The Amazing Spider-Man

**yoco** · 20.07.11, 21:52

Release Date: July 3, 2012 (3D/2D theaters)
Studio: Columbia Pictures (Sony)
Director: Marc Webb
Screenwriter: James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, Steve Kloves
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary, Campbell Scott, Irrfan Khan, Martin Sheen, Sally Field
Genre: Action, Adventure
MPAA Rating: Not Available

Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.

**Wolfman86** · 20.07.11, 23:47

Here's the HD version

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

Looks like it will be pretty good, and same events as the original. Maybe they will be able to take this Spider-Man reboot further than the original.

**yoco** · 21.07.11, 11:01

Did you like the first person view? I honestly didn't, and I'm hoping it will be minimum in movie!

**shawshankraj** · 21.07.11, 17:41

Trailer don't look good as i expected

**zizo22** · 22.07.11, 11:30

and the actor is not seem like spider man at all
it's not convincing at all.

**Rin-Kokonoe** · 27.07.11, 22:31

I hope this movie is not crap. disney has a way to messing things up

**shawshankraj** · 07.02.12, 13:29

I really like the trailer like a lot...

**atlantis** · 07.02.12, 17:14

I dont like the new actor, he is like escaped from a gay porn movie ...

**ParamouR** · 07.02.12, 19:53

the spiderman cast should stay as it is

**slikrapid** · 09.02.12, 22:17

yikes, not another teen superhero movie/sequel, not to mention that the spiderman franchise doesn't have much to offer anyways - after the whiny & annoying maguire & dunst duo vs some of the lamest opponents ever, comes the confused/emo wannabe along with a number of virtual no-names (including the talentless i-fans) that has 'failure' written all over it

focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.

the only things amazing here are the seemingly indestructible or never-ending industrial sh*t-to-gold mechanism coupled with the lap-it-up attitude of (some of) the viewers

verdict: junk, simple as that

and another thing, notice how the movie (along with numerous other movies, somewhat also comics, books) supports/promotes a contrived idea of heroism & heroes, where these individuals usually start off as some troubled, 'different' outcasts, 'rebels' & weirdos in general (or as a result of some devastating personality-changing event, usually a tragedy), fanatically embracing some socially acceptable (ie. heroic, as opposed to villainous) extraordinary/extreme activity, which paints their behavior as something uncharacteristic of the ordinary individual, implying how heroism is something exclusive and rare, whereas it is quite common, when not viewed as a specific extracted subset, fi. the so-called 'struggle to survive' is an example of a common heroic behavior inherent to all beings, (dedicated) parenting may be another (though temporary), etc.

a hero is basically simply a highly dedicated individual, devoted to some goal (regardless of what the society 'thinks' of that goal, because the societal standards are usually/often arbitrary and relativistic, ie. not aligned with the fundamental 'principles' of existence, but rather aligned with a selected subset that supports its dominating position, that provides supporting material for its pillars)

a superhero is a term for a super-human hero, a hero with super-human abilities, to put it bluntly, its the guy who can jump (way) more than others (in a society that admires 'jumping')

- a true hero (societal-wise) is one completely dedicated/devoted to a societally/socially acceptable goal, the true villain being his opposite (regarding the societal dualistic scale/range of values)
- a true hero (linguistic-wise) is one completely dedicated/devoted to a goal, the true villain having the same characteristics, though a different goal (putting aside the societal influence onto linguistic interpretation, which steers it into the previously mentioned 'definition')
- a true 'hero' (essential-wise) is one completely dedicated/devoted to a fundamental/existential goal (where the distinction between hero-villain has no meaning, simply because this distinction is non-fundamental in the first place, this also means that the term 'hero' or 'heroism' becomes inadequate to describe this 'state', especially if still thought of in a dualistic way, not to mention how 'linguistics' and even 'thinking' itself are inadequate to accurately convey the meaning of such a 'state', this 'state' has to be experienced or attained in order to be properly or truly understood)