text:
Spidey Deserves Better
Posted on 07/16/12 at 12:00 PM in Columns by Jim Mroczkowski
There's a lot to be said for expectation management.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
Years ago, while working at a job where there were "clients," I fell in love with that phrase and all it represented. If you get so excited about a project that you let your imagination run away with you and start expecting it to be a mind-blowing, life-changing, pants-filling experience, you are all but guaranteed to be disappointed. On the other hand, if you go in expecting a 6 and you get an 8, it's much more satisfying than saying, "Where's my 10?" with your arms crossed throughout your life.
This may be pessimism. This may be realism. This is definitely why I ended up liking The Amazing Spider-Man as much as I did. Before it came out, America said, "Why are they doing this, again?" After it came out, America said, largely, nothing. I don't think I've seen people flock to a movie on opening weekend and then act like it never happened this thoroughly since Iron Man 2. My expectations were so managed, I didn't even bother to see it until yesterday. And then it was great.
People are not giving this movie its due. Spidey does not deserve to come in second to Ice Age 4: The Child Gouging in its second weekend. (Man, Ice Age was a fun idea for a movie. For a single movie. Talk about retelling the same story over and over; Marvel's got nothin' on those highway robbers. Has it become evident yet that I have small children?)
We often say that your favorite version of a character is the one that was on the racks when you were a kid. Sam Raimi's childhood Spider-Man was the Stan Lee version, the mostly humorless Charlie Brown in a unitard. In three movies, I think Raimi allowed Spidey a single quip, while the Angst truck was backing up for another delivery.
The Spider-Man of my childhood, and probably yours, was a different breed of bug. He still couldn't catch a break, but he was used to it by now, and was much more happy-go-lucky and likely to use humor as a defense mechanism. (I maintain that the quippy chatterbox we all know and love today is single-handedly the result of Peter David writing the character in the mid-eighties, but I can't prove it until one of you provides me with that grant I'm always asking for.) In other words, "my" Spider-Man is a lot more like the one in the latest movie.
I like watching him build his costume instead of having it fall out of the sky into his lap at some point offscreen. I like seeing him fiddling with his web doohickeys. Oh, and the part where he builds a web and then finds his prey by feeling vibrations on the web like a real spider? How have I lived almost forty years and never seen anyone use that before now?
This was the first time seeing Uncle Ben die (and I feel like I have seen that happen roughly 7,000 times) actually made me start to cry. Then, when Gwen sees Peter at school the next day and hugs him, I started to cry again. At a Spider-Man movie.
So, why is this one not having the impact of its predecessors culturally? Is it just because it had predecessors in the first place? Is Joe Moviegoer actually befuddled by the reboot? I doubt it, personally, judging by how readily everyone moved on from Neon & Nipples Batman to Christopher Nolan's version.
Is it that Marvel's The Avengers by Marvel scratched this itch for everybody already? Does The Dark Knight Rises have anything to worry about? Again, I doubt it: people seem to regard Nolan's Batman movies as something set apart from your Marvel fare and your Green Lanterns. People seemed to treat the last one like it was its own genre.
Is it just a case of people saying, "Who's the Lizard? Who's Rhys Ifans? Who's Andrew Garfield? Who cares about any of this?" It's not like Chris Evans or Chris Hemsworth were big superstars. The character is the star of a movie like this.
I don't know. I cannot solve this Rubik's Cube. Although I guess the fact that I don't understand how many of my fellow Americans think is not a surprise.
I don't think The People are burnt out on superhero movies, but between you and me I think I might be. I feel like I used to see interesting movies about realistic people in the real world, but now it doesn't even seem like those movies are getting made. I'm sitting here trying to think of the last time I saw a movie where nobody had magic powers or came from another planet, and I think it may have been Bridesmaids. Before that…?
As long as superheroes are saturating the marketplace, at least they're in the hands of talented people who are taking them seriously rather than people who put a skull on Dolph Lundgren's knife and call him the Punisher. If you can remember a time when your favorite comics were not represented anywhere in the culture at large, what's amazing about the times we're living in isn't that so many of these movies have been made, it's how many of these movies have been good. I can remember reading a magazine article in the eighties about how a Spider-Man movie was never going to happen because of all the rights issues and technical challenges. Now we're on our second set. My expectations have been blown out of the water.
Jim Mroczkowski would dearly love to unravel the mystery of what Uncle Ben's job is.
Filed Under: Columns Tagged With: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Marc Webb, Marvel's The Avengers, Spider-Man, The Amazing Spider-Man, The Dark Knight Rises, Webbing
Latinvolt says:
Sorry I disagree, Although a good movie, It really lacked a lot of characterization. Why bother pputting Peter back in highschool setting when he has apparently absolutely no friends. It was nice seeing the background Parents scenes but Aunt May and Ben are not well developed. why waste so much of the movie tracking a killer and then just dropping the whole plot Peter making a promise and just as quickly dismissing it very un-like my spidey. And seems like couldnt care less about money issues or helping poor aunt may. Def not the best Spidey movie
RoiVampire says:
Peter had no friends in the original books in high school either, but all the major villains were introduced during that time. High school spider-Man has always been the best.
Harry Osborne
Harry didn't appear until issue 31, long after all the major villains. He and Peter didn't become friends until college.
KevinAB says:
AND to disagree with you LATINVOLT, Flash Thompson in this movie started down that oh so complicated bully-to-friend road that he did in the comics as well. He actually WAS an original complicated friend/foe supporting character in the books, and they managed to make that happen here with the death of Peter's uncle being the catalyst. They managed to believably make that dynamic switch and Harry Osborn, as RoiVampire said, was NOT a high school friend of Peter's. Yeah, there was a lot of editing and cutting of stuff in the film, leaving dangling plot threads, but I am okay with them pushing it back to a sequel. I also think Uncle Ben got MORE character development here than he did in the original Raimi film, a lot more actually. I agree with JIMSKI 100% here. This movie was great like Frosted Flakes. I loved the first Spider-Man movies, but after seeing this, I realized they were SO not great at portraying the character from the comics I knew. In fact, the iFANBOYS said as much in their review while also giving the movie a 3.5….which made no sense as they pointed out it was much better than the Raimi films but gave the Raimi films like 4.5s at the time they were released…SO you know…not sure how they managed that fuzzy math.
Axelca22 says:
I liked this take on the story where the hunt for Uncle Ben's killer is the motivation for becoming Spider-man. I think a pivotal scene was the dinner argument where Captain Stacey nails it when he says that he thinks Spider-man is out on a personal vandetta and not to help people. The next fight scene on the bridge is the first time Peter is truly heroic. At this point in this movie the Hunt for the killer is no longer important. He will probably pop up in a future movie but I do not think this plot thread had to be finished to make this one complete.
flakbait says:
I enjoyed it quite a bit, even if I'm not sure why the Lizard's plan was so bad. Oh no, we'll all be indestructible and all disease will be cured! Also, it was totally ripped off from the old '90s Spider-Man series. But I think it did pretty much everything better than the previous ones.
I, too, am puzzled by the general lack of buzz. I think people are generally confused why it exists when they just put out several Spidey movies just a few years ago.
Agreed. This movie was the Spidey I grew up with in the 80s and 90s. Love the way he moved, Love the Lizard fight in the school and the web coccoon. Garfield was just so much more charming as Peter than any other actor in the original trilogy.
I just want to know what that post credits scene meant. I've been reading Spider-Man comics for 25 and I don't know what that scene was about.
nastysnow says:
amazing Spiderman has made 521 million worldwide in 1 weeks and on pase for over 800 million. by comparison Batman begins only made 373 million worldwide in its entire run and xmen first class only 352 worldwide people care. i enjoyed it i really think it was a good film. maybe im in the minority. but its sandwich between avengers and Batman. but to say people don't care isn't true.
tornado says:
USPUNX says:
Compared to the explosion and immediate cultural impact the originals had, people don't care about this version. That's the point Jim was making and he is absolutely correct. It's not all about numbers.
when the film makes tons of money like it is people do care.
I still think you're missing the point so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Maybe you're too young to remember what it was like when Rami's first two Spider-Man films came out but they were THE movies those summers. ASM is just another superhero movie this summer. The feeling of excitement around the two is completely different. Yes ASM has made a ton of money, but compared to Rami's films, people care a whole lot less.
mutielover says:
The first Spider-Man came out right after 9/11 so there were a lot of people who were looking for an escape.
I'm not sure of the exact date but I think the first Spider-Man came out in the summer of 2002, almost a year after 9/11.
cahubble09 says:
@USPUNX: Green Lantern was "just another superhero movie". Do you really think Spidey is living on the same street as that S#$%%Y excuse of a film?
Following up on nastysnow's earlier stats, in two weeks the ASM movie has grossed just less than a third of what the Avengers did in eleven.
Not convinced? Take a look at user reviews on Rotten Tomato … Again, in just two weeks, Spidey has garnered ~>290k user reviews (84%) compared to the Avengers' ~>450k (96%) … Granted, viewers seem to enjoy the Avengers a bit more than ASM, but the Avengers had the benefit of being released first (not to mention some brilliant script-writing by Joss Whedon).
It's the media reviews that suck … on Rotten Tomato, 279 reviewers averaged a 92% positive rating for The Avengers, but only 251 reviewers (roughly the same amount in scale) have garnered Spidey a lackluster 74%.
Counting reviews is subjective, of course, but it looks to me like FANS are paying attention and giving the film its due, while the media reception has been a bit less enthused.
Okay, you guys just aren't getting it. I'm not talking about reviews or amount of money made or any of statistic of numerical success you can muster. I am talking about popular interest. When the 2002 Spider-Man came out it was a massive cultural phenomenon. It spawned a freaking broadway musical. Yes the musical didn't debut until last year but production began in 2002, just thee months after the release of the movie. I was nineteen when Rami's Spider-Man cam out so I remember it very well. Toby McGuire and Kirsten Dunst were everywhere. They were on every morning talk show and late night show. They hosted SNL, Spider-Man was on the cover of every entertainment magazine. This film has just not generated that level of excitement and buzz.
Also in regard to @cahubble09's point about two weeks vs. eleven weeks. I'm sure Avengers generated most of that money and reviews in its first few weeks and then tapered off, just like every movie. Spider-Man will do the same. Now that it has been out for two weeks both ticket sales and reviews of Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes will start to roll in at a much slower pace. One of the theaters in my town is still showing Avengers five times a day, three months after its release. I highly doubt I'll be saying the same for Spider-Man.
@USPUNX: I think we can agree to disagree. It simply is not the case that we're "just not getting it". I would suggest that you've simply refused to acknowledge that others might view Spidey's impact differently than you. We understand your point (at least I do), but just don't agree with you. Stats representing ticket sales, reviews, etc. etc. are INDICATORS OF POPULAR INTEREST (for that matter, I'd love to take a look at secondary merchandising … with Disney selling Marvel products now, the numbers might be telling). One theater in one town isn't representative. Any kind of "cultural phenomenon" assessments simply can't be offered for several years after a particular event has occurred.
ResurrectionFlan says:
Why did the movie made soley to retain copyright, that most people already think they saw, not receive the fanfare it deserves?
The marketing was fucking terrible also, they didn't show the biggest star in the movie in ANY of the advertisements. It made about the same impact culturally as Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions.
Plus there are simply too many superhero movies now, they aren't special at all any more. I saw X-Men four times opening weekend when it came out. I have yet to see this movie, I don't even really want to.
Who was the biggest star?
TheSquirrel says:
Hey man Shattered Dimensions for the DS is one of the best Super-hero video games ever made.
2-d side scrolling Spider-Man beat em up action.
Also Vulture 2099.
jason1749 says:
ASM was a fine movie, but sadly it was only the fourth-best Spider-Man movie to come out in the last ten years. It was pretty obvious that huge parts of the movie were chopped out in post-production with characters that disappeared for huge swaths of the film (Gwen) and ones that just disappeared all-together (Osborn's henchman). It just lacked a lot of the fun that Raimi's first film had and more than anything, Webb's direction lacked any amount of style. While I realize that Marvel has made serious bank off of using directors who fit into their house style, Raimi's Spider-Man movies were the best-looking Marvel movies we've gotten and there's just nothing special looking about this new one. The one good thing about DC's movies has that they've largely, for good or ill, been auteur-based. Allowing Burton, Schumacher, Donner and Nolan to adopt their own style and create their own worlds was what made a lot of those movies truly special.
blkassassin106 says:
I think people become less awe struck after the second movie of a comic character. Other than Iron Man, most people see the sequel of a movie as the best one yet. The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, maybe the second TMNT live action movie, X2. After their second movie people say, "They can't top that." and then when the 3rd movie is released usually it doesn't or people are underwhelmed. So when The Amazing Spider-Man came out people may have thought, "It was good, but I've seen Spider-Man four times."
No you were going good there. But Secret of the Ooze is not better than the original TMNT (movie). TMNT took place in present time (for when it came out). TMNT 2: the Secret of the ooze takes place 4 years int he past (from when it came out). That was always very strange to me.
Oh yeah but Super Shredder, it does get a bunch of bonus points for Super Shredder.
DocDoom says:
Super Shredder was so awesome, he had to immediately kill himself.
Jr. Wormwood says:
I keep hearing how great this movie is, but I still can't muster up any desire to see it. I don't know when it happened, but somewhere along the road my love for this character just fell flat. Maybe it's because I don't feel like there are any new stories to be told with him. I really don't know… He's constantly young and cracking jokes, and at some point that just became more annoying than entertaining to me.
wallythegreenmonster says:
i talked to my 14yr old Nephew this weekend. He's a HUGE spiderman fan. His entire life is Spiderman everything and has been watching the movies and cartoons since he was practically a baby. He didn't like this movie much at all…he said it wasn't anything like "the originals" that he loved "back when i was a kid"
junior fanboy in training. Had to share that story.
BCDX97 says:
Pretty funny.
Smasher says:
I recall an interview with Stan Lee from the 90s where he envisioned a Spider-Man movie franchise akin to 007's. Yes, different people would play Peter Parker but the stories would be evolve.
The general public saw this movie as something they had seen already. They asked, "Why are we getting another Spider-Man (#1) movie?" And the studio failed to answer the question both in terms in how it was marketed and within the movie itself.
Had this been a continuation, people would have gone to Amazing Spider-Man just to see what happens next. Instead they said, "Been There, Done That" and skipped it.
The problem with not doing a reboot is Rami blew all the classic Spider-Man villains and NONE of them were memorable. I agree that this has an "already seen it" feel but I also think they had to do a reboot otherwise Spidy would be fighting Hobgoblin and Kangaroo in the sequel.
By that logic none of Spider-Man's villains could be reused in the comic book.
Spidey has a huge rouge's gallery and Raimi used four of them (5 if you included Harry)- Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Sandman, and Venom.
Which leaves you with: Kraven, Vulture, Electro, Mysterio, Chameleon, Molten Man, Beetle, Rhino, Shocker, Hydro-Man,etc.
I believe Doc Ock is probably the most realized villain in any comic book movie. He has the sibilance of a character arc and probably the most well-executed battle scenes.
@smasher: I don't think you can really compare reusing a villain in a comic book to reusing one on film. It is well established that after enough time villains always come back in comics. However, people don't expect to go to the movies and see the same villain in every film of a franchise, especially after he has already been defeated. They are two totally different situations and not comparable at all.
@mutielover: I wasn't trying to imply Spidey was out of villains, I was only saying the best known had already been used in Rami's films. Aside from Kraven and Mysterio, I'd consider most of the villains you mentioned to be B-level compared to the likes of Vemon, Doc Ock, and the Green Goblin.
I also totally disagree with Doc Ock being the most realized villain in any comic movie. I found his character to be very stock and pretty much comic villain 101. If you're looking for villains with a real arc I'd point to either Stane from the first Iron Man or particularly Loki from Thor.
@USPUNX Just because it hasn't been done on film doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
And no one suggested using "the same villain in every film of a franchise" – that'd be silly.
If, for example, at the end of Spider-Man 6 there was a prison break I think audiences would be excited by the possibility of seeing the villains return.
Maybe the villains would team up with each other. Maybe this time they'll discover Spider-Man's secret identity. Maybe they'd turn a claim to be reformed and be good guys (or will they?).
Plenty of possibilities.
WilliamTrinity says:
With ticket prices rising every year, I don't think wrapping up the same origin story in shiny new paper is going to get movie goers (forget comicbook fans) excited or into the theater.
It was a good movie, but nothing that I would recommend. In fact my response has been, take your money and go see an excellent film like Moonrise Kingdom, or save it for Dark Knight in a couple weeks.
Hopefully, DC will learn from this when rebooting Batman and Green Lantern if that's the road they are going. At this point we've seen the origin before. Forget that and just give us a fresh idea that will get people excited.
SCOOTMAN says:
Although there was good stuff in it, this film is pretty boring. I don't know the Peter Parker in this film because I felt he was a bit of a jerk. Plus there's story threads in the movie that they completely forget about. I'm glad this film seems to be fading away cause I don't think it deserves anymore buzz than it got. I hope they do better with this property next time but I'm not holding much hope.
I thought he made a great wise-cracking spider-man, but a terrible Peter Parker.
@TheSquirrel: Nail on the head, dude.
s1lentslayer says:
I agree as well. Spider-man was great, Peter Parker wasn't.
For it to have more of an impact they probably needed a bigger star playing Peter.
CrescentCityBlues says:
I agree, this was less Peter Parker and more Rain Man.
It was a "pretty good" movie. We have had two excellent Spider-man movies, and two decent Spider-man movies IN ELEVEN YEARS. If you're going to milk a character that hard for movies you need to make sure they come out great. People have seen Spider-man be nerdy and nervous, they've seen him swing around on webs, they've seen him deal with his uncle's death. If you're going to 'remake' something you should attempt to do it better. Unfortunately Amazing Spider-Man did not do it better.
From an advertising perspective, they have done very little to position this as a a "new" movie. It looks and feels like a continuation of the Spiderman franchise and the key art and trailers make it look like another superhero genre movie. I think for something like this, some attention could be given to actually creating original advertising that stands out. Show a poster thats 90% red…do something that stops people in their tracks. We scoff at how important that stuff is, but on a subconscious level, nothing tells people something is new, than showing them something they haven't seen before. I see all this advertising with different logos and names several times a year.
Take that background from the Spiderman poster here. It could very well work as a background for Dark Knight Rises. If you keep playing with the same 4 or 5 ingredients, you eventually start to repeat yourself.
Unoob says:
I think it ALL came down to marketing. The trailers for this were made like they were catering to the "Twilight" crowd. Mostly "Personal" scenes. Dark. Too serious. And most of all, outside of the first person web slinging shots, no fun. The Avengers trailer BOMBARDED us with every hero in costume, explosions, action, and humor. I think it was as simple as that. I do a comic podcast and website (Alt3redEgos.com), and even I begged off of the review on this movie. I just have no desire to see this. And I LOVE Spidey. I will get it on DVD eventually.
Additionally – THE ORIGIN!?!? AGAIN!?!! This was a HUGE mistake as well I believe. Combined with the trailer, average movie goers are probably thinking "Been there. done that" as well.
Thank you. I felt like the movie dragged when Peter was out of costume. Also, did he need to have his mask off so much?
tripleneck (@tripleneck) says:
I went to see AMS for a second time so I could see it in 3D, but also because I liked it enough to pay twice. As much as I liked the Avengers, I only saw it once in the theater. This Spider-Man movie has an emotional heart that the previous Raimi films lacked even though I liked those, too. Other commenters have rightly mentioned the strong portrayals of Uncle Ben, Peter, and Gwen. The acting, writing, and directing finally hit the right emotional notes that a lot of us wanted in the characters. I felt a relationship to those characters that made me want to spend more time with them and see the film again. I felt the same about Steve Rogers in Captain America and it's why I liked it so much more than Thor last year. Avengers was a TON of fun, but for me it was spectacle even though it had great character moments. I may not be as attached to those heroes as other fans, but for me AMS had a personal story interlaced with the action which is why it meant more to me.
And I'm not claiming it was a perfect movie.
I think people are forgetting that the original Spider-Movie was full of problems, too. Mary Jane was clearly originally supposed to be Gwen Stacey, hastily re-written when they decided they didn't want to kill her at the end, which was obviously massively re-written for a happier ending. There Goblin mask is ridiculous. Maguire looks old. James Franco is mediocre at best. etc, etc.
I think that one is probably old enough for nostalgia to blur the perception, but recent enough that people don't need another dose of it.
I agree. I think people remember the Rami Spider-man movies so fondly because they haven't watched them recently. I don't think any of them hold up, and they are only ten years old.
i dont get how a film thats on its way for 800 million. cant be overlooked its likely to be one of the three big summer fims
JesseCuster says:
I know its been said a million times, and its been said here in the comments already, but ENOUGH with the origins.
My trepidation with 2013's Superman is that, once again, we get ORIGINS all over again.
I can't say this enough: James 007 Bond. One movie after another, switching through different 'creative' teams and actors, and nearly all of them WORKED. Yeah, some of the films carry a style indicative to the time period and its not always consistent from Thunderball to Quantum of Solace, but that's what made the franchise so awesome. Everyeone goes into knowing only 3 important things: Bond is a badass spy, he's got some nifty gadgets, and its shaken, not stirred.
Superhero movies CAN follow that same formula. Not every single 'sequel' has to be in the same 'universe' as the previous one. You don't need to go back and re-tell the beginning all over again just because the face of the person playing them changed. People do get it and they do understand. You know, you look at Schumacher's awful Bat-films and of all the complaints and criticisms, I have never, ever, heard a fan, casual fan, or non-fan average movie goer say, "What I don't get is how it fits in with the first 2 movies". Technically they do fit, but really watch them again and see that there's nothing there really that requires knowledge from Burton's Batman or Batman 2. The only real connection was having the same actors play Gordon and Alfred.
Ed Norton's Hulk is another great example of how it can work.
I would have FLOCKED to see this Spider-man flick had they skipped the origins and just jumped right in with Parker already established as Spider-man.
casino royal rebooted james bond
Grandturk says:
WheelHands says:
I'm with you, Custer.
@tornado: That's true, but the fact that it reset him back to pre-00 had very little to do with the plot. One could argue that his time with Vesper is the cause behind his future treatment of women, but other than that nothing drips with origin. JesseCuster's example and point are still valid.
MisterShaw says:
They'd never done an "origin" story for Bond, either. Also, it didn't reboot Bond; all of the Craig Bonds take place before the others. Not that it matters in the slightest.
yes but now bond is no longer a widower from on her majesty secret service. they kept that going trough roger moores films . it was brought up in the spy who loved me. and he was at her grave in for your eyes,only. felix even brought it up in license to kill daltons last bond.
There hasn't been a Superman origin on film since the original 1978 film. If 35 years isn't long enough between origins what is?
@USPUNX
Agreed. With Superman I think they should do a re-make with plot points peppered in to suggest sequels.
JokersNuts says:
This movie was fantastic and I enjoyed it very much. I got the exact same experience you did, I think I cried a couple times during the film too. I had zero expectations for this too. I think that fans who complain about it really need to sit down and watch the Raimi films again. As much as I love Spider-Man 2, that film and its predessor have really suffered the test of time. (although the fight with Doc Ock on the clocktower remains probably the best Super-Hero fight ever put to screen)
NRD says:
I can honestly say I never got the "buzz" around the first three films, I didn't connect to Peter Parker, I didn't get excited about it and I generally didn't root for Spiderman to win.
The Amazing Spiderman, just, woah! Completely different. I walked out of that cinema thinking "I finally think Spiderman is cool now." Yes there was some slight things that bugged me in the film, but that happens in most films. This film really got me rooting for Spiderman/Peter Parker.
I really enjoyed it and I'm also surprised that the general media hasn't been praising it as much as I believe it should be.
Green Lantern deserves better. Superman deserves better. Spider-Man has had four movies released in the last ten years, three of them were good, and they all made money. What more do you want? Spider-Man fans have nothing valid to complain about in terms of the character getting the attention he deserves.
As far as the reaction to the film, I can only speak from personal experience. With the exception of Wolverine Origins, I haven't missed a superhero midnight show in years. I have yet to see this one, and I think I know why. In the past year, when everyone I knew was asking me "Why are they rebooting Spider-Man?", I would defend the choice, say that it was probably the best move they could make, and encourage them to see it when it comes out because of everything it had going for it. Many of those folks took my advice, saw it, and enjoyed it. Now they're asking me if I'm ill, because they can't understand why I haven't seen it yet.
I am interested. I love Spider-Man. I'm a fan of everyone involved. I'm just not moitvated to sit through another 45 minute origin story before I see him in action. I just don't care that much. This lack of interest surprised even me, but I have yet to say anything but a lazy "I'll get around to it." And with DKR coming out this week, I doubt I'll get around to it for another two weeks or so.
I just think that when an installment in any franchise comes out every three years, the excitement is distilled, and people aren't in any rush. There's always gonna be another one right around the corner.
Ilash says:
Even acknowledging the film's many problems, I loved the hell out of Spider-man movie. It's not up to Spidey 2 but it's largely better than the first one and infinitely better than the third.
One question though: what's with your second last paragraph? Movies with regular people aren't being made any more? Really? Sorry Jim but you have to be living with your head in the sand to not notice that the vast majority of movies don't feature superheroes or outright fantasy settings. Are you exaggerating to make a point or what?
dennisnahas says:
I think I'm burned out on the movie going experience in general. Before the Avengers, I think it had been a year since I'd been to the movies, and in 2011 I think I went out to a theater maybe three times, all for comic book films. Prices haven't gotten so high, the theater keeps trying to push me into 3D, kids are crying and yelling at the screen, and GET OFF MY LAWN WHIPPER SNAPPER, GARRRR.
RobotZombie says:
I loved the movie.
I went in very frustrated that I was getting the origin story again but, despite some of the holes in the movie, I found the good far outweighed the bad. The character work was great, the acting was wonderful, and the fights and web-swinging looked amazing.
I think the studio failed in their marketing of the movie and the shadow of Batman definitely hurt it.
Switch625 says:
I saw it on opening day and it was really good. I enjoyed it quite a lot. There just isn't that "I've gotta see it again" factor that Avengers (for example) had. The movie's just kind of there, not compelling me to see it again. It may be a reboot, but it's not too far removed from Sam Raimi's movies, at least as far as the "Spider" action goes. It had the same swinging camera effects the last three movies had. They didn't do anything new at all with the effects. I greatly prefer Garfield's Peter Parker though. Even though there was a lot of teenage angsty stuff going on, which bores me to tears, he was very likeable in the role and I look forward to seeing what else they come up with in this version of the franchise.
Comments like this are exactly why I'm passing on seeing it in the theater – I've heard this same thoughts from a lot of other people.
Cerberus says:
I've not seen this film and I'm not the biggest Spider-Man fan ( not read much/ translate that into almost nothing ) but…. if this is a reboot, why didn't Marvel go the Ultimate Spider-Man and Miles Morales path then ?
Currently reading the first TPB for Ultimate and loving it.
sitara119 says:
you're right. if you're going to start over, might as well go with Miles and make this really interesting.
USM is Marvel's best book. what a wasted opportunity.
I would absolutely refuse to see a Spider-Man movie starring Miles Morales.
Why Switch625 ?
Because I have no emotional attachment to Miles Morales and therefore am not interested in his story or adventures.
At this point (what, one year in?) I don't think you could have a Miles story without a death of Peter Parker story. I don't think movie audiences are ready for that story. And I certainly don't think movie studios have exhausted using Peter Parker/Spider-Man on the big screen.
Plus, I don't know which movie studio owns the film rights to Miles Morales. If it isn't the same as Sony then it could be mighty complicated to pull off.
movie audiences are ready for anything these days. clearly it's the traditional comic nerds who aren't ready for anyone other than their precious peter parker to fill spidey's boots.
sitara119
I agree, there is more than enough material already out for a Miles Morales film, the only thing is film studio ownership but if Sony own the Spider-Man rights then I couldn't see an Issue, another re-boot using a different character that's already in the comics seems bloody daft… a little consistency for once eh ffs.
finbarbat says:
Jim, this is a fantastic angle on the superhero movie!! I am really enjoying reading this thread and I think you hit a nerve. Great job!
I wish I had seen this new Spider-Man first, instead of the Raimi ones. It has problems, but the Raimi ones have more problems (which have been thoroughly outlined above). But the first time I saw Spider-Man, the magic of seeing my favorite character from childhood swinging around on-screen overcame most of them. So if I'd seen this far better take on Spidey first, I might've died of sheer happiness.
i'm underwhelmed for the new spidey movie. i mean, i wanna see it. i'm gonna. i just don't really seem to care when. might wait for dvd. i'd be more excited if it wasn't another orgin movie. i'm sure the effects and fight scenes are awesome and i want to see Sheen as uncle ben, i guess.
i like the idea of putting him back in high school. teenage spidey is the best spidey. that's why USM has been the best spidey book for the past 12 years. i just don't want to start this story over at the beginning AGAIN.
i'd feel the same if 2 years from now DC announced they were goin' to reboot Batman again.
let's continue the story from any point other than the very beginning from now on, please.
i always thought uncle ben was an electrician.
TomiH says:
Haven't had a chance to see this yet, but it has to be better than the Raimi movies, right?
Seriously, re-watch them and see if they hold up in this post Batman Begins, Thor, Dark Knight, Iron Man, Avengers, X-men First Class world.*
*They don't.
Agreed. I used to think Spider-Man 2 was the best thing under the sun but rewatching it, the dialogue is just awful.
People say that Dunst was wrong for MJ but I don't think the writers get enough of the blame. MJ in the raimi movies was so bland and not at all the fun loving care free girl with a different date every night that MJ was in the comics before the marriage.
Man, people are so fickle.
It's not about being fickle it's about growing in your appreciation for the source material and the way films are made. The dialogue from part 2 is laughable in some moments and brilliant in others, but mostly just mediocre.
Harry: You were like a son to my father.
Peter: (awkward silence) Thank you.
The previous dialogue takes place during a birthday party where everyone looks sad as hell.
The movie is paced well and the fights are sensational but the whole "I lost my powers because i stopped believing in myself" was weird. Huge chunks of the movie don't hold up like i thought they would
ScorpionMasada says:
Another retelling of the Spider-Man origin.
I would love to hear someone who says, "I don't like The Walking Dead comics because it's just the same stories happening over and over" explain to me how great the Spider-Man movie is.
All the mediocre reviews and the retelling of Spidey's origin have led me to skipping it in the theaters. I kinda want to see it, but I have no great desire to do so. Better luck next time.
Definitely gonna see Dark Knight and Avengers was great. And last years low-key super-movie, X-Men First Class, was my favorite of them all. But enough with Spidey's origin already.
Jeremy Carrier says:
"I don't think I've seen people flock to a movie on opening weekend and then act like it never happened this thoroughly since Iron Man 2"
That's because IM2 wasn't very good. And neither was ASM.
For me personally, I really like the Spider-Man parts of this Spider-Man movie. My issues were with the "movie" parts.
The plots that went nowhere ("I shall not rest until I uncover my father's secre- OH SHIT, A GIRL!").
The cramped, hyper-rushed pace ("Amazing Spider-Man: The story of an orphan, desperate to come to terms with his parent's death… I mean, his uncle's death… I mean, his girlfriend's dad's death…").
The random nonsense (I guess The Lizard can… summon lizards to himself, now? Kind of an Aquaman-of-the-sewers thing?).
The strange cypher that is Peter Parker in this movie (The kid speaks zero complete sentences in the first 30 minutes. Good way to establish his personality, movie).
The ham-fisted, savagely lazy rehash of the ending of the first movie ("We can't be together, Mary-Gwen, for super convenient plot reasons, the tension of which you will negate immediately by figuring them out and explaining them to the audience).
Now, the web-shooters? A Spider-Man that's actually funny? Martin Sheen? The fight in the school? All totally rad. They just needed to be in a better movie.
The Lizard controlling lizards thing, I'm almost positive that was part of the Shed storyline a couple years ago.
The Lizard was controlling crocodiles in his first appearance.
The Lizard is Croc Master? Make that movie, Marvel and whoever owns the GI Joe movie rights!
I mean… listen, that's cool and all, but it still makes no damn sense within the movie. That'd be like Ben Reiley walking through the house eating a sandwich and no one commenting on it.
Would he be wearing a blue hoodie? Because I have some more movie dollars for you right here.
javier84 says:
I could not agree with you more, I would just like to add that the scene where the thief pulls a knife on spider man that we have seen in the trailers; makes Spider-man come off as more of a jerk than likeable character in the movie. I would have to say that for the majority of the movie Peter comes off as unlikeable and unsympathetic. I understand building the character up to be a jerk at first and then having the character grow in to a better person as the movie goes along, but for the entirety of the movie he is a complete jerk to Aunt May who by the end seems like she has completely lost her mind. I think the movie is getting the type of attention it is getting because it deserves it. It is an okay movie with a decent love story and a lot of editing and plot problems.
Hmmmm, the amount of comments being deleted on this site recently is beginning to border on censorship. I truly appreciate the environment on ifanboy as it is one of the most positive comic sites I've ever found, but a little disagreement and heated discussion from time to time isn't going to destabilize that.
MaxPower says:
Jim, could you expand a little bit on what you mean by "cultural impact" ? Are you simply referring to mainstream media coverage? Or comic-fandom's lack of response to it (which I believe you make a case for)? Having not seen the film, I can't speak to the quality nor compare it to Raimi's trilogy,nut to a certain degree I have to imagine that fandom is just overloaded this summer between the other comics-related films/tv shows/games/SDCC and general publishing news. When the first Spider-Man came out, there was the X-Men film, some Blade movies, the horrible bat-nipples (as you noted) and the Superman franchise from the 70's. That's it. It was a big deal because it was so new, one of the pioneers of comics crossing over into the new frontier of non-comics mainstream audiences. Marvel was coming out of bankruptcy and hadn't even begun to think about how it was about to spoil us all with their own movie studio. Anyway, just my thoughts and I appreciate the article for its honesty.
Yeah, context is key.
I mean we actually had a movie version of the Avengers for the first time this summer and it was GOOD. Pardon the people for not doing backflips over Spider-Man this year.
JSAkid says:
Good article and while I haven't seen the movie yet, I agree with the no expectations then coming out of the movie much more pleased than going in with high hopes but on the flipside movies like The Avengers where there wasn't a trilogy done in recent years and had total build up with the highest of expectations, including the possible future of comic book movies, was much better on the sneak preview night due to the sheer raw energy and enthusiasm in the theatre, it made an awesome movie just that much more fun cause you could feel and hear everyone else's excitement and cheers…most fun I had seeing a movie. I love Spiderman and think I'll enjoy this too, it just didn't warrant a midnight screening for me. I do think its lack of public reaction is because of the prior trilogy and bigger comic movies with higher expectations coming out before and after it, Dark Knight Rises is a midnight screening for me as well.
There are a lot of good superhero movies coming out this summer.
There are a lot of movies that people might be thinking about seeing besides superhero movies.
Spider-Man has been done before. Three times.
I'm hoping it's great, but…
It's just not all that exciting, really.
Neither is a Batman movie or a Superman movie, at this point. Sorry.
Show me something new. You want me to get excited? Take a risk.
zombox says:
Easy answer. It isn't a pretty good movie. Its mostly terrible. The only positive I found in that movie was Emma Stone.
BuckyCap says:
I loved it. In my opinion, it was way better than the Rami movies. I thought the action scenes were perfect, the acting was spot on. Can't wait for the sequels.
actually there's not goin' to be any sequels. they're just goin' to remake the origin story from now on.
"Hahaha man…laughable!"
TeleCarlos says:
My girlfriend and my daughter both loved the movie and so did I. Really liked Garfield's acting and portrayal. I would see this movie again. Honestly, I stopped caring what some petty fans may think. Especially ones that don't really create anything themselves. Great movie for new fans of the character.
There's no need to call people petty just because they don't agree with you about liking or disliking Spider-Man. Also, how do you know none of the people that have criticized Spider-Man have never created anything? Can you please provide a resume of all the thing you have created so we have a context for your comment?
I don't understand the "don't criticize unless you can do it" thing. I can't make a pie to save my life, but I can certainly tell when one's fantastic or terrible.
xoman says:
I really liked the first two Raimi Spider-man movies. The second one was especially good. From the costume, to the trailers, this new one has really not excited me in any way. Spider-man is my favorite and I would argue, best super hero, yet I will wait until blu-ray to watch it. I blame Sony for rebooting, a weird costume, and for a smart ass (in a bad way) portrayal of Spidey in the trailers.
I mean really, who gives two craps about Peter's parents?
By the way, they're gonna do the same goddam thing to Batman in a couple years…
Killraven says:
A big part of me wants to see this, but 5 years has not been enough to wash that horrible Spiderman 3 taste out of my mouth. I just can't bring myself to see this at the theatre because of Rami's last outing. I will definately get it on blue ray when it comes out. Looking forward to this weekend though. Ready to get my Batman on.
fo sho says:
There's really no mystery…the problem is that it feels like we just saw this movie! Sure all the details are different but to the average moviegoer, it feels like…wait, Spiderman's origin again??? And as far as rebooting, everyone hated Nipples Batman so there was actual demand for a better Batman movie. I don't think there was necessarily as much disdain for the last Spiderman trilogy even with the third flick being as bad as it was since the first two were so good.
Oops…also…when did Peter Parker start looking so emo hipster?
when they made a movie about high school kids set in the year 2012. I see high schoolers at the local coffee house all the time and even the ones who don't wear hipster-esque shirts still have the skinny jeans.
This is a tad off topic but:
Am I the ONLY person who actually liked Iron Man 2? It's clearly not as great as the first movie but I found it to be quite enjoyable. Not everything about it worked of course (Iron Man having a drunken party in his suit is very close to emo Peter Parker singing in a club), but most of the movie was entertaining.
Back on ASM…..My sister recently watched it over the weekend and she loved it. Said it was better then the Raimi films. So I guess I have no choice but to watch it at some point.
i love iron man 2. mickey rourke is awesome.
Jim Mroczkowski (@jimski) says:
Iron Man 2 totally has its moments. Even the drunken party could have been emotionally affecting if they didn't have the DJ scoring the fight at the end. The music utterly wrecks that scene, which could have been a "Demon in a Bottle" moment.
When my friends and I are poking fun at Iron Man 2, the scene we always reference is, "Do you like your bird? Do you not like the bird? So it is your bird, I thought it wasn't your bird, I'm confused, I thought you didn't like the bird… You know what, take the bird." Upon repeated viewings, this scene goes on for roughly eleven hours.
I liked Iron Man 2, not as much as the original but still really enjoyed it. My major complaint was it didn't feel like there were any stakes. The villain was only after Iron Man, the world or innocent people weren't really ever in danger.
@jimski: I have a feeling that the scene was going to be played more seriously. But let's face it; it's RDJ in a robotic suit, drinking, and dancing….Even if it is meant to be serious there's no way they could have.
People apparently don't like Sam Rockwell in the movie because he's trying to hard to be like Tony Stark. But that's the point of his character! I thought he was funny anyways; hope he's in IR3 in some capacity.
I'll say it outright; I loved Iron Man 2. The hate that movie gets is baffling to me.
My only problem with Iron Man 2 is being expected to accept Mickey Rourke as a scientific genius, looking like that.
ya know, there's an old sayin' about judging books by their covers…
not everyone who's a genius looks like 1960's peter parker.
they tend to be eccentric more often than not.
itsbecca says:
I saw it late due to traveling, but I honestly really quite loved it. Garfield was pitch perfect for me, as the movie started I was thinking, he's too attractive, how is this going to work? Then he had a conversation with Gwen Stacey and I realized, oh. That's how. Fabulous job there.
I also agree on making the web, as soon as I realized what he was doing? Genius. Agreed as well on Uncle Ben, as soon as he went out that door after peter my nails started to dig into the armrest, and when it happened. Gone.
It wasn't perfect for me, there were a few awkward things that I won't mention, mostly because I've already forgotten them, but overall it gave me the same sort of thrills I get from reading a well written arc and that's exactly what I what from my superhero moves.
Sherlock19 says:
I loved this movie. I have not been this excited about Spider-Man in a long, long time. I stopped reading Spidey around the JMS era, felt that Ultimate Spider-Man was getting too……………er…dunno. (I think I was extremely burnt out on Bendis) And the last movie I saw was the 3rd.
Now Ultimate Spider-Man is in my top 5 favorite comics to buy, Dan Slott's made me love AMS all over again, and this Spider-Man movie is my favorite. I agree with this article completely.
Although, I still respect everyone's right to disagree………am I allowed to do that on the internet?
Goldenboy says:
I wonder if this movie is just suffering from coming out after a bad movie. Batman Begins did not do well, but I think we would agree it was at least a very good movie. Were people so turned off by Spider-Man 3 that they stayed away?
Most non-comic people I have spoken to have loved this movie as did I. I think many comic fans brought preconceived ideas into this movie. I agree that it was too early for a reboot, but it was done very well. Let's try to go into these films with an open mind.
I'm not sure it's fair to say Batman Begins didn't do well. It made over $200 million domestically, over $370 million including international sales, and according to Wikipedia is was number one at the box office for two weeks, pretty impressive for a summer movie these days, and had the biggest opening week total of any Batman film. When it left theaters it was the second highest grossing Bat film to date. I think most studios would take those numbers.
Can I say, I don't think I've ever seen a movie split the fanbase's reaction so squarely down the middle. Even the civilians I've talked to are a 50/50 split. Simply fascinating.
Watchmen was mostly love it or hate it, I'm one of the ones who loved it and I love the book, (cue tomatoes) but I just thought it was done with more care and substance than a lot of movies in general and looked great on the Imax and directors cut bluray. Most critics gave it 3 out of 4 stars even though I heard tons of bad feedback from the publics mainstream online reaction and have since not cared what anyone thought (like I ever did) about comic films or anything I like for that matter, I usually don't check reviews cause I like to form my own opinion without prior notions going into it.
Even Comcast rates Watchmen 3 outta 4 stars and can't figure out they're vague rating system, as the two star ratings range from award winning movies to complete box office bombs.
i agree with not taking into account other people's opinions on movies. i skipped spirit of vengence at the movies in 3D because of all the negative feedback, even here. not to mention, i didn't really dig the first ghost rider flick. i watched part 2 on dvd and loved it(i might be the only one).
i also love watchmen the book, the movie and, so far, the BW mini's.
Oh and with all this good or bad feedback on Spidey, the real issue for me is that Marvel Studio's now being in full swing need to buy the movie rights to Spiderman back.
Sockman says:
I really tried to give this movie a chance but I really couldn't have cared less as I was watching it. Everything just seemed stale and rehashed. I was a fan of the mechanical web shooters and Emma Stone as Gwen though. I think this film is silently warning anyone that wants to listen "WB" that rebooting the origin of the same character over and over in such a short time span is going to only weaken the property. Spiderman is doing well because it's the first to try the stunt but mark my words each follower will do worse, generate less buzz, and seem more irrelevant than the last.
mattstev2000 says:
I grew up as a Spidey nut and the first Raimi film was probably bar Batman Begins the most excited I've ever been for a film. Loved it then, still love it now – Spider-Man 2 was even better.
Couldn't care less about this one, haven't made any effort to see it in the cinema probably won't bother with it when it comes out on DVD.
Firstly, Marvel has been slowly killing my interest in Spidey with their handling of him since OMD but the actual conceit of the film itself suffered from too many black marks against it…
Way to early for a reboot (especially given the fact that Raimi got a bit screwed over with Spidey 3 by the studios/producers getting him to insert Venom into the story – he should have had a chance to redeem it with Spidey 4), bad casting (Garfield is too cool for PP, Peter is a geek/nerd not an edgy outsider), bad villian choice (especially considering it was CG – Spidey 3 was hampered by the dumb CG creations), wrong tone in the trailers (it's Spider-Man not Batman FFS), generally poor critical reception and the dumb 'x-treme' Spidey suit.
To be honest, I think the general public, the casual fans who make up the difference in ticket stubs between "okay" and "hit," are still confused by comic book reboots.
The comparison point here would be BATMAN BEGINS. Time may have dimmed our memories, and the huge success of THE DARK KNIGHT makes us think the NolanBat has been a cultural phenomenon from the start, but BB was much more of a slow burn. It did well, and took in decent box office over the length of it's run, but it was a slow and steady film that built more through word of mouth. And most of my conversations with non-fans at the time centred around explaining that it was not a prequel, it was a reboot. Then a polite pause before explaining what I meant by reboot.
In fact, even yesterday I had that conversation, when someone asked if DKR was going to tie into the 90's films.
I haven't seen the new Spidey, so I can't speak to it's quality, but the reboot issue is going to be playing a major part. A sequel would probably make more money, once this first one has built through word of mouth and dvd.
FormerPoetLaureate says:
I can't drag myself to the theater to see another origin story. Enough already.
I liked ironman 2. Wasn't perfect but, a good effort and well, I can't unwatch it and get my money back. I also liked Sups Return. Not perfect, but, just another take on these malleable characters. Yes, I can criticize crappy work! I really dislike X3 and wish it had never been born! Also dislike anything that M Bay touches. This Spidey was great, it just didn't agree with "some" people, and that is ok, nothing to cry or fret about. Didn't like it? Cool, move on! Just to be more annoying: yes create stuff, just not for money and feel great about it! I also create good times and happy vibes wherever I go. Most of the time. I guess I agree with the writer of this column and the wonderful people that put a lot of effort into creating this movie! Thanks movie studio, Lee and Kirby, Webb and Gardield!
They only made one other spider-Man origin right? I'm not crazy am I? People are acting like this is the tenth movie to tell Peter's origin. I've literally seen 3 movies in theaters tell me Batman's origin if you include (mask of the phantasm) and guess what? If it's done well I will go see another one. Chill out folks.
Conor Kilpatrick (@cskilpatrick) says:
Also people only complain about superhero movies for whatever reason meanwhile Sherlock Holmes will be getting his 3rd reboot in 4 years with "Elementary." The other two being the RDJ movies and the BBC "Sherlock."
People will complain about Superman next year as well, despite it being the coolest origin ever.
Mask of the Phantasm doesn't count.
Tim Burton's batman wasn't about batman's orgin.
it was about the Joker's.
sure, we got some flashback action of his parents being murdered. it provided us with his motivations, but it wasn't about him getting his costume together, learning how to fight, putting his equipment together, building the batcave, etc.
so truly, Batman Begins is the only orgin story of Batman on the big screen. and i hope it stays that way.
as a comic fan, i've read peter parker's origin story A LOT OF TIMES(they use to bring it up at least every other issue back in the day). i've watched all the cartoons, which start as an origin story. and i've seen it in the theatres. Hell, it was on Broadway for fuck's sake.
this spider-cow has been officially milked. i want more spider-man movies and comics, just no more peter parker origins for a while. i'm full, thank you.
Toshimoko29 says:
My problems with the movie aren't related to it being a super-hero movie at all. It was just a really slow, dragging, poorly told story IMO. As a super-hero movie, though, I must admit that it is a terrible comparison to Avengers, which I consider perfect in almost every way. I don't really mind seeing Peter's origin story again, but Garfield's version wasn't a version I could develop feelings for. Also, I don't know if it's been mentioned, but the part where Spider-Man shot a bunch of webs and felt for the vibrations was done in the comics after he developed the extra spider abilities (like the wrist spike), I think in JMS' run. Overall his new abilities were stupid and unneeded so they did away with them.
Any chance iFanboy would be willing to set up a Movies page similar to the weekly Comics page?
It'd be interesting to see the average star ratings of comic book movies from the iFanbase.
Could also give the iFanbase the ability to add movie reviews.
Could also link out to the published reviews from iFanboy staff, special edition podcasts, and boards when the movie came out.
Considering the feature films and DC to DVD animated ones over the past decade there's plenty of content to create a Movies listing on the website.
I imagine it could also attract new users to the site as well as advertisers.
RaceMcCloud says:
Wow, I wrote the companion piece to this one three weeks ago over at "StashMyComics.com". Great minds and what-not, Jimski. Here's the link: http://www.stashmycomics.com/blog/index.php/2012/07/geek-cinema-oh-yeah-theres-a-new-spider-man-movie-coming-out/
stevetwo says:
The bloom is off the rose. These movies aren't just made for comic fans. Studios want EVERYONE to see them. When the first Superman debuted in '79(?), people FLOCKED to theaters to glimpse this fictional character they either grew up with or knew all about – and because there had never been a movie like it – ever. Same with Batman. "Regular" moviegoers stood in line for hours alongside comic fans (myself included) to see the biggest baddest comic book hero ever. People saw the first couple of movies, were satisfied, and moved on, especially when horrid sequels (aka Supes and Bats 3 and 4) came out.
Then a new breed of hero showed up whom people could relate to even better because he was human too: Indiana Jones and John McClain (Die Hard) were jumping off buildings, facing impossible odds, etc. Just like James Bond. Why go see a hammy Tommy Lee Jones in bad makeup when they can watch Harrison Ford in a losing fistfight around whirling propellor blades? Bruce Willis taunting Hans Gruber over a walkie talkie? To quote Robert Townsend's great flick, 'Hollywood Shuffle': "Man, that shit could really happen!"
One exception – Batman. I believe he falls into the Bond/Jones/McClane category. Naturally, you have to treat the character with respect (Joel). There have been bad Bond/Jones/McClane films. But Batman is just like them: a guy in a suit, like James Bond. He can get beat up, like Indiana Jones. He can be killed, like John Mc- well, not yet I guess.
As long as studios don't overdo one character, they'll make money. Raimi's first two Spider movies again played to our culture's childhood: everyone knows who Spider-man is, but no one had EVER made a movie – a real movie with great actors, writing and special effects about one of the most famous superheroes in the world – like this.
Yes, we'll get more Iron Man, Cap and Thor – who doesn't want to see more of them? But I believe that if Avengers hadn't come along, I highly doubt IM 3 would be as successful.
jasonrage says:
I enjoyed how the death of Ben Parker was performed. And I mean enjoyed as in it really hit me hard, "right in the chest plate" so to speak. It felt like a real death. It remided me of my own fathers death. In movies, there is this cliche' where when a parent dies, they get this one last line that somehow defines the main character for the rest of the movie. I appreciated the death of Ben Parker, one second he was there, the next he was gone. No final words, no calling out to his loved ones, no good bye, just gone. That is the way the death of a parent is for the majority of us. Thank you Marc Webb.
i thought the same thing. When my father died there were no last words. i went to bed one night and he was there and the next morning my aunt came into my room and told me he was gone


/ Plastic US American Flag Tablecloth, 84" x 54"
Plastic US American Flag Tablecloth, 84" x 54"
Remember Old Glory as you sit down for dinner with this traditional Plastic US American Flag Tablecloth. Covered with classic red, white, and blue American flags, this plastic table cover is a quick and easy way to decorate your 4th of July party. To create a festive display, simply drape it over the table before piling the desserts, centerpieces, and other patriotic party supplies on top. It's also handy for sprucing up a Memorial Day picnic or other patriotic holiday.
• American Flag Table Cover measures 84" x 54"


Fixed: Enchanter, Zealot pet : dot should now interrupt every tick.
Fixed: Cabalist, Emerald pet : dot should now interrupt every tick.
Fixed: Necromancer : dot should now interrupt every tick.
Added: Shadowblade Realm Rank 5 Ability.
Added: Savage Realm Rank 5 Ability.
Added: Infiltrator Realm Rank 5 Ability.
Updated: Free Weapons merchants have been completely reworked.
Updated: Free Armors merchants have been completely reworked.
Updated: All armors are no longer neutral, example : Midgard Chain is now vulnerable to thrust and Hibernia Scale to slash.


text:
Celebrities Music Carl McCoy: Top 10 Must-Know Facts About Rock Singer
Carl McCoy: Top 10 Must-Know Facts About Rock Singer
Carl McCoy (Rock Singer) was born on the 18th of January, 1963. He was born in 1960s, in Baby Boomers Generation. His birth sign is Capricorn and his life path number is 11. Carl's birth flower is Carnation and birthstone is Garnet. What does this all mean? Let's find out!
Discover all the facts that no one tells you about Carl McCoy below ↓
NAME: Carl McCoy
REAL NAME: Carl McCoy
NICKNAME: The 24th Moment, Sheerfaith
PROFESSION: Rock Singer
Carl McCoy, best known for being a Rock Singer, was born in England, United Kingdom on Friday, January 18, 1963. Metal and Gothic rock musician best known as the lead vocalist of Fields of the Nephilim. His albums with the band include Elizium and The Nephilim.
Family: He dedicated one of his albums, Zoon, to his daughter Scarlett. Scarlett and her sister Eden both recorded vocals on their father's Mourning Son album. Carl McCoy father's name is under review and mother unknown at this time. We will continue to update details on Carl McCoy's family.
Dating: According to CelebsCouples, Carl McCoy is single .
Net Worth: Online estimates of Carl McCoy's net worth vary. It's easy to predict his income, but it's much harder to know how much he has spent over the years. CelebsMoney and NetWorthStatus does a good job of breaking most of it down.
2. Carl McCoy's zodiac sign is Capricorn
Carl McCoy zodiac sign is a Capricorn. Dates of Capricorn are December 22 - January 19. Those born under the Capricorn zodiac sign are talented at applying their intelligence and ambition to practical matters. Stability and order are important to them - and this makes them good organizers. They are driven, patient, strategic, determined, disciplined, responsible, and persistent. On the other hand, they can also be pessimistic, greedy, cynical, fearful, ruthless and rigid.
The British rock singer has been alive for 21,540 days or 516,979 hours. There were precisely 730 full moons after his birth to this day.
Carl McCoy was born on a Friday. Friday is ruled by Venus, the planet of love, balance, beauty, romance, elegance, and pleasure. People born on Friday are social animals, artistic, and obsessed with beauty and love.
Countdown to Carl McCoy's next birthday.
Carl McCoy will be turning 59.
4. On Carl McCoy's birthday
The world's population was 3,210,271,352 and there were an estimated 113,464,323 babies born throughout the world in 1963, John F. Kennedy (Democratic) was the president of the United States, and the number one song on Billboard 100 was "Go Away Little Girl" by Steve Lawrence.
532 – Nika uprising against Emperor Justinian in Constantinople fails, 30,000 killed by troops loyal to the Emperor in the Hippodrome.
1591 – King Naresuan of Siam kills Crown Prince Minchit Sra of Burma in single combat, date is now observed as Royal Thai Armed Forces day.
1788 – First elements of the First Fleet carrying 736 convicts from England to Australia arrives at Botany Bay to set up a penal colony.
5. Carl McCoy's height and weight
We're currently in process of confirming all details such as Carl McCoy's height, weight, and other stats. If there is any information missing, we will be updating this page soon. If you any have tips or corrections, please send them our way.
Carl McCoy was born in the Year of the Rabbit. People with Chinese zodiac Rabbit sign usually impress others with an image of tenderness, grace and sensitive. They are romantic in relationship, having a high demand in life quality. They avoid arguing with others, and have a capability of converting an enemy into a friend. Their strengths are gentle, sensitive, compassionate, amiable, modest, and merciful. But they can also be amorous, hesitant, stubborn, timid, conservative. Their lucky numbers are 3, 4, 9, and lucky colors are red, blue, pink, purple.
7. Carl McCoy's life path number is 11
Carl McCoy was born in the middle of Baby Boomers Generation.
9. Carl McCoy's birthstone is Garnet
10. Carl McCoy's birth flower is Carnation
Rock Singer

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


As the world continues to push against gender constructs, the conversation around how people are identifying themselves is constantly evolving. Each week, MILK.XYZ will feature a guest editor writing about their specific relationship with gender and, often, where it intersects with fashion. This week, we feature artist Brandon Jean.
My name is Brandon Jean. I'm 21 years old and currently a student at Pratt Institute. Born in Queens, New York and raised in Florida, I was brought up in a Haitian household in a small town were the views on gender are strictly black and white.
Growing up, gender and sexuality were considered taboo; it was never a topic of discussion. It was as if sexuality was the elephant in the room that no one wanted to acknowledge.
I was always confused growing up, I've always known I was different. I never wanted to admit this truth to myself because it was difficult and complicated, people didn't like different in my town. Constantly trying to fit into my surroundings, I never felt truly comfortable with who I was. The constant denial and shame I put myself through took a toll on me. I felt lonely. I always sheltered myself in my own little world to feel at peace, putting up this façade helped me deal with judgmental parents and ignorant, adolescent kids. It was when I explored expression through fashion that I was finally able to tear down this wall I put up and discover my own confidence in individuality.
Moving back to New York for school has opened up my eyes to the many possibilities within fashion that are normally out of the norm in more conservative parts of the nation, such as small towns in Florida. Growing up, being the only one like myself was hard. Identifying as the only queer man of color in my town was difficult, I was always bombarded with questions about my sexuality when I didn't even know the answer myself, yet everyone else seemed to know. Without much representation or someone to look up to, I felt alone in a world so big. My experiences with gender and its relationship to fashion have helped me realize who I really am and shrink the world that once seemed so big.
Unfortunately, gender within our society plays a huge role in fashion. Though, as seen in recent popular culture, artists, designers, and musicians have been taking steps to reshape the stigma surrounding gender in relation to fashion. In Calvin Klein's 2016 campaign Young Thug was featured at the forefront of breaking down gender roles in less fluid communities. Young Thug states, "You can be a gangsta in a dress or you can be a gangsta with baggy pants." Statements such as these from artists like Young Thug help influence a younger culture of black men such as myself to step out of the gender norms created and upheld by our society.
Fashion has allowed many, including myself, the freedom of self-expression. It has allowed me to step out of my comfort zone and truly express myself for who I am. Growing up I used to always ask myself "who am I." Not always knowing where I belonged, I felt like I was an outsider. It was fashion that helped me come to terms with my sexuality and who I was as a person. I was able to express myself the way I deemed fit. I don't see gender when it comes to fashion. you should feel comfortable wearing what makes you happy.
No matter what point I was at in my life there was always one constant that never changed. Fashion. Whether I decided to wear makeup, a crop top, a choker, or any other article of clothing deemed "feminine" is a clear example of the barriers that gender creates within fashion dictated by our society. It's the times that we live in now that gives us the freedom to break down these gender barriers that constrict the individuality of young black men. Fashion, unlike any other design field, has had the greatest impact on our society whether it be social, political, environmental, or cultural. Fashion plays a big part in the world we live in, so why limit yourself when you can help change the world just by embracing your individuality.
Our times are fluid and I couldn't be happier to be apart of a generation that's breaking society's standards of gender where I can feel accepted for who I am, a young Bisexual man of color. As a young black man, our society is constantly telling us how we should live, act, and carry ourselves. There has always been this stigma placed on a black man on what we're supposed to look like and wear. I write this to hopefully inspire younger men of color to step into their comfort zone and fully embrace themselves for who they are. It's your body and no one has the right to tell you how to live. Put on your eyeshadow, wear your blouse, and never be sorry for being truly and honestly you.


Athyr graduated from United Medical & Dental Schools of Guy's & St Thomas' in 1996 and has been providing orthodontic treatment since 1999. He is experienced with traditional types of orthodontic appliance, but is especially interested in the more 'discrete' options such as Invisalign and lingual orthodontics.
In addition to orthodontic treatment, Dr Al-Killidar diagnoses and treats many patients referred for cosmetic smile makeovers, missing teeth, jaw joint problems, and related disorders including headaches, neck aches, ear symptoms, excess tooth wear, tooth clenching and grinding.


text:
Q: Missing pub folder path from static content in magento 2 I deploy my site on centos7 and deploy content as well which is in pub folder.But when i inspect element it shows path like in screenshot attatch without pub folder name.Some files are missing as well from path.Any solution

A: replace main .htaccess
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/pub/
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/setup/
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/update/
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/dev/
RewriteRule .* /pub/$0 [L]
DirectoryIndex index.php

A: Anyone with this issue on 2.4.2, I hope this helps save you hours of headaches. https://devdocs.magento.com/guides/v2.4/config-guide/bootstrap/mage-dirs.html
/vendor/magento/framework/App/Filesystem/DirectoryList.php has some changed URL_PATHs from previous versions, the pub part has been removed for some reason, causing the broken paths to static files. Replace the pub and all is well:
self::MEDIA => [parent::PATH => 'pub/media', parent::URL_PATH => 'pub/media'],
self::STATIC_VIEW => [parent::PATH => 'pub/static', parent::URL_PATH => 'pub/static'],
self::PUB => [parent::PATH => 'pub', parent::URL_PATH => 'pub'],
self::UPLOAD => [parent::PATH => 'pub/media/upload', parent::URL_PATH => 'pub/media/upload'],
Then rerun upgrade commands:
rm -rf var/di/* var/generation/* var/cache/* var/log/* var/page_cache/* var/session/* var/view_preprocessed/* pub/static/*
php bin/magento setup:upgrade
php bin/magento setup:di:compile
php bin/magento setup:static-content:deploy
php bin/magento cache:clean
php bin/magento cache:flush
php bin/magento indexer:reindex

A: Update in your index.php file
Path: pub/index.php
DirectoryList::PUB => [DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub', DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub'],
DirectoryList::MEDIA => [DirectoryList::PATH => 'pub/media', DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub/media'],
DirectoryList::STATIC_VIEW => [DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub/static']
<?php
/**
 * Public alias for the application entry point
 *
 * Copyright © Magento, Inc. All rights reserved.
 * See COPYING.txt for license details.
 */

use Magento\Framework\App\Bootstrap;
use Magento\Framework\App\Filesystem\DirectoryList;
use Magento\Framework\App\Http;

try {
    require __DIR__ . '/app/bootstrap.php';
} catch (\Exception $e) {
    echo <<getMessage()}

HTML;
    exit(1);
}

$params = $_SERVER;
$params[Bootstrap::INIT_PARAM_FILESYSTEM_DIR_PATHS] = [
     DirectoryList::PUB => [DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub', DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub'],
     DirectoryList::MEDIA => [DirectoryList::PATH => 'pub/media', DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub/media'],
     DirectoryList::STATIC_VIEW => [DirectoryList::URL_PATH => 'pub/static']
];

$bootstrap = Bootstrap::create(BP, $params);
/** @var Http $app */
$app = $bootstrap->createApplication(Http::class);
$bootstrap->run($app);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: import a python module from a user-specified dir? I have a cross-platform GUI interface to PyInstaller. I would like to check the version of PyInstaller that is installed. The user provides the install folder of PyInstaller. I can do this through the command-line python pyinstaller --version but that opens a command-prompt on Windows which I want to avoid. Is there a way to access the get_version() function in a Python module not in the same path as the application being run? Alternatively, how do I prevent the command-prompt from launching on Windows while maintaining cross-platform compatibility of my app.
Here's my code so far:
def pyversion(installdir):
    flags=[]
    flags.append(sys.executable)
    pylocation = os.path.join(installdir, 'pyinstaller.py')
    flags.append(pylocation)
    flags.append('--version')
    p = subprocess.Popen(flags,
                         stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
    out,err = p.communicate()
    return float(out.strip()[:3])

A: my_path = "some/path/blah"
os.path.insert(0,my_path)
import my_custom_module

you just need to add it to the path before importing it...or maybe I dont understand what you are asking


text:
Bed and Breakfast hotels in Swindon
Located in Wiltshire in south-west England, Swindon is a lovely quaint town. Come and visit with Campanile Bed and Breakfast hotels!
Distance from Swindon downtown
Hotel bordeaux france
Hotel dijon
Hotel marseille airport
Hotel bydgoszcz
Hotel colmar
Hotel chandon epernay
Hotel tour eiffel
Hotel airport paris charles de gaulle
Hotel yangzhou
Bed and Breakfast Swindon
1 Hotels in Swindon and its surroundings
GBP 39
Hotel CAMPANILE SWINDON
2 km from downtown of Swindon
Swindon is a large town in south-west England situated halfway between Bristol , to the east, and Reading , to the west. London is about 81 miles (130km) east. If you include the small towns of HIghworth and Wroughthon, the population of Swindon is around 209,000 people. The town has a fairly mild climate, with winters and summers of equal length. To the south and east, the town is bordered by the chalk hills of the Wiltshire Downs. The River Ray forms the western border, including its tributary of the River Cole.
Swindon was originally a Saxon settlement that sat atop a limestone hill. It was referred to as Suindune, possibly meaning "Sweyn's Hill". It was a small trading town, up until the mid 1800s. The original market area is not confined to the hill located in the centre of the town, referred to as "Old Town". With the construction of the Wilts and Berks Canal in 1810 and the North Wilts Canal in 1819, Swindon was able to prosper in the heart of the Industrial Revolution. The Isambard Kingdom Brunel's Swindon Works was built in 1842 for the repair and maintenance of the Great West Railway (GWR) trains. The New Swindon Improvement Company was formed in 1844 as a co-operative, and had the UK's first lending library. Through the 20th century, the use of steam engines gradually declined, resulting in the closing of much of the old industry in Swindon during the 70s and 80s. Today, Swindon is very residential, and in 2008 it featured in The Times' list"The 20 best places to buy a property in Britain".
A two-day break:
Two days is the perfect amount of time to get a good feel for this cosy British town. A first stop should be the Swindon Museum, which has interesting displays on local history, archaeology and geology. The Swindon Art Gallery holds an impressive collection of 20th-century British art, including works by L.S. Lowry and Henry Moore. An absolute must-see is the Great Western Railway Museum. It is located in a restored railway works building and is rich in history as well as games for children. It is right next to the "Shopping Village" outlet centre and the National Trust Headquarters, so your day will be full of things to do.
A week-long stay:
If you decide to stay a bit longer, worry not, because you'll find many other things to do. Spend some time walking around the many public and private stately homes and gardens spread out through the town. A notable one is the Avebury Manor and Garden. In terms of water, very little of the Wilts & Berks Canal remains, but its course can still be traced by following Canal Street from Kingshill into the town centre. The Corate Water was originally built to supply water to the Wilts & Berks Canal but has now become a public park. Definitely spend some time visiting the "Old Town", which is located up on the hill in the town centre. If you need a break and to get out, Bristol, Bath , Salisbury and Reading are all close by. You can also visit the Cricklade steam railway or the White Horse Hill in nearby Uffington.
Your entire family will love Swindon, a calm and charming town that is rich in history!
The Campanile Swindon Hotel is but 3km (2 miles) from the city centre. At the junction of two motorways, you can easily get to Swindon from numerous nearby cities. Driving along the M4, taking either junction 15 or 16 will take you right on in. There are also Park and Ride buses that will take you around where you need to go. When heading to the town centre, watch out for the Magic Roundabout, into which five roads converge, each with its own mini roundabout connected to its neighbours'. As a result, there are five mini-roundabouts and a mega one that goes around anti-clockwise. Swinson is also on the main Paddington – Bristol/Swansea train line. Once in the centre, travel on foot is best.
Swindon is full of different places to choose from, ranging from traditional English and Irish pubs to Chinese and Indian restaurants, cafes and bars.
The Swindon Mela is an annual festival, held in the Town Gardens in August, which celebrates Indian culture. It attracts about 10,000 visitors each year. There is also an annual music festival called the Swindon Shuffle. Other fun events during the year include the Swindon Festival of Literature, the Swindon Invincible Festival and the Big Arts Day held at Lydiard Park.
The novel "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" by Mark Haddon takes place in Swindon.
https://www.visitwiltshire.co.uk/towns-and-villages/swindon-p1501903 (official tourist site)
https://www.swindon.gov.uk/ (official city site).


text:
We're all about People
London at 10 Trinity Square
Aukett Swanke
Sub-Contractor
McCue Fit Out
Situated in the heart of The City of London, the building at Ten Trinity Square is one of London's most treasured buildings, having once been the seat of power for both the Port of London Authority and the United Nations.
The Sir Edwin Cooper designed building was originally built in 1922 and occupied by the Port of London Authority until 1970. In 1946, the building hosted the inaugural assembly of the United Nations in 1946 and was later used for the famous signing of the first UN Charter in 1948, hosted by Winston Churchill.
In the latest chapter in its extraordinary life, the Grade II* listed building has undergone a meticulous conversion, with Ardmore overseeing the sensitive refurbishment and transformation into a spectacular Four Seasons Hotel and apartments.
We worked alongside Adrmore on the ironmongery schedule supplying McCue Fit Out with a full door package to the 100 Bedroom Hotel by The Four Season Group
Visit our partners on this project
Four Seasons Hotels
Aukett Swanke Architects
Ironmongery Innovations Ltd
#instagram#
#twitter#
#pinterest#
#linkedin#
Providence Tower
Brent Civic Centre
The Gantry
Lee Steward
Lucy Kemp
'Chinkey' Seaman
Jo Gisby
Handle Suites


Nearly all Illinois DUI suspects are asked to perform the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST's). These are the tests that are meant to measure whether a person has lost the normal use of their mental and physical faculties – although a growing chorus of scientists are debating their validity for that purpose. IL DUI Attorney Brian Roberts wants you to understand that there are several medical defenses to SFST's.
The initial SFST protocol was designed and tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) with the purpose of making police officers better able to judge whether a DUI suspect was intoxicated. The studies were conducted by scientists using precise measuring equipment in a controlled environment. None of the test subjects were known to have had any prior ankle, knee, hip, back, neck, or head injuries.
Anyone who has suffered a concussion likely realizes that the effects of that injury have lifetime implications. People with repeated head injuries – like football players – face a lifetime of dizziness, loss of balance, and other side effects. If you have ever suffered a head injury, and have access to medical records, those injuries can be used to explain any poor performance on the SFST's.
Two of the standardized tests are highly susceptible to misinterpretation if the test taker has suffered leg problems. IL DUI Attorneys have often heard police tell people who report a leg injury to simply, "stand on the other leg, then." The problem with that approach, however, is that if your body is experiencing pain or struggling to maintain normalcy, then keeping the injured leg elevated is likely not a realistic expectation.
People who are overweight are generally less able to maintain balance as well as people who are physically fit. In fact, NHTSA has now admitted that these tests are not designed to be performed on overweight people. Of course, the police still administer these tests to such folks without any scientific basis of validity.
Anyone with back or neck injuries will have an extremely difficult time maintaining balance on one leg, or walking in a heel-to-toe manner. Both of these maneuvers require normal balance before the tests even begin. People with injuries that require one half of the body to compensate to the injured half will perform poorly on these tests.
If you have injuries in your past or present you likely have a valid medical defense to the SFST's. These tests are difficult enough on the side of a roadway, often at night, and when you are nervous at the prospect of being arrested. They are virtually impossible if you have medical injuries or history. IL DUI Attorney Brian Roberts is ready to give you a free, confidential case evaluation. Call him right now to learn how he can help you fight an Carbondale, IL DUI charge.


text:
Home Conservation Field Reports Herping - A Love Affair
Herping - A Love Affair
Having spent years in the vast Thar, combing through the sands of the most densely human-populated desert in the world, Vipul Ramanuj writes an appreciation of the gamut of herplife that the Great Indian Desert manages to sustain.
Photo: Vipul Ramanuj
Herping has taken me from the wettest places in the Western Ghats to the extreme corners of Arunachal Pradesh and the dry Thar Desert. I come from the arid western region of Gujarat and the Thar has always felt like home. In my younger years, I remember scouring this desert habitat for herps especially the Sochurek's saw-scaled viper Echis carinatus sochureki, which is unlike the other Echis carinatus ssp. The sochureki adults are considerably larger in size and much paler in appearance. This snake is equipped with a hemotoxic venom and is one of the world's fastest-striking snakes. The sight of these side-winders leaving their tracks behind on the ripples of sand is unforgettable.
It is for this and other herps that I continue to explore Thar Desert year after year.
Back in the day there weren't many scientific journals, articles or books that one could easily procure to expand one's knowledge. Convenient online search engines too were a distant dream. Life was all about spending maximum time in the field to gain hands-on experience of wildlife.
There's never a dull moment when you're in Thar. Over the years, on my countless trips here, I've always gone back home with newer knowledge and better experiences. Herping takes on a new meaning in the desert. It is actually like a treasure hunt. You find yourself devising routes, studying the terrain, traversing different habitats on foot, picking up tell-tale signs on the shifting sand, driving at the lowest possible speed for road transects, always in pursuit of the hidden gems of the herpetological world!
STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL
The struggle for survival drives life in the desert. While some species thrive during the sweltering hours of the day, others adapt by digging themselves into burrows, hiding under the crevices of rocks or simply resting under any available shade. Indian fringe-toed lizards Acanthodactylus cantoris put on quite a show of raising their fore legs and hind legs alternately to minimise contact with the hot sand as they go about in search of ants, termites and other insects.
The challenges only add to the adventure and the list of local friends you make along the way. Since my partner-in-crime and wife Catherene and I would specially visit these far-fetched locations for herptiles, we would easily catch the villagers' fancy. This worked in our favour since they would approach us anytime they sighted a snake or a monitor lizard near their house. Once, while observing spiny-tailed lizards Saara hardwickii in a field, one of the kids from a Banjara community informed us of a desert monitor Varanus griseus stuck in their well for almost two months. We saw the monitor circling the water surface and asked for a rope and I plunged straight into the well. The well opening was just wide enough to jump inside and I found myself in waist deep water. It was an adult reptile and had almost filed off its nails in the struggle to climb up the wall to freedom. I could see scratch marks all around. I managed to secure it with a noose and send it to safety. I was then hauled out as a wave of celebration ensued. We released the monitor nearby and were gratified to have been able to rescue the exquisite creature.
On the other hand, the Laungwala toad-headed agama Bufoniceps laungwalensis pulls the disappearing act of sliding under loose sand by simply jerking its body. Not unexpectedly, it took many failed attempts to finally spot our first one in the expanse of dunes.
After dark the sand dunes display completely different signs of life. The sandfish Ophiomorus raithmai, is an amazing skink that 'swims' through loose sand in search of unsuspecting prey including beetles, crickets and sundry insects. The sand dunes are marked with the trails they leave behind, alongside plentiful beetle
tracks that reveal some of the abundant nightlife of the dunes.
PHOTOGRAPHING THE DESERT
The Thar Desert is a wonderland for photographers. Apart from herps, the austere landscape is nothing short of mesmerising. The dunes take on golden hues at sunrise and sunset, while the nightsky lights up with gleaming diamond-like stars.
Photography at night poses challenges. Taking care of delicate equipment is a struggle. Nights are windy and macro photography involves lying low on sand dunes, with tiny sand crystals hitting your face together with countless insects attracted to the head lamp! And then there are scorpions to contend with, such as Buthacus agarwali, which buries itself in the sand. I had one crawl under my chest while lying prone on the dunes. Luckily, it wasn't intimidated by my presence and eventually crawled away!
There are different habitat types found in the Thar Desert apart from sand dunes. This includes scrubland and rocky terrain. Having extensively studied the reptiles of Thar Desert, the checklist of the species found here have not just been carefully documented by me but are embedded in my memory. This includes the stunning, diminutive Persian gecko Microgecko persicus euphorbiacola recorded for the first time in India from Thar Desert (Agarwal, Ishan 2009). Despite its small size, the striped body pattern creates quite an impression and it can be difficult to spot when in tricky crevices. Sharing a similar habitat is the keeled rock gecko Cyrtopodion scabrum. The Sind sand gecko Crossobamon orientalis, with its patterned body and glistening eyes is equally impressive!
Most geckos don't possess eyelids. Since they can't blink, they lick their eyes to keep them clean and moist. Capturing them on camera in the act is both challenging and rewarding.
THE LAND OF SNAKES AND MORE
Far from the notion that deserts are lifeless, I have found them to be vibrant and alive with fascinating lifeforms such as the vibrant morph of the red-spotted royal snake Spalerosophis arenarius or the interesting looking Sind awl-headed snake Lytorhynchus paradoxus, with its perfectly adapted snout that enables it to dig into the sand to seek out prey.
Locals have many myths revolving around snakes. Some think of the red sand boa Eryx johnii as auspicious... others believe it to be a bad omen. Sadly, for the snake this spells trouble from both the sides. I like to interact with locals whenever I get the chance and while learning from them, I also try to expand their knowledge of reptiles to dispel some unreasonable fears which give rise to unfounded myths and superstitions in villages.
There are times when we're scanning the habitat for species that we know we might find there. Other times we are, delightfully, taken by complete surprise.
In September 2017, I was lucky to see a species that had eluded me all these years – the Afro-Asian sand snake Psammophis schokari, an extremely agile reptile active during the day. Its sandy appearance and slender body offers it great camouflage. On that trip, we sighted the Afro-Asian sand snake, not
once, but twice! And that too on a night walk.
The sheer abundance of life in the Thar is mesmerising. There is more to the desert than meets the eye and I for one can never get enough of what the desert has to offer. Since this is a lesser known and a poorly studied area, one of our main purposes of exploring the Thar is to highlight the species found here through photography and spread awareness regarding the sheer diversity and importance of this little-appreciated ecosystem.
Deserts are as vital to our planet's diversity as the prime big cats' forest habitats. Sadly, there are no comparable flagship species to 'attract' public attention and policy makers, apart from the falling population of Great Indian Bustards, which are restricted to small pockets of the Great Indian Desert. Consequently, the lesser known fauna of this region too faces a huge threat from large industrial projects involving windmills and solar power plants that extensively affect the habitat upon which these species are wholly dependent. The camp followers of such projects... road expansions, land use change, pollution and more in turn cause irreparable damage to the fragile ecosystem adding yet another nail in the coffin of arid zone biodiversity!
Author: Vipul Ramanuj, First appeared in: Sanctuary Asia, Vol. XXXVIII No. 2, February 2018.


text:
Temporary Changes to Prague Airport Check-in Procedure
Prague Airport continues to implement projects designed to facilitate the airport's modernization and capacity increases, such as the reconstruction of the baggage sorting area in Terminal 1, which will partially affect the passenger check-in process this year.
From Sunday, 1 March 2020 until the end of August 2020, passengers on flights of 22 selected carriers will be checked in at Terminal 2 instead of Terminal 1.
For a period of time, the check-in process will not follow the division of the terminals to flights within and outside the Schengen Area. However, flights will still be boarded and handled at Terminal 1, just as now. Prague Airport has launched an extensive information campaign which will continue to run throughout the summer season to ease passenger orientation around the airport during the temporary change.
"The number of handled passengers is growing every year and the airport has already reached and exceeded its capacity limits. Therefore, we have been gradually implementing projects that are part of the airport development and will contribute to its modernization and partial increases in its handling and operational capacities. The reconstruction of the baggage sorting area, which has continued for the second year and will temporarily require operational restrictions, is one of the most important projects in this respect. The reconstruction will result in a more modern and even safer space for checking hold baggage, which will most certainly be appreciated by passengers," Václav Řehoř, Chairman of the Prague Airport Board of Directors, said.
The check-in of passengers of the selected airlines will take place at Terminal 2 Departure Hall counters, at a place clearly marked as "RED ZONE". This change only applies to passengers leaving Prague aboard flights operated by airlines subject to the changed check-in process, travelling with large checked baggage or in need of collecting their boarding pass, i.e. passengers who have not checked in online in advance.
These passengers are advised by the airport to arrive directly at Terminal 2. After check-in, they will proceed to Terminal 1 for passport control and security screening prior to their departure.
List of airlines subject to the temporary check-in procedure change:
Czech Airlines – Seoul Flights Only
Jet2.com
Rossiya Airlines
Ryanair/Buzz
25 New Brands Came to the Czech Market Last Year
Despite the coronavirus crisis, this is one brand more than the year before Although the retail segment is…
Node5 Coworking Spaces: A Space to Grow
Are you a young entrepreneur? Perhaps you work in a start-up? Is working from home just not working…