THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Review

by     Posted 169 days ago

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review

When Sony decided to reboot Spider-Man, it was a bit of surprise since Sam Raimi‘s series still had life in it, and everyone involved in the production was eager to return for a fourth installment.  But the studio cravenly hit the restart button, and even though they hired a director with great potential and a strong cast, The Amazing Spider-Man was a weak return for the wall-crawler.  It was too gritty and the plot was an utter mess based on coincidence with entire plotlines cut to ribbons (what happened to Irrfan Khan?).  The Amazing Spider-Man 2 wants to function as a reboot of a reboot, and while it’s marginally better than its predecessor, it suffers from an overstuffed plot where no one seems to be on the same page.  There’s a fun, lighthearted tone that always peeks out, especially in the scenes between Peter (Andrew Garfield) and Gwen (Emma Stone) as well as Spidey at his most buoyant.  But that vibrancy is always snuffed out by ridiculous villains, cheap motivations, and shiny but lifeless action scenes.

Peter Parker is having a lot more fun being Spider-Man, but he’s ambivalent about his relationship with Gwen Stacy because even though he loves her, he promised her deceased father (Denis Leary) that he would stay away in order to keep her safe from harm.  This time around, harm comes from two sides.  The first is Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), a nerdy, beleaguered, and completely unappreciated Oscorp engineer who is a total Spidey fanatic after being rescued by the superhero.  When Dillon accidentally falls into a tub of genetically engineered electric eels, he transforms in to Electro, who has the power to control electricity.  The other danger comes from Peter’s childhood pal Harry Osborne (Dane DeHaan), who is now running Oscorp after the death of his father Norman (Chris Cooper), but suffers from the same terminal illness, and believes that the only cure is Spider-Man’s blood.  Oh, and Peter is still trying to solve the mystery of his father’s secret work for Oscorp.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review

That’s four, loosely connected plotlines, and they’re all set at different tones and serving different purposes.  There’s some overlap like Peter and Harry trying to cope with their different birthrights (lo and behold, their fathers worked together), but even that’s a tenuous connection.  Peter’s background is still a mystery, and now he has a blessing/curse.  Harry knows why he’s dying and he’s straight-up doomed.  Additionally, their renewed friendship feels hollow since they haven’t seen each other in eight years, so they’re almost strangers.  When they eventually become enemies (this isn’t a spoiler; it’s in the trailers), nothing has really been lost.

Perhaps if the film took more time to build what they had, there would be more tragedy to the picture, but the sequel is all over the place.  How can there be room for pathos when you have Harry enraged over his mortality but not long after he’ll be skipping along to remind us he’s a callous villain?  We get a few scenes of how sad and pathetic Max is, but then he’s transformed into a special effect designed for set pieces.  Sure, there’s something vaguely tragic about their transformations in the sense that they weren’t always bad, but that’s always been the point of Spider-Man villains—they’re irresponsible with their great power.  And in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, they both dislike Spider-Man because he didn’t give them what they wanted (blood for Harry, attention for Electro), so they’re not just irresponsible; they’re petulant crybabies.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review

The relationship with Peter’s deceased dad, Richard Parker (Campbell Scott), is also underserved because it’s more of a plot point rather than something where a son would be struggling to have an emotional connection with his lost parent.  Even though Garfield plays the scene for all its worth, an important revelation comes off as exposition rather than a heartbreaking loss.  The emotional resonance is minor at best, and further undermined by the plot holes required to create the scene in the first place.

Where The Amazing Spider-Man 2 works is where the first movie worked: the relationship between Peter and Gwen.  The chemistry between Garfield and Stone remains superb, and I would say it’s the “heart” of the picture except it’s relegated to just another plot line.  It’s the best of the four since it provides some welcome warmth and humor, but even it gets screwed up by the shoddy script.  Screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and Jeff Pinker back themselves into a corner, and then they clumsily try to maneuver out of it.  What’s left is the hope that Garfield, Stone, and director Marc Webb can some day work together on a movie that has a good script.  It will probably be a movie that doesn’t involve Spider-Man.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review

For his superhero sequel, Webb is at the mercy of whatever the dumb scenes require.  There’s no tonal consistency because the characters are inconsistent.  Everyone is acting like they’re in different movies, and then tripping across their interactions with only the loosest motivations to guide them.  Dillon loved Spider-Man, but because of a misunderstanding, he now hates Spider-Man and also developed a god-complex.  You can make the case for why Electro would behave this way.  You can even make the case for why the suit he creates for himself would have silly lightning bolts on the arms (someone as uncool as Max would design an uncool costume), but it comes off as silly because the character is stuck in a movie with a missing dad, a scorned son, and a tortured romance.  Where does someone like Electro fit in?  How can Webb possibly manage such a scattershot narrative?

The results are mixed at best.  The sweet romance between Peter and Gwen has to stand side-by-side in a movie where the main villain’s music is dubstep (points to Webb for making this genre the music of villainy).  In Raimi’s films, there was camp, but it was a classic comic book kind of camp that remained consistent.  The Amazing Spider-Man 2 swings all over the place, and occasionally it will stick with something that works.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review

Webb has no problem tapping into the superhero’s humor and warmth.  When you strip away all of the idiot machinations and plot holes, you have the Spider-Man we want to see.  He’s the people’s hero, and he relishes being the good guy.  Spider-Man is incredibly funny, although sometimes the reliance on humor can be to the detriment of the character like when he decides to banter with criminal Aleksei Sytsevich (Paul Giamatti) rather than just stopping him.  But this is at least forgivable because there’s a sense of joy and excitement to the scene.

What I can’t forgive are the film’s priorities, and I honestly can’t tell what those are beyond setting up a sequel featuring the Sinister Six.  And perhaps a crass attempt for bigger set pieces is a fitting direction for a franchise that can’t focus on one story or give characters the time they need to develop.  For The Amazing Spider-Man series, it’s all about cramming in as much as possible, quality be damned.  That doesn’t mean the movie is all bad, and it’s slightly better than the first movie in almost every single way.  It doesn’t ruin its comic book origins, but it still suffers from awful plotting and haphazard character development because story and character aren’t the highest priority for this franchise.  The priority is the franchise.

Rating: C-

the-amazing-spider-man-2-review




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Iron Man 3 Is a Mess

    Enough is enough of these cinematic universes. Just focus on making movies that have the strength to stand on their own merit instead of functioning as one long trailer for the next installment.

    • The Pop Pessimist

      Yeah, seriously!

    • The Pop Pessimist

      Yeah, seriously!

    • Spanky

      Enough of them? You’ve had enough after just 1? Which is the Avengers

      The rest have only just started – Spiderman, about to start – XMen, or have not started yet – DC

      • GrimReaper07

        Iron Man 2, to an extent Captain America 2, this movie and Fantastic Four’s coming up, though we don’t know if that’ll be good or not.

      • rick

        the second half of captain america 1 for sure, he really should have spent more than one movie in the 40′s

    • http://www.twitter.com/dsilinski Darren

      I would argue that movies like the Winter Soldier do exactly that. Marvel threw too much cross-referencing into Iron Man 2 and they learned their lesson from it – Dark World, Winter Soldier, and Iron Man 3 felt like independent stories.

      • Thorin 2: The Dark Hobbit

        Agree with you on Winter Soldier and Iron Man 3, but I strongly disliked Dark World. I think it failed to expand upon Thor and Loki’s characters (as opposed to Winter Soldier/IM3, whose character developments hugely impact the MCU). Next to Iron Man 2, Dark World is definitely the weakest of the MCU, imo.

      • JBug

        I agree, but Thor 2 wasn’t bad. It was just ok, which is still disappointing when you considered Marvel’s track record.

      • Lovecraftlives

        Thor 2 had some scenes edited out of it, which left in, might have made it a better film.

      • JBug

        I hate what Alan Taylor did to that franchise. Is there an extended cut with these deleted scenes?

      • Lovecraftlives

        Alan Taylor didn’t hurt the film. Marvel made him make those cuts. I think they got scared and thought it was too long or something. The film did well, so I don’t know what the problem was. I hope they will be able to release an Extended cut in the future. The film didn’t have the best script and I heard they were making changes while filming it, never a good sign.

      • JBug

        I don’t like the way Alan Taylor messed with the tone and look of the franchise. Nothing to do with the cuts.

      • vpuik

        This comment did not clarify at all to me what ‘character development’ means. No character development in Thor? Captain America’s character hugely impacted MCU?

      • Thorin 2: The Dark Hobbit

        How do you think the events in The Dark World changed Thor’s character? By comparison, and without giving away spoilers, you can see the difference as to how the events in IM3 and Winter Soldier had an impact on the MCU and those characters, respectively.

        I can’t break it down any more than that. If you’ve seen all three movies discussed here and also understand the meaning of ‘character development’, then you should see the vast difference. I was respectfully making a point in my rebuttal to Darren’s comment, not writing a thesis on film structure.

      • vpuik

        That makes more sense. I’ve always wondered what people are talking about with ‘character development’ That’s about the most concise description I’ve read. :)

        I still think Thor’s relationship with Loki, his family and Asgard in general changed during TDW. Loki’s prison scenes were pretty important to what makes him tick, but by the end of the movie he was back to his old cocky self. But then again I loved that movie. :)

        Winter soldier makes more sense, but I read the original comment backwards.

        I’m hoping to see spider-man this and we’ll see if it’s all it’s hyped up to be either positive or negative.

      • Thorin 2: The Dark Hobbit

        Glad I could explain without specifically explaining. lol. =) I guess we don’t know what’s changed until the next time we see him/them, which kind of supports the idea that The Dark World is weak – because we SHOULD know what’s changed by the end of that movie. The last scene with Loki and Thor was kind of a big deal, but still, I’m not sure how it shows Thor to be changed any more than he was at the end of the first Thor. Loki didn’t prove to be any different either – still untrustworthy and a weak stand-alone villain.

        I’m counting on TAS2 to be entertaining – nothing more. Supposedly, it’s improved on the first so it should at least meet my expectations of not being boring like the first.

      • vpuik

        I’m more of a visual movie guy. One of my favorite parts of the Dark World was Kurse so character development is not generally important to me. That being said I’m going to ASM with low expectations so it won’t disappoint like MoS. Bad movie with bad characters is bad no matter how good it looks.

      • Thorin 2: The Dark Hobbit

        How do you think the events in The Dark World changed Thor’s character? By comparison, and without giving away spoilers, you can see the difference as to how the events in IM3 and Winter Soldier had an impact on the MCU and those characters, respectively.

        I can’t break it down any more than that. If you’ve seen all three movies discussed here and also understand the meaning of ‘character development’, then you should see the vast difference. I was respectfully making a point in my rebuttal to Darren’s comment, not writing a thesis on film structure.

      • The Flobbit

        You have got to be kidding me. Dark World is borderline genius compared to the moronic, idiotic borefest that was The Incredible Hulk: a movie so bad Marvel is now pretending it does not exist.

      • The Flobbit

        You have got to be kidding me. Dark World is borderline genius compared to the moronic, idiotic borefest that was The Incredible Hulk: a movie so bad Marvel is now pretending it does not exist.

    • let them have cake AND eat it!

      With the amount of talent out there, including one’s that have offered to take the helm and have been denied (*David Fincher*), there’s no excuse why they can’t do what you’re saying AND create a cinematic universe. Don’t let these greedy studios delude you into thinking we can’t have both.

    • Don Sterling

      winter solider is far and away the BEST marvel movie ever made. iron man and spider man 2 (raimi) are 2nd and 3rd. I believe all of these movies follow one cohesive storyline and don’t care for much “setting up” which i agree takes away from the movie.

      • Werefon

        Spider-Man 2 is The Best Spidey film yet. Agree on Iron Man 1 and The Winter Soldier.

        Also, the villains are interesting, Motivations are believable.

        Action scenes at the right places. You never get bored or annoyed by plot exposition.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Winter Soldier is far and away the most overrated Marvel movie, with fans ignoring its flaws and shortcomings. After the chances taken in films like Iron Man 3 and the controversy surrounding some of those choices, TWS was so safe that it couldn’t build any anger from fanboys. Which means that it didn’t push any boundaries. Hydra are in SHIELD, hide and then fight Hydra, it could’ve been so much deeper than that. The Winter Soldier wasn’t explored at all in a film named after him, Pierce, Widow, Fury, all were completely unambiguous, it was just far too safe.

        Avengers, Iron Man 3, X-Men 2, First Class, The Wolverine and Spiderman 2 are all better Marvel films imo. I’d also say that Thor and Iron Man were more consistent and solid films, although whether they’re actually better depends on seeing TWS again to confirm/deny.

      • Don Sterling

        i disagree with you an so does virtually everyone with a brain. but hey that’s your opinion.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Ironically, everyone with a brain could easily see the flaws in TWS and not ride the hype train, being objective.

      • Don Sterling

        okay what was overrated about it? you insinuated wolverine, x2, im3 and first class were better? i think TWS was way better than avengers. it had a singular cohesive story that didn’t seem like 2.5 hour trailer for a future movie(s), it advanced multiple character arcs, every major character looked strong and was flushed out. avengers did none of these things. unlike avengers, TWS made the viewer think…it was more than good guys vs bad guys. TWS was not a superhero movie to me, it was more than that…just like the dark knight.

      • Aquartertoseven

        It wasn’t deep, it wasn’t ambiguous as it should’ve been. There was no ambiguity, no paranoia, it was always clear cut. Black Widow, despite being teased as a former KGB agent, never did anything suspicious, imagine if she was in the fray working for the Russians to get helicarrier specs, as superheroes like Stark are allowing the US to get far ahead of other nations. It would’ve added depth to her character.

        Falcon was the token black guy, someone Cap for no reason trusted above other Avengers like Stark because he met and spoke with him five minutes prior. Had he been an agent of some organisation, another keeping an eye on Cap, it would’ve been easy to accept him. It also would’ve acknowledged other agencies, just like other countries above. Pierce not being the Red Skull was a dud, that could’ve tied everything together, linked with Thanos potentially and other Avengers’ worlds. The Winter Soldier did nothing, and he was the subtitle after all. Even at the end of the film, he only then became slightly open to the possibility of being Bucky, this should’ve had a more significant focus in the film.

        The climax was laughably simplistic with the key cards. First off it could’ve shown the characters working their ways through the helicarrier and maybe showing them to have trouble and perhaps even failing. Imagine the stakes if one helicarrier fired its guns and killed loads of people, death raises tension and stakes, both of which TWS lacked. Secondly, there didn’t even need to be Bay style, huge scale, big explosions climax, it should’ve been small scale and personal.

        The stakes still could’ve been high, with the helicarriers in the air awaiting orders, but a clash in the SHIELD headquarters could’ve prevented Pierce from sending out the orders. This should’ve in my opinion been a fight between the duo of Pierce (unmasked as the Red Skull) and Rumlow, the Winter Soldier (who fights Pierce as well as Cap and his group due to a failsafe from the brainwashing), Cap, Falcon and Fury, with Black Widow against them all, having her own mission of getting helicarrier specs, as the Russians need to catch up with all of these American advancements. Hell, Fury could’ve been the Red Skull, that would’ve been an amazing twist but you know fanboys and how worked up they get. This could be worked around by saying that the real Fury is locked up somewhere, with Von Strucker or something. So faux Fury could be with Rumlow in this scenario and Pierce could be a Hydra agent that thinks that Skull is going too far, potentially turning him into less of a clear cut bad guy, or just a usurper. The anarchy of this division and violence, with the superpowered Cap, Skull and Winter Soldier further displaying their physical advantages over the non superpowered would have been highly refreshing and for me, preferred. Hell, that could’ve been coupled with one helicarrier firing during the fight, so the heroes afterwards would desperately struggle to stop the other two from firing. Sorry for the essay lol.

      • Don Sterling

        you make some fine points, but i think a lot of your ideas are making the movie too convoluted. having red skull come back so soon would be a waste in creating something most movies fail to do and that’s create a genuine surprise. when i was watching the movie with my friends, everyone was thinking redford would be red skull…so i think it was smart to not go that route. red skull as fury? sorry that doesn’t make sense, but hey we got a shocker?

        bucky was already depicted as the brainwashed villain, not knowing the difference between right or wrong…having a similar plot point revolving around black widow wouldn’t work in my opinion. there’s talk of widow getting her movie, so making her a villain doesn’t work.

        falcon as the token black guy? lol. pretty sure fury is black. cap trusted falcon as a genuine good guy when he ran into him working for USVA counselling soldiers who deal with post traumatic stress. in a world full of selfish people, falcon came across as someone he could trust because he had a heart.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Trust me, a little convoluted is better than too safe. Besides, it would be relatively easy to understand for most, with maybe the younger kids getting a little confused. Fury being the Red Skull would throw people off quite well imo, as we all expected RS to return, just not as that character.

        Skull, posing as Fury to remain inconspicious and to get Cap to unknowingly help him, could be forced out of Hydra by Pierce or something, it could work. If things were fitted accordingly.

        Widow wouldn’t be brainwashed, just unpredictable. With her own agenda. She wouldn’t necessarily have or need much time to deal with this subplot nor have to be stamped as a villain, as it wouldn’t have to be that black and white. It could link into Cap 3.

        Fury had a point, a purpose, Falcon didn’t. He should’ve imo been like a CIA operative that was keeping an eye on Cap and when the manhunt started, the CIA was superceded by SHIELD and Falcon decided to help Cap instead of join the manhunt. Or do both, either way, he needed time to work his way into the story better than what we got. With the CIA, Falcon could have exposure to advanced tech rather than being some random, ordinary soldier that for no reason has access to advanced tech, even though we’ve been shown that only advanced organisations like SHIELD and Hydra use advanced tech.

      • Don Sterling

        agree to disagree, i absolutely loved CATWS. my favorite movie since 12 years a slave actually.

      • Captain Falcon

        Excellent point about Falcon! The main theme of TWS was “who can you trust”. Falcon was the ONLY character that Captain America (and the audience) could undoubtedly trust based on how they built his character in the film. I hope they don’t write him off after this one.

      • Captain Falcon

        Also, the biggest amount of heart came from Falcon’s character development. The scene at the VA when he was talking about what he does and why he does it – that was way more serious than any Marvel movie I’ve ever seen, and I’m sure it hit home for a lot of people, whether they’ve been to war or not. It tackled PTSD in a much more mature manner than IM3 (which came off as being comical and slightly inappropriate).

        Standing ovation to Marvel for going there. Captain America is a superhero, but he is also a soldier with emotions and memories. They tailored his character so well in that regard and treated him the utmost care.

      • Don Sterling

        you make some fine points, but i think a lot of your ideas are making the movie too convoluted. having red skull come back so soon would be a waste in creating something most movies fail to do and that’s create a genuine surprise. when i was watching the movie with my friends, everyone was thinking redford would be red skull…so i think it was smart to not go that route. red skull as fury? sorry that doesn’t make sense, but hey we got a shocker?

        bucky was already depicted as the brainwashed villain, not knowing the difference between right or wrong…having a similar plot point revolving around black widow wouldn’t work in my opinion. there’s talk of widow getting her movie, so making her a villain doesn’t work.

        falcon as the token black guy? lol. pretty sure fury is black. cap trusted falcon as a genuine good guy when he ran into him working for USVA counselling soldiers who deal with post traumatic stress. in a world full of selfish people, falcon came across as someone he could trust because he had a heart.

      • Aquartertoseven

        It wasn’t deep, it wasn’t ambiguous as it should’ve been. There was no ambiguity, no paranoia, it was always clear cut. Black Widow, despite being teased as a former KGB agent, never did anything suspicious, imagine if she was in the fray working for the Russians to get helicarrier specs, as superheroes like Stark are allowing the US to get far ahead of other nations. It would’ve added depth to her character.

        Falcon was the token black guy, someone Cap for no reason trusted above other Avengers like Stark because he met and spoke with him five minutes prior. Had he been an agent of some organisation, another keeping an eye on Cap, it would’ve been easy to accept him. It also would’ve acknowledged other agencies, just like other countries above. Pierce not being the Red Skull was a dud, that could’ve tied everything together, linked with Thanos potentially and other Avengers’ worlds. The Winter Soldier did nothing, and he was the subtitle after all. Even at the end of the film, he only then became slightly open to the possibility of being Bucky, this should’ve had a more significant focus in the film.

        The climax was laughably simplistic with the key cards. First off it could’ve shown the characters working their ways through the helicarrier and maybe showing them to have trouble and perhaps even failing. Imagine the stakes if one helicarrier fired its guns and killed loads of people, death raises tension and stakes, both of which TWS lacked. Secondly, there didn’t even need to be Bay style, huge scale, big explosions climax, it should’ve been small scale and personal.

        The stakes still could’ve been high, with the helicarriers in the air awaiting orders, but a clash in the SHIELD headquarters could’ve prevented Pierce from sending out the orders. This should’ve in my opinion been a fight between the duo of Pierce (unmasked as the Red Skull) and Rumlow, the Winter Soldier (who fights Pierce as well as Cap and his group due to a failsafe from the brainwashing), Cap, Falcon and Fury, with Black Widow against them all, having her own mission of getting helicarrier specs, as the Russians need to catch up with all of these American advancements. Hell, Fury could’ve been the Red Skull, that would’ve been an amazing twist but you know fanboys and how worked up they get. This could be worked around by saying that the real Fury is locked up somewhere, with Von Strucker or something. So faux Fury could be with Rumlow in this scenario and Pierce could be a Hydra agent that thinks that Skull is going too far, potentially turning him into less of a clear cut bad guy, or just a usurper. The anarchy of this division and violence, with the superpowered Cap, Skull and Winter Soldier further displaying their physical advantages over the non superpowered would have been highly refreshing and for me, preferred. Hell, that could’ve been coupled with one helicarrier firing during the fight, so the heroes afterwards would desperately struggle to stop the other two from firing. Sorry for the essay lol.

      • Don Sterling

        okay what was overrated about it? you insinuated wolverine, x2, im3 and first class were better? i think TWS was way better than avengers. it had a singular cohesive story that didn’t seem like 2.5 hour trailer for a future movie(s), it advanced multiple character arcs, every major character looked strong and was flushed out. avengers did none of these things. unlike avengers, TWS made the viewer think…it was more than good guys vs bad guys. TWS was not a superhero movie to me, it was more than that…just like the dark knight.

      • Don Sterling

        i disagree with you an so does virtually everyone with a brain. but hey that’s your opinion.

      • beating a dead wolverine

        The Wolverine was two hours of nothing. It’s structure was generic, as was the action that was sprinkled throughout to keep our attention. It barely had any plot. It was an unnecessary excuse to give Wolverine another self-titled cash grab, while at the same time snubbing all those other mutants more than worthy of their own film.

        Not sure how you could put it in your list next to those other (far superior) films.

      • Aquartertoseven

        The Wolverine was a story and character based film, what a superhero film should be. If you don’t want that then you’d like films such as Man of Steel and The Amazing Spiderman.

      • GrimReaper07

        There really wasn’t much character development though. At the end of the movie Wolverine is pretty much the same guy he was in all of the X-men films.

      • Aquartertoseven

        He learned to care about another, let go of Jean and move on.

      • beating a dead wolverine

        Wolverine was always caring. He displayed that trait in all of the X-Men films (except maybe Origins). We didn’t need two hours of him learning to let Jean go and wondering if he wants to live forever or not. That’s a subplot and isn’t substantial enough to be the sole premise of a movie. The plot of the movie had nothing to do with these themes either. It was just him fighting random goons who didn’t pose any threat to him at all. There were too many characters who contributed nothing to the story and nothing to the X-Men universe. For such a complex character, we were short-changed with an overly simplistic “character study”. GrimReaper07′s response nailed it.

      • Aquartertoseven

        He learned to care about another after being emotionally destroyed after Jean died.

      • beating a dead wolverine

        He has a rough exterior, but he was caring long before Jean dying. And for the record, he KILLED Jean (in the movie universe, at least). If anything, you could argue that the character “developments” in The Wolverine were already a part of his character by default, as displayed by Jackman since the first X-Men film. He has a rough exterior because he’s afraid to get close to anyone because he knows he’s going to out-live them. He cared about Rogue throughout the series, as well as the rest of his team and all the other students of Xavier’s School.

        So again, The Wolverine brought nothing new to the table that will impact the character’s timeline in the X-Men movie universe. The movie was plain boring.

      • Aquartertoseven

        You’re not getting me, I know that he cared for people before Jean died but her death left him feeling empty and isolated from other people, from life. At the end of The Wolverine he moved on and sort of found himself again, ready to embrace the world.

        Of course he killed Jean, duh, being forced to KILL the love of your life would screw up anyone.

      • beating a dead wolverine

        Wolverine was always caring. He displayed that trait in all of the X-Men films (except maybe Origins). We didn’t need two hours of him learning to let Jean go and wondering if he wants to live forever or not. That’s a subplot and isn’t substantial enough to be the sole premise of a movie. The plot of the movie had nothing to do with these themes either. It was just him fighting random goons who didn’t pose any threat to him at all. There were too many characters who contributed nothing to the story and nothing to the X-Men universe. For such a complex character, we were short-changed with an overly simplistic “character study”. GrimReaper07′s response nailed it.

      • GrimReaper07

        Eh. Not really much of a character arc I think. Didn’t care that much about their relationship, thanks to X-men 3

      • Aquartertoseven

        He learned to care about another, let go of Jean and move on.

      • GrimReaper07

        There really wasn’t much character development though. At the end of the movie Wolverine is pretty much the same guy he was in all of the X-men films.

      • Aquartertoseven

        The Wolverine was a story and character based film, what a superhero film should be. If you don’t want that then you’d like films such as Man of Steel and The Amazing Spiderman.

      • GrimReaper07

        I agree with @Aquartertoseven:disqus in that it’s Marvel’s most overated movie yet, although I do think it’s one of the best. There’s no way in hell it beats Spiderman 2, Avengers or Iron Man 1 though.

      • Avengers is Low-Key

        With all due respect to Joss Whedon and you all, I think Avengers is Marvel’s most overrated movie, and TWS beats it. Avengers might be the best ACTION superhero movie, but the story is so damn weak! Avengers 2 will probably be the best Marvel movie when it’s released and will make people see how watered down Avengers is.

      • GrimReaper07

        The plot in Avengers is pretty bare bones, but the story isn’t. The plot in Winter Soldier is pretty good until two thirds into the movie and the movie lacks any really engaging characters, cause while Cap is good in the movie I wouldn’t even say he’s much better than he was in the Avengers (Black Widow was much better in the latter). The Winter Soldier himself is a mechanism for amazing action scenes but the character himself is predictable and has far too little screen time or relevance to the plot. What Avengers doesn’t have in plot it makes up in spades with characters and good writing. The action scenes don’t hurt either. Plot is overrated.

      • GrimReaper07

        The plot in Avengers is pretty bare bones, but the story isn’t. The plot in Winter Soldier is pretty good until two thirds into the movie and the movie lacks any really engaging characters, cause while Cap is good in the movie I wouldn’t even say he’s much better than he was in the Avengers (Black Widow was much better in the latter). The Winter Soldier himself is a mechanism for amazing action scenes but the character himself is predictable and has far too little screen time or relevance to the plot. What Avengers doesn’t have in plot it makes up in spades with characters and good writing. The action scenes don’t hurt either. Plot is overrated.

    • http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepr1xp/index.html unsean

      Not at all. Using your logic, we shouldn’t have anymore westerns because of Heaven’s Gate, or science fiction movies because of 2001: A Space Odyssey (It’s Stanley Kubrick. It’s also remarkably boring, though visually spectacular).

      If studios treated their cinematic universes right, like Marvel Studios, then I have no complaint because they do a cinematic universe right.

      Sony’s (Amazing Spider-Man) only problem is that they’re forcing it too much (besides making really mediocre movies). Instead of letting things build gradually, they’re just throwing things together, which probably has more than a little to do with the (mostly) critical contempt for the movies.

    • eatshit

      Blame Avengers success….;)

  • Iron Man 3 Is a Mess

    Enough is enough of these cinematic universes. Just focus on making movies that have the strength to stand on their own merit instead of functioning as one long trailer for the next installment.

  • Lance

    Ugh. This is depressing.

    Spidey’s my favorite Marvel hero of all time. If only we could get him back into the Marvel fold. But this movie’s almost guaranteed to do better than the previous one, isn’t it? Shame on you, public. Shame on you.

    • http://mattedscreen.blogspot.com/ TheMattedScreen

      … well, the first Amazing Spider-Man movie made about $70million less than Spider-Man 3 with a similar budget and the benefit of 3D ticket prices… so who knows if this one makes similar business we might see a change in the creative team.

    • HORSEFLESH

      Spidey is in the Marvel fold. Marvel own all TV rights which they can exploit.

    • Boop

      Exactly. The public has complete control over the future of this franchise. If this movie flops, Disney can take Spidey from Sony and do him justice. It’s up to us.

    • Boop

      Exactly. The public has complete control over the future of this franchise. If this movie flops, Disney can take Spidey from Sony and do him justice. It’s up to us.

    • Boop

      Exactly. The public has complete control over the future of this franchise. If this movie flops, Disney can take Spidey from Sony and do him justice. It’s up to us.

  • pandapool
    • DEADP00L

      Blasphemy! That idea is not only terrible I’ll eat my own crap to avoid it!

      • pandapool

        I was joking. I’m saying that Deadpool should just shoot this Spidey in the head. Didn’t you look at the pic?

      • DEADP00L

        It doesn’t open on my end.

      • DEADP00L

        Oh I see now I had to use Chrome.

        I like it. XD

      • Werefon

        But the script is SMASH tough.

      • Werefon

        But the script is SMASH tough.

  • pandapool
  • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

    Seems to be about the general consensus online. Beautiful looking movie with no substance. Spider-Man in costume is right but everything around him is wrong. Basically we are back to the bottom along with Spider-Man 3. Guess i’ll just stick to watching Raimi’s Spider Man 2 to get my fix. How is it that in the 10 years since that film came out that we can’t make a film as equal if not as close to what that film represented? My one issue with Raimi’s Spider-Man villians was that he always wanted his audience to have some sympathy for them (I especially hated Sandman as it was way over the top) and never just a terrifying villian because they are straight up evil. Was really hoping after TASM that all of the small mistakes, which I could overlook, could have been fixed in the sequel but it seems like they just went in reverse and made it even worse. Looks like I’ll be passing on this summer’s kick off film.

    • Melwing

      If we could have Raimi’s movies with Garfield/Stone instead of Maguire/Dunst, I would be so happy.

      • Aquartertoseven

        I wouldn’t. Spiderman doesn’t need to be Twilight with hipsters.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Stone out acts Dunst any day of the week. Maguire as Peter Parket was perfect but not as Spider-man and the reverse can be said about Garfield as he’s a great Spider-Man but a bad Peter Parker.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Stone out acts Dunst any day of the week. Maguire as Peter Parket was perfect but not as Spider-man and the reverse can be said about Garfield as he’s a great Spider-Man but a bad Peter Parker.

    • Melwing

      If we could have Raimi’s movies with Garfield/Stone instead of Maguire/Dunst, I would be so happy.

    • Melwing

      If we could have Raimi’s movies with Garfield/Stone instead of Maguire/Dunst, I would be so happy.

  • Vulcan

    Well Orzi and Kurtzman are responsible for the plot messes that are the Transformers series and Sleepy Hollow, so that part doesn’t surprise me. I don’t think that Webb is right for a super hero action film. I think he needs to go back to his roots that were (400) Days of Summer and the excellent Battleground series, and do independent movies, maybe one with Garfield and Stone, because there chemistry really was the best part of the first one.

  • M&M

    Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci… How the hell do these hacks keep getting work?!

    • Farrell

      people keep paying to see the movies they write.

      • DEADP00L

        They’d see those movies regardless of who writes them.

      • Farrell

        Exactly the problem. People should.educate themselves about who is making these crappy movies if they dont like them.

      • http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepr1xp/index.html unsean

        To an extent, you’re right, though I am going to miss it. If i see anything this weekend, it’ll probably be The Quiet Ones (or Captain America: The Winter Soldier for the third time).

      • emmalove

        they still write some SHITTY scripts…Transformers….Star trek…..all cliche filled crap We need something original like Looper or Dark knight rises.

      • Melwing

        Dark Knight Rises? Good script? Oh, dear….

      • DEADP00L

        DKR…

        You have just demonstrated our problem.

      • Werefon

        Looper stole the idea from the script called Geminy Man that was around Hollywood for some time. You can find some drafts online (they are all different in a sense of timeline and realism – sci-fi or thriller or action or all together).

  • belicious beylicker

    Minor note: it’s Irrfan, not Iffran.

    Also, kudos on exposing Kurtman, Orci etc.

    We need to do all we can to make sure they never work in Hollywood again.

    It’s like Hollywood just picked a random bunch of students from an Adult Special Day Class in Kentucky to write scripts. I wonder if they pay those poor, slow saps.

    • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

      Thanks for pointing out the error. Fixed!

      • belicious beylicker

        thanks Matt! And please keep up the campaign against Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof and their ilk. They’ve really crippled the recent Hollywood blockbusters, from Transformers, to Star Trek, to Prometheus, to Spider-Man. Ain’t there no decency left??

      • Grayden

        Star Trek was pretty awesome, Into Darkness faltered.

      • Frank

        Yea but you have to keep in mind, we’re not in those editing rooms. We’re also not the ones taking notes from executives. And we haven’t read the writer’s original script, with their intent. So possibly those emotional notes *were* in there, just consider that. It’s a job and they work for very insisting people, who also are afraid of losing their jobs. But I agree, there is no question that we need more character development in these films and could do with less spectacle. When I saw Man of Steel, my immediate reaction was that this film was edited with terse emotional scenes because of the blowback of Brian Singer’s tedious Superman Returns. If Man of Steel was just recut with some balance, a little less action and more time with Clark and his father, it could have been much better. But the execs are tentative. It’s a razor thin line to losing a job. Very hard work for all involved and always a miracle when a film truly nails it. I applaud everyone that works in the business, because you get picked apart. It conspires to fuck you up. Then you read some comments online and they cut big-time. And these writers, they’re just trying to feed their kids and do the best they can. You can’t implicate them alone. No question, people make mistakes. Hopefully they grow from them and make the brave choices of character development because that identification is what audiences crave too. The good thing about reboots is there are always 2nd chances. :)

      • belicious beylicker

        Yeah, but have you watched ANY of their films??? there is a constant in the flagrant mediocrity, and it is THEM. so yes, YES, we CAN implicate them alone. The producers of their films, and the directors, have made MANY other decent films.

      • Frank

        I have. I enjoyed the first Star Trek and Mission Impossible III was my favorite of the franchise but that’s anecdotal. Respectfully, we just disagree but I understand your points and frustration. And definitely, if you choose to implicate only them, that’s your right. But it isn’t an informed opinion, this I know. I know you aren’t reading their favorite drafts. You’re seeing a completed picture, which is the result of many influences. I know the process intimately and it is fucking maddening. I assure you, they answer to people. They answer to the people who fund their movies. In addition to that, the notes from directors and executives can often be remarkably confusing, conflicting and that doesn’t matter – they still need serviced. And if it doesn’t work, they can never tell anyone publicly. It’s harder than it looks, which is why so many movies aren’t successful. And I don’t mean box office successful, I mean truly good movies. Ask yourself this however. The producers and directors who work with them, who have made many other decent films – why would *they* continue to work with Orci and Kurtzman if they were flagrantly mediocre? Surely you value the opinion of those successful producer and directors. There are many screenwriters in Hollywood and even more that want to be there, yet these guys have sustained. This is my last post regarding it. If I didn’t sway you, I understand. Do they make mistakes? No question. Are they totally to blame? Absolutely, unequivocally, not.

  • enderandrew

    The had filmed scenes with MJ coming in as a new potential love interest as well and cut that from the film. Can you imagine a fifth plot crammed in?

    One of my complaints from the original was how Peter was a bit of a punk and self serving, at least early. He only hunted down criminals to get revenge, and ultimately didn’t care. He mouthed off to the Chief of Police because ultimately he was a disrespectful teen.

    Then near the end of the movie he gives a speech to Gwen about how selfless he has to be in fighting The Lizard. It seemed out of place.

    I was hoping in the sequel they’d stick with Peter being a genuinely nice guy.

    I’m not sure I like Garfield as Parker, but I do agree the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is great.

  • HONEST

    Sony is going down, nowadays they don’t know how to make the quality films.

  • aceshigh

    No surprises here.

  • Steven

    I loved this movie and would rank it above Winter Soldier. This is coming from someone who didn’t like the first Garfield film.

    Critics loved Iron Man 3, so they got no credibility in my opinion.

    • JBug

      I think everybody who isn’t an IM fan loved IM3. I happen to be an IM fan and I loved IM3. I was having to much fun to be pissed at the Mandarin twist and botching of Extremis/AIM.

      • eternalozzie

        I only hated Iron Man 3 because they pooped all over the Iron Man universe after keeping its spirit in the first 2 movies.

      • JBug

        Are you referring to the tone and style of the movie? I personally loved what Shane Black did. I thought it was fresh.

      • Homer Dancastellanister

        Yes the humour was good, only thing is I wanted to see an Iron Man movie, not the Tony Stark Comedy show.

        I also thought the action scenes were by faaar the weakest in the trilogy, thanks to the crappy extremis fire breathing weirdo’s and also due to Tony making several rubbish suits that broke far too easily, when his previous suits have been shown to be extremely resilient. I get that he creates more suits out of paranoia after the Avengers, but they were all so pathetic and indistinguishable that the action became incredibly boring after he jumped into crappy suit no 4.

        Concerning the twist, I think people would have been far less annoyed if the villain replacing ‘mandarin’ (Aldritch Killian or whatever) was at least decent, but alas he wasn’t. I honestly think he was the second lamest marvel villain to date. (the lamest honor goes to Malekith).

        Also, Tony destroying all his suits?

      • eternalozzie

        They took one the most diabolical and dangerous super villains of all comic bookdom and made him into a punchline … fake Mandarin can never be forgiven for its crimes against comic book nature.

      • Aquartertoseven

        No-one cared about him, what crime? That’s like saying ‘never forget what they did to Squirrel Girl’ after a Squirrel Girl film.

      • eternalozzie

        They took one the most diabolical and dangerous super villains of all comic bookdom and made him into a punchline … fake Mandarin can never be forgiven for its crimes against comic book nature.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Oh my God, yet more incredibly dumb complaints about IM3. His suits were screwed together by Jarvis, whereas the emergency suit wasn’t. Simple as that. Most that dislike the film have no idea what happened.

      • Homer Dancastellanister

        Yes the humour was good, only thing is I wanted to see an Iron Man movie, not the Tony Stark Comedy show.

        I also thought the action scenes were by faaar the weakest in the trilogy, thanks to the crappy extremis fire breathing weirdo’s and also due to Tony making several rubbish suits that broke far too easily, when his previous suits have been shown to be extremely resilient. I get that he creates more suits out of paranoia after the Avengers, but they were all so pathetic and indistinguishable that the action became incredibly boring after he jumped into crappy suit no 4.

        Concerning the twist, I think people would have been far less annoyed if the villain replacing ‘mandarin’ (Aldritch Killian or whatever) was at least decent, but alas he wasn’t. I honestly think he was the second lamest marvel villain to date. (the lamest honor goes to Malekith).

        Also, Tony destroying all his suits?

      • Homer Dancastellanister

        Yes the humour was good, only thing is I wanted to see an Iron Man movie, not the Tony Stark Comedy show.

        I also thought the action scenes were by faaar the weakest in the trilogy, thanks to the crappy extremis fire breathing weirdo’s and also due to Tony making several rubbish suits that broke far too easily, when his previous suits have been shown to be extremely resilient. I get that he creates more suits out of paranoia after the Avengers, but they were all so pathetic and indistinguishable that the action became incredibly boring after he jumped into crappy suit no 4.

        Concerning the twist, I think people would have been far less annoyed if the villain replacing ‘mandarin’ (Aldritch Killian or whatever) was at least decent, but alas he wasn’t. I honestly think he was the second lamest marvel villain to date. (the lamest honor goes to Malekith).

        Also, Tony destroying all his suits?

    • Grayden

      I’m curious how you rationalize putting this above what is arguably one of the best comic book movies ever made. I’d put WS right behind Dark Knight, and tie it with Iron Man.

      • Steven

        I thought the relationship between Garfield and Stone was superb. I found the last act of the film to be extremely powerful and terrifically handled. The CGI scenes with Peter flying through air were such a step up from previous movies and the build up to the Sinister Six made me yell with excitement.

        Winter Soldier was a lot of fun but I was never emotionally engaged in it. That’s the problem I have with most of the Avengers connected movies, I never get emotionally invested in them.

  • Spicerpalooza

    I know this will likely never happen, but I would love to see Marvel negotiate with Sony and Fox a new business model in which Marvel co-finances the movies they don’t hold rights to in exchange for creative control.

  • JBug

    Hey Matt, very nice review. My only disagreement is when it comes to letting Webb off the hook. I get that he is a talented director (500 Days of Summer was excellent), but I believe some of the blame for the lack of consistency and tone should fall on him. Of course the writers have let this franchise get away from them, but it is up to the director to pull it all together. The numerous plot points indicate the ambitious nature of the film. If pulled together nicely, it should make the film all the more rich. Nolan managed several plot points in The Dark Knight and the film was all the more magnificent because of it. Webb proved himself competent in the off beat genre, but he has yet to proven himself when it comes to big budget action movies.

    • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

      I think Webb doesn’t have the pull Nolan did nor the experience. Keep in mind that Nolan had 3 movies under his belt when did Batman Begins and then took the time to really figure out Dark Knight before leaping into it. Webb is perfect for a studio–he has enough visual prowess and personality to earn the respect of the skeptical, but not enough experience to throw his weight around.

      • JBug

        Thanks for the response, Matt. Is Webb’s lack of pull the reason he can’t manage the tone in these films? I figured it was just his style and that it works in certain settings and jars in this one. It looks like he’s definitely got personality in spades as he is competent when it comes to managing the relationships and drama, but why do you feel he’s skilled with visuals? Not that I know what goes into these movies, but I thought that visuals in big movies are primarily driven by the budget.

      • DNAsplitter

        That is the most spot on answer in regards to Webb. He has great visual flair and knows how to get emotional impact from his character’s dialogue but has no control with studio decisions as he does not have enough power due to lack of experience. It is the reason why Raimi left the franchise after Spiderman 3. Too much studio control and it was something that he was not going to compromise his vision for. It’s the reason why Marc Webb will come back to continue to direct the third film is because he still needs to build his resume at this point.

      • DNAsplitter

        That is the most spot on answer in regards to Webb. He has great visual flair and knows how to get emotional impact from his character’s dialogue but has no control with studio decisions as he does not have enough power due to lack of experience. It is the reason why Raimi left the franchise after Spiderman 3. Too much studio control and it was something that he was not going to compromise his vision for. It’s the reason why Marc Webb will come back to continue to direct the third film is because he still needs to build his resume at this point.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Actually, he didn’t leave as much as he was fired. Spider-Man 4 was very close to happening. That’s why it was such a bombshell when Sony announced they were rebooting the franchise.

      • Werefon

        He personally called producers and said that script is not clicking the right way, and he doesn’t feel that film will work. And if it is not working, he didn’t want to spent his time and giant budget on it. He knows about Soider-Man 3, more than any of us. So, he didn’t want that.

        So, studio overnight called up a meeting and decided to start over again.

        He wasn’t fired. He left. But I prefer to watch Spider-Man 3 than TASM 2. It is bad film with some good moments against horrible film with editing problems and stupid script.

        They (as it was in first TASM) cut out action scenes (and make them shorter and more accessible to the kids) but left love story that is repeating over and over with Harry Osborn that nobody needs (even Dane DeHaan judging by his cartoony performance).

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I’m just telling you what I was told in private from someone very close to the production (obviously not the specifics of what he said or who told it to me because I promised him to keep those facets confidential). It’s important to remember that what Raimi says in public may not be untrue, but it’s also not going to burn a bridge if he doesn’t have to.

      • Werefon

        It is not from Raimi or producers either!

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I can round and round on this, but it’s not going to go any further since I can’t reveal my source. Also, it’s getting waaaaay off topic.

      • Werefon

        Ok. Script sucked by the way. Big Time. With Black Cat and Vulture.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I haven’t read the script, and I don’t know how the final film would have turned out. What I do know is that so far the reboot has been disappointing.

      • Werefon

        Weak Outings, agree.

        But still I find first one of “The Amazing” series more compelling. I know they missed so much things with The Lizard but he at least had good motivation (than he wanted to turn everyone into Lizards – and it was stupid).

        The thing with TASM 2 is that everything is stupid.

        Also, Webb tried to create more realistic world for his movie in the first one and it felt that way with practical Spidey stunts and stuff. And it is just changed completely. It went opposite direction and became colorful cartoon (kids like colorful, fleshy stuff so..)

        Besides the writers, we could blame Avi Arad, to make it kid friendly.

        I mean, who cuts action scenes and more interesting plot points and leaving all that boring and repeating crap. Well, bad filmakers.

        I just hope Sinister Six will be better judging by Cabn in the Woods. Man can work on a budget and stil have Dragon Bat flying around along with Unicorn and Robots and Giant Snakes.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I haven’t read the script, and I don’t know how the final film would have turned out. What I do know is that so far the reboot has been disappointing.

      • Werefon

        It is not from Raimi or producers either!

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Thanks for the knowledge on SP4. Also my other question for you is that you at the end you summerized that you think TASM2 is slightly better than the 1st film but yet you rated it lower. Why is that? Unless I’m misreading what you intended.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I left a comment near the top explaining that ASM 1 has dropped in my estimation since the time I posted my review back in 2012. As of May 1, 2014, I feel that in retrospect, ASM 2 is slightly better than ASM 1, but that feeling may change months from now.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        I must have missed that part. Thx.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Thanks for the knowledge on SP4. Also my other question for you is that you at the end you summerized that you think TASM2 is slightly better than the 1st film but yet you rated it lower. Why is that? Unless I’m misreading what you intended.

      • TigerFIST

        Nolan took his time? Begins 2005 Prestige 2006

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Took his time between Batman movies. He did a personal project before jumping right back into the franchise, and I think that’s part of the reason Dark Knight is such a significant improvement over Batman Begins.

      • TigerFIST

        Significant improvement? Hmmmm. I may be the only one that feels this way but I liked begins and the dark knight exactly the same. Both 9.5/10 for me. Two different films but still both fantastic!

      • TigerFIST

        Significant improvement? Hmmmm. I may be the only one that feels this way but I liked begins and the dark knight exactly the same. Both 9.5/10 for me. Two different films but still both fantastic!

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Batman Begins falls apart in the third act. Batman’s arc is about how he doesn’t kill people, and then he kills Ra’s al Ghul by handcuffing him to an inescapably deadly situation.

      • TigerFIST

        He didn’t handcuff him. He just didn’t save him

      • JBug

        I’m with you Avery, except I think Begins was 9/10 and Dark Knight was 10. Both were incredibly solid. One was near perfect and the other was perfect, IMO.

      • JBug

        I’m with you Avery, except I think Begins was 9/10 and Dark Knight was 10. Both were incredibly solid. One was near perfect and the other was perfect, IMO.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Batman Begins falls apart in the third act. Batman’s arc is about how he doesn’t kill people, and then he kills Ra’s al Ghul by handcuffing him to an inescapably deadly situation.

      • Aquartertoseven

        Begins and TDK are worlds apart, the latter is an improvement in every way.

        Begins- 7.8
        TDK- 9.0

      • Aquartertoseven

        Begins and TDK are worlds apart, the latter is an improvement in every way.

        Begins- 7.8
        TDK- 9.0

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Took his time between Batman movies. He did a personal project before jumping right back into the franchise, and I think that’s part of the reason Dark Knight is such a significant improvement over Batman Begins.

      • the king of comedy

        I`m glad to see some love for Batman Begins, I also believe that Batman Begins is almost as good as The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises is truly dissapointing in comparisson.

      • the king of comedy

        I`m glad to see some love for Batman Begins, I also believe that Batman Begins is almost as good as The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises is truly dissapointing in comparisson.

      • Grayden

        Begins 2005, Dark Knight 2008. Directors, as producers, can work on multiple projects at once. The fact that The Dark Knight was so successful, even though Nolan did the Prestige between Batman films, shows how well the man is organized and knows what he’s doing.

      • Grayden

        Begins 2005, Dark Knight 2008. Directors, as producers, can work on multiple projects at once. The fact that The Dark Knight was so successful, even though Nolan did the Prestige between Batman films, shows how well the man is organized and knows what he’s doing.

  • Don Sterling

    This movie will make a lot of money, goldbergs opinion means nothing. Absolute BUFFOON!

    • Farrell

      not just Goldberg…half the reviews say its garbage.

      • Don Sterling

        they;re all imbeciles, its gonna make 800 million at least world wide.

      • Farrell

        reviews have nothing to do with box office. shitty movies make money all the time.

      • Don Sterling

        reviews work for smaller budget movies with less hype. these blockbusters are critic proof, see transformers.

      • Farrell

        and the sky is blue. nobody is refuting that. you called Goldberg a bafoon for the review when he’s simply telling it like it is. if you think reviews don’t matter, why are you reading them?

      • Don Sterling

        because he wrote like 1400 words that were just echoing sentiments shared by 100 other more prominent reviewers who said the exact same thing, but in a less self riteous manner. goldberg needs to get over himself, his reviews are long tedious and boring!

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        And yet you read it anyway!

      • Arthur Dent

        He just can’t quit you, I guess.

      • Don Sterling

        is there something wrong with reading? considering the mistakes you make throughout your reviews, perhaps you should read your articles before you post em. complete amateur hour!

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Mistakes like proper capitalization?

      • Don Sterling

        this is a messageboard, capitalization isn’t an essential criterion. as for your articles, they’re riddled with mistakes!!!

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        I’m pretty sure there’s no such thing as a message board style guide, in which case, normal rules of grammar apply. I might make mistakes (and I’m happy to acknowledge and fix them), but you’re just being lazy.

      • Don Sterling

        well im writing from a phone, so yes im being ‘lazy’

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        As long as you acknowledge it.

      • Don Sterling

        well im writing from a phone, so yes im being ‘lazy’

      • Don Sterling

        this is a messageboard, capitalization isn’t an essential criterion. as for your articles, they’re riddled with mistakes!!!

      • TigerFIST

        Don Sterling, please shut the fuck up! You sound like an idiot! If you feel that way don’t read the review or go to another site. The fact that you change your name to ‘Don Sterling’ says enough

      • TigerFIST

        Don Sterling, please shut the fuck up! You sound like an idiot! If you feel that way don’t read the review or go to another site. The fact that you change your name to ‘Don Sterling’ says enough

      • Werefon

        So, you the 6 year old dumb ass that liked the film with targeted audience of 6-8?

        Well, this movie was meant for you. Enjoy. Also, ask your parents to not feed you a horse shit. It made you stupid.

      • Don Sterling

        Speak English you foaming at the mouth troglodyte.

      • Werefon

        Hey, it is you COckSuckA! Was missing your Stupid Ass comments.

        Welcome back – Retard!

        P.S. Your English Sucks just like You!

      • Don Sterling

        speak English you foaming at the mouth neanderthal, i dont understand retard speak.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Guys, please don’t resort to using the word “retard”.

      • pro346

        sounds like every movie in the mcu only targeted 4 to 5 year olds

      • Werefon

        Even worse. Go check it yourself.

      • pro346

        sounds like every movie in the mcu only targeted 4 to 5 year olds

      • pro346

        sounds like every movie in the mcu only targeted 4 to 5 year olds

      • Werefon

        So, you the 6 year old dumb ass that liked the film with targeted audience of 6-8?

        Well, this movie was meant for you. Enjoy. Also, ask your parents to not feed you a horse shit. It made you stupid.

      • Werefon

        So, you the 6 year old dumb ass that liked the film with targeted audience of 6-8?

        Well, this movie was meant for you. Enjoy. Also, ask your parents to not feed you a horse shit. It made you stupid.

    • Arthur Dent

      Shut up, whitey! Go burn a cross in your backyard.

    • unsocial

      IDK… Midnight screenings came up short of Cap 2′s by a couple million… Right now predictions aren’t sounding too good…

      • Don Sterling

        internationally spiderman will crush captain america. sucks, because im sure captain america is 10 times the film.

      • unsocial

        Again not really… Spidey 2 has been out for 2 weeks in a lot of places already and hasn’t come close to $200 million yet.. That’s not really great either…

      • Don Sterling

        first amazing spiderman made 750 million world wide, sequels tend to make more than the predecessor. second, spiderman hasn’t been released in the 2nd biggest foreign market…china, brazil hasn’t gotten it yet either. the 155 million number you see now is from week 1. which is huge. the next foreign box office number you see will show a massive gain.

      • unsocial

        I know how much ASM made… #2 has been out in the UK for 2 weeks… The $155 million on box office mojo was an update from approx. 2 days ago.. Sequels don’t always make more… Unless it’s part of the MCU it seems… ASM #1 also has the lowest BO take of any Spidey movie so far too.. It came short by approx. $100 million from a couple of the Raimi films totals…

      • Don Sterling

        and yes asm2 will make more than asm 1 which made 100 million more than TWS world wide.

        transformers 2 , pirates 2, dark knight, thor 2, cap 2, etc, etc, etc all made more than the original movies

      • unsocial

        Okay so you are comparing a summer movie (ASM) to a non summer movie (Cap2)… Isn’t really much of an cogent argument.. Considering that Cap made that much while school was still in session is more impressive a feat than Sony repakaging a 10 year old movie for the summertime..
        Did you know that sequels to the Godfather, Grease, The Exorcist, Star Wars: A New Hope, Fatal Attraction, The Mask, Speed, The Blair Witch Project etc. all had smaller takes than their originals? One article I googled pegged approx. 80% of all sequels produced make less money then their 1st flick
        Not to mention you just used 2 examples that I already brought up about sequels that made more than their originals….. You may want to pay attention next time…

      • Don Sterling

        and yes asm2 will make more than asm 1 which made 100 million more than TWS world wide.

        transformers 2 , pirates 2, dark knight, thor 2, cap 2, etc, etc, etc all made more than the original movies

      • Don Sterling

        first amazing spiderman made 750 million world wide, sequels tend to make more than the predecessor. second, spiderman hasn’t been released in the 2nd biggest foreign market…china, brazil hasn’t gotten it yet either. the 155 million number you see now is from week 1. which is huge. the next foreign box office number you see will show a massive gain.

      • Don Sterling

        internationally spiderman will crush captain america. sucks, because im sure captain america is 10 times the film.

  • Jonze

    I felt like it was just a fun, summer blockbuster that has a lot of flaws. I’m bias in that I’ve always loved Spider-Man as a kid. The tone is pretty inconsistent, the villains suck and the writing is pretty terrible. But the action sequences and the romance between Garfield and Stone elevate this to a pretty solid movie (at least for me). A more appropriate title would be The Above Average Spider-Man (yes, pun intended)

    • JBug

      I really agree with this. These movies aren’t accomplishing anything, but the spectacle is still great, and it’s nice having fun when going to the movies in the summer. Not every movie has to be high quality if it has something else to offer. It would sure be nice if they did decide to maintain some quality though. I think we are a little spoiled living in today’s day and age.

    • http://www.JustPressPlay.net Lex Walker

      Does that really even qualify as a pun? That’s just substituting Above Average for Amazing.

      • Jonze

        I guess, I just wanted to add some humor into it.

      • 97point6

        That’s what makes it a pun.

      • http://www.JustPressPlay.net Lex Walker

        That’s like saying Lava Cream is a pun on Ice Cream because you substituted a word out. That’s not what makes it a pun.

  • http://mattedscreen.blogspot.com/ TheMattedScreen

    I know about a dozen people living across the pond that saw this last week, and damn, Matt’s review is probably the most positive I’ve read!

  • Person

    I hope this movie flops miserably. That’s really all I have to say. With all due respect to the cast and crew (minus Garfield, who’s always been overrated), this movie isn’t worth their time and effort, and this series needs to just go away.

  • DEADP00L

    Well I’ll say it because it’s me: we ‘fanboys’ who aren’t actually fanboys just sci fi lovers told you so! This installment felt weak from the start; we all said it, we all felt it and yet the nay sayers with their ‘ you haven’t even seen it yet ‘ kept on trying to make it happen. We know quality when we see it and feel it. It’s instinct.

    It’s the same for that horrendous TMNT reboot abomination; we all feel it, it’s a dud. Transformers is DEAD it’s been done to death and then some. Studios can say whatever they want it’s not going to change the fact that these movies are empty and soulless.

    On the other hand, look how Apes is being approached and take note. Watch Godzilla and take note studios, they remain FAITHFUL to the classics though they have their fresh approaches but most importantly they have SOUL ie a story, plot, character development and depth in addition to awesome fight scenes. Apes is how you do a reboot.

    What a mess, studios today are being run by vapid clueless people.

    • JBug

      I’m calling that Godzilla isn’t going to be amazing (less than 60 on RT) and that TMNT is going to be better than bad (over 50 on RT). I understand the excitement around Godzilla, but in the end of the day it’s not interesting no matter how well produced it is. The title character has zero personality. There is nothing thought/emotion provoking about a giant lizard destroying cities and fighting giant bugs. How is this going to be good? I’ll admit it looks awesome, but I can’t see this being good.

      • Arthur Dent

        Total fail.

        Godzilla is going to be about man dealing with an unstoppable force of nature. It’s not about Godzilla contemplating the question to the ultimate answer of life, the universe, and everything over a nice cup of Earl Grey. The title character doesn’t need to be deep or introspective, it’s about the people around him.

        I predict 80+ for Godzilla on RT. Easy.

      • JBug

        Haha, great comment. I hope you’re right. Even if it is about man dealing with an unstoppable force of nature (which will probably lead to a monster show down in the 3rd act so don’t get your hopes up), since when are disaster movies above 80 on RT? The trailers and posters look incredible, but this looks to be setting itself up like MoS.

      • Arthur Dent

        I’m holding out hope for Godzilla, X-Men, and Guardians of the Galaxy this summer.

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Early reports from advanced screenings indicate Godzilla the kaiju will have limited screen time. Apparently, if you happen to enjoy slow-burn monster reveals like what you saw in Jaws, Jurassic Park and Alien, there’s a good chance you’ll like the film. Most twitter reviewers said the movie was either very good or fantastic. :)

      • Werefon

        Still, works for me!

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Early reports from advanced screenings indicate Godzilla the kaiju will have limited screen time. Apparently, if you happen to enjoy slow-burn monster reveals like what you saw in Jaws, Jurassic Park and Alien, there’s a good chance you’ll like the film. Most twitter reviewers said the movie was either very good or fantastic. :)

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Early reports from advanced screenings indicate Godzilla the kaiju will have limited screen time. Apparently, if you happen to enjoy slow-burn monster reveals like what you saw in Jaws, Jurassic Park and Alien, there’s a good chance you’ll like the film. Most twitter reviewers said the movie was either very good or fantastic. :)

      • Werefon

        RT rating? JUST NO.

      • Werefon

        RT rating? JUST NO.

      • Werefon

        RT rating? JUST NO.

      • Grayden

        You never got the point of Godzilla then. It’s never been about Godzilla the creature/character. It’s always been about mankind dealing with the repercussions of our arrogance that we can control things that we were clearly never meant to control. The loss of life and damage to our cities serves as the reminder that we are very, very small in the face of nature. Godzilla isn’t meant to have a personality; It’s a force of nature. Your loss if deeper metaphorical implications illude you.

      • Grayden

        You never got the point of Godzilla then. It’s never been about Godzilla the creature/character. It’s always been about mankind dealing with the repercussions of our arrogance that we can control things that we were clearly never meant to control. The loss of life and damage to our cities serves as the reminder that we are very, very small in the face of nature. Godzilla isn’t meant to have a personality; It’s a force of nature. Your loss if deeper metaphorical implications illude you.

  • Kyle Chandler

    Thanks for the review! Franchise building should never come at the expense of a solid story. For all their faults, at least the Avengers MCU gets that much.

    DO YOU HEAR THAT BATMAN vs. SUPERMAN vs. WONDERWOMAN vs. CYBORG!?!

    • DEADP00L

      hahahahaaaa!!! Oh DC and the studios have lost their minds. That’s just not only stupid, wonky and atrocious; it’s so grossly juvenile that I can’t even explain just how bad of an idea that is.

    • eternalozzie

      what? no Nightwing or Blue Beetle?

      • http://www.JustPressPlay.net Lex Walker

        You say that, but we all know it’s not REALLY out of the question. I would not put it past them.

    • Don Sterling

      wonderwoman and cyborg won’t have big roles in the movie, they’ll have minor NON super hero roles. i read the script, buffoon.

      • DEADP00L

        They don’t need to be – period.

      • Kyle Chandler

        Reading the erotic DC fanfiction posted to 4chan by the guy that claims to be zach snyder’s go-to caterer probably isn’t all that representative.

      • Don Sterling

        I’m a billlionaire you dirty ape.

      • Werefon

        Speak English Retarded Horse!

    • Werefon

      ….vs. BAD WRITING vs. UNNECESSARY CHARACTERS WHILE YOU HAVE 2 BIGEST HERO’s OF ALL TIME vs. WB CHICKENING PUT vs. BROKEN NECK.

    • Werefon

      ….vs. BAD WRITING vs. UNNECESSARY CHARACTERS WHILE YOU HAVE 2 BIGEST HERO’s OF ALL TIME vs. WB CHICKENING PUT vs. BROKEN NECK.

    • Werefon

      ….vs. BAD WRITING vs. UNNECESSARY CHARACTERS WHILE YOU HAVE 2 BIGEST HERO’s OF ALL TIME vs. WB CHICKENING PUT vs. BROKEN NECK.

  • Grayden

    Anyone who thought Raimi’s series still had life left in it after the third installment is either kidding themselves for the sheer joy of it, or hilariously out of touch. Raimi’s third go killed the franchise in my books.

    Oddly enough, it was like what happened with the Evil Dead series. The first film was a legit horror film, and then the second started to slip just a bit into camp, and the third went full on camp, unintentionally (producing one of the silliest rompfests of all time). Though, I dare say that Raimi fully intended the camp in Spider-man 3. So yeah, I’m fine with Sony rebooting it, because I dunno if I could stand a fourth Spider-man where, for all we know, we’d have gotten Spidey breaking the fourth wall the entire time.

    • Kyle Chandler

      Spiderman 3 felt like a pretty cynical take on that world. It’s been widely said that Raimi didn’t want to include venom, but was strong armed by the studio. Venom was never a character that would fit tonally with those films (or with Raimi), and it manifested as campy emo silliness because that’s in his wheelhouse.

      I think a 4th film could have been interesting, and even though I wasn’t a fan of Spiderman 3, I would have preferred another film rather than seeing the origin story YET AGAIN.

      • Grayden

        I just wouldn’t be able to take any of the characters seriously. Peter and MJs relationship was central to the series and they ended it, so I’m not sure where they would have gone within that context. Not to mention they killed off two of his villains. I just lost all faith in Raimi after that, as far as Spider-man went.

      • Kyle Chandler

        Oh yeah, spiderman 3 was a low-point and I don’t really have confidence SP4 would have been all that better, but at least it wouldn’t be almost the exact same plot of Spiderman 1 like ASM was.

  • Agent777

    So Electro is just the Riddler from Batman Forever?

    • Doug_101

      EXACTLY. 20 minutes into this flick, I turned to my friend and said, “Two words: Batman. Forever.” This movie was awful.

    • Doug_101

      EXACTLY. 20 minutes into this flick, I turned to my friend and said, “Two words: Batman. Forever.” This movie was awful.

    • Werefon

      Or Mr.Freeze from B & R!

  • Davis

    The relationship between gwen and peter is so messed, peter comes across as a terrible boyfriend who needs a restraining order slapped on him.

    Also Andrew Garfield need stop trying to make the cool guy peter parker happen, he’s a geek live with it.

  • Justin Alick

    One of the few reviews of Matt’s that I’ve completely agreed with. I might have even given it a D+, given how reliant it was on its megabudget for pointless filling. The movie was annoying from start to finish.

    • 97point6

      At least they got your money.

    • 97point6

      At least they got your money.

    • 97point6

      At least they got your money.

  • MIXTER

    I am possibly the only one here that really liked TASM, sure it wasnt perfect, and there were bits of Raimi films i missed. But i liked the more grounded tone, the suit, the visuals more subtle. It reminded me more of the 70s Spiderman films/tv show. Just a guy in a suit with powers in a real world setting, and silver eyes. Garfield was great too.

    I’m seeing ASM2 tomorrow, but I think due to mass fan whining, they have gone overboard to try make it too different, and am worried they are gonna go full Schumacher on this. Was hoping 2 would be a better stylistic continuation of 1. Still, i’ll give it a shot.

    • 97point6

      Don’t worry you’ll be happy, just ignore the noise. C- my ass.

    • Werefon

      Don’t worry you’ll cry, just ignore tasteless noise makers. C- his ass.

  • Tom

    I was pretty disappointed with the sequel. I liked the Lizard and that he was the only antagonist of the previous film, we knew enough about him. With this, the villains motivations are pretty ehh. I’d to have like to have seen some backstory on Max Dillon and Peter and Harry’s relationship through some flashbacks or something.

  • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

    Marc Webb was the worse thing that happened to the Spiderman franchise. We went from the Comic Bookish spiderman to the cartoonish spiderman.

    • brNdon

      But his last name is Webb. How could they go wrong?!

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Exactly what I wrote on my blog when they announced the reboot of Spiderman:
        Spiderman trapped in the web of Marc Webb…

      • Werefon

        You should blame Avi Arad for making it more Kid Friendly by cutting down action scenes and additionally dubbing some dialogue over Spider-Man (You probably noticed how Spider-Man kept repeating the same words).

        Some Action that was cut is in trailers and tv-spot (Just like with the first film).

        A lot was cut as in any movie. The problem is They left boring shit and cut more interesting stuff.

  • Arthur Dent

    I hate that goddamn Goblin pic in the article. 1) Same pic has been published everywhere repeatedly. 2) Terrible look for the Goblin

  • mattinacan

    couldn’t agree more, this movie is atrocious

  • Scooter

    I enjoyed the hell out of it. What happened to going to the movies for just a good time and a good smile?

    • 97point6

      Exactly, 80 percent of the commentators here haven’t seen the movie. They’d rather bitch and moan the night away. BTW, saw the 7:00pm presentation, I enjoyed the hell out of it too.

    • 97point6

      Exactly, 80 percent of the commentators here haven’t seen the movie. They’d rather bitch and moan the night away. BTW, saw the 7:00pm presentation, I enjoyed the hell out of it too.

    • 97point6

      Exactly, 80 percent of the commentators here haven’t seen the movie. They’d rather bitch and moan the night away. BTW, saw the 7:00pm presentation, I enjoyed the hell out of it too.

  • NICK НΛRT

    don’t think anyone deserves points for putting dubstep in any film..

  • STAR-LORD #ROUGE SQUAD

    I saw this last Friday and it was over stuffed but the movie it self was better than the first. I think it was just a set up for the universe like Man Of Steel. But I wouldn’t down grade it to a C-,that’s just saying you hate the fact it was already a reboot. I didn’t like the fact they did it and I got banned for my thoughts on IGN years back. The only reason I like comicbook universes is they give you something to look forward to and they did it with this. Not every comicbook movie will be a smooth as Marvel/Disney but you can’t act like you didn’t see this coming. Trust me it’s worth the watch and it wasn’t boring.

    • STAR-LORD #ROUGE SQUAD

      I’m getting old SMFH

  • http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepr1xp/index.html unsean

    The original ASM was pretty bad. Reading the review above it doesn’t sound like much an improvement.

  • Strong Enough

    SO is it really the Batman & Robin for a new generation?!

    • Werefon

      Yes. Even Mr. Freeze is present in film. Sometimes he acts like Dr. Manhattan!

  • https://www.facebook.com/MyPassion4Life?ref=hl Javan Clark

    I’ve seen the movie and fully agree with this review. Don’t waste your time.

  • https://www.facebook.com/MyPassion4Life?ref=hl Javan Clark

    I’ve seen the movie and fully agree with this review. Don’t waste your time.

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    Seeing how the first movie in the rebooted franchise was an F, a C- for this sequel is a fair grade.

    What’s interesting is that on RT, this sequel is now LOWER (56%) that Raimi’s SM3 (63%). Same story at Metacritic.

    That’s indicative of the quality.

    • Aquartertoseven

      TASM should’ve been lower than SM3 too, 70+% on RT was ridiculous.

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Yeah. This cast has been sadly wasted on a substandard reboot under Webb’s direction.

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    BTW on a Godzilla poster reveal thread, I said I wanted to have a t-shirt with the motif on it. So I had it made! Apologies to the copyright prudes.

    See here:
    http://tinypic.com/r/2zs0c2h/8

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    BTW on a Godzilla poster reveal thread, I said I wanted to have a t-shirt with the motif on it. So I had it made! Apologies to the copyright prudes.

    See here:
    http://tinypic.com/r/2zs0c2h/8

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    BTW on a Godzilla poster reveal thread, I said I wanted to have a t-shirt with the motif on it. So I had it made! Apologies to the copyright prudes.

    See here:
    http://tinypic.com/r/2zs0c2h/8

  • pro346

    the review sounds like he’s talking about ironman 3…..

    • Aquartertoseven

      How? That was a great film, 8.5 to any sane, rational mind. A C- is more fitting for Thor 2 than anything else.

  • cineast4

    Nice to see a rating that actually sticks to the tone of the review. Far too many reviewers, with this film in particular (and other blockbuster nonsense), seem to dislike the film(s) but give it good a rating.

  • suspend your mind

    I thought it was enjoyable. Definitely better than the first installment. Their were a couple pacing issues and a plot line couldve been cut here and there but overall it was a blast. This is the first film that they’ve released where Spiderman looked like Spiderman to me. The cinematography was stunning. Loved how they framed alot of shots based on comic panels. (Dutch angles in Peters room with Aunt May). No, it wasn’t perfect, but damn it was fun. The action sequences were by far the best in any Spidey movie thus far. To all the naysayers, atleast go see it. It’s worth the Garfield/Stone chemistry alone.

  • suspend your mind

    I thought it was enjoyable. Definitely better than the first installment. Their were a couple pacing issues and a plot line couldve been cut here and there but overall it was a blast. This is the first film that they’ve released where Spiderman looked like Spiderman to me. The cinematography was stunning. Loved how they framed alot of shots based on comic panels. (Dutch angles in Peters room with Aunt May). No, it wasn’t perfect, but damn it was fun. The action sequences were by far the best in any Spidey movie thus far. To all the naysayers, atleast go see it. It’s worth the Garfield/Stone chemistry alone.

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    I’ve personally talked with people who worked on Spider-Man 4 before it was canceled. Have you?

    Batman has the opportunity to save Ra’s al Ghul. Wayne says at the beginning of the movie that he’s not an executioner. But at the end, he’s like “I don’t have to save you.” If the film had made it that Ra’s refused Batman’s help, that would be different. Instead, Batman leaves him to die, thus undermining Batman’s “Do Not Kill” review.

    And thanks for calling back past reviews. Glad you remembered them. Shows you care.

    • Grayden

      I would argue that not saving someone is no where near the same as outright killing them. It’s a very fine line, I’ll grant you, but there’s still a line between the two. Furthermore, how can you save someone who so clearly does not want to be saved?

      Even on the night of the attack Ra’s could have retreated when he knew Batman wasn’t going to give up. Batman knew that Ra’s would never stop, and instead of futily pleading with Ra’s to reconsider his plan and let Batman bring Gotham back, Bruce made the only choice he could: Let Ra’s die. As he was perfectly willing to do, as there were no pleas for help. That’s not the kind of man Ra’s was. He’d rather die in his duty than fail and be captured. Yet, he destroyed the controls of the train so that Batman couldn’t stop it. You see him close his eyes and accept his death. He didn’t curse Batman or some other cheesy villianous trope. He sealed his own fate, not Batman.

    • Grayden

      I would argue that not saving someone is no where near the same as outright killing them. It’s a very fine line, I’ll grant you, but there’s still a line between the two. Furthermore, how can you save someone who so clearly does not want to be saved?

      Even on the night of the attack Ra’s could have retreated when he knew Batman wasn’t going to give up. Batman knew that Ra’s would never stop, and instead of futily pleading with Ra’s to reconsider his plan and let Batman bring Gotham back, Bruce made the only choice he could: Let Ra’s die. As he was perfectly willing to do, as there were no pleas for help. That’s not the kind of man Ra’s was. He’d rather die in his duty than fail and be captured. Yet, he destroyed the controls of the train so that Batman couldn’t stop it. You see him close his eyes and accept his death. He didn’t curse Batman or some other cheesy villianous trope. He sealed his own fate, not Batman.

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    I’ve personally talked with people who worked on Spider-Man 4 before it was canceled. Have you?

    Batman has the opportunity to save Ra’s al Ghul. Wayne says at the beginning of the movie that he’s not an executioner. But at the end, he’s like “I don’t have to save you.” If the film had made it that Ra’s refused Batman’s help, that would be different. Instead, Batman leaves him to die, thus undermining Batman’s “Do Not Kill” review.

    And thanks for calling back past reviews. Glad you remembered them. Shows you care.

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    And now you’re banned. I have no more patience for worthless personal attacks.

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    And now you’re banned. I have no more patience for worthless personal attacks.

  • Doug_101

    Great review, Matt. I actually marked it a little lower than that (D+). I was constantly reminded of one thing as I watched it: Batman Forever. Awful. Orci and Kurtzman are godawful and need to go.

  • Gaurav

    I dont understand… Part 2 is thousand times better than part 1 which
    was a supreme messy disaster… still on rotten tomatoes… part 1 holds
    73% and part 2 has 55%…ufff!!!!
    Except action to non-action
    ratio….i like every other thing about the movie… i wish if they had
    shortened some talkative portions to made it crisp….but overall..
    excellent movie…
    2nd… i dont understand… if Rhino was just for
    introduction.. why he has to be even added in any of the promo….it
    gave false impression that spidey gonna fight with all 3 villains
    simultaneously…

  • Gaurav

    I dont understand… Part 2 is thousand times better than part 1 which
    was a supreme messy disaster… still on rotten tomatoes… part 1 holds
    73% and part 2 has 55%…ufff!!!!
    Except action to non-action
    ratio….i like every other thing about the movie… i wish if they had
    shortened some talkative portions to made it crisp….but overall..
    excellent movie…
    2nd… i dont understand… if Rhino was just for
    introduction.. why he has to be even added in any of the promo….it
    gave false impression that spidey gonna fight with all 3 villains
    simultaneously…

  • Don Sterling

    matt goldberg isnt so bright, have you heard of ip blockers? lol

    • mattinacan

      tool

      • Don Sterling

        Nimrod

    • mattinacan

      tool

  • Don Sterling

    matt goldberg isnt so bright, have you heard of ip blockers? lol

  • Don Sterling

    well said Andrew, Matt thinks he’s the smartest person in the world. you’ll probably get banned for correcting him.

  • Don Sterling

    well said Andrew, Matt thinks he’s the smartest person in the world. you’ll probably get banned for correcting him.

  • Pingback: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Reviews: What Did You Think?

  • the REAL Ultimate Spider-Man!

    Solution: Kill Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) and introduce Miles Morales!

  • the REAL Ultimate Spider-Man!

    Solution: Kill Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) and introduce Miles Morales!

  • pandapool

    I give it an A.

    Great action, amazing special effects, great chemistry and performances from all the leads. The only complaint I have is that there wasn’t enough Electro! Hated the first TASM, but absolutely loved this one. Best Spidey film yet! Can’t wait for the rest :)

  • STAR-LORD #ROUGE SQUAD

    You might get banned for that LMMFAO

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    He did!

  • STAR-LORD #ROUGE SQUAD

    Remind me never to get on your bad side. But I don’t take it personal if I disagree with a review,at least your accurate most of the time.

  • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

    It’s not a matter of “accuracy”. I don’t care whether or not people agree with me. I care if they behave themselves. If you act like a troll or are rude in general, you get banned.

  • STAR-LORD #ROUGE SQUAD

    True dat sir,true dat.

  • JBug

    Matt, way to take out the trash today! Screw freedom of speech. Here’s to keeping the peace.

  • JBug

    Matt, way to take out the trash today! Screw freedom of speech. Here’s to keeping the peace.

  • Farrell

    Devin Faraci should take lessons from you. He bans people for disagreeing with him.

  • Farrell

    according to me and half the internet.

  • Farrell

    i can do my part, which is skip the film and refuse to support them financially.

  • Farrell

    no, it is not just my opinion that its a shitty movie, like you said it was earlier. just correcting you.

  • Farrell

    of course one person cannot personally stop this from happening, that’s obvious. but the point is they can do all they can to contribute. just because i cannot stop Orci and Kurtzman does not mean i should start watching their shitty films. i dont watch them because they’re terrible and in turn i’m choosing to not support them financially. just because i can’t stop them doesn’t mean i actually want to contribute to their continued success. now do you have anything substantial to offer or are you just trolling to get a reaction?

  • Farrell

    my original response was to the guy who said Goldberg’s opinion means nothing. it does, because half the reviews agree. that’s not acting like my opinion is right. i was correcting the first guy. and no one is claiming they can get Orci and Kurtzman fired, so i’m not sure what you’re talking about.

  • mattinacan

    ready for the ban hammer again? see you next time!

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    Deprived of food and water in your mom’s basement again huh?
    Try and get out sometime. The sun helps.

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    Two different review systems I listed.
    Indicative = serving as a sign

    For example, Moe Greene’s comments are indicative of an immature mind…

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    Two different review systems I listed, encompassing critics and users.
    Indicative = serving as a sign

    For example, Moe Greene’s comments are indicative of an illogical mind.

Click Here