Don't have much to say about this. Underwhelming teaser, can't say much more until there is a clip released or a full length trailer.
Looks slick, but are they really just doing the same story over again? The average person must have seen Spiderman like five times now. Also that tagline is so poorly thought out. "We all have secrets. The ones we keep, and the ones that are kept from us." But if they're kept from you, then... you don't have them. Hnng.
Too soon. Seen this shit already. Probably won't even bother going to see this. Doesn't even look like a decent reboot. Hey look, the same stuff as the first movie in the last installment but in 1st person. Yeah, but who gives a crap?
That was underwhelming, and the first thing that sprung to mind when I saw the New York city skyline was The Dark Knight. Nolan's sequel may have set the precedent for the quality of a comic-book movie, but it doesn't follow that you have to emulate what made that particular film great. I realise it sounds nitpicky as hell to pick up on the skyline (it's a skyline ffs) but there was something about it evoking a Batman, rather than a Spider-man, feel. Badhat already picked up on the silly tag line, so let's mock "Ready to play God?" instead. All general problems with that line from a scientist aside for a moment, is that something Doc Connors would say? If that's the direction they are taking the character then they haven't paid enough attention to either Ultimate (their main "source" apparently) or any of the other incarnations of the character in the comics.
Seems like a pointless film to me. Why reboot a series when you are just following the same initial setting as the first Spider-Man, which was superb? It has a mountain to climb to beat it. Plus I doubt Garfield's ability as an actor, I mean he was okay in the Social Network but I don't know, from what I saw of the teaser the performance doesn't look believable at all.
I'd forgotten about this. Looks exactly like the first one with different actors. Also that first person bit looked like an average video game cinematic :\
I recommend everyone watch the now cancelled Spectacular Spider-man, a great show that skips the origin stuff and dives straight into an already established Spider-Man.
Yeah, nothing extraordinary, but I have to admit that I am slightly excited by the idea of atleast-half-decent Spiderman movie. Heh, yeah. Made me think of Mirror's Edge.
Putting the stupendous train wreck that was Spider Man 3 aside, I wouldn't debase Raimi's efforts. Spiderman 1 and 2 are masterpieces compared to the absolute glut of superhero shit being released these days. People were praising Thor as if it was the latest benchmark in superhero films. Quite sad if that's how low people are willing to place their standards now. As for the trailer, far too serious and obviously unnecessary. Maguire's awkward origin story was as smooth as can be, and doesn't need a redoing. Also relevant: No J.K. Simmons, possibly the most perfect piece of casting of a comic book character ever done.
The problem with most Superhero movies is (among other things) the villains are poorly written. Most of the people who make these movies seem to know very little about the source material, and just make the villains "evil" because "**** yeah good vs evil it'll be so epic!!111" Raimi's Spider-Man movies do have some things that I really like (not the least of which is J.K. Simmons) but the majority of his villains are very one-dimensional. Go and watch Spider-Man 2 again. Nothing that Doc Ock does, he does for any reason whatsoever. His experiment kills his wife, so he throws a hissy fit and does it all over again. Why? Who knows! Then they drop the entire sun into the lake. Cause that makes sense. Most Marvel films suffer from that problem, of just having dull as hell villains. Being a huge fan of the bad guys, it always disappoints me. Like the original Iron Man. Goddamn did Jeff Bridges Iron Monger just feel so tacked on, like they wrote a movie and said "Oh shit, we forgot a villain, quick let's shove it into the last 5 minutes".
Mirror's Edge. People actually liked the first Spiderman film? I thought it was the worst piece of shite ever. That being said I might go watch this. Same story, yes. But trailers sometimes don't do their films justice. Tentatively optimistic on this one.
I can see why Spider-Man 2 is held to such a high standard (despite disliking the film), but the first Spider-Man instalment is a corny piece of rubbish. Even Willem Dafoe couldn't save it from itself. Raimi was just totally wrong for the project and made that truth absolute with his third and final release.
Oh I tend to agree, a good villain is paramount in superhero films considering most of the actual heroes themselves are one note foils for them to play off. I thought Doc Ock had some potential but I'd agree it was wasted. There could have been something poignant, as shown by his last moments. Alfred Molina is a talented actor as well. Apart from that though, as entertainment the two films for myself personally are still quite good popcorn events. My point standing that they are significantly better than anything recently released, though perhaps I should sit for down for another viewing. Rose tinted goggles. Haha, I was similarly perplexed when he entered the fray, nothing had led to that climatic battle. Iron Man 2 was even more pitiful. Whiplash seemed to have been dispatched within thirty seconds. It's perhaps an obvious choice but I still favour Ledger's Joker over any other cinematic villains. A perfect realisation of a psychopath/terrorist that could so easily exist in our world.
I definitely agree as far as Doc Ock goes. I can't speak to how they stand up compared to newer Superhero movies, as I haven't seen Iron Man 2, or Thor, or the newest X-Men. The last Superhero movie I saw might have been Wolverine, which was a pretty bad movie. But comparisons aside, I think I would have found the Spider-Man movies much more enjoyable if it felt like there was any actual chemistry between the actors. Toby MacGuire is so whiny and emo that I just want to hit him, and he's paired with Kirsten Dunst, who manages to jump every scene between looking like a spoiled whore and being as wooden as Keira Knightley. There is so much about the movies that could have been improved, but better casting and a solid story would have gone miles in the right direction. Speaking towards this trailer - what the goddamn hell was that "first person" camera shit about?
this movie looks like a piece of crap. most of spiderman's charm comes from his ****ing charm and one-liners, not from being an emo bullshit whinebag. one of the reasons the third one was a big huge throbbing back of cocks. also lol first person
New trailer out. I actually think that this looks surprisingly good. But, anything can be better than Sam Raimi's adaptations I suppose.
Eh. I've heard the reason why Columbia is pushing this so quickly after the previous Raimi series is because the rights are about to go back to Marvel next year. They're just trying to get as much money out of the ip as possible. I can't say I necessarily agree with that.
There are definitely some angles with this adaptation that I like more than Raimi's, like Peter being more of a scientist, and having some snarky moments, but The Lizard looks ridiculously ****ing stupid.
...are you talking about the third one here only, or are you including two of the best superhero action films to date?
It's that it's a night-shot. When I think Spider-Man I do think of New York and skyscrapers, but I think of him swinging between well-lit skyscrapers during the day, his reflection shinning off them as he zooms past highly visible. Spider-Man is about being seen and heard. He fights his enemies for the most part head on while throwing snarks at them.
I am the only showing almost no interest in this? infact the movie seem like trying to hard to be like the dark knight returns or something or maybe since I think that since the first 3 movies arent that old to make a remake this remake dont seem to be worth it,so now I am dreading the fact of remakes coming more frequently than before also I dont care what the hardcore fans thinks,but the biological web shooting is cooler than the artificial ones hell even the lizard looks crappy
I saw the first person sequence in thethers, in 3d, and it gave me massive eye strain and the head ache that goes with it. Well done...
To elaborate on what I said: The best Superhero Films are The Dark Knight, and X-Men 2. There are others that have good things to them, like Ang Lee's Hulk or even Batman Returns. The biggest thing that those films suffer from is poor villains. Take Spider-Man 2. I thought Molina was absolutely brilliant as Doc Ock. He was perfect for the role. But among the movies other numerous flaws and bad casting decisions, the role was incredibly poorly written. Doc Ock has literally zero motivation for doing anything that he does. On the flip side of that, with Iron Man they made a villain who did have some motivation, but was crammed into the last 10 minutes of the movie and felt so tacked on and just silly. Then in the sequel they made the main character the villain. Superhero stories often focus on making the villain pretty similar to the hero, which is something that I love, but they never quite pull off in most of the films, because they focus on the inconsequential or even aesthetic aspects of it instead of searching for any depth as to what makes them similar. Examples of it being done wrong are, you know: Iron Man / Iron Monger. Hulk / Tim Roth Hulk. Scientist Reed Richards / Dr. Doom. Scientist Peter Parker / Scientist Otto Octavius. Spider-Man / Venom. While the only time it's done right is The Dark Knight. When Joker says things like, "Maybe we can share [a padded cell] together" and "You complete me", there's insight there into their personalities and how they are, as Joker says, both freaks. It's a depth and understanding of the duality between the hero and villain that isn't found in the other films. I definitely agree with all of this. Biological ones are pretty ****ing nonsensical and silly. YES, THAT'S RIGHT, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SCIENCE OF SUPERHEROES. Mostly I like the artificial ones because they play right into Peter being a scientist, and how it isn't all just superpowers. It's a bit of Batman thrown in to an otherwise boring "HURR MY POWERS DO EVERYTHING FOR ME" like ****ing SuperMan.
The movie is more comic book accurate, and truer to the character. I for one welcome a grimdark Spider Man film.
well I never liked the artificial web shooters,there I said now I will prepare for the rage of the die hard fans cuz cmon,superheroes all going gimicky are lot and batman has that throne