With Great Power ...

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

With Great Power ...

MovieBob breaks down the new Amazing Spider-Man trailer.

Read Full Article

I'm confused... Bob basically said he didn't like the movie based on the trailer, but in the little blurb above he calls it amazi- oh, wait a minute, that's just part of the title, nevermind.

Some of the complaints here I can understand, but others are genuine biased nitpicking. There's no "maybe Bob is biased" about it. Picking on how Peter Parker is dressed and the hoodie he wears is all aesthetic. It doesn't actually change the substance of the film, and let's face it. Hollywood having a character wear that current era's popular fashion? NO WAI.

It's like going back to the 80's and complaining about people having ridiculously hair-sprayed do's and overly colorful clothing.

The number of substantial complaints are few and far between in this trailer run down. I can accept that MovieBob isn't excited because it is an obvious cash grab, and I can accept that the back-story and destiny thing is complete crap. I also am worried that the death of Uncle Ben is glossed over, assuming it happens at all. I don't like that sort of origin either, I feel like it misses the point, and it is only being done for the sake of standing apart from Raimi's flicks.

That doesn't automatically make the film shit.

When MovieBob reviews this film, it doesn't matter how good it actually is, he's going to hate it. If he comes back saying "I was pleasantly surprised", I'll cut out my own tongue.

I can't take Denis Leary seriously as an actor, because all I hear from him is Ice Age's Diego.

Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.

Rect Pola:
Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.

I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.

I'm with you, Bob. I want to like the movie, but not diggin' on a few of the things. The costume for Spidey is the worst for me, worst in the sense that I feel like such a pathetic nitpicky fanboy when I bring this up, but the fact that they decided to change the costume seems to me like they're purposefully trying to distance themselves from the Raimi films as much as they can; something compounded by the fact that Raimi and the original cast were very quickly given the boot and replaced.

And yeah, the Lizard looks off too, and that's another nitpick, and giving him a lab coat would help.

And the backstory with Peter's parents is lame too. Though you brought up the Ultimate universe version and I think it was handled better there than in the mainstream U.

Beyond the gripes I have, it looks... OK. And many of the gripes come from the events that led to this movie. But it isn't fair to blame the film itself for what went on behind the scenes, and I'll try to judge it on its own merits when it comes out.

I look forward to more hate for Peter Parker's floppy hair and hipster getup. "We love Spidey because he's a nerdy outcast, and we can all relate to...wait, he's not OUR KIND of nerdy outcast? WHAT A HIPSTER EMO CUNT LOL"

That aside, that was a refreshingly balanced rundown of the trailer from Bob. I think it looks way better than the Raimi films, but I thought they were total shit so of course I'm inclined to like this one. I still disagree with Bob, but I can see where he's coming from. I do have the advantage of not being a stunted manchild who can't distinguish a passing observation from a hate-filled condemnation, though.

I'm not really getting the whole lab-coat complaint. What we have is a scientist who tries to regrow his missing arm and ends up turning himself into a big lizard monster who apparently looks wrong because he doesn't keep his lab-coat?

To be honest, I'm looking forward to this more than the Avengers. The tone is right, New York is grimy and dark instead of colorful and pleasant, the whole "destiny" angle is a pleasant suprise especially since it fits more with the mechanical web-shooters angle of Spider-man, the origin story is different than the original, and the casting seems right on queue.

I love this trailer and can't wait. Please note that while I am a huge Spider-man fan, I was extremely mixed on the first trailer. I'm not sure biased fanboy who loves everything Spidey-related.

Eh, I think it looked fairly good. I think most of your complaints come from it differing from established comics backstory, which I'm not that bothered about.

In fact, to address your complaint about Spidey dressing like a hipster; Spidey is supposedly a smartass nerd type, no? Being a hipster suits him down to tee.

Seventh Actuality:
I look forward to more hate for Peter Parker's floppy hair and hipster getup. "We love Spidey because he's a nerdy outcast, and we can all relate to...wait, he's not OUR KIND of nerdy outcast? WHAT A HIPSTER EMO CUNT LOL"

Kind of odd for someone to complain about considering that hipsters are the nerds of today.

still looks completely and utterly BORING. Why the HELL did they give Spidey Edward Cullen's hair? Anyway, this'll be forgotten as soon as TDKR rolls around and curb stomps every blockbuster coming out in the summer.

Malignanttoe:

Rect Pola:
Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.

I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.

You know, MovieBob's shtick is that he is a movie reviewever whi is a nerd, so when we go to him for his oppinions in his oppinion piece, if we get supprised or angry when he's being a nitpicky nerd, we might have set our perspectives a bit off. Of course he's fucking bias, he's a Spider-Man fan, we go in to this article knowing he's bias, it's kind of the point!

MovieBob:
The problem, as ever, seems to be that Spidey lacks facial features. In comics and animation you can cheat that a little bit, in order to convey subtle cues as to how the spider-witticisms are supposed to be taken. But here, in live action, it's just flippant snark accompanied by frantic head-bobbing pantomime, like Dane Cook playing a Power Ranger.

Huh, that's a damn good point. In the comics and cartoons, they have the eyes of the mask move to help convey his tone, even if that makes no sense in real life (they do that a lot with Batman's mask, too). But that can't work in a live action movie without looking really goofy (probably why Batman's mask always has open eye holes in the live action movies). And I'm not sure what they could do about it instead, cause the head bobbing thing sure doesn't work. Most other superheroes have the advantage of no mask (Superman) or a partial mask (Batman), but Spiderman's kind of screwed there.

I somehow didn't get the feeling Parker was that emoish (especially not as much as in the Raimi films)...don't know what happened. And yes, I hope there are some better jokes and puns in fights, in the comics and in the 90s cartoon there were genuine jokes midfights, in fact that was the specific part of Spiderman...and the funnier counterpart Deadpool (but he was breaking the wall as well).
Only one enemy? I guess they're not going for Nolan's Batman enough to make more plots into one.

What I am hopping for is a Spidey or Parker cameo in Avengers, maybe just as a boy on a bus or something.

Varya:

Malignanttoe:

Rect Pola:
Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.

I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.

You know, MovieBob's shtick is that he is a movie reviewever whi is a nerd, so when we go to him for his oppinions in his oppinion piece, if we get supprised or angry when he's being a nitpicky nerd, we might have set our perspectives a bit off. Of course he's fucking bias, he's a Spider-Man fan, we go in to this article knowing he's bias, it's kind of the point!

Sorry, I meant close-minded.

/shrug

The Raimi films were poorly cast, heavy-handed, and the third one was an utterly unmitigated disaster with functionally no redeeming value.

Bring on the reboot, I say.

Let's be honest here: this movie was sunk the moment they cast Garfield as Spiderman. He's not dead-eyed and subtly abusive enough to get the all-growed-up Twilight girls a-swoonin' and his testicles have clearly not descended sufficiently far for any gentleman to take his heroic adventures seriously.

The stupid spidey-saves-the-day moments and random plot changes from the old series are just icing on the cake. Avengers is still the one to watch for when it actually comes out. Will that one be great? Who can say. But Spiderman will clearly be awful.

Varya:

Malignanttoe:

Rect Pola:
Can anybody else not read this because of the stupid Darkness background? I thought those were supposed to be only the side bars.

I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.

You know, MovieBob's shtick is that he is a movie reviewever whi is a nerd, so when we go to him for his oppinions in his oppinion piece, if we get supprised or angry when he's being a nitpicky nerd, we might have set our perspectives a bit off. Of course he's fucking bias, he's a Spider-Man fan, we go in to this article knowing he's bias, it's kind of the point!

I'd love to be a professional games critic one day, but for now I can only speak as an amateur wannabe, so nothing I say is with any sense of real authority on this matter.

Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry. Now, it's impossible for anyone to hide their biases. Bob makes it obvious that he has certain biases, typically involving things like robots, monsters, boobies, gore and things that aren't religious (especially on his blog). However, in some cases he needs to distance himself from those biases to try and judge something based on what it actually is.

Bob having issues with the backstory and the whole destiny angle? Valid. His problems with Andrew Garfield's clothing and his ONE LINE of snark in the trailer? Nitpicking for the sake of finding something not to like.

He has done it with other films in the past. He doesn't do it with everything, but there are times I am forced to sigh and roll my eyes when he makes one big smart-ass comment that reads like it came out of 4chan as if he actually has a point, rather than shouting "THIS IS MY OPINION AND I KNOW IT TO BE TRUE!". I have no problem with someone providing a logical reason for why they like or dislike something. But it has to be presented as a logical argument first.

MovieBob bitching that Peter Parker is wearing "hipster" clothing (quick everyone! Let's all try and define what "hipster" is again and wonder at how no one can actually agree on it!) is no different than the old assholes snubbing Super Hero films altogether. MovieBob is getting older, he has expectations of certain aesthetics and styles, and now that times are changing he is judging certain ones harshly.

Though truth told, I'm not even sure I see the "hipster clothing" angle. Peter Parker is wearing clothing. Maybe I'm oblivious to fashion trends, but there's nothing particularly douchey hipster about what he's wearing to me.

It doesn't look set to be as terrible as Green Lantern I don't think, but it certainly doesn't look like anything special. Complicating Spiderman's background with secret experiments or whatever is uneccessary, and having every single scene of Spiderman at night does seem like a really stupid attempt to make things seem more cool and edgy. Spiderman always was a colorful hero, and most of his villains are too, he's not Batman and they shouldn't be trying to make him into one. But the darkness might also be about hiding the CGI since the Lizard looks to be nothing but computer generated, and having the head still mostly human seems very odd.

The other thing that just seems odd to me, when they announced the reboot was moving Peter back to high school I figured there might be some reason for that, making him seem younger, a bit more overconfident, play up his school relationships more. But we only get one brief shot of him throwing a guy against the lockers and then, boom he's working with Connors in the Oscorp lab it seems and the only student that matters is Gwen, and he's pretty much super serious the whole way through barring the car thief segment. Maybe there's more in the movie of course but just from the trailer it seems like making him younger was done without much point. It doesn't hurt anything and is more like the comics I suppose, it just doesn't seem to have any significance in the movie though so far as the trailer is concerned.

moviedork:

Seventh Actuality:
I look forward to more hate for Peter Parker's floppy hair and hipster getup. "We love Spidey because he's a nerdy outcast, and we can all relate to...wait, he's not OUR KIND of nerdy outcast? WHAT A HIPSTER EMO CUNT LOL"

Kind of odd for someone to complain about considering that hipsters are the nerds of today.

Except, you know, shallow, store made, lifeless versions of nerds. They're the hot topic variety of nerds, marketed and created to have kids buy into this variety of "cool" for now.

ccesarano:

Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry.

Really? Cause he sure hasn't shown any signs of this being the case. There's a whole bunch of "I'm a critic" jargon in his posts, and a whole bunch of passive agressive whining about "how you should talk to a critic", which is hilarious, sure, but nothing in his posts or videos are anything more than what can be found with a quick wikipedia run, combined with the snark, bile and outright lying of a general Fox News coverage.

ccesarano:
Some of the complaints here I can understand, but others are genuine biased nitpicking. There's no "maybe Bob is biased" about it. Picking on how Peter Parker is dressed and the hoodie he wears is all aesthetic. It doesn't actually change the substance of the film, and let's face it. Hollywood having a character wear that current era's popular fashion? NO WAI.

Didn't the clone who was not a clone who may have been a clone but really wasn't, wear a hoodie?

They probably settled on the Hipster look way back when for those few brief moments, people thought Hipsters looked cool.

He's wearing a T-Shirt and a jacket. How is that a fucking hipster?!

Anyway, I think it looks good. I'm not particularly into comics, but it looks more like my brief impression of the comic-book Spider-Man than the previous incarnation.

I never really liked Tobey Maguire in the role all that much either. Too weepy.

"They wouldn't screw around with the most important part of the origin-story, would they?"

Do you not think it'd perhaps be interesting if they didn't do literally the exact same thing that you've seen again and again?

SpiderJerusalem:

moviedork:

Seventh Actuality:
I look forward to more hate for Peter Parker's floppy hair and hipster getup. "We love Spidey because he's a nerdy outcast, and we can all relate to...wait, he's not OUR KIND of nerdy outcast? WHAT A HIPSTER EMO CUNT LOL"

Kind of odd for someone to complain about considering that hipsters are the nerds of today.

Except, you know, shallow, store made, lifeless versions of nerds. They're the hot topic variety of nerds, marketed and created to have kids buy into this variety of "cool" for now.
sure, but nothing in his posts or videos are anything more than what can be found with a quick wikipedia run, combined with the snark, bile and outright lying of a general Fox News coverage.

"shallow, store made, lifeless versions of nerds."

Because nerds are typically so full of life and totally non-consumerist.

ccesarano:

Though truth told, I'm not even sure I see the "hipster clothing" angle. Peter Parker is wearing clothing. Maybe I'm oblivious to fashion trends, but there's nothing particularly douchey hipster about what he's wearing to me.

You're definitely not the one whose oblivious to fashion trends. I'm not entirely sure what people would expect him to wear; I mean, he's wearing clothes that fit properly, I guess that might not be nerdy enough (and therefore too 'hispter-y') for people.

I actually do find the new origin story kind of refreshing. I've always liked Spider-man because of how relatable his character is, but coincidentally I was always pretty bored of his origin story. But I really wanted a better villain than the Lizard, like say... Carnage. *sigh* oh well.

The original Trilogy while the last one wasn't as GREAT as the first two.... I can't go on. There's no F'n need to re-boot the series.
End of line.

While I understand Bobs points, I'm going o remain optimistic for this film. But to to be honest the whole Dane Cook in a power rangers outfit comment made me laugh my ass off. XD

Woodsey:
"They wouldn't screw around with the most important part of the origin-story, would they?"

Do you not think it'd perhaps be interesting if they didn't do literally the exact same thing that you've seen again and again?

Spiderman is about the responsibilities of being a super hero and the way we get to that is by Spiderman refusing to stop a burglar leading to his Uncle getting killed. The reason they've done the exact same thing again and again is because it's the basic foundation of the Spiderman story. It's like having Batman's parents die in a freak accident instead of being killed by a mugger.

ccesarano:

Varya:

Malignanttoe:

I had to switch my browser to compatibility mode.

I have to agree that there's obvious bias coming from Movie Bob. With all due respect, I think you're holding onto the nostalgia a little too hard. I don't know if it'll be a good movie, but I think the trailer was alright. Not ground breaking, but alright.

You know, MovieBob's shtick is that he is a movie reviewever whi is a nerd, so when we go to him for his oppinions in his oppinion piece, if we get supprised or angry when he's being a nitpicky nerd, we might have set our perspectives a bit off. Of course he's fucking bias, he's a Spider-Man fan, we go in to this article knowing he's bias, it's kind of the point!

I'd love to be a professional games critic one day, but for now I can only speak as an amateur wannabe, so nothing I say is with any sense of real authority on this matter.

Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry. Now, it's impossible for anyone to hide their biases. Bob makes it obvious that he has certain biases, typically involving things like robots, monsters, boobies, gore and things that aren't religious (especially on his blog). However, in some cases he needs to distance himself from those biases to try and judge something based on what it actually is.

Bob having issues with the backstory and the whole destiny angle? Valid. His problems with Andrew Garfield's clothing and his ONE LINE of snark in the trailer? Nitpicking for the sake of finding something not to like.

He has done it with other films in the past. He doesn't do it with everything, but there are times I am forced to sigh and roll my eyes when he makes one big smart-ass comment that reads like it came out of 4chan as if he actually has a point, rather than shouting "THIS IS MY OPINION AND I KNOW IT TO BE TRUE!". I have no problem with someone providing a logical reason for why they like or dislike something. But it has to be presented as a logical argument first.

MovieBob bitching that Peter Parker is wearing "hipster" clothing (quick everyone! Let's all try and define what "hipster" is again and wonder at how no one can actually agree on it!) is no different than the old assholes snubbing Super Hero films altogether. MovieBob is getting older, he has expectations of certain aesthetics and styles, and now that times are changing he is judging certain ones harshly.

Though truth told, I'm not even sure I see the "hipster clothing" angle. Peter Parker is wearing clothing. Maybe I'm oblivious to fashion trends, but there's nothing particularly douchey hipster about what he's wearing to me.

Problem with me arguing about this is that I don't wanna put words in hus mouth or sound like some White Knight defender of Bob, I just got a thing with people shouting "bias" in a crowded theater.
Of course, complaining about "hipster-looking" clothes is nitpicky, but like it or not, nitpicky things can destroy a movie experience for someone. Nevertheless, if the movie is amazing, and Bob gives it the axe because he hated the clothes, then you have an argument, untill then, it's just "and another thing" in a text full of valid complaints.
And as for juding out the "snarky coments" as nitpicky, I don't agree. The arguments he provided were solid, sarcasm don't really work all that great when behind a mask, and it's still just a first impression, so maybe it works great, but Bob's got a point so far.
Again, really not trying to defend Bob's views, I grudingly found a lot of it quite enthralling, and I'm VERY biased against it, the way they treated Rami really pissed me off. Again, just have a thing about the word "bias"

SpiderJerusalem:

ccesarano:

Bob is paid to be a critic. This means he has a level of knowledge that tends to exceed that of most folks in the entertainment industry.

Really? Cause he sure hasn't shown any signs of this being the case. There's a whole bunch of "I'm a critic" jargon in his posts, and a whole bunch of passive agressive whining about "how you should talk to a critic", which is hilarious, sure, but nothing in his posts or videos are anything more than what can be found with a quick wikipedia run, combined with the snark, bile and outright lying of a general Fox News coverage.

You both need to listen to the podcast he did with Media Sandwich. MovieBob flat out states that his shows aren't meant to be unbiased criticism; they're fully opinion shows, and the Escapist is paying him for just that: his opinions. You don't have to agree with them, but don't complain that he's doing the job asked of him because his opinion is different than yours. No one's forcing you to listen to him, after all.

OP: I'm nervous about this one. This trailer looks like a batman movie got crossed with the spiderman characters and instead of fixing their error just looked at the film and said, "Oh well," and sent it out anyway. It doesn't feel like Spiderman to me. It feels like a much darker, more emo character than the one I want to watch. I'm not as big a critic of the continuity like MovieBob (I like the Ultimate universe just fine), but I can't say its an improvement on the original story.

All and all, time will tell more than any trailer will. I await its release with skepticism, hoping to be proven wrong but ready to be sadly right.

Now I want to see Dane Cook playing a power ranger. ^_^

Well...I didn't hate it. I don't have as much of a continuity boner as some people have, and Emma Stone has a way of always making me happy, so I'm probably actually going to go see it. The promise of The Lizard being in it makes me happy, though admittedly not as happy as those first screens of Doc Oc and his awesome fucking arms a few years back made me. There's definitely a lot of The Dark Knight visible here, but that's okay for the moment. Though, there was this little gem that made me laugh:

That's not the case here, and also seems to explain why J. Jonah Jameson apparently isn't in this version: They've already got their "Spider-Man is a menace!" foil.

Who would you get to play him, Cave Johnson J. K. Simmons? Now that would be a ballsy move, to bring back the actor to do the same, parallel universe role.

Like we would let any other actor possibly do it.

It's a shame, one of my favorite things about Spiderman was that hey, it could have happened to any of his classmates. I'm much less looking forward to this :/

I know in comic books they can keep a license by writing a bin novel or whatever. Like the write a cheap shitty short story and then they bin it, but they get to keep the license or something anyway. I read that some where, that may have been the way things were in the 30's or whatever and I'm not sure if it still applies.

But the question is: do they have to shoot and release an entire film to keep a license, I'm amazed there isn't some legal trickery in there that would minimise their required financial investment into a license. Maybe a big picture ep on the what what. Edumacate me a little please. I'm willing to wait for an ep on if there is something interesting there to be seen; so please don't spoil the surprise by replying if there is something there to be looked at.

To me, I think, this film version represents a lot of the changes that were made when Marvel re-did spider-man for the ultimate version. Or sort-of like a cross over between ultimate spidey and Spectacular Spider-Man a few years back(which everyone should watch as it's fantastic).

I think I'll give Garfield a fair shot before I rip him a new one over how good/bad his performance was in the trailer. What I can say is that he certainly felt more like a character than Tobey Maguire did. It's pretty sad when the 90's spider-man cartoon had a better portrayal of spider-man's inner turmoil than the live action version of it did. Spider-Man is supposed to be a snarker, not having him be one, is more than a little jarring. Sure there were funny moments in the films, but very few of them had to do with a snarky spidey (most often JK Simmons perfect casting as JJ, or Peter being clumsy).

I think a lot of the dislike Bob is having with this movie is more to do with the general non-outcry of the fandom. A lot of people are looking forward to this now. At the same time looking back at the Raimi films and realizing that they weren't as good as we remember them being(and not just the 3rd one). I think he views it as a bunch of people shitting on a great director, while praising the guy who did 500 Days of Summer (which is a really good movie).

In short, I think the more I see of this movie, the more I'm actually looking forward to it. I love Emma Stone as Gwen, I love Leary as George Stacy, and I certainly love the webshooters.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here