The Amazing Spider-Man 2 gets mediocre reviews: ala Spiderman 3 - Polidicks

Guess they are gonna skip a part 3 and reboot the reboot, no? You know, because rebooting franchises is apparently a big thing now a days?

I honestly liked this movie, but the other marvel movies are way better (for example the last Captain America movie, it was really good) I just wish Disney will get the rights someday, Spidey deserves more than this, even if Andrew fits the role better than Tobey imho

I liked it

I enjoyed the film, it suffered purely because Sony were pushing so hard to desperately cram as much extended universe stuff in there as possible. Was Dan Dehaan a good actor? Absolutely. Was this role wasted on him because he's just sequel bait? Absolutely. It really sucks because everything about Electro was so damn spot-on. And it was funny.

For me, the core problem with this is [sp]changing Peter's origin story by having his Dad an important scientist. It took out how much you can relate to Peter. At least in the original films, he was just some dorky kid that randomly gets bitten by a spider. It made seem like anyone, like I dunno, the viewer, could be Spider-Man and he deals with all the shit teenagers/young adults have to deal with but having to balance that with Spidey life, which the original Spider-Man 2 just did.. But now they changed it to your dad has to be an important scientist for that shit to happen. And the film wanders off too much with that plot that doesn't really impact anyone that much, and cause the film didn't made me care enough.[/sp] The original Spider-Man 2 will always be the height of any Spider-Man film.

[QUOTE=Rammaster;44712046]For me, the core problem with this is [sp]changing Peter's origin story by having his Dad an important scientist. It took out how much you can relate to Peter. At least in the original films, he was just some dorky kid that randomly gets bitten by a spider. It made seem like anyone, like I dunno, the viewer, could be Spider-Man and he deals with all the shit teenagers/young adults have to deal with but having to balance that with Spidey life, which the original Spider-Man 2 just did.. But now they changed it to your dad has to be an important scientist for that shit to happen. And the film wanders off too much with that plot that doesn't really impact anyone that much, and cause the film didn't made me care enough.[/sp] The original Spider-Man 2 will always be the height of any Spider-Man film.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately, all of peter parker from these films is Ultimate Spiderman, not Amazing Spiderman. Booo.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44709586]Nothing can be worse than 3. Why? This scene:[/QUOTE] Wasn't the cringeworthiness the whole point of that scene? It reinforced Peter Parker's still an awkward dork off duty that wants to be "cool" - that's why Venom can tempt him with a "cool" power fantasy. The kinda self-absorbed watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here "cool" you grow eventually out of, which is part of the reason why you want [i]him[/i] to grow out of the suit. I don't think the concept was executed well, but that scene had its purpose and was, as blunt as it was implemented, painfully effective IMO.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44709586]It's nearly as shitacularlymazing as the Dark Knight Rises plane scene.[/QUOTE] lol what

I saw the movie the other week and I thought it was better than the first, but it's not 'amazing'. The main problem I have with the 'Amazing' movies it Andrew Garfield. I feel that he makes a decent Spiderman, but I really don't like how he acts as Peter Parker. He's a little too douchy feeling in my opinion, if he dialed it back it would be considerably better.

I'm staying away from this film because of exactly this, first one felt a kick to the balls as it is. I'd still like Sony to keep the rights to Spider-Man though. The Marvel universe is just generic Hollywood fluff for the most part.

They've still yet to get a Spiderman actor than can portray him as the perfect balance of goofiness and tongue in cheek badassery he is in the comics. Tobey Macguire was too much goofiness and Andrew Garfield is just too much 'teenage heartthrob'

[QUOTE=koeniginator;44709717]not great [img]http://i.imgur.com/ADrtb3t.png[/img][/QUOTE] The only thing that could have made that game slightly better would be a soundtrack done by KMFDM like spiderman 2's game adaptation: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ovw_1xcFug[/media] Fighting enemies to this was the shit. [URL="http://grooveshark.com/#!/album/Spider+Man+2+Videogame/4552519"]It's really all great.[/URL]

That's a shame, I really like Andrew Garfield as Spidey.

[QUOTE=Rammaster;44712046]For me, the core problem with this is [sp]changing Peter's origin story by having his Dad an important scientist. It took out how much you can relate to Peter. At least in the original films, he was just some dorky kid that randomly gets bitten by a spider. It made seem like anyone, like I dunno, the viewer, could be Spider-Man and he deals with all the shit teenagers/young adults have to deal with but having to balance that with Spidey life, which the original Spider-Man 2 just did.. But now they changed it to your dad has to be an important scientist for that shit to happen. And the film wanders off too much with that plot that doesn't really impact anyone that much, and cause the film didn't made me care enough.[/sp] The original Spider-Man 2 will always be the height of any Spider-Man film.[/QUOTE] Well in the original comics, his parents are SHIELD agents. Rights issues kinda forced them into using the Ultimate backstory. And besides, "important scientist dad" is much more believable and relatable than "secret spy dad"

I'm still confused about this. I was completely disappointed by the first ASM and I had zero expectations for the second. When I walked out of the cinema I was actually happy that I saw it. Electro I think was handled as best as he could, at least their version, which is your average slightly crazy outsider driven super crazy by huge amount of power. From trailers it's obvious they shot more scenes than there are in the movie and some of them looked more interesting than the ones we got in the final cut. There are a lot of stupid secondary characters that only take valuable screentime (Kafka and Harry's secretary for example). A lot of complaints are aimed at the love story. Now I'm not a fan but there was definitely a chemistry between Peter and Gwen that made it watchable.

As much as I hated SM3, the fight scenes that were done with practical effects were great in Raimi's movies. Some of the fights were really brutal, especially the end fight in SM1. Are there any non-cgi fight scenes in this one?

The Average Spider-Man

All I really want to see is a Carnage movie, just once.

[QUOTE=Marden;44712757] There are a lot of stupid secondary characters that only take valuable screentime (Kafka and Harry's secretary for example).[/QUOTE] That's because they're comic characters. It's been said the secretary will become Black Cat.

I still think Topher Grace should have been Parker all along.

I saw this with some friends last week. I didn't get what was going on, although maybe it's because it's a sequel to a film I've never seen. It was OK, I guess. Wouldn't recommend it to anyone, though.

[QUOTE=SexualShark;44708728]pure teen angst in this oh god it was horrible[/QUOTE] I can't remember any "teen angst" scenes. I've really liked both films so far, but then I haven't seen the old Spiderman films in ages.

I don't know why, but the Amazing Spider-Man movies felt a lot more cheap and rushed than the first trilogy was, even though they weren't that great either.

I watched it last night, and where the first Amazing Spiderman movie was enjoyable though forgettable, this one was just a plodding mess of a movie. The first thing I noticed was that Andrew Garfield was acting eerily similar to Hayden Christensen in the Star Wars prequels. The same irritating, unlikable, whiny attitude. He even looked strangely similar. If you thought Tobey was blubbery in the first movies, in this one there's hardly a scene where Garfield has his mask off where he's NOT choking back tears. The second problem was the villains. I thought we learned from Spiderman 3 that throwing in too many villains is a recipe for a confusing and unfocused plot. Spiderman 1 and 2 managed to establish their villains and give them compelling backstories within the first 20 minutes of the movie! This one it felt like it wasn't until 40 minutes in that Electro finally has his accident, and then another 20 before he actually starts becoming a villain. The movie felt like it was just padding everything out so it could be 2.5 hours long, like every other movie is nowadays. Then there were too many plotlines, which served very little purpose [sp]for instance, the entire plotline about his dad, and how they built up the whole mystery surrounding his special project. The only thing that plotline served for the story was to say that the spider venom wouldn't work on Harry. The plotline between Gwen and Peter felt terribly forced, and it became painfully obvious she wouldn't survive as soon as she said she was going to Oxford. Harry felt like he went way too crazy way too quickly, and Electro's whole spiderman obsession evaporates into him just being a generic villain once he's got his electro powers (all the villains hate spiderman! His hatred isn't any different!)[/sp] There was also the incomprehensible CG fight scenes. Half the time I literally could not tell what was happening during a fight. The movie was too long, to unfocused, and the characters weren't likable or compelling enough to make it worth it. I'd say this was just about as bad as Spiderman 3.

Keep in mind that Avi Arad, the producer of this film (and Spider-Man 3), is also producing the Metal Gear Solid movie. I fear for the future.

[QUOTE=Bynine;44712957]The Average Spider-Man[/QUOTE] Spiderman: Turn off the dark

I quite enjoyed this movie. I wasn't really expecting much at first and I have a huge boner for the first trilogy of Spiderman movies. Thinking back though I kinda thought the pacing was horrible. The movie plays out well but when you look back you realize everything gets rushed right at the end.

After watching the movie myself, I think it was a decent movie. I'd watch it again with a group and probably again when nothing else good is on. Needed more CGI destruction of the city, though. Like, Godzilla scale stuff. I cannot wait for the Godzilla remake.

It was a lot better than I expected, honestly. All I heard was how terrible and Spiderman 3 it was before I saw it, but I was really surprised at how much I liked it. It had some crappy dialogue and obvious plotholes, but I was thoroughly entertained throughout. In my opinion, the first one is way worse. I didn't like it much at all, but this one definitely sold me on the upcoming sequel. But that's why I never really pay attention to Rotten Tomatoes. I almost always disagree with their ratings. Everything either seems super underrated or super overrated. [editline]4th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Janus Vesta;44709638]Once I saw the trailer I was expecting it to be bad. I mean you have Electro, Green Goblin and Harry Osborne, AND Rhino? I can understand having 2 bad guys if you use one as a flunky but this film has 3 films worth of bad guys crammed into it. Did they learn nothing from Spiderman 3?[/QUOTE] Harry and Green Goblin are the same thing practically, Electro being alongside him is kind of necessary, and Rhino only has a few minutes of screen time at the very end to set up the next movies so he really doesn't even count in my opinion. It's not like Spiderman 3.

[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;44716909]Keep in mind that Avi Arad, the producer of this film (and Spider-Man 3), is also producing the Metal Gear Solid movie. I fear for the future.[/QUOTE] Why are they making a movie of a movie?