The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man General Discussion & Speculation Thread - Part 10

[socool]

[QUOTE="_____";23154651]Anyone here wish marvel had the movie rights over Sony? I do[/QUOTE]

Not at all. Marvel doesn't make bad movies, but they're all so generic, so safe. Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, and The Incredible Hulk all look so similar. None of them are special in anyway. Look at The Amazing Spider-Man, it's so visually different in every way. Are there parts of Sony I don't like? Sure. They're greedy, cheap, and have Avi Arad. But I would take all of those over a generic superhero movie.

 

[ITheSymbioteI]

[QUOTE="_____";23154651]Anyone here wish marvel had the movie rights over Sony? I do[/QUOTE]

Nope. Don't want Spidey time in a movie to be compromised for the building up the bigger story, other main characters, etc.

Spidey works best as a personal story, not in the story of a team overall.

 

[ITheSymbioteI]

Just saw the new trailer in front of "The Avengers". The 3D and cinematography looked amazing!

did you see it in IMAX? I did and saw only the 2nd trailer in 2D

And yes, I'm in the US

 

[AbsractPo3tic]

I think what Majorie is trying to say is that Uncle Ben's death was a huge inspiration for Spider-Man as a hero - he caught robbers and murderers, the same people that killed his uncle. It wouldn't make sense for him to already be a vigilante before his uncle died.

I can see that but here's the flip side of that: peters been bullied most of his life. Picked on. Looked over. Outcast by choice or whatever. If he decides to fight the thieves and crooks who essentially do the same thing, isn't that compelling too? And once he loses his uncle, that point just continues to hit home with him.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Um, color me lost but where exactly did it hint anywhere that Peter was experimented upon by his parents? As another orphan lost along the way, albeit similarly adopted, my biological parents are a very important alternate reality in my life and finding the truth about why I am really here, who I really am, and everything. You guys got handed a road map for the most part and as an orphan who loses that? That kind of sucks. And we are haunted by all of these questions that you guys already have answered and take for granted.

So why is Peter 'haunted' by the truth about what happened to his parents? Most of us who lost our parents early on ARE haunted by it. And the rest really seems to play into the whole corporate governmental conspiracy plot line, not of a father who experimented on his son. Just from a really grounded level of a ghost practically following you around. There are tons of ghosts in these situations that you have to overcome and live with.

Plus AS I SAID BEFORE -- Uncle Ben's death will hit home for him, especially now more than ever. Lose one set of parents? You're an orphan. Lose both sets? Now that's my GREATEST fear. I can't go through that again. I'd risk ANYTHING to make sure it doesn't happen again. It would be a thousand times worse. I can't even say goodbye to teachers easily, not because I particularly like them - but because it's beyond hard for me to lose anyone whereas for a lot of other people that wouldn't be such a big problem. So losing another parent? Yeah. Basically saying Uncle Ben's death will carry A LOT more weight now than in the past.

In order to make Peter desperate to find his parents, this movie makes Uncle Ben seem like a jerk to his nephew.

Um, no, not at all. My adoptive parents are awesome parents. Everyone I know likes my parents. And yet, if I could? I would still be beyond interesting in knowing who my biological parents are. Not because of my adoptive parents. But for me. Because you can have two sets of parents and care about them just as equally. Why is it people can understanding not having a favorite son or daughter, but not understand how this can be for having sets of parents?

And from that interview posted above, no wonder they're getting everything right and where this comes from:

Well, Andrew went to Queens to sort of study how kids behave, act, dress, and he was very specific about the choices he made in terms of costumes and stuff. It was about trying to find how a kid acts these days given the background that he has. Meaning, he was abandoned as a child -- and irrespective of the parents' motives, or the conditions that surrounded that -- you can't help but feel a little bummed out by that. And cheated, and a little distrustful of the world.

There is an attitude, but again that manifests itself [by Peter being] an outsider by choice. He has a skateboard. He can be a little bit surly, but there's a goodness to him that is sometimes misguided and sometimes not, but there's an attitude. But I think it's really specific to this Peter Parker that you haven't seen before.

So I have no doubt they're going to get the adoptive parents importance down as well. It may be slightly different from biological parents. I don't know. I never had that. I'm jealous a lot of you reading this probably do have that. But, that doesn't change how I look up to my adoptive parents. And it doesn't sound like Peter looks down or feel all that distanced from May or Ben either. Just grounded in the truths of the matter.

 

[Spider-Who?]

If everything we're hearing is true about the origin changes, Peter isn't a regular guy.

But Peter never WAS a "regular" guy. How many "regular" guys do you know that are certified geniuses at 17? The idea of a slightly changed origin does not change his character - he's still a smart outcast and orphan who starts out using his powers irresponsibly before learning how to use them correctly.

What was so appealing about comic Peter is that his life was dramatically changed because of an unpredictable accident. In other words, it could have happened to anyone.

He still gains his powers through a chance encounter with a spider - that's pretty unpredictable. It doesn't make it predetermined at all. IF the rumor of his DNA being messed with at an early age is true, that still doesn't change the fact that he had to be at the right place at the right time in order to get bit, in fact, that makes it even MORE of an unpredictable chance encounter. And if THAT'S what makes him so appealing to you, you need to read more Spidey comics. There are far more and far better reasons to find Peter Parker/Spider-Man appealing.

If the rumor about Ben's death is true, then a burglar won't be responsible.

Burglar, carjacker, mugger, it doesn't really matter WHO kills Ben so long as it's a criminal that Peter could have stopped but didn't. THAT'S what matters. There's always a slightly different take on the night Ben died and we will see it in the film - set photos suggest Webb is using the Ultimate comics version.

Peter was different from other superheroes because he didn't deal with just global-menacing threats. Peter took care of the small-time crooks because he believed these thugs were just as devastating to people's lives as the super villains.

How has the reboot version of the origin changed this?

 

[socool]

OK, well, I've calmed down a little on the rumored changes to the origin. I just needed to vent. I still HATE the idea, and the fact that I prayed they wouldn't go that route since day 1 makes it even worse, but I think I can live with it. Still wish they would've scrapped the idea. Making Peter's father responsible for the spider is enough.

 

[awesome232]

Um, color me lost but where exactly did it hint anywhere that Peter was experimented upon by his parents? As another orphan lost along the way, albeit similarly adopted, my biological parents are a very important alternate reality in my life and finding the truth about why I am really here, who I really am, and everything. You guys got handed a road map for the most part and as an orphan who loses that? That kind of sucks. And we are haunted by all of these questions that you guys already have answered and take for granted.

So why is Peter 'haunted' by the truth about what happened to his parents? Most of us who lost our parents early on ARE haunted by it. And the rest really seems to play into the whole corporate governmental conspiracy plot line, not of a father who experimented on his son. Just from a really grounded level of a ghost practically following you around. There are tons of ghosts in these situations that you have to overcome and live with.

Plus AS I SAID BEFORE -- Uncle Ben's death will hit home for him, especially now more than ever. Lose one set of parents? You're an orphan. Lose both sets? Now that's my GREATEST fear. I can't go through that again. I'd risk ANYTHING to make sure it doesn't happen again. It would be a thousand times worse. I can't even say goodbye to teachers easily, not because I particularly like them - but because it's beyond hard for me to lose anyone whereas for a lot of other people that wouldn't be such a big problem. So losing another parent? Yeah. Basically saying Uncle Ben's death will carry A LOT more weight now than in the past.



Um, no, not at all. My adoptive parents are awesome parents. Everyone I know likes my parents. And yet, if I could? I would still be beyond interesting in knowing who my biological parents are. Not because of my adoptive parents. But for me. Because you can have two sets of parents and care about them just as equally. Why is it people can understanding not having a favorite son or daughter, but not understand how this can be for having sets of parents?

And from that interview posted above, no wonder they're getting everything right and where this comes from:



So I have no doubt they're going to get the adoptive parents importance down as well. It may be slightly different from biological parents. I don't know. I never had that. I'm jealous a lot of you reading this probably do have that. But, that doesn't change how I look up to my adoptive parents. And it doesn't sound like Peter looks down or feel all that distanced from May or Ben either. Just grounded in the truths of the
matter.

Definately agree!

 

[Avenger]

[QUOTE="_____";23154651]Anyone here wish marvel had the movie rights over Sony? I do[/QUOTE]I don't. If Spidey were with Marvel, he'd be merged into the MCU, and I prefer Spider-Man on his own.

If it were up to me, I'd put the Avengers and the Fantastic Four under one studio, the X-Men under another (I prefer the X-Men in their own, separate universe as well), and Spider-Man and Daredevil together (just so that they can share the Kingpin).

 

[Radioactive]

I don't. If Spidey were with Marvel, he'd be merged into the MCU, and I prefer Spider-Man on his own.

If it were up to me, I'd put the Avengers and the Fantastic Four under one studio, the X-Men under another (I prefer the X-Men in their own, separate universe as well), and Spider-Man and Daredevil together (just so that they can share the Kingpin).

This.

 

[stillanerd]

So what essence that made the character appealing did they remove exactly?

All the essence of the character is gone? He's still a regular guy for before the spider bit him, he still has everyday problems, he still has to balance everyday life and superhero life and he still decides to use his powers to help people in the end. Sounds like Spider-man to me.

Lol I'm not going to read the spoilers but just piecing things together with this conversation everyone is having about the origin, I'm with mayo on this one: If his dad had something to do with his powers, how does that change who Peter is or how relatable he is as a character? It changes his history but that doesn't mean automatically his high school life will be so far out of reach of an actual high school kid, or he'll stop having money problems or girl problems or lose his sense of humor or responsibility or even his flaws. THAT'S what makes Peter relatable, that's why he's lasted so long: Because he deals with crap in his everyday life that all of us deal with in our everyday lives, not his origin, not his powers; Peter Parker is the main reason spider-man is so successful as a character.

None of us (I'm assuming) can relate to being hunted by police, clinging to walls, being bitten by altered spiders or fighting mob bosses and monsters, but we can relate to relationship problems, dealing with the parent of your girlfriend/boyfriend, trying to help your family survive and take care of your loved ones, all while trying not to make a mess of everything and figure out who you are as a person and what your destiny is

What is the quality that distinguishes Spider-Man from every other superhero out there? He is "the hero who could be you." What does this mean exactly. Well, in part, it is because Peter Parker, outside of his costumed identity, has to deal with the problems, responsibilities, and obligations each and every one us make everyday, that much is indeed true. But that is only ONE part of it; an important and fundamental part, to be sure, but not the only part.

Unlike other heroes, Peter Parker doesn't gain his powers due to being an alien from another planet, or because he happens to be tremendously wealthy, or because he has a unique set of genes that make him "special," or because he was "destined to become the chosen one." He gets his powers in a manner not unlike how we find sometimes find ourselves thrust into greatness--through sheer dumb luck and bit of free will. Peter choose to be at that science exhibit and, it just so happens, he gets bitten a spider which also just so happens to give him incredible powers. The spider could have just as easily bitten anybody else there--even one of use if we just so happened to be there at the time.

Furthermore, upon getting his powers, what does Peter initially decide to do with them? Probably what a lot of us would do if something like that happened to us: we'd use them to get rich, or get back at the people who we believed had wronged us, or show off in front of our friends, or try out for sports, or perform practical jokes on unsuspecting people, or just do something stupid out of sheer fun. The last thing on our minds would be "I'm now going to make myself a costume so I can go out and fight crime." In other words, we would be thinking how these powers could benefit us instead of other people--not unlike the special talents and "gifts" we are ourselves have.

And what causes Peter to finally use those powers to fight crime and help other people? It's not just because he failed to stop a criminal who later went on to kill his Uncle Ben; it's because he, knowing full well the guy was a criminal and that he had the power to stop him, choose not to because he felt it wasn't his problem, because he didn't want to get involved. Because he felt it wasn't his responsibility. And it's because of that moment of arrogance, because he made a conscious decision, he unknowingly caused the death of the one person in his life who was truly like a father to him. And he fights crime after learning who it was that killed that person because he doesn't want to make that same mistake ever again.

Now if you have a Spider-Man who partially gets his powers as a result of genetic tampering when he was a child, and if you have him fighting crime before his Uncle gets killed, and thus have to come up with some other way of making him indirectly responsible for his death, then you have essentially created a different character. Sure, he may look like Spider-Man, have the same name and powers as Spider-Man, live in the same city as Spider-Man, have web-shooters like Spider-Man, and even make wisecracks just like Spider-Man, but it's not really Spider-Man. Because you have changed how he becomes who he is and why he does what he does, which is far more important than whatever surface elements may or may not be "faithful" to the comics.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

[QUOTE="_____";23154651]Anyone here wish marvel had the movie rights over Sony? I do[/QUOTE]

I do but it only applies after ASM as I'm quite excited for it. Unless it's good enough to adapt into the MCU as is.

Overall, however, I support MS getting any and all rights back where they belong.

I think calling the MCU films 'safe' or 'samey' is a pretty weak jab at a young studio who have thus far produced five hits out of five attempts while simultaneously establishing a shared universe onscreen. I would love for Spider-Man to be a part of that.

 

[Doctor Who]

*gasps* Lizard....... with lab coat............. *faints*

http://api.ning.com/files/cGKezHqyQ...AVO5wvVWg6O*mvGX-L2KUKeww__/LizzardImage2.jpg

 

[Web face]

We have went over the fact that he is a vigilante before Uncle Ben's death. He isn't doing it because it is right, or that it is his responsibility, he does it when he feels like it. He has been bullied all of his life, so when he gets his powers, he beats up Flash and gets in trouble for it. Now instead of going after his bully he goes after the bullies outside his school, thugs and thieves. He is probably doing nothing more than bullying the criminals because he can get away with it, just to blow off some steam. Uncle Bens death will still make Peter more responsible than he was before.

 

[mayo23]

Anyways, I think the dinner scene where Gwen says Peter lives with his aunt and uncle was a mistake on her part. Seriously though, we see Peter sewing the mask to either his proto suit or his final suit in his room, with Uncle Ben's murderer's wanted poster. And the new trailer has captain stacy asking peter about his father during the dinner scene. So you've got "hey what does your father do?" "i never really knew my father, he left when I was very young" "peter lives with his aunt and uncle" "um..just my aunt actually, my uncle died not too long ago" and then captain stacy starts insulting spider-man and bam; "maybe he's trying to do something the police can't!" "can't????" silence...."haha" captain stacy laughs, he was just joking (btw, you see him laugh/chuckle/smile or something in the 2nd trailer)

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Now if you have a Spider-Man who partially gets his powers as a result of genetic tampering when he was a child,

Who still apparently gets randomly bitten by J. Random Spider, an event that doesn't happen that often but is still required for spider powers. And I haven't seen a clip of anyone forcing a spider bite onto him.

and if you have him fighting crime before his Uncle gets killed,

'Not taking wrestling career seriously' replaced with 'not taking random crimefighting seriously'. What are we missing? A lame wrestling scene. We'll live.

 

[Web face]

Anyways, I think the dinner scene where Gwen says Peter lives with his aunt and uncle was a mistake on her part. Seriously though, we see Peter sewing the mask to either his proto suit or his final suit in his room, with Uncle Ben's wanted poster. And the new trailer has captain stacy asking peter about his father during the dinner scene. So you've got "hey what does your father do?" "i never really knew my father, he left when I was very young" "peter lives with his aunt and uncle" "um..just my aunt actually, my uncle died not too long ago" and then captain stacy starts insulting spider-man and bam; "maybe he's trying to do something the police can't!" "can't????" silence...."haha" captain stacy laughs, he was just joking (btw, you see him laugh/chuckle/smile or something in the 2nd trailer)

That makes sense. I hope TASM surprises us.

 

[Radioactive]

*gasps* Lizard....... with lab coat............. *faints*

http://api.ning.com/files/cGKezHqyQ...AVO5wvVWg6O*mvGX-L2KUKeww__/LizzardImage2.jpg

Hope he looks this epic for the majority of the film.

 

[mayo23]

That makes sense. I hope TASM surprises us.

I really hope that's the case. I'll say this though, there's a lot of we haven't seen yet of the chemistry. The hallway scene b/w Gwen, Peter and Uncle Ben really had something in terms of chemistry that the Raimi films didn't. Andrew Garfield in particular has a way of conveying emotion through his expression as well that's very compelling and it sort of gives you chills. If you've seen the opening scene to Boy A, you'll know what I mean. Well, the use of music helps as well.

Really though, I think the people who are saying that this Peter won't be sympathetic enough from the trailers are underestimating Marc Webb's and Andrew Garfield's abilities. He was able to make a murderer feel sympathetic for goodness sake!

 

[BobbyCorwin88]

Thanks to those of you speaking up on the very obvious fact that Peter still is randomly bitten by a spider which unlocks his powers. The essence of the classic origin is still very much there.

Here's why the comparison to Ang Lee's Hulk is complete crap. The origin of Hulk in that film was depicted as a giant piece of pretentious bull crap. It was confusing to boot. And in the end, no one cared. It didn't matter that Banner had been experimented on as a kid, everyone just wanted to see him Hulk out.

How is this any different with Peter? This goes back to the fact that this film is trying to differentiate itself from the past trilogy. Why in the world would they do the same exact origin? And in a way they still are! So what's the big deal? I personally like the change. I don't mind a little destiny added in to the mythos of Spidey, just as long as it's handled in a non-pretentious way. I really like the idea that all of this might circle around back to Osborn, which plays perfectly off of Ultimate Spiderman. So many good things can come from this. It annoys me to no end when fanboys cannot accept any kind of variation on a comic book character that has been around for over 60 years.

In short, most fans and the GA are not going to care how Peter gets his powers, so long as he learns responsibility and is swinging around NYC as Spidey. Which, as we have seen, looks jaw-dropping incredible.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Thanks to those of you speaking up on the very obvious fact that Peter still is randomly bitten by a spider which unlocks his powers. The essence of the classic origin is still very much there.

Here's why the comparison to Ang Lee's Hulk is complete crap. The origin of Hulk in that film was depicted as a giant piece of pretentious bull crap. It was confusing to boot. And in the end, no one cared. It didn't matter that Banner had been experimented on as a kid, everyone just wanted to see him Hulk out.

How is this any different with Peter? This goes back to the fact that this film is trying to differentiate itself from the past trilogy. Why in the world would they do the same exact origin? And in a way they still are! So what's the big deal? I personally like the change. I don't mind a little destiny added in to the mythos of Spidey, just as long as it's handled in a non-pretentious way. I really like the idea that all of this might circle around back to Osborn, which plays perfectly off of Ultimate Spiderman. So many good things can come from this. It annoys me to no end when fanboys cannot accept any kind of variation on a comic book character that has been around for over 60 years.

In short, most fans and the GA are not going to care how Peter gets his powers, so long as he learns responsibility and is swinging around NYC as Spidey. Which, as we have seen, looks jaw-dropping incredible.

Well said. As long as they execute the origin story well, I've no problem with the change.

 

[stillanerd]

We have went over the fact that he is a vigilante before Uncle Ben's death. He isn't doing it because it is right, or that it is his responsibility, he does it when he feels like it. He has been bullied all of his life, so when he gets his powers, he beats up Flash and gets in trouble for it. Now instead of going after his bully he goes after the bullies outside his school, thugs and thieves. He is probably doing nothing more than bullying the criminals because he can get away with it, just to blow off some steam. Uncle Bens death will still make Peter more responsible than he was before.

And I get totally get that angle: that Peter, because he's so drunk on his power, essentially becomes the very type of person which has tormented him all his life. However, if he is already fighting crime, even if it's not for the most noble or altruistic of reasons, isn't he still using his powers for the greater good? Not to mention, isn't he also indirectly helping other people by stopping criminals, even if his motives for doing so are not entirely non-selfish? Remember, the tragedy of his Uncle Ben's death was the result of him choosing NOT to get involved in stopping a crime because he felt using his powers to fight crime was now beneath him, something which he arrogantly believed wasn't his concern or responsibility.

Who still apparently gets randomly bitten by J. Random Spider, an event that doesn't happen that often but is still required for spider powers. And I haven't seen a clip of anyone forcing a spider bite onto him.

But, if in this film, Peter's DNA has been tampered with by his father in such a way that only a genetically-altered spider also developed by his father has to act as a catalyst, then it's not so random anymore. Not to mention it's yet another huge coincidence that's added to an ever growing list of coincidences about this film.

'Not taking wrestling career seriously' replaced with 'not taking random crimefighting seriously'. What are we missing? A lame wrestling scene. We'll live.

The whole point of the wrestling scene--which, BTW, he actually does take seriously--is that he's more interested in using his powers to make a quick buck than he is stopping bad guys or in the service of others. The whole point is that he's motivated to fight crime because of he feels he caused his Uncle's death by not stopping a criminal when he had the power to do so and doesn't want to repeat that mistake ever again. If he's already fighting crime before that happens and then continues to do so afterwards, then he's motivation for being a superhero changes.

 

[Michael Frost]

This argument again?

Even if you don't take crimefighting seriously, you're still godamn doing it. It won't change that much once you get "serious" about it. The purpose will be the same and there won't be that much of an impact on the character's way of thinking...

 

[AbsractPo3tic]

Thanks to those of you speaking up on the very obvious fact that Peter still is randomly bitten by a spider which unlocks his powers. The essence of the classic origin is still very much there.

Here's why the comparison to Ang Lee's Hulk is complete crap. The origin of Hulk in that film was depicted as a giant piece of pretentious bull crap. It was confusing to boot. And in the end, no one cared. It didn't matter that Banner had been experimented on as a kid, everyone just wanted to see him Hulk out.

How is this any different with Peter? This goes back to the fact that this film is trying to differentiate itself from the past trilogy. Why in the world would they do the same exact origin? And in a way they still are! So what's the big deal? I personally like the change. I don't mind a little destiny added in to the mythos of Spidey, just as long as it's handled in a non-pretentious way. I really like the idea that all of this might circle around back to Osborn, which plays perfectly off of Ultimate Spiderman. So many good things can come from this. It annoys me to no end when fanboys cannot accept any kind of variation on a comic book character that has been around for over 60 years.

In short, most fans and the GA are not going to care how Peter gets his powers, so long as he learns responsibility and is swinging around NYC as Spidey. Which, as we have seen, looks jaw-dropping incredible.

Yeah, I'm with Bobby on this one. Instead of thinking of a great response, I'll just go with this. I think some of us just see Spidey differently and certain aspects of the character differently which, guess what, is why he's written by different artists and there will be different takes of him on the screen. I really don't see how anything happening or rumored to happen changes his character but also, that's just it, it's a rumor. Why don't we just wait to see what happens or at least until something official comes down. If the origin is changed, and it probably is, as long as it doesn't change who he is, what he does and he's still recognizable as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, does it really matter?

 

[mayo23]

The difference is that there's a conflict of intention between Peter beating up thugs because he now can without a care about the consequences vs. him doing something to help others because he's taken to heart what he feels is his responsibility and because his recklessness had dire consequences. I think that's enough impact. Obviously you don't, but that doesn't make anyone's opinion less valid.