DVDizzy Forum

Does this count? It's a Marvel comic sure but Marvel Studios and Disney are uninvolved I'm pretty sure. Good trailer though. AG looks very Peter Parker if not a little too good looking. Also I know a lot of people dislike the new suit but I quite like it plus having web shooters rather than natural wrist ones gets me pretty excited as well.

-Skyler

I hate the web shooters, but know there are a large group of Spidey fans that like them. So I guess we now have Spidey films for both sets of fans?

This suit I feel looks too much like Nike is endorsing Spider-Man or something. I realize with the with re-boot thing (which I think was stupid, but anyway) Sony was going to try and make it as different from the Toby series as they could, but I just feel they could have changed the suit without making it look so much like a track outfit.

Too soon to be necessary or illicit interest. I like Andrew G. and Emma S. but couldn't care less about this film - and the CGI when he's running atop the buildings is pretty bad.

This isn't Disney. FOX still owns movie rights for X-Men, Fantastic Four and Daredevil while Sony still owns Spider-Man and Ghost Rider. None of those movies should be in the Disney section.

Anyways, there really hasn't been any news regarding this movie that interests me. It all started with the casting; Andrew Garfield as Peter, Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben and Sally Field as Ant May, terrible casting. Absolutely terrible. A 27 year old playing a high schooler (he'll be 30 by the time they do the sequel, also set in high school)? Not to mention he looks nothing like Peter, with the wild hair and skateboard. He just seems like an emo d-bag, not a nerd. Emma Stone as Gwen could be interesting. Casting was one of the best parts about the Rami Spider-Man, so I'm disappointed that they seemingly skipped searching altogether and just went for big names. Also, I hate the high school setting. I never liked the Ultimate story lines and I'm confused as to why they're calling this The Amazing Spider-Man when it doesn't follow that incarnation but the Ultimate incarnation. I'm indifferent on the costume and web-shooters. The first person thing at the end was cool and I'm sure it would be amazing in 3D but I'm not sure there is anyway you could ever incorporate that into the movie without it taking everyone out of the picture.

Overall, I'd much rather have seen Rami remake the third Spider-Man to what he originally planned then this re-due.

It looks fine, but basically a faithful remake of the first <i>Spider-Man</i> movie. What's the point? I'd have been excited for a <i>Spider-Man 4</i>. But ten years is not long enough to merit a remake. What advances have been made? 3D? This summer's numbers have shown that people are avoiding 3D when given the choice. Seriously, what's next, remaking <i>Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone</i>?

Luke wrote:It looks fine, but basically a faithful remake of the first <i>Spider-Man</i> movie. What's the point? I'd have been excited for a <i>Spider-Man 4</i>. But ten years is not long enough to merit a remake. What advances have been made? 3D? This summer's numbers have shown that people are avoiding 3D when given the choice. Seriously, what's next, remaking <i>Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone</i>?

Somewhere, I know I read that someone was considering re-filming/re-editing parts of the first 2 or 3 Harry Potter films so that they would better match the later films. Sorta like how George Lucas updated the original 3 Star Wars films. I watched Sorcerer's Stone the other night, and I think I would like the idea of them going back and re-doing some of the CG effects, and re-adjusting some of the scenery.

Going back on topic I also agree that this re-boot is way too soon. I'm frustrated because Spider-man is one of my favorite characters in the Marvel Universe, but between this new re-boot and the broadway musical I feel like people are either going to not really understand the character past a suit or get over saturated and stop caring as much.

singerguy04 wrote: Somewhere, I know I read that someone was considering re-filming/re-editing parts of the first 2 or 3 Harry Potter films so that they would better match the later films.

Considering how I felt the series lost its magic with the fourth film, I think that's a terrible idea. If they should change anything, it's The Half-Blood Prince. It says a lot when you can turn off a hardcore Harry Potter film from ever seeing the final two films.

Luke wrote:It looks fine, but basically a faithful remake of the first <i>Spider-Man</i> movie. What's the point? I'd have been excited for a <i>Spider-Man 4</i>. But ten years is not long enough to merit a remake. What advances have been made? 3D? This summer's numbers have shown that people are avoiding 3D when given the choice. Seriously, what's next, remaking <i>Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone</i>?

Well said!

By the way, give them long enough (or not very long as the case may be) and I'm sure "Potter" will get "re-imagined."

I'm sure they'll re-make HP after they've finished milking the current series for all its worth (extended editions, possible theatrical re-releases, etc.).

I saw an extended commercial for this last night. I'm actually interested in it. For one, I'm glad it looks different from the last series. I think I might end up liking it more, tbh. I just worry this won't do that well--though I seriously doubt it would flop--considering it wasn't that long since the last series. They should've waited at least 5 years.

Neal wrote:Too soon to be necessary or illicit interest. I like Andrew G. and Emma S. but couldn't care less about this film - and the CGI when he's running atop the buildings is pretty bad.

this. If you look closely, looks like they didnt even change the costume. I'm betting people will pass over this.

And jpanimation, I wouldnt exactly call some of this cast "big-name".

I'm mildly interested to see what sort of new directions this may take.

estefan wrote:

singerguy04 wrote: Somewhere, I know I read that someone was considering re-filming/re-editing parts of the first 2 or 3 Harry Potter films so that they would better match the later films.

Considering how I felt the series lost its magic with the fourth film, I think that's a terrible idea. If they should change anything, it's The Half-Blood Prince. It says a lot when you can turn off a hardcore Harry Potter film from ever seeing the final two films.

I know this is off-topic for the thread, but I really disliked The Half-Blood Prince, too. I think it's the worst of the series. But the Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 and 2 are vastly better than it. Give 'em a try. Actually Pt. 1 is my favorite in the series.

I'm still baffled as to why there's a Spider-Man reboot. I personally liked the old one (just the first one, but the second one was okay). The teaser looked pretty good, but honestly, I'm not interested because it's come too soon.

Well, it looks like I'm losing interest in the Spiderman reboot.

I mean, the trailer looked like I'm playing a video game or a simulator.

TheValentineBros wrote:I mean, the trailer looked like I'm playing a video game or a simulator.

Yeah, the CG in the part of the trailer where we're in the viewpoint of Spiderman as he jumps across skyscrapers already looked dated.

estefan wrote:Considering how I felt the series lost its magic with the fourth film,

This. Less magic and whimsy and more high school melodrama.

Still, the first couple of films have terrible visual effects. Half the time it looks like they didn't even have a compositor, to which the director credits the tight schedule and limited budget, so I wouldn't mind an update addressing the poor quality (remember, LotR came out at the same time and looks a million time better).

As for Spider-Man, Webb confirmed in a recent interview that the first person stuff will be in the movie, as he wanted the audience to experience Spider-Man (also his excuse for it being shot in 3D).

Linden wrote: I know this is off-topic for the thread, but I really disliked The Half-Blood Prince, too. I think it's the worst of the series. But the Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 and 2 are vastly better than it. Give 'em a try. Actually Pt. 1 is my favorite in the series.

Don't worry, I plan on watching those two soon. Should be seeing Part 1 next week, followed shortly by Part 2 on the big screen.

Disney's Divinity wrote:

TheValentineBros wrote:I mean, the trailer looked like I'm playing a video game or a simulator.

Yeah, the CG in the part of the trailer where we're in the viewpoint of Spiderman as he jumps across skyscrapers already looked dated.

IKR? And plus, I don't need to see Spiderman's backstory again. I mean, sure Batman's backstory was good in Batman Begins, but seriously?

We still have another year, so the effects will probably improve greatly.

At least I like this Gwen Stacy. The one in Spidey 3 was horrible and a joke.

This one (Emma Stone) actually look like Gwen Stacy and I'd imagine will act more like her too.

This is a picture of the new suit. I hate it so much! It seriously looks like Nike is sponsoring Spider-Man or something! Amazing Spider-Man: Just do it!






And the action figure based on this new Spidey:

I probably guess that they had to redo everything in the last minute, right? RIGHT?!