The Amazing Spider Man 2 (2014)

[Khev]

I doubt Marvel Studios would do any better.

I agree! Said no one....

 

[thenammagazine]

I doubt Marvel Studios would do any better.

 

[Khev]

MCU is the everlasting sky. "Grounded" movies live beneath it.

 

[karamazov80]

I doubt Marvel Studios would do any better.

For the record, I don't think they are responsible for the best comic films of the last decade, but they are more consistently good than any other studio doing comic movies.

 

[azurepred]

I finally saw this for the first time today. Now, Spiderman has always been my fav superhero, but I basically saw what I expected. Another meh Spiderman movie. The problem isn't Garfield. Foxx was ok and a lot of the slo-mo action is very cool, but the writing is bad, the story is not interesting in the least bit. I actually thought Foxx would have been the worst part of the film, but the Osbourne, daddy Parker, and Rhino stuff didn't mesh at all. I felt 0 suspense, even when Gwen died, I didn't really feel much. The villains have almost always been bad in every Spidey film except maybe the original number 2. It's really a shame that all the Spidey movies are on the bottom of Marvel totem pole and it's not even close to me.

 

[Baneofdemon22]

Darn, I'm sorry you feel that way. I think Spider-man 2 is my favorite Marvel movie. Did you at least like the train sequence? I haven't been too big of a fan of the villains either though, but then again, in the comics the only Spider-man villains I liked were Venom (Before Lethal Protector stuff), the Hobgoblin, the Green Goblin, Kingpin, and Tombstone.

 

[azurepred]

Train sequence? From the original sm 2? I think a lot of these sm films are trying to be too big and fancy with the villains. They just have no depth and in most cases they cast lousy actors to play them. Just an easy example would be the guy that played sandman in sm 3 should've played venom.

Obviously that film wouldn't have been saved by doing that though, but the sandman actor was one of the few good things about sm 3. All of the great superhero movies depend on great villains and good actors to play them. Having a good sm isn't enough

 

[ironwez20]

I finally saw this for the first time today. Now, Spiderman has always been my fav superhero, but I basically saw what I expected. Another meh Spiderman movie. The problem isn't Garfield. Foxx was ok and a lot of the slo-mo action is very cool, but the writing is bad, the story is not interesting in the least bit. I actually thought Foxx would have been the worst part of the film, but the Osbourne, daddy Parker, and Rhino stuff didn't mesh at all. I felt 0 suspense, even when Gwen died, I didn't really feel much. The villains have almost always been bad in every Spidey film except maybe the original number 2. It's really a shame that all the Spidey movies are on the bottom of Marvel totem pole and it's not even close to me.

This is true.... Garfield plays a great spiderman not so great peter parker, electro was ok, dane dehahn was fine its just the **** writing. Nothing feels big or on an epic scale like the first two movies.

 

[Baneofdemon22]

Those are very valid points, and I can completely understand why you wouldn't like them, but I don't think that was the focus of Spider-man 2. Either way, it is very campy and the characters lacking depth are reasonable turn offs. The villains and underwhelming plots are the biggest reasons why I wasn't the biggest fan of the Marvel movies, so I'm curious, what are your favorites of the batch?

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

MCU is the everlasting sky. "Grounded" movies live beneath it.

Thor is probably the most grounded Marvel movie. They take a God make him an alien, take away his powers and have him hang out on Earth in regular clothes with in-accurate Thor characters and Non-Thor characters for the majority of the movie

I doubt Marvel Studios would do any better.

Agreed

 

[Khev]

Thor is probably the most grounded Marvel movie

Indeed.

 

[karamazov80]

Well in fairness, "grounded" WB/DC still had the dildo ships and dragons.

 

[thenammagazine]

Those are very valid points, and I can completely understand why you wouldn't like them, but I don't think that was the focus of Spider-man 2. Either way, it is very campy and the characters lacking depth are reasonable turn offs. The villains and underwhelming plots are the biggest reasons why I wasn't the biggest fan of the Marvel movies, so I'm curious, what are your favorites of the batch?

One of the things that makes Marvel so successful is that the reader actually has some sympathy for the villains. You might not agree with their actions, but you understand why they're doing them. ASM2's villains were completely unsympathetic. You wanted to feel for Max, but then find out he's a creepy stalker, and the "experimentation" scenes that would've been the perfect vehicle to feel for him being tortured, were instead, turned into campy comedic moments with the ridiculous German Scientist. Harry comes out of nowhere having been a life long friend of Parker's despite not caring enough to be at Ben's funeral, finds out he's suffering from a horrid illness and then throws tempertantrum after tempertantrum when he doesn't get his way. The viewers are left feeling annoyed by the spoiled little brat, not sympathetic. Rhino was just all around absurd.

 

[thenammagazine]

Well in fairness, "grounded" WB/DC still had the dildo ships and dragons.

I wouldn't call ripping off Avatar all that "grounded."

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

it's really a shame that all the Spidey movies are on the bottom of Marvel totem pole.

Except Spider-Man 2 which is still at the top

 

[jye4ever]

S2 kicks all kinds of ass its not even funny.

 

[karamazov80]

Nam makes a good point about the villains in ASM 2, though Marvel Studios also has some pretty evil, unsympathetic villains (Red Skull, Stane, Malekith, Ronan). I think the problem with ASM 2 was that they seemed to want to make at least Harry and Elektro sympathetic characters on some level, and failed because they did odd things like making Elektro seem like a comedic character at times instead of a tragic one, and glossing over Harry's relationship with Peter in a way that didn't feel natural to the narrative being told. When Marvel tries to make a villain sympathetic, or at least to make the audience understand how they became corrupted (Loki, Vanko, Pierce) they usually do a good job.

 

[DiFabio]

There's only three comic book film villains that pulled off the sympathetic angle well, Doc Ock, Magneto and Penguin.

But even then, they have their moments of pure evil. Electro and Harry are a joke because of how they were handled, Sandman with his dumb little "sick kid" subplot and transformation was better.

 

[karamazov80]

I think Loki works as well as those other guys you mention (minus maybe Magneto), though you have to understand from the beginning that he's not a normal human being and is so traumatized by his childhood and discovery of his parentage that he will always have this chip on his shoulder that drives him.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Nam makes a good point about the villains in ASM 2, though Marvel Studios also has some pretty evil, unsympathetic villains (Red Skull, Stane, Malekith, Ronan). I think the problem with ASM 2 was that they seemed to want to make at least Harry and Elektro sympathetic characters on some level, and failed because they did odd things like making Elektro seem like a comedic character at times instead of a tragic one, and glossing over Harry's relationship with Peter in a way that didn't feel natural to the narrative being told. When Marvel tries to make a villain sympathetic, or at least to make the audience understand how they became corrupted (Loki, Vanko, Pierce) they usually do a good job.

Can't really think of a truly great villain from Marvel outside of Loki in the first Thor. The first lot you mentioned were just evil because, the second lot at least tried to give them some motivation with mixed results.