The Amazing Spider-Man

RegularKarate · July 05, 2012, 12:24:24 PM

Did no one see this?

I did. It stinks, but there are some good things in it:

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are really good in this. If they had a better movie to be in, I would have applauded this thing for focusing on the characters over action sequences.

I feel like a second movie might actually be good. Half of this dumb thing was retreading the origin story we saw not that long ago (that was only slightly changed for what seems like setting up the events of the sequel). With some better writing and CG, I could see the second one being really entertaining (let's face facts, they are going to make a sequel).

The rest is pretty awful though. Terrible villain and the worst third act I've seen in a long time.

©brad · July 05, 2012, 12:42:51 PM

Man I can't remember the last movie with so many conflicting reviews all from people I trust! A good buddy of mine just raved about it and he's one of us.

Meh, I'll just see Savages this weekend instead.

modage · July 05, 2012, 12:52:55 PM

Skip both!

See 'Beasts' or "Magic Mike."

©brad · July 05, 2012, 01:02:55 PM

Good call! Dying to see both.

Was Savages not good either?

modage · July 05, 2012, 01:21:42 PM

Nope. Baaad script. Benicio is fun/nuts though.

Pubrick · July 05, 2012, 05:58:44 PM

skip modage!

see RK!

polkablues · July 13, 2012, 01:36:03 AM

Not only was this better than the Raimi Spider-mans, it was SO MUCH better than them in every conceivable way that whereas I was mildly indifferent to Raimi's films in the past, I now actively dislike them, having a direct comparison to show me everything they did wrong. Not that this one is a perfect movie, or even a great movie, or at times even a very good movie, but I don't remember how I planned on ending this sentence.

To recap: too drunk to review, but I liked it. Garfield/Stone > Maguire/Dunst.

modage · July 13, 2012, 07:55:53 AM

Quote from: polkablues on July 13, 2012, 01:36:03 AM
Garfield/Stone > Maguire/Dunst.

This part may be true but not in this film, it's not.

My ramblings here but FilmCritHulk says it better than I could have. And then there's this...

©brad · July 13, 2012, 09:00:17 AM

You see! Two people I know and trust have completely opposite opinions. I'm almost afraid to see this now.

RegularKarate · July 13, 2012, 10:25:21 AM

I gotta hop on board with Mod's negativity this time.
Polka has lost his mind. I'm going to assume he saw it drunk and further got confused because of his Emma Stone induced pants tightening.

and Spiderman 2 was good, guys.

Fernando · July 13, 2012, 11:14:28 AM

Quote from: ©brad on July 13, 2012, 09:00:17 AM
You see! Two people I know and trust have completely opposite opinions. I'm almost afraid to see this now.

haha yes, I was already belittling the movie without seeing it, right now im a ship lost at sea.

polkablues · July 13, 2012, 11:50:25 AM

To clarify, I got drunk AFTER seeing the movie. Maybe it's a byproduct of lowered expectations, but I spent the whole movie thinking, "why on earth do some people hate this so much?"

RegularKarate · July 13, 2012, 12:23:02 PM

Quote from: polkablues on July 13, 2012, 11:50:25 AM
"why on earth do some people hate this so much?"

Read that filmcrithulk review that Mod linked to. It really does nail why the movie doesn't work for me.

polkablues · July 13, 2012, 12:49:24 PM

See, and I can read that and get it. He lays out his case, and I can totally understand how all of those issues are problems. But none of it was enough to make me dislike the movie. All those critiques and more can be leveled at the Raimi films as well.

I think this one really does boil down to personal preference. If the movie hooked you, you can look past all those problems. If it didn't, you can't.