The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man (First Reactions: Critics, Fans) (Spoiler Alert) - - - - - Part 14

[cobrastatus]

edit: *first in line

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

why?

Cause my parents aren't gonna take me again.

 

[Ashes2Phoenix]

I am going to go and see it again tomorrow afternoon alone provided I have finished the majority of my editing projects. Can't wait !

 

[pickleweed]

The 2D showing I wanted to see sold out while waiting to get a ticket so I bought the next one which was 3D and had to wait around for 2hrs but it was worth it, first in like and I got bomb ass seats.

would have if i didnt have obligations later in the day. i was already squeezing it in as it was. wont get the chance to go again until saturday. and then im seeing it come hell or high water.

 

[cobrastatus]

would have if i didnt have obligations later in the day. i was already squeezing it in as it was. wont get the chance to go again until saturday. and then im seeing it come hell or high water.

Good luck bud! Hope u get to catch the flick.

 

[pickleweed]

Good luck bud! Hope u get to catch the flick.

thanks man. here's hoping it's worth the wait.

 

[bosef982]

His motivations just became so scrambled. I got what he wanted to do, and it's something we've seen before, but it was so sudden it was just like okay, first he starts out as a guy with good intentions, then once he turns to the Lizard, he suddenly wants to turn people into Lizards, then he goes back to being good. It just felt uneven. You have something to work with there, it just got lost within everything was going on, I thought it could have been handled in a better way.

They had some good ideas, it's just the execution seemed to have gotten lost in the shuffle with the other things going on around it. Which is why the simplicity of the first two films made the villains motivations and schemes feel developed and even.

It can even be a gut feeling you get when watching something. Immediately during the Connors lab scene I suddenly kind of went, "Wait... what?" With something like Ock or the Goblin it just flowed and I bought it. A questionable thought never came to mind. It rolled with whatever was going on in the narrative.

or how about the fact that -- hey guys, let me gas all of NY with a serum that turns you into a lizard...temporarily...??

Yeah, the serum didn't turn him permanently, why would he presume it would NY? It's a pathetic plot hole that makes no sense and just reeks of lazy writing.

 

[cryptic name]

He was becoming more and more lizard-like after each transformation. And after the first dosing, the assumption is that the lizard-people would be like him and want to be lizards so would accept further doses.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Plot hole or not it worked for the film.

 

[Alchemyst]

I enjoyed the hell out of this movie, pretty much the Spider-Man film I've always wanted

 

[stillanerd]

Not sure if this has been posted on these forums yet, but the National Catholic Register did review of the film, and even though the critic likes certain aspects of it better than the original Raimi films, he brings up a very salient point where he thinks the film really gets it wrong:

For all that, the new film bungles who Spider-Man is, where he’s coming from. This isn’t the only problem (there are notable issues around the plot and the interpretation of Spider-Man’s reptilian foe, the Lizard), but, for me, it’s the most intractable, because it undermines the hero’s moral center.

Here is the crux of who Peter Parker has always essentially been, at least in his origins: A brainy high-school outcast unexpectedly bequeathed with extraordinary powers, Peter initially uses those powers for personal gain — until the murder of his Uncle Ben at the hands of a thug Peter could have stopped but didn’t. Blaming himself for his uncle’s death, Peter learns a lesson his uncle tried to teach him: that with great power comes great responsibility. From then on, Peter seeks to use his powers responsibly to protect people generally. With his uncle gone, Peter’s Aunt May becomes an even more crucial figure in his life, and he worries over and cares for her in her widowhood even as he also draws inspiration from her strength of spirit.

The Amazing Spider-Man includes some of these key markers, from Peter’s brains and outcast status to Ben Parker’s murder. Yet Peter’s response to his uncle’s murder — the key turning point in the character’s development — is completely wrong. Instead of blaming himself, or resolving to use his powers to protect others, he directs all his wrath against the murderer, leading to an extended manhunt as Peter tracks down thugs who fit the general description of his uncle’s killer while showing no interest in other criminals.

I’m not against giving Peter a longer learning curve. I get that Peter’s vendetta against his uncle’s killer parallels his earlier retaliation against high-school bully Flash Thompson (Chris Zylka), over which Uncle Ben himself rebuked Peter. The problem is that the movie never gets where it needs to: At no time does the lesson of power and responsibility emerge in connection with Ben’s death.

Instead, Peter’s sense of responsibility emerges in connection with the Lizard — partly because no one else is in the Lizard’s power league and partly because (for reasons I won’t spoil) Peter blames himself for the emergence of the Lizard in the first place.

This is not dramatically equivalent to Peter blaming himself for his uncle’s death, for several reasons. First, the act for which Peter blames himself in connection with the Lizard is not an irresponsible or selfish act. There’s no way he could have foreseen the trouble it would lead to, whereas anyone could foresee that letting a thug escape could lead to further thuggery. Second, it is not a failure to use his powers that Peter blames himself for here. It is crucial to who Spider-Man is that a failure to use his powers leads to consequences that impress on him the importance of using his powers responsibly and selflessly.

His uncle’s death has always served as a deeply personal inspiration for Peter’s sense of responsibility and heroic duty. The Lizard thing is much less personal — less connected to who Peter is. Indeed, in this telling, the murder is hardly necessary at all and makes little impact on the rest of the story. (It’s telling that the best scene in connection with the murder takes place the next day at school.) It’s true that Peter first dons the mask to protect himself while seeking to track down his uncle’s killer, but the movie could just as easily have skipped all that and stepped up the Lizard rampage, with practically the same results.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-the-amazing-spider-man/#ixzz1znWluTtp
​

 

[bosef982]

Good God, the lengths I'm seeing people go to defend even the littlest flaws in this film -- never mind the largest ones -- is appalling. It's maybe the worst I've ever seen fanboys rally around a film with such CLEAR issues.

"It's assumed that that can work..."

Wow, that's like 7 leaps of logic you just made there and you're okay with that? I'd love to work for some of you, b/c you apparently expect nothing out of those who you pay --

I'm sorry. I pay money. I don't expect to have to do half the writing for the film; I don't expect to have to assume and deduce the logic of the villain's still-stupid plot.

I'm really just sort of disgusted by some people's intractability in accepting that this film is FAR FAR FAR from perfect, and it's pushing me to dislike the film when after a 3rd viewing, I really liked it.

It's no longer enough for fanboys for someone to LIKE the film; they have to love it without judgment. Ridiculous.

 

[I Am Jack's...]

Good God, the lengths I'm seeing people go to defend even the littlest flaws in this film -- never mind the largest ones -- is appalling. It's maybe the worst I've ever seen fanboys rally around a film with such CLEAR issues.

"It's assumed that that can work..."

Wow, that's like 7 leaps of logic you just made there and you're okay with that? I'd love to work for some of you, b/c you apparently expect nothing out of those who you pay --

I'm sorry. I pay money. I don't expect to have to do half the writing for the film; I don't expect to have to assume and deduce the logic of the villain's still-stupid plot.

I'm really just sort of disgusted by some people's intractability in accepting that this film is FAR FAR FAR from perfect, and it's pushing me to dislike the film when after a 3rd viewing, I really liked it.

It's no longer enough for fanboys for someone to LIKE the film; they have to love it without judgment. Ridiculous.

I have not seen people call it perfect. In fact, many have said it is far from perfect, but they still liked/loved it and are willing to defend it. Me included. What's so wrong with that? Other than it being different from what you think? You sound mad because people aren't agreeing with your opinion.

 

[DeathChill]

I'm sorry but it's pretty pathetic that people really enjoying and defending a movie makes you dislike it.

 

[Robin91939]

Bosef, I'm with you -- I think.

I definitely see things that could be improved. With about another 15 minutes, perhaps, they could have fixed much of the film's problems. However, I am confident that the film still works pretty well on the whole without any change.

Adding Billy Connors and giving him a life threatening illness (maybe too similar to Penny Marko in Spider-man 3) could have helped. This would give Connors a reason to want to "cure" the world and make him even more sympathetic and a father's desperation could explain irrational thought.

But -- Connors' own longing for his arm is played pitch perfect in this film and is beautiful in many parts and shots of the film.

If we could have kept and elaborated on the Doctor Ratha's character. However, I am fully confident (based on Ben's monologue at the end of the film) that the "things left open" will be closed in sequels.

The only scene I'd get rid of is the baseketball scene -- or at least play the dunk a little less for laughs and not make it SO over the top.

However, none of this changes the fact that the characterization of Peter Parker/Spider-man was tremendous. Gwen Stacy was lovable, Curt Connors was sympathetic, May was protective and concerned (and not played as an idiot. She clearly knows he's Spidey by film's end) and Ben was stern but loving.

As you said -- you like the film. I just got out of a second viewing and my opinion remains the same. As much as a I love Spider-man, much of it is nostalgia. And now, 10 years later I can see some of the flaws in that, still, great film. I'd rank The Amazing Spider-man up in the Spider-man 2 neighborhood. Both are tremendous Spider-man films -- both have little changes that could be made -- but both still stand up great.

(Note: I payed extra close attention and there is just the one flag when the construction worker walks past the screen in the ally and we see it painted on the brick wall. Yes, the camera lingers on it for about 1 second, but I wouldn't say it's gratuitous, lol).

Bottom line is -- this film could be perfected. But that's true of all films (except Inception, that film is perfect, lol). But I will say that The Amazing Spider-man proves that the franchise is in capable hands. People who love the character and who can make entertaining, faithful films. It has me excited and confident for a sequel.

-R

 

[antonydelfini]

Not sure if this has been posted on these forums yet, but the National Catholic Register did review of the film, and even though the critic likes certain aspects of it better than the original Raimi films, he brings up a very salient point where he thinks the film really gets it wrong:

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-the-amazing-spider-man/#ixzz1znWluTtp
​

I get what he's trying to say.

I'd say his "Paul to Damascus" moment came when Captain Stacy told him Spidey's not a hero, that all he has is a personal vendetta.

After that dinner scene, that is when Peter chose to save the boy instead of pursuing the Lizard, and afterwards the "i'm Spider-Man" line, which indicates the maturity of the character.

That dinner scene seemed to have woken Peter up when it should have been Ben's death that made him realize the with great power comes great responsibility.

That's why my complaint about the film is that Ben's death didn't have too much impact on me.

Good analysis from the reviewer.

 

[Robin91939]

That's why my complaint about the film is that Ben's death didn't have too much impact on me.

Good analysis from the reviewer.

I posted this in the "character arc" thread, so I'll reiterate here:


I couldn't disagree more.

I thought that the way that they handled the death of Uncle Ben was absolutely beautiful and powerful. To take an event that everyone sees from a mile away and still make it powerful, is no easy task.

I'll elaborate...

Ben and Peter argue. Ben tells him about responsibility and that if he is in the position to help a person, it is his moral responsibility to do so. This speech is compounded with the speech Ben gives Peter at school in an earlier scene where he tells Peter that life isn't about revenge or "getting even."

Peter storms out and walks around the neighborhood -- angry at his Uncle, but more angry at the fact that his own Father isn't alive to give him this speech.

Ben goes out searching for Peter, calling him on his phone with no answer... He leaves a voicemail.

Peter goes to a connivence store, has a disagreement with the clerk, the clerk is robbed, and the thief runs into the street. Peter then sees the thief knock into his Uncle Ben, and a gun falls free. Ben sees the gun and sees that he has a chance to grab it and help the innocent bystanders, and acts on what he believes is his responsibility. Ben struggles with the thief for the gun. Peter watches, stunned, as the thief gets the better of Ben and fires of a fatal shot. Ben dies in Peter's arms...

Peter then ignores everything that Ben has taught him. Consumed by rage and anger, Peter uses his newfound power only to avenge the death of his Uncle. He acts selfishly and recklessly.

At the Stacy's house is where he is put in his place by George, and he begins to realize just how silly and selfish he is being. And that as much as he tries to justify what he is doing -- there is no escaping the fact that he is doing just what Uncle Ben warned him not to do. It's "not about getting even," it's not about revenge. And the powers he has aren't to be used for his own gain -- it's his moral obligation to help others with them... his responsibility.

The lesson sinks in and is set in stone when he is fighting the Lizard on the bridge. He has the opportunity to pursue the Lizard but is torn by the plea of a father to save his son. Upon saving the child, and seeing him reunited with his father, he understands what Ben meant and totally takes the lesson to heart. He goes from "that spider guy" and becomes "Spider-man."

The voicemail at the end -- when he listens to it in full is just symbolic of the lesson. Right after Ben's death, Peter played the message, but shut it off prematurely, he wasn't ready to hear those words yet -- he was still clouded by rage and acting selfishly. He wanted to kill only his own pain, that's all. By the film's end he has accepted his responsibility as a hero to the city and it's symbolized and reaffirmed by him now being able and ready to hear Ben's message out.

It's truly a great arc, and a beautiful moment in the film.

I hope maybe you see it a little more for what it is, and maybe I've swayed you... If not, you enjoy 2002's Spider-man. It's also a great version of the origin, and a favorite film of mine -- this was just better, I think.

-R

 

[cryptic name]

Good God, the lengths I'm seeing people go to defend even the littlest flaws in this film -- never mind the largest ones -- is appalling. It's maybe the worst I've ever seen fanboys rally around a film with such CLEAR issues.

"It's assumed that that can work..."

Wow, that's like 7 leaps of logic you just made there and you're okay with that? I'd love to work for some of you, b/c you apparently expect nothing out of those who you pay --

I'm sorry. I pay money. I don't expect to have to do half the writing for the film; I don't expect to have to assume and deduce the logic of the villain's still-stupid plot.

I'm really just sort of disgusted by some people's intractability in accepting that this film is FAR FAR FAR from perfect, and it's pushing me to dislike the film when after a 3rd viewing, I really liked it.

It's no longer enough for fanboys for someone to LIKE the film; they have to love it without judgment. Ridiculous.

The assumption I was talking about was that of the character of Connors', not my own assumption. People are just discussing different points of view on the movie with you. There's no need to be such a raging prick about it.

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

The assumption I was talking about was that of the character of Connors', not my own assumption. People are just discussing different points of view on the movie with you. There's no need to be such a raging prick about it.

Whoa... let's not get too far ahead of ourselves here

I would've asked for all of us to just agree to disagree, but I remembered we were on the Hype.

 

[cryptic name]

Whoa... let's not get too far ahead of ourselves here

I would've asked for all of us to just agree to disagree, but I remembered we were on the Hype.

I read his post as really condescending to people who weren't sharing his viewpoint. Didn't mean to offend, friend.

 

[Eddie Brock]

I posted this in the "character arc" thread, so I'll reiterate here:


I couldn't disagree more.

I thought that the way that they handled the death of Uncle Ben was absolutely beautiful and powerful. To take an event that everyone sees from a mile away and still make it powerful, is no easy task.

I'll elaborate...

Ben and Peter argue. Ben tells him about responsibility and that if he is in the position to help a person, it is his moral responsibility to do so. This speech is compounded with the speech Ben gives Peter at school in an earlier scene where he tells Peter that life isn't about revenge or "getting even."

Peter storms out and walks around the neighborhood -- angry at his Uncle, but more angry at the fact that his own Father isn't alive to give him this speech.

Ben goes out searching for Peter, calling him on his phone with no answer... He leaves a voicemail.

Peter goes to a connivence store, has a disagreement with the clerk, the clerk is robbed, and the thief runs into the street. Peter then sees the thief knock into his Uncle Ben, and a gun falls free. Ben sees the gun and sees that he has a chance to grab it and help the innocent bystanders, and acts on what he believes is his responsibility. Ben struggles with the thief for the gun. Peter watches, stunned, as the thief gets the better of Ben and fires of a fatal shot. Ben dies in Peter's arms...

Peter then ignores everything that Ben has taught him. Consumed by rage and anger, Peter uses his newfound power only to avenge the death of his Uncle. He acts selfishly and recklessly.

At the Stacy's house is where he is put in his place by George, and he begins to realize just how silly and selfish he is being. And that as much as he tries to justify what he is doing -- there is no escaping the fact that he is doing just what Uncle Ben warned him not to do. It's "not about getting even," it's not about revenge. And the powers he has aren't to be used for his own gain -- it's his moral obligation to help others with them... his responsibility.

The lesson sinks in and is set in stone when he is fighting the Lizard on the bridge. He has the opportunity to pursue the Lizard but is torn by the plea of a father to save his son. Upon saving the child, and seeing him reunited with his father, he understands what Ben meant and totally takes the lesson to heart. He goes from "that spider guy" and becomes "Spider-man."

The voicemail at the end -- when he listens to it in full is just symbolic of the lesson. Right after Ben's death, Peter played the message, but shut it off prematurely, he wasn't ready to hear those words yet -- he was still clouded by rage and acting selfishly. He wanted to kill only his own pain, that's all. By the film's end he has accepted his responsibility as a hero to the city and it's symbolized and reaffirmed by him now being able and ready to hear Ben's message out.

It's truly a great arc, and a beautiful moment in the film.

I hope maybe you see it a little more for what it is, and maybe I've swayed you... If not, you enjoy 2002's Spider-man. It's also a great version of the origin, and a favorite film of mine -- this was just better, I think.

-R

Hot damn, man. I enjoyed the film, but you just took it to a whole different level. I don't know how the "So all this is about getting even?" connection until this moment.

 

[Dragon]

I posted this in the "character arc" thread, so I'll reiterate here:


I couldn't disagree more.

I thought that the way that they handled the death of Uncle Ben was absolutely beautiful and powerful. To take an event that everyone sees from a mile away and still make it powerful, is no easy task.

I'll elaborate...

Ben and Peter argue. Ben tells him about responsibility and that if he is in the position to help a person, it is his moral responsibility to do so. This speech is compounded with the speech Ben gives Peter at school in an earlier scene where he tells Peter that life isn't about revenge or "getting even."

Peter storms out and walks around the neighborhood -- angry at his Uncle, but more angry at the fact that his own Father isn't alive to give him this speech.

Ben goes out searching for Peter, calling him on his phone with no answer... He leaves a voicemail.

Peter goes to a connivence store, has a disagreement with the clerk, the clerk is robbed, and the thief runs into the street. Peter then sees the thief knock into his Uncle Ben, and a gun falls free. Ben sees the gun and sees that he has a chance to grab it and help the innocent bystanders, and acts on what he believes is his responsibility. Ben struggles with the thief for the gun. Peter watches, stunned, as the thief gets the better of Ben and fires of a fatal shot. Ben dies in Peter's arms...

Peter then ignores everything that Ben has taught him. Consumed by rage and anger, Peter uses his newfound power only to avenge the death of his Uncle. He acts selfishly and recklessly.

At the Stacy's house is where he is put in his place by George, and he begins to realize just how silly and selfish he is being. And that as much as he tries to justify what he is doing -- there is no escaping the fact that he is doing just what Uncle Ben warned him not to do. It's "not about getting even," it's not about revenge. And the powers he has aren't to be used for his own gain -- it's his moral obligation to help others with them... his responsibility.

The lesson sinks in and is set in stone when he is fighting the Lizard on the bridge. He has the opportunity to pursue the Lizard but is torn by the plea of a father to save his son. Upon saving the child, and seeing him reunited with his father, he understands what Ben meant and totally takes the lesson to heart. He goes from "that spider guy" and becomes "Spider-man."

The voicemail at the end -- when he listens to it in full is just symbolic of the lesson. Right after Ben's death, Peter played the message, but shut it off prematurely, he wasn't ready to hear those words yet -- he was still clouded by rage and acting selfishly. He wanted to kill only his own pain, that's all. By the film's end he has accepted his responsibility as a hero to the city and it's symbolized and reaffirmed by him now being able and ready to hear Ben's message out.

It's truly a great arc, and a beautiful moment in the film.

I hope maybe you see it a little more for what it is, and maybe I've swayed you... If not, you enjoy 2002's Spider-man. It's also a great version of the origin, and a favorite film of mine -- this was just better, I think.

-R

It's a terrible arc.

1. It's a rip-off from Raimi's 2002 film (Peter refuses to stop the robber because he has a beef with the victim) Only this time Peter wasn't even wronged as was Peter in Raimi's film. Peter was in fact committing wrong however meaningless that wrong is.

2. Why the F*** doesn't Peter help his Uncle? Was he that mad at him?

Spoiler

His spider sense alerts him to the Lizard attacking the bridge- but it doesn't alert him to Ben's imminent demise?

3. The film completely misses the point. Peter shouldn't have given up the search, because bottomline this guy is still a killer and will very likely kill again. He has to be brought to justice.

 

[Robin91939]

Hot damn, man. I enjoyed the film, but you just took it to a whole different level. I don't know how the "So all this is about getting even?" connection until this moment.

Happy to, lol. I just really loved this moment in the film. And for all it's (small) flaws--the broad strokes all work beautifully. The heart of the film is great, the characyerizations are great and the protagonist's journey is rich and satisfying.

We can argue the size of the Lizard's snout, the use of the American flag, if the fight scenes surpass "the train fight", or the rationality of the Lizard's plan 'till the end of time-- but it won't change the fact that it NAILED the big stuff.

The journey of Peter Parker, Peter's relationship with his Aunt and Uncle, the impact of the death of George Stacy, Peter's love of Gwen Stacy and the meaning of Uncle Ben's teaching and their affect on Peter... These are the important things. And Webb knocked them out of the park. The smaller things can be addressed and fixed in the eventual sequel. The important thing, as I've said, is that Spider-man is back. And he's in capable, passionate hands. And that's a good thing.

-R

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

I find that really strange when lizard was going to release stuff that turn people into lizards but poilces rather chase spideman than trying to stop the lizard.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

Happy to, lol. I just really loved this moment in the film. And for all it's (small) flaws--the broad strokes all work beautifully. The heart of the film is great, the characyerizations are great and the protagonist's journey is rich and satisfying.

We can argue the size of the Lizard's snout, the use of the American flag, if the fight scenes surpass "the train fight", or the rationality of the Lizard's plan 'till the end of time-- but it won't change the fact that it NAILED the big stuff.

The journey of Peter Parker, Peter's relationship with his Aunt and Uncle, the impact of the death of George Stacy, Peter's love of Gwen Stacy and the meaning of Uncle Ben's teaching and their affect on Peter... These are the important things. And Webb knocked them out of the park. The smaller things can be addressed and fixed in the eventual sequel. The important thing, as I've said, is that Spider-man is back. And he's in capable, passionate hands. And that's a good thing.

-R

Well said