The Amazing Spider-Man (The Movies)

[Carbo]

He never lost his powers, he merely found himself unable to use them on account of mental stress and trauma when he realized being Spider-Man wasn't bringing anything good into his life since he was constantly missing out on his jobs, his friends, love life and college. It's like a rapid metabolism failure, and MJ was merely the straw that broke the camel's back.

Also I don't know about you guys but organic webbing was one of the few things Raimi altered which I felt actually made slightly more sense if the spider bite was supposed to give him spider abilities.

Then those who say that Spider-man 2 was character driven...what the fuck? For whom?

It was character driven for the same reasons Iron Man 2 was character driven. The villains? Put them in the backseat and use them merely as a plot chip which is making the real story center, the hero's inner problems, be the crucial thing that keeps the plot going. Whether the movie succeeded or not is arguable, but personally bringing that entire dilemma onto the big screen, along with central disputes within Peter's entire character that's part of what made Spider-Man so important, is what made the movie so groundbreaking for me to begin with since there was really nothing like it.

[turbojet]

He never lost his powers, he merely found himself unable to use them on account of mental stress and trauma when he realized being Spider-Man wasn't bringing anything good into his life since he was constantly missing out on his jobs, his friends, love life and college. It's like a rapid metabolism failure, and MJ was merely the straw that broke the camel's back.

Genetics don't work like that. And even if you say it was stress which is a flimsy reason to begin with,it would have been better to show him just getting sloppy or getting his ass kicked by Doc Ock so bad that he reconsiders that he should be Spider-man anymore(just like the comics). Him just losing his power then suddenly gaining it back was a lame excuse.

Also I don't know about you guys but organic webbing was one of the few things Raimi altered which I felt actually made slightly more sense if the spider bite was supposed to give him spider abilities.

Except the webbing would come out of his ass and not his wrists. It also takes away from the part that is supposed to show us that Peter Parker is a genius and he created webbing himself. We never get any hint that Parker was intelligent other than the film just telling us that he is brilliant over and over.

It was character driven for the same reasons Iron Man 2 was character driven. The villains? Put them in the backseat and use them merely as a plot chip which is making the real story center, the hero's inner problems, be the crucial thing that keeps the plot going. Whether the movie succeeded or not is arguable, but personally bringing that entire dilemma onto the big screen, along with central disputes within Peter's entire character that's part of what made Spider-Man so important, is what made the movie so groundbreaking for me to begin with since there was really nothing like it.

Fine. I'll concede to that, but unlike Iron Man 2, I am not watching a Tony Stark trying to survive and restore some stability in his life before he dies. I am watching a Peter Parker whine and complain about how life just is not fair completely abandoning the very reason why he became Spider-man and why he should stay Spider-man. Spectacular Spider-man has the same sub-arc over the entire course of the first season in which he has a gene toxin that can remove him of his powers. Throughout the series, he questions why should he bother anymore and ponders why not take the gene cleanser. Then at the very end, he thinks of all the people he saved while being Spider-man and how being Spider-man may have insulated him from friends, it also got him closer to his loved ones. Raimi never thinks of that. No Peter goes back to being Spider-man because, shit on a duck, no one else can save these people from Doc Ock. Hell, in Amazing Spider-man, Peter began his descent into vigilante purely in retaliation of his Uncle's death. Then, Captain Stacey points out to Peter that Spider-man is not protecting the people, but simply lashing out at suspects in order to gain a measure of revenge. Then after he saves a kid, Peter starts to realize that he saved those people on the bridge and if it weren't for him, they would have died. He straight up says this to Gwen when she says, "That is not your job." That is the Spider-man that I grew up as a kid and read about in the comics. Raimi's Peter Parker comes off as being entirely selfish and irresponsible. Hell, during his power down, he watched as someone gets mugged in an alley and does nothing to help them. Yeah, the same shit that got his Uncle Ben killed, and he did nothing. And I am supposed to feel bad for this character? Really?

Edited July 5, 2012 by turbojet

[Carbo]

Fine. I'll concede to that, but unlike Iron Man 2, I am not watching a Tony Stark trying to survive and restore some stability in his life before he dies. I am watching a Peter Parker whine and complain about how life just is not fair completely abandoning the very reason why he became Spider-man and why he should stay Spider-man. Spectacular Spider-man has the same sub-arc over the entire course of the first season in which he has a gene toxin that can remove him of his powers. Throughout the series, he questions why should he bother anymore and ponders why not take the gene cleanser. Then at the very end, he thinks of all the people he saved while being Spider-man and how being Spider-man may have insulated him from friends, it also got him closer to his loved ones. Raimi never thinks of that. No Peter goes back to being Spider-man because, shit on a duck, no one else can save these people from Doc Ock. Hell, in Amazing Spider-man, Peter began his descent into vigilante purely in retaliation of his Uncle's death. Then, Captain Stacey points out to Peter that Spider-man is not protecting the people, but simply lashing out at suspects in order to gain a measure of revenge. Then after he saves a kid, Peter starts to realize that he saved those people on the bridge and if it weren't for him, they would have died. He straight up says this to Gwen when she says, "That is not your job." That is the Spider-man that I grew up as a kid and read about in the comics. Raimi's Peter Parker comes off as being entirely selfish and irresponsible. Hell, during his power down, he watched as someone gets mugged in an alley and does nothing to help them. Yeah, the same shit that got his Uncle Ben killed, and he did nothing. And I am supposed to feel bad for this character? Really?

Hold on a minute, you're comparing elements of Spider-Man 2 to the reboot? The sequel to the origin over the new origin?

The only reason he ever descended into vigilantism in the movie was to find the guy who killed his uncle, the very same reason he went after his uncle's killer in Raimi's original movie. The only difference is whether you'd prefer it being played as an ongoing subject of development or whether or not you rather prefer the kind-of sort-of accidental murder be a catalyst for the responsibility that he ended up accepting after Ben's creed.

It's amazing how much credit you give the new reboot for being more true to roots to his character when it really isn't as a whole. The Amazing Spider-Man might have had a more effective plot element to work with if it weren't for the fact that every set piece that creates the story and sets the antagonist and the situations just so happen to be all related to each other instead of the every man luck-struck hero Peter was always in the comics. If you think that Peter's character development was true to the comics, then look around you. Because none of the scenes in the movie that set it up allow for it to be so. They even screwed up the origin behind Ben's death and what it entailed, and hell, that was one of the things Raimi did right, shock and awe.

And before you try pinning Peter returning to Spider-Man as a result because of Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2, you're making it sound like it isn't part of a huge build up that follows after the movie's entire first act. The fire place incident which in turn becomes a subtle nod to the original movie back when he did have powers, the resolution between Aunt May and Peter, and finally Doc Ock comes at the end. If he really did just decide to "get his powers back" when it happened, his spider sense wouldn't have finally sounded after being silent for almost a majority of the entire movie.

While I understand how people might prefer the individual movies based on their own accounts, when it comes to their merits in origin, both of them have quite a few missteps. But I honestly can't see how anyone could say straight faced that the new version is in any way more true to form.

[Sami]

He never lost his powers, he merely found himself unable to use them on account of mental stress and trauma when he realized being Spider-Man wasn't bringing anything good into his life since he was constantly missing out on his jobs, his friends, love life and college. It's like a rapid metabolism failure, and MJ was merely the straw that broke the camel's back.

Well, shouldn't they have come right back when he decided that he needed to help people and started feeling confident about himself again? Or wouldn't they have only disappeared when he was swinging around the city whilst dwelling on his own thoughts, rather than an intense fight with Octavious when the last thing on his mind is his nonexistant social life and he's more focused on keeping his ass alive?

I get what Raimi was going for, but I honestly think Peter deciding for himself to stop being Spider-Man (or using a gene cleanser-type chemical to wipe the powers out) on his own accord would have been a much more powerful way to get the message across, rather than an unfortunate turn of events that would have effectively forced him to give up on his heroic persona regardless of his own personal drive to help people.

Also I don't know about you guys but organic webbing was one of the few things Raimi altered which I felt actually made slightly more sense if the spider bite was supposed to give him spider abilities.

Alright, I've brought up this scene numerous times, so I guess it's about time I dissected it.

• 00:50 - Okay, so apparently he accidentally made this very specific hand motion when reaching for his fork? Alright, alright, I can buy that.
  
• 00:55 to 00:58 - Okay, so the web is stuck to his wrist because... why? If his hand isn't in that position, shouldn't it have disconnected? Is it something he controls with his mind?
  
• 1:28 to 1:30 - Alright, so the web is stuck to his hand? How? Why? He clearly doesn't want it to be, since he's struggling to get it off, and I really doubt he's still got his hand in that position.
  

Okay, so why was the web stuck to his wrist? Why did he shoot the web in the first place? How did he figure out what motion he was supposed to make, only to forget immediately afterwards? And for that matter, how is it that nobody in the entire school pays any attention to the possibility that Spider-Man might be that Parker kid who was shooting webs all over the cafeteria back in high shcool? Yeah, Peter was pretty sloppy at keeping his identity completely secret in the new movie as well, but at least we don't have to assume that over a hundred people completely aware of Peter's name and identity completely forgot that he was shooting fucking webs all over the place right around the time Spider-Man made his debut.

It was character driven for the same reasons Iron Man 2 was character driven. The villains? Put them in the backseat and use them merely as a plot chip which is making the real story center, the hero's inner problems, be the crucial thing that keeps the plot going. Whether the movie succeeded or not is arguable, but personally bringing that entire dilemma onto the big screen, along with central disputes within Peter's entire character that's part of what made Spider-Man so important, is what made the movie so groundbreaking for me to begin with since there was really nothing like it.

You do bring up a good point here, and it would definitely explain why my opinion on the movie is such a stark contrast to the majority's; I really couldn't care less that Spider-Man was losing his powers because that guy in the costume was never Spider-Man to begin with to me. I felt no sympathy when "Mary Jane" (uuuuuuuugh. God, I know I'm coming off as a snobbish elitist here, but... fuuuuuuuck. This movie's Gwen Fucking Stacy was a better Mary Jane.) got engaged because she never did anything in the entire trilogy but whore herself around, complain about how much her life sucks, and get kidnapped. The world would be better off without her anyway. The drama was there, but it was completely lost on me just because of how alienating of an experience it was and how much I absolutely loathed "Mary Jane" as a character (and not just because she didn't act like the original Mary Jane did).

I'll say again though that I thought Octavious was perfect in that movie. Despite all of the film's issues, I really did enjoy his character.

They even screwed up the origin behind Ben's death and what it entailed, and hell, that was one of the things Raimi did right, shock and awe.

I actually really liked the alteration of Uncle Ben's death in this one. Without ever having to mutter the words "with great power", Ben served as a martyr for that philosophy, putting his own life at risk in order to try and save someone else's. Also, in regards to the whole "shock and awe" thing... Peter saw his uncle try and tackle the guy who he'd let out of the shop, and by the time he ran up to him, Ben was completely dead. If that isn't shocking, I don't know what is. Not even I was expecting Ben to try and tackle the guy like that. It was a really respectable way to handle the death that everyone expected from the very beginning.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Desudash Demonhoof

[Carbo]

I get what Raimi was going for, but I honestly think Peter deciding for himself to stop being Spider-Man (or using a gene cleanser-type chemical to wipe the powers out) on his own accord would have been a much more powerful way to get the message across, rather than an unfortunate turn of events that would have effectively forced him to give up on his heroic persona regardless of his own personal drive to help people.

Fair enough, I can understand this part of your criticism, along with not enjoying the actual characters. That's all understandable. That said;

Alright, I've brought up this scene numerous times, so I guess it's about time I dissected it.

• 00:50 - Okay, so apparently he accidentally made this very specific hand motion when reaching for his fork? Alright, alright, I can buy that.
  
• 00:55 to 00:58 - Okay, so the web is stuck to his wrist because... why? If his hand isn't in that position, shouldn't it have disconnected? Is it something he controls with his mind?
  
• 1:28 to 1:30 - Alright, so the web is stuck to his hand? How? Why? He clearly doesn't want it to be, since he's struggling to get it off, and I really doubt he's still got his hand in that position.
  

Okay, so why was the web stuck to his wrist? Why did he shoot the web in the first place? How did he figure out what motion he was supposed to make, only to forget immediately afterwards? And for that matter, how is it that nobody in the entire school pays any attention to the possibility that Spider-Man might be that Parker kid who was shooting webs all over the cafeteria back in high shcool? Yeah, Peter was pretty sloppy at keeping his identity completely secret in the new movie as well, but at least we don't have to assume that over a hundred people completely aware of Peter's name and identity completely forgot that he was shooting fucking webs all over the place right around the time Spider-Man made his debut.

Yeeeahhhh Amazing isn't getting out of here scotch-free either I'm afraid. I'll just have to quote this GAF post.

Flash can't pull basketball off from skinny Peter's hand because it's somehow adhered as fuck

Skinny Peter Parker makes a 30 foot slam dunk, broken glass and all

Skinny Peter lifts and pins guy to locker with ease

Oh my god skinny guy swinging through the city and beating up criminals

Probably not skinny Peter

EDIT: Guys, just to set the record straight - I don't hate the new movie. It's mediocre at worst for me. I just don't like going to the movies to see a mediocre movie since I can't end up recalling bad moments to see me laugh at something or get angry at, or good moments that made me kick back and smile.

[Sami]

Ha ha, alright, fair enough. The basketball thing was pretty silly, I admit (... though I still liked seeing Peter get the satisfaction of humiliating Flash in front of his friends). Regardless of that though, you have to admit shooting webs is a bit more "Spider-Man" than pinning a guy to a locker.

[pppp]

He never lost his powers, he merely found himself unable to use them on account of mental stress and trauma when he realized being Spider-Man wasn't bringing anything good into his life since he was constantly missing out on his jobs, his friends, love life and college. It's like a rapid metabolism failure, and MJ was merely the straw that broke the camel's back.

That still doesn't explain how exactly does stress alter your genetic structure. Metabolism failures don't alter your DNA. In fact, nothing does. Besides, when exactly does the movie explain that he's just unable to use them instead of losing them?

Edited July 5, 2012 by pppp

[Burning Finger]

Saw the movie Tuesday night and I loved it, miles better than the Raimi trilogy.

I loved the chemistry between Garfield and Stone, they were great in their roles, it pains to me know what Gwen's ultimate fate will be.

I thought Garfield nailed Peter and Spider-Man, he actually felt and looked the part to me, something Maguire never had and is one of my biggest gripes about the Raimi trilogy. Though to be honest, I thought Andrew made Peter act a little to awkward in the beginning, but I felt once Peter started to open up to Gwen and even Gwen's family at the dinner table, he was actually a really cool kid, like a real person you know. Honestly the entire cast was better here, and I always felt Raimi's casting was off, the only ones I agreed with were JK Simmons as Jameson, and Dafoe as Norman.

I was a bit disappointed that the only scene with Spidey really using his trademark quipage was the car jacker scene. I was really hoping he'd have some awesome one-liners while up against The Lizard, but from what I can remember there was only one, when he says "Someones been a bad lizard." Hopefully they improve on that in the sequels.

The only things I really didn't like about it was, how The Lizard turned those police into lizards, and they never did anything with it. I also didn't like the crane scene at the end, honestly thats something I would expect to see in one of Raimi's Spidey films. I also felt they should not have

killed off Captain Stacy in this one, it was just too soon

.

But yeah, I can't wait for the sequel and see where they go with this continuity.

I don't understand why this film is getting so much hate on the web. One thing I keep seeing people say is that the movie is a rip-off of the 2002 film and how Marc Webb steals 4 key elements from Raimi. That doesn't even make any sense. For one Webb did not steal anything that Raimi didn't already steal from the original source material for his movie. Sam Raimi did not create Spider-Man.

The thing is they are both origin movies on the same character, there was bound to be similarities between the two. What are people complaining about?

Edited July 5, 2012 by Kamina

[Carbo]

"Untold Story" aspect from the movie cut out. Spoilers naturally.

Besides, when exactly does the movie explain that he's just unable to use them instead of losing them?

Specifically, the doctor scene, in which the examiner questions Peter's mental state. It's never explicitly stated, but it really doesn't have to be. Setting aside the whole Spider DNA, despite being what granted him his abilities, DNA is only a genetic code, and it's not what sustains facets such as heightened senses, strength and, in Spidey's case, webbing.

If he actually lost DNA, it wouldn't just come back to him.

[Stritix]

Just saw it, and I loved it. Not once did I find myself getting bored. Not even a little. I found it to be pretty realistic too, which made it even better. Is it better than the original movie? I think so. I can't wait to get the game. I highly recommend seeing this movie.

None of my friends would come with me to see it with me, they said I was being 'childish' to want to see such a movie. So I actually sat through the entire thing on my own. I got a few odd looks, but I found it to be much more enjoyable on my own than with chatty friends.

[Sami]

I don't understand why this film is getting so much hate on the web. One thing I keep seeing people say is that the movie is a rip-off of the 2002 film and how Marc Webb steals 4 key elements from Raimi. That doesn't even make any sense. For one Webb did not steal anything that Raimi didn't already steal from the original source material for his movie. Sam Raimi did not create Spider-Man.

The thing is they are both origin movies on the same character, there was bound to be similarities between the two. What are people complaining about?

As someone who loved it, I can easily tell you that the movies are essentially telling the same story but with differences in tone and execution. Raimi's Spider-Man told the origin story with a goofy 60's-esque kind of narm and had a very different style of dialogue for the characters. Problem is, it wasn't "Spider-Man" in the slightest, so when I went to see this one, I really didn't care whether or not I got "the untold story", because I was really just hoping to see "the origin story but actually told properly this time".

This movie gave me exactly what I wanted and I was very satisfied as a result, but I really can't blame Raimi fans like Carbo or Barry for being more critical about it. If the first origin story was perfectly fine, why tell it again? but it wasn't perfectly fine so retelling it is perfectly okay

[Burning Finger]

As someone who loved it, I can easily tell you that the movies are essentially telling the same story but with differences in tone and execution. Raimi's Spider-Man told the origin story with a goofy 60's-esque kind of narm and had a very different style of dialogue for the characters. Problem is, it wasn't "Spider-Man" in the slightest, so when I went to see this one, I really didn't care whether or not I got "the untold story", because I was really just hoping to see "the origin story but actually told properly this time".

This movie gave me exactly what I wanted and I was very satisfied as a result, but I really can't blame Raimi fans like Carbo or Barry for being more critical about it. If the first origin story was perfectly fine, why tell it again? but it wasn't perfectly fine so retelling it is perfectly okay

Oh I agree with you. I myself would rather have had the reboot with Peter already being Spider-Man for a couple years already. We already know how Pete becomes Spidey, we didn't need to see it again.

Either way, I'm glad we're finally getting real Spider-Man movies now. I appreciate the Raimi trilogy for what it was, but I rarely ever felt like I was watching Spider-Man.

Edited July 6, 2012 by Kamina

[Abominal SnowTaz]

Just saw it, and I loved it. Not once did I find myself getting bored. Not even a little. I found it to be pretty realistic too, which made it even better. Is it better than the original movie? I think so. I can't wait to get the game. I highly recommend seeing this movie.

None of my friends would come with me to see it with me, they said I was being 'childish' to want to see such a movie. So I actually sat through the entire thing on my own. I got a few odd looks, but I found it to be much more enjoyable on my own than with chatty friends.

I saw it today and here's what I have to say about it.

It's not as bad as I felt it was going to be. Not saying it was going to be a train wreck seeing/no seeing. I liked it. Seeing Peter's parents and how he was left with Aunt May and Uncle Ben gave me more of the origin story than the first Spider-man movie. As already mentioned, I like that they stuck closer to the comics. I saw a lot of things altered. Peter's inspiration for the suit, Uncle Ben's death, how Pete got bit (that's probably not too different but hey, who telling the story?). I also liked that he met Gwen Stacy first this time, not Mary Jane. If they're following the comic so close does that mean Green Goblin gets another appearance and is going to.....never mind. Foreshadow....

There are a few I didn't like about this movie. First off, Spider-man's web source. I thought he shot it out of his wrists, but in the comics he uses web fluid, so i'll let that one slide. Anther thing is Spider-man's smart ass remarks. I love hearing those, what happened? I was expecting him to say to Lizard, "Hey, buddy, try Mentos." There were just a few quips here and there. And, here's the big one...

..the death of Captain Stacy.

That was waaaaaaay too soon. And the 'promise' was kinda reversed there.

Well...all in all, I love the movie. If there's a sequel, I'm there.

[Brad]

In other news, original concept art of The Lizard and Spider-Man has come up today.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/07/05/what-spider-man-and-the-lizard-almost-looked-like

...Why does The Lizard look better in his original concepts? It captures his scary factor and animalistic behaviour without making him look like a super jolly green dinosaur.

[Sami]

In other news, original concept art of The Lizard and Spider-Man has come up today.

http://uk.ign.com/ar...ost-looked-like

...Why does The Lizard look better in his original concepts? It captures his scary factor and animalistic behaviour without making him look like a super jolly green dinosaur.

... So do the Sony executives just throw out the good concept art of every "origin story" villain?

[Jacky]

the concepts in that particular article looked awful, sorry, but their are some concept art that were also just released that looked pretty damn good.

I personally like these two.

Edited July 6, 2012 by The Amazing Jacky

[Johnny Boy]

I personally like these two.

Why couldn't they use this design for the movie?!

[Sami]

Cinema Snob did one of his blog reviews with his friends. They all really loved it.

[Balding Spider]

In other news, original concept art of The Lizard and Spider-Man has come up today.

http://uk.ign.com/ar...ost-looked-like

...Why does The Lizard look better in his original concepts? It captures his scary factor and animalistic behaviour without making him look like a super jolly green dinosaur.

Dear lord its Parallax all over again.

[Carbo]

The movie is now part of a trilogy.

I sure look forward to Gwen Stacy's inevitable death in the third one.

[Johnny Boy]

The movie is now part of a trilogy.

I sure look forward to Gwen Stacy's inevitable death in the third one.

[\gunther]

So who here likes pricey Japanese figures of men in tight costumes??

Looking adorable, yo.

I'll be seeing the movie Monday night. I'm really intrigued and can't wait to see it for myself, since there doesn't seem to be much of a general consensus on the movie's overall quality, as of now. I've probably been seeing as many people raving as I've seen complaining about its very existence.

[Chaos Warp]

So yeah, saw it last night, really loved it. Honestly, I think it's way better then the Rami movies because it feels so much more like a Spidey movie, not just a good movie that Peter happens to be in. The classic Spidey snark, Gwen's character (FUN FACT: The two actors playing Gewn and Peter/Spiderman actually fell in love on set for real and are now a couple living in New York.), the action scenes, everything. Just as the trailers showed, they really nailed how Spidey moves in this movie. It probable helped that the Lizard could climb walls as well, which made for some Amazing (See what I did there?) on-the-wall/ceiling scenes. I also really liked how Gwen was a strong female character in her own right and not just the damsel in distress. They just got so much more right then last time around.

The one issue I have with this movie is definitely the pacing. After a certain point, it just needs to learn to god damn slow down and pace itself. I was able to tolerate this and still love the movie though, so Your Mileage May Vary. Also, it doesn't reinvent much in terms of a reboot, so that may make it seem pointless, but not to me. It does retell the same story, but it does it so much better then the Rami movies that I'll happily accept this as a new start for Spidey's movie franchise.

All in all, awesome movie. Sure, has some issues and sure, it's not the Avengers (to be fair, not many movies can match that level of perfect) but does that make it bad? No. Not at all. I definitely recommend you see this.

To end it, my favourite scene was (spoilerd to be safe, not a huge ending spoiler but it does take place during the final battle)

When the crane operators, led by the father of the boy that Spidey saved earlier in the movie aligned their cranes so Spidey had a clear path to Oscorp. Has the best swinging shots in the movie, and somehow manages to be so badass and heartwarming at the same time. Love it.

[Carbo]

When the crane operators, led by the father of the boy that Spidey saved earlier in the movie aligned their cranes so Spidey had a clear path to Oscorp. Has the best swinging shots in the movie, and somehow manages to be so badass and heartwarming at the same time. Love it.

I thought that scene was the most unintentionally hilarious scene in the entire movie, mostly cause it was such a stupid point to care about when the movie had no issue handling that aspect earlier.

[turbojet]

The movie is now part of a trilogy.

I sure look forward to Gwen Stacy's inevitable death in the third one.

I call second. It has to be the second. It just has to.