The Amazing Spider-Man Who else feels sick?

[Dangerous]

Yes, but printed on webs would stretch into weird shapes, and look inconsistent , unlike the comic's costume.

I don’t see how.

That’s not what happens with the Hammond / Jap / Universal suits which feature either stitched or printed webs. In the case of the Jap suit the webs were printed not stitched. Here the webs behave in the same way as stitched webbing with regard to stretching issues since the webs are fused with the main fabric of the costume in the same way stitched webs would be.

Meaning- they would not/don’t stretch in ‘ways that were out of control' or make the webs look ‘weird, awful and inconsistent'.

For you to suppose printed webs would behave wildly different to stitched webs for no good reason, and with no evidence is pure theory, and a pretty imaginative one at that.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Um..no. This is just speculation on your part and is just plain WRONG. Yes, there was creative differences, but it had nothing to do with Raimi stalling the franchise:

http://au.movies.ign.com/articles/106/1060521p1.html

Raimi had said from the beginning, that he would do a fourth depending on the script. You can see from that article, that he found disagreement with the studio on what the next film should be. What then does that tell you?

Sam Raimi simply had found that the studio was once again trying to control his direction. We've seen the result of that already - in SM3! Who cares if he wanted the Vulture? (I personally think he should've gone with the Lizard since he's been building it up for 3 films), if he was given the chance to make SM4 with the Vulture with a great story why should the studio care? We all know that Raimi favors the old Spider-Man villains and we've already seen the result when he is in full control. The result is Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2. So who's argument is valid on who should have control? Raimi or the Studio?

Put simply, this is really about Columbia Pictures wanting full control. This cluster**** of a film they're making now is anything but a decision made with the fans in mind. They wouldn't let Raimi make the film he wanted to make (one that DID have the fans in mind) so they let him walk. . Having the same cast and crew returning to a series for this long is rare enough as it is. The majority of people wanted a Spider-Man 4 NOT a reboot. Why we're not getting it after the original cast and crew were already involved is unforgivable. In fact, the only reboot there should be is at Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios...starting with Avi Arad.

 

[WhiteRat]

I can't be any happier that Raimi is not attached to this franchise anymore; he gave me an average first movie, a great second one, yes, but again a terrible third one; so it's kinda one out of three for me. I don't need any more stupid jokes or Superman references in Spiderman movies.

If another director comes and gives this a more serious approach I don't think anyone can take the smile out of my clowny face.

I agree with everything El Payaso says.I love the idea that they are rebooting it like they did with Batman Begins.The Raimi movies were carbon copy ripoffs of the superman movies with bad jokes.the first and third I rank as terrible,the second one was very good so it was one out of three for me as well.time to start it all over again.I myself could actually dance to this news.

 

[TheSlag]

I agree with everything El Payaso says.I love the idea that they are rebooting it like they did with Batman Begins.The Raimi movies were carbon copy ripoffs of the superman movies with bad jokes.the first and third I rank as terrible,the second one was very good so it was one out of three for me as well.time to start it all over again.I myself could actually dance to this news.

I agree. I hope they get the characters right with the reboot. I am excited by the possibilities.. hopefully they will deliver the goods.

But a more serious (less cheeze) approach to Spider-Man intrigues me, ESPECIALLY if they follow the characters and storylines of ASM.

 

[WomanOfSteel]

I feel sick... from spider-man 3 still. I love raimi but he allowed that mess to be filmed. The franchise needed new blood.

Couldn't agree more. Spider-Man 3 was horrible..1 and 2 not so bad..But with all these new superhero movies coming out, Spider-Man needed that reboot.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Wasn't Spider-Man 3 the result of the studio corrupting what Sam Raimi originally wanted?

 

[Chris Wallace]

Noone wants to acknowledge this. It's much easier to hate Raimi.

 

[Nevincer]

It's not because it's easier to blame Raimi, it's because my problems with the movie had little to do with "teh greedy corporation$$$!!!", which is actually something I see parroted on message boards far more than this exaggerated minority opinion which is to criticize Raimi. Just look at the backlash at the reboot, it far outweighs the positive, so I don't know why anyone is trying to paint Raimi as the victim here.

For one thing, I had no interest in seeing the Sandman or the Vulture cinematically in any shape or form, and even if they were handled well that'd still be the case because I don't find either to be rich characters like the Goblins or Doc Ock. They just don't do it for me, sorry...

Sure, I would have watched it mererly to see the continuation of Spidey's story, but if all Raimi had to offer on that front was a bad retcon about Uncle Ben's murderer punctuated by stupid dance-offs, cheesy kid actors, reporters and a plethora of other stupid humour I would have just as much reason to hate it.

Those are the characteristics that made me hate SM3, the type of cheese that Raimi puts in the films and in this case went a step too far; sure, the handling of the symbiote and goblin stories were mediocre, but those weren't the biggest flaws, and if Raimi only included the cheese to purposely butcher the film after being forced by Sony to put in Venom then that says a lot about him as a director. That's all I have to say on the matter.

Oh, and in response to the thread title, I for one was ecstatic when the reboot was announced. Raimi's trilogy was my first proper exposure to the character, and yes his interpretation was cool in some ways, but from what I've learned a comic accurate spider-man sounds way more appealing to me, so I'm excited. Haters gonna hate

 

[Superwoman Prime]

It's not because it's easier to blame Raimi, it's because my problems with the movie had little to do with "teh greedy corporation$$$!!!", which is actually something I see parroted on message boards far more than this exaggerated minority opinion which is to criticize Raimi. Just look at the backlash at the reboot, it far outweighs the positive, so I don't know why anyone is trying to paint Raimi as the victim here.

We aren't trying to play the victim card on Raimi's behalf. We're just pointing fingers.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Noone wants to acknowledge this. It's much easier to hate Raimi.

Hate Raimi? No, not at all.

BLAME Raimi for giving us a very sloppy third movie? Yes.

Sure, it's one thing that the studio forced the symbiote and Venom, but do you blame the studio for Raimi giving us an awful version of the symbiote, giving us Venom for only a tiny amount of time, having Sandman be Uncle Ben's real killer and having dancing, hair flipping, too much crying and a very poorly-taste conclusion with Harry?

Yes, that's all of the studio's fault. Shame on us all for blaming Sammy Raimi

 

[Rocketman]

The only thing that sickens me is that J. Jonah Jameson isn't included in this reboot.

 

[Nevincer]

The only thing that sickens me is that J. Jonah Jameson isn't included in this reboot.

Nah, I disagree. I think that's a good thing they're taking their time to introduce characters like Jameson and the Osbornes.

By waiting for the sequel until we see more of Parker's world like Jameson, him become a photographer, and being introduced to the head of Oscorp (which is apparently responsible for the Lizard and his radioactive spider bite in the reboot) the scope of the elements surrounding Peter can expand in a very natural way and leave us more to look forward to in the future.

Kind of like how in BB Batman mostly operated in the narrows, but in TDK they showed more of the larger part of the city, the mayor, introduced more iconic threats like Two-Face/Joker and it became more of a massive ensemble.

Also, J.K Simmons was Jameson. I appreciate taking more time before finding a replacement for him

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I don't feel sick, expect the new movie to be a lot more fun than Raimi/Maguire's first movie

As a purist I'll be happy if-
2-Spidey is full of quips

If they are as fun as Iron Man we'll all be happy

4-Villain costumes are faithful

Only the first Green Goblin, there were some cool concept arts much better than the goofy costume released in theaters
As for Doc Ock being classic he would look too goofey

5-We get mech webshooters, no organics

I adore organics in the movies, adore mechs in other media

6-Spidey's origin is fixed to radioactive Spider and Ben getting shot at home

For the next Batman series, I want a faithful adaption of Two-Face so close to his pre-tas counterpart, a cheesy villain overly obsessed with number 2

 

[henzINNIT]

Hate Raimi? No, not at all.

BLAME Raimi for giving us a very sloppy third movie? Yes.

Sure, it's one thing that the studio forced the symbiote and Venom, but do you blame the studio for Raimi giving us an awful version of the symbiote, giving us Venom for only a tiny amount of time, having Sandman be Uncle Ben's real killer and having dancing, hair flipping, too much crying and a very poorly-taste conclusion with Harry?

Yes, that's all of the studio's fault. Shame on us all for blaming Sammy Raimi

With the exception of the Ben/Sandman retcon, all of these are a result of the Studio's changes. Raimi didn't understand or appreciate the Symbiote story, so you can blame him for that if you like, but he was pressured into making those changes.

 

[Anno_Domini]

He was still part of the writing team that wrote the damn script. The studio can push whatever they want, but it's the writers that are the ones that had a great idea of what to do and still gave us a sloppy mess.

And the retcon...man, Raimi messed up from the jump if he WANTED the retcon.

 

[Chris Wallace]

The only thing that sickens me is that J. Jonah Jameson isn't included in this reboot.

So far that's the thing that annoys me the least.

 

[henzINNIT]

He was still part of the writing team that wrote the damn script. The studio can push whatever they want, but it's the writers that are the ones that had a great idea of what to do and still gave us a sloppy mess.

And the retcon...man, Raimi messed up from the jump if he WANTED the retcon.

Eh I disagree still. I wouldn't expect any writers to cope well trying to assimilate major plotlines and characters that are unwanted and unnecessary in such a short space of time. They could have done a better job in many ares, but mistakes are made in a rush. Raimi had proven himself with two films and the studio should have trusted him.

The retcon was indeed there the whole time. Sandman was always in SM3 and that was always his connection to Peter. I don't like it either, there are better ways to tie people together without convoluting the past. Ahh well.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Raimi had proven himself with two films and the studio should have trusted him.

 

[Spiderine]

Nah, I disagree. I think that's a good thing they're taking their time to introduce characters like Jameson and the Osbornes.

By waiting for the sequel until we see more of Parker's world like Jameson, him become a photographer, and being introduced to the head of Oscorp (which is apparently responsible for the Lizard and his radioactive spider bite in the reboot) the scope of the elements surrounding Peter can expand in a very natural way and leave us more to look forward to in the future.

Kind of like how in BB Batman mostly operated in the narrows, but in TDK they showed more of the larger part of the city, the mayor, introduced more iconic threats like Two-Face/Joker and it became more of a massive ensemble.

Also, J.K Simmons was Jameson. I appreciate taking more time before finding a replacement for him

I agree. They will probably make his existence known with the Daily Bugle but save his intro for the sequel when Peter starts work there.

 

[Web-Shooter]

Nah, I disagree. I think that's a good thing they're taking their time to introduce characters like Jameson and the Osbornes.

By waiting for the sequel until we see more of Parker's world like Jameson, him become a photographer, and being introduced to the head of Oscorp (which is apparently responsible for the Lizard and his radioactive spider bite in the reboot) the scope of the elements surrounding Peter can expand in a very natural way and leave us more to look forward to in the future.

Kind of like how in BB Batman mostly operated in the narrows, but in TDK they showed more of the larger part of the city, the mayor, introduced more iconic threats like Two-Face/Joker and it became more of a massive ensemble.

Also, J.K Simmons was Jameson. I appreciate taking more time before finding a replacement for him

Well said, I agree completely. And I'm sure the Jameson in these films won't be teleported from some 40's screwball. The tone will have been established by the time the new JJJ has his first scene. It will be interesting to see how they keep him in character, without having him bounce of the walls to the degree we saw in Raimi's world..

 

[Anno_Domini]

JJJ being a hard-ass boss would fit just fine, imo. Just no goofy assistants as in Raimi's world and it'll fit just fine. It wasn't JJJ, in any way, that was making his a cheesey/goofy/over-the-top character; it was the people around him, imo.

 

[Web-Shooter]

JJJ being a hard-ass boss would fit just fine, imo. Just no goofy assistants as in Raimi's world and it'll fit just fine. It wasn't JJJ, in any way, that was making his a cheesey/goofy/over-the-top character; it was the people around him, imo.

Pretty much agree, although I do think that Simmons performance (and scenes with his staff) took it's que from those 40's comedies (and Raimi obviously) with that machine-gun type rapid dialogue.

 

[dan1]

Haters gonna hate

 

[El Payaso]

Wasn't Spider-Man 3 the result of the studio corrupting what Sam Raimi originally wanted?

Did the studio force dancing finger-gunning Peter in? Or the atrocious Butler scene? Or singing Mary Jane? Or the kitchen twist dancing scene?

 

[Nevincer]

Did the studio force dancing finger-gunning Peter in? Or the atrocious Butler scene? Or singing Mary Jane? Or the kitchen twist dancing scene?

Don't forget the British reporter, and Raimi's kids.