Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 15 NEXT
 

Nate Corran:

thomaskattus:

DRTJR:
...How do you make a Spider man movie with out J. Jonah Jameson?

This was my question as well. He is an iconic part of the Spider man mythos.

Because JK Simmons IS JJJ. There is no one they could've found to play him that wouldn't have pissed people off, so they just made the Daily Bugle into CNN and called it a win for Sony for out thinking the drones called Spider-Man fans.
That said, FUCK Sony.

Is that really the reason? Christ, now I just hate this movie a little more.

OT: That said, I don't necessarily "hate" this movie or think its as bad as Bob says it is. Yes, it's a bland and uninteresting little jaunt that doesn't explore anything new, but it doesn't fuck up too much stuff. Is it better than the originals, god no, and I think that's its most crippling issue. Lizard doesn't command the screen like a villain should (ala Osborn or Doc Ock). The hero does,indeed, have an issue with not settling in on a particular personality. And I think that they just don't give Emma Stone enough to do, despite her doing a good job regardless. A lot of what Bob criticizes is, indeed, true, but for me, it just makes the film average. The only thing worth getting angry about is that it already has a sequel in the works and that we're expected to accept this bland-sameyness in place of the original two and their bastard third-installment. Sony failed here, yes, but if you really have nothing better to do with your time, it's not the worst way to spend an afternoon. Alternatively, Avengers is still in some theaters... also Brave was good. Yeah. Better options there entirely. :D

Well, if plenty of people will indeed go see it, as they have so many similar movies before, then perhaps it doesn't suck as much as Comic book/movie buffs think it does?

There's art and there's entertainment. Good art is thought-provoking, inspiring, innovative, and emotional. Good entertainment have you laughing with your mates.

This thing might fail as art, and even as a coherent narrative: But if millions upon millions will be content with it, then I'm going to go with their opinion, rather than someone mired in Spiderman lore, anti-commercialism, and analytical cinematography implore me to think of it.

DoomyMcDoom:

Carpenter:

DoomyMcDoom:

And this is why I would be disinclined to see this movie, Jameson is my favourite character from any Spiderman series, comics cartoon or otherwise, without him, the world of spiderman may as well cease to exist.

Also, teen romance crap? Seriously? Pass.

Comics and all three movies dealt with his romantic life.

I'm not trying to be hostile or judgmental, but when you guys say stuff like that, it makes me wonder if you even read the comics or watched the movies or even watched the cartoon series.

I agree, Jameson is an important part of the universe, but you don't need to cram in every single character into the first movie.

Most of the "Romantic plot" in the spider man stuff I've been exposed to/read/watched, has been later life stuff, or Peter not having the balls to do anything about it, then abruptly having to save people, I don't remember it ever being really important outside of longing, and then a strange comic arc where he and MJ were married... Might just be my memory fading.

The show and the first movie (and all of them that follow) deal with the teen romance stuff.

You guys seem to be remembering a different Peter Parker, or you are jumping on the "I was a fan all along" thing, which seems to be a trend now that "nerd culture" is considered cool.

The amount of people who blindly accepts MovieBobīs opinion as fact truly astonishes me ("Bob didnt like it. I wont see it"). I īm also amazed to read stuff like "Iīm glad this movie will fail", even without watching the film. The review seems fueled by fanrage and i can tell that Bob went into the theatre without an open mind. Since the reviews are all over the place, iīll give it a shot and find out for myself if itīs good or not.

Carpenter:

DoomyMcDoom:

Carpenter:
Comics and all three movies dealt with his romantic life.

I'm not trying to be hostile or judgmental, but when you guys say stuff like that, it makes me wonder if you even read the comics or watched the movies or even watched the cartoon series.

I agree, Jameson is an important part of the universe, but you don't need to cram in every single character into the first movie.

Most of the "Romantic plot" in the spider man stuff I've been exposed to/read/watched, has been later life stuff, or Peter not having the balls to do anything about it, then abruptly having to save people, I don't remember it ever being really important outside of longing, and then a strange comic arc where he and MJ were married... Might just be my memory fading.

The show and the first movie (and all of them that follow) deal with the teen romance stuff.

You guys seem to be remembering a different Peter Parker, or you are jumping on the "I was a fan all along" thing, which seems to be a trend now that "nerd culture" is considered cool.

Not so much the second as the first I think, I never claimed to be a super fan of spiderman, just that I've come into contact with it, and please stop refering to me as you guys, I know I seem to have multiple personalities but I am in fact one person.

When I said "Might just be my memory fading" I meant it, most of my experience with spiderman is from the old cartoon, and that's a while back yo.

DoomyMcDoom:

Carpenter:

DoomyMcDoom:

Most of the "Romantic plot" in the spider man stuff I've been exposed to/read/watched, has been later life stuff, or Peter not having the balls to do anything about it, then abruptly having to save people, I don't remember it ever being really important outside of longing, and then a strange comic arc where he and MJ were married... Might just be my memory fading.

The show and the first movie (and all of them that follow) deal with the teen romance stuff.

You guys seem to be remembering a different Peter Parker, or you are jumping on the "I was a fan all along" thing, which seems to be a trend now that "nerd culture" is considered cool.

Not so much the second as the first I think, I never claimed to be a super fan of spiderman, just that I've come into contact with it, and please stop refering to me as you guys, I know I seem to have multiple personalities but I am in fact one person.

When I said "Might just be my memory fading" I meant it, most of my experience with spiderman is from the old cartoon, and that's a while back yo.

What I was trying to say is that if a teenager getting involved romantically with another teenager is something that makes you immediately hate or avoid a movie, spiderman is something to avoid altogether.

Oh, wow, somebody call the wahmbulance, guys, Bob's angry!

I mean, if you don't like a movie then you don't like a movie, but I don't think that's really his feelings on this. He seems to be mostly upset about the circumstances behind the film's creation (which really doesn't mean jack shit, no matter what he says) and it's deviations from the source material (JJJ isn't in it? Ohhhh, nooooo, movie ruined!), rather than the film itself. And he's had it in for this thing since the beginning; he's always wanted it to bomb because how dare they fire Sam Raimi!

I have never heard Bob be this legitimately angry before, and considering how he's previously talked about gender, racial, and sexual politics, that REALLY makes me sad. I know he's "proud to be a geek" and all that, but it's just a movie, and one that he's clearly more angry about being different than he is about being bad.

Bob, please leave Fanboy Mode and try and enter your Legitimate Film Critic Mode.

PhunkyPhazon:

Siege_TF:

Gwen Stacy wasn't 'Gwen Stacy', she was a lab assistant named Gwen Stacy who, again, didn't have the decency to die like a good Gwen Stacy should. This is the Aeris Gainsbourogh of the Spidey series and she's survived two unassoicated movies. That's wrong. They could have at least made her a literal corperate whore like in Antitrust, but that'd make her interesting. God forbid.

To be honest, there's a lot in that post I could pick apart, but I would like to address just one particular thing:

THIS IS THE FIRST MOVIE WITH SEQUELS ALREADY PLANNED!

Asking them to kill Gwen this early would be completely pointless. And no, the fact that she survived SM3 has no relevancy here because this is an entirely different continuity with its own character arcs to deal with. Save her death for a story arc where it will actually have impact. Remember Rachael in The Dark Knight?

The fact that she survived SM3 has everything to do with her surviving AMS because it's Gwen Stacy. That's two movies that they've botched the one thing that she's supposed to do. It's not even a hard thing, easy as falling off a log (or a bridge). She is supposed to die to hammer home that even though he accepted the whole power - responcibility thing he still can't save the day all the time. But he does. But he's not supposed to. Because I'm Batman. I mean because he's Spider Man.

Opinions are subjective ideas people can have, yet this guy has reached into the fabric of the universe and bent it to the point where he created a singularity and has spoken an opinion that is completely and totally wrong.

Unlike the past movies, which people spend too much time fellating, The Amazing Spider-Man is the most faithful and best adaptation there is. It is disrespectful for people to keep calling themselves Spider-man fans and then go on to say they didn't like a character that so closely represents the actual comics.

The unnecessarily scathing review would hold a lot more weight if Bob hadn't publicly decided that he hated the movie more than a year ago (even complaining about Andy Garfield's hair). I generally agree with Bob, but this was as far from an objective review as I've ever seen him give.

EDIT: Just came back from seeing the movie. It was good. All Bob's subjective gripes are his to have, but objectively it was well paced, had a decent script, was well acted and had some entertaining action scenes. Andy Garfield, in particular, played his character infinitely closer to the comic version than Tobey Maguire did (he really had the wit down, where Maguire hardly had any of that).

It's not going to win anything outside of an MTV Movie Award, but almost as bad as Green Lantern? Not even in the same galaxy.

Sadly, the attempt at world-building is also doomed, as Peters original birth parents were killed by The Red Skull (last I checked, unless this has been retconned).

Just saw it last night and let me say, there's a very good reason why this movie has been getting good reviews everywhere else, and it isn't because the world has gone mad like Bob would like to believe.

Even so, this is what I say: Bob told you to not see this film because he doesn't want it to make any money. But you also can't trust me to tell you it's good. Don't listen to me, the critics, or Bob when we tell you how awesome or shitty this movie is.

See it for yourself. Make your own judgement on whether it was worth it or not.

This is not a movie you can judge easily without actually seeing it. This isn't Transformers or Battleship or Sucker Punch where you can look at the trailer and just know it's going to be shitty without even watching it.

I just saw it then with some friends. Not exactly my first (or second, or third, or fourth, or...) choice, but I really only went because I haven't seen my uni friends all holidays so far, and this is what they chose to see. Anyway, yeah, it's pretty bad. The whole thing looked visually pretty cheap, and the Lizard did look Spidey's poor obnoxious one-liners were extremely painful to endure, but the worst part was the awkward period of muttering between Gwen and Peter when trying to ask her out on a date. One of the weirdest, idiotic things I've ever seen in a movie.

Also, honourable mention goes to spidey crawling out of a sewer, covered in blood and poo, and into Gwen's room, whereupon she immediately smothers him in kisses. What. The. Fuck.

You know what? I don't care. This films looks shitty but nowhere near as bad as Raimi's films. yeah, that's right I can't stand those terrible "films."

Sorry, just had to say that.

ChildofGallifrey:

The unnecessarily scathing review would hold a lot more weight if Bob hadn't publicly decided that he hated the movie more than a year ago (even complaining about Andy Garfield's hair). I generally agree with Bob, but this was as far from an objective review as I've ever seen him give.

I have to agree. As much as I love Bob(I do love him... to the point where it's creepy!) I got a bit sick of his Twitter feed condemning the film before it came out. And before a trailer was released.

Also, just so we're clear... I go to an IT school filled with nerds, geeks, programmers, the works. Smart guys with glasses that would serve as the stereotypical nerd that Bob wants to be protagonists so badly.

You walk around campus... You see half of them skateboarding to class. They dress like Peter Parker did. A lot of them can be serious slackers.

These people exist, Bob. They're real. More real than your narrow perception of what nerds are "supposed to be", and I'm glad they updated it instead of resorting to a decades-old stereotype that we've seen so many fucking times and has already been done in a Spider-man film.

And in that, we only got the barest of bones when it came to Toby Maguire's Peter Parker being a "scientist".

People, in this film, Peter Parker rides a skateboard, but he's also a scientist. He's a scientist first. He uses his smarts and knowledge as much as his spider skills. He builds things, he designs things, he figures out equations and formulas. You never got that in Sam Rami's films, and that's a huge character trait to leave out.

The Peter Parker in this film feels like someone I would know in real life, especially where I work.

This is such a shame. I wanted this to work out for Andrew Garfield. He's a good actor. :-/

Well the bob haters came out in force this time. He didn't like the movie. You dont get internet tought guy points for saying he's wrong just because he expected it to suck. I expected green lantern to suck when I saw it and, as it turned out, yeah it sucked pretty much regardless of my opinion. Funny how that works.

As for Spider-man, this movie looked like a steaming pile way before Bob said anything about it. I'll skip this iteration of the web slinger until the next inevitable (and from whay i've heard, pretty close by) reboot.

MANIFESTER:

Yet I don't think that is the case. Hell he probably went into it thinking it would be bad and it met or exceeded those expectations (in the worst way imaginable it seems). He probably went into it knowing more than the average viewer, since it is his job, but I cannot say he went into it not giving it a chance. That is your opinion.

Indeed, it is[ my opinion, but it's an opinion that's been supported by pretty much everything Bob has said about this film from the day it was announced. He's always hated it, in part because, well, he's clearly a bit of a Raimi fanboy.

Personally, I felt that the first Raimi Spider-Man movie was... okay. Not great overall, a little heavy on some of Raimi's signature moves, and incredibly poorly cast. The second one was a bit better, but the third was bad enough that it should have killed the franchise outright.

So yes, I will assert that Bob's review of this film is, essentially, unfair and biased from the start. Ordinarily Bob and I line up on our opinions, oh, around 60-70% of the time. I've not seen this film, but I'm also not going to use Bob's review as a factor in whether or not I will.

And yes, reviewing is an inherently subjective process, but again, there's a distinct difference between subjective and prejudiced. Professionally speaking, his duty is to put personal feelings aside to as great an extent as possible and review a film on its merits, not how he feels about its existence.

Antonio Torrente:

MrBrightside919:
To say I saw that coming a mile away would be an understatement...

After Spiderman 3, I don't have much faith in future Spidey movies...unless Marvel gets the rights back, which will never happen unfortunately...

*Crosses fingers for this movie to bomb hard*

Sorry to dash your dreams( and mine) this movie is no. 1 right now in other countries including here in the Philippines.

Guess i'm not crossing them hard enough...

Scarim Coral:
Yesh, I haven't seen you rage that much since the Green Lantern review. From the sound of it, it seen this year isn't good for Spider-man per say (well I don't know what going with him in the comic but I do know that Ultimate Spider-man is aweful).

Either way it look like my question had been answer to wheather to watch this or Prometheus if I'm going to the cinema any time soon before The Dark Knight Rises.

How do you justify that Ultimate Spider-Man is awful? You can argue that you don't like it, that's fine, but I would hardly call it awful.

marcogodinho:
The amount of people who blindly accepts MovieBobīs opinion as fact truly astonishes me ("Bob didnt like it. I wont see it"). I īm also amazed to read stuff like "Iīm glad this movie will fail", even without watching the film. The review seems fueled by fanrage and i can tell that Bob went into the theatre without an open mind. Since the reviews are all over the place, iīll give it a shot and find out for myself if itīs good or not.

This doesn't surprise me. There was a lot of it in the opposite direction for The Avengers (Bob knew he would like it and reviewed it as much), and the fandom rejoiced...and gloated accordingly.

As for my opinion, no, a reboot wasn't necessary, but it isn't the end of the world. I just use reviews to see if it's worth the effort to go see a movie in the theater (I'm a grownup now, I really do have to wonder if three hours is worth spending on a movie).

But I'm inclined to believe that this movie isn't the worst thing ever, just the way I believed The Avengers wasn't the best thing ever going in (turned out I was right, but anyway...cheap dig over)

Existentialistme:

Scarim Coral:
Yesh, I haven't seen you rage that much since the Green Lantern review. From the sound of it, it seen this year isn't good for Spider-man per say (well I don't know what going with him in the comic but I do know that Ultimate Spider-man is aweful).

Either way it look like my question had been answer to wheather to watch this or Prometheus if I'm going to the cinema any time soon before The Dark Knight Rises.

How do you justify that Ultimate Spider-Man is awful? You can argue that you don't like it, that's fine, but I would hardly call it awful.

I can assure you that I'm not the only one who had been hating the Ultimate Spider-man cartoon.
While I can assume comments made from places like Youtube or Comicvine ain't legit but would this prove enough that there are people disliking the Ultimate Spider-man?-
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/06/19/the-boy-who-hated-ultimate-spider-man/

EDIT- Oh how about this? http://www.thecriticalfailure.com/tag/ultimate-spider-man/

Scarim Coral:

I can assure you that I'm not the only one who had been hating the Ultimate Spider-man cartoon.
While I can assume comments made from places like Youtube or Comicvine ain't legit but would this prove enough that there are people disliking the Ultimate Spider-man?-
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/06/19/the-boy-who-hated-ultimate-spider-man/

Okay, the cartoon sure, but did you read the actual books? I thought they were very good for the most part. A couple of bad choices here and there, but the beginning of them and the retelling of the origin story was great. Like, I'll probably get a lot of hate for this, but at the start of the original Amazing Spider-Man, all the characters seemed kind of dull and not fully formed. It took a LONG time for the series to come into itself. Sure, it was immensely likable from the start, but not necessarily 'good.' I'll go back and read it now and realize how dated it is, and frankly, to me the early stuff is just kind of silly and boring. Spider-Man has always and will always be my favorite super hero and I feel the Ultimate Spider-Man run captured why we all love him quite well, while still delivering a more modernized take on him that's a bit easier to swallow now a days.

Siege_TF:

The fact that she survived SM3 has everything to do with her surviving AMS because it's Gwen Stacy. That's two movies that they've botched the one thing that she's supposed to do. It's not even a hard thing, easy as falling off a log (or a bridge). She is supposed to die to hammer home that even though he accepted the whole power - responcibility thing he still can't save the day all the time. But he does. But he's not supposed to. Because I'm Batman. I mean because he's Spider Man.

Have some patience with this, seriously. Yes, Gwen Stacy should probably die, even Emma Stone agrees on this. But that doesn't mean she has to die the exact instant she appears onscreen! It's not like they introduced her in the comics only to kill her off the very next issue, she lasted over 80 issues! In Ultimate, she lasted 40 (Although she was eventually brought back, but whatever), in the Spectacular cartoon she lasted the entire run, and may have eventually kicked the bucket had it continued.

This movie is already filled with enough death to traumatize Peter, how impactful would Gwen's have been on top of everything else? Save it for a future movie, let the audience truly grow used to her and like her. before stuffing her in the fridge.

Existentialistme:

Scarim Coral:
Yesh, I haven't seen you rage that much since the Green Lantern review. From the sound of it, it seen this year isn't good for Spider-man per say (well I don't know what going with him in the comic but I do know that Ultimate Spider-man is aweful).

Either way it look like my question had been answer to wheather to watch this or Prometheus if I'm going to the cinema any time soon before The Dark Knight Rises.

How do you justify that Ultimate Spider-Man is awful? You can argue that you don't like it, that's fine, but I would hardly call it awful.

Because it's really Ultimate Deadpool? Because most of the jokes don't work? Because the supporting cast is really annoying and unlikeable? Because the villains are all C-listers from different Marvel franchises? I'm not saying you can't like it, but there's a lot of things wrong with this show.

Existentialistme:

Scarim Coral:

I can assure you that I'm not the only one who had been hating the Ultimate Spider-man cartoon.
While I can assume comments made from places like Youtube or Comicvine ain't legit but would this prove enough that there are people disliking the Ultimate Spider-man?-
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/06/19/the-boy-who-hated-ultimate-spider-man/

Okay, the cartoon sure, but did you read the actual books? I thought they were very good for the most part. A couple of bad choices here and there, but the beginning of them and the retelling of the origin story was great. Like, I'll probably get a lot of hate for this, but at the start of the original Amazing Spider-Man, all the characters seemed kind of dull and not fully formed. It took a LONG time for the series to come into itself. Sure, it was immensely likable from the start, but not necessarily 'good.' I'll go back and read it now and realize how dated it is, and frankly, to me the early stuff is just kind of silly and boring. Spider-Man has always and will always be my favorite super hero and I feel the Ultimate Spider-Man run captured why we all love him quite well, while still delivering a more modernized take on him that's a bit easier to swallow now a days.

I don't but I know enough how different Ultimate Spider-man is when comparing to the comicbook (yes I know Peter is a joker at times and for one thing how the hell do you get Venom just by tampering Peter blood? Even then without going from the comicbook outer space route, I know that in the Ultimate Spider-man comicbook the symbiote was like an organic suit to cure cancer or something like that).
I just dislike it so I'm keeping it to myself (mostly). I mean if you like it then go ahead, I won't bother you unlike some people (I ain't no hater/ troll, I hate the show therefore I stop watching it as simple as that).

DoomyMcDoom:

DRTJR:
...How do you make a Spider man movie with out J. Jonah Jameson?

And this is why I would be disinclined to see this movie, Jameson is my favourite character from any Spiderman series, comics cartoon or otherwise, without him, the world of spiderman may as well cease to exist.

Also, teen romance crap? Seriously? Pass.

Okay. I've had enough of this. As I said, I've been reading Spider-man comics for 20 years and let me just say that J. Jonah Jameson is the WORST character in the series. Seriously, he is one dimension to a point where he is just plain predictable to a point of annoyance. He does -everything- in his power to screw over anyone actually trying to help and never does a single thing actually meaningful or useful with himself.

Do you know why J.J hates Spider-man? Because he is jealous of him. Seriously, anyone who's picked up a Spider-man comic would know this. In the early part of The Amazing Spider-man, J.J admits right out that the reason he hates Spider-man isn't because he has a mask on, it's the fact that he helps people and asks for nothing in return, and it makes him feel like less of a person because he's never accomplished anything of the sort or would never try to.

Even after Peter Parker revealed himself publicly, Peter call J.J out on it and he admitted he was right later. He is a petty, self centered, piece of one dimensional sad excuse for a character and it is hard to see why people even like him so much. Past that, you want to know why he sucks so badly in the original trilogy of Spider-man movies? His reasoning for disliking Spider-Man was never stated. He was just a hateful little jerk who couldn't grow up. They failed at even establishing why a character is the way he is just like they did with Peter, Mary Jane, and Gwen in those movies. (They pulled off Eddie Brock correctly though. That was a surprise.)

He's not even doing it to sell papers, he just wants to slander because he'll feel better about himself. When he had a heart attack in The Amazing Spider-Man comics, I was seriously hoping he would die. So they can bury that one horse lined character who all he amounts to is childish biterness and "IT'S ALL SPIDER-MAN'S FAULT!" With all truth, he is the Brian Griffin of Spider-man series. A one dimensional, self centered character that thinks he knows better, but in reality is just a one trick pony of a hack.

I just got back from seeing this and I enjoyed it a lot more then the original film and while its not up there with the Avengers and Thor, its very entertaining. I felt all the main characters were better handled then in the 2002 film with the change from from dork to Superhero feeling a lot better paced and the small changes to the origin story, I felt, improved it. Dr Conners motives were believable if a little crazy (but then who isn't after turning into a giant lizard?) and I thought the CGI was fine.

However, I like a lot of character development/relationship moments in my films and the more cheese it has the better. I also grew up with the height of CGI being the tv show Reboot so I admit I often can't see what everyone is complaining about when they say a piece of CGI looks crap.

Andronicus:
but the worst part was the awkward period of muttering between Gwen and Peter when trying to ask her out on a date. One of the weirdest, idiotic things I've ever seen in a movie.

I probably shouldn't admit this, but for me that was the most realistic part of the film as I've had attempts to ask people out end up just like that (though sadly I got a no).

After having got back from seeing it, I'm very perplexed. Did I watch a completely flick? Granted it had flaws but I thought it was alright. Maybe it's simply a case of whether you think a Spider-Man film should break tradition or not.

Unlike Green Lanturn which everyone hated, this one hasn't received a critical lashing despite Bob's rage... weird.

actually from what i seen so far of it outside theaters it looked more like they tried to recreate the feel of the way the old T.V. show from the 70s and failed at it badly, which is not saying it was a bad show back then it was really good for the time up there with Batman (the Adam West version). but still i probably just rent it over Netflix or get when Red Box has it out for a night.

Wow, just got back from seeing this and I gotta say I completely disagree with moviebob on this one. If you're into superhero movies then give this a chance. Don't get me wrong it's not the best one out there but it certainly isn't as bad as Bob suggests (I'm calling him biased for this review). As a matter of fact I'd call it a good movie.

...A guy Spider-Man helped paying him back by giving him a clear path to webswing is a worse scene than this:

image?

Bob, we are clearly on veeeeeeeeeery different wavelengths here.

Sis:
Whenever someone asks me why I think your opinion should be taken with a grain of salt half the time, I'll point em to this video. You've been against this movie since before anything got announced besides that it's going to happen. And it shows. Even if this movie was The Dark Knight levels of good, you'd probably still say it was bad.

Bingo! Bob's laughable levels of desiring self affirmation ring completely true here. Why I didn't bother to watch this before watching the film today.

I love Spider-Man, have for twenty years.

I HATED the three previous films.

And? I liked this film.

It was not perfect, it had issues, but it felt honest, genuine and truer to the source material and distinct in a modern adaptation. I will watch this again, which is more than I can ever say for the previous three train wrecks.

I liked this Peter/Spider-Man, I liked this Gwen, I liked this Uncle Ben and Aunt May. The villain has its issues, but I am fine if the hero I love is finally done justice on the screen.

Oh, and I do agree about the crane scene being poor and should be cut, much like the HORRIBLE "You mess with New York!" garbage scene of Spider-Man 1 on the bridge.

Simply put, this is groundwork for something great, even if it was simply good. I hope it does gang busters and get to see where this series goes in the future.

Bob, did you even watch this movie?

It was fantastic, and now I see page after page of "Thanks Bob, I won't see it."

No. It was a good movie, give it a shot for yourself.

ITT: Free thinkers, people who think they're free thinkers, then explain themselves annoyingly, and people who blindly agree.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 15 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
Registered for a free account here