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

[Lantern Venom]

That was most people's take on him. He's one of the most criticized elements in the movie, and one of the most unpopular villains in a CBM. It's not reaching to say Sony messed up there.

If by "most people", you mean Raimi trilogy loyalists and the usual CBM-ignorant movie critics, then you may be right.

However, Foxx got 3 nominations for his performance in TASM2 at the Teen Choice and NKCA. Given that Spider-man has always been geared toward the younger generation (sometimes to a fault), it's safe to say Foxx was successful.

As for the critics, one of the few who I respect when it comes to CBMs is Richard Roeper. His review of TASM2 was one of the most intelligent that I saw/heard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID5ZKHlnVqU

 

[Snow Queen]

Okay, I don't mind this Electro, but Teen Choice awards is a really awful award show and almost anything from a blockbuster gets nominated, it seems. For examples:

Best villain: Rachelle Lefevre and Cam Gigandet in two Twilight movies, Alexander Ludwig in The Hunger Games, Joseph Gordon-Levitt in GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, Melissa McCarthy in Identity Thief

Best Actor (sci fi/fantasy): Sam Worthington in Avatar, John Cusack in 2012, Taylor Lautner for most of the Twilight movies, Sam Worthington in Clash of the Titans, Johnny Depp in Alice in Wonderland, Jake Gyllenhaal in Prince of Persia, Robert Pattinson for most of the Twilight movies, Cardboard cutout Liam Hemsworth in Hunger Games

Best Actress (sci fi/fantasy): Kristen Stewart for Twilight, Blake Lively for Green Lantern, Vanessa Hudgens for Journey 2, Mila Kunis in Oz: The Great and Powerful, Halle Berry in X-Men: Days of Future Past, Natalie Portman in Thor: The Dark World

Action movies: The Matrix Reloaded, The Day After Tomorrow, The Matrix Revolutions, Revenge of the Sith, Superman Returns, X-Men: The Last Stand, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Transformers, Spider-man 3, Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, X-Men Origins Wolverine, Terminator Salvation, GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, Robin Hood (Ridley Scott), Red Tails, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones

Sci Fi/Fantasy movies: Avatar, Iron Man 2, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, Prince of Persia, Clash of the Titans, Alice in Wonderland, The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 and 2, Wrath of the Titans, Oz the Great and Powerful

 

[The Joker]

He was flat out a Schumacher villain.

That's almost disrespectful to Schumacher villains. At least most of them were entertaining to watch.

If by "most people", you mean Raimi trilogy loyalists and the usual CBM-ignorant movie critics, than you may be right.

No I mean most people in general, including those aforementioned people of good taste.

However, Foxx got 3 nominations for his performance in TASM2 at the Teen Choice and NKCA. Given that Spider-man has always been geared toward the younger generation (sometimes to a fault), it's safe to say Foxx was successful.

No offense but it's always so easy to turn your own arguments against you with some of the bizarre logic you come up with.

Your absolute favorite, Topher Grace as Venom, got nominated for several awards including MTV movie award for best villain, and the Teen Choice award for best villain. MTV and Teen Choice are mega popular with the young generation.

So going by your logic you must agree that he was successful, too.

As for the critics, one of the few who I respect when it comes to CBMs is Richard Roeper. His review of TASM2 was one of the most intelligent that I saw/heard

"Chris Cooper adds gravitas to the movie".

You need to read more reviews then if that's one of the best you've seen.

Okay, I don't mind this Electro, but Teen Choice awards is a really awful award show and almost anything from a blockbuster gets nominated, it seems. For examples:

Best villain: Rachelle Lefevre and Cam Gigandet in two Twilight movies, Alexander Ludwig in The Hunger Games, Joseph Gordon-Levitt in GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, Melissa McCarthy in Identity Thief

Best Actor (sci fi/fantasy): Sam Worthington in Avatar, John Cusack in 2012, Taylor Lautner for most of the Twilight movies, Sam Worthington in Clash of the Titans, Johnny Depp in Alice in Wonderland, Jake Gyllenhaal in Prince of Persia, Robert Pattinson for most of the Twilight movies, Cardboard cutout Liam Hemsworth in Hunger Games

Best Actress (sci fi/fantasy): Kristen Stewart for Twilight, Blake Lively for Green Lantern, Vanessa Hudgens for Journey 2, Mila Kunis in Oz: The Great and Powerful, Halle Berry in X-Men: Days of Future Past, Natalie Portman in Thor: The Dark World

Action movies: The Matrix Reloaded, The Day After Tomorrow, The Matrix Revolutions, Revenge of the Sith, Superman Returns, X-Men: The Last Stand, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Transformers, Spider-man 3, Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, X-Men Origins Wolverine, Terminator Salvation, GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, Robin Hood (Ridley Scott), Red Tails, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones

Sci Fi/Fantasy movies: Avatar, Iron Man 2, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, Prince of Persia, Clash of the Titans, Alice in Wonderland, The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 and 2, Wrath of the Titans, Oz the Great and Powerful

 

[titansupes]

If by "most people", you mean Raimi trilogy loyalists and the usual CBM-ignorant movie critics, then you may be right.

Well, that's dismissive. I'm very far from being a Raimi loyalist, and obviously I'm not ignorant of CBM's... So how do you account for my dislike for this Electro?

 

[UltimateWebhead]

That was your take on him. I liked Electro's erratic, volatile nature, but there was certainly a tragic side to him that made for a well-rounded character:

I will definitely agree that they had potential in Max/Electro. The idea of him was great but they completely squandered that potential. They did not give him nearly enough depth as he could have been one of the more intriguing unsympathetic villains in a CBM. He was barely in the movie, locked away in a cell until it was 'time' for him to come out and be a plot device. His fight with Spider-Man was just there so Gwen could show up to help out and then moments later get killed by the pretend GG. Like I said before, I really loved the idea they had going for Max, it was very interesting, but unfortunately they never did anything interesting with him. They gave him one of the worst caricaturized (if that's even a word) looks ever which pretty much negated that anyone would or could take him seriously. Like Joker said, Sony messed up. Then again, that was the running theme with ASM2.

If by "most people", you mean Raimi trilogy loyalists and the usual CBM-ignorant movie critics, then you may be right.

Whoa. I'm neither a Raimi-loyalist nor a CBM-ignorant critic. I'm actually a devoted Spider-Man fan and a fairly well-educated comic book one at that.

So...yeah, they messed up with Max/Electro. Squandered potential.

 

[Erzengel]

Yeah, Electro belongs up there with Magneto, Loki, the Joker, and Zod. LOL

 

[harryoscop]

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Yeah, Electro belongs up there with Magneto, Loki, the Joker, and Zod. LOL

I'm guessing this was directed at me??

No one is saying Electro is an A-level villain like the ones you mentioned, cause he's not in that category. That doesn't mean they couldn't have made him into an interesting unsympathetic villain in ASM2.

 

[Erzengel]

That wasn't directed at you honestly, but it seems like some posters are inferring it.

We can talk about wasted potential for a variety of CBMs. But all we have was what was released and the general consensus is that it was subpar.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

That wasn't directed at you honestly, but it seems like some posters are inferring it.

We can talk about wasted potential for a variety of CBMs. But all we have was what was released and the general consensus is that it was subpar.

Yeah, Electro is fairly uncomplicated and a B-lister at best but that shouldn't excuse Sony for the final result. Max's mental health, his psychological issues, could have made for a good on-screen villain, at least one of the first to be unsympathetic in a Spidey movie, had they taken him/it seriously. They even had the talents of an Oscar-winning actor in Foxx at their disposal but like most everything else, it was wasted. I agree the movie is subpar and that does appear to be the consensus.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Okay, I don't mind this Electro, but Teen Choice awards is a really awful award show and almost anything from a blockbuster gets nominated, it seems. For examples:



Sci Fi/Fantasy movies: Avatar, Iron Man 2, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, Prince of Persia, Clash of the Titans, Alice in Wonderland, The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 and 2, Wrath of the Titans, Oz the Great and Powerful

My opinion probably doesn't count for much since I'm 2-3 times the age of their target demo, but I liked every movie on that list with the exception of Wrath of the Titans, which I haven't had a chance to see yet.

No offense but it's always so easy to turn your own arguments against you with some of the bizarre logic you come up with.

Your absolute favorite, Topher Grace as Venom, got nominated for several awards including MTV movie award for best villain, and the Teen Choice award for best villain. MTV and Teen Choice are mega popular with the young generation.

So going by your logic you must agree that he was successful, too.



"Chris Cooper adds gravitas to the movie".

You need to read more reviews then if that's one of the best you've seen.

No offense, but you could change your user ID to "No Offense", because you say "no offense" quite often before you say something that could be perceived as offensive--no offense intended. In all seriousness, you need not worry about offending me. I find SHH to be quite refreshing, including these little written-word wrestling matches. As Mr. Gone once told The Maxx, "Another tussle-good for the soul!" I'll bring the bald head. How do you look in purple pajamas?

I'm also not surprised that Topher is popular with teens since he still looks and sounds like a teen even though he's 36. Plus, his acting makes Kristen Stewart look like James Earl Jones in Othello by comparison. That's got to be appealing to the Twihards.


This is a quote from movie critic David Kaplan about TASM2:

Call me an old fuddy-duddy, but if you've seen one Spider-Man film, you've seen 'em all.

I often sense this kind of underlying hostility toward CBMs from movie critics, especially veteran ones, so I don't usually put stock in their opinions. Roger Ebert was an exception and Roeper seems to have the same proper enthusiasm about the genre.

 

[The Joker]

No offense, but you could change your user ID to "No Offense", because you say "no offense" quite often before you say something that could be perceived as offensive--no offense intended. In all seriousness, you need not worry about offending me. I find SHH to be quite refreshing, including these little written-word wrestling matches. As Mr. Gone once told The Maxx, "Another tussle-good for the soul!" I'll bring the bald head. How do you look in purple pajamas?

I have to say no offense to you quite often because often some harsh truths need to be said to you in regards to the frequent illogical stuff you do be saying. I don't want to come across as needlessly harsh towards you, whether it offends you not, it's not an impression I want to give anyone.

I'm also not surprised that Topher is popular with teens since he still looks and sounds like a teen even though he's 36. Plus, his acting makes Kristen Stewart look like James Earl Jones in Othello by comparison. That's got to be appealing to the Twihards.

Is this the best response you could come up with? Your silly teen choice awards argument for the awful Jamie Foxx Electro just got turned on it's head, and the only response you can give is another of your tired Topher bashings.

Never mind the fact that looking and sounding like a teen is not a guarantee to garner awards, or else every teen actor would be cleaning up with award nominations. Not to mention as Snow Queen so brilliantly pointed out, the Teen Choice awards have a long sad history of nominating awful movies and movie characters. Foxx's Electro is just one of many.

This is a quote from movie critic David Kaplan about TASM2:

I often sense this kind of underlying hostility toward CBMs from movie critics, especially veteran ones, so I don't usually put stock in their opinions.

You're tainting all critics with the same brush. Few vs the many. Not to mention David Kaplan is not a veteran film critic. This is not the 80's or 90's. Comic book movies are respected now more than they've ever been. They are thriving. Last year all the big ones; Captain America The Winter Soldier, Days of Future Past, Guardians of the Galaxy etc all clean up with the critics getting big fat healthy scores because they're great movies.

Only one rotten apple in the bunch and that was TASM 2. Deservedly so.

 

[Erzengel]

Agreed.

The movies that are considered the top of the CBM tier, TWS, DOFP, GOTG, TDK, SM2, X2, Avengers, IM all have high ratings from critics.

With CBMs, it's easy to see the creme rise to the top and it's not uncommon anymore for a CBM to be well reviewed.

If you want to talk divisive movies like SM3 or MOS, etc. those movies are different.

 

[Leenie]

My reaction to The Joker's posts:

Well done, dude.

Also, it's seriously not "just the Raimi fans" that are not enthusiastic about this movie. The critical reaction to both TASM1 and TASM2 are proof of that. TASM1 had an overall positive response.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Agreed.

The movies that are considered the top of the CBM tier, TWS, DOFP, GOTG, TDK, SM2, X2, Avengers, IM all have high ratings from critics.

With CBMs, it's easy to see the creme rise to the top and it's not uncommon anymore for a CBM to be well reviewed.

Even CBMs that aren't the cream of the crop get good reviews, like Age of Ultron, The Wolverine, or TASM1.

If anything it is more common for them to get at least decent reviews. For the most part it is only the true stinkers that get slammed. Critics are more than fair to CBMs these days.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I have to say no offense to you quite often because often some harsh truths need to be said to you in regards to the frequent illogical stuff you do be saying. I don't want to come across as needlessly harsh towards you, whether it offends you not, it's not an impression I want to give anyone.



Is this the best response you could come up with? Your silly teen choice awards argument for the awful Jamie Foxx Electro just got turned on it's head, and the only response you can give is another of your tired Topher bashings.

What you call "illogical", I call "original". Sometimes I agree with the critics and the general audiences, other times I think they're full of bantha fodder.

I don't necessarily need any specific awards or reviews to know if a movie or performance was good. I know both of those as soon as the movie is over, regardless of what others think. I was just speaking the truth on the reaction to TASM2 because the reaction of its critics on SHH is born of overly enthusiastic Raimi trilogy loyalism. As much as I liked the previous Spidey movies (even with Eric Forman goofballing as only he can), I accepted the fact that it was over and Spidey fans were being given a different take on the mythos. The assertions that TASM2 was a massive flop simply isn't true and the majority of audiences did indeed like it.

As for Electro, just watch TASM2 again and see how many times Foxx's tone, expression, and body language change during the film. Those are marks of a skilled, veteran actor. The opposite, of course, is ol' floppy arms who brought his single expression and a voice that is less expressive than Robot B-9 to SM3.

Agreed.

The movies that are considered the top of the CBM tier, TWS, DOFP, GOTG, TDK, SM2, X2, Avengers, IM all have high ratings from critics.

.

They have high RT ratings, but note that I said underlying hostility. Buried within some good reviews (and plenty of unfair negative ones) is a lack of comic book knowledge and a sense that a culture that was marginalized 20 years ago has invaded their turf.

 

[Erzengel]

So all the negative feedback on sites like SHH is due to biasness and not necessarily quality?

 

[OcStat]

If this movie was never made we could all be friends

 

[Daltonio]

So all the negative feedback on sites like SHH is due to biasness and not necessarily quality?

No, not all of it, but a lot of it is, yes.

 

[The Joker]

What you call "illogical", I call "original". Sometimes I agree with the critics and the general audiences, other times I think they're full of bantha fodder.

That's nothing to do with what I was saying. Who you do or do not agree with is not the issue. It's the illogical arguments you're using to back up your opinions like teen choice award nominations meaning that the character was successful.

I don't necessarily need any specific awards or reviews to know if a movie or performance was good. I know both of those as soon as the movie is over, regardless of what others think.

That's your opinion. The fact is the majority disliked Electro in TASM 2. You were trying to falsely claim he was a success just because he got a teen choice award nomination. That's the sort of illogical nonsense you say that I'm talking about.

I was just speaking the truth on the reaction to TASM2 because the reaction of its critics on SHH is born of overly enthusiastic Raimi trilogy loyalism.

Prove this insulting and untrue assumption. If you're going to accuse legions of fans of some sort of bias then prove it. I know you won't be able to, but I want to see you attempt to justify this rubbish claim with some proof.

Fans everywhere have slammed the movie. Critics slammed it. Even the people associated with the movies didn't care for it, and I'm not just talking about Amy Pascal and Co. Even Andrew Garfield acknowledged the problems with the movie. James Horner called it a horrible mess and that's why he refused to do it.

As much as I liked the previous Spidey movies (even with Eric Forman goofballing as only he can), I accepted the fact that it was over and Spidey fans were being given a different take on the mythos. The assertions that TASM2 was a massive flop simply isn't true and the majority of audiences did indeed like it.

Two things;

1. By the TASM 2 came around, fans had long, long, LONG since accepted that the previous franchise was over and we were in a whole new franchise that was doing something different. In fact most accepted it even before TASM. Myself included. If you doubt that I can show you posts from pre 2012 made by myself that show this.

2. If the majority of the audiences liked TASM 2, it wouldn't be the end of the franchise. If all you have to try and prove that is teen choice awards, then your argument sank before it even began.

As for Electro, just watch TASM2 again and see how many times Foxx's tone, expression, and body language change during the film. Those are marks of a skilled, veteran actor. The opposite, of course, is ol' floppy arms who brought his single expression and a voice that is less expressive than Robot B-9 to SM3.

I've watched TASM 2 enough times to know what Foxx's performance is like. It is a cartoonish, camp, cringe worthy performance. Changing from one level of camp to another doesn't make a good performance. I don't doubt Foxx was probably trying his best in the role, but it didn't help one iota.

But hey he and Grace both got a teen choice award nomination so by your brilliant logic they're the same lol.

Agreed.

The movies that are considered the top of the CBM tier, TWS, DOFP, GOTG, TDK, SM2, X2, Avengers, IM all have high ratings from critics.

With CBMs, it's easy to see the creme rise to the top and it's not uncommon anymore for a CBM to be well reviewed.

If you want to talk divisive movies like SM3 or MOS, etc. those movies are different.

Exactly.

My reaction to The Joker's posts:

Well done, dude.

Also, it's seriously not "just the Raimi fans" that are not enthusiastic about this movie. The critical reaction to both TASM1 and TASM2 are proof of that. TASM1 had an overall positive response.

Thanks Leenie

And yes, the idea that it's just Raimi fans or hardcore CBM people who don't like it is baseless, untrue, and just the denial of TASM fans who can't accept the movie was disliked so much.

So all the negative feedback on sites like SHH is due to biasness and not necessarily quality?

Only in denial world

 

[Erzengel]

I can make up my own decision on what I like or don't like. I may not see a movie in the Theater because of lukewarm receptions but I would usually watch it on Netflix or on cable.

Early last year, I was almost indifferent to the X-Men and Spider-Man series. While I enjoyed, FC, The Wolverine and even thought TASM was decent, I didn't get the warmest of feelings when I started seeing previews and plot points for TASM2 and DOFP. I thought Quicksilver's outfit was honestly silly and felt that he was a quick fit in response to AOU.

The reviews for both convinced me to see DOFP in the theaters and TASM2 on Netflix. Now I was aware of the negativity towards TASM2, but I kept an open mind. I didn't agree with the posters who thought this was the worst CBM to ever be filmed. I think some posters were a little overdramatic. I didn't like the villains, I didn't like the parents storyline, I didn't like the heavy handedness of not making it Peter's fault, I didn't like the marginalization of Uncle Ben. I think those are all valid complaints and why I find TASM2 to be borderline average to fair.

To say that some of us are so enamored with a previous series that we can't possibly give a new series a honest, unbiased opinion, is frankly insulting.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Prove this insulting and untrue assumption. If you're going to accuse legions of fans of some sort of bias then prove it. I know you won't be able to, but I want to see you attempt to justify this rubbish claim with some proof.

Fans everywhere have slammed the movie. Critics slammed it. Even the people associated with the movies didn't care for it, and I'm not just talking about Amy Pascal and Co. Even Andrew Garfield acknowledged the problems with the movie. James Horner called it a horrible mess and that's why he refused to do it.



Two things;

1. By the TASM 2 came around, fans had long, long, LONG since accepted that the previous franchise was over and we were in a whole new franchise that was doing something different. In fact most accepted it even before TASM. Myself included. If you doubt that I can show you posts from pre 2012 made by myself that show this.

2. If the majority of the audiences liked TASM 2, it wouldn't be the end of the franchise. If all you have to try and prove that is teen choice awards, then your argument sank before it even began.


Only in denial world

TASM2 made over $700 million. Combine the budget with marketing, it still made a profit, even if it wasn't quite what Sony was expecting. Success.

Rotten Tomato user reviews: over 218,000 people, 66% positive. Success.

It sold over 500,000 DVDs in it's 1st week (#1 ranking) 119,000 in its 2nd week (#4 ranking). It sold over 600,000 Bluray copies in it's first week (#1 ranking), over 150,000 in it's 2nd week (#1 raking) and 77nd thousand in its 3rd week (#2 raking). Success.

That's plenty of valid criteria and airtight proof that TASM2 was successful.

The franchise didn't end because the movie was a flop. It ended prematurely, just like Raimi's did, because Sony is severely lacking in vision. If you need proof of that, reread nutty ol' Amy Pascal's emails.

 

[Lantern Venom]

If this movie was never made we could all be friends

We don't need to agree to be friends. There are a lot of movies, CBMs and otherwise, that are divisive. Even if people hate my opinions, I never take it as a personal dislike of me. I hope everyone feels as I do on that front.

No, not all of it, but a lot of it is, yes.

It reminds me a lot of the wave of pro TASM people that were here in '12 saying that Webb outclassed Raimi's entire trilogy with 1 movie. The ovewhelming majority of them were biased haters of the original franchise before TASM hit theaters.

 

[The Joker]

TASM2 made over $700 million. Combine the budget with marketing, it still made a profit, even if it wasn't quite what Sony was expecting. Success.

There's a fine line between a movie being a financial success and being liked. Or are you going to tell me Ghost Rider is well liked just because it was enough of a financial success to get a sequel?

Rotten Tomato user reviews: over 218,000 people, 66% positive. Success.

Ok lets get some perspective here. A year ago the movie was in the 80 percentage range. Now it's at 66% and still dropping. Here's another reality check for you;

Spider-Man 3's average score is 3.3/5 based on 2,261,245 votes. That's over 2 million votes, and it's held that for 8 years now. You're crowing about a shrinking vote that has an average of 3.7/5, just a mere 0.4 difference from SM-3, and based on a paltry two hundred thousand votes, only one year after release. Just imagine how much that vote will have shrank when it reaches 8 years and 2 million votes. It'll probably be lower than Batman and Robin's lol.

It sold over 500,000 DVDs in it's 1st week (#1 ranking) 119,000 in its 2nd week (#4 ranking). It sold over 600,000 Bluray copies in it's first week (#1 ranking), over 150,000 in it's 2nd week (#1 raking) and 77nd thousand in its 3rd week (#2 raking). Success.

That's plenty of valid criteria and airtight proof that TASM2 was successful.

Again financial success does not equal to a movie being well liked. If it did, the franchise would still be going strong. That is a fact.

The franchise didn't end because the movie was a flop. It ended prematurely, just like Raimi's did, because Sony is severely lacking in vision. If you need proof of that, reread nutty ol' Amy Pascal's emails.

Wrong again. That's a hat trick. Raimi's franchise ended because Raimi walked. That is a fact stated by the man himself. Whereas the TASM franchise ended because TASM 2 was a colossal disappointment. Financially Sony made peanuts off it. Like only 50 million profit. The critics slammed it. The fans loathed it. And Amy Pascal predicted all the problems people would have with it BEFORE it was released. She saw it for what it was. She was on the ball.

Again all these are facts.

I can make up my own decision on what I like or don't like. I may not see a movie in the Theater because of lukewarm receptions but I would usually watch it on Netflix or on cable.

Early last year, I was almost indifferent to the X-Men and Spider-Man series. While I enjoyed, FC, The Wolverine and even thought TASM was decent, I didn't get the warmest of feelings when I started seeing previews and plot points for TASM2 and DOFP. I thought Quicksilver's outfit was honestly silly and felt that he was a quick fit in response to AOU.

The reviews for both convinced me to see DOFP in the theaters and TASM2 on Netflix. Now I was aware of the negativity towards TASM2, but I kept an open mind. I didn't agree with the posters who thought this was the worst CBM to ever be filmed. I think some posters were a little overdramatic. I didn't like the villains, I didn't like the parents storyline, I didn't like the heavy handedness of not making it Peter's fault, I didn't like the marginalization of Uncle Ben. I think those are all valid complaints and why I find TASM2 to be borderline average to fair.

To say that some of us are so enamored with a previous series that we can't possibly give a new series a honest, unbiased opinion, is frankly insulting.

That's too much logic for this thread

 

[DOBSON10]

I watched this movie tonight since it was the only thing on TV besides the awful NBA Finals matchup and I've been popping in to read this thread from time to time so I figure I might as well comment.

I definitely think people exaggerate how bad this movie is. I agree it has some pretty major flaws but I think people get alittle carried away with the hate. I think it's an average comic book movie overall. That said, this movie was a pretty big disappointment because ASM1 is by far my favorite Spider-Man movie and coming off of that I had really high hopes that this franchise would be great. I'll try to stay away from bashing the Raimi movies as much as possible but I thought ASM1 was a massive improvement in every way. Andrew Garfield was basically perfect as both Peter Parker and Spider-Man to me, I'll never understand some of the negative comments about him being rude, aloof, *****ey etc. It really feels like I was watching different movies than the people who make these claims. Garfield and Emma Stone were both really great in these two movies. I'll always be disappointed that the sequel didn't reach the potential it had so that this series could have continued with Garfield as Spider-Man.

Alot of people say this movie suffered because of the change in tone and I definitely agree with that. Most say it was because they were trying to copy the success of the Marvel movies but I think it was also the studio reacting to Raimi fans complaints about the movie and that they tried to add elements to mimic the Raimi series and the MCU. Whatever it was they definitely failed because the change in tone really ruined what I felt like was a great table setting from the first movie.

The biggest flaw in this movie was the villains. Jamie Foxx was absolutely terrible in this movie as both Max Dillon and Electro in my opinion. Admittedly, maybe I am biased, because I've never thought he was a very good actor. He's OK in comedies and he does a great Ray Charles impression but overall I think he's a very mediocre actor. I'll never understand what people see in him. That said, I won't put all the blame on Foxx, the dialogue and motivations for his character were awful. Personally, I think alot of it had to do with the Studio and/or Marc Webb trying to make Electro into a blend of a Raimi/MCU villain. On top of the bad dialogue for Electro, I thought that his line delivery was simply awful. His character "turn" from completely docile invisible loser to over the top, super confident but incredibly cheesy villain felt very illogical to me. None of Max's original character traits carried over except for his desperate need for attention, which is basically his entire motivation for his actions once he turns into Electro, which I think is probably the weakest villain motivation I've ever seen. He hates Spider-Man based on one scene where he delusionally feels Spider-Man is trying to steal his spotlight in the Times Square fight. I understand the helpless loser becoming drunk on having power over his life for the first time but instead of developing that they just completely changed the person he was in an instant. It was incredibly poor writing.

As for Harry Osborn/Green Goblin, I thought that Dane DeHaan was great during his two "sane Harry" scenes, where he reunites with Peter and they talk on the beach and his death bed talk with Norman. But from that moment on, he becomes an irrational petulant child with yet another set of poor motivations and storyline. His "turn" was rushed and his dialogue/line delivery as "Green Goblin" was every bit as awful as Foxx's Electro. This movie would have been infinitely better had they simply removed Dillon/Electro from the movie entirely and focused on Chris Cooper's Norman Osborn. Talk about wasted potential. Cooper could have been a very impressive Norman had he been given the chance and written within the same tone as the first movie. Not a sympathetic villain like the Lizard was, but more serious, dastardly, less over the top villain. They had already set up Norman's character as a heartless bastard willing to do anything to survive, so his turn would have been more logical. DeHaan would have made a great non-villain Harry Osborn and they could have really developed both of those characters into a good storyline. If they had spent the whole movie setting up Cooper to become Green Goblin as an attempt to cure his disease and simply have Harry be the unwanted Son back from boarding school/childhood friend of Peter's the movie would have been more streamlined and the villain would have had much better development.

I didn't have a big problem with the Parents storyline as most people have. Personally I think it's natural given how they wrote the story that Peter would have alot of questions about his Parents. To me that's basic human nature and it made sense, who wouldn't want to know more about their parents in that same situation? The storyline wasn't great by any means but I like the idea behind it. I think it would have tied in better to the story had Norman been the one to use the serum, given that it was him who turned on Richard Parker and it would have been far more ironic if he was the one to be mutated into the Goblin because he didn't know that Richard had used his own DNA to create the serum so that Norman couldn't use it for dangerous purposes. It definitely could have been executed better but the idea had potential. I do understand the complaints about Uncle Ben being glossed over alittle but I don't think it was a glaring weakness. A couple more lines and replacing two of the four Captain Stacy visions (I think it was 4, IIRC?) with visions of Ben would have fixed that.

I thought Peter and Gwen's storyline was mostly well done and as usual both gave very good performances. Gwen's character was basically the opposite of Mary Jane in the previous movies, where she was anything but the damsel in distress, constantly trying to throw herself into the action. I thought that was a good dynamic to add to the Peter/Gwen relationship, all though that, combined with the Captain Stacy visions did foreshadow the ending alittle too much. But it was hard to run away from that anyway given Gwen's fate was always inevitable.

Overall I think the movie had some good moments, Peter/Gwen, Peter/Aunt May, Peter/sane Harry, Harry/Norman, Spider-Man and the turbine kid, Spider-Man and the mini-me Spider-Man at the end, some of the action scenes were good. But overall the villains were just terrible and the CGI did get very video game like to the point where it just didn't look good or real. The story just had one to many sub-plots and focused on the wrong villain characters. The villains were way over the top and their dialogue was incredibly bad. Which again I think stems from them trying to copy the MCU/Raimi villains. The movie's story just wasn't cohesive enough. I don't think it's as bad as alot of people claim but the villains really drag this movie into a hole that the rest of the movie just doesn't make up for.