The Amazing Spider-Man Review Thread (SPOILERS)

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

I am excited for a reboot and think it's EXACTLY what this franchise needs. They did a good job forging the way for comic book movies but the casting for the first one was more to legitimize the genre than cast to the actual characters themselves.

Yeah, they definitely pioneered the comicbook-films of today.
I mean, as in really today, the great originals were of course the ones like Burton's Batman, but that's different.

I still think they did a good job on the 'Spider-Man'-films also in the casting.
Who cares if they're not exactly spot-on cast... well, I guess enough people.
But I just loved the films and the actors as the characters.
And I didn't become a fan of 'Spider-Man' because of the films.
I mean, I'm not one of the younger kids either.

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

Isn't demanding a reboot for a series that had one awful a bit premature? I mean Batman was just going downhill for the most part, that's why it got a reboot. But like I said if that synopsis posted before, I guess it was the smart way to go.

But when will reboots stop? What if they fail again in the series? Another reboot? I mean how many reboots will I have in my lifetime? I'd like to see one official series be continued. Not remade.

I agree. Again, studios just freak out over the least bit of "negativity" and they want to pull the plug.

The 'Hulk'-franchise (or for what it was...) is a similar story.
Sure, it might have not been as successful and pretty much failed in the eyes of most people with the first film.
But, and I'm sorry GreenScar, but 'The Incredible Hulk' was not VERY good.
It might have "wowed" people action-wise, but it was a lame attempt to a reboot.
And where does it stand now, is anyone waiting for a "sequel" or will there be anything else?...
The 'Hulk'-film might have had the typical traits of a "failure of a comicbook-movie".
But if you really look at it, you'll see it's the better film.
I loved it anyway and saw it years after it came out.


I'm not so much against "rebooting" a franchise, but indeed only if it's really dead.
Like for Batman it was a great surprise, that's the way to do it. Or James Bond too for that matter.
But rebooting has become a trend, one started it, the rest wants to do it out of principle.
Sure, for the business-side things have to kinda keep going, but still...
They should have taken a better approach than this immediate overhaul.
If it becomes a success, fine, good for them.
But I'm only afraid this will be one of these dramatized wannabe-blockbusters and it won't fit Spidey.

[tron3]

Originally Posted by Damage Inc.

...

I'm not so much against "rebooting" a franchise, but indeed only if it's really dead.....

Yeah, the original Hulk movie was DOA. It needed a reboot. But Spider-man 3 isn't like Superman IV, The Quest for Peace. It could have been saved.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. If they trimmed an extra 15 minutes of the B.S. the storyline would have been tighter, moved at a better pace, and could gain another half star. That's the difference between a good movie and a great movie.

C'mon, Hollywood has special releases of their movies all the time. And most of the time it's repackaged crap. A few extra snips could save Spiderman 3 and lead to a proper sequel.

[Darkhawk9587]

Originally Posted by Adegan

In the Ultimate Universe, which by earlier reports looks to be the direction they are going, Peter works maintaining the Daily Bugle's website instead of being a photographer. It's sort of an after school job and also helps him be informed of any criminal activity in the city.

Ah, I did not know that. I am definitely lacking in the Ultimate Universe knowledge.

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by tron3

Yeah, the original Hulk movie was DOA. It needed a reboot. But Spider-man 3 isn't like Superman IV, The Quest for Peace. It could have been saved.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. If they trimmed an extra 15 minutes of the B.S. the storyline would have been tighter, moved at a better pace, and could gain another half star. That's the difference between a good movie and a great movie.

C'mon, Hollywood has special releases of their movies all the time. And most of the time it's repackaged crap. A few extra snips could save Spiderman 3 and lead to a proper sequel.

Well maybe the Hulk-film needed a reboot commercially, even though it wasn't bad.

But I agree on 'Spider-Man 3', that it was of course better commercially than something like 'Hulk'.
Indeed silly to suddenly just stop a successful franchise.

Anyway, indeed perhaps a new cut could have made up for the critique the third film got.
Perhaps even both cuts and better added footage that was left out.

[vegeta88]

Spider-Man needed a reboot. Since they could not keep the same cast and crew, they had to get all brand new people. I think it would have been bad to keep the same story continuity as wells since so many people have died

[Show spoiler] three of Spider-Man's biggest villains and Harry Osborn

. I wouldn't want more movies with different actors following the rules set by the previous films.

One thing that I want to make clear is that I'm not asking for everything to happen again, Spider-bite, Uncle Ben, becoming Spider-Man, etc. I just think the new film should start fresh with out constrictions.

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by vegeta88

Spider-Man needed a reboot. Since they could not keep the same cast and crew, they had to get all brand new people. I think it would have been bad to keep the same story continuity as wells since so many people have died

[Show spoiler] three of Spider-Man's biggest villains and Harry Osborn

. I wouldn't want more movies with different actors following the rules set by the previous films.

One thing that I want to make clear is that I'm not asking for everything to happen again, Spider-bite, Uncle Ben, becoming Spider-Man, etc. I just think the new film should start fresh with out constrictions.

I definitely agree with that part.
That's the thing I actually put most question-marks to, rather than the reboot in general.
Cause apparently they are going down that road again.
And... I won't buy it unless previews show that it would definitely be an amazing retelling of it.

If it will be this movie with this teenage boy playing Spider-Man and what not,
I'm definitely not going to see it, at least not at the cinema.
Cause, sure, the beginning mainly involves Peter Parker being in High School and everything,
but I don't want to see some boy a lá Zac Efron take on the role.
I'll be nervous the day I watch the trailer...

[doctorD]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

I think reboots are here to stay for a while. It's the new thing and as long as they prove to be successful they're going to keep doing it.

Personally I'm all for it as long as the reboot is a better, higher quality product.

The problem with Spider-man wasn't only the misstep that was part 3, it's the actors were now to costly to continue. They were also making demands that didn't really serve the story (Dunst needing to have a singing part in the film). The whole thing was spiraling out of control. Sony stepped back, weighed their options (I believe) and decided this was the best way to protect the longevity of this franchise. I think we should all wait and see how things unfold before passing judgment. Who knows, maybe after we all see it, we'll wonder why Sony didn't make THIS movie to begin with. Then again...maybe not

Time will tell

well said!

[Darkhawk9587]

Brian Micahel Bendis Says New Spidey Will Be Ultimate!

So says the Ultimate Writer himself!
A anonymous tipster sent the below info into SuperHeroHype via LatinoReview:

"I talked to Bendis today.

Yeah, I met him at Emerald City ComiCon in Seattle, it was awesome. Got a picture, and a signature. Awesome guy, I ate some of his cookies. Was thirty minutes late though.. I asked him really quickly about the reboot, I told him to "give a lot of good ideas to the movie, just please make sure its really good". (Sorry to all the Ultimate-SM haters).

He told me, "From what I've heard it's going to be exactly like this (pointing to my Volume 1 of Ultimate Spider-Man". ("Verbatim")

.. So. Yay!"

I guess that means we could get a mutated Green Goblin at the end of the first flick? Your guess is as good as mine. Sorry Non Ultimate fans but at least we are getting away from Raimi's Green Goblin Power Ranger outfit. With James Cameron helping with visual effects you can bet we will get a more Comic realistic version of Gobby this time around!

[GreenScar]

I personally liked the Ultimate take. I'm interested in this. I hope the casting is good.

[Damage Inc.]

I thought the look of the "original" Goblin in 'Spider-Man' was awesome.
Didn't like the childish "hip" follow-up for his son though...
What was that about, was it supposed to resemble something from certain comics?
Or was it really like... a hip younger outfit for a younger guy?...

It was kinda OK but... too "modernistic"... and wow, that word is not even marked as a typo...

But I loved the idea of the Goblin-outfit sort of being the armor from the military or something.
But then it makes me think, were they trying to become more efficient fighters or scare the enemy?
No I don't quite remember if he had altered the look of the outfit for himself, to look like a Goblin you know.
Cause... if that was original military design... LOL

[Adegan]

Originally Posted by Darkhawk9587

Brian Micahel Bendis Says New Spidey Will Be Ultimate!

Yes!! I was hoping for some kind of confirmation from Bendis that the new take would take the Ultimate route. I really like the stories from the Ultimate Universe plus it has a very cinematic feel to the storytelling as well. I can't wait to see who they cast and see how everything unfolds, should be very interesting.

[Darkhawk9587]

Brian Michael Bendis DENIES Ultimate Spider-Man Comment

Brian Michael Bendis denies the Ultimate Spider-Man Movie comment reported by Latino Review last week.


This comment was originally posted on a fanboard at SuperHeroHype.com and gained notoriety when Latino Review wrote an article about it:

"I talked to Bendis today.

Yeah, I met him at Emerald City ComiCon in Seattle, it was awesome. Got a picture, and a signature. Awesome guy, I ate some of his cookies. Was thirty minutes late though.. I asked him really quickly about the reboot, I told him to "give a lot of good ideas to the movie, just please make sure its really good". (Sorry to all the Ultimate-SM haters).

He told me, "From what I've heard it's going to be exactly like this (pointing to my Volume 1 of Ultimate Spider-Man". ("Verbatim")

.. So. Yay!"


After this was mentioned on Latino Review many other sites, including ComicBookMovie.com, aggregated it. Surprisingly, Bendis himself took the time to clear up any misconceptions:


Latino Review has since caught up with the SHH forum poster. This is what he had to say about his the comment, "I didn't want it to get out and start a huge conflict. This was not my intention. I'm just a dedicated fan of Bendis and Spider-Man. The last thing I would want is for one of my heroes to think I'm an inconsiderate *******."

[Batman1980]

I have to say after reading up on MJ, I don't think Kirsten Dunst did the character justice. Granted, writing can be blamed for the fact that they made her helpless and annoying but MJ is supposed to be a redheaded bombshell and Dunst doesn't come close. That is one thing I hope they rectify in the reboot for sure.

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I have to say after reading up on MJ, I don't think Kirsten Dunst did the character justice. Granted, writing can be blamed for the fact that they made her helpless and annoying but MJ is supposed to be a redheaded bombshell and Dunst doesn't come close. That is one thing I hope they rectify in the reboot for sure.

I'm not one that's totally against her portrayal Kirsten Dunst,
cause I think she did the character well and everything.
However, I agree she's not quite the same as I know her from example the Animated Series.
Like you pointed out she'd be this bombshell of a girl and Kirsten Dunst is just very pretty and cute.
Even when she played M.J., it doesn't change a lot about her.
I guess it's a similar case as to how people found Tobey Maguire to play P.P. too geeky and all.
While I think that part is even more acceptable though, as it just started out.
But indeed as the drawn portrayals he was a little less like that.

Thinking about this it seems like Raimi wanted the films to be as close as possible,
yet keep it a little more child-friendly and such as it would be live-action.
Something in that direction, make the characters a little less rough I mean.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I have to say after reading up on MJ, I don't think Kirsten Dunst did the character justice. Granted, writing can be blamed for the fact that they made her helpless and annoying but MJ is supposed to be a redheaded bombshell and Dunst doesn't come close. That is one thing I hope they rectify in the reboot for sure.

They played Mary Jane as a bit of an amalgamation of Gwen Stacey and MJ. They toned down the "bombshell" aspect partly because of that and presumably partly because Kirsten Dunst just doesn't have that air about her.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

They played Mary Jane as a bit of an amalgamation of Gwen Stacey and MJ. They toned down the "bombshell" aspect partly because of that and presumably partly because Kirsten Dunst just doesn't have that air about her.

I thought Gwen Stacey was in movie 3? I don't like that woman too much but even she's better looking than Dunst.

[Darkhawk9587]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I have to say after reading up on MJ, I don't think Kirsten Dunst did the character justice. Granted, writing can be blamed for the fact that they made her helpless and annoying but MJ is supposed to be a redheaded bombshell and Dunst doesn't come close. That is one thing I hope they rectify in the reboot for sure.

I agree. I didn't mind Dunst's portrayal as MJ. Could've been better, but overall not bad.

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I thought Gwen Stacey was in movie 3? I don't like that woman too much but even she's better looking than Dunst.

Hopefully they'll stick a little closer to the comics (whichever universe they work with). I didn't like how Gwen randomly showed up in SM3. I think they should've left well enough alone after not using her in SM1 (switching MJ instead of her for the bridge scene).

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

I'm sticking by my earlier post reporting that this is going to happen.

This came out today;

The search for the new "Spider-Man" appears to be over.

HitFix has exclusively learned that Logan Lerman is first choice for Sony Pictures and the clear frontrunner to replace Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker in the reboot of the blockbuster franchise. A source close to the production tells HitFix Lerman is "almost 100% locked" but not in contract negotiations for the role yet.

Marc Webb ("500 Days of Summer") is directing the new untitled "Spider-Man" which is being written by James Vanderbilt ("Zodiac," "The Losers") and is meant to be a more teen-friendly incarnation, taking Peter Parker back to his early days of balancing girl trouble, homework, and crimefighting. The new film is expected to begin production later this year for a July 3, 2012 release.

Maguire, co-star Kristen Dunst and director Sam Raimi were expected to continue their version of the wall-crawler's adventures until Raimi bowed out after creative differences with the studio earlier this
year. At that time, Sony Pictures decided to re-cast the film and move in a new direction, and had already been developing a reboot script as a contingency plan.

Lerman beats out rumored contenders Anton Yelchin, Jesse Eisenberg, Patrick Fugit and Johnny Simmons.

The 18-year-old Los Angeles native is best known for his role as Percy in February's hit "Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief." His other credits include "Gamer," "My One and Only," "Bill," "3:10 to Yuma," "The Number 23" and the TV series "Jack & Bobby" where he played Bobby. Lerman got his start in two Mel Gibson films "What Women Want" and "The Patriot" at the young age of 8.

The attention focused on the casting of this role is not surprising when one considers that, historically, one of the reasons "Gone With the Wind was a phenomenon when it was released in 1939 was the deep investment that the audience already had in the characters thanks to the popularity of the book. Mega-producer David O. Selznick made canny use of the the casting process to hype the film, and the search to find the right Scarlett O'Hara and the right Rhett Butler was international news for a full year.

These days, it seems that the search for each new superhero has become a major sport for outlets that cover entertainment news, no doubt because modern audiences have a major investment in seeing these characters done right. When Sony Pictures decided to reboot "Spider-Man," speculation began immediately, and Lerman was one of the early names bandied about. At the time, those conversations were premature, but it appears that the process has brought Sony back around to the young actor, and now he is poised to wear the familiar red-and-blue costume after all.

[OrlandoEastwood]

How many times has this kids name popped up? It still isn't official.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by OrlandoEastwood

It still isn't official.

[Show spoiler]