Spiderman 2

whowatches · 07-09-2004, 10:42 AM

Anyone seen it yet? Thoughts? Criticism?

I've heard it's the best superhero movie ever. It'd have to be pretty darned awesomo to beat out Superman.

Watcha think?

saintsfan1313 · 07-09-2004, 11:24 AM

Saw spiderman 2 couple of nites ago. Wasn\'t all that i thought it would be. Better story line than before, good plot. Action was about the same. Good movie overall, but wasn\'t what everyone made it out to be.

JKool · 07-09-2004, 01:04 PM

ww,

Superman, not a bad pick, but what about Batman (the first one) and X-men (either). I also thought these were first rate Comic Book movies. I haven\'t seen Spidy2, but it would have to be pretty good to top these others. I\'m sorry to report that I\'m not a huge Superman fan, so it will be hard for me to judge relative to that standard - what do you think of these others?

ScottyRo · 07-09-2004, 01:51 PM

My opinion is that Spidey 2 was a good movie, but not a good as the first. maybe that\'s because the \"new\" had worn off...I don\'t know.

It is definitely worth seeing if you enjoyed the first Spidey or these types of movies. My biggest problem was that everything seemed drawn out to me. I wouldn\'t say I was bored, but I was concious of time at many points during the movie - meaning I wasn\'t pulled into it so much that when it ended I hadn\'t realized two hours had passed.

Positives: The story was good. Doc Oc was fabulous. He was a much better baddie than the goblin although I loved Dafoe\'s performance. The visuals were again superb, but there wasn\'t anything just outright jaw-dropping that I can remember.

I guess overall it was straight-forward and what I was expecting with no huge surprises, but, again, definitely worth seeing.

whowatches · 07-09-2004, 02:09 PM

I loved Batman, but I did feel that it was a bit too \"TimBurtoned\". Jack was Jack, but the campy scenery and dialogue wore thin. The second Batman was better... more dark and brooding like the comic in the eighties and nineties. The third was tough to endure, and I walked out of the fourth one about thirty minutes into it.

Spiderman (the first one) was darned near perfect in my eyes regarding story and overall look. The major problem I had was the portrayal of the Green Goblin. I like Defoe, but the armor and talking to himself was too offbase from the original source material.

As far as the X-Men, I\'ve liked both movies okay, but I still haven\'t bought into the cast. Stewart is perfect, McKellan (sp) is awesome, Jackman is great (although Gary Sinese would\'ve been better), but the other cast members don\'t fit for me. I also would\'ve liked the costumes to have been more comic-bookish. If you\'re gonna do a comic book movie, do a comic book movie.

I guess my obsession with Superman is a holdover from childhood. He, along with Spiderman, was the reason I learned how to read as a kid. That movie captured every image and idea I\'d ever had about the character perfectly. I can still watch it today and get goosebumps.

WhoDat · 07-09-2004, 03:55 PM

Spiderman (the first one) was darned near perfect in my eyes regarding story and overall look.

Yuck! I was extremely disappointed by the first Spiderman, especially after all the hype it got. It seemed a whole lot like the first Alien movie. Those special effects were great in 1985, but they suck now. A Bug\'s Life was a better movie! hehehe.

Now Troy is a movie I still want to see. I love a good \"ancient\" epic. Give me gladiator type fighting.

whowatches · 07-09-2004, 05:32 PM

Yuck! I was extremely disappointed by the first Spiderman

Really?

I thought the adaptation of the costume was innovative and that the special effects didn\'t overshadow the story (which followed the origin of the character very well). What effects bothered you so much? Did you read the comic as a kid?

I agree about Troy. I haven\'t seen it yet, but I love epic movies. Can\'t wait to see how well the adapted the classic.

Not gonna even touch your gladiator comment.

JKool · 07-10-2004, 10:54 PM

I liked Troy, but as far as an \"adaptation\" goes, hmmm... I\'d say the book was better. Hector was easily the best acted and most compelling character in the movie.

As for \"comic book movies\", I always thought one of the best things about comic books - other than the dazzling \"art\" - was that they were able to convey interesting moral stories. One of the things I always really like about X-men was its ability to demonstrate some of the dangers of racism and fear. Thus, when the movies weren\'t so clearly \"comic booky\", I was pleased that it might reach a wider audience.

One of the things I like about the Spiderman franchise is that the movies feel like they are having fun - like reading a comic book - some stuff is just in there as a throw back. Also, Spiderman isn\'t just about the comics, there is also the very popular TV series to deal with. On the whole, I thought it was all pretty well done.

whowatches · 07-11-2004, 12:15 AM

As for \"comic book movies\", I always thought one of the best things about comic books - other than the dazzling \"art\" - was that they were able to convey interesting moral stories. One of the things I always really like about X-men was its ability to demonstrate some of the dangers of racism and fear.

Totally agree. Great point. This is one reason I\'m very glad so many of these movies are finding success today. The stories they tell are our modern-day morality plays. I\'d venture to say that the X-Men movies would\'ve used the more \"comic bookish\" look if they knew the success that Spiderman would have.

Superman\'s on TNT if you wanna check it out, J. Good stuff, my man.

kenpersons · 07-11-2004, 07:10 PM

Some things to consider:

Comic Book reading is unique in that it\'s a visual medium that tells stories with pictures, but as a personal experience, not shared with an audience.

Spiderman is special because at his core he\'s just a guy like you, but powerful. A guy dealing with guilt and powers and balancing a real life with hero life.

Superman is near invincible and an alien and not many are able to empathize, you know?

Sam Rami, the director, gets it, and created a beautiful movie. If he doesn\'t at least get nominated for an oscar I\'ll be pissed.

The movie itself is a brilliant dynamic because while Peter Parker struggles with being good as Spiderman or trying to live his life, we get a villain in Otto Octavious who has a similar struggle but with evil, but has lost what he considered his life.

It\'s a well told story with spectacular visuals and developed characters. A little action, a litle drama, a little love. It\'s a complete movie.

Complete.

I don\'t know if that makes it the best or better or worse than anything. One of the great mistakes we make as a society is using comparison as a judge of quality. What I can tell you is that it\'s a job well done on all fronts.

07-09-2004, 10:42 AM	#1
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575	Spiderman 2 Anyone seen it yet? Thoughts? Criticism? I've heard it's the best superhero movie ever. It'd have to be pretty darned awesomo to beat out Superman. Watcha think?
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575

07-09-2004, 11:24 AM	#2
saintsfan1313 El Mero Mero Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Kingsville, Tx Posts: 669	Spiderman 2 Saw spiderman 2 couple of nites ago. Wasn\'t all that i thought it would be. Better story line than before, good plot. Action was about the same. Good movie overall, but wasn\'t what everyone made it out to be.

07-09-2004, 01:04 PM	#3
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Spiderman 2 ww, Superman, not a bad pick, but what about Batman (the first one) and X-men (either). I also thought these were first rate Comic Book movies. I haven\'t seen Spidy2, but it would have to be pretty good to top these others. I\'m sorry to report that I\'m not a huge Superman fan, so it will be hard for me to judge relative to that standard - what do you think of these others?

07-09-2004, 01:51 PM	#4
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Spiderman 2 My opinion is that Spidey 2 was a good movie, but not a good as the first. maybe that\'s because the \"new\" had worn off...I don\'t know. It is definitely worth seeing if you enjoyed the first Spidey or these types of movies. My biggest problem was that everything seemed drawn out to me. I wouldn\'t say I was bored, but I was concious of time at many points during the movie - meaning I wasn\'t pulled into it so much that when it ended I hadn\'t realized two hours had passed. Positives: The story was good. Doc Oc was fabulous. He was a much better baddie than the goblin although I loved Dafoe\'s performance. The visuals were again superb, but there wasn\'t anything just outright jaw-dropping that I can remember. I guess overall it was straight-forward and what I was expecting with no huge surprises, but, again, definitely worth seeing.

07-09-2004, 02:09 PM	#5
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575	Spiderman 2 I loved Batman, but I did feel that it was a bit too \"TimBurtoned\". Jack was Jack, but the campy scenery and dialogue wore thin. The second Batman was better... more dark and brooding like the comic in the eighties and nineties. The third was tough to endure, and I walked out of the fourth one about thirty minutes into it. Spiderman (the first one) was darned near perfect in my eyes regarding story and overall look. The major problem I had was the portrayal of the Green Goblin. I like Defoe, but the armor and talking to himself was too offbase from the original source material. As far as the X-Men, I\'ve liked both movies okay, but I still haven\'t bought into the cast. Stewart is perfect, McKellan (sp) is awesome, Jackman is great (although Gary Sinese would\'ve been better), but the other cast members don\'t fit for me. I also would\'ve liked the costumes to have been more comic-bookish. If you\'re gonna do a comic book movie, do a comic book movie. I guess my obsession with Superman is a holdover from childhood. He, along with Spiderman, was the reason I learned how to read as a kid. That movie captured every image and idea I\'d ever had about the character perfectly. I can still watch it today and get goosebumps.
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

07-09-2004, 03:55 PM	#6
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Spiderman 2 Spiderman (the first one) was darned near perfect in my eyes regarding story and overall look. Yuck! I was extremely disappointed by the first Spiderman, especially after all the hype it got. It seemed a whole lot like the first Alien movie. Those special effects were great in 1985, but they suck now. A Bug\'s Life was a better movie! hehehe. Now Troy is a movie I still want to see. I love a good \"ancient\" epic. Give me gladiator type fighting.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

07-09-2004, 05:32 PM	#7
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575	Spiderman 2 Yuck! I was extremely disappointed by the first Spiderman Really? I thought the adaptation of the costume was innovative and that the special effects didn\'t overshadow the story (which followed the origin of the character very well). What effects bothered you so much? Did you read the comic as a kid? I agree about Troy. I haven\'t seen it yet, but I love epic movies. Can\'t wait to see how well the adapted the classic. Not gonna even touch your gladiator comment.
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575

07-10-2004, 10:54 PM	#8
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Spiderman 2 I liked Troy, but as far as an \"adaptation\" goes, hmmm... I\'d say the book was better. Hector was easily the best acted and most compelling character in the movie. As for \"comic book movies\", I always thought one of the best things about comic books - other than the dazzling \"art\" - was that they were able to convey interesting moral stories. One of the things I always really like about X-men was its ability to demonstrate some of the dangers of racism and fear. Thus, when the movies weren\'t so clearly \"comic booky\", I was pleased that it might reach a wider audience. One of the things I like about the Spiderman franchise is that the movies feel like they are having fun - like reading a comic book - some stuff is just in there as a throw back. Also, Spiderman isn\'t just about the comics, there is also the very popular TV series to deal with. On the whole, I thought it was all pretty well done.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

07-11-2004, 12:15 AM	#9
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575	Spiderman 2 As for \"comic book movies\", I always thought one of the best things about comic books - other than the dazzling \"art\" - was that they were able to convey interesting moral stories. One of the things I always really like about X-men was its ability to demonstrate some of the dangers of racism and fear. Totally agree. Great point. This is one reason I\'m very glad so many of these movies are finding success today. The stories they tell are our modern-day morality plays. I\'d venture to say that the X-Men movies would\'ve used the more \"comic bookish\" look if they knew the success that Spiderman would have. Superman\'s on TNT if you wanna check it out, J. Good stuff, my man.
whowatches 500th Post Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 575

07-11-2004, 07:10 PM	#10
kenpersons Registered Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 92	Spiderman 2 Some things to consider: Comic Book reading is unique in that it\'s a visual medium that tells stories with pictures, but as a personal experience, not shared with an audience. Spiderman is special because at his core he\'s just a guy like you, but powerful. A guy dealing with guilt and powers and balancing a real life with hero life. Superman is near invincible and an alien and not many are able to empathize, you know? Sam Rami, the director, gets it, and created a beautiful movie. If he doesn\'t at least get nominated for an oscar I\'ll be pissed. The movie itself is a brilliant dynamic because while Peter Parker struggles with being good as Spiderman or trying to live his life, we get a villain in Otto Octavious who has a similar struggle but with evil, but has lost what he considered his life. It\'s a well told story with spectacular visuals and developed characters. A little action, a litle drama, a little love. It\'s a complete movie. Complete. I don\'t know if that makes it the best or better or worse than anything. One of the great mistakes we make as a society is using comparison as a judge of quality. What I can tell you is that it\'s a job well done on all fronts.
kenpersons Registered Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 92	It\'s not a question of whether or not the Saints will win the Super Bowl this year. It\'s a question of which Saint will be the MVP of the game. What do you mean I\'m not supposed to snort the granola?