The Amazing Spider-Man Teaser Trailer
Well, hello summer 2012...! You're doing quite a job this week attempting to make summer 2011 look stupid...
Quite the tonal shift from the Sam Raimi movies. At least this teaser trailer has actual footage in it, unlike Dark Knight Rises.
I'm pretty excited for this. Except... POV shot? blech... I hope that doesn't make the actual movie. Doom already used that gimmick a few years ago and it was really lame.
Thanks for sharing. I liked Sam Raimi's first two Spiderman movies. This one looks like it is very serious.
Utah Video Productions
Check out my Motion Training DVD
Check out my Motion Tutorials
Peter Parkour, looks like.
That said, the dark, emo tone isn't necessarily a bad thing. And the trailer so far looks good. i LIKE the mechanical web-shooters idea because it points up Parker's intellectual, scientific and invention abilities. I'm not a deep fan of Spiderman, so I don't know if the parental back-story comes from on eof the comic books or was cooked up for the movie.
This one is all about Gwen Stacey, the girl who Peter loved before Mary Jane Watson. For the non-comic followers, Gwen is one of the very few Marvel comics characters that stayed dead after getting killed.
Really, another origin story? What a waste of 50% of the film. We all know the origin. Sure effects have improved a bit since 2001, but I think we could just pick up the story. Superman Man of Steel is doing the origin story because it has been 33 years since that was put on film. But I think the audience knows the deal.
The PV sequence is cool and looks like a Universal Studios 3d ride - it had better not be in the movie. It looks like it was made for the trailer - a reveal that cool you don't give away before the actual film. Or if you do, the rest of the film had better have something even better.
And do we need another Spidey movie? I realize there are more villains, more storylines and more actors besides Tobey Mcguire but I feel we have had enough Spiderman.
That being said, I will be there with 3D glasses on - the 3D is potentially going to be awesome.
[Mike Cohen] "Really, another origin story? What a waste of 50% of the film. We all know the origin."
I hate hate hate origin stories. Hate 'em. Let's look at some successful movie franchises: James Bond, Harry Potter, Transformers, Lord of the Rings - not an origin story in sight.
We still don't know what James was doing before he had a license to kill.
We only know what happened before the Transformers came to earth from what two of the robots told us in a couple of paragraphs each.
We'll learn more about the origin of the ring and all that when we see The Hobbit, but we sure didn't need the Hobbit FIRST.
There were a few bits here and there about Harry and Voldemort's pasts, but they were woven across lots of movies. There was never a single one that started with Harry as a baby.
Why, that would be as stupid as starting with Darth Vader as a whiny brat, staggering through every human's most awkward years, with us so embarrassed we have to look away from the screen and try not to laugh out loud.
That would be stupid.
Much, much better to start with the story already in progress, and let us piece together the past on the fly.
[Mike Cohen] "And do we need another Spidey movie? I realize there are more villains, more storylines and more actors besides Tobey Mcguire but I feel we have had enough Spiderman."
The problem with Tobey is the same problem with this guy: TOO OLD. In the comics, Peter Parker doesn't graduate from high school for two more years after the character is introduced. It's a BIG DEAL that he's a high school kid.
This new actor is TWENTY SEVEN.
I ain't saying that you can't play somebody younger than you are. I'm saying that this 27 year old can absolutely NOT pass for 16, or 18. Maybe 21 with good makeup.
I'm also not saying that you can only do things the way they are in the comics. I've barely read any since the 60s. But I just looked it up to be sure I wasn't misremembering. Yup, says right there: one purpose of the reboot is to send Spidey back to high school.
At age TWENTY SEVEN.
More generally, you don't need to "reboot" a franchise that ran from 2002-2007. Want to do something new with a story? Just do it.
Unless Spiderman is suddenly going to be an intergalactic orphan who gets his power from the yellow sun, then get on with it already. Don't waste $200 million telling me what I can learn in a couple of flashbacks....or worse, what I already know.
[Mike Cohen] "That being said, I will be there with 3D glasses on - the 3D is potentially going to be awesome."
Since you mentioned the Universal ride, I'll note that THAT was some of the best 3D I've ever experienced. It'd be great if the movie was that energetic. I'm just afraid that the same lack of imagination that got us this far will prevail from here as well.
And my semi-regular disclaimer - I am well aware that some of the people who read this will do the best work of their careers on this movie, and I have nothing but respect for them. As a movie fan, i WANT this movie to be great.
It's just that my spidey-sense is tingling already, and not in a good way....
[Tim Wilson] "More generally, you don't need to "reboot" a franchise that ran from 2002-2007. Want to do something new with a story? Just do it"
Couldn't agree more Tim. It seems like a completely superfluous movie, but of course it'll rake in a truckload, so in a financial sense I guess not. Sigh. . .
[Mark Suszko] "Peter Parkour, looks like."
Sock that away. Save it for your Twitter feed in 2012.
[Tim Wilson] "This new actor is TWENTY SEVEN."
Dawson's Creek had most, if not all, of the principle actors in their early twenties during the first season. Then they stayed in high school for 3 extra years (they must be dumb or something), before finally becoming freshman in college at the age of 26. Late bloomers!
It's probably hard to find good teenage actors. Especially one who you can bank a huge movie like Spider-Man on. A studio executive probably thought for like 2 seconds about it. "We can discover some unknown teenager who may or may not blossom, orrrrrrr we can get the critically acclaimed dude from The Social Network, who we can suspend disbelief for and pretend he's 18...?"
I like that dude (I was going to say "kid", but then I realized he's a year older than me) from the Social Network. I'm willing to accept him as a teenager, I guess. Hollywood has done worse.
In terms of origin stories, I don't mind them at all for new properties, I love the sense of discovery in superhero films. But yeah, Spider-Man is not only an origin everyone knows about, but it's an origin that was covered just 10 years ago. Should have started off this new one with a scene of him in uniform already.
It's one thing to say that James Van Der Beek was 20 when he started playing Dawson. (I just looked it up.) He played a college freshman when he was 22. That's not all that far off. By the time he had 128 episodes under his belt, he was 26...but we'd been seeing him along. We knew he was aging because we watched it.
Compare that to STARTING at 27, and episode 2 at age THIRTY. That's much different than playing an 18 year old when you're 22.
Some names that just popped into my head. DiCaprio was 21 for The Quick and The Dead, R. Phoenix 19 for Indiana Jones.
Rob Pattinson is 24 with 4 Twilights in the can. Daniel Radcliffe is 20. Shia LeBoeuf turned 24 last month, making him 23 for shooting Transformers 3. Elijah Wood was 21 for LOTR.
Heath Ledger was 25 for Brokeback Mountain.
How old was he for The Joker? TWENTY SEVEN.
Now, to give you your point about origin stories sometimes being useful - we needed something to get us from Adam West to Michael Keaton to Christian Bale. Nolan's movie was itself based on rebooted source materials, Frank Miller's Batman: Year One, which re-envisioned it from gothic to gritty.
Hey, note that Aronofsky was in line to do the Batman reboot before Nolan came on. The studio was definitely sniffing around the right clump of trees.
But even more interesting than Year One, check Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns. Imagine Heath Ledger's The Joker 25 years older....except that he's Batman, and he's bitter. Here's the cover of Dark Knight Book 4: The Dark Knight Falls, pained by Lynn Varley. Click to see it full size.
But no matter how you reboot Spidey, you need to get the character closer to the edge of the actor, or you run way out of gas really fast.
I don't think that a 30 year-old Spiderman would need to be bitter, but it would be a lot more interesting to me to at least feel the need for reassessment. He's not a student so he can't skip work as easily. If he's not married, does he has friends? Or is he still isolated a dozen years after he got bit? Or is he 30, in New York, alone AND in a dead end job where he CAN be absent for long stretches? Like luxury real estate sales. :-)
I'm just looking for a reason to feel hopeful about this.
I've read Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns. It's REQUIRED reading for comic book fans. So awesome. (side note recommendation: The Killing Joke, another Batman one-shot short graphic novel, which was one of Nolan's biggest influences on his Joker portrayal; quick read, also fantastic. The ending is beyond amazing). I know Dark Knight Returns has gotten optioned for film and put in development hell a few times I believe, probably because you need to wait until Mr. Nolan is done with Bruce Wayne before someone else can nudge in. That would be a very cool movie if pulled off correctly, though.
I think all superheroes could have an interesting take as older characters. Though, that was kind of a major point of Watchmen. So it has already been done to an extent.
And I didn't know Dawson went to college so early. I used to watch it early in the morning before class in college on TBS or something, it seemed like they were in high school forever. Like 4 seasons forever. But I guess I'm not surprised I'm wrong.
But I will stick behind my statement that it's more logical to bank a huge Spider-Man reboot on a rising star (even if he's 27) than it is to bet their millions on some unknown kid. Off the top of my head, I can't think of an actual teenage actor who could pull it off.
[Tim Wilson] "Elijah Wood was 21 for LOTR."
Technically, he was playing a Hobbit in his 30s, so that's a stretch in the other direction.
(I know Hobbit's age differently, just messing around here. Ian Holm was playing a 111-year-old)
To your point about not knowing any younger actors who you could build a series around, I'd point to Pattinson and LaB as a starting place. Both started around 20, which like Van der B, is entirely plausible.
Any of the other names in my post would count as well. Almost all of them were known quantities at that point, with significant work under their belts.
The only really risky one was Daniel R of course, but some gambles pay off.
And not that known quantities or rising stars mean anything. Other than a nice supporting role in The Conversation, Harrison Ford's only jobs in between American Graffiti and Star Wars 4 years later were single episodes of Kung Fu and Petrocelli (I miss 70s TV, man), and 4 made-for-TV movies, including...wait for it...DYNASTY!!!
Oops, dang, not the one with Joan Collins. The one with Stacy Keach. Oh well. Check out the artwork - at least he looks perfect as Keach's daughter.
Two more words about 27 year old movie stars: Jessie Eisenberg...actually, 26 when they shot the movie, and who would make a much, much better Spiderman than this guy appears to be so far....
I'll stop until next summer now. :-)
I really like the first two Spider Man movies directed by Sam Raimi and wasn't sure if I wanted to see the same story re-told. I have to say, The Amazing Spider-Man was really cool. I think it had a cool feeling to it. For me something about Uncle Ben in this one wasn't as likable as in Sam Raimi's version. Anyways, they made the story different enough and had Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane Watson which made it feel new and fresh. I love this version:
Utah Video Productions
Check out my Motion Training DVD
Check out my Vimeo page