Reel Features Ticket 04
This is one of those scenarios where I really wanted this movie to be a success because I enjoyed the first movie from 2012.
The Reboot had a decent cast with a reasonably competent story that retold Spider-Man's origins with a fresher perspective and the first on-screen appearance of Gwen Stacy - Peter Parker's first love interest from the comics, and judging from the performance of Emma Stone in this movie, the more likable one. Now, for the context of that statement - I do not dislike the character of Mary-Jane Watson. No. Far from it. I despise the way she was written for Kiersten Dunst's performance, which in my opinion she got progressively worse and more insufferable with each sequel. With Emma, you believed that she was Gwen. Her delivery of her lines were natural and there was good chemistry between her and Andrew and she just came across as a very likable character.
So seeing as how well the first movie did, you'd think that this follow-up would build on the premise that was established from the former and show Parker adjusting more to his duties as a crime-fighter, his studies and his relationship with Gwen. For the most he does this and Andrew did what Tobey Maguire did not do enough of from the Raimi Trilogy and that was Spidey tell jokes. Because this is a core dynamic of Spidey's character. He uses humour as a facade to mask his true feelings and to alleviate tension
With the clip above to me is true Spider-Man behaviour. He's reprimanding a car-thief but doing it in such an amusing fashion that you wonder what he'll do to him next. This was a major component that was sorely lacking from the first 3 movies. I think the only joke Maguire cut in the first movie was "that's a cute outfit. did your husband make it for you?" right there shows that Maguire could do the humour of the webslinger and yet the script does not provide him with more comedic material to work with.
The story is much less competent than the previous with Parker & Stacy constantly going back and forth with their breakups and makeups to the point that it gets insufferable. I appreciate that couples in real-life can have on and off relationships but even so I don't think it was this repetitive in the movie.
The reunion between Harry Osborn feels really forced where there doesn't appear to be any chemistry between Garfield and Dane DeHaan. Now, Dane plays a very good Harry Osborn as someone who really resents what his father has treated him and revealing what has been passed onto him regarding the medical condition that kills him. With James Franco and Tobey, there was an actual connection between them as friends. Here, there's none of that and that's really disappointing.
And the way that it's handled with attempting to cure Harry of his illness with lines of "we just need more time" and yet this is never expanded upon, to the point that HISHE resolved the plot issues by saying that Harry's company would be able to take Parker's blood and find a way to synthesise a cure from Parker's blood.
When the fans have a better understanding of how to resolve plot holes when compared to a multi-million dollar studio - there is a problem!
Jamie Foxx is one of the few aspects that I can't complain about. I enjoyed his performance as Max Dillon and his alter-ego Electro. Although I do question how Electro got his suit after he's helped to escape from his containment in Prison.
Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone's performance is the only other acting aspect that I have nothing bad to say about. They are just a treat to watch together. Their timing and delivery is authentic and they actually seem like a real couple on-screen. Plus they actually dated each other in real life for a few years until they reported broke in 2015. Which is a shame because they were a nice couple.
The biggest problem that Amazing 2 had is pacing and consistency. As mentioned the way on and off situation between Peter and Gwen got jarring and you felt like yelling at the screen 'will you make your mind up?!' and the fact that writing was lazy in how they could have resolved Osborn's situation.
Equally so I felt the angle with resolving the Richard Parker situation from the first movie where Peter finds his secret lab in an abandoned Subway Station and finds his father's computer with a video message explaining what had happened. When you take into account that this series was based on the quest for Peter to learn the truth about his parents and it's resolved with something as lack-luster as this? That felt like a let-down.
The suit I cannot complain about in the slightest because this is possibly the comic-book-accurate version of the suit. That's not to say that the first 3 movie costumes were anything to dismiss, but when you look at the comic-book counterpart and then see what was produced for this sequel it's almost like the character has stepped out of the pages of the comic book and onto the big screen.
I didn't expect the movie to go with the Gwen Stacy death story. But I suppose to be true to Spidey's lore then it had to happen at some point in a movie adaptation. Just a shame it had to be Emma Stone's portrayal because she made that role so likable and memorable. You feel the emotion from Parker because he did everything that he could to save his love and yet his webbing couldn't reach her in time. But as it's been pointed out over the years, this is where he learned not to repeat the same mistake with Mary-Jane by firing out more webbing to support the rest of her body and not just her front which because he had not sent out more web is what contributed to her death when her head snapped onto the floor.
The ending definitely left the door open to a sequel but it was revealed that Garfield had been fired from the series due to no-showing a Sony meeting and bad-mouthing the movie in interviews and other press related events. While he was right in that the movie was far from perfect he definitely earned some minus points for the lack of tact. And this is me saying this as a fan of Andrew Garfield. 'Very talented performer and likable guy from what I understand. But it's often said:"Discretion is the better act of valor." So, while I am disappointed why he got fired from the role, I'm not surprised either. Because you don't bite the hand that feeds you.
We wouldn't see another iteration of Spider-Man until Tom Holland was cast in 2016' Captain America: Civil War as a much younger Peter Parker than had previously been betrayed. Whereas in the last 2 incarnations, Parker had been portrayed as entering the last years of High School to starting University, this version of Parker is midway through High school at 15.
In conclusion: Amazing Spider-Man 2 is a mess. There are elements that I enjoy from the chemistry of the leading protagonists, to the authenticity of the suit and the humour of Garfield, but that's it. The writing is all over the place to the point that a YouTube channel fixed the problems in the video further up from here. That really highlights how problematic a Production is when a YouTube video has more of a grasp on how to execute a Movie story more.
Take a look if you're genuinely curious. But I'd avoid this one. Because when you have Spider-Man 3 laughing at your problems - that says a lot.
You can purchase Amazing Spider-Man 2 from
Thunderbirds Are Go | Up from the Depths Part 2 Review