All I got from this review is that your bashing this film just because it's a reboot and that isn't fair.Even though it's a reboot it still deserves to be watched as a film on it's own.
What's "unfair"? If you're rebooting a movie with a mere 8 years between them, I think it is very fair to ask for a completely different take on the story.
Batman Begins was a reboot, too, but no one would argue that it was too similar to 1989's Batman. Nolan "made it his own."
Same thing with the 2008 Hulk vs the 2003 Hulk. Completely different movies. From what I can see "The Amazing Spiderman" looks pointless since we already have Raimi's (which was awesome)
I for one would agree that a origin story didn't need to be a focus on the first movie. Even still Marc Webb says the difference is that this movie "is a origin of Peter Parker not Spider-Man" so I will leave it that at. Majority of you have valid points though.
Sadly...still waiting for "good" bad review...so far their biggest issue is that this is a reboot and they don't ike it...I don't know what did they expect...Uncle ben to survive? Spiderman being bitten by a mosquito? Some porn scenes? Really they should be able to look at it as new movie...I never saw anyone complaining about Bruce's Parents death in Batman Begins...I guess we also have to wait for a sequel to see some fair reviews.
Ummm...that's like saying we should look at the Psycho remake with Vince Vaughn completely on it's own terms. That's absurd.
Any remake, reboot or...what's the term Hollywood is using these days?..."reimagining"...will inevitably be compared to the original.
We don't live in a vacuum...there is context to everything. Especially when you consider that the original Spidey movie is barely 10 years old.
X-Men: First Class was completely different from the first X-Men movie, so it didn't invite comparisons. This movie is using many of the same characters, and the same origin story. To suggest that this should be evaluated completely on its own terms is ludicrous.
I still want to see this movie, but to be fair to McWeeny I think he articulates his arguments pretty well beyond just saying "it sucks because it's a reboot." Judging by his description it feels like in trying to tell "the untold story" they ended up jettisoning story elements and beats from the first series that actually worked, which is basically throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
This series, in my opinion, really did need a reboot after the third film, (or, at the very least, a sequel that never made any reference to the third film), and it seems to be there are things Sony, in rebooting, have done right, but like McWeeny and I'm sure many other fans I'm still a little leery of starting all over again from scratch.
I'm excited for the 3-D, though, and James Horner's score, which, based on what I've heard online, sounds awesome.
Oh and I never saw "'been there, done that.'" Problem when critics review other movies...and now almost every movie is copy of something...from the top of my head...Avatar...I had that feeling and I didn't compalin about that issue...I saw exact the same thing when I watched Pocahontas when I was a kid...
Funny enough, I watched Pocahontas as well when I was a kid, and I don't recall any blue people, science fiction, avatar body transfers, giant battleships, flying on dragon-like birds, alien-esque mechs, giant dog creatures or anything like that.
people who watch spiderman movies are fans of spiderman.
fans of spiderman have seen the original film.
im not saying its going to be bad, however ill admit that I'm not necessarily anxious to see a remake of a movie that i still watch on a frequent basis (it came free with my ps3). ill still go see it in theatres. just cuz its spiderman and i need to pay my respects. on the 3rd or 4th week of release, only though.
Well When I watched first trilogy for the first time I thought it was pretty good...I even graded 1:8 2:9 3:7 or something like that...lately I watched it again and my grades changed drastically... 1:4, 2:6 and 3:2 so I'm tahtnkful for this reboot. It's first movie in the series and I'll wait for the sequel even more. It might be new begining for Spiderman movies and it can do a lot of good for the franchise...like Nolan's Batman. And I don't see a problem in making reboot after 10 years...it's not short period of time...I don't think I would be excited for this movie if I would be in my 40's.
"For example, one of the cornerstones of the Spider-Man story involves the death of his Uncle Ben and the events that lead up to that moment. It's one of the easiest elements of the story to get right, and somehow, in trying to find a new way to do it, this movie totally fumbles the beat. Poorly conceived and poorly staged, it's an emotional zero, a moment that should serve as the thing that motivates everything else Peter does on his journey."
maybe he criticize for emotional zero.
This reviewer does a good job explaining his thoughts on what he felt was wrong with the movie. If some of you would take off your rose-tinted glasses and read it for what it is, you would see that. His comments about Uncle Ben's death, the excessive use of angst, and how he evokes Bendis' work on the Ultimate comic are valid and succinct enough for me. The parallel he makes with the new film's Parker family and the Skywalkers sounds spot on as well. Read, and more importantly, COMPREHEND the bloody review, people, this is actually one of the more well-written commentaries on the film, and you can tell by how the author writes that he's well versed in all things Spider-Man.
What most of you spastic fanboys aren't paying attention to is the fact that MOST reviews, both positive and negative, do a terrible job explaining their criticisms and praise. The funny thing is; however, that I never see any of you neurotic buffoons storming the gates of the beaming reviews with the same accusations i.e. "The reasons they give for praising this movie are ridiculous!!!!11111oneone11!!"
Save yourselves the embarrassment you hypocrites, and quit while you're ahead. Some of you talk a good game and feign as though you're fighting the good fight for that one well-written, articulate negative review, but your facade is readily transparent, so quit polluting the comments of every review with your nonsense already. The same accusations you levy at all the negative reviewers(You made up your mind before you saw the movie!!!!) apply to yourselves just as well.
Ronnie Fazzio
All I got from this review is that your bashing this film just because it's a reboot and that isn't fair.Even though it's a reboot it still deserves to be watched as a film on it's own.
Jun 27 - 12:53 AM
Brad Hadfield
What's "unfair"? If you're rebooting a movie with a mere 8 years between them, I think it is very fair to ask for a completely different take on the story.
Batman Begins was a reboot, too, but no one would argue that it was too similar to 1989's Batman. Nolan "made it his own."
Jun 27 - 06:00 AM
Ryan Kramer
That's a bingo.
Jun 27 - 06:51 AM
Todd Garry
Couldn't agree more.
Jun 27 - 10:14 AM
Jake Braden
Same thing with the 2008 Hulk vs the 2003 Hulk. Completely different movies. From what I can see "The Amazing Spiderman" looks pointless since we already have Raimi's (which was awesome)
Jun 27 - 10:29 AM
David Higueron
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Jun 27 - 10:45 AM
Joshua Henderson
I for one would agree that a origin story didn't need to be a focus on the first movie. Even still Marc Webb says the difference is that this movie "is a origin of Peter Parker not Spider-Man" so I will leave it that at. Majority of you have valid points though.
Jun 27 - 12:32 PM
Joshua Henderson
And by first movie I meant this movie which will probably the first in a new series.
Jun 27 - 12:34 PM