The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Rotten Tomatoes score? - Part 1

[Avenging Spidey]

No. Christopher Nolan knows how to develop villains and keep the tone at a certain spot. The reviews for this film say the tone is all over the place and the villains are underdeveloped, boring, weakly motivated, etc.

But Spider-Man isn't Batman, and he doesn't need over-developed or pseudo-developed villains like the ones that Nolan produces, Spider-Man is essentially a love story, and that is what this film is about and why I believe some critics have so many problems with Marc Webb's take.

If you read any of the greatest Spider-Man stories, they are full of drama and tragic love stories, with very strong and fleshed female characters, from Aunt May to Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane. Spider-Man isn't about the villains, that was never what made him interesting to begin with, Spider-Man is about Peter Parker.

And somehow I really doubt that Christopher Nolan could ever do a better job than Marc Webb is doing with Spider-Man, mainly because Nolan has proved time and time again how clueless he is making believable romantic relationships or female characters.

But I bet that a lot of critics think and want the same that you do from Spider-Man stories as well. Thank God it seems that Sony and Webb know what's best for Spider-Man better than their detractors or Nolan could ever do.

 

[Neno_Kos]

No. Christopher Nolan knows how to develop villains and keep the tone at a certain spot. The reviews for this film say the tone is all over the place and the villains are underdeveloped, boring, weakly motivated, etc.

no. christopher nolan movies are christopher nolan movies, they are not neither comic book movies or (anti)hero movies. his batman trilogy are basically movies with batman somewhere put in there where he tell criminalist story 2 and half hour long about villains . his batman in batman movies is underdevoloped. 2h movie with 30 min Batman at most...

 

[MahvelBaby!]

If people think Rotten Tomatoes are biased against this film because its owned by Warner Brothers need to check the Man of Steel score again

They had to eventually put all the bad reviews because there weren't any good ones left to put

 

[Tim_Riggins]

I love Nolan, but he couldn't pull off Spider-Man in a million years.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Not sure nolan would want to do Spider-man, he barely wanted to do Batman :P

 

[Spider-Fan]

Not sure Nolan really has anything to do with this conversation...

 

[webhead731]

But Spider-Man isn't Batman, and he doesn't need over-developed or pseudo-developed villains like the ones that Nolan produces, Spider-Man is essentially a love story, and that is what this film is about and why I believe some critics have so many problems with Marc Webb's take.

I never said Spider-Man was Batman. I am just clarifying to the poster that Christopher Nolan does things differently. If he were to have directed this same movie, the same way, the response would probably be worse because the expectations would have been higher.
Sam Raimi's films were love stories and the critics loved the first two and were mixed on the third. Has nothing to do with it. Critics are tearing this one up because it is apparently a mess and really hammy with terrible villains.

And somehow I really doubt that Christopher Nolan could ever do a better job than Marc Webb is doing with Spider-Man, mainly because Nolan has proved time and time again how clueless he is making believable romantic relationships or female characters.

I will give you that up until Catwoman. He did great on her. However I wouldn't say he was clueless before that.

Thank God it seems that Sony and Webb know what's best for Spider-Man

Judging from the response I'm seeing and some of their liberties they took with the source material, it doesn't look that way.

no. christopher nolan movies are christopher nolan movies, they are not neither comic book movies or hero movies. his batman trilogy are basically movies with batman somewhere put in there where he tell criminalist story 2 and half hour long about villains . his batman in batman movies is underdevoloped. 2h movie with 30 min Batman at most...

Are you kidding me? Go watch Batman Begins. That is a whole Batman development movie.
The whole trilogy takes a ridiculous, an absolute ridiculous amount inspiration from the comic books. Long Halloween, Knightfall, Year One, etc etc.

 

[FN Spider-man]

Not sure Nolan really has anything to do with this conversation...

Nolan and Batman are notorious for finding their way into a discussion

 

[Nilso]

He doesn't, thematically Batman and Spider-Man are completely different characters.

 

[MahvelBaby!]

I'm happy to hear that the depiction of Spider-Man and Peter Gwen was nailed, that is really important to me I can overlook allot if that is the case, Spider-Man has always been more about the melodrama of the characters than anything else anyway.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm still sticking with 74%.

Looking at it right now, I can't see it staying above 70%, but you never know. There is a clear and systematic problem in all the RT reviews, even the positive ones. This does not seem to be a well thought out and well put together movie. The reviews read like an early draft that is quite pretty, but also has no structure whatsoever.

 

[Tim_Riggins]

Liberties are taken for a reason, as far as I know, you"re not directing the movie or writing it, it's easy to say that from the point of view of a fan.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Nolan and Batman are notorious for finding their way into a discussion

I know they do.

So, I will kindly ask people drop the Batman talk. This has gone from an offhand comment about Nolan being a RT favorite director, to the quality of his Batman films...and that isn't what this thread is for. So guys have to knock it off.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

But Spider-Man isn't Batman, and he doesn't need over-developed or pseudo-developed villains like the ones that Nolan produces, Spider-Man is essentially a love story, and that is what this film is about and why I believe some critics have so many problems with Marc Webb's take.

If you read any of the greatest Spider-Man stories, they are full of drama and tragic love stories, with very strong and fleshed female characters, from Aunt May to Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane. Spider-Man isn't about the villains, that was never what made him interesting to begin with, Spider-Man is about Peter Parker.

And somehow I really doubt that Christopher Nolan could ever do a better job than Marc Webb is doing with Spider-Man, mainly because Nolan has proved time and time again how clueless he is making believable romantic relationships or female characters.

But I bet that a lot of critics think and want the same that you do from Spider-Man stories as well. Thank God it seems that Sony and Webb know what's best for Spider-Man better than their detractors or Nolan could ever do.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Since when did a film being a "love story" mean you can have bad structure and plot threads that take up screen time and just walk off into oblivion? That didn't exactly happen with Gone with the Wind, and lets face it 99% of stories are love stories. From Star Wars to Citizen Kane. Now, I haven't seen the film yet, and I am still pretty pumped. I like the first one just for Garfield and Stone. But every review seems to indicate we are talking about another film that is riddled with structural problems, just like the first.

And this time there is no, "the origin got in the way" excuse.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Since when did a film being a "love story" mean you can have bad structure and plot threads that take up screen time and just walk off into oblivion? That didn't exactly happen with Gone with the Wind, and lets face it 99% of stories are love stories. From Star Wars to Citizen Kane. Now, I haven't seen the film yet, and I am still pretty pumped. I like the first one just for Garfield and Stone. But every review seems to indicate we are talking about another film that is riddled with structural problems, just like the first.

And this time there is no, "the origin got in the way" excuse.

No, this time it seems to be Sinister Six build-up filler got in the way excuses.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No, this time it seems to be Sinister Six build-up filler got in the way excuses.

The origin of the Sinister Six.

This is reminding me a bit of Iron Man 2. We want the movie, we need the movie to sort of bridge the character, we have a pretty good idea, but it is not developed past the idea stage. Though I could see it and not feel that way at all.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Looking at it right now, I can't see it staying above 70%, but you never know. There is a clear and systematic problem in all the RT reviews, even the positive ones. This does not seem to be a well thought out and well put together movie. The reviews read like an early draft that is quite pretty, but also has no structure whatsoever.

I don't disagree with your assessment. It's not like I'd be shocked if it ended with a 55-65% rating.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't disagree with your assessment. It's not like I'd be shocked if it ended with a 55-65% rating.

I know, I just wanted to give a little context to my point of view.

 

[InJustice]

Just curious. Has it ever been known when the Spider-Man script was written? The problems mentioned in the RT reviews could be as a result of being rushed.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Not sure nolan would want to do Spider-man, he barely wanted to do Batman :P

Nolan pursued Batman and very much wanted to do it.

I think his interest was waning by movie number 3, but he still wanted to tell a complete story.

 

[PeterBenParker]

I'm not nervous.

 

[Spider-Fan]

The origin of the Sinister Six.

This is reminding me a bit of Iron Man 2. We want the movie, we need the movie to sort of bridge the character, we have a pretty good idea, but it is not developed past the idea stage. Though I could see it and not feel that way at all.

I think IM2 and Thor 2 appear to have had similar criticisms as TASM2 is getting. Good comparisons.

 

[Leenie]

Are people REALLY saying they want Christopher Nolan to direct a Spider-Man movie? Nolan did fine with Batman (though TDK is the only one of his Batfilms that I outright love and think deserves all of the hype), but NO to him directing Spider-Man. Just ... No. That would be the worst.

I'd be interested to see Brad Bird take a stab at a live action superhero movie. I still think he was the ideal candidate for Superman, but I'd be interested in seeing what he can do with Spider-Man. Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (which was surprisingly VERY good) showcased that the man knows exactly what he's doing with action movies. That scene in M:I - Ghost Protocol with Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) hanging by a rope on the side of that building, running around? Hello, Spidey!

 

[Spidey-Lad93]

Some of Spider-Man villains don't need a lot of development if they ever decide to use The Shocker for example we don't need to see his Orgins But Venom is a character who need a lot of development two movies at least