Science Fiction and Fantasy Community Forums

Full Version: Spiderman 2
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Spiderman 2 is getting AWESOME reviews. Ebert said he is amazed about how good it is and it may be the best super hero movie he's ever seen. Thats high praise. Can't wait to see it. I'm sure most of you guys will see it before me since I always wait until the crowds die down a little so make sure you post what you think about it when it comes to your town.

DeamondBleed

I hope it's better than the first, that movie really sucked.

I'm hoping to see the Punisher in the next week, it's amazing the number of Super Hero movies coming out right now.
Saw the movie this evening, found it to be excellent. My main complaints with the first one was the overblown press and promotion, and since the sequel didn't have that, I went into it without the annoyance of that months-long media blitz. Plus, every blasted introductory superhero movie is one that establishes the character, and they all follow more or less the same basic track. The sequels are where they get to cut loose.

And Spidey 2 does that. A great story that finds Parker resolving his identity. It totally builds on the first movie, and if the hints given are any indication, the third film will continue that trend.

I was way happy to see Bruce Campbell in the role of a picky theater usher. Very funny! Also enjoyed seeing Donna Murphy (Star Trek:Insurrection) again, as Doc Ock's wife.

Alfred Molina is so great for Doc Ock. You wish that all movies had casting as dead-on as this.

I confess I can't stand Kirsten Dunst. I regret that it's now too late in the series to dump her. I really think that she brings down many of the scenes that could be very powerful. Just MO, of course.
I don't understand why people didn't like the first Spider-man and, to be honest, I wasn't aware of such criticisms until now. I think both movies are great, but this one isn't burdened with the task of building Spidey's character.

Both movies have been very faithful to the classic Spider-man premise and themes. I am amazed that they were able to get away with being so faithful to the original comic. Obviously, the movie plots are very condensed, and so far the relationship with Betty Brant has been downplayed considerably (and poor Gwendolyn is nowhere to be seen, but that's okay because I didn't like the whole I-killed-Gwendolyn-I'm-A-Loser storyline anyway).

Had a great time watching Spidey 2. Mary Jane, especially, got some quality scream time before her screamfest ensued. And Aunt May was simply fantastic. Who wouldn't want her in their family?

I was blown away by the small parts a lot of people played. Donna Murphy, whom I have only seen in "Star Trek: Insurrection", was stunning, and her role lasted only a few minutes. She is one beautiful lady who projects a lot of class and sensuality.

Bruce Campbell was a hoot as the rude usher.

And for a brief moment I thought they had sold J. Jonah Jameson down the river, but then they redeemed him immediately in a very funny scene.

It was, all around, every bit as good as the first movie and then some.
Quote:Originally posted by Michael
I don't understand why people didn't like the first Spider-man and, to be honest, I wasn't aware of such criticisms until now. I think both movies are great, but this one isn't burdened with the task of building Spidey's character.

I admit, I've got nothing solid against the first one. I didn't expect to like it, then I saw it and thought it was great. Then I kept hearing about it, incessantly. Maybe I'm just dumb that way, but I get real tired of hearing about stuff all the time. People were talking about it like it was the best thing since indoor plumbing, and while it was good, I didn't think it was that good. As I said, it was the incessant hype that nearly killed it for me, not the movie itself.

Quote:
I was blown away by the small parts a lot of people played. Donna Murphy, whom I have only seen in "Star Trek: Insurrection", was stunning, and her role lasted only a few minutes. She is one beautiful lady who projects a lot of class and sensuality.

I agree! Her beauty is devestating! I appreciated that they included her, though, because it showed how Doc Ock was this great man. Totally different from what he becomes. I like villians like that better sometimes. The kind that you know from the get go that they aren't rotten to the core.

Quote:
And for a brief moment I thought they had sold J. Jonah Jameson down the river, but then they redeemed him immediately in a very funny scene.


He was so funny! Sam really packed the laughs into the movie. I loved Ted's small role as Jameson's 'yes man.' :laugh:
Quote:Originally posted by Michael


Bruce Campbell was a hoot as the rude usher.




I completely cracked up during the scene in the hospital when they showed the chainsaw....very reminiscent of Army of Darkness. That scene was definitely all Sam Raimi.
I liked the first one but after a while the green goblin got on my nerves. I'm not one for crazy's. I prefer the ones that go bad too. I liked the way the Doc had a plan so he wouldn't loose control then was over come by it, and his ending was awesome (don't want to go into it - would spoil it for those that haven't seen it).

But I have to say this one was way better than the 1st. There were sub-plots that did a great job building on the main one.
Quote:Originally posted by Ursa
I completely cracked up during the scene in the hospital when they showed the chainsaw....very reminiscent of Army of Darkness. That scene was definitely all Sam Raimi.


Yeah! When I saw the chainsaw my brain yelled "Evil Dead!" :laugh:
The movie really "pulled me into it" emotionally.I liked the first one, but it was a two part movie imo...first act story line, second act action. This one interwove action/story/emotion much more evenly. And those four evil appendages!! When they were first put into operation I felt a real uneasiness that I never feel in the scariest of horror movies...anyone else get that?:ohno:
I was also reminded of "Independence Day" by the hospital scene.

I read an interview with Alfred Molina in which he said they filmed him rising up off the gurney, singing the opening stanzas of "If I were a rich man". He was preparing to star in a new production of "Fiddler on the Roof" at the time. The puppeteers made his mechanical arms dance to the song. He is hoping that footage gets onto the DvD. So am I.
Yep, he got nominated for a Tony for "Fiddler" this past year, and I believe lost out to, of all people, Hugh Jackman, who's also doing a musical. I believe both are still running.

There's also more than a little similarity to the hospital scene in Sam's earlier film "Darkman," as well as the whole idea of the brilliant scientist, disfigured in an explosion, carrying on his experiments unseen in a huge abandoned warehouse/foundry thingy. Plus direcor John Landis turns up in a cameo in both operating room scenes! :laugh:
Quote:Originally posted by DeamondBleed
I hope it's better than the first, that movie really sucked.

I'm curious. What didn't you like about it. Did you really think it "really sucked" or are you just over-emp[hasizing to make a point?

Quote:I'm hoping to see the Punisher in the next week, it's amazing the number of Super Hero movies coming out right now.

I understand that The Punisher was no better this time than the last time they tried to do it as a live action film with Dolph Lundgren. I passed on it given the previews that I saw, the poor reviews the movie received in general, and the pathetic box office the movie earned. THe movie came and went faster than Superman late for a luncheon.

But in truth, there aren't any more or less "super hero" movies now than there have been in the past. As a genre, the super hero movie has been alive and kicking since the low-budget early days of the theater "shorts" with the Rocketeer, Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon. I don't think that there has been a sudden upsurge in the number of super hero films that are being released, just an upsurge in the budgets for such films, as studios have seen them become a rather proitable venture when done correctly.

For the records I was very pleased with Spider-Man 2. The depth of the characters is what made Marval stand out over DC Comics, and I'm pleased to see the same being true for at least some of their movies.
Quote:Originally posted by DeamondBleed
I hope it's better than the first, that movie really sucked..


Yeah, the first one was really *lame* wasn't it? The main problem I had with it was Defoe's villain, who, even for a comic bad guy, was *completely* over the top. The second one rocks.! I love the elevator scene! :clap: :bg:

RR, I agree with you on the character development in this one. I feel they really exceeded themselves on this one. I had my doubts on Maguire's capabilities from the first one, but this one really *oozes* angst.
Willem Dafoe played the original Green Goblin completely faithfully to the comic. You couldn't have asked for a better performance.

Now, Peter Parker in the first movie was not as angst-ridden as Peter Parker in the second movie, and that is probably a fair complete. When Spidey and the original Green Goblin really got going, Peter's chief motivation had been the death of his girlfriend, Gwen. The Goblin killed her.

The movies have sort of moved Mary Jane Watson into the she played, although she was a fairly brief blip on the radar screen. Mary Jane was her best friend in the comic, and it took her and Peter a while to get together.
I thought that spiderman II was a good movie. I was not really a comics fan, but after the spiderman series (and a little help from the xmen movies) i have now read a few comic books. I see how they can be entertaining. The movie itself, was alright. I liked the petty struggles throughout the movie. And the head newspaper guy was funny. I didn't like MJ when she ran out of her wedding. She looked, well, 'weird'. Overall, on a grading scale, i give it a B.


'Nice spidey suit'

TheBadgerlock

Hello people,

So I had to answer a spider-man thread. I was wondering about what somebody said ealier here of the Spider1. Somehow I cannot understand how someone could get tired of briefly discussing of a movie; be it good or bad - or just annoyingly in between. So I don`t know how the hype could truly ruin it for someone, especially if one has already deemed it an ok film in general. It`s just curious how people are different that way.

I myself liked the first one very much. It was fabulously entertaining as a movie and the story was portrayed with an unexpected freshness. Certainly, I haven`t seen many (older) movies of this type since I`m only an occasional movie-fan. But aside from the mostly necessary predictability of a movie meant for introducing a known story, I think it had a lot of that this second movie threw a little out of proportion; so eventually they might be both just enjoyable. Many reviewers have considered the Spider1 too serious and similar things have been said of the first x-men movie, but I guess that as I am mostly curious to see how an absurd idea can be justified to a moderate realism, I didn`t perhaps pay it too great attention.

Yet some of the plot-twists in Spider2 annoyed me mildly. So, Peter inadvertantly shows his face in the train and all people curiosly stared and contemplated on him and payed him respect (which was one of the finest scenes by the way), but after it, it felt like the writers had suddenly thought that what a heck then, and suddenly there came a flood of revelations and Peter is out there sharing his secret identity left and right that he had years kept secret. I thought it felt a bit sudden; only mildly odd. If I would see it again I wonder if it would change?

The Ock was not a really well justified villain. I felt the Goblin`s change had felt more realistic, even if the Ock was undoubtedly much more credible-looking. Perhaps the are just so many mad scientists you can take seriously, or so I found to my dismay.
I know little of the comic`s plot, but I know some random things here and there. One thing I noticed was that the change or madness in Harry looked so familiar. Every piece of the set, every angle of the camera in that scene looked so like I had seen it before, just like that. I do not know whether it was in the comics, cartoons or just in my head. Did it ring a bell to you guys or is it me who`s mad here?

All and all I think that this film was a loads of more sugary than the first one and realistic relationship or no there was very much of it. It felt rather pathetic of MJ to ready to marry the new guy just in the hopes the he was the Spider.
The utterly happy ending was a bit of a bore. The first movie might not be as angst-ridden Peter`s life here, but it`s the bitter ending rather 'made up for it'. On the other hand all the weighting misfortunes that plagued Peter now were at times too nasty to be really believable. He was a donald duck, only worse. You were gringing and grinning at the same time to that. Yet, it was visually a parade, especially the silly but necessary bike and helmet he had.
Only the Bugle headman, whose name I now forgot, went over board with the banter sometimes. In the end there was the perfect opportunity for him to redeed himself and show the character was cabable of bitterness or something three-dimensional under his constant banter, instead of being just a caricatyre. But he left it to that to my dissapointment.

Oh, does Aunt May actually know of Peter`s little extra-hobby on no?

But what I liked best in the 2 were for one the little interludes that broke free from the relentless action. I remember especially that the 'Raindrops keep falling on my head' was such sweet scene with a totally unexpected choice of music that continued the keep it fresh.
Certainly, the action was beautiful created, even if Peter was a bit more of a hunk than he was in the first, which added a bit to comedy-factor too.

'He just stole that guys pizzas!', the jump backwards from the bike in the crowded street and the elevator scene were indeed nice comedy too. Oh by the way, who on earth Was that guy in the elevator?! I been thinking and thinking but I just can`t remember where I remember him from.

It was very nice the see that the New York of the film looked a little 'un-american' to my eyes. And with that I mean that there was little of the general stereotypes you usually see in tv-shows. Whether or not this is the truth, the out come felt more international and that made it easier watching it.

It would have been wonderful to see if Peter missed the flying with his webs when he decided he would give up his mission. He obviously seemed to enjoy it. Even though the was a scene, I think, where he very nearly professed to be afraid of heights, which was a very amusing though. But also he would enjoy helping and saving people, and his anguish over his assumed responsibility he has tried to fullfill, even with out his special talents, was very heartfeltly illustrated with the burning building scene. Very true bitterness. That`s why it was in a way nearly 'kathartic' to have him recieve people`s gratitude to his face in the train scene.

A nit-picker in me wonders of this: is Peter actually leaving those long threads hanging from the buildings and windows all over the city as he swings around there? Wink
Quote:Originally posted by TheBadgerlock
Yet some of the plot-twists in Spider2 annoyed me mildly. So, Peter inadvertantly shows his face in the train and all people curiosly stared and contemplated on him and payed him respect (which was one of the finest scenes by the way), but after it, it felt like the writers had suddenly thought that what a heck then, and suddenly there came a flood of revelations and Peter is out there sharing his secret identity left and right that he had years kept secret. I thought it felt a bit sudden; only mildly odd. If I would see it again I wonder if it would change?

One of the biggest conceits of superhero comics in the 1930s through 1970s (I don't know about what came after that period) was that these guys in the tight suits can run around making quick wardrobe changes and battling super villains without revealing their faces.

I think the gradual unravelling of Peter's secret is a much more credible consequence of his actions. The people on the train don't know that he is Peter Parker. They only know what his face looks like, and as time goes by, they may start to see him in the faces of similar looking young men.

But the scene underscores the vulnerability of Peter's ego. He is afraid to be true to himself. That is, after all, one of the primary conflicts in the movie (and in the original Spider-man comic -- in fact, he even tried to get rid of his powers on occasion and ended up growing extra arms instead).

Quote:The Ock was not a really well justified villain. I felt the Goblin`s change had felt more realistic, even if the Ock was undoubtedly much more credible-looking. Perhaps the are just so many mad scientists you can take seriously, or so I found to my dismay.

The justification for Ock's change in personality was the little inhibitor chip at the top of the apparatus on his back. It was burned out in the accident. His grief at the loss of his wife (whose death he blamed himself for) and his shame at his failure made him emotionally vulnerable to the manipulations of the artificially intelligent arms.

While all that is explained in the movie, it comes out in about three sentences. I didn't catch it the first time, but I heard what they were saying more carefully the second time I watched the movie.

I think the presentation of this idea was a little weak. They probably should have devoted a few more minutes to developing the threat the arms posed to Ock's integrity.

I don't remember how or why he became a villain in the comic, so I don't know how faithful the movie is to the original concept of his change. But once he gives in to the arms, he is very much like the comic villain.

Quote:I know little of the comic`s plot, but I know some random things here and there. One thing I noticed was that the change or madness in Harry looked so familiar. Every piece of the set, every angle of the camera in that scene looked so like I had seen it before, just like that. I do not know whether it was in the comics, cartoons or just in my head. Did it ring a bell to you guys or is it me who`s mad here?

In the comics, Harry, Jr's insanity was treated similarly to his father's. In the movie, they were evoking the elements from the first movie which had depicted Sr's insanity.

Quote:It felt rather pathetic of MJ to ready to marry the new guy just in the hopes the he was the Spider.

That wasn't why she was ready to marry him. He was a famous hero (not superhero, but he had walked on the moon) who had all the worthy desirable-husband attributes of rich, handsome, and confident.

Mary Jane kissed him in that upside-down fashion to test her feelings. She wanted to see if she could feel the same sparks for John that she had felt for Spider-man (and Peter, whom she kissed at the end of the first movie). And she didn't feel the same way.

One of the crucial things about the Peter-Mary Jane relationship in this movie is that she reached out to Peter BEFORE she found out who he was. She may have been trying to confirm for herself that Peter was, in fact, Spider-man, but she was also testing her feelings for Peter. John had failed the kiss test. Peter was going to be given the opportunity to take it without having to put on the costume.

Mary Jane's attraction to Peter was stronger than her attraction to John. But she also knew, by her wedding day, that she was marrying the wrong guy. She didn't love John. He was just a replacement for Peter. Mary Jane tried to tell him that when they were talking in the backyards of their houses on the night of his birthday.

I think the movie's "happy note" conclusion for the Peter-Mary Jane relationship is a red herring. She may still be at serious risk in the third movie, but if they carry this through logically, she is going to have to wake up and realize she chose a guy who cannot always be there for her.

Quote:Oh, does Aunt May actually know of Peter`s little extra-hobby on no?

I think she figured it out after he rescued her from Doc Ock. She seemed to really be egging Peter on with double-entendres when she was packing her stuff to move.

Quote:'He just stole that guys pizzas!', the jump backwards from the bike in the crowded street and the elevator scene were indeed nice comedy too. Oh by the way, who on earth Was that guy in the elevator?! I been thinking and thinking but I just can`t remember where I remember him from.

Hal Sparks. He hasn't had what I would call a spectacular career, but he seems to have gotten around.

Quote:A nit-picker in me wonders of this: is Peter actually leaving those long threads hanging from the buildings and windows all over the city as he swings around there? Wink


They are biodegradable. :bg:

invicta

check this out if you liked the movie http://heyspidey.poptarts.com

Steve S.

Saw the flick yesterday. I thought it was as good as the first - Liked both very much. I thought the violence was a bit more than the first, (and didn't like that) especially Doc Ock waking up in surgery.

I did like Doc Ock as a villain more that Green Goblin. I wish I hadn't known about the villain beforehand. Knowing it and seeing Peter at the Doc's home with his lovely wife, I knew what the fate of that wife would be. Sad

Besides all the others already mentioned, I liked the portrayal of Harry. When he asked whether Peter would tell him Spidey's identity, his face just kept getting darker.

I really liked that the director took the material seriously and that each character had understandable motives for what they did.

I did enjoy Spidey & the Doc's battles. Well done. Also liked that the Doc's demise was due to his doing the right thing & thereby gaining a measure of redemption.

One slight distraction to me was the Doc's robotic appendages reminded me too much of the 'scutters' from Red Dwarf, where their three-clawed ends also doubled as faces of a sort, showing reactions.

Here's a fun LEGOs version for you:
http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.d...40&qth=400

Cheers,
-Steve S.
Quote:Originally posted by DeamondBleed
I hope it's better than the first, that movie really sucked.

I'm hoping to see the Punisher in the next week, it's amazing the number of Super Hero movies coming out right now.


I'd have to agree with you there (On the Spiderman point) It didn't really have enough action for me. I'm hoping to see it soon
Pages: 1 2