The Amazing Spider-Man movie

[kingdom warrior]

I'd like to be a bit less cynical on that point.

After all, they were yappin on and on about cross-breeding and the resulting blend of human/animal.

Having Lizard be that much larger than Spidey was a dramatic visual within the context of that theme
of the film in that when the two fought it looked a lot more like a "Lizard battling a Spider" than it would
have if Lizard ewere "normal" size.

In other words They wanted a bigger opponent so kids can go buy a lizard toy.....

[huedell]

In other words They wanted a bigger opponent so kids can go buy a lizard toy.....

It's an added bonus

I'm sure there totally WAS the studio/merchandising villain that twirled his moustache
and danced to dark dramatic music cues as he plotted his insidious plan to sell an attractive toy
to the unwitting children.

BTW... if your vision is so on point, why was the comicbook LIZARD figure I was referring to actually LARGER
than the movie version?

That studio exec villain mastermind bungled the job!

[Earth 2 Chris]

The Hasbro 3.75 Lizard is woefully out of scale to the Spider-Men in that line. The 6" "Power Action" type figure is more the proper scale, it would seem!

Chris

[MIB41]

my only question mark was why was the lizard so big? I'm far from a spidey expert but remember him being pretty much normal human size, until recent history that is.

The more immediate answer is the industry trend for this genre to sell toys. Look at the Abomination, Venom, Iron Monger, or the Frost Giants and Destroyer from Thor. Even lesser films in the horror genre like Van Helsing where you had a 15 foot Werewolf or similar size Mr. Hyde. I think it's all designed to be over-the-top so they will translate better as toys. I think that is also why they change the cosmetics of the hero outfits. Kids have to have a new version of the same hero. I hate to sound overly cynical, but that is a big part of making these films. When Joel Shumaucher made the abysmal Batman & Robin film, he was told to make the film look "toy-etic". Merchandise is a big part of the profits in these films. And they help also as backup should the film falter. Green Lantern is a good example. The movie flopped, but the merchandise sold very well. Studios have to cover the bottom line in a number of different ways. A license as rich as Marvel and DC will always utilize that philosophy in making these movies.

[huedell]

MIB... its a no brainer that superhero movies are motivated, enhanced & otherwise enriched by toy sales. You'd have to be woefully naive to think otherwise.

But all jokes aside, I just don't see the direct connection between a villain's size in a movie and toy sales. There are so many reasons to make it an unconvincing theory. Just looking at superhero movie merch history for one.

Using Abomination as an example seems inconclusive as the character has always been large.

Ill drop this for now. Get back to me when they put Catwoman in a suit with stilts designed JUST for a movie.

[pmjlghrs]

We saw this over the weekend and thought it was great. Everything everyone has said positive about the film carries through.

Now, did anyone else see the acting similarity between Garfield and a young Tony Perkins, say from Psycho?

[The Toyroom]

Now, did anyone else see the acting similarity between Garfield and a young Tony Perkins, say from Psycho?

YES! I couldn't put my finger on it at the time but something seemed "familiar". Thank you!

[Earth 2 Chris]

^Well if Aunt May ends up dried up in the attic, we'll know why!!!

Chris

[emeraldknight47]

^Well if Aunt May ends up dried up in the attic, we'll know why!!!

Chris

[Gorn Captain]

I wasn't expecting a whole lot really.
But I ended up loving the whole movie!
The actors were great (liked them a lot more than in the Raimi era), and it was fun, moving and entertaining, with some really funny moments and some really tragic ones.
I'm kind of hoping they'll keep Gwen around instead of the "she's doomed" scenario.

Only the webswinging in 3D made me slightly nauseous. I hate 3D...

[suspense39]

We saw this over the weekend and thought it was great. Everything everyone has said positive about the film carries through.

Now, did anyone else see the acting similarity between Garfield and a young Tony Perkins, say from Psycho?

I saw it last night, and felt something familiar about Garfield, about halfway through the film I realized that he was very much like Anthony Perkins! After that it was stuck in my head and I couldn't really get over it. I thought the film was ok, it covered to much of what had already been covered. I don't know why they couldn't do a James bond type thing and just continue the series with a new actor in place....in a way the film seemed kind of pointless even though I enjoyed it.