Movie: The Amazing Spider-Man

[Animeniax]

Comparing Amazing to the Sam Raimi version structurally, implying one is better than the other, is foolish. They're exactly the same. Replace Goblin with the Lizard, Jameson with Gwen's father, and you're there. They even share the "hero's mentor is actually the villain" plot-point.

You should probably have clarified this line, because it is easy to misread.

First superhero movie that ever did a hero's origin in detail? It's not even the first Sam Raimi superhero movie with a full origin story and a solid plot. That would be Darkman (and quite the good movie). There are a number of other movies from around that time which do the same. Superman in '78, Supergirl, Rocketeer, Swamp Thing, The Phantom (goofy, bleh movie), etc.

They had different goals and production requirements that affected what they did in the movie. Raimi's movie was the first major motion picture in the modern era featuring a superhero of Spider-man's pedigree and history. I remember distinctly the online discussions leading into the movie wondering how they'd pull off the special effects and CGI a character like this would require, as it hadn't been done before. Darkman, etc were hardly the same caliber of movie with a major character financially or technologically. I think in trying to be faithful to the canon, they spent the majority of the movie on origin, particularly the setup of the Osborn love/hate relationship with Peter that would be a common thread in all 3 movies.

I swear you read things people write to you and somewhere between your eyes and your brain it gets lost in translation.

Go back and read your post and maybe you'll see it, but I doubt it. You implied Capt Stacey's primary role in the movie was to reinforce Peter's relationship with Gwen. Not only is this ridiculous, as she's the love interest and that does not require reinforcement in any story without being redundant, but you're reading too much into it. Basically you're saying Peter loves Gwen, and Peter loves Gwen +1 because her dad asked him to take care of his high school sweetheart. He didn't even get her pregnant. The Stacey character was misused and discarded to add senseless "depth" to a weak story.

[darkshadow]

They had different goals and production requirements that affected what they did in the movie. Raimi's movie was the first major motion picture in the modern era featuring a superhero of Spider-man's pedigree and history.

How can you be this fucking stupid? Spiderman's "pedigree"? Did you just denounce Superman as the fucking (america) cultural icon that he is?
And even if you try to use "modern era" and "pedigree" bs to support your shitty argument, X-Men was still made first.

I'm really looking forward to you arguing that xmen wasn't a "major motion picture" or isn't of the same "pedigree" as spiderman, like the fucking idiot you are.

[Animeniax]

Superman is indeed a major superhero, but realizing his abilities on film is a lot simpler than what you have to do for a character with Spider-man's abilities, not to mention his enemies' abilities. X-men was first, but again, most of their special abilities don't require the kind of special effects wizardry that Spider-man requires. Plus they were extremely light on origin and background stories for each of the characters in X-men, so they could concentrate more on story.

The original Spider-man movie was in a class by itself. Comparing it to more modern superhero films should take that into account, especially a rebooted Spider-man.

Oh and here are the requisite niceties you seem to thrive on: you're a fucking idiot, and you swallow.

[Kagemane_no_Jutsu]

This is clearly just a simple case of a nostalg-fag.

So your reasoning as to why Ryllharu is wrong to say the original and reboot are nearly identical in structure is because you personally had never witnessed an origin story containing "special effects wizardry"???


If you had actually watched this film with an open mind than you would have noticed that it's digital effects is equally revolutionary being one of the most innovative uses of the RED IMAX camera in any film. While Raimi's film did of course break new grounds, the same can undoubtedly be said for the Amazing Spiderman.

[Animeniax]

This is clearly just a simple case of a nostalg-fag.

So your reasoning as to why Ryllharu is wrong to say the original and reboot are nearly identical in structure is because you personally had never witnessed an origin story containing "special effects wizardry"???


If you had actually watched this film with an open mind than you would have noticed that it's digital effects is equally revolutionary being one of the most innovative uses of the RED IMAX camera in any film. While Raimi's film did of course break new grounds, the same can undoubtedly be said for the Amazing Spiderman.

But no, you again miss the point of the argument. There were complaints of a lack of story in the original movie compared to the Amazing movie, which is contradicted by Ryllharu's comments about identical structure. The original movie had other obstacles that the Amazing movie didn't have, such as a fleshed-out origin story which hadn't been done for a major character requiring a lot of special effects and budget to pull off, which was my point. Raimi's film did it when such special effects were still in their infancy.

[Ryllharu]

The original movie had other obstacles that the Amazing movie didn't have, such as a fleshed-out origin story which hadn't been done for a major character requiring a lot of special effects and budget to pull off, which was my point. Raimi's film did it when such special effects were still in their infancy.

I started this post writing several paragraphs, proving how you're wrong on both a technical and thematic standpoint, but it's really futile.

I'm honestly at a loss for why you have such a hard-on for the original Spiderman movie. You've been going to increasingly desperate lengths to justify why it is better.
(Note: it isn't.)

"Grasping a straws," doesn't even cut it, you're grasping at monomolecular wires.

[UChessmaster]

If Animeniax is actually Sam Raimi, that would make PERFECT sense.

[Animeniax]

I started this post writing several paragraphs, proving how you're wrong on both a technical and thematic standpoint, but it's really futile.

I'm honestly at a loss for why you have such a hard-on for the original Spiderman movie. You've been going to increasingly desperate lengths to justify why it is better.
(Note: it isn't.)

"Grasping a straws," doesn't even cut it, you're grasping at monomolecular wires.

I'll admit the trilogy colors how I see the first movie because it makes more sense in light of what occurs in the 2nd and 3rd movies, so it's easier to forgive some of deficiencies of that first movie. I mentioned earlier that I recently saw the original movie again and I'll admit it wasn't particularly spectacular after 10 years and the maturation of the genre.

So it's not so much that I love the original movie as it is I dislike how they handled the Amazing movie. At it's core it's a money grab and that will always be a strike against it, as most agree it was too soon for a reboot. But changing the origin story, changing the Peter Parker character, and the treatment of the supporting characters really made it hard to like the new movie, plot holes and weaknesses aside.

[Kagemane_no_Jutsu]

If Animeniax is actually Sam Raimi, that would make PERFECT sense.

lolololololollls


btw Sam Raimi's director of photography made it look like someone came all over the lens. Everythings so unnaturally lit. Bleh.


Anyway man I'll give you this much: Amazing isn't a perfect film. While I don't believe anyone here claimed it to be even close to it..... its not a bad one either tho.

Saying something made by Hollywood is a "money-grab" is like saying something made by Wes Anderson goes against the norm.

[Animeniax]

It must suck that you guys don't believe in anything or feel any strong connection to something. I guess that comes with being a part of the "meh" generation where shit flies by so fast and you can google search your way through life without actually having to think about anything. I wondered what comic/cartoon/book character they could make significant changes to that would upset you, but I doubt there are any. Most of what you guys have experienced in the last few years is all rehash and mostly unoriginal, so you don't know what it feels like to have something you grew up with and loved changed for the sake of making a quick dollar by some Hollywood studio. Lucky you.

[Kagemane_no_Jutsu]

Listen man. I was the BIGGEST fucking Spiderman1 fan. I saw it over and over, talked about it on the school bus, hell I had the damn soundtrack. The 2nd film, even more so, now that soundtrack kicked ass.... the trailer song, dashboard confessional, played by a band I already loved. The story was sortof lack luster to be completely honest. Just as the 1st one was, and threefold for the 3rd. While Doc Ock was always an interesting villain... and portrayed on the big screen no differently, I simply didn't enjoy that there were really only 2 main aspects of the film. Love interest and villain. Something I believe led to the more intertwining story we just saw recently in Amazing.

Gwen Stacey was integral to the story, not just as a love interest as you've deemed to calling her, but as an essential plot driving character. While MaryJane was involved more in the 1st film I thought everything was too crammed into a small package. Not to say the package wasn't filled with good story and characters; but having the origin, Uncle ben, Pete getting bullied, Mary Jane, Harry Norman and Oscorp, The Daily Bugle, AND the Green Goblin.... without a doubt the most iconoclast villain of the spiderman series (you can say its Venom but you'd be wrong) all having their own little stories being fleshed out not just being supporting roles. It never has the time to step back and say... "holy shit this is Spiderman".... Tobey never puts on a figurative mask, only a literal one. He doesn't make any hilarious little quips and deal with stress by talking nonstop while under the mask. We don't see the type of dynamic acrobat style techniques we see from Amazing that we're all so accustomed to in the Spideyverse. And then on top of all that to kill of Green Goblin in the first fucking film is just sacrilege. Maybe if they would of had Harry really take up the mantle instead of just clipping newspapers and at the last minute making a deal with Doc Ock, then maybe it could have panned out alright. But instead he comes back in the 3rd in more overly stylized outfits and is back to being a dunce before the 2nd act. We see a lightning shred of potential for what the story could have been where he forces MaryJane to dump Pete in a heart wrenching scene that is probably the only good part of that movie.


Okay I could go on for days obviously but I'll tap out here. I'll say this tho..... You say that "our" generation doesn't hold anything sacred and we only want new new new new, well my friend if you were really the spiderman fan you claim so hard to be than you would notice the same exact contrasting aspects of the Raimi trilogy to the classic stuff. While everyone here can see it so clearly, that Amazing is so much more truthful to the comics, and at the same time in an updated way... it feels much more grounded in a reality we actually exist in. Peter Parker suddenly feels like someone I personally can relate to (even if I can't build cool shit), and it feels like its in the 21st century (even if no one uses Bing).


Simple as that.....





Edit: Okay lemme rephrase that: You're a spidey fan, okay great, but I really just think you're letting nostalgia take hold and because those movies (the 1st one I'm sure especially) held an important moment in your life where we did see one of our most beloved superheroes in real life human form. And you were right Spiderman 1 was in fact a huge step up as far as big blockbuster movies go.... even having Xmen come before it (it did, right?) nothing felt the same as the first movie. Clearly it was an important moment in my life, I was obsessed after that one..... but I guess it comes down to different tastes and different styles. Just as Tobey and Garfield have different acting approaches, and Raimi and Marc Webb have different directorial styles. Anway...

Its been a pleasure.

[Buffalobiian]

Guys, lay off the insults. Next person to do it next gets a temp ban of some sort.

[Animeniax]

@KnJ: Alright best post from you that I've read yet, and yeah I read the entire post. It's been fun discussing the two movies/franchises.

Now we can wait for news about the sequel to Amazing. To be fair, as I mentioned, it's hard not to compare the entire first trilogy to the one Amazing movie, which isn't really fair. How they handle the sequel and tie-in to the elements of the first Amazing will go a long way to making Amazing 1 a worthwhile movie.

[Kraco]

It must suck that you guys don't believe in anything or feel any strong connection to something. I guess that comes with being a part of the "meh" generation where shit flies by so fast and you can google search your way through life without actually having to think about anything. I wondered what comic/cartoon/book character they could make significant changes to that would upset you, but I doubt there are any. Most of what you guys have experienced in the last few years is all rehash and mostly unoriginal, so you don't know what it feels like to have something you grew up with and loved changed for the sake of making a quick dollar by some Hollywood studio. Lucky you.

I think you have it backwards. If they hadn't made significant changes, then it would have been nothing but 100% money-grab. The first Spiderman movie is hardly is so outdated yet it would have required a rerelease like some movie from the 60's or 70's when there was no CGI. No doubt a big part of making this movie was the mentioned licensing issue, but looking at it from a different perspective, making a restart so soon forced them to make it different. Naturally some people would like it less, some more. It's infinitely better being different than being the exact same, from anybody's pespective. This way it offered a chance to be better for some people, while the rest can forget it.

[UChessmaster]

I wondered what comic/cartoon/book character they could make significant changes to that would upset you, but I doubt there are any.

Mary Jane Watson Parker.


The Green Goblin.

Ever heard of those? that`s 2 out of 3 main characters ruined but hey, JJJ is true to the comics for those whole 10 minutes he appears in the trilogy, so it`s ok.

[Kraco]

Mary Jane Watson Parker.

Haha. She looks like straight out of Bratz.

[UChessmaster]

Haha. She looks like straight out of Bratz.

MJ is my favorite character ever, she has a lot of awesome images.

[Animeniax]

So what did they change about MJ or GG in the first movie that was so significantly different to ruin them, compared to the changes made to Peter in the Amazing movie? You don't seem to realize or refuse to admit that the death of Uncle Ben and the hounding of JJJ are two core elements of Peter and Spider-man that are both his driving force and a large part of the conflict that he feels as a "hero".

I think it's hilarious that the comic cover you posted to show some supposed major change in MJ also includes a prominent image of the Daily Bugle calling Spider-man a menace.

[UChessmaster]

So what did they change about MJ or GG in the first movie that was so significantly different to ruin them, compared to the changes made to Peter in the Amazing movie? You don't seem to realize or refuse to admit that the death of Uncle Ben and the hounding of JJJ are two core elements of Peter and Spider-man that are both his driving force and a large part of the conflict that he feels as a "hero".

MJ: Is not MJ in any way shape or form aside from the hair color and the name, as a matter of fact she`s not even a character, she`s an object to be kidnapped and used as bargain chip by whatever villain is up this month, princess peach style. A plot to motivate the main character to do stuff, just like a car full of kids thrown of a bridge or a derailed train. The original MJ is a strong woman, so different from the dumb "refrigerator" women that plagued most super hero comics, strong personality, party girl, unlikely heroine compared to Gwen, but in the end she won Peter`s heart, the chemistry between them is so amazing in the comics i can`t describe.

GG: A) Every scene he was in was corny, EVERY. SCENE. HE. WAS. IN.

B) He had no motives whatsoever, no plan besides killing those business people and recruiting Spider-man, to what end? why does he needs spider-man? is it to spread his Goblin gas? conquer/destroy the world? Does he needs his radioactive sperm? What does he wants to do exactly?.

C) The suit.



May: Deliver us!
GG: Finish it!
May: From eeeeeeeeviiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil!!!!!!!!!!
GG: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Making Peter a hipster is nothing, NOTHING compared to what they did to MJ and GG.

The changes to Peter made him relevant to this age, the changes to MJ and GG effectively downgraded them.

I think it's hilarious that the comic cover you posted to show some supposed major change in MJ also includes a prominent image of the Daily Bugle calling Spider-man a menace.

And? JJJ is a part of spidey`s universe wether i like it or not, would you like me to edit it out Mr. Raimi? Uncle`s Ben death and JJJ have been discussed about a million times already, you`re the one that wont acknowledge it. You can even read it in this same page, why would i repeat the same?

[Animeniax]

MJ: Is not MJ in any way shape or form aside from the hair color and the name, as a matter of fact she`s not even a character, she`s an object to be kidnapped and used as bargain chip by whatever villain is up this month, princess peach style. A plot to motivate the main character to do stuff, just like a car full of kids thrown of a bridge or a derailed train. The original MJ is a strong woman, so different from the dumb "refrigerator" women that plagued most super hero comics, strong personality, party girl, unlikely heroine compared to Gwen, but in the end she won Peter`s heart, the chemistry between them is so amazing in the comics i can`t describe.

GG: A) Every scene he was in was corny, EVERY. SCENE. HE. WAS. IN.

B) He had no motives whatsoever, no plan besides killing those business people and recruiting Spider-man, to what end? why does he needs spider-man? is it to spread his Goblin gas? conquer/destroy the world? Does he needs his radioactive sperm? What does he wants to do exactly?.

C) The suit.

May: Deliver us!
GG: Finish it!
May: From eeeeeeeeviiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil!!!!!!!!!!
GG: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Making Peter a hipster is nothing, NOTHING compared to what they did to MJ and GG.

The changes to Peter made him relevant to this age, the changes to MJ and GG effectively downgraded them.

And? JJJ is a part of spidey`s universe wether i like it or not, would you like me to edit it out Mr. Raimi?

You seem oddly obsessed with the proper depiction and elaboration of what amounts to side characters in a movie. Of course they can't devote too much screen time to developing MJ. Not only do most viewers not care, but in the original comics she wasn't this amazing character that would justify elaborating on in a movie. She was Peter's love interest, the "it" girl he wanted but couldn't have. Her role was to show Peter's inadequacy and inferiority that he spends the rest of his life trying to resolve.

GG had about as much motivation and development as the Lizard, but somehow the Lizard is held up to be some iconic villain? Why the double standard? And the crappy GG suit isn't any worse than the crappy CGI Lizard.

The fact that you downplay the change from outcast nerd to hipster is about all the evidence needed we'll never see eye to eye on this. Like I said before, you subscribe to a revamped Peter that Marvel changed for a new audience, and that's tragic. He's no longer the underdog loser nerd who rises above expectations and shows kids what they can be. The lessons to treat power with respect and responsibility are gone. Even Captain America included that as a central character and plot point. But Amazing Spider-man is just some cool kid who got his new iPhone 5 and lookit what he can do with it! I see how that appeals to today's youth.

Uncle`s Ben death and JJJ have been discussed about a million times already, you`re the one that wont acknowledge it. You can even read it in this same page, why would i repeat the same?

I repeat it because you continue to not acknowledge how important those elements are to the character and how their omission or change in the Amazing movie is much more significant than changes to MJ or GG. Of course, you don't feel that way because your Spider-man is a modern bastardization that downplays the significance of those elements.