Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I mean... really?
that one will probably be blocked soon.
looks good though
and Spider-man 3 was essentially warm piss running down the back of your neck during a driving test.
I can't see the trailer, but I can guess that it's just a way to retell the story (like comics have been doing for ages) with a new setting/villains.
Why is Andy Murray playing Spierman
'what is this strange thing happening to me? why is it so difficult to have powers?' etc. STOP
the films that kick started the whole comic book movie trend, X-Men and X-Men 2, were set in an established universe. Don't know why all that followed insisted on explaining to us in painfully tedious detail why everything was the way it was.
Blade wasn't an origins story either and that was cool as. Stupid Hollywood.
It's an ensemble piece, but it did have Rogue finding out about her ability, using that as the exposition device. It also showed Wolverine entering the fold.
They still managed to make Wolverine and First Class such is Hollywood's obsession with origin stories. Kudos to Bryan Singer for bucking the trend before it even became a trend.
Also see for proof that not all origin stories are shit.
Yeah First Class was pretty good. I'm just saying you don't need to fall back on an origins story for a comic book film to be good and I'm surprised X-Men wasn't used as a template. Doesn't matter if it was an ensemble piece, so was Fantastic Four.
X-Men wasn't an origin story per se, but the viewer's way into the backstory was via Rogue and Wolverine - the two characters who were normal/outsiders to the group and the X-Men world.
And it's really interesting.
There is zero interest in seeing Peter Parker get bitten by a spider or Bruce Wayne's parents murdered again. At last Batman Begins put a different spin on it and made it a little bit more interesting
and it had an origin story.
Burton's Batman didn't particularly. Batman Begins probably does more because of how much people wanted Batman: Year One to tell that story than anything else.
The reason the films do this is an attempt to reach the greatness of Superman I.
People do origin stories because every film maker has an ego of wanting 'their' version of the character definitive and conservative studios are nervous that people won't follow it unless you start at the beginning
and citing Blade isn't really going back at all.
I'm also sick to death of origin stories but whether or not you or Eltham enjoyed Superman I & II's story and conception, studios are ridiculously conservative and I believe they're really trying to ape the phenomenal success of that template in their superhero films.
The fact remains that barely any superhero film can touch the original Superman.
which is widely cited to have started with X-Men. Blade came before it but it was X-Men which really got the ball rolling. Don't recall this trend starting in 1926 or whenever you watched your Superman Talkies.
that they were agents for SHIELD who were framed for being traitors..blah blah blah...
and also featuring SHIELD heavily? i dont think they have the license rights for them
like, that shot of him sitting at the back of the class, hood up, hunched over his notebook... nah.
Like a launch PS3 game or something
looks exactly like gameplay from Mirror's Edge
were exactly the same. i would play a first person spiderman game if it was like mirrors edge.
So I'll doubtless be going to see this, but if this isn't by far and away the worst of the three big superhero films released next year (The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers, The Amazing Spiderman) then I'll be very very surprised.
General consensus is both Thor and Iron Man were really good films, and Captain America looks like it could be great too. I know it could have the Spiderman 3 effect of trying to do to much but I doubt it'll be worse than TAS.
i quite enjoyed the bits set on Asgard but it was in no way a really good film, neither was Iron Man 2. and i'm looking forward to Captain America but that's had a pretty lukewarm reaction as well. the only thing that makes me think it might not be a complete overblown nightmare is Joss Whedon directing
like spiderman 3
actually quite looking forward to this, i like Mark Webb, i like Emma Stone, i like Rhys Ifans, i like Andrew Garfield, i like Spiderman. I do wish isn't wasn't another origins story, but it's about ten years since Raimi's first Spiderman was released, so there's bound to be a whole group of people for who this isn't just a rehash.
And...they're rebooting it to make more money. obvs.
i loved the first two tobey maguire ones tho!
what are the facts here? there must be something going wrong.
I actually don't like Spider-Man: whiney kid bollocks for people who are still all WAHmbulance about being bullied at school and/or not ever going out with the hottest girl in class/the year.
As for this: good to see they've really taken on board how much over-use of shitty CGI held back the last three films with their first-person section that looks worse than Half-Life 2.
So much better than Kirsten Dunst.
New Spiderman films will be based on the "Ultimate" comic line which is based in a more gritty/realistic universe. This wont be the origin story from the last trilogy and if it goes in the direction the trailers make it look like it will be more a story about his parents. That said the trailer makes it look like Twilight so the jurys out[/geek]
was the best thing about that 'series'. But that's because all three films were SHIT.
It was absolutely fucking awful.