Let's Go Out To The Movies: The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (The Title Is Misleading)

Alo Party Peoples.

As an independent film critic with my own site to publish reviews on, I have very little oversight in regards to what I put out. This means I can freely pick and choose what gets reviewed here. Sometimes that doesn't work out, like the last two weeks, but for the most part I have the final word on what you see here. I'm very grateful to have this platform, and I try to live up to my promised schedule so I can show you my gratitude.

Since I was unable to cover Transcendence last weekend (the professionals have savaged it by the way), and literally nothing else came out in wide release this weekend, we're talking about the new Spider-Man movie. I originally didn't plan to cover it, because it looked terrible, but I haven't put out a review in a while. Two years ago, Sony decided that they couldn't let Marvel/Disney get the film rights to the Spider-Man franchise back, and they decided that an ultra marketable, slick and gritty reboot was the easiest way to hold onto them. It didn't really work as a movie, but it made a killing at the box office, which led Sony to give the green-light for five more of these. Here's how the first of those sequels turned out.

Peter Parker is having serious work-life balance issues between his vigilantism and his relationship with Gwen Stacy, while digging further into his father's spider research for Oscorp. Which has been taken over by Harry Osborne who's dying of a hereditary disease that he thinks can be cured by the blood of Spider-Man, which Peter is reluctant to give him because it might turn him into the Green Goblin. Oh, and an Oscorp electrical engineer named Max Dillon falls into a vat of electric eels which turns him into the super-villain Electro. I know that doesn't have much to do with the rest of the story, but I only bring it up because the movie gives this character a lot of screen time.

Let's get this out of the way, this is technically better than the first film in the 'Amazing' line. There's definitely been some improvement, the Spider-Man suit looks a lot better, mostly due to getting rid of the all black reflective eyes, and the action is probably the best in the Spider-Man movies. However, that doesn't make this movie good. I do think that the professionals might have been a little too hard on it, but I can't say it's a good movie. There are serious pacing issues, when it isn't in full on action mode I kept thinking "Dear lord, get on with it", and the tone is constantly in flux between that full on action and drawn out Twilight-esque romance that just isn't engaging. What chemistry Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone do have is definitely coming from their relationship off-camera, not from the script.

See what I mean?

Speaking of performances, Jamie Foxx is not very good as Max Dillon/Electro. As Max his goofy as hell character just doesn't fit with the tone of these movies, and as Electro he just looks ridiculous. No, I didn't think the version of Electro from the comics would look good in live action, but this movie's version looks like, in the words of one critic "homeless Doctor Manhattan", and it is just as ridiculous. As for the rest of the cast, Sally Field is a solid Aunt May, but Dane DeHann isn't very good as Harry Osbourne. I don't buy that this kid has only weeks to live, and my father remarked that his hairstyle was terrible.

In conclusion, while I can see some improvement from the last one, in all honesty The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is pretty mediocre. The professionals have made it out to be 'the worst kind of passionless, financially motivated, corporate film making of the franchise age' but that might be a little harsh. Oh, I can see why they feel that way, especially with all the Sony product placement, but there are definitely worse examples of corporate film making out there. It isn't terrible, but I can't recommend seeing it.

Have a nice day.

Greg.B