The Amazing Spider-Man (The Movies)

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

I guess Movie! Venom will finally have someone to brag to.

[Brad]

New clip, Spidey needs to save some plutonium. Loving the whole vibe of this. 

 

[Soniman]

So umm...did that CG look wonky for anyone else or....?

[Milo]

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=95738

I would like to say that this is a good thing but really all it confirms to me is that Sony must wear a legendarily massive dunce cap

 

I don't really see the point of having Rhino in the film if he's not going to be in the film that long, especially if it's not going to have any /major/ bearing on the overall plot. Venom in his not-Eddie form had a combined total of six minutes on camera but he's was still the primary antagonist for that film.

 

If Rhino's presence in the film is the equivalent of a four-minute cameo, then the writers could had easily saved Rhino for a one-minute stinger. Like after the credits roll there's a timeskip after the events of the second movie to show what sets up the event of Spider-Man's battle with Rhino in this scene which would eventually happen in the third film. Or they could had just kept him out of the second film overall.

 

So umm...did that CG look wonky for anyone else or....?

 

The scene of Spider-Man jumping on inflated balloons in the first film looked more realistic than this. I can finally see the videogame comparisons Carbo's leveled at it.

[Willsy]

Andrew Garfield wants Mary Jane to be male:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/07/10/spider-mans-andrew-garfield-wants-mary-jane-to-be-male

Not sure what to think of this. While I support LGBT protagonists, Spiderman has always been straight. It's would be a big change, and no doubt a polarising one.

Also, changing MJ into a guy would be too much of a change when she has always been a woman.

[Toby]

Sounds like a certain someone is projecting his saucy wants and tantalizing desires~.

 

Garfield, if you want to fuck Michael B. Jordan, go fuck Michael B. Jordan. No one will judge you, promise.

[turbojet]

Toby, you know you would want to watch as well. It would be the only way you'd be interested in this movie

[Balding Spider]

New clip, Spidey needs to save some plutonium. Loving the whole vibe of this. 

 

So, where's his Spider-sense?

[Toby]

Toby, you know you would want to watch as well. It would be the only way you'd be interested in this movie

Curses, foiled again!

[turbojet]

Curses, foiled again!

In all seriousness though, the only great thing that this movie has is the cast. Like that is it. Garfield may be trying to stretch things a bit too far for some folks, but to my knowledge, he is the only person actually trying to bring Miles Morales or any black/gay/woman super hero in films which is something DC cannot even fathom at the moment and Marvel is just touching on. So I appreciate the effort.

[Brad]

I'd be down with it. 

[Nintendoga]

....And suddenly just like that, Andrew Garfield was replaced with another actor in Amazing Spider-man 3

This is a film series about a Spider-Hero fighting crime. I could give less of a flippity flop about Peter Parker's sexuality, and I don't want the films to waste 30 minutes exploring such an uninteresting thing.

God damn it Marvel why can't you just buy the rights back?

[Willsy]

I actually like Andrew Garfield. No, not just because he's a good looking guy (I admit it), but he does seem to do a good job with his role. He seems very passionate about it too. But yeah, I want the rights to go back to Marvel. But I'd at least hope that they keep Andrew as Peter.

[Carbo]

....And suddenly just like that, Andrew Garfield was replaced with another actor in Amazing Spider-man 3

This is a film series about a Spider-Hero fighting crime. I could give less of a flippity flop about Peter Parker's sexuality, and I don't want the films to waste 30 minutes exploring such an uninteresting thing.

God damn it Marvel why can't you just buy the rights back?

In the context of the current cinematic universe I don't really see there being that much of a gain for them.

Spider-Man isn't nearly as relevant in the movie industry these days as the other big players. The fact that Marvel could manage to take four of some incredibly undermined heroes that no one but enthusiasts cared about (particularly Iron Man who was mostly only remembered simply because of some cold war inspired propaganda stories and just by virtue of being an Avenger) and make a movie that became the third highest grossing movie of all time speaks volumes in how Marvel are for the most of the part comfortable with running their own race, being more relevant than even the original Spider-Man Raimi trilogy. Even when the cinematic universe went back to doing things solo, Iron Man 3 is still not far behind The Avengers, proving that there was a big amount of hype still left and eventually became the fifth highest grossing movie of all time. Now they have Captain America 2 on speed dial which, according to early impressions, might be Marvel's best movie period. In fact, Marvel are so pleased with the movie that they already got the Russo brothers on a fast track to direct the third movie. Which is going to release May 6, 2016. The same date that the Superman vs. Batman movie is coming out.

Let that sink in for a moment: Marvel is so confident in their properties that they're going to pit Captain America, alone, against both Batman and Superman.

With the way these next years are laid out for Marvel I really doubt they are going to wrestle Sony out of Spider-Man. They already got Ghost Rider back, but they said they're not interested in doing anything with him. They got Daredevil back, but rather than getting a movie he's going to get a Netflix series to tie into Marvel's Defenders line of continuity (which in the grand scheme of things would fit Spider-Man more because he's mostly a street-level super hero). Marvel is comfortable with building on the monolith foundation they already have for keeping things at a basic level and Sony are comfortable with churning out Spider-Man movies for decent profits, because besides 007 it's the only big movie franchise they have that makes good bank, despite the fact that the reboot grossed less than any of it's predecessors.

Now that reality saddens me on it's own because Spider-Man deserves better. But funny as it may be, I kind of don't really care much about Spider-Man in a movie context anymore, and I think the world has sort of moved passed him being the most relevant super hero money maker.

To be honest, the only franchise that's detrimental to Marvel by virtue of not being handled in-house as part of the cinematic universe is Fantastic Four. That's the only real franchise that at this point could stand to be put into The Avengers, would fit perfectly at home and give a lot of context for that particular universe, but Fox seems to be desperate to latch onto that too despite no one asking for it after it's abysmal predecessors.

[Blue Wisp]

Andrew Garfield wants Mary Jane to be male:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/07/10/spider-mans-andrew-garfield-wants-mary-jane-to-be-male

Not sure what to think of this. While I support LGBT protagonists, Spiderman has always been straight. It's would be a big change, and no doubt a polarising one.

Also, changing MJ into a guy would be too much of a change when she has always been a woman.

That's from last year's July. :I

 

Either way, if this means Samuel L.Jackson is Mary Jane, then by all means I like this.

[turbojet]

In the context of the current cinematic universe I don't really see there being that much of a gain for them.

Spider-Man isn't nearly as relevant in the movie industry these days as the other big players. The fact that Marvel could manage to take four of some incredibly undermined heroes that no one but enthusiasts cared about (particularly Iron Man who was mostly only remembered simply because of some cold war inspired propaganda stories and just by virtue of being an Avenger) and make a movie that became the third highest grossing movie of all time speaks volumes in how Marvel are for the most of the part comfortable with running their own race, being more relevant than even the original Spider-Man Raimi trilogy. Even when the cinematic universe went back to doing things solo, Iron Man 3 is still not far behind The Avengers, proving that there was a big amount of hype still left and eventually became the fifth highest grossing movie of all time. Now they have Captain America 2 on speed dial which, according to early impressions, might be Marvel's best movie period. In fact, Marvel are so pleased with the movie that they already got the Russo brothers on a fast track to direct the third movie. Which is going to release May 6, 2016. The same date that the Superman vs. Batman movie is coming out.

Let that sink in for a moment: Marvel is so confident in their properties that they're going to pit Captain America, alone, against both Batman and Superman.

With the way these next years are laid out for Marvel I really doubt they are going to wrestle Sony out of Spider-Man. They already got Ghost Rider back, but they said they're not interested in doing anything with him. They got Daredevil back, but rather than getting a movie he's going to get a Netflix series to tie into Marvel's Defenders line of continuity (which in the grand scheme of things would fit Spider-Man more because he's mostly a street-level super hero). Marvel is comfortable with building on the monolith foundation they already have for keeping things at a basic level and Sony are comfortable with churning out Spider-Man movies for decent profits, because besides 007 it's the only big movie franchise they have that makes good bank, despite the fact that the reboot grossed less than any of it's predecessors.

Now that reality saddens me on it's own because Spider-Man deserves better. But funny as it may be, I kind of don't really care much about Spider-Man in a movie context anymore, and I think the world has sort of moved passed him being the most relevant super hero money maker.

To be honest, the only franchise that's detrimental to Marvel by virtue of not being handled in-house as part of the cinematic universe is Fantastic Four. That's the only real franchise that at this point could stand to be put into The Avengers, would fit perfectly at home and give a lot of context for that particular universe, but Fox seems to be desperate to latch onto that too despite no one asking for it after it's abysmal predecessors.

As an avid comic book reader, they seriously need to do something with Spider-man in that media because when fucking Hawkeye takes your throne as the quintessential New York super hero, you know you fucked up as of late.

[Sami]

I still think Amazing Spider-Man was a more enjoyable movie than any of the Marvel films. Avengers was a lot of fun (and probably closest but Spider-Man wins by virtue of being Spider-Man), Iron Man 1 was okay, Iron Man 2 sucked, Captain America sucked, and Incredible Hulk... I saw it about five years ago and remember literally nothing about it so I'll just assume I didn't care about it.

 

I'm not ashamed to note that I'm extremely biased towards Spider-Man because he's the only super-hero I really cared about growing up and the only one I actually know anything about now. Read a bunch of his comics, was an active member on the message boards for the Spider-Man 3 game and Web of Shadows, bought all the games up till Web of Shadows, watched some of the shows, etc. I don't like Marvel's style of movies at all (too bombastic and action-heavy, imo) and I didn't enjoy the majority of them. I'd be really sad to see Spider-Man acquired by them considering how much I loved the first ASM.

 

Well aware that this is an extremely unpopular opinion. Not really interested in debating it because it's pure preference and bias talking for me. I don't have faith in Marvel delivering a Spider-Man movie I'd enjoy. 

[Willsy]

The Amazing Spiderman was in my opinion miles better than Raimi's trilogy, I just didn't like Toby Maguire as Spidey, he was too spick and span generally and not to mention....

http://youtu.be/1e3Y_xkXh_Q

And...

I really prefer Garfield. I think he nails the role and fits it like a glove.

[Soniman]

  I vastly prefer SP1 and 2 over ASM by virtue of feeling like that had some emotion and atmosphere to it. They made New York feel like New York (maybe because of the time period, I dunno), it had some style and personality to it which I don't get with ASM it just feels like a rather bland movie that really just feels standard super hero movie fair, like you can tell the movie was made because Sony wanted to keep the license, it's not terrible but it's not remarkable in any way to me. I can recall so many moments and great scores from the original movies but I would be hard pressed to do the same for ASM.

 

But hey, if I can give ASM2 some credit it does seem to be injecting a lot more style and flair in it's presentation and so thats appreciated.

[Dejimon11]

Here it is the final trailer

[Soniman]

What the hell kind of trailer is 8 minutes long?

 

Derp just a analysis video

[Dejimon11]

What the hell kind of trailer is 8 minutes long?

It's actually 2 minutes the remaining part is the review since the video said "trailer + review"

[Carbo]

A trailer that finally shows the good bits.

Now I've seen the entire movie!

Goblin is so badly shoehorned into this movie with the most rushed backstory ever tailored with no implications ever hinted at in the previous movie for Harry and Peter. Fucks sake why didn't they cut this shit out and pace it better.

[Toby]

This train wreck is going to be delicious.

[Soniman]

I like how they actually put out an official screen shot of Goblin.

 

So it's like, why should the audience care about Harry before his transformation now? They now know he become the villain later on and  so the scenes with Peter and Harry bonding it up will mean nothing to them, good job guys.