SPUMC Thread - RIP STAN LEE - ACROSS THE SPIDERVERSE out now

[tdogg2k]

Originally Posted by Uptempo kid

Originally Posted by Tdogg2k

No one has ever or will ever really care about mysterio.

Worst of the sinister 6..
Although in the shattered dimensions game he was pretty dope

Its a shame. Spidey has some of the most interesting villains next to Batman... A Sinister Six movie would be great but all the time they would have to introduce and juggle for that to happen

Yea they'd have to intro Electro, vulture, Kraven, Mysterio   (for the people no one knows) but honestly the back story on all them aren't that important. or aren't hard enough to come up with some BS 15 min plot...  (maybe Kraven would take a little longer)...
unless amazing spiderman 2 focused on King Pin and the creation of some of these then let this happen in 3.  which would mean no carnage or venom though

 

[JCMojica24]

I enjoyed the movie very much! Better than the previous 3 Spiderman movies IMO. Emma Stone is that girl for me!!

 

[KingParappa]

Originally Posted by Tdogg2k

Originally Posted by Uptempo kid

Originally Posted by Tdogg2k

No one has ever or will ever really care about mysterio.

Worst of the sinister 6..
Although in the shattered dimensions game he was pretty dope

Its a shame. Spidey has some of the most interesting villains next to Batman... A Sinister Six movie would be great but all the time they would have to introduce and juggle for that to happen

Yea they'd have to intro Electro, vulture, Kraven, Mysterio   (for the people no one knows) but honestly the back story on all them aren't that important. or aren't hard enough to come up with some BS 15 min plot...  (maybe Kraven would take a little longer)...
unless amazing spiderman 2 focused on King Pin and the creation of some of these then let this happen in 3.  which would mean no carnage or venom though

Would be "Amazing" tho. 

They shouldn't do a Venom/Carnage storyline at all imo. I ALMOST rather have them do the Clone saga... (I'M KIDDING)

 

[ecruteakcityboy]

The post credit scenes are starting to become whack and sort of gimmicky. Ugh!
Watching tonight with the little bro!

 

[Moderngz]

I hear it's a twilight-like spidey movie -_-. Is this true?

 

[outlaw8413]

Originally Posted by SOleILL

I hear it's a twilight-like spidey movie -_-. Is this true?

That's kinda close. It's more science fiction and romance than action. Hopefully this just lays the groundwork for an even better 2nd movie. Like in Spiderman 2 when we already knew what the deal was and they just got to the action?

 

[rfx45]

Movie was pretty good, despite the origins pretty much being exactly the same, it didn’t bore nor did it feel unnecessary. It’s was a good reboot on the origins.

Film felt a bit slow in the beginning but again never boring, just right. There were cheesy parts but overall the film was good. I’d rank it right there with SM1, slightly below SM2 and well above SM3. The first half did feel more like a love story with a bit of Spiderman origins around it but it worked for me, others might hate it.

Acting was superb, Garfield was still difficult to be taken as a nerd just by his looks but his acting chops far exceeds Tobeys. His awkward mannerisms were also pretty good.

Emma Stone simply looked great on the big screen and she is just miles away from Dunst in both looks and skill. Just is also very alluring and played the part well.

Action sequences are perhaps the best out of all the Spiderman franchise. It was fast and quick paced and it really showed Spidey as very acrobatic and agile, it is the best interpretation of how Spidey might actually fight.

Costume looked much better in action and the light-up spider web wasn’t noticeable in the film and I almost didn’t notice the silver shoes either.

The Lizard looked much better on-screen too, the no-snout wasn’t as bad when he’s moving. It did look a bit fake once they do a close-up but it wasn’t bad at all. I definitely expected worse.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

Movies plot points were pretty similar to SM1 with a few changes like his parents being there in the beginning and Stacy pretty much falling in-love with him w/o trying much. Connors was pretty much Osborne in this film (failing in science so he experiments on himself and even has a schizo moment here and there).

I didn’t like how cheesy it got in the end where the NYers helped Spidey by lining up all the cranes. Ugh.

I also hated how vague who the guy in the mid-credits scene too, I have no freaking idea who it is. It would have been nice to make it more distinguishable (like Fury or Thanos) because if no one knows who it is, then it just shows that there is a sequel (which we all knew already) and that there is more to his parents (which was pretty obvious).

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by NiceLikeChrist

I enjoyed it. Not as much as Spiderman 2 though. I'd say high 6 or low 7/10. Any word on what went down in the post credits?

My friend speculated that

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

it was Mysterio

Would be pretty hype if true.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

It can't be Mysterio, it simply makes no sense. He's a special effects artist, he'll be such a random choice for a next villain.

It has to be Norman Osborne, it just had to be but how he disappeared in the shadows it somewhat stupid. I could easily see it as Peters dad too, I need to see the film again but wasn't his dad wearing a similar hat that the guy int he shadows was holding when he left Peter as a kid int he beginning of the movie? Pure guess though but it's a possibility. 

What I think of it though is that they probably don't know who to use as a villain for the sequel yet.

 

[rfx45]

Sony Pictures is reporting that Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man brought in $7.5 million in 3,150 midnight screenings last night with $1.2 million, roughly 16% of that amount, coming from the 300 IMAX screens which had midnight showings.

This is similar to what Spider-Man 3 took in at midnight on May 4, 2007, and that ended up making $59.8 million its opening Friday on its way to a record-setting opening weekend of $151 million. Today being Tuesday may lower that amount considerably even with most schools being out and people leaving work early for the 4th of July holiday tomorrow.

By comparison, Michael Bay's original Transformers did $8.8 million in midnights (including 10pm previews) when it opened on the same day five years ago. Its sequel Transformers: Rise of the Fallen made $16.6 in midnight screenings alone while last year's Transformers: Dark of the Moon did $13.5 million (again including previous night previews).

ComingSoon.net's box office guru The Weekend Warrior predicted an opening day of $27 to 30 million for The Amazing Spider-Man earlier today, but with $7.5 million already in the bank, it should definitely be on the higher side of that amount if not closer to the opening day of Spider-Man 2.

 

[proshares]

RFX:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I thought Webb said there'd be hints/glimpses of the next villian during this movie? From that, I took that they knew where they'd be taking the sequel.

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by Proshares

RFX:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I thought Webb said there'd be hints/glimpses of the next villian during this movie? From that, I took that they knew where they'd be taking the sequel.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

If that is in fact true, then the only real clue is Norman Osborne. 

Other than that, Rhino might make an appearance since in the lab when Peter snuck for the tour when the hologram of different animals came up, there was a rhino figure on the bottom left.

 

[checks mcgee]

People seem to forget how much of a BANGER the OG spiderman was, but I see a lot of positive review in here so I may check it out.

 

[Deleted member 38182]

Originally Posted by RFX45

Originally Posted by Proshares

RFX:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I thought Webb said there'd be hints/glimpses of the next villian during this movie? From that, I took that they knew where they'd be taking the sequel.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

If that is in fact true, then the only real clue is Norman Osborne. 

Other than that, Rhino might make an appearance since in the lab when Peter snuck for the tour when the hologram of different animals came up, there was a rhino figure on the bottom left.

Spoiler

idk how to do spoilers

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by rck2sactown

Originally Posted by RFX45

Originally Posted by Proshares

RFX:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I thought Webb said there'd be hints/glimpses of the next villian during this movie? From that, I took that they knew where they'd be taking the sequel.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

If that is in fact true, then the only real clue is Norman Osborne. 

Other than that, Rhino might make an appearance since in the lab when Peter snuck for the tour when the hologram of different animals came up, there was a rhino figure on the bottom left.

Spoiler

idk how to do spoilers

 

[Deleted member 38182]

whoops I was using <> not []

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I thought Osborn was supposed to hint at Proto Goblin, could just be another stupid rumor I read tho

I need to stop taking those so seriously

 

[blakep267]

why do people act like Kirsten Dunst wasnt sexy back in that 2000-02 range. Bring it on, that rain scene with the perky nips. Shes grossy now, but Ill take 2000 Kirsten Dunst over Emma

 

[levar burton]

Just five years after director Sam Raimi wrapped up his trilogy that grossed $2.5 billion worldwide at the box office, comic book creator Stan Lee's 50-year-old Marvel flagship character gets a stylish Hollywood reboot. However, as robustly eye-popping and pristine the visual effects shot in IMAX are the film needs more than what director Marc Webb offers. Too much time is wasted on Peter Parker, leaving little to develop his relationships with supporting characters.
28-year-old Andrew Garfield delivers an A+ very believable performance as awkward, shy high school senior and the wise-cracking web-slinging protagonist. Suited up as the wall crawling hero Garfield offers a dead on sarcastic and witty impression of Spidey that exceeds expectation in comparison to Tobey McGuire's dry humor.  Emma Stone is equally convincing as 17-year-old high school senior Gwen Stacy, whenever the two are on screen together the frisky chemistry succeeds at nailing a genuinely adolescent teenage love affair.

But as stated before, too little time is left for Peter to develop an on-screen bond with any of the important characters. Sally Field and Martin Sheen who play Spidey's legal guardians Uncle Ben and Aunt May are rarely seen instilling values that are the canon of  "The Amazing Spider-Man". Flash Thompson and Parker's interaction comes off very formulaic and contrived.  Harry Osborn is but a speck of paint on the wall in this film, as pre-hero Peter addresses Flash by his first name Eugene rescuing Harry from bullying. Just bullet riddled with continuity errors.Ten years after Raimi's 2002 classic, Marc Webb and stunt coordinators Vic and Andy Armstrong set out with one purpose, to make a more realistic Spider-Man. While no one can argue that the visual effects will swat Raimi's CGI attempt like a bug, Raimi's writers Stan Lee and Steve Ditko do a better job with character development than this film does.In 136mins little is revealed about the background of  Dr. Curt Connors /The Lizard (Rhys Ifans) and his relationship to Peter's father, there's parts of the story you are literally forced to come to your own conclusions and left guessing. Many characters are used unsparingly and disposed of  like actions figures in a Saturday morning cartoon toy commercial. The mysterious boss of Connors, his connection to Norman Osborn and relentless need to deliver the Lizard Serum to Osborn is left in limbo after their meeting on the bridge. If you're not a reader of the comic book you're left confused.

The company invested so much into trying to out-do the past Spider-Man films in comparisons it missed its mark as a classic. I saw the film in a packed Manhattan theater last night in 3-D IMAX , we're all in agreement it's very visually explosive. Spider-Man soars through Manhattan's streets and free falls over acrophobia inducing aerials of the city. 8 foot Lizards that deserve special acknowledgement for its design staying true to its comic book roots as most film adaptations do not. The film simply doesn't live up to its hype.  But you wont leave the theater unsatisfied, the film is amazing, well, sort of.

So should I go see it or not? Or it a movie worth waiting for Blu-Ray or Netflix?  Pretty much all reviews say the effects are second to none but the story line is weak feels like the Dark Knight, can anyone confirm this before I Fandango?

 

[grimey]

Dope movie

 

[18th letter]

stop putting stuff in spoilers, the movie is already out dammit.

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by blakep267

why do people act like Kirsten Dunst wasnt sexy back in that 2000-02 range. Bring it on, that rain scene with the perky nips. Shes grossy now, but Ill take 2000 Kirsten Dunst over Emma

I actually like Dunst as MJ and Tobey as Peter but Dinst always had that white trash, snaggle tooth look to her. She was attractive in Just Bring It but Crazy/Beautiful made her look more slutty and trailer trash than anything else, I'd still bang her but you can kind of see her looks might be going downhill. Stone is just more perky and just has a great sense of humor as that girl next door type of chick. And just in comparison to the Spiderman movies, Stone > Dunst in acting and look. Dunsts' only advantage is she had the knockers so they got her in a wet shirt as much as possible.

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by 18th letter

stop putting stuff in spoilers, the movie is already out dammit.

Seems like a lot of people are still undecided on whether to see the film or not. 
You know people will rage-rant if you say something that'll spoil the movie. 

 

[mayhemmonkey000]

In terms of the scene in the end credits

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

I think it's Chameleon. From what I remember he knows about Peter's parents and it would make sense how physically someone can be in there with Doc Conners.  

 

[bombbiggidyphil]

Originally Posted by 18th letter

stop putting stuff in spoilers, the movie is already out dammit.

Yeah, the hell with those who haven't seen it.
  

 

[generationz]

I'm on the fence about this one too. The whole plot of lizard trying to turn the city into lizards via a machine sounds so generic. I bet his reasoning is pretty generic as well IE - Wanting to control people, Wanting a superior race, Wanting his own army and etc. Either way I see it being a generic plot point. If anyone has seen the movie already could you elaborate?

 

[rfx45]

Originally Posted by GeNeRaTiOnZ

I'm on the fence about this one too. The whole plot of lizard trying to turn the city into lizards via a machine sounds so generic. I bet his reasoning is pretty generic as well IE - Wanting to control people, Wanting a superior race, Wanting his own army and etc. Either way I see it being a generic plot point. If anyone has seen the movie already could you elaborate?

You are correct to a point but the movie is much better at portraying Connors. He was "good" in the beginning and only wanted to cure diseases or to be more specific, make everyone the same. Then he was forced to make a decision but refused to test on human subjects w/o perfecting it and was forced to use it on himself. Then as a Lizard, he had somewhat like a schizo effect and that is when it started going downhill. Soyeah it is a bit generic but they did display it in a good way and portrayed Connors as an innocent scientist turned/forced to be bad. 
To be honest though, the film doesn't really revolve around the villain and his premise though, it really is about Spiderman and Gwen Stacy and it was done well. I say watch it for the action alone, just to see Spiderman fight and move exactly how we imagine Spiderman is in the comics.