The Amazing Spider-Man The Official ASM THEATRICAL TRAILER Thread!

[Scarlet Spider]

Batman Begins told the origin, and people thought it was a prequel to the Burton/Schumacher films. It's not a foolproof method of distinction.

Exactly. So why would you run an even bigger risk of alienating/confusing your audience but leaving out the origin entirely?

 

[VenomSpawn]

Just letting you all know, I live in NYC and they are filming LITERALLY outside my house RIGHT NOW

Then you have no excuse not to get us some pictures. What are they going to do, tell you to go away? xD Get out there, man.

 

[Godzilla2014]

How do you expect them to set up their characters and story without the origin? Just dropping us into the middle of things isn't a good idea at all.

And just having it in flashbacks isn't sufficient enough to have us truly understand the characters.

Yes, it is. Batman is living proof it is. We started in the middle, with Batman kicking ass, then being introduced to Bruce Wayne, then discovering Bruce Wayne is Batman, and then finding out why he became Batman before the climax. Granted, Batman was a much more mysterious character in this character than Spider-Man, but the technique can work nonetheless.
Most of the Spider-Man cartoons (both SM:TAS and TSSM did this) do the exact same thing as well, and no one really bats an eye. It's just not been used in a live-action film before.

But if you want to tell the origin story, tell the origin story, and don't just use the origin to occupy the first half of the movie.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Exactly. So why would you run an even bigger risk of alienating/confusing your audience but leaving out the origin entirely?

Because I would rather they be confused as to whether or not this is a sequel to the Raimi films than bored watching a formulaic retread of the origin story they saw ten years ago.

 

[Poeman]

Then you have no excuse not to get us some pictures. What are they going to do, tell you to go away? xD Get out there, man.

lol i woke up from sleep...im in a apartment building, i called my security downstairs about it he told me too

Wish i could, but im going back to bed (have work). Just letting you all know as the movie is continuing to film and it looks like a action sequence or something as they have crews on top of a building too.

 

[VenomSpawn]

Because I would rather they be confused as to whether or not this is a sequel to the Raimi films than bored watching a formulaic retread of the origin story they saw ten years ago.

And on that note, I'm going to bed.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Because I would rather they be confused as to whether or not this is a sequel to the Raimi films than bored watching a formulaic retread of the origin story they saw ten years ago.

Ah but see, your ticket (along with mine and everyone else's here) is already sold. It's the general audience that will decide this movie's fate. They can't and shouldn't be taken for granted.

I'm curious, are you against origins being retold in general, in live action? How do you feel about the Superman reboot, retelling his origin again?

 

[©KAW]

Haha...he wants a confused audience....that's rich.

 

[Godzilla2014]

And on that note, I'm going to bed.

Cracked article "8 Pointless Laws All Comic Book Movies Follow"; Rule # 8-"The First Film Requires A Tedious Origin Story". That explains why telling the origin is unnecessary.

 

[itsleroy]

Just letting you all know, I live in NYC and they are filming LITERALLY outside my house RIGHT NOW

You lucky mother...

=/

 

[SnuffTheRooster]

Cracked article "8 Pointless Laws All Comic Book Movies Follow"; Rule # 8-"The First Film Requires A Tedious Origin Story". That explains why telling the origin is unnecessary.

Yeah, and movies in general are unnecessary. We could do with out them so why do they bother making them?

If you're a "spider man fan" and don't want to sit through 20 minutes of Spider Man becoming Spider Man then I don't feel you deserve to call yourself a spider man fan.

 

[Spiderman6592]

I agree. What type of fan complains about seeing the most badass origin story in comic book history being retold?

 

[SnuffTheRooster]

The ultimate lazy. So lazy they can't even sit and keep there eyes on the screen of one of their "heroes" for 20 minutes because they'd rather have everything they want handed to them on a silver platter. "oh I know the origin I don't want to see it, do you mind cutting it out for me, Marc Webb?" Actually it sounds more like "OMG ORIGIN SUCKS JUST SKIP IT GOSH!"

You've got such a tough life

 

[Curmudgeon]

I love origin stories. They're guaranteed character development in movies that may otherwise be occupied by mindless action and very little plot. I don't think we have to worry about that with this film, but I love getting as much character development in as possible anyway.

 

[Batmind]

The thing is, the origin is pretty simple, and rather consistent throughout the various incarnations and retellings, and the Raimi film didn't screw it up, so unless it's changed significantly for this incarnation of Spider-Man, then there's really no need for it. Our minds can fill in the blanks with prior knowledge. Did anyone go into Spider-Man and not know how Peter Parker became Spider-Man?

Now, I honestly, think the origin story is rather compelling, and could possibly support its own film. But as exposition, backstory before the story really gets going, then it's a waste of half a film.

Yeah but you are ass backwards with this comment because in this version Gwen Stacy is a main character. Her death will have a huge impact on the further development of Spiderman and Peter Parker as a character.

I would even argue that by having MJ as the love interest right off the bat Raimi left the door wide open for someone to come in and retell the story like it's supposed to be. And the pointlessly adding Stacy in the third movie. Why ? It could have been any other hot chick, why was it Gwen Stacy ?

Its different dude and needs to be told. Raimi messed up, admit it.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Yeah, and movies in general are unnecessary. We could do with out them so why do they bother making them?

If you're a "spider man fan" and don't want to sit through 20 minutes of Spider Man becoming Spider Man then I don't feel you deserve to call yourself a spider man fan.

My problem isn't the origin itself per se, but that it's again being used to occupy the first half of a film before moving on to Spider-Man fighting a supervillain.
I actually had my own ideas for a retelling of Spider-Man's origin that would take risks and be radically different from the superhero origin story formula as we know it, if anyone would like me to share them.

I agree. What type of fan complains about seeing the most badass origin story in comic book history being retold?

The one who paid to see Spider-Man kick ass.

Yeah but you are ass backwards with this comment because in this version Gwen Stacy is a main character. Her death will have a huge impact on the further development of Spiderman and Peter Parker as character.

Its different dude and needs to be told. Raimi messed up admit it.

I don't give a damn about Gwen Stacy (616). She sucked and she died for good reason. If you don't want to tell that story (as Raimi didn't for his first film), then skipping her is completely justified, in my opinion.
And that's a terrible argument for a new origin story, as Gwen Stacy didn't appear until Peter went to college, like most of the popular supporting characters.

 

[Batmind]

I don't give a damn[\b] about Gwen Stacy (616). She sucked and she died for good reason. If you don't want to tell that story (as Raimi didn't for his first film), then skipping her is completely justified, in my opinion.
And that's a terrible argument for a new origin story, as Gwen Stacy didn't appear until Peter went to college, like most of the popular supporting characters.

Well there's your problem. You don't care. You just wanna see a random guy in spandex, kicking ass.

Fair enough, you could have just said so y'know.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Yeah but you are ass backwards with this comment because in this version Gwen Stacy is a main character. Her death will have a huge impact on the further development of Spiderman and Peter Parker as a character.

I would even argue that by having MJ as the love interest right off the bat Raimi left the door wide open for someone to come in and retell the story like it's supposed to be. And the pointlessly adding Stacy in the third movie. Why ? It could have been any other hot chick, why was it Gwen Stacy ?

Its different dude and needs to be told. Raimi messed up, admit it.

There is no divine law that states "Gwen must come first". The fact is, a series of films is much more finite than its comic book source material. There may not be enough to establish Peter's relationship with Gwen, kill her off, and establish his relationship with Mary Jane. There's just not the guarantee that there will be a next installment to tell that story. After all, Sam Raimi wanted to direct a Spider-Man Hexalogy, not just a mere trilogy.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Well there's your problem. You don't care. You just wanna see a random guy in spandex, kicking ass.

Fair enough, you could have just said so y'know.

I do care. Otherwise I wouldn't bother posting. I want characters, and I want to see Spider-Man on the screen. My problem with the origin is that it's repeating Spider-Man's structure, and the origin is just used to occupy the first hour of the film, meaning that the Peter's conflicts as Spider-Man just come in half-way through. The end result is two half films, and not one whole film.
Just imagine what could have been done with 2 hours to develop the Spider-Man/Green Goblin rivalry instead of 1, for example.

I prefer Mary Jane over Gwen by far, and I didn't really care that Gwen was excluded from the Raimi films for the most part. Yes, her tragic death is a great story, but that's really all the character has contributed to the Spidey Mythos in the long term.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I do care. Otherwise I wouldn't bother posting. I want characters, and I want to see Spider-Man on the screen. My problem with the origin is that it's repeating Spider-Man's structure, and the origin is just used to occupy the first hour of the film, meaning that the Peter's conflicts as Spider-Man just come in half-way through. The end result is two half films, and not one whole film.
Just imagine what could have been done with 2 hours to develop the Spider-Man/Green Goblin rivalry instead of 1, for example.

I prefer Mary Jane over Gwen by far, and I didn't really care that Gwen was excluded from the Raimi films for the most part. Yes, her tragic death is a great story, but that's really all the character has contributed to the Spidey Mythos in the long term.

I asked you earlier but I never received a response.

What's your stance on the Superman reboot also re-doing a well known origin, that's already been done before?

In Superman's case, even Nolan/Goyer are doing the same thing that's being done with the Spider-Man reboot, in regards to the origin.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I asked you earlier but I never received a response.

What's your stance on the Superman reboot also re-doing a well known origin, that's already been done before?

In Superman's case, even Nolan/Goyer are doing the same thing that's being done with the Spider-Man reboot, in regards to the origin.

I honestly am not really sure what I feel about the origin being done in Man Of Steel. Part of me thinks that the origin is so well known that it doesn't need repeating, and another part thinks that the last time it was done on film was over 30 years ago, so I might be receptive to see the origin story on the big screen for an entirely new generation.
Spider-Man was only 10 years ago. It's too recent, and there really haven't been any technological revolutions in special effects in those ensuing 10 years for the reboot to really benefit like there is in the case of Superman.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I honestly am not really sure what I feel about the origin being done in Man Of Steel. Part of me thinks that the origin is so well known that it doesn't need repeating, and another part thinks that the last time it was done on film was over 30 years ago, so I might be receptive to see the origin story on the big screen for an entirely new generation.
Spider-Man was only 10 years ago. It's too recent, and there really haven't been any technological revolutions in special effects in those ensuing 10 years for the reboot to really benefit like there is in the case of Superman.

Don't forget Superman also had a television show on for the last ten years that chronicled Clark Kent's complete origin from beginning to end. Granted a TV show only has a fraction of the viewership of a feature film, but it still counts.

My point is, Superman has the most well known and famous superhero origin of all time and it has been done numerous times, but they still go back to it, to give the current generation a new point of entry into the character and his mythology.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Don't forget Superman also had a television show on for the last ten years that chronicled Clark Kent's complete origin from beginning to end. Granted a TV show only has a fraction of the viewership of a feature film, but it still counts.

My point is, Superman has the most well known and famous superhero origin of all time and it has been done numerous times, but they still go back to it, to give the current generation a new point of entry into the character and his mythology.

But this is the same generation as the one that saw Spider-Man, so the argument doesn't hold very well.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

But this is the same generation as the one that saw Spider-Man, so the argument doesn't hold very well.

The argument holds because ten years is enough time for a new generation of kids to see a new version of Spider-Man but honestly that's not even the most important reason to include the origin.

If the film was connected to Raimi's Spider-Man universe (the same way X-Men: First Class was tied into the same universe as the previous films), I'd agree covering the origin again would be a waste but this film has nothing to do with the 2002 film.

They need to establish a new foundation for this series and show the audience what exactly is different about this new version of Spider-Man and why they should care about these characters.

 

[Godzilla2014]

The argument holds because ten years is enough time for a new generation of kids to see a new version of Spider-Man but honestly that's not even the most important reason to include the origin.

If the film was connected to Raimi's Spider-Man universe (the same way X-Men: First Class was tied into the same universe as the previous films), I'd agree covering the origin again would be a waste but this film has nothing to do with the 2002 film.

They need to establish a new foundation for this series and show the audience what exactly is different about this new version of Spider-Man and why they should care about these characters.

Actually, a generation is 20 years, and it's only been five since Spider-Man 3. So it's the same generation of kids, really.

The origin is included because Sony wanted to stick to the tired tried-and-true superhero origin story formula so that they could play it safe with the reboot instead of taking risks.