THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN post release discussion - Page 8

The operating room scene is FANTASTIC.  I love it very much, I just wish the rest of the film was as strong.   But, I guess I should Read A Comic, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

 

A crazed scientist who has already stated in a conversation with his sentient metal tentacles that he's going to steal cash to fund his experiments. Yeah, those robberies sure lack motivation! IT'S IN THE FILM, YOU DUNCE. My comment about not reading comics has got nothing to do with it being "what a comics villain does" and everything to do with the film not shying away from the inherent nuttiness of superheroes in print.

 

And holy fuck, are you ever off about tone. Raimi's command and balance of the operatic and the goofy is what makes SPIDER-MAN 2 sing. I weep for the future of film fandom when faced with such lack of imagination.

Fund his experiments?  Where is he buying his equipment?  Radio Shack?  Why not just, IDK, STEAL THE EQUIPMENT.  Or expand the Harry plot line and have him give him ALL the stuff he needs instead of just the rock, for Ocks assistance in capturing Spider-Man.  Sorry, that little 3 second "explanation" of why he needs to rob banks, is lazy.  It's an excuse to have some extra action scenes and to show the audience that he is a bad guy.  Dunce?  LOL, okay there slugger. 

What you consider imagination, I consider a director having free reign with no checks and balances. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

It's becoming clear that the way forward for superhero properties is bland, inoffensive regurgitation, free of tone and flair.

Yup...this is exactly what bothers me about Amazing Spider-Man.  It's designed to be a placeholder...I mean come on, Marc Webb?  500 Days was decent, but what untapped cinematic potential for genre filmmaking did we see in that film?  With Raimi it was obvious and perfect.  Same with Fincher and Alien 3/Se7en.  Same with Donner and Superman.  Same with Burton and Batman (not perect but damn distinct and interesting)  Same with Greengrass and the Bourne sequels (except maybe Supremacy...somebody introduce him to a fucking tripod)  Those were bold casting choices.  This is just the studio getting somebody with hip name value who has as much power as your average production assistant, so they can order him around, and then dump him when it underpeforms (which they expected) because it's just to keep the rights.

This is the type of shit chud should be boycotting.  Especially after the integrity Marvel has been showing with their films.

Originally Posted by Freeman 

The aunt May in the new movies could never reach the pure magic of this scene.  I don't care if you think the Raimi movies were "too cheesy" they had so much heart, and sincerity that I just love.  I feel an emotional connection to those movies that isn't as strong for the new version. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVX-cUJGdxs

By the time the 3rd movie hit, I was hoping Aunt May would die a horrid death at the hands of emo Peter then her dead carcass air-dragged behind Harry's glider as NYC erupted in unanimous celebration throughout the streets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Draco Senior 

That scene is fine, but my problem with Aunt May in Raimi's films, and in the most common interpretations of the character, is that she seems to exist almost solely as the speech machine at the most convenient points in the story.  There's nothing wrong with May giving overwritten speeches in small doses, but when that seems to be the sole purpose of the character - at least in her major scenes - that's a bit of an issue and it becomes dull.  Rosemary Harris generally does good work in spite of the scripts, but in most of her scenes she's simply not a character.  I won't be seeing this movie until tomorrow, but I'm disappointed to hear Aunt May isn't in it enough...I liked Webb's idea of a May who challenges Peter as he's coming home with all of these new issues a little more, and not just in her speeches.

Si!

Quote:

Originally Posted by felix 

Are the Raimi films really that good? I mean i've watched them a few times but i never felt any deep love to revisit them anytime soon. I'd much prefer Garfield's interpetration of Peter Parker than Tobey's. Ditto for Emma Stone over Kristen Dunst. I admit AMAZING has some serious Editing and Plot problems, but it clicked for me much better than the Raimi films for some reason.

 

I am thinking of catching it again later this weekend.

1 is good up until the end of the origin sequence. 2 is solid. 3 is an interesting joke.

I've still not seen this but imagine I probably will some time over the course of this week. Despite the internet being inundated with tons of free footage I haven't watched much outside of the initial trailers and random TV spots. I'm not wildly excited to see it but I am interested to see if it can offer something better to me than "Gee, gosh, really?" Raimi's versions. I've always been on the outs with most people regarding that trilogy because it never really worked for me: I hate Dunst's portrayal of MJ, Tobey's goofy in all the wrong ways and their relationship is full-on cheese and just bad when it's not; they handled Goblin poorly ("WE'LL MEET UH-GAIN, SPIDAH-MAAAAAAN!"); Molina was ultimately a very bland Otto; 3 was a mess but probably the most interesting because of said mess. And that's only scratching the surface; Aunt May grated as they went on; too much fucking crying.
 

P.S. I love you, internet:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

It's an excuse to have some extra action scenes and to show the audience that he is a bad guy. 

psssst

That's generally what a genre screenplay is.  Excuses to show action and build character.

Well, it's been real. Bye, everyone!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

psssst

 

That's generally what a genre screenplay is.  Excuses to show action and build character.

I get that, and I like Spider-Man 2, I just don't buy into this notion that it's the greatest superhero film of all time.  It's a decent film, that I feel is uneven.  Doc Ock was a cool villian, and that OR scene is great, so great that it hurts the film in peaking at that moment.  Add in Dunst and her clear lack of interest in her character, the movie for me becomes a chore to sit through.  But, that's just me, if you like it or love it, that is awesome.  It just doesn't work for me. 

"Next, on "Literalist Fanboy Roundtable", we'll be discussing why Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor didn't just use his obvious scientific genius to become rich, instead of pursuing harebrained supercriminal schemes. Our secondary debate will focus on Otis - just why would an obviously intelligent man have such a stupid sidekick? IT'S SO UNREALISTIC."

The Raimi films haven't gotten worse, we're just living in the world of big-budget super-hero films the first Spider-Man helped usher in (moreso than X-Men, I think).  The form has evolved, so of course earlier films might look a little dated to some people.  But this "The Raimi films were never any good" attitude is just coming across as an attempt to be iconoclastically cool.

And see, here's the thing about Spider-Man 2 -- when a film is completely engaging you on an emotional level, as Spider-Man 2 does, you're so caught up in the swell of things, you don't think about nitpicks and things like "Why is he robbing banks?"  You're being manipulated, and successfully, into just going along with the ride.  It's the difference between me enjoying Amazing Spider-Man despite its familiarity, and me despising Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter; it's all in the execution.

Perhaps Doc Ock still had respect for Radio Shack and wanted to make sure to support technology vendors.  Nobody likes banks!  Steal from them!  Spider-man 2 continues to speak to the zeitgeist!!!

I don't think it's the best superhero film of all time.  I give that title to Donner's Superman.  But Spider-Man 2 is probably a close second.

Such heated emotions for something that played so tedious for me!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

If I call Monster Pete a reductionist cunt, will people be mad at me?

You're British, right? It'll probably sound really classy when you say it, so I'm sure it's fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

Such heated emotions for something that played so tedious for me!!!

"Tell THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN I said "hello"."

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

If I call Monster Pete a reductionist cunt, will people be mad at me?

wait till you see me champion Blade Trinity.

Also this.

Molina is very good, and I think my favorite scene of him is when he is talking to Peter about love and his past with his wife.  Small moments like that, are the parts I like about Spider-Man 2. 

I gave AMAZING SPIDER-MAN a chance, ended up enjoying it and look forward to where things go from here. But the film simply does not have the heart of the 3 Raimi films. You can make all the quibbles you want about SPIDER-MAN 1-3, but this is a statement of fact. In 10 years no one is going to look back on Marc Webb's technically competent but largely soulless film and care when they reboot the series yet again.

Also, if quibbling is your thing, you could spend just as much time quibbling about ASM as you could the Raimi films.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

Also, if quibbling is your thing, you could spend just as much time quibbling about ASM as you could the Raimi films.

And still not have a moment that lands like "Go get'em, tiger" does.

I never had much invested in the Maguire/Dunst chemistry or the way MJ specifically was written throughout the films (one too many poorly written "damsel" moments for my liking and an uninteresting arc that simply collapsed, peaking somewhere in the middle of 2 and just never getting back up), but that was a good moment, yes.

Seeing this in a few hours.  Very curious to see Garfield/Stone at last...I've been more impressed with their chemistry in the trailers alone than I was with Macguire/Dunst in all 3 films.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

And still not have a moment that lands like "Go get'em, tiger" does.

Or a moment as moving as her saying, "Isn't it about time someone saved your life, Peter?" or Peter telling Norman, "I have a father. His name was Ben Parker..."

Or a moment as hilarious as this:

Yes, I'm serious.

The more nerd rage that sequence produces the more I LOVE IT!

I remember going to the Spider-Man 3 midnight premiere with a bunch of friends and being the only person in the theater laughing at that part. The stunned silence of dozens of crest-fallen nerds only made it more funny.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

Spider-Man is silly. These superhero movies are all silly. To pretend otherwise is silly. But I will not accept people trashing on Alfred Molina. That man gave a character called "Dr. Octopus" warmth, heart and a tragic final moment. He's the greatest comic book villian on film.

Greater than Dominic West's (I assume) Oscar winning turn as Jigsaw? A bold claim sir!

It all comes down to "With great power comes great responsibility". This is the philosophical cornerstone of the Spider-Man character, and in its desperation to distance itself from the Raimi original, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN dances around this phrase, wording it differently to the point that it doesn't even have the same impact. ( A weird choice because it recalls the 2002 film in so many other ways, why choose this ALL IMPORTANT thing to jettison?) I can't even tell you what the phrase was changed to in ASM. It really shows you where ASM's heart is, and why despite all its strengths, it will never supercede the Raimi SPIDER-MAN.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JLassiter 

I remember going to the Spider-Man 3 midnight premiere with a bunch of friends and being the only person in the theater laughing at that part. The stunned silence of dozens of crest-fallen nerds only made it more funny.

The midnight premiere of that is still my favorite movie-going experience. Ten minutes in (knowing how bad it was), the whole audience turned into MST3K cracking jokes aloud and everyone was laughing.

Oh, and one major complaint pertaining to AMAZING SPIDER-MAN -- THEY NEVER EXPLAIN HIS SPIDER-SENSE! They show it happening, but if you hadn't seen the Raimi films, you'd have no idea what is going on! The film literally depends on the old series to give you that detail!

No, he's standing on Gwen's balcony when it happens. It has nothing to do with reflexes. And all it is represented by is a noise. Fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

It all comes down to "With great power comes great responsibility". This is the philosophical cornerstone of the Spider-Man character, and in its desperation to distance itself from the Raimi original, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN dances around this phrase, wording it differently to the point that it doesn't even have the same impact. ( A weird choice because it recalls the 2002 film in so many other ways, why choose this ALL IMPORTANT thing to jettison?) I can't even tell you what the phrase was changed to in ASM. It really shows you where ASM's heart is, and why despite all its strengths, it will never supercede the Raimi SPIDER-MAN.

Couldn't help but say aloud, "Just say the damn phrase!" when that happened. Such have your cake and eat it too bullshit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

No, he's standing on Gwen's balcony when it happens. It has nothing to do with reflexes. And all it is represented by is a noise. Fail.

It also happens on the subway on the way home after he's bitten.

I was thinking more about the subway.  Didn't even recall the Gwen moment.

Though I do recall thinking, "Why isn't the spidey-sense going off for all these other useful situations?"

But I suppose you could say that for the Raimi movies too?  I don't remember well enough.

Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but on the subway, doesn't his Spider-sense just alert him to the fact that he's about to get a beer bottle put on his head or something?

I did like the subway scene though, nice comedy of errors. Seemed like a Raimi scene, frankly.

Also: I wished they had shown him eating the frozen mac and cheese.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but on the subway, doesn't his Spider-sense just alert him to the fact that he's about to get a beer bottle put on his head or something?

 

It was the condensation from the bottle hitting his head I believe that caused him to freak out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

 

Fund his experiments?  Where is he buying his equipment?  Radio Shack?  Why not just, IDK, STEAL THE EQUIPMENT.  Or expand the Harry plot line and have him give him ALL the stuff he needs instead of just the rock, for Ocks assistance in capturing Spider-Man.  Sorry, that little 3 second "explanation" of why he needs to rob banks, is lazy.  It's an excuse to have some extra action scenes and to show the audience that he is a bad guy.  Dunce?  LOL, okay there slugger. 

 

What you consider imagination, I consider a director having free reign with no checks and balances. 

These are comic book superhero movies. Let's face it, in the end, they aren't really all that good or interesting. You kind of have to accept the staples of the genre (bad guys rob banks) and automatically dock the film because you are an adult, and this stuff is primarily made for kids.

Also, anyone else find it weird that the film mostly presumes you need to be reintroduced to the Spider-Man mythos, but there's absolutely no explanation as to what "spider-sense" actually is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Also, anyone else find it weird that the film mostly presumes you need to be reintroduced to the Spider-Man mythos, but there's absolutely no explanation as to what "spider-sense" actually is?

Or why/how Peter can stick to things. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

 

Also, anyone else find it weird that the film mostly presumes you need to be reintroduced to the Spider-Man mythos, but there's absolutely no explanation as to what "spider-sense" actually is?

I guess you missed my posts.

He's a SPIDER-maaaan, people!  You want them to spoon-feed you every explanation, all Nolan-liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiike???

... spiders have spidey-senses, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

That man gave a character called "Dr. Octopus" warmth, heart and a tragic final moment. He's the greatest comic book villian on film.

He left out the most important one of all: Fun.

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

He's the greatest comic book villian on film.

The Raimi film NAILED introducing Spiderman much more effectively both logically and emotionally in half the time.  The fight with Flash, being able to look at Flash, back at his arm all within a milisecond.  Discovering the webbing, how the webbing works.  Wall crawling for the first time...  I did like ASM, but god damn if the Raimi movie isn't better at the origin stuff in EVERY way!

I feel like I'm one of the few who is really not sure about Andrew Garfield's performance.  I don't know how much of it has to do with the baggage of his FABULOUS hair.

No one should have hair that fabulous.  I envy him, therefore I loath him.

That hair is pretty Fab bra...

As a side note Badass Digest has three concept art pics of the Lizard, and as is expected all three designs are better than the goomba we got.

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 
I did like the subway scene though, nice comedy of errors. Seemed like a Raimi scene, frankly.

I'd be willing to be money that anything fun and vibrant with sparks is from Sargent's contribution. Vanderbilt's stuff is probably the excised "Untold Story" - seems like the kind of thing he'd do to Spider-Man and Kloves' was probably the poor bastard who had to stitch drafts together and modernise the dialogue.

Originally Posted by Shaun H 

 

The Joker is shit in comparison. It's pretty shallow performance full of tics. Iconic? Yeah. Best? Fuck away no.

I'll retort after I wake up from watching Alfred Molina's Doc Ozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Aw, I thought Molina was fun.  A guy who talks to the tendrils from his spine?

His little, "HA!!!" when he smacks Spidey a good one.  His big-ass "NOOOOOOOOO!!!!" in the operating room showing Vader how it's done!

Originally Posted by Shaun H 

I'll retort after I wake up from watching Alfred Molina's Doc Ozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

You're so utterly wrong. The Joker is interesting, but it's a very adolescent interpretation of a character. Molina played corny and big, but in an operatic way.

Ledger seems to play it as if he knows he's going to be in a film. And I couldn't give two wanks about The Joker as a character, he's fun to watch because of the reactions he causes - but on his own, pretty boring.

I'd happily watch whole scenes of Molina on his own being charming and tragic while robbing GOLD from a bank.