The Amazing Spider-Man (Trailer)

I scoffed when this was first announced, but that was a damn good trailer. I'll probably end up seeing this now. It looks better than the Sam Raimi movies.

The Unseen Moon said:

One thing I've learned over the years is this simple rule:

Never base an entire movie from a trailer!

Because trailers are always misleading. They can always make a movie look better or worse than they actually are.

Click to expand...

You've obviously never seen Dan in Real Life, then. Crappy trailers the honestly portrayed a crappy movie.

That being said, the second trailer has me stoked - Spider-Man AND Avengers in the same year? Hell yes.

Going to see it tonight in 3-D IMAX.

dragonjax said:

And...seriously? What's up with the mysterious Parker Parents?

Click to expand...

That goes all the way back to Amazing Spider-Man Annual #5, IIRC, from about 1968 or so.

I've been patiently waiting for the Lizard to make his appearance. It's about dadgum time! I am cautiously optimistic.

Fantastic! Better than any of the predecessors. And a complete reboot. Created a new backstory with Peter Parker's mom and dad. His dad is a scientist working at OsCorp along with Dr. Connors, and it shows how Peter comes to live with Uncle Ben and Aunt May. Has Gwen Stacy and her police captain father.

Or maybe I was just so wowed by the 3-D special effects. I had no idea. To me, 3-D was crappy red/blue glasses and a fuzzy picture. This was crystal clear and multi-dimensional. Spidey swinging into the theater just awed me.

I thought 3-D was just a silly gimmick until I saw this.

Saw it the other day with my kids and enjoyed it for the most part. Here's my thoughts and hope you don't mind but even if you do...neener neener neener...

Positives: The acting is very good. Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield look like high schoolers instead of twenty to thirty-somethings attempting to look like high school students. Sheen, Field, and Denis 'Wise-ass' Leary are all very solid in their supporting roles.

It sticks more closely to the comic book version i.e. his web shooters (SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--sorry). Interesting backstory plotline set up but not fully explored so I guess I'll have to wait for the sequel. The action is good and no, it doesn't have the hyperkinetic camera movements of Sam Raimi's versions but the direction is still solid. Spiderman is more athletic in this, like a gymnast and a contortionist. Costume is pretty good but a bit different. Still, acceptable.

Romance is plausible. In fact, the way the two leads play it, it seemed very nicely done and totally believable, the pangs of first love, the losses, and the heartache associated with it.

Negatives: I was a bit disappointed in The Lizard. Great CGI but the face...uh-uh, not what I expected although not terrible. The pacing was a bit slow at first but then it picked up after the 'bite me' scene. Ending seemed a tiny bit disappointing. Garfield needs to eat! I know Spiderman isn't supposed to be super-muscular like Superman or Captain America, but this boy needs a sandwich! (Actually, three or five of them). He should have put on about ten more pounds of muscle to give himself the 'wiry, muscular look' instead of the 'dieting wannabe gymnast' look.

Overall verdict: If you're expecting another really fast-paced Sam Raimi-ish type of flick, you'll be disappointed. If you want something a bit deeper emotionally, then this is it for you. Four out of five stars.

J.S.F. said:

It sticks more closely to the comic book version i.e. his web shooters (SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--sorry).

Negatives: ... Garfield needs to eat! I know Spiderman isn't supposed to be super-muscular like Superman or Captain America, but this boy needs a sandwich!

Click to expand...

Spoiling...

I hated Sam Rami's organic web-shooters. In fact, I found it rather creepy.

I liked that the movie attributed Steve Ditko because this Spider-Man is very Ditkoesque. Not overly muscular, but more skinny.

I'd give it a 4/5 as well. One of the better movies I've seen in a while, possibly my favorite superhero movie. Acting was great, dialogue was great, the pace might be seen as slow, but that put the emphasis on the characters and relationships as opposed to shit blowing up. I think Garfield makes a great Peter Parker/Spider (both in terms of his superficial appearance and his ability to play the character...)

I'm on the fence, but leaning more toward wanting to see it from what I read on boards like this. So, will keep checking back!

Saw it last night. Liked it lots. I definitely prefer it over the previous Spidey movies.

I was with four adults and three kids. Two thumbs up from everyone.

Is everyone Spideyied out? I'd have thought there'd be more discussion On this.

*shrugs* I'd rather have a Howard The Duck reboot.

That would be fun.

^^^No, it wouldn't.

I'm seeing this tomorrow So excited! I'm a huge fan of the comics (and I have a super girly crush on Andrew Garfield, which doesn't hurt either). *crossing my fingers this'll be good*

Saw it, reviewed it, hated it.

I was very disapointed with the movie. Not only does it fail to measure up to Spiderman 1-3, but it's a piss poor effort to movies like Chronicle, The Avengers, or Dark Knight. This is the kind of movie I was hoping they'd stopped making years ago.

I think they made this move too soon.

Seriously, the last group of spider man films were only a few years old. I think if they'd have waited a few more years (say late 2010's), the last batch of spiderman films would have been forgotten enough to justify a reboot. Especially given that the first two films were excellent, and even the third wasn't that bad.

I know someone is going to bring up batman begins, but you have to admit the batman franchise was circling the toilet before Nolan was given the reins. The last good batman movie was made in ~92?, over 13 years prior to batman begins. In that context after the shitty batman films of the mid-late 90s, I can see a reboot.

I really, really enjoyed the film. I thought Garfield was excellent as Peter, and I loved that the movie was much closer to the comic books than in the previous films.

However, I agree - I thought it was rebooted too soon after the 1-3 Raimi ones... I do have to admit that our theater was filled with lots of kids between 14-5, who maybe haven't seen those ones. So,

Maybe my expectations were low, but I really really enjoyed the hell out of this movie. It surprised me. I felt this was a better Peter Parker (not in terms of acting, but in terms of what the actor was given to work with: screenplay/writing/dialogue).

I felt the story had more heart and I was far more "behind" Peter Parker as a character in this movie than I ever was in any of the Raimi films. I felt like Raimi always had too much going on in his films, always put character development in the backseat in lieu of adding in another act or putting in more dazzling fights and such.

I'm ready for more and I'm wholly on board. It feels so weird to even be typing this, but I'm totally sold.

Saw it today. I was skeptical going in, thinking it was too soon, etc., but I was pleasantly surprised. I like Garfield's Parker/Spiderman better than Maguire's. He had the sarcasm and wise cracks down pat, unlike Maguire's who played him too emo. Overall, I really liked it. Also, Martin Sheen pretty much owns the screen in every role he ever does.

One thing I didn't like, though, was the return to cartridge-based web-shooters. That was a key innovation to the lore that Raimi and his team made that was so obvious it was brilliant. It perfectly ties into him being a mutant and fits logically with his other spider-based mutant powers. Hell, even the comics followed suit (but I think they reverted back to cartridges later).

I'm curious now how they'll handle Gwen Stacy's story in the second film and what repercussions I might have in continuing this new series. No spoilers for people unfamiliar with the comics, but you can read about it here, if you'd like. The resolution of her storyline was not only a pivotal moment in the history of Spiderman, but also in the history of comics in general. It seemed like they were setting it up in this movie.

Opty said:

One thing I didn't like, though, was the return to cartridge-based web-shooters. That was a key innovation to the lore that Raimi and his team made that was so obvious it was brilliant. It perfectly ties into him being a mutant and fits logically with his other spider-based mutant powers. Hell, even the comics followed suit (but I think they reverted back to cartridges later).

Click to expand...

See, now I loathed those organic web-shooters. Absolutely loathed them. That was one of my biggest complaints about the Raimi version.

Well, even though Peter Parker is, in the comics world, one of the big genius brains of the Marvel Universe nearly on par with Mr. Fantastic, Ant-Man, Tony Stark, etc., it's pretty tough for me to accept that a high school kid could invent something that not even the world's leading chemical companies could. If he were that smart in high school, he wouldn't have been in high school.

The organic web shooters make much more sense from a mutant powers perspective, especially given all the other spider abilities he developed from the bite (which eventually led to his giant spider mutation in the Six Arms Saga).

Opty said:

I'm curious now how they'll handle Gwen Stacy's story in the second film and what repercussions I might have in continuing this new series. No spoilers for people unfamiliar with the comics, but you can read about it here, if you'd like. The resolution of her storyline was not only a pivotal moment in the history of Spiderman, but also in the history of comics in general. It seemed like they were setting it up in this movie.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen this the new movie, but I was a psuedo-fan of the Raimi trilogy (I liked the first two, didn't care for the third, and was rather apathetic towards Dunst's portrayal of MJ, though she's a talented actress in other movies).

I want to see this one, despite my unsureness of Garfield (I didn't care for his role in Dr. Parnassus). I like that they're going back to the roots of the original comic. And I hope they're following the Gwen Stacy storyline.

I mean, I like Mary Jane, but I don't know why they used her first instead of just following the GwenSS in SM#1 and introducing MJ to brighten up emo Parker in #2, thus giving him more incentive to be so damn emo over her because he's trying to be super protective. And then the love triangle with Harry would've made much more sense. Don't get me wrong, I thought James Franco was hot, but his role in the movie did nothing for me.

tbh, I'm kind of hoping they introduce Felicia, too. But I used to watch the Amazing Spiderman when I was younger, and while I'm a fan of SM, I couldn't care less for most of his villains. Kingpin was my favorite. Lizard and Green Goblin and Doctor Octupus were kind of weak, IMO. Campy. The weekly X-Men villains were less pathetic to me. And I can't stand most of them -- love Magneto, though.

I started reading Spider-Man comics when Peter was with Felicia but then went back and read old ones and have always liked Gwen better than MJ. Don't get me wrong MJ is cool and awesome in her own right and I Hulk out massively with what they did with the "One More Day/Brand New Day" storyline. But Gwen has a special place in my heart. So much so that the FLI in my comic book based WIP is named Gwen.

I enjoyed the movie very much. (though there was some nerd rage over some basic mistakes/changes. The Lizard cannot surprise Spider-Man people. Spidey-Sense! WTF?) Emma Stone nails Gwen Stacy. Garfield is good and different enough from Maguire to make it his own character. Dennis Leary was an inspired choice to play George Stacy.

That said I will eat my shoe if the next movie doesn't end how we all think it will end and then the last scene is this.

I saw it this weekend and was pleasantly surprised. I thought Andrew Garfield made a great Parker and Emma Stone is always great to watch.

The one thing that stood out from the previous franchise is that I believed Peter is a smart kid. You're only ever told as much in the Raimi films, but I appreciated here the small things--the engineered lock on his door--and the bigger picture items like his web shooters and his work with Dr. Connors. It also took on a darker edge of a high school kid figuring out how to deal with extraordinary pain (parents, Uncle Ben's death) at the same time he comes into extraordinary power.