The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Critic bias towards this franchise?

[sl500jazz]

The films can be good in their own right.

You can easily say that any film you dislike is unnecessary. You can pretty much make an argument for anything and try to justify it but that doesn't make it so.

True, but as others have stated, these films don't exist in a vacuum. You can't judge something without having standards to judge it by, and for film critics, those standards have been raised by films (within the genre and/or of the same character) that have preceded TASM2.

It depends on the critic.

Critics love movies like geeks love comic books.

Are you certain film critics are immune to fandom any more than geeks?

I can't speak for every film critic. Just saying that for most professional film critics, faithfulness to the comic books probably takes a back seat to the execution of the story and quality of the film as a whole.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

True, but as others have stated, these films don't exist in a vacuum. You can't judge something without having standards to judge it by, and for film critics, those standards have been raised by films (within the genre and/or of the same character) that have preceded TASM2.




I can't speak for every film critic. Just saying that for most professional film critics, faithfulness to the comic books probably takes a back seat to the execution of the story and quality of the film as a whole.

Critics are human they're prone to fandom just like everyone else with an media obsession.

They may not obsess over superheroes but film directors? Quite possibly.

 

[GremlinZilla89]

The acting in the Raimi films is probably the worst aspect for me. It's not all bad, but where it counts it lets me down. Mainly our two leads. I find Maguire to be one of the worst mainstream actors working today. I don't buy him in 90% of the stuff I see him in. He's just Tobey Maguire.

Dunst got worse and worse as the films went on. The writing for MJ didn't help matters either. She's probably the most unlikable love interest in any superhero franchise. Hell, one of the most unlikable side characters in any superhero franchise.

Franco fared the best of the main three. He made his cheesy dialogue work for the better in Spider-Man 3.

I love Defoe as Green Goblin. One of my favorite onscreen superhero villains.

Molina does nothing for me as Ock. Sorry. He's rather A-typical imo.

Hayden-Church did pretty damn good with what he was given. Perfect casting. Wasted role.


Defoe, Simmons, Franco and Harris give the best performances in that trilogy.

 

[TeeKay]

Been an interesting read. Having watched TASM2 for the 3rd time, I still love it but Spider-Man 2 is where the Spiderman films peaked. That movie is a masterpiece in it's own right. The acting in the Raimi trilogy was bad? Remember the scene where Peter confesses to Aunt May about Uncle Ben, or the scene where Aunt May gives Peter the money and he doesn't wanna take it? I understand if people have preferrence over the other but this is not bad acting imo:

 

[GremlinZilla89]

Been an interesting read. Having watched TASM2 for the 3rd time, I still love it but Spider-Man 2 is where the Spiderman films peaked. That movie is a masterpiece in it's own right. The acting in the Raimi trilogy was bad? Remember the scene where Peter confesses to Aunt May about Uncle Ben, or the scene where Aunt May gives Peter the money and he doesn't wanna take it? I understand if people have preferrence over the other but this is not bad acting imo:

Hence, why I made it clear on WHO I felt sucked and who didn't.

 

[The Joker]

Been an interesting read. Having watched TASM2 for the 3rd time, I still love it but Spider-Man 2 is where the Spiderman films peaked. That movie is a masterpiece in it's own right. The acting in the Raimi trilogy was bad? Remember the scene where Peter confesses to Aunt May about Uncle Ben, or the scene where Aunt May gives Peter the money and he doesn't wanna take it? I understand if people have preferrence over the other but this is not bad acting imo:

Hear hear

 

[TeeKay]

Hence, why I made it clear on WHO I felt sucked and who didn't.

Maguire is a good actor. Watch Brothers. Yeah he didn't quip that much but his Peter was far more likeable and believable than Andrew Garfield in the first film. Man was he unlikeable in TASM. Never really got the hate for Dunst. Wasn't my first choice for MJ but her character's actions made sense and she actually had an arc through-out the trilogy. To each their own I guess.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Looking back on the Rami Spider Man movies, they aren't very good acting wise and Toby is a boring dull portrayal of Peter/ Spiderman, and Kristen as MJ is an insult to the comic book character, Harry's portrayal is meh, and the Green Goblin looked like a Power Ranger villain.

 

[GremlinZilla89]

Maguire is a good actor. Watch Brothers. Yeah he didn't quip that much but his Peter was far more likeable and believable than Andrew Garfield in the first film. Man was he unlikeable in TASM. Never really got the hate for Dunst. Wasn't my first choice for MJ but her character's actions made sense and she actually had an arc through-out the trilogy. To each their own I guess.

I did watch Brothers. He sucked in that too. I just don't believe anything the man does. It's that simple. And I highly disagree about Garfield. The guy is INSTANTLY more relatable and believable than Maguire, wide-eyed, dopey portrayal.

Dunst is horrid. She is there merely to be an end goal for Peter to achieve. She has no personality. All we ever know about her is that she wants to act and loves Peter.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

I did watch Brothers. He sucked in that too. I just don't believe anything the man does. It's that simple.

Dunst is horrid. She is there merely to be an end goal for Peter to achieve. She has no personality. All we ever know about her is that she wants to act and loves Peter.

Toby was BORING as Peter/ Spider man he had none of the personality and humor that Spidey is known for. Kristen or Rami clearly didn't give a crap about portraying MJ as a strong female character with depth like her comic counterpart. Instead she was whinny victim the entire trilogy with no likable qualities about her. Franco as Harry was a joke......

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Toby was BORING as Peter/ Spider man he had none of the personality and humor that Spidey is known for. Kristen or Rami clearly didn't give a crap about portraying MJ as a strong female character with depth like her comic counterpart. Instead she was whinny victim the entire trilogy with no likable qualities about her. Franco as Harry was a joke......

Tobey is a much better Peter/Spider-Man. He is likeable, nerdy, funny, and charming. Kirsten Dunst is not half as bad as some fans try to make out she is. It's fabricated hyperbole. She was a strong female character. She escaped a rough home life, made a career for herself, and even stood up to the villains several times. She was a flawed character sure, but MJ of the comics was a flawed person, too, because of her messed up childhood. That's why she treated men like objects, and threw Peter's marriage proposal back in his face that first time.

James Franco is a terrific actor and he nailed Harry Osborn. His friendship with Maguire's Peter is more real and well developed than the hollow rushed one we got with DeHaan and Garfield in TASM 2.

The Raimi movies are not flawless, especially 3, but overall the first two, and a lot of the 3rd one they are much better than both of the reboot movies.

Marc Webb is not cut out for the Spider-Man franchise.

 

[GremlinZilla89]

Toby was BORING as Peter/ Spider man he had none of the personality and humor that Spidey is known for. Kristen or Rami clearly didn't give a crap about portraying MJ as a strong female character with depth like her comic counterpart. Instead she was whinny victim the entire trilogy with no likable qualities about her. Franco as Harry was a joke......

I do like Maguire and Dunst in the first film. The script services them the best out of the three films. Peter is given more of a personality and MJ has a spark of her spunky self showing most of the time. And their chemistry actually works in the first film.

In the sequels the dialogue becomes stilted and awkward and their chemistry dries up and blows away. The entire struggle with them in Spider-Man 2 never feels justified or organic. It feels utterly obligatory.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Tobey is a much better Peter/Spider-Man. He is likeable, nerdy, funny, and charming. Kirsten Dunst is not half as bad as some fans try to make out she is. It's fabricated hyperbole. She was a strong female character. She escaped a rough home life, made a career for herself, and even stood up to the villains several times. She was a flawed character sure, but MJ of the comics was a flawed person, too, because of her messed up childhood. That's why she treated men like objects, and threw Peter's marriage proposal back in his face that first time.

James Franco is a terrific actor and he nailed Harry Osborn. His friendship with Maguire's Peter is more real and well developed than the hollow rushed one we got with DeHaan and Garfield in TASM 2.

The Raimi movies are not flawless, especially 3, but overall the first two, and a lot of the 3rd one they are much better than both of the reboot movies.

Marc Webb is not cut out for the Spider-Man franchise.

I strongly disagree. Toby had no personality in the role, seriously Spider Man makes witty comments and energetic, Toby had none of these qualities, unless you want to count is awful dark side performance in Spider Man 3. Kristen did nothing but whine about her crappy acting career and get captured in the climax of ALL three movies. Franco has Harry was also pretty boring and his snowboard goblin in Spider Man 3 was the biggest joke I ever seen. I mean, that still aren't bad movies but I think Andrew is MILES better than Toby in the role. And Emma Stone BLOWS Kristen Dunst out of the water without question.

 

[GremlinZilla89]

Tobey is a much better Peter/Spider-Man. He is likeable, nerdy, funny, and charming. Kirsten Dunst is not half as bad as some fans try to make out she is. It's fabricated hyperbole. She was a strong female character. She escaped a rough home life, made a career for herself, and even stood up to the villains several times. She was a flawed character sure, but MJ of the comics was a flawed person, too, because of her messed up childhood. That's why she treated men like objects, and threw Peter's marriage proposal back in his face that first time.

James Franco is a terrific actor and he nailed Harry Osborn. His friendship with Maguire's Peter is more real and well developed than the hollow rushed one we got with DeHaan and Garfield in TASM 2.

The Raimi movies are not flawless, especially 3, but overall the first two, and a lot of the 3rd one they are much better than both of the reboot movies.

Marc Webb is not cut out for the Spider-Man franchise.

He's mostly just nerdy. There is a huge disparity between Tobey out of the suit and in the suit. I never really feel it's Maguires Peter in that thing. His personality in the sequels is nothing more than wide-eyed, dorky loser. He's such a sopping wet puppy dog it's embarrassing. NONE of Peters inner strength or personality in present in those films. Its like Raimi focused completely on the crap luck aspect of Peter's life he forgot to give him real personality. Peter is mostly a lost, sad, weepy dork in the sequels. And when he does talk in the suit it feels odd and out of place because of how large that disparity is.

None of MJ's characterization felt linear. Her broken home aspect was dropped as soon as it was introduced and her choices never felt like something organic to the character. They just felt like plot points to give Peter another hard time. Not enough time or writing is spent with MJ to give her her own personality. I didn't even know why Peter and her still had feelings for each other after a while. They had nothing in common. They had no sweet moments, no down time, no shared interests, no chemistry. It was was one soap opera scenario of "will-they-won't-they" after another. It had no charm or personality. Gwen in TASM 1 is more of a well rounded character than MJ is in THREE full movies. Ya, MJ she talked a bit of smack to the villains here and there, but she still ended up a helpless damsel THREE. FREAKING. TIMES.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

I strongly disagree. Toby had no personality in the role, seriously Spider Man makes witty comments and energetic, Toby had none of these qualities, unless you want to count is awful dark side performance in Spider Man 3.

He had a personality, a good strong personality. He didn't need to be firing off one liners all the time for that.

Kristen did nothing but whine about her crappy acting career and get captured in the climax of ALL three movies.

That's the type of fabricated hyperbole I was talking about. The only time she complained about her career was in 3. Sure she got captured at the end of all three movies, but that is one small part of the character's overall arc.

You're over exaggerating small things to try and make them sound worse than they are. It's called bias.

Franco has Harry was also pretty boring and his snowboard goblin in Spider Man 3 was the biggest joke I ever seen.

If that was the biggest joke you've ever seen, then your stomach will be sore from laughing when you see the villains of Amazing Spider-Man 2.

I mean, that still aren't bad movies but I think Andrew is MILES better than Toby in the role.

Andrew was terrible in the role in the first one. He was too moody and obnoxious. He is a lot better in the sequel I will say, but he still has not reach Tobey's high standard. At this rate he never will.

And Emma Stone BLOWS Kristen Dunst out of the water without question.

I do like Emma better, but blows her out of the water, no. Dunst was excellent as MJ and is just subjected to extreme negative hyperbole by fans like you who say things like her complaining about her career and getting captured was all there was to the character when they were only small facets to the overall character's story.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

He's mostly just nerdy. There is a huge disparity between Tobey out of the suit and in the suit. I never really feel it's Maguires Peter in that thing. His personality in the sequels is nothing more than wide-eyed, dorky loser. He's such a sopping wet puppy dog it's embarrassing. NONE of Peters inner strength or personality in present in those films. Its like Raimi focused completely on the crap luck aspect of Peter's life he forgot to give him real personality. Peter is mostly a lost, sad, weepy dork in the sequels. And when he does talk in the suit it feels odd and out of place because of how large that disparity is.

Peter is nerdy. That's who he is. He's a Science geek and nerd. He doesn't skateboard, or sit in class brooding with his hood up or any of the other hipster type of nonsense that Webb has polluted the character with.

Peter Parker is the hard luck guy who overcomes adversity. He's Marvel's little engine that could. His inner strength is always coming through in all three movies.

None of MJ's characterization felt linear. Her broken home aspect was dropped as soon as it was introduced and her choices never felt like something organic to the character. They just felt like plot points to give Peter another hard time. Not enough time or writing is spent with MJ to give her her own personality. I didn't even know why Peter and her still had feelings for each other after a while. They had nothing in common. They had no sweet moments, no down time, no shared interests, no chemistry. It was was one soap opera scenario of "will-they-won't-they" after another. It had no charm or personality. Gwen in TASM 1 is more of a well rounded character than MJ is in THREE full movies. Ya, MJ she talked a bit of smack to the villains here and there, but she still ended up a helpless damsel THREE. FREAKING. TIMES.

That's not true at all. MJ's broken homes aspect is why the character fought so hard to be a success. She said that in the first movie where she can't wait to escape her home life, get to the city and make something of herself.

Those harsh home insecurities show through, like when she's being slammed by the critics in 3 and she says she reads their words and it's like her father wrote them.

Some fans just overlook these character nuances and focus on small aspects like her being captured and exaggerate it as though it was the bulk of the character's story when it was a minority.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Does "buzz word" equal any word that criticizes the Raimi trilogy?

No, just the constant use of the word "cheese" for a cheesy character being something bad.

 

[Neno_Kos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8K1TxDnczM

when somebody have critics toward this franchise and prefer Raimi's trilogy make him watch this video

 

[Lord]

Sam Raimi was great at small moments, the bits with Aunt May and some of the ones between Mary Jane and her boyfriend in the 2nd film felt more natural and "real" than most of the "realistic" films we're getting nowadays.

 

[Picard Sisko]

"Go Spidey Go!" and all other side characters are bad? I allways found those bits amusing, gives some energy to the films, which is more in line with classic Hollywood than the modern idea that everything needs to be pseudo-realistic.

I thought some of those bits were god awful. "You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us!" Or what about, "Whoa, he just stole that guy's pizzas!"

 

[sl500jazz]

I personally never cared for Raimi's interpretation of MJ. The way that he handled the character and their relationship was IMO one of the weakest aspects of the entire trilogy. Webb clearly does wonders with romance, which is something that has been consistently recognized by the critics.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Sam Raimi was great at small moments, the bits with Aunt May and some of the ones between Mary Jane and her boyfriend in the 2nd film felt more natural and "real" than most of the "realistic" films we're getting nowadays.

I never bought the relationship between MJ and John Jameson in Spider-Man 2. Maybe if his character had some more development it would have been different. But he was just some guy that happened to be JJ's son that also happened to be in a relationship with Mary Jane. They kissed and shared a couple of scenes together, but it was something they didn't spend enough time on.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

That's the type of fabricated hyperbole I was talking about. The only time she complained about her career was in 3. Sure she got captured at the end of all three movies, but that is one small part of the character's overall arc.

Yep, and to be fair to Raimi / SM3, she wasn't even supposed to be the damsel in distress at the end of Spider-Man 3 originally. Once it was found out BDH was preggers, they changed it. It made more sense anyways, with the whole forgiveness plot angle.

If that was the biggest joke you've ever seen, then your stomach will be sore from laughing when you see the villains of Amazing Spider-Man 2.

LOL I'm really digging your posts as of late.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Until someone shows me a Spider-Man comic where he disrespects police officers in his first meeting, plays around with a car thief for 30 minutes, steal tech from Oscorp (Venom suit doesn't count), spits on Captain Stacy's grave, let's Uncle Ben die over milk, plays on his phone during the job (that's Deadpool not Spidey), Spidey bends a ****ing field goal post, Aunt May not involved, and showcases Gwen his powers in just about there first date; then you can say TASM Spider-Man is Spider-Man.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Until someone shows me a Spider-Man comic where he disrespects police officers in his first meeting, plays around with a car thief for 30 minutes, steal tech from Oscorp (Venom suit doesn't count), spits on Captain Stacy's grave, let's Uncle Ben die over milk, plays on his phone during the job (that's Deadpool not Spidey), Spidey bends a ****ing field goal post, Aunt May not involved, and showcases Gwen his powers in just about there first date; then you can say TASM Spider-Man is Spider-Man.

I have a right to say whatever I want. The stories and circumstances are different, but the persona of Spider-Man is captured perfectly with Andrew Garfield's interpretation of the character.