Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - The Movie That Broke MovieBob

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

So much for giving it a chance, eh? I get that it's a very cynical approach to filmmaking by mainly existing to set up future movies and I can see why that would be annoying. But is it really that much different to the Marvel Studios method? Yes the Marvel films are generally better but I can't help but feel MovieBob's forcing himself to hate this a bit more than he needed to. I've seen the film and it's definitely not perfect, but I had a good time with it despite not particularly enjoying the first one.

I can see how hating the behind the scenes stuff, combined with having issues with the film (to be fair most of his negative comments about the actual film are fairly accurate) could lead to hating it, but there's still so much positive stuff he ignored. For me Spider-Man himself was pretty much perfect in how he moved and acted. The action was superb, not just 'cos it looked cool but because he spoke and fought like Spider-Man, something I'd argue Tobey McGuire never did.

I don't normally complain about reviews, and I usually enjoy MovieBob's stuff, but this seemed a bit too far. No the film isn't perfect and I have no issue with folk not liking it for some of the weak characters and (occasional) poor dialogue; or the conveniences and generally messiness of the plot. But I can't help but think that if the Sinister Six and Amazing Spider-Man 3 through 900 hadn't already been announced that this would've been a more positive review.

00DUMB:
This was the pain I felt with Other M. Hope you feel better Bob.

For the sake of completeness, I must point out that Moviebob actually liked Other M.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc4h8hNYev0

So I'm sure no one knows what I'm talking about here but Bob's problem is his vision of what spider-man should be is steve ditko's run on spider-man. Classic simple art on paper clean single arc storylines. Sony however is making 90's spider-man which had a slew of convoluted plots and villains all constantly retconned in ways that just complicated things more. Some of it was pretty cool and some of it wasn't. I've never had a problem with Spider-mans parents being mystery scientists though and that's Bob's biggest heartbreak plot wise.

I do take his side on this part though. The more I read about this expanded spider-man universe the more trouble I have believing Sony has the resources and participants to make it work. Even if this movie doesn't fail eventually the franchise will just like the last trilogy. Sony will inevitably overextend their money grubbing and fall on their own sword. I can really see why that would upset Bob and for once I agree with you man. As a critic it must be like being there for Batman & robin on opening night all over again.

Sorry Bob, as a 90's kid all I'm really obligated to do is sit back and enjoy the ride until Sony crashes this thing into a brick wall.

petef201:
So much for giving it a chance, eh? I get that it's a very cynical approach to filmmaking by mainly existing to set up future movies and I can see why that would be annoying. But is it really that much different to the Marvel Studios method? Yes the Marvel films are generally better but I can't help but feel MovieBob's forcing himself to hate this a bit more than he needed to. I've seen the film and it's definitely not perfect, but I had a good time with it despite not particularly enjoying the first one.

I can see how hating the behind the scenes stuff, combined with having issues with the film (to be fair most of his negative comments about the actual film are fairly accurate) could lead to hating it, but there's still so much positive stuff he ignored. For me Spider-Man himself was pretty much perfect in how he moved and acted. The action was superb, not just 'cos it looked cool but because he spoke and fought like Spider-Man, something I'd argue Tobey McGuire never did.

I don't normally complain about reviews, and I usually enjoy MovieBob's stuff, but this seemed a bit too far. No the film isn't perfect and I have no issue with folk not liking it for some of the weak characters and (occasional) poor dialogue; or the conveniences and generally messiness of the plot. But I can't help but think that if the Sinister Six and Amazing Spider-Man 3 through 900 hadn't already been announced that this would've been a more positive review.

The difference between The Amazing Spider-man and The Marvel Movies is the Marvel movies focus on creating stand-alone features with world-building, and sequel set-up relegated to the sidelines, whereas here a lot of the story is about bringing up plot points that are meant to pay off in future sequels or spin-offs, and lots of interesting characters and threads are dropped for use in later movies. Iron Man 2 has set-up for future Marvel movies, but Iron Man doesn't spend a third of the film looking for Thor's hammer, or freeing Captain America from the ice.

Really? The first movie was bad? I thought it was good. Not perfect, but good.
By hearing this movie is better that the first one, I fear maybe it isn't for my taste...

Really? Why so soon?

Either way, I totally know the feeling right now. Hell, I'm feeling it right now. I used to be all about reviews and analysis, but now thanks to this one encounter with an otherwise incredibly nice person, I can't find myself thinking too deeply about anything without thinking about what she would say in response. See also: anything made by CR! of Familiar Faces fame, who continuously acts immature and overly critical about My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic to the point where I can't enjoy any of his work anymore.

It's sad, though, because people will just continue to dismiss Bob's criticisms as just whining or that it's not as bad as Bob makes it out to be. Quite frankly, I tend to agree with Bob, and I see no reason to doubt what he says here is true. Hell, I'll agree with Bob in saying the Spider-Man costume looks great, WAY better then it did in the first movie, same goes for the web-slinging! But much like a lot of episodes of TV shows I like, a few good things sometimes can't outweigh what I ultimately don't like about the whole thing.

piscian:
So I'm sure no one knows what I'm talking about here but Bob's problem is his vision of what spider-man should be is steve ditko's run on spider-man. Classic simple art on paper clean single arc storylines. Sony however is making 90's spider-man which had a slew of convoluted plots and villains all constantly retconned in ways that just complicated things more. Some of it was pretty cool and some of it wasn't. I've never had a problem with Spider-mans parents being mystery scientists though and that's Bob's biggest heartbreak plot wise.

I feel like Bob wants the movies to be more like the Stan Lee/ Steve Ditko comics because they were really good. Having read alot of silver age comics, the Spider-man comics always stood out to me as step above the other comics of the time and still age remarkably well (in my opinion).

My problem with ASM is that it doesn't seem to understand who Peter Parker. The importance of the alter ego was Stan Lee's entire design philosophy when he was creating characters. He wanted you to think Spider-man was cool, but he wanted you to CARE about Peter Parker, and in these new movies I don't.

To be honest, I'm a bit sick of your criticism of the amazing Spiderman.. considering how FUCKING HORRIBLE, the original Sam Raimi trilogy was.
I have more fun with these movies, they are more entertaining, the dialogue between the characters is great. Where Tobey Maguire had as much personality as stale bread, Garfield is actually entertaining, and Emma Stone adds some actual depth to her character unlike the flat as hell Kristen Dunst. I think Sam Raimi is a terrible director, if spiderman 2 and 3 didn't break you completely, then you are simply a fanboy, and this is just whining. Those movies are HORRIBLE by ANY metric, and this one.. is just ok.

As far as my interests of Spiderman go, The Playstation 1 game is probably the only thing I played and genuinely like about Spiderman, The first Raimi movie is sillier in hindsight, but Spiderman otherwise hasn't been a property I've been interested in too much for quite some time (Well, okay, I bought Web of Shadows and I hear Spiderman 2: The game is amazing, but the PSX game is the highest point to me).

As far as the movies go, I didn't like Amazing Spider-man, I thought it wasn't coherent enough to really get into, the film felt more of an amalgam of comedy, sci-fi (slick sci-fi, the kind that explains midichlorians to an audience, not dark difficult sci-fi) and adventure, but not as smart or witty enough to really get into, but neither was Sam Raimi's version.

But, it was fine, I was glad I waited until it came out in such a fashion that I didn't have to pay for it to watch it, but I don't think this will be much better, and I'll probably reserve the "Wait N' See" option of the last movie for this one. I could go see Capt. America, that's still in theaters.

A great (but as what cost?) review, Moviebob.

MovieBob:
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - The Movie That Broke MovieBob

MovieBob feels that The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is, in a way, a better movie than its predecessor... but just barely.

Watch Video

Um, bob? Do you want to watch a decent movie length toy commercial? If you do, just private message me and I will link you to the youtube video.

I thought it was "meh". There were parts I liked, plenty I didn't but didn't feel bad after watching it. It was... a movie, not one way or the other, if you catch my drift. While I can also understand Bob's overall downbeat attitude, I'm not buying him feeling done with everything. He knew he wouldn't like it long before the first trailer even came out.

In a twist though, the Avengers films Bob and many of us love are the reason for this. Sony is reacting to Marvel Studios's success. Same with DC. All the good those films have brought, there has been and will continue to be a lasting negative consequence.

However I will say now as I've said in the past, I think Bob is going to hate the new Godzilla regardless. There just seems to be a lot of foreshadowing, not liking the "serious" previews, the Big Picture episode on the matter etc. I may have to quote myself now when the film and his review do come out.

shogunblade:
As far as my interests of Spiderman go, The Playstation 1 game is probably the only thing I played and genuinely like about Spiderman, The first Raimi movie is sillier in hindsight, but Spiderman otherwise hasn't been a property I've been interested in too much for quite some time (Well, okay, I bought Web of Shadows and I hear Spiderman 2: The game is amazing, but the PSX game is the highest point to me).

As far as the movies go, I didn't like Amazing Spider-man, I thought it wasn't coherent enough to really get into, the film felt more of an amalgam of comedy, sci-fi (slick sci-fi, the kind that explains midichlorians to an audience, not dark difficult sci-fi) and adventure, but not as smart or witty enough to really get into, but neither was Sam Raimi's version.

But, it was fine, I was glad I waited until it came out in such a fashion that I didn't have to pay for it to watch it, but I don't think this will be much better, and I'll probably reserve the "Wait N' See" option of the last movie for this one. I could go see Capt. America, that's still in theaters.

A great (but as what cost?) review, Moviebob.

If you ever get the chance to try Spiderman 2 the game, do it. You will thoroughly enjoy it. It brings across the one thing that people miss about Spidey while they (often rightfully) hate on the terrible writing happening for Peter Parker: being Spider-Man is heart-pounding, joy inducing, bloody FUN! His power set is kick-ass without being broken, and web-slinging is pure awesome-sauce. Doubly so in SM2 - many is the player who got carried away web-slinging about Manhattan and forgot to actually get to the mission point on time.

Loads of the worlds heroes are cool, but not all of them get to have fun doing so. It's also why the Ninja Turtles are so beloved.

I couldn't love this more. Not Bob hating it, no, but Bob throwing a petulant fit because Sony won't play fair and give the Spider-man ball to Marvel where it can do the exact same thing that Sony does, franchise building and sequel setting. Couldn't love it more that he whines about how "boring" the villains are, or how "shitty" they look compared to the "cooler-looking" comic book counterparts. (Because a giant rhino robot is worse than a man wearing a rhino suit, or a blue man made of electricity looks worse than whatever the fuck this is) If a comic book movie deviates from a comic book in any sort of form, you better believe Bob's going to hate it.

Bob even acknowledges that Sony and Marvel do the exact same thing, but he can't bring himself to criticize the Marvel ones because he believes those are more complete with character arcs and growth, even though I've yet to see a comic book movie where a character grew more than a WWE character. Callbacks and easter eggs and side characters that don't mean shit but give the fans something to squeal about is what Marvel does. So to rail against one for doing it while simultaneously praising the other is just the height of hypocritical fanboyism. Oh yeah, I know he said he totally doesn't want it to fail so it can revert back to Marvel, but lets be honest here.

TL;DR: Bob should really just give up and become a fisherman

Delcast:
To be honest, I'm a bit sick of your criticism of the amazing Spiderman.. considering how FUCKING HORRIBLE, the original Sam Raimi trilogy was.
I have more fun with these movies, they are more entertaining, the dialogue between the characters is great. Where Tobey Maguire had as much personality as stale bread, Garfield is actually entertaining, and Emma Stone adds some actual depth to her character unlike the flat as hell Kristen Dunst. I think Sam Raimi is a terrible director, if spiderman 2 and 3 didn't break you completely, then you are simply a fanboy, and this is just whining. Those movies are HORRIBLE by ANY metric, and this one.. is just ok.

But they followed the exact same arcs in the books and everyone pretty much had the same costumes, so they're awesome in Bob's eyes because they're exactly what he pictured.

piscian:
So I'm sure no one knows what I'm talking about here but Bob's problem is his vision of what spider-man should be is steve ditko's run on spider-man.

The line from his first Captain America review ("This is exactly what I pictured in my head when I was six years old playing Captain America") should tell you everything you need to know about Bob's problems as a critic, especially with comic book movies.

I do take his side on this part though. The more I read about this expanded spider-man universe the more trouble I have believing Sony has the resources and participants to make it work. Even if this movie doesn't fail eventually the franchise will just like the last trilogy. Sony will inevitably overextend their money grubbing and fall on their own sword. I can really see why that would upset Bob and for once I agree with you man. As a critic it must be like being there for Batman & robin on opening night all over again.

Sorry Bob, as a 90's kid all I'm really obligated to do is sit back and enjoy the ride until Sony crashes this thing into a brick wall.

At this point I'm really hoping the whole comic books extended cinematic universe theme fails. You can have comic book movies and franchises, go ahead. But if your eye is always on this bigger world and not the story, the story tends to be lacking. A lot. If Captain's got a demi-god and an indestructible monster on his side, why is anything ever in danger.
"What happens if Cap doesn't destroy the helicarriers?"
"Well one of them's targeting Hulk, who just gets real pissed off if you shoot him, so he'll probably take care of this."

ZZoMBiE13:

I know this is going to sound mean spirited, but I honestly wish their restructuring efforts failed so Disney could just swoop in and either buy back the movie rights to Spider-Man or just outright buy up Sony Pictures.

I don't even care about "Spidey needs to be an Avenger" or any of that stuff either. I'd just like them to let Spider-Man take a break from the cinema for a while. Like the post Batman & Robin Warner let Bats take a few years off to lick his wounds before coming back with Nolan and Bale and Begins.

Yeah, absolutely. I don't want Spidey to be in the Avengers either. It's not that I want him not to be there, I just don't care.

Zachary Amaranth:

The feeling doesn't exist for me. And I hope it never does, because I can't imagine being this upset over a game, or a comic, or a movie, or a toy.

You and me both.

I have been loudly outspoken on these forums as someone who absolutely despises Final Fantasy XIII, with reasons mostly stemming from my past experiences with the Final Fantasy franchise before it. I dare say that how I feel about Final Fantasy XIII would almost even approach how Bob felt about Amazing Spider-Man, or how a great portion of the internet still seems to feel about Star Wars.

But why would I ever let that ruin my enjoyment of the rest of the Final Fantasy franchise? If anything, it reinforces what I loved about the previous entries even more. It means I'm still hopeful for a day when they get back to making things I'm interested in. Why should I waste so much of my energy on saying that Square Enix "ruined" their franchise for me, when instead I can brush it off and move on and merely hope they do better next time? It's just a video game. And in the case of Amazing Spider-Man 2, it's just a movie.

I'll be honest, I couldn't even watch this entire video. I've been getting tired of most of the superhero coverage since a few months before The Avengers came out, and it just gets hammered in deeper and deeper with every new superhero film Bob covers. But this? This crossed a line into 'unprofessional' that I don't think any critic should do as part of their paid work. I'm the first person to say that 'critics should be objective' is a silly argument, because there is practically no objectivity in entertainment outside of production values, but there's still professionalism, and that should keep someone from making six minute rants about how they're depressed and feeling done with their job because of one movie which, by their own admission, they only consider "mediocre".

well dang I just watched the honest trailer making fun of the original trilogy and remembered how much better the first two films were. I'll give Bob this toby really was a much better classic spider-man, Dafoe was awesome and so was molina. Also the score was epic and come on...raimi.

Yeah ASM is passable and fun, but I can definitely see Bob being miffed. I wish they'd have just let Raimi do his thing and end the trilogy on a high note. If they had I don't think there'd have been room for a reboot like this.

Well Bob, now you know how i feel since they announced that a live action version of Lord of the Rings would be in the planning (1994) and that it is planned to replace Samwise Gamgee with a female, because the Samwise/Frodo relationship looked too gay.
To my relieve, Samwise was in the movies, but i still have this urge to puke at everything LotR related. And the butchering of the Hobbit just proves i was right for the last 20 years.

Redd the Sock:
I felt the same way when Mass Effect 3 ended (to this day I still have problems getting hyped for much of anything for fear of crashing disappointment.) I wish you better respect for your opinion now than we got for ours then.

I'll withhold judgement until I see this for myself, but I don't have much hope. I didn't particularly like any of the Spidy movies to date.

Couldn't have said it better. As you wish failure upon those who butchered Spider Man, i wish you to understand the full extent of the dissapointment ME3 brought upon those who loved the franchise.

To each his own, but I think Bob tends to get way to wrapped up in the drama of what is in the end, an artless cash-in. This is part of becoming an adult nerd. You must expect that corporations, who only want money, are going to frequently making a mess of a thing you like. But none of that other stuff is erased. You don't have coal miner's lung, Bob, you just have to see a bad movie every year, which is already guaranteed to happen anyway. If your dreams are crushed by Sony Pictures, it might be better that you find new dreams in the long run.

I think people carrying personal baggage and pre-existing notions of what they think Spidey should be is the problem. You've had one film to guage the direction they're taking him. If you didn't like it then it's a safe bet you won't like this. Generally it seems people that love the Maguire/Raimi films hate ASM and vice versa.
Either way, Sony aren't giving the rights back. So it doesn't matter what your personal take on film!Spidey is, this is the one we have for now (until they inevitably reboot it again).

Personally, I didn't like the Raimi films. I didn't like Toby Maguire and I couldn't have given two shits about Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane. And Spiderman 3 was a goddamn travesty; I had such acute second-hand embarrassment from that film. It was awful. Willem Dafoe and Alred Molina were the bomb though.

So far I've liked both ASM films. Garfield to me is infinitely superior as Spiderman (though I'm not convinced of him as Peter Parker). On more than one occasion his snarky quips and antics had me and my friends laughing in the cinema. I also liked Emma Stone as Gwen; she didn't make me want to flip tables half as much as Dunst did.

I do think the new films have a massive weakness in the villain department though. Credit where it's due, Raimi's villains (at least in 1 & 2) were awesome. Rhino was... disappointing. And they could have done more with Electro. More build up to the scene where

Was ASM2 perfect? No.
Were there plot holes and dodgy writing? Definitely.
Did I have fun for 2 hours and leave entertained? Hell yes.

This from the guy who loved Springbreakers!

Sure, the script was written by monkeys but I saw it in 3d and the web-swinging alone gave me a good time.

So Bob is going through the exact same emotions that thousands of Star Wars fans are after the closing of the EU. Huh, weird coincidence. But yeah anyone who's had that experience of something that used to be one of your greatest joys in life turning into something you hate knows it sucks.

irishda:
I couldn't love this more. Not Bob hating it, no, but Bob throwing a petulant fit because Sony won't play fair and give the Spider-man ball to Marvel where it can do the exact same thing that Sony does, franchise building and sequel setting.

The exact fucking opposite of what Bob said he wanted but ok. I can see that you are going to be completely reasonable and not at all petty in your line of argument.

irishda:
Couldn't love it more that he whines about how "boring" the villains are, or how "shitty" they look compared to the "cooler-looking" comic book counterparts. (Because a giant rhino robot is worse than a man wearing a rhino suit, or a blue man made of electricity looks worse than whatever the fuck this is)

The villains ARE boring no matter what your definition is, and Bob does a pretty good job of explaining his reasoning. Electro is built up like the big bad but his arc doesn't make much sense and ultimately he just turns out to be a henchman for the equally boring Green Goblin, and the Rhino is litterary just in it for two scenes and have absolutely no fucking characterisation beyond obnoxious and stupid Russian stereotype.

As for the looks thing, I agree that the original designs really aren't a whole lot "cooler", but that is also not something I will fault Bob on since he pretty much admits up front that part is his own preference. What IS a bit more objective in this case is that these new designs are a tad more lazy when being "out there" has always been one of the reasons to go see these types of characters.

irishda:
If a comic book movie deviates from a comic book in any sort of form, you better believe Bob's going to hate it.

You don't pay a whole lot of attention to Bob's videos do you?
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/7231-The-Big-Spoiler-Iron-Man-3

irishda:
Bob even acknowledges that Sony and Marvel do the exact same thing, but he can't bring himself to criticize the Marvel ones because he believes those are more complete with character arcs and growth, even though I've yet to see a comic book movie where a character grew more than a WWE character.

Because if YOU don't see the merits that another critic sees in a movie, then obviously they don't exist. "Dissenting opinions", what's that?

irishda:
Callbacks and easter eggs and side characters that don't mean shit but give the fans something to squeal about is what Marvel does. So to rail against one for doing it while simultaneously praising the other is just the height of hypocritical fanboyism.

Except Bob has often and repeatedly made it clear that there is a difference between a Movie franchise that focuses on creating Movies that work as standalone features yet remain interconnected by references and easter eggs, and a franchise created for the SOLE purpose of delivering minor callbacks, references and easter eggs in order because that is what that other franchise did and they made a gazillion dollars. Please, just stop talking already. You obviously have no interest in any kind of discussion because you repeatedly make claims about Bob's supposed intentions that he has already addressed. I haven't even seen you try to refute a single Point he made against the Movie itself, you just want to Point out how much of a "hypocrite" he is because he dares to have a personal interest in these types of Movies and because he also happens to Think that one Company is better at it than others.

SuperScrub:
You want to talk broken to me, MovieBob?

Yes, he does. His standards are not the same as yours, and his belief system is not the same as yours. It is pretty egotistical and judgmental to say his disappointment is somehow less valid than yours just because of the specific subject matters involved; particularly when--and forgive me if this sounds dismissive of your faith--many people consider Spider-Man and Jesus Christ to be of approximately equal historical authenticity. You do not get to set his priorities, nor determine the strength of his reactions.

Zachary Amaranth:
This all seems petty and childish.

Then, by all means, enjoy your enlightenment over those of us more benighted than you. I have tried to explain the feeling to you and you do not understand, which is fine, but I do not have any interest in trying to explain any further if you're just going to belittle and dismiss others' feelings simply because they aren't your own.

Delcast:
Those movies are horrible by any metric, and this one is just okay.

What metrics are you referring to, Delcast? What specific methods of judgment are you using? Because I have to say, it sounds very much like you're inventing some sort of objective scale of movie quality out of thin air in order to justify calling Mr. Chipman names.

Damn that wrap up sums how i've felt since OMD and when Doc Ock took over Peter's body. What a sad state of affairs, oh well at least I have Spider-man 2099.
My mate keeps trying to get me to see this film and I keep telling him I want to spend my money on something more worth while... like heroine.

Anyway, I catch this on TV or get a dvd file off a mate when it's available. But I think it proves those who complained about Gobby in the first film looking like a power ranger are full of crap, he looks and did look tamed compared to what we got in this film.

Oh I saw this image on IGN and it convinces me how the Green Goblin's original look could work on screen.

It's still silly but it's better than - well that!

Could someone spoiler-tag the bit that Bob mentioned was laughable? I don't play on paying to see the movie while its in theaters. (I'm pretty sure I already know what the events of the scene in question are, but I want to know what it was that took away its gravity. Spoil away!)

Gerardo Vazquez:

gogool808:
I just watched this video for the 3rd times. He spends maybe about 2 minutes of actual reviewing. The rest of it is complaining about something that has nothing to do with this movie. I understand he is upset Sony has a plan for the future of Spider-man and it's not going to be sold to marvel anything soon, but I also know you are very intelligent.

What is this "I'm done with movies" crap. Did you really think your review spider man wasn't going to hold on it's own you had to do this crap? I know you don't go into these videos without a plan and wing it based on your actual opinion. I know you plan things so that your opinion appears relevant with the viewers. I also know you understand a great deal of film and how they work. The thing is that this review is the most half assed thing I have ever seen you do. You literally filled 50% of this review with repetition and soft phrases. The 2 minutes of review were just repeated phrases from some first year film class. How in the world do YOU not understand why harry is still mad even though his illness is cured? You mention marvel more than 3 times I believe.

You aren't reviewing films with expert criticism anymore like you used to. I pretty much realized this with your review on the last twilight movie. Everything people think you will like you will hate, and everything people think you will hate you give it some kind of praise that no one would understand unless you have an "expert" level of understanding in film.

Honestly I just think that the movie dream in you died something back. The dream of making the films you love just didn't pay out like you thought. That kid you used to be that couldn't wait to be in front of a screen to be apart of something bigger than everyday life. Are you seriously becoming the thing you hate the most?

He did review the film.. To give you a concise summary "The Amazing Spider-man has no real real narrative structure, every element of the film is shameless set-up for future movies that leave the actual film in question with nothing but bones, none of the film's villains have a cohesive plan that drives the film, the sub-plot with Richard Parker is stupid and unnecessary Harry Osborn feels like a huge retcon, and while the things Bob likes are the same things everyone likes(good action, good web-slinging) everything involving the actual story is SHIT. Just shit." How's that for a review?

Oooookay. I see you are also using 1st year film school phrases without some context. You are telling me its bad that they are setting stuff up for future films AND telling me its stupid they didn't set up harry for this movie from the last one. Also please stop assuming every protagonist has to be this overlord with some diabolical plan from the beginning that gets foiled from the one thing super heroes are set up to do. The parts where you don't know if he is doing this because it will fill a master plan, or he is just really angry and has super powers. That really is the most terrifying part of the film. By the way I love the copy pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

gogool808:
I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vasquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

I will join your movie trauma support group, Movie Bob. I sympathize with that feeling described right at the start of the video... the feeling of something you love being indelibly associated with something you hate. Spidey was my childhood favorite too, and I've been carrying this bitterness around since the FIRST shitty Spiderman Trilogy!

JimB:

gogool808:
I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vasquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

It's because it refers to my point that you really don't have an opinion and just use phrases people think are amazing. Also that sentence he quoted was actually accurate to the only thing bob said about the spider-man movie that resembles a review. I guess if you want to call that a review it's fine. I just have seen most of his older videos to have more respect from his opinion than that.

Auron225:

To all those that are saying "I haven't seen ASM2 but Bob says it's the worst thing in creation so I'll condemn it too and avoid it like the plague", I implore you to refrain from having an opinion until you have actually seen it. If you hate it with every fibre of your being too, then fine. Just remember that everything out there (no matter how miraculously outstanding you think it is) will have at least one person giving it an "AAHH!! MY EYES!!!" style review.

That would require us giving over our money, which defeats the purpose of researching criticisms about the movie beforehand. Bad movies don't deserve your money. I'll watch it when I can, but I'm not spending my entire evening and some extra money just to be disappointed again.

gogool808:

JimB:

gogool808:
I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vazquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

It's because it refers to my point that you really don't have an opinion and just use phrases people think are amazing.

Wait, what? Who's "you?" Are you talking to me? Of course I don't have an opinion of the movie; I haven't seen it. It isn't even out in my time zone. But when did my opinion even become part of this conversation? Are you talking about Gerardo Vazquez? Has he even seen the movie yet, and whether he has or hasn't, when did his opinion become part of this? It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue.

So is the Escapist hiring? Because I'm available. I have no credentials, but I'm available.

Also having the name Webb and working on Spiderman? Well I giggled.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here