SAT/Wkd Numbers (EST TASM $23.8m(+15%)/$65m; Savages $5.6m(-2%)/$16.2m; KP 2.5m(-8%)/7.2m

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

The only issue I had with this version of the Hulk was the design of his neck musculature. It's just a little too thin(see pictures below). Other than that this is still the best Hulk ever brought to screen.

[Moviefanatic]

Sorry but the Lizard looked horrible.

[Jay Beezy]

In that respect Jack, you've made a valid point, even though it's based off of your opinion of the Lizard which differs from mine.

Edited July 8, 2012 by Jay Beezy

[ZattMurdock]

no way this is happening, this guy HAS to be a plant. I mean no one can be this naive and non-human. I remember Kal in BOM days, he had 2-3 gripes. this is beyond whacko, this is Dayyyummmmm whacko

...I'm talking about a film that I love and you don't. You have been nothing but disrespectful to anything related to comic book films that isn't related with Nolan somehow, you seem to be one of the most "whacko" fans on the bunch here and you are now accusing me of being a plant or calling me Kal or something. Dude, grow up. People like different things than you do. I respect you for enjoying Nolan and TDKR, but even the new film is taking subplots from recent films and running with it and you're not seeing me smack down that film here. I respect you, would you and the others be SO KIND of respecting the others too? Seriously? How old are you, twelve? Edited July 8, 2012 by iJackSparrow

[kitik]

Re: ASM

You could easily argue that this was the best Stan Lee cameo of all time.

[BoxOfficeZ]

The fucking bear from Brave is a better villain than the Lizard.

Sad but true, the Lizard was completely a non event, and the final fight was meh. Totally a forgettable villain.Very good numbers for TASM, and great for TED.

[John Harris]

Saw the movie finally:

You can't just have TASM on par or slightly better than Spider-Man 1 for it to be a class apart. Spider-Man 1 blew people away as a new thing in 2002. People simply were not awed by TASM because its already been attempted. Even if it had been attempted, the new attempt is not as ground breaking as Spider-Man 1. This is why with cheaper tickets, lower theaters and no 3D tax, Spider-Man 1 made 400+ Million at the Box Office while with all those fiscal advantages, TASM will make less than Spider-Man 3.

Spider-Man 1 - 8.5/10

Spider-Man 2 - 10/10

Spider-Man 3 - 6.5/10

TASM - 7.5/10

Despite the flaws in Spider-Man 1, there was a sense of newness and awe for something completely new, something never before attempted. if THIS TASM was released in 2001, it would have been a 9.5/10

I'd pretty much rank the Spidey films the same way. TASM definitely suffers because of the similarities to the first movie. I still think it was a mistake to show the whole origin again. They should've gone the Incredible Hulk route, and just shown a new origin during the credits, an effective way to establish immediately that this is a new version of the character. Specifically, I had no desire to see yet another take on

the death of Uncle Ben, especially one that veers even further from Stan Lee's brilliant version in Amazing Fantasy #15. Raimi's had the wrestling match, the battle with the burglar in the abandoned warehouse, and, most importantly, that chilling moment when Peter discovers that Ben's murderer is the man he set free - all straight from the source material. TASM's version is SO much less effective. Spidey doesn't even capture Ben's killer! Webb's treading into "The Joker killed Batman's parents" territory there, assuming that

he knows better than the men who created these characters.

Sure, I enjoyed the movie - it's well-done in a lot of ways, and Garfield and Stone are at least as good as Maguire and Dunst ever were. I greatly look forward to the sequel, which hopefully will bear no resemblance to any of the storylines used in the first trilogy.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

Sorry but the Lizard looked horrible.

May have been by design to make the new version of GG look that much better. I seriously think Sony is using this film as marketing tool. Good but not great...just enough to get people interested, then watch how much better the sequel is so most reviewers say "it's 100% better than the first." or "best Spider-Man film ever." Sony may be purposefully lowering expectations while still building them.Nolan/WB were masters of this with Batman.We will only know whether this was true in 22 months.

[ZattMurdock]

The only issue I had with this version of the Hulk was the design of his neck musculature. It's just a little too thin(see pictures below). Other than that this is still the best Hulk ever brought to screen.

I've heard people online complaining that the Hulk gets bigger when angry in Ang Lee's Hulk, that's the single aspect in the film that he nailed. I get where you are coming from, but this could be easily improved in the sequels where that rule for Hulk is back in full force: the more angry he gets, the bigger/more muscular he gets. What I dig a lot in Whedon's Hulk is that he isn't shaped as a bodybuilder like in TIH, that's one of visual aspects that it's perfected for the Hulk in The Avengers.

[kayumanggi]

Re: ASM

You could easily argue that this was the best Stan Lee cameo of all time.

Finally, someone agreed with me.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

Stop with the personal attacks. It's just a movie.

[Orestes]

Finally, someone agreed with me.

People have actually disagreed with you about that? I would think it would be virtually indisputable.

[Moviedweeb]

Sorry but the Lizard looked horrible.

I really enjoyed The Lizard actually.

[Michael Gary Scott]

I dont get the hate at all for asm. Was it the best movie ever no. However it was an enjoyable movie. I dont see bad wom either. All the people i know that seen it have liked it.

[kitik]

I really liked the look of the Lizard.Well, let me clarify: I wasn't thrilled when we first saw the look a few months ago, but it really worked well in the movie itself.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

I dont get the hate at all for asm. Was it the best movie ever no. However it was an enjoyable movie. I dont see bad wom either. All the people i know that seen it have liked it.

Don't you understand that a Spider-Man film that dares to be released 17 days before the sure to be religious experience that is TDKR would have to be The Godfather with webs to even deserve its very existence?

[YoursTruly]

I really liked the look of the Lizard.Well, let me clarify: I wasn't thrilled when we first saw the look a few months ago, but it really worked well in the movie itself.

I dunno...when "Poor Peter Parker" came out of that LOLface, I almost lost it.

[JackO]

no way this is happening, this guy HAS to be a plant. I mean no one can be this naive and non-human. I remember Kal in BOM days, he had 2-3 gripes. this is beyond whacko, this is Dayyyummmmm whacko

That's what I thought but fnj said psycho.

[ZattMurdock]

Re: ASM

You could easily argue that this was the best Stan Lee cameo of all time.

Finally, someone agreed with me.

Not only the best Stan Lee cameo of all time, but one of the most anthological Spider-Man scenes in live action ever. Just insane shit, hands down best fighting sequence in any Spidey film IMO.

May have been by design to make the new version of GG look that much better. I seriously think Sony is using this film as marketing tool. Good but not great...just enough to get people interested, then watch how much better the sequel is so most reviewers say "it's 100% better than the first." or "best Spider-Man film ever." Sony may be purposefully lowering expectations while still building them.

Nolan/WB were masters of this with Batman.

We will only know whether this was true in 22 months.

LOL at your theory man, but after seeing the Lizard in the big screen I realized that we will NEVER see Ultimate Hulk Goblin in the big screen, because it would feel redundant to see yet another green giant monster, here is whatI think that will happen:

They will perfect the formula from both the 00 Spiders and the Lizard's formula, making what will look like a stable formula that will save Norman's life AND make him probably much more stronger and faster than Spidey, what they didn't count is at also again there will be side effects, turning Osborn into a psychopath, basically using Ultimate story points with an update in Goblin's classical look. This time without the Goblin Ranger armor, of course. Or I'm completely wrong and there will be a transformation, but to something very much like the classical Gobby look, since they've actually already used the Hulk Goblin look.

I'd pretty much rank the Spidey films the same way. TASM definitely suffers because of the similarities to the first movie. I still think it was a mistake to show the whole origin again. They should've gone the Incredible Hulk route, and just shown a new origin during the credits, an effective way to establish immediately that this is a new version of the character. Specifically, I had no desire to see yet another take on

the death of Uncle Ben, especially one that veers even further from Stan Lee's brilliant version in Amazing Fantasy #15. Raimi's had the wrestling match, the battle with the burglar in the abandoned warehouse, and, most importantly, that chilling moment when Peter discovers that Ben's murderer is the man he set free - all straight from the source material. TASM's version is SO much less effective. Spidey doesn't even capture Ben's killer! Webb's treading into "The Joker killed Batman's parents" territory there, assuming that

he knows better than the men who created these characters.

Sure, I enjoyed the movie - it's well-done in a lot of ways, and Garfield and Stone are at least as good as Maguire and Dunst ever were. I greatly look forward to the sequel, which hopefully will bear no resemblance to any of the storylines used in the first trilogy.

I know this is controversial, but I couldn't be more satisfied with the retelling of the origin, I feel that's what makes me truly care about this new take on Spider-Man and I feel people will have this pay off BIG TIME in the future sequels. I know how much protective people are with the first trilogy, but the thing is, neither Raimi or Webb created Spider-Man, what they did was give their takes on the mythos, and I find Webb's take far more in line with what I have in mind for Spider-Man. You take away the origin, and you have the convoluted Raimi origin to rely on, while this origin is actually something that new films based on Spider-Man can rely on for future reboots: it keeps the origin of the character simple. I want Webb to have his own take on Spider-Man but at same time, I want both Marvel and Sony been pretty vocal with what can and what cannot be done with Spidey. Having his parents related to the origin of the spiders that one day will bite him is actually something that gives more gravitas for the character's mythos, so while I have no problem whatsoever to see a new take on the mythos ten years from now, I can see they using this film storyline as the starting point for new reboots, proving that Webb won't screw up making Uncle Ben's killer Max Dillon, Chameleon or anything.

The reason they had to reboot and the opening credits scene is just impossible is because they screwed up with Raimi's trilogy. Give Spidey some real time in high school/college and don't fuck with the mythos while been bold, and you have a platform you can build your reboots upon, pretty much like Marvel is doing with their films, but not how Warner is doing with Batman, where all you can go is with the legacy aspect that I don't feel as the best route when it comes to these characters.

Edited July 8, 2012 by iJackSparrow

[Justin121]

Rth, can u give us any info?