A(nother) Negative Review of The Amazing Spider-Man 2
This doesn't look good. And I'm talking quality, not quantity.
I saw TASM2 last Thursday with some friends. Personally, I went in with low expectations. Every commercial for the film made me feel worse and worse. Learning Electro's origin ahead of time really set the bar low. Seeing an early screen cap of the new Green Goblin made me cringe.
So I went in without much hope. The movie wasn't going to look good and it was very clear that there would be little-to-know faithfulness to the comics. That last bit isn't necessarily the most important trait for a comic book movie, but it matters to me. Especially when the series is one I've loved since I could read.
Even with the bar set so low, I was disappointed. The only item that surprised me was that I actually liked the new look of Spidey's costume -- it looked more realistic than ever before, especially while it was in motion. Most of the pre-release images made it look like CGI rubbish -- turns out, it was the best part of the movie for me. I loved the way the costume bunched up and moved with the wind. I'd take two hours of web-swinging over most of the rest of the movie.
I'm going to jump into spoilers in a moment. I don't have any real positives to say without spoiling something, so I'll just leave folks up here with my Arbitrary Rating of 3/10. And at least one of those points is because the title had "Spider-Man" somewhere in it... Even though it barely followed a single comic issue or arc.
SPOILERS BELOW THE SPIDER!
Swing away or be spoiled! Majorly!
If you're still reading, it's your own fault for being spoiled -- I made a half-hearted attempt at warning you! I'm just going to go for an item-to-item basis of what I didn't like. Maybe toss it a bone here and there, maybe. For the most part, this is just nerd-rage. If you want to save yourself some grief, just know that I didn't like it. I won't necessarily suggest that folks skip it, but I suspect I'll never watch it again. And, if I ever buy it, it's just because I'm sick and twisted -- much the same reason I own a copy of Spider-Man 3...
Maxwell is more of a nerd than this Peter ever was, hmmm.
Electro: Love Jamie Fox. Didn't mind that they made his character a stalker/creep, even if that's not normally an Electro trait. They at least tried to give him a reasonable pathos for becoming a super villain -- he wanted attention and was angry at the world. Unfortunately, they used a boring stereotype to get there -- Jamie Fox's character was a meek scientist picked on by his boss who, at one point or another, stole his idea/plan for a major scientific breakthrough. UHG. I'd much rather they stuck with the comic book motivation: "OH CRAP I'VE GOT SUPER POWERS! TIME TO ROB A BANK!" I'd totally do it. I did enjoy the background music they kept playing when we got Electro's point of view. It was a nice underscore to Electro's shifting moods and damaged psyche.
Electro's origin has never been particularly dignified, but the fact that they changed it to include electric eels really irks me. Not every villain in the series has to have the same Oscorp tie-in or be immediately related to an animal. It confines the universe to such a small, meaningless scale. The Amazing Spider-Man movie-verse lacks and depth of character (or characters) because it's always the same old shtick. What a waste.
All-blue Electro looked bad. Would have much preferred a normal-ish Jamie Fox throwing some voltage around. And the final fight between Spidey and Electro was foolish. Electro can, apparently, teleport/move as fast as electricity. Spider-Man should not have been able to dodge almost every blow and run circles around the supposed major villain of the film. But he did, and then the final blow just didn't bother to make much sense.
Le Sigh.
Peter Parker: In this series, he isn't a nerd. He's a skateboarder. He reminds me a lot of my youngest brother -- same clothes, same hats, same instagram photos. That's fine -- I like updated characters (see Tony Stark in Iron Man films vs comics). They also made it so there is no indication that he's intelligent. In the comics, he's a genius-level character. Sure, Marvel has quite a few of those, but this one's my favorite, and taking that away from him is unfortunate. Maybe, just maybe they'll use the events at the end of the film to inspire Peter to excel... But that might be hoping for too much.
Classic outfit with movie spiders.
Spider-Man: I felt a bit better about his quips and antics in this film, though still think Andrew Garfield introduces too much "scathing sarcasm" without being enough of a "jovial jokester." Spider-Man's jokes are supposed to be bad, but I always considered them more along the lines of "Dad Humor," not "Hipster Humor."
Norman Osborn: A complete waste. Wrong wrong wrong and awful. Maybe this was an attempt to keep comic fans guessing, but that didn't make it any better. His foolish claws were unwarranted and were another visual slap to the face. This film was full of 'em.
Harry Osborn: Didn't care for most of this characters scenes. There was one or two that were fairly decent, but otherwise he came off as an uneducated, cruel, and entitled prick. Harry Osborn is never shown to be decent or interesting, beyond that he was a "good friend" to Peter at one point in their past (not shown on screen at all). Then, after being removed from the head of the company, he immediately becomes homicidal, ready to kill or, at the very least, torture folks to get his way.
The Green Goblin: Even the campy Goblin armor from Raimi's Spider-Man was better than the absolutely ridiculous looking farce they offered us in this film. That's not even mentioning that the plot-device armor (literally, armor), had some sort of "healing" ability inherent in it... Yet Norman wasn't mentioned wearing it at any point. And of course, all Osborns must now how to use a Goblin Glider immediately, even if they've never seen one before... I found this character insulting to fans and a huge waste of a villain.
THIS is your goblin, folks. Why!? Who said this was a good idea!? Who!?
Gwen Stacy: Didn't care for her at any point in the film, and I generally really like Emma Stone. They kept dangling the Europe red-herring, but it wasn't particularly useful -- non-comic fans had no idea that Gwen Stacy ever actually left for Europe, and comic fans could smell what was really coming a mile off.
This movie made some serious (and unfortunate) changes to her death. In the comics, the Green Goblin (Norman, a well-known enemy of Spider-Man, at this point), hurls Gwen from the top of a bridge (the images and text from the comic actually confused which bridge it was). Spidey shoots a web to save her from falling to her death. Turns out, the sudden stop from his web breaks her neck and she is dead when he gets to her. Peter debates that the Goblin could have snapped her neck before throwing her, but it is pretty clear that Peter made a major mistake and caused the death of someone he loved, fully assisted by the Goblin -- if Peter had planned it better, he could have prevented the whiplash by using two strategically placed web-strands.
In the movie, the Green Goblin (Harry, newly dosed up with some magic spider venom, who suddenly realizes that Spider-Man is really his friend Peter) hurls Gwen into a clock tower. Spidey saves her from the initial fall and immediately begins fighting the Goblin in the tower while Gwen tries to find cover. The ensuing fight causes the clock tower to fall apart and Gwen to plummet to the ground below. Spidey jumps down and shoots a single strand to try and catch her. We see if barely miss a multitude of debris as it finally connects with Gwen, right before she's about to hit the ground -- and her back arcs backwards. Not clear if her neck or spine is broken, but she is most definitely dead. Except, the Goblin's involvement in the actual death was involuntary (it occurred during the fighting, not in any way he planned), and Peter really couldn't have saved her -- the debris prevented him from using more than one strand even if he thought about it, and any more delay would have had Gwen hitting the ground before he got to her.
... Not so much. Death by general irresponsibility, really.
Sure, they got a decent camera angle to catch the famous comic-book frame. Ish. Sure, Gwen died in the end. But bother Peter and the Goblin's responsibility in this death were dramatically reduced with the way this film portrays it, and that is supposed to be one of the defining moments of Parker's life and his relationship with the Goblin.
The Rhino: Looked absolutely awful, but I was ok with it as an ending.
The Rhino, who now comes equipped with heavy artillery.
After the credits: What. The. Hell. Not only was it not Spider-Man (or Sony...), but it looked rushed, the characters all looked stupid. Maybe this is a lead up to a Sony/Fox team-up down the line... But seriously, make mine Marvel. It makes me sad that the rights to my favorite characters are in the hands of folks who have no idea how to use them.
That's all I feel like complaining about. Please offer any argument you have. I'd like to see some merit, but I really can't. Even the obvious tie in for the Sinister Six has me depressed, considering I've already seen what the Goblin and Rhino look like (and it really, really isn't any good).
The one credit I do give to the movie, and it's something I loved about the first one, is the color and cinematography. It has great use of color, and just a real feeling of a comic movie. That, however, doesn't cover of the bizarre change in Harry (I was baffled by his actions at the end, which I felt had zero motivation) and other strange story elements. I also feel the Rhino suit was just, ugh, wtf is this. I didn't mind Electro's motivations and story arc, though you do bring up a good point that the lowly scientist having his ideas stolen is very cliched. Not that you probably care, but there was apparently a shot cut out of the US version of the movie where the severed head of Harry Osborn, Sr. is in one of those "Sinister Six" compartments. So, ah, yeah, wtf.
And the post credit X-Men scene....I had been REALLY excited since I heard "X-Men give Spidey an assist in post credits scene" in an article headline. But, umm, that? It made no sense? Was that military guy carrying the mutant spider venom in the case? Isn't this Vietnam in the 70's era of Days of Future Past? What does this have to do with Spiderman? Wtf is Mystique doing? Why were there so many quick cuts without ever explaining or showing what we were seeing?
I agree on the color (which surprised me) and that they had a lot of nice shots. And I even liked Spidey in the Spidey suit, both in looks and action.
The after the credits scene was an advertisement for Days of Future Past. A hastily cut one that made me less excited for the movie. Apparently this was due to a director conflict -- the guy could work on Spider-Man with Sony if he included the add from X-Men (Fox). Which makes me kind of angry. There is absolutely no loyalty to telling a good, coherent story. Instead, it's all about the money. Sure, that's pretty much a constant in the US, but stay away from my comic characters.
The one credit I do give to the movie, and it's something I loved about the first one, is the color and cinematography. It has great use of color, and just a real feeling of a comic movie. That, however, doesn't cover of the bizarre change in Harry (I was baffled by his actions at the end, which I felt had zero motivation) and other strange story elements. I also feel the Rhino suit was just, ugh, wtf is this. I didn't mind Electro's motivations and story arc, though you do bring up a good point that the lowly scientist having his ideas stolen is very cliched. Not that you probably care, but there was apparently a shot cut out of the US version of the movie where the severed head of Harry Osborn, Sr. is in one of those "Sinister Six" compartments. So, ah, yeah, wtf.
ReplyDeleteAnd the post credit X-Men scene....I had been REALLY excited since I heard "X-Men give Spidey an assist in post credits scene" in an article headline. But, umm, that? It made no sense? Was that military guy carrying the mutant spider venom in the case? Isn't this Vietnam in the 70's era of Days of Future Past? What does this have to do with Spiderman? Wtf is Mystique doing? Why were there so many quick cuts without ever explaining or showing what we were seeing?
I agree on the color (which surprised me) and that they had a lot of nice shots. And I even liked Spidey in the Spidey suit, both in looks and action.
DeleteThe after the credits scene was an advertisement for Days of Future Past. A hastily cut one that made me less excited for the movie. Apparently this was due to a director conflict -- the guy could work on Spider-Man with Sony if he included the add from X-Men (Fox). Which makes me kind of angry. There is absolutely no loyalty to telling a good, coherent story. Instead, it's all about the money. Sure, that's pretty much a constant in the US, but stay away from my comic characters.