New Spider-Man trailer

[Rabid Kimba]

Man...this is gonna kick major ass...



Andrew Garfield makes a great Parker/Spidey...he has the face, the acting chops, the voice...and most of all...he's better built for Spidey than the shorter and slightly stockier Tobey Maguire...wow...I LOVE the look of this movie...and Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy is gonna make everyone forget about Kristen Dunst's Mary Jane...

...I might be in the minority here...but this trailer gave me more goosebumps than even The Avengers...believe it or not...

[Remus]

Yeah !!!! Awesome man !!! Another spiderman superhero movie !!!!!

Yeah man...special effects, computer animation, explosions, webs, fancy costumes and shit !!!!

Yehhhhhhhhhh man....I got a fuckin hardon thinking about it bru !!!!'!!!

[Redneck]

I dont know if i wanna follow the new Spiderman-movies. The Trilogy with Maguire was really fantastic and maybe should be left alone...its not necessary to let a new Spiderman following...not that fast. I would welcome other Superhero-movies much more (The Avengers 2, Thor 2, Iron Man 3, Batman 3, another Wolverine Origin etc...i know they all will come..). I dont like changing the main-actor-thing....thats the only thing that bitters me with The Avengers...i want Norton as Hulk.

[Flashman]

Yeah !!!! Awesome man !!! Another spiderman superhero movie !!!!!

Yeah man...special effects, computer animation, explosions, webs, fancy costumes and shit !!!!

Yehhhhhhhhhh man....I got a fuckin hardon thinking about it bru !!!!'!!!

Lol! Sarcastic whacker!

Looks fun but it'll have to be tip top to beat the first film w/ Toby Maguire.

[Rebel]

Yeah !!!! Awesome man !!! Another spiderman superhero movie !!!!!

Yeah man...special effects, computer animation, explosions, webs, fancy costumes and shit !!!!

Yehhhhhhhhhh man....I got a fuckin hardon thinking about it bru !!!!'!!!

Exactly my thoughts. How many different versions can they make?

[Rabid Kimba]

Yeah !!!! Awesome man !!! Another spiderman superhero movie !!!!!

Yeah man...special effects, computer animation, explosions, webs, fancy costumes and shit !!!!

Yehhhhhhhhhh man....I got a fuckin hardon thinking about it bru !!!!'!!!

Brought to you buy F-1 nerd cumin' at watching sweatin' little midgets driving around like retards in pretty little colorful cars.

Yeah...just like that...

[Rabid Kimba]

Exactly my thoughts. How many different versions can they make?

Better start saving your money now...because you are going to take your kids multiple times for the new Spidey movie...

[Rebel]

I'm not going to lie. They can be fun to watch, but at what point does it get played out?

Ohhhhhh. Change the cast, add more CGI, and our Kimbster will explode in his tight-ass plaid shorts every time.

[Rabid Kimba]

I dont know if i wanna follow the new Spiderman-movies. The Trilogy with Maguire was really fantastic and maybe should be left alone...its not necessary to let a new Spiderman following...not that fast.

Fuck Tobey Maguire...I never liked that little motherfucker...can't act, can't dance (that dance scene in Spidey 3 was cringe-worthy, lol)...and his body was all wrong for Spider-Man...stocky, short-armed, big chest...all wrong...but Garfield has the right body, very lean and long...



Maguire is short and has stocky little arms...Spider-Man is lean with long arms...and Andrew Garfield was perfectly cast...plus he's a way better actor...Maguire always has this stupid perpetual smirking face even when he's acting serious...it's not even close...

[Laztrooper]

Am I looking forward to this movie? Yes.
Could I have lived without them making a remake? Yes

IMO the Maguire Series was good enough to not warrant a Remake so soon. I was not a fan of everything in the originals especially that gay ass dancing in part 3 but, it was still a bit soon to reboot the film.

I think the major push to remake it was the fact that since Batman Begins every wants to do Superhero Movies but, with a Darker more serious tone. The Original 3 Spideys would have been better if the Studios weren't forcing Raimi to make the movie their way.

[Rabid Kimba]

No more Maguire little bitch screams....

[Rabid Kimba]

I think the major push to remake it was the fact that since Batman Begins every wants to do Superhero Movies but, with a Darker more serious tone.

I have to agree with you here.

Nolan's influence is obviously present in this new Spider-Man flick...it has a more serious tone than the previous more kid-friendly Spidey flicks.

[Remus]

Andrew Garfield is HOT ! makes a great Parker/Spidey...he has the dreamy face, a great ass, the sexy voice...and most of all...he's better built for Spidey than the shorter and slightly stockier Tobey Maguire...wow...I LOVE ANDREW !...

...I might be in the minority here...but this Andrew in a skin tight suit had me rushing for the Kleenex, a private room and some quality alone time.

I caught your post before you de-homo'd it. No wonder your obsessed with ebony thunder cock !

[Rabid Kimba]

Asshole....

[Flashman]

[Rabid Kimba]

Remus prefers this...

[Rebel]

Fuck Tobey Maguire...I never liked that little motherfucker...can't act, can't dance (that dance scene in Spidey 3 was cringe-worthy, lol)...and his body was all wrong for Spider-Man...stocky, short-armed, big chest...all wrong...but Garfield has the right body, very lean and long...



Maguire is short and has stocky little arms...Spider-Man is lean with long arms...and Andrew Garfield was perfectly cast...plus he's a way better actor...Maguire always has this stupid perpetual smirking face even when he's acting serious...it's not even close...

Spiderman is a freakin comic superhero. "He is lean with long arms..." In your dreams, que no?

[Redneck]

Fuck Tobey Maguire...I never liked that little motherfucker...can't act, can't dance (that dance scene in Spidey 3 was cringe-worthy, lol)...and his body was all wrong for Spider-Man...stocky, short-armed, big chest...all wrong...but Garfield has the right body, very lean and long...



Maguire is short and has stocky little arms...Spider-Man is lean with long arms...and Andrew Garfield was perfectly cast...plus he's a way better actor...Maguire always has this stupid perpetual smirking face even when he's acting serious...it's not even close...

I cant agree with you here. I think he did a good job in the movies (i agree with you that he looks a little strange sometimes...). But i really liked the 3 spiderman-movies. Dunst was also a great part of it.

[Redneck]

Spiderman is a really cool type of Superhero but i think at the moment people are satisfied with the Maguire movies. I dont think that it gets the same popularity than the trilogy before.
I am looking forward to the next projects after The Avengers like "Ant-Man", "Guardians of the Galaxy" and "The Inhumans". And as i mentioned before of course "Thor 2" and "Iron Man 3".

[Joe King]

No reason other than $$$ to remake the franchise 5 years after the last one ended. I thought it was a great series until the end of the 3rd movie and the killing off Venom.

and Emma Stone is overrated. Dunst is prettier.

[Laztrooper]

No reason other than $$$ to remake the franchise 5 years after the last one ended. I thought it was a great series until the end of the 3rd movie and the killing off Venom.

and Emma Stone is overrated. Dunst is prettier.

Uh yeah there are more reasons then just money. I already pointed that out in my earlier post. The Days of making kid friendly Super hero films like Spiderman and the Fantastic four are over. Everyone wants their Superhero movies with some edge now and making a Spiderman 4 with Maguire would not have achieved that. There is no doubt they could have made money with the old cast(Spiderman 3 netted 630 Million+ in Profit) but, they took alot of heat for Spiderman 3 so now they want to make it more legit. If it was purely about money then they would have stuck to the same formula, instead they want to be like Nolan and get Money and respect and the same time.

Emma Stone overrated. Lol That's funny. If you think Dunst's portrayal of Mary Jane was good then you don't know much about acting. She's a good actress but, she didn't do anything special in the Spiderman Trilogy.

[Redneck]

. If you think Dunst's portrayal of Mary Jane was good then you don't know much about acting. She's a good actress but, she didn't do anything special in the Spiderman Trilogy.

I really loved her in that role. She was fascinating (especially in the first part..).

[Joe King]

Uh yeah there are more reasons then just money. I already pointed that out in my earlier post. The Days of making kid friendly Super hero films like Spiderman and the Fantastic four are over. Everyone wants their Superhero movies with some edge now and making a Spiderman 4 with Maguire would not have achieved that. There is no doubt they could have made money with the old cast(Spiderman 3 netted 630 Million+ in Profit) but, they took alot of heat for Spiderman 3 so now they want to make it more legit. If it was purely about money then they would have stuck to the same formula, instead they want to be like Nolan and get Money and respect and the same time.

Emma Stone overrated. Lol That's funny. If you think Dunst's portrayal of Mary Jane was good then you don't know much about acting. She's a good actress but, she didn't do anything special in the Spiderman Trilogy.

You really think they are rebooting this series to "do it right"? Get real.

What is Emma Stone bringing to the table that Kirsten Dunst didn't (in regards to acting, not marketability)? You're acting like Mary Jane Watson is a complex character LOL.

[Laztrooper]

You really think they are rebooting this series to "do it right"? Get real.

Go back and read before opening your mouth with dumb statements. I never said they are remaking it to do it right. I said they are remaking it because the way Superhero movies are made has changed since Nolan made Batman Begins. Now people want Superhero films with a darker and more serious tone and the Era of Kid Friendly films like Spiderman (Maguire Series) and the Fantasitic Four movies has gone and now people want more substance. It's really not that hard to grasp. Kimba even acknowledged it himself in one of the posts above. If they kept the same fourmula they still would have made a shitload of money but, now they want the films to be respected as well as profitable and not laughed at like Spiderman 3.

What is Emma Stone bringing to the table that Kirsten Dunst didn't (in regards to acting, not marketability)? You're acting like Mary Jane Watson is a complex character LOL.

One again, do you ever bother reading things clearly? Where did I claim that she was bringing anything more then Dunst?

What I said was that she didn't do anything special with the role and laughed at you claiming Emma Stone is Overrated. Not to mention the fact that you ask a question about what stone brings to the table and you want to limit my answer by ignoring the fact that Stone is currently more marketable then Dunst was at the time she made the Spiderman films

Stone is not only just as good and as attractive as Dunst her career is currently still on the rise, especially after making The Help.

[Joe King]

Go back and read before opening your mouth with dumb statements. I never said they are remaking it to do it right. I said they are remaking it because the way Superhero movies are made has changed since Nolan made Batman Begins. Now people want Superhero films with a darker and more serious tone and the Era of Kid Friendly films like Spiderman (Maguire Series) and the Fantasitic Four movies has gone and now people want more substance. It's really not that hard to grasp. Kimba even acknowledged it himself in one of the posts above. If they kept the same fourmula they still would have made a shitload of money but, now they want the films to be respected as well as profitable and not laughed at like Spiderman 3.

and the primary reason being $$$. Don't be stupid. Too late since you are already extolling the "acting virtues" of Emma Stone over Kirsten Dunst. LMAO.

THEY FOUND AN ANGLE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. PERIOD.

[Laztrooper]

and the primary reason being $$$. Don't be stupid. Too late since you are already extolling the "acting virtues" of Emma Stone over Kirsten Dunst. LMAO.

THEY FOUND AN ANGLE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. PERIOD.

Are you retarded? The Primary focus for EVERY Movie is to make money. The didn't need an angle to make more money you fool! They could have made a 4th film with Maguire and still made a shitload of money but, they are going in a new direction and hoping they make the same amount of money as the previous films while making it more gritty and realistic. It's like you don't even bother reading things clearly before speaking.

Also please point out one post were I claiming that stone was a better actress then Dunst. Just another BS lie from a fake ass christian if you can't come up with an actual post backing up your claim. I am awaiting your quote.......

[Joe King]

Are you retarded? The Primary focus for EVERY Movie is to make money. The didn't need an angle to make more money you fool! They could have made a 4th film with Maguire and still made a shitload of money but, they are going in a new direction and hoping they make the same amount of money as the previous films while making it more gritty and realistic. It's like you don't even bother reading this clearly before speaking.

Also please point out one post were I claiming that stone was a better actress then Dunst. Just another BS lie from a fake ass christian if you can't come up with an actual post backing up your claim. I am awaiting your quote.......

Let's see. ONE more movie with Maguire or MULTIPLE movies with a "new approach". You are falling for the studio hype, not me. I'll watch it for free.

All of your posts have basically agreed with my sentiment but you fail to understand that. I can't help you there.

[Laztrooper]

Still waiting for the fake ass Christian to point out one post were I claimed that stone was a better actress then Dunst. Or were you just lying and talking out your ass like the rest of your posts in here?

[Joe King]

Still waiting for the fake ass Christian to point out one post were I claimed that stone was a better actress then Dunst. Or were you just lying and talking out your ass like the rest of your posts in here?

I said Stone was overrated. I meant it in regards to looks. You brought up acting, so I responded. I do think Dunst is a better actress but that Stone has had more recent higher profile stuff.

Funny how you go to the "religion crutch" even when talking about movies.

[Laztrooper]

I said Stone was overrated. I meant it in regards to looks. You brought up acting, so I responded. I do think Dunst is a better actress but that Stone has had more recent higher profile stuff.

Funny how you go to the "religion crutch" even when talking about movies.

Bullshit you meant that. You stated she was overrated and that Dunst was prettier which is clearly stating two different points.
In your own words.

Emma Stone is overrated. Dunst is prettier.

Where exactly did you clarify that calling Stone overrated means Dunst is prettier. You made two statements and are now back peddling.

and the primary reason being $$$. Don't be stupid. Too late since you are already extolling the "acting virtues" of Emma Stone over Kirsten Dunst.

Still waiting for you to point to one post were I stated Stone was a better actress like you claim or were you lying like the fake ass Christian I am claiming you to be?