SPIDER-MAN 4: More Storyboards Revealed

did he just threw a gargoyle ?!

Im so glad these movies are over. I know TASM isnt anything special but it is exponentially better than any of Raimis shitty ass Spiderman movies

Post all of the corny image macros you want; calling TASM the trash that it was isn't nearly as outlandish as you'd like it to be. Movie was garbage, right down there with Raimi's 3rd film.

Whatever the Hell Spider-Man 4 was going to be, couldn't have been as bad, let alone worse, than what we got in the half-assed remake. Oh but we have web-shooters and a sh*t talking Spidey now. Yay.

@Visualiza
"right down there with Raimi's 3rd film"

Really ?

Harry is having amnesia.


symbiot just falling out of the sky, close enough to bond with Peter.

Peter going full emo, cause that's like the most evil thing in the world you can do .

Gwen Stacy is in this ? ... please.
What was a purpose of this again ?

Topher Grace as Venom ?

The butler just forgot to mention Harry that the dead of his father was not Peter's fault ?
He should do it ... like 2 movies ago.

With all of the mistakes they did while making TAS (Lizard is such a half dimensional villain, Connors leaves the clues to his plan right there on the monitors,) no one should say that this movie was as bad as Spiderman 3.

At least they tried.
Not just red the script, call it shit and went on full lazy mode.

The only thing that you can say about this movie was that it was better paced than part II. But that's another story.

TASM did suck.. I was viewing it with anticipation then I found myself cringing over most of the film.. Everything after the part he put the suit on was awful

Beginning was good tho

I own the newest box set, watched all four of them several times within the same week and drew my conclusions from there.

What is your point though, really? List a bunch of cherry-picked bullet points so that I'll just go ahead and say "Welp, guess you were right!"

Yeah, no.

Both of these films were terrible enough for it to be pointless to "figure out" which one was worse than the other. At a certain point, when movies are bad enough I lump them all into the same category. A polished turd is still a turd.

Spider-Man 3 was indeed a terrible film. It's a chore to watch. The only good I can say about it is, oddly enough, the same that I can say about TASM. The action scenes were very well shot & choreographed. They hold up exceptionally well by today's standards IMO, but unfortunately, good action with a disjointed plot doesn't make a great movie.

List all the bullet points you want, not gonna get into a pissing contest, but I will explain my main issue with the film. I didn't like how it pandered to the audience. The carjacker scene is the best example of this. Everyone likes to cheer this scene on and say "Yay, we finally have a smart-ass Spidey", but that scene ain't Spider-Man. His jeers shouldn't be for the sake of slapstick punchlines, but rather to get inside the heads of his adversaries. Spider-Man, or really any hero who wasn't a sadistic prick, wouldn't, and damn sure shouldn't, waste such an extensive amount of time poking and prodding a common thief like that. The whole scene was so drawn out as to be OVERT, a huge problem throughout the whole movie. I can't appreciate spoon-fed cinema, it's insulting to the audience and this movie was peppered with it. People brag about webshooters in this? WTF for? He never USED them in any way(different cartridges, uses, and capabilities) that distinguished them from the organics in the older films, and worse than that, the WRITERS never used them in creative ways either. Not once did they malfunction, fail, run out of fluid, break, or in any way add any sort of dynamic to the character. By the time Connors smashed them at the end, he was all but defeated and the movie finished anyway. Lame. Funnily enough, all of the little bullet points people like to brag about in defense of this film, are the exact downfalls that make it as bad as it is. "We've got web shooters; we've got Gwen Stacy; We've got wise cracks!" When you peel back that onion; however, what you have are undeveloped, poorly written ideas whose only purpose is their existence alone, there's no substance to any of the major elements in the film.

tl;dr - A poorly written abomination of a film, and a travesty of a Spider-Man adaptation, in every damn way.

Butthurts....

I'm torn on Gwen/Mary Jane.

In Emma Stone's case, she's an immensely talented actress, but her character had no depth to her. She was more or less Peter's sounding board, and not only was there no conflict in their relationship(they got together and got along far too well for what was presented on screen; they practically went from being complete strangers to deeply involved lovers), but there was hardly any conflict within Gwen herself. She was hopelessly boring and completely wooden.

Mary Jane, on the other hand, had as much depth to her as Peter ever did in all of the Raimi trilogy, and IMO, was arguably written(I have to emphasize written, not acted) as well or better than Parker himself. From the family issues, to the occupational woes, and the men in her life, there were a lot of layers there. Nevermind the overused damsel in distress trope; both franchises are guilty of it at this point, but the problem was twofold for me. For one, she wasn't the sultry, fun-loving, witty bombshell of a Mary Jane we all wanted to see. Raimi's MJ was very much of his own design. Normally I can overlook this; however, this brings me to my second issue. Kirsten Dunst just couldn't get a hold of the role. Her acting was abysmal...pity, as she was given a CBM female lead that actually had some semblance of depth and conflict present.

If nothing else, going back to what I said about Stone, this franchise has a much more talented cast than the previous one did. I don't know how they were able to rake in the actors that they did, but if there's anything that bodes well for the future of the franchise it's the acting talent. If the powers that be can anchor the next movie with a good script, deep characters(as opposed to caricatures) and a reasonable conflict, I'll forgive this mess of a film and enjoy what's on the horizon.

If Tobey Mcgayer was going to be in this one, then I prefer 1000 times better the reboot.

Your argument makes no sense.

/ generic TASM being shit comment /

I Agree spiderman 4 should be made and yes TASM was so wack that the gross profit proves it. I miss all the past spider man series so Sony FCK! u Boy