text:
Get Your Stuff Reviewed!
The Doctor Who Archive
Who Are the Writers?
The Batman Archive
The Archive of Things
'Spider-Man' (2002) vs 'The Amazing Spider-Man' (2012)
07/11/2012 by gfunk101
Let's not kid ourselves here – the end result is going to be The Amazing Spider-Man is the better film. We've already had two of our reviewers say as much. However a shift in attitude occurred when this new franchise was announced – suddenly people hated the Raimi trilogy. "Finally," the people were saying. "Somebody is going to do this right". That whole 'Untold Story' tag line always got on my nerves because it's a story that's been told multiple times.
Was it done so poorly to begin with? Spider-Man and its immediate sequel were massive hits both in cinemas and on home systems, and became the benchmark that all comic books films were compared to. Sure, it was goofy but so is the source material. Spider-Man is like Superman in that he's one of the few characters to retain the spirit of the early days of serial comics. Batman is awesome because he has changed with the times, but Spider-Man provides an alternative hero who needs to stretch the boundaries of plausibility a little. If you try to male a 'realistic' Spider-Man you'll likely to wind up with Super Generic Modern Hero-Man.
He's bland!
So I went to see The Amazing Spider-Man with my mind clear of expectation or opinion. I completely cleared my mind of the previous films. At least I tried to…the reality is that it's much too soon and comparing the two in my head was unavoidable, it's still much too fresh in our memory. If Batman Begins came out a year after Batman and Robin we would've been grateful for something to wash away the bad taste, but the style would still be what we associate with the series. So I went with it. Here are the results.
Raimi's take on the character (Toby Maguire), was like many of the characters in the series in that they were broad stereotypes. There was very little to separate out the Dork Peter Parker at the beginning of the movie from dozens of others in cinema. Thick glasses, anorak, mistaking a wave to someone else for a wave to him – it's all been done before and it's been done since. It did contrast well with the change into Spider-Man in that it gave him that everyman quality when someone so familiar becomes someone special. Even then he's a character with very little depth, swinging drastically from so-happy-it-must-be-drugged-induced to nobody-feels-my-pain-except-My Chemical Romance. The time was never taken to really develop the character beyond his need to use great power responsibly.
"So…how DO I shot web?"
Marc Webb's character (Andrew Garfield) is much more human. We only get the sense that he's an outsider at school because he walks around slumped, eyes down and has trouble with the school bully, not because he has glasses and smiles like a chimp at girls. He has his own personality traits and hobbies, and even steps up to the bully when he's picking on a smaller kid. Parker is a well-developed person who thinks for himself, makes mistakes even when trying to do the right thing. Ultimately he's the more memorable character because there are some non-generic features to him.
"With web-shooters, bitch."
The original film had a couple of steps ahead of the new movie here because they used the most famous and longest running villain from the Spider-Man franchise: The Green Goblin. Almost all the ground they had on the new film is then totally lost when they dressed him as a Power Ranger reject. The design here was just downright awful. His suit looked awful in both design and construction – it's hard to believe that such flimsy plastic could turn away a punch. Flying around on a surfboard thing and throwing bombs is pretty cool, but it's impossible to take him seriously as a character or a threat. Willem DaFoe has a lot of fun hamming it up (almost more than anyone else) but as soon as the mask goes on he loses all credibility.
"Rar."
Jumping ahead to the new incarnation we have the extremely generic Lizard. Basically he's a scientist who mutates into a giant (wait for it) lizard while also going mad and trying to kill everyone. He's a poor choice for a cinematic villain who ultimately works through developing a strong character. Rhys Ifans brings a lot of heart to the role, giving Curt Connors a realistic motivation that functions as his weakness. Strangely enough, they wind up making some of the same mistakes Raimi made by having the villain develop a totally random split personality that he talks to. Both Green Goblin and Lizard (and even Doctor Octopus) do this and it cheapens the character. He's the better character, but the more they push him into craziness the poorer he is for it. When he starts putting in action his big plan it's not really clear why he's doing it.
"Dude, OCCUPIED!"
Thankfully they seem to be taking a cue from the Ultimate Spider-Man comic series in the new franchise in that the major villains all stem from the same experiments being conducted by Ozcorp. A shadowy Norman Osborne is a presence over the whole story making Goblin an obvious candidate for the sequel, and a glimpse of Doc Ock's mechanical arms also sets up this foe.
The Love Interest
Although Mary-Jane is the iconic Spider-Man love interest, Gwen Stacey was his first girlfriend and met a tragic end, giving them both a key part in the character's history. I never got my boxers in a bunch over MJ getting first dibs in the first trilogy because, well, it's not important. That kind of detail is only relevant to the Accuracy Police who will never, ever accept any slight variation from the source material. Honestly, the girl in the original trilogy might've been named Humbert Plumberpoodle, it wouldn't give her any more personality beyond getting kidnapped.
MJ never featured as anything other than a token love interest. Her function was only providing Peter with a girl to gawp at and rescue from the inevitable kidnapping that occurs every single time. From film to film she's either being successful or failing, yet her behaviour and dialogue is interchangeable. Kirsten Dunst is a talented performer but with this material she only uses a confused grimace or a copy/pasted smile (granted that's twice as many expressions as Kristen Stewart boom tish). This simplicity is fine in a blockbuster film, but over the course of three films it begins to get dull.
"I'm smiling!"
Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey, on the other hand, is every thing a blockbuster love interest could and should be. Just like Peter and Connors she's a really well rounded character. Unlike many characters in this role she doesn't fall for the hero because he's grown muscles and stopped wearing glasses, but it's an affection that begins with seeing him stand up to a bully when he picks on a younger kid and it develops as they spend more time together. It's awkward and it's sweet and like most of the relationships in this film it is a strong point of the plot. When faced with danger at the end she doesn't get kidnapped and scream about it, but takes an active role in helping. Peter trusts her with this because he knows that she's capable of helping and when she does run into trouble she handles it. The final scenes, when they have to confront what they've faced, she really steps out of the token love interest mould to prove that she is a unique character.
The Supporting Cast
If there's one area where the new film stands out from the first one, it's in the casting of Uncle Ben and Aunt May. In Raimi's films the roles of Uncle Ben and Aunt May were only included out of obligation to the comic series, and given Peter Parker moves into his own apartment halfway through the first movie they needed to come with contrived reasons to keep May involved as the series wound on (like getting kidnapped when MJ had a prior booking). They could've been dropped and all we would've missed out on was that awful dialogue about Peter thinking MJ was an angel.
"…and when your cousin first saw Natalie Portman he asked "are you an angel?" But that kid was kind of special."
Martin Sheen and Sally Field…well, it's Martin Sheen and Sally Field. These two weren't cast primarily based on their ability to look kinda like their comic book counterparts but because they can perform the roles. There's a real warmth between them and their relationship with Peter gives us a genuine sense of what has shaped him as a person. It's kinda like being raised by President Bartlett. Which is awesome.
The Effects/Action
If there's one thing that sold me on the new Spider-Man movie it's the involvement of Vic Armstrong, Hollywood's most awesome stuntman/co-ordinator. The dude is Superman, Indiana Jones and multiple James Bonds. Even though he's not strapping on the spandex these days he's running the show and that means we have a person in the suit on the wires swinging through the streets whenever possible. A major criticism attached to the first trilogy is an over-reliance on CGI and while people have gotten carried away with this complaint there is a real disconnect between the viewer and the action when we know for a fact that there isn't a real person on the screen.
Spider-Man wishes there wasn't really someone behind him.
The Amazing Spider-Man is much, much more convincing in this area. When it is a CGI character it's just as obvious as usual but used creatively enough not to eject us entirely out the action. When it's very clearly a person doing the stunts it is really impressive. Andrew Garfield is often involved in the stunts and when he isn't we have some parkor athletes to give the character the right kind of movement. When Spider-Man is scrabbling along the walls with a very arachnoid gait it's imaginative and very cool. Still haven't worked out how to stop his clothes hanging towards the wall he's climbing though…
The story from Spider-Man is in a word safe. It pushes no boundaries and tries no new things. It's a kid who gets bitten by a spider, becomes a hero and saves the day. It's the template that gets used in pretty much every generic superhero movie (swapping out 'spider bit' with 'toxic waste', 'gamma radiation', etc). If you want to switch off and have goofy fun then you won't feel as though you've been short-changed.
The Amazing Spider-Man conversely gives you all of that and more. We have the generic villain who is driven mad with power and his desire to fix the world, but this time there is a sympathetic side to the character that makes him as well developed as the hero. The hero himself isn't a stereotype and grows and develops without relying on gimmicks to do so. Spider-Man as a young character who has been reinvented for the modern era. Gwen Stacey is a character first and a love interest second, existing to do more than provide the hero with someone to rescue.
In short, the new film actually has a story to tell. It dispenses with cheesy one-liners and gimmicky villains and builds strong characters whose stories hinge on their relationships with the other characters. The added realism, a genuinely tragic character arc and brilliant performances from the whole cast elevate this above the comic book movie standard set by the movie Spider-Man. If The Amazing Spider-Man is Batman Begins then Spider-Man is the Adam West starring Batman television show from the 60s with the same bright colours and cheeseball characters.
Category : Movie Reviews, Showdown!
Tags : geek, movies
← The Pull List: Must Read Comics Week of 7/11/2012
DC VS. Marvel: Catwoman vs. Black Cat →
202 thoughts on "'Spider-Man' (2002) vs 'The Amazing Spider-Man' (2012)"
Tim The Film Guy on 07/11/2012 at 7:57 pm said:
We all know who wins this contest 😀
Just watch spiderman 3 dance scene haha
Romi on 07/12/2012 at 7:20 pm said:
Hey; I really don't agree, the dance scene is great !
Pingback: Double Barrelled Shoutgun Review – Avengers vs. Amazing Spider-Man | ThePageBoy
Pingback: My Take On: The Amazing Spider-Man
The Dolly Blog on 07/12/2012 at 4:22 pm said:
Adam West as Batman is awesome! 😀
Posky on 07/12/2012 at 10:59 pm said:
Full support. The Adam West Batman has to exist as the polar opposite of the Nolan ones. I love them both.
I don't think the Raimi Spider-Man is quite like the Adam West era Batman though. It's too middle ground while 1960s Batman was as over-the-top as it gets.
gfunk101 on 07/13/2012 at 8:56 am said:
Absolutely. Evey version of Batman has their own merits. Except THAT one.
L. Palmer on 07/13/2012 at 12:40 pm said:
Personally, I really like the Adam West Batman. It's use of kitsch is so over the top and ridiculous that it's good for a laugh. Is it the truest to the comics? No. But, it's fun. In contrast, I feel Joel Schumacher's turn in the Batman director's chair was a huge disservice to the franchise.
The best version of Batman, however, would have to be Batman: The Animated Series.
eongxien on 07/16/2012 at 11:06 am said:
It wasn't just THAT ONE… there were two of them. =D
W. R. Woolf on 07/12/2012 at 4:35 pm said:
Now I want to see the new film 🙂
I've always loved Spider-man (from the cartoons), but I didn't like the films much, so I wasn't going to see the Amazing Spider-Man before I read this 🙂
I only saw it because I had the chance to see a movie on the world's biggest cinema screen. Totally worth it.
penta.batang on 07/12/2012 at 4:47 pm said:
Spider-Man….heeeeemmmm. [www.lowongankerjabatang.wordpress.com
penta on 07/12/2012 at 4:48 pm said:
SPIDERMAN (PETER PAKER) on 07/12/2012 at 5:20 pm said:
SPIDERMAN (PETER PARKER) IT'S THE BEST
AND THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN IS ENEMY
Lackadaisical Loser on 07/12/2012 at 5:21 pm said:
Very cool comparison. I'm definitely watching this one. 🙂
Thanks, hope you enjoy!
M. Duratovich on 11/13/2012 at 11:55 am said:
Please,..screw this totally biased cgi/ultimate spiderman fan boy review by gfunk101.. The Raimi Spiderman series is just the right mix of the original campy comic book from the 60's meshed with modern action and graphics. This 'new' spiderman remake is all for those that are way to young to appreciate the bronze and silver age comics that actually spawned it. It caters and pampers to the 'new' kids who spend $5 a comic, and get very LITTLE substance wise for their money. Ultimate art on the big screen noise. Hell the TRUTH is that with a 230 million dollar budget this film only made 33 million domestically. Fact is the Raimi trilogy is better and made far more money with a cheaper production budget. This isn't the Hulk vs the Incredible Hulk now…And the only real difference in the charcters IMO is thefact that 'Spidey's' webs are created and not part of his powers. No spider sense really btw with the new version. Actually your whole premise/synapsis/analogy is so biased and flawed it is pathetic.. I get it ,..you liked the new film ,..good for you. I myself thought it was so-so.. But to drudge up BS for your own 'agenda' and then claim to be inpartial is ludicris as well as makes you a liar gfunk101. You or anybody else who says differently is selling something.
gfunk101 on 11/13/2012 at 12:12 pm said:
This is the funniest comment I've ever seen.
Cristiano Carvalho on 12/24/2012 at 10:12 pm said:
As I reader of the 60's and 70's Spider Man's comic books, I completely agree. The 2002 Spider Man was a groundbreaking super hero movie, probably even more groundbreaking than the first X-Men. It was the very first time (with perhaps the exception of the 1978 Superman) that you could actually see a film with a superhero doing all the things he did in the comics. Tobey McGuire was perfect as Peter Parker – even physically – not to mention that he's a fine actor himself. Besides, every single element of the original story is there: a perfect Jonah Jameson, great actors like Williem Dafoe and James Franco, and also Kirsten Dunst as a fine Mary Jane. Even with that ridiculous stiff mask, the Green Goblin was a much more interesting villain than the Lizard, who is as dramatic as Godzilla.The effects of the 2002 version were superb for the time and most of all, the story followed the original comics perfectly (except for the artificial webbshooters, presented in the new version, I give them that). Not to mention that Spider Man 2 is one of the greatest super hero movies ever. So, what's the point of rebooting the series after such little time since the last Raimi's Spider Man? They should either continue with the original cast and director or simply finish the whole thing.
Pingback: 呀!
goosequilldippedinvenom on 07/12/2012 at 7:03 pm said:
Love the review – I must admit I was a big fan of the earleir Spider-Man movies, but I can't wait to see what the reboot will do to freshen things up. Also can't wait to see the fate of Gwen!
I still love 'Spider-Man 2', but this is the better story.
The FilmFellas on 07/12/2012 at 7:17 pm said:
Very good post – I enjoyed this in 3D…the one film where 3D really worked when flying through the buildings. I rated the love story in this two and you're right, the characters were developed well. We gave it 8 out of 10 http://thefilmfellas.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/the-amazing-spider-man-review/
mullberrywhine on 07/12/2012 at 7:20 pm said:
Well – I can't wait to go see it! Of course, a nice young man in spandex always brings the gals in droves, and I am sadly no exception. 😉
Lol on that count you won't be disappointed!
dmiller1969 on 07/12/2012 at 7:26 pm said:
Reblogged this on Dennis E. Miller and commented:
I must admit that when I read the announcement for The Amazing Spider-Man that I thought it was far to soon from Spider-Man 3 to reboot the franchise. However, the more I see and read of this n
It still feels very early to revisit the story. Good job nonetheless.
The only justification I can think of for this reasoning is that there are multiple series of the comics and they are taking one of those story lines for this new franchise. This makes sense to me since this film allows us to find out what happened to Peter's parents and has Gwen as his love-interest instead of Mary Jane. I think it will be worth seeing, if for no other reason than to see if the franchise reboot is indeed worth the effort. I suppose it will always feel odd to have a new franchise begin within such a short period of time after the initial one ends, particularly when the original was well-loved by so many. 🙂
nikilee30 on 07/12/2012 at 7:58 pm said:
Thanks for posting this – its a really detailed breakdown and I appreciate it!
I enjoyed writing it!
hmkvermahmkverma on 07/12/2012 at 8:12 pm said:
Amazing SpiderMan – Amazing Animation. All credit to the animation team for making the film a techincal wonder.
shariaz on 07/12/2012 at 8:23 pm said:
That good but i prefer a good movie.
I hear good movies are good.
theneodoctrine on 07/12/2012 at 8:28 pm said:
Amazing critic! Thanks for sharing 🙂
3teensmom on 07/12/2012 at 8:30 pm said:
I ABSOLUTELY LOVED, LOVED, LOVED this film! It depicts the teens in the most realistic light I've seen in film to date. True conflicts, true emotions, true reactions. Garfield is genius and Stone is solid. This is a humanistic approach versus caricature. Thanks for reviewing so well and so thoroughly (I would have said so even if I disagreed)!
wahyu nurudin on 07/12/2012 at 8:42 pm said:
aku masih suka tokoh Tobey maguire.
affae on 07/12/2012 at 8:51 pm said:
Thanks for the review. Nicely analysed and everything.
theyellowranger on 07/12/2012 at 8:53 pm said:
I liked the original but you're right, The Amazing Spider-Man was waaaaay better. Loved it. Nice review/comparison. Congrats on freshly pressed!
Thanks, it was a very cool film.
Graham Milne on 07/12/2012 at 8:58 pm said:
Excellent analysis. Never could stand Emo Peter Parker from the Raimi trilogy. So much more depth in this new version – Garfield is simply a better actor as well.
To be fair to Maquire I think Garfield had much better material to work with. Working with the same script I still think Garfield would've been better though.
cigarettesandmovies on 07/12/2012 at 9:02 pm said:
Nice analysis, but we all know The Amazing Spider-man must be better, it's in 3D 😉
Livi on 07/12/2012 at 9:19 pm said:
When I started reading this, I was ready to hate you, because I'm one of those fans that loved all three movies, and because I watched them when I was younger, I never picked up on any of these errors that you're pointing out. But you wrote such a thorough review that you've changed my mind. It was very helpful to have a point-by-point analysis of the differences between the films, and now I can see both the weaknesses of the first three and the things I will probably like about this new one. I haven't seen it yet, but this makes me sure that I want to. Thanks!
I still like the first two of Raimi's films – but this is a much better tone for the character. Realistic without being serious.
David Clarke on 07/12/2012 at 9:59 pm said:
I liked The Amazing Spider-Man, even if I felt that it was about 30 minutes (maybe more) too long. I also feel that the film, as a whole, was superior to the Sam Rami film. However, with that said, the Sam Rami trilogy was fun and exciting until the third installment. His third film ruined his trilogy and his franchise.
thesaputras on 07/17/2012 at 7:34 am said:
I like the amazing spiderman better 🙂
Satusatuen on 07/12/2012 at 10:08 pm said:
amazing spiderman is amazin'
Lainey hauser on 12/10/2012 at 1:23 am said:
The amazing spider man is better than all of the other ones
But the other ones are good to but not as good as the amazing spider man
I can not wait until the Template:Spider-Man comes out in 2014
AMAZING SPIDER-MAN FAN! I LOVE ANDREW GARFIELD!!!!! on 12/11/2012 at 5:50 pm said:
ramiungarthewriter on 07/12/2012 at 10:31 pm said:
I actually thought the Green Goblin was pretty terrifying in the armor and that the purple spandex would've taken away from him. But then again, I was 11 when I saw that film, so go figure.
As for the new film (which I'll see this afternoon), please tell me the special effects on the Lizard look believable! I hate it when you can tell it's digital to the point that it's funny or stupid!
When you get the camera close to the lizard for his dialogue it looks a little goofy. When he's getting all actiony it looks awesome.
ramiungarthewriter on 07/13/2012 at 10:30 am said:
tell me about it, I just saw it and wrote a review on my own blog. tell me, did you notice the octagons?
yeah I totally agree. In the scene close to the end where he is the white jacket and has the satchel. It looks so fake but still, it doesn't bother me too much.
angelialva on 07/12/2012 at 10:43 pm said:
Reblogged this on Angeli Alva and commented:
Great review! Good read. 🙂
mdprincing on 07/12/2012 at 10:46 pm said:
wow, that was deep, now I must see the new film.
When he does cry, its for a good reason, not some pussy reason like the Tobey Maguire version did. and when he does cry, you feel his emotions.
Arctictiger01 on 07/12/2012 at 11:21 pm said:
Really looking forward to seeing the new movie, but I heard there's a lot of Peter crying in it…I thought it was supposed to be 'darker' than the original version…
He just leak a couple of tears, but it never just comes out of nowhere. He feels like a more realistic person, trying not to let people see how upset he is and regretting letting his emotions get the best of him at times.
weaponsofmassdelight on 07/12/2012 at 11:23 pm said:
Thank you! I wrote a review on my blog and said pretty much the same thing. Gwen Stacey makes much more sense than MJ. It is just a shamethat this one had to come second. I love your review. The writing is great.
llanwyre on 07/12/2012 at 11:26 pm said:
Nice review! I completely agree with the earlier poster who said that part of the charm here is that the teenagers act like real teenagers. Haven't seen that in a blockbuster in FOREVER. There's some really strong dialogue here that just wasn't present in the first film, as you noted.
Terry Malloy's Pigeon Coop on 07/12/2012 at 11:50 pm said:
Admittedly i haven't seen the new film but there's just something about Andrew Garfield i can't warm to. He looks much more Peter Parker-esque than Maguire did, but i'm just not a fan of his. I can't really explain why. I'm still interested to see this though despite that. Great write up!
Mikalee Byerman on 07/12/2012 at 11:58 pm said:
Humbert Plumberpoodle…that made me laugh out loud.
And yeah, I vote President Bartlett for Uncle Ben any day of the week. I loved his character — of course, I don't think Martin Sheen can play any other role (have you seen "Seeking a Friend for the End of the World? Same character…). But I do love him so.
I haven't seen that. I want President Bartlett to be my Uncle…
bardicblogger on 07/13/2012 at 12:08 am said:
Great post! I quite liked the 2002 Spiderman but I never quite felt that Toby Maguire was right for the role. One of the greatest aspects of the character Spiderman/Peter Parker was his depth and his flawed nature. Nothing personal against Toby M but he didn't quite get that dark angst across and full personality that I wanted to see. I can't wait to watch the new film and see how it has been done this time.
Pablo on 10/20/2012 at 3:47 am said:
10 years ago was either Tobey Maguire or Elijah Wood. I liked Maguire (and not having anything else to compare it to besides that japanese version) I liked the first two movies. In the third I hated that venom thing. Now that I have seen this one, I feel it more, even when the story is not completely close to the comics, it makes more sense and the movie has more heart. I liked it!
theftsmatt on 07/13/2012 at 12:12 am said:
Reblogged this on Best In The World and commented:
Just because I love Spidey!
JamieCurtisBaker on 07/13/2012 at 12:44 am said:
The first two Spider-man flicks were awesome.The third was Sam Raimi taking the piss out of Sony. I've seen the original trilogy and the new reboot. For their times, they are perfect. I have no complaints with what Raimi did. My beef is mainly with Sony butchering Venom/Brock's storyline. But they are two completely different universes. The reboot is beautifully written and tells the same origin story again, but doesn't bore us. In fact, it was like seeing it all over again for the very first time. It was a breath of fresh air, but not in a way that means the trilogy was stale. It's still watchable much as Batman with Michael Keaton is still watchable, although completely different from Batman Begins. Overall, The Amazing Spider-man stood apart and was a genuinely pleasant movie experience.
nightscapeproductions on 07/13/2012 at 1:49 am said:
Very Interesting review. I admit I really liked the orignal spiderman movies but the new movie was a hundred times better, HOWEVER, I didn't really see as many reasons as your brought up upon watching it. Good job!
dockfam on 07/13/2012 at 1:49 am said:
I haven't seen the movie yet, but my parents took my kids last week. My son is now 14 so he was in his peak "Spiderman" obsession stage when the first SpiderMan came out — needless to say I've probably seen the first few movies over a hundred times each. I look forward to seeing this one soon if I can find the time.
The one complaint my parents had about this cast was that Peter and the girl looked too old to be in high school…they thought it wasn't really realistic.
Oops I just realized what I said "realistic" surely isn't a term to be used when speaking of comic book heroes, so I guess it doesn't matter! 🙂
I teach in a high school, and they looked the part to me.
Heather on 07/13/2012 at 2:01 am said:
I really agree with all the points you made. I think that's why I wasn't such a huge fan of MJ in the films – she was just kind of… there… great analysis.
Junior on 07/13/2012 at 2:22 am said:
The series with Toby mcguire is much better, The new Movie coming out is just not the same. Good try in making others think different.
Arah on 07/13/2012 at 2:42 am said:
Loved the humour in the Amazing Spiderman. Completely adored Emma's portrayal of Gwen! All my friends had to listen to me repeatedly mutter "that's how it's done, MJ…" throughout the movie.
yetysaurus on 07/13/2012 at 2:45 am said:
I haven't had the opportunity to see the film yet – thank you for this review (without spoilers!) Looking forward to seeing even more now!
JP on 07/13/2012 at 2:56 am said:
Cool article. The end of Spiderman 3 is quite exchangeable but they used the last villain in the last film when they are filming the un-mutant Lizard there. It's obviously the good movie of this year.
writerdood on 07/13/2012 at 3:02 am said:
I enjoyed the first series quite a bit. When I heard about this one, my first thought was that it was too soon for a reboot. But here it is, so I imagine I'll probably watch it, but not in the theater. I'll wait for the DVD on this one. The biggest disappointment for me was the villain. Willem Dafoe was awesome in the first spider man, and really made the movie for me. I didn't mind the costume that much, although I though it could have been a lot better. (You made this for the military and it looks like THAT?). I loved his lab scenes, and how he wiped out his assistant. The split-personality bit was a little over the top, but still fun.
kaleidoscopebrain on 07/13/2012 at 3:04 am said:
Thanks for the actually-realistic review! (I've always loved Andrew Garfield, but I heard some mixed reviews from people (with unreliable taste), so I wasn't sure if that was a good enough reason to see it) I was totally wondering about this movie all week, and now I am definitely gonna see it!
321 Pic on 07/13/2012 at 3:06 am said:
I've always loved Spider-man, Now I want to see the new film
rachelbethahrens on 07/13/2012 at 3:11 am said:
I think I want to see this now. But I have to say Mary Jane is a character also. She's not swooning all over Spiderman all the time, especially in the second movie. She's done waiting for Peter and she'll move on if she has to. Spiderman 2 is still one of my favorite superhero films. But even though the hero is played by someone who grew up in ENGLAND, I think I might see Amazing Spiderman just to find the real story. Great post, though.
ladylavinia1932 on 07/13/2012 at 5:14 am said:
["I think I might see Amazing Spiderman just to find the real story."]
You won't find the real story in "THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN". Like the Rami films, Webb's film changed what was printed in the comics.
Plus, the director made 500 Days of Summer, my favorite break up film with the most AWESOME killer soundtrack.
theteenagejournal on 07/13/2012 at 3:39 am said:
I'll definitely be making this movie a part of my summer bucket list now!
CleverrealityDerek on 07/13/2012 at 4:31 am said:
Great post. My vote is for Toby, old villains, Kirsten (I have a crush), New supporting cast, new effects.
Overall I think the first trilogy was just fine, but I like the new one two
allcancerfightingfoods on 07/13/2012 at 4:31 am said:
Btw a friend told me spiderman is made up, but I am sure it's real. Anyone can prove either? Thanks
The Wandering Mind on 07/13/2012 at 4:41 am said:
It was a fun movie, But watching in 3D was a waste. I'll probably watch it in theatres again.
freak0nature on 07/13/2012 at 4:42 am said:
Interesting. I might actually watch the movie now. I was getting really tired of Spiderman, it's not like I dislike him as a superhero but he, like many others, has been a bit overdone. But this movie seems interesting and your post has helped give me some perspective. I knew that the movie was going to be different than the one Toby Macguire was in but I was still expecting…idk…another generic superhero movie. I may be spoiled as a movie goer but I would like to learn something new about a Superhero when watching a movie or at least get a different feel from it (i.e. Tim Burton's Batman movies vs. The Dark Knight series) after reading your blog I feel that Spiderman can be seen all shiny and new.
gfunk101 on 07/14/2012 at 10:40 am said:
It is the same origin story we've already seen – but with better character work.
TEES AND MORE on 07/13/2012 at 4:54 am said:
Reblogged this on TEES AND MORE and commented:
Love Spiderman
["Let's not kid ourselves here – the end result is going to be The Amazing Spider-Man is the better film. We've already had two of our reviewers say as much. "]
Are we really supposed to accept what is obviously your opinion as fact?
I'm sorry, but I don't agree. Neither movie is better than the other, as far as I'm concerned. And the next time you make such a comparison between two films, why don't you try admitting that your opinions ARE just that and not some statement we're suppose to accept as fact.
No, I don't feel that I have to "admit" that what I write is my opinion. I thought that it would it be obvious to everyone reading it that everything I write is my own opinion.
I'm hardly going to be writing about someone else's opinion, am I? Did you come to 'Funk's House of Geekery' expecting to read Lady Gaga's opinion?
ladylavinia1932 on 07/13/2012 at 1:16 pm said:
[No, I don't feel that I have to "admit" that what I write is my opinion. I thought that it would it be obvious to everyone reading it that everything I write is my own opinion.]
Then PLEASE indicate that you were stating your opinion, instead of starting articles with ""Let's not kid ourselves here – the end result is going to be The Amazing Spider-Man is the better film. We've already had two of our reviewers say as much." Is it possible to say "I believe this movie is better than . . .?"
["I'm hardly going to be writing about someone else's opinion, am I? Did you come to 'Funk's House of Geekery' expecting to read Lady Gaga's opinion?"]
I actually felt as if I was reading Lady Gaga's opinion.
gfunk101 on 07/13/2012 at 1:36 pm said:
My name is at the top of the website. The article is started with 'by gfunk101'. I write the article referring to my personal experiences and use a first person perspective. It's a film review, which is by definition an opinion.
If you can't work out that you're reading my opinion from all of that unless it's pointed out to you, then good luck with life.
Natasha on 07/13/2012 at 5:23 am said:
Really looking forward to seeing this, despite the fact that it seems a little early for a reboot
It is way to early for a reboot. Good film, but I couldn't shake Raimi's version from my head.
dunkdad on 07/13/2012 at 5:31 am said:
Dude! This was gnarly! Great Post!
I don't often get my work called 'gnarly'! Thanks!
dunkdad on 07/13/2012 at 9:52 pm said:
No problem! (It was either gnarly or bodacious) You should post more stuff on great superheroes like this! BTW, What's your fav superhero!
Lol there's a small hint in my avatar! And the header for this site. And the background.
preciouslymecindy on 07/13/2012 at 5:46 am said:
I Enjoyed both but liked the love interest in the Amazing spider man ever. Emma Stone is amazing all by herself. I liked the comic relief of the amazing spiderman and the co characters but for the most part it was predictable, like it had been done before lol cause it had but great write up 🙂
Parlor of Horror on 07/13/2012 at 5:53 am said:
Sure, the amazing spiderman is better than the others cause its NEW! lets see how you all feel 10 years from now when they're doing the 3rd reboot.
Just like the way we all loved 'Spider-Man 3' when it was new? This is the better story, better characters and better performances and time isn't going to change that.
Parlor of Horror on 07/14/2012 at 10:30 am said:
I didn't see this yet so I can't really say too much. I may be blown away and agree with you 100%. I didn't like 'Spider-man 3' but 1 & 2 were awesome films when they came out.
They're still damn good films, especially the second one. Personally I don't understand where all the disdain for the trilogy has suddenly come from.
bost0nfire on 07/13/2012 at 6:07 am said:
I liked both versions.. but I had forgotten about a lot of the stuff you pointed out and now I realize I like the new one better. Nice post. Oh and Kristen Stewart def sucks.
{lv} on 07/13/2012 at 8:21 am said:
I agree. I walked out of the theatre loving The Amazing Spiderman. I was never that impress with the first series (with Tobey Maguire) because I wasn't convince Maguire as Spiderman and Kristen Dunst as MJ. Andrew Garfield had me convince that he was Peter Parker and the chemistry between Garfield and Emma Stone is so much more electric. I thoroughly enjoyed The Amazing Spiderman more. Each has there moments but overall, The Amazing Spiderman is more memorable in its cast, characters, actions, and story.
zensouth on 07/13/2012 at 8:46 am said:
I think that when the 'newness' of the new movie wears off it will seem as dorky as the 2002 version. I think it is way over-acted, with just as many cheezy one-liners. I was hoping for an edgy re-boot ala Batman Begins, but instead I got goofy Peter Parker using his new found spider-powers to skateboard to Coldplay in what I can only guess was an abandoned boat warehouse. It was like a teenage coming-of-age sequence taken right out of 1994.
Plus, all the plot holes. Did spidey just steal all his webbing from Oscorp? You're telling me no one noticed? Since when to high school kids get even a fraction of the clearance at a corporation like Oscorp anyway? Actually, since when do highschoolers get any internships like that ever? Where did his suit come from? Where did he get the materials to make his web-shooters? And wouldn't spidey already have tested out of high school anyway if he was so smart that he could solve problems that couldn't be solved over a lifetime of two genius scientists? Also, what are the odds that spidey is going to run around NY roughing up bad guys and not ONE ever pulls a gun. Dude has no body armor, his weakness is BULLETS.
Having said that, the action was excellent, and the Lizard beat spidey like a drum, which made spidey seem more human and vulnerable, adding to the drama.
Stealing the webbing from Oscorp did bug (boom tish) me as well. At first he just rocks into this high security room and nobody follows it up, then he later goes back and steals things…no wonder they produce so many mutants!
This version is still pretty goofy, but that's always been a part of the comics. I still like the first one, in part for the dorkiness of it.
dapperdolly on 07/13/2012 at 9:03 am said:
Great review, though somewhat confusing because when I started reading it I got the impression that you saw the Raimi versions as on par with or a little 'inferior' to the new one but it changed and ended with sounding vastly inferior.
I haven't seen the new film yet so can't comment on it, and I've only seen the cartoons from the 80's onwards and the Raimi films, but I thought The Amazing Spiderman was supposed to be an alternate dimension/universe/timeline whatever where this is a different Peter Parker. So how come the storyline is so similar? Was it like that in the comics?
I personally liked the trilogy and thought they were technically well made for their time, though it's true they used too many old fashion stereotypes in the story. I'm not really a fan of re-loads, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were undeniably very well made but I hated the character and I couldn't sympathize with him much, plus the train scene in BB as well as the abilities of hero and villian were too over the top for 'normal' people (but with money or training) imo. The same goes with Superman, I hated the characters and plot, and awful things stood out like him being able to carry a continent made of kryptonite. I only liked the casting in that one. But, I won't let those affect me if/when I get round to watching The Amazing Spiderman.
As for the split personality issue, it doesn't bother me as I think more people suffer from it than we realize, particularly people with either a ton of money and resources or extremely little – if not split personality then at least disassociation. Also, the heroes/heroines in these super hero roles tend to have at least split-identities if not split or separate personalities as well. For me it's like how detectives/cops and criminals/villains tend to share similarities in order to understand or fight each other effectively, that doesn't mean they're the same but the detective is usually aware of how the person they are chasing thinks because they are able to imagine it themselves or anticipate how the other thinks, but (hopefully) they wouldn't want to behave that way themselves.
I wrote the article right off the bat after watching 'Amazing Spider-Man' while on holiday so what you've got really is a stream of consciousness. When I sat down I thought the films would be more balanced but the more I thought about it the more the new film stood out as better.
guilhermeferrera on 07/13/2012 at 9:29 am said:
Great !!!
Temp Candy on 07/13/2012 at 10:11 am said:
The old spider man is way more inspirational. The one they made more recently that was just released into theatres makes me want to vomit 😦 I dont like Emma Stone or that British guy either… Toby Mcguire did a PERFECT job. They didnt need to make a new one!? SO disappointed.
ejomlexus on 07/13/2012 at 10:45 am said:
All I know is that, they all do this for the sake of avangers…
Both were good, though.
sufeel97 on 07/13/2012 at 10:49 am said:
Reblogged this on sufeel97.
Joe Labriola on 07/13/2012 at 11:14 am said:
I'm going to reboot the reboot.
shutupandsmileforme on 07/13/2012 at 11:55 am said:
I like your point of view and I think that it is true. Although I love The Amzaing Spiderman, I still love the old movies because it was the first Spiderman and my favs. If you think about it, 2002 was many years ago and effects and production could've changed quite a bit. I really like your opinions though.
bad_yeti on 07/13/2012 at 12:58 pm said:
*spoilers*
First off, well written article. Personally, I was vastly disappointed by the new film and don't agree with a lot of what you commented on. I do agree that Martin Sheen was brilliant as Uncle Ben and that Emma Stone was a much better character both on script and on screen than MJ. But, I get annoyed when people say that this is a "gritty" and "realistic" film and I'm unbelievable tired of people comparing ASM to Batman Begins. Spidey and Batman are two completely different types of heroes and if Batman is at home in a dark and gritty world, Spider-man is decidedly out of place.
If you look at the source material it becomes obvious that the Spidey universe is not at all realistic. He's high school nerd who gets bitten by a radioactive spider, nearly all his arch-villains are scientists or small time crooks who all happen to inhabit the same neighborhood and undergo some wacky transformation. We've got an old man flying around in a green bird costume, a guy with star-fish lightning face-mask that looks like a christmas ornament, A guy in a rhino costume, an old man who makes toys and who is also an alien, A hairy chested man in a cheetah outfit that wants to skin Spidey and turn him into a rug, and like fifty alien symbiote spin-offs villains with names that sound like bad 80's death metal bands. Carnage, Venon, Anti-Venom, Toxin, Lasher, Scream, ect.
I may be in the minority here, but I actually prefer my Spidey movies to have the tone and mood of a comic book. I KNOW that Spidey; I spent my childhood reading his adventures. I see him there in the 2002 Spider-man, but I don't see him in the ASM. If you're comparing it to Batman Begins then you're doing it wrong. I think its funny that the larger-than-life, over-the-top approach to Spidey that everyone loved in the early 2000's is now considered terrible.
Andrew Garfield never BECOMES Spidey for me; he's just Andrew Garfield in a suit that looks like a basketball (sorry, I don't like it).
To me, Spider-man is defined by being a wise-cracking smart-ass, but who is also the perpetually unlucky (Parker Luck) under-dog that learns life's lessons the hard way. Yes, Toby's Parker is defined by recycled tropes, but it's still effective in establishing the Peter that I know. I like that Peter, I'm perpetually routing for him. I'd rather have him established by recycled troupes that are proven and work than unnecessarily re-tooling him to seem "fresh." And I think that's the biggest reason why everyone is oddly loving this film. It's fresh and new, yes, but does it work as a Spidey film? It suffices, but is ultimately disappointing.
I remember being excited when hearing about the casting for Spidey and I really want to like AG, but I can't. He never appears as the underdog to me, but as another alpha male hidden within a nest of other alpha males. Where he seems most galvanized on screen are the scenes where he picks on others or beats up random guys outside clubs or goes on a vendetta against petty thieves that may have a cute tattoo on their wrist (really?). I understand that this makes him more edgy, but it's not Peter Parker behavior to me.
And oh man, what are you talking about that Toby's Spidey had no character development? I loved his journey with arrogance and selfishness because it was fun (and more accurate); he did the first thing any normal high school kid would do: try to exploit his new powers for $$. And to impress a girl. By amateur wrestling. We got some great cameos with Bruce Campbell, and wrestling legend, Macho Man Randy Savage (Nice costume, did your husband make that for you?). I'd actually argue that Toby's Spidey goes through a more extreme and profound journey of discovery (and w/o any weird ultimates story lines about secret agent parents). He reacts to the powers in a kind but immature way that leads to great tragedy, deals with the guilt and grief, and then selfishly kills the man responsible, has to learn to deal with a life on his hands, watches the girl of his dreams get with his best friend, gets the girl, loses the girl, and watches a man who he admired and almost a father figure die a twisted monster.
The fight scenes were memorable and well-scripted, the soundtrack was epic and added emotional depth and essentially established a franchise alone. Spider-man was immature and confused and was constantly cracking jokes (web to the mouth of J. Jonah when Gobby enters the Bugle, "shhh….mommy and daddy have to talk now.") ASM had one joke that I can recall (the small knives one from the trailer), and the few fight scenes were short and unmemorable. He fought mostly with his webbings and seemed to lose his super strength (he can actually do things like stop moving trains and throw cars, hell even lift buildings). Again, I don't know this Spider-man. Other people may like it, but I don't.
The 2002 film may have a "safe" story, yes, but I interpret that as "accurate" in telling the origin for what it is and not trying to make it something more for the sake of appearing fresh or edgy. It's not a terribly original story, but it's solid and well-made and it also establishes a rich and vibrant world for future films to flourish. ASM has a story that drags in parts and is full of plot holes (if the lizard has to constantly reinject the serum to maintain the effect, why do Gwen & Pete need the oscorp distribution device? All the victims will revert on their own in time, also if Gwen reaches the device before Kurt and her and Pete already know that his plan hinges on the device being undamaged and in working order; I don't know, why not trash it? Tiny lizards hanging out with Kurt? Spiderman dodging a full clip at point blank in one scene and then a cop's accidental haphazard shot inexplicably hits a swinging and pre-cognitive Spidey at a great distance?)
The 2002 film is fun and it has J. Jonah Jameson, Betty Brandt, Flash, Harry, Robbie, a Bruce Campbell cameo, Raimi's car, "The Classic" (Army of Darkness, ect) . The ASM has Flash and only Flash. The ASM world just seems a little bland and colorless in comparison.
And finally, the villains. I can admit that Gobby isn' the best Raimi villain (Doc Oc) and his costume could have been better, true, but as ridiculous as Raimi makes his villains he always does and amazing job grounding them with believable motivations. Gobby uses his new powers to get revenge on the Oscorp board members after usurping him from a company he founded and then after noticing Spidey's powers tries to bully him into joining him. Rhy's Kurt Conners starts off promising, researching a breakthrough to benefit all humankind and that will heal his deformity, but once he turns in the the Lizard creature he loses all rationality and his motivation becomes muddy. Suddenly he's talking to himself just like Gobby, and he wants to turn his wife and kid along with all of New York into CGI lizard monsters? He likes the power and suddenly he wants everyone else to have it too? Not to mention that doing so would make the advantage of his new powers become completely irrelevant. Also, tiny lizard totally dig him now. They'll probably stop hanging out with him once all of NYC are CGI lizard monsters though.
Kurt's brave act of saving Spidey at the end lost it's emotional impact for me because the character was already ruined. He stopped being a character and turned into a prop. The old "grabbing the hand as he falls over and then pulling him up" trope is not enough to revive his honor. Didn't have the same impact of dying Norman's last words "don't tell Harry.." or Doc Oc's self sacrifice to contain the nuclear reaction.
Sorry for ranting, haha! When someone has a reaction to a movie that makes me say "wait, did we even watch the same film?" I have to speak up and explain my perspective. I don't think ASM was a "bad" film and I LOVE that they're attempting to tell the biggest tragedy of Spider-man mythos (regrettably, Raimi's approach to the Stacys was influenced by ultimates) and I WILL see future films in the franchise for that reason, but was it better than 2002's Spider-man?
Let's face it, it's not even close.
I agree that people have this strange notion that this reboot was going to go down a similar path to 'Batman Begins', and such a take would be pretty awful. Spider-Man needs a bit of silliness to work.
whackywhizkid on 07/15/2012 at 5:26 pm said:
You have written a reply-blogpost? 😉
Jae on 07/13/2012 at 1:22 pm said:
Well, it sounded that you really liked The Amazing Spider-man.
I must admit, I watched the first trilogy and I don't remember much about it. Except the part about Peter Parker dancing in the club…
Ew, you only remembered that part? Better give them a rewatch!
Well, I don't exactly remember his moves…
But give them a rewatch? And, what? Start comparing them to The Amazing Spider-man even more? I'm not quite sure I'd like that…
Adiw We on 07/13/2012 at 1:41 pm said:
Spiderman 1, 2 and 3 are amazing, but The Amazing Spiderman is brilliant. Great goodness for the great review
Michele McGovern on 07/13/2012 at 7:39 pm said:
Agree. 100%. 😉
arasyidash on 07/13/2012 at 1:42 pm said:
I like new costum…very simplified…
Vishvesh on 07/13/2012 at 2:11 pm said:
You have completely dissected the movie. Well done!
honeykein on 07/13/2012 at 2:31 pm said:
Mary on 07/13/2012 at 3:01 pm said:
I think my favorite part of this entire post is your nod to "The West Wing," and therefore I've decided I must see the film.
I miss the West Wing. I miss C.J.
I miss Josh. And Toby. Also C.J., Sam, Leo, Abigail, Charlie, and we cannot forget Ainsley Hayes.
a solemn punch on 07/13/2012 at 3:50 pm said:
Bookmark first. Read later. If it's freshly pressed, It must be good.
creativefind on 07/13/2012 at 4:13 pm said:
Reblogged this on creativefind.
Vergielyn Cubol on 07/13/2012 at 4:14 pm said:
Reblogged this on The Writing Corp and commented:
I'll reblog this 😀 😀 Thanks
drewpan on 07/13/2012 at 5:34 pm said:
I hated the idea of this remake at first, but yeah, that all went out the window when I saw the first proper trailer. Garfield and Stone absolutely owned this movie, and that alone would've pushed this film above the previous ones!
gothichydran126 on 07/13/2012 at 8:35 pm said:
I don't know…I haven't seen The Amazing Spiderman yet but when I saw the previews on TV I didn't like his cocky attitude. I guess I should see it before I judge it further from Raimi's versions which I liked.
But tell me, did Stan Lee make a cameo in this reboot like he has in all the Marvel films?? Always loved spotting him in each film. 🙂
Stan the Man is in this one, and you won't miss him. He has a very funny scene – my favourite cameo of his to date.
gothichydran126 on 07/14/2012 at 6:23 am said:
Now you've convinced me! I've got to see it now 🙂
herdailydigest on 07/13/2012 at 9:13 pm said:
OMG …i just wanna watch the movie right NOW! thanks for the review!
bahia on 07/13/2012 at 10:21 pm said:
I thought it was too early to revisit this franchise, but everything I've heard about the new movie has been good. I like your side by side comparison. I'm definitely going to check it out.
moopsz on 07/14/2012 at 12:12 am said:
Jason on 07/14/2012 at 12:59 am said:
I stopped reading this article after about 3 paragraphs because you didn't run spell check or grammar check. Please, before publishing things that you want people to read, do this; it makes people think that your article isn't worth reading, even if you have great things to say.
AMYunus on 07/14/2012 at 1:21 am said:
wow, great post. I love it much but this background of this blog annoys me. 😆
adventurousgirls on 07/14/2012 at 1:50 am said:
I think you are spot on with your critique. When lizard is having a crazy moment in the sewer the multiple voices definitely seemed like the green goblin going crazy in the office scene. I also loved the Gwen and Peter interactions because they did reply seem like awkward 17 year olds.
midnitechef on 07/14/2012 at 2:02 am said:
Thanks for the review and contrast!
essaylove on 07/14/2012 at 2:27 am said:
This was exactly what I needed. I wanted to see the new one just for A. Garfield, but this convinced me otherwise. Thanks!
annkang on 07/14/2012 at 4:43 am said:
I absolutely hated the spider-man 1,2,3 (didn't even watch the third one) but LOVED the new amazing spiderman. loved this review as well. it was much closer to the original comic book.
Marti Parham on 07/14/2012 at 8:13 am said:
Congrats on being pressed!
Candace Howze on 07/14/2012 at 9:46 am said:
Very intriguing and informative post! I was pretty leery about watching the new Spiderman because I was so attached to the old one, but reading this brought out a lot of solid points and motivated me to give a try. Great review!
Follow The Eaten Path on 07/14/2012 at 12:51 pm said:
Kudos to you for a good analysis! And a mighty good read too!
I agree with most of the points you made, some more (like the one about the love interest – I want to scream every time I see Dunst's skullish grin and droopy eyes, completely at cross-purposes with each other!) but I do have reservations about some.
For the hero, I think in context of when it was made, there needed to be a simplicity in story telling, a sort of breaking-down or spoon-feeding if you like, and therefore a caricature-ish depiction of the geek Peter Parker. 'Amazing' is quite obviously for a more movie-ripe audience, a more evolved cine-goer who has been lapping up all the superhero films of the last decade and a half with glee and is therefore looking for something 'faster, higher, stronger' in whatever is served up next. So the geek-to-cocky transformation of Garfield, his getting carried away and having a bit of fun on the side with his new-found powers enamours him to the audience in today's context, much as the thick frames and shuffled walk of Maguire did before.
For the support cast, I agree Martin Sheen really brings in something special and solid to Uncle Ben – he is a wonderfully believable tower of strength, whose sudden absence is therefore that much more poignant and hard-hitting. But Sally Field's Aunt May is slightly crazed, cranky and almost witch-like, not a reassuring or comforting figure-head at all. Give me Rosemary Harris' doe-eyed, kindly, dependable, ever-huggable Aunt May any day… she constantly reminds you why being good is good, and brings out the nice things in everyone, not just Peter. Here was a character that again, was believable and relatable, just like Sheen's Ben.
F&F on 07/14/2012 at 9:40 pm said:
yet to watch "The Amazing Spider-Man.ll hold on to your post,until I watch it.
Swapnil Bhatnagar on 07/14/2012 at 9:57 pm said:
Reblogged this on TechHackers » iSwapnil™ and commented:
and that's so true.. lol
therandomgeekguy on 07/15/2012 at 1:34 am said:
I agree wholeheartedly. As much as I loved the two Sam Raimi "Spider-Man" films (Can't we just pretend "Spider-Man 3" never happened like many people do with "Batman & Robin"?), they weren't as good as "The Amazing Spider-Man". Everything about this new film made me remember why I have always loved Spider-Man. Marc Webb told a better story than Sam Raimi, the cast was better on every level, and the move hit me on an emotional level the previous series didn't.
I will always be thankful to Mr. Raimi and Tobey Maguire, however, for giving me my first chance to see Spider-Man done well on a big screen.
rafflesianews on 07/15/2012 at 1:44 am said:
just say wow
Fiona @ lifelyricslemoncake on 07/15/2012 at 3:41 am said:
I can't believe it's been 10 years! Excellent synopsis and comparison. Will pass it on. Congrats on being freshly pressed!
Andreas Moser on 07/15/2012 at 5:35 am said:
2002. Much better. On all counts.
No it is not The Amazing Spider-Man 2012 is much better
sarangirl on 07/15/2012 at 5:51 am said:
I think the new film is so impressed bu its own cleverness that it lacks soul. The hipster vindictiveness towards the old films is totally out of place.
discolouredviews on 07/15/2012 at 7:10 am said:
Reblogged this on discolouredviews and commented:
Good Review
Three Men & A Red Head on 07/15/2012 at 2:27 pm said:
Brilliant post. Subtle contrasts you could see in both the movies. But, Garfield whoops Maguire anyday! 🙂
setinmotion on 07/15/2012 at 9:23 pm said:
Great post 🙂 I recently wrote a review of The Amazing Spider-Man myself and I thought that a few of our points were quite similar, in particular Andrew Garfield's character development as Spidey and the kinda pointless villain.
Also, I'd completely forgotten Kirsten Dunst as a redhead. Uhm…
gamesfemme on 07/15/2012 at 9:56 pm said:
I did really enjoy the first trilogy, but I'm planning on keeping an open mind when I check out the new movie tonight. Thanks for this insightful comparison 🙂
cellynseah on 07/15/2012 at 11:28 pm said:
Reblogged this on cellynseah and commented:
emm.. not yet watch it
Nick! on 07/15/2012 at 11:37 pm said:
Interesting comparison. I don't know if it is truly fair to say that a fault (when comparing the two) is that the earlier film "played it safe" (although, I feel that both films are fairly vanilla). You have to realize that in 2002, superhero films were not one of the dominant genres they are today. Doing what they did in 2002 *was* taking a risk. If they played it safe then, Peter would rarely have been in his costume and the Green Goblin would remain a shady businessman.
megacolby on 07/15/2012 at 11:56 pm said:
Reblogged this on Technicolby.
randomcastillo on 07/16/2012 at 12:59 am said:
Reblogged this on randomcastillo.
jbewing on 07/16/2012 at 1:53 am said:
I must drag my wife and I to this, thank you for the solid review.
jennabunnyy on 07/16/2012 at 3:46 am said:
Honestly, I haven't seen "The Amazing Spider-Man" yet for this exact reason. I'm too scared to see that the trilogy I fell in love with over the years isn't as good as I thought it would be. I'm scared. But, hey, I'll get over it.
1letmetellu on 08/23/2012 at 2:06 am said:
The format of Comparison is cool well written to prove that "The Amazing Spider-Man" is better than the previous one (Spider-Man (2002)).Don't worry the trilogy you fell in love with still good as you thought.About "The Amazing Spider-Man" it's very boring from starting only the climax of the film is average not so good as it should be.special effects what can i say about that.It's 2012 where the Producers like Steven Spielberg serving Transformers to the CGi lovers "The Amazing Spider-Man" failed in front of them the lizard they showed in the movie is look like animated creature in the movie i expected more action/fight scene then the Spider-Man 2 or Marc Webb tried to show Peter Parker story in a different way and his is totally failed in that
*Death of Uncle Ben was Horrible in TAS (2012)
**Background Music/Theme Music they forgot to add (Raimi's trilogy has the better)
Inspirational Story/Dialogues not at all
***First between Gwen Stacy & Peter Parker little bit funny where Tobey's is very famous
****The Death scene of Stacy's Father little bit Emotional (Marc Webb tried well but failed)but not so good i laughed when Peter/Andrew says at the end of the movie promise are meant to be broken.you are breaking a promise that you make in front of a person who is dying that was sick.
there are many error in the movie i can't describe.there are some lovers who love this reboot i don't know y i think they love the cast too much Andrew Garfield/Emma u know Twilight effects.
The format of Comparison is cool well written to prove that \"The Amazing Spider-Man\" is better than the previous one (Spider-Man (2002)).Don\'t worry the trilogy you fell in love with still good as you thought.About \"The Amazing Spider-Man\" it\'s very boring from starting only the climax of the film is average not so good as it should be.special effects what can i say about that.It\'s 2012 where the Producers like Steven Spielberg serving Transformers to the CGi lovers \"The Amazing Spider-Man\" failed in front of them the lizard they showed in the movie is look like animated creature in the movie i expected more action/fight scene then the Spider-Man 2 or Marc Webb tried to show Peter Parker story in a different way and his is totally failed in that
**Background Music/Theme Music they forgot to add (Raimi\'s trilogy has the better)
***First kiss scene between Gwen Stacy & Peter Parker little bit funny where Tobey\'s is very famous as evrybody konw.
****The Death scene of Stacy\'s Father little bit Emotional (Marc Webb tried well but failed)but not so good i laughed when Peter/Andrew says at the end of the movie promise are meant to be broken.you are breaking a promise that you make in front of a person who is dying that was sick.
there are many error in the movie i can\'t describe.there are some lovers who love this reboot i don\'t know y i think they love the cast too much Andrew Garfield/Emma u know Twilight effects.
goodgarbs on 07/16/2012 at 6:07 am said:
Old Spiderman Is WAAAYYT Better!!
writingforeverwherever on 07/16/2012 at 11:58 am said:
Enlightening aaaaand helpful.
sonofwalt on 07/16/2012 at 12:31 pm said:
Good and thorough, fair review. You've convinced me to see the movie. 🙂
Mr.Jay on 07/16/2012 at 3:28 pm said:
10 years later, still remember the feeling when I watched Spider Man: love and courage.
urbandud on 07/16/2012 at 10:55 pm said:
the two spider man film catered to their specific market. the first one was more comic book like, while the latest feels grounded. here, if you may, i will share my review. http://goo.gl/GmBMh
the new one is actually based alot on the comics. you read the first 13 issue of Ultimate spider-man and you'll see how marc webb relates it to that series, the amazing spider-man is based on the ultimate spider-man comics, (sound wierd but yeah…)
ariananunez on 07/17/2012 at 11:27 pm said:
this is fantastic, i want to see the new one, and I'm a fan of the comics, didn't really ever like the Raimi versions (Toby Maguire? come on) I like that they are starting from the REAL beginning in this one
Reblogged this on Ariana's Brain Blog.
Pingback: Double Barrelled Shotgun Review – Realism and 'Realism' | ThePageBoy
daof on 07/18/2012 at 2:57 am said:
i hope the film will be good
antoinettemsmut on 07/18/2012 at 2:58 am said:
I love articles like this. While I'm not that interested in Spider Man, it really pulls apart the elements of storytelling to compare what worked and what didn't. This is the type of writing that will benefit any creative type. Thanks for posting!
fifagame on 07/18/2012 at 4:24 am said:
great post and my choice : spider man 2002
unfilteredeverything on 07/18/2012 at 1:18 pm said:
Okay so here's the thing. Stan Lee's scene/appearance was the best of any film he's ever been in. 'Nuff said.
investmentingoldandsilverr on 07/18/2012 at 9:30 pm said:
One of my favorite movie series. Images are very nice. Thanks for the heavy article.
Catherine on 07/24/2012 at 12:25 am said:
Reblogged this on The Cat and The Beard.
perrysimon on 07/25/2012 at 8:52 am said:
The Amazing Spider Man was much better than the old Spiderman movie
Naero on 08/18/2012 at 5:24 am said:
I agree with most of this comparison /except/ for your assessment on Spiderman (2002)'s storyline. I favor Garfield, but I don't believe it's fair to brand off Maguire as a generic superhero, who drastically turned noble overnight.
Maguire's incarnation of Peter Parker was initially fascinated by his powers for his prowess to hold his own against bullies, as well as progressively using it for his own benefits to impress his love interest (a la the wrestling competition to save up for a car, after witnessing her reaction to Flash's new car). He even acted rash enough to dismiss Uncle Ben's mentoring, because he did not embrace the moral principle of responsibility straight off the bat. The death of Uncle Ben and his pursuit for the culprit however, did motivate him to combat crime – he's been in deep regret about refusing to apprehend the suspect of the crime, out of resentment for getting the short of the stick for his victory in the ring. Without traumatic events, it doesn't seem as plausible that he would be on his heroic endeavors.
It can also be argued that the "Acquiring superpowers overnight, being fascinated by them, traumatic event, heroic motivations" chronology has been reused overtime, but you seemed to convey that he generically transformed into a superhero simply by acquiring superpowers; I disagree with this due to the reasons explained, but I generally agree with most of your review, including Andrew Garfield being more true to humanity.
jackthe mack on 08/19/2012 at 1:29 pm said:
not to be mean or sound judgy but this isnt a reboot its just another version of spider man like the comics for me both are great and spiderman vs amazing spiderman it aint even about that its just wich director made the better movie. amazing spiderman other alternate universe than the other one
The studio will be pleased to hear there's at least one person who believes the marketing.
Savannah on 08/27/2012 at 6:06 pm said:
I read the first few paragraphs. Once I reached the mispelling of Tobey MaGuire, I instantly knew the reviewer did not know what he was talking about. While the new Spiderman movie was great and I have high hopes for this Andrew Garfield, both movies sought after different viewers. One being an older age group, the other, more of an adolescent. Also, Tobey has a sort of distinct acting style, and gave Spiderman his own twist rather than playing it safe and sticking with the comics. Also, it is terribly sad to see reviews like this! Where the writer does not speak from knowledge. I respect everyboy's opinions, however, I respect facts even more and these facts were more, "this is how it is because I say so." Not only is the entire first movie as a whole criticised unfairly, but the actors as well. Those actors have made some brilliant movies and each put a great spin on their characters. This sounds lame, but "if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all." Meaning, if you love one movie and hate the other, the two cannot be fairly judged.
I don't hate the first film. I didn't say that I hated it. In fact, I said that I like it.
Perhaps you if don't like someone's opinion you should disregard it instead of trying to twist their meaning to suit your flimsy argument.
1letmetellu on 08/30/2012 at 12:50 am said:
Hmm you are right Savannah after reading his review i feel too that he hate the Raimi's trilogy.
well after watch the amazing spider man i want to say that
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IT WAS A CRAP COPY OF SPIDER-MAN (2002)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
almost of all scenes were copied horribly vry boring the first half.vry bad film it was !
Axilero on 09/29/2012 at 12:16 pm said:
Wow this article is major bullshit whoever wrote neds to jump off a bridge. Where do I begin with the inaccuracies of the new film.
No Wrestling Match
No Daily Bugle which i hardly doubt they'll show
Parker overdoes the EMO look.
Gwen definitely not the first love of Parker.
Lizard with too much shitty CGI effects.
Uncle Ben's death not even and emotional punch than the 2002 film.
Aunt May not supposed to look young.
Finally I'm pretty sure Peter was bitten on the hand rather than the neck.
Yeah, not being bitten on the hand really made every other part of the irrelevant.
Greg Landry on 11/19/2012 at 7:42 am said:
Awful, biased review. You can't even spell the actors names correctly. It's Tobey Maguire. Do a fucking simple google search. Jesus, you suck. The Amazing Spider-man was simply … ok. Spider-Man 2 is still far superior. TAS is better than Spider-Man 3. This new entry might be on par with the original Spider-Man film. Your review, while at times well thought out, falls flat when you can't even spell actors names correctly. Quit reviewing movies and hand in your geek card. You're fired.
Wow, what a cry baby.
Angel on 11/22/2012 at 11:45 pm said:
This film is truly amazing, i still love the original movies but Garfield just seems better to fit the role as Peter Parker,and i bet we just took out Tobey Maguire cause he gained wait and stopped shaving, i like that the movie follows the comic book more. Thanks writer of review!!
Netherman14 on 01/26/2014 at 2:11 am said:
I have a slight problem with your comment about your Superman, post-Crisis Superman stories are basically only about Lois and his civilian life.
This is New-52 Superman, http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/10/103530/2269546-46.png this is Golden Age Superman, from the real early days, http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11/115299/2543421-Superdicklol.jpg http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11/115299/2543422-Superdicklol2.jpg http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11/115299/2543430-Superdick5.jpg http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11/115299/2543431-Superdick3.jpg http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11/115299/2543432-Catch.jpg
Find Geekery
The Most Read Posts Today!
Why I'll Never Buy a Funko Pop Vinyl Figure (By A Compulsive Collector)
Dead Files Top 10 Episodes
Top 10 Kitties in Cinema - Big Cats Edition
Star Wars in Review: The 10 Most Idiotic 'Star Wars' Characters
The Dwarves of 'The Hobbit' - A Guide to the Characters and Cast
Star Wars Easter Eggs in Indiana Jones
Cinderella (1950) vs Sleeping Beauty (1959)
Celebrity Look-alikes
Why Quentin Tarantino Is Batshit Crazy Insane
The 20 Most Useless Websites Ever
Find More Geekery
#Clay5
100 Must Read Comics
50 Years of Bond
Around the Webs
Channel Geek
Cheap Game Tuesday
Classic Scene
Gaming: A Legitimate Hobby
Geek Guide
Geek Lit.
Geek Playlist
Geek Rant
Legends of Geekdom
List ALL the Things!
MCU Master List
Movie Marathon!
Mysteries and Intrigue
noirvember
Obligatory Comics Section
Original VS Remake
Quick Bites of Geekness
Random Geekness
Retrogeek
The Disney Marathon
Top 100 Women in Pop Culture
Follow Funk's House of Geekery on WordPress.com
Be Awesome! Get Geekery Email!
We Like Being Liked
We Twitter!
007 action animation appa the gypsy avengers avengers month batman book books casting celebrities celebrity cheap game tuesday Christmas classic comedy comic comics convention Cosplay DC DC Comics disney doctor who fashion film food Game Of Thrones games gaming geek ghosts guide Halloween horror Internet interview iron man james bond joss whedon legends list lit marathon Marvel MCU monsters movie movie review movies music mystery Netflix new release Oz Comic Con paranormal random Ranked rant retro review reviews sci-fi showdown star wars supanova superman tabletop television the avengers top 10 tribute tv video games X-men
A Community of Geeks!
3,090,386 Awesome Geeks
Categories Select Category #Clay5 100 Must Read Comics 50 Years of Bond Around the Webs BATMAN! Casting Call Channel Geek Cheap Game Tuesday Classic Scene Convention Cosplay Doctor Who Food and Drink Gaming: A Legitimate Hobby Geek Fashion Geek Guide Geek Lit. Geek Playlist Geek Rant Interviews Legends of Geekdom List ALL the Things! MCU Master List Movie Marathon! Movie Reviews Mysteries and Intrigue noirvember Obligatory Comics Section One Hit Wonder Original VS Remake Podcasts Prophecies Quick Bites of Geekness Random Geekness Retrogeek Showdown! Spotlight Table Top The Disney Marathon The Pull List Top 100 Women in Pop Culture Tribute Uncategorized X-men
We Want to Be Liked
I need my Geekery!


text:
//---------------------------------------------------------------------
// <copyright file="OperationHandler.cs" company="Microsoft">
//      Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. See License.txt in the project root for license information.
// </copyright>
//---------------------------------------------------------------------

namespace Microsoft.Test.OData.Services.ODataWCFService.Handlers
{
    using System;
    using System.Collections;
    using System.Collections.Generic;
    using System.Linq;
    using System.Linq.Expressions;
    using System.Net;
    using Microsoft.OData.Core;
    using Microsoft.OData.Core.UriParser.Semantic;
    using Microsoft.OData.Edm;

    public class OperationHandler : RequestHandler
    {
        public OperationHandler(RequestHandler other, HttpMethod httpMethod)
            : base(other, httpMethod)
        {
            if (httpMethod != HttpMethod.GET && httpMethod != HttpMethod.POST)
            {
                throw new ArgumentException("The HttpMethod in OperationHandler must be GET or POST.");
            }
        }

        public override void Process(IODataRequestMessage requestMessage, IODataResponseMessage responseMessage)
        {
            object result;

            if (this.HttpMethod == HttpMethod.GET)
            {
                // we cannot invoke same action request multiple times, so only Functions are allowed to do the server-driven paging
                this.QueryContext.InitializeServerDrivenPaging(this.PreferenceContext);

                result = this.ProcessFunction();

                if (this.PreferenceContext.MaxPageSize.HasValue)
                {
                    responseMessage.AddPreferenceApplied(string.Format("{0}={1}", ServiceConstants.Preference_MaxPageSize, this.QueryContext.appliedPageSize.Value));
                }
            }
            else
            {
                // TODO: currently ETag feature does not support action operation

                result = this.ProcessAction(requestMessage);
            }

            if (result == null)
            {
                // Protocol 9.1.4 Response Code 204 No Content
                // A request returns 204 No Content if the requested resource has the null value,
                // or if the service applies a return=minimal preference. In this case, the response body MUST be empty.
                ResponseWriter.WriteEmptyResponse(responseMessage);

                return;
            }

            using (var messageWriter = this.CreateMessageWriter(responseMessage))
            {
                if (this.QueryContext.Target.TypeKind == EdmTypeKind.None ||
                    this.QueryContext.Target.TypeKind == EdmTypeKind.EntityReference ||
                    this.QueryContext.Target.ElementTypeKind == EdmTypeKind.EntityReference)
                {
                    throw Utility.BuildException(HttpStatusCode.NotImplemented, "Unsupported return type in operation.", null);
                }
                else if (this.QueryContext.Target.TypeKind == EdmTypeKind.Entity || this.QueryContext.Target.ElementTypeKind == EdmTypeKind.Entity)
                {
                    ODataWriter resultWriter;

                    IEdmNavigationSource entitySource = this.QueryContext.OperationResultSource ?? this.QueryContext.Target.NavigationSource;

                    if (this.QueryContext.Target.TypeKind == EdmTypeKind.Collection)
                    {
                        IEdmEntitySetBase entitySet = (IEdmEntitySetBase)entitySource;

                        resultWriter = messageWriter.CreateODataFeedWriter(entitySet, (IEdmEntityType)this.QueryContext.Target.ElementType);
                        ResponseWriter.WriteFeed(resultWriter, result as IEnumerable, entitySet, ODataVersion.V4, this.QueryContext.QuerySelectExpandClause, this.QueryContext.TotalCount, null, this.QueryContext.NextLink, this.RequestHeaders);
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        if (this.HttpMethod == HttpMethod.GET)
                        {
                            var currentETag = Utility.GetETagValue(result);
                            // if the current entity has ETag field
                            if (currentETag != null)
                            {
                                string requestETag;
                                if (Utility.TryGetIfNoneMatch(this.RequestHeaders, out requestETag) && (requestETag == ServiceConstants.ETagValueAsterisk || requestETag == currentETag))
                                {
                                    ResponseWriter.WriteEmptyResponse(responseMessage, HttpStatusCode.NotModified);
                                    return;
                                }

                                responseMessage.SetHeader(ServiceConstants.HttpHeaders.ETag, currentETag);
                            }
                        }

                        resultWriter = messageWriter.CreateODataEntryWriter(entitySource, (IEdmEntityType)this.QueryContext.Target.Type);
                        ResponseWriter.WriteEntry(resultWriter, result, entitySource, ODataVersion.V4, this.QueryContext.QuerySelectExpandClause, this.RequestHeaders);
                    }
                }
                else
                {
                    ODataProperty property = new ODataProperty() { Name = "value", Value = ODataObjectModelConverter.CreateODataValue(result) };
                    messageWriter.WriteProperty(property);
                }
            }
        }

        private object ProcessFunction()
        {
            return this.QueryContext.ResolveQuery(this.DataSource);
        }

        private object ProcessAction(IODataRequestMessage requestMessage)
        {
            IEdmOperation operation;
            var lastSegment = this.QueryContext.QueryPath.LastSegment;

            if (lastSegment is OperationSegment)
            {
                OperationSegment operationSegment = (OperationSegment)lastSegment;
                operation = operationSegment.Operations.First();
            }
            else
            {
                OperationImportSegment operationImportSegment = (OperationImportSegment)lastSegment;
                operation = operationImportSegment.OperationImports.First().Operation;
            }

            Expression[] parameters = this.ProcessActionInvokePostBody(requestMessage, operation);
            this.QueryContext.ActionInvokeParameters = parameters;

            return this.QueryContext.ResolveQuery(this.DataSource);
        }

        private Expression[] ProcessActionInvokePostBody(IODataRequestMessage message, IEdmOperation operation)
        {
            using (var messageReader = new ODataMessageReader(message, this.GetReaderSettings(), this.DataSource.Model))
            {
                List<Expression> parameterValues = new List<Expression>();
                var parameterReader = messageReader.CreateODataParameterReader(operation);

                while (parameterReader.Read())
                {
                    switch (parameterReader.State)
                    {
                        case ODataParameterReaderState.Value:
                        {
                            object clrValue = ODataObjectModelConverter.ConvertPropertyValue(parameterReader.Value);
                            parameterValues.Add(Expression.Constant(clrValue));
                            break;
                        }
                        case ODataParameterReaderState.Collection:
                        {
                            ODataCollectionReader collectionReader = parameterReader.CreateCollectionReader();
                            object clrValue = ODataObjectModelConverter.ConvertPropertyValue(ODataObjectModelConverter.ReadCollectionParameterValue(collectionReader));
                            parameterValues.Add(Expression.Constant(clrValue, clrValue.GetType()));
                            break;
                        }
                        case ODataParameterReaderState.Entry:
                        {
                            var entryReader = parameterReader.CreateEntryReader();
                            object clrValue = ODataObjectModelConverter.ConvertPropertyValue(ODataObjectModelConverter.ReadEntryParameterValue(entryReader));
                            parameterValues.Add(Expression.Constant(clrValue, clrValue.GetType()));
                            break;
                        }
                        case ODataParameterReaderState.Feed:
                        {
                            IList collectionList = null;
                            var feedReader = parameterReader.CreateFeedReader();
                            while (feedReader.Read())
                            {
                                if (feedReader.State == ODataReaderState.EntryEnd)
                                {
                                    object clrItem = ODataObjectModelConverter.ConvertPropertyValue(feedReader.Item);
                                    if (collectionList == null)
                                    {
                                        Type itemType = clrItem.GetType();
                                        Type listType = typeof(List<>).MakeGenericType(new[] {itemType});
                                        collectionList = (IList)Utility.QuickCreateInstance(listType);
                                    }

                                    collectionList.Add(clrItem);
                                }
                            }

                            parameterValues.Add(Expression.Constant(collectionList, collectionList.GetType()));
                            break;
                        }
                    }
                }

                return parameterValues.ToArray();
            }
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Trump Supporters Hold Nationwide Rallies
By VOA News
Supporters of President Donald Trump, Katie Miller, right, and her husband, Mark Miller, from Boonsboro, Md., join a rally at the National Mall in Washington, organized by the North Carolina-based group Gays for Trump, March 4, 2017.
Backers of U.S. President Donald Trump held rallies across the country Saturday.
The "Spirit of America" rallies were organized by a group called the Main Street Patriots, which is made up of some of the same people that founded the Tea Party movement eight years ago to voice concerns about the way the federal government operates.
Supporters line President Donald Trump's motorcade
Supporters line President Donald Trump's motorcade route near the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., March 4, 2017.
Trump, driving through Florida toward his Mar-a-Lago resort, stopped his motorcade briefly to see a group of about 100 cheering supporters at the roadside. The cheering, flag-waving group had set up an elaborate display, with flashing lights, images of Trump and his campaign slogan, "Make America Great Again," and other messages decrying the president's Democratic critics in Congress.
Debbie Dooley, a leader of the group and co-founder of the Tea Party, told Time magazine the rallies held Saturday were meant to be a positive response to recent negative events held by Trump's political rivals.
A supporter of President Donald Trump chants sloga
A supporter of President Donald Trump chants slogans during a March 4 Trump rally on Fifth Avenue near Trump Tower in New York, , March 4, 2017.
"This is not a Tea Party rally," she told Time. "We're not anti-this and anti-that. We're very focused on not having negative signs, making sure they're positive and upbeat."
Ralph King, a founder of the Main Street Patriots, told Cleveland.com, though, that the rallies were meant to shame Republicans who haven't embraced Trump, more than to counter Democratic opposition.
"Donald Trump's biggest roadblock is going to be the Republicans," King told the website.
Supporters of President Donald Trump gather during
Supporters of President Donald Trump gather during a March 4 Trump rally on the state Capitol steps in Denver, March 4, 2017.
Rich Black, a rally organizer in Berkeley, California, told a CBS reporter the rally there was also meant to serve as "a march for free speech" — a response to violent protests last month at the University of California-Berkeley that forced conservative writer Milo Yiannopoulos to cancel a scheduled speaking engagement.
"This cannot go unchallenged anymore," Black told a local television station. "What you saw on February 1 [was] innocent people, including bystanders, being physically assaulted by these thugs. Let's call it what it is."
President Donald Trump supporters Tristan Pitera,
President Donald Trump supporters Tristan Pitera, left, and Jesse Michaelson of Sound Beach, N.Y., take part in a March 4 Trump rally on Fifth Avenue near Trump Tower in New York, March 4, 2017.
At least 60 pro-Trump rallies were scheduled to take place throughout the country Saturday — in large cities like Washington, small cities like Conway, South Carolina (population: 19,000) and cities as far removed as Honolulu, Hawaii.
While most events were peaceful, a few clashes occurred. In Berkeley, Trump supporters and protesters clashed, with some hitting each other over the head with the wooden sticks from their signs, police said.
There were also minor scuffles reported in St. Paul, Minnesota, and Nashville, Tennessee.
Trump Accuses Obama of Pre-election Wiretapping
President Donald Trump has accused his predecessor, Barack Obama, of wiretapping his offices at Trump Tower in New York City before the November 2016 presidential election.In a series of tweets Saturday, Trump likened the alleged wiretaps to the Watergate political scandal that eventually led to the resignation of former president Richard Nixon in 1974.Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire…

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A group of tourists had a once in a lifetime experience when they encountered a pride of lions at a farm in South Africa. The footage, filmed on February 24 near Johannesburg, shows the owner of the farm being greeted by a male lion and his two lionesses. The filmer Josh Berman told Newsflare: ''The lions treat him as one of the pride and even play with his dogs on the farm. He keeps them in an enormous enclosure and very well kept and fed, as can be seen in the video.'' The man raised the lions at his home in Sandton and eventually moved them to his private farm.


At home both with the electric bass and acoustic double bass, Freddie Draper is an accomplished session musician, orchestrator, and instrument builder. His intimate knowledge of his instruments and advanced technical expertise give Freddie a unique insight into instrumental pedagogy.
After graduating from ICMP with a first class honours degree and 'Best Bass' award to his name, Freddie joined the teaching faculty in 2014. As a professional session player, he has been privileged to work with seasoned producers such as Bruce Woolley (The Buggles, Will Young, Grace Jones), Ray Stiles (Mud, The Hollies), and Mick Jones (The Clash, B.A.D.), and has recently played with acts including Fjokra, Gareth Gates, John Own Jones, Louise Dearman, Ejem Ugzor, The Glass Child and Lazy Habits. Freddie has toured internationally and performs on the major U.K. summer festival circuit, including appearances at Glastonbury and the Isle of Wight Festival.
When off the road, Freddie is particularly passionate about instrument design and contemporary music technology. He is constantly finding new ways to utilise effects pedals and peripherals with his basses. He has constructed several of his own instruments, and works closely as a product developer for British acoustic bass company Gillett Guitars. He is proud to endorse Musicman Basses, Darkglass Electronics and Tech 21 pedals.


A great way to use webpage tracking to your advantage is to trigger automations every time someone visits onevof your pages.
Best practice: Tagging the contact allows you insight into overall engagement over time with certain pages. For example, you may see that a contact has engaged multiple times with your "Group Classes" page - which allows you to make an assumption that the contact is interested in joining a group class. You could then set-up a Tag Rule to start a contact on a "Group Class" specific campaign once they show enough interest.
Here are 2 great articles on Tagging and Tag Rules.


text:
https://sputniknews.com/20190928/SNP-confidence-vote-BoJo-1076910972.html
'The Only Game in Town': SNP Announces Boris Johnson Likely to Face No-Confidence Vote Soon
After his controversial suspension of parliament, which the UK Supreme Court ruled was in fact illegal, Mr Johnson is having to fight for his political life... 28.09.2019, Sputnik International
https://cdnn1.img.sputniknews.com/img/107689/38/1076893806_0:57:3375:1966_1920x0_80_0_0_7f604a9f5f7ba472965b72f454d9f34f.jpg
https://cdnn1.img.sputniknews.com/img/107689/38/1076893806_0:0:3257:2047_1920x0_80_0_0_390d7e212db93ffe750e33b9f61778c9.jpg
news, europe, world, scottish national party, nicola sturgeon, jeremy corbyn, labour party, boris johnson, brexit
10:32 GMT 28.09.2019
© REUTERS / Parliament TVBritain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson gestures as he speaks at the parliament, which reconvenes after the UK Supreme Court ruled that his suspension of the parliament was unlawful, in London, Britain, September 25, 2019, in this screen grab taken from video
© REUTERS / Parliament TV
After his controversial suspension of parliament, which the UK Supreme Court ruled was in fact illegal, Mr Johnson is having to fight for his political life against a raft of opposition MPs who want to see him removed from power.
The Scottish National Party (SNP) have suggested that UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson could, in the coming days, face a no-confidence vote in his leadership in an effort to remove him from power and shepherd in a Jeremy Corbyn-led 'caretaker' government.
The SNP's plan is part of a broader effort among the opposition parties to prevent a no-deal Brexit, with the party's trade spokesperson, Stewart Hosie, declaring in an interview with BBC radio 4 that faith in Boris Johnson to "obey the law" has been lost.
On the heels of talks between opposition party leaders at Westminster late this week, Mr Hosie said that a no confidence motion appeared to be the only path left to ensuring that Boris Johnson does not push a no-deal Brexit through parliament on the deadline of October 31.
"We have to do that [implement a no-confidence vote] because there is now no-confidence that the prime minister will obey the law and seek the extension that parliament voted for only a few weeks ago," Mr Hosie told the BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"If we are serious about the extensions, that is the only game in town. It does it appear they [Labour] want the extension, and if the only way to do that is a no-confidence vote, an interim administration for a very short term, simply to get that Article 50 extension, and then to call an election it would be hard to see them reject that offer," Mr Hosie added.
Hosie elaborated that the overarching aim of all opposition parties and individuals must be to forestall a no-deal Brexit, and that on this issue there needs to be complete unity. However, the main obstacle in the road is Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson, who has consistently ruled out the possibility of her party throwing their support behind a Jeremy Corbyn-led caretaker government, that would seek to ensure the Brexit deadline is extended beyond October 31 in order to rule out a no-deal Brexit.
"If another name came forward that was acceptable to everybody – a Ken Clarke or Dominic Grieve-type figure – then self-evidently that would be a good thing to do. But it is also self-evidently the case that the second-largest party [Labour] should have the first chance to form that administration," Mr Hosie told the BBC.
"If Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems are actually serious about stopping Brexit then they need to stop playing political games [and] get on board with everybody else," he added.
There were those, however, who appear to be somewhat uncomfortable about the idea of Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister.
— Carley Michael Jabara (@CarleyJabara) 25 September 2019
— Louise (@Louise_katz) 25 September 2019
— Tom (@FredThomasUK) 28 September 2019
The news comes as the SNP's leader, Scotland's first minister Nicola Sturgeon, has said that she is open to the possibility of backing Jeremy Corbyn as an interim leader in order to request an extension to Article 50 from Brussels, followed by a general election.
So far, Labour's position has been that it will only support a general election once it has guarantees that a no-deal exit from the EU on October 31 will not happen.
"We are all going to have to compromise, we are all going to have to swallow our pride and put up with something for a matter of days to allow that to happen, and get on with it," Miss Sturgeon is quoted as telling BBC Scotland.
Moreover, on Friday, Miss Sturgeon responded positively to a Tweet calling for a Jeremy Corbyn-led temporary government to secure an Article 50 extension.
— Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) 27 September 2019


text:
Q: Date validator that validates if the date is greater than or equal to today with Zend Framework $form = new Zend_Form();

$mockDate = new Zend_Form_Element_Text('mock');

$mockDate->addValidator(???????);

$form->addElements(array($mockDate));

$result = $form->isValid();

if ($result) echo "YES!!!";
else echo "NO!!!";

Assumption that the element is in a date format. How do I determine that the date given is greater than or equal to today?

A: You can create a simple validator to do this:
class My_Validate_DateGreaterThanToday extends Zend_Validate_Abstract
{
    const DATE_INVALID = 'dateInvalid';

    protected $_messageTemplates = array(
        self::DATE_INVALID => "'%value%' is not greater than or equal today"
    );

    public function isValid($value)
    {
        $this->_setValue($value);

        $today = date('Y-m-d');

        // expecting $value to be YYYY-MM-DD
        if ($value < $today) {
            $this->_error(self::DATE_INVALID);
            return false;
        }

        return true;
    }
}

And add it to the element:
$mockDate->addValidator(new My_Validate_DateGreaterThanToday());

You probably want to check the date with Zend_Date for localization of dates and further benefits.
For creating custom validates, take a look at writing validators from Zend´s manual.

A: The question is rather old. In the current version of ZF2 it is not necessary to write new validators. Simply add a filter / validator like this:
public function getInputFilter()
{
    if(!$this->inputFilter){
        $inputFilter = new InputFilter();
        $inputFilter->add(array(
            'name' => 'mock',
            'validators' => array(
                array('name' => 'Date'),
                array(
                    'name' => 'GreaterThan',
                    'options' => array(
                        'min' => date('Y-m-d'),
                    ),
                ),
            ),
        ));
        $this->inputFilter = $inputFilter;
    }
    return $this->inputFilter;
}

And it does the job. There is also an option called 'inclusive' which if set to 'true' (in the 'options' of GreaterThan), will allow 'today' to be a valid date

A: class My_Validate_DateGreaterThanToday extends Zend_Validate_Abstract
{
    const DATE_INVALID = 'dateInvalid';

    protected $_messageTemplates = array(
        self::DATE_INVALID => "'%value%' is not greater than today"
    );

    public function isValid($value) {
        $this->_setValue($value);

        $date = new Zend_Date($value);
        $date->addDay(1);
        $now = new Zend_Date();

        // expecting $value to be YYYY-MM-DD
        if ($now->isLater($date)) {
            $this->_error(self::DATE_INVALID);
            return false;
        }

        return true;
    }
}

that's better because uses standardized Zend_Date methods to check dates, the other awsner user a string comparison that can evaluate to impredictable values...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange