Is Spider-Man 2 a masterpiece?

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

No. But the Raimi films are some the best in the genre, mostly because of the tone.

It has a joy, a heart, and a charm that doesn’t exist in most superhero films, and never gets annoying, which cannot be said about the Webb/Watts films (Ned, I'm looking at you).

Every location, from May's house, to Peter's apartment, to the Daily Bugle, is a joy to simply be in.

 

[Dweet]

Not sure its a masterpiece but its one of the best you can get for a superhero movie.

 

[FlareKnight]

It is really good to be sure. A really good villain, a good arc for Spidey himself, and some moments that just stick you.

Deserves a ton of praise and would be nice to see another Spider-Man movie get close to that level. Even if that's really hard to manage.

 

[TheVileOne]

I'm going to help everyone out: YES.

That said, just one person's opinion.

Some people think Joker is a masterpiece. I do not. I think it's a decently made film, not great, with a great performance by Joaquin Phoenix. Some people think Dark Knight is a masterpiece, and I think it's relatively close to that. Spielberg I recall was one of the few filmmakers who praised Dark Knight as cinematic art and not just disposable comic book fare.

I still think Spider-Man 2 is the best and most purest Spider-Man movie to date.

 

[Boom]

A masterpiece? No.

One of the best superhero movies ever made? Yes.

A classic? Absolutely.

 

[metaphysician]

A masterpiece? No.

One of the best superhero movies ever made? Yes.

A classic? Absolutely.

This sounds an awful lot like "the only way something can be a masterpiece is by meeting an impossible standard that no movie can actually meet in truth". *cough*

 

[Boom]

This sounds an awful lot like "the only way something can be a masterpiece is by meeting an impossible standard that no movie can actually meet in truth". *cough*

If that's the way you want to interpret it, sure!

 

[metaphysician]

Well, what *is* your definition of a 'masterpiece'? What exactly does a movie need beyond "is one of the best ever" and "has lasting appeal and influence"? Because I'm kind of not seeing what else there is supposed to be.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I'm under no illusions. Its just a great flick.

I think most modern cinema (if even only decent) is a masterpiece in its own way. Hundreds or even thousands of people come together to create something. That most even scratch the surface of "watchable" is nothing short of a miracle.

So that being said, Spidey 2 is awesome. It came at a time where great superhero cinema was few and far between. But I wouldnt call it "better for its time" than X2, Batman 89/Returns or Donner's Superman. Or even, for that matter, The Dark Knight or Iron Man or Infinity War.

With time, movies get better and better. I was 11 when Spidey 2 came out. Of course its gonna hit different. But somehow these films are continuing to capture my imagination and wow me. That says something.

No reason to write off older films or anything like that. Just that, if you're looking for it, new ground is continually tread, new ideas explored and in a more immersive way.

I personally wouldnt trade the modern cosmic scale of the MCU for Raimi's spider-man trilogy.

Maybe thats an unfair comparison. I wouldnt trade my top 3 MCU films for Raimi's trilogy.

 

[TheVileOne]

A masterpiece? No.

One of the best superhero movies ever made? Yes.

A classic? Absolutely.

Sounds like a masterpiece to me.

 

[Herofan]

A lot more than good, not flawless or perfect but I would say more than great so, yes, excellent and even a masterpiece.