The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Man Reboot Costume Part 4 - "What's that in his eye??" edition

[Spider-ManHero12]

But why would Peter make his suit evolve? I mean, it's psosible, but I just don't see it happening.

 

[©KAW]

Now you care about faithfulness to the f---ing comics. After all of the drastic changes in Raimi's films that you love like it's your mother.

 

[roach]

someone's off his pills

 

[©KAW]

I just love the irony in this.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Now you care about faithfulness to the f---ing comics. After all of the drastic changes in Raimi's films that you love like it's your mother.

Because those were changes that worked, if you ask me. Besdes, there's a lot of stuff in Riami's film that is faithful that you probably don't even know. Btw, I've said a bunch of times that I liked the suit, I'm just not obsessed with it as other people.

Maybe the costume will work great for thee film and I hope it does. We'll just have to wait and see. Like I said, I like the suit, but deifnitely not as much. Does that mean I'll hate the film? Absoloutely not and there are quite a few things that look awesome so far, but I'm also very skeptical. What's wrong with that? Start looking at your faults AND trolling habits, my friend. You're the king of it. Let's face it, you've got something against Raimi for no reason and you're a bandwagon fan. You're no better than anybody else on here no matter how self loving you seem to act.

Btw, since when have you ever cared about the comics? Seriously, since when have you ever referenced a Spider-Man story?

 

[roach]

you mean the irony in people who bash the Raimi films for not being faithful and yet praise the new production when the suit isnt faithful?

 

[©KAW]

you mean the irony in people who bash the Raimi films for not being faithful and yet praise the new production when the suit isnt faithful?

Sam Raimi made mediocre Spider-Man films (even with the classic suit) quality-wise, I bashed him as director who doesn't know when he has a horrible script or how to direct his actors. The Dark Knight has changes that are not faithful to the comics, including his classic gray/blue suit. Still, it's a great Batman film with room to evolve. I can't say that about Spider-Man franchise now can I. I've never praised this production for the suit, just for the riddance of the director and two lead actors. I've seen there work in Spider-Man, and the classic suit or classic web-shooters couldn't have save these films from mediocrity.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Sam Raimi made mediocre Spider-Man films (even with the classic suit) quality-wise, I bashed him as director who doesn't know when he has a horrible script or how to direct his actors. The Dark Knight has changes that are not faithful to the comics, including his classic gray/blue suit. Still, it's a great Batman film with room to evolve. I can't say that about Spider-Man franchise now can I. I've never praised this production for the suit, just for the riddance of the director and two lead actors. I've seen there work in Spider-Man, and the classic suit or classic web-shooters couldn't have save these films from mediocrity.

You are so ignorant, my friend. How many Spider-Man comics have you even read? Sure, Raimi made some changes, but overall, they worked (it shows by audience reactions) and his films were based off of the classic version of the character and if you can't see that, then maybe you should read more comics or something. Not panel for panel, but he put his own twist on a classic era of the Spider-Man comics. It's the classic Peter parker and there were comic book similarities in there whether you want to admit it or not. Changes? Yeah, but the essence was there.

Changes are always going to happen, but when you change a suit (like here) that could have easily looked different but with a different texture and small changes, then it's worth noting. Like I said, I'm not bashing the suit (I like it), I'm just saying what I think is true. This movie could be fantastic, so we'll see, but the fact that you're getting upset due to skepticism is VERY VERY hypocritical. Skepticism IS necessary.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Truthfully,the suit has grown on me,but I still wanna see how it looks in action. But,honestly,Raimi's suit was perfection for me.

It would have been perfection for me if the webbing wasn't raised. And also black with a stitched-like feeling ala Webb's suit. I think if we have a new film that combined both ideas on both suits, we'd get one amazing Spider-Man, imo.

Raimi - the suit itself(albeit, a much brighter blue) besides the raised webbing and also without the logos

Webb - use the logos/emblems on this suit along with the stitched webbing as well as the mechanical webshooters

 

[©KAW]

You are so ignorant, my friend. How many Spider-Man comics have you even read? Sure, Raimi made some changes, but overall, they worked (it shows by audience reactions) and his films were based off of the classic version of the character and if you can't see that, then maybe you should read more comics or something. Not panel for panel, but he put his own twist on a classic era of the Spider-Man comics. It's the classic Peter parker and there were comic book similarities in there whether you want to admit it or not. Changes? Yeah, but the essence was there.

Changes are always going to happen, but when you change a suit (like here) that could have easily looked different but with a different texture and small changes, then it's worth noting. Like I said, I'm not bashing the suit (I like it), I'm just saying what I think is true. This movie could be fantastic, so we'll see, but the fact that you're getting upset due to skepticism is VERY VERY hypocritical. Skepticism IS necessary.

I'm ignorant, but you think Spider-Man 3 was AWESOME!!! Seriously, how can you be skeptical of any comic book film if you like that turd? Your standards are pretty damn low. Wouldn't it be you who hasn't read the comics if SM3 thrills you to the bone.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Dude....knock it off, seriously.

 

[Spiderman6592]

To be fair, KAW has a point. The Spider-Man films were held in such high regard because they were the first of their class. If Spider-Man 1 or 2 were released in the past 2-3 years, they would have been immensely overshadowed by Iron Man and Batman. I love them for what they were, and they're still 2 of my favorite movies personally, but they simply aren't as good as films that have come out recently. Now, as I've said, I'm sure the films would have been different if they had come out later, but KAW is right in saying that the films are not as impressive in comparison to BB, TDK or the first Iron Man.

I am by no means a Raimi basher, but to call the dude ignorant for actually making some valid points is just as ignorant as you accuse him of being.

 

[Anno_Domini]

KAW's biggest issue, as it always has been, is because he keeps saying Spider-Man 3 is a dumb film and bashes anyone for giving it any credit. Sure, I think it's an awful film as well and I use to be just like him and call the ones who liked that film "stupid" and even "ignorant", but that's not going to change anyone's opinions. I state my own opinions on that film now WITHOUT bashing the fans about it.

 

[Spiderman6592]

I agree about KAW's attitude towards others, but he is correct about some things and to call him ignorant for having a different opinion is just as ignorant as the things he does at times.

 

[zanos]

They did that with Batman, TWICE (Burton/Nolan), and no cared to the tune of 1 Billion dollars worldwide. Batman suit was change about 99% (compare to Amazing's 15% costume change) from his original and classic BLUE/GRAY 70 year old suit, and no one gave a damn when it was time to pour into the theaters. Now he's sitting on the best comic book movie to date and the most successful single comic book film in history. The movie itself matters most (The Dark Knight proves this), Spider-Man has the classic suit in Spider-Man 3, but it couldn't save the film from being a piece flammable sh--!

As much as I disagree with the look of the Batman suits from all the films, the logic and practicality behind the alterations makes too much sense for many to make too big a stink about it. He's a man who dresses like a bat with big pointy ears and a long flowing cape. In order for audiences to suspend disbelief, they felt the needed the incentive of realism injected into the look of the character, so they make the costume completely black, thick and rubbery looking, explaining it as kevlar, etc.. The alterations gave it believability for general audiences since the films take place within the context of the real world. The alterations serve no purpose in the new SM film. People will not be so readily to accept changes purely for cosmetic purposes, especially when so many are now aware of what the costume really looks like in the comics if they didn't before.

 

[El Payaso]

I don't understand how people can hate the costume. I can understand not liking certain aspects, but it's red, blue, and has a webbing design. It's a Spider-Man costume. People are making way too big a deal out of the change. You're entitled to your opinion, I just don't get the disdain some people have for the suit. I think it looks great.

You have probably disliked something in your life. If you have, then you should understand.


If the suit had spider-webs I might not be as disgusted by it. But it's like some regular net. It wasn't that difficult to give Spiderman suit spider-webs. In the end the "reason" for the re-design is not there, so it feels to me like changing for the sake of it.

 

[zanos]

You are so ignorant, my friend. How many Spider-Man comics have you even read? Sure, Raimi made some changes, but overall, they worked (it shows by audience reactions) and his films were based off of the classic version of the character and if you can't see that, then maybe you should read more comics or something. Not panel for panel, but he put his own twist on a classic era of the Spider-Man comics. It's the classic Peter parker and there were comic book similarities in there whether you want to admit it or not. Changes? Yeah, but the essence was there.

Changes are always going to happen, but when you change a suit (like here) that could have easily looked different but with a different texture and small changes, then it's worth noting. Like I said, I'm not bashing the suit (I like it), I'm just saying what I think is true. This movie could be fantastic, so we'll see, but the fact that you're getting upset due to skepticism is VERY VERY hypocritical. Skepticism IS necessary.

Actually, Raimi's films are based off the Superman movies. His PP was not based off Lee's interpretation, but rather the Clark Kent character from Donner's films. Even the whole Spider-man losing his powers for the love of a woman in the sequel was lifted directly from Superman 2.

You say the essence was there, but I would disagree with this wholeheartedly. Raimi altered the personalities of both Peter and M.J. How can the essence of Spider-man still be in the films, when the two most important characters within the SM universe aren't even remotely like they are from the comics? Even Peter's entire purpose for becoming Spider-man was altered. In the comics Peter became completely self absorbed after the spider bite; in the films, Peter simply wanted to make some extra cash to buy a new car, so he can impress MJ. Comic book Peter didn't stop the crook because he was getting petty revenge on someone that wronged him like he did in the film, he did it because he was selfish and only cared about himself and it cost it him dearly. In the film, Peter didn't attempt to stop one crook from robbing another, one of which actually just robbed him moments earlier.
Where's the great lesson to be learned from that? If anything a situation like that would only push Peter to become a vigilante rather than a superhero. That's what the Punisher does. That's not Spider-man. So tell me again how Raimi got the essence of Spider-man?

 

[©KAW]

As much as I disagree with the look of the Batman suits from all the films, the logic and practicality behind the alterations makes too much sense for many to make too big a stink about it. He's a man who dresses like a bat with big pointy ears and a long flowing cape. In order for audiences to suspend disbelief, they felt the needed the incentive of realism injected into the look of the character, so they make the costume completely black, thick and rubbery looking, explaining it as kevlar, etc.. The alterations gave it believability for general audiences since the films take place within the context of the real world. The alterations serve no purpose in the new SM film. People will not be so readily to accept changes purely for cosmetic purposes, especially when so many are now aware of what the costume really looks like in the comics if they didn't before.

There was no need to make Batman suit as busy and unattractive as it is, the audience would have accepted a less bulky suit that was deemed bullet proof and not black. And the classic colors of his suit has endured for 65+ years (at least they could have used Black/Gray), but people didn't give a sh-- because Nolan produced a great movie. The movie itself being great is more important than the suit. Don't try to convince me that you can change Batman's classic suit but NOT Spider-Man's, that's bullsh-- and you know it. The audience will accept Spider-Man's new suit just as easily as Batman's if they make a damn good or great film. Just like they will accept a new actor playing Peter Parker if it's a damn good film.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I'm ignorant, but you think Spider-Man 3 was AWESOME!!! Seriously, how can you be skeptical of any comic book film if you like that turd? Your standards are pretty damn low. Wouldn't it be you who hasn't read the comics if SM3 thrills you to the bone.

Nope, because I embrace certain types of changes that work.

Trust me, I think it's quite obvious you rarely know what you're talking about. And I also think it's obvious that you may not be as familair with Spider-Man as you may think. And Ultimate Spider-Man doesn't count as knowing the character 100%.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Actually, Raimi's films are based off the Superman movies. His PP was not based off Lee's interpretation, but rather the Clark Kent character from Donner's films. Even the whole Spider-man losing his powers for the love of a woman in the sequel was lifted directly from Superman 2.

You say the essence was there, but I would disagree with this wholeheartedly. Raimi altered the personalities of both Peter and M.J. How can the essence of Spider-man still be in the films, when the two most important characters within the SM universe aren't even remotely like they are from the comics? Even Peter's entire purpose for becoming Spider-man was altered. In the comics Peter became completely self absorbed after the spider bite; in the films, Peter simply wanted to make some extra cash to buy a new car, so he can impress MJ. Comic book Peter didn't stop the crook because he was getting petty revenge on someone that wronged him like he did in the film, he did it because he was selfish and only cared about himself and it cost it him dearly. In the film, Peter didn't attempt to stop one crook from robbing another, one of which actually just robbed him moments earlier.
Where's the great lesson to be learned from that? If anything a situation like that would only push Peter to become a vigilante rather than a superhero. That's what the Punisher does. That's not Spider-man. So tell me again how Raimi got the essence of Spider-man?

Like I said, there were changes about the attitudes of the characterds, but the essence of Peter was there. By that I mean what the character was sort of like during Lee's run. He had a bunch of problems, Aunt May was sick, and he always felt guilty that he couldn't be there for her all the time. This was shown mostly in Spider-Man 2.

As for the buying the car stuff and the robbery, like I said, that's considered change for the movie. You can change things and still have the heart of the comic counterpart, IMO. There were aspects of the character from the 60's put into the films. Like I said, especially in Spider-Man 2. Yeah, he didn't wisecrack every few moments and he wasn't as confident (though, S-M2 did show that he did have confidence at one point), but that's change for the movie and I thought it worked overall.

As for MJ, in the comics she was more of girl that likes to have fun and go to parties and such (up unti lthe 80's, of course. Like I said, that's another change they made, but it's one of those things that I didn't mind.

 

[©KAW]

Nope, because I embrace certain types of changes that work.

Trust me, I think it's quite obvious you rarely know what you're talking about. And I also think it's obvious that you may not be as familair with Spider-Man as you may think. And Ultimate Spider-Man doesn't count as knowing the character 100%.

So, you embrace a dancing buffoonish Peter when he gets the symbiote suit, a Mary Jane who's jealous of Spider-Man, and Sandman being the killer of Uncle Ben. And an entire franchise based on the blueprint of the Superman films. Good for you.

No, I won't trust you, you think Sam Raimi makes awesome Spider-Man movies. You're the one who should be questioned if you're a fan of Spider-Man's.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

So, you embrace a dancing buffoonish Peter when he gets the symbiote suit, a Mary Jane who's jealous of Spider-Man, and Sandman being the killer of Uncle Ben. And an entire franchise based on the blueprint of the Superman films. Good for you.

When did I say I loved the dancing? How about that? Love how you're quoting the previous user I responded to.

You rant about there being too much cheese when once in a while, there were cheesy moments in the comics. Which all the more proves my point. Spidey singing out loud while swinging. Works in the comic, but it in some ways is cheesy. Spider-Man is not as dark as you think and he never was. His dark stories were once in a while and that's it.

No, I won't trust you, you think Sam Raimi makes awesome Spider-Man movies. You're the one who should be questioned if you're a fan of Spider-Man's.

No, man, what I is that you have shown know proof that you've read one single Spider-Man comic. Hell, you hate The Spectacular SPider-Man (if I remember correctly). A show that's very true to the comics (616, USM, etc), yet, you make fun of that. Not saying you can't hate it while loving the comics, but the majority of people who have read the comics do love it. I've been down this road before, you want SPider-Man to be something he's not. I have a feeling this reboot won't satisfy you, sadly.

 

[zanos]

I don't understand how people can hate the costume. I can understand not liking certain aspects, but it's red, blue, and has a webbing design. It's a Spider-Man costume. People are making way too big a deal out of the change. You're entitled to your opinion, I just don't get the disdain some people have for the suit. I think it looks great.

Spider-man only has one costume and it's not up for interpretation.

There was no need to make Batman suit as busy and unattractive as it is, the audience would have accepted a less bulky suit that was deemed bullet proof and not black. And the classic colors of his suit has endured for 65+ years (at least they could have used Black/Gray), but people didn't give a sh-- because Nolan produced a great movie. The movie itself being great is more important than the suit. Don't try to convince me that you can change Batman's classic suit but NOT Spider-Man's, that's bullsh-- and you know it. The audience will accept Spider-Man's new suit just as easily as Batman's if they make a damn good or great film. Just like they will accept a new actor playing Peter Parker if it's a damn good film.

Audiences accepted it at the time for the reasons I stated and because expectations were low. The only other Batman ppl had seen up until that point was the one Adam West portrayed, so it probably wasn't hard for anyone to accept the new changes to the suit. Audiences for BB were more readily agreeable to the new costume because they've just grown accustomed to the batsuit looking that way. It's not difficult to reason it out.
If anything it's completely opposite with Spider-man: audiences now have higher expectations than ever and have already grown accustomed to the old costume being the one and only.

 

[©KAW]

When did I say I loved the dancing? How about that?

You thought SM3 was awesome, it contains awesome dancing. Unless you're willing to admit that it was sh--. [/quote]Love how you're quoting the previous user I responded to.[/quote]The Spider-Man movies were lifted from Superman, we all know that but you. Too much to be called a homage, if that's what you're talking about.

You rant about there being too much cheese when once in a while, there were cheesy moments in the comics. Which all the more proves my point. Spidey singing out loud while swinging. Works in the comic, but it in some ways is cheesy.

Yeah, TOO MUCH CHEESE, it wasn't once in a while with these movies, it was every other scene. But I looked at it as not having a smart director behind the lens. Cheesy also comes in the form of performance from the actors, working from a horrible script with poorly written dialogue.

Nope, I think you're stubborn, selfish, and are a bit pissed that you have shown know proof that you've read one single Spider-Man comic. Hell, you hate The Spectacular SPider-Man (if I remember correctly). A show that's very true to the comics (616, USM, etc), yet, you make fun of that. Not saying you can't hate it while loving the comics, but the majority of people who have read the comics do love it. I've been down this road before, you want SPider-Man to be something he's not. I have a feeling this reboot won't satisfy you, sadly.

You obviously don't remember correctly, I like the first season of Spectacular, the second season was awful. You're a funny kid, just because someone isn't easily pleased by mediocre movies and cartoons with Spider-Man's name on it, doesn't mean he/she isn't a Spider-Man fan. I hold Spider-Man to a higher standard than you, you can't slap sh-- in front of my face and call it ice-cream.

 

[©KAW]

Spider-man only has one costume and it's not up for interpretation.

Yes it is, according to the guys who own his copyrights on the suit, MARVEL. They love changing Spider-Man's suit in the comics and giving the thumbs up for doing so in the movies, amongst other interpretations.

Audiences accepted it at the time for the reasons I stated and because expectations were low. The only other Batman ppl had seen up until that point was the one Adam West portrayed, so it probably wasn't hard for anyone to accept the new changes to the suit. Audiences for BB were more readily agreeable to the new costume because they've just grown accustomed to the batsuit looking that way. It's not difficult to reason it out.

The audience will always accept a new suit if you deliver a film that they like/love. You could change Batman's suit in the third film and no one would give a sh-- if it delivers the goods.

If anything it's completely opposite with Spider-man: audiences now have higher expectations than ever and have already grown accustomed to the old costume being the one and only.

What is the audience going to do in your mind, I'm curious to know, are they going protest the movie because the suit is 15% changed from the original? Sorry, but the general audience simply don't care like we do, especially if that upcoming trailer is great. And fanboys are showing up regardless, so I don't even count them.