I just saw Spiderman 2.

I’m disappointed. The friend who I saw it with is disappointed. Maybe it was the hype plus my expectations perhaps were too high from the first one. But everyone who had seen it said it was fantastic – better than the first. Maybe I’m just too critical. I originally listed what I didn’t like about it, but it’s 3:30 in the morning and my writing was poor and not lucid at all. Bottom line: I won’t be going back to the theaters to see it.


I was disappointed too. I think that one of the reviewers at Imdb gets right to the heart of what bothered me, though. It was too like the first one. It’s very sad when something becomes formulaic after just two titles.

As one who was delighted with it overall, but troubled by some details, I would be interested in hearing the specifics or your review when you get a chance.

Put me down as another person disappointed with the movie. I realize it’s based on a comic book, but the motivations of the characters, along with the really, really bad jokes, and the not-so-great fight scenes culminated in the most boring two hours I’ve spent in a long time. (And I loved the first one, by the way).

I have to ask, what did you expect? This is a comic-book movie, first of all, and I don’t think they took anything that wasn’t already in the Spider-man story. As far as Peter struggling to get by (and yes, that part was different) and Harry moping- respectively those are what the story is about and what the character is like.


Okay, now that I’m a little more awake and alert, I’ll list the things that bothered me about the movie.

The acting was just plain bad. This was something that bothered me from the first one. Good acting is when I forget that this is an actor speaking lines from a script. The only time I got that feeling with either movie was with J.K. Simmons’ character, J. Jonah Jameson. Simmons stole the show for me on both accounts.

He’s Spiderman, not Superman. This was something that bothered me from the first one as well. The guy was able to do things with his body that made me think I was watching Unbreakable at times. The way he stopped the train just made me shake my head. Even worse, when he had lost all his powers, Peter Parker was still unable to get hurt. Jumping off a building, falling about 20 stories, smacking into a wall, then falling onto and denting a car gives you quite a bit more injury than a crick in your back.

Dr. Octopus and Mary Jane aren’t Superman, either. As with Spidey himself, the other characters of the movie just couldn’t seem to get hurt no matter what. People being thrown against walls, picked up and swung around by their heads – I’m sorry, it was all too unbelievable. Stan Lee also took quite a few liberties with the laws of physics in this movie. We see Doc Ock lifting things which apparently are several tons or more, yet there’s no counterweight. Anyone who has used a forklift knows that there’s a weight installed in the rear to prevent tipping. Physics just don’t work the way we saw. I won’t even get into the whole miniature sun thing.

(Before you tell me, “Hey, it’s just a comic book,” let me tell you that I’ve kept that thought in my mind the entire movie, unfortunately. Artistic license only goes so far.)

The movie was choppy. I can’t quite place my finger on this one, but the movie just didn’t have a polished feel. Perhaps this was because it was comprised of very many, very short scenes instead of fewer, longer ones which we’re used to.

I wanted to slap Harry Osbourne. It seems the only reason for his existence in the movie was to keep him from being forgotten so they could use him in the next one. A very two-dimensional character, Harry seems to be nothing more than a whiny, boozing character who changes obsessions more easily than I change my mind. His personality changes were abrupt and nonsensical. A brief exchange between Harry and Peter:

Harry: Happy birthday, bud! I’m so glad to see you again! Since we’re such best friends and never see each other, I want to take some time to catch up!

Peter: Uh, thanks.

Harry: What was that “uh” for?? Hey, wait! I forgot that I’m supposed to be hating Spiderman for a minute! And since you said “uh,” that tells me I’m supposed to hate you, because you take pictures of him for the newspaper! Oh, by the way, I might be a handsome, young millionare, but you’re the reason I haven’t had a date since high school! slaps Peter a few times

Peter: Uh, dude, could you please stop slapping me?

Harry: There! You said it again! I know you two are up to something! But that’s okay, because you’re my best friend and I trust you. hugs Peter We still going bowling tomorrow night? Good. If you need me, I’ll be in my room screaming at a mirror.

Where has the chemistry between Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst gone? The two were a caster’s dream in the first one, but their second meeting showed less chemistry than Arnold Schwartzenegger starring opposite Mandy Patinkin would. By the end of the movie, I was almost hoping that Mary Jane would marry the astronaut. Dunst also did not look her best in this film. I checked the first movie’s hair and makeup crew against the sequel’s, and the sequel’s crew had half the people, not to mention that most of the original crew had since departed.

I think that’s enough for now. Again, maybe I’m being too critical. Feel free to fire away.


Wow, I have to disagree with just about every one of your criticisms. I thought it was a very good movie, twice as good as the original.

Why do you disagree?

I liked Spiderman 2, but I can empathize with you - I very much didn’t like Shrek 2. Just don’t get it.

And how! As for the dialogue, I felt they went with kind of an old-timey, slightly over-formal style. Sometimes it sounded weird, but I was surprised to find I kind of liked it. They went for a sort of classic feel and got it, and didn’t make an unnecessary effort to be hip.

Granted. But he is a superhero and you probably just have to assume a certain degree of invulnerability for him to go about his job. Spider-man, Neo, all of these people (regardless of their dodging abilities) get hit with punches that should liquefy their innards. And actually, for me it was less of an annoyance in this movie than in The Matrix since it made sense here. As far as his injuries, I figured his powers were coming and going so he didn’t get hurt much. Wasn’t really a problem for me.

Also true. But this has become so common in movies these days that I can’t pick on Spider-man for it.

Stan Lee had nothing to do with the script as far as I can tell (he has a credit for the comic, but I don’t know who did the storyline the movie is based on).

Too bad. There’s a ‘too far’ point for everybody, but you do have to allow some artistic license and the old “suspension of disbelief.” The miniature sun wasn’t supposed to be believable. You’re complaining about fulcra here. That’s too picky even for me, and I love picking at movies. Come on.

See, here we’ve got some actual criticisms of the movie. I don’t necessarily agree, and I thought it was a very good movie, but they’re more valid in my opinion.

I hated it, too. The first hour can be summed up with, Peter is a loser; let’s wallow in it. Okay, we get it already. Did* anyone* think he would make MJ’s play on time? Doc Ock doesn’t really show up until the second half, and the Christ imagry on the subway almost made me ill. Getting a little too serious about the character’s suffering, or, at best, laying it on way too thick. Plus, it was clear after the Doc Ock scenes that MJ would not settle for anyone less than Peter, so why does she go all the way to the alter before realizing it? Unbelievable, and how cruel.

I liked Doc Ock, and grew fond of his arms. But then, I grew fond of the Fell Beasts in LOTR.

I noticed in the thread where everyone LOVED the movie, that many of the responses were from people who loved comics–they kept talking about how the movie was true in spirit to the comic version of the mythology. Comics don’t grab me. So I’m thinking that it was just a movie where I don’t resonate at the right frequency to appreciate the angst.

So, I hated it, but I’m willing to believe that someone who liked it had good reasons of their own.

For the record, I was hoping for a nice adventure-type movie, like the first one, and the X-Men movies. A little spectacle, a little surprise, nice effects, a story with some tension but that I wasn’t expected to take too seriously. It wasn’t that this was more serious than I expected, though, it was that it was so obvious about what the point was. If you don’t care about the what, you won’t care about the how.

I love comics more than most people and I almost walked out on Spider-Man 2.

To be fair, my main complaint was that it was just too long. Not too long in a “hey this movie is two hours!” way, but too long in a “at least 30 minutes of this movie should’ve ended up on the cutting room floor” way.

It was the same problem that the LOTR series ran into as it moved along, going from an amazing FOTR, to an almost unbearable ROTK: it tried to be too “epic”.

Spider-Man 2 lost the fun spirit of the first one and replaced it with too much angst and too many cheesy monologues.

The good parts were good though, I’d love to see a “Phantom Edit” of this movie.

As a comic book reader with a decent amount of physics education, I have accepted that there are certain things about comic book physics that just aren’t the same as in real life physics. Two of the main ones are:
(1) If you catch a falling person before they hit the ground, they will never be hurt, no matter how fast they were going when you caught them. The only exception to this rule that I can remember ever seeing in a comic book is the death of Gwen Stacey.
(2) The hero’s ability to lift large objects is limited only by his level of strength. Superman or the Hulk can pick up a building and throw it at someone, and no counterweight is required. It wouldn’t work in our world, but in the comics it’s a fact of life.

I’ve accepted that these are the laws of the comic book universe, so seeing them violated doesn’t bother me.

Overall, I liked the movie (although I agree somewhat with some of your criticisms). I thought it was a fairly faithful adaptation of the comic, and that it took the source material seriously. As long as a comic book movie does that, I’m at least going to be half-way satisfied with it.

I really liked that part. It made me think of thetime in the comics when Spidey WAS literally crucified. Talk about foreshadowing!

Maybe you should check out the source materials…

MJ would not settle for anyone less than Peter, so why does she go all the way to the alter before realizing it? Unbelievable, and how cruel.{/quote}

Must be nice to live in a world where people never do things they don’t want to do but do them because everyone expects them to.(if that makes sense)

II didn’t much like the movie either and have loved all the (Marvel) comic book movies I’ve seen sans the abortion known as Hulk. Unlike you though, I can’t really place what I disliked so much about it as most of your complaints don’t really bother me and I love stories where the heroes are angsty. There just wasn’t something right about the film and it’s sad. I really wanted to love it.

I’m not sure how anyone could see Peter as a loser. I mean, he stays up most of the night fighting crime, goes to work and school in the day, barely stays above his rent, and is wracked with guilt over his uncle’s murder - all of keeps making his friends quite irritable with him anyway. And his former best pal is losing his mind. That’s enough to put anybody under.

Actually, I never quite comprehended why anyone would feel guilty for ducking away from a man carrying a Desert Eagle (I think that’s what Eddie Brock had in the first flick - it had to be least a .44 or .45 cause it was pretty big in the barrel). I mean, you can be a kick-butt wrestler but you’d be nuts to take on a desperate robber with a gun like that. I know I’d be cowering.

Disappointing but way way better than the first one (which I hated).

Things that irked me in this one were:

“Hi I’m a power ranger in a lift, marvel at my awful looking costume”

Doc Oc talking to his f*cking arms!!!
(“The chip, it’s gone, oh my god the arms are alive, what rob a bank - ok whatever you say arms” :o )

Why does NYC have a train going to a bridge that hangs over the river?

Some dodgy acting from almost all parties involved.

His aunts big speech about heroes. Dumb.

Kirsten Dunst somehow managing to look plain for almost all the film :frowning:

Ropey CG in quite a few places.

The unnecessarily long set up for his mate to become hobgoblin.

Losing all his powers through stress except his ability to take a beating - very handy when he falls 6 stories a couple of times!

Talking to his dead uncle.

I thought it was a pretty decent flick. Not great, but worth the $$.

It ran about 30 minutes too long; they could have trimmed some of the romance, some of the angst, and some of the miscellaneous firings, dumpings, and failures, while leaving enough to make the film work.

I liked Dr. Octavius’ character. He wasn’t a stereotypical villian; he was the victim of an industrial accident. The setup included a warning about how much artificial intelligence was built into the manipulator arms, and the mandatory note about how the “isolator chip” would keep them from taking over (Dum-de-dum-dum-DUM) … which of course is exactly what subsequently happened.

I also liked the visualization of Dr. Octopus and his arms. The CGI was convincing, at least in the close-up and medium shots. Some of the fight scene CGI got a bit dodgy, but overall, much better than the first movie.

And, yeah, they could have dropped the entire “You killed my father, prepare to die” bit.

Funny, I seem to recall that the batman movies were based on comics too, and they didn’t have plots as similar as each other…but maybe the fault is with the comics themselves. Do they suffer from “read one, read them all” too?