SPIDEY 4 becomes AMAZING becomes Marvel's SPIDER-MAN

[ShyViolet]

Two new stills:

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2 ... n-stories/

[GeorgeC]

Second Amazing Spider-Man trailer -- Looking good but I don't base opinions on trailers. Cleverly cut trailers can hide not-so-cleverly-made films.
Rethinking position on Emma Stone...
she looks better with black headband;
so did Bryce...

Could lead to a revival of Gwen Stacy in the main Spider-Man comics.


P.S. -- When you go to YouTube and find something you want to share, Click on SHARE, then click on OPTIONS and CHECK "Long Link" under "Options."
Copy and Paste the "Long Link" in the Reply window.

For some reason, the shorter link doesn't always work in the Forum.

I've had this problem a few times this past year...

[Dan]

I watch the trailer and it's just not working for me. I don't know, it just doesn't feel like Spider-Man to me. More like Sony trying to infuse Christopher Nolan's take on Batman into Spider-Man. The difference is that Nolan's take works for Batman because of who the character is. That's not what Spider-Man is.

The executives at Sony have got to be a nervous wreck because if this film does not work they know they will lose a franchise because Marvel and Disney are just standing by ready to secure the film rights to the character. And Marvel was fine with the job Sam Raimi did.

[Dacey]

May as well give this a bump since the sequel opens in a few days here and has been playing elsewhere for two weekends now.

From what I've heard, it's almost NOTHING but set-up for "future" installments that will probably never actually get made. And EVERY trailer has been marketing the inclusion of the Rhino (heck, he's gotten several posters), but apparently he only shows up at the VERY end, and my guess is that shot of Spidey bashing him in the previews is actually the last shot of the film...without us even seeing the impact.

Can I go to some alternate reality where they actually made Spider-Man 4, please?

[eddievalient]

Well, we all know Sony doesn't want Marvel to get Spider-Man back the same way Fox won't let Marvel have X-Men back, so no matter how terrible the new Spider-Man films are (and the last one was extremely terrible), the series will, unfortunately, continue.

[Buzz Bumble]

The review of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 in the local newspaper here today gave it 2 out of 5 and started with the paragraph ...

This quick-arriving sequel does little to dispel the generic aftertaste of its 2012 predecessor and once again has me pining for the giddy heights of Sam Raimi's original Spider-Man trilogy.

and says these further down ...

But the action is harmed by the awkward, rushed story that surrounds it, which often feels like it's aimed at 5-year-olds.

... especially when it comes to Foxx's character, who never once says anything that a grown-up would say.

This one spends a lot of time setting up future sequels, but, at this stage, I couldn't be less interested.

[EricJ]

especially when it comes to Foxx's character, who never once says anything that a grown-up would say.

Yes, I did rather get that impression from the trailer where they actually showed him.

[Ben]

Well, we all know Sony doesn't want Marvel to get Spider-Man back the same way Fox won't let Marvel have X-Men back, so no matter how terrible the new Spider-Man films are (and the last one was extremely terrible), the series will, unfortunately, continue.

Well, at least while the films keep making money. If they're that bad, why don't we simply stop going to them? Sony would stop making them, the rights would revert back to Disney and then they can put Spidey in a new Avengers film and he'll ne a big hit all over again.

Same as for Fantastic 4 and X-Men, but while these films continue to bring in the returns that make them worthwile to produce, Sony and Fox will keep making them and retain the rights.

Of course there is the (slight) possibility of licensing and overlaps, but again not until profits dip. The best thing is simply not to make these films big hits... In getting more of what we want, we're not actually getting what we want!

[EricJ]

Well, at least while the films keep making money. If they're that bad, why don't we simply stop going to them? Sony would stop making them, the rights would revert back to Disney and then they can put Spidey in a new Avengers film and he'll ne a big hit all over again.
Same as for Fantastic 4 and X-Men, but while these films continue to bring in the returns that make them worthwile to produce, Sony and Fox will keep making them and retain the rights.

That strategy would have worked about thirty or forty years ago, but we're in the age of rights and warring parent corporations now.
Where Sony still makes Spidey movies because they have to, and Fox still holds on to the F4 and X rights just to piss Disney off. The audience has long since been ruled out of the equation.

[Dacey]

Yup. I totally buy that Fox is making $100-budget+ tentpoles--at the risk of losing millions if they fail to find an audience--"just to piss Disney off."

[EricJ]

Yup. I totally buy that Fox is making $100-budget+ tentpoles--at the risk of losing millions if they fail to find an audience--"just to piss Disney off."

It's not about movies anymore, it's about Franchises: As long as they have last year's hit to make next year, every studio thinks they have a "Hit in the box" Brand-Name franchise that the audience can take off the grocery shelf every year like a can of peas, with the "pre-approved quality" of knowing what to expect from the title, and no wondering whether one entry is different from another.
Disney has Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars and the Princesses; Warner has Harry Potter, Batman, and Tolkien; Universal thinks it has a Fast & the Furious movie every year by the clock, and Sony and Fox have....what else exactly?
(At least, now that it doesn't look like there'll be another Die Hard or Aliens vs. Predator for Fox, and Sony's still searching for that Brand Name label, even if they have to make a hundred Resident Evil sequels to do it. Spidey's the closest thing they've had in years, and they're not letting it go without a tooth and nail fight.)

[Ben]

Once again, Mr J is spewing...something.

Look, two Spidey movies in a row fail, and Sony's out of the Marvel business. It is as simple as that.

[Dan]

Here's how I look at it:

Amazing Spider-Man 2 needs to be a big success if Sony hopes to justify their hanging on to the license. The first Amazing Spider-Man was the lowest grossing of all the Spider-Man films both domestically (the only one of the four to not gross at least $300 million) and world-wide (grossed $752.2 million, which is below the next lowest Spider-Man 2 at $783.8 million). If Amazing Spider-Man 2 does not at least do better than the first Amazing, then Sony is going to have a tough time convincing folks that they should be able to maintain their hold on the property.

[Dacey]

They may not be the Spider-Man movies we deserve. Or even the ones we need. But they're the only Spidey flicks we're going to get right now. For better or for worse, I'll take what I can get.

[Ben]

Well it's making silly money around the world so it looks like Columbia's stronghold on Spidey is pretty safe for now.