The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Andrew Garfield IS Spider-Man!

[The Vigilante]

Riiiiight. Nerds don't exist anymore. Anyone who says that obviously hasn't been in high school for a while or is completely removed from reality. People keep throwing around the terms "modernized" and "realistic" like they actually mean something.

Well actually I'm a senior in high school. And yeah while nerds like Max Dillon and those 2 that were walking behind Peter do exist, it doesn't mean Peter has to be. Peter Parker was created to be the underdog who was given a gift. In 1963, that underdog was nerds with sweater vest and big round glasses. Today, the underdogs are people like Peter who get bullied, are outsiders, and have no friends. And I've seen these kinds of people first hand and I feel Andrew's Peter is relatable this way.

Yes, but he learns from those mistakes and takes them to heart. Attonement and guilt are at the core of the character. He may not be perfect, but that doesn't mean he doesn't make the effort to do the right thing/make the right choice.

Guilt is a key point of the character of Spider-Man. Don't you remember that part during the dinner scene where Captain Stacy points out that "The Spider Guy" is just going around beating up the same kind of people instead of actually trying to help the innocents. This was a moment where actions speak louder than words and you can see Peter's face change as he processes this. And what's the next scene? him saving a bunch of cars and people from the lizard and giving hope to a little boy. That is the moment he shifts from a vigilante to a hero. Also like to point out that the whole reason Peter goes after Conners is because he feels responsible and guilty for indirectly turning him into the Lizard.

I'd argue he should have learned about responsibilty from his Uncle's death, but no, this needs to bedelayed and stretched out until Gwen dies. Then what? He can never be with anyone again after his next supposed "lesson", right? Oh wait, Mary Jane is the next love interest, right? Okay, scrap that. There are other lessons that Peter can learn other than "with great power there must also come great responsibility." (Raimi's films did this).

Who says he hasn't already learned about responsibility? The fact of the matter is he's a 17 year old kid. He suddenly has all of this power and it's alot to take in. It's a story about what it means to grow up and face the consequences of your actions. He breaks the promise at the end because he saw that it was hurting Gwen and he feels he can still be Spider-Man and protect her. And as you can already see in Amazing Spider-Man 2, he feels guilty about it. And it's not like he broke the promise in a day. He broke up with her during a rainy season and avoided her up until the end where its noticeably sunny. It was a subtle way as to say that he's been keeping this promise for awhile but it's not making either of them happy

 

[Shikamaru]

So he irresponsibly chooses to break his promise to Captain Stacy? Makes sense.

Lesson learned from TASM: Being responsible is super fun! You can do pretty much whatever you want!

I see that the "Peter is an *** because he didn't keep his promise" argument has resurfaced. I still don't understand all the crap Peter gets for not keeping his promise.

A friend of mine wrote the following. He is defending Peter's decision at the end with the same arguments I've been using on this site but does a much better job than me at explaining it and getting straight to the point. The whole post is good but I bolded the part that I want you to reflect on the most:

Here’s a question: why is it that Tobey’s Peter could be with MJ because she CHOSE it in SM2, but in TASM even though Gwen WANTS to be with him, KNOWS his secret, and KNOWS the dangers that come with it… she’s not allowed that same happiness? How is it somehow more responsible to leave her to fend for herself in the wake of her father’s death? How does that make him less of an ass? No one ever explains this at all.

I mean yeah, her dad wanted that. That’s nice. Does that make every guy who ever dated a girl whose dad didn’t like him an ass? Should he have dumped her because daddy’s not fond of him? The daughter has no say? Is this the 1950s?

And furthermore, how exactly is he a “horrible person" throughout? He saves a kid’s life even at the risk of revealing himself, he got in harm’s way when he didn’t need to, he made a choice to go after the Lizard and protect people BEFORE he knew it was Curt Connors (or do people forget the scene on the bleachers ever happened?) and the best part: this comes after his selfish endeavor to only go for crooks that bore resemblance to the guy that killed Uncle Ben.

Know what that right there is? A CHARACTER ARC. What did he learn? RESPONSIBILITY. And the next movie’s official synopsis even refers to the fact that what her father says to him still weighs on his mind. Know what that might be called? AN ONGOING CHARACTER ARC.

Like seriously people, y’all act like Peter pretends his human side doesn’t exist. Like what, after Gwen’s death in the comics, should he not have stayed away from Mary Jane? Would that not have been the “responsible" thing to do? To simply break himself free of any unnecessary attachment so no one else would get hurt? Is this what you expect?

Best get angry with Stan Lee and Gerry Conway then, because they thought otherwise.

Like seriously people, what the actual frig do you want from him, because whatever you seem to recall having read is DEFINITELY NOT SPIDER-MAN.

This movie was directed by a man who grew up reading the comics, who can name the issue in which obscure, oft-forgotten things in the comics happened, who also included references in this film to Spidey comics half of everyone’s never read. (Untold Tales of Spider-Man #1 comes to mind with his conversation with Captain Stacy.) I think it’s pretty safe to say he gets him.

Source: http://theultradork.tumblr.com/post/54564397159/spider-man-rant-time

Put yourself in Gwen's shoes. Pretend as if moments prior to your mother's death, your mother told your girlfriend to stay away from you because she believes you will not be safe around her or be able to handle the rough times that will come with being with her. Your girlfriend promises to do so, breaks up with you, and stays away from you. How would you feel? Would you feel happy at your mother? Or would you feel offended and/or disgusted because she thought she could make such a decision for you and believed you couldn't make such decisions for yourself?

 

[blake c]

So he irresponsibly chooses to break his promise to Captain Stacy? Makes sense.

Lesson learned from TASM: Being responsible is super fun! You can do pretty much whatever you want!

The real lesson learned from TASM is that we all have a choice for what we use our own talents and life for. We can use them selfishly for our own reasons(Peter trying to find Uncle Ben's killer) or as a responsibility to help others(Peter saves that kid at the bridge).

 

[blake c]

Some of us just didn't care for the portrayal of the character. I guess that's pretty hard to understand though!

There really aren't nerds anymore, there are the people who make good grades, whom also dress with latest fashion and are extremely popular, then you have the kids who hate school and make f's, and you have your scene kids and the people who are really intelligent, but they just don't push themselves and happen to be socially awkward and do not take part of the terribly society around them. The last group I mentioned is pretty much exactly how Andrew betrayed Peter Parker The world is a lot different now. For me Andrew did a fantastic job (as the 9th doctor would say). He really connected with me personally.

 

[Vid Electricz]

I see that the "Peter is an *** because he didn't keep his promise" argument has resurfaced. I still don't understand all the crap Peter gets for not keeping his promise.

A friend of mine wrote the following. He is defending Peter's decision at the end with the same arguments I've been using on this site but does a much better job than me at explaining it and getting straight to the point. The whole post is good but I bolded the part that I want you to reflect on the most:

Source: http://theultradork.tumblr.com/post/54564397159/spider-man-rant-time

Put yourself in Gwen's shoes. Pretend as if moments prior to your mother's death, your mother told your girlfriend to stay away from you because she believes you will not be safe around her or be able to handle the rough times that will come with being with her. Your girlfriend promises to do so, breaks up with you, and stays away from you. How would you feel? Would you feel happy at your mother? Or would you feel offended and/or disgusted because she thought she could make such a decision for you and believed you couldn't make such decisions for yourself?

It's not the intent/content so much as the execution. The entirety of SM2 was a meditation on Peter balancing both of his lives and the responsibilites that come with each. At the end, Mary Jane finally convinces him that to face them with her. The moment feels earned. Ditto with the comics.

In TASM it's done on a lark. Almost as a tacked on aftethought to cap the movie off with a "happy" ending. It doesn't feel sincere and it certainly doesn't feel earned. A lot of people sensed that and it rubbed them the wrong way (understandably).

 

[Vid Electricz]

There really aren't nerds anymore, there are the people who make good grades, whom also dress with latest fashion and are extremely popular, then you have the kids who hate school and make f's, and you have your scene kids and the people who are really intelligent, but they just don't push themselves and happen to be socially awkward and do not take part of the terribly society around them. The last group I mentioned is pretty much exactly how Andrew betrayed Peter Parker The world is a lot different now. For me Andrew did a fantastic job (as the 9th doctor would say). He really connected with me personally.

Eh. I understand exactly what they were going for in "modernizing the character" (ie. pandering to teens). I like garfield, but I didn't "connect" at all with this version of Peter Parker.

 

[The Vigilante]

Eh. I understand exactly what they were going for in "modernizing the character" (ie. pandering to teens). I like garfield, but I didn't "connect" at all with this version of Peter Parker.

I guess that's why you don't like this version of the character then. But honestly, I connected greatly to this version of the character. With Tobey, I just felt kind of bad for him, especially in 2 and happy for him whenever things go his way, but I never connected with him. With Andrew's version, I saw myself as Peter Parker. I skateboard, I stutter, I love science and aspire to be a mechanical engineer, I wear military jackets and glasses and cut holes in my sleeves for my thumbs. It's all of those small details in the character that you stop and think "Hm I'm alot like this guy." Maybe if you connected to the character you would feel different about this interpretation.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Garfield felt like a more socially awkward teen, I was the same in my teens and i enjoyed some other modern aspects

 

[blake c]

Eh. I understand exactly what they were going for in "modernizing the character" (ie. pandering to teens). I like garfield, but I didn't "connect" at all with this version of Peter Parker.

Well then I'm glad we at least have two different Spider-man franchises that are able to connect with different groups of people. Just curious, are you going to give TASM 2 a chance? I'm really thinking this movie will change the minds of a lot of people who didn't like the first one.

 

[Shikamaru]

It's not the intent/content so much as the execution. The entirety of SM2 was a meditation on Peter balancing both of his lives and the responsibilites that come with each. At the end, Mary Jane finally convinces him that to face them with her. The moment feels earned. Ditto with the comics.

In TASM it's done on a lark. Almost as a tacked on aftethought to cap the movie off with a "happy" ending. It doesn't feel sincere and it certainly doesn't feel earned. A lot of people sensed that and it rubbed them the wrong way (understandably).

It is not the execution you and other people have a problem with. It is entirely the content. The entire root of the complaint is not rooted in a perceived poor execution, but the motives and behavior attached.

Meanwhile, in SM2, people ignore that. And you cannot take execution away from the whole. You cannot ignore that Peter intentionally tried to break up her engagement. You cannot ignore that she left her fiance at the altar and humiliated him for him. You cannot ignore these behaviors.

Yet Andrew's Peter is seen as the "***hole" because he did not abandon the girl. This, of course, ignores the fact that you're comparing a culmination of a relationship "expressed" (albeit poorly imo) over two films to one that is still fledgling.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

Well then I'm glad we at least have two different Spider-man franchises that are able to connect with different groups of people. Just urious, are you going to give TASM 2 a chance? I'm really thinking this movie will change the minds of a lot of people who didn't like the first one.

You can never be too sure, but I'm leaning towards this belief as well.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Well then I'm glad we at least have two different Spider-man franchises that are able to connect with different groups of people. Just urious, are you going to give TASM 2 a chance? I'm really thinking this movie will change the minds of a lot of people who didn't like the first one.

Of course I'm giving TASM2 a chance. I didn't hate TASM, but there were a great many things I felt could have been done better.

It is not the execution you and other people have a problem with. It is entirely the content. The entire root of the complaint is not rooted in a perceived poor execution, but the motives and behavior attached.

Meanwhile, in SM2, people ignore that. And you cannot take execution away from the whole. You cannot ignore that Peter intentionally tried to break up her engagement. You cannot ignore that she left her fiance at the altar and humiliated him for him. You cannot ignore these behaviors.

Yet Andrew's Peter is seen as the "***hole" because he did not abandon the girl. This, of course, ignores the fact that you're comparing a culmination of a relationship "expressed" (albeit poorly imo) over two films to one that is still fledgling.

Nope. As I said previously, it is the execution. Exploring these issues and giving them room to breathe over the course of two films as opposed to rushing an unearned, tacked on, feel-good moment into the end of the first film makes a world of difference. Sorry.

 

[blake c]

I'm thinking it might even make TASM more popular as well. It'll help show the character development over the movies and a lot more things will be clearer

 

[GuestStar2004]

So do we think re-telling the origin story was a good thing? For the overal story progressing through movies?

 

[Vid Electricz]

So do we think re-telling the origin story was a good thing? For the overal story progressing through movies?

I was all for it. If the series had to be re-booted, then I say go for it. Spidey's got a great and very moving origin. Omitting it would be like omitting a part of the character. I think it's necessary for understanding the character. It's not something that can be glossed over.

That said, I was less than enthused after viewing the final product.

 

[blake c]

So do we think re-telling the origin story was a good thing? For the overal story progressing through movies?

Well I'm going to say yes because of how Peter's parents worked at Oscorp, and how Peter's dad bred the Spiders. Also their suspicious deaths really add to it. The retelling of the origin, while not perfect, has really done good for Spidey. I really liked TASM, but with 3 more of these movies coming out, they are going to be a lot better all because of all the aspects to draw from thanks to the new orign

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I see that the "Peter is an *** because he didn't keep his promise" argument has resurfaced. I still don't understand all the crap Peter gets for not keeping his promise.

A friend of mine wrote the following. He is defending Peter's decision at the end with the same arguments I've been using on this site but does a much better job than me at explaining it and getting straight to the point. The whole post is good but I bolded the part that I want you to reflect on the most:

Source: http://theultradork.tumblr.com/post/54564397159/spider-man-rant-time

Put yourself in Gwen's shoes. Pretend as if moments prior to your mother's death, your mother told your girlfriend to stay away from you because she believes you will not be safe around her or be able to handle the rough times that will come with being with her. Your girlfriend promises to do so, breaks up with you, and stays away from you. How would you feel? Would you feel happy at your mother? Or would you feel offended and/or disgusted because she thought she could make such a decision for you and believed you couldn't make such decisions for yourself?

Was your girlfirend's mothers death basically a byproduct of your violent life? That's the biggest part of it, Captain Stacy doesn't disapprove of Peter, he doesn't want Gwen brought into the conflict. Him being brought into the conflict led to his death.

 

[Shikamaru]

Nope. As I said previously, it is the execution. Exploring these issues and giving them room to breathe over the course of two films as opposed to rushing an unearned, tacked on, feel-good moment into the end of the first film makes a world of difference. Sorry.

Sorry but it ain't. Your entire complaint is that Peter broke Captain Stacy's promise. May I even remind you of this:

So he irresponsibly chooses to break his promise to Captain Stacy? Makes sense.

Lesson learned from TASM: Being responsible is super fun! You can do pretty much whatever you want!

Regardless of the execution, the end result would have been the same: Peter broke Captain Stacy's promise. You cannot change that fact no matter how you execute it.

It's not that hard to read in between the lines and see what you are doing. You have no valid comeback argument to the rant I posted so now you've desperately shifted to critiquing the execution to try to still find something to complain about in that particular part of the film. Sorry to break it to you, but you're not fooling anyone.

Also, there are future consequences for Peter's decision. That's why they're building towards Gwen's death. We also know for a fact that Peter's decision to go against the promise will haunt him in TASM 2.

 

[Shikamaru]

Was your girlfirend's mothers death basically a byproduct of your violent life? That's the biggest part of it, Captain Stacy doesn't disapprove of Peter, he doesn't want Gwen brought into the conflict. Him being brought into the conflict led to his death.

Where does it hint or confirm that Gwen will become Spider-Man's sidekick in the activities he takes part of? Her going to Oscorp to make the cure was a one-time exception since Peter couldn't get there in time and that was before the promise too.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Was your girlfirend's mothers death basically a byproduct of your violent life? That's the biggest part of it, Captain Stacy doesn't disapprove of Peter, he doesn't want Gwen brought into the conflict. Him being brought into the conflict led to his death.

If said mother's death was a byproduct of said girlfriend's violent, risky lifestyle, then I'd probably think about how much creedence I put in said mothers words and respect her enough to understand that she's probably got enough wisdom to know what's what.

But hey, in TASM they had Stacy make Peter promise to "stay away" from Gwen, as opposed to the comics where Stacy made him promise to "look after" Gwen. Two completely different things.

In TASM, Peter is going to look like even more of an outright chump once Gwen dies. Like, "Oh, you didn't learn to sacrifice and protect those you love even after your Uncle's death? Oh, you were even warned to keep Gwen out of it? Now she's dead and you're to blame because you couldn't learn from any number of people you've already lost and the advice they've given you? Wow. When will you learn?"

Just seems that they're really stretching this theme thin to the state of diminishing returns.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Sorry but it ain't. Your entire complaint is that Peter broke Captain Stacy's promise. May I even remind you of this:

Regardless of the execution, the end result would have been the same: Peter broke Captain Stacy's promise. You cannot change that fact no matter how you execute it.

It's not that hard to read in between the lines and see what you are doing. You have no valid comeback argument to the rant I posted so now you've desperately shifted to critiquing the execution to try to still find something to complain about in that particular part of the film. Sorry to break it to you, but you're not fooling anyone.

Also, there are future consequences for Peter's decision. That's why they're building towards Gwen's death. We also know for a fact that Peter's decision to go against the promise will haunt him in TASM 2.

If that was what I was doing. I don't need a "comeback" (lol! Are we in the schoolyard?) because I know what I'm talking about. But nice try at discrediting me. My argument is that it's not about the end result but the method of arrival. Heck, I might have felt different about the end result if it hadn't been handled with a little more finesse and not so poorly (as was the case in TASM).

So there are future consequences for Peter's decision. They're building towards Gwen's death. We know for a fact that Peter's decision to go against the promise will haunt him in TASM 2.

Okay...so what? This is just such weak, telegraphed storytelling. Peter's Uncle dies (and he's indirectly responsible for it), he learns about power & responsibility (kind of?), then Captain Stacy dies (and he's all but directly responsible for it) AND warns him to keep Gwen out of it. Then Gwen dies (again, because of Peter). It loses it's impact after a while. It leaves you scratching your head, wondering what it'll take for this guy to learn.

 

[Crimz]

Like Garfield's portrayal a million times better than Maguire.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Like Garfield's portrayal a million times better than Maguire.

a million and a half. HAH! beat that.

 

[The Vigilante]

a million and a half. HAH! beat that.

a million and three quarters!

 

[pr0xyt0xin]