The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Shailene Woodley COULD BE Mary Jane Watson.....in TASM3

[Nicko-Ray]

MJ gives peter a lift to somewhere because car is broken down, that whole scene can be taken out, are we gonna watch this film and see the scene where peter is where ever MJ gave him a ride too and say OMG LOOK AT THE CHOPPY EDITING WE DID'NT EVEN SEE HOW PETER GOT THERE RAWR RAWR RAWR. webb can easy film a scene to get around that seeing as they are still filming or if anything get rid of any mention to it

Sadly, that's exactly what's gonna happen for some people.

 

[Picard Sisko]

So she was a throwaway character in some throwaway scenes? Why were there throwaway scenes in the first place? This is like, creative writing 101. You don't include it in the story unless it's necessary to...wait for it...telling the story.


Can I co-sign this? I couldn't possibly agree more. The guy seems to be stumbling in the dark and he's definitely bitten off more than he can chew. TASM was glaring proof of that. He made only one feature film prior to TASM (and it's "success" was based on the smart script, not direction). Why get a visionless novice to cut his teeth helming a big budget film about a beloved, iconic character? x infinity

And LOST ultimately turned out to be a massively dissapointing letdown, just like TASM. Huge potential, out the window.

Webb may have an "idea" about what he wants to do (George Lucas has lots of "ideas"), but let's be clear-he did not "pitch" TASM to them. The studio knew which direction they were headed in before Webb was announced as director. He may have had a hand in crafting some elements of the script, but he did not write the script.

Cutting important characters and revising what should have been a solid script from the start shows not only a lack of focus, but that he (nor the writers) didn't have a concrete plan for what he'd wanted to accomplish in the first place. I hate to bring up the Batman films, but Nolan is the boss in terms of having a stellar script with concrete ideas and focus and sticking to it- and turning out wonderful, well thought out films.

Every movie has scenes that are taken out of the movie and left as a "deleted scene." Not really a big deal. I wouldn't call MJ's scenes "throwaway scenes."

As for LOST... That's really just your opinion. I couldn't disagree more.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Sure, Marc Webb isn't writing the script, but he does have a say in what happens in it. He has an influence in what happens in the movie. That's why when you are watching TASM, you can feel that this is a "Marc Webb film." The relationships and chemistry between characters are strong, which is also very prominent his his last film (500) Days of Summer.

The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in 500DoS felt realistic and palpable because of the thoughtful, well developed script. The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in TASM felt unbelievable and tacked on because of the poor script, which was exacerbated by poor editing.

I was scratching my head when Gwen invited Peter over to her house for dinner as a first date after only having spoken to him (very briefly), two times prior, then immediately having them making out with Pete confessing his secret identity. None of it felt natural or well thought out. Ugh.

 

[Picard Sisko]

The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in 500DoS felt realistic and palpable because of the thoughtful, well developed script. The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in TASM felt unbelievable and tacked on because of the poor script, which was exacerbated by poor editing.

I was scratching my head when Gwen invited Peter over to her house for dinner as a first date after only having spoken to him (very briefly), two times prior, then immediately having them making out with Pete confessing his secret identity. None of it felt natural or well thought out. Ugh.

Well, to each their own. The chemistry/relationship in TASM was probably the best part of the movie, and it felt very believable IMO. I've known people in high school who started dating immediately after meeting and not really getting to know each other.

 

[eLPAtitoyUPI]

The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in 500DoS felt realistic and palpable because of the thoughtful, well developed script. The relationship/chemisty between the two leads in TASM felt unbelievable and tacked on because of the poor script, which was exacerbated by poor editing.

I was scratching my head when Gwen invited Peter over to her house for dinner as a first date after only having spoken to him (very briefly), two times prior, then immediately having them making out with Pete confessing his secret identity. None of it felt natural or well thought out. Ugh.

The hell? The chemestry between Peter and Gwen was a top point of the movie.

Well, to each their own. The chemistry/relationship in TASM was probably the best part of the movie, and it felt very believable IMO. I've known people in high school who started dating immediately after meeting and not really getting to know each other.

Don't tell him that, he will argue that they aren't teenagers any more at the time of the plot.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Every movie has scenes that are taken out of the movie and left as a "deleted scene." Not really a big deal. I wouldn't call MJ's scenes "throwaway scenes."

As for LOST... That's really just your opinion. I couldn't disagree more.

False.

Nolan's movies don't have deleted "throwaway" scenes. He knows exactly what he wants to film and how it will serve the story (thanks to having a strong script and well developed vision).

Even movies that do have deleted scenes- are scenes which are cut because of running length issues, much to the directors chagrin. Not to completely remove a character, revising the storyline in the midst of filming. It just doesn't bode well for TASM2, which is looking to be a repeat of the first one.

 

[Shikamaru]

If Shailene does end up being recast, it will most likely be due to scheduling. I severely doubt that she would be recast due to a bunch of cyber-bullies.

However, there is one good thing that can come out of her being recast for that reason and being replaced with an actress that is a total bombshell but can't act. It will be absolutely hilarious to see Shailene's haters praise the new actress' performance solely due to her looks despite the performance itself being bad.

So, question. What does this mean for Gwen's death?

Will she die in ASM2 and the girls never meet? Will she die in ASM3 in the same film first MJ appears?

I really hope she dies in the third film. I don't think I would accept a rushed version of Gwen's death or her death happening at someone other than the Green Goblin. It will really hurt the second film for me if she dies in that one.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Well, to each their own. The chemistry/relationship in TASM was probably the best part of the movie, and it felt very believable IMO. I've known people in high school who started dating immediately after meeting and not really getting to know each other.

The hell? The chemestry between Peter and Gwen was a top point of the movie.

Garfield and Stone are perfectly fine actors and when they were on screen together, it was great, but the rushed nature of the script- made worse by the awful editing and pacing made it all feel rushed, unnatural and unbelieveable.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

the ignorant negativity toward ASM2 in this thread is at an all time high.

 

[Picard Sisko]

False.

Nolan's movies don't have deleted "throwaway" scenes. He knows exactly what he wants to film and how it will serve the story (thanks to having a strong script and well developed vision).

Even movies that do have deleted scenes- are scenes which are cut because of running length issues, much to the directors chagrin. Not to completely remove a character, revising the storyline in the midst of filming. It just doesn't bode well for TASM2, which is looking to be a repeat of the first one.

Excuse me, but I'm sure even Christopher Nolan "the great" has found scenes in his movies which were taken out because they were unnecessary for the main plot or jus throwaway.

The 2009 Star Trek film had subplots and characters completely removed from the script because the director found them to be too complicated and unnecessary for the story. And look at what a success it turned out to be.

 

[Doctor Who]

I'm happy all the MJ scenes we're taken out of this movie and are going to be put into the third film instead. I felt with Peter's progression of the story with Gwen plus two brand new villains and Harry Osborn, that's enough to keep a sequel busy.

Since I've also never seen Woodley act before, I won't judge her performance based on looks... which STILL seems to be the same ol' b*tching I hear around here. The only problem I can see with these cut scenes is the flow of the film; loved TASM, but one of it's biggest flaws was that I could tell what scenes were cut before I even knew there were unused scenes. So I'm very much hoping for a better edit this time around.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Garfield and Stone are perfectly fine actors and when they were on screen together, it was great, but the rushed nature of the script- made worse by the awful editing and pacing made it all feel rushed, unnatural and unbelieveable.

Once again, just your opinion.

 

[Majik1387]

Stone and Garfield had one of the most believable chemistry's in a comic movie; What you smoking?

 

[Shikamaru]

Stone and Garfield had one of the most believable chemistry's in a comic movie; What you smoking?

This.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

This.

Truth.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

Stone and Garfield had one of the most believable chemistry's in a comic movie; What you smoking?

 

[Vid Electricz]

Once again, just your opinion.

Kinda goes without saying though, doesn't it? Just like you believing the romance was perfectly executed doesn't make it so.

 

[fuflipflops]

i don't think anyone is saying andrew and emma don't have chemistry, just that (in their opinion) gwen and peter's romance could've been handled differently.

 

[Majik1387]

No, someone distinctly said the chemistry was rushed, unnatural, and unbelievable.

They are wrong on all 3 counts.

 

[Vid Electricz]

i don't think anyone is saying andrew and emma don't have chemistry, just that (in their opinion) gwen and peter's romance could've been handled differently.

 

[GuestStar2004]

webb didn't rush the relationship between gwen and peter, there was actually alot of screen time for them together, alot more then most films do

 

[Vid Electricz]

No, someone distinctly said the chemistry was rushed, unnatural, and unbelievable.

They are wrong on all 3 counts.

Exactly what I wrote:

Garfield and Stone are perfectly fine actors and when they were on screen together, it was great, but the rushed nature of the script- made worse by the awful editing and pacing made it all feel rushed, unnatural and unbelieveable.

Meaning that the chemistry between them was just fine (ie. the way that they interacted with each other), but the story itself was rushed and compacted in a way that felt unnatural and contrived to ME. How do you rush chemistry anyway? Exactly what definition are you using for the word "chemistry"?

How can my opinion be wrong? Am I telling you that you're wrong on all three counts because I disagree with you?

 

[Majik1387]

Exactly what I wrote:

Garfield and Stone are perfectly fine actors and when they were on screen together, it was great, but the rushed nature of the script- made worse by the awful editing and pacing made it all feel rushed, unnatural and unbelieveable.

Meaning that the chemistry between them was just fine (ie. the way that they interacted with each other), but the story itself was rushed and compacted in a way that felt unnatural and contrived to ME. How do you rush chemistry anyway? Exactly what definition are you using for the word "chemistry"?

How can my opinion be wrong? Am I telling you that you're wrong on all three counts because I disagree with you?

Because your opinion contradicts itself.
"The chemistry was great! But it was too fast, unnatural and unbelievable! But it was great"
It makes no sense, obviously the pace and way the chemistry was built worked for you to believe it and like it, otherwise you wouldn't have believed it in any way.

webb didn't rush the relationship between gwen and peter, there was actually alot of screen time for them together, alot more then most films do

Exactly. It didn't drag, it wasn't an immediate thing, it was perfectly handled.

 

[Doctor Who]

i don't think anyone is saying andrew and emma don't have chemistry, just that (in their opinion) gwen and peter's romance could've been handled differently.

I thought their romance was the best selling point of the film. And prefer it being handled this way: teenage adolescence with roughs and bumps. It felt more grounded than most that I can take seriously. There's room for mistakes and it's an approach where Peter is being a little reckless... like most boys are at the coming of age.

The way I see it, he's not going to become the man with great power and great responsibility until it it costs him Gwen's life. It's a more tragic approach for humble beginnings, and I hope it goes that way if Webb plays those cards. I feel the journey of Andrew's Spiderman is going be far more difficult and more understanding towards common demographic who are nerds like Pete and me, or those who've lost a loved one or being that one person trying to make what should an impossible relationship work.

And so far... the romance is what they've got right so far, so I don't honestly see how opinions can differ.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

the ignorant negativity toward ASM2 in this thread is at an all time high.

Yeah and it's not just in this thread. Typical though--molehills and mountains.

Stone and Garfield had one of the most believable chemistry's in a comic movie; What you smoking?

t:

This.

Truth.

No, someone distinctly said the chemistry was rushed, unnatural, and unbelievable.

They are wrong on all 3 counts.

Yep.