# 1st trailer for The Amazing Spiderman!



## toiletstand (Jul 20, 2011)

hay gurl hay

not gonna lie im totally looking forward to this. ive been watching the 90s cartoon on netflix for the past two weeks.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 20, 2011)

tltstand said:


> hay gurl hay
> 
> not gonna lie im totally looking forward to this. ive been watching the 90s cartoon on netflix for the past two weeks.




looks like it will be tenfolds better than the ones that came out this past decade. A much more serious angle it seems.


----------



## Xaios (Jul 21, 2011)

I haven't been able to watch the trailer yet, but I will when I get home. When I first heard about the reboot, I basically said "who the hell is Andrew Garfield?" However, his work in The Social Network REALLY impressed me, he was the heart and soul of that movie.

The Sam Raimi movies brought their own charm, and Spider-Man 2 as actually really good in my books, but there's no doubt they took a bit too much from the original cartoon series way back in the day and not enough of the nineties cartoon, which was also quite a bit more serious.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 21, 2011)

This reboot looks darker and more serious, closer to the more recent comics. Hopefully they get the balance between Peter Parker and Spider-Man right because Raimi's films focused on Parker a bit too much considering Tobey's version wasn't particularly interesting. And when Spider-Man was on screen, he wasn't fleshed out enough to really be a character of his own. In the comics Spider-Man is a lot more confident, wise-cracking side to Peter parker and they pretty much missed this in the films. It's important in showing the transformation Parker makes into Spider-Man is more than phsyical. He gains confidence that his normal geeky self wouldn't have. Obviously this film will be focused on Parker more as it is about how be becomes Spider-Man, but if they treat the characters better than Raimi did then it will be good. The only real good thing about the Raimi films were the villains, who were played brilliantly each time. No Mary Jane in this one either I don't think, just Gwen which is how it was originally in the comics.


----------



## ArkaneDemon (Jul 21, 2011)

That was sick.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jul 21, 2011)

Dark Knight Rises take note: that is how a trailer is done.

The end seemed like low quality CGI/high quality video game footage?


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 21, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> Dark Knight Rises take note: that is how a trailer is done.
> 
> The end seemed like low quality CGI/high quality video game footage?


 
To be fair it is youtube quality.


----------



## Customisbetter (Jul 21, 2011)

There was a perfectly good ladder on that brick wall...


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jul 21, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> To be fair it is youtube quality.



I meant the graphics themselves, not the video quality. If that was a game that would be cool, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## -42- (Jul 21, 2011)

Wow, this seems familiar.


----------



## kmanick (Jul 21, 2011)

we need another Spiderman movie?


----------



## poisonelvis (Jul 21, 2011)

hell yeah!!!i remember the 80's marvel movies(all made for tv)and the spiderman tv show from the 70's,so i been loving all the comic movies now,and yes i'm old.


----------



## Pauly (Jul 21, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> I meant the graphics themselves, not the video quality. If that was a game that would be cool, but I'm not holding my breath.



It's typical for teasers to use unfinished CGI shots, so I'd imagine it should look better on release. Have to say though, it only feels like 5 minutes ago the first one came out, do they have to reboot everything so quickly? On the flipside, someone on another forum said this one is more in tune with the Ultimate universe's Spidey.

I'll reserve judgement until there's a full trailer.


----------



## GazPots (Jul 21, 2011)

Man these remakes are getting churned out quicker and quicker these days. 

Not even a decade since the first Spiderman movie.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jul 21, 2011)

Pauly said:


> It's typical for teasers to use unfinished CGI shots, so I'd imagine it should look better on release. Have to say though, it only feels like 5 minutes ago the first one came out, do they have to reboot everything so quickly? On the flipside, someone on another forum said this one is more in tune with the Ultimate universe's Spidey.
> 
> I'll reserve judgement until there's a full trailer.



I've not seen CGI that basic in any film or film trailer ever I don't think. It's not going to be what's finally featured in the film because this seems to be a high budget franchise reboot.


----------



## Triple-J (Jul 21, 2011)

Personally I thought they should have given it a few more years before making another Spiderman movie cause even though I'm not a fan of the Raimi movies I understand that people are attached to them so I'm a little worried that even if this turns out to be incredible it will flop because most people are still in love with Raimi's take on Spiderman.
Despite my doubts I really like the look of this and I think the Spidey-pov camera bit looked pretty cool too the only thing that irks me though is that the trailer reminds me of Batman a bit too much plus it's another movie retelling the origin of Spiderman which I think is a bit of a waste really cause even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad knows how that plays out. 



vampiregenocide said:


> This reboot looks darker and more serious, *closer to the more recent comics*.



The thing is that Spiderman has always had that type of darker edge anyway ("Kraven's last hunt" anyone?) it's just that it doesn't define him as much as someone like Batman or the Punisher, plus mainstream representations of Spiderman as seen in Raimi's movies and Spidey cartoons brushed that side of things under the carpet and chose to portray him in a more one dimensional manner to sell toys.


----------



## Mexi (Jul 21, 2011)

this seems more of a throwback to the spiderman cartoon of the 90s, when peter had to manufacture those web dispenser dealies. that said, this looks alot more interesting than the last couple spiderman movies


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 21, 2011)

Triple-J said:


> The thing is that Spiderman has always had that type of darker edge anyway ("Kraven's last hunt" anyone?) it's just that it doesn't define him as much as someone like Batman or the Punisher, plus mainstream representations of Spiderman as seen in Raimi's movies and Spidey cartoons brushed that side of things under the carpet and chose to portray him in a more one dimensional manner to sell toys.


 
I agree with what you're saying, but in recent years Spider-Man has become even darker I think, at least in the comics.


----------



## ROAR (Jul 21, 2011)

I'm looking forward to this.

On another note, when will Scar Symmetry be please?!
WHEN?!


----------



## Explorer (Jul 22, 2011)

Well, I clearly haven't kept up with the newer variations in Spiderman retconning. Some of those revealed story elements have nothing to do with the comic or any of the cartoon series through the '90s. The Raimi movies managed to stick closer to the Spiderman story of the previous 40 years than this trailer.

I thought you all were exaggerating about the CGI, but it truly sucked ass. If that was the pinnacle of what they've done so far, and they considered that trailer-worthy... I'm gonna save my money.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 22, 2011)

The cgi in the last three spider-man films wasn't exactly amazing. I'm not judging it till I see it on screen though. 

And Explorer yeah it does seem like they're going a bit further back with this one, including Peter's parents in it and maybe explaining more as to why they aren't around.


----------



## Triple-J (Jul 22, 2011)

Explorer said:


> Well, I clearly haven't kept up with the newer variations in Spiderman retconning. Some of those revealed story elements have nothing to do with the comic or any of the cartoon series through the '90s. The Raimi movies managed to stick closer to the Spiderman story of the previous 40 years than this trailer.



To be fair I don't think this movie is actually based on the "Amazing" version of Spiderman it's more about the "Ultimate" version of the character with a few other bits and plot devices thrown in. Ultimate Spider-Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jul 22, 2011)

ROAR said:


> I'm looking forward to this.
> 
> On another note, when will Scar Symmetry be please?!
> WHEN?!



Que?


----------



## Edika (Jul 22, 2011)

The problem is than when a comic book like Spider man is being published near 50 years and has several titles, crossovers, revamps and so on, when you are trying to present that to people you have to take into account people that have never read or never quite followed the comic and die hard fans. You also have to take into account that it is 2000 something and not the 60's so it has to appeal to the younger generations that are used to super flashy drawing and sometimes deeper and darker stories. If you please the one group you disappoint the other. Personally I didn't enjoy that much the Raimi Spiderman movies because there should have been the character of Gwen Stacy ( big part of Spiderman life) Kirsten Dunst manages to piss me off in every movie I see her and Toby Maguire seemed like he was going to burst into tears the whole movie. Peter Parker was not a happy teenager but he was not a whiny pussy like he was portrayed by this guy in the Spiderman movies (truth be told I haven't seen the 3rd movie). I just wanted to repeatedly kick him in the nuts! So any improvement on that is welcome!


----------



## technomancer (Jul 22, 2011)

Absolutely no interest. Judging from the trailer it's yet another, "Let's redo this, and try to make it dark and edgy, and do a ton of annoying camera work and awkward scenes that add nothing but let us use 3D and charge more for a ticket."

Hopefully the Avengers tie ins continue to be good because this looks like shit


----------



## Xiphos68 (Jul 22, 2011)

Isn't this basically the same story of the first spiderman movie that came it out in like 2003 or something? 

So why do the same movie again (although this one seems interesting)? 

IMO they should've continued with the other series and just make better movies, the first one was cool but the second (haven't seen all of it) and third I didn't like as much.

Although I did enjoy seeing Venom in the third movie.


----------



## Sicarius (Jul 22, 2011)

technomancer said:


> Absolutely no interest. Judging from the trailer it's yet another, "Let's redo this, and try to make it dark and edgy, and do a ton of annoying camera work and awkward scenes that add nothing but let us use 3D and charge more for a ticket."
> 
> Hopefully the Avengers tie ins continue to be good because this looks like shit


You got all that from a 2:30 clip?


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 22, 2011)

Xiphos68 said:


> Isn't this basically the same story of the first spiderman movie that came it out in like 2003 or something?
> 
> So why do the same movie again (although this one seems interesting)?
> 
> ...


 
They're rebooting it because Sam Raimi left (thank God) and Tobey Maguire ad Kirsten Dunst said they would only return if Raimi did. So basically instead of what would've been Spider-Man 4 they're just starting it fresh, only they're not making it exactly the same. In Raimi's first one, Peter Parker finishes high school not long into the film and his absent parents are never really explained. This new film is said to focus on Parker through High School and explain more backstory regarding his parents. Yeah it's the same story because it's Spider-Man, but they're treating it a little differently. 

Yeah Venom was awesome, he was the only thing I liked about that movie. There were moments in that film where Raimi almost captured the comic book feel and got close to where I thought a Spider-Man film should be, but on the whole there were too many cringey moments to ignore. Emo-Parker was awful.


----------



## Triple-J (Jul 25, 2011)

IGN got to see a preview of the film which revealed all the characters in much more detail than the trailer anyone interested should read the article about it as it sounds very promising. Comic-Con: Is Spider-Man's New Movie His Best One Yet? - Movies News at IGN


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 25, 2011)

I'm getting more and more hyped about this. The lizard is one of my fave villains and I missed Spidey's humour from Raimi's films.


----------



## MFB (Jul 25, 2011)

What Ross said basically.

I love the Lizard as a villain, and in the new Spiderman's he becomes fucking ridiculous (and I know they won't make him go this route), so it'll be good to see him in the movies finally. Venom is a classic character, but I didn't feel like Eddie Brock's character was done right by Topher Grace (nothing personal, they changed Brock) and even as a Flash Thompson role, it wouldn't have worked. Not to mention, one of my favorite things about Spiderman has always been his sharp wit and humor, which the films didn't have much of - they focused on Parker balancing his everyday life with Spiderman which in the show, took more of a backseat.


----------



## Lukifer (Jul 25, 2011)

I agree with Techno that they seem to be trying to the be like the Batman franchise and be less cartoony and more dark and serious. Cool with me though, Ill watch it. It will still be better than alot of other movies Ive paid to see!


----------



## Triple-J (Jul 25, 2011)

MFB said:


> What Ross said basically.
> 
> I love the Lizard as a villain, and in the new Spiderman's he becomes fucking ridiculous (and I know they won't make him go this route), so it'll be good to see him in the movies finally. Venom is a classic character, but I didn't feel like Eddie Brock's character was done right by Topher Grace (nothing personal, they changed Brock) and even as a Flash Thompson role, it wouldn't have worked. Not to mention, one of my favorite things about Spiderman has always been his sharp wit and humor, which the films didn't have much of - they focused on Parker balancing his everyday life with Spiderman which in the show, took more of a backseat.



You are very right about Topher Grace as it felt like he was camping it up at times and playing the role more like something out of the 60's Batman tv show it was just way too over the top really. 
Imo the thing they really missed about Venom is the fact that Venom/Brock and Spidey/Parker are not only opposites physically but mentally too as Brock was an older guy who was bitter at the opportunities he'd missed in life and jealous of Parker who in his eyes had it all to live for and they lost that aspect of Parker/Brock's relationship by casting a younger actor as Brock.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 25, 2011)

Triple-J said:


> You are very right about Topher Grace as it felt like he was camping it up at times and playing the role more like something out of the 60's Batman tv show it was just way too over the top really.
> Imo the thing they really missed about Venom is the fact that Venom/Brock and Spidey/Parker are not only opposites physically but mentally too as Brock was an older guy who was bitter at the opportunities he'd missed in life and jealous of Parker who in his eyes had it all to live for and they lost that aspect of Parker/Brock's relationship by casting a younger actor as Brock.


 
I dunno I thought Topher Grace was good in the sense he brought some humour to the role. But I think he actually would have been a better Spider-Man as opposed to Venom. You're completely right about Eddie being an older, bitter guy. Hell in the comics he ends up slashing his wrists. But they focused on the dark side of Parker in Spidey 3 (Which Tobey couldn't pull of convincingly, he isn't a very moody actor) and left little time to expand on Venom as a character.


----------



## Xaios (Jul 25, 2011)

I am *so* glad they're going back to his webs being an artificial chemical compound and not a super-power. I had kinda gotten used to it with the movies, but I remember when I first discovered they had done that, it bugged the crap out of me.

The storyline I really hope they nudge towards is the Clone Saga. I think it would be interesting to see Ben Reilly.


----------



## Sicarius (Jul 25, 2011)

Fuckin' loved the Scarlet Spider.

But I don't know. There are a lot of really cool stories in the Marvel world that could be made into movies.

Civil War and the Secret Wars come to mind. The Clone Saga would really confuse people unless it was the 5th movie.


----------



## Bekanor (Aug 15, 2011)

I'm not even slightly surprised that this looks gay.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Feb 7, 2012)

An actual story? Hollywood sure is spoiling us.


----------



## Randy (Feb 7, 2012)

Where's his cape?


----------



## Explorer (Feb 7, 2012)

Worst Superman ever.

However, this looks to be an interesting Spiderman movie.


----------



## sakeido (Feb 7, 2012)

This Superman redesign looks great, but I hate spiders


----------



## 8Fingers (Feb 8, 2012)

Sorry fans but I hated all Spider movies.
Parker was never a dumb guy, Maguire played a dumb parker(probably a director's fault), Park has some dark problems beneath his nerd teen face or whatever you wanna call him but never a dumb, boring and annoying guy.
Plus all movies are shallow, no depth in characteres or stories, replace Maguire with Butthead and nobody would notice a difference, well probably everybody would laugh instead of wanting to kill a dumb and boring Peter Parker.
Stories are so shallow that I can even imagine their sketches over a table like in this part we need more effects, in this one less light but NEVER something about adding depht to those stories.I read a lot of Spiderman magazines, I used to have a huge collection but one day I lost interest.
Another Spiderman beginning is a joke, come'n just keep going the story from where they stopped it but...I'll watch it for sure cause sometimes Hollywood surprises us with a good movie among so many stupid things


----------



## 8Fingers (Feb 8, 2012)

sakeido said:


> This Superman redesign looks great, but I hate spiders



The funny stuff is here spider is a slang for pussy!
In the 80's they used to be hairy so people used to call them.......spiders.
These days spiders are bald(you guys know brazilian wax  ) so we should rename them to something they really look like ...........oysters


----------



## Xaios (Feb 8, 2012)

I wouldn't say that Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man was dumb, just incredibly naive. The second one showed that he was a fairly intelligent student. Of course, he's pretty much a genius in the comics, which it looks like they're getting back to here.


----------



## flint757 (Feb 9, 2012)

Xaios said:


> I wouldn't say that Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man was dumb, just incredibly naive. The second one showed that he was a fairly intelligent student. Of course, he's pretty much a genius in the comics, which it looks like they're getting back to here.



In all honesty they just made Tobey behave like a major pussy, I mean SM3 was just the worst. I think there was more crying than fighting. He was also too light-hearted. I really enjoyed a more dark humored spidey back when I was a kid.


----------



## Xaios (Feb 10, 2012)

flint757 said:


> In all honesty they just made Tobey behave like a major pussy, I mean SM3 was just the worst. I think there was more crying than fighting. He was also too light-hearted. I really enjoyed a more dark humored spidey back when I was a kid.



Indeed, but that's a separate problem altogether from his supposed intelligence level.


----------



## Choop (Feb 10, 2012)

What does spiderman do that makes him a genius? I do read comics, however never read much of spiderman. It seems like the tie-in's and issues I did read always try to remind us that Peter is smart, but he doesn't seem to be applying it. I just got the impression he was clever and could think on his feet, but isn't really on the level of other full blown geniuses in marvel.

edit: Aside from web shooters/webbing and other general tech he designed for himself. I mean he is really young too, which could explain it a bit better.


----------



## flint757 (Feb 10, 2012)

Xaios said:


> Indeed, but that's a separate problem altogether from his supposed intelligence level.



Well they showed in the second one that he wasn't dumb, but it was more of a side note I think. He only failed his classes because of his spidey duties. Either way I'm actually glad they are starting over from a different base, I feel they totally missed the bar last go around.


----------



## MFB (Feb 10, 2012)

Choop said:


> What does spiderman do that makes him a genius? I do read comics, however never read much of spiderman. It seems like the tie-in's and issues I did read always try to remind us that Peter is smart, but he doesn't seem to be applying it. I just got the impression he was clever and could think on his feet, but isn't really on the level of other full blown geniuses in marvel.
> 
> edit: Aside from web shooters/webbing and other general tech he designed for himself. I mean he is really young too, which could explain it a bit better.




If memory serves correctly he's on par with Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic) in terms of intelligence; which also helped him during the whole Spider Island incident and allows him to serve as a really helpful member of the Future Foundation


----------



## pentecost (Feb 15, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I'm actually glad they are starting over from a different base, I feel they totally missed the bar last go around.



x2, the first series was a major injustice, borderline unwatchable imo. the green goblin/spidey dialogue in the first film took me back to the days of watching power rangers. no bueno. i hope it's not quite as 'dark knight' as it seems from the trailer though. if so, i hope they at least took some notes from the first two ninja turtles flicks. well minus vanilla ice 

if do push this reboot in a dark direction, i hope they do a sequel around loosely based on 'kraven's last hunt.' instant classic.


----------



## Xaios (Feb 16, 2012)

Some of you guys are way too dramatic about the Raimi Spiderman movies. Maybe they didn't conform to your vision of what it should have been, but they were fun to watch in a not-bad way. If there is one thing that Sam Raimi understands, it's campiness, and they nailed it. Plus, they had Bruce Campbell, and in the end, doesn't that alone make them awesome?

(Although truthfully, I can only speak for the 1st and 2nd movies, never saw the 3rd. And I *am* still looking forward to the new one.)


----------



## flint757 (Feb 16, 2012)

Xaios said:


> Some of you guys are way too dramatic about the Raimi Spiderman movies. Maybe they didn't conform to your vision of what it should have been, but they were fun to watch in a not-bad way. If there is one thing that Sam Raimi understands, it's campiness, and they nailed it. Plus, they had Bruce Campbell, and in the end, doesn't that alone make them awesome?
> 
> (Although truthfully, I can only speak for the 1st and 2nd movies, never saw the 3rd. And I *am* still looking forward to the new one.)



First was alright, second was great, but the third one was unforgivably terrible...


----------



## Lukifer (Feb 17, 2012)

Saw the full trailer Monday at the theater. Looks pretty awesome.


----------



## Choop (Feb 17, 2012)

MFB said:


> If memory serves correctly he's on par with Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic) in terms of intelligence; which also helped him during the whole Spider Island incident and allows him to serve as a really helpful member of the Future Foundation



Ah I see, I didn't read through the spider island stuff. One of my friends did, maybe I'll just get him to fill me in on it. I did read some FF though and his costume was way sick!


----------



## MFB (Feb 17, 2012)

Spider Island itself is only six issues and theres a prelude/epilogue as well so total of 8, but I read them on there own to catch up in two days. I'd say you'd probably get more out of it that way but some stuff might not be as shocking if you havent read Spidey in a while/at all.

Amazing Spiderman comics are currently gearing up to coincide with this since issue 680 starts the next Lizard arc as well. It'll be interesting to see if they update him as far as they can which would mean killing his wife from cancer and Curt losing to the Lizard and eating his son and never able to turn into a human again. That'd be fantastic to see, not only because it's gritty and makes you sympathize for his loss of wife/son/humanity; but because it'd also be the truest to date/comic they've done.


----------



## Theemarkmiller (Mar 13, 2012)

kmanick said:


> we need another Spiderman movie?



after the first 3 nightmares. yes.


----------



## Theemarkmiller (Mar 13, 2012)

Xiphos68 said:


> Although I did enjoy seeing Venom in the third movie.



yeah, thats because they pretty much destroyed what venom SHOULD have been.


----------



## Theemarkmiller (Mar 13, 2012)

i just hated how commercial they tried to make the original 3 movies. i mean, macy gray... i could also deal with not seeing peter parker dance down the sidewalk. plus the poor planning. i mean they introduced so many characters in the 3rd movie. gwen shouldve been in the series from the beginning. venom needs to be huge. period. he needs to be like 3 times the size of spider-man drooling green slime. big nasty tongue. his mask shouldnt retract every time he speaks. seeing eddies face inside venoms mouth might be cool. the green goblin shouldnt be a shiney and power ranger looking. raimi should just stick to making horrible horror movies. there are so many villains to choose from for spider man movies, but if they do it right it could be amazing. obviously venom. i could do with a good version of the green goblin and even seeing harry osbourne become the green goblin 2. i think the right director could make a new spiderman saga amazing (no pun intended) and we need more cross overs! throw the fantastic 4 in there. the human torch and spider were pretty good friends. and daredevil. its just a matter of not making them incredibly cheesy.


----------



## MFB (Mar 13, 2012)

Spiderman had the potential to be a HUGE commercial film, and if I recall correctly - they WERE, so obviously they did something right; I mean, how many big successful films have you made? Cause currently Raimi's beating you even if you feel they're bad. They tweak things from the comic for that transition to film because sometimes, they don't translate well. Would you say Spidey's outfit looks cooler since it's got that nice faux-piping on his costume along with the little hex pattern and NOT looking like it's made of straight spandex hugging Toby McGuire's junk in all it's glory for two hours? And same for Green Goblin - he's dated in his outfit so it was an update for both film and time. In the animated series and comics, he looks like he's wearing half of Peter Pan's ward-robe with a goblin mask over it; instead they took him and said, "Norman Osborn is the CEO of Oscorp who becomes a villain, don't you think he'd give himself some ya know...protection?" 

And you want cross-overs in the new Spiderman movies? God no, Daredevil was atrocious sans the ONE scene where Jennifer Garner stood in a low cut, extremely form-fitting dress practically thrusting her boobs towards the camera, and Fantastic Four wasn't much better; as well Chris Evans was busy as Captain America for both the Cap movie and Avengers while this was shooting so it would've been hectic. Only person I think would be a cool introduction for the Spiderman series would be Kraven the Hunter since you can use him as friend first as Sergei, then have him become Kraven and play into the whole Kravenov family hunting Spiderman in the sequel.

Just let Andrew Garfield have his movie where Lizard looks like a badass and Dennis Leary acts as a tough NY cop who's actually going to hopefully give Parker a run for his money, cause if they make it REALLY up to date that mean Jameson will be Mayor of NYC and he HATES Spiderman; so it'll be a real hunt to take him down.


----------



## Theemarkmiller (Mar 13, 2012)

MFB said:


> Spiderman had the potential to be a HUGE commercial film, and if I recall correctly - they WERE, so obviously they did something right; I mean, how many big successful films have you made? Cause currently Raimi's beating you even if you feel they're bad. They tweak things from the comic for that transition to film because sometimes, they don't translate well. Would you say Spidey's outfit looks cooler since it's got that nice faux-piping on his costume along with the little hex pattern and NOT looking like it's made of straight spandex hugging Toby McGuire's junk in all it's glory for two hours? And same for Green Goblin - he's dated in his outfit so it was an update for both film and time. In the animated series and comics, he looks like he's wearing half of Peter Pan's ward-robe with a goblin mask over it; instead they took him and said, "Norman Osborn is the CEO of Oscorp who becomes a villain, don't you think he'd give himself some ya know...protection?"
> 
> And you want cross-overs in the new Spiderman movies? God no, Daredevil was atrocious sans the ONE scene where Jennifer Garner stood in a low cut, extremely form-fitting dress practically thrusting her boobs towards the camera, and Fantastic Four wasn't much better; as well Chris Evans was busy as Captain America for both the Cap movie and Avengers while this was shooting so it would've been hectic. Only person I think would be a cool introduction for the Spiderman series would be Kraven the Hunter since you can use him as friend first as Sergei, then have him become Kraven and play into the whole Kravenov family hunting Spiderman in the sequel.
> 
> Just let Andrew Garfield have his movie where Lizard looks like a badass and Dennis Leary acts as a tough NY cop who's actually going to hopefully give Parker a run for his money, cause if they make it REALLY up to date that mean Jameson will be Mayor of NYC and he HATES Spiderman; so it'll be a real hunt to take him down.



im just saying if they did everything with good taste then it would be awesome. look at watchmen. that, in my opinion was perfect. they had cheesy costumes and the way it was done made it work. its all in the director and staff behind the film. im hoping the new spidey movie does follow the ultimate universe because norman osborne actually did become a goblin. haha. regardless im pumped.


----------



## iRaiseTheDead (Mar 14, 2012)

I've always wondered... when he slings those webs towards the sky... what holds it to keep him up?


----------



## Xaios (Mar 14, 2012)

iRaiseTheDead said:


> I've always wondered... when he slings those webs towards the sky... what holds it to keep him up?



God.


----------



## Lukifer (Mar 14, 2012)

Definitely agree Venom was way too puny. I thought he was a big bad dude and Topher Grace???


----------



## flint757 (Mar 15, 2012)

Theemarkmiller said:


> im just saying if they did everything with good taste then it would be awesome. look at watchmen. that, in my opinion was perfect. they had cheesy costumes and the way it was done made it work. its all in the director and staff behind the film. im hoping the new spidey movie does follow the ultimate universe because norman osborne actually did become a goblin. haha. regardless im pumped.



It's like the difference between early batman and current batman or even a couple back. You can't tell me the original series wasn't corny. When spiderman was made superhero movies were still pretty corny hence the "lack" of effort we perceive. Now, the audience enjoys serious superheroes and as such expect it.

Don't use popularity as an argument for quality. Nickelback nuff said.


----------



## SammyKillChambers (Jun 24, 2012)

I've been excited about this film for a VERY long time. Going to see it as soon as it's out! Shot ALL the web!


----------



## MrPepperoniNipples (Jul 4, 2012)

saw it last night!

Was very imperssed

liked the actor choices a lot too

Emma Stone was fantastic, and pretty much anyone could play a better peter parker than old toby


----------



## MFB (Jul 4, 2012)

Spoiler



Probably my favorite comic book adaptation to. date.

Everything about this was great, and the writers really nailed Peter Parker for this one vs. how he was in the Raimi films. He's got one liners but they aren't his personality, he still does the right thing and try to help everyone. I think part of that is due to Andrew Garfield as well and him being a still relatively young actor and having the tall, kind of lanky look that Parker also has vs. Maguire. Emma stone was great as Gwen Stacy too and she felt very natural with Garfield, but that's to be expected when the lead actors are technically a couple. 

I felt the Lizard could've looked a bit more intimidating, mainly because in the comics and even the older animated series he had a large snout vs. a flat face like in this one where he had no nose. Aside from that he was great, and felt more like an actual threat than ANY of the villains from the original Raimi films. 

I also liked a lot of the little things like the casting for Aunt May (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen aka THE ILLUSIVE MAN) as well as the beginning with his parents and playing it out like the cartoon which if they WANTED - they could make a play on them being SHIELD agents and them being killed was part of their cover  Even the synthetic shooters were a great touch versus it being natural webbing, but it would've been cool to see him switch cartridges since we never saw it part of me went "did he ever run out?"

There's more but I forget them now, but still I recommend it to everyone


----------



## Xaios (Jul 8, 2012)

Just saw it a few hours ago. I really enjoyed it, for the most part.



Spoiler



The biggest problem is that the movie has some absolutely *glaring* plot holes and strange writing choices. For example:

1) Evil Indian Guy: You see him crack his head on the windshield of the car when Spider-Man saves him on the bridge. And then he disappears completely.

2) Doc Connors was a completely believable character right up until the moment he takes the serum that turns him into the Lizard. Then it's like his motivation changes *completely*. It's a really unnatural progression.

3) The crane scene. Now let me be clear, I actually really enjoyed it as I was watching, but it's totally absurd. It's seriously "the eagles are coming!" level of deus ex machina. Yes, they introduce the dad on the bridge, and they give him a motivation, but then they mobilize the army of crane operators as if they're marines. Do they have some sort of emergency button that sends out a signal to all the crane operators (in the middle of the night no less), like the equivalent of Order 66 or something? Except instead of "kill the Jedi, it's "mobilize the cranes so Spider-Man can use them as a bridge!" Really?? It's an absurdist version of the lighting of the beacons scene from Return of the King.


----------



## MFB (Jul 8, 2012)

Spoiler



Yeah, I noticed the Indian guy disappears on the second time around but maybe they left it so that he comes back in the followup? 

As for Conners motivation, that one they're playing more true to the current comics as Lizard is the current villain, and for a while he's been a lizard in all forms both mentally and physically claiming humans to be weak and that they don't deserve live because of it but recently he was transformed back into a human but still retains the lizard mindset so it's really cool to see/read. I think if you look at it how this started, he just accepted that Oscorp wouldn't take no for an answer and he was already fired so instead of trying to fight the good fight he says "Nope." and does what he knows he REALLY has to and how he really needs to fight them - as the Lizard. Then he just falls victim to the Lizard psyche and that's when he really starts to become like the comics. Although this time he didn't eat his own son.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 8, 2012)

Spoiler



The crane scene was a tad ridiculous, but it's a super hero movie so compared to reality a lot of it is a tad ridiculous like him being able to fight like a champ with a bullet wound when he couldn't even make it to the building until the cranes lined up. The better question for the cranes is are there really that many lying around?  

I thought the fact that he was torn by Captain Stacy's death and then at the end was like "na never mind" to be odd, but I suppose a teenager would do that. 

As for Connors he wasn't full lizard (mentally, am I right in the fact that his psyche split like Osborne as the green goblin?) when he tried stopping the Indian fellow. Once he transformed and realized what he was capable of he became obsessed with the perfection aspect (especially since as a human his arm just disappears) Once he realized this, he was basically trying to share that with the world; it may have moved a tad too quickly, but makes since nonetheless. My guess if he is still the main baddy next go around he will be more of the mindset of fuck humans they need to die. 

Now, I do agree that is was very odd that the Indian fellow is no longer relevant once a worse bad guy is present especially since he made a direct threat to Connors about the Parker's. I don't read too many comics though so it is quite possible there is a better explanation lying in there.


----------



## toiletstand (Jul 8, 2012)

had a great time watching this. its a bit bloated in some parts. but i thought it was great overall


----------



## flint757 (Jul 8, 2012)

It was superior IMO to the other installments Garfield makes a better Spidey than Toby.


----------



## pentecost (Jul 10, 2012)

Spoiler



i thought the movie was great, but they still messed with some things that they really didn't have to.

i too would have preferred a more traditional look for the lizard, i get the desire to keep him looking more like connors but it wasn't really necessary. and yeah, the crane thing was a little gratuitous. felt like a typical feel-good comic book implausibility though, so it wasn't the worst thing ever.
i didn't like how carelessly/inaccurately he flaunted his identity, it worked with the plot but it kills the notion of isolation and the suspense of preserving his secret.
i missed the banter!!! what they did with the car thief was PERFECT, but that was the only time it was really used. straight from the original ninja turtles movie. dark, gritty scene with a wiseass bordering on anti-hero. i thought they could have snuck in a few more quips throughout and still kept the serious overtones.
possibly the best stan lee cameo to date.
even with nitpicks, it's definitely a winner and lived up to the hype. i'll see it again.


----------



## MFB (Jul 10, 2012)

pentecost said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



To be fair, I believe Gwen did technically learn his identity over time but in a 2 hr 15 min movie they're obviously gonna fit it in and I thought they at least did a good job with her write in and even writing her potentially out. I love Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield, and the last thing I want to see is him snap her neck as Spiderman while she's falling and he's just trying to save her; there's depressing and then there's seeing that. It's like "NO!" The Captain Stacy thing was acceptable and I'm kind of glad they did it, because it brought them together and bridged the gap between the NYPD and himself albeit only for a minute. Did it ever happen in comics? No, but who cares. Plus, the Captain dies so it's still only him and Gwen that know.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 11, 2012)

Spoiler



Saw it last night, and I'm glad someone nailed exactly what I wanted from a Spider-Man film.

Spider-Man actually is a character in this one, whereas in the Raimi films he was neglected for Peter Parker. I like the fact that Spider-Man is more of a cocky trash-talker whereas Parker is still awkward and finding his feet. I felt like Raimi missed that aspect of the films. Spider-Man gave Parker the ability to escape his normal life and become something special, which is reflected in his increased confidence.

I'm a huge fan of the lizard, and aesthetically I initally thought the appearance of this version wasn't that great. I liked the idea of having a more elongated face, being almost dinosaur-like. However, after seeing the film I love this version. Keeping him more human was a great move, as it makes him more creepy. Plus you can still see Connors in there, which makes him less of a mindless beast and more of a twisted human.

As for the Indian guy, he ends up becoming the proto-Goblin I believe, acting as a test subject for the serum that creates the Green Goblin, so we will probably be seeing him again.

I loved everything about the film, which is more than I can say for the Raimi ones. The writing, acting and effects were all top-notch and I'm looking forward to seeing the next one. 


Also, who saw the post-credits scene?


----------



## setsuna7 (Jul 11, 2012)

Yes,saw the post credit. A very tantalizing teaser...


Spoiler



I think that dude in Connor's cell is in fact Norman Osborne,I hope, so that he will throw Gwen, and Parker will kill her by saving her with his webbing!!


----------



## flint757 (Jul 11, 2012)

Spoiler



But the voice he was hearing in his head while in the sewers was the same (or it least I thought so). Are we certain he isn't just hallucinating much like the green goblin did during his transformation (split personalities). Don't get me wrong the threat that person said was right along with what the Indian fellow said to Connors earlier so I could be way off (probably am). I doubt it is Norman though, didn't they say he was deathly ill?


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 11, 2012)

setsuna7 said:


> Yes,saw the post credit. A very tantalizing teaser...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



I think you're completely right. His voice sounded very evil and reminded me instantly of Willem Dafoe's GG (Which will be hard to top). I'm wondering whether because the Lizard is essentially the foundation for what teh Green Goblin will becaome (presumably), that they may take the Ultimate Spider-Man route and make him an actual monster rather than a mental high-tech man. They may want to take a different route to Raimi's one to freshen things up. Also did you notice Connors still had some scales on his neck? 





flint757 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> But the voice he was hearing in his head while in the sewers was the same (or it least I thought so). Are we certain he isn't just hallucinating much like the green goblin did during his transformation (split personalities). Don't get me wrong the threat that person said was right along with what the Indian fellow said to Connors earlier so I could be way off (probably am). I doubt it is Norman though, didn't they say he was deathly ill?





Spoiler



I dunno, I thought it was the split-personality just starting to emerge. It sounded much more beastly. And they said he was dying, but he might have a condition that doesn't stop him walking around. They didn't specify his condition.


----------



## setsuna7 (Jul 11, 2012)

Yes, I noticed the scales too...


Spoiler



The deep evil voice made me think that it will be Osborne.Yes I do hope they follow the Ultimate Spiderman storyline,cuz we've seen DeFoe's tech head version.so it would nice TUS version!!


----------



## synrgy (Jul 11, 2012)

Saw this on Saturday.

Preface to opinion = I've never been a big Spidey fan. I liked the story in the books on occasion - depending on the writer - and I liked the artwork back when McFarlane was doing it, but just never felt there was as much to sink my teeth into as I was able to find in other popular comic properties, subtexts aside.

I usually tend to purposely avoid spoilers/plot reveals for these kinds of movies, so I was under the _loose_ impression from the first trailer that it wasn't going to be another origin story; that it would pick up at some point where Parker has already been Spidey for a while. I was disappointed when I found out as it unfolded before my eyes that it was indeed another origin story, after all.

Anyway, in a nutshell, I liked it better than any of the Tobey Trilogy, but I still wasn't terribly impressed. Enjoyable popcorn flick, but I won't have much desire to own it when it comes out on home release.

I felt that the casting/acting was spot-on, but I also felt that the plot/pacing was thin/weak, and found much of the editing - particularly during the first 1/3 of the film - to be noticeably sloppy. In some of Peter's conversations, there are questionable camera cuts which come with visual-continuity issues.

Just my opinions, of course. Again, I thought it was good; just not as good as I think it ought to have been, particularly considering how much time, and how many chances they've now had to do this well. 4th time _still_ wasn't the charm, for me.


----------



## MFB (Jul 11, 2012)

Spoiler



I HIGHLY doubt that Osbourne is just walking around like that when we were told he was in critical condition and would die soon if Connors work wasn't finished/pushed up. The guy in the cell didn't even look like he was ill, and my guess is that with the thunder and lightning? He's Electro. He disappeared as quickly as he appeared and it seemed like the guards wouldn't just let someone stroll in to Lizard's cell even if it's him. Why not have him remain outside and talk through the bars? 

As for the voices - it was Connors psyche breaking and him becoming more attached to the Lizard side of his brain and sort of DE-evolving. Norman went through the same thing but it wasn't on the DNA level like what caused Kurt's, his was just him cracking from stress and life in general. Even in the comics now, Kurt detests humans and thinks they're weak and that's what we see happen here too.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 12, 2012)

MFB said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



There are plenty of conditions that people die from that you wouldn't be able to tell they were ill. Besides, as someone owning a company like Oscorp, he'd probably still have access to cutting-edge treatments, just not a cure. Electro as far as I remember, wasn't a scientist or particularly intelligent person, so the character we see in that scene doesn't quite seem to fit him. Besides, he questions Connors about Peter's parents, and seeing as they and Connors both worked for Oscorp, it's fairly safe to assume that their deaths probably were something to do with Osbourne. 

And true, but he does grow alternate personalities. In a recent comic Connors actually watches the Lizard eat his own son, but he cannot control his actions as the Lizard completely takes over. Then another, more recent alter-ego called 'Shed' forms.


----------



## synrgy (Jul 12, 2012)

Spoiler



Guys, it was obviously Peter Wayland..


----------



## MFB (Jul 12, 2012)

vampiregenocide said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, he questions Connors about Peter's parents, and seeing as they and Connors both worked for Oscorp, it's fairly safe to assume that their deaths probably were something to do with Osbourne.





Spoiler



I can't remember if it was just in the show or if it's technically canon, but aren't Parkers parent SHIELD agents and them being killed was part of their cover? I know that's how it went in the animated series but I can't remember if that was adopted from actual continuity or was a fancy way of them playing SHIELD into the show for more "LOOK MARVEL STUFF! ARE YOU LOOKING YET? GOOD!"


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 12, 2012)

MFB said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I can't remember if it was just in the show or if it's technically canon, but aren't Parkers parent SHIELD agents and them being killed was part of their cover? I know that's how it went in the animated series but I can't remember if that was adopted from actual continuity or was a fancy way of them playing SHIELD into the show for more "LOOK MARVEL STUFF! ARE YOU LOOKING YET? GOOD!"





Spoiler



I've not heard that before, might be the case. Would be a good way to tie in with the Avengers.


----------



## Xaios (Jul 12, 2012)

vampiregenocide said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I've not heard that before, might be the case. Would be a good way to tie in with the Avengers.





Spoiler



Never gonna happen, unfortunately. The film rights for Spider-Man are owned by a completely different party. Getting the Avengers' characters' film rights owners to agree was a monumental task, I sincerely doubt they could pull off that plus Spider-Man, especially when there's almost no cross-pollenation between these characters in the comic books.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 12, 2012)

Xaios said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Never gonna happen, unfortunately. The film rights for Spider-Man are owned by a completely different party. Getting the Avengers' characters' film rights owners to agree was a monumental task, I sincerely doubt they could pull off that plus Spider-Man, especially when there's almost no cross-pollenation between these characters in the comic books.



We can but hope. But Spider-Man has mixed with the Avengers many times. He's not always helped them, but he's had many run ins with them, including the Ultimates timeline which this movie is heavily based on.


----------



## MFB (Jul 12, 2012)

Yeah but Amazing Spiderman = Peter Parker whereas Ultimate Spiderman = Miles Morales, so even if we were to see him it'd be a different one or Sony would be getting a MONUMENTAL sum of money since they own the rights to the character.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 13, 2012)

MFB said:


> Yeah but Amazing Spiderman = Peter Parker whereas Ultimate Spiderman = Miles Morales, so even if we were to see him it'd be a different one or Sony would be getting a MONUMENTAL sum of money since they own the rights to the character.



The original Spider-Man in the Ultimate series was Peter Parker. Miles came later.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 13, 2012)

vampiregenocide said:


> The original Spider-Man in the Ultimate series was Peter Parker. Miles came later.



Just as a quick factoid how'd someone else become spider-man? (Not much of a comic reader)


----------



## MFB (Jul 13, 2012)

They killed Peter, simple as that


----------



## flint757 (Jul 13, 2012)

Okay, so how did this Miles dude gain his abilities? In the same manner?


----------



## MFB (Jul 13, 2012)

Yeah, it's just that instead of him being a genius and visiting a lab - his uncle is a thief and he stole it the spider that bites Miles for some guy who tries to doublecross him. He runs away with it and then it gets loose in the apartment, and you can guess what happens.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 13, 2012)

Okay cool.

Thanks.

I'll have to read them some time.


----------



## MFB (Jul 14, 2012)

Don't bother, it starts off very mediocre and only goes down from there. Bendis as usual is stretched thin so the quality of his works has gone downhill and this really shows it.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 14, 2012)

I've got so much catching up to do with Ultimate Spider-Man. I have the first few graphic novels and I've read a few other issues here and there, but I haven't kept up with it. :/ I only buy novels, not comics. Might have to buy a few more soon.


----------



## Magdalene123 (Sep 11, 2012)

I loved this film, it had the best visual effects ever, I am now looking forward to its sequels.


----------

