Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN Teaser Trailer (Non-Shaky)!

Nordling here.

I'm still iffy on this.  The point-of-view camerawork looks like something out of MIRROR'S EDGE or a first person shooter.  I think Andrew Garfield does good work based on the little we've seen, and I like the idea of realistic action sequences, but there's something off about this that I can't put my finger on.  Maybe it's because we've been here before, and Sam Raimi's love of the source material was so genuine and true that, especially in the first two films, it really felt like Spider-Man.  This one - not so much, although the mechanical webshooters do look pretty neat:


THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN opens next year, and you'll likely see this trailer on the big screen this weekend attached to CAPTAIN AMERICA.  Nordling, out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 20, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST


    by Meadowe

  • July 20, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST

    who are they kidding

    by cekma

    trying to almost pretend it's not a spiderman movie until the last seconds. This ain't batman begins/Nolan.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST


    by JesseDart

  • July 20, 2011, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Not a great teaser, gotta admit

    by Patch

    I'm not bagging on the film, which I think will be intriguing, as they are using a "Nolan" template. Just gotta admit that this teaser didn't do it for me. The parts they are expecting to sizzle, don't. There isn't really much tension. Wish we could have seen some of the Lizard effects.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:29 a.m. CST

    bigger version :

    by tbdeinc


  • July 20, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST


    by aaron cassese

    not anything to exciting. I will still see this movie opening day but I still think this was an unnecessary reboot, as most are.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST

    I've seen more meat on a butcher's apron

    by AnalFissure

    Garfield looks like he'd shit his knickers if you so much as looked at him the wrong way.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST

    his parents were no god commie spies!!!! bastards

    by DannerV2

    just the smurfs

  • July 20, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST


    by Meadowe

    I've never seen Peter Parker drawn as, ahem, unattractive as garfield. Tobey was a good lookin' guy but also nerdy looking. garfield reminds me of dj qualls.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:31 a.m. CST

    good , god, whatever.

    by DannerV2

    spider smurfs

  • July 20, 2011, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Going against the trend

    by Roman

    I thought it looked Badass. I am not some jilted person its more FREAKING SPIDER MAN!! That is never bad

  • July 20, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST

    interested but not convinced

    by Calvin_Crack

    i think that the end of the teaser, spiderman shoulda been like "MARRRRRKKKKK?!?!!!!!"

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Why does it SAY 1080P but it's only in 360?

    by SmokingRobot

    What is this, 1996?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    the POV thing is just for the trailer

    by Mysterious_Volvo

    i dont see it having any place in the actual movie. but this film is so redundant its sickening. the car tossing thing we've seen in spiderman 2.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Reboots prevent cash-cowing sequels...

    by Mickster_Island Batman & Robin, Superman III & IV, X-Men 3, and basically every comic after the bright and inventive first creative team leave. Nerds, I know you've been told otherwise, but reboots are your friends.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Looks a'ight

    by Nasty In The Pasty

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    whats with the shitty trailers

    by elsewhere

    First TDKR and now TASM. Figured they would actually show Spider-Man doing his thing considering all the hype around the practical stunt work.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Is the budget for this thing still supposed to be 80 million?

    by Mysterious_Volvo

  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Thumbs down

    by Lourdes Galan

    Horrible Cgi, awful costume and Spider-Gay....... Hope this absurd reboot will fail.....

  • July 20, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST

    And it's gone

    by donkey_lasher

    Bye Bye

  • July 20, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    I disliked Raimi's films.

    by JTStarkiller

    This one seems more up my alley. I don't want a dark brooding Spider-Man, but Raimi's dramatic skills were seriously lacking. Everything just felt goofy. Awkward acting, dialogue, directing. Everything. Hopefully this one fixes all of his mistakes.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Still worried about the tone of this

    by sunwukong86

  • July 20, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    and less than 7 minutes later....

    by matchesmalone2380

    It's taken down. Do we really need another origin story???

  • July 20, 2011, 11:36 a.m. CST

    It's really dark...

    by Immortal_Fish

    Too dark. If it wasn't for the POV, I'd have thought this was a teaser for a horror movie. Do we really need the exposition on his parents? This is Spider-Man. Where's the fun?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:36 a.m. CST

    Raimi ruined the franchise.

    by Santiago Charboneau

    Spiderman 1 and 2 were pretty faithful to the original source material, but spiderman 3 was total bullshit.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Whatever it takes...

    by craptacular

    To erase the cinematic memory of Topher-Venom, I will endure.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    I remember seeing this movie in theatres

    by Transhuman

    I have it on DVD. Too soon for a reboot.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Raimi's spiderman

    by donkey_lasher

    was too good to be rebooted so soon. This will appeal to anyone under the age of 12. Everyone else will ywan and say it's been done.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:38 a.m. CST


    by Bill Binkelman

    Can't imagine a good reason for a re-boot. Tobey was as good a Peter Parker as one could hope for...this new guy looks like an Emo Peter Parker...where's the sense of fun?

  • Someone said this before, and I agree: being Spider-Man helped Peter Parker overcome his shyness and be a more well-rounded person. I have this old comic book where Mark Bagley is asked who he thinks would be great as Spider-Man in the "upcoming" film (the interview was in 93 or 94) and he said Charlie Sheen would be a great Peter Parker. I mention this because I think it's kind of funny that now his father Martin Sheen is Uncle Ben. I thought 500 Days of Summer was ok and I like a lot of Marc Webb's videos but I still can't get over rebooting the entire thing. Avi Arad said in an interview that this wasn't a reboot...well then I guess that wasn't an all-new origin with Gwen Stacy that we just saw right? And when did Gwen Stacy have anything to do with a scientific company? I digress; if the movie is good I don't care what job she has. But yeah Garfield better be thanking his lucky stars that he starred in Heath Ledger's last movie because I think that's what helped him get the role.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:38 a.m. CST


    by NixEclips

    I think I'm going to be sick.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:39 a.m. CST

    I'm sorry but...

    by TheWacoKid

    Sam Raimi's Spider Man movies were not that great. I tried to like them, but I finally gave up. They were just OK.. The only good parts were James Franco and Willem Dafoe. Tobey Maguire might have looked the part, but to me, wasn’t great, and Kirsten Dunst was just all around terrible for her role. I just didn’t like the campiness of the first 3. They all seemed reminiscent of Joel Schumacher’s Batman movies. Andrew Garfield looks great, and Emma Stone is a huge upgrade from Dunst. So call me excited about a good Spider Man movie finally. However, that first person Spider Man stuff? They gotta knock that off because that was just ridiculous.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:39 a.m. CST

    holy shit that looks fucking great!


    fuck all of you haters... i just done understand it. Raimi did okay, but his films are already seem very dated. and tobey "mopey" macguire was boring and slightly retarded in the movies. dont get me wrong, they were awesome because they were spidey movies. This trailer looks great. A Garf looks like Parker should look. and FUCKING MECHANICAL SHOOTERS. thank you. ... fucking dumb organic shooters...

  • July 20, 2011, 11:40 a.m. CST

    nice name "fassneto"

    by Jesiah

    Now that was a great freakin' movie!

  • July 20, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    reboot you your arse

    by eROKv

    everyone rails endlessly about corporate greed, but then take a break from the railing to watch a useless, blatant cash-grab of a reboot by a giant corporation. idiots.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    So far it's missing the fun...

    by Somerichs

    Spiderman is a wise-cracking wiseass, has a sense of humor and goads the baddies. He's not brooding and serious and troubled (at least not troubled in the way they seem to be portraying him here). This feels a little like spider-bat-man. I'm hoping that's not the case and there is a little more sense of "holy fuck how cool is this" than what's shows in this clip. I'm also assuming he's as brilliant in this reboot as he is in the comics/movies, but that doesn't necessarily come through here...

  • July 20, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Spiderman 2 has not aged well...

    by Mick

    Saw it again recently, and much of it seems dated and cheesy--it used to be my fave comic adaptation along with X-Men 2. If Raimi purportedly loved the source material so much, why were his Harry Osborn & Venom characters so off-base? Why did Harry turn into the Gliding Goblin? Why did he start with MJ and try to shoe-horn Gwen Stacy? Sure some of these had to be studio edicts, but if he was so in touch with the source material, why deviate so much?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    The POV looks like shit...

    by Martin

    Hope it's just for the teaser trailer, cause it's really bad. Seems straight out of a game. I was reading articles about how he wanted the new spider man to be less CG, more realist... and then we get that crappy 3D POV... I don't get it.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    1st person POV makes it look like I'm playing a video game

    by Titus05

  • July 20, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    I am officially less interested.

    by DOGSOUP

  • July 20, 2011, 11:43 a.m. CST


    by jasper Stillwell

    Props are due to the guy. He respected the orginal material and he gave us a love letter to Ditko, Romita et al . And yet he still managed, (despite never really getting a handle on Mary Jane and totally wasting Gwen Stacy), to make things feel contemporary and fun. This is the Ultimates version so I guess it'll be aimed at 12-year olds. So I really have no hopes for this at all. Though maybe it'd be nice to see a wise-cracking, smart-ass Parker...for once.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Far too soon for a remake.. PASS....

    by vorlonkosh

  • July 20, 2011, 11:46 a.m. CST


    by Mars

    This trailer sucks sucks SUCKS! the movie will suck, the costume sucks (no belt? slippers? basketball-head? purple crotch! LOL) this movie will be hyped to the extreme with marketing and will make millions off your hard earned cash! one word, Torrent!

  • July 20, 2011, 11:46 a.m. CST

    So... does he end up suing the Facebook guy?

    by v3d

  • July 20, 2011, 11:47 a.m. CST


    by Meadowe

    I guess since Percy Jackson didn't do well and ag had the social network in the can they went the andrew barfield route.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    hahaha the only reason

    by Mars

    why they are showing us the POV shots of him swinging, is because they dont wanna show how shitty the suit really looks, and how much skinnier this spiderman was to tobey, at least he put on sum lean muscle!

  • July 20, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST


    by sickerandsweeter

    NOT! Is this Dark Spider-man? Post 9/11 Spider-man. I mean all the others were post 9/11 spider-man, but we have Batman for the dark mood and characters, we don't need Spider-man to be more like a Michael Mann film too. But I hated (500) days of Summer and I love Sam Raimi, so call me bias.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Raimi's Spider-Man was too good to be rebooted so soon.

    by elsewhere


  • July 20, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    So is the Red Skull in this?

    by cookylamoo

    The communist Red Skull from the Fifties because he's the one that killed Peter's Parents.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Looks like Batman is going to make Spider-Man his bitch.

    by Astronut

    Because let's face it, this sucks.

  • I would be much more interested in that; even if it is good if The Dark Knight Rises is any good people will forget about this reboot pretty fast.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:50 a.m. CST

    The suit is still killing me

    by skycrapper

    How do you screw up the suit? I'm a hardcore Spidey geek so I'll be there when it comes out but man this reeks of Sony just wanting to retain the cash cow rights.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Looks great

    by slone13

    Fuck anyone who doesn't think so.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Yes, you quoted me correctly elsewhere

    by donkey_lasher

    I meant the first Spiderman, not the godawful sequels. Perhaps you weren't around or old enough to enjoy the first one, which got rave reviews?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:54 a.m. CST

    I cant believe the 1st person POV hate


    this site mostly caters to trolls, so not surprised

  • July 20, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    You mean the one with the Power Ranger Green Goblin? Yes I was around. lol

  • July 20, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Spiderman for the Twilight crowd?

    by seasider

    This is what concerns about the upcoming Superman movie as well. Nolan's Batman movies have been so successful that studios feel like they have to use his formula for every super hero flick now. It worked for Batman because he is kind of a dark character to begin with. But Spiderman is not some depressed hero full of angst. I'll withhold judgement till the movie comes out but so far it looks way too moody and not fun and do we really need to see a headcam shot of Spidey swinging around tall buildings?

  • I'm a lifelong movie goer pal. This is the biggest bullshit I've ever seen. I should have been safe seeing this thing this week no fucking problem.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:59 a.m. CST

    What would you have preferred?

    by donkey_lasher

    A rubber masked Green Goblin, or a CGI faced Green Goblin, or a Power Ranger Green Goblin? It was a pretty difficult character to visualise on the screen.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Raimi didn't ruin a goddamned thing

    by spidercoz

    Sony did, with their incessant interference. If they had just left him the fuck alone to make the movie he wanted to make, we'd not only have a good Spider-man 3 out there, we'd have Spidey 4, and prally 5 in pre-production right now. Now what do we have, some no-name schmuck without a single good credit to his name kowtowing to every asinine demand the studio morons make. I'm sure it'll be everything they want. I think it's a bunch of re-re-rehashed bullshit. But I'm sure it'll make money just because people are low attention span idiots. Though it won't make nearly the bank that the first 3 did. And that Spidey suit looks like a speed skater gone wrong. Fuck this shit.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST

    ok teaser

    by silverdog

    still hate the new costume. it does not look "home made" at all anyway. it looks as expensive, over-designed, and exaggerated as the old one ... only fuglier. the red- black desings alex ross did for the raimi movies would have worked 10.000 times better.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Dumbest reboot ever?

    by nemov

    Watching the origin story in this trailer was tedious enough. I have ZERO interest and sitting through another origin story for Spiderman.

  • I have a 200 inch screen at home. Seriously. There is nothing to get me out of the house besides 3D IMAX. I was plenty happy watching the illusionist at 200 inches instead of 3D IMAX transformers- but fuck me running. That fucking thing played for 2 weeks tops.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:04 p.m. CST


    by donkey_lasher

    I fully agree. People also have short memories about Spiderman 1. It was very popular when it came out, and most people on this site loved it. I don't understand where the hate has come from. It's aged as much as Burtons Batman, and no-one knocks that.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:06 p.m. CST

    give us a REAL bad guy for once

    by fred

    Someone really evil. The only bad thing about the first three was that none of the villains were unrepentantly bad, just the victims of circumstance. It was like a Super Friends episode.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Sorry to hear about Transformers 3

    by donkey_lasher

    But Bay had no chance against that finale.

  • Let's see here. What am I gonna say? Please show transformers 3D IMAX again. Perhaps for some afternoon shows. Or I'll fucking bash your fucking head in when your walking to your car? Does that sound good? Anyone have anything else to add to this?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:07 p.m. CST

    It was a pretty difficult character to visualise on the screen.

    by elsewhere

    Bullshit. They could have easily tweaked it so the serum Osbourne consumes changed his appearance to look like the classic Green Goblin. As for the costume, well I'm sure they could made that work as well. Problem is, Raimi didn't know what the fuck he wanted his movies to be.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    ultratron, i'm presuming your 200 inch screen is a projector screen rather than a bonafide HD TV?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by SeXX ED

    I'm with you too, completely. Well said, thanks.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:09 p.m. CST

    There's a lot of hate for the POV

    by Mockingbuddha

    But I remember a quite long POV at the end of, I think the first Spider Man, but I guess it could have been the second. They like ended the movie with it. I don't remember any of this hate back then. Having said that, tone seems a little off. I hope there is some humor in this. Like what I've seen from Garfield.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:09 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    And yeah, the origin stuff in this trailer seems very dull and staid - as if they've gone out of their way to cut the most subdued trailer possible. Would have been better if the teaser had only been the first-person sequence imho.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:10 p.m. CST

    Fucking stop...

    by DigitalBeachWar

    ...Stop saying that Raimi ruined Spider-Man with the third film. The fucking studio ruined the third film... not Raimi! And stop saying that the new Peter Parker looks "emo" He doesn't in the slightest look "emo". He looks like a fucking hipster model for The GAP. Get it right before you start flapping your fucking uninformed fingers.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    2 things I noticed....

    by MoneyGrabSequel

    A web comes out of his spider bite, so does that mean the webs are organic and the only shooter is mechanical? Also showed him sewing the Spidey suit....funny considering all of the "how can a kid make that suit" comments

  • July 20, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Raimi ruined Spider-Man

    by elsewhere

  • July 20, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    BETTER youtube link

    by Jubba

  • July 20, 2011, 12:12 p.m. CST

    man, most of you are FUCKING IDIOTS

    by BILLY

    This looks decent. If I judged my interest on this trailer , then I REALLY want to see it. The P.O.V of Spiderman is awesome. And no shitty CGI like in the orignal spiderman films. Now, listen-I still think SPIDERMAN 2 is the best superhero film to date. No arguing there. But Raimi is gone, and I think this iteration looks okay. Obviously, we may have to wait for reviews....but based on this trailer, I'm sold.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:13 p.m. CST

    This could absolutely work

    by Jamie

    Young Peter Parker didn't really hit his stride till becoming Spider-Man gave him a little bit of he was kinda broody, maybe not dark but distant, and very socially awkward. Looks like that's what they're going for in the trailer. I've always kinda liked the parts of the comics where you're reading about Parker, not watching Spider-Man do something amazing. My problem with Raimi's version, is that he got him out of highschool way too fast, so he never really developed Peter Parker as much as he did Spider-Man. And for me at least, Spider-Man has always been the opposite of Spider-Man comics...Peter Parker is the main character, with Spider-Man being his alter Batman comics, Batman is the main character, with Bruce Wayne being his alter ego.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST


    by donkey_lasher

    I saw no camera flares. Are they being saved for the full trailer?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    So unnecessary.

    by Royston Lodge

    Why? Really, why? Why bother? I don't get it. I just don't get it.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man's for kids and losers

    by NightArrows

    What a hilariously dumb-fuck thing to say. My God™, there are so many stupid mother fuckers on this site...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Transformers 3

    by Mockingbuddha

    is not worth getting so worked up over. It's okay, but still Macheal Bay Transformers. Just wait and watch the video on your giant tv. I thought the first two Tf's looked better on tv anyway, and mines way smaller than yours.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    I can't believe I have to see another SM origin movie.

    by moorE12

  • July 20, 2011, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Spiderman sucks... always has, always will

    by Nick

    Well, the 90s cartoon was fun... but this, and the other films... CRAP

  • July 20, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    It's for the Android Generation

    by donkey_lasher

    A Sony authorised adaptation which has been inspired by Star Trek and Twilight. Don't expect any close ties to the source material here folks. The Avengers movie will piss all over this.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    After seeing the trailer...

    by Ator

    I feel very "meh" about this. It's not often a trailer makes me less interested to see a film.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    The trailer plays like the set-up for a horror movie.

    by Orbots Commander

    Yeah, that isn't Spider-Man. Maybe Sony should have titled their movie the Man-Spider or something. It's also obvious that Webb and the studio are hiding the costume, probably because it's a fugly mess. Either that, or due to their constrained budget, their action shots are few and far between, which may explain the POV shot.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Yep, organic webs for sure

    by MoneyGrabSequel

    just mechanical shooters. Stupid. Parker makes the damn things! Why is that soooo hard to put on film. Strike 2. Maybe on the next re-reboot in 5 years...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Who killed Hollywood? (please read)

    by Billy_D_Williams

    Who killed Hollywood? Whos' responsible for an environment in which the studios are hellbent on building an assembly line for "event" pictures/reboots/etc? How did we find ourselves in a situation where production costs are so high that it's all but impossible to take artistic risks? Who decreed that the primary responsibility of filmmakers is to provide the equivalent of a theme-park ride (the Spidey POV shot???) rather than relating a personal story about believable characters? The answer is that Hollywood bears no relationship to the Hollywood that existed through the first eigh decades of its development. The studios have lost their identities as seedbeds. of pop culture. They've been relegated to a new role as mere appendages of vast multi national corporations grinding out "content" for the global distribution mills. Hollywood's assembly line has been scaled down and retooled, not only to feed the world's movie theaters and TV screens, but also to channel new product and ideas into theme park rides, music, toys, video games emporiums and all the other ancillary goodies that enhance the revenue streams of their corporate parents. The movies that get the green light are as close to being "risk averse" as possible, tailored to whet the appetites of financing and marketing partners rather than audiences. Today the decision as to wehether to green light a movie may involve scores of executives, with the debate hinging on questions like: Will the movie play well in Europe and Asia? How strong is the video and DVD/blu-ray aftermarket? Will the subject matter attract marketing partners like McDonald's? Will there be tie ins for toys and other merchandising opportunities? Could the storyline inspire a theme park ride? Could the narrative be captured in a brief TV commercial? Welcome to the world of movies as merchandise. In the era of the evnt picture, no one has time to worry about anachronistic issues like whether the story works (plot holes galore in TDK) or the characters are believeable. The process of starting a movie is more akin to introducing a new toothpaste, with one major difference: With toothpaste, the key lies in marketing prowess, not in the quality of the product. With a film, every moviegoer in America seems to know from day one whether it works or not. If the movie isn't entertaining, no amount of ad spending can make a difference. The problem with these megapics of course is that like "Godzilla", they crumble under their own weight. Because of the sheer magnitude of the investment, corporate committees intervene at ever opportunity to offer "advice" about the cast, storyline, and other "creative issues". Deputations from Burger King, Pepsi, and the like also increasingly have their input. Soulless, by the numbers megapics are the inevitable result. Movies become "product" just as ideas become "content", and studio execs become more corporate apparatchiks. The key to stopping this abomination is us, the people who support the pyramid, keeping it upright. There is no reason to complain about the state of the movie business if you keep shelling out your hard earned dollars. PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT THIS REBOOT

  • Same old shit, man... E-yup, I agree wholeheartedly. This is such a money grab. Yeah I know, every film project is a money grab, but how blatant can they be? Just look at this thing. Rewind to poor reviews of Spider-Man 3... Shortly after, Twilight hysteria begins to take hold... Sony sees a chance to cut costs (increasingly expensive actors, clashes with Raimi, etc) from its Spider-Man series AND!! AT THE SAME TIME!! refurbish its Spider-Man by appealing to the Twi-tards. And they're doing it all for $80 mil... a pittance compared to what the franchise was costing them. Hell, if I remember right, Total Recall cost $100 mil and that was back in 1989, 1990. $80 mil for a fresh, new, awesome SPIDER-MAN FILM?! As many have pointed out, they should have waited another few years to let the body cool and the smell dissipate. This new Spider-Man refurbish: 1) IS TOO SOON 2) DOES NOT OFFER ANYTHING TRULY '' NEW '' 3) LOOKS DIM AND DEPRESSING I'll be blown away by movies like Dark Knight Rises and Prometheus. Because those projects get me excited with the prospect of something new and thrilling. This? Count me the fuck out.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:24 p.m. CST

    HATE having the parents being a part of the story

    by Thunderbolt Ross

    Terrible idea

  • July 20, 2011, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Garfield sounds EXACTLY like Tobey.

    by Se7en

    WTF. Thought this was a reboot. Feels I've been here before. Nothing new here folks. They should've ditched the origin story. YAWN.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:27 p.m. CST

    nemov, you said it

    by Transhuman

    It's boring enough watching the origin stuff in this trailer, let alone the movie when it comes out

  • July 20, 2011, 12:30 p.m. CST

    I'm with jtstarkiller on this one...

    by Don

    I liked Raimi's love for the source material, but he missed the mark when it came to Spidey being an absolute smartass when in costume. The dialog at times WAS clunky and the organic webshooters never did do it for me. This looks more along the lines of Ultimate Spider-Man, which is fine. It took the mythos in a slightly different direction than the original, and you have to do that to maintain AND attract a newer/younger audience. I've been a fan of Spidey for close to 40 years, and true, this is NOT the Spidey I grew up with. But you have to embrace the fact that your favorite character is on the big screen for the whole world to see (flaws and all), than never to experience that feeling (multiple times now) with the Raimi trilogy before it and now this version.

  • Garfield has got a face like a spanked arse. What genius decided that yet another 'origin' story was needed. This will probably appeal to the emo twilight tweenies and Glee fans. Let's face it movie making is a busuness, like all businesses they go for profit. With movie's it's the common denominator, for this it's 12a rating + tweenie dialogue + twilight 'mood' + game and music video tie in + product placement = profit (hopefully) but just like Gay Lantern i don't think the studio has realised audiences are far less interested in this genre now. I predict C.A. will also suffer after a good opening. Fan boys will rush to see these movies, after that, 'the fall' Harry Potter is showing how it's done. No pretending it's anything more than what it is, a steady decade of movies - which other franchise can say it's TENTH movie is it's most successful. Transformers was beating it's chest for a few weeks then, BAM harry spanks the robots. Warner Bros will clean up this year with Harry Potter and then next year with TDKR. With everyone else fighting over what's left. Spider Man has been done - 2 great movies & 1 so-so movie. This looks trite and 'by the numbers' Garfiled is epically miscast, he's a good actor but not in the ailling superhero genre. Audiences will always recognise Batman movies as they have risen into the so called 'crossover' domain like Star Wars and James Bond, everyone knows Batman. Iron Man also is successful because Stark, like Wayne, is just a man - people identify immediantly with these characters. Batman IS dark and forboding, Iron man is his jock brother. Green Lantern, Spider Man, even Super Man in the 21st century, will never connect. The more advanced we become, the more 'human' we'll want our hero's. This movie.............should have been made 7 years ago.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:31 p.m. CST

    The Mirrors Edge analogy is pretty spot on. Who decided

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

    that we need a replay of the origin story? I haven't given this movie much thought, but after seeing the trailer, I have to say, Why? Wonder what the Comic Con crowd will make of it...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    And yeah, nobody...

    by Orbots Commander going to get worked up over Transformers-frickin'-3 and the lack of IMAX screens. Everybody knew that the final Potter was going to be huge; the pre-sales and tracking had been off the charts for weeks, months. Theater owners planned accordingly. Maybe if this was The Dark Knight Rises or some Ridley Scott/Peter Jackson epic, I'd care more.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    This is Spider-Man. Where's the fun?

    by fat_rancor_keeper

    I agree. Damn that trailer is FUCKING BLEAK. It doesn't look bad per say, but I was expecting something just a bit more upbeat. Trailers can be deceiving though. We'll see.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    I'm not screaming my head off

    by Laserhead

    But this certainly looks like dogshit; the POV was tired and uninspiring, as was the generally darkened tone of the piece.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Emo Spidey

    by disfigurehead

    How do the kids say it? Gay fag shit. Yeah.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:33 p.m. CST


    by uberman

    I think this looks terrific. I'll wait for the movie before I pass further judgement.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    That strand of spiderweb in his neck, he analyzes it and makes more.

    by Carl XVI Gustaf

    Then makes nifty web shooters. Raimi's version hasn't ages well at all. And when was the last time you got the urge to rewatch any of them? The only part he really nailed was the origin. That was amazingly spot on! (oh and the Dr Octopus Evil Dead arm cam thing was neat) Other than that the movies had the same strange, silly tone that Xena had. Really looking forward to this one! (which other than the basketball costume looks perfect)

  • July 20, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    I really want to get into this...

    by DutchDrunk

    But there really hasn't been enough time between the first Spiderman film with Tobey and this one. I mean, how different can the origin story -really- be?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Haters gonna hate

    by Sanyi

    I love this trailer.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Biological webshooters...

    by Chris Moody

    ...were one of the things that Raimi & Co. actually got right. The idea that a high school kid -- even a nerd -- could develop some sort of "web shooter" is pretty stupid. They should have kept the natural web shooter from the Raimi films. I just think that it will be so stupid to have a constant, "OH NO! MY WEB SHOOTERS ARE EMPTY!" plot element. But, who knows? Maybe they will make a hybrid web shooter? In other words, they can have biological webbing with the shooter used only for control?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST


    by DipshitKnight

    I get it- It's the dark and edgy Spiderman. Yup. I'm good- gonna watch the smurfs.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:36 p.m. CST

    What billy-d-williams said above...

    by jf

    amen brotha!

  • July 20, 2011, 12:36 p.m. CST

    I hope the laughable POV CGI crap was made only for the trailer

    by DonRivella

    Did we really need a tall and skinny Spiderman? Did we really need another origins story! Fuck it, I'm still gonna watch this.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:36 p.m. CST

    It better be AMAZING.

    by DrPain

    or leave that word out of the damn title.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:36 p.m. CST


    by VermithraxPejorative

    Looks very dull and boring. I'm not going to pay money to sit through another origina story. I kind of hoped this bombs because the studios can push any super hero shit out these days and it will do well. WHy couldn't they just pick up where the last one left off, but with a complete re-imagining. We don't need to see nerdy peter parker bit by a spider again... This trailer doesn't have the OMG factor I was hoping for.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:37 p.m. CST

    Raimi's first Spider-Man sucked rhino balls

    by Lone Fox

    Power Ranger Goblin. Macy Gray. Predominantly soap opera acting. A miscast Toby Maguire. Bruce Campbell (give it a fucking rest. We get it. He was in a couple of decent genre films 20 fucking years ago) World's most annoying Aubt May. The good? Franco. Dafoe. The 2nd film was really good. But jesus...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Really liked 500 Days of Summer, but fuck this.

    by CreasyBear

    A Peter Parker who is even less fun-loving and wisecracking than Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker? Parker is not a tortured soul, he's DRIVEN. There's a difference. Some of the shots in this trailer looked downright Twilight bad. This trailer confirmed what I was afraid of.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Not entirely sold, but hopeful.

    by Clavius

    Spider-Man 1 and 2 may have had their flaws, but overall they were fun movies, with a genuine, lighthearted comic book spirit. Don't misunderstand me, I LOVE the Nolan Bat-Universe and much of what's been done with superhero films to date. But I think certain characters don't lend themselves as well to the "dark and brooding" style of interpretation as others do. Spider-Man is one such character. I don't want to pass judgement on a 2 minute trailer, but so far it really looks like they're trying to Dark-Knight-ify Spider-Man which (IMO) is totally the WRONG way to go. Superman is another such character that needs to be epic, colorful and bold but rein it in just before it hits campy. While I enjoyed "Superman Returns" more than many, it was far too moody for what Superman should be. Flaws and all, Raimi had it right in terms of balancing the fun and excitement while throwing in gravitas where it was necessary. That's why I'm so looking forward to Captain America. It looks like a big, fun, colorful comic book adventure movie. So I'll remain cautiously optimistic that the trailer is miles different from the finished product, but on first impression, I'm concerned. All that said though...Emma Stone is hot!

  • There's nothing wrong with wanting to tell a different story. Just do it 15 years from now - and actually tell a different story... Raimi's stuff was good enough. This does appear to be an attempt to continue to cash in on the "superhero" film trend...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:39 p.m. CST

    The haters are winning the votes here

    by donkey_lasher


  • How else can people actually be excited about this crap?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST

    And the creativity and ingenuity that Marc Webb

    by CreasyBear

    showed in 500 Days may not even show in this movie which leaves . . . what, exactly? Take away the editing playfulness of 500 Days, add Twilight angst, subtract any sense of Peter Parker's joy, and you get . . . this trailer.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST


    by Ryan

    They should give the superhero movie-going public enough credit to know an origin story is not needed. HE GOT BITTEN BY A SPIDER AND BECAME A SPIDER-MAN. WE GET IT. Oh, and I'm not singling out Spider-Man here... SUPERMAN WAS SENT TO EARTH BY HIS KRYPTONIAN PARENTS AS KRYPTON EXPLODED. WE GET IT.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Okay, not a mantra

    by donkey_lasher

    But two words that sum up the misgivings

  • July 20, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Why the f**ck do we need this retread?

    by KillaKane

    I like the casting, overall look and tone, I just think it's so retarded to go back to yet another origin story when the work's already been done and so briliantly by Raimi. The Alien prequel's got the right ethos right, show the fanboys something truly *new* : faithful to the continuity of the source material but revelatory. I just hope that the running time of this flick is'nt squandered on a gratuitous recap.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:41 p.m. CST

    The POV shot that closes the trailer

    by mr.underwater

    is fucking awesome It flipped my tummy a bit just watching it on my monitor. On iMAX, my balls would probably be in my throat.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:41 p.m. CST

    Billy D

    by donkey_lasher

    I'd say younger, but I totally agree.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:42 p.m. CST


    by Ryan

    Exactly correct. EON doesn't retell the James Bond "origin" story every time it casts a new actor. Give us enough credit that we understand how Spider-Man got here, and throw us into a GOOD STORY (I know... huge challenge here)

  • July 20, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    This Parker is a '' hipster GAP store employee '' LOL

    by Astronut

    You're right, not so much emo as he is GAP kid.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:45 p.m. CST

    Just can't get over a reboot already

    by BizarroJerry

    It just seems weird. I know Raimi 3 was years ago now, but in Hollywood time it still seems very recent to me. Yes, it'll probably make a lot of money, but people are gonna still see the trailer and think, "again, really?" I do hope that the tone isn't quite as grim as it appears here. I can't stand all the humor being drained out of things that should have it. What I did like with Raimi was how quickly he graduated Peter and Harry. I'm gonna have trouble watching this new movie if its full of whiny teenagers. But they're aiming this at those tenagers, I guess, and not me.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:45 p.m. CST

    'Twilight angst'..?

    by Lone Fox

    Have you never read a Spider-Man comic?

  • July 20, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    They're using the same FONT as the Raimi films??

    by D.Vader

    That's pretty fucked up.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    If Raimi had love for the source material........

    by david starling

    .......Then who the fuck directed the third one? I don't think this was too bad, certainly a teaser!! I've heard Vic Armstrong's view on this movie (he's a reputed stuntman, and stunt director and such), and his work on it, and I want to see it for his thoughts alone!!

  • July 20, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    Love the 'Mirror's Edge' bit.

    by blackwood

    First person parkour is neat. Everything else, don't really care. Emma Stone is fantastic, though. I wish she were the main character.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    lemmings unite

    by Billy_D_Williams

    no wonder foreigners have nothing but utter contempt for Americans...

  • July 20, 2011, 12:48 p.m. CST

    Another fucking origin story

    by D.Vader


  • July 20, 2011, 12:48 p.m. CST

    Budget $80 mil? SP1=$140m, SP2=$200m, SP3=$260m

    by MoneyGrabSequel

    ...and this was shot in 3D? I predict few big action sequences and I bet Uncle Ben doesn't get shot at all.

  • The only silver lining is that the comments on this trailer are so universal in their disdain that maybe the one bean-counter out there who actually earned his position - for whom a sense of perspective is enough to set him apart from his peers - might realize that this industry is nearly FUBAR and needs an operation, stat.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:50 p.m. CST

    This already looks a million times better than Raimi

    by Nico Toscani

    I never liked ANY of the Raimi films.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:50 p.m. CST

    looks ok

    by Chris Saturia

    i agree the tone is weird...and the pov shot went on for too long.

  • To me, there is no question how they should have done it. No helmet. No CGI demon face. Willem DaFoe — the actor — had the EXACT SAME FACE AS THE GREEN GOBLIN! THE EXACT SAME!!! Especially when he went into his evil tirades, like when he talked to himself in the mirror!! What Raimi * should * have done is created a thin rubber '' mask '' for DaFoe that kept most of his facial features intact. It's ironic but DaFoe looked more evil and menacing and more like the Green Goblin when he wasn't portrayed as the Green Goblin!! I always thought it was crazy they missed such a perfect opportunity!

  • July 20, 2011, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Not impressed

    by Kremzeek

    The whole thing is candyshell coated and over-produced. On top of that, we *just* went thru the Spidey origin story onscreen not even a decade ago. Considering that film was a colossal mainstream hit, I don't think we need to handhold the audience thru it again. I also have never been a fan of the mechanical webshooters. If he's got spider powers (the main one being webshooting), why wouldn't he be able to shoot webs naturally? It doesn't make sense to me within the context of the story. I know it's a sticking point with diehards, but Raimi did that better, at least. And, frankly, the shooters are something I could've overlooked if the rest of the film looked great... but it doesn't, sadly. Maybe I'm starting to get a little bit comic book movied-out.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Teaser and trailers for Raimi's Spiderman...

    by knowthyself

    ...were far more exciting and his suit was more faithful to the comics even with organic web shooters.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:54 p.m. CST

    An emo looking Peter Parker, oh joy.

    by Yamato

    I want the real Peter, full nerd. Peter was a brainy, geeky, nerd. And origin tale? Is that needed. Doesn't everyone know the origin by now?

  • 1st film cost 40 mil to make. Second cost a tiny bit more but they had the pipeline in place and have been paying everyone whatever peanuts they see fit ever since. Each film has made around a billion US domestic. God knows the worldwide. They've been printing their own money since the start. 40 mil isn't the tax on the billions they made from that tired shrek shit. It's all in the beard's offshore accounts as we speak

  • July 20, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST

    reboots will now come every ten years...

    by Billy_D_Williams

    to usher in the lifeblood of the new generations...because God knows Spider-Man 1 is like wahtching a movie from the 19-fucking-30s to teens nowdays.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST

    The FIRST PERSON segment looks like a FIRST PERSON game?

    by JonJonB9

    shit, with such insight we can all see how you got a job here

  • July 20, 2011, 12:56 p.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    Even though I don't agree with you about Raimi, you're spot on about the Green Goblin. My feelings exactly.

  • July 20, 2011, 12:57 p.m. CST

    The First Hour of Raimi's Spider-Man...

    by Goldfingah brilliant. It's absolute perfection right up until the time that Peter takes out the drawing of the definitive Spider-Man costume that he contemplates while Danny Elfman's wonderful "with great power..." theme swells. After that? Not so much. It's because of this that I'm not entirely opposed to a from-the-ground-up reboot. This trailer didn't exactly blow me away but I'm keeping an open mind. But jeez, that Zimmer-derivative music for the trailer is as annoying as fuck. If they aren't going to get Elfman back I sure as hell hope they DON'T go with another Remote Control composer.

  • He used that fucking toy money. If you missed it. It's gone forever. No 3D IMAX vacation to Chicago for you. That what it looks like in 3D IMAX with that new camera. Like being in another city. Just fucking like it. But you will never see that if you haven't already. Harry Potter now owns the IMAX theater. Yay.

  • Always fucking up on iPad.

  • July 20, 2011, 1 p.m. CST

    No one needs this movie....

    by corplhicks

    A reboot? Already. Absurd. Maybe in 10 years. The POV was video game like. Cars being tossed etc. Been there done that. And now the trailer hints at some secret possibly about his parents that's a new plot twist.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:01 p.m. CST

    I Hate This.

    by Salchucks

    After years of not commenting I dug up my AICN password just to write that.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Somebody needs this movie

    by rev_skarekroe

    "Somebody" being "Sony." 'Cause it'll make money and keep them from losing the rights.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:04 p.m. CST

    salchucks... that was amusing

    by Astronut

  • July 20, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST

    how hard is it to film a brick wall and pipes? this cgi blows


    I dont have a problem with pov shots, I have a problem with cgi shots of things you can actually film easily so they dont look like a dreamcast game. I would love a great spiderman reboot. I doubt this will be it with the heavy emphasis on the origin and that kinda gross shot of pulling the spider web out of his neck, also there is nothing we havnt allready seen in the other movies in this trailer, but who knows maybe it wont suck, cant really judge till you see the full movie

  • July 20, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST

    It's not a bad trailer.

    by eric haislar

    Look I like the Raimi films event the 3 one which i think gets a bad wrap it's not as awful as people say. there is at least 70% worth good stuff in that film. But I agree....... why do a reboot at all we could have just continued the story and made Spiderman 4. Hell Raimi left because he did not think he could make the 2011 release date. so what did they do decide to reboot and release in 2012. Makes no sense if it was that easy why not just push it back for Raimi. Studios go figure. But still this does look like it could be good. So O am not going to bash it. Has a good cast and looks like a different approach only time will tell. Who knows maybe this will be a excellent take just like Nolan did with Batman. Fingers are crossed. But does seem a bit like a cash grab. hope it's not. I hope there is something special there.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage


  • Ya gotta have high ceilings and a long throw distance

  • July 20, 2011, 1:06 p.m. CST

    another origin story = so lame

    by freak2thec0re

    seriously, why? This could definitely be another Green Lantern

  • Could it work? The Net is great for gathering the masses, I know......... but is a boycott — one that would actually truly affect the studios box office take — is that even possible?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Twiderlight? Spiderlight? "Mirror's Edge?"

    by Pixelsmack

    ‎"Mirror's Edge" game designers I'm sure our flattered at the Spidey city exposition.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:08 p.m. CST


    by spidercoz

    With great power comes *grggr kah thud* Dead. There's your fucking reboot.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:08 p.m. CST

    I hear that there will be an IRON MAN reboot...

    by Chris Moody 2014. :-P Seriously though: Why REBOOT this franchise? It was already making a fortune. They could have easily continued it with a lower budget and different set of actors/directors/writers. The person who is probably most upset is DYLAN BAKER. The guy was waiting eight years to be THE LIZARD in a Spiderman film!

  • July 20, 2011, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Haters will all watch this movie

    by Nerd Rage

    Those who say they won't are flat out lying and most will secretly enjoy it. Just you wait and see.

  • To quote Ripley, '' There must be a way. How? How do we do it? ''

  • July 20, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Those First Person POV action scenes...

    by jdsnotnice

    ...are absolutely horrible. If that's the way they're doing things, I'm definitely not paying to see this flick.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Watching the teaser feels like...

    by LarkStew

    ... I've slipped into a parallel universe where it's exactly the same movie but just oddly different. If the 2002 version had never been made, this would look good. But as it stands, I don't see anything here that justifies this movie's existence. Why couldn't they spend that money on doing something new?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Those First Person POV action scenes...

    by jdsnotnice

    ...are absolutely horrible. If that's the way they're doing things, I'm definitely not paying to see this flick.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by blackwood

    It's an interesting idea -- but as recent history has shown, internet fan community interest can be startlingly effective at shutting down a film's box office. Maybe if we want it to fail we should show incredible support.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    Looks great, for now. I wanna see Lizzy

    by the Green Gargantua

  • So true. That was such a tired act.

  • Mark it down.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:12 p.m. CST

    A Tampon

    by MrDuke118

    That's what this film will be. A menstrual tampon

  • July 20, 2011, 1:12 p.m. CST

    That first person part would be an amazing video game

    by Sardonic

    Mirror's Edge plus Spiderman, tell me that's not a good idea. As for the movie, I'm not impressed, though I do like Andrew Garfield.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:12 p.m. CST

    (tired act being the kidnapping of MJ.....)

    by Astronut

    Yup. So true.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    mrduke118 - - - ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!

    by Astronut

  • July 20, 2011, 1:14 p.m. CST

    youtube link?

    by Bouncy X

    the trailer is up in HD on yahoo, surprised they didnt update the article and provide a link there. i saw it through a post on

  • July 20, 2011, 1:14 p.m. CST

    It Looks Fucking TERRIBLE

    by NeonFrisbee

    New title: THE EMOTASTIC TWILIGHT DOUCHE-MAN. I thought the POV shots of Spidey on the roof looked cool and that's about it. Everything else looks like ass.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:15 p.m. CST

    I agree with

    by Brannagins Law

    1st person CG never works well because you can easily see how the lighting and textures all together don't work as a whole image. I would have been much more excited to see this done with real camera work on real world locations. I can't imagine that would cost more to do than the CG would. I think we still have another 10 years before CG can be close enough to reality that our minds don't see the differences.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:16 p.m. CST

    Lack of anything memorable in the trailer.

    by davidwebb

    Everything in there, we've seen done a dozen times in every medium. There's nothing in there that's new. And it's not just that, the next trailers better be good. By comparison, the full trailer for Captain America had that moment of skinny Steve jumping on the grenade. Told me everything I wanted to know about the character. Hell, even made me well up a bit to see it. But this just seems totally humourless, and without any joy. Pretty much by numbers. Prove me wrong, Webb/Garfield.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:16 p.m. CST

    With great greed, comes great reprehensibility.

    by WriteForTheEdit

    Fuck this thing. Hard.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:17 p.m. CST

    His parents are in this? They were scientists? The secret? WTF?

    by Chuck_Chuckwalla

    Let me guess, his parents subjected him to a science experiment (a la Ang Lee's Hulk) and he finds out about it, goes back to that lab and the spider bite activates his latent spider abilities? And let me also guess that Curt Conners was a colleague of theirs that had gone through a similar procedure which turns him into the Lizard. I haven't read Spidey regularly since before the Clone saga, so maybe someone out there can tell me if this is based on a comic story that retconned his origin. Other random thoughts: not crazy about Garfield. Costume sucks. Trailer is devoid of humor. POV scene looks like a very cool video game.

  • You guys kill me! ha!

  • July 20, 2011, 1:18 p.m. CST

    Raimi's Spider-Man Ruled (At Least The First Two Did)

    by NeonFrisbee

    This just looks *really* bad. And I mean, shit, why are they rebooting this already? I guess for the Twihards, emos, and assorted 13 year old douchehammers? Spider-Fail, Spider-Fail, does whatever an emo does (cry / do hair / put on make-up / cry some more / blame parents / cry / more make-up / cry / cry / cry / cry)...

  • I guess every superhero needs some kind of internal struggle or weakness, and in this case it's apparently crushing depression. Really want to like this but godDAMN Parker looks like he'd wander halfheartedly into a mugging, throw a light punch in the general direction of one of the muggers and then shrug and walk away. ''What's the point'' he'll mumble. ''My parents are DEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD.'' Oh no, the Lizard has kidnapped Gwen Stacy and is threatening to blow up the city! Can Spider-Man muster up the energy to get out of bed?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Yeah, this trailer was MEH.

    by Chris Moody

    I am less enthused than I was before I watched it. If this film tanks, Herc will blame Sarah Palin. Mark my words. ;-)

  • July 20, 2011, 1:23 p.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage

    and his ugly-mary-jane/ maskless-spider-man/ no-wisecracks/ sandman-killed-uncle-ben/ anorexic-speechless-venom/ barely used spider-sense/ dopey-peter-parker/ vulturess/ snowborder-Green-Goblin 2/ Macy Gray including/ dancing-emo-parker/ wasted-Death-of-Gwen-Stacy/ spider-man-pizza-guy/ MJ-getting-kidnapped-every-movie/ power-ranger-green-goblin/ organic-wrist-jizz sorry ass. His Spider-man movies are overrated, self-aware cheese-fest. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Okay movie producers, here's your problem.

    by Dr_PepperSpray

    You see something like Batman Begins, which was written by fans who thought a true version of Batman hadn't been represented in Film yet and you wanted to bottle that. That's admirable, and a step in the right direction. Begins was a little repetitive and hokey at times, but it was inspired and paid respect to it's comic-book origin even if the plot points were off. <P> Unfortunately this version of Spider-man, though inspired by Batman begins doesn't look like it's doing what Begins did. It seems like you think they are both the same character, just slightly different. There's a real tone problem here. Though there are dark moments in the comic-book, Spider-man isn't a dark comic and neither is the character of Peter Parker. Though there are moments of heavy drama, Spider-Man is NOT the Dark Knight. I don't mean to say Sam Raimi got it right either, in fact I think he went full stupid rather then fun and witty which is what makes Spider-man a enjoyable read. <P> Rather then take the good intentions of Batman Begins and translate a truer Spider-man to the big screen it appears you've taken what is essentially Batman begins and funneled the Spider-man characters into it. <P> Yeah, you'll make money but Fuck you. You didn't really try and so why should I, a customer who's money you're vying for, make the effort to see this? <P> Hell, there is even a shot with Peter Parker at the docks that looks exactly the same as a Bruce Wayne at a ship yard from Batman Begins. Why not just CG Andrew Garfield's face over Christian Bale and save some production costs? Does he throw a gun in the water too after deciding he isn't going to shoot the mob boss because he's too afraid? Bah! <P> And what on Earth was that Spider-Man the video game clip at the end all about? I thought your crew was shooting a lot of practical effects? <P> I'll be more then happy to eat my words if they put out a trailer showing that this isn't some dark and moody Batman Begins wanna be, but you know I'm on to something here.

  • Pause as Spider-Douche suddenly become the favorite superhero of 13 year old girls (+ their mother's in loveless marriages and/or middle aged obese virgin pedophiles) everywhere.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Where have all of the haters gone?

    by elsewhere

    That's what I'll be thinking come next summer when this movie kicks the shit out of Raimis turds. I know none of you will have the balls to admit you were wrong.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Looks like 'Daredevil' or "Ghost Rider' quality.

    by Fritzlorrerains

    Marc Webb fail.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    TDKR teaser > TASM

    by Fritzlorrerains

    By far

  • July 20, 2011, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Well said, dr_pepperspray

    by Chuck_Chuckwalla

    That's exactly what the problem is.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Why does every reboot...

    by Lee

    need to be an origin story? I will see this, and I hope it looks good, but I don't want to spend yet another 2 hours watching a re-envisioning of a tale we all know intimately.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST


    by eric haislar

    His parents where scientists in the Ultimate's version. I want to say there where killed in a explosion or something. But i think they are drawing from the Ultimate's for the source material.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:30 p.m. CST

    Wow! That was surprisingly excellent!

    by Jerry Piper

  • That is all.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:31 p.m. CST

    No more sequels... from now on every movie should be an origin/reboot

    by Inexplicable_Nuclear_Balls

    Let's have a new director and cast each time. Just tell the origin story over and over. Would that make you happy, my sweet little Hollywood? Regarding the Goblin's face... if they could make Hellboy work, they certainly could do it with GG.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:31 p.m. CST

    Original WTC trailer for Raimi's first Spider-man

    by BenBraddock

    was just the best! I still get goosepimples every time I see it. Damn pity (though understandable) that it got withdrawn...

  • July 20, 2011, 1:36 p.m. CST

    After seeing Andrew Garfield play grown up roles

    by Turd Furgeson

    In social network and red riding I have a hard time seeing him play a teenager....

  • July 20, 2011, 1:36 p.m. CST

    WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY ?????????

    by AtheistScum

    Why are they making this again?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Who said this movie was dark?

    by Nerd Rage

    It's just more grounded and less self-aware than Raimi's corny Spider-Ham bullshit. Remember the tv commercial actors with the over done brooklyn accents? "You mess wit one of us, you mess with all of us! derpy derp!" Fuck those movies.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Did Nolan direct this?!?

    by The_guy_in_the_rated_R_movie

    Shit, this feels like a gritty, realist reboot à la Batman Begins. I'm intrigued...throw in Emma Stone's tits and I'm sold.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Age Differences

    by NeonFrisbee

    I'm willing to bet that all the people here who liked the trailer and want to see this are under 15 years of age (and/or are obese middle aged pedophiles).

  • July 20, 2011, 1:38 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • there is content in the comics and cartoons that support a parent backstory that may be interesting.... however, a reboot is just a shite idea. I liked the first film, found the second too wordy and Dr Oc was just wrong, especially at the end and the third made no sense.... what was the black ooze? A suit or symbiant? It was just wrong. Plus snaggletooth just sucked the life out of the franchise.... i would not have boned that with a spider cock. Oh, so did Aunt May (i agree with previous post... boring old cow.) Gotta say that pretty much all comic book movies suffer with the third act, Spider man 1 did, so did iron man 1 (not so much 2 because the fight was more real) all of the x-men did and finally the second hulks last act was total balls which is a shame because most of that film was really good fun. oh, second batman film last hour was strange.... just end already!

  • July 20, 2011, 1:39 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 20, 2011, 1:39 p.m. CST

    It was downhill after the WTC trailer

    by Nerd Rage

    If only Raimi's films lived up to that trailer.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Like Nordling, I'm iffy on this

    by batmancw

    While I love the character, and think Garfield will make a decent PP/Spidey, I wasn't impressed by the trailer, and I'm sick to death of origin stories. Anyone who would go to this movie that doesn't know Spiderman's origin by now must be a very young child or have been living in a cave for the last 50 years. Though it showed much less, I was far more excited by TDKR trailer because I trust Nolan to take the series out with an epic conclusion. I want to see how they're CGIing the Lizard before I get my hopes up that this will actually be worth my 15 bucks.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:41 p.m. CST

    I agree, nerd rage.

    by Astronut

    But what's derpy derp mean?

  • July 20, 2011, 1:41 p.m. CST

    OK I'm a whiny so-and-so...

    by Mr Gorilla

    But that looked really GOOD! Well done all. Can't wait to see it. (And I loved the first two Raimi films too.)

  • July 20, 2011, 1:41 p.m. CST

    Not bad. Not bad at all.

    by AsimovLives

    Unfortunatly, the CGI still looks like... well, CGI, really. As CGI as from the older Spider-Man movies. You know, the ones directed by the Evil Dead guy, remember him? Yeah, it's kinda funny that how it seems that CGI aparently doesn't seem to have evolved all that much since 10 years ago. Weird that.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:42 p.m. CST

    Holy shitballs, 100% better than Raimi

    by Orion

    The tone in that trailer is better than any of Raimi's films. My first thought when I saw his parents leaving Peter with his aunt an uncle is that it would lessen the impact of his uncle dying. In the comics, Peter always thought his parents died, so his aunt and uncle were the only family he had. However, the way the trailer is cut together it makes his character feel more abandoned, more of an outside and it sets up a good mystery, for I assume, a future movie. The POV shot is pretty exciting. PS Aunt May has a crazy, homeless look about her while Uncle Ben looks like a real man. Garfield seems like a vast improvement over Maguire's squeeky wheel. Don't get me wrong, I like Toby as PP, but there's something better about Garfield in the role. The action moves so fast, it's hard to notice the differences about the costume. I always thought, outside of the CG sequences, Rami's spider-man costume made Spiderman look rediculous. I'm looking forward to this.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:42 p.m. CST

    I am being serious though. Has a film boycott ever worked?

    by Astronut

    Because this refurbished Spider-Man makes me want to find out.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:43 p.m. CST

    Looks completely awful

    by Tim Herr

    Hopefully it's just poorly edited, and hopefully the POV thing is not in the movie. Honestly I think it will be wretched one way or the other.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:43 p.m. CST

    Seeing is believing my friends. At least this one is for me.

    by AsimovLives

    I have absolutly no idea how this one will turn out. The fact i haven't seen 500 DAYS OF SUMMER might factor into this.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:44 p.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage

    Spider-man 4 actors wanted a shitload of money, Raimi was out of ideas (Vulturess? lol!), and SM3 fucking sucked diseased ass.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:45 p.m. CST

    you're all dumb fucks

    by WhySoSerious

    this movie looks great! it looks more realistic than the first spiderman film. less cgi. less goofy bullshit moments. you actually get to see spiderman fucking CRAWL around...unlike the rami films where all he does is jump and fucking swing around like a god dame fucking monkey. this movie will kick serious ass with the general public. as for you fucktard nerds...don't see it. if i see any of you in the theater, i'm going to fucking kick your ass in front of your mother, then fuck your mom in the ass for giving birth to you in the first place.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Peter's parents and the Red Skull

    by GeneralKael

    I think maybe one of the reasons for the reboot was so that they could link this to the other Marvel movies if they wanted to - my guess is that you will see some kind of reference to the Red Skull killing his parents. I wouldn't be surprised if this new Spider Man makes an appearance in the Avengers, but I find it more likely that Nick Fury appears in a cameo to tell Peter that his parents died or something like that(maybe not in a way that Peter or anyone knows it had anything to do with SHIELD).

  • July 20, 2011, 1:46 p.m. CST

    2 more points

    by batmancw

    It seems that they are setting up the idea that PP's parents were spies/agents of Shield along the lines of a Spiderman comics storyline that I've almost forgotten. Finally, to nitpick--the spider bites him on the NECK? IF you're going to retell the origin, and I know this is a "fanboy" gripe, but for God's sake--it was ALWAYS a bite on the HAND that gave Peter his powers & I see NO reason to change that. Sheesh!

  • Once you strip away the reused BB & TDK stuff from the new Batman teaser, there's almost nothing to it. There's a VERY quick shot of Bane & Batman and Gordon in his hospital bed waiting for his bedpan to get changed. ;> If it's too early to judge ASM, given how little we get, then isn't it also too early to judge TDKR? We get even less out of that teaser. Again, I'm not defending the ASM teaser. It's all a little too rushed looking in the VFX department and the rest looks like rehash by way of Nolan or Cronenberg. However, TDKR teaser (realistically) gives us less hope because it just plain gives us less. TDKR _does_ do a better job of pitching the product, telling us "more of what you liked." My problem here is that, if we look at this as a pitch to audiences, ASM doesn't give us a compelling enough reason to watch either way. It doesn't do much to change people's minds. If you already have a hardon for it after seeing the leaked pics months ago then nothing has changed for you. If you wanted to burn Garfield's hair before the teaser you'll still want to break out that Zippo now. A good teaser or trailer is designed to change the minds of people who aren't already sold on the product. Trailer #1 or whatever you're calling this changes no minds yet. To me, this trailer does the exact opposite of what the X-Men First Class trailers did. Those changed minds. This one reinforces opinions. I'm more psyched to see what they have in store for Trailer #2. We've all seen a lot of really bad trailers for some really good movies, and vice versa. I think that they'll learn from this outing and give use a more compelling argument next trailer. If they don't, audiences might not flock in droves. Again, teasers & trailers aren't designed for the haters or the fanboys. They're designed for the undecided masses. Honestly, of all the superhero teasers we've seen leaked this week, the only one that truly has my inner geek dancing for joy is Avengers. Yeah, it's a bit of a sausage fest, but it really is a once in a lifetime opportunity to see all of your favorites together at once. I sincerely hope they pull it off. If they do, it'll give DC/WB a more compelling reason to push Justice League through - hopefully following Marvel's model of build-up.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Irony: Obese Virgins Calling Kirsten Dunst Ugly

    by NeonFrisbee

    Please. Most of you calling her ugly wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of even talking to her let alone hooking up with her or even any completely random, nondescript, average girl-next-door. So stop it, seriously, it's ridiculous. Granted, Emma Stone is hotter (especially with the blonde hair), but still. Most of you would furiously masturbate yourselves into a coma if Dunst even walked by you on the street.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Yeah really big meh from me

    by kafka07

    Spiderman on the big screen should be made fun again. How can they fuck that up? I mean wtf they have lots of great source material. This trailer is flat.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:47 p.m. CST

    I Generally Hate Reboots

    by NHRonin

    And this one is completely unnecessary. No reason for yet another origin story ten years after the first one came out. Why can't they simply follow the Bond formula and just replace the lead actor? We don't have to see Bond's origin every time a new 007 takes over and the same is true of Spiderman.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:48 p.m. CST

    I agree that Raimi's movies weren't that great.

    by mastermold

    Raimi is a shlocky, campy filmmaker and I didn't like the casting particularly of Macguire and Dunst. However I don't think that "Nolan-fyin" Spider-Man is the best way to go either. Hopefully this will be faithful and good in its own right. BTW, what the fuck is up with Garfield's hair? It's the same shag he had in the Social Network and it doesn't look like Peter Parker.

  • You saw more about the bank robber's character than Spiderman's. It was more of an action set piece then about the characters. This teaser is clearly showing this is all about the character of Peter Parker as Spiderman, rather then some cool CG shots of him swinging around.

  • Right. Long point made shorter; NO superhero movies are realistic. Even Nolan's Batman series. I mean, Nolan's Batman may be *closer* to realistic, but there's still nothing realistic about it.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:52 p.m. CST

    The POV sequence was the best thing about it

    by Benovite1

    Original way of showing us Spider-man and a unique perspective. I don't know if this movies gonna suck or not but at least they got that right. And it prolly won't even be in the movie. If it is, I hope they run the CG through a few more passes to nail the detail.

  • Reboot Spider-man after 5 years and it's a tragedy. Oh the horror. Cry me a river.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:53 p.m. CST

    most honest response...

    by rogerdodger21

    from my girlfriend, who is not generally a fan of superhero movies - "why are they doing the same movie again?" exactly. short term memory may rule the land, but if she remembers, everyone remembers.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:55 p.m. CST

    nerd rage

    by eric haislar

    In all honesty though batman movie got to be truly awful they had no choice. For the most part the spider-man films where very good and in no need of it.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Some people actually think this looks good?

    by VermithraxPejorative

    Seriously? or is that your low expectations being suprised by a real movie? I'm sure this film will be competant in its own right but it seriously has problems right out the door. I can't believe they are redoing the origin, the high school shit, and power discovery in the alley. Seriously? oh, and organic shooters were the best idea ever, I don't care what anyone says. This has been done before, and probably better.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Anyone who thinks that "POV" shot was cool....

    by Tank Williams

    Clearly has never played a FPS before...Or like Nordling said Mirrors Edge. It was shockingly un-original, especially for the big "bang" moment in the trailer. Epic failure on the POV shot.... But im digging the dark tone of the flick. But, come on, a quick shot of the lizzard would have jazzed me more than that!

  • July 20, 2011, 1:57 p.m. CST

    @neonfrisbee - There are LEVELS of realism

    by cookepuss

    Kick-Ass was totally unrealistic in context of the world we see outside. However, within its own context, it adheres far more to reality than fantasy. Whenever you deal with superheroes, you have to suspend disbelief and accept that some things go with the territory. TDK is entirely unrealistic. However, given the world crafted by Nolan, everything Wayne does is entirely plausible and even acceptable. Compared to TDK, or any other movie for that matter, Batman & Robin was a live action cartoon. It's all a matter of perspective. As far as the whole Raimi VS reboot thing goes, I'd much rather they have taken the 007 route, switched actors, and kept the party rolling along.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:58 p.m. CST

    Fade to black every two seconds was annoying

    by FrodoFraggins

    Do we really need a new spider man origin story this soon anyway?

  • The vibe Im getting is junk teen TV nonsense.

  • Keeping in mind we all know the third one sucked (largely because of studio interference, mind you). It's not so much a "tragedy" as it is monumentally pointless, lame, and stupid. Nolan's reboot of Batman took a dead property that was wallowing in some garish, cornball glitterhell and turned it into a brilliant, insightful, thought-provoking, exciting, cool piece of popular cinema.

  • July 20, 2011, 1:59 p.m. CST

    Gwen Stacy better die at the end.

    by jdsnotnice

  • July 20, 2011, 1:59 p.m. CST

    This teaser was....

    by LouisCedar

    [Rant] AWESOME. Yes, awesome. You whiney nerds are pathetic. "Whhaaaaa I don't want another origin movie whhaaaa this isn't Raimi so it sucks whaaaaaaaaaaa" Seriously. You people. This is different from the Raimi flicks tonally, and because it's a new spider-man, for a new crop of youngsters who have never seen a spidey-movie on the big screen (or were too young to really remember it clearly), a new origin movie makes sense. It redefines the tone and style of these new movies, and Establishes this film apart from the Raimi movies (something Superman Returns didn't do, which you all seem to enjoy pointing out). Honestly, I'm going to say it--I never liked Raimi's take on the origin. And I never really liked Toby McGuire all that much as Spider-Man. And Kirsten Dunst was annoying as all hell as Mary Jane. Spider-Toby only spent fifteen minutes in Highschool, a part of the movie that is almost unwatchable because EVERY person in that school is very clearly in their thirties. Willem Dafoe was awesome as Norman/Goblin, but his suit made him look like a rogue power ranger. The BEST thing about Raimi Spidey was J. Jonah Jameson, and even he was played like more of a comic book character than an ACTUAL hard-ass spidey-hating newsman. Spidey never made any quips, and while Peter was clearly smart, he was never established as a genius. Genius + quipping = two pretty important parts of Spider-Man that were completely ignored. Yes, Spider-Man 2 was better, and featured some awesome direction on Raimi's part (the Doc Ock awakening scene was masterfully done) but spider-toby was still mostly flat, Dunst was still completely annoying, and Jameson, while humorous, was still a caricature instead of a character. And then there was Spider-Man 3. I don't think I really need to go into that abortion of a film. So yeah. I WELCOME this movie, and I think that the teaser looked AWESOME. Yes, Nordling, Raimi's love of Spider-Man was clear in his Spider-Man films. But I'm sorry--those films just don't stand up over time. They were great because his first Spider-Man film was one of the first post-X-Men comic book films to take the source matter seriously rather than making a ninety minute long toy commercial. But once that novelty wore off, the films themselves just didn't hold up. So yeah, sorry if I'm committing some sort of nerd betrayal by saying this: But thank god for this movie. It looks AWESOME, and I've been waiting a long time for a Spider-Man movie that was actually a Spider-Man movie, rather than being a "here are all the things that I like about the character" demonstration. [/Rant]

  • Prior to BB, Batman's origin was only glossed over. This wasn't just a reboot. It was essentially a year on tale and that wasn't done before. That was new territory. Based on this teaser trailer, ASM looks to be covering a lot of old territory. That's what sticks in people's craw the most. Not just that it's a reboot or that it's too early or that it's not in Raimivision.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:01 p.m. CST


    by Tank Williams

    Why don't you write a book about it...sheesh

  • With the exception of temporarily croaking for a few months, Ultimate Gwen has been ticking for 10+ years now and we, as readers, are better off for it. She's a much better version than the original. Much more fleshed out and real, as real as these things go.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Spiderman 2!!! Best Marvel film period!! Fact Bitches!!

    by Tank Williams

  • July 20, 2011, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Looks interesting...

    by NuteG

    ...but there's that sense of deja vu.<br><br>I remember the first Spider-Man 3 teaser (revealed maybe a year before the movie) being a lot more exciting. Pity the actual film was a bit of a mess.<br><br>The Dark Knight Rises teaser looks more interesting. As a man, Bruce Wayne can be destroyed, but as a symbol he can be everlasting. Can't wait to see where they take the story.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:05 p.m. CST


    by Orion

    That line is better and more evocative than lines like "NO GOBBY...."

  • July 20, 2011, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Somebody is defending Kristen Dunst's appearence

    by Nerd Rage

    You must think Billy Corgan with a wig and breast would be fuckable. You blind bastard... Her teeth look like stained chiclets that were dipped in dog piss.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:06 p.m. CST

    BLACK CROTCH-Never forget...

    by ZOMBRE

    That cgi cartoon at the end was fucking awful. That was like a spidey ps2 game trailer. Looked fake INSTANTLY. But honestly, we havent seen any shots of Spidey's pissed himself costume yet. The are obviously hiding it. Im pretty pissed hes got blue fingers, silver slippers and A BLACK CROTCH! Dammit I love my Spidey costume untouched please. You cannot design a better one mr "designer" sir.

  • You cannot change ANYTHING about Spider-Man. His parents have to die, he has to move in with his aunt and uncle who look like his grandparents. Uncle Ben has to die at a wrestling much that Peter was wrestling in. All those beats have to be hit.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:07 p.m. CST

    I mean "SM's" not "SP's".

    by moorE12

  • July 20, 2011, 2:08 p.m. CST

    You know...

    by VermithraxPejorative

    if you edited Spider-man 3 there's a good movie in there somewhere. Get rid of all the venom shit, focus on Sandman's story, and also kill Mary Jane immediately or something. I also didn't mind, at least in principle, the alien suit story, BUT give it some reason for being on Earth instead of the lamest Dues Ex Machina device ever where peter goes to the park and a alien meteor lands next to him lol. Also, the alien suit would've left a good opening to focus on venom in a fourth film. It's all useless now, and Raimi's films, even the SPidey 2(which was great) had many flaws including terrible casting. I wont be seeing this movie in theatres, but maybe they can at least fix some stuff or make it interesting again.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:08 p.m. CST

    I liked it except for the POV cgi fail at the end.

    by ewokstew

    He's not trying to ape Raimi and personally I think that's a good thing.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by NeonFrisbee

    Oh yeah, I agree. I think that Nolan's Batman is about as close to a *realistic* superhero movie as you're ever going to get, but that it's still, by it's very nature, unrealistic. I guess my point is that I don't know if shooting for realism is the best thing for superheroes. It doesn't have to be goofball 60s Batman camp, either, but even the most "gritty" superhero flick will always be right on the cusp of totally ridiculous.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Dull trailer

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    To have to sit through an hour-and-a-half of the origin story, all over again, will be tedious in the extreme. They should have just recast Maguire and Dunst and continued on from Spidey 3 (even with no direct continuity). Sort of like the Bond films. This film will be something worse than poor. It will be REDUNDANT. Spider-Man 3 will be viewed as a masterpiece in comparison.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:12 p.m. CST

    I wonder if Uncle Ben will die in this one

    by sunwukong86

  • Comic movies are stuck on the former, but have yet to wholly nail the latter. They're into a more reality driven presentation, but still deathly afraid of mask, costumes, quips, and everything else that sets comics apart from other forms of fantasy. Marvel is starting to turn around and do both, but I think that DC may get gun shy again after Green Lantern.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:15 p.m. CST

    Rome is Burning

    by the1980mutant

    I cant believe people are justifying the need for a reboot less than 5 years after part 3 came out. Spiderman has so many other stories to tell, any uneeded exposition on the origin is frankly a waste of time and money. We could be delving much farther into the source material -Electro, Mysterio, Hobglobin, Hell they could have even setup a Sinister Six movie. It would have been ok to sign new actors and new contracts for a second trilogy if they wanted to quasi-reboot. Instead we are going to get an hour of Garfield running around learning to be spiderman while Connors morphs into Lizard. They already had this story setup in Raimi's films. For all the haters of Raimi and his part 3, you sure have short memories. Raimi's movie was sabotage internally by pressure from the execs. Spiderman 1 and 2 were brilliant in my opinion - he retained the essence of the character, aesthetic of the look, and handled the classic villains with great finesse. If you are defending this because they are rebooting this for the handful of 5-year-olds that may have never heard of spiderman, it may be time to have your lithium prescription checked. This movie is unnecessary.... And it looks crappy to boot.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:15 p.m. CST

    Dunst looks like a crack whore...

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    Not to mention they made her character shrew-like, high maintenance and selfish. Not my idea of Mary Jane.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:17 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man has daddy issues?

    by drewlicious

    So they're making reference to his parents in this one. I'm not too keen on this since Peter Parker never really lacked a father figure. Uncle Ben fit that mold perfectly which is why it's so tragic when he's killed. Giving Parker issues with his biological father kind of negates Uncle Ben's impact a little. I'm starting to think that almost every screenwriter and studio exec comes from a broken family. Statstically I suppose it's likely.

  • Redundant is an appropriate word for this. I like to also use the word '' refurbished ''

  • July 20, 2011, 2:18 p.m. CST

    I already hate myself for sitting through this origin again

    by Beezbo

    I wish I could get a discount for walking into the movie about 45 minutes in. Hope this isn't as grim as TDK - I prefer my superhero movies with a little bit of comedy.

  • This is the same mistake that ever franchise does. They don't seem to understand that movies are an artificial reality that you can do anything you want with. So why not ignore a shitty sequel and continue from the good one. All you would have to do is re-shoot the scene with Peter and MJ at his apartment with the new actors and use that as the pre-title sequence and BAM, take the story where ever they want.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Spectacular, Spectacular...Spider-Man, Spectaculaaaaar

    by skycrapper

    I miss watching that cartoon with my kid. They at least 'got' what Spider-Man was all about. It's too bad the movies haven't really gotten it yet. Maybe in 15 years when another reboot is going to come down.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Ready for a re-boot

    by Scott

    The Raimi franchise is like the Spiderman: TAS, it hits the right spidey notes, tells a pretty good story, but the individual characters do not resonate much. McGuire and Dunst both looked the part, but I didn't care about their relationship at all. And SM2 was great, but not the end-all of superhero films. Remember the whole part where he lost his powers because he didn't have faith in himself, or some other "need to create conflict" reason? I'm glad we're getting the movie equivalent to the USM (which is what they should've called it). Some of the steps will undoubtedly stay the same, but I like that we're getting into his parents leaving, we'll have a better female in it, and maybe we'll even see a good Venom portrayal down the line (I think it's what his parents were working on).

  • July 20, 2011, 2:21 p.m. CST

    STOP !!!

    by Todaysfate

    Stop rebooting superheroes !!!. ... So Spiderman3 sucked hard. Whats wrong with accepting that as it is and making a better part 4? Why start OVER again? Its just like TV these days. Nothing ever gets past season 1. Is this all about making money or does our society truly have that short of an attention span?. Lets let one of these heroes for once move forward have some stories beyond an origin. What a WASTE. Just like Star Wars and these 6 years of 3D versions that are about to be thrust upon us. Someone tell me how THAT is better than some NEW SW. content? And while we're on the subject .... yeah Nolans Batman was nice ... hope part three is good ... but you know ... this Batman legacy is just incomplete without The Riddler, Penquin, Batgirl, and Robin. Im sorry ... there should be more than 3 of these movies and I know Nolan could probably reinvent these characters just as cool as he did The Joker. ... What is up with these people in hollywood. If you're gonna reboot something .. go ALL the way or don't go at all. !!!End Rant.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:22 p.m. CST


    by Franck even more. Next.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:23 p.m. CST

    looks good so far...

    by Detached

    love the spidey-point-of-view shots. garfield looks good. emma seems like a good gwen. what's very interesting is that this includes peter's parents. are they setting up a film involving them? that could be great...

  • July 20, 2011, 2:25 p.m. CST


    by DannyOcean01

    Absolutely fucking awful. Is Parker some mopey, emo dunce now? Is he a science geek? And that POV web swinging looks utterly flat. Goddamn do you miss how much Raimi nailed the action. Spiderman is supposed to be THE wisecracking, fun hero, not Batman in crimson tights. It is a teaser, and this is the typical overreaction, but apart from Stone's Gwen Stacey (ripped from the comics), this looks wretched.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:25 p.m. CST

    yeah, yeah... Spiderman, wonderful, we're all excited, but...

    by Ted Knight

    Riddick 3 set to start shooting in September!! Rejoice sci-fi fans!!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:25 p.m. CST

    The Refurbished Spider-Man

    by Astronut

    Like a nice, refurbished computer! Well.... that's what is is!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:26 p.m. CST

    made for the masses

    by krisko

    most of us "elitist internet nerds" don't like this, don't want another origin story, and don't want to see it. you gotta expect even the most average summer movie goers are gonna have the same opinion. same basic story this soon? joe the plumber does not approve!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:27 p.m. CST


    by LouisCedar

    That's awesome, bro. How rather than addressing anything I say, you make a vague, trite insult. You're SO AWESOME. Wish I could be JUST like you, dude. And to the person that said this movie isn't covering any new ground: Seriously? Peter's relationship with Gwen Stacy is one of the formative parts of his origin story, and in the Raimi movies it was COMPLETELY skipped over. Peter's trust issues with Mary Jane, his feelings that being in a relationship with him is too dangerous for her--that all comes from his relationship with Gwen. And that material--that has never been seen in a spider-man movie before--is exactly what this new spider-man movie is covering. So no new ground? Really?

  • July 20, 2011, 2:30 p.m. CST

    neonfrisbee I take it you are NOT an obese virgin yourself?

    by fat_rancor_keeper

    You're "the cool guy" simply pointing out what the rest of us are? lol

  • July 20, 2011, 2:30 p.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage


  • July 20, 2011, 2:31 p.m. CST

    The casting seems really off...

    by AlienFanatic

    I'm not into Spider-Man, but I did remember reading some of the comics when I was really young. The casting for Ben and Mae in the Raimi series seemed absolutely sublime--both actors exuded a warmth and charm. Casting the caustic Martin Sheen and the shrill Sally Field seems so wrong for the parts. As far as the POV goes that's for one reason only: 3D. 3D is really obvious when it's used to render depth of field. The director is using 3D as a bludgeon, just as much as directors in the 50's used to have things pop out of the screen at you. I'm sure the next trailer will be better, but the beats on this were all way off.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Actually, no...

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    The whole point of Mary Jane was that, despite her looks and profession, she was warm hearted and encouraging, and not bitchy; I hate to use the whoary old cliche, but she was the beauty 'with a heart of gold'. Dunst was the opposite of all these things and, to add insult to injury, she didn't look like a supermodel, or even hot enough to qualify as the cute 'girl next door', to make up for her terrible personality! It made Peter look even worse; was the poor bastard so fucking horny that he would have been prepared to act like a servile lap dog to any piece of dog-eared skirt that came his way? Sheesh, I know he's a nerd, but have a bit of self-respect, please!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:34 p.m. CST


    by NeonFrisbee


  • July 20, 2011, 2:35 p.m. CST

    This looks fantastic so far...

    by AssyMuffJizz

    I will never understand the NO REBOOT knee jerk reactions. It's an iconic comic book character, guys. New writers and artists are rebooting/reinterpreting Spiderman ALL THE TIME. Think about that. Open your mind a little, will ya, and don't be so quick to judge.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:36 p.m. CST

    Still don't like it

    by Cruizer Dave

    In fact, I like it less. Terrible casting. Terrible idea of shoehorning Peter's parents into it. Terrible gimmick in the first person reveal of Spidey. Terrible tone for a Spidey movie. Nothing in this gives me hope.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Its "The Lizard"...

    by TopHat

    ...That's the villian this time around. So, no, Gwen Stacy's not dying. I swear to God "geeks" have become so pathetic; you people making excuses for this are just monsters. Peter Parker as a fucking "chosen one"?? "...The secrets that are kept from you"? What utter bullshit. But that's totally okay with you guys, eh? Does it look neat? Have to keep a positive front, right? Any negativity is suspect. Well, FUCK-ALL. This looks like shit. And that is not a "fanboy" opinion. Its an obvious attempt at Nolan's Batman - and that ain't good. The Gwen Stacy/Green Goblin storyline is perfection. This takes place at Oscorp. The Lizard is a scientist there (Rfyns Ifa-don'tknowhowtospellhisname). So, no green goblin. Saving him for the sequel. Probably a hint of him at the end of this one. Sound familiar? Gwen Stacy knows about Parker. Takes care of him. Acts as his conscience. SOUND-FAMILIAR? Parker's parents die. He's left alone. An outcast. S-O-U-N-D-F-A-M-I-L-I-A-R-?-?-? But, of course, y'all will fucking take anything now. Who cares about the fucking comics. "Gotta be Positive" You should make fucking buttons with that as your slogan. Oh, and F.Y.I. - I'll bet all my money that the POV crap stays in the movie; works well with the 3-D. Gotta have 3-D Yet another movie geek contribution to film. On your mark. Get set. APOLIGISTS AWAY

  • July 20, 2011, 2:40 p.m. CST

    The Lizard is a scientist there (Rfyns Ifa-don'tknowhowtospellhisname).

    by fat_rancor_keeper

    lol true I must not be enough of a geek because half the time I see people GUSH over a certain actor or actress I usually have no clue who the fuck the person is.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man was released in 2002

    by professor murder

    This reboot is being released in 2012. WOW! 10 years! really, is that all? Talk about too early. Talk about trying to cash in. They were going to just do Spider-Man 4 with the old cast before that all fell apart. It's Spider-Man 3 that probably ruined that in the long run. SM3 should have just been centered around Venom(except done well) and then a spawn(carnage) could have emerged at the very end. SM4 would be the whole Spiderman and Venom kind of being friendly enemies against a crazy Carnage on a killing spree.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:44 p.m. CST

    loisceder hit the nail on the head

    by Nerd Rage

    The Death of Gwen stacy is considered one best comic book story arcs and what does Raimi do? He revamps it into a mindless cliche wasting a great opportunity to add depth to the franchise, then he repeats the same rescue of a kidnapped Mary Jane over and over again. He must think we're all idiots. If he did SM4 Spider-man would've rescued Mary Jane from the Vulturess. Newsflash! Raimi thinks Spider-man fans are idiots. SM3 and reuse of the kidnapped Mary Jane climax proves he believes this.

  • unless of the very slimest of slimest chances the studios agree to work with one another which is pretty much nil.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST

    I like it.

    by MrFloppy

    I loved the first two ones (number 3 was a huge letdown). And I think it's too soon for a reboot (specially if we're going AGAIN with the same origin story) But I think too the franchise needed to break with Raimi's vision, and I really like what I saw here.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST


    by NeonFrisbee

    I don't know how "cool" I am (I mean, I'm here, right? Which proves I'm not that cool), but I'm neither obese (I exercise regularly) nor a virgin (haven't been since high school). See, you can usually tell the obese virgins by the way they fly into a blind rage about things that don't really mean all that much and/or shriek about how a given starlet has "too sharp knees" whilst they've never actually even kissed a girl, let alone dated and/or slept with one (they haven't paid to do so first). Search your pet rancor's shitstrewn deathcage, you know it to be true...

  • July 20, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST

    louisceder I meant to say

    by Nerd Rage

  • music was slick too the way spider-man is supposed to be!!!!

  • July 20, 2011, 2:50 p.m. CST

    tophat is a Raimi apologist

    by Nerd Rage

    Fuck Same 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. Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:52 p.m. CST


    by Pipple

    Been a spidey fan for as far back as first grade. Drew him all day while learning some math and shit... So I'm more than overjoyed that they're attempting to give us a more accurate and serious version this time. No dancing, no cookies, cake, no barely funny spidey. And all this talk about spidey being too depressed and sad and shit in this teaser, um... that's who he is, he's you and me on our worst day, but his sense of humor helps him hang on to his sanity. Hell I'm having a terrible day(car accident), but i'm for whatever reason looking on the bright side of things... what I love: Topher Grace is spiderman, but this guy's goofy lanky body and demeanor kinda works out, but he has to match or surpass topher's charm and wit if he's going to truly work. Webshooters are back. what else... 2 things. There seems to be more subtlety and care taken in crafting the character's relationships and personalities which is not something the raimi movie's cared to do. POV webswining is fantastic. It's better than the shitty ass cartoon bobbing around videogame bullshit from the old movies I think. I always wanted to get one shot of spidey thwipping a building from his pov in the raimi movies but it never happend. This trailer did what 3 big budget movies failed to do, how sad.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:53 p.m. CST

    of course this is a money grab

    by Orion

    They want to make as much money as humanly possible. Its fucking hollywood. Do you go to work to lose money? The raimi movies were too expensive. They keep it lowerbudgeted they dont have to make a billion to break even.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:54 p.m. CST

    Ghost Rider is Marvel's wise-cracking hero in 2012

    by DannyOcean01

    It would appear.

  • July 20, 2011, 2:58 p.m. CST

    Search your pet rancor's shitstrewn deathcage, you know it to be true...

    by fat_rancor_keeper

    hmmm turns out you are right lol please continue....

  • July 20, 2011, 2:59 p.m. CST


    by fat_rancor_keeper

    was when the franchise jumped the shark. once i found out about that unnecessary change i knew things were all downhill

  • July 20, 2011, 3:01 p.m. CST

    This is Spider-Man for Millennials, nothing more.

    by kevred

    Parents are part of the story because Millennials can't do anything without their parents' involvement. POV sequence is there because they spend so much time playing video games. Emo music is there because Millennials are the only ones who take that garbage music seriously. Parker is a scruffy ragamuffin skater dude (instead of a buttoned-up nerd, as has been the case from the beginning) because that market -tests better with the Millennials. The tone is somber and moody (all the wrong kinds of melodramatic) because of Twilight and the like. I think we can just stop listening to everything Webb has been saying about what's gone into this "new" take on Spidey. This isn't a fresh start from the Raimi films; this is just the final conquering of the franchise by the studio and its marketing wing. Say what you will about Raimi's films, but the idea of a studio like Sony giving a franchise to the guy who did Evil Dead seems positively refreshing compared to this button-pushing crap.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:05 p.m. CST

    Twilight of the Dark Spider Knight!

    by Dr_PepperSpray

    Sorry, couldn't help but take another jab at this.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:07 p.m. CST

    Looks Excellent!

    by steverogers5

    Looks like they're finally taking it seriously and trying to make the characters and look more 'real world' based. Raimi's flicks had a weird tone about them that made it hard for there to be any real tension or sense of peril in them. (And I can't believe people are complaining about the cgi here, it looks tons more convining than the near cartoon sequences in the first two spiderman flicks. I almost got a sense of vertigo watching that. Can't wait to see it in the big screen!) More damaging though was Raimi's casting that slow short assed, macguire with his near retarded style of delivery, that was a complete mismatch for Spidey. But I think Garfield could pull it off. Hope they have him be a bit of a smart ass when he's fighting villains, as that was almost completely missing from Raimi's flicks, At least it certainly looks like they're giving him some proper scientific smarts this time out. I am a bit perplexed though that people are complaining that this doesn't show much of the effects. The film's nearly a year off from release. And you can bet your ass they're working on making a monstrous looking Lizard that'll scare the pants of any young kids. (Though they'll love it really..) Comparing this to the final Spiderman trailer of Raimi's first flick is a bit unfair. As I think we'll have a couple of more revealing trailers to come, that'll will blow people's sock off with the completed action sequences. A better comparison would be to compare it with the first trailer that was released for the original raimi Spiderman. (You know the World Trade Centre one that had to be pulled.) It only showed Spidey at the end too. And certainly didn't give you much of a feel for the story, or show any of the big action sequences of the finished film. Though it was a cool reveal. Ironically probably the best thing Raimi ever shot for the flick. (Since there was no creepy moronic macguire or power rangers goblin in it!) Looking forward to this. I have a feeling we might actually get a Peter Parker that is actually likeable this time around, and who is fast and agile enough for it to be more believable that it's him in the suit.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Not a reboot - it's a REMAKE

    by rhaemye

    Not another (the same) origin movie. Please.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:10 p.m. CST

    SM3 sucked because of the studio?

    by Nerd Rage

    How do you know? Were you sitting next to Raimi when the studio told him to make Maguire wear eye liner and a Bieber-bowl and dance like an idiot? They told Raimi to put Green Goblin 2 in a shitty snowboarder outfit? They told Raimi to make the symboite Peter Parker act like Buddy Love from the Nutty Professor. They also told Raimi to make Sandman Uncle Bens killer and re-use the kidnapped Mary Jane rescue for the third time. They probably forced Raimi to make Peter cry like a bitch half the movie and have snaggletooth sing an entre song. Yeah the studio...

  • July 20, 2011, 3:12 p.m. CST


    by doom master

    It's Boring. It's Shitty. It's UNNECESSARY. Why couldnt they just toss him into another movie without explaining the ORIGIN again? Why go through all that exposition that weve already been exposed to? This has to be THE lamest reboot ploy ever conceived, not even 4 years after the last movie was done... FUCK THIS MOVIE. Fuck it Hard. Fuck it in the ASS. FUCK IT NOW. if you celebrate this piece of shit you are an idiot.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Not a reboot - it's a REMAKE

    by rhaemye

    Not another (the same) origin movie. Please.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:13 p.m. CST

    This Ain't Spidey

    by THX1968

    That's what you can't quite put your finger on. First, Peter Parker may have been a misfit or an outsider, but it wasn't from lack of trying. He always had a natural, good natured resolve. As the amazing Lee/Ditko stories progressed Peter became more confident thanks to his adventuring as Spidey. This is just not going to work for so many reasons.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:14 p.m. CST

    WOW -- Pretty lame

    by Lucky13

    The POV shots were laughable... what an idiotic idea. But man, I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the spider sliding down to Parker -- WTF, wasn't this movie JUST FUCKING MADE??? And that Emma Stone broad is detestable... Ugh. I don't get what the excitement about her is all about. Ugly trailer trash looks, 50 yr old Margot Kidder smoker voice -- yech. KevRed said it best -- this film isn't for anyone but the millennial-gen queerboys and gals. They can have it.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:14 p.m. CST

    LOL by the way what the hell is a MILLENIAL?

    by doom master

    Stop giving them names!

  • July 20, 2011, 3:17 p.m. CST

    It looks good

    by IceMonkey

    I was hoping they wouldn't just copy what Raimi did and it looks like they didn't. I remain hopeful.

  • Owzies!!! Mooooooommmmyyyyy HELP!!

  • Finally a Spider-man movie where the characters come to life, not just rice-paper thin caricatures.

  • whereas most of the folks who appreciate what they see from the teaser are thinking and writing like reasonable adults. Fascinating.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:21 p.m. CST

    this crap looks like its been made for twihards

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 3:21 p.m. CST

    this is not made for comic fans just for chciks who love twilight!

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Case in point.

    by AssyMuffJizz

  • The statement in my previous comment was meant to be in quotes, and was followed by a mockery of the statement itself and the person who made it in another comment above. Well, AICN, it's not like anyone would ever need to use quotation marks in a comment. No, sir.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:22 p.m. CST

    Andrew Garfield is so wrong in this!The Costume is a Joke

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 3:22 p.m. CST

    i hope this will tank! even tobey looked better as peter parker

    by captaindickbloodsrobot

  • July 20, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man 3 WAS Raimi's fault.

    by Lone Fox

    He'd just made Sony a fuckload of money off 1 & 2. SM 2 was the biggest superhero flick since Burton's Batman. Hell, biggest movie period. And it took Nolan's Dark Knight years later to eclipse it. Raimi was in the position Nolan's in now. He could do whatever he wanted with the series. If he let the studio interfere, he should've got himself a backbone.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:25 p.m. CST

    looking forward to a new take

    by Redmantle

    Tobey never really pulled off Spidey's intelligence or wise-assness. While I enjoyed Spidey 1 and 2, I think there's definitely room for another interpretation of the material. Never liked Dunst in the role, always thought she was subpar. So... curious to see what Webb has cooked up.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Yes, assymuffjizz, you are a paragon of sage maturity.

    by kevred

    As for me, I write more intelligently than all the plants/apologists on this board put together, so I throw the curve right out the window. This trailer looks terrible, and the film looks completely unnecessary. Except as a market-tested way for Sony to make a ton of money from the Millennials who will respond in Pavlovian fashion to all the pandering elements of this production.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:26 p.m. CST

    Too soon -- Nicholas Hammond will always be Spider-Man!

    by Curious_Jorge

  • July 20, 2011, 3:27 p.m. CST

    Thank you, kevred. Comparatively speaking, I am.

    by AssyMuffJizz

    And--just for the record--I consider you an exception.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:27 p.m. CST

    raimi flicks not perfect

    by rogerdodger21

    they're dark knight-ing it, and that may be ok. raimi is a cartoon filmmaker. he earns some depth and then loses it with film school camera tricks that are fun as all hell but create a tim burton/gilliam "look at me" turn into fantasy. they're not spider-man movies, they're sam raimi movies. i loved the first two, and that was great for a time, but i have no problem seeing what happens when you show a kid whose whole life has been brutal and let him unleash with powers in a real world setting - does he embrace the fun or get tough and mean? wide-eyed tobey got old after a while, and dunst never did it for me. emma is gwen from "go." i'm in.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:27 p.m. CST

    Man, some people just can't be pleased.

    by Executor

    While it wasn't "amazing", it was still a good teaser. TEASER. Yes. Look it up. This trailer isn't going to have huge chunks of plot or action sequences. It is a calling card. A good teaser trailer to spark awareness of the upcoming movie and show us the tone and new main character. And you nerds are miserable, just waiting to unleash your little nerd fury. It must be difficult living up to the imaginary nerd standards in your mind. I feel sorry for the lot of you. p.s. you will all see it opening weekend too. Because you are weak little nerds that lack the strength to stand behind your internet words.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:27 p.m. CST

    lone fox, go ask Jon Favreau about that.

    by kevred

    The more money a studio makes, the less power it has. That's an interesting hypothesis.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:28 p.m. CST

    But for every kevred, there are ten captaindickbloodsrobots.

    by AssyMuffJizz


  • July 20, 2011, 3:29 p.m. CST

    Dig on thisssssssss...

    by Astronut

    • I won't miss Snaggletooth • I won't miss lines like '' No, * you're out *, Gobby! Out of your mind! '' • I won't miss MJ getting kidnapped every single time • I won't miss gay dance numbers that smack of those in Breakin' II: Electric Boogaloo And STILL I will not be going to see this shit-tastic, origin-retellin', ugly silver slipper wearin', hair helmet refurb

  • July 20, 2011, 3:30 p.m. CST

    The man with Spidey posters hanging on walls speaketh..

    by T 1000 xp professional

    I really doubt that the makers of the trailer and the marketing folks screwed up enough to completely betray the presentation of the actual movie. If this is what we're going to get on the day of release, then I honestly think I'm going to skip this one.. Everything looks and just feels off. It's as if the first Spider-man film, with all of its plot points, decided to be told in Nolan's batman world. I really liked the cast, but this is not what the franchise needed after Spidey 3... "Spider-Man" the brand will not disappear if people don't watch this. the only thing that's a bummer is I'm going to have to wait another couple years for a better version.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:30 p.m. CST

    If this were a new video game

    by Dr_PepperSpray

    it would be running on the dark knight engine.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:31 p.m. CST


    by AssyMuffJizz

    I'd hardly call the dance numbers in question "gay." They were--alas--all too straight.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:31 p.m. CST


    by unclemonty666

  • July 20, 2011, 3:33 p.m. CST

    astronut is right about Goblin

    by Vermicious Knid

    They blew a perfect opportunity in pt 1. Willem Dafoe is practically Green Goblin sans make-up. it wouldn't have been much of a stretch to have the Goblin serum distort his face with the super crazy. Shit, the demonic possession in Evil Dead looked exactly how Goblin should have looked. I don't see how that was missed (or more likely vetoed)

  • July 20, 2011, 3:34 p.m. CST

    p.s. you will all see it opening weekend too.

    by Astronut

    No I won't.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:35 p.m. CST

    I wonder how they'll handle Spidey-Sense in the film...

    by Johnno

    I'm guessing a mix of quick cuts, saturated colours and slo-mo accompanied by the sound of a trombone...

  • July 20, 2011, 3:37 p.m. CST


    by AssyMuffJizz

    Not even if I take you to a nice dinner and pay for the movie? Come on, man...

  • July 20, 2011, 3:38 p.m. CST


    by proevad

    A pussy who complains a lot.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:38 p.m. CST

    at the very least...

    by fred

    the Goblin should have had a purple tunic.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:40 p.m. CST

    And assymuffjizz, kudos for an unrepentant user name

    by kevred

    I've regretted my bland one for a long time, but it probably reflects my actual persona as well as anything else.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST

    This looks like a step backwards...

    by GeorgieBoy

    Trailer looks boring. Emo Peter Parker. Uh... Origin story AGAIN?! Garfield doesn't seem up to the task. Sorry folks. I won't be participating in this obvious cash-grab.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST

    I miss snaggletooth.

    by obi_juan

    Tired of these actors and actresses with their fixed teeth.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by Astronut

    Oh, O - Kaaaaaaaaaaay..................... lol

  • And we know how that turned out.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:46 p.m. CST

    The only thing I would change about Raimi's Spiderman is Goblin.

    by knowthyself

    The toy department had a hand in his creation that's for sure. Embarassing for the most part and almost ruined the whole film but luckily Raimi's tone matched the silliness of that suit and made it okay.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Cartoons have Rebooted the Spider-man Origin many times

    by Jawsh Murdock

    So I guess what I'm saying is that Hollywood is quickly becoming Fox Kids and Nicktoons level of quality! Next up... The Spectacular Spiderman story starring Haley Osmett followed by Ultimate Spider-man starring Nathan Fillion. Just go with the flow I guess...

  • July 20, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST

    When are they going to reboot this one?

    by screamster101

    Taking bets... 1 year from now? 2? Place your bets ladies and germs!

  • July 20, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Only good thing about raimi movies was JJJ

    by Pipple

    Everything else was garbage.

  • God, there were some awful lines in those Raimi films.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:48 p.m. CST

    Kevred- Favreau was a totally different situation

    by Lone Fox

    IM 1 did okay with general audiences. Really well with fanboys. IM2 just wasn't as good. I'm not saying the studio gets less power, I'm saying they recognise the talent and allow the director to do his best (in an ideal world). IM 2 didn't feel like too much studio interference, aside from the Avengers link shoehorned in. SM3 seemed like the studio interfered incessantly. Raimi was in a position to dig his heels in. Nolan has done just this. Raimi didn't. Nolan has refused to film 3D, against studio wishes. And he's now supervising Superman. He earned clout. Raimi could have built on SM 2's success, alas...

  • July 20, 2011, 3:49 p.m. CST


    by Astronut


  • July 20, 2011, 3:50 p.m. CST



    Every superhero movie needs a meaty villain - this one has "Proto-Goblin" and "The Lizard" and Raimi passed on both over three movies. I predict "The Less Than Amazing Turkey-Man" will bomb. That is all.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:51 p.m. CST

    I would never have thought of Spiderman done in this manner

    by chien_sale

    Color me intrigued though.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:52 p.m. CST

    @executor, to your point:

    by kevred

    I have the feeling that, despite the tidal wave of "you nerds hate everything" posts we see on nearly every talkback, that a lot of people actually can be pleased, and just have different opinions about different films. Take me, for example. I think this trailer, and the entire tone and approach to this new Spidey film, stinks. I think it's unnecessary and pandering and just drab and joyless. But I had a great time at X-Men:FC. I loved Thor. I'm really looking forward to the Hobbit, even though some of the dwarf designs are ridiculous. Can't wait for Avengers. Thought the last Harry Potter film was disappointing, in the same way that the last few have been, though I enjoyed it and wouldn't have missed it. (Actually enjoyed the previous film a lot more.) Looking forward to Cowboys and Aliens. Captain America looks good. I thought The Dark Knight was highly overrated, but I really enjoyed most of it (thought it nose-dove in the last act), so I'm curious about TDKR, even though the lineup of characters doesn't interest me too much. Conan looks stupid, but might be fun enough, especially since I'm currently going through audiobook versions of the original REH stories and digging the heck out of them. Prometheus sounds great in some ways, but I hate prequels - if it was a completely standalone story, I'd be more interested. Sherlock Holmes looks stupid. The Thing looks horrible and indefensible. M:I looks like good dumb fun, Dragon Tattoo looks intriguing, War Horse looks excellent but would probably make me too sad. John Carter looks promising, but hard to believe they'll do it right. 3 Musketeers looks stupendously bad. I'll be in a seat opening night for the next Bond film.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:52 p.m. CST

    Organic Webshooters/Origin Story

    by IceTitan

    So you guys don't want an origin story but you DO want mechanical webshooters? I love Spiderman as much as the next guy but you cats are being ridiculous. Spidey DOES have organic webshooters in the comics. After his metamorphosis post-House of M he developed the ability to shoot web from his hands as well as talk to insects. Personally I'd rather they do the organic webs without doing an origin story. I really feel robbed of seeing Lizard on screen after 3 damn movies of build-up. I don't care if they do Lizard in this one, it won't be the same relationship with 2 different actors.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:54 p.m. CST

    I put my faith in nemov

    by HyphenatedWords

    Watching the origin story in this trailer was tedious enough. I have ZERO interest and sitting through another origin story for Spiderman.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:56 p.m. CST

    Actually rogerdoger21, my problem with Raimi Spider flicks

    by chien_sale

    ...was there wasn't enough of Raimi's signature as a filmaker and it felt like a work-for-hire movie. I wished Raimi's style would have shown more, whether it was his usual humour to not using as much CGI. If you want a real Sam Raimi super-hero movie, watch Darkman. Great little flick with tons of style and innovation, fun as Hell.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:56 p.m. CST

    I will reserve my judgement

    by kristianjerman

    until later. They obviously don't have much done in the way of final effects.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Hey, kevred

    by Astronut

    PROMETHEUS is a standalone story — it is not about the alien as much as it is about the gods and engineers of space. It will be more like 2001 than the original Alien, at least the signs indicate as much. I am looking forward to TDKR Prometheus Avengers Man of Steel mayyybe the revamp Total Recall Not much else. I'm picky.

  • July 20, 2011, 3:59 p.m. CST

    The POV is much better than...

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    That crappy camera movement in the first Raimi flick. It is too soon for a reboot and this looks too dark to me, but the POV looks very good! I normally don't care for it, but if any character justifies twisting and turning the camera, it's Spiderman.

  • July 20, 2011, 4 p.m. CST


    by AssyMuffJizz

    Good lord. Every opinion you have almost precisely mirrors mine! TDKR really tanked in the last act, didn't it? The boat business was badly handled. I really loved THOR and think it's actually the best superhero movie I've seen (in that it delivered exactly the kind of superhero entertainment I wanted). I'm cool with the dwarf designs. Keeping an open mind.

  • and it looked like shit. even down to the awful CG arms popping in front of the camera. this looks fucking awful. rebooting a movie thats only like 10 years old LOLOLOLOL i wonder when the Captain America reboot will come out.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:01 p.m. CST

    Meant TDK of course -- not TDKR

    by AssyMuffJizz

  • kill yourself, fatso

  • July 20, 2011, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Looks like a weak film, but it's unfair to judge it by the trailer.

    by MajorFrontbum

    The CG work looks horribly dated.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:07 p.m. CST

    I find it funny...

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    How many people complain about CGI without being specific. I think people have gotten so used to it that now they think everything is CGI!

  • July 20, 2011, 4:16 p.m. CST

    Garfield Parker..

    by Charger

    This guy just isn't a good fit for Peter Parker.

  • Maybe it's the compromise I've wanted all along: organic web, but mechanical shooters. He produces the stuff in his body, but the shooters extract it/control it/direct it/shape it.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Glad I waited to watch a good quality version

    by Kammich

    All along I've vowed not to judge this film based off of speculation and production stills. It was incredibly important to see this thing in motion to get a grasp on the tone that Webb, et al are going for. In that regard, its a very interesting trailer. My thoughts... - It looks like they weren't blowing smoke up our asses by proclaiming the film "darker," because it does appear to be darker both aesthetically and thematically. I think its an interesting choice to focus heavily on the loss of Peter's parents as part of his origin. It adds another layer of tragedy once Uncle Ben bites it... hopefully they don't go TOO overboard and turn Pete into a brooding middle-class Bruce Wayne. - Production design for the lab and spider bite "incident" looks badass. Actors look great in character, too. Emma Stone is fn adorable. Looks like Ditko's drawings jumped off the page. - Wish they would've given us more Dr. Connors. Some of his lines and delivery make him come off kind of like an ass... I think that'd be a mistake on the filmmakers part. He doesn't need to be a complete candy ass, but he does need to be a friend and father figure to Pete. Hopefully the next trailer will give us a LITTLE tease of the Lizard. - Whose voice is that saying the line about "not knowing what you truly are"? Is it Irfan Khan's Van Adder? Doesn't sound like Connors. - The P.O.V. shot is cool, but am I the only one who gets the feeling that its not even going to be in the film? I think its an SFX money shot to get people hyped, especially when this trailer is attached in front of a 3D movie. I truly doubt we get any First Person Spidey in the actual flick. - The score at the beginning is great, but the Hans Zimmer knockoff at the end kind of blows. Why is it so hard to give Spidey a good theme?

  • July 20, 2011, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Wow, that was actually terrible.

    by Nabster

    Seriously, that was horrendous. Even Garfield looks terrible in this.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:22 p.m. CST

    I'm not going to judge yet

    by Captain Moscow

    The trailer looks really bad, but there wasn't enough shown to make up my mind. IMO it all depends on how Lizard is handled. It's kind of funny, I actually liked the first person shot the other day when it was a shaky hand-cam version because you couldn't tell how low quality it was. If that is the caliber of CG being used I fear I'll be very disappointed. But, like I said, I won't pass judgment yet.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Do we need this story again?

    by unfaithfullyyours

    No. Though, Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben does excite me. Brilliant casting, that.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Oh, and that webbing doesn't mean organic for sure

    by Captain Moscow

    I mean it could, but it doesn't have to. He could take the bits of webbing that are popping up on him and be inspired to create his shooter. That'd be pretty dumb, but it could happen. Or the scene could have had a completely different explanation that just didn't make sense in the context it was shown.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:26 p.m. CST

    You guys complained about Emo Parker before...

    by TitusPullo

    wait 'til you get a load of this film. You'll be crying for Spider-Man 3 until the end!

  • 1. The lighting reeks of artificiality. It's as if this is a rough pass. It looks like they're going with a low quality IBL rig. 2. There's either zero to insufficient ambient occlusion, which is necessary to pick up the fine surface detail. 3. The camera work, obviously is not done with a traditional, physical rig. It looks like basic motion path, similar to what you'd see with an "on rails" FPS game. 4. The glimpse we get of Spider-Man, however brief, doesn't fit with reality. Pretty sure that's probably a CG dummy. I'm guessing based on the combination of posing in the building reflection and the surfacing that we can see of the costume in the tracked POV shot. 5. The metal work on the buildings and the textures in general have this all too classic glossy CGI look. Clearly this stuff is not finished. There are lot of passes that go into a final render and this one doesn't have enough. You can tell this just by looking at the texture & shader quality. Look at the brick work also. 6. The birds.... C'mon. The birds. How can you NOT know that this is CGI? Bad at that. Very fake. I can keep going on and on. There's a lot of stuff done in the POV shot that would be prohibitively expensive, difficult, or otherwise impossible to do physically. This is clearly CG. You'd think that people would know the difference by now, yet some people are actually still fooled by obvious CG in movies like Rise of the Planet of the Apes. (Weta's good, but not "uncanny valley" good.) Anyway, the POV shot here is clearly CG and stands out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the footage - both in quality and executed cinematography.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:29 p.m. CST

    astronut, I hope you're right about Prometheus.

    by kevred

    If you are, I'll probably love it. I just don't want to have everything about the origin of the aliens and Space Jockey laid out on screen. It's the mystery of those things that is so evocative in the original film. In the end, it's the unknown that's terrifying - the mysterious shock of this bizarre creature appearing out of the void, the ruin of an alien pilot from who knows where - not the known.

  • (apologies if it's already been linked to)<P> Christ, not old enough to remember THAT abortion clearly has a diminished appreciation of how good comic book movies are now.<P> The last Spider-Man origin movie was TEN YEARS AGO. Too soon, my ass. There are kids that are now 13 who were 3 years old when the first came out.

  • It actually wasn't bad for when it came out. The landscape for comic adaptations was way different back them. I'm not saying that they didn't mess it up there, but it actually wasn't the unmitigated disaster you'd assume. It was more than a lot of people were doing at the time. Honestly, it could have been worse. I refer you to the Japanese Spider-Man adaptation, the Reb Williams Captain America, or the Cathy Lee Crosby Wonder Woman. It CAN get worse. (Much worse if you've ever seen the aborted Justice League pilot or the Corman Fantastic Four.)

  • July 20, 2011, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Too dark of a tone for Spiderman

    by jimmy_009

    They forgot the fun. This isn't supposed to be Dark Knight.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:38 p.m. CST

    LOL @rsanta

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    Well, at least you are specific...but still mostly wrong. :P I am also a CGI artist by trade. I didn't say I thought it wasn't CGI, but you are crazy to think this is poor quality. It may not be entirely finished because I'm sure you're aware that sometimes things get put into trailers before the final lighting work is done. I think the camera work is actually very good and better by far than the first film by Raimi. It's better than the 3d camera work in LOTR, which didn't match up to the rest of the camera work in the movie and therefore stuck out "like a sore thumb," as you say.

  • So sad that even the worst of the worst comic movies today looks like the Shawshank Redemption by comparison. =)

  • July 20, 2011, 4:41 p.m. CST

    I've been doing CG for 21 years. And you?

    by cookepuss

  • That's a very good way to put it - that's how I felt too. Thor hit just the right tone for me, and I felt satisfied with it. Now that I think about it, there have been a lot of comic book movies, but very few that really felt like unabashed *superhero* films. There's a quality about 'Thor' - which had fun with, but never apologized for, its massively powerful hero - that I haven't seen in a film since the first couple Superman films. As for the Hobbit dwarves, I like most of it, but don't like the human proportions and near-complete lack of long beards. It seems a bit timid to go that way. But still keeping an open mind too, and the Hobbit films are my overall most-excited-about of the next few years, along with Avengers.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:43 p.m. CST


    by christpunchers2007

    The first half looked like a badly acted TV drama. Something just doesn't look right. It's not that it's too bleak (which it is), but it takes itself way too seriously. All the panning shots of melodrama is too much. Doesn't feel "organic", just some scripted BS played by the numbers of X celeb of the week(even Raimi's first attempt is better).

  • July 20, 2011, 4:45 p.m. CST

    playkins they got this crazy invention called DVD/Bluray

    by Mel

    just because a movie came out 10 years ago doesnt mean it's impossible to watch it.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Mmm, about the same.

    by KnowItAllFromCali

  • The more you know about how sausage is made the less you want to eat it. LOL

  • July 20, 2011, 4:50 p.m. CST

    Seriously, this is pointless.

    by matt

    Its clear they are redoing these movies just to be able to stick him in a avengers sequel. For Christ sake they just made these movies. They do not need to be remaking them already.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:52 p.m. CST

    playkins, I enjoyed that clip more than this teaser.

    by kevred

    Sure, it's cheesy. But it's got more life, personality, style, and fun than any ten of the likes of this new Spidey film. And the REAL camera shot over the edge of the building, and standing/walking along the ledge, was more dramatic and affecting than any of the junk in this trailer. Not saying that the 70s series was a good realization of Spidey. But it actually did capture some of the gung-ho quality of the 70s Spidey comics, and used real stunt work that not only looked like, but actually *was* real people hanging and climbing on real buildings, and there's no comparison to that. It's like old Jackie Chan fight scenes compared to wire-fu. You either appreciate the more-real, or you don't.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:53 p.m. CST

    rsanta74, you're talking out of your ass

    by jimmy_009

    You probably use Maya or something so that makes you an expert, right? Congrats, so do 100,000 other people out there. Until you tell me you work for Digital Domain or ILM, I'm just going to assume you're a low-ranking nobody as you're giving lighting crits on a grainy trailer video that fucking Ed Catmull wouldn't be able to make. The shot is CG? Well fucking duh. It's common sense that it's CG.


  • July 20, 2011, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Why the origin story

    by Jotham

    Does anyone out there really not know how Spider-Man got his powers? It's a waste of film to have to do that again.

  • July 20, 2011, 4:57 p.m. CST


    by KnowItAllFromCali

    Hey, at least you stepped up to the plate and gave some critiques. I just don't agree with them. :D I'm pretty sure that the people who put the sequence together spent lots of time on the roofs of buildings and took lots of photographs. I think the lighting looks fine and frankly, I don't see how anyone can complain about detail when the YouTube video is so low quality... When I watch a movie, I tend to focus more on the story and characters and that's disappointing enough! I just find it funny that people complain about CGI. Just go back 20 years and look at effects and tell me CGI these days is really that bad. No one would have even attempted a sequence like this. *Disclaimer: I am a fan of practical effects, as well.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:07 p.m. CST

    Origin stories...

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    I think if you're going to reboot a franchise, another take on the origin is a must. Yeah, we all know he was bit by a radioactive spider, but the details are essential to our understanding of the character and whether or not we care about what happens to him. So far, he seems a bit too brooding for my taste.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:07 p.m. CST

    @jimmy_009: Talking out of YOUR ass now.

    by cookepuss

    First off, you don't impress anybody because you can toss Catmull's name around. Second, not every established CG artist works at DD, Framestore, ILM or whatever. There are MANY studios and MANY industries. Don't assume. You look like a schmuck for doing so. 21 years and low ranking? I can wipe my ass with your pay check. Third, as far as my credentials go, my work has ranged from character design/animation to archvis and so forth. I have administrated and moderated 2 large international global CG communities over the past 10 years. I have also had a number of published articles and in-depths on the subject matter over the years. I've also acted as a consultant to some top tier houses over the years too. The extent of my software knowledge goes far beyond Maya. I am "fluent" in about 25-30 different apps, in addition to the core Autodesk products. None of them warez btw. Just in case you want to cast doubt there. I write my own plugins. I've got a small 10 node, 30 core render farm in my apartment. (It's rendering right now, enabling me to bitch at you.) And so on. FTR, Maya's installed user base is actually known to be less than half that. Just so you know. (As of 2008 or so I think that it was hovering somewhere above 30k.) Y'know what? I'm not gonna even address this issue further. Think what you want, jimbo.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:08 p.m. CST

    webb is shooting blanks.

    by HelveticaConspiracy

    garfield looks like a dildo caught in the headlights. stone is not the movie star everyone thinks she is. no one wants to see a spiderman origin story again (even one where his parents are involved in some convoluted conspiracy). no matter what angry nerds say on this site: to millions of moviegoers maguire will always be spiderman. this movie will bomb. and, sony has never, and will never, even come close to making the kind of money that raimi's films made.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:09 p.m. CST

    Just Biding My time Till Spidey 4

    by Geomancer21

  • July 20, 2011, 5:11 p.m. CST

    They'll probably just use stock Godzilla footage for Lizard

    by Terminocity

    Sucks that Sony still owns the rights to this and are clearly just milking the fucking cash cow. Can't wait till Marvel studios finally gets a crack at it. They better streamline the origin, because people have seen this shit before. That Mirror's Edge scene looked atrocious - I hope for all our sake that was just for the trailer or we are in trouble.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:11 p.m. CST

    @knowitallfromcali: Fair enough. Agree to disagree.

    by cookepuss

    The lighting was the first thing that bothered me, actually. Whatever. What bothered me most was that they included an incomplete shot. I get that it's a long way from being finished, but it hurts the film in the eyes of the public. Remember the unfinished CG in the X-Men 1 trailer. Oh! So... So... Painful. =)

  • July 20, 2011, 5:12 p.m. CST

    I think you're a tool for claiming...

    by jimmy_009 be able to spot the nuanced things you say out of a low quality trailer (and which I don't think even jived with what was on screen). You grabbed some jargon you thought might jive and ran with it. My point on Ed Catmull was that you could be a fucking Grandmaster CGsmith and not accurately spot that nuance based on the size and quality of the trailer. So unless you claim to be some kind of CG Rain Man, you're talking out of your ass.

  • Goes to show how far CG has come.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:14 p.m. CST

    Do we really need another origin story so soon?...

    by bcom77

    It could end up being a good movie, nothing can be judged until we see it, but I just feel it's too soon to reboot the Spider-man series. I know Nolan did it with Batman but that was a good decade after the final movie in the previous Batman series. The last Spider-man movie was only 4 years ago. I don't know, it just doesn't feel right and I'm still not sold on the new costume. Apart from the original Superman movies, the costume in the Raimi movies was probably the closest you'd get to pulling the costume right out of the comicbook and throwing it straight onto the screen. It was an incredibly faithful reproduction and it looked good. I don't like the new lines and the blue fingers. It doesn't looks as symetrical as the proper costuume. Garfield has the perfect body shape for Spider-man but I'll have to see more of the costume in motion to make my mind up. On another note, I've just realised how many massive superhero movies are coming out next year. The Dark Knight Rises, Superman, Spider-man and The Avengers. I can't think of a summer period where we've had so many top level super heroes hit the screen at one time!

  • July 20, 2011, 5:16 p.m. CST

    emo twilighty spiderman? yech..

    by Dark Doom

    Costume.........suck actor...............suck plot.................suck Oww look I have zit on may back oww Imma spider.....oww look at first person shooter camera angle........oww teeen angst. Looks like a whole bag of dead suck to me.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Too dark a tone for Spider-Man

    by Mattman

  • "Grabbing some jargon".... I LOVE that. So full of shit. That's what you are. Again, 21 years of doing CG. Come back to me when you can at least argue the topic intelligently Whether or not knowitallfromcali and I disagree or not is a personal issue, as we're both coming from different angles likely. We're both probably looking for different things, based on what we each do.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:18 p.m. CST

    What utter shit

    by ShamelessElitist

    Seriously. How could this Webb guy think this looked like a good first impression?

  • July 20, 2011, 5:20 p.m. CST

    Fuck this movie


    Fuck this movie

  • July 20, 2011, 5:22 p.m. CST

    @rsanta74 wanna work on my movies? lol

    by sunwukong86

  • July 20, 2011, 5:22 p.m. CST

    Spiderman 3 was a masterpiece


    this is what you get now assholes

  • July 20, 2011, 5:22 p.m. CST


    by KnowItAllFromCali

    That's a good example of the point I was trying to make. Another hazard of the trade is that real life sometimes stops looking like real life and instead looks like models to be made, textures to be painted, etc.

  • I'm also blessed to have access to my little brother who's an AD/DP a large corporate imaging agency. This is the type of stuff we go over for fun, composition and whatnot. It does warp your mind if you're not careful.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:27 p.m. CST


    by cookepuss

  • July 20, 2011, 5:29 p.m. CST

    WTF was THAT?!? LOL Anyway @sunwukong86

    by cookepuss

    I'm under contract for at least the next 18 months. You sound like my friend, Gary. Dude pitches ideas for short we'll never have time to make. =)

  • July 20, 2011, 5:29 p.m. CST

    I have no problem with you

    by jimmy_009

    Pointing out that it's CG. It's OBVIOUSLY CG. I call bullshit on a comment like: "2. There's either zero to insufficient ambient occlusion, which is necessary to pick up the fine surface detail." How the fuck can you tell? It's a low-res, highly compressed video and that's motion blurred throughout. No fucking kidding you're not going to be picking up surface detail. Pause a frame, it's blurry as shit. "But that's clearly due to the lack of ambient occlusion and blah blah blah." Yeah, you're just dumping jargon. Until you see a high quality video or better yet see it on a big screen, I don't accept your opinion as anything other than some guy spouting jargon. If you tell me the same thing after seeing a REAL high quality clip, then I'll change my mind.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:32 p.m. CST


    by Felix Buckman

    Why do we need yet another superhero origin movie? We know these characters already. Geez.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:43 p.m. CST

    remember the rumor that the budget was $80 million?


    no, the effects are not going to be as good. But I think the professional effects guys on the project know what ambient occlusion is lol.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:44 p.m. CST

    You know what this reminds me of?

    by SifoDyasJr

    It reminds me of those homemade trailers on YouTube where someone takes a comedy movie and cuts a new trailer that makes it look like a horror movie instead. Maybe they will surprise us like they did with X-men First Class, which turned out to be the best of the series despite early marketing missteps, but right now, this looks terrible.

  • I'm really glad the studio isn't alienating me because I'm not a geek, and therefore have no prior knowledge of this franchise. It's odd though, that that the studio - having ruled me out as a geek - wants me to geek out about a franchise I know nothing about and consume as many related multimedia products as I can afford. Seems like it would make more sense if they just targeted geek-movies at geeks so they didn't have to explain the origin story every time for mongoloids like me.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:45 p.m. CST

    POV sequence...

    by Pelicanhead

    ... Would have looked more realistic with a few blinks thrown in. Especially when landing after a big jump.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:45 p.m. CST

    rsanta74 is a fucking liar

    by NightArrows

    He animates flip books, and at BEST worked on that horrendous piece of shit Gnomeo and Julliette.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:47 p.m. CST

    The little boy

    by christpunchers2007

    Do we really need a movie trying to pull our heart strings by adding a little boy who's sad because his folks are leaving? And whoever is playing Peter's dad is a bad actor. Uncle Ben from Raimi 1 was 10x better. Very lame way to try to add an Avengers setup.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Hey CGI dudes...

    by Dark Doom

    Maybe we could turn down the suck knob on this movie?

  • July 20, 2011, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Dunst is fucking gorgeous and sexy

    by Krinkle

    You guys are out of your minds. She's a beautiful girl and a terrific actress. And while her teeth are not West Coast perfect, they're hardly "ghetto teeth" - they're unaltered regular-girl teeth, which we should be celebrating, not making fun of. I mean she is GORGEOUS. Great bone structure, great body - has anyone seen VIRGIN SUICIDES? This whole "Dunst is ugly" is the classic version of "the big lie": You nerds hate women so much, and your only way of getting "revenge" is slamming a movie star who can't respond. You're a bunch of goose-stepping, group-thinking fascists and you belong at the bottom of the sea, where you can argue the finer points of comic-book bullshit to the end of time. I mean, you nerds will NEVER hold in your arms or touch a woman half as hot as Kirsten Dunst. Never. Especially you, nerd - the one who's just about to write a post (full of misspellings) about how I'm a faggot or something.

  • In the words of the immortal Bruce Campbell... You got real ugly.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST

    The CG does look like a video game clip.

    by Chris Moody

    Just saying.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST

    Someone in marketing needs to be fired

    by thatswhatshesaid

    Yes I hate the idea of another origin story too, but at least sell the thing as something new. What a terrible first impression and boring first look.

  • July 20, 2011, 5:59 p.m. CST


    by Steve Zodiac

    You know, for my taste, nothing can come close to the first ever spider-man trailer...remember? the one that i call The Two Towers? where an helicopter is caught in spidey's gigantic web? in the middle of the twin towers? Now that was a trailer

  • July 20, 2011, 6 p.m. CST

    Raimi's Spider-Man

    by Briannicus

    I will give it to Raimi that he had some brilliant scenes and did seem to have a true affinity for the source material, however I had some serious problems with the way Tobey portrayed Peter parker/Spidey. for one he always seemed SO damned mopey, mumbling through his lines really didn't help matter either. Also one of THE defining characteristics of Spider-Man is his quick wit in the heat of battle, taunting his enemies and just being obnoxious. That aspect was almost NEVER even hinted at in the Raimi movies. Hopefully at least THAT aspect is kept in this new version. As far as how the trailer looks, are you people really THAT dense? If you cut a trailer properly, you could make a comedy with some dramatic moments look like a COMPLETE drama. Best bet, plant your asses in the seat when the movie opens, watch the movie THEN form an opinion.

  • Even at a lowly 360p you can pick up a lot of these little things. I hate to say this, but it's the type of stuff you know when you see. Mentally, you learn what visual junk to filter out and what you really should be looking for. I don't know about knowitallfromcali, but I've had to work with previews as low as 240p. (Smaller back in the day.) It doesn't make sense, economically or computationally, to render out a full frame only to have to change it. Imagine trying to do this for 30 minutes of 24fps footage if each frame is going to take you 6 or 8 hours to render at preview quality. It's a waste of time. Mostly, you can preview stuff at really low resolutions if you know exactly what you're looking for. Sounds like a lame cop out of an answer, but CG is full of a lot of wonky workarounds like this. Not because we want to, but mostly because you have no choice. Effects AO or SSS are computationally expensive. There are telltale signs when it comes to obvious CG. It could be some missing or obviously procedural anistropy on a brushed metal surface. It could be a surface that looks like it has its maps baked in, out of convenience, instead of controlled in passes. It could be somebody cheating with specularity when reflectivity will give you a decidedly less plastic-like look. It could be something as simple as relative contrast or the distribution or coloration of shadows that stand out to you. It could even be TOO MUCH detail. Again, stuff you know when you see. Even highly compressed trailer footage. Sorry if that doesn't impress you or clarify things as much as you'd prefer. Look for these small things in very small renders is a skill (or curse depending on who you ask). Because you don't want to waste more time with larger frames that'll get thrown away, your eye gets trained a certain way. Trust me. You don't waste farm time if you don't have to. Like knowitallfromcali suggested, this is CLEARLY not a final comp. It's still a number of passes and tweaks away from that. I'm less impressed by the shot choices in the POV than the incomplete CG. Like some have said, too videogame-y.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:05 p.m. CST

    Here's what they need to do...

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    Construct a life-sized replica of the tops of several buildings. Rig the replica to a super-sized motion simulator ride with six degrees of freedom. Put a stunt man in a Spidey suit on wires and have him crawl and leap around while the motion ride moves the replica around in a choreographed sequence. Yep, that'd be awesome!

  • July 20, 2011, 6:15 p.m. CST

    Not another origin story?

    by rahtard

    But none of you complained about the origin story of Batman begins which was totally unnecessary, actually you all jizzed over it. And then you complain that Raimi's origin wasn't 100%, but this film appears to be 100% faithful. I'm a fan of the character and I loved the Raimi films, all of them. I wanted to hate this, I wanted to hate this really hard. But this trailer looks really, really good. Raimi did a great job in telling Peter's story, and this actually looks, right now, that it will do a better job of that. The costume is still weak, but by all accounts its designed to look really good in 3D. My faith is restored and I have hope for this. And what are you all going to say in about 5 years when Aronofsky makes Year One? Not another origin, blah, blah, blah. But for once you'll get a director that will give you a true depection of a characters decension into darkness in the name of justice.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:15 p.m. CST

    Wilson Fisk

    by khaosmatrix

    The tower where peter is bitten is called the Fisk Building in NY

  • July 20, 2011, 6:16 p.m. CST

    Useless reboot! A bad idea to start with...

    by MovieGeekBlog

    Why not give us a proper spiderman 4? its' only been 10 years since the first one.... Bad bad bad idea

  • x

  • July 20, 2011, 6:34 p.m. CST


    by VanMan

    The FPS thing sucks (horrible CGI), but maybe the script will save it. You can have your own opinion, but Raimi's Spiderman sucked (horribly boring.) A reboot this soon after isn't smart, but I don't consider Raimi's attempts real films anyway.

  • For Christ's sake, I know 25 year-olds that have never seen "Star Wars". It's not impossible to imagine, nor did I mean to imply it would NEVER happen.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:35 p.m. CST

    Besides the stupid POV stuff at the end, I like this.

    by Ironhelix

    Of course the whole things is completely unnecessary in the first place, but I suppose it's too late for that now. Feels totally different than Raimi's, which is good. Wasn't a big fan of anything about the previous spider man films. Terrible acting, retarded, rubbery-looking CGI, and the worst casting (for spidey) of all time.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:40 p.m. CST

    Wow, just terrible.

    by OldDickLemon

    The costume looks awful, Garfield looks like a tool, and the minute of PS2 quality first person shooter at the end was just embarrassing. And what's with the apparent parents sub plot? I never read the comics, but hasn't the basic cannon been that they died in a car crash when Peter was young, and that was pretty much it for them? Now the dude from Singles "has secrets"?

  • July 20, 2011, 6:40 p.m. CST

    This is NOT a Marvel Studios Production

    by THX1968

    Yet, of course they're involved. This is a Laura Ziskin production (may she rest in peace), and Ziskin worked for Columbia. In other words, this is a Columbia production - or Sony, if you will. Sony had to shit out another Spidey flick before the license on the character expired. Make no mistake - Spidey is a cash cow.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:45 p.m. CST

    Is U2 godfathering this?

    by seansarto

  • July 20, 2011, 6:45 p.m. CST


    by NightArrows

    I kid, I kid. I know who was responsible for Gnomeo and Julliette.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:51 p.m. CST

    What y'all got against video games? ;)

    by KnowItAllFromCali

  • July 20, 2011, 6:52 p.m. CST


    by locater16

    The first person POV IS straight out of a game, specifically "Mirror's Edge" and people complained about it there as well. Also, was it appropriate to snicker at "emo highschool kid in hoodie" because they didn't really look like that back when I was in highschool and people still dressed like that.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:56 p.m. CST

    who cares.

    by Thugsnarf3000

    Really...who cares. We've had our Spidey origin story already, and it was fantastic. We don't need another. The character is established...just give him some people to fight and we are good to go.

  • July 20, 2011, 6:58 p.m. CST


    by Ark99

    While I think Raimi's heart was in the right place for 1 and 2, anyway, this seems to me like it's going to be a far more faithful adaptation of the comics. Raimi seemed to like to pick bits and pieces of Spider-Man's mythology and throw them together as he saw fit. As was already stated in the talkbacks, the death of Gwen Stacy was an excellent storyline in the comics and the character herself is amazingly important piece of who Peter is. And unfortunately in the movies we know, she was added as nothing more then a throwaway role. And then we have the webshooters. Designed by Peter himself, as well as the web formula. Raimi glossed over the fact that Peter was a genius. But we never truly saw it in action. The mechanical shooters are more then just an aesthetic change, it says something about the charecter. As for Peter's portrayal in this film, Mark Webb has said that Peter was "a nerd with big glasses. ... What was important in those early comics was this notion that Peter Parker is an outsider and how we define that in a contemporary context [is important]. That, I think, was one of the challenges for us -- getting Peter Parker's outsider status to be current. Peter Parker is a real kid. He's not a billionaire. He's not an alien. He's a kid who gets picked on and gets shoved to the outside. The 90-pound weakling, that's who Spider-Man is when he gets bit. So much of the DNA of the character is the fact that he was a kid when he got bit. He is imperfect, he is immature and has a bit of a punk rock instinct. In his soul he's still a 90-pound weakling even after [the transformative bite]." On another note, as far as I'm aware there has been no casting for Norman Osborn, though Oscorp does fit into the movies. Ideally we'll have a trilogy developing Norman into the villain he deserves to be. And if the filmmakers have the ball, we'll see the death of Gwen Stacy. And for those worries about the tone, Webb also had this to say: "I love a lot of the Ultimate Spider-Man artwork and story lines, there's a lot more of an adolescent, playful quality," he says. "And I think that's a big part of [the] Spider-Man universe and hasn't really been explored cinematically before."

  • July 20, 2011, 7:07 p.m. CST

    So can we expect a Blade reboot for the Twilight crowd?

    by Tikidonkeypunch

  • July 20, 2011, 7:07 p.m. CST


    by Orbots Commander

    I wasn't a huge fan of Ultimate Spidey. There were some good ideas there: I like the updating for some of the villains, including Venom and the Green Goblin, who was re-imagined as a full on transformation into a gargoyle with wings that I think works. I will concede that the character has seen many different interpretations over the last few years, including an awful red and gold super suit designed by Tony Stark. Didn't Marvel finally just re-wipe the slate clean with Brand New Day, get rid of MJ, the secret identity reveal and effectively reboot?

  • July 20, 2011, 7:07 p.m. CST

    Tobey is Parker

    by CullenisPrime

  • Another Spiderman origin story less than 10 years from the last one, which pretty much got it right. This just looks weak. The story involving Andrew Garfield looked like it might have been promising for the first half of the trailer....if the rest of the trailer and movie had not been about Spiderman. But as a Spiderman film, this looks weak and will exist within the large shadow of Raimi and Maquire's Spiderman.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:12 p.m. CST


    by seasider

    Thanks for quotes from Webb and I have no doubt that he and everyone involved in the movie are trying their hardest to make the the best movie possible but that doesn't necessarily mean the movie will succeed. So far the movie to me feels too much like a laundry list for fanboys who complained about Raimi's version. I honestly don't care how faithful a filmmaker is to the source material. I just want a good movie and I'm hoping Webb delivers on that.

  • So... let me get this straight, from what I can tell from the trailer, this moody brooding emo dude with big mussed up hair named Peter Parker (POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD) gets bit by some kind of radioactive spider, thus giving him the powers of some kind of inveritable "Spider-Man." Huh. Wow, I've never heard of that before. I always thought that perhaps a drum of radioactive waste would fall on his head, or perhaps he passed through a radioactive cloud or something to become "Spider-Man," but here they make it seem like he is bit by a spider (which is also, possibly, radioactive). I mean, did you see that bite on his neck?! It looked like a big spider bite. And instead of getting cancer like many of those poisoned by radiation, he gets freaky spider-like powers to cling to buildings, and then it seems he invents some kind of mechanical "web-shooter" to swing from building to building, kind of like a web-slinging spider. I don't know, though, it would seem to me that with such awesome powers would also come some pretty awesome responsibilities, too, don't you think? But, what do I know? I guess we'll just have to see this movie (which is also apparently about the two different kinds of secrets there are) to find out how it all plays out. I wonder if there will be a show-down at the end between this so-called Spider-Man and some kind of arch-villain who possesses equally powerful strength derived from the animal kingdom. The question then becomes, will this Spider-Man live to see another day? I just don't know.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:13 p.m. CST

    very cool

    by juice willis

    No complaints here.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:14 p.m. CST


    by Ark99

    Yeah, they did. MJ is still around in the comics, and like Peter remembers everything. Ultimate line had some interesting villain updates, but Bendis always had consistently good scripts, imo. Always far more Peter centric the Spider-man, and really allowed a reader to connect more with. Bendis was actually consulted about the character for this movie.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:16 p.m. CST

    Just one villian I think is an improvement.

    by seansarto

  • July 20, 2011, 7:17 p.m. CST

    They should have started it with the Green Goblin...

    by alienindisguise

    and do the Goblin right, have Peter accidentally kill Gwen and there is your emotional drama by the ass load. I bet there will be a total of about 15 minutes of Spiderman in this crappy flick.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:19 p.m. CST

    In regards to Peter's parents

    by Ark99

    If Webb is taking his inspiration from the Ultimate version of Spider-Man, it might be worth noting that Peter's daddy created Venom..

  • July 20, 2011, 7:21 p.m. CST


    by Ark99

    To do the Goblin justice, they'd need more then one film.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:37 p.m. CST


    by I_Snake_Plissken

    I'm looking forward to this film, it should finally answer the question of "how did Spiderman get his powers?"

  • July 20, 2011, 7:39 p.m. CST

    I actually like the Ultimate Green Goblin.

    by Orbots Commander

    It was a clever refresh to ditch the faux demon getup and glider and go for a full on demon transformation. And per Ultimate Spidey, I suspect in the new movie(s), the source of Spider-Man's, the Lizard's and Goblin's powers are the result of the same formula/McGuffin invented by the dead Parkers. Hey, that would be a great name for a rock band: The Dead Parkers.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:39 p.m. CST

    Peter's Parents

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    The fact they were included in the trailer makes me wonder is they are going to tie SHIELD or the CIA into this somehow. Or it could just be a way to set up the fact that he's a sad little bastard.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:42 p.m. CST

    Who is the bad guy in this anyway?

    by I_Snake_Plissken

  • July 20, 2011, 7:43 p.m. CST

    by Ark99

    I doubt it would be Shield, but the CIA or even Oscorp would be more likely.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:44 p.m. CST

    Don't like "Twilight" Peter Parker...

    by HB_Dad

    This looks awful compared to the last trilogy...

  • July 20, 2011, 7:44 p.m. CST

    this looks awful

    by Enourmous_Gentials

    we are all dumber for having seen it

  • July 20, 2011, 7:46 p.m. CST

    Studio is to blame for SP3... Read the book about the making of it

    by Andrew Coleman

    You can see that Raimi was working on a film that had Ben Kingsley as the Vulture who escapes prison and plans to get revenge on Spider-man. They had the suit made and Ben casted. Then Arad and other studio hacks came in and stopped production... Demanding a re-write of the script involving the black suit and venom because "that's what fans want". Fucking suit ass holes. Raimi protested because he never really knew the Venom story line and wanted to keep classic villains... Studio didn't give a shit. They handed him that shit storm and frankly he manned that ship decently well. Seriously just find a Barnes and Noble and look through it if you don't want to buy it... They have pics of the Vulture costume and everything. So yeah the studio ruined SP3 and now we have this horrible emo garbage. Maybe there is still time to scrap it and make SP4 no one would care if they did.

  • July 20, 2011, 7:51 p.m. CST

    Hasn't anyone seen Days of Summer?

    by The Fuck

    Great movie, I give this director a chance. Maybe the cgi is ok instead of great. It doesn't have the budget and that might be better. I don't want it to be focused on the quality of some brick textures. I want it to have a solid fucking story!

  • July 20, 2011, 8:06 p.m. CST

    Is there a reason Peter's parents are in their mid-50's?

    by waylayer

    Way to gamble your kid will be missing a chromosome or two, Mrs. Parker.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:07 p.m. CST

    cgi effects look like cgi effects!

    by tazzzer

    crappy effects, same old origins story glad to seen sheen on screen again tho aside from that this willbe a bag of shite!

  • venom inexplicably falling from outer space and almost landing on spiderman. Even the original blob was more plausible. It is the single most retarded moment ever placed on film. Perhaps outdoing everything George Lucas has filmed since 1999. It's actually worse than the Afro-American robots in transformers 2 that act like a couple a cracked out niggers.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:11 p.m. CST

    I'm sorry but this looks completely inferior to the Raimi film.

    by Cap'n Jack

  • July 20, 2011, 8:12 p.m. CST

    It's too soon for a re-boot.

    by Ted Knight

    That Mirrors Edge sequence had me reaching for my 360 controller.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:13 p.m. CST

    WTF Was That? Fuck Another Origin Story!!!!!!!!Fuck Sony!!!

    by ChiTownsBest

    How in the hell are they doing the same fuckin story with only a few minor differences? The original is only 10 years old. Spiderman 3 was not good but it wasn't bad in the same sense as Batman and Robin. It was bad because it was way to bloated.It did not need a complete reboot. Why not just use a new cast and do some new stories instead of this retread bullshit? What's worse is the effects look worse then the Raimi movies. Fuck this cash grab bullshit!

  • July 20, 2011, 8:15 p.m. CST

    Such a necessary Reboot

    by NoMotivatioN

    Lets face it theres only one good spiderman movie out of that 3 PART TWO as a film pretty fucking great I have to say. But its time to let go of these guys directing our movies, its time to embrace the future and lets start a new with our superhero movies and just film in general real and darker is always better cause non of us are kids, kids dont pay for shit, its US lol make it for us when it comes to comics graphic bla bla bla. Which is whats happening but not everyone is embracing it! The look of this movie looks way better and I really dig the tone, cause the movies going to be way better then anything SAMI did, the actor tall skinny looks better then short and buff, as of The spiderMan look. And going away from "Cartoony" its never a bad thing, part one was like watching a cartoon and that just sucked balls Im not a kid lookin to see a amature direct and to me these movies arent really for kids, there subjects are always more so, sure its a teenager type story but if you bring it out of the Cartooney world, its just going to be a better film for it... I just like how this is looking and at first the costume didnt do it for me but if the movie and story is going to be what the begging of that trailer showed, not that crappy CGI SCENE at the end, I think we might have a pretty Kick Ass movie on our hands. Why all the hate and all the love for the last 3? I thought you guys love film making, or was it Sam Rami you so loved and were lil kids in poppy world. You Tim Burton fans really get on my "you know what really grinds my gears" ;)

  • July 20, 2011, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Wow... that was terrible.

    by Triple_J_72

    I can't get excited about that. Try again.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:28 p.m. CST

    And Andrew Garfiled's dome is too big.

    by 77AD

  • Ho hum. Green lantern can do more than swing from a rope and I didn't even see that. In fact Megamind is the best superhero film since spiderman 2.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:37 p.m. CST

    Big nose... yeah. Big nose.

    by Triple_J_72

    *cough cough* Nose. Too big. NOSEYNOSEYNOSEY NOSENOSENOSE!

  • July 20, 2011, 8:40 p.m. CST

    Interesting video comparison...

    by bcom77

  • July 20, 2011, 8:43 p.m. CST


    by ChiTownsBest

    How is this a good idea? The first movie was good but not great. The main reason was because it had to tell the origin story. Once Raimi got full control in part 2 even you agree he made a great movie. Part 3 was taken away from him and he made a movie he didn't really want to make. He also made some bad scene choices in part 3. I have no problem with the reins being handed over to another director or changing the actors. The main issue here is them retelling another origin story. Nobody wants to see that shit again only 10 years later. Who's it being made for 10 year olds who missed the original? This is not the same situation as Batman Begins. The original Tim Burton Batman didn't really tell an origin story. They only flashed back to the death of Bruce's parents. Batman Begins expanded the story and told a full origin. What exactly can this movie bring to the table that wasn't already shown in the Raimi original? Nothing! They even have a scene of him sewing the costume. This is pure greed and nothing else. I bet this backfires on Sony completely. The best thing that could happen is that this movie bombs and Sony gives the rights back to Marvel.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:45 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 20, 2011, 8:51 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

    Yeah, forcing Sam to use a character that he didn't like wasn't a good idea but Avi Arad was right that the black suit and Venom was EXACTLY what the fans wanted. But would Raimi's idea for SM 4 really have worked, I mean, THE VULTURE?!? Let's not forget that outside of the first two Evil Dead and Spider-man movies, Raimi has been known for producing badly conceived and stupid projects (Timecop, M.A.N.T.I.S, Hercules/Xena) and I have little doubt that the retarded Goblin costume from SM 1 and that shitty snow boarder crap from SM3 was his moronic idea. The best thing would have been if Raimi quit after 2 and the studio went for a symbiote/Venom storyline that spanned over parts 3 and 4.

  • July 20, 2011, 8:52 p.m. CST

    Are you ready to play God?

    by Triple_J_72

    WTF are they even talking about?

  • July 20, 2011, 8:55 p.m. CST

    Raimi's Vulture idea sounds like it woulda been good

    by seansarto

    Even if SP3 had just stuck with the Sandman, and fleshed out that story more, I think it would have been a good piece of film..But Venom is it's own story....Too much going on in those films, trying to stictch all the pieces together in a HUUUUUUGE BLOCKBUSTIN' spectacle....Comic books, to me, just don't read that way...

  • July 20, 2011, 9:02 p.m. CST

    Establish the antagonist

    by seansarto

    If they waste too much time re-establishing the protagonist here...I think the Lizard, will flop.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:07 p.m. CST

    Blame Sony

    by christpunchers2007

    SP3 may have been the best of the trilogy. Ben Kingsley as Vulture? That would have been interesting. Much better than Sandman and the god-awful overexposed Venom which Sony seems to love so much.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:08 p.m. CST


    by Michael

    Perfect. (applause)

  • July 20, 2011, 9:08 p.m. CST

    Well, I think what's new about this one is...

    by animatronicmojo

    Peter Parker gets bit by a radioactive spider.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:09 p.m. CST


    by ChiTownsBest

    Agreed, Raiimi did make a bad choice with the Goblin costume and fans did want Venom. The problem is that nobody wants another origin story either. Are they giving fans what they want now? No, they're just going for another cash grab. Which is why they insisted on Venom in part 3, for the cash. The studio didn't give a shit that Raimi knew absolutely nothing, or even cared to know, about Venom. It was a recipe for disaster. The biggest issue is that the movie was still a hit and there was no need to reboot. They could have just changed directors and the cast and moved on.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:11 p.m. CST

    I also hope they don't follow the Ultimate story line for sequels...

    by Andrew Coleman

    This arc is fine and using the Ultimate story is fine for the reboot in this one movie since the Lizard is pretty basic. But I hope for sequels they use old school set ups for villains. I mean if they stick with Ultimate.... SPOILERS I GUESS... Emma Stone will become Carnage... That's right cute Emma Stone would be Carnage. No fucking thank you. The villain creations are all lame and lack any thought. Every villain just has the "my DNA changed" story line. Doc Ock is a bitch too in those comics which always pissed me off. And Green Goblin was basically Hulk on coke. The Ultimate story is interesting but the villain recreations were horrible. Hope the films avoid this otherwise this already shitty reboot will become epically shitty.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:16 p.m. CST

    Spidey 4 = The Vulturess, red headed kid casting

    by Larry Sellers

    Does anyone remember that stuff? Hathaway and Malkovich? Casting MJ's kid? And now we have an unexciting trailer for a SLIGHTLY different origin story. No it's not exactly like it, but it reminded me too much of the first 20 minutes of the first movie. I also don't need to see Spider-man so bleak. (Teen angst existed long before Twilight, so I'm not going to make that comparison.) But this trailer is all wrong. And so was that teaser poster. Smells like the X-Men First Class marketing team has been here. I'm ready for this movie (or at least the full trailer) to prove me wrong, but for right now I'm just not feeling it.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:16 p.m. CST

    why are you fuck heads still whining about Spiderman 3


    when this movie is going to suck 10 times harder? Idiots!

  • July 20, 2011, 9:22 p.m. CST

    I forget the origin.. he eats a radioactive spider, right?

    by Autodidact

    Good thing they're telling the origin again.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:29 p.m. CST

    The world didn't need this, because it already exists.

    by Jaka

    Why are the telling the same story over again? It just makes no sense.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:30 p.m. CST

    because they gutteed the budget


  • July 20, 2011, 9:33 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

    Make part 3 be about Peter turning to the darkside, which is technically what they did, except show him becoming and actual bastard (instead of a dancing buffoon) causing him and M.J. to split up by the end of the movie which would then allow for Gwen Stacey to become Peters main squeeze for parts 4/5/6. Also, at the end Peter realizes what the suit has turned him into and gets rid of it. Let it come into contact with Eddie Brock and make Venom the villain of part 4 where, say he's going around killing people while Spidey is getting the blame which puts them into Direct conflict with Venom. This also gets the police on Spidey's ass. Getting back to 3 though, make the relationship between Parker and Dr. Conners the focal point of the story. He's turning into The Lizard and SM has to fight him a few times. Finally, at the end of the movie, Spidey KILLS the Lizard which then turns back into Dr. Conners. Peter's accidental murder of Dr. Conners and the break-up of his relationship with M.J. would be enough to prompt him to get rid of the suit. Furthermore, in regards to Harry Osbourne, keep his initial attack on Peter but have him in his Fathers suit but keep the snowboard as I kinda liked that thing instead of the bulky glider. Peter hands Harry his ass and he winds up in the hospital. Now, keep the amnesia storyline but have it that Harry is only pretending because while in the hospital he realizes that he can't take on Parker. So he decides to fuck with him in other ways like seducing M.J. and getting her pregnant and maybe even killing Aunt May and making it look like an accident. Have M.J. tell Peter that she's pregnant with Harry's kid which would send Parker into a psychotic rage, causing him to kill Harry. This would also be another factor in helping Peter realize that the sit is turning him into a monster. That's all I got for now. But by the end, Harry is dead, so is Dr. Connors along with Aunt May and Peter's relationship with M.J., thus setting the stage for Part 4 where he redeems himself by taking down Venom while finding a new love with Gwen.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:34 p.m. CST

    I don't even like superheroes and agree 100%...

    by Jaka

    ...regarding Venom. Its what most fans wanted and Raimi screwed it up (which is too bad because the first two were pretty damn good, even to a non-superhero guy). <p> I remember seeing all those crazy Venom covers back in the day and they always made me stop and look even though I had no intention of buying them. So I was excited when I heard that character was in the third movie, and disappointed when I saw the how little he had to do with it in the end. <p> I also agree there's no point in complaining about it now. But there IS a point to complaining about the fact they're telling the same stupid story over again when they could have just continued on with different stories and a new cast, like James Bond or something.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:39 p.m. CST

    I WAS excited for, not so much.

    by DoctorWho?

  • July 20, 2011, 9:45 p.m. CST


    by BBSloth

    Haven't we already seen this movie?

  • They should've called it Spider-Man Begins. Now, I've been very vocal against this reboot, not because I think it's too soon (shit, I'll take a Transformers reboot, right now, thank you), but because Raimi, Tobey, Dunst, and the fans didn't deserve this reboot. At the least, we deserved a conclusion to the story that was being told (a la DKR), but they could've easily continued the series with a different director or even actor (I remember Jake Gyllenhall's name being thrown around for a little bit there). If WB can make 8 HP films, Sony could've produced 6 Spidey films, easily. I was looking forward to ending the saga with a final battle against the Sinister Six. Oh, well. Sony wants me to sit through another by-the-numbers origin story. It's a cash grab, plain and simple. I won't be supporting this movie, and it doesn't help that the trailer looks terrible. I would've easily rather had a $250 million dollar budget featuring tons of aerial battles against the Vultures, than an $80 million dollar Batman Begins wannabe featuring ANOTHER orign story. Did you know Batman Begins had an $80 million dollar budget? Hmmm. Andrew Garfield is a good actor, but, so is Tobey McGuire. I hope Raimi goes to WB and does Batman after Nolan finishes his saga. As for Spidey, I will not buy movie tix for this shite. And Spidey fans defending this should snap out of their denial and stand up to Sony for this atrocity.

  • July 20, 2011, 9:48 p.m. CST

    ...'' the Hulk on coke''

    by DoctorWho?

    Yikes, that would be fucked up. I can just see an all night 'whammer' at AVENGERS HQ after a successful campaign of kicking Dr. Doom's ass or something. Stark drunk off his ass, a girl on each arm. Thor on acid just staring at his hand. Nick Fury pissing in the bushes. Black Widow table dancing and showing some titty after one too many Long Island iced teas. Cap of course, keepin' it straight with some milk and cookies. The Hulk doing a line of blow off of Pepper Potts' bare ass. <p> Maybe as an extra on the dvd release. I can hope right?

  • July 20, 2011, 9:57 p.m. CST


    by Michael

    Yes, because literary prowess and grammatical skills are absolutely essential when expressing yourself on a geek talkback. Give us all a break and pry your lips off of your mirror.


  • July 20, 2011, 10:08 p.m. CST


    by Michael

    Yeah but by that time you've paid your money and the studio has already won. If the movie sucks, you're stuck in the chair and out 8 bucks or whatever. I understand it's difficult to judge a film by just a trailer, but in this day and age the consumer is a fool if he isn't very selective. In an ideal world we'd be able to afford to see every damned film that comes out and ignore press stuff; unfortunately, this world is far from perfect and finances are limited, at least for most of us.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:23 p.m. CST

    louiscedar - its not whining and crying...

    by Jaka

    ...its fact. I mean, shit, there's several scenes in the trailer that mirror scenes in Raimi's first movie. That does NOT get me excited. It makes me think, "meh, wait for cable".

  • July 20, 2011, 10:23 p.m. CST

    There are some major Raimi dick suckers in here WOW

    by Crusher Creel

    I didn't know cheesy dialogue and acting, a mopey non growth unfunny no personality Peter Parker, saving Mary Jane thrice times, Venom Lite, Sandman-Did-It-All-Along, Paint Ball Goblin, Aunt May speeches, cartoony effects and plots, Bruce Cameo must have a cameo every movie was the way to please everyone for Spider-Man. Dumb ass holes. This looks fucking great - takin' seriously, Gwen Stay, Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben??? That alone sold me. Suck it Raimi lovers. Suck it hard.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:27 p.m. CST

    I Can't Put My Finger On It

    by Crusher Creel

    You're right, a Spider-Man movie with actual balls. Yeap, we haven't seen that yet, Nordling.

  • Raimi got a lot right, but there's plenty of room for another interpretation. Everyone take a deep breath.... Lizard is a good villain, though I wish Dylan Baker could've played him. Emma Stone looks great as Gwen. She has more screen presence than Kirsten. The POV shot may be in the movie, but why not? If it's 3D, those are the kind of shots I will happily pay to see at the motherfreakin Alamo. Garfield looks great, a bit broody. Not sure about parents' mystery, but again, why not? Raimi played fast and loose with the origin...this ain't sacrosanct, boys. XO

  • July 20, 2011, 10:42 p.m. CST


    by Aaron

    I have just shown this trailer to my girlfriend, who is not a geek, or fangirl, or comic book reader; just a woman who likes to go to the movies with myself and her kid. Her response was: why are they telling the beginning part of the story again, and why do they have a new peter parker, cuz she liked tobey. She is mainstream audience. A good barometer, methinks, against the incestuous geekery that occurs here. She also thought the batman trailer was fairly lame. Havent shown her avengers, but im pretty sure she will dig it. It is nice having a different perspective around the house.

  • July 20, 2011, 10:47 p.m. CST

    1st person = too video game-i

    by Ogmios_the_Eloquent

    on the fence about this...

  • July 20, 2011, 10:55 p.m. CST

    I am more interested in this than I was before.

    by Charlie

    The first person stuff, I thought was interesting, although i'd like to see a proper 1080p version of the trailer before I call it substandard CG quality. They should have just done like the Hulk Reboot/Sequel. Where basically it was a sequel to a first film which was never made. Instead of retreading the origin. Can't believe superman is being rebooted, heavens forbid what will happen if Nolan and Bale are really done with the Batman franchise.

  • I just don't understand the need to retell a story that was recently told quite well. It simply isn't needed. Batman Begins doesn't feel or look like Burton's Batman, but it doesn't tell exactly the same story, either. Ya know?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:06 p.m. CST

    Huge mistake doing the origin again

    by brobdingnag

    There are so many more interesting directions to go than this.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:13 p.m. CST kids just asked me if this was a game trailer.

    by fustfick

    Nope. But it sure fucking looks like one. Man, I was really pumped for this movie, but that trailer is terrible. I've been itching to see a live action Lizard since the Raimi movies. At least there's that to look forward to. I just hope he wears the lab coat when he's a monster. That's about the best I'm hoping for right now...that the goddamn Lizard wears his lab coat. It's a sad day.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:15 p.m. CST

    trailer is cut weird

    by Bass Ackwards

    its like they're selling it as a thriller. Or maybe that's the movie they made?

  • July 20, 2011, 11:15 p.m. CST

    They fucked it up

    by SunsetLament

    They fucked it up in the exact same way WBs fucked up Superman Returns. All the dark coloring and moody shit. It's like they are trying to make a Matrix knock-off instead of using the source material that people have loved for 50 years. Then they'll act all surprised when it tanks. Morons.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:20 p.m. CST

    Shut Up You Whiney Fucking Idiots!

    by Queefer Sutherland

    This is a pretty damned good teaser trailer. Much better than fucking Dark Knight Rises. Though I have no doubt DKR will turn out to be a better film. Still, I'm just judging the teaser, and I really liked what I saw here. I don't care if they remake Spiderman a dozen times. I can always go back to the ones I liked and forget the rest. But I'll always give somebody a chance to tell a story better, or differently, or both. After all, Batman Begins didn't lessen the overall Batman body of work. It improved it, immensely. A lot of people were really fond of the Burton films, just like we're fond of Raimi's vision. And in spite of his "love for the reference material" he took some big liberties with Spidey's story, starting with biological web shooters. So shut the fuck up you whiney fucking idiots! Give it a chance. Some of you won't allow yourselves to like it just so you can be an annoying fucking bitch in these talkbacks, but maybe those of us who are intelligent, discerning, sophisticated movie goers won't judge this work ahead of time, and might wind up liking it! Of course, it might be a giant corn-ridden turd of a film, and I'll proclaim it so if it is. But I hope not. Tobey Hooper was kind of annoying, anyway.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:28 p.m. CST

    this looks like shit


  • July 20, 2011, 11:33 p.m. CST

    fuck this movie


    bring back Spiderman 3 and rerelease it in 3d.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:44 p.m. CST


    by CatVutt

    As others have said, if they'd done a Hulk-like reboot, sorta glossing over the whole origin thing, I might have checked it out. But this is fucking retarded. Won't bother.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:48 p.m. CST

    Watch the Twin Towers Spider-man teaser

    by kidicarus

    Then watch this piece of shit angst-ridden emo bullshit, and then then me which movie will have made more money in the end. Damn straight.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:51 p.m. CST

    Ghost 82

    by Briannicus

    My whole point is that judging a movie by the content of a trailer is not the most intelligent thing in the world. Countless GOOD movies have suffered because of bad trailers and vice versa. It's simple, if you don't like the trailer then don't watch the movie. Bitchin' about it is NOT helping matters. I think I'm more tired of people BITCHING about origin stories than I am about the actual origin stories.

  • July 20, 2011, 11:57 p.m. CST

    So now it's ok to re-boot a 10 year-old movie? Jesus.

    by ennio

    Further proof that corporate studio execs are looking for safer and safer bets. They have no shame. None. Nothing is off limits now. You hear that ding? The Dark Knight re-boot just got green-lighted.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:01 a.m. CST

    Raimi's Spiderman never HAD a proper origin story

    by chien_sale

    He found a spider, she bite him and that's it. that was the origin. for a super-hero story it needed a more spectacular better defined origin of how he came to have these powers. Hell just look at Raimi's Darkman, that was a nice origin story for a super-hero.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:03 a.m. CST

    Sick to death of reboots and fucking origin stories

    by flatulence

    It'd be like, instead of the hundreds and hundreds of interesting editions and stories and characters in the many comic series, we just got hundreds of 1st editions with different versions of Peters or Bruces or Clarks origin; fuck that, get on with actual stories that USE the characters and not just tell us AGAIN where they came from.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:07 a.m. CST

    Hey kidicarus, you dumfuk

    by Queefer Sutherland

    Spiderman 3 was nothing but angst-ridden emo bullshit. The first two weren't too far behind. That fact that you or anybody can dismiss a film so readily after a teaser just shows how angst-ridden and full of emo bullshit YOU are. Bunch of goddamned fucking whining cocksuckers! Each one of you probably has a broken-off dick rotting inside his shitter. Go kill yourselves.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:13 a.m. CST

    looks pretty cool

    by warrenE33

    good trailer is good. focusing on peter's parents is interesting approach to the teaser. because, i don't know what the fuck happened to them (died in a car crash? bullshit death? or something). so, it instantly establishes "get ready for something new from this character you think you know inside and out." and the Mirror's Edge sequence is insanely cool. not because it looks real, but because you get to see his creepy little hands snaking around. I want to say it was just like the cartoon I watched as a kid. but not sure that was actually in there. but. it works. Alls looks much more tonally cohesive than raimi's films (which were fun, and full of energy. but each was a mess in terms of tone. goofy kitsch to tough action to stiff melodrama. bleh. this film seems more focused on being creepy.). win.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:13 a.m. CST

    i_snake_plissken - you owe me a new monitor

    by flatulence

    I just laugh-spewed my coffee all over it.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:13 a.m. CST

    Look at "Darkman"?!?

    by CatVutt

    You can't possibly have posted that with a straight face.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:32 a.m. CST

    It's off, cause it's going to suck

    by Cobb05

    Ok, well, maybe it won't suck, but I will bet it will be the worst of the Spider-Man movies. It's off because it's trying to be a big blockbuster instead of just being a good story. This one has what? Half the budget of Spider-Man 3? The POV is actually a cool idea, that Raimi would've done amazingly. The POV on the trailer looked cheaply done. Also I really hate the costume. The eyes looks really stupid and the sneakers are a bad choice. I wish there would've been a hint of what the Lizard will look like. He's probably CG and I think that's really bad because if they made Spider-Man and some of the other CG look cheap, they obviously didn't blow the budget on the Lizard. I really wish they would've done more with the movie. I don't like Ultimate Spider-Man. I don't think Webb was the right choice for director. I get the vibe from the trailer like it's a CW show.

  • July 21, 2011, 12:33 a.m. CST

    Gwen, yeah. The rest... meh.

    by lettersoftransit

  • July 21, 2011, 12:57 a.m. CST

    why couldn't the trailer be like this?

    by Orion

  • July 21, 2011, 1:03 a.m. CST

    I get the feeling that...

    by bubcus

    ... the "mirror's edge" sequence of him running around and jumping from building to building is just for the teaser and not from the actual film. Sort of like the capturing the helicopter teaser we got from the first Spider-Man film. I could of course be wrong, I just have the feeling that the sequence we saw was strictly for the teaser.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:04 a.m. CST

    yeah nordling something is off...

    by Josh

    I felt the same way everything looked so damn cool, and then that ending POV crap left me hating it. I'm like this is so cheese ball, the CGI is worst then rami's film. Which I didn't really like at all. There okay but nothing that amazes me. But hey it does come out on my b-day and I do have faith in this. Emma does a good job as gwen. I wasn't digging the blond hair but I think it's growing on me. I still love her much better with red, it brings out her eyes more.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:04 a.m. CST

    yeah nordling something is off...

    by Josh

    I felt the same way everything looked so damn cool, and then that ending POV crap left me hating it. I'm like this is so cheese ball, the CGI is worst then rami's film. Which I didn't really like at all. There okay but nothing that amazes me. But hey it does come out on my b-day and I do have faith in this. Emma does a good job as gwen. I wasn't digging the blond hair but I think it's growing on me. I still love her much better with red, it brings out her eyes more.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:23 a.m. CST

    If you guys hate it so much...

    by LouisCedar

    Then why the fuck do you insist on talking about it endlessly? seriously. If you hate it, if you don't like the idea of it, if you don't think it's necessary, then why waste your life telling anyone who will listen about how much you hate it? Oh, wait what's that, you say? Oh, so you don't actually have real logical reasons for hating the movie, you just reserve negative opinions for almost everything, because you think that finding reasons not to like something makes you smarter than everyone else? Well I guess that makes sense. But here's the thing: It doesn't make you sound smarter. It actually makes you sound pretty goddamn stupid. So please, just stop. Instead, attempt to formulate an ACTUAL OPINION about something. It's a pretty nice experience, I promise. For those of you who legitimately don't like the look of this: You still have the Raimi movies. You can watch them whenever you want. The existence of a new Spider-Man film won't erase them from the universe. So instead of bitching endlessly about this movie, just go watch those instead. Because you are NEVER going to get a Raimi created Spider-Man 4. It's not going to happen. Sorry. But this movie is happening. Bitching about it endlessly by way of citing reasons that aren't really valid (like it doesn't cover new ground, even though it actually seems to cover a LOT of new ground) and just watch the movies that you enjoy, rather than wallowing in disappointment that Spidey 4 isn't happening.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:43 a.m. CST

    Maguire not human enough to be Spidey. Kudos to picking The Lizard.

    by Onin Solstice

    Only gripe I have is that we're retreading the origin again. I assumed it would be less prevelant than it looks. Does anyone not know Parker gets chomped on by a spider? Anyone?

  • July 21, 2011, 1:47 a.m. CST

    Looked at the POV almost frame by frame.

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    If it wasn't for the camera movement, I'd think they were all photographs. Y'all that think it's terrible are just crazy.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:21 a.m. CST

    @chitownsbest Jesus, this is abit long , my bad

    by NoMotivatioN

    the reason is, to tell it right my friend, you said it yourself the first one wasnt good. Yes your points are very much true about greed and hey, fuck it lets tell it again for the younger crowed, I see that competely but it wasnt up to us was it? We have no say in what story were gonna ssee and now that this trailer is out, the tone of the flick looks great. If your gonna reboot it, then fine Great, if your gonna tell the origin again, then your gonna have to do it right. Now that we know how to make these types of movies Lets do them right, Now im not fully in but am more excited about where we are headed towards these types of movies being darker being Directed by someone with an eye, meaning an eye for film. Color, aspect and tone and telling a story. But its where we are going with these movies guy,cause if they get it right, we dont need a origin story again, why we got one , really is because it wasnt done right the first time they new it, but oops, somehow that crapper made many cause fans are really fans, they see a cartoon and their oh cool im a kid again, no boo.But they knew it too, its just that the Tim Burton fans of the world types cant see that its crap, and not every good. EXSAMPLE, The thing awesome, master piece what can you call as a master piece of Johns lately or 90s? Okay abit of a strength their I could tim burton as a perfect exsample but my point is the new crop and more talented people coming in are a good change to reboot something that wasnt made right the first time around. 3rd was bad, there are no good things about it but , man, thats cgi trickary allright. And yes raimi made a great fucking movie with spiderman Two in how he made a story with emotion and the best scream while someone is tryin to slow down a train, but its still had its goofyness which he did pull of unlike one and Three. If were force to get a reboot they know they're gonna have to get it right so it can move forward towards the future. And how do we do that? lol By making it right, heres hoping buddy. Im not your buddy guy, im not your guy friend, his not your friend buddy, im not your buddy guy, were not your guy lol sorry was watchin SP again, good points and I see your view point on the why of the same story, my anwser, well damn I said it alot here haha

  • July 21, 2011, 2:22 a.m. CST

    Looks Great, F You Douchebag Whiners

    by grievenom

  • July 21, 2011, 2:26 a.m. CST

    I hate it so much


    AHHH MY EYES The new Twilight movie looks better.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:41 a.m. CST

    It will blow Raimi's shit out of the water.

    by Volllllume3

    Spider-Man 3: never forgive, never forget!

  • July 21, 2011, 2:50 a.m. CST

    Macy Gray cameo?

    by Atomic_Crusader

    Sorry, given the amount of snark around here I couldn't resist. As far as trailers go I liked it! I like how they take it a step further putting you in Spiderman's shoes/head, way up high. Martin Sheen and Sally Fields will probably chew things up a bit. I don't like the flourescent lighting at the laboratory, that has been way, way over done. No bad guys in sight, hmm, giant lizard...might be something they are still working on trying to make it cool. They' ll duke it out towards the end of course and that'll be that until #2 etc, etc. Will Spidey be in Avengers?

  • July 21, 2011, 4:02 a.m. CST

    shouldnt have done the origin again.

    by Obscura

    ...Thats why this feels so odd. they should have just jumped straight in with a new spiderman story. not a sequel, but just a quick 10 minute recap and then into the story. I like daredevil did (regardless of what you think of the film, its an efficient way of getting a complex origin out of the way) i just want a good spiderman story. none of this 'how he got the costume' bullshit we're gonna be forced to sit through AGAIN.

  • July 21, 2011, 4:30 a.m. CST

    What is going on?!

    by pr0g2west

    Is this really happening...didn't SpiderMan starring Toby McGuire come out not a decade ago? Somebody help me out here...what am I missing? And not only that...the special effects don't look all that special to me. If you remake something...shouldnt it have better special effects? Ok, I admit I am not a comic book/movie fan at all, so I guess I feel that this movie is a complete and utter waste of time and money. And, the look and feel of that trailer reminded me NOTHING of Christopher Nolan. People on this site saying it has a Nolan vibe to I don't know what to say. Well, while im at it I might as well belittle comic books even more. Super heros are not real, nowhere close to real. A person can not become super human by getting bit by a radioactive spider. Its scientifically impossible. Therefore, I don't give a fuck about comic book movies. I can't get interested in them...not even as a child. They are just so phoney that I don't invest any emotion into them. Kids who are into this stuff...enjoy, have fun. Adults who are into need to seriously examine your life and your priorities.

  • July 21, 2011, 4:55 a.m. CST

    ZERO desire to see another Spidey origin film.

    by Nicoflex

    We got that shit out of the way already fuckwads. The teaser has done nothing but dampen my interest. Good work!

  • Seriously, mechanical webshooters are one of the things that always pissed me off in the comics. Super fucking lame.

  • July 21, 2011, 5:28 a.m. CST

    They literally rebooted Spider-Man

    by Xen11

    they gave him new boots.

  • July 21, 2011, 5:41 a.m. CST

    This looks even more shit than I expected.

    by Eli_Cash

    Trying to be all dark and epic. And what's up with the whole "secrets that are kept from us" garbage. This supposed to have some intrigue about his parents? Was he really genetically engineered or something? Were his parents involved in some political horseshit. WTF kind of movie is this? I thought this was supposed to be a about a cop-dog! This is neither a cop nor a dog, its a fuckin ghost! And that POV sequence looked straight out of a video game, low polygon counts and everything. If its in the actual movie it'll just be icing on the cake. Lets see, crap suit + crap effects + crap story + crap tone = ? Help me out. I suck at math.

  • July 21, 2011, 5:42 a.m. CST

    this is super amazingly lamerman


  • July 21, 2011, 5:52 a.m. CST

    Anyone know who is doing the music for this film?

    by surfabilly

  • July 21, 2011, 5:57 a.m. CST

    the music is probably being done by someone named

    by Xen11

    Six Pence None The Richer Cause six legs - spider- Marc Webb directing get it? hahahaha hahahaha oh boy that tickles

  • July 21, 2011, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Spiders have eight legs.

    by Eli_Cash

    But I hope your right. The whole logic of this movie is fukked anyway.

  • C'mon, dudes, you are failing me here. Where is the dumb ass typical complain from some moron that an actor of the "wrong" nationality is playing an american character? Who wants to be the first?

  • July 21, 2011, 6:51 a.m. CST

    Michael J. Fox should have been Peter Parker

    by amiguete

    Toby McGuire looked like a mongoloid, and this guy does look like an asshole... Peter Parker was SMART in the comic books. Why didn't they here at least James McAvoy?

  • July 21, 2011, 6:55 a.m. CST

    I'll watch the sequel

    by centilope

    The rehashed origin shit will be out of the way by then.

  • July 21, 2011, 8:33 a.m. CST

    I want a gang war between Kingpin an Silvermane.

    by whatevillurks

  • July 21, 2011, 8:38 a.m. CST


    by theplant


  • July 21, 2011, 9:25 a.m. CST

    Never thought I'd say it

    by wash

    But this shit will make actually make me appreciate Spiderman 3. But damn if I won't watch it anyway (because...Emma Stone).

  • July 21, 2011, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Things i liked and didn't liked about this trailer.

    by AsimovLives

    Overall, the trailer gave me a positive disposition toward this movie. But i haven't been against this movie since the start. Not because i was displeased with Raimi's Spider-Man movies. I enjoyed them all, and i find stuff to like even in the much maligned 3rd movie. And i sure liked to know what a 4th Raimi spidey movie would had been like. Alas, it didn't come to pass. I take this new Spidey movie as an experiement, so to speak. To see how the same basic story would be played out by a different filmmaking team. As such, i'm curious about the final product. Things i liked: - The cast seems pretty solid. Lots of familiar faces of actors i enjoy and like. - I don't mind the turn for a darker mood. arker and moodier doesn't mean the movie became emo and a twilightification. It depends only on how well it's made. Spider-Man has always been, from conception, one of the most angst ridden characters of the Marvel pantheon, and that's becasue poor spidey has always the bad luck to have real life interfere with his life, both as a person and as a super-hero, all the time. He's the hero who never gets a break. He has perpectual bad luck. How doesn't that make you moodier? If anything, the tone seems quite apt for a Spidey movie. - I liked this little detail of seeing Parker sewing his costume. Either it's from him making the costume, or him repairing it after a brawl or something. One problem i did had about the Raimi movies is that the costume seemed to have came out of the left field. It suddently was there, fully formed. If this movie at least makes lip service to how Parker got his costume, it will be sweet. - Yes, the CGI in the finla shot is rather obvious, regardless of what the CGI professionals above might say otherwise. But i think it's not a finished product yet, so i can take it's still unifinshed and artificial look. As for the movements looking fake, well, of course ther ehas never been in this world such a creature as Spider-Man, so it's pretty hard to say how he would actually act and walk about, and how his movements would look like, specially in a POV fashion. So, as such, i give that subject a rest. It's not enough to bother me. Things i disliked: - While above i defended, so to speak, this seemly turned for a darker and moodier tone for the new movie, i do fear, like so many others in here, that the movie might have suffered a twilightification. I hope not, but the possibility is there. - I wonder if they will ballance right the advanture side of the story with the moodier part. i think a Spider-Man movie should have both in EQUAL MEASURE. The adventure should be exciting, but with a touch of the dramatic to it, while the drama should play as real drama because Parker's life is rife with it, but which he always mannage to control. I don't know how this director is good with drama since i never saw 500 DAYS OF SUMMER. And what i ahve eard of that movie is pretty mixed, so i have no way to accertain that. - I don't like the implication, as given in this trailer, that Peter Parker's parents might had been involved in some top secret stuff. It's too cute that Parker's parents were involved in some top secret stuff which might be related to him as Spider-Man, considering the fact he became Spider-Man due to a freak accident. It's just too cute, it's too coincidental, it's too scriptwriting mechanics. I rather that perker's parents deaths were merely an accident of which there has no other implications in his life other then the fact he grew up a sadder and lonier kid then usual, despiste the good job done by his uncles. Of course, maybe his parents' death is not a foreshadowing of anything else and we are reading it wrong, but that's not the vibe the trailer gives. One thing i never figured out about Peter Parker's uncles is that, are they really his uncles, or are, as i think they are, his great-uncles? The age discrepency between them always veered me to the later hypothesis. Also, was Gwen Stacy also an egg-head like Parker (the hot librarian type), or was she more of a social well adjusted cheerleader type of girl (basically, his opposite) that Parker just had to great luck to hook up with? Anybody can help me out figuring this out? Thanks in advance.

  • July 21, 2011, 9:43 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    If i have to chose between being a skeptical or a believer, i chose skepticism anyday of the week over anything else.

  • July 21, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    hey asi, what up

    by spidercoz

    So you liked Spidey 3, even though it's crimes were much more serious than Star Trek? Interesting.

  • July 21, 2011, 10:23 a.m. CST

    Things i didn

    by quantize

  • July 21, 2011, 10:24 a.m. CST

    Things i didn't like about assholesmells trailer review

    by quantize

    everything...who the fuck is sad enough to write THAT much shit about a minute or two about a movie that may or may not be total shit...depending on the other 100 minutes or whatever.. pompous asshole

  • July 21, 2011, 10:25 a.m. CST

    spidercoz that was a good point you just made there...

    by Astronut

    ... just a train wreck all over the place, SM3... and asi thinks it was ok. And yet, he has nothing but vitriol against NuTrek. Wonder if he'll respond?

  • July 21, 2011, 10:30 a.m. CST

    Short memories

    by Therawbeats

    You all have them. The first 2 Raimi films were great! This looks like redundancy at its finest.

  • July 21, 2011, 10:35 a.m. CST


    by spidercoz

    of course he will, he can't help himself that's the thing I like about asi, you throw one of his own logical inconsistencies back at him, it just fuels him more

  • July 21, 2011, 10:35 a.m. CST

    crusher creel

    by Michael

    So let me get this's OK to fellate this movie but NOT Sam Raimi's?

  • July 21, 2011, 10:52 a.m. CST

    to @genderblender's points:

    by kevred

    * characters talk like human beings (no, they don't) * no pointless Raimi camera-flying (except for the extended POV nonsense that makes up a significant portion of the teaser) * looks set in a real world with real dialogue (no, it doesn't, at all) * no emo dancing (just horrible emo music) * no magical butler fixing the plot (impossible to make that claim from this teaser) * no organic webshooters (maybe, but why then is he pulling web out of his neck?) Essentially, you're wrong in everything you claim about this film. Doesn't augur well for your judgment on other matters.

  • July 21, 2011, 11:07 a.m. CST

    In 2015 this will be rebooted by Raimi's Spiderman 4

    by kidicarus

  • h and AVATARD since it rips off pretty much everything in the world and promotes flash over substance. But I am serious... we need to BOYCOTT THIS CRAP and send a message to the brainless shit-heads in Hollywood: NO UNECESSARY REMAKES/REBOOTS/REIMAGININGS

  • July 21, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Does Spiderman sparkle in the sunlight in this one?

    by Xionsmith

    This looks like Twilight garbage.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:33 p.m. CST

    The future

    by christpunchers2007

    No doubt this movie will make its quick bucks in theaters, as will all the other blockbusters that are coming in 2012. But if most of these superhero films somehow all critically bomb, we may soon see a slow down of these over-engineered but poorly thought-out "graphic novel adaptations". And I welcome that. We need quality flicks, not a shitload of quantity coming in every 2 to 3 weeks.

  • July 21, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST

    The mama and papa Parkers were "heroes" angle

    by christpunchers2007

    is so god damn lame. Quit trying to pull heart string by making Parker a Bruce Wayne, trying to live up to his daddy's mantle. I don't need to see n baby Parker all the way back when he was pissing in his diapers. At least they could have been a bit more clever with an origin story. You're disconnecting your audience right away by making the parents of Parker too far fetched and away from "normal folks". Who would get excited or hyped up by a stupid shot of Parker entering a school hall with some Zimmer-carbon-copy trailer music? Are directors these days that fucking dumb to NOT know how to set up a believable scene? That "school hall" is too obvious of a set it just yanks you out of the movie: the neat-looking extras, the POSITIONING of these extras in relation to the perfectly centered and lowering camera, and the impossible state of cleanliness of a school hall... this ain't MTV Webb, this isn't Degrassi or Twatlight or whatever the fuck pimply 13 year old's are into these days. If you can't even make a movie LOOK realistic, why bother doing the "Nolan" angle? Which, by the way, is a complete misfit for a SPIDER-MAN movie. Spider-man is meant to be dark on another type of level underneath his witty banter, not because you can hire some hideous doche to emulate moopy Tobey or because you shot everything in a poorly lit environment.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Sarcasm aside...

    by animatronicmojo

    It's not just that the same story was told in a movie ten years ago. For those of us who read or used to read comics when they were younger, just how many times has Marvel re-hashed Spider-Man's origin story, which was written almost 50 years ago? Many, many, many, many times- again, and again- in sooo many "What If's," in the first frame of every damn Sunday's comic strip, again and again in cartoon and TV versions, and now on Broadway. By now, who living under what rock does not know that as a teenager Peter Parker was bitten by goddam radioactive fucking spider!? And, honestly, I've never enjoyed revisiting this lame, predictable story- I could care less about Uncle Ben, who shot him, Peter's short-lived career as a professional wrestler, etc.- none of that interests me in the least. To tell this story again is... All. Treading. Water. OK, so after we get through all that there'll be some kind of CGI Lizard-Man, maybe in a lab coat, and they fight, Spidey's suit gets a few rips before he wins. I don't know, I haven't read the script, so maybe there'll be some incredible new dimension to it- what happened to his parents, etc., *yawn* Andrew Garfield is a talented actor, however, does this moody kid sulking in his bedroom and staring at his own reflection seem at all like the fun, cocky, wise-cracking, nerdcore genius-inventer savant HERO that I grew up with? Absolutely not. And yes, IMO, Tobey "Google-Eyes" McGuire did not nail the character either, and MJ, Kirsten Dunst was not. So, yeah, consider my expectations way too low to care about this film version. And why then do I sit here typing this nonsense when I have more important things to do? Because I am a so-called "hater?" Nein! Because I LOVE and grew up reading many a great Spider-Man comic, and would LOVE to see the character done well in an involving story (that does not involve any spider-bites). 'K?! I don't know, maybe they can get it together for the sequel. Wouldn't mind seeing this a well-done TV serial, either.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:19 p.m. CST

    If the Terrible Tinkerer isn't in this, it will fail

    by FlyingToupee

    Just sayin'.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:20 p.m. CST

    And where is Anne Hathaway as Vulturess?

    by FlyingToupee

    I wanted to see those luscious tits covered in feathers.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:41 p.m. CST

    Terrible Tinkerer comment

    by Astronut

    Funny, dude

  • July 21, 2011, 2:41 p.m. CST

    If Paste Pot Pete isn't in this, it will FAIL

    by Astronut

  • July 21, 2011, 2:42 p.m. CST

    If Big Wheel and Rocket Racer are not in this, it will FAIL

    by Astronut

  • July 21, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST

    If the Mindworm isn't in this, it will FAIL

    by FlyingToupee

  • I mean, seriously? Let's see, without even breaking a sweat I can think of: Sinister Six Green Goblin/Gwen Stacy Morbius/Lizard/Six-Arm Spidey Spider-Slayer/J. Jonah Jameson The Jackal/Professor Warren/Gwen Stacy/Spider-Man clone thing Kraven/Lizard List goes on and on and on. They have a veritable wealth of awesome options for stories to be told and they reboot with another telling of the Zzzzzzzz origin. GOD, I hope it fails so it teaches them a lesson.

  • July 21, 2011, 2:52 p.m. CST

    If Willow The Wisp is not in this, it will FAIL

    by Astronut

  • July 21, 2011, 2:54 p.m. CST

    If Ramrod is not in this, it will FAIL

    by Astronut

  • July 21, 2011, 3:01 p.m. CST

    shooters and spider bites aside....

    by Dr.007

    WTF is up with Garfield's feet? Check those things out in the briefcase scene. Those claws make me thing the dude should be playing the vulture and not Twi-spidey. I thought for a second is was a promo for Rise of the Planet of the Apes

  • July 21, 2011, 3:02 p.m. CST

    If Hypno-Hustler is not in this, it will FAIL

    by Astronut

  • July 21, 2011, 3:04 p.m. CST

    as for the parents

    by Dr.007

    the dead hero parents leaving a psychological scar that bobbles for years is soo tired. Maybe they die Climbing the northeast face in Chamonix...

  • July 21, 2011, 4:43 p.m. CST

    That POV does not look good...

    by SK229

    I don't know how some people (and I've actually noticed this a lot among people I know personally who work in digital vfx) can look at that and not be able to tell that it just doesn't look real. I'm shocked they even put it in the teaser... you should always put your best foot forward... for all the money spent on marketing and the influence marketing has on what gets made, I'm continually amazed at the teasers/trailers that get through the filter. Still, I'm guessing that shot isn't in the movie itself, but why even use it? One REALLY good shot of him swinging around for 4 seconds is worth more than that entire shot. I agree too that there's something off but I personally never liked Raimi's movies, so I don't mind seeing a new take. Just wish it wasn't an origin. Getting back to the CG vs. practical discussion, both sides require a director who won't let shoddy stuff through the pipeline. The reason (one of them, anyway) Ridley Scott is Ridley Scott or Spielberg is Spielberg is that they instinctively know how to shoot an effect and sell it and they know when it's not working. Many people who work in visual effects can put the stuff together, but many dont' have the eye to know when its right and when it isn't. And I'm not taking anything away from them, just being able to do ANY of that stuff takes an artist and someone willing to put in a shit load of hours learning the software as well as the art, but that final 10% of what sells an effect is usually down to the eye of the director... and the budget!

  • July 21, 2011, 7:09 p.m. CST

    this is gonna bomb


    all you assholes that cried your little girl eyes out about Spiderman 3 deserve this shit. Enjoy your shit sandwich!

  • July 21, 2011, 7:11 p.m. CST

    I hope you enjoy rubber lizards and video game cut-scene effects


    because that's what were gonna get. After an hour of Twilight build-up of drama and no action, there will be a short action scene at the end that looks like an xbox360 game. That's what you get for 80 million.

  • July 21, 2011, 7:29 p.m. CST


    by KnowItAllFromCali

  • July 21, 2011, 7:32 p.m. CST

    Oops, let's try this again...@sk229

    by KnowItAllFromCali

    Apparently, hitting return can accidentally cause a post... Anyway, dude, how about pointing out specifically looks off to you. My theory is that the motion itself is what is throwing people off. It's only obvious that it's CGI because of the way the camera moves and the fact that everyone knows 3d is the only way it CAN be done.

  • July 21, 2011, 8:36 p.m. CST

    The spidey hands look CGI and the ducts/pipes on top of the rooftops are obviously CGI


    It's cheap. Fuck this movie.

  • July 21, 2011, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man trailer replicated in Mirror's Edge

    by broken ear

  • July 21, 2011, 9:18 p.m. CST

    animatronicmojo, I forgot about the Micronauts

    by kevred

    I think Pixar should jump on them and make their first film targeted specifically to a slightly older age range of kids. Still young, but just a little older.

  • July 21, 2011, 10:19 p.m. CST

    pr0g2west and others who don't get why

    by Queefer Sutherland

    They're remaking it because it's cheaper than paying Toby and Sam tens of millions of dollars plus a percentage. Their contracts were over, so they were in a negotiable position and wanted too much money. They figured they could make more by rebooting it. But the expectations are high. I wouldn't wanna be an actor in this, or be the director. Yeah, seeing the origin again kind of sucks, so all the more pressure for them to do it really well. Frankly, uncle Ben's death was pretty unemotional. Spiderman never knew when to get emo. They either overused it or didn't use it when they should have. Eh, I'll see it. I think it looks fine. And for those stupid fucking whiners who are bitching about the quality of the POV shot, you're pretty much full of shit. You're having to stop it frame by frame to see if it looks realistic or not. So it must be pretty fucking good. Special effects were never made to be watched frame by frame. No MOVIE was ever made to be watched frame by frame. It's not the way you're supposed to watch a movie. It's like standing backstage to watch a magic act. So you watch it frame by fame and pull on your little weenies and think you're so fucking smart and observant when in fact you're just some pathetic dweeb who wants to bring himself up and look all smart. You're not fooling me. You ignorant stinking fucks. Your heads should be cut off and your necks should be fucked. Hey, have a good night ya'll!

  • July 22, 2011, 2:45 a.m. CST

    It looks like cgi because...

    by Eli_Cash

    It looks like a fucking cartoon. I didn't frame by frame anything. It literally looks like a videogame cutscene, like somebody else said. The simplified shapes and textures and the crappy point lighting. You don't have to know what this stuff is to know it looks like crap. But if you understand it, then you know WHY it looks like crap, and that makes it even funnier. Oh and genderblender, thanks. I didn't know that. But I have to say, if that's what they're doing in this movie it makes it the whole story even more of a non-sequitor. This movie is shaping up to be the worst superhero movie ever made. Like epic bad. It may even be a genre killer. Not that I'm complaining. Getting a little tired of this geek nostalgia trip that's dominated the last decade.

  • July 22, 2011, 2:50 a.m. CST

    The dialogue tells you what you need to know.

    by Eli_Cash

    "So Pete, tell us about yourself. Not much to tell really. Peter lives with his Aunt and Uncle." That's about how much depth I expect there to be to any of the characters. They are their circumstances. This is written by assholes who just wanna list off facts that everybody knows. Think about it. That's what they PUT IN THE TRAILER. That is their "take" on the character.

  • July 22, 2011, 5 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    To say that Spider-Man 3 is a terrible movie is one of those AICN's dogmatic bullshit taken on blind faith crap i don't partake with. Abrams Trek is a retard dumb stupid movie all the way through. Spidey 3 actually has good things to it, and one would need to be deliberatly oblivious to it to fail to notice them. As for the rest, i'm pretty good, as well as anybody can be in this economy. And how are you yourself? I hope all is fine.

  • I don't dislike Spidey 1 and 3. I find them flawed but not bad. There's things in both movies that i wish it weren't there. I hated the Goblin sui design for the first movie. I hated the Marcy Cray blunt shoving into the movie. I hated the scene at the bridge where the people throw beer cans at the Goblin. I hated the final fight scene between goblin and Spidey. I disliked the fact that there was no true build up to the final spidey suit, that he shows up already with it. Not evne a lip service done to how he got it, or made it, or stole or, or whatever. The 3rd movie suffers from too many villains. It's obvious that the original intention was to only have the Sandman and the New Green Goblin as the movie's villains. But the studios, in their wisdom, decided to shove Venon into it. And the movie hurts for it. I didn't liked the artificial way they linked Sandman with uncle Ben's death. I understand that the whole point of the movie is that a godo person can find in his heart the strengh and good will to forgive a good person who did a bad thing and that bad thing is so hurtful to one's soul. I liked that, but i wish they had found a more elegant way to do that without reconning the death of Uncle Ben. i hated how wasted the Gwen Stacey character was done in the movie. Both of a waste of a good character and a good actress. I disliked how fast the turn over of Harry character was done, and how blunt and awkward it was. And yes, the emo dancing is irritating. I guess the point is that it's suppposed to be irritating and anoying. It is showing Peter Parker at being an asshole. i guess the very point opf the dance stuff is for us to feel irritation and anoyance at the new Peter Parker under the influence of simbiote. We are supposed to find the new Pater Parker an irritating asshole, and the movie decided to do that by, among other thing,s present him as a parody of an emo jerkass and with him dancing like an emo jerkass. I think it's all in the spirit of parody. Maybe it' worked TOO well. I love Spider-Man 2, there's no doubt about that,. In fact, it's the only Raimi Spider-Man movie i own the DVD. I can't bring myself to buy the other two, even if i have a lesser negative opinion of them then what's imposed in here by the AICN Geek Dogma Bullshit.

  • ... is because Spider-Man has international appeal. A Spider-Man movie is a garantee hit in the international market. Unlike most marvel comic heroes, Spider-Man has a huge an appeal outside of the USA. Spider-Man is by far the most well known marvel character outside the USA, and the most popular and beloved as well. No other marvel character can match Spider-Man in popularity and public consciousness. So, the new Spider-Man movie will do make bank for Sony. The real question about this movie is just if it will be any good.

  • ... is because Spider-Man has international appeal. A Spider-Man movie is a garantee hit in the international market. Unlike most marvel comic heroes, Spider-Man has a huge an appeal outside of the USA. Spider-Man is by far the most well known marvel character outside the USA, and the most popular and beloved as well. No other marvel character can match Spider-Man in popularity and public consciousness. So, the new Spider-Man movie will do make bank for Sony. The real question about this movie is just if it will be any good.

  • July 22, 2011, 5:28 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    If i read this trailer correctly, i think in this new movie they want to present Peter Parker as a more dramatic character instead of the goofy nerd he was in the Raimi movies. While in the Raimi movies they played Parker for laughs half the time, it seems in this new Spider-Man movie the tone for the character is more dramatic and serious. Or as some might call it, more emo, so to speak. Maybe that's a consequence of the times. While when the Raimi's first S+piderman movie was being made it was during the rise of the nerd and geek culture, this one is made in the rise of the emo culture, i guess. So, maybe, maybe they are making a Spiderman movie with a Peter Parker in tune to the day and age, i guess. If that is a good thing or not, that's another matter. I once read the treatment that Cameron wrote for his Spidrman movie he was to make in the mid-late 90s, and in that treatment Cameron made Peter Parker into a punk-ass smart-ass asshole. I guess the Spider-Man filmmakers want to make their Peter Parkers roll with the times.

  • July 22, 2011, 5:32 a.m. CST

    queefer sutherland

    by AsimovLives

    i believe the main reason for this remake existing instead of a 4th Raimi/Maguire spiderman movie is not so much money and paycheck, but that Raimi and Maguire wanted to have more control over the movie after the reaction the 3rd movie got. The 3rd movie, in which the Studio had a lot of control over it, where the studio pulled their weight all the time, and vetoed half the things Raimi wanted and didn't wanted to make in the movie. Both Raimi and Maguire must have felt less then satisfied with the final result of the 3rd Spidey movie, adn they wanted to have as much control over the next movie as they had over the second. So, the studio, not wishing to give others control, said goodbye and good ridance to Raimi and Maguire and restarted anew. To quote from the first Spider-Man movie, they went back to formula.

  • July 22, 2011, 5:33 a.m. CST

    genderblender, you do not have the heart of a poet, do you?

    by AsimovLives

  • July 22, 2011, 5:40 a.m. CST

    I think they made this trailer look emo


    because of TDK's success. Which is utterly fucking retarded, Batman should have a darker tone than Spiderman, naturally. The more you analyze this trailer, the shittier it looks and the worse you think this movie is gonna be. Like someone mentioned, listen to the dialogue. It's fucking dreadful. I hope this movie fucking bombs.

  • July 22, 2011, 5:41 a.m. CST

    the opening of the trailer is exactly how TDK opens, including the score


  • July 22, 2011, 5:59 a.m. CST

    I thought it seemed familiar.

    by Eli_Cash

  • July 22, 2011, 6:12 a.m. CST


    by Eli_Cash

    I really don't understand what the whole "emo" thing is, so I couldn't tell you whether I agree or not. Moreover, I don't think there's any characterization of Parker in the trailer that gives us much to go by. He's a cipher. He just kinda grins and seems introverted. I dunno. Maybe that's emo? <shrugs> I just wanna see a spiderman movie that shows how cool it would be to be a teenager with super powers. Fuck all the emotional baggage. And the conspiracy/intrigue/dark-secrets angle. It should be pretty simple really. That was the best part of Raimi's first spiderman movie. Unfortunately they only showed it for about 30 minutes, then jumped forward to college and threw in the "heavy" (and implausible and melodramatic) stuff.

  • One thing you said rings as absolute truth to me: Spider-Man shouldn't look as dark as Batman. Spider-Man's dramas, as it seems to me, are more of a sort of soap-opera quality (in a good way). Batman is the one who drabs in the darker recesses of humanity.

  • July 22, 2011, 8:23 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    I think that my emo is what is characterized in many of today's teen culture of a predominance of complete expression of angst emotions above all else. It's not that teenhood has never been angsty in the pas,t it always was, but it seems recent generations hallow in it. As in, what ocne was considered a bad thing, angst, is now considered good. Some shit like that. Maybe it's a matter of how each generation defines itself. We al know that all the generations that came before have always a terrible capacity to relate the othe new ones, generally speaking. It seems it's impossible to jump the generation gap, no matter how hip some older people try to be. There's hints in this trailer of the so-called emo vibe of the new Spider-Man, or should i say, Peter Parker. The hooded wardrobe, so common in the emo fashion style. The shy guy who hides his face in his books, which for some weird reason doesn't detract the attention of a girl, quite the contrary, it makes him even more appealing and noticable. It's little hints here and there. Hopefully, it might just be the typical misrepresentation of the trailer in regard to the actual movie. How many good movies have had bad trailers? Too many ot count. I alkways use MASTER AND COMMANDER as exmaple, that was a magnificent movie that had one of the worst trailers i ever had seen in my whole life. Now, one thing i agree with you and is that the presentation of the sens eof wonder that Peter Parker gets from his newly gained powers. But that can only work so far. As son tragedy hits parker and he gains a sense of responsability for the use of his powers, the fun has to go. One of the more important aspect of Spider-Man is that how seriously he takes his sense of responsability about doing the right thing. I always found that his sarcasm is born from how serious he takes his self-imposed duties, and it's his release valve, his smart-ass sarcastic humour in dealing with things. But make no mistake, Spider-Man is one of the least fun characters in the Marvel pantheon. Life keeps piling shit on him that he has little time to celebrate his super-powers. In that regard, SPIDER-MAN 2 hit the nail in the head about who is Spiderman. Now, if only they had made him the smart-mouth he is in the comics, it would had been perfect. And this is one of the few things that i ask the new movie to get right that the previous didn't seem to bother to: to make Spider-Man the quipster that we all know and love.

  • It would take the mastery of Shakespeare to pull that shit off. I really hope i misread the trailer in that aspect.