The Amazing Spider-Man OFFICIAL Rate & Review the Amazing Spider-Man! - Part 1

[Anno_Domini]

Sounds a bit hypocritical to say we can only speak on something you enjoy and not dislike.

 

[Oscorp]

Yeah while I think chaseter is an extremely annoying and pretentious person on here, it is his right to make a negative review. Especially in a topic where you're supposed to write a review with your personal thoughts.

Though I can't say I agree with his post the slightest. They tried too hard to be different yet he critizises them for "copying SM1"? In what way would he be pleased then?

It has no classic feel? Well, IMO it has. Doesn't need to be campy and cheesy to feel classic.

But that's all up to him.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Sounds a bit hypocritical to say we can only speak on something you enjoy and not dislike.

No... What are you talking about? Its not hypocritical. If I said he should not be constantly criticizing the movie, but then I went off and did the same thing about another film I hate, then I would be a hypocrite.

Yeah while I think chaseter is an extremely annoying and pretentious person on here, it is his right to make a negative review. Especially in a topic where you're supposed to write a review with your personal thoughts.

Though I can't say I agree with his post the slightest. They tried too hard to be different yet he critizises them for "copying SM1"? In what way would he be pleased then?

It has no classic feel? Well, IMO it has. Doesn't need to be campy and cheesy to feel classic.

But that's all up to him.

I think I said this about 4 or 5 times, but I never said he doesn't have the right to give a negative review. I'm saying I don't see the point in constantly discussing how much you hate a movie on a message board, when you could be somewhere else talking about something you love. LET'S MOVE ON ALREADY.

I agree that the movie has a bit of the classic feel of Spider-Man, though not as much as the 2002 film. It has the basic elements all there, but it is more modernized. It's very "now." That's both good and bad, because it feels more relatable today, but could also mean that it won't age well. Then again, Star Wars feels like its 1979, but still holds up today. Back to the Future feels 80s, but can also be relatable for modern audiences. So only time will tell.

I don't see TASM "copying" SM1. There are similarities, and I noticed a few elements of the film that were used which originate with the Raimi films (Peter running back home to Uncle Ben/Aunt May after first using his powers, the villain has a dual personality), but the movie is still very different, and feels new to me. Now with a sequel, Webb can make his own Spider-Man movie without worrying about people calling it the "same" film over again. Unless Peter Parker quits being Spider-Man over again, I think we don't have to worry about that.

 

[Anno_Domini]

No... What are you talking about? Its not hypocritical. If I said he should not be constantly criticizing the movie, but then I went off and did the same thing about another film I hate, then I would be a hypocrite.

No...constantly talking about liking the film when chaseter can't come on here to talk about disliking the film is hypocritical.

You say one can't bring in their views, but you're doing the exact same thing and so are others. That's hypocrisy. Doesn't matter if it's positive or negative, they are all still views of the film and all should be free to say what they what.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I watched ASM again on Bluray just the other day and I must say that I agree with those that enjoy the movie more with each viewing.

 

[Picard Sisko]

No...constantly talking about liking the film when chaseter can't come on here to talk about disliking the film is hypocritical.

You say one can't bring in their views, but you're doing the exact same thing and so are others. That's hypocrisy. Doesn't matter if it's positive or negative, they are all still views of the film and all should be free to say what they what.

You don't give up, do you?

Moving on, finally...

I noticed during the scene where Dr. Connors shows us his "split personality," most of the lines are taken from the deleted lab scene, where he says "Would you give it all up? All the... POWER you feel?" I assume they threw that scene together in one of the last edits of the film.

 

[Fox]

Obviously everyone is welcome to their opinions, but I do have to wonder what exactly led you to form yours.

This whole movie just feels like a half assed and forced attempt on a Spider-Man movie.

What felt forced about the film exactly?

Nothing really felt genuine.

But you see, I thought it felt very genuine. I thought the performances felt real, I thought all of the choices by the characters and progression to the climax made sense and tied together nicely. The film actually worked with itself as a film, a single unified story that nicely covered the emotional journey of the character all wrapped up in a comic book movie.

Can you elaborate on why it DIDN't feel genuine to you?

You could tell Raimi was a huge fan of the character and to me this script seems like someone pretending to love the character. It has no classic feel at all.

I do believe Raimi has a huge love for the character, yes, but that doesn't mean he was automatically the right man for the job. I think Marc Webb's film actually does show a love for the character, making sure keep certain things fresh (we had just seen the previous trilogy after all), while also remaining faithful to the spirit of source material.

That said, what part of the film did you think wasn't done with a love of the character?

They tried too hard to make it different from the previous 3 that they focused on what they could do different than what they could do right ...all the way down to the costume.

What did they do wrong exactly? They did change some things yes, because, like I said, they had to or we would have been bored. But they made sure they still hit the essential beats of the character, and even the stuff they changed was not only true the the comics (Peter's Parents were barely touched on in Raimi's films), but also added a greater emotional foundation for our character and the the future of the series.

As for the costume, it never bothered me while I was watching the film. When I first saw stills I was a bit concerned, but by the time I saw it I barely noticed the changes, because he still looks like Spider-man. If anything, I actually believed Peter could make this costume, whereas I never really accepted that the costume from the last films could have been made without a substantial costuming budget.

What's hilarious is how much they copied from SM1 without realizing it.

I see that less as 'copying the movies' as it is 'taking from the source material'. The Flash basketball scene? I felt it had more in common with Ultimate Spider-man than it did with the 'hallway fight scene' in Raimi's film. Peter discovering his powers? Well yeah of course they had that in there. It's kind of part of the plot. Peter using his webbing for the first time? aside from the fact that its 'the first time' the scene's were pretty different, but what would you prefer? That Peter just uses his webbing with no explanation?

Both TASM and SM are origin movies. About the same character. By their virtue they kind of NEED to have a number of scenes that share a certain level similarity.

This film wasn't supposed to be an homage to the 1962 comic book, but rather an interpretation of the character in 2012. So while you may prefer the older film for it's 'traditional' feel, I prefer the newer one because I think it feels more relevant.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

I like the Spider-man choreography much more in this one. I though SM swinging on one big web in the Raimi series was great at first, but I like ASM's web slinging a bit more. . Plus I think we had better angles. I still love the swing scene in SM2, though, when he goes to the play. And lest we forget:

ASM is really growing on me...(In terms of Spider-man scenes)

 

[Picard Sisko]

Obviously everyone is welcome to their opinions, but I do have to wonder what exactly led you to form yours.



What felt forced about the film exactly?



But you see, I thought it felt very genuine. I thought the performances felt real, I thought all of the choices by the characters and progression to the climax made sense and tied together nicely. The film actually worked with itself as a film, a single unified story that nicely covered the emotional journey of the character all wrapped up in a comic book movie.

Can you elaborate on why it DIDN't feel genuine to you?



I do believe Raimi has a huge love for the character, yes, but that doesn't mean he was automatically the right man for the job. I think Marc Webb's film actually does show a love for the character, making sure keep certain things fresh (we had just seen the previous trilogy after all), while also remaining faithful to the spirit of source material.

That said, what part of the film did you think wasn't done with a love of the character?



What did they do wrong exactly? They did change some things yes, because, like I said, they had to or we would have been bored. But they made sure they still hit the essential beats of the character, and even the stuff they changed was not only true the the comics (Peter's Parents were barely touched on in Raimi's films), but also added a greater emotional foundation for our character and the the future of the series.

As for the costume, it never bothered me while I was watching the film. When I first saw stills I was a bit concerned, but by the time I saw it I barely noticed the changes, because he still looks like Spider-man. If anything, I actually believed Peter could make this costume, whereas I never really accepted that the costume from the last films could have been made without a substantial costuming budget.



I see that less as 'copying the movies' as it is 'taking from the source material'. The Flash basketball scene? I felt it had more in common with Ultimate Spider-man than it did with the 'hallway fight scene' in Raimi's film. Peter discovering his powers? Well yeah of course they had that in there. It's kind of part of the plot. Peter using his webbing for the first time? aside from the fact that its 'the first time' the scene's were pretty different, but what would you prefer? That Peter just uses his webbing with no explanation?

Both TASM and SM are origin movies. About the same character. By their virtue they kind of NEED to have a number of scenes that share a certain level similarity.

This film wasn't supposed to be an homage to the 1962 comic book, but rather an interpretation of the character in 2012. So while you may prefer the older film for it's 'traditional' feel, I prefer the newer one because I think it feels more relevant.

Well, couldn't have said it better.

I like the Spider-man choreography much more in this one. I though SM swinging on one big web in the Raimi series was great at first, but I like ASM's web slinging a bit more. . Plus I think we had better angles. I still love the swing scene in SM2, though, when he goes to the play. And lest we forget:

ASM is really growing on me...(In terms of Spider-man scenes)

I think it has a lot to do with special effects improving over a period of time. Spider-Man 1 was made over ten years ago, and it has already been 8 years since the second film. Spider-Man 3 was pretty much the same as Spider-Man 2, though there were some neat shots of Spider-Man swinging (saving Gwen Stacey, waking up with the symbiote costume). With the Amazing Spider-Man, it really feels like he is swinging through the streets. Its just more believable. The Raimi Spider-Man looks too perfect when swinging through the NYC streets.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I didnt think much of this movie when I saw it in the cinema, I gave it an 8 but the more I thought about the more I disliked it, finally watched it on BD and enjoyed it SO much more.

It still doesnt beat Raimi's first 2 movies for me personally, and Raimi still did the origin better, but tASM grew on me hugely with a re-watch. Garfield is just awesome in this, he plays the role superbly. And yes with better technology some of Spidey scene's were superb, although the fights are still a little dissapointing.

 

[Picard Sisko]

The first two Raimi films will always hold a place in my heart, and I think Spider-Man 2 is my favorite comic book film of all time. But I think TASM has a lot more potential for the franchise than SM1 did back in 2002.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Imo, TAS-M lost its potential for a great franchise with how many flaws the film has. If anything, TAS-M 2 can just end up being the better film and not really build up on the first film.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Imo, TAS-M lost its potential for a great franchise with how many flaws the film has. If anything, TAS-M 2 can just end up being the better film and not really build up on the first film.

How so? The first film has a lot of flaws, but it set up a lot of cool stories for the sequels. Its just a matter of these stories being done right.

 

[Aracno_8000]

Hi buddies! i hust want to tell that the amazing spiderman has been a very very good movie, for what regards the story of peter and his parents...and im happy that there are unsolved questions, because the sequels will be interesting and close to the comics stories...i really like how Marc Webb configured this new trilogy.

Meanwhile....Tobeys talks about his reaction on TASM reboot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lISRruMLGJs Loooool

 

[Anno_Domini]

How so? The first film has a lot of flaws, but it set up a lot of cool stories for the sequels. Its just a matter of these stories being done right.

But the flaws is what messes up the first film. Scenes being taken out that lose character development, one character's fate being unknown and may not even show up in the sequel, the idea of Peter Parker being tested on that's no longer in the film film thus nulling the 'Untold Story' idea, even the loose end of Uncle Ben's killer being out and about(which, imo, this is the only thing that could be set right as it's possibly meant to have ended this way, but the other three I mentioned? They were obviously meant to be in the first film and shown).

 

[Oscorp]

But the flaws is what messes up the first film. Scenes being taken out that lose character development, one character's fate being unknown and may not even show up in the sequel, the idea of Peter Parker being tested on that's no longer in the film film thus nulling the 'Untold Story' idea, even the loose end of Uncle Ben's killer being out and about(which, imo, this is the only thing that could be set right as it's possibly meant to have ended this way, but the other three I mentioned? They were obviously meant to be in the first film and shown).

I don't see how taking out the story of Peter Parker being tested on (IF that's taken out completely and not saved for ASM2) hurts the story overall. For me, personally, it's a good thing they took that out because I just don't want that twist.

Ratha's sudden disappearing is a flaw for sure, unless they intend to keep him in the sequel. But we don't know yet.

Uncle Ben's killer obviously has a bigger part of the story (maybe Peter finding him, wanting to beat him to a pult but have learnt that revenge is not the solution). I think that's pretty clearly shown by Webb in ASM.

So what if they don't go with the "Untold Story" thing? Does that make the story they go with any worse? This sequel doesn't have as much potential as Raimi's because they don't go with the Untold Story? Doesn't make too much sense to me.

EDIT: The whole build-up of Norman Osborn and Oscorp and Gwen Stacy's death alone makes this trilogy have much more potential in my eyes.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I don't see how taking out the story of Peter Parker being tested on (IF that's taken out completely and not saved for ASM2) hurts the story overall. For me, personally, it's a good thing they took that out because I just don't want that twist.

Ratha's sudden disappearing is a flaw for sure, unless they intend to keep him in the sequel. But we don't know yet.

Uncle Ben's killer obviously has a bigger part of the story (maybe Peter finding him, wanting to beat him to a pult but have learnt that revenge is not the solution). I think that's pretty clearly shown by Webb in ASM.

So what if they don't go with the "Untold Story" thing? Does that make the story they go with any worse? This sequel doesn't have as much potential as Raimi's because they don't go with the Untold Story? Doesn't make too much sense to me.

EDIT: The whole build-up of Norman Osborn and Oscorp and Gwen Stacy's death alone makes this trilogy have much more potential in my eyes.

Spider-Man in 2002 didn't plan too much for the sequels (other than Harry Osborn swearing revenge on Spider-Man).

Peter will find his uncle in the sequel, and I'm sure they are planning something cool with it. They cut out the scene with Dr. Ratha getting killed, so its possible he may come back. If he doesn't, it would be very disappointing, but I don't think that ruins the sequels.

The Untold Story is about the parents, and that will be furthered explored. We don't know if Peter's father actually experimented on him or not, that is just an assumption based on one of the cut lines, "Do you think what happened to you, Peter, was an accident?" All we can do is assume.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Yes, the 'Untold Story' could be a big loss since the first film and even the Blu-ray/DVD promos focused on that, then with anything about an 'Untold Story' not even being mentioned. Huge flaw if you ask me, something they could've fixed for the Blu-ray/DVD promos since certain scenes/dialogue was taken out of the final cut.

 

[Picard Sisko]

They just recycled TV spots and promos from the theatrical release to advertise the Blu-Ray. Those are marketing flaws, and shouldn't be used to deduct points from the film itself.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It kills the movie when you see it though and realizing it's no different than just another adaptation of the origin.

 

[Picard Sisko]

It was another adaption of the origin, but I think it set up the "Untold Story." I don't think it killed the movie, at least not for me, since I kind of had some low expectations walking in. The movie raised questions, beginning the untold story, that will be answered in the sequels.

There is only a one scene in the film that I can actually say I hate. Peter walking into the Police Station to tell Captain Stacey about Dr. Connors... it felt so forced, and the acting was way off. "Not a dinosaur, and not dressing up. He has transformed himself into a giant lizard." Anyone feel the same about that?

 

[Nathan]

Not really. I think accusing someone of having transformed into a giant Lizard, is going to sound silly, no matter how you say it.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Not really. I think accusing someone of having transformed into a giant Lizard, is going to sound silly, no matter how you say it.

I can't explain it. Maybe its because his accent kept slipping in that scene, but something about it didn't feel right. Like they accidentally used the wrong take in the final cut of the film. Its the one scene that makes me cringe every time I see it. I love the movie, and still have it rated as 8.5/10...

 

[Anno_Domini]

It was another adaption of the origin, but I think it set up the "Untold Story." I don't think it killed the movie, at least not for me, since I kind of had some low expectations walking in. The movie raised questions, beginning the untold story, that will be answered in the sequels.

That's a logical excuse to say it only set up an untold story since we didn't get it in the film film, lol, but there had to be some kind of untold story that was in the film at first that was just taken out and that's what killed a lot of expectations for a lot of people when they first went to see TAS-M. I know I didn't have any expectations as I promised myself I wouldn't have any for any other film after Spider-Man 3, and while I enjoyed TAS-M far better than S-M 3, I can say that I was a bit shocked to see no 'Untold Story' at all.

There is only a one scene in the film that I can actually say I hate. Peter walking into the Police Station to tell Captain Stacey about Dr. Connors... it felt so forced, and the acting was way off. "Not a dinosaur, and not dressing up. He has transformed himself into a giant lizard." Anyone feel the same about that?

That and many other scenes, lol.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I don't think there really was much more to the film than what we saw. It definitely is a setup for future films, where the "untold story" will really be told, however.

I don't think there are any other scenes in the film I could say are hatable. At least that's my opinion. What other scenes did you hate?