Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

UPDATE!! AMAZING SPIDER-MAN TRAILER STILL ONLINE FOR NOW!! An Amazing, Spectacular Hyphenated Leak will have you crawling up the walls!


Merrick here..

Several readers have pointed out that the trailer is still on line, 
HERE!   Thanks for the heads up, folks!  That last shot is...something.  It's kinda like MIRROR'S EDGE, but Arachnidier!

Here's an embed.




Hey folks, Harry here...   This was something found via twitter and purports to be the upcoming THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN trailer that's being released this week to coincide with CAPTAIN AMERICA and COMIC CON.    Personally - I can not wait to see this trailer in 3D and on a big screen 2D.   That P.O.V. Web-Swingin' Wall-crawlin' shot is just a wowzer!  Great way to kick off COMIC CON week!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 19, 2011, 4:30 a.m. CST

    Βetter than the shitty TDKR/Avengers teasers

    by KilliK


  • July 19, 2011, 4:33 a.m. CST

    SPIDEY does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    Hmmm. Kind of bland origin type stuff for the first part of the trailer and then it morphs into the first-person Disneyland Ride stuff at the end. I need to watch it in a hydraulic chair with wind being blown at me and a bunch of kiddies screaming for the full effect.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:34 a.m. CST

    the amazing spiderman

    by paul lester

    looks good

  • July 19, 2011, 4:36 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    That's because Spiderman shooting wrapped in May 2011 whereas TDKR only began that month.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:36 a.m. CST

    blows the TDKR trailer away.

    by Deeber

    not that it had to be much to do that.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:38 a.m. CST

    I think it's a mistake...

    by godric

    to do an origin story again. The Tobey Maguire version is still pretty fresh in everyone's minds. This trailer makes me think, "Why are they telling this story again?"

  • July 19, 2011, 4:40 a.m. CST

    Good, but....


    ...I wish they would cut a friggin' trailer properly these days! My god it makes me angry. All that fading to black inbetween shots. Must be a third of this trailer is black, if anyone bothered to time it! I used to love trailers, but mostly these days the format detracts from the content for me. That said, this looks cool.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:40 a.m. CST

    @Vader TDK's teaser didnt show any shots from the film

    by KilliK

    but still it was way better than the TDKR teaser. in other words your argument failed.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:41 a.m. CST

    Teaser vs Trailer

    by vadersmyfather

    Probably also worth point out that this is the full trailer, whereas TDKR is merely a teaser

  • July 19, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    Amen, kilik

    by centilope

  • July 19, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    I agree that it blows TDKR teaser but...

    by Mariusz

    ...fuck Spider-Man! 2012 belongs to the BAT!!!

  • July 19, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    Despite it being a retread, the tone looks interesting.

    by prunkhaft

    It appears this one might go beyond paper thin characters that are used to go from action piece to action piece, and go for something a bit more satisfying. Not that I mind the summer blockbuster money shots, but I like to be invested in a story as well. Hope this will turn out as well as I hope.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    I dunno - looks good so far. Wonder how long it will be up?

    by ClayMatthews

  • July 19, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    I actually skipped through parts of it...

    by Kelly Grimes

    That's how bored I am with his origin. Total rehash, some looked scene for scene. Tasteless reboot and this didn't sway me one bit. I hope it's good and I hope you guys enjoy it. But it's not for me.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:44 a.m. CST


    by centilope

    Because a) the studiobosses gotta eat and b) the Raimi movies were for the most part shit

  • July 19, 2011, 4:44 a.m. CST

    Doesn't look very promising at all.

    by MajorFrontbum

  • July 19, 2011, 4:47 a.m. CST

    I'm so glad they improved his costume!

    by Rupee88

    fucking assholes....adding insult to injury. I won't pay a dime to see this...will just download it and fast forward through it. If you pay to see this, you are just rewarding more shit movies.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:48 a.m. CST

    This looks fucking awesome!

    by elsewhere

    The score at the beginning sounds magical. Sort of Spielbergesque and the footage doesn't come across as corny or cheesy at all. Don't really care for the FPS parkour at the end, but mark my words this will kick the shit out of Raimis version.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:48 a.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 19, 2011, 4:48 a.m. CST

    I had to kill Sony Pictures for making a mistake...

    by Dick Jones

    ...and that mistake being Spider-Man 3. It was Batman & Robin awful. And as for a reboot already? What are you fucking kidding me? Just think how much the general public is going to be confused.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:49 a.m. CST


    by centilope

    TDKR has only been shooting for 2 months or so, Amazing has wrapped up shooting a while ago. TDKR trailer is a rushed teaser, Amazing is the full trailer. The full TDKR trailer will show up in December, then we will see.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:50 a.m. CST

    I don't know

    by Jayeskimo

    Im not against the idea of updating the cast / director etc. Especially after the third one. But I agree that telling an origin story is a mistake. I think an 'Incredible Hulk' approach would have been a better option. Acknowledge what has come (so recently) beforehand but make it your own. The beauty of comics is that there are so many amazing stories to be told, and yet we're being subjected to the same ones over and over and over. I know Batman's parents got shot. I know Superman comes from a destroyed plant and Peter got bitten. Move on hollywood. Show me what else you can do . . .

  • July 19, 2011, 4:52 a.m. CST

    WEB CAM!

    by Lone Fox

    That is all.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:52 a.m. CST

    The POV looks pretty sweet doesn't it

    by centilope

    It reminds me too much of that POV parkour game and the Doom movie, though.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:53 a.m. CST

    Another bootleg teaser!! Gah!!!

    by kafka07

    Looks like he spazes out a lot when he's bitten. First person point of view shot was borderline cool, but also reminiscent of Doom.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:54 a.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    You hack.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:54 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    I',m not sure how my argument failed... TDKR DID show shots from the film - but not many because they have only been filming 2 months so have little footgae to use. That was why it was merely a TEASER. Spider-mans' filming has wrapped and so they have as much footgae to show as they like. That is why it is not a teaser but a full TRAILER.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:55 a.m. CST

    What's with...

    by smallfry

    ...the POV section? Looks like a trailer for Mirror's Edge 2.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:57 a.m. CST

    WOW! Awful.

    by Scott Sullivan

    TDKR teaser's one second of Batman looking scared is more interesting than this slightly shittier version of Raimi's origin story.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:57 a.m. CST

    Good lord **YAWN**

    by Red

    To summarize: Teen haunted by his parents disappearance overcomes this to emerge as an uber-emo-super hero. Excuse me whilst I barf. Smells like the stink of Disney.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:59 a.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 19, 2011, 4:59 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    To me, if they wanted to do another origin story it needed to be completely different, or not do it at all. This seems less a re-boot and more a re-make.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:59 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Doesn't look like Peter Parker gets bit by a spider in this one... More like a Brundlefly thing when he gets irradiated in an experiment with a spider in the booth with him. You know what... bring in Jeff Goldblum as The Fly and you've got the perfect villain for Spiderman!

  • July 19, 2011, 5 a.m. CST

    Looks good to me

    by Sanyi

    I love Raimi's Spidey-movies but after the third one I think it needed a fresh blood. I guess this one will be different in tone and everything, and the director is an interesting choice (I love (500) Days of Summer). Also, Andrew Garfield is a good actor so can't wait. Go, Spidey, Go!!

  • July 19, 2011, 5:02 a.m. CST

    Have to agree about the origin

    by cushing1967

    I don't see any real artistic reason why the have to tell it again but I guess that origins are such an integral part of superheroes personal mythologies that anyone making a film might want to stamp their own name on it. I also guess that it'll be 10 years since the first movie and a lot of the audience will have been very small kids when the first one came out and out of them some might not have seen the Raimi film? I do agree that a Title Sequence recap would have been much better - but I'm up for a new Spider-Man film. I liked the Raimi movies - well the first two but I also found some of them a bit tedious. I hated the descent into soap opera level emotion between Peter and MJ, I hated the fact that it happened in every film and seemed to show that apart from the fighting and swinging about the city that the writers had no real idea how to propel a story without resorting to the old - I love you Peter but for some reason I will have to dump you - nonsense.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:04 a.m. CST

    ...and the Raimi fanboys come out of the woodwork

    by elsewhere


  • July 19, 2011, 5:08 a.m. CST

    as someone who isn't attached to this character completely...

    by macheesmo3

    This looks like Twilight:Spiderman seriously........ It's like they took emo Peter Parker from part 3 and made a movie about him....... It looks like a movie made for 17 yr old girls

  • First movie is solid but lacks focus. Second movie is a masterpiece. Third movie goes overboard and runs everything into the ground. Raimi should have stopped at 2 and we should have got a symbiote storyline that spanned 3 and 4. In 3 Parker gets the black suit and at the end of the movie he gets rid of it. Part 4 has Venom as the main villain. In 3 they should have brought in The Lizard and had the movie focus on Peters relationship with Connors. Put Harry Osbourne in a coma and leave him there until whenever.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:11 a.m. CST

    Spider-Gay cannot be George C Scott grandson

    by Lourdes Galan

  • July 19, 2011, 5:13 a.m. CST

    Poor hater nerds...

    by Lemure_v2

    I do understand that you HAVE to come on here and bitch about every single piece of news in one way or another because of a serious need for attention, however... Comparing this to TDKR is stupid. They're totally different films about totally different characters, and we're lucky to even get a teaser for TKDR this early. And the loser who whined about mechanical web shooters? Go and read the comics, twat. This, TDKR and Avengers all look good.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:15 a.m. CST

    Poor hater nerds...

    by Lemure_v2

    I do understand that you HAVE to come on here and bitch about every single piece of news in one way or another because of a serious need for attention, however... Comparing this to TDKR is stupid. They're totally different films about totally different characters, and we're lucky to even get a teaser for TKDR this early. And the loser who whined about mechanical web shooters? Go and read the comics, twat. This, TDKR and Avengers all look good.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:16 a.m. CST

    Gwen Stacy, Scientist

    by buggerbugger in go-go boots technology. Looks wank.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:22 a.m. CST


    by Suskis

    It's time to give a hard lesson to the studios. Until people flocks to see this shitty reboots and prequels, that's what the studios are going to give us. This Spiderman reboot was the most unneeded movie of the century.

  • Scores are so cookie cutter generic these days thanks to the Hans Zimmer factory, can we please get a balls to the wall HERO theme for Spiderman? Howard Shore is the only composer who has the ability(beyond John Williams) to create an amazing memorable, hummable theme. Please Hollywood wake up. From 1975-1984 Williams created the most amazing, mind blowing themes from Jaws, Superman, Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Close Encountees. Just look at those 5 movies and their sequels and it's fucking magical. The man did more in 10 years for movie scores than ever before. It really blows my mind. The man is the Mozart of his time, he really is. I don't care if he just writes music for a visual medium he's Mozart. Hire Howard Shore Sony or John Williams himself if he ever decides to make a non speilberg film again. Id pay him just to write a main theme for me and I'd hire a different composer for the rest. For Williams, writing main heroic themes is just like taking a shit

  • July 19, 2011, 5:31 a.m. CST


    by biscuithead

    DKR trailer is better.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:32 a.m. CST

    This is to Raimi's Spiderman what Nolans Batman is to Burton's

    by melonman

    Finally we're getting the proper Spidey. It may be a little too soon, but fuck it, this looks great.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:34 a.m. CST

    isnt it amazing how so many superhero trailers 'leaked' at the same time......

    by harryknowlesnothingaboutfilm

  • July 19, 2011, 5:35 a.m. CST


    by Deeber

    true...the studios are pushing out these teasers way to early. remember when the big summer movie teasers aired during the super bowl? not even the trailers...the teasers aired for the first time in january!

  • July 19, 2011, 5:35 a.m. CST

    Oh yes!

    by ChiefRoberts

    I'm officially excited!

  • July 19, 2011, 5:44 a.m. CST

    I still think it's odd they are going back to the beginning...

    by WeylandYutani

    so soon after the original trilogy of films. But I must say, this feels a lot more like the comics I read in the 80s and early 90s. I thought Raimi's iteration was decent but ultimately far too camp. Webb seems to have taken a page from Nolan's Batman films and used a more grounded/less broad take on the story. Promising.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:46 a.m. CST

    I think it's too soon for a reboot.

    by james_cameron_raped_my_childhood

    This trailer is like one of those dreams where you're waching a movie you know really well but something's off & you can't figure it out. Left me with that same feeling. <p> The Incredible Hulk reboot was cool thanks to an energetic pace and the dumb joy of watching monsters beat the shit out of each other, but this is like they've gone in the opposite direction.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:48 a.m. CST

    I hate it

    by Hando316

    This movie looks horrible in so many ways. I don't like the tone or anything else it offers. Shall I call this a wanna be Batman Begins styled film?

  • July 19, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST

    Someone's a fan of Mirror's Edge.

    by UltimaRex

    Doesn't mean anyone's going to pay for a movie they saw ten years ago...

  • July 19, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST


    by JethroBodine

    Seen it b4. I'll skip it.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST

    @vadersmyfather Who gives a fuck if it is called

    by KilliK

    a teaser or a trailer. The both trailers/teasers are the first official video advertisements for the two upcoming movies. They both use film shots from the movie.TDKR did use shots,although very few,from the actual movie. Right now that we are talking,the both trailers are being compared by the fans,regardless if the one is teaser and the other a trailer. So i ask you,why exactly am i wrong to say that the SM trailer is better than the TDKR teaser? because of semantics? or because you are a fanatical fanboy? BTW if it was the TDK teaser that we would be talking about,we both know that we wouldnt give a fuck if it was a teaser or a trailer because it would be more awesome than the Avengers/SM trailers combined. or am i wrong?

  • July 19, 2011, 5:56 a.m. CST

    LOL @ red_sun

    by JethroBodine

    "the stink of Disney" LOLOLOL!

  • July 19, 2011, 5:56 a.m. CST

    padded with different scenery.

    by vulturess

    still the same old ride. pass.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:57 a.m. CST

    I actually like it...

    by Goldfingah

    ...but I guess this seals that it really is a from-the-ground-up reboot. I can live with that, for as long as Spider-Man actually manages to spout out his patented witty lines this time.

  • July 19, 2011, 6 a.m. CST

    reboot every trilogy every few years?

    by TaraLivesOn

    Is this Hollywood's plan because they can't risk anything new and innovative? I guess they will reboot batman again in a few years and then superman in another few years, over and over and over again, until technology reaches the point where everything can be done via pure cgi in 25 years.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:02 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    It is quite imporatnt to undersatnd the difference because Teasers are not intended to be full Trailers. *Hint - the use of the word TEASER kinda gives that away* The Spider-man Trailer is in your eyes presumably "better" than the TDKR Teaser because it uses 100% footage from the film, something TDKR is unable to as it has only begun filiming. S Later in the year/early next year, we will see a Trailer for TDKR when filimg has wrapped.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:10 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Killik, actually based on the strength of this trailer and the Batman teaser... if I knew nothing about either film... and someone said which would you rather watch tonight... I'd choose the Batman one! This Spidey one just makes the film seem a little bland.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:12 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    I agree with you. Generally, I prefer Teaser's because full Trailers have a habit of telling most of the story in 2 minutes!

  • July 19, 2011, 6:12 a.m. CST

    1st Captain American review- a rave!

    by simpledao4

  • July 19, 2011, 6:15 a.m. CST

    Yes this trailer is much better...

    by Derrida77

    ...if you like your movie to look like a fucking video game.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:19 a.m. CST

    I'm sure the POV shot will look great in 3D...

    by Chewtoy

    Especially since this film was the first one to use the new, more-easy-to-film-with 3D cameras. Still, most of the trailer is very dark, which is never a good thing when it comes to 3D. Moreover, that POV shot is literally the only thing fun about this trailer. It has a very dark and somber tone throughout. It doesn't do much to convince me that this reboot will inject more of the humorous Spidey that Raimi's films lacked.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:24 a.m. CST

    I felt nothing.

    by Smashing

    I saw a Spider-Man origin film in 2002, loved it, don't need or want a reboot, I mean I already paid to see an origin story, Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and very, very gredy.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:25 a.m. CST

    Raimi still rules dude but this looks rather terrific...

    by scenic

  • July 19, 2011, 6:28 a.m. CST

    It's a good thing they did another origin story

    by Nuck81

    I had already forgotten how Parker became Spider-Man. The cover on the back of my Spider-Man DVD doesn't spell it out so clearly...

  • July 19, 2011, 6:29 a.m. CST

    aaawwwwwwwwwwwwww shit

    by Pipple

    totally takes me back to when I was watching the original spidey trailer for the first time. I believe they had webshooters in that too but no, this time they'll keep them. Seems very focused on telling a more mature/serious story instead of the slapstick cartoon that the original film was, hopefully that's the direction they're taking.

  • is better because it was done better. TDKR was done in a very mediocre way. TDK didnt use any footage and it is 1m times better than the TDKR teaser. So no,my problem with the TDKR teaser is not WHAT it used to be made,but HOW it was made from the start. i hope i am clear enough about this.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:31 a.m. CST

    I must be insane.

    by double_ball_hanger

    I thought TDKR teaser was perfect for a movie that comes out IN A YEAR. The shot of a relentless, unfatigued Bane straight up slasher movie walking at a tired, kind of scared Batman was awesome and probably the best 1.5 seconds of a movie to show for a teast.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:32 a.m. CST

    The origin again? So Soon?

    by FlyingToupee


  • July 19, 2011, 6:34 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    I'm not sure what you mean by "done better." Seems a very vague assertion to me with no real substance to it.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:34 a.m. CST

    Why another reboot?!

    by yamayama

    I find this bizarre. Its not so long ago we had Peter coming to terms with the loss of his friend and father figure. But yet there he is again. From scratch. I dont see the point in this. It would have been better if they had just let this be a continuation of the character and have him a couple of years into being Spidey just before the advent of the secret wars. We could have had him going up again Wilson Fisk and the "six" or having Spidey avoiding Shield and their agents. Or even the Clone storyline with Ben Reilly.But yet we are getting another origin story. Cant be bothered. Wont be paying to see this.

  • An Evil Dead reboot with Diablo Fucking Cody doing a re-write. The whole world is going to fucking Hell!!!

  • July 19, 2011, 6:37 a.m. CST


    by Kyle

    This looks like crap to me. Awesome, we get to see the same movie all over again...but with a crappier looking suit, cheesy first person view web slinging and "web shooters" that make all the mega fan boys go goo goo ga ga...And everyones favorite Emma Stone...I'm so pumped for this movie. That was my Emma Stone impression. Because you know, everytime she says something in a movie she does it with a sarcastic tone.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:39 a.m. CST

    One thing i wish they had added to the POV

    by ahdvd

    In the POV shot, at the moment when he freedives off of a roof (just before using the webslinger's for the first time) i WISH they had done it as a view of a backflip, instead of just a dive off the roof, this would have given the character more of a energetic feeling like he's enjoying doing it more.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:44 a.m. CST


    by Mike

  • July 19, 2011, 6:47 a.m. CST

    Video is now dead, bastards are quick

    by ahdvd

  • July 19, 2011, 6:48 a.m. CST


    by Wacky Packages

  • July 19, 2011, 6:48 a.m. CST

    Raimi's Spiderman movies SUCK SEWER GAS.

    by Wacky Packages

  • the same can be said about TDKR teaser.right?

  • July 19, 2011, 7:07 a.m. CST

    This is Still a Teaser - it's a long teaser but still

    by cushing1967

    It shows some parts from what is presumably the first third of the movie. There are no money shots, no shots of Ifans (that I saw) and no real big money shots. I don't think it's very effective as a teaser because it's so long - TDKR teaser is much more effective for me. Obviously it's being released soon to have a presence at Comicon. The real trailer will have much more in it - and I do agree that this teaser isn't that exciting. It would have been much better if it had just been the POV shot to be honest. Just the camera spinning and zooming round a city scape, hints of the gloves as he climbs and then the shot of him swinging towards the window followed by the logo. That would have been a teaser in the very proper sense.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:17 a.m. CST

    new link here. get it while you care

    by DannerV2

  • July 19, 2011, 7:20 a.m. CST

    that POV sequence....

    by MamboMan


  • July 19, 2011, 7:26 a.m. CST

    What Culture have got it [LINK]

    by the power of Grayskull

  • July 19, 2011, 7:30 a.m. CST

    Just wish we didn't have to see the origin again...

    by knowthyself

    Did audiences really forget how he became Spiderman?

  • July 19, 2011, 7:33 a.m. CST


    by teamneedle

    it really does look a lot like the raimi film- trade oscorp for some other generic tech company- cut the wwe shit from the first one and boom, same movie-

  • July 19, 2011, 7:34 a.m. CST

    TDKR teaser is better.

    by UMAGA

    This has been filming a lot longer than TDKR and there's not much too this at all. Same origin stuff we've all seen with some Mirror's Edge at the end.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:35 a.m. CST

    TDKR TEASER > SPIDER-MAN TEASER... less is more.

    by Astronut

    The poster above who wrote "one second of TDKR teaser was better than the entire teaser for this..." ? He was right.

  • Maybe it's just the music - starting with emo and going to ridiculously melodramatic orchestral - but this just screams "faux gravity". Hopefully it's just been selectively cut to present a certain vibe for marketing, and this doesn't represent the glum, brooding, joyless tone of the actual film. Because holy cow, there was nothing fun at all in that trailer. Again, nice POV shot, but that does not a movie make. If this trailer is indicative of the full film's tone, then we really are going to look back at the Raimi films and think, "remember when there was actual color and some form of awkward humanity in a Spider-Man film?" And not just some misguided attempt to turn Spidey's world into a bleak, gray place?

  • July 19, 2011, 7:37 a.m. CST

    I have no interest in first person action..

    by UMAGA

    unless it's some chick gobbling my knob through another dude.

  • I say this as someone who grew up buying Spider-Man comics every month for nearly 10 years. He was always my favorite. But Nolan changed all that. He took the idea of a superhero film and made it classy. Class, people. It's what all these Marvel films lack. Kubrick. Scott. Nolan. These are the men who have raised the bar. This new Spider-Man is going to be "just another superhero film," IMO.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:44 a.m. CST

    Another link

    by Kai_Mah'gra

    ....get it before it's gone:- Interestingly enough the 1970's TV show also had that same POV gimmick to introduce Spiderman and it looked just as goofy back them. Of course, they didn't have the benefit of CG special effects, so they can be forgiven for the poor decision making. What's the excuse of the guys who came up with this? Just another, in a long line of already poor decisions starting with that awful suit re-design.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:47 a.m. CST

    And I thought the people on here knew about comics...

    by Lemure_v2

    The reason why they keep rebooting is because the origin is the most interesting part of any superhero, it defines them. Once Batman's got over the death of his parents, it comes down to saving Gotham over and over. Once Spider-man gets over the death of his uncle it comes down to saving New York (and Mary Jane) over and over. etc etc etc etc... Then after a while the writers run out of ideas and bring in aliens or fuck knows what. And then they go back to the start again, ad infinitum.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:50 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    the same can be said about TDKR teaser.right?

  • July 19, 2011, 7:52 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    There isn't a great deal to TDKR teaser because (as I and otehrs have already pointed out) it has only been filing for 2 months, whereas S-M wrapped before TDKR even began. This obvious fact seems to continually allude you, strangely.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:54 a.m. CST

    They know it's going to leak..why not just release the fuckin thing?

    by knowthyself


  • July 19, 2011, 7:59 a.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    Webb is riffing on Nolan, so how can you say it'll be "just another superhero film"? Sure you're not getting The Avengers teaser mixed up with Spider-Man?

  • July 19, 2011, 8:01 a.m. CST

    Ndally, I agree Howard Shore is the best out there

    by L. Ron Bumquist

    Sad he wasn't hired for the Superman reboot.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:07 a.m. CST



    Shit yeah. Shore would have given Supes a robust new theme with a little twist of Goldsmith-esque mystery every now and then. Who's doing Snyder's movie? Tyler Bates? He did all right with WATCHMEN, but I don't know if he has the right kind of approach. Now, I don't want someone to do their best John Williams impression, either, but we don't need another Zimmer impression, either. BAAAAHHHHM!!! BAAAAAAHHHM!

  • July 19, 2011, 8:10 a.m. CST

    Nice, Ari

    by BlackBauer0320

    does anyone have an actual working link still for those of us late to the party?

  • July 19, 2011, 8:12 a.m. CST


    by Astronut

    Webb riffing on Nolan = futile attempt This is gonna be "grade C" level Twilight Spider-Man. The studio all but spelled that out word for word when it announced it was doing this reboot. I don't know about you, but I don't like Twilight. And I don't like the concept of Twilight Spider-Man. Too bad we can't clone Nolan. He's one of the select few who knows how to do this..... take a super hero from the comics and make him fantastic on screen. And he does it with CLASS.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:15 a.m. CST

    weird about the origin thing.

    by alice133

    i hope uncle ben keeps coming back and getting killed off by different famous cameos in every sequel movie. one of stan lees cameos can be as one of uncle bens killers. and aunt may gets to kill and dismember uncle ben and feed him to peter disguised as meat loaf. because cannon is 4 loserz.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:15 a.m. CST

    Don't know where you're getting Twilight from

    by elsewhere

    It has a dark, gritty look and nothing about the footage or dialogue comes across as corny. The beginning score is reminiscent of Spielberg and the latter score sounds a lot like The Dark Knight. Where exactly is this Twilight you're seeing?

  • July 19, 2011, 8:16 a.m. CST

    theory about Bane's mask....


    if there is no 'venom' in Nolan's vision, what's Bane's 'power' going to be besides trained strength and conviction? what's with the mask? is it just to guard his teeth in a fight? not likely. it looks like a gas mask or rebreather...and the fear gas has shown up in many forms throughout both movies so far. i have a theory that bane is actually ADDICTED to it. he's peaked and now uses it for the adrenaline rush/strength that fear brings, but he has mastered the visual fear it creates too. it no longer has the fear effect on him, but gets him really amped regardless. he'd probably used it via Ra's for years during training to overcome his fears and weaknesses. this would explain why he seems fearless and unstoppable too.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:27 a.m. CST

    Fuck Sam Raimi

    by Nerd Rage

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage


  • July 19, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST

    Fuck Sam Raimi

    by elsewhere

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST

    Fuck Sam Raimi

    by elsewhere

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST


    by Astronut

    Twilight angst... hipster douche bag drama, incessant brooding, unnecessarily poetic, depressing, etc etc Make no mistake about it: once the studio saw Twilight raking in mega-cash, that's when they decided to go this route for a reboot. Look at the dude. He has the same exact douche-y look as "Edward." The women are gonna LOVE this shit. It's the trend.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:31 a.m. CST

    Fuck Sam Raimi

    by elsewhere

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:31 a.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage


  • July 19, 2011, 8:34 a.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    Sorry, bud. You're wrong.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:35 a.m. CST

    One more for good luck. Thanks nerd rage.

    by elsewhere

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:36 a.m. CST

    Sorry but that trailer was nothing like Twilight.

    by Nerd Rage

    Nothing like it. Nice try though.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:47 a.m. CST

    That was surprisingly boring

    by SifoDyasJr

    I love Spidey more than anything else in this world, but my Spider-sense has been screaming warning almost since the beginning on this. This trailer did not alleviate my fears. On the positive side, a Green Lantern level flop could result in Marvel Studios and Disney regaining the full rights to the character to do it the right way.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:48 a.m. CST

    another link

    by robzilla

  • And it will be filled with angst and forbidden love. Fuck The Amazing Spalding-Man.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Get ready for........ The Amazing Spalding-Man!

    by Astronut

    Only thing I see they got right is the mechanical webshooters. The rest is so "meh."

  • July 19, 2011, 8:51 a.m. CST

    Hey Morons saying the Spidey teaser was better than TDKRn teaser

    by Sequitur

    1. They have been filming Spidey longer than TDKR has been filming, so there is more complete footage to show 2. Nolan is famous for his secrecy regarding his films, so he won't give that much away in the first teaser. 3. You are all morons. End. Thread.


  • July 19, 2011, 8:58 a.m. CST

    anyone who thinks the TDKR teaser is better than ASM teaser

    by spider_neil

    is IN. SANE. you don't see anything in the TDKR teaser and gordon is MUMBLING! talk about emperor's new clothes with regards to nolan.

  • July 19, 2011, 9 a.m. CST

    By the way, elsewhere and others...

    by Astronut

    F--- Raimi and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest.

  • July 19, 2011, 9 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    At last, a person that speak sense.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:01 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    Still muppets saying there isn't much footage in the TDKR teaser!!

  • July 19, 2011, 9:02 a.m. CST

    the hell - - ? (this website is so awful sometimes)

    by Astronut

    I typed other stuff and it never posted... Anyway... I agree with the F--- Raimi and his ugly-mary-jane/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated cheese-fest statement. All of that. But. I still do not think this film will be the one to get it right. I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.

  • Another stupid reboot with a fugly, flat cast. Another origin story (yawn!). Garfield looks like a tool (and, not in a funny Peter Parker way; in an annoying way). His parents have secrets; and the radioactive spider is connected?!! Stretch! Teaser is so boring, it has to turn into a video game halfway through to keep anyone interested. Mechanical web-slingers look dumb as hell and pose so many logistical plot holes that Webb painted himself in a corner trying to be 'realistic' ('cause everyone knows, Spiderman comics are known for their gripping realism). Suck it, Sony! Your reboot will need to be rebooted after this one flatlines @ the BO. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

  • .. is the type of thing that makes me embarassed to admit I ever liked comics. It makes them more worthless as ongoing fictions than soap operas. It's also the reason I haven't read a "regular issue" of any comic in more than ten years, unless it was loaned to me by a friend. I only read trade paperbacks where I can check before-hand that it doesn't involve Spider-clones and such.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:13 a.m. CST

    and, another thing: fuck this douche-y, mopey, boring, spider-tween garbage.

    by HelveticaConspiracy

    my only hope for this movie is that someone takes garfield, in his basketball pajamas, rolls him into a ball and bounces him all over the city. then, he cries about it for 20 minutes while he mope-ily narrates his inner turmoil. oh, man, this movie looks so boring!

  • July 19, 2011, 9:16 a.m. CST

    you guys LOVE to complain about maguire's "emo" moment in SM3...

    by HelveticaConspiracy

    congrats! now you have an ENTIRE movie with EMO PARKER: AMAZING SPIDER-DOUCHE!

  • July 19, 2011, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Inception = Emperor's New Clothes

    by Autodidact

    I guess it's time to screen it again to see if it holds up better on second viewing. But honestly I think INCEPTION was the most overrated movie of 2010 by far. I just can't accept a movie about dreams where the dreams are so un-dream-like. And I think they should have called it EXPOSITION.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:20 a.m. CST

    my final thoughts:

    by HelveticaConspiracy

  • July 19, 2011, 9:22 a.m. CST

    my final thoughts:

    by HelveticaConspiracy

    Listen to the audience reaction to the TDKR & Avengers teasers: Explosive, palpable excitement. Listen to the audience reaction to Amazing Spider-Tween: Crickets. End of story.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:22 a.m. CST

    Nice Interview with Webb

    by eric haislar

    Sounds like he has a good grasp on the material.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:23 a.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    spoken like a true mouthbreathing knucklehead. Thanks for the laugh. Let me guess, Transformers and Green Lantern are your two favorite movies of all time.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:25 a.m. CST

    let spidey join avengers

    by Jubba

    just have him swing through a scene in avengers 1 or 2, help out with someone falling and say he's off to deal with an octopus man or something and leave it at that. tie it all in together, please!!!

  • July 19, 2011, 9:26 a.m. CST


    by Astronut

  • July 19, 2011, 9:27 a.m. CST

    How 'bout '' THE AMAZING SPALDING-MAN '' ?

    by Astronut

    There are several product placement moments in the film depicting basketballs.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:27 a.m. CST

    youtube spidey-video

    by Jubba not the trailer, though.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Another link to the least for now.

    by MRJONZ72

  • July 19, 2011, 9:29 a.m. CST

    RE: Final thoughts

    by Nerd Rage

    We don't know f there was a fanboy audience for ASM. We'll see how they react at comic-con. I bet it won't be silent.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:33 a.m. CST

    butthurt Raimi fanboys

    by elsewhere

    your tears are delicious! mmmm

  • - - now they're going overboard in my opinion. Crossovers in every film!! Now Parker's parents are freaking SHIELD AGENTS?! WHA - ? We don't need that level of unification in these films. Isn't it challenging enough for them to even make a great film in the first place without having to over-engineer everything? Put it this way: Boba Fett was a cool character. Why? Because he had mystique and was rarely seen. Boba Fett in his own film: Zzzzzzz They are taking this cross-over shit too far. It's like everyone and everything is related — too coincidental. It's getting predictable and boring.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:34 a.m. CST

    There's a difference between emo and genuine poignancy

    by Nerd Rage

    When something moves the audience it is genuine poignancy when the audience laughs at the title character for being over-emotional (Maguire's crying in SM3) it's EMO.

  • Answer this question: Do you like to ride roller coasters? You do? Okay! Would you want to ride a roller coaster to and from work every single day for the rest of your life? Of course not. Too much of anything — even a cool thing — does not make it a good thing.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    Had to be long

    by rahtard

    BC its a reboot. They had to come out and restore or even build faith due to the fact this movie has been getting blasted. And it succeeded. Compare this to the first Batman Begins teaser, it actually reveals as much. Nolan just does whatever he wants due to the fact that nerds have given him a blank check. Pay no mind to the major plot hole which is the end of the Dar Knight. Just excited to see Bale get that annoying voice beaten out of him and Aronofsky get to make a legit Year One movie.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:51 a.m. CST

    roller coaster to work?

    by Jubba

    yes please.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:52 a.m. CST

    It's gone! For the love of God, it's gone! Why oh why do I sleep?

    by The Reluctant Austinite

    I should be logged on to AICN 24/7, eyeballs bleeding. I take a short siesta and I miss the Spider-man trailer! What is wrong with me?

  • July 19, 2011, 9:53 a.m. CST

    mopey >>> dopey

    by Nerd Rage

    Maguire was a dopey zombie and a wooden plank. I prefer Peter Parker have more introspection if it means there's an actual spark to his personality.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:55 a.m. CST

    rahtard you have a perfect screen name

    by Astronut

    You're in denial. Nolan, with or without rabid fan support, * still * makes a superior product not to mention the best superhero films ever made.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Maguire was a dopey zombie and a wooden plank.

    by Astronut


  • July 19, 2011, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Not impressed. The Avengers teaser was way better

    by cookepuss

    Up to a point, the trailer has a dark and gritty Nolanverse look to it. Then they move to the POV sequence and it all falls apart. They go out of their way not to show you the costume. Then, when they give you glimpse of it in the reflection, it's like.... Holy shit! This thing looks fucktarded. I don't care that it's a reboot. I don't care that Emma Stone is horribly miscast, when she should've been MJ. I don't even care that they're going the Ultimate route by having a younger, more vibrant Aunt May. What I DO care about is when creators fuck with perfection and dick over the iconic costumes. Just look at how well that went over with a certain rubber nippled movie. Spider-Man's costume in the last 3 movies was spot on. Okay. They want to tweak it? Fine. Change the hexagonal texturing and tweak the lenses. Just enough to make it look different, but still the same. Don't go out of your way to Poochyize it and make it "extreme" in a way that almost makes it look like a different character. Flames on Optimus. You guys know what I'm talking about. Even the crazy old Japanese Spider-Man's costume looked better - weirdness and all. Having seen this teaser and the Avengers one multiple times, I can tell you which one I'm more excited to see. Avengers. That teaser still has me squirming with nerd glee. Spider-Man has me itching to use it as an excuse for a bathroom break. I don't want to damn a movie I haven't seen. However, was there any real need to reboot this series and so soon? I'm not saying that the original trilogy was perfect, but I'll be damned if anybody told me that they weren't genre classics. What I get out of here is the following: 1. Sorny is disappointed by the lumpy 3rd movie and decided to toss out the baby with the bath water. 2. Some of the execs saw TDK and said, "Hey! We can do that to a character who's totally the opposite!" 3. Marvel has been trying to de-age Peter for years. For many years, and even now to an extent, USM's teen angst has been much more interesting. 4. Marvel has ZERO interest in MJ these days. Between having her make a pact with the devil to wipe their marriage from existence and practically writing her out of the book, MJ is persona non grata in the Spiderverse. 5. Somebody still thinks that FPS-like POV shots are still cool. Pssst. They aren't. It was a novelty in the movie Doom and nearly got some people sick even then. Even if this is just for one scene, it's silly. (I'm not even talking about the unfinished CG either.) 6. Somebody at Columbia doesn't know how to cut a trailer. That thing is hella boring. Like the lazy TDK teaser decided to make out with sleepy first Rise of the Planet of the Apes trailer. No real suspense or drama in this teaser/trailer thing. 7. Are we REALLY so interested in Peter's dead super spy parents that we need to see them in flashback? They're not integral to the comic. Why should we care here?

  • July 19, 2011, 10:07 a.m. CST

    I hope there's less crying in this reboot.

    by Astronut

    I swear to god every 10 minutes someone was crying in that last train wreck.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Do a search on youtube you'll still find it

    by matthooper8

    It looks really bad in both content and resolution. Epic fail, well at least the trailer.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:10 a.m. CST


    by rahtard

    Really? Then explain why Batman would take the fall for Dent, and why would Gordon assist in framing him for the murders that Dent commited when it would have been easier to pin it on the Joker, oh and BTW the weapon Dent used was the Joker's and could have been linked to other murders that have been linked to the Joker. Oh and what abut the cops who were watching Batman take down the bad guys while Gordon was on the phone with "Harvey" and pleading for his family? No denial, just Nolan and his bloated lapses in logic, and you eat it up.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:12 a.m. CST

    emma stone is horribly miscast

    by Nerd Rage

    lmao, she looks exactly like Gwen Stacy in the promotional pics.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:12 a.m. CST

    up here...

    by bigmanseattle

  • There's your reasons for the reboot.

  • Do you remember how many fans were excited when they thought she was gonna play MJ and how many more were disappointed/pissed when they found out that she was going to be Gwen? Having said that, Stone would work as the hipper, more punk USM version of Gwen. She's totally wrong for the 616 version and probably deserves to be thrown off a bridge, but the Ultimate version... I can see that. Just wish she would've been MJ. She's worlds better than Dunst, who actually wasn't so bad at certain points.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:23 a.m. CST


    by Astronut

    Ya know what? You make sense with those points, I will give you that. No film is perfect. But no one nailed it better than Nolan with TDK. I would take TDK with its plot holes/discrepancies over any other superhero film other than mayyybe Superman: The Movie. I like films which exude class. And tension and twists and turns and excitement. Sans the abuse of corn-ball shit. If that makes me a '' Nolan nut sack rider '' then I guess I am.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:31 a.m. CST

    @nerd rage: reasons for reboot

    by cookepuss

    Well THAT is a resounding "no duh." I don't disagree with your logic, but I still don't see that as enough reason for a reboot. SM3 sucked? Ignore it and never mention it again. Raimi had stupid ideas for SM4? Replace him. Actors got too old/expensive? Replace them too. Now, while that sounds like what's being done here, it's not. We're being treated to his origin for the 2nd time in 10 years. They could've just moved on with a SM4 that acknowledged the first two movies, pretended that the 3rd didn't exist, and moved into an exciting new direction with a new cast. That's EXACTLY what X-Men First Class did and to great effect. They acknowledged the Singer movies, largely ignored the 3rd, and prebooted it into a new direction. THAT is what ASM should be doing. Don't ignore the Raimi version of his origin. Acknowledge it. Go back to his highschool years. Dwell there for a little bit longer than Raimi did. Tease at some of the things that Raimi did that you may want to do better in future movies. Move on from there. Preboot it XFC style. Don't do this, whatever this is.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Kirsten Dunst was horribly miscast, so no surprise

    by sunwukong86

  • July 19, 2011, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Spider-Man 2 was the best Raimi, and..

    by Autodidact

    I loved it the first time around in theatres in 2004. Then I rented it in 2007 and found it insanely depressing. Seriously that movie is a fucking downer!

  • July 19, 2011, 10:42 a.m. CST


    by Sparhawk38

    That's it. Nope.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:47 a.m. CST


    by grendel69

    Whats all this crap with Parkers parents... I dont need to know the conspiracy that killed them. How they died wasnt important, Parker was raised by his Aunt and Uncle is all I needed to know..... and the original retold... why? Just go w/ Parker already powered... Not interested at all.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:49 a.m. CST

    just pray it's a success....

    by cloneomat

    otherwise we'll have to see the origin atory AGAIN in another reboot

  • July 19, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST

    where I come from...

    by cloneomat

    a's snd s's sre interchsgeable

  • July 19, 2011, 10:52 a.m. CST

    This new Spider-Man ride looks great!

    by rev_skarekroe

    Wait, it's from a movie?

  • July 19, 2011, 10:55 a.m. CST

    It looks okay, but a bit 'dark' for Spider-Man.

    by Orbots Commander

    The character isn't Batman, where it needs a dark tone. Spidey is more light-hearted. I also got a very Nolan/Fincher type feel from this. Maybe that's what Webb was going for? In all I'm mixed on this reboot. The trailer doesn't look awful, but aside from the POV shot, there's not much there to get too excited about. The transformation and origin also seemed to be re-hashing, almost shot for shot, Raimi's take on the origin story. That stuff is dull. I will give the studio this much: I was worried that this would be very much in the Twilight vein, and I didn't get that vibe from this trailer, at all.

  • July 19, 2011, 10:59 a.m. CST

    Not a Hater Troll, but agree with 'catchtheman' it's totally GENERIC

    by Jeff Myers

    More jazzed for Dark Knight 3, Cap, etc

  • July 19, 2011, 11:01 a.m. CST

    Astronut, they've always been SHIELD agents.

    by davidwebb

    It's only in the Ultimate continuity that they were biologists etc. As far as I remember, they were killed by the Red Skull. So the crossovers there aren't being 'forced' by the scriptwriters. I'm curious, though that FPS sequence has put me right off. Is that stuff still considered cool? Is it because of a lack of finished action/Spidey footage? Is it for the 3D viewings? I'll echo what most of you seem to be saying here, that the hard reboot approach is unnecessary. Recast and find a new production team, sure. But it would have been easy to keep the existing continuity in place while still making a film that feels fresh.

  • WHAT HE GOT RIGHT..... - More functional bat-costume - A more epic looking visual presentation - Joker & Gordon = EPIC WIN Better than anything in the Burton movies. - Tumbler. Not the batmobile we know, but hot damn is it good. - Giving Batman a fighting style all his own - Giving the bat-gadgets a context and having their tech make sense. - Bale as a charming billionaire playboy Batman - Eckhart as Dent/Two-Face WHAT HE GOT WRONG..... - More bad guys does NOT equal a better movie. Joker was a bazillion kinds of awesome. Was there any reason to add in a second bad guy? Having in Dent was great. Having in Two-Face was excessive. It took away from Joker's story and only managed to pad the movie. Two-Face deserved his own turn as major villain. He shouldn't have had to play second fiddle to a bigger baddie yet again, as Jones did with Carey back in the day. Don't get me wrong. I know WHAT they were doing with dent, but I thought that he deserved more than just being second to Joker. - Bale was believable as a comic book billionaire, but not a real world one. Keaton looked more the part there. His Wayne was shrimpy, but believable. He wasn't a playboy, but erred more on the eccentric - which imo suits any guy who's willing to dress up as a bat much better. - Nolan let Bale growl his way to stupidity. They should've reined that it, yet they didn't. Even without post processing to the voice, its over the top. - Bale's Batman comes off as a thug instead of master detective. Compare that to Keaton's Batman. He's got this inner rage/crazy that served him well in movies like Beetlejuice or Pacific Heights, but he's also got this "I'm smarter than you" thing going with him that you can see in his Batcave scenes. - Nolan's vision was epic, but his portrayal of Gotham was a disappointment. Gotham is supposed to be more than a crime filled version of Metropolis. It's supposed to have this almost stylized gothic look to the architecture. It's supposed to be equal parts beautiful and hauntingly scary. Burton nailed his, while Nolan opted for the easier way out. - As amazing a he was, Joker got screwed. His story was LITERALLY left hanging. Had I not know better, I might've assumed that Ledger died mid-production and that Eckhart's Two-Face side story bit was brought on to cover it up. They ran out of steam on the Joker story. Batman can't kill him because that's not what he does. They had no easy ending for the Joker bit. They could've had him crawl away to lick his wounds and create chaos another day, allowing Batman to choose Gotham first and deal with Joker another day. Maybe that would've given Joker some satisfaction - watching Batman's life in chaos and watching his city burn. Arresting him seems like an easy way out, which is apparently what they did. - I've said it before, but Morgan Freeman needs to choose different roles. Wise old black man is getting pretty tired. - Caine is a good confident to Bale's Wayne, but he's not really Alfred. He's still Michael Caine here. Maybe it's the way he was written. Maybe it was the way he was acted. I don't buy him as Alfred. IMO, Alfred has yet to make an appearance. TDK is an awesome movie. Don't get me wrong. However, if I had the chance to watch Spider-Man 2 or TDK a hundred times, I'd choose Spidey every time. I'd get tired of TDK after the first couple of plays. Alfred Molina's tubby Doc Ock may not have the dark allure of Ledger's Joker, but he's every bit as well acted and maybe even better written. Ledger only won the Oscar because he died. He wouldn't have won had he not. Fucked up to say, but probably true. TDK isn't the end all, be all comic movie. It's good, but it's flawed. It stands with the best in the genre, but I'm not totally convinced that it is THE best. That's open for debate and subject to opinion - or even mood.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:05 a.m. CST

    I'm really worried about a "dark/edgy" Spider-Man

    by sunwukong86

    Spider-Man has never been Batman. This worries me.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:11 a.m. CST


    by CooGuy

    was due to the license set to expire for Sony. They pulled the trigger to restart the franchise so they could keep the cashcow that much longer. Marvel wanted it back..

  • July 19, 2011, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Marvel wanted it back..

    by cookepuss

    .. because they would've done a better job. Not to mention that Spidey would've become a part of their shared movie universe.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    We get that Parker's life is full of angst but c'mon BRING THE FUNNY!

    by skycrapper

    Parker/Spider-Man is a funny guy. Why so serious? Costume issues aside that POV was pretty cool in my opinion.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:21 a.m. CST

    I'm glad we're getting the origin story again...

    by BiggusDickus

    ...because, you know, I was really fuzzy about how the kid got his spider powers. What was his name again? Paul, wasn't it?

  • July 19, 2011, 11:22 a.m. CST


    by MattHooper

    Didn't like it.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Your July Leaked Superhero Trailers, ranked

    by Greggers

    3. AMAZING SPIDER-MAN. The Good: * Probably no scene where Peter learns to shoot his webs by making a variety of hand gestures and catchphrases, eventually settling on the rockin' Heavy Metal configuration. Oh the hilarity! * Sally Field seemed genuinely concerned. The Bad: * Dark! Damned Bootleg! * I can't get over this weird feeling that I've essentially seen everything I'm seeing less than 10 years ago. Strange. * I can't get it out of my mind that Andrew Garfield is a grown man playing a high school student. I mean, I can't be the only person to have seen RED RIDING on Netflix, right? And that's from a few years ago! 2. THE DARK KNIGHT RISES The Good: * When the title comes up? That's pretty cool. * I still marvel at how Gary Oldman's English voice is so radically different than his American voice. It's like he's different guys! * Feels like a big deal. This is going to be a big deal. The Bad: * Dark! Damned Nolan! * Bane's mask looks like he's got a mini Alien facehugger on his mouth. * I really need a little bit more. Like Anne Hathaway more. And the Best July Leaked Superhero Trailer: 3. AVENGERS! The Good: * Definitely an "Avengers, FUCK YEAH!" vibe going on. That's always fun. * It was cut to seem exciting, like all kinds of crazy shit is going on, and Robert Downey Jr. will be there to make fun of it while it's happening. The Bad: * Dark! Damned bootleg! Can we *please* upgrade camera phone technology for the sake of the bootleg movie trailer? Come on? How much more of a killer app do you want? * The way Samuel Jackson hits the T hard when says the word "it." Cap: "To get me back into to the world?" Jackson: "No, to save iT."

  • July 19, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Generic superhero teaser #2345

    by alienindisguise

    Seems pretty pointless. Just another cash grab before the comic book film implodes on itself which will happen within a year.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:27 a.m. CST

    As I Suspected....

    by THX1968

    "Darker and grittier" - Hollywood parlance for "All of the angst and none of the fun". And the suit still looks terrible. This film appears to be Spider-man in name only. I still hold my prediction that this will be the George Lazenby of Spider-man flicks, and the last one we see from Sony.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:27 a.m. CST


    by Grinning White Skull

    Everybody is so PRETTY! Hey, Peter has mutant radioactive blood. Maybe he can sparkle in the sunlight! Weeeeeeeee! POV web-slinging! So you don't have to show the costume!

  • July 19, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Been wanting more POV

    by Autodidact

    We haven't had a good POV sequence in a real movie since the DOOM movie. Just a matter of time until movies are done entirely in POV as it's probably the best way to really make use of 3D. Imagine a movie that was in real-time using a single POV shot in 3D. That in itself will become its own "thing".

  • July 19, 2011, 11:40 a.m. CST

    loose the CGI POV, looks like a bad video game

    by j2talk

  • July 19, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    I heard at the end before the credits, we are getting a cameo

    by sweeneydave


  • July 19, 2011, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Why was this even necessary?

    by Mephisto the Great

    Three things of which I am sick and tired: 1. Quick cuts, with fades to black, in trailers. 2. Reboots. 3. The idea that darker = better Thank you "Batman Begins" for making the movie industry another step down into banality. Chris Nolan probably never realized the crap that would try to mimic his formula.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    CONSPIRACY! Death of Peter's parents not what it seems!

    by Crestfallen

    The trailer alludes to a "secret" or conspiracy about how Peter's folks died. 1) The goodbye scene with dad: "You're going to stay with your aunt and uncle for a while... there's something your mom and I have to do." 2) the discovery of dad's work briefcase; 3) the investigative (?) visit to the skyscraper; 4) the last line of the trailer: "We all have secrets, the ones we keep ... and the ones kept from us." tltr: Peter is looking into his parents death which involves the science lab/skyscraper - where Gwen works and Peter gets spider - bitten - and the scientist guy who becomes the main villain.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:52 a.m. CST


    by matt

    This series is barley a decade old. Why the fuck are they starting over already? And with a sub par villain?

  • July 19, 2011, 11:54 a.m. CST

    good POV sequence

    by RaveX

    district fucking 9. a.k.a. "look fuckers, this is what your halo movie could have been like, wink-wink"

  • July 19, 2011, 11:59 a.m. CST

    So Raimi's spiderman was his clone

    by KilliK

    or it was all a deam? HA.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Looks hopeless!

    by genrefanboy

    Sony better prepare for a big loss here it looks like cr@p & that POV shot looks so fake & forced. Straight to DVD is the best option here otherwise it will struggle to make $100M worldwide comic book movies are so yesterday too many have been made most are bland & boring. RIP Spiderman.........

  • July 19, 2011, noon CST

    Fking Yawn!!!

    by Mars

    I will not be seeing this sorry excuse for a movie, what an insult to spiderman fans everywhere if they release this half-assed piece of shit it will only appeal to the idiot hypers out there, notice how they try to cover up the suit and never show you the costume, because even the director knows they made a mistake in designing the suit, and gwen as a scientist!?!?! isn't she supposed to be a ditzy blond? crap crap crap, I WILL NOT BE WATCHING THIS, wont give the studio my money!

  • July 19, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST

    When it was organic web shooters everyone complained.

    by ganymede3010

    Now that they've went with the mechanical web-shooters I still see the fanboi's complaining? Make up your minds sheez.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man is not Emo

    by Sorbo1980

    Shit, now I'm worried. Spider-man was never a "dark" character other than his turn in the Venom suit. With that said, even if it is dark, if it's done right, I'll praise it.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Of course reboots are necessary

    by Lone Fox

    Unless you're happy with an approaching 40 yr old Toby Maguire in the next flick. ALL franchises should be trilogies, ala Nolan, then switch creative teams. Give us a fresh take on the characters. It's not fucking rocket science. This trailer looks fucking awesome.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:07 p.m. CST

    I think we already know how next year's superhero movies will rank out...

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    1. The Dark Knight Rises 2. The Avengers 3. The Amazing Spider-Man I could tell all that even before watching the teaser trailers!

  • July 19, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Maybe I'm an asshole, but I like what I see and hear.

    by ColonelFatheart

    No, there's no maybe about that. I take it back. I AM an asshole. Frankly, I don't give a shit. Good riddance, Raimi. Let's see what you got, Webb.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Teaser Trailer versus Regular Trailer... Who gives a shit???

    by Johnno

    The point is that if I were to play TDKR, AVENG, & SPIDEY trailer back to back in front of a normal audience of movie goers, they are not going to discriminate what trailer is what and what it's fair to judge by. They're going to be more excited by whichever trailer was mroe exciting! And the Avengers and Spider-Man trailer were more exciting than Dark Knight Rises by virtue of the fact that they had more footage to show off. They were also edited and put together better than the Dark Knight Rises with it's cliched marketing taglines which it would've been so much better without and thus it doesn't even rise up to the excitment of the Dark Knight or Inception teasers, FACT! I'm sure inevitably an amazing Dark Knight Rises trailer will come along. So whatever! Right now Avengers and Spider-Man win! But more importantly the real winner here is ME! Because I'll be there Day-1 to enjoy all this awesomeness next year! Hell I wasn't feeling Spider-Man due to the shitty costume and the rethreading of the origin story. But this trailer showed me that the origin story is being a bit more involved and actually doing stuff differently. It has Gwen Stacy! And it makes me want to start a petition to get EA games to make me a Spider-Man game that plays like Mirror's Edge! So that trailer made this skeptic excited, and thus it did an excellent job! I'm prepared to be Amazed!

  • There's not one memorable or inventive action scene in any of the Batman movies. Nolan is great at setting up the impending action scenes but he often fails at delivering the big jaw dropping spectacle. Look at Inception, the most bland, boring, and un-imaginative dreamworld ever shot on film. The only thing he's adept at is capturing the serious tone of the moment, beyond that he's a below average action filmmaker.

  • Just one humorous line from Parker or Spidey to balance out all the grimdark. I thought he was going to say something a little tongue in cheek after the "we all have secrets" line, but hopefully Webb keeps his comedic side intact.

  • I'm no great fan of the Raimi films (except Spider-Man 2), but after that series set up characters and story arcs that never reached a satisfying conclusion, I have no plans to invest in a rebooted series which also looks as if it will have a continuuing arc. If one Spider-Man series wasn't allowed to reach a proper conclusion, I see no reason why another rebooted series will be guaranteed to reach a conclusion either.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Universal Studios' Spider-Man simulation ride...

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    is the best Spider-Man 'movie' to date. That's the tone I want from a Spidey movie, not soap opera theatrics or an inappropriately dark, Batman-aping style.

  • It just boggles the mind how in one breath so many of you can laud Nolan's bleak and 'emo' Batman films (for the record, I don't believe that they are emo, I'm just applying the standards so many geeks do) and then cry 'TWILIGHT'! when SPIDER-MAN goes the darker route.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    What annoys me most about Spidey most...

    by sapno_krei that there may eventually be yet another reboot if Sony relinquishes the rights or comes to a deal to allow Spider-Man to interact with Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe characters. The only way to get around having to reboot Spidey again would be for the makers of this series to future-proof it -- to intentionally make it so that it doesn't conflict with anything established in the MCU. Unlikely? Yes. But a good move if Sony's execs have any brains at all.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Back to formula?

    by Atticus Finch

    No need for another origin story for Chrissakes.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Ugh, first the Broadway musical, now Emo Spidey?!? WTF

    by Stalkeye

    Tis may be the nail in the Webslinger's coffin, I fear. )0:'

  • July 19, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Bonesaw is ready!

    by Atticus Finch

    As long as they are doing the origin, who is playing Bonesaw McGraw?

  • July 19, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Harry, this movie looks like shit. You've sold us out, man.

    by bat725

  • July 19, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Andrew Garfield meet George Lazenby

    by THX1968

    The only consolation I get from watching this terrible preview (Gwen Stacy - Scientist?!?!), is that it will be released and then quickly forgotten. The rights to the Spider-Man character will then belong solely to Marvel Studios. Will they give the reins back to Raimi? That would be very interesting, but unlikely. The best thing they could do is just continue the story established by Raimi. Recasting is just fine, rebooting is not. So unnecessary to reboot simply because of a trend. Hollywood is not a town of thinkers or leaders. It is a town of strategists and followers. They hired a no-name director that cost nothing and would do as he was told. That is why what you are looking at in this preview doesn't feel like Spider-Man, because it isn't. Applying a "dark and gritty" formula to Spider-Man will not work because that is not what the character is. Oil and water.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Hopefully Peter will keep his mask on in this version!

    by Atticus Finch

    It was fucking annoying that Parker was ripping his mask off every two seconds. Half of NY knew who he was!

  • July 19, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    WOW this looks great

    by Everette Hartsoe

    love it

  • July 19, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    WOW this looks great

    by Everette Hartsoe

    love it

  • July 19, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    WOW this looks great

    by Everette Hartsoe

    love it

  • What kind of asshole WOULDN'T want that???

  • July 19, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST

    It looks very different from the Raimi films

    by dahveed1972

    Which is absolutely crucial. I enjoyed parts of 1 and most of 2, but would actually be interested in seeing a spider man that exists in a more realistic universe. Not saying theyre gonna pull it off, but Im def intrigued. How they explain the webshooters is important, to me at least. Theyll have to make Peter a genius on par with Stark/Richards et al, and i would guess that the basic technology will have predated the spider bite, with peter just putting the finishing touches on it. Maybe theres a better way to explain it, guess well find out soon enuf. Considering how far away the premiere date is, the trailer is just fine. Im actually gonna try to go spoiler free from this point onward. fingers crossed.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Just saw it here:

    by BenBraddock

  • July 19, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST


    by BenBraddock

  • July 19, 2011, 12:25 p.m. CST

    He IS a genius on/just below the Stark Richards level

    by Katet19

  • July 19, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    that POV-CGI looks preety shitty to me...

    by unami

  • July 19, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST

    Sorry, but

    by TruantOranje

    This reboot looks like it's gonna blow major ass. TDKR trailer is a hundred times this trailer. A thousand. This Spider-man looks like my alcoholic brother had a hand in its creation. Awful.

  • And they were far from being unimprovable somehow. That kind of blind reverence is what gave us Superman Returns. If the movie is different from Raimi's version, and is good, thats all that matters. And if you're a true fan of the comic books, you're not gonna have a problem with a new take on the character. Certain Nolan's Batman, and the world he created for him, is a pretty radical departure from both the source material and the Burton films.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    slone13, re: roller coaster to work

    by Astronut

    Hey genius, the point being that after a while it gets predictable and the thrill goes away. Dip shit.

  • And you are correct, sir — TDKR trailer is a thousand times better and more impactful than this trailer.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:37 p.m. CST

    Haven't I seen this before?

    by btc909

  • July 19, 2011, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Too soon?

    by ChicagoRonin

    You know, I'd be excited about this if the Raimi trilogy had never been. Unfortunately, even if this is really well done, too much of the material (namely the origin stuff) seems like it will feel like a retread. I think it would have been better if they took the "James Bond" route - just swap in a new actor and keep the series going, and don't reboot things until more than 30 years have passed.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:44 p.m. CST

    Hard to see in this video

    by Continentalop

    But the webshooters were left behind by his dad, right? That's what he is looking at in the box?

  • July 19, 2011, 12:44 p.m. CST

    Everything I worried about

    by Cruizer Dave

    is in this trailer. Too emo. Too much Twilight hair. Integrating Pete's parents into it. The dark tone. The lack of any fun. The hammy acting (someone should of told Pete's dad to not act like he was acting). I don't think this is going to a worthy successor to the Rami films.

  • Spoiler: His parents are still alive.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Meh... Starting Over is Boring

    by KISSman24

    Going through the whole backstory again is a drag. This trailer didn't excite me all -- and I love Spider-man. Would have rather had a Spider-man 4 instead.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:46 p.m. CST


    by DepressedDonkey

    1-Avengers 2-Spider-Man 3-TDKR That's the order I'd put these recent trailers/teasers in. At least the first two actually showed something, the TDKR trailer? Meh. I'm going to need more than a glimpse of Bane's shoulder to make me jizz in my pants like the rest of you.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Damnit! Cap is 96 minutes????

    by whatevillurks

  • July 19, 2011, 12:50 p.m. CST

    bikoque, SPOILER

    by jim

    I thought they were LMDs working for the Chameleon.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Ugh another emo Spiderman movie.

    by Thanos0145

    Where's the wise-cracking Spiderman? Spiderman needs to be fun, not depressing.

  • July 19, 2011, 12:54 p.m. CST

    What hurts me most is that this is a Spidey movie and I'm not jumping for joy.

    by T 1000 xp professional

    I've seen this story before! and I've seen it done well. Andrew Garfield looks the part, but the heavy pathos and dark tone is a little overwhelming and fits better with a side-story or "What if" storyline instead of a movie that's supposed to capture the essence of spiderman. I always saw Peter looking at life in such a positive light that when the tragedy strikes it makes it interesting to see how his worldview copes(instead of seeing such an angst ridden character from the get go)It's funny that I'm reminded of the stereotypical tortured Russian artist, and even the story that comes to mind that would be best for this is Kraven's Last Hunt in which DeMattieis said he was heavily inspired by guys like Tolstoy ... As far as the look goes, the afternoon CGI New York looks identical to Raimi's film, especially in the old removed helicopter trailer... I guess I gotta wait till more footage, but you know, most of us a lot of times are usually on point in sensing what the final product will be like especially when you have the marketing guys at sony who usually know what they're doing in capturing the film.....

  • July 19, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST

    whatevillurks, where you getting that running time?

    by jim

    As far as I can find, it is 125 minutes

  • July 19, 2011, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Peters parents were SHIELD agents

    by sunwukong86

    but its not important to his origin at all

  • July 19, 2011, 12:59 p.m. CST

    Certainly looks grimmer.

    by Mr Nicholas

  • July 19, 2011, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Some day they'll get it right.

    by Astronut

    Despite this terrible glimpse at FAIL, I am convinced that Spider-Man as a film, can work. It can be real world. It can be serious. Above all, it can be classy and EPIC. It can also be fun when it needs to be. The tone sets the whole thing for these superhero films. If the tone is too silly and jokey-joke (aka Raimi's at times), we take it less seriously. If the tone is too dim and douche-y, which I am getting from this trailer, it drains all the fun out. Spider-Man can be as '' kick-ass real '' as Nolan's Batman but it can still give us some fun, ie; his one-line wisecracks aimed at the bad guys. There is a good balance that can be had if enough time and care is put into it. Spider-Man with silver slippers? Depressing Peter Parker? The list goes on and on. I have no good reason to get excited over this, not a one. This could have been great but I fear that will not be the case.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:04 p.m. CST


    by whatevillurks

  • July 19, 2011, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Fandango has cap listed at 124 minutes. 96? BS

    by cookepuss

  • What gives? Was that earlier report all fake? It had the Lizard roaring, his foot transforming, the Spidey reveal on the Empire State Building, Uncle Ben's death speech? Bullshit I guess..

  • July 19, 2011, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Whew. Panicked for a second.

    by whatevillurks

  • July 19, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    @your moms box

    by KilliK

    i was making a joke mate,relax.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    Moviefone also lists Captain America's "MPAA Rating: R"

    by jim

    Something tells me they are not the most reliable source for movie details.

  • Also a FACT. To just shit on a movie you havent seen yet is pretty goddam stupid. But dont let that stop you.

  • the last x men movie, which i mostly liked, would have been completely different if it had been made by Marvel. And thats not necessarily a bad thing. Its not necessary that all marvel IP exist in the same cinematic universe. Its fun, and, given what theyre doing with the Avengers, somewhat necessary, but hardly a requirement. Hell, even within the comics, there are multiple universes to allow for more freedom to the writers. The first few years of Ultimate Spidey were better, more interesting, and more realistic (relatively speaking of course) than the flagship amazing title. Quality is the only thing that really matters, and as i said before, theres definite room for improvement when it comes to Spider man.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:26 p.m. CST

    But who is playing the Randy Savage part??

    by kafka07

    Sorry....too soon?

  • July 19, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    i love how everyone bitches about him being a teenager

    by sunwukong86

    Peter was 16 when he got bit by the spider. He was in highschool for a longgg ass time during Stan Lee's run. And the emo thing, Spidey invented emo.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    I shit all over Green Lantern before I saw it...

    by Astronut

    Sometimes you just know.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST

    '' Spidey invented emo '' WTF????

    by Astronut


  • July 19, 2011, 1:37 p.m. CST

    We're processing this video into a format you can play----

    by The Reluctant Austinite

    Oh, curse you cruel Internet! I slept while Harry posted the original link. Now AICN TEASES ME with this RED BOLD UPDATE promising me another link. Meanwhile I've gone to lunch and I'm gone for an hour and a half. It's gone. Won't load. Who is the sadistic puppet master at AICN who monitors my log in and log outs and only posts important/temporary links and trailers while I'm away? Sir, you will pay in the next life for the blackness in your soul.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:40 p.m. CST

    @astronut Exactly what I said

    by sunwukong86

  • July 19, 2011, 1:53 p.m. CST

    RE:Why is Spider-Man not allowed to be dark?

    by cookepuss

    Because, in spite of all the bad shit that happens to him, Pete's coping mechanism is humor. Batman broods. Peter makes inappropriate jokes. Everybody deals with pain and tragedy differently. Spider-Man's book has been known to be dark on occasion, but that's the exception instead of the rule. Humor is also one of the things that Spider-Man uses to throw his enemies off balance. It's like the Joker. You see this guy with clown makeup and you don't take him seriously. You only realize that it's too late when he's got a gun to your face. Same thing with Spider-Man. His enemies think that he's a fool, but he's just using humor to outsmart them.

  • July 19, 2011, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Please no circus crap with clowns and hyper giggly BS

    by Knobules

    Hate hate hate it when they fall back on that crap. Burton is the worst. Raimi did it in the first Spidey and many other have done it. Hollywood. People HATE clowns! And not in a they scare me Im afraid way. Its just that they HATE that crap and its stupid.

  • I like the darker tone. This movie could be nasty, especially if it ends with a certain person's gruesome demise.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:10 p.m. CST

    by findingclues4u

  • July 19, 2011, 2:12 p.m. CST

    Been there, done that

    by Tom Fremgen

    Curious how much of the movie is spent on the whole spider bite power discovery part, because that could get really really boring. Also curious about Peter's parents, this that going to be the running threat through all the new movies? Not `sure I'm crazy about that idea either.

  • Well meaning, some interesting ideas, a promising cast and a good director... but it will be a relative box office failure. That is my prediction.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:36 p.m. CST

    10 years later

    by elsewhere

    and people are still clinging to Raimis version like it's the definitive Spider-Man. wake the fuck up you knobs.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Would've been nice to see the classic title typeface.

    by Dennis_Moore

  • July 19, 2011, 2:38 p.m. CST

    X-Men: First Class was trashed up until the release day...

    by invincible88

    ...and I predicted rightly that it would be far better than most expected because I could see the focus was on the characters rather than the pyrotechnics. Anyone who has seen 500 Days of Summer would realize that this will be the same. As for the origin story: It doesn't matter what story is told as long as it is told well, and Marc Webb can tell a fricking story.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:38 p.m. CST

    YMB: I don't disagree with you about overall tone. However,

    by cookepuss

    you don't want to make it TOO dark. If you venture too much into that TDK territory you really do risk moving too far away from the source material. Spider-Man's comic, with a few exceptions, IS generally lighter and fluffier. Lizard has never really been the source of Spidey's greatest dramatic stories. Any time they've tried to get uber-serious with Lizard it's come off limp. Same with Vulture, Doc Ock, Rhino, Mayhem, & some of his more recent lame rogues. If we were talking about Kraven, pre-Venom symbiote, Hobgoblin, or year one Green Goblin then, yeah, Spider-Man would certainly have reason for his world to be darker. His world is generally lighter though, as he doesn't tussle with these guys so often and GG has been hit or miss. Spider-Man is one of those books that straddles the fence between comical and serious. Same thing with Fantastic Four. It can be very serious at times, but can just as easily fit into the box of "funny book." The other problem with Spider-Man is that it has been a fairly long time since he's dealt with real world issues & dark drama. He's pretty far removed from the drug addiction stories or murdered girlfriend years. For the past 15 years or so, Spider-Man's adventures have fallen more into the category of antics instead. Clones. Deals with the devil. Parkour crazy webcam phenoms. Too many Spider-People and Goblins to count on two hands. If you've followed the comic for the past 30+ years as I have you'd notice how Spider-Man has become far too cartoony. Even when it purports to be dark, it's an inconsequential and fake sort of darkeness because you know that it'll all come up roses in 3 or 4 months. Batman lives in a world of darkness and his rogues tend to border more on the homicidal. Spider-Man's in the light and surrounded by some to the goofiest of the goofy. His rogues are more concerned with settling old grudges or proving how much smarter they are, even when their plans are Bond villain lame.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:38 p.m. CST

    That POV shot is stunning...

    by Righteous Brother

    Either way next year, us geeks win. TDK, Superman, Spidey and the Avengers.

  • That's too true to be good. ;-)

  • July 19, 2011, 2:44 p.m. CST

    interesting. totally different tone than Raimi

    by smudgewhat

    it looks like they're trying to Nolanize Spidey. the music is particularly reminiscent of TDK.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:46 p.m. CST

    @elsewhere: It's not that people are clinging to it. It's that

    by cookepuss

    It's been 10 years since the FIRST movie, but less than half of that since the most recent. The 3rd movie was a semi-turd. The series certainly deserves re/prebooting. However, let the body get cold. Even Batman had a longer mourning period for the corpse that was B&R. They waited 2x as long to reboot with BB. Not opposed to re/prebooting Spider-Man. Just wait. Let the Raimi version fade a little more from the collective minds of the moviegoers. The problem is that Sony is rushing this shit out. Emphasis on "rush" and "shit" here. The don't want to lose the rights so they're hacking it out with little thought. Don't think so? Pick up Entertainment Weekly and look at that costume again. It's shit. Pure. Stinky. Lumpy. Shit. So bad that it's got flies buzzing around it. Had Sony not rushed, this is the sort of costume that would've never left the drawing board - much like the aborted Alex Ross costume designs.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:46 p.m. CST

    also, agree with dahveed1972

    by smudgewhat

    different companies are going to come at the material in totally different ways. i'm concerned that the Avengers is going to force all related characters into narrow bottles. then the movies just become factory processing, not art.

  • It certainly fits the darker tone.

  • July 19, 2011, 2:49 p.m. CST

    another link

    by berserkrl

    For the moment:

  • July 19, 2011, 2:58 p.m. CST

    What else can be said? Except...

    by jorson28

    Yeah, it's a better trailer than the one for TDKR, but for reasons that I think have already been covered here, namely the fact that TDKR only has about two or three months of filming done out of a planned seven or eight. I don't think it reflects on the quality of the final films, though, and I think many of our potential complaints can be traced back to the pressure that we fans have put upon studios to SHOW US SOMETHING about these movies sooner and sooner. I think that's also why you've got so many trailers fading to black every few seconds. They're likely using unedited, maybe even untimed footage with few, if any effects, and on top of all that, half the shots are probably outtakes, with most of the dialogue being safety recordings since so many of these movies have to be dubbed so extensively in post. That said, yeah, they're retreading the origin, but the villain is new and, I think, the origin might be retooled a bit to tie more closely into Peter's parents (who, in the comics, were spies that died on the mission mentioned in the trailer). If so, I'm glad because I think that was a really big, missed-opportunity for Raimi when he was doing his films. Of course, as dark and gritty as it seems, I can still see a little of Raimi's influence here, particularly in the final shot. Maybe I'm just attributing to Raimi what anyone would have to do to translate the comic, but in terms of HOW shots of Spidey in-air are choreographed and filmed, I'm sure this production is benefitting from the years of work from Raimi and company. The big problem will be the sheer number of superhero and genre movies coming out next year. Spider-Man, Batman, Avengers... Of the three, at least two are bound to "underperform," and without meaning to unfairly pre-judge the work, I can't help but think that the "loser" (for lack of a better word) will be "Avengers." Two out of the four heroes in that film will have just been introduced onscreen the previous year in films that, as yet, have not both been reviewed and tested, and the director is a television veteran whose own fans will have reservations about his ability to do action. My personal favorite is Batman, but realistically, I think Spider-Man will take home top dollars. It's been an extra year between films and as gritty as they appear to be making it, I think it will still have a slightly larger appeal in the summer. TDK is a great film, IMO, but it did have the slightly unfair and even morbid advantage of Heath Ledger's surprisingly good and eventually Oscar-winning performance being unveiled a few months after his untimely death.

  • July 19, 2011, 3 p.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    The only people concerned with it being rushed are Raimi fanboys. They're clinging. They don't want to let those turds go. Denial can be ugly.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:03 p.m. CST

    always kill the super villain? Not so sure.

    by cookepuss

    Sandman? Lived Lex Luther? Lived TDK Joker? Lived Magneto? Lived Loki? Lived Ra's Al Ghul? Lived (apparently) Scarecrow? Lived And so on. A bunch of them have died, but that's just because movie writers don't want to deal with the concept of all of these villains floating around in the world. Just the idea that Spider-Man could go to The Raft to grill to Norman and pass by all of his other imprisoned rogues is a budget boggling idea. They want the good guy to win definitively. The only way to do that is if the bad guy dies. The only way to do that is for the bad guy to go out with a bang of his own making, or one that is done by the hero, but SOMEHOW doesn't make him look like murderer. It also doesn't help that 90% of these movies are origin flicks that implicitly assume that these guys are the 1st or only superheroes. The comics deal with this imprisonment issue fairly well. Marvel alone must have 3 or 4 prisons for these super douches. Movies need to up the ante with how they define their worlds. It's okay to acknowledge that they live in a world filled with supers. I think that Avengers will address this more clearly than any comic film to date.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:05 p.m. CST

    rsanta74 is right

    by Astronut

    Like I posted before, yes, the tone sets the whole thing for these superhero films. If the tone is too silly and jokey-joke (aka Raimi's at times), we take it less seriously. If the tone is too dim and douche-y, which I am getting from this trailer, it drains all the fun out. Spider-Man can be as '' kick-ass real '' as Nolan's Batman but it can still give us some fun, ie; his one-line wisecracks aimed at the bad guys. There is a good balance that can be had if enough time and care is put into it. And you don't over-do it. Here's a great example: We would all agree The Empire Strikes Back is very serious in tone. But we get an occasional crack such as "And I thought these things smelled bad... on the outside..." That sort of thing works if you are not throwing cracks around constantly. In Raimi's films, he had not only thrown cracks and bad jokes around throughout all 3 films (nothing, and I mean NOTHING beats the awful line from Pete saying '' I had to practically beat a little old lady to get these cranberries... '' just awful), but it was the DELIVERY of some of those wise cracks that had me cringing. Here's one: '' No, Gobby, it's you who is out! out of your mind!! '' which Spider-Man says in an extremely non-intimidating Toby McGuire voice — ie; gay sounding. Line. Must be good. Delivery. Must be convincing. And you cannot over-do it.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Ugh. That trailer did NOTHING for me.

    by geeko2000

    Sadly. First person view was okay, but I was expecting a little more grit and darkness with the theme. Why reboot if it looks the same as the others. Why fix something that isn't broke?? Fuck.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:08 p.m. CST

    pointless reboots unite

    by Billy_D_Williams

    this trailer acts as if we've never seen a Spider-Man film before, like it's trying to get "oohs" and "ahhs" from the audience...but we saw a Spider-Man movie only a few years ago....they even show some of the saw god damn scenes as the original!!!

  • July 19, 2011, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Pov? Damn the video game generation...

    by Jay

    I want to watch a film. Not someone playing a first person jumpman (Ya, I'm that old school) Ever so slowly the beauty of the craft goes down the toilet. And you guys revel in it...

  • vadarsmyfather was correct that TDKR is still shooting so why the fuck have a pointless teaser for a movie out IN A YEAR!!! Just leave it at the poster and give us a teaser with substance before xmas!!! Attach to Mission Impossible anyone??? They did the ssame with TDK. And as for the Avengers teaser, if rather watch it in HD than some camera phone bullshit... again spoilt by impatience - by the studio and this site and others. I dont think we need reminding that it is being made and who is in it which is alll it does. The Spiderman trailer is shit too... did paul Greengrass make it for not doing the new Bourne? Could they have cut to many other scenes? Again probably spoilt by being shit quality rather than just waiting until RELEASED!! At which time it will still be shit and frankly I dont think we need an origin story less than 10 years after 9/11 which led to the pulling of THE BEST TEASER to a superhero movie bar none.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:15 p.m. CST


    by Billy_D_Williams

    we have to stop being Hollywood's bitch...the only way we will stop getting these reboots, sequels and adaptations is if we stop supporting them! otherwise you fucks have no reason to complain! Good, original filmmaking cannot thrive unless we support it and stop supporting everything else!

  • Just look at the timeline, man. As of now, it's been 4 years since the last movie. That's NOT a long time. Would you be so happy if, tomorrow, they remade 24 on TV and cast somebody else as Jack Bauer? No. You'd shit your britches. Let the body get cold. I'm not opposed to a reboot or preboot. The series went off the tracks with #3. Much more bad than good. Never denied that. Not a fanboy of Raimi either. I think that he injected a little too much of his Xena or Evil Dead cheese into some of #2's scenes. I'm the first one to stand against some of the things he brought to the series. However, it's not about any of that. 4 years is a nothing period of time when we're talking about a reboot. It's not enough time to get rid of the bad taste left by the last movie. It just isn't. Hulk proved that. And, yeah, this movie DOES look like it has its fair share of problems. Aesthetically, there's only so far that you can stray from the source material before you betray it. This costume DOES look rushed. This is the sort of design that would not have tested well with focus group. It looks like something that might otherwise have been rejected in a normal pre-production phase. As a licensee, Sony was working on a ticking clock. Anybody who says otherwise is a liar. Use it or lose it. That's the deal. Columbia is taking a risk by pushing it out as quickly as possible. It might work in their favor. I don't doubt that. It might as well blow up in their face. We may be looking at another Superman Returns or, lord forbid, big budget Roger Corman Fantastic Four. BTW, blanket statements aren't so hot. You can't call an entire franchise turds without expecting your beloved one to be put under the microscope. Not saying that Nolan's flicks are turds. I'm just saying that they're AS FLAWED as the Raimi Spider-Man movies. Just different tones and themes. No such thing as a perfect superhero adaptation yet. NONE of them have come close to that. All of them miss the mark where it counts, at least to the fanboys who intimately know the source material.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:17 p.m. CST

    @the green gargantua remember Magneto's plastic prison?

    by sunwukong86

  • July 19, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    @sunwukong86 : And Batman has Arkham

    by cookepuss

  • July 19, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    the reboot saved us a Raimi spiderman wedding

    by Orion

    Id rather sit through another origin story than that. Spiderman in high school was ignored by raimi and thats when the comics were at their best. I just wish the kid looked more like a kid.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:39 p.m. CST

    Agreed! No Spider-Man Sam Raimi wedding debacle

    by Astronut

  • July 19, 2011, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by grievenom

    Fantastic. Can't wait to see it in all its HD glory. Now, bring on the Lizard!!

  • July 19, 2011, 3:39 p.m. CST

    Is it time for the Harry Potter reboot yet

    by Hedgehog000

    Hey, it's been 10 years since the first one. Time to start again.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:40 p.m. CST

    (in a non-intimidating Toby McGuire gay voice)

    by Astronut

  • July 19, 2011, 3:41 p.m. CST

    RE: the reboot saved us a Raimi spiderman wedding

    by cookepuss

    Never would've happened anyway. Even in the comics, Marvel seems to be VERY anti-marriage and anti-kid. They're very selective about which characters marry, procreate, and even age. In an attempt to keep these character "iconic" they keep them from growing and evolving. The Faustian pact that erased Spider-Man's marriage from history still pisses off comic readers. They retconned his whole marriage just so that they could de-age Peter and allow him to fuck anything that moves. Apparently, they think that it makes him more interesting and that marriage and children are boring. Seems to me like Marvel's writers/execs are all in mid-life crises and sort of hate where they're at personally. That's just my take on that. Franklin Richards, in 30 years, has maybe only aged 1 or 2 years. Never mind the fact that his kid sister shot up to 3 or 4 in near real-time, or as close to as Marvel gets. Instead of having Cyclops be happily married to Maddie, they have him run off on her to become a deadbeat dad. Instead of allowing him to be happy with his son, they ship the kid off to the future - only to return as the over the hill soldier Cable. Instead of having him remain happily married to Jean, they give her an aneurysm and kill her. Scarlet Witch has kids? Undo them and make sure they were figments of her imagination. (Don't get me started on the supposed return of them in Young Avengers.) How long til they age Luke Cage's kid so they don't have to "write around" it? How long til they break up Storm & Black Panther; although I'd be happy with that since it was forced in an attempt to court the minority (read: black) reader. Not my assumption, btw. This was openly acknowledged in the interviews that surrounded that BS event marriage. Either way, Storm & Black Panther are married, right? What's the best way to deal with them? MARVEL: "I know! Write them off and barely show them ever!" Like I said, they try to keep these characters iconic and young by preventing them from evolving. When they DO move them forward, they don't know what to do with them. Pathetic actually. Just a sign of bad writers. Spider-Man wasn't boring because he was married. He was boring because the writers didn't know how to make him, and his situation, interesting. Period. BTW: Marvel isn't alone in this. Just look at DC's so-called nu52 "soft" reboot that seemingly also undoes Clark's marriage to Lois.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:44 p.m. CST

    spiderman was dark and melodramatic in the early comics

    by Orion

    Feeling that no matter what he did the world still hated him.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:45 p.m. CST

    Spidey, Avengers....

    by Sicuv Uyall

    Two movies fighting for second place. We all know what the best movie will be next year. flap flap.

  • But I still think they could have done all of that via flashbacks instead of retelling the whole origin story again. We likely won't see Spider-man in costume until a half hour or more into the movie. Can't they just jump right into the action, even if it's a reboot?

  • July 19, 2011, 3:46 p.m. CST

    500 Days of Emo Spidey


    This will suck!

  • July 19, 2011, 3:51 p.m. CST

    hedgehog, not a joke, there will be a Harry Potter reboot


    and dumbfuks will pay to see it just like dumbfuks are going to see this.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:57 p.m. CST

    @kikstad: You're right.

    by cookepuss

    They CAN just jump into the action. They can simply integrate the origin into the story via flashbacks and such. It has been done before and with much success. The problem is, especially with comic book movies, there's a "paint by numbers" sort of formula they use to make these things. Integrating the origin into the story proper sort of goes against the grain with the current modus operandi in Hollywood. Is it nice that they're touching on the Parkers? Maybe. Is it necessary? Not really. Even in the comics, they weren't essential. Peter grew up with Ben & May in their place. They were more mother & father to him than Mary and Richard ever were. When they did explore them in the comics, it was done in the cheesiest and most 90s way possible. I'd like to think that the movie might get them right, but I'd just as well that they avoid his parents as to not diminish the contributions to his upbringing by Ben & May.

  • July 19, 2011, 3:58 p.m. CST

    must be saving the face-fucking scene for the climax

    by CT1

    good move

  • July 19, 2011, 4:03 p.m. CST

    next up, Harry Potter reboot

    by Billy_D_Williams

    followed by Lord of the Rings reboot, then comes another Batman reboot, same with Iron Man, etc

  • July 19, 2011, 4:07 p.m. CST

    So can we get Raimi back yet?

    by Andrew Coleman

    Watched the trailer this morning... Horrible. I knew Webb would blow it big time and it's pretty obvious now. Yuck. They should just release this on DVD and then lets Spider-man 4 get green lit. This looks like nonsense.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:10 p.m. CST

    Looks good enough for me to buy a ticket

    by Dark Knight Lite

    I still hate the costume. Typical over-designed Hollywood garbage. As someone who got their first Spidey comic book in 1965, and bought every one after that up to 1995 (Maximum Clonage killed it for me,) Raimi's first two Spidey films were an almost perfect distillation of the Lee/Ditko/Romita era. I say that, even though I know they bungled the Mary Jane character from the start. In the wake of Miller's THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, Spidey went "dark" for a while, so that approach is a legitimate one, even though it's not my preference. This Garfield kid is a good actor (giraffe neck notwithstanding,) so I'll give it a shot.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:14 p.m. CST

    Rest in Peace Sam Raimi

    by christpunchers2007

    Sony hacks screwed the 3rd film by forcing Raimi to "do" Venom. The guy didn't give a shit about some stupid Gen X character, and what we got on screen was not the story he wanted to do (Originally would have been Doc Conner/maybe Sandman/Green Goblin 2). Of course we'll never really know for sure what Raimi's original plans were. Sony axed Raimi's chance at redeeming himself with a 4th film, one which doesn't reek of studio interference. It's really Sony's own fault for making the 3rd film a critical failure (its financial success was guaranteed though). But is it really necessary to boot off the director and do another origin story? This reboot looks as emo as Twilight.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:34 p.m. CST

    The origin rehash will burn off at least 1hr of screentime

    by SoupDragon

    Why burden the movie with repeating something that is so fresh in everyone's memory?

  • July 19, 2011, 4:39 p.m. CST

    Once a bootleg appears, just release the official fucking thing

    by alienindisguise

    stupid studios

  • July 19, 2011, 4:40 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man has ALWAYS been emo

    by Monolith_Jones

  • July 19, 2011, 4:41 p.m. CST

    christpunchers2007 But the worst part of Raimi's series was his idea

    by Monolith_Jones

    Sandman killed Uncle Ben? Really??!?! Terrible, I hate that when everything has to be tied together.

  • July 19, 2011, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Sandman didnt kill Uncle Ben

    by sunwukong86

    Sandman car jacked him, pulled a gun on him, and his blonde partner bumped his arm triggering the gun. Its why Peter forgave him. But I do agree, the whole sub-plot was stupid

  • July 19, 2011, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Fuck origin stories


    They are shit the first time never mind doing them again a few years later. They seem like a cop out to me so they can have long sections on the film where the hero doesn't have super powers. Just as there seems to be a very high number of super hero movies where the hero loses their powers for a while. No powers, few special effect. Money saving bullshit.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:02 p.m. CST

    @sunwukong86 ; @monolith_jones

    by cookepuss

    @sunwukong86: Raimi's Sandman was a huge mistake for SM3. Let me tell you why. 1. In the comics, he had nothing to do with Spidey's origin. It was total crap that they shoehorned him into it in the first place. 2. They tried to get you to sympathize with him by showing his sick daughter then they TOTALLY drop the daughter storyline. 3. While his "rebirth" was cool, he was little more than special effect. Church was wasted in this movie. They didn't allow him to play an outright villain, but they didn't allow him to play an realized character either. 4. Venom stole his screen time. It started off as Sandman's story and Sony crammed Venom down Raimi's throat to the point where he Sandman got lost midway through. Either give Sandman the spotlight or don't use him at all. Same with Venom. This two villain bullshit is killer for superhero flicks. @monolith_jones: You're right. Spider-Man has always been very emo. Sad, but true. If you look back on the entirety of his comic run, that sumbitch cries a LOT. ^_^

  • July 19, 2011, 5:19 p.m. CST

    The Green Goblin

    by elsewhere

    The Green Goblin is visually one of the most iconic characters in comics yet Raimi felt the need to drastically change his appearance. Same thing for the second Green Goblin. Why? And don't say for the sake of realism.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:24 p.m. CST


    by christpunchers2007

    Sandman as Ben's killer might have not been what Raimi originally had planned. Not making any excuses but I feel that Raimi stopped caring once his own ideas kept getting raped by the studios.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Another Origin story??? yawn...

    by VermithraxPejorative

    I think if they were going to reboot they should have done it the way of "The Incredible Hulk". But after seeing this trailer, it doesn't look any better than Raimis. In fact, it looks worse and feels lifeless. Doesn't get me excited at all... I hated the last Spider-Man film, but, is this one really worth getting excited about. I hope I'm wrong.

  • July 19, 2011, 5:42 p.m. CST

    It's here...

    by blackmantis

  • It's a shame that he was messed up as he was. Had Ultimate Spider-Man been around longer, I would have happily accepted at the Bendis/Bagley version. It doesn't jibe with the 616 version, but it's certainly less cartoony and easier on the eyes of moviegoers. Spider-Man's costume was always an easy sell. First, it was designed by a kid. Second, it was designed as wrestling attire. The problem with the traditional Green Goblin is that the visual is a much hard sell. Here's a deranged scientist who goes after his son's best friend. He takes a potion to make himself a super. Instead of going out to kill him, he first dons a purple and green jester/goblin costume and builds Halloween themed weapons. It's kinda goofy as written. It has that classic Lee/Ditko "let's run this up the flagpole and see if it flies" shot in the dark. It worked in that 60s sort of way, but got increasingly hard to swallow as the decades wore on. Norman's reasoning behind dressing and acting the way he did in the comics was pretty rudimentary and often nonsensical. I'm not happy with how Raimi did it either, but I can tell you that the Lee/Ditko way is not without its flaws. Bendis/Bagley's version is more movie-like and even a bit more scary, but I'm not sure that non-USM fans would buy it either. It's a shame too because Osborn is Spider-Man's arch enemy and he's hampered with designs that either won't work on screen or wouldn't be accepted by the masses. As far as origin movies go.... The audience is tiring of them. The Superhero sub-genre will either die out or be forced to evolve. Some properties like FF & Hulk need rebooting, while others need to be or can be taken to cable/network TV. However, the established franchises will likely start moving on to the meatier stories if they don't want audiences to abandon them. Thor's a good example of introducing a character and not dwelling on an origin. It could be argued that it was his origin, but it also kinda wasn't since there was this almost Shakespearean/Greek tragedy quality to the father & sons story that outweighed any of the background into Asgard(ians). I've got a bunch of Marvel properties I'd love to see hit the small screen, but I'm guessing I'm their only fan. =P

  • July 19, 2011, 5:51 p.m. CST

    We're processing this video to a format you could play.

    by Triple_J_72

    Still waiting...

  • July 19, 2011, 5:52 p.m. CST

    POV for Spidey looks good! Very interactive!

    by HollywoodHellraiser

    Makes you feel what Spidey goes through when he swinging above the rooftops! Why this scares nerdboys is beyond me? And Peter has ALWAYS been emo. Remember the guy was less than zero in school. A loser among girls and a nerd among jocks. Plus he NEVER used 'humor' to rise above his depression. His 'wisecracks' only came out when he don his costume as Spidey to cope with his fear against his opponents.

  • Seems to me that this is what's going on. Instead of embracing comics in all of their goofy glory, fans and movie makers are running from the image of a 45 year old TV series. Batman `66 was fun, but man did it fuck up the public's perception of comics. All that "BAM!" and "POW!" and "ZAP!" stuff made people think that comics are just for kids. Some people still think that when, in fact, today's comics are often better written than some of TV's best genre programming. More than that, for a "kiddie" medium, they often tackle heavy issues you don't see much elsewhere. *Peter Griffin Voice* ... Shut up, Adam West!

  • July 19, 2011, 5:59 p.m. CST

    Very interactive (TRANSLATION: Wow! I want to PLAY this game!)

    by cookepuss

    I'm inclined to agree with others here. This scene might not appear in the movie at all. It reminds me of that bank robbery scene in the first trailer for Spider-Man 1. It was teaser material and nothing more. It didn't fit into the movie as it was filmed. You can only blame the post-9/11 climate for having this WTC featuring teaser yanked. It was a cool way to show a day in the life of Spidey, but was never really meant for public consumption. I don't think that we'll see this POV shot in the movie. If it does show up.... WOW! WTF are they thinking? Writers, don't write after smoking a bowl and playing your PS3 all night.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:17 p.m. CST

    I have to say, that was pretty fucking cool!

    by elgato73

    The more and more I see of this reboot, the more and more interested I get. It doesn't look a thing or feel at all like Raimi's films. There was a lot of whimsy and lightness to Raimi's Spider-Man even in the second one. Here, this feels and looks a lot like Ultimate Spider-Man. It's definitely moody and darker. I think the introduction of Peter's parents is a good move as that poses all kinds of possibilities for potential story lines. Would not be surprised if they (like in the Ultimate comics) play a big role in all of the "scientific experimentation" that go on in the story.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:24 p.m. CST

    Re: rsanta

    by BillEmic

    You're like the voice of reason on this board - well, the person I agree with the most - and you cracked me up with the line about writers smoking a bowl + playing their PS3.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:25 p.m. CST

    People vs Stuff

    by CookedHam

    Haha, no contest. Yeah that's right it's people.

  • July 19, 2011, 6:53 p.m. CST

    you're gonna WISH this was as good as Twilight:Eclipse


  • July 19, 2011, 6:57 p.m. CST

    Life Lesson#1002: Never trust a teaser

    by seansarto

  • July 19, 2011, 7:02 p.m. CST

    rsanta -Marvel USEd to write off the kids

    by deelzbub

    Now at Marvel, there is a concerted effort across the board to bring in next generation versions on nearly every character. It reeks of desperation, like on a 10th season TV show where they adopt a little kid because they have ran out of all other ideas. Lil' Moon Knight, we know you're on the way any day now.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:09 p.m. CST

    the trailer makes me want skip this even more....

    by darthSaul666

    It's funny to me that the Raimi haters think he wasn't close enough to the comics. IMO Dark Knight lite said it best about Spidey. From the looks of the trailer and some of the theorizing in this TB I bet ASM will be even farther from the comics than Raimi ever was. I'm a little suprised no one's griped yet about how often Uncle Ben shows in the trailer. The darker approach is reminding too much of Batman so far....

  • July 19, 2011, 7:10 p.m. CST

    I'll be there for Spidey.

    by HapaPapa72

    Okay, so they're retelling the origin. So what. We're actually getting a hot female lead, the freaking Lizard, web-shooters, and the gangly guy looks like Peter Parker. I'm there. I'd take a re-told origin over a brand-new Twilight any day.

  • July 19, 2011, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Not terrible...

    by MoneyGrabSequel

    I'll probably see it

  • July 19, 2011, 7:45 p.m. CST


    by workshed

    My two daughters are 7 and 15... they adore the Adam West/Burt Ward tv show (we have every episode) and, whist they don't mind the Keaton/Burton films so much, they couldn't give two hoots for Bale/Nolan's vision. Let's face it... they certainly had the finest Batmobile and villains. So... basically... you're right... except for Chris Reeves, no-one has managed to crystalise the image of Batman better than Adam West and I doubt that's ever going to change. Now, let's have a quick go at the Batoosi.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:38 p.m. CST

    christpunchers2007 RE:Raimi not caring.

    by Monolith_Jones

    That's even worse. I'm an artist myself and I have to give every project 100 % regardless of how unhappy I am. At the end of the day, it's my name on it.

  • July 19, 2011, 8:42 p.m. CST

    Not available due to copyright

    by The StarWolf

    So why not remove the thread?

  • July 19, 2011, 8:56 p.m. CST

    @the starwolf

    by berserkrl

    Because the thread is what you read to find out where it currently IS available.

  • Nick Cannon - Spiderman Will Smith - Uncle Ben Michael Clarke Duncan - Doctor Octopus

  • July 19, 2011, 9:22 p.m. CST

    @the starwolf

    by Zardoz5

    I just watched at one of the links in the thread:

  • July 19, 2011, 9:46 p.m. CST

    Nice trailer, BUT...

    by justmyluck

    ..after this and THE AVENGERS trailer 'debut' in cam-o-crap-o-vision, I've finally made the decision to just WAIT until these promos are available in a high quality format. Even for this commercial fluff, a bit like that final SPIDERMAN P.O.V. shot should be viewed properly instead of a diminished first impression from JUNK OPTICS.

  • July 19, 2011, 9:48 p.m. CST USA Today....

    by BetaRayBill07

    "Marc Webb's new web-slinging The Amazing Spider-Man reboot is one of the few cinematic superheroes coming to Comic-Con this year. Webb is taking material from the comic books and spinning it in a modern way with his hero, who will swing onto the big screen in 2012. This Peter Parker, played by Andrew Garfield, will be more of an irreverent, rebellious trickster than prior Spideys such as Tobey Maguire, Webb says. "There's a little bit of punk rock in this kid." Fuck this. Punk rock in this kid? I hope this tanks badly. Epic fail.

  • And I absolutely agree...this is how the world ends.Maybe Richard Kelly should make a movie called "America-Land Tales" to update all the shit that has been going down in the gool ol' USA since "SouthLand Tales".

  • The damn books cost too much. Honestly, that's what it is. Marvel always had an eye on the younger readers. I remember when I was in jr. high, back in the far flung year of 1987, Marvel used to put out books like: - Droids - Ewoks - ALF - Spider-Ham - Planet Terry and so on. Marvel's STAR imprint was actually damn big, so much so that it collapsed in on itself really. My point being, Marvel never had an issue with luring in the kids. However, it was always easier back then because the comics cost 60¢. Even with inflation accounted for, that was still impulse purchase pricing. Today, when the cheapest comic you can buy is nearly $3, many parents will think twice. When comics average $4 or $5, it's not a sustainable habit for kids today. That doesn't stop Marvel or DC from trying. Over the 10 years, they've put out everything from X-Men Evolution, Tiny Titans (aw yeah!), and so forth. It's just not really profitable for them to do it. Comics in general aren't a huge money maker. Between the cost of the paper, the high price of "superstar" talent, and obvious greed, it's a lose-lose scenario for everybody. Really, Marvel's and DC's best bet is to create more comics that work on multiple levels. For example, Pixar movies like "The Incredibles" have obvious kid friendly jokes and visual elements. At the same time, there are some subtle, but clearly adult oriented jokes. It's the same sort of tactic used by classic 2D animators like Chuck Jones or Tex Avery. Hell, it's a classic tactic even used by Shakespeare. Something for everybody. The real problem, more so with Marvel than DC, is that the books most likely to be the "gateway drugs" tend to also be the lowest performing. They don't see the big picture, how those small numbers may actually end up translating to bigger numbers on their other books. Like I said, gateway drugs. Take Tom DeFalco's Spider-Girl for example. That book lasted 10 or 11 years. It sold like shit. However, I can't tell you how many acknowledged fans actually moved on to the core Spider-books because of it. People who might not have cared about Spider-Man's world flocked to it thanks to this access point. It Spider-Girl wasn't a kid's book, but it also wasn't X-Force. It was a tradition Spider-book written in the traditional "Marvel style" by ad former EIC - who's a hell of a nice guy, btw. Sadly, even though it lasted for a decade, it was always in danger of cancellation because it sold like crap. (Never mind the fact that Marvel was adamant about nullifying EVERY trace of a married Spider-Man.) Generally, such books don't sell too well any more because, again, the prices are high. Not using that as an excuse, but only to illustrate how comics have nudged themselves away from the local convenience store racks and more into the direct market specialty shops. Marvel & DC still do solid business, via trades, at the book store level. However, these "gateway drug" books become increasingly less appealing once the pricing of a collection jumps up to $15 or $20. A bargain when you do the math, but moving away from the impulse purchase pricing. Especially in today's economy. Marvel TRIES to lure kids in, however evil that sounds, but it's just too expensive to be habit forming for the yungins. Now, if Marvel were to come up with a SENSIBLE day/date release scheme and lower than print pricing on the digital versions.... Then, maybe, we're back in business when it comes to impulse purchases of comics. Then, maybe, it'll become more likely that lil' Billy will be able to more easily snooker his dad into buying a couple of his favorites for his iPad. Sadly, Marvel's got its feeder up its cornhole when it comes to digital. Greed and incompetence has kept them from catching up with the new tech as well as they should have. Kids today...... They fucking HATE paper. LOL Okay. I don't know that for a fact. However, and I don't know about you, but I've run out of space for my comics. My nephew, he's young enough where digital matters much more to him than analog/print. As much as I love the feel and smell of paper, I totally get it. I've got 15k issues and would REALLY love some solid and _legal_ digital release mechanism to come from the House of Ideas. Marvel & DC: Wanna court younger readers? Speak their language. Tell paper to fuck off. ... I'm just sayin'. =)

  • It so perfectly captured the (goofy) vision of the pre-crisis Batman so clearly that it burnt it into the collective minds of the general population. Batman `66 became the face of all comics. For a time, that was fine. However, when the world outside evolved and got more complex, that vision started to look more hokey. If this is what comics were about then CLEARLY they must be for kids. Look at the world outside. Vietnam. The Cold War. The Cuban Missile Crisis. Chernobyl. Comics evolved to reflect the ever changing world around them, but non-comic fans were stuck on that iconic image of Adam West with the Batoosi and the shark repellent. Comics changed, but the collective mindset of the non-fan didn't. Your kids may tolerate Keaton's Batman, but, as an adult, you no doubt can appreciate how much it tore down that 20+ year old image of comics being for kids. It set a new standard and let the non-fans know that, "Hey, comics can be grim and gritty. They can say stuff. They don't have to be all 'BAM' and 'POW'. In fact, most aren't. Check us out. We're cool again." It also didn't hurt that the film starred some legitimate talent like Keaton & Nicholson. It also didn't hurt that Prince, a man clearly not known for children's songs, provided musical support. Adam West's Batman was a great show that reflected a lot of the quirks of the decade. The 1st season is especially tasty. It just sort of locked people's mindsets for decades. There's nothing wrong with what Batman `66 does. In fact, I wish MORE modern comic flicks would embrace their pulp roots. I just think that they need to strike a balance between the complex and admittedly goofy. It's okay for Spider-Man to be dark. It's also okay for him to be outright funny too. The comics embrace both aspects. Why should the film eschew one in favor of the other? Why should non-fans look down on the sort of humor served up regularly in the comics. Dan Slott's She-Hulk was amazing at doing both, yet it'll never see an adaptation because non-fans are now stuck in the Nolan and Raimi visions of what DC and Marvel films should be like, neither of which have fully embraced their comic roots. Movie dudes have traded in one narrow perspective of how comics and comic movies should look like for another equally narrow perspective.

  • It's entirely possible that he's a bit gloomy as's also entirely possibly that once he puts his suit on and starts doing his Spidey thing he is totally fill of quips. Like people have said, it's his defense....I doubt he'll be the silent, emo, Edwardish Spiderman that everyone here is tending to think he will be. At least lets wait until we see something with him Spidey-ing it up before we decide.

  • Exploring some heretofore unknown origin is just fanfic horseshit, narrative laziness and the very thing that made Wolverine Origins such a trial to watch. It's the reason all prequels are so reliably tedious - writers can't write a story of their own so they simply reverse engineer someone else's. I'll be amazed if this thing is any good.

  • In that 60-150 second span, they have to tell us what we're going to watch, why we should watch it, and how it's different. Sony/Columbia may well be infusing ASM with genuine Spidey humor, but the teaser isn't reflecting that. Instead of saying that this is Spider-Man by way of Lee or Bendis, it's more accurately saying that this is Spider-Man by way of Nolan. Whether or not that's true is an entirely different story. It may very well be the most accurate portrayal of Spider-Man ever seen. It may perfectly reflect the best of both Lee & Bendis' visions for the character. However, tonally, it steers into the grim & gritty skid and away from the humor established by both creators. Even when you look past the dark shaky cam.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:11 p.m. CST

    Fuck this movie


    it's going to blloooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

  • July 19, 2011, 11:20 p.m. CST

    rsanta - comics sales and kids today

    by deelzbub

    I agree on the high price of comics keeping kids and their folks from picking them up. I remember as a kid, when comics jumped in price from 35¢ to 50¢, and I was in tears because I wasn't getting 3 comics for a dollar and change anymore. I can't imagine being a little kid these days and plunking down four dollars a pop for comics. I honestly think comics WOULD sell more to kids today if: -Return to newsprint paper, at least for flagship titles, to bring the price down.. The glossy paper drives the price way up. I read awhile back that no one makes that paper anymore. Not true. I get an agriculture paper on a regular that's printed on the same stuff. -Comics Spinners make a comeback. The ones in Barnes and Noble don't count. Three or four titles crammed next to the magazines in the grocery stores don't count. Comic book stores count, but not in the way of converting the masses. I'm talking grocery stores, convenience stores, CVS, Walgreens, gas stations, etc. Put the spinners back in, put some reasonably priced titles in the reach of kids, and there's your next generation of readers, folks. It's not rocket science.

  • July 19, 2011, 11:42 p.m. CST

    Spidey isn't supposed to be a dark and gloomy story...

    by darthadv

    ...beyond, at least, the death of Uncle Ben. I remember waiting for years for a live action Spidey, even seeing failed teaser posters in the late 80s that a movie was coming... and when the Tobey version finally came, I was really ok with it. In fact, so were millions of others and it was the highest earning superhero flick until the new Batman films came around. Were the Spidey films perfect? No. But I think they captured the essence of the story. Heck, even the natural webshooters were easy to accept because what jobless teen would have the money and resources to develop mechanical ones? This trend of trying to make every superhero movie "dark" and "realistic" is getting tired and old. That's *not* what made the new Batman films work: doing those dark worked because that is what the character's history called for! Spidey is supposed to be a more lighthearted trip (as should be Superman), but judging by this trailer, they're going for dark and gritty. I don't think it's going to fly, and I guarantee you that people that don't follow films as closely as possibly folks on this site *will* be wondering where Tobey and the gang went. It's too bad that we won't see Tobey interact with Downey in some crossover.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:01 a.m. CST

    Trailer was leaked by production company

    by mackmm

    I believe it was leaked by Sony to draw attention away from Dark Knight Rises trailer. There is no theater lighting in trailer nor is there any audience or camera operator noise the sound is almost crystal clear. Speculation started earlier this week when The Avengers trailer was "Bootlegged" TDKR trailer was announced and shown at Harry Potter. Who has actually seen either of the Marvel trailers on the big screen last weekend?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:38 a.m. CST

    and I was in tears because I wasn't getting 3 comics for a dollar

    by cookepuss

    I know the feeling. =) I first started reading Uncanny X-Men when it was 35¢ too. In 1981, at age 7, I wasn't getting a huge allowance so that was perfectly priced. Imagine being able to read Byrne/Claremont era for what it would cost you to by gum or candy. Awesome! By the time I was 12 or 13, I was getting $7 a week from my dad. For the 1986, that was pretty solid. I would go to my LCS every Wednesday after school and pop my load on 10 comics. Best feeling ever. Comics jumped up to $1 and suddenly my pull list was down to 7 titles. Now, at 37, I'm LUCKY if that same $7 will by me 2 comics. As you've suggested, you can't even blame it on inflation. That same 60¢ comic from 1986 might only cost $1.30 today if inflation were the only reason for costs rising. Unfortunately, books now cost 3x that. The situation is complex. 1. Lowering paper quality would help, but those newsprint stocks bleed. They're not so great with the more precise, modern computerized coloring techniques. More than that, they yellow pretty easily. For collectors, newsprint stinks. 2. So-called "superstar" talent sucks up a lot of budget. Everybody wants a Grant Morrison, Joss Whedon, Chris Bachalo, or Bryan Hitch. That name recognition comes with a substantial price tag and the return or results aren't always worth the investment. I blame the 1990s and Image Comics for this. Fans and speculators turned these guys into rock stars. It upset the balance. There were other guys doing work that was just as good or innovative, but weren't asking for diva treatment. Now, as readers, we're paying for a new generation of artists and writers with rock star dreams and grand egos. 3. The wars overseas have driven up oil prices. No doubt, that has affected traditional distribution costs, which are then ultimately being passed on to the consumer. 4. The 1990s read like the beginning of a Dickens novel. They really do. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it ws the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness;" On the one hand, the 1990s were great because computer tech was coming into its own, paper stock was getting better, art and stories were becoming more complex (if a bit dark), and books were selling like crazy. Unfortunately, that new tech was being abused on pricey gimmick covers, we were paying our new rock gods not to leave, and books were only selling like crazy because of variants and speculators hoping to find the next Amazing Fantasy 15. What does this have to do with today? Pricing, like the hands on a clock, only move one in one direction. Once the big 2 started on that pricey path, everybody else followed and the only direction for everybody to go was up. We're still paying for the folly of the excessive, extreme 90s. 5. Editors are now expected do more than just edit and that costs more too. When Joe Quesada appears on Larry King, you just know he isn't getting paid minimum wage. Granted, guys in his position aren't rolling in dough, but they're also likely getting paid more (to scale) than they were 20 years ago. Again, that's a cost passed on to consumers - worse now because comics today only sell 10%-20% as many issues as they did 15 years ago. 6. Some higher profile books are priced to support lower selling, often lower quality books. Essentially, you're paying so that somebody else can read something that might not otherwise exist. You can lower paper quality. That'll lower prices for sure. You can even opt for more unknown, nameless talents. That'll lower prices too. You can't account for the costs associated with dealing with distributing a physical object or the enhanced responsibilities of creators thanks to renewed global popularity of the medium. You certainly can't stop the never ending tide of stupidity coming from the publishers, who always seem to flock to trends or gimmicks. You can't stop them from pricing one book one way, as to support a low selling pet project. The only real ways to lower comic prices are: 1. Digital. You save on shipping and paper. Those are two big problems. If you go digital, you can reach further globally. You might lower prices, but more than make up for it in volume. 2. Go with nobodies. Fuck "star" talents and go with the unsung heroes hungry to write or draw their childhood favorites 3. Stop driving away readers by trying to gain new ones. It never works. New #1 issues are Band-Aid publishing tactics. Sales usually dip to pre-reboot levels, if now lower. Stop retconing stuff because you think it'll make the book more accessible. It doesn't. It only makes history MORE complicated. That drives away readers, which forces pubs to either drop books or raise prices. There are tons of tactics which actually drive old readers away. Marvel & DC are guilty of cheap tricks which end up backfiring. 4. Don't overexpose characters. You think that you're giving people what they want by giving them 100 Deadpool books. You think that you're earning a sweet buck off of our stupidity. You're not. We, as readers, get tired. You, as publisher don't recognize this until its too late and you're at the beginning of a 6 part story. Now, you're stuck finishing out a car wreck of a story for a series that's BLEEDING money. If publishers made their precious characters commodities and showed a little restraint then maybe each new appearance would sell lots more and you could afford to dial back cover prices. As readers, that means.... Stop supporting trends. Don't buy the go out of continuity limited series or one shots that only act as rack filler. Don't buy those supposedly rare variants. For the love of god, don't support hyped project that you KNOW will be bad. Vote with your wallet. Pubs will stop publishing shit and stop supporting these money hungry rock stars. If you support these wannabe celebs then don't complain when comics cost too much. The movie industry is guilty of this too. We're paying for their excess. We're paying because they're failing. We're paying because they don't make smart decisions. We're paying because they think they're giving us more of what we want when, in fact, they're bleeding the cash cow dry. About the only thing Lucas has said recently that makes any sense is that, maybe, the age of big budget blockbusters and overpriced movie stars should be over. Think about how much lower priced movies or comics could be if you focused on deep & substantial content instead of personalities or bloated excess.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:51 a.m. CST

    This is already miles ahead of Raimi's work

    by cgih8r

    I love the look of the film it feels less cheesy and more real and alive. The dialogue is already more believable and less preachy than the Raimi version. Seriously most of the CGI on the Raimi movies would make anybody from the Syfy channel cringe.

  • Again, I firmly believe that Spider-Man is fairly light and fluffy, for the most part. However, both the character and the book have seen some dark times beyond Ben's death. - Green Goblin tosses Gwen off a bridge. Pete tries to save her and accidentally snaps her neck. - Harry gets addicted to drugs. - Pete goes a little bonkers and backhands MJ - May is near death's door and only making a deal with Mephisto, Marvel's version of the devil, will save her. - Pete is buried alive and left for dead. - Kraven comes back and kills a bunch of the characters in his extended Spider-family. - MJ (supposedly, but not really) has a miscarriage and loses their baby If you really dig around, you can find some pretty dark stuff in Spider-Man. You can also find enough reasons why he cries like an emo baby, which he's done on a number of occasions. So, yeah, the comic CAN be dark, gritty, and even emo. It just doesn't TEND to be that way. The book has gotten a little cartoony for its own good, losing some of the true pathos or social/moral conscious that it had in the late 60s, throughout the 70s, and into the 1st half of the 80s. There have been a few exceptions in the aughts, as with the post 9/11 stories, but those have been exceptions. Don't believe me? I present to you....Anti-Venom, Mr. Negative, Screwball, Freak, & Mayhem. Still not convinced enough? How about the cartoony Mayor JJ Jameson? Not yet? What about the overdrawn, go nowhere story of the Spider Tracer Killer. Spider-Man is a comic that has lost its way. In fact, much of Marvel's modern stuff is a long way off from where it should be. Remember the days when the X-Men had actual first names, personal lives, real problems, & didn't sleep in their costumes? IOW, remember when characters actually had... character? Now, they're mostly caricatures. Fun and exciting caricatures, but still caricatures. Any surprise we're having trouble getting to meatier, deeper stories in comic movies?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:01 a.m. CST

    conscious = conscience

    by cookepuss

    you know what mean. =)

  • July 20, 2011, 1:06 a.m. CST

    if i was sony, i would remove the vid too

    by john

    they have added the 90s back story about parkers parents being agents...sucked then, sucks now its dark, the first person doesnt work, and everything that made me fall in love with spidey as a gone

  • July 20, 2011, 1:10 a.m. CST

    rsanta74...but not the overall tone

    by john

    which made those epis even more shocking if the entire movie is dark, like dark wont work read the original cameron script and see why a dark spidey movie just wont work

  • July 20, 2011, 1:21 a.m. CST

    Cameron's a different beast though. He really is

    by cookepuss

    I'm not disagreeing with you on how Spidey shouldn't be all all dark. I agree. It'd be an epic fail. As far as Jame Cameron goes, the man IS another creature unto himself. Remember, he doesn't come from a story telling background - at least not in the traditional sense. He's a former truck driver who entered the film industry as a special effects guy, which is where he stayed for quite a while before he transitioned to director & writer. His perspective is more on the visual. It comes as no surprise to me that his vision isn't in line with what the Spider-Man deserved. Here was a guy who worked on big VFX projects like Terminator, Abyss, Avatar, Aliens, Dark Angel, & Titanic. Spider-Man is a world away from the type of visually heavy and somewhat character lighter story telling that some of his flicks tend to be. Not to say that his movies didn't have stories, but a movie like Spider-Man invariably becomes a 2hr character study. For a guy with a VFX background, that's a tough task. (I could go on about where Avatar's story and characterization failed, but that's a fight I'd rather avoid, I suspect. AICNers are a scary bunch. LOL)

  • July 20, 2011, 1:27 a.m. CST

    My point being, in cased I didn't make it clear....

    by cookepuss

    Cameron would've been the wrong guy for the project either way. BTW, can you imagine if Leo actually DID get that role. What a clusterfuck that would've been. It's only recently that he's earned his man card. Only way I would've been more pissed was if the Nic Cage Superman went beyond the test phase and actually hit screens. =)

  • July 20, 2011, 1:47 a.m. CST

    Hey fanboys, it's time to grow up

    by theplant

    It's not too soon to reboot the SM franchise. You are simply getting old. And yeah, all Sam Raimi SM films sucks ass. Tobey Maguire looks like a pervert. He looks like he rather be banged by DSK and shag Mary Jane. fuck you raimi, you raped my childhood.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:49 a.m. CST


    by theplant


  • July 20, 2011, 1:54 a.m. CST

    Fuck this. Punk rock in this kid? Epic WIN

    by theplant

    Dirty Tobey Bourgeois Spider-Man sucked. BRING ON RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS FLAVOURED SPIDER MAN

  • are you kidding us ? are you that dumb ? 2 months should offer a solid third of the movie already in the can. 2 shots is like the first two hours of the first morning.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:06 a.m. CST

    Hey, it's a movie.

    by gunnarcannibal

    Cool. There are lots of movies and here is another movie. Maybe this will be good. Maybe it won't be. Hmm I guess we will see. Good-Bye and know that I love you.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:37 a.m. CST

    hey, AICN


    you should totally post that an early scene from Conan is up on the official sight.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:59 a.m. CST

    Shit I got a diploma from a film school on drawing cartoons!!!!!

    by darthSaul666

    My art kicks ass on yours.......easily!!!!!! I hope my compatriots can realize that Marvel movies are akin to Steven King films from the 80's

  • July 20, 2011, 4:05 a.m. CST

    make me eat my words...I'll be watching your gesture drawing....

    by darthSaul666

    I didn't get a diploma for nothing!!!!!!

  • July 20, 2011, 4:15 a.m. CST

    Oops let my drumming arrogance get through...

    by darthSaul666

    Yeah I play drums in an indie rock band too!!! If you are in the L.A. area in mid will I !!!! If you wanna be there with me at the Whiskery a Go Go when I am say DS6!!!!!!!

  • July 20, 2011, 4:24 a.m. CST

    Who made who?

    by darthSaul666

    Ain't nobody told you?

  • July 20, 2011, 5:08 a.m. CST

    take a leak?

    by Dana

    That was VERY good sound quality for a "leaked" trailer. Wherever did it leak from I wonder?

  • July 20, 2011, 5:36 a.m. CST

    theplant i own spidey number 2

    by john

    fair condition...cuz as a kid i read it and no, ditko's spidey wasnt dark...mostly because lee's dialogue didnt allow for dark even though the suit was originally supposed to be black and red, but the color separations didnt work

  • July 20, 2011, 5:42 a.m. CST

    Holy Crap, was that a miserable trailer! As a Spidey Fan, I must weep

    by Ringwearer9

    Seriously? A fucking Dark Knightified Spider-Man movie? With the Dark Knight thudding "scared of heights" music? And young Spidey dealing with the trauma of losing his parents at a young age, and being all broody and angsty about it, just like Batman? Are you fucking kidding me? And any of you assholes saying this "looks good to me" ... WHY? You've got another fucking Nolan Batman flick coming, do you really need a Nolanesque Spider-Man movie? Of course, my rage is premature, it's just a trailer, and may have been mocked up to make it LOOK Dark Knighty, but ... theres a good chance that they may be selling the actual product, and if they are ... come back to us Sam Raimi, all is forgiven! And to those above opining about how Sam Raimi just "didn't care" about Spider-Man 3 ... take another look. Sure, he was handed tons of notes, but he and his brother worked their asses off to work those notes into a thematically coherent plot, if overly complicated. That's not something someone who "doesn't care" does. And the superhero fights in 3 were the most comic-booky of any of the 3 spider-man films ... quite spectacular, in fact. If you were an actual fan of the comics, that should have had some appeal for you, but no, it's all "he wore black and danced, Batman would never dance, this movie sucks". Fucking fanboy douchebags. Goddamn it. A Spider-Man trailer where Spidey is all scared of heights with the scary Batman music? Whoever made that trailer doesn't get Spider-Man at all. Being Spidey is exhilarating, liberating, FUN, not terrifying. Fuck, what a horrible trailer.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:20 a.m. CST


    by Orbots Commander

    The only way comics sales come back in a large way, is via digital download. That's where the publishing industry, in general, is headed. Note, Borders/Waldenbooks liquidation notice yesterday---they're liquidating all remaining stores in the U.S. because they failed to find a buyer---due to a decline in physical book sales, while missing the ebook/Kindle/Nook trend. Comics are part of publishing and have all the same issues as, say, magazines and newspapers: lack of physical sales, and more importantly, lost advertising revenue to online. Publishing, books and magazines aren't going away (ebook sales at Amazon are booming); it's just that the business model is radically changing.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:24 a.m. CST

    Corman's Fantastic Four looked better than this.

    by Apple Octopus

    Dear Sony, give up your rights to Spidey movies. You don't deserve them.

  • July 20, 2011, 7 a.m. CST

    Sorry the Amazing Spider Man Teaser looks kind of boring

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 7 a.m. CST

    i`m not sold on this...and Andrew Garfield looks wrong as Peter Parker

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 7 a.m. CST

    fuck even tobey looked more like peter parker

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 7:06 a.m. CST

    When did Spiderman become a series for the CW?

    by The Outlander

    Just kidding! This doesn't even look good enough to be a CW series. Only one word comes to mind, bland.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:44 a.m. CST

    Tobey macguire did look like peter parker.

    by Norman Colson

    But he failed at his witty comic delivery, it sounded very unspidey like. no energy or zanniness to it... sad... could have made it much more better with a marvel writer who can write some funny shit for spider man to say. i mean the character is second to deadpool in witty reparte'.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:34 a.m. CST

    No go

    by The StarWolf

    So much for 'puny Parker'. Can't take the guy seriously in the role, he's just too sturdy looking.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:55 a.m. CST

    ringwearer 9, I'm with you regarding Spidey 3


    It had it's good parts. The origin of Sandman was amazing! Had Venom been left out altogether I think it could have been decent. In other words if the studio let Raimi make the movie he wanted to.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:55 a.m. CST

    Those POV shots .... O_O

    by docimian

    i liked it better when it was called mirrors edge

  • July 20, 2011, 9:06 a.m. CST


    by Dr_PepperSpray

    Can you not tell your fucking legal arm to take a break and stop removing the videos?! <P> Mother fucker, it's like you don't like publicity or something.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:15 a.m. CST

    rsanta --like your 4 ways to lower prices

    by deelzbub

    but I still don't enjoy reading comics on a computer screen. Probably b/c I'm old and have been spoiled by the medium. If I want to flip back to a previous page, I dont want to be clicking buttons. I'm on the computer enough as it is. Reading comics is a well-deserved break from looking at a computer screen all day.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:47 a.m. CST

    How to have fixed Spidey 3

    by cookepuss

    1. No Venom. Topher was a solid anti-Peter and could have been a decent Venom, but he was written in the cheesiest way possible. No Venon, Stealer of Time 2. Don't waffle. Is Sandman a bad guy or is he a misunderstood good guy? I don't mind complexity. Just don't confuses it with ambiguity. Pick a direction and go with it. 3. Finish your sub-plots. WTF happened to Sandman's daughter? Remember her, the sick girl he was supposed to be stealing money for? Don't start something you can't or won't finish. 4. Don't go back to the well too often, especially if it means that you're rewriting your own continuity to do so. There was no need to shoehorn Sandman into Spidey's origin. None. That thread was over and done with. Come up with something new instead of rehashing and milking the origin. 5. Emo != Complex & Conflicted. Especially the way Raimi did it, Emo Parker was bordering on satirical. Put on the black suit? Gotta tussle the hair & look all moody. If the character is making fun of himself and being the butt of his own joke... Not sure that he's all that conflicted. He was just smug and douchey. 6. For the luva god, NO SONG & DANCE NUMBERS!!!! That disco dancing Emo Parker meme shows you exactly why. This sort of campy bull has no place here. It takes away from any intended complexity and gravitas. I didn't mind the "Raindrops Keep Fallling On My Head" number from the second movie because it was designed to reflect Pete's of new outlook on life. Here? Not digging the disco dance crap or the jazz club number, especially when it compromises his identity by acting all acrobatic and such. 7. Maybe pick a better villain. No offense against Sandman and his visually engaging origin, but he's a pile of dirt with the IQ to match. He's no match for Peter, who's smart enough to turn him into mud, glass, or whatever. Sandman gets his ass kicked in the comics for good reasons. Raimi should've gone with Kraven the Hunter. 8. If you ARE going to finish what you start, do it right. Raimi spent 2 movies building up to Harry getting his revenge and either becoming Green Goblin 2 or Hobgoblin. Instead, we get a lame cyberpunk snowboarder and a lame amnesia subplot to avoid having to deal with it all head on. Whole hog or no hog. 9. You can't kill every villain. Eventually, Spider-Man IS going to look like a murderer. Spider-Man fights Goblin? Goblin gets impaled. Spider-Man fights Ock? The good doctor drowns to death. Spider-Man fights Venom? Poor Eddie gets vaporized. Spidey's looking like suspect #1 here. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be one of his enemies. I'll end up in the East River for sure. Somebody needs to teach Raimi, and other comic movie writers, about creative conflict resolution. This ain't it. 10. Just because you've got access to certain actors doesn't mean you need to use them. Love Rosemary Harris. Love Bruce Campbell. Love Ted Raimi. Love Stan Lee. Love Elizabeth Banks. Don't need to see them every movie. I know that they exist in his world. I know that they add flavor, but some of them (Bruce) steal time just for the sake of comic relief, moral support, geek service, and inner circle stroking. That's okay sometimes. However, if you're aiming to finish out the series with a darker, meatier plot... lose the dead weight. If it's not contributing or moving the plot forward in a substantial way, you don't need it. 11. Clear A and B plots. Which was your A plot here? Was it Harry's revenge, as promised in 1&2? Was it Peter's dark side and Venom? Was it Sandman's terrorizing the city with, um, sand? It wasn't always clear at times as B plots would take center stage. Likewise, it felt bad when the A plot would get shoved aside and minimized. It was a muddy mess. 12. Bigger isn't always better. WTF do comic movie writers still think that more villains equal a better movie? It never does. It only blurs the focus. SM3 had Venom, Sandman, Dark Harry, and (at times) Peter himself. You can add insurmountable odds through other means. Playing the numbers game is lazy and quite a gamble. Same problem I had with TDK. Joker should've been all the flick needed. Instead, they crammed in Two-Face and even a cameo by Scarecrow. It worked out a lot better in TDK, but it was still somewhat of a problem there too. Don't give me more bad guys. Give me a smarter bad guy. Give a stronger bad guy. Give me a scarier, more dangerous bad guy. Give me a bad guy who, just because of who he is, 1-ups the hero at every turn. THAT is a villain. Fix all of this and Spider-Man 3 would've been a good movie. Fix all of this and Spider-Man 3 would have been a DIFFERENT movie. Just sayin'. That flick was too far gone to save without reworking the whole thing.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:58 a.m. CST

    rsanta, agree with most of you points, but you missed one


    Gwen Stacy! Why bring her in at all let alone to to just be a pseudo-other woman.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Also, I'm ok with two villains in Spidey 3


    Since we already had the Goblin in the 1st one. Sandman should have been story B and become Harry's henchman. And Venom scratched.

  • TDKR is going to flat-out crush this "Spider-Man Returns" POS The last five seconds of TDKR teaser is better than the entire trailer for this film. It has intrigue, suspense, amazing doom-like tension, and class. And it gives you CHILLS it is so good. This? We've seen it all before. TDKR is going to OWN 2012, fools.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:21 a.m. CST

    @deelzbub: I like paper too. There are pros and cons though.

    by cookepuss

    PRO paper... It's real. You can touch it. You can smell it. God help me, if you're a goat, you can even taste it. It's something you can hold onto forever. You're not dependent on a service to provide it or a machine to store it. You've got a real sense of ownership with a printed comic. With a printed comic, you can always figure out which one you loved the most as a kid. It's the one that looks like hell. It's not just well worn. It probably looks like it's been to Serbia and rolled up in somebody's boot. Maybe you didn't take care of it well or treated it as a collector would, but it was certainly loved. This is a comic that grew old with you. Digital comics seem to evoke Wooderson from Dazed & Confused. You may keep getting older, but your digitals stay the same age. There's something equally positive and depressing about that. CONS paper... It costs more. It degrades. Storing 15k issues on a hard drive is a lot easier than finding space for 15k worth of long boxes. You can't carry all of your print favorites with you on a long trip. Paper, as a medium, is much more limited. There's stuff that you can do, visually, with digital that you can't with paper and ink. Paper is bad for the environment. Digital can reach a much larger global audience. At 37, I certainly empathize with you. I like my paper comics. At the same time, I'd rather not fight evolution. Digital isn't just the future. Digital is now. I like my DVDs, but am not opposed to ditching them once I rip them to MP4 on my media drive. I'm like my old mix tapes, but playlists are a lot more convenient when you hit the gym. I like my old tape/CD collection, but I sure as hell prefer carrying 10k songs with me on a tiny iPod. I like my games, the manuals they come with, and the cases they come in. I also like saving 25% by skipping the brick & mortar guys. You lose some of the human touch in the name of progress, but what you gain can be infinitely greater. I don't want to become like some old people who are scared of new things just because I refuse to give up my favorites. You either have to accept that the world changes, quickly, or you become the product of a bygone era. If it's new, I'll try it. New music? New tech? New trends? New whatever? No fear. What's the worse that happens? I hate it or look like an idiot trying? Big deal. I've got no shame. Maybe I'd be on the losing end by going digital everything. Can't say I didn't try to embrace the future instead. Better that than run from it.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:21 a.m. CST

    astronut, I don't think anyone is really excited about this


    I for one said from the get go that Webb was a poor choice and the only reason he got the gig is because of his last name. There is no doubt that Nolan trumps Webb.

  • I'm not saying I don't think that ASM will be a steaming pile. It might very well be. I'm not so enthusiastic by what I'm seeing here. However, I see no purpose in hating it just because I love one film more. That's fanaticism at its worst. Take each movie by itself. For all we know, Nolan's 3rd Batman may succumb to the 3rd comic movie curse. Then again, it may kick all sorts of ass. You never know. Judge each on its own merits... once you see actually them.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Higher quality version here.

    by Smashing

  • July 20, 2011, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Second verse the same as the first

    by cookepuss

    Still not sold yet. Hopefully the 2nd trailer will show us a bigger picture of what we're getting here, 616/USM or Nolanverse Spider-Man.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:43 a.m. CST

    I'm actually turned around now.

    by Smashing

    It all looks and feels rather exciting and I'm looking forward to seeing it finished, the POV shot is cool and I like the music and vibe.

  • What an angry individual you are. I would be suprised if in two months they have enough material to create a balanced teaser trailer. The other issue, of course, is that they may not wish to include much footage. It is, after all, a TEASER.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:58 a.m. CST

    The POV shot is terrible

    by Martin

    Did you guys actually saw it in HD? It's baaaad. Looks like game footage

  • July 20, 2011, 11:03 a.m. CST

    choppa, rsanta74 (and others), here's my analogy

    by Astronut

    I'm not angry as much as I am bewildered. I get that we can all love/look forward to more than one movie... I totally get that. I just cannot see how anyone could get pumped up for more of the same Spider-Man we got only a few years back... what are they giving us (except for the Lizard) that we haven't already seen? Judging by the trailer, I see an uglier suit (with silver SLIPPERS, mind you), an angst-ridden Twilight-esque dude with a bizarre long neck, and a repeat of the origin story. Wow, how awesome. I get that you can look forward to more than one film, yes, but here's my analogy. (I love analogies) You just find out that a relative has died and left you two sports cars which you get to take possession of next summer. They tell you one car is a Kia Forte and the other is a Lamboghini Gallardo. Batman is the Lambo. Guess who's the Kia.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:04 a.m. CST

    @vadersmyfather: It works both ways, y'know.

    by cookepuss

    People shouldn't out & out hate something that's barely there. At the same time, they shouldn't proclaim it an automatic win either. This goes for the TDKR worshipers as well as the ASM haters.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST


    by Smashing

    I guess it's natural his home made suit would look shitty, unlike Raimis Parker would could apparently whip up super stylized outfits, maybe after Fury enters his life SHIELD will outfit him?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST


    by vadersmyfather

    I am neither a worshiper nor a hater. I simply think it is unrealistic to berate TDKR (as some were doing) when they are not really in a position to offer as much polished footage as ASM. Also, I think the context of the films is very different, one clearly focusing on the ending of a trilogy and so offering a recap to draw it all together, the other starting afresh and making clear that is the case.

  • QFT That's my earlier point exactly. That's why you have to let it cool off more before you reboot. As of now, it's been only 4 years since SM3. That's nothing, really. They waited 2x that before relaunching Batman. That's not to say that SM3 was was much of a turd as Batman & Robin, but you DO have to have a decent period of time between failure and reboot. Get that bad taste out of people's mouths. X-Men successfully dodged this decade long mourning period by making First Class equal parts reboot and prequel, picking & choosing the best from each previous flick. XFC was an apology for X3, although that flick does have some redeeming qualities. Spider-Man, if they're to truly ditch Raimi's stuff, has to be approached in such a way so that people almost forget Spider-Man 3.

  • Completely agree.

  • The hours on these productions are long. There's also a lot you can't show because much of the movie is VFX and that will be accomplished in an even lengthier post-production phase. Still, there's no way they'll be shooting this for 6 months. Principle shouldn't last much longer and will be followed up by pickups & reshoots. You can actually accomplish a lot on a film in 2 months.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:22 a.m. CST

    You can actually accomplish a lot on a film in 2 months.

    by vadersmyfather

    You can. But as you highlight there may be otehr reasons why it was kept under wraps. I believe that principal photography is due to finish in November. Somewhat starngely, in an interview this morning Michael Caine said that they were half way through filming - although he may have meant his scenes.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST

    rsanta74, one more fix for Spider-Man 3

    by jim

    Create a climax for the film that doesn't involve Spidey fighting the villain(s) in order to save Mary Jane (again). It's "with great power comes great responsibility" not "with great power comes the ability to bail your girlfriend out of a jam". Where is the Spider-Man who takes on the villain simply because it is the right thing to do, because he is the only one who can do it; and not because a loved one is in danger?

  • This spread out schedule might mean that there's a lot of practical VFX work, which requires a lot more setup. I'm also guessing that they also end up doing a lot of mocap and wire stuff, which is a time drain too. Pushing principle to November might also mean that they're already actively working on the CG heavy Lizard stuff right now, as to stay ahead of the post-production crunch period between principle and release. Might also mean that they're winging some stuff as they go along. (Wouldn't be the first time. That's right, Iron Man. I'm talking to you.) A production like this is such a big puzzle with tons of moving pieces. It doesn't seemed rushed to all of you, but when you consider that post-production alone can often take up a year, you can see what I'm talking about. For the record, Episode I was filmed between June 26 and Sept 30 of 1997. 3 months. That flick had almost 2,000 VFX shots, which is part of the reason why it wasn't released for nearly 2 more years after they shot it. ASM taking 6 months of principle? Not unprecedented, but it does seem a little longish for a top tier studio. At least to me. WTF do I know? LOL

  • July 20, 2011, 12:05 p.m. CST

    Create a climax for the film that doesn't involve...

    by cookepuss

    Thank You Mario! But Our Princess Is In Another Castle!‏ That's pretty much what it amounted to. MJ, even in the comics, has rarely been more than a sexy Princess Toadstool. She's defied cliche that at times, but fallen into that same damsel in distress mold one too many times.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    big jim


    you know that it's Gwen Stacy in this one and more than likely she's going to die in the end?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    @the_choppah: Gwen might NOT die

    by cookepuss

    Rumors are that this Spider-Man is more closely tied to the Ultimate Universe version. In that continuity, Gwen is very much still alive and has remained so for nearly 11 years.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST

    rsanta74, I could not agree more with this point:

    by jim

    you wrote: "Stop driving away readers by trying to gain new ones. It never works. New #1 issues are Band-Aid publishing tactics. Sales usually dip to pre-reboot levels, if now lower. Stop retconing stuff because you think it'll make the book more accessible. It doesn't. It only makes history MORE complicated. That drives away readers, which forces pubs to either drop books or raise prices. There are tons of tactics which actually drive old readers away. Marvel & DC are guilty of cheap tricks which end up backfiring." In the late '90s, as a 20 year reader of The Amazing Spider-Man, The Avengers, The Fantastic Four, and Captain America, I felt completely marginalized when Marvel announced "next issue, #1 of Volume 2". Why? Because "kids today don't want to get into collecting comics with 300 or 400 + issues to catch up on". Yet, issue 1 (volume 2) of The Amazing Spider-Man still had 400+ issues of backstory behind it. Pandering to an excuse (not necessarily the reason) why they have trouble attracting new readers, while dismissing long-time readers, was insulting. But then again, that was Marvel in the '90s - the only thing that mattered was this quarter's bottom line (dealing with next quarter's in the next quarter). These days what gets to me is the Variant covers. Seems like every other issue of every other book has them nowadays. Sure, it's a nice bonus for the comic book stores who get 1 Variant for ordering X of said book, then sell it for 10 times, or more, the cover price. However, most of the time the Variant covers are way more interesting and appealing and simply better, than the regular covers. Regular covers are often bland and somewhat generic. Maybe it's just me, but wouldn't using the more artistically imaginative cover on the regular issues attract more customers?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:31 p.m. CST

    the_choppah, yes I know

    by jim

    I was referring to Spider-Man 3. Would have been nice if Raimi'd mixed it up a bit, had a Spider-Man who faced the impossible odds climax out of a sense of duty rather than a need to rescue a loved one.

  • - Gimmick cover with holograms, wrap around, & gatefold covers. Blank covers even. - Bagging comics like Ultimate Spider-Man 160 so that they don't get spoiled online immediately, yet spoiling the ending themselves to the press. - Limited edition variants that are intentionally being designed to boost the after market and speculation - "Everything Will Change" hype for summer events that change nothing, except for sales (temporarily). Heroes Reborn & Onsalught, anyone? - More characters are dark, gritty, extreme, and even homicidal. Just like the 90s, minus the excess of pouches. Apparently, Marvel subscribes to the Poochy the Dog school of design & marketing. =) - Unnecessary relaunches. Honestly, there was no reason to reboot New Mutants as X-Force back in the early 90s. The creative team was the same. The cast was largely the same. Even the direction didn't shift much from what was done in the past 12-18 months. It was a cheap sales tactic so that they could push new bagged #1 issues. Ironically, the book ended up reverting to the original 80s lineup after not too long. Now, Allred/Milligan's X-Force.... THAT was a reboot worthy shift in direction. Marvel is gonna screw themselves over if they keep this up. They're well on track to duplicate every mistake of the 90s if they're not careful. Even Disney has a tolerance for failure. The comics are essentially being kept alive as a life support system for the much more profitable movies. Marvel sales already suck compared to 15 years ago. Some high profile books keep on bleeding readership. If that continues, not even Disney will turn a blind eye and Marvel will be in trouble again. What really grinds my gears (lol) is the "made for trade" mentality. Forced (de)compression pisses me off. They think that they'll sell more TPBs if they force these convenient 4 or 6 issue arcs down our throats at the book store. They may well be right. However, in doing so, the quality of the writing is suffering. Made for trade stories tend to feel either rushed or padded. Writers like Bendis, while awesome, have been guilty of stretching 2 issues worth of story out to 6. It's a sleazy cash grab. There's almost no room nowadays for those "done in one" series' or epic slow burn arcs that take 12 or 18 months to unfold. Claremont in the 80s was great at those. Forced arc structures are killing quality as much as event overload, which keeps actual deep characterization at bay. This made for trade philosophy? That's what's driving floppy sales up. People aren't supporting the monthlies, instead opting to wait 6 or 9 months for the next trade. It's a killer.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:48 p.m. CST

    driving floppy sales DOWN. oops. ;->

    by cookepuss

  • Can somebody give me a break and please elucidate this poor non-english speaking foreigner, aka me, on the meaning of that strange weird neologism. Merrick always hurts his own native language everytime he writes, but that's a bit much even for such an anti-grammar-nazi like me.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST

    "Gwen might NOT die". And the nerd rage will be epic... or not.

    by AsimovLives

  • July 20, 2011, 2:34 p.m. CST

    asimovlives, nerd rage is always epic

    by jim

    What, that sucks; X would be awesome!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:37 p.m. CST

    oops haunted site - try that again

    by jim

    Nerd rage is always epic, and ever-present regardless of content and context. Nerd1: "I hate they are doing X!" Nerd2: "No, So-And-So confirmed they are not doing X" Nerd1: "What, that sucks! X would be awesome!"

  • July 20, 2011, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by BlackBauer0320

    I'm pretty sure there are several articles out there stating that Emma Stone is signed on for several films. While it could be that this would be for flashbacks or cameos, it seems unlikely that they're going the classic death route, at least in this one.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:03 p.m. CST

    As far as the trailer goes...

    by BlackBauer0320

    Now that I've seen it in HD it seems fair to comment on it. I do like the cast. I think Garfield could really excel here, and I can accept him as a high school kid. I realize he's too old but how often are high school characters ever played by someone at the correct age? Even Maguire was about 27 when he was playing Parker the first time around. Emma as Gwen also strikes me as good casting, as she looks natural with the blonde hair (since she is, after all), and she always seems to exude charisma and likability in the things I've seen her in. The tone also sits well with me. I think we'll see more humor mixed in as we see more footage, but the darker mood certain sets it apart from its predecessor, and that is a necessity. As far as the POV, it's a neat idea, but I'm not sure it really sells the trailer. It's clearly supposed to be the money shot that gets everyone excited, but it doesn't quite do it for me. I can remember the day the trailer for the first Spider-Man came out, and I must have watched it 100 times just for those glimpses of him in action. Those are the money shots. I'm okay if they keep that in the movie, as it's something different, but we definitely need to see more. As big of a Spider-Man fan as I am, the final shot of Bane closing in on a beleaguered Batman did a bit more for me (though I hate to fuel the masses on here, which seems to be mostly Nolan lovers).