Escape to the Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man

Sphinx86

New member
Apr 15, 2009
86
0
0
Is it weird that when I hear Bob go on a fanboy rant I want to see the movie more?
Not because I think he's wrong - more like a train-wreck fantasy i.e. Can it really be that bad?

Cos of his Green Lantern review I did wait til video being seeing that, and I have to say he was right. I don't read comic books so there was no fanboy level rage from me, but I could see that there was a better movie underneath what we were given, and was seriously disappointed.

So I'll give Bob the benefit of the doubt and wait til video for this one.
 

AJey

New member
Feb 11, 2011
164
0
0
Oh, the hypocrisy of people. And Im talking about viewers here. Bob is so perfect when your opinions agree, but the second he disses something you people like, it becomes bias, fan rage and all the other nonsense. Watch the video again and count how many bad things he has pointed out in this movie. Things that make this movie what it is. Yet people choose to ignore them because something they liked was critiqued in the very ruthless manner. There are legitimately bad things in this movie (and around it) so why are you defending them? I dont get it! You can like the movie yet recognize the low quality of it. But calling Bob biased after he points out a vast array of things gone bad is just dishonest!
 

MANIFESTER

New member
Sep 14, 2009
64
0
0
Raesvelg said:
MANIFESTER said:
There's a difference between the objective opinion of the author of a review, and a situation where the reviewer went into a film hating it right off the bat and refusing to give it even the slightest shred of objective consideration.

This is clearly a case of the latter.
Yet I don't think that is the case. Hell he probably went into it thinking it would be bad and it met or exceeded those expectations (in the worst way imaginable it seems). He probably went into it knowing more than the average viewer, since it is his job, but I cannot say he went into it not giving it a chance. That is your opinion.

And sir I think your bias against Moviebob is deplorable. Not even giving him a chance. You probably went into the review hating it right of the bat and refusing to parse the slightest shred of objective information from it. I expected an "objective opinion" from you.

Poking fun aside, I think opinions about art or entertainment are by their very nature subjective not objective, but I obviously don't have such a problem with it as you do. Maybe it was just the way it was presented that put you off. I don't know.
 

xaszatm

That Voice in Your Head
Sep 4, 2010
1,146
0
0
So...everyone ignored the dangling plot threads that are just left for no reason? Or the fact that the main character is completely unlikable? Why are so many people LOVING this movie like its a cinematic masterpiece? Like its the greatest movie of all time?

It was a very decent popcorn flick, but I don't understand why so many people are ignoring the MANY flaws of the movie like...


1. What happened to Uncle Ben's killer? I mean, why keep that plot thread open? What, is he somehow going to reappear as the Mole King in a sequel for more unnecessary angst?

2. Why is Peter Parker so unlikable? His social awkwardness was cute...for about two minutes before it became annoying. When he becomes Spiderman, he acts like a pompous idiot with his head to big to fit in his mask. Yes, I know that in the comics he is a wise cracker, but here he is just full of it. "I do the job the police cannot!" You need to be likable or the police need to be incompetent. Neither happens.

3. The crane sequence is contrived. How does this happen when the city is being evacuated? How do they know Spiderman is headed towards Oscorp? Why do so many people rush to his aid? It is the last one that really bugs me.

4. Why are so many people suddenly supporting him? Granted, it IS nice to see a continuity where Spiderman doesn't have to deal with everyone hating him, but why don't they? As far as they know, Spiderman is just some constumed freak. In fact, we are told by Peter Parker himself that "people support him." When? Why couldn't the movie spend less than a minute of random people saying "I support Spiderman."?

5. Peter Parker is UNLIKABLE! Yeah, that was a point earlier, but it deserves repeating. He spends the movie being a vigilante not because he wants to be a hero, but because he wants revenge. Then, the power goes to his head and he does it because he "has to." and forgets about Uncle Ben. Of course, he does it without TRYING to cooperate with the police (Well, other than acting like a crazed individual, then acting like the police doesn't understand him). And the ending, he learns nothing! Why is he Spiderman? What motivates him to be a hero? Hell, he purposely waits until Captain Stacy dies before denying his promise to keep Gwen Stacy out of harm. It is not the fact that he denies it that bugs me (After all, she is the main love interest), but the fact that he says "The best promises are the ones your can't keep." WELL GREAT JOB WITH THE HERO'S LIKABILITY GUYS!

Now, I did like a lot in the movie as well, any of the action scenes between Spiderman and the Lizard are awesome. And some of the web slinging scenes were nice, but the movie as a whole just fell apart. Like I said, it is good as a popcorn flick but, why are people LOVING this movie? It's not great nor as bad as moviebob says, but still, why are people praising this film? I found myself bored between action scenes where all the plot holes appeared.

Also:

Gunnyboy said:
The Avengers cinematography was worse.


Funny how "just because" storytelling gets a pass there, but not here.
The "just because" storytelling gets a "pass" (personally I do not agree with you on the "just because") because the movie is fun enough that I am not thinking about the problems of the movie until later. In the Amazing Spiderman, my mind begins to drift towards the many plot holes of the film because the movie itself has to few good moments between awkward, boring, or contrived scenes.

(...wow, i need to calm down...sorry if this offends..although it really shouldn't...)
 

Dangit2019

New member
Aug 8, 2011
2,449
0
0
Wow. Bob, that was overreacting a lot. The movie was a average movie and you managed to blow it up because they "screwed up" your beloved franchise. Do you remember nothing from the Phantom Menace review?

On a more critical side, I had some complaints: JJJ was sorely needed. Connors/Lizzard didn't make much for a big villain as he was a bit too ridiculous to be taken seriously and they kept showing him up front all the time instead of building any atmosphere about him. The romance scenes had a bit of chemistry, but they ultimately ended in stuttering competitions. The crane part was amazingly cheesy and stupid, but definitely not as much as Emo Tobey McGuire. It was annoying that they didn't resolve the plot with the guy who murdered Uncle Ben.

Incoming spoiler-filled rant on why the evil plot was clumsy:

When they showed a machine in the first 10 minutes that could circulate a chemical throughout a large area, it was pretty obvious that the Connor's "genius plan" was going to be to gas the city in the last 20 minutes. Hell, they even mentioned in that first expository dialogue that the gov't was scared someone would use it for chemical warfare. I mean, can you get any more obvious?

On a positive note, the actors were great. The two leads were much more welcome than the last two, and the comic scenes with Garfield accidentally destroying everything were hilarious. I actually would love a sequel due to the story already having been set up (in EXCRUCIATING detail) in the first one, meaning the second one won't have to deal with all the B.S. surrounding the mythos everyone can already recite in their hearts by now. Also, Emma Stone's hot, so that's a plus.

Overall, 7/10. Nothing to fuss about, nothing to whine about, and nothing to praise about. An afternoon filling light show that at least is trying instead of letting Sam Raimi come back to ruin the franchise in one final blow.

PS: If they pull out the Clone Saga on us, I will hold a Columbia exec hostage until they get other plans.
 

Metalrocks

New member
Jan 15, 2009
2,406
0
0
im still thinking if i should watch it. the movie will come out by the end of the month in hong kong. im more exited about the new batman movie. thats a must watch for me.
but if i have nothing better to do, i might give spider man a try.
 

General Vengeance

New member
Aug 26, 2009
187
0
0
I had a feeling this was gonna suck, it all started with the Silver Slippers when they first began to film the Amazing Spiderman. Many thanks for the review, and I'll ensure I avoid this one.
 

Baralak

New member
Dec 9, 2009
1,244
0
0
Lieju said:
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*
 

mrblakemiller

New member
Aug 13, 2010
319
0
0
All I can hear while listening to Bob is all the times he was so daggum sure this movie was going to suck from day one. I can really hear the "I hate this because I've decided to" in every sentence.

Seriously, half of those "just so happens" coincidences were part of the introduction of Venom into the Ultimate universe, and Bendis made that awesome. A scientist who performs experiments of questionable safety and ethics works for Oscorp? How little sense that makes!
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Um... Wow.

I'm certainly not in any huge hurry to see this one; what I've seen in the previews looked iffy, I'm lucky to catch a couple of movies a month, and there are more intriguing possibilities both now and in the near future.

That said, the movie is running at 71% on Rotten Tomatoes right now, and while Your Mileage May Vary may be the motto of our age, I can't help but wonder if MB's fondness for and intimate knowledge of Spider-Man's backstory is necessarily acting as informed perspective in this case rather than baggage.
 

xPixelatedx

New member
Jan 19, 2011
1,316
0
0
You know, it would really help your cause if you didn't sound this mad BEFORE you even saw the movie. You just seemed so upset that the franchise was being rebooted and that Toby wasn't Spiderman anymore. And before you talk about cheap looking, maybe you should revisit the First spiderman movie. Did you recall the scene where the green goblin kills those people on the rooftop? It looked like the set to a highschool play. Come on man...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIMfIYaMuzo&feature=player_detailpage#t=95s
So by all means hate on this new movie, but don't call it cheap looking considering what your defending by comparison. Aside from some awesome CGI in movie 2, the original trilogy was some of the cheapest looking movies I've ever seen in a theater.

I do agree that the lizard design looks like crap though. Without a muzzle he just looks like killer Croc from batman... or a green Locust from Gears of War. That's about as bad as they could have possibly designed him.
 

Apples_McGrind

New member
Oct 27, 2009
41
0
0
Kumagawa Misogi said:
Why Movie Bob is WRONG AGAIN he liked Scott Pilgrim which to say aweful is not enough and Sucker Punch ergh. Bob has little taste.
You do know that pointing out that someone has a difference in opinion with the norm doesn't make that someone's opinion invalid.

And don't knock Scott Pilgrim. That's a great film and anyone who loves it as much as I do is in my good book.
 

Jaebird

New member
Aug 19, 2008
1,298
0
0
Jesus, the majority of the people in this thread are friggin' sheep. "Oh no! A person on the Internet said its bad. That means I don't see it, right? Right? ...Line?"

I still plan to see it for myself, because that's what matters at the end of the day. If I find it to be good? Fine. If its bad? Whatever. Not like it'll be the first bad movie I've ever seen in my life.
 

DrGhost

New member
Apr 20, 2011
80
0
0
This review is very biased. Movie Bob hated the idea of a Spider Man reboot since they first announced it. He went in to the theater already hating the movie without giving it a chance, of course he's gonna write an awful review.

This video is pretty much just Movie Bob ranting and seeing red the whole time.

If you go into a theater with a bad attitude, then you're probably gonna leave with one too.

Disappointing review, I thought the film was good, not amazing, and it sure as hell did not suck.

7/10
 

Diddy_Mao

New member
Jan 14, 2009
1,189
0
0
I had a feeling this was going to suck. I wasn't planning on watching this to begin with for pretty much all the reasons that Mr. Bob pointed out in this review.



Y'know...cancelling Spectacular Spider-Man and putting the kibosh on Raimi's run on the films?
That sucks but I'll live.

Replacing them with Ultimate and Amazing Spider-Man respectively and expecting me to smile and ask for more shows a level of contempt for your audience that I only thought possible long long ago in a galaxy far far away.
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
kyosai7 said:
Lieju said:
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.