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

[titansupes]

Agreed. That, and you can interpret what happens to Gwen as "See ladies? This is what happens when you try to do 'guy stuff.' You die." Or, they were saying "See? We can do a strong female character ... To a certain point, that is." I don't think that's what the movie was trying to say, but they inadvertently gave those vibes (in my opinion). It's part of the reason why I think that killing Gwen off altogether turned out to be a bad decision, given the way it was handled. The way her death was handled really hurt the narrative of the film, because Sony just had to throw more comic book references in the film (because references are what make comic book movies good, right? ).

The only character flaw that Gwen really had is that she was attracted to someone like Garfield's Peter Parker. Like I said, she is way too good for him. Plus, her insisting on being there during the final battle felt more like she was trying to prove something (possibly it was Sony trying to prove something; that they can be all "empowering" for women now?), rather than her wanting to be there for Peter even if she was risking her life.

EDIT: I'd say that Gwen hitting the Lizard with some blunt object (I forget what; I haven't seen TASM since it was in theaters) in TASM1 is a bigger gesture to risk her life for a loved one instead of what she did at the end of TASM2.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

TASM2 dodged a huge bullet by someone making the right call to leave that scene with Peter's father out. People think that TASM2 is hated now? Think of the reaction if that scene had been left in.

It was Hirai. You know it's bad when the CEO of the parent corporation has more respect for the mythos than the producers and director.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Oh wtf, this has taken me aback a little. I originally thought that Jones' character was specifically supposed to be Felicia from the beginning.

They really were clueless with what they were doing with this franchise, such wasted talent...

I had great hopes for ASM2 and in the beginning things were looking good, especially when we got our first look at the new suit and how many of the cast, mostly Garfield's opinion, were praising the script.

The first sign of trouble was when it was announced that Shailene/MJ was cut from the movie. It didn't seem like much of a big deal at the time or maybe I was just too naive to see what it really meant. Of course later as we learned the entire production was a mess from top to bottom. Shame.

That is fantastic. My heart still hurts from Spectacular Spider-Man being canceled. Everybody who worked on that show really understood and loved the characters. There's a reason why that show is one of my favorite comic book cartoon adaptations, second only to Batman: The Animated Series. It's my favorite Marvel cartoon, that's for sure.

I've been listening to this podcast that features Weisman, one of the producers, Vic Cook, Sean Galloway, and a couple of the cast members, all talking about the production and behind the scenes surrounding TSSM. If you've got the time you should give it a listen, I'll come back and edit this post with the link. But anyways, it's so enlightening listening to these guys and gals talk about their interest in making this show. Truly they are big fans of the character and especially Weisman and Cook who talk about their upbringing and reading those early Lee/Romita issues of Spider-Man. They wanted to pay their respect to those great stories by updating them for a contemporary audience. You can tell just by how they talk about it, just how much they do love the source. Vic Cook often states, how he felt the mantra of Great Power comes Great Responsibility was bestowed upon himself and the rest of the crew to get things right. To make the show iconic, to keep it classic, to make it cohesive. It really sucks they aren't able to continue what was and still is imo the best Spidey adaptation. I can only hope with the future of these live-action movies going into the MCU, Marvel has the wits about them to get the same kind of like-minded individuals to produce them/write them/direct them, etc. We need more Weismans and Cooks involved in these projects.

edit: Leenie, here's the link: http://www.spidey-dude.com/?cat=118

"Schmoopy" is 100% the exact way I've described it to people. I don't mind cute stuff in a romantic storyline, but I felt that the dialogue between Peter and Gwen had pretty much no substance. It was fluff, with the occasional exposition shoehorned in. I'm not trying to hate on Andrew Garfield or Emma Stone (because I honestly really like them as actors; I've enjoyed their work outside of the TASM movies).

I agree that both Garfield and Stone are terrific actors and their chemistry is also undeniable. But why the writers had to stoop to such corny, schmoopisms, I'll never understand. Their dialogue in the 1st ASM movie was pretty good. I enjoyed it. But the way it was presented in ASM2, and not just that 'date' scene, it actually made me feel less about their connection.

This may be one of the #1 reasons as to why I don't care for the TASM movies. Uncle Ben feels very discarded, and that is a huge, huge problem. I was very irked in TASM2, when Peter would react to the very mention of Uncle Ben. For example, at the graduation, Aunt May expresses how she wishes Ben had been there. Peter's response to that seemed very catty to me ("He'd yell at me to get a job or something"). While I think that was an attempt at humor, it just came across as weird. For lack of better words, I didn't feel the love. I don't believe that Peter misses his Uncle in these movies ... And that's a problem.

I don't mind the parents being incorporated into the Spider-Man movies, but I don't think they should have taken center stage of Peter's motivations like they did in the TASM movies. It is very important to establish that Peter views Aunt May and Uncle Ben as his parents first (since they pretty much raised him). I think that Marvel Studios could have pulled off the parents plotline (because with S.H.I.E.L.D. in the picture, the parents plotline would have actually went somewhere interesting, and it would have connected Spidey into the cinematic universe really well).

All these movies, shows, etc are adaptations of the source. And, I am all for them making changes, as all adaptations do. However, it's when they make changes that either do not benefit character development, the story or a combination of both, that's when I take issue. It's one thing to try and make an interesting twist on a situation or scenario but when it comes at the expense of losing what made that story or character so great in the first place...it feels so contrived. It's a turn off.

TASM2 dodged a huge bullet by someone making the right call to leave that scene with Peter's father out. People think that TASM2 is hated now? Think of the reaction if that scene had been left in.

What I would like to know, is who felt that scene or just the idea of that scene was a good idea in the first place? I remember Webb gave an explanation as to why it was taken out and I believe it was Kaz Hirai, Sony's CEO, that was the guy who pulled the plug on that scene but I don't remember hearing who decided to actually film it. Was it part of the original script? One of the classic Arad/Tolmach mid-filming changes? I guess all that is moot at this point but even just the fact that they filmed it, well, it stinks.

It was Hirai. You know it's bad when the CEO of the parent corporation has more respect for the mythos than the producers and director.

 

[Leenie]

I agree that both Garfield and Stone are terrific actors and their chemistry is also undeniable. But why the writers had to stoop to such corny, schmoopisms, I'll never understand. Their dialogue in the 1st ASM movie was pretty good. I enjoyed it. But the way it was presented in ASM2, and not just that 'date' scene, it actually made me feel less about their connection.

I feel that the dialogue hindered their chemistry (and that's really not their fault; it's difficult to pull off some of the bad dialogue they were given, IMO).

After seeing this particular deleted scene from the first TASM movie, there is no denying that Garfield and Stone have good chemistry with each other. I just didn't feel it with the dialogue they were given, sadly.

[YT]4ilWAxJdr4I[/YT]

That moment, right there, tells me all I needed to know about how they felt towards each other. I can totally feel the chemistry here. It's such a simple scene, but it's a lovely one (maybe the candles are a little too much, but I'm paying more attention to them than the background, honestly). The scene shows me how they feel, rather than telling me by dishing out "schmoopy" lines all of the time. Why this moment wasn't left in the first movie, I'll never know.

 

[Leenie]

I had great hopes for ASM2 and in the beginning things were looking good, especially when we got our first look at the new suit and how many of the cast, mostly Garfield's opinion, were praising the script.

The first sign of trouble was when it was announced that Shailene/MJ was cut from the movie. It didn't seem like much of a big deal at the time or maybe I was just too naive to see what it really meant. Of course later as we learned the entire production was a mess from top to bottom. Shame.



I've been listening to this podcast that features Weisman, one of the producers, Vic Cook, Sean Galloway, and a couple of the cast members, all talking about the production and behind the scenes surrounding TSSM. If you've got the time you should give it a listen, I'll come back and edit this post with the link. But anyways, it's so enlightening listening to these guys and gals talk about their interest in making this show. Truly they are big fans of the character and especially Weisman and Cook who talk about their upbringing and reading those early Lee/Romita issues of Spider-Man. They wanted to pay their respect to those great stories by updating them for a contemporary audience. You can tell just by how they talk about it, just how much they do love the source. Vic Cook often states, how he felt the mantra of Great Power comes Great Responsibility was bestowed upon himself and the rest of the crew to get things right. To make the show iconic, to keep it classic, to make it cohesive. It really sucks they aren't able to continue what was and still is imo the best Spidey adaptation. I can only hope with the future of these live-action movies going into the MCU, Marvel has the wits about them to get the same kind of like-minded individuals to produce them/write them/direct them, etc. We need more Weismans and Cooks involved in these projects.

edit: Leenie, here's the link: http://www.spidey-dude.com/?cat=118

Thanks for the link! I will definitely listen to it soon.

Spectacular Spider-Man was truly a lovely surprise. I remember watching it when it first aired in 2008. I wasn't expecting anything special, but boy did that show deliver. Overall, I think that Disney has done a really good job with Marvel ... Except when it comes to the animation.

It is just a shame that this show got canned to make Ultimate Spider-Man. Ultimate Spider-Man's animation is really nice, and it's always nice to hear J.K. Simmons voice as JJJ ... But that's where my compliments towards the show end.

 

[Daltonio]

Come my friend, let us partake in a celebratory dance in honor of Gwen Stacy.

That is a very swell idea, if I do say so myself.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Peter learned the high price of being a hero meant that the dangers weren't only to himself, but those closest to him. He grappled mightily with his love for Gwen vs his respect for Captain Stacy, but ultimately he accepted the risks of being a couple because she obviously accepted them as well.

Contrast that to Mary Jane, who finally appeared to have had a cathartic moment about Peter at the end of SM2, which was such an outstanding scene, but she reverted to her myopic nature (she actually got worse) in SM3. I would think Amy Pascal, who had a hand in such a empowering women's movie like A League of Their Own, would have applauded Gwen in TASM 2, who was willing stand by the hero even at the expense of her own physical safety, verses the bratty damsel-in-distress that Mary Jane was in the Raimi trilogy. Honest Trailers hit the nail on the head when they described Mary Jane's treatment of Peter in those movies: "Meet Mary Jane Watson, the love of Peter's life, and the worst girlfriend ever."

As for Gwen's death being Peter's fault in the comics, that's a vast oversimplification. Goblin was the catalyst for setting up the entire scenario on the bridge, so he's ultimately to blame. Peter tried to save her, but whether his effort caused more harm (as with the neck snap) or he was a few seconds too late (as with the cracked skull), it comes to the same story point: sometimes the hero's best efforts still come up short and someone close to him/her dies.

Damn it,

Somewhere, someplace, someone said Peter was happier than ever at the end of the movie? So, not wearing the suit for five months, and later, doing what he's meant to do no matter how he's feeling, means he learned nothing?

The stuff people come up the days..

 

[Doctor Octopus]

But with Gwen dead (and with her death not being his fault whatsoever), what does Peter need to worry about now? He doesn't seem to be haunted by Captain Stacy anymore, and he isn't in a constant state of worry anymore (since his worst fear was realized, but it was clearly established that none of it is his fault). Peter no longer has anything to feel guilty about with Gwen dead. That's why I think he is better off. Like I said, I highly doubt that was the movie's intention, but the messy storytelling led me to that conclusion. Peter should have never betrayed Captain Stacy's last wish before TASM2 in the first place (that's the messy storytelling I'm talking about). I think the story would have been more tragic, effective, and poignant if Peter and Gwen had not been together as a couple throughout most of the movie: They get together near the end of the film, with Gwen saying that it's her decision to make. Once they're finally together, she dies ... And Peter feels the weight of that (since in the end, he feels that he betrayed Captain Stacy's last wish/warning). I feel that would have at least been much better to watch than this "on again/off again" stuff that I hated.

And the messy storytelling also makes Gwen's death kind of comical to me. She "had" to be there, because only she knew the power grid ... And all she did was push a big red button. It was really sloppy of the movie to do this; the only reason that detail was included is because they needed an excuse for her to be there so she can die ... "Because her dying was in the comic books."

This may be an unpopular opinion, but Mary Jane was pretty much the only character I felt sorry for in Spider-Man 3. There's a reason why she "reverted" back to her insecure ways: Peter was simply not listening to her and he was dismissive of her problems. MJ was finally experiencing a dream of hers (being on Broadway), and she ended up failing at it ... And Peter was oblivious to all of it because he was too wrapped up in the glitz and glamor of being Spider-Man. MJ herself said that reviews bothered her because it was like listening to her father yelling terrible things at her ... And Peter was dismissive of it. I'm sorry, but that's gotta hurt. Especially when considering how supportive she was of him at the end of Spider-Man 2, this is how she gets treated in her relationship? Sorry, but team MJ in this case (even though the Honest Trailers and CinemaSins are hilarious. "Starring: Spider-Man Pooping!" ).

Plus, even though he refused to acknowledge her problems, and even though he made every conversation about him, MJ still checked up on Peter after he found out that Flint Marko killed Uncle Ben. Doesn't seem like such a bad girlfriend to me.

I have my big problems with Spider-Man 3, but I really don't think that MJ was one of them. My only issue with her is that she got captured again, when it really wasn't necessary in the third movie.



I get that it's not directly Peter's fault (I don't want to see Spider-Man pull a gun on Gwen and shoot her, haha). Ultimately, it is the Goblin's fault. However, in TASM2, Gwen's speech pretty much exonerated Peter from any possible guilt. Peter even tried his best to keep Gwen away from the fight. Not even when he caught her with the web was it possibly his fault (unlike in the comics). It played out more like "Well, she was going to die anyway, at least I tried to save her." Sure, the web caught her in time to only make her head hit the ground, but if he had not tried, then Gwen would have splattered onto the ground anyway.

Agreed so much.

Great post Leenie.

That isn't something good though because the only reason that happens is because the script needs her to be there just for the Goblin to kill her. Gwen is not really as independent or empowering as people want to believe, she just happens to know and have things that conveniently work on Spidey's favor(working at Oscorp in TASM so she could get what they needed to stop the Lizard, knowing how to fix the power plant and how to fix the web-shooters) but ultimately none of that was earned, those things were given to her by the script to give the illusion that she wasn't a damsel in distress and in the process they turned her into a Mary Sue that was literally perfect in every sense, she wasn't really a character she was more like a plot device.

Agreed. That, and you can interpret what happens to Gwen as "See ladies? This is what happens when you try to do 'guy stuff.' You die." Or, they were saying "See? We can do a strong female character ... To a certain point, that is." I don't think that's what the movie was trying to say, but they inadvertently gave those vibes (in my opinion). It's part of the reason why I think that killing Gwen off altogether turned out to be a bad decision, given the way it was handled. The way her death was handled really hurt the narrative of the film, because Sony just had to throw more comic book references in the film (because references are what make comic book movies good, right? ).

The only character flaw that Gwen really had is that she was attracted to someone like Garfield's Peter Parker. Like I said, she is way too good for him. Plus, her insisting on being there during the final battle felt more like she was trying to prove something (possibly it was Sony trying to prove something; that they can be all "empowering" for women now?), rather than her wanting to be there for Peter even if she was risking her life.

EDIT: I'd say that Gwen hitting the Lizard with some blunt object (I forget what; I haven't seen TASM since it was in theaters) in TASM1 is a bigger gesture to risk her life for a loved one instead of what she did at the end of TASM2.

Also agreed about this on Gwen.

Peter learned to be a hero he has to break the promise he made to a dying man about his daughter? Now there's the morals of a great hero right there. It's ok kids to make promises and then break them if you really want to be someone's gf.

HA you really want to use Honest Trailers. You want to start quoting what they said about TASM 2? Because their vid is longer for that than any other Spidey movie. More crap to slag off.

Gwen was a dumbass who went to the place where a super villain with electricity controlling the whole city was, even when her superhero bf tried to stop her because it was too dangerous, all because she said Peter didn't know how to work some control grid, and all she did was push a freakin button. Guess Peter was too dumb to press a button haha. Then the dumb blonde is to blame for troll doll Goblin finding out Peter is Spidey. Thanks blondie. Then she goes and gets herself killed.

Gwen was the idiot to blame for her death and troll doll boy finding out he's Spidey. Talk about taking a big smelly dump on a classic Spidey tale eh.

lol it's true Peter learn nothing, and he come off as terrible person and hero. It's so bad how much they ruin Gwen death.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I feel that the dialogue hindered their chemistry (and that's really not their fault; it's difficult to pull off some of the bad dialogue they were given, IMO).

After seeing this particular deleted scene from the first TASM movie, there is no denying that Garfield and Stone have good chemistry with each other. I just didn't feel it with the dialogue they were given, sadly.

[YT]4ilWAxJdr4I[/YT]

That moment, right there, tells me all I needed to know about how they felt towards each other. I can totally feel the chemistry here. It's such a simple scene, but it's a lovely one (maybe the candles are a little too much, but I'm paying more attention to them than the background, honestly). The scene shows me how they feel, rather than telling me by dishing out "schmoopy" lines all of the time. Why this moment wasn't left in the first movie, I'll never know.

I agree. Both capable actors with a ton of chemistry and it seemed wasted in the second movie by giving them cheap dialogue.

That particular clip you posted was a touching moment between them and right there, as you say, the chemistry is palpable. I can't for sure say why it was cut. Honestly though, there were several clips in the deleted scenes from ASM that should have been included in the final version.

Thanks for the link! I will definitely listen to it soon.

Spectacular Spider-Man was truly a lovely surprise. I remember watching it when it first aired in 2008. I wasn't expecting anything special, but boy did that show deliver. Overall, I think that Disney has done a really good job with Marvel ... Except when it comes to the animation.

It is just a shame that this show got canned to make Ultimate Spider-Man. Ultimate Spider-Man's animation is really nice, and it's always nice to hear J.K. Simmons voice as JJJ ... But that's where my compliments towards the show end.

You're welcome! And enjoy!

Initially I was not excited about the reboot. Like many people I was severely disappointed with SM3 however when the reboot was announced, it was more of a blow than a feeling of elation or happiness. More than anything, I wanted to see Raimi get back to what made the 1st two movies so great. I wanted to see him get to make SM4, return to that quality of SM1 & 2, and go out on a high note. A vindication of sorts. Being the Spidey fan that I am, I tried to remain positive about the reboot and gave Sony a fair shot. In short, they blew it.

Marvel has done a relatively good job with their built universe. I'd say the majority of their movies thus far have been either average to above average or great. No real stinkers in there. I definitely have more faith in them at this point than I would if Sony were forging ahead and making ASM3 on their own or *shudder* the Sinister Six movie. Marvel has done a good job with castings, hiring good directors, etc. but they've also had some issues. Feige is in though and the removal of Arad and Tolmach from the creative producing chairs has me feeling good. With the first reboot it was cautious optimism but now looking forward to this next reboot my hope and genuine optimism has been renewed. I guess only time will tell but I'd like to see Marvel churn out some movies that get back to the basics of Spider-Man, just like how TSSM was so successful in its interpretation.

 

[Daltonio]

Damn it,

Somewhere, someplace, someone said Peter was happier than ever at the end of the movie? So, not wearing the suit for five months, and later, doing what he's meant to do no matter how he's feeling, means he learned nothing?

The stuff people come up the days..

Yeah, I know right?

I can understand some of the complaints but stuff like those make me wonder who actually watched the movie and who didn't.

 

[Leenie]

Damn it,

Somewhere, someplace, someone said Peter was happier than ever at the end of the movie? So, not wearing the suit for five months, and later, doing what he's meant to do no matter how he's feeling, means he learned nothing?

The stuff people come up the days..

He gets a pep talk from Gwen in the graduation video after mourning for five months. That speech gets him to become Spider-Man again. The message of Gwen's speech was basically to "move forward, because we only have one life to live, and it won't last." Aunt May even offers him words of encouragement. That's what tells me that Peter is happy at the end of TASM2.

So ... Am I supposed to assume that Peter just puts on the costume just to come back home and be sad again? Because the message of Gwen's speech and Aunt May's words lead me to believe that's not the case. And if Peter does come back home to be sad and depressed ... Then were they going to show him do that "on again/off again" stuff with Mary Jane (or any other possible love interest) in the next movie? Because that would have been really redundant and repetitive. It also tells me that they totally shouldn't have had Captain Stacy's dying words asking Peter not to be with Gwen in the first place. It took a lot of the punch away from Gwen's demise. The TASM movies could have just killed Gwen off and then have Peter feel the guilt of having someone close to him in future movies instead of having Peter feel the guilt because of Captain Stacy.

Like I said before, I don't think the movie was trying to say "Hey, Peter is better off with Gwen dead." However, the messy storytelling gives off that vibe.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Yeah, I know right?

I can understand some of the complaints but stuff like those make me wonder who actually watched the movie and who didn't.

He gets a pep talk from Gwen in the graduation video after mourning for five months. That speech gets him to become Spider-Man again. The message of Gwen's speech was basically to "move forward, because we only have one life to live, and it won't last." Aunt May even offers him words of encouragement. That's what tells me that Peter is happy at the end of TASM2.

.

He certainly wasn't in a good place, but he came to the realization that he couldn't simply shut down forever like he had been doing for months. Regardless of how things were unfolding in his personal life, he had a job to do that was beyond the capabilities of others. When he visited Gwen's grave constantly throughout those months, he was slowly and reluctantly accepting his ongoing responsibility.

 

[Keehar]

He gets a pep talk from Gwen in the graduation video after mourning for five months. That speech gets him to become Spider-Man again. The message of Gwen's speech was basically to "move forward, because we only have one life to live, and it won't last." Aunt May even offers him words of encouragement. That's what tells me that Peter is happy at the end of TASM2.

So ... Am I supposed to assume that Peter just puts on the costume just to come back home and be sad again? Because the message of Gwen's speech and Aunt May's words lead me to believe that's not the case. And if Peter does come back home to be sad and depressed ... Then were they going to show him do that "on again/off again" stuff with Mary Jane (or any other possible love interest) in the next movie? Because that would have been really redundant and repetitive. It also tells me that they totally shouldn't have had Captain Stacy's dying words asking Peter not to be with Gwen in the first place. It took a lot of the punch away from Gwen's demise. The TASM movies could have just killed Gwen off and then have Peter feel the guilt of having someone close to him in future movies instead of having Peter feel the guilt because of Captain Stacy.

Like I said before, I don't think the movie was trying to say "Hey, Peter is better off with Gwen dead." However, the messy storytelling gives off that vibe.

Yeah, I know right?

Sloppy story telling at it's worst. They made a pig's ear out of the Stacy deaths.

 

[Leenie]

He certainly wasn't in a good place, but he came to the realization that he couldn't simply shut down forever like he had been doing for months. Regardless of how things were unfolding in his personal life, he had a job to do that was beyond the capabilities of others. When he visited Gwen's grave constantly throughout those months, he was slowly and reluctantly accepting his ongoing responsibility.

Once he saw Gwen's speech, I don't think he was so reluctant. He seemed motivated. At the very end of TASM2, I think that Peter is in a much better place than he was at the beginning of the film (because no more guilt, like I've explained).

The storytelling is a problem for me. I feel that the writers wrote themselves into a corner with Captain Stacy and Gwen. Sure, the message of Gwen's speech is actually quite nice ... But I think that it gets lost in the fray considering how guilty Peter was feeling throughout the movie (because of Captain Stacy's last words rather than Gwen's death). If Captain Stacy had not said those words at all, then I think Gwen's death, how Peter dealt with it, and her speech would have made a much better impact on me. With Gwen dead, Peter doesn't have to deal with Captain Stacy haunting him anymore, and he can't feel guilty about Gwen simply because her death was in no way his fault (since the writers made Gwen proactive to a fault, really). One can argue that Harry went towards Gwen once he had a "lightbulb moment" about Spider-Man's identity, but it wouldn't have happened at all if Gwen had not insisted on being there (and, really, I think Harry would have taken Gwen regardless of her association with Peter; Harry was a-ok with hurting multiple people). It's why I feel that the overall handling of her death was contrived, and why I think it loses its punch.

Also, like I said, if a TASM3 had been made, would the movie really make Peter weary about another relationship? If so, then the character learned nothing from Gwen's speech, and the film would be overly redundant, based on what happened in the previous films. Captain Stacy's final words really muck up a lot of things in the narrative of these movies, in my opinion. Peter should have learned about the risk of having loved ones close to you while being a superhero through Gwen's death, not through Captain Stacy's final words.

 

[Lantern Venom]

With Gwen dead, Peter doesn't have to deal with Captain Stacy haunting him anymore, and he can't feel guilty about Gwen simply because her death was in no way his fault.

It stands to reason that Captain Stacy's words would only be amplified after Gwen's death. Capt. Stacy saw Gwen's ultimate fate through the perceptions of a cop. He knew the stakes, especially when Peter was faced with foes who were above the conventional methods that society employs to maintain order.

Peter surely felt guilty simply because that's the nature of a hero. In the same way a police officer or firefighter might carry guilt about not being able to reach a victim in time. Every if he or she did everything right, the mission ended up in failure. For individuals trying to make a difference, it's natural for them to question what they could have changed or done better to save a victim, even if there are no answers to be had.

 

[Leenie]

It stands to reason that Captain Stacy's words would only be amplified after Gwen's death. Capt. Stacy saw Gwen's ultimate fate through the perceptions of a cop. He knew the stakes, especially when Peter was faced with foes who were above the conventional methods that society employs to maintain order.

Peter surely felt guilty simply because that's the nature of a hero. In the same way a police officer or firefighter might carry guilt about not being able to reach a victim in time. Every if he or she did everything right, the mission ended up in failure. For individuals trying to make a difference, it's natural for them to question what they could have changed or done better to save a victim, even if there are no answers to be had.

Then why didn't Peter see Captain Stacy after Gwen's death? He showed up in random spots throughout the movie. Why not after Gwen's death (when it actually would have made most sense)? It's inconsistent.

EDIT: I also think that Captain Stacy's death should have been used as a inspiration for Spider-Man, rather than an instrument of guilt for Peter and Gwen's relationship (it's also painfully obvious, "hammer to the head" foreshadowing that was really not needed). Captain Stacy died heroically, putting himself on the line for Peter. It should have been used as a message of sacrifice, and also a warning of the dangers Peter will face as long as he keeps putting that mask on. That would have linked with Uncle Ben's speech about "moral obligation" extremely well, too (especially since Uncle Ben's voicemail is played near the end of the film). By the end of TASM1 (with the webslinging; a moment in the film that I actually liked), the audience would know that he's in it for the long haul. I think that would have been a much better message than some "broken promises are the best kind" line (a line that created several problems I have with TASM2).

 

[Andrew Lucas]

He gets a pep talk from Gwen in the graduation video after mourning for five months. That speech gets him to become Spider-Man again. The message of Gwen's speech was basically to "move forward, because we only have one life to live, and it won't last." Aunt May even offers him words of encouragement. That's what tells me that Peter is happy at the end of TASM2.

So ... Am I supposed to assume that Peter just puts on the costume just to come back home and be sad again? Because the message of Gwen's speech and Aunt May's words lead me to believe that's not the case. And if Peter does come back home to be sad and depressed ... Then were they going to show him do that "on again/off again" stuff with Mary Jane (or any other possible love interest) in the next movie? Because that would have been really redundant and repetitive. It also tells me that they totally shouldn't have had Captain Stacy's dying words asking Peter not to be with Gwen in the first place. It took a lot of the punch away from Gwen's demise. The TASM movies could have just killed Gwen off and then have Peter feel the guilt of having someone close to him in future movies instead of having Peter feel the guilt because of Captain Stacy.

Like I said before, I don't think the movie was trying to say "Hey, Peter is better off with Gwen dead." However, the messy storytelling gives off that vibe.

You don't need to assume anything, just watch the movie again, you're not getting it. Like any other human being, Peter couldn't simply move on in a blink of an eye, he's not like the other superheroes in other movies who can achieve that.

He mourned Gwen for five months, and then he realized that life keeps going forward and he needed to move on and not get stuck on what could have been. It's simple as that, you move on and keep doing your stuff, regardless of the recent turn of events.

"I kind of like to think that Spider-Man gives people hope."

"For what?"

"That eventually things will be alright."

No matter how buried it gets, or how lost you feel, you must promise that you'll hold on to hope. Keep it alive, we have to be greater than what we suffer. My wish for you is to become hope, people will need that.

Like Gwen said, he shouldn't be miserable forever like you want him to be despite the months he spent to mourn her. He needs to be out there doing what he does best, because people need him and it will forever be that way. The greater good.

So, at the end of the movie, it shows Peter moving on, doing what he's meant to do, and making people smile, because that's what Spider-Man does, and what he always should do, no matter how hard his life looks to be. Happy or not.

 

[Leenie]

You don't need to assume anything, just watch the movie again, you're not getting it. Like any other human being, Peter couldn't simply move on in a blink of an eye, he's not like the other superheroes in other movies who can achieve that.

He mourned Gwen for five months, and then he realized that life keeps going forward and he needed to move on and not get stuck on what could have been. It's simple as that, you move on and keep doing your stuff, regardless of the recent turn of events.

"I kind of like to think that Spider-Man gives people hope."

"For what?"

"That eventually things will be alright."

No matter how buried it gets, or how lost you feel, you must promise that you'll hold on to hope. Keep it alive, we have to be greater than what we suffer. My wish for you is to become hope, people will need that.

Like Gwen said, he shouldn't be miserable forever like you want him to be despite the months he spent to mourn her. He needs to be out there doing what he does best, because people need him and it will forever be that way. The greater good.

So, at the end of the movie, it shows Peter moving on, doing what he's meant to do, and making people smile, because that's what Spider-Man does, and what he always should do, no matter how hard his life looks to be. Happy or not.

What kind of hope has Spider-Man instilled in the people around him, though? Gwen's dead, he denied Harry of his blood (that scene with Spidey turning Harry down was so unnecessary; Harry would have been better off with Spidey not showing up at all), Spider-Man abandoned his city for five whole months ... What hope, exactly? That hope happens whenever Spidey feels like it? A lot of the themes and ideas in these movies are all over the place, and none of the themes are fleshed out enough. Is the movie about hope? Is it about time? Is it about loss? Is it about guilt? Is it about loneliness (with Electro's character)? The film makes nothing clear about what it wants to say, because everything is glossed over, and everything is a mess. But derpitty derpy durr ... I just "don't get it."

Typically, when someone tells me "You don't get it," then I tend to dismiss the opinion. Just so you know.

Spider-Man mourning for Gwen seemed to be very glossed over, and that takes away so much from such a big story arc (and from such an important character like Gwen). Just because the movie says it's been 5 months, that doesn't mean I believe it or feel the consequences. The movie did not sell me the aftermath of Gwen's death well enough for me to believe that there's an aftermath (because the "mourning stuff" took, like, 2 minutes in the film- very glossed over). The movie shows Captain Stacy haunting Peter throughout the movie ... Then Peter sees nothing after Gwen's death? If the movie was trying to shoehorn in some not-so-subtle "guilt theme," then the movie needed to be consistent about it. Show Captain Stacy; hell, showing Peter having similar visions of Gwen would have at least been something. All I see is that Peter visited the cemetery a lot in some quick montage while being on hiatus as Spider-Man. Before the Rhino, what was happening in New York while Spidey was gone? Did other supervillains attack the city? Did the crime rate go up? Did Peter have visions of Captain Stacy or Gwen? What happened in those 5 months as a result of Gwen dying?! The movie doesn't care to show me, so why should I care?

At the very least, with Spider-Man 3, I can easily say that the movie is about revenge versus forgiveness. I can't say what TASM2 is about, because the movie is so jumbled and messy. Sure, a lot of plotlines (like the Sandman retcon) feel extremely forced, but at least all of it fit into a single running theme.

 

[The Joker]

What kind of hope has Spider-Man instilled in the people around him, though? Gwen's dead, he denied Harry of his blood (that scene with Spidey turning Harry down was so unnecessary; Harry would have been better off with Spidey not showing up at all), Spider-Man abandoned his city for five whole months ... What hope, exactly? That hope happens whenever Spidey feels like it? A lot of the themes and ideas in these movies are all over the place, and none of the themes are fleshed out enough. Is the movie about hope? Is it about time? Is it about loss? Is it about guilt? Is it about loneliness (with Electro's character)? The film makes nothing clear about what it wants to say, because everything is glossed over, and everything is a mess. But derpitty derpy durr ... I just "don't get it."

Typically, when someone tells me "You don't get it," then I tend to dismiss the opinion. Just so you know.

Spider-Man mourning for Gwen seemed to be very glossed over, and that takes away so much from such a big story arc (and from such an important character like Gwen). Just because the movie says it's been 5 months, that doesn't mean I believe it or feel the consequences. The movie did not sell me the aftermath of Gwen's death well enough for me to believe that there's an aftermath (because the "mourning stuff" took, like, 2 minutes in the film- very glossed over). The movie shows Captain Stacy haunting Peter throughout the movie ... Then Peter sees nothing after Gwen's death? If the movie was trying to shoehorn in some not-so-subtle "guilt theme," then the movie needed to be consistent about it. Show Captain Stacy; hell, showing Peter having similar visions of Gwen would have at least been something. All I see is that Peter visited the cemetery a lot in some quick montage while being on hiatus as Spider-Man. Before the Rhino, what was happening in New York while Spidey was gone? Did other supervillains attack the city? Did the crime rate go up? Did Peter have visions of Captain Stacy or Gwen? What happened in those 5 months as a result of Gwen dying?! The movie doesn't care to show me, so why should I care?

At the very least, with Spider-Man 3, I can easily say that the movie is about revenge versus forgiveness. I can't say what TASM2 is about, because the movie is so jumbled and messy. Sure, a lot of plotlines (like the Sandman retcon) feel extremely forced, but at least all of it fit into a single running theme.

Exactly. Well said

 

[Keehar]

You don't need to assume anything, just watch the movie again, you're not getting it. Like any other human being, Peter couldn't simply move on in a blink of an eye, he's not like the other superheroes in other movies who can achieve that.

He mourned Gwen for five months, and then he realized that life keeps going forward and he needed to move on and not get stuck on what could have been. It's simple as that, you move on and keep doing your stuff, regardless of the recent turn of events.

"I kind of like to think that Spider-Man gives people hope."

"For what?"

"That eventually things will be alright."

No matter how buried it gets, or how lost you feel, you must promise that you'll hold on to hope. Keep it alive, we have to be greater than what we suffer. My wish for you is to become hope, people will need that.

Like Gwen said, he shouldn't be miserable forever like you want him to be despite the months he spent to mourn her. He needs to be out there doing what he does best, because people need him and it will forever be that way. The greater good.

So, at the end of the movie, it shows Peter moving on, doing what he's meant to do, and making people smile, because that's what Spider-Man does, and what he always should do, no matter how hard his life looks to be. Happy or not.

Nope that's not how it is. Other superheroes don't just get over deaths either, but they don't spend friggin months doing nothing but moping and mourning like dopey Garfield did.

TASM 2 being the lousy lazy ass movie it is just jumps over the grief period and has instant pep talk Gwen video ready for Peter to jump back in the Spider-Man saddle.

Leenie is so right. The movie is all over the house and doesn't cover it's themes if it even has any because it has no friggin clue what it's trying to say. Probably nothing. The worst thing about those dumb Captain Stacy visions is Gwen said Peter has dumped her so many times over it. So he like keeps breaking her heart, then expects her to take her back. So what did he learn from Cap Stacy's death? How to keep breaking promises because they're the best kind to break ha? What is he supposed to have learned from Gwen's death in this movie? Stay single forever? Or he is just going to keep making up and breaking up with MJ if they ever used her haha.

Best thing about talking about this is we know we'll never see the follow up to this bull.

 

[harryoscop]

Whoa, I had no idea a debate was still going on for whether TASM2 was good or not...

 

[Andrew Lucas]

What kind of hope has Spider-Man instilled in the people around him, though? Gwen's dead, he denied Harry of his blood (that scene with Spidey turning Harry down was so unnecessary; Harry would have been better off with Spidey not showing up at all), Spider-Man abandoned his city for five whole months ... What hope, exactly? That hope happens whenever Spidey feels like it? A lot of the themes and ideas in these movies are all over the place, and none of the themes are fleshed out enough. Is the movie about hope? Is it about time? Is it about loss? Is it about guilt? Is it about loneliness (with Electro's character)? The film makes nothing clear about what it wants to say, because everything is glossed over, and everything is a mess. But derpitty derpy durr ... I just "don't get it."

Typically, when someone tells me "You don't get it," then I tend to dismiss the opinion. Just so you know.

Spider-Man mourning for Gwen seemed to be very glossed over, and that takes away so much from such a big story arc (and from such an important character like Gwen). Just because the movie says it's been 5 months, that doesn't mean I believe it or feel the consequences. The movie did not sell me the aftermath of Gwen's death well enough for me to believe that there's an aftermath (because the "mourning stuff" took, like, 2 minutes in the film- very glossed over). The movie shows Captain Stacy haunting Peter throughout the movie ... Then Peter sees nothing after Gwen's death? If the movie was trying to shoehorn in some not-so-subtle "guilt theme," then the movie needed to be consistent about it. Show Captain Stacy; hell, showing Peter having similar visions of Gwen would have at least been something. All I see is that Peter visited the cemetery a lot in some quick montage while being on hiatus as Spider-Man. Before the Rhino, what was happening in New York while Spidey was gone? Did other supervillains attack the city? Did the crime rate go up? Did Peter have visions of Captain Stacy or Gwen? What happened in those 5 months as a result of Gwen dying?! The movie doesn't care to show me, so why should I care?

At the very least, with Spider-Man 3, I can easily say that the movie is about revenge versus forgiveness. I can't say what TASM2 is about, because the movie is so jumbled and messy. Sure, a lot of plotlines (like the Sandman retcon) feel extremely forced, but at least all of it fit into a single running theme.

Sure. Spider-Man means nothing for the people around him. Logical I won't even explain that to you cause it's like teaching the order of the numbers.

I said this once, but let's repeat it again, as showed in the movie, people cheer up for Spider-Man, because they believe on him to keep them safe if needed, their guardian, someone who's always present despite everything that is going on, someone to believe and look up to, that's why Peter needs to keep going on, it's not like hope happens whenever he feels like it, Peter just learned that he can't just take a break like he did, he's needed, hence him learning a valuable lesson from his dead girlfriend and coming back at the end of the movie for good this time.

It's about time, as evidenced on the opening, Gwen's speech, Harry's against the clock search for a cure, Richard and May's words. Some bad stuff will always happen, but since life doesn't last forever, you need to make the most of it. Simple.

And the franchise never showed Uncle Ben working in the construction of bridges, so that means you don't believe it or it's a bad thing? They don't need to show if Peter catches a bus to visit Gwen's grave, or if the crime rate got up because that's pretty obvious, and no supervillains because not everyone can simple earn powers by simply falling into an enormous hole. Visions could easily have happened on the sequel since the first ones appeared when he was very happy.

Yep, you're being biased, or else you wouldn't bring Spider-Man 3 up, it took you some time.

If you dismiss my opinion, then don't bother to reply, it would save us some good energy and I would be glad. Your choice.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Whoa, I had no idea a debate was still going on for whether TASM2 was good or not...

Me too, it just happens to be the same old people as usual

BTW, nice to see you again bud

 

[Leenie]

Sure. Spider-Man means nothing for the people around him. Logical I won't even explain that to you cause it's like teaching the order of the numbers.

I said this once, but let's repeat it again, as showed in the movie, people cheer up for Spider-Man, because they believe on him to keep them safe if needed, their guardian, someone who's always present despite everything that is going on, someone to believe and look up to, that's why Peter needs to keep going on, it's not like hope happens whenever he feels like it, Peter just learned that he can't just take a break like he did, he's needed, hence him learning a valuable lesson from his dead girlfriend and coming back at the end of the movie for good this time.

It's about time, as evidenced on the opening, Gwen's speech, Harry's against the clock search for a cure, Richard and May's words. Some bad stuff will always happen, but since life doesn't last forever, you need to make the most of it. Simple.

And the franchise never showed Uncle Ben working in the construction of bridges, so that means you don't believe it or it's a bad thing? They don't need to show if Peter catches a bus to visit Gwen's grave, or if the crime rate got up because that's pretty obvious, and no supervillains because not everyone can simple earn powers by simply falling into an enormous hole. Visions could easily have happened on the sequel since the first ones appeared when he was very happy.

Yep, you're being biased, or else you wouldn't bring Spider-Man 3 up, it took you some time.

If you dismiss my opinion, then don't bother to reply, it would save us some good energy and I would be glad. Your choice.

Heck yes, I'm being biased. I never denied that. I expected better for a reboot that apparently "needed" to happen so soon. Instead of fixing previous problems, I think Sony exacerbated them. Plain and simple.

We both have different opinions, and guess what? That's really not a big deal. You like the movies, and I don't. Whoop-de-do. The thing is that you are being needlessly catty towards me (and towards others who share the same opinion). I am simply voicing my distaste for a film series, and the reasons why I have distaste for it. Have I, at any point, said anything bad about the fans of the TASM movies? No, because that's ridiculous.

Also, message boards exist for discussion. If you don't want to read any possible negative opinion about movies you enjoy, then might I suggest you go to a thread that only accepts positive posts? I'm sure they exist, and if they don't, then you can make one.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Heck yes, I'm being biased. I never denied that. I expected better for a reboot that apparently "needed" to happen so soon. Instead of fixing previous problems, I think Sony exacerbated them. Plain and simple.

We both have different opinions, and guess what? That's really not a big deal. You like the movies, and I don't. Whoop-de-do. The thing is that you are being needlessly catty towards me (and towards others who share the same opinion). I am simply voicing my distaste for a film series, and the reasons why I have distaste for it. Have I, at any point, said anything bad about the fans of the TASM movies? No, because that's ridiculous.

Also, message boards exist for discussion. If you don't want to read any possible negative opinion about movies you enjoy, then might I suggest you go to a thread that only accepts positive posts? I'm sure they exist, and if they don't, then you can make one.

You think I'll lose my head if you liked the movie or not? Lol, no, in fact, I only kept replying to your posts because you apparently are more neutral than the others who I rather not waste any time with.

I don't get the last part, have I ever said anything about posting here only if you liked the movie? No. Believe me, if I hated reading negative criticism, I wouldn't be on this section, but.... surprise! I am, so that was utterly pointless.