# The Amazing Spiderman 2



## BORTZ (Jul 18, 2013)

Ill bump this till I die, or at least till them movie comes out.

I liked the first one, obviously not the best movie ever, but I'll take it.

That said, Electro looks like a dork. Like "generic blue guys with viens". I know i know, they are trying to modernize heroes and villains like Bane and Loki and shiz. But I dont think Electro made the cut. Then again, why do I care? I wanted Mysterio to be the villain, but this is obviously why we cant have nice things.


----------



## emigre (Jul 18, 2013)

I thought the first one was shit to be honest. Saying that, I probably watch it albeit via downloading it.


----------



## Enchilada (Jul 18, 2013)

I actually enjoyed the first one, and I'm not a fan of Spiderman or any Super-Heroes. I may watch this when it comes out.


----------



## GameWinner (Jul 18, 2013)

I'm looking forward this this, I'm one of the many that actually enjoyed the first movie.


----------



## BORTZ (Jul 18, 2013)

emigre said:


> I thought the first one was shit to be honest. Saying that, I probably watch it albeit via downloading it.


 
Howbouts i buy your ticket and you can come watch it with me in the theater.


----------



## Gahars (Jul 18, 2013)

The first Amazing Spider-Man was just all sorts of awful, so I can't say I have much hope for this (except maybe Paul Giamatti). The look for Max Dillon/Electro looks all sorts of bad, the drama behind the set (the rewrites and recasting of MJ) don't inspire much confidence, and I can't say I'm looking forward to watching them try to cram in the Green Goblin/Sinister Six buildup. Just... bleh.

They cancelled Spectacular Spider-Man for this. Ultimate Spider-Man is still on air and shows no sign of stopping. Peter is dead in all of the books. Nowadays, being a Spider-Man fan is suffering.


----------



## AlanJohn (Jul 18, 2013)

Jamie Fox with a British accent? No thanks.


----------



## Wombo Combo (Jul 18, 2013)

I am a huge Spiderman fan but the first Amazing Spiderman sucked hard. And not digging Jamie Fox acting as a Spiderman Villan.


----------



## raulpica (Jul 18, 2013)

I liked the first one, I hope the second one will be even better.

I found Peter Parker to be a better character in the new movie, I actually dunno how accurate is compared to the comics, but it was more enjoyable overall than Tobey-EmoSpider-McGuire was.


----------



## blaisedinsd (Jul 19, 2013)

I liked much about the first one but you could tell they monkeyed with it to drop that one story line referenced in the early trailer that people freaked out about and it suffered for it (even if killing that idea was probably the right call).


----------



## natkoden (Jul 19, 2013)

emigre said:


> I thought the first one was shit to be honest. Saying that, I probably watch it albeit via downloading it.


 
Same here. Went to see it and had a terrible time. Andrew Garfield is a shitty actor and his Peter Warker was crap.

Script was awkard and for 15yos.

I'm not making the same mistake again. BDRip 1080p it is.


----------



## narutofan777 (Jul 25, 2013)

they couldn't get someone else to play him?


----------



## Veho (Dec 5, 2013)

Trailer's up. 


​ 



Also, poster. 



Spoiler


----------



## Gahars (Dec 5, 2013)

mfw that inferior trailer and poster

It's a shame, really. That Spider-Man costume is actually amazing, and it seems like Garfield is sounding better behind the mask. Everything else, though? Ehhhhhhh no.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Dec 5, 2013)

The Amazing man would make a better movie ;O;


EDIT: I was kind of meh on the first Amazing Spiderman movie though, I'll probably end up downloading this whenever a DVDRip is released


----------



## Zeliga (Dec 5, 2013)

they just ruined spiderman, why does he use a machine to shoot webs u_u


----------



## GameWinner (Dec 5, 2013)

Zeliga said:


> they just ruined spiderman, why does he use a machine to shoot webs u_u


 
Not sure if serious.


----------



## jefffisher (Dec 5, 2013)

Zeliga said:


> they just ruined spiderman, why does he use a machine to shoot webs u_u


yeah wtf man, spider man his always used web shooters, they ruined him in the first series of shitty movies by making it not work the way it always has if you are going to complain about something this is the one thing that is not an option.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Dec 5, 2013)

Yeah, the only thing I liked about that trailer was the improved Spider Man suit. It just felt like there was too much going on overall. I can see the over abundance of sub-plots being a huge detriment. *sigh* Is it really that difficult to just give us an Avengers crossover?


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Dec 6, 2013)

Personally, I loved this new trailer. Looks epic.


----------



## Zeliga (Dec 6, 2013)

jefffisher said:


> yeah wtf man, spider man his always used web shooters, they ruined him in the first series of shitty movies by making it not work the way it always has if you are going to complain about something this is the one thing that is not an option.


 
No, no no I do love spiderman but im just not used to see him use the webshooter, sorry :S


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Dec 6, 2013)

Zeliga said:


> No, no no I do love spiderman but im just not used to see him use the webshooter, sorry :S



Then you haven't watched a whole lot of Spider-Man outside of the "cry cry mj cry cry" tobey maguire films.


Personally, I like the look of this film so far. I actually was one of the few that really liked Spider-Man 3 (Aside from the emo/dancing and poor choice of Eddie Brock). The rest of the film was fantastic. I mean, when I think of Spider-Man, I don't think of some whiney little cry baby bitch like Toby portrayed him as in the first 2 films.


----------



## Zeliga (Dec 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Then you haven't watched a whole lot of Spider-Man outside of the "cry cry mj cry cry" tobey maguire films.
> 
> 
> Personally, I like the look of this film so far. I actually was one of the few that really liked Spider-Man 3 (Aside from the emo/dancing and poor choice of Eddie Brock). The rest of the film was fantastic. I mean, when I think of Spider-Man, I don't think of some whiney little cry baby bitch like Toby portrayed him as in the first 2 films.


 
Sorry didnt get the chance to see any cartoons or read the comics.


----------



## zeello (Dec 7, 2013)

The music is Inception, and the villain is Dr. Manhattan?


----------



## gokujr1000 (Dec 8, 2013)

Gahars said:


> Peter is dead in all of the books.


 
@ Gahars
To be fair Peter's death in the Ultimate Spider-Man was handled extremely well and was bound to happen eventually. Miles Morales is actually a pretty good replacement too, probably one of my favorites to wear the Spider suit. Peter's death in the Amazing Spider-Man was completely insulting though.

@ ASM2 Trailer
Now before I talk about the trailer some thoughts about the original movie. The first Amazing Spider-Man sucked so much ass because of how many plotholes were just blatantly left there. Plotholes that were originally filled before the director decided to make himself Sony's bitch and removed like 20 minutes of footage that would have made the film Amazing like it was supposed to be. I mean as if you wouldn't look at what happened to Sam Raimi and Spider-Man 3 and realise that if Sony tells you to do something to your film you do the opposite.

I think it just might be for my entire dislike towards the first ASM but this trailer to me just looked terrible. Electro looks pretty awful but at least he looks like he was inspired by the Ultimate Electro design. Paul Giamatti just looks like Paul Giamatti. Peter Parker looks awkward in the worst way possible, just like in the first ASM. And finally Emo Goblin looks like he's playing the exact same character from Chronicle. I understand that Rhino will be the villain Spider-Man beats up at the start of the film but I'm worried about two vital villains being in the film at once.

Also is it just me or did it look like they once again put the after-credits scene into the trailer?


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Feb 7, 2014)

Nercobump.


----------



## AsPika2219 (Feb 9, 2014)

Nice, sound likes Star Wars style! 
I will waiting for this!


----------



## Gahars (Feb 20, 2014)

Spoiler











 
I'M THE APEX PREDATOR, PETER!



Spoiler



I miss DaFoe already.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Feb 20, 2014)

Gahars said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## AsPika2219 (Feb 21, 2014)

Spider-man join EARTH HOUR on this March!

http://news.sky.com/story/1211577/spider-man-becomes-earth-hour-ambassador


----------



## BORTZ (Feb 24, 2014)

I actually really liked the first one (surprise surprise) save a few issues. 
I am looking forward to this one as well (another surprise). 
Not only is Emma Stone a killer Gwen, but I like where they are going with the villains, heading for the sinister six line up. 

The villain design however... not so much. 

From the original trilogy (RIP lol) JJJamison should have been kept, because he was perfect in every way, and this might be my own volition but IMO Willem Dafoe made a terrifyingly good Norman Osborn/Green Goblin. 

/Swings away before Gahars beats me with a stick


----------



## slingblade1170 (Feb 25, 2014)

I prefer the Toby Mcguire spiderman movies.


----------



## Social_Outlaw (Mar 4, 2014)




----------



## Hyro-Sama (Apr 9, 2014)

This movie seems to be off to a great start. It's already got a 6.9 from IGN. (Better known as Incompetent Gaming News.) Watch your backs, Marvel.


----------



## BORTZ (Apr 10, 2014)

slingblade1170 said:


> I prefer the Toby Mcguire spiderman movies.


Really? Can you elaborate? Im actually interested. I like parts or characters from them, but not them entirely. 
For instance, Green Goblin and JJJamison were top notch. But other things... not so much. Toby made a great Peter, but a bad Spider-man.


----------



## GameWinner (Apr 10, 2014)

Reviews seem very mixed so far.
Still can't wait until it hits Blu-Ray!


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2014)

I agree with Bortz. By far, my favourite character in the first 3 movies was Jameson. I also think that Alfred Molina resembled a lot DocOc in appearence.


----------



## Gahars (Apr 10, 2014)

BortzANATOR said:


> Really? Can you elaborate? Im actually interested. I like parts or characters from them, but not them entirely.
> For instance, Green Goblin and JJJamison were top notch. But other things... not so much. Toby made a great Peter, but a bad Spider-man.


 

Not him, obviously, but I'll step up to the plate and offer my two cents. (Also I started writing, then realized I wrote too much but I can't stop now because I'm too invested).

1) Tone - The most important thing to remember is that Raimi's movies are based almost entirely on 60's-70's Spider-Man. Raimi hits just about the right balance of campiness and dramatic, cycling between the two from scene to scene (at least for the first two). The Amazing Spider-Man is a Spider-Man movie that wishes it was Batman. 
2) Direction - The CG hasn't aged all that well, but Raimi's stylistic direction still holds up. I mean, just take a look at this scene. There's practical effects and stunt work involved here; mix that with Raimi's camerawork and every blow has weight. The audience "feels" every punch Pete takes, which makes the beat down and comeback all the more effective. Contrast that with, well, this. The camerawork is just kinda... there. There's no real impact when they hit each other, and it just looks like a cartoon or cutscene half of the time. The movie's ten years older but somehow looks far worse.
3) Peter - It seems kinda weird to say, but Peter Park, not Spider-Man, is the core of a Spider-Man movie. Think of it like the Iron Man movies - as cool as the suit may look, if Tony Stark doesn't work, then the movie doesn't work. Toby's Spider-Man was weak, but his Peter was strong, and that's what matters most. Andrew Garfield is just kind of awful as Peter. I don't think it's his fault; the guy's actually a pretty great actor. It's a problem of writing, direction, and casting more than anything else.
4) Writing - Raimi's Spider-Man has the greatest line of all time. Amazing Spider-Man has Uncle Ben die for chocolate milk. Plus, I don't know, Raimi's stuff is just a lot more memorable and quotable. There's not really any line that sticks out to me from ASM, and making everything tie in to Oscorp is just so damn limiting.

Raimi's movies are far from perfect (MJ's pretty flat as a character, Toby's Spider-Man isn't nearly as quippy as he should be, even I find the corniness a little much at time, Spider-Man 3, etc.), of course. The perfect Spider-Man adaptation was Spectacular Spider-Man, but that was cancelled because we are the playthings of a vengeful, spiteful God.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies are basically the Marvel equivalent of the Donner Superman films. They capture and embrace the Silver Age spirit perfectly - they're cheesy and corny, sure, but endearingly so. The Amazing Spider-Man was just made for the copyright and it shows.

Any disagreements can be filed here.


----------



## slingblade1170 (Apr 10, 2014)

BortzANATOR said:


> Really? Can you elaborate? Im actually interested. I like parts or characters from them, but not them entirely.
> For instance, Green Goblin and JJJamison were top notch. But other things... not so much. Toby made a great Peter, but a bad Spider-man.


 
I guess I got a problem with change is my biggest issue. Its kinda like the new batman movie is gonna have Ben Afleck which even though I like him I accepted Christian Bale as batman. Toby Mcguire was a good Peter and spiderman to me and they did 3 movies with a cliff hanger ending and just stopped and started over with "The Amazing Spiderman". Willem Dafoe and James Franco as the goblins, it just all seem too good to change and start fresh.


----------



## BORTZ (Apr 10, 2014)

Haha cool, yeah im not going to disagree. The older movies didnt exactly age well, but there some things in the new one that I didnt really like. 

But at least the old ones gave us the material for this.


----------



## Dartz150 (Apr 17, 2014)

I already watched the movie, (It was showed early here in Mexico, and due to competition with another cinemas, Cinepolis Cinemas released the movie one day early, the official day is tomorrow) so here are my first spoilers for everyone who cares:




Spoiler




I can confirm that Gwen dies  , that scene is goregous, the clock tower, the suspense, the fight (but short) the ambiance, everything, it kept me in the edge of my seat every second, and yup, Green Goblin's fault.
A sinester Six adaption Movie version: Rihno, Vulture, Doc Oc, and Venom? At the end of the movie these are experiments ran under the hands of oscorp.
Electro vanishes, or so we think, his death was very enigmatic (overcharging and then an explosion, only a part of his head was left).
It is revealed why Peter was fully compatible with the Spider Poison, because those modified Spiders had his father DNA only, this menaing that the only password for it are the Parker's descendance.







I could continue, but I think is ver blantant to do so, wait until may so you can watch it too . Very pleased BTW, I enjoyed every part of the movie.


----------



## EvilMakiPR (Apr 30, 2014)

I just watched it!!! I really like it!!

And the people complaining about too many villians relax!


----------



## Gahars (May 4, 2014)

I just saw this and I don't know what to say about it, really. I don't hate it, because hatred would require me to feel something towards it.

It's just... there's nothing there. There's not even much of a plot, just a bunch of subplots and a checklist of name drops. Things happen and then it just stops. Max Dillon gets maybe a few scenes as Electro with vague, unclear motives ("I'm gonna make it all dark... and then I'll be a God, and then, uh... no Spider-Man, that's for sure!") and then he's just gone. They hired Jamie Foxx but gave the guy nothing much to work with. The Green Goblin is in the movie for... 5 minutes? Less? I think the idea of using the Rhino as a bookend was neat, but the sound mixing seemed really off; Paul Giamatti was mostly incoherent. Peter and Gwen's ping pong relationship gets pretty exhausting after a while; the chemistry between the actors was fine, but they just sort of tread over the same ground over and over. Felicia Hardy's in it but isn't like Felicia Hardy in any way, shape, or form, so I don't know what the point was. Same with Alistair Smythe.

The parents subplot... it just doesn't really go anywhere. Peter has this big crisis about thinking his parents were traitors, but something that could be the driving force of the film only lasts for all of maybe ten minutes total. Plus, I don't know... explaining Peter's powers through his blood, as if he was destined to get the spider bite, doesn't sit well with me. Your mileage may vary, but I think the effectiveness of Spider-Man's origin is the sense that it was a random happenstance. It could've been anyone, and only by luck did it happen Peter, the last person anyone would expect to become a hero. Making it his destiny or his fate... I don't know, cheapens it a bit.

Also, his hesitance to give Harry his blood seemed rather... out of nowhere. He talks about how it could potentially be incompatible, but come on. I mean, I don't think the guy's just going to gulp the packet down as soon as he can. Also, why was Harry's disease progressing so quickly? For something that took 40 years to kill Norman, it advances in a span of a few weeks in film time.

What was the point of throwing in Dr. Kafka, the most stereotypical evil scientist (German accent and all) possible?

Why do we never see Peter in college? Or working for the Daily Bugle? These are all important things for the character but they just kind of hang on the periphery all the way through.

Also, it features the absolutely worst montage music choice possible. I mean, just... what. Why? Who thought this was a good idea? It didn't even fit in the slightest.



Spoiler



And after Gwen's death was just so weirdly paced. They rush through Peter quitting in all of 3 or so minutes and tack it on at the very end. Compare that to Spider-Man 2, where that's a plot point that drives the entire film. Why condense it to the point where it has no impact or significance? The movie would've ended at a much stronger note if it just stopped at the funeral scene.


 
I could go on and on, but I won't. There's just so many weird holes and leaps in pacing and logic, the movie feels incomplete. Apparently there's a ton of scenes cut from the film or never filmed at all (Electro killing his mother, Mary Jane's entire subplot, etc.). It's like Sony spilled and made a mess of a movie. It's a weirdly disjointed mess.

It may sound like I'm being harsh here, but there are some things I liked. Garfield's Spider-Man was spot on; the quips worked pretty well here. The actors all turned in good performances, even if they were underutilized. Also, there was a lot of scenes of Spider-Man just being a hero - saving people, helping out the little kid, etc. It's a touch that a lot of superhero movies seem to be forgetting recently, so I was happy to see it here. Plus, the death scene itself was pretty well handled, and Garfield really sold the moment.

It's not awful, I don't hate it... but it's just not very good, either. Maybe someday someone could edit this down into something cohesive.

EDIT: Okay, one more thing... of all the things to take away from Dexter, why oh why did they have to use Ghost Dad?


----------



## Devante (May 4, 2014)

Man, you guys took the words out of my mouth in regards to Sam Raimi version and in regards to this latest one. 

Spider Man 2 being the best of the 5 movies (the Toby one).

This latest one was especially goofy. What a step back from the first one. 
Electro was easily the coolest part of the movie. I even enjoyed the play on dubstep. But his motivation wasn't fleshed out. Batman 2 was a great example of the whole unappreciated and ignored social outcast uses that anger to lash out with Pfeifer' s Catgirl.

I also was surprised they really went with the falls in vat of electric eels to get powers. Seems like the origin of a villain from the 60's, when we were naive and thought that was a good enough explanation. 

James Franco's goblin was much,  much better. 

Story wise,  even Spiderman 3 had a more involved plot.

Oh and apparently Gwen ams Peter kept going out,  completely disregarding one of the most important points of the first movie. 

And that plane crisis near the end was so stupid and unnecessarily tacked on.


----------



## eosia (May 4, 2014)

You should watch I,.Frankensteion too, this movie is amazing


----------



## megaexplosion (May 4, 2014)

This movie was so much better than the first one. The first one wasn't horrible but it was lackluster at best. But this did such a great job doing what Spiderman 3 failed to do. Ugh, 10/10. Spiderman fans everywhere rejoice. And the setup for the next movie is too good. 


Spoiler



Sinister Six Forever <3


----------



## Hyro-Sama (May 5, 2014)

Seems like I made the right decision in opting out of the Spider-Man films. As expected, the success of the Avengers is having all the of the studios with rights to comic books characters push for their own cinematic universes. Unfortunately, it seems to be at the price of the quality of the films themselves.


----------



## Veho (May 6, 2014)




----------



## FireEmblemGuy (May 6, 2014)

It was certainly better than the first movie, but it was still pretty mediocre. The best I can say for it is that they handled the big part near the end a lot better than I expected them to.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (May 11, 2014)

Watched IGN's review of Godzilla and it just made me even more excited for it than TASM2.

TASM2 has too many characters for just one film, same like Avengers and Batman Vs. Superman. I didn't really like Avengers it was overhyped.


----------

