Peter Parker1
Member
i think they're gonna change more than size on the eyes. they will probably change the shape and color as well. i trust marc webb, i bet it will be cool
New Spidey Suit for The Amazing Spiderman 2
- Thread starter Argonaut
- Start date
CalMusquez
Active Member
Regarding Electro; I would honestly be most happy with no special badguy costume. I think they should really go a more realistic route and just try and make him badass in a tattered electrical worker outfit.
I hope he get webbing under his arms. I have no idea how it would be useful, but I always liked it.
SPIDERPIGC
New Member
I don't know, I just hope they don't go with such a comic-y look... I don't think it'll look too great on screen.
Now that's something that I think would not translate to the screen at all. It just has too much potential to look silly.
The way I view the lens change, it would give him a larger field of vision and it's completely possible. Perhaps he just uses like a snowboarding visor instead of sunglasses. Or he could make his own with plexi-glass. It's really not that ridiculous or comicy.
Yes it is. You're saying an eye hole that extends all the way to his hairline helps his field of vision?! Once you venture past the brow it's of no help at all.
You have to remember - Mcfarlane did this simply to give Spidey a wider range of manga like expression. The eyes would change and become more blown out when Spidey was surprised, squint when confused - yadda yadda The movie will leave them stationary - just big over extended gaps that look like he's always saying "OH MY GOD"
You have to remember - Mcfarlane did this simply to give Spidey a wider range of manga like expression. The eyes would change and become more blown out when Spidey was surprised, squint when confused - yadda yadda The movie will leave them stationary - just big over extended gaps that look like he's always saying "OH MY GOD"
yeah i really don't like them at all, but then again, I've always been a fan of the really small slanted eyes (like Romita and Ditko).
The webbing under the arms would look cool if and only if they had brought the full Ditko/Romita style Spidey to the screen and not the Andrew Garfield version.
The webbing under the arms would look cool if and only if they had brought the full Ditko/Romita style Spidey to the screen and not the Andrew Garfield version.
FSURobbie
Well-Known Member
QFT up in this joint...
Yes it is. You're saying an eye hole that extends all the way to his hairline helps his field of vision?! Once you venture past the brow it's of no help at all.
You have to remember - Mcfarlane did this simply to give Spidey a wider range of manga like expression. The eyes would change and become more blown out when Spidey was surprised, squint when confused - yadda yadda The movie will leave them stationary - just big over extended gaps that look like he's always saying "OH MY GOD"
If you go by that exact photoshop rendition, sure. But they're also slightly extended width-wise in that photo. And, the fimmakers can do whatever they want with them, they could make them a little wider. I'm not a fan of the mcfarlane eyes anyway. I'd much rather see the rounded, romita lenes.
I personally just am not that big of a fan of anything the Amazing Spider Man did. No offense to anyone, but the most accurate thing that was in that entire movie was Lizard. Andrew Garfield did not remind me of the classic Peter Parker even the slightest bit, the suit looked more like the 2099 Spider Man, and there's a whole list more of what just completely makes me disappointed. So to be honest, I wont care what they change about the eyes or suit for the next movie. If they really want to change something, get rid of Garfield (but that wont happen), change the suit to look like the original comics, and get the director, script writer, and everyone else on the crew to read up on the comics! That would make almost ALL the fans of the comics happy, and it would be accurate.
crabra comander
Master Member
Why do directors need to follow a comics storyline? You want something targeted at young teens?
Who thinks it's cool that Kraven kills himself? Honestly?
As far as Garfield is concerned. Again, why does he need to be specifically like your idea of Spider-man? He is tall and lanky, yet athletic, like Spider-man.
And for the naysayers saying he was to mean spirited for the first one. It's called character growth. He's upset that his Uncle was killed. He'll move out of that phase.
FSURobbie
Well-Known Member
Comics stopped being targeted at teens and younger decades ago. Comic book folks have long since realized that their audience is 18-34 and male. I love Spidey but I'm not sure I would let my kids read him at this point. Heck, Marvel has a special line they debuted a few years ago to address younger readers as they realized the problem of their books trending mature themselves.
Kraven killing himself was awesome. It fit the build up of the character. I have the complete arc and it's a thing of beauty story-wise and artistically. I'm not sure I've read of a super villian offing themselves before or since. Spidey, the comic, has been a trailblazer in a lot of respects so the idea that it panders to kids isn't accurate. Heck, the first comic to go against the Comics Code Authority was ASM due to an issue where Peter tries to help Harry battle his addiction to heroin.
Sorry, doesn't really relate to the movie discussion, I just get my dander up when I see the still bandied about refrain that comics are for kids that has existed for over 100 years now. That might have been true back in the golden age of comics, but it stopped being accurate a long time ago.
Directors could do a lot worse than creating a faithful silver screen representation of modern comic story arcs.
crabra comander
Master Member
Not saying it was targeted toward kids. Young teens. Big difference.
Young teens like violence and drugs. Complex story lines? Not so much.
Personally I just wanted to see the next boss battle.
Young teens like violence and drugs. Complex story lines? Not so much.
Personally I just wanted to see the next boss battle.
crabra comander
Master Member
I don't mind the milk runs. Batman has better excuses though:lol
I personally thought Amazing Spiderman was more accurate to the comics in many ways. Garfield was the perfect choice, imo. No they didn't make him straight up nerdy like he had been in the comics, but I think the reasoning behind that was called for. In Webb's own words, being a nerd isn't such a bad thing nowadays; being smart and scientific has become cool, similar to how reading comics is becoming more and more acceptable. Peter was portrayed as an outsider: awkward, doesn't fit in, yet still very intelligent.
His portrayal of Spiderman was by far my favorite thing in the movie. We finally have a spidey that throws out quips while fighting criminals, and the fact that his crime fighting is still shown to affect his personal life (especially with aunt may) is perfect. I think they maintained all of the key ideas from the comics while doing a good job of upgrading them for modern times.
I think after what they established in the first film, the good things are only going to get better. As crabra comander said, it's character growth. They are expanding his maturity into the second film instead of making it instant when he became spidey.
His portrayal of Spiderman was by far my favorite thing in the movie. We finally have a spidey that throws out quips while fighting criminals, and the fact that his crime fighting is still shown to affect his personal life (especially with aunt may) is perfect. I think they maintained all of the key ideas from the comics while doing a good job of upgrading them for modern times.
I think after what they established in the first film, the good things are only going to get better. As crabra comander said, it's character growth. They are expanding his maturity into the second film instead of making it instant when he became spidey.
I think you guys misunderstood when i said i didn't like Garfield... I didn't like how Garfield looked as Spider Man and Peter Parker. I just kinda felt he looked more like "grasshopper" man in the suit and Edward Cullen as Peter Parker... I mean really, yes spider man is not supposed to be like a bodybuilder, but he still isn't supposed to have chicken legs!
And apart from him (and honestly, i can tolerate him, i just don't necessarily think hes the best Spider Man they could've got) but there was no Daily Bugle in the movie, no scene where he signed up to wrestle when he first got his powers (yes, that was in the comics), and then the only reason he was supposed to make his suit was for a television show he was featured on. and after ALL that happened, that's when uncle Ben died and he started fighting crime. but what happened in the Garfield version? he gets powers, makes web shooters, uncle Ben dies, he fights crime, and then makes his suit..... those are very important details that you cant leave out... ESPECIALLY for super hyper accuracy fans like myself.
and just to prove my point about how Garfield looks as spider man, when did this
become this
and if anything, Garfield looks even a bit bigger in that picture (since its animated)
Don't get me wrong, i liked the movie. I just didn't like a few aspects of it.
And apart from him (and honestly, i can tolerate him, i just don't necessarily think hes the best Spider Man they could've got) but there was no Daily Bugle in the movie, no scene where he signed up to wrestle when he first got his powers (yes, that was in the comics), and then the only reason he was supposed to make his suit was for a television show he was featured on. and after ALL that happened, that's when uncle Ben died and he started fighting crime. but what happened in the Garfield version? he gets powers, makes web shooters, uncle Ben dies, he fights crime, and then makes his suit..... those are very important details that you cant leave out... ESPECIALLY for super hyper accuracy fans like myself.
and just to prove my point about how Garfield looks as spider man, when did this
become this
and if anything, Garfield looks even a bit bigger in that picture (since its animated)
Don't get me wrong, i liked the movie. I just didn't like a few aspects of it.
Last edited:
crabra comander
Master Member
I don't think they had much choice with the skipping of those parts. Would I consider the wrestling gig a key aspect of his story? Possibly, but they gave a nod to that in this film.
I think the film had too much that they knew had already been done to continue on the same path as Raimi's version.
I think the film had too much that they knew had already been done to continue on the same path as Raimi's version.
Werstrooper
Well-Known Member
Yeah I thought the nod was done well also.
Similar threads
