# Spiderman 2



## Tusk

Saw it on opening day. This is one of the few movies I have gone to on the day it opened because I hate the lines and crowded theaters, but the wife wanted to see it really bad. I thought it was great. It is one of those sequels that takes a movie that was very good to begin with, and builds on it and improves the story. I think it has a lot to do with the same director returning with the same vision as the first. Many times a franchise changes hands and the quality of the sequels suffer because the director wants to take the movie a different direction.

I would highly recommend it. Good mix of story, continuing character development and action. The effects are spectacular.


----------



## JBKing

That's good to hear. I can't wait until Saturday, when I go see it.


----------



## djlong

*Very* good sequel... My wife said they FINALLY ended a comic-book movie the RIGHT way.


----------



## Mike D-CO5

I thought the movie was very heavy on personal angst and heartache and it reminded me of a soap opera plot . Will MaryJane marry old "Bob" or will she come back to Peter Parker? Will Peter give up being Spiderman and succeed in school or will he not? Tune in tomorrow ..... 

People in the audience were making cracks throughout the movie: "I can't believe I paid Money to see this". and of course " This sux big time!" All in all I felt this was a very slow plodding movie with very little action till the later half. 

We seem to be going through all the villians of Spiderman one at a time. And what's with half of New York seeing his face in costume ,not to mention MaryJane too. OF course they left it open for "Spiderman #3". I think the first movie was better.


----------



## Mike123abc

I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed, especially kids. It really is not the typical action flick. Instead it has plot and character development, not an unending stream of explosions and action. It will probably be way over the heads of most kids to understand a lot of the movie.


----------



## Geronimo

The Spiderman comics were always more of a soap opera about Peter Parker than an action/adventure story. But kids have understood it for years.


----------



## JBKing

Just browsing the internet, I read about 25 good reviews and only saw one bad one - Salon (like that has any significance). It appears S2 is an actual movie, not just a special effects / action extravaganza.


----------



## Chris Blount

Possible Spoiler ahead but nothing that gives away plot points:




I just got back from seeing Spiderman 2 and I very much enjoyed it. Good story and good action sequences. 

This movie is definitely not what I expected. Much more story line and plot than action. I agree somewhat that the first hour drags a little but it's nice to see a superhero comic book movie compare to Batman (IMHO, the king of all comic book movies). It dives deep into the relationship between MJ and Peter Parker along with some good back story relating to the death of his uncle. 

The special effect sequences were also very good. Although much of the action was CG, it blended very well with the live action. Quite frankly it was almost seemless in some parts where I couldn't tell between live action and CG. 

I also notice that the CG animators are getting good with physics. There is one part when Peter falls from a building and hits a car and then the pavement. The shot is done so well that it's hard to not let out an "Ouch!" after he hits. 

Some of the camera work is also very imaginative. Spiderman is fighting the bad guy on a moving train and at first you think they are on top of the train. Then all of the sudden the camera flips and backs away to reveal that they are actually on the side. Very well executed!

Without giving anything away, I thought the villain in was better. More menacing and violent. Judging from how many people get hurt, this movie could have been MUCH more bloody. I commend the director for holding back. Too much gore can be a real turnoff and I'm sure the studio didn't want an "R" rating on their hands.

Overall, good movie and highly recommended. I think Spiderman 1 and 2 are both on par with eachother. Each does well in telling the story and both deliver a good movie watching experience. I give it a strong 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.


----------



## Jasonbp

I went and saw it today. I thought it was much better than the first one. I agree with Chris that the first 45 minutes to an hour is kind of a drag. 

On topic: it est. gross for opening day is $40.5million, the highest for a Wednesday.


----------



## Geronimo

Whilr this is hardly great cinema or great drama it isa truly great fantasy come to life. I recommend it highly at that level. If you are not willing to view it as an eight year old would it might not be for you. But sometimes something like this isa lot if fun.

I will say that I am absolutely stunned aty how Sam Raimi learned his craft making cheesy horror flicks. Maybe tehre si something to be said for learning one's craft this way.


----------



## Phil T

Instead of going out to watch fireworks we went and saw it last night. It was a great time to go and the theater was only about 1/4 full. I really enjoyed it.


----------



## John Corn

I thought it was great, but didn't necessarily blow the first one out of the water like a lot of critics seem to be saying. 
Storywise, I'd say it was about equal to the first one, which I thought was also good. I think it drags a little in the middle, with too much focus on Aunt May and also the Peter Parker/Mary Jane will they/won't they thing slows the story down. Would've liked to have seen more of Doctor Octopus. The fight scenes are fantastic and the f/x have definitely improved from the first one. Overall, a very good movie and a worthy second chapter in the Spidey saga. Can't wait for the next one.


----------



## JBKing

Spiderman2 is a great movie and I would argue that it _*is*_ great cinema. It has great character development, believable characters in unbelievable situations as well as facing problems just as we do, action, and it says something about morals and responsibility without being heavy handed. To me, that is great cinema, something sorely missing in movies today.

Spiderman 2 is better than the 1st but not so much as to diminish the 1st in any way. The 1st took a lot of time on the origin which is to be expected. The 2nd had more time for the character relationships. As an added bonus, we didn't have to put up with that hideous Green Goblin costume!  I am very pleased with Mr. Raimi, as long as he is involved, they can churn out as many Spiderman movies as they want. I can't think of a better Peter Parker than Tobey Macquire. Kirsten Dunst is an excellent MJ, and the man playing JJJ is incredible, May is great also. The only problem I have is Harry, and I can't quite put my finger on it. I remember Harry as being more timid but that was early in Spiderman's career, I'm not sure how he has been portrayed for the last 15 years.

I have just 2 concerns: I didn't notice how many arms Curt Conners had, but I would swear he had both in Spiderman 2. I thought he was always missing an arm, or was that caused by an accident that we may someday see on the screen?

<possible spoiler>
......
......

Also, I was a little disappointed to see so many people see Spidey without his mask. Despite their assurances of not telling, I was disturbed by the whole secret identity being blown. Although, it was a great scene with Spidey giving everything he had to save the train, passing out, then to have the passengers carry him over their shoulders to the back of the train for recovery, very poignant indeed.

Also, I can see where some, especially younger kids, can be bored through part of Spiderman 2, but surprisingly, my 5 year old said he was never bored. I asked him what he thought of all of the kissing, and he said, 'well, it didn't last very long'. 

It's been years since I've seen the same movie twice at the theater, I just may do it this time!


----------



## Geronimo

They clearly showed that Dr. Connors was missing an arm. Who knows he could be a villian in Spiderman 3, Spiderman 4 or somewhere beyond. 

While they have made some changes from the comic (genetic engineering vs. radiation, no invented web shooters, taking incidents from other girlfriends and having them happen to MJ etc.) the movies clearly pay homage to the comics. I was glad that Stan Lee got another cameo. Too bad Steve Ditko could not get the same treatment.


----------



## JBKing

I forgot about Stan Lee's cameo. I was the only idiot in the theater who waved his hands in the air and (I think) whispered "Stan Lee!" when Mr. Lee was on screen for that split second. I'm not sure, but I could swear my wife sunk down in her seat just a bit more!


----------



## iKwak

Better than the 1st one!


----------



## Guest

I thought that s2 was better than the first. Partly because I already knew the story of spiderman and the first movie wa just like the cartoon story growing up. #2 was new and doc oc was more realistic of a villian than the goblin. I did like the character developement and the "love story" was not nearly as cheesy as in the first. The effects were awesome. I did wonder why everyone saw his face, during the movie, but it is better this way than sitting through 4 movies in anticipation. If the movie would have been 4 hours long I still would hae loved it. Thumbs up!


----------



## Mark Holtz

_The two Spiderman 2 threads have been merged into one. - *Holtz*_


----------



## jrjcd

i guess in the spiderman movies, stan lee's credit will always be "man pulling child out of danger",,,lol


----------



## kydish

Great character development, CGI is so seamless. I wonder which of the three vilians they hinted at will be next.


----------



## Geronimo

They hintes at the Green Goblin (harry this time) and the Lizard. Who was the third?


----------



## kwajr

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I thought the movie was very heavy on personal angst and heartache and it reminded me of a soap opera plot . Will MaryJane marry old "Bob" or will she come back to Peter Parker? Will Peter give up being Spiderman and succeed in school or will he not? Tune in tomorrow .....
> 
> People in the audience were making cracks throughout the movie: "I can't believe I paid Money to see this". and of course " This sux big time!" All in all I felt this was a very slow plodding movie with very little action till the later half.
> 
> We seem to be going through all the villians of Spiderman one at a time. And what's with half of New York seeing his face in costume ,not to mention MaryJane too. OF course they left it open for "Spiderman #3". I think the first movie was better.


i think he sighned for 6 so far


----------



## Geronimo

I guess "man Wolf" is the thhird one mentioned. I don't see that hough. But what so I know?


----------



## BobMurdoch

I loved Spiderman 2 and think it is the best Superhero movie I've seen since Superman II in the thrill o meter combined with good acting vein.

The first hour needed a little more punch, but the character building was useful and paid off later. Great villain, great scenes, and GOOD CGI that only looked really fake about once every 15 minutes. 

SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!! Skip the rest of this post if you haven't seen it yet......

Three scenes that got ME all choked up .... One - the scene with the two kids telling Peter that they'll keep his secret ripped my heart out, threw it on the floor, and kicked it around the theater for a bit. Ditto FOR MJ seeing behind his mask during the battle. This and the previous movie really drove home how he couldn't have what he anted in life because they would always be used against his alter ego, so we all felt his huge relief when his secret was revealed to her. And double ditto for MJ standing in his doorway like Rachel at the end of the Friends finale over his protestations to stay away.


----------



## kydish

I think they are Hob Goblin, Lizzard, and Venom(depending on how UPSET he is for being stood up at the wedding).


----------



## Geronimo

Harry is not Hobgoblin. That is someone else. He simply became the Green Goblin in the comics. The Hobgoblin is/was a character who stumbled on a hidden cache of Norman osborn's Green Goblin equipment.

The Lizard also appears. And John Jameson is Man Wolf. There was no reference to Venom. In the cartoon the Venom suit is brought back by Col Jameson. But in the comics there was a much longer more involved origin.


----------



## kydish

Ok, I will raise the geekness here to a new level  

Ultimates Captain America so kicks ass over regular-continuity Captain 
America..

BAM! kicked it up a notch!


----------



## Geronimo

Not sure I follow that kydish. I just was not sure how you saw references to Hobgoblin or Venom. Not sure how Ca' comes into play.


----------



## kydish

You are correct in your analogy and I could not argue with you so I thought maybe some humor.


----------



## Geronimo

Cool. Sorry if I was coming on too strong.


----------



## JBKing

Or what about Rocket Racer and The Prowler?  

A tip of the hat to anyone who remembers these two 'super' villians who never should'a seen comic ink!


----------

