The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man: Box Office Thread - Part 2

[I Am The Knight]

For me it's ASM > TDKR > Avengers.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Well, they're all not definite "origins", so, you should learn that.

Maybe not in terms of their powers but definitely in terms of their introduction to the movie going people

Can I say TDKR owns them all? t:

No, but I think TAS-M owns Avengers in certain aspects, as Avengers own TAS-M in certain aspects. Between those two, there isn't a definite "winner".

Nope you cant say that
All 3 are very good movie but none of them are perfect imo

 

[Anno_Domini]

That is a good point. Batman Begins didn't even gross $400 million world wide. People do not give Amazing Spider-Man enough credit considering all of the summer competition between Avengers and TDKR.

I think the reason is because TAS-M got most of its numbers foreign. Only $241 million so far in domestic where the budget is $230 million.

 

[I Am The Knight]

It's kinda like Pirates 4 in that way...

 

[Anno_Domini]

Maybe not in terms of their powers but definitely in terms of their introduction to the movie going people

That definitely knocks The Incredible Hulk still out of the list then. And Iron Man 2.

Nope you cant say that
All 3 are very good movie but none of them are perfect imo

Sure, all three were good, but TDKR is a bit better, imo. I mean, when you have a film like Avengers called the best CBM and then TDKR appears and that is now called the best CBM, it tells you something.

 

[Jexx]

Well if people actually believe TAS-M is leagues better than Avengers, then I would understand if some wouldn't believe TDKR is better, haha.

Ehh....

I can't tell you're essentially saying your opinion is superior or not..

 

[Anno_Domini]

Ehh....

I can't tell you're essentially saying your opinion is superior or not..

And I'm really not. I would place Avengers and TDKR as great CBMs, but I'll also give TDKR the slightest edge. Imo, TAS-M is only a good movie.

 

[Jexx]

Ah, well, I think that they're all great comic book films. Also, I'd say that TDKR is closer to the term movie than CBM than TASM, so I have no idea why you labeled TASM as a movie instead of a comic book movie. :/

 

[Spiderdevil]

The only thing that may be more meaningless than personal anecdotes is generalised comments about what the majority felt based on personal anecdotes. The fact that the moments are clearly present though prove that the film is constructed no differently than TASM in terms of how it aims to engage the audience.

Nope.Coulsen wasnt even likeable,atleast not as much as Uncle Ben

Except I've just been picking out odd moments as they occur to me, the ratio of human moments to action beats is far greater than you'd suggest (there are only really four set pieces in a film that's nearly 2 and a half hours).

Sorry but I dont consider the members fighting each others or trash talking as 'Human' moments either

Furthermore, these are not scenes designed for showing humanity arbitrarily, they are moments interspersed within every scene, including action scenes, as I illustrated.

They are so small that are not even significant

The humanity is always at the forefront, just as with TASM.

Definitely not

They're also far from 'half hearted', the moments have set up, consistency and pay off. Natasha is sarcastic with a professional smugness in her first scene even when in danger, showing personality and humanity. Then she adopts a cautious, cynical side with evidence of real anxiety in the next, contrast allowing us to appreciate who she is as a person. Loki drags out every atrocity she's committed, throws it in her face but she holds fast (simultaneously giving us an insight into her worldview) and tries to reason and plead with Banner. All this hammers the trauma of her encounter with the Hulk home, through careful writing and planning. The opposite of 'half hearted'.

I understood her character,you dont need to explain it to me

To be quite honest, the relationship between Natasha and Clint is explored to the same degree as Peter and Gwen's, which is charming but shockingly underdeveloped.

Thats being shockingly biased
Natasha/Hawkeye was even more underdeveloped than say Peter/MJ in Raimi's movies and Bruce/Miranda Tate in TDKR and thats saying a lot
But I dont really blame Whedon,there was no room for relationship development in that movie

Laughs are great, I know. They also make sense and provide insight into character providing you decide to actually think about what's on the screen. Not only is the awkwardness between two co-workers who have had disagreements wonderfully human but it then shows Hulk to be of an impulsive character, uncomfortable when challenged. He's not an empty construct, he has personality and traits that people have.

You can make ****-on-a-stick sound as philosophical as possible but it doesnt change the fact about what it is,i.e **** on a stick
I am not calling the scene **** but it was only there for the laughs,nothing more,nothing less

No. Its spectacle is enhanced and justified by the humanity which seeps from every pore of the film.

Not really,and definitely not as much as TASM

The Avengers is a movie to be enjoyed by kids and adults.Just like Spider-Man.

Raimi's Spider-man

If anything it's an understatement, the characters in the Avengers are more aptly and subtly characterised than those in TASM.

Barring Dr Connors,Absolutely not

No matter how you try to contrive differences, the case is Avengers was an origin which succeeded on levels the others didn't.

Definitely
But I still dont consider it an origin

It seems that you chose to ignore most of the heart and emotions you could have related to in The Avengers. As I've said, these things are demonstrably present.

They may be present here and there but the fact it that they are completely overshadowed by the main elements of the film-Action and Humour

Explain to me why an intern being dragged out of Oscorp because Peter stole his ID is a moment of genuine humanity while Steve grasping on to a minor reference point as a result of his feelings of isolation, for example doesn't count.

I was only talking about the humour in this point

As you said in an earlier post. You say that scenes like Hulk smashing Loki serve only to get laughs but you ignore similar parts in TASM, Peter destroys his bathroom,

The destroying bathroom scene had two purposes
To show the extent of Peter's new found strength and his confusion accosiated with it and ofcourse the Humour

and the fact that the Hulk scene works as a subversion of the relatively trite and worn down tropes of the genre, which TASM play straight.

I have no idea what you mean by that sentence
Once again I repeat,Those scenes in TA had no purpose apart form getting some laughs

The audience was made to care for Coulson. We're also made to care for the characters his death affects and can appreciate the dramatic irony of the emergence of Coulson's playing cards.

The Playing cards was a nice touch but as I said,I felt nothing about his character

A lot of what you say regarding Loki is accurate, but his personality is consistent throughout, provides a source of conflict to drive the plot and a thematic parallel to the heroes, which is more than the Lizard does.

He is as flawed as The Lizard imo,even more maybe
But the difference is that TA had too many positives which hides the poor villian completely(Which TASM fails to do)

I disagree, the tension as Banner slowly recounts his tale of attempted suicide is incredibly involving, among various other things.

Agree to an extent
But the scenes I mentioned are much more emotionally driving without Peter Parker even saying a word

As I said,I love the TA,I would want TA2 to be similar
But I would never want a Spider-man movie to be like this or any other Marvel movie for that matter

 

[Spiderdevil]

I think the reason is because TAS-M got most of its numbers foreign. Only $241 million so far in domestic where the budget is $230 million.

Whats wrong with foreign earnings?

That definitely knocks The Incredible Hulk still out of the list then. And Iron Man 2

Iron man 2-Yes

TIH-No,it was still introducing the rebooted Hulk

Sure, all three were good, but TDKR is a bit better, imo. I mean, when you have a film like Avengers called the best CBM and then TDKR appears and that is now called the best CBM, it tells you something

Neither of them are imo
TDK and SM2 are better
But I have equal amounts of all opinions
TA being the best or TDKR being the best some even prefer TASM from the 3
So,its all about opinions and what you prefer

 

[Picard Sisko]

Its all about opinions... neither of the three films that came out this summer (TA, TASM, or TDKR) are "the best." You can't officially label which movie is the best.

 

[Arachnid]

Its all about opinions... neither of the three films that came out this summer (TA, TASM, or TDKR) are "the best." You can't officially label which movie is the best.

I agree...I obviously think some films are better than "others", but that doesn't mean I enjoy the "others" more.

For example, I think that The Avengers was probably a better film than The Amazing Spider-Man, in my opinion, but I liked TASM better. I'm a bigger Spidey fan, and if I had to pick one or the other, I would pick TASM to watch again. So overall, I give Spidey the edge. It's not necessarily better, but I enjoyed it more.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I agree...I obviously think some films are better than "others", but that doesn't mean I enjoy the "others" more.

For example, I think that The Avengers was probably a better film than The Amazing Spider-Man, in my opinion, but I liked TASM better. I'm a bigger Spidey fan, and if I had to pick one or the other, I would pick TASM to watch again. So overall, I give Spidey the edge. It's not necessarily better, but I enjoyed it more.

 

[Jexx]

I actually think that even if a movie is technically superior to another film, yet I enjoy that other film more, the one you enjoyed is better to you.

 

[DeathChill]

I'd say for me it was TASM>TA>TDKR. I honestly thought it was going to be TDKR wayyyy in the lead (TDK is one of my favourites) but the movie had way too many issues for my liking. I wasn't really even that into TA either. I liked it, but I feel it is overhyped a bit.

 

[Oscorp]

I agree DeathChill, I'd rank them the same. Though, I loved Avengers and found TDKR to be very good, just not as good as I expected.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Ah, well, I think that they're all great comic book films. Also, I'd say that TDKR is closer to the term movie than CBM than TASM, so I have no idea why you labeled TASM as a movie instead of a comic book movie. :/

I wasn't calling TAS-M just a movie. Just didn't feel like saying CBM.

Whats wrong with foreign earnings?

Loosen your tights there kid. I didn't say anything was wrong; just stating facts on why some would say TAS-M wasn't a big enough success as it wasn't that great domestically.

Iron man 2-Yes

TIH-No,it was still introducing the rebooted Hulk

Introducing the new Hulk, sure, but it wasn't an origin by any means.

Neither of them are imo
TDK and SM2 are better
But I have equal amounts of all opinions
TA being the best or TDKR being the best some even prefer TASM from the 3
So,its all about opinions and what you prefer

You say The Dark Knight and Spider-Man 2 are, but then you're not one of the critics that has said this about The Avengers or The Dark Knight Rises.

I agree...I obviously think some films are better than "others", but that doesn't mean I enjoy the "others" more.

For example, I think that The Avengers was probably a better film than The Amazing Spider-Man, in my opinion, but I liked TASM better. I'm a bigger Spidey fan, and if I had to pick one or the other, I would pick TASM to watch again. So overall, I give Spidey the edge. It's not necessarily better, but I enjoyed it more.

I am mostly a Batman fan myself, but even if I even give TDKR a slighter edge with the three CBMs, I can definitely see how The Avengers is a great and phenomenal movie. The Amazing Spider-Man, while a good film in its own right, was disappointing only because of Lizard, which, funny enough, is something I never complained about before the film was released and now having seen TAS-M twice, Lizard is the one thing that I didn't enjoy when watching the film.

 

[JKKS085]

Star trek made 257m domestic and 127m overseas.
ASM domestic will pass that total (Trek domestic) in just over a week

Hardly. The movie won't make more than 4 million between monday and thursday and will be lucky to make 4,5 million this week-end. It'll still be under 250 after the week-end (and probably even after next monday).
And if you adjust ST domestic numbers for inflation (wich makes around 272 million), they're simply out of reach for TASM.

Then again I've adressed this thing before in this thread, the funny thing to remember is that, the last Star Trek movie to gross domestically over 100 million was released back in 1986.

Sure you can compare TASM and Star Trek 2009 overseas gross but while Star Trek was never popular abroad, Spider-Man always grossed more in foreign countries than it did domestically. Though the difference between TASM's domestic and foreign gross is indeed unprecedented in the franchise.

 

[Lorus]

Nope.Coulsen wasnt even likeable,atleast not as much as Uncle Ben

The point that I'm trying to make is that the approach is the same: introduce character, endear them to the audience, establish a relationship between them and another principal character, then kill them for desired effect. You've established your own feelings about the two deaths but the fact remains that Uncle Ben's death doesn't indicate any difference in the way the films tell stories.

Sorry but I dont consider the members fighting each others or trash talking as 'Human' moments either

Not only are you generalising every scene between action beats as 'trash talking', which is disingenuous, but you're presenting an incredibly narrow definition of what can qualify as 'human'. The way we respond to characters in stories is based on their similarities to us and our ability to empathise with their situations. Every scene weaves into the dialogue evidence of who these people are presents their vulnerabilities and intentions to us which allows to be caught in the conflict of the 'trash talk'. Which only really takes up one scene anyway.

They are so small that are not even significant

In what way are they small? They may not prove to be the sole focus of any one scene but they are frequent almost to the degree of omnipresence and convey their point without fanfare, as people do in life. There may be no entire scene devoted to 'Steve is sad because he feels isolated and irrelevant' and nothing else, but the ideas and emotions radiate throughout. You cannot dismiss the impact of even one line.

I understood her character,you dont need to explain it to me

That paragraph doesn't explain her character. It was my illustrating that every emotional or human moment that the character displays has been carefully planned and included in the film in a calculated way for maximum effect. I did it to refute your ridiculous claim that Whedon threw these moments in half-heartedly or as some vague throw away attempt at creating moments of humanity when that is obviously not the case.

Thats being shockingly biased
Natasha/Hawkeye was even more underdeveloped than say Peter/MJ in Raimi's movies and Bruce/Miranda Tate in TDKR and thats saying a lot
But I dont really blame Whedon,there was no room for relationship development in that movie

I'm not being biased. The relationship between Natasha and Clint isn't explored in any real detail but it at least establishes key facts. It tells us why they connect with each other, the reason they maintain the relationship and gives us an idea of how it may have started and been solidified.

Peter and Gwen are treated with an equally minimal attention, we can assume they find each other attractive but we have no concept of what they see in each other beyond that. Why does Peter trust Gwen with his secret? Why does she invite him round for dinner? These reasons are completely unexplored, Peter and Gwen like each other but it's obvious their scenes together aren't there to develop their relationship but simply move the plot forward or characterise Peter.

Both relationships are pretty much on par with each other in terms of complexity, it's just that Peter and Gwen have more scenes together.

You can make ****-on-a-stick sound as philosophical as possible but it doesnt change the fact about what it is,i.e **** on a stick
I am not calling the scene **** but it was only there for the laughs,nothing more,nothing less

It was there for a laugh, but the laugh came as a result of drawing on a shared human experience and characterisation. It's further proof of Whedon understanding that all his characters can still feel real, even when fighting an alien invasion.

Not really,and definitely not as much as TASM

Of course it is, spectacle without human reference point is terrible. That's why The Avengers was received completely differently than other films like Transformers, it's not because Whedon uses CGI 'better' than Bay, indeed he probably doesn't. TASM has no real claim to embracing 'more humanity' it's just more overt.

Raimi's Spider-man

Webb's too. You're not thinking straight if you believe Webb doesn't want children to see and enjoy his film.

Barring Dr Connors,Absolutely not

Webb plays less shades with his characters and doesn't define them as strongly as Whedon does.

They may be present here and there but the fact it that they are completely overshadowed by the main elements of the film-Action and Humour

They are not overshadowed by them, they are usually intertwined with them. Scenes can't just be categorised as 'action' or 'humorous', they are composed of many different attributes and humanity is often showcased through things like action or humour. That's if you even really accept the idea that a human moment or emotion can be rendered moot by a completely independent action scene.

I was only talking about the humour in this point

You previously didn't count Steve's reaction to getting a Wizard of Oz reference as indicative of 'heart'. It was a moment of humour. You went on to say the intern being dragged out of Oscorp was also humour and had heart. I asked the difference.

The destroying bathroom scene had two purposes
To show the extent of Peter's new found strength and his confusion accosiated with it and ofcourse the Humour

That was the purpose of the subway and alarm clock breaking scenes. The bathroom was redundant and only served as humour.

I have no idea what you mean by that sentence
Once again I repeat,Those scenes in TA had no purpose apart form getting some laughs

The overall effect is to get laughs yes, it manages this partly be circumventing expectations. That was never a moment that I claimed to be 'human' as it were though.

The Playing cards was a nice touch but as I said,I felt nothing about his character

As I've said before, be that as it may, the techniques of the filmmakers are the same. There is no difference in how the films are made. They are using the same approach.

Agree to an extent
But the scenes I mentioned are much more emotionally driving without Peter Parker even saying a word

Now you're moving the goal posts by suggesting the superiority of moments with no dialogue, although those are also present in the Avengers...

As I said,I love the TA,I would want TA2 to be similar
But I would never want a Spider-man movie to be like this or any other Marvel movie for that matter

As I continue to try to point out, Spider-Man and most of the Marvel films are already made like the Avengers. There is no real difference.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I think that JJ Abrams created a whole new generation of Star Trek fans with his reboot, so perhaps the untitled sequel coming out next year will do much better.

I love how many people said that TASM would either bomb or do really poorly. It did really well for a reboot in the box office that had SO MUCH going against it. Compare it to Batman Begins, X-Men: First Class, and the Incredible Hulk.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I think that JJ Abrams created a whole new generation of Star Trek fans with his reboot, so perhaps the untitled sequel coming out next year will do much better.

I love how many people said that TASM would either bomb or do really poorly. It did really well for a reboot in the box office that had SO MUCH going against it. Compare it to Batman Begins, X-Men: First Class, and the Incredible Hulk.

Domestically, Star Trek and Batman Begins are the only reboot films that have done pretty damn good.

By foreign numbers, The Amazing Spider-Man is doing a phenomenal job and is the only film that's right behind Casino Royale in regards to reboots that are having great numbers.

 

[Bruce Malone]

I'm just wondering what other franchises have come out with so many sequels with the following films making less that the last domestically?

This is now the 3rd spidey film in a row where the sequel has made less money domestically than the last. I know it's a reboot and all but wouldn't sony have wanted to change this trend at some point?

S1: $403,706,375

S2: $373,585,825

S3: $336,530,303

TASM: $242,955,672 and counting.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Batman (1989): $251,188,924

Batman Returns: $162,831,698

Batman Forever: $184,031,112

Batman & Robin: $107,285,004

Batman Begins: $205,343,774

The Dark Knight: $533,316,061

Batman kind of just fluctuates.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I'm just wondering what other franchises have come out with so many sequels with the following films making less that the last domestically?

This is now the 3rd spidey film in a row where the sequel has made less money domestically than the last. I know it's a reboot and all but wouldn't sony have wanted to change this trend at some point?

S1: $403,706,375

S2: $373,585,825

S3: $336,530,303

TASM: $242,955,672 and counting.

The thing is that after a while, audiences will get tired of Spider-Man. They screwed up Spider-Man 3, and Amazing Spider-Man was a reboot. If the sequel to TASM doesn't do well, then after this franchise is over, whether a completed trilogy or not, we won't see a good Spider-Man movie for a very long time.

Which could also be good, because it could force Sony to sell the film rights back to Marvel... which would be nice.

 

[grieven]

For me it's ASM > TDKR > Avengers.

Ditto.