The Amazing Spider-Man 2

FunLover18

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

Harry is pretty much confirmed to be (at least this film's) Goblin.

Is it? The trailers seem to be going out of their way to hide the Goblin's identity

Soft Falling Rain

FunLover18 wrote: »

Is it? The trailers seem to be going out of their way to hide the Goblin's identity

http://www.iamrogue.com/news/movie-news/item/10731-green-goblin-rides-again-amazing-spider-man-2-images.html

Check out the still image, it's most definitely DeHaan and not Cooper.

I'm guessing the lack of solid shots of the Goblin's face is down to them still probably trying to perfect effects.

krudler

Soundtrack is up on spotify, I like the main theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqXvj44vRoE

Mickeroo

krudler wrote: »

Soundtrack is up on spotify, I like the main theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqXvj44vRoE

That sounds very 80's sci-fi to me.

krudler

Mickeroo wrote: »

That sounds very 80's sci-fi to me.

Good!

McLoughlin

A clip from X-Men: Days of Future Past has been shown in the credits of Spiderman its unknown if its a mistake or a possible cross-promotion/collaboration between Sony & Fox.


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a565117/x-men-days-of-future-past-sting-shown-in-amazing-spider-man-2-credits.html

FunLover18

McLoughlin wrote: »

A clip from X-Men: Days of Future Past has been shown in the credits of Spiderman its unknown if its a mistake or a possible cross-promotion/collaboration between Sony & Fox.


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a565117/x-men-days-of-future-past-sting-shown-in-amazing-spider-man-2-credits.html

Seems to be intentional cross promotion but not a cross-over

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=40776

shamcfc

Sorry I dont want to read through thread till I have seen the movie,

My 5 year old is obsessed with spiderman, Would it be a bit much to bring him too see this, I see its a 12a, Is there some parts just not suited for that age group

Nervous Wreck

Was fairly disappointed with this, unfortunately...

shamcfc wrote: »

Sorry I dont want to read through thread till I have seen the movie,

My 5 year old is obsessed with spiderman, Would it be a bit much to bring him too see this, I see its a 12a, Is there some parts just not suited for that age group

Defo not suitable. There's some parts that will give him nightmares for the next couple of weeks. Not many, mind. But enough to warrant avoiding.

constitutionus

will be going with me best mate at the weekend but i dont hold out much hope for it.

something about the whole advertising campaign for this screamed "desperation".

AirBiscuit

I wasn't expecting there to be a such a sad part. I guess that's what made it so sad, that it was unexpected

brianregan09

I absolutely loved it favourite spiderman to date ,can't believe Tobey Maguire was ever spiderman he should have been harry osbourne

Basq

Ehhh... it was OK.

Andrew Garfield was much better in it I thought than the first movie, and I thought the penultimate scene with *ahem* (not even gonna put in spoiler tags this close to it's release) was well done.

But there was lots of problems with it including far too many villains, the 2h30m runtime was nuts and
the humour felt more childish than I remember in the first movie.

Not horrible.. not great.. passable is probably fair!

Adamantium

Mickeroo wrote: »

That sounds very 80's sci-fi to me.

Hans Zimmer does a Superman theme for Spidey :rolleyes:

krudler

Overlong but enjoyable, there's a big soggy middle section after a brilliant opening half hour or so and the climax is excellent. There was no need for it to be nearly 2.5hrs long though and there was a lot of fidgeting in the screening I was at, some jokes fell really flat too but there are some great comedy beats, I chuckled at

him trying to fight off a cold and buying loads of cold medicine in Spidey gear with a wooly hat and scarf

. Foxx is grand as Electro but Dane Dehaan is excellent as Harry. The cgi is much improved in this one and it's much brighter than the previous movie, some of the webslinging scenes are dizzying even in 2D.

A tighter edit would have made for a much better flowing film overall.

Rubber_Soul

It had its moments but on the whole I didn't really enjoy it. As others have said it's way too long and really drags at times. I know you shouldn't expect subtlety in a film about a bloke in a spandex outfit tearing around New York but the

foreshadowing of Stacey's death had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. From the hugely out of place speech she gave about death (that you knew was coming back as a closing monologue), to the constant flashes of Denis Leary looking grim and then of course the 800 times they broke up throughout the film you didn't need to know the comics to know where it was heading.

krudler

I loved the opening sequence

with the tow truck and the police cars

was great to see real stunts in a big summer movie.

Mickeroo

Adamantium wrote: »

Hans Zimmer does a Superman theme for Spidey :rolleyes:

I'm not sure I follow you?

googled eyes

What's this like visually? I found the trailers very harsh ( cgi-wise) almost video game looking

krudler

googled eyes wrote: »

What's this like visually? I found the trailers very harsh ( cgi-wise) almost video game looking

Varies from excellent to too fast and floaty. There's a really decent sequence with stuntmen and real vehicles early on but it's mostly cgi fests in the later scenes

johnny_ultimate

I have to say krudler, 'really decent' is probably the mildest compliment I've read on here :pac:

krudler

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I have to say krudler, 'really decent' is probably the mildest compliment I've read on here :pac:

The

Paul Giamatti

scene? I thought that was good fun, could have done without the ludicrous amount of shakey cam in the previous scene

on the plane

though that was way over the top.

Basq

krudler wrote: »

..could have done without the ludicrous amount of shakey cam in the previous scene

on the plane

though that was way over the top.

The opening

plane scene

just felt too familiar... probably because

The Dark Knight Rises

did it bigger and better!

cloud493

Good movie, wasn't a fan of Osbourne at all.

Soft Falling Rain

Saw it this morning and........I was left with the same opinion that I had after watching the first one: a decent film elevated by the two central performances. Given the talent on hand you're just left with the feeling that so much more could be done.

nix

I enjoyed it better than the first, to be honest i didnt notice it dragging and felt they could have fleshed out the finish more, felt real rushed at the end. I didnt realise the length of the movie until i read the above posts, really?! 2 and a half hours?? Flew by :eek:

Soft Falling Rain

The ending was very rushed alright. Dehaan was excellent until the Goblin transformation, which really added nothing. The Goblin offered no threat and was tact on simply to ensure the big moment was delivered in this film. The more I think about it the more annoyed I am at the hamfisted introduction of GG.

Nervous Wreck

This was a decent film. It could, and should, have been great (amazing?) but there were just too many things wrong with it. But I'll start with what was right.

Andrew Garfield - Even better in this than the first one. He's a great Spider-man and a perfect Peter Parker.

Emma Stone - There is nothing about her that isn't amazing; couldn't have been cast any better.

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone - The chemistry between the leads made the film.

Spider-man - For the most part, Spidey was awesome, from the webslinging to the acrobatics.

Dane Dehaan - Creepy as all fcuk, if a little overrated for his performance.

The.... 'event' - Was incredibly well handled, due mostly to some superb acting.

No emo streetdance!

The

Sinister Six

setup at the end!


But the bad..... SPOILERS AHEAD, DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YA!

Jamie Foxx - Overacted everything. He was great in his first scene or two. After that, bleh.

Electro - Not the best Spidey villain at all but this version was particularly bad.

Retreading old ground - I predicted three things going in to this movie. 1) A villain would have a monologue explaining their motivations. 2) A villain would learn Spidey's identity. 3) A villain would die. 2 and 3 didn't bother me but I really hoped I'd be wrong about 1, given it's happened in every Spidey movie to date and is always cringey. But no. We got Electro yammering on to himself about his motivations at several points during the film.

The 'event', though well handled should have happened either in the middle of the film or right at the end with, pretty much, nothing after it. The battle with the Rhino came to quickly after.

Ma and Pa Parker - Seriously, who gives a ****? That story thread added absolutely nothing but time to the movie. Speaking of which...

The run time. Absolutely no need for it to be nearly 2.5 hours. Cut out the boring parents story and it woulda been a much tighter film.

Too many villains. Again.


Anyway, I did enjoy it. There was just an overwhelming amount of bad to it. But thankfully, Spidey, Garfield and Stone made it enjoyable nonetheless!

irish_stevo815

Seen it earlier and was quiet impressed as I wasn't we expecting much TBH. The

Gwen death scene

was done very well I thought .

The one major gripe was that the movie basically was filling in the gaps from the trailers.... Especially the fact that the very last scene was shown in trailers again and again

ancapailldorcha

irish_stevo815 wrote: »

Seen it earlier and was quiet impressed as I wasn't we expecting much TBH. The

Gwen death scene

was done very well I thought .

The one major gripe was that the movie basically was filling in the gaps from the trailers.... Especially the fact that the very last scene was shown in trailers again and again

My main qualm with that was the abuse of slowmo and the fact that they completely

skip Spiderman's reaction to it though his refusing to accept her death initially was nearly touching. I'm pretty sure that, in the comic, he nearly kills the goblin though I could be wrong.

I liked it overall, despite the over-dependence on CG. They did a much better job of handling the 3 villains than Raimi did in his final installment. Garfield and Stone are a much better sell both individually and as a couple than Maguire and Dunst ever were.