|
Death By The Blues posted:Visually this film doesn't look interesting. For all the flack Raimi got with his, they at least had his unique visual brand. Have you and I been watching the same trailers for Marc Webb's take on Spider-Man? Someone mentioned it before, but I've never seen footage at night look so vibrant and wonderfully saturated before seeing The Amazing Spider-Man footage. Seriously, the aesthetic of the film looks pretty drat great in my opinion.
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Movie looks good but I'm already angry at how loving often Spidey unmasks/gets unmaked. It is trying to be like Ultimate Spider-Man
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
varlet posted:Peter giving the kid his mask was adorable. That was genuinely my favorite part and I really hope that if the plot sucks, we at least get a ton of real "human" moments like that. It adds so much dramatic ballast to the proceedings that it's unreal.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 02:09
|
|
|
That car scene gave Peter Parker more character and humanity than Raimi's entire trilogy.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 03:09
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:That car scene gave Peter Parker more character and humanity than Raimi's entire trilogy. It's a really neat scene that sets up a nice parallel between Peter and the kid where the mask gives them strength to do something they usually can't at all. The mask is just Peter's way of fooling/pretending to himself that he's a real super hero and is able to do great things, like a coping mechanism that teens will have when they're up against something they can't comprehend or control.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 07:01
|
|
|
If this was mentioned earlier I think I missed it, but does anyone have any idea who's talking to Connors about Peter's parents? I was thinking it might be Norman Osborne in a small role to set up possible sequels, but I haven't seen anything to confirm that.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
indigenous nudity posted:If this was mentioned earlier I think I missed it, but does anyone have any idea who's talking to Connors about Peter's parents? I was thinking it might be Norman Osborne in a small role to set up possible sequels, but I haven't seen anything to confirm that. It's Irrfan Khan (The investigating detective in Slumdog Millionaire) who plays Dr. Ratha, someone who works at Oscorp with Conners.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:It's Irrfan Khan (The investigating detective in Slumdog Millionaire) who plays Dr. Ratha, someone who works at Oscorp with Conners.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I have no idea how big his role is in this movie, because there's been loads of changing information about his character. First he was going to be the 2nd villain, then we found out that didn't happen because the actor didn't want to play a villain. So who really knows. He hasn't appeared in a single trailer yet that I've seen, which leads me to believe they're keeping him under wraps for a reason. He has been in at least one of the trailers, there's a shot of the Lizard ripping car doors off looking for him on the bridge.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:18
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:It's Irrfan Khan (The investigating detective in Slumdog Millionaire) who plays Dr. Ratha, someone who works at Oscorp with Conners. It's not. It's probably Norman Osborn, but no one knows yet. Here's an interview with Marc Webb where they ask him: quote:Q: Not to get too specific about the trailer, but who was the voice that said, "Did you tell the boy about his father?" Also, every single scene with Spider-Man shows that Marc Webb really gets his movement. It looks absolutely amazing. DeathChill fucked around with this message at 05:12 on May 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 05:09
|
|
|
The guy had an indian accent! Unless they are making Norman from Mumbai, I doubt it's Norman Osborn.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 05:25
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:The guy had an indian accent! Unless they are making Norman from Mumbai, I doubt it's Norman Osborn. I am not sure that you're thinking of the right scene. The scene I'm talking about (and assuming the original poster of the question) is when Connors is in some sort of cell and some creepy skinny looking white guy asks him if he told the boy about his father. Definitely no Indian accent.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 05:33
|
|
|
I'm personally expecting a Norman Osborn reveal at the very end of the film, since this movie heavily involves Oscorp and I find it hard to believe he won't appear in at least some minor capacity.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 06:53
|
|
|
It'll be a 3 second clip of him peering in all creepy like from a dark doorway when Spidey beats Lizard.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 09:58
|
|
|
The actor in the cell is not Khan. In high res you can see it's a white guy. Almost sickly white but that could be the lighting. Could be a Stromm-type character that works for Osborn so that they can wait to worry about who to cast as Norman until a subsequent film. Also, given what Webb has said about the story of Peter's parents not being finished with this first movie, I wonder if the Connors-Mystery Guy scene is from the end of the film, after Connors has been captured.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 13:25
|
|
|
Is it true that Fox isn't too happy with what they've seen so far? Some goon mentioned it in passing in maybe the superhero movie thread. The trailers look great, though.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 14:58
|
|
|
SpaceMost posted:Is it true that Fox isn't too happy with what they've seen so far? Fox "not liking it" predisposes me to liking something. Lizard Combatant fucked around with this message at 15:04 on May 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
SpaceMost posted:Is it true that Fox isn't too happy with what they've seen so far? I assume that means it is not like the Raimi films bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 18:29 on May 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
SpaceMost posted:Is it true that Fox isn't too happy with what they've seen so far?  Fox doesn't like it because it's going to make a shitload of money for Sony
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 17:34
|
|
|
I don't know why Sony's nervous. I mean, is there any reason to think this movie won't make at least 200 million domestic? I don't know what the budget was, but they can't possibly be expecting Avengers or Dark Knight Rises numbers. I dunno, I'm psyched to see it. There are a lot of different angles that a Spider-Man movie can cover that other superhero films can't and the Raimi films barely explored any of it. It looks like it'll easily be the best Spider-Man film unless these are crazy, misleading, Green Lantern-level previews.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 18:11
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:I assume that means it is not like the Rani films Oh god, a Spider-Man/Time and the Rani crossover? My darkest fears in one film.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 18:27
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:I don't know why Sony's nervous. I mean, is there any reason to think this movie won't make at least 200 million domestic? I don't know what the budget was, but they can't possibly be expecting Avengers or Dark Knight Rises numbers. I assume because idiots are afraid of change, even if it will still make bank.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:I don't know why Sony's nervous. I mean, is there any reason to think this movie won't make at least 200 million domestic? I don't know what the budget was, but they can't possibly be expecting Avengers or Dark Knight Rises numbers. One of those hasn't even come out yet, and before Spider-man 3 muddied the waters you can sure this franchise would've been seen as a competitor for the $1 billion crowd.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:One of those hasn't even come out yet, and before Spider-man 3 muddied the waters you can sure this franchise would've been seen as a competitor for the $1 billion crowd. Yeah, but Spider-Man 3 did come out. This movie's probably not going to come near $1 billion but it'll still definitely make money, which is why Sony's nervousness confuses me. Also, I don't get what you mean by "one of those hasn't even come out yet". Are you doubting that DKR is going to make bank, or are you saying that Sony's nervous because of the competition?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 20:57
|
|
|
Reminder that Spider-Man 3, as much as people reacted badly to it, almost made a billion dollars. Like, I'm talking spitting distance close.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 21:36
|
|
|
Wasn't it by far the most successful Marvel franchise film until recently?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 21:37
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Wasn't it by far the most successful Marvel franchise film until recently? At that point the only real competition would have been x-men and Blade. Do you mean individual films or film series? bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 21:41 on May 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
I believe so, yeah. Up until Avengers, it made more than any other Marvel movie that I'm aware of. I think the closest behind it was Iron Man, and there's like a $150 million drop to get to that, if not more.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Yeah, but Spider-Man 3 did come out. This movie's probably not going to come near $1 billion but it'll still definitely make money, which is why Sony's nervousness confuses me. Sorry, I wasn't clear at all, I mean Sony is nervous about the competition. Three massive superhero films in one summer, two of which are long-awaited franchise installments has got to seem pretty daunting even for a recognized brand like Spider-man.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Reminder that Spider-Man 3, as much as people reacted badly to it, almost made a billion dollars. Like, I'm talking spitting distance close. True. I'd expect bad feelings from 3, combined with unfamiliarity with the reboot putting people who did like it off, to almost assure a major drop-off from what 3 made. But lovely reviews for its predecessor didn't stop Transformers 3 from blowing past $1 Billion, so what the gently caress do I know? PriorMarcus posted:Sorry, I wasn't clear at all, I mean Sony is nervous about the competition. Three massive superhero films in one summer, two of which are long-awaited franchise installments has got to seem pretty daunting even for a recognized brand like Spider-man. That makes sense. How close are the release dates for DKR and this?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:That makes sense. How close are the release dates for DKR and this? A little over two weeks? This one does come out July 4th weekend and I don't think it has any real competition, so it's probably going to make a lot of money opening weekend. Yeah, the releases for the first week of July are this, Savages (an R-rated crime flick, so not a huge overlap there), Katy Perry's concert movie, and Queen of Versailles, which is going to be for the arthouses, so it's pretty clear for hitting kids and teenagers. Closest thing that might take a bite out of it is Ice Age. That'll eat into 3D screens and maybe pull a bit of the kid demographic. Weirdly, everything else in between it and Batman are R rated, adult oriented movies. That's really unusual for July.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Weirdly, everything else in between it and Batman are R rated, adult oriented movies. That's really unusual for July. With Spider-Man and Batman in July I'm sure this is a case of other movies steering clear. The R-rated ones and the kids movies are different markets so they're safe. This movie's going to make them money, they're not worried about that. With a huge first week (it comes out on the Tuesday of that July 4th week) and then a second complete week free and clear, plus overseas, they're fine. They're only worried about the movie gumming up the works for sequels. They can't sell another reboot so this one's going to have to be the basis for at least a few subsequent films.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
Well, rumor has it that the budget, which was intially reported to be a very modest $80 million, has ballooned to over $200 million. This is just a might be part of the reason why Sony is worried about whether it will be profitable for them. For comparison, the Raimi trilogy had a combined budget of $597 million and grossed almost 2.5 billion worldwide.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 07:28
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:I believe so, yeah. Up until Avengers, it made more than any other Marvel movie that I'm aware of. I think the closest behind it was Iron Man, and there's like a $150 million drop to get to that, if not more. Spider-Man 3 made more than Iron Man? Wow. I've been deliberately avoiding following this movie much but the trailer hype finally got me to cave and watch them, and goddamn this looks good as hell. Garfield really looks and sounds like he completely nailed the spirit of the comic book Spider-Man. edit: And even if you didn't like the script to (500) Days of Summer, you gotta admit it was directed drat sharp.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
sambafish posted:Well, rumor has it that the budget, which was intially reported to be a very modest $80 million, has ballooned to over $200 million. This is just a might be part of the reason why Sony is worried about whether it will be profitable for them. For comparison, the Raimi trilogy had a combined budget of $597 million and grossed almost 2.5 billion worldwide. Is it even possible to make a special effects heavy superhero film with big stars for $80 million?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 10:13
|
|
|
Well, Iron Man "only" cost $140 million and had much bigger actors and possibly a greater scope in terms of location filming and such. So I could see $200 being a talking point for them.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 10:51
|
|
|
That rumor comes from a guy who played a background role and did some stunt work on the film. Why would he have any reliable information about the budget?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 11:13
|
|
|
precision posted:Well, Iron Man "only" cost $140 million and had much bigger actors and possibly a greater scope in terms of location filming and such. So I could see $200 being a talking point for them. I seriously doubt, wages wise, that Iron Man had MUCH bigger stars.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 11:46
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:Ummmm... that $200 million seems to be comparable to the budget of a Raimi film then, not even considering inflation. That's not bad at all. Also they might have rolled th ecost of Spider-Man 4 into there. I think the same thing happened with Spider-Man 1 they placed all the failed projects into the budget for that one.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:I seriously doubt, wages wise, that Iron Man had MUCH bigger stars. Also an Iron Man movie was a much bigger risk than a new Spider-Man, because before 2008 who gave a poo poo about Iron Man?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2012 14:32
|
|