The Amazing Spider-man

[riddler]

It depends on how all these characters are used. Spiderman 3 failed partially due to an excess of main characters so hopefully they dont make that mistake again. Ideally most of these other chracters will be kept in the background for the most part setting up for the third film.

[Edd Grayson]

The Amazing Spider-Man is one of my favorite films, it surpasses the Sam Raimi trilogy with ease.

However, it has its flaws, the Lizard was not that developed as I would have liked and George Stacy's death came off as rushed, they should have at least kept him for the sequel IMHO.

[johnnygobbs]

The Amazing Spider-Man is one of my favorite films, it surpasses the Sam Raimi trilogy with ease.

However, it has its flaws, the Lizard was not that developed as I would have liked and George Stacy's death came off as rushed, they should have at least kept him for the sequel IMHO.

You make some good points there Edd.

One thing missing from Dr Curt Connors' story was his family background, an element which humanised him in the comic-books.  One deleted scene in the TASM extras apparently involves him visiting his son at pre-school (I gather it is implied that Curt and the boy's mother are now estranged).  I do wish that scene had been left in the film because the home-life dynamic of each individual Spider-Man villain, particularly a fairly sympathetic one like Connors/The Lizard, adds to their complexity and credibility - they're not just a moustache-twirling, puppy-bashing nasty but a 'real person' with the same type of hang-ups and issues as Peter Parker.

I do think Captain Stacy's death was well-handled and the character was deservedly given a decent amount of screen-time but one aspect I was sad to see go was Spider-Man's part in his death.  In the comic-books, Spider-Man accidentally contributes to Stacy's death during a fight with Dr Octopus which causes debris form a building to come tumbling towards a child Stacy leaps in to save.  In the film, Spider-Man's actions don't particularly contribute to Stacy's death which somewhat detracts from the pathos particularly the guilt Peter feels in pledging to protect Gwen for a dying Captain Stacy.

[The Laughing Fish]

The Amazing Spider-Man is one of my favorite films, it surpasses the Sam Raimi trilogy with ease.

However, it has its flaws, the Lizard was not that developed as I would have liked and George Stacy's death came off as rushed, they should have at least kept him for the sequel IMHO.

You make some good points there Edd.

One thing missing from Dr Curt Connors' story was his family background, an element which humanised him in the comic-books.  One deleted scene in the TASM extras apparently involves him visiting his son at pre-school (I gather it is implied that Curt and the boy's mother are now estranged).  I do wish that scene had been left in the film because the home-life dynamic of each individual Spider-Man villain, particularly a fairly sympathetic one like Connors/The Lizard, adds to their complexity and credibility - they're not just a moustache-twirling, puppy-bashing nasty but a 'real person' with the same type of hang-ups and issues as Peter Parker.

I do think Captain Stacy's death was well-handled and the character was deservedly given a decent amount of screen-time but one aspect I was sad to see go was Spider-Man's part in his death.  In the comic-books, Spider-Man accidentally contributes to Stacy's death during a fight with Dr Octopus which causes debris form a building to come tumbling towards a child Stacy leaps in to save.  In the film, Spider-Man's actions don't particularly contribute to Stacy's death which somewhat detracts from the pathos particularly the guilt Peter feels in pledging to protect Gwen for a dying Captain Stacy.

To be honest, I didn't really like Denis Leary's acting when Captain Stacy when he died. Just came across as half-assed and hammy like Marion Cotillard as Talia al Ghul's. Nonetheless I see one of the biggest criticisms with the first Amazing Spider-Man was how Peter Parker decided to go back against the promise he made Captain Stacy and decided to see his daughter again; people complained what a dick Parker was. I did feel the same way at first, until someone online convinced how the point about this new Spider-Man is about him paying the consequences of his actions; thus making "With great power comes great responsibility" a theme. Parker runs risk of paying a heavy price in the future, but if so it will make him all the wiser.

[johnnygobbs]

The Amazing Spider-Man is one of my favorite films, it surpasses the Sam Raimi trilogy with ease.

However, it has its flaws, the Lizard was not that developed as I would have liked and George Stacy's death came off as rushed, they should have at least kept him for the sequel IMHO.

You make some good points there Edd.

One thing missing from Dr Curt Connors' story was his family background, an element which humanised him in the comic-books.  One deleted scene in the TASM extras apparently involves him visiting his son at pre-school (I gather it is implied that Curt and the boy's mother are now estranged).  I do wish that scene had been left in the film because the home-life dynamic of each individual Spider-Man villain, particularly a fairly sympathetic one like Connors/The Lizard, adds to their complexity and credibility - they're not just a moustache-twirling, puppy-bashing nasty but a 'real person' with the same type of hang-ups and issues as Peter Parker.

I do think Captain Stacy's death was well-handled and the character was deservedly given a decent amount of screen-time but one aspect I was sad to see go was Spider-Man's part in his death.  In the comic-books, Spider-Man accidentally contributes to Stacy's death during a fight with Dr Octopus which causes debris form a building to come tumbling towards a child Stacy leaps in to save.  In the film, Spider-Man's actions don't particularly contribute to Stacy's death which somewhat detracts from the pathos particularly the guilt Peter feels in pledging to protect Gwen for a dying Captain Stacy.

Nonetheless I see one of the biggest criticisms with the first Amazing Spider-Man was how Peter Parker decided to go back against the promise he made Captain Stacy and decided to see his daughter again; people complained what a dick Parker was. I did feel the same way at first, until someone online convinced how the point about this new Spider-Man is about him paying the consequences of his actions; thus making "With great power comes great responsibility" a theme. Parker runs risk of paying a heavy price in the future, but if so it will make him all the wiser.

Exactly.  It's not as if Peter's going to avoid it all ending in tears.  He's still a kid making foolish mistakes and he's going to be paying for them until he wises up.

Also, I do think Peter was trying to avoid continuing his relationship with Gwen.  The scene in the rain at his doorstep demonstrated that he was at least attempting to honour his promise to Captain Stacy, but Gwen was pushing for the relationship and young hormones etc meant that Peter found the promise too unbearable to keep.  He probably, rather foolishly, believes he can maintain a relationship with Gwen whilst protecting her from his enemies, and it will be interesting to see whether he will ever be able to get close to someone again when he and Gwen finally pay for this transgression.

[riddler]

I think they also wanted to make a contrast with the previous series; a lot of people including myself feel he was written/acted poorly; McGuire was too wussified and nerdy. For that reason alone they can't have him cry in this series; in situations where he might, they'll have him tough it out. Instead of making him a nerd, they made him more of an outcast. He has nerdy elements (he's still a genius) but he's not all out with it. It would actually be interesting to see how this Peter Parker acts with a symbiote should they choose that plotline.

As far as connors son. I havent seen the deleted scenes (but I do have the blu ray) but I wonder if it's due to the similarities with Harry osborn being the single father?

[johnnygobbs]

I think they also wanted to make a contrast with the previous series; a lot of people including myself feel he was written/acted poorly; McGuire was too wussified and nerdy. For that reason alone they can't have him cry in this series; in situations where he might, they'll have him tough it out. Instead of making him a nerd, they made him more of an outcast. He has nerdy elements (he's still a genius) but he's not all out with it. It would actually be interesting to see how this Peter Parker acts with a symbiote should they choose that plotline.

Yes, Parker is more of a 'freak' than a 'geek' in this version.  At least he's not always on the verge of tearing up although I won't have a problem if he is portrayed shedding a tear when the inevitable death of another close loved one finally occurs.

As far as connors son. I havent seen the deleted scenes (but I do have the blu ray) but I wonder if it's due to the similarities with Harry osborn being the single father?

Here is a précis of the deleted scene in question.  Presumably it's on the blu ray though.

Anyway, maybe it was cut because one of the child extras in the scene kept looking straight into the camera:
http://www.empireonline.com/features/amazing-spider-man-hidden-secrets/p6

Where do they find these kids?    I hope that wasn't the reason because it would appear he may have spoiled what sounds like an interesting and emotionally effective scene which would have broadened out and further humanised the Dr Connors character.

Presumably you're referring to Norman Osborn being a single father rather than Harry but I don't see the similarities since this scene seems to imply that Connors is estranged from his young son whereas, Norman is only emotionally estranged from Harry but by all accounts they live together and Norman is implied to either be widowed or his wife has disappeared.

[riddler]

I'm hoping they up the comedic and sarcastic aspect of spider-man in this one.

To me neither Macguire or Garfield played spider-man authentically. It may be due to the writing but spider-mans trademark is he's a wisecracking smart ass while he's fighting villains. Most of the recent video games get it right (web of shadows specifically), they've been playing him a little too seriously (I get that it's not usually them in the costume but they are voicing him. Neil Patrick Harris does an awesome job voicing spidey). To me the only fight scenes that truly felt like something which came out of the comics in the films were the Doc Ock bank heist fight and the Lizard school fight. Hopefully this one improves the fighting scenes.

[Edd Grayson]

There are a lot of easy jokes Spidey could use against Electro and Rhino. I just hope they'll do that and not keep him mute like Raimi did.

[The Dark Knight]

I just hope they'll do that and not keep him mute like Raimi did.

Raimi had a balanced interpretation of Spider-Man in my book. We saw him wall crawl. Jump around. Web swing. Use webbing balls. Spider-sense. Quick reaction times. He got it all in there. Humour wise, I find people undersell the wry little lines - which are mixed in with his missions statements such as let her go, where is she, etc.

Off the top of my head he had stuff like:

"Here's your change!"
The whole lift dialogue and "and it rides up in the crotch a little bit, too."
"Go web! Fly! Up, up, and away web! Shazaam! Go! Go! Go web go! Tally ho.""
"Hey, kiddo. Let Mom and Dad talk for a minute, will ya?"
"Where do all these guys come from?"
"A couple of minutes ago wouldn't have been so bad either."
"I guess you haven't heard. I'm the sheriff around these parts"
His entire turn in the black suit.
Web zipping the pizza away from that dude's mouth.

With a Raimi film, the're's never a shortage of charm or humour.