New Amazing Spider-Man Trailer Arrives (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News



Message


Empire Admin -> New Amazing Spider-Man Trailer Arrives (7/2/2012 8:57:40 AM)

Post your comments on this article




MoBiUGeArSkIn -> RE: New Amazing Spider-Man Trailer Arrives (7/2/2012 9:46:29 AM)

Really enjoyed the event last night, and the trailer looked sweet as in 3D.

This really sells the film. Yesterday, I was freakin' out about the Avengers TV spot. I was totally unprepared for just how good Spiderman is looking.

Some weird backlash surrounding the Lizard design... looks fine to me. Roll on July!




MoBiUGeArSkIn -> RE: Pointless? (7/2/2012 10:15:58 AM)

What difference does it make how long they wait? Comic book movies are popular. Spiderman is popular. They still own the film rights. What's it matter if the result is a decent night at the movies?




Kayotik -> RE: Pointless? (7/2/2012 10:21:44 AM)

I have the same problem with this as I do with Raimi's films. I just don't agree with the choice for lead actor. Andrew is far better an actor than Toby in my opinion, but I just don't think he feels right for the role of Spiderman.

It looks less cartoony than Raimi's at least, and I'm really hoping they do Venom properly in a future sequel. But the Lizard I'm not keen on, he looks like a villain from Buffy The Vampire Slayer.

I'll see the film before I pass judgement, I'm just not that excited by the trailers so far.

Also wish they'd skipped the origin story. Getting so sick of them. Yes fine reboot it so we can have a proper version of Venom and all, but we don't need to see how he becomes Spiderman again. Incredible Hulk did a really good job of summerising the origins in the opening credits so we could just get on with the story. Would've far preferred they do that with Spiderman too.




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: (7/2/2012 11:59:02 AM)

Toby Maguires Parker didnt feel right to me.He just looked like a wimp from begining to end,while I think Andrew Garfield will hopefully grow into the role with more character development progression.Also Im not a big fan of Kirsten Dunst,certainly not the worst actress about but her performances generally go from good to average.

Overal Im looking forward to this movie.




Spaldron -> RE: Mixed Bag Of Nuts (7/2/2012 12:41:45 PM)

Looks..............ok I guess. Tbh I find it hard to get excited about anything with Rhys Ifans in it s I'm undecided.




spideed2 -> RE: Mixed Bag Of Nuts (7/2/2012 1:03:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Y2Neildotcom

I'm also concerned by the number of costume "jokes" they've managed to cram into these two minutes.


Im slightly concerned a Spiderman fan would say that, sorry dude. Spidermans comic MO shows that he cracks wise almost constantly when in constume. This is one thing Tobey McGuire and the script never nailed.

As for 3d, its shot in it which helps (although im not sure its completely neccesary).

Im sure the CG will improve over the next 5 months.

Im like you though, as someone who was sceptical of the premise, this actually looks welll...very good. Im a little suprised actually.




attakdog -> RE: Mixed Bag Of Nuts (7/2/2012 1:15:43 PM)

Hating the new costume, looks like its made out of some hideous cheap plastic/rubber hybrid. Maguire's spidey costume looked far sleeker and cooler.




Kayotik -> RE: Mixed Bag Of Nuts (7/2/2012 1:34:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: spideed2

quote:

ORIGINAL: Y2Neildotcom

I'm also concerned by the number of costume "jokes" they've managed to cram into these two minutes.


Im slightly concerned a Spiderman fan would say that, sorry dude. Spidermans comic MO shows that he cracks wise almost constantly when in constume. This is one thing Tobey McGuire and the script never nailed.

As for 3d, its shot in it which helps (although im not sure its completely neccesary).

Im sure the CG will improve over the next 5 months.

Im like you though, as someone who was sceptical of the premise, this actually looks welll...very good. Im a little suprised actually.


He was meaning the amount of jokes about his costume, as in making fun of it.

It also annoys me that the trailer gives away, or at least heavily hints that Gwen will find out Parker is Spider-Man within the movie. One of the parts I liked about Raimi's Spider-Man films was that it wasn't until the end of the second one that the love interest discovered it.




Y2Neildotcom -> RE: Mixed Bag Of Nuts (7/2/2012 4:27:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayotik

quote:

ORIGINAL: spideed2

quote:

ORIGINAL: Y2Neildotcom

I'm also concerned by the number of costume "jokes" they've managed to cram into these two minutes.


Im slightly concerned a Spiderman fan would say that, sorry dude. Spidermans comic MO shows that he cracks wise almost constantly when in constume. This is one thing Tobey McGuire and the script never nailed.

As for 3d, its shot in it which helps (although im not sure its completely neccesary).

Im sure the CG will improve over the next 5 months.

Im like you though, as someone who was sceptical of the premise, this actually looks welll...very good. Im a little suprised actually.


He was meaning the amount of jokes about his costume, as in making fun of it.

It also annoys me that the trailer gives away, or at least heavily hints that Gwen will find out Parker is Spider-Man within the movie. One of the parts I liked about Raimi's Spider-Man films was that it wasn't until the end of the second one that the love interest discovered it.


Whilst there may be a number of gags at his costume in the comic books, do we really need to have multiple jokes in one two minute trailer? Even if the jokes in the trailer are the only ones in the film, a little much isn't it? Make some other quips I say. Unless the comic was a Paris Fashion Week Special, I'm sure they don't bang on with costume gags on every page.

On some of the other comments, I also agree with keeping his identity a secret, it adds to the suspense and mystery. Although I agree with what Sam Raimi said, that you can't portray much emotion behind a mask, it's still the point of the story.

Keep Gwen alive and kill her off with the Goblin I say.

The problem I have is movies are all wrapped up and focused on the singular. With a franchise as popular as Spider-Man and previous proven successes, why not have the villian survive to fight another day? Why not have plot lines that span multiple movies? You can wrap up some points to provide the audience with a sense of conclusion, but leave other things open ended for a possible sequel.

I could ramble on and perhaps tomorrow, I will...




JIm R -> RE: WoW!!!! iIn 3-D!!! (7/2/2012 10:03:30 PM)

Still boycotting it but to be fair it looks quite good.




MonsterCat -> RE: New Amazing Spider-Man Trailer Arrives (7/2/2012 10:10:40 PM)

Emma Stone as a blonde. [sm=wub.gif]

I suppose it looks pretty good, but I wonder if re-starting the franchise so soon after the Sam Raimi films will work against it.




directorscut -> RE: The Lizard is it? (7/2/2012 10:53:15 PM)

Parker looks like that jerk Venkman constantly electrocutes at the beginning of Ghostbusters.

Trailer is a big meh, a big sense of seen it all before. And that CG looks just as fake as the 2002 film. And there was nothing that particularly wowed me at all.




Kayotik -> RE: Ooooh Yyyyeeeeaaaah (8/2/2012 10:33:27 AM)

I believe a reboot is acceptable if there's a good idea that deserves to be told in a better way.
For example, I'm one of the few who is more looking forward to the proposed Batman reboot (again) than I am over Dark Knight Rises. But then I'm a fan of the comics and always felt Nolan's films, though good, were too far removed from what I love about the comics.

This Spiderman film at least looks closer to the comics than the camp-fest that was Raimi's films. But I'm still not convinced it's the best they can do.

I just can't wait until the finally do a dark and gritty reboot of the Power Rangers Movie.




JIm R -> RE: Ooooh Yyyyeeeeaaaah (8/2/2012 11:19:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayotik

I believe a reboot is acceptable if there's a good idea that deserves to be told in a better way.
For example, I'm one of the few who is more looking forward to the proposed Batman reboot (again) than I am over Dark Knight Rises. But then I'm a fan of the comics and always felt Nolan's films, though good, were too far removed from what I love about the comics.

This Spiderman film at least looks closer to the comics than the camp-fest that was Raimi's films. But I'm still not convinced it's the best they can do.

I just can't wait until the finally do a dark and gritty reboot of the Power Rangers Movie.


Raimi's original's were not 'camp' in my book, they showed an angry, dark Peter in the first, an anguished Peter in the second and in the third, all control was taken away by Arad from Raimi so you can't say it's a Raimi Spiderman film as many aspects of the completed film were not Raimi's 'vision'.




horribleives -> RE: Ooooh Yyyyeeeeaaaah (8/2/2012 12:05:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JIm R

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayotik

I believe a reboot is acceptable if there's a good idea that deserves to be told in a better way.
For example, I'm one of the few who is more looking forward to the proposed Batman reboot (again) than I am over Dark Knight Rises. But then I'm a fan of the comics and always felt Nolan's films, though good, were too far removed from what I love about the comics.

This Spiderman film at least looks closer to the comics than the camp-fest that was Raimi's films. But I'm still not convinced it's the best they can do.

I just can't wait until the finally do a dark and gritty reboot of the Power Rangers Movie.


Raimi's original's were not 'camp' in my book, they showed an angry, dark Peter in the first, an anguished Peter in the second and in the third, all control was taken away by Arad from Raimi so you can't say it's a Raimi Spiderman film as many aspects of the completed film were not Raimi's 'vision'.


See, much as I liked the first two, this was one of the problems I had with them - the lack of humour in Spidey. At least this trailer suggests that we may eventually get the wise-cracking webslinger familiar from the comics and cartoons.




jobloffski -> RE: Ooooh Yyyyeeeeaaaah (8/2/2012 12:11:54 PM)

Too many bad choices in 3 for it to carry on from there, whoever made the choices.

Repeat of previous thoughts: The first three started with it being all about a girl, best friends wanting the same girl, the second traced the fracturing of the Peter/Harry friendship. These were the undercurrents of the first two and should have been the conclusion of the trilogy, best friends duking it out, showing ROTS how you do a fight between friends, with MJ either dying during the last act or seeming to have died from the POV of peter and Harry, adding rage and grief to the final fight, with then, and only then, Harry surfacing to be a bit lmore ike himself when Sandman will beat Spidey to death if he doesn't say, no...enough...

No venom, no rival photographer for pete to tangle with, no Gwen Stacey, just pure payoff for the arc that was being so carefully crafted for two thirds of the trilogy. Absolutely no negation of the core reason spidey came to be (he could have saved Uncle Ben and his hero career is about trying to make up for that). But the 3rd film made Pete v Harry a too minor part of the film and shoved in more ideas and character arcs than one film could really deal with and it didn't stand a chance of being a balanced, coherent film. If only the handling of the Harry/Petter thing could have lived up to the shock in Parker's eyes and the smirk on Harry's face after Harry slapped him in the second film. That mood in that moment should have been the seed for the mood and content of 3, perhaps ending with MJ and Peter walking from Harry's grave, to give thematic and visual symmetry to the trilogy, with Peter having gotten everything he wanted AND everything he was afraid might hapen as a result of getting what he wanted. With one supervillain per film to play out the three film arc against, it would have been good old fashioned plant ideas at the start that payoff at the end storytelling.

The story would have been decisively concluded, and it would have been all about a girl and the cheesy innocence of the first film would have had the shadow of the third film looming over it every time you saw it after that. Instead, the 3rd film had a Harry/Peter face off at the start and relied on 'Harry suffers from amnesia and has conveniently forgotten about the events of the last few years of his life' as a plot device to make the rest of the film possible AND a ludicrous 'I've known all along he didn't kill your father" revelation to make it possible to resolve the story. That kind of writing gets marked down if you are getting marked for what you write. Shame that level of scrutiny apparently doesn't apply when hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, eh?

Hard to carry on from where the 3rd film left off, and whether Raimi jumped ship or was made to walk the plank for arguing with execs during production/after it was all over, and with undoubtedly cast loyalty to the departing director, reboot was inevitable,, not least because any director coming in after Raimi would have been left with trying to bed in a new cast with the principle baddies in the gallery basically either squandered and/or killed off, and a main character whose motivation would have to be reset, because the entire 'It's my fault Uncle Ben died' thing was erased from the set up.

It's not as if I'm on Raimi's case with the above comments, since all I've suggested for what might have worked better was getting rid of some of the final content of 3, and refocusing what the film partially did to be the main focus of it. It's a shame nobody apparently noticed how crowded the character roster was and the effect that had on the storytelling before a frame was shot.




Kayotik -> RE: Looks Really Promising (10/2/2012 11:17:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kitf


Also, remember that Sony HAD to make some kind of Spider-Man movie to retain the rights. They could've left off where Spider-man 3 finished and we could've had more dire tripe.



But imagine if Marvel Studios gained the rights to the Spider-Man movie franchise. We could have had a far superior film instead of this, plus we might have even had Spider-Man in a future Avengers sequel.




tftrman -> RE: Looks Really Promising (10/2/2012 11:56:31 AM)

This trailer seems to show Spiderman in costume sans mask as much as with it on. Yes, we get that it's Andrew Garfield we don't need to see his face all the time!




jobloffski -> RE: Looks Really Promising (10/2/2012 1:02:59 PM)

However, the only time in the trailer it seems like others have a chance of seeing his face I think it looks more like 'spidey uses his speed to flip about and take out people before they ID him as Peter' than 'Unconscious Peter Parker's face seen by a shitload of people on a train'.

No worries about him not wearing the mask when he either doesn't need to hide his face or isn't cornered, unmasked, but able to use the kind of quick pounce speed a spider has to prevent people recognising him (possibly a deliberate riposte to the situation in Raimi's films?). Or indeed if fighting someone who knows who he is. And nice twist on with great power comes great responsibility: historically science has produced what could be used for good or ill, and it's Peter's intellectual power/scientific mind that is in this film, responsible for the Baddie situation.




fiercehairdo -> RE: Looks Really Promising (10/2/2012 11:44:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tftrman

This trailer seems to show Spiderman in costume sans mask as much as with it on. Yes, we get that it's Andrew Garfield we don't need to see his face all the time!



Agreed. Same problem with the old Spiderman movies - this insistence on showing Spidey without his mask in full public view is just annoying from a plot perspective and aesthetically: I wanna see Spidey in full costume, looking cool.




jobloffski -> RE: Looks Really Promising (11/2/2012 6:13:24 AM)

Not so sure he's in 'full public view' in the same way TM's Spidey was (in 2, especially, with him being knocked out and seen by dozens of people on a train).

Connors works out who he is (says new species in town, aggressive when provoked, trailer misdirects to make it look like he's possibly talking about himself/Lizard, but he's talking about Spidey, and this may be the 'leverage' that leads to the 'formula' so knowledge of ID becomes a plot point and a way of avoiding too many 'expressionless rubber bodied CGI masked man fights computer lizard complaints for the showdown), Gwen probably finds out after not too long, far as I can tell. Good. Prevents the need to have too much precious screentime wasted with Peter agonising over whether he should tell the truth. We've been there already so the film can just crack on with not being too much of exactly the same as what has come before and telling its story.

And the only time in the trailer he is certainly in front of people who may see him without his mask, the police are unmasking him, and presumably, since the approach is apparently slightly 'darker' presumably he has to use agility/speed/webs (assuming webs haven't run out and that's the reason he's been compromised) to get the hell out of there without being recognised, or else the film is fucked.

If the webs have run out, then that bit may well represent stillness, then swift attack, a spider like attribute that previously, Raimi didn't use, not needing to because except as an 'impotence' joke (not working when he lost his confidence/self belief), Spidey had infinite webs, making webslinging the equivalent of Spidey being able to fly. If webs can run out, then Spidey will have to fight differently, more tactically, and the environment he happens to be in will either help or hinder him, and he'd actually have to do more 'wall crawling' if he cant tottaly rely on webs all the time. This could very well be a much better Spidey film than we've seen before...

Sony, don't make a fool of me, with a dog of a film, and, er, cash please[;)]




Cool Breeze -> RE: Looks Really Promising (11/2/2012 5:11:41 PM)

Agree with what others have said here.Way too many shots of Spidey without his mask.You are either in the suit or not Garfield.

Look at it this way, can you imagine Bales Batman removing his cowl.At least when hes in the suit it always stays on (so far anyway).




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875