The Amazing Spider-Man 2

ShagNastii

I think anyone whinging about too many villains is a bit rich. One of them was only on screen for roughly 4/5 minutes.

krudler

ShagNastii wrote: »

I think anyone whinging about too many villains is a bit rich. One of them was only on screen for roughly 4/5 minutes.

Exactly, it wasnt like

Rhino was in and out of the plot the entire film, I actually was wondering where he was until the last scene, considering the suit he wears is on the poster I thought it'd be in it more

smuckers

I actually enjoyed Amazing Spiderman 1 more, this was pretty awful, cheesy lines accompanied by underdeveloped villians, Electro was very dull. De Hann was excellent until, well I won't spoil it for people who havent seen it.

WinterSong

Does anyone know the name of the song that played when

Peter was in his room, piecing together some of the things about his dad?

I quite enjoyed it but not as much as the first one. Definitely felt overlong, although I thought several bits were very well done and surprisingly emotive.

B.A._Baracus

Seen this today and it's not as good as the first Amazing Spider-Man movie.
Definitely a bit too long and well... just not that good. Sure some good parts but that ending too.

We all know there will be an Amazing Spider-Man 3 movie - it didnt need that type of ending

PhiloCypher

Anyone else think

the whole harry setting the sinister 6 in motion and subsequent Rhino scene would have been better left as a marvel style post credit scene instead of slapping it on the end of what was already a badly paced film.

?

constitutionus

krudler wrote: »

Exactly, it wasnt like

Rhino was in and out of the plot the entire film, I actually was wondering where he was until the last scene, considering the suit he wears is on the poster I thought it'd be in it more

felt the same meself. this has been sold by some critics as having the full sinister six in it and thats not the case at all.

over all i thought it was good. not great, but good. it felt too long but for the life of me i cant recall anything particularly deserving of being cut to bring down the time either.


i preferred it to the first outing as the comedy of spideys character flowed far better and garfield looks alot more confortable in the role now.

on him i really really prefer him in the role than maguire. he just comes off as more sympathetic to me and IMO looks better in the suit. thought harry was great too. foxxs villain did feel a litte like a reject from a burton batman film but wasnt as over the top as i feared it'd be going by other posters comments and on the effects side he made for some great visuals.

i went to see it in 2d so cant comment on the 3d but it did seem to have ALOT geared for that on the webslinging front. TBH Though i wont be going to see it again so i guess ill never know.

solid entertainment IMO.

6 / 10 From me. ya can do worse.

silverbolt

Firstly electro vs spiderman looks like a console game cut scene i was half expecting a green A button to show up on the bottom of the screen.

New Goblin erm - yeah dane dehaan looks like eddie furlong and thats all ill say about it.

Jamie Foxx interesting to see him playing something other than the hard ass black guy (in first part of the movie).

The pacing is all over the place. 2.5 hours is far too long and sure as hell didnt need the sub plot with the parents.

By far the most credit has to go to Andrew Garfield, the guys acting in this is nothing short of phenomenal. I was seriously moved by his performance By far the best movie parker/spidey on screen to date (i was never much of a maguire fan). I cannot sell the blend of parker and his alter ego that this guy brings to the screen enough. On the whole i enjoyed it.

Looper007

I liked it but more for the Gwen/Peter stuff rather then the action, you can see Andrew and Emma have some amazing chemistry and why they are a real life couple. The

Death scene with Gwen was actually very touching and you could hear a few sniffles from the audience

Andrew Garfield was the star of the show, he really is the heart of the movie. His scene with Sally Field was touching too. Jamie Foxx did well with what he was given. Dane Dehaan was interesting as Harry Osborn and his scene with Chris Cooper was really well done. Emma Stone really won me over in this film, I'm now a fan of hers and she's far better then Kristen Durst.

It's amazing to say the love story won me over in a Superhero rather then the action but I taught it was well done and nothing too disappointing. Totally marked out at the end

With the little kid in his spiderman outfit standing up to Rhino, then Spiderman comes and is ready to kick ass

Those type of scenes is why we love superhero films.

Garfield for the third film deserves a classic Spiderman film, still think Spiderman 2 is the crowning glory but this slowly slides into 2nd place.

B.A._Baracus

Anyone else think that

peter's dad is still alive? The parachute was placed nicely in a couple of shots and you never saw him die or the plane crash

.

smuckers

Anyone else think Felicity Fox is

Blackcat?

Nervous Wreck

smuckers wrote: »

Anyone else think Felicity Fox is

Blackcat?

She's defo Felicia Hardy but I doubt they'll bother to flesh the character out tbh.

PrettyBoy

Wasn't expecting much from this, overall impressions are that it could have been better and it could have been worse. It was ok.

I'll agree with everyone in saying that Garfield and Stone are outstanding together, they suit their respective roles perfectly and their chemistry together is brilliant. Garfield is the perfect Peter Parker IMO. Never warmed to Maguire and Dunst as the leads in the original movies.

I think Electro was a poor choice of villain and while I like Jamie Foxx, he just wasn't right for this movie.

There's a few things I felt they should have done differently but I'm a big Spider-Man fan so I enjoyed it. Worth a watch.

Looper007

smuckers wrote: »

Anyone else think Felicity Fox is

Blackcat?

Seen as Felicity Jones is the next big thing in Hollywood I'd expect her to have a bigger part in the next film, I could hear a few in my screening saying exactly that she's

Blackcat

Mark Hamill

Maybe I was hearing it wrong but didn't it say during the film that

genetically altered spiders that came from Richard Parkers research were destroyed when he died in the plane crash (as part of the cover-up at the time)? So where did the spiders come from that bit Peter Parker in the first film, weren't they the same spiders?

Deano7788

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Maybe I was hearing it wrong but didn't it say during the film that

genetically altered spiders that came from Richard Parkers research were destroyed when he died in the plane crash (as part of the cover-up at the time)? So where did the spiders come from that bit Peter Parker in the first film, weren't they the same spiders?

I thought it said

they were destroyed after the events of the first movie along with all the other human animal hybrid research. I thought Richard arranged that they would only work with Parker blood back then as a failsafe against Osborne, rather than that they were destroyed.

nix

Yeah

Parker spliced the spider DNA with his own so it would only work with him, just so osbourne couldnt steal it from him, hence why it worked on Peter without making him crazy, they killed the spiders themselves after the doc connors incident in the first movie as good faith to the public, but yer man kept the venom from the spiders, so thats all they had left from that work.

Oafley Jones

Does this thread seem extremely quiet to anyone else? Curious as to why? Personally, I've no interest in seeing this at all, felt the last one was awful and I've no confidence in the director; plus I've got superhero movie fatigue.

bren2001

I wasn't a fan of the last one but thought it was ok. I thought this one was truely awful. I don't get the love for Garfield and Stone, I do think they were the best thing in the film but I don't think they were particularly good. The pacing of the film was poor, it was needlessly 2.5 hours long with very little character development for Electro.

Even all that aside, I am glad to know:

1. A homemade neoprene suit would not melt when that large a charge is applied.

2. Magnetising a screw means it turns into a battery that can store an infinite charge.

3. I enjoyed Peter trying to charge his batteries using an AC supply. Surprised it didn't work for him...

Looper007

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Does this thread seem extremely quiet to anyone else? Curious as to why?

It's a very see it and forget it film, like most of Marvel superhero's films, they have a lot of fandom at the beginning and like most comic book fan's they don't live up to the hype of the forum and the comic book fans. The only superhero comic movies threads I've seen been kept busy were Nolan's Batman films and the Avengers film.

Mr Freeze

I'm not a big Marvel/Spider-man fan at all. I didn't like the Raimi films, but I did like a lot of The Amazing Spider-Man, I thought the Lizard was crap but over all I enjoyed the film.

I wasn't expecting much form the sequel, but I am going to go against the grain and say I liked it.

The 2.5hrs flew by, and I even liked Electro, especially liked how the fight scenes with him were scored, that worked really well in my opinion. Pity the fights were a total CGI fest.

The 3 villains didn't ruin it like it did Spiderman 3, I thought they handled it fairly well or as well as they could have.

I was surprised they killed Gwen Stacy, I was aware of her death in the comics, I didn't think the studio would be brave enough to include it, pleasantly surprised that they did and it made for a great scene. I thought they were just alluded to it, but weren't actually going to do it. She was wearing the exact outfit from her death scene in the comics too.

I'm actually looking forward to the next one and any spin offs.

PrettyBoy

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I'm actually looking forward to the next one and any spin offs.

I hope Venom makes an appearance somewhere.

ancapailldorcha

PrettyBoy wrote: »

I hope Venom makes an appearance somewhere.

As Sony are hoping to replicate the MCU with the Spiderman licence, I'd say that this is a given. I just hope that they do it properly as opposed to what we got in Spiderman 3.

PrettyBoy

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I just hope that they do it properly as opposed to what we got in Spiderman 3.

Likewise, his 2 scenes in Spider-Man 3 were disappointing to say the least.

ancapailldorcha

PrettyBoy wrote: »

Likewise, his 2 scenes in Spider-Man 3 were disappointing to say the least.

I'd say you'd need at least 2 films. One with Peter imbibing the symbiote and then rejecting it followed by another featuring Eddie Brock bonded with it.

Slydice

Went to see it this evening. Very few people in watching it. Liked it overall though I thought it dragged in places.

LOL, Spanner to the face

Saw this last night and enjoyed it for what it is, a disposable, big budget CGI spectacle that's more concerned with selling action figures than anythign else. The original, was an overlong and at times incredibaly dull film made for the cynical reason of holding onto the rights. It was a film born out of necessity above all else. The sequel is a step up, it actually feels like a fully formed film though it's still nowhere near as much run as Raimi's Spiderman 2.

There seems to be quite a lot of plot here though the writing is wafer thin and when you look at it, really there's nowhere near enough going on to justify the bloated 2 hour 2 runtime. The opening scene with a mid city chase is one of the better car chases in some time, the reliance on good old fashioned stunt work is a nice change of pace from the video-game graphics generally associated with a $200+ million summer blockbuster. There's a sense of weight to the scene that sadly, is absent from the rest of the film.

Much has been made of the multiple villains present in the film but thankfully the film never suffers as a result. The Rhino, heavy in all the prerelease promotional material is barely on screen for five minutes and has so little impact that they were as well to save him till part 3. Elctro is the lead villain here and while at first Max Dillon feels like a cliched if welcome change from the traditional megalomaniac villains of past superhero films it's not long before all attempts at adding some depth to the role are jettisoned in favor of a character we've seen a dozen times before. At the heart of the character is a man so downtrodden that he has no sense of self worth but the writers aren't interested in saying anything interesting or what power does to such an individual. No Electo's motivation and plan is so familair at this stage that you know where it's going ten steps ahead of teh cast.

Harry Osborn and his transformation into the Green Goblin is equally flaed. Again we're presented with an interesting charter with sympathetic motivations but rather than do anything with it the writers simply rehash a plot as old as cinema is. What's worse is that this time round Harry's hatred of Spiderman is so simplistic and tenuous that it really doesn't pass muster.

The script here really is poor, full of lazy tropes and scenes pilfered from every blockbuster and superhero film of the past two decades. No doubt the rushed production time means that they were under severed time restrictions but still there is no reason that any film should be cliched and trite. Gwen is little more than window dressing and her arc is feels like something any writer would dump after the first draft. The foreshadowing prevalent throughout the film is so heavy handed and poorly implemented that any surprise is lost.

Still, even with the poor script and terrible characterizations there's actually a lot to enjoy here. The action scenes are incredibly well handled and there's a nice cartoon feel to it all. While every other comic book character has underwent a dark reboot, Spiderman seems happiest when embracing the ridiculously, over the top buffoonery that's at the heart of the character. There's a child like glee throughout the film that will put a smile on your face and any film in this day and age the features a cartoonish, mustache twirling mad German scientist really isn't supposed to be taken serious. It really is a film made for 10 year old boys and as such it works far better as a kids film than as a serious or adult one. Go to it with that in mind and you'll have a far better time than if you approach it as a modernesque superhero film. There's something incredibly reassuringly fun about a character spouting one liners as bad as Spidey does and it makes for far better viewing than any dark and brooding character whom takes himself far too serious.

And before I forget, the score is one of the more interesting in quite some time. Elector's scores are underpinned by unnerving voices repeatedly telling him how alone he is. As the film progresses the voices become louder and louder till they're hard to ignore. It's a simple idea that works wonders in creating a sense of unease.

Saw this the other night, it looked great but was a horrible movie with such a horrible soundtrack !

I thought that the score was rather good, even if Zimmer did steal wholesale from his back catalogue. One of the themes from Crysis was used repeatedly throughout the film and I spent a few minutes trying to place it. The songs, well they were a little familiar and generic, the kind of cookie cutter fare that you'd hear on The OC

Soft Falling Rain

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Saw this the other night, it looked great but was a horrible movie with such a horrible soundtrack !

I loved the score to the point I bought it and that is actually rare for me. Hans Zimmer is the man IMO.