Mania Review: The Amazing Spider-Man Comments -


Showing items 101 - 110 of 154
<<  <  8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >  >>  
Wiseguy 7/6/2012 1:07:02 PM

Saw it again last night and like most times with high expectations I enjoyed it more the second time around.

2 things became clear to me, first Spidey obviously has no "spidey sense" but his quick reflexes and powers make up for it and second Aunt May clearly knows he is Spiderman by the end.

My guess of Richard Parker's actions may seem far fetched but I'd guess that he developed the formula. Instead of turning it over he injected into Peter but without one key ingredient. The formula lies dormant an without effect in Pete's dna for later retrieval. But Pete going to Oscorp and bitten by the same spiders his father was producing completed and activated the serum. The equation Pete gave Connors was probably and obviously faulty perhaps from earlier experiments

I doubt that Richard was experimenting with himself ala Lee's Hulk simply because of the assumed timeline. Pete's already about 6 years old when the whole drama started. Meaning that Richard had a breakthrough years ago

Wiseguy 7/6/2012 1:11:08 PM

But I am still wondering what the guy in the shadows meant by "the truth about his father". Could he mean a spy ala the comics.

And whatever happened to Ratha after the bridge incident? I think they have bigger plans for his character down the line. I thought he was destined to become Proto Goblin

hanso 7/6/2012 1:27:57 PM

 My guess is the truth is Richard Parker is alive or he injected Pete like you said.

millean 7/6/2012 2:24:07 PM

Well, expanding on those possibilities...  the guy in the shadows could end up being the original Peter Parker, and the Pete we just saw Garfield play will end up being his clone!  :)

Then all of the movie fans would experience the same hate all of the comic fans did back in the day.

wish 7/6/2012 7:16:44 PM

Wiseguy, I think a lot like you do, right down to the Father hiding Peter because of something unique about the boys genes or dna or something altered, and the trailers hinted at Connors asking Peter if he even knows what he is or what his father did or something to that effect.  The bite was a catalyst.  This movie ruled, it was at least on par with the first 2 by Raimi, but I'm actually inclined to say I enjoyed this new one more for several reasons, the first being Garfield's ownership of the role, the second being the cgi and 3D, just wowfuckwow on both counts.  Great action scenes, very clear and smooth with very cool moves that have only been imagined and implied through comics, it's good to finally see it done right.  And Connors/Lizard is my favorite villian so far.  That bridge sequence is absolutely exhilarating!  I love Emma Stone, real actual love.  Lots of reasons to love this movie!  This will be the first movie I go see more than once this year!


wish 7/6/2012 7:21:06 PM

I totally believe the guy in the shadows is mysterio, but it might be the vulture too......that would tie Aunt May into the sequel in a big way.........but as soon as I heard him speak I knew it was Michael Massee, funboy himself, and yes as Wiseguy pointed out, the most unfortunate he was to be the man who pulled the trigger that ended Brandon Lee's life.  I knew they'd never cast him as Norman Osborn and it's even been confirmed by Rhys Ifans himself now that it isn't Osborn at the end.  Ready for more!!

DaForce1 7/6/2012 8:00:31 PM

 Seriously, Wise and Hanso, your theory (which isn't in the movie I saw) could be just as plausible as JMS' 'Spider God' theory in the comics when JMS introduced the character of Eziekiel. Ha! Maybe the shadow guy in Conners' cell WAS Eziekiel!! It all makes so much sense now why no one else wandering into the spider room at Oscorp could get the Spidey powers even if they were bit!! All hail the mighty Spider God and Its myterious ways!!!

DaForce1 7/6/2012 8:02:03 PM

 No wait...the shadow guy in the cell was Madame Web!! 

DaForce1 7/6/2012 8:36:12 PM

Webb has gone on record (interview with the Huffington Post (on 6/26 "Specter of Sam Raimi" article)) that Peter wasn't genetically modified by his parents. An early cut and script of the movie WERE going in that direction, and then they did those reshoots a few months ago to remove as much of that stupidity as possible.

I'd post the link to it, but this comments section format is so fucked up as it is that you can barely get a normal post to work, let alone one with a link in it.


hanso 7/7/2012 7:30:08 AM

Daforce, see below from badassdigest:

"Months ago I told you guys that I heard rumors that The Amazing Spider-Man would be making a simple, but huge, change to Spider-Man’s origin. No longer would the spider bite change Peter Parker into a superhero. Rather, the spider bite would activate something already within him that would make him a superhero.

This is not reflected in the final movie. Sort of. The hints of it are still there, and when you add in deleted elements that snuck into the marketing you can see the shape of the thing where it once existed.

The first major hint is still in the movie. Curt Connors is talking about how every other subject upon whom cross-species DNA merging was attempted died. He does not know that he is speaking to the one success story. But how did Peter survive? The movie leaves this sort of dangling there, but the clues are in front of your face. Peter was bitten by a spider... a spider that Peter’s father bred. A spider like the one under glass in the film’s prologue. A spider like the one on the chalk board in his father’s office.

The scene where Connors tells Peter no subject survived looks like it might have been a reshoot. Why do I say that? Because of this sequence in the film’s second trailer, where Peter is showing Curt Connors the missing algorithm in a totally different setting than the final film. He’s filling it in on a chalk board in what I’m assuming is Connor’s home office.



<<  <  8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >  >>  


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.