Being a dissertation [including poor attempts at humor] in multiple parts by one semi-crazed Spider-Man fan.
Allow me to preface this article with note for those that missed the first part, or just found it forgettable.
The purpose of these articles is to entertain. To offer a (hopefully) amusing critique of the new Spider-Man movie, or at least what we know of it so far. A critical (devils advocate) view if you will.
The core of this critique is the argument that those responsible for this new movie have little respect for the source material and are changing who the characters are to the point that they are our beloved characters in name only. If you are the kind of Spider-Man fan that is OK with a re-imagined Peter Parker, one that is nothing like the Peter Parker from the 616 universe, then you will of course disagree with the premise.
Or maybe you are just at odds with my conclusions, either way I hope you can still enjoy this article without feeling you have to agree with it, and I look forward to pleasing you in my “Why The Amazing Spider-Man movie is going to be awesome” article that completes this series.
So please bare with me for one long final diatribe, and you will receive relief in my final article that offers a counter point.
And now, for those that stubbornly believe that who Spider-Man and his alter ego Peter Parker are is essential to what makes them so great. It is for those fans that I continue to offer the argument that this is not your Spider-Man movie, and in fact that it will suck.
Let us begin…
Part 2b – A small follow up to part 2 – The soul of Peter Parker.
Before we get to the next section I do want to address an argument made by some in regards to the Ultimate comics. That is the claim that the movie is being mainly based on the Ultimate comics and therefore should not be criticized for it’s deviations from who Peter is in the Amazing universe.
Despite my distaste for the Ultimate comics, I did read and collect the first 90 issues, and I did not remember Peter being changed to the degree Marc Webb seems to describe (and other information seems to support that I will get to later). So I went back and reread those first few issues.
To my surprise I found Peter is as much the bookish science nerd as he is in the Amazing comics. And in fact the first issue bares more than a passing resemblance to the first Raimi movie. And Marvel’s own Universe Wiki describes him as a “quiet, bookish, boy”.
Mr. Punk Rock Ethic himself
For the most part who Peter is in the issues covering his origin as Spider-Man is pretty darn faithful to the core of the character seen in the original comics. Sure he has a sweater now rather than a suit and tie. But as far as who Peter Parker is, it is very respectful to the source material. So any argument that says “Ultimate” is the inspiration for this movie and therefore these changes are OK, is one that I think holds little weight.
If the new movie portrays Peter the way he is in those first issues of Ultimate, we shouldn’t have any complaints in that regards.
However I believe the interview with Marc Webb clearly shows that not to be the case. Along with other evidence that supports this that I will get to later.
In fact I think that calling the movie “The Amazing Spider-Man”, without being very faithful to the “Amazing Spider-Man” comics is a bit insulting. Maybe I would be more open to these changes if it were called “Web of Spider-Man” or “Spider-Man Begins”.
However for the next section I am going to concentrate on an entirely different offense against the source material (don’t worry I’ll get back to what they are doing to Peter in the next section). Something that seems to have gained far more traction for controversy on the internet.
I am of course talking about the costume…
Part 3: The costume SUCKS! AKA: Basketball head strikes back.
Let me be clear, a bad costume design is not going to ruin this movie. But I feel that it does once again illustrate a lack of respect for the source material and the arrogance with which those responsible think they can reinvent these characters. But for those that think it is unfair to say the movie will suck based on the costume, well please bare with me. I offer this only to add small weight to the argument, not as a central thesis.
So no matter how bad the costume is, it cannot make it a bad movie and the creators know that. However it seems they felt up to the challenge of disproving it, because boy is this costume ugly.
This has got to be the worst Spidey costume ever, right?
OK fair enough, this is the worst Spidey costume ever.
Although it is a little more faithful to the comics.
Part 3a – Ch-ch-ch-changes. AKA: What happened to the Web heads webs (on his head!)?
While it is true that Spidey has had a whole host of gimmicky costumes over the years, they were always temporary fixtures rather than redesigns. Usually not much more than an attempt to boost sales. The black costume stuck around for a while and has returned at times due to popularity, but for the most part the classic costume has not been messed with.
Sure different artists over the years have drawn it in slightly different ways, the eyes are now bigger and the underarm webbing is seen less often these days. But I think the vast majority of Spidey fans agree, the classic duds are close to perfection.
So why would they make such big changes to it for the movie? Is it change for change’s sake? Do they feel the need to differentiate from the Raimi movies so strongly that they are OK with such deviations from the iconic costume?
And while I don’t want my criticisms of this film to be boiled down to Webb Vs Raimi. It does have to be noted that the Raimi costume was vastly superior. I know some people manage to find reasons to dislike it, and I’ll be honest the raised webbing needed to grow on me (although I was sold on the overall look when it was revealed).
But the clear fact is this, the Raimi costume was pretty darn faithful while also looking awesome on the big screen. I know, lot’s of people complain that it’s not realistic that Peter could have made that costume. And I have seen the same criticism of the new one too. But I have two issue’s with that criticism –
1. Didn’t you already suspend your disbelief to the point you were able to believe a radiactive Spider can give someone “Super Spider-powers”? I think that asking you to believe a high-school kid made that costume is really not a big request at that point.
2. Peter Parker is supposed to be a genius remember? A guy smart enough to create one of his best “powers” himself; his web shooters. Should not have too much of a problem creating a great looking costume.
Why he would come up with this ugly thing is another issue.
Let’s just have a quick look at the new costume, side by side with the one seen in the Raimi movies (along with some insets of comic Spidey for comparison).
Will the real Spider-Man please stand up?
Now I know these things like this are entirely subjective, but I imagine few people can tell me that they think that the new costume looks as good (never mind better) than the one from the Raimi movies?
And that shot actually hides the worst changes to the costume!
What have they done to the webbing on his head!? Was this necessary? It’s uneven and no longer even looks like a spiders web, like they entirely missed the point. And the way the web wraps around his head rather than circles round the front like an actual spiders web, makes it look more like some weird gimp mask.
Hello boys!
As much as I dislike the weird gloves, the silly boots, yellow eyes, lack of front belt, ridiculous leg stripes and skinny back spider; none of those compare to my distaste for how weird the “webs” look on his face. They simply do not look like webs, and I do not understand why they would change something that has been set in stone in every iteration of the comic (with the rare exception of some bad/lazy artists). It is honestly like the designers did not understand that it is supposed to be a web. This is how this weird design looks when flattened and placed beside what an actual spider web looks like.
I honestly don’t even know what that looks like, but it’s certainly not a spiders web. I remember reading a very interesting article about a science experiment where they dosed spiders with different drugs and looked at the resulting webs they built. None of them looked this dumb.
Looking at this made me wonder what the spider signal would look like with this weird “web”.
To put it simply, it just does not look right. And is change for change’s sake.
I am going to give it the benefit of the doubt on the eyes though I presume that we will not be able to see his eyes in the final movie. And hopefully the costume will look a bit brighter and more colourful after post processing.
What the costume will look like after post processing effects (hopefully).
Part 3b – It’s filthy! And it’s rubber?
Why did they go with rubber? Such a strange choice. For a start wouldn’t it be very hard to breath through? Maybe it’s not rubber, but it sure as hell looks like it. In fact his head looks like a basketball to me.
This movie’s going to be a slam dunk!
And can someone explain to me why this costume is so damned filthy? Seriously take another look at this close up and how dirty it looks. Why would anyone consider that I good thing?
Does anyone have a wet wipe?
“How the hell did my crotch get so dirty?”
And I’m really not keen on the silly line down his leg either. Makes him look like he’s representing Serbia in the winter Olympics! I could spend more time on the other things I don’t like about the costume redesign, but you have all seen the images and it would just come across as anal and nit picky. At the end of the day, while I do think it is indicative of the movies problems. A bad costume does not a bad movie make. And it looks better in some promo shots.
“No seriously, this is embarrassing!”
Also did I mention that Spidey’s head looks like a basketball?
Part 4: The bad news from Comicon. AKA: Peter Parker on suicide watch.
OK I’ll be honest, the majority of information that came from Comicon actually made me feel much better about the movie. But I will save all that for the positive article and concentrate on the parts that I did not like (after all this is still called “Why the Amazing Spider-Man movie is going to suck”).
In the absence of the actual footage, I am forced to work from descriptions. I am going to use this article from Io9 as my main source –
So if you believe there are untruths in these descriptions, take it up with them. But I am going to presume they are describing it accurately.
After the trailer, the first footage shown at the panel introduces us to Peter Parker’s pre-superpowered life. His teachers complain that he’s tardy. He’s reprimanded for skateboarding in the hallway. He’s constantly bullied. He’s the kid who hides beneath his hoodie in the back of the classroom, the kid who always comes home with a black eye and can say he tripped and fell only so many times. But when he punches one of the boys who hit him in school, he and Uncle Ben are called into the principal’s office.
Ok I think this should be pretty supportive of my previous interpretations of Marc Webb’s quotes. This does not sound like the brainy, nerdy, bookworm, straight A student and wallflower of the comics. From this description Peter sounds like a very troubled youth.
I am once again going to break down these quotes for comment.
His teachers complain that he’s tardy. He’s reprimanded for skateboarding in the hallway.
Here we have what I believe is the manifestation of Marc Webb’s “punk rock instinct” in Peter. He’s not merely talking about his DIY attitude to making his web shooters, but a rebelliousness that was simply not part of who the comic book Peter was in any way. I believe this is what Marc Webb described in regards to how they are making Peter an outsider. He’s not a socially awkward nerd, he’s the rebel kid who get’s into trouble skateboarding in the hall, shows up to class late and gets into fights.
Both the Amazing and Ultimate Peter Parker’s would not be getting into trouble for being tardy to class pre-superpowers. Peter is a straight A student, a teachers pet. One of the reasons he is picked on in the comics is because he is percieved as this by the bullies.
And skateboarding? I honestly cannot picture Peter Parker with a Skateboard pre-superpowers in either Amazing or Ultimate. Now I can see the Ultimate Peter take it up after he has got his powers, maybe as a modern alternative to the scooter in Amazing. But as I described at the beginning of this article, pre-spider bite Ultimate Peter was as much the bookish nerd as Amazing Peter.
He’s constantly bullied. He’s the kid who hides beneath his hoodie in the back of the classroom, the kid who always comes home with a black eye and can say he tripped and fell only so many times. But when he punches one of the boys who hit him in school, he and Uncle Ben are called into the principal’s office.
Peter was picked on in the Amazing comics, but not so much bullied. There was a hint of bullying in Ultimate, but no fighting. And in both it was for being a bookish nerd, not because he was anti-social in a late to class, sit at the back and hide kinda way. And while I’m not against Peter fighting back pre-superpowers rather than being bullied, it also does not sit right with the character on the pages of Ultimate or Amazing. In fact it would not take much effort to find examples of Peter talking about how he was never in a real fight before his super powers.
OK some more descriptions of the footage.
As they leave the office, Uncle Ben (played by Martin Sheen) asks about the boy Peter punched, “Is he the kid that hit you?” When Peter doesn’t answer, Ben continues, “So this is all about getting even. If it is, I guess you’re pretty proud of yourself right now.”
This just doesn’t sound like a the type of conversation I would expect to hear between Peter and Uncle Ben. I can’t imagine ben saying “I guess you’re pretty proud of yourself right now” in either Amazing or Ultimate.
The next scene shows us Peter holding his father’s leather briefcase. He searches through the case, taking out his father’s glasses, his OSCORP ID, his calculators, and finally, a mysterious folder of documents.
Peter’s father worked for Oscorp? Ok not a big deal I guess.
Peter visiting Gwen at OSCORP.
Er actually I have no problems at all with the spider coming from Oscorp, I do like foreshadowing for future villains.
Part 5: Dissecting the trailer. AKA: My god is that web coming out of his neck!?
OK so far I have only mentioned the trailers existence in passing. Because while it may be the the most we have sen of the movie. It does not contain the best clues if it’s direction. But the time has finally come to take a look at some scenes from the trailer and see what we can learn based on the information previously covered.
It’s interesting how many people commenting on the trailer say how dark it is. The truth is quite literal, I brightened every one of these shots in order to see them more clearly. As far as commenting on the movies “dark tone” based on the trailer, well a trailer can be very deceptive and can pretty much have any tone they want regardless of the final movie (see the happy “The Shining” trailer for example), so I won’t comment it further.
First we have Peter as a little boy being told by his father that he has to stay with his Aunt and Uncle because they have to go away for a little while. I think it’s pretty clear from what has been said elsewhere by Marc Webb and Andrew Garfield along with what we see in the trailer, that this event is going to be very important to the story in this movie.
I have a few issue’s with this. First of all if the loss of his parents is going to be the reason why Peter is so anti-social, well it is once again alarmingly out of character. As far as I recall, Peter never brooded once in the comics in regards to the loss of his parents. And certainly never pre-superpowers (Amazing or Ultimate).
My other issue is more minor but is an important reason why Peter did not brood about his parents in the comics. In the Amazing universe, Peter is left with Uncle Ben and Aunt May when he was a baby, not a little boy as seen here. As seen in Amazing Spider-Man Annual#5 (1968), the first issue to have any details on Peter’s parents at all.
So growing up, Aunt May and Uncle Ben are the only parents he ever really knew. He mentions always wondering who his parents were, but we are talking about 1 issue only and that came out around issue #67 in continuity. I couldn’t find any details in regards to Peter’s parents in Ultimate other than they were scientists. But he certainly did not brood about them pre powers.
It will be interesting to see if there is any mention of Pete’s parents being Shield Agents, especially with Sony not having the license to use Shield. I think it’s more likely they will be scientists like in the Ultimate universe.
Also, did Peter not need glasses as a little boy?
Then we have a shot of Peter walking down the corridor at school. Virtually everyone turns to look at Peter as he passes them, like they are afraid he may have brought a gun to school. He’s clearly unpopular for reasons beyond being a science nerd.
Next we see Peter having dinner with the Stacy’s. He has a black eye. Either from being Spider-Man or getting into those fights described above. But as he is missing his glasses I think we can presume this is post spider bite.
Later we see this shot of Peter in which he appears to be discovering his fathers old brief case. A scene that is not disimilar to something seen in the previously mentioned Amazing Spider-Man Annual #5. As I said, it appears there are secrets involved with the disappearance/death of Peter’s parents that are central to the plot of this movie. Especially since on close examination, the photo in the bottom right appears to be of Dr. Curt Connors and Peter’s father.
We see Peter wander or break into to an area of Oscorp he isn’t supposed to be. Supposedly in search of more information on his parents. He is then bitten on the neck and we see him pull some webbing from the bite.
OK so I know it seems rather minor, but for what possible reason did they change the spider bite to his neck rather than his hand? It’s seems like change for change’s sake! I don’t recall seeing a single “incarnation” of Spider-Man before that changed the bite from the back of his hand. So why change it? What could this change possibly add?
When you have a change like this that can not reasonably add anything to the story, then what can it be but change for change’s sake and a lack of respect to the source material?
And why the hell is there webbing coming out of his neck? Did the spider bite him or climb in and build a nest?
Part 6: Gwen Stacy. AKA: I heart Mary Jane.
One final comment on Gwen Stacy in the movie before I offer a conclusion and follow up with my counter arguments.
First of all I’ll straight up admit my bias. I never really liked Gwen Stacy, she started off as a cruel beauty queen that was full of herself and had all the boys falling over her. Her only attraction to Peter was that he had no time for her (mainly because he was too busy with his sick Aunt or being a superhero). And when they finally got together, she became a sappy daddy’s girl that fawned over Peter. And despite Stan Lee and John Romita’s best efforts she just was not very interesting and Mary Jane stole every scene they shared. Worst of all she hated Spider-Man. As a reader I could never really root for Pete and Gwen’s relationship when she despised Spidey so much.
However, Peter was in a serious relationship with Gwen before MJ (although he did date MJ casually first, and Betty Brant more seriously before that). So while I have no problems with them having Gwen in the movie, I do feel that unless they have the guts to kill her off like in the comic and then develop MJ as Peter’s true love, they should have skipped her. And maybe they will, there has certainly been hints that they might. Both Marc Webb and Emma Stone have refereed to “Gwen’s story”, which I think most people would interpret as a reference to her ultimate death at the hands of the Green Goblin. If that is the case and they intend to tell that story in part 2 then my point on this is truly moot.
Also the casting choice for her is baffling in regards to the character seen on the pages of the comic. Now don’t get me wrong, I LOVE Emma Stone, I think she is fantastic. I also think that her spunky personality would have been perfect for Mary Jane. But for Gwen?
And this image concerns me too –
It would appear from this image that Peter is still wearing his Spidey oufit from the waist down. Which forces me to conclude that Gwen is aware that Peter is Spider-Man and is supportive. Nothing could be more out of character for the Amazing universe Gwen. Although it would fit perfectly for the Ultimate universe Mary Jane!?
However as I have said, I’m not a big fan of Gwen. So changes to her character do not concern me as much. But it does seem like an unnecessary change. After all MJ did not know Peter was Spidey in the first Raimi movie. And in the comics Gwen dies having never known. But I am a fan of Peter having someone to confide in about is life as Spider-Man, I just prefer it to be MJ as it is in both Amazing and Ultimate.
In Conclusion
I think I have provided ample evidence that there appears to be a serious lack of respect being shown to the source material in the making of this reboot. Especially in regards to Peter’s personality pre-spider bite. Also the costume sucks.
And I think taking this evidence into account and deciding that the movie will not be very good, especially for long time die hard fans of the comic; is not an unreasonable conclusion to come to.
Will it be an inaccurate conclusion? Only time will tell. And believe me, nothing would make me happier upon this movies release than to find that all my fears and reservation were completely unfounded and that the movie is fantastic.
However make no mistake, there are positive things that we know about this movie. And these things strongly support the argument that this movie will be good.
So with that in mind I hope you all join me next week, when I complete this series of articles with the final section titled…
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
BTW, it wasn’t because of the third movie, but because that was around the time they did the terrible OMD/BND bs.
Marvel has so mismanaged Spider-Man, trying to turn him into something he’s not in several different incarnations, including the regular ASM universe. I have been unable to stomach anything Spider-Man since the third movie, and the new trailer and director comments just reinforces that. Used to be my favorite superhero. Now I can’t wait for the next Batman movie. Thanks, Marvel.
Why r they trying to ruin this movie why change the story why is emma stone not marry jane why gwen this is soo stupid why ruin somthing that had potential
I always liked this break down of Nerd/Geek/Dork. Very accurate to the way my social circles broke it down when using the definitions. Always thought of myself as a Geek.
For me Peter was a Nerd pre-Spider bite. After that he gained a lot of confidence from being Spider-Man and became a Geek.
It’s not gonna suck, it better not. I hope they get the Lizard done right.
Interpret this as you wish….
From Nerd Dictionary:
Nerd is a term that refers to an intelligent but single-minded person obsessed with a nonsocial hobby or pursuit.[1] Nerds are generally considered to be awkward, shy and/or unattractive by most.[2] Thus, a nerd is often excluded from physical activity and considered a loner by others, or will tend to associate with a small group of like-minded people.
@#23 Masterslinger – On his glasses – True, but scenes showing him as a child in the comics always had his glasses. A minor issue, which is why I only mentioned it in passing.
On the Gwen picture. In the high definition screenshot, it appears to clearly show his Spidey trousers. Not to mention she’s tending to wounds from a battle with the Lizard.
I may be wrong, but in discussion threads on SuperHeroHype most people are convinced that it is his Spidey trousers. Take a look and zoom in – http://goo.gl/QdLqj
@#24 JB – I’ll admit that I do not like it when they change who Peter is from the comics. To me the very essence of what makes Spidey so awesome is who Peter Parker is as a person.
But I certainly object to the claim that I am just “determined not to like this movie”. I want nothing more than to love this movie, but that doesn’t mean I will try and justify everything that seems wrong in order o convince myself that I will like it. As I sated clearly in the article, there is a lot to like and be hopefully about this movie. And if I was determined not to like it, then why am I writing a follow up article that will say nothing but positive things about it?
Change may come with every adaptation but that does not mean that it is OK to make what appears to be changes to the fundemental core of who Peter is. A versitile character he may be, but he was not a troubled youth.
And I think having a discussion about how it appears Peter will act based on quotes from the director that were talking directly about that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Not to mention I also talked about scenes from the movie that were shown at comicon aswell as the small section on the trailer. I mean when they describe a scene in which Peter gets in trouble for skateboarding in the hall, it’s not like I am making any presumptions about how Peter is acting is it? He clear was skateboarding in the hall. Unless the footage was misleading and Flash was skateboarding and get’s Peter blamed. But since we have also seen pics of Peter with Skateboard I think it’s fair to say the footage spoke for itself. I tried to make as few presumptions as possible and when it was unavoidable, noted the possibility that there was inaccurate presumption being applied.
As for the costume – As I said in the article, beside the temporary gimmicky costumes Spidey has had from time to time; the classic duds have remained virtually unchanged (they didn’t even make the slightest change to them in “Ultimate”), and are universally loved.
I would be fine with some minor changes and touches to improve it’s appearance on screen. But these are huge changes to the classic duds for no good reason. And bad ones in my opinion.
And the costume looks the same in the promo shots as the on set pictures, The ones I chose were simply because they gave a better look at certain aspects of the design. It’s not like the on set costume is different to the one that will be seen on the screen. Take a look at the on set Raimi costume shots. Looks just as great there as the filmed version.
It seems to me it just boils down to, “It’s changed and I don’t like it.” That, and, you’re determined to not like this movie.
Change comes with every adaption, and it’s what makes things interesting. Peter is a versatile enough character for this. I think part of the character’s appeal is that he can interpreted in a variety of ways, and his reaction to different situations can be easily imagined. Basing how Peter will act off of some quotes and two minutes of footage is really premature, and just nitpicking.
As for the costume, I do get that it can be polarizing, but a change shouldn’t really be surprising. Costumes change a lot in film adaptions, and there are a lot of different variations in his costume. However, I think using the set photos as an example of the costume is just plain cheap.
As to glasses, he might not know he needs them until kindergarten, or like first grade. Some eye issues can develop later on. As to him having his uniform on with Gwen helping him. where? Looks like black bookbag strap. Can you zoom in on it or something? It doesn’t look that similar… it could be…
Thanks for the comments guys. Getting much better quality this time, more debate and less hate. I’ll try a to address all the questions aimed at me.
@#1 Andrew C – Allow me to assure you that these articles were not written as a “cynical attempts to drum up traffic”. The first one was originally written for my own blog that is pretty much read only by friends and family, there wasn’t the slightest attempt to “drum up traffic” when I wrote it. I only offered it to Bard after it was finished. And after the feedback on the first (mainly that the venomous tone was not being taken as the humor I intended) I wrote this article in a less confrontational and therefore less controversial style. Had my only concern been to drum up controversy and traffic I would have continued with the style that got so many people upset. And I’m not trying to push people’s buttons, just simply expressing some thoughts and opinions while trying to entertain at the same time. I have a feeling you didn’t read this article.
@#5 jon – I think you are getting too focused on the one time I used “socially awkward nerd” as short hand for all the things Peter is. It may be debatable that in todays culture you can be a “socially awkward nerd” and also be a rebellious kid that gets into trouble at school. I think that would be a pretty loose reinterpretation of what a nerd is (since it has always meant smart, bookish and usually academically successful). However that really does not matter, because who peter was is not a label that can be redefined by todays standards but a set personality. Peter was a good kid, a smart well adjusted kid. He would never be the kid getting in trouble for something like skateboarding in the hall, or being late to class. But as I addressed in the article, you state that you are open to what you call a “fresh contemporary take” on who Peter is, so you do not agree with my argument against such a thing. And I completely respect your opinion.
However I just don’t agree that Peter can’t be contemporary and still be the smart, well adjusted and academically successful kid he always was in the comics. Being contemporary and fresh does not mean you have to change the essence of who these characters were. Believe me there are plenty of kids today that are like Peter was in the 60’s.
@#11 jon – You may be right on the chronology of these events, and on why the costume is dirty. Which is why I mentioned such possibilities in the article. However, since the costume is that dirty in every single shot released and captured at filming by the press. I’d bet dollars for donuts that is how it looks all the time.
My issue with the parents is not that it was only in one issue, but that that issue shows that Peter was not a troubled youth because of the loss of his parents. And making that a big part of the movie is a deviation from character that I am personally not happy with.
On the eyes, if we can see his real eyes through the costume eyes I think it looks very silly. However I gave them the benefit of the doubt and stated I doubt that will be the case.
The costume is of course very subjective, but it does appear that the vast majority of people do not like this one. I agree on the web shooters, but I don’t think it’s a big deal, and disagree that it has much to do with the costume at all, in the comics we can’t see the shooters regardless of if they are mechanical or organic (which they were for a while).
@#6 Brian Bradley – I only went back in order to cross reference the new information with the old. And I did not want to dwell too long on each aspect, it would come across as too nit picky. And believe me I’m not trying to “sell you” on disliking the movie, just raising some points of concern for discussion. That’s why I’m following up with a positive look at the movie.
@#8 Two-Bit Specialist – You are supposed to be entertained while encouraged to discuss these possible issue’s with the movie. Talking about the minutia of Spider-Man is what this site is all about.
@#9 Doc Folsome – My source material is not just the trailer as I have stated many times. I have only a small section on the trailer because there is only a small amount of information we can learn from it. The majority of discussion has been on comments made by Marc Webb and the other footage shown at Comicon. And I’m not judging the movie based on this information either. I’m offering points of discussion and critique of the information. The result of which is supposed to be the discussion we are having right now in the comments. So goal achieved.
@#18 Nathaniel Collins – Thanks man. And I comment on most posts these days. I only don’t comment on reviews because I don’t read them. No offense to the writers but I usually get to the issues after the review is up and don’t see a need to go back and read a review after I have read the issue. I read the reviews every now and again for comics I’m not reading. I’ll try and comment when I do.
The future articles I have planned will no doubt be far less controversial and have less comments. I certainly do not plan any articles for the purpose of being controversial or to drum up traffic or comments.
@12-XFD
Great, just what we need in this world, more horrified wives.
I think we get your point Chris, but I don’t know to what degree the comments will have on encouraging other type of articles. Unless of course you want to create a tabloid type atmosphere and mentality, where everyone is slowing down to get a peek at the car wreck at the side of the road. And not many Spidey subjects would get this kind of feedback anyway, unless of course some writer berates a fanboy on the message boards.
CrazyChris is speaking pretty much for everyone who writes for the site, at least me anyway. When I’m writing a review I want to know that people are at least reading it by commenting on it instead of just skimming it over and going onto the boards. We don’t spend our time writing because were getting paid (because we don’t… Grr… lol), but because we like this site and like Spider-Man. Would I love to pull a Gerard and get hundreds of comments? Heck yeah but sadly I’ll never get there (I know Gerard just got a kick out of reading that if he saw it).
Comment on what you like or explain why you disagree. We want both.
Congrats to Parabolee on getting this much attention and welcome to the front page crew. Now, do I agree with Parabolee’s articles so far? Hell no, but he’s getting feedback and that’s what Brad likes. Here’s another comment for ya.
I just asked my wife to decide between the 2 images of the new reboot costume and the Vivid video parody costume. I asked which costume belonged to which flick. She got it completely backwards and seemed horrified by Spidey’s reboot costume.(And then horrified that Spidey’s doing porn now.)
They had him get bit on the neck so the Twilight fans will watch…
So my point is that multiple negative comments still comes across as “we’re paying attention to this so write more like it.” If you want to encourage a different type of article, comment on those articles.
That may be true Chris, but as someone who welcomes the reboot, lets just say the responses have been encouraging.
Also, guys, as a writer for this site I can tell you that the number of comments is my only real guage for success, so if you want to see different types of articles then comment on the ones you like instead of complaining about the pieces you dislike. I would rather have 100 comments of “you suck” than 5 people saying “good job” because at the end of the day the most important thing to me is to know people are actually reading this stuff.
*looks at the title*
It’s going to suck WHAT?
Parabolee: “Then we have a shot of Peter walking down the corridor at school. Virtually everyone turns to look at Peter as he passes them, like they are afraid he may have brought a gun to school. He’s clearly unpopular for reasons beyond being a science nerd.”
Most likely happened after the fight, but that’s just speculation, like everything else
Parabolee: “And can someone explain to me why this costume is so damned filthy? Seriously take another look at this close up and how dirty it looks. Why would anyone consider that I good thing?”
Well perhaps it got dirty chasing the Lizard through the New York sewers, or rolling around on the pavement dodging bullets from New York cops hunting him. Or perhaps it’s just an accumulation of everything up into that point in the film. Why doesn’t he wash it? Perhaps he’s like most every other teenager in the world and figures why wash it if it’s going to get dirty again. Or maybe he washes it the very next scene after these pictures. Stay tuned…..
Parabolee: “So growing up, Aunt May and Uncle Ben are the only parents he ever really knew. He mentions always wondering who his parents were, but we are talking about 1 issue only and that came out around issue #67 in continuity. I couldn’t find any details in regards to Peter’s parents in Ultimate other than they were scientists. But he certainly did not brood about them pre powers.”
So I actually appreciate that Webb is developing this story on the screen because it has tremendous dramatic potential, yet your against it because it was only one issue it was mentioned? Excuse me while I..
Parabolee: “I am going to give it the benefit of the doubt on the eyes though I presume that we will not be able to see his eyes in the final movie. And hopefully the costume will look a bit brighter and more colourful after post processing.”
What exactly is wrong with seeing his eyes to some degree? You won’t see them completely, but I assume it’s for dramatic purposes. I know you don’t see them in the comics, but that probably has more to do with the fact that (in comics) drawing a human eye over a spider eye would be redundant and look stupid. I said in comics, the real word is different. And if it means that Spidey won’t have his mask ripped off one more time for the sake of dramatic effect, THEN I’M ALL FOR IT!
On the issue of the costume, I’m not in love with either Raimi’s or Webb’s. Spider-Man is simple spandex, that’s it. But they worry about the look on film, that it isn’t cool enogh or have enough dimensionality. But that’s the suit, it’s kind of lame and hand made. If they really wanted to be true to the costume, this is what they would do. Just imagine a close-up of this costume with the amateurish stich work and imperfections! That would be so awesome! But it will never happen. That’s part of what made Spider-Man cool to me was that dichotomy. That someone in that get-up could do things like he does. But that’s my interpretation, I’m sure others would be different.
And I’d rather have this costume with actual Web-shooters then Raimi’s bodily fluid shooting out from Tobey’s wrists. They actually do tie in to tie in to Peter’s science acuman and history in battling villians.
Funny that I liked the first part better even if I disagreed with you more there 🙂 You make some good points here as well, but I still want to be cautiously optimistic about this whole thing, seeing as I´ve heard at least some good things about this movie(Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone being the main stars is a huge plus, great actors). Also very intrested in how they will do the Lizard. I just hope they don´t make him way too bulky(I mean a little bulk will surely be needed, but please not too much, then he´ll just look like Killer Croc)
@Andrew C and his comment in #1
Very well said, I could not agree more with your logic, Parabolee clearly has an opinion on this matter but how can any of us weigh our opinions against his when the source material is a movie trailer and not a movie! Can we at least wait until the movie hits the theatres before releasing a full-scale critique? I’ll provide a title for that rant, “Why the Spider-Man sucked!” (notice the past tense)…
I actually saw the Spidey trailer this weekend at the Cap movie, and I have to say that I’m honestly intrigued by the plot. I thought it was a nice touch to add Peter’s parents into the storyline very early on and I’m excited to see where they’ll go with that.
In my opinion, a movie doesn’t need to strictly follow comic book canon, the comics don’t even follow the canon for f#$% sake (and neither did the Raimi movies for that matter)! Movies are a different medium than serialized books (obviously) and thus may employ different plot strategies to convey their message. I think the movie’s role should be to provide an interpretation of the character and (*gasp*) that interpretation may be a bit different from Stan Lee’s.
As far as criticizing the costume, to me, that’s one that will most certainly evolve throughout this franchise (from a business perspective it makes sense too b/c they’ll sell more toys) as Peter develops into his role as a super hero. I’m not worried that it doesn’t look like the original costume now, but by movie 2, it may. I didn’t see the webbed-armpits in the Raimi movies, should that be a strike against his films?
I think it silly to judge a book by its cover or a movie by its trailer…jokingly or not…
BD, imho, there’s better stuff to put on the front page, no disrespect to you Parabolee…
@Parabolee – I just don’t understand what I am supposed to get from reading this article. What do you want me to do with this information?
@Punisher – I’m GLAD they did that reboot. By doing that, Marvel Studios disassociated themselves from that horrible first movie and put their plans in motion for the Avengers. The best thing they could’ve done was rehash the origin in the intro sequence.
I like continuity in my movies too, but you gotta look at it from the studio’s perspective: Terrence Howard was being a jerk and demanded more money. Marvel didn’t have it, so they found someone else.
Let that be a lesson to you, children. If you get greedy, bad things happen to you.
Seems a little rushed, like you didn’t fully explore some of the statements you were making, and why go back to stuff that you were talking about in the first entry? The trailer section especially seemed pretty short especially considering that that trailer is the one thing we mainly to have to actually go off of now, figured you would spend more time on that.
Still not sold on disliking this movie… am I worried a little? Sure, but it’s Sony and any non-Marvel Studios movie now a days doesn’t have a lot of hope in my opinion. This is going to be a weird combination of Amazing, Ultimate and whatever else the screenwriters think will help better tell their story. We won’t ever see the true version that you’re hoping for until Marvel gets the rights back, and that won’t happen for a long long time most likely.
Parabolee: “Here we have what I believe is the manifestation of Marc Webb’s “punk rock instinct” in Peter. He’s not merely talking about his DIY attitude to making his web shooters, but a rebelliousness that was simply not part of who the comic book Peter was in any way. I believe this is what Marc Webb described in regards to how they are making Peter an outsider. He’s not a socially awkward nerd, he’s the rebel kid who get’s into trouble skateboarding in the hall, shows up to class late and gets into fights.”
Based on the quotes and what I’ve seen, I’m not prepared to make that statement. I hardly think Webb will completely turn Peter into Jim from Rebel Without a Cause. But then I haven’t seen the movie. I still think he will be a socially awkward nerd. But that has evolved from the sixties. I think we must have different interpretations of socially awkward. It seems you think it should mean bookish or shy (wallflower). I think you can be socially awkward and be late to class, skateboard in the halls, and get into fights . In fact by todays standards, I think they go hand in hand. Just because Peter wears a Ramones T-shirt (or whatever it is) doesn’t mean he will be a punk. Just take a look at the people who are wearing these shirts today. To the issue of whether it happened in the comics, I have no argument. As you stated that did not happen. But it does not equate for me that because it didn’t literally happen in the comics, it cannot be Peter Parker. Thats just my thought and I know alot of people who agree with me on various boards (and many disagree too obviously). Webb did say that he wants to make it contemporary. I do think that Peter would act differently today then he did in the 60’s. The social fabric is different in alot of ways. The awareness of being a nerd is different, there is all this cross-pollination happening, this mixing of genres in pop culture and in everything else really. There is a fashion trend called nerd chic. The paradigm has shifted. I would say more kids are rebellious today in general. The DIY ethic is much more common in them with new media and technology. Back in the 60’s your parents disiplined you and that was that. Nowadays more kids rebel then ever. Hell, you hit (spank)your kid today to try and disipline them and you are likely to get someone knocking on your door. We’ve given them more power and more space to rebel. The essence of Peter Parker, what people related to will still be there IMO. But yes, the details will be shifted as I said, like everything else has been shifted. If that makes some people turn away, so be it. But it will also attract many people who were turned off by Raimi’s dated artiface. Yes it may have been more sympatico with the early comics, but this isn’t comics. Two different mediums. If that means altering something to make it work better on screen (for a modern audience) then so be it. And although I am not in favor of change for change sake, I am in favor of fresh and contempoary takes on something that is in need of it. And I think this franchise desparately needed it. Whether you, I, or anyone else end up liking it we won’t know for sure until we see it.
I have rebuttals to some of your other points, but I’m too busy right now, so perhaps later.
Definitely a bit of a turn from the first piece. I, again, am not a huge Spiderman fan and cannot truly comment on a lot of the source material. I will however comment that the costume is a huge dissappointment to me as well. I was a great fan of the Raimi movies and thought they did an amzing job with the costume (although the Goblin’s kinda sucked). I must agree that this will not kill the movie, as I took issue with the bondage leather X-Men outfits but I thoroughly enjoyed the first 2 movies. That drastic of a change does lead me to beleive that many other things will change though, as evident in the trailer.
I feel that the best superhero movies to date didn’t change that much of the core characters (or didn’t star Ben Affleck). Come to think of it, I can’t conjure up one movie that is such a drastic departure from the source material. Even though the origins changed for the first 2 renditions of The Punisher (and I have issues with both), the core was there. Violent crime destroyed his family and he turned into a rampaging lunatic on a mission to punish the corrupt. At least War Zone didn’t delve into that messy topic if they didn’t plan to get it right.
I also don’t like this “dark” Peter. Changing a few characters, a timeline or a relationship is somewhat forgivable to me, but they really are changing the man behind the mask, therefore changing his motivations. They almost pulled this crap with Superman a while back where they were making him a red & blue Batman more or less, but it never got off the ground. As much as I love both Kevin Smith and Tim Burton, I think their incarnation would have killed the character. For Spiderman (In costume, not Peter Parker, to be clear.), I am truly hoping they don’t at least change the wisecracking personality we all came to know and love.
Lastly, why a reboot at all? They did it with The Incredible Hulk (not a fan) and I felt it was unnecessary then. At least with Batman they had an excuse… Way too much time had passed and Joel Schumacher destroyed the two prior films. They are also getting into this disturbing trend with video games. Are we that tapped for content? How many times do we need to retell a story? Even though I crave continuity in my films (Not a fan of Cheadle change in Iron Man either!) I could still forgive if they had dropped in new actors and continued Spiderman down the path of his life. There is a wealth of villains he could have vanquished and challenges he could have faced. With movie effects what they are today, I would love to see what they could have done with the Lizard or Electro.
Raimi & Tobey, you will be missed guys!
I thought this one is that old article recycled
That thing about the web from the neck was my first impression, it’s a web out of the neck
I don’t think Sony would have access to SHIELD, so the scientist backstory is more likely. I wouldn’t be surprised if they adapt Peter’s dad creating the black suit if they ever want to do Venom without the symbiote crap.
This will undoubtedly garner lots of replies just like the last installment, so let me just quickly say… I wonder when Brad will realize that just because something gets a lot of feedback, doesn’t mean it’s quality or constructive for the site. You could also put on the front page “Joe Quesada likes to eat babies.” I’m sure that would get a lot of replies too. Personally, I’d rather see more reviews, podcasts, thoughtful analysis instead of cynical attempts to drum up traffic by pushing buttons. Maybe stuff that gets a hundred replies is good for the site short-term, but it drags down the overall reputation of the place imho.