TheMutt92
New member
Marc Webb confirmed...
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/19/marc-webb-to-direct-new-spider-man-trilogy/
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/19/marc-webb-to-direct-new-spider-man-trilogy/
The Amazing Spider-Man
- Thread starter TheMutt92
- Start date
DocWhiskey
Well-known member
I bet you Joesph Gorden Levitt will be Parker/Spidey.
Dr Bones
New member
Lance Quazar
Well-known member
While this kid is undeniably a talented actor, I have absolutely zero interest in the franchise moving forward.
It's asinine to do a complete reboot this soon after the other films. It also seems funny that they wanted to return the Peter Park character to his high school roots and then they wound up casting someone who is nearly 30.
The director has zero track record, especially for this kind of film. Sure, 500 Days of Summer was a fitfully entertaining, but deeply flawed film. However, doing one single indy rom com doesn't exactly translate to making a $150M action film.
The first two films succeeded because of the Sam Raimi and his team. When the studio began meddling too much, we wound up with Spider Man 3.
Is newbie Webb the guy to stand up to the studio and defend his vision (assuming he even has one?) Don't make me laugh.
It's asinine to do a complete reboot this soon after the other films. It also seems funny that they wanted to return the Peter Park character to his high school roots and then they wound up casting someone who is nearly 30.
The director has zero track record, especially for this kind of film. Sure, 500 Days of Summer was a fitfully entertaining, but deeply flawed film. However, doing one single indy rom com doesn't exactly translate to making a $150M action film.
The first two films succeeded because of the Sam Raimi and his team. When the studio began meddling too much, we wound up with Spider Man 3.
Is newbie Webb the guy to stand up to the studio and defend his vision (assuming he even has one?) Don't make me laugh.
DocWhiskey
Well-known member
Lance Quazar said:
In one article I read yesterday, it briefly mentioned his age, and I believe producer Laura Ziskin said that they might rewrite the script making Petey a college student.
Which makes me think (again), why the hell are they rebooting this?
They took away a Parker in his early twenties attending college and coping with his responsibility as Spider-man.
And now they're going to give us a Parker in his early twenties attending college and coping with his responsibility as Spider-man.
Seriously, Sony? Whatever/
Lance Quazar
Well-known member
DocWhiskey said:
Honestly, I think it has a lot to do with control. I don't want to be too cynical, but we know that Sam Raimi was not happy with Spider-Man 3 (just like the rest of the world) and that he was forced to incorporate elements (i.e. Venom) that he didn't want to. The producers and studios enforced their will and the results were disastrous.
We also know that Sam Raimi was having major issues with the Spider Man 4 scripts that were coming in. He told the studio flatly that he wasn't going to make their projected release date because the script wasn't ready to be put into production.
And what happens? He (and the entire old Spider Man regime) are immediately fired and replaced by a newcomer with (virtually) no experience and (eventually) an unknown actor.
This way, Laura Ziskin and the studio can do whatever they want, hiring people with no clout to make things difficult for them at any point.
They were willing to sacrifice their initial projected release date in order to get their way. By that point, I suspect Raimi was at least partly thankful to be relieved of the franchise. It's not like he and Maguire are going to be begging for work.
TheMutt92
New member
Gwen Stacy cast...
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/05/emma-stone-cast-as-gwen-stacy-in-spider-man/
... And the Lizard confirmed and cast!
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/13/rhys-ifans-will-play-the-lizard-in-spider-man/
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/05/emma-stone-cast-as-gwen-stacy-in-spider-man/
... And the Lizard confirmed and cast!
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/13/rhys-ifans-will-play-the-lizard-in-spider-man/
TheMutt92
New member
The Drifter
New member
I'm not a fan of that suit. It looks like a coat of red and blue chain-mail has been submerged in a vat of baby oil.
Montana Smith
Active member
Lonsome_Drifter said:
Aunt May knits them for him.
The Drifter
New member
The Man said:Maybe it is. One thing sure to enhance any potential blockbuster: baby oil!
Heh, I think that I know where you're going with that!
But, it serves another purpose as well - most people like shiny things!
TheMutt92
New member
Montana Smith
Active member
TheMutt92 said:
Going back to the original comic book source, then. Will they ditch the spider hairs too?
Looks like this will be a Nolanesque approach, and therefore a shot in the arm for Spidey.
Dr Bones
New member
Not sure about the suit just yet. I guess they need to veer away from the previous movie suit which was kind of close to the comics in many ways.
Not sure how the mask will look as the suit looks plastic and as such thicker than spandex/lycra and therefore not very breathable for the mask.
At least he's not over padded with fake muscles.
Not too worried about one of my favourite childhood heroes yet.
Not sure how the mask will look as the suit looks plastic and as such thicker than spandex/lycra and therefore not very breathable for the mask.
At least he's not over padded with fake muscles.
Not too worried about one of my favourite childhood heroes yet.
Montana Smith
Active member
JP Jones said:I feel like I'm the only one who really likes this. It's close to Raimi's perfect suit in color, but necessarly different in style and texture. It's very nice.
I like it's comicy look, not like Chris Nolan would make it.
When I wrote Nolanesque I was referring to the functionality - the mechanical webshooters. In the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man didn't he create the webs from his own body, along with having spider hairs that make him stick to surfaces? If they take those away, not only are they returning him to the original comic book, but also making him less mutant, more mechanical, and therefore more compatible with Nolan's vision of Batman (i.e. making the fantastic less fantastic).
The costume though is less comic book, appearing to be a thicker material, more functional, less as though it's been painted directly onto Peter's body.
kongisking
Active member
Montana Smith said:
God, I hope so. As for that suit, I'm okay with it being slightly different from the classic look. I mean, while we're referencing Batman here, consider how awesome the suits in the new films look, despite being totally different from the comics. I see nobody complaining about that. Probably because Batman looks better in all-black, instead of a makes-no-logical-sense mix of grey, blue and black...
Compare:
To:
Now tell me, which Bats looks more badass and cool? So the lesson here is: if the new suit of a movie superhero looks a little different from what we're used to, don't throw a fit.
Montana Smith
Active member
kongisking said:
There's always been the problem where a hero can get away with a certain look in a comic, but once in real life, they can look literally 'comical'. These guys shouldn't be running around with their underpants over their tights. For the girls, of course that's okay, and it should be actively encouraged!
While Spidey's going to be slightly different to Bats, in that Spidey is an actual super-powered mutant, I like the idea of bringing him as far back down to earth as possible. As in making his suit, wall crawling abilities and web slingers practical. One of the reasons I never understood the love for Superman, was that Supes was so phenominally super-powered. I prefer heroes brought down to a more human level, even if they are super-strong and have a tingling sense of danger.
YouNeverKnow
New member
kongisking said:
The answer to your query is the former, not the latter.
Nolan's Batman could only do a fraction of the things that Neal Adams' Batman could, and most of that could be traced down to the suit. I realize it's not grounded in 'reality' or has any particular functionality, but I'll be Gol-durned if somebody's going to tell me Nolan/Bale's suit is better than the classic.NOW, on to my other favorite character. From the look of Garfield in that pic, he already might be a better Peter Parker than Tobey McGuire. I love all 3 (yep) of the Spider-Man films, and thought that suit was excellent. But this new suit manages to capture something....even though I disagree with some streamlined aspects. (No belt? Where are his extra cartridges or the Spidey Signal gonna go? Why do the gloves have that weird flaming shape?)