The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Rotten Tomatoes score? - Part 4

"Max’s journey from nobody to super-villain could have been an intriguing exploration of race in New York. Before his transformation, Max is exploited by a large corporation. After he is changed, Max staggers out into the streets of New York in a hoodie, looking either physically or mentally ill. And when he is captured, he is turned into a medical research subject by an unscrupulous doctor. Any one of these situations might have been an interesting way into how black New Yorkers are treated by big companies when they are employees, the police when they are homeless or ill, or the medical establishment when they are sick."

This is a portion of a review from the Washington Post. I'm now convinced that some people give negative reviews because their ideas didn't make it in the film. I think I'm officially done caring about the RT score.

Oh gosh ... I'm not a fan of the movie whatsoever, but that review is pretty ridiculous.

And, I am not surprised this kind of review came from The Washington (com)Post. That newspaper is constantly on some kind of soapbox; of course they'd suggest this idea for a comic book movie.
 
I think the critics got this one right. Just saw it, and this movie is in the right % range.
But I thought the evil American critics had to burn for being wrong? How can they be right? :csad:
 
So provided something doesn't come up I'm definitely seeing it tomorrow.
 
I don't think anyone said that did they? :wow: Except maybe avenging spidey?
 
I told Avenging Spidey the American critics were gonna jump all over this (I wasn't alone), but I didn't know it would get as bad as it got.

Somewhere Avenging Spidey is having a meltdown.:exp:
 
It went down from 73% to 54% when it hit America right? Oh how I yearn for the days of the 70's
 
Will you all be moving over to DOFP once that starts getting reviewed on Rotten Tomatoes? I love hearing all your reactions!
 
IMO this film deserves pretty much every bad review it was given.

I'd say it deserves more. Still, if you skim a lot of the fresh reviews, the things that are being said are backhanded in some instances, and downright scathing in others. Reading the blurbs without considering the recommendation would lead me to believe that far more critics didn't like it than those that did.
 
What is startling is how poor a lot of the "fresh" reviews are.
 
What is startling is how poor a lot of the "rotten" reviews are.
Not really when it is at 54%. That it is at 54% with a lot of "fresh" reviews sounding more "rotten" then "fresh", you wonder how things could have gone. This film could have easily been in the 40s.
 
I feel like i'm one of those people that's gonna give it a fresh while darn near trashing it. I feel like i like it but the only things i'm thinking of are the negative things.
 
Not really when it is at 54%. That it is at 54% with a lot of "fresh" reviews sounding more "rotten" then "fresh", you wonder how things could have gone. This film could have easily been in the 40s.

The movie really got lucky with all those 3/5 reviews.
 
Ahhh you guys are the my opinions are fact type folks eh
 
I'd say it deserves more. Still, if you skim a lot of the fresh reviews, the things that are being said are backhanded in some instances, and downright scathing in others. Reading the blurbs without considering the recommendation would lead me to believe that far more critics didn't like it than those that did.

Agreed, even the more positive reviews felt more negatory that positive lol.
 
What is startling is how poor a lot of the "fresh" reviews are.

Reading the blurbs of all the fresh reviews, sounding negative confuses me.

ifvi46.jpg


hs8gw2.jpg


zwlz5g.jpg


kb4yu9.jpg
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,395
Messages
22,096,975
Members
45,893
Latest member
DooskiPack
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"