The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 General Discussion - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is an interesting article about the pre-production on ASM and their experimentation with the 3d cameras. Could be a reason attributing to why ASM cost 230 million.

http://www.fxguide.com/featured/shooting-diary-of-spider-man-bringing-it-to-the-screen/

It also makes me realize how much people underestimate the amount of work that is put into pre-production and screen testing/camera testing.

yeah, interesting. i wonder if now that they are shooting on film whether that will free up more money to be used elsewhere. regardless, im glad they are shooting on film, props to the cinematographer for making that happen.
 

Herc_is_Disappointed.gif
 
Didnt Avi Arad say Ghost Rider and War Zone were great movies too? all he kept talking about was ghost rider fighting a tidal wave or some nonsense. He really should just be quiet and be the money man or whatever it is.
 
yeah, interesting. i wonder if now that they are shooting on film whether that will free up more money to be used elsewhere. regardless, im glad they are shooting on film, props to the cinematographer for making that happen.
TASM2 is going to be another hugely expensive film, whether you think it looks like it or not. Thanks to them now shooting mostly on location in New York...I'd say the 220-250M range easily.
 
Didnt Avi Arad say Ghost Rider and War Zone were great movies too? all he kept talking about was ghost rider fighting a tidal wave or some nonsense. He really should just be quiet and be the money man or whatever it is.

Yeah he should have been honest and called his own production Rubish,that would have been nice
 
That's because he just lets anything happen. He doesn't ever sit down and think what he should give a pass to and what he shouldn't give a pass to. He seems to just give a pass to everything. Those movies and shows you brought up are things he gave a pass too without looking too deeply in them and they just happened to be good.

Thats the thing with Arad and Sony
If one of their production turns out to be good its because 'they gave a pass' and 'didnt involve them into it'
And if one turns out to be average/bad,everything bad in it is because of Arad
 
Avi really does get a bad rap..is dude perfect? No but what producer or director is? I know it's been said before but there is plenty of blame to go around on Spider-man 3, not just to the producers of the flick. it's one of those things where he doesn't get credit for the successes but he does get blame for the failures..penalty of leadership I guess

Exactly
Very few producers/directors are perfect 10
 
Bigger and Better always seems to backfire on most directors and end up a big mess.

In most superhero franchises, the second movie goes bigger and badder than the first one most of the time and it usually ends up being an improvement over the first. X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, and The Dark Knight are the obvious examples. They're all bigger and badder than the first ones and are considered by most to be superior over the originals. This is nothing new for comic book movies.
 
^ looks like a lot of "glow-y" lights in there. That similar of Oscorp lights if you know what I mean. Not saying it's Oscorp..but what do you guys think?? Why would they utilize the armory in the first place when they have stages?

I'm hoping Dan Mindel (DP) makes the movie look great.
 
Name one CBM sequel(not a threequel) that goes the "bigger, better" route and backfires.
What do you mean by not a threequel, I'm talking trilogy. To me SM3, IronMan 2, The Dark Knight Rises are movies that went bigger and backfired. Meaning the smaller movie before them (SM2, IronMan, TDK) was much better to the general audience.
 
The Dark Knight Rises did not "backfire"... Though that is a discussion for a different thread I suppose.
 
The Dark Knight Rises did not "backfire"... Though that is a discussion for a different thread I suppose.
T'was far from being the greatness that is TDK, actually, I don't even think it was better than BB. To each his own.
 
What do you mean by not a threequel, I'm talking trilogy. To me SM3, IronMan 2, The Dark Knight Rises are movies that went bigger and backfired. Meaning the smaller movie before them (SM2, IronMan, TDK) was much better to the general audience.

Not the general audience, comic book fans believe dark knight rises backfired.
 
Maybe backfired is the wrong word, I mean the GA/fans liked it less than TDK.
 
What do you mean by not a threequel, I'm talking trilogy. To me SM3, IronMan 2, The Dark Knight Rises are movies that went bigger and backfired. Meaning the smaller movie before them (SM2, IronMan, TDK) was much better to the general audience.

This is the second movie in the franchise we are talking about and the second movie is usually bigger and badder and succeeds at that so we are at least safe for now.
 
This is the second movie in the franchise we are talking about and the second movie is usually bigger and badder and succeeds at that so we are at least safe for now.
You're right, it's usually is bigger and that's my point, I'd prefer it to stay the same or go smaller than the original. But I can clearly see that is not the case here.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"