The Amazing Spider-Man ASM Blu-ray: Most Wanted Features and Extras

[Anno_Domini]

just stop...lol sm3 happened and sandman was uncle bens killer in the raimi universe. All 3 films are connected and are by the same director. Raimi didnt pull a damn evil dead. All of these films follow each other and are canonical. Smh.

Cool. It's not canon if you ask me though

I don't own it, thus, I don't pay attention to it bud.

 

[Mike]

Cool. It's not canon if you ask me though

I don't own it, thus, I don't pay attention to it bud.

thats fair. But one day youre going to walk into wal mart and see SM3! Mwuahaha!

 

[A Necessary Evil]

that was me joking notice the "Lol" but pretty good attempt.

 

[©KAW]

Peter is bitten by a spider, check.

Uncle Ben's killed, check.

Spider-Man 3 only added Sandman as the real killer and over portrays the 'forgiveness' theme through the film and that doesn't really hold the hero's true origin at all, just gives the viewers a retcon that can be thrown out if one doesn't even enjoy the third film.

Yeah, but Uncle Ben wasn't killed by the man in the first movie, UNCHECK. And now Spider-Man finally has the one who actually killed him, which is the turning point of Spider-Man's origin (finding Ben's killer), which happened in SM3.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Too bad Raimi did it better. Poor kaw

 

[Mike]

lol cool gif. Cant go wrong with RDJ. Thanks bro.

 

[Mike]

Too bad Raimi did it better. Poor kaw

thats not accurate. If im not mistaken....thats an opinion. Yea..yea im sure thats an opinion lol

 

[©KAW]

Too bad Raimi did it better. Poor kaw

What, making Sandman Uncle Ben's killer, having two leads horribly cast for their roles, allowing Peter/Spider-Man to let a man fall to his death and his Uncle Ben's killer go free. Poor me...or poor Spider-Man? He's the one who got butchered. Although he can't tell you, because he doesn't speak, lol. t:

 

[A Necessary Evil]

"I'm too cheap to pay the two cents for something I can't afford; and my uncle's gonna be a dumbass and attempt to stop a man with a gun" Vs. "You screwed me over 2900 bucks, so I'm gonna let the robber pass."

Way to go Webb

 

[Mike]

"I'm too cheap to pay the two cents for something I can't afford; and my uncle's gonna be a dumbass and attempt to stop a man with a gun" Vs. "You screwed me over 2900 bucks, so I'm gonna let the robber pass."

Way to go Webb

hmmmn raimis spider-man couldnt shoot webs because of an inferior complex (performance issues) Webbs spidey has web shooters. Zing! This is awesome!

 

[A Necessary Evil]

hmmmn raimis spider-man couldnt shoot webs because of an inferior complex. Webbs spidey has web shooters Zing. This is awesome!

What?

Yup, Amazing has webshooters. That already proves ASM>SM1.

 

[Mike]

What?

Yup, Amazing has webshooters. That already proves ASM>SM1.

ummm no i was trading jokes about the movies we like......notice the "Zing!"

 

[©KAW]

"I'm too cheap to pay the two cents for something I can't afford; and my uncle's gonna be a dumbass and attempt to stop a man with a gun" Vs. "You screwed me over 2900 bucks, so I'm gonna let the robber pass."

Way to go Webb

Is that it, that all you've got?

Uncle Ben doing the right thing and trying talk some thug into doing the right thing. That's you're comeback?

Do you really want to compare that to having your Uncle Ben's killer right in front of you as if to say, "I no longer care that you killed my Uncle, I no longer care about bringing you to justice, to hell with my Aunt May who lost her husband, to hell with my Father Figure who taught me most of who I am, to hell With Great Power...I'm going home. You can go free.

Trust me, you can't win this debate, Raimi made sure of that.

 

[Mike]

Is that it, that all you've got?

Uncle Ben doing the right thing and trying talk some thug into doing the right thing. That's you're comeback?

Do you really want to compare that to having your Uncle Ben's killer right in front of you as if to say, "I no longer care that you killed my Uncle, I no longer care about bringing you to justice, to hell with my Aunt May who lost her husband, to hell with my Father Figure who taught me most of who I am, to hell With Great Power...I'm going home. You can go free.

Trust me, you can't win this debate, Raimi made sure of that.

kick his ass sea bass! Lol

 

[A Necessary Evil]

I've already won it

 

[Mike]

I've already won it

hey KAW in la la land sm3 doesnt exist. We have no debate dude lol. He wins!

 

[Anno_Domini]

thats fair. But one day youre going to walk into wal mart and see SM3! Mwuahaha!

Seeing Spider-Man 3 at Wal-Mart doesn't affect my opinion. I see Batman Forever, Batman & Robin and all of those great ****** sequels, but they don't bother me either t:

Yeah, but Uncle Ben wasn't killed by the man in the first movie, UNCHECK. And now Spider-Man finally has the one who actually killed him, which is the turning point of Spider-Man's origin (finding Ben's killer), which happened in SM3.

He was killed by the man in the first movie if you don't pay attention to a film filled with one giant retcon

But, let's pay in mind Spider-Man 3's retcon; the only major problem if Sandman is the killer is that Spidey let him go. Yes, it's a HORRIBLE move, but the film forced the forgiveness theme throughout the film, so at a thematic point, letting Sandy go makes sense, it's just not something Spider-Man would do and it contradicts the 'With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility' motto because Sandy isn't being taken back to prison. Although, to say letting Marko go is a downside to Spidey's origin, or at least the part pertaining to Uncle Ben, it's not. Peter Parker went through countless lessons during his time as Spider-Man and keeps remembering those special words said by his uncle. He is Spider-Man and has gone through enough trials to already be Spider-Man. The retcon doesn't really kill Spidey's origin at all.

What, making Sandman Uncle Ben's killer, having two leads horribly cast for their roles, allowing Peter/Spider-Man to let a man fall to his death and his Uncle Ben's killer go free. Poor me...or poor Spider-Man? He's the one who got butchered. Although he can't tell you, because he doesn't speak, lol. t:

Making Sandman the killer isn't the issue, the retcon is. Sandman could have very well been the killer if planned out just as much as Black Cat's father was the killer in The Spectacular Spider-Man, so at least be clear if you're referring to the retcon as the problem.

But...to gripe on Raimi's trilogy when you yourself said we have two more films to go for Webb's series. Let's not say Raimi butchered his series so far when Webb could as well butcher his version. And he didn't do that well the first time at bat anyways, imo.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Is that it, that all you've got?

Uncle Ben doing the right thing and trying talk some thug into doing the right thing. That's you're comeback?

Do you really want to compare that to having your Uncle Ben's killer right in front of you as if to say, "I no longer care that you killed my Uncle, I no longer care about bringing you to justice, to hell with my Aunt May who lost her husband, to hell with my Father Figure who taught me most of who I am, to hell With Great Power...I'm going home. You can go free.

Trust me, you can't win this debate, Raimi made sure of that.

And for Webb's, it's this: "To hell with finding my uncle's killer; even though it seemed like I was very focus, I will take Captain Stacy's advice and stop searching for the killer, but damn that dead captain if he thinks I'm going to stay away from his daughter!"

 

[spider-neil]

If you ask me Webb AND raimi got it wrong. To me the whole point of the burgular scene is supposed to be about happenstance, an innocuous moment when through plain laziness/selfishness fails to stop common criminal when he has all the power in the world.

In both movies Peter was wronged so took his petty 'revenge', ANYONE would have done what Peter did. Peter was screwed out of money in the first movie and was two cents short in the ASM.

For pity sake what is so hard about doing a simple scene where after Peter revels in his power in one moment the next day or week he is in Oscorp/high school or just walking down the freaking street and a robber who is being chased by the police/security is running towards him. With all of the powers Peter displayed in the previous scene it would be easy to stop this criminal, heck even for a NORMAL man all he has to do is trip him up but oh no Peter lets him run past. The Policeman/security guard should then come up to Peter and say 'why didn't you stop him' to which Peter should say words to the effect of 'It's not my job/It's not my problem/let someone else handle it'.

Then you play out the movie and let the audience forget the scene, then you kill uncle Ben and then you have Peter catch the criminal and be hit by a ton of bricks when you get the reveal. Raimi's version is 'close' but imho it's still wrong. The burgular scene should be completely random and motivated by selfishness not revenge.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Is that it, that all you've got?

Uncle Ben doing the right thing and trying talk some thug into doing the right thing. That's you're comeback?

Do you really want to compare that to having your Uncle Ben's killer right in front of you as if to say, "I no longer care that you killed my Uncle, I no longer care about bringing you to justice, to hell with my Aunt May who lost her husband, to hell with my Father Figure who taught me most of who I am, to hell With Great Power...I'm going home. You can go free.

Trust me, you can't win this debate, Raimi made sure of that.

 

[©KAW]

If you ask me Webb AND raimi got it wrong. To me the whole point of the burgular scene is supposed to be about happenstance, an innocuous moment when through plain laziness/selfishness fails to stop common criminal when he has all the power in the world.

In both movies Peter was wronged so took his petty 'revenge', ANYONE would have done what Peter did. Peter was screwed out of money in the first movie and was two cents short in the ASM.

For pity sake what is so hard about doing a simple scene where after Peter revels in his power in one moment the next day or week he is in Oscorp/high school or just walking down the freaking street and a robber who is being chased by the police/security is running towards him. With all of the powers Peter displayed in the previous scene it would be easy to stop this criminal, heck even for a NORMAL man all he has to do is trip him up but oh no Peter lets him run past. The Policeman/security guard should then come up to Peter and say 'why didn't you stop him' to which Peter should say words to the effect of 'It's not my job/It's not my problem/let someone else handle it'.

Then you play out the movie and let the audience forget the scene, then you kill uncle Ben and then you have Peter catch the criminal and be hit by a ton of bricks when you get the reveal. Raimi's version is 'close' but imho it's still wrong. The burgular scene should be completely random and motivated by selfishness not revenge.

What the hell are you talking about, those scenes are suppose to be all about selfishness, nothing more and nothing less? It's about NOT doing the right thing, learning a horrible lesson from being selfish. Learning from it and then bettering yourself because of it. WTF comic book have you all been reading?

 

[©KAW]

Seeing Spider-Man 3 at Wal-Mart doesn't affect my opinion. I see Batman Forever, Batman & Robin and all of those great ****** sequels, but they don't bother me either t:



He was killed by the man in the first movie if you don't pay attention to a film filled with one giant retcon

But, let's pay in mind Spider-Man 3's retcon; the only major problem if Sandman is the killer is that Spidey let him go. Yes, it's a HORRIBLE move, but the film forced the forgiveness theme throughout the film, so at a thematic point, letting Sandy go makes sense, it's just not something Spider-Man would do and it contradicts the 'With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility' motto because Sandy isn't being taken back to prison. Although, to say letting Marko go is a downside to Spidey's origin, or at least the part pertaining to Uncle Ben, it's not. Peter Parker went through countless lessons during his time as Spider-Man and keeps remembering those special words said by his uncle. He is Spider-Man and has gone through enough trials to already be Spider-Man. The retcon doesn't really kill Spidey's origin at all.



Making Sandman the killer isn't the issue, the retcon is. Sandman could have very well been the killer if planned out just as much as Black Cat's father was the killer in The Spectacular Spider-Man, so at least be clear if you're referring to the retcon as the problem.

But...to gripe on Raimi's trilogy when you yourself said we have two more films to go for Webb's series. Let's not say Raimi butchered his series so far when Webb could as well butcher his version. And he didn't do that well the first time at bat anyways, imo.

Yeah, okay, I can't debate this with you if going to go into SM3 doesn't exist mode. And I happen to think he did better than all three movies the first time out. We don't have a Peter who stood by and did nothing as a man fell to his death before him--that he himself is involved with. Nor do we have a Peter who let his Uncle Ben's killer go free after catching him. Marc Webb can butcher it, depending on what he does in the next 1 to 2 films, but Sam Raimi has already butchered it.

 

[Oscorp]

TASM also took too many notes out of Raimi's already written book, though let's be honest; the Gwen/Peter moments were class.

Too many notes from the comics you mean?

 

[Oscorp]

Damn this place is crazy

 

[spider-neil]

What the hell are you talking about, those scenes are suppose to be all about selfishness, nothing more and nothing less? It's about NOT doing the right thing, learning a horrible lesson from being selfish. Learning from it and then bettering yourself because of it. WTF comic book have you all been reading?

Bloody hell, easy tiger!
What I took away from AF15 is that if you have the power to help someone you should (regardless of the circumstance). My general point is in the movies Peter was slighted so it was 'understandable' he acted in the manner he did, I probably would have done the same thing. But in AF15 Peter wasnt slighted and he was given the oppertunity to stop a crook even though the only motivation to do so was it was the right thing to do but he chose not to.
For me as a concept AF15 works better than both movies.