The Amazing Spider-Man 2

[Replies From View]

I want them to reboot a franchise halfway through a movie. Sort of like a superhero Lost Highway.

I like this idea.  Sort of like sacking Dick Donner, replacing him with Lester, but instead of the latter completing the former's work to create a whole film, reboot it from the middle onwards, including recasting and restarting the origin story again from scratch, plus a fresh title sequence.  And then presumably ending in the middle again because otherwise the film would be far too long.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Can't believe that this has just been spoiled for me by Tom fecking Watson!!

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I fucking meant Danny Elfman and somehow typed John Williams.

I am still right though.

Nah, I don't reckon most folk are that bothered. Anyway, the new one has Hans "BWAAAAAM!" Zimmer, who also scored Christopher Nolan's Batman films, and they were popular enough.

If it were a different director - someone with similar cult film credentials to Raimi - then I wouldn't be surprised if the first film was better received. The second one is pants, regardless of who made it.

[Hobo]

I thought the music was bollocks. My 9 year old son loved the film though, and thought it was 'epic'.

[Replies From View]

Snag him round the chops until he stops saying "epic" then.

[Hobo]

I have no control, I blame his mother.

[El Unicornio, mang]

What the actual fuck

http://screencrush.com/amazing-spider-man-2-blu-ray/

[Glebe]

A giant blue Jamie Foxx head on wheels would be something.

[Replies From View]

[El Unicornio, mang]

It's literally a Blue "Ray" heh

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Foxx's glacier mint.

[Replies From View]

Foxx's glacier mint.

Which object in the photograph?

[SteveDave]

It's literally a Blue "Ray" heh

CLOSE THE THREAD! WINNER!

[Custard]

The first film got 3 stars from me, and this newie gets 2. Raimi's films were better

Just call me Ebert

[Replies From View]

The first film got 3 stars from me, and this newie gets 2. Raimi's films were better

Just call me Ebert

The first of the reboot was better than Raimi's first film, so you are wrong there.

[Custard]

Hmm, possibly. Not seen Raimi's first in a while. But I'd say his second pisses all over either of Webb's

[Tiny Poster]

From what I've read, the plan is to do a third Spider-Man film and then a Sinister Six film. Now if they use Harry Osborn, the Lizard, Electro and the Rhino (maybe not the Rhino) that means they've only got two or three more to bring in, and they can introduce one or two of those in the third film, and then the other(s) in the actual Sinister Six film.

I think in large part it's because of The Avengers. After the success of that franchise, everybody's scrabbling to build a massive universe. X-Men are doing their big time travel thing and uniting both versions of the character, DC are slowly, agonizingly slowly doing Batman vs Superman, and so Sony are looking for whatever they can to make things bigger and grander.

Sony have greenlit a Venom film too, and Garfield has mentioned the possibility of Miles Morales appearing to take over from Peter Parker. The Man Of Steel sequel is pretty much being changed to Superman And New Batman (And Wonder Woman), and they've announced the Justice League film, making that a hastily-cobbled shared universe in the space of a single trilogy.


Now, Marvel had five movies (six, if you consider the Bana Hulk to share continuity with Norton's) to establish their main characters and universe before getting to The Avengers (the third most successful film ever). Now, these other rushed franchises might make some excellent profits on the brand recognition alone, but they aren't going to be as satisfying as the Marvel efforts. And with this in mind, Iron Man 3 was the top grossing film of 2013, with MoS at number nine, just edging out Thor 2.

[CaledonianGonzo]

The first of the reboot was better than Raimi's first film, so you are wrong there.

Having watched the reboot last night, nyet.  Both movies screw up the villain and the original is blighted by Macy Gray, but the reboot is just woeful.  Emo, Coldplay-soundtracked, instagram-filtered twaddle.

Andrew Ellard is forever the cackling Salacious Crumb to Glinner's Twitter Jabba, but he nails a few of its other problems here:

https://storify.com/ellardent/tweetalong-the-amazing-spider-man

Peter tracks to the sewer by seeing little lizards headed down there. Is that a thing? Would a big lizard attract small ones? #ASM

[El Unicornio, mang]

The main problem I have with the Raimi Spider-Man films is that I find Tobey Maguire quite annoying (although I can't quite figure out why) and he doesn't really have the right build. Andrew Garfield makes a much more convincing Peter Parker, I think.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

It's possibly more due to the writing, but I thought Maguire made a much better Peter, being convincingly geeky while Garfield is far too handsome and cool. It's vice versa when they're in costume, as Garfield is much better at the smart arsed quips.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Garfield's good, as is Emma Stone, but I've no idea how that head of hair fits under the mask.

[checkoutgirl]

The main problem I have with the Raimi Spider-Man films is that I find Tobey Maguire quite annoying

Couldn't agree more, Maguire is very annoying and stinks up most of the films he's in. That stupid self satisfied smile. That bit in the third film where he gets this hair do and goes to a jazz club. What the fuck was that about? A real nadir. It was a silly bit of comic relief that requires comic talent which Maguire just hasn't got. Mind you Kirsten Dunst is very annoying too. Still, Spiderman 2 with Alfred Molina was an excellent film, one of the best superhero films I think.

[CaledonianGonzo]

That bit in the third film where he gets this hair do and goes to a jazz club. What the fuck was that about?

It's a tonal premonition of Andrew Garfield's sulky, Byronic emo-Spidey.




(And the best bit of the third film).

[Lord Mandrake]

It's possibly more due to the writing, but I thought Maguire made a much better Peter, being convincingly geeky while Garfield is far too handsome and cool. It's vice versa when they're in costume, as Garfield is much better at the smart arsed quips.

I found Toby Maguires geeky routine too contrived whereas Garfield plays it natural and whilst he is handsome it is an unconventional way plus he has the ganglyness and that whiff of cockiness that spidey should posses. He would have Maguires spidey in a spider fight and when Toby starts crying he would call him a fat shit.

[Spiteface]

When's he getting the giant robot from the 70's japanese show? That'll be in The Amazing Spider-Man 3, right?

[Custard]

So basically, Garfield's Spider-Man should be photo shopped into Raimi's second film, and everything else should fuck off?

Sorted!

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I found Toby Maguires geeky routine too contrived whereas Garfield plays it natural and whilst he is handsome it is an unconventional way plus he has the ganglyness and that whiff of cockiness that spidey should posses.

But that cocky whiff is all over him before he ever becomes Spider-Man.

Also, even in the third film, Maguire isn't as creepy as Garfield gets at points. Aside from the aforementioned stalking, there's a bit in Amazing Spider-Man 1 in which Gwen says she has to leave and Peter starts smirkingly pressuring her to stay, with the obvious implication that he wants to chuck his web fluid on her.

[Phil_A]

I think this most recent film was basically coasting on the immense charm of Stone & Garfield as actors. In every other respect, it was just really, really weak.

Take, for example, when Harry Osborne goes from spoilt rich kid to unredeemable sociopath in the space of about five minutes. At least Raimi took a couple of films to set-up Harry's transition to the Dark Side(and I still think Raimi's Spider-Man 2 is a genuinely good film), here it just comes out of nowhere and pretty much only serves to move the plot forward.

I also hated how Max/Electro was initially set-up like he was going to be a sympathetic bad guy, and then at a certain point they just drop all that and go "Okay, he's evil now." Perhaps a better script might've drawn a parallel between Max's obsession with Spider-Man and Peter's own obsessive tendencies, but this is clearly not that script. What it is is the most grindingly obvious example of a "Get these characters from Point A to Point B" job, and fuck logic, believable characterisation and anything else that might make it a worthwhile cinematic experience.

Having said all that, the one scene I did like was the bit right at the end with The Rhino, which felt for a moment like proper Silver Age Spidey. If they keep that tone for the Sinister Six movie and drop all the endless crying and dull Peter's Dad conspiracy stuff, it might just work. Of course they won't, but I can dream.

[Ant Farm Keyboard]

Maybe the could use Glenn Howerton as Dennis Reynolds to be the next Spider-Man. It could be interesting, at least because of the implications.

[Urinal Cake]

Maguire is the better Parker. Garfield is the better Spider-Man. Stone is the better LI. Franco[nb]oh God[/nb] is the better Osbourne.