Discussion in 'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' started by Thread Manager, Feb 15, 2013.
If this is real New York, I'd love to pay it a visit, stay there a couple of weeks
Peter Parker barely grew in the Raimi films. He pretty much learned everything by the end of SM1. If no sequels were made, it wouldn't have mattered (I love SM2, but just saying).
That setup is part of what makes him who he is though. His relationship with MoneyPenny is VERY important. She is the girl that he could NEVER have. Vesper's death and betrayal really impacted him, and of course that is why he could never really "love" another woman.
How is it a cop out? Its NOTHING like Batman thinking its okay to kill people.
He still learned to be more responsible with his powers (remember that bridge scene?). He is a teenager, and he is going to make mistakes. Jeremy Jahns said it perfectly in his review, I recommend you go watch it if you haven't already. He isn't going to say "Wait, my uncle said I have to be responsible and that is what I'm going to do!" almost instantly.
Oh my, they have stories to tell! Stories that will actually connect all three movies and create a... STORY ARC! Who would have thought?
if 9/11 had happened elsewhere and spider-man took place in that city and they threw stuff at goblin and said and acted the way the new yorkers did in spider-man 1, i would have groaned.
it isn't the act of standing together / throwing stuff that is cheesy, it is the way they go about it. loud, boisterous, lots of attitude; it is all new york citizen.
and like i said, the cheese worked because that's how new yorkers are in the media i have seen them in.
they are loud, maybe even obnoxious, but they have good hearts.
That link is also full of a lot of stupid stuff. It compares SM3 and ASM for starters which is about the dumbest argument for ASM I have ever seen.
I should compare SM2 against ASM if that were the case. SM2 beats ASM hands down any day of the week over and over and over.
... your point being? If 9/11 happened elsewhere (technically, the twin towers were not the only buildings that were attacked), then we probably would not have gotten this scene in the film.
I disagree, SM2 and ASM are both a 7/10
That's fine but it's not the clear majority opinion.
the whole point of spider-man is the principle. has he learned to abide by this principle at the end of tasm? no. did he learn to abide by it by the end of spider-man 1? yes. did he learn to abide by it in the comics shortly after his uncle died? i believe so. did it take gwen stacy's death to make him follow the principle? no, he already did follow it, gwen's death was an unfortunate consequence to him following it in the first place; which is where the drama comes from in spider-man stories: does he stick to his principle and live a hard life, or does he betray it and take the easy road?
pff, ms. money penny is hardly important to bond's core character, otherwise she would have been in casino royale, which was, like it or not, an origin story. i didnt hear a single person after casino royale or quantum of solace came out going "where was money penny?" she is a component to bond's story once he has become bond, she is not an integral part of him becoming who he is.
i made the batman comparison because he has a golden rule like peter. tasm ends with peter not fully embracing the great power rule, so i said it would be like batman etc etc.. it was a ridiculous example to show how mistaken it is to not have spider-man become spider-man at the end of tasm. so it is SOMETHING like batman thinking it is okay to sometimes kill. it is an apt example.
another could be if they made a robin hood movie where he still steals from the occasional poor person.
i wonder if you should change your signature picard, it really seems to me like you prefer tasm to spidey 1 and 2, you defend it so vehemently. kind of like the ying to anno's yang. #thatsoundeddirty
oh and i may as well leave links here that more or less correspond with my feelings with tasm being at best a 7.5/10 movie (which is as high as it is partly because he is my fave fictional character, and am therefore a bit biased)
if you can leave pro tasm links, i can leave this.
I prefer SM1 & SM2, but I think TASM and this new franchise has so much more potential than the previous films.
I think my user name (not signature) is fine the way it is, thank you.
You can post any links that you want, that's fine. Is this supposed to be a competition? "if you can leave pro tasm links, i can leave this." LOL
I've seen RedLetterMedia's review of TASM a long time ago. I disagree with many of their arguments, but I respect their opinion. If you can get them to like a film, then that's a huge achievement.
i dunno man it seems like if tasm 2 comes out to the same critical consensus and fan consensus (mixed) that tasm 1 did, that you will be its most staunch defender.
like the voltron of the spider-man forums.
I couldn't care less about the critical consensus or fan consensus. I can formulate my own opinion. Sure, I take interest in what the film gets on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes, but more so for the sake of curiosity. If I happen to like the film, then I like it.
If I'm like the Voltron of the Spider-Man forums, you must be Jar Jar Binks.
By your logic, I should like and defend a movie if its highly rated, but trash it if it gets poor/mixed reviews? I'm not a sheep.
the only way to objectively test you on this is for me to list a bunch of things that could happen in the tasm2, and gauge your reaction. then when the movie comes out and it indeed has things that you were opposed to, then see if you stick by your original stance.
far too much work. but for interests sake, would you care if there is a new suit with no explanation, would you care if rhino wasn't just used briefly, would you care if someone other than goblin killed gwen? would you care if spider-man always required an overhead anchor point to swing in a straight line? would you care if norman hit on gwen? would you care if peter got cloned when he was a kid and the real peter reveals himself in the post credits teaser? would you care if you didn't have over 6000 posts on this site in under a year?
was just trying to set up a scenario where objectively, the amazing spider-man 2 is an average film, and i used film reviews and fan consensus to approximate such a condition.
if stan lee and a bunch of spider-man artists and writers all thought it was meh, does that count for nothing?
at some point you have to consider outside opinion as relevant.
I never said the franchise could flop, or turn out to be atrocious. I feel like the movie could really go places, and I surely hope they don't waste this opportunity. Seriously, you're trying too hard.
You are really bad at making points, my friend.
I do respect others' opinions, but in the end, how YOU feel about a movie is what counts.
According to Stan Lee, all of the Marvel movies are "masterpieces." I didn't say others' opinions are irrelevant.
Repulsor Blast, how exactly does Peter not learn the message of "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" by the end of the movie? He clearly does by the end of the movie after hearing the voicemail and being affected by the events in the story (Capt. Stacy's speech, the Lizard events, etc.). His entire character arc is that he starts out by going on a manhunt. All he cares about is catching his uncle Ben's killer. By the end of the movie, he learns the message of WGPCGR and is no longer focused on just catching his uncle's killer for vengeance but on helping those in need because he has the power to do so. This doesn't mean he could care less about his uncle's killer still being out there but that helping a guy like me and you from the average robber is just as of an important priority to him as catching his uncle's killer by the end of the film. The motivation that drives him now is the proper motivation the Spider-Man we all know has.
If you believe he didn't learn the message of WGPCGR because he broke Captain Stacy's promise, my response to that is this....
Ultra Nolanite raises a good point too....
Stan Lee went as far as to say that TASM is the greatest comic book movie made. Something that even I think is a ridiculous stretch and I usually defend the reboot just as much as Picard does or maybe even more.
So if Spider-Man 2 is generally viewed by most critics and fans as an average film, and I happen to really like it, what's the big deal?
The synopsis for TASM2 includes Peter struggling with the promise he made to Gwen's dad.
Actually, it wasn't. That scene was written and filmed prior to the 9/11 attacks. It really had nothing to do with 9/11 or the patriotism and strong bond that arose from the attacks.
Learning what it means to be responsible =/= you always apply it perfectly and make no mistakes. Spidey is human after all and possibly the most human superhero created. Even in the comics, he did struggle to fulfill the message of WGPCGR and to try to protect everyone even after Ben's death. That doesn't mean he never learned the message of WGPCGR to begin with or that he wasn't the Spider-Man we all know and love prior to some of the major screw-ups he made in the comics, Gwen's death being the most well known one.
9/11 did affect the production of Spider-Man 1 in many ways (such as the cutting of the twin towers sequence). I always assumed that it was supposed to be the BIG reveal of Spider-Man, but it was trashed after 9/11 and it just cuts to him being Spider-Man.
Lots of things changed about the movie. Not that this is really relevant, just a fun fact, but originally, they shot and filmed Peter making web shooters...
Wanted to post this here just for fun ....
And that is the assumed loophole that will be the death of Gwen
If any writer I'd like to get his view on the reboot, I look for J.M Dematties, he told the webmaster of Spider-Man Crawlspace he did not like Raimi's first film