New ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ Set Photos Feature Live-Action Web-Slinging

3 years ago by  

While debate rages about whether or not Marc Webb’s upcoming reboot, The Amazing Spider-Man, is a welcome fresh start for the franchise or an unnecessary rehash, there have been some interesting (promising?) things that have been captured in photos taken on both the LA and NYC sets.

Some of these points of interest and/or debate have been the Spider-Man’s mechanical web-shooters (a departure from the organic shooters in Sam Raimi’s Spidey films), star Andrew Garfield’s look as Peter Parker, and even an early look at The Lizard (Rhys Ifans). Today we add another topic of debate to the Amazing Spider-Man pile with new NYC set photos that further indicate that Spidey’s web-slinging theatrics will only be part CGI in Webb’s film.

Back in 2002 it seemed revolutionary that movie technology had progressed to the point where a CGI Spider-Man could convincingly pull off all the web-slinging acrobatics that define the character. A CG Spidey was widely seen as a necessary move, since no live actor or stuntman could conceivably handle the physical demands of the web-slinging work and still make it look good onscreen.

Well, I guess nobody told Marc Webb and Co. what the limits of possibility are, because as we’ve seen in previous set photos, a stuntman (and Garfield?) will indeed be getting down and dirty as Spider-Man in action. Today’s latest crop of photos reveal more of the intense wire-work that will be used in the film, which will also be mixed with CGI (notice the missing webs) to create the full-on “Spidey effect.” I have to say, the results look pretty good so far:

Shots of “Spider-junk” aside, I like that the stuntman (I’m assuming it is a stuntman and not Garfield) seems to have the look of Spidey down-pat while web-slinging. It wouldn’t be enough to just hit the wires and start-a-swinging – comic book artists have been drawing Spidey’s body in specific poses, at specific angles, for decades, in order to create a sense of real-world physics that would apply if a guy indeed started swinging on thin strips of webbing from dizzying heights. From what I see in these set photos, the ASM stunt team have done their homework and will be trying to honor the iconic Spider-Man physicality that has distinguished the hero.

Also a plus: in an era where so many films rely on CGI (Green Lantern, looking at you,) I’m happy to see some good ol’ fashioned movie magic being utilized…even if this film will also be leaning on the crutch of 3D to turn a higher profit. Speaking of which: I wonder if having a live actor doing the web-slinging will play better or worse in the 3D format…

What do you guys think – happy to see a real person doing the web-slinging?

The Amazing Spider-Man will swing into theaters on July 3, 2012.

Sources: Splash News & Daily Mail UK

68 Comments

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. I kinda like the suit. It reminds me of the old 70′s tv show. I think the physique of spidey is perfect. The should be skinny and sinewy not stock and beefy like in the Raimi films. I’m also loving the poses that spidey is striking while swinging. It’s good to see a more practical approach too, I hate it when the use CGI for no good reason.

  2. The more I see the new Spidey outfit makes me dislike it more and more…

    • Im sure it will help when you see it the way its meant to be seen on screen with the filters and lighting differences. Those pictures are obviously not what It will look like. I do prefer the white eyes over gold however.

    • Really? I will now respectfully put you in the category of “whining fanboy”. The suit stays true to the comics. What do you dislike about it?

      • I myself some what like the costume….I just don’t like how they have like over the top amouts of blue where the red used to be on the legs…..to me it kinda looks like he’s just wearing a pair of skinny sweats.

    • I agree and I’ve been a BIG fan for 30yrs!

    • I agree and I’ve been a BIG fan for 30 years!

  3. It looks really good, but the stuntman is obviously alot more muscular and built than Andrew Garfield is. I hope it isn’t obvious in the movie that the Parker and Spiderman aren’t played by the same person.

  4. Poses are good. Costume I don’t like.

    But with every reboot of a franchise I guess they just have to be a lil different. I don’t see this particular version lasting too long, so they can have fun with it.

  5. Dont be suprised to hear that Garfield did alot of his own stunts i know the stunt team has done alot but i know he’s under there as well and is doing some major swinging. P.S. I love the suit this movie will be epic.

    • Andrew is doing some major swingin under the suit. I hope he does some web swinging as well.

  6. I too like the poses that spidey is striking here…def more dramatic and organic looking

  7. The suit looks good. I am all for “real” action over CGI any day. I hope to get a trailer in the near future. That will tell the tale.

  8. Does anybody else think the costume looks…gay?

    • its a man in tights. this qualifies all superheroes, aside from those that wear armor, to look…fruity

  9. So far, so good. This looks awesome so far. This movie seems to be fixing everything I didn’t like about the Raimi films. The CGI spiderman was pretty to look at but completely unrealistic and videogamish. This is a huge improvement, and faithful to comic poses as noted previously. Tobey Maguire is a fine actor, however I did not like his pathos-laden Peter Parker. I read a review of Thor on Newsarama today that made an interesting point- superheros that seem to relish being superheros, whether saving lives, taking a spin in a sports car, or slicing up badguys (Wolverine, Iron Man, Leonides, here’s looking at you) make compelling movies, but superheros that are too angsty work better perhaps on the printed page in comics. If Garfield strikes the right balance of angst and hubris, and projects 200% exuberance when needed, I would predict this movie to be a hugely enjoyable and successful reboot.

  10. Gay? No it just looks different,on screen it may turn out to look better.

  11. Why are his eyes yellow?

  12. I wonder if they will airbrush out what appears to be the stuntman’s penis in that one shot?

    My general expectation for this film is very low, so it won’t be too difficult to impress me.

  13. I’m still snickering at “spider-junk”. If you got it? Flaunt it! lmao

  14. Practical stunts and (hopefully) effects = very good! I’m getting to the point that I’d rather see slightly crappy practical effects than great CGI. Whatever you may think of the costume, casting, etc, kudos to Webb for going old-school and giving us some movie magic in a movie where you’d least expect it.

    • They’re doing so much practical stunts as possible because of the low-budget.

      Raimi’s Spiderman web-swinging CGI will always be better because Spidey is not a typical human making stunts or Batman, a man with gadgets that enhance his powers. His body is sur-human having abilities like swinging so fast between buildings but manages to make typical poses and strengh that will ruin or kill anybody’s limbs. That’s Spiderman!

      I cannot imagine the stunt doing such perfect movements while in the air at such speed. And it’s narrowing the direction’s potential.

  15. “Spider-junk” haha! That’s a great laugh. I love that they are using as much of the stunt men and actors as possible. I keep forgetting about this movie though. I’m so excited for TDKR, MoS, and The Avengers that I often have to remind myself that Spiderman is also a must see…

  16. I’m glad they’re going for true live action, rather than the CGI Spidey route.
    I didn’t like how Spidey often would seem more like a bouncing rubber ball than an actual person with weight.

  17. This is more of what i have been wanting to see. I think spidey’s costume will look slightly better after lighting and etc. Plus Andrew Garfield is awesome

  18. i love practical effects when you can do them right, it just makes it more believable, and when they mix cg with practical as well.the less cg the better. and less action is most of the time better to have great action placed well is better. i think if they follow these rules and focus on character development and story then they will have something great.

  19. I’m glad that Marc Webb and Co. are looking to use more practical effects. Raimi’s Spider-man trilogy already looks dated because of the reliance on CGI. Seeing things done for real gives things a bigger sense of spectacle. Look back to The Dark Knight, where MOST of action was done practically, with CGI added in as an accent – not the main driver.

    Here’s to hoping more films go back to the approach of practical effects!

  20. I’m also in the same boat of the more I see the costume, the more I don’t like it. The front that keeps pointing to the “Spider-junk” (Great wording by Kofi Outlaw by the way. Hilarious!) is just awkward to me for any super hero costume. Peter Parker is suppose to be a teenage genius, not a high school meat-head that likes to point out he has a crotch all the time. But aside from that, I love everything else I’ve seen and heard about the movie. Especially these awesome looking shots. I’ll love this movie as long as it has a good story to back up the good promising photos.

  21. Practical effects are a plus. I am still dubious about that suit though. Don’t like those Nike looking shoes, so here is hoping that’s just for stunt and acting purposes. As Jack said, it does look like it’s pointing to his crotch.

  22. Nope. Costume looks SLIGHTLY better than Wonder Woman’s but that is the ONLY nice thing I have to say about THIS movie. Not.seeing.it.

  23. I’ve been on the fence about this, but this settles it. I’m legitimately excited for this film.

    • yh same here

  24. I thought most people thought the flying sequences in the other Spiderman movies looked too CGI. I agree.

  25. I wish them all the best… But you know that the CGI junkies still won’t be happy…..

  26. Call me a whining fanboy all you want but this looks horrible. Gold eyes? Racing Stripes on hipster skinny jeans? Ahh and the good ol practical vs CGI effects argument, to which I say, if the idiots at SONY weren’t in such a hurry to rush this movie to market to avoid losing rights they would be putting in ALL SORTS of CGI EVERYWHERE!

    Let’s be clear here everyone, this movie is a blatant rush job to retain rights to a lucrative character. The use of practical effects is simply a consequence of this rush job under the guise of artsy, gritty, & real. The Raimi films had years to perfect beautiful CGI effects.

    • You are a whining fanboy……

    • Where are those big menacing eyes that make Spider man the SPIDER MAN? I could overlook the other details of the coustume….but please please…could the coustume designer just make those eyes bigger and badder!:)

    • I won’t go so far as to label it as horrible but when I looked at the images I noticed the SAME exact things that bothered me. Namely the red “football uniform” stripe down the leg and the gold eyes. They just look stupid.

      You missed the gold booties though Dante! We can only hope those are in for the moment to keep the actual feet from wearing out and will be digitally replaced post production. If not it will be a decided buzzkill to the overall look/appeal.

      also is it just me or does the stunt double have a different body shape than Andrew Garfield? i.e. more short and stocky instead of thin.

      and EZ…..Your comment wasn’t cute nor clever. It’s nothing more than trolling and being an ass.

      • But he/she said “Call me a whining fanboy all you want…..”. I wanted to and I did. Nothing wrong with being a “whining fanboy”, I’ve been known to dabble in the odd ‘Xbox360 vs PS3′ argument.

        • Dude, you were being nothing but a smart ass so please stop trying to justify it. It’s called being a troll.

          • Okay??? I’m a troll then.

            • @Ezee-T yes you are a troll.

      • I saw the booties, I was just hoping they were for practical & not movie use as you suggest. I mean if Spidey is wearing sneakers in this sham…sigh.

    • Sorry,I love Movies,and I love good Movies,
      but it pains me everytime when I see this and think Sam Raimi could have done it !

      Will watch,but surely not forget what had could been with Raimi at the helm !
      Stupid reboot !

    • His eyes aren’t gold genius… that’s a reflection. However, I agree with you on most accounts. I’m completely unimpressed. This does feel like a rush job and that’s never good. It’s far to early to reboot this series and it feels pushed down my throat. This looks good as a tv show actually more so than a major motion picture.

      • Really, the eyes aren’t gold? Despite the fact that every publicity shot shows gold eyes? I suppose they’re just catching the light just so in EVERY picture right? Please…

      • They are gold.

  27. I’m in. I wasn’t looking forward to this film (too soon), but now it looks like it might get my vote… Looking forward to it.. let’s hope the story hits a home run too!

  28. i will watch this.
    i am fine with either web shooter. i know the mechanical ones are old school, but the internal physical fluid seems more in line with the other powers. i couldn’t understand him crawling on walls in the other movies if he had little thornlike things protruding from his fingertips, how would that work with gloves and boots on and how would that work on glass.?

    why isn’t the original tv show on dvd yet?

    • “why isn’t the original tv show on dvd yet?”

      Do you mean the live action one?