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
 

Remember when children's cartoons (particularly one in which the main character wasn't allowed to *punch* anyone) had more thoughtful introspection on the nature of loss and coming to terms with their own being than serious films? Pepridge Farms remembers.

At least the Marvel Studios movies keep the spirit of the characters alive. The most recent Captain America had him having to deal with the bad things the government he trusted is doing (including the infiltration and corruption). Hell yes that would happen. Jackson as Fury is the most brilliant casting ever as well.

The Amazings, Wolverines, and *Shudder* Fantastic Four movies have just been dull lifeless robots put into place to trick people for as long as they could. Good thing 60s X-Men at least has a soul.

Wow. OK, despite having the funniest subtitle I've seen since the Escapist started doing them, I feel bad for Bob. He's hated movies before with unbridled fury, but ASM2 gave him an existential dilemma. I think he needs a hug and a few beers.

Just please don't cram this into every other video you do from here on out, like you did with certain others.

Slightly off-topic: What's so bad about Peter Parker finding out his parents were agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.?

captcha: Nonstop You
I think Bob's been stopped dead in his tracks by this one.

SonOfVoorhees:
I read about the ending on wikipedia. An if it does end that way then id react the same way. lol. They are world building as quick as possible. Same as what DC are doing with BvS to get their JL movie set up. All the suits are rushing everything to make Avengers box office while ignoring what Marvel had to do and the time and risk to get there.

^Agreed.
Just like DC, they're trying too hard to rush to that Avengers gold finish, only without realizing that the very reason The Avengers worked is because every main character has had time to develop in a previous film, and each film does something to connect it to the others.

But even then, The Avengers is just a damn fun action flick; continuity hiccups and all.

If this is the route Sony and DC are going to take; well, I'm definitely going to avoid seeing any of the company's respective films going forward. (friends are trying to drag me to this film tonight...I'm trying to tell them I'm not really interested in Spiderman)

Not that I needed further encouragement to avoid DC. Last year, I was dragged to Man of Steel and sure enough I spent the entirety of that film bored and annoyed. Not for any of the "controversial" reasons comic geeks had, but because as a story, it felt rushed; resulting in some of the flattest blandest characters I've ever seen in a film.

gogool808:

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.

Honestly if these movies were being made alongside Marvel's own Spider-man movies then I think I'd be judging them a lot less harshly. I wouldn't love them, but I wouldn't go out of my way top hate them since I'd have perfectly good Spider-man movies to fall back on, but instead the continued success of this flawed film franchise is the reason marvel isn't making Spider-man films, so i can't help but feel I'm heaping my frustrations, and expectations on them.

And now you know how I felt during Mass Effect 3.

In fact, you could take the beginning and end monologue, swap out Spider Man for Mass Effect, and it would be a pretty accurate summation.

For the first time since 2007, I can actually relate to Moviebob.

Oh sure, NOW they make a movie tie-in video game that actually matches the movie.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/05/02/amazing-in-quotes

This movie is kinda frustrating to me. There were a few good moments, but there were several more bad moments.

Honestly Bob, I'm kinda surprised that you didn't mention

Anyway, I do have to agree on the whole sequel thing now that you mentioned it. It does seem like this movie's purpose was to set up several sequels and spin offs to make cash off of. And as a result, the movie was just very unfocused.

Although personally, I do like Garfield's performance. I feel he and Emma Stone have really good chemistry, and I do enjoy all the scenes they have together.

As for...

Finally.

To me, this movie had potential. As I actually did like the first movie despite some of it's flaws. But it was just an unfocused mess that had a bunch of good moments be overshadowed by the bad ones.

Oh man. Man, do I get this. This is exactly how I walked out of Green Lantern. Something I love just rendered into utterly worthless crap. I feel for you, Bob. I really, truly do. Honestly, I wouldn't even complain if Marvel got the rights back to Spidey, not because I want Avengers with Spidey or something stupid like that, but because they've proven that they know what do do with the properties they bring to the table and I don't want this kind of thing to happen to more people who truly love these characters. I've all but given up hope that DC can be saved as anything more than action figures at this point, but man do I wish that Disney could somehow just take everything that has escaped Marvel and bring it back to their sandbox (with the possible exception of X-Men at this point, we'll see how Days of Future Past plays out). If you're ever down it Texas I'll buy you a drink, brother.

Got back from it last night, and as predicted I disagree with Bob. Andrew is perfect in the role, his chemistry with Emma Stone is perfect, Dehaan's great, Sally Field is great, etcetera. Narratively it is indeed a cobweb, resembling Iron Man 2 in a lot of ways. Multiple threads going on at once that converge at the end, perhaps not exactly gracefully. They both even have the "long dead father provides the narrative McGuffin" trope. But the movie is fun on the strength of its leads alone; not ideal but certainly not terrible.. Electro's switch from unstable floor mat to megalomania is a little jarring, but like The Lizard before him I can't help but feel there's a lot of him on the cutting room floor. Almost 90% of the deleted scenes for Amazing 1 were all Conners/Lizard stuff. There's almost certainly a lot of Harry on the cutting room floor as well.

So yeah, sorry Bob but I disagree with you. I've enjoyed these two Spider-Man movies far more than the wooden and emotionally shallow Raimi trilogy by a wide margin. I'm not going to be an arrogant prick and tell you you're wrong about subjective media, however.

Not trying to start a fight here. Honest question.

Master Taffer:
Electro's switch from unstable floor mat to megalomania is a little jarring, but like the Lizard before him I can't help but feel there's a lot of him on the cutting room floor.

Are you saying Electro is a problem but that you don't mind it because they probably filmed a lot of stuff they didn't end up showing you?

JimB:
Not trying to start a fight here. Honest question.

Master Taffer:
Electro's switch from unstable floor mat to megalomania is a little jarring, but like the Lizard before him I can't help but feel there's a lot of him on the cutting room floor.

Are you saying Electro is a problem but that you don't mind it because they probably filmed a lot of stuff they didn't end up showing you?

No no, I'm saying it's a problem. I'm just hypothesizing that the problem might be due to editing.

Okay. Thanks for answering the question, Master Taffer. I have been in positions where I found myself willing to somewhat forgive a problem because I had an intuition that something better could have happened if not for things behind the scenes (can't remember any examples off the top of my head, though), and wondered if something like that was going on here.

JimB:
Okay. Thanks for answering the question, Master Taffer. I have been in positions where I found myself willing to somewhat forgive a problem because I had an intuition that something better could have happened if not for things behind the scenes (can't remember any examples off the top of my head, though), and wondered if something like that was going on here.

It's potentially happening here fore me. With ASM1 the vast majority of the cut and alternate content was Conners and Lizard stuff, most notably where he interacts with Peter quite a bit. Of note were two scenes; one where Conners waits for Peter at his home to give his condolences to him for Ben and an alternate scene where instead of finding Conners' plan on a video file he actually finds Conners himself. They added a lot to his character and I assume it was cut because of the length of the film (both ASM1 and 2 are pretty long movies already), and if it's a choice between developing protagonist or antagonist in the case of Spidey the protagonist is the obvious choice. I'll have to wait for the movie to come out for home consumption to see if that's the case here as well.

I really liked this film.

Spiderman is still Spiderman and thus far he's always been entertaining.

I see alot of arguing going on here over which of the two series is objectively better but personally I don't see alot of difference between them, they share alot of the same problems and whatever version you happen to prefer really just comes down personal preferences.

Personally I prefer the Amazing Spiderman films over the originals for various reasons but their all still fun to watch, as I said before Spiderman is always entertaining.

Sniper Team 4:
By the way, those opening lines, about being in love with something and then having it tainted? That's how I'm worried I'm going to feel about Star Wars.

If you didn't already feel like that upon watching Episode 1, I wouldn't worry about it. Firstly, there's not really any direction on the quality scale to go but up from there, and secondly you clearly don't have any particular emotional investment in the franchise if Ep. 1 didn't flip your "I'm done with this shit" switch already.

Welcome to my world, Bob. I've been here since 1997. Frankly, I hated the Raimi Spider-man movies. I detested the Nolan Batman movies. And I can't wait for my favorite obscure Marvel hero, Star-Lord to get ruined in Guardians of the Galaxy. I'm just sick of super hero movies in general.

This side of the nerd abyss isn't so bad. There just isn't much about it that makes you happy. It's a lot like growing up.

I really hate how people prop up Marvel, like their cookie cutter, weightless films is the template for all superhero films. Phase 2 has been a joke, with crap stories, forced comedy, and cliffhangers which render the films useless.

Jim_Callahan:

Sniper Team 4:
By the way, those opening lines, about being in love with something and then having it tainted? That's how I'm worried I'm going to feel about Star Wars.

If you didn't already feel like that upon watching Episode 1, I wouldn't worry about it. Firstly, there's not really any direction on the quality scale to go but up from there, and secondly you clearly don't have any particular emotional investment in the franchise if Ep. 1 didn't flip your "I'm done with this shit" switch already.

I am able to ignore Episode I, II, and III (which, to me, is the worst of the lot for lore reasons) because they barely had any affect on the Expanded Universe and the characters I grew up with over the past twenty-five years. The authors just sort of went, "Yeah, that happened, but whatever," and kept telling stories about Luke, Han, Leia, Chewie, Jacen, Anakin, Jaina, Zekk, Tenel Ka, Raynar Wedge, Hobbie, Face, Jenkins, Piggy, Admiral Ackbar, Tahiri, Ben, Mara Jade, and everyone else. Now that Disney has decided none of that happened, I am very worried.

And for the sake of my sanity, and preventing a pointless fight on the internet, I'm going to pretend that you said this in jest, in a good humor sense of way. Because if you didn't--if you truly are serious when you say that someone doesn't have a deep connection to something because they don't feel the same way about one part of it that you do--then that is a very good way to get yourself into fights, either verbally or physically. It's like saying to a girl, "Prove it," when she says she's a gamer or a nerd about something.

I really enjoyed the movie. It wasn't any sort of classic but I had a lot more fun with it than I did the original 3. I'm really hoping for more, and I can't stop listening to the Elecro music from the movie. So I guess my point would be to watch it for yourself instead of assume it's bad because a critic said so.

I hope my opinion doesn't occur the wrath of a guy I see harping on everyone for going against the critic here though, I just feel like it was a decent film.

I just got back from watching ASM2, and WOW, the only word coming to mind is WOW. Bob, you couldn't be further off the mark if you tired, but I expected that after you raged on the first movie despite how great it was.

My review? ASM2 is not just better than ASM, but it blows it out of the water in just about every way, so much so I think it's even surpassed the Avengers in many ways. The characters are brilliantly written, the feel and character personalities closely mirror the comics especially the Ultimates version, the actors are great in their roles, the character's motivations make perfect sense, the plot feel natural, instead of that "3 act structure" crap that so many call the epitome of good writing when it's actually terrible, (note: real life is pretty disjointed and chaotic, it's buildup to action to more action to buildup to nothing happening to action out of nowhere etc. and plots should follow that) the action was great while the CGI did a good job of not looking fake, and it didn't get bogged down every other scene by lovey dovey scenes (they were there yes, but they didn't dominate the whole movie like with the 3 Raimi movies) nor did they make just about all the motivation for everything Peter did especially fighting the super villains be about impressing or rescuing the girl like the Sam Raimi movies did. Also, once again just like the previous movie the damned love interest actually DOES something besides get kidnapped and used as a hostage, and doesn't go out of her way to cause problems, despite how she ends up at the end.

One last thing, I'll say it, Andrew Garfield is the best person to portray both Spider-Man and Peter Parker since the 90's animated series. He makes horrible quips constantly as Spider-Man as the character should but knows when to drop it and get serious, and as Peter Parker is delightfully awkward and bumbling around other people but not to a ridiculously played up extent like the Raimi movies were. Probably the most important though, is that whether as Spider-Man or Peter, Andrew Garfield actually sounds like he cares about what's going on, while this Spider-Man KNOWS HOW TO HAVE FUN and not worry too much about his problems, which to be fair he doesn't have much of yet. With Tobey Maguire either because of bad acting or just because he just naturally sounds like that he never sounds like he gives a damn about what is going on or like he's so depressed he's 2 minutes from cutting his wrists, even when his face emotes his voice doesn't.

scorptatious:

Honestly Bob, I'm kinda surprised that you didn't mention

Probably because A. they didn't care to use the time for it and B. it would be both stupid and lazy of them to do so, as a significant portion of Peter's character development in the first movie was learning to let go of his vendetta and use his powers responsibly. Peter going after Ben's killer (who if I were him would have left the city long ago anyway) now would have largely invalidated this character development. It doesn't particularly matter what happened to Ben's Killer in either movie anyway.

Having Peter give up being Spider-Man for 5 months and spend that time staring at her grave on apparently a daily basis is glossing over it? I don't know how they could have done it better without devoting half the movie to it.

How so? Since he created those spiders to begin with and needed human DNA to do it it's only natural that either Richard Parker or one of the people on staff would have been the donor, especially if he wanted to ensure that his work couldn't be properly reproduced without him. It also gives a good excuse as to why the spider venom worked with Peter but not with Harry.

Just saw ASM2, and I have to say... it was excellent. Best Spidey movie of the five we have so far.

While I love the Raimi trilogy dearly, they feel like "Sam Raimi's Spider-Man". The ASM films feel like "Marvel Comics' (occasionally Ultimate) Spider-Man", and I much prefer that in a Spidey film.

All I'll add is that the ending (everything: Gwen, Rhino, all of it) just plain worked, and when the movie was over, the theater applauded. Haven't seen that happen in a theater since Avengers.

I feel your pain, brother. I've sat through 3 Transformers movies, and I feel your pain.

Just got back from seeing this. I don't get it Bob. Did you see a different movie then I did? I really enjoyed it. I didn't think I would, but I really did

My theater applauded at the end as well.

Nowhere Man:
Just got back from seeing this. I don't get it Bob. Did you see a different movie then I did? I really enjoyed it. I didn't think I would, but I really did

My theater applauded at the end as well.

The way I see it a good critic should divorce themselves from their own disinterests, but bob is a comic book fanboy and thus it's not right unless it fits with his little niche. Practically ever videa he holds up the avengers like some sort of pinnacle of movie making. His boyhood fantasy of the sort of movie he always wanted to see. That's fine for him. Personally I found the avengers incredibly dull, boring, badly written badly cut and lacking. It's his show, his format and he can say whatever he wants. The constant omg the avengers gets is getting as irritating as omg johnny depp in a weird hat thing though.

I'd say about 9/10 of these comments are agreeing with MB. Some of the people are just extrapolating on his review without even having bothered to watch the movie themselves. I'm going to be a dissenting voice to this review because I actually kinda liked it.
Garfield is a much better Spidey than the depressing nerd version that Maguire portrayed.

Garfield and Stone have great chemistry as a couple(leagues better than Dunst and Maguire). They made Spider-Man feel powerful again. He seems like the hero that could take on multiple villains on a weekly basis instead of the one that gets his ass handed to him by every minor villain. The music fits the action better than almost any film I've seen especially the Hans Zimmer/Pharrell team-up for Electro's Theme. I actually like that Rhino had a more minor role as basically an up-jumped thug. Not every villain needs to be complex multi-layered character. It's kind of a breath of fresh air to see a villain that's not the genius turned madman character. I think that at the very least this was an enjoyable popcorn flick and definitely worth the watch even just for the eye candy.

I think when you see this kind of reaction to a movie it is more of an issue with the reviewer than the movie itself. He seemed to like the Raimi movies but if you go back and rewatch those without your nostalgia glasses on they have lost a lot of their luster and the new films actually look pretty good in comparison. This is the kind of review where I can't help but think that he went into the movie wanting to hate it and that is exactly what he got out of it.

deathbydeath:
It's possible to give rational analyses of things you despise. I, for example, hate Deus Ex: Human Revolution with a passion that could burn houses down, but if you asked me to sit down and give it a formal review I'd say the game is good and give it a score somewhere around 4/5.

Preach on. I despised Human Revolution for every decision the devs made in it -- I couldn't even get past the Everything Is Orange bs (no joke: it hurts my eyes for several days after playing). I adore Deus Ex and suffered through several playthroughs of the objectively bad Deus Ex 2, and while I understand that Human Revolution is not as bad, it's just such a bad Deus Ex game that I can't play through it. And yet I also understand that there's a crap-ton of people who like it.

Which is bad for me, because that means the franchise will go off in a bad direction. Which it already did -- look at the latest installment.

So I sympathize with Bob. We can't avoid more bad Spider-Man. It can't be escaped. I'm right there, too.

Hey Bob, I'm glad to see a fellow critic approaching this from the perspective of a fan. I review based on a star system, I gave the first film a single star, this one I gave a three solely based on Foxx's performance and the small improvements they made on the first film. Hindsight, feeling it's more of a two now. Prior to writing my review I heard a bunch of people giving it high praise on the radio and thought maybe I'm just being a snobby critic and I should go easier on this film. No, Spiderman was as huge an influence on me as he was on you. Peter Parker was the worst part of this film. To me he is supposed to be a quintessential geek fantasy of the nerd becoming the hero. I played the games and had some of the comics and this was just not him.

Electro kept it engaging, his buddy-comedy-I-need-you with Harry Osborn was the best chemistry on camera. I know Garfield and Stone are dating in real life but they were just frustrating to watch like that jock and cheerleader couple you see in every high school rom com that just isn't clicking and she's fed up with his bs and he is clingy as all you-know-what.

I'd rather Sony pump money into a family drama pic with DeHaan and Tom Felton as a couple of boys with big daddy issues because at least that would be something more co-cohesive and engaging than this film. I'm posting a link to my review at the bottom of this, not for promotional purposes but as a discussion point. Hindsight, I think I went to easy on it, I'm just starting out as a critic and I second guess myself when I think my not liking something might just be snobby.

http://tawfikzone.com/?p=421

Outch Bob you pretty much sound like how I felt after I saw Man of Steel for the first time.(Well except it didn't taint everything that is Superman for me and was still able to go home and watch Superman Returns to put a smile back on my face)
Man of Steel both infuriated me and broke my heart. Mainly because I knew what they were trying to pull off had worked and people thought that's what Superman has to be for today's audiences, and yet no on has any problems with Mr. Boy Scout Rogers(neither do I).

Meh. I liked the film.

Sucks to be you, I guess.

And now Bob understands what Mass Effect fans went through after Mass Effect 3.

OT: The scene Bob laughed at... wasn't remotely funny. It was horrifyingly brutal and honestly made me cringe. It was the only part of the movie that actually managed to elicit an emotional response from me as well.

That is until they ruined it by not ending the movie where they should have.

That was the most frustrating thing about this movie. For every great moment, there were at least five bad ones. The constant tonal shifts made it really hard to stay invested.

"Want this move to fail" "sick and tired of Spiderman"

Exactly how I felt after the first ASM (ASM, it sounds like a sexually transmitted disease, pretty fitting really). When I heard that a second film was actually being made, it was like being kicked in the gut, after already being floored from the kick to the testicles which was ASM 1.

They say Rhino looks like Transformers but I know where they really ripped off the design. Machinegun, multi rocket launcher and face window? Yeah I've seen that.
image

Hey Bob,

I don't really have an opinion of this film, except to say that I haven't seen it or its predecessor (in large part because of your review of the former). Just wanted to comment that this video is a lovely example of what I enjoy most about your work. It's almost a "Big Picture" video that somehow infiltrated into "Escape to the Movies". Thanks.

One of the best spidey movie !!! for me this is the best and perfect !!! i wish there would be new heroin for spidey in next movie ... 5/5 !!!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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