#1  
Old 06-24-2012, 04:16 PM
The Amazing Spider-Man



Directed by Marc Webb

Written by James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, Steve Kloves

Genre: Action

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

Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary, Martin Sheen, Sally Field

Rated PG-13 for sequences of action and violence

Runtime: 136 minutes


It's hard to muster up much excitement for this, but the reviews have been solid so far and I like the talent involved so I will probably check it out.

Last edited by Bourne101; 06-24-2012 at 04:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-24-2012, 04:25 PM
Like I stated many times before I can't believe were getting a Spider-Man movie flying so far under the radar, never thought I'd see the day. I'll definitely be checking this out in IMAX 3D and I'm glad to see its off to a good start on RottenTomatoes.com. I definitely agree it was a few years too soon for a reboot and most of the general audience doesn't even realize its a reboot. I like a lot of the talent involved and hopefully it brings something fresh...a true smart-ass Spider-Man is a solid first step.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-24-2012, 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AspectRatio1986 View Post
Like I stated many times before I can't believe were getting a Spider-Man movie flying so far under the radar, never thought I'd see the day.
That's how bad Spider-Man 3 was.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-24-2012, 04:54 PM
No, that's how much love Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy still has.

General audiences still have such a high regard for the work that this reboot still sits wrong in a lot of minds. That's a tough factor they will have to overcome with word of mouth. If this was Spider-Man 4 it wouldn't be under anyone's radar and most people would be going insane with anticipation.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-24-2012, 09:52 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic about this film. I definitely love the cast, and I'll see any film with Spider-Man. The early reviews out of the UK are also fairly strong.

It may be flying under the radar, but I still think it will be a solid hit. I am hearing tracking is for around 125-150 million over its long opening. (Tuesday-Sunday) Remember this comes over Fourth of July and will thus likely do quite well.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-24-2012, 10:17 PM
That I would rather see the Katy Perry 3D concert movie over this shows how little vested interest I had in the whole reboot from the get go.

I'll wait until DVD.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-25-2012, 04:31 AM
Of the 3 major super hero movies coming out this summer, I think this will clearly be the weakest of the 3 though it still looks pretty solid to me.

I think I need to revisit Sam Raimi's original Spider-Man. I originally awarded it 3 1/2 stars and I think that's probably too generous. I think this will be better but I still don't think it'll be a great movie.

Gotta feel sorry for Dylan Baker though. After having little to do for 2 movies, they finally have Lizzard be the bad guy and it's a friggin' reboot!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-25-2012, 05:03 PM
I re watched the original Raimi version about a week ago and it hasn't aged very well .

I think people were just happy to see SM in a big budget film so the film made loads of money that summer. MJ and Parker are borderline terrible in that film, although the SM aspects are still strong . Yes, GG is still a reject power ranger, still can't take him seriously .

Then we have part 2, it's still epic, it made amends for all the faults in part one, it's genuinely one of the best comic book hero films i've ever seen, even up there with TDK . Great villain with palpable menace, terrific personal journey for Parker, action set pieces to drool over, it has it all.

Part 3 was and still is a turd fest .


What does all that mean, this latest installment of the SM saga looks like they finally got it right , and i can't wait
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-25-2012, 05:49 PM
I think the quality of all 3 Spider-Man flicks are virtually the same. Good but not great.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-25-2012, 08:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChar4321 View Post
No, that's how much love Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy still has.

General audiences still have such a high regard for the work that this reboot still sits wrong in a lot of minds. That's a tough factor they will have to overcome with word of mouth. If this was Spider-Man 4 it wouldn't be under anyone's radar and most people would be going insane with anticipation.
+1, that's how I feel. SM3 wasn't very good, but I felt like Raimi built up enough capital with two 400+ million dollar domestic box office hits. He deserved another go, to fix the mistakes of SM3 (which I really felt was more the studio. Its why trilogies are so hard, when the first two are huge boxes, studios feel the need to meddle and push for every extra dollar, rather than letting the guys who got you there do their thing. Studios don't understand long term.)

Eight years ago, Batman was DOA. Nobody wanted to see another film, for the opposite reason: the Schumacher films were so terrible that WB let a relatively unknown director do whatever he wanted, just so long as he made it good. I want another SM film, as much as anyone, and I want to believe its good. What I don't want is twilight in tights.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-25-2012, 08:22 PM
To be honest, I am completely glad they done away with Maguire. The guy was pants. I am happy we've got a new cast. I still think a reboot is inappropriate considering how highly regarded the first two were but I am excited. Garfield and Stone are awesome in my books and Webb directed (500) Days of Summer
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-25-2012, 08:32 PM
I'm glad Raimi is done with this franchise. His talents are better suited elsewhere. I hate when talented directors get bogged down by big franchises. Luckily, Nolan has been able to make films in between and is cutting himself off at 3 (not to mention he has knocked each entry out of the park so far).

As for this version, I honestly think it will be close to the level of the first two entries in Raimi's series (and obviously above the 3rd). Webb is pretty talented, and Garfield and Stone are two of the better young acting talents working today. I just wish they had waited a bit longer and had gone with a slightly different vision (like what Fincher had in mind). I hardly think it will be Twilight in tights though.

Last edited by Bourne101; 06-25-2012 at 08:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-25-2012, 09:03 PM
What did Fincher have in mind?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-25-2012, 09:11 PM
So far, the look of Spider-Man has been my main draw--he looks great. However, the Lizard CGI--specifically what's shown in the trailer--looks really bad.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-25-2012, 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobe8byrant View Post
What did Fincher have in mind?
http://collider.com/david-fincher-spider-man/133170/
Quote:
“My impression what Spider-Man could be is very different from what Sam [Raimi] did or what Sam wanted to do. I think the reason he directed that movie was because he wanted to do the Marvel comic superhero. I was never interested in the genesis story. I couldn’t get past a guy getting bit by a red and blue spider. It was just a problem… It was not something that I felt I could do straight-faced. I wanted to start with Gwen Stacy and the Green Goblin, and I wanted to kill Gwen Stacy.

The title sequence of the movie that I was going to do was going to be a ten minute — basically a music video, an opera, which was going to be the one shot that took you through the entire Peter Parker [backstory]. Bit by a radio active spider, the death of Uncle Ben, the loss of Mary Jane, and [then the movie] was going to begin with Peter meeting Gwen Stacy. It was a very different thing, it wasn’t the teenager story. It was much more of the guy who’s settled into being a freak.”
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-25-2012, 11:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne101 View Post
Aka probably better than Raimi's work?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-26-2012, 03:11 AM
I'm pretty excited for this, will be surprised if it is bad

Last edited by Hucksta G; 06-26-2012 at 03:19 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-26-2012, 03:15 PM
I'll probably get around to seeing it but I am gonna see Savages before it for sure.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-28-2012, 11:00 AM
The Amazing Spider-Man

Only four days are left. I am very excited to watch this movie on 3rd July.

Download Frasier Episodes Free , Download American Idol Episodes
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-28-2012, 03:38 PM
This movie currently has a 75% on Rotten Tomatoes. Better than Spiderman 3. I am for sure watching this next week.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-29-2012, 08:39 AM
WOW! Roger Ebert gives 'Amazing Spiderman' 3.5/4 stars!

Ebert said:
Quote:
"...a remake of Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man' (2002)... This is a more thoughtful film, and its action scenes are easier to follow in space and time."
full article here: http://www.rogerebert.com/apps/pbcs....IEWS/120629969
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-29-2012, 02:17 PM
I want to like this, but I am having a hard time with Garfield.
Should be a HUGE weekend. $150 land with the way the holiday falls.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-29-2012, 05:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne101 View Post
I'm glad Raimi is done with this franchise. His talents are better suited elsewhere. I hate when talented directors get bogged down by big franchises. Luckily, Nolan has been able to make films in between and is cutting himself off at 3 (not to mention he has knocked each entry out of the park so far).

As for this version, I honestly think it will be close to the level of the first two entries in Raimi's series (and obviously above the 3rd). Webb is pretty talented, and Garfield and Stone are two of the better young acting talents working today. I just wish they had waited a bit longer and had gone with a slightly different vision (like what Fincher had in mind). I hardly think it will be Twilight in tights though.
Dear God could you imagine a Spiderman film directed by Fincher?! That would just be so fucking awesome
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-30-2012, 03:15 AM
Spidey was always my favorite comic book character. Relatable, funny, intriguing story, great villains. I still would argue Spiderman 2 is as good as any other comic book movie.

That said, the first Spiderman wasn't really great. The origin story was flawlessly done, but the movie as a whole was pretty average. I like that this movie is taking a different route (relatively speaking, 10 years for a reboot isn't much time at all) with the origin and not trying to replicate the "with great power comes great responsibility" guilt of Spiderman. I want it to stand on its own, and I want to love it. Guess we'll see in due time.

Also, I think another reason it's flying under the radar is because the other comic book movies this summer are just much, much bigger. Hard to compete with Avengers and Dark Knight Rises, and those will be the comparisons we all make, fair or not.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-30-2012, 08:18 AM
The film's release date is only a few days away, and I still can't muster up much excitement. This is coming from someone who is a HUGE Spider-Man fan. As others have said, it's too early for a Spider-Man reboot. Spider-Man 3 barely came out 5 years ago, and even though it was a trainwreck, there's no justification for this reboot at this point in time. Why not just make a Spider-Man 4 with the same cast/crew as The Amazing Spider-Man instead? I'd be way more excited about that film than...this.

With that said, I will definitely see the film. There's no way I'm passing on a Spider-Man film, considering that Spider-Man is my favorite comic-book superhero. It looks pretty decent, features a great cast (although I've been able to move past the fact that Sam Raimi is no longer involved in this franchise, it will be difficult to see Andrew Garfield playing the web-slinger instead of Tobey Maguire, who I absolutely loved as the character), and the word of mouth is positive. I'm going into the film with very low expectations, though.

We'll see, won't we?

Note: The Lizard looks fucking terrible! I don't think watching the film is going to change my mind about that.

Strider

Last edited by Strider; 06-30-2012 at 08:22 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-02-2012, 08:43 PM
This was amazing
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-02-2012, 08:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strider View Post

With that said, I will definitely see the film. There's no way I'm passing on a Spider-Man film, considering that Spider-Man is my favorite comic-book superhero. It looks pretty decent, features a great cast (although I've been able to move past the fact that Sam Raimi is no longer involved in this franchise, it will be difficult to see Andrew Garfield playing the web-slinger instead of Tobey Maguire, who I absolutely loved as the character), and the word of mouth is positive. I'm going into the film with very low expectations, though.

We'll see, won't we?

Note: The Lizard looks fucking terrible! I don't think watching the film is going to change my mind about that.

Strider
That is EXACTLY how I feel. This is the first real Marvel film (hard to count Ghost Rider or even War Zone) that is completely under my radar and has produced little or no excitement leading up to its release. Usually I know everything at every stage of development. This one, I just didn't care and kind of still don't. Maybe I'll be surprised and enjoy it more knowing NOTHING going in. I haven't even cared enough to watch any of the preview clips or TV spots. Maybe low expectations and a fresh take will pay off. I'll find out tomorrow.

Note note: The Lizard does indeed look terrible. I'm hoping it's good despite that because it's a big strike against going in.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-02-2012, 09:46 PM
I too agree that the Lizard looks pretty bad. What was the budget for this anyways? It seems like they too some short cuts on the cgi

They should of hired some of the geniuses over at Weta (the guys that did Gollum and Rise of the Apes) to make the Lizard look better.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-03-2012, 03:13 AM
Had low expectations and was pleasantly blown away, I love the original trilogy and am one of the rare people Who liked #3 but this one was better than all 3 of the first films put together. This was better than First Class which I knows gets a lot of love around here. Garfield was perfect, the directing was great, Webb understands the character, it's nice to see that Parker is genuinely smart, and can hold his own when talking with the best scientists in the world. They got so much right here, die-hard Spider-Man fans are going to appreciate this on many levels. Kiss scene at Gwens was better than upside down rain kiss in the first movie. This is top 5 best comic movies ever.

**Spoiler about after credit scene**
who was that talking to Connors in the jail cell?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-03-2012, 04:51 AM
I'm a big fan of Tobey Maguire as an actor. I think he's done some fantastic work in some incredible movies (The Cider House Rules, Wonder Boys, Seabiscuit, Brothers just to name a few) but I DEFINITELY think Andrew Garfield is a far better Peter Parker/Spider-Man than Maguire. I also like Emma Stone here more than Kristen Dunst in the Spider-Man movies and she DEFINITELY has more to do than Bryce Dallas Howard did in Spider-Man 3. Together, Garfield and Stone are wonderful. I really love the chemistry between them. Some very cute moments. Another pleasant surprise was Dennis Leary as Gwen's father. He definitely has more to do here than James Cromwell did in Spider-Man 3. The only person who doesn't beat her other counter part is Sally Field. But then again, that's probably because Field is largely wasted in the part, where as in the other Spider-Man movies, Rosemarie Harris brought a lot more to the role and was given more to do.

Spoiler:
There were a couple of things I liked more in the original Spider-Man. How Peter discovers his powers, Uncle Ben's death were both handled better in Sam Raimi's original 2002 film. Uncle Ben's death in particular, the way the whole thing played out just seemed way too much of a copy of the 2002 flick. In fact, there were several moments throughout the entire movie that just felt overly familiar. But I did like how they handled the after math of Uncle Ben's death more in this movie.


The action scenes in this movie is definitely a marked improvement over any of the 3 previous movies. I thought the Lizard looked great and I liked that the movie doesn't overuse him. And the climax set on top of Oscorp building, is pretty exciting.

All in all, I really liked and borderline loved the movie. I'm not sure yet what I'm gonna give as a rating. I'm between a 7 or an 8. I liked it enough that I'm actually leaning on an 8. I actually enjoyed this movie more than The Avengers. Though I'm sure The Dark Knight Rises will be the king of the comic book genre (heck, it'll be the king of the summer and maybe even the year!). But this is a nice appetizer for The Dark Knight Rises.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-03-2012, 04:57 AM
I still will only ever see Tobey as the real and true Spiderman. He is like family. I'll be watching this on the fourth of July.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-03-2012, 06:17 AM
Oh, btw: BEST STAN LEE CAMEO, EVER!
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-03-2012, 06:40 AM
Saw it tonight and I thought it was great.

8/10

My favourite of the year so far.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-03-2012, 06:54 AM
What a total piece of shit. I hope it flops like crazy so people at Sony get fired. I fuckin' want my money back. It actually made Spider-Man 3 a good movie. Like if I had a choice to watch The Amazing Spider-Man or Spider-Man 3, which I thought was a total travesty when I saw it at midnight back in 07, I would gladly watch Spider-Man 3 and enjoy it knowing I'm not watching that total shit fest piece of shit The Amazing Spider-Man. Like what a fucking piece of shit. People in my theatre were booing at the end which I never thought possible because of how fucking stupid Spider-Man 3 was, but this was even fucking stupider. I seriously hope they make a Spider-Man 4, I know it seemed out of the cards but this is such a total fucking piece of shit they should just go back to Raimi's. Like holy shit... Fuck Sony.

0/10

Last edited by Abuckley89; 07-03-2012 at 06:59 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-03-2012, 08:40 AM
So rant aside, what was so bad about this film?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-03-2012, 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DareDevil View Post
**Spoiler about after credit scene**
who was that talking to Connors in the jail cell?
My guess, probably most people feel the same, Norman Osborne.
Even when I saw the trailers I figured it was Osborn just from the voice. Reminded me a bit of Willam Dafoe in a way.
As for the movie, I enjoyed it. I thought Andrew Garfield was good and fairly natural playing a young peter parker. Emma stone is always nice to see. To be honest the cast was pretty good. Lizards look still felt off as did the CG but overall I thought it was a very well done reboot.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-03-2012, 08:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodMagnus View Post
My guess, probably most people feel the same, Norman Osborne.
Even when I saw the trailers I figured it was Osborn just from the voice. Reminded me a bit of Willam Dafoe in a way.
I don't think he was Norman Osborn because I think they would want to get a higher profile actor to play Osborn. I mean, Michael Masse, the actor who we saw in the scene, is one of those character actors who people probably know his face, but not his name. But I don't think he's high profile enough to get a role as big as Norman Osborn.

That's just what I think though. I could be wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-03-2012, 09:04 AM
Why not? This reboot was a bold enough move. Why not get a lesser known to play Goblin/Osborn?
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-03-2012, 09:10 AM
Haters gonna hate....9/10 best comic book film of the year so far , the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is amazing ..it actually does have a 500 Days Of Summer feel , which is not bad IMO. I can't fucking wait for the sequel of this movie , Sony has taken the right direction. And Garfield is so much better as Parker , Tobey was alright ...but acting wise Garfield is so much better.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-03-2012, 10:11 AM
Hmm, someone is claiming that ASM makes SM part 3 a good movie ,now i know i can't take him seriously . The rating is silly also 0/10 . I have to admit the post is funny but nonsensical .

I'm glad the people i normally trust with their opinions are the ones who are impressed with this film although i was convinced a long time ago, just gives me more confidence about it's quality
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump