I love this review, focusing on the character development and interaction, instead of continuously ranting on how this movie is "copying" the Raimi films and relying on the same characters and plot points. Great job, Captain Logan! You've done it again!
You know, the whole idea of Peter Parker destined to be Spider Man that these films kept hammering really undermines the main point of the character for me. To me, Peter was just this social outcast dorky kid who got amazing superpowers one day, made a mistake, and eventually knew to use those powers to help people which is part of what made Spider Man interesting and relatable, the whole destiny angle just takes that away.
Great review, I have always maintained this film was just as good as the first Raimi film, only it accomplishes everything the Raimi film didn't, while failing on the things that film succeeded on. I'd say the only thing they failed to really do both, what Spiderman 2, the sole film in the film franchise, did was have a strong, fully realized villain.
So this is just me, but I wasn't bothered by the final line in the movie. I always took it as Peter slyly telling Gwen that he had decided to break the promise he made with her father and wants to pursue their relationship. He opted to listen to Gwen and her desire to remain in a relationship than abiding by her father's wishes.
Such a great review! couldn't agree more... Great movie! just not flawless :) I'm also one of the people that really really likes TASM 2 just as much if not slightly more than this film for having some more ambition and a little more balls than the first film to try some new things and having more villains... What impresses me most about the second one is how it manages to amalgomate many different tones seamlessly in just one scene and make me engaged in every character and story even with a lot going on. Which is something Spider Man 3 failed completely at.
***** I didn't feel he was shoehorned because we had a lot of build up before he became the goblin and he was an actual part of the story. I never found ASM1 dark or gritty, I thought it was pretty lighthearted, I just think it had serious moments, pretty much like the ASM2. But hey that's just me :)
Patrick Ward How exactly was Harry "part of the story"? He contributes nothing, all he does is whine about his vaguely described disease and become an awful version of the Green Goblin at the end.
>What impresses me most about the second one is how it manages to amalgomate many different tones seamlessly in just one scene and make me engaged in every character and story even with a lot going on. Which is something Spider Man 3 failed completely at. Is that why Rhino has no relation to the plot of the movie? Or is that why the movie wastes its entire runtime on setting up Electro as the big bad, even though he doesn't do jack shit while the bad guy that is actually relevant is the guy who gets no development at all? I
Logan you forget that one other reason he stopped searching for his Uncles killer was because of what Captain Stacy. What he said, "He isn't helping anyone but himself." That line is very similar to what Uncle Ben said after the Flash incident.
Man, your reviews are always so great! You make really REALLY great points! I always wanted to know your thoughts on this one, and I am not disappointed.
I love your reviews. It's amazing how much time I can spend watching your videos. I love hearing your opinions on these super hero movies; You make so many awesome points which can actually change my perception of movies. Keep up the great work and I hope you continue to grow as a channel!
The vultress was fake it was confirmed later that Felica was going to be Black Cat. Also why does captain Logan not like the Vulture? I think he's great.
There is a great deleted scene in Amazing Spiderman where Connors says to Peter, "We must be greater than what we suffer." Why they got rid of that I have no idea but that made him more of a Father figure there. The villains in this reboot are all rushed for the sake of having a battle. *Cough*( Electro & Green Goblin.)
Loved the review Cap! This is my 2nd favourite Spider-Man film (after TASM 2). Oh and the Back to the Future reference... GENIUS *insert Flash's laugh from Spectacular Spider-Man*
Thank you for highlighting Peter's celebration scene. You actually get it. Everybody else poops on it for the most shallow of reasons. "itz bad cuz skatezboordz lolololol I'm such a fanz hurdurhurdur!"
As contrived as the spider bite was in the film, I like how everything surrounding Uncle Ben's death is a legitimate series of dominos. Peter humiliates Flash, Uncle Ben is called to the principal's office and is forced to switch his shift, forcing Peter to have to pick up Aunt May, Peter instead slacks off and explores his new powers and helps Conners out with his formula, leading to the argument where Peter runs off and Uncle Ben follows, only to come across the criminal Peter let slide, specifically because he was looking for Peter. Say whatever you will about changes to the source material, but those were all, I think for the better.
Spider-Man: The romance is complete rubbish and some effects didn't age well, but I still really enjoy it. Spider-Man 2: Bloody brilliant. One of my favorite comic book films ever. Spider-Man 3: Everything the previous movie set up gets ruined beyond repair. Fuck this film. My biggest problem was Sandman, his character was idiotic and a complete mess (I'm supposed to find him sympathetic... while he's dumb enough to NOT go rub literally any other city in the world, and he was totally going to murder Peter in cold blood if Harry didn't intervene) and the reveal that he basically killed Uncle Ben because he had a sensitive trigger is sooo stupid... The Amazing Spider-Man: Not everything comes flawlessly together, but the stuff I like, I REALLY like. The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Overstuffed and messy, but I oddly enjoyed it. It's a guilty pleasure.
I completely agree on your thoughts about the Lizard, It would've worked fine if the turned him into a mindless rampaging monster, the whole "Turn everyone into lizards for a day" evil plan really wasn't necessary.
Great Review!, I can't believe this movie is 2 years old already I remember when I went to go see it on July 3rd then just a few days later I went to go see it again. I recently saw The Amazing Spider-Man 2 it was awesome I saw it on opening night May 2
You should Superhero Rewind Spiderman: Shattered Dimensions. It's a game, yes, but you've reviewed a few, if not all by now, of the Batman Arkham games & I think it would be cool to see you review it.
he always looks at the plot of the games though, and its implications. Shattered Dimensions has no plot really. A game like Spider-Man Web Of Shadows would be more fitting, seeing as how morality fits into it. But even then thats a long shot.
If there's a Spidey game to review, I'd have to say go with Edge of Time. Gameplay wise, i won't pretend it's the best lol, but in terms of story and the overall narrative and plot, I think Cap can really dig into the Psychology of the two Spider-Men. Plus it's short, meaning the quicker he can review it ^__^
Congrats....you just passed my test....I am serious, I sort out "good reviewers from bad reviewers" by looking how they approach The Amazing Spider-man. If they give it a fair shake, they pass. If they dismiss it from the get go, I put them into "is likely too much influenced by nostalgia" pile.
I don't really think they're influenced by nostalgia if they dismiss this movie, It has some pretty noticeable issues (notice how Irfahn Khans character completely disappears from the movie with no closure or conclusion to his story) Chris Stuckmann did not care for this movie and I don't think he was influenced by nostalgia at all. He made points that had little if anything to do with the original Raimi films.
Chris Stuckmann actually did an initial review which was way more positive before he went back and stomped all over it the moment he did a series about the Spider-man movies, which would boil down to him having to rate all those movies, and he obviously didn't want to put the remake over the original, so he excused in the first take exactly the same stuff he complained about in the remake. He lost a lot of my respect since he did it, especially since he took down his first review instead of being honest how much he downgraded the movie the second time around. I don't mind people liking the original more, if they are honest about its flaws, too. But don't tell me that the first movie had great character development and then turn around and complain about the way the remake flashed out the characters. Especially don't try to tell me that Mary Jane is better written than Gwen Stacy.
swanpride I really don't think it was a case of him not wanting to rank it above the first movie. He said in one video, Shortly after his first review of TASM, He began seeing more flaws in it and did a facebook post taking his score back, so having to review all Spider-Man movies I don't think really affected his overall feeling in anyway and the issues he brought up in his review really have nothing to do with the Raimi movies at all, like Sam from Sams Channel. I think Chris's complaints about Gwen Stacy not receiving any character development, The Lizard being a poorly developed villain with a ridiculous plan, then unappealing color palette and the amount of montage sequences really had nothing whatsoever to do with the Raimi movies at all. especially the complaint about Irfahn Khan.
The first Amazing Spider-Man movie is, in my opinion, the most average superhero movie that I've ever seen. It's a giant mixed bag. When this movie succeeds with aspects like the chemistry between Garfield and Emma, making Garfield a much better Spider-Man, a new take on the story, and the characterization, it does it very well. However, with aspects like the bleak and bland world, the Lizard being nothing special, and some of the horrible contrivance, this films does sink a bit. I will say that this film is good enough to get me invested in the new movie series, and thanks to the second movie, makes me wonder how the third film is gonna go. I loved Amazing 2, for the record. :)
This film does a great job to modernize Peter and his character's mythos. Surprisingly, the first quarter or so feels like a mystery. And to me a welcomed change along with other alterations, making this origin film feel different enough to the previous incarnation and still very enjoyable. This Peter feels more tortured and alone thanks to the loss of his parents in the plane crash, along with Ben Parker. Plus in this version, he's more a social outcast as a loner atleast in the beginning, which I also appreciate, while still being a science wiz. And his character arc was expertly done. I really like how after Ben's death Peter tries solely to catch his killer, and that's how he inadvertently quote, "helps the police" and is a hero, but of course was actually wrong. Captain Stacy is geniusly his indirect mentor figure in this, and helps shape Peter by explaining to him how his alter ego seemed to be on a vindictive path, and not simply saving people. After this conversation, in the excellent bridge scene where Peter saves a little boy, he finally becomes and embodies the hero Spider-Man! And is also why he stopped looking for Ben's killer and focuses on doing the right thing. Of course his Uncle's last words must have helped too, and I feel that iconic lesson was given here in a very realistic manner. I also like that this Spider-Man is more spider-like, and that his first villain also has similar capabilities, but very different as a being when in his Lizard form of course. The chemistry of the couple is also excellent, and feels very real. And this film does finish its main story arcs and evolves Peter a long way, but it's a great choice for it to end teasing more of the Peter-Gwen relationship. It definitely makes me want to see a sequel and more of them both. Especially because Gwen herself was also a great character with a lot of charm. It's a 9/10! Sidenotes, I just need to say I really loved that because of Spider-Man's moral obligation to save Jack, the little boy, he was rewarded by getting aid from his father later in the film, which he absolutely needed to win the day. That, and the emphasis on the webshooters being very useful, but if broken or all used up, could leave Spider-Man in a very tough predicament since it's such a huge tool in his arsenal. Lastly, the fact Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone were actually dating at this time is simply an amazing fact.
i think the amazing spiderman is the second best spiderman behind spider man 2.i yet to see amazing spiderman 2.but i feel the amazing spiderman had a better origin and i can relate more to peter than the original.i feel the original has aged poorly.its probably the cheesiest of the 3 rami movies.the special effects dont hold up like its sequels.
I must say, I agree that Dr Connors should have had more screen time in the film, and more interaction with Peter. but I don't say that because I thought his character was week or underutilized. quite the contrary, I thought Rhys Ifans was excellent in the role, and that he made every second of screen time count. I'd really like to see more from him now, sense I can only recall him from a handful of roles.
Hey Cap, long-time fan here. Excellent analysis as always. I'd like to address a couple of your criticisms: -I always got the sense that Dr. Ratha deliberately lured Peter into the Spider-room. When he sees Peter's face after they bump into each other, it seems like he recognizes him (judging by how his facial expression changes once he locks eyes with Peter). Then right before he goes into the Spider-room, he looks back in Peter's general direction. You could argue that he was looking around to make sure that no one was following him. However, I took it as him making sure that Peter WAS following him. We know that he knew Richard Parker (or at least of him) from his later conversation with Connors. But then again, that's just how I read the scene. Maybe you read it differently. -The reason why most of Spider-Man's scenes are at night is simple. He's in high school, he goes to classes in the daytime. Raimi got Peter out of high school really quickly, so Peter had more time to be Spider-Man in the day (as a recent college graduate myself, college students tend to have more flexible schedules and thus more free time in the day). -I don't really agree that Connors becomes an entirely different person after turning into the Lizard. Even the Lizard's "crazy" plan is just Connor's own life's goals taken to horrifying extremes. Connors wants to create a world "without weakness." A world without disease, physical deformities, injuries, etc. As the Lizard, he still wants to do that. It's just that now that goal has morphed into something horrible. Now that he has all of these great gifts/physical abilities, he sees "frail" humanity as a weakness. "A world without weakness" becomes "cure the world of HUMAN weakness and turn everyone into a stronger, better life-form." Also, right before he injects himself, Dr. Ratha reveals that he wants to conduct dangerous an unethical tests on veterans without their knowledge and consent, and Connors morally objects. It's what gets him fired. After he starts to turn into Lizard, he still wants to stop Ratha. He hails a cab and rushes to try and catch up to Ratha, but as he continues to mutate "stopping Ratha" morphs into "kill him in his car on a bridge." He's still the same person at his core, he's just been warped into a more extreme version of himself. And at least the Lizard had some semi-understandable motivation. Raimi's Norman didn't really have any motivation. He kills the members of his BOD and then, he just randomly does stuff without any large goal (or at least we're never told what his larger goal is). Still, those are minor disagreements. It was still and excellent analysis overall. Are you going to be doing Avengers soon by any chance?
Watching this makes me realize you need to do your in-depth analysis on The Spectacular Spider-Man, the animated series. I would love to hear your thoughts on [arguably] one of the best adaptions to the comics to date.
As for the costume, I actually like it for a completely personal reason. By 2011/2012, I sorta "grew out of" my "Spider Man phase", sort of. I was a huge fan of Marvel, and this was still a while before Marvel's the Avengers would turn Marvel from that pseudo-underground comic company only comic book fans knew to the massive cultural juggernaut it was now, and as a result Spider Man was the only Marvel hero I really saw everywhere. Because of that, Spider Man was the only Marvel hero my younger cousins were aware of, and so I saw Spider Man as the child's Marvel hero, not helped by the fact that he was one of the youngest that I was aware of at the time. This was until, one day, I was going to Walmart with my Dad, and saw a poster for The Amazing Spider Man. I don't know exactly what it was about the costume, just that I immediately fell in love and wanted to see the movie.
Billy Crystal I saw it in theaters, and enjoyed it. I watched the sequel today. I thought the sequel was sub par. People call it the "Batman and Robin" of spider-man, and I don't think its really that bad.
I definitely agree. The first one was a great Spiderman movie and the sequel is not as good as I was hoping it'd be but it's definitely not as bad as Batman and Robin or Spiderman 3. It is miles better than those 2. AS 2 is on par with the first Spiderman in my opinion.
5:41 There actually was an explanation for Andrew Garfield's costume... A) Because Peter needs to hide his face from whoever he's interrogating, and B) The whole thing where Peter overhears the two nerds at his school talking about wind resistance and velocity and shiz... :P
I think the last line of the film is really to set up what I think is the the whole conflict of the second film. Peter decides to take up the responsibility of Spiderman, but he doesn't quite understand yet the sacrifices he will have to make. He's lived his life being smarter, and now, more powerful than anyone else. I wouldn't say his life is generally easier, but there are instances where it is. As Spiderman, he's come to represent hope.He has to be more than himself, but he's conflicted with that responsibility and what he wants. He doesn't completely get that he has to choose one over the other, that is until the point is driven home with what happens to Gwen. Peter came off as a really imperfect hero in TASM2. He refused to be a martyr through most of the film, and Gwen's final fate is really what I think teaches him to be the Spiderman we would eventually know.
One thing I don't get about people who don't like this series (The sequel in particular) is that they say it looked like a cartoon. Motherfucker it's Spiderman! It's supposed to look like a cartoon. I'd probably be pissed if it didn't look like a cartoon.
given that family is a big theme in these films, I wanted to offer some thoughts. I'm an adopted child, my parents took me home when I was only 11 days old. I've always had a soft spot for adoptive parents in fiction, and adoption is a common theme in superhero stories. personally I think the added plot point with Peter Parker's parents, in the new films was a mistake. Peter's biological parents aren't mentioned in the Raimi films, because they're never really relevant to the story. moreover Peter's Aunt May and Uncle Ben are his true parents. there's even a line that makes this point clear: "I had a father, his name was Ben Parker." in the new films, by adding this whole element with his lost parents, I actually think that detracts from the relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben. plus I think the whole plot point with Peter's parents in the Mark Webb films, wasn't very well handled to begin with. though, as it turns out I think Cliff Robertson, and Martin Sheen were perfect choices to play Uncle Ben. I'm really glad that they pretty much got his character perfect both times.
Geekvolution Personally, I've never agreed with the notion that because it wasn't done in the comics that he cannot be done in other mediums. Peter's parents weren't important in the comics, ok so what? This is a movie, not the comics. They're allowed to go in different directions. It's just like different writers have their own takes on the character, Webb has his. I see no rule that says they can NEVER use his parents. If anything, that just limits potential story options. If people want to critique HOW the parents thing was handled, that's completely fine. But to argue that it should never be done at all, I'll never agree with that.
Michael Singer I think you miss understand what I was saying. when I said that his parents weren't important to the story, I was talking about the Raimi movies, as they are not mentioned in those films. all this stuff with Peter's missing parents does infact come from the comics. the story is a little different, but it is based on a plotline from the comic. that mysterious guy in the hat and trench coat, who's always in shadow, that's a villain from the comics known as The Gentleman, who has a grudge against Peter's father. the point I was making didn't have anything to do with what or wasn't in the comics. I was talking about the portrayal of Peter's family in the context of the film. personally I prefer the way it was handled in the Raimi films, coming from my own viewpoint as an adopted child. if I was Peter Parker, I would unquestionably consider Uncle Ben to be my dad, as Toby did in the Raimi movies.
Thank you. As a die hard Spidey fan I continually find it extremely difficult to express my feelings for this film without sounding like a complete comic zealot. It truly pains me cause there is so much to love and so much to equally hate about The Amazing Spider-Man franchise. I cant help but feel that Sony is trying too hard to appease to the comic accurate fad Marvel Studios gave prominence to in their wildly successful franchises. Sony's acknowledgment of this initially seemed proactive but was undermined by their lack of insight on the Spidey universe. Which may very well be why this film feels insecure of its place in this golden age of CBMs. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has proven that Sony is simply grabbing the most prominent Spidey story arcs/characters and shoehorning them together into a film. To top it all off, Sony's strategy so far has been to cut major pieces of these films for future installments. Its turned this franchise into heavy handed "to be continued" tv serials than stand alone films. In the end, I understand all this internet venting wont solve any of these woes. So, unfortunately for them, I wont be supporting anymore Sony developed Spider-man films.
To be honest, they should give Spider-Man a break for a few years (I honestly don't know the terms of the rights). They should go for another Spider-Man (Hate Avi Arad for saying Peter's the only Spider-Man) after a while, maybe Miguel O'Hara. Or maybe do Noir, it'd be interesting.
That'd be a great idea! Hell I'd even see a Scarlet Spider movie(as long as the clone shenanigans is kept to a minimum). I honestly don't understand why Sony and Marvel can't cooperate seeing how Fiege is Avi Arad's good friend and former co worker. Avi also claims to be one of the co-creators of the MCU and if that is truly so, then maybe theres more to it than we think. That'd be absolutely nuts if Avi is actually sabotaging the Sony Spider-man franchise in the MCU's favor. Just thinking about that gets me a little giddy inside.
DestroyerOfSandwiches Wait, which Scarlet Spider, Kaine or Ben Reilly? Ah anyways, I think The Amazing Spider-Man franchise is way too damn familiar to the Ultimate universe, I can't help, but unofficially call it "Ultimate Spider-Man." They can't seem to find a middle ground for Spider-Man, even though it doesn't seem that complicated. I rewatched the original Raimi trilogy and I thought, "Jesus they're really burning through these villains (pun intended for Venom XD)." I think Webb has a better understanding for character development while Raimi's seemed to fluctuate so much it was getting annoying (I'm looking at you Tobey and Kirsten). I'll give Raimi this, despite the corny and cheesy dialogue, he did keep it simple and to the point. He made each movie self-contained.
Both. But Ben Reilly is my personal favorite so Kaine would be reduced to a cameo. It'd be easier for me to just call it Sony-Man simply because of equal merging of 616 and Ultimate's elements yet still being a completely different take on the character all together. I've always seen the flaws in the original trilogy and is still a nostalgic experience to watch. Sam Raimi's trilogy is its own take, or universe if you will, all on its own. Even if Spidey eventually ends up in Marvel Studios hands that will be another universe as well. Taking elements from 616 and Ultimates, and still intertwine into the MCU.
DestroyerOfSandwiches To me, Spidey could hold up his own movieverse, but I wouldn't complain if he's interconnected with the MCU if done right. I think building up to the Sinister Six is a ballsy move for Sony. When we see the entire roster for SS, it better be worth all that build-up, otherwise they should just sell the rights back to Marvel. Hell, Marvel's doing Ant Man, I'm curious about what they would do with the other Spider-Men.
Spiderman did just paint a target on that kids back though, now that he knows his identity. I doubt it will since these are movies, but that info would spread since he knows. I really enjoyed the episode of batman beyond that touched on this topic.
You wanted a realistic reason for the spidey suit? .... is that even possible? What exactly were you expecting? He bought a suit made of a great material that only came in those colours on ebay and stuck a spider on it?
Hey Cap, I just wanted to say that I love that you can give me a new appreciation of a film even if I don't completely agree with you. I do partly agree about the vigilante to hero arc. The idea of Peter knowing that he is indirectly responsible for his uncle's death and being consumed with vengeance to find his killer, but ultimately learning to be a hero is compelling. It makes the theme justice and heroism vs. vengeance and vigilantism. By never having Peter catch Uncle Ben's killer it conveys that he let vengeance go and embraced heroism and it ultimately conveys that we should not be consumed with vengeance because it's not productive and that we have to move on and be greater than what we suffer. That is thematically great and moving. The problem is that the script is unfocused and the film doesn't present a thematic throughline that would have conveyed that message to the audience (at least not in an effective way). Sure we get the dinner scene and the bridge scene that are meant to transform Peter from vigilante to hero, but the film doesn't build a cohesive story around those themes, so it leaves the bridge and dinner scene unaided and unsupported in helping to define the arc that Peter takes. It comes off as saying that this one moment changes Peter even though he wasn't all that different before the change and isn't all that different after the change. The film doesn't commit to the character arc and that undercuts the impact of the arc.
Captain Logan, I absolutely love your analysis of this movie (as I do with all of your reviews and analyses) and all of the different points you bring up are fascinating. However, I'm curious in your opinion about something. You mention the idea of the domino effect and how Peter's actions and consequences that lead to the spider bite start the never-ending cycle of responsibility that parallels that of and is caused by his father's decisions. You also mention though how even though the idea is great that the events in the movie that lead him to that place (going to Oscorp, running into the guy with the double-zeroes, etc.) are implausible, which I agree with. Long-winded introductions and context aside, I was curious as to how you would plot the events in a plausible way that would achieve a similar end but properly reflect and convey that domino effect idea in the way that you see it. I understand that you're not big on "re-writing the movie", but I just think it's such a fantastic and fascinating idea and I want to see how you would try to incorporate that idea better into the movie without the implausibility.
As for the suit... I much preferred the suit established in the first installment of this new series as opposed to the spidey costume featured in Amazing Spider-Man 2. The initial suit looked like a slightly alien scaly skin with athletic sportswear elements. Also,in Amaz. S-M there was a sequence which suggested how Parker actually constructed the suited thus giving us a clearer explanation for how the suit came to be. In Amaz. S-M 2 the costume designers basically threw originality out the window and reverted back to the suit design as seen in the Sam Raimi series with minor tweaks. To add insult to injury no explanation for the costume change. The costume basically looks like a flashy Hollywood flexible spandex suit and not like one pieced together from existing materials by a crafty talented artist. It makes him look more like a toy perhaps to be more appealing to children.
Cap do you think there's room to reveal Ultimate Venom latter one, I prefer the Ultimate Venom's origin to the classic version. Peter's father creating Venom as a bio suit give's Peter a personnel connection to the villain. I know it may seem unrealistic for Richard to have created both the spider and the simbiote, but as I said the origin is better.
I must say, I remember subscribing to you a very long time ago and enjoying the in depth analysis on your superhero film reviews. Back then you maybe had a 1000(ish) views per video. I am so happy to see your channel getting more internet recognition. By the way I asked a question a very long time ago and I never got a response back, would you ever consider doing a Superhero Rewind of the movie Hollywoodland?
Great review but did you have to spoil arrow, i am only up to episode 5 of season 2, but know i know shado dies and slade is pissed at Oliver for it . If you say something like that next time could you say spoiler please. :)
28:30.or perhaps its because oscorpe likes to keep stuff like that in case it would be neccasary later.AMAZING SPIDERMAN2 SPOILER.in tasm2 even tho they were supose to get rid of the spiders they take the venom out of them in case it would be useful later.so oscorp seems to do this all the time
Andrew Garfield is the best Spiderman, full stop. It's depressing that he's lost the role now. Amazing Spiderman 2 was bad but it wasn't Garfield's fault, not by a long shot.
+negavenom i'm glad they cancelled the Amazing series those movies were boring, the Raimi trilogy was a million times better, but if u like the Amazing series that's all good i got nothing against u
negavenom no problem, i just prefer the Raimi trilogy, mainly cause 1: i grew up with that version of Spidey & 2: Amazing #1 just felt 2 me like a complete rehash of Raimi's Spidey #1, & Amazing #2 was just so overstuffed, overly crowed, & felt more studio mandated Raimi's trilogy felt made by sum1 who loves the character
I hope this isn't a bad time to bring this up, but are you going to do The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises any time soon since you did this? I don't blame you if you won't if you think they're way too complicated.
People seem to latch onto the line "those are the best kind" as some proof that Peter is a complete douche in this movie. I literally face-palm at this. What about Gwen. SHE is the one upset AT WHAT HER FATHER asked of Peter-hence her hurt and anger when she says "it's my father isn't it?" She didn't want to uphold the promise at all. Peter did, and it comes back to bit him in the ASS hardcore in the sequel, as I'm sure most of you people already know.
I love this review, focusing on the character development and interaction, instead of continuously ranting on how this movie is "copying" the Raimi films and relying on the same characters and plot points. Great job, Captain Logan! You've done it again!
It did rely on the same character and plot points though, except done much worse.
The actor playing Norman Osborne's lackey is also in Life of Pi, and in that film, there is a tiger named Richard Parker.
Brilliant review
You know, the whole idea of Peter Parker destined to be Spider Man that these films kept hammering really undermines the main point of the character for me. To me, Peter was just this social outcast dorky kid who got amazing superpowers one day, made a mistake, and eventually knew to use those powers to help people which is part of what made Spider Man interesting and relatable, the whole destiny angle just takes that away.
So I take it you're not a fan of this movie.
Spencer Malley It wasn't awful, I was just underwhelmed with it.
Great review, I have always maintained this film was just as good as the first Raimi film, only it accomplishes everything the Raimi film didn't, while failing on the things that film succeeded on. I'd say the only thing they failed to really do both, what Spiderman 2, the sole film in the film franchise, did was have a strong, fully realized villain.
So this is just me, but I wasn't bothered by the final line in the movie. I always took it as Peter slyly telling Gwen that he had decided to break the promise he made with her father and wants to pursue their relationship. He opted to listen to Gwen and her desire to remain in a relationship than abiding by her father's wishes.
Such a great review! couldn't agree more... Great movie! just not flawless :) I'm also one of the people that really really likes TASM 2 just as much if not slightly more than this film for having some more ambition and a little more balls than the first film to try some new things and having more villains... What impresses me most about the second one is how it manages to amalgomate many different tones seamlessly in just one scene and make me engaged in every character and story even with a lot going on. Which is something Spider Man 3 failed completely at.
***** I didn't feel he was shoehorned because we had a lot of build up before he became the goblin and he was an actual part of the story.
I never found ASM1 dark or gritty, I thought it was pretty lighthearted, I just think it had serious moments, pretty much like the ASM2. But hey that's just me :)
Spider-Man 3>TASM 2.
Patrick Ward How exactly was Harry "part of the story"? He contributes nothing, all he does is whine about his vaguely described disease and become an awful version of the Green Goblin at the end.
>What impresses me most about the second one is how it manages to amalgomate many different tones seamlessly in just one scene and make me engaged in every character and story even with a lot going on. Which is something Spider Man 3 failed completely at.
Is that why Rhino has no relation to the plot of the movie? Or is that why the movie wastes its entire runtime on setting up Electro as the big bad, even though he doesn't do jack shit while the bad guy that is actually relevant is the guy who gets no development at all? I
You couldn't have explained why I like TASM2 so much any better.
Logan you forget that one other reason he stopped searching for his Uncles killer was because of what Captain Stacy. What he said, "He isn't helping anyone but himself." That line is very similar to what Uncle Ben said after the Flash incident.
Man, your reviews are always so great! You make really REALLY great points! I always wanted to know your thoughts on this one, and I am not disappointed.
:)
Geekvolution
up next, superhero rewind: the avengers.
I love your reviews. It's amazing how much time I can spend watching your videos. I love hearing your opinions on these super hero movies; You make so many awesome points which can actually change my perception of movies. Keep up the great work and I hope you continue to grow as a channel!
Uncle Ben never said "with great Power comes great responsibility" in the comics.....
They did show where the suit came from. You probably blinked and missed it, but it was still there.
plus it had the best stan lee cameo ever
The vultress was fake it was confirmed later that Felica was going to be Black Cat.
Also why does captain Logan not like the Vulture? I think he's great.
30:47 That shot was jumpy in the theater (especially in 3D), and creepy in still frame
Best review of any spider-man film i've ever heard.
There is a great deleted scene in Amazing Spiderman where Connors says to Peter, "We must be greater than what we suffer." Why they got rid of that I have no idea but that made him more of a Father figure there. The villains in this reboot are all rushed for the sake of having a battle. *Cough*( Electro & Green Goblin.)
Loved the review Cap! This is my 2nd favourite Spider-Man film (after TASM 2). Oh and the Back to the Future reference... GENIUS *insert Flash's laugh from Spectacular Spider-Man*
My day has been made..
You would be the best English teacher LOL
28:17 - 28:26
Just skip over that part if you haven't seen Arrow yet.
Thank you for highlighting Peter's celebration scene. You actually get it. Everybody else poops on it for the most shallow of reasons.
"itz bad cuz skatezboordz lolololol I'm such a fanz hurdurhurdur!"
As contrived as the spider bite was in the film, I like how everything surrounding Uncle Ben's death is a legitimate series of dominos. Peter humiliates Flash, Uncle Ben is called to the principal's office and is forced to switch his shift, forcing Peter to have to pick up Aunt May, Peter instead slacks off and explores his new powers and helps Conners out with his formula, leading to the argument where Peter runs off and Uncle Ben follows, only to come across the criminal Peter let slide, specifically because he was looking for Peter. Say whatever you will about changes to the source material, but those were all, I think for the better.
Spider-Man: The romance is complete rubbish and some effects didn't age well, but I still really enjoy it.
Spider-Man 2: Bloody brilliant. One of my favorite comic book films ever.
Spider-Man 3: Everything the previous movie set up gets ruined beyond repair. Fuck this film. My biggest problem was Sandman, his character was idiotic and a complete mess (I'm supposed to find him sympathetic... while he's dumb enough to NOT go rub literally any other city in the world, and he was totally going to murder Peter in cold blood if Harry didn't intervene) and the reveal that he basically killed Uncle Ben because he had a sensitive trigger is sooo stupid...
The Amazing Spider-Man: Not everything comes flawlessly together, but the stuff I like, I REALLY like.
The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Overstuffed and messy, but I oddly enjoyed it. It's a guilty pleasure.
I completely agree on your thoughts about the Lizard, It would've worked fine if the turned him into a mindless rampaging monster, the whole "Turn everyone into lizards for a day" evil plan really wasn't necessary.
Still looking forward to the "City of Scars" and other fan film rewinds.
weird how the nostalgic critic did his review today also
Great Review!, I can't believe this movie is 2 years old already I remember when I went to go see it on July 3rd then just a few days later I went to go see it again. I recently saw The Amazing Spider-Man 2 it was awesome I saw it on opening night May 2
You should Superhero Rewind Spiderman: Shattered Dimensions. It's a game, yes, but you've reviewed a few, if not all by now, of the Batman Arkham games & I think it would be cool to see you review it.
he always looks at the plot of the games though, and its implications. Shattered Dimensions has no plot really. A game like Spider-Man Web Of Shadows would be more fitting, seeing as how morality fits into it. But even then thats a long shot.
True, but Shattered Dimensions was cool. Maybe the Amazing Spider-Man games then.
If there's a Spidey game to review, I'd have to say go with Edge of Time. Gameplay wise, i won't pretend it's the best lol, but in terms of story and the overall narrative and plot, I think Cap can really dig into the Psychology of the two Spider-Men. Plus it's short, meaning the quicker he can review it ^__^
Congrats....you just passed my test....I am serious, I sort out "good reviewers from bad reviewers" by looking how they approach The Amazing Spider-man. If they give it a fair shake, they pass. If they dismiss it from the get go, I put them into "is likely too much influenced by nostalgia" pile.
I don't really think they're influenced by nostalgia if they dismiss this movie, It has some pretty noticeable issues (notice how Irfahn Khans character completely disappears from the movie with no closure or conclusion to his story)
Chris Stuckmann did not care for this movie and I don't think he was influenced by nostalgia at all. He made points that had little if anything to do with the original Raimi films.
Chris Stuckmann actually did an initial review which was way more positive before he went back and stomped all over it the moment he did a series about the Spider-man movies, which would boil down to him having to rate all those movies, and he obviously didn't want to put the remake over the original, so he excused in the first take exactly the same stuff he complained about in the remake. He lost a lot of my respect since he did it, especially since he took down his first review instead of being honest how much he downgraded the movie the second time around. I don't mind people liking the original more, if they are honest about its flaws, too. But don't tell me that the first movie had great character development and then turn around and complain about the way the remake flashed out the characters. Especially don't try to tell me that Mary Jane is better written than Gwen Stacy.
swanpride I really don't think it was a case of him not wanting to rank it above the first movie. He said in one video, Shortly after his first review of TASM, He began seeing more flaws in it and did a facebook post taking his score back, so having to review all Spider-Man movies I don't think really affected his overall feeling in anyway and the issues he brought up in his review really have nothing to do with the Raimi movies at all, like Sam from Sams Channel.
I think Chris's complaints about Gwen Stacy not receiving any character development, The Lizard being a poorly developed villain with a ridiculous plan, then unappealing color palette and the amount of montage sequences really had nothing whatsoever to do with the Raimi movies at all. especially the complaint about Irfahn Khan.
A new 40 minute retrospective!? My body is ready!!
To be fair, the football part clearly shows that the people on the field didn't see exactly what happened.
So weird how this came out the every same day as the nostalgia critics Old vs new on the spiderman movies.
The first Amazing Spider-Man movie is, in my opinion, the most average superhero movie that I've ever seen. It's a giant mixed bag. When this movie succeeds with aspects like the chemistry between Garfield and Emma, making Garfield a much better Spider-Man, a new take on the story, and the characterization, it does it very well. However, with aspects like the bleak and bland world, the Lizard being nothing special, and some of the horrible contrivance, this films does sink a bit. I will say that this film is good enough to get me invested in the new movie series, and thanks to the second movie, makes me wonder how the third film is gonna go. I loved Amazing 2, for the record. :)
God this is so true. Are you going to Zachs party tomorrow?
Wow the new microphone makes all the difference in the world!
This film does a great job to modernize Peter and his character's mythos. Surprisingly, the first quarter or so feels like a mystery. And to me a welcomed change along with other alterations, making this origin film feel different enough to the previous incarnation and still very enjoyable. This Peter feels more tortured and alone thanks to the loss of his parents in the plane crash, along with Ben Parker. Plus in this version, he's more a social outcast as a loner atleast in the beginning, which I also appreciate, while still being a science wiz. And his character arc was expertly done. I really like how after Ben's death Peter tries solely to catch his killer, and that's how he inadvertently quote, "helps the police" and is a hero, but of course was actually wrong. Captain Stacy is geniusly his indirect mentor figure in this, and helps shape Peter by explaining to him how his alter ego seemed to be on a vindictive path, and not simply saving people. After this conversation, in the excellent bridge scene where Peter saves a little boy, he finally becomes and embodies the hero Spider-Man! And is also why he stopped looking for Ben's killer and focuses on doing the right thing. Of course his Uncle's last words must have helped too, and I feel that iconic lesson was given here in a very realistic manner. I also like that this Spider-Man is more spider-like, and that his first villain also has similar capabilities, but very different as a being when in his Lizard form of course. The chemistry of the couple is also excellent, and feels very real. And this film does finish its main story arcs and evolves Peter a long way, but it's a great choice for it to end teasing more of the Peter-Gwen relationship. It definitely makes me want to see a sequel and more of them both. Especially because Gwen herself was also a great character with a lot of charm. It's a 9/10! Sidenotes, I just need to say I really loved that because of Spider-Man's moral obligation to save Jack, the little boy, he was rewarded by getting aid from his father later in the film, which he absolutely needed to win the day. That, and the emphasis on the webshooters being very useful, but if broken or all used up, could leave Spider-Man in a very tough predicament since it's such a huge tool in his arsenal. Lastly, the fact Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone were actually dating at this time is simply an amazing fact.
I didn't mind the Lizard's scheme, but I do agree that they shouldn't have cut Connors' family out or cut that scene in the sewer.
i think the amazing spiderman is the second best spiderman behind spider man 2.i yet to see amazing spiderman 2.but i feel the amazing spiderman had a better origin and i can relate more to peter than the original.i feel the original has aged poorly.its probably the cheesiest of the 3 rami movies.the special effects dont hold up like its sequels.
I must say, I agree that Dr Connors should have had more screen time in the film, and more interaction with Peter. but I don't say that because I thought his character was week or underutilized. quite the contrary, I thought Rhys Ifans was excellent in the role, and that he made every second of screen time count. I'd really like to see more from him now, sense I can only recall him from a handful of roles.
Cap, you have convinced me to watch this movie again. I think it deserves a second chance (though it still has some flaws)
TASM does NOT hold onto Peter's values. It throws them in the toilet, craps over them, and flushes them down the drain
Another great review Cap, I think its also about time to get a Dark Knight Rises review
You see Peter make his costume in this unlike the 2002 version
Hey Cap, long-time fan here. Excellent analysis as always. I'd like to address a couple of your criticisms:
-I always got the sense that Dr. Ratha deliberately lured Peter into the Spider-room. When he sees Peter's face after they bump into each other, it seems like he recognizes him (judging by how his facial expression changes once he locks eyes with Peter). Then right before he goes into the Spider-room, he looks back in Peter's general direction. You could argue that he was looking around to make sure that no one was following him. However, I took it as him making sure that Peter WAS following him. We know that he knew Richard Parker (or at least of him) from his later conversation with Connors. But then again, that's just how I read the scene. Maybe you read it differently.
-The reason why most of Spider-Man's scenes are at night is simple. He's in high school, he goes to classes in the daytime. Raimi got Peter out of high school really quickly, so Peter had more time to be Spider-Man in the day (as a recent college graduate myself, college students tend to have more flexible schedules and thus more free time in the day).
-I don't really agree that Connors becomes an entirely different person after turning into the Lizard. Even the Lizard's "crazy" plan is just Connor's own life's goals taken to horrifying extremes. Connors wants to create a world "without weakness." A world without disease, physical deformities, injuries, etc. As the Lizard, he still wants to do that. It's just that now that goal has morphed into something horrible. Now that he has all of these great gifts/physical abilities, he sees "frail" humanity as a weakness. "A world without weakness" becomes "cure the world of HUMAN weakness and turn everyone into a stronger, better life-form." Also, right before he injects himself, Dr. Ratha reveals that he wants to conduct dangerous an unethical tests on veterans without their knowledge and consent, and Connors morally objects. It's what gets him fired. After he starts to turn into Lizard, he still wants to stop Ratha. He hails a cab and rushes to try and catch up to Ratha, but as he continues to mutate "stopping Ratha" morphs into "kill him in his car on a bridge." He's still the same person at his core, he's just been warped into a more extreme version of himself. And at least the Lizard had some semi-understandable motivation. Raimi's Norman didn't really have any motivation. He kills the members of his BOD and then, he just randomly does stuff without any large goal (or at least we're never told what his larger goal is).
Still, those are minor disagreements. It was still and excellent analysis overall. Are you going to be doing Avengers soon by any chance?
He clearly becomes twisted from taking the serum given his lucidity and regret at the end.
Just a little FYI, this wasn't added to the playlist.
Watching this makes me realize you need to do your in-depth analysis on The Spectacular Spider-Man, the animated series. I would love to hear your thoughts on [arguably] one of the best adaptions to the comics to date.
Cap does it again. You never cease to amaze me with your reviews.
Marc Webb directed 500 days of summer good love story right there.
As for the costume, I actually like it for a completely personal reason. By 2011/2012, I sorta "grew out of" my "Spider Man phase", sort of. I was a huge fan of Marvel, and this was still a while before Marvel's the Avengers would turn Marvel from that pseudo-underground comic company only comic book fans knew to the massive cultural juggernaut it was now, and as a result Spider Man was the only Marvel hero I really saw everywhere. Because of that, Spider Man was the only Marvel hero my younger cousins were aware of, and so I saw Spider Man as the child's Marvel hero, not helped by the fact that he was one of the youngest that I was aware of at the time. This was until, one day, I was going to Walmart with my Dad, and saw a poster for The Amazing Spider Man. I don't know exactly what it was about the costume, just that I immediately fell in love and wanted to see the movie.
Great review. Totally agree with the points you made in the video
Cool spiderman scene
Oh, yes. I watched TASM yesterday, it'll be cool to hear your thoughts.
For the first time?
Did you see the sequel?
I thought the 1st one was really good. The second one kind of sucked.
Billy Crystal I saw it in theaters, and enjoyed it. I watched the sequel today. I thought the sequel was sub par. People call it the "Batman and Robin" of spider-man, and I don't think its really that bad.
I definitely agree. The first one was a great Spiderman movie and the sequel is not as good as I was hoping it'd be but it's definitely not as bad as Batman and Robin or Spiderman 3. It is miles better than those 2. AS 2 is on par with the first Spiderman in my opinion.
Actual Ben never said "with great power comes great responsibly". It was a yellow text box.
5:41 There actually was an explanation for Andrew Garfield's costume... A) Because Peter needs to hide his face from whoever he's interrogating, and B) The whole thing where Peter overhears the two nerds at his school talking about wind resistance and velocity and shiz... :P
sir you deserve more subscribers!
I think the last line of the film is really to set up what I think is the the whole conflict of the second film. Peter decides to take up the responsibility of Spiderman, but he doesn't quite understand yet the sacrifices he will have to make. He's lived his life being smarter, and now, more powerful than anyone else. I wouldn't say his life is generally easier, but there are instances where it is. As Spiderman, he's come to represent hope.He has to be more than himself, but he's conflicted with that responsibility and what he wants. He doesn't completely get that he has to choose one over the other, that is until the point is driven home with what happens to Gwen. Peter came off as a really imperfect hero in TASM2. He refused to be a martyr through most of the film, and Gwen's final fate is really what I think teaches him to be the Spiderman we would eventually know.
For the the amazing Spider-Man 3 I want them to go back to the tone of this one!!!
Hey Cap, this means you're gonna do a rewind of dark knight rises and the avengers very soon, right? :D
those came out in 2012!
Kind of sounds like you basically want Spider-Man: Homecoming tbh
I actually think that this Spider-Man atmosphere would be a cool backdrop for Ninja Turtles. It's dark. It's New York and it's science fiction.
8:18 Speaking of Smallville, what happened to your reviews, you still doing them?
They'll be back when I finish Spawn Year later this year.
Geekvolution Awesome, love your videos mate, keep it up :)
One thing I don't get about people who don't like this series (The sequel in particular) is that they say it looked like a cartoon. Motherfucker it's Spiderman! It's supposed to look like a cartoon. I'd probably be pissed if it didn't look like a cartoon.
given that family is a big theme in these films, I wanted to offer some thoughts. I'm an adopted child, my parents took me home when I was only 11 days old. I've always had a soft spot for adoptive parents in fiction, and adoption is a common theme in superhero stories. personally I think the added plot point with Peter Parker's parents, in the new films was a mistake. Peter's biological parents aren't mentioned in the Raimi films, because they're never really relevant to the story. moreover Peter's Aunt May and Uncle Ben are his true parents. there's even a line that makes this point clear: "I had a father, his name was Ben Parker." in the new films, by adding this whole element with his lost parents, I actually think that detracts from the relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben. plus I think the whole plot point with Peter's parents in the Mark Webb films, wasn't very well handled to begin with. though, as it turns out I think Cliff Robertson, and Martin Sheen were perfect choices to play Uncle Ben. I'm really glad that they pretty much got his character perfect both times.
Excellent points and I really appreciate your unique perspective. Thanks for commenting.
Geekvolution Personally, I've never agreed with the notion that because it wasn't done in the comics that he cannot be done in other mediums. Peter's parents weren't important in the comics, ok so what? This is a movie, not the comics. They're allowed to go in different directions. It's just like different writers have their own takes on the character, Webb has his. I see no rule that says they can NEVER use his parents. If anything, that just limits potential story options. If people want to critique HOW the parents thing was handled, that's completely fine. But to argue that it should never be done at all, I'll never agree with that.
Michael Singer I think you miss understand what I was saying. when I said that his parents weren't important to the story, I was talking about the Raimi movies, as they are not mentioned in those films. all this stuff with Peter's missing parents does infact come from the comics. the story is a little different, but it is based on a plotline from the comic. that mysterious guy in the hat and trench coat, who's always in shadow, that's a villain from the comics known as The Gentleman, who has a grudge against Peter's father.
the point I was making didn't have anything to do with what or wasn't in the comics. I was talking about the portrayal of Peter's family in the context of the film. personally I prefer the way it was handled in the Raimi films, coming from my own viewpoint as an adopted child. if I was Peter Parker, I would unquestionably consider Uncle Ben to be my dad, as Toby did in the Raimi movies.
Thank you. As a die hard Spidey fan I continually find it extremely difficult to express my feelings for this film without sounding like a complete comic zealot. It truly pains me cause there is so much to love and so much to equally hate about The Amazing Spider-Man franchise.
I cant help but feel that Sony is trying too hard to appease to the comic accurate fad Marvel Studios gave prominence to in their wildly successful franchises. Sony's acknowledgment of this initially seemed proactive but was undermined by their lack of insight on the Spidey universe. Which may very well be why this film feels insecure of its place in this golden age of CBMs. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has proven that Sony is simply grabbing the most prominent Spidey story arcs/characters and shoehorning them together into a film.
To top it all off, Sony's strategy so far has been to cut major pieces of these films for future installments. Its turned this franchise into heavy handed "to be continued" tv serials than stand alone films. In the end, I understand all this internet venting wont solve any of these woes. So, unfortunately for them, I wont be supporting anymore Sony developed Spider-man films.
To be honest, they should give Spider-Man a break for a few years (I honestly don't know the terms of the rights). They should go for another Spider-Man (Hate Avi Arad for saying Peter's the only Spider-Man) after a while, maybe Miguel O'Hara. Or maybe do Noir, it'd be interesting.
That'd be a great idea! Hell I'd even see a Scarlet Spider movie(as long as the clone shenanigans is kept to a minimum). I honestly don't understand why Sony and Marvel can't cooperate seeing how Fiege is Avi Arad's good friend and former co worker.
Avi also claims to be one of the co-creators of the MCU and if that is truly so, then maybe theres more to it than we think. That'd be absolutely nuts if Avi is actually sabotaging the Sony Spider-man franchise in the MCU's favor. Just thinking about that gets me a little giddy inside.
DestroyerOfSandwiches Wait, which Scarlet Spider, Kaine or Ben Reilly? Ah anyways, I think The Amazing Spider-Man franchise is way too damn familiar to the Ultimate universe, I can't help, but unofficially call it "Ultimate Spider-Man."
They can't seem to find a middle ground for Spider-Man, even though it doesn't seem that complicated. I rewatched the original Raimi trilogy and I thought, "Jesus they're really burning through these villains (pun intended for Venom XD)."
I think Webb has a better understanding for character development while Raimi's seemed to fluctuate so much it was getting annoying (I'm looking at you Tobey and Kirsten). I'll give Raimi this, despite the corny and cheesy dialogue, he did keep it simple and to the point. He made each movie self-contained.
Both. But Ben Reilly is my personal favorite so Kaine would be reduced to a cameo. It'd be easier for me to just call it Sony-Man simply because of equal merging of 616 and Ultimate's elements yet still being a completely different take on the character all together.
I've always seen the flaws in the original trilogy and is still a nostalgic experience to watch. Sam Raimi's trilogy is its own take, or universe if you will, all on its own. Even if Spidey eventually ends up in Marvel Studios hands that will be another universe as well. Taking elements from 616 and Ultimates, and still intertwine into the MCU.
DestroyerOfSandwiches To me, Spidey could hold up his own movieverse, but I wouldn't complain if he's interconnected with the MCU if done right.
I think building up to the Sinister Six is a ballsy move for Sony. When we see the entire roster for SS, it better be worth all that build-up, otherwise they should just sell the rights back to Marvel. Hell, Marvel's doing Ant Man, I'm curious about what they would do with the other Spider-Men.
cap are you gonna use your spiderman 2002 archive check list when you get to spiderman homecoming?
Spiderman did just paint a target on that kids back though, now that he knows his identity. I doubt it will since these are movies, but that info would spread since he knows. I really enjoyed the episode of batman beyond that touched on this topic.
You wanted a realistic reason for the spidey suit? .... is that even possible? What exactly were you expecting? He bought a suit made of a great material that only came in those colours on ebay and stuck a spider on it?
I really like you're reasoning for it since I thought Peter specifically chose those colors instead of them coming that way. Well done 👌 👌
there are some reason why I actually like it more than spider-man 3
Hey Cap, I just wanted to say that I love that you can give me a new appreciation of a film even if I don't completely agree with you. I do partly agree about the vigilante to hero arc. The idea of Peter knowing that he is indirectly responsible for his uncle's death and being consumed with vengeance to find his killer, but ultimately learning to be a hero is compelling. It makes the theme justice and heroism vs. vengeance and vigilantism. By never having Peter catch Uncle Ben's killer it conveys that he let vengeance go and embraced heroism and it ultimately conveys that we should not be consumed with vengeance because it's not productive and that we have to move on and be greater than what we suffer. That is thematically great and moving. The problem is that the script is unfocused and the film doesn't present a thematic throughline that would have conveyed that message to the audience (at least not in an effective way). Sure we get the dinner scene and the bridge scene that are meant to transform Peter from vigilante to hero, but the film doesn't build a cohesive story around those themes, so it leaves the bridge and dinner scene unaided and unsupported in helping to define the arc that Peter takes. It comes off as saying that this one moment changes Peter even though he wasn't all that different before the change and isn't all that different after the change. The film doesn't commit to the character arc and that undercuts the impact of the arc.
Captain Logan,
I absolutely love your analysis of this movie (as I do with all of your reviews and analyses) and all of the different points you bring up are fascinating. However, I'm curious in your opinion about something.
You mention the idea of the domino effect and how Peter's actions and consequences that lead to the spider bite start the never-ending cycle of responsibility that parallels that of and is caused by his father's decisions. You also mention though how even though the idea is great that the events in the movie that lead him to that place (going to Oscorp, running into the guy with the double-zeroes, etc.) are implausible, which I agree with.
Long-winded introductions and context aside, I was curious as to how you would plot the events in a plausible way that would achieve a similar end but properly reflect and convey that domino effect idea in the way that you see it. I understand that you're not big on "re-writing the movie", but I just think it's such a fantastic and fascinating idea and I want to see how you would try to incorporate that idea better into the movie without the implausibility.
May you do a rewind on Green Lantern? I really want to hear your thoughts about it!
As for the suit...
I much preferred the suit established in the first installment of this new series
as opposed to the spidey costume featured in Amazing Spider-Man 2. The initial suit looked like a slightly alien scaly skin with athletic sportswear elements. Also,in Amaz. S-M there was a sequence which suggested how Parker actually constructed the suited thus giving us a clearer explanation for how the suit came to be. In Amaz. S-M 2 the costume designers basically threw originality out the window and reverted back to the suit design as seen in the Sam Raimi series with minor tweaks. To add insult to injury no explanation for the costume change. The costume basically looks like a flashy Hollywood flexible spandex suit and not like one pieced together from existing materials by a crafty talented artist. It makes him look more like a toy perhaps to be more appealing to children.
can you do a superhero rewind on the movie constantine?
have you thought about maybe doing a Superhero Rewind of Chronicle or the 2012 TMNT series, Captain Logan? :)
Since Osbourne sees everyone as a means to his end, do I hear consequentialist anyone?
Cap do you think there's room to reveal Ultimate Venom latter one, I prefer the Ultimate Venom's origin to the classic version. Peter's father creating Venom as a bio suit give's Peter a personnel connection to the villain. I know it may seem unrealistic for Richard to have created both the spider and the simbiote, but as I said the origin is better.
I must say, I remember subscribing to you a very long time ago and enjoying the in depth analysis on your superhero film reviews. Back then you maybe had a 1000(ish) views per video. I am so happy to see your channel getting more internet recognition.
By the way I asked a question a very long time ago and I never got a response back, would you ever consider doing a Superhero Rewind of the movie Hollywoodland?
Good review, i like this film and love the sequel. I agree the villain in this is the main flaw, it is unrealized and the end third is strange
Actaully.... I would of been ok without the "taking over the world" thing when Lizard was turning everyone into lizards.
OH MAN! after heading captain logan saying the lyrics of Coldplay's kingdom come make me watch to look it up on youtube
Some intersting thoughts from you. I enjoyed this movie but I would still say Spider-Man (2002) is a better movie than TASM.
i love this movie.
and i love asm2 more.
I liked the movie but all the stuff they cutout I think I'd loved it if they left that stuff in!
your review are awesome i can't wait to see a Dark Knight Rises review one day
Great review but did you have to spoil arrow, i am only up to episode 5 of season 2, but know i know shado dies and slade is pissed at Oliver for it . If you say something like that next time could you say spoiler please. :)
What do you think of the new spiderman reboot?
Green lantern (2011) ?
Pick out the huge flaws that destroyed the movie!!!! Please and thanks (:
AWESOME VIDS MAN, Keep it up :)
28:30.or perhaps its because oscorpe likes to keep stuff like that in case it would be neccasary later.AMAZING SPIDERMAN2 SPOILER.in tasm2 even tho they were supose to get rid of the spiders they take the venom out of them in case it would be useful later.so oscorp seems to do this all the time
Peter not a nerd he's a Hipster
Hey Cap, aren't you going to add this review to the playlist?
We need a Scott Pilgrim review
when are you going to finish the rest of spawn year?
Andrew Garfield is the best Spiderman, full stop. It's depressing that he's lost the role now. Amazing Spiderman 2 was bad but it wasn't Garfield's fault, not by a long shot.
+Andrew Wang I blame Sony.
+negavenom i'm glad they cancelled the Amazing series those movies were boring, the Raimi trilogy was a million times better, but if u like the Amazing series that's all good i got nothing against u
***** And I'm glad you showed respect with your opinion.
negavenom no problem, i just prefer the Raimi trilogy, mainly cause
1: i grew up with that version of Spidey & 2: Amazing #1 just felt 2 me like a complete rehash of Raimi's Spidey #1, & Amazing #2 was just so overstuffed, overly crowed, & felt more studio mandated
Raimi's trilogy felt made by sum1 who loves the character
***** I see your point. :)
If your reviewing every superhero movie ever made, does that include foreign language movies? Like the Super Sentai and Kamen Rider movies?
Do the second one
He'll do them *all* eventually.
I LOVED this movie
37:01 I died.
Wasnt this episode suposed to be City of Scars?
I hope this isn't a bad time to bring this up, but are you going to do The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises any time soon since you did this? I don't blame you if you won't if you think they're way too complicated.
People seem to latch onto the line "those are the best kind" as some proof that Peter is a complete douche in this movie. I literally face-palm at this. What about Gwen. SHE is the one upset AT WHAT HER FATHER asked of Peter-hence her hurt and anger when she says "it's my father isn't it?" She didn't want to uphold the promise at all. Peter did, and it comes back to bit him in the ASS hardcore in the sequel, as I'm sure most of you people already know.
I would agree with you if TASM 2 hadn't happened, but since it did I think Lord Gremlins point is correct.