I consider this to be similar to the American "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" remake, as well as the upcoming 4th Bourne movie. Looks great and all, and I'll probably see it at some point (and even enjoy it somewhat), but I'd rather movie producers spend money on something new and original...

I see it more as "about time they fixed that crap, hope it's good, but it can't make things worse"

As long as it doesn't have a ****ing dance number.

Or like, 2 ****ty sequels.

Why does everyone hate that trilogy but me =[

I don't hate the concept, just the execution.

I dunno. Two was one of the best ones. And DSettahr, there is no originality in Hollywood anymore. I thought this was understood.

I liked the first two a lot, and ignoring the fact that there's no real reason for Sandman to want Spiderman dead, I enjoyed the third one too up until the symbiote turns up.

i liked spiderman 3, it was long, but its way better than people say in my opinion

spider-man should be campy and sappy, its not christopher nolans batman

Spiderman 3 is another good example of a movie that isn't nearly as bad as everyone says it is.

I liked 1 well enough, and 2 is in my top ten best Superhero movies ever (got bumped out of the top 5 by Iron Man, sadly).
3 I don't care for. Topher Grace as Venom I didn't expect to like, but did. Hell, he woulda been a great Peter Parker himself.

-The music for the third one was pretty good, too. Christopher Young can keep up with Danny Elfman, and that's pretty serious business.

One was alright. It was the origin story, which is always troublesome to get out of the way, but all things considered, it was pretty good.

Two was excellent- everything I'd want in a superhero movie.

Three had it's moments, but damn, that song and dance routine was painfully awkward to watch. It also felt like they were trying to cram too much character development into one movie. It wasn't bad enough that I thought the series was beyond redemption and needed to start over, though.

In particular, I feel bad for Dylan Baker, the actor that played Curt Conners. It was my understanding that they were setting him up for a future movie appearance as The Lizard by including his character in Spiderman 2 and 3. Instead of getting his chance at playing the role of man villain in a Spiderman movie, they instead reboot the series. Kind of like what happened to Billy Dee Williams in the Batman Movies- he was cast as Harvey Dent in Batman Returns, and told that he would be able to reprise the role as Two Face in a future film. Instead, they decide to recast the role with Tommy Lee Jones instead (apparently Williams was pissed when it happened).

Pissed yeah, but he still got a paycheck out of it.

-Gotta love them Pay-or-play contracts.

Hidden Message in Newest Spider-Man Trailer Kicks Off New ARG

Anyone in one of those cities?

I'm in Seattle.

http://collider.com/michael-bay-transformers-4-reboot/145200/

Ok at this point I'm going to go ahead and say this really is too early for a reboot.

Well, they pretty finished the series as hard as they could.

-You know what I'd actually really like to see... is if we could get Michael Bay kicked upstairs to producer so he can keep that sweet sweet pentagon approval coming, then get Neill Blomkamp to do direction, assuming he's good with an American cast. He would be ideal for a Transformers movie.

That does seem like it would be pretty good.

I can't really see Neil Blomkamp being down with including those majestic shots of F-22s and troops walking into the sunlight that get all that "Pentagon approval" though.

I dunno, it'd be cool to see a Transformers film that wasn't one of the worst films I've ever sat through.

I liked the first one fairly well, but the two sequels are deeply, deeply flawed. I honestly think that Transoformers 2 is an actual bad movie. The forest fight scene is pretty damned cool, but overall, it's a really, really bad movie.

The first one is ok until all of the autobots that aren't Bumblebee turn up, then it's just awful. The second one was worse all round and I haven't bothered enduring the third.

I still enjoy a lot of things about the first one. The first 40 minutes or so are great, until the other autobots start speaking. The scene where we first meet the autobots is probably the best in the movie, up until they start talking. The rest of the movie is a mish mash of awesome and really bad. There are just a handful of things that could be removed from that movie and it would be amazing. Overall I still like it quite a bit, honestly. The two sequels are just really bloated and it's honestly hard to follow the plot.

Michael Bay should probably just stick to blowing up practical effects.

I still contend that he would be the best 2nd unit director in the history of film.

My mind mutes the dialogue in most Michael Bay movies. I can't see how anyone would not like the last 40 minutes of Transformers 3 though. Especially in IMAX.

I would like to see a Grindhouse style duo of films, only they're disaster films made by Bay and Roland Emmerich.

Roland Emmerich is what happens when a guy like Michael Bay thinks he can make message movies.

Independence Day is an overrated sack of ****, Stargate is not. Thats as far as I talk about Roland because I refuse to watch his newer works since The Day After Tomorrow was sssstttttuuuuppppiiiiddddd

Universal Soldier and Stargate are pretty awesome. The Patriot is great in a lot of ways. You have to disregard the fact that it's almost completely inaccurate as far as actual history goes, though, which makes it about the same as a certain other historical epic starring Mel Gibson.

Everything else in the man's filmography is pretty damned bad. The existence of Roland Emmerich movies is one of the biggest reasons I tell people they need to lighten up when they start whining about movies like Episode I. That man makes actual horrible movies. He literally only seems to care about showing landmarks being destroyed onscreen, but ever since he started doing it purely with CG, it lost a lot of what was good about the destruction in Independence Day. When people talk about how the prequels and various other movies are lifeless CG fests, it's nice to point them to Emmerich and Bay's movies.

I think in terms of being an actual movie, Transformers was probably the best in the series. However, it was sorely lacking in robot fighting action.

Revenge of the Fallen went too far the other direction, robots robots all the time and the only two who ever got any dialogue or character exploration scenes were the ****ing Twins. Sideswipe, meanwhile, gets two lines consisting of a total of five words, Ironhide and Ratchet are barely in it, and Bumblebee's still doing the radio voice.

Dark of the Moon, meanwhile, is better than both prior movies at finding a balance. I don't really know if it's good or not, yet. I only saw it the one time, and after I left the theater I just wasn't feeling the same buzz I got from the first two films. I don't know if I was just not in the right mood or frame of mind, or if I was starting to get tired of the whole schtick. It's strange, because it did many things I know I should have liked, but afterwards, it was like "Well, that was a movie. I should go home and do something else." I think I need to give it another watch.

Aside from that, the main thing to remember is that it's not what a movie is about, it's how it's about it. I consider Independence Day to be superior to Day After Tomorrow or 2012 despite being the same basic film because Independence Day has better acting, more coherent set pieces, and entertaining characters. To drag this back to the original topic, Spiderman 3 is a dreary movie full of clumsy writing, lackluster acting, and absurd attempts at metahumor (it's funny because it's just so goddamn bad!), whereas... say, Captain America is fairly brainless action for the most part, but ends up a superior film because of its charming actors all having good chemistry with one another.

-In other words, Spiderman 3 failed at being excellent, but Captain America succeeded at being good. And I think that sums up a lot of problematic movies, especially sequels: trying to be excellent and failing terribly at it.

I agree with everything you have said in that post, Jarl.