SPIDER-MAN reboot

July 04, 2012 @ 23:40:15
i thought the film was pretty good. I had low expectations though. Disregarding story changes one thing for sure is that the new Peter Parker is a lot better than Toby's emo Spidey from the original films who say's fuck all and just stares blankly. The new one is a lot more comic accurate. This Spider-man actually cracks jokes and is sarcastic. His moves and combat during fight sequences is also more authentic to the comics. He comes across as really agile and nimble compared to the original Spider-man films.
July 05, 2012 @ 03:13:55
^
co-sign. I actually like this better than the Sam Raimi "Spiderman".
July 05, 2012 @ 03:25:28
Spiderman 3 is the movie of our generation. Who mad?
July 05, 2012 @ 05:41:36
for those of you who have seen it how does it compare to sam raimi's spiderman?

more like along side the first 3, this one is....?
July 05, 2012 @ 08:10:32
this makes you care about peter/gwen/aunt may/uncle ben more than the other ones did with mary jane and them. but imo the villains in every previous spider-man movies are all better than the lizard and even though andrew garfield is the better peter the fight scenes in the raimi films were more ambitious. everyone remembers the fights in them, but these were kind of an afterthought. other than the stan lee shit lol.
July 05, 2012 @ 11:23:06
stone > dunst
July 05, 2012 @ 18:27:24
Ehh, average but liked how it was much in-depth with the parents and uncle/auntie situation.

Heartbreak Boyz | Mia Khalifa Fan Club

July 05, 2012 @ 19:41:03
stone > dunst


All day.

I actually thought the movie was great. The cast was on point. And I definitely didn't mind seeing the origins of spider man all over again. Even though that was one of the main issues I was having going into the movie.

This one alone topples all 3 past Spiderman's. K. Dunst as mary jane? that was awful.

Instagram: kingkast1

July 05, 2012 @ 19:56:53
**SPOILER**
Who do you think was in dr conners cell at the end? My guess is norman osborn


it's been confirmed its not Norman Osborn
July 05, 2012 @ 20:02:48
for those of you who have seen it how does it compare to sam raimi's spiderman?

more like along side the first 3, this one is....?


I thought the original Toby M movie was better, just as an overall movie. yet i thought the actors were much better in this one.

Yet I liked the OG movie cuz there was more action, the Villain was a million times better and the story was just better.
July 06, 2012 @ 01:55:20
They were way better than the 3rd that is true but both they were all crappy adaptations of spider man. The action was cool yes but most of the characters and villains were butchered and/or changed from their comic book personas even when they didnt need to be.


what r u talking about? even within the comics there's multiple versions of each character's "persona". the first two raimi spider-man movies were so on point in this category. they were an homage to the original golden-age spider-man. the first two movies oozed that cheesy goodness that you find in comic books from the 60's - 70's.
July 06, 2012 @ 02:55:37
so i was watching the old spiderman movies on FX and im sorry but they were pretty bad. the effects and the cheesy acting completely ruin the great casting they had going on. i understand your point gold, about it being an homage to the golden era spiderman, but still.
July 06, 2012 @ 03:05:44
Spider-Man 2 >
July 06, 2012 @ 04:41:54
i havent seen it yet, but i thought i'd post this in here to see if you guys noticed this and agree:





reference article for the second video:
http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/
July 06, 2012 @ 06:12:54
They were way better than the 3rd that is true but both they were all crappy adaptations of spider man. The action was cool yes but most of the characters and villains were butchered and/or changed from their comic book personas even when they didnt need to be.


what r u talking about? even within the comics there's multiple versions of each character's "persona". the first two raimi spider-man movies were so on point in this category. they were an homage to the original golden-age spider-man. the first two movies oozed that cheesy goodness that you find in comic books from the 60's - 70's.


Spider-Man wasn't a golden age superhero,he was around during the silver age of comic books..
And no, I wouldn't say they were really that great but I know they followed/were inspired by some pretty important plotlines in the comics. It's been a while since I've seen the first two films but from what I remember the Spider-man 2 film was inspired by the Spider-Man No More story and the first film had some elements of the gwen stacy story arc even though she wasn't even in the first film lol. (The part where the green goblin dies by his own glider was taken from "the night gwen stacey died" story arc).
July 06, 2012 @ 06:21:01
i havent seen it yet, but i thought i'd post this in here to see if you guys noticed this and agree:

reference article for the second video:
http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/


I agree with the article and videos. If i would have watched the trailers numerous times, or had watched them before i went to go see spiderman then i would've been more keen to notice those flaws. Bottom line is this spiderman was okay, not great like the 1st two but there is still a chance for the sequel to be amazing and that's what im looking forward to. I'll probably watch the movie again this weekend just to get a better understanding off everything.
July 06, 2012 @ 11:24:25
i remember while watching thinking most of the bigger scenes had been spoiled in either the trailer or one of the 25 minutes' worth of clips up online. that's not cool
July 07, 2012 @ 02:41:25
i liked it this shit was great tbh, the beginning was slow but after that i thought it was really well done

edit:
i went in with no expectations and i didnt watch trailers or read previews or none of that shit. so i wasnt dissapointed

pink like hamilton

July 07, 2012 @ 02:41:50
AND EMMA STONE IS PERFECT IN EVERY WAY IMAGINABLE

pink like hamilton

July 07, 2012 @ 03:23:36
http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/06/film-crit-hulk-smash-the-amazing-spider-man-has-99-problems-but-an-uncle-be/
July 07, 2012 @ 07:46:15
They were way better than the 3rd that is true but both they were all crappy adaptations of spider man. The action was cool yes but most of the characters and villains were butchered and/or changed from their comic book personas even when they didnt need to be.


what r u talking about? even within the comics there's multiple versions of each character's "persona". the first two raimi spider-man movies were so on point in this category. they were an homage to the original golden-age spider-man. the first two movies oozed that cheesy goodness that you find in comic books from the 60's - 70's.


Spider-Man wasn't a golden age superhero,he was around during the silver age of comic books..
And no, I wouldn't say they were really that great but I know they followed/were inspired by some pretty important plotlines in the comics. It's been a while since I've seen the first two films but from what I remember the Spider-man 2 film was inspired by the Spider-Man No More story and the first film had some elements of the gwen stacy story arc even though she wasn't even in the first film lol. (The part where the green goblin dies by his own glider was taken from "the night gwen stacey died" story arc).


excuse me, silver age. you know what im talking about though. when i think of the inspiration for the tobey mcguire spider-man (and the raimi movies in general), i think of this everytime:



and just read those speech bubbles. they're so cheesy. which is why im a fan of raimi's (intentional) cheesiness.

This post is hidden due to user account is no longer active or improper post content.

July 07, 2012 @ 20:09:03
i liked it because in the end they didn't kill off the villain.
like the spidermans from 2001.
its like they killed off venom, which means they would have never been able to lead to carnage
who doesn't like carnage?
July 08, 2012 @ 02:51:28
Can someone elaborate to me the teaser at the end part of the movie
July 08, 2012 @ 03:14:21
^ had to leave before credits ended did something happen after it ?
July 08, 2012 @ 03:16:52
^ had to leave before credits ended did something happen after it ?


Dr. Lizard was locked up and was either talkin to himself or there was another man in his cell waiting and was talking about the "truth" about Peters dad. along those lines
July 08, 2012 @ 14:58:29
lol it's funny how many people left before it was over but still say it was alright
July 08, 2012 @ 17:40:49
^ had to leave before credits ended did something happen after it ?


Dr. Lizard was locked up and was either talkin to himself or there was another man in his cell waiting and was talking about the "truth" about Peters dad. along those lines


LOL, if you saw it you'd know it was another man and not himself. It's either Mysterio, Jackal, or Noman Osborn, don't know why people might speculate it's shocker. It has to be someone that knows the secrets of Richard parker.
July 08, 2012 @ 19:32:17
I was thinking it was Noman Osborn.

I liked this flick tbh, it went by fast. Peter>Spider-man>villain>loves Gwen>Shows Identity>MORE MOVIES & villains

I want to see the world burn

July 08, 2012 @ 20:06:42
Originally posted by Inactive User
I was thinking it was Noman Osborn.

I liked this flick tbh, it went by fast. Peter>Spider-man>villain>loves Gwen>Shows Identity>MORE MOVIES & villains


word his growth to Peter to spiderman didnt take 2/3rd of the movies. pretty dope. the end credit is prolly Osborn. He'd prolly use that same science design/machinery with the green smoke and turn him into schizo/goblin
Please login first to reply.
x