Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man

NaramSuen

New member
Jun 8, 2010
261
0
0
The moment I heard about this reboot, I have had a bad feeling and everything I have seen or heard afterwards has just added to it. Whatever leftover desire I had to see this in the theatre has just been thrown out the window with your review. Oh I'll still watch it, but just like Green Lantern, it will be a rental.
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Can some1 spoil me that scene that he mentions where they "tried" to do the "infamous train scene of Spiderman 2" for us to give a shit about?
 

Baralak

New member
Dec 9, 2009
1,244
0
0
NaramSuen said:
The moment I heard about this reboot, I have had a bad feeling and everything I have seen or heard afterwards has just added to it. Whatever leftover desire I had to see this in the theatre has just been thrown out the window with your review. Oh I'll still watch it, but just like Green Lantern, it will be a rental.
I really recommend it. It's a great film. I loved it more than any of other other 3 films. Heck, my whole family loved it, and my mom doesn't even care for Spider-Man
 

Nargleblarg

New member
Jun 24, 2008
1,583
0
0
chaosyoshimage said:
Carnage95 said:
I've been a Spider-Man fan since I was three or five years old and I absolutely adore him. I saw the film twice and I love every minute of it! Sure there were a one or two things that they didn't include that made me a tad disappointed, but overall this film is THE Spider-Man film I have been waiting for. Andrew Garfield totally nails it as Peter Parker and he looks like him too. The film also tugged on my heartstrings where as the previous trilogy didn't do anything for me.

The previous trilogy was a total cheese-fest, the main cast's acting was mediocre and I've always cringed at the dialogue between Peter and Mary Jane. The only actors that I felt that stood out were Bruce Campbell and J.K Simmons. Other than the costume design, Tobey's Spider-Man didn't act like Spider-Man. Hardly any wisecracking and taunting of his enemies.

Go watch this film if you love Spider-Man because this is the one I was waiting for and they delivered.

Also to those who aren't going to watch this film because they want it back with Marvel Studios, go watch the film seriously. If you didn't know, Sony and Marvel might make a deal to have Spider-Man join the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There was a rumour that the OSCORP building was going to be in The Avengers, however they took it out because of the timing of the films. There were interviews conducted that have asked if Spider-Man could join the MCU and they said if Spider-Man does well, they might work something out.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelMovieverseNews/news/?a=61371
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/eyegloo/news/?a=62896

Edit: Fixed the link issue.
All of this, especially the part about tugging heartstrings, this movie hit me a lot harder than the Raimi trilogy and it pisses me off a little to see people call it "soulless". I literally teared up at a couple of parts.
I completely agree with all of the above; I especially want to point out the "tugging heartstrings" that was mentioned. This movie made me realize that I never gave a shit about the characters in the Raimi films. In the Raimi films the characters were all just blandly written. And while the actors in that trilogy were good (well in Spiderman 2) the characters that they portrayed were stuck in their 1960 comic book stereotypes. This new movie has both great actors and interesting characters, and I actually found myself upset at a few parts due to the conflicts both physically and mentally surrounding them. And I do like the Raimi trilogy don't get me wrong, but this movie simply just blew them out of the water.

This movie has its issues, but no where near to the rampant degree expressed in the review. This new modernized movie fixes a lot of problems of the old and brings the trilogy into the 21st century for real this time. It is for this same reason that they rebooted the comics in the late 90s and Ultimate Spiderman was born.

And I hear a lot about stuff that was left out especially noted is JJJ, but you know there is going to be a sequel right?

And the point of the movie ripping off the Batman movies....so what? The Nolan movies have helped pushed comic films into a era of realism; what is wrong with embracing it?

At the end of the day though judge for yourself; just don't take Bob so seriously sometimes.
 

jpo009

Lord of the Dance
Apr 16, 2009
35
0
0
I think I'm gonna skip the next couple of these reviews, Spider Man was not only good but pretty great. Better then the first one of the last trilogy for sure. It wasn't perfect but it wasn't boring or poorly acted or poorly written.
Maybe its not perfect , but its worth a look.
 

ckam

Make America Great For Who?
Oct 8, 2008
1,618
0
0
I never knew that Bob did movie reviews on Tuesday... I guess that's good to know.
 

notimeforlulz

New member
Mar 18, 2011
183
0
0
Terratina. said:
Well, at least the tie-in movie video game is decent...

The worst thing is that one of friends is super pumped for this movie and now she's gonna be all disappointed.
Have you seen Garfield's ass in that suit? No she won't be.
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
No J. Jonah Jameson?

I was expecting this movie to be really bad, "what it on DVD while drunk" levels of bad. And yet somehow everything new I learn about it lowers my expectations more. But no J. Jonah Jameson?
 

Wuvlycuddles

New member
Oct 29, 2009
682
0
0
anthony87 said:
Fusioncode9 said:
Looking through these comments is just pathetic. Most people here are deciding not to see the movie because of Bob's pointless fanboy rage. Mos reviews call it a solid film, even Roger Ebert enjoyed it. I've seen the movie and it is NO-WHERE near as bad as Bob is saying. It's no The Dark Knight but it's a overall a solid film.

Nooners said:
I figured this would would suck, sadly. Thanks for the advance warning, Bob. Should've listened to you when you said not to see Green Lantern.
TorchofThanatos said:
okay then, thats another movie I wont go see
I wonder if the Avengers is still playing... hmmmmmm...
rayen020 said:
never planned to see it and now i'll make sure not to.

Also why do all your tuesday reviews have movies that suck?

FastLogan2400 said:
Ouch. I was really hoping this movie wasn't going to suck as hard as everyone thought it was going to, but now I'm definitely not seeing it after hearing this.
C'mon guys, form you own opinions!
I actually love you for this post.

It always gets to me when I see people basically posting "Oh Bob you're so right! Not that I've seen the movie or anything like that but it's you so of course you're right!"

The nerve of some people, eh? Following the advice of a professional critic, ITS MADNESS I TELL YE! MAAAAADNESS! MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
 

Aeriath

New member
Sep 10, 2009
357
0
0
DioWallachia said:
Can some1 spoil me that scene that he mentions where they "tried" to do the "infamous train scene of Spiderman 2" for us to give a shit about?
Essentially, they've noted that it's not that feasable to webswing perfectly down the middle of the streets liek in the previous trilogy and so he swings from one side to the other while moving forward. He's injured which is slowing him down and he's racing against the clock. There's a history in the comics of construction workers coming to Spidey's aid. Spidey helped rescue a guy's kid earlier in the movie and the guy is a construction foreman. He gets cranes all up the street Spidey is trying to swing along to align themselves so that he can swing from one crane to the next and speed his journey. I thought it was a little cheesy but I that it worked. I am one of those dreaded people who question where the webs go though.

Full disclosure: I was hyped to see the movie for ages. I'm on a Spiderman binge currently so I had high hopes for the movie when I went in.

I liked it apart from a few minor points that aren't worth mentioning. As much as I like the Raimi films they are a little cheesy and it was nice to see that this one added a little more realism and showed Peter's progression into his powers. I'm puzzled at Bob's comments about Uncle Ben's manner of death, I thought it was actually more powerful because of the tweaked circumstances.
 

SnakeoilSage

New member
Sep 20, 2011
1,211
0
0
Imagine how eff'ing cool it would be if at some point during the final act of the Avengers, one of them stumbles upon a Chitauri knocked senseless and hanging from a web? That would have been the better Spider-Man than this and he wouldn't have even been in it.
 

C2Ultima

Future sovereign of Oz
Nov 6, 2010
506
0
0
Oh come on now Bob, the film isn't that bad. It's not very bad at all. I'll admit, some of what you said was right on; the crane scene at the end is contrived (but still could've been cute if it hadn't been so overdone), the Lizard's face looks ridiculously unconvincing, and Curt Connors himself is more or less a copy of Norman Osborne. Still, It isn't nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

I think a good interpretation of this review is to list the things Bob says are terrible, randomly pick about 80% of them, then replace "terrible" with "not bad, but could've been a lot better".
 

DiMono

New member
Mar 18, 2010
837
0
0
You know what I've learned from watching Bob review movies? That he is completely incapable of judging a movie on its own merits, and with almost 100% accuracy if he hates a movie, it's actually good. Put down your fanboyism and try to enjoy the movie for what it is, and nothing else.

I've heard from others who are deeply invested in the Spider Man world that the origin story in TAS is actually the most faithful one to the comics yet seen on film. So where is all this hate about ignoring the source material as it pertains to the origin story coming from?

Seriously, stop being so emo and butthurt about the movie not living up to your hopes and dreams, especially when you went into it already convince that it was going to be bad. This act of yours is getting old and irritating. If you can't review a movie objectively, then why are you calling yourself a movie critic at all?
 

chaosyoshimage

New member
Apr 1, 2011
1,440
0
0
Freakout456 said:
I completely agree with all of the above; I especially want to point out the "tugging heartstrings" that was mentioned. This movie made me realize that I never gave a shit about the characters in the Raimi films. In the Raimi films the characters were all just blandly written. And while the actors in that trilogy were good (well in Spiderman 2) the characters that they portrayed were stuck in their 1960 comic book stereotypes. This new movie has both great actors and interesting characters, and I actually found myself upset at a few parts due to the conflicts both physically and mentally surrounding them. And I do like the Raimi trilogy don't get me wrong, but this movie simply just blew them out of the water.

This movie has its issues, but no where near to the rampant degree expressed in the review. This new modernized movie fixes a lot of problems of the old and brings the trilogy into the 21st century for real this time. It is for this same reason that they rebooted the comics in the late 90s and Ultimate Spiderman was born.

And I hear a lot about stuff that was left out especially noted is JJJ, but you know there is going to be a sequel right?

And the point of the movie ripping off the Batman movies....so what? The Nolan movies have helped pushed comic films into a era of realism; what is wrong with embracing it?

At the end of the day though judge for yourself; just don't take Bob so seriously sometimes.
All of this, especially the bits about Ultimate Spider-Man, I've been reading it lately and I love it so much. Amazing feels like an adaptation of that, while the old movies feel like an adaptation of 60's books.
 

CarlsonAndPeeters

New member
Mar 18, 2009
686
0
0
So a few comments:

1) Why yes, the crane thing was ridiculously stupid

2) What did they change about Ben's death? The key points I see are (a) the last thing Peter said to him was an insult (b) Peter could have stopped the killer but didn't. What was missing?

3) I really enjoyed the movie. Really did. I didn't think the acting, screenplay, or visuals (other than the Lizard) were too bad. I'm not going to call bias, cause that's stupid. From the first trailer, you thought this looked bad and I thought it looked good. When the movie came out, you didn't like it and I did. That's not bias; that's having individualistic taste.

But I will say this: Bob, if this movie does well, don't be depressed that its because film studios are tricking people into seeing a lazy Spider-Man movie. It will do well because a lot of people liked it. Whether you condemn the process that led to its creation or not, the result satisfied a lot of people. Green Lantern bombed because everyone hated it. If this does well, its because you are in the minority (which is fine; personally I hate X-2, but whatever), but the rest of us have a right to enjoy are movie and hope it performs well in the box office.
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
I didn't hate it as much as you did. Still, you had good points.

However, I'd argue that the only big coincidence is that Gwen works for Connors.

All the other stuff fits well together; Peter's parents were involved with the research, that leads to Peter getting his powers, the same stuff leads to Connors becoming the Lizard. And Osborn is behind it all. It would be a far bigger coincidence if that all happened independently.

I agree with how they handled Connors/Lizard, he is my favourite Spidey-villain, and the movie did seem to hint he'd be more like himself in the (possible) sequels...

BTW, I think this movie was heavily influenced by the Ultimate Spider-Man comics...

And I couldn't tell if the CGI on Lizard was bad or not, because the 3D makes everything look fake. I hate 3D.
 

Gunnyboy

New member
Sep 25, 2010
103
0
0
The Avengers cinematography was worse.


Funny how "just because" storytelling gets a pass there, but not here.