Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: I knew it!

Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: I knew it! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: I knew it! - 20/6/2012 4:34:32 AM   

Posts: 2871
Joined: 1/5/2006
I was very excited for Spiderman 1 and thought it was shite. Was not excited for Spiderman 2 but thought it was great. Was underwhelmed with Spiderman 3 but don't see the problem with it that everybody else does so this new one can do no wrong for me really.

Thats all I have to say about that except JACE007!!! HEY JACE007

You wrote this:

I agree and something I said before on PROMETHEUS: Either this reviewer was getting hints from a comic book fanboy and trying to look clever by quoting Bagley; or he was instructed to give TAS a 3 star rating to boost more hits).

I'm giving it 5 stars as I am a fan of the character and know Garfield,Stone & Leary will rock. Is it me, or was Rhys Ilfans not mentioned at all?

now tell me. Who is that goddess in your avatar and how do I get one?


How dare you call me inhumane. Right you fucker. I'm going to do the washing up.

(in reply to SUPER_movie_FREAK)
Post #: 31
RE: sigh - 20/6/2012 10:30:09 AM   


Posts: 437
Joined: 11/12/2005


ORIGINAL: jodybriggs

patently unnecessary reboot. just fox cashing in by milking it's few comic licences to death. i hope this kind of turn around doesn't become an acceptable norm for more studios.

Obviously News Corp. are Satan's media arm, but I hardly think they can be blamed for Sony rebooting this franchise.

As for the film - 3 stars suggests a perfectly acceptable film (you might even say average) and the content of the review supports the rating given. Unfortunately, I decided a while back to only break my boycott of this origin story due to a 5 star review. I may well be cutting my nose off to spite my face, but it's the principle - if I pay to watch it then I'm saying that I'm happy to watch reboot after reboot (it's on my LoveFilm list though but that seems more acceptable somehow).

The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done.

I blame Michael Bay for this stand - if only I hadn't been foolish enough to think Transformers: Dark of the Moon would atone for RotF...

(in reply to jodybriggs)
Post #: 32
RE: sigh - 20/6/2012 1:18:09 PM   

Posts: 10108
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
Only two pages in 24 hours. I don't think this thread is going to kick off like Prometheus tbh.


And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 33
RE: sigh - 20/6/2012 2:34:06 PM   


Posts: 437
Joined: 11/12/2005
Maybe people are saving their bile for the (The) Dark Knight Rises review. That has the potential to attract a lot of whackjobs, whereas I'm not too sure this film has been built up all that much in the minds of the hardcore.

Not every thread can be like Prometheus' - or Scream 4's (another favourite of mine) - or they wouldn't have that 'event' feel about them.

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 34
RE: sigh - 20/6/2012 2:36:43 PM   

Posts: 54399
Joined: 1/10/2005
It's kind of bad enough we get posts reviewing the review without being taken further off-topic by reviewing the thread. It's not a chat thread - you can do this kind of thing in off-topic, please. 


Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!



Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 35
Its Sony not Fox - 21/6/2012 12:11:22 PM   


Posts: 55
Joined: 4/9/2008
From: Cardiff
20th Centuray Fox doesn't own the rights to Spider-Man, Sony does.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 36
bi-product - 21/6/2012 12:48:49 PM   
Richard Fi


Posts: 15
Joined: 13/8/2006
not what you meant.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 37
The Dark Knight Rises - 21/6/2012 2:00:19 PM   


Posts: 55
Joined: 4/9/2008
From: Cardiff
With all the hype that EMPIRE are giving the Dark Knight Rises, if they give it anything less than a 5 star rating I'll personally castrate the reviewer.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 38
RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/6/2012 2:05:47 PM   

Posts: 1313
Joined: 18/3/2008
From: San-Diago, which is German for 'Whales virgina'...



With all the hype that EMPIRE are giving the Dark Knight Rises, if they give it anything less than a 5 star rating I'll personally castrate the reviewer.

That makes no sense. Empire are always going to hype up a film like TDKR because its the final chapter in one of the most successful trilogies ever made; by one of the most succesfull directors in recent years about one of the most succesfull and popular comic characters of all time. That doesn't automatically mean they have got to give it a good review even if its shit.

Remember Wolverine? That got hyped up to the hills and given the character, actors, back story and budget quite rightly so...but I would sooner be skull fucked than watch it again...and the Empire review was in agreement (although I don't remember the phrase 'skull fucked' being used much...which is a shame)...


I just wish stuff like, I don't know, the slow & systemic CRATERING of this country could inspire the same call-to-arms as Batman casting

(in reply to SUPER_movie_FREAK)
Post #: 39
RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/6/2012 2:20:57 PM   
Filmfan 2

Posts: 1052
Joined: 30/9/2005
I reckon that if the review for The Dark Knight Rises is published a little before the release of the film, the thread will reach 15 pages before anyone actually sees it.

Also, I give this thread 6.5/10 thus far.

< Message edited by Filmfan 2 -- 21/6/2012 2:21:16 PM >


I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins

(in reply to waltham1979)
Post #: 40
RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/6/2012 5:36:33 PM   
Dirk Miggler

Posts: 1079
Joined: 14/1/2009



With all the hype that EMPIRE are giving the Dark Knight Rises, if they give it anything less than a 5 star rating I'll personally castrate the reviewer.

(in reply to SUPER_movie_FREAK)
Post #: 41
Saw it last week. Pointless reboot! - 26/6/2012 3:13:57 AM   


Posts: 11
Joined: 31/5/2012
The Sam Raimi films were MUCH better!! This thing lacked heart and a lot of humour. For my full review, check out the blog section of my website (see my user name for the address)

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 42
What did we expect? - 27/6/2012 9:18:56 PM   
The Watcher


Posts: 53
Joined: 29/9/2011
I mean, a rushed reboot just so a corporation can hang onto the rights of one of it's biggest successes...

It's a summer filler, the real litmus test will be how it compares against TDKR

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 43
Guardian Review - 2/7/2012 3:19:28 AM   


Posts: 124
Joined: 15/5/2006
From: Shanghai
Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian loved it. So there.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 44
Amazing Spider-man was Amazing - 3/7/2012 6:08:57 AM   


Posts: 1
Joined: 2/7/2012
The Amazing Spider-man was really amazing. The stunt scenes and other 3D sequences was so exciting scenes. The almost review said that the Amazing Spider-man is good film to watch. when I searched in the internet I got a good review from a website. You can also check this nice review.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 45
More 'Web of' than 'Amazing' - 3/7/2012 11:07:33 PM   


Posts: 110
Joined: 9/6/2012
Should of just kicked off a whole new tone and look with 'in your face villains' but alas we get more of the for James Horner's score...should of got Alan Silvestri or better yet....Stu Phillips. This film could easily sit side by side with Raimi's third opus?

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 46
Good fun - 3/7/2012 11:39:18 PM   


Posts: 50
Joined: 19/9/2006
Thoroughly enjoyable with Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone both excellent in their respective roles.

Leaves a number of loose ends which will hopefully be followed up in a sequel.

It does suffer it that you keep comparing it with the first Sam Raimi Spiderman which is still fairly clear in the memory.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 47
Better than the trailer suggested... - 4/7/2012 12:15:48 AM   

Posts: 257
Joined: 28/4/2012
From: Oxford, UK
For a film that's as completely unnecessary as The Amazing Spider-Man, it's pretty good. Not great, but pretty good.

Considering this is a bona-fide origins tale (and considering the running time), the story skips along at a fair old rate, yet it feels like not a lot actually happens. One of the biggest questions the film asks is left unanswered for a sequel, and various others seem not to matter, apparently. Elsewhere, Andrew Garfield plays a good Spider-Man. I'm not convinced about his portrayal of Peter Parker, but I think that's more down to the character than the actor.

But ultimately, when you're Marvel and you've already released Avengers this year, is there really any point in a reboot of an origins story that most folks still remember from ten years ago, and only features one superhero anyway?


More reviews and rambling like that ^^^ at: >>> <<<

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 48
RE: Better than the trailer suggested... - 4/7/2012 12:42:19 AM   

Posts: 18273
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
I thought it was utter rubbish. Poor plotting, massive leaps of logic and some clear editing to take out all the interesting stuff this films trailers were promising.

Will write in more detail tomorrow.


It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to TheMightyBlackout)
Post #: 49
RE: Better than the trailer suggested... - 4/7/2012 1:33:58 AM   
Private Hudson

Posts: 1841
Joined: 30/9/2005
Actually I went in tonight with very low expectations and was pleasantly surprised. The story was fine and a few good riffs on the origin story and a nod to the Green Goblin, Norman Osborne (part 2?).

I never understood the logic behind such a recent reboot but I think it did work. The actors to a tee were better than their counterparts in the Sam Raimi movie (which I do love, and still think just shades this movie).

The villain was okay, but not quite as gripping as the Green Goblin, but it was good to see a different villain appear. I thought Spidey's banter when fighting was a bit more like the cocky bugger he can be in the comics and yes logic is left at the door (he gets a cell phone signal in the sewer?) but it was fun.

Andrew Garfield is a better Spidey than Tobey Maguire hands down. He is geeky and thin and looks more like Peter Parker. Martin Sheen was a great Uncle Ben.

Gwen Stacey was a different choice naturally than MJ Watson, but it worked and Emma Stone was good also even though for some reason she looks far older than Garfield and they are actually dating?! I just checked and Garfield is 28 and Emma Stone is only 23! WTF?

Also did you know Andrew Garfield was actually born in LA and has an American Dad?

Anyway, overall a good movie and very enjoyable. Can't think of anything really that was poor. It was exciting and good natured. Spider-Man should never be dark, just like Superman.


Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 50
Good, far from great. - 4/7/2012 7:57:05 AM   


Posts: 151
Joined: 14/10/2009
Another decent review though I did think Garfield let the side down during the big emotional scenes. If you keep reviewing as accurately as this I may even start buying your mag again :)

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 51
PERFECT REVIEW! - 4/7/2012 9:09:25 AM   


Posts: 221
Joined: 3/11/2005
Saw this last night. Very similar in story line to the first Toby Maguire film but I think Garfield did a better job as did Emma Stone. My main reason wanting to see this was because of The Lizard who was a great character in the comics and cartoons. I have to agree with Empires review of this. I went with a friend and we both agreed it good / better than average. Its certainly not a 4 star excellent film but worth a look.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 52
Enjoyable Romp - 4/7/2012 9:45:41 AM   

Posts: 85
Joined: 9/11/2005
Congrats to Empire! The most accurate review in a long time! I saw this last night with my other half who isn't a fan of superhero movies. I got a tap on the shoulder 20 mionutes in saying "Isn't Uncle Ben dead?" I hadn't told him it was a reboot! That aside he settled down to the rest of the movie. When the credits rolled at the end we went out silently. "Well?" I asked. "I thought it was quite good I preferred it to the last Spiderman movie even more than the Avengers!" So if that's not a vindication of doing a reboot so early on nothing is.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 53
AMAZING STUFF INDEED!!!! - 4/7/2012 6:15:49 PM   


Posts: 62
Joined: 24/12/2011
Pretty amazing stuff indeed!! I have to say I was rather impressed with this reboot of the Spiderman franchise. What we have on display is much more than web-slinging antics but more an embrace and study of our much loved comic book characters.

Andrew Garfield does a great job as both nerdy high schooler Peter Parker come Spiderman and his blossoming relationship with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) is a joy to behold. As peter battles not only high school bullies, once bitten he treads the origins of Spiderman with ease, this is a Spiderman with allot more bite than in the previous Riami outings, as he teases, threatens and intimidates countless baddies and thugs to truly own his much used spandex.

Others shine too, Peters Uncle Ben, played by Martin Sheen is both restrained and given a real sense of emotional conviction as there ill fated destiny is played brilliantly as Peters new found gifts not only cause trouble at High school but with Emma's Police Chief father played by Dennis Leary. All the while a touching realtionship with his Aunt May played by Sally Field is handeld with great care and sensitivity as Parker stuggles to come to terms with the sudden loss of his parents and a Spiderman who must remember to bring eggs home when he's told!!

The 3D is handeld very well, and Spidermans wonderful web slinging antics are bought to the screen on par and both surpass the Riami version, as Peter battles not only thugs but the intellect and brawn of the lizard villian played by a tortured Rhys Ifans. with great intensity. This is a slick, modern take on Spidey with enough action, fun, morals and romance with touching relationships to enjoy! This all builds rather nicely to some great action set-pieces and the climactic showdown at Oscorp towers,


< Message edited by Ramone87 -- 4/7/2012 6:20:03 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 54
RE: AMAZING STUFF INDEED!!!! - 4/7/2012 7:48:48 PM   


Posts: 355
Joined: 23/6/2006
Ten years have passed since the release of Sam Raimi/Tobey Maguire’s first iteration of Peter Parker aka Spider-Man, which took nearly twenty-five years to get Marvel Comics’ iconic wall-crawler on the big screen. During the last decade, we had Raimi’s near-perfect second instalment, as well as his baggy threequel which gained much disapproval from both fans and critics. It may seem odd reboot the franchise, five years after the last film as there were plans to do Spider-Man 4, which was shut down following the departure of both director and star.

In the hands of a new director who’s ironically named Marc Webb, and Andrew Garfield as the first Brit to portray the web-slinging superhero, Spider-Man is successfully revamped. In this retelling of the origin story, nerdy teenager Peter Parker is living his life as a high school student, who is often bullied, neglected and has a crush with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). Despite the love from Aunt May and Uncle Ben (Sally Field, Martin Sheen), Peter wants to find the truth about the death of his parents, which then leads him to not only his father’s old colleague Dr Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), but an encounter with a radioactive spider.

It’s one thing to get the man behind The Evil Dead to direct a big superhero blockbuster, but it is certainly another thing to get music video director Marc Webb to direct this much-anticipated reboot following his quirky rom-com debut (500) Days of Summer. Whilst Raimi’s trilogy was somewhat influenced by Richard Donner’s Superman, Webb’s film attempts to tell Spidey’s origin story in a Batman Begins-styled presentation. Although this is not as dark and complex as Christopher Nolan’s Bat-flicks (nor it shouldn’t be), and similarly reproduces a number of key points of the 2002 version, there is more detail into how and why Peter chooses to step into the responsibility of becoming New York’s new hero.

If there is anything original to present in the franchise, The Amazing Spider-Man is more of a coming-of-age story as whilst Peter is trying to find out who were his parents, he during the process ends up finding an identity for himself of which he accepts. Following Maguire’s charming portrayal from the previous films, Andrew Garfield (a devoted fan of the comics and the character, in general) may have outshined his predecessor as a twenty-something who looks much younger. Introduced as a rather socially-awkward intellect, the transformation to crime-fighting vigilante and later spandex extraordinaire is wonderfully convincing.

With a greater focus of his high school life, Peter’s relationship with Gwen Stacy is just as important as his superheroics, and this is where Emma Stone comes in. At the film’s heart, the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is delightful as their characters are experiencing first love, with humorous moments along the way, such as an uncomfortable dinner with Gwen’s dad George (Denis Leary), the police captain who sees Spider-Man as a threat.

At very best, this is the second-best of the film series after Raimi’s Spider-Man 2, and the reason for this is the choice of villain. Whilst Alfred Molina’s Doctor Octopus will remain the standout baddie, Rhys Ifans is very sinister as the mad scientist who is determined to find a formula to grow back his right arm, which then leads him to transform into a giant talking lizard. As always with this superhero flicks, the climax has to be a CGI fest, but there is enough brain and emotion to be fully entertained, particularly when Spidey does the most spectacular webslinging to date, of which IMAX 3D does indeed support.

Whilst The Amazing Spider-Man doesn’t reinvent the franchise in the same way that Nolan did for the Dark Knight, its bold new direction and great performances will be a treat for newcomers and Spidey-heads.

(in reply to Ramone87)
Post #: 55
RE: AMAZING STUFF INDEED!!!! - 4/7/2012 9:58:57 PM   

Posts: 5616
Joined: 20/1/2008
From: 10-0-11-0-0 by 0-2
I really enjoyed it. Got rid of the bitter after taste of Spiderman 3, while taking a pick 'n' mix attitude to the source material to redress some of the previous failings and omissions, while revamping other aspects. Garfield and Stone are great, and great together, and there's a real emphasis on character.

My son absolutely loved it too, which I was so pleased about.


Body Hair Beautiful: An Armpits for August Special

(in reply to R W)
Post #: 56
Passionless. Pointless. Unnecessary. - 4/7/2012 10:07:38 PM   


Posts: 40
Joined: 20/12/2005
Bring back Raimi and Maguire! Garfield's Parker is characterless. Why doesn't anyone care that his mother is dead? Why doesn't he show the slightest bit of sympathy to Aunt May when Uncle Ben gets killed? Why was that homage-to-Johnny-Cash Coldplay song chosen to underpin that montage? Who signed off the design of the big lizard's face? I have other questions that would act as spoilers so I'll leave those.
Anyway, this movie lacks heart. Re-treads from the recent Raimi versions had me looking at my watch, while the fresher aspects are there for Twilight fans. I wanted to like it, but it's pants. I would never choose to watch this over Raimi's origin story.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 57
RE: Passionless. Pointless. Unnecessary. - 4/7/2012 10:24:38 PM   

Posts: 5616
Joined: 20/1/2008
From: 10-0-11-0-0 by 0-2


ORIGINAL: sunflies

Why doesn't anyone care that his mother is dead?

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that nobody cares about the mother. The parents death is years before the main film gets going, and his father becomes the main focus after finding the satchel, which leads to insights on both their fates.


while the fresher aspects are there for Twilight fans.

Like what exactly? I despise Twilight and can't see the slightest resemblance to that piece of guff and this film.


Body Hair Beautiful: An Armpits for August Special

(in reply to sunflies)
Post #: 58
RE: Passionless. Pointless. Unnecessary. - 4/7/2012 10:36:09 PM   
Dr Lenera


Posts: 4084
Joined: 19/10/2005

Young Peter Parker is playing hide-and-seek with his scientist father when he discovers his father’s study has been broken into. His father gathers up hidden documents, and Peter’s parents take him to the home of his Aunt May and Uncle Ben then mysteriously depart. Years later, a teenage Peter attends Midtown Science High School, where he’s bullied by Flash Thompson and has caught the eye of Gwen Stacy. At home, Peter finds Richard’s papers, and learns his father worked with fellow scientist Dr. Curt Connors at OsCorp. Faking his way into OsCorp as one of a group of high-school interns, Peter sneaks into a lab where extremely strong “biocable” is being created from genetically modified spiders, one of which bites him. On the subway ride home, he is shocked to find strange spider-like abilities manifesting……..

What’s the point?

That was my immediate reaction on learning that only five years after Spiderman 3 [which I don’t think is quite as bad as its reputation and needs that Director’s Cut that fans have been clamouring for but Sam Raimi has steadfastly refused to do], the next film to feature the masked web slinger would be a reboot and start all over again. Surely they could have just made Spiderman 4 with some different lead cast members? It worked for James Bond several times, and would be far preferable to retelling an origin story that was done well enough in the first Spiderman, a film which for me ranks in the top ten superhero films list and was done almost as well as it could have been. Still, curiosity began to get the better of me and many early reviews have been very good indeed. I shouldn’t have let myself believe them though; when one positive review calls the film “the Twilight of superhero films”, as if any similarity to that abysmal franchise is a good thing, you know it can’t be that good!

Well, it’s certainly not the Twilight of superhero films; it’s far better than that. It’s an enjoyable, well made entry in the Marvel canon. Taken on its own, it would probably seem very good indeed. Unfortunately, it’s not possible to take it on its own, and this is not so much because there have been previous Spiderman films. No, it’s primarily because it’s basically a remake of the 2002 picture. This might sound like a strange thing to say, but it’s 50% a remake of the first half and 50% a remake of the whole film. Peter Parker is in high school the entire time and much of the film is devoted to him becoming Spiderman, but we also have a villain to contend with, while elements not used at all are often still given variants. For example, Peter does not become a journalist so we have no J. Jonah Jameson, the editor who considers Spiderman a criminal and wants to catch him, but we do have Captain Stacy, a police chief who thinks the same way about Spiderman.

Instead of being treated to a rousing piece of music by Danny Elfman and cool titles, things which really set up the excitement in the Raimi movies, we get into this particular picture straight away. We briefly see Peter as a young boy and meet his parents before flashing forward some years where Peter is now a teenager. For around an hour the film then becomes a rehash of the first third of the original film, only played at slower speed and in more detail. A good example is when he creates a device to shoot a web properly [something that is more faithful to the comics than Raimi’s character, who fired webs from his actual wrists]. He has lots of trouble before he gets it right. Unfortunately, the film is also very repetitive and takes forever to get going. When it eventually does, replete with a lame redoing of the death of Uncle Ben from Spiderman and the creation of a villain called the Lizard, the film becomes very action-packed and almost too fast-paced. It isn’t clear exactly why the Lizard becomes villainous and other matters are rushed. Nor is there room for any memorable lines like “with great power comes great responsibility”, though at least the moral aspects of the story are present and correct.

The final third consists mostly of Spiderman battling his opponent in various locations – the best brawl being one that rages through the college and includes the best cameo by Spiderman creator Stan Lee yet – but none of these scenes improve on the Spiderman Vs Dr Octopus train battle in Spiderman 2 and, as with the first half, it all just becomes very repetitive. The best action scene actually occurs about half way through as Peter uses parkour-like abilities to battle and evade a street gang. Now I didn’t see this in 3D, as I think it’s a mainly pointless and nowhere-near-perfected format that I resent paying any extra money for, and also because I think all those Spiderman swinging scenes would make me feel sick! Actually the swinging scenes are quite few in number and often brief, though I did notice a few choice moments where things are hurled at the audience, something I sometimes think 3D is only really good for, and a few POV shots which would would be quite effective. The advances made in CGI between the first film and this one are also evident, making the original’s swinging sequences look very fake.

That’s probably the only improvement though, which mostly just repeats situations and ideas from the 2002 film in an inferior manner. Even the subplot of Dr Curt Connors, the guy who becomes the Lizard [and a character who actually appeared in Spiderman 2 and Spiderman 3 but never got a chance to turn monstrous] features things like his bosses cutting the funding for his project and him talking to himself. Even though the tone of the film does get quite dark, I just got more and more fed up with the sense of déjà vu and overall this Spiderman film just doesn’t have enough of its own identity, with director Marc Webb refusing to put much of a personal stamp on it. Even things which they could have improved upon are usually botched. Something that annoyed me about the Raimi trilogy was that, whilst Peter was as awkward and put-upon a nerd as you could imagine, when he became Spiderman he never became the cheeky, slightly arrogant Spiderman of the comics that I remember loving when I was a kid. In this film, they get Spiderman right, but Peter seems far too confident and sure of himself. In one section he virtually does a bit of spying. None of the Spiderman films so far have shown that Spiderman is actually a very different character to Peter.

I did like the way the film almost ignores the idea of Peter trying to hide the fact that he’s Spiderman to his girlfriend Gwen Stacy [also in Spiderman 3], though there’s little chemistry between the two and certainly no equivalent to that wonderfully romantic upside down kiss! The Amazing Spiderman is mostly well acted. Toby Maguire will always be Peter to me but Andrew Garfield is a better actor and gives the poorly written character some nice nuances. The film also boasts one of James Horner’s strongest scores of late, which is more diverse than Elfman’s efforts and has a decent main theme, but I’m not convinced that the film should ever have been made. At least it leaves some matters unfinished and therefore sets things up for a sequel which should be a bit more original. As the final scene of Spiderman swinging about came up and I started to get up from my seat and head for the exit [I didn’t bother to stay for the after-credits scene which is apparently as meaningless to those not ‘in the know’ as the bit at the end of The Avengers], all I could think of was…….

What’s the point?

Rating: 5.5/10


check out more of my reviews on

(in reply to Rebenectomy)
Post #: 59
RE: Passionless. Pointless. Unnecessary. - 4/7/2012 11:10:23 PM   

Posts: 18273
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
This review is going to be foot loose and fancy free with spoilers so look at your own risk. Needless to say I am not a fan of the film. But if you are going to see it, I would say the 3D is pretty useless. I went to a 3D screening and watched 90 percent of the film with my glasses off. The image looked pretty good. Go and see it in a 2D screening.

Anyway! Onwards to this rambling review of mine….

In a world where the flawed but ambitious Prometheus is getting slain by just about everyone for a compromised script, awkward pacing and gaping plot holes, it is interesting to see how many people are giving Spider-Man a pass, when it is not only guilty of the same crimes, but it also lacks that aforementioned ambition.

It is clear that if the film had a soul, it was ripped apart in editing. The story of Peter’s parents is the only thing that exists to justify another reboot of the series, and it is the thing that the editors have taken a knife too.

In one scene Peter (seemingly and unbelievably for the first time) Googles his father’s name, and in what looks like an insert shot, we read that his parents were killed in a plane crash. Yet Peter talks about his parents as if they are alive. Plenty of clues remain that suggest Peter was the subject of a genetic experiment by his father, and his powers didn’t come from the spider bite.

Perhaps fearing reactions, it seems Sony got cold feet here, and instead cut the film to make it as close to the traditional origin as possible. There has been a lot of praise for the first hour of The Amazing Spider-Man, and while certain scenes do work, overall there is a sense of ticking boxes. The movie almost knows that the audience already went through these scenes, and quickly moves forward. Thus we see Uncle Ben killed, but he is barely referenced in the rest of the film. Aunt May disappears from the bulk of the movie after Ben’s death. Everything is by the numbers; none of it feels like it matters.

Comparisons are being made to Batman Begins, and it is undeserved. One of the great things about Begins, was a sense of a growing relationship between the man and the city. In Spider-Man he is just suddenly there one day. We get no sense what New York makes of it, nor whether he is having any effect on things. The reaction of the public is mostly off stage, and as such, New York, which is one of the characters of Spider-Man just feels like AnyCity USA.

Of course there is one scene which I am sure people will bring up in reaction to this, but remember that a) that is down to one character who has a connection to Spidey and b) because we have no sense of public opinion, the scene just doesn't come off nearly as triumphant as it should. There is a scene in the 2001 film which is similar, and while cheesy, feels like it is saying something about the character and the city.

Performance wise, Garfield is good. But I have issues with his Peter Parker. He doesn’t seem like a kid who struggles at school against bullies. He takes pictures and skates and is into science. As 21 Jump Street correctly pointed out, nowadays this version of Peter Parker would be the cool kid, and Flash would be seen as a joke.

There is no real arc to Parker – before he gets his powers he defends a kid from being bullied without question. The idea of Peter is a guy who is constantly trying to become the hero he wants to be. In Spider-Man he is already there before the bite, he just screws up indirectly.

Emma Stone is good as well, but she has nothing to do but nice cutesy romantic stuff with Peter. Hey studios – don’t bother clapping for not making the lead girl a damsel in distress when your other solution is to shove her in a car.

Rhys Ifans is…fine, I suppose. For the first half at least. I didn’t get a sense of tragedy or conflict about him. He made decisions in the film because the script demanded it, not because the audience felt a struggle within Connors.

Sheen is Sheen. He does what he does and he does it well. He is poorly served by a script that is even afraid to put the words “With great power….” into his mouth and instead gives him a less succinct alternative. Sheen has that warmth and carries with him the working class ethic seen in Wall Street, along with the nobility of West Wing. But he plays the role pretty much the same way as he did in the Departed. I love him though, so that doesn’t bother me.

The film really comes apart in the second half of the film. In one scene the Lizard is trying to stop someone from experimenting on other humans. Yet later on he…experiments on humans. Questions abound, such as why the police need to wait for Spider-Man to get to the tower? Did no one think about shooting at the tower and bring it down?

Why exactly was the Lizard at Peter’s school? Couldn’t he have just been getting on with his plan? Peter didn’t seem too bothered seeing as he was in the building. Was the Lizard unable to switch off his PC in the sewers, so as to not clue in anyone who might find it, about what his master plan was? That might have been helpful. The neat little lizard graphics rampaging around the city were a cute little addition that he somehow had the time to design up. I also wanted to see the scene where Connors was hauling all that equipment down into the sewers and trying to set it up.

It was also great that the super secure building which is established as being super secure didn’t have any security cameras or security guards around the secure room with all the genetically modified spiders. Peter wanders around with ease. Why?

Because the script has to let him wander around. I am not even sure why he went off – I suppose he couldn’t just go up to the door of the scientist he wanted to speak to and introduce himself….oh wait.

Talking of which -
“Peter, your father and I spent decades trying to perfect the formula, but it was all for nothing. I am still looking…hoping one day that I can…”
“Here you go”
“What’s this?”
“The formula”
“Oh, cheers!”

The films action, what little there is of it by the way, is rote, and without much in the way of an objective. Bad guy jumps at Spider-Man, he shoots lots of webbing, Lizard breaks free. Rinse. Repeat. There is no creativity, and in fact the best moment of all the fights scenes is when it is in the background as payoff to a joke.

Now I haven’t really gone into a comparison with the first Spider-Man but how can it be avoided when this film treads the same ground? I am not a huge fan of the Raimi films – indeed I outright hate number 3. But the first one, while dated, took time to build its world, and its relationships. Even as you knew Norman Osborne was going to be a bad guy, you were sort of touched when he seemed to take Peter under his wing. The dynamics between the kids felt real. You got to know Ben before he was taken away. The movie wasn’t seemingly devoted to setting up a sequel (Norman Osborne is dying! But we won’t show you his face. No siree). And it allowed itself to be comic book big.

Now, no one is asking Amazing Spider Man to be a replication of the first one, but what I would like to have seen was a take distinct, yet still given time to breathe. For example both films have the bad guy doing an internal monologue to themselves. But with Lizard it comes out of nowhere and doesn’t return. With Norman it is the next step towards madness, and Dafoe really sells that moment. If you are going to repeat specific moments from the first film, you better make darn sure you can do it just as well, or better. Heck they even had a scene after the final battle where Spidey has to make a promise which causes him pain.

And that is the problem. Amazing Spider-Man doesn’t do enough to make itself distinct, and in those areas where it repeats what has come before, it is the inferior version of those events.

The best bit is at the end, when Spidey does his final swing around the city (as done in previous films) and it looks like he blows his load over the audience in a triumphant final shot. I doubt I could come up with a better metaphor for my feelings about this film.

2 stars because I like the actors. And the mouse-lizard. He was awesome. Want a whole film about him.

< Message edited by Rgirvan44 -- 4/7/2012 11:23:14 PM >


It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: I knew it! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:

New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts

Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI