Go Back   Behind The Voice Actors > TV / Movie / Game Central > Movie Discussion

Movie Discussion Discuss all things related to upcoming, latest and classic movies! Threads may contain SPOILERS!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-06-2017   #131
Numbwillstan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: California
Posts: 1
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

wow...really glad I read up on max steel before actually seeing it lol.

The last one I've seen is Arrival.

I'd give it an 8/10 and that's not bad for how horrid M Night's movies have been in the past decade
Numbwillstan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2017   #132
The Doctor
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Finland
Posts: 618
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

With Spider-Man: Homecoming's premiere being only one month away, I'm going to rewatch all the previous Spider-Man movies in preparation, so I can compare it to them fairly. Let's get things started!

Spider-Man (2002)

While Blade and X-Men came first, this is without a doubt the movie that we have to thank most for the current superhero movie renaissance. You can trace a great deal of the tropes still used today back to this movie and this movie embracing the comic book aesthetics made sure that black leather didn't become a norm (well, outside of Singer's movies). Without Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi, The Avengers might have never assembled in the big screen during our lifetime. Heck, this movie pretty much invented MCU's tone and style, before there even was MCU. But, that doesn't mean that this is the best Marvel movie ever made and a vocal group of fans have in recent years expressed an opinion that the movies has become outdated, since it isn't (for example) as serious as X-Men movies, ambitious as Civil War or epic in scale as The Avengers. While that is a valid opinion to have, I still unashamedly love this movie. For me, it's kinda like your old dog that you had since it was a puppy. It is showing its age, but it still makes you smile.

The best part is the first act and I would argue that this is one of the best adaptations of Spider-Man's origin to date. It updates the most outdated elements of the comics (changing the radioactive spider to a genetically manipulated one) and adds more meat to some elements that were originally rushed (for example, letting us actually get to know uncle Ben before he dies), but still keeps all the iconic imagery and emotionally resonating moments. Rest of the movie suffers little bit from both the hero and villain not really having strong motivations or goals besides just being the hero and villain, but the character stuff still holds it together.

There is this huge broken base over whenever Tobey Maguire was good casting choice or not. The common complaints seem to be that he was too whiny as Peter Parker and not jokey enough Spider-Man. Me personally, I think that he is great! I could be forgetting stuff from the sequels, but in this movie Peter never really whines when it isn't justified (let's see you hold tears when your father figure dies) and as Spider-Man he is based more on Stan Lee/Steve Ditko - era, where the character wasn't the motormouth we know today, but a deadpan snarker. So, while Tom Holland might be my favorite live-action Spider-Man and Josh Keaton my favorite period, Maguire will always hold his own in my eyes. Admittedly, I might not able to separate my personal reasons for liking him from the more objective reasons. You see, while growing up, Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man was my role model. I was relentlessly bullied in school, making every day of my life a living hell and destroying my self-esteem, until I started high school. Seeing a loser like Maguire's Peter Parker going through the same thing, but still becoming a hero and inspirational figure like Spider-Man, made my days little bit more bearable.

Well, that got heavy. Let's get back to talking about a silly movie again...

A lot of people really hate the romance stuff in Raimi movies and Webb movies definitely did them better, but I think they work fine in this movie, when you watch it in vacuum from the other movies. Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst have believable chemistry and the backyard scene, while corny as hell, does tug your heartstrings. I have no problem believing that these two would have an affection towards each other, but are either too shy or clueless to act upon it. Even the universally despised Mary Jane, I actually like in this movie. Sure, she is nothing like the character from the comics, but when taken as complete reinvention, she works fine. A lot of people have said that Raimi's MJ is manipulative wench, but watching this movie again, I actually saw confused young women who, because of her abusive home, was desperate to find love and acceptance, and didn't always know how to pursue it correctly and just jumped from one dysfunctional relationship to another. Problem is that she never grows or develops over this character flaw in the sequels, but like I said, she is fine in thie first movie.

But let's talk about the element that steals the whole show: Willem Dafoe as Green Goblin! Dear God, does he chew the scenery. He makes creepy facial expressions, talks with nasally voice, makes twisted jokes, talks to himself... and I love every minute of it! This his how I think Green Goblin should be portrayed. Completely insane, but still dangerous as hell. I also never understood the hate for the costume. The Power Rangers comparison especially just baffles me (it is an amor, not spandex!!). The mask is pretty close to the idea of the original and the armored suit makes sense in a movie. If I had to complain about something, Goblin does seem to lack any goal or motive (like I already said above) after he kills OsCorps' board of directors and while I appreciate that they kept the scale small and didn't give him any huge destroying the whole city plans or the like, it is little weak that rest of the movie he just seems to be obsessed with Spider-Man (which he is in the comics, but only after a long-lasting rivalry).

Let's also briefly talk about the two things that are often brought up when people say that this movie hasn't aged well: poor special effects and the corny moments. For the effects, I don't have much to say. It is little distracking when web-slinging Spider-Man and flying Green Goblin are suddenly turned into early Pixar - level of CGI-puppets or when Mary Jane is holding onto a lifeless Spider-Man dummy, and they do take you out of the movie. To give them credit, they clearly knew when their effects weren't up to the task, and always cut away to either a more convincing effect or close-up to the actor's face as soon as possible. In regards to the corny moments, I'm fine with them. Again, I might be forgetting some of the more embarrassing moments from the sequels (besides the Emo-Peter and dancing in the third movie), but in this movie specifically they don't really go any further than any today's superhero movie would. I actually even like the scene where people throw trash at Green Goblin, because earlier scenes of the movie established that people were actually grateful for Spider-Man and that scene paid it off. Maybe all the "You mess with Spider-Man, you mess with New York" and "You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us" stuff should have bee left out, but considering the real-life reason for their inclusion, I don't know if that would have been possible. Although, it is weird that Goblin doesn't just kill them or scare them away with a pumpkin bomb.

In conlusion, the first Spider-Man movie isn't flawless and the superhero genre has evolved a lot since then, but it is still a solid movie. Not a masterpiece, but ton of fun and I love it, both for notalgic and "legitimate" reasons.

Rating: 8/10
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2017   #133
The Doctor
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Finland
Posts: 618
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

My Spider-Man movie rewatch project continues with...

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

This is the big one. The one Spider-Man movie that everyone universally loved when it came out and is still considered by many to be the best Spider-Man movie. Heck, a lot of people would even call it one of the best superhero movies period. So, how do I feel about it?

Let's start with the good stuff.

The scenes where Peter struggles to balance out his normal life with being Spider-Man and failing miserably are classic Spider-Man. All the time-honored problems of Peter Parker's life are presented. He can't keep a job, is always broke, has relationship troubles and his grades are falling. All of this culminates with pretty solid adaptation of the seminal comic book story, "Spider-Man No More!", and we even get a live-action recreation of the iconic panel of Peter Parker walking away from the Spider-Man costume he threw to garbage. These moments and elements make this movie feel like an authentic Spider-Man story the best possible way.

The villain is even better than Green Goblin from the first movie. At the time, Doctor Octopus was easily one of the best cinematic Marvel villains, besides Magneto, and he still holds up great. I would even say that he is easily more compelling than the original comic book character ever was. Doc Ock is sympathetic and you understand his motives, not to mention that he, unlike Green Goblin, has a clear goal during the entire movie and even goes through a character arc. The center of this is Alfred Molina's brilliant performance, which combines genuine drama with comic book hamminess effortlessly. If I had to nitpick something, the whole AI of the tentacles controlling him is little weird and frankly unnecessary, since I'm sure that the audience would have bought him going crazy after losing his wife to his failed experiment.

Speaking of Doctor Octopus, I would like to mention my personal favorite scene as a small side-note. I'm of course talking about the hospital scene. For a short moment, Sam Raimi indulges his horror - roots and gives us a scene that would be right at home in one of the Evil Dead movies. We even get a guy wielding a chainsaw and point-of-view-shots from the monster's perspective. What's there not to love?

The first movie had a great first act, but the rest of the story was little directionless, but here we have no such problem. I already mentioned the stronger story for the villain, but the title hero also has an actual character arc through the entire movie. Peter has to learn that taking responsibility is not easy and he is going to have to do personal sacrifices, but all the good he does matters in the end and his actions inspire people to be better people themselves. Not to mention that all the supporting actors also get more to do, with Rosemary Harris's aunt May being a suprising standout.

The effects mostly got better after the first movie. Everytime Spider-Man becomes CGI, it isn't all that noticeable and all the action scenes are both more exciting and fast-paced than in the first movie. Then again, CGI-Doctor Octopus always looks like he is made of rubber and there's some really bad green screen during the fire scene (which is weird, since the fire scene in the first movie looked fine).

Unfortunately, we are now getting to the bad stuff and unlike with the first movie, where the problems were relatively minor, they are not easy to ignore here.

Let's get the worst parts out of the way first. This movie started the downfall of Mary Jane and the romantic sublot. I was willing to cut Mary Jane some slack in the first movie, because she was clearly still imature and she never did anything intentionally malicious. But here she is supposed to be more mature, but she acts very entitled about Peter giving her attention and does some legitimately awful things. Getting engaged with someone just to spite Peter and then leaving said person at the altar are horrible things to do and I have no sympathy for her after that. And the romance between her and Peter is just awful beoynd belief. One of my most hated tropes in fiction is conflict coming from the lack of communication and Peter/MJ romance is pretty much build around that cliche. I get that Peter doesn't want to tell MJ that he is Spider-Man, but there are other options than just vaguely saying that he had hindrances that stopped him from seeing her play. Just tell her that you almost got run over and your bike was trashed. That's not actually a lie and you even have your broken bike as a proof. And honestly, Peter still trying to pursue MJ after she is engaged to someone else, doesn't make him look too likeable.

My other major problem is Peter losing his powers, because it makes no sense. The only explanation seems to be that when he loses his confidence, he loses his powers with it. That would have been fine as a metaphor, but as an actual explanation it is just stupid and I really wish that they would have given an actual scientific explanation (even a completely nonsensical one would have been preferable). The way how he gets his powers back doesn't make much sense either, since he already gotten his confidence back after the pep talk from aunt May, but still needs MJ to be kidnapped before being back to full-power. This seems to imply that he can only be Spider-Man as long as MJ keeps getting in trouble, which carries some unfortunate implications. I really wish that they would have just left the whole subplot out of the movie, since the original comic story worked fine without him losing his powers.

In conclusion, it is really hard for me to rate this movie. At least in comparison to the first movie. The good things are really good, but the bad things are really bad. In the end, I gave this movie slight edge over the first movie for all the things it got right. I really wish that Raimi and co. had fine-tuned all the weaker parts, so this could have been true masterpiece, but it is still a great movie the way it is. It just has some serious flaws as well.

Rating: 8.5/10

Last edited by The Doctor; 06-12-2017 at 05:26 AM.
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2017   #134
The Doctor
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Finland
Posts: 618
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

I'm now done with the Raimi's trilogy, so that means that the last movie I saw was...

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Before I start talking about how I felt about this movie after this particular viewing, I would like share a story. Spider-Man 3 was the first movie I was looking forward to and felt hype for. The first two movies came out little bit before I was interested enough in movies to pay attention to what was coming out or playing in theaters, so I saw them first time on video, but Spider-Man 3 came out at the perfect time. I was 13 years old, obsessed with Spider-Man and Venom was my favorite supervillain at the time, so you can bet that I was beoynd excited. I visited forums daily in the hopes of people posting spoilers, interviews, trailers or screenshots that I had missed and I watched all the trailers so many times that I had them memorized. Days seemed to move slow as snail and the movie couldn't come out soon enough. Finally, the movie premiered and I went to see it... and loved every minute of it. I'm serious. I unironically loved Spider-Man 3 and thought that it was a great movie. I wasn't even in denial about it, like Star Wars fandom famously was after seeing Phantom Menace. I genuinely loved it. But now, 10 years later when I'm more mature person with better critical thinking skills, and after everyone and their mom has gone through Spider-Man 3 frame-by-frame and pointed out everything that is wrong with it, does the movie still hold up?

No.

I could make this longer than my two posts about the previous movies combined, but everyone knows the problems of Spider-Man 3. Your criticisms are also my criticisms. So instead, I just focus on the things that annoyed me personally the most, but keep in my that these aren't the only things wrong with the movie.

The main problem is that the movie tries to cram too much into two hours. Black Suit Saga, Harry's revenge, Sandman, Gwen Stacy, Peter's and MJ's failing relationship and Venom are just too much for a one movie. Maybe all of these elements could have worked in a one movie, if they had stronger connection, but the movie feels like a collection of random segments and most of the subplots just disappear for while to give room for other subplots. When the symbiote finally bonds with Peter, you have almost forgotten that it was hiding in his room or when Harry finally gets his memories back, you have almost forgotten that he was supposed to be one of the villains. Reportedly, this was originally supposed to be a two-part movie, but the studio said no (ironic, considering that only few years later two-part movies would become a trend), which honesgtly would have been for the better, but now we are stuck with a movie that has more ingredients than it knows what to do with.

In this movie, MJ becomes unlikeable and all the goodwill from the previous movies dies. She does nothing, but act like entitled brat throughout the whole movie and she seems to think that Peter is a psychic, because she never tells him about her problems and then gets mad when he doesn't know about them. Just like in the last movie, most of the problems of this relationship come from the lack of communication and this time most of it is her fault. Sure, Peter isn't much better, but I can kinda forgive that fame would go over his head after years of being bullied social outcast. MJ is just a brat.

Previous two movies had great villains, which makes it so much more disappointing that this one drops the ball with them.

Harry is probably the most salvageable thanks to the previous two movies building him up and James Franco's great performance, but he is still far from actually being good. First of all, his design is terrible! I could probably stomach the costume, since I remember Raimi saying something to the effect of "Harry isn't a Goblin, but just Harry seeking revenge" before the movie came out (although, if that was the case, why would you then credit him as the "New Goblin"), but the snowboard-glider is laughable. I get it that it's supposed to be smoother than the original glider and fit to tight spaces, but why does it have to look like a snowboard? Second, Harry's story-arc doesn't work, because he becomes a good guy again for nonsensical reasons (I get to that later) and he uncharacteristically acts like Spider-Man's plucky sidekick during the climax.

Sandman also had potential to be decent under better circumstances. Thomas Haden Church was spot-on casting choice and he looks like he was ripped straight from the pages of the comics. The sympathetic backstory wasn't too bad either and I still choked up little bit when he sees his daughter for the last time. Sadly, it is all downhill from there. The movie relies so heavily on the audience feeling sorry for him, that it kinda ignores all the bad things he does. "I'm not a bad person, I just got unlucky" doesn't really work, when you kill people and help black slime-monster to kidnap woman who has done nothing to you. This could have worked, if they played it as him just not caring about anything else than saving his daughter and losing his perspective, but the movie always acts like that he is morally a good man and Spider-Man is wrong for not hearing him out. The retcon of him being the true killer of uncle Ben doesn't work and just creates bunch of plot-holes. It is also little hamfisted, how the movie tries to have it cake and eat it too, by having Sandman accidentally pull the tigger after his accomplice tapped him on the shoulder, so uncle Ben's death is still kinda Peter's fault for not stopping him. In the end, even though I liked Church's performance and the attempt at trying to make the character more three-dimensional than his comic book counterpart, he is the villain whose exclusion or very least downgrade from one of the major villain to a just henchman would have improved the movie most.

The biggest insult was what the movie did to Venom and the black suit saga as a whole. Venom is often seen as one of the outdated relics of the 90's, when superhero comics were trying too hard to be edgy, but there's honestly a lot of depth to the character that would make an amazing movie. And all of that depth was ignored by Raimi in favor of one-dimensional douchebag.

In the comics, Eddie is proud of his job and genuinely wants to be a great reporter. In the movie, he seems to be doing it just for the glory and is willing to cheat.
In the comics, he is a good man, who is just a victim of circumstances. In the movie, he is a slimeball who gets what is coming to him.
In the comics, he goes to the church to ask God's forgiveness, because he is going to commit suicide. In the movie, he is there to ask the God to kill Peter Parker (WTF?!).
In the comics, Venom had clear morals and would avoid hurting the innocent people. In the movie, he kidnaps Mary Jane and promises to kill her.
In the comics, Eddie and the symbiote constantly fought for the control, but wouldn't be able to live without each other either. In the movie, we have no idea what the bond with the symbiote is like.

I'm not saying that the character has to be 100% faithful to the source material, but if the adaptation is less compelling in almost every possible way, you have a problem. To add insult to injury, one year later this version of Venom (well, at least a very similar version of this Venom) was done right in Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. It is honestly real shame that Raimi doesn't like the character and probably half-assed his story on purpose, because he would be the perfect director to adapt him. Let him dust off his Evil Dead - sensibilities again and he could make Venom both scary and funny.

And like I said, their butcher everything else about the symbiote too. One of the most beloved comic book storylines of all time and the best they could come up with were emo haircut and dancing? I have seen people try to defend both by saying that Peter is still a dweep and he is trying to act cool in his own dorky way, but I'm sorry, that's not how the black suit has ever worked. The symbiote feeds on your emotions and because anger is the best nourishment for it, it makes you act more aggressive. Even the 90's cartoon, which was infamous for the ridiculous amounts of censorship, got that right. Instead of a montage of Peter dancing like a jerk, we should have a montage of Spider-Man beating up small-time crooks to a bloody pulp and the like.

However, the biggest problem of the movie are all the plot contrivances. The meteor containing the symbiote just happens to land next to Peter Parker. Harry just happens to get an amnesia early in the movie, so he is out of commission for a while. Flint Marko just happens to stumble to a science experiment run by the most irresponsible scientists ever. Harry just happens to get his memories back, when it is dramatically most convenient. MJ just happens to be dumb enough to go along with Harry's orders to break-up with Peter, even though she knows that Peter is Spider-Man and could take Harry down. Eddie Brock just happens to be at the church the same time as Peter gets rid of the symbiote. Harry's butler just happens to know how Norman actually died and decides to finally tell Harry (I know that he was originally supposed to be a manifestation of Harry's good-side or other such nonsense, but nothing in the finnished movie even implies that).

After all of that, is there anything good about this movie? Well, the actors are all still good (I even think that Topher Grace would have been great with better script), the production values and effects are amazing, the birth of Sandman is one of the greatest scenes of all of the Spider-Man movies, all the action scenes are ton of fun to watch and the soundtrack is the best of the whole trilogy. I also appreciate that ending does give closure for all of the major storylines and nothing important is left hanging. Sure, in a perfect world Raimi would have made one more movie that would have redeemed the franchise and left us with better taste in our mouths, but the story doesn't exactly need it. Spider-Man 3 has a reputation of being one of the worst superhero movies of all-time, but I'm not personally sure if I would even place it in the TOP-10. It is a bad movie, but it isn't unwatchable and I did enjoy myself every now and then.

Rating: 5.5/10
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2017   #135
The Doctor
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Finland
Posts: 618
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

Now that I'm done with Raimi, it is Webb's turn.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

I don't lie, I had no desire to revisit this movie. When I saw it in the theater, it left litte to no impression on me and as the time passes, I find new flaws about it everytime I think about it. But I set myself a goal to watch all the previous Spider-Man movies before Homecoming premieres, so here we go.

It would probably be easiest to start with things that liked. Like I said when I talked about the first movie, this movie handles romance better than Raimi ever did. Peter's and Gwen's relationship feels more sincere and Gwen as a character is much more compelling than Mary Jane was. I'm still hesitant to say that the romance is great, because most of the interactions between our two leads are typical awkward mumbling that you see in every romantic comedy, but to be fair, this was the begining of their romance so there was room for them to grow as couple.

The action scenes weren't too bad either. Sure, nothing as cool as the train fight from the second Raimi movie, but nothing too shabby either. Garfield is more agile than Maguire, so Spider-Man gets to do more acrobatics and they also do some really fun stuff with the web-shooters.

That was fun. Now, let's talk about things that I didn't like.

I think that the main reason why this movie doesn't work, is the fact that it has no passion behind it. It feels like a movie created in a lab by marketing people, who tried to replicate the formula of recent popular superhero movies (mainly Nolan's Batman). Nothing about this movie feels unique or stands out. The dry and washed out color scheme doesn't help either. I could pick any random superhero movie blindfolded from a bargain bin and it would probably have more personality than this movie. Love or hate them, Raimi movies even today have their own style and feeling.

I hated the subplot about Peter's parents. It was stupid move from the comics to try to make them important and it was mistake from the filmmakers to adapt that. The main reason why Spider-Man has such a universal appeal for over 50 years, is the fact that everyone can relate to him and see themselves under the mask. When you make the death of Peter's parents part of some grand conspiracy or even connected to his origin, you suddenly turn Peter's coming-of-age story to a story about a kid who was destined for greatness. You also make uncle Ben and aunt May seem useless, when Peter never seems to care about them and just angst over how he didn't know his father. Not only does that misses the point of Ben and May, but it is rather insulting to real-life adoptive families.

This is possibly one of the worst retellings of Spider-Man's origin ever. The way he gets his powers is unintentionally silly and the way uncle Ben dies is just dumb. Uncle Ben getting killed because of a chocolate milk makes Peter look incredibly petty and childish, but more damningly his death doesn't really come across as Peter's fault. I mean, Ben would have probably died anyway, if he was stupid enough to wrestler a man who was in much better physically condition and was armed. Besides, there wasn't really any need to do the origin again, since everybody already knows it and it plays little to no importance to the rest of the movie. If this movie had started out with already active Spider-Man, what would have been fundamentally different about it?

Do you think that Raimi movies are too corny to be taken seriously? Then how about the subway scene were Peter uses his powers and no one bats an eye? Or the scene were he destroys the bathroom? Or the scene were Peter seriously tries to convince George Stacy that Curt Connors has transformed into a giant lizard? Or the scene were the father of the kid who Spider-Man saved just happens to be a crane operator who organizes all the other crane operators to help Spider-Man?

All of the actors are talented and great in other projects, but here they either have nothing to work with or all their character development scenes were cut out. Martin Sheen is spot-on casting choice, but he just doesn't emit the same fatherly wisdom as Cliff Robertson did and Sally Field's Aunt May is practically a non-entity. Irrfan Khan's character (did they ever even say his name?) is pretty much a cartoon villain, who just disappears from the movie, because the conclusion of his story-arc was cut out, making you wonder why not just cut him out entirely.

The Lizard is frankly terrible villain, especially when compared to villains from Raimi movies. The movie is never clear whenever the Lizard is a separate entity from Connors or all his hidden ambitions/thoughts exposed in a monstrous form. We never get to know Curt Connors as a person, so we have no idea if we should feel sorry for him or be terrified that his darker side has emerged. Heck, the first impression of him alone leaves a lot to be desired. There's little to no build-up to him, he is just there, and then he runs away like a wuss after one kick from Spider-Man. Compare that to Green Goblin destroying entire military base or Doctor Octopus killing entire room of doctors, and you see the difference. It also doesn't help that Lizard's design is terrible and he looks too dopey to be genuinely scary. And honestly, if you want to do more "serious" and "grounded" Spider-Man movie, you don't use the Lizard as the villain and especially don't have his main goal to be taking over the World.

I saved the biggest thing for the last: Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. You either love him or hate him. I personally don't hate him... I loathe him! Don't get me wrong, Garfield is talented actor and could have maybe surpassed Tobey Maguire with better material, but here he is awful! His Peter Parker is despicable, unlikeable and completely unsympathetic. He always acts selfishly and never shows any respect for anyone (he is nice to uncle Ben only after he got what he wanted). Not to mention, I don't think that Garfield has ever even seen actually bullied person. His Peter Parker would never be a social outcat (at worst, people would just ignore him). Oh, and the ending made it pretty clear that he never learned the responsibility lesson.

"My dying wish is that you stay away from my daughter"
"Lol! I don't wanna do that. She's hot!"

Garfield's defenders always like to point out that, unlike Maguire, he was actually joking when he was Spider-Man. Well, congratulations! You got your joking Spider-Man at the cost of Peter Parker.

So yeah, I don't like this movie very much. On technical level, it is better (or at least more coherent) than Spider-Man 3, but I would rather watch the latter again. Spider-Man 3 is a bad movie, but at least it is more entertaining and memorable. TASM, when not insulting to the title character, is ultimately just very forgettable and dull.

Rating: 5/10

Oh, and this movie is partially to blame for the cancellation of Spectacular Spider-Man, so screw it!
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2017   #136
The Doctor
Member
 
The Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Finland
Posts: 618
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

My personal little Spidey-Marathon is now over, which means that it is time to share my thoughts on...

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)

For starters, I have to confess something. This was actually the first time I saw this movie. Because I didn't particularly care for the first TASM movie and the trailers were waving all the possible red flags, I didn't go see this and all the bad reviews made sure that I had no interest to catch it up later on DVD. But because I wanted to watch all the previous Spider-Man movies before Homecoming, I went to a flea market and bought the cheapest copy that I could find (1 euro, if you are curious) and finally sat down to watch it. I hate to admit it, but I didn't completely hate it. Sure, it is by no means a good movie and my expectations being at the rock-bottom probably helped a lot (if I ever rewatch this movie, I doubt I would be as lenient on it), but it was much more pleasant viewing experience than the first TASM movie.

What elements did I like exactly? Well, the best part of the previous movie, I.E. Peter/Gwen romance, was even better here. Now they are interacting like an actual mature couple rather than two romantic comedy stereotypes. They love always feels genuine and the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is perfect. I also found Garfield's Peter Parker much more likeable this time around. Sure, he still can't act like actual outcast nerd to save his life, but he isn't being selfish dick anymore and seems to actually care about aunt May. The more cheerful and comedic tone also helps to make some of the goofier moments feel less out of place, and the film simply is more pleasing to the eyes since, unlike the previous movie, it remembers that colors exist. On top of that, I genuily loved the 5-10 minutes that I came after the prologue (which I will talk about later), since like Spider-Man 2 it showed us the classic depiction of Peter Parker's/Spider-Man's everyday life, but put int own spin to it.

Sadly those elements are not enough to salvage the movie. Like with Spider-Man 3, I could write endlessly about all the flaws, but since I have no time or energy for that, I focus on my major issues.

The biggest problem is that this story has no focus. It is just clorified teaser for Spider-Man Cinematic Universe (mainly the Sinister Six movie), which never got off the ground. Even Spider-Man 3 was trying to be about revenge and how our choices shape us as people. TASM2 is just little side-segment in Peter Parker's life, which leads to almost none of scenes feeling like they have any importance, since they are not advantaging anything.

The subplot about Peter's parents continues and it is even worse. They even start the movie with it, which is probably the most unengaging way you could have opened a Spider-Man movie. Not to mention how little sense things are starting to make. If Peter's parents were trying to disappear, why would they try to flee from the country in a private jet that was most likely provided for them by the very company they were trying to hide from? And if OsCorp has no problem with orchestrating their deaths, why was Gwen still alive after she snooped around and almost got caught (is not like they don't know that it was her)? Things even go to downright incompetant storytelling, when we have to suffer through Peter thinking that his parents were traitors and criminals, when we already know that isn't the case. Mysteries are only fun when the main character and the audience are on the same page in terms of what clues are available.

The villains are better than The Lizard, but still rather weak.

Electro from the comics is pretty much a blank slate in terms of personality and there isn't even one big definitive Electro story that you could use as your cornerstone, so the filmmakers and the actor can have as much freedom as they want with him and reinvent him however they want. In other words, I have no problem with them turning Max Dillon into a deranged weirdo (even though I can understand why so many people see him as a mean-spirited jab at comic book fans). What I do have problem with is that his story-arc doesn't make much sense. Throughout the whole movie, he is bullied by people working for OsCorp, OsCorp stole his invention and OsCorp's mad scientist tortures him, which leads to... him teaming-up with the son of OsCorp's founder to kill Spider-Man. Wouldn't the most logical step for him be going after the people who actually made his life miserable? This particular interpretation of Electro was actually done right in (criminally underrated) Spider-Man: The New Animated Series, where Max Dillon was Peter's schoolmate, who was bullied and tormented by his peers, and he actually goes after and tries to kill his tormentors once he gets his powers. That both makes sense and is easier to follow. Oh, and the fact that he got his powers from electric eels, but is still vulnerable to water makes no sense.

Harry Osborn, on the other hand, has little to no redeeming qualities as a villain. Dane DeHaan is not terrible actor, but he pretty much plays Harry as two-dimensional snivelling loser who sneers a lot. He and Garfield don't have believable chemistry as former childhood friends, which might have been the point, but there's no tragedy in his turn to the dark-side, if he and Peter have barely any emotional connection. Harry's transformation and last minute fight with Spider-Man is also so rushed that it makes Venom in Spider-Man 3 look good in comparison. And, to be frank, his Goblin-design SUCKS! Seriously, after this Wicked Witch of the West - reject, no one is allowed to complain about Dafoe's Goblin mask. Oh, and the fact that Norman lived to somewhere around his 60s (if we use Chris Cooper's age as an indication of the character's age), but Harry acts like the goblin-disease will kill him in few days makes no sense.

But what leaves the most sour taste in my mouth is the ending. Dear God, the ending sucks. They rushed the death of Gwen Stacy, not because they had cool or interesting take on it, but because of some perverse feeling of obligation, since people were expecting it to happen eventually. This means that Gwen's death has none of the emotional impact it had in the comics and the fact that Goblin killed her doesn't matter, since he and Spidey don't have the rivalry that has been escalating for years like in the comics. We don't even get any character development out of Peter from this, since most of his mourning happens off-screen and the movie ends with him being his usual jokey-self.

There are other problems like the random Denis Leary-Ghost, out of place humorous moments (Rhino is killing God knows how many people and Spidey is just cracking jokes), Felicia Hardy in-name-only, OsCorp apparently creating all of the classic Spider-Man villains, sudden mood whiplashs and the most irresponsible mother of all-time (who brings their kid to watch a gunfight?), but those were the things that killed the movie most for me. So, I guess that leaves us with the million-dollar question: Which is worse, this or Spider-Man 3? Honestly, it kinda comes down to your personal taste, since they are bad in their own unique ways, while also sharing some common flaws. I think that I personally slightly prefer Spider-Man 3, since it is connected to two movies that I love, while TASM2 is connected to a movie that I despise. I will probably rewatch Spider-Man 3 again, but don't currently have any desire to revisit TASM2.

Rating: 5.5
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2017   #137
electronic456
Member
 
electronic456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 721
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

Groundhog Day
RIP Harold Ramis, this was a comedy classic. This movie utilizes the time loop concept so well that it made for a really funny and also well-dramatized movie. It's awesome to see Bill Murray playing the cynical Phil Connors grow as a character.

This movie's story reminds me of Christmas Carol quite a bit with its selfish protagonist better himself as a person. This movie understands the comedy that lies through repetition of the same thing over and over again. So to see a movie secluded to specific environments was cool in a way to make you feel interested with the next move Phil does.

It's amazing all the way through. I think this movie shot through the roof of being one of the funniest movies for me. It moves at a pace to see the protagonist remedy his mistakes and helps us to root for him.

Thank you Harold Ramis, your contribution to make us laugh won't be forgotten.

Final rating: 10/10 I honestly think this is the best collaboration between Bill Murray and Harold Ramis. I know, I know.... Ghostbusters, but this is just great as well.


Taken
The movie moves at the fast pace because you look at the title of the movie and think I know what this movie is about. I think if you didn't have someone like Liam Neeson, it would have been dull. We get stuff like how he was a CIA agent but not a whole lot about what he is afraid of out in the world which feeds into why he cares about his daughter so much.

The whole reconnecting with their child part was alright, I buy it because Liam Neeson is great as an actor. The daughter however was really grating on several fronts as she's like a spoiled child but I cared enough about her safety due to my sympathy towards Liam himself. He can sell the badass former CIA agent he is as well as a caring family man.

Famke Janssen is also a good addition in this movie despite her minimal screen time I felt. The action was a lot of shaky cam but it is okay. It didn't give me a headache like I fear I would plus it was enough for me to smile when Liam Neeson is kicking ***. I feel like Liam Neeson was the one actor who just so happened to stand out a lot within this movie. As I said before, if it wasn't him acting the role then I don't think I would give it the score I'm about to give.

Liam Neeson is just that talented and I do think he's kind of the reason why I can watch Phantom Menace fine enough as he and Darth Maul were the stand outs to that movie. You can have this movie on screen play out and it's enjoyable enough.

Final rating: 7/10 I didn't love it but I thought it was enjoyable so I'm just gonna say that I liked it.

EDIT: How do you get from Los Angeles to Paris so fast to a hotel room that hasn't been checked. Like where were the police and the hotel managers?

Last edited by electronic456; 06-16-2017 at 12:13 AM.
electronic456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2017   #138
TylerMirage
It's time to oil up
 
TylerMirage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 13,459
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by electronic456 View Post
EDIT: How do you get from Los Angeles to Paris so fast to a hotel room that hasn't been checked. Like where were the police and the hotel managers?
Hotel room? You mean Amanda's (the daughter's friend) cousin's apartment? Typically apartments don't have cleaning services and routine check-ins.
TylerMirage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2017   #139
electronic456
Member
 
electronic456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 721
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
Hotel room? You mean Amanda's (the daughter's friend) cousin's apartment? Typically apartments don't have cleaning services and routine check-ins.
Oh whoops... But still shouldn't the neighbor hood have heard the screaming and said "Hello police, there's a lot of screaming going on next door. Do you mind dropping in to see what is going on?"
electronic456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2017   #140
TylerMirage
It's time to oil up
 
TylerMirage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 13,459
Default Re: Review the last movie you saw thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by electronic456 View Post
Oh whoops... But still shouldn't the neighbor hood have heard the screaming and said "Hello police, there's a lot of screaming going on next door. Do you mind dropping in to see what is going on?"
Not if you need the scene to follow the classic home-invasion trope. Nearly every home-invasion or kidnapping or otherwise audibly-noticable kerfuffle in movies could be stopped/prevented/invesitaged if there was someone within earshot of the commotion.

Plus, she did have her boombox blasting music incredibly loudly... how convenient for the kidnappers.
TylerMirage is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.