The Amazing Spider-Man TASM Easter eggs, foreshadowing, and other references!

[Anno_Domini]

Lol, I won't continue into this politics thing.

They do in the Ultimate comics
But I agree with you,they should have concentrated on a better and different screenplay to make the movie different

I don't read ****, so I wouldn't know. All I know is that they worked with Eddie Brock's parents as that goes along with the same idea in TSSM. So they took the idea of Peter's father working with someone and it was Dr. Connors, but still...the film still seemed to push Uncle Ben aside. No bueno.

Because Leaving does show that he didnt hurt them.
I dont think you can assume so easily that Joker wasnt going to hurt anyone else
As I said,its safer to assume that the cars wont burst into flames

By knowing exactly what Joker wanted, it's much, much safer to assume Joker was going to leave afterwards than assuming no more other vehicles would burst into flames when it'll be unlikely for only one car to burst into flames and only one.

Showing him leave wouldnt have hurt
As I said,we are left to assume

Assume what? How can you ASSUME he left when the film continues on afterwards? You're using words way too much that you're not making any more sense now.

Everybody was discussing that scene and I gave my opinion
It wasnt specified to anyone in particular

No...I was the only one discussing the scene, and I'm the only one who brought it up in the first place. I.e., you were replying directly towards me, the one who first brought it up. And bringing in TDK doesn't really help you since you only bring up anything Nolan Bat-related when I'm in a discussion.

I don't see what's wrong with having an emphasis on a part of Peter that's never really been explored in other movies.

At least they're TRYING to do something different, as opposed to having this be a contemporary version of the previous trilogy, word by word, scene for scene.

There isn't anything wrong, if it can be done right. For the reboot, it felt like it was pushing Ben to the side and only focusing on Peter being this orphan who wants to find out how his parents. That's legit and all, but Peter does have parents. As he said to GG in Raimi's film, he does indeed have a father.

 

[Spiderdevil]

I don't read ****, so I wouldn't know. All I know is that they worked with Eddie Brock's parents as that goes along with the same idea in TSSM. So they took the idea of Peter's father working with someone and it was Dr. Connors, but still...the film still seemed to push Uncle Ben aside. No bueno.

It felt that in the initial part but imo they corrected it with giving him the final speech and all

By knowing exactly what Joker wanted, it's much, much safer to assume Joker was going to leave afterwards than assuming no more other vehicles would burst into flames when it'll be unlikely for only one car to burst into flames and only one.

Lets agree to disagree

Assume what? How can you ASSUME he left when the film continues on afterwards? You're using words way too much that you're not making any more sense now.

*Left without hurting anyone

No...I was the only one discussing the scene, and I'm the only one who brought it up in the first place. I.e., you were replying directly towards me, the one who first brought it up. And bringing in TDK doesn't really help you since you only bring up anything Nolan Bat-related when I'm in a discussion.

Believe want you want
Half a dozen people were discussing the same and I gave my opinion.I didnt quote you
I gave the TDK example because I wanted to show similar things have happened in the best CBM also.I also gave examples of SM1 and SM2 later

 

[Anno_Domini]

It felt that in the initial part but imo they corrected it with giving him the final speech and all

I don't really find ending the film with a speech from Ben correcting it, lol, but we'll see how much more they push Ben to the side in the sequel when I'm sure they will explore more on Peter's search about the truth with his parents and just forget about his uncle, the guy who raised him for so many years.

Lets agree to disagree

If you want to say this without admitting that one of us is right, then sure t:

*Left without hurting anyone

We can't assume anything from that either since he didn't as like I said, Joker had a specific target. But we can assume Spider-Man didn't rescue anyone else when he sure could have because we at least saw Dr. Ratha still in his vehicle.

Believe want you want
Half a dozen people were discussing the same and I gave my opinion.I didnt quote you
I gave the TDK example because I wanted to show similar things have happened in the best CBM also.I also gave examples of SM1 and SM2 later

Six others were discussing the same topic that I first brought up? This is new to me.

 

[Spiderdevil]

I don't really find ending the film with a speech from Ben correcting it, lol, but we'll see how much more they push Ben to the side in the sequel when I'm sure they will explore more on Peter's search about the truth with his parents and just forget about his uncle, the guy who raised him for so many years.

Lets see

If you want to say this without admitting that one of us is right, then sure t:

LOL we can do this forever
Then I would get blamed for targetting you so I might just end it here

We can't assume anything from that either since he didn't as like I said, Joker had a specific target. But we can assume Spider-Man didn't rescue anyone else when he sure could have because we at least saw Dr. Ratha still in his vehicle.

He targetted that old man and was gonna rip open his mouth.Thats enough point to know he can hurt other people
He can target other people.

Six others were discussing the same topic that I first brought up? This is new to me.

I dont even know who bought it up,I just gave my opinion

 

[Anno_Domini]

This is slowly dying down, but I do want to reply to this....

He targetted that old man and was gonna rip open his mouth.Thats enough point to know he can hurt other people
He can target other people.

DID he actually hurt anyone else after he tossed Rachel out of the window? No. Why? Because he had a target. Just because he was going to kill the board member and Rachel does not deter him that he was trying to find Dent. But it's simply pointless to go through the entire crowd when he got nothing out of two people already as well as Batman having knocked out his goons.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Did anyone else notice that Ratha's driver's name is Alfred? Could that have been a little nod to Bats/Nolan?

 

[Rise_-]

Did anyone else notice that Ratha's driver's name is Alfred? Could that have been a little nod to Bats/Nolan?

I was thinking about that too, maybe.

Speaking of foreshadowing... did anyone pick up on the fact that Ratha tells Connors to save Norman or "We'll both lose our heads?" then Ratha happens to have his head chewed on, albeit in a deleted scene.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I was thinking about that too, maybe.

Speaking of foreshadowing... did anyone pick up on the fact that Ratha tells Connors to save Norman or "We'll both lose our heads?" then Ratha happens to have his head chewed on, albeit in a deleted scene.

It's kind of fitting too how Connors is the one Ratha tells about losing their heads and then it's Connors that ends up doing the chewing.

 

[Rise_-]

It's kind of fitting too how Connors is the one Ratha tells about losing their heads and then it's Connors that ends up doing the chewing.

Agreed...

 

[SpiderMarvelite]

Well Ill be dammed at that forshadowing...

 

[Anno_Domini]

Did anyone else notice that Ratha's driver's name is Alfred? Could that have been a little nod to Bats/Nolan?

I didn't even know this, lol.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I was thinking about that too, maybe.

Speaking of foreshadowing... did anyone pick up on the fact that Ratha tells Connors to save Norman or "We'll both lose our heads?" then Ratha happens to have his head chewed on, albeit in a deleted scene.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I didn't even know this, lol.

It's a very quick thing and something I didn't notice until my third viewing (first on Bluray). It happens during the bridge scene when it first shows Ratha sitting in the back of his car while stuck in traffic. Ratha says something like, "Alfred, will you please get out and see what is going on."

They could have picked any name for Ratha's driver/assistant but they went with Alfred. I'm thinking it was a nod to Bats/Nolan.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Did anyone else notice that Ratha's driver's name is Alfred? Could that have been a little nod to Bats/Nolan?

I doubt it was a nod to Batman. Alfred seems to be commonly used amongst drivers, servants, butlers, etc. If anything, it was a nod to the Raimi films since the driver was played by Michael Papajohn, who was casted as Uncle Ben's killer in Spider-Man 1.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

I doubt it was a nod to Batman. Alfred seems to be commonly used amongst drivers, servants, butlers, etc. If anything, it was a nod to the Raimi films since the driver was played by Michael Papajohn, who was casted as Uncle Ben's killer in Spider-Man 1.

Yeah same. I agree. With the first part at least. There's no way I think this series would try to give a nod to the Nolan series. I mean c'mon they're making their own movie/universe.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Yeah same. I agree. With the first part at least. There's no way I think this series would try to give a nod to the Nolan series. I mean c'mon they're making their own movie/universe.

If anything, aren't the Nolan films more of a rival to the Spider-Man films?

 

[Oscorp]

Did anyone else notice that Ratha's driver's name is Alfred? Could that have been a little nod to Bats/Nolan?

Haha I didn't at first until my little brother said "Hey, every butler's called Alfred it seems!" haha!

 

[Oscorp]

I doubt it was a nod to Batman. Alfred seems to be commonly used amongst drivers, servants, butlers, etc. If anything, it was a nod to the Raimi films since the driver was played by Michael Papajohn, who was casted as Uncle Ben's killer in Spider-Man 1.

That was him!? I'll have to check that scene again!

 

[Rise_-]

He's in The Dark Knight Rises too.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I doubt it was a nod to Batman. Alfred seems to be commonly used amongst drivers, servants, butlers, etc. If anything, it was a nod to the Raimi films since the driver was played by Michael Papajohn, who was casted as Uncle Ben's killer in Spider-Man 1.

I think it was a nod to Bats/Nolan imo. They could have selected any name for the driver yet they went with Alfred. Just because it's common among a certain profession doesn't mean a thing...there are other common butler/driver/servant names too but they didn't pick one of those. And just because the driver is an actor from the Raimi series how is calling him Alfred a nod to the Raimi films? Besides, Papajohn is in TDKR also.

Yeah same. I agree. With the first part at least. There's no way I think this series would try to give a nod to the Nolan series. I mean c'mon they're making their own movie/universe.

Why wouldn't they? Nolan and his DK series has raised the bar for superhero movies. There's nothing wrong with giving a wink or a nod to a game changing set of films. It's such a minor thing to use the name Alfred that most people probably wouldn't even pick up on it, yet the filmmakers would and that's who it is aimed towards. It's like a small "thank you for helping to make this possible." Say what you will but the DK has influence on this set of films whether you like it or not.

He's in The Dark Knight Rises too.

Yeah. This.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It's a very quick thing and something I didn't notice until my third viewing (first on Bluray). It happens during the bridge scene when it first shows Ratha sitting in the back of his car while stuck in traffic. Ratha says something like, "Alfred, will you please get out and see what is going on."

They could have picked any name for Ratha's driver/assistant but they went with Alfred. I'm thinking it was a nod to Bats/Nolan.

If anything, just a nod to Batman. Doubt it was a nod of any kind to Nolan since he didn't create the character of Alfred, lol.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

If anything, just a nod to Batman. Doubt it was a nod of any kind to Nolan since he didn't create the character of Alfred, lol.

It's true that Nolan didn't invent the character Alfred however it's like I said earlier, there's no denying Nolan's influence on this series and any superhero film for that matter. It's such a subtle thing that it could be argued that it is indeed not a nod to Nolan yet I feel that it is, just for that reason.

 

[Rise_-]

It's not a nod to Nolan so much as it is to the character of Alfred. No, not Caine's portrayal, just Alfred in general. lol

 

[Anno_Domini]

Lol, for once this is something I can't compare to Nolan's trilogy

 

[UltimateWebhead]

There's no comparisons being made. It's just a nod or wink or what have you to another film franchise thru a subtle mention of a character's name. I don't care what anyone says...that's how I see it.