The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 General Discussion - - Part 86

[Keehar]

As for TASM2, I really can't fathom the viewpoint that it somehow out of character for Spider-man. That kind of scenario is a staple of comic book lore.

Nope it ain't. If that's how it was you'd have a bazillion proper examples. But nope you only had crazy OOC tales like Spider-Man Reign and DKR.

Why are you having difficulty fathoming something that is factually true? It should be the other way around. Nobody is saying that a hero taking some time out to grieve because of a tragedy or a loss of a loved one never happens. But not for months on end abandoning their superhero duties while the people/city they protect suffers like in TASM 2, which is very much out of character for Peter. But you're here posting Green Lantern facial expressions in some attempt to validate that, which is something that makes no sense at all.

That doesn't happen, unless you're talking about those elseworlds out of canon tales, which are the only examples you've been able to cite, which are not valid examples for in character traits because the sky's the limit on the insane things they do in tales like that, some of which have already been cited to you.

Even in the infamous 'Spider-Man no more story' in the comics, he didn't abandon his Spider-Man duties for weeks or months. It was a matter of days, and during the story we see him go through personal conflict about what he's doing, and do some soul searching, just like in Spider-Man 2. As others have already said, with TASM 2's sloppy one minute montage of Peter's months and months of quitting and wallowing in misery, we see nothing insightful like that. Just him spending countless time hanging around Gwen's grave.

You mentioned X-Men Days of Future Past as using the same plot device as TASM 2. It absolutely 100% did not. Charles Xavier had not formed his X-Men team yet. He did not break up the X-Men and sink into depression. He just abandoned his school for mutants. The X-Men had not happened yet, which is why Wolverine was telling him later that when he does meet the X-Men team like Scott, Storm, Jean etc in the future that he has to guide them, lead them because they'll need him. Had he abandoned the X-Men team and done that, then you'd have a valid movie example.

It's the same with The Dark Knight Rises example you tried to use on the previous page. You said Batman quit for years because of Rachel and Harvey's death. Also 100% untrue. He quit because Gotham didn't need him any more. Organized crime was cleaned up because of the Dent Act. This is verbally stated several times in the movie. He didn't abandon his city for a long time because he was wallowing in grief like Peter did in TASM 2. That didn't even happen in the comics when he lost Gwen. He had reason to feel guilt for her death in there, too, unlike in TASM 2.

Spot on.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Yeah. I'm not cool with other opinions, yet, I'm here since this movie got released and you're the first one to ever say such thing, that must say something about me, because you're making false assumptions based on one post that doesn't even send off that impression.

Sure, do the same stuff because other people are doing it as well.

Again, and again, I wasn't discussing with anyone before you, so, if they're bringing the other franchise into the discussion, that's not my problem because I'm not involved, they know the rules, and I don't need to hunt them for not following the rules established a long time ago.

In all fairness, Andrew, the rules of intermingling the franchises into a discussion was banned because back when those discussions were happening, people were unable to do so in a civil manner. I mean the mods had to close the general discussion thread because of the ridiculousness. Yeah, I'm aware about the created Vs. thread in Spidey World. Again, it was created to see if people could discuss the franchises civilly. It had positive results. If you're having issues here, I'd report it to a mod but imo I have seen a relatively good debate with posters being civil with one another. IMO, bringing up the films in the entire series is only a natural part of the process because comparisons are inevitable. It only makes sense. Disagreements are also inevitable.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

In all fairness, Andrew, the rules of intermingling the franchises into a discussion was banned because back when those discussions were happening, people were unable to do so in a civil manner. I mean the mods had to close the general discussion thread because of the ridiculousness. Yeah, I'm aware about the created Vs. thread in Spidey World. Again, it was created to see if people could discuss the franchises civilly. It had positive results. If you're having issues here, I'd report it to a mod but imo I have seen a relatively good debate with posters being civil with one another. IMO, bringing up the films in the entire series is only a natural part of the process because comparisons are inevitable. It only makes sense. Disagreements are also inevitable.

As I said before, I won't proceed with discussions after someone brings the past trilogy to try and show how much those movies were superior on their views, and because it's against the rules as well. That's me, if you want to do that on the General Discussion thread instead of the comparison one, then do it, I won't get involved and I won't waste my time with such person.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

As I said before, I won't proceed with discussions after someone brings the past trilogy to try and show how much those movies were superior on their views, and because it's against the rules as well. That's me, if you want to do that on the General Discussion thread instead of the comparison one, then do it, I won't get involved and I won't waste my time with such person.

Understandable.

They opened that Vs thread to see if people could discuss the franchises in a civil manner and it had good results. This was awhile after they had to close the general discussion thread. It was a 'let's open this up and see what happens.' Again, it was positive. Now that the movies from ASM have been out a while, people have calmed down and discussions don't seem as heated, really.

I don't support making comparisons to try and put down one thing over another and that goes for anything, not just the Spidey movies. But...if comparisons are being made in attempt to shed light on why someone prefers one thing over another, I don't think that should be a rule breaker. People discussing things civilly is a good thing cause it promotes education. And comparisons are just a natural part of that...I haven't really seen anything against that notion here in this thread as of late.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Why are you having difficulty fathoming something that is factually true? It should be the other way around. Nobody is saying that a hero taking some time out to grieve because of a tragedy or a loss of a loved one never happens. But not for months on end abandoning their superhero duties while the people/city they protect suffers like in TASM 2, which is very much out of character for Peter. But you're here posting Green Lantern facial expressions in some attempt to validate that, which is something that makes no sense at all.

That doesn't happen, unless you're talking about those elseworlds out of canon tales, which are the only examples you've been able to cite,

You mentioned X-Men Days of Future Past as using the same plot device as TASM 2. It absolutely 100% did not. Charles Xavier had not formed his X-Men team yet. He did not break up the X-Men and sink into depression. He just abandoned his school for mutants. The X-Men had not happened yet, which is why Wolverine was telling him later that when he does meet the X-Men team like Scott, Storm, Jean etc in the future that he has to guide them, lead them because they'll need him. Had he abandoned the X-Men team and done that, then you'd have a valid movie example.

It's the same with The Dark Knight Rises example you tried to use on the previous page. You said Batman quit for years because of Rachel and Harvey's death. Also 100% untrue. He quit because Gotham didn't need him any more. Organized crime was cleaned up because of the Dent Act. This is verbally stated several times in the movie. He didn't abandon his city for a long time because he was wallowing in grief like Peter did in TASM 2. That didn't even happen in the comics when he lost Gwen. He had reason to feel guilt for her death in there, too, unlike in TASM 2.

In 1980, we saw Superman abandon his abilities to jump between the sheets with Lois in Superman 2. Had Zod & crew not shown up, the logical progression of that storyline is that he chose romantic love over his heroic duty for a lifetime. Moreover, Xavier was well aware of the mutant threat in the world (he was even responsible for sending one of the biggest threats over to Magneto's side) and still chose wallowing in booze over doing anything about it. Wolverine did the same thing in Old Man Logan, despite being one of the only heroes left in the world. Compare those two instances to a teenager, who had just experienced the 5th death of a loved on in his short life, and Amazing Spidey 2's ending pales in comparison to the other situations where the hero shirked his or her duty.

Not surprisingly, we don't see eye-to-eye on the ending of TDK, either. Bruce questioned the effect of his mission to Alfred after Rachel's death. He also judged Harvey's reputation to be bigger than the continued good he could do as Batman. Their deaths were instrumental in Bruce hiding out while the "storm" that Selina mentioned brewed outside for years.

While you and others might put specific continuity parameters on what you consider valid for adaptation, that doesn't change the simple truth that those stories are still a factual parts of the mythos. Given that both Marvel and DC have undergone various degrees of reboots with just about every character, the assertion that TASM2's ending was somehow plucked out of thin air just doesn't stand up to any degree of scrutiny.

 

[The Joker]

In 1980, we saw Superman abandon his abilities to jump between the sheets with Lois in Superman 2. Had Zod & crew not shown up, the logical progression of that storyline is that he chose romantic love over his heroic duty for a lifetime.

You're talking what ifs there. You can can apply such logic to any of the storylines where heroes quit and came back for what ever reason. The point and the fact is they came back for a reason after a short period of time. And didn't renege on it afterward. They did not sit it out for months on end and let people suffer.

Moreover, Xavier was well aware of the mutant threat in the world (he was even responsible for sending one of the biggest threats over to Magneto's side) and still chose wallowing in booze over doing anything about it.

Xavier had not taken on the responsibility of combating the mutant threat yet. He had not formed his X-Men team. He had barely just begun his school for mutants, let alone started any of that.

Wolverine did the same thing in Old Man Logan, despite being one of the only heroes left in the world.

Old Man Logan is set 50 years in the future in an alternate universe designated as Earth-807128. You see how every example you go for is not canon.

Compare those two instances to a teenager, who had just experienced the 5th death of a loved on in his short life, and Amazing Spidey 2's ending pales in comparison to the other situations where the hero shirked his or her duty.

Your two examples are invalid. Comparing them to TASM 2's ending is therefore invalid. It still stands out as an awful out of character thing for Spider-Man or any of the stand up heroes to do. That's why you're struggling to find a valid in continuity example rather than elseworlds ones.

Not surprisingly, we don't see eye-to-eye on the ending of TDK, either. Bruce questioned the effect of his mission to Alfred after Rachel's death. He also judged Harvey's reputation to be bigger than the continued good he could do as Batman. Their deaths were instrumental in Bruce hiding out while the "storm" that Selina mentioned brewed outside for years.

You're wrong on both counts. Questioning the effect of his mission after Rachel's death was not a factor in his retirement after TDK. Heroes questions themselves all the time. Part of being a hero. If it had been a reason he would have quit then and there instead of continuing on and taking down the Joker. Again this is verbally stated in the movie. I can provide quotes that say so. Can you quote a single line that suggests he retired because Rachel died? Rhetorical question. I know you can't because I know none exists.

As for Harvey's death, it was the effect of his legacy that forced Batman into retirement. Gotham was cleaned up of crime because of the Dent Act. He wasn't needed any more. Again all this is verbally stated in the movie.

This is not an opinionated issue. You're factually wrong on this.

While you and others might put specific continuity parameters on what you consider valid for adaptation, that doesn't change the simple truth that those stories are still a factual parts of the mythos. Given that both Marvel and DC have undergone various degrees of reboots with just about every character, the assertion that TASM2's ending was somehow plucked out of thin air just doesn't stand up to any degree of scrutiny.

No they're not. They play no part in the canon mythology of the characters any more than any of the other insane out of continuity stories that have been done do. Someone mentioned one of the more hilarious OTT ones earlier, like this;

Batman being a murderous blood sucking vampire is no more part of his character than your aforementioned examples are with those characters. They're all invalid out of continuity stories. It is your examples and TASM 2's ending that don't stand up to any degree of scrutiny.

 

[Lantern Venom]

You're talking what ifs there. You can can apply such logic to any of the storylines where heroes quit and came back for what ever reason. The point and the fact is they came back for a reason after a short period of time. And didn't renege on it afterward. They did not sit it out for months on end and let people suffer.



Xavier had not taken on the responsibility of combating the mutant threat yet. He had not formed his X-Men team. He had barely just begun his school for mutants, let alone started any of that.



Old Man Logan is set 50 years in the future in an alternate universe designated as Earth-807128. You see how every example you go for is not canon.



Your two examples are invalid. Comparing them to TASM 2's ending is therefore invalid. It still stands out as an awful out of character thing for Spider-Man or any of the stand up heroes to do. That's why you're struggling to find a valid in continuity example rather than elseworlds ones.

.

The examples are legion in comics and their various non-print translations. You can set up personal parameters after the fact, but that doesn't change the truth of the events. I'm sure that none of the examples I would cite would meet all of the personal criteria for each individual comic book reader, but that's irrelevant. It's an indisputable fact that the ending of TASM2 is a variation on a plot device that's been used in comics for decades prior to 2014.

While you and others might not have liked that ending, your feelings are surely colored by a pre-existing bias. Underneath his powers, Peter was still barely a man in the TASM series. Had he been a policeman or marine or firefighter who had undergone a similar period of inactive depression after a 5th soul-shaking death, that would be perfectly logical. Grief, particularly when it's piled in layers, can immobilize even the most committed person. But when that person finally overcomes it and finds his or her way back, then we cheer like the crowd did when Peter came to confront Rhino. When that cop's face lit up with hope when he saw that Spidey had returned, that echoed the feelings of so many comic book fans over the years who have watched a favorite hero be taken out of action for various reasons, but picked up a comic one day and experienced the euphoria of the hero returning.

 

[The Joker]

The examples are legion in comics and their various non-print translations. You can set up personal parameters after the fact, but that doesn't change the truth of the events. I'm sure that none of the examples I would cite would meet all of the personal criteria for each individual comic book reader, but that's irrelevant. It's an indisputable fact that the ending of TASM2 is a variation on a plot device that's been used in comics for decades prior to 2014.

If the examples are legion you'd be able to cite a comparable in character canon one. But so far all your examples have been from elseworld non canon stories which are invalid because they are not examples of in character characteristics. It's why you can't find a canon example to back yourself up with.

If you're going to talk about what is in character for Peter or any hero to do, you naturally choose from the set established canon stories that define who they are. Not the elseworlds stories that go into territories totally out of character, like the ones you're citing, or Batman being a killer vampire, or any of the other elseworld stories that take characters to places that they would never go in regular continuity. That's the point of them. They are fun crazy stories that can put characters in situations and have them do things that is completely outside their character. But in no way are they a reflection of who they are.

Or are you going to sit there and try and argue Batman being a vampire who beheads people is part of his character.

While you and others might not have liked that ending, your feelings are surely colored by a pre-existing bias. Underneath his powers, Peter was still barely a man in the TASM series. Had he been a policeman or marine or firefighter who had undergone a similar period of inactive depression after a 5th soul-shaking death, that would be perfectly logical. Grief, particularly when it's piled in layers, can immobilize even the most committed person. But when that person finally overcomes it and finds his or her way back, then we cheer like the crowd did when Peter came to confront Rhino. When that cop's face lit up with hope when he saw that Spidey had returned, that echoed the feelings of so many comic book fans over the years who have watched a favorite hero be taken out of action for various reasons, but picked up a comic one day and experienced the euphoria of the hero returning.

I can't speak for the others, but based on their logical and well backed up arguments, they are not colored by any bias. Nor am I. We're talking facts here. Not personal opinion. Personal opinion is whether you like or dislike that awful TASM 2 ending, in spite of it being horribly out of character for Peter.

Peter has been consumed by grief many times in the comics. So have all the other heroes at some point or another. They don't sit by a grave for months on end and do nothing while their city goes to the dogs. The best stories where a hero has quit (and not for months on end) shows them conflicted, doing some soul searching as Leenie previously pointed out to you. We got nothing like that in TASM 2. We just got a brief montage of Peter doing the same thing day in and out for months. Standing there at Gwen's grave. Boring, weak, uninteresting. That's not how Peter handles death. That's not how he handles conflict.

All TASM 2 did was take the bare bones of a hero quitting story, and bastardized it into something dreadful.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The execution was worse than anything. You can build a good story around Peter dealing with the grief and explore how it affects his responsibilities as Spider-Man and probably have a good film out of it. But haphazardly slapping it in the final five minutes post-climax of this film only to have him easily resolve the problem within that five minutes just makes Peter come off as some selfish, whiny, jerk. And that is a problem throughout these two films. Peter constantly puts his own wishes above the greater good, which is the exact opposite of what this character should be. And at the very end of this series, since there is no next film, he still does it. So he never actually learns his lesson no matter how many times it blows up in his face.

That does not make for a likeable protagonist.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

BTW, am I the only one who likes to pretend that Rhino killed him after the cut-out to the credits? That would be a fitting end for this version of the character.

 

[Leenie]

The execution was worse than anything. You can build a good story around Peter dealing with the grief and explore how it affects his responsibilities as Spider-Man and probably have a good film out of it. But haphazardly slapping it in the final five minutes post-climax of this film only to have him easily resolve the problem within that five minutes just makes Peter come off as some selfish, whiny, jerk. And that is a problem throughout these two films. Peter constantly puts his own wishes above the greater good, which is the exact opposite of what this character should be. And at the very end of this series, since there is no next film, he still does it. So he never actually learns his lesson no matter how many times it blows up in his face.

That does not make for a likeable protagonist.

Well said. I get what the movie was trying to do (well, I'm using the term "trying" very loosely), but the execution makes everything a mess. Do I think Sony wanted the character to be unlikeable for many people? Of course not, but the sloppy storytelling does paint Peter in a less than flattering light. For example, it makes me think of the CinemaSins video of TASM2, during the graduation scene at the beginning of the film, while Peter and Gwen are kissing on stage: "Way to make it about you two, jerks." While I obviously think the movie was trying to make that scene charming and cute, it came across as self-centered and attention-seeking to me; obnoxious, even. There are just a lot of bad decisions about these movies, and seriously ... That makes me feel bad for the actors. I've said it many times, and I'll say it again: The cast deserved better.

And in regards to your other post, I don't know who I would prefer to kill who: Spider-Man or Rhino. Both are pretty insufferable characters to me. Oh man, and the big spider symbol that appears before the credits start? It's like Sony was saying (in an almost cocky fashion) "Yeah, that's what it's all about, guys." I've only seen TASM2 twice (I only watched it a second time, just to share some lulz with my brother who had not seen it at the time; that was actually a fun viewing of the film): The first time I saw that spider symbol at the end instead of an actual fight that was promised to me in the trailers, I was like "GTFO." Whether it's Spider-Man or Rhino, we all know who died at the end of that fight: the franchise. :\

 

[DX]

BTW, am I the only one who likes to pretend that Rhino killed him after the cut-out to the credits? That would be a fitting end for this version of the character.

I like to think that right after the film cut to black, Poochie Parker heads back to his home planet and dies on the way there.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

BTW, am I the only one who likes to pretend that Rhino killed him after the cut-out to the credits? That would be a fitting end for this version of the character.

Ouch.

 

[Keehar]

BTW, am I the only one who likes to pretend that Rhino killed him after the cut-out to the credits? That would be a fitting end for this version of the character.

Totally. Killed by one of the cheesiest lamest villains ever. Perfect end for the Garfield Spidey.

 

[Daltonio]

The examples are legion in comics and their various non-print translations. You can set up personal parameters after the fact, but that doesn't change the truth of the events. I'm sure that none of the examples I would cite would meet all of the personal criteria for each individual comic book reader, but that's irrelevant. It's an indisputable fact that the ending of TASM2 is a variation on a plot device that's been used in comics for decades prior to 2014.

While you and others might not have liked that ending, your feelings are surely colored by a pre-existing bias. Underneath his powers, Peter was still barely a man in the TASM series. Had he been a policeman or marine or firefighter who had undergone a similar period of inactive depression after a 5th soul-shaking death, that would be perfectly logical. Grief, particularly when it's piled in layers, can immobilize even the most committed person. But when that person finally overcomes it and finds his or her way back, then we cheer like the crowd did when Peter came to confront Rhino. When that cop's face lit up with hope when he saw that Spidey had returned, that echoed the feelings of so many comic book fans over the years who have watched a favorite hero be taken out of action for various reasons, but picked up a comic one day and experienced the euphoria of the hero returning.

 

[The Joker]

The execution was worse than anything. You can build a good story around Peter dealing with the grief and explore how it affects his responsibilities as Spider-Man and probably have a good film out of it. But haphazardly slapping it in the final five minutes post-climax of this film only to have him easily resolve the problem within that five minutes just makes Peter come off as some selfish, whiny, jerk. And that is a problem throughout these two films. Peter constantly puts his own wishes above the greater good, which is the exact opposite of what this character should be. And at the very end of this series, since there is no next film, he still does it. So he never actually learns his lesson no matter how many times it blows up in his face.

That does not make for a likeable protagonist.

Well said. I get what the movie was trying to do (well, I'm using the term "trying" very loosely), but the execution makes everything a mess. Do I think Sony wanted the character to be unlikeable for many people? Of course not, but the sloppy storytelling does paint Peter in a less than flattering light. For example, it makes me think of the CinemaSins video of TASM2, during the graduation scene at the beginning of the film, while Peter and Gwen are kissing on stage: "Way to make it about you two, jerks." While I obviously think the movie was trying to make that scene charming and cute, it came across as self-centered and attention-seeking to me; obnoxious, even. There are just a lot of bad decisions about these movies, and seriously ... That makes me feel bad for the actors. I've said it many times, and I'll say it again: The cast deserved better.

And in regards to your other post, I don't know who I would prefer to kill who: Spider-Man or Rhino. Both are pretty insufferable characters to me. Oh man, and the big spider symbol that appears before the credits start? It's like Sony was saying (in an almost cocky fashion) "Yeah, that's what it's all about, guys." I've only seen TASM2 twice (I only watched it a second time, just to share some lulz with my brother who had not seen it at the time; that was actually a fun viewing of the film): The first time I saw that spider symbol at the end instead of an actual fight that was promised to me in the trailers, I was like "GTFO." Whether it's Spider-Man or Rhino, we all know who died at the end of that fight: the franchise. :\

Hear hear

BTW, am I the only one who likes to pretend that Rhino killed him after the cut-out to the credits? That would be a fitting end for this version of the character.

I have to admit that is both amusing and very fitting lol.

 

[TeeKay]

Jesus Christ Joker, I respect you bruh. The way you always argue your points and back them up with facts is great man. I hope one day me and you engage in a discussion we disagree on.

 

[LizardMan07]

Would anyone have liked the film to just fade to black at the end of the funeral scene? And then go with a silent credit roll?

Think it could have been really effective, but I actually found the death sad so I might be in the minority

 

[Lantern Venom]

I had the exact opposite reaction to the ending of TASM2 that many Raimi loyalists seem to have had. If I read a case file where a person's life had followed a similar trajectory as Peter's did from his parents' exit to Gwen's death, I wouldn't be surprised if that person was catatonic or suffering from a dissociative identity disorder. I've seen this kind of grief and its toxic effects in real life, and believe me when I tell you that it isn't pretty. It would take an extraordinary person just to keep functioning through this, let alone resume a difficult mission. It would take hero.

Would anyone have liked the film to just fade to black at the end of the funeral scene? And then go with a silent credit roll?

Think it could have been really effective, but I actually found the death sad so I might be in the minority

I wouldn't have had a problem with that if we were headed to a part 3, but I'm glad that we saw Peter assuming the mantle of the Spider since that was the end of another chapter in the Spider-man mythos. I found the death sad as well, and my daughter was shocked. She's a bit too young for the Dark Knight trilogy, so she had never seen a hero's love interest die. I showed her Gwen's death in the comics later on and talked with her about how instrumental that event was in shifting mainstream comics to more mature storytelling.

 

[LizardMan07]

I did enjoy the way they handled it, thought it was really powerful and encapsulated the essence of what it meant to be Spider-Man really well.

I really enjoyed the two films and I'm glad they went the way they did. It really was Marc Webb's aim to tell a really powerful story about Gwen and Peter and I think he ended up doing that.

Sure yee it wasn't Norman but really that wasn't relevant to the story Webb was trying to tell

It could have been received better if they did things differently but the way they ended up doing it specifically suited the way I like a Spider-Man film to go, so I'll always be happy with the series and how it ended

 

[Leenie]

Would anyone have liked the film to just fade to black at the end of the funeral scene? And then go with a silent credit roll?

Think it could have been really effective, but I actually found the death sad so I might be in the minority

A better way to end the film would have been this:

Gwen dies, cut to her funeral, and then show Harry in the asylum saying that "it's not over yet," implying that Peter's hardships are far from over.

Sure, it's a bummer ending, but so was Empire Strikes Back. It would have been much more effective than trying to shoehorn in Rhino with some lazy "fight scene" for the ending. Rhino totally could have been saved for the next movie. Also, imagine if Gwen's graduation speech video had been saved for the third movie, while Peter is mourning and losing faith in himself as a hero. THAT would have been some pretty powerful stuff, in my opinion. TASM2 rushed everything and summed up Peter Parker's grieving over Gwen Stacy, the love of his life, into 2-3 minutes of screentime.

 

[LizardMan07]

A better way to end the film would have been this:

Gwen dies, cut to her funeral, and then show Harry in the asylum saying that "it's not over yet," implying that Peter's hardships are far from over.

Sure, it's a bummer ending, but so was Empire Strikes Back. It would have been much more effective than trying to shoehorn in Rhino with some lazy "fight scene" for the ending. Rhino totally could have been saved for the next movie. Also, imagine if Gwen's graduation speech video had been saved for the third movie, while Peter is mourning and losing faith in himself as a hero. THAT would have been some pretty powerful stuff, in my opinion. TASM2 rushed everything and summed up Peter Parker's grieving over Gwen Stacy, the love of his life, into 2-3 minutes of screentime.

Yeah, I really like what you described as well!

If they'd listened to a lot of Feige's advice and focussed more on Harry I think they really could have set themselves up for the long haul, the story they set up had so much potential and they sorta ran through it at the end. I didn't mind the ending but you're right, if they took it slower, it would have been better

They tried so hard to force their own little cinematic universe that they ended up getting spidey into the MCU

Hopefully now with the new one they'll be able to do the world building more organically and focus more on the story

I don't see a bad movie in TASM2 but I see a massive missed opportunity

 

[The Joker]

Jesus Christ Joker, I respect you bruh. The way you always argue your points and back them up with facts is great man. I hope one day me and you engage in a discussion we disagree on.

Why thank you

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Would anyone have liked the film to just fade to black at the end of the funeral scene? And then go with a silent credit roll?

Think it could have been really effective, but I actually found the death sad so I might be in the minority

I think that would have been too abrupt. That wouldn't have given enough of a resolution to the climax's events, imo. Instead of cutting directly from the graveyard to Harry and Fiers and then to the end fight with Rhino, I wish they would have explored more the ramifications Gwen's death had on Peter and actually shown this in the film. I would have also liked to see a scene involving Gwen's family, I mean, in the span of about a year they lost their husband/father and their daughter/sister. All we got was just a quick shot of them at the funeral. How come we didn't see Gwen's family at the grave like we did with Peter? Or maybe a scene with Peter going to visit her family? That could have been a very powerful scene. But...considering how they threw out Connor's family in ASM, why would Gwen's family get anything other than that treatment. I guess there just wasn't enough time at the end of the movie for all that nonsense Plenty of time for "Da Rhynooo!" though.

The more I think about all the missed opportunities with this film and all the issues with the contrivances, bad dialogue, and just bad choices in general, I really dislike this film more and more.

 

[Snow Queen]

Joker, I disagree with you a lot on this film (it's something of a guilty pleasure, though I don't think it's as bad as it's reputation), but I must applaud how thorough you are at explaining your thoughts.