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
 

It's nice having low expectations of movies. I'd go into that expecting him to swing around on his webs for awhile, fight a few goofy villains and then it would be over and I'll be happy. I mean it's nice when you get an Avengers but I have a blast at all these movies.

Lol. Bob hating on this movie actually makes me like it even more. I was on a 6/10 score, but I might turn it up to 7/10 now. :)

The "no character arcs" is bullshit by the way. Peter has an arc, Electro a short one, Harry a pretty important one.

Sejborg:
Lol. Bob hating on this movie actually makes me like it even more. I was on a 6/10 score, but I might turn it up to 7/10 now. :)

The "no character arcs" is bullshit by the way. Peter has an arc, Electro a short one, Harry a pretty important one.

And as Bob already detailed none of those arcs really came together to form any cohesive story in the overall grand scheme of things.

He literally acknowledged in the video that there were arcs in the movie, but no real definitive plot to nail down entirely.

kaizen2468:
It's nice having low expectations of movies. I'd go into that expecting him to swing around on his webs for awhile, fight a few goofy villains and then it would be over and I'll be happy. I mean it's nice when you get an Avengers but I have a blast at all these movies.

Exactly. These people who hate on movies like this should already know what they're getting into, and if they liked the concept enough to walk in to begin with they should enjoy the movie. In other words, don't expect something out of a movie when you already know that's not what you are going to get.

Captcha: yes definitely

Apparently even the captcha agrees.

I am using this post as representative of a trend I've noticed in this thread. Comic Sans is far from the only person doing it, but I have to get to work and don't have time to go quote mining.

Comic Sans:
I honestly believe that Bob doesn't want to like these movies. He has an idea in his head as to how it should be, and when it doesn't do that he rails against it.

Not for nothing, but I kind of get the same vibe about people who have a problem with his taste in the franchise. "It's impossible that he dislikes the movies for the reasons he stated in the videos! No, his real reasons are the narrative I assert about him being butthurt!"

Comic Sans:
I think people are forgetting all the flaws of the original Spider-Man films.

You're not the only person to do it, so I don't mean to single you out when I ask: why do people do this? When people criticize the current franchise, why do people try to change the subject and start ripping apart the old one? It's very suspicious to me, because I can't help noting that people almost never respond by defending the movie--by saying, "Here are things I like about the Amazing Spider-Man 2"--but rather they respond by attacking the previous trilogy. The implication there is not that the current franchise is actually good, but rather only that the previous one isn't. It feels like a bait and switch.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the previous trilogy. Raimi loves his melodrama way too much for my taste. I just feel like people are tipping their hands when they're presented with a choice to defend this movie's good points or change the subject to attack a different movie's bad points and opt for the latter.

Comic Sans:
Writing the movie [off] and hoping it flops because a guy on the internet said it was bad is the height of ignorance.

I also think it's telling when people have the choice to defend the movie's good points or attack the people who don't see it, and opt for the latter. Suddenly it stops being about whether the movie is any good but whether people have the gall to disagree with you, which, for all the complaints about Mr. Chipman's bias, certainly calls your own into question.

Sorry to hear about your (hopefully) brief lapse into hatred of Spider-Man and comic book movies and Hollywood. Sounds like we have another Batman and Robin here, except this time the company making it is quite intent on making Batman Triumphant afterwards even if it does tank.

He's not just reacting to ASM2 being bad, but the promise of many more like it to come no matter what he says or does. Because licensing.

I know. Try cheering yourself out of this funk by doing a Big Picture or Intermission on the various Spider-Man animated series' and what you liked about each of them. Always cheers me up to remember personal favourite scenes in Spectacular and 90s Spidey. I even liked Norman Osborn's character in that one.

Or if you're up for something more relevant, explain to people 'Why Sam Raimi's Spider Man 2 Still Rules', because it's been listed on your top 3 favourite comic book movies before and people have given you flack for that. I just found it average myself, but maybe you can shed some light on why you like it so much.

HA well was never really a fan of spiderman always came off as emo to me back in the day and after those first 3 movies that just bored the shit outta me ive not even felt the need to watch these news ones. And this and many other people iove spoke to just seems kinda lame.

But now Bob knows how i felt with the Transformers made by Bay. It just ruined transformers for me, or it being taken more then anything else but a big long kids toy advert.

I have one last hope that a warhammer40k movie will happen and not suck lol

fuck you sony for making Bob sad Bob

Gerardo Vazquez:

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.

Good point well made. The world building does get in the way here, but think I just felt MovieBob was overly harsh.

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.

I loved the PSX Spider-Man games! Great memories!

JimB:

Not for nothing, but I kind of get the same vibe about people who have a problem with his taste in the franchise. "It's impossible that he dislikes the movies for the reasons he stated in the videos! No, his real reasons are the narrative I assert about him being butthurt!"

Yeah, I feel the same way. While I think Bob is a little hard on ASM, I often feel that his detractors go too far in the other direction, with them glossing over or outright ignoring any flaws or missteps the film had. In the more extreme cases, they'd be essentially arguing that ASM was the Citizen Kane of superhero films, a flawless, sacred work of art.

(Personally, I thought ASM was okay at best. It had a lot of good points and a lot of potential, but it also had many, many problems holding it back.)

JimB:

Zachary Amaranth:
He can't be serious, can he?

Of course he can. Have you never been exposed to something you truly hate and thought, This is my future, this is what the world holds for me now? I have. For instance, love of the roleplaying game Exalted was a pretty huge part of my life for ten or fifteen years, but a few years back, after trying so hard to navigate the train wreck of the game created by an entirely too eager system designer playtested by no one in particular and eight years of the series having no cohesive editorial oversight because the company was floundering and that no one involved just gave a shit about to the point that books were printed with text copied and pasted from the previous edition referencing mechanics that no longer exist...I just couldn't sustain my enthusiasm. Something broke inside me. I began to hate the line, the books (that is, the physical objects sitting on my shelf), and the community surrounding them. I'm still not totally over it. The game line is now being developed by a publisher that gives a damn, and the books are being written by the all-stars whose work was actually good, but I'm still not totally over it. I still kind of hate it.

So, Mr. Chipman, should you be reading it, I think I understand how you feel, and you have my sympathies. The only thing I can say to you is that people heal. They may scar, but the wound does close.

Dude, accept that good things dont last forever and you will be fine. For what was worth that game kept you entertained for ten to fifteen years and you probably really enjoyed it during those times so be gratefull that it happened and accept that it went to shit. I can still listen to the first few albums of Offspring even though they turned to shit without any problem, sure it would have been awesome if they kept the quality they once had but I am thankfull that I did (and can still) listen to those old ones.

And Bob basicly had a franchise he liked a lot be incredibly turned into an advertisement (loosing the chance to be a worthwile movie or part of the Avengers for a long time), well, that sucks but the comics (what is the actual Spiderman) are still going as they always have been and movies in general are still going to be good or bad, its not like ALL movies will be like The Amazing Spiderman 2 or anything, just the next Spiderman movies that he can choose to ignore.

Basicly he is a huge fanboy crying that the movie adaptation of that thing he liked is shit. Get over it.

Bob, grow up. Seriously. It was an okay movie - not great, not memorable, just okay.
For you to declare this harmless bit of fun as something that destroyed Spiderman is difficult to understand. In ASM, Spiderman is actually a wisecracker and the love interest does something other than scream for help - which is truer to the source material when compared to the original trilogy.
The Richard Parker thing is lacking a payoff at the moment, I'll give you that.
And it's true that some of the dialogue and scenes in ASM are dripping with cheese - but the original trilogy suffered the same problem.
ASM and ASM2 are okay movies, same as Spiderman 1 and 2.

Huh. I feel pretty sorry for Bob. It seems like an unfortunate coincidence for him that Hollywood's obsession with remakes and adaptions has rolled around when stuff from his childhood is just getting to the 'old enough to be retro'. Transformers, TMNT, Robocop, comics (not specific to his generation, but certainly not a big part of younger ones)... It must suck seeing things you love get turned into things that you really, really don't. Even if they're not outright terrible a lot of the time, seeing it happen to every damned thing must be disheartening. I sure as hell know that if the Lego Movie had sucked I'd probably have shed a few tears in the cinema (I did, but more because it was awesome). I suppose this might be more a case of the straw that broke the camel's back rather than this specific film being devilspawn.

I don't know how to take this review.

There's the "here we go again" angle, where I thought Bob was being unfair about ASM 1 and the fact the he kept bringing it up every chance he got for months got me to kind of dread his shows (ironic that this mirrors his sentiment on ASM 2 a bit).

There's the "hey, he says it's better" angle, where I genuinely think ASM 1 is the best Spider-man movie out there, and Bob isn't the only one saying this one is better, so regardless of his absolute point, his relative statement gets me quite a bit psyched to see this.

There's the "so maybe shut up about it, then" gut feeling that I wish I could stop, because other people disliking shit I like shouldn't have a bearing on whether I like it. But Bob's hostility is so emotional, so invested that my own nerd self, who has always been into Spidey since in the 80s I got a black and white copy of the first Green Goblin appearance can't help but want him to shut the hell up.

And there's the sad hint at a saturation point with these movies, too. The fact that nobody cares what Bob thinks anyway, because there are so many of these by this point that they'r becoming disposable, so where it would be a foregone conclusion that I would queue up for a nostalgia trip of a superhero movie in the past, I've gleefully skipped RoboCop and Total Recall, never made any effort to watch Green Lantern and the only thing that may get me to go see Batman vs Superman is Ben Affleck's presence (no, seriously) in case he's used his newfound clout to make a positive impact in there somewhere.

But mostly, mostly I just want to break it down. To explain why Bob was dead wrong about ASM, to watch this one, make my own mind (believe it or not, I'm totally open to this being bad, I just can't rightfully say I have been warned one way or the other by Bob's review), and then put my opinions on both in context. Because that's what Internet age does with emotional advocacy of nerdy shit. It makes you want to push back. I don't much like that part of the online culture, and I think I keep it more rational than most, but it's undeniable that when somebody goes on record, for money, with a rant of this magnitude you can't really help to want to tie the guy down and force him to have a long, hard conversation about why this is happening, especially if you disagree.

See, there's nothing more frustrating about online conversation than the moment when public opinion coalesces. The part where people are trying to make up their mind about shit. It was the two days before we all decided that TMNT sucked, or that first week where people still thought Man of Steel was a good movie. Or the week when the ending of Mass Effect 3 got good reviews from game critics. That time when people get to have their own justified opinion that diverges from the norm is great, and then the concrete dries and we all have to agree on what's cool or not, even if we secretly don't get there for the same reasons, or at all. Bob's rant is part of that trend, and it sucks that a clever guy like him ends so often on my "oh, come on!" list for things like these.

josemlopes:
Dude, accept that good things don't last forever and you will be fine.

That really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, but thank you for that glib advice on how to live my life and what beliefs to hold, I guess.

Uberpig:
Bob, grow up. Seriously. It was an okay movie - not great, not memorable, just okay.

Would you like to explain why it was okay, or shall we just take your word for it?

Uberpig:
For you to declare this harmless bit of fun as something that destroyed Spider-Man is difficult to understand.

Your difficulty understanding why he said that may spring from him not having said that. Apart from him clearly disagreeing with you about it being harmless, he didn't say Spider-Man is ruined; he said he felt sick for a while (his exact words are, "for longer than I'd care to admit") of Spider-Man.

Uberpig:
It's true that some of the dialogue and scenes in the Amazing Spider-Man are dripping with cheese, but the original trilogy suffered the same problem.

And more of this refusal to allow people to discuss the movie being reviewed unless they also tear apart the movies from ten years ago. I seriously do not get this. What is this mentality that we must castigate movies other than the one being talked about? Is it some kind of human shield defense, like, "If you complain about the movie I like, then you also have to complain about this other movie that isn't involved in the current conversation?"

I think people who are giving Movie Bob a hard time don't see where he's coming from.

Usually I don't jump into these sort of things... because I avoid drama. However, I can totally understand Movie Bob's perspective on this. The Amazing Spider Man 2 isn't the worst movie ever- he even addresses this by saying it was better then the first movie.

What he dislikes about it... is the direction. The way they shoehorned the villains in and how the movie just has a terrible story/plot. It's one of those movies that butchers a franchise/tradition and goes it's own way of doing things. Imagine if you grew up with the cartoons, the classic (insert show/comic/book/movie here) for a long time.

Then, a company decides to make a movie off it. Turns out to be a great success and you love it. Great!
Buy hold on... there's a reboot. Yea... that, reboot. The one where the company (or a different one) decides to give it a shot. Then they change everything you know, love, and feel about the series as a whole. It drains you, and I would personally know this with the Dead Space series. Instead of a reboot though, it was Dead Space 3.

When they turn characters into something they're not suppose to... having a dumb sub-plot shoved in there, having the lore around it change just to get more appeal saying "Hey look how crazier this series became!"

I totally understand Movie Bob. He doesn't hate this movie because it sucks. He hates it because the direction is totally screwed up and blowing over what made the original Spider Man good in quality. You could also say that everyone loved the Dark Knight, but imagine if the Batman and Robin movie (with the nipples) came out after. That is EXACTLY what's happening here with Movie Bob.

You're free to like this movie. That's perfectly okay. But don't be giving Movie Bob a hard time please... I can totally sympathize with the man. He did this review the best he could without acting immature and told us straight up how he felt.

So yea...

Caramel Frappe:
I think people who are giving Movie Bob a hard time don't see where he's coming from.

Usually I don't jump into these sort of things... because I avoid drama. However, I can totally understand Movie Bob's perspective on this. The Amazing Spider Man 2 isn't the worst movie ever- he even addresses this by saying it was better then the first movie.

What he dislikes about it... is the direction. The way they shoehorned the villains in and how the movie just has a terrible story/plot. It's one of those movies that butchers a franchise/tradition and goes it's own way of doing things. Imagine if you grew up with the cartoons, the classic (insert show/comic/book/movie here) for a long time.

Then, a company decides to make a movie off it. Turns out to be a great success and you love it. Great!
Buy hold on... there's a reboot. Yea... that, reboot. The one where the company (or a different one) decides to give it a shot. Then they change everything you know, love, and feel about the series as a whole. It drains you, and I would personally know this with the Dead Space series. Instead of a reboot though, it was Dead Space 3.

When they turn characters into something they're not suppose to... having a dumb sub-plot shoved in there, having the lore around it change just to get more appeal saying "Hey look how crazier this series became!"

I totally understand Movie Bob. He doesn't hate this movie because it sucks. He hates it because the direction is totally screwed up and blowing over what made the original Spider Man good in quality. You could also say that everyone loved the Dark Knight, but imagine if the Batman and Robin movie (with the nipples) came out after. That is EXACTLY what's happening here with Movie Bob.

You're free to like this movie. That's perfectly okay. But don't be giving Movie Bob a hard time please... I can totally sympathize with the man. He did this review the best he could without acting immature and told us straight up how he felt.

So yea...

I actually do get where he's coming from, that's not the problem. I felt this way with Mass Effect 3 and the ending. However, I disagree with you entirely when you say he's not being immature. He is. He just spent the majority of what was supposed to be devoted to the actual review whining that his interest in Spider-Man and movies have been severely impacted by a single movie he did not like. That's just... ridiculous for an adult to say in my opinion, let alone a professional. Reviewing the movie the best he could would have been him staying on topic and not trying to come off like some gigantic fan since forever and because of that he has to absolutely despise this movie. It certainly doesn't help that he railed on the last one for months on end. Super-hero and monster movies in general always make me want to doubt Bob's professionalism. He seems to never be able to separate his fanboyism from whatever the topic is and review the movie for what it is. He'll recommend terrible movies like Pacific Rim. He'll swear up and down an okay movie is the worst thing he's ever seen like ASM. He has absolutely no consistency in these topics.

I can understand that some people are not going to agree with me on Bob's reaction and whether or not it was warranted. That's fine. But don't go expecting that people like me are not to call him out on how we perceive his behavior. If you or Bob thought that he wasn't going to get any flack for this video and instead only endless sympathies, then well... I'm not quite sure what you expected.

IamLEAM1983:
Someone convince Sam Raimi to reboot those reboots. Anything, literally *anything* would be better than this.

Ya know, as much hate as the Sam Raimi trilogy got (as an adaptation, deserved) at least the first two were good MOVIES.

Not necessarily Spider-man movies, but movies.

The ASM movies don't even hold up in that category. They are just soulless 2 and a half hour slogs through New York and CGI.

OT - I'm not seeing this in theaters. If they want my money, they can earn it. Guardians of the Galaxy, here I come.

JimB:

You're not the only person to do it, so I don't mean to single you out when I ask: why do people do this? When people criticize the current franchise, why do people try to change the subject and start ripping apart the old one? It's very suspicious to me, because I can't help noting that people almost never respond by defending the movie--by saying, "Here are things I like about the Amazing Spider-Man 2"--but rather they respond by attacking the previous trilogy. The implication there is not that the current franchise is actually good, but rather only that the previous one isn't. It feels like a bait and switch.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the previous trilogy. Raimi loves his melodrama way too much for my taste. I just feel like people are tipping their hands when they're presented with a choice to defend this movie's good points or change the subject to attack a different movie's bad points and opt for the latter.

I think the reason for this is that Bob has pretty much held up the Sam Raimi movies as "The Best Spider-Man Movies!" He puts them on a pedestal and then complains about the Amazing Spider-Man movies as if they are some sort of sacrilege. Rather than just an average reboot that is actually pretty good as far as reboots tend to go these days.

He doesn't like them, that's fine. But when the first one came out he spent months harping on how it was representative of everything wrong with Hollywood and has been trashing ASM2 on his blog since the first information on it came out.

I can't speak for anyone else of course, but that's what grates me about his opinion of these movies. He doesn't seem to dislike them because they are objectively or even subjectively bad. He hates them because they aren't the Sam Raimi movies. That would be fine normally, but like I said he's been raking ASM movies over the coals since before the first one even came out.

People go after the Raimi movies and point out their flaws, logic hiccups and bad writing/acting because that's what Bob does to the ASM movies, while claiming the Raimi ones are the definitive versions. It's not the right way to go about it, but considering the vitriol Bob shows for the ASM movies, I'm not surprised alot of people want to tear down his pedestal as well.

I thought the overall rotten tomatoes scores of the spidey movies was interesting. Aggregate scores don't always tell the whole story, but they do give a general impression.

Movie = Critic Score, Audience Score
Spider Man = 89%, 67%
Spider Man 2 = 94% 81%
Spider Man 3 = 63%, 51%
Amazing Spider Man = 73%, 78%
Amazing Spider Man 2 = 58%, --

By this metric the latest movie is the worst, beating out Spider Man 3 by a little. I think its interesting that Spider Man 2 is the best rated. I like it, but I have friends who walked out during the middle. It also looks like critics tend to enjoy the original 3 more than audience members, and its the other way around for ASM (no audience ratings for ASM2 yet).

DeimosMasque:

JimB:
You're not the only person to do it, so I don't mean to single you out when I ask: why do people do this? When people criticize the current franchise, why do people try to change the subject and start ripping apart the old one? It's very suspicious to me, because I can't help noting that people almost never respond by defending the movie--by saying, "Here are things I like about the Amazing Spider-Man 2"--but rather they respond by attacking the previous trilogy. The implication there is not that the current franchise is actually good, but rather only that the previous one isn't. It feels like a bait and switch.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the previous trilogy. Raimi loves his melodrama way too much for my taste. I just feel like people are tipping their hands when they're presented with a choice to defend this movie's good points or change the subject to attack a different movie's bad points and opt for the latter.

I think the reason for this is that Bob has pretty much held up the Sam Raimi movies as "The Best Spider-Man Movies!"

Fine, but that doesn't really have anything to do with anything. People are still attacking a different franchise rather than defending the one under discussion, which comes off as very guilty-minded, and when people do attack the Raimi films, they tend to do so by attacking elements of the movies that bear no resemblance to the bits Mr. Chipman criticized in the current series. If he complains about there being only a flimsy pretense of a story and characters with no clear motivations, the response is more apt than not to be, "Oh yeah? Well the Raimi movies are cheesy!" The only way that wouldn't be pure nonsense is if Mr. Chipman had complained about the Webb movies being cheesy, but he didn't.

DeimosMasque:
People go after the Raimi movies and point out their flaws, logic hiccups and bad writing/acting because that's what Bob does to the ASM movies, while claiming the Raimi ones are the definitive versions.

I only watch his videos on this site and don't read his Twitter or blogs (I didn't know he has a blog until you brought it up), but so far as I know, he's never said the Raimi versions are definitive. He's only ever mentioned them in his videos as a basis for comparison about how certain elements can succeed or fail. I'll retract this if you know something I don't, but as best I can tell, the whole "he thinks the Raimi versions are definitive" line is a completely unsupported narrative created by people who take offense to him disliking a movie in an attempt to invalidate his opinion.

You know one of my fav scenes from the Raimi films, or at least the aspect I think he did well? The Ol' "Parker Luck" the scene in the second movie where he keeps trying to get a drink and stuff and either it's taken away or it's empty.

I compare the first Spider-Man to ASM and as an adaptation Raimi simply "got" spider-man, by that I mean peter and his relationships. I had a better sense of what the film was trying to be, my mate says it's great and I trust him like a poison doughnut (anyone know the reference game and tv show they get a high five), so if I go see the film he's paying for the tickets.

And this is exactly why I don't want to watch this movie. I love Spiderman and I don't want to feel a sense of dread when I see him. I'd rather remember him how he was.

I didn't like Amazing Spider-Man and wasn't looking forward to the sequel. I'd like to thank Bob for saving me the time and money I might have otherwise wasted on ASM2.

Fingers crossed for Days of Future Past, but it's not looking good.

WhiteFangofWar:
Sorry to hear about your (hopefully) brief lapse into hatred of Spider-Man and comic book movies and Hollywood. Sounds like we have another Batman and Robin here, except this time the company making it is quite intent on making Batman Triumphant afterwards even if it does tank.

He's not just reacting to ASM2 being bad, but the promise of many more like it to come no matter what he says or does. Because licensing.

I know. Try cheering yourself out of this funk by doing a Big Picture or Intermission on the various Spider-Man animated series' and what you liked about each of them. Always cheers me up to remember personal favourite scenes in Spectacular and 90s Spidey. I even liked Norman Osborn's character in that one.

Or if you're up for something more relevant, explain to people 'Why Sam Raimi's Spider Man 2 Still Rules', because it's been listed on your top 3 favourite comic book movies before and people have given you flack for that. I just found it average myself, but maybe you can shed some light on why you like it so much.

Except its sounding like, to me at least, Batman and Robin can be seen as kind of a fun extension of the old Adam West Batman. Given the right mind set and group of people it can at least be a fun romp with friends. This however doesn't appear to even have that value and also I don't think we have another "Batman and Robin" on our hands. If we did the franchise would be set to die and Marvel could get the rights back if for nothing else than to protect Spider-man and let him recover from this beating for a few years. However I don't think that's going to happen. I'm hearing the Rotten Tomato meter has been dropping but the box office numbers keep going up. If it breaks even they might make a third one. It needs to come short. Substantially so and I don't think its going to do that sadly. :(

sebashepin:

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.

Not to derail the Moviebob whining party going on in this thread, but what aspects of the ME3 endings did you not like? Feel free to be specific, as I have played through. I found them bittersweet, for the most part.

Gerardo Vazquez:

This is something I run into a lot whenever people talk about The Amazing Spider-man, more specifically whenever anyone complains that The Amazing Spider-man seems to devote a good chunk of it's setting-up future installments to the detriment of the actual movie, or that a lot of it's important plot points seem to go nowhere people usually respond with something along the lines "Well of course they're setting up future movies. That's how the superhero genre works! Marvel does this all the time! Why is it that it's only a bad thing when Sony does it?" People need to understand that there's a difference between what The MCU does, and what Sony is doing with the new Spider-man franchise. When it comes to laying the groundwork for future installments most of The Marvel movies are actually pretty lax even when it comes to things like direct sequels. In Phase 1 especially most of the big references to future projects show up in the background, and end credits scenes, and the when the movie ends most of the overlying mysteries, huge plot threads,or big villains seem mostly dispersed, and even if there's still some big answered question or sequel hook you never feel like the movie is unsubstantial due to it. Go back and look at Iron Man's 1 & 2, The Hulk, Thor, or Captain America. Does the story feel incomplete? Do you feel like too much of the movie was devoted to something that didn't pay off? Do you feel like parts of the movie were edited out because the film makers wanted to save something for a sequel? That's the problem with The Amazing Spider-man's 1 and 2, the final product feels insubstantial because of crazed attempt to make a sprawling franchise out of only 2 movies. Back in the day we'd scoff at a bad movie for trying to tease a sequel in the last few minutes, but today "Eh. Yeah Doctor Conner's history, motivation, and personality is slapdash, and yeah we kinda don't understand where Peter's powers come from, and yeah the subplot about Richard Parker and his wife goes nowhere, and yeah we're not entirely sure why Oscorp is doing anything, but they'll be a sequel so just roll with it.". I'd be more willing to have more faith in these movies if I liked the direction or if I was sure that Sony and Mark Webb had a well thought out plan for this franchise, but with the excising of entire characters, and plots points from movies that desperately need them, I really don't think anyone knows what they're doing.

Personally I just hope that it leans towards gwen becoming carnage but that's a different story. That and peters dad revealing to just be another clone. I guess I'm more forgiving just because even bad superhero movies are superhero movies. I'm pretty sure they could just hire a competent director or producer to make a better movie. I also understand that the MCU does things differently and I accept that. I'm not someone who's hates something because everyone says I should. Also looking back the MCU doesn't set up things for the future but forgets things from the past. The entire character development from the first 20 minutes of iron man 1 completely flew out the window for every sequel involving iron man after that. The Marvel movies have many flaws that people overlook because it is still something amazing. I don't feel any different here with spider-man.

Personally, I got like this after the first film. I was foolish enough to get my hopes up for round 2, but I guess now I don't need to bother with Sony hero flicks for a while.
Frankly, I still can't get over that "shocking" [hilarious] scene toward the end! Everyone in the audience including myself all started giggling and then the giggling settled into confused whispers of "...was that funny on purpose?" and such.

I totally understand your frustration Bob. Was a pretty piss poor movie. Piss poor superhero movies can still be fun, but the attempt at interfilm continuity in this fealt less like the promise of and interesting new breed of entertainment spanning many instalments, and more like Microsoft's attempt at taking over the entertainment world. Like Sony merely having found a way to all but stop the movie and show us a trailer for whatever else there cooking up.
And god...DAMN, the product placement! No shame!

aww, on one hand I really feel bad for Bob, on the other I am glad it was him and not me that had to suffer through, what i could easily tell was going to be, another bad Spidey movie.
Somewhere in the back of my head was still an off chance that I may give this movie a "oh why not" shot. Thanks to Bob, I now know not to even give the "film" a remote chance (probably not even if its free... probably, a free movie is still a free movie and i could always try and make fun of it all while watching).
I surely hope one day Spidey gets revived and pieces of you can be made whole once more. I too have felt the pain of watching something i once enjoyed turn sour, and have a distinct feeling another tragedy is soon to befall us all (i'm looking at you TMNT M.Bay Nightmare).
Anyways, a big THANK YOU to Bob, saved me time and money that i might have foolishly spent one lazy, nothing-better-to-do night. Know that your reviews are appreciated and your suffering has not been in vain. You are one of the few movie reviewers I trust and usually am in agreement with your reviews.
Stay Strong! Guardians of the Galaxy is not too far away!

Watched the Big Picture and then this straight after. Whelp!

I don't really have the money to watch all these comic book adaptations in the cinema.

There are still good films out there, you have to go looking for the really hard to find stuff. Man the Cinefamily Vimeo account is awesome, have found so much stuff.

Also scrolling through the Warner Archive Collection and just picking movies from the covers.

Back to Spiderman. Didn't he have a fight with the X-Men at one point and win? http://www.jpj.net/~angel/SvsX/SvsX.html To quote Wolverine "He made us look like fools! Like amateurs!"

Maybe someone could do a Roger Corman with the Fanastic Four and make a good movie that they will not release?

Deadpool movie should be an easy sell surely? Plenty of snark.

The Legion of Doom movie could also work as a comedy if they just show all the bad guys in a room getting their plans foiled. "As the smartest gorilla in the world, I am incapable of anything else."

So Bob is now in his Venom period?

RJ Dalton:

IamLEAM1983:

Or, shit - someone convince Sam Raimi to reboot those reboots. Anything, literally *anything* would be better than this.

Hell, I'd just say have Sam Raimi pick up the original Spider-Man series where it left off. The Bond franchise had at least eight meh-to-downright-bad movies in it and it still kept going, because nothing is ever perfect 100% of the time. So Spider-Man 3 was kind of a bust, so what? Move on and make the next one better.

But noooooooo! Batman rebooted and that was successful, so we've got to reboot everything.

That's one of the problems with comic in general, every hero is locked in an endless time loop like the movie Groundhogs Day. Sure there may be some minor differences in the details here and there but everything will unfold exactly the same way as it has before. The reason Avengers was so good was because they got all that origin story stuff out of the way beforehand and could just get down to business. More of these superhero movies would be helped if (for example) they just started with Parker already as Spider Man. They cna give a few mins getting any newcomers up to speed just not have that be the entire movie. At this point 90% of the people going to see these movies already know more or less how the origin goes so it's just going to be dull and repetitive, especially if its so soon between reboots.

Characters dying (at least the big name ones) holds no shock value because we all know it won't stick. Either they will find a way to pull a Monty Python and just get better, or the suits in charge will hit the reset button that has been worn down to a nub by now. It's not about telling a complete three act story anymore. Rather its maintaining the status quo in order to keep milking the same cow even after it has died and been brought back to life like a Frankenstein monster.

Well, we get the film industry we deserve. This will probably gross close to a billion again.

Oh I never liked Spider-Man in the slightest bit. I've always had a burning hatred for the whiny character and as for the previous four films, I just hated them all of them so badly so I'm skipping this one. Then again I hate comic books in general these days with the only things that I like being The Dark Knight Trilogy, the X-Men film series and the excellent Marvel Cinematic Universe. Other than those three, comics don't interest me in the slightest bit.

Although I am surprised to see Bob hate this movie with a Revenge of the Fallen passion considering he thought One More Day wasn't that bad. XD But c'mon Bob, it's just a crappy movie. Yeah there's more to come but there's still other Marvel movies out there. Then again I don't completely understand why you're so upset because I hate Spider-Man and wish he burned in hell. :/

I kind of felt this way after watching the second Hobbit movie. I adored LOTRs. Sure, it wasn't perfect (Arwen, urgh) but it was still a great, fun set of films, presented as an overarching character-story with Frodo being the main character in Fellowship and Frodo and Aragorn being the main characters once their stories fork in different directions. But when I watch the Hobbit and the second Hobbit....I feel like it's become more about the display than the story.

I'm sorry Bob. /patpat

 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