Red Mosquito

I've only seen the reboot once. Maybe I should give it some time and re-watch. I think I was biased going into it, because I thought it was stupid to do Spider Man all over again so soon after the Toby ones.

darth_vedder wrote:Did people actually like the first one?

I thought the first two Toby ones were good. His 3rd one was terrible, and I thought the reboot was pretty bad too.

I liked it. The actor playing Spider-Man did great.

darth_vedder wrote:Did people actually like the first one?

I thought the first two Toby ones were good. His 3rd one was terrible, and I thought the reboot was pretty bad too.

it was ok. i might watch it again but i'll def not buy it.

often times i get hung up on the 'looks' of a movie or character, and i hated the look of the Lizard. you're making a super-hero movie that has a giant Lizard...make it look like the comic books.

oh, and the fact that the Lizard has bouts with his alter ego seemed all too familiar too soon.

red calzolaio wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Did people actually like the first one?

I thought the first two Toby ones were good. His 3rd one was terrible, and I thought the reboot was pretty bad too.

it was ok. i might watch it again but i'll def not buy it.

often times i get hung up on the 'looks' of a movie or character, and i hated the look of the Lizard. you're making a super-hero movie that has a giant Lizard...make it look like the comic books.

oh, and the fact that the Lizard has bouts with his alter ego seemed all too familiar too soon.

i dont think the lizard in a black tshirt, white lab coat and purple pants would work to well (with an aligator head). as far as the bouts with the alter ego thats pretty much how he was in the comics so i see no issue with that

I still haven't seen the first one. Nothing about this one looks good to me.

BurtReynolds wrote:I still haven't seen the first one. Nothing about this one looks good to me.

i am reporting that MCP has multiple accounts

I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

Peeps wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I still haven't seen the first one. Nothing about this one looks good to me.

i am reporting that MCP has multiple accounts

McParadigmatBurt

Peeps wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I still haven't seen the first one. Nothing about this one looks good to me.

i am reporting that MCP has multiple accounts

though we bitch and moan about nearly the same movies, they are never exactly the same ones. there are subtle differences.

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

basically they are building towards the sinister 6 from the comics, hence why you are getting a villian here and there in each movie as well as easter eggs about future villans.

if they can pull it off it will be majorly epic, but as we have seen in SM3, too many characters/bad guys at once can be a bad thing if written badly

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

I just liked the whole tone of it more than all of Raimi's films. It was funnier, darker, more stylish. But looking at this trailer, it looks too busy. I loved the relative minimalism and streamlined plot of the last film, but (again, I can only judge by the trailer) I don't think it actually established enough plot points and threads to contain all this kapow-shazam. I guess I wish all superhero movies were origin stories, I find them way more interesting than non-stop action. The Raimi films' origin story was lame I thought; this one was good.

harmless wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

I just liked the whole tone of it more than all of Raimi's films. It was funnier, darker, more stylish. But looking at this trailer, it looks too busy. I loved the relative minimalism and streamlined plot of the last film, but (again, I can only judge by the trailer) I don't think it actually established enough plot points and threads to contain all this kapow-shazam. I guess I wish all superhero movies were origin stories, I find them way more interesting than non-stop action. The Raimi films' origin story was lame I thought; this one was good.

Pretty much agree. I liked Raimi's Spider-Man. And I loved Spider-Man 2. But, yeah, I'd rank Amazing Spider-Man over the first and third Raimi films.

Peeps wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

basically they are building towards the sinister 6 from the comics, hence why you are getting a villian here and there in each movie as well as easter eggs about future villans.

if they can pull it off it will be majorly epic, but as we have seen in SM3, too many characters/bad guys at once can be a bad thing if written badly

Exactly. I'm rooting for this franchise. I love Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. I hope they can pull of the Sinister Six.

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:I thought the first Amazing Spider-Man was really good, yeah. This one looks a little more generic.

It just looks like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. If they can pull it off, it'll still be a wildly entertaining film. But it can't just be spectacul. And it all depends on the payoff. What are we building toward? Are we building too much too fast? I think this looks fun. But I don't know if it looks good.

The Amazing Spider-Man was better than two of Raimi's Spider-films.

I just liked the whole tone of it more than all of Raimi's films. It was funnier, darker, more stylish. But looking at this trailer, it looks too busy. I loved the relative minimalism and streamlined plot of the last film, but (again, I can only judge by the trailer) I don't think it actually established enough plot points and threads to contain all this kapow-shazam. I guess I wish all superhero movies were origin stories, I find them way more interesting than non-stop action. The Raimi films' origin story was lame I thought; this one was good.

Pretty much agree. I liked Raimi's Spider-Man. And I loved Spider-Man 2. But, yeah, I'd rank Amazing Spider-Man over the first and third Raimi films.

Agreed

Gotta say Spider-Man 1 & 2 are both great, the 3rd kinda sucked, kinda like X-3. "The Amazing Spider-Man" I thought was pretty good, and this sequel is looking pretty good. I have high hopes.

Why is the third movie so hard to do right?

X-3 may have been fine if Singer stayed on.


LOTR, Nolan's Batman, Indiana Jones and original Star Wars are have excellent third acts. What good trilogies have horrible third acts besides Austin powers and the godfather?

i can think of one...

stip wrote:X-3 may have been fine if Singer stayed on.


LOTR, Nolan's Batman, Indiana Jones and original Star Wars are have excellent third acts. What good trilogies have horrible third acts besides Austin powers and the godfather?

Batman Forever, Superman III, Revenge of the Sith, Return of the Jedi, Rocky 3, The Matrix Revolutions, Jaws 3, Rush Hour 3, Hannibal, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean, Robocop 3, Poltergeist 3. Most people will tell you Alien 3, though I really liked it. But I also didn't like LOTR: Return of the King. A lot of folks also didn't like Back to the Future 3.

Those are off the top of my head.