The Differences between the reboot The Amazing Spiderman and previous spiderman franchise

When Spider-Man swings back into theaters, there will be some big changes in store for audiences accustomed to the previous franchise.



The trailer yielded lots of new details about Peter Parker’s upcoming return to the big screen, but one of the most significant takeaways from it was confirmation of some of the ways this version of the webslinger will differ from his big-screen predecessor.

British actor Andrew Garfield puts on the webbed mask and replaces previous franchise headliner Tobey Maguire this time around, but that’s not the only big change audiences should expect from what’s being billed as the “untold story” of Spider-Man.

Here are five more changes you can look forward to when your friendly neighborhood wall-crawler swings into theaters in July.

Mechanical Web-Shooters

Same Raimi’s “Spider-Man” franchise became the target of much criticism early on when it was revealed that Peter Parker’s webs would be an organic product of his mutation rather than the wrist-mounted mechanical devices he uses in the comics. That diversion from the source material is corrected in Marc Webb’s upcoming reboot of the franchise, as the new footage clearly shows Peter Parker developing, testing, and making ample use of artificial webs and a web-shooter with a red glow. In one particular scene, Peter is seen fiddling with the web-shooter and accidentally setting it off, resulting in his face being webbed to the device. In another scene, Spider-Man toys with a car thief before sticking him to a wall with a series of web shots — with the red glow of the web-shooter pulsing each time he slings a web at his target. There’s also a nice, up-close shot of the web-shooter itself in the new trailer for “The Amazing Spider-Man.”

Quipping while Thwipping
Rather than the progressively more angsty, emo Peter Parker we saw in the last “Spider-Man” franchise, the webslinger is clearly returning to his joke-a-minute roots in “The Amazing Spider-Man.” In the footage shown yesterday, there were very few scenes of Spidey in costume that didn’t also involve a steady stream of jokes coming from the wall-crawler. During the aforementioned run-in with the car thief, Spider-Man toys with the criminal for a while as only a high-school kid can, dropping to his knees when the guy pulls a knife and exclaiming, “Oh no, is that a real knife? Aargh! That’s my only weakness!” — only to stick him to the wall with a barrage of webs a second later. If nothing else, this film’s take on Spidey brings him back to being that playful brat fans love, but criminals hate.

Spider-Man is Public Enemy #1
With the exception of eternal Spidey-hater J. Jonah Jameson, the previous “Spider-Man” films were largely a webslinger love-fest, with Peter Parker enjoying life as a celebrated hero loved by the public. This time around, Spider-Man clearly won’t be winning any popularity polls, as the new footage included quite a few scenes in which Spider-Man is being chased, attacked by, or attacking police officers around New York. To make matters worse, much of that anti-Spidey sentiment seems to come from Gwen Stacy’s father, George Stacy (played by Denis Leary), a high-ranking NYPD officer. One especially tense scene shown during the preview event featured Peter and Mr. Stacy arguing about Spider-Man’s intentions over dinner and making things extremely uncomfortable for Gwen.

He Does Whatever a Spider Can
While past installments of “Spider-Man” on the big screen did a great job of presenting the range of Peter Parker’s spider-given abilities, “The Amazing Spider-Man” appears to be taking things one step further when it comes to Spidey’s enhanced agility and “spider sense.” In the footage shown during yesterday’s event, there was one particularly great scene in which Spider-Man is seen dodging bullets by first twisting from side to side and then flipping over the gunman in one fluid motion from a standing position. Rather than presenting his enhanced reaction time via a sudden switch to slow-motion (a la the previous films), “The Amazing Spider-Man” appears to take the opposite approach, with the world moving at normal speed while Spider-Man reacts instantaneously to everything that occurs. In the aforementioned scene, Spider-Man dodges left, then right, at the same time each shot is fired, and then jumps behind the gunman the moment the third shot is fired — mimicking the sort of blink-and-you-miss-it movement of real-world spiders when threatened.

Loving the Man, Not the Mask. During the preview event for “The Amazing Spider-Man,” actress Emma Stone explained that one key difference between her character, Gwen Stacy, and Peter Parker’s love interest from the previous films, Mary Jane Watson, is that Gwen falls in love with Peter, not Spider-Man. That difference might seem small when mentioned in passing, but it’s a key component of Peter Parker’s history in both the comics and, apparently, in the upcoming film. During one scene shown during the event, Gwen is seen telling Peter — who happens to be wearing his Spider-Man costume at the time — that she already worries about whether her policeman father will come home every night, and stresses that she doesn’t want to have the same concerns about Peter. Along the same lines, Gwen and Peter’s relationship appears to develop well before he dons a costume and starts fighting bad guys. When measured against the infamous upside-down Spidey kiss between Mary Jane and Peter in the first “Spider-Man” film and the struggles he had convincing Mary Jane to love him when he wasn’t wearing the mask, this dynamic should make for a major tonal shift in the reboot that sets “The Amazing Spider-Man” apart from the previous franchise.

/sources

CLAUSE 15.0 - PRACTICAL COMPLETION AND DEFECTS LIABILITY

PAM 98 Clause 15.1 has defined 'Practical Completion' as follows: When the Architect is of the opinion that the works are practically completed,meaning that the Contractor has performed and completed all the necessasry Works specified in the Contract and the patent defects existing in such Works are "de minimis", the Architect shall forthwith issue a Certificate of Practical Completion.

The words 'de minimis' are derived from the maxim 'de minimin non curat lex' meaning 'law does not concern itself with trifles.' However, without referring to further case law, the term is difficult to understand. The term 'de minimis' was used in the case of H.W. Neville (Sunblest) ltd v William Press (1981) 20 BLR 78 where the judge said: 'I think the word practically complete..gave the Architect a discretion to certify that the Contractor had fulfilled its obligation...where very minor de minimis work had not been carried out, but if there were any patent defects...the Architect could not have given a certificate of practical completion.'

It must be noted that under PAM 98 definition, Practical Completion can be issued when '...the patent defects existing in such Works are "de minimis...' whereas under the definition in Neville (Sunblest), there should be no patent defects. The PAM 98 definition allowing for patent defects is therefore contrary to the definition in Neville (Sunblest).

For a more detailed understanding of Practical Completion,please also refer to the cases of Westminster County Council v J Jarvis [7 BLR 64], Emson Eastern Ltd v EME Development Ltd [55 BLR 114], and Mariner International Hotel v Atlas [2007] 1 HKLRD 413.

To be continued on Clause 15.1 Practical Completion And Defects Liability.

/sources from Handbook For PAM Contract 2006

Contrasting Concepts of Harmony in Architecture: The 1982 Debate Between Christopher Alexander and Peter Eisenman

Just an old interesting reading article i like to share.

Contrasting Concepts of

Harmony in Architecture:

 

The 1982 Debate Between

Christopher Alexander

and Peter Eisenman

An Early Discussion of the "New Sciences" of

Organised Complexity in Architecture 

Editors’ Introduction

This legendary debate took place at the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, on November 17^th 1982. Not long before it, Alexander had given a talk on The Nature of Order, which was to become the subject of his magnum opus of architectural philosophy. The original version he envisaged was less than half the size of the final four-volume work as it now stands, but its main ideas were already formulated.

 

Before the debate Eisenman had listened to the tape of Alexander's talk – one of the first public presentations of the ideas in The Nature of Order. What followed was thus partly shaped by those ideas. What ensued can be said to represent an historic occasion: Alexander is presenting his basis for the New Paradigm in Architecture at the same time as Eisenman presents his competing, diametrically opposed, deconstructivist claim for such a Paradigm.

 

The importance of the debate has been widely recognised. Twenty years later, the Harvard Graduate School of Design republished it alongside three other seminal documents from the post-1969 period: an early piece by Alexander Tzonis on the “end of ideology in architecture”, excerpts from a 1994 conference on “De-naturalized Urbanity”, and a recent debate on urbanism between Rem Koolhaas and Andres Duany. Some people may only have heard of the 1982 encounter because Alexander said Eisenman was “fucking up the world" in a public forum; but if this is all one knows about it, one is not prepared for the generally good-natured tone of most of the exchanges.

READ MORE HERE @ www.katarxis3.com

 

Brief bio of Christopher Alexander:

Christopher Wolfgang Alexander (born October 4, 1936 in Vienna, Austria) is a registered architect noted for his theories about design, and for more than 200 building projects in California, Japan, Mexico and around the world. Reasoning that users know more about the buildings they need than any architect could, he produced and validated (in collaboration with Sarah Ishikawa and Murray Silverstein) a "pattern language" designed to empower anyone to design and build at any scale. Alexander is often overlooked by texts in the history and theory of Architecture because his work intentionally disregarded contemporary Architecture discourse, appealing more through methods consistent with his theories than through established practices. As such, Alexander is widely considered to occupy a place outside the discipline, the discourse, and the practice of Architecture. In 1958 he moved from England to the United States, living and teaching in Berkeley, California from 1963. He is professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. Now retired (though still active), he is based in Arundel, Sussex, UK.
/source Wikipedia


Brief bio of Peter Eisenman:

Peter Eisenman (born August 11, 1932 in Newark, New Jersey) is an American architect. Eisenman's professional work is often referred to as formalist, deconstructive, late avant-garde, late or high modernist, etc. A certain fragmenting of forms visible in some of Eisenman's projects has been identified as characteristic of an eclectic group of architects that were (self-)labeled as deconstructivists, and who were featured in an exhibition by the same name at the Museum of Modern Art. The heading also refers to the storied relationship and collaborations between Peter Eisenman and post-structuralist thinker Jacques Derrida.
/source Wikipedia