The Amazing Spider-Man (Post-release)

Buying his web [or stealing it] was kind of lame. He should have figured it out himself. If it is off the shelf then many other people have it as well.

I did like his other spider qualities, such as attraction to flies and sitting in his web. Being part spider can't be all good.
Better than being part fly though.
 
This confuses the crap out of me. Not the post, but the difference between this movie audience and the audience from Avengers.

I cried 'wolf' with Avengers for it being tooooo much like the comics; perhaps even too faithful - I didn't grow up with the comics myself and thus didn't care much for it. The result to my comments though was an overwhelming backlash from comic purists.

Then I see this post where it says that followers of the comics are (paraphrased) the 'minority'.

Which confuses the crap out of me...especially since both movie genre's are Marvel.

:sick

The most important thing in my post is the fact that it's about telling A story not anyone one particular story. If the story is good, the story is good...no matter where it came from.

I can't speak to the Avengers, as I REALLY never got into those comics, but I do know an engaging story when I see one. If they made an engaging story without any elements from the comics minus the characters, I would have enjoyed it just as much.

-Nick
 
I wonder how much trouble it would have been to have someone make a comment about "first the Chitauri, now rampaging lizard men...." I know different studios were involved, but you would think Disney could have gotten some reference thrown in.

Maybe that's why so many cranes were present in the area: repairs.
 
Just saw the movie this evening and i have to say i was quite happy with it.

as a non avid reader of the comics i have a few questions and pointers.

Firstly why the need for these Movies to constantly have the Hero remove their masks, i mean does Spidey really reveal himself to Cop Stacy in the books ?

I sat wondering how much of the origin the reboot was going to include and i personally think they did just enough rather than dwell or skip through it to much, i honestly believe that the sequels will include more of the origin story as the movie moves along there were plenty of pointers to suggest that this would be the case.

My Hunch also suggests that sony will want to include as many Villians into their franchise to combat the Avengers Franchise so maybe instead of a trilogy of Spiderman movies we have six, the sixth being the Super 6 movie ive heard talked about ie 2,3,4 and 5 introduces a new villian leading upto episode 6 super 6
 
Firstly why the need for these Movies to constantly have the Hero remove their masks, i mean does Spidey really reveal himself to Cop Stacy in the books ?

I'm getting tired of that too. It seems like when in costume they have their mask removed more often than not. Give me the consummate actor like Hugo Weaving who never shows his face in the movie because the character doesn't remove his mask. EVER.
 
Well, he didn't reveal himself to Captain Stacy. He got zapped with a stun grenade or whatever it was, then when they had him, they took off the mask. He kicked all their butts without him giving up his ID until Stacy pulled a gun on him in a position he couldn't defend himself. At that point he was beaten and had no choice but to turn around.

Not a bright move, though, telling your girlfriend of a couple days, oh btw, i'm spiderman...

As for 6 flicks, have they announced signing him for 6? If not, 6 is way too far to plan IMO. Plus, they don't really have to compete with Marvel's Avengers. It's not a one or the other affair, plus, the rumor is they may work a way to get Spiderman over to the Avengers.
 
I'm getting tired of that too. It seems like when in costume they have their mask removed more often than not. Give me the consummate actor like Hugo Weaving who never shows his face in the movie because the character doesn't remove his mask. EVER.

I tend to agree with you. My reckoning is that they feel they need to remove the mask to convey emotion. They think that the audience is too dumb to be able to figure out how the character feels about given situation by body language and/or dialogue alone.
I remember once an interview where they were saying how a Halo movie wouldn't work because Master Chief never removes his helmet. Rubbish. There are ways around it.
 
Actually, I think it's to convey the actor is actually in the suit at some point. Otherwise, it can be stunt double or 3d mesh the whole time. Be a major downer to land the role of Spiderman and never wear the suit you know.

Part of it's emotion, but it's also to help you connect the actor to the character.
 
Well, he didn't reveal himself to Captain Stacy. He got zapped with a stun grenade or whatever it was, then when they had him, they took off the mask. He kicked all their butts without him giving up his ID until Stacy pulled a gun on him in a position he couldn't defend himself. At that point he was beaten and had no choice but to turn around.

He had no problem dodging bullets earlier.
 
I only got one thing to say: Darth Vader.

Oh crap... he eventually took of his mask too... well... **** then... C-3PO.

People who think someone HAS to take off the mask to show emotions is clearly... NOT... getting it and should stop being able to make decisions regarding movies. Go away... you are wasting air.
 
I only got one thing to say: Darth Vader.

Oh crap... he eventually took of his mask too... well... **** then... C-3PO.

People who think someone HAS to take off the mask to show emotions is clearly... NOT... getting it and should stop being able to make decisions regarding movies. Go away... you are wasting air.

I'm gonna bet there are gonna be complaints from the lay moviegoer when Karl Urban doesn't take off his mask in Dredd.
 
Saw it today. I think it was really great. My only issue was the CGI for the Lizard (it was weak in some shots). To me, the way Garfield nailed it has Parker / Spider-Man. Looking forward to the next one!
 
Saw it tonight. Not sure what my opinion is yet. Really felt like no Jameson was a fubar, and didn't Peter always go to school with Harry Osborn?? Just felt like they left out key pieces of the mythos to me. But the Spiderman cg was really sharp, if the Lizard was not so much...
 
Saw it last night with the gf. We both really enjoyed the movie. Good fun and had more of a comic book feel IMO than the last movies.

Didn't like the cgi lizard (ever since golem I now hold that as the bar for where all cgi main characters should be at) and I never understood how he didn't run out of web fluid.

All in all much better than the other spiderman movies. Can't wait for the next one!
 
I just got back from seeing this too. I enjoyed it but I have to say - the emotions that I went through when watching it were no different to the emotions that I felt when watching the first Toby Maguire movie.

When I left the movie theater - I couldn't help thinking "what was the point of doing this?" because it really didn't bring anything new to the party that I hadn't seen already.

I thought they made the lizard too big and Hulk-like. Why couldn't they have kept him closer to human size?

Oh well - I'm looking forward to Dark Knight Rises now.
 
This thread is more than 11 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top