Dammit, still no bloody artwork for this on the Sony UK press site, and it was listed there months ago... Still, can anyone say 'cash-in'?

Nice artwork.  I wonder if the 8 extra minutes will add anything useful.

8 minutes maybe borrow it from a friend.

Man this took long to come out.  Campy looking cover, too.  I'll keep my two disc, although a free ticket to S3 would have tempted me.

I wonder if the remastered video and audio could possibly be better than the superbit version? I'm guessing it wont be in DTS. Which rocked the house on the superbit. And what are the extras gonna be on disc 2? The extras on the special edition were pretty good.

Not worth it.

People, if you have the cable channel FX, they aired this extended cut of "Spider-Man 2" in January and it is nothing special. Most of the scenes are just added exposition/extended versions of scenes. The runaway train sequence and fight at the dock sequence are just the same as in the theatrical cut, the only extended fight sequence I can think of is the one where Doc Ock robs the bank while Peter and Aunt May are there, and it's not that special.

Besides, the original 2-disc special edition already has a good picture and excellent Dolby Digital 5.1 track (and the Superbit has DTS), so unless Sony remixed the audio in DD-EX surround and gave the video the Lowry treatment, not much to improve upon. And the extras in the 2004 edition are copious and cover almost every aspect of the production.

I do applaud Sony for not making this an entirely barebones release - I'd consider buying it if it included a free ticket to see "Spider-Man 3".

I still don't get the .1. Is it only 1/10 better than the regular Spiderman 2? Why didn't they pull a Fox and do Spiderman 2.5, at least it makes sense and doesn't sound [as] stupid. Or, whatever just happened to Spiderman 2 : Extended Cut.

i agree with some of you... if a free ticket for S3 comes inside of it... done deal!

the cover art looks so much better!!!

I'm a big Spidey fan, so I'll probably at least rent this.

Yeah, I watch the FX cut in pieces, and I know is they Superman II'd it and put a bunch of scenes in front of the title sequence.  Normally it wouldn't be such a bad idea, only that they way they edited it was strange and the Marvel logo came after they showed a rewind from the first and the music stops and restarts wierd.

It felt like something I would do on Vegas rather than something a big movie studio would do for a re-release.  Anyway, my brother already has 1 & 2, and I'll wait for 3 before I buy my own copies.

It is just my opinion..but I find Spiderman series the worst of all comic-book adaptations. I just don't like it..and I can't even point out why.

Oddly enough, I never bought this movie. So, I'll be sure to pick up this one.

bondfool wrote: OOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHH!  Eight whole minutes!   Six of which may be in the credits.  I pooping my pants as we speak!

Well, the 8 minutes extra in Superman: The Movie weren't too bad and were definitely noticeable changes, so I wouldn't slag them off just yet.

Chris Johnson wrote: £ukasz D wrote: It is just my opinion..but I find Spiderman series the worst of all comic-book adaptations. I just don't like it..and I can't even point out why.
I'm not a fan of them either. I find the acting horrid and Sam Raimi's style doesn't fit. I also found the 2nd one to be too much like a soap opera. But I still wouldn't call either the worst comic book movies out there. "Hulk" earned that award rather painfully.

It's funny how people flocked to see this and slagged off Superman Returns for not having enough action, when it probably had just as much as this.  I don't agree with you about Hulk though, I thought that was a decent film.  It's definitely a film you either love or hate though, but I personally found it really enjoyable and enjoyed seeing what an otherwise arthouse director can do with a hollywood film.

I'll probably pick this from some sale later on.