Amazing Spider-Man 2 review with spoilers!

[huedell]

To me it makes it less plausible.

What's "less plausible" about a guy with a billion dollar company at his disposal rounding up a bunch of criminals (that ALREADY work for him) to work for him in a super-powered capacity? These are mostly all thugs and losers who could EASILY get bought by the highest bidder---you know, the boss-guy with a billion dollars. The more crafty evil scientists join on for "revenge" reasons or blackmail or whatever.

It's MUCH less plausible that all those freaks happened into sand creators, rhino transformers, etc etc.

[thunderbolt]

If it makes it easier for you to grasp then more power to you. I just find it really contrived and a lot less believable. In the future use my whole post, instead of using it out of context.

[huedell]

But I think the film makers are rushing things somewhat in these movies.
The first film should have focused solely on the death of Uncle Ben. The death of Captain Stacy should have been saved until the second film, and Gwen's demise should have waited until the third movie.
That's the kind of dramatic pacing that would have imbued each one of those pivotal losses in Peter's life the gravity and impact they truly warranted.
That would have made a dramatically satisfying and balanced trilogy. And with plans to make more than three movies in this series anyway, they certainly did not need to rush things.

Maybe they didn't need to rush things, but I feel they needed to differentiate things from the Raimi movies, so the sooner they're away from the heavy Ben stuff the better. That doesn't mean they eliminate the imact or lesson learned from the Ben stuff, but the more overt stuff has been done already, so it needs to be minimized so the Webb films stand more on their own.

And the focus on Peter's parents is something that Webb should have avoided, in my opinion. I didn't like that arc in the comics, either. Aunt May and Uncle Ben are/were the parent figures in Peter's life.

And they always will be the parent figures. Adding his blood parents to the mix and the contrast it gives to his relationship with May/Ben only adds more dimension and strength to it.

[madmarva]

You just added a whole full generation of coincidence.

Exactly, just like the ASM screenwriters.

As Tbolt wrote, it works for you, and that's great, but for others it doesn't. There's no harm either way. It's personal preference.

All of these super hero origins are preposterous to begin with. None of them have an ounce of plausibility whether the heroes are interconnected to their villains or not.

Beyond stating our opinions, there's really nothing left to discuss. We're not going to change each other's minds.

[huedell]

Exactly, just like the ASM screenwriters.

Nope. That's exponentially "worse" than those screenwriters and your analogy makes the idea go from "arguably efficient" to "flat-out silly".

I can rationalize the debate over the "efficient" part (it's a hardcore Spidey comicbook-fan's luxury to see it the other way, I suppose)---but for you to use the Batman-villain analogy to prove the point, at best muddles it with a whole new aspect of plot thread unity (it becomes "inarguable coincidence" at that point rather than "believably logical") and, at worst, your analogy disproves itself by getting uber-wacky with the backstory... the two layers you're laying out makes it a mathematical thing rather than a somewhat evenly matched "opinion" scenario.

[huedell]

In the future use my whole post, instead of using it out of context.

Why use your whole post if there's no reason to? It was PERFECTLY in context. You didn't even quote anyone to begin with. At least I did that. Everyone knows we're talking about "consolidating origins".

[palitoy]

There's even a setup at the end showing Doc Ock's tentacles and Vulture's wings, both of which are apparently now Oscorp creations. That undermines the characters of Otto Octavius and Adrian Toomes by reducing their own genius inventions to Oscorp handouts for the villain of the week. That's my other problem with the movie. Oscorp is behind EVERYTHING. The biggest villains in the movie are an evil board of directors and a wacky scientist.

Yeah, I think that's the underpinning of my apathy towards this franchise. I really loved the first two Riami films, the third one just needed Richard Pryor to be the worst part 3 ever.

I watched ASM and it's got all this needless underlay of Peter's parents being spies but the heart of the plot (the Lizard making everyone Lizards) is taken straight from the Superfriends. Even this whole "Oscorp makes all the villains" is right out of the 90s Spider-Man toon. The rest just feels like fan service to me.

These are just rentals to me.

[thunderbolt]

Why use your whole post if there's no reason to? It was PERFECTLY in context. You didn't even quote anyone to begin with. At least I did that. Everyone knows we're talking about "consolidating origins".

and there you go again. Besides, your professed love of Superman III negates any defense you make of anything. I'm starting to remember why I had you on ignore for a year or so.

[hedrap]

What's "less plausible" about a guy with a billion dollar company at his disposal rounding up a bunch of criminals (that ALREADY work for him) to work for him in a super-powered capacity? These are mostly all thugs and losers who could EASILY get bought by the highest bidder---you know, the boss-guy with a billion dollars. The more crafty evil scientists join on for "revenge" reasons or blackmail or whatever.

It's MUCH less plausible that all those freaks happened into sand creators, rhino transformers, etc etc.

Wait. So "reality" is a billionaire who hires criminals with the goal of making them into super-freaks? How do you gel that with the Bugle and it's incessant coverage of super-fights?

I get that you like the tight threading Hue, but it's only plausible if you're going for soap opera. The only way Osborne could disassociate himself from his super-crew is if he killed each one after they failed. Otherwise, one arrest will give Capt Stacey, or JJJ, a name, an employer and their tech. After that, OsCorp is prime suspect and that's with only one arrest, because the criminals are not capable of doing this on their own. You turn out two or three super-villains and "logic" has SHIELD getting involved as they shut the place down. It would be great - for one movie. Not a series.

The way it could have, (IMO opinion should have) worked, is Parker's dad, Ock and Connors works for Osborne with Ock in a different department. From there, it could have splintered out with a loose association. So OsCorp could have been ground zero, but once the genie is out OsCorp can no longer be the source, (which it apparently is still going to be). I mean, it's beyond lazy to associate Kraven with the group as another powered-up tech. The whole point of the character is he's a international hunter/hired killer brought in. If Osborne powers him up, too, he's no different than Rhino.

[thunderbolt]

^^^ Its just really lazy writing and also thinking that most people are too stupid to be able to handle anything not tied up in neat little bundles like someone seems to enjoy. As an aside, can't wait a year or so and see all the transformer Rhino figures still sitting around at TRU.

[madmarva]

Nope. That's exponentially "worse" than those screenwriters and your analogy makes the idea go from "arguably efficient" to "flat-out silly".

Exactly Huedell, I was using the absurd to make a point. Glad you caught that.

And as far as hardcore fans, who else is going to care about the origins of the villains anyway? Most who went to see the movie have no emotional interest in the character beyond what the film is capable of generating for a couple of hours. Only a fan is going to think twice about the film after seeing it. Most viewers are in the theater to spend some time with their kids or significant others or buddies as much as they are to see the movie. No big deal. They want to see some cool special effects, some action and fights and the good guy win. Most wouldn't know or couldn't care less that the movie deviates from the source material. Maybe a lot of them never read a comic book at all. And it's great that so many general viewers enjoy super hero films today that all these movies get made.

Only the fans care enough to nitpick and that's what we're really doing. For the most part, the movie delivers. Could it have been better? Sure it could. But it also could have been a lot worse.

But Huedell, we know that the movie and the opinion you expressed isn't really what you care about. Over the years, you've made it very clear all you really care about is arguing ad nauseam. And you do it so well. You balance being just abrasive and obnoxious enough to keep things riled up without going far enough to get banned.

So, bravo. I give the devil his due. You've done it again. Aren't you proud.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I will agree, the Oscorp is behind everything angle is trite. But to be honest, I haven't really cared for any of the villains in the Spidey films, other than Doc Ock. I liked Dafoe out of costume, but beyond that, it was only Mollina's Ock that I really got behind, and even then he was very different from the comic, since he was a decent man corrupted by his invention. Hayden-Church's Sandman had great potential, but then you tied him into the throw-in Venom, and undermined Spidey's origin, via him shooting Uncle Ben.

In ASM, I didn't care much for the Lizard's look, and I really wanted to see Raimi's Doc Connors become the Lizard, so was biased going in. It was Garfield's and Stone's portrayals and chemistry that made me like the film.

So I went into this one with the same expectations. I liked the villains better than expected, but my expectations were low. But honestly, as a fan, I never cared much for Spidey's villains outside of the Goblin. To me, the draw of the character was the drama of Peter and his interaction with his supporting cast. So I guess that's why the dumbing down of the villains doesn't bother me as much as some.

Chris

[Goblin19]

I missed this thread. I wholeheartedly agree with all the negative opinions expessed about this movie. It's a convoluted, bloated, dull, misguided mess, with a lazy script. The father story is boring, the Harry storyline ruahed horribly that seems to only be thrown in there to kill Gwen Stacy and set up a sequel. The dialog is obvious at times. Does Max (Electro) actually have to say I'm a nobody. We get it, he's a loser. Most times conversations are had or speeches are given only to relate to a later scene. For example, Gwen's commencement speech, Peter's father's computer message that miraculously addresses all of Peter's questions and nothing else. But the biggest flaw is having so much crammed in there that Peter and Gwen, who should be the focus, are not given enough together for me to care about them. I could go on with my issues like the kid in the Spidey suit, the airplanes full of strangers that we're supposed to care about, everyone running into each other in NYC, the jarring tone changes, but I'll stop.

I really enjoyed the first Raimi Spider Man movies, especially 1 &2. 3 was decent. I even thought TASM was passable. This one just lost me completely Of course, it's just my opinion.

[MIB41]

Actually I thought there were a couple of well thought out themes in the story about abandonment and loss. Electro was abandoned (and therefore lost) by society. Parker was abandoned by his parents which caused him to overcompensate as Spider-man by trying to be that person who gave people the hope he never had. Gwen felt abandoned by Parker and by the death of her dad. And Harry was detached and abandoned from his father before losing him to an illness that was taking his own life as well. And each made a conscious decision how to respond to that emotion when given the opportunity to address it. Electro succumb to the addiction of power and the attention it commands. Both Parker and Gwen run from their feelings of abandonment and choose to embrace one another and accept the risks (but believing they can control them). And Harry, desperate to save his own life so he can find meaning and statement for his existence, embraces the risks of taking the spider extract formula. I thought it all fit very well. Unfortunately I think the critics came in looking for something more superficial and missed the story here. The best analogy I can make is they came to a Rocky film looking for a boxing movie and missed the part about personal redemption. And it's not like these themes are buried in the script. They stand tall and clear. And honestly those are the areas that make this film so surprisingly deep in many places. Even Aunt May is brought into the equation to try and teach Peter how she dealt with her loss of Uncle Ben. It's a surprisingly powerful story throughout. That's my opinion.

[Earth 2 Chris]

^Well said Tom. And welcome back pal!

Chris