Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man

[Baralak]

I didn't hate it as much as you did. Still, you had good points.

However, I'd argue that the only big coincidence is that Gwen works for Connors.

All the other stuff fits well together; Peter's parents were involved with the research, that leads to Peter getting his powers, the same stuff leads to Connors becoming the Lizard. And Osborn is behind it all. It would be a far bigger coincidence if that all happened independently.

I agree with how they handled Connors/Lizard, he is my favourite Spidey-villain, and the movie did seem to hint he'd be more like himself in the (possible) sequels...

BTW, I think this movie was heavily influenced by the Ultimate Spider-Man comics...

And I couldn't tell if the CGI on Lizard was bad or not, because the 3D makes everything look fake. I hate 3D.

I missed the credits scene, but at the end, he seemed to be remoseful for his actions. In the sequel, I'd love to see him show up, boost himself with a "Refined" formula (hopefully one that gives him a better form, preferably with a more lizard-like face) and help out Spidey. " I did some horrible things. It's time I started to repent!" *inject, then charge forward Hulk in Avengers style, punching villain/OP mook in the face*

I don't think that's the best use of Lizard/Connors.
The way Connors/Lizard should be is with the Jekyll/Hyde thing going on. Have Connors repent and be an ally to Peter, and fight against Lizard, who has his own goals.
The point of Lizard as a villain is that Connors isn't really responsible for what the Lizard does, and often Spidey had the problem that he was afraid to hurt the Lizard because he didn't want to harm Connors.

I'm not sure if was just a rumor, but I heard that had there been Spider-Man 4, the villains would have been Lizard and Kraven. That would have been brilliant. Have Kraven hunt The Lizard, forcing Spidey to save him, while also fighting him.

I was actually thinking of a couple of the special team ups Lizard and Spidey had in the Animated Series.

 

[McMindflayer]

This was not a review.

If you watched this review with no knowledge of the new spider man, this review would tell you nothing!

This was repeating the words "This is shit" over and over again. All I got from his entire "review" was that he didn't like it. You could almost see the froth coming from his mouth.

He never explained what about it was bad. At least nothing in depth. No examples of where it went wrong. He never went into the plot of the movie, never described Parker's character or anything about how it resembled/didn't resemble the comics.

I expect something of a review from movie bob. I've watched his reviews for a while now and his big picture videos. he talks about why things don't work. What was done right and wrong. Hell, his Green Latern review was better than this one and he hated that one too.

This "review" was a waste of time on my part and any effort, if any, on his. He should be ashamed of it.

 

[Lieju]

I didn't hate it as much as you did. Still, you had good points.

However, I'd argue that the only big coincidence is that Gwen works for Connors.

All the other stuff fits well together; Peter's parents were involved with the research, that leads to Peter getting his powers, the same stuff leads to Connors becoming the Lizard. And Osborn is behind it all. It would be a far bigger coincidence if that all happened independently.

I agree with how they handled Connors/Lizard, he is my favourite Spidey-villain, and the movie did seem to hint he'd be more like himself in the (possible) sequels...

BTW, I think this movie was heavily influenced by the Ultimate Spider-Man comics...

And I couldn't tell if the CGI on Lizard was bad or not, because the 3D makes everything look fake. I hate 3D.

I missed the credits scene, but at the end, he seemed to be remoseful for his actions. In the sequel, I'd love to see him show up, boost himself with a "Refined" formula (hopefully one that gives him a better form, preferably with a more lizard-like face) and help out Spidey. " I did some horrible things. It's time I started to repent!" *inject, then charge forward Hulk in Avengers style, punching villain/OP mook in the face*

I don't think that's the best use of Lizard/Connors.
The way Connors/Lizard should be is with the Jekyll/Hyde thing going on. Have Connors repent and be an ally to Peter, and fight against Lizard, who has his own goals.
The point of Lizard as a villain is that Connors isn't really responsible for what the Lizard does, and often Spidey had the problem that he was afraid to hurt the Lizard because he didn't want to harm Connors.

I'm not sure if was just a rumor, but I heard that had there been Spider-Man 4, the villains would have been Lizard and Kraven. That would have been brilliant. Have Kraven hunt The Lizard, forcing Spidey to save him, while also fighting him.

I was actually thinking of a couple of the special team ups Lizard and Spidey had in the Animated Series.

If I recall correctly, at least once some telepath awakened Connors mind when he was being Lizard...

At any rate, something like that should only happen after it's established what kind of relationship they normally have. We need to see that Lizard and Connors are two different people. In this movie, that wasn't apparent. However, the ending and the end-credits scene seem to hint at that kind of a thing.

So I actually wish they'll make a sequel.

My biggest problem with the design of Lizard was how he was naked. Really, now? Without his labcoat he looks just like a generic lizard-monster.

 

[Endocrom]

Hey, that kid's dad was in Red Dawn.

Anybody whant to spoil the STUPID thing they did with the swinging lines?

Don't forget the

Spoiler

tags

 

[Baralak]

I didn't hate it as much as you did. Still, you had good points.

However, I'd argue that the only big coincidence is that Gwen works for Connors.

All the other stuff fits well together; Peter's parents were involved with the research, that leads to Peter getting his powers, the same stuff leads to Connors becoming the Lizard. And Osborn is behind it all. It would be a far bigger coincidence if that all happened independently.

I agree with how they handled Connors/Lizard, he is my favourite Spidey-villain, and the movie did seem to hint he'd be more like himself in the (possible) sequels...

BTW, I think this movie was heavily influenced by the Ultimate Spider-Man comics...

And I couldn't tell if the CGI on Lizard was bad or not, because the 3D makes everything look fake. I hate 3D.

I missed the credits scene, but at the end, he seemed to be remoseful for his actions. In the sequel, I'd love to see him show up, boost himself with a "Refined" formula (hopefully one that gives him a better form, preferably with a more lizard-like face) and help out Spidey. " I did some horrible things. It's time I started to repent!" *inject, then charge forward Hulk in Avengers style, punching villain/OP mook in the face*

I don't think that's the best use of Lizard/Connors.
The way Connors/Lizard should be is with the Jekyll/Hyde thing going on. Have Connors repent and be an ally to Peter, and fight against Lizard, who has his own goals.
The point of Lizard as a villain is that Connors isn't really responsible for what the Lizard does, and often Spidey had the problem that he was afraid to hurt the Lizard because he didn't want to harm Connors.

I'm not sure if was just a rumor, but I heard that had there been Spider-Man 4, the villains would have been Lizard and Kraven. That would have been brilliant. Have Kraven hunt The Lizard, forcing Spidey to save him, while also fighting him.

I was actually thinking of a couple of the special team ups Lizard and Spidey had in the Animated Series.

If I recall correctly, at least once some telepath awakened Connors mind when he was being Lizard...

At any rate, something like that should only happen after it's established what kind of relationship they normally have. We need to see that Lizard and Connors are two different people. In this movie, that wasn't apparent. However, the ending and the end-credits scene seem to hint at that kind of a thing.

So I actually wish they'll make a sequel.

My biggest problem with the design of Lizard was how he was naked. Really, now? Without his labcoat he looks just like a generic lizard-monster.

I liked seeing him wear it when he did, though! My main issue with him was the face. It should have been more lizard like, with the protruding mouth and nose.

 

[Lokyar]

I had actually seen a few headlines in papers saying that this movie was horrible, but I generally wait to hear from MovieBob if it's one I care to hear from a critic on. And I'm glad I did. Everything he pointed out are things that would have pissed me off had I dropped cash to see it. I had high hopes, too. I'd only seen a trailer or two but what I saw was enough to get me excited. Spider-Man being a wise-ass to punks, you've got me interested. Just don't screw up the rest.

I agree with Bob, I hope this bombs so hard and loses Fox so much money that they finally give Spidey back to the people that WANT to make a Spider-Man movie. A SPIDER-MAN movie, not a 'Bland superhero who happens to be called Spider-Man' movie.

 

[Kingjackl]

While the film itself was pretty average, but I think Bob overdid it with the whole angry, vitriolic ranting business. It's pretty clear he was going to hate it based on principle alone, but surely it wasn't bad enough to warrant that level of panning. Hell, it was superior in pretty much every way to Spiderman 3, though that isn't saying much.

Personally, I don't give a shit about the whole corporate boardroom origins of this movie and just thought it was a fun teen rom-com with a bit of webslinging action on the side. In my opinion, every teen rom-com could be improved by including 20 minutes of webslinging action.

 

[atomicmrpelly]

i really want to know what the "stupidest thing to ever happen in a spiderman movie" is!

 

[Antonio Torrente]

To say I saw that coming a mile away would be an understatement...

After Spiderman 3, I don't have much faith in future Spidey movies...unless Marvel gets the rights back, which will never happen unfortunately...

*Crosses fingers for this movie to bomb hard*

Sorry to dash your dreams( and mine) this movie is no. 1 right now in other countries including here in the Philippines.

 

[Antonio Torrente]

I agree with Bob, I hope this bombs so hard and loses Fox so much money that they finally give Spidey back to the people that WANT to make a Spider-Man movie. A SPIDER-MAN movie, not a 'Bland superhero who happens to be called Spider-Man' movie.

It's Sony who holds the rights to Spiderman not Fox. Its the X-Men franchise that Fox holds.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Glad to see everybody is taking MovieBob's review with a grain of salt. /sarcasm

Whenever someone asks me why I think your opinion should be taken with a grain of salt half the time, I'll point em to this video. You've been against this movie since before anything got announced besides that it's going to happen. And it shows. Even if this movie was The Dark Knight levels of good, you'd probably still say it was bad.

Glad someone shares my thought process. This was the first negative review I've seen from it. everybody else said it was better than the original.

 

[Lokyar]

@Antonio Torrente: Ah, my bad. I think a few posts said fox(such as this one [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.380712-Escape-to-the-Movies-The-Amazing-Spider-Man#14969962]) and my brain remembered that instead of the actual company.

 

[Siege_TF]

This was not a review.

If you watched this review with no knowledge of the new spider man, this review would tell you nothing!

This was repeating the words "This is shit" over and over again. All I got from his entire "review" was that he didn't like it. You could almost see the froth coming from his mouth.

He never explained what about it was bad. At least nothing in depth. No examples of where it went wrong. He never went into the plot of the movie, never described Parker's character or anything about how it resembled/didn't resemble the comics.

I expect something of a review from movie bob. I've watched his reviews for a while now and his big picture videos. he talks about why things don't work. What was done right and wrong. Hell, his Green Latern review was better than this one and he hated that one too.

This "review" was a waste of time on my part and any effort, if any, on his. He should be ashamed of it.

He actually did exactly that.
The Lizard creature was poorly designed and the CG looks outdated, like in the remake of The Thing.
Parkers' birthparents were never particularly important, save for one story arc the 90s cartoon, and the Ultimate comics, but they shifted focus away from May and Ben to them int he movie because. Well, because.
Parker's character was all over the place, he's too unfocused and cannot be described in detail because there is no detail. You're asking Bob to do a better job of describing a thinly spread peanut butter sandwitch.
Gwen Stacy wasn't 'Gwen Stacy', she was a lab assistant named Gwen Stacy who, again, didn't have the decency to die like a good Gwen Stacy should. This is the Aeris Gainsbourogh of the Spidey series and she's survived two unassoicated movies. That's wrong. They could have at least made her a literal corperate whore like in Antitrust, but that'd make her interesting. God forbid.
Also, poor action sequences.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

Gwen Stacy wasn't 'Gwen Stacy', she was a lab assistant named Gwen Stacy who, again, didn't have the decency to die like a good Gwen Stacy should. This is the Aeris Gainsbourogh of the Spidey series and she's survived two unassoicated movies. That's wrong. They could have at least made her a literal corperate whore like in Antitrust, but that'd make her interesting. God forbid.

To be honest, there's a lot in that post I could pick apart, but I would like to address just one particular thing:

THIS IS THE FIRST MOVIE WITH SEQUELS ALREADY PLANNED!

Asking them to kill Gwen this early would be completely pointless. And no, the fact that she survived SM3 has no relevancy here because this is an entirely different continuity with its own character arcs to deal with. Save her death for a story arc where it will actually have impact. Remember Rachael in The Dark Knight?

 

[Merrick_HLC]

I'm just going to say check out The Cinema Snob's review on Blip as a sort of counterpoint.
It has spoilers if you keep watching it long enough, but IMO they did a great job pointing out why this movie works & is worth watching.

I'm not going to deny Raimi's movies are better 'cinema' overall, but honestly I never really enjoyed them, outside of a technical level.

Well I did enjoy the second movie, but that was ENTIRELY due to Doc Ock & his scenes, they could have edited Spider-Man out for all I cared.

 

[Sexy Devil]

Just saw it, thought it was pretty kick-ass. Like, Spider-man 2 level of kick-ass.

Spoiler

On your "it just so happens" point, it really isn't that stupidly convenient in the movie. I mean he goes there because he discovered his dad worked there and the rest unfolds naturally. The project was basically stunted without Peter's dad's work and he set all the events in motion. It's not like he randomly showed up to Oscorp and oh look my dad worked here, oh look so does Gwen, oh look they're doing whacky science project. I'm not defending the Peter's parents thing because that was objectively dumb and ended up going nowhere but the rest was solid.

The Gwen thing was a bit of a stretch but it stands to reason that a girl as smart as her would have an internship in a place such as Oscorp.

Really not seeing the issues with Peter's character either. He's conflicted, you know, like a teenager. He's allowed to have interests like skating even if he is a geek.You know what's underneath that, though? An ultimately good kid who willfully took a beating from Flash so that another wouldn't have to. And the emo scenes were from the realisation that his overinflated sense of pride got his uncle killed. Peter has so much more depth than in the originals, and Garfield pulls it off spectacularly.

And as for that one scene with the cranes? In terms of public reception to Spider-Man it wasn't very good but in terms of character growth it was pretty great. It was a big moment to have gone from that guy shaking down blonde guys in an alleyway in search of his uncle's killer, to being shot, bruised, and generally unable to continue, but pushing on anyway.

Will admit that the CGI was the worst piece of shit I've seen in a very long time though.

I think the problem isn't with stereotypes, its the fact that Peter Parker has NEVER been an emo/skater/slacket. He has always been a geek, a science nerd. To gloss over that part of his persona (which they don't even commit to because he eventually builds the web throwers), is a huge change from who Peter Parker has always been. It reeks of trying to pull in the teenager summer goers by trying to create a "hip" Spiderman. A change is fine. Completely rewritting the character traits that make Peter Parker who he is? Overboard.

You're working under the assumption that being a skater/slacker automatically makes you dumb. It's possible to be smart, but not bother with school work because that particular brand of work annoys you. Let me put it this way: I'm sure you've had a class that is a complete breeze but wasn't really your thing; did you honestly want to do the work for that class? And skating is a recreational activity that in no way affects your ability to be smart.

Anyone else notice the split between the comments here and the facebook ones on the video?
Any way I'll probably end up seeing this movie as a last resort when I got nothing else going on.

I'm just gonna say it - the people commenting here are all-purpose nerds who set out explicitly to hate it since the reboot was announced. If you read through the comments you'll see that people are just using the review to justify hating it, and have only seen the trailers. But most of the people in these comments who've actually watched it are disagreeing with the review. I wager that the people in the FB comments have actually watched it, and that's why they're disagreeing.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

Seems to me all the complaints have been based on your conceptions of classical spider man. i did not see any complaints on the movie as a movie itself apart from CGI and the lizard character. you go thru saying peter parker is emo, skater, slacker. you would have prefered a single stereotyped character? it seems to me he is more of a normal person, more grounded on reality. a real person =/= stereotype.

I think the problem isn't with stereotypes, its the fact that Peter Parker has NEVER been an emo/skater/slacket. He has always been a geek, a science nerd. To gloss over that part of his persona (which they don't even commit to because he eventually builds the web throwers), is a huge change from who Peter Parker has always been. It reeks of trying to pull in the teenager summer goers by trying to create a "hip" Spiderman. A change is fine. Completely rewritting the character traits that make Peter Parker who he is? Overboard.

and what would you define as being a geek, a science nerd?(wich btw, is not what defines peter parker as an essential character)

im sorry, but it is your preconception of geek and science nerd that is wrong, not the movies. a science genius does not have to fall into your vision of a virgin shirt wearing googley eye doofus. peter parker is a genius, a science lover, and a deeply troubled teenager. that is what has defined him. he is RELATABLE. the fact that you are defending that a character should be defined by this one dimension, by this stereotype, is appauling. characters should be complex and interesting, not one liners.

Now I know your flame-baiting because that's exactly what Peter Parker is. A nerd. He was not cool, he had massive self-esteem issues. He is the perennial geek, which is why he was so appealing to the comic book reading audience. Troubled is fine, but changing the premise of what made the character to sell it to the audience is bad form. Read the comics and get back to me, otherwise we're done here.

Have you READ a comic since 1970? Peter wasn't a perennial geek, he was a kid with an interest in science (who is also really smart and studies for it) who before he gained his powers was incredibly shy and reclusive but once he got them became a lot bolder, he started asking girls out (unless you count dating the two hottest girls in school as a geek activity), he did not have these imaginary self-esteem issues your thinking of. He had GUILT issues over his own inactions and even recently had the problem of declaring "No-one dies when I'm around" before finding that it was borderline impossible to keep to that. He was appealing at the time because he was a teenager who was the main superhero, not the side-kick. If his main focus was as a geek, he wouldn't have worked for the Bugle for so long making chump change, he would've applied for Horizon and other labs much earlier on (even at Horizon, he isn't the geekiest, Grady is nth times as nerdy as him!)

This is, of course, just the mainstream coninuity not even getting into Ultimate Spiderman where he acts... well, a good deal like Amazing Spiderman's interpretation, a lot snarkier. You can be annoyed it doesn't fit your own view of Spiderman (my views on how accurate that is aside) but it's hardly completely off base by not making him the quiet awkward kid a la Tobey Maguire.

 

[Durgiun]

Oh great, and I have a friend who's begging me to go see it with him IN 3D because he really really wants to see it for his birthday. I have no problem in buying him a ticket, but he also wants ME to go with him because ''movies aren't meant to be seen alone in cinemas''.

Maybe if I link him to Bob's video he'll change his mind.

And then Mila Kunis will maybe break into my home and demand hot, steamy, rough sex.

 

[SpectacularWebHead]

I dread to watch this review.
The again, I'm the kinda guy who will avidly defend Green Lantern the movie, so I might be more likely to like it....

 

[McMindflayer]

This was not a review.

If you watched this review with no knowledge of the new spider man, this review would tell you nothing!

This was repeating the words "This is shit" over and over again. All I got from his entire "review" was that he didn't like it. You could almost see the froth coming from his mouth.

He never explained what about it was bad. At least nothing in depth. No examples of where it went wrong. He never went into the plot of the movie, never described Parker's character or anything about how it resembled/didn't resemble the comics.

I expect something of a review from movie bob. I've watched his reviews for a while now and his big picture videos. he talks about why things don't work. What was done right and wrong. Hell, his Green Latern review was better than this one and he hated that one too.

This "review" was a waste of time on my part and any effort, if any, on his. He should be ashamed of it.

He actually did exactly that.
The Lizard creature was poorly designed and the CG looks outdated, like in the remake of The Thing.
Parkers' birthparents were never particularly important, save for one story arc the 90s cartoon, and the Ultimate comics, but they shifted focus away from May and Ben to them int he movie because. Well, because.
Parker's character was all over the place, he's too unfocused and cannot be described in detail because there is no detail. You're asking Bob to do a better job of describing a thinly spread peanut butter sandwitch.
Gwen Stacy wasn't 'Gwen Stacy', she was a lab assistant named Gwen Stacy who, again, didn't have the decency to die like a good Gwen Stacy should. This is the Aeris Gainsbourogh of the Spidey series and she's survived two unassoicated movies. That's wrong. They could have at least made her a literal corperate whore like in Antitrust, but that'd make her interesting. God forbid.
Also, poor action sequences.

But that's the thing. he would have gone over these points in depth. He Should have. Hell, you just reviewed Parker's character better than Movie Bob did.

He should have gone over what he felt parker should be, instead of what he is. He should have gone over the plot or what he felt was the bad writing.

But instead we get him pretty much just fast rambling about the movie. It's like he had a bullet point paper and read them off in his most rage Induced state.

His coincidence nitpick is something that happen in EVERY movie. People who coincidentally know each other or coincidentally meet up. Hell Spiderman 3 Had it with Venom leaving spiderman. They went to the same empty church?

I enjoy Movie Bob reviews, I want him to keep doing reviews and not whatever this video was.