With Great Power ...

Xenominim

New member
Jan 11, 2011
90
0
0
It doesn't look set to be as terrible as Green Lantern I don't think, but it certainly doesn't look like anything special. Complicating Spiderman's background with secret experiments or whatever is uneccessary, and having every single scene of Spiderman at night does seem like a really stupid attempt to make things seem more cool and edgy. Spiderman always was a colorful hero, and most of his villains are too, he's not Batman and they shouldn't be trying to make him into one. But the darkness might also be about hiding the CGI since the Lizard looks to be nothing but computer generated, and having the head still mostly human seems very odd.

The other thing that just seems odd to me, when they announced the reboot was moving Peter back to high school I figured there might be some reason for that, making him seem younger, a bit more overconfident, play up his school relationships more. But we only get one brief shot of him throwing a guy against the lockers and then, boom he's working with Connors in the Oscorp lab it seems and the only student that matters is Gwen, and he's pretty much super serious the whole way through barring the car thief segment. Maybe there's more in the movie of course but just from the trailer it seems like making him younger was done without much point. It doesn't hurt anything and is more like the comics I suppose, it just doesn't seem to have any significance in the movie though so far as the trailer is concerned.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
ccesarano said:
Some of the complaints here I can understand, but others are genuine biased nitpicking. There's no "maybe Bob is biased" about it. Picking on how Peter Parker is dressed and the hoodie he wears is all aesthetic. It doesn't actually change the substance of the film, and let's face it. Hollywood having a character wear that current era's popular fashion? NO WAI.
Didn't the clone who was not a clone who may have been a clone but really wasn't, wear a hoodie?

They probably settled on the Hipster look way back when for those few brief moments, people thought Hipsters looked cool.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
He's wearing a T-Shirt and a jacket. How is that a fucking hipster?!

Anyway, I think it looks good. I'm not particularly into comics, but it looks more like my brief impression of the comic-book Spider-Man than the previous incarnation.

I never really liked Tobey Maguire in the role all that much either. Too weepy.

"They wouldn't screw around with the most important part of the origin-story, would they?"

Do you not think it'd perhaps be interesting if they didn't do literally the exact same thing that you've seen again and again?

SpiderJerusalem said:
moviedork said:
Seventh Actuality said:
I look forward to more hate for Peter Parker's floppy hair and hipster getup. "We love Spidey because he's a nerdy outcast, and we can all relate to...wait, he's not OUR KIND of nerdy outcast? WHAT A HIPSTER EMO **** LOL"
Kind of odd for someone to complain about considering that hipsters are the nerds of today.
Except, you know, shallow, store made, lifeless versions of nerds. They're the hot topic variety of nerds, marketed and created to have kids buy into this variety of "cool" for now.
sure, but nothing in his posts or videos are anything more than what can be found with a quick wikipedia run, combined with the snark, bile and outright lying of a general Fox News coverage.
"shallow, store made, lifeless versions of nerds."

Because nerds are typically so full of life and totally non-consumerist.

ccesarano said:
Though truth told, I'm not even sure I see the "hipster clothing" angle. Peter Parker is wearing clothing. Maybe I'm oblivious to fashion trends, but there's nothing particularly douchey hipster about what he's wearing to me.
You're definitely not the one whose oblivious to fashion trends. I'm not entirely sure what people would expect him to wear; I mean, he's wearing clothes that fit properly, I guess that might not be nerdy enough (and therefore too 'hispter-y') for people.
 

Towels

New member
Feb 21, 2010
245
0
0
I actually do find the new origin story kind of refreshing. I've always liked Spider-man because of how relatable his character is, but coincidentally I was always pretty bored of his origin story. But I really wanted a better villain than the Lizard, like say... Carnage. *sigh* oh well.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
The original Trilogy while the last one wasn't as GREAT as the first two.... I can't go on. There's no F'n need to re-boot the series.
End of line.
 

Doneeee

New member
Dec 27, 2011
359
0
0
While I understand Bobs points, I'm going o remain optimistic for this film. But to to be honest the whole Dane Cook in a power rangers outfit comment made me laugh my ass off. XD
 

Jumpingbean3

New member
May 3, 2009
484
0
0
Woodsey said:
"They wouldn't screw around with the most important part of the origin-story, would they?"

Do you not think it'd perhaps be interesting if they didn't do literally the exact same thing that you've seen again and again?
Spiderman is about the responsibilities of being a super hero and the way we get to that is by Spiderman refusing to stop a burglar leading to his Uncle getting killed. The reason they've done the exact same thing again and again is because it's the basic foundation of the Spiderman story. It's like having Batman's parents die in a freak accident instead of being killed by a mugger.
 

Varya

Elvish Ambassador
Nov 23, 2009
457
0
0
ccesarano said:
Varya said:
Malignanttoe said:
Rect Pola said:
Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.
I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.
You know, MovieBob's shtick is that he is a movie reviewever whi is a nerd, so when we go to him for his oppinions in his oppinion piece, if we get supprised or angry when he's being a nitpicky nerd, we might have set our perspectives a bit off. Of course he's fucking bias, he's a Spider-Man fan, we go in to this article knowing he's bias, it's kind of the point!
I'd love to be a professional games critic one day, but for now I can only speak as an amateur wannabe, so nothing I say is with any sense of real authority on this matter.

Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry. Now, it's impossible for anyone to hide their biases. Bob makes it obvious that he has certain biases, typically involving things like robots, monsters, boobies, gore and things that aren't religious (especially on his blog). However, in some cases he needs to distance himself from those biases to try and judge something based on what it actually is.

Bob having issues with the backstory and the whole destiny angle? Valid. His problems with Andrew Garfield's clothing and his ONE LINE of snark in the trailer? Nitpicking for the sake of finding something not to like.

He has done it with other films in the past. He doesn't do it with everything, but there are times I am forced to sigh and roll my eyes when he makes one big smart-ass comment that reads like it came out of 4chan as if he actually has a point, rather than shouting "THIS IS MY OPINION AND I KNOW IT TO BE TRUE!". I have no problem with someone providing a logical reason for why they like or dislike something. But it has to be presented as a logical argument first.

MovieBob bitching that Peter Parker is wearing "hipster" clothing (quick everyone! Let's all try and define what "hipster" is again and wonder at how no one can actually agree on it!) is no different than the old assholes snubbing Super Hero films altogether. MovieBob is getting older, he has expectations of certain aesthetics and styles, and now that times are changing he is judging certain ones harshly.

Though truth told, I'm not even sure I see the "hipster clothing" angle. Peter Parker is wearing clothing. Maybe I'm oblivious to fashion trends, but there's nothing particularly douchey hipster about what he's wearing to me.
Problem with me arguing about this is that I don't wanna put words in hus mouth or sound like some White Knight defender of Bob, I just got a thing with people shouting "bias" in a crowded theater.
Of course, complaining about "hipster-looking" clothes is nitpicky, but like it or not, nitpicky things can destroy a movie experience for someone. Nevertheless, if the movie is amazing, and Bob gives it the axe because he hated the clothes, then you have an argument, untill then, it's just "and another thing" in a text full of valid complaints.
And as for juding out the "snarky coments" as nitpicky, I don't agree. The arguments he provided were solid, sarcasm don't really work all that great when behind a mask, and it's still just a first impression, so maybe it works great, but Bob's got a point so far.
Again, really not trying to defend Bob's views, I grudingly found a lot of it quite enthralling, and I'm VERY biased against it, the way they treated Rami really pissed me off. Again, just have a thing about the word "bias"
 

Falcon123

New member
Aug 9, 2009
314
0
0
SpiderJerusalem said:
ccesarano said:
Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry.
Really? Cause he sure hasn't shown any signs of this being the case. There's a whole bunch of "I'm a critic" jargon in his posts, and a whole bunch of passive agressive whining about "how you should talk to a critic", which is hilarious, sure, but nothing in his posts or videos are anything more than what can be found with a quick wikipedia run, combined with the snark, bile and outright lying of a general Fox News coverage.
You both need to listen to the podcast he did with Media Sandwich. MovieBob flat out states that his shows aren't meant to be unbiased criticism; they're fully opinion shows, and the Escapist is paying him for just that: his opinions. You don't have to agree with them, but don't complain that he's doing the job asked of him because his opinion is different than yours. No one's forcing you to listen to him, after all.

OP: I'm nervous about this one. This trailer looks like a batman movie got crossed with the spiderman characters and instead of fixing their error just looked at the film and said, "Oh well," and sent it out anyway. It doesn't feel like Spiderman to me. It feels like a much darker, more emo character than the one I want to watch. I'm not as big a critic of the continuity like MovieBob (I like the Ultimate universe just fine), but I can't say its an improvement on the original story.

All and all, time will tell more than any trailer will. I await its release with skepticism, hoping to be proven wrong but ready to be sadly right.
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
Well...I didn't hate it. I don't have as much of a continuity boner as some people have, and Emma Stone has a way of always making me happy, so I'm probably actually going to go see it. The promise of The Lizard being in it makes me happy, though admittedly not as happy as those first screens of Doc Oc and his awesome fucking arms a few years back made me. There's definitely a lot of The Dark Knight visible here, but that's okay for the moment. Though, there was this little gem that made me laugh:

That's not the case here, and also seems to explain why J. Jonah Jameson apparently isn't in this version: They've already got their "Spider-Man is a menace!" foil.
Who would you get to play him, Cave Johnson J. K. Simmons? Now that would be a ballsy move, to bring back the actor to do the same, parallel universe role.

Like we would let any other actor possibly do it.
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,836
0
0
It's a shame, one of my favorite things about Spiderman was that hey, it could have happened to any of his classmates. I'm much less looking forward to this :/
 

notimeforlulz

New member
Mar 18, 2011
183
0
0
I know in comic books they can keep a license by writing a bin novel or whatever. Like the write a cheap shitty short story and then they bin it, but they get to keep the license or something anyway. I read that some where, that may have been the way things were in the 30's or whatever and I'm not sure if it still applies.

But the question is: do they have to shoot and release an entire film to keep a license, I'm amazed there isn't some legal trickery in there that would minimise their required financial investment into a license. Maybe a big picture ep on the what what. Edumacate me a little please. I'm willing to wait for an ep on if there is something interesting there to be seen; so please don't spoil the surprise by replying if there is something there to be looked at.
 

katsabas

New member
Apr 23, 2008
1,515
0
0
If the picture didn't suggest it, I am a fan. And I have a few points I would like to raise against Bob's criteria that it looks a lot like Batman.

This isn't something to be proud of. Neither the looks of Batman nor the interpretation of Al Ghul was good. In fact, they both sucked the biggest. Bale looked like someone in a batsuit and not like THE Batman.

Looks about Heath Ledger were also negative as hell before the movie came out.

Garfield will feel a lot more Spidey than Bale would ever dream to feel like Batman. However, Maguire was lousy as Peter so it's a tie here.

Changing the origin story ? I don't think they will. Martin Sheen will kick ass as Uncle Ben. Why ? Cause the Illusive Man beats Alfred any day of the week.

If the mood is dark ? Hello, Gwen plus bridge.

The red light on the shooters is an 'oi, watch it' for the amount of web left on the cartridge.
 

Smertnik

New member
Apr 5, 2010
1,172
0
0
Meh, the movie looks decent enough but I don't like the changes from the original story. I'm mostly put off by Connors' design (judging by the trailer, at least), he was one of my favourite characters.

anthony87 said:
I'm not really getting the whole lab-coat complaint. What we have is a scientist who tries to regrow his missing arm and ends up turning himself into a big lizard monster who apparently looks wrong because he doesn't keep his lab-coat?
I can only assume that his reason for the complaint is the fact that Connors kept on his coat in the comics. It kinda belongs to his overall look.