Amazing Spider Man 2

[marvelguy25]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlR-dgJsYMI

39:01-41:22

41:29-42:15

43:27-47:36

33:20-34:35

1:04:09-01:04:51

any thoughts?


did peter even learn anything in this film? what was the moral anyway?

will sony will the rights? any news on that because i really want them to lose it

[marvelguy25]

Granted, but the thing we have to also take into consideration is that Webb, Kurtzman, and Orci did know that the first Amazing Spider-Man was supposed to be the first film in a new film franchise, so it was expected of them to make sequels for that franchise. Also, let's not forget that Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 also came out two years after his first Spider-Man film, and Spider-Man 2 is considered to be not only better than the first but one of the best comic book films ever made. Still, you do make a very salient point: Sony's need to have a Spider-Man film practically every year is going to lead to rush jobs and that's going to affect the overall results and quality of those films.

you know what would be BS? despite hard evidence that marc webb is a talented director with the deleted scenes, pre visualization, and whatever scenes that were originally in this movie people are gonna give him crap for a new project regardless of having freedom and lots of talents because they somewhat have their code as critics, their pride and mostly their ego. seriously, i've ran into a number of stubborn people online and it is really irritating to sit through.

[marvelguy25]

so if by chance marvel does get the rights back do you think andrew will reprise the role or will someone like dylan o'brian take over?

[Punisher007]

I think that the problem is much more with Sony wanting to build this bigger universe. That's not a problem in and of itself, but it did force them to cram A LOT into this film (which hurt it as a standalone piece). With the Raimi films, it seemed like Sony gave Raimi and co a lot more freedom to do their own thing (minus forcing him to add Venom into SM 3 of course). I would be curious to find out how much of this movie's problems were the screenwriters fault and how much was the studio forcing things on them (though I doubt that we'll ever know for sure). The stuff that really worked in the movie was the stuff NOT connecting to building up the greater universe. It's a lot like IM 2 in that regard. Still, there was enough good stuff here that I'm still looking forward to TASM 3.

[jgprime]

did peter even learn anything in this film? what was the moral anyway?

Peter learns that there is a weight to being Spider-Man. It is as much a curse as it is a blessing. He keeps investigating the secrets sorrounding his parents and keeps secrets from Aunt May, who is in turn hurt at watching her adoptive son chasing ghosts. Pete wants to honour Capt. Stacy's promise yet he gets back together with Gwen. Harry is obsessive with finding a cure for a disease that he doesn't even understand yet Peter's ambivalent about handing his blood because it could worsen Harry's condition. Peter ultimately loses Gwen & Harry, and only has enough time to make things right with Aunt May. Peter stops being Spider-Man & mourns Gwen for 5 months, the words of Aunt May & Gwen then remind him that he can't mourn forever, he has to start to move on. Instead of being held down by Gwen's death and clinging to what has happened in the past, Peter has to treasure the moments he had with Gwen and become a stronger person. Pete's duty as Spider-Man & as a symbol for hope is calling him, so he hits the webs again.

Say what you want about Electro & Harry, but Peter's story with Gwen & Aunt May and the overall moral of the movie is very well done (at least in my opinion).

As many posters and the film makers have said before on this forum and in other media, there is an overall moral of how our time is constantly running out and sometimes we don't even know it. It is up to us to decide what we're going to do with it, especially with the people we care about.

Also if Spidey ever shows up in the MCU they will obviously recast Garfield as Peter. The man in my opinion owns the role, as Peter Parker and as Spider-Man. The tone of ASM now fits pretty well with the MCU so there's no need to reboot it again. Dylan O'Brien needs to stay the hell away.

[normanosborn]

Peter learns that there is a weight to being Spider-Man. It is as much a curse as it is a blessing. He keeps investigating the secrets sorrounding his parents and keeps secrets from Aunt May, who is in turn hurt at watching her adoptive son chasing ghosts. Pete wants to honour Capt. Stacy's promise yet he gets back together with Gwen. Harry is obsessive with finding a cure for a disease that he doesn't even understand yet Peter's ambivalent about handing his blood because it could worsen Harry's condition. Peter ultimately loses Gwen & Harry, and only has enough time to make things right with Aunt May. Peter stops being Spider-Man & mourns Gwen for 5 months, the words of Aunt May & Gwen then remind him that he can't mourn forever, he has to start to move on. His duty as Spider-Man & as a symbol for hope is calling Pete, so he hits the webs again.

Say what you want about Electro & Harry, but Peter's story with Gwen & Aunt May and the overall moral of the movie is very well done (at least in my opinion).

Overall as many posters and the film makers have said before on this forum and in other media that there is an overall moral of how our time is running out and sometimes we don't even know it. It is up to us to decide what we're going to do with it, especially with the people we care about.

Also if Spidey ever shows up in the MCU they will obviously recast Garfield as Peter. The man in my opinion owns the role, as Peter Parker and as Spider-Man. The tone of ASM now fits pretty well with the MCU so there's no need to reboot it again. Dylan O'Brien needs to stay the hell away.

I gotta agree that Peter's relationships with Gwen and May were done really well in the film, one of the best things in it for sure.

[Scott Taylor]

Electro's amount of development was fine; has he ever had much motivation? He's always been a grunt and not a mastermind.

Exactly. Same goes for Rhino. And both of them were defeated quite easily and never posed that much of a threat. The movie would have made no sense to me if Electro had been turned into a serious threat. Raimi took the number 1, number 2 and number 3 Spidey villains in his movies. Webb and Co. seem to be going for the rest. Which is ok, but if you use those B and C list villains, and do it right, then the villains just aren't going to ever be the focus.

I enjoyed this so much more than the last one. Spider-Man should be fun and tragic at the same time. The initial reboot forgot that first part.

The tone of this movie was just about spot on, with Spidey beign genuinely funny and devil-may-care and Peter being a mix of emo (the good way to show it) and sort of flakey.

EDIT: Oh, the one thing I really didn't like was Harry's transformation into the Goblin. Why did he decide he should put that suit on? Why does it have a glider? Or frigging PUMPKIN BOMBS? Seems way out of place amidst all the animal-themed stuff.

Harry's transformation was awfully quick. Seemed they could have had a little more build up there, maybe by scrapping the whole Spidey-blood storyline and starting earlier with him seeking the venom. I'm convinced that for those who feel the movie was crowded with villains, it was Harry that took it over the top. I didn't mind, it seemed alot like a comic book to me.

[Slade Wilson]

Finally seen the movie last night. And I wholeheartedly agree with DC Comics writer Scott Snyder who tweeted about the film "People are way too harsh on it" .

Personally I am baffled by the mediocre reviews (only 54 % at rottentomatoes) and the negative voices from the fandom which claim that this is yet another bad movie like Spider-Man 3 was. I must have watched a very different movie then.

In my opinion, while still flawed in places, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is pretty much the best Spidey movie besides Raimis Spider-Man 2. It is much more breathtaking and powerful then Raimis and Webbs first films and superior (no pun intended^^) to Raimis 3rd film in pretty much every way.

but moreso in my opinion this film is also by far the most true and faithful Spider-Man adaptation yet. In fact in terms of tone and characterization this movie is lightyears above all of Raimis films and just finally the Spider-Man that I had wanted to see on the big screen for the last 10 years or so. When Webb rebooted the series, most people said the reboot was unnecessary. But without it , we would have never gotten this kind of Spider-Man and for that alone I am beyond happy about the reboot. It should have been done this way already 10 years ago.

Before I get started, here a bit of information of my personal history with Spider-Man and his world:

Besides the X-Men (which got me into comics with the Jim Lee comics in 1993), Spider-Man was the first superhero I ever loved. I read my first Spidey comic I think back in 1991 or 1992. I remember it was a story with Spider-Man fighting Dock Ock and I was confused that in the other stories in the comic (It was a paperback) his costume was all black. A year later X-Men then made me a comic fan and I also started reading Spidey regularly now. Those were the days of McFarlane, Larsen and Michelinie. Their style really impacted me and "formed" me as a comics fan along with the work of Jim Lee on X-Men, which is most likely why the early 90s is still my most favorite Marvel era ever and remains unmatched for me until this day. Especially the artwork.

I became a huge X-Men and Spidey fan and not only read their issues monthly but also read up on their history a lot. This was before the days of wikipedia and I was barely 12 years old. I studied encyclopedias and official handbooks and all that stuff. I would do nothing else but reading up on X-Men and Spidey history for days and nights. Eventually I was a dedicated reader and collector of Spider-Mans for about 15 years - until Marvel unleashed "One More Day". That story didnt just broke my heart, it insulted me as a Spider-Man fan and I copuld no longer support Marvels actions with this character. I felt betrayed and for the first time since the early 90s I dropped all my Spidey books and I have since never read another new issue of Spider-Man. Especially not after they got rid of Peter and established Superior Spidey. While I know there are many people who praise what Slott has done with Superior, the very concept of it is offending to me as a yearlong fan of the character. In fact so far I have not picked up a single Spider-Man comic ever written by Slott. His era kind of began when I jumped ship. Now that they have brought Peter back and Amazing is relaunching, the movie has made me concidered for the first time in over 5 years to give Spider-Man (or rather Marvel) a new chance and picking up the new book. But after what Marvel has done to this character in the last decade, I have become very careful and pessimistic.


Webb Vs Raimi

Raimis films were always kind of a mixed bag to me. On the one hand the visuals, music and especially storylines were absolutely amazing and to see Spider-Man in live action swinging through NYC and battle the likes of Goblin and Dock Ock was a dream come true. especially the Dock Ock stuff made me gasp with joy and excitement and god Danny Elfmans music was so perfect.

On the other hand, Raimi never could get the characters right. I dont get why people praise Tobey Maguire so much as Spider-Man. He was terrible. He was nothing (as in zero) like the Peter or Spidey from the comics. He was not fun (Most of the humor came from things being done to him instead of him being funny), he was whiny and emo all the time and he was NEVER cool. His facial expressions were always so awkward and I could just never believe him to be my Peter Parker. THE Peter Parker. As Spider-Man he was even worse. He had nothing of Spideys funny attitude or his lighthearted style. The costume was awesome but everything else about him wasnt.

Mary-Jane was even worse. In the comics I LOVE Mary-Jane, I love her more than Peter does lol. Although Gwen is sacred to me and Felicia Hardy is always my nr.1 Marvel girl, I do love Mary-Jane like crazy. But Kirsten Dunst (much like Tobey) was an utter failure in the role. She had nothing of MJs mindblowing beauty or fire and seemed like a completely different character. Yes she and Tobey had chemistry but not the kind of chemistry I want to see between Peter Parker and Mary-Jane Watson. It also felt often over the top and way too mushy and especially when Tobey would make his emo speeches it became downright cringeworthy.

I am not someone who has something against emotions in movies. I love emotions. I love epic love, friendship and all the powerful feelings of joy and sadness that come with it. There are several movies which had me get chilly and brought out the waterworks in my eyes. But in Raimis films it felt too awkward and overdone. It didnt feel right or organic. And it certainly did not feel like the epic love of Peter and MJ from the comics.

Then there is the villains. And thats where Raimi truly lost me. While I admit that Molina and Dafoe were absolutely brilliant in their roles, I hated some of the ways they were portrayed by the script. Ock being the victim thats being controlled by his tentacles or Norman who is Peters father figure and only a poor victim of the Goblin instead of Peters sworn blood enemy and powerhungry, insane psychopath - I hated this so much. I wanted the epic Peter vs Norman stuff from the comics in the films that we have seen in stories like Death of Gwen Stacy, the conclusion of the Clone Saga or Millars brilliant Marvel Knights: Spider-Man series.

the fact that they made Goblin look like a goofy Power Ranger didnt help much either (Why do they never give the Goblin a green/purple design?). While Sandman was mostly good (especially visually), turning him into Bens killer was just effed up. With Venom it was the other way around - the story was actually pretty good and mostly faithful to the comics but the casting of Topher Grace and Venoms much too slim design ruined much of that. And for the 4th movie Raimi wanted to turn the Vulture into Vulturess?! WTF?

Dock Ock was Raimis best villain adaptation but virtually every other villain was kind of ruined by him in my opinion - also because he was always so hellbent on making his villains as "human" as possible until they were all basically just tragic characters who werent so bad after all. Ugh.

And there were other things that I really hated about the Raimi films. Making MJ his first love instead of Gwen for example, only to bring in Gwen later as nothing but competetion for Gwen and as a means to screw up Peters relationship with MJ. Like for many other fans, Gwen is sacred to me and to treat her like that in Raimis films felt insulting and degrading.

I do admit that Raimi got several things perfectly right though. Spideys origin story was perfectly adapted, I loved Harrys story arc from friend to Goblin and then dying heroically. That was probably my most favorite thing in the Raimi films. Also J.Jonah Jameson was PERFECTLY cast. I am glad we didnt see him in the new film just yet because honestly I cant imagine anyone else but JK Simmons playing him. I also loved how Raimi adapted stories like "Spider-Man, no more" or the Venom Church scene or how he played with the references to the Death of Gwen-story in the climax of the first film. He also was a visual master, many of his visuals and action scenes in these films had such an iconic feel and impact to them.

So yeah in the end Raimis films were a very mixed bag to me. They were mostly good films and Spider-Man 2 was for the most part a truly fantastic film but none of his films ever were faithful or satisfying Spider-Man adaptations to me - especially when it came to characterization or casting choices of the lead characters.

So when Sony announced the reboot, I was one of the very few who got really excited. Because I felt that this was Sonys chance to finally give us the Spider-Man that Raimi never did. To me it was an oppertunity to start over and create a much more faithful version of that world - and with ASM 2 Webb finally is doing just that.

Admittedly Webbs first film was a bit rocky. While from the get go he established a much more faithful Spidey universe than Raimi did (especially when it comes to the characterization and casting of Peter), the movie often tried much too hard being different then Raimis first film just for the sake of being different and as a result the origin story in ASM 1 felt much less iconic and powerful then in Raimis film and sometimes almost like a mock up. I also hated how they tried to avoid the "With great power comes great responsibility" line just because Raimi had made it so famous for movie audiences because it is such a pivotal thing to the Spider-Man mythology and it was really missing in ASM (yet if they had included it EVERYONE would have accused them of copying Raimi too much - tough dilemma).

TO BE CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

[Slade Wilson]

And while the Lizard is a cool villain in the comics, he didnt translate that well to the screen in this version (Also because the design was pretty bad, should have gone with McFarlanes design) and certainly was not the best villain for an origin story of Spider-Man (then again neither was Chameleon, who was the first foe Spidey faced in the comics IIRC). Also I felt that the first ASM seemed often to hold back on the visuals and action and while never bad or dull, there was always the feeling that its simply not spectacular enough - especially when compared to The Avengers which was released only months before.

On the other hand, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone were absolutely perfect together and in those roles. Their portrayals and chemistry was everything I had always wanted to see in the Spidey films and everything Raimis films never had. Plus Webbs version was generally more faithful to the mythology, wether its the inclusion of webshooters and portraying Peter as funny and brilliant or respecting the Peter/Gwen relationship as Peters first true love before there even was a Mary-Jane.

But sadly the first ASM really was missing that iconic imagery and feeling that had defined Raimis first film so again this movie had been a mixed bag - just for very different reasons then Raimis films. In a way ASM was the exact opposite (Which is probably what they were going for to avoid comparisons as much as possible) but because it was so focused on distancing itself from raimis work, it felt a bit underwhelming and odd because if you want to do Spider-Mans origin and do it right, its inevitable to do some of the things Raimi did - because he did them so well. All in all I would say that the first ASM really suffered from trying to tell the same story as Raimis first film but make it as different as possible - which just doesnt work all that well.


The Amazing Spider-Man 2

ASM 2 doesnt have these problems. The movie really feels finally free of the similarities with Raimi and gets to do its very own thing. And that results in an infinitely better movie. I dont really get how ASM 2 has lower review scores than the first ASM or Spider-Man 3 (or even Raimis first) because it is so much better than all of them. Yes it is still flawed and particularly in the middle when Peter and Gwen are kind of on the outs it loses a lot of momentum and starts dragging along. In those moments the movie comes dangerously close to undoing its great work until then and drown in mediocrity but thankfully it picks up again before that can happen and the last 30 minutes or so are an absolute blast and the most spectacular, epic and heart-shredding stuff ever done in a Spider-Man movie. the visuals and action scenes are so much better than really anything from the first ASM. They throw it all against the wall here, just like I had always wanted to see in a Spidey movie. And the best thing is that virtually every actor has stepped up their game as well. Garfield is the perfect Spider-Man here. He just nails the character so much. His Spider-Man alone is worth the entire reboot in this. THIS is the Spider-Man that I know, love and always wanted to see.

The same goes for Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy. I already loved her in the first film but she is even twice as great in this one. her chemistry with Peter is just perfect, its everything I had always wanted to see with Peter and Gwen on the big screen. When Gwen makes her graduation speech I started to get the feeling that they would really do it and go for the Death of Gwen-story. And when that happened in the end - and more importantly the way they made it so MUCH like in the comics - it ripped my guts out. In the comics I got to Spidey when he already was with MJ and Gwen was always the great memory and pain from the past. Even though I had read the legendary Death of Gwen Story (I even got that awesome "Death of the Stacys" hardcover) and like every Spidey fan knew that story in and out, Gwens death still always felt like the past, like something that happened a long time ago, like a scar from old times.

Ever since she died, she has been referenced a lot in several of my most favorite Spidey stories and the emotional weight and importance of her and the pain of her loss is always present. And so is Peters fear of something like that ever happeneing again. Its ALWAYS there, its haunting him until this day (or at least until I dropped Spideys books :P ).

To finally see this most defining moment for real, in live-action, not as something from the past but as what is happening to Peter right here and now - its hard to put into words what I felt in that scene. I had pictured this scene for so often and so long and had always been afraid that they wouldnt do the enormity of that moment in the comics enough justice on film. That its done too quickly or not impactful and powerful enough. But Webb did it perfectly. While not 100 % like in the comics (I liked the fact that Peter and Gwen actually had their last romantic intimate moment on the bridge instead of killing her there like in te comics - that was a brilliant touch), it completely embodied that legendary scene in almost every way. The terror for Peter, seeing Gwen fall to her death, the unreality of that moment for him, his desperate attempt to catch her and than that final moment where her body breaks when the web reaches her - that moment hit me so hard. When Peter cried over her body, I cried with him. I cant remember when a superherofilm has had such a powerful emotional impact on me like in that scene. It was everything I could have possibly wanted from an adaptation of Gwen Stacys death and for that scene alone I love this movie more than any of Raimis films.

TO BE CONCLUDED IN NEXT POST

[Slade Wilson]

The villains were pretty cool too. Far better than the first ASM. Jamie Foxx was awesome as Electro. He was funny and odd as Max and once he embraced being Electro, he had some of the most badass and epic scenes in the film. The only thing I didnt like about him was that again he was very different from Max in the comics. I heard that he is more based on the Ultimate version (which I never read) so that make sense because he wasnt really much like 616 Electro. Still Foxx was very cool.

I understand that some people are upset that Spidey technically killed Electro (Its the Man of Steel controversy all over again it seems) but it didnt bother me very much to be honest. Spidey wasnt really planning on murdering Electro, just stopping him whatever it takes. Too many lives were at risk and Electro was enormously powerful in those moments (reminding me a lot of how he became much more powerful and deadly in Millars MK: Spider-Man run) and its possible that Spidey didnt even know that the overload would actually kill him and possibly thought it would only knock him out. In any way, it didnt really bother me and I am getting tired of these "controversies" every time a hero is responsible for a villains death.

To quote Hit-Girl "What is this, the Silver Age?" :P

Another complaint about the movie seems to be that it has "too many plots and characters". While that was true about Spider-Man 3 and Raimi wasnt really able to interweave these plots and characters very organically, making the movie feel like several episodes, the same doesnt apply to ASM 2. We had essentially two villains here and their plots were interweaved very cleverly in my opinion. It never felt too much for me or that it has too many characters. movies like Star Wars, Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings have far more characters or plots than ASM 2. hell the MCU films have more characters and more complicated plotlines than ASM 2. I really dont understand why a Spider-Man movie is suddenly "overloaden with plotlines and characters" when we have basically only two villains and a couple of plotlines (Harrys arc, Peter/Gwen, Peters father, Electro) that intersect quite organically with each other. I never felt that the movie was too overstuffed or anything. This was nothing like the debacle in Spider-Man 3.

I loved the inclusion of Ravencroft Institute and seeing all those easter eggs about Dock Ock, Vulture etc. That was pretty cool. Also loved Rhino at the end. I think the Rhino mech-suit is a pretty awesome concept and it looked really badass and made Rhino much more of a threat than just some guy in a grey spandex suit. Dane deHaan was really good as Harry and you could really see how he was more and more falling apart. Dane did a great job with that character. His transformation into the Goblin was pretty much a given and his scenes with Spidey and Gwen at the end were truly awesome and the best Spidey vs Goblin stuff we have ever seen yet. So much better than what Raimi did with him.

However while Harrys Goblin look in ASM 2 was an improvement over Raimis version(s), it still didnt look right yet. the armor was great but he really needed a mask instead of this deranged Joker-esque look. Though this version of Goblin was admittedly the first truly scary and creepy version of the character in live-action. Especially Harrys face and the way he speaks is really unsettling and almost disturbing. That Goblin insanity manifested itself here physically in ways we have never seen before and makes Dafoes Goblin almost laughable in comparison.

Also one thing that I really did not like at all is that Norman Osborn isnt the Goblin and only has like 5 minutes of creepy screentime before he dies. That was quite the diappointment because in my mind Norman is and always will be the one, true Green Goblin and Peters ultimate nemesis. I guess they didnt want to draw too much comparison to Raimis Norman/Goblin and thats why they do away with Norman quickly and make Harry the Goblin instead of making Harry Normans Goblin-successor. I still hated that though because it means that we once again wont get the epic Peter/Norman feud from the comics onscreen.

I also noticed that the scene from all of the trailers where Harry tells Peter that Oscorp has been monitoring him ("Why?" "Isnt that the question of the day") was not in the movie. Or did I miss this? Given that the scene was in virtually every trailer, it seemed weird to not see it in the film.

I also loved the introduction of "Felicia". I do assume that this is Felicia Hardy in disguise and in subsequent films we will see her taking the spotlight as Black Cat. As I said before Felicia is my absolute most favorite female Marvel character, I am just so utterly in love with her :P And one thing thats really pissed me off is how she always "almost" ends up in the movies but then only shows up in the very mediocre videogames. It cant be that hard to finally let her shine on the big screen. At least ASM 2 seems to give us a little glimpse of that and really appreciate that. I cant wait for Felicity Jones to go all out in the next films and break out the mask, claws and blonde hair God knows Peter could really use a shot of Party-Hardy right now

One thing that I still found very unimpressive and weak was the music though. I wish the ASM films would come up with a really iconic and powerful score like Elfman did for Raimis films but the ASM scores always feel so underwhelming. Its really hard to believe that ASM 2 was scored by the same man who scored Man of Steel because sadly ASM 2 had absolutely nothing of the epic and powerful music that MoS 2 had. usually Hans Zimmer is much much better than this.



So all in all I would say that Amazing Spider-Man 2 is NOWHERE near as mediocre or bad as most critics and many fans claim. To me it is one of the best Spider-Man films ever made and by far the one feeling most true and faithful to the comics. The movie finally delivers the kind of Spider-Man and the tone from the comics (both fun and emotional) that I had wanted to see on the big screen for a very long time and the last 20 Minutes or so had an enormous emotional impact on me in ways that very few superherofilms ever did.


I´d give the movie a very good 8/10.

PS: Sorry for the enormously novel-sized review but as a big Spidey fan who has only just seen the movie, there was just a lot on my mind about the experience and opinion on this film that I wanted to share.

[Punisher007]

The reason why lots of critics are having trouble with it is simple. BTW, again I did enjoy it despite my problems with some elements of it. The vast majority of critics are not comic book fans. They judge movies by film standards. Does it work as a film. Comics and film are different mediums and what works in one does not necessarily work in the other. The sudden tonal shifts may work fine in a Spidey comic book, but they don't work nearly as well in a movie. I'm a Spidey fan and know about this balance, and even I had problems with the tonal shifts in the movie, so I can completely understand why critics did as well. In the context of FILM (which are supposed to have a consistent tone), it feels jarring. The fact that there's such a huge difference in tone from the first Webb movie only adds to that. And critics judge characters by film standards as well. Again, Electro might be a loser in the comics, but most critics, and indeed most of the GA, don't know that. So this is the first time that many of them have seen Electro, and they didn't think that he was all that interesting. Again, it's understandable. These movies are ultimately for a GA, so you need to get them up to speed and this movie didn't do that very well. Stuff like character development, a bloated plot, etc are also film-specific problems. You can get away with shoving a lot of characters into a ongoing comic book series (or even a TV show like GOT) because you've got time to develop all of them. In a two to two and a half hour movie, there simply isn't enough time. SM 3 had this problem, and this movie (although it was still miles better than SM 3) made some of the same mistakes. What makes it all the more annoying here is that you would have thought that Sony would have learned from the mistakes of SM 3, but apparently not.

[Kevinroc]

I said before that I think it is a bad movie. A movie that I think defines "so bad it's good."

But the stuff with Richard Parker is just completely terrible. I hate everything about that plot. From the destiny aspect to Richard having a secret underground train lab. (What?! How does THAT work?!) A secret underground train lab that totally exonerates him and where he sent all evidence and...

Ugh... I hate that plot.

[Punisher007]

Really, you're really going to complain about the "underground hideout" in a comic book movie? Seriously, that's like complaining about there being bullets in a war movie.

[Batmankoff]

I can totally understand why some critics didn't like it. Watching the movie felt like marathoning a season of a TV show on Netflix, which is something you wouldn't do unless you were really captivated by it. I happen to love Spidey, so I had no problem doing this kind of "marathoning" in the sense that ASM 2 never came close to losing my attention over the 142 minutes. If somebody doesn't have that same knowledge and enthusiasm for the character that I have, I could totally imagine being bored or overwhelmed.

What I don't understand is the way people act like this was on par with Spider-Man 3 or Batman Forever. This movie did a LOT of things better than other superhero movies. Peter and Gwen are far and away the best couple in the history of superhero movies. I can't think of anyone that even comes close. As far as villains go, Dane Dehaan's Harry Osborn was outstanding. In the scene where he frees Electro ("I need you, Max!"), he manages to be utterly sympathetic and a completely manipulative scumbag at the same time. I get that a lot of people felt he was crammed in and could have been saved for a later movie, but I would argue that not only was Harry the main villain of ASM 2, but ASM 2 worked as well as an origin story for the Green Goblin as ASM 1 did for Spider-Man. Where Electro is concerned, I think comparisons to Jim Carrey's Riddler ignore a lot of the nuance of Jamie Foxx's performance. Max Dillon could easily be interpreted as an individual with high-functioning autism who was taken advantage of and mistreated at work because of it. He latches on to Spider-Man because not only is Spidey a beloved figure in NYC, but also because he's the only one who treats Max as an equal (this is something that has caused me to retroactively dislike Man of Steel that much more. Does Superman ever say a word to the people that he helps? Spidey not only saves Max's life, he picks up his blueprints, dusts him off and makes the effort to learn the guy's name!). When everything goes terribly wrong in Times Square, Max feels betrayed. As a direct result of this perceived betrayal, he's imprisoned and tortured. I totally disagree with the notion that he becomes a walking plot device. Taking everything that's happened to him into consideration, along with the fact that he's quite literally drunk with power, it makes total sense for him to do what he does.


This is an area that the MCU movies have somehow managed to skate by without much criticism. The majority of their villains are completely one dimensional and uninteresting. Aside from Loki and the villains of the Cap movies (Robert Redford's Alexander Pierce is probably my favorite MCU villain), there just isn't much there. Abomination and Whiplash are both pretty one-note and fell well short of their potential. With all due respect to Christopher Eccleston (who is my favorite Doctor), I think Malekith is one of the worst comic book villains ever to grace the big screen. He was completely lacking in personality and motivation and didn't have a single scene that I would consider memorable.

[Kevinroc]

Really, you're really going to complain about the "underground hideout" in a comic book movie? Seriously, that's like complaining about there being bullets in a war movie.

The underground hideout that can only be accessed by special tokens that were hidden in a calculator.

The family has no money because Richard spent it all on his secret underground lair.