# The Amazing Spider Man



## Elder the Dwarf (Jul 5, 2012)

Any opinions on the movie?  I thought it was pretty well done, although it was a bit too awkward at times for me.  There are parts where I was like yeah, they are teenagers, they like each other, it is cute.  I get it, now move on.  But I did like the movie.  Andrew Garfield, the new Peter Parker, is much better in my opinion than Tobey Maguire.  It was hard to ever buy Maguire as the hero type.  Garfield is a little more believable.  He kinda reminds me of a nerdier, more likable Hayden Christensen.  I also like Emma Stone more than Dunst, and the chemistry is better.  Garfield's realization of heroism was a great moment for me, and most of the film (especially after the first parts) worked for me.

With all that said, it was too soon.  The plot is pretty damn similar, especially the first half, with only a couple changed names and a  different villain.  Otherwise, same story. Maybe in five years this would have been different.  Then again, maybe it wouldn't.  What do you guys think?


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jul 5, 2012)

The movie itself was fine; good writing, good acting, good directing.

The only problem was there was no good reason (from a viewer's point of view) for the movie to exist. The only reason it happened at all was because Sony loses the rights to make movies based on the Spider-Man franchise after this year (or they would have if they didn't make a movie; it's not entirely clear), so it was either make a movie (and a bunch of money) or don't. They had no incentive to do something totally different, and it looks like they're going to make a crapload of money on it anyway.


----------



## Elder the Dwarf (Jul 6, 2012)

Agreed, Benjamin.  Hopefully they have a little more room to work with the story in the next one.


----------



## Devor (Jul 6, 2012)

I enjoyed it. I thought the lizard was a more natural first villain than the green goblin, it tied in well with Spiderman's origins while the Goblin felt a little random.  The other film, I think, forced them to ruin some of the opening scenes, so that they didn't even use the responsibility line. I assumed they would skip the origins and start with an experienced Spiderman - I think I would've enjoyed that more than a watered down rehash of it.  But I loved the acting and was happy to see Peter Parker feel like a nerd - he is, after all, implied to be the smartest person in the Marvel universe in the comics.


----------



## Feo Takahari (Jul 6, 2012)

Coincidentally, the article linked in my signature presents an interesting theory on how this movie got to be the way it did. (It was clearly edited quite a bit, and it seems to have lost a few plotlines in the process.)


----------



## Reaver (Jul 13, 2012)

Devor said:


> Peter Parker... - he is, after all, implied to be the smartest person in the Marvel universe in the comics.



Peter Parker smarter than Reed Richards, Tony Stark & Bruce Banner? I don't think so.


----------



## Devor (Jul 13, 2012)

Reaver said:


> Peter Parker smarter than Reed Richards, Tony Stark & Bruce Banner? I don't think so.



Ant Man is actually _declared_ to be the smartest person in the Marvel Universe, and Ant Man tells Peter Parker that if he stopped web slinging and spent more time learning, Peter would be smarter.  There was some piece of tech they developed independently, and Parker built it without a problem while Ant Man struggled for months.


----------



## Reaver (Jul 13, 2012)

You know what? The fact of the matter is that *Groo the Wanderer * makes all these other characters look like potato heads.


----------



## Devor (Jul 13, 2012)

Reaver said:


> You know what? The fact of the matter is that *Groo the Wanderer * makes all these other characters look like potato heads.



Only because, after looking at him, the image of the potato head is scarred painfully into your memory, so that you're haunted by constant flashbacks of his potato-ey head.


----------

