The new trailer for Marc Webb’s Amazing Spider-Man reboot has just hit the web… and it doesn’t look bad at all! The film stars Andrew Garfield as the titular and angst-filled hero and Emma Stone as the love interest alongside Martin Sheen, Sally Field, Denis Leary, Rhys Ifans, C. Thomas Howell and Campbell Scott (and yes, probably Stan Lee). It claims to tell the “untold story” but appears to be an origin tale, so who knows what Webb and friends have up their sleeve. (Beside the web shooter I mean.) Check out the new trailer below.

When Sony released the “Untold Story” tagine for The Amazing Spider-Man, it rang about as true as a career politician and lobbyist claiming to be a Washington Outsider (or, for a less current joke, like Hot Pockets claiming they wouldn’t cause your bowels to erupt). It’s a rebooted franchise – essentially a remake of an earlier film that came out of the same studio a decade ago. However, there were always elements that hinted at Sony and direct Marc Webb going big instead of going home. A new synopsis, uncovered by the Times of India (via Screen Rant), shows off exactly what they mean by an untold story, and as it matches up to the original Sam Raimi film – it’s pretty damned untold. Sure, there are the teenage elements of angst and that certain feeling of being lost in a sea of hormones without a rudder or a helping hand. Hopefully there will be some playfulness and some sarcasm. Of course there will be a spider bite. All of it rings familiar, except the rest of the plot. In fact, much like a comic book, it reads like an alternate history of a character delivered by a new writer. Check it out for yourself:

The marketing machine behind The Amazing Spider-Man, the upcoming reboot of Peter Parker’s coming-of-age origin tale, hasn’t been giving us much to chew on lately. It was all the way back in July when they released the first teaser trailer for the film and here we are, entering a new year and still only teased. Though there is no indication of when the studio might release a meatier trailer with more finished effects work, so we can get a better idea of how this movie is really going to look, there were a handful of still images recently released via the movie’s official Facebook page. These new images don’t focus so much on Spider-Man and his battles with the villainous Lizard, but they do give us a glimpse into the sequences where he’s figuring out his powers. There seem to be scenes where he discovers that he suddenly has what it takes to fight back against bullies, that he has mad ups on the basketball court, and that it’s not so hard to swing around on suspended chains at abandoned construction sights as it used to be. I think it’s all a metaphor for puberty. Also there’s a shot of Emma Stone all decked out in her Gwen Stacy garb and holding some hefty books to remind us that Gwen Stacy is and forever shall be a prettier, smarter, less annoying romantic interest for Peter to pursue than that catchphrase-spewing ball of drama Mary Jane Watson.

The theatrics have almost all but gone from Comic-Con. Last year it was a genuine moment between a young fan and Ryan Reynolds delivering the Green Lantern Oath that brought down the house. This year’s biggest scene was more planned out, but it was nonetheless genuine. Before the Amazing Spider-Man panel in Hall H, a crazed fan dressed up as Spidey rushed the Q&A microphone and started raving about the comic books to great applause. Then he took off his mask. And there’s video.

For all we know, The Amazing Spider-Man could turn out to be a lot of fun. It does have a lot of things going for it, such as a very solid cast — the likes of Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Dennis Leary, Rhys Ifans, the list goes on. It also has a director in Marc Webb who has shown a fair amount of promise. Then there’s the stuff that doesn’t bode well for the franchise reboot, namely the retelling of Spidey’s origin story and, well, this awful trailer. In fairness, it’s not a complete wreck. The first 3/4 of this trailer show some visual panache, some characters we’ll recognize and that same old spider bite. The last bit, one would imagine, is a CGI sequence intended to show off the 3D elements of the film. It looks like something we’d be playing on a Playstation, not seeing a movie theater. See for yourself via the official embed just after the break.

In the newest edition of Entertainment Weekly, Andrew Garfield is keen to point out that his work in the new Amazing Spider-Man isn’t a “replacement” for the work done by Tobey Maguire even though, by definition, it is. While Sony won’t be scouring the world destroying copies of the other movies, Garfield is undoubtedly the new face of the franchise. That status was made official with the first look at his character  in action – perched on a subway train ceiling, clinging to Emma Stone while shirtless and staring over his shoulder dramatically. Ladies and gentlemen, here’s your new Spider-Man:

James Vanderbilt, the man who wrote the script for Sony’s upcoming franchise relaunch The Amazing Spider-Man, has already been put to work writing the script for the sequel. And I don’t mean that he’s just getting some ideas together. Heat Vision reports that he has already met with studio execs, got the thumbs up for his proposal, and has been sent off to put pen to paper. Is this good news? Is this bad news? How do we react to something like this? Not only has the first film yet to be released, it hasn’t even finished shooting. What we might have stumbled upon here with this bite of news is the ultimate example of modern information overload. But, despite all that, I’m kind of happy to hear that a sequel is already in the works. If you would have told me when I was walking out of Spider-Man 3 that I would be looking forward to a reboot of the franchise I would have thought you were crazy. If you told me I would be ready for it only a couple years after Raimi’s trilogy ended I would have had you committed. But here I am kind of looking forward to seeing The Amazing Spider-Man. I think it mostly has to do with the actors. Andrew Garfield really charmed me last year in The Social Network, and Emma Stone is just a doll. I would be looking forward to any project that paired these two promising young names up. [Due to Content Scraping and Theft, we have been forced to try abbreviated feeds. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and woud very much appreciate you clicking through to view the full article on FilmSchoolRejects.com]

As the only literate Reject, it’s my duty to find the latest, the greatest and the untouched classics that would make great source material for film adaptations. I read so you don’t have to. “Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.” I have no idea what a bumblepuppy is, but Neil Postman was right to point out that while Orwell (and especially his “1984″) cautioned against tyrannical thought-police shoving rats in our faces to get us to comply, Aldous Huxley was more concerned with a governmental structure that shoved pleasure and an overload of information and distraction in our faces to get us to comply. Orwell is what happens post-apocalyptically. Huxley is what happens when society prospers beyond our wildest dreams. It’s unclear why a feature film has never been made of “Brave New World.” It’s baffling actually because the material there is so rich. With the completely average trailer for Atlas Shrugged out this week, it got me thinking about the classic philosophical novel that I identify with the most, what shaped my thinking most when I was younger, and the prospect of that novel becoming a movie. Here’s how I’d want to see it done, and in the effort to make it as viable as possible, my dreamcasting is all also economically viable for any studio who would take the chance on this brand. In [Due to Content Scraping and Theft, we have been forced to try abbreviated feeds. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and woud very much appreciate you clicking through to view the full article on FilmSchoolRejects.com]

The new generically titled Spider-Man movie is no longer generically titled. It shall now be titled The Amazing Spider-Man, which everyone expected and might be a little presumptuous. Fortunately, the production has also released a beautiful, very large portrait of the suit in all its glory. Check it out for yourself:

A masked vigilante is terrorizing the city, and Aint It Cool has gotten some wonderful (if not slightly blurry) photos of the culprit. Plus, TMZ even has video of the guy doing a flip into a moving vehicle. Prepare for the inundation of Spider-Man stuff. The first official picture of Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker opened a flood gate that has people asking about manual spider webs and hunting down the set to take pictures and video. In a way, it feels like the good old days. Folks passionate about movies are snapping off unauthorized content and sending it in to their favorite movie sites (and TMZ). The nostalgia is palpable. So is the blue and red spandex.

It’s been another awesome week here at Film School Rejects. We launched several new columns, including our first action-centric weekly romp (Bullet Points), a feature focused on Cole Abaius and Landon Palmer’s IM conversations (Talking Heads) and our two new dailies (Vintage Trailer and News After Dark) are going strong. The hard work is happening, and hopefully you’ve noticed. If not, that’s okay. You will soon. For now, lets focus on the best articles of the week as we explore The Week That Was.

He’s already got some scars on his cheek and some tears in his spandex. The reboot of Spider-Man has a lot to prove. It’s a continuation of a franchise with none of the previous players, a restart for something still fresh in the minds of fans. Still, this first picture of Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man goes a long way to help out. Normally, flat pictures don’t do much to help the look of a grown man in a goofy outfit, but here, Peter Parker not only looks ready to scrap – he looks like he just did.

With this entry, we will have made it an entire week with my new-fangled column, known to you as Movie News After Dark. Congratulations to the seven (or so) of you who have been following along. It’s been a blast. It seems fitting that on a day when I spent more than the necessary amount of time on Twitter bemoaning the fact that most movie blogs don’t care about real movie discussions (they only — I argued — want to republish the top ten lists of filmmakers who saw 11 movies in 2010), that I bring you several news stories that are rather silly. It may be hypocritical in your minds, but what makes it okay is the fact that I really love you, dear readers. And those other sites don’t love you. Trust me, I heard them say it.

Hey, you. Yes, you. No, not that person behind you who seems curiously intent on strangling you with a stand of fishing line. You. I’m guessing you are here because you want to know what’s going on in the world of movies? And chances are you’ve had about enough of the “Film School Rejects attitude” seen in other, more wordy editorials. I’m here to rescue you and give you only the news that you crave as we both stare up at the moon together. And just as you realize that the guy behind you was, in fact, killing you this whole time, you are also going to realize something else: I’m delivering the news with attitude, as well. What can I say, it’s late…

As 500 Days of Summer director Marc Webb gets closer to putting Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) into Spidey’s spandex, casting of the smaller roles continues. We’ve already got the principles for Sony’s next Spider-Man reboot: Garfield as Parker, Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, Rhys Ifans as The Lizard, Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben and Sally Field as Aunt May. Now we get to add Denis Leary as George Stacy, the father of Gwen.

It is a shame and guilt that will weigh on him for years. Heatvision is reporting that Martin Sheen – whose entire, storied filmography is overshadowed by his striking ability to put on a sport coat by sliding both arms in at the same time (see The West Wing for proof) – is at the one-yard negotiation line to join the rebooted Spider-Man as Peter Parker’s tragic Uncle Ben. Jokes aside, it’s difficult to see this as being anything but stellar news. Andrew Garfield is a strong acting talent, and Sheen is almost unmatched when he puts on the father figure voice. It’s just one more hit to those who don’t believe comic book movies can’t pull in profound actors (even if they are destroying the industry). Now to see if his son will play the criminal that Spider-Man refuses to catch.

Since we already have a stellar review of Never Let Me Go from Lauren, and since it’s a film that demands a bit more investigation, there’s nothing like a list of things liked and things not liked in order to get all the thoughts straight. The film saw a limited release (and was one of the Secret Screenings at Fantastic Fest), but it never made it beyond the coastal markets. Still, it promises to have at least some sort of presence during awards season and DVD and Blu-ray will give even more people the opportunity to see it. Without further ado, here are the 10 things I liked about it, and the 5 I didn’t.

The casting for Spider-Man keeps going strong, yet it feels like only yesterday they were announcing Willem Dafoe as the main villain for Spider-Man. Sony doesn’t want to give away who he’ll be playing, but they are willing to announce that it’ll be Rhys Ifans stepping up to the plate and battling Andrew Garfield’s Peter Parker. Yes, since you were thinking it, this makes Spider-Man even more British. Ifans is a competent choice. It’s laudable that they’re choosing to cast strong acting talents, but Sony had that same game plan the first go ’round, so it’s not wholly unexpected. No word yet on which villain it’ll be, but Ifans’s physicality lends itself more to The Vulture than it does to The Rhino. What villain do you think he’ll be?

Sony’s newly rebooting Spider-Man, under the direction of Marc Webb (500 Days of Summer) and lead of Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) appears to have secured a feisty red-head blonde for its Mary Jane Watson Gwen Stacy. Emma Stone, known for her roles in Superbad, Zombieland and the recently released comedy Easy A, is said to be on the cusp of being has been offered the role. Mary Jane Stacy will be a second primary love interest in this new saga, according to reports, as the film will first introduce (the currently not cast) Gwen Stacy Mary Jane Watson as Peter Parker’s secondary lady. With the casting of Stone, Sony is showing their hand in wanting to take things in a different direction. She’s sexier, sassier and plenty more dynamic and fiery than her predecessor, Kirsten Dunst Bryce Dallas Howard. To say the least, I approve. [Deadline]

The Social Network is nothing new, but that’s kind of the point. Its structure creates a story of uniquely American ingenuity, individualism, and capital that we’ve seen often, one that follows beat-for-beat the formula of young, ambitious, humble beginnings to meteoric rise toward contested success to the people that really mattered being inevitably pushed out of the way. It is in The Social Network’s belonging to that subgenre which draws apt comparison to films like Citizen Kane, Sweet Smell of Success, or There Will Be Blood – not qualitative comparisons, mind you (the very title of Citizen Kane has become an inescapable and meaningless form of hyperbole in that regard), but comparable in terms of basic narrative structure and genre play. Such narratives are perhaps more common in films depicting less legitimate business practices – gangster films – which also catalog the rise in stature but fall in character of an outcast who uses the system for their own advantage. From starry-eyed associations with questionable made men (Timberlake’s Sean Parker and the debaucheries of success associated with him) to the inevitable “hit” on one’s kin in the best interest of the business (Zuckerberg and Parker firing Eduardo Saverin), The Social Network is something of a Goodfellas for geeks. Why is it that the first major studio film about the phenomenon of social networking feels like such a familiar movie? Why does it resort to well-honed, expertly crafted but familiar cinematic territory instead of pioneering unexplored terrain analogous to the phenomenon [Due to Content Scraping and Theft, we have been forced to try abbreviated feeds. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and woud very much appreciate you clicking through to view the full article on FilmSchoolRejects.com]