Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Will Audiences Get A Sneak Peek At THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN On February 6th?

Nordling here.

With all the big, anticipated summer releases coming this year, THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN feels like the little guy under the table while the grown-ups talk.  Personally, I want to see it, but at the same time I have issues with the whole way the Raimi thing was handled, and it's hard not to see this movie as Sony's way of holding on to the franchise and preventing Marvel Studios from getting it back.  But I like Marc Webb as a director, and I especially like Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker.  He's a gifted actor and he's the biggest reason I want to see the film.

And on February 6th, people in major cities will be able to see a sneak peek of what Webb has in store for THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN.  At The Untold Story Begins you can sign up (if you live in the cities of Berlin, London, Los Angeles, New York, Madrid, Paris, Moscow, Mexico City, Rio, Rome, Seoul, Sydney, and Tokyo) to see some new footage on February 6th.  If you live in one of those citites, act fast (and seats may already be gone for some of them) and you'll get to attend.  It's unclear what fans will be seeing - it could be the Comic-Con footage, or it could be something new.  I know that the Comic-Con footage ran both hot and cold for audiences - they liked the webslinging, but the Lizard didn't work for many people - so I'd expect that this would be improved over that footage.

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN has got serious competition on the superhero movie front this year, and with this, they're trying to steer the geek conversation their way.  THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN opens July, 2012.

Nordling, out.  Follow me on Twitter!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:03 a.m. CST

    The lizard design sucks..

    by Axl Z

    Sure does!

  • if we want to finally get some new original genre movies.Enough already with repeatedly milking properties which have never been realized in their fullest potential.and that goes to TDK and SM2 too. Money is good but sometimes,sometimes you need to get some risks and bring to the audience something more,something better,something new than just re-serviced,re-heated fast food. Big Jim's Avatar,Distric 9,Pirates,Push,etc and a lot of other films proved that you can be both original,intelligent and successful with your average audience.But i guess it is better from a business perspective to take the safest way to earn more money even if it means to rehash the same old shit and FUCK ART.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:24 a.m. CST

    Just in case you forgot what they did to your beloved Spidey

    by ZOMBRE

    http://www.celebuzz.com/photos/andrew-garfield-films-spider-man/andrew-garfield-films-spider-man-in-costume-6/

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:26 a.m. CST

    The untold story?

    by paint163

    You mean the origin story again.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:27 a.m. CST

    Spiderman...Spiderman...Does whatever a spider can!

    by Larry Knowles

    Harry please call me so we can complain about the Lizard's human face.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:31 a.m. CST

    I live in London so had a look at the London site....

    by cameron

    Basically it just allocates you a ticket coupon to take with you but it's purely first come first served. Movie starts at 8pm so i'm guessing the uber nerds will be outside waiting for the doors to open at about 8am......I'm not going to head over there at around 7pm to be confronted by 1000 nutters dressed in red leotards shotting fake web...I get enuff of that at home!!!!

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:42 a.m. CST

    I predict this movie will actually do very well

    by Pipple

    couple of reasons why: 1. People still love spiderman. 2. Kids 3. It's actually taking itself seriously unlike the raimi movies. Ever since I was fucked over with the first spidey, I wanted them to reboot him and I'm finally getting it. I can't see how this movie will fail. Much like with Begins and TDK it's going to be hard for it to go down the same path as its predecessors.

  • LOL ... Dream on.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 8:10 a.m. CST

    TWO whole cities in the US? Fuck that.

    by ShiftyEyedDog

    They couldnt at least do a Chicago?

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 8:18 a.m. CST

    I'm old Greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeg!

    by Mr.Macphisto

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 8:19 a.m. CST

    No love for Chicago?

    by Joe Walsh

    I'll never understand why Chicago never gets limited releases. As for the movie, I'm still perplexed by it'd tone. The preview makes it look bleak and angsty, but reports say that it has spidey in a lighter tone than Raimi's films. A sneak preview would be helpful.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 8:47 a.m. CST

    @oscar_bait I asked this SAME question on SHH.

    by gk1

    this sneak preview MAY be its undoing...unless they pay the people to shut up or sign something. if someone was smart they would sneak a stealth recorder in lol.

  • Is because it's Sony's way of holding on to the franchise and preventing Marvel Studios from getting it back. Even its tagline, "The Untold Story" just sounds like, "Nuh uh! We're not rehashing the same shit again!". Personally, I didn't see what was so terrible about the Raimi films, the first two anyway. Mary Jane was miscast (should have been Alicia Witt) but otherwise I thought they were fine. Maybe because I'm not a comic book guy so I didn't care that they weren't completly faithful to the source material. By the way, if you think this is bad, strap yourselves in because you know they're going to reboot Batman in a few years, especially if Avengers does well and they decide they need to do a Justice League movie. So be prepared for those fucking pearls to hit the pavement yet again.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 9:34 a.m. CST

    Mysterious Suitcase

    by Doctor_Strangepork

    Fuck this shit.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST

    I believe in this film...

    by KevinMuller

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:03 a.m. CST

    I believe in this film...

    by KevinMuller

    I think it will inject something new into our beloved web crawler.. Though I still hate the lizard design

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:08 a.m. CST

    I have issues with the way the Raimi situation was handled

    by D.Vader

    Yeah, just have Raimi keep developing a fourth movie, writing scripts and casting actors, all the while paying James Vanderbilt to write a reboot script behind his back. Real classy, Sony.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:08 a.m. CST

    The Lizard looks like "Old Greg", just with better FX

    by Mr.Macphisto

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:33 a.m. CST

    Favorite Comic Book Character...

    by ScriptCunt

    and yet I cannot seem to muster a measurable half-fuck over the existence of this movie... just can't. Maybe Cialis would help...

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Can Spidey at least crack wise in this one?

    by Nico Toscani

    I think he did it maybe twice in the whole Raimi series.

  • It was a total bitch move on Raimi's part.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Spwilighter-Man

    by BiggusDickus

    Meh.

  • ...who wandered into a science lab where the girl you have a crush on inexplicably works because she's a genius savant, and you mistakenly go into a room with weirdo lighting and get infused with spider DNA giving you strength, agility and webbing that comes out of the nape of your neck, and your parents were scientists too who left you a mysterious suitcase with a suit with suction boots and gloves and sewn-in tubing to redirect your neck-webbing to nozzles on your wrists, you too can become a super-hero and fight a badly-rendered, human headed lizard and not fuck Emma Stone (sorry, it's still PG-13!)

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST

    BORING and the Lizard looks awful

    by ass clown

    I would rather see a full length feature film of Jim Carrey stalking Emma Stone and bring a voyeur while Spiderman intervenes. Does anyone else have Glenn Close's creep Albert Knobbs image stuck in their head. Ive seen too many movies recently and they wont let up on showing that creepy trailer

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:02 a.m. CST

    I got my passes.

    by Nick

    HUZZAH!

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:08 a.m. CST

    will not see it. ever.

    by billyhitchcock1

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Do you love me?

    by Loosejerk

    Are you playing your love games with me?

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Does anybody know the details of the Sony contract?

    by lochkray

    Do they just have to make movies of any quality and still retain the rights, or do they have to perform to a certain standard before they revert back? I mean, are we going to be looking at a five million dollar budgeted FOUND FOOTAGE direct to video Spiderman story in a few years, just because Sony is afraid to lose their grip on the name? Its happened to other franchises. I just wonder what the conditions of the Spiderman contract are.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:31 a.m. CST

    So he has spider powers but cannot spins webs??

    by Swordfleece

    That's fucked up! They should've kept the organic shooters. Why give him all the powers of a spider but require self made mechanical web-shooters??

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Mark my words, this will be great...

    by MST3KPIMP

    I really don't think many of you realize how this will exceed your low expectations.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Redirected neck webbing?

    by Bass Ackwards

    Is that for real?

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Why not just put it on during the SuperBowl?

    by Saen

    A whole commercial brake just Spiderman.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Mech webshooters prove only a nerd could've been Spider-man

    by Nerd Rage

    They emphasize how Peter need his book smarts to fight crime. Synthetic webbing allows Spider-man to change his formula to counter various super-powers. They fit it in Spider-man rogue gallery who mostly use technological weapons, especially Doctor Ock and Green Goblin. Mechs are also one of the coolest gadgets in comic book history. What do organics add to Spider-man? Nothing, they're just obvious and lazy.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:14 p.m. CST

    You know what's in the suitcase?

    by Joe Walsh

    Toenail clippings and human hair. Turns out Pete's dad was a little weird. The mystery can't be unsolved...

  • Peter was supposed to be brilliant. I mean mega-smart. He was a skinny nerd with a big brain. He was socially awkward, with a smart-ass mouth (anger issues), that he was afraid to use. When he puts on the costume he lets that anger/fear out in the form of smartass comments. He builds his web shooters because he's f'ing brilliant. He is put down so much but the "cool kids" that he grows selfish and bitter. Hence he goes out at first only for himself. This leads him to not stopping the burglar. He sucks with girls because he lacks confidence and social grace (until he gets older and grows up a lot) THIS IS SPIDER-MAN. Why can they not put him on the big screen.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Marsellus Wallace's soul is in the suitcase. Oh, wait! Wrong movie.

    by Mr. Pricklepants

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    spiderman

    by danny rose

    fucked up the origin story plus i dont like the new guys hair

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:31 p.m. CST

    "THIS IS SPIDER-MAN. Why can they not put him on the big screen."

    by Mr. Pricklepants

    Perhaps this movie will have that Spider-Man. I'll give it a shot. Sure, it's a story that's been told before, with a couple of differences, but they do that shit all the time in the comic books.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    2006 all over again?

    by tylernol

    Anyone remember the summer of 2006? Superman Returns debuted a week before Pirates 2 and got crushed? I can see the same thing happening here again when TDK opens a couple weeks after AMS. At least Spider-Man has a couple weekends to make the lion's share of its money before Batman opens (I can't see Ice Age providing much direct competition). When Spider-man went face-to-face with Star Wars in 2002, Spidey was something fresh for the movie-going public. Plus, Star Wars was coming off the poorly-received Episode 1 (which did huge box office but is generally regarded to be a crappy movie). This time it's more of the same for Spidey, and he's facing the incredible goodwill leftover from the last Batman movie. I predict he'll get squashed by the Bat this summer.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    Eventual new Batman series

    by Joe Walsh

    Please be in the middle of him being Batman like 89. And set in 1930s Gotham. Problem solved.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    No Lab Coat, No Ticket

    by Annie The Pod Racer

    plus Twilight haired Parker is lame, will he glitter too???

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Inside the suitcase are

    by teddy_duchamp

    The keys to the Spider-mobile! Ps if he uses web shooters where does spider-man store the webbing?

  • Superman crushed? It grossed 390m worldwide.Granted it was not the big hit that the studio wanted to be but still it was not a flop,it did quite well for a movie franchise which was dead for almost 20 years. Hell, the more popular Batman franchise made less,around 370m worldwide,with its rebooted BB movie which came out during a period with no competition at all. ASM will make a lot of money,that's for sure, but it wont achieve the same success that SM3 did.Which means ASM2 has the potential to surpass the success of Raimi's movies.

  • What happened to Pete's parents. Gwen Stacy being a major player and not an afterthought. Pete's technical skills in building his own devices.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Will this be Marvel's Green Lantern?

    by SifoDyasJr

    I think it might... I love Spider-man, I think Marc Webb is a good director and Andrew Garfield a great actor, but I can't generate any enthusiasm for this whatsoever. It looks cheap compared to the original series (of which the first two were pretty good), and doesn't fit the tone of what Spider-man the character is at all. It looks more like a Twilight movie than a light-hearted super hero--and I believe that was intentional which sucks even more. And that outfit is just unbelievably terrible. Captain America did the costume-to-movie conversion absolutely right because it stayed true to the original design even as it was adapted it to work in a real-life situation. If it comes out and everyone falls in love with it and it scores high on the tomatometer, I'll give it a shot week 2, but I won't be there opening night.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:14 p.m. CST

    Wouldn't the web shooters come out of his ass anyway?

    by Mugato5150

    I understand it's a comic book movie but there should still be internal logic.

  • Fact. Sadly Couldn't they go more for that kick-ass Ben Reilly outfit?

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:29 p.m. CST

    How can they top Nolan's Batman?

    by garagons

    Batman Beyond. Anyone betting how TDKR will end? My money is on Bruce Wayne dying, Gordon Hewitt's character taking over the mantle Kind of how Ra's operate in the first movie

  • The disgruntled nerds don't have much influence at the box office.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:32 p.m. CST

    zombre - Holy Christ the Nicholas Hammond suit looked better

    by Crimson Dynamo

    hell i'd take the Electric Company suit over that one

  • Marvel is calling her children home.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Emo-Peter Vs the Goomba

    by DerLanghaarige

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:42 p.m. CST

    3D-Man

    by DerLanghaarige

    Ture, but unless they somehow managed to make this movie REALLY good, I can imagine a huge drop in its 2nd week, when the public realized that Tobey Maguire and Co are not just NOT in it, but that it also has absolutely nothing to do with the previous three movies, which, despite lots of nerdy bitching about organic webshooters and Kirsten Dunst not being a natural ginger, have many fans.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:46 p.m. CST

    mr macphisto - the lizard looking like old greg

    by i_got_worms

    ...is comedy gold. Looking forward to how the new spidey film portrays the mangina.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:52 p.m. CST

    I'll just wait for the third reboot in 2020

    by Mel

    Maybe by then it will be worth watching.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Zombre pics

    by Righteous Brother

    The costume definitely doesn't look as good as the Raimi version - it looks very rubbery to me, the eyes are wrong, and the suit's missing the red belt bit - I'm still hoping the film will be good though, and I'll overlook the costume.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 2:24 p.m. CST

    Avatard

    by Urall Luzers

    The guy who described Avatar as original and intelligent needs to get a fucking clue.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 2:29 p.m. CST

    fuck this movie

    by disfigurehead

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 2:32 p.m. CST

    @urall luzers no thanks,i already got one of those.

    by KilliK

  • Yes. Remake. Maybe not a shot for shot remake, but it's still the same story as the first one, albeit with a couple of changed elements (the parents, Gwen in the MJ role, Lizard in the Osborne role). But, other than Van Sant's "Psycho," every remake changes a few things. Bottom line: There was absolutely no reason for SONY to retell the origin. They should have just recast the leads, hired a new director if they didn't want to Raimi and just kept the series going.

  • Nothing matched the scope or perfection of that trailer, not even Raimi's three movies.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 3:36 p.m. CST

    Fuck the haters

    by Nerd Rage

    Go jerk off to Spider-man 3.

  • Which is why I can't understand people complaining about this. It's more Spider-Man fer crissakes!

  • Wait, someone please explain to me why they wanted another Sam Raimi Spider-Man movie. I need to understand why.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 4:06 p.m. CST

    It's just ANOTHER mad scientist...

    by sonnyfern

    At least making him a mindless cause of destruction would've been original, but they've done the mad scientist bit twice now...will he have to save Gwen Stacy at the end? Mary Jane got kidnapped THREE fucking times. They need to break the mold and really do something different. Making The Lizard another mad scientist is just beating a dead freaking horse. He's pretty much unrecognizable as the character we all know and love. Shame on them.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Of course Mary Jane got kidnapped 3 times

    by Mugato5150

    What comic book movie doesn't have the girl getting kidnapped? I mean you can name some but it's certainly not the norm, especially in something as pedestrian as Spider-Man.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 4:24 p.m. CST

    It's wierd. Just can't get myself interested in this movie.

    by Isaac R.

    I WANT to, but nothing I've seen so far has grabbed me.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 4:27 p.m. CST

    I mean, I'm TRYING. I really am. But it just seems so...meh.

    by Isaac R.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 4:44 p.m. CST

    nerd rage: Peter was only a nerd the first year

    by chien_sale

    After the first year, Peter lost his glasses, got the hot girls. And then he quit school to be full-time photographer. Oh he always was an underdog but the nerd Spidey only really became the thing when Bendis did Ultimate Spider-Man

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Raimi's Spidey movies were shit.

    by noiretblanc

    So I don't care what they did to that hack.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:30 p.m. CST

    Garfield does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    Nordling, you state that you're interested in this primarily because of Andrew Garfield? You say he's a gifted actor. What you basing that on? Far as I can see Garfield's only been in two movies. IMAGINARIUM OF DR PARNASSUS (in which he played an annoying whiny sidekick) and THE SOCIAL NETWORK (in which he played an annoying whiny sidekick).

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:31 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    And yes, the last SPIDERMAN 3 movie was woeful. True dreck. Still peeved with this site for giving it glowing reviews.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 7:56 p.m. CST

    It's not going to flop

    by john

    It comes out 17 days before TDKR and on 4th of July weekend.

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 9:10 p.m. CST

    Garfield's only been in two movies?

    by Alec.Eiffel

    You sure about that, bud?

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 9:17 p.m. CST

    ENOUGH.WITH.THE.MOTHERFUCKING. ORIGINS!!!!!!!!!!

    by Jobacca

    My most hated thing about the current crop of comic book movies is that Hollywood CANNOT move beyond the origin story. WE DO NOT NEED TO SEE SPIDERMANS ORIGIN AGAIN!!!!! We JUST saw that fucking movie. Same with Superman....my 84 year old GRANDMOTHER can tell you Supermans origin note for note....we DO NOT NEED yet another movie covering the same damn story that every other movie has already told. The audience is not as stupid as the execs who are making these things. I dont need Morgan Freemen to spend 30 minutes of the movie telling me where he bought the tires for the Batmobile....JUST SHOW THE FUCKING BATMOBILE!!!!! How about making KINGDOM COME? or THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS? or THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN(without the giant mechanical spiders and gay polar bears)? Jesus Hollywood...move on already!!!!!!

  • Jan. 28, 2012, 10:35 p.m. CST

    THIS IS THE REASON WHY IT WILL SUCK (Major Spoilers)...

    by TopHat

    Ready? SWAT LIZARDS The climactic battle involves The Lizard making the members of a SWAT team into lizards like him. It takes place on top of a building. Also, The Lizard uses a bright yellow hover thing that has guns and shoots missiles. I. Shit. You. Not.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 12:23 a.m. CST

    yeah, "the untold story" that doesn't bode well

    by thethang

    It means that the studio is worried people will be confused by the "reboot" thing and they are going to try and soft sell it as a prequel, even though it's just a different version of the same story Raimi told in his Spider Man. If Sony sticks with this then they can expect to hear/see/read a lot of criticism about a confusing add campaign.

  • I'm surprised he can write complete sentences. Good job, Lennie.

  • First of all, Spidey 3 was a fucking abortion of a movie.... Oh god, where to begin? Retconning Sandman into Uncle Ben's murder was fairly stupid, but whatever. How about the scene where we actually see all the cool Goblin tech that Harry has lying around, including a badass silver varient of the original Goblin Mask and a classic glider and instead we get Extreme Snowboarder Paintball New Goblin. Kiss my ass. How about Mary Jane going from "I know it will be hard because your Spiderman and things wont be easy but I loves you, you little arachnid fuck, now go get em Tiger" at the end of Spidey 2 to "BITCH BITCH MOAN BITCH, Im an unlikable hag" In Spidey 3. How about the random truck full of sand in the middle of NYC that just happens to be in the Sandmans path?(and no, it wasn't an empty truck that Sandman filled with himself, there were shovels, the cop spawned one) Strugging emo bangs Peter Parker. And while I'm on the subject of the bangs.... They had a fucking emo bang origin scene. A scene where we actually see Parker bring his hair down into emo bangs. Did we need that? Could we not have pretty much figured that out ourselves? Aunt Mays oh so fucking cheesy speech. Mary Jane not being like "Hey Peter, Harry's right over there and he says he's going to kill you, but ya know, your fucking Spiderman, so why don't you go beat his ass?" The butler revealing shit. If the butlet knew, why would he wait that long to tell Harry? Clearly he knew Harry was consumed by rage and vengeance prior to him getting his face blown the fuck up. The news cast finale. Gwen Stacy being utterly fucking pointless. And everything that was out there about part 4 sounded even worse...the fucking VULTRESS? Really? That's what you guys would have wanted to see instead? Also MJ was horribly miscast to begin with. Now...with all that being said about the last movie, lets talk about this one. It's like all of you are totally ignoring the comic con footage that got almost unanimous love because of how well Spidey was portrayed. Ya know, he actually fucking quips and acts like Spidey as opposed to mostly silent Spiderman of the past 3 movies. Or the fact that they've filmed tons of practicle effects and stunts as opposed to making all of the Spidey shit one big CGI cartoon.(yes I know the first person portion of the trailer was CGI, doesnt change the fact that we've seens tons of pics/footage of them filming a lot of real shit) so where's the bitching coming from? His costume is different? His haircut? The fact that they're redoing the origin? It's a different take on it, it's not just Spiderman 1 rehashed. There's a different big bad, bringing Gwen into it, if anything it's a more Ultimate take on things. The Lizard design? None of these things matter, if its a good movie. Everything about the comic con footage suggests it will be and that they've nailed the Spiderman character. Lets fucking relax. If it comes out and it blows, fine. But after the fucking disappointment that was Spidey 3, it'll be hard for it to be any worse. Honestly, how many of you even read comic books? You're bitching about tone? Did you guys see the same Spider-Man 3 that I did? That movie shit all over the fucking comics. It shit all over Spider-Man fans. Hell it shit all over fucking movies. You all have your panties in a bunch because it's a retelling of the origin. So fucking what? It's obviously a different take. Chill the fuck out. I've never seen so much prejudging of a movie based on bullshit and assumptions and at times outright ignorance of the facts in my goddamned life.

  • First of all, Spidey 3 was a fucking abortion of a movie.... Oh god, where to begin? Retconning Sandman into Uncle Ben's murder was fairly stupid, but whatever. How about the scene where we actually see all the cool Goblin tech that Harry has lying around, including a badass silver varient of the original Goblin Mask and a classic glider and instead we get Extreme Snowboarder Paintball New Goblin. Kiss my ass. How about Mary Jane going from "I know it will be hard because your Spiderman and things wont be easy but I loves you, you little arachnid fuck, now go get em Tiger" at the end of Spidey 2 to "BITCH BITCH MOAN BITCH, Im an unlikable hag" In Spidey 3. How about the random truck full of sand in the middle of NYC that just happens to be in the Sandmans path?(and no, it wasn't an empty truck that Sandman filled with himself, there were shovels, the cop spawned one) Strugging emo bangs Peter Parker. And while I'm on the subject of the bangs.... They had a fucking emo bang origin scene. A scene where we actually see Parker bring his hair down into emo bangs. Did we need that? Could we not have pretty much figured that out ourselves? Aunt Mays oh so fucking cheesy speech. Mary Jane not being like "Hey Peter, Harry's right over there and he says he's going to kill you, but ya know, your fucking Spiderman, so why don't you go beat his ass?" The butler revealing shit. If the butlet knew, why would he wait that long to tell Harry? Clearly he knew Harry was consumed by rage and vengeance prior to him getting his face blown the fuck up. The news cast finale. Gwen Stacy being utterly fucking pointless. And everything that was out there about part 4 sounded even worse...the fucking VULTRESS? Really? That's what you guys would have wanted to see instead? Also MJ was horribly miscast to begin with. Now...with all that being said about the last movie, lets talk about this one. It's like all of you are totally ignoring the comic con footage that got almost unanimous love because of how well Spidey was portrayed. Ya know, he actually fucking quips and acts like Spidey as opposed to mostly silent Spiderman of the past 3 movies. Or the fact that they've filmed tons of practicle effects and stunts as opposed to making all of the Spidey shit one big CGI cartoon.(yes I know the first person portion of the trailer was CGI, doesnt change the fact that we've seens tons of pics/footage of them filming a lot of real shit) so where's the bitching coming from? His costume is different? His haircut? The fact that they're redoing the origin? It's a different take on it, it's not just Spiderman 1 rehashed. There's a different big bad, bringing Gwen into it, if anything it's a more Ultimate take on things. The Lizard design? None of these things matter, if its a good movie. Everything about the comic con footage suggests it will be and that they've nailed the Spiderman character. Lets fucking relax. If it comes out and it blows, fine. But after the fucking disappointment that was Spidey 3, it'll be hard for it to be any worse. Honestly, how many of you even read comic books? You're bitching about tone? Did you guys see the same Spider-Man 3 that I did? That movie shit all over the fucking comics. It shit all over Spider-Man fans. Hell it shit all over fucking movies. You all have your panties in a bunch because it's a retelling of the origin. So fucking what? It's obviously a different take. Chill the fuck out. I've never seen so much prejudging of a movie based on bullshit and assumptions and at times outright ignorance of the facts in my goddamned life.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 3:13 a.m. CST

    You've already posted all that on other articles, ajt2111!!

    by TopHat

    I too have posted the stuff about SWAT on other articles as well, but, its because no one has acknowledged how LAME it is! Personally, I am not against this film because of wanting Raimi back; I agree, SPIDERMAN 3 was God-Awful. He obviously had studio idiots breathing down his neck and his takes on some things throughout the whole trilogy were too campy for my taste. Also, he had the problem that a lot of male film makers have today: Not being able to create good female characters. All they can do is include a female character that basically belittles the male lead every time something bad happens, yet, THEY themselves don't do anything. Another example is "Rachael" in Nolan's Batman films. This is obviously just a way for Sony to keep the rights to Spider-Man instead of giving them back to Marvel (quo dos to Nordling for being the only Internet film reviewer to point this out). Sony is obviously banking on the fact people will automatically go to this and make excuses for it just because its Spider-Man ...and it seems they're right, going by some of these posts.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 4:04 a.m. CST

    I understand Tophat, however

    by ajt2111

    I can't help but feel you're basing everything you know about the finale on the leaked lego toy thing....that's a bit much. I do agree, he probably will turn the swat into lizards, but can we possibly see it first/read some reviews/something before we snap judge? All the comic con footage of Spidey was positive. Lizard was ehhhh....but lets see what happens huh? We've got a great lead, a good director, great actors(for the most part). You seem reasonable Tophat, perhaps a little more time before we decide weather the movie will suck cock in hell or not? At the same time, I'm not saying it'll be good, it could very well blow, but I'm not going to condemn a movie that could honestly go either way before seeing any real footage.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 4:11 a.m. CST

    Also..

    by ajt2111

    I'm not saying Sony's motivation for this was anything but to keep the film rights and make an assload of money in the process. Still it's smart business to make a movie that you can build a franchise off of. They didn't hire hacks, all around they have decent talent. So let's see what happens is really my only point. It's the reasons why people are deciding this is going to suck that bother me. It's a total prejudgement. I'm a comic book reader. I read ASM, I've read the entirety of USM(including the 6 Miles issues) Avenging Spider-man, etc. Of many, many comics I read every week. Behind Batman, Spidey is my favorite hero. I enjoyed Spider-Man 1 and still find 2 to be one of the best Superhero movies I've seen. I've already pointed out why 3 blew, and I went into that with hopes raised high after part 2. Believe me if this movie sucks ass I won't be apologizing for it. But damn it, I'll at least see it first.

  • I recommend Super with Rainn Wilson...it's fucked up, but sort of brilliant in it's own way. It's also dark and the type of movie I can see some people hating for subject matter, while others like me love it. I'd say, give it a shot, it'll either be your cup of tea, or not. I enjoyed the holy fuck out of it though.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 5:43 a.m. CST

    The Raimi films weren't all that...

    by Yeti

    Seriously. The first one was good (not great). The second film was ok, but the third was too long, lacked focus tried to shove too many characters into the story. Biggest problem of all three was the amount of time focusing on the orgins of every baddie Spidey came across. As for an orgin story itself, Sony dropped the ball big time but not taking a page from The Spectacular Spider Man cartoon that ran on the cartoon network a couple of years ago or so. The story picked up three months or so AFTER Peter's been bitten by that spider, lost his uncle, and spending the summer going after small time crooks and hoodlums in NY. Spiderman at this point is an urban myth (someone's taking out crimminals and leaving them for the cops) and it's starting to get the attention of some very bad people (in this case Tombstone).

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Spectacular Spiderman cartoon

    by hulkiest

    Indeed, was very good and totally nailed the humor, chaos, trouble at home, dual life, romantic entanglements, etc. of Peter Parker's life. (And the they were the first to plausibly and effortlessly bring Venom into the picture, something David Michelenie --his creator-- couldn't even do) Plus, the action, webslinging and aerial ballet were top-notch. My only gripe with the series was that the character designs were sort of ugly and too simplistic. If only MTV's Spiderman had the writing team Spectacular SM did, instead of that irritating Real Life vibe that they were going for, then we might have actually had Spiderman perfection. I say, really, stop with the live action Spiderman, X-Men, Hulk, et. and get Pixar to do an animated Spiderman movie. Then if that's great, just have them produce all the Marvel films.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 1:25 p.m. CST

    killik

    by AsimovLives

    I certainly do not bask in your enthusiasm for Avatar. Do do not use it as an example of an intelligent movie. It's intelligence is in how it was made. In that regard, it's brillant. Technical-wise and how it pulls the strings of the audiences, it does a magnificent job. But the story is simplistic to the point of pain. TDK is a movie i use as an example of an inteligent movie, both in how it was made and the story it tells. Or DISTRICT 9, which you did aforementioned. I find D9 to be so much superior to Avatar in all their mutual aspects. And i did liked Avatar.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 1:28 p.m. CST

    oh c'mon, people ar enow bashing the Raimi's spidey movies?? C'mon!!!

    by AsimovLives

    I can understand the disapointment about Spider-Man 3 (which i do not share but can understand where it comes from). and while i enjoyed it, i did not fell inlove with the first Spidey movie. But hating or bashing Spider-Man 2 is just wrong! It's wrong! C'mon!! Bashing genuinely good movies for the sake of looking hip is all kinds of wrong. There's far much better examples of bad comic book movies to use as to vent your frustration. You guys ever heard of Batman and Robin?

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 1:32 p.m. CST

    ASIMOV!! god damn you.

    by KilliK

    where have you been mate? i got worried. how is you post-surgery recovery goes? is everything ok?

  • Well,that's YOUR opinion mate,a wrong opinion nevertheless but you are free to keep it. I,on the hand,consider Avatar a very intelligent movie and like it or not,i am going to stand for this fact forever.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 1:51 p.m. CST

    killik

    by AsimovLives

    Avatar's intelligence is on how it was made. Cameron's talent and wisdom with filming tecnology is more then obvious from watching the movie. But storywise is reads like a simplified version of Dances With Wolves by a person who never actually watched the movie and only knows by reputation. Tomorrow i'm going for my second surgery. I'll get hospital leave, if things go well (which i think they will) the day after. AICN's willing, i'll back for more posting anoyance in the very near future. I say this because i starting to suspect that AICN wants to ban me.

  • Nope,sorry you are completely wrong.The story is simple but not simplistic,there are a lot of multi-layered ideas and themes that it presents and explores. You may not agree with this but in the end of the day it is,well,a fact. Glad to hear you are going well.I wish you luck with your second surgery and a fast health recovery so that you come back here. cheers.

  • I think SWAT Lizards is a fucking awesome idea. The Lizard does sometimes turn, y'know, other things into Lizards. He does stuff like that. A horde of Lizards tearing the fuck outta everything and only Spidey is there to save the day? That sounds awesome. Seriously, if this is something you DON'T want to see in a Spider-Man then we both have terribly different standards of cool shit that goes into Spider-Man movies.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 2:54 p.m. CST

    killik

    by AsimovLives

    thanks. the worst part of this in-between and post-surgery time is that i'm not allowed to drink alchoolic drinks. I'm out of the sauce for a month now. No whisky, no wine, and more emphatically, i'm strictly now allowed to drink beer. bummer. I'm sorry, but Avatar's story is simplistic. and i don't say this lightly. i hate to say it because it's James Cameron. i like the movie and i can see the good in it and like it for it. but i would be lying to myself if i denied to see the so many poor decisions and simplistic silliness that permeates the movie from begining to end. I think that Cameron really aimed for a simple story. that in itself is a noble ambition. it was his intention. but he failed and did instead made a simplistic movie. avatar is a funy movie in that even though it's manipulative, i don't any cynicism in his part (unlike JJ Abrams, if i have to use a counter example). But in the end, Cameron's story for Avatar reads as very simplsitic. He doesn't even seem to understand the implications of some of his choices in regard to story and characteriztion. It's not that i cannot take a more simple version of a good vs evil story and characters. when used well, a completly evil character can be every engaging and interesting, like the villain in PAN'S LABYRINTH (and as history showed us, many fascists were exactly like that). It doesn't bother me that the movie Avatar wants to portait most humans as callous, misguided, blind or just plain bad. What bothers me is that the counterpart to the human villains are a bunch of despicable isolationist snobish know-it-all intollerant blue-cats who are as bad in abusing the life on their own planet but use self-delusional beliefs to justify their own actions in the guise of communion with nature. which is nonsense, because the na'vis are doing literal mind-rape with the other creatures with their bio-USB braids. The other beasts are doing their bidding, with no gain for them. That's not connection, that's slavery. But the na'vis treat and call it communion. of course they would, that's how any group who imposes their will to others justify their actions. it's obvious that it was not Cameron's intention, but that's the consequences of the very thing he put to the story. it's funny that the creatures that evolved in padora without a bio-USB are the ones that are more agressive to the na'vi to the point of killing them on sight, like the aerial dragon fliers. they are the ones that actually need to be trained and domesticated and broke, like humans do to wild horses. the pandora animals that the na'vi cannot mind-slave are the ones that are the more agressive to them. i winder why! and again, i don't think tat was Cameron's intention, but it ends up that way. yeah, i really didn't liked the fucking na'vis. i found them to be a bunch of sefl-rightous cunts. but there was a group of characters who to me are the true heroes of the movie, the ones who should had been the real protagonists. ones which Cameron does have sympathy for them: the human scientists. this are the only characters in the whole movie who are not self-centered assholes. the corporation people are self-centered asshoes. the military are self-centered assholes. the na'vis are sefl-centered assholes. the human scientists are the only ones who are moived by altrusitic motivations. they ar ehte only ones who try to rewach out, despiste how many times they are kicked out or mocked or dismissed. they are the only ones who actually show a willingness to compromise, to acept and undrstand the others. the others, the corporation/military humans or the na'vis, for them is either their way or no way. the movie wants me to think that the na'vi are the ure noble characters in the movie, the figures of example and admiration. the fuck they are. one of the reasons why i'm always reluctant to rewatch the movie is because of thoae fucking blue cats cunts. For me, the moie is good and really watchable from the start until the Na'vi princess, the nephratiti or whatever the fuck that butch cunt is called, shows up. from then, it's all downhill. and i like the movie, but man, i'm bummed by it. Give me DISTRICT 9 any day! If i could, i would make a version of Avatar where the story centered about the real heroes of the movie, the human scientists. And add a bit more grey areas to the story. because the simpliscism of the movie's story is gratting to me. There's a difference between a simple story that has a complex text and subtext to it (Blade Runner and Ghost In The Shell are poster boys of that), and a simplistic movie which puts a lot of stuff happening in the plot but shows the most basic good vs evil presentation of characters and story. Which Avatar is so often. i know you will not agree with many things i wrote above. no matter. it's all friendly chat, anyways. that's what truly matters. I always find myself defending Avatar against it's most ardent bashers, believe it or. I can understand why people like it, or why they don't. Now imagine if this movie had been made But despite it's flaws, it could had been so much, much worst. Imagine if it had been made by JJ Abrams. Oh my!!

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 2:56 p.m. CST

    can you guys go a bit easy on the spoilers, please?

    by AsimovLives

    some of us do want to give this movie a chance and reserve our opinions until we watch it. like me. please!

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Swat lizards? Really??

    by Isaac R.

    Well...ok. I guess...

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Hey it worked in TDK right? Fuck it...why not.

    by Isaac R.

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 3:26 p.m. CST

    The hero fighting a Swat team I mean. Not actual Swat lizards.

    by Isaac R.

    Whatever. You know what I mean.

  • That sounds totally awesome to me. Spidey fights genetically engineered freaks, it's what he does! That's his MO! And now, lots of them!

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 5:48 p.m. CST

    WHAT ABOUT TORONTO!?

    by Jackson

    Canada's a place too, you know

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 6:53 p.m. CST

    Not seeing this one.

    by Scarecrow237

    I do not blame Sam Rami for the failure of Spider-man 3. I blame Sony. For Sony to turn around and say that "Spider-man 1 and 2 no longer matter, here's an emo 'darker and edgier' reboot" so soon after getting rid of Rami tells me that Sony are money grubbing scum. I am purposely boycotting this release and will not buy a ticket, or any tie-in products sold with images from it. I want Sony to know that they made a mistake, though I doubt if they will notice only 3 less ticket sales

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 7:58 p.m. CST

    Did Spidey sew that suit out of discarded basketballs?

    by garagons

  • Jan. 29, 2012, 8:27 p.m. CST

    The Untold Story

    by DuncanHines

    Is it just me, or does that poster look like a scene out of Metallica's video for "The Unforgiven?"

  • Jan. 30, 2012, 3:04 a.m. CST

    Jesus Christ!!!!

    by ChiefRoberts

    There are other cities in England than just fucking London you know?!!!!!!!

  • ...his 4 dicks and sphincter cast the shadow of the bottom half? lol