The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Harry Osborn in the new trailer...

[Miken Ayers]

I don't know if I'm a fan of Peter and Harry knowing eachother previously, and meeting for the first time in ten years. Since the last movie centered around OSCORP, wouldn't Peter being childhood friends with the CEO's son come up before now?

 

[webhead731]

Please, that would have required them to think ahead. I think they are just pulling stuff out of their ass.

 

[Picard Sisko]

They were childhood friends. Bringing him up in TASM1 wouldn't have even been relevant.

 

[Broseph44]

This doesn't need it's own thread. And of course webhead comes in here to chime in with his obvious hatred for the film. Already made up his mind. Very nice.

 

[Miken Ayers]

They were childhood friends. Bringing him up in TASM1 wouldn't have even been relevant.

A multibillion dollar company his father worked for, leads to what his father was working on till he died in a plane crash, also owned by probably a family friend if Richard Parker and Norman Osborn's kids were childhood friends.

That's more than a little relevant.

 

[Miken Ayers]

This doesn't need it's own thread. And of course webhead comes in here to chime in with his obvious hatred for the film. Already made up his mind. Very nice.

Then don't post in it. It may go away quicker.

 

[Broseph44]

Then don't post in it. It may go away quicker.

Don't worry this thread will be locked soon. Pointless thread is pointless. Good day sir.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

Well, seeing as Ultimate Eddie Brock was the same way... a childhood friend who returned in Peter's life only to suddenly undergo a change that would ultimately affect their friendship let alone, too, their dads were working on something that would 'change the world' ala the symbiote suit.

So I don't get what's the big deal? They didn't pull the idea out of their ass; they just substituted Eddie for Harry.

 

[Morbius]

And no-one mentioned the Sandman-Uncle-Ben-death being pulled outta a magic hat. I prefer to think of it as pulling it out of a hat, rather than an ass. It sounds a lot less disgusting that way, y'know?

 

[jacobed]

Nowhere in the first would that come up. Sure he goes into Oscorp but he never talks about it with anyone so when would Harry ever come up. Wouldn't care if this was a pointless thread but man the creator is a jerk. Plus wrong

 

[SikeMullivan]

I mean, as bigoted as webhead is, he's right. Connors and Peter very likely would have brought it up. But let's be honest, there's **** like that in every sequel. No one had mentioned Harvey Dent in Batman Begins? Suddenly he's the cat's pj's a day later (literally a day. Batman receives Joker's "calling card" at BB's end)?

Shame on them for expanding the universe.

 

[chaseter]

Don't worry this thread will be locked soon. Pointless thread is pointless. Good day sir.

Pass around the rose colored glasses.


bump

 

[JOE]

Lolololol.

 

[Fudgie]

I mean, as bigoted as webhead is, he's right. Connors and Peter very likely would have brought it up. But let's be honest, there's **** like that in every sequel. No one had mentioned Harvey Dent in Batman Begins? Suddenly he's the cat's pj's a day later (literally a day. Batman receives Joker's "calling card" at BB's end)?

Shame on them for expanding the universe.

TDK is set nearly a year after BB.

Joker: "A year ago these Cops and lawyers wouldn't dare cross any of you"

 

[SikeMullivan]

That doesn't mean that Batman has been around for a year. And even so, it takes Batman and Gordon a year to investigate The Joker...? Even though he's already been leaving his card at crimes by the end of BB? And it takes Harvey Dent a year to be literally a nobody to hot shot DA? Either way it's ridiculous and my point remains: sequels retcon and shoehole all of the time. It's about finding a way to make it work.

 

[Fudgie]

That doesn't mean that Batman has been around for a year.

Yup it does since the Cops and lawyers didn't dare go after the head mob guys until Batman came along and they nailed Falcone in Begins. In Begins the mob was untouchable and the Cops and lawyers could never touch them or even tried to until Batman came along and gave them the dirt on Falcone.

And even so, it takes Batman and Gordon a year to investigate The Joker...? Even though he's already been leaving his card at crimes by the end of BB?

Yup because back then Joker was just a theatrical bank robber to them. Even the mob didn't take him seriously when he stole like 60 mil from them.

Chechen: "Who's stupid enough to steal from us?"
Maroni: "Two bit whack job who wears a cheap purple suit and make up. He's not the problem. He's a nobody"

Gordon and Bats were more concerned with nailing the organized crime. The mob.

Gordon: "What about this Joker guy?"
Batman: "One man or the entire mob? He can wait"

And it takes Harvey Dent a year to be literally a nobody to hot shot DA? Either way it's ridiculous and my point remains: sequels retcon and shoehole all of the time. It's about finding a way to make it work.

Yup you can accomplish a hell of a lot in a year. He wasn't really considered a hot D.A. until he locks up half of the city's criminals. He did that in like a day or two.

 

[SikeMullivan]

He suddenly became enough to warrant Batman's interest because *gasp* he's conveniently dating Rachel.

lol Dude, my point remains no matter how much you defend it. Things that were written into TDK could have very easily been mentioned in BB, just like Harry probably could've been mentioned in TASM but wasn't. My point is that that doesn't matter. If the story is well written and the characters are well acted and well written, it won't matter. Just like it didn't matter in TDK.

 

[Fudgie]

He suddenly became enough to warrant Batman's interest because *gasp* he's conveniently dating Rachel.

Nope he became an interest when Bruce saw how good and honest he was, and a big Batman booster, too, so he tested him to see if he was as great as he seemed by giving him that Chinese Mob accountant guy and getting him to squeal on the mob and put them away.

Harvey did it. He put away more crooks than Batman had ever managed.

lol Dude, my point remains no matter how much you defend it.

Nah they don't. I have facts from the movies to prove you wrong.

Things that were written into TDK could have very easily been mentioned in BB

Nah they couldn't since in BB they had a D.A. called Finch who was eventually murdered at the end. That set the way for Dent to be the new D.A. in the sequel.

But they didn't need to mention Dent because it's not like he was a personal friend of Bruce's or anyone else in the BB movie.

just like Harry probably could've been mentioned in TASM but wasn't. My point is that that doesn't matter. If the story is well written and the characters are well acted and well written, it won't matter. Just like it didn't matter in TDK.

I don't care about Harry not being mentioned in TASM. I'm just proving you wrong about TDK.

 

[SikeMullivan]

lol You're taking facts from the sequel that you have already seen. I'll be able to do exactly what you're doing with TASM2 after it comes out....which once again is my point.

But for whatever reason you aren't getting it. I'm not even arguing with you haha

 

[Fudgie]

lol You're taking facts from the sequel that you have already seen. I'll be able to do exactly what you're doing with TASM2 after it comes out....which once again is my point.

Then you shouldn't be trying to argue TASM2's case if you haven't seen it should you. I can argue TDK's because I have seen it. I wasn't talking about TASM. Only TDK.

But for whatever reason you aren't getting it. I'm not even arguing with you haha

I get it fine pal. I'm not talking about Harry or TASM. Just Dent and TDK. You're the one who brought it up to try and back a point about a movie you ain't seen yet.

 

[Chivi]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Peter forgot about Harry until he saw him again on the news. Especially with all the crap going on with his parents, his social life, and his work as Spider-man. That being said, it was a bit disappointing that Harry was not mentioned at all in the first film.

 

[SikeMullivan]

Then you shouldn't be trying to argue TASM2's case if you haven't seen it should you. I can argue TDK's because I have seen it. I wasn't talking about TASM. Only TDK.



I get it fine pal. I'm not talking about Harry or TASM. Just Dent and TDK. You're the one who brought it up to try and back a point about a movie you ain't seen yet.

You should go back and read my posts...I really don't get why you're missing this.

The first thing I said was that we need to wait and see how it plays out. You should probably understand the context of the posts before responding to them.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

having seen all the footage of Harry so far, I can honestly see real chemistry between his Harry and Andrew's Peter. Maybe even better than Harry's and Peter's chemistry in the Raimi movies which I thought was one of the few good things in that trilogy

 

[The Shape]

To be fair towards TDK, Harvey Dent was likely working at Internal Affairs during the events of BB (as he mentions in TDK). In BB, Rachel's DA parter was murdered. So, it makes perfect sense that Harvey was promoted to DA in between the events of BB and TDK, after which he begins a relationship with Rachel.

No need or reason for him to be mentioned in BB, if you ask me.

 

[TheLongestDay]

To be fair towards TDK, Harvey Dent was likely working at Internal Affairs during the events of BB (as he mentions in TDK). In BB, Rachel's DA parter was murdered. So, it makes perfect sense that Harvey was promoted to DA in between the events of BB and TDK, after which he begins a relationship with Rachel.

No need or reason for him to be mentioned in BB, if you ask me.

well said