Spider-Man (2012) Reboot

[JOE SOAP]

I liked the little comics that came with them.

[Leigh S]

I love the angsty nature of 60s Spider-man, so if they've gone for that, all well and good... but the trailers definition of angst seemed to be asking the hot girl out in a semi-awkward but cute way while she says yes in a semi-awkward and cute way... I seem to recall Gwen being a bit harder to get than that, and that was the fun of it - Parker could beat the villain, but his relationships were a mess ( well more of a mess than either the Raimi or (seemngly) this one would have it) ... who am I kidding - give me Betty Brant!  Best Spider-man girlfriend dynamic ever.

[Goaty]

Reviews for Amazing Spider-Man been averages, so heavy loads of clips not help?

[Professor Bear]

General vibe I'm getting is that the biggest problem is nothing new has been done with the material, but then it is a reboot of a film that's only ten years old and is based on a pretty well-known/riffed origin story.  Since the Sam Raimi movie came out there's been three separate and distinct cartoon shows based on Spider-Man, and god knows how many comic book reboots.  I'm not sure what they were expected to do with the material given the rushed production process and as long as it manages to be "okay" I think those involved have probably done the best they could.

Aside from the ludicrous amount of toys seen onscreen (flashing web-shooters, Spider-sneakers, Spider-Man track pants), the biggest issue for me would really be that the clips I've seen seem to make it look a lot like a superhero version of MTV's Teen Wolf, though turnabout is fair play as the supervillain of that show's current season is a humanoid lizard created by the hubris of its human alter-ego...

[dracula1]

Iam aware of a bunch of Twighlight-teenies that are chomping at the bit to see this movie.  If it can rope in a percentage of that type of ciinema Goer it should do ok! 

[JOE SOAP]

I'm not sure what they were expected to do with the material given the rushed production process and as long as it manages to be "okay" I think those involved have probably done the best they could.

They could've done what Marvel did with the Incredible Hulk: tell the origin in the opening credits and move on from there. A simple story could've been executed from that point on.

The feeling I'm getting is they did try and do more with the origin, however pointless, but that it ended up either not being shot or back in the edit-bins. Things are set-up but undeveloped.

[Professor Bear]

I am making an assumption here so feel free to disagree, but I reckon the movie bods' thinking was that they had to do the origin story again because they wanted a teenage Spidey and if they just skipped the origin as you suggest, audiences would assume that this was a direct continuation of the adventures of the Spidey from the Raimi flicks, who by the end was a guy in his late 20s and far outside the age range ASM is aiming for.
A retelling of the origin arguably seemed a necessary evil if Sony wanted to clearly and unambiguously differentiate from the Raimi trilogy, as while Incredible Hulk may have been a decent film in the eyes of some and made a load of cash, it is generally viewed in the industry as a failure and many are still unclear if it is actually a sequel or a reboot of the Ang Lee thing.

[JOE SOAP]

I'd say the Hulk's less than stellar reception was more down to not really knowing how to handle the character in a solo-run and the fact they'd all ready tried to boot the character not too long before and, importantly, without great success. Many people will see a Spidey film for the pure joy alone of seeing the web-head vault through the Manhattan skyline, the Hulk just wrecks things; a harder Joe Super-Soap to put on-screen without someone else to play-off. Spidey had always been No. 1 in the Marvel mutie-verse -probably still is- before Downey Jnr. put on some coloured tin-foil.

While I agree with your most valid point about Sony needing to push Parker's teen-ness, I don't see them being so ham-strung by that as you do. Incorporating the teenage factor was important but does the re-origin of Spidey really need at least two-thirds of a film to do that? Who doesn't know Peter Parker and that origin by now? I'd say 15 minutes tops of cinematic short-hand to drop him right back in high-school.

[radiator]

if they just skipped the origin as you suggest, audiences would assume that this was a direct continuation of the adventures of the Spidey from the Raimi flicks, who by the end was a guy in his late 20s and far outside the age range ASM is aiming for.

Such concerns haven't stopped them from explicitly selling this film as 'Spider-man 4'.

[brendan1]

I am making an assumption here so feel free to disagree, but I reckon the movie bods' thinking was that they had to do the origin story again because they wanted a teenage Spidey and if they just skipped the origin as you suggest, audiences would assume that this was a direct continuation of the adventures of the Spidey from the Raimi flicks, who by the end was a guy in his late 20s and far outside the age range ASM is aiming for.

Garfield's 28 already. The same age as Maguire was.

I think it would have been far braver - and more interesting - to do a Spiderman who genuinely was at school. And have a kid play him at 17 or whatever. A bit like the Harry Potter films, except not fucking shit.

But, as feared, they've gone for the halfwit teeny angst Twilight dollar, and as such it will be rubbish in comaprison to the Raimi film.

TRUFAX

[Goaty]

One problem about that poster as they try to selling the Amazing Spider-Man as "The Untold Story"

but the problem reviewer mentioned this;

VERY HEAVY SPOILER!!!!

[spoiler]that the untold story not out in this film, possible in the new sequel to Amazing Spider-Man! WTF? [/spoiler]

[Professor Bear]

Garfield's 28 already. The same age as Maguire was.

Maguire was playing 28, though.  Garfield isn't.

but does the re-origin of Spidey really need at least two-thirds of a film to do that? Who doesn't know Peter Parker and that origin by now? I'd say 15 minutes tops of cinematic short-hand to drop him right back in high-school.

Can't speak for certain as I haven't seen it yet, but the videogame story seems to suggest that [spoiler]Spidey and the Lizard's powers come from the same source, and that source [/spoiler]is a large plot McGuffin in the movie.

[JOE SOAP]

Can't speak for certain as I haven't seen it yet, but the videogame story seems to suggest that [spoiler]Spidey and the Lizard's powers come from the same source, and that source [/spoiler]is a large plot McGuffin in the movie.

An unnecessary adjunct, to a simple origin, that I believe is not fully answered in the film as a lot of the [spoiler]parental stuff[/spoiler] has been dropped.

[bluemeanie]

Going to see it Wednesday. Like the look of the trailer and I had an old Spider-Man annual as a kid where he fought the Red Skull and it was all about his parents secret history, so the fact they're doing some of this gave me a nice bit of nostalgia for a book I'd forgotten.

[Mike Carroll]

Just back from the first screening in Liffey Valley, Dublin... Overall: Good fun, but kind of unnecessary given that the first Raimi movie is only ten years old. Worth a look, though!