Spider-Man Reboot

[NNL]

What do you guys think of the new Spider-Man reboot?

Do you believe it is needed? What do you think of the choice for Peter Parker? And what would you like to see in this reboot that could improve the original trilogy?

---------------------------

As for me, I have not watched anything else that the new actor for Peter Parker has done, but his age looks the part, so he could do very well.

Now do I think the reboot is needed? Yes and no, I believe that if they learned from the mistakes with the 3rd movie they could've improved the series. But I do think the series was running out of steam, especially after killing off one of the biggest spider-man villains and the actors were getting older.

The only thing that worries me is how soon they're popping this next one out. Are they really taking their time to make a reboot?

I mostly want them to take their time in establishing one villain and I want them to make this new series have a different take, otherwise it isn't worth it.

Thoughts?

 

[KIYX]

All of these movies are being rebooted because Marvel purchased their movie licence from Sony so they can put out the movies under their own name.

This is why the hulk was rebooted after only a few years, this is why the X-men are being rebooted.

 

[Autumnleaf]

I think rebooting movies is easy money for the makers of the movies. I think its sort of sad to the art. There are so many great ideas and storys dying to be told. Its time to tell them. For instance, the Dragonlance books or some of Stephen Kings stories. Even the Bible. Hollywood should have latched right onto Bible tales after Mel Gibson made his mint off of Passion. But they didn't. That tells me there's some kind of atheist pinko commie agenda going on in tinsel town. Maybe its the Illuminati.

 

[FireRock]

Even though I'm a big Spidey fan, I've only looked into the Reboot briefly...it was one of those things where I would hear about it and groan as I rolled my eyes.

I took a look at the guy they've got cast as Peter Parker. I don't doubt his acting ability (loved his character in "The Imaginarium...") but I question whether he can pull off the nerdy Peter Parker look like Tobey did. This new guy is a little too trendy and good-looking for me to think he could do it, but maybe his acting will really pull him through it. I don't hold out much hope for the villain, but I've been plesantly surprised before.

Also, I don't want to go through the whole story again. I saw him get bit by the spider and his uncle get killed and et cetera...please don't make me do it again, because it probably won't be near as good and I won't have near the same experience as I did the first time I saw it all.

Speaking of which, I keep hearing the phrase "darker and grittier" in relation to the direction and feel of this Reboot. No. Just no. One of the reasons Spider-Man was one of my favorite superheros was because he was a very real person, very human, and also because of the humor he had. I loved the one-liners they used in the old animated series (made in the early 90s I think?) and in the few comics I read. There was this wonderful sense of humor running under the entire story. If they try to turn this into some sort of "Dark Knight" garbage or whatever...*incoherent grumbling*

Anyways, everything that I've read and heard about this Reboot is not hopeful, in my opinion. But I also thought that while the third movie was the least favorable of the three films (this is why big film companies need to keep their dirty hands out of the film), it was a franchise ruiner. It's okay if you want to take the series (can a movie have a series now?) in a different direction...and I would possibly be in favor of it...but to throw everything away and do the same thing all over again? No. Just no. Bad move.

I agree with Autumnleaf...there are so many other stories out there that could and should be told instead. It's like the big movie companies have selective deafness when listening to their audiences. It's ridiculous.

 

[Ayersy]

As a huge Spidey fan (I'm wearing a Spider-Man t-shirt as I type this. ), I'm interested to see what they'll do with it.

I'm hoping they can condense the origins of how he came about, as we know all that, already. Seems silly to re-do everything.

I would like to see a darker and grittier tone, over all, but I think Spidey needs more of his trademark humour and one-liners, as they are a large part of his character, and they were sorely lacking in the Raimi films. It works well in the comics, when they go down that route, so I don't see why they can't work it into the films. In that way, it kind of makes Spidey the light in the darkness. Even if the rest of the film is dark and gritty, Spidey will cheer it up with some comic relief.

They'll have to be very careful about how they do it, obviously. Spidey has a huge fan-base, and if they mess it up, it'll be a disaster for them.

 

[Guy Incognito]

While I'm not holding my breath on it being as great of a reboot as Batman Begins, it is definitely needed in my opinion. Now I may be in the minority, but I haven't enjoyed a single one of the live action films, and the third was one of the worst movies I've seen in recent memory on all fronts. Much like first run of the Batman franchise; Spidey is in need of a serious overhaul.

I can't comment on the new actor, as I have seen none of his work, but I'm liking a change from Toby (I was a fan of his Peter Parker, but not his Spiderman), and I really hope he nails it.

I hope they all nail it. I grew up on Spidey. I really want my good Spiderman movie haha.

 

[puppetmaster]

I'm a big Spidey fan too

 

[christian74]

AutumnLeaf is absolutely right. Mel Gibson made "Passion of the Christ" because he has connections in the Industry. I will post a Documentary film behind Hollywood's struggle to stop Christian or Bible based Film. Illuminati and some Atheists producers are being used by Satan to propagate the Good news from being seen & heard via Film. A few more posts, and I'm done for 50.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I do hope they get this right.

The tone of the movie/franchise needs to be found. Spiderman is a character who can be light, but has a myriad of things that have happened to him that could and have made him a very dark character at times; this should be reflected and found. It should not be the Dark Knight in terms of darkness, or as light as those crappy Fantastic Four flicks.

Andrew Garfield I think is a great casting choice. From the limited I've seen him in (The Social Network, and a couple youtube clips from a couple of his other movies), he's a solid actor who has range, so I have faith in the guy. I also have hope's in the director's (Marc Webber) capabilities, as he did a stellar job with (500) Days Of Summer.

We'll see how it goes. Next summer we have The Amazing Spiderman, The Avengers, and the main event; The Dark Knight Rises. Should be a good summer.

 

[CrystalBrooke]

All of these movies are being rebooted because Marvel purchased their movie licence from Sony so they can put out the movies under their own name.

This is why the hulk was rebooted after only a few years, this is why the X-men are being rebooted.

Did you see the first Hulk from 2003..or whenever it was? It was probably the worst movie I have ever seen. It needed to be done.

About the new Spiderman: I think it's going to suck and I refuse to watch it. My husband is a HUGE fan of Spiderman and he's not going to watch it either.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Did you see the first Hulk from 2003..or whenever it was? It was probably the worst movie I have ever seen. It needed to be done.

About the new Spiderman: I think it's going to suck and I refuse to watch it. My husband is a HUGE fan of Spiderman and he's not going to watch it either.

After Spiderman 3, there's nowhere to go but up. I can watch Batman and Robin, I can't watch Spidey 3. That says something about where the Spiderman franchise got.

 

[CrystalBrooke]

Oh I agree, it was awful..altho, I feel as if I must admit to not liking any of the Spiderman movies, but I do see a huge difference between the first and the last. I still don't think it needs to be re-done, but whatever.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Oh I agree, it was awful..altho, I feel as if I must admit to not liking any of the Spiderman movies, but I do see a huge difference between the first and the last. I still don't think it needs to be re-done, but whatever.

Fair enough. I'm in the same boat, I hated the other Spiderman flicks as well, but three especially.

And that's why I don't have a problem with the reboot haha, it's a good time to take a shot at making it right when it really can't get any worse

 

[Diane_Windsor]

All of these movies are being rebooted because Marvel purchased their movie licence from Sony so they can put out the movies under their own name.

This is why the hulk was rebooted after only a few years, this is why the X-men are being rebooted.

Exactly, there's a reason that Disney, of all companies, purchased Marvel.

I think "reboots" are stupid for the most part. I even think the term "reboot" is stupid. Call it what is it a re-make. Why doesn't Hollywood re-make and destroy Star Wars or Indiana Jones next?

 

[alegator21]

I think "reboots" are stupid for the most part. I even think the term "reboot" is stupid. Call it what is it a re-make. Why doesn't Hollywood re-make and destroy Star Wars or Indiana Jones next?

They already did! The last Indiana Jones was terrible!

 

[Guy Incognito]

All of these movies are being rebooted because Marvel purchased their movie licence from Sony so they can put out the movies under their own name.

This is why the hulk was rebooted after only a few years, this is why the X-men are being rebooted.

The Ang Lee Hulk from 2003 was awful, didn't sell that well, and they couldn't develop a sequel they liked. Rebooting it with The Incredible Hulk in 2008 was a good choice.

X-Men First Class also wasn't a reboot, it was a prequel. It relied too much on material from the first 3 films in the franchise to be a reboot. It's also not a reboot when Fox is planning on doing both sequel to X-Men First Class and an X-Men 4. Reboots for the most part do away with pre-established continuity from the previous films in the franchise (ie; Batman Begins, Casino Royal), not exist in and with the other films.

I think "reboots" are stupid for the most part. I even think the term "reboot" is stupid. Call it what is it a re-make. Why doesn't Hollywood re-make and destroy Star Wars or Indiana Jones next?

But it's not a remake, there's a difference. A remake is more faithful to it's film material (even if it's fairly little), and should look and feel like the original film (even if it's whole point is to be updated), where as a reboot has little-nothing to do with the pre-established film/continuity (again as examples; Batman Begins, Casino Royal).

Also, generally speaking, reboots generally happen within a shorter time frame (if you look at the trend, it's been 3-8 years for a reboot). Where as remake/remake franchise's happen later. For example, at this point, if a new Jaws film was to happen, it'd be a remake.

From a business standpoint, a reboot happens with the hope to restore financial and (hopefully) critical stability to the franchise that went down the toilet. A remake is retelling of successful story, for a modern audience.

They already did! The last Indiana Jones was terrible!

Crystal Skull had it's stupid stuff, but I honestly rank it around Temple of Doom. It might have been bad, but it wasn't Star Wars Prequel Trilogy bad.

 

[Beechwell]

I'm not a fan of all these reboots and prequels either, but I am afraid it is a necessary concession to the consumers' (i.e. us) desire for familiarity. We all tend to like things we are familiar with, and a new movie about a dear hero of our childhood will always peek our initial interest more than a completely new creation.

That being said, I don't think reboots are necessarily bad. They offer a chance to tell new stories or explore new sides of old ones in a familiar setting. The new Battlestar Galactiva series (reimagination, reboot, whatever) has done that splendidly imo. As did the Pirates of the Caribbean (not a direct reimagination, but basically a recycling of old Pirate clichés). Oh, and Knights of the Old Republic

So I'll try to treat this new Spiderman installment as I would a completely new franchise, and judge it by its own merits, and not in relation to prior Spidermans. Well, I'll try

 

[Save_Me_From_Myself]

I just think its a little "too soon" to reboot Spiderman. I mean....the recent reboot is still fresh in everyones mind. When did Spiderman 3 come out? 2007? I don't know...it just seems to be too soon.

I do think all these reboots is just a way to make more money anyways, that and Hollywood is running out of ideas. I wonder how long it will take before they reboot Ironman?

 

[Guy Incognito]

I just think its a little "too soon" to reboot Spiderman. I mean....the recent reboot is still fresh in everyones mind. When did Spiderman 3 come out? 2007? I don't know...it just seems to be too soon.

I do think all these reboots is just a way to make more money anyways, that and Hollywood is running out of ideas. I wonder how long it will take before they reboot Ironman?

They have no reason to reboot Iron Man at all right now, it's still a critical and financially viable franchise that didn't bookend itself though

 

[Lean Forward]

Personally I like the reboot, BTW apparently Superman has renounced his US citizenship..lol apparently he's tired of being viewed as a tool for US policy "truth justice and the American way just isn't enough anymore" haha