Jump to content

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012 Reboot film)


Trent B

Recommended Posts

http://www.oscorpind...es.com/mutagen/

The clip betrays Horner's usual BEAUTIFUL MIND mystery string/piano style. No danger motif yet.

Are you sure its original music?

I wouldn't be so facetious to call it 'original' but i expect it to be part from JH's score and as such it crushes the notion that he has deviated from his well-worn formula all too much.

Why should he anyway?

Considering all the movies he has on his resumee, The Amazing Spider-Man is pretty low on the list.

It still has an odd ring to me that Horner does this lame Spider-Man reboot. I doubt he needs the money. How much did they offer him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it looks great. Much better than The Avengers, and either way other people see things that you or I don't. How the hell did Jerry write so many great scores from less-than-average flicks? Man can draw inspiration from very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he tends to score good films. Or rather I haven't seen the bad films he has scored. He's the most derivative composer in the industry, for sure, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still has an odd ring to me that Horner does this lame Spider-Man reboot.

Whatever you think about it, it's still a high-profile franchise movie coming from a big studio starring a beloved character known by everyone in the world, with the very likely possibility it will be one of the biggest box-office hits of the year. I think these are all good reasons for any composer to accept such an assignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it looks great. Much better than The Avengers, and either way other people see things that you or I don't. How the hell did Jerry write so many great scores from less-than-average flicks? Man can draw inspiration from very little.

I agree, I think this Spidermen film looks much more interesting than the last 3. I see alot of petty hate and jealously directed towards this film for little reason.

If it works great, if it sucks too bad but it's reason for existance is just as legit as a forth tobey mcguire spidey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it looks great, I don't think it looks horrible. It just looks very "meh" to me. Looks like some original ideas mixed into a worn-out, cliched plot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it looks great, I don't think it looks horrible. It just looks very "meh" to me. Looks like some original ideas mixed into a worn-out, cliched plot

which means it's just like 97% of the movies out there.

It's just as original looking as the flavor of the day, the Avengers, I like the think of it as I did the first Spidermen film. Overhyped overrated and overpraised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it looks great. Much better than The Avengers, and either way other people see things that you or I don't.

Agree with you that it looks great. But It's going to be hard to top Avengers imo. I saw Avengers again yesterday and wanted to see it again immediately after. Still do. I've never watched a movie three times at a cinema. It's very rare for me to look at a movie twice at one. I'm tempted to check out Avengers for a third time. But I doubt Amazing Spiderman will have the same impact on me the way Avengers did. Though I do think it'll be great judging by the last two trailers.

which means it's just like 97% of the movies out there.

It's just as original looking as the flavor of the day, the Avengers, I like the think of it as I did the first Spidermen film. Overhyped overrated and overpraised.

Just like "The Dark Knight" and this is coming from somebody who enjoyed that film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does that mean the end of the film won't launch into a song? That would be refreshing.

Problem with Horner, is he's taken some projects recently clearly for the money or because he was headhunted by a producer (Karate Kid), so it's hard to tell whether he actively decided that he wanted to do this.

IOW, was he truly inspired, or just going through the motions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you? You spent time asking us what we are talking about, when the thing we've been talking about was literally only posted 5 posts before yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Piece Of The Amazing Spider-Man Score Has Been Revealed!

Apparently, Horner has written the End Credits.

Nice! A bunch of rests, how awesome is that!

And that preview looks absolutely terrible. The effects for the Lizard due seem poorly done. And there are a lot of cliches there.

I know a lot of people here don't seem to like Raimi's trilogy, but with the exception of the last film, I felt those nailed Spiderman in a cinematic, entertaining blockbuster fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The Amazing Spider-Man.

I've just watched the film. It's not terrible, but feels like written by 10 different people, each of them wanting to tell a different story. It wants to be a touching drama, an action film and pure comedy. Somehow Sam Raimi pulled it off better (even though, I'm not a massive fan of his films)..I like the whole "being a spider" aspect of the film where Peter freaks out over his new powers (I get this is a metaphor for puberty). The pacing is way too slow (it takes ages before you even see Spider-Man) and nothing makes real sense. The characters' do things for some reason and the plot holes are of the size of a moon. And yet it is all watchable. I just wish Garfield didn't push his "nerdy Peter" this far. He stammers all the time and after a while it becomes quite annoying. I liked the actress playing Gwen Stacy in this film.

One aspect which is definitely better than in the other three is the CGI. Still not perfect, but they're getting there with this particualar wall crawler.

The music. There is much music missing from the album (and I want it). The mixing is loud so you're going to hear it. To the point of distraction at certain points. Horner plays it completely straight and upfront, so some people are going to hate it. You know, sad things happen so we hear sad music. And while there is too much music in the film, I kind of enjoyed it that way. It's not often nowadays that film music is in the spotlight like this. The main theme is probably as recognizeable as you'll likely to hear in 2012 movie. Not subtle scoring, but entertaining nontheless.

Not a disaster, but seems rather pointless to reboot this series. But I guess The Twilight crowd disagrees...

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The score is the only thing which makes me want to see it. Especially since you mentioned good stuff you noticed which isn't on the ost (typically Horner).

I don't even know what the dude who plays spiderman looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I preferred it over Raimi's films which I never liked. I thought it was too long but it was never boring.

the effects were really good this time around. Wish I saw it in 3d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I preferred it over Raimi's films which I never liked. I thought it was too long but it was never boring.

the effects were really good this time around. Wish I saw it in 3d

Sigh, another overly long popcorn flick. Someone should revive the old hour fifty runtime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came back from The Amazing Spider-man. Crocodile pretty much summed up my views about the film. It's a watchable film indeed and not as awful as the trailers made it out to be. But one can't help but feel how pointless this reboot while watching the film. It was like watching the plot of the original Spiderman play over again with different actors (especially in the sequences where Garfield is becoming Spiderman). Even the Lizard reminded me of Green Goblin in certain ways. In the end Raimi's films were far better (take into consideration I enjoyed them very much with the exception of Spiderman 3).

I didn't like the CGI much. Didn't like the costume either (but I've already expressed that concern, I thought it would be better in film, it wasn't). And those awful POV shots started getting on my nerves.The film is poorly paced and thank God there was the score to help drive the film. I felt there were a lot of things that could have used work. But I really did like the chemistry between Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield. Their acting was quite enjoyable and admittedly added a more personal touch to the film than the original.

Oh and the score was great fun in the film, very enjoyable to watch. Ultimately, the original Raimi films reign supreme...and while its decent, this film is kind of redundant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I preferred it over Raimi's films which I never liked. I thought it was too long but it was never boring.

the effects were really good this time around. Wish I saw it in 3d

Sigh, another overly long popcorn flick. Someone should revive the old hour fifty runtime.

I was just telling a friend about this - cut a half-hour's worth of bad comedy and military hard-ons out of each Bayformers movie, and each one becomes infinitely better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of James Horner's latest, Joey?

Karol

It's a purchase for me. It's very good, perhaps the best score this year or at least the score I've enjoyed the most.

I'll say again for me this Spiderman film was superior in most everyway over the Raimi films which we mostly awful and the last dreadful. Andrew Garfield is a much better Peter Parker and Spiderman.

One thing I am so glad this film didn't do. It didn't place Peter and his Aunt and Uncle in abject poverty like in the first 3 movies.

Again the effects as so much better. The filmmakers took a completely different approach to make them look less like animated/cartoonish effects. Those in the first film are unbelievable and awful. 0's and 1's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so the next Spider-Man reboot needs to not show the origin of Spider-Man. Just join his adventures at some point when he's already around kicking ass. Like Batman 1989. Not all these superhero flicks need to show how they got radioactive powers and turned buff. Only Superman: The Movie had a good origin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so the next Spider-Man reboot needs to not show the origin of Spider-Man. Just join his adventures at some point when he's already around kicking ass. Like Batman 1989. Not all these superhero flicks need to show how they got radioactive powers and turned buff. Only Superman: The Movie had a good origin.

[OPINION]

Maybe, but recall that this rebooted Spider-Man franchise wanted to do things different from the Raimi/Maguire series. They wanted to make his spinnerets artificial as opposed to natural, introduce his father as a plot point, and have him pine over Gwen instead of Mary Jane. The only way to do that and undeniably tell the audience that this wasn't Spider-Man 4 was to make a new origin story.

Batman (1989) showed enough origin story as flashbacks scattered throughout the main story that it was not required to make the origin story the prologue or the first so many acts, as was done with Batman Begins. Plus, since Batman (1989) couldn't begin with a straight-up origin story without giving away their idea that Jack Napier's gang killed Bruce's parents and directly led to the creation of Batman in the first twenty minutes of the movie, defanging the plot. The remaining three Batman films continued this trend of showing snippets of flashback to spread the origin story around.

[/OPINION]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just saw the film.

I like it a lot, I thought it was actually terrific.

However, in a few places, I felt like they intentionally wanted to avoid the similarity to Raimi's first movie, which is understandable, but still silly because after all, it is the same character with the same origin story.

I missed the wrestling bit, but it's probably a good thing they didn't include it. Nothing could top the Macho Man ;)

The way Uncle Ben dies and the consequences for Peter are done very well.

Also, I dearly missed J.J. Jameson. But I realise there was probably little time for that.

I thoroughly enjoyed the acting, Andrew Garfield is very good as Peter Parker. Tobey Maguire (a nice touch that the "Seabiscuit" novel is lying around in Gwen's room) was probably a little closer as far as the look is concerned, but the elements of the character are there, and transported into the 21st century perfectly.

I also like his body language in the Spidey suit. Very quirky and closer to the comic book than Maguire's style.

Overall, it's pretty damn good to see the origin story being adapted a bit more faithfully, and I'm especially thrilled they chose Gwen over MJ (even though I expected her to pop in, and if just for one brief scene).

I was always bothered by the inexplicable fact that Raimi simply ignored Gwen and the impact she, and her death, had on Peter.

I can only hope there will be one or two sequels where the Gwen/MJ story is told properly.

I honestly can't remember whether Captain Stacey died in the comic book or not. I have to check that, but his death in the end seemed fitting, and if only because his knowledge of Peter's double identity would have been too much of a burden for further stories.

The inclusion of Curtis Connors is adequate, even though the actor in Raimi's films was a better fit for me. The CGI on the Lizard, well, let me put it this way, it was as realistic as a genetically created, 10 ft tall talking lizard will ever be.

I found the whole movie really great, but still, there is this one moment ... You know, I go to a Spider-Man film, and I willfully abandon basic principles of physics, human behaviour and biology. But the coincidence, that the guy whose son Spidey saved happens to watch TV at work, and is able to convince his peeps to position their cranes, that just happen to be in perfect position for Spidey to use for swinging to Oscorp Tower - that is too much to take.

Horner's score is fantastic, but there is one moment, the first scene of Peter in his full costume, that Horner made look very corny with his fake choir. And that first hero shot is something you just don't mess up in a superhero film.

And while I like what Horner did, let me tell you, Jesus Christ, when I think what Elfman could have done in this film, I might as well orgasm.

No offense to Horner, but Elfman does electronics better, and his quirky, energetic style would have fitted this film perfectly.

And I doubt he would do a sequel.

Did anyone else catch the additional scene after the principal end credits?

Who do you think Connors was talking to? Norman Osbourne? The way he seems to dissapear so quickly makes me think Mysterio, but that would be a strange choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Koray is absolutely right, you guys should have known better. I've gone and added spoiler tags to your posts.

Anyone else have any opinions on the movie? Trying to decide if I should see it in the theater or just wait and watch it at home like I do with most movies these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.