‘Amazing Spider-Man’ NY Set Pics: Early Spidey Costume & Human Lizard [Updated]

Published 2 years ago by , Updated May 9th, 2013 at 9:44 am,

2011 has been a landmark year, when it comes to the release of set pictures and videos from in-production films. The shooting process for projects ranging from tentpole comic book movies (The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises) to popcorn franchise installments (Resident Evil: Retribution) and even higher-predigree dramas (Gangster Squad and Cloud Atlas) has been partially chronicled, via amateur images and clips.

That’s also been the case for Sony’s The Amazing Spider-Man, which recently underwent reshoots on location in the streets of New York – and, sure enough, we have the images to prove it.

Today’s batch of Amazing Spider-Man clips include star, Andrew Garfield (and his stunt double), handling some tricky maneuvers and dressed up in what looks to be a prototype of the iconic Spidey costume. The mask is similar to that which Tobey Maguire’s Peter Parker first wore in Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, but Garfield is otherwise decked out in black attire, complete with sunglasses and a beanie – unlike Maguire’s unpolished full-body outfit in Raimi’s movie.

Rhys Ifans as Dr. Curt Connors/The Lizard was also present for the reshoots, which look to partly involve Connor’s regeneration of his arm – judging by the set pics, which reveal Ifans bearing what appears to be a newly-formed (and still gooey) limb.

UPDATE: We’ve added some extra photos, which chronicle the filming of a scene that involves George Stacy (Denis Leary), along with some additional images of Garfield in casual Peter Parker mode. There are also some pics which reveal that Emma Stone is around for the reshoots, though she is currently sans her (natural) blonde locks that she went with to play Gwen Stacy.

Check all that (and more) out in the Amazing Spider-Man set photo gallery below:

 

A lot of fans are still not keen on the idea of rebooting the Spider-Man franchise via another origin story – one directed by Marc Webb – especially seeing how Raimi’s original Spidey flick will only be a decade old by the time Amazing Spider-Man hits theaters. The crew behind the new film are clearly aware of the controversy and working hard to ensure that this new film truly stands apart from its predecessor (in a good way).

Between the film’s admirable cast and a teaser trailer that hinted at some genuinely innovative 3D sequences, along with a (possibly) more “realistic” and contemporary portrayal of the Spider-Man universe, there’s good reason to think that Amazing Spider-Man could prove its early detractors wrong. As always, we shall have to wait and see…

-

The Amazing Spider-Man swings into 2D, 3D, and IMAX 3D theaters around the U.S. on July 3rd, 2012.

Source: The Daily Mail, Newscom

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: spider-man, the amazing spider-man

22 Comments

Post a Comment

Comment With Facebook

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. So if this ends up really sucking, do we get to un-reboot it and move forward with the original Spiderman 4 with John Malkovich as The Vulture? Because personally, that is what I would rather watch anyway. there was already a perfectly good cast and director. And as far as blaming Sam Raimi for the crap that was Spiderman 3, I am fairly certain it was studio/production interference that forced Venom into the storyline and not the director.

    • It’s easy to blame the studio for forcing Venom into the movie…But, I think that Raimi’s the one that dropped the ball. The studio and fans were right to want Venom in the movie…Sandman was a lame choice for villain. But, Raimi decided to throw a hissy-fit instead of making a good movie.

    • I will concede to this if it ends up being good people just keep quiet about anything before it laying it to rest.

      Or better yet keep talking about it cause it will never come back.
      Raimi is gone, McG is gone, The Farmers Insurance guy is gone. Never to come back. People need to get over it.

    • Wait wait wait… You want to see an old guy that has a pair of wings that make him live longer? Really? Ild rather see Kraven, Rhino, Electro, Shocker, or Scorpion… ANYONE other then Vulture…

      OMG, You were kidding? LOL I thought you were serious, and I went on a rant when I should have seen your sarcasim, lol, very funny :D

    • The Vulture is just a Grandpa Munster in a Tweety-Bird costume. Better villains would be The Scorpion, Electro, Mysterio, and yes, The Lizard, and perhaps Morbius (if he were not too intense for the kiddies). The 3rd. Spiderman movie was not that great, although The Sandman was a pretty good villain. I would’ve liked to see the original franchise continue with Spiderman #4 & #5 (but without Vulture, Rhino, Kraven, or any other useless villains such as those; stick to the ones I recommended above). It is too bad the company forced Raimi and McGuire out by putting unrealistic pressure on them. The company may have shot themselves irrepairably in the foot. I hope this next Spiderman movie is good, but I must confess to having doubts until the flick comes out and proves me mistaken.

  2. The Raimi movies were flawed from the get go. the first one is the only good one. Kirsten Dunst was a terrible MJ.

    • I have to agree that we really can’t continue the Raimi series. It’s long gone and I highly doubt the main characters would even return.

      I just wish that IF they were going to do a reboot that they would have stayed true to the source material this time (mechanical web shooters is NOT enough) instead of introducing brooding emo Peter Parker.

      • I love the Raimi Spider-Man movies (Spider-Man 3 notwithstanding) but I also think that they’re in the past now. I’m conflicted about the reboot because I think that origin stories in any superhero movie are almost superfluous, but I love the Spider-man in high school angle and if they’re gonna do that they have to do another origin.
        And I share the concern that Spidey’s gonna be brooding or dark or some nonsense, but we have to bear in mind that the teaser we saw only showed very little of Spider-man in action or even Peter Parker talking to anyone. Let’s all bow our heads and pray for a lighthearted joke-spitting Spider-man who’s just a little more grounded in reality.
        Lord, deliver unto us an awesome Spider-Man that we may sleep soundly.

        • Well, since they have assured us that Spidey himself was going to be the joke cracking witty bandering arachnid that we all love, I think the brooding Parker would be a good thing. In the original comics, Peter pretty much stuck to himself. The only times he ever showed any social interest was when he was in science class or at the Bugle. Other than that, he was a quiet wallflower (quoted from Flash Thompson). It definately does positive things for the character where he is quiet and shy whereas spider is funny and loud. This has helped his secret identity in the comics for a long time. But again I do not really believe that he will be a brooding Parker. In the trailer he looked more like he was distracted. He didnt cry in the trailer, he didnt look sad in the trailer, he just looked…blah. Imagine a kid with a genius intellect who suffered a tragedy as a child. A tragedy that he could never fully understand. He keeps to himself maybe from some subconscious fear of loosing people and with his genius mind, cant find any level grounds on which to start friendships. (of course he finds a hot genius girlfriend, but hey, thats comic books for ya) All I’m saying is that whether he is just an awkward and shy genius or a brooding teenager, either way I will be happy with the character.

      • @ mongoose

        They are actually being far more true to the source material than Sam Raimi ever was. Peter Parker is emotional, angsty, and brooding on the inside, and just nerdy/socially awkward on the outside. But just like in the comics, this movie is exploring the character’s duality, counter-balancing that Peter Parker with a a very sarcastic wise-ass Spider-man who never shuts up (Something Sam Raimi’s Spider-man/Peter Parker never truly got, thus taking out probably the most characteristic thing about Spider-Man other than his powers). They are having Gwen Stacy (Parker’s original love, long before he was ever with mary jane), they are introducing Peter’s parents (very integral to his character/history), and they are using Mechanical web shooters (just like the comics). For those who are complaining about his body type (being too skinny), they are basing this movie on the ultimate universe, and in that universe, Spider-man is very skinny and lanky.

        Raimi took pieces of the Spider-Man mythos that he liked, and pretty much made up his own thing. Not really following the source material that much, which is why by comparison to the comics, the whole universe is jumbled. Not that this is a bad thing, movies are adaptations and things need to be changed if necessary to work in film. Comic book nerds are some of the whiniest and unpleaseable fans out there when it comes to film. They want everything to be straight from the comic word for word, and all hell breaks loose if it’s not. But films are a different medium, and with only a 2 hour time frame to tell a good story for a character who has 50 some years of history in the comics. One word… ADAPTATION. So there’s nothing wrong with Raimi’s movies from that standpoint, and the Raimi SM series really set the standard for super hero films during it’s time. But the most fatal thing he got wrong was the spirit of the characters. You can change things in the universe to fit your film, fine, but you cant change the feel of the characters and the universe, otherwise it doesnt feel like Spider-Man all that much. Spider-Man has little to no sarcasm at all, and he mostly just cried all the time. Mary Jane is NOT a weak “save me!!” damsel in distress. She is sassy, she is tough and can hold her own, and while Peter and MJ had their drama in the comics, it was nothing like the crap Kirsten dunst brought to the films. Especially in Spider-Man 3 (<—Root of most of the tragedies that even occurred in that movie.)

        • Well said. I had the privilege of reading both the backissues of ASM (I got through about 200 plus issues) simultaneous to reading USM from beginning to the end of Peter Parker. USM is a good book, and it’s surprisingly loyal to the first hundred or so issues of ASM. I understand that Bendis changed some key things that really upset some fans, but regardless, his character work on Peter Parker, Aunt May, Jameson, Uncle Ben, Doc Ock, and especially on Norman Osborn (that’s Norman, and not GG) were quite fantastic.

          I am looking forward to this reboot. I think that Peter Parker will be an interesting character in and of himself this time around. I didn’t get that from the Peter Parker that Tobey portrayed, even though I appreciate Tobey’s work. Just as important, I think that Emma Stone will give us one of the most likeable female co-stars ever in a superhero movie. I really do hope that she’s more than just a love interest in this movie. This is a Spider-man/Peter Parker film, so I expect him to get the bulk of the attention, but I’d like to feel in Emma Stone’s performance that the character has depth.

        • Hear hear. I for one am excited to see this origin story because it is more complete/true.

    • I think all the Raimi movies were flawed. Green Goblin seemed like a character from Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. Fans (like me) were just so happy to see Spidey on the big-screen that we ignored the absurdity. Raimi’s films lacked any sense of good judgement (Spidey removing his mask every chance he gets, Spidey in an elevator in costume, emo Peter Parker, organic web shooters, etc.) and each sequel became more and more laughable as the franchise progressed. I’m one fan who is extremely happy to see this franchise take a different direction.

  3. I have to admit that I enjoyed Spider-Man 1&2 it was the 3y, not to rd one that likes to dance jis problems away ruined it for me with the emo Peter Parker not to mention casting Topher Grace as Brock/Venom

  4. @ buttass

    if that’s your worry then you should read the descriptions of the SDCC footage.

  5. If I’m not mistaken, this will be the first movie that Rhys Ifans will have an American accent in.

  6. I was disgusted when the news of this reboot first surfaced but I gotta say that I like the mood and footage in teh first trailer. I also like the fact of Stone playing Gwen rather than Dunst as MJ.

    But my first disappointment is that they are redoing the origin – which is totally unnecessary IMO. Unless it’s done in brief flashbacks (which is still possible I think), like the early episode of the 90′s animated series, I’m just not interested in seeing the origin again.

    That said, seeing set pics of Peter in an early spidey costume doesn’t do anything for me. Now I’m just thinking “get this one out of the way and move on to the sequel already so we don’t have to see the origin again”

  7. Now if they wanted to truely re-boot it, I would just start with our new spanish/african american Miles Morales.

  8. The first Spiderman with Tobey was great, I really dont understand why they forged ahead with a reboot when they easily could have spun off in a different direction using the end of that movie as the origin.

    If anything it’s sort of irritating, making me not inclined to want to buy a ticket like I did for the first one – which wasnt that long ago.

    • 10 years is a pretty long time.

      Its quite easy they want to sweep the Raimi stuff under the rug.

  9. not going to be impressed with this one.

  10. yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss :D

Be Social, Follow Us!!