Our monthly session with IMDb Managing Editor Keith Simanton is actually a week late this time out–it’s nothing but a scheduling conflict, but it did allow us to speak a little more openly and candidly about The Amazing Spider-Man than we otherwise might have, given that it wouldn’t have been in theaters by the time the story ran if it were on time last Monday.As we did last month, we’ll be presenting our conversation in two parts–the first, of course, will focus on this weekend’s box office champ, The Amazing Spider-Man. Next time around, we’ll shift gears a little and look forward to The Dark Knight Rises, Justice League and all the other goodies that DC Entertainment has in their Santa-sized toy bag for the next few years. That’ll come tomorrow.I haven’t seen The Amazing Spider-Man yet, Keith [Note: In the time since this interview, I have, and reviewed it. I thought it was good, but not great], but we can speak as though I have because other people in the comics industry who made media screenings have already spoiled the pertinent bits for me.Well, actually, I’ll have to be really honest: I don’t know what got spoiled for you, because for me it was a very frustrating experience to watch The Amazing Spider-Man. It’s the first part of what seems like it would be a really great trilogy–unfortunately they forgot to make the first movie. It’s almost like a “to be continued” TV show in some regards.There’s a bunch of things that you walk out of there and don’t know any more about than you did going in. It’s very exasperating because I liked Andrew Garfield a lot, and Emma Stone. It’s a good cast but it does–it feels like a “to be continued,” Damon Lindelof special.
One would have thought, though, that failure to answer that major plot point would force the filmmakers to resolve other aspects of the film.
Rhys Ifans
talk to those guys
It seems to me as though they’re building a world where everything is very conspiratorial and so anything can be a secret.
Oh, and by the way, her father’s a cop, so you don’t necessarily want her to have unfettered access to your nefarious doings.
It seems like that should have raised a red flag at some point in the film, when her father became obsessed with Spider-Man, right? I mean, not only is her dad a cop but he’s now taking a special interest in exactly the kind of stuff we’re doing here!
And it’s funny becuase I’d never really considered–and I’m sure there’s someplace in the comics that it tells you but I don’t know–what happened to Dr. Connors’ arm. He just…didn’t have one. So the idea of “We’re going to make that a plot point, and further than that, a plot point that’s not resolved,” is interesting to me. To me it’s not an odd thing that’s hanging out there until they made it one.
Do you think this a kind of inherent problem with a lot of these big tentpole-type franchises where you always have to have your eye on the sequel and the sequel to the sequel? That you can’t ever do anything really big in the first movie?
Avengers
Man of Steel
a coda
Spider-Man
Marc Webb
Gollum
Do you think that teeing up another Spider-Man movie in this coda helps them or hurts them in terms of their announcement that they want to tie in Venom and then potentially Ghost Rider into the world of Amazing Spider-Man to create their own mini-universe?
Men in Black
Venom
Avengers
that screening at El Capitan
Spider-Man
Do you think that if that underperforms, that undermines the idea of Webb coming back as director, or so you think they’re pretty much committed to his version and then the next guy’s version comes next time?
Gary Ross
The Hunger Games
Twilight
Harry Potter
I was struck by the fact that the big, climactic fight scene takes place at Oscorp–and so I’m sitting here going where it feels like the old Superman TV show where Lois would get kidnapped and it was like, “This is a grave threat!…to me, and five of my friends.” And with a superhero film you want it to feel like there’s more than that in the balance.
a few nice scenes
