The Amazing Spider-Man

[kristie]

who's looking forward to this movie? here's the trailer:

[youtube]FpKPiHYJc54[/youtube]


also someone got a little creative & did this spidey-related video:

[youtube]A61ceQT0US4[/youtube]


BTW, if there is already a thread about this, i apologize.

 

[CashMan]

If they are going to turn SpiderMan into an emo(like in SM3) or a hipster, I will not watch the movie. Other than that, it is #2 on my list behind TDKR to watch.

 

[HTownCowboysFan]

I see it Thursday...will let y'all know.

 

[DallasEast]

If they are going to turn SpiderMan into an emo(like in SM3) or a hipster, I will not watch the movie. Other than that, it is #2 on my list behind TDKR to watch.

That's a genuine risk, but I don't believe that will be the case. The previews have a serious feel to them in my opinion.

 

[Stash]

Comics fan since childhood so I'll definitely see this one.

I wasn't happy that they re-booted this franchise so quickly, but from the trailers it looks like they've done a nice job with it.

Now I look forward to the respective film companies working together to bring the entire Marvel Universe together on some level.

 

[kristie]

I see it Thursday...will let y'all know.

OK.

 

[Hoofbite]

Not interested at all.

The NBA playoffs were so saturated with commercials I have no desire to see the entire movie.

 

[Aikmaniac]

Agreed with Hoofibite. No real interest at all.

I think it's too soon to "reboot" Spiderman. Unlike some, I actually enjoyed the Sam Raimi movies. I would've thought a fourth from him would've given him a chance to catch the magic from 1 and 2.

 

[CashMan]

Agreed with Hoofibite. No real interest at all.

I think it's too soon to "reboot" Spiderman. Unlike some, I actually enjoyed the Sam Raimi movies. I would've thought a fourth from him would've given him a chance to catch the magic from 1 and 2.

#3 was TERRIBLE! I still don't understand why he did nothing with Dr. Conners character.

 

[kristie]

#3 was TERRIBLE! I still don't understand why he did nothing with Dr. Conners character.

maybe #4 was going to be the one where connors(the lizard) would be the main villian like he's going to be in this new one. who knows.

 

[Reality]

Not interested at all.

Me either .. it looks like Spider-Man for Twilight fans.

#reality

 

[TheCount]

I'll see it, but mostly because it's a Spiderman film. I'm not really excited for the movie though.

 

[Kevinicus]

I'm not sure about the whole parents thing, but I do think it looks to be much better than the Raimi versions which have terrible replay value, except the third which was terrible the first time. They look to have gotten the Peter Parker character much better this time.

 

[DallasEast]

All that I ask from movie adaptations of comic titles is that they capture the true essense of the character(s) and the book(s). If another version hits the big screen, I hope that it is an improvement over a previous rendition.

Tim Burton's Batman (the original/I will not speak of its sequels) was very good in my opinion, but it was still too cartoony. Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins captured the real feel of the character and its books--although the cityscape of Gotham City was a tad too much. Of course, The Dark Knight was a grand slam in artistic interpretation.

That is the sort of film evolution I hope to see from The Amazing Spider-Man. Spider-Man and Spider-Man II were very good in my opinion, but still reeked of Saturday morning cartoon fare. Marc Webb has an opportunity to learn from Nolan's vision of the genre and really do the character real justice. I'm anxious to find out if he 'gets it' or not.

 

[CashMan]

All that I ask from movie adaptations of comic titles is that they capture the true essense of the character(s) and the book(s). If another version hits the big screen, I hope that it is an improvement over a previous rendition.

Tim Burton's Batman (the original/I will not speak of its sequels) was very good in my opinion, but it was still too cartoony. Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins captured the real feel of the character and its books--although the cityscape of Gotham City was a tad too much. Of course, The Dark Knight was a grand slam in artistic interpretation.

That is the sort of film evolution I hope to see from The Amazing Spider-Man. Spider-Man and Spider-Man II were very good in my opinion, but still reeked of Saturday morning cartoon fare. Marc Webb has an opportunity to learn from Nolan's vision of the genre and really do the character real justice. I'm anxious to find out if he 'gets it' or not.

I think what worked for Batman and Batman Returns(which I think was the better of the two), was the dark oddness of Tim Burton.

 

[DallasEast]

I think what worked for Batman and Batman Returns(which I think was the better of the two), was the dark oddness of Tim Burton.

I will agree with that, except the Batman Returns part. Even the dialogue was quirky and good...

"Have you ever danced with the Devil in the pale moonlight?"

"This town needs an enema!"

Good stuff. Still, Burton put too much of his own interpretation of the characters into it. On the other hand, Nolan allowed Batman, his alter-ego Bruce Wayne, Ra's al Ghul, The Joker, etc., be themselves. That's genius in my book.

 

[Stash]

All that I ask from movie adaptations of comic titles is that they capture the true essense of the character(s) and the book(s). If another version hits the big screen, I hope that it is an improvement over a previous rendition.

Tim Burton's Batman (the original/I will not speak of its sequels) was very good in my opinion, but it was still too cartoony. Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins captured the real feel of the character and its books--although the cityscape of Gotham City was a tad too much. Of course, The Dark Knight was a grand slam in artistic interpretation.

That is the sort of film evolution I hope to see from The Amazing Spider-Man. Spider-Man and Spider-Man II were very good in my opinion, but still reeked of Saturday morning cartoon fare. Marc Webb has an opportunity to learn from Nolan's vision of the genre and really do the character real justice. I'm anxious to find out if he 'gets it' or not.

I think it comes down to having respect for both the subject matter and the audience.

When you do that, you have success. When you don't, you don't.

Look at Batman in particular. Which films did better? The ones that took things more or less seriously?

Look at the incredible success the Avengers has, it's because the people responsible respected both the subject matter and the audience.

And they were handsomely rewarded.

 

[Stash]

I think what worked for Batman and Batman Returns(which I think was the better of the two), was the dark oddness of Tim Burton.

Not for me.

The more serious tone was what worked for me, not the weird stuff.

And that's why Nolan's work far outshines Burton's.

 

[Yeagermeister]

I'll take Burton's first two and the dark knight. The rest of them sucked and yes that includes batman begins.

 

[Yeagermeister]

As for the new spidey....no thanks. Peter gets his powers from being bitten by a spider. Any other way is not true to Spiderman.