The Amazing Spider-Man Marc Webb to return? - Part 1

[Anno_Domini]

well true , but remember any other movie franchise that was rebooted,made the origin again?

TAS-M didn't really have to, though.

And..."Not my problem" to "Not my policy" doesn't help.

Okay, you thought it was fascinating, I didn't, I can live with that.

Yeah, but he wasn't walking down the street like a goofy ******, with the "Rain Drops..." song blowing in the wind while tripping over his shoe laces. What about the goofy scene with him and the broom in the closet, or the elevator scene, or the backyard scenes with MJ (yuck). When he's not a social ******, he's an awkward goofball, and when he's not an awkward goofball, he's a muted Spider-Man with the personality of a dead person.

Goofy? Sure. ******? See, that's where your argument falls flat.

Yeah right, in SM1 he only let a man fall to his death without slinging a web to save him. When the idea was always to do the right thing and bring him to justice. And yes, as much as you don't want to connect SM1/SM2 to SM3, it didn't stop Sam Raimi from doing just that, and giving us his real Spider-Man origin story in SM3...not SM1. Letting Marko go defeats the purpose of "With Great Power...", now we have a hero who doesn't fight for or believe that a murderer/bank robber should go to prison. I would have settled for Spider-Man at least saying to Marko, "If you want my forgiveness than turn yourself in."

Like I said...I don't pay attention to Spider-Man 3 anymore. To me, the real product is the duology of Spider-Man 1 and 2.

Honestly, if we are spending all this time comparing Tobey to Garfield, Raimi to Webb, 2002 to 2012, you have to look at the trilogy as a whole. Take the good with the bad. If Sony and Raimi thought SM3 was worth releasing, its one part of a whole trilogy.

And if you aren't gonna do that, you have to stick with just the first one. Spider-Man vs. Amazing Spider-Man, and compare them as origin stories. You can't pick and choose which performance by Tobey to compare with Garfield, because Garfield hasn't been given three movies to prove himself.

My opinion, of course. Just doesn't seem fair.

Superman III and IV was thought of being "worth releasing" but fans never bring those two up when they talk about loving the old Superman films. Should they? Is it not fair to take out III and IV because they're crap? What about Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, X-Men: The Last Stand?

And as origin stories, I much prefer the '02 film.

That whole statement is extremely hypocritical. Theres no reason to use Spider-Man 3, when everyone knows it was a developmental mess.

 

[©KAW]

Goofy? Sure. ******? See, that's where your argument falls flat.

Actually it doesn't fall flat, I'm not calling him "******ed," I'm saying he's a "social" ******. Meaning, this guy stumbles over words when he's talking to MJ, who he has known for years. He stands at the end of the block looking up at her window, pining with doe-eyes like a ***** cat for a saucer of milk. Last time I checked, that was stalking. It wouldn't be so bad if Raimi didn't focus the majority of screen-time on their romance in each film.

Like I said...I don't pay attention to Spider-Man 3 anymore. To me, the real product is the duology of Spider-Man 1 and 2.

Did you not read my post, SM1 isn't Spider-Man's origin story (only half of it), so how can you not pay attention to SM3, the movie that completed his real and full origin story?

James Cameron made a doulogy with Terminator and T2.

Sam Raimi didn't make a doulogy (even though your mind likes to block out SM3 like a really bad traumatic experience), he made a TRILOGY. Sooner or later you're going to have to own up to that, it's fact.

 

[chaseter]

I block out this movie. Marc Webb hasn't made a Spider-Man movie yet. If the next movie is fantastic...no need to buy this one.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I block out this movie. Marc Webb hasn't made a Spider-Man movie yet. If the next movie is fantastic...no need to buy this one.

Good For You. ASM was not fantastic imo, but it was a very good start and if the sequel improves on everything, it will only make this movie even more so. There's no need to buy a movie, it fits into the 'want' category and I will be doing just that.

 

[Oscorp]

Amazing Spider-Man is the only Spider-Man movie made

 

[chaseter]

Webb did such a great job that Sony will try anything to get him back.

 

[Oscorp]

Actually, the thing that might stop him from working with the sequel is FOX rather than Sony.

 

[chaseter]

Nah...that's the PR excuse. That would have been known before ASM production.

 

[Oscorp]

Let's wait and see what happens. But Sony replacing Webb might not mean he made a bad movie, just not the movie Sony wanted. Sony have made bad decisions before. Sony wanted Venom in SM3, doesn't mean that was a good idea. Sony might want to go the Transformers route, which could be a reason for replacing Webb.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I would love to have Webb give it another go but honestly it doesn't matter to me who directs the sequel, so long as it is someone that can find a good balance between the character development and the action.

 

[Web face]

Webb did such a great job that Sony will try anything to get him back.

I guess that means that Sam Raimi was a bad director because Sony didn't try anything to get him back.

 

[Oscorp]

What I hope the most is that Webb returns and improves a little on the action. Nolan did improve on that as well, I have no doubt that Webb might as well. The stuff he does well is too good to waste away for some two dimensional action director.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Actually it doesn't fall flat, I'm not calling him "******ed," I'm saying he's a "social" ******. Meaning, this guy stumbles over words when he's talking to MJ, who he has known for years. He stands at the end of the block looking up at her window, pining with doe-eyes like a ***** cat for a saucer of milk. Last time I checked, that was stalking. It wouldn't be so bad if Raimi didn't focus the majority of screen-time on their romance in each film.

Still don't buy the word "******" being associated to Maguire's Peter at all. So, yes, your argument indeed falls flat when you use that word.

Did you not read my post, SM1 isn't Spider-Man's origin story (only half of it), so how can you not pay attention to SM3, the movie that completed his real and full origin story?

A retcon doesn't mean it completed the origin

Sam Raimi didn't make a doulogy (even though your mind likes to block out SM3 like a really bad traumatic experience), he made a TRILOGY. Sooner or later you're going to have to own up to that, it's fact.

No **** it's fact Sam Raimi directed Spider-Man 3, but since it destroys the real origin, any character development made by from Spider-Man 2 and makes every villain in the third installment worthless, then I'd rather just have 1 and 2 in my DVD/Blu-ray library.

Amazing Spider-Man is the only Spider-Man movie made

You talk about my "childish" remarks when you say this.

I would love to have Webb give it another go but honestly it doesn't matter to me who directs the sequel, so long as it is someone that can find a good balance between the character development and the action.

Agreed.

The sequel definitely needs more of both and also a balance as you said.

I guess that means that Sam Raimi was a bad director because Sony didn't try anything to get him back.

Sony, instead, shouldn't have forced all of their ideas unto Raimi.

 

[Web face]

Sony, instead, shouldn't have forced all of their ideas unto Raimi.

Exactly my point. Just because Sony isn't trying that hard to get Marc Webb back, doesn't mean that he didn't do a good job. Sam Raimi did a fantastic job with the first 2. It was when Sony stuck their fingers in a little too deep into the movie when things started getting bad.

 

[TheBat812]

Is there any confirmation to that rumor that much of ASMs arc was cut out of the second and third acts?

 

[Web face]

Is there any confirmation to that rumor that much of ASMs arc was cut out of the second and third acts?

I don't think so I think it is just a rumor that people use lines from the trailer that weren't included in the full movie to support. It is possible that that is what happened, but there is no hard proof.
Correct me if I am wrong though.

 

[Transcended]

This is the CBM sequel I'm currently most anxious about. I really hope Sony doesn't go for a full tonal overhaul; I love what's been established in ASM.

 

[chaseter]

I guess that means that Sam Raimi was a bad director because Sony didn't try anything to get him back.

They brought him back for 4...he walked. Sooooooooo........

 

[Web face]

They brought him back for 4...he walked. Sooooooooo........

So they didn't try anything to bring him back.

 

[chaseter]

Walking =/= fired.

 

[Anno_Domini]

This is the CBM sequel I'm currently most anxious about. I really hope Sony doesn't go for a full tonal overhaul; I love what's been established in ASM.

While I can't say it's the sequel I'm more anxious about(X-Men: Days of Future Past is the one I'm most excited over), I am really hoping for something special for TAS-M 2. As much as I can't say I rather enjoy TAS-M a whole lot as others, I can say that the reboot didn't die from just one film. It had some good points where the sequel can build upon and become better at points that lacked or failed, imo, with the first film.

 

[Web face]

Walking =/= fired.

Walking=Sony didn't try hard enough to get him back.

 

[LegendAssemble]

Is there any confirmation to that rumor that much of ASMs arc was cut out of the second and third acts?

Yeah pretty much. People here will say theres no confirmation but theres those lines from the trailers, and pictures of a fully rendered Lizard, Unmasked Peter Parker, and Dr.Ratha in a confrontation in his hideout. If you're familiar with deleted scenes involving a great deal of CGI, they're usually not fully rendered because effects like that aren't cheap and take a lot of time. Also with the choppy editing of Peter finding Connors hideout of the film (notice no wideshots of Peter in the room, only close ups), and the inclusion of Ratha (which created a huge plot hole, something the crew would vigorously avoid) it's evident that this whole segment was cut out very late in production for reasons officially unknown. However that being said Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson are officially innocent, but most of the evidence points otherwise.

Walking =/= fired.

Walked means walked. They had to have the movie out by 2012 and Raimi was adamant on keeping the Vulture and not having a repeat of 3. He left the project along with the entire crew and given the lack of progress over the past 2 years they had a plan b and didn't feel the need to negotiate. You act like Sony was somehow more pleased with Webb than him but they edited Webbs movie to hell and all three of Sams made significantly more money without inflation or 3D boosts. In short Walking does not equal fired.

 

[LegendAssemble]

While I can't say it's the sequel I'm more anxious about(X-Men: Days of Future Past is the one I'm most excited over), I am really hoping for something special for TAS-M 2. As much as I can't say I rather enjoy TAS-M a whole lot as others, I can say that the reboot didn't die from just one film. It had some good points where the sequel can build upon and become better at points that lacked or failed, imo, with the first film.

this.

 

[SpiderMarvelite]

SONY needs to fight for the man who made the best Spider-Man movie and reboot of all time. Bastards will get studio hack or something.

TASM2- **** BLOWS UP.
TASM3- MORE **** BLOWING UP WITH BOOBS.