‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ Spoilers Discussion

Published 2 years ago by , Updated September 18th, 2012 at 8:09 am,

 The Amazing Spider Man Spoilers Discussion

While our readers are already talking about this movie in the comments section of our The Amazing Spider-Man review, this is the place where you can discuss Amazing Spider-Man spoilers without concerns about ruining the movie for people who haven’t seen it yet.

If you’re posting comments here, assume that anyone in the conversation has seen the movie – if you haven’t seen the movie, we would recommend you don’t read the comments here until you have. 

For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant team check out our Amazing Spider-Man episode of the SR Underground podcast.

We’ve set up a poll below where you can rate The Amazing Spider-Man for yourself. Other than that, feel free to discuss the film and all its surprises!

[poll id="341"]

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

293 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. Overall I felt the movie was great. It had it’s flaws, but I feel that it was better than Raimi’s first and on par/just below that of the second one due to the emotional factor and the more realistic tone of TASM.

    I’m really interested to see how much longer they keep Gwen around and how they will introduce Mary Jane. Whoever they chose to play Mary Jane will have to be a top knotch actress, because it will take great acting in order for audiences to understand and sympatheize with Peter’s position between the two girls.

    • I’m hoping they won’t bother with Mary Jane, we’ve seen that before. Sticking with Gwen would be a good way for this new trilogy to stand out just that little bit more from the old one.

      • i imagine this as a franchise that has 2 trilogies. the first trilogy being the parents and having norman osborn in the third film, gwen gets killed. a second trilogy could open up a different arc following from what was left behind. that would be interesting especially if it’s about symbiotes.

  2. Just saw The Amazing Spider-Man yesterday. All in all, I loved it. Although it had some issues, it was a great movie overall. I’d rank it higher than Spider-Man 3 (obviously, although I actually enjoyed SM3, albeit less than 1 and 2), and also higher than SM1. Compared to SM2, I still haven’t decided which I think is better, but its pretty damn close.

    This movie had a difficult task, as they were trying to restart a franchise that didn’t exactly need restarting. They were trying to make a Spider-Man origin story and superhero movie, but at the same time not make it repetitive. I think Webb/Sony overall succeeded.

    In my opinion, the high points of the movie were the cast, character development, tone, effects, and also the plot.

    Andrew Garfield was excellent as Peter Parker. He really looked, talked, and acted like a modern-day teenager. He successfully portrayed the awkward and quirky kid, and was able to be funny when needed, and brave when needed. He was able to give off the impression of a rebelling teenager who is missing his parents. At times it was hard to believe that he was being played by a 28 year old British guy.
    Emma Stone was also great. She played her role well and was believable as a smart, pretty, brave, and at times awkward teenage girl.
    Rhys Ifans was very good as the tragic villain of the Lizard.
    Martin Sheen and Sally Field were excellent, as usual.
    And Denis Leary was great as well.

    To me, the main difference between TASM and the Raimi trilogy was the tone and feel of the film. Looking back, the Raimi films seem so… old-fashioned. Don’t get me wrong, I loved the original Spider-Mans. I grew up on those movies. I even enjoyed #3, which I later bought on DVD. (It was a fun and action-packed movie, even though it was disjointed.) But he was still old-fashioned. What Webb did here with Spider-Man was modernize it. Peter Parker wasn’t a nerdy science guy who nobody talks to. Rather, he was a loner because he chose to be a loner. He was smart, sure, but more of a “cool nerd”, if that makes any sense.

    Anyways, his character was just a lot more relatable than Tobey Maguire’s Parker which in hindsight seems so old-fashioned outdated. This new Parker listened to his ipod. Used google to find out about his father. Talked on his cellphone, even in the suit. Rode around on his skateboard. And did other things that were classic teenager, like raiding the fridge and studying on the roof.

    Similarly, the love interest was also improved. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone was arguably the best part of the movie. Their awkward conversations, more mature moral debates, and intimate moments were so natural. Heck, at times when they were laughing, it looked like it was the outtakes, that’s how natural it was. (And Garfield and Stone are actually dating in real life now). And I liked how Gwen was not portrayed as a perfect, unattainable trophy girl, like MJ was. Gwen had personality and was equally awkward in the movie, which makes much more sense. And thank god Gwen wasn’t a hostage in the movie, like MJ was 3 times. That’s not an exaggeration. Mary Jane was literally taken hostage by Green Goblin, Doc Ock, and Venom. This movie wasn’t afraid to not conform to the superhero stereotypes. Similar to the Nolan Batman films, in which Rachel was only a hostage once, and she died.

    The effects were great as well. I saw it in 2D. And honestly, I’m not so well-versed in this area, so I’ll just leave it at “it was very enjoyable to watch.”

    But enough about my positive review of the movie. Time to get into what I didn’t like. Here, there were 3 general problems I had with TASM: (1) Deja Vu. (2) Scenes in the trailers that weren’t in the movie. (also the trailers gave away a lot). (3) Pushing things off for the sequel.

    The Deja Vu was predictable and for the most part unavoidable. Essentially, at many times in the film, it just seemed like we had seen this exact movie before. And to some extent, we had, in 2002. As I said, this was a necessary evil that Sony chose to take in order to reboot the franchise. Some of it was unavoidable, such as the spider bite, Uncle Ben’s death, and so on. But there were other moments, such as the Lizard talking to his evil self, which reminded me all too much of Dafoe’s Green Goblin. That just seemed WAY too familiar, and it wasn’t even so necessary to the story.

    In fact, the Deja Vu isn’t just for the previous Spider-Man movies, but for superhero movies in general. They seemed to have the same exact formula as every superhero movie ever created. True, they did break this formula a few times, like with the hostage thing I mentioned earlier, and also the fact that Spider-Man revealed his identity to Gwen, her dad, and Aunt May seemed to figure it out at the end, but other than that, it was very similar. But I guess overall the tone was different, and it was more grounded, modern, and relatable, which set it apart from Raimi’s trilogy, but not necessarily from other superhero movies.

    A MAJOR drawback for the film, for me at least, was the fact that there were so many lines and scenes in the trailers and clips that were not in the final product. Now, I don’t know whether this is normal and I just noticed it because I watched the trailers and tv spots too many times, or if they edited way too much out. Either way, I noticed, and I think a lot of other people did too. Here’s a few things in the trailers/clips, in no order whatsoever, that didn’t make it to the final product:

    -The doorman scene (I guess understandable. Not so necessary and it seems like a classic deleted scene.)
    -Some of the POV shots from Trailer 1 (Not necessarily a bad thing. They used it a few times in the movie and it worked well but honestly, that trailer looked like a video game.)
    -Some of the back and forth between Peter and Captain Stacy at the table. “Tell us about yourself,” “Not much to tell,” “Peter lives with his aunt and uncle,” (from trailer 1 and i think later trailers as well.) “What does your father do?” “I never knew my father” (from trailer 3, i think). (These aren’t so necessary to the plot, and I guess they needed to cut down time.)
    -Some of the back and forth between Peter and Gwen when she’s attending to his wounds. “You’re a wanted man, Peter Parker” “my father has … looking for you” “seems a bit excessive” (Again, not completely necessary)
    -Peter’s dialogue at the end of trailer 1. “We all have secrets…” (It’s possible that this was just recorded for the trailer)
    -Peter’s dialogue at the beginning of trailer 3. “This life is not an easy one…” (This one probably WAS just recorded for the trailer)
    -Connors saying “ready to play god” (although that might have actually been there. I dont remember)
    -Some of the football scene. “Wanna play football?” “too dangerous”

    And there were 3 lines by Dr. Connors that were all over the trailers and TV spots, and would’ve completely changed the movie, yet were NOT in the final product:
    -”If you want the truth about your parents Peter, come and get it”
    -”Did you think what happened to you Peter was an accident?”
    -”Do you have any idea what you really are?”

    With these 3 lines, it’s not like they were cut from the final product, so they took these lines out of the advertising. No, go and watch trailer 3. All 3 lines are there, and the 3rd line is clearly the climax of the trailer. In TV spots that are airing right now, all you hear is these 3 lines.

    Why am I so concerned about these lines? Well, I was expecting a slightly different origin story maybe where Peter was experimented on as a kid and the bite was just a trigger, but he had part spider DNA in him all along. I don’t know, something along those lines. This dialogue from Dr. Connors really suggests that there’s more to Spider-Man than meets the eye, but these lines weren’t even in the movie!!

    Now it’s possible that we WILL get this modified origin story, but not until the sequel(s). Which brings me to my 3rd point. I was kinda pissed that they pushed a lot off until the sequel. Now, it’s no surprise that Sony is making a sequel, especially since they need to release a Spidey flick every few years, but they could have at least made a complete story that doesn’t leave so many loose ends (why Peter’s parents left, are they really dead, what’s with the spider in the jar, who’s the man in the shadows, etc.) Batman Begins didn’t leave all these loose ends, and when I first saw it, I actually thought it was a prequel to the original Batman movies, leading into the Joker in Batman 1. But I digress. Anyways, it’s understandable that they wanted a sequel, but some parts seemed lazy, pushing off elements until the next movie. I hope TASM 2 is incredible, similar to TDK in the batman series.

    Other drawbacks were, as I said, the trailers gave away too much, like the antidote filling the sky, not the lizard stuff. And having the credits scene in the trailers (and even in TV spots!). Seriously? And pretty much every big action sequence was already shown in the trailers.

    And another drawback I’d like to mention is some minor character development, or just inconsistencies. It was never really explained how Connors goes back and forth from being a full blown lizard to a half lizard to a regular guy with no real rhyme or reason. It was also never really explained why Peter’s hands stuck to some things but not other things, and how he was able to control it.

    Wow, this is a long post. To wrap things up, overall I loved this movie. It did seem familiar at times, but it was a great addition to the superhero movie collection. The acting was fantastic, the movie was more modern and relatable, the tone was slightly darker, and it was an all-around enjoyable movie. Like I said, there were issues, but I believe that this will be a great new successful franchise.

    I’m not pro-Raimi nor pro-Webb. I’m pro-Spiderman. I liked the previous movies (even 3, to some extent). And I liked this one as well. No bitterness over the Raimi films being cancelled. And at the same time, not forgetting about them. I enjoyed all of these movies, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

    All in all, a great film. Not perfect, but one of my favorite superhero movies. Possibly cracks my top 5. (certainly top 7.)

    • You hit it dead on with my biggest issue.

      WHY DID THEY NOT EXPLAIN HOW HIS HANDS STUCK TO SOME THINGS THEN THE NEXT SCENE NOT TO OTHER PAPERS

      • umm thats comes to show how much you know abt spidey it has to do with molecule bonding and if you read the series peter doesnt really know either how he does it

  3. Oh, and regarding the end scene, I believe it was Norman Osborn. He sounded like Osborn sounds, at least the way Willem Dafoe portrayed him. The actor who played that character looks like Dafoe as well. And it would have to be a character who knows both Dr. Connors and Richard Parker well, and Osborn fits that description in this storyline.

    I know that he’s supposed to be dying, and he seemingly appeared and disappeared with the lightning in a maximum security prison cell. But it’s possible that the man was essentially Connors imaging Osborn. Connors is still somewhat insane and seeing things, and he believes that Osborn visited him in his cell. It would certainly explain how he got there and how he appeared and disappeared. And it doesn’t make the dialogue any less significant. Connors’s Osborn said exactly what real Osborn would say. It’s like Connors’s projection of Osborn. (Inception, anyone?)

    Or I could be totally off.

    • Ho tge he’ll cares if he looks or sounds like Wiilem Dafoe (which Michael Massee doesn’t really)? This is a completely different movie with no relation to Sam Raimi’s films. Also, Mark Webb and Rhys Ifans have both confirmed in interviews that it was not Osbourn.

      • (I assume that “Ho tge he’ll” means “Who the hell” in cellphonese)

        I know that this movie has no relation to the Raimi films, it’s just that when Massee said his lines, his voice and his style just sounded a lot like Dafoe’s Osborn in Spider-Man, so I was reminded of the Green Goblin. And as I said, Osborn would make sense is context, as he knows both the Parkers and Connors.

        But you’re right, Ifans did confirm that it’s not Osborn. (Couldn’t find anything that Webb said discounting Osborn. He was just mysterious.) So it seems like my theory is wrong, unless Ifans is trying to throw us off, or he doesn’t know the whole story.

    • i know how did osborn disappear in the cell?

      • what was spiderman pushing to make the webs come out?

  4. I thought the movie was great, it was very true to the original comics and i love the way they actually brought in more scientific reasons for connors transfornation and for peters transformation which makes it seem more realistic. Excellent performances from Garfield and Stone they had a lot of chemistry, and also from Martin Sheen, as he really had you emotionally invested in his character. Also Rhys Ifans confirmed that the man in the mid credits scene was not Norman Osbourne

    • I have to disagree with you on that one. There were aspects that were true to the spiderman comics. Webb has done well with incorporating Peter Parker as today’s “geek” however Peter Parker as a character vanished to me. Stan Lee thought of Peter as a geek but someone more real. Not many people can relate to Webb’s Peter. Not all geeks have skateboards, Peter defintely didn’t. Same as Raimi, Peter was never thought to have a scooter but it was geeky. The character was unrelateable in my opinion. Peter and Gwen’s relationship was perfect as well but again drifted away from the comics as Gwen knows he’s spiderman. This could of been made a lot better. I’m with ezra on this as well, i’m not pro webb or pro raimi but more pro spiderman. I’m proud to call myself a spiderman fan boy. Make a movie for the fan boys as well. Tell the Spider-Man story the way it was meant to be told. Not a made up untold story. The visual aspect of this film is amazing and thats what Webb has excelled in. I understand that Webb is under the impression there will be trilogy however I see this trilogy going the same place Tim Burtons Batman went. Remembered but not what Spider-Man stands for. Thats just my opinion.

  5. I thought the movie was great, it was very true to the original comics and i love the way they actually brought in more scientific reasons for connors transfornation and for peters transformation which makes it seem more realistic. Excellent performances from Garfield and Stone they had a lot of chemistry, and also from Martin Sheen, as he really had you emotionally invested in his character. Also Rhys Ifans confirmed that the man in the mid credits scene was not Norman Osbourne – http://www.examiner.com/article/rhys-ifans-reveals-who-was-not-the-amazing-spider-man-mid-credits-scene

  6. My 2 cents
    1. Couldn’t have Harry Osborne in this movie because Parker met Harry in College
    2. Guy in limo was left swinging but we can use logic to assume he escapes back to Oscorp
    3. Uncle Bens killer was left uncaught to give a sequel room to grow
    4. Osborn will probably not be GG until after a second movie.
    5. Shocker would be a cool villain because we can see him cause some earthquakes
    6. Mysterio would be cool
    7. Chameleon and Kraven (half brothers) would be a cool story line. Chameleon as working with or under Oscorp and having Kraven come in to hunt “the Spiderman”
    8. They didn’t change the “With great power comes great responsibility” that much. It was tweeked and that is frustrating but they did a good job explaining it.
    9. Only 5 people know Spidermans true identity. Captain Stacy (dead), Gwen, Aunt May, Curt Connors, and the little boy Spidey saved.

    • He met Gwen in college too (same issue as Harry as a matter of fact) so they could have had Harry.

    • Love the Cham/Krav idea. Also, at least one other person knows who Spidey is, that guy in the cell with Conners.

    • Unless I missed something Aunt May doesn’t know his identity. In the end when he gets home I thought it just showed how relieved he was to be safe and back after seeing all the craziness on the news.

      • That’s what iThought too, Aunt May was just relieved he came back in moderately good condition.

        PS: iWonder if Peter told anyone he got shot in the leg

      • I got the impression that she knows who he is. Just the way she acted at the end and there was the “hmmm” moment when Peter walked away from the TV as it was reporting about Spider-man.

        • She might have had a suspicion, but I agree with the others, there wasn’t really any indication that she knew, for a fact, that he was Spider-Man.

    • “Only 5 people know Spidermans true identity. Captain Stacy (dead), Gwen, Aunt May, Curt Connors, and the little boy Spidey saved.”

      Really, ONLY? He was Spider-man for what, a whole week and already 5 people know who he is (one whom he just decided to tell even before they kissed?) That’s a pretty damn big number for his first week. Plus you also missed the person Connors was talking to.

      • The whole reason so many people know his identity was b/c he didn’t put a priority on keeping it a secret until Cap Stacy died. Now he sees why he needs to keep it a secret.

        But Mongoose, you didn’t like this movie? They should have put Rocket Raccoon in it to save the day. Possibly the TMNTs should have joined him as well.

        I’m just joking. To each his own. I loved the movie though. I don’t care about staying true to the comics to a certain extent with the origins and a few other things b/c it was done in the 1960s. I just want as many Marvel movies as possible that are up to a certain level. When they butcher Ghost Rider it makes me cringe, but at least I get to see my characters on the big screen. Hate seeing origin stories repeated though.

        • Just because you don’t like the raccoon, don’t hate on others that do.

          As for the secret identity…..if his identity wasn’t so important then why would be have gone to all the trouble to order this zentai suit off off the internet? (which, in and of itself, was completely stupid) Felt to me like nothing but contrived plot devices.

          Revealing to Gwen – So they could “bond” over something and have her create the antidote to contribute to the plot resolution.

          Revealing to “Dad” – So they could change the heart of the guy who was on a jihad against him (because he was more important to get off the street than The Lizard?)

          Revealing to the kid – The one instance that was unimportant.

          Revealing to Connors/Lizard – Who the hell uses label tape anymore? This was a plot contrivance in the worst way to give the bad guys his identity. This one alone pretty much puts everyone Parker knows in danger.

          • He said he was joking about the raccoon bit.

          • I wasn’t hating. Said I was joking, messing with you. But don’t hate on those who liked ASM just b/c it didn’t stay true to every detail of the comic like you wanted it to.

            I would assume that concealing your identity would be mainly from the police. Wouldn’t you want to impress a girl you like with a super power? It explained well enough for me why he got the suit. He saw it in that old boxing ring and must have liked it.

            Maybe he got a label maker from his uncle or even father when he was a kid. Who the hell uses a 35mm camera either? Purests do. Actually, Peter uses a label maker in the comics as recently as the issue when him and Torch were rooming together.

            • Well the RR thing is a carry over from the GotG article and you were pretty forward in your dislike of the character/name and you didn’t seem to change your position so while it was a joke, there was some truth in there. Guess I’m just not a fan of button pushing.

              And I don’t hate anyone. I can either agree with someone’s opinions or disagree and then try to explain my position.

              Concealing your identity…….even this version of Parker should have some common sense (and I’m sure he has read comics) so you just can’t go around telling/showing everyone who you are because of the consequences. He covered up his face originally so the bad guys wouldn’t know who he was to come after him. There are enough identity plot holes in this movie without contriving more.

              And while a stick on label might have worked 40 years ago, someone today would have just ripped the labels off and kept/sold the camera. Considering he is Mr. techno genius, engineering and building his own webshooters, you would think he would have invented a micro tracking device so he can find it himself (if lost or stolen). They could have then tied that in with him turning that into the Spidey trackers. They could have had Connors finding the chip and tracing it back to Parker. Now THAT I would have bought.

              A retro camera is one thing but relying on a label to get his camera back is just a bad plot device.

              • Sorry man, I usually don’t like pushing buttons but I’m never usually serious. Which is weird b/c I don’t think RR is a good idea on the big screen. The joy of these comics and movies are that we can get together and disagree or agree about many things. That’s why I have read comics for 20 year on and off.

                I still think they made the identity thing work. Like I said, what better way to get a girl than to tell them you are a Super Hero? I mean, you’re ultra powerful and fighting for the common man. If that doesn’t land you a chick, she probably doesn’t swing that way.

                I see what you’re saying about the label maker, but I think that he has a thing for old gadgets. Seriously, if his dad or uncle gave him the camera & label maker, he has a strong attachment to it and would use it. And, he did just use it within the last 3 months in ASM, so it works for me. But, to each his own.

                Let me ask though, Mongoose, do you like Miles Morales? has nothing to do with anything except I’m curious why he is so popular. To be fair, I’ve never read any books w/ him in it out of spite except for the new Spider-Men.

  7. I just saw it yesterday and I have to say that the film was 95% great and 5% terrible.

    The film had me all the way until the scene where Spiderman gets shot and has to get to the Oscorp tower. Then, suddenly, too many convenient things happen in quick succession to get him there. The kid that he saved just happened to have a father who just happened to be a crane operator who just happened to have enough pull to convince the other crane operators who just happen to still be working after dark to move their cranes into position for Spiderman to get to the tower. That was just too much Deus Ex Machina for me.

    Otherwise, the film was practically flawless.

  8. I liked that he created his own web. Gives a little more dramatism, like in the comic books, when he rans out of it.

  9. I thought it was good not great but definitely had a better feel then the Raimi films.And i know Uncle Ben had to die but that scene was stupid.Why would he try to go after that gun? It had nothing to do with him.He should’ve just tried to get to a safe spot out the way of harm.And in this one you didn’t feel the pain as much when he passed like you did in the first Spider-Man.Damn i almost shed a tear myself when Pete was holding him after he was shot.But im still excited to see where they go from here but people who didn’t like those X-Men films i don’t think they will enjoy these.

    • I agree. Uncle Ben was stupid. There’s being responsible and being foolish. He could have lived to give a (better) description to the police. I suppose the carjacking in Raimi’s movie was similar but I could understand the impulse to keep your car a little more.

      Even the scene with the guy stealing had no resonance. How much was he stealing that anyone would be obligated to say something, knowing that anyone could be packing a gun? There was no build-up. Peter didn’t seem unduly put-upon in his life. In the other versions, he decides to be selfish and look out for his own interests, after enduring being bullied and ignored by his classmates, and seemingly abandoned by his biological parents. In the comics Peter is a “straight arrow,” wears a tie and gets good grades. With a little power he is free to rebel against the expectations he’s been relegated to.

      As I’ve thought about it, I think the ASM “origin” is still going on. Peter is not really going to have a change to a more selfish attitude followed by an epiphany. Instead he’s merely seeking the killer out of anger and revenge. In the movie he was only going after people who fit that description (must be a popular look in NY, and fortunately the suspect wasn’t part of any minority. That wouldn’t be an acceptable movie). In this version, the reason he goes after the lizard is because he feels responsible for giving Connors the formula (although his Spidey sense tingles at Gwen’s home and he rushes to the bridge, before he actually knew it was Connors). To me Peter came across as rather “affected,” like all his shrugging and stammering was in large part a “cute” act for Gwen. And maybe that’s what the director is going for; a more real and complex teenager who might feel some obligation, but isn’t above using his situation to impress his love interest (“oh my god, where did you get those scratches? Let me nurse you.”). It is a realistic take on an actual person and especially a teenager.

      Ultimately, It doesn’t work for me. Spider-man’s story to me works best as a comic-bookish melodrama. His story isn’t “realistic.” People really don’t have powerful life-changing epiphanies as much as they have proclivities along with gradual understanding (as in the ASM movie). But the original story works powerfully as a metaphor. Many people can realize, or simply have a sense, that they were self-absorbed and selfish when they are younger, and that they hurt people with or without thinking. I’ve always found Peter’s guilt relate-able, as well as his oftentimes neurotic struggle to do what’s right. He can be self-flagellating. Michael Chabon describes him as a “Catholic superhero” (Catholics being big on guilt).

      I think Raimi had a good handle on this. As much as people constantly whine about Tobey crying too much, there was a clear sense of melodrama to the movies. One of my favorite scenes is in Spider-man 2. Peter has lost his powers and is relieved, living a more balanced life. Suddenly he sees a guy getting beat up, repeatedly thrown against a wall and punched in the gut. Half the screen shows the scene, while the other half shows Peter’s troubled face. He’s torn between sticking his neck out and seeing to his own needs. It’s a comical scene. Peter has “inner turmoil” while someone nearby is physically getting the crap beat out of him. The audience of course is supposed to feel Peter’s pain and struggle, while the actual victim is merely another prop in the protagonist’s story.

      Raimi’s movies are what they are, love them or hate them. But they know what they are. They have a mature mind, direction, and intention behind every plot point and scene. Moreover, the ideas seem inspired by the actual Spider-man comics. Webb’s ASM does have some ideas, but they seem scattered and disconnected from the Spider-man story, as if he’s only imposing them on top of it as it exists, instead of really giving us his understanding of the story.

      People argue that Raimi’s movies are based on the 60′s comics, and that ASM is based on the 80′s, 90′s, and Ultimate line. That’s probably true. But I think what most people aren’t realizing is that those later versions were also inspired by the 60′s comics, and as such they can also be judged on their understanding. It’s like the majority of comic book art from the sixties was inspired by studying life and fine art, whereas the late 80′s and nineties saw a glut of art inspired by comic book art. A lot of it had an “inbred” quality to it, a misunderstanding of anatomy, perspective, and design. I think comic writing can be the same way, and now I’m saying the movies are that way too. The nineties also had artists inspired by comics, who educated themselves in the underlying principles. Same with the writing. But for me, Marc Webb’s ASM is more of the former.

  10. Sorry about the above essay, what I really came here for is to ask some questions about the movie in the spoiler sections.

    What happened to the SWAT team that turned into lizards? I saw them infected, and then cured, but there was no in-between. Are we to suppose they lay there convulsing the entire time before the antidote reached them? I was expecting them to terrorize the city a bit, but it seemed like that wasn’t included in the story more out of budget concerns more than any logic.

  11. The movie was pretty good but not great. It made the same mistakes tha Raimi made. Don’t use some new twist on Spiderman. Leave out the clone story (you know its coming) and new costume design. Raimi made the mistake of organic web shooters brought in by Cameron.
    Stick to the classic just like Superman. Brainy, scrawny kid that had to learn a hard lesson through personal tragedy. Keeps getting people he knows (friend or foe) involved in his storylines and has gut wrenching choices to make as a result. Uses his brain and tech to his advantage. Follow Nolan’s lead and present all the pieces and possible solutions during the movie so the audience is thinking and involved. Make it a complex and hard solution.

    One thing I will say about Raimi is that I believe he brought the idea to the big screen that the bad guy was a good guy at heart that had made a bad choice. This foe gets a second chance after coming up against the brain, brawn, and heart of the hero.
    Similarly one of the things that made Iron Man 1 was what Tony developed with Yensen in the cave. That is where the heart was in that movie. There was no development of the heart in IM2 and that is one major place it failed. Also the drunken humor reminded me of the dancing Peter Parker from SM3. Reminded me a bit of the offbeat humor in Evil Dead. Good humor but in wrong story. That light heartedness is just too much and reminds me of the story lines that developed when the comics code authority stepped in on comics and turned the away from real stories and into youth romances. Anyone remember Batmite?

    Avengers succeeded in my opinion because each had their fan base and they wanted to see the “classical” character interact with the others. Trust me, first time I saw it I found tons of flaws. Second time I saw it they all disappeared because the characters worked predictably and enjoyably together. I enjoyed the ride. Hulk… Nuff said. There was heart there too at the loss of a character, which I think could have been done in some other manner while still keeping that person alive. He was a great character. You should never kill a great character! Captain America’s costume needs work. Enjoyed seeing the armor come out of Thor’s costume and would have enjoyed more time on that. Too much sitting around thinking… These are men of action. Even while hesitating or thinking about something they need to be simultaneously doing something. Think Tony working on his jot rod from IM1. I.E. working on armor while debating direction, etc… Like a soldier thinking while under fire.

    So back to new Spidey… Lose the tennis shoe costume. Redesign it so that his feet can actually touch a surface through a special material. He can do it with his hands… Why not his feet? Keep him brainy developing his own tech. Slim up those webshooters. Don’t have him coming home like he got the @rap kicked out of him each day. Spider sense is supposed to help avoid injury right? Utility belt/pouch (think slim here like money belt) under clothing for back up shooters, alternative and spare webbing, and spider tracer (think detective storylines here), etc….
    Classic spiderman costume design. Leave Venom out of it and all newer characters. There is plenty of time to get into those stories later. Make Lizard look like Lizard. You want a good story look at Todd McFarlane’s Lizard/Kraven the Hunter storyline. Character manipulated by other characters. Also his Taskmaster/Mysterio storyline. Spidey on warpath, awesome! Todd’s dialogue needs work but the story concepts are solid.
    PS: Venom in SM3 was driven purely by fanboy request.

  12. @Jon: How can you say that the Lizard didn’t look like the Lizard? Aside from being a bit larger, he looks almost identical to the Lizard as Steve Ditko drew him. I’m so glad they didn’t go with the lame McFarlaine version with the elongated snout.

    As for the Lizard/Calypso/Kraven story, it took McFarlaine like 4 or 5 issues to tell a story that would take a better comicbook writer 1 or 2 issues to tell. Of course, your mileage may vary.

    Vintage Lizard:
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eJOeSpAQk8M/TtYeHd9EVzI/AAAAAAAAHbU/n_eDg1OMAbE/s400/steve+ditko+Lizard.jpg

    • Sorry but that Lizard looks nothing like the original “man-lizard” from the comics. I would suggest you examine the two side by side a bit closer. ;)

    • He looks similar but I wish he kept some clothes on *.*

    • I believe “identical” is a very loose term being used.
      Ditko was gecko-ish with more snout (as opposed to a human-ish nose in TASM), non human shaped eyes, and more or less a head that did not refer to human at all. I can’t say the same for TASM which is very “human” in the head. Eye shape, brow, jaw line, nose outline. He could have been a guy wearing face makeup and contacts.

      MacFarlane may be more alligator than friendly little gecko but he is supposed to be an adversary is he not? Why can’t he have the body of a predator and the mind of a mad scientist? Ditko had essentially no teeth and no claws. He’s like the Poison Ivy of adversaries all “green” and no mean.

      With regard to story length, I prefer a story that develops over many issues compared to one that resolves in 1 or 2. I believe that is why graphic novels are so popular. They are compilations of maybe 10 single books that put down a well timed and paced story. When reading the original single issues that make up a graphic novel coming to the end of a book and it being a cliff hanger is what makes the next book so good. Its what builds up in the audience’s… anticipation. There may be others that can “depict” the story in 1 book but they often lack drama and the ability to draw the reader in.

  13. In my opinion, this movie was rushed! I’ll start with the positives.

    Visually, its great! Gwen and Peter’s relationship, Gold! Emma Stone, Hot! That’s all the positives.
    I was actually disappointed with the storyline, the suit, the characterisation and like everyone else, the Lizard.
    “The Untold Story” aspect was not needed; I don’t think audiences really cared about an origins story for Spider-Man. For the fan boys, i.e. me, I hated it. Peter’s real story is to accept change and take you on his journey, this movie was made for audiences to believe that Peter was arranged to be spider-man, nothing like the comics. Spideys suit choice from ebay killed me even more. This basically opens up a gate to where you could pretty much find out who spider-man is by opening up his browsing data on the internet. They explain the web shooters but not spidey sticking to the wall. Again I’m left wondering. The decision to make Peter today’s geek was not thought well at all. In my opinion he was a tad bit emo/ geek/ skater. That aint peter Parker. Peter is a smart guy. He has wit and has charm. The big hair for Peter was a bad choice as well. How would you fit all that hair in a latex type mask so quickly? Again, another blank in the story. I did enjoy the smart ass Spider-Man though. Everyone has already summed up a lot in the story line although and a few of you have mentioned that its like the comics. In my opinion the storyline was nothing like the comics. It had aspects but was not like a comic, unless it was a Sony Comic. The burglar is Spidey’s first villain not the lizard. I was made to forget about it him and watch the development of the Lizard. The fighting scenes are excellent but it became too quick like as if they remember oh yeah we got a story to tell. The lizard looked like an acid burn victim who could not stop smiling. This could of been made more “amazing” but lacked it as Webb was more focused on the relationship building between Gwen and Peter. I wanted more out of it. I don’t think this is Marvel Material and certainly not on the same level as The Avengers. I’m seeing another reboot in the works which sucks as I’m a big Spidey Fan. I just hope its done right. I hope it will not only be made for all audiences but for the fan boys as well.

    • Ah the suit……worse still, once Spider-man becomes well known, all the people who made the suit have to do is look to see which one person ordered this seldom sold item from New York around the time of his appearance.

      Does no one even think about these stupid loopholes?

  14. Well I bit the bullet and, against my better judgment, saw TASM today. I didn’t think I could continue to discuss it w/o having seen it first hand. Unfortunately, there was little that changed my mind about how I felt about the basic elements of the movie/plot.

    Still hated the costume, the Lizard looked very CGI (I wondered if the same people who did Green Lantern did the Lizard….and Nostelg-O, you will be happy to know I kept seeing Voldemort in him! Especially that voice! >< ) and I thought Parker was just a punk, not the witty and thoughtful person from the comics but an emo punk kid with an attitude. The expected negatives aside though, I thought the story in general was decent except it was NOT the story of Peter Parker. It felt like XMFC all over again (but this time I paid the full admission price). Sony took the material and re-arranged/twisted everything to make it work in their plot. This is exactly why I don't want anyone but Marvel making movies about Marvel characters, because I'm tired of the source material being contorted and screwed with so badly. If Sony wants to make their own superhero, great but please stop playing musical chairs with the SM canon.

    *** spoilers below ***

    Specific sticking points for me:

    - Giving The Lizard a Snout would have made him much more terrifying, with a gaping maw that could take a chunk out of you.
    - Having it ALL be centered around Osporp, right down to the fact that Parker didn't even invent his own webbing, so has to rely on Oscorp to get his "supply"? /sigh While that's again clever to find another way to tie in with Oscorp, it's also lame because Parker didn't design it. He also never ran out which was disappointing.
    - Vilifying Parker in the eyes of the Police. This is Batman's side of the street and the cops ALWAYS thought of him favorably and thought JJJ was unjustly harsh. Which brings us to no JJJ.
    - Parker walking in and in less than 1 min (screen time) figures out the correct formula Conners has been searching for for 10 years in an afternoon? arg.
    - Parker literally revealing his secret identity to just about EVERYONE! unknown kids, girlfriends, police, the BAD GUYS?! Aunt May doesn't stand a chance.
    - Gwen able to just figure out the antidote formula in minutes? If only we "real people" had this amazing level of intellect.
    - No spider sense. I know it looked as if he had it on the train but getting shot? A ludicrous plot device and never should have happened.
    - The list does go on but that will suffice.

    I will say that the few combat scenes there were, were excellent and even better than the Spider-man 2 scenes with Doc Ock. The web slinging perspective was also breath taking. That's about all the good I can think of.

    • I can understand and agree with some or most of your points sir, but as for the fighting I still feel in terms of action the Raimi films are still superior. While we didn’t get tons of action Spiderman 2, the train sequence is still one of my favorite fights in a superhero movie and the other fight scenes at the bank and the warehouse are also incredibly well done. I did like the high school fight in TASM, but the sewer fight was way too quick and Sony pretty muched spoiled the end fight sequence by giving too much away in the trailers. Also on the end fight the coolest part was when Capt. Stacy came to help other than that I didn’t really think final fight was that climatic or epic any way. That’s my thoughts anyway

      • I just barely re-watched SM2 (yeah for TV airing it every other week) and while I really liked the action, TASM did a better job imho. A lot of that however is due to the improvements in CGI over the past 10 years. The best scene from SM2 was saving the train and there is nothing that compares in TASM to the sheer teeth gritting emotion involved in that scene. I don’t consider that really a part of the fight scenes though.

      • The Raimi movies, especially 2, have a lot of heart behind the fights. That, to me is what makes the movies rewatchable. It’s not unusual for any movie to have “good fights” and special effects. But they fade from memory without story and motivation.

    • I’m glad you saw it. That is good Mongoose. Gives you legitmacy. And I wouldn’t think a bit about “supporting” them. The way I see it, “time will tell.” So basically how much repeat business will the movie get? I’m not even limiting that to the initial BO run. But will the movie be bought, rented, and watched a lot in the months and years to come? Will people be talking about it in a positive way?

      Honestly, I think it will have a short painful life, showing fits of promise. It’s no Batman Begins, but it’s not exactly Superman Returns. The closest comparison might be Incredible Hulk, a movie that comic book fans seem to love, but didn’t excite the general public so much. Even that isn’t a perfect comparison. This property has the “rights” Albatrose around it’s neck, so Sony has to go forward (not that they shouldn’t).

      I like XMFC, and of course I love the Raimi movies. I think most fans seem to rate these movies based on the amount of fidelity to the comics or simply if they like what is done with characters, design, and action. I think I want a good solid movie. I didn’t like Raimi’s interpretation intially, but over time I’ve changed my attitude. I can accept it for what it is, and I think it does what it intends to do very well.

      I don’t have problems with the details of ASM. Well, I do. Some. But I could accept it if the movie was good. Nolan and Raimi made movies that feel like unified visions. All the parts fit, and they have the distinctive mark of the directors. The scenes, dialogue, the silent expressions, the music, costume and set design, all work toward the given story. ASM just seems all over the place. It’s wants to have the “hard candy shell” of the Spider-man story, with the “gooey center” of a indie-romance-character-study. It slowly tells it’s emotional story, and then short-changes the main plot. Like what happened to the SWAT team? It would have explained why Spider-man was the only one who could have saved the city if the rest of the police were battling an army of lizard SWAT. Instead, you have to ask why a helicopter didn’t shoot the lizard off the top of the tower (and just keep shooting him). The movie also wants to be “realistic” introducing nuanced motivations, supportive shoes, and web swinging that takes energy, distance, and parabolas into account. I’m not opposed to a little “realism.” Raimi created a cartoony world where you could get away with a lot. To much “reality” opens it up, fairly, to plot-holes and inconsistencies. It can be done, but I don’t think this “Universe” is very solid or well thought-out.

      Oh well, I’m getting over my initial disgust. If people like it, then good for them. I’m glad I’ve got a great version that Raimi made, and maybe this series will come out stronger in the sequel.

    • @mongoose: I’m not gonna go through all of your points, but regarding “Parker walking in and in less than 1 min (screen time) figures out the correct formula Conners has been searching for for 10 years in an afternoon? arg.” So, I’m pretty sure he didn’t figure out the formula on his own. He saw the formula in his father’s secret files and I guess he memorized it. Then we he saw Connors was working on the same problem, he helped him out.

      • I noticed that too. Did he copy and take credit, or did he tweak it? Do we know?

      • But there was that 1 min screen time where they were working on a virtual screen and mouse and had like 5 failures and then success. They did make it appear as if Parker was at the controls and Connors was in more of a consulting capacity. The point is, this should have taken more time but I guess super geniuses only need a few hours.

        • Yeah lets make a movie of 10 hours on the two scenes. 5 hours for figuring out the formula and another five to make it work. How interesting that would be.

  15. The lizard is such a great villain, especially in the recent sagas, because he has made it his life’s goal to convert as many people to their reptilian instincts. He is a brutal killer and the animal eventually takes over. I hope they take him further. The books around the “Big Time” story with the lizard were amazing. I have the new one that was out last week but haven’t gotten to it yet.

  16. The movie was pretty good but not great. It made the same mistakes that the Raimi movies made. They should both stay away from a new twist on Spiderman. Leave out the clone story (you know its coming) and new costume design. Raimi made the mistake of organic web shooters brought in by Cameron.
    Stick to the classic character just like they need to do with Superman. For Spiderman a brainy, scrawny kid that had to learn a hard lesson through personal tragedy. Keeps getting people he knows (friend or foe) involved in his storylines and has gut wrenching choices to make as a result. Uses his brain and tech to his advantage. Follow Nolan’s lead and present all the pieces and possible solutions during the movie so the audience is thinking and involved. Make it a complex and hard solution.

    One thing I will say about Raimi is that I believe he brought the idea to the big screen that the bad guy was a good guy at heart that had made a bad choice (think Sandman). I like this take on the bad guy. This foe gets a second chance after coming up against the brain, brawn, and heart of the hero.
    Similarly one of the things that made Iron Man 1 was what Tony developed with Yensen in the cave. That is where the heart was in that movie. There was no development of the heart in IM2 and that is one major place it failed. Also the drunken humor reminded me of the dancing Peter Parker from SM3. Reminded me a bit of the offbeat humor in Evil Dead. Good humor but in the wrong story. That light heartedness is just too much and reminds me of the story lines that developed when the Comics Code Authority stepped in on comics and turned them away from real stories and into youth romances. Anyone remember Batmite?

    For reference, Avengers succeeded in my opinion because each had their fan base and they wanted to see the “classical” character interact with the others. Trust me, first time I saw it I found tons of flaws. Second time I saw it they all disappeared because the characters worked predictably and enjoyably together. I enjoyed the ride. Hulk… Nuff said. There was heart there too at the loss of a character, which I think could have been done in some other manner while still keeping that person alive. He was a great character. You should never kill a great character! Captain America’s costume needs work. Enjoyed seeing the armor come out of Thor’s costume and would have enjoyed a few more seconds on that. Too much sitting around thinking… These are men of action. Even while hesitating or thinking about something they need to be simultaneously doing something. Think Tony working on his hot rod from IM1. I.E. working on armor while debating direction, etc… Like a soldier thinking while under fire.

    So back to new Spidey… Lose the tennis shoe costume. Redesign it so that his feet can actually touch a surface through a special material. Frankly I like the Raimi costume minus the organic shooters. As far as sticking to walls he can do it through his gloved hands… why not his feet? Keep him brainy developing his own tech. Parker is supposed to be a kid genius after all. Slim up those webshooters. Don’t have him coming home like he got the @rap kicked out of him each day. Spider sense is supposed to help avoid injury right? Utility belt/pouch (think slim here like money belt) under clothing for back up shooters, alternative and spare webbing, and spider tracer (think detective storylines here), etc….
    Classic spiderman costume design. Leave Venom out of it and all newer characters. There is plenty of time to get into those stories in later movies. Make Lizard look like Lizard. You want a good story look at Todd McFarlane’s Lizard/Kraven the Hunter storyline. Character manipulated by other characters. Also his Taskmaster/Mysterio storyline. Spidey on warpath, awesome! Todd’s dialogue needs work but the story concepts are solid.
    PS: Venom in SM3 was driven purely by fanboy request. Better character development in the other two characters would have been more than enough for that film.

    • Also, slow up the action so we can see the great moves being done.
      This is the same thing Bruce Lee had to do so the Western audience could see the beauty of the fighting and understand who was doing what.

  17. I have to put my thoughts to rest about this movie. I hated it for more reasons than one. I’ll try to list whatever I can remember as I tried to drown out the memory with alcohol afterward while thinking about the $20 D-Box ticket I flushed down the toilet.

    -An hour into the movie and still NO SPIDERMAN. REALLY?

    -The score was quirky and distracting.

    -The actress who played Aunt May was so bad she seemed disconnected from anything going on in the scene. The character did nothing to move the story along, she just sniveled in the background.

    -Too many plot holes and bits that went absolutely nowhere: the skateboarding, the bending of the goal post with a football, the basketball bit, the citizens/swat team turning into lizards, the connection to Peter’s parents and his mutation, etc.

    -Peter stole his webbing instead of designing it himself.

    -If all it took was one of those spiders that spin webbing cable to turn Peter into Spiderman then Why was it never addressed that there are hundreds more in OsCorp?

    -Showing up at Gwen’s house injured only to want to make out with her for 5 minutes.

    -The oments of pretend chemistry between Peter and Gwen (“Let’s get ouuut of here”-shakes head insanely)

    -The crane operator calling his buddies in the middle of a city wide evacuation and asking them to put their lives on the line to operate several cranes (cranes that happen to be on every building on the way to OsCorp). That entire scene was right out of a Spiderman video game mission (way to go guys, real original)

    -If Spiderman can stick to surfaces then Why did Connors have to save him from falling off the OsCorp building? The same building He ran up to begin with.

    The fight scenes were good and the swinging was cool also a few other scenes, as a whole it still doesn’t qualify as a SUCCESS as most sites are claiming. I don’t feel it justifies a 3.5 out of 5 star rating. With all the buzz this movie is getting I feel major let down by my peers.

    ‘The Amazing Spiderman’ managed to make Raimi’s ‘Spiderman’ look better in my eyes.
    That is all.

    • Agree! Preaching to the choir! It justifies 3.5 out of 10. This movie and Prometheus has left me with a lot of unanswered questions.

  18. From watching the movie, I got the feeling that Peter Parker is a clone of his supposed father, Richard Parker; in this version of the Spiderman story. This is mostly from clues like him finding his father’s glasses and realizing he has the exact same vision as him; his parents leaving their child behind so easily without much of emotions (they are leaving an experiment subject behind rather than their actual offspring); the whole reason of his parents leaving and never appearing in front of him (as Peter would then realize they look exactly the same when grown up). Additionally, while I haven’t seen the trailers, but if it’s true that these lines were originally in the movie:
    -”If you want the truth about your parents Peter, come and get it”
    -”Did you think what happened to you Peter was an accident?”
    -”Do you have any idea what you really are?”

    Then it’s even more supporting points that it is the case. (“what you really are”, instead of “who you really are”, suggesting he’s an experiment subject; or “what happened to you was an accident”, suggesting him surviving a genetically-modified spider bite and gaining abilities while not transforming could be because he had special genes in him when cloned)

    Anyone else think this might be the case?

    • Wow, that really explains a lot. It just sucks how they cut out so much from the movie, like when Ratha goes into Connor’s lair in the sewers. There’s still a lot of questions left unanswered.

      -What is the connection between Peter’s parents and Oscorp?
      -What happened to Uncle Ben’s killer?
      -Whose the “man in the shadows”?
      -What role will Norman Osborn play?

    • Also if this theory is right, him leaving his bloody hand print behind would serve as an evidence that someone (good or evil) can use later on to prove that he was a clone of Richard Parker.

    • Hmmm. Very interesting theory. I really like it and I think it would make a lot of sense and tie up a lot of the loose ends. However, the only issue I see with this is if we find out in the next movie that Peter is not actually human, i feel like it will be much harder for the audience to relate to him. I don’t think any of us has any idea what it feels like to suddenly find out one day that you were never actually born, but rather you’re a science experiment created in a lab.

  19. as much as I loved this movie, the only character I couldnt see being replaced was Cliff Robertson from the first Spiderman movie by Raimi. Martin Sheen was great but not as good as Robertson

  20. I believe he just copied it. People were saying how much smarter he was than Tobey’s spiderman when he actually was copying a lot. He didn’t know what the formula meant he did research on it and taught himself about the formula in general.

  21. I think he copied it. It seemed like he found his fathers briefcase found the formula then taught himself the basics of the equations through Dr. Connors book. People were saying how much smarter he was than Tobey’s spiderman but I disagree. He wasn’t really overly smart. Tobey’s spiderman was talking to Doc Ock pretty smartly throughout sp2. Garfield’s just took his fathers formula. Spiderman should have been released before the Avengers.

    • I totally said that during the movie, I was like really, you copied your dads formula and took credit for it, that was so out of character to me.

      And yes I agree Tobey’s SM was smart too, this movie just showed it more wit all his gadgets and making his web shoots, even though he based it off of Oscorp tech, which, i dont know, I thought in the comics he made a bunch of different trials from scratch to resemble spider web.

  22. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM, DENNIS LEARY DID ACTUALLY SAY IN THE MOVIE THE LINES ” THIS CITY NEEDS YOU, PROTECT THEM”. CORRECT, I SWEAR HE DID.

  23. Is it just me or did the Lizard look a little like this guy from Battle Beyond the Stars.
    http://watikalemon.com/watikalemon/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/battlebeyond6.jpg

  24. If TASM does involve the clone storyline I don’t think Marvel would have chose it if they were making a reboot. The clone stories were a mess a did a lot of damage to the spidey backlstory integrity and upset a lot of faithful spidey followers. But in comic book form they brought in a bunch of money and maybe that is why Sony chose it.
    Check Wikipedia to read about the whole clone mess…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clone_Saga

  25. Okay, Loved the movie. But lets talk post credits scene. Who was that? My guess? Morbius the Living Vampire. He seemed incredibly fond of the shadows. This is most likley just for dramatic effect. Actualy that’s what it is for. But that’s just what I though would work for his character. Also the possible back story for him would work just perfectly. Okay, so what could have happened was that Michael Morbius was working with Connors and Richard Parker during the cross species project. He wanted to use bats instead of lizards or spiders. Parker and Connors say no because what he’s planning wouldn’t work. He then decides to do the project himself. He breaks into Parkers house and takes what he needs ( the opening scene). Morbius then test it on himself and becomes the Living Vampire. Connors may have came across him at some point and knows how dangerous he can be. Which eplains why he seems so frightened of him.
    Spider-Man then tries to fight Morbius but ends up losing multiple times. He then gets help from Connors via him becoming the Lizard and the both of them fighting Morbius together. (Happened in the comics)

  26. Likely the guy at the credits was Electro, which may point to the Sinister Six in a later movie and each of them appearing in earlier movies individually (similar to how Avengers was built up by previous movies). As others have stated the mysterious character appears and disappears at the same time as when lighting strikes.
    Maybe they are planning on their own Avengers-like ensemble cast movie? But the ensemble is Spidey against six baddies!

  27. Starting to feel like Im one of the few that didnt enjoy this movie that much. To be honest, Im still not sure how I feel about it.

    When I first heard about the reboot, the first thing i said was, “Im not sure how I feel about this.” And after seeing the film yesterday the first think I said was, “Im not sure I how I feel about this.”

    Dont get me wrong I liked it, I enjoyed it.. something was just off… and it has nothing to do with the Sam Raimi films. Just, IMHO they missed a big boat with this movie.

    I couldnt shake the fact that from the start I never felt like i saw a real Curt Connors.. it was bothering me so much it was distracting. When they were in his home the first thing I said was, “where the hell is his family.” Because truly there is no Curt Conners without his family. His family was always the thing that kept him from giving into the beast, at least thats how I felt reading the couple of comics I read. Im not sure if they stated something about them in the film, I may have missed it, but this movie was basically about family and the lose of them, they even used the man whos son was saved on the bridge to empathize this, but really, the main villain has NO family. When his true character is so driven by them, how did that happen.

    Theres no way this script was written without his family involved, I feel as though they were removed in a rewrite. I just feel like, yes people wanted lizard, but should they have gave us him? I dont think so my self. they could have waited for a sequel, establish the character, it would have been a lot more emotional. Knowing, yeah Pete dont hurt him, its still Doc Connors, you gotta save him but stop him from killing people. In this I didn’t care enough about him. IT was almost like he was just filling in the villain role. Yeah, the villain does fill the villain “role” but I shouldn’t notice, I should feel like he’s a character i need to care about, and I didn’t.
    Plus I wasnt completely with the fact they kinda made him go crazy, that too felt off, he willingly wanted to make everyone Lizards, usually its Curt thats against it and Lizard whos trying to make him. I never felt they were two different people/things.

    Theres a lot that bothered me, but that was the tip of the ice berg.

    Pete using his powers on several occasions at SCHOOL, just was off to me, yeah hello, that guy is totally spider-man. Felt like I was watching Smallville for a while, like really, you didnt notice what he just did lol smh

    They did a good Flash, but his random change into Peters friend midway was so random.. sorry, I nitpick EVERYTHING..

    I love Denis Leary in every role hes in lol.. Capt Stacy death was interesting to me, probably the most interesting part of the movie next to Peters parents.

    All in all, it was a good movie, imo though, they missed the boat they could have introduced a good amount of characters for this universe, half of them could have worked at OsCorp lol And no Harry, really, I know they want to go a different direction, but milk is still milk no matter what cereal you pour it on. But you cant have Norman and no Harry, complete fail to me.. okay I feel like I ranted and was being over judging, maybe Ill watch it again to see how I feel. Sorry if this is too long.

  28. I absolutely loved this movie (of course since I love spider-man, I’d probably say that regardless)! As to everyone saying that a lot of the story seemed like it was repeating Raimi films, it didn’t. It was using the source materials from the original comics (which were written decades before Raimi’s Spider-Man). I actually cared about this Peter Parker and enjoyed the dialogue a lot (as opposed to the Raimi films, were I was just waiting for spidey to fight the main villain), and he was HILARIOUS as spider-man, wisecracking jokes every chance he got. One thing that annoyed me was that the lizard could simply regrow any injured part of himself, like his tail. Science fact here: to make something you have to something to make it with. Where did all the tissue come from that regrew every injured part (alright, there’s my science rant. I’m done with that now)?

    As for the sequel, what I would like to see is some of Norman Osborn, but not as the main villain, as more of a behind the scenes pulling the strings kinda character. That way we can have Green Goblin for the third film. As a main villain for the sequel, I think Electro would be cool, because then it wouldn’t be brute strength vs brute strength, it would have more chances for spidey to show off his sciencey smarts.

  29. I don’t know if it has been said before, but i am still going to say it: 2016.
    It actually was pretty obvious to me, so let’s count the facts:
    1. The Amazing Spider-Man is officially a part of a trilogy.
    2. The second movie is coming out in 2014, so let’s say the third one could come out in 2016.
    3. Gwen’s flat is 2016, a bit too random to be unimportant.
    Either i am thinking too much, or this actually means something. Probably Gwen will die in the third movie, which will come out in 2016. So i don’t think they will have the Green Goblin as the villain for the second one, but for the third one, which means the guy with Connors wasn’t Norman.

    Anyways, i absolutely LOVED the movie. I actually think this served as a better first part of a series than Raimi’s. What i didn’t like though is how much time it took them to get to the Spider-Man stuff. The first 20 minutes or so you could have thought you were watching a rom-com… though it has it’s good sides. For example, it’s better for people who aren’t that much into comic book movies..But The Avengers proved it doesn’t really matter, so i hope Sony will learn for the sequel. The effects were awesome and i really liked the way they made the relationship between Peter and Gwen. I think everybody would have liked this movie much more if there wasn’t a Raimi trilogy…