Amazing Spider-Man 2 review with spoilers!

[MIB41]

^^^ Thanks Chris! Submerging toe in water. It's been a long road to walk.

[Godzilla]

I took the family to see it. My 2 boys (7 and 9) both loved it. For me, it's a win right there.

My wife and I both thought it was ok. I felt Jamie Fox was channeling Richard Pryor in character pre-super powers. Once he's Electro, I didn't find him much better. Criticisms about Harry and the Goblin being rushed were right one.

But the fight scenes were good, the chemistry between the two leads was excellent, and Garfield nails being Parker. It could live up to a film like Winter Soldier, but it was ok. You could do worse for a summer comic book movie.

[huedell]

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.

This kind of "abandonment" thread is the type of thing that makes a movie like ASM2 move like a well-oiled machine. I felt swept up in he cohesiveness of ASM2 because of what I saw as skilled screenwriting throughout. It even made Peter and Harry's "reunion" seem plausible to me despite me wondering "Did I miss something that displayed their former relationship? Scenes from earlier in ASM2 or ASM1?" But the cohesiveness quickly smoothed over that aspect for me. This was especially potent with the "With great power comes great responsibility" theme which was played darker than it had ver been played before in a Spidey film... and I appreciated that darkness for it's more powerful impact. Not just with Gwen's fate, but with Peter's knowledge gained about his father abandoning him. I actually think they should have made MORE of that bit by fleshing out the lead up payoff a bit more---or in a different way. I think they were going for the impact of an EMPIRE STRIKES BACK "I am your Father." type reveal, and something made it fall a bit short, when it had the potential to be a bit more powerful.

I missed this thread. I wholeheartedly agree with all the negative opinions expressed about this movie....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....

Things like that are what made me like the movie more. They didn't feel forced to me at all.

"Gwen's commencement speech":
Gwen was going away to college the whole movie, so why *wouldn't* the film start with a graduation speech about "living and dying while retaining who YOU are, and the benefits of that"? That's a perfect screenwriting success because it's using a typical graduation speech that ultimately colors the ending in a way that communicates the message of the movie.

"Peter's father's computer message":
The theme of "abandonment" as well as the theme of "With great power comes great responsibility" are perfectly intertwined and then showcased in this computer message that #1 Explains what Parker Sr. did that caused great evil to be unleashed and what the impact dynamics were of that and #2 the message related the ONE other thing that Parker Sr. needed to express in relation to that great evil... that his solution meant he was abandoning the ONE thing that he loved most in life. In other words, the great power of his dangerous experiments meant that he had to be responsible, and abandon what HE wanted for the greater good of society. It just so happens that both these things (the only two things that a fugitive Father would find pertinent to mention) answers Peter's two burning questions. These aren't forced coincidences, these are easy to understand character motivations. AND, before Parker Sr. can digress into anything LESS pertinent, the imminent danger is hinted at in the background voices that include a young Peter, and indications of an impending Oscorp, again, fitting perfectly within the realm of the story being told. I mean, this IS what was happening at the time Parker Sr. was leaving the message.

When something fits as well as these two things, its not because it's forced coincidence, it's because it's smart screenwriting. Stuff that's established and then becomes a "pay off" to the audience. I understand if you think that, even with the multiple steps to the "payoff" that there's screenwriting shortcomings, but then I have to wonder "How hard does a screenwriter have to work in order to legitimize a set-up/payoff?"

[huedell]

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.

Cry me a river. Superman III? What a cop out. If you put me on ignore, it'll save you from having to make any good arguments other than bringing up a totally unrelated issue that only shows how past grudges color your present behavior. Lame.

[huedell]

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.

I can't agree with this assessment because there's a million ways to disseminate suspects from a pure Oscorp takedown. Payoffs, blackmail, rogue government involvement... heck, even your own Doc Ock scenario could be tweaked as a diversion to the "main problem" you're centering on.

I bought into LexCorp being what it was in STAS/JL/JLU (essentially what you're saying *can't* be easily rationalized as far as this superhero universe reality), and there's no reason IMHO why others shouldn't have either. Same with ASM's Oscorp.

[huedell]

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.

Oh yes. This is my goal. "All" I do around here is wreak havoc. Geesh. I like geek-toy stuff, and I like a good debate. You wanna make it into something more? That's on you.

As far as the ACTUAL stuff being discussed... what you said about being hardcore fans that nitpick is understandable.

I also get that you were trying to make a point by saying both levels of unifying were absurd. But, the "Batman" scenario you gave is SO disproportionate to what actually went down in ASM2 that it's a disservice to the fine work that was put into the ASM2 script.

If a hardcore fan saw both scenarios, maybe he'd be so disgusted that he'd agree with you---but there are many of us who are not that hardcore. And I sincerely thought you were leaving room for that POV, the POV of how a "non-affected" person would think after seeing the movie and then reading your comparison to the Bat-villain scenario. If you're not willing to "give" even *that* much, then it seems unfair to the subject debate.

[MIB41]

This kind of "abandonment" thread is the type of thing that makes a movie like ASM2 move like a well-oiled machine. I felt swept up in he cohesiveness of ASM2 because of what I saw as skilled screenwriting throughout.

What I found especially skillful in the writing and direction was during Gwen's speech she talks about the beauty of life and how so much of it is about TIMING. And during that portion of the speech, you see Spider-man saving people's lives by mere seconds (which is a daily process for him). And that plays on so many themes far beyond just the foreshadowing of her own fate. But what it also does is start the subconscious reasoning inside Parker to find a way to get back to Gwen.

And it's so subtle but very deliberate at every step. When Electro sends out that burst of electricity, the whole scene is slowed down to show you Spider-man's awareness of it's track and so when he shoots his webbing, he knows exactly who is at risk and saves scores of people in literally the blink of an eye. That's not an accident in story structure either. It's not a pointless 'wow' moment. It was very purposeful in convincing not only Peter, but the audience, how often he can snag people from death's clutches with routine ease. And when Electro is defeated, the director is setting people up to believe the story is winding down and that Peter and Gwen will be okay after all...enter the Goblin on the scene. The wild card. The exception to the rule.

And even though Spider-man saves her from that first fall, he can't control every aspect of what is happening as Gwen dangles from a web line that is snarled in between two gears. And even though Spider-man anticipates it, sees it, this time he can't stop it. And when the line breaks and everyone falls, he shoots his web line through the debris to find Gwen as he has found countless strangers, yet when the web finally takes hold, it's a second TOO LATE and Spider-man isn't even aware until he gets down there and holds her. It's a stunningly brilliant script. Masterfully done.

I think it's a polarizing film because you either followed what Marc Webb was doing or you were lost looking for a set up that never came. It wasn't about the villains. It was about fate, timing, and the decisions we make that ultimately impact how those play out. The abandonment theme was played on every major character, including the villains, to demonstrate how isolated and alone people can feel even when they come from polar opposite areas of life.

[jncsystems]

I saw their interpretation of Rhino and was like " Whut ?" I guess Stan Lee took the money and ran when they brough out that abomination - worst adaption of a villain ever !

[huedell]

And even though Spider-man saves her from that first fall, he can't control every aspect of what is happening as Gwen dangles from a web line that is snarled in between two gears. And even though Spider-man anticipates it, sees it, this time he can't stop it. And when the line breaks and everyone falls, he shoots his web line through the debris to find Gwen as he has found countless strangers, yet when the web finally takes hold, it's a second TOO LATE and Spider-man isn't even aware until he gets down there and holds her. It's a stunningly brilliant script. Masterfully done.

I think it's a polarizing film because you either followed what Marc Webb was doing or you were lost looking for a set up that never came. It wasn't about the villains. It was about fate, timing, and the decisions we make that ultimately impact how those play out. The abandonment theme was played on every major character, including the villains, to demonstrate how isolated and alone people can feel even when they come from polar opposite areas of life.

Bravo, MIB---annnnd---on top of all you so masterfully pointed out, is the use of a clock as a central part of the action that illustrates all this! Cheesy (more obvious) part of the observation, but I just had to mention it

[MIB41]

Bravo, MIB---annnnd---on top of all you so masterfully pointed out, is the use of a clock as a central part of the action that illustrates all this! Cheesy (more obvious) part of the observation, but I just had to mention it

Another good point Huedell. The symbolism is just littered through this movie. And to reiterate, I loved the fact the villains were not the story here, which is unfortunate when I hear people complain about them being "under-developed". To me that's like watching an episode of Batman '66 and complaining why the goons didn't have a back story. It wasn't about them. These individuals were just another obstacle Spider-man faced every day whether they were super-powered or just a bunch of kids bullying another in an alley. It was illustrating the uncertainty of what he faced every time he put on that mask and why it was so difficult to keep that balanced with his personal life. It also demonstrated that all of these people Spider-man encountered could share the same insecurities, even the same ambitions, yet come from entirely different backgrounds. And of course the results for each were all anchored in the Spider-man principle of personal responsibility. Some accepted that, others did not. And the results made them what they became. I think Marc Webb really put allot of work into this script and it shows.

[huedell]

Another good point Huedell. The symbolism is just littered through this movie. And to reiterate, I loved the fact the villains were not the story here, which is unfortunate when I hear people complain about them being "under-developed". To me that's like watching an episode of Batman '66 and complaining why the goons didn't have a back story. It wasn't about them. These individuals were just another obstacle Spider-man faced every day whether they were super-powered or just a bunch of kids bullying another in an alley. It was illustrating the uncertainty of what he faced every time he put on that mask and why it was so difficult to keep that balanced with his personal life. It also demonstrated that all of these people Spider-man encountered could share the same insecurities, even the same ambitions, yet come from entirely different backgrounds. And of course the results for each were all anchored in the Spider-man principle of personal responsibility. Some accepted that, others did not. And the results made them what they became. I think Marc Webb really put allot of work into this script and it shows.

Yep. And maybe (a notable amount of critics as well as many hardcore Spidey comicbook readers) had different expectations of what an ideal Spidey movie should've been (and should be).

And when something like this scenario occurs, you get unfortunate reviews where that hard work of Webb's becomes disconnected from fairly steering the fate of the film's reputation/image in the public's eyes. If that happens with ASM2, then that's too bad, because this is the kind of film that I can put above most all other Marvel/DC movies, and truly call it: "A good film" and not merely a film "loyal to the source material". Dare-I-say that it is one of those that is "too good" for it's own good

The irony in this is that I think some of the more subtle tight writing in ASM2 (as far as distributing the themes you mentioned earlier) has the potential of actually concealing more loyalty to the source material (within less explored---thus less recognizable-- Spidey tropes) than one would guess exists in the ASM2 film at first glance.

P.S. a lot of the stuff that you diagrammed in your latest post is what I've learned as the KEY way to write your "hero" vs. "the villains that the hero faces" in your screenplay.... I think the new Goblin even comments on it in ASM2 (the "choices" a hero makes vs. the ones that make one a villain/evil). This "choice" theme has always been the Gwen Stacy story frame theme, and it's been echoed in the close of Batman Forever as well as the first Raimi Spidey movie, with MJ filling in for Gwen. Dare-I-say that this Webb version illustrates this theme the best, if not "the best from my POV". It surely was the one that had the most emotional resonance with me.

[hedrap]

I can't agree with this assessment because there's a million ways to disseminate suspects from a pure Oscorp takedown. Payoffs, blackmail, rogue government involvement... heck, even your own Doc Ock scenario could be tweaked as a diversion to the "main problem" you're centering on.

I bought into LexCorp being what it was in STAS/JL/JLU (essentially what you're saying *can't* be easily rationalized as far as this superhero universe reality), and there's no reason IMHO why others shouldn't have either. Same with ASM's Oscorp.

You know, you're right about that. Animated had a demo starting with five year-olds so the stories had to be simplistic enough for them to get, and Marvel movies are made with that mentality. That's why fanboys creamed their jeans over Winter Soldier; it was pretentious so it felt adult.

[Hector]

ASM 2 was hot and cold for me.

First..

Many were talking dismissing Electro for being Black, or whatever, I never even noticed what race Electro was...he just turned out to be the best villain in the movie, lol.

Jamie Foxx gave him some heart...he was actually likeable even in mad Electro mode...a geek turned vengeful villain...I actually dug his role.

Dane DeHaan's Harry Osborn was pretty dead on...but boy...his Green Goblin was pretty lame...he made Willem Dafoe's Gobby look downright magical. The only one lamer was James Franco's snowboard version.

Paul Giamatti's role was not even needed in the film...and his Rhino was just truly embarrassing...I noticed people in the audience giggling and laughing...one dude said, "oh, look, a poor man's Transformer", no lie, lol.

How ironic that they missed the mark on the villains...but they got Spidey, oh so right...

Andrew Garfield owns the role of both Spidey/Parker though...it embodies the role much more effectively than Tobey Maguire ever did...love the jokes and sarcasm of Spidey...something Maguire never achieved (and his Parker was always humorless as well). Plus Garfield doesn't have that annoying screechy Maguire voice/screams...and Garfield's longer and leaner body makes him more effective as Spidey.

The problem the third installment is going to suffer is the absence of Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy...she was the glue that held everything together...she was the heart and soul of the franchise...and she was incredible adorable to say the least...it was the chemistry between Garfield and Stone that made the movie work for me...now that she's gone...Amazing 3 doesn't look so good anymore to me. We shall see.

Spidey's CGI has vastly improved...his swinging through New York is truly amazing to watch...so are the fight sequences...and the dude is just funny.

But they did cram too much stuff in one movie...so it felt rushed in many areas.

...and like many posters said before...the whole thing about Parker's parents, and OSCORP being involved in everything, it's like SHIELD and HYDRA all wrapped into one...lame.

I have always like Spider-Man a lot more than Captain America...but the Winter Soldier is the superior film.

I just can't can't get over of how lame the Green Goblin was...and how pathetically weak and stupid Rhino was...good grief man, lol.

I rate ASM 2 a 7 outta 10 (it gets a seven because Garfield is perfect as both Spidey/Parker, despite the film's other problems).

Nuff said!

[Earth 2 Chris]

You know, you're right about that. Animated had a demo starting with five year-olds so the stories had to be simplistic enough for them to get, and Marvel movies are made with that mentality. That's why fanboys creamed their jeans over Winter Soldier; it was pretentious so it felt adult.

Or, it could be that it was just a good movie, ya know. That might be it.

Chris

[phil]

I hated it. I wasted enough time sitting through so I won't waste any time going into details here.