The Amazing Spider-Man Anyone hate the shoes?

[Oscorp]

Guys just ignore Anno. Put him on your ignore lists or something. I have and it feels like breathing fresh air after years of crap.

He just lacks the ability to feel empathy for anything. He's not really understanding anything. Not his own fault, that's just the way he is. He is extremely narrow minded who happens to like to act like a 7 year old *****ebag on Internet forums. Not his own fault, he's probably born this way. He might have been bullied as a kid or something and now acts out to "get even", in which case we all should feel sorry for him instead of getting angry. Just ignore him and let him have his fun on his own.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Yah...if you can't read my comments and NOT get hurt like an actual child would, go ahead, ignore me

My comments are only for adults that aren't thin skinned I guess

 

[Web face]

No probably not. People here on this site in particular are very much just whatevers new, including a lot of the mods. Especially on the Batman forums, around 2008 when Heath Ledger wowed the world with his performance people immediately made the Nicholson vs. Ledger argument, which lead to the Keaton/Bale argument until someone finally. Made the point that they're different interpretations of the same character and both are very flawed but perfect for their given context.

Now I say this a lot on here but people try to insist that you can't compare 89 Batman to 2002 Spider-Man, well thats a huge load of it because you very much can. Both movies paved the way for superhero films to come into the mainstream and both were unexpected huge hits. Now really, Spider-Man had a mostly word of mouth campaign, if it was "crap" then it wouldn't have worked out to well. If Spider-Man 2 was "crap" it wouldn't have been hailed as the best superhero movie of all time, circa 2008.

I too thought that Amazing was much better than 1-3 (and I still think it's better than 3) until I saw it a second time. It has so many problems on a structural level that just standout more and more each time you watch it. Yeah MJ sucked, Spidey didn't have webshooters, and Green Goblin looked stupid but at least the story was consistent. Really it's just ignorant for people to say this movie is so much better because with all thats changed since 2002, I expected A LOT more from a Spider-Man reboot than a wanna be Nolan flick.

Wait it's ignorant to think that this one is better? If anything is ignorant, it's that you think it's a wannabe Nolan flick. It's not, it just chooses to take itself a little more seriously. I was a little sick of all the cheesiness, and I prefer this interpretation to the old one. I'm with OP84CC82, If Andrew Garfield played Spider-Man first, more people would say that he is the best and only Spider-Man.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I can agree that TAS-M feels like Webb tried to make something akin to Nolan's Batman Begins. Just, everything felt like Webb tried to make something more than he could handle while grabbing the crowd of Nolan's trilogy, which obviously didn't happen, imo.

And...I also agree that Raimi's films would be truly amazing if Garfield was his Peter/Spidey. Garfield is definitely better than Maguire, although I feel Garfield needed more to be a better Peter Parker.

 

[Web face]

I can agree that TAS-M feels like Webb tried to make something akin to Nolan's Batman Begins. Just, everything felt like Webb tried to make something more than he could handle while grabbing the crowd of Nolan's trilogy, which obviously didn't happen, imo.

And...I also agree that Raimi's films would be truly amazing if Garfield was his Peter/Spidey. Garfield is definitely better than Maguire, although I feel Garfield needed more to be a better Peter Parker.

I thought Webb was just trying to make a more grounded, more emotional story, which I found great. I mean, Ben's death and everything after it was good in SM1 too, but the voicemail in TASM, I thought, was really powerful and emotional. Not enough to make me cry or anything but it was definitely emotional.
One thing I disliked about Peter Parker was that at the end the teacher told him that he was tardy again. I know he was smart, but I thought he should have been a little more of a good student in terms of getting to class on time or paying attention to the teacher. If they showed him stopping a crime before school in the middle of the movie, and show that he was tardy because of it, I wouldn't have minded it. But it just seemed like they made Peter too much of a bad kid in school.

 

[chaseter]

Really didn't warm to ANY of the costume changes but Webb shot the movie so darkly, you could barely make them out anyway... Sort of makes you wonder why they bothered.

Same here. Look at the Hot Toys 1/6 figure...it looks like **** and shows how awful the costume was.

 

[Oscorp]

You're seriously judging the costume design for a movie...based on a Hot Toys figure??

At least just say "Same here. The costume looks awful" because that would be much less stupid.

 

[chaseter]

The Hot Toys figure doesn't say "display in dim lighting".

It's movie accurate so take that as you will.

 

[OP84CC82]

Really it's just ignorant for people to say this movie is so much better because with all thats changed since 2002, I expected A LOT more from a Spider-Man reboot than a wanna be Nolan flick.

I'm ignorant for having an opinion? I don't see the problem with me saying that I think The Amazing Spider-Man is a better film than the first one was. And also, if you think that this is a "wannabe Nolan flick" you have either not seen The Amazing Spider-Man or you haven't seen a film by Christopher Nolan in your life.

 

[Oscorp]

The Hot Toys figure doesn't say "display in dim lighting".

It's movie accurate so take that as you will.

A Hot Toys figure doesn't show a suit is bad or not. A really good looking suit could look terrible on a toy because it's no way near as polished in detail like the film costume.

Just say you think the design itself in the movie sucks. It's shown in good light in the school fight. I can understand people not liking the suit, but to reference to a Hot Toys figure is just silly.

EDIT: And yeah, I laugh when I see people seriously saying ASM is a wannabe Nolan film. It's really not. If anything, it resembles Webb's past work (500) Days of Summer alot more. There are really no big similarities between Nolan's films and Webb's ASM at all. Oh he's taking out bad guys at night? That's pretty logical when he has classes at day. Also, he does have a battle at daylight in the school. Sure, I'd want a moment where Peter has to skip a class because there's something going on at day, but that's about it.

 

[OP84CC82]

But it just seemed like they made Peter too much of a bad kid in school.

I got to class late the other day and it wasn't because I was talking to someone.

 

[chaseter]

A Hot Toys figure doesn't show a suit is bad or not. A really good looking suit could look terrible on a toy because it's no way near as polished in detail like the film costume.

It's a $200 1/6 movie accurate figure. It certainly does show how the suit looks. Are you serious? It looks just as crappy as all the set photos under the bright lights. The movie was dark and mostly at night so you really can't see all the stupid design choices they made. Look at the Hot Toys SM3 figure...it looks just like the friggin Raimi suit.

It has all the same details...IT'S MOVIE ACCURATE. It's the exact same just 12' instead of 72'.

Just say you think the design itself in the movie sucks. It's shown in good light in the school fight. I can understand people not liking the suit, but to reference to a Hot Toys figure is just silly.

First off, don't tell me what I should or shouldn't say. Sit down.

Secondly, the design of the movie costume sucks white dog doo. The Hot Toys figure shows what the suit looks like when it's not dark or fast moving. The yellow lenses, the silver shoes, the non web pattern basketball looking mask, the leg stripes, stupid over designed gloves, the blinking web shooters, the horrible pattern on the stomach that are just straight lines, no belt....

They tried too hard to be too different and they failed. The only thing I like are the vibrant red and blue.

Is that what you wanted to hear?

 

[Oscorp]

All I asked for was for you not to say something stupid again

 

[OP84CC82]

You want evidence of how some people in the general audience like Tobey better just because he was the original, read this comment from some lady on facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=358348664241050&set=a.122310797844839.23502.101198429956076&type=1&ref=nf

i prefer the one with the real charactors bunch of wanna bes in the new one

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Why is it that every damn thread, no matter the topic, has to turn into a childish battle between the Raimi film and Webb film?

 

[chaseter]

All I asked for was for you not to say something stupid again

Let's worry about ourselves before we start worrying about other people.

 

[Spider-Who?]

The shoes never really bothered me. It was the lack of a belt, the leg stripes, and the thin arm stripes that irked me. But now that I've seen the film, played the game, I dig the shoes, and the arm/leg stripes are a not a big deal. Still would like to see a belt on there, but I can live without it. You never really notice it in the film anyway.

 

[Oscorp]

Yeah it could need a belt actually. Better designed than the one in the game though.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

The shoes never really bothered me. It was the lack of a belt, the leg stripes, and the thin arm stripes that irked me. But now that I've seen the film, played the game, I dig the shoes, and the arm/leg stripes are a not a big deal. Still would like to see a belt on there, but I can live without it. You never really notice it in the film anyway.

I agree and what's funny is prior to the release of the game, I was one of the people who was talking about how much I liked the look of the belt. Yet when it came time to actually play the game, I found myself using the suit minus the belt way more. Not exactly sure why but it just looked better without it...glad Beenox gave us the option to use it or not.

 

[chaseter]

It was ugly because it was a Batman utility belt with pouches.

 

[Oscorp]

Pretty much, yeah

 

[Anno_Domini]

I thought Webb was just trying to make a more grounded, more emotional story, which I found great. I mean, Ben's death and everything after it was good in SM1 too, but the voicemail in TASM, I thought, was really powerful and emotional. Not enough to make me cry or anything but it was definitely emotional.
One thing I disliked about Peter Parker was that at the end the teacher told him that he was tardy again. I know he was smart, but I thought he should have been a little more of a good student in terms of getting to class on time or paying attention to the teacher. If they showed him stopping a crime before school in the middle of the movie, and show that he was tardy because of it, I wouldn't have minded it. But it just seemed like they made Peter too much of a bad kid in school.

Ben's voicemail was meaningful, definitely, but that doesn't really take away the idea that I feel Webb tried to succeed as how Nolan succeeded.

EDIT: And yeah, I laugh when I see people seriously saying ASM is a wannabe Nolan film. It's really not. If anything, it resembles Webb's past work (500) Days of Summer alot more. There are really no big similarities between Nolan's films and Webb's ASM at all. Oh he's taking out bad guys at night? That's pretty logical when he has classes at day. Also, he does have a battle at daylight in the school. Sure, I'd want a moment where Peter has to skip a class because there's something going on at day, but that's about it.

Can anyone tell me how the hell TAS-M felt more like (500) Days of Summer?

Let's worry about ourselves before we start worrying about other people.

Say one more "stupid thing" and he'll ignore you, lol.

 

[spida-man]

stop fighting!

 

[Lord]

I just don't like the silver on the shoes

 

[TheForgotten]

Well, there's the obvious box office returns. Both in real and adjusted returns, the first three did far better.

Second, back in July Yahoo did two polls and Maguire won both by like 60/40 and 75/25 and there were over 500,000 votes.



Which is what goes through my mind when I read through this forum.



Or maybe they simply like the films and performance better.

That has to be the most f*&^ing pathetic reasoning I have ever read from someone.

What do box office numbers have to do with anything?! By that logic, when Batman Begins was released, most people prefered Keaton over Bale. But we don't know that for sure. It could have been the opposite.

And the poll? Really? When? What poll? Could I have a link?