CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN Pre-Release Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN Pre-Release Thread - Page 13

post #601 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

 

 

Also, I just can't stop laughing at the images in this Facebook page...

https://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=119847111367497

 

30512_120252184660323_119847111367497_228945_5317096_n.jpg

 

Taxi Spider

post #602 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeI View Post

 

That scene forever gets a pass from me. I was a New Yorker at the time Spider-man was released and watched the movie in a theater 1/2 a block away from the place where I was working on 9/11 and handed out water and juice to people that had escaped the buildings. That scene was added for New Yorkers and, for all its hokeyness, it went over like gangbusters where I was. I always appreciated it.

 

That went over huge everywhere (at least in the US). The "I have a father... His name was Ben Parker..." line too. Whole audience cheered when Peter said that.

post #603 of 1142

Tobey NAILS that line. I also particularly love his "Hi.... this is really heavy" in 2. And God bless him for committing to looking like a total dumbass in 3 at certain points.

post #604 of 1142

A lot of good it did him and Raimi. Most of the audience missed the point of these scenes. Geeks especially. Because they think that when they act cool and dark they look like Brando in The Wild Ones. Not like Urkel immitating The Fonz.

post #605 of 1142

True, true. I still find it commendable. And Tobey's not even my favorite Spidey; that honor goes to Josh Keaton, who voiced him in the terrific Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon, and Keaton's a large reason why I still love that show so much.

post #606 of 1142

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=16AwVWvjQhY

 

Four minute preview is now online.  A lot of it is simply recycled footage, but the bit at the beginning shows off a very solid sequence where Peter saves a kid from a burning car off the side of a bridge.  I liked the touch of him sharing the mask.

post #607 of 1142

Wait,

 

Is that C. Thomas Howell?  My interest in this movie just went up by about 75%.

post #608 of 1142

I'm going to go ahead and say I actually really like that little piece of Spidey and the car thief. That's a sense of playfulness and joy we've all wanted, yes?

post #609 of 1142

Honestly, nothing's really turned me off from this movie as of yet.  Maybe it's worse than the Raimi ones, maybe it does play in familiar territory, but until it's out, we won't know if it's good or not.  It's not like it's being made by people with no skills (to pay the bills).

post #610 of 1142

Yeah, there's nothing really bad about the extended trailer. Well, maybe some cgi flames, but that's nitpicking. I get the feeling that I've seen nearly the whole movie though without much of a sense of drama. We'll see though.

post #611 of 1142

Is it's simply cheap, lazy, mercenary existence enough to dislike the film for? Cause that's kinda where I'm coming from overe here.

 

That and Peter Potter anyway.

post #612 of 1142

I guess I'm just a lost cause interest-wise as far as this movie is concerned. That extended clip just looked like more the same, albeit caked up in terrible CG. I was actually reminded more of the bridge sequence in FANTASTIC FOUR than any of Raimi's films. Only darker.

 

Am I alone in groaning when Spider-man pulled off his mask during that rescue? Sony sure loves to show off the actor's face in action sequences...

 

And, boy, the Lizard still has a few passes to go before he stops looking like a video game. That claw in the car window looked awful.

post #613 of 1142

True, but it's still a preview, so I'm not too worried about all the CG.  Video Gamey Iron Man vs. the tank comes to mind.

post #614 of 1142

No, I think that the use of the mask during the rescue was pretty neat.  CGI fire aside, I found the entire sequence to be quite well-done.

post #615 of 1142

Ugh, and now we're gonna get the backlash to the backlash aren't we.

 

Fucking internet.

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDkwpoH49C5QfuATPj6hYIkFHnf6xnuGGg1FNiMHg0qQ1FZTZXgh7UkUE2

post #616 of 1142

More of the same save for the opening (albeit finally a good piece of something from this movie with him and the kid) and the very end. Meh.

 

Sony still hasn't found a hook to get people interested and frankly on the eve of The Avengers, and The Dark Knight Rises coming, this just pales in comparison.

post #617 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by neoolong View Post

Wait,

 

Is that C. Thomas Howell?  My interest in this movie just went up by about .075%.

 

Fixed that for me.

post #618 of 1142

Hey, don't disrespect Mark Watson like that.

post #619 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by neoolong View Post

True, but it's still a preview, so I'm not too worried about all the CG.  Video Gamey Iron Man vs. the tank comes to mind.

 

For sure, and I imagine that they'll be working on it feverishly right up to release.

 

But, to be fair, that was one shot. This trailer has at least a half dozen terrible-looking moments.

post #620 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by neoolong View Post

Hey, don't disrespect Mark Watson like that.

 

He'll always be Ponyboy to me.

post #621 of 1142

I'm liking what I'm seeing of the Spider-Man stuff, but the rest of it doesn't look interesting at all. I can't help but feel that they're showing all of their best bits.

post #622 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog View Post

Is it's simply cheap, lazy, mercenary existence enough to dislike the film for? Cause that's kinda where I'm coming from overe here.

 

Thisy this this this.

 

I have a feeling that, realistically, I may be eating some humble pie come July. It isn't going to be a bad film. The problem is that every discision that put this film in motion is a corporate one.

 

In every trailer or piece of marketing you can just feel Sony's hand. The film will need to justify it's existence to me (beyond "moar moniez") which I know sounds unforgivably egotistical but I'm just being honest. Unless this film grabs me by the balls I'll be thinking "WHY?" the entire time.

post #623 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki Odinson View Post

I could really, REALLY do without the whole "destiny" bullshit but I do like the idea of doing something with Peter's parents as they were always a black hole of information.

 

Eh...

 

250px-Richard_and_Mary_Parker_UToSM-1.jpg

post #624 of 1142

Gotta admit that I think it looks excellent, judging from this extended trailer alone! But as someone who is pretty hostile towards the Raimi trilogy, It will take a lot to make me fall for a new Spider-man movie. We'll see. Let's all just hope that we get a good movie.

post #625 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitches Leave View Post

Gotta admit that I think it looks excellent, judging from this extended trailer alone! But as someone who is pretty hostile towards the Raimi trilogy, It will take a lot to make me fall for a new Spider-man movie. We'll see. Let's all just hope that we get a good movie.

I really liked it.  I like how he saved the kid with the mask.  Nice touch and it looks like the movie has a soul.  I liked that sequence quite a bit.

post #626 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post
 I liked the touch of him sharing the mask.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode29 View Post
Am I alone in groaning when Spider-man pulled off his mask during that rescue? Sony sure loves to show off the actor's face in action sequences...
Quote:
Originally Posted by cccc View Post

I really liked it.  I like how he saved the kid with the mask.  Nice touch and it looks like the movie has a soul.  I liked that sequence quite a bit.

I can see both sides of this. Irked me at first, but he seemed to have a good reason. Unfortunately, CT Howell Jr. becomes Spider-man's black-mailing sidekick...

post #627 of 1142

Yep, he saves falling vehicles on a bridge and removes his mask at every opportunity. That's some damn fresh material right there; never saw that before. What was I thinking?

 

"...the summer's most anticipated film..."

 

Holy shit, the hubris.

post #628 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by theslik1 View Post

"...the summer's most anticipated film..."

 

Holy shit, the hubris.

That struck me more like desperation

post #629 of 1142

I guess they hopped on the anti-Batman backlash train too.

post #630 of 1142

I'll admit that trailer did look interesting. Except I hate that "Lead must remove mask for 50% of the movie" clause that seems to be in every Spiderman move actor's contract.

 

Also the Lizard should have been the bad in Raimi's first Spiderman.

post #631 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by theslik1 View Post

Yep, he saves falling vehicles on a bridge and removes his mask at every opportunity. That's some damn fresh material right there; never saw that before. What was I thinking?

 

Exactly what I was thinking. Another Spidey movie with the actor not wearing the mask most of the movie. Fuck you, Sony. Give the goddamn rights back to Marvel PLEASE.

post #632 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

I'll admit that trailer did look interesting. Except I hate that "Lead must remove mask for 50% of the movie" clause that seems to be in every Spiderman move actor's contract.

 

Also the Lizard should have been the bad in Raimi's first Spiderman.

Isn't that kinda the problem with most superhero films?  Though it seems more apparent with the Spiderman films--probably because of the lack of eye sockets.

post #633 of 1142

Well, I loved the Raimi films, I loved them a lot. So, when I heard about this reboot, I was annoyed, more than annoyed, livid! And mostly I still am, but still, I think it's important to enter every film with an open mind, this is hard, but otherwise preconceived notions could cause one to colour the film in certain shades unfairly, so it's also important. I have read a consensus here largely towards to general dislike and dissatisfaction with the project, I think for two reasons...

 

1. The fact that it was rebooted at all. Raimi, and the rest of the major players were in place, and they threw them away in favour of something rebooted. This was probably due to the fact if Raimi made a Part 4, then it would certainly be their last, and would need rebooting anyway, so Sony made the cynical business decision of re-starting earlier so they could make a new franchise earlier. Also, the relative speed of the reboot ties in as well, the Raimi films weren't given any time sufficient enough to settle into pop-culture, instead there is a new version a scant ten years after the first film. Whether casual audiences are ready to accept such a swift turn-around remains to be seen.

 

2. The reboot simueltaneously being overtly similar yet also changing intrinsic parts of the mythology. A lot of this film looks to be business as usal (bridge-based fight scenes, origin story), yet there seems to be strange changes to the core mythology. A discussion over Peter's parents could be interesting, but the film seems to cast this as a defining cause for his becoming Spider-man, thus removing the eveyman freak-accident angle which I think may be responsible in some part for the character's enduring popularity. Any previous attempt to make Spider-man being spider-man the result of some pre-ordained destiny doesn't work, it was an accident, it could have happened to anyone, but it happened to Peter Parker, and he chose to use the gifts he recieved for good, ONLY after he'd already paid the price for using them for personal gain. It's a wondefully human story about the choices we make, by making it pre-ordained, you're taking out that element of personal choice, diluting the character and making him like any other Neo, Anakin, or Harry who were always meant to be the chosen one.  

 

In truth this film can be anything, maybe it's a bold, new direction for the series that will be embraced and remembered for generations to come, maybe it will be one of those interesting films that heavily divide people and will be argued about endlessly, probably on these boards. Or maybe it will be an unmitigated disaster, the likes of what hasn't been seen since Batman & Robin. Only time will tell, whatever the result, I'm excited and curious to find out.

post #634 of 1142

I seriously doubt this will be a Batman and Robin-level disaster. At worst, it's going to a well-acted, competently shot action film that completely borks the Spider-Man mythos.

post #635 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

I seriously doubt this will be a Batman and Robin-level disaster. At worst, it's going to a well-acted, competently shot action film that completely borks the Spider-Man mythos.

 

This.

 

I think a lot of people are making this seem to be a lot worse than it will be.

post #636 of 1142
Thread Starter 

To me a box-ticking, focus-grouped holding pattern of a movie like this is far more irritating than a movie whose reach exceeds its grasp. I'm fairly sure it will be competent, well-shot, well-acted. I'm also fairly sure it's going to bore the shit out of me. Films like these are what separate the regular geeks from the cinema geeks - I can't get excited like this because, as much as I love Spider-Man, this film's very existence represents almost everything wrong with the studio mentality of today.

post #637 of 1142

Yeah, I'm kind of with you on that, Andrew. I saw all three previous Spider-Man films in theaters (yes, even 3), but I seriously doubt I'm going to plunk down actual money when there are so many other options available this summer, even charmingly goofy action trash like G.I. Joe Retaliation. When I'm more excited to see something like that than a new Spidey movie, there's a problem.

post #638 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

 

This.

 

I think a lot of people are making this seem to be a lot worse than it will be.


Okay, perhaps my statement was a touch hyperbolic, I was just trying to show two extremes of both good and bad results.

post #639 of 1142

I wonder if Sony is scrambling to cut some of the excruciating filler scenes (doorman? twitchy peter had a concussion?).  It's those that really got me turning on the movie.

post #640 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

This.

 

I think a lot of people are making this seem to be a lot worse than it will be.

 

I'm not sure I ever said that the product would be "bad" as in poorly acted or shot. My arguments are that the product is annoyingly derivative of modern superhero tropes that do not mesh well with the character and his world. Not only that, but the story/character beats that best define Classic Spider-Man have either been shitcanned or pointlessly meddled with.

 

The product is clearly aimed at the Twilight crowd and I'm sure it will do gangbusters in that regard. 

post #641 of 1142

Surprised this is such an active discussion, with about five or six FULL threads dedicated to Amazing Spider-Man.

 

SONY: Let's make another Spider-Man. Less like the last Spider-Mans, but pretty much exactly like every other superhero and/or fantasy movie ever.

post #642 of 1142

Would people be more accepting of the reboot if they had just adapted Spider-man: Reign instead?

post #643 of 1142

Directed by Joe Carnahan!

post #644 of 1142

I was explaining to a friend of mine that Spider-Man couldn't be in "The Avengers" because he's owned by Sony, while Marvel Studios put out "The Avengers", even though the Spider-Man character was actually created by Marvel.

 

He laughed at the idea of Spider-Man being "owned" "like a slave", but when you really think about it, there's some truth to that. It's like this movie is getting made not because the people behind it care about what's best for the character, but rather because they just want to exploit it as a property to potentially make money from.

post #645 of 1142

Hey, moviemaking is mercenary. There has to have been some spite on Sony's side because they announced a Spider-Man IV release date for their shareholders, only to see Sam Raimi give them nothing at the proposed deadline. Not the right way to make movies, but it makes sense from a business perspective. Sony needs product, and if you lose a major summer release tentpole, you can't just replace those lost revenues overnight.

 

The flip side is if they said, "Sam, you've made billions for us, we'll wait," then they risk announcing a release date late, when everyone has claimed a spot, and they have to counterprogram some other blockbuster, hurting both studios. Given that this is Spider-Man, however, they probably should have done exactly that, and watched another studio blink.

post #646 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi View Post

He laughed at the idea of Spider-Man being "owned" "like a slave", but when you really think about it, there's some truth to that. It's like this movie is getting made not because the people behind it care about what's best for the character, but rather because they just want to exploit it as a property to potentially make money from.

 

To their credit, the general public appears to be getting that vibe too. Hence the disinterest.

post #647 of 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi View Post
It's like this movie is getting made not because the people behind it care about what's best for the character, but rather because they just want to exploit it as a property to potentially make money from.

 

And this is different from every other superhero movie how?

post #648 of 1142

Ouch, that's a little cynical, don't you think? I dare say there's a few filmmakers and studios out there who have made superhero movies with more than just financial ambition motivating them. Folks who were inspired by some genuine affection for the character and a sincere desire to honour the hard work and imagination of the writers and artists behind the character and its comics.

post #649 of 1142

Well, folks greenlit the movies because they want tentpole dollars flowing into the company.  But directors and other creatives, say a Nolan, are probably more focused on the artistic side of things.  But, the start is financial ambition, because these things costs bucketloads of bucks.  That doesn't mean that there's not honest affection or a desire to do something creative with the property at work also.

post #650 of 1142

I'm bummed that the Lizard won't be in a better flick. *shrugs* Can't work up anymore Nerd Rage about this one at this point. I've gone from facepalm to apathy.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN Pre-Release Thread