The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Dustin: 3 of 5 stars Nick: 2 of 5 stars Average: 2.5 of 5 stars (Woozy canary)

Dustin: The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is the sequel to The Amazing Spider-Man, and not to be confused with the 2004 film Spider-Man 2. This time around, Spider-Man faces off with a motley crew of villains including Electro, the Green Goblin and Rhino, while juggling personal relationships with love interest Gwen Stacy, guardian Aunt May and friend Harry Osborn. He’s also trying to come to terms with why his parents seemingly abandoned him as a child. This summary may make the film sound as if it’s bloated and overly complex.

Nick: The film tried to be dumb fun with serious drama, and the two never fit well together. All the drama scenes felt forced. Like Peter and Gwen’s break up. How long after the first film ended did this film begin to where we had to witness their break up? Which wasn’t much of a break up. They got back together right away.  

Dustin: There were lots of scenes involving acting and a story. Coming off cartoonish action sequences with Spider-Man’s wisecracks while dodging bullets, the tone of the serious scenes felt off. I had trouble caring about the drama between the action. I thought this may have been because I didn’t see the last film, but probably not.

Nick: I’m in the minority of people who liked the chemistry of Peter Parker and Mary Jane in Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man more than Peter and Gwen in Marc Webb’s version. While Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield are arguably better actors, the characters crafted for them are not very complex and their charm wears thin. Same could be said of the villains. I actually didn’t mind at the beginning how flat the villains were because I was taking the movie as silly, but the more complex the film tried to be, the more frustrating it got that Electro’s main goal was to be noticed.

Dustin: I thought the Sam Raimi movies had more emotional weight. This screenshot from Spider-Man (2002) is iconic because you actually care about the romance:

The new Spider-Man movies are disposable entertainment. I don’t think that’s necessarily bad in and of itself, but these movies have the appearance of being darker and more character-driven without actually delivering on that front.

Nick: Concurred. If the villains had better reasons to be villains beyond their hatred for Spider-Man then there would be more emotional weight. Even Sam Raimi’s third Spider-Man film (which is still the worst in the franchise) had a villain, the Sandman, who wanted to provide for his dying child as the intended main villain. Raimi was forced to make Venom the main bad guy by the studios. Venom was a character Raimi didn't care for, and that is why the film ultimately failed. Too many bad guys and none of them get enough screen time to impose their character on the audience. The same could be said of this movie.

Dustin: If this movie was just about Spider-Man versus Electro, and only introduced the Green Goblin as a teaser, the story would have been leaner and felt more appropriate in length. It could have cut most of the Peter Parker story as well. I found I didn't care about those scenes. I couldn't care less whether Gwen went off to England. The “dumb fun” elements of this movie were actually pretty well done. But ever since the Dark Knight series, all super heroes need to be dark and brooding.

Nick: It’s funny that’s your take from this movie when that was my biggest complaint about Man of Steel. Speaking of, Sony’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2 sure had a lot of advertisement. Especially for its own business, Sony! Every phone, laptop and TV had to let you know it was a Sony. While there might not be as many obvious product placements as Man of Steel, it feels even more annoying, since Sony is advertising themselves.

Dustin: Trust me, I noticed the Sony product placement in the Sony movie. I also thought they went a little too far in the scene where they showed the man use a Samsung Galaxy and then die of brain cancer.

I think Man of Steel was a little more consistent in tone that this movie. The shifts from cartoonish to dramatic in this movie were too jarring. And since I enjoyed the cartoonish action scenes and was bored by the dramatic moments, I think the film should have just stuck to the fun stuff.

Nick: Since you didn't see the first movie, let me tell you that Gwen Stacy’s father (Denis Leary) dies at the end of the movie and finds out Peter’s secret identity. He tells Peter to leave his daughter alone because Peter would be putting her in danger by proxy. The tension his wish created in this movie caused a lot of my annoyance. Peter constantly seeing her father everywhere he goes and this weighing down on him feels more forced than it should. I blame this for a lot of these tonal shifts. This moment Peter is OK, then he thinks of Gwen’s father, and now the tone is sadder, and the next scene he feels guilty, but the next moment he doesn't give a fuck anymore, but in the next scene the guilt comes back again. GAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! It also feels weird considering Gwen doesn't seem so distressed by her father’s death, while Peter sees him everywhere he goes.

Dustin: I think the movie did a fine job establishing that backstory for people who hadn’t seen the last film. They showed the ghost of Denis Leary in his cop uniform looking at Peter Parker disappointedly whenever he got too close to Gwen. Just like Leary did in the previous series as Harry Osborn’s father.

Denis Leary

Nick: It always bothers me when plot is built by misunderstandings. Electro did not want to hurt anyone, but couldn't contain the power, and Spider-Man was trying to help, but the police kept shooting at Electro and making him angry. Then Electro misunderstands Spider-Man and ends up hating him. Harry ends up misunderstanding Spidey’s intentions as well and ends up hating him. Though on Harry’s side I didn't fully understand why Peter was so opposed to giving him a vial of blood that would save his life. His reasoning was was it could kill Harry. Ummm… he’s already dying at an alarming rate. New reason, please!

Dustin: I thought the misunderstandings added good tension between Electro and Spider-Man. They could’ve been friends if Electro calmed down a second and listened. But, like you, I also didn’t understand why Peter wouldn’t just give Harry a vial of his blood if it would save his life. I imagine Peter Parker not donating blood to the Red Cross because he doesn’t care for free cookies. I also didn’t see how Peter Parker and Harry Osborn could have ever been friends. We’re given some dialogue about Harry being there for Peter as a child when Peter’s parents died, but their personalities are so different, and Dane DeHaan gives such a creepy vibe, the scenes between them were just awkward and painful to watch.

I felt much more emotionally invested in the friendship between Tobey Maguire and James Franco in the 2002 film, and when Franco turned against Spider-Man, the conflict was much more tense and ironic. However, DeHaan makes a much better Green Goblin. He just looks like a goblin, and he makes a great villain.

Nick: The moments between Spider-Man and Electro before he turned evil provided the most entertaining moments. (I had to say something positive!)

Dustin: I thought Jamie Foxx was miscast as Max Dillon/Electro. While Foxx is one of the most versatile and talented actors in Hollywood today, he just isn’t believable as a nerdy social outcast. And it didn’t really matter after he turned into Electro, as anybody could have been Electro’s CGI stand-in.

Nick: I’d skip this movie and go catch Captain America: Winter Soldier a second time--a movie that is light while having more of a genuine emotional impact.