The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Rotten Tomatoes score? - Part 3

[DarthSkywalker]

Not the Marvel arguement again. I've seen every single Marvel movie and the only movies that for me are expertly executed are IM and WS. So Marvel producing Spidey is no guarantee of quality.

That is apparently 2 more then Spider-Man has had since 2004.

 

[spider-neil]

That is apparently 2 more then Spider-Man has had since 2004.

Ha! Still less than evens it will be good

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think I'm the most obsessive movie nerd in my family.

My brother and I can carry a conversation in movie/television quotes. I don't know if that is sad or awesome.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

That is apparently 2 more then Spider-Man has had since 2004.


My brother and I can carry a conversation in movie/television quotes. I don't know if that is sad or awesome.

I think that's awesome.

 

[MahvelBaby!]

What could have been.

A part of me is kind of over the whole "what if Marvel had the rights ...?" thing, though. I'm just so deflated at the thought of talking about future Spider-Man movies at this point (which is why part of MovieBob's review resonated with me). I would just be happy if the poorly done (in my opinion, before anyone blows a gasket) Spidey movies would just stop, period. I want Spider-Man to have a long break, but I know that won't happen.

Overused meme (I know), but I wish Sony would just ... "Let it Go."

They can't let it go dude not while it makes money, because after a certain amount of years rights revert back to Marvel Studios and they don't want that, only way it happens is if Sony closes down film division.

 

[eLPAtitoyUPI]

I would only take a Marvel-made Spider-Man if he didn't show up in Avengers.

Spider-Man is best on his own.

 

[Shikamaru]

Marvel can rely on making one great movie every few years and the other ones just being passable. You can then point to Marvel and say "Look at the great movies they made, sure they're not all perfect but none of them are exactly bad either."

With Sony being Spider-Man's only property - and a pretty darn big property that carries a lot of weight, they can't rely on that. They need a great Spider-Man film. Which has been long overdue already.

 

[spider-neil]

I would only take a Marvel-made Spider-Man if he didn't show up in Avengers.

Spider-Man is best in his own.

My favorite incarnation of Spidey is Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends

 

[CaptainCraig]

Maybe TASM3 can be their version of the clone saga and clone SM2 '04, thus giving us a good Spidey film again?

Maybe?

 

[JKKS085]

With Sony being Spider-Man's only property - and a pretty darn big property that carries a lot of weight, they can't rely on that.

It's getting significantly lighter film after film ...

 

[Suzanne78]

I go by a rule: one is a fluke, and 2 is a trend. Webb has shown a trend: he can't pace these movies. I don't expect this to change.



Actually, I think Webb has more control of this product than we want to admit. I just think maybe this series is too big for him. He has those hints of brilliance in the series, and yet in both films, we have been talking about poor pacing and weak villains. I don't think Sony is to blame entirely for this. Sure, they want more villains in these movies. But, that doesn't excuse the execution of the villains he IS working with. Just because the studio says you must use Electro, doesn't mean you have to do Electro the way he was done.

Pretty much QFT!

So, what's the weekend projection on this thing? Still at $95mil?

 

[eLPAtitoyUPI]

Also, for Spider-Man to leave Sony, the company must be in bankrupt. It is their biggest franchise by far, and they need money.

 

[spider-neil]

Also, for Spider-Man to leave Sony, the company must be in bankrupt. It is their biggest franchise by far, and they need money.

Isn't Bond their biggest franchise (with MGM)?

 

[Leenie]

They can't let it go dude not while it makes money, because after a certain amount of years rights revert back to Marvel Studios and they don't want that, only way it happens is if Sony closes down film division.

Well, obviously they won't let it go, for the reasons you stated.

I was just saying what I wish would happen, even if it's a hopeless one.

 

[eLPAtitoyUPI]

Isn't Bond their biggest franchise (with MGM)?

Nooo, Spider-Man brings more money to the table.

Bond is their second biggest (not talking about quantity of movies, of course). Think that Sony hasn't recieved the money of 20 Bond movies because they didn't have the rights.

 

[Suzanne78]

eeexactly in 2010 they were like: "awww man, we need to keep spider-man he is a big profitabble character,let´s do a movie to keep him"
in 2012, "OMG!, look the Avengers they made a billion dollars! we need that amount of money too, let´s do a team movie too, we don´t have a team of heroes, but we have villains,let´s do the next movie to build up to that"

I've already said it before in this thread, but I thought it was a huge mistake for Sony to make all these sequel and spinoff announcements. To a degree, I think that affected a little how this specific movie was reviewed by some of the critics.

Not saying the complaints that it feels more like franchise fodder aren't valid, but if Sony had just kept its plans of a spinoff and the scheduling a little bit looser, then maybe that critique of the movie wouldn't be so pronounced.

I think Sony bit off way more than they can chew by trying to push forward on a crazystupid schedule on a Spider-man Cinematic Universe.

 

[Spidey-Lad93]

I'm not one of those people that criticise these movies for being reboots but now I'm beginning to believe it was too early for a reboot when you have two brilliant Spider-Man movies and one half decent one which is over-hated by people maybe they should have just let Sam Rami make Spider-Man 4 and allow him to finish his story. Then give Spider-Man a break for 5 years and and then start planing for a reboot and by the time it's released it would have been 8 years since Spider-Man 4

 

[Suzanne78]

If it was made by Marvel, it would have been a different movie. Perhaps one many would consider better?

Considering all the movies Marvel has made have stayed above 60% on RT… you may be onto something there, Darth!

 

[MahvelBaby!]

I would only take a Marvel-made Spider-Man if he didn't show up in Avengers.

Spider-Man is best on his own.

Agreed! And I'm a huge MS mark, it's why I'm ok with him not being part of the MCU

I just prefer him on his own, maybe cross him over with Daredevil...maybe

 

[CaptainCraig]

My best ever incarnation of Spidey is Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends

Why this isn't out as a DVD series set still has me baffled.
Whose holding this up and where?!!

 

[TalismanRing]

Marvel right now is probably making more $ off of Spiderman merchandise than Sony is making off of the films. But there is no way Sony would allow a valuable asset to just lapse even with another couple of under performers. This isn't Ghost Rider.

 

[Shikamaru]

It's getting significantly lighter film after film ...

Yep. At this rate, I see Spider-Man ending up in Superman's status. This whole thing is similar to when Batman overtook Superman in the late 70's-mid 80's. Superman is still around though and is still popular, but he's DC's next thing after Batman. And he also has problems getting off the ground a lot of the time in comparison to Batman. In a similar way, I see Spider-Man becoming the "other" property after Iron Man and the Avengers.

That is, if things continue at this rate. And at the moment, there is nothing to indicate that they won't.

 

[AF3619]

I've already said it before in this thread, but I thought it was a huge mistake for Sony to make all these sequel and spinoff announcements. To a degree, I think that affected a little how this specific movie was reviewed by some of the critics.

Not saying the complaints that it feels more like franchise fodder aren't valid, but if Sony had just kept its plans of a spinoff and the scheduling a little bit looser, then maybe that critique of the movie wouldn't be so pronounced.

I think Sony bit off way more than they can chew by trying to push forward on a crazystupid schedule on a Spider-man Cinematic Universe.

i think we all can agree we don´t want a cinematic universe like Avengers, we just want good spider-man flicks, i mean this film got spider-man right and if they could just focus on one villain than franchise building this could´ve been a lot better.

If they want a cinematic universe really bad, they could do it slower than they are putting too much in little time.
but enough for that we are going off topic...

 

[JKKS085]

Considering all the movies Marvel has made have stayed above 60% on RT… you may be onto something there, Darth!

Above 65%

 

[spider-neil]

I'm not one of those people that criticise these movies for being reboots but now I'm beginning to believe it was too early for a reboot when you have two brilliant Spider-Man movies and one half decent one which is over-hated by people maybe they should have just let Sam Rami make Spider-Man 4 and allow him to finish his story. Then give Spider-Man a break for 5 years and and then start planing for a reboot and by the time it's released it would have been 8 years since Spider-Man 4

The problem wasn't the reboot, the problem was the reboot wasn't enough of a departure from the old movies. Also, they should have avoided the origin like the plague. Because not only was the origin ground ALREADY covered it took up screen time which could have been used to flesh out the villain and it also meant elements from the first movie got pushed into the sequel rather than making the opening movie self contained.

No origin would have made the reboot seem fresh and chances are there wouldn't be apathy towards the sequel. Forget the reviews, a character like Spidey should be critic proof. My brother (a casual movie goer) confirmed this by saying he wasn't bothered in seeing ASM2 because ASM1 was average (his words not mine).

If ASM2 underperformers I think it will be more to do with the first movie than the second.