Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Amazing Teaser...

Spider-Man, Spider-Man...






The teaser trailer for Sony's "The Amazing Spider-Man" is out...

While I won't call it amazing, I'll say that it sets a different tone than the Sam Raimi films. It looks interesting and Andrew Garfield gives the impression that he'll make a great Peter Parker. I'll be glad to see a full trailer near the end of the year. I'm curious as to what The Lizard will look like. I love the line in the trailer that he says, even though we don't really see him.

I know the Mouse doesn't mind getting the money, but they'd really love to get their hands on the character so that Marvel Studios could work him into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But like the X-Men series, that'll have to wait for decade or so. But this film could be good. It can't be as bad as "Spider-Man 3." Hopefully, Sony has learned to stay out of the way. Riiiiiiight.

2012 is going to be a very big year...

13 comments:

Brianna Marie Angelakis said...

He looks like he'll play a great Spider-Man. The graphics at the end of the trailer don't have me all too thrilled though. I'm hoping they're still in the rough stages. Maybe it'll look good in 3D? Though I'm not a fan of live-action 3D films.

Kevin said...

Looks really good. I never liked Raimi's films. Doc Ock was done great, but the rest is...well, dumb. Tobey's a bad actor in them, so was Kirsten Dunst, the villains weren't portrayed well, and my favorite villain, Venom, was ruined beyond comprehension. I think this looks 10x better than Raimi's, his films were just cartoonish and ludicrous in effects and every aspect. It's almost laughable how bad the effects are in the movies. I know a lot of people like them, that's fine, but I stand corrected. I know Andrew Garfield from Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, he did a great job. I was hoping they would pick him when I heard the lineup.

Anonymous said...

I could of sworn I saw this movie back in 02, 04, and 07 but I could be wrong.

Cory Gross said...

I've seen way worse movies than Spider-Man 3, some of which went on to get Oscars. Sure it wasn't as good as 1 and 2, but come on!

perfectly flawed said...

I don't know Cory, SM3 jumped the shark when emo Peter Parker started to strut his stuff in the bar..

Allan said...

Universal has passed on "The Dark Tower" film series. Seeing that Disney is keen to get its hands on a fantasy property, do you think there is any chance WDC will pick it up instead?

Capt. Tomorrow said...

The only reason this movie is being made is so that Sony can bleed as much money as they can out of Spider-Man before Disney gets the chance to bleed as much money as they can out of the character.

Cory Gross said...

I never understood the complaint about that struttin' scene. "It's so dumb, he's such a loser"... yyyeeessssss, that was the point of that scene. It was supposed to be dumb and show that Peter had an egotistically distorted self-perception without being all ponderous and emo. That was actually one of my favorite scenes in the whole movie because of it.

B-mask said...

On the one hand, this looks good. Humourless and very unlike the character I grew up with, but it's only a teaser, and the cast is pretty damn perfect.

On the other hand, I kinda want it to fail so that Disney can grab it for Marvel. I mean, Thor, Iron man 1+2 were beautifully no-nonsense films that simply made people feel good and provided fun, and ultimately utilised what worked in the comics and only threw out or changed what didn't, or streamlined it. If this film fails to do any of these things, then yes, let it sink.

Anonymous said...

"Hopefully, Sony has learned to stay out of the way. Riiiiiiight."

I don't buy the idea that Sony was the reason Spider-Man 3 failed artistically. If Sony made Spider-Man 3 bad, then Sony made Spider-Man and its first sequel good. Besides, even if Sony did make Raimi do certain things, it's not like they told him to make Peter act tough by impersonating a character from "Night at the Roxbury". "Sam, we like what you're doing for Spider-Man 3. But we feel Peter should act tough by eating cookies. Also, there should be at least three musical numbers. And you know that whole conflict with Harry? Let's just give him amnesia until it's convenient for him to become evil again."

I wish more could have been done with Raimi's Spider-Man franchise. But it was beginning to look like even he wasn't taking advantage of it. Based on the leaked screenplay, Raimi still wasn't going to feature the Lizard as a villain, which was a real shame for Dylan Baker. Instead, Peter was going to accidentally kill the Vulture, leading to the Vulture's child becoming a villain for revenge. But wait... doesn't that sound familiar?

Brian - Mouse Expedition said...

the darker tone makes it seem better, but I really like that it is more to the REAL origin of spider-man than the Raimi films

Anonymous said...

It looks awful. The first movie is iconic, the second is brilliant, the third isn't the best but it's entertaining. Now, the 4th, the big restart looks like it's going to be BORING.
And boring, is the worst thing a movie can be.

Darrell said...

I have to agree with Anonymous #3--the third isn't the best but it's entertaining. It's main problem is that there is so much going on in it and some loose story lines are left dangling. I think Tobey did a fabulous job as Spider-Man and it's hard to imagine another person in his place.

I'm not too sure about this trailer--it seems too much at times like "been there, done that." However, it looks darker than the other trilogy. And seeing the Lizard should be interesting. It might also be interesting to see how they handle Gwen in this trilogy. Will they kill her off like they did in the comics? We'll find out in 2012 I guess...