PDA

View Full Version : Movies and TV Spider Man 2


Pages : [1] 2

whoman69
11-02-2012, 03:09 PM
Jamie Foxx reportedly up for the villain in ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2′

Your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man will face off against a "shocking" new adversary in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2." According to Variety, Oscar-winner Jamie Foxx is in early talks to play the villain Electro in Sony's superhero sequel to this summer's reboot of the Marvel Comics' franchise.

While the studio hasn't officially commented on casting, Foxx all but confirmed the role Thursday with a post-Halloween tweet:
Dressed up as Electro for Halloween last night. Costume fits well.
— Jamie Foxx (@iamjamiefoxx) November 1, 2012

The classic Spidey villain Electro, aka Maxwell "Max" Dillon, gained the ability to control electricity after being struck by lightning. Created by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, he first appeared in "The Amazing Spider-Man #9" in February 1964. Foxx would be a departure from the comic-book character, who has traditionally been depicted as being Caucasian.

There was a hint that Electro would be the villain of the next movie at the end of "The Amazing Spider-Man." In a short scene during the credits, Dr. Curt Conners, aka the Lizard (played by Rhys Ifans), was visited in his jail cell by a mysterious figure obscured in the shadows. The man (played by actor Micheal Masse) asked Connors if he told Peter Parker the truth about his father, and when Connors says no, he disappears with a flash of lightning. This lead some people to assume that figure was supposed to be Electro, but others believe it to be Norman Osborn, who was mentioned throughout the film (and later becomes the villain, Green Goblin).

This would be the first time Electro would appear in a movie, but back in 1991, director James Cameron developed his own "Spider-Man" project that would have featured the character as one of the villains. Cameron's version got caught up in a web of legal issues surrounding the rights, and he eventually left the project, going on to direct "True Lies" and "Titanic." "Spider-Man" wouldn't hit the big screen until the next decade.

Stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are set to reprise their roles as Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, respectively, with Shailene Woodley ("The Descendants") reportedly in talks to join the cast as a young Mary Jane Watson. "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is scheduled to swing into theaters on May 2, 2014. Jamie Foxx will next be seen playing the title role in Quentin Tarantino's "Django Unchained," opening this Christmas.

UPDATE: In an interview with Collider.com, director Marc Webb confirmed that the villain of the sequel will be Electro. He said, "I think Electro is an incredibly visual, exciting, dangerous villain. So, there's a lot of appealing stuff that's going to happen."

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/jamie-foxx-reported-villain-amazing-spider-man-2-221012641.html

Fruit Ninja
11-02-2012, 08:19 PM
I couldnt even watch more then 40 min in the first one of this reboot. shit was terrible.

Guru
11-03-2012, 02:30 AM
I couldnt even watch more then 40 min in the first one of this reboot. shit was terrible.

I really enjoyed it. of course, I went in expecting it to stink so it could only go uphill with me.

Pushead2
11-03-2012, 02:56 AM
Shit is trash

CoMoChief
11-03-2012, 07:15 AM
that last spiderman was downright laughable.

Deberg_1990
11-03-2012, 08:48 AM
I really enjoyed it. of course, I went in expecting it to stink so it could only go uphill with me.

This. I put off seeing it for weeks, then finally took my son. We both really enjoyed it.

DBOSHO
11-03-2012, 11:39 AM
You guys are literally the only people outside of myself that didnt like the new one.

I didnt like it at all. Everyone else thought it was oscar worthy.

Tribal Warfare
11-04-2012, 01:52 AM
<object id="sbPlayer" width="500" height="375" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" classid="clsid:D<param name="movie" value="http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation.com/mediaplayer/springboard/mediaplayer.swf"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="flashvars" value="config={'externalConfiguration':'http://www.springboardplatform.com/superconfig/co007.js','playlist':'http://cms.springboardplatform.com/xml_feeds_advanced/index/122/rss3/591231/'}"></param><embed src="http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation.com/mediaplayer/springboard/mediaplayer.swf" width="500" height="375" flashvars="config={'externalConfiguration':'http://www.springboardplatform.com/superconfig/co007.js','playlist':'http://cms.springboardplatform.com/xml_feeds_advanced/index/122/rss3/591231/'}" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent"></embed></object>

KILLER_CLOWN
11-04-2012, 10:20 AM
I have zero interest in the NEW Spiderman, I really liked the old crew and thought it was a horrible idea to reboot it now.

CoMoChief
11-04-2012, 10:34 AM
I don't understand the reboot...being that they had just made record sales on the last spiderman series that wasn't really that long ago...at all. Did the film makers really believe they were going to top that? Doesn't make sense. 20 yrs from now...maybe, but why so soon?


It'd be like if someone re-did The Dark Knight 10 yrs from now. Horrible idea (sadly someone will do it).

keg in kc
11-04-2012, 10:40 AM
It'd be like if someone re-did The Dark Knight 10 yrs from now. Horrible idea (sadly someone will do it).They won't remake The Dark Knight, but they will reboot Batman, starting with the Justice League movie.

ThaVirus
11-04-2012, 07:17 PM
Not excited about Electro..

Being that its a reboot, Venom and Carnage shouldn't be off limits. I'd like to see Venom done right.

ThaVirus
11-04-2012, 07:30 PM
It sucks that guys like Rhino, Scorpion, Shocker and Vulture are either lame or just meatheads with boring backstories. It really limits the Spiderman rogue gallery. Perhaps they could bring in the Kingpin or Tombstone to use some of those guys as lackies.

Actually now that I think about it, Kingpin rights may be owned by a different studio..

Oh well. They should be able to work with Green Goblin, Hobgoblin, Venom, Carnage, Doc Ock and Lizard.

lcarus
11-04-2012, 10:50 PM
I don't understand the reboot...being that they had just made record sales on the last spiderman series that wasn't really that long ago...at all. Did the film makers really believe they were going to top that? Doesn't make sense. 20 yrs from now...maybe, but why so soon?


It'd be like if someone re-did The Dark Knight 10 yrs from now. Horrible idea (sadly someone will do it).

I'm with you. Seemed so soon to reboot a series. However I can't really blame them. This movie made 750 million dollars world wide in box office sales. Plus they'll make more with DVD/Blu-ray and toys and shit. Once they make another couple sequels (at least) they'll have made a shitload of money whether the movies suck or not.

I personally liked the first 2 Spider-Mans with Tobey Maguire. Thought they were pretty entertaining. The third one I did not care for much. The addition of Venom was poorly done and pretty weak.

Haven't seen the rebooted "Amazing Spider-Man" yet, but I thought the trailer looked ok. In fact my brother has it on blu-ray. I think I'll give it a watch tonight before bed. I really love Emma Stone and Denis Leary, so it has that going for it. I don't know what to think of Andrew Garfield though. Time will tell I guess.

Jamie Foxx as Electro seems dumb as hell though. Not a fan of that move. Who knows though. I thought Heath Ledger was a terrible choice for the Joker initially. How wrong was I about that! ROFL

Aries Walker
11-04-2012, 11:04 PM
It sucks that guys like Rhino, Scorpion, Shocker and Vulture are either lame or just meatheads with boring backstories. It really limits the Spiderman rogue gallery. Perhaps they could bring in the Kingpin or Tombstone to use some of those guys as lackies.
Shocker I'll give you. Vulture is at least as interesting as a behind-the-scenes puppet-master as Tombstone will ever be. Scorpion has the whole interdependency/can't-function-without-a-symbiote thing, plus his history as a private eye. Rhino was a meathead for a long time, but they've put some real depth to him recently, and now he's an absolutely fascinating character.

You wanna talk meatheads, there's always Hydro-Man. He doesn't even get a costume.

Tribal Warfare
02-04-2013, 11:58 PM
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Has Started Production (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Has-Started-Production-35526.html)

It seems like just yesterday we were waiting for Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man to swing into theaters, and already its sequel is on the way. In the last few months we've heard some huge casting news, from the addition of Dane DeHaan as Harry Osborne and Shailene Woodleyas Mary Jane to Jamie Foxx as Electro and possibly Paul Giamatti as The Rhino. Now that the origin story is out of the way we're fascinated to see what kind of story the director will be spinning for part two. And it all begins today.

Webb has announced on his Twitter account that production has officially started on The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and has posted a picture to mark the occasion. Posted with the message, "Day 1. #anamorphic #film #philthecameraoperator," what's interesting about the photo is that the director appears to be using film instead of shooting digitally (like he did for the last movie), which means that he's not shooting in 3D here.

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news/35526/_1360046955.jpg

lawrenceRaider
02-06-2013, 11:36 AM
I really enjoyed it. of course, I went in expecting it to stink so it could only go uphill with me.

Same here. I'll watch the next one.

DaneMcCloud
02-06-2013, 11:41 AM
I don't understand the reboot...

Sony was under a contractual deadline. Either reboot immediately or watch the rights revert back to Marvel.

CoMoChief
02-06-2013, 04:30 PM
Sony was under a contractual deadline. Either reboot immediately or watch the rights revert back to Marvel.

ahh i see

Javabean
02-07-2013, 10:57 AM
Sony was under a contractual deadline. Either reboot immediately or watch the rights revert back to Marvel.

My understanding was that Sony didn't need to reboot it -- they needed to make a movie or lose the rights.

I understand why they didn't want to continue the Raimi series, but they could've at least assumed we're all familiar with how Spider-Man got his powers and skipped the origin, which I thought was the weakest part of the new movie. Raimi's first one did it better, even as corny as it was.

But once it got past the origin, Webb's version was interesting if not amazing. I look forward to the next one.

BigChiefTablet
02-07-2013, 11:02 AM
I thought the latest was ok, not great, but decent. BUt I'm glad they dumped whiney ass Tobey McQuire.

ThaVirus
02-07-2013, 11:08 AM
My understanding was that Sony didn't need to reboot it -- they needed to make a movie or lose the rights.

I understand why they didn't want to continue the Raimi series, but they could've at least assumed we're all familiar with how Spider-Man got his powers and skipped the origin


Yeah, I can agree with this.

EVERYONE knows Spider-Man's powers and how he got them.

Frosty
02-07-2013, 12:09 PM
But once it got past the origin, Webb's version was interesting if not amazing. I look forward to the next one.

I agree. I liked that the new one was more old school Spidey (like have to make his own webbing) than the Raimi ones. One change I did like was making Aunt May more badass. The weak, frail Aunt May plot devices from the comics got old over time.

Gravedigger
02-07-2013, 09:11 PM
IGN has a story up that shows a locker with the number 14, from a set photo tweeted by Marc Webb with the hashtag #happybirthday. Knowing Dane Dehaan has been cast as Harry Osborn fans have already started freaking out about the picture and drawing conclusions from it.

In the Ultimate Spiderman comics Eddie Brock and Peter Parker find the Venom suit in a locker with the same number. February 6th is Dehaans birthday and Josh Trank, who directed Chronicle, is set to direct the Venom stand alone movie. All signs point to Dehaan being Venom outside of him being cast as Harry Osborn. I think Dehaan, the actor, would make a great Venom. However I'm tired of the skinny Venom, didn't like it in Spidey 3, don't like the idea of it now.

http://screenrant.com/amazing-spider-man-venom-harry-osborn/?_r=true

Tribal Warfare
02-28-2013, 06:21 PM
New Amazing Spider-Man 2 Set Photo Might Reference The Rhino (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Set-Photo-Might-Reference-Rhino-36081.html)

OMG, Spider-Man is going to cameo in this summer’s Iron Man 3, where Peter Parker will help Tony Stark take down The Mandarin (Sir Ben Kingsley), who receives his power from ten cosmic rings he obtained from the alien technology of a crashed spaceship! Seriously! Why else would The Amazing Spider-Man director Marc Webb Tweet this latest photo other than to drive Spider-Man fans mad? It’s so obviously a confession of a Mighty Marvel Team-Up … right?!

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news/36081/_1362093182.jpg

OK, so this is just the new photo posted to Webb’s busy Twitter account, and it could mean everything – or nothing at all. The director has teased a few tantalizing images on his account that usually send Spidey trackers (like myself) into a frenzy to figure out what he might mean. An ominous locker? It has to mean Venom. Right?

Today’s photo shows a layout of various designs for ring tattoos. For all we know Webb is in the market for his own tattoo, and decided to share his decision with friends, family and followers. But he tagged it as “Day 18” of the current ASM 2 shoot. And he hashtagged it with #pravda. That’s where things get interesting.

Pravda, if you do a little digging, is the Russian word for truth and also a political newspaper associated with the country's Communist party. The paper was closed by Russian President Boris Yelstin temporarily before being revived by the Communists to be their vocal mouthpiece. Could this be an allusion to Paul Giamatti’s Rhino character? In the comics, the Rhino is also known as Aleksei Mikhailovich Sytsevich, a Russian mafioso who morphs into his brutish super-criminal when special armor is bonded to his body.

Or Webb could simply have been tweeting from the American lounge Pravda SoHo, which is famous for its Russian vodka.

No matter how you spin it, Webb has all of us dancing on his web as he continues to tease his sequel. May 2, 2014 can not get here quick enough.

Frosty
03-02-2013, 12:53 AM
I like that the Spider-Man reboot is old school but some of those early villains were lame. The Rhino is one of the lame ones. So is the Shocker. How about Mysterio or the Vulture if they are going to avoid doing the Green Goblin again?

Tribal Warfare
04-16-2013, 08:59 PM
http://latino-review.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/tasm2-electro1.jpg

Sure-Oz
04-16-2013, 09:04 PM
http://latino-review.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/tasm2-electro1.jpg

WTF? Electro doesnt he have a mask

Tribal Warfare
04-16-2013, 09:08 PM
WTF? Electro doesnt he have a mask


http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Utimate-Electro-Amazing-Spider-Man-2.jpg

they are basing the look on the new cartoon "Ultimate Spider-Man".

Deberg_1990
04-16-2013, 09:09 PM
http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Utimate-Electro-Amazing-Spider-Man-2.jpg

they are basing the look on the new cartoon "Ultimate Spider-Man".

Good show. I've watched it with my son a few times.

Tribal Warfare
04-16-2013, 09:16 PM
Good show. I've watched it with my son a few times.

I found their comedy ploy is over the top with trying too hard at that aspect .

bowener
04-16-2013, 09:18 PM
http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Utimate-Electro-Amazing-Spider-Man-2.jpg

they are basing the look on the new cartoon "Ultimate Spider-Man".

So we're going to see Jamie's junk again?

Deberg_1990
04-16-2013, 09:20 PM
I found their comedy ploy is over the top with trying too hard at that aspect .

Heh, at times I guess....but it's pretty funny most of the time.

-King-
04-16-2013, 09:29 PM
The Tobey McGuire Spiderman origin movie was 100x better than the reboot. The reboot was just laughable.

Javabean
04-17-2013, 07:14 AM
Heh, at times I guess....but it's pretty funny most of the time.

I've been warming up to it, although I'm still disappointed that they cancelled the excellent "The Spectacular Spider-Man" for this. It's decent but it's clearly aimed at a younger audience -- my 10-year-old niece loves it.

And yes I realize the irrationality of being disappointed that a cartoon is targeted at 10-year-olds.

Deberg_1990
04-17-2013, 07:33 AM
I've been warming up to it, although I'm still disappointed that they cancelled the excellent "The Spectacular Spider-Man" for this. It's decent but it's clearly aimed at a younger audience -- my 10-year-old niece loves it.

And yes I realize the irrationality of being disappointed that a cartoon is targeted at 10-year-olds.

Yea, its probably aimed a little younger, but its not overly or too kiddie like Super Hero Squad is.

Whats funny is how much SHIELD stuff is in it, yet they cant weave Spiderman into the SHIELD stuff in the movies.

bowener
04-17-2013, 03:37 PM
Yea, its probably aimed a little younger, but its not overly or too kiddie like Super Hero Squad is.

Whats funny is how much SHIELD stuff is in it, yet they cant weave Spiderman into the SHIELD stuff in the movies.

Sony owns the rights to Spiderman's big screen appearances and Disney owns the rest of Marvel I believe. Lame.

Sure-Oz
04-17-2013, 05:25 PM
http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Utimate-Electro-Amazing-Spider-Man-2.jpg

they are basing the look on the new cartoon "Ultimate Spider-Man".

gotcha..atleast they didnt pull it out of nowhere

Buck
04-17-2013, 05:38 PM
Put me in the "I enjoyed the first one" group.

Not looking forward to Jamie Fucking Foxx though. WTF.

Simply Red
04-17-2013, 05:41 PM
The last Spider Man I saw was so bad - I took it back to Redbox after viewing it for about 7 minutes. It was like trying to tolerate The Hobbit.

Cmd'r&Chief
04-17-2013, 09:13 PM
You guys are all douche noodles. The first spiderman trilogy was way too childish. With the exception of James Franco, William Dafoe, and the guy who played Jameson, the cast was a joke. You guys can keep your Walt Disney spiderman trilogy. The rest of the world will appreciate a spiderman with a more realistic and dark twist.

Gravedigger
04-18-2013, 01:12 AM
You guys are all douche noodles. The first spiderman trilogy was way too childish. With the exception of James Franco, William Dafoe, and the guy who played Jameson, the cast was a joke. You guys can keep your Walt Disney spiderman trilogy. The rest of the world will appreciate a spiderman with a more realistic and dark twist.

I thought that the second Spidey was the best movie, one of the best comic book movies of all time. I found that the remake was on par with the original, some things I didn't care about on both, some things seemed cheezy and forced on both, the Villains weren't as developed as I would've liked them to be, etc.

Electro interests me, and if rumors are true, Dane Dehaan as Venom would be super sweet, but I feel he'd be better as Carnage.

Superturtle
04-18-2013, 02:01 AM
Wonder if
Peter will kill Gwen on accident like in the comics
JFC that would be a dark twist.

Also they're filming right by me in Rochester NY. 10 days I think.

Buehler445
04-18-2013, 07:48 AM
Wonder if
Peter will kill Gwen on accident like in the comics
JFC that would be a dark twist.

Also they're filming right by me in Rochester NY. 10 days I think.

Shit man. Surely they won't do that after they Needlessly killed her father.

Deberg_1990
07-29-2013, 08:41 PM
Comic Con trailer leaks online. watch it fast while it lasts....

http://vk.com/video64139721_165924045?hash=febc6afa1a3367fc

Buehler445
07-29-2013, 08:49 PM
Looks decent.

Frazod
07-29-2013, 09:00 PM
Meh. I preferred the Tobey Maguire/Kirsten Dunst movies. Maybe not the third one, but definitely the first two.

These reboots are getting ridiculous.

KILLER_CLOWN
07-29-2013, 09:13 PM
Meh. I preferred the Tobey Maguire/Kirsten Dunst movies. Maybe not the third one, but definitely the first two.

These reboots are getting ridiculous.

Me too, dumbass decision to reboot them.

Aries Walker
07-29-2013, 09:14 PM
Nice trailer. It still looks like it will stink.

Also, Jamie Foxx looks ridiculous in the makeup.

Guru
07-29-2013, 09:47 PM
Audience didn't seem too impressed. usually you would hear a bunch of cheering during a comic con trailer.

Doesn't look very good at all.

Deberg_1990
07-29-2013, 10:33 PM
Audience didn't seem too impressed. usually you would hear a bunch of cheering during a comic con trailer.


I honestly think its because we are reaching a point of diminishing returns with Spider-Man. It's become so commonplace, it's become rather boring and blah.

Frazod
07-29-2013, 10:55 PM
They'll make a new one starring Justin Bieber in 2017.

-King-
07-30-2013, 02:44 AM
You guys are all douche noodles. The first spiderman trilogy was way too childish. With the exception of James Franco, William Dafoe, and the guy who played Jameson, the cast was a joke. You guys can keep your Walt Disney spiderman trilogy. The rest of the world will appreciate a spiderman with a more realistic and dark twist.

How are these new Spider Man movies more realistic or darker?

I couldn't even finish the Amazing Spiderman. It's a horrible movie. It's nowhere near as good as the first movie in the Tobey Maguire trilogy.

-King-
07-30-2013, 02:49 AM
By the way, is there a spiderman villain that isn't basically a science experiment gone wrong?

Superturtle
07-30-2013, 02:58 AM
By the way, is there a spiderman villain that isn't basically a science experiment gone wrong?
I think Rhino is going to be in a robot suit or something. If they are going the sinister six route with movies 3 and 4 they better get Alfred Molina as Doc Rock again. He was so fucking perfect.

Aries Walker
07-30-2013, 04:37 AM
To be fair, most of Spider-Man's major villains were created in the 60's, when comic book characters weren't exactly nuanced. On the other hand, that same decade gave us Loki, Galactus, Kingpin, Magneto, Juggernaut, Mandarin, Ultron, and Dr. Doom. So, yeah, for being the story of a science wunderkind, Spider-Man is unusually anti-science in this regard.

Rausch
07-30-2013, 06:45 AM
http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Utimate-Electro-Amazing-Spider-Man-2.jpg

they are basing the look on the new cartoon "Ultimate Spider-Man".

I really don't like this half Ultimates/ half traditional approach marvel has taken with their movies lately.

Anyong Bluth
07-31-2013, 04:22 PM
Me too, dumbass decision to reboot them.

They are contractually obligated to do a movie in x amount of time otherwise the rights to Spidey revert back to Marvel. Sony had to really fast track the last movie because the deadline was quickly approaching. I'm not sure of the language, because obviously they can't expect to constantly churn out flicks and not expect it to get tired and diminish expected box office numbers- my guess is its like 7- 10 years max between movies or they lose the rights- which many fanboys would love if Marvel got them back so the character could be used without restriction in the Marvel movies

Aries Walker
07-31-2013, 05:50 PM
You guys are all douche noodles. The first spiderman trilogy was way too childish. With the exception of James Franco, William Dafoe, and the guy who played Jameson, the cast was a joke. You guys can keep your Walt Disney spiderman trilogy. The rest of the world will appreciate a spiderman with a more realistic and dark twist.
Here's the problem, though: he's not a dark character. He's a trickster, a fast-talking and flag-waving good guy saving the world while taking care of his elderly aunt. He tries to be a good role model, wears bright colors, and is a teacher by day. He struggles with guilt and sacrifice and doing the right thing, but he's not a gloomy or shadowy guy, like Batman, Daredevil, or Punisher. By trying to make him (and Superman, because they did this same thing in Man of Steel) into a dark, gritty, Batman-ish character, they're losing who he is.

The ones who are doing it right are (no surprise here) the makers of Captain America, and to a lesser extent the rest of the Avengers movies. They kept the characters, and in some cases even made them more interesting, but didn't go all tortured and Chris Nolan.

And by the way, the rest of the world preferred Spider-Man and especially Spider-Man 2 than Amazing Spider-Man. We'll see if Amazing Spider-Man 2 can beat their 89 and 93 percent scores on Rotten Tomatoes, for example.

Aries Walker
07-31-2013, 05:52 PM
They are contractually obligated to do a movie in x amount of time otherwise the rights to Spidey revert back to Marvel. Sony had to really fast track the last movie because the deadline was quickly approaching. I'm not sure of the language, because obviously they can't expect to constantly churn out flicks and not expect it to get tired and diminish expected box office numbers- my guess is its like 7- 10 years max between movies or they lose the rights- which many fanboys would love if Marvel got them back so the character could be used without restriction in the Marvel movies
They could have done Spider-Man 4, though, but they knew they'd have to back the money truck up to just about every actor there, and eventually they'd start losing them.

ThaVirus
07-31-2013, 06:13 PM
I think Spider-Man 2 was the best superhero film ever prior to 2008.

Anyong Bluth
07-31-2013, 07:01 PM
Here's the problem, though: he's not a dark character. He's a trickster, a fast-talking and flag-waving good guy saving the world while taking care of his elderly aunt. He tries to be a good role model, wears bright colors, and is a teacher by day. He struggles with guilt and sacrifice and doing the right thing, but he's not a gloomy or shadowy guy, like Batman, Daredevil, or Punisher. By trying to make him (and Superman, because they did this same thing in Man of Steel) into a dark, gritty, Batman-ish character, they're losing who he is.

The ones who are doing it right are (no surprise here) the makers of Captain America, and to a lesser extent the rest of the Avengers movies. They kept the characters, and in some cases even made them more interesting, but didn't go all tortured and Chris Nolan.

And by the way, the rest of the world preferred Spider-Man and especially Spider-Man 2 than Amazing Spider-Man. We'll see if Amazing Spider-Man 2 can beat their 89 and 93 percent scores on Rotten Tomatoes, for example.

I don't think the last one was "darker" per se at least not like Nolan's Batman, just a bit more gritty and I know I'm biased because I never much cared for Tobey as Spiderman, and do like Garfield as Parker so far.

The last one wasn't tremendous, but I enjoyed it. I think I also just liked the film's pacing a lot more than early 2000's trilogy. Those seemed to plod along and had some extended boring segments for my liking.

Everyone will have their own opinion, so its not like there isn't justifiable criticism for any of the last 4 Spidey films.

Deberg_1990
07-31-2013, 07:07 PM
I don't think the last one was "darker" per se at least not like Nolan's Batman, just a bit more gritty and I know I'm biased because I never much cared for Tobey as Spiderman, and do like Garfield as Parker so far.

The last one wasn't tremendous, but I enjoyed it. I think I also just liked the film's pacing a lot more than early 2000's trilogy. Those seemed to plod along and had some extended boring segments for my liking.

Everyone will have their own opinion, so its not like there isn't justifiable criticism for any of the last 4 Spidey films.

I enjoyed the reboot alot more than I thought I would. What I liked most about it was the spidey action scenes looked more real and not as much CGI fakery as the Raimi flicks. Of course alot of that is advances in special effects I'm sure.

Anyong Bluth
07-31-2013, 10:28 PM
I enjoyed the reboot alot more than I thought I would. What I liked most about it was the spidey action scenes looked more real and not as much CGI fakery as the Raimi flicks. Of course alot of that is advances in special effects I'm sure.

Ya, me too.

I remember when some teaser footage for the last one came out and just had the rough cut cgi - not fully finished, and the internet dorks were going bonkers with rage thinking this rudimentary version was an indication of it going to look like shit since it was known Sony was rushing to get it released on a very tight schedule.

Mr. Laz
07-31-2013, 10:48 PM
By the way, is there a spiderman villain that isn't basically a science experiment gone wrong?
not really

I think the Rhino is an experiment too


venom is more of an alien than an experiment though

Aries Walker
08-01-2013, 04:55 AM
Rhino is actually an experiment gone right. His suit does pretty much exactly what he (and the Commie scientists that made it) wanted it to.

Javabean
08-01-2013, 07:17 AM
I think Spider-Man 2 was the best superhero film ever prior to 2008.

Agreed.

Some have said that the first X-Men movie ushered in the current superhero movie generation, but that first X-Men movie took a lot of liberties with its characters. The first two Spider-Man movies were the first movies to stay true to the character and setting and perform exceptionally well at the box office since the original Superman movies.

I don't know if people really appreciate how groundbreaking that was for the genre -- they were coming off an era of bat nipples and black leather and cheesy villains, and then Raimi gave us the actual Spider-Man from the comic books, and it became the first movie ever to gross over $100 million on its opening weekend. I doubt Marvel would have given us a string of decent to great comic book movies without that. I even question whether Nolan would've been allowed to give us a serious interpretation of Batman.

Yeah, the new movie obviously had better CGI and overall it was decent, but it departed from the actual comics -- even from the Ultimate version -- for no apparent reason. If the second continues down the same path and deviates further, they might as well bring in Joel Schumacher for the third one.

Pestilence
08-01-2013, 01:02 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JNSK0647wJI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Gravedigger
08-01-2013, 09:39 PM
I'm sorry, but Jaime Foxx looks damn ridiculous in that makeup and bald head. His eyes being crossed when it flashes the shot of his face doesn't help either. That teaser doesn't do anything for me in excitement for this movie. The stills of him with the hood all lit up with blue LED's is badass though.

Deberg_1990
12-02-2013, 09:15 PM
Looks like Green Goblin will be in this along with Electro and Rhino. Poster reveal here.

First trailer drops on Thursday.


http://www.aintitcool.com/node/65305

Gravedigger
12-03-2013, 12:45 AM
Looks like Green Goblin will be in this along with Electro and Rhino. Poster reveal here.

First trailer drops on Thursday.


http://www.aintitcool.com/node/65305

Please just stick to one villain... please oh please. If you do a disservice to Electro/Green Goblin the same way you did to Venom/Sandman.... I'm going to flip shit.

Rausch
12-03-2013, 12:51 AM
Please just stick to one villain... please oh please. If you do a disservice to Electro/Green Goblin the same way you did to Venom/Sandman.... I'm going to flip shit.

This.

Venom deserved his own movie. Still does.

I really wish Marvel had the rights to SM and FF...

Aries Walker
12-03-2013, 04:38 AM
This movie is going to be a spinning, flipping train wreck of hilarious proportions.

dannybcaitlyn
12-03-2013, 05:41 AM
ehhh, Reminds me of Doc Octavious. Wish they would have went something supernatural on the villain this time with Morbius.

dannybcaitlyn
12-03-2013, 05:54 AM
Morbius!

Sorter
12-03-2013, 06:23 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9hFZu6rXqYk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/k5QpygrlhLw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/95P89zxoFeU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/8073/gobclear.jpg

Anyong Bluth
12-03-2013, 10:58 PM
This.

Venom deserved his own movie. Still does.

I really wish Marvel had the rights to SM and FF...







Please just stick to one villain... please oh please. If you do a disservice to Electro/Green Goblin the same way you did to Venom/Sandman.... I'm going to flip shit.







Looks like Green Goblin will be in this along with Electro and Rhino. Poster reveal here.

First trailer drops on Thursday.


http://www.aintitcool.com/node/65305

Sony Pictures had a terrible last year, and is going full boar on Spiderman, and will be doing stand alone movies on Spiderman related characters like Venom, and this next movie is supposed to be a bit of a new introduction of the sinister six - the whole plan being to cash in on the super hero craze and box office success.
Paul Giamatti briefly talked about his role as Rhino, and made it sound like while he is in the upcoming movie, but that he wasn't really a major part of this film, but has been told that the plan for future movies would be when he would have a much larger role and screen time.

Looks like Sony is banking on a Spiderman Universe of films to right their studios downturn. They're having to drop their yearly releases from 22-26 per year to about 18 this next year, and for example they had 4 "summer blockbusters" this last year, but as of right now only have 1 slotted for next year. They're going to be way more judicious on big budget films, and it looks like they're going to double down on the super hero genre for any big budget films since their viewed as a guaranteed bet that is bankable with high appeal and box office returns.

Mr. Laz
12-04-2013, 01:56 PM
more than 1 super villain at once isn't a problem to me

spidey is constantly outnumbered and a huge underdog


shitty super villians are the big problem

Halfcan
12-04-2013, 02:09 PM
Pretty burned out on all the comic book movies-prob pass on this and all the rest. It is like watching the same movie over and over.

Aries Walker
12-04-2013, 04:50 PM
So don't watch it.

ThaVirus
12-05-2013, 09:26 AM
I'm on my phone so I can't embed but here's the new trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtube_gdata_player&v=nbp3Ra3Yp74&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dnbp3Ra3Yp74%26feature%3Dyoutube_gdata_player

I think that's right anyway. My friend sent me the link through text so I removed the "m." And replaced it with "www". If someone on a computer could embed it I'd appreciate it.

....... But hooooollllyy balls! Those action sequences look fresh as fuck! Catching flying cars? Boss! Dodging point blank machine gun fire? Fucking boss!

I'm a but hesitant about having three villains in this one but the story behind his father and Oscorp seems intriguing. I am officially excited about this movie.

ThaVirus
12-05-2013, 09:27 AM
Spider-Man is a beast.

ThaVirus
12-05-2013, 09:27 AM
I have a Spider-boner.

Halfcan
12-05-2013, 09:28 AM
So don't watch it.

I won't :harumph:

Tribal Warfare
12-05-2013, 09:51 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/QC5jDtpG78c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

-King-
12-05-2013, 10:13 AM
Meh. Still say the first two Tobey Maguire Spider Man's are way better than this reboot.

Mecca
12-05-2013, 10:36 AM
Pretty burned out on all the comic book movies-prob pass on this and all the rest. It is like watching the same movie over and over.

This is like saying "man I really hate action movies". I find them entertaining that's more than I can say for a lot of the other crap that gets released these days.

Halfcan
12-05-2013, 10:42 AM
This is like saying "man I really hate action movies". I find them entertaining that's more than I can say for a lot of the other crap that gets released these days.

3 spidermans then reboot and make the same movies again? Pass. I saw Thor 1 so really didnt' need to see Thor 2 or 3,4,5,6,7,8,9.

Too many original movies to see to waste time on copycats. I will prob get it FREE at the library because my son is still into it.

Pestilence
12-05-2013, 10:44 AM
This looks pretty good. I won't be seeing it in the theaters or anything....but I'll rent it when it gets released on DVD.

WhiteWhale
12-05-2013, 11:01 AM
Meh. Still say the first two Tobey Maguire Spider Man's are way better than this reboot.

Raimi's spider-man movies.

Tobey fucking sucks. His casting was the worst thing about Raimi's films. He was a nobody before them, and he's a nobody after.

Deberg_1990
12-05-2013, 11:02 AM
Looks cool. I'm down. I went on record last time as having enjoyed the reboot. I thought it was gonna be garbage.
Posted via Mobile Device

Mecca
12-05-2013, 11:10 AM
3 spidermans then reboot and make the same movies again? Pass. I saw Thor 1 so really didnt' need to see Thor 2 or 3,4,5,6,7,8,9.

Too many original movies to see to waste time on copycats. I will prob get it FREE at the library because my son is still into it.

You do realize by this distinction basically every action movie that gets released is the same thing, mystery, horror just all the same with slight tweaks.

Thor 1 and 2 really aren't anything alike other than the main characters. Does this mean you don't watch any TV shows because I can't imagine having to sit through 100 plus episodes of the same thing since well it's the same characters.

ThaVirus
12-05-2013, 11:29 AM
3 spidermans then reboot and make the same movies again? Pass. I saw Thor 1 so really didnt' need to see Thor 2 or 3,4,5,6,7,8,9.

Too many original movies to see to waste time on copycats. I will prob get it FREE at the library because my son is still into it.

If you've already seen Batman Forever then no need to watch The Dark Knight and miss out on a great fucking flick!

Gravedigger
12-05-2013, 12:28 PM
I think it looks great, I'd bet that Rhino is only in it for two scenes, the one at the beginning and the last scene where you see him go to hit him with a sewer plate cover. At the beginning he is just a guy but he gets the suit to challenge Spidey by the end of the movie.

Anyong Bluth
12-05-2013, 12:44 PM
Count me in as definitely liking this trailer and excited to see this.

keg in kc
12-05-2013, 01:23 PM
Never did see the first one. This trailer almost looks more like a video game cutscene than a movie trailer.

Aries Walker
12-05-2013, 03:58 PM
I'll watch it, but I'm expecting it to be on the level of X-Men 3, at best.

-King-
12-05-2013, 08:44 PM
Raimi's spider-man movies.

Tobey fucking sucks. His casting was the worst thing about Raimi's films. He was a nobody before them, and he's a nobody after.

As opposed to the guy that's spiderman in this movie? He's a much worse actor than Tobey. And he wasn't anything before this reboot, and he'll likely be nobody after.

-King-
12-05-2013, 08:46 PM
Looks cool. I'm down. I went on record last time as having enjoyed the reboot. I thought it was gonna be garbage.
Posted via Mobile Device

I turned it off halfway...twice.

Guru
12-05-2013, 10:19 PM
three villains? JFC :facepalm:

bowener
12-05-2013, 10:24 PM
There are three villains, but it appears they are all from OSCORP, which means Spiderman will just have to do something stupid like blowup a computer at OSCORP or smash the Goblins glider or something.

ThaVirus
12-05-2013, 10:29 PM
Pause the trailer at 1:17. Looks like Oscorp has Doc Ock's tentacles and Vulture's wings on display.

Rhino is a mech suit and the Goblin (is it Green or Hob?) has a glider so maybe they all came from Oscorp? I wonder what angle they're going to take with that storyline.

Anyong Bluth
12-05-2013, 10:36 PM
I'll watch it, but I'm expecting it to be on the level of X-Men 3, at best.

Speaking of which, Singer announced today that X-Men Apocalypse is a go for 2016.

Sorter
12-06-2013, 01:18 AM
3 spidermans then reboot and make the same movies again? Pass. I saw Thor 1 so really didnt' need to see Thor 2 or 3,4,5,6,7,8,9.

Too many original movies to see to waste time on copycats. I will prob get it FREE at the library because my son is still into it.

Someone must hate Shakespearean themes.

Guru
12-06-2013, 01:42 AM
Someone must hate Shakespearean themes.

Dos mother know you weareth her drapes?

Sorter
12-06-2013, 02:27 AM
Dos mother know you weareth her drapes?

ROFL

Aries Walker
12-06-2013, 04:31 AM
Someone must hate Shakespearean themes.
He read Henry IV, so he didn't need to bother with Henry V, VI, or VIII.

Tribal Warfare
12-13-2013, 10:20 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/iXhv7CoLAOo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Fish
12-13-2013, 10:43 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/dfSDYg3oB5Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ja!

Red Brooklyn
12-13-2013, 10:45 AM
Rise of Electro, huh? Is that new?

Also, that shot of Times Square going dark was pretty rad.

Halfcan
12-13-2013, 11:04 AM
You do realize by this distinction basically every action movie that gets released is the same thing, mystery, horror just all the same with slight tweaks.

Thor 1 and 2 really aren't anything alike other than the main characters. Does this mean you don't watch any TV shows because I can't imagine having to sit through 100 plus episodes of the same thing since well it's the same characters.

They have made the exact same movie 4 times. Spideys uncle has kicked the bucket more times than John Goodman.

Thought Thor sucked so passed on seeing the last one.

Anyong Bluth
12-13-2013, 02:29 PM
Saw the 3d trailer before Hobbits 2, looked pretty good overall - not too bad CGI wise and the 3D was done pretty well for the scenes they showed.

I'm less intrigued by Foxx's villain - definitely keen on seeing Giamatti in future movies since he's not really in this one much except for setting things up for the franchise going forward. I like their casting choice for Harry Osbourn, and if you've seen Chronicle (a movie I really liked) he was in that and can definitely act. He's got good range and can totally play both sides of Parker's friend and the other side as the Goblin.

In terms of the plot, I kinda dig the underlying story of Peter trying to clue together what all his father was involved with before his parents died under suspicious circumstances.

Chris Cooper plays Norman and it looks like he's on his death bed in the trailer. I'd actually like to see a movie that had him and Peter's parents ( played by Campbell Scott and Embeth Davidtz) as a sort of back story further delving into the whole set up and background.

Deberg_1990
12-13-2013, 04:42 PM
They officially announced they plan to make a series of Sinister Six films. Basically Sonys answer to the Marvel film universe.




http://www.hitfix.com/news/confirmedthe-amazing-spider-man-3-venom-the-sinister-six-movies-on-the-way

bowener
12-13-2013, 05:27 PM
They officially announced they plan to make a series of Sinister Six films. Basically Sonys answer to the Marvel film universe.




http://www.hitfix.com/news/confirmedthe-amazing-spider-man-3-venom-the-sinister-six-movies-on-the-way

So the stand alone Venom movie... will that be the start to an entire new Spiderman series or what? A bit confused. I loved Venom as a kid, mostly because he looks fucking awesome, but honestly he is a pretty boring villain. He really doesn't do much more than smash shit and fight Spidey. Spiderman as a film enterprise is actually quite boring to me. It would obviously benefit immensely if Disney were to acquire the rights and work him in with the rest of their Marvel heroes. He would benefit by having some real foes to face, and by taking the 2nd billing for a while as a superhero. For me anyway.

Anyong Bluth
12-13-2013, 05:51 PM
Just the blurb I saw:

'Amazing Spider-Man 3' is on the way along with 'Venom' and 'Sinister Six'
By Jacob Kastrenakes
Posted: 8 Hours Ago


Sony Pictures has big plans for the Spider-Man universe.

Though The Amazing Spider-Man 2 won't be hitting theaters until March, the studio is already announcing three new movies in the franchise: a third Amazing Spider-Man film, a Venom film, and a film featuring The Sinister Six — a group of Marvel supervillains. The Amazing Spider-Man 3 will begin production this fall with a planned release date of June 10th, 2016. Marc Webb, who directed the first two Amazing Spider-Man films, hasn't signed on to direct it just yet, but Sony Pictures says that it hopes he'll return.

THE FILMS WILL BE CONNECTED BY TONE AND STORY

The studio appears to be interested in recreating Marvel's success with The Avengers.

"Until now, we have approached each film as a separate, self-contained entity, but with this move, we have the opportunity to grow the franchise by looking to the future as we develop a continuous arc for the story,"

Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach, who will produce the three new films, say in a statement. Sony Pictures has assembled a broader team to oversee all three upcoming films as well, ensuring that a continuous tone and plot arc tie them together.
Alex Kurtzman, previously a writer on Star Trek and Transformers, will direct and co-write Venom. The Cabin in the Woods director Drew Goddard will write, and may also direct, The Sinister Six. Sony Pictures doesn't detail where the franchise might go beyond these next three films, but if they're successful, it appears that the studio will be eager to call up new Spider-Man stories and villains to bring to life.

Arad and Tolmach say there's plenty to look through: "With more than 50 years’ wealth of stories in the comic books to draw upon for inspiration, the Spider-Man universe is truly boundless."



Via Deadline
Source ComicBookMovie.com

Deberg_1990
12-13-2013, 06:17 PM
Yea, it's really too bad Marvel doesn't control all it's characters. Would love to see Spider-man interact with the Avengers.

Anyong Bluth
12-14-2013, 12:03 AM
Ya know, I think I prefer the International Trailer over the US cut:

<iframe width="1280" height="720" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/FsS0Qjvgdxo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Tribal Warfare
12-31-2013, 09:07 PM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/PFjZa0wnQUM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Tribal Warfare
01-01-2014, 05:42 PM
http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/amazing-spider-man-2-banner-600x317.jpg

Fish
02-03-2014, 03:37 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/dW5u_y27LmQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

-King-
02-03-2014, 05:06 PM
Looks shitty.

keg in kc
02-03-2014, 05:15 PM
Never saw the first, and I don't feel any more interested in the 2nd after the new trailer(s).

Ragged Robin
02-03-2014, 06:42 PM
crap

Wallcrawler
02-03-2014, 08:33 PM
Looks awesome to me.

Not really sure what people are expecting here. This looks far more badass than any of Raimi's films.

Deberg_1990
02-03-2014, 08:56 PM
So are they leading up to a Sinister 6?

green goblin, electro, rhino, lizard, doc ock, and vulture?

Aries Walker
02-03-2014, 09:22 PM
Yup. I'm thinking not Lizard, since they more or less 'cured' him at the end of One, but they've already announced they're planning a Sinister Six movie. I would hope the sixth would be Mysterio.

ThaVirus
02-03-2014, 10:38 PM
I think it looks pretty damn good. I'm not expecting an Oscar-worthy plot line from my summer superhero flicks.

.. And Mysterio is a fag but his illusions could be bad ass on the big screen.

Aries Walker
02-04-2014, 04:27 AM
Which is why they need him. So many superpowers have already been shown on screen, they're running out of new special effects to show us. His main problem is that you can't see his face, so actors may not want to play a role where their head is stuck in a mirrored fishbowl.

Pestilence
02-04-2014, 09:27 AM
So are they leading up to a Sinister 6?

green goblin, electro, rhino, lizard, doc ock, and vulture?

Except the Rhino just looks to be a machine.

-King-
02-04-2014, 10:11 AM
Looks awesome to me.

Not really sure what people are expecting here. This looks far more badass than any of Raimi's films.

The first Tobey McGuire Spiderman was miles better than the first Amazing Spiderman piece of shit.
Posted via Mobile Device

Anyong Bluth
02-04-2014, 01:48 PM
So are they leading up to a Sinister 6?

green goblin, electro, rhino, lizard, doc ock, and vulture?







Yup. I'm thinking not Lizard, since they more or less 'cured' him at the end of One, but they've already announced they're planning a Sinister Six movie. I would hope the sixth would be Mysterio.


They're actually planning a Sinister Six movie, and a stand alone movie for each of the villains. Sony is milking anything they can From the Spider-Man IP as much as possible because the box Office draws are so lucrative.

KC native
02-04-2014, 01:51 PM
The first Tobey McGuire Spiderman was miles better than the first Amazing Spiderman piece of shit.
Posted via Mobile Device

Negative. Tobey McGuire was a bitch. Peter Parker is a nerd, but he's not a bitch. Tobey was terrible at the smart ass quips that Spidey is known for. He just came across as a whiney fuck. The British kid has nailed Spidey's smart assness.

Plus the fight scenes in the Amazing Spiderman felt like they were right out of the comic. The rapid fire use of Spidey's webs to move around the lizard gave me flash backs to when I used to read the comic.

-King-
02-04-2014, 02:02 PM
Negative. Tobey McGuire was a bitch. Peter Parker is a nerd, but he's not a bitch. Tobey was terrible at the smart ass quips that Spidey is known for. He just came across as a whiney fuck. The British kid has nailed Spidey's smart assness.

Plus the fight scenes in the Amazing Spiderman felt like they were right out of the comic. The rapid fire use of Spidey's webs to move around the lizard gave me flash backs to when I used to read the comic.

I couldn't even finish the first Amazing Spiderman. It was that bad. Tobey can act circles around the new kid, and that says a lot.

KC native
02-04-2014, 02:20 PM
I couldn't even finish the first Amazing Spiderman. It was that bad. Tobey can act circles around the new kid, and that says a lot.

I agree that Tobey is a better actor. I disagree that he was the better Spiderman.

Valiant
02-04-2014, 05:41 PM
I like the last one, this one looks fun also.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 05:57 PM
The first Tobey McGuire Spiderman was miles better than the first Amazing Spiderman piece of shit.
Posted via Mobile Device

Heh.

Your and idiot.

I guess if you like looking at a shitty goblin costume that looked nothing like the character, and that couldn't make the cut for a Mighty Morphin Power Rangers tv episode, or watching Kirsten Dunst hang onto a fucking mannequin for a swing sequence, then I guess you could say the first movie was better.

Maguire was shit as Spiderman. He did an okay job as Peter, but he utterly failed as Spider-Man. No trash talking, never really talked at all unless he was yelling "Hang On" or screaming in pain. Loved his little bitchass high pitched "EHH!" when hitting the ground after Goblin sent him flying in the climax of the first film. Here, Ill let you enjoy that again. I know you loved it.

7hpx3pKDtrw


Maguire's Spider-Man was a woe is me whiny bitch up until the abortion that was SM 3 where he was the super happy dork, and then an emo douchebag. I don't think I need to address how they destroyed "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" in SM 3. That was just the dumbest thing ever, bottom line.

Part of Raimi's movies was bad writing, and part of it was shitty design and direction by Raimi himself. He got butthurt when he was made to put Venom into his third film, so he tanked it and got out of the franchise.

ASM was light years better than any of Raimi's films that all had the same "Save Mary Jane" plot. Seriously. How many fucking films do we need to see where that is the main goal of the story?

ASM Spidey was saving the city, not the damsel in distress, which was a damn welcome change.

ASM 2 looks awesome, with the exception of the machine style Rhino. Im not digging that at all.

Aries Walker
02-04-2014, 06:08 PM
Except the Rhino just looks to be a machine.
In one of the shots in one of the trailers, you could see Paul Giamatti in there. It's a battlemech, like in Avatar.

scott free
02-04-2014, 06:25 PM
The new Spiderman sucked balls, great big ones... and I doubt this next one will be any better.

Aries Walker
02-04-2014, 06:29 PM
The Raimi Spider-Man was better than The Amazing Spider-Man, mostly because The Amazing Spider-Man was awful. Maguire-Spidey may have come across as whiney, but Garfield-Spidey was a showoff, and a bully, and went beyond being a wiseass to being a loudmouthed dick. The storyline was screwed around; they made Peter into a darker character, didn't develop the reasons why he fought crime and kept his identity secret, and he had some sort of Daddy-issue corporate intrigue storyline that he really didn't need hamfistedly crammed in there. Contrarily, there was no wrestling match, no J. Jonah Jameson, and Spidey never learned or mentioned his signature line of dialogue. It was a bad movie.

I will give it this: Even with the ten-year technology difference, the special effects in the first one were weak, and the second one did do some inventive bits of fight choreography, especially during the fight in the halls of Midtown High. Those aside, though, it didn't have much going for it that Raimi's didn't do better.

And I guarantee the sequel won't be as good as Spider-Man 2.

Brock
02-04-2014, 06:34 PM
The tobey movies sucked yak butt. Tobey wasn't even close to being the biggest problem with those pieces of shit. The new ones are far, far better.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 06:39 PM
The reboot is crap. Old ones are obviously old and the scripts had their share of problems but were far superior. Toby was the better Spidey. Peter IS SUPPOSED to be nerdy/awkward not a hipster douche bag like in the new ones.

Brock
02-04-2014, 06:44 PM
Tobey wasn't awkward and nerdy. He acted like a pussy. Zero chemistry between him and the wretched Kirsten Dunst. Jizz shooting out of his wrists. Botched villain after botched villain. Just utter trash.

Aries Walker
02-04-2014, 06:49 PM
Ah, yes, I should have granted that as well: the casting of Kirsten Dunst was a trainwreck.

I don't see how you could possibly imagine a better Green Goblin than Willem Dafoe, though. No one does dangerously-insane like he does, and he looked like Gobby even without his mask on.

scott free
02-04-2014, 06:56 PM
The idea of being able to shoot webs because of the transformations in your body is a helluva lot easier for me to believe, than some high school kid with the brains and means to actually manufacture that shit.

Its bad enough that neither series bothers to explain where this kid got his fancy suit, but atleast the first series had a plausible explanation for the webs.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 07:19 PM
The idea of being able to shoot webs because of the transformations in your body is a helluva lot easier for me to believe, than some high school kid with the brains and means to actually manufacture that shit.

Its bad enough that neither series bothers to explain where this kid got his fancy suit, but atleast the first series had a plausible explanation for the webs.

He creates the web shooters in the comics.

This is a film based on the comic.

What part of this are you having difficulty with?

You can believe that a guy can get the proportional strength, speed, agility, and borderline precognition of a spider, but you cant believe that he might be able to build web shooters?

Heh. Stick to non fiction, and your head will hurt less pal.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 07:24 PM
You can believe that a guy can get the proportional strength, speed, agility, and borderline precognition of a spider, but you cant believe that he might be able to build web shooters?


lol that doesn't make any sense. Read what he posted. It makes more sense that the web shit in his wrists develops because he gets all the other spider attributes. It doesn't make any sense that he would get everything else EXCEPT that but is smart enough to make it himself despite being a young and hip high schooler.

Valiant
02-04-2014, 07:40 PM
lol that doesn't make any sense. Read what he posted. It makes more sense that the web shit in his wrists develops because he gets all the other spider attributes. It doesn't make any sense that he would get everything else EXCEPT that but is smart enough to make it himself despite being a young and hip high schooler.

Other than him creating his own web shooter in the comics?

ASM I view as an updated version, kind of like ultimate spiderman comic.. Most kids are not nerdy or dorky, especially if they got powers. They would act more like ASM.

KC native
02-04-2014, 08:53 PM
lol that doesn't make any sense. Read what he posted. It makes more sense that the web shit in his wrists develops because he gets all the other spider attributes. It doesn't make any sense that he would get everything else EXCEPT that but is smart enough to make it himself despite being a young and hip high schooler.

ASM is much closer to the comic books than the first set of movies.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 08:59 PM
Can you guys tell me where in that post refers to comic book accuracy? I said it's more believable/makes more sense that way.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:04 PM
lol that doesn't make any sense. Read what he posted. It makes more sense that the web shit in his wrists develops because he gets all the other spider attributes. It doesn't make any sense that he would get everything else EXCEPT that but is smart enough to make it himself despite being a young and hip high schooler.

It makes perfect sense.

His issue was suspension of disbelief. He was fine with all this other completely impossible shit happening to a human body, but took issue that Pete might be smart enough to create the wrist mounted propulsion system for his weblines. THAT was what he had trouble believing. Pretty funny when you think about it.

Peter has a pretty damn high intellect in the books. Its not quite on par with Stark or Richards, but its well within the paramaters of building some web shooters.

In the books he created the web fluid as well as the web shooters, but I guess for ASM they decided that having it already exist at Oscorb would be better for their story.

The building of his web shooters was a simple way to showcase how smart Peter really is.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:10 PM
Its bad enough that neither series bothers to explain where this kid got his fancy suit

Try again.

CuKqQ6plZ_I



JpSrswsOl0o

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 09:15 PM
His issue was suspension of disbelief.

It goes both ways.. He gets all his spider powers so why is it so hard to accept he gets the web shit too? Why not?

scott free
02-04-2014, 09:22 PM
He creates the web shooters in the comics.

This is a film based on the comic.

What part of this are you having difficulty with?

You can believe that a guy can get the proportional strength, speed, agility, and borderline precognition of a spider, but you cant believe that he might be able to build web shooters?

Heh. Stick to non fiction, and your head will hurt less pal.

ROFL whoa, yeah maybe I'm just out of my depth with all of the heavy mental lifting in comic books.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:25 PM
It goes both ways.. He gets all his spider powers so why is it so hard to accept he gets the web shit too? Why not?

Are you dense?

I never said it wasn't believable. I simply pointed out how ridiculous it is to say something is "hard to believe" or "easier to believe" in a movie based on a comic book that is based on completely unbelievable shit.

As for why not, I would simply say if youre going to make a movie based on a book, you should remain true to the source material.

I guess its not that big of a deal when you think about it. Its not like any shitty comic book movies were made that completely disregarded the source material.

Its not like anything completely stupid has ever happened like Sandman being Uncle Ben's killer, Sabretooth being Wolverine's brother, or Deadpool having katanas up his arms shooting optic blasts with his mouth sewn shut. I guess with the way Im acting you would think that Batman's love interest in the books turned out to be some halfassed villain that tried to kill him, destroy Gotham, and got herself killed in the process, all after an eight year stint where Bruce inexplicably just stopped being The Batman.

Screw it. We don't need source material. Im sure the Hollywood screenwriters can do a much better job than the folks that have been actually writing the stories for decades.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:30 PM
ROFL whoa, yeah maybe I'm just out of my depth with all of the heavy mental lifting in comic books.

Maybe not so much that as youre just not paying attention. You took issue with not knowing where he got the suit, and I provided the clips from both films that explain your issue.

Maybe you never read the comic books. Its just funny to me that in a movie filled with totally unbelievable shit, someone would call bullshit and be like "brah, that would TOTALLY never happen."

Its hilarious.

scott free
02-04-2014, 09:43 PM
Maybe not so much that as youre just not paying attention. You took issue with not knowing where he got the suit, and I provided the clips from both films that explain your issue.

Maybe you never read the comic books. Its just funny to me that in a movie filled with totally unbelievable shit, someone would call bullshit and be like "brah, that would TOTALLY never happen."

Its hilarious.

Yes, I forgot the movies talking about the suits.

But in the instance of the webs, I dont care about the official lore, gaining that power like he gained every other makes a lot more sense to me... and oh yes, I read the hell out of Spidey comics as a kid, but that was the 70's so its been a while.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:47 PM
Yes, I forgot the movies talking about the suits.

But in the instance of the webs, I dont care about the official lore, gaining that power like he gained every other makes a lot more sense to me... and oh yes, I read the hell out of Spidey comics as a kid, but that was the 70's so its been a while.

They were better then.

Cheaper too.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 09:53 PM
As for why not, I would simply say if youre going to make a movie based on a book, you should remain true to the source material.

Please. Even the most successful superhero film ever completely and utterly shits on the source material. The entire Nolan franchise shits on the Bat mythos. Taking the liberty of such a minor detail that you spend less than two seconds thinking about while watching is not a big deal.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:55 PM
Please. Even the most successful superhero film ever completely and utterly shits on the source material.

And what film is that, exactly?

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 09:55 PM
Also from that "love interest" comment it sounds like you don't actually know what you're talking about. Talia has been the greatest batman villian in the last decade in the comics. NOT just a 'love interest.'

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 09:57 PM
Also from that "love interest" comment it sounds like you don't actually know what you're talking about. Talia has been the greatest batman villian in the last decade in the comics. NOT just a 'love interest.'

And she was handled so well in DKR. Weird.

Bats had no idea who she was.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 09:58 PM
And she was handled so well in DKR. Weird.

Bats had no idea who she was.

Because, as I said, Nolan shits all over the source material.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 10:00 PM
Because, as I said, Nolan shits all over the source material.

And yet you claim that its not a big deal to disregard it.

Strange.

Ragged Robin
02-04-2014, 10:02 PM
And yet you claim that its not a big deal to disregard it.

Strange.

Yeah it's not a big deal apparently because The Dark Knight is the highest grossing film ever. Nolan's films were the complete character and source assassination and yet you're discreditting the Spiderman franchise due to such a small and pointless source material change like web-wrists versus web-shooters. That's like me saying Nolan's films are shit because he makes Batman expose his eyes and wear makeup instead of wearing high tech lenses like he's supposed to ROFL. Virtually everything about Nolan's films goes against source material down to how the character flat out responds and you hardly hear a peep about it.

scott free
02-04-2014, 10:04 PM
They were better then.

Cheaper too.

Pretty sure that when I stopped buying them they were no more than 25 cents.

Aries Walker
02-04-2014, 10:06 PM
ASM is much closer to the comic books than the first set of movies.
ASM isn't anywhere near closer to the comics than the first movies. It has Gwen instead of Mary Jane, and his web-shooters are mechanical; otherwise, it's miles off. Read what I wrote up above for why, and there's more besides.

-King-
02-04-2014, 10:08 PM
It goes both ways.. He gets all his spider powers so why is it so hard to accept he gets the web shit too? Why not?

This. Him getting web shooting powers is much more believable than him making a gadget that shoots out webs.

Wallcrawler
02-04-2014, 10:20 PM
Yeah it's not a big deal apparently because The Dark Knight is the highest grossing film ever.

Talia wasn't in The Dark Knight. She was in The Dark Knight Rises.

Nolan's films were the complete character and source assassination and yet you're discreditting the Spiderman franchise due to such a small and pointless source material change like web-wrists versus web-shooters.

If I discredited the Spiderman films, it certainly wasn't over the webbing. I wish that were the problem I had. You could start with the Mighty Morphin Power Ranger dumpster dive that produced the Green Goblin costume in movie one, on to the challenge of how many times will Peter remove his mask and reveal his identity, to Otto Octavius being a genuinely good dude that was corrupted by "evil smart arms that control him" and then killed by sacrificing himself at the end of the second film (after Peter once again inexplicably takes his mask off for no reason in front of the most dangerous man he's ever faced to this point), to the humorous side note of Harry's butler waiting until he's taken a grenade to the face and become horribly disfigured to go ahead and tell him that his father died by his own hand, on to the biggest goat **** of them all being the destruction of the idea of With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility by making the thief that Peter chose not to stop turn out not to be Ben's killer after all. Sorry Pete, even if you had stopped him, Uncle Ben would still be dead. You've become Spider-Man and destroyed your social life for nothing.


That's like me saying Nolan's films are shit because he makes Batman expose his eyes and wear makeup instead of wearing high tech lenses like he's supposed to.

Not quite.

Virtually everything about Nolan's films goes against source material down to how the character flat out responds and you hardly hear a peep about it.

It isn't for me to say that its impossible to make a good movie using comic book characters without staying true to the source material. Nolan's take, while not in line with the books, sat well with fans in Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight.

Dark Knight Rises however, in my opinion, was complete garbage.


You can argue it to the end of time. Some like Kubrick's "The Shining", and others hate it because its nothing like the book its based off of.

Changing the source material is a lie. Youre making a film directed at the fans of this material. Its their money you want. Instead of making the film true to the source material, you take their money and say "Look at all this shit I changed! You like it?"

In some instances it works out. In other cases you get Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin, and doing an awesome job for a few minutes and then a giant middle finger in the middle of the film as he's revealed to be nothing more than a patsy., and the Mandarin you read about in the comics isn't going to be represented in the film at all.




.

scott free
02-05-2014, 12:00 AM
Dark Knight Rises WAS a letdown, Tom Hardy aside.

Wallcrawler
02-05-2014, 06:29 AM
Dark Knight Rises WAS a letdown, Tom Hardy aside.

It was too much of a departure from the characters.

This Nolanverse Batman started off strong, but the idea that Bruce would just stop being Batman for eight years is way out of left field, and then the whole "Peace, Im out" at the end when he fakes his own death and retires with the bitch that set him up to be killed was another WTF moment.

Batman fans know that Bruce IS Batman. He is that guy. The billionaire playboy is the façade. No way he just stops being that pissed off rage fuelled vigilante.

If Nolan didn't want to do CGI, he shouldn't have done Bane. No venom present whatsoever. The mask he wears is supposed to be a painkiller?

Odd that the "World's Greatest Detective" never once targeted that mask in their first fight. It should've been flashing like the vulnerable area of a boss in an arcade game.

In the books Batman broke Bane because he was utterly exhausted when they finally clashed. Bane released everyone and his brother from Arkham and after Bats wore himself down for weeks on end bringing them all back, then Bane attacked and wiped the floor with him.

In Nolan's film, Bats is apparently not smart enough to target the mask, and too old and washed up to fight him one on one. But hey, get thrown in a hole with a displaced vertebrae, get a nice crunches and pullups montage, and Bats is able to come back and own Bane in a beautiful homage to Rocky 3.

Fish
02-05-2014, 09:11 AM
You know what bothered me about The Dark Knight Rises? That magic knee brace band thing that changes him from limping cripple to superhero? Billion dollar market completely ignored...

Anyong Bluth
02-05-2014, 01:30 PM
It was too much of a departure from the characters.

This Nolanverse Batman started off strong, but the idea that Bruce would just stop being Batman for eight years is way out of left field, and then the whole "Peace, Im out" at the end when he fakes his own death and retires with the bitch that set him up to be killed was another WTF moment.

Batman fans know that Bruce IS Batman. He is that guy. The billionaire playboy is the façade. No way he just stops being that pissed off rage fuelled vigilante.

If Nolan didn't want to do CGI, he shouldn't have done Bane. No venom present whatsoever. The mask he wears is supposed to be a painkiller?

Odd that the "World's Greatest Detective" never once targeted that mask in their first fight. It should've been flashing like the vulnerable area of a boss in an arcade game.

In the books Batman broke Bane because he was utterly exhausted when they finally clashed. Bane released everyone and his brother from Arkham and after Bats wore himself down for weeks on end bringing them all back, then Bane attacked and wiped the floor with him.

In Nolan's film, Bats is apparently not smart enough to target the mask, and too old and washed up to fight him one on one. But hey, get thrown in a hole with a displaced vertebrae, get a nice crunches and pullups montage, and Bats is able to come back and own Bane in a beautiful homage to Rocky 3.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JU9Uwhjlog8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

ThaVirus
02-05-2014, 01:51 PM
I was always a fan of Spider-man having web shooters due to biological changes. I was never a fan of the "oh shit I just ran out of webbing mid-fight" plot device.

scott free
02-05-2014, 02:38 PM
DKR just stretched my suspension of disbelief too far... Catwoman was completely unnecessary and unbelievable, the entire police force trapped underground, that goofy ass prison with everyone dressed in the same overly clean rags, Scarecrow running some silly, stupid court, Batman being nearly crippled but coming back in few short weeks, months?

It wasnt even about them not sticking with canon on Bane, just too much other unbelievable stuff... what made the other two so great was, atleast within the world Nolan created, everything was pretty believable... this one just took it all too far, it was a farce.

Anyong Bluth
02-05-2014, 05:15 PM
DKR just stretched my suspension of disbelief too far... Catwoman was completely unnecessary and unbelievable, the entire police force trapped underground, that goofy ass prison with everyone dressed in the same overly clean rags, Scarecrow running some silly, stupid court, Batman being nearly crippled but coming back in few short weeks, months?

It wasnt even about them not sticking with canon on Bane, just too much other unbelievable stuff... what made the other two so great was, atleast within the world Nolan created, everything was pretty believable... this one just took it all too far, it was a farce.

In retrospect, nothing you say I can really not agree with, except I didn't think Catwoman was an unnecessary character anymore than any other supporting role you find in tons of movies. That's just the part of movies. But, let's be real, the possibility of and fervored expectations simply meant TDK wasn't ever going to realistically be matched- let alone topped.

Not to discredit Nolan, but I think if you're setting out to do a trilogy, unless you have the entire story committed to script or from source material, it's just not going to hold up when you approach it by writing them individually and then shooting them. No different than the Matrix movies.

It's just really tough to switch gears from an episodic film and then create a story arc that's quality while making sure you have cohesion throughout, yet also having a film stand On its own.

Pestilence
02-05-2014, 05:26 PM
Would it have changed things for the worse if the three Nolan Batman films were all one story spread out over 3 movies? i.e. The Hobbit. Would it have made it better?

scott free
02-05-2014, 05:30 PM
In retrospect, nothing you say I can really not agree with, except I didn't think Catwoman was an unnecessary character anymore than any other supporting role you find in tons of movies. That's just the part of movies. But, let's be real, the possibility of and fervored expectations simply meant TDK wasn't ever going to realistically be matched- let alone topped.

Not to discredit Nolan, but I think if you're setting out to do a trilogy, unless you have the entire story committed to script or from source material, it's just not going to hold up when you approach it by writing them individually and then shooting them. No different than the Matrix movies.

It's just really tough to switch gears from an episodic film and then create a story arc that's quality while making sure you have cohesion throughout, yet also having a film stand On its own.

I simply have to disagree about Selena Kyle, it was just too much... in this world, not only is there a badass richest man in the world who goes around doing nearly impossible things, but now theres a female criminal who's just as capable?... it was COMPLETELY unnecessary IMO, it added nothing and subtracted everything.

It was nothing more than a cheap attempt at garnering/appeasing more female viewers IMO, all it did was divert attention from the fact that Nolan apparently wasnt sure how to fill two and a half hours with what Bruce Wayne is doing, and even with her needless character he still cheats us of any real Batman action by belaboring the totally ridiculous prison sequence.

Nolan had a nearly limitless amount of source material to draw a better story from, I'll tell you exactly how this movie felt... Blade III... dry, stale and paint by numbers, NOTHING that was cool about the first two was included in the last one.

If Nolan has ever made a bad movie, THIS was it.

Deberg_1990
02-05-2014, 05:37 PM
Negative. Tobey McGuire was a bitch. Peter Parker is a nerd, but he's not a bitch. Tobey was terrible at the smart ass quips that Spidey is known for. He just came across as a whiney ****. The British kid has nailed Spidey's smart assness.

Plus the fight scenes in the Amazing Spiderman felt like they were right out of the comic. The rapid fire use of Spidey's webs to move around the lizard gave me flash backs to when I used to read the comic.

They made Peter Parker less nerdy. It was definately an "emo ish" type of makeover.

Deberg_1990
02-05-2014, 05:43 PM
It was too much of a departure from the characters.

This Nolanverse Batman started off strong, but the idea that Bruce would just stop being Batman for eight years is way out of left field, and then the whole "Peace, Im out" at the end when he fakes his own death and retires with the bitch that set him up to be killed was another WTF moment.

Batman fans know that Bruce IS Batman. He is that guy. The billionaire playboy is the façade. No way he just stops being that pissed off rage fuelled vigilante.

If Nolan didn't want to do CGI, he shouldn't have done Bane. No venom present whatsoever. The mask he wears is supposed to be a painkiller?

Odd that the "World's Greatest Detective" never once targeted that mask in their first fight. It should've been flashing like the vulnerable area of a boss in an arcade game.

In the books Batman broke Bane because he was utterly exhausted when they finally clashed. Bane released everyone and his brother from Arkham and after Bats wore himself down for weeks on end bringing them all back, then Bane attacked and wiped the floor with him.

In Nolan's film, Bats is apparently not smart enough to target the mask, and too old and washed up to fight him one on one. But hey, get thrown in a hole with a displaced vertebrae, get a nice crunches and pullups montage, and Bats is able to come back and own Bane in a beautiful homage to Rocky 3.


I think it stayed true to Nolan's vision of his character and his story arc. Does an artist always have to stick closely to his original source material? Shouldn't he be allowed some flexibility? Every medium is different.

scott free
02-05-2014, 05:53 PM
The Raimi Spider-Man was better than The Amazing Spider-Man, mostly because The Amazing Spider-Man was awful. Maguire-Spidey may have come across as whiney, but Garfield-Spidey was a showoff, and a bully, and went beyond being a wiseass to being a loudmouthed dick. The storyline was screwed around; they made Peter into a darker character, didn't develop the reasons why he fought crime and kept his identity secret, and he had some sort of Daddy-issue corporate intrigue storyline that he really didn't need hamfistedly crammed in there. Contrarily, there was no wrestling match, no J. Jonah Jameson, and Spidey never learned or mentioned his signature line of dialogue. It was a bad movie.

I will give it this: Even with the ten-year technology difference, the special effects in the first one were weak, and the second one did do some inventive bits of fight choreography, especially during the fight in the halls of Midtown High. Those aside, though, it didn't have much going for it that Raimi's didn't do better.

And I guarantee the sequel won't be as good as Spider-Man 2.

THIS... they tried too hard to make him like Batman, instead of nerdy/snarky he just came off like a hipster dick, Spiderman isnt supposed to be "dark", thats where Raimi REALLY failed in #III (what an awful movie, a typical #3) that was never his thing no matter how hard the director/writers wanted it to be so.

Aries Walker
02-05-2014, 06:05 PM
Incidentally, that seems to be a thing. They tried to angsty-darken up Superman and - in that terrible pilot - Wonder Woman as well. All three characters wear bright red and blue, and their character's increased darkness was reflected in their costumes, which all became maroon and navy.

The one flag-colored character that has not gotten that treatment as of late? Captain America, and his movies are critical and popular home runs. Coincidence?

Anyong Bluth
02-05-2014, 06:39 PM
Incidentally, that seems to be a thing. They tried to angsty-darken up Superman and - in that terrible pilot - Wonder Woman as well. All three characters wear bright red and blue, and their character's increased darkness was reflected in their costumes, which all became maroon and navy.

The one flag-colored character that has not gotten that treatment as of late? Captain America, and his movies are critical and popular home runs. Coincidence?

Guess it says to not be jaded and dark you've literally got to be a throwback to someone that was a contemporary of the early to midcentury time period from the last century - 20s, 30s, 40s.

Basically, most of the people he first meets in the present find him hokey, and you see that country versus city folk interaction to start with.

So, now that Cap's suit is a much darker red and blue for this next movie, does that mean we should expect his character will fall more in line with the updated versions of the other superheroes?

scott free
02-05-2014, 06:51 PM
Guess it says to not be jaded and dark you've literally got to be a throwback to someone that was a contemporary of the early to midcentury time period from the last century - 20s, 30s, 40s.

Basically, most of the people he first meets in the present find him hokey, and you see that country versus city folk interaction to start with.

So, now that Cap's suit is a much darker red and blue for this next movie, does that mean we should expect his character will fall more in line with the updated versions of the other superheroes?

Not trying to answer for Aries, but if my reading of the new plot is close, no... CA wont be darker, but the world around him WILL be.

The black and white, good and evil world of the 40's-50's is gone... now it'll be a million shades of grey in this murky new world, with Cap as the moral holdout making the tough, but clearcut decisions.

Ragged Robin
02-05-2014, 07:44 PM
It was too much of a departure from the characters.

This Nolanverse Batman started off strong, but the idea that Bruce would just stop being Batman for eight years is way out of left field, and then the whole "Peace, Im out" at the end when he fakes his own death and retires with the bitch that set him up to be killed was another WTF moment.

Batman fans know that Bruce IS Batman. He is that guy. The billionaire playboy is the façade. No way he just stops being that pissed off rage fuelled vigilante.

If Nolan didn't want to do CGI, he shouldn't have done Bane. No venom present whatsoever. The mask he wears is supposed to be a painkiller?

Odd that the "World's Greatest Detective" never once targeted that mask in their first fight. It should've been flashing like the vulnerable area of a boss in an arcade game.

In the books Batman broke Bane because he was utterly exhausted when they finally clashed. Bane released everyone and his brother from Arkham and after Bats wore himself down for weeks on end bringing them all back, then Bane attacked and wiped the floor with him.

In Nolan's film, Bats is apparently not smart enough to target the mask, and too old and washed up to fight him one on one. But hey, get thrown in a hole with a displaced vertebrae, get a nice crunches and pullups montage, and Bats is able to come back and own Bane in a beautiful homage to Rocky 3.

Nothing about Nolan's films was Batman to me. They're largely good movies but not good Batman movies. Nothing about Nolan's Batman had any of the beats that fundamentally makes the character who he is. The first two minutes of Sherlock Holmes 2 was more like Batman than all three of Nolan's films combined.

What's disturbing is that this is the direction DC wants to go with its live action depictions: completely shit on the character for the sake of being darker and grittier because it's more "realistic". Superheroes aren't ****ing realistic.. that's the whole point. They did the same exact thing to Superman in Man of Steel and Ollie in Arrow.

scott free
02-05-2014, 08:15 PM
Nothing about Nolan's films was Batman to me. They're largely good movies but not good Batman movies. Nothing about Nolan's Batman had any of the beats that fundamentally makes the character who he is. The first two minutes of Sherlock Holmes 2 was more like Batman than all three of Nolan's films combined.

What's disturbing is that this is the direction DC wants to go with its live action depictions: completely shit on the character for the sake of being darker and grittier because it's more "realistic". Superheroes aren't ****ing realistic.. that's the whole point. They did the same exact thing to Superman in Man of Steel and Ollie in Arrow.

You can argue around it I'm sure, but THEE most comic book worthy Batman scene EVER put on film was Batman in the parking garage, I will swear on it to my dying day.

Crashing the deal in the Batmobile amongst all of the fakes, whipping ass, cutting into the side of the van with his equipment, slamming off it then jumping onto and crushing the hood?... man, jumping down onto then crushing the hood? THAT was Batman straight from your favorite childhood comic.

And I also think you're missing the best part about Batman... within that world he ISNT so unbelieveable, in fact, you can almost imagine this guy as an American 20-30 years down the road... the technology for so much of it alone makes it almost believable.

Ragged Robin
02-05-2014, 08:23 PM
You can argue around it I'm sure, but THEE most comic book worthy Batman scene EVER put on film was Batman in the parking garage, I will swear on it to my dying day.

Crashing the deal in the Batmobile amongst all of the fakes, whipping ass, cutting into the side of the van with his equipment, slamming off it then jumping onto and crushing the hood?... man, jumping down onto then crushing the hood? THAT was Batman straight from your favorite childhood comic.

And I also think you're missing the best part about Batman... within that world he ISNT so unbelieveable, in fact, you can almost imagine this guy as an American 20-30 years down the road... the technology for so much of it alone makes it almost believable.

Beating up bad guys and punching them in the face is actually the last thing I would think about when I think of Batman. His prowess as a fighter is the least important aspect of the character. Also the whole "well let's make it 'realistic' because it's more believable" is asinine. As if every story needs to be "believable" in order to be a good story. Shitting all over it for the sake of "realism" TAKES AWAY from it more than it adds.. if it adds anything at all.

scott free
02-05-2014, 08:35 PM
Jeeez, such a snotty ass, no fun at all reply for a subject so multi-interpretable... take your views and have fun with them within your own mind.

For me, when Batman kicks criminal ass in the parking garage, uses the Bat tools to try and break in, grimaces desperately while doing so, gets shook... but then ultimately crashes onto the hood just as they thought they had gotten away was as good as it will EVER get... it was EXACTLY like the darker interpretations come to life.

THAT was a comic book come to life, save the personal BS for someone who's still in their 20's - early 30's.

Ragged Robin
02-05-2014, 09:10 PM
It's actually incredible ironic that for the sake of "realism," Nolan focuses on the most childish aspect and appeal of the character (cool toys, beating down bad guys, ninjas, etc).

There's really only two ways Batman can be written in order to do it any justice. That's either the gritty/noir/detective/crime aspect of him ala The Long Halloween/Hush or the super cool superhero/badass James Bond version ala Batman RIP/Batman INC. Neither of which has any of the live action stuff have shown.

Batman is the World's Greatest Detective. He is nothing if not that. The focus should be on his deductive skills and intellect. Batman's gimmick is that he is prepared for every single eventuality and situation. Next would be his interpersonal relationships as it relates to him being a recluse for the sake of the greater good as he sees it. Next would be Batman and his allies as legacy characters. The whole 10-year old sidekick makes complete sense. The whole "well having a 10 year old going up against guys with guns is not realistic" is retarded because that's not the point. Having a grown man dressed up as a giant bat and punching people with guns and without killing is not realistic either. This is the boy who died in him the night his parents got murdered. This is the childhood Bruce always wanted to have but was denied. The idea of Robin is to remind Bruce of his humanity and purpose so that he doesn't go over the edge. Robin should be portrayed as an apprentice, not entirely a field-combatant/partner. In the comics the first Robin grows up to to become Nightwing and later takes over as Batman with Bruce's son being his Robin -- IMO the BEST period of Batman to date, reversing the roles with a fun, laid back Batman countered with an uptight, violent and stuck up Robin.

The legacy aspect is what they should capitalize. Audiences love continuity, it's as simple as that. That's how I'd do it -- a couple movies with Ben as Batman and build up Robin/Nightwing. Then have Batman ****ing DIE in grand fashion in a Justice League movie. Then continue the franchise/continuity with Nightwing taking over (learning to become Batman without becoming Bruce, thus showing us what really makes Batman who he is -- goldmine of a concept needed to be mined here). Then perhaps end with Bruce coming back with two mother****ing Batmen on the screen to blow everyone's minds wide open (ala Rock of Ages/Final Crisis, Darkseid seemingly kills Bruce but really sends him lost across all of space and time -- how's THAT for scifi?).

scott free
02-05-2014, 09:18 PM
Eat your damn cereal and come home from the snow sled hill when it gets dark, for a warm dinner, kiddo.

Jeeezzz... my interpretation and no other you assholes!

Pssst, its a COMIC BOOK MOVIE.

Aries Walker
02-05-2014, 09:33 PM
Guess it says to not be jaded and dark you've literally got to be a throwback to someone that was a contemporary of the early to midcentury time period from the last century - 20s, 30s, 40s.

Basically, most of the people he first meets in the present find him hokey, and you see that country versus city folk interaction to start with.

So, now that Cap's suit is a much darker red and blue for this next movie, does that mean we should expect his character will fall more in line with the updated versions of the other superheroes?
Beats me, but we can meet back here after April 4 to discuss it.

Wallcrawler
02-06-2014, 10:53 AM
If this measures up to the Spider-Man 2 game of the Raimi era, Ill be pretty happy.

DUaiR9gXkdo

Tribal Warfare
03-19-2014, 02:05 PM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/DlM2CWNTQ84" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

BigRichard
03-20-2014, 04:12 PM
Can't wait.

Deberg_1990
03-20-2014, 04:14 PM
I feel like I've seen the entire movie already....

Rausch
03-25-2014, 04:11 PM
I like this Spiderman/Parker better but I'm skeptical about the movie itself.

Reminds me of S3 where they just tried to do too much...

Mecca
03-25-2014, 05:32 PM
I like this Spiderman/Parker better but I'm skeptical about the movie itself.

Reminds me of S3 where they just tried to do too much...

Supposedly Electro is the only big part villain in the movie while the rest are smaller parts setting them up for future movies.

Tribal Warfare
04-01-2014, 05:39 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/uLvQMxZmNPY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990
04-14-2014, 04:01 PM
Early reviews are out. Seems to be mostly positive. Nothing amazing, but not bad either. Sort of like the first film.


http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man_2/?nopopup=true

keg in kc
04-14-2014, 10:53 PM
Kinda surprised at this trailer, thought they'd been trying to hide this part of it. Potentially hugely spoilery:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/ABNDaHKVn9o?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

ThaVirus
04-15-2014, 12:08 AM
So Gwen will die this go 'round?

Tribal Warfare
04-15-2014, 02:52 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/XDurTxrVs7I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990
04-15-2014, 05:51 AM
Kinda surprised at this trailer, thought they'd been trying to hide this part of it. Potentially hugely spoilery:



Not watching this, but Sony is really giving this movie a huge push. Almost trying too hard. I feel like I've seen the whole movie already.
Posted via Mobile Device

Buehler445
04-15-2014, 07:15 AM
So Gwen will die this go 'round?

Eh.

Could be a curveball. They may send everybody to the theater thinking that and then off someone else.

Gravedigger
04-15-2014, 10:13 AM
Eh.

Could be a curveball. They may send everybody to the theater thinking that and then off someone else.

Seems like it'll go either way. He'll either snap her neck trying to save her like in the comics or he'll save her but in other trailers you see him without his mask on bawling pretty bad, I don't think he'd be bawling so much over Harry, but that scene is the last big showdown it would appear between Green Goblin and Spidey with Gwen getting abducted and thrown around.

keg in kc
04-15-2014, 10:20 AM
Not watching this, but Sony is really giving this movie a huge push. Almost trying too hard. I feel like I've seen the whole movie already.There's almost a sense of desperation to it.

I still have zero interest in seeing it, I was just a little surprised with the trailer.

Swanman
04-15-2014, 10:27 AM
There's almost a sense of desperation to it.

I still have zero interest in seeing it, I was just a little surprised with the trailer.

I wish all the movie companies with Marvel character would just let the licenses go back to Marvel. I want competent filmmakers doing Spiderman and Fantastic Four films. The XMen franchise is looking better with the reboot but it would be even better with the rest of the Marvel universe under one umbrella.

Deberg_1990
04-15-2014, 11:04 AM
There's almost a sense of desperation to it.

I still have zero interest in seeing it, I was just a little surprised with the trailer.

Yea, im wondering if it was tracking low or something? I mean, im sure it will make alot of money, but its not like people are clamoring to see it or anything. Not that i can tell.

Almost a perfunctory action to go see it.

Sure-Oz
04-15-2014, 11:44 AM
I might see spiderman, it's almost as if it's the same old burned out bs.

Bowser
04-15-2014, 11:55 AM
I wish all the movie companies with Marvel character would just let the licenses go back to Marvel. I want competent filmmakers doing Spiderman and Fantastic Four films. The XMen franchise is looking better with the reboot but it would be even better with the rest of the Marvel universe under one umbrella.

This can't be quoted enough.

ThaVirus
04-24-2014, 01:04 AM
I enjoyed this one quite a bit. We all know it's just a money grab and likely nowhere near as good as it could be if it were in Marvel's hands, but... What can ya do?

Anyway, the cast did a great job, specifically Garfield, who I thought really settled into the Spidey role, the chick that plays Gwen, the dude that played Harry Osborn, and Jamie Foxx.

The action scenes were fucking AMAZING. They've really nailed the way Spider-Man moves and also his little quips in battle in this new franchise.

Gwen's death scene was super intense for me. I thought that was really well done. I didn't know if they had the balls to kill her off, especially in such gruesome fashion as she died in the comics, but they went for it and I thought it hit hard.

I also like that they're leading up to the Sinister Six.

I still think Spider-Man 2 is one of the best superhero movies ever, while the Raimi trilogy as a whole was pretty good but there are certain elements of this new franchise that I enjoy. Don't expect anything revolutionary from this one; just turn your brain off and enjoy.

ThaVirus
04-24-2014, 01:05 AM
Oh, yeah. I'm pretty easy to please but a couple negatives for me:

I thought Rhino looked like absolute shit. Seriously? Mini guns? Come on, bro.

And although I enjoyed the flick, I'm not clamoring to see the next installment. If this ends up being one of the better blockbusters this summer, I'll be pretty disappointed.

keg in kc
04-24-2014, 01:21 AM
I don't think there's any chance of that, re: "If this ends up being one of the better blockbusters this summer, I'll be pretty disappointed."

ThaVirus
04-24-2014, 01:28 AM
I hope you're right. I watched Captain America 2 recently and enjoyed that one about the same as Spider-Man 2.

I think X Men will probably be around the same level as Cap and Spidey so I'm putting all my summer eggs in the Godzilla basket. That movie looks awesome.

keg in kc
04-24-2014, 01:54 AM
Winter Soldier was great. If Spider Man 2 is on that level I'll be greatly shocked. Not that I ever plan to see it.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is my dark horse this summer. I think Guardians of the Galaxy could be really cool, too, but I'm not convinced they're going to be able to convince people to actually go to the theater to see something that looks that crazy. It's pretty far outside the safe, cookie-cutter Hollywood blockbuster formula, at least in appearance. I hope it does well.

The biggest movie of the year will probably be the next Transformers sequel. :(

Some big movies later in the year. Gone Girl will probably be huge. I would say Interstellar is the one I'm looking forward to the most, but it's not here until November 7th.

Anyong Bluth
04-24-2014, 06:36 AM
Winter Soldier was great. If Spider Man 2 is on that level I'll be greatly shocked. Not that I ever plan to see it.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is my dark horse this summer. I think Guardians of the Galaxy could be really cool, too, but I'm not convinced they're going to be able to convince people to actually go to the theater to see something that looks that crazy. It's pretty far outside the safe, cookie-cutter Hollywood blockbuster formula, at least in appearance. I hope it does well.

The biggest movie of the year will probably be the next Transformers sequel. :(

Some big movies later in the year. Gone Girl will probably be huge. I would say Interstellar is the one I'm looking forward to the most, but it's not here until November 7th.

Winter Soldier was slightly better than I expected, and I enjoyed it even though I've felt it's yet to hit it's stride with getting the character established. I'm not explaining it well, but I'm eager to see where they go with it in 3.

As for Spidey 2- I guess I'm in the minority that liked the 1st, and Toby just never jived with me as an actor for that role, and I completely prefer Garfield regardless of one liking the Raimi trilogy.

I'm crossing my fingers that Dawn of the PotA can match the 1st, but that's a heavy order. Even though Franco isn't back - except maybe in a small cameo that's been rumored, I like the cast they brought in for the 2nd part of the series.

I had zero opinion about GotG since I wasn't familiar with it prior to the movie going into production. From the clips, trailers, and bits and pieces trickling out, I'm actually eagerly awaiting to see this once it opens. Pratt and Del Toro look great so far in the limited stuff they've put out. I hope I'm not disappointed given my recent interest.

I'm sure Transformers will rake in it's tons of cash. I'm cool with bringing in the new cast. Wahlberg doesn't bother me like he does for some.
The plot line based on the trailers doesn't seem nearly as interesting as #3, but this is totally the type of movie meant to be seen on the bigscreen. I'm holding out hope that the rumors are true and they decided to cut the campy stuff and this one will be grittier / skewed more towards an adult audience?

Anyong Bluth
04-24-2014, 06:42 AM
Yea, im wondering if it was tracking low or something? I mean, im sure it will make alot of money, but its not like people are clamoring to see it or anything. Not that i can tell.

Almost a perfunctory action to go see it.

Sony is actually expecting it to do well. It's faired better than Captain America 2 in it's limited international release 1st weekend. I believe $46 million in very limited release of 15 countries. Estimates for the US is at about $100 million for the 1st weekend.

The studio head at Sony said they're very please and aiming for a billion at the box office. Seems a bit high- unless they have a huge number of IMAX / 3D theaters where they can really rake in the $$$ due to ticket cost. They'll virtually unchallenged for 2 weeks before Godzilla drops, and then X Men comes out and that will likely be it's 1st competition for entertainment dollars.

As for X Men- it just looks too awesome! I'm probably only setting myself up for disappointment only because my desire to see it so it will fall prey to unreasonable expectations. I'm trying to be reasonable but damn it looks awesome.
Part of my worry stems from pressure being put on Singer to trim down his theatrical cut because the studio obviously wanted to squeeze as many showing in per day as possible. I know for example an entire action sequence of roughly 20-25 minutes was cut where they have to rescue one of the mutants, I won't name, held captive in the mansion that has been taken over and turned into a sentinel base.

Also curious as to who the 4 secret Mutant cameos being kept under wraps will be?

ThaVirus
04-24-2014, 09:34 AM
Winter Soldier was great. If Spider Man 2 is on that level I'll be greatly shocked. Not that I ever plan to see it.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is my dark horse this summer. I think Guardians of the Galaxy could be really cool, too, but I'm not convinced they're going to be able to convince people to actually go to the theater to see something that looks that crazy. It's pretty far outside the safe, cookie-cutter Hollywood blockbuster formula, at least in appearance. I hope it does well.

The biggest movie of the year will probably be the next Transformers sequel. :(

Some big movies later in the year. Gone Girl will probably be huge. I would say Interstellar is the one I'm looking forward to the most, but it's not here until November 7th.


Yeah, I thought Winter Soldier was a legitimately good movie. Probably much better than Spider-Man in technical terms, but the enjoyment I got from both movies was about on the same level. That could be due to the fact that Spider-Man is my favorite superhero. Who knows..

But yeah, you're right. I had totally forgot about Dawn of the Apes and Transformers! I know everyone here hates the Transformers flicks but I LOVE them and this one looks to be pretty good. I also LOVED Rise of the Apes so my hopes are up big time for this next installment. I can deal with no Franco if they give Oldman the chance to carry the movie.

Pestilence
04-24-2014, 09:48 AM
Winter Soldier was great. If Spider Man 2 is on that level I'll be greatly shocked. Not that I ever plan to see it.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is my dark horse this summer. I think Guardians of the Galaxy could be really cool, too, but I'm not convinced they're going to be able to convince people to actually go to the theater to see something that looks that crazy. It's pretty far outside the safe, cookie-cutter Hollywood blockbuster formula, at least in appearance. I hope it does well.

The biggest movie of the year will probably be the next Transformers sequel. :(

Some big movies later in the year. Gone Girl will probably be huge. I would say Interstellar is the one I'm looking forward to the most, but it's not here until November 7th.

Usually my wife will see a preview for a comicbook movie and agree to go to it with me. She saw the preview for "Guardians of the Galaxy" and responded with....what the hell was that shit? Looks like I'll be going by myself.

Anyong Bluth
04-24-2014, 12:35 PM
Yeah, I thought Winter Soldier was a legitimately good movie. Probably much better than Spider-Man in technical terms, but the enjoyment I got from both movies was about on the same level. That could be due to the fact that Spider-Man is my favorite superhero. Who knows..

But yeah, you're right. I had totally forgot about Dawn of the Apes and Transformers! I know everyone here hates the Transformers flicks but I LOVE them and this one looks to be pretty good. I also LOVED Rise of the Apes so my hopes are up big time for this next installment. I can deal with no Franco if they give Oldman the chance to carry the movie.

Oldman is Oldman- can't think of a flick he's in I dislike.
Don't sleep on Jason Clarke, as I believe he's got a fairly large role in the movie too. He's by far the best actor in the business that literally NO ONE talks about! Also a favorite of mine who just so happens to be in a ton of stuff that qualify as some of my favorite shows, movies, and series.

Deberg_1990
05-01-2014, 10:13 PM
Figured I Bump this since it opened tonight. Anyone going to see it this weekend?

Deberg_1990
05-02-2014, 06:50 PM
Just saw it. It was decent I guess. Sort of just going through the motions though.

It's too bad because I really like this cast. Garfield and Stone especially. Even though Electro is advertised as the main villain, you could remove him from the film and it wouldn't have any effect on the plot as a whole. He was mainly just there to have a couple of action set pieces and extend the runtime by 30 minutes.

If anything this film felt a lot like Raimi's Spider Man 3. It was a little too overstuffed with plot and trying to set things n motion for the next film.

Rams Fan
05-02-2014, 11:07 PM
Not bad, not good, not great. Just OK.

Some stuff I didn't really buy into. Didn't like the whole ending sequence. But I thought Garfield was fine as Spidey and Jamie Foxx as Electro should've gotten way much more film time.

Rams Fan
05-02-2014, 11:11 PM
Also, I could have been wrong, but:

Did Harry say he went to Mizzou before he said he went to Singapore in the scene with Peter when they're near the river after Peter asks where Harry's been?

Also caught on to Dr. Kafka, but "she" being a "he" threw me off for a bit in the film.

RustShack
05-02-2014, 11:50 PM
I thought it was real good. But the people I went with brought a water bottle of vodka and I drank a lot of that during the movie. Don't know if that played a role or not... But I wasn't really a fan of the first one.

Deberg_1990
05-03-2014, 08:00 AM
Also, a compliant........the entire Spidey universe feels awfully small. Everything begins and ends with Oscorp. Everyone either works for them or is connected somehow. Then, it all hinges on the coincidence of Peter getting bit by his fathers spiders? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense?

Halfcan
05-03-2014, 08:55 AM
This movie is getting 1 to 1 and 1/2 stars. Already figured it for a DVD film-should be there soon. Maybe spidey 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 will be better?

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 10:07 AM
55% on Rotten Tomatoes, 37% among 'Top Critics'. From what I've been hearing, Garfield, Dehaan, and Stone give great performances in a mediocre movie.

It wasn't a good sign when Jimmy Fallon said to Jamie Foxx that they should talk about the movie, and Foxx replied, "Aww, do we have to? I was having fun here."

Bowser
05-03-2014, 10:09 AM
I really have little interest in seeing this, but a buddy took his kids to see it in the new AMC Prime theater, and he said it made the whole thing worth it.

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 11:37 AM
55% on Rotten Tomatoes, 37% among 'Top Critics'. From what I've been hearing, Garfield, Dehaan, and Stone give great performances in a mediocre movie.

It wasn't a good sign when Jimmy Fallon said to Jamie Foxx that they should talk about the movie, and Foxx replied, "Aww, do we have to? I was having fun here."

He's probably pissed because his screen time got major trim?

Deberg_1990
05-03-2014, 12:11 PM
He's probably pissed because his screen time got major trim?

I actually thought he was decent. Didn't care much for his dorky persona as Maxx, but Electro was pretty sweet.
Posted via Mobile Device

Rams Fan
05-03-2014, 12:47 PM
Also, a compliant........the entire Spidey universe feels awfully small. Everything begins and ends with Oscorp. Everyone either works for them or is connected somehow. Then, it all hinges on the coincidence of Peter getting bit by his fathers spiders? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense?

You could make the same case with Superman and Lexcorp for the most part.

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 01:04 PM
I'd like to see them be adventurous enough at some point to take a stab at coming up with an original villain.
Not everything has to rehash as if the comics are the requisite source for any good story.

The comics are spun off in 1000 directions and free to introduce and create as they please.

Valiant
05-03-2014, 01:41 PM
55% on Rotten Tomatoes, 37% among 'Top Critics'. From what I've been hearing, Garfield, Dehaan, and Stone give great performances in a mediocre movie.

It wasn't a good sign when Jimmy Fallon said to Jamie Foxx that they should talk about the movie, and Foxx replied, "Aww, do we have to? I was having fun here."

Fans are giving it a 70+ on there though.

Gravedigger
05-03-2014, 05:15 PM
I liked it, about as much as the first Amazing Spiderman. Yeah it has its flaws, but I got my money's worth.

Rhino was wasted, he was exactly as I figured. All those clips you see with Rhino/Paul Giamatti are right at the beginning of the movie and right at the end of the movie. When he spins the sewer covers and hits Rhino in the side of the head thats the last shot.

It took a bit for the villains to catch their stride but I liked Dane Dehaan as Green Goblin/Harry and I liked Electro, I don't know what the critics are really talking about. Electro has the best action scenes in the movie with the Times Square scene and the Power Plant scene towards the end. In the Times Square scene he hears voices and metal music as he shreds the entire place, it's a pretty badass way to introduce his psychotic side instead of the Lizard just hearing an evil side. I really loved the power plant scene how it goes from Electro fight directly in Green Goblin fight. BUT Green Goblin just gets his ass kicked really quickly, the worst thing he does is nab Gwen Stacy. And speaking of that scene.... scroll down if you want to be spoiled...




















































She dies. Painfully too. She falls and Spidey catches her by the chest with his webbing but when her head snaps back it still hits the floor even though he caught her body right before she hit the ground so in a way it's similar to the comics but with a cool twist. But the sound that it makes when her head snaps back and hits the ground..... OUCH. Painful sound. Also after that it follows the predictable ending from the first one. Gwen's graduation speech "inspires" him to continue being Spiderman... kinda lame. And how the hell did Harry look all badass and Goblin in the final fight and then look normal in Ravencroft? Explain that one to me, seems the Spider Venom would've deformed him forever.

Then the Rhino end scene, like Rhino would just stop for Spiderman to talk to the kid, and as if a ton of bystanders would be just sitting behind a police barrier as machine guns and rockets are fired 100 feet away from them.

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 05:32 PM
Other movies that rated higher on Rotten Tomatoes: Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3, Superman Returns.

One critic called Amazing Spider-Man 2 "the Batman and Robin of the Spidey series."

Ouch.

scott free
05-03-2014, 05:40 PM
So in other words, it blows... just like the first one.

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 05:58 PM
Moreso, apparently.

scott free
05-03-2014, 06:13 PM
Moreso, apparently.

I read a funny article on Cracked.com (god bless that site, LOVE 'em) that basically said you know a superhero franchise has jumped the shark when they try to pack too many villains into one movie.

It means they didn't have a strong enough story for one villain, so they just try to dazzle everyone with multiple bullshiters... I hated the last one anyway, Spiderman was never supposed to be "dark and gritty".

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 06:17 PM
I liked it, about as much as the first Amazing Spiderman. Yeah it has its flaws, but I got my money's worth.

Rhino was wasted, he was exactly as I figured. All those clips you see with Rhino/Paul Giamatti are right at the beginning of the movie and right at the end of the movie. When he spins the sewer covers and hits Rhino in the side of the head thats the last shot.

It took a bit for the villains to catch their stride but I liked Dane Dehaan as Green Goblin/Harry and I liked Electro, I don't know what the critics are really talking about. Electro has the best action scenes in the movie with the Times Square scene and the Power Plant scene towards the end. In the Times Square scene he hears voices and metal music as he shreds the entire place, it's a pretty badass way to introduce his psychotic side instead of the Lizard just hearing an evil side. I really loved the power plant scene how it goes from Electro fight directly in Green Goblin fight. BUT Green Goblin just gets his ass kicked really quickly, the worst thing he does is nab Gwen Stacy. And speaking of that scene.... scroll down if you want to be spoiled...




















































She dies. Painfully too. She falls and Spidey catches her by the chest with his webbing but when her head snaps back it still hits the floor even though he caught her body right before she hit the ground so in a way it's similar to the comics but with a cool twist. But the sound that it makes when her head snaps back and hits the ground..... OUCH. Painful sound. Also after that it follows the predictable ending from the first one. Gwen's graduation speech "inspires" him to continue being Spiderman... kinda lame. And how the hell did Harry look all badass and Goblin in the final fight and then look normal in Ravencroft? Explain that one to me, seems the Spider Venom would've deformed him forever.

Then the Rhino end scene, like Rhino would just stop for Spiderman to talk to the kid, and as if a ton of bystanders would be just sitting behind a police barrier as machine guns and rockets are fired 100 feet away from them.



Giamatti talked about this long ago. He said that his appearance was really just a cameo and to set up for being featured in the future.

Have to see the Gwen scene again, but all the clock parts falling would have done her in anyway- somehow they magically never fall all the way to the ground?

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 06:23 PM
Other movies that rated higher on Rotten Tomatoes: Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3, Superman Returns.

One critic called Amazing Spider-Man 2 "the Batman and Robin of the Spidey series."

Ouch.







So in other words, it blows... just like the first one.

I'd disagree with any of those being better movies. Seriously, even with it's flaws, this is a better movie by far. I'm sure that there are some that don't or won't care for it, but it's still not the disaster those other 4 mentioned above are.

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 06:27 PM
I read a funny article on Cracked.com (god bless that site, LOVE 'em) that basically said you know a superhero franchise has jumped the shark when they try to pack too many villains into one movie.

It means they didn't have a strong enough story for one villain, so they just try to dazzle everyone with multiple bullshiters... I hated the last one anyway, Spiderman was never supposed to be "dark and gritty".
I could give you a half hour about this, but that's a thing that's happening to superheroes now. There's a misconception that in order to make them interesting, they have to be conflicted, emotional, almost anti-heroes; it's even being reflected in their darker costumes. Superman and Spider-Man are the most obvious offenders, but I can almost guarantee that's what we'll get with the new Fantastic Four as well, and I think it's a major reason why we haven't seen Wonder Woman have her own damn movie by now.

The big exception is Captain America, fortunately. It's no coincidence that of those mentioned, he's also the one whose movie adaptation is the most identifiable and relevant to our real-life world, and is therefore - in my humble opinion - the best character.

If I didn't have a paper on Zachary Taylor to write tonight, I would seriously be able to go on and on about this.

Valiant
05-03-2014, 06:31 PM
Other movies that rated higher on Rotten Tomatoes: Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3, Superman Returns.

One critic called Amazing Spider-Man 2 "the Batman and Robin of the Spidey series."

Ouch.

Critics are some of the worst people to rate niche movies. Personally I think some of them get paid for their ratings. Or maybe, Marvel trying to get the rights back.

ASM2, critic 54, audience 76
SM3, critic 63, audience 51
XM3, critic 57, audience 63
SR, critic 76, audience 62

B&R, critic 12, audience 17 seems everyone agreed. No where near what is going on above though.

So when an audience gives a 3/4 rating, it seems like it might be a fun movie to watch.

I am seeing it at 8, so I can confirm or deny personally then.

Just saying never trust movie critics on comic or horror movies, nor comedies.


Super troopers
critic 35, audience 90.

scott free
05-03-2014, 06:32 PM
I'd disagree with any of those being better movies. Seriously, even with it's flaws, this is a better movie by far. I'm sure that there are some that don't or won't care for it, but it's still not the disaster those other 4 mentioned above are.

I've watched it twice, the second time only to make sure I wasn't wrong about it the first time.

It sucks balls IMO, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 06:35 PM
Ah, but did it suck more balls than Spider-Man 3? Because that sucked some pretty serious balls.

scott free
05-03-2014, 06:41 PM
I could give you a half hour about this, but that's a thing that's happening to superheroes now. There's a misconception that in order to make them interesting, they have to be conflicted, emotional, almost anti-heroes; it's even being reflected in their darker costumes. Superman and Spider-Man are the most obvious offenders, but I can almost guarantee that's what we'll get with the new Fantastic Four as well, and I think it's a major reason why we haven't seen Wonder Woman have her own damn movie by now.

The big exception is Captain America, fortunately. It's no coincidence that of those mentioned, he's also the one whose movie adaptation is the most identifiable and relevant to our real-life world, and is therefore - in my humble opinion - the best character.

If I didn't have a paper on Zachary Taylor to write tonight, I would seriously be able to go on and on about this.

Yep, straight arrow and very much un-conflicted Cap, rocks... but I will never be able to put him above Bales Batman.

Aries Walker
05-03-2014, 06:46 PM
Batman was an anti-hero to begin with, though, as was Wolverine, Hellboy, and (since about 1980) Daredevil. I'm talking about the non-anti-hero-heroes who do their thing for mainly altruistic reasons and whose ideals are typically reflected in their bright costuming. Another example is Oliver Queen on Arrow.

scott free
05-03-2014, 06:54 PM
True.

Deberg_1990
05-03-2014, 08:18 PM
Ah, but did it suck more balls than Spider-Man 3? Because that sucked some pretty serious balls.

It's better than that. Ironically though, it resembles that movie some. The overstuffed plot, underdeveloped villains.

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 08:35 PM
I've watched it twice, the second time only to make sure I wasn't wrong about it the first time.

It sucks balls IMO, we'll just have to agree to disagree.







Ah, but did it suck more balls than Spider-Man 3? Because that sucked some pretty serious balls.

Like I said- its not that I'm raving about it, but it's better than the previous mentioned movies.

I'm not offended if other's opinion differs.

Anyong Bluth
05-03-2014, 08:40 PM
Critics are some of the worst people to rate niche movies. Personally I think some of them get paid for their ratings. Or maybe, Marvel trying to get the rights back.

ASM2, critic 54, audience 76
SM3, critic 63, audience 51
XM3, critic 57, audience 63
SR, critic 76, audience 62

B&R, critic 12, audience 17 seems everyone agreed. No where near what is going on above though.

So when an audience gives a 3/4 rating, it seems like it might be a fun movie to watch.

I am seeing it at 8, so I can confirm or deny personally then.

Just saying never trust movie critics on comic or horror movies, nor comedies.


Super troopers
critic 35, audience 90.

You're partly right, because critics aren't above making salacious statements in the intended result being quoted in tv, radio, and print spots. Quick way to build a national name and move up the ladder to be the next nationally known critic. Pretty kush job to be the next S&E, Maltan, or Roeper.