The Amazing Spider-Man - OPEN SPOILERS NOW

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

I do really like the direction for this movie. It's visually beautiful looking.
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

I do really like the direction for this movie. It's visually beautiful looking.

I like that it feels as vibrant and colorful as a comic book. Alot of blue and red in the city at night. And Spiderman moves far more eloquently, it kinda reminds me of the USM game right down to that end battle on the rooftop.
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

Hope there is an art book:)

Indeed, i don't buy art books, but for this it'd be fascinating to see the stages of the costumes, web shooters and Lizard.

I like that it feels as vibrant and colorful as a comic book. Alot of blue and red in the city at night. And Spiderman moves far more eloquently, it kinda reminds me of the USM game right down to that end battle on the rooftop.

:goodpost:
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

Nope. Venom indeed ruined the film.

And the directing was fine, it was the writing that was terrible.

Raimi and Co wrote a script. Finished it. And was forced to add Venom, and all that stupid crap with it. Hence, Spider-Man 3.

So what your telling me is that just because the studio wanted venom that ruined the movie ? Venom was in the movie for like ten minutes. So venom is responsible for Peter Parker acting like a _____ on the bridge, venom is responsible for that terrible new goblin suit, venom is responsible for them switching the origin and making sandman the killer ? Nah bro they choose the direction they wanted to take and it failed hard. I'm pretty sure they could of handled it a lot better. Also venom had nothing to do with them not fleshing out the story and adding a sense of darkness to the black suit but instead they decided to focus on a stupid love triangle between mj Harry and Peter. Let's just say even if the vulture was in the new movie then that would be overkill sense spidey 2 left on a cliffhanger with Harry finding the goblin tech. It was a bad idea to include venom but the whole spiderman 3 movie wasnt because venom it was poor vision
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

So what your telling me is that just because the studio wanted venom that ruined the movie ? Venom was in the movie for like ten minutes.

Pretty much. If they'd left it the way it was, X-Games Goblin would've been saved for another sequel because Peter wouldn't have needed the help and the Sandman story alone was great. But tossing in Venom was trying to pack ten pounds of ____ in a two pound bag. If he'd been gone, you'd have Goblin II (or bend it and have him be Hobgoblin) set up with Venom also set up and at least two more films cocked and loaded. Instead we got a halfassed hodgepodge so convoluted you get whiplash looking to and fro trying to figure out WTF is happening.
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

Raimi wanted Vulture, we got Venom it's over let it go lol.

Avi Arad and Co. is to blame!
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

because i'm quite excited for this

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nSMg2G8jEI"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nSMg2G8jEI[/ame]
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

So what your telling me is that just because the studio wanted venom that ruined the movie ? Venom was in the movie for like ten minutes. So venom is responsible for Peter Parker acting like a _____ on the bridge, venom is responsible for that terrible new goblin suit, venom is responsible for them switching the origin and making sandman the killer ? Nah bro they choose the direction they wanted to take and it failed hard. I'm pretty sure they could of handled it a lot better. Also venom had nothing to do with them not fleshing out the story and adding a sense of darkness to the black suit but instead they decided to focus on a stupid love triangle between mj Harry and Peter. Let's just say even if the vulture was in the new movie then that would be overkill sense spidey 2 left on a cliffhanger with Harry finding the goblin tech. It was a bad idea to include venom but the whole spiderman 3 movie wasnt because venom it was poor vision

You've obviously never written a script before.

Which is fine. It's not something everyone needs, or should do. But, that also means you don't understand why Spider-Man 3 was didn't work.

Pretend you wrote a script. 123 page script. Your script contains certain elements, scenes, characters. It all flows well, and makes sense.

Now, imagine you're say....5 months, or so before filming, and someone comes to you and FORCES you to make changes.

Add characters, replace scenes, ect. You're going to have to change the story around to make these changes work. But have little time, and the clock is ticking. You can't stop the train now, you have to stay on schedule. You movie comes out in 1 and a half years. AND you have to cast, and start pre-production, all while you're re-writing the script,.

It won't turn out well.


The script had Vulture and Sandman, right? Well, even if Sandman was Ben's killer, it would've worked better, because we would only have to deal with the redemption of Sandman...if that was the case, and it wouldn't have come off so cheesy, because we would've gone through a journey with this character, rather then have him pop up every once in a while to fight. And the Vulture would be the main, evil villain, if that was the case.

Point was, without Venom, without the suit, we could've had a possible proper end for Harry, a better MJ relationship, a shorter run time, and a more compact story line.

Instead, thanks to Venom, the movie was ruined.
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

You've obviously never written a script before.

Which is fine. It's not something everyone needs, or should do. But, that also means you don't understand why Spider-Man 3 was didn't work.

Pretend you wrote a script. 123 page script. Your script contains certain elements, scenes, characters. It all flows well, and makes sense.

Now, imagine you're say....5 months, or so before filming, and someone comes to you and FORCES you to make changes.

Add characters, replace scenes, ect. You're going to have to change the story around to make these changes work. But have little time, and the clock is ticking. You can't stop the train now, you have to stay on schedule. You movie comes out in 1 and a half years. AND you have to cast, and start pre-production, all while you're re-writing the script,.

It won't turn out well.


The script had Vulture and Sandman, right? Well, even if Sandman was Ben's killer, it would've worked better, because we would only have to deal with the redemption of Sandman...if that was the case, and it wouldn't have come off so cheesy, because we would've gone through a journey with this character, rather then have him pop up every once in a while to fight. And the Vulture would be the main, evil villain, if that was the case.

Point was, without Venom, without the suit, we could've had a possible proper end for Harry, a better MJ relationship, a shorter run time, and a more compact story line.

Instead, thanks to Venom, the movie was ruined.

well said :goodpost:
 
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

123 pages is a little more than 2/3rds of a average 2 hour film or so. I was just pulling CP's leg.

:rolleyes2
 
Last edited:
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man

Venom wasn't the worst thing in SM3. The characterization of Peter Parker was the worst part (which I blame Maguire for), followed by the embarrassing scene where Peter dances, and then there's Gwen who was just scenery with nothing to do in the story.

Thomas H. Church is a good actor who was poorly utilized. When I saw the poster for SM3 where he's hiding his little girl behind him and the cops are drawing - I thought they knew what they where doing with the character. Too bad it didn't turn out that way.

Venom could work in a film, but you must have a director who actually likes the character. I think you would also have to throw in the numerous venom-ish spinoff characters as well.
 
Back
Top