The Amazing Spider-Man (The Movies)

[Balding Spider]

A couple new (Low-Res) Spiderman clips.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LshJ1a-p9lA

*chuckle* Ah Spider troll

[PeanutButterDimond]

Better quality version of the second clip. You gotta love how much of a troll Spidey is.

"Is that a knife? Is that a real knife?""Yes it's a knife.""My weakness. Not a-not a knife. Anything but a knife." XD That's hilarious.

Also, thanks to RealIronMan from the Superherohype forums:

SFX Magazine-ASM(Extracts)

First up, here’s producer Matt Tolmach on the film’s primary villain:

“Choosing the villain is always a huge conversation,” shares Tolmach. “The cool thing about Spider-Man villains is that they’re not just villains – they usually play a bigger dramatic role. In this case Peter has a very powerful relationship with [Curt] Connors [the alter-ego of the Lizard]. There’s a connection between Connors and Peter’s past. There’s something there that you’ve never seen before, and there’s also a sense in whichthere are two paths you can go down – the path of the hero or the path of the weaker man.

“We made a real concerted effort to tell a different story. And this is a villain that serves the story we’re telling about, ‘Who am I? Where did I come from?’ There are thematic reasons why Curt Connors is the right villain for this movie. Sometimes a movie is made or broken by its villain, and a great villain is somebody who is as inextricably tied into the story as the lead. They are often the personification of the thing that the lead is trying to overcome. And that’s what this is.”

Purists may be irked that the movie sheds the Lizard’s iconic croc-in-a-lab-coat visual. “Look, this is the big screen interpretation of it,” argues Tolmach, keen to defuse any potential fanboy ire. “You have to think about it – on the one hand we’re making a decision to tell a story that lives very much in the real world. That was a big part of the conversation – to ground it in our world, a world where there’s gravity, where the laws of physics apply. There’s a tangible explanation for how things are done.

“And in that world there has to be a Lizard. So how do you do that? You have to make the Lizard something that could come from this world. And that’s where you depart – literally – from the pages of the comic book.”

And here’s star Andrew Garfield on why Spider-Man is a metaphor for Internet trolls (bet you never thought you’d read that sentence!):

“You feel the power of it, the power of not being seen, the power of the mask. Peter becomes witty when he’s got that protective layer. It’slike he’s on a message board. He’s got the anonymity of the Internet within that suit, and he can say whatever the hell he likes, and he can get away with anything. He can f**k with people and there’s no consequences because nobody knows who the hell he is.

We all know how powerful and potentially dangerous that anonymity is."

EDIT: A New Clip!

Edited April 2, 2012 by The Groosenator

[turbojet]

This movie is going to be so awesome.

[Sami]

"OH GOD PLEASE, NO! NOT A KNIFE! THAT'S MY ONE WEAKNESS!"

This movie has officially earned my approval. Hurry up, July 3rd...

[lounge]

this reminds me of the sonic cycle. When this was announced, everyone including me hated it. Now, everyone's liking it. Even Maguire and Dunst said the movie looks cool and they can't wait to see it.

[Sami]

this reminds me of the sonic cycle. When this was announced, everyone including me hated it. Now, everyone's liking it. Even Maguire and Dunst said the movie looks cool and they can't wait to see it.

Most people we annoyed that they were going to be retelling the origin again.

Personally, I was just glad that we were finally rid of Maguire and Dunst. I hated the both of them.

[lounge]

Yeah the thing I hated the most about the original trilogy was too much of a focus on Mary Jane. She became so annoying especially in 2. I'd rather they continued the story from 3 with the same cast though with the director, vibe and new suit of this reboot. This new spiderman movie looks like it has a fun vibe which I like.

[Emperor Robrainiac]

Spider-man trolling that criminal cracks me up every time I watch it, especially when he "sneezes" web at him.

I'm looking forward to this!

[PeanutButterDimond]

Well, I've now seen people complaining about Spidey's jokes and toying with the criminal because they're "too harsh" and "make him a douche bag" and a "jerk". One of the biggest complaints about the Raimi trilogy was Spider-Man's lack of wise cracks and now that we have that in full force, it's a problem and hurts the character.

I've actually seen someone say that Spidey's jokes and his toying around with the thug "completely destroys his characterization"(Actual quote) and "goes against the characterization of Peter in the comics"(actual quote). I'm dead serious. So now that Spidey's actually toying around and cracking jokes, it's a bad thing, makes him a douche, deviates from the character in the comics and completely destroys the characterization of Peter Parker.

I can't describe how wrong that whole thought is. Spider-Man's always been a wise ass. It's who he is. He's a teenager who is bullied and now that he is strong and can remain anonymous, he's having fun with it. That's what he is in the comics and that's what he is in the film. If this Spider-Man's a douche than practically every other Spider-Man must be one too. Seriously, some people are just never pleased.

Rant aside, I am psyched for this film and it a hundred times closer to the comics and better than Rami's version(even though I do like Spider-Man 1,2 and 3). I can't wait to see this film. The more I see, the more excited I get.

Edited April 4, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[turbojet]

Well, I've now seen people complaining about Spidey's jokes and toying with the criminal because they're "too harsh" and "make him a douche bag" and a "jerk". One of the biggest complaints about the Raimi trilogy was Spider-Man's lack of wise cracks and now that we have that in full force, it's a problem and hurts the character.

I've actually seen someone say that Spidey's jokes and his toying around with the thug "completely destroys his characterization"(Actual quote) and "goes against the characterization of Peter in the comics"(actual quote). I'm dead serious. So now that Spidey's actually toying around and cracking jokes, it's a bad thing, makes him a douche, deviates from the character in the comics and completely destroys the characterization of Peter Parker.

I can't describe how wrong that whole thought is. Spider-Man's always been a wise ass. It's who he is. He's a teenager who is bullied and now that he is strong and can remain anonymous, he's having fun with it. That's what he is in the comics and that's what he is in the film. If this Spider-Man's a douche than practically every other Spider-Man must be one too. Seriously, some people are just never pleased.

Rant aside, I am psyched for this film and it a hundred times closer to the comics and better than Rami's version(even though I do like Spider-Man 1,2 and 3). I can't wait to see this film. The more I see, the more excited I get.

Tell those assholes to watch Superman. Batman must be fucking brutal if you thought Spider-man was bad. I mean seriously. Batman toys with his prey and loves scaring the shit out of them. Don't act like he doesn't when you know damn well he does.

[turbojet]

Double-post: I did some searching to find pics of Spider-man trolling criminals incessantly...and it was pretty easy.

And this entire sequence makes every argument about Spider-man not being a troll null.

Video evidence.

I rest my case.

Edited April 4, 2012 by turbojet

[Eternal EX]

Proof of Spider-troll

Keaton! Oh how I've already missed you. Oh wait wrong topic.

[Celestia]

That post pretty much sums up everything I love about Spidey. On the other hand, I also like the idea that you know when he's seriously upset by something when he isn't quipping at all. (For example, in the first Raimi movie, it was obvious that he wouldn't be making any quips when he tracked down the guy who killed his uncle. Other than that, the only fights in that movie I couldn't have seen with any "quippage" would be the last one with Goblin.)

In any case, I'm glad the reboot's Spider-Man is a lot more snarky (although I'm not watching those clips I think I'll wait until I actually see the movie haha). I never considered the whole superhero identity = anonymous troll thing until now, actually...it's oddly accurate, although obviously Spidey uses his trolling powers for good.

[PeanutButterDimond]

New clip of Gwen and Peter interaction.

I really like it. It's slow and stumbling. Which really feel natural and realistic. I like the chemistry. Gwen's a bit joking yet kind and Peter's kind of stumbling through words and he's awkwardly speaking. I rally like the acting here.

Now, it's our favourite part folks, ridiculous complaints and conclusions from this scene by the internet!

-The scene is campy(Grantes, the person who said this based it off of gifs and not the actual clip and admitted this)

-Peter Parker is emo and "not as fun as Spider-man should be".(you guys can handle this one. I don;t feel like raging.)

Edited April 6, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[Sami]

New clip of Gwen and Peter interaction.

I really like it. It's slow and stumbling. Which really feel natural and realistic. I like the chemistry. Gwen's a bit joking yet kind and Peter's kind of stumbling through words and he's awkwardly speaking. I rally like the acting here.

Now, it's our favourite part folks, ridiculous complaints and conclusions from this scene by the internet!

Stupid web filter at school prevents me from watching. D:

-The scene is campy(Grantes, the person who said this based it off of gifs and not the actual clip and admitted this)

-Peter Parker is emo and "not as fun as Spider-man should be".(you guys can handle this one. I don;t feel like raging.)

Question: Does this Peter like to talk about horses and getting back on them? Because if not, I might just be one really disappointed man.

[PeanutButterDimond]

Some new info courtesy of RealIrOnMaN from SSH. Don't know where RIM found it but he's never lied before so I'll believe this is legit. Everything he post concerning this film has been legit so far so read and enjoy.

It sounds interesting. I am certainly not against changes especially when handled well. Sounds like nothing to important is being changed yet it sounds different enough to feel fresh from the old series.

The whole Ben thing is fine because from set videos and exclusive con footage, we know it still affects Peter and is based off of the Ultimate origin.

I also really like that the whole parents thing won;t be solved after this one film and that it will be more like an arcing subplot through the series.

"I wanted to give the audience something new, so that started off with getting underneath the parents' story, which will unfold over probably a few movies," Marc Webb told MTV News during a recent interview. "We don't totally wrap up that story in this first movie. It's sort of anongoing mystery. That was something that was interesting to me."

The story of Peter's parents isn't the only curveball being thrown at Spider-fans, either. Webb acknowledged that there are "obligations to the canon, in terms of Uncle Ben and the spider-bite, but the conditions under which those things happen are very different" in his movie.

"This is probably a reveal," he said, "but

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!

:

there is no wrestling match in this movie

. The character is evolving in a different way. It's about finding a balance between iconic elements of the 'Spider-Man' mythology—like how Uncle Ben's death transforms him emotionally—but it happens in a different way."

As for the radioactive spider that gave Peter his powers? "He's bitten by a spider," Webb confirmed, "but maybe it's not a radioactive spider. Or maybe it is! You'll have to see."

"There are elements that we were very conscious of," the director continued, "but it all emanated from [the idea of] this kid who got left behind by his parents many, many years before. I thought that was interesting enough for me to explore."

Edited April 10, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[Balding Spider]

On the topic of the spioler you posted Peanut, I have no issue with this.

As for the radioactive spider that gave Peter his powers? "He's bitten by a spider," Webb confirmed, "but maybe it's not a radioactive spider. Or maybe it is! You'll have to see."

It's either Raimis Genetically modified Spiders or it's a radioactive one Webb, don't try and play misleading here.

[turbojet]

-The scene is campy(Grantes, the person who said this based it off of gifs and not the actual clip and admitted this)

-Peter Parker is emo and "not as fun as Spider-man should be".(you guys can handle this one. I don;t feel like raging.)

I hate when people use emo when it doesn't fit. Having real issues in your life and feeling down about them doesn't make you emo and this should stop. I don't want an unflappable, undeterred icon like Superman. Hell, the entire Marvel universe is built on the premise of having more palatable down to Earth beings. Ironman may be a super rich playboy, super genius like Bruce Wayne, but he is a frequent alcoholic with issues of his dad expecting too much out of him. Captain America(at least in the Ultimate Universe) retains ideals of an America that was sexist, racist, and extremely capitalistic. Hell, the Avengers are pretty much the Justice League with the exception of them being a government entity instead of a private enterprise(*cough* Bruce Wayne*cough*).

As for Spider-man, we all know who he is. He goes through unemployment just like many Americans did in 2010 and still are.

Does he complain about it? Yes Does he feel hopeless? Yes. Does he stop being Spider-man to find economic fortune? No.

As for Peter Parker in this version, he is a high school kid whose only interest is getting laid, going to school, and going to college. He is bullied mercilessly, and has had his parents killed in an accident. Outside of school, he is a lower middle class kid who lives with his Uncle Ben and Aunt May. He isn't sunshine and rainbows. He has never been fun personified and I think some people overlook the Peter Parker aspect of his life and look strictly at his persona of being Spider-man. Greg Weisman didn't forget that. Brian Bendis didn't forget that. Paul Dini is forgetting that(I really am annoyed with the Ultimate Spider-man cartoon). Peter Parker is living a vicarious fantasy as Spider-man when he is underneath a mask. The power of anonymity empowers him. It makes him bolder. In fact, it becomes a plot point in early Spider-man comics or series that this change of character is so drastic that people can't identify him when he speaks or cannot believe he, Peter Parker, is Spider-man. So Petey being the life of a party is a ridiculous assertion. Mary Jane wasn't that neither as she was a party girl only to hide the pain of living with an abusive father and disjointed household.

Edited April 11, 2012 by turbojet

[PeanutButterDimond]

Completely agreed, Turbojet. Peter can be snarky at times but for the most part, he's an average down-to-earth guy who has problems and treats them seriously. Spider-Man is the side of him that is funny and brave and strong. It's that power of being anonymous that makes such a drastic contrast between the Peter Parker side of the character and the Spider-Man side of the character. he's not like Batman/Bruce Wayne because we all know that the real person is Peter Parker and that Spider-Man is the mask but there is still that contrast between the two sides that is very important.

On the topic of the spioler you posted Peanut, I have no issue with this.

It's either Raimis Genetically modified Spiders or it's a radioactive one Webb, don't try and play misleading here.

I wonder if it has anything to due with Richard Parker's work. Maybe Richard was working on radioactive or genetically altered spiders. Considering this has a lot of it based off of Ultimate, it's not too far fetched.

On another note...

I had a small discussion in the TASM game thread(Which you should check out if you haven't lately because previews have been pouring in) with Speederino. I have removed it from that thread and am now posting it here because this is where ir belongs.

Alright, maybe that was a bit of a stretch (Sort of. I loved the trailers for Last Airbender, and we all saw what happened with *that*), but I still see just as much potential for a bad movie as I do a good one. It's great to see a live-action Spidey who jokes and has web shooters, I guess it's the Peter Parker/civilian life stuff that's keeping me wary. Peter himself feels all 'dark and edgy' in a good portion of the footage

I groaned at the dark and edgy comment(No offense to you but I'm sic of people saying Pete is emo or like Edward from twilight). Let's do a scene by scene shall we.

Doorman scene- He's not really all that dark and edgy here. He seems exactly like "one of us". He stumbles over his words, gets lost in thought and seems all around like an average guy. Except for trying to keep his secret identity, well, secret of course.

Stacy window scene- He certainly doesn't seem dark and serious here either. I mean, he jokingly says "your doorman's intimidating"

Stacy Residence scene- he doesn't seem dark here. He may be serious but why wouldn't he be. He has his girlfriend's father, who's a police captain, saying bad things about his identity which he tries to use to help people and the city. So of course he's going to be serious and defensive. Perfectly reasonable.

Bathroom scene- He learns of his new strength by breaking everything in his bathroom and making a huge mess. Surprised and shock, he tries to fix it but it only gets worse. A pretty normal response to everything in your bathroom breaking as you touch it.

Gwen and Pete in class- He's an average teen. He's fumbles, he's awkward, he trips over his words, he's unfocused. He's an average teenage guy with a girl that he likes. Not really all that dark and edgy.

I'm not trying to be mean but I really hate people acting as if Pete in this film is trying to be this dark and edgy bad boy and that he's just some emo trying to be dark and edgy for the sake of being edgy. I just don't see it!

Know what I see? I see an average teen being an average teen while dealing with a secret identity, no parents and everyday relationships. I see Peter Parker. I really hate how the words "dark and edgy" and "emo" are being thrown around like rubber balls.

I'm not terribly fond of what I'm seeing with Captain Stacy. Nothing against Denis Leary, but so far his character feels too much like Jameson. I can understand having him start off not trusting Spidey, but he seems to be leading the anti-Spider-Man bandwagon in this version.

Good thing Jameson isn't in this film.

Honestly from a realistic standpoint, it makes sense. You're the police captain who's genuinely trying his best to help protect the city when all of a sudden this unknown person is swinging around in a red and blue suit, cracking jokes and trying to do your job better. the fact that Spidey can come of as creepy due to his ability to stick to walls. His apparent tendency to be out mostly at night in this film doesn't help.

Back to Peter though, what I liked about McGuire's Peter is that he felt like one of us. A lovable shmuck who was easy to relate to and perfectly portrayed the kind of stress a double life like this would entail. I'm not saying Garfield's version has to be exactly like that, but this feels too super-serious for my tastes.

I love McGuire's Peter and I certainly got the "one of us" feel but sometimes it felt way too... played for laughs. He gets pushed around by bookbags, gets fired for not delivering a pizza on time and at times, his awkwardness felt too comedic. Like he was awkward just to get a laugh or be awkward a lot of the time.

I get a more "one of us" feel from Andrew's Peter so far because he seems to have more of a balance of funny and serious. This is a kid who lost his parents at a young age and gets bullied constantly. that's going to affect a person. That being said, he still has comedic moments as pointed out above. He doesn't feel that serious or at least not serious for the sake of being serious. He's reacting to stuff like anyone would. He's defensive of his alter-ego, he confused as hell when he starts breaking things just by touching them, he's awkward around someone he likes, he wants to learn more about his parents and overall, he feels like a teenager.

Peter Parker, in my opinion, should be a mostly serious, grounded, awkward and yet still humorous person. While Spidey is a loud motor mouth who's always cracking jokes while doing amazing things. There's two sides to Peter Parker. The side that has to abide to society and everyday problems and the side that can be carefree and do anything he wants due to being anonymous to everyone else. He's teen with everyday problems, who lost his parents and wants to find out more about them while also struggling with people's perception of his alter ego. He should be serious about that. That doesn't mean he has to be humorless but he's not all smiles and sunshines. None of us in real life are. A lot of us love the internet because we can act so much more freely than usual. Be more sarcastic and witty and obnoxious with no consequences. That's why Pete loves being Spider-Man. He can leave all his problems behind for a while and be carefree and joking and perform amazing stuff. He's free from the consequences for judgement as Peter Parker.

There's no way to know how this stuff will turn out from watching the trailers, so I'm holding off all real judgement until I see the movie.

Agreed.

Edited April 10, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[Speederino]

I've actually seen someone say that Spidey's jokes and his toying around with the thug "completely destroys his characterization"(Actual quote) and "goes against the characterization of Peter in the comics"(actual quote). I'm dead serious.

Oh that's nothing. I once heard a girl say she didn't like Maguire as Spider-Man because he was "too nerdy." Find me a Peter Parker who isn't nerdy and I'll show you my $20 million mansion.

[Sami]

Oh that's nothing. I once heard a girl say she didn't like Maguire as Spider-Man because he was "too nerdy." Find me a Peter Parker who isn't nerdy and I'll show you my $20 million mansion.

Despite not putting eloquently, I can only assume she meant exactly what I would have meant: He doesn't act like Spider-Man. Look at turbojet's post earlier to see what I mean. I could never, ever imagine Maguire pulling that off. He's just really mellow and socially awkward. Blah.

I'm only seeing clips, and I already far prefer Garfield's performance over Maguire's.

[PeanutButterDimond]

I liked Maguire's acting to be honest. I got a real everyday guy vibe from him. Then again, I'm a fan of the Raimi trilogy in general. Did it have flaws?Yes. But i think it got a lot right. Just as the new series will get things right and wrong.

If there is one bad thing I could say about the reboot is that it really have made some fan really mad at eachother. Whenever I watch a video on Youtube concerning either film series or on a forum, there's people being assholes about. Some people are arguing over the two like it's a war. Insults are being flung, insulting names are thrown, profanity is yelled to the heavens. It's just ridiculous. It's like some people can't understand to accept different interpretations of the same thing. I love the Raimi trilogy. I thought they were good films and good Spider-Man films. I love Spider-Man 1, Spider-man 2 is my second favourite superhero movies, I liked Spider-man 3 and I'm excited as hell for TASM. But if you say something good or bad on either films and you'll get fans screaming at you, saying "You aren't a TRUE Spidey fan".

That rant aside, I'm becoming impatient for this film. I am so excited for it. It looks so good. All this discussion on it made me subscribe to The Amazing Spider-Man comics today. And I feel like watching Spider-Man 2 now. I'm in a real Spidey mood now.

I just watched Spider-Man 2.1's train fight scene and I am really excited to see how the fights in TASM will be.

Edited April 11, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[Sami]

Don't get me wrong, I think the first two Spider-Man movies are good films on their own (fuck the third one tho'); in fact, I'd go as far as to say that I loved the second one. But Spider-Man, they are not. At least not with my interpretation of the character.

[PeanutButterDimond]

I wouldn't say they aren't Spider-Man. Lack of jokes aside. The films, 2 especially, did feel like Spider-Man To me at least. Two certainly captured the whole problems of someone with a real life being a superhero. Which is a big part of Spider-Man which I think was captured well. Not to mention Spidey's really acrobatic moves. The whole unique thing that Spider-Man start of a normal person with everyday problems having to deal with superhero stuff is something that is very much Spider-Man and is well represented in 1 and 2, in my opinion. Two also did a good job of loosely adapting "Spider-Man No More". But that's just my opinion. Do the Raimi films have differences from the comics? yes. But still, I think they got enough right, at least most of the crucial stuff(Jokes aside), that I do consider them good Spider-man films(1 and 2 at least. fantastic in Spider-Man 2's case).

I feel they got enough right for t to be Spider-Man. But hey, everyone interprets the character differently so what might be Spider-Man to some, might not be Spider-Man to others. That's the beauty of such a long running character. He has been, and will continue to be, interpreted many many ways.

Edited April 11, 2012 by PeanutButterDimond

[lounge]

Honestly I never understood why so many people liked 2. I thought there were way too many cheesy scenes. Too much of a focus on annoying extras. And I felt the movie really drags on because of him being so focused on Mary Jane and quitting spiderman. It didn't feel like the amazing movie to me that everyone constantly says. Batman Begins yes, Dark Knight yes, Iron Man yes, Raimi's first 1 & 2 not so much. I did like the first half of 1, but then it has then it starts to have the same problem with 2 with cheesy scenes/acting.

Ironically 3 is my favorite of the Raimi trilogy. Which is funny because everyone, and I mean everyone despised that movie. I remember when I was in highschool, my teacher asked about whether 3 was any good, and everyone in the class was like "It's terrible!"

And when I saw it, I couldn't understand why. It felt the most fun to me. It had that fun vibe. Less focus on Mary Jane, and it was entertaining. It actually felt like what Spidey should be to me. Goth Peter was hilarious to me, which is what they intended. But people take it the wrong way and say it looks ridiculous. I'd rather they continued with the original cast but with a different director since Raimi's idea for wanting to do the Vulture was terrible. And Tobey still looks young. But they were so stubborn and would only return if Raimi directed, c'mon how lame can they be? Different directors take the helm of continuing series all the time. It's not like these movies are cinematic masterpieces like Chris Nolan's films. But whatever.