You fail to mention that it's an ORIGIN story, with all reports eluding to a fairly similar SM1 story with Lizard instead of Green Goblin and Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane. If they try and reboot Batman five years after TDKR with a new origin story (that is extremely similar to Batman Begins) you will see the same exact complaints.
He pulls 18 just fine when he's 28. Spider-Man 1 was in 2002. SM3 in '08. ASM2 will be 2014, ASM 3 in 2016. By the fourth movie he'll be in his early 30s and still will pull early 20s just fine. They learned their lesson the first time. They won't recast or reboot before a fourth movie, I think. It'll go on as long as Andrew doesn't look too old. And even if he does start looking late twenties in the movies, that's fine too. Guess what, Peter Parker ages.
Does anyone know how many movies Garfield has on his contract? Also, I really hope Webb comes back; he seems pretty unsure. It would be a shame if he didn't get to continue the story after laying the foundation.
Does anyone know how many movies Garfield has on his contract? Also, I really hope Webb comes back; he seems pretty unsure. It would be a shame if he didn't get to continue the story after laying the foundation.
The only way I don't see them rebooting is if this film is a John Carter level of bomb. If it's a success, which it looks to be, they'll stick with Andrew for a trilogy. By then, they'll need to reboot out of necessity or desire to avoid unfair comparisons for the next actor. All you have to do is look at Nolan's Batman or Jason Bourne to know that success can cast just as big of a shadow as failure.
The only way I don't see them rebooting is if this film is a John Carter level of bomb. If it's a success, which it looks to be, they'll stick with Andrew for a trilogy. By then, they'll need to reboot out of necessity or desire to avoid unfair comparisons for the next actor. All you have to do is look at Nolan's Batman or Jason Bourne to know that success can cast just as big of a shadow as failure.
The problem for Sony is that they need to have an active project or lose the rights. If Sony are able to buy the movie IP outright from Marvel then there is a good chance Sony will make this a trilogy and put the IP on moratorium for 7-10 years (like Batman) but if they can't then they will just recast and continue the story rather than reboot and have another origin story.
My respect level for both of them just went up 1000% percent. Garfield in particular for how he handled that. I would have decked the asshole with the camera and ended up on some tabloid for doing so.
Nobody's expecting Oscar-worthy writing from a superhero movie, but there's a massive gulf between something like Transformers and something like The Avengers. The former is a complete mess, while the latter actually has things like pacing and character interaction and a distinct lack of pee jokes.
That said, they wrote Star Trek, so maybe they're not completely incompetent.
My respect level for both of them just went up 1000% percent. Garfield in particular for how he handled that. I would have decked the asshole with the camera and ended up on some tabloid for doing so.
That's where i'm worried. It could so very easily turn into a clusterfuck of unique adaptations at this point. The only goal for ASM2 should be making it better and more impactfull than the first. Nothing sucks more than a sequel that's worse than the first, and they have to live up to Raimi's SM2 throwing that whole notion out the window. I just don't want them to fuck up the inevitable Gwen scene.
The fact is a reboot is usually always scorned after the original was a celebrated movie. If they waited 5 years more people might have thought differently.
Or waited 20 years to bring back Superman and look how that turned out. Fuck the hate this movie is getting because it's a short turn around for a reboot.
The Raimi movies are far from perfect. I still enjoy the first two ( didnt age that well, mainly how shitty Tobey is imo), but for reviewers to have a bias cause this is a reboot is stupid.
Have you read Webspinners Tales of Spider-Man #12? Something like that for chameleon could be amazing. Maybe along with Kraven since they're related and work together in some of the original comics. I don't know how Mysterio could work and be interesting, it'd turn into a silly mess similar to Sherlock Holmes, where things seem magical and beyond belief and then there's always a rational explanation.
I think the fact that the 'modern' Ult. SM issues made a joke out of Mysterio (in the fake movie) sort of indicates something.
Actually, more recently the Ultimate Universe introduced Mysterio as his own character right before
Peter died
and not as just a sight gag. He was used quite well. He just showed up to random places and fucked up things with his illusions. It was pretty great. I think they could pull it off if you team him up with someone else.
Also, this is a great video review. They seem to not care that it's a reboot if done right, and their excitement has really got me pumped. Even in most of the negative reviews, the complains of being a reboot and hitting some of the same notes don't bother me at all.
It's weird: you get some reviews who say it's like the same movie as SM1, and others who say it's a totally different take. If you ask me, it seems most people haven't seen SM1 in ten years and they've kind of built it up in their memories since it was one of the first big successful superhero movies of the current superhero binge that's going on right now.
Actually, more recently the Ultimate Universe introduced Mysterio as his own character right before
Peter died
and not as just a sight gag. He was used quite well. He just showed up to random places and fucked up things with his illusions. It was pretty great. I think they could pull it off if you team him up with someone else.
I remember that actually, Felecia was part of it too. Post-bagley Ult. SM doesn't sit that well with me though. you're right though, a twisted physiological take could work.
I remember that actually, Felecia was part of it too. Post-bagley Ult. SM doesn't sit that well with me though. you're right though, a twisted physiological take could work.
I agree. I miss Bagley's pencils on the series. There was just a great appeal to it. I just remember picking up the Venom arc in Ultimate Spider-man and just being floored by the art.
+ Some great casting. Martin Sheen (best thing in the movie), Ifans, and Garfield being the stand-outs, though Sheen is pretty much waisted because, you know, this movie just had to be a damn reboot. Yeah, more on this later...
+ It's colorful!
+ Lizard is handled particularly well, at least early on. One of the best shots of the film IMO
him looking at his arm's reflection
. Film needed more of this
+ Unsurprisingly, Marc Webb handles couples well
Cons:
- Film comes off like it was shot by two different directors. Webb handling the drama while a committee handled the action.
- As I said, they just had to make it a reboot. Sure I accepted it, but holy shit did things get surreal when
Uncle Ben exits
...which is handled worse than it's predecessor despite so much of the rest of the film being better than the former.
- Action is merely pedestrian most of the time. I mean, there's some creative shots and good choreography, but it lacks energy. As I said, there's no real sense of a director's "vision" behind it, just what looked cool to the guys designing/rendering them. And, of course, like most comic film adaptations, there's simply not enough of it. It seems like Blade 2 get's to go down as one of the best paced comic movies in this regard.
- We get it, Marc Webb does couples really well
- Score, despite what I read here on good ol' GAF, is completely forgettable 90 percent of the time. There's even points where there's just too much of it in scenes that don't need it.
- Was Denis Leary cast in this because he was in Rescue Me or something? Dude phones it here
- Lizard's arc becomes shitty
- Movie is waaaay too damn long and probably could have had most of the origin shit cut out entirely. Which is weird because the origin stuff is some of the best bits (and where Webb excels) ...but it doesn't need to exist
Overall, like I stated before, the movie feels like it was designed by a board room, not shot but a passionate crew. Spidey 3 doesn't exist, but you can't just deny what Raimi accomplished with Spidey 1 and 2. His love REALLY came through in those movies and he had his vision so to speak, that is just completely absent here.
6/10
We doing rankings?
1. Spidey 1
2. Spidey 2 (at least the first 3/4s)
3. Amazing Spider-Man
4. Cancer
5. Aids
6. Spidey 3
This is indeed the case as it standard practice for bringing such a 'green' director to work on such a massive project.
I don't think people realise the extent to which this goes on. While Justin Lin can do action it's actually his 1st/2nd unit guys who do all the heavy lifting in his Fast/Furious films. Probably the same thing here.
I agree. I miss Bagley's pencils on the series. There was just a great appeal to it. I just remember picking up the Venom arc in Ultimate Spider-man and just being floored by the art.
Sarah Pichelli is doing wonders with "Spider-Men". She was awesome at the start of the new Miles Morales USM, but they took her off for bigger, better things I believe.
I do appreciate all of you guys who have seen it posting impressions. I've adjusted my expectations to be more in line with what a lot of you are saying, so I'll probably get more enjoyment out of the film that way
This is indeed the case as it standard practice for bringing such a 'green' director to work on such a massive project.
I don't think people realise the extent to which this goes on. While Justin Lin can do action it's actually his 1st/2nd unit guys who do all the heavy lifting in his Fast/Furious films. Probably the same thing here.
It's fine though, film is entertaining enough, will make monies, and Sony get's to rest easy knowing they get to hold on to the property just a little longer
Also, looking at the previous page and that Sentry GIF fest. All of that comes off more hollow that it should in the finished film =(
+ Some great casting. Martin Sheen (best thing in the movie), Ifans, and Garfield being the stand-outs, though Sheen is pretty much waisted because, you know, this movie just had to be a damn reboot. Yeah, more on this later...
+ It's colorful!
+ Lizard is handled particularly well, at least early on. One of the best shots of the film IMO
him looking at his arm's reflection
. Film needed more of this
+ Unsurprisingly, Marc Webb handles couples well
Cons:
- Film comes off like it was shot by two different directors. Webb handling the drama while a committee handled the action.
- As I said, they just had to make it a reboot. Sure I accepted it, but holy shit did things get surreal when
Uncle Ben exits
...which is handled worse than it's predecessor despite so much of the rest of the film being better than the former.
- Action is merely pedestrian most of the time. I mean, there's some creative shots and good choreography, but it lacks energy. As I said, there's no real sense of a director's "vision" behind it, just what looked cool to the guys designing/rendering them. And, of course, like most comic film adaptations, there's simply not enough of it. It seems like Blade 2 get's to go down as one of the best paced comic movies in this regard.
- We get it, Marc Webb does couples really well
- Score, despite what I read here on good ol' GAF, is completely forgettable 90 percent of the time. There's even points where there's just too much of it in scenes that don't need it.
- Was Denis Leary cast in this because he was in Rescue Me or something? Dude phones it here
- Lizard's arc becomes shitty
- Movie is waaaay too damn long and probably could have had most of the origin shit cut out entirely. Which is weird because the origin stuff is some of the best bits (and where Webb excels) ...but it doesn't need to exist
Overall, like I stated before, the movie feels like it was designed by a board room, not shot but a passionate crew. Spidey 3 doesn't exist, but you can't just deny what Raimi accomplished with Spidey 1 and 2. His love REALLY came through in those movies and he had his vision so to speak, that is just completely absent here.
6/10
We doing rankings?
1. Spidey 1
2. Spidey 2 (at least the first 3/4s)
3. Amazing Spider-Man
4. Cancer
5. Aids
6. Spidey 3
Honestly, if they had continued the series, MJ most likely would've gotten more screen time than she had already. She was incredibly one dimensional in that show if I recall.
I think Spectacular is the perfect primer for ASM actually, especially when it comes to Gwen. Hell, maybe after ASM is released more people will look into Spectacular for more Gwen action... and Marvel will realize the error of their ways with Ultimate. (It'll never happen, but I can dream... )
Yeah I don't count that shit story. Prefer to forget it. I don't hate Gwen but come on, the Parker/MJ relationship is one of the best in comics. MJ's personality, back story etc. has a lot of depth. Gwen is important in the Spidey lore because of her demise.
Yeah I don't count that shit story. Prefer to forget it. I don't hate Gwen but come on, the Parker/MJ relationship is one of the best in comics. MJ's personality, back story etc. has a lot of depth. Gwen is important in the Spidey lore because of her demise.
you're right though, a twisted physiological take could work.
