Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - The Movie That Broke MovieBob

[JimB]

I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vasquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

 

[PCPLX]

I will join your movie trauma support group, Movie Bob. I sympathize with that feeling described right at the start of the video... the feeling of something you love being indelibly associated with something you hate. Spidey was my childhood favorite too, and I've been carrying this bitterness around since the FIRST shitty Spiderman Trilogy!

 

[gogool808]

I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vasquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

It's because it refers to my point that you really don't have an opinion and just use phrases people think are amazing. Also that sentence he quoted was actually accurate to the only thing bob said about the spider-man movie that resembles a review. I guess if you want to call that a review it's fine. I just have seen most of his older videos to have more respect from his opinion than that.

 

[Alcaste]

To all those that are saying "I haven't seen ASM2 but Bob says it's the worst thing in creation so I'll condemn it too and avoid it like the plague", I implore you to refrain from having an opinion until you have actually seen it. If you hate it with every fibre of your being too, then fine. Just remember that everything out there (no matter how miraculously outstanding you think it is) will have at least one person giving it an "AAHH!! MY EYES!!!" style review.

That would require us giving over our money, which defeats the purpose of researching criticisms about the movie beforehand. Bad movies don't deserve your money. I'll watch it when I can, but I'm not spending my entire evening and some extra money just to be disappointed again.

 

[JimB]

I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vazquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

It's because it refers to my point that you really don't have an opinion and just use phrases people think are amazing.

Wait, what? Who's "you?" Are you talking to me? Of course I don't have an opinion of the movie; I haven't seen it. It isn't even out in my time zone. But when did my opinion even become part of this conversation? Are you talking about Gerardo Vazquez? Has he even seen the movie yet, and whether he has or hasn't, when did his opinion become part of this? It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue.

 

[anonymity88]

So is the Escapist hiring? Because I'm available. I have no credentials, but I'm available.

Also having the name Webb and working on Spiderman? Well I giggled.

 

[gogool808]

I love the copy-pasting you are doing because you really have nothing else to say other than what Bob said.

Gerardo Vazquez is directly responding to your accusation that Mr. Chipman offered little to no review of the movie. Why on Earth wouldn't he quote Mr. Chipman's own words to rebut your patently false assertion? Why would he make his own arguments when that is not the topic at hand?

It's because it refers to my point that you really don't have an opinion and just use phrases people think are amazing.

Wait, what? Who's "you?" Are you talking to me? Of course I don't have an opinion of the movie; I haven't seen it. It isn't even out in my time zone. But when did my opinion even become part of this conversation? Are you talking about Gerardo Vazquez? Has he even seen the movie yet, and whether he has or hasn't, when did his opinion become part of this? It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue.

did....did you seriously just resort to that? Do I really have to continue this comment with you? Ok to be fair I won't point out that what you said "It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue" is pretty much what you are doing. Actually you are right though, I was talking to "you" because you responded to me. You really don't have an opinion anything. You just regurgitate things from other sources.

Also nothing you are saying is referring to Bob anymore. So it really has nothing to do with this "conversation".

 

[JimB]

Did....did you seriously just resort to that?

Resort to what? What are you talking about?

Do I really have to continue this comment with you?

Yes, you do. There are trained snipers aiming at the back of your head right now, and they will murder you the instant you stop talking to me. If you stop talking to me, the last thing you'll ever see will be your nose striking the wall five feet away from the rest of your head.

I mean Jesus Christ, dude.

Okay, to be fair, I won't point out that what you said--"It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue"--is pretty much what you are doing.

Crap, and for two reasons. Saying "I won't point out X" doesn't mean you didn't point out X; the second is I am not changing the subject. I am still talking about the same thing I have always been talking about to you: the false claims you have made about the contents of this review.

Actually you are right though, I was talking to "you" because you responded to me. You really don't have an opinion anything. You just regurgitate things from other sources.

No, I haven't. I have been presenting my own beliefs about the things you say, neither more nor less. I never once claimed to have an opinion about this movie that, once again, I have not seen because it is not out in theaters anywhere within a two hour drive of where I live, so why you insist I ought to have an opinion about a movie I haven't seen is just baffling to me.

Also nothing you are saying is referring to Bob anymore.

I never said I am talking about him. I said I am talking about your statements. To a limited degree, I also referred to Gerard Vazquez's statements. You are the only person who has ever said I am talking about Mr. Chipman.

 

[Razhem]

Well, I liked it and the first one too, a lot better than the McGuire spiderman (I like to call him "preschool stalker" spiderman) as far as I'm concerned. That Bob rages like the crazy hack I know him to be doesn't surprise me, he is the sort of fanboy that goes with all the preconcieved ideas in the world and probably convinced he was going to hate, so go him.

The goblin was added too quickly, no denying that and I'm not thrilled that every spider villian is an Osborn weapon in a basement, but the Gwen scene was heart wrenching and this is the best real life Peter Parker I've ever seen, period.

 

[gogool808]

Did....did you seriously just resort to that?

Resort to what? What are you talking about?

Do I really have to continue this comment with you?

Yes, you do. There are trained snipers aiming at the back of your head right now, and they will murder you the instant you stop talking to me. If you stop talking to me, the last thing you'll ever see will be your nose striking the wall five feet away from the rest of your head.

I mean Jesus Christ, dude.

Okay, to be fair, I won't point out that what you said--"It sounds like you're just trying to change the topic after someone provided direct evidence that your claims are untrue"--is pretty much what you are doing.

Crap, and for two reasons. Saying "I won't point out X" doesn't mean you didn't point out X; the second is I am not changing the subject. I am still talking about the same thing I have always been talking about to you: the false claims you have made about the contents of this review.

Actually you are right though, I was talking to "you" because you responded to me. You really don't have an opinion anything. You just regurgitate things from other sources.

No, I haven't. I have been presenting my own beliefs about the things you say, neither more nor less. I never once claimed to have an opinion about this movie that, once again, I have not seen because it is not out in theaters anywhere within a two hour drive of where I live, so why you insist I ought to have an opinion about a movie I haven't seen is just baffling to me.

Also nothing you are saying is referring to Bob anymore.

I never said I am talking about him. I said I am talking about your statements. To a limited degree, I also referred to Gerard Vazquez's statements. You are the only person who has ever said I am talking about Mr. Chipman.

Oooooo should I take quotes apart like that so I can change the context of the quote? I mean this is the forum about his video after all right? I figured that's what people talk about. Who is asking you about your opinion of the movie? You keep bringing it up like i'm pestering you to see it.

Ok actually hold on. I understand you are very self aware about how you talk, but you have to actually make sense. Stop bringing in some textbook crap trying to pull of some higher intelligence...thing.

Also I mention many times that 30 secound review in a 7 minute video is terrible for his standards. I DON'T accept his review based entirely on the fact that he can do so much better. I also state AGAIN if you want to accept that as a review it's FINE.

No one is asking for your review on the movie. So stop bringing it up.

 

[JimB]

Should I take quotes apart like that so I can change the context of the quote?

I freely admit that my own extremely literal thought processes may be to blame for parts of this, but so far as I can tell, there is no original context to your quotes. You just say things at random, constructing sequences of words that only barely make sense in English while referring to things you don't explain so that I am forced to ask you for clarification (which, incidentally, you refuse to provide) and changing the topic constantly. If I were more intuitive, I might be able to follow your thought process, but as it stands, I cannot.

I mean this is the forum about his video after all right? I figured that's what people talk about.

And then the conversation changed when you started making statements that at best you honestly believe because you did not actually watch or retain any information of its contents, or at worst that you are actively lying about and are now trying to cover for that by attacking people who point it out.

Who is asking you about your opinion of the movie?

You are. You keep telling me I have no opinions of my own and that I regurgitate others' opinions as my own, and you do so in the context of condemning me.

Stop bringing in some textbook crap trying to pull off some higher intelligence...thing.

I do not need to defend my intelligence to anyone, least of all you, gogool808. That is why I never brought it up. You are the only person here who has done that. Please quit attributing your statements to me. It is incredibly dishonest of you.

 

[gogool808]

Should I take quotes apart like that so I can change the context of the quote?

I freely admit that my own extremely literal thought processes may be to blame for parts of this, but so far as I can tell, there is no original context to your quotes. You just say things at random, constructing sequences of words that only barely make sense in English while referring to things you don't explain so that I am forced to ask you for clarification (which, incidentally, you refuse to provide) and changing the topic constantly. If I were more intuitive, I might be able to follow your thought process, but as it stands, I cannot.

I mean this is the forum about his video after all right? I figured that's what people talk about.

And then the conversation changed when you started making statements that at best you honestly believe because you did not actually watch or retain any information of its contents, or at worst that you are actively lying about and are now trying to cover for that by attacking people who point it out.

Who is asking you about your opinion of the movie?

You are. You keep telling me I have no opinions of my own and that I regurgitate others' opinions as my own, and you do so in the context of condemning me.

Stop bringing in some textbook crap trying to pull off some higher intelligence...thing.

I do not need to defend my intelligence to anyone, least of all you, gogool808. That is why I never brought it up. You are the only person here who has done that. Please quit attributing your statements to me. It is incredibly dishonest of you.

Wait. You understand I have to talk like that because you keep separating my quotes into different questions right? Seriously look at each and every one of your responses. It's a different topic every time.I'm not attacking you either. You talked to me, and I have nothing really to say anymore because I've stated my reasons multiple times why I said those things to Gerard. Also I know you don't need to defend your intelligence so stop bringing out your community college level logic cred. Also no one is asking you about the movie. This whole time i'm taking about his review.

Are you just trying to win some internet fight or something? Also that run on sentence was pretty funny. Also the condemning part made me laugh to.

also did you want me to stop so you can win? I feel like we are just embarrassing ourselves, because my point was made already. "If you consider that as a review. It is fine."

 

[Master Taffer]

I've been a Spider-Man fan since i was five years old. That's close to 25 years ago now. When Amazing Spider-Man was coming out in 2012, I was prepared to hate that movie. I watched Bob's review and found the scathing tone of it a little extreme, but was steeled myself for what was to come. Then I saw Roger Ebert give it a glowing review, and I couldn't help but cock an eyebrow. Bob and Ebert were my two critics, as I tended to agree with the two of them in terms of film taste. So to see one foaming at the mouth and the other giving it a 3.5 out of 4 stars made me curious.

To be frank, walking out of the movie I thought MovieBob was not only wrong about the quality of the film, but I started to question whether he was reasonably watching the movie. Critics are not meant to be objective. If a film critic was capable of applying an objective rating of a film's quality, not only would films no longer be subjective art but we wouldn't need more than one critic. I don't expect Bob to be objective walking into a film anymore that I expect myself to be. But once and awhile our preconceived biases can get in the way of something enjoyable.

I'm sorry Bob is upset about this film franchise, but I can't take his reviews of ASM and ASM2 to heart at all. After how wrong I thought he was with the first one, there's no reason for me to listen to him on this one. Plus wishing for other people to fail is pretty damn petty.

 

[Dandres]

It is hard to jump on the poor Bob band wagon when I have friends are huge Spiderman fans as well. Between them have read/collected every piece of written and video work of Spiderman out there. The only issues they have had with the comics were they thought the Clone saga was way too long.

They liked the last Spiderman movie and I did not think it was that bad and I will go see the next one based off of what they think of it. Just think in 20 years we will be discussing how bad the Spiderman reboot of that generation is over this generations except for Bob, he might not survive a 3rd reboot.

 

[JimB]

You understand I have to talk like that because you keep separating my quotes into different questions, right?

I do not understand what "like that" means, because, as with so many of the things you say, you are referring to something that is evident to you but that you are not letting me in on. It's like you and I are having a telephone conversation and you're asking me what I think about that thing over in the corner of your room as if I can see it.

I have nothing really to say anymore because I've stated my reasons multiple times why I said those things to Gerard.

You have spent a surprising number of words on your post announcing you have nothing else to say any more. I find that suspicious.

I know you don't need to defend your intelligence so stop bringing out your community college level logic cred.

Yes, bringing out logic is terribly gauche in a debate, isn't it? Why bother referencing provable facts when we can just go off on rants with little to no basis in reality and expect our anger to be proof that the things we say are true?

Are you just trying to win some internet fight or something?

Of course. I only need to win one more fight and then I can fight Johnny of the Cobra Kai Dojo to win the All-Valley trophy and Elisabeth Shue.

That run-on sentence is pretty funny.

I do not think you understand what the definition of "run-on sentence" is. I used a single compound-complex sentence, if that's what you're referring to.

Did you want me to stop so you can win?

I mostly just want you to stop making shit up.

I feel like we are just embarrassing ourselves, because my point was made already.

So...you're embarrassed to continue arguing, but you do it anyway because I haven't yet given you permission to stop? Okie-dokie, then.

 

[Fox12]

*Wants to berate Bob for being a whiny asshole. Sees busted Lord of the Rings paraphernalia, and remembers how bad it felt to see The Hobbit, in all of its horror. Decides to pat Bob on the back instead.*

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Yeah, I don't care if this makes me sound sadistic but...I was laughing listening to this review.

Ok, I get that he doesn't like the movie, fine, he's a movie critic and his job is to give opinions on movies, but listening to an adult talk about watching a movie about a fictional character in a fictional universe with a tone that felt more akin to listening to someone describe how the person who murdered their parents was let off on a technicality is just really sort of insane, sad, and funny at the same time.

Venom was always my favorite comic book character, and I hated how he was depicted in "Spider-Man 3", but I would never act like it was the low point of my existence or that it had somehow shattered my psyche, especially considering that all I had to do to re-live the version of Venom I liked is open up 1 of hundreds of comics and see him again. Bob acts as if all previous Spider-Man media is now banned and he is stuck with only this version for ever and ever.

For him to wish for a big-budget movie such as this to fail is also all sorts of messed up, especially considering it's not like this is some sort of political or social "message" movie with which he strongly disagrees with the point it's trying to make. Stone, Foxx, and Garfield will be fine if the movie flops, but there are lots of writers, special effects folks, set workers, etc. who's livelihood depends on the studio they work for doing well. To say you hope that their jobs are put in jeopardy because "boo-hoo, I don't like this Spiderman!" is petty beyond belief. Just don't freakin' watch the movie, and go read one of the 40 years worth of available Spider-man comics if you want the Spiderman that "you like".

 

[IrisNetwork]

Don't quit yet Bob, we need you to tear apart Transformers 4! Then 5 and 6.