Peter parker made the gizmos that hooked on his wrists to shoot his webs from, like a gambler's hold out. They weren't part of his physical alteration, at least in the comic book.
luv dem wet clothes
Attended in a large AMC theater. Surprised that the light output was not up to SMPTE standards (my eyes are calibrated). How did the cinematography look to anyone else? The colors looked better on my home TV watching the trailer. It could have just been my location.
Boy you can sure tell who read the mags and who didn't
Peter parker made the gizmos that hooked on his wrists to shoot his webs from, like a gambler's hold out. They weren't part of his physical alteration, at least in the comic book.
------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
Raimi did an awesome job directing this monster movie. I thought the computer animation would be a joke, but it worked because of the way the camera is always moving and pulling your complete focus off of the CGI.
Very nice script, nice effects, great casting and acting. I loved it.
). Imagine: This fragile print has already been run through one of those antique film-destroying mechanical projector things at least 8 times and it hasn't been ruined yet!! Take that Steven Soderbergh! (Don't tell Steven that reels 4 & 5 both had that wavy rolling line thing for a few seconds, or that reel 5 seemed to have soft focus but the rest of the movie was razor sharp).I liked it a whole bunch. Worked for me completely. I've never read the comics, didn't know anything about the characters going in, didn't need to. The special effects work great, partly for the reason that Brent mentioned: You're looking at Spidey, not the CGI backgrounds. I think Roger Ebert must have had a boil on his ass or something the day he previewed this because the movie he saw and complained about is not the one I just saw. A perfectly good summer action blockbuster.
Now the question I have is if the box office holds up, is that space movie coming out in a couple weeks going to push Spidey off the best screens too soon? I guess we know the answer to that.
To the movie itself, SPIDERMAN had its moments, especially in the first half of the film. But never once did I empathize with Parker. This was just another comic book adventure, with a villian one couldn't take seriously with that ridiculous mask.There was som much character jumping it became pretty exhaustive trying to keep up. I think filmmakers need to go back to viewing these films on the giant screens they show to the public on instead of their computer screens. This doesnt have the feeling of a classic (which I felt the Superman (1978) did.
"Imagine: This fragile print has already been run through one of those antique film-destroying mechanical projector things at least 8 times and it hasn't been ruined yet!! Take that Steven Soderbergh! (Don't tell Steven that reels 4 & 5 both had that wavy rolling line thing for a few seconds, or that reel 5 seemed to have soft focus but the rest of the movie was razor sharp)."
I must have missed something somewhere. What does Steven Soderbergh have to do with Spiderman?
Dave
I decided to wait until a weeknight to see this movie because I figured the theatres would be crazily busy on the weekend nights for this particular movie. Some people from work wanted to go, so on the spur of the moment, we did.
After reading all of the positive reviews, I wasn't as impressed with the movie as I thought I'd be. As a computer scientist, I looked closely at the spider web graphics at the beginning of the film to see if I could notice any aliasing when strands of web went nearly horizontal on the screen. I did not notice any, although I was sitting in the next to last row.
As for the Peter Parker character, it was obvious to me that he was the character I should sympathize with and pull for in the film, but a few of the things he did made me wonder, like when he got mad at his uncle and told him to stop pretending to be his father. The way the movie ended surprised me (and got some "what the hell?" type of responses from the audience as well).
As for the presentation quality, it was excellent, but this was the worst theatre experience I've ever had due to all of the talkers, seat kickers, and cell-phone users sitting all around our group. Both the row behind us and the row in front of us were full of people of a certain characteristic that is not PC to mention that talked during the entire movie non-stop. At times, I missed movie dialog because their talking was louder. We were outnumbered by these people and were in no good position to ask them to stop talking. These people frequently hit our seats with their feet and put their feet on the top of the seats beside me. Every now and then, a cell phone would go off and I'd hear one of them having a conversation on the phone. If I were the type of person that only went to the theatre every few months, after this experience, I would likely have never had a desire to go to a theatre again. Fortunately, I know that this extreme case is the exception rather than the rule.
Another weirdness about this visit: From a previous showing, I'd been given an "emergency ticket" and was told there were no restrictions on it (as I've always been told when given one of these). I tried to use it and was told "We're not taking these for this movie yet." I guess "No restrictions" does not mean "no restrictions".
------------------
Evans A Criswell
<A HREF="http://hsvmovies.com/" TARGET=_blank>Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site</A>
------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut http://www.muellersatomics.com/
David and Evans,
why didn't you get an usher to boot them out? or at least tell them to be quiet?
This theatre still shows 35mm trailers to the lobby area using a rear-projection screen.
------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
I make no bones about telling people like that to shut the PHUG Up!, literally, and have almost been into a few fights because of it.
Just the other day I was trying to study in my college library when a woman with a VERY noisy kid came in. The kid would not shut up and she failed to controll it. So I politely told her that the perfect solution would be a stapler, super-glue and duct tape...People around me thought I should be more sympathetic. Why, I asked? After all, this is a place for study, not Romper Room, and yes, I am paying good money for my education, NOW SHUT UP OR GET THE HELL OUT! I think she got the message! 
Spiderman was better than I expected. CGI wasnt too bad other than the beginning where Toby was running over the roof tops. Fun stuff though.
As for spiderman, the movie was ok...and that's about it. I didn't 'relate' with the main character, everything that happened to him did not effect me in anyway. But, you have to give it some credit, it is based on the comic and they kept it that way. For example, the cheezy effects while spiderman is swinging from building to building looked quite comedic to me. 
If anyone takes offense at my statements, I ask them to look up the stats on shootings in and around movie theatres, and correlate those shootings to the type of film showing at the time. Facts speak for themselves. Folks may be afraid and bury their heads when PC issues arise, but when there is an issue that affects patron perception and even patron safety, it deserves to be brought forward in a matter-of-fact manner without fearing either PC hushing or blatent racist rhetoric.
A true "hood" black audience at an action film simply has to be experienced firsthand. Think of "Rocky Horror" interaction with the screen characters, customers changing seats, and multiple unrelated conversations going on at the same time and you'll get the beginning of understanding of what it is like. Short of calling in police and alienating most of the audience, there is nothing that can be done to change the behavior of such a group enough to satisfy the average (in this case minority) moviegoer. In these situations, the movie is simply a meeting place, and has far less significance than the social interactions that occur. Anglos needn't feel superior, there are plenty of white counterpart activities, sports events, and even soccer riots being examples.
Action audiences can be rough on the theatre and generate a bad reputation, but they can also be the primary income at an older location. Some theatre owners go out of their way to avoid booking films that will exacerbate the problem, and some just accept it as a fact of life and book in the action to increase attendance. There is no one correct way to respond to such an audience. As long as the majority of any particular audience enjoys experiencing a film in a certain way, and as long as no damage is done, common sense and the bottom line have to dictate policy.
quote:
A true "hood" black audience at an action film simply has to be experienced firsthand. Think of "Rocky Horror" interaction with the screen characters, customers changing seats, and multiple unrelated conversations going on at the same time and you'll get the beginning of understanding of what it is like.
That's a pretty good description of what was going on in the row in front of our group and the row behind our group, on a small scale. The people were reacting out loud to many things happening in the movie and "talking back" to the characters, as well as having their own conversations and occasionally talking on cell phones. If everyone in the audience does this same thing, then there really is no problem. It's only annoying to people that do not treat a moviegoing experience as a big social gathering. Several of my friends say that getting a group together to go to a movie is usually fun, but is not a good social gathering because there isn't a good way for people to interact. If our group had been in the middle of a group similar to ours and we started talking back to the characters and having our own conversations, I'll bet we'd get thrown out.
------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site
The seniors down here don't move around as much, but they can be just as offensive in their own way.
What's happened to the judgement of people when they bring their under-five-year-old children to a PG-13 movie? I pray that they have Green Goblin nightmares for the next month!
I was a little confused in that it looked very much to me that they were projecting SPIDERMAN at 1.66. I would have chalked it up to my misjudging it, but at least two of the trailers had letterbox borders on top and bottom, which reinforced my conclusion that the trailers were hardmatted at 1.85 and they were projecting the feature at 1.66. Why this would be, I cannot even guess.
I enjoyed the film and I thought the first half was the more interesting -- I thought the whole discovery process was very well done and Peter was played and directed with a quiet curiosity that was engaging. Although as said elsewhere, his reaction to his uncle's attempt at understanding him was a unexplained and disconcerting. It seemed harsh, almost cruel for no apparant reason. Something wind up on the editing floor that shouldn't have? It was good seeing old verteran actor Cliff Robertson back on the screen.
I thought the digital effects were integrated well, although as John P. said, they were a bit softer than the rest. There were times when Spiderman was doing his building hops that he looked like a cartoon placed in a live background, which is exactly what CGI is, but I mean more than that -- he looked like an animated Disney cartoon character. But that was only for a few moments here and there and it didn't really distract from the overall effect. The sound was terrific, evidently the people running the Astor Plaza haven't yet figured out how to compromise that yet. I found the film's score to be adequate for the moods of the scenes, but it had no memorable themes -- something that almost all classics have.
My one strong objection was to that final fight between Spiderman and poor Willem Defoe in that silly mask; it was begging for an editor. It went on and on -- who needs to see two characters viciously bashing each other to a pulp for ten minutes -- and at one point it was so violent that I actually looked away in disgust. It really was quite gratuitous. Funny, you would never see two women bashing each others faces in, but for guys, superheros especially, it's perfectly OK. But then again, we live in a male-bashing culture, so who cares. Anyway, it could have been edited down to half the length and we all would have gotten the point.
As for the audiences that are unruly and causing a disturbance, I lay that right at the feet of the theatre operator. You are paying $10 for a ticket, that should entitle you to a well patrolled, safe environment. It is the exhibitor's responsibility to have adequate ushers and security personnel to deal with the type of situation you describe. As much as I am with Will for telling people to be quiet or to get off the effin phone and WATCH THE EFFIN MOVIE, a patron shouldn't have to be put in that position. There should be theatre personnel checking the rooms for just those conditions. Years ago ushers would walk the isles and aim flashlights at people who had their feet up on chairs or who were talking. In today's multiplexes a constant presence of even a single usher per screen would be financially prohibitive. Understood, but there is no reason why during the course of the screening security personnel could not walk into each room, looking for problems. Sometimes the presence of theatre personnel, even for only five or ten minutes in the theatre, changes the way groups act. Once a theatre gets a reputation for zero tolerance of inappropriate behavior and that troublemakers will be ejected, you'd be surprise how different people will act. On the other hand, give them an environment where they are basically left to their own devices without any question that no theatre personnel will ever be seen, well that just encourages the kind of inconsiderate behavior that's been described. I had to walk round the entire theatre complex to find a single person to complain about the focus problem. This was the last show and it seemed like after the film started, the entire theatre staff went home. Patrons sense that. The rowdy ones sense it even more. So, yes, there are people who will act like animals unless there are trainers present, but it is the theatre's responsibility to provide the trainers, not letting it fall to the poor patron to take up the chair and the whip.
When people are behaving inconsiderately, walk out and demand your money back. And tell them why. Ask them why there are no theatre personnel to be found and why none were in the theatre to remove the annoyance. Being subjected to idiot patrons is just as much a reason to demand a refund as is an out-of-focus picture or bad sound. If enough people did that, management would soon get the word. They will find that it is easier (and cheaper) to throw out the thugs (they don't get refunds) than to have dissatisfied patrons walk out demanding their money back.
quote:
I was a little confused in that it looked very much to me that they were projecting SPIDERMAN at 1.66. I would have chalked it up to my misjudging it, but at least two of the trailers had letterbox borders on top and bottom, which reinforced my conclusion that the trailers were hardmatted at 1.85 and they were projecting the feature at 1.66. Why this would be, I cannot even guess
The Spiderman show I saw had a letterboxed trailer, I think it was "Bad Company".
Theaters basically just look the other way with regard to disruptive customers. They depend on complainers to bring problems to their attention, rather than being proactive about fostering a better environment.
That final fight got to me too. Not so much the visual, but the audio was like a foley artist went psycho on the stage. Several times i've had the volume up in the booth while i was working elsewhere and listend to that jumble of "oof, ah, grr, umph" for ten minutes.
But this movie, though i completely enjoyed it, had one of the worst line deliverences ever. Peter to Gramma in the Hospital: "Gee, gramma, did i really say that?" I cringe everytime i hear it.
-Adam
I too noticed three frames with cap code in the second reel. I hope they come up with a less noticeable way to include that information. I don't think that the average viewer will notice it, but I did. It isn't horribly distracting, but it certainly doesn't help.
I saw the movie at the Megastar 16 in Maple Grove. This was my first experience at one of their theaters, and since they have a certain reputation around here, I was quite curious to see how things were run.
It is one of the most attractive theaters I have ever been in. It is very well decorated, and doesn't have all of the bright, gaudy colors everywhere as most theaters do. There was a sign on the door that said that they were hiring, so just out of curiousity, I asked the girl in the box office if they were hiring projectionists. She said that they were only hiring for floor staff, and that they never hire projectionists, but that the floor staff people work their way up to the booth. That didn't make me too confident about the presentation of the film I was about to see.
I can say that the film was in focus, but the sound could have been a bit better. I don't think the room was eq'ed very well. The amazing part about it is that from the first frame of the first trailer to the end of the film, there were 5-8 base scratches. The number increased as the film progressed. I have NEVER seen a film that was running for 9 days look that bad. I couldn't believe it. After the show I found a manager and told him, and he was the first manager I have ever complained to (at any theater) that really seemed to care. He gladly refunded our money (which was only $4 each for a 5:00 show) and indicated that this might be that projectionists last mistake, "if you know what I mean." I told him that they have to be much more careful in the threading and handling af their prints if they want people to come back to their theater. I also told him to look into getting some cleaning machines and filmguard. He said that he would talk to their head projectionist (a projectionist of 40 years, supposedly) about all of that. I certainly appreciate his willingness to listen, and what seemed to be genuine concern for my comments and complaints, but there is no reason or excuse for a print to be in that condistion. Maybe all of the damage was incurred during the show I saw, but probably not. Those sorts of mistakes should be dealt with and prevented whenever possible. I will certainly return to that theater again, and I am curious to see how the next films look.
------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
This would be previews of scope films presented in its whole form and not cropped down for 1:85 presentation. The last time I saw this was a flat preview of THE 13TH WARRIOR. Why its done I do not know, but it is done.
Dave
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)