Spider-Man 2 Preview Online

First post - source mongering... by numbski · 2003-12-15 05:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

The video is embedded in a swf file....ack!

Anyone able to extract it?

BTW, Doc Oc rox. :P Also the car dodging shot...wow. :)

Nice FX

--

Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

Re:First post - source mongering... by iainl · 2003-12-15 05:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Arrgh. Well, that explains why I can't see it. swf files don't play on my IE - every time I try the installer, it goes off to the Macromedia site, and comes back with an error. Nothing informative about it, no option to just download the whole thing, so I'm stuffed.

Well done, Macromedia.

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Re:First post - source mongering... by MikeXpop · 2003-12-15 05:12 · Score: 1

Did you catch the 2 seconds of him running in a suit and then ripping the shirt open to reveal the spiderman suit?

DAMN. Talk about ripping off superman!

--
Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
Re:First post - source mongering... by IANAAC · 2003-12-15 05:37 · Score: 1

Not to be too much of a troll, but it worked fine for me using SuSE 9 (of course I also had CrossOver Plugins installed for the Quicktime bit).
Re:First post - source mongering... by WTFmonkey · 2003-12-15 05:37 · Score: 1

I'm guessing Carl.
Re:First post - source mongering... by Keldian · 2003-12-15 05:38 · Score: 1

I think that is intentional. From the first movie it is clear that Superman exists as a comic book hero in that world. Peter is a geek and likely a fairly big Superman fan.
Re:First post - source mongering... by iainl · 2003-12-15 05:41 · Score: 1

Quote the AC: "Here's a solution: use Windows. Works out of the box"

Sorry, wrong answer. Win2000 Pro and IE 6 here. Its just that the Flash player install doesn't play well with proxies.

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Re:First post - source mongering... by tntguy · 2003-12-15 05:47 · Score: 1

Not to mention he did that in the first movie, too -- during the Unity parade/festival (whatever it was called).
Re:First post - source mongering... by Ark42 · 2003-12-15 05:58 · Score: 1

I'm still trying to figure it out. I wget'd the .swf from that page, and used swfdump to extract some information:
The URL it gets the movie info from is http://playlist.webevents.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.d ll?pt=xml&sg_id= but it appends some junk to that, and then it only gets a playlist file of some sort. I logged my browser requets and found:
GET /makeplaylist.dll?pt=xml&sg_id=39082&sid=5550836&s =96429575 HTTP/1.1
But the playlist file only contains this information:

And I don't know how to go about grabbing the stuff from this weird rtmp:// protocol.

--
Morphing Software
Re:First post - source mongering... by Ark42 · 2003-12-15 06:00 · Score: 2, Informative

Note to self, use preview next time, the playlist file contains:

<PLAYLIST MEDIATYPE="FLASH"><STREAM AD="NO" APPNAME="ContentMgmt" URLPREFIX="rtmp://" SERVER="flvcontent.bcst.yahoo.com" BITRATE="3000" PORT="" PATH="/pub04root1/Pub04Share04/sonycorp.cm/5550836 .flv" QUERYSTRING="StreamID=5550836&sg_id=39082& pl_b=003FFAD1A744A5CB5B000014AD3FDDF504&s=9642 9575&ru=MozillaOTHERS" URL="" TITLE="Spiderman 2 -- Vyvx feed -- normal frame rate" AUTHOR="Yahoo!" COPYRIGHT="© 2003, All Rights Reserved." STARTTIME="" ENDTIME="" ></STREAM></PLAYLIST>

--
Morphing Software
Re:First post - source mongering... by NoNeeeed · 2003-12-15 06:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

That has to rank as one of the worst ways to deliver a moview trailer, full-stop.

I'm on a corperate network with a nice fat pipe, but I have to play the 100k version, the 300k version plays about 5 seconds, stops, plays the next five, stops, etc. The client doesn't seem to be able to cache properly. Even with flash's cache turned right up.

Just give us a damned MPEG or Quicktime file!

I bet this is mostly done to prevent copying. When will people realise that this just stops your advert from being seen by the most people. Normlly when a trailer comes out on the Apple site, one of us donwloads it and shares it with our mates, cos it's quicker. That's good advertising. This is like saying "no, you can only see adverts for Coke if you go to a special Coke store". It's not like it is the full movie, it is just a trailer, the first rule of advertising is make sure as many people see it as possible.

Bah, bloody suites.

I hope someone manages to extract it.

--
Paul Leader
Re:First post - source mongering... by Issue9mm · 2003-12-15 06:29 · Score: 1

I'd be surprised if they were deliberately alluding to Superman, as he's a DC owned character, and Spider-Man is Marvel. It's just typical comic fare, really, and something someone expects to see happen eventually.

-9mm-
Re:First post - source mongering... by gpinzone · 2003-12-15 06:40 · Score: 1

Don't be too surprised. Stan Lee made many references to competing characters throught his career, and the competition has returned the favor. Check out the Simpsons episode with Mr. Lee. It's quite hilarious to watch him shove a Thing doll into a Batmobile.
Re:First post - source mongering... by wo1verin3 · 2003-12-15 06:45 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'm still trying, but it looks like they got smart.

a) The video is not contained within the .SWF file. The flash file itself is only 61.8 KB

b) They did more then just load a video file on the same server, it appears to be coming from a streaming server of sorts, here is a piece from the flash code that someone brighter then me might be able to figure out:

StreamEngine.prototype.doConnect = function () {
this.standard_nc = new NetConnection();
this.tunnel_nc = new NetConnection();
this.standard_nc.cType = standard;
this.tunnel_nc.cType = tunnel;
this.standard_nc.connected = this.tunnel_nc.connected = false;
this.standard_nc.owner = this.tunnel_nc.owner = this;
this.standard_nc.onStatus = this.tunnel_nc.onStatus = function (info) {
};
fcServer = "flv1.broadcast.vip.dal.yahoo.com";
appName = this.playList.firstChild.childNodes.this.playListA ctive.attributes.appName;
var connectString = "rtmp://" + fcServer + "/" + appName;
this.standard_nc.connect(connectString);
trace (connectString);
this.tunnelLoad = setInterval(this,"tunnelConnect",1500);
Re:First post - source mongering... by derF024 · 2003-12-15 07:00 · Score: 1

Quote the AC: "Here's a solution: use Windows. Works out of the box"

Sorry, wrong answer. Win2000 Pro and IE 6 here. Its just that the Flash player install doesn't play well with proxies.

Better answer: use linux. the trailer worked perfectly fine for me on my debian laptop. Apt also works fine behind proxies. More than I can say for the crappy Quicktime trailers that apple pushes.
Re:First post - source mongering... by derF024 · 2003-12-15 07:06 · Score: 2, Informative

I bet this is mostly done to prevent copying. When will people realise that this just stops your advert from being seen by the most people.

Or maybe to make it work on more platforms? Macromedia's plugin is installed on all windows machines by default, and is easy to install under linux as well. Quicktime and WMP don't have nearly the same default install base. I wish they'd do more movie trailers using flash, as neither quicktime nor WMP work as a plugin on my system, usually resulting in me screwing around with wget looking for source urls to get anything useful out of apple.com's crap traliers.
Re:First post - source mongering... by LightningTH · 2003-12-15 07:24 · Score: 1

Turn snort or tcpdump on and look at what it connects to. I'd do it right now but I'm at work so I cant watch the traffic.
Re:First post - source mongering... by Issue9mm · 2003-12-15 07:39 · Score: 1

Consider me wrecked. I was of the opinion that all of this style behaviour occurred well after Stan Lee was usurped as EIC of Marvel. Before that, the most homage played to DC characters like Superman was in parody, ala Gladiator (Superman ripoff, that every character in Marvel promptly spanked and sent packing.)

-9mm-
Re:First post - source mongering... by fenix+down · 2003-12-15 08:20 · Score: 1

Except only the newest version of flash can play the video. I think people who compulsively upgrade flash to enable stupid little niche features are about as common as people with quicktime. It's nice that it works on Linux properly, but I'm not going to congratulate them for having found a byzantine escape route to avoid using a sane format.

I wouldn't even mind losing some quality on Macromedia's "NEED MORE NON-STANDARD PRODUCT LOCK-INS RAARR" video codec to make some people happy, but couldn't they have used a slightly less infuriating interface? OK, flash isn't exactly known for fuctionality, but I'm pretty sure the ability to navigate within a clip is pretty fucking fundamental to this whole video player idea. Maybe a simple seek bar is to useful to be trendy enough, but Jesus, how hard is a rewind button? "Oops! You blinked during the cool bit, now you gotta sit through 30 soul-raping seconds-that-feel-like-decades of Peter the Emo Bitch being a pussy again! Ha ha! That'll teach you to consider paying us exhorbitant amounts of money for 2 hours of questionable entertainment, you dumbass!"
Re:First post - source mongering... by noisehole · 2003-12-15 08:26 · Score: 1

reencoded as ogm (xvid/ogg)
torrent at http://forums.bytemonsoon.net/showthread.php?p=218 82#post21882

maybe someone hosts the torrent as a direct download
enjoy
Re:First post - source mongering... by derF024 · 2003-12-15 08:35 · Score: 1

Except only the newest version of flash can play the video.

Hadn't noticed. Apt keeps flashplayer up to date with whatever is the latest so it just worked for me.

OK, flash isn't exactly known for fuctionality, but I'm pretty sure the ability to navigate within a clip is pretty fucking fundamental to this whole video player idea. Maybe a simple seek bar is to useful to be trendy enough, but Jesus, how hard is a rewind button?

There was a fairly usable seek bar on the player I got.
Re:First post - source mongering... by noisehole · 2003-12-15 08:36 · Score: 5, Informative

alternative url : torrent
Re:First post - source mongering... by bfg9000 · 2003-12-15 08:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

I bet this is mostly done to prevent copying.

Yeah, it's a pretty sad state of affairs when companies are being this overprotective of their "intellectual property". I remember the good old days when companies actually WANTED customers to see their ads, now the ads themselves are restricted and controlled as if they were a separate product.

Oh well, if I can't see the ad, I can't get hyped about the product, and I'll spend my money elsewhere. They chose control over profits.

On a side note, I'm guessing Apple releases a DVD of all their ads in High-Def pretty soon. No kidding, it'd sell like hotcakes, and only Apple seems to realize that a fanatic fanbase is a GOOD thing.

--
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
Re:First post - source mongering... by chateau_x · 2003-12-15 09:09 · Score: 1

an easy fix is to right-click & zoom in a couple times ...

then click-hold and drag the little movie window over so that it's centered.
Re:First post - source mongering... by pipingguy · 2003-12-15 09:14 · Score: 1

Quicktime? I'd rather chew my own arm off.

WTF is wrong with mpeg, no sidestream ad content?

Considering that the download itself is an advertisement...
Re:First post - source mongering... by wo1verin3 · 2003-12-15 09:21 · Score: 1

It appears to connect to flv1.broadcast.vip.dal.yahoo.com, and as per the source above (decompiled flash code) it uses RTMP.

How to Stream an FLV Movie via RTMP

If you want to stream in Flash, you will have to make an FLV file. FLV is currently proprietary so the only way to render is through Flash MX or Sorenson Spark.

Hrm, looks like its in .FLV which can really only be played through flash, any other ideas?
Re:First post - source mongering... by multimed · 2003-12-15 09:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

You're giving them too much credit--while it's true about the wider audience playback with Flash, if that were really their reason, then they would have actually emhedded the video into a swf. The flash player can play back video encoded with the Sorenson Spark (or Spark Pro) codec which is pretty decent (though obviously not as good as MPEG 2/4). Instead, it actually connects to a stream which can neither be saved nor cached so playback is mostly dreadful. When I'm in charge, I'm going to send out CDs with the files to the largest P-to-P sharers. Seriously it's not like there is some value to a trailer and that people are somehow taking money away from them by downloading/copying them. It is a f*cking advertisement to get people to spend $8 on a movie ticket, and later $19 on the DVD. The more people who see the trailer, the more will purchase the money. Friggin' idiots.

--
Vote Quimby.
Re:First post - source mongering... by JasonStiletto · 2003-12-15 10:29 · Score: 1

unless you mean 4, somewhat crappy compression, compared to Quicktime or divx/xvid.. it all plays with the mplayerplug-in anyway.
Re:First post - source mongering... by 1lus10n · 2003-12-15 11:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

mplayer plug in. why ? because i have yet to see a video it wont recognize and play correctly. including wmv, quicktime, real, and this crappy ass flash trailer. and it also works fine behind proxies.

obligatory linux taunt:
Go Linux its your birthday !!!
Go Linux its your birthday !!!

--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
Re:First post - source mongering... by Macgruder · 2003-12-15 16:17 · Score: 1

Ok, looks like I'll have to requalify as a geek.

What can I used to play OGM files? Codecs for Quicktime / Media Player / DivX, or yet another player?

--
I'm not crazy,I'm actively irresponsible.
Re:First post - source mongering... by Elfan · 2003-12-15 17:23 · Score: 1

Here ya go:

http://ld-anime.faireal.net/guide/ogm-en#what

It will take a few steps but ogm is a better coantainer format than avi and friends.
Re:First post - source mongering... by epsilon_alpha · 2003-12-29 03:04 · Score: 1

I don't know what you're talking about ... it didn't happen to me and worked out just fine.

--
-[EPSILON]-

.torrent locations ? by rastakid · 2003-12-15 05:07 · Score: 1

Asuming the host will be down sooner than you can say 'Slashdotted', are there any locations of .torrent files?

--
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?

Re:.torrent locations ? by Elfan · 2003-12-15 17:26 · Score: 1

http://www.cyberyoda.org/download.php?id=691&file= Spider-Man.2.Trailer.ogm.torrent

Or just scroll up.

Trailer in theatres? by jimmer63 · 2003-12-15 05:07 · Score: 1, Interesting

When will this trailer be in theatres? What movies will it be playing before? I want to see this on the big screen.

Re:Trailer in theatres? by iainl · 2003-12-15 05:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

"When will this trailer be in theatres? What movies will it be playing before?"

Both rumour and plain logic says Rings on Wednesday - certainly, there is little else that you'd want to attach it to this week.

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Re:Trailer in theatres? by gfxguy · 2003-12-15 08:16 · Score: 1

While it's not unheard of... LOTR is Newline and Spiderman is Universal. When trailers are "bundled" with a movie, there's usually some rhyme and/or reason.

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Re:Trailer in theatres? by black+mariah · 2003-12-15 10:57 · Score: 1

A Large Sum of Money = Rhyme + Reason ;-)

--
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.

About the trailer... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 05:08 · Score: 5, Informative

Clearly Dr. Octopus is the nemesis, but I read the Lizard will be in this movie as well. Maybe he will appear in a future trailer?

Re:About the trailer... by The+Lynxpro · 2003-12-15 05:33 · Score: 4, Informative

"Clearly Dr. Octopus is the nemesis, but I read the Lizard will be in this movie as well. Maybe he will appear in a future trailer?"

Dr. Curt Conners might be in the film. He was mentioned as being Pete's boss before Pete got fired from the lab in the original film. Curt Conners in the comics became "The Lizard." However, it is doubtful "The Lizard" will make a reptilian appearance in this film. Remember, Sony plans on Spidey being a never-ending franchise, like MGM/UA's James Bond series.

But, from the way it sounds, the Scarecrow will appear in the new Batman film for the first 10 minutes before the movie focuses on Batman and his main foe, R'as Al Ghul. What a great film...Chris Nolan directing and they already have Christian Bale as Batman, Michael Cain as Alfred, the guy from 28 Days Later as the Scarecrow, and possibly Kurt Russell as Sgt./Commissioner Gordon...

Oh yeah, back to Spider-Man 2! :0

--
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
Re:About the trailer... by jayhawk88 · 2003-12-15 06:02 · Score: 1

God, I hope not. IMHO that whole "two villian" cheese was the worst thing to happen to the Batman films (well, that and giving it to Schumacher I suppose).

Doc Oc's got enough juice to give Spidey a good ride for an entire movie on his own, he doesn't need the Lizard showing up for no damn good reason. This goes for any future Spidey villians down the road too: Venom (obviously), Carnage (you just know they're going to throw him in on the Venom pic), Return of Green Goblin/Hobgoblin (again, can't you just see the whole Osborn family mess in one picture). Hell, you do it right, you could even get whole pictures out of guys like the Shocker or Vulture, but probably no way that happens.

On a side note: damn did that car-chuck scene kick ass.
Re:About the trailer... by the+Man+in+Black · 2003-12-15 06:22 · Score: 1

This goes for any future Spidey villians down the road too: Venom (obviously), Carnage (you just know they're going to throw him in on the Venom pic), Return of Green Goblin/Hobgoblin (again, can't you just see the whole Osborn family mess in one picture).

God please not Carnage. The "Holy shit this groovy black costume I picked up during the Secret Wars is alive!" storyline promptly ceased being entertaining when the Marvel execs decided "Hey, if they like Venom, why don't we give them FIVE! WEEEE!". I'm big on Eddie Brock, and I like how they slipped him in the first movie, and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing Sam Raimi work his Mojo on a Venom story. Not to mention seeing the big "Venom grin" on the big screen. (If his first appearance is in complete darkness where all you can see is the grin, like in the comics, I will shit myself).

Oh, and definitely do a Green Goblin II/Hobby Gobby thing, though I don't remember which one was Osbourne Jr.. I had the first Hobgoblin storyline when I was a kid (all the way up through Inferno, where he turned into a real demon), but I'm at a loss on specifics.

I don't know that Shocker or Vulture or Kraven would translate well, or make interesting movie characters, personally.

--
El riesgo vive siempre!
Re:About the trailer... by Issue9mm · 2003-12-15 06:32 · Score: 1

The Vulture, as portrayed later in the books, was a great character. Basically he was a washed up super-villain, helpless without his costume, and all the realities that entailed. It was a well-done storyline, and one I've never seen as well done with such an obviously second-rate character.

The fun was in the acknowledgement of his status.

-9mm-
Re:About the trailer... by Kierthos · 2003-12-15 06:35 · Score: 1

Harry Osbourne (the son) was one of the Green Goblins at a couple different points in the comics. For one of his runs in the green suit, he was pretty damn insane, and for another, he was fairly sane, working on the same side as Spider-Man, and knew that Spidey was Peter Parker. Of course, Marvel trashed that when they had him go insane again, attempt to kill his own wife, and then die of a brain fever. (Which is, of course, what lead into the return of the original Green Goblin, back from the dead... although they retconned it in the comics so that he didn't really die those many years ago.)

Now, if you want confusing, try and understand the number of people who claimed to be the Hobgoblin...

Kierthos

--
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Re:About the trailer... by jayhawk88 · 2003-12-15 06:44 · Score: 2, Informative

See, that's the thing: no way you can convince me a Venom-themed movie needs anything other than Venom. Perhaps this is in the works for the third movie? The trailer showed a brief shot of a military-dressed man with someone. This was how they setup Venom in the SpiderMan cartoon, since they didn't have Secret Wars - some guy (JJ's son I think?) was an astronaut and came back from space with the symbiot in tow. It first found Parker but he eventually rejected it, then it found Eddie. You setup the first part of the movie showing Eddie getting fired because of Peter, he finds the symbiot, learns that Parker is SpiderMan, goes a little bit nuts, Bingo, instant movie. Venom-themed SpiderMan movie has the potential to be truley kick-ass if they do it right.

You're probably right about the various low-tiered characters, but then you don't really need them. By the time you get through Doc Oc, Venom, and another Green Goblin/Hobgoblin movie, your 4 pictures in and the franchise is probably running out of juice anyway. Actually, what might be really cool is to have a SpiderMan/Daredevil crossover movie vs. The Kingpin, since he's a big presence in the Spider books anyway. Lots of good opportunities for Spidey/Daredevil "This is how I handle things" stuff. Too bad Daredevil got screwed up out of the gate and will be lucky to see the light of day again.
Re:About the trailer... by ZerroDefex · 2003-12-15 10:12 · Score: 1

The Doctor who becomes the lizard is played by Bruce Campbell, and you can see him briefly in the trailer.
Re:About the trailer... by Excen · 2003-12-15 11:41 · Score: 1

and possibly Kurt Russell as Sgt./Commissioner Gordon...

I must point out my objections on the choice of Kurt Russell as Commissioner Gordon. As an actor and screen presence, he just doesn't give off the Gordon vibe. If Russell were a little more, um (lacking a suitable adjective here), for the sake of conversation, less stony, than maybe he would fit, but with his other work, namely Soldier and Stargate, he just doesn't fit the character of "The Commish", as Harvey Bullock so eloquently put it.

--
"No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
Re:About the trailer... by mr100percent · 2003-12-15 19:43 · Score: 1

R'as Al Ghul? Isn't she one of the Protoss from Starcraft?

Screw .swf by Gannoc · 2003-12-15 05:09 · Score: 4, Informative

Get it up on Quicktime/Apple like all other trailers, you bastards.

Re:Screw .swf by gmuslera · 2003-12-15 05:21 · Score: 1

Or less propietary formats. avi/asf is pretty widely supported, helix (from realnetworks) is open. Quicktime depends too much on apple players that are not available for all plataforms, even when mplayer can cope with it i'm not sure how much will be left out.
After all, the company that makes the movie and the trailer want that us buy their product, or speak about it, or reccomend it to friends. The whole idea of the trailer is that the people have a hint on how it will be. Putting things in a way that make difficult to see for a lot of people is against the objetive of making a trailer.
Re:Screw .swf by runenfool · 2003-12-15 05:31 · Score: 2, Informative

avi or asf? Huh? And quicktime is too proprietary?

How about an mpeg? 4 even ..
Re:Screw .swf by vigilology · 2003-12-15 05:35 · Score: 1

A .avi can be in one of any number of codecs. It's just a suffix.
Re:Screw .swf by Zed2K · 2003-12-15 05:38 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Quicktime is available for all platforms that matter.

Oh wait, it won't play on my cell phone or my gameboy either...what about those formats? After all, people who love movies don't only use OS's that are niche products but also have cell phones.
Re:Screw .swf by spicyjeff · 2003-12-15 06:44 · Score: 2, Informative

Actually QuickTime 6.3 does have APIs for this sort of thing...3GPP.
Re:Screw .swf by hendrix69 · 2003-12-15 07:05 · Score: 1

Can anyone say what kind of streaming technology is used by such swf pages? Is it better/worse than Real or WMA or whatever?

--
The power of Christ compiles you!
Re:Screw .swf by Sabalon · 2003-12-15 08:18 · Score: 1

so is quicktime.

It's all about the codec inside the wrapper file.

Either way -- it looks good.
Re:Screw .swf by danielsfca2 · 2003-12-15 08:40 · Score: 1

90% of the trailers out there in QuickTime, and I'm pretty sure all the ones on apple's Trailers site are not strictly "streaming." They're just a regular MOV file that you can choose to open in the browser and watch-as-you-download, but you can also just right-click and save it., or pause the trailer and wait for the seek bar to fill up with gray, indicating it's done downloading.

If your connection can't handle the progressive download, then save it and quit whining. No format can compensate 100% for your network problems. Besides, this way you'll have the file to watch later or show to friends.
Re:Screw .swf by Bert64 · 2003-12-16 05:02 · Score: 1

The linux plugin is very buggy, closed source (difficult to integrate with new browsers, cant fix bugs) and the existance of the closed source plugin stops people from developing an open plugin. There are no native plugins for linux running on non x86 architectures, theres no native plugins for the *BSD's or for the commercial unixes or other OS's such as VMS.
The problem with propriatory formats becoming popular, is they can stifle the adoption of new platforms, the more widespread swf becomes, the more useless any platform not supporting it becomes for web browsing. Someone could invent a super os or a super platform tomorrow, something that beat all the competition hands down and totally undercut it on price, but this innovation would be stifled by an inability to support these propriatory formats. Contrast this with open standards, where the software vendor can implement it themselves, or open source where the vendor can port existing applications to their new platform.
If it werent for propriatory apps and formats, do you think people would still be using kludgy x86 processors, legacy bioses and a number of other old things anymore? Hardware designers would have much more freedom to innovate without the need to directly support backwards compatibility.. Speak to some engineers at AMD and ask them how much the need for x86 backwards compatibility has hindered them and held them back.

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Re:Screw .swf by stubear · 2003-12-16 09:52 · Score: 1

"Speak to some engineers at AMD and ask them how much the need for x86 backwards compatibility has hindered them and held them back."

Then explain to me why AMD decided to extend teh life of X86 through their 64-X86 based processors instead of dumping it and following Intel's lead with IA-64 and the Itanium? I'll tell you why; money, plain and simple. AMD sees money in extending teh life of X86 while Intel sees opportunity in develping a modern and much better platform. Because AMD refuses to drop X86, Intel will likely have to quickly develop (if they haven't already) a compatible chip to teh AMD 64-X86 line. Intel's willing to let it go, why isn't AMD? The world is not black and white.

WAY too small by neoform · 2003-12-15 05:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why was it so tiny? i could barely see anything.

--
MABASPLOOM!

Re:WAY too small by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 05:25 · Score: 2, Funny

You know.... if I had a nickel for everytime I heard that. No. Wait a second.... ummmm - nevermind
Re:WAY too small by Zed2K · 2003-12-15 05:36 · Score: 1

Its just flash. Right click and select zoom.
Re:WAY too small by wo1verin3 · 2003-12-15 05:59 · Score: 2, Informative

Instead of going to link, first go directly to flash file in your browser:

1) Go to http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/sony/spiderman 2/master5.swf.

2) As the other poster says, now right click and use the 'zoom in' feature.
Re:WAY too small by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 06:25 · Score: 1, Funny

Why was it so tiny? i could barely see anything.
Yeah, that's what she said.
Re:WAY too small by gl4ss · 2003-12-15 07:37 · Score: 1

doesn't solve the problem that it is tiny as fuck.

but i guess it was used as a exclusive(and hid behind flash) and they would have just died with a bigger resolution(also, most of the viewers wouldn't have been able to watch it withoug waiting for it to load up first).

that said it really doesn't tease me that much.. maybe i'll see it in the movies maybe not.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Something to look forward to? by Breaker_1 · 2003-12-15 05:11 · Score: 1, Insightful

I don't know if anyone else felt this way, but is ANOTHER sequel to a bad movie something to look forward to? I'm looking forward to something origional again. There have been what? 4 or 5 sequels out this year? Where is the origionality at?

Re:Something to look forward to? by Gr33nNight · 2003-12-15 05:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

At the local independant theater house. Check it out sometime, you'll be suprised at what you find.
Re:Something to look forward to? by Stone316 · 2003-12-15 05:17 · Score: 1

By the looks of the preview, its going to be much better than the first one....

--
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
Re:Something to look forward to? by Breaker_1 · 2003-12-15 05:18 · Score: 1

Thanks largely in part to the wonderfully large corporate conglomerate theatres by my house (all 4 of them) there are no more independent theatres left around me.
Re:Something to look forward to? by musikit · 2003-12-15 05:19 · Score: 5, Funny

Where is the origionality at?

ORIGINALITY went the way of spellchecker.

gone forever never to return again
Re:Something to look forward to? by bogado · 2003-12-15 05:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

Pop culture is often serial. Comic books never end, why should movies based on them end? The comic books usualy reinvent themselves from time to time, to let new blood come in, and introduce new plot-lines.

--
[]'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins
^[:wq
Re:Something to look forward to? by NDPTAL85 · 2003-12-15 05:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why was this modded up? Spiderman was an EXCELLENT movie and a great comic book to film adapatation on par with X-Men and clearly superior to recent Batman films, Daredevil and The Incredible Hulk.

--
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Re:Something to look forward to? by GoofyBoy · 2003-12-15 05:32 · Score: 1

>Where is the origionality at?

Uh.... look at Superman 2 and Batman and Robin movies.

Some originality killed those series.

--
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Re:Something to look forward to? by RedK · 2003-12-15 05:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

but is ANOTHER sequel to a bad movie something to look forward to?
What sequel to a bad movie are you referring to ? This story is about the Spider-Man sequel, you know, the great characterisation, the innovative twist on an old story, the great acting and The Macho Man Randy Savage as BONESAW!
Oh... right... it's trendy now to bash movies because they're mainstream. Ok, i'm sorry, Bad Mainstream Media for stealing our geek icons!! Bad bad! Spider-Man sucks since it's now popular and enjoyed by those non-geeks.

--
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Re:Something to look forward to? by stevey · 2003-12-15 05:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

Well I don't know about anybody else but I've never read a comic in my life and I loved the first film.

Sure I knew most of the story from watching the cartoons and the old tv shows, but comics just never appealled to me as a kid - ditto for the X-Men.

Maybe I'm the perfect target audience, maybe I'm not qualified to comment at all, either way I loved the first one and will be seeing this when it comes out.

Right now I'm just waiting to see the RoTK (I did read those books as a child and never imagined I'd see an adaptation, let alone a good one! :)
Re:Something to look forward to? by Breaker_1 · 2003-12-15 05:37 · Score: 1

I mean origional ideas for movies, not a movie based on a comic book, or a story. Though arguably the one series that started this is in fact a good series.. The last good movie I saw was "13". Thats an origional story.
Re:Something to look forward to? by Breaker_1 · 2003-12-15 05:40 · Score: 1

Trendy or not, take an objective view on it. There are some popular movies that I think are great, and popular for a reason. Then there are weak movies with a huge marketing push (see The Hulk).
Re:Something to look forward to? by NanoGator · 2003-12-15 05:51 · Score: 1

"What sequel to a bad movie are you referring to ? This story is about the Spider-Man sequel, you know, the great characterisation, the innovative twist on an old story, the great acting and The Macho Man Randy Savage as BONESAW!"

Did you only watch the first half of the movie?

--
"Derp de derp."
Re:Something to look forward to? by kgarcia · 2003-12-15 06:13 · Score: 1

By the looks of the preview, the original was going to be much better than it was.......
Re:Something to look forward to? by milkme123 · 2003-12-15 06:24 · Score: 2, Informative

Four or five sequels? You wish!

2003 Sequels:
Lord Of The Rings 3
The Matrix Reloaded
The Matrix Revolutions
Terminator 3
Bad Boys 2
Charlie's Angels 2
Final Destination 2
Hypercube: Cube 2
2 Fast 2 Furious
Dumb & Dumberer
Rugrats 2: Rugrats Go Wild!
Legally Blonde 2
Tomb Raider 2
Spy Kids 3D
American Pie 3
Jeepers Creepers 2
Scary Movie 3
Barbershop 2
Freddy Vs Jason
X2

And in 2002:
Blade 2
Austin Powers 3
Star Wars Ep 2
Harry Potter 2
Lord Of The Rings 2
Die Another Day (James Bond 20)
Star Trek 10
Once Upon a Time in Mexico (Desperado 2)
Men In Black 2
Stuart Little 2
Spy Kids 2
The Santa Clause 2
The Scorpion King (The Mummy 3)
American Psycho 2
Analyze That (Analyze This 2)
Baby Geniuses 2: Superbabies
Jason X
The Sum Of All Fears (Jack Ryan 4)
Re:Something to look forward to? by M37all1cA · 2003-12-15 06:35 · Score: 1

> Once Upon a Time in Mexico (Desperado 2)

Don't mean to be anal, but 'Mexico should be El Mariachi 3...
Re:Something to look forward to? by Highlander · 2003-12-15 06:39 · Score: 1

I think that a lot of people would disagree that Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, and Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King are sequels.

H
Re:Something to look forward to? by TechnoPops · 2003-12-15 06:43 · Score: 1

It was modded up for the fact that he made a somewhat insightful point that Hollywood tends to recycle the same ideas over and over, not because of his opinion on the movie.

But seriously, should you mod someone down because their opinion doesn't agree with yours? By that logic, if I had the mod points, I should mod you down, too, because I wasn't all that hot about the first movie either. :P Tastes differ from person to person, people like different things. Remember that.

--
"Each time you smile, it'll only last awhile. Life may be scary, but it's only temporary."
Re:Something to look forward to? by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 06:56 · Score: 2, Interesting

It should be noted that the first great work of western literature was the Iliad, by Homer. The second great work of western literature was the Odyssey, a sequel (and better than the original, IMNSHO). What did you expect?

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Re:Something to look forward to? by RavinDave · 2003-12-15 07:00 · Score: 1

Many of Shakespeare's best were sequels. A full 2/3 of the existing Greek opus were sequels (parts of trilogies).

Sequel != crap.

At least not automatically. It's not inherent in the form. Moreover, storytellers know that people actually like the familiarity that sequels provide. However much they may deny it, any psychologist/anthrologist/Wendy's Fry Cook will tell you we tell the same stories over and over.

Ignominious, perhaps -- but it has the virtue of being true.
Re:Something to look forward to? by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 07:02 · Score: 1

...and they would be correct. Tolkein wrote The Lord of the Rings as one big book -- the publisher insisted on breaking it into three volumes. So TTT and RotK are not technically sequels, they're the second and third volumes of a single work.

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Re:Something to look forward to? by OblvnDrgn · 2003-12-15 07:02 · Score: 1

I think that a lot of people would disagree that Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, and Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King are sequels.

From Mirriam-Webster: (Emphasis in original)
Sequel [n] - 2 a : subsequent development b : the next installment (as of a speech or story); especially: a literary or cinematic work continuing the course of a story begun in a preceding one

I think that a lot of people would be wrong, then.
Re:Something to look forward to? by YomikoReadman · 2003-12-15 07:12 · Score: 1

I think that if you take one book, break it into 6 sections plus the appendix, then publish it as either 2 books to a volume, or 1 whole book as it is meant to be, it's really not possible to make a sequel.

--
I have no regrets, this is the only path.
My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
Re:Something to look forward to? by scot4875 · 2003-12-15 07:20 · Score: 1

clearly superior to recent Batman films, Daredevil and The Incredible Hulk

Not that it's difficult to be superior to those cinematic masterpieces...

I mean, that's akin to saying that a full-body massage is superior to being punched in the face. (or maybe in this case, superior to prison rape...)

--Jeremy

--
Jesus was a liberal
Re:Something to look forward to? by sheared · 2003-12-15 08:11 · Score: 1

The first movie was just plain bad.

Boy, it sucks to be you.
Re:Something to look forward to? by fenix+down · 2003-12-15 08:30 · Score: 1

Jesus, of course. Why would you subject yourself to the second half when you could leave early and pretend it stayed decent all the way through?
Re:Something to look forward to? by lehyeong · 2003-12-15 13:48 · Score: 1

There have been what? 4 or 5 sequels out this year? Where is the origionality at?

I liked "Fellowship of the Ring" and all but having 2 sequels was just bald attempt at starting a franchise. When will people learn?
Re:Something to look forward to? by Snaller · 2003-12-16 16:22 · Score: 1

Spider-Man sucks since it's now popular and enjoyed by those non-geeks.

No, it just sucks because its crap. And that's a valid opinion you idiot censors.

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Release date by rf0 · 2003-12-15 05:11 · Score: 4, Funny

Right on my Wedding Anniversy...cheapo present :)

Rus

--
Cheap UK and US VPS

It's Monday, so I guess we by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 05:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

like the MPAA today. We'll hate them tomorrow when there is some P2P story.

Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by Zelet · 2003-12-15 05:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think the MPAA is fine. They put out a great product for the most part and I really can't complain about thier prices. I am sure it costs a hell of a lot more to produce a movie than some canned artist that they have for CDs yet the cost of a DVD isn't much more than a CD.

--
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by Ashe+Tyrael · 2003-12-15 05:27 · Score: 1

I am sure it costs a hell of a lot more to produce a movie than some canned artist that they have for CDs yet the cost of a DVD isn't much more than a CD.

Not much more than a CD? But when you consider that cd's are vastly overpriced to hell and back, it starts to get into perspective a little better.

--
"How fine you look when dressed in rage."
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by SpamJunkie · 2003-12-15 06:46 · Score: 1

It costs a lot to make movies when you have to cover the $20 million given to Arnold Schwarzenegger five times for movies that still lost money. It also costs a lot of money to continue letting Kevin Costner make big budget flops. If the movie industry stopped making obviously poor choices then it wouldn't be so bad.

But even still, you can't complain about prices when you pay the same amount to see the ultra-low budget Blair Witch and the ultra-high budget Phantom Menace in the same summer?
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by iminplaya · 2003-12-15 06:50 · Score: 1

I guess we should support this movie if it wasn't made by Miramax. Just don't link to it if it's not available in your country. I personally believe we should boycott any group (MPAA in this case) that supports what Miramax did.

--
What?
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 07:05 · Score: 1

It's Monday, so I guess we like the MPAA today. We'll hate them tomorrow when there is some P2P story.
Indeed. People who aren't one dimensional tend to have both good and bad feelings on any topic of significance. And we often feel the deepest hatred for those who we love the most...

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by lamasquerade · 2003-12-15 07:43 · Score: 1

Good quality product? Are you completely mad? What was the last good Hollywood movie? (LoTR doesn't count, made in NZ with only Hollywood $$) The amount of unmitigated shit that spews fourth from that swamp every year is sickening. And the people who pay to see it and support it despite the tons of quality being produced around the world should just get the labotomy over and done with. I read this thread to see if there was a sane person among us to respond to this article with a 'who the fuck cares!' and I come accross someone supporting the 'quality' from Hollywood? I have never been more amazed...

--
// It had been Fat's delusion for years that he could help people. --Philip K. Dick, Valis
Re:It's Monday, so I guess we by Zelet · 2003-12-15 08:49 · Score: 1

If it is "Hollywood $$" then it is a Hollywood movie. I don't care where it was filmed. How many films are actually filmed in the city of Hollywood. Secondly, a movie's purpose is to entertain. They do that extraordinarily well. So what that they don't have depth or much character development. People don't want that. They want cool stuff blowing up. Some of my favorite movies of all time a lot of stuff blows up or gets killed.
1. LotR
2. Braveheart
3. X-Men 2
4. Shrek
5. Gigili (just kidding)

Fact is - there is plenty of trash coming out of Hollywood but plenty of really great stuff as well. Maybe you don't think so but most of America disagrees with you.

--
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)

wow... by Spytap · 2003-12-15 05:12 · Score: 1

Awesome trailer, though mroe of a teaser than an actual trailer. That alone makes me positive of next summer's number one B.O. hit though.

Re:wow... by cluke · 2003-12-15 05:48 · Score: 2, Funny

That alone makes me positive of next summer's number one B.O. hit though.

Yep, all those sweaty, overexcited, unwashed nerds in one place at one time... you'll get quite a BO hit off that alright! ;-)
Re:wow... by big_a · 2003-12-15 05:49 · Score: 1

I agree. Awesome trailer. Probably the best one I have seen all year. I got goosebumps.

nah by SweetAndSourJesus · 2003-12-15 05:14 · Score: 2, Informative

Yahoo has more bandwidth than God, man. They're advertising this on their front page, so I imagine they're ready for some serious hits.

--

--
the strongest word is still the word "free"

Re:nah by gobbo · 2003-12-15 05:20 · Score: 1

I'm on a university network and can't play it decently, serious stutter.

--
Damn those pesky terrorists
Re:nah by notanatheist · 2003-12-15 05:38 · Score: 1

Actually it played quite fine considering it's 60+ posts later. Looks exciting. Can't wait for the nice large clear version to appear at apple.com. :)
Re:nah by BeesTea · 2003-12-15 06:34 · Score: 1

Ask your roomate to shut down his warez server for a few minutes. If that doesn't work, maybe you can pursuade all the people on your floor pumping out ICMP from Nachi to fix their machines.

--
2b2b2b415448300d

Real Life by grub · 2003-12-15 05:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's nice to know that there will be something to look forward to after RotK comes out.

Umm.. there's something called Real Life.. It's a hoot, I suggest you disconnect for a while and try it out.

--
Trolling is a art,

Re:Real Life by Patrik_AKA_RedX · 2003-12-15 05:25 · Score: 1

You like Real Life too?
Re:Real Life by JudgeFurious · 2003-12-15 05:32 · Score: 1

And honestly my "real life" only has to last two more days. Once Return of the King makes it out of the gate then the rest from here on out is gravy.

Oh wait, Extended DVD! Got to make it one more year....then the gravy.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Re:Real Life by Zoop · 2003-12-15 06:30 · Score: 2, Funny

Real Life.. It's a hoot, I suggest you disconnect for a while and try it out.

Yeah, war, terrorism, women rejecting you, going uphill is work, getting killed doesn't result in a respawn...I can see the appeal.
Re:Real Life by JFMulder · 2003-12-15 07:17 · Score: 1

Insightfull??? I read it as "At least there is [another movie] to look forward to after ROTK". This is just pointless bashing in quest for some moderator points.

As for if there's nothing good coming up in theaters after ROTK, there's Exorcist: The Beginning (I hated the first movie but I realise a lot of people are very fond of it, so it's a big event a lot of people won't miss), The Passion of Christ (wether you believe in God or not, this is a movie not to miss, the buzz in the press around this one is awesome), Hellboy (another comic book adaptation that a lot of people have been waiting for a while) and finally the best of the lot, Harry Potter : The prizonner of Azkaban. In fact, I'm more looking forward to HP than Spiderman2.
Re:Real Life by Snaller · 2003-12-15 07:21 · Score: 1

Where can you buy that? How much is it?

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Re:Real Life by adamy · 2003-12-15 08:23 · Score: 2, Funny

As a saxophone player all I can say is...

Turn down the amp.

Damn guitarists. That's it. I'm getting a mike and an Amp.

--
Open Source Identity Management: FreeIPA.org
Re:Real Life by Jugalator · 2003-12-15 08:25 · Score: 1

Umm.. there's something called Real Life.. It's a hoot, I suggest you disconnect for a while and try it out.

Bah... Troll modded high... :-/

I bet he was only saying this: "nice to see there are other movies than RotK to look forward to after that one", and not "ah, cool, that will give me something else to do than sit on my butt and browsing Slashdot". But of course, I can't be 100% sure, and neither can you. I could basically say the same to you, as you're posting on Slashdot. That must mean you're posting on Slashdot all day long and are just waiting to pay for the right hooker to get over to you? Right? :-/

No need to attack someone just because of your personal prejudices...

--
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Re:Real Life by danielsfca2 · 2003-12-15 08:57 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as good beer.
Re:Real Life by black+mariah · 2003-12-15 11:08 · Score: 1

Yeah, like your damn creeching bleeting wounded animal calls are worthy of being audible. Damn Mongilians... err... saxaphonists. ;-)

--
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Re:Real Life by adamy · 2003-12-15 12:36 · Score: 1

You don't know how right you are.

The one time I recorded (for friend's demo album) all he used in the mixing process were a bunch of screeches and honks...basically sound effects.

--
Open Source Identity Management: FreeIPA.org

Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by Faeton · 2003-12-15 05:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

I love the fact that they're still making Peter Parker a geek. True to the comic's heritage and spirit. Although in the first one we see that he has no need for glasses, he's still wearing them here. A geek at heart, but one that can kick ass.

The anguish between his powers/ reponsibilities and love life looks to play a bigger part in this movie. DocOct looks great without a cheezy mask to hide behind.. and it looks like they're working in the revenge angle for Harry Osborne. Looking good here!

Next up, Spiderman 3.. Introducing Venom!

Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by mydigitalself · 2003-12-15 05:25 · Score: 2, Funny

isn't the whole point of him continuing to wear glasses so that he doesn't give his identity away?
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by drinkypoo · 2003-12-15 05:29 · Score: 1

Wasn't the whole point of the grandfather comment karma whoring? (+1, I love geeks, they're so dreamy)

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 05:57 · Score: 1, Funny

Thank you Captain Obvious, the day is once again saved thanks to you.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by sharkey · 2003-12-15 05:58 · Score: 1

That was the Superman/Clark Kent scenario
To be fair, Superman had that little "S" styled forelock, and Clark didn't, at least in the movies.

--

--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by ConceptJunkie · 2003-12-15 06:06 · Score: 1

Next up, Spiderman 3.. Introducing Venom!

Rats! I'm still holding out for Paste-Pot Pete.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by shut_up_man · 2003-12-15 06:11 · Score: 1

It's crazy, but this has actually worked in real life for me, so don't knock it too hard. I'd been playing sat afternoon soccer with a bunch of guys for months (without specs) and turned up to a bar with glasses on, and they didn't recognise me. I was even introduced directly, and they still thought I was another guy with the same name as "that guy from soccer". Pretty surprising, although I'm still doubtful it would work on Lois Lane over a period of years.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by Issue9mm · 2003-12-15 06:34 · Score: 1

No. You may not have noticed, but typically, Spider-Man wears a mask, and not glasses. The glasses aren't so much part of his secret identity, per se, as he's ditched them long ago in the comics and cartoons.

You're thinking of the other S-Man.

-9mm-
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by shut_up_man · 2003-12-15 06:41 · Score: 1

12th man, actually.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by nycheetah · 2003-12-15 15:21 · Score: 1

OMG! The Venom CGI should be even better then the all the Matrix and Lord of the Rings movies Combined! And of course they are going to have to have the Hulk in it to make up for his last movie.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by Minna+Kirai · 2003-12-15 20:29 · Score: 1

they're still making Peter Parker a geek. True to the comic's heritage and spirit.

I don't think so. Yes, Petey still had his scientific background, but in the movie, he doesn't do anything with it. It's not part of his super-power.

For the sake of two funny scenes about awkwardly adjusting to biological web-slingers (the cafeteria fumble and his rooftop recitation of superhero slogans), they stripped out the whole gadgeteer aspect of the character.

Spider-Man (from 1960) was in many ways a hybridization of the two most successful superheros (from the 1930s). On one side is Superman, whose powers are intrinsic to his being. The opposite is Batman, who suffered criminal trauma and fights with gadgets and guile.

In the middle is Spiderman, who is physically abnormal (but not to the stupifying extreme Superman is), but who lost a family member and carries unique gizmos, Batman-like.

At least, that's how it's supposed to be. But instead of Spidey's technical prowess being an integral part of his identity, it only gets lip service. In the movie he doesn't build slingers, he grows them. Using the body, and not the mind. That moves him out of the nerd herd and into the jock camp.

Next up, Spiderman 3.. Introducing Venom!

I wonder how they'd manage this. First, the film has to establish him as wearing this strange suit, for an extended period of crimefighting.

The best approach is for him to rescue astronauts from a bad landing, where a falling glass canister of space-goop cracks over his head. Back home, painstaking application of bleach does nothing to prevent the stain from spreading over the whole thing in the wash...
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by SuiteSisterMary · 2003-12-16 08:51 · Score: 1

The directors specifically wrote out the home-built webslingers, as they didn't want to be so insulting to the audience as claim that a high school kid can build in an evening an adhesive that 3M couldn't come up with in several years.

--
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by Minna+Kirai · 2003-12-16 09:35 · Score: 1

It's the superhero-comicbook genre! Insulting the audience's intelligence is old hat.

Comic books are all about lone crackpot inventors who whip up hightech weapons that put McDonnel-Douglas to shame. That's how their world works.

In the case of Spider-Man, he has the extra excuse of his inherent climbing ability. Just prepend some pseudoscientific babble: "Studying my own mutated fingertips under the electron microscope revealed an amazing nanoscale pattern of unprecedented adhesiveness, which I shall attempt to synthesize in the UC..."
Re:Peter Parker - Still a Geek! by SuiteSisterMary · 2003-12-17 02:10 · Score: 1

Aye, comic books are all about that. Trying to bring them into the mainstream of movies...

Or would you rather another Punisher or Captain America movie effort? :-)

--
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.

Let me get my hands by Illserve · 2003-12-15 05:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

on the web monkey who coded up that streaming client.

I know it's getting hammered, but you can't even pause the damned thing to let it catch up, and if you restart it, you get 2 simultaneous audio streams at different time points.

Re:Let me get my hands by drinkypoo · 2003-12-15 05:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

Hiding your video in flash is the latest greatest way to stop people from stealing your video, though you might be able to steal it anyway with SWF Decompiler. The problem isn't the webmonkey, it's idiot studios that think it's a good idea to stop people from downloading and distributing trailers/teasers.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Let me get my hands by FrostedWheat · 2003-12-15 06:17 · Score: 1

Hiding your video in flash is the latest greatest way to stop people from stealing your video

Have the browser/viewer download the movie via a local HTTP proxy then just copy the URL from the logs. Handy for getting quicktime movies. Not sure if that would work with a flash embedded movie.
Re:Let me get my hands by macemoneta · 2003-12-15 07:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why on Earth would ANYONE with two (functioning) brain cells want to prevent broad, free, distribution of an ADVERTISEMENT???

--
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Re:Let me get my hands by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 07:14 · Score: 1

An excellent question. One must assume, given the evidence, that the average media exec is mononeurocellular...

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Re:Let me get my hands by Snaller · 2003-12-15 07:25 · Score: 1

Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

But why would I?

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Re:Let me get my hands by Overzeetop · 2003-12-15 07:29 · Score: 2, Funny

Of course you've got to protect it. Otheriwse thosed damned hackors will put it on the internet and then EVEYBODY will see it.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Re:Let me get my hands by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 07:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

Because they think that being able to gauge how popular the movie will be based upon how many times the trailer is downloaded.
Re:Let me get my hands by rnelsonee · 2003-12-15 08:06 · Score: 1

Doesn't work for a flash-embedded movie. I've got the SWF downloaded, and even have a SWF decomplier that lets me view images and other binary data, but I don't know how to export it. If anyone knows how to do this, I'm all ears. The decompiler is Sothink's SWF decompliler availabe here
Re:Let me get my hands by dubiousmike · 2003-12-15 08:06 · Score: 1

Because then they don't have the chance to place tracking cookies on your box.
Re:Let me get my hands by stripe · 2003-12-15 08:39 · Score: 2, Informative

I think its so that SONY can use it as a marketing research tool. With the trailer distributed all over the map they cannot get an accurate assessmet of the film's potential. With a larger more accurate forecast they can hit up McDonalds or Burger King or whatever franchise that sells movie tie ins for more $$$.
Re:Let me get my hands by Blakey+Rat · 2003-12-15 08:43 · Score: 1

I can come up with two reasons in the first ten seconds of thinking about this:

1) So they can track how many people connect to the site and view the trailer, and also whether people finish viewing the entire trailer, or whether they move to another site before it finishes.

2) So they can dissuade fake trailers (like the fake Episode 2 trailer for Star Wars). By going to the Flash site, people know they're getting an actual trailer from the studio.

--
Comment of the year
Re:Let me get my hands by RickHunter · 2003-12-15 08:50 · Score: 1

Only problem with that line of reasoning is that they could do so far more effectively with BitTorrent. Not only that, but they'd reduce the load on their servers and people would actually be able to watch the freaking trailer.

But you can bet that idea would get shot down because BitTorrent is "peer to peer".
Re:Let me get my hands by danila · 2003-12-15 09:13 · Score: 1

You are wrong, there is another problem with that line of reasoning. It's assuming that marketing execs are smart.

Truth is that they are dumb and even dumber. There are countless accounts by web-designers of how clueless their clients are. This is just another case. Sometimes someone in the studio will actually use his brain and come to a conclusion that it might actually be possible to give away the trailer. Then you will have DOWNLOADABLE trailers, like you have on Matrix site.

--
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Re:Let me get my hands by Kenneth+Stephen · 2003-12-15 09:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

Then you arent thinking very well. The primary objective of advertising is to publicize your product, and not to track who is watching your publicity. If you have to sacrifice one for the other, guess which one makes sense to be sacrificed?

With regards to your second point - if someone creates a fake trailer and distributes it, how is the recipient to know that there is a real trailer that is only available from the official site? If someone is going to be taken in by a fake, it doesnt really matter what the delivery mechanism is on the official site.

--
There is no such thing as luck. Luck is nothing but an absence of bad luck.
Re:Let me get my hands by UserGoogol · 2003-12-15 10:53 · Score: 1

Arguably, they might think they can make profit off those insane fans who will go to a movie purely to see a trailer, or those slightly less insane fans who will merely consider a good trailer the straw that breaks the camel's back in their decision.

But yes, it's stupid.

--
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
Re:Let me get my hands by Afty0r · 2003-12-15 11:03 · Score: 1

The primary objective of advertising is to publicize your product, and not to track who is watching your publicity.

Indeed it is, however tracking the popularity of a trailer, how much it is watched etc. has a clear, perceived value, which is something a supplier can charge for... having "lots" of people view your trailer sounds nice, but has no defined value, so a supplier cannot charge for it.
Re:Let me get my hands by squaretorus · 2003-12-15 22:19 · Score: 1

The primary objective of advertising is to publicize your product, and not to track who is watching your publicity.

No. The primary objective of advertising is to increase the profitability of the franchise. And to bring that profit forward. If you can quote a larger number of downloads of your trailer than the last LOTR trailer then McDonalds / Pepsi / Whoever will pay more $$ to run a tie in.

Magazines spend an awful lot of time and energy and cash on getting their circulation figures up, and generating detaile demographics. They would rather sell another 10 copies to 'rich bastards' than another 100 copies to students.

I'd reject the 'fake trailer' point - but tracking whos watching your trailer is a big deal!

Damned thing by ToadMan8 · 2003-12-15 05:19 · Score: 1

broken already...

Maybe it's Opera on Linux... Maybe advision.webevents.yahoo.com is blocked 'cause of that "advision" part.

Either that or they are just ignoring coding standards again.

Or we broke it again and they don't have their server set to provide useful feedback.

Either way I'll host a mirror with hella huge (edu) bandwidth if someone wants to give it to me.

--
I haven't posted in so long, my sig is out of date.

Re:Something to look forward to! by Patrik_AKA_RedX · 2003-12-15 05:21 · Score: 4, Funny

and I was ready to commit suicide. Thank you for saving my life Slashdot

Lucky this arrived on time. /. wouldn't be the same without Anonymous Coward.

Awesome CGI, good teaser by giftedtiger74 · 2003-12-15 05:21 · Score: 3, Funny

Yes it would be nice to have it in QT and downloadable.. Yes it has an awesome catch scene at the beginning of the trailer with the still poignant "Peter can't let himself fall for MJ".. Bottom line, its gonna be a summer blockbuster and we all will pay our 8$+$5 for our X-treme 128oz Turbo Chug and Popcorn flavored butter. ;)

Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by MORTAR_COMBAT! · 2003-12-15 05:39 · Score: 4, Insightful

Peter can't let himself fall for MJ

No. Peter has already completely fallen for MJ, but can't endanger her by being with her. That's the tragedy of Spider-Man, that's the part (aside from fairly interesting baddies) which makes Spidey so interesting (to me at least). (Just because Clark Kent can't endanger Lois Lane by being with her and revealing he is Superman, doesn't make Spider-Man a rip-off, does it?)

--
MORTAR COMBAT!
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by RichMan · 2003-12-15 06:06 · Score: 1

Go pick up the latest Ultimate Spider Man comic. This theme is covered very heavily in the comic.
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by Isca · 2003-12-15 06:12 · Score: 1

where the hell do you go to the movies where drink and a popcorn is only $5??!?!?!?!?
:)
-Chris
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by Gothic_Walrus · 2003-12-15 08:29 · Score: 1

If you don't mind me asking, what issue number is it?

--
Goo goo g'joob.
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by pjack76 · 2003-12-15 08:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

(Just because Clark Kent can't endanger Lois Lane by being with her and revealing he is Superman, doesn't make Spider-Man a rip-off, does it?)
I can't even believe I'm arguing this point, but the crucial difference is that (at least at first) Lois wants nothing to do whatsoever with Clark, she only has eyes for Superman.
I thought in the comic that MJ knew Spiderman's secret identity all along -- IIRC, she flirted with both of them, knowing full well they were the same guy, but Peter of course had no clue. She also flirted with Flash, Henry and so on.
On the other hand, Spiderman flirted with Black Cat and a host of other women as well. The whole comic was all about the college promiscuity. I'm actually a little surprised that the movies don't capture that aspect about Peter, that once he goes to college his love life gets extremely complicated. I guess Hollywood always has to go for the "one true love" aspect. On the other hand they did a great job of portraying MJ as somebody who doesn't know what she really wants and dates a lot of different people.
...this is what I do instead of fixing databases at work...

--
Wow, a lucrative publishing contract! I don't have to be evil anymore. --Meteor
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by DavidBrown · 2003-12-15 08:40 · Score: 1

The dynamic between Superman and Lois Lane vs. Spider Man and Mary Jane is different. The thing to understand about Superman is that Clark Kent isn't an act - that's the real guy, just a bit more clumsy on purpose. Lois Lane loves Superman, but won't give Clark Kent the time of day.

But Mary Jane falls for Peter Parker before she knows he's Spider Man.

Of course, when dealing with comic books, it really depends on which of several hundred continuities you are dealing with. Marvel and DC keep Spider Man and Superman alive by redoing them every several years.

--
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by wickedj · 2003-12-15 08:41 · Score: 1

Just because Clark Kent can't endanger Lois Lane by being with her...

From Mallrats:

It's impossible, Lois could never have Superman's baby. Do you think her fallopian tubes could handle the sperm? I guarantee you he blows a load like a shotgun right through her back. What about her womb? Do you think it's strong enough to carry her child?
...
He's an alien, for Christ sake. His Kyrptonian biological makeup is enhanced by earth's yellow sun. If Lois gets a tan the kid could kick right through her stomach. Only someone like Wonder Woman has a strong enough uterus to carry his kid. The only way he could bang regular chicks is with a kryptonite condom. That would kill him!
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by MORTAR_COMBAT! · 2003-12-15 13:35 · Score: 1

I can't even believe I'm arguing this point, but the crucial difference is that (at least at first) Lois wants nothing to do whatsoever with Clark, she only has eyes for Superman.

A good point, but CK as Superman also doesn't want to endanger LL by being with her.

--
MORTAR COMBAT!
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by Minna+Kirai · 2003-12-15 20:57 · Score: 1

I guarantee you he blows a load like a shotgun right through her back.

But... his sperm can fly! Each time he ejaculates, a swarm of airborn flagellates burst off faster than a bullet, using their x-ray vision to find attractive eggs to fertilize...

Only someone like Wonder Woman has a strong enough uterus to carry his kid.

The powers don't manifest until 10 years old.

PS. Lex Luthor is Superman's grandfather...
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by pjack76 · 2003-12-16 05:36 · Score: 1

A good point, but CK as Superman also doesn't want to endanger LL by being with her.
Well, Lois does a great enough job putting herself in danger anyway just to be with her beloved Superman...Everyone in that triangle is psychotic. :)

--
Wow, a lucrative publishing contract! I don't have to be evil anymore. --Meteor
Re:Awesome CGI, good teaser by RichMan · 2003-12-17 03:01 · Score: 1

What issue? Actually most of them.
In ultimate spiderman, Mary Jane knows he is spiderman, there is a big question of where their relationship is relative to peters desire to be spiderman and his desire to be with Mary Jane.
Also some very good moments with Aunt May. A lot of personal conflict stuff which is what SpiderMan has pretty much always been more about rather than the obligitory villian fight of the week.
US: 46 - back story about related events
US: 47 It was also fun, as always, to see a little bit of Peter's personal life, and I love that he and Mary Jane are an item once more. Item might not be a strong enough word, though, because really Mary's got the same good-natured busting of Peter's chops and ability to see what he can't that I'd expect from a married couple. Clearly, these two complement one another, and I love that Mary Jane in the Ultimate universe has been gifted with a sarcastic sense of humor that can match Peter's, as well as brains that make her more than just "the hero's girl."
US: 48, 49 Confrontation with JJJameson and some good Aunt May stuff.
US50 Later, Peter and Mary Jane have another one of their heart-to-hearts, and their honesty and love grows even more. But what Peter doesn't realize is that MJ has been sharing her secrets, and they're about to come to the attention of the wrong people.

Mmmmm... MJ by DesertFalcon · 2003-12-15 05:27 · Score: 1, Funny

Good to know there will be at least one scene featuring Mary Jane in an evening gown. That's reason enough for me to see it.

--
--- 11 meters/second, or 24 miles per hour - the airspeed velocity of an unladen European swallow. Really.

Re:Mmmmm... MJ by rizzo · 2003-12-15 06:48 · Score: 1

Personally, I'd prefer to see MJ without the evening gown.

--
"More organs means more human." - Zim

Re:Huh? by gobbo · 2003-12-15 05:28 · Score: 2, Funny

"It had zero redeeming features."

I can think of, well, one: awesome camera-on-a-rope shots. :-)

--
Damn those pesky terrorists

Only thing to look forward to... by MosesJones · 2003-12-15 05:30 · Score: 1, Troll

Now that Saddam Hussein has had to pull out of "Santa Claus and the Weapons of Mass Destruction".

Crazy beard... crazy guy.

--
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi

Re:Something to look forward to! by Ark42 · 2003-12-15 05:32 · Score: 1

Don't forget Kill Bill vol2: after that, Spider Man 2, and RotK, there is nothing left to live for. No, not even Star Wars 3.

--
Morphing Software

yup by SweetAndSourJesus · 2003-12-15 05:32 · Score: 5, Funny

If you're ever on the run in a comic, just put on some glasses.

"You've got the wrong man, officer. That guy wasn't wearing glasses."

Works every time.

--

--
the strongest word is still the word "free"

Re:yup by BrynM · 2003-12-15 05:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

As someone whos only been wearing glasses for only a year or so (and I'm over 30), I can say that the disguise can work - but not if the person you are trying to deceive sees you every day. I've had people standing right next to me that don't recognize me because they knew me before the glasses and they knew me pretty well before. No kidding. I was kind of amazed when I realized that it worked.
A psychologist friend explained to me that people zero in on a particular feature of the face to remember what you look like. With most people, it's the eyes and/or the nose. When you have glasses, it's the glasses and/or the nose and the eyes are pretty much ignored. Since that major feature is no longer in common with their previous mental image of you, their brains classify it as a "new" person until corrected by the observer gathering more information or being told.
If you don't believe me, get some stage glasses (no prescription) and go see some folks you haven't seen in a while at a bar or somewhere else that's crowded and public. Now see how long it takes for one of those friends to recognize you.

--
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
Re:yup by hcuar · 2003-12-15 06:40 · Score: 2, Funny

Friends? What are those?
Re:yup by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 07:09 · Score: 1

Hehe exactly -- you've all seen Mystery Men, right? Never underestimate the power of glasses...

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Re:yup by cpt+kangarooski · 2003-12-15 08:31 · Score: 1

For example, in the Tick comics, the Caped Wonder disguises himself as Clark Oppenheimer, thanks to his glasses. At one point, after the Tick breaks them, Clark has to curl his fingers around on his face (like the glasses frame) to preserve his secret identity.

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

Re:Something to look forward to! by Fjord · 2003-12-15 05:34 · Score: 1

I think you'll want to wait for Harry Potter: The Goblet of Fire as well. I can't say about The Order of the Pheonix, though, since I'm still in the middle of it.

--
-no broken link

way to pull a "lone gunmen"... by c.derby · 2003-12-15 05:36 · Score: 2, Funny

how about a spoiler warning, eh?

you ruined the trailer for me!

=)

--
-- derby

Re:Something to look forward to! by Planesdragon · 2003-12-15 05:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

Oh, come on.

Fantastic Four

new Superman

new Batman

A post-Matrix film from the Watchowskis

some other epic fantasy movie.

Even if just the movies, there's always something coming down the pipe worth living for.

Direct link to the movie? by julie-h · 2003-12-15 05:52 · Score: 1

Does anyone have a direct link to the trailer, so I can "wget" it?=)

Features? by sulli · 2003-12-15 05:52 · Score: 1

As in "Science Fiction, Double"? Kind of old-school for slashdot, don't you think?

--

sulli
RTFJ.

Another Link by NeurAlien6 · 2003-12-15 05:54 · Score: 1, Informative

Go here to get the trailer straight from Sony Pictures.

--
I'm a lvl25 Artist in the game of Life (tm)

Re:Another Link by Isca · 2003-12-15 06:08 · Score: 1

ok, maybe I am a bit slow, but all I can find at at this link that you gave us (I'm trying now, at 12:07PM CST) is a link to the same page as the main post.
Where do you go to get it once on the main page? I'm at work, and my link is too slow... Whaaaaaaaa!!!!!!

Streaming Sucks by vanyel · 2003-12-15 05:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'll wait for the quicktime version so I can actually watch it. I have yet to have streaming video work well, even at postage stamp size and a high speed connection. This one is no exception. Let me download something with decent quality in non-realtime, ThankYouVeryMuch...

Re:Streaming Sucks by reiggin · 2003-12-15 07:33 · Score: 1

Other than the small size, the quality was great. Perhaps it is the quality of your connection rather than the quality of the streaming. When I watched it, it was just as good as QT or MPEG4. Again, the small size was somewhat annoying. But quality was great.
Re:Streaming Sucks by vanyel · 2003-12-15 07:47 · Score: 1

Small size is part of the quality experience, but in my case, it kept stopping too. And I have a "384K" link that I've seen do 700K (apparently someone's not bothering with bandwidth limiting). In any case, a dialup user can get a large size, high quality download that a "broadband" streaming user can only dream of.

Spoiler by cdrudge · 2003-12-15 05:59 · Score: 1

He lives. Bad guy dies/is captured. A little bit of romance is thrown in. Someone else can fill in the rest of the details.

Re:Spoiler by Gr33nNight · 2003-12-15 07:19 · Score: 1

Real Life : You live, you spread seed, you die. The end. Might as well end it now, since you know how its going to end, right?

...getting there is half the fun.
Re:Spoiler by cdrudge · 2003-12-15 08:15 · Score: 1

Being 24 w/ 3 kids...I guess I'm ready to die.
Re:Spoiler by Sabalon · 2003-12-15 08:30 · Score: 1

Learns that with great power comes great responsiblity.

Re:You must be kidding! by NUBlackshirts · 2003-12-15 06:01 · Score: 1

"Who's the baddest?" "Sho'Nuf!"

Re:Huh? by sootman · 2003-12-15 06:01 · Score: 4, Funny

"It had zero redeeming features."

Did you step out for a Coke when Kirsten Dunst was getting rained on? That's two redeeming features right there.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

No such thing as an "original story" by Xoder · 2003-12-15 06:05 · Score: 1

"They're boring, really. They only have six plots, but they swap them round a bit."
George Orwell, 1984

--
The previous sig has been removed due to /. protecting your best interests

Please! by Scudsucker · 2003-12-15 06:09 · Score: 1

Can we have a cameo appearance of Magneto in this movie? Pretty Please? And have Doc Ock try to take him out?

-1 Overrated by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 06:10 · Score: 1, Interesting

Ummm.... get bent.

I enjoy movies, most specifically sci-fi and fantasy movies, not only watching them and anticipating them, but sharing and discussing them later with close friends. It gives me a great deal of pleasure and satisfaction. Because my particular obsessions are not the same as yours (whatever they are) does not mean I'm not engaged with my life.

When people say "get a life" what they really mean is "get my life," i.e. "share my interests, like what I like, or I condemn you." To which I give a hearty middle finger, because no matter what you choose to do with your time, there will always be a legion of nobodies lining up to let you know you're wasting it, and should instead be doing X, where X is whatever they consider worthwhile, whether it be movies, macrame, hang-gliding, roller fucking, or seeing how many Twinkies you can stuff in your mouth at once.

My life is my life, I've chosen it, and I'm fine with it. If you don't happen to think it qualifies, that's your problem, not mine.

For my part, I'm flying to Minneapolis in a couple of days to see ROTK opening night with my best friends in all the world, go out and have some beers afterward, discuss the movie, and have a great time -- just like I have the last two LotR movies. So there's real life for you.

Hmmm,,, REminds me of a song :) by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 06:11 · Score: 1, Informative

Ode to a Superhero

Peter Parker was pitiful
Couldn't have been any shyer
Mary Jane still wouldn't notice him
Even if his hair was on fire

But then one day he went to that science lab
That mutated spider came down
Oh, and now Peter crawls over everyone's walls
And he's swingin' all over town

La li la, li de da
La la, li le la da dum

Sling us a web, you're the Spider-Man
Sling us a web tonight
'Cause we're all in the mood for a hero now
And there's evil doers to fight

Now Harry the rich kid's a friend of his
Who horns in on Mary Jane
But to his great surprise it seems she prefers guys
Who can kiss upside down in the rain

"With great power comes great responsibility"
That's the catch phrase of old Uncle Ben
If you missed it, don't worry, they'll say the line
Again and again and again

Oh, la la la, di de da
La la, di di da da dom

Now Norman's a billionaire scientist
Who never had time for his son
But then something went screwy and before you knew he
Was trying to kill everyone

And he's ridin' around on that glider thing
And he's throwin' that weird pumpkin bomb
Yes, he's wearin' that dumb Power Rangers mask
But he's scarier without it on

Sling us a web, you're the Spider-Man
Sling us a web tonight
'Cause you're brave and you're strong and so limber now
But where'd you come up with those tights?

It's a pretty sad day at the funeral
Norman Osborn has bitten the dust
And I heard Harry's said he wants Spider-Man dead
Aw, but his buddy Pete he can trust

Oh, and M.J. is all how for Peter now
Aw, but Peter, he just shuts her down
Mary Jane, don't you cry, you can give it a try
Again when the sequal comes 'round

Oh, la la la, di de da
La la, di di da da dum

Sling us a web, you're the Spider-Man
Sling us a web tonight
'Cause we all sure could use us a hero now
And we think that you'll do all right

Weird Al

Re:Nothing other than Spidey after ROTK? by GoofyBoy · 2003-12-15 06:12 · Score: 4, Funny

How can you say that?

--
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.

Doc Oc! by euxneks · 2003-12-15 06:15 · Score: 1

It's Bill Gates!

--
in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni

Re:Nothing other than Spidey after ROTK? by Isca · 2003-12-15 06:18 · Score: 1

How [imdb.com] can [imdb.com] you [imdb.com] say [imdb.com] that [imdb.com]? Oh my... For those who don't want to click on these, I've listed them below:

Leprechaun: Back 2 tha Hood

MXP: Most Xtreme Primate

Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights

Jersey Girl

Garfield

Ok maybe, Jersey Girl will be good --- But Dirty Dancing??? Augh!

You're one of those people that give slashdot a bad name!

-Chris

EVERY year is unoriginal by GuyMannDude · 2003-12-15 06:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

There have been what? 4 or 5 sequels out this year? Where is the origionality at?

So you're saying that years in which there are fewer sequels feature more original movies? You must be joking. Every year Hollywood puts out films that are copies of previous films. They change the names, of course, but most films follow the same tired old formula.

If anything, sequels provide the opportunity (I'm not saying they always succeed) to do something different from the first film for the simple fact that a lot of the character development has already been completed. Not to mention there is a built-in audience so they could (again I'm not saying they always do) try something a little more radical. The Empire Strikes Back was very little like Star Wars. Even The Matrix Reloaded wasn't very similar to the original Matrix, although some would argue that the sequel was a step in the wrong direction.

Bottom line: if you want to see something original, then look for movies by new directors or new countries (check out some of the movies coming out of India if you want something radically different). Complaining about Hollywood showing too many sequels is rediculous. Even if there is ever a summer with NO sequels, I doubt the films will be any more original than any other year.

GMD

--
watch this

Re:EVERY year is unoriginal by koali · 2003-12-15 09:10 · Score: 1

100% agree. Look at X2, which I enjoyed more than X-Men (even if the budget had a lot to do with that).

ROTK... by Lamont · 2003-12-15 06:20 · Score: 1

unless of course you've already seen ROTK at a sneak preview like me, in which case you are waiting for it to actually be released so you can go see it again!!!!! :p

Re:You must be kidding! by burgburgburg · 2003-12-15 06:21 · Score: 1

I AM the Shogun of Harlem!

Is Toby still doing it by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 06:22 · Score: 1, Interesting

I heard a little while back that Toby McGuire couldn't do the movie because of his back. Is there any reveal that he is still in the movie?

Re:Is Toby still doing it by Gr33nNight · 2003-12-15 07:23 · Score: 1

That was a story about a year ago, where he hurt his back filming Sea Biscuit, but it turned out to be bunk. Trust me, if he wasnt doing the flick, you would know about it.
Re:Is Toby still doing it by jallen02 · 2003-12-15 07:45 · Score: 1

I read an article on this. He was not showing up for some minor commitements, like blue screen scans. Boring stuff. He had a back injury and his time was being split by his other movie project (Seabiscuit) at the time.

He is still in, he shaped up and is still in as far as I know

Jeremy
Re:Is Toby still doing it by DuckDodgers · 2003-12-15 07:56 · Score: 1

He still did the film... I think filming was delayed because of his injury, but it is still Tobey.

Speaking of comic books on film... by mblase · 2003-12-15 06:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

...There's also a QuickTime trailer out for the upcoming Hellboy movie.

Re:Speaking of comic books on film... by Excen · 2003-12-15 12:09 · Score: 1

DAMN!!!!!!!

That looks like a crazy movie! Everyone really should take a look at that trailer. If you thought the FX in the Spider-Man trailer were good, this one is going to blow your mind. Hopefully the movie can deliver more than Revolution Studios' previous masterpieces (Think Gigli, or closer to the point, XXX).

--
"No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad

Re:Something to look forward to! by TopShelf · 2003-12-15 06:41 · Score: 2, Informative

I figured after Return of the King, that was it for my life, and I was ready to commit suicide.

Dude, what are you thinking? At least wait for the DVD to come out next summer. Or if you want to really hang around, Peter Jackson has discussed the possibility of filming "The Hobbit" after he completes his King Kong remake.

Personally, I think they could keep the WETA Workshop busy by doing a TV series of various storylines from the Silmarillion & Book of Lost Tales...

--
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more

Re:Nothing other than Spidey after ROTK? by JudgeFurious · 2003-12-15 06:41 · Score: 1

Funny. Nicely done GoofyBoy.

Leading off with Lep2, that was inspired. Someone with some points get off their butt and give up a +1 Funny for this guy!

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.

Trailer is a dream come true by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-15 06:43 · Score: 2, Funny

Seriously. Who hasn't had that dream where Kirsten Dunst insists on kissing you only to wake up in a big mess?

Re:Something to look forward to! by JudgeFurious · 2003-12-15 06:46 · Score: 1

The "post-Matrix film for the Watchowskis" is something I'll pass on. They took a perfectly great movie (The Matrix) and reduced it to a single part of a completely worthless trilogy that had a very good chance of being the worst crap thrown at a screen this year (except that Gigli showed up and made everything better by gobbling up all the "suck" that 2003 could possibly contain)

If those guys never make another movie I'll be relieved.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.

Doc Oc's accent by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · 2003-12-15 06:52 · Score: 3, Funny

Isn't Doc Oc suppose to have a east european accent? I guess in today's politically correct world we can't portray ANY foreign person as the bad guy, in fiction anyway.

--

Technoli

Re:Doc Oc's accent by KirkH · 2003-12-15 07:29 · Score: 1

Nope. No accent. He was born in New York. Check it here.

He was given the accent in the cartoon for some unknown reason.
Re:Doc Oc's accent by Darth23 · 2003-12-15 07:34 · Score: 1

He shoots, he scores! Why does everyone whine about "PC" at the drop of the hat these days? I think some people are WAY TOO SENSITIVE when a lack of insensitivity displayed.

--
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
Re:Doc Oc's accent by Slurm-V · 2003-12-15 08:28 · Score: 1

Um, a friend of mine who pays attention to these things reckons you've got him confused with Dr Doom, the villainous dictator of Latveria. . I, of course, can only take their word for it.

--
Of course it's going off the rails. How else is it ever going to fly?
Re:Doc Oc's accent by shaper · 2003-12-15 08:49 · Score: 1

No accent. He was born in New York.

And I'm guessing from this that you are from, oh, I dunno, New York maybe?
Re:Doc Oc's accent by KirkH · 2003-12-15 10:53 · Score: 1

Heh. That went over my head. Didn't even think about it. Of course, I'm from South Carolina, so figure that one out. :)

Re:I am using Windows and it doesn't by stuntshell · 2003-12-15 06:57 · Score: 1

C'mon your insensitive, I know you ARE the first poster, I just checked your IP and it matches. Don't come around here no more!!!!!

--
0011 1111 0111 1010

Re:I had to launch it on IE... by kcurrie · 2003-12-15 06:57 · Score: 1

It just worked fine with Mozilla Firebird on Linux for me..

--
-- I speak only for myself.

FOUR legs.....? by SensitiveMale · 2003-12-15 06:58 · Score: 1, Interesting

Should he be known as Dr. Quadrapus then?

And no, his real arms and legs don't count.

Re:FOUR legs.....? by intermediate_represe · 2003-12-15 07:18 · Score: 1

4 mechanical and 4 natural limbs. adds up to eight.

--
Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the human race.
Re:FOUR legs.....? by ayahner · 2003-12-15 07:47 · Score: 1

Sorry, budzooski... Oc had 4 in the comic as well. http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8 &oe=UTF-8&q=doctor+octopus Come on! 8 would be unrealistic!
Re:FOUR legs.....? by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 08:17 · Score: 2, Informative

Should he be known as Dr. Quadrapus then?
And no, his real arms and legs don't count.

He went from a 4 limbed creature to an 8 limbed creature.

Why YOU don't count the first 4 is your problem.

--
You can't take the sky from me...

Obligatory Mystery Men Tie-In by Safety+Cap · 2003-12-15 06:59 · Score: 2, Funny

The Shoveller: Don't start that again. Lance Hunt wears glasses. Captain Amazing doesn't wear glasses!

Mr. Furious: He takes them off when he transforms.

The Shoveller: That doesn't make any sense, he wouldn't be able to see.

--
Yeah, right.

Re:Obligatory Mystery Men Tie-In by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 08:15 · Score: 1

I'm veering off-topic, but I LOVE the shoveller!

The Shoveller: God gave me a gift: I shovel well.

The Shoveller's wife: You shovel very well.

--
You can't take the sky from me...

Re:Something to look forward to! by mark_lybarger · 2003-12-15 07:03 · Score: 1

i've watched the 2nd movie ( first and second installments) and it's a decent movie. about as good as the first movie if you can look around the uber-movie glasses lots of people put on after the first movie.

The theatres will all be empty. by RavinDave · 2003-12-15 07:04 · Score: 1

Take a look at the stiff competition that comes out one week earlier.

Bill Murray a lock for an Oscar.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Re:The theatres will all be empty. by ShadowBlasko · 2003-12-15 08:05 · Score: 1

I had to watch that twice just to make sure it was not a hallucination.

Why?

Thats it, just Why?

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass

Re:Something to look forward to! by miracle69 · 2003-12-15 07:04 · Score: 1

Alien Vs Predator

--
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.

This is getting spooky... by StressGuy · 2003-12-15 07:09 · Score: 1

Not long ago, we were having a conversation about this subject and I was saying that Doc Oc needs to be the next Spiderman villian and that it would really be cool if a batman was done that featured Ra's Al Guhl and was a little more gritty and less "Tim Burtonesqe" style fantasy-goth.

Said conversation also included the following:

1) Wonder Woman movie has got to be inevitable

2) From a special-effects standpoint, Green Lantern and Dr. Strange could both be potentially pretty cool projects.

--
A goal is a dream with a deadline

Re:This is getting spooky... by The+Lynxpro · 2003-12-15 07:52 · Score: 2, Informative

"Not long ago, we were having a conversation about this subject and I was saying that Doc Oc needs to be the next Spiderman villian and that it would really be cool if a batman was done that featured Ra's Al Guhl"

Join the club. Ever since WB was toying with the "Batman Year One" storyline, I had been posting on AICN that that idea was a mistake and that they should pit Bats up with Al Ghul instead of retreading on past movies. I was estatic when the rumors started appearing that Al Ghul was indeed the main villain. I had hoped screenwriter David Goyer had included Al Ghul's daughter Talia as a character (to which I wanted Monica Bellucci to portray) but apparently the film is Talia-less and instead we'll have Katie Holmes as Bruce Wayne's girlfriend named "Rachel" instead.

As for Spidey meets Doc Ock, that had been the plan since the 80s when the "Spider-Man" film property was in the hands of the Cannon Group. Screenwriter Ted Newsom wrote several scripts for Spidey's origin film with Ock as the main villain. He is in fact suing Marvel and Sony over several of his script elements appearing in Spidey1 yet he did not receive a screenwriting credit...

--
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
Re:This is getting spooky... by Sabalon · 2003-12-15 08:21 · Score: 1

Well, there is already http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077469/ so I guess that means they'll have to do Green Lantern instead :)
Re:This is getting spooky... by Noren · 2003-12-15 09:03 · Score: 1

They're remaking other movies based on less popular Marvel characters, why not that one?
Re:This is getting spooky... by Sabalon · 2003-12-15 09:43 · Score: 1

Guy with guns...that's easy for people to relate to.

Guy waving hands in devil sign while wearing odd clothes...a little harder.

Guy with green ring producing eye popping 3d cgi fx...easy to relate to :)

I just wish they'd finally make a good Captain America movie.

Re:Wow by bluesnowmonkey · 2003-12-15 07:11 · Score: 1

Um, why did that get modded as 'Troll'? I mean, it wasn't very informative or anything, but aren't we allowed to express emotion anymore without carefully crafting it into the perfect funny, informative, exciting, life-changing post of euphoria?

Anyway, it wasn't a troll, because I was completely serious. This movie looks awesome, and I think they're going to make truckloads. Especially if these first two films become the basis of a Bond-like series, and they keep the quality up. I don't buy DVD's much, but it sure would be neat to own such a collection.

MJ?! by Gr33nNight · 2003-12-15 07:16 · Score: 1

Peter Parker has fallen for Michael Jordan?!?
This I gotta see!

Re:MJ?! by Docrates · 2003-12-15 07:30 · Score: 1

Peter Parker has fallen for Michael Jordan?!?

Not Michael Jordan, Michael Jackson!.

And since Tobey McGuire looks like a young boy, they say it's mutual.

--

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.

Re:I am an heretic by osu-neko · 2003-12-15 07:23 · Score: 2, Informative

I liked the original spider-sense better than the bullet-time spider sense. It used to be a subconcious thing, a feeling, an urge, a reflex. Now its just his conciousness speeding up, I find that less interresting and much more mundane.

Actually, that's not true. If you don't feeling like rewatching the original movie, just watch this trailer. The spider-sense is definately still there as a subconscious feeling/reflex. The fact that he also has the ability to think in "bullet-time" does not replace the vital, near-psychic spider-sense -- it's just something additional to it.

--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."

Not a solution by HanClinto · 2003-12-15 07:24 · Score: 1

Sorry friend, but the "Click here to watch the trailer!" goes back to the same swf file on Yahoo.

No Informative points from me on this one, although you get an E for effort.

Re:I am an heretic by shidoshi · 2003-12-15 07:24 · Score: 1

That one little thing - the wrestling promoter bit - ruined the ENTIRE movie for you?

Wow... you must not enjoy very many movies then, if trivial little things like that can ruin a film for you.

The swinging looks as bad as always by Darth23 · 2003-12-15 07:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Unfortunately. When can we see a Spiderman movie that shots of swinging through the city that look as good as the 60's cartoon?

--

-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.

Re:I am an heretic by Gr33nNight · 2003-12-15 07:25 · Score: 1

Are you trying to say you DIDNT like the movie?

Re:Huh? Huh? by tomzyk · 2003-12-15 07:26 · Score: 1

Did you step out for a Coke when Kirsten Dunst was getting rained on? That's two redeeming features right there.

Coke and Kirsten Dunst are the two redeeming features?
I don't get it.

--
Karma: NaN

Re:supprised myself by RobFrontier · 2003-12-15 07:29 · Score: 1

You're right it wasn't some of Williams best work however it was some of Willem's best work.

Re:Huh? by Snaller · 2003-12-15 07:30 · Score: 1

"It had zero redeeming features."

Did you step out for a Coke when Kirsten Dunst was getting rained on? That's two redeeming features right there.

No, he's just not a teenager who freak out over irrelevancies.

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 07:31 · Score: 1

It bugged me the whole time. It was a distraction for the rest of the movie. Its bad storytelling, and yes, I am a nitpicker, yes, I do have a hard time finding good movies.

Though I give credit for effort.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Not to not-pick... by Sargondai · 2003-12-15 07:34 · Score: 1

but as cool as the "tire rolling over Peter's face" shot is, the car is simply not oriented that way, right?

Re:I am an heretic by Saint+Nobody · 2003-12-15 07:34 · Score: 1

you forgot one important detail: they did the "death of gwen stacy" story, except they removed both death and gwen stacy. (although i've heard that one of the tombstones in the graveyard is for gwen stacy which makes it even worse!)

would it really be so bad to not have mary jane play significantly in the first movie?

--
#define F(x) int main(){printf(#x,10,#x);} F(#define F(x) int main(){printf(#x,10,#x);}%cF(%s))

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 07:43 · Score: 1

Actually, that's not true. If you don't feeling like rewatching the original movie, just watch this trailer. The spider-sense is definately still there as a subconscious feeling/reflex.

Tell you what, when I have the time, I'll do both.

I saw it twice at the theatre (I told myself I must have been in a bad mood that first day, but alas, the second viewing only reaffirmed my annoyances), and have not seen it again since. But I did like the web slinging, so I'll have something to like if I see it again.

So, from ememory, in the first one the spider sense was just bullet time. Here's what I remember from the school fight spider-sense (the first spider-sense scene IIRC):

Flash takes a swing at him. Peter looks at the fist coming in slow mo, doges it with this little nonchalant look, and then grins happily at what he can do now. Looks to flash again, and er...end bullet time I think.

Then Flash's thug friend attacks Peter from behind, he deliberatly chooses to do some acrobatics, yadiyadiyada...I don't remember him acting purely on instinct at any point. It might just be fuzzy memory, but he was in control the whole time, and chose to let his body do the things it can do. As opposed to the comic where he unwittingly doges pillow-atacks from his wife (who is then insulted that he sees her and her pillow as a threat worthy of summer-saulting to the sealing).

I don't remeber him getting a vague feeling of danger from objects or situations either, then again it was just one movie and they have other things to do than spend half an hour showing us the many ways in wich the spider-sense works, so that's ok.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:I am an heretic by gozar · 2003-12-15 07:51 · Score: 1

The gratuitous "he takes off his shirt and shows off his muscles" scene. Sure, the ladies loved it, but come ON, that was, as I said, gratuitous. I don't mind taking off the shirt to show off the muscles to the ladies if its got a motivation...

Part of the reason they did that was to show the difference the spider bite did to his body. The muscles were real, Toby McGuire had been working out. When they showed him not muscular that was special effects.

Anyway, you missed my biggest beef of the film. The fact that he now creates the web material through his body instead of him creating his web shooters and the web stuff.

--
What, me worry?

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 07:52 · Score: 1

you forgot one important detail: they did the "death of gwen stacy" story, except they removed both death and gwen stacy.

Yeah, that too.

Although merging 2 characters into one is a classic movie-adaptation thing. You have this limited amount of time and if 2 characters are similar enough ("the girlfriend"), then you cut one out and give its attributes to the other.
But that bugged me too.

And his webbing was way too strong (it holds him, Gwe..er..Mary Jane, a 'cab' with around 20 people in it, while the Goblin whacks him around...lil' bit too much there). But that's an action movie finale, so they have to overdo it, its expected, so I can forgive that one. I mean, its a superhero movie, we're not there for the realism.

Removing a death...yeah...cheap.
Not only that, but on TOP of saving Mary Gwen he ALSO saves 20 other people at the same time. It made me feel like they were saying "the spider man you know and love sucks ass, here's a better one, he can save EVERYBODY", lessening the whole "its hard being a hero" thing.

Me == picky.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

It's not embedded by Snaller · 2003-12-15 08:00 · Score: 1

as such, ie, there is not a complete quicktime in the SWF, the Flash streams it from the Yahoo site. Ie, streaming quicktime, and you don't just download that.

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 08:03 · Score: 1

you missed my biggest beef of the film. The fact that he now creates the web material through his body instead of him creating his web shooters and the web stuff.

Organic web-shooters: 4th item on my list...

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:I am an heretic by Vanguard(DC) · 2003-12-15 08:16 · Score: 1

ok, you REALLY need to get out more!

--
"I think, therefore I get paid."

That's a bummer.... by StressGuy · 2003-12-15 08:27 · Score: 1

you got to have Talia, that's an important sub-plot in the whole storyline with Ra's Al Guhl. Oh well, can't have everything I guess.

--
A goal is a dream with a deadline

Re:That's a bummer.... by The+Lynxpro · 2003-12-15 10:02 · Score: 1

" you got to have Talia, that's an important sub-plot in the whole storyline with Ra's Al Guhl. Oh well, can't have everything I guess."

Apparently the script is borrowing from "Batman Year Two" as well as the animated film "Mask of the Phantasm" if the rumor mill is true. I also think this is an idiotic idea because anybody that has seen "Mask" already knows what this Rachel character will be up to. Talia is the way to go, but maybe David Goyer has something up his sleeve besides the ink on his forearms...

--
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*

Re:I am an heretic by Sabalon · 2003-12-15 08:28 · Score: 1

The organic web-shooters.

I didn't mind this. To me it makes more sense anyway...he "organically" sticks to the wall, so why not organically shoot webs.

It may have also been done to make the movie flow better...now he can just run down the alley and rip his clothes off and he's Spiderman...no need to stop, attach web shooters, all that stuff. Gives us the nice Superman tribute in the new trailer :) I could go either way on it.

What, there's a suit-tree in his backyard?
At Lowes...$29.99. They are all out of the good ones...the one I got only grows wonder-twin outfits...what a bummer :)

My wondering is the promoter saw what Parker could do...wouldn't he be a bit more concerned about trying to rip him off as he could "tear him apart".

Don't forget Viggo Mortensen by NYTrojan · 2003-12-15 08:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

It is rumored that Aragorn will play as Ra's Al Ghul http://filmforce.ign.com/batman/articles/445/44558 8p1.html

Re:Don't forget Viggo Mortensen by The+Lynxpro · 2003-12-15 10:23 · Score: 1

"It is rumored that Aragorn will play as Ra's Al Ghul http://filmforce.ign.com..."

Don't forget Russell Crowe either. That's another of the hot rumors. Although Jeremy Irons, Alan Rickman, or Jason Isaacs would be more apt. Even Timothy Dalton...

--
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*

Miramax? by danielsfca2 · 2003-12-15 08:45 · Score: 1

Wait, what did Miramax do? I must have taken a day off and now I'm all behind on who we hate.

No need to post a diatribe, though. A link would be fine.

Re:Miramax? by iminplaya · 2003-12-15 09:30 · Score: 1

This...http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,6 1554,00.html
(Someday I'll learn how to make links)
Slashdot posted earlier today

--
What?

Re:I am an heretic by Slurm-V · 2003-12-15 08:49 · Score: 1

Attempting to dequibblise somewhat...

Bullet time 'spider sense - I think that's more showing how his reaction time has sped up - he has the speed and strength of a spider - which is a completely separate power best shown in bullet time, even if the two are often used in conjunction.

The muscles and the mirror scene - any teenager who works out spends an inordinate amount of time staring at the mirror. A newly buffed teen would spend exponentially longer. This was practically cinema verit.

--
Of course it's going off the rails. How else is it ever going to fly?

Now just a minute, Comic Book Guy. by mr_luc · 2003-12-15 08:49 · Score: 4, Funny

/Stan Lee.

Let me see if I have this straight.

You don't like one of the most fun movies of the last year because:

1) The movie used a storytelling effect that differed from your interpretation of the comic book.

2) 4 seconds of seeing a guy's muscles made you uncomfortable, and you didn't like seeing Dunst in a wet shirt.

3) You disagree with the one thing that the movie did to really improve on the credibility of the story (web-shooters; what the hell, that was the stupidest part of the comic book, like a teenage kid is going to make those on his own), but your suspension of disbelief hinges on the credibility of the supposed actions or inactions of a bit character in an introductory subplot.

Not only does 1) make it clear that someone has funnelled the Saharah into your vagina, and not only does 2) make us question your sexuality -- but "Spider Man 2099!ONOZ!!" -- wtf.

I direct your attention to every episode of the Simpsons where Comic Book Guy is remotely involved.

Now, in classic Bart fashion, go and write on the blackboard 10 times "I WILL NOT EMULATE COMIC BOOK GUY".

Something to look forward too?!! by node159 · 2003-12-15 08:49 · Score: 1

Fat chance, if the first one is to go on I'm not even going to bother keeping it on the LAN server if someone uploads it, let alone download it, or gosh go watch it at the movies...

Piracy must be making no impact whatsoever in hollywood if the quality of shit thats produced is anything to go by. (Competition generaly brings lower cost with better quality).

--
GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?

Re: Nothing to look forward to? by andi75 · 2003-12-15 08:59 · Score: 1

It's nice to know that there will be something to look forward to after RotK comes out.

This guide probably hasn't heard of Harry Potter yet. I'm certainly looking forward to that one.

- Andreas

was I the only one that hated this movie? by Rooked_One · 2003-12-15 09:00 · Score: 1

I rarely ask for my money back if I see something really horrid in the theatre... I did with daredevil without hesitation and almost with spiderman - did people really like that movie?

Trailers spoil movies! by ALeavitt · 2003-12-15 09:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

Seriously, I'm sick of this trend. The trailer for the original Alien is still the best one I've ever seen; rather then show you the plot or good glimpses of the monster, all you got were quick shots that let you know that Alien was going to scare the hell out of you. Now we have trailers like the one for the Matrix Reloaded (they showed the best parts of the Hundred-Agent Fight) and this monstrosity for Spiderman 2. I think it would have been much cooler if we had seen Doc Oc's mechanical tentacles walking up... and nothing more. Leave well enough alone; let us know we're getting something cool, but don't show the best parts. Leave some surprises for the actual movie.

--
This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.

Re:Trailers spoil movies! by SuiteSisterMary · 2003-12-16 08:41 · Score: 1

Episode 1. They gave away all the good bits about Maul and what not.

But for this trailer, they should have left it at the two footsteps from the robot arms, approaching the shattered window of the restaurant.

--
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.

Geek cred? by fenix+down · 2003-12-15 09:14 · Score: 1

No, he just gets hired to be the stunt double for every goddamn member of Weezer right before the restauraunt scene.

Seriously though, Sam, your new glasses are not cool. Putting them in your movie isn't going to help, they're just ugly. You look like a goddamn racoon with jaundice. I know the poster at Lens Crafters said they were "tight", but sometimes Calvin Klein has to tell those little lies to make you buy his crap. I feel for ya, Sam baby, really, but sometimes you just have to quit while you're ahead. Nobody wants to get rescued by a flying emo kid with super powers, not even in a movie.

Complain by Lord_Dweomer · 2003-12-15 09:25 · Score: 1

I, like many of us am extremely upset at their choice of distribution of the trailer. As someone posted, why the hell try to limit distribution of an advertisement? So! With that being said, was anybody here able to find an email address to inform them of their mistake? I looked but was unable to find one.

--
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!

Re:Nothing other than Spidey after ROTK? by BullSnot · 2003-12-15 09:35 · Score: 1

wow, Bill Murray as Garfeild... I wanna see that now

Maybe I'm misinformed... by Gothic_Walrus · 2003-12-15 09:36 · Score: 1

...but when I posted this, it was scored a 5 for "Informative."

How the bloody hell is this informative?

--
Goo goo g'joob.

Re:I am an heretic by RedK · 2003-12-15 09:40 · Score: 1

Flash takes a swing at him. Peter looks at the fist coming in slow mo, doges it with this little nonchalant look, and then grins happily at what he can do now. Looks to flash again, and er...end bullet time I think.

Actually, you should rewatch that scene. When Flash first swings at him and everything goes bullet-time, notice that while everything is shown to the audience, from a fly going over head to a kid throwing a paper plane, this is not Peter's actual view point of the scene. He doesn't even turn around before dodging the punch, he just knows what's going on and dodges it. It's the same spider-sense that was in the comics.

At the end of the movie, notice how he doesn't turn around either when the Goblin's glider suddenly shoots towards him. Even though he's distracted by Osbourne's speech, he jumps out of the way at the right moment.

Again, like some other poster said, watch the trailer. This is 2 minutes long and won't cost you a thing. You'll see how he dodges the car. He never saw it coming, he just jumps out of the way.

There are other examples throughout the movie, but these are the ones I remember off the top of my head. His spider-sense isn't really changed, it's still an instinct, and sense of danger and the direction it's coming from.

Now, I know this post might sound like nit-picking, but so was your original post.

--
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM

Scoop by vivek7006 · 2003-12-15 09:43 · Score: 1

To top the previous movie's upside-down kissing scene, this time the spidey will be shown in 69 position with MJ

I wonder if this one will make a profit.(winkwink) by Machina70 · 2003-12-15 10:05 · Score: 1

But since then they'd have to pay the actual creator of Spiderman royalties, I'm sure this one will still fail to make a profit.(at least on paper)

But remember kids, the MPAA insists you respect their intelluctual property and be fair to the all the "little people" who earn their living making movies.

Only CEO's and Lawyers are allowed to screw people over and make money off other peoples creations.

Know your role.

(This post sponsered by the MPAA{Stealing your dreams and dumbing down America one day at a time})

"Can Spider-Man come out to play?" by Picass0 · 2003-12-15 10:06 · Score: 1

Wrestling promoter, hell, what about MJ's answering machine? Peter and Green Goblin have a discussion that's being recorded, and everything MJ needs to get a clue is discussed.

It would be nice if they got past the secret between Pater and MJ in the next movie. It doesn't work for me. "Gee, Spiderman, you have the same arrested-development sounding voice as my friend Peter Parker."

To which Spidey says "You were so much hotter in Interview with a Vampire"

Re:"Can Spider-Man come out to play?" by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 18:19 · Score: 1

hell, what about MJ's answering machine? Peter and Green Goblin have a discussion that's being recorded, and everything MJ needs to get a clue is discussed.

Well, I totally bought that: MJ is an hairhead who can't put 2 and 2 together. ;- )

"Gee, Spiderman, you have the same arrested-development sounding voice as my friend Peter Parker."

I guess that's why superheroes never mingle with people who can do voice figerprint analysis...

--
You can't take the sky from me...

Doc Ock's Tentacles by zors · 2003-12-15 10:46 · Score: 1

Was anyone else impressed by the look of the tentacles, considering that they're made with puppetry and not CG? My brother's a puppetry major and he got some isinde info on it, i was kind of worried it would look like ass.

Re:Doc Ock's Tentacles by KirkH · 2003-12-15 11:10 · Score: 1

There will be scenes with CG tentacles -- some of these are in the trailer as far as I can tell -- but Raimi stated he was going to use real tentacles (aka puppetry) whenever possible. My guesses are that in the close shots we're seeing puppetry, but in the long shots (Ock entering the window, climbing the clock tower) it's CG.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2003-12-15 10:53 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

not all Hollywood movies suck by GunFodder · 2003-12-15 11:23 · Score: 1

Ah, the tired old "Hollywood movies suck, let's see more foreign films". I don't think it's fair to compare dozens of US made movies to the one or two best movies made in every other nation in the world for the year. I think there were more than half a dozen Hollywood flicks I enjoyed this year. I doubt I can name that many from anywhere else. Of course there are dozens more crappy US movies as well, but you have to take the bad with the good.

not according to IMDB by Scudsucker · 2003-12-15 11:32 · Score: 1

Their Spider-Man II page lists Dylan Baker as Dr. Connors, and Bruce Cambell as a "snooty usher".

Re:Saddam's "Spider Hole" by Excen · 2003-12-15 12:02 · Score: 1

You brought up an interesting quirk of the first Spider-Man film, at least in my mind, that I saw.

Was anyone else annoyed at the end of Spider-Man, when all the people were tossing crap off the bridge at the Green Goblin and that one dude yelled "Don't Mess With New York," or some BS like that? I mean, after they scrubbed all the skyline shots, it was blatantly obvious that they, being the studio, the editors or whoever, were cashing in the integrity of Sam Raimi's original vision for brownie points with the type of crowd that believes "Faux News: Fair and Balanced" is a legitimate news source. The scene just didn't fit and, as well as the final montage where he lands on top of the Empire State Building and the American Flag whirls around him, destroyed much of the movie's enjoyability for me.

I have no idea whether all the cheeze was Raimi's fault or what, but it was annoying, and I'm too lazy to consult IMDB or Google.

--
"No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad

No, funny you idiot moderator by Snaller · 2003-12-15 12:56 · Score: 1

Humor is so subjective - tsk tsk.

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Torrent File by nfg05 · 2003-12-15 14:48 · Score: 1

It may be too late for anyone to care now, but I maxed out my DSL connection at 150 KB/s dl'ing the file from this torrent I found on suprnova.org.

It's called a homage... hello! by spoco2 · 2003-12-15 15:34 · Score: 1

Geeze, you think that Raimi isn't a big enough geek to love Superman and want to do a homage to one of the greatest superhero films of all time?

Very nice by Psychic+Burrito · 2003-12-15 16:17 · Score: 1

At last a movie studio tries to make a difference with Trailers. No Mr. Voice, no statements-intercut-with-titlecards.

I actually enjoyed the fact that for the first 40 seconds, a bit of a story is presented, and I was quite taken in by the abrupt change in the action. Bravo.

Of course, I still wished for trailers that don't give away anything and are an artform for themselves. How about creating a finished film that has a condensed 2-minute-beginning - and then one could just use this beginning as a trailer!

Re:Huh? Huh? by sootman · 2003-12-15 16:40 · Score: 1

Let me know if you still don't get it. The pic only shows one redeeming feature well, but if you watch the scene, you'll see both.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Re:Something to look forward to! by minion · 2003-12-15 17:43 · Score: 1

and I was ready to commit suicide. Thank you for saving my life Slashdot

Careful what you say. Some left wing liberal might read that and either decide slashdot should be outlawed (and the process known as slashdotting, or people who read slashdot are a threat to themselves and need to be medicated.

--

-- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.

So you LIKE seeing the boy's muscles? by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 17:56 · Score: 1

Note to drunken moderators: I wasn't trolling, he is.
But they're drunk, so here goes:

Let me see if I have this straight.

You didn't, here's the many ways how...

1) The movie used a storytelling effect that differed from your interpretation of the comic book.

If by "interpretation" you mean he fucking explains it that way, yeah, I guess you could say "interpretation".

2) 4 seconds of seeing a guy's muscles made you uncomfortable, and you didn't like seeing Dunst in a wet shirt.

I clearly said it was the cheap exploitative way it was done, not the showing, that I hated. I distinctly remember mentioning how The Transporter did it right.

And technically, I think it might have been illegal for me to enjoy Kristen's Dunst wet t-shirt scene...how old was she at that time?
I still remember her as that lil' girl in Interview With The Vampire, and she's not my type.

Now, had it been Salma Hayek in a wet t-shirt, that's a different story.

3) You disagree with the one thing that the movie did to really improve on the credibility of the story (web-shooters; what the hell, that was the stupidest part of the comic book, like a teenage kid is going to make those on his own)

Yeah, getting bitten by a funky spider makes hir arms secrete and excrete at great force a substance with unheard of physical propreties.
That makes it more realistic, yeaaaaaah...

And
He
Still
Made
Web Shooters.

that was the stupidest part of the comic book

Yeah, getting bitten by a rioactive spider makes you super human instead of giving you cancer, less realistic than genius kid invents super adhesive. Ooooooookaaaaaay....

but your suspension of disbelief hinges on the credibility of the supposed actions or inactions of a bit character in an introductory subplot.

Yes.
I went to see a superhero movie, my suspension of disbelief wasn't going to be about physics or biology.
But wether or not Peter Parker defies the laws of physics and biology, people are still people. And greedy resentfull people do not pass up on 10 000 000 dollars when all they need to do to get that money is to screw over someone you allready hate.

Not only does 1) make it clear that someone has funnelled the Saharah into your vagina,

Real classy.

2) make us question your sexuality

I'm the one who didn't enjoy the scene showing the naked, muscled body of a teenage boy. You, on the other hand...

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 18:07 · Score: 1

I didn't mind this. To me it makes more sense anyway...he "organically" sticks to the wall, so why not organically shoot webs.

I think its equally nonsensical.

I also think it takes something away from Peter Parker.
He was a genius in the comic books, someone who would have achieved greatness with or without radioactive spider bites.

Now he's just a normal kid given magic powers. It makes the masses idetify more easily, but it takes something away, something I liked.

now he can just run down the alley and rip his clothes off and he's Spiderman...no need to stop, attach web shooters

Actually, he does still have "aiming" web shooters, they "regulate" the web or something...bottom line: he gotta attach them anyways.

My wondering is the promoter saw what Parker could do...wouldn't he be a bit more concerned about trying to rip him off as he could "tear him apart".

With 10 millions you move to mexico...

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 18:11 · Score: 1

Bullet time 'spider sense - I think that's more showing how his reaction time has sped up - he has the speed and strength of a spider - which is a completely separate power best shown in bullet time, even if the two are often used in conjunction.

Could be...

I'm due for a rewach, I'll keep that in mind when I do.
Might help make me appreciate it more : )

The muscles and the mirror scene - any teenager who works out spends an inordinate amount of time staring at the mirror. A newly buffed teen would spend exponentially longer.

Narcissism...valid motivation. I buy that: Still cheap and exploitative, but internally consistent. Makes it tolerable.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:I am an heretic by Scrameustache · 2003-12-15 18:15 · Score: 1

Now, I know this post might sound like nit-picking, but so was your original post.

I like nit picking.

here's more:

Again, like some other poster said, watch the trailer.

They've had years to rethink their mistakes, so the second one doesn't redeem the first.

But I'll watch for that Goblin glider dodging you mentioned, might be something there I missed. I was loosing interest by that time, maybe I wasn't paying enough attention : )

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Forget the plot... by Zog+The+Undeniable · 2003-12-15 22:20 · Score: 1

Is there a repeat of THAT scene in the rain where Kirsten Dunst's bra appears to have been stolen by the Green Goblin?

--
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.

Re:Something to look forward to! by Fjord · 2003-12-16 03:49 · Score: 1

Yeah, but I was trying to give him something to look forward to after Spiderman so that he won't kill himself on July 3rd. HP:PoA will probably have already been out by then, and HP:GoF is far enough away that he'll have another year and a half of life .

--
-no broken link

QuickTime Trailer by cemysce · 2003-12-16 05:26 · Score: 1

Get a much higher quality QuickTime trailer from here:
http://mp3procontent.bcst.yahoo.com/proot4/PubShar e14/yahoomovies/13/5554990.mov

unbelievable by Scrameustache · 2003-12-16 05:41 · Score: 1

Internet troll
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

On the Internet, a troll is a person who posts messages that create controversy or an angry response without adding content to the discussion, often intentionally. Though technically different from flaming, which is an unmistakable direct personal attack, trolls often resort to innuendo or misdirection in the pursuit of their objective, which is to create controversy for its own sake, discredit those with whom they disagree, or sabotage discussion by creating an intimidating atmosphere.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:Don't call me Paste-Pot Pete! by ConceptJunkie · 2003-12-16 06:59 · Score: 1

Actually, I was trying to remember his newer name, but couldn't.

Of course, we can always hope for cameos by the Rhino and the Kangaroo.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.

High Res Quicktime Torrent Here by AIX-Hood · 2003-12-16 08:21 · Score: 1

http://www.filerush.com/torrents/spider_man_2-movi e_trailer.mov.torrent

Re:Saddam's "Spider Hole" by SuiteSisterMary · 2003-12-16 08:44 · Score: 1

Even in the original comic, as I recall, Spidey was portrayed as having a lot of 'grass roots' support; the average man on the street loved him and his crime fighting ways, and there was a fair amount of city boosterism.

Same thing in Superman and Batman, of course, but they're fictional cities.

--
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.

Yes, they do. by jotaeleemeese · 2003-12-17 00:28 · Score: 1

Specially here because Peter Pan, I mean, Parker, is one of US! He is a GEEK!

I was wiser than you: waited a few weeks aftwer the premiere, asked friends that saw it with a valuable opinion about movies, and avoided it like the plague.

--
IANAL but write like a drunk one.

Re:Wow by bluesnowmonkey · 2003-12-19 22:39 · Score: 1

You know, sometimes I don't think this website attracts the friendliest crowd around.

304 of 425 comments (clear)