PDA

View Full Version : The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)



ManBurning
02-07-2012, 03:13 AM
Surprisied to not see a spider-man thread yet...

Anyway, the new trailer hit the 'net tonight.
I don't think it looks half bad. This whole trailer looks better then the whole Sam Raimi Trilogy already.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTxGlb0JVP4

AgentofChaos
02-07-2012, 07:20 AM
There was a lot to like in that trailer. I'm legitimately excited. The spidey costumer looks bad ass.

I worry however that the Lizard is going to be this bland cgi monster rather than the unique and cool villain he could be. There were points where it looked like they got it down pat, and others where it looked so generic and boring.

I also am disapointed by the lack of JJJ, but I guess the character hasn't come into this timeline yet.

burn.
02-07-2012, 11:22 AM
The trailer is amazing, but I'm afraid on how the Lizard will turn out.

Lizard concept (http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news/28117/The_Amazing_Spider_Man_The_Lizard_Revealed_Concept _Art_1322679075.jpg)

Reminds me of this: http://moviebuzzers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/super-mario-movie-goomba.jpg

dlb
02-07-2012, 11:29 AM
that resemblance came to my mind too. but those two leaked trailer screenshots of the Lizard that have been going around the internet for some time now make him look very cool. Maybe he will change throughout the film and become even more reptilian as the movie progresses. the trailer looks anyway!

bobbie solo
02-07-2012, 12:01 PM
meh. wont support this. should have just made a 4th movie in the series with a new cast, not yet another reboot.

ManBurning
02-07-2012, 12:43 PM
meh. wont support this. should have just made a 4th movie in the series with a new cast, not yet another reboot.

I wouldn't even completly consider it a direct reboot though. It's more of a "new tale" in Spider-man's legacy. The story doesn't resemble anything at all like the original Sam Rami flick. Sure, they are re-telling his orgin, but you can tell it's more mature and sophisticated. Not all colourful and goofy and cartoony like the first one. And it's not like they are doing a carbon copy of the same story, we have the introduction to the Lizard and all.

This has potential to kick all kinds of ass.
My only grief is what's already been pointed out, the look of the Lizard. But, they've never been one to get the villians down-pat in the franchaise. With the exception of Doctor Octopus, I think they did a good job with him.

thevoid99
02-07-2012, 01:08 PM
OK, this might actually be better than that last one. Sam Raimi owes me $7 for that shit.

wight rabbit
02-07-2012, 01:45 PM
should have just made a 4th movie in the series with a new cast, not yet another reboot.

Why would you want the movies continued with a new cast? Did you see what happened when Schumacher took over Burton's Batman series (not to say that Burton's films were amazing, or anything)?


OK, this might actually be better than that last one. Sam Raimi owes me $7 for that shit.

Blame Sony for that one. Raimi wanted to make up for how terrible 3 was by spending more time on 4, but they wanted a product sooner than he wanted.

Wretchedest
02-07-2012, 02:32 PM
I think it looks a little bit better. Not as hoakey and we get some more of that spiderman snark that I like from the comics. It would be difficult to do them as badly as Raimi.

also a litt OT but I've always figured the schumacher Batmans for practically a different series than the burton batmans...

spahn
02-07-2012, 02:32 PM
the new trailer is EPIC WIN! Being a huge spider-man nerd, I am more excited for this film now that the trailer came out. They seem to be doing a really good job with all characters and Andrew Garfield looks to be a convincing Peter Parker, which was my biggest worry. July 3rd seems so far away.

october_midnight
02-07-2012, 03:04 PM
Looks like it'll have some viral stuff too, via the URL near the end of the trailer: http://markofthespider-man.com/

Self.Destructive.Pattern
02-07-2012, 05:04 PM
I wouldn't even completly consider it a direct reboot though. It's more of a "new tale" in Spider-man's legacy. The story doesn't resemble anything at all like the original Sam Rami flick. Sure, they are re-telling his orgin, but you can tell it's more mature and sophisticated. Not all colourful and goofy and cartoony like the first one. And it's not like they are doing a carbon copy of the same story, we have the introduction to the Lizard and all.

This has potential to kick all kinds of ass.
My only grief is what's already been pointed out, the look of the Lizard. But, they've never been one to get the villians down-pat in the franchaise. With the exception of Doctor Octopus, I think they did a good job with him.

I agree with all of this. Seems like Spidey has a new swag in this movie, and a more accurate one. I think Andrew Garfield fits the role a lot better than Toby Maguire from what I am seeing so far. Don't get me wrong, I loved the first two Spider-Man films. But this seems a lot more promising.

Wretchedest
02-07-2012, 05:55 PM
The onbe thing this trailer has me skeptical about I guess is the relationship between connors and parker. it seems like they just paint him as an asshole from the get go, but iirc in the comics he's more of a reluctant villain... a jekyll/hyde type? which is far more interesting. Of course, not expecting much, but do hope they get the action done in some entertaining way.

OVerall it looks surprisingly similar plotwise to the original.

GoodSoldier333
02-07-2012, 07:14 PM
Extremely meh.

Highly Psychological
02-08-2012, 02:19 AM
That X Men reboot last year, it was a good film, good cast, but it kind of felt pointless at the same time. Had seen it all done before, the new ideas were too late, its noble to try and succeed in improving a decaying series but i just got a case of serious deja vu and im sitting there thinking this is good and has everything going for it, but why dont i care about this very much anymore?
Why does this not excite me anymore? It did not seem fresh, original or new, im thinking this is better but i dont really care??? it was not different enough to warrant a reboot, I cant put my finger on it, i expect to be getting the same vibe with this...... the first X Men by Bryan Singer was far better than Spiderman ever was but still.....
Does this really need reboot, im sure its probably better than the Spiderman 3 and more serious and subtle, but like the X Men reboot from last year it does not seem radically different enough to get overly excited about. Batman Begins on the other hand felt very, very different from Batman and Robin and it felt like there had been a sufficient gap between the two.

Apart from the groundbreaking special effects , I never really liked the Spiderman series, infact the first one from 2002 is really, really bad, the second one had a brilliant villan but I never liked Tobey Maguire, the whole series felt very safe and boring, so it may be interesting to get a darker, less commercial, uncompromising, more experimental approach to the series too.

Hazekiah
02-08-2012, 03:01 AM
Sony was due to lose the license and let it revert back to Marvel if they didn't do SOMETHING soon, and they waited a good, long while after the third film, as far as I'm concerned.

They only get to do a few more before Marvel gets Spidey back anyway, so whatever...let 'em have their fun and make their money, it certainly looks like a different enough and kick-ass approach, so it's a WIN/WIN, really.

And Connors looks like a quiet old guy who takes his missing lab partner's son under his wing, as it were, after he gets tracked down. How is that "an asshole from the beginning," exactly?

Likewise, just like any other trailer, the effects work is rushed and incomplete. Give 'em some time for the Lizard, he seems to be coming along fine. At the worst, he appears to be almost identical to the classic design...so no real problems there, ultimately.

:)

kdrcraig
02-08-2012, 07:05 AM
The trailer's cool I guess, not cool enough to get me to spend 15 bucks at the theater to see this. I like Spider-Man well enough but I'm just failing to get excited for this at all.

nvr_mind
02-08-2012, 10:33 AM
How can you not be excited? This looks sooo much better than Sam Raimi's cheesy ass movies. I'm looking forward to it and I never really cared for Spider Man in the first place.

emptydesk
02-08-2012, 10:41 AM
it's spider-man, it's supposed to be campy. raimi's first movie hit the tone perfectly. this is not a franchise meant to be remotely gritty and dark. this isn't batman.

october_midnight
02-08-2012, 10:48 AM
it's spider-man, it's supposed to be campy. raimi's first movie hit the tone perfectly. this is not a franchise meant to be remotely gritty and dark. this isn't batman.

So true, but you can tell that's definitely what they're trying to mimic.

Hazekiah
02-08-2012, 12:21 PM
Ah, yes, the story of an awkward kid orphaned by his parents who gets raised by his constantly imperiled and at-death's-door Aunt and the Uncle he accidentally got killed who has to fight the nice old amputee he doesn't want to hurt while chasing after his doomed-to-die first love whose father gets killed partially because of him, too.

Nope, no room for a dark approach there, straight camp ALL-THE-WAY.

-_-

Wretchedest
02-08-2012, 12:30 PM
it's spider-man, it's supposed to be campy. raimi's first movie hit the tone perfectly. this is not a franchise meant to be remotely gritty and dark. this isn't batman.

While i agree that spiderman isnt necessarily the darkest material, batman started out and was campy for decades before batman year one came along and there was something that a reader could take seriously. And that batman movies didnt stop with the campy til nolan took over...
and when you think about it... grim and gritty is kind of the new camp...

emptydesk
02-08-2012, 12:53 PM
Ah, yes, the story of an awkward kid orphaned by his parents who gets raised by his constantly imperiled and at-death's-door Aunt and the Uncle he accidentally got killed who has to fight the nice old amputee he doesn't want to hurt while chasing after his doomed-to-die first love whose father gets killed partially because of him, too.

Nope, no room for a dark approach there, straight camp ALL-THE-WAY.

-_-

you're saying this as if elements of drama and peril can't exist along with camp in a story about a teenage boy in red and blue tights, like it wasn't the point to begin with

this is how a spider-man movie should feel:

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

Hazekiah
02-08-2012, 12:57 PM
No, the point of Spider-Man was always putting the focus of the story on a KID who's constantly bogged down with SERIOUS PROBLEMS and TOUGH DECISIONS while he learns about RESPONSIBILITY. The "camp" was just the sugar to help the medicine go down.

emptydesk
02-08-2012, 01:01 PM
believe i covered that in the "exist along with" part

fincher was on sony's shortlist to direct this and he smartly turned it down

Hazekiah
02-08-2012, 01:06 PM
That balance is in all versions generally, sure. I'm just saying the first three movies leaned towards the camp a bit more and now this is leaning towards the serious a bit more. Both are valid and getting in digs at this for going too "dark" while it's clearly still pretty comical is just silly. Especially given the parts of the story it's been set-up to deal with.

And, hell, yes...just caught that edit. Erik Larsen is THE SHIT and that was a great run.

:)

Wretchedest
02-08-2012, 01:53 PM
you're saying this as if elements of drama and peril can't exist along with camp in a story about a teenage boy in red and blue tights, like it wasn't the point to begin with

this is how a spider-man movie should feel:

http://i.imgur.com/XbBtG.jpg
Like a n indistinguishable clusterfuck of sweaty manly muscle, spandex and gunpowder?

butters
02-08-2012, 02:02 PM
This movie doesn't really interest me, but a question for those familiar w/ the story.... (I'm not at all trying to troll here...) -

Was there something lacking from the actual story in the first movie that needed to be retold? I'm not familiar with the story apart from what was presented in the films, so I'm wondering, what was missing? (Again, honest question, not trolling.)

I know the rights changed hands and maybe there was a desire to reset the style for further sequels, but I'm wondering more about the story aspect of this vs. the 2002 film. Was something "wrong" in the first one?

emptydesk
02-08-2012, 02:29 PM
Like a n indistinguishable clusterfuck of sweaty manly muscle, spandex and gunpowder?

like a superhero comic book, so yes

Jinsai
02-08-2012, 03:05 PM
Why would you want the movies continued with a new cast? Did you see what happened when Schumacher took over Burton's Batman series (not to say that Burton's films were amazing, or anything)?

Tim Burton's Batman movies were amazing, especially Returns.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
02-08-2012, 03:12 PM
Tim Burton's Batman movies were amazing, especially Returns.

I second this. I think a lot of people forget about how good they were in their time because everyone is on Nolan's dick these days. Batman Forever had some moments....

Hazekiah
02-08-2012, 05:20 PM
This movie doesn't really interest me, but a question for those familiar w/ the story.... (I'm not at all trying to troll here...) -

Was there something lacking from the actual story in the first movie that needed to be retold? I'm not familiar with the story apart from what was presented in the films, so I'm wondering, what was missing? (Again, honest question, not trolling.)

I know the rights changed hands and maybe there was a desire to reset the style for further sequels, but I'm wondering more about the story aspect of this vs. the 2002 film. Was something "wrong" in the first one?The origin has been told and re-told and updated and re-vamped and retconned and whatever else in the comics so many times that it's kinda beyond right or wrong at this point, lol. You just pick and choose what characters to open up with and take it from there to tell it however you like within a general framework. The biggest departure from the classic chronology though was mainly Gwen not popping up till the 3rd film, since she was Peter's first love long before M.J. came along. So this is "correcting" that and going into some really interesting story stuff related to that which the previous trilogy never even touched upon. And making Peter have organic webshooters instead of creating his own with his budding science/inventor genius-level intellect. This is going a more classical route with that stuff, too. The Raimi trilogy also never dealt with his parents, who had a pretty interesting backstory retconned into the original run's early days and yet is still considered canon in most cases, and this looks like they plan to get into all that, too.

I don't wanna spoil too much but that's the big stuff.

Oh, and Sandman vs. Uncle Ben, of course.

Like I said, though, it's just a different approach. With the amorphous nature of comics it's kinda pointless trying to be all hardcore-purist about it.

I think it'll make a lot of that crowd very happy while surprising and hopefully impressing a lot of the people who don't know much else other than the original movies, though.

Should be interesting!

butters
02-08-2012, 05:57 PM
^^^ many thanks for that reply, concise enough for what I was looking for. The Gwen/MJ scenario makes a lot of sense, as does the backstory with his parents.

dpeters
02-08-2012, 06:30 PM
you're saying this as if elements of drama and peril can't exist along with camp in a story about a teenage boy in red and blue tights, like it wasn't the point to begin with

this is how a spider-man movie should feel:

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

I've always wondered how Freud and Jung would view each nemesis.

wight rabbit
02-10-2012, 02:08 PM
The first Batman was decent. Returns was my favorite as a kid, but watching it now sees me cringe at how cheesy the acting gets at times. Forever had potential, until it started getting campy.

...but anyway. SPIDER-MAN! He does whatever a spider can, right?

Wretchedest
02-10-2012, 03:03 PM
On another note, i hope we get an early introduction to eddy brock this time around... i actually thought they did a decent job in 3 with the eddy/peter relationship before they pronptly flushed it down the toilet.

When i was little i subscribed to spiderman just before maximum carnage started, so that portion of his legacy will always remain my favorite.

Conan The Barbarian
02-10-2012, 04:22 PM
if they make a trilogy of spider man movies that are great, I say they take a gamble and start a maximum carnage movie. hell, just jump into the fucking story.

imail724
02-11-2012, 01:45 PM
I wonder who'll they'll get to play JJJ (even if he's not in this one, he's gotta show up in the next one). IMO J.K. Simmons was perfect.

Broadbent
02-12-2012, 10:53 PM
I wonder who'll they'll get to play JJJ (even if he's not in this one, he's gotta show up in the next one). IMO J.K. Simmons was perfect.


You said it about Simmons, that guy was born to play JJJ. I can't see how they'd leave em out

theruiner
02-14-2012, 03:51 AM
And the viral marketing continues... (http://www.slashfilm.com/film-receives-package-peter-parkers-backpack-the-amazing-spiderman-viral/)

The geeks over at the Slash Film comments section already decoded the clues. I'll put spoiler tags so I don't spoil it for anyone who wants to figure it out for themselves. Basically, they figured out that the new page of the Mark of the Spiderman website is markofthespider-man.com/prepare. And then someone figured out that this new page seems to be showing what order to click the boxes on the main page of the site, though nothing happens when you do that (yet).

Self.Destructive.Pattern
05-19-2012, 11:28 PM
4 minute preview. Looks pretty dam good if you ask me.


http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man/trailers/11150746/ (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man/trailers/11150746/)

Deadpool
05-20-2012, 12:29 AM
The more I see of this movie, the more excited I get. There was a new TV spot for it tonight that aired during SNL, and I'm just loving the dynamism they're giving Spidey's web-slinging and body language. I read an interview with Marc Webb, and he dropped Mark Bagley's name as inspiration for that stuff, which made me really happy - he and Bendis did great work on Ultimate Spider-man.

Seeing the latest trailer in 3D in front of The Avengers was a thrill, too, of course. In regards to 3D, Webb also mentioned that they made a conscious decision to a.) keep Spidey's entire body within the frame when swinging, and b.) maintain longer shots of the swinging because it supports the illusion more that way. Sounds like a great, practical approach! I'm psyched for those POV sequences, too. I wasn't sure if that was going to be exclusive to that first trailer or not.

carpenoctem
05-20-2012, 10:44 AM
I saw the trailer in front of the Avengers yesterday and was surprised by how much it intrigued me. "Oh no, you found my weakness! My weakness is small knives!" I will see this one for sure whenever it comes out. Maybe not opening weekend, but not long after. It helps that Andrew Garfield is so much more likable than Tobey Maguire. And it's also very colorful and futuristic looking, it seems like it will be a real treat for the eyes.

ManBurning
06-29-2012, 09:06 PM
Only a few days left! I bought my advanced tickets today for the first screening in Vancouver. 8pm Monday evening! I havn't been this excited for a new release in the theatre in a LOOOONG time! Spider-man is my faviourte of all the superhero's, so I have high hopes for this one!

richardp
06-29-2012, 09:44 PM
I was pretty disappointed with it, not that I had HUGE expectations or anything, but I at least hoped it'd be fairly decent with Marc Webb directing.
If anyone is interested, here's my review:
http://lostinreviews.com/2012/06/review-the-amazing-spider-man/

ManBurning
06-30-2012, 04:10 AM
I was pretty disappointed with it, not that I had HUGE expectations or anything, but I at least hoped it'd be fairly decent with Marc Webb directing.
If anyone is interested, here's my review:
http://lostinreviews.com/2012/06/review-the-amazing-spider-man/

I started reading your review, But I had to stop quite early as I feel I was treading into a spoiler minefield, so I stopped. I'll probably go back and read it after I see it. I read enough where you indicated you weren't (aren't) really a Huge spider-man fan (growing up) and are more of a Batman guy. So i'm going to go ahead and still have strop hopes for this one, as I am a HUGE spider-man fan, and I actually enjoyed the 3rd movie alot. People say it's bad, but It's really not that bad, I actually really enjoyed it, so, you kind of compared this one to being no better or no worse than the original so I think i'll like this movie, as I thought the original (3) were pretty darn good superhero movies.

My final note would be, I'm more of a spider-man guy than a Batman guy. Like you said, apples to oranges.

hellospaceboy
06-30-2012, 10:32 AM
I try to keep my expectations at bay, but I can't help it, they're pretty high! The cast is great, and I like the little elements that are revealed (the web shooter instead of an organic whatever, the fact that he's actually wanted by the police, etc), I feel that they tie back to the comics nicely.

And the Lizard was one of my favorite villains, so that's a win.

Space Suicide
06-30-2012, 11:18 AM
I second this. I think a lot of people forget about how good they were in their time because everyone is on Nolan's dick these days. Batman Forever had some moments....

Agreed! I fucking love Batman and Batman Returns. Those movies rule(d)! The Penguin was so morbid in Returns, I love it.

I have zero interest in this Spider-Man reboot. Feels kinda odd for a reboot this early on, as 3 came out in 2007.

Hula
07-01-2012, 12:57 PM
I have zero interest in this Spider-Man reboot.

The great thing about cinemas is you don't actually have to go to them if you don't want to watch what they're showing.

My friends are all pretty big into Marvel and DC so I don't think I'll have any trouble finding somebody to go with the way I did with The Dark Knight. Can't wait!

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
07-02-2012, 10:00 PM
Andrew Garfield is charming and manic and better by far than soggy seat cushion Tobey Maguire (sp?). Emma Stone lights up the screen but doesn't have a whole lot to do, really, which is to be expected.

The pacing is terrible, especially at the beginning; I often wanted to punch the editor. The score was fucking atrocious, like I imagine there was a meeting near the end of the project where someone had to decide whether to go with what's there or delay this thing and miss summer box office. It's just so tone-deaf and out of sync and over the top; the score leaves the movie with no room to breathe and prods and underlines every development like Navi from Ocarina of Time in Hollywood blockbuster music form. The direction and script feel like the products of a marketing committee (though the first-person sequences—awkward and off-putting and seemingly intended only to placate 3-D audiences and probably test the waters for longer such sequences in a sequel or other movie entirely—were mercifully brief, maybe less than half a minute all together), though there were a few moments that got some genuine laughs, and the actors carried their lines better than the lines might really have deserved (well, Garfield and Stone did, anyway). The web-slinging sequences are excellent.

It was okay. I had a good time. I wasn't excited about it going in and didn't come out disappointed, but I won't be back for seconds. The second one should be a lot better (as long as they don't kill Gwen Stacy).

The Lizard's face looks like one of the goombas from the Super Mario Bros movie. The instant you recognize this you won't through the duration be able to get it out of your mind.

Wretchedest
07-02-2012, 10:37 PM
Feels kinda odd for a reboot this early on, as 3 came out in 2007.

Except 3 was the Ultimate train wreck of a movie. Rebooting was the smart thing to do, for sure.

Except that so far it sounds like this thing is lackluster all over the place.

october_midnight
07-03-2012, 12:25 AM
The Lizard's face looks like one of the goombas from the Super Mario Bros movie. The instant recognize this you won't through the duration be able to get it out of your mind.

LOL that pretty much ruined the movie before I ever see it haha...anything slightly resembling anything from SMB is reason enough to possibly avoid it.

dlb
07-03-2012, 01:42 AM
I know it's pretty hard to get a character like this right and they did a good job to let Ifans' face shine through, but at least someone must've warned the executives that it just looks like another Goomba or even Killer Croc from Batman TAS. They should really have showed some balls and alienate his appearance even more, especially his teeth. Not such a huge letdown like Venom was in Spiderman 3, but still...

ManBurning
07-03-2012, 01:59 AM
Probably going to be some light spoilers in here... read at your own risk.

Well, I enjoyed the movie for that it was. And it was better than the original Sam Raimi Cut, that's my opinion.

The overall movie had a darker more mature feel to it, and to me that's exactly what I wanted in a spider-man flick.
The original trilogy was too cartoony and too over the top. It worked for it's time, but if you try watching those movies again, you realize they are just one big cheese fest.

The new one has it's flaws as well of course, not saying it's perfect. But it's a step in the right direction. They did alot better job with the story this time around.
Just like Corvus T. Cosmonaut (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/members/647-Corvus-T-Cosmonaut) said, the pacing was TERRIBLE! They crammed way too much into the first half of the movie. Like the way Peter transitioned from human into Spider-man, was just too quick. There was no build up. No, hey whoa... why is this happening to me, and then... oh this is happening as well? It was all just way too sudden.

Also, as metioned above, the first thing that came to mind with the look of the Lizard was the Goomba from the Super Mario Bros. movie. It almost ruins it, but when I consider how bad they butchered the Green Goblin from the first movie, I'll forgive them for this as well. He was alot better of a villain than the green gobin and his power rangers suit was in the other spider-man movie.

The actors were spot on, Andrew Garfield stold the show as Peter Parker. Emma store was pretty good as Gwen as well.
There were a couple continuity errors that bothered me, like how after the big night where peter parker saved the city from the Lizard, he came home super bruised and battered to the point he had like 6 inch gashes along the side of his face, and then the next day Gwen shows up at his door and he was all clean and perfect and had no marks or cuts on him?? That was totally unbeleiveable.

So for the "hidden" end scene at the end, with Dr. Connors in his jail cell and the mysterious man shows up asking him if he told Peterthe truth about his father, any speculation on how that man is? Is he in the jail cell next to him, or is he just a visitor? I'd say if he was just a guy visiting Dr. Connors it's probably Norman Osborne. But that wouldn't make much sense, as throughout the whole movie they kept saying he was terribly ill and about to die at any point unless they found a cure for his condition... So that kind of rules him out, as he wouldn't just go for a stroll to the local prison to chat to an inmate.

Deadpool
07-03-2012, 02:44 AM
I'm too tired to read through all the other posts right now, but I just got back from a 12:01 IMAX 3D screening (once again, exclusive poster in tow), and I enjoyed the hell out of it. I thought the Lizard looked amazing, even though they didn't do the badass McFarlane "snout" version. Garfield and Stone were awesome and have great chemistry, and as expected, I loved Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben. More than anything else, it just felt really, really good to be back in the Spider-Man universe. I had a blast. Also worth mentioning that I felt more emotional watching The Amazing Spider-Man than I did watching any of the Raimi films, but then again, I'm a big softie. Though, honestly, this one really balanced the light-heartedness with the melancholy very well.

I haven't seen any of the Raimi movies in years, but (like Ebert) I'd say Webb's take is at least equal to Spider-Man 2 which I always considered my favorite of that series.

Wretchedest
07-04-2012, 10:37 AM
It was soooo meh.

They really just took the original first movie and swapped out certain characters/actors while rehashing the same tired plot.

Andrew Garfield performs well ajd the action scenes are pretty good too, but there were many kissed oppurtunities tobplease fans that they passed up. Like the stinger... they just dont know how to tease and hint like Marvel does, they cant tell a story like the batman movies do, and it doesnt know how to he all out fun like the avengers did. It tries all of those things and in the end feels very unspirited.

Kid Charlemagne
07-04-2012, 12:13 PM
I thought it was good, liked it better than Raimi's first one and third one, Spidey 2 is still the dopest, but as a whole Andrew Garfield killed it, never thought Tobey Mag was a believable or even good Peter Parker. I disagree with whoever said that the transformation was too quick. I thought they did it just fine with all the build up. I mean I would've preferred it if it were just beginning with Spidey and his powers already, but I realize they have to add some development and all that shit. Straight up though, I noticed how the film stole a huge chunk of it's plot from this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PF5HVzrG1Q
www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5XJ2UDd9T0

Wretchedest
07-04-2012, 12:29 PM
They could have easily started spiderman with his powers already. Im all about development, but it worked for the burton batmans..

REPLICA
07-05-2012, 03:11 PM
I have to agree with an earlier post that the score was a little misplaced at times. Also... The post about the lizard looking like the Goomba... I'll agree with that too.

Fixer808
07-05-2012, 04:11 PM
They could have easily started spiderman with his powers already. Im all about development, but it worked for the burton batmans..
This is a very good point. We don't need another origin story, everybody already fucking knows who and what Spiderman is! Especially considering this is following Raimi's trilogy so closely.


anything slightly resembling anything from SMB is reason enough to possibly avoid it.
I'll not tolerate any badmouthing of SMB. That movie is comedy gold.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
07-05-2012, 04:44 PM
This movie shot down a lot of my expectations. The original was wayyyy better than this garbage rehash. His transformation was way too quick for me, the cheesy ass skateboarding segment was awkward and stupid, and the way he just adapted to his powers so quickly after the subway scene just made no sense to me. Everything felt so rushed and the pacing was horrible. Garfield, Stone, and Rhys Ifans were all great in the acting department. The Spidey suit was top notch, and the webslinging and action scenes were to die for. I liked how they made Spider-Man come off as more sarcastic and it seemed they were more true to how he acts with the mask on. They could have done so much more with this, but for me it fell flat. I am going to re-watch the original and see how much more ass it really did kick. Nothing will top Spider-Man 2.

wight rabbit
07-06-2012, 03:29 PM
This movie shot down a lot of my expectations. The original was wayyyy better than this garbage rehash. His transformation was way too quick for me, the cheesy ass skateboarding segment was awkward and stupid, and the way he just adapted to his powers so quickly after the subway scene just made no sense to me. Everything felt so rushed and the pacing was horrible. Garfield, Stone, and Rhys Ifans were all great in the acting department. The Spidey suit was top notch, and the webslinging and action scenes were to die for. I liked how they made Spider-Man come off as more sarcastic and it seemed they were more true to how he acts with the mask on. They could have done so much more with this, but for me it fell flat. I am going to re-watch the original and see how much more ass it really did kick. Nothing will top Spider-Man 2.

It amuses me that people keep talking about how quick the transformation was when a lot of those people complained about seeing all that over again. Raimi's movies were fine, but this is from the same guy that did the Evil Dead series, so, of course, they're going to be more on the tongue-in-cheek, cartoony side. That being said... Webb took the character and put him into a more realistic realm, but not taking it as far as Nolan does. I think it's a good balance and I'm definitely looking forward to future films in this series.

Also: for those of you still complaining about how soon the series got a reboot, realize that comic book characters typically have multiple interpretations from different story tellers. A new film series is no different than a new comic series featuring the web-slinger.

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
07-06-2012, 04:50 PM
Why does Raimi's involvement necessarily entail tongue-in-cheek cartoonishness? You know he's made movies other than Evil Dead, right?

wight rabbit
07-06-2012, 05:55 PM
Why does Raimi's involvement necessarily entail tongue-in-cheek cartoonishness? You know he's made movies other than Evil Dead, right?

I am aware. I guess I can't explain it any more than I did... I just feel like Raimi added a bunch of silliness to his series; one particular scene that comes to mind is Peter figuring out what hand gesture shoots the organic web. I'm not saying I hate the films at all, I just feel that Webb is taking it a little more serious while maintaining the type of humor presented in the comics. That's just me...

ManBurning
07-06-2012, 08:49 PM
Why does Raimi's involvement necessarily entail tongue-in-cheek cartoonishness? You know he's made movies other than Evil Dead, right?

WATCH THIS. Then maybe you will agree just how cartoony, lame and cheesy Sam Raimi's trilogy was

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fio8x-G_tvM

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
07-07-2012, 07:21 AM
I wasn't saying his Spider-Man movies were not cartoonish, I was challenging Triggermine's implication that Raimi's involvement means of course a project must be cartoonish.

hellospaceboy
07-07-2012, 07:23 AM
I really enjoyed the new Spider-Man movie!

My only problem was with the Lizard's final plan, which was very cheap and didn't make much sense. This is the kind of thing that people who never read comic books think comic book villains do.

But I can get over it. Everything else clicked for me, the cast was dead on, the visuals were great, and the Lizard was surprisingly frightening (especially during fight scenes).

My 2 cents on the reboot thing: Spider-Man -even in the comics- tend to lose it's charm once he's a grown up. Trust me, it's not much fun seeing the guy get married and have kids. He's someone who works the best as a young adult. The cast of the original Raimi films were getting too old for the roles. And the creative juice was running out by Spider-Man 3...

hellospaceboy
07-07-2012, 07:59 AM
WATCH THIS. Then maybe you will agree just how cartoony, lame and cheesy Sam Raimi's trilogy was

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fio8x-G_tvM

This video sucked. Most of the issues it brought up are completely non-issues, like the American flag, Doc-Oc's arms, the extras in Spider-Man 2... The effects in the first movie are just dated, but were great at the time. Willem Defoe rocked the Green Goblin. Etc.

Hazekiah
07-07-2012, 08:29 AM
Pardon the intrusion here, I've only skimmed the thread since I haven't had a chance to catch the new movie yet and don't wanna catch too many spoilers, but THIS caught my eye and demanded attention:


Why does Raimi's involvement necessarily entail tongue-in-cheek cartoonishness? You know he's made movies other than Evil Dead, right?

You mean like Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness, Darkman, and Drag Me to Hell?

I mean, I know he's done a lot of other stuff. And I haven't seen most of it so I can't really comment on that...but THIS is what he's best known for by the public and, well, COME ON.

Tongue-in-cheek and cartoony to the EXTREME.

And don't even get me started on TV shit he's produced like "Hercules," "Xena: Warrior Princess," "Legend of the Seeker," etc.

OUCH.

Is that ALL he does?

No.

But tongue-in-cheek and cartoony is a pretty good bet at this point.

:-\

owinn
07-07-2012, 02:19 PM
Pardon the intrusion here, I've only skimmed the thread since I haven't had a chance to catch the new movie yet and don't wanna catch too many spoilers, but THIS caught my eye and demanded attention:



You mean like Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness, Darkman, and Drag Me to Hell?

I mean, I know he's done a lot of other stuff. And I haven't seen most of it so I can't really comment on that...but THIS is what he's best known for by the public and, well, COME ON.

Tongue-in-cheek and cartoony to the EXTREME.

And don't even get me started on TV shit he's produced like "Hercules," "Xena: Warrior Princess," "Legend of the Seeker," etc.

OUCH.

Is that ALL he does?

No.

But tongue-in-cheek and cartoony is a pretty good bet at this point.

:-\

Sam Raimi can do ANYTHING - he's a fucking super hero himself and Spiderman 2 was fantastic. To further the argument, here's a clip from A Simple Plan

http://youtu.be/tjYSxlqLOew

To keep on topic - I'm prepared to be disappointed, but I hear Dennis Leary is actually pretty good in this too, is that right?

ManBurning
07-08-2012, 04:13 AM
To keep on topic - I'm prepared to be disappointed, but I hear Dennis Leary is actually pretty good in this too, is that right?

Dennis Leary did quite well. But then again, he was playing an asshole type charachter, and those are the roles Leary is know for, so it worked.

But EVERYONE did an amazing job at the acting. Especially Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield. Garfield just nailed the Peter Parker role down to a "T".
Overall, the acting is spectacular, the effects are good, but it doesn't bring anything new to the table (well, asside from the tiny backstory about Peters parents), and I think that's the movie's downfall. I have been hearing such good things about the acting and effects and writing and directing, but what I think people are dissappointed and shunning it about is the fact it's the same old Origin story about how he became Spider-man that people are bored to death of.

That's the only negaitve thing to be said about this film. While watching it, it's almost like you alreadyknow everything that is going to happen. There are little to no elements of surprise. I like the reboot way better than the original for it's darker and more serious tone, but I think it's gaining negative public opinion for being almost a carbon copy to Sam Raimi's first movie.

I'll admi, the movie didn't blow me away after watching it. I wasn't on the edge of my seat for any of it, I wasn't wondering how it was going to end or what was coming next. It was a pretty bland movie going experience when it was all said and done. I enjoyed the movie, but it could have been ALOT better if they did a whole new story ark rather then rebooting it from the start.

What I am extremely concenred about though is for the SEQUEL.. I'm hearing rumors of the villian and continuation and it's more ho-hum yawnary if you ask me...
So apparently for the sequel we are getting none other than... *drum roll*... out good friend the Green Gobiln. Can you say waste of film space? Seriously, it's already been done! It's going to be another Sam Raimi Rehash if they take that route. I understand what Marc Webb is trying to do, but he needs to be a little more original. They are going for the Death Of Gwen Stacey story arc here. Green Goblin will come in next and kill her... Now whether they are going to be doing that in the next movie, or over the course of 2 more movies, it is unknown... but something tells me the next movie is gonna be boring as well if they do more Green Goblin. I'd like to see someone new again... Rhino, Electro, Maybe even Vulture (as lame as he kind of is). I'd really, really like the Maximum Carnage story Arc to commence, but that will NEVER happen.

Space Suicide
07-08-2012, 11:02 AM
A sequel with this film reboot? What a surprise, gotta milk everything to death for as much as it's worth. Consider me uninterested, just like I am with this first film of this reboot. They're trying so hard to make it a serious Spider-Man, trying to cash in on success of Nolan's Batman in the same vain.

I only ever really liked the first Spider-Man film from 2002. Never bothered to watch 2 and what they did with Venom and Eddie Brock in 3 turned me off so much I couldn't be asked. Venom is one of my favorite comic book characters of all time and they made him....entirely wrong in 3.

henryeatscereal
07-08-2012, 11:31 AM
Just like Space Suicide said, the other movies ruined Spidey for us (specially part 3) so im very skeptic with this one, maybe i'll watch it sometime on a bootleg copy or download it in a near future just because im curious to watch the Lizard and i think that's about it...

Just after watching i'll know if it's a good idea making a sequel but from the start sounds like a lousy idea (much like Ghost Rider part 2)

Self.Destructive.Pattern
07-08-2012, 06:51 PM
There was no Daily Bugle, and No JJJ. That right there was a fail in my book. It also felt like they just threw in him webbing his camera to get a picture of The Lizard just to make up for having a lot of key elements missing in this movie. If they do make a sequel with The Green Goblin, it would be sweet if they would make a more grotesque mask, or even have an arc from the Hobgoblin days. But a Carnage story arc, or even the symbiote story arc would be to die for and not to make Venom look like a scrawny alien.

Wretchedest
07-08-2012, 09:52 PM
Ok, to suggest that this new version of spiderman isn't equally as lame and cheesey as the old ones is just.

Sam Raimi's Spiderman's are at least self aware about it. They know they're cheesey and they try to make it work. The writing in the new movie is pretty terrible, there's no easy way to sympathize with any of the characters, and there motivations and reactions are never convincing. it's never the fault of the actors.... the script just sucked. Who put's a girl from school as their computer desktop? It just seems wierd and creepy. Raimi's Parker was at least close friends with his girl... Really the new ones are just as cheesey, even if it's difficult to tell sometimes under its modern veil. It certainly tries to hide it.

It's all so procedural and cold. The movie doesn't seem to care about what's going on in it, and neither does the audience since its something we've all done before. Having just watched Spiderman 2 again last night, at least that one had some feeling behind it. It cares about it's characters and the audience can sympathize with Peter Parker and Co. are experiencing. Sam Raimi actually took advantage​ of how cheesey it was, and I think it still holds up.

wight rabbit
07-08-2012, 11:02 PM
So apparently for the sequel we are getting none other than... *drum roll*... out good friend the Green Gobiln. Can you say waste of film space? Seriously, it's already been done! It's going to be another Sam Raimi Rehash if they take that route. I understand what Marc Webb is trying to do, but he needs to be a little more original. They are going for the Death Of Gwen Stacey story arc here. Green Goblin will come in next and kill her... Now whether they are going to be doing that in the next movie, or over the course of 2 more movies, it is unknown... but something tells me the next movie is gonna be boring as well if they do more Green Goblin. I'd like to see someone new again... Rhino, Electro, Maybe even Vulture (as lame as he kind of is). I'd really, really like the Maximum Carnage story Arc to commence, but that will NEVER happen.

Oh, really? What'd you think of The Dark Knight?


Who put's a girl from school as their computer desktop?

I thought he just had photo editing software up and he happened to have that particular image in frame...

ManBurning
07-09-2012, 03:24 AM
Oh, really? What'd you think of The Dark Knight?


This doesn't have to be a spoiler tag... but since Triggermine did a spoiler tag I guess I'll throw one on here too... also, this is kind of derailing from the thread...
The below comment has nothing to do with Spider-man.
I actually couldn't stand The Dark Knight. It was the only batman movie I absolutly hated and wanted my money back after I saw it in the theatre. Actually, funny you should bring this up, I literally JUST posted my opinion of The Dark Knight over in the dark Knight Rises thread. It's on the last page right now how I mentioned that I couln't stand the movie and thought it was over-rated and swore off going to see the new one and was boycotting all advertisments and trailers. Which then got me thinking... What if I go into the dark knight rises completly blind, like having not watched any of the trailers, maybe my expectations are so low for disliking The Dark Knight so much, I might actually enjoy the new one... So I'm contemplating seeing it. Probably catch a cheap showing on like toonie tuesday or something.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
07-09-2012, 01:53 PM
Ok, to suggest that this new version of spiderman isn't equally as lame and cheesey as the old ones is just.

Sam Raimi's Spiderman's are at least self aware about it. They know they're cheesey and they try to make it work. The writing in the new movie is pretty terrible, there's no easy way to sympathize with any of the characters, and there motivations and reactions are never convincing. it's never the fault of the actors.... the script just sucked. Who put's a girl from school as their computer desktop? It just seems wierd and creepy. Raimi's Parker was at least close friends with his girl... Really the new ones are just as cheesey, even if it's difficult to tell sometimes under its modern veil. It certainly tries to hide it.

It's all so procedural and cold. The movie doesn't seem to care about what's going on in it, and neither does the audience since its something we've all done before. Having just watched Spiderman 2 again last night, at least that one had some feeling behind it. It cares about it's characters and the audience can sympathize with Peter Parker and Co. are experiencing. Sam Raimi actually took advantage​ of how cheesey it was, and I think it still holds up.

I am watching Spidey 2 right now on FX, and I just do not see how anyone can think the new one was better than this or even the first installment. The Amazing Spider-Man had no character development at all and the pacing again was just horrible. I agree that it was not the actors fault that the script and production was so bad. Seeing Garfield trying to show his emotion for Uncle Ben dying right in front of him was so ridiculous. I couldn't take it seriously at all. But lets be real here, what super hero movies aren't cheesy? Or have at least a good handful of cheesy parts of lines in them? Even though The Dark Knight was not a marvel film, god there were so many cheesy laughable parts in that film and I do agree to this day that it is way overrated; that is another debate on it's own though.

Raimi's films produced a pretty good script, great characters, and like what was said above...some EMOTION. Even though the CGI is very obvious in the older films and take over the realism sometimes, who cares? These movies were made almost 7 to 8 years ago so of course there are going to be flaws in the CGI itself. But after watching Spider-Man 2 again, I can say that the action sequences are still great and keep you at the edge of your seat. The Amazing Spider-Man barely kept my attention, even it the fighting and web slinging looked a lot better.

Oh, and just to add about Carnage:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/06/comic-con-marvel-teases-minimum-carnage

Wretchedest
07-09-2012, 02:39 PM
I think there are a lot of people out there, including myself, who want to see the carnage thing come to fruition. It seems difficult to execute, though. Its territory to be tread very ligtly, as there are a lot of steps along the way, most importantly getting venom right. If you look at the comics right now, it doesnt even seem like Marvel is getting Venom right. Right now venom duel wields pistols and works for a government agency. And hes Flash Thompson! In so many ways hes a different character now. It makes me nervous.

So maybe we HAVE seen them plant thise first se eds. Sony IS developing a Venom solo pic. And it seems crazy misguided to n not to tie it in to the spiderma movies... itll be interesting to see how all of this plays out.

wight rabbit
07-09-2012, 03:47 PM
This doesn't have to be a spoiler tag... but since Triggermine did a spoiler tag I guess I'll throw one on here too... also, this is kind of derailing from the thread...
The below comment has nothing to do with Spider-man.
I actually couldn't stand The Dark Knight. It was the only batman movie I absolutly hated and wanted my money back after I saw it in the theatre. Actually, funny you should bring this up, I literally JUST posted my opinion of The Dark Knight over in the dark Knight Rises thread. It's on the last page right now how I mentioned that I couln't stand the movie and thought it was over-rated and swore off going to see the new one and was boycotting all advertisments and trailers. Which then got me thinking... What if I go into the dark knight rises completly blind, like having not watched any of the trailers, maybe my expectations are so low for disliking The Dark Knight so much, I might actually enjoy the new one... So I'm contemplating seeing it. Probably catch a cheap showing on like toonie tuesday or something.

I only did the spoiler tag for consistency. As for your reply... Fair enough. I'll go over to the other thread and check out your post to get more insight. I was just hoping my initial reply would be a good counter-argument, but, if you didn't like the film, I guess that's out the window.

ManBurning
07-09-2012, 10:09 PM
Oh, and just to add about Carnage:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/06/comic-con-marvel-teases-minimum-carnage

Verrrry Interesting! The name is lame, but hopefully something good comes from this.
Not sure what to except of it either, but if it spawns some sort of mini-movie or video game I'll be interested. if it's just a new series of comics then count me out. I haven't bought or read a comic in decades, lol. So I have no idea what direction any of these superheros and Villians have taken these days. Someone else here mentioned something about Flash Gordon being Venom now with 2 pistols or some nonsense?? Yeah... No thanks! No interest in that rubbish.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
07-10-2012, 03:13 PM
Verrrry Interesting! The name is lame, but hopefully something good comes from this.
Not sure what to except of it either, but if it spawns some sort of mini-movie or video game I'll be interested. if it's just a new series of comics then count me out. I haven't bought or read a comic in decades, lol. So I have no idea what direction any of these superheros and Villians have taken these days. Someone else here mentioned something about Flash Gordon being Venom now with 2 pistols or some nonsense?? Yeah... No thanks! No interest in that rubbish.

Yea man, I just do not see it. Eddie Brock will always be Venom to me in this comics. I think the last comic book I read was actually from the Maximum Carnage series back in 1995. Comics are a dying breed anyway unfortunately. I really hope for something to come out of this but my expectations are no where near anything at the moment.

And I was thinking about the movie at work today and holy shit did I love the part when Spidey dodges those bullet at point blank range! God that was so bad ass.

Broadbent
07-10-2012, 05:51 PM
Saw this over the weekend and I really wanted to like it, but it just seemed to soon to tell the spiderman story again. I read some people saying the transformation into spiderman was too fast. I 100% disagree. That took waaaaaay to long to happen. the first 40 minutes of the movie dragged on so long. Peter Parker gets bit by a radioactive spider and gets super powers. Shouldn't take 40 minutes. Once the action scenes did come along the special effects were great, but after 3 spidey movies the nostalgia of watching him swing through the city was lost.

Great movie, bad timing.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
07-10-2012, 09:32 PM
Saw this over the weekend and I really wanted to like it, but it just seemed to soon to tell the spiderman story again. I read some people saying the transformation into spiderman was too fast. I 100% disagree. That took waaaaaay to long to happen. the first 40 minutes of the movie dragged on so long. Peter Parker gets bit by a radioactive spider and gets super powers. Shouldn't take 40 minutes. Once the action scenes did come along the special effects were great, but after 3 spidey movies the nostalgia of watching him swing through the city was lost.

Great movie, bad timing.


I think more people are trying to say that after he gets bit, he is on the subway and then after him having a bad sleep, he just wakes up and is sticking to things and kicking people.

In the original he is not feeling good, and having cold sweats; it seemed more believable to me. They just build it up much better in the original about him developing his new powers. The scene when he saves MJ from falling, him sensing Flash's punch in school and showing everything else he is sensing in the hallway.... it was all done so much better. Even him messing up with smashing into a wall trying to swing.. in the new one he is just swinging around buildings already (was it the practice on those chains in that cheesy ass skateboard scene??) It's like the people that made the new one want you to assume that he already did all of that and you don't have to see it again. The couple of things they brought new to the table like him making a new suit, making his web shooters, they could have done so much more with what they had and went into depth with it.

SeeOhDeeWhy
07-10-2012, 10:12 PM
Since the original trilogy is still pretty fresh in everybody's mind, I actually prefer how quick his transformation is in this. The first Raimi movie did a great job at showing Peter getting his powers and I don't think we need to see him go through it again. We all know who Spider-Man is, his powers, his origin. There's no need to rehash. Honestly, I would've been completely fine if his origin was all in the opening credits like The Incredible Hulk.

Although, as much as I would've preferred a much shorter transformation, I thought it was hilarious when he smashed his alarm clock halfway through the first beep.

ManBurning
07-10-2012, 10:20 PM
I read some people saying the transformation into spiderman was too fast. I 100% disagree. That took waaaaaay to long to happen. the first 40 minutes of the movie dragged on so long. Peter Parker gets bit by a radioactive spider and gets super powers. Shouldn't take 40 minutes.

I think you may be misinterperting what we mean by the transformation being too fast. We don't mean the 40 minute buildup to when he gets bitten, I am quite alright with everything that leads up to that point. It's the fact he gets bitten at like 4 in the afternoon leaving Oscorp Tower and next think you know he wakes up on the subway with 100% full blown superpowers. That was way too quick, he probably wouldn't see results that quick. I can see the next morning after going to bed, but no way from a short afternoon nap on the subway train home and then all of a sudden you get woken up and you have super strength, and reflexes and can stick to ceiling walls without trouble.

dlb
07-11-2012, 02:00 AM
So now I finally saw it in full and I have to say that I like it way more than the first Spiderman and Spiderman 3! The Amazing Spider-Man is right up there with Spiderman 2 IMHO.

Although the Lizard really looked too much like the Super Mario Bros. Goombas they got him fairly right and as already said the acting was quite good for a movie of that sort. It was no Dark Knight (which I don't like either to be honest), but I liked it for its slightly higher grittyness and bleakness. The action and swinging scenes were great!

Garfield may have come off too whiny in some parts, but did a way better job than Maguire. Than again that was not too hard to do.

Only thing that I really dislike about this reboot is that it looks like we have to go through every single thing again with these new actors. And c'mon... the Goblin? Huge dissapointment if it's true.

EDIT: Screw my iPad!

AgentofChaos
07-12-2012, 12:22 PM
I really enjoyed this film. It was just refreshing to be back in the Spidey world to be honest. Really enjoyed the environment they created. Was it perfect? Far from it. But I think Webb did a respectable job, and I thought most of the casting decisions were spot on. Garfield was aces, loved his attitude and delivery.

I bought into most of the emotional moments too. Maybe that makes me a sap. There were a few cringe worthy moments I could have done without though. For example, I was down with the New Yorkers helping busted ass Spidey with the alignment of the steel girders, but when the random dude came in and swung the beam down to save him shortly thereafter that was definitely pushing it. And the Gwen Stacey antidote sequence? Hmmm... a machine in the middle of the room basically labeled antidote maker that verbally communicates "antidote is ready" when the serum is finished certainly suspended the believeablity factor for a moment. I was fine with the Lizard CGI, it could have been better, but it was better than what I had expected from the trailers, and I was glad there was some lab coat action at points as well.

I think the after the credits scene was screwed up royally, which was frustrating. It was obviously Norman Osborn, but leaving it up for debate and not introducing the character properly was a very flawed decision. I understand there are casting issues, but come on. There are many creative ways around that. At this point, the way I see them going is this; PT 2 will show more of Norman, but still as more of a string puller than as the villan. I bet we get a Mysterio or Scorpion type baddie for Spidey to grow against. So basically Osbourn hires that villain to take on Spidey, as they flesh out more of Oscorp, Peter's Parents backstory, Peter at the Bugle, and possibly Eddie Brock to set up a solo Venom film in the process. Then for the 3rd after Spidey defeats said baddie, Osborn realizes he needs to take care of Spidey himself, further develops the Goblin tech, and kills Gwen on the bridge just as their romance was finally starting to bloom, and it ends with a very somber tone as Gobby remains at large afterward and Spidey vows to protect the city in her honor, etc.

I would be down with taking that journey through two more films. Gwen definitely needs to die though. I'm even down with the Goblin being the villan again in the sequel just so long as she dies. Nothing against the character or the actress, but it just has always bugged me because Gwen's death should have been the first story told back when the original Spidey got greenlit in the first place. It sets up so much of why Peter Parker is the way he is. How you gloss over that is beyond me. Getting the first part of the origin story or the general plot of a comic book film told is easy, the second half is always toughest to wrap up (see Spidey 1, X-Men, X2, X3, Wolverine, etc) and you had this absolute fastball teed up for you with Gwen and they just fucking wasted it, multiple times no less. No excuse for that. I assume the reason that the dickless Hollywood execs thought it was too risky to kill a main character that early in a franchise that is geared towards kids? Bambi motherfuckers. BAMBI. Such fucking pussies.

cashpiles (closed)
08-29-2012, 04:59 AM
Well Spiderman has finally come to China along with Batman. They've been released at the same time so it feels like there's a Spiderman VS. Batman vibe going on. Case in point, at the theatre I was at they had life-sized cutouts of Batman and Spiderman next to each other. It was kind of awesome. Choose the superhero you want to see, and after you're done, see the next one.

I thought the tone of the film was well done. Spiderman was a smart ass: as he should be. The actor brings more of an edge to the character than the other guy did a few years ago. Because although Peter Parker is kind of a nerd, he also gets a dose of confidence and cockiness from his new powers. The portrayal of Peter Parker in previous films was a bit goody two-shoes. The action sequences are like a comic book, but a bit grittier than previous Spiderman films, which is good. Lots of laughs. Just a pleasant experience and a fun movie. Worth watching.

Jinsai
08-29-2012, 05:38 AM
I didn't like this movie... mainly because it sucked

Self.Destructive.Pattern
08-29-2012, 06:55 PM
I thought the tone of the film was well done. Spiderman was a smart ass: as he should be. The actor brings more of an edge to the character than the other guy did a few years ago. Because although Peter Parker is kind of a nerd, he also gets a dose of confidence and cockiness from his new powers. The portrayal of Peter Parker in previous films was a bit goody two-shoes. The action sequences are like a comic book, but a bit grittier than previous Spiderman films, which is good. Lots of laughs. Just a pleasant experience and a fun movie. Worth watching.

Agree with you fully on this. There is a more edgy side to him this time around, and the action sequences I loved. The part when he dodges the bullets had me out of my seat.

SeeOhDeeWhy
10-10-2012, 10:14 PM
Looks like they found their Mary-Jane for the sequel. (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/10/10/shailene-woodley-amazing-spider-man-2)

kdrcraig
11-15-2012, 07:08 AM
Finally watched this last night and liked it, completely different feel from the other movies. Besides the Lizard kind of looking like shit this was pretty awesome, the action scenes were bad ass. I fucking hate spiders so that scene in the spider room made my skin crawl. I bought the 3D blu-ray combo pack and I gotta say the 3D was kind of shitty, will probably be watching this in 2D from now on.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-04-2012, 02:17 PM
Interesting news.. Jamie Foxx as Electro?

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/12/04/jamie-foxx-talks-electro-in-amazing-spider-man-2

Wretchedest
12-04-2012, 05:15 PM
And so continues the studio's stubborn refusal to include the eddie brock story...

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-04-2012, 08:06 PM
And so continues the studio's stubborn refusal to include the eddie brock story...

For real. Maybe they think it is too early since it was horribly done in Spidey 3, but shouldn't that give them more motivation to shit on that version and make a much better one? But it is also great to see some villains we haven't seen on the big screen yet.

I would cream if they went and did a symbiote story line.

wight rabbit
12-04-2012, 09:20 PM
For real. Maybe they think it is too early since it was horribly done in Spidey 3, but shouldn't that give them more motivation to shit on that version and make a much better one? But it is also great to see some villains we haven't seen on the big screen yet.

I would cream if they went and did a symbiote story line.

It's too early, regardless... Eddie Brock/Venom didn't show up until later in Peter's career. It seems that Webb is focusing on the early Spider-Man stories that casual fans might not know about; hence why Gwen Stacy is the love interest and Mary-Jane is not yet involved. I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Vulture became involved in the third installment.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-04-2012, 09:54 PM
It's too early, regardless... Eddie Brock/Venom didn't show up until later in Peter's career. It seems that Webb is focusing on the early Spider-Man stories that casual fans might not know about; hence why Gwen Stacy is the love interest and Mary-Jane is not yet involved. I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Vulture became involved in the third installment.

Yea I get ya. I really hope they go one with the stories and make a series of movies that lead up to Brock coming into the scene. There were talks about Vulture already being in this or the next film like you said, but I would take any of the villains that have been mentioned so far.

pigpen
12-05-2012, 07:08 PM
carnage? Never going to happen

Broadbent
12-05-2012, 07:20 PM
Yea I get ya. I really hope they go one with the stories and make a series of movies that lead up to Brock coming into the scene. There were talks about Vulture already being in this or the next film like you said, but I would take any of the villains that have been mentioned so far.

Spiderman is a money making franchise.I'd love to see them expand the universe a bit. maybe have the black costume story in a 3rd spider flick, setting up Brock, followed by a Venom movie where he can be the hero and carnage could be the bad guy, spidey making a cameo in the third act to help defeat carnage together.

I'm a dreamer...

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-05-2012, 11:21 PM
Spiderman is a money making franchise.I'd love to see them expand the universe a bit. maybe have the black costume story in a 3rd spider flick, setting up Brock, followed by a Venom movie where he can be the hero and carnage could be the bad guy, spidey making a cameo in the third act to help defeat carnage together.

I'm a dreamer...

I would love if they would incorporate Spidey like they have done with The Avengers and linking other super-hero movies to him as well. They need to start getting more clever. But hey, I can dream too ;)

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-08-2012, 12:04 AM
Dane DeHann cast as Harry Osborn.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man/news/1926423/weekly_ketchup_chronicle_star_cast_as_spider-man_2s_harry_osborn/

Self.Destructive.Pattern
02-03-2013, 06:18 PM
Paul Giamatti cast to play Rhino?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noobz/news/1926771/weekly_ketchup_warcraft_movie_finds_new_life/

wizfan
02-07-2013, 03:29 PM
Man, they keep surprising me with their casting choices. Foxx and Giamatti are gonna be so much fun.

EDIT: And VENOM?

http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=27426

Self.Destructive.Pattern
02-07-2013, 06:08 PM
I would love it if they found a freaking good match for some to play Brock. I would REALLY love if they had all the mayhem with Electro and Rhino in the second film, then having Venom come in at the end to lead into another film; that would have so many people just wanting more.

october_midnight
04-16-2013, 09:24 AM
First look at Jamie Foxx as Electro. (http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/headlines/temp/temp4173.jpg)

Conan The Barbarian
04-16-2013, 10:06 AM
Uhhhhh......

thefragile_jake
04-16-2013, 10:11 AM
What in the world? This looks incredibly goofy.

AgentofChaos
04-16-2013, 10:29 AM
It actually doesn't bother me. I'm fine with the way he looks. It's not as though they were going to give him the wolverine-esque green and yellow costume with the fucking lightning bolts on his face.

kdrcraig
04-16-2013, 11:14 AM
I think he looks pretty cool.

Conan The Barbarian
04-16-2013, 12:31 PM
It actually doesn't bother me. I'm fine with the way he looks. It's not as though they were going to give him the wolverine-esque green and yellow costume with the fucking lightning bolts on his face.

I would have liked it better if they left the blue off. I'm sure they will explain it.

thelastdisciple
04-16-2013, 02:55 PM
Oh god that's horrible, he looks like Mr. Freeze!

Callahan
04-16-2013, 04:15 PM
Oh god that's horrible, he looks like Mr. Freeze!

Come on, that's just cold!


...sorry, I'll leave now.

ManBurning
04-16-2013, 11:38 PM
Personally, i'd rather have the tacky green and yellow suit at this point over this...
But, as long as Rhino looks cool and Venom appears even for just a brief introduction, i'll be happy.

Still waiting for that Maximum Carnage movie though, c'mon hollywood! Get on that!

Actually, I think that would be a great solo Venom movie, the Maximum Carnage story. With maybe a brief cameo from Andrew Garfield slightly in the movie as Peter Parker showing a confrentation between him and Eddie Brock at the Daily Bugle, then him finding the suit, his life leading up to the suit and how it changed him after, going to jail, meeting Cletus Kasady and turning him into Carnage, then him needing to go to Spider-man for another quick cameo at the end to team up and bring him down.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
04-17-2013, 05:20 PM
I kinda like it myself. I could go either way with the classic Electro and the modern look.. but I feel if they made every villain look like the ones in the comic it would look completely cheesy.

october_midnight
05-11-2013, 07:58 PM
So here's uhh...here's Rhino.

http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/headlines/temp/temp4242.jpg

Yup.

Jon
05-11-2013, 11:04 PM
they're making another Joy Ride movie?

sorry...

Self.Destructive.Pattern
05-12-2013, 05:43 PM
What.... the hell... is that.

wizfan
05-12-2013, 05:51 PM
Guys, this is probably Rhino before his transformation. http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=28348

Self.Destructive.Pattern
05-12-2013, 08:11 PM
Guys, this is probably Rhino before his transformation. http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=28348

Ohhh.. well I never knew really anything about Rhino hence my reaction. Good post :p

october_midnight
07-11-2013, 09:18 AM
http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/headlines/temp/temp4375.jpg

dlb
07-11-2013, 09:25 AM
Phew, I really don't know what to say, other than... you might have to see him in motion to appreciate that character design.

henryeatscereal
07-11-2013, 12:51 PM
...i guess is more "believable" than a Yellow mask with lightning bolts on it

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-05-2013, 11:05 AM
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=112047

Here we goo!

Broadbent
12-05-2013, 06:20 PM
Anyone catch the tease of the sinister six? looks like oscorp has 6 doors all with villains special powers behind them. the vulture wings and doc oc arms being shown in the trailer. I was wondering how they were going to tell 3 villains origin stories in one movie but it looks more like it's setting up the bigger picture for the sinister six. Can't wait!

gorast
12-05-2013, 06:54 PM
ASM2 looks great.

Aside from Harry's horrendous emo hair, that is. Jesus, didn't they learn from Spider-Man 3?

Also, I'm kind of confused as to how much Green Goblin factors in here. Three villains is dangerous for a Spider-Man film (again, Spider-Man 3). Hopefully since Electro was pushed so hard as the "main" villain, it'll mean that the other two have a lot less screentime. Ideally, I think Rhino could bookend the film as a sort of low-level villain, while Goblin stays behind the scenes for most of the film and only shows up at the end.

Space Suicide
12-05-2013, 06:58 PM
Electro looks so shitty!

Jamie Foxx as well? Double fail.

henryeatscereal
12-05-2013, 08:33 PM
:( sorry, i'll pass...

Self.Destructive.Pattern
12-05-2013, 09:31 PM
Well Rhino being robot like is weird, but it looks like something the Russians may have built instead of something that Oscorp may have manufactured so hopefully we see something in future films... who knows. If you notice when they show the sinister 6 doors opening, they show a 7th door?? Who is the man in the hat from the first film?? So many questions to be answered. To me, Electro looks pretty awesome here especially in that fight scene at the the end of the trailer.

Deadpool
12-05-2013, 11:42 PM
Seeing 3 villains show up in a Spider-man film again is definitely a little worrisome, but I can't help but be excited by that trailer. Like Final Destiny said, I'm hoping/imagining that Rhino will be the low-level "intro" villain, Electro will be the main conflict, and Goblin/Harry/Oscorp will operate mostly in the background. I'm really excited for Dane DeHaan's Harry, and I hope he does a good Goblin. Curious where they're going with Norman's character... I was getting used to the idea of Chris Cooper turning up as Goblin in a movie or 2.

I guess it's easy for me to give the next installment the benefit of the doubt since 2 more guaranteed movies have already been announced, and that suggests some really cool shit in terms of the grander story and plan (see: Sinister Six, Mary Jane Watson, etc.)

thevoid99
12-05-2013, 11:58 PM
Eh... sorry but I don't think this is going to be any good. I'm having bad memories of Spider-Man 3. I still want my $7 back!

ManBurning
12-06-2013, 12:30 AM
Started watching the trailer, got half way in and turned it off. I told myself I wasn't gonna watch it at all, as I already know i'm gonna go see it and trailers just ruin the movie. half way in I was already saying "yep, this is ruining the movie"

I'll admit, based on what I know, i'm a little worried as well. 3 villains? I donno about that... Green Goblin again? Get a new story arc guys... Electo looks retarded!

october_midnight
12-13-2013, 10:54 AM
Venom and Sinister Six movies officially announced by Sony. (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/venom-and-sinister-six-movies-announced/1100-147735/)

Broadbent
12-14-2013, 12:24 AM
Venom and Sinister Six movies officially announced by Sony. (http://www.comicvine.com/articles/venom-and-sinister-six-movies-announced/1100-147735/)

That's pretty sweet about the Venom movie, as long as it's approached right. The Sinister Six is a bit of an odd choice though... An all villain movie? Are they just going to be fighting each other with no spidey? Or are they going to setup Venom as a hero and have Venom and fight the sinister six? maybe spidey and venom team up to fight them?


This all seems like a lot of groundwork being laid before The Amazing Spider Man 2 even comes out.

AgentofChaos
03-20-2014, 08:58 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlM2CWNTQ84

Final trailer.

Also the daily bugle tumblr has been teasing some interesting things lately; Hobgoblin, Shocker, and even The Jackal. Possibilities are endless.

thefragile_jake
03-20-2014, 10:57 PM
This just feels like an even less impressive Raimi film. I'm not diggin' it really.

AgentofChaos
04-15-2014, 08:07 PM
IMAX screening poster for the May 1st shows from Mondo

http://www.imax.com/community/blog/check-out-new-the-amazing-spider-man-2-imax-fanfix-tm-and-get-tickets-today/

http://static.imax.com/media/filebrowser/uploads/asm2_fanfix_blog_1000x1444.jpg

Self.Destructive.Pattern
04-30-2014, 12:20 PM
This movie was fucking horrible!! Probably the biggest disappointment ever for me for a superhero movie. The acting was horrendous, and if you have seen the latest trailer...... that's the movie. Fuck this shit.

ManBurning
04-30-2014, 01:18 PM
This movie was fucking horrible!! Probably the biggest disappointment ever for me for a superhero movie. The acting was horrendous, and if you have seen the latest trailer...... that's the movie. Fuck this shit.

uh oh... not something I wanted to wake up and read... Was super stoked for the film, planning on seeing it this weekend. Hopefully since I have avoided nearly all trailers and press releases about the film, I won't have quite as an unfavorable impression of the film. But you're not the first person I have heard who has disapproved of the movie.
Really don't have high expectations for this now...

I know better than to watch these superhero movie trailers, they ruin the movie to no end. I watched half of the very first trailer way back when, but turned it off halfway through because the whole movie was getting ruined. I can just imagine how much more footage was released with all the other trailers released since then. Hell, I haven't even been watching the trailers and I feel like I know the whole goddamn movie based on general browsing of the internet for the last few months. You just can't escape this movie wherever you go. If you're on any website or read any newspaper they have leaked spoilers thrown around left and right in photo or headline form that you just can't help but notice. Urgh...

Least I haven't watched a single trailer for Godzilla. Don't know fuck all about that film. That might be the movie that wins May for me. I'll still go see Spider-man this weekend despite the poor reception.

Space Suicide
04-30-2014, 01:27 PM
I was optimistic for this film but I also hear its a CGI fest. I expected as much but not to the amount people have stated. It might be all right for a watch. Couldn't be any worse than another hodge podge random superhero flick from the past 10 years.

theimage13
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
One of the chase scenes was filmed in my hometown. People here are going absolutely apeshit for this movie...and frankly, I couldn't care less. If it turns out the movie itself is actually interesting (for someone who has no investment in the whole Marvel world), I guess I'll catch it when it hits the dollar theater.

Self.Destructive.Pattern
04-30-2014, 06:19 PM
uh oh... not something I wanted to wake up and read... Was super stoked for the film, planning on seeing it this weekend. Hopefully since I have avoided nearly all trailers and press releases about the film, I won't have quite as an unfavorable impression of the film. But you're not the first person I have heard who has disapproved of the movie.
Really don't have high expectations for this now...

I know better than to watch these superhero movie trailers, they ruin the movie to no end. I watched half of the very first trailer way back when, but turned it off halfway through because the whole movie was getting ruined. I can just imagine how much more footage was released with all the other trailers released since then. Hell, I haven't even been watching the trailers and I feel like I know the whole goddamn movie based on general browsing of the internet for the last few months. You just can't escape this movie wherever you go. If you're on any website or read any newspaper they have leaked spoilers thrown around left and right in photo or headline form that you just can't help but notice. Urgh...

Least I haven't watched a single trailer for Godzilla. Don't know fuck all about that film. That might be the movie that wins May for me. I'll still go see Spider-man this weekend despite the poor reception.

They actually just released a new trailer for Godzilla and it is tits... that is all I am saying about that one.


I am totally on your side about how the media handles movies like this, and maybe that took some of it away for me... but when I am so into a movie I tend to read all the updates and what not and I was really optimistic about this one because despite some flaws from the first film... the first film was really enjoyable for me. The new one just seemed like they had absolutely no idea what they wanted to do here. It ended on a promising note, but that isn't saying much.. just my opinion.

I'll be seeing this again in better quality, but until then.. it left a very bad taste in my mouth.

october_midnight
04-30-2014, 06:33 PM
Whoa, people were actually expecting this to not be horrible?

[parasite]
04-30-2014, 07:08 PM
we see it last nite and I really liked it!

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
05-02-2014, 12:52 AM
This may be the most frustrating movie I'll see all year. There was a period several years ago before the Marvel movies really picked up and started getting their shit together where I was done, just totally finished with all the terrible movies based on comics. Amazing Spider-Man 2 was a throw-back to that. It's a reminder of how terrible comic book movies can be, how totally inept and misguided and stupid and fan-fellating and unfocused and cynical and cheap. And there are a few things it does really well, and those things highlight just how awful everything else is.

The characters are barely coherent. The plot floats around without any real connective tissue or tension in a way that might be described as 'avant-garde'. I checked my watch around the 100-minute mark and was honestly surprised at the time because the film never dropped exposition mode, and so many of the scenes began with, "Oh, well I guess we're doing this now. Where are we? Why are we here? What the hell..." or culminated in moments where characters stopped making sense or pulled convenient little tricks out of nowhere at all.

Amazing Spider-Man 2 is Sony seeing Disney/Marvel's success and their marketing saying, "Hey, so with this movie we have to start setting up all of our other movies, and people will see and love this and all of the coming features just because people love this comic book shit."

AgentofChaos
05-02-2014, 02:44 PM
I enjoyed it. It had its flaws and pacing issues certainly, had some bad dialogue and cheese, and was definitely way over exposed in the marketing which made it feel like a little bit of a let down (especially the end sequence) BUT I enjoyed watching Garfield as Spidey, the web slinging was excellent, the Goblin stuff was well done on both accounts, and the core of the story was sensible for the most part. I won't go into too much more details and spoilers, but I think the movie came from a good place just ended up a bit poorly executed, and like we all knew, they tried to do too much in a limited span of time (although it was still actually managed and put together a bit better than I expected).

One thing that really did bother me was the character development of Electro. It's like they went out of their way to make him a fan of Spidey, but really failed to find a good reason to turn him bad. Why not just make it easier on yourself and have him hate spidey from the get go for a simple reason? That was pretty stupid.

nvr_mind
05-03-2014, 11:06 AM
I too enjoyed it. Even at its worst, I cannot be as bad as that one-hit-wonder AKA Sam Raimi's abortions. It wasn't as crammed as I thought it was going to be at all. Garfield is great as Parker. I love that he's not at all whiney or overly nerdy like McGuire's. I thought they tried too hard in the Raimi trilogy and made him more of a stereotypical nerd. I didn't even mind how they did Electro and how they played the obsessed with Spidey/pent up anger about being ignored and stepped on.
Overall, besides the cheese and silliness here and there though I've come to accept that about superhero films, I thought it was pretty damn good and really looking forward to the next sequels even though I've grown tired of all these superhero films.

richardp
05-03-2014, 12:22 PM
Not that I'm super invested in the Spider-Man franchise, because I think he's a stupid superhero, but this movie was on par with some of the worst shit that Marvel's ever churned out.

I could retype everything here but instead I'll simply just post the link to my review on my website:
http://lostinreviews.com/2014/05/movie-review-the-amazing-spider-man-2/

thevoid99
05-03-2014, 01:42 PM
Not that I'm super invested in the Spider-Man franchise, because I think he's a stupid superhero, but this movie was on par with some of the worst shit that Marvel's ever churned out.

I could retype everything here but instead I'll simply just post the link to my review on my website:
http://lostinreviews.com/2014/05/movie-review-the-amazing-spider-man-2/

That is excellent. I'm glad I decided not to see this because it looks horrifically bloated.

nvr_mind
05-03-2014, 02:59 PM
Whatever. It wasn't that bad. It was still miles better than the Iron Man sequels.

Broadbent
05-04-2014, 01:03 AM
Just got home. Mixed feelings about this for sure. It had high highs and low lows. Full rant tomorrow....

Wretchedest
05-04-2014, 01:26 AM
I enjoyed watching this but it was basically the Batman Forever of Spiderman movies.

It certainly looked fantastic. But it had that very specific variety of cheese oozing from its every oriface. So many "Why?!". Moments.


Still... Second best spidey movie? Its all relative.

ManBurning
05-04-2014, 02:03 AM
OK, saw it tonight and... Meh, it might be time to hang up the spider-man suit. I mean, the movie wasn't terrible, but... I just think i've seen this story time and time again.
Spider-man used to be my favorite superhero growing up, but I fear I may have grown out of the franchise. All in all, I think it was a decent film, but just seems like something we saw 7-10 years ago already.

It surprisingly wasn't as clustered as I thought it was going to be based on all the information that I heard leading up to the movie (3 villains?). But the pacing was done well enough. I mean, none of the villains really got any real development time. I like what they did with the Green Goblin, but it almost seemed like it was a little rushed so they could just finally wrap that whole story arc up so they can finally move onto something new. This green Goblin is probably the best on screen Spider-Man Goblin i've seen yet (look wise), I hated the look of the first one, and then James Franco's was even worse. This one, they finally got the look right.

The Rhino suit wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be. In fact, that was probably the best part of the film. I remember hearing Rhino was going to be in it and it was a mechanical suit and I was super pissed it wasn't going to be a classic man in a rubber rhino suit, but this worked out well. After I gave it some thought, a live action rubber Rhino suit would have been lame.

I'm just ready for something new now. I want to see where else they can take this franchise. I'm done with NYC super-villain threatens the city and takes one of Peter's loved ones hostage plot. Bring on something like Maximum Carnage. Guess with this so called Venom movie or this Sinister Six movie they are talking about being in the works could be the refreshing spider-man movie i'm looking for. Hopefully they're done right.

Kid Charlemagne
05-04-2014, 12:12 PM
Whatever. It wasn't that bad. It was still miles better than the Iron Man sequels.

Wrong. Iron Man 2 was kind of lame, but it looks like Apocalypse Now compared to this movie. Seriously, the first hour of the film just jumps from scene to scene with hardly any development going into any of the minor characters. Jamie Foxx was laughable, his one liners as Electro are on par with Arnold's Mr. Freeze jokes from Batman and Robin. The movie is also way too long, you could've cut it short by at least 20 minutes, and it just ends like that. Someone mentioned earlier that there's so many plotlines that there's no tension, and that's absolutely correct. It's a poorly sequenced film. Sometimes sequels are so bad because they try to paint a bigger story for the future of the franchise, this is The Amazing Spider-Man 2, let's throw all we can into one movie and hope people will go to the next ones so we can tie everything up...which would be fine, if they hadn't done a terrible job in making this one work.

Wretchedest
05-04-2014, 06:27 PM
It was so scattervrained and unfocused. Like the last movie, it never seemed to care about its own scenes. Whenever it hit a groive i was confortable with, it woukd introduce some random new plot element we really didnt need. It moves along too quickly to give a shit. Gwen Stacy's going to oxford? Why?..when she dies, the movie spends 3 minutes on him coping and then moves on. Max Dillon is accompanied by his own sing along music number, which is wacky. Also when he first become electro, everyone pretty much attacks him for no reason at all.

Broadbent
05-04-2014, 07:50 PM
Alright, Mixed feelings about this for sure, so let's break it down. Let's start on a positive note, the visuals.

Everything in this movie looked fantastic. The new spider suit is great, someone took the time to make perfect subtle reflections in the eyes every time they showed his face. The Goblin look was absolutely nailed and came about in a way that was semi-believable. The Rhino costume was also dealt with in a great realistic way. Though he had zero screen time. Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that they showed too much in the trailers and I agree with that 100%.

Now for the plot. Good god, there were major script problem. Unfocused is the best way to describe it. The pacing was awful and nothing was linear. It was just all over the place. The movie was bloated with villains who had little to no motive. The Electro character was so poorly written. As were all his lines. Now cheesy spiderman lines I can handle, the comics are laced with them. But I didn't need Electro rhyming one liners. I literally lol'd at some of them in disbelief that they made it into the movie on not on the cutting room floor. The casting in the movie was perfect but the lines were just verbal diarrhea. I couldn't wait to see Paul Giatmatti, Jammie Foxx and BJ Novak in this, but the writing was just so poor nobody could make those lines work.


Now Let's talk about the best part of the movie The death of Gwen Stacey. The Chemistry between Spidey and Gwen was spot on the entire movie and kept me interested. And it honoured the comics very well. Shot excellently and scored excellently(unlike the rest of the movie)


Overall I give it 2.5/5

Wait for the DVD.

AgentofChaos
05-05-2014, 11:19 PM
The movie does a great job with a lot of things but Webb absolutely sucks at building hype within this universe. He’s got the cast down, he’s got the spidey dialogue and the web slinging down, now he’s got the costume down, he’s done the villains pretty well, the stories are actually decent for the most part (some of Electro’s development was weak but whatever)and the effects were stellar.
BUT where he failed in the first movie, and he failed again here, is creating a fabric to get connected to. I don’t know how many people walked out of there absolutely pumped for Spidey 3, but it wasn’t a lot (even for those who enjoyed it, it did little to get fan boys dicks hard for future instalments). Interested possibly, but it was still such a wasted opportunity when you could have easily accomplished big things if you set the table up properly instead of just tacking on the Rhino scene which you’ve been advertising up the wazoo for months.


In the first movie you had this pointless stinger, who we STILL don’t technically know who it was. Stupid on so many levels don’t even get me started. This movie you wasted Chris Cooper, you teased a concept that is probably still 2 movies away, which while filled with potential, has nothing incredibly enticing about it since we still have to go through the whole painful building process for it. We sat through a whole movie, which while enjoyable (at least for me), established only a small portion of the universe despite taking the huge post spidey 3 risk of appearing bloated by trying to cram too much in (not sure how they managed to do so little to build the universe while having introduced as many as 6 different villains to be honest) and they left us with little clue as to what to expect in the third film. They could still go anywhere at all, more Goblin stories, Venom, Dr Octopus and/or Vulture, apparently Kraven is in the mix now or Webb wants him to be, Black Cat, Mysterio/Chameleon? All of which makes me feel like they don’t really have a plan. And then you have no stinger which only reinforces the fact.
They also wasted time including characters like Colm Feore’s, Gustav Fiers, etc that are completely useless except to help set up basic plot devices, which just comes off as lazy and uninspired.
Across 2 spidey movies you have included only a brief sniff (aka 1.5 scenes) at his two greatest villans, Norman Osborn and Otto Octavius, while no real indication that either is a mastermind pulling the strings from behind the scenes. Spidey’s b villans are cool by design, but they are always at their most effective when used as tools by people smarter than they are. After 4 hours in this universe, we’ve yet to be introduced to anyone who isn’t a chaotic loose cannon Peter is merely struggling to manage, as opposed to a real maniacal genius. And you had all the opportunity in the world to do that. THOSE are the kind of things that get fans excited and build a buzz for future projects.
You somehow have a venom movie already on the books for the future and have only managed a sneaky easter egg with a name. The lack of a coherent thought process in the scene selection and in the characters they introduce is borderline embarrassing since that was the antithesis of what they appeared to be shooting for in the wake of trying to compete with the MCU.


So to wrap up, Norman Osborn could be dead, could be Green Goblin, could be Mysterio, could be Vulture? Harry Osborn could be Green Goblin, could be Venom, we still don’t know the “official” Sinister Six lineup, what the Black Cat is doing, haven’t met JJJ, no sign of MJ (although I do agree it probably made sense to cut her from this cut of the film), and we have two mysterious characters looming in the shadows who could be anyone with any purpose?
Like how stupid and convoluted is Webb trying to make this? It’s a shame because everything else is spot on and both movies have been fun otherwise. I guess it's kind of ironic that people say this feels like a chapter in a larger book which made it hard to care too much, while I feel its a much better stand alone piece, which would actually be great if they weren't so concerned with appearing to be building more than that, and throwing pointless distractions around, ie easter eggs, teaser images of multiple characters they have yet to introduce in the trailer, end credits etc.

All that venting being said, did anyone else love that opening sequence though? It felt so comic book, one of the better intros to a superhero flick in a while. How anyone can like comics, film, and spider-man and write with a straight face this was shittier than Iron Man 3 is so far fucking beyond me.

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
05-07-2014, 04:17 AM
This was shittier than Iron Man 3 because that was an imperfect but still great, well-written movie.

But no, you're right: while I do really like film, I'm not a fan of superhero comics, and I've never even read an issue of Spider-Man (and don't believe that's relevant anyway). How anyone can like film or storytelling and write with a straight face that Amazing Spider-Man 2 (or 1) was better than Iron Man 3 is so far fucking beyond me.

AgentofChaos
05-07-2014, 09:32 AM
Look, I could go into lengthy details as to why IM3 is just the worst, but here is not really the place for that. Would I have enjoyed it on its own, had it been a stand alone film that had nothing to do with pre-existing characters or stories? Impossible to know one way or the other, but I still suspect not (and I love Shane Black outside of the franchise).

I will concede to you that if I was not a spidey fan, I *may* have liked ASM2 less than I did. Because some elements that I enjoyed were not necessarily relevant to the story, they were just nice moments, sequences, shots, of stuff I enjoy seeing because of my history with the character. Stuff that was improved over previous films which was nice to see addressed. So yes then, I would say that you not having read an issue is relevant in this instance. Conversely, It also explains why you could like IM3, because it basically takes the character and pisses on its face, and only someone who completely oblivious could enjoy the farcical joke they turned it into. Of course someone who doesnt read comics is going to like a film that basically makes a joke about how stupid they are! At least Spidey 2 tried to take itself seriously, even if it failed in some respects in my eyes.

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
05-07-2014, 04:04 PM
You're admitting that your primary issue isn't with whether the movies work independently, or how truthful the characters were to themselves and their stories, but because they differed from the comics or otherwise violated your expectations of how an adaptation of that material should look, in some way deviating from your own take on comics canon. Which is something you're certainly entitled to. But you aren't actually critiquing the movies when you do that, and it's obvious that other readers of the comic books have a completely different take on it. Those others are not betraying the source material by approaching it differently.


I still have tremendous respect for RDJ and Shane Black but my god IM3 was not a good comic book movie. Big step back for Marvel. I'm crushingly disappointed right now. If you read Extremis this basically pisses all over it. I understand sacrifices need to be made for cinema but lines were crossed. I tried so hard to love it. I wanted to very much. But honestly I even favour Last Stand over it. Maybe Spidey 3. Definitely every other Marvel film. Shane Black just doesn't get Tony Stark. He gets RDJ as an actor, but not this character. And with that, there's obviously no way he could get any of the other characters either. Black turned the movie into one big running joke and at times I questioned whether anyone truly cared about it being taken remotely seriously. There was absolutely no fan service which is part of what made the other films cool. It was like they said nobody knows or cares that much about the Iron Man story so let's just make a movie for everyone and take tons of liberties and hope no one will notice. It did nothing to establish hype for another movie or the MCU, even the "stinger" was extremely weak. I don't know what else to say except I can't believe the early reviews were so positive. I feel like they had to have been bought and paid for, or written by people who have absolutely no investment in comics or this universe. Iron Man 2 looks like a gem compared to this.

These films aren't the comics. Readers of the comics might draw various lines in the sand, boundaries within which the film versions of their beloved characters must fit to remain consistent or recognizable, but that's an individual decision. You draw your line here, others may put it elsewhere, and the filmmakers are beholden to neither. But this shouldn't be an issue. The films must be able to stand completely on their own.

AgentofChaos
05-08-2014, 08:48 AM
Eh I dont know, of course they aren't the comics, and liberties must be taken, and fans have different lines in the sand, but if you are going to go against the core of the character, and go places and do things that said character would never do, then it ceases to be that character, those stories, that franchise, and whether the film succeeds on its own at that point is somewhat irrelevant. If it wanted to care about doing that, it shouldn't have branded itself under the banner of said character and should have been its own film. A comic book film at the very least has to attempt to live up to the essence of the work and characters it is supposed to be adapting. Otherwise I don't see the point.

Tony Gordon
05-08-2014, 11:05 AM
I'm too scared to go see it. Everyone is telling me it's like Transformers 2 all over again, which don't exactly bug me cause I thought the first Transformers was horrible, so I knew the second one wasn't worth my time.


The first Amazing was OK even though I didn't like the idea of a reboot. Yet another time of being told the origin story of Peter Parker? Please.....but surprisingly, I enjoyed it. I found the new version of Spiderman to be a lot more true to the comics with the cheesy fun goofiness that was totally absent in the first trilogy. Parker is a smartass, he's goofy and can be down right funny in the comics. It's supposed to be cheesy like that. Everything that people bitched about with the first Amazing movie were reasons I liked it.

I wasn't very big on the original series that came out in the early 2000's. The first movie was pretty good,but it had it's problems. It felt like half way through it, it became boring. I had this same problem with the Captain America and Thor movies (I have not seen the sequels and have no plans on it).
Then the second Spiderman totally lost me half way through. It had the effects, I loved the bad guy this time around, and some parts of it were really cool, but the whole "I love her but I don't love her" bullshit with Mary Jane dragged it on. Toby wasn't a bad Peter Parker whatsoever, but something just did not click with me regarding that movie. I do not understand all the praise it gets NOW. I remember when it first came out, everyone was disappointed in it, but now it's the best thing since sliced fucking bread now that they don't like Garfield as Spidey.
I won't even mention Spiderman 3, cause I don't think it's even worth going into.


I haven't seen this movie but I was really excited for it. I've been hearing all these rumors about how it's going to bomb in the box office now cause it's so terrible. Word of mouth has not been very kind to it. I still hope it's good, and I'm not here to compare it to the older movies, fuck that nonsense.

AgentofChaos
05-08-2014, 11:14 AM
FYI the original Spider-Man 2 at the time of its release was widely regarded as the best super hero flick made to date. Granted it didn't have a lot of competition, but I'd say it's not aged as well as one would have liked. It still stands up, but there have been much better things done since then that make it pale it comparison to what it was once viewed as.

If you liked the first Amazing Spidey, you should definitely check 2 out. I would say its as good or better than its predecessor. There is definitely a ton of classic spidey charm and Garfield kills it once again. My issue with it is more as a second piece in a trilogy +, and not so much as a stand alone entity. I think had this been the first instalment and they just dove into it, I would've liked it that much more. But its definitely worth seeing. Haters gonna hate, and all that.

Tony Gordon
05-08-2014, 04:44 PM
I'm just ready for something new now. I want to see where else they can take this franchise. I'm done with NYC super-villain threatens the city and takes one of Peter's loved ones hostage plot. Bring on something like Maximum Carnage. Guess with this so called Venom movie or this Sinister Six movie they are talking about being in the works could be the refreshing spider-man movie i'm looking for. Hopefully they're done right.


Maximum Carnage was so fun on the Super Nintendo. Great game and even greater music in the 16 bit MIDI form.

I would love to see a super hero movie based on a villain for once. Give us a Lex Luthor or a Victor Von Doom movie. I would totally pay money to see a Doom movie, though Venom wouldn't be a bad one either!

ibanez33
05-08-2014, 05:41 PM
I'm reading Maximum Carnage right now and I would piss myself if they turned it into a movie.

implanted_microchip
05-08-2014, 06:39 PM
I'm reading Maximum Carnage right now and I would piss myself if they turned it into a movie.

Problem with a character like Carnage is that if it wasn't R rated it would really lessen the impact and I can't imagine them making a Spidey related movie anything above PG-13. I'd rather have no Carnage at all than have a watered down version.

Conan The Barbarian
05-08-2014, 07:49 PM
Not true. They can cut out of frame when graphic shit happens. A pg13 can get you anywhere these days, as long as there is no nudity.

ibanez33
05-09-2014, 01:08 AM
Not true. They can cut out of frame when graphic shit happens. A pg13 can get you anywhere these days, as long as there is no nudity.

exactly. And even if they gave it an R, they'd still probably water it down. off-screen violence for most of it would be best no matter what the rating is.

littlemonkey613
05-09-2014, 03:55 AM
Eh I dont know, of course they aren't the comics, and liberties must be taken, and fans have different lines in the sand, but if you are going to go against the core of the character, and go places and do things that said character would never do, then it ceases to be that character, those stories, that franchise, and whether the film succeeds on its own at that point is somewhat irrelevant. If it wanted to care about doing that, it shouldn't have branded itself under the banner of said character and should have been its own film. A comic book film at the very least has to attempt to live up to the essence of the work and characters it is supposed to be adapting. Otherwise I don't see the point.

I completely agree with this premise. Comic book movies are first and foremost adaptations of source material and people forget that. Like when they change a character so much that they are not recognizable or at least don't have the same core, I always just don't understand why they dont just make a new character. I think arguments for changing those things does get stronger when the movie is a masterpiece but when the fuck does that ever happen? None of the best super hero movies in my opinion took much liberty with the core of main characters. Spiderman 2 perhaps, since Raimi's Peter Parker is questionable (not bad in my personal opinion though) , but so much of that movie was true to the spirit of the comics and it was a really great and consistent movie overall.

Nobody would be okay with people changing Harry Potter characters so much that they aren't the same character anymore for instance. I think it comes down to non comic book readers forgetting that the source material (at least where character and motivation is concerned) should be respected just as much as any novel or book series. Saying that the only thing that matters is how good it is as a stand alone film with no context is a real insult I think to the legacy of the character and everyone who has enjoyed that character over decades and worked on it.

I think the films should take the same approach as comic writers when they are making a non canon stand alone or when companies reboot a character's universe. You can take liberties, but no one is going to respect your shit if the character is some random person with the beloved name slapped on it.

Moving on!

Things I liked about this Spiderman movie:
1. Spidey being Spidey - they really got down his web slinging action, swinging shit and his humor and snark
2. I actually really liked Electro up until towards the end of the movie. I thought he was a really sad and sympathetic character.

Things I disliked:

Literally everything else. Ugh.
The way they introduced the Sinister Six shit was literally the most tasteless garbage ever. I would give up my first born for the MCU to have the Spidey franchise :'(

/ @AgentofChaos (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=387) its funny because I obviously agree with your rant but I also think this movie was perhaps like BAREEEELY better than Iron Man 3, so I disagree that its totally cray for people to like that movie better and I hated that one as much as you lolol. I agree that this movie got way more right in terms of the protagonist's character (and not making an iconic villian imaginary LOL), but as a whole I thought this was pretty terrible in general so Idk

ibanez33
05-09-2014, 05:03 AM
I completely agree with this premise. Comic book movies are first and foremost adaptations of source material and people forget that. Like when they change a character so much that they are not recognizable or at least don't have the same core, I always just don't understand why they dont just make a new character. I think arguments for changing those things does get stronger when the movie is a masterpiece but when the fuck does that ever happen? None of the best super hero movies in my opinion took much liberty with the core of main characters. Spiderman 2 perhaps, since Raimi's Peter Parker is questionable (not bad in my personal opinion though) , but so much of that movie was true to the spirit of the comics and it was a really great and consistent movie overall.

Nobody would be okay with people changing Harry Potter characters so much that they aren't the same character anymore for instance. I think it comes down to non comic book readers forgetting that the source material (at least where character and motivation is concerned) should be respected just as much as any novel or book series. Saying that the only thing that matters is how good it is as a stand alone film with no context is a real insult I think to the legacy of the character and everyone who has enjoyed that character over decades and worked on it.

I think the films should take the same approach as comic writers when they are making a non canon stand alone or when companies reboot a character's universe. You can take liberties, but no one is going to respect your shit if the character is some random person with the beloved name slapped on it.

Moving on!

Things I liked about this Spiderman movie:
1. Spidey being Spidey - they really got down his web slinging action, swinging shit and his humor and snark
2. I actually really liked Electro up until towards the end of the movie. I thought he was a really sad and sympathetic character.

Things I disliked:

Literally everything else. Ugh.
The way they introduced the Sinister Six shit was literally the most tasteless garbage ever. I would give up my first born for the MCU to have the Spidey franchise :'(

/ @AgentofChaos (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=387) its funny because I obviously agree with your rant but I also think this movie was perhaps like BAREEEELY better than Iron Man 3, so I disagree that its totally cray for people to like that movie better and I hated that one as much as you lolol. I agree that this movie got way more right in terms of the protagonist's character (and not making an iconic villian imaginary LOL), but as a whole I thought this was pretty terrible in general so Idk

In a perfect world, we'd have the spidey movies being adapted from books by the guys who wrote said books, and all of the Marvel character movie rights would be owned by Marvel still, and the Deadpool movie would finally exist.

But, of all the marvel movies thus far, Spiderman is the one that is getting the most fucked over. It's like Sony doesn't even care, they're just making Spiderman movies to spite the Avengers franchise. I haven't seen TAS2 yet, but it looks awful. The concept is pretty good, but the casting and looks for Electro and Harry Osborne are fucking atrocious. It's a fucking Spiderman movie, we WANT it to be campy! Not Jamie Foxx covered in blue shit. I haven't seen it yet but from the trailers I'm going to assume it's awful, just like the Lizard still having a mostly-human face.

The Venom movie could change everything, though. We'll just have to wait I guess. I would love it if they did pull a Harry Potter though and make the movies increasingly darker as the series progresses, so they can ease into a hard R rating for Carnage but still gain fans from the earlier PG-13 movies of ASM and ASM2 and Venom.

Shadaloo
05-11-2014, 01:25 AM
It's a mixed bag. It's not hot garbage (Nowhere near as terrible as Transformers 2, which probably deserves its own oxford entry under 'shit'), but it is rather unfocused, and goes on longer than it needs to. It beats you over the head with foreshadowing until you're numb.

If there's a reason to see it, it's just to see Garfield in action as Spidey, and his chemistry with Stone. He nails it, and they work well together, respectively.

It's a really average sequel to a slightly above-average film. It's not bad, but coming off of the showing that was Captain America 2 is not going to do it any favors.