider-Man gets as much wrong as it does right. The relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben & Aunt May is a bit vague. (Does he really see them as the role models that mold him into the young man that becomes a crimefighter rather than someone who cashes in on his powers?)

There were a number of things that bugged me about the movie (pardon the pun), not the least of which was the failure of both Andrew Garfield and the script to really capture the character of Peter Parker. This kid wasn't Peter Parker. Not the character from the comics, cartoons, and the previous three movies. He was just some teenager of above average intelligence who is a bit of a whiner and a brat. I found that to be really disappointing.

Still, the action scenes were good, and I liked Emma Stone and Denis Leary, so the movie was fairly entertaining. If I could re-vote I'd only give it 3 stars instead of the 3 1/2 that I gave it.

Not bad, but not great, either. It falls short of the comic book superhero movie elite, which is where I would put Raimi's first two Spider-Man movies.

Tarantino
07-04-12, 08:58 PM
My main gripe about this movie is that everything just seemed so easy for the characters.

Now I have spider powers! I'd better make some web shooters. Done! I need to find out who the Lizard is. Just kidding, he's Doc Conners! He needs to find out who I am. Got it! We need an antidote for the Lizard...just go in the lab and cook one up! Conveniently, on the screen, it reads...'Lizard Antidote'.

The movie was also really...REALLY cheesy. Especially the scene in the hall where Peter struggles to ask Gwen out. Jesus Christ.

I gave it 3 stars on the poll because the action scenes were really good...although the final battle felt a bit short and underwhelming.

joe_b
07-04-12, 09:20 PM
7 is still pretty young(I have one turning 6 and another turning 8 soon). That's second grade. 10 is different and probably depends on the child. I saw Gremlins at 9, when it came out, and it freaked me the fuck out for weeks.It's different for every kid, I guess. One my earliest theater-going memories was seeing Gremlins 2 (at age 4) and I had a freakin' ball. Granted, it's more of a comedy -- but Mohawk was scarier than any Gremlin in the original film.

I saw The Amazing Spider-Man this afternoon. A guy came in at the last minute and plunked his son (who didn't appear much older than 4) in the chair next to me. I considered moving because there were plenty of empty seats left, but the kid couldn't have been more quiet. It's nice to know at least some parents teach their children how to behave at the movies. Now, the woman sitting to my right with the whining toddler on the other hand... -rolleyes-

(BTW, she was whining during the Peter/Gwen scenes. The Lizard stuff didn't seem to phase her in the slightest. :shrug:)

Why So Blu?
07-04-12, 09:53 PM
My main gripe about this movie is that everything just seemed so easy for the characters.

Now I have spider powers! I'd better make some web shooters. Done! I need to find out who the Lizard is. Just kidding, he's Doc Conners! He needs to find out who I am. Got it! We need an antidote for the Lizard...just go in the lab and cook one up! Conveniently, on the screen, it reads...'Lizard Antidote'.

The movie was also really...REALLY cheesy. Especially the scene in the hall where Peter struggles to ask Gwen out. Jesus Christ.

I gave it 3 stars on the poll because the action scenes were really good...although the final battle felt a bit short and underwhelming.


Uh, it was worst watching Parker trying to ask that fugly Kirsten Dunst out in the first film, too.

Solid Snake
07-04-12, 10:31 PM
Why does that scene between gwen and peter come off as cheesy to you?

Michael Corvin
07-04-12, 10:43 PM
So those that have seen it how much of an origin story is this? Total reboot, or do they kinda gloss over it?

joe_b
07-04-12, 10:47 PM
Nope, it's pretty much covered. All the important beats (spider bite, discovering powers, designing costume, practicing swing) are there.

N2DVD
07-04-12, 11:03 PM
Saw it opening day, really enjoyed it, especially the two leads...

Ky-Fi
07-04-12, 11:23 PM
Not a bad effort. Some great set pieces and a nice supporting cast. I never really warmed up to Garfield though---his delivery and mannerisms just completely reminded me of Hayden Christensen in the Star Wars prequels, and that's not a good thing. Also, the first half really dragged for me, as it just covered the same ground as the first Raimi movie. I wish they had just picked up with the character and not redone the origin and "learning the powers" thing which we've seen so many times recently. Things picked up once the Lizard got going, though, and I thought it improved in the second half. When Dennis Leary restrains his "obnoxious Boston a-hole" schtick, he's actually a decent actor.

Have to say I still prefer the Raimi/MaGuire combo though, and by a clear margin. And while it certainly wasn't a bad movie, I'm still left thinking that there was no need for a reboot.

B5Erik
07-04-12, 11:59 PM
Not a bad effort. Some great set pieces and a nice supporting cast. I never really warmed up to Garfield though---his delivery and mannerisms just completely reminded me of Hayden Christensen in the Star Wars prequels, and that's not a good thing.

THAT'S what's been bugging me! I couldn't figure it out until I read that. While Garfield is better in this than Christensen was in Star Wars he's still got a similar style. Peter Parker in The Amazing Spider-Man IS a lot like Annakin Skywalker in that second SW prequel. He's not Peter, he's Annakin.

Good call.


Also, the first half really dragged for me, as it just covered the same ground as the first Raimi movie.

Sadly, it didn't do it nearly as well.

If not for Spider-Man 3 I think most fans would be really upset at the dropoff in quality that this movie would have represented from Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2.

bluetoast
07-05-12, 12:59 AM
I guess we're also to assume that Aunt May and Peter have an unspoken understanding about his identity? Otherwise she seems very tolerant of his nightly beatings.

kgrogers1979
07-05-12, 01:29 AM
Peter Parker in The Amazing Spider-Man IS a lot like Annakin Skywalker in that second SW prequel. He's not Peter, he's Annakin.

Annakin. Don't call him Annie! It's Anakin.

celmendo
07-05-12, 01:40 AM
It's not a remake.

Give me a f'n break. Reboot or remake, semantics. I just saw it and it's half the same movie. Let's call it a reboot because maybe people won't see that we're shoving the same movie in your face. -rolleyes-
That being said I have no problem with it. I enjoyed it quite a bit.

Finisher
07-05-12, 02:06 AM
This thing really benefits from low expectations. Had zero anticipation but was pleasantly surprised. Garfield nailed it as did Emma Stone. Stone is hot and can act: basically the opposite of Kirsten Dunst. Spidey's movements look more human here; doesn't look so over the top CGI-y.

shadowhawk2020
07-05-12, 06:15 AM
My main gripe about this movie is that everything just seemed so easy for the characters.

Now I have spider powers! I'd better make some web shooters. Done! I need to find out who the Lizard is. Just kidding, he's Doc Conners! He needs to find out who I am. Got it! We need an antidote for the Lizard...just go in the lab and cook one up! Conveniently, on the screen, it reads...'Lizard Antidote'.

The movie was also really...REALLY cheesy. Especially the scene in the hall where Peter struggles to ask Gwen out. Jesus Christ.

I gave it 3 stars on the poll because the action scenes were really good...although the final battle felt a bit short and underwhelming.

Since they were working on crossing Lizard DNA with human DNA wouldn't it be plausable that they had a "Lizard Antidote" programmed into the computer?

Mr. Cinema
07-05-12, 09:08 AM
The film got an A- from Cinemascore.

wahlers
07-05-12, 09:58 AM
Does nobody else think the mystery man at the end was Chameleon?

- He can change appearance so could pretend to be Richard Parker to get at Peter, and in the comics in the 90s there was a big storyline where he built LMDs of Richard and Mary Parker on orders from Harry Osborn to screw with Peter's life.

- He could easily have been an employee at OsCorp who worked with Connors and Richard Parker and was maybe hurt by the tests resulting in his chameleon abilities being related to the gene therapy and decay rate.

- In the comics he was also a childhood friend of Kraven the Hunter and was even the guy who sicked him on Spider-Man the first time he showed up. How cool would it be if they even used this connection to have Kraven show up in a future movie?

- And just as far as credentials go, he was the villain in Amazing Spider-Man #1 after all. :)

Goldberg74
07-05-12, 11:15 AM
I saw a 10pm showing in 3D last night... and there were about 20 people in the theater. I guess most were out watching fireworks.

Anyways, I liked the show (and the 3D worked for me), but concerning the mid-credits scene, has anyone considered:

Alistair Smythe?

Ash Ketchum
07-05-12, 12:09 PM
Peter Parker was such a powerful and engaging character in the comics when I started reading them (at the age of 11 in June 1965) that I fear it's too hard to capture those qualities in a filmed performance, esp. so many decades after the fact. Even in the 1960s, I doubt there would have been a young actor at the time who could have pulled it off convincingly. (They probably would have cast some California beach boy in the part, somebody like Tommy Kirk or someone from the Beach Party movies.) Nicholas Hammond in the 1970s TV series was not terribly effective.

I had problems with Tobey Maguire in the Raimi films, only because he didn't match my preconceptions of the character, although I thought that from a strict acting standpoint, he did as well as anyone could have done it at the time. I had real problems with Andrew Garfield's performance in SOCIAL NETWORK, so if I see the new Spiderman, I'll be going in with low expectations.

But the extraordinary impact of the character in the comics on my impressionable consciousness as a youth has made it difficult for me to fully accept any screen portrayal. It's bound to suffer in comparison.

wahlers
07-05-12, 02:12 PM
His performance in this is much more in line with his role in The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.

If someone liked him in it I would say there's a good chance they would like him in Amazing Spider-Man.

Shannon Nutt
07-05-12, 02:42 PM
I saw it yesterday and liked it very much...it's not a perfect film, but it gets more right than wrong, and turns out to be better than Raimi's first Spider-man movie, but not quite as good as Spider-man 2.

I think Uncle Ben's death (I'm assuming that's not a spoiler!) is handled much better in this film than the original one, but I think Tobey had a much better handle on Peter than Andrew does. The problem with Andrew is although he's playing a nerd, he never comes across as one. He's playing the part a little too hip and cool than he should...although I think he does a better job of portraying Peter's turmoil and grief than Tobey (king of the single tear flowing down his face!) did.

Tarantino
07-05-12, 03:47 PM
Why does that scene between gwen and peter come off as cheesy to you?

Seriously?

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 03:59 PM
Does nobody else think the mystery man at the end was Chameleon?

- He can change appearance so could pretend to be Richard Parker to get at Peter, and in the comics in the 90s there was a big storyline where he built LMDs of Richard and Mary Parker on orders from Harry Osborn to screw with Peter's life.

- He could easily have been an employee at OsCorp who worked with Connors and Richard Parker and was maybe hurt by the tests resulting in his chameleon abilities being related to the gene therapy and decay rate.

- In the comics he was also a childhood friend of Kraven the Hunter and was even the guy who sicked him on Spider-Man the first time he showed up. How cool would it be if they even used this connection to have Kraven show up in a future movie?

- And just as far as credentials go, he was the villain in Amazing Spider-Man #1 after all. :)

where the fuck did you get that from? There's nothing at all to hint that person. In no form. whatsoever. none.
-----------------------


saw it today. LOVE LOVED the 3rd act. Just great stuff. Kind of iffy here and there upon arriving to it but once that 3rd act hits..it hits.

I really liked how Parker was trying to find the guy that killed Ben.

I think I liked Garfield's angst/emotions better than Maguire's. Also his nerd wasn't...really nerdy, he had nerdy things around him..but he himself..wasn't that nerdy. It was almost borderline sexualized at one point, the character w/ Gwen. Though....once that 3rd act hits..he's a great Parker. Kind of bothered me. I did however like most of the Gwen and Peter moments. As was mentioned before about the moment in the hall w/ parker and stacy...I really liked it. It had that awkwardness one would expect out of it. kind of funny, kind of cute but honest w/ the awkwardness. Stone is a great Stacy. Her dialogue and her running of it was solid. Really enjoyed it. I also enjoyed Flash Thompson...it made me smile that little character element he had here that wasn't in the others. I kind of felt bad for the nerdy girl that was seen a few times. She was cute...kind of thought how...she might have had something there but nothing. As someone mentioned...things were a bit too convenient for the story. Bothered me a bit. Dug the NYC moment..was soooooo much better than Raimi's...that was too cheesy in SM1. In here it had purpose....convenient..but it was better. I really liked that moment.

Didn't dig Parker's intentional or unintentional showing off out of the suit. Skateboard scene was cool. Felt more "real" I guess for how he learned his stuff and did the suit too. Loved his little line while in it's pre production phase. I really enjoyed the 1st person moments. they were few and quick but had impact. I liked them.

It's a mixed bag. A lot of solid w/ some mediore as well.

On a technical level...i really really dug the color palette. Raimi's film had a very dull color palette. Nothing to age it horribly like Macy Gray. The filmmaking of it, again on the technical was very good. CGI wise I had no issue w/ it at all except for

the underwater battle, Connors' lack of an arm...some shots looked bad, and when Parker first tries out the webs.

Otherwise..on that aspect very good. CGI Spidey felt more real than Raimi's as well. Liked the camerawork and sets. Again on Raimi's..the sets...looked like sets. They were dull and lifeless at times. Here they had a real house to work in, lab looked real, etc. Good set design. On the aspect of music..much like the story at times...the music hit convenient moments too easily and some of the music wasn't inspiring, I'd say dull. Though aside from those predictable bits of music..the rest was pretty solid. Really liked the intro music had some poignant nature to it that felt right for Spidey.

I'd argue this was better than SM1. Just as flawed..but it was better. I'd put it ahead of SM1 and SM3, behind SM2 though.

wahlers
07-05-12, 04:17 PM
Wow Solid Snake, thanks for the kind words. Sometimes I forget how unnecessarily rude people on the internet can be.

I thought I laid out my ideas succinctly and that they make sense.

I guess I'm supposed to just be a complete tool and assume it's Norman Osborn like most of the loud-mouthed assholes on all the forums. :/

If you're so brilliant why don't you regale us with your insight on the credit footage?

jeffkjoe
07-05-12, 04:23 PM
Bottom line: Too long.

- didn't need to see the spider bite again
- didn't need all the Uncle Ben stuff
- didn't need to see him make the costume, discover his powers, etc.


Should have shaved off 30 minutes right there and made it tighter.

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 04:29 PM
i wasn't trying to be an ass. I just plainly stated it. There's not much to really grab at that thread you have there.

i don't assume nothing aside from that

that that guy sounds like Dafoe. Which, if intentional, is kind of eh cuz you're jiving w/ someone else's take on it and not making it on it's own. I don't know if it's Osborn. The closest I can get to that is cuz the guy sounded like Dafoe...who was Osborn. That's it. I don't know who he was.

talking about that man. WTF happened to him? Seems like he put his hat on and just disappeared? Kind of played off like it was Connors' imagination, the way they did it.

Also...wtf happened to Ratha? His car was saved w/ him in it, looked like he survived..and we never saw him again. One would think something more would be explored..but...nothing. Unless I missed something about that.

wahlers
07-05-12, 04:44 PM
I'm not saying that they spelled anything out about the identify of the mystery guy. In fact, the only identify that were leaning towards would be Norman Osborn which is why I'm almost certain it's not him. Otherwise I'm going to be sorely disappointed in the obviousness of the writers. I'm hoping this is all just misleading. I'm good if they want to set up Norman as Norman only or behind-the-scenes of 2 and have him show up as full-blown Goblin for 3.

For the Chameleon though, I'm just stating that existing information about the Chameleon from the comics would work well into the mystery plot about Peter's parents and the lab setting with a minimal of reworking needed to fit this new franchise. He would also work nicely into a more down-to-earth character instead of somebody ridiculous like classic Spidey villains like Scorpion, Rhino, Electro, or Mysterio.

About the voice though, the actor who played the guy in the cell is Michael Massee who just sort of sounds like that anyway. I specifically always remember him as the guy in SE7EN who worked at the Lust crime scene. Just think about the way he sounded when the police were interrogating him and he pretty much just sounds like that. If anyone can be blamed for misleading people, blame the casting director.

freshticles
07-05-12, 04:58 PM
Does nobody else think the mystery man at the end was Chameleon?

- He can change appearance so could pretend to be Richard Parker to get at Peter, and in the comics in the 90s there was a big storyline where he built LMDs of Richard and Mary Parker on orders from Harry Osborn to screw with Peter's life.

- He could easily have been an employee at OsCorp who worked with Connors and Richard Parker and was maybe hurt by the tests resulting in his chameleon abilities being related to the gene therapy and decay rate.

- In the comics he was also a childhood friend of Kraven the Hunter and was even the guy who sicked him on Spider-Man the first time he showed up. How cool would it be if they even used this connection to have Kraven show up in a future movie?

- And just as far as credentials go, he was the villain in Amazing Spider-Man #1 after all. :)

As far as it goes, your theory has a lot more ground to stand on compared to the popular one which was just debunked, so no worries. I liked it.

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 05:07 PM
Though I've nothing against the character...it would be nice to see some very formed mystery and intrigue were that character in any of the new trilogy. That'd be a nice change of pace, considering we don't have that in these genre flicks.

And of the basis of the writers...I've never been really surprised by anything we've seen story wise from any of them, entertained sure...but w/ it's flaws. IF we did get something along the lines that that character would bring..I admit...I'd be surprised at the risk taking of it. An argument I'd bring up is that Raimi's films hit generic trends and lack innovation in the genre w/ the template of narrative...though they were well done when they could be.

devilshalo
07-05-12, 06:16 PM
Also...wtf happened to Ratha? His car was saved w/ him in it, looked like he survived..and we never saw him again. One would think something more would be explored..but...nothing. Unless I missed something about that.
In the original script, he isn't Ratha. He is Nels Van Adder. And in the first cut of the film, he's in Connor's sewer lab and gets his head bit off by the Lizard. (To me it opens the door for a protogoblin possibility if they had kept that.. if the lizard gas helps him grow a new head, that is.
I'll be seeing it tonight so I can sort of see what was cut from the original and what things changed.

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 06:29 PM
yeah, bro. I'd love to hear about that.

Also...I noticed that...it does feel cut. Like pieces were missing in moments. maybe it was just me. The bad thing about this movie is that it's a lot of moment but not a lot of connective tissue in a way. Like there are missing scenes that led to this or that scene.

devilshalo
07-05-12, 06:41 PM
Well, when it came time to give our opinions and they asked what should be cut out, I couldn't think of one thing because everything seemed essential to the film. So after tonight, I'll get to see where the cuts were made.

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 08:03 PM
i'd also like to add that this has the best Stan Lee cameo ever. EVER.

Ky-Fi
07-05-12, 08:11 PM
i'd also like to add that this has the best Stan Lee cameo ever. EVER.

Agreed. :lol:

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 08:22 PM
and here it is for you guys if you want to see it:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CUM3F9WIwrk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

joe_b
07-05-12, 08:43 PM
Nothing to age it horribly like Macy Gray.Amen to that. I remember when Spider-Man first came out and they were discussing that very point on Howard Stern. I think someone mentioned that Green Goblin should have thrown a pumpkin bomb at the stage to blow her up. :lol:

Solid Snake
07-05-12, 08:48 PM
It sticks out horribly to me. I didn't even know who the fuck she was at that point. I barely know of her now still. Then the dancers dancing there too. Ugh. horrible. horrible. I'm assuming that was a studio thing? she work for Sony records or something. horrible voice too. Just..horrible.

Dr. DVD
07-05-12, 09:08 PM
Saw it. Best Stan Lee cameo ever!

Overall, I thought it was good but not great. I felt the movie dragged a bit much, and felt too much like a love story with Spider-Man in it as opposed to the other way around. The action scenes were good, and I have to give credit to Garfield and Stone, they really brought the characters to life. However, as an earlier poster stated, I never felt that Peter was a nerdy kid as much as just another hipster type. Hated how they changed Captain Stacy's dying words, goes completely against what the character originally stood for IMO. Lizard was a bit too massive IMO, and came acroos as rather cartoony.

On a side note, I saw this with my parents (home for some vacation time) and they really liked it. I tend to notice a high corellation with people who know little about Spider-Man and those who like this interpretation.

Mike86
07-05-12, 09:29 PM
Saw it today and thought it was a bit better than I expected. I really liked Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, that was really good casting if you ask me. I think that in a lot of ways her and Garfield have more chemistry on screen than Maguire and Dunst did. I also liked Denis Leary as Captain Stacy. He did a lot better than I expected him to do. I also overall thought the film was shot a bit better than Raimi's version. Looking back on the Raimi Spider-Man films everything comes off as sort of cheap looking and the sets don't look that great.

I had some problems with Garfield though in ways. I'll agree with whoever posted that he didn't really come off as nerdy like Peter should be and more just seemed like a regular guy trying to come off nerdy but it didn't seem to work that well. Plus to me some of his one liners came off as a bit too much if you ask me. Granted I get that Peter makes cheesy jokes in the comics a lot but some in this just seemed kind of overdone and a bit forced. He wasn't terrible but I don't think he was perfect either. Also I didn't like the look of The Lizard in the trailers and it didn't translate any better to the final product. I just thought it came off goofy and was hoping for it to be done a bit better I guess.

Spiderbite
07-05-12, 09:35 PM
Saw it in 2D tonight with my wife and 8 year old kid. My wife liked it better than both of us. My kid just seemed so-so on it and I didn't really care for it. It was okay but I never got excited while watching it as I did for Spider-man 1 or 2. Here are some random thoughts:

The humor wasn't really there. No nerdy Peter Parker. Gwen did nothing for me (but I give the writers credit...at least she wasn't used as a damsel in distress cliche). I hated the way they killed Uncle Ben. Really...two pennies are what sets off his death? Retarded.

I did like Peter's hunt for his killer. I didn't like the way he was bitten. Didn't like the costume. The Lizard was ho-hum as a villian. The movie took way too long to get to the Spidey stuff. Would have cut at least 30 minutes out of it. Liked Sally Field though they didn't give her enough to do. Liked Peter's cuts and bruises.

The finale was okay but it never felt very tense. It just seemed sort of dialed in. The crane scene was gay. I know others hate the train scene in Part 2 but I think it was very well done. This copy-cat scene just came across as lame without any real heart. I liked that Gwen knew the secret identity though that does take away some of the fun of Peter having to keep it a secret.

The basketball scene was just plain dumb. Still don't know why they don't recreate the boxing scene from one of the early issues of Spider-man where Peter boxes Flash and knocks him out cold but makes it appear to be an accident/lucky punch. The death of Uncle ben felt more impactful (does that sound right?) in the first movie than in this. In this it just seemed another quick way to get Peter on the road to Spider-man instead of guiding his entire life.

How do these teenagers make perfect costumes in an afternoon? I'm always amazed by that.

I really missed J.J.J. Great cameo by Stan the Man! (I was getting worried he wasn't gonna show.)

I really liked the webswinging thru the city but I still think the first two movies' effects still stand up today so it was more like, been there, seen that...nothing special.

And to everyone who bitched that in the earlier movies that Spidey's mask was off way too much...more of the same here.

My ranking: *** out of ***** stars.

No way was this better than Spider-Man 1 or 2. It was better than 3 but not by a whole bunch (and for the record, I have an extreme dislike for part 3). This movie just didn't hold much excitement for me. And seeing how my 8 year old came out with about the same feeling as I and my wife liked it the best...that's a really weak Spider-Man movie. :(

StephenX
07-05-12, 10:09 PM
No way was this better than Spider-Man 1 or 2. It was better than 3 but not by a whole bunch (and for the record, I have an extreme dislike for part 3). This movie just didn't hold much excitement for me. And seeing how my 8 year old came out with about the same feeling as I and my wife liked it the best...that's a really weak Spider-Man movie. :(

It could also mean your tastes in film are comparable to an 8 year old, couldn't it?

Chadm
07-06-12, 12:36 AM
The Amazing Spiderman was a carbon copy of Sam Raimi's Spiderman. Which itself was a pretty bad movie.

They made an exact remake of a 9 year old movie. Heaven help us.

2.5/5

Dragon Tattoo
07-06-12, 01:20 AM
The Amazing Spiderman was a carbon copy of Sam Raimi's Spiderman. Which itself was a pretty bad movie.

They made an exact remake of a 9 year old movie. Heaven help us.

2.5/5

You'd have to be mentally crippled to say this and actually believe it.

Superboy
07-06-12, 01:29 AM
Going back and watching the first Spider-man movie really pains me. Its glaring flaws have only gotten worse over time.

The stupid scene with Macy Gray. It doesn't help that the song really really sucked and does not fit the movie AT ALL.

The set design and lighting are extremely bland. The lighting has no texture and no definition.

The fight scenes were such a lame rip off of the matrix. I cringed every time I see them.

Maguire felt really bland for some reason. I think they were trying to make him an every man, but they ended up making him a nobody. There's nothing really special about him other than he gets super powers.

Dunst is a terrible, horrible, god-awful actress, and I can't stand her. The only good roles she's ever had was when she played 1. a life-sucking inhuman monster that was forever trapped in the body of a child (what a coincidence!) 2. a stereotypical bimbo cheerleader that's utterly flat and lifeless (what a coincidence!) 3. a borderline psychotic ninny that makes obscene demands of her peers whom she treats like an audience (again, what a coincidence!).

However, I love Cliff Robertson. He really made the movie for me. Hell, he CARRIED the entire first act, and his cameo in Spider-man 2 did not seem forced or cheesy at all. He can deliver corny lines without eliciting laughter.

Spiderbite
07-06-12, 06:45 AM
It could also mean your tastes in film are comparable to an 8 year old, couldn't it?

Wow, people are really sensitive to criticism of this movie. :lol: Good for you if you liked it but you don't have to be insulting if someone didn't like it as much as you did. Jeez.

Spiderbite
07-06-12, 06:57 AM
Oh yeah...and the score was terrible. Not only lacking a true theme but even the background music was crummy. But then again, the other Spider-Man movies had terrible scores as well so nothing new there.

There hasn't been a truly great superhero theme since John Williams did Superman nearly 35 years ago.

FantasticVSDoom
07-06-12, 08:04 AM
Not a great movie but had a fun time with it, much better than I was expecting... Miles and miles better than the original so glad about that. Interested to seeing what they do with the sequel.

dex14
07-06-12, 08:10 AM
Oh yeah...and the score was terrible. Not only lacking a true theme but even the background music was crummy. But then again, the other Spider-Man movies had terrible scores as well so nothing new there.

There hasn't been a truly great superhero theme since John Williams did Superman nearly 35 years ago.

Agreed on Spidey's theme...but...

Horseshit...Elfman's Batman score is amazing.

Goldberg74
07-06-12, 08:32 AM
So where was Bruce Campbell in this one? I couldn't find him. ;)

Dr. DVD
07-06-12, 09:41 AM
Didn't know there was this much hate for the first Spider-Man movie. Sure didn't seem that way back in 2002 when it was released. Wonder what happened?

B5Erik
07-06-12, 09:54 AM
The Amazing Spider-Man makes Spider-Man (1) look like a masterpiece of cinema.

Too many details of the story were just glossed over, too many things unresolved, too many things defied logic, and too many things were just way too easy and convenient for Peter.

And Peter Parker the skateboarding, hoodie wearing, angry, bratty, whiny rebel without a clue? That just flies in the face of 50 years of developing that character. It would be like reimagining Bruce Wayne as a drunken millionaire playboy in the Arthur mold. Lame.

B5Erik
07-06-12, 09:56 AM
Jason Bailey's review is dead on...

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/56864/amazing-spider-man-the/

Tyler Foster's review is really good, too...

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/56866/amazing-spider-man-3d-the/

RocShemp
07-06-12, 10:38 AM
Dunst is a terrible, horrible, god-awful actress, and I can't stand her. The only good roles she's ever had was when she played 1. a life-sucking inhuman monster that was forever trapped in the body of a child (what a coincidence!) 2. a stereotypical bimbo cheerleader that's utterly flat and lifeless (what a coincidence!) 3. a borderline psychotic ninny that makes obscene demands of her peers whom she treats like an audience (again, what a coincidence!).

Which is the third one from?

Groucho
07-06-12, 10:44 AM
I'm guessing the third one is Marie Antoinette.

CaptainMarvel
07-06-12, 11:01 AM
:shrug: I like Dunst okay and never got the hate for her. I thought she was great in Elizabethtown and The Virgin Suicides, and I thought she was good in How to Lose Friends & Alienate People, All Good Things, and Eternal Sunshine.... Now whether those movies were any good (aside from ESOTSM) is another question, but she was quite good in them.

RichC2
07-06-12, 11:05 AM
I never got the hate for either, she was great in Melancholia and Virgin Suicides and I thought really good in Eternal Sunshine and All Good Things. To each their own though.

StephenX
07-06-12, 11:38 AM
Wow, people are really sensitive to criticism of this movie. :lol: Good for you if you liked it but you don't have to be insulting if someone didn't like it as much as you did. Jeez.

You misunderstood. I actually haven't seen it yet. I am simply stating when you refer to the opinion of an 8 year old more than once in your opinion on why a movie isn't good, it could mean less regarding the movie's quality, and more about what you, as the viewer, consider a good comic book movie.

It's not meant as an insult, and I apologize if it sounded that way. I love certain movies too, but when explaining what I don't like, saying "My nine year old niece was bored by the plot" probably isn't the best way of criticizing the film. I highly doubt Marc Webb's target audience (or any comic book movie, for that matter) are targeting such a young demographic. Sure, they may like it, but the money is in appealing to males and young adults. Not 8 year old's. In turn, saying a child didn't enjoy it holds no weight all when reviewing a movie.

I hope that clears it up.

StephenX
07-06-12, 11:46 AM
Didn't know there was this much hate for the first Spider-Man movie. Sure didn't seem that way back in 2002 when it was released. Wonder what happened?

I'm one of the ones who cannot stand them. By the end of the second film, Maguire's Parker just seemed to be constantly crying and whining about something, and the way Raimi treated the character of Mary Jane was aweful...she was a basically a bitchy, self-absorbed teenager one second and a sweet, caring friend the next. Top it off with Maguire moping around for what seemed like 2 hours, it just doesn't sit well with me.

I'm probably the minority here, though.

Double_Oh_7
07-06-12, 11:57 AM
I'm one of the ones who cannot stand them. By the end of the second film, Maguire's Parker just seemed to be constantly crying and whining about something,

Have you ever read a Spider-Man comic book?

devilshalo
07-06-12, 01:12 PM
Have you ever read a Spider-Man comic book?
Would that make a difference to the average movie goer? I get that Spidey is iconic and most people know who he is, but I would care to guess that most are not the same fanboys that was into reading and collecting comics.

Spider-man was a weekly newspaper comic strip and there have been so many different media interpretations from the classic cartoon, to Spider-man and his Amazing Friends, to the silent web head from The Electric Company all the way to the Raimi movies and current Spectacular Spider-man cartoons...

He's Marvel's Superman. Everyone knows him and the origin, but not everyone read the comic books to be intimately familiar. I think film & tv media are what people will compare the various versions to, not the 50 years of comic book history.

Finally, got to see the finished print and I came away with it that this was similar to the Lois & Clark series. Where the focus was on the relationship and the villain or whatever is secondary.

Solid Snake
07-06-12, 01:23 PM
Peter Parker didn't come off as a whiny annoying bitch in the comics. Raimi's Parker does. Webb's Parker is here and there. He really becomes the Parker we mostly know in the 3rd act.

RocShemp
07-06-12, 01:41 PM
Peter Parker didn't come off as a whiny annoying bitch in the comics. Raimi's Parker does.

This annoyed the hell out of me. It was particularly irritating in Spider-Man 2.

Superman07
07-06-12, 03:36 PM
I saw this the other day and really enjoyed it. I think it was better than all of the Raimi films, which I liked a the time (with the exception of 3). I felt the actors fit the roles better, the direction was better, and the characters more believable.

I happened to catch some of Spidey 2 on TV the other day and 5 minutes of it so many things jumped out. The direction took me of the story (pans, shifts and focusing on unimportant elements), the characters were non-rationale (especially Harry), and the general tone was too camp.

I hope there is a directors cut of TAS, and/or a lot of elements make it into a second film. Also, I'm not an avid Spiderman reader, but I wouldn't mind this going 4-6 films where we get to see Peter progress into his 30s and how he adapts personally and as Spiderman.

Spiderbite
07-06-12, 06:33 PM
You misunderstood. I actually haven't seen it yet. I am simply stating when you refer to the opinion of an 8 year old more than once in your opinion on why a movie isn't good, it could mean less regarding the movie's quality, and more about what you, as the viewer, consider a good comic book movie.

It's not meant as an insult, and I apologize if it sounded that way. I love certain movies too, but when explaining what I don't like, saying "My nine year old niece was bored by the plot" probably isn't the best way of criticizing the film. I highly doubt Marc Webb's target audience (or any comic book movie, for that matter) are targeting such a young demographic. Sure, they may like it, but the money is in appealing to males and young adults. Not 8 year old's. In turn, saying a child didn't enjoy it holds no weight all when reviewing a movie.

I hope that clears it up.

I now understand your point but I think you are missing mine. Something is wrong when my 8 year old sees a Spider-Man movie and thinks it was ho-hum and not bang-zoom. This is a kid who wore a Spider-Man T-shirt to the movie, watched the entire season one of the recent Spider-Man cartoon on the way home in the car from vacation today, was Spider-Man for his first Halloween costume, has a Spider-Man trash can for Christ's sake, etc., etc.

This was not Macbeth that I took him to see. It was a fucking comic book movie. Granted my kid doesn't have the greatest taste in the world. He loves that Annoying Orange show and thinks it is hilarious. He can be a dumb kid. But to produce a Spider-Man movie that he was bored for most of the time, that means something to me. I know you don't know my kid and maybe I put too much emphasis on whether he liked it or not. I figured I was just being picky when I came out disappointed and he was going to say that he loved it. It really surprised me when he didn't.

It seems adult comic book nerds don't want kids to like their stuff because it somehow belittles their favorite medium. But everyone was a kid once and that was the time they got into comic books (or funny books as my Dad called them). A Spider-Man movie should engross a kid that is fascinated with the character, not bore them. (disclaimer...I am not speaking for every kid as I am sure there are tons of kids who loved the movie.)

Anyway, I look forward to giving it a second viewing when it reaches home video. I tend to be extra critical of movies that I see in the theater (especially since I paid 27 freaking dollars for the 3 of us to attend a 4:00pm showing...not including popcorn. Crazy!)

I never said that I hated the movie. I just found it to be very average and not very exciting which is not what you would expect in a Spider-Man film. It definitely had it's good points but they were just too few and far between.

devilshalo
07-06-12, 06:55 PM
Spider.. did your son see Superman Returns? And if he did, was his reaction the same as it was towards The Amazing Spider-man? I think that's a closer comparison of a larger than life, heroic figure than that of any of the Nolan Batman films, since Batman is supposed to be dark and brooding.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, but these movies are PG-13. So it does skew a little older and a little differently. And, he's already seen Spider-man's origin with Raimi's original films, so to bring on another origin story which resembles parts of Spider-Man 1 & 2, I can see why it would seem boring.

Spiderbite
07-06-12, 08:47 PM
No, he actually hasn't seen any of the Superman movies sad to say. But to say a PG-13 Spider-Man movie would or shouldn't appeal to younger kids is pretty much a cop-out. Just because it is PG-13 doesn't mean it isn't supposed to be fun. He went crazy over The Avengers, Real Steel and plenty of other PG-13 movies.

Sorry...didn't mean to turn this thread into what my son likes and dislikes. I just didn't want to ignore your question.

For myself, maybe I went into this movie with too high of expectations. I was astonished in the original thread where people were bashing this movie before it had even been released. I thought most of the trailers looked fantastic. Leaving disappointed was really surprising to me. I have been a Spider-Man fan all my life and the early years are my favorite (due to my reading of Marvel Tales over and over as a kid in the early 80's) so re-doing the origin didn't bother me at all. I actually thought it could be done better than Raimi did it. I was surprised that I liked Raimi's origin better to be honest.

Again, I look forward to revisiting it on BD when it is released.

Change of subject: Has anyone seen the movie in 3D and felt it was worth it?

Solid Snake
07-06-12, 09:31 PM
I saw this the other day and really enjoyed it. I think it was better than all of the Raimi films, which I liked a the time (with the exception of 3). I felt the actors fit the roles better, the direction was better, and the characters more believable.

I happened to catch some of Spidey 2 on TV the other day and 5 minutes of it so many things jumped out. The direction took me of the story (pans, shifts and focusing on unimportant elements), the characters were non-rationale (especially Harry), and the general tone was too camp.

I hope there is a directors cut of TAS, and/or a lot of elements make it into a second film. Also, I'm not an avid Spiderman reader, but I wouldn't mind this going 4-6 films where we get to see Peter progress into his 30s and how he adapts personally and as Spiderman.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd like to see this Spidey grow into a man moreso than Raimi's. He just never evolved in those. This guy is seeing what his powers mean, the reaction of his existence, etc. I like that. Evolution in character. Especially w/ the end...he has to evolve and understands better. That and I'd like to see the character progression for Stacy...and hell...even Flash. I liked Flash how he changed too. Feels more real.

Superboy
07-06-12, 09:36 PM
I now understand your point but I think you are missing mine. Something is wrong when my 8 year old sees a Spider-Man movie and thinks it was ho-hum and not bang-zoom. This is a kid who wore a Spider-Man T-shirt to the movie, watched the entire season one of the recent Spider-Man cartoon on the way home in the car from vacation today, was Spider-Man for his first Halloween costume, has a Spider-Man trash can for Christ's sake, etc., etc.

This was not Macbeth that I took him to see. It was a fucking comic book movie. Granted my kid doesn't have the greatest taste in the world. He loves that Annoying Orange show and thinks it is hilarious. He can be a dumb kid. But to produce a Spider-Man movie that he was bored for most of the time, that means something to me. I know you don't know my kid and maybe I put too much emphasis on whether he liked it or not. I figured I was just being picky when I came out disappointed and he was going to say that he loved it. It really surprised me when he didn't.

It seems adult comic book nerds don't want kids to like their stuff because it somehow belittles their favorite medium. But everyone was a kid once and that was the time they got into comic books (or funny books as my Dad called them). A Spider-Man movie should engross a kid that is fascinated with the character, not bore them. (disclaimer...I am not speaking for every kid as I am sure there are tons of kids who loved the movie.)

Anyway, I look forward to giving it a second viewing when it reaches home video. I tend to be extra critical of movies that I see in the theater (especially since I paid 27 freaking dollars for the 3 of us to attend a 4:00pm showing...not including popcorn. Crazy!)

I never said that I hated the movie. I just found it to be very average and not very exciting which is not what you would expect in a Spider-Man film. It definitely had it's good points but they were just too few and far between.

This. This is why they made this movie. And yes, their target audience is children. Just look at Spider-man's webshooters. They were clearly designed to sell toys. And putting the mask on a kid...

I would love to see two kinds of Spider-man movie:

One that is a complete remake of the character, one where Uncle Ben doesn't die, his girlfriend isn't Gwen Stacy or Mary Jane, his suit is always just some hobbled-together homemade suit, and he's more of a darker vigilante type that shows no mercy on criminals. If you've ever read Darren Aronofsky's treatment of Batman, it'd be similar to that. Take the familiar elements away, and try something new.

Another one would be similar to James Cameron's vision, where Spider-man is older, married, has a child on the way, and is much stronger and more powerful, but is facing harder villains and challenges. Not as funny and lighthearted, but a much more potent action film. It would be nice if they used a decent villain.

Dr. DVD
07-06-12, 09:39 PM
I was thinking the same thing. I'd like to see this Spidey grow into a man moreso than Raimi's. He just never evolved in those. This guy is seeing what his powers mean, the reaction of his existence, etc. I like that. Evolution in character. Especially w/ the end...he has to evolve and understands better. That and I'd like to see the character progression for Stacy...and hell...even Flash. I liked Flash how he changed too. Feels more real.

I will give this movie credit for progressing more characters than Peter, including making Flash somewhat of a good guy towards the end. I am curious as to just how far they will take Peter's progression, as most of us know a major step involves Gwen's coming to an abrupt halt.

Solid Snake
07-06-12, 11:03 PM
Indeed. I want more Gwen progression. I hope that doesn't stop till...ASM3.

B5Erik
07-06-12, 11:20 PM
The more I think about ASM the less I like it.

Disappointing movie. Especially that skateboarding, hoodie wearing, emo, rebel without a clue pretending to be Peter Parker...

B5Erik
07-06-12, 11:22 PM
I will give this movie credit for progressing more characters than Peter, including making Flash somewhat of a good guy towards the end.

That was SO stupid. Flash goes from BIG time bully to best buddy in 2 days? Come on! Are you serious? LAME.

Flash went from mercilessly beating Peter to a pulp, showing ZERO humanity and compassion (mocking Peter while he's beating him up), and then Uncle Ben dies and Flash is suddenly a caring friend? SUPER LAME.

Dragon Tattoo
07-06-12, 11:23 PM
The more I think about ASM the less I like it.

Disappointing movie. Especially that skateboarding, hoodie wearing, emo, rebel without a clue pretending to be Peter Parker...

So you keep saying.

Solid Snake
07-06-12, 11:26 PM
Sometimes that's all it takes, man. Also Parker went off on him, so Flash knows Ben's death and Peter now aren't to be pushed. Worth mentioning...Parker still wasn't comfortable w/ Flash being nice.

This Flash was tons better than the Raimi Flash.

B5Erik
07-06-12, 11:37 PM
In the comics it took YEARS for Flash and Peter to become friends - and it didn't happen in high school (it happened in college). Like in the real world, guys like that don't change overnight. I knew a lot of guys like that, and the ones that aren't dead didn't change until well into their 20's, and some of them into their 30's.

Sorry, I'm just not buying that Bully to Buddy in 2 days bit. Even in the comic books they knew better than that (Peter kicked Flash's ass in a boxing match around issue 11 or so, but Flash took several more years to become a decent human being). Stan Lee knew that bullies don't change just like that (snaps fingers).

Spiderbite
07-06-12, 11:57 PM
I did like in that scene that Flash was wearing a Spider-Man T-shirt though. Remember, Flash was always Spider-Man's #1 fan but still treated Peter like shit. I always loved that from the early comics.

Groucho
07-07-12, 12:10 AM
To be fair, there's only one movie here. They don't have months and months to drag out a story and build a relationship like in a comic.

riley_dude
07-07-12, 12:47 AM
I liked it but the origin story was way too familiar since it has only been 10 years since the Raimi movie.
The action set pieces and the chemistry between Garfield and Stone were what made the film.
Didn't quite care that they never resolved Uncle Bens killer storyline only do they can have another movie.

Lara Means
07-07-12, 01:52 AM
Spider-Man 2 was just about comic book perfection. Fuck the haters. This new movie doesnt come close. I give it 1 1/2 out of 4

Superboy
07-07-12, 02:00 AM
The more I think about ASM the less I like it.

Disappointing movie. Especially that skateboarding, hoodie wearing, emo, rebel without a clue pretending to be Peter Parker...

I think they were just trying to modernize this movie so that it would vibe better with modern kids.

B5Erik
07-07-12, 02:41 AM
To be fair, there's only one movie here. They don't have months and months to drag out a story and build a relationship like in a comic.
But they did know that they would have a sequel coming right away, so there was no reason to rush the change in Flash Thompson to the point where it just became stupid and outright laughable. They could have saved that for the 2nd movie (and then it would have made sense).

devilshalo
07-07-12, 04:22 AM
Flash gave a whoop ass to Peter over that other nerd and Peter still refused to bow to his wishes. Peter shows him up on the basketball court and now has the other guys laughing at Flash. And now he understands Peter's loss. Maybe he had something similar happen which is why he felt compassion and could relate with Peter now? Why is it that hard to believe that he had a change of heart?

devilshalo
07-07-12, 05:22 AM
No, he actually hasn't seen any of the Superman movies sad to say. But to say a PG-13 Spider-Man movie would or shouldn't appeal to younger kids is pretty much a cop-out. Just because it is PG-13 doesn't mean it isn't supposed to be fun. He went crazy over The Avengers, Real Steel and plenty of other PG-13 movies.
Certainly, the MPAA can't distinguish such a wide range in their rating using PG 13.

I think there's a vast difference in tone between Superman and Superman Returns, Batman & Robin and The Dark Knight and the first Spider-man to The Amazing Spider-man. All 3 of the original films went from fun (dare I say campy) to reboots that were serious to make them more 'adult' or 'real' for lack of better descriptions.

kgrogers1979
07-07-12, 08:11 AM
I think they were just trying to modernize this movie so that it would vibe better with modern kids.

Exactly. Its just like the Ultimate universe Spider-Man modernizing it for today's kids.

And anyway, Peter did wear a hoodie once upon a time in the comics. Ben Reilly's Scarlet Spider costume had a hoodie, and since he was a clone of Peter he technically was Peter in all but name.

Tarantino
07-07-12, 08:23 AM
Exactly. Its just like the Ultimate universe Spider-Man modernizing it for today's kids.

And anyway, Peter did wear a hoodie once upon a time in the comics. Ben Reilly's Scarlet Spider costume had a hoodie, and since he was a clone of Peter he technically was Peter in all but name.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Dr. DVD
07-07-12, 10:02 AM
Indeed. I want more Gwen progression. I hope that doesn't stop till...ASM3.


And how would you have it stop....?

Solid Snake
07-07-12, 10:33 AM
And how would you have it stop....?

her death. One of peter's greatest failures. He couldn't save her when he did the act. I do hope she falls from the bridge and she goes like in the comics. So sad. Seeing him fail. Losing THE love of his life.

It was teased in SM1. Which annoyed me cuz that's sacred ground that Raimi treaded on. You don't get close to that unless you do it. It's probablt the most important spidey story.

Jules Winfield
07-07-12, 10:39 AM
her death. One of peter's greatest failures. He couldn't save her when he did the act. I do hope she falls from the bridge and she goes like in the comics. So sad. Seeing him fail. Losing THE love of his life.

It was teased in SM1. Which annoyed me cuz that's sacred ground that Raimi treaded on. You don't get close to that unless you do it. It's probablt the most important spidey story.

It would be great if they did her death but since Emma Stone is so popular, would they want to? Especially since so many people think she's one of the good things about the new Spidey.

kgrogers1979
07-07-12, 10:44 AM
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm not sure why that's so funny. Ben Reilly's personality is obviously the exact same as Peter's personality being that he is a clone. A clone doesn't have its own unique personality. If Ben liked wearing a hoodie, then obviously that like comes directly from Peter. So people saying that comic book Peter never would have worn a hoodie don't actually know what they are talking about since Ben/Peter did wear a hoodie.


her death. One of peter's greatest failures. He couldn't save her when he did the act. I do hope she falls from the bridge and she goes like in the comics. So sad. Seeing him fail. Losing THE love of his life.

It was teased in SM1. Which annoyed me cuz that's sacred ground that Raimi treaded on. You don't get close to that unless you do it. It's probablt the most important spidey story.

Yeah, Raimi did everything but kill the girl. He included the scene of Norman being impaled by his own glider, which was taken almost directly from the comic.

Personally I hope they kill Gwen in the next movie and the third movie be the 70s Clone Saga. That way they can keep Emma Stone signed on since she can play her own clone. I feel the 70s Clone Saga would be a fitting end to the trilogy.

B5Erik
07-07-12, 10:46 AM
Flash gave a whoop ass to Peter over that other nerd and Peter still refused to bow to his wishes. Peter shows him up on the basketball court and now has the other guys laughing at Flash. And now he understands Peter's loss. Maybe he had something similar happen which is why he felt compassion and could relate with Peter now? Why is it that hard to believe that he had a change of heart?
Because the way they wrote Flash's character up to that point he HAS to heart. He has no sympathy, no empathy - he's just a mean bully who doesn't care about the feelings of others, and being shown up on a basketball court isn't going to change the fundamental nature of a person. And a person devoid of sympathy and empathy won't give a shit that Peter's uncle died.

The change was too dramatic. People don't change that radically that quickly. That's not reality. Empathy and sympathy are personality qualities that you don't just develop overnight.

That was bad writing.

StephenX
07-07-12, 11:08 AM
Peter Parker didn't come off as a whiny annoying bitch in the comics. Raimi's Parker does. Webb's Parker is here and there. He really becomes the Parker we mostly know in the 3rd act.

This.

After seeing it last night, Parker was a bit more "rebellious, almost hipster" than he should have been, but the inner tormet (which led to Raimi's Parker crying constantly) was done much better. Especially after what happens in the third act, Garfield becomes the Parker we all know. I enjoyed this much more, and look forward to seeing Garfield and Stone again.

Now, I did feel the first act was a little slow. I'm not sure whether it's because I have essentially seen this before or because Webb's pacing was off. I will say the superior acting held my interested, though.

Solid Snake
07-07-12, 11:12 AM
It would be great if they did her death but since Emma Stone is so popular, would they want to? Especially since so many people think she's one of the good things about the new Spidey.

Seems like even Stone knows it's coming up. Mentioned how she has to make Stacy very likable etc. Not to make like ASM broke ground but...it took chances that Raimi's didn't or wasn't allowed to. I mean..we had gun shots and blood here. Shit was getting serious. A character's murder, I don't mean Ben. Shit was amping up in the 3rd act.

I'd also like to mention that I really liked how we had a take on the police in this via Stacy. They actively were after him and The Lizard. And well..they were active. They responded, how I assume a police department would, in taking care of serious shit as it escalated. I really liked that. Really dug when they found The Lizard and shot him up.

Solid Snake
07-07-12, 11:34 AM
Well, when it came time to give our opinions and they asked what should be cut out, I couldn't think of one thing because everything seemed essential to the film. So after tonight, I'll get to see where the cuts were made.

So....what was your thoughts on the changes made?

Also...some people have made mention of the lack of a music theme for our hero here. You know what? I don't think we always need a superhero theme to triumphantly blast about. Some characters need one for how big they are in a sense but for Spidey and other heroes? I don't think we need one. Just depends on the character really. Superman is literally the most iconic. Also who he is as personality practically calls for it. And for Burton's Batman, same goes for Nolan's, those heroes were an extreme of sorts, in different ways that called for a theme. Burton's set a mood and was more....brooding. Nolan's is a force and has to be felt as such.

Iron_Giant
07-07-12, 05:02 PM
Watched the movie with my son last night, we both had mixed thoughts on the new movie.

I loved G Stacey, she was like of the Spidey team, while MJ was more of self-centered girl.

The swinging around seem more real than the CGI in the 1st.

The actor who plays Peter Parker was very distracting because he looked just like my sons best friend.

Neither one of us like the Lizard. The rest of the movie was a "Real World" as you can get for a Comic Movie, but the Lizard look to CGI/Comic Book to us. Green G and Doc Oc from the first 2 movies were awesome villains and looked great.

Had fun at the movie, but will not get repeat viewing from me or my son. Not sure how much overall repeat viewers the picture will get as a whole, but I do think it will have a sharp fall after TDKR comes out.

Would be awesome if the movies does not have great legs and does not make a ton of $$$ for Sony, so the rights revert back to Marvel/Disney. Then, Spidey can appear in The Avengers down the road.

Mike86
07-07-12, 05:53 PM
Watched the movie with my son last night, we both had mixed thoughts on the new movie.

I loved G Stacey, she was like of the Spidey team, while MJ was more of self-centered girl.

The swinging around seem more real than the CGI in the 1st.

The actor who plays Peter Parker was very distracting because he looked just like my sons best friend.

Neither one of us like the Lizard. The rest of the movie was a "Real World" as you can get for a Comic Movie, but the Lizard look to CGI/Comic Book to us. Green G and Doc Oc from the first 2 movies were awesome villains and looked great.

Had fun at the movie, but will not get repeat viewing from me or my son. Not sure how much overall repeat viewers the picture will get as a whole, but I do think it will have a sharp fall after TDKR comes out.

Would be awesome if the movies does not have great legs and does not make a ton of $$$ for Sony, so the rights revert back to Marvel/Disney. Then, Spidey can appear in The Avengers down the road.
As much as I want the rights to go back to Marvel/Disney that won't happen as long as Sony keeps on churning out a film every so often. The only way is if Marvel/Disney bought the rights from Sony (which I'm sure would be ridiculously expensive) or if Sony fails to make a new film every five years I want to say is the amount time that can lapse (which they won't let happen). Plus I think this will still do decent when all is said and done. It won't do numbers like The Avengers or The Dark Knight Rises but it should do okay.

kgrogers1979
07-07-12, 06:49 PM
Neither one of us like the Lizard. The rest of the movie was a "Real World" as you can get for a Comic Movie, but the Lizard look to CGI/Comic Book to us. Green G and Doc Oc from the first 2 movies were awesome villains and looked great.

You think Power Ranger Goblin looked great? :whofart:



Would be awesome if the movies does not have great legs and does not make a ton of $$$ for Sony, so the rights revert back to Marvel/Disney. Then, Spidey can appear in The Avengers down the road.


Yeah, because after one box office failure, Sony is just going to let the rights to the franchise lapse just like that... :sarcasm:

That's some pretty strong kool-aid you must be drinking.

Artman
07-07-12, 07:11 PM
Would be awesome if the movies does not have great legs and does not make a ton of $$$ for Sony, so the rights revert back to Marvel/Disney. Then, Spidey can appear in The Avengers down the road.

This strikes me the same as rooting for one's own political party to fail, just so they "might" become stronger down the road. This just isn't reality unfortunately. It just means Sony would spend less and Spider-man films would diminish in stature...which I just can't see as a good thing for anyone. Let's hope we get a solid trilogy out of these, and than we'll see what happens with the series.

DJariya
07-07-12, 07:59 PM
Just got back from seeing it.

:thumbsup: I thought it was pretty good. I would give this a solid B. My grade would have been a little higher had it not been another origin story.

But, I think story-wise, they brought enough fresh elements to it where it didn't feel like a complete rehash of the 1st movie. I enjoyed Garfield's take on the character. He didn't come across as a whiney douche that Maguire's Parker appeared to be at points during his 3 movies. I think Garfield came across as a more mature Parker and handled getting his new powers alot less corny compared to the 1st movie.

I didn't really like Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben. I think Cliff Robertson was much better in the role. His death did lack the emotional impact that Robertson's Ben had in the original.

:thumbsup: Loved Loved Loved Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy. She kicked Kirsten Dunst's ass being a believable and hot love interest to Peter. Great chemistry between Garfied and her.

For those who are familiar with the Spidey comics, where does Gwen fit in the storyline compared to MJ? I was always led to believe that MJ was Peter Parker's Lois Lane. I would love to see Gwen again in the inevitable sequel.

One little plot hole that kind of annoyed me:



After Lizard released the biological agent that caused the cops to start changing, I thought we would see more chaos. Plus, he released another cannister in the middle of town. Instead, they kind of forgot about that for almost 30 minutes. Then when Peter released the antidote and everyone started changing back, you mean to tell me the cops were still in their uniforms? I would have liked to have seen more from that. I felt that whole sequence was a little pointless.



Some good special effects and action sequences. Webb impressed me how he shot the movie. I'm game for a sequel and I will definitely get this on BD.

fumanstan
07-07-12, 08:08 PM
I'm mixed on this. There were parts that I liked more then Raimi's Spider-Man movies, and parts that I didn't. At the end, I think I still preferred Raimi's Spider-Man origin movie better then this one.

I liked Raimi's depiction of the entire Parker as a nerd in high school better, as brief as it was. That includes Flash Thompson. I for one agree that Flash's change into beating up Parker for almost no reason to being his friend was too quick, and the basketball show off scene was as bad as it was when the clip was posted earlier as a standalone.

I also liked Raimi's entire spider bite origin better, rather then it involving Oscorp, Parker's parents, and Conners here. I felt the opposite as some here, in that the relationship with May and Ben, including the casting, was far better in Raimi's and that Ben's death felt stronger to me in that movie then in this one, including the way the death happens on how Peter reacts to it and feels guilt. I also liked Raimi's montage of Peter learning about his skills overall better and development of his costume, although that was marred by bad CGI even for it's time. Peter using as abilities to fight was better here though.

Having Gwen in this movie was far better then MJ. That and I liked Garfield and Stone better then Maguire and Dunst throughout the whole movie. Just better actors all around, and more likable throughout the movie.

The Lizard sucked, IMO. I liked the idea of using him as the villain, but the look of the creature was as bad as it felt in the trailers, and having him talk was a bad decision. I'd rather him be the brainless monster versus the intelligent Connors just looking to cure his arm. I also very much disliked Conner's sudden turn to a bad super villain scheme. Which ultimately led nowhere as well, since we never got to see other "lizard" guys attacking. Green Goblin looked pretty hokey, but I thought Dafoe was established better as a villain then the Lizard here. Doc Ock's portrayal is still the best in a Spider-Man movie.

The inclusion of a "New Yorkers help save the day!" scene was annoying. It wasn't nearly as bad as how Raimi did it, but a stupid inclusion with the cranes. Really stupid.

Overall, 3 and a half stars out of 5. It was enjoyable, and wasn't particularly bad. But honestly, I spent more time thinking about parts of the first Spider-Man that I liked better, even if that movie is also flawed. It's really only the actors in this movie that keep it enjoyable; everything plot and story related I liked more in the first 2 Raimi movies. That's not including part 3, which is the worst out of the 4 movies we've gotten by far.

Also, I didn't like the end credits scene. It would have been better if it actually foreshadowed who we were going to see (like seeing Thanos in Avengers), but it didn't really do that if the character isn't Norman since you can't tell who it is. Plus the entire thing about Peter's parents never felt like as big of a shock or mystery to me that it should be if that plot continues into a sequel.

kgrogers1979
07-07-12, 08:39 PM
For those who are familiar with the Spidey comics, where does Gwen fit in the storyline compared to MJ? I was always led to believe that MJ was Peter Parker's Lois Lane. I would love to see Gwen again in the inevitable sequel.

Gwen was Peter's first love in the comics.

(Some people might try to argue that Betty Brant was Peter's first girlfriend, which is technically correct, but their relationship was more like a high school fling that lasts five minutes. They didn't last more than a handful of issues in the comics.)

So that's why I say Gwen was his first love as in the first girl he truly loved, and wasn't just some dumb high school lust.

Peter met Gwen in college actually, unlike this movie which shows them in high school together. MJ was mentioned first in the comics while he was still in high school, but she wasn't actually seen until much later. Anna Watson (Aunt May's best friend) was always trying to get Peter to go on a blind date with her niece MJ, but Peter figured that MJ was probably some hideous creature so he never went.

Unlike in the movie, Captain Stacy was killed in crossfire between Doc Ock and Spider-Man, and he always supported Spider-Man and as he was dying he told Spidey that he knew he was secretly Peter and for him to take care of his daughter after he was gone. It was pretty much the complete opposite of the movie version of Captain Stacy.

Gwen ends up blaming Spidey as much as Doc Ock for the death of her father, and she can't stand living in the New York with all the constant reminders of Spidey so she moves to Europe for a time.

Later when she comes back, Green Goblin kidnaps her and takes her to the Brooklyn bridge and throws her off. Spidey catches her with his web, but the whiplash ends up snapping her neck. Spidey in anger then beats the living crap out of the Goblin. His goblin glider is bent so that the two pointy things are laid out horizontal and the Goblin tries to ram it into Spidey's back, but his spider-sense warns him and the Goblin is impaled instead. This is pretty much exactly how Raimi's first movie played out, with MJ replacing Gwen and of course MJ didn't actually die.

Jules Winfield
07-07-12, 08:49 PM
Seems like even Stone knows it's coming up. Mentioned how she has to make Stacy very likable etc. Not to make like ASM broke ground but...it took chances that Raimi's didn't or wasn't allowed to. I mean..we had gun shots and blood here. Shit was getting serious. A character's murder, I don't mean Ben. Shit was amping up in the 3rd act.

I'd also like to mention that I really liked how we had a take on the police in this via Stacy. They actively were after him and The Lizard. And well..they were active. They responded, how I assume a police department would, in taking care of serious shit as it escalated. I really liked that. Really dug when they found The Lizard and shot him up.

I haven't seen the movie yet but like I've said in other threads, I'm incredibly skeptical. I just can't help it. I do hope they go through with killing Stone eventually though. But who knows? Judging by the swiftness of this reboot, they might have to reboot again before they kill her off.

Dragon Tattoo
07-07-12, 09:15 PM
I haven't seen the movie yet but like I've said in other threads, I'm incredibly skeptical. I just can't help it. I do hope they go through with killing Stone eventually though. But who knows? Judging by the swiftness of this reboot, they might have to reboot again before they kill her off.

Why don't you actually watch the movie before bitching in all of its threads?

Jacoby Ellsbury
07-07-12, 09:32 PM
Saw this last night. My thoughts are going to go all over the place so I'm just going to smoosh it into one paragraph. Thought it was worse than the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies. A little too much Peter Parker not enough Spider-Man. Even when he had the suit on it seemed like his mask was off half the time, I've seen a maskless spiderman only a fraction of the time in the years I have read and watched Spider-man movies and cartoons, I guess the movie focused on the early early moments of Spidey's life, seeing how he didn't even work at the Daily Bugle yet. Maybe he wasn't aware of the consequences of doing so and maybe he doesn't learn until after the Dennis Leary talk at the end, but it just seemed like Peter was revealing his identity too much in this movie. Subway scene, kid in the car bridge scene, high school scenes where he showed super abilities, police captain, etc. This kinda felt like a Hulk movie to me, not that impressed, should have been a second villain or something. Im used to a white haired Aunt May. Since this movie was not a 4+ star movie(I gave it a 3.5 which is a worth watching once type grade for me), I thought it wasn't worth a reboot this soon. The special effects were not really improved since the last series. Does Gwen Stacy ever conceal her thighs? Wore the same type of outfit with 5-6 variations in every scene. The Stan Lee scene was pretty cool, probably my favorite Stan scene in any Marvel movie. Oh wait, this movie was shot in 3-D, which I didn't see nor do I care for 3-D, is that where the budget went? Avengers was definitely a much better movie and I don't even like the Avengers outside of Hulk. What I enjoyed about this movie was we saw a new villain, and I liked the casting except Sally Fields should have had white hair.

Jules Winfield
07-07-12, 09:47 PM
Why don't you actually watch the movie before bitching in all of its threads?

It's almost not worth it to watch it now because when I do give my opinion, you're just going to laugh at how I can come up with a reason why I like/don't like it. :(

Tarantino
07-08-12, 12:19 AM
Why don't you actually watch the movie before bitching in all of its threads?

Like you with Battleship?

Rocketdog2000
07-08-12, 12:34 AM
I saw this the other day and really enjoyed it. I think it was better than all of the Raimi films, which I liked a the time (with the exception of 3). I felt the actors fit the roles better, the direction was better, and the characters more believable.

Saw the movie the other night, and this is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. While it's not a perfect movie, I still think it's the best one made yet. And yes, that includes Spider-man 2.

I happened to catch some of Spidey 2 on TV the other day and 5 minutes of it so many things jumped out. The direction took me of the story (pans, shifts and focusing on unimportant elements), the characters were non-rationale (especially Harry), and the general tone was too camp.

I've actually been watching all the Raimi Spidey films since going to see the new one, and I've gotta say, having not see them in years, they don't hold up nearly as well as I remember them. (Well, 1 and 2, at least. 3 was always a dud.) A lot of the acting comes across as sooo cheesy, and campy. As much as I used to like Spider-man 2, even that wasn't nearly as good as I remember it. I found Amazing Spider-man a far superior movie on many levels.

Rocketdog2000
07-08-12, 12:47 AM
Thought it was worse than the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies. A little too much Peter Parker not enough Spider-Man. Even when he had the suit on it seemed like his mask was off half the time, I've seen a maskless spiderman only a fraction of the time in the years I have read and watched Spider-man movies and cartoons, I guess the movie focused on the early early moments of Spidey's life, seeing how he didn't even work at the Daily Bugle yet. Maybe he wasn't aware of the consequences of doing so and maybe he doesn't learn until after the Dennis Leary talk at the end, but it just seemed like Peter was revealing his identity too much in this movie.

Did you actually see the Raimi Spider-man movies - particularly 2 - because that was always a big problem I had with them. Peter had his mask off far too often in those flicks, too. At least when he did it in this movie, one scene aside, I felt it made more sense.

My Other Self
07-08-12, 12:51 AM
Like you with Battleship?:lol:

Dragon Tattoo
07-08-12, 12:59 AM
Like you with Battleship?

Fuck Battleship.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 09:23 AM
Like you with Battleship?

And with Magic Mike also?

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 11:25 AM
Honestly...I think kgrogers and Dragon Tattoo are the worst to post in here. DT is...well..he's sensitive. And kgrogers keeps bringing up the comics like that should matter in how this movie stands..as a movie.

The film is the film. Let it stand as is. If you want to argue it as adaptation. Fine. that's free game. But to actually use that as a level of quality for argument is stupid.

The film did better than Raimi's in a lot of way. It also fucked up as much. I'm sorry some of you guys can't get over that trends change. Is it bad that Peter skateboards? No. that doesn't do shit to the core of character. Is it bad that he's supposedly a nerd but he..really doesn't nerd about really? Yeah. That's a flaw the movie fails to grow on.

You guys really really need to go over your personal bias in people and take it for what it is on it's own.


Also kgrogers..I don't know why you brought up Reilly..but that was stupid. Him having a hoodie had no reason for Parker wearing a hoodie here. It's a trend. More people wear hoodies now..that's it.

I haven't seen the movie yet but like I've said in other threads, I'm incredibly skeptical. I just can't help it. I do hope they go through with killing Stone eventually though. But who knows? Judging by the swiftness of this reboot, they might have to reboot again before they kill her off.

eh...that's kind of a weak thought logic there, though valid to mention. They rebooted. Fine. This one seems to be doing fine. Seems to head in good direction by the end. And seems like they want to head that way cuz they're letting them do stuff that Raimi's never did or wasn't allowed to do. Maybe this new "TDK aftermath" we have now is good. I dunno. At least in the influence in how much you can push the storytelling situation, quality aside.


Why don't you actually watch the movie before bitching in all of its threads?

you know..you talk about him bitching but as weak grounded as his reasoning was..it's a valid question. Also..you bitch a lot too. you're practically known for it now. calm down and get over whatever the hell you need to get over.


Mods: I'm sorry but..this is getting stupid. Really? Guys here are going nuts.and..maybe I'm the one to call it out but...we got people here acting like bitches and whining as such. I think we need a leash on some people.

fumanstan
07-08-12, 12:06 PM
Yeah, I think its funny how krogers takes every opportunity to post random comic book references that don't really apply to anything. Its like Famiy Guy cutting away to pop culture references.

"A hoodie? Remember the time when Peter got cloned ..."

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 12:10 PM
I think using the comics as ground to stand on for the film's quality or a reason for being of this and that is stupid. That'd be like saying this shit made since in the Potter books but they didn't really talk about it in the movie. Well you know what? The movie failed w/ it. Don't get me near the book otherwise the film fails on it's own in the format. It should NEVER be shackled to the source. It's an adaptation. And needs the source to inspire but not to control it.

I love the comics. And everything kgrogers brings up is valid for the sake of an adaptation. But it's falls down hard when you try to buckle it for reasoning of the film's own quality.


Now getting over all that crazy. I really liked Stacy but felt that her relationship w/ Connors was there but never really shown. Like we know she's an intern, fine. that's cool. And she later has interaction w/ him in various ways later, and his reaction to her is respectful in not to harm her, one could say. But we NEVER see how well he appreciates her enough not to push her across when she got in the way. i still feel we're missing a scene of them interaction and their being an appreciation for her. Like when:

Gwen was hiding from Connors in the lab..he finds her and she sprays him w/ fire. he covers it w/ his hand...but doesn't harm her. Takes what he needed and goes, he KNOWS it's her but nothing. And that's it. i LIKED that she was a strong gal and whatnot but I never got a real sense of how much he may appreciate her aside from the line about that letter he wrote.

I just KNOW there has to be be something to add layer to their work relationship and it was a missed opportunity here.

bluetoast
07-08-12, 12:40 PM
Yeah that seemed a bit lacking. Another element that was left dangling (quite literally) was Connor's boss whose storyline was never resolved. Yes we probably know that Osborne is going to be a factor but we don't need constant set-ups for sequels. Just one more scene with that guy and what he learns would have been nice.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 12:51 PM
yeah, devilshalo said that

he was killed in the cut he saw. like he was in his makeshift lab and Connors bit his head off in some fashion. And I KNOW there's a scene w/ them in the lab cuz I posted a pic of scene..but we never got it.

i really really want to know what was cut from what he saw. Like I said before...I feel that there's some connective tissue in scenes that was cut out for some reason. sometimes it feels like there's a beat that was missed but the next scene happens and something is lost there.

bluetoast
07-08-12, 12:56 PM
Damn, didn't know they had scenes as big as that being cut.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 01:11 PM
like I said, I'm waiting on devilshalo to give us the rundown cuz I honestly feel like stuff was cut and it affected the film's overall quality in plot.

fumanstan
07-08-12, 01:18 PM
Having that character be Nels Van Adder would have been nice just so that the character wasn't an absolute throwaway random goon like he was in the final cut.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 01:25 PM
Damn, didn't know they had scenes as big as that being cut.

here's that image of that scene.

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/asm-lizard1.jpg

so we KNOW shit was cut out. Important stuff besides this possibly.

Again..I really really love the look of the color palette for this film. Had a lot of life in it. Great colors and sets. Raimi's was dull and fake. Though enjoyable as well but...the look was eh.

CharlieK
07-08-12, 01:29 PM
i really really want to know what was cut from what he saw. Like I said before...I feel that there's some connective tissue in scenes that was cut out for some reason. sometimes it feels like there's a beat that was missed but the next scene happens and something is lost there.

Here's a pretty lengthy & thorough article on the excised scenes we've seen in promo materials and how they may have fit into the movie.

A few weeks ago a YouTube user took all of the clips and trailers released for The Amazing Spider-Man and made a pretty accurate, beat-by-beat 25-minute long version of the movie. Buried in all of that footage, and in the photos released by Sony marketing, was evidence of a different version of the movie.

Even the most positive view of the movie has to acknowledge the feeling of dangling plotlines and truncated editing. By my count there are two and a half major plotlines that are just left in the wind at the end of the movie: the hunt for Uncle Benís killer, the wrap up of Oscorp goon Mr. Rathaís story and the mystery of Peter Parkerís parents.

Peterís parents is the half a plotline; while itís obvious that the mystery is meant to continue into the next movie, the structure of this film makes it feel as if the whole story is simply dropped in favor of a big fight scene. Thereís no sense of closure to any aspect of the disappearance of Peterís parents.

There are enough clues in photos and trailers to hint at what was originally meant for some of these plotlines. Let's go one by one and see what might have been cut:

1. Spider-Manís War Against Rockers, or, The Hunt For Uncle Benís Killer.

The one dangling thread that I can't begin to resolve is the hunt for Uncle Benís killer; in the final movie Peter simply drops the quest, without a sense of any completeness. He doesnít seem to make peace with the idea that the guy is still on the streets and he doesnít catch the guy - the story just dries up. Iíve heard rumors that an earlier cut of the film included more closure on this story, but I canít be sure.


2. The Vanishing Villain, or, The Mysterious Disappearance of Evil Mr. Ratha.

One story that did get tied up in the original cut of the film is Mr. Rathaís. In the finished film Ratha gets attacked by the Lizard on the bridge and then... is gone. You have to wonder how this guy doesnít put two and two together and realize the giant rampaging lizardman might be related to the world-class herpetologist specializing in cross-species DNA merging who he has been berating.

But he did! Check out this picture, released in May:

http://i.imgur.com/zhXrJ.jpg

Whatís weird is that the picture was released only two months ago. Was this scene in the film right up until the last minute? The CGI was certainly finished. Why was it cut?

This was a major scene in the original version of the movie. Spider-Man shows up in the middle of it, and much information about his parents seems to have been given in this sequence. My guess is that this is why Ratha's death was axed - there was no way to recut the sequence because the structure of it was always about giving Peter information about his genetic destiny.

A poster at the Superhero Hype message boards put together images and screengrabs that seem to be all from this sequence. The story of it is laid out pretty well here:

http://i.imgur.com/MzgDY.jpg

Mr. Ratha finds Connors' sewer lab, is about to kill him and then Connors turns into the Lizard and gets him first. Spider-Man shows up, there's a tussle and then...? I'm not really sure where this fit into the film; it had to take place after the scene where Spider-Man 'hunts' the Lizard in the sewer, but how long after?

Anyway, Ratha died in the original cut. I can't figure out if he was turning into a lizard in that large picture or if it's just an element of coloring.


3. Peterís Perplexing Parents, or, Why Didnít They Tell The Untold Story?

Months ago I told you guys that I heard rumors that The Amazing Spider-Man would be making a simple, but huge, change to Spider-Manís origin. No longer would the spider bite change Peter Parker into a superhero. Rather, the spider bite would activate something already within him that would make him a superhero.

This is not reflected in the final movie. Sort of. The hints of it are still there, and when you add in deleted elements that snuck into the marketing you can see the shape of the thing where it once existed.

The first major hint is still in the movie. Curt Connors is talking about how every other subject upon whom cross-species DNA merging was attempted died. He does not know that he is speaking to the one success story. But how did Peter survive? The movie leaves this sort of dangling there, but the clues are in front of your face. Peter was bitten by a spider... a spider that Peterís father bred. A spider like the one under glass in the filmís prologue. A spider like the one on the chalk board in his fatherís office.

The scene where Connors tells Peter no subject survived looks like it might have been a reshoot. Why do I say that? Because of this sequence in the filmís second trailer, where Peter is showing Curt Connors the missing algorithm in a totally different setting than the final film. Heís filling it in on a chalk board in what Iím assuming is Connorís home office:

http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/images/spideyblackboard.jpg

Iím wondering why this changed. In the finished movie Peter gives Connors the alogrithm on a napkin, which feels small and casual. This scene of Peter at the chalkboard is more visually interesting, and ties in with the chalkboard in the prologue. Was there, perhaps, other dialogue that tied into that scene - and into Peterís genetic destiny?

In the first and last trailers we hear a man - clearly Mr. Ratha - whispering ĎDo you think what happened to you, Peter, was an accident? Do you have any idea what you really are?í That certainly sounds like a reference to Peterís genetic destiny, and a clip that I donít believe is in the finished film. Judging by the whisper Iím going to guess - and this is just a guess - that it is Rathaís dying words to Peter after the Lizard does him in. This is a movie that seems like it should have at least one info dump dying declaration in it, and this would have been it.

And thereís more! The last two trailers released have Dr. Connors saying, mid-Lizard transformation, ĎIf you want the truth about your parents, Peter, come and get it!í What truth is that? Thereís no Ďtruthí in the film, and Connors and Peter never have a good conversation about Peterís parents. Going by the "ASM Deleted Scenes #1" image that line of dialogue may very well take place during the sewer encounter with Mr. Ratha.

By the way, it would make the end of the film work better if Peter didnít just give Connors information he found in his dadís briefcase. Wouldnít it be more dramatic if some element of Peter himself - maybe his blood - was an integral part of making the Lizard formula work? Wouldnít that make Peterís sense of guilt for helping create the Lizard carry more weight? Iím actually not convinced this was ever in any filmed version of the movie, but it feels like the ghost of an idea cut out of a previous draft.

To me this all adds up to obvious proof that at one point The Amazing Spider-Man explicitly had a storyline about Peterís genetics. Thatís the much-hyped ĎUntold Story.í In an interview with the Huffington Post, Marc Webb denied this. Sort of:

I have heard rumors that you wanted Peter's parents to be the source of his powers, not the traditional accidental radioactive spider bite. There are rumors of a reshoot to incorporate the more traditional spider bite.

MW - I think there was something on the internet.

I want to clear that up.

MW - It's completely false.

So what we see is the way it was always shot?

MW - Yes.

What heís denying here is the bite, not Peterís ĎUntold Storyí of genetic destiny. The original cut of the film ALWAYS had Peter being bitten, which is what Webb is saying in that quote. What it also had was the concept that the only reason why Peter didnít die was because of something uniquely special about him. Something certainly involving his father.

By the way, I suspect that thereís a change in the movie to make Peterís parents' disappearance less open ended. If you listen to the dialogue and gauge by Peterís emotional state, you would guess that his parents vamoosed late one night and no one ever heard from them again. In fact Peter bitterly responds to Uncle Benís speech on responsibility by saying he wished his father had some. Which is a weird thing to say when your dad died in a plane crash.

I believe that the newspaper clipping saying Peter and Mary Parker died in a plane crash (seen when Peter is Bing-ing his father. I believe he gets spider powers before I believe he uses Bing) was a late insert. There is nothing else in the film that indicates Peterís parents are dead. Everything else makes it seem like theyíve simply vanished off the face of the earth.


4. The Connors Family, A Date And Some Other Stuff.

Every movie has scenes that are cut out simply for time or pacing. The Ratha and Peterís genetic destiny stuff feels like it was cut for larger issues (ie, not fucking the franchise from the reboot). This next stuff feels like it was cut for time.

Curt Connors wears a wedding ring, which we see a number of times. In the tie-in game he has a son. In the comic Connorsí son is actually an important character. There is no wife or child in the movie. Annie Parisse was cast in the film as 'the villain's wife;' at the time we thought it might have been Ratha's wife (he was named Van Alter then, after an obscure character in the comics), but it seems likely she was actually Connors' wife.

At the press junket for the film Andrew Garfield said that his favorite scene was actually cut; it was a scene of Peter and Gwen on a romantic date, including them swinging around a lamppost. The beginning of this is in the movie, and plays as an homage to the ĎCan you read my mindí sequence in 1978ís Superman.

Was there more with the SWAT Lizards? It's such an odd choice to turn a SWAT team into monsters... and then never go back to them. Could an earlier version of the script have Spider-Man get injured fighting them before his final battle? In the film Spider-Man takes a bullet from a cop with a hearing problem, which doesn't play as dramatically.

Thereís evidence in the trailers that the dinner with the Stacy family was longer, and that in particular Captain Stacy asks Peter about his father. The addition of this might have helped the scene feel more natural as Peter gets defensive about his dad; instead the dinner conversation goes from zero to arguing in no time flat. Also cut was the 'intimidating doorman' scene leading into that sequence. This scene was posted online and sucked, so no great loss.

What was a great loss was the the POV swinging scenes. The Comic-Con 2011 footage and the first trailer included a lengthy bit of POV web-slinging that was cut to shreds in the movie. This is the most baffling change in the whole film. I suspect it was done for pacing, but in IMAX and 3D this should have been big time money shot stuff.

It seems to me obvious that The Amazing Spider-Man got a huge last minute recut. Marketing was still using concepts and imagery related to a completely deleted storyline - the ĎUntold Storyí - as recently as May. This fits in with rumors I heard that a spring screening for Sony execs went poorly and changes were made. Excising the ĎUntold Storyí seems to have been the brunt of that change.

I doubt weíll see much of that stuff on home video release. The studio will decide how much they want to follow up on this stuff as they move into the sequel; if they do want to follow up on it the footage will remain hidden so as to not contradict anything in upcoming movies. If they donít want to follow up theyíll just hide the footage away for a decade or two.


Was The Untold Story Cut From THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN? (http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/)

fumanstan
07-08-12, 01:33 PM
I liked Raimi's tone, it was bright and colorful and it made Spider-Man's suit really pop and stand out in the day time. It matched the lighter tone of his movie. I thought this just kept everything dark and shadowed; I don't think its particularly good at all. :shrug:

fumanstan
07-08-12, 01:42 PM
Here's a pretty lengthy & thorough article on the excised scenes we've seen in promo materials and how they may have fit into the movie.

A few weeks ago a YouTube user took all of the clips and trailers released for The Amazing Spider-Man and made a pretty accurate, beat-by-beat 25-minute long version of the movie. Buried in all of that footage, and in the photos released by Sony marketing, was evidence of a different version of the movie.

Even the most positive view of the movie has to acknowledge the feeling of dangling plotlines and truncated editing. By my count there are two and a half major plotlines that are just left in the wind at the end of the movie: the hunt for Uncle Benís killer, the wrap up of Oscorp goon Mr. Rathaís story and the mystery of Peter Parkerís parents.

Peterís parents is the half a plotline; while itís obvious that the mystery is meant to continue into the next movie, the structure of this film makes it feel as if the whole story is simply dropped in favor of a big fight scene. Thereís no sense of closure to any aspect of the disappearance of Peterís parents.

There are enough clues in photos and trailers to hint at what was originally meant for some of these plotlines. Let's go one by one and see what might have been cut:

1. Spider-Manís War Against Rockers, or, The Hunt For Uncle Benís Killer.

The one dangling thread that I can't begin to resolve is the hunt for Uncle Benís killer; in the final movie Peter simply drops the quest, without a sense of any completeness. He doesnít seem to make peace with the idea that the guy is still on the streets and he doesnít catch the guy - the story just dries up. Iíve heard rumors that an earlier cut of the film included more closure on this story, but I canít be sure.


2. The Vanishing Villain, or, The Mysterious Disappearance of Evil Mr. Ratha.

One story that did get tied up in the original cut of the film is Mr. Rathaís. In the finished film Ratha gets attacked by the Lizard on the bridge and then... is gone. You have to wonder how this guy doesnít put two and two together and realize the giant rampaging lizardman might be related to the world-class herpetologist specializing in cross-species DNA merging who he has been berating.

But he did! Check out this picture, released in May:

http://i.imgur.com/zhXrJ.jpg

Whatís weird is that the picture was released only two months ago. Was this scene in the film right up until the last minute? The CGI was certainly finished. Why was it cut?

This was a major scene in the original version of the movie. Spider-Man shows up in the middle of it, and much information about his parents seems to have been given in this sequence. My guess is that this is why Ratha's death was axed - there was no way to recut the sequence because the structure of it was always about giving Peter information about his genetic destiny.

A poster at the Superhero Hype message boards put together images and screengrabs that seem to be all from this sequence. The story of it is laid out pretty well here:

http://i.imgur.com/MzgDY.jpg

Mr. Ratha finds Connors' sewer lab, is about to kill him and then Connors turns into the Lizard and gets him first. Spider-Man shows up, there's a tussle and then...? I'm not really sure where this fit into the film; it had to take place after the scene where Spider-Man 'hunts' the Lizard in the sewer, but how long after?

Anyway, Ratha died in the original cut. I can't figure out if he was turning into a lizard in that large picture or if it's just an element of coloring.


3. Peterís Perplexing Parents, or, Why Didnít They Tell The Untold Story?

Months ago I told you guys that I heard rumors that The Amazing Spider-Man would be making a simple, but huge, change to Spider-Manís origin. No longer would the spider bite change Peter Parker into a superhero. Rather, the spider bite would activate something already within him that would make him a superhero.

This is not reflected in the final movie. Sort of. The hints of it are still there, and when you add in deleted elements that snuck into the marketing you can see the shape of the thing where it once existed.

The first major hint is still in the movie. Curt Connors is talking about how every other subject upon whom cross-species DNA merging was attempted died. He does not know that he is speaking to the one success story. But how did Peter survive? The movie leaves this sort of dangling there, but the clues are in front of your face. Peter was bitten by a spider... a spider that Peterís father bred. A spider like the one under glass in the filmís prologue. A spider like the one on the chalk board in his fatherís office.

The scene where Connors tells Peter no subject survived looks like it might have been a reshoot. Why do I say that? Because of this sequence in the filmís second trailer, where Peter is showing Curt Connors the missing algorithm in a totally different setting than the final film. Heís filling it in on a chalk board in what Iím assuming is Connorís home office:

http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/images/spideyblackboard.jpg

Iím wondering why this changed. In the finished movie Peter gives Connors the alogrithm on a napkin, which feels small and casual. This scene of Peter at the chalkboard is more visually interesting, and ties in with the chalkboard in the prologue. Was there, perhaps, other dialogue that tied into that scene - and into Peterís genetic destiny?

In the first and last trailers we hear a man - clearly Mr. Ratha - whispering ĎDo you think what happened to you, Peter, was an accident? Do you have any idea what you really are?í That certainly sounds like a reference to Peterís genetic destiny, and a clip that I donít believe is in the finished film. Judging by the whisper Iím going to guess - and this is just a guess - that it is Rathaís dying words to Peter after the Lizard does him in. This is a movie that seems like it should have at least one info dump dying declaration in it, and this would have been it.

And thereís more! The last two trailers released have Dr. Connors saying, mid-Lizard transformation, ĎIf you want the truth about your parents, Peter, come and get it!í What truth is that? Thereís no Ďtruthí in the film, and Connors and Peter never have a good conversation about Peterís parents. Going by the "ASM Deleted Scenes #1" image that line of dialogue may very well take place during the sewer encounter with Mr. Ratha.

By the way, it would make the end of the film work better if Peter didnít just give Connors information he found in his dadís briefcase. Wouldnít it be more dramatic if some element of Peter himself - maybe his blood - was an integral part of making the Lizard formula work? Wouldnít that make Peterís sense of guilt for helping create the Lizard carry more weight? Iím actually not convinced this was ever in any filmed version of the movie, but it feels like the ghost of an idea cut out of a previous draft.

To me this all adds up to obvious proof that at one point The Amazing Spider-Man explicitly had a storyline about Peterís genetics. Thatís the much-hyped ĎUntold Story.í In an interview with the Huffington Post, Marc Webb denied this. Sort of:

I have heard rumors that you wanted Peter's parents to be the source of his powers, not the traditional accidental radioactive spider bite. There are rumors of a reshoot to incorporate the more traditional spider bite.

MW - I think there was something on the internet.

I want to clear that up.

MW - It's completely false.

So what we see is the way it was always shot?

MW - Yes.

What heís denying here is the bite, not Peterís ĎUntold Storyí of genetic destiny. The original cut of the film ALWAYS had Peter being bitten, which is what Webb is saying in that quote. What it also had was the concept that the only reason why Peter didnít die was because of something uniquely special about him. Something certainly involving his father.

By the way, I suspect that thereís a change in the movie to make Peterís parents' disappearance less open ended. If you listen to the dialogue and gauge by Peterís emotional state, you would guess that his parents vamoosed late one night and no one ever heard from them again. In fact Peter bitterly responds to Uncle Benís speech on responsibility by saying he wished his father had some. Which is a weird thing to say when your dad died in a plane crash.

I believe that the newspaper clipping saying Peter and Mary Parker died in a plane crash (seen when Peter is Bing-ing his father. I believe he gets spider powers before I believe he uses Bing) was a late insert. There is nothing else in the film that indicates Peterís parents are dead. Everything else makes it seem like theyíve simply vanished off the face of the earth.


4. The Connors Family, A Date And Some Other Stuff.

Every movie has scenes that are cut out simply for time or pacing. The Ratha and Peterís genetic destiny stuff feels like it was cut for larger issues (ie, not fucking the franchise from the reboot). This next stuff feels like it was cut for time.

Curt Connors wears a wedding ring, which we see a number of times. In the tie-in game he has a son. In the comic Connorsí son is actually an important character. There is no wife or child in the movie. Annie Parisse was cast in the film as 'the villain's wife;' at the time we thought it might have been Ratha's wife (he was named Van Alter then, after an obscure character in the comics), but it seems likely she was actually Connors' wife.

At the press junket for the film Andrew Garfield said that his favorite scene was actually cut; it was a scene of Peter and Gwen on a romantic date, including them swinging around a lamppost. The beginning of this is in the movie, and plays as an homage to the ĎCan you read my mindí sequence in 1978ís Superman.

Was there more with the SWAT Lizards? It's such an odd choice to turn a SWAT team into monsters... and then never go back to them. Could an earlier version of the script have Spider-Man get injured fighting them before his final battle? In the film Spider-Man takes a bullet from a cop with a hearing problem, which doesn't play as dramatically.

Thereís evidence in the trailers that the dinner with the Stacy family was longer, and that in particular Captain Stacy asks Peter about his father. The addition of this might have helped the scene feel more natural as Peter gets defensive about his dad; instead the dinner conversation goes from zero to arguing in no time flat. Also cut was the 'intimidating doorman' scene leading into that sequence. This scene was posted online and sucked, so no great loss.

What was a great loss was the the POV swinging scenes. The Comic-Con 2011 footage and the first trailer included a lengthy bit of POV web-slinging that was cut to shreds in the movie. This is the most baffling change in the whole film. I suspect it was done for pacing, but in IMAX and 3D this should have been big time money shot stuff.

It seems to me obvious that The Amazing Spider-Man got a huge last minute recut. Marketing was still using concepts and imagery related to a completely deleted storyline - the ĎUntold Storyí - as recently as May. This fits in with rumors I heard that a spring screening for Sony execs went poorly and changes were made. Excising the ĎUntold Storyí seems to have been the brunt of that change.

I doubt weíll see much of that stuff on home video release. The studio will decide how much they want to follow up on this stuff as they move into the sequel; if they do want to follow up on it the footage will remain hidden so as to not contradict anything in upcoming movies. If they donít want to follow up theyíll just hide the footage away for a decade or two.


Was The Untold Story Cut From THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN? (http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/)

Good read, a lot of that makes sense and jives with the promos and trailers that we had been seeing.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 01:45 PM
Here's a pretty lengthy & thorough article on the excised scenes we've seen in promo materials and how they may have fit into the movie.

A few weeks ago a YouTube user took all of the clips and trailers released for The Amazing Spider-Man and made a pretty accurate, beat-by-beat 25-minute long version of the movie. Buried in all of that footage, and in the photos released by Sony marketing, was evidence of a different version of the movie.

Even the most positive view of the movie has to acknowledge the feeling of dangling plotlines and truncated editing. By my count there are two and a half major plotlines that are just left in the wind at the end of the movie: the hunt for Uncle Benís killer, the wrap up of Oscorp goon Mr. Rathaís story and the mystery of Peter Parkerís parents.

Peterís parents is the half a plotline; while itís obvious that the mystery is meant to continue into the next movie, the structure of this film makes it feel as if the whole story is simply dropped in favor of a big fight scene. Thereís no sense of closure to any aspect of the disappearance of Peterís parents.

There are enough clues in photos and trailers to hint at what was originally meant for some of these plotlines. Let's go one by one and see what might have been cut:

1. Spider-Manís War Against Rockers, or, The Hunt For Uncle Benís Killer.

The one dangling thread that I can't begin to resolve is the hunt for Uncle Benís killer; in the final movie Peter simply drops the quest, without a sense of any completeness. He doesnít seem to make peace with the idea that the guy is still on the streets and he doesnít catch the guy - the story just dries up. Iíve heard rumors that an earlier cut of the film included more closure on this story, but I canít be sure.


2. The Vanishing Villain, or, The Mysterious Disappearance of Evil Mr. Ratha.

One story that did get tied up in the original cut of the film is Mr. Rathaís. In the finished film Ratha gets attacked by the Lizard on the bridge and then... is gone. You have to wonder how this guy doesnít put two and two together and realize the giant rampaging lizardman might be related to the world-class herpetologist specializing in cross-species DNA merging who he has been berating.

But he did! Check out this picture, released in May:

http://i.imgur.com/zhXrJ.jpg

Whatís weird is that the picture was released only two months ago. Was this scene in the film right up until the last minute? The CGI was certainly finished. Why was it cut?

This was a major scene in the original version of the movie. Spider-Man shows up in the middle of it, and much information about his parents seems to have been given in this sequence. My guess is that this is why Ratha's death was axed - there was no way to recut the sequence because the structure of it was always about giving Peter information about his genetic destiny.

A poster at the Superhero Hype message boards put together images and screengrabs that seem to be all from this sequence. The story of it is laid out pretty well here:

http://i.imgur.com/MzgDY.jpg

Mr. Ratha finds Connors' sewer lab, is about to kill him and then Connors turns into the Lizard and gets him first. Spider-Man shows up, there's a tussle and then...? I'm not really sure where this fit into the film; it had to take place after the scene where Spider-Man 'hunts' the Lizard in the sewer, but how long after?

Anyway, Ratha died in the original cut. I can't figure out if he was turning into a lizard in that large picture or if it's just an element of coloring.


3. Peterís Perplexing Parents, or, Why Didnít They Tell The Untold Story?

Months ago I told you guys that I heard rumors that The Amazing Spider-Man would be making a simple, but huge, change to Spider-Manís origin. No longer would the spider bite change Peter Parker into a superhero. Rather, the spider bite would activate something already within him that would make him a superhero.

This is not reflected in the final movie. Sort of. The hints of it are still there, and when you add in deleted elements that snuck into the marketing you can see the shape of the thing where it once existed.

The first major hint is still in the movie. Curt Connors is talking about how every other subject upon whom cross-species DNA merging was attempted died. He does not know that he is speaking to the one success story. But how did Peter survive? The movie leaves this sort of dangling there, but the clues are in front of your face. Peter was bitten by a spider... a spider that Peterís father bred. A spider like the one under glass in the filmís prologue. A spider like the one on the chalk board in his fatherís office.

The scene where Connors tells Peter no subject survived looks like it might have been a reshoot. Why do I say that? Because of this sequence in the filmís second trailer, where Peter is showing Curt Connors the missing algorithm in a totally different setting than the final film. Heís filling it in on a chalk board in what Iím assuming is Connorís home office:

http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/images/spideyblackboard.jpg

Iím wondering why this changed. In the finished movie Peter gives Connors the alogrithm on a napkin, which feels small and casual. This scene of Peter at the chalkboard is more visually interesting, and ties in with the chalkboard in the prologue. Was there, perhaps, other dialogue that tied into that scene - and into Peterís genetic destiny?

In the first and last trailers we hear a man - clearly Mr. Ratha - whispering ĎDo you think what happened to you, Peter, was an accident? Do you have any idea what you really are?í That certainly sounds like a reference to Peterís genetic destiny, and a clip that I donít believe is in the finished film. Judging by the whisper Iím going to guess - and this is just a guess - that it is Rathaís dying words to Peter after the Lizard does him in. This is a movie that seems like it should have at least one info dump dying declaration in it, and this would have been it.

And thereís more! The last two trailers released have Dr. Connors saying, mid-Lizard transformation, ĎIf you want the truth about your parents, Peter, come and get it!í What truth is that? Thereís no Ďtruthí in the film, and Connors and Peter never have a good conversation about Peterís parents. Going by the "ASM Deleted Scenes #1" image that line of dialogue may very well take place during the sewer encounter with Mr. Ratha.

By the way, it would make the end of the film work better if Peter didnít just give Connors information he found in his dadís briefcase. Wouldnít it be more dramatic if some element of Peter himself - maybe his blood - was an integral part of making the Lizard formula work? Wouldnít that make Peterís sense of guilt for helping create the Lizard carry more weight? Iím actually not convinced this was ever in any filmed version of the movie, but it feels like the ghost of an idea cut out of a previous draft.

To me this all adds up to obvious proof that at one point The Amazing Spider-Man explicitly had a storyline about Peterís genetics. Thatís the much-hyped ĎUntold Story.í In an interview with the Huffington Post, Marc Webb denied this. Sort of:

I have heard rumors that you wanted Peter's parents to be the source of his powers, not the traditional accidental radioactive spider bite. There are rumors of a reshoot to incorporate the more traditional spider bite.

MW - I think there was something on the internet.

I want to clear that up.

MW - It's completely false.

So what we see is the way it was always shot?

MW - Yes.

What heís denying here is the bite, not Peterís ĎUntold Storyí of genetic destiny. The original cut of the film ALWAYS had Peter being bitten, which is what Webb is saying in that quote. What it also had was the concept that the only reason why Peter didnít die was because of something uniquely special about him. Something certainly involving his father.

By the way, I suspect that thereís a change in the movie to make Peterís parents' disappearance less open ended. If you listen to the dialogue and gauge by Peterís emotional state, you would guess that his parents vamoosed late one night and no one ever heard from them again. In fact Peter bitterly responds to Uncle Benís speech on responsibility by saying he wished his father had some. Which is a weird thing to say when your dad died in a plane crash.

I believe that the newspaper clipping saying Peter and Mary Parker died in a plane crash (seen when Peter is Bing-ing his father. I believe he gets spider powers before I believe he uses Bing) was a late insert. There is nothing else in the film that indicates Peterís parents are dead. Everything else makes it seem like theyíve simply vanished off the face of the earth.


4. The Connors Family, A Date And Some Other Stuff.

Every movie has scenes that are cut out simply for time or pacing. The Ratha and Peterís genetic destiny stuff feels like it was cut for larger issues (ie, not fucking the franchise from the reboot). This next stuff feels like it was cut for time.

Curt Connors wears a wedding ring, which we see a number of times. In the tie-in game he has a son. In the comic Connorsí son is actually an important character. There is no wife or child in the movie. Annie Parisse was cast in the film as 'the villain's wife;' at the time we thought it might have been Ratha's wife (he was named Van Alter then, after an obscure character in the comics), but it seems likely she was actually Connors' wife.

At the press junket for the film Andrew Garfield said that his favorite scene was actually cut; it was a scene of Peter and Gwen on a romantic date, including them swinging around a lamppost. The beginning of this is in the movie, and plays as an homage to the ĎCan you read my mindí sequence in 1978ís Superman.

Was there more with the SWAT Lizards? It's such an odd choice to turn a SWAT team into monsters... and then never go back to them. Could an earlier version of the script have Spider-Man get injured fighting them before his final battle? In the film Spider-Man takes a bullet from a cop with a hearing problem, which doesn't play as dramatically.

Thereís evidence in the trailers that the dinner with the Stacy family was longer, and that in particular Captain Stacy asks Peter about his father. The addition of this might have helped the scene feel more natural as Peter gets defensive about his dad; instead the dinner conversation goes from zero to arguing in no time flat. Also cut was the 'intimidating doorman' scene leading into that sequence. This scene was posted online and sucked, so no great loss.

What was a great loss was the the POV swinging scenes. The Comic-Con 2011 footage and the first trailer included a lengthy bit of POV web-slinging that was cut to shreds in the movie. This is the most baffling change in the whole film. I suspect it was done for pacing, but in IMAX and 3D this should have been big time money shot stuff.

It seems to me obvious that The Amazing Spider-Man got a huge last minute recut. Marketing was still using concepts and imagery related to a completely deleted storyline - the ĎUntold Storyí - as recently as May. This fits in with rumors I heard that a spring screening for Sony execs went poorly and changes were made. Excising the ĎUntold Storyí seems to have been the brunt of that change.

I doubt weíll see much of that stuff on home video release. The studio will decide how much they want to follow up on this stuff as they move into the sequel; if they do want to follow up on it the footage will remain hidden so as to not contradict anything in upcoming movies. If they donít want to follow up theyíll just hide the footage away for a decade or two.


Was The Untold Story Cut From THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN? (http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/)


that's the stuff I'm talking about. i know when I watched the movie I was confused by some scenes. i wonder who ordered that? This is Webb's 2nd movie. I don't think he has much to argue with..but if it was him. Why? And it was the studio? Why the cuts? Make it shorter? Preferred pacing?

kgrogers1979
07-08-12, 01:50 PM
Honestly...I think kgrogers and Dragon Tattoo are the worst to post in here.

:sad:

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 01:57 PM
I love your knowledge but..ya got to let the film stand on it's own, bro.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 02:52 PM
eh...that's kind of a weak thought logic there, though valid to mention. They rebooted. Fine. This one seems to be doing fine. Seems to head in good direction by the end. And seems like they want to head that way cuz they're letting them do stuff that Raimi's never did or wasn't allowed to do. Maybe this new "TDK aftermath" we have now is good. I dunno. At least in the influence in how much you can push the storytelling situation, quality aside.

How is my logic weak but valid? Mutha Fucka...

It may all seem to be headed in a fine direction but things change. Neither of us ultimately know whether things will go down the good path or not but I'd love to be proven wrong and have this Spidey series be one of substance.

Dragon Tattoo
07-08-12, 03:01 PM
you know..you talk about him bitching but as weak grounded as his reasoning was..it's a valid question. Also..you bitch a lot too. you're practically known for it now. calm down and get over whatever the hell you need to get over.


It was not a valid question. Did you even read it? Did you understand it? It didn't have thirty ellipses and wander off point several times in broken English so that may be the problem.

Needless to say, asking if this series will need a reboot again before the end is a completely asinine question, as Sony has throttled these actors and Webb with much stricter, longer-term contracts than they did with Raimi and the suck squad.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 03:20 PM
It was not a valid question. Did you even read it? Did you understand it? It didn't have thirty ellipses and wander off point several times in broken English so that may be the problem.

Needless to say, asking if this series will need a reboot again before the end is a completely asinine question, as Sony has throttled these actors and Webb with much stricter, longer-term contracts than they did with Raimi and the suck squad.

My question was completely facetious. -screwy- It was poking fun at the fact that they only rebooted after ten years. You can just win though, okay? It's exhausting talking to you. Congrats.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 03:25 PM
It was not a valid question. Did you even read it? Did you understand it? It didn't have thirty ellipses and wander off point several times in broken English so that may be the problem.

Needless to say, asking if this series will need a reboot again before the end is a completely asinine question, as Sony has throttled these actors and Webb with much stricter, longer-term contracts than they did with Raimi and the suck squad.

See what I mean? So sensitive.

And it is a valid question, joke or not. How is he supposed to know all the details of the contracts and such? it's a bit weak in grounding, cuz we've all this wonderful feelings of ASM's existence, but it's valid. I wanted to answer it in some form, joke or not.

you take this too serious. It's a fucking movie. This is almost like the Prometheus thread. We've come across near, if not exceeding the, levels of emotional response here.

we've got you getting all sensitive. kgrogers trying to back this and that up in the film w/ the comics. It's getting kind of crazy here.

Mike86
07-08-12, 03:40 PM
My question was completely facetious. -screwy- It was poking fun at the fact that they only rebooted after ten years. You can just win though, okay? It's exhausting talking to you. Congrats.
:lol: True that.

Dragon Tattoo
07-08-12, 03:56 PM
My question was completely facetious. -screwy- It was poking fun at the fact that they only rebooted after ten years. You can just win though, okay? It's exhausting talking to you. Congrats.

That was my fucking point. Jesus Christ. Did you seriously not understand that I was just pointing that out how ridiculous it was that Snake had the audacity to claim you may have had some sort of point?

You were clearly just bagging on a movie you hadn't seen. Congratulations. Most of us got it.


you take this too serious. It's a fucking movie. This is almost like the Prometheus thread. We've come across near, if not exceeding the, levels of emotional response here.

we've got you getting all sensitive. kgrogers trying to back this and that up in the film w/ the comics. It's getting kind of crazy here.

No, apparently you take it too seriously, treating jokes and clear slams against a movie that someone hasn't seen as some legitimate form of critique.

Either that or you're backpeddaling now that you've found out that it was just an offhand remark and not some genuine inquiry as to the possibility of a reboot after 3 more films.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 04:02 PM
Congratulations. I got it.

Yay!:clap:

The Cow
07-08-12, 04:09 PM
You were clearly just bagging on a movie you hadn't seen.

You, of all people, are going there? rotfl

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 04:10 PM
That was my fucking point. Jesus Christ. Did you seriously not understand that I was just pointing that out how ridiculous it was that Snake had the audacity to claim you may have had some sort of point?

You were clearly just bagging on a movie you hadn't seen. Congratulations. Most of us got it.



No, apparently you take it too seriously, treating jokes and clear slams against a movie that someone hasn't seen as some legitimate form of critique.

Either that or you're backpeddaling now that you've found out that it was just an offhand remark and not some genuine inquiry as to the possibility of a reboot after 3 more films.

no. I answered it, joke or not. Cuz well..this is the internet. People are obviously weird. obviously.

Dragon Tattoo
07-08-12, 04:17 PM
You, of all people, are going there? rotfl

Oh no, cause I bagged on the fucking stripper movie and Battleshit. Oh noeees.

Yeah, keep raping that dead horse. :lol:

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 04:19 PM
I'm not bagging on the movie itself, Dragon Tattoo. I'm bagging on the fact that the trailers look like shit and the ridiculous nature of a reboot ten years in. I'm bagging on the fact that a lot of people who like it that are posting on here have the need to bag on Raimi's movies in their praise for ASM. Just praise the movie. If it is very good, shouldn't that be enough. It should be able to stand on its own two feet without having to drag Raimi through the grinder. Did you notice these are not actual critiques on the movie itself?

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 04:21 PM
Praise is a little bit too heavy. i would say that we like it more. It ain't that great to praise though.

also..where the fuck is devilshalo?! I want to know what the differences were from his viewing.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 04:22 PM
I also have no illusions that you will treat what I just said like a level headed adult.

Dragon Tattoo
07-08-12, 04:25 PM
I'm bagging on the fact that a lot of people who like it that are posting on here have the need to bag on Raimi's movies in their praise for ASM. Just praise the movie. If it is very good, shouldn't that be enough.

No. Because we have people like you or Tom Creo (who has outright stated that he will never see this movie and yet, keeps coming into these threads) who have been coming into this thread and the other main SM thread since the beginning just to repeatedly antagonize people who have the audacity to like this movie, or even give it a chance.

I also have no illusions that you will treat what I just said like a level headed adult.

Nor I, you. If you were a level-headed adult, you'd probably have left after the fifteenth bad joke about a movie you haven't seen. Even I eventually left the Battleship and Magic Mike fans to their devices.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 04:30 PM
Praise is a little bit too heavy. i would say that we like it more. It ain't that great to praise though.

Don't take it so literally, man. Praise, like, whatever. It would be great to hear positive comments on the new movie without all the bickering on Raimi and especially the downright disdain from certain people.

Jules Winfield
07-08-12, 04:36 PM
No. Because we have people like you or Tom Creo (who has outright stated that he will never see this movie and yet, keeps coming into these threads) who have been coming into this thread and the other main SM thread since the beginning just to repeatedly antagonize people who have the audacity to like this movie, or even give it a chance.



Nor I, you. If you were a level-headed adult, you'd probably have left after the fifteenth bad joke about a movie you haven't seen. Even I eventually left the Battleship and Magic Mike fans to their devices.

Go back and read my posts. I've only stated my dislikes about the new Spiderman movie from what I've seen. Now, go to the who's the better Parker thread. Someone responded an opinion different from yours. It looks like you were the one being antagonistic.

Ranger
07-08-12, 05:14 PM
Just saw it today. I liked it, 3/4 stars, but I still liked Raimi's Spider-man 1 (and 2).

Webb did a good job bringing a new Spider-man to us, it felt more adult and serious to me. While it seemed like Raimi was going for a more classic comic feel. I definitely agree the first half was a bit slow, but the second half was solid and the action scenes were really great. Post cred scene was great, too.

Hokeyboy
07-08-12, 05:51 PM
Saw it. Really liked it :up: It's not a superlative picture but it's a solidly fun comic book movie with more on its mind than epic mindless idiocy. Pacing was a little wonky and it could have used some more judicious editing (there was some noticeable choppiness), but overall it worked well. Below Spider-Man 2, but above Spider-Man and FAR above Spider-Man 3.

And Emma Stone is a knockout. It's not so much her looks -- which are quite fine, don't get me wrong -- but something about the way she carries herself, the way she projects with her eyes, the expressiveness of her face, she's the real freakin' deal. And I'm old enough to be her Dad. CHRIST...

Spiderbite
07-08-12, 05:54 PM
And Emma Stone is a knockout. It's not so much her looks -- which are quite fine, don't get me wrong -- but something about the way she carries herself, the way she projects with her eyes, the expressiveness of her face, she's the real freakin' deal. And I'm old enough to be her Dad. CHRIST...

She can't help but project with her eyes. She looks like a real life anime character. Her eyes are at least twice the size of a normal human.

Solid Snake
07-08-12, 07:11 PM
Yeah, she's cute. But those eyes stand out in weird way. They just catch your attention.

StephenX
07-08-12, 08:44 PM
Saw it. Really liked it :up: It's not a superlative picture but it's a solidly fun comic book movie with more on its mind than epic mindless idiocy. Pacing was a little wonky and it could have used some more judicious editing (there was some noticeable choppiness), but overall it worked well. Below Spider-Man 2, but above Spider-Man and FAR above Spider-Man 3.

And Emma Stone is a knockout. It's not so much her looks -- which are quite fine, don't get me wrong -- but something about the way she carries herself, the way she projects with her eyes, the expressiveness of her face, she's the real freakin' deal. And I'm old enough to be her Dad. CHRIST...

Regarding Emma Stone, a lot of it is screen presence and charisma. If you've seen her in Zombieland, Easy A, or hell, even Superbad...she is very sharp and charismatic. And she's perty.

Giantrobo
07-08-12, 10:32 PM
Saw it today and it didn't do much for me. It was decent, but nothing made me really care. Oh well.

Daytripper
07-09-12, 12:14 AM
Saw it today and it didn't do much for me. It was decent, but nothing made me really care. Oh well.

Felt the same way. There were so many ridiculous and dumb scenes. Parker walking into Oscorp for the first time to see Dr. Connors, and the receptionist pointing him to all of the intern badges. Not asking him for his personal I.D. Then later, Parker walking around in this high security facility on his own. Where are the security cameras!? I also loved how Gwen (who is also an intern there) knows the code to evacuate the building. Other WTF scenes, when Dr. Connors turns from a lizard into man again in the sewers. Where did he get that blanket when he walks out? And how about his lab in those sewers (!?) When and how did he set that up? All of the computer equipment, etc. And this lab was right next to the water and waste in the sewers? No wall??

movieguru
07-09-12, 12:29 AM
The difference I see is that films like Fantastic Four and DareDevil weren't that great to begin with so to me if they want to reboot them it's fine. Spider-Man seems different to me as at least the first two movies were decent so a reboot wasn't totally necessary in my mind and they could have just recast the parts and carried on with a sequel or whatever. I'll still see this either way and don't think it looks that bad I just wish they would have not gone the reboot route.

The first 2 Superman films were great as well. They recasted the parts and carried on with a sequel and look what happened there.

majorjoe23
07-09-12, 08:17 AM
. Other WTF scenes, when Dr. Connors turns from a lizard into man again in the sewers. Where did he get that blanket when he walks out?

Youve never heard of sewer blankets? They're everywhere! Try spending some time in the sewer before throwing out ridiculous criticisms like this!

While watching, I probably spent too much time thinking that floating in poop water couldn't be good for Peter's chest scratches. And that Capt. Stacey probably should have been able to smell him.

But I did enjoy the movie, despite the filmmakers seemingly not knowing how poo works.

RocShemp
07-09-12, 08:23 AM
I finally saw this yesterday and enjoyed it a great deal. I do hope the BD features an extended cut since the stuff folk her mentioned had been cut seems pretty important.

I read over at Blu-ray.com that the mystery man at the end was portrayed by Michael Massee (Funboy from The Crow) and he actually appears earlier in the film in the background while Peter and the Lizard are fighting in the High School.

By the way, who was the cute girl with the glasses? The one Flash accidentally knocked paint over her banner. Was she supposed to be this movie's equivalent of Betty Brant?

EDIT: Nevermind. I checked over at Wikipedia. The character is called Missy Kallenback and she's portrayed by Hannah Marks.

mphtrilogy
07-09-12, 01:23 PM
I liked it a lot, and thought it was pretty close to Sam R's version 1.0

Nice job, and would see it again. Well worth the watch if you are a Spidey fan.. and the 3d was nicely used.

devilshalo
07-09-12, 02:34 PM
like I said, I'm waiting on devilshalo to give us the rundown cuz I honestly feel like stuff was cut and it affected the film's overall quality in plot.

The article with some of the rundowns of what was omitted it pretty spot on. Some of it is hard to remember from a screening last November.

With Peter finding Uncle Ben's killer.. there's a scene cut where he goes thru more perps and he stops himself cuz he's getting a bit reckless and angry. So he takes the police sketch and puts it away for the time being and decides to use his powers to help people rather then for revenge. I guess seeing it at the end of the film is supposed to tell you that he's still looking.

The scene with Connor's blackboard felt more effective than just Peter handing over the notepad with the algorithm. And it dealt more with he and Connors talking about his parents.

Ratha's death. And I don't ever recall anyone calling him by name. He figures out where Connor's is hiding out. He's stealing shit for his lab, man! And he actually shoots Connors, but then the Dr. turns into the Lizard and kills him by biting his head off (well, it is implied) with no pay off to the earlier scene with Connors and Ratha talking about if the serum didn't work, "Osborn would have both our heads."

They obviously cut down on the first person stuff. And they cut down the carjacker getting webbed up (Parker goes on and almost runs out of fluid.) reminded me of the scene in Raimi's original that had Peter trying to shoot his web with a bunch of different hand postures.

I have to go back to the script to remember everything that was changed/omitted.

madcougar
07-09-12, 03:28 PM
Gave it 3 1/2 stars. If this was the first Spiderman movie ever, I would have crapped my pants. But it comes on the heels of 1 and 2, which in my opinion where much better movies. Thought the Lizzard looked lame and his entire motivation was SUPER lame (but not as lame as Eric Foreman as Venom!). The new leads didn't do anything for me either.

TGM
07-09-12, 04:05 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7xqvBqfaQwE?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

nando820
07-09-12, 04:40 PM
Saw it. Really liked it :up: It's not a superlative picture but it's a solidly fun comic book movie with more on its mind than epic mindless idiocy. Pacing was a little wonky and it could have used some more judicious editing (there was some noticeable choppiness), but overall it worked well. Below Spider-Man 2, but above Spider-Man and FAR above Spider-Man 3.

And Emma Stone is a knockout. It's not so much her looks -- which are quite fine, don't get me wrong -- but something about the way she carries herself, the way she projects with her eyes, the expressiveness of her face, she's the real freakin' deal. And I'm old enough to be her Dad. CHRIST...

ditto :D saw it this wknd and was pretty impressed but there was a a few minutes here and there that could have been cut. Now the weight its on the sequel cause it be hard to surpass Raimi's Spidey 2...

IstvanTheHun
07-09-12, 05:00 PM
Pretty disappointing stuff.

James Garfield is a douchebag, and I prefer Tobey Maguire's nerdy Peter Parker over the Coldplay-skateboarding Garfield douchey Peter Parker.

The script is very weak - they try to forge a new story and then just as quickly abandon it. Many plotpoints remain unexplained, and there are way too many contrivances, coincidences, and plotholes.

Even worse, the film is not exciting or awe-inspiring in any way, shape, or form. it is rather dull and lifeless. the villain has no compelling motivation or any true sense of impending doom, he just becomes a monster and turns cars over and then wants to use a very conveniently placed weapon - it all just happens too quickly without any logical progression. poor writing indeed.

and Marc Webb simply does not supply the film with a unique vision; his earnest attempts at developing relationships are just futile.

one of the most unimpressive Marvel films in a while. I would have much preferred to see Sam Raimi redeem himself with a Spidey 4 that kicked some butt....
or...have Disney buy the Spidey rights, and do the reboot as a new connection to The Avengers continuity...have Spidey exist in the same universe. If they did that, and the same with the FF...we could have a Secret Wars trilogy with Spidey getting the black suit and all that jazz. Now that would be awesome. but not this crap.

Solid Snake
07-09-12, 05:05 PM
Secret Wars would be the biggest clusterfuck ever. And no to that. That's asking too much from anyone.

IstvanTheHun
07-09-12, 05:28 PM
Secret Wars would be the biggest clusterfuck ever. And no to that. That's asking too much from anyone.

no way, I would kill to see that.

Make an Avengers trilogy, throw out a couple more Iron Man, Thor, Captain sequels... reboot Spidey and the FF, each with a trilogy perhaps (have Daredevil and the Punisher appear in a spidey sequel), and then about 10 years down the road, end it all with an epic Secret Wars, with the Beyonder and Dr. Doom.

I think this could work, and bring together all the main characters into one universe (with exception of the X-men...but that is an option too).

I think an FF reboot, where Tony Stark and Fury are part of their initial voyage into space would be..... fantastic!! lol

Dragon Tattoo
07-09-12, 06:28 PM
no way, I would kill to see that.

Make an Avengers trilogy, throw out a couple more Iron Man, Thor, Captain sequels... reboot Spidey and the FF, each with a trilogy perhaps (have Daredevil and the Punisher appear in a spidey sequel), and then about 10 years down the road, end it all with an epic Secret Wars, with the Beyonder and Dr. Doom.

I think this could work, and bring together all the main characters into one universe (with exception of the X-men...but that is an option too).

I think an FF reboot, where Tony Stark and Fury are part of their initial voyage into space would be..... fantastic!! lol

And this is why fanboys are not allowed to make movies.

Solid Snake
07-09-12, 06:36 PM
And this is why fanboys are not allowed to make movies.

I wouldn't go that far. But fanboys w/o an understanding of the film industry shouldn't make movies would be more proper of statement.

IstvanTheHun
07-09-12, 06:37 PM
And this is why fanboys are not allowed to make movies.

nice condescending douchebag tone.


before you jump to conclusions about fanboys making movies... think about who makes good genre movies and who does not. Marc Webb is probably not a fan, and his movie is pretty lame. Raimi is a huge fan. Tim Burton was a Batman fanboy.

If a fanboy had made the Star Wars prequels, they probably would not have been as horrendous as they were.

your comment has no merit and reeks of pretentious ignorance (yes you've achieved a new level of oxymoronism). I've worked in the film industy, i've made my own films...not one of them even remotely having to do with a fanboy project. So when I see these films, and see how poorly they are written, and what a lack of vision they have as far longer term story arcs for franchises...I can be inspired with excellent ideas on how to improve, without having to be "a fanboy". And yes... I did read all the classic Marvel comics. And there's the rub.

IstvanTheHun
07-09-12, 06:42 PM
I wouldn't go that far. But fanboys w/o an understanding of the film industry shouldn't make movies would be more proper of statement.

and posters w/o knowledge of who here is in the film industry and who is not would be more proper also.

I still think "fanboys" have a better grasp of these genre stories than many veteran screenwriters and directors.

Dragon Tattoo
07-09-12, 06:44 PM
before you jump to conclusions about fanboys making movies... think about who makes good genre movies and who does not. Marc Webb is probably not a fan. Raimi is a huge fan. Tim Burton was a Batman fanboy.


Thanks for proving my argument.

RocShemp
07-09-12, 06:50 PM
Tim Burton was a Batman fanboy.

Burton pissed all over Batman. They're good Burton movies but terrible Batman movies.