The Amazing Spiderman Movie (May have spoilers ahead)

[generator_g1]

Just got back from seeing the movie. Andrew Garfield was great as Peter Parker without the angst and Stan Lee's cameo is probably his most funniest one yet. Although they changed some details (Uncle Ben's death for example), they still work and it's a good thing that the people of NYC can rally behind Spidey instead of being against him. I didn't even miss the Daily Bugle....

[mr friendly guy]

There is only one question I want to know. Should I see it in 2D or 3D?

[Stofsk]

The word I've heard is see it in 2D.

[evilsoup]

That's always the right choice.

[mr friendly guy]

2D it is then. Although the 2 movies who I felt 3 D enhanced it, were Avatar and Flying swords at Dragon gate. The others including clash of the titans were meh.

[Zinegata]

It was actually pretty decent; and yes also watched it in 2D.

[Moby Halcyon]

I saw the 3D - the movie was filmed in it, but the punch doesn't come until the final crane sequence leading up to Oscorp tower, which - for me - was worth the price of the 3D alone. Fortunately, I work at the theater and don't pay for tickets, but the swinging sequence was great.

[Havok]

Yeah, why would you want to watch a character like Spider-Man in 3D. That is just silly.

[Nephtys]

Ehh. The movie was kinda meh. I was entertained, but a few things bugged me.
Spoiler

1. Chekov's Gun over/misused. The aerosol chemical weapons/vaccine device, cold blooded lizards. Even a speech about 'too bad we can't use this device, since even unwilling people can't outrun a benevolent cloud', etc.
2. Shit spelled out for the audience. Giant repeated 'LIQUID NITROGEN' in shot so you could know what it was? A huge american flag behind the guy who rallied the construction workers for spiderman?
3. Why was Gwen, a high school student, working in a high profile corporate lab with apparent access to a vaccine machine that can also make biological weapons? Also, why does it have a very dramatic bitching betty voice to remind you that a vaccine still has 5 minutes to cook?
4. Peter Parker is suddenly on alright terms with Flash and the school later in the movie? Why? HOW?
5. How doesn't everyone notice Peter's obviously got superhuman reflexes and strength? He severely dents a football goal after throwing a football at it from like 40 yards away! He smashes glass by accident and tears off a steel pole from the subway!
6. ...he uses BING to search for things?
7. Gwen and His relationship didn't make any sense. So he stutters a few times, then random high school stuff kicks in? Kaaaay.
8. Gee Whiz, thanks Doc, for accepting a really rather rudimentary equation with a logarithm and some factorials in it, glancing over for a half second and going 'why, that's it! Let's take it to the lab where I have an overly fancy hologram'.
9. So... Oscorp has a factory that breeds spiderman-causing spiders? what the hell?
10. Yes Doc. Go inject yourself with a compound that only was first tested on mice abut an hour ago. While alone in a dark office. Nothing could possibly go wrong with that.

[Superman]

Hey guys, I haven't posted in a while so I thought I'd start back in this one. I think I have to agree with Nephtys. It wasn't bad, but I didn't think it was good either. Some scenes were great and others were boring and made the movie drag. And did anyone else think the CG was really bad? What was the deal with that?

[CaptainChewbacca]

The one thing I dont understand is how did Peter know the sample number for the antidote? Was he working at oscorp for a while, or was it a one-time thing?

[Jim Raynor]

I just saw this movie today (can't believe how "late" it feels for a Saturday, due to the movie's extra early Tuesday release), and I have to say that I enjoyed it very, very much.

It's hard to separate this movie from the still fairly recent Raimi version that came out "way back" in the year 2002. That was one of the greatest movie experiences I've ever had, since it came out at EXACTLY the right time for me. I was the same exact age as Peter was in that movie, and the idea of him learning to be a man as he, Harry, and MJ went into the big city to strike their own path spoke directly to me. That movie, the first HUGE hit in the recent superhero blockbuster genre, basically codified my beliefs about what a superhero movie should be like. So when I heard that they would be rebooting this project just 5 years after Spider-Man 3, I also had the feeling that it was "too soon." The trailers, and the marketing of this movie as a darker and edgier take on the character, also made me wary. I considered rewatching the 2002 Spider-Man movie before going to the theater to see Amazing, so that I could compare all the differences. But I eventually resisted that urge so that I could judge this film on its own merits as best I can.

To be honest, even with all the differences this almost feels like the same movie as the 2002 version. The "darker and edgier" stuff was practically false advertising, and unnecessary false advertising at that. All the classic beats are there: Peter being a nerd who's picked on at school, him getting his powers and having fun testing them out, Uncle Ben's death, the kindly mentor who becomes a crazed villain, Spider-Man turning away his love interest out of a feeling of responsibility, etc. This movie had a surprising light and fun tone, and was in some ways LESS melancholy than the 2002 version. This was a straight Spider-Man adaptation, right down to his portrayal as a bright superhero who wisecracks and inspires people. There really isn't that much of a difference between Amazing and its predecessor, and the movie doesn't do a whole lot to refute the feeling that it's "too soon." In its defense, I will say that I don't consider that to be a horrible thing either. I think I would have been far more displeased if this movie actually was a lot darker, doing too much to change things just to justify its existence.

So what was different this time? For one, Peter Parker was somewhat of an admirable hero in high school even before he got his powers. He was someone who stood up for the little person, even if all he could do was get himself beat up instead. Peter seemed like a well-adjusted and friendly guy, not the brooding loner portrayed in the trailers or the cripplingly shy nerd that Tobey Maguire played.

In a way he was a bit too well-adjusted; his confrontation with Flash Thompson in this version was far less violent or objectionable than the 2002 fight. So was his argument with Uncle Ben, shortly before Ben's death. The robbery victim that Peter chooses not to help was also just some jerk cashier who was rude to him, and not a money grabbing wrestling promoter who stiffed him out of thousands of dollars. In the 2002 movie, I could really see Peter getting too selfish and full of himself. In this one, he only made a couple brief bad decisions, that didn't sell me as much on the idea of Peter going down the wrong path, shortly before Ben's death sets him straight.

The romance with Gwen Stacy here was more well done than the 2002 romance with Mary Jane. Here, Gwen and Peter actually have a personal connection and relationship throughout most of the movie. They banter, and Peter even confides in her. On the other hand, the MJ romance was mostly him pining after her from a distance, or charming her while hiding behind the mask of Spider-Man. I liked the way that Gwen came across here, as someone who worried about him but was always supportive.

Curt Conners finally got to be the Lizard after a decade of teasing. I thought that he was a pretty effective villain. All of the movie's additions to the Lizard here really made him seem like a much more formidable foe than I can remember ever thinking of him as. This guy was a hulking beast who made Spider-Man look like a weak little kid. The healing factor that they gave him was a nice touch, as was his portrayal as some kind of biological terrorist. One thing that I didn't like was his humanlike face, and the old man voice that they gave him. It seems like they strangely wanted to give Rhys Ifans some pseudo "face time" or something even when he was the lizard, by modeling the creature's appearance after him (it didn't work with the Rock way back in The Mummy Returns, and I don't think it was needed here). I would've preferred a more traditional reptilian snout, and a more frightening voice for him. Strange how they get so many things right in the portrayal, but fall short on a few cosmetic things like that. Reminds me of the way that Raimi's Green Goblin, with his goofy looking armored mask, came across.

Overall, I thought this was a great movie that was faithful to the source material, exciting, and emotionally moving. It didn't really tread any new ground, but that's no serious crime to me. It did quite a few things better than the Raimi version did, and nailed the character and his world just as much. Out there, there are lots of kids seeing this as their first Spider-Man movie. I have no problem with that.

Rating: 9/10

And one last thing, the post-credits scene:
Spoiler

I was absolutely SURE that they would show Norman Osborn injecting himself with a modified version of Dr. Conners's formula, setting him up as the Green Goblin. But that's not what happened. Who the hell was that guy who visited Conners in jail? The credits only call him "Man in the Shadows."

[CaptainChewbacca]

In the last scene I think Spoiler

The man in the Shadows is Morbius

[streetad]

Spoiler

I assumed it was Norman Osbourne. Connors knew him and it was implied that he was involved in the death of Peter's parents.

I couldn't help wondering what film Tony Stark would make of 17 year-old scientific genius Peter Parker. I'm sure there's be a job there for him if he wanted it.

[Superman]

In the last scene I think

That's a pretty good guess.

[Havok]

Doubtful. Why would Morbius know or have anything to do with Peter's parents and their true fate. They made it clear in the movie that Osborne was responsible for what happened to them, so I would say it was him.

Anyway, just saw it and minor nitpicking aside, I thought it conveyed Spider-Man perfectly. Just the right amount of snarkyness, to the point where he borders on out right being a dick.

I also thought the casting was excellent as far as Parker and Stacey go and they definitely had much more charisma and chemistry than McGuire and Dunst. I also really liked their silly attempt at setting up a date with each other in the school hallway. I thought it captured their youth and reminded us that they are indeed teenagers (and actually looked the part to boot)

What I didn't like was the Lizard design... at all. It looked really bad and just kept pulling me out of the movie.
Also, killing Capt. Stacey I didn't like and it really takes away from the promise Peter makes to him, only to have him decide to break it. They should have let him live and had Gwen break the promise or talk him out of it if they didn't have the intention of having Peter ostracize her for her own protection.

One thing I did note was that the producers gave the setting the same feel as Iron Man and the Avengers movies had with the obviously way ahead of our time tech, and even though it isn't the same studios, it feel like I was looking at the same universe. Things like the semi-futuristic looking buildings and the holographic interfaces to name two.
The way the populace of New York acts towards Spider-Man, you could easily make the case that it is due to the previous antics of the Avengers, or maybe just Iron Man, already being accepted by the public. Also, New York seemed to evacuate like motherfuckers and without any fuss. A by product of the Hulk already having "broke Harlem".

Overall, not the best Spider-Man movie, but definitely the best representation of Spider-Man on the big screen IMO.

[PainRack]

I been hearing that the relationship between Gwen and Parker is one of the few parts of the movie that made this noticeable compared to the 2002 movie?

So.... what's your recommendations? I been getting mixed reviews and thought I just asked a couple of science fiction nerds instead:D

[InnerBrat]

I thoroughly enjoyed it, but only in a "so bad it's good" way. I honestly spent the entire time laughing in despair and at one point I think I scratched my eyelids trying to claw out the science. If you have a good suspension of disbelief, I'm sure it's very enjoyable, but I don't recommend it for:

1) People who have been to New York. (Coney Island is in Queens and you can see the Empire State Building from it - is the one I remember most strongly.
2) People who have experience in science - not in a movie pseudoscience way, but in a 'that's not how science works' way (the organization of the research lab; a self-defined herpetologist doing no actual herpetology (and getting very simple things wrong) and talking about things that actually exist in ways that made it sound like it was a NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY IDEA. (Seriously, guys. Gene splicing exists. Crack open Wikipedia)
3) People who are aware of existing Spider-Man. I mean, com'on, if there's one superhero character who didn't need Daddy Issues...

I will say this:
All the actors were great, and in one scene, Spider-Man's banter and his 'friendly neighborhod'ness was perfect. However, you can see that scene in the trailer just fine.
It was much better than Turn Off the Dark, which I saw last year at the time in which Arachne gave Peter his costume while singing about "red for the blood of the innocent and blue for how bad you feel about it." And then they had sex on the astral plane. But even the musical had the "With great power comes great responsibility," line (though Uncle Ben doesn't say it), which AS-M lacks (and when it's vaguely alluded to, it's attributed to Peter's Dad, and not Uncle Ben).

Why adaptation writers hate Uncle Ben, I'll never know.

So really, my recommendation - only if you're willing to enjoy the terribleness of it.

[Havok]

If you go to see SPIDER-MAN for accurate science or even expect it, you are a colossal idiot in the first place. Even if you expect sorta kinda correct science, you should be slapped.

And really? Daddy issues? Spider-Man, along with Batman, are the kings of having Daddy Issues, and always have been. Adding in his real father is just giving more to the character so he doesn't end up as one dimensional as McQuire's "Oh Mary Jane I love you so much" version.

[mr friendly guy]

I been hearing that the relationship between Gwen and Parker is one of the few parts of the movie that made this noticeable compared to the 2002 movie?

So.... what's your recommendations? I been getting mixed reviews and thought I just asked a couple of science fiction nerds instead:D

I would watch it, although I am in two minds about getting the blu ray when it comes out. Just for the record I got the blu ray of the Mcguire version of Spiderman (all the trilogy) and Thor, and will most probably get the Avengers as well. So you have an idea of my likes to help gauge things.