|
|
Post by ck100 on May 2, 2024 3:54:54 GMT
I haven't seen it so I don't really have any comments. It cost a lot of money, made a lot of money, and the Spider-Man franchise went onward like before.
Leonard Maltin Movie Guide Review:
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014) - 2.5 out of 4 stars "Although this sequel to the 2012 SPIDER-MAN reboot continues to seem like Hollywood's attempt to drive another Marvel comic book franchise into the ground, the lack of exposition this time, plus a nifty trio of villains led by Foxx's loopy Electro, make this outing a bit more fun than Garfield's first spin in the tangled web. Free-flying scenes through the landscape of N.Y.C. skyscrapers and amped-up action set pieces will satisfy fans, although it doesn't move the quality needle very far for Spidey's screen persona. Look for the usual cameo from co-creator Stan Lee as a guest at Peter Parker's graduation. Chris Cooper, Denis Leary, and Martin Sheen appear unbilled. 3-D Panavision."
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on May 2, 2024 4:15:35 GMT
I’m not much of a fan, but there are some good parts.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on May 2, 2024 4:32:24 GMT
I liked it more than the first reboot simply because it didn't feel like a carbon copy of another film, but it is a spectacular fuck up. It's like the studio not only learned nothing from Spider-Man 3, but put those problems on steroids.
In retrospect, though, I'm glad these movies exist because of No Way Home.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winston Wolfe on May 2, 2024 4:50:28 GMT
Not terrible, but easily the weakest Spider-Man movie after 3. Electro is a mediocre villain (much better in No Way Home) and the story overall isn't that engaging. Dehaan's Goblin is a decent interpretation (for the 5 minutes he's in this) and Gwen's death scene was done well, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on May 2, 2024 6:51:50 GMT
Never bothered with it. The first Amazing Spider-Man was enough torment for me. Not a patch on the Raimi films.
|
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on May 2, 2024 8:51:39 GMT
5/10 Its alright but nothing special.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 2, 2024 12:05:58 GMT
Never saw the Garfield Spider-Man movies, they look terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by janntosh on May 2, 2024 12:06:43 GMT
It’s bad. But it actually has some of the best visuals and swinging scenes of any Spider-Man movie
Also was cool to see aspects of the story followed up in No Way Home
|
|
|
|
Post by James on May 2, 2024 16:13:21 GMT
It's my least favourite Spidey movie with feeling messy but I think it has some strong moments. Garfield and Stone have good chemistry, and are just good in the roles generally, and the costume is an improvement over the first TASM, maybe one of the best looking in all the movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by 博:Dr.BLΔD€:锯 on May 3, 2024 10:08:05 GMT
I enjoyed both of the Garfield spideys, and great to see him back alongside Toby recently. I always like me a super-hero movie, Marvel a tad more than DC as I learnt to read via Tales to Astonish and DD as a kid. I'm thankfully not as preciously picky as a lot of the pundits here...if you're brought up with Nicholas Hammond as TV Spidey, Adam West .... and Lou Ferrigno as the green guy...bless'em all ....you’ll know what I mean. The two post-Raimi Spideys were initially odd though..... seeing tennis icon Andy Murray look-alike portraying the Web-Slinger. But both movies for me served a lot of Aces . (Groan  ) |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on May 3, 2024 15:03:27 GMT
I never got on board, primarily I was fully against rebooting an already highly successful Spider-Man trilogy, & that soon no less. I wanted zero part of rewarding that.
I think there's room after No Way Home for another Garfield turn, maybe Secret Wars?
|
|
|
|
Post by Roberto on May 5, 2024 17:51:56 GMT
Nowhere near as good as the Tobey's of course, but I enjoyed both the Garfield ones. Best part was the credits though!
|
|
