The Amazing Spider-Man Uncle Ben's Killer

[Picard Sisko]

I'm sure it won't be as simple as they are just dating in TASM2, as if nothing happened between them in TASM1. I'm certain there will be some tension between them, especially now that MJ will be added to the mix.

 

[Picard Sisko]

from the way i see it peter had a bad night, he is confused and hurt over his parents, just had a arguement with uncle ben which didn't help, then the store clerk was a jerk so when the robber took the money peter just thought its his problem that jerk can deal with it

peter didn't know he had a gun and maybe part of the reason he wants revenge so bad is because he is not only angry at the robber but also angry at himself

Read a book called "Philosophy of Spider-Man: Web of Inquiry." Its very good, and talks about how he himself feels very guilty for the death of his uncle, and that's why he can't just quit and stop being Spider-Man. The book compares him to other heroes, like Batman, and how his parent's death was not his fault, and Joe Chill was not caught immediately like Uncle Ben's killer. In that sense, Peter has to keep fighting crime to keep him from hurting so much, where Batman doesn't have that guilt. He could take off his cape and live as Bruce Wayne with no problem.

 

[GuestStar2004]

harry and mary jane may be dating, maybe why they are both in the film

its raimi who liked the love triangles

 

[Picard Sisko]

I'm sure there will be some conflict in there with Peter and Gwen.

 

[Anno_Domini]

But isn't that the point? That Peter is a jerk, hence his need for the lesson of power and responsibility?

Being irresponsible doesn't have to mean being a jerk, though. I never felt Raimi's Peter was a jerk even when he didn't use his powers responsibly.

I'm starting to see what you mean. It's a shame that they couldn't do the wrestling thing due to being too similar

then again, I still think that this movie didn't need the origin in the first place to establish Andrew's Peter. In TSSM they got us to know Peter's character in the very first episode, and none of that character building referred to the origin. Then the movie wouldn't have had to twist every part of the origin to make itself original

Agree with this fully

TAS-M DIDN'T need to even go through the origin and while the first hour has a much more humanistic tone to it that I enjoyed, doing the actual origin itself again, going through Ben's death, all of that didn't really need to happen. When the next Spidey reboot happens, it'll just be a joke if they go through the origin again for a third time in a row, lol.

Peter didn't get scammed in SM1 "technically." He wasn't in the ring for three minutes. Not saying he shouldn't have gotten any money, but technically he was wrong.

When Peter isn't told otherwise that he HAS to stay in the ring for a full three minutes and no less to get that $3,000 than yes, it was a scam.

so almost a repeat of raimi's spiderman 1 and 2

peter told mary jane he couldnt be with her in sm1 and then got with her at the end of sm2

i know many wouldn't mind if they did things similar but TAS got enough criticism for being similar too already

And that's the thing...it does not need to repeat any service from Raimi's trilogy.

Read a book called "Philosophy of Spider-Man: Web of Inquiry." Its very good, and talks about how he himself feels very guilty for the death of his uncle, and that's why he can't just quit and stop being Spider-Man. The book compares him to other heroes, like Batman, and how his parent's death was not his fault, and Joe Chill was not caught immediately like Uncle Ben's killer. In that sense, Peter has to keep fighting crime to keep him from hurting so much, where Batman doesn't have that guilt. He could take off his cape and live as Bruce Wayne with no problem.

Not to jump solely on Bruce Wayne, but that's why I appreciate Nolan's trilogy so much because of what you mentioned. Bruce can always hang up the cape and he finally did after taking out the core problems he had: the mobs that create future Joe Chills and the League of Shadows that played a part in Batman's origin. With all said and done, he finally hung it up for someone else. And that's why someone like Spider-Man can't go the same route with his films because he should continue and that's why I will be fine if Spidey never catches the killer; and letting him go and fly away really defeats that purpose(looking at you, Spider-Man 3 ).

 

[Picard Sisko]

I doubt the next "reboot" will have the origin. If anything it should be a "loose" reboot, building off of what we have established in this universe.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Ehh, I would definitely not want a loose reboot building off Webb's series.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Not to jump solely on Bruce Wayne, but that's why I appreciate Nolan's trilogy so much because of what you mentioned. Bruce can always hang up the cape and he finally did after taking out the core problems he had: the mobs that create future Joe Chills and the League of Shadows that played a part in Batman's origin. With all said and done, he finally hung it up for someone else. And that's why someone like Spider-Man can't go the same route with his films because he should continue and that's why I will be fine if Spidey never catches the killer; and letting him go and fly away really defeats that purpose(looking at you, Spider-Man 3 ).

if spider-man catches his uncles killer it wouldn't change anything, he still has the power to help others

"with great power comes great responsibility"

"You're a lot like your father. You really are, Peter, and that's a good thing. But your father lived by a philosophy, a principle really. He believed that...that if you could do good things for other people, you had a moral obligation to do those things. That's what at stake here. Not a choice, responsibility."

 

[Picard Sisko]

Ehh, I would definitely not want a loose reboot building off Webb's series.

Well considering you have a hatred for it, that's not surprising. I see no reason to do a full reboot unless the franchise really goes down the toilet, and gives us another Spider-Man 3 or worse...

 

[Anno_Domini]

Of course what I think about TAS-M, but even then, there is no need to have some loose reboot building off Webb's events...that's where you try to pull a Superman Returns that did not work. Best to have a reboot that doesn't start with an origin, but at least hints about it such as TSSM.

 

[Shikamaru]

Of course what I think about TAS-M, but even then, there is no need to have some loose reboot building off Webb's events...that's where you try to pull a Superman Returns that did not work. Best to have a reboot that doesn't start with an origin, but at least hints about it such as TSSM.

I don't think you know what a loose reboot is. A loose reboot is by default something like TSSM - something that just jumps straight in with everyone already established. A loose reboot continuing Webb's franchise would be just that. There would really be nothing to keep from the Webb franchise other than the fact that Gwen will be dead and the Green Goblin will be dead/arrested. Other than those things, you can pretty much tell any other Spider-Man story from the comics. The loose reboot would essentially be the same thing as a Spider-Man story from the comics that doesn't take place in Peter's early years as Spider-Man (by early years, I mean 15 - 19/20).

 

[Picard Sisko]

I don't think you know what a loose reboot is. A loose reboot is by default something like TSSM - something that just jumps straight in with everyone already established. A loose reboot continuing Webb's franchise would be just that. There would really be nothing to keep from the Webb franchise other than the fact that Gwen will be dead and the Green Goblin will be dead/arrested. Other than those things, you can pretty much tell any other Spider-Man story from the comics. The loose reboot would essentially be the same thing as a Spider-Man story from the comics that doesn't take place in Peter's early years as Spider-Man (by early years, I mean 15 - 19/20).

Yes thank you.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I know exactly what a loose reboot is even as I said...and I quote, literally:

there is no need to have some loose reboot building off Webb's events

Having Gwen dead and Green Goblin being dead or arrested(however Webb handled it) is using Webb's events, and I do not want that simply put.

NOW, if Gwen is dead in a reboot and Green Goblin had a different outcome than how Webb handled it, then I will be fine with that as it will pretty much not be building up from Webb's events. Only placing Peter later in his life where Gwen Stacy has already died and Green Goblin is still out there and about.

 

[Shikamaru]

NOW, if Gwen is dead in a reboot and Green Goblin had a different outcome than how Webb handled it, then I will be fine with that as it will pretty much not be building up from Webb's events. Only placing Peter later in his life where Gwen Stacy has already died and Green Goblin is still out there and about.

Are you effing kidding me? What you just described IS a loose reboot from Webb.

A loose reboot doesn't mean at all that the events are exactly the same as what happened before. Maybe Gwen died in a different way. Maybe Green Goblin was arrested/died in a different way. But in the end, the point is that Gwen died and Green Goblin was in prison/died shortly after Gwen's death.

Also, when I said that the loose reboot will follow up with Green Goblin being arrested or dead, I didn't mean that this meant he wouldn't show up in the reboot. It meant that he was arrested/died shortly after Gwen's death only to come back later at some point in Peter's career and continue the battle but off-screen. So yes, you can have a loose reboot where Green Goblin is alive and Gwen is dead. Hell, Green Goblin being "dead" is really just a metaphor for him hiding in Europe since that's what happened in the comics. At least that's what I meant when I said it will end with him being dead.

 

[Anno_Domini]

So then what Picard said...is not what you're meaning as well? Something not accurate to Webb's events...so why bring up Webb's events at all?

 

[Mr. X]

I just hopped on this thread so not sure what everyone said, but my suspicion is they will have him find his uncles killer. In first movie that was his mission. But once lizard came on to the scene, he got side tracked and after bridge scene he feels the responsibility to stop lizard and basically be a hero. But he's not the hero yet. I think that's a lesson he'll learn about responsibility AFTER Gwen dies(that is if they do kill her off). But at end of movie they showed the poster of killer pinned up in peters room. Now that could mean several things....maybe a reminder of what happened and what he lost and he wants to prevent that from happening to others, or he still has his eye out for the punk. He may not be actively lookin for him now, cause he's doin the whole hero thing now...but I feel it'll be a bump into him situation, maybe he's doin another robbery or something and spidey comes to save the day and sees the star tattoo on left wrist. And he snaps. True test of hero time. Kill him like he wanted to all along and sought out to do or turn him in...who knows!

I dunno, just my thoughts. But I definitely think we'll see him again....I just hope not as a super villian -.-

 

[Vid Electricz]

I don't see the point (thematically) of having him find the killer. It makes no sense and doesn't add to the story. Pete has learned his lesson about responsibility and having him catch the killer just to tie up loose ends for the sake of the plot is weak.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Pete has learned his lesson about responsibility

No he hasn't. He lost all merits of having learned his lesson when he broke his promise to Captain Stacy at the end of TAS-M.

 

[Vid Electricz]

lol. Agreed. He learned how to be responsible in a way (using his power for good, etc...) But I hated that he even hinted at breaking the promise. Just disgusting writing. This is one of the things I absolutely hated about this movie. It's too reliant on the sequel. Every movie (whether a sequel is planned or not) should be able to stand on it's own with complete character arcs, etc... This was done well in Batman Begins, Iron-man, heck even the Hobbit did it well.

This movie is relying on the sequel to complete the character arc, which is sloppy and lazy.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Agree fully to that. While Batman Begins gave a hint to Joker, it still didn't hinder the film of feeling like itself without having to rely on a sequel. Imagine if TAS-M 2 for some reason didn't happen. The effect of that would leave the first film on a distasteful note and would feel so incomplete, more so than it does now, imo.

 

[Picard Sisko]

They weren't certain that there would be a sequel to batman begins.

 

[Vid Electricz]

If they had only made Batman Begins and never even made the Dark Knight or TDKR, Begins (even with the Joker tease) would still feel like a complete stand alone movie (much like Batman: Year One)

My biggest gripe with TASM was that it felt, as you said, incomplete. Meandering, half-finished character and story arcs left dangling. To me, this is an insult from the filmaker to the audience.

 

[Picard Sisko]

But they knew a sequel to amazing spiderman would happen. It's not an insult. Treat it as part 1 of a series.

 

[Mr. X]

If they had only made Batman Begins and never even made the Dark Knight or TDKR, Begins (even with the Joker tease) would still feel like a complete stand alone movie (much like Batman: Year One)

My biggest gripe with TASM was that it felt, as you said, incomplete. Meandering, half-finished character and story arcs left dangling. To me, this is an insult from the filmaker to the audience.

I get what you are saying. But at end of batman begins, they did set up joker for next film.....

But yea It was a complete movie pretty much. But I don't want spidey or every hero movie to follow the formula of Nolan's batmans. I want each movie to have its own uniqueness.

Webb and Sony have an idea with this new reboot of spidey. Lets see where asm2 goes...

 

[Mr. X]

I don't see the point (thematically) of having him find the killer. It makes no sense and doesn't add to the story. Pete has learned his lesson about responsibility and having him catch the killer just to tie up loose ends for the sake of the plot is weak.

The killer can pop up at a point where Peter is right there with learning the responsibility of a hero. Or maybe he's already learned it. This can be the ultimate revenge test for him....