The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)

[riddler]

I wish i was online this afternoon, you two brought up a lot of interesting points to discuss

It surprises me that they used such a high-profile actor, Chris Cooper, for a couple of scenes (one of which was a flashback).

Interesting that while it is a regular thing in the comics for dead characters to come alive again, the only comic film which ever tried it was TMNT 2. The manner in which he was quickly disposed of as well as the buildup from the first film leads me to believe Norman will return

They better not make the same mistakes the last franchise did by rushing Venom's origins. 

They know the backlash spider-man 3 got over the venom treatment, no way they'd repeat it. The venom film is slated for 2017, the year after spidey 3. Originally I thought they may have gone the flash thompson Venom route but he wasn't in the second film.

Who are the 'haters'?

There's a few miscellaneous groups; some folks whom are extreme on one side of the DC/marvel debate hate everything on the other side. Nolanites hate on every CBM he doesn't touch and especially this one since it's nothing like a Nolan film, pretentious people who believe it makes them smarter if they enjoy a boring movie and thus would hate a film like this, and lastly Raimi fans.

She could have been Felicia Hardy, I can't think of any other reason for giving her the name, if she is Felicia Hardy I don't like it either. I'd like to see Black Cat, but not with Felicia as Osborn's secretary (does everything have to be tied to Oscorp in some way?  )

So far the character doesn't match Felicia hardy but that being said she is a thief and thus could con her way to such a job. Or it could be an ambiguous nod similar to how the 2002 spider-man film had an unseen character named "Eddie" who'd been researching spider-man for the Bugle which it turned out couldn't have been Eddie Brock.

I hope Eddie Brock will be established over a couple of films before he turns into Venom.  I agree he shouldn't be an 'old friend' of Peter's, but he should be developed as a work colleague/rival at the Daily Bugle who has reasons for despising Parker.

As I wrote above, he'll have a maximum of one film pre-venom. I think that's fine. I mean a lot of people felt the Brock treatment in spider-man 3 would have been fine if they moved the church scene to the very end of the film and used the next one for Venom. Though it appears Venom will be heroic in his solo film as Carnage is in it so not sure if we'll get to see him take on spidey.

What do you think the Sinister Six line-up will be? They've hinted at Doc Ock and Vulture and we already have Rhino and Electro available.

Harry is available, I don't think Electro will be part of it but you never know. Lizard is available although Connors redeemed himself. There were hints at doc ock and vulture. I'm not sure how they'll do such a film since the sinister six are not protagonists so how will they have a superhero film without a hero?

and she survived while Gwen only got two movies and died. I thought her death was handled well here although I didn't want it to happen since I like the character and the actress.

Definitely agree although MJ was WAYYYY overused and wasted in the previous series, she passed her expiry date by the second film, the third was just overkill. With the rapid pace this films have moved I get that Webb is moving on from Gwen.


I think they got the humour they wanted; I don't think they were trying to make anyone fall out of their chair laughing, they were going for a few snickers and got them. Much better than the previous film in which several jokes missed the mark or there were scenes getting laughed AT (the breakup scene)

[johnnygobbs]

You make some great points riddler!  And I wish you'd been around earlier too so that Edd and my discussion could have been a three-way one. 

Interesting that while it is a regular thing in the comics for dead characters to come alive again, the only comic film which ever tried it was TMNT 2. The manner in which he was quickly disposed of as well as the buildup from the first film leads me to believe Norman will return

It may have been you that planted the notion in my head, but it's a good one that makes a lot of sense.  I hope Norman does come back.  It would make for a great surprise.

In most cases, the villains don't return in these films because we see the corpse.  For instance, in the Burton/Schumacher films we see the Joker, Penguin, Max Shreck and Two-Face die onscreen and the remains of their corpses.  Then again, with the Nolan franchise I always kept expecting Ra's Al Ghul and Two-Face to come back because there wasn't the sense of finality to their fates in 'Batman Begins' and 'TDK' that we got in the earlier Batman franchise.  I think Nolan was trying to hedge his bets. 

They know the backlash spider-man 3 got over the venom treatment, no way they'd repeat it. The venom film is slated for 2017, the year after spidey 3. Originally I thought they may have gone the flash thompson Venom route but he wasn't in the second film.

It's a shame they didn't bring Flash back.  I'd have liked to have seen more from Parker's high school including the likes of Liz Allen, and the rest of the snooty popular kids that used to torment Parker.  I always liked that element from the comic-books as clichéd as it might have been.

Then again, the upshot of Thompson not returning is that he won't be Venom.  I'd much rather Eddie Brock became Venom, although I suppose there is an interesting logic to Thompson becoming Venom too.  A popular high school athlete who ends up an alcoholic loser post-high school and seeks to take it out on the guy he used to bully.

As I wrote above, he'll have a maximum of one film pre-venom. I think that's fine. I mean a lot of people felt the Brock treatment in spider-man 3 would have been fine if they moved the church scene to the very end of the film and used the next one for Venom. Though it appears Venom will be heroic in his solo film as Carnage is in it so not sure if we'll get to see him take on spidey.

I was one of those people who thought that 'Spider-Man 3' should have ended with the church scene and a set-up for 'Spider-Man 4'.  If Raimi had done that I wonder if Sony would have still canned his ass from the franchise.  Of course there's no point dwelling on the past but it could have gone two ways.  A cliffhanger ending might have forced Sony's hand and compelled them to bring Raimi back for a fourth film.  However, if Sony can get rid of Raimi even after 'Spider-Man 3' became the biggest film of its year maybe they wouldn't have cared about frustrating cinema-viewers with an unresolved ending.  Look at 'Green Lantern'...that set up future instalments with 'Sinestro' that were not to be, and even the wonderful MCU has its own example, what with Dr Samuel Sterns turning into 'The Leader' in 'The Incredible Hulk'.  Sadly I doubt we'll ever see a resolution to that set-up since Tim Blake-Nelson is now appearing in 'The Fantastic Four' as a future Mole-Man. 

I like the idea of Venom becoming a conflicted villain/anti-hero rather than an out-and-out evil guy but I would prefer that he was set up as Spider-Man's nemesis first before we saw him spun-off into his own Venom franchise.  On that basis, maybe the filmmakers will bring back Flash Thompson because at least he has already been partly established, and it would make sense for him to be one of the six recruited into the 'Sinister Six', but unlike the others he gets a conscience and reforms whilst in jail.  I don't really see Thompson as that type of criminal however.  He's just a thuggish jock.  Not someone with a dark tormented side.

Harry is available, I don't think Electro will be part of it but you never know. Lizard is available although Connors redeemed himself. There were hints at doc ock and vulture. I'm not sure how they'll do such a film since the sinister six are not protagonists so how will they have a superhero film without a hero?

At least they'd be breaking some new ground, but since 'TASM2' has underperformed somewhat at the box-office, at least domestically, will anyone care to see a film exclusively featuring the villains?

Definitely agree although MJ was WAYYYY overused and wasted in the previous series, she passed her expiry date by the second film, the third was just overkill. With the rapid pace this films have moved I get that Webb is moving on from Gwen.

The earlier franchise repeated itself too often with MJ getting kidnapped and imperilled all the time.  Then again, I think that's why it was probably a good thing the series ended at three films.  It really does feel like a three-film arc that delivers on Parker's introduction at the very start that this is a 'story about a girl'.  It's also the 'Harry Osborne' saga, an arc that is established and completed within the trilogy.  So in essence, the 'Parker, MJ, Osborne love triangle' trilogy.

As for the new franchise, I like Gwen.  She was well-written and performed and I'm glad she wasn't in peril all the time but over the course of two films was helping Parker rather than needing to be rescued by Spider-Man.  In fact, the one time she did need to be saved, Spider-Man failed...

[riddler]

You make some great points riddler!  And I wish you'd been around earlier too so that Edd and my discussion could have been a three-way one. 

Interesting that while it is a regular thing in the comics for dead characters to come alive again, the only comic film which ever tried it was TMNT 2. The manner in which he was quickly disposed of as well as the buildup from the first film leads me to believe Norman will return

It may have been you that planted the notion in my head, but it's a good one that makes a lot of sense.  I hope Norman does come back.  It would make for a great surprise.

In most cases, the villains don't return in these films because we see the corpse.  For instance, in the Burton/Schumacher films we see the Joker, Penguin, Max Shreck and Two-Face die onscreen and the remains of their corpses.  Then again, with the Nolan franchise I always kept expecting Ra's Al Ghul and Two-Face to come back because there wasn't the sense of finality to their fates in 'Batman Begins' and 'TDK' that we got in the earlier Batman franchise.  I think Nolan was trying to hedge his bets. 

They know the backlash spider-man 3 got over the venom treatment, no way they'd repeat it. The venom film is slated for 2017, the year after spidey 3. Originally I thought they may have gone the flash thompson Venom route but he wasn't in the second film.

It's a shame they didn't bring Flash back.  I'd have liked to have seen more from Parker's high school including the likes of Liz Allen, and the rest of the snooty popular kids that used to torment Parker.  I always liked that element from the comic-books as clichéd as it might have been.

Then again, the upshot of Thompson not returning is that he won't be Venom.  I'd much rather Eddie Brock became Venom, although I suppose there is an interesting logic to Thompson becoming Venom too.  A popular high school athlete who ends up an alcoholic loser post-high school and seeks to take it out on the guy he used to bully.

As I wrote above, he'll have a maximum of one film pre-venom. I think that's fine. I mean a lot of people felt the Brock treatment in spider-man 3 would have been fine if they moved the church scene to the very end of the film and used the next one for Venom. Though it appears Venom will be heroic in his solo film as Carnage is in it so not sure if we'll get to see him take on spidey.

I was one of those people who thought that 'Spider-Man 3' should have ended with the church scene and a set-up for 'Spider-Man 4'.  If Raimi had done that I wonder if Sony would have still canned his ass from the franchise.  Of course there's no point dwelling on the past but it could have gone two ways.  A cliffhanger ending might have forced Sony's hand and compelled them to bring Raimi back for a fourth film.  However, if Sony can get rid of Raimi even after 'Spider-Man 3' became the biggest film of its year maybe they wouldn't have cared about frustrating cinema-viewers with an unresolved ending.  Look at 'Green Lantern'...that set up future instalments with 'Sinestro' that were not to be, and even the wonderful MCU has its own example, what with Dr Samuel Sterns turning into 'The Leader' in 'The Incredible Hulk'.  Sadly I doubt we'll ever see a resolution to that set-up since Tim Blake-Nelson is now appearing in 'The Fantastic Four' as a future Mole-Man. 

I like the idea of Venom becoming a conflicted villain/anti-hero rather than an out-and-out evil guy but I would prefer that he was set up as Spider-Man's nemesis first before we saw him spun-off into his own Venom franchise.  On that basis, maybe the filmmakers will bring back Flash Thompson because at least he has already been partly established, and it would make sense for him to be one of the six recruited into the 'Sinister Six', but unlike the others he gets a conscience and reforms whilst in jail.  I don't really see Thompson as that type of criminal however.  He's just a thuggish jock.  Not someone with a dark tormented side.

Harry is available, I don't think Electro will be part of it but you never know. Lizard is available although Connors redeemed himself. There were hints at doc ock and vulture. I'm not sure how they'll do such a film since the sinister six are not protagonists so how will they have a superhero film without a hero?

At least they'd be breaking some new ground, but since 'TASM2' has underperformed somewhat at the box-office, at least domestically, will anyone care to see a film exclusively featuring the villains?

Definitely agree although MJ was WAYYYY overused and wasted in the previous series, she passed her expiry date by the second film, the third was just overkill. With the rapid pace this films have moved I get that Webb is moving on from Gwen.

The earlier franchise repeated itself too often with MJ getting kidnapped and imperilled all the time.  Then again, I think that's why it was probably a good thing the series ended at three films.  It really does feel like a three-film arc that delivers on Parker's introduction at the very start that this is a 'story about a girl'.  It's also the 'Harry Osborne' saga, an arc that is established and completed within the trilogy.  So in essence, the 'Parker, MJ, Osborne love triangle' trilogy.

As for the new franchise, I like Gwen.  She was well-written and performed and I'm glad she wasn't in peril all the time but over the course of two films was helping Parker rather than needing to be rescued by Spider-Man.  In fact, the one time she did need to be saved, Spider-Man failed...

I guess Flash's character already went through the arc in the first film; he was a jerk at the beginning, He was a jerk at the beginning, then Peter humiliates him, he tries to be nice to Peter and Pete humiliates him then at the end they share a nice moment. So there may not have been a need for him in the second film.

Flash is not a villainous venom; he loses his legs in the army and is given the symbiote by the government.

Raimi and co left after negotiations broke down, if he was willing to be a 'company man' he would have returned. I'm nearly positive that if the Venom transformation scene was at the end of the film we'd have a spider-man 4. Even without Raimi, the fan anticipation for a Venom film would have been outstanding.


Venoms story arc would need to develop Eddie Brock while sumutaneously giving spidey the black suit, then have Venom as a villain followed by the Venom becoming a hero. The Venom film is supposed to have Carnage so the question is can the full arc be reached in two films? Or will the Carnage transformation happen at the end the say supider-man 3 should have done Venom?


Gwen went out on a high. She saved peter more times than he saved her.  That puts Dunst/MJ to shame.

[Edd Grayson]

I agree that Gwen went out on a high compared to MJ but I think I would've liked it better  if she was in one more movie. I really liked her character.

I don't really like the idea of the Sinister Six being tied to Oscorp which means they'll be more like Harry Osborn's henchmen than their own thing.

I would love it if Norman was still alive, I'll actually be disappointed if the few scenes in TASM 2 will be all we've got of him in the new franchise.

I hope we get the see the Daily Bugle and JJJ in the third film.

[johnnygobbs]

I agree that Gwen went out on a high compared to MJ but I think I would've liked it better  if she was in one more movie. I really liked her character.

I don't really like the idea of the Sinister Six being tied to Oscorp which means they'll be more like Harry Osborn's henchmen than their own thing.

I would love it if Norman was still alive, I'll actually be disappointed if the few scenes in TASM 2 will be all we've got of him in the new franchise.

I hope we get the see the Daily Bugle and JJJ in the third film.

I think the danger in using Gwen for a third film would be that she would end up in peril again and again like MJ did, although these films do need to find a way to make the girlfriend character interesting without always putting her in the heart of danger or turning her into her own action star.

I agree with you about the Sinister Six.  I hope each of them will have their own personality, background and reason for hating Spider-Man.

We see Parker answering a few emails from JJJ in 'TASM2' so it's very likely JJJ will appear in the next film.

[Edd Grayson]

I hope he will appear.


Do you think they'll introduce a new girlfriend in the next films, like Mary Jane Watson? If they do, I hope they make her more like the comics and less like Kirsten Dunst's version.

Some say Felicia will eventually become the Black Cat in this series. Like I said before, I'd like that, but I can't really picture Felicity Jones' character as Felicia Hardy. Maybe they'll make me change my mind about her.

Developing six villains is difficult though. I wonder how it will all turn out.


If they do Eddie Brock as well, the series will really feel like comics with so many characters involved.


Imagine having Spider-Man fight the Sinister Six while wearing the black suit that affects his personality. I'd like to see that on film.

[riddler]

Do you think they'll introduce a new girlfriend in the next films, like Mary Jane Watson? If they do, I hope they make her more like the comics and less like Kirsten Dunst's version.

MJ was cast and shot a few scenes for ASM2, they decided to cut her out to avoid excess characters. I think we can assume she'll be in the third film but hopefully not as a love interest. I want gwen to have a lasting effect on Peter as opposed to him jumping back in with a new girl. Emma Stone is contracted so expect her to be a presence similar to Dennis Leary and Martin Sheen

Imagine having Spider-Man fight the Sinister Six while wearing the black suit that affects his personality. I'd like to see that on film.

I'm hoping we get to see a proper symbiote spider-man. No goofy dance scenes, now that we have a less nerdy spider-man, show Garfield under the influence. The advantage is that they can have the hero act villainous and blame the suit. So if they want to set up a darker bitter JJJ, it could work better with a more bitter spidey. It could also develop a true hatred with Harry and Peter; have a dark Peter actually go out of his way to seek revenge on Harry.

I would love it if Norman was still alive, I'll actually be disappointed if the few scenes in TASM 2 will be all we've got of him in the new franchise.

One interesting comparison with the previous series; we all remember the backlash over Venom getting killed right after the 2007 film came out- a time we assumed the series would continue. Yet so far I haven't seen a backlash over the green goblin- possibly because harry is still alive but if Norman stays dead, it could be deemed an equally shabby treatment.

I think the danger in using Gwen for a third film would be that she would end up in peril again and again like MJ did, although these films do need to find a way to make the girlfriend character interesting without always putting her in the heart of danger or turning her into her own action star.

I kind of would have preferred another film with Gwen but I give it a pass on the basis that it was rather authentic with the comics; though it could have been just as easy to save Harry becoming the goblin for the next film and have the Rhino fight Spidey.

I hope we get the see the Daily Bugle and JJJ in the third film.

I think Webb confirmed we'll see JJJ and presumably the Bugle. Without Gwen there'll be scenes opened up for a new setting and it'll be a nice change from Oscorp.

I kind of feel like this series hinges on this next film especially being Webb (and possibly Garfields last); it's critical they get Venom right. Especially after his treatment the last series (which was fine the way it ended but would have sucked if it went on and we only got those 10 minutes). This is their chance to blow the Raimi films out of the water, it's still debatable about which series was better but if they do Venom justice I think that could clinch it for the new series. But there's also the potential in them messing up Venom and the Green Goblin and then the argument would be "at least Raimi gave us the Green Goblin"

[Edd Grayson]

For the record, I think Willem Dafoe's performance was good even though the suit certainlydidn't help the audience to take the Green Goblin seriously.

Alfred Molina was good as Doc Ock even if I didn't like the way he was portrayed. He should've been more of a villain, like he was in the comics.

I really hope they'll do the Symbiote Spider-Man justice too. They could make a great movie with Symbiote Spider-Man with setting up Venom at the end for another one.


What other villains would you like to see? I'd like to see the Scorpion, maybe.

[riddler]

For the record, I think Willem Dafoe's performance was good even though the suit certainlydidn't help the audience to take the Green Goblin seriously.

Alfred Molina was good as Doc Ock even if I didn't like the way he was portrayed. He should've been more of a villain, like he was in the comics.

I really hope they'll do the Symbiote Spider-Man justice too. They could make a great movie with Symbiote Spider-Man with setting up Venom at the end for another one.


What other villains would you like to see? I'd like to see the Scorpion, maybe.

if they take on the idea of a darker JJJ then definitely scorpion. I do like the idea of having different types of villains; so for instance they've done electro and green goblin, I'd rather they stay away from shocker and hobgoblin. I'd rather avoid sandman for the simple reason he was the only non arch-nemesis shown in the last series.


One drawback is that all the villains in the 5 movies other than Venom has been sympathetic to an extent;
Green Goblin- Norman Osborn corrupted by the goblin
Doc Ock- redeems himself and was a role moden
Sandman- the daughter aspect
Harry Osborn
the Lizard- Peter's mentor/Richards parter
Electro; good guy corrupted and unwillingly given powers

I kind of want to see an all out bad guy that we root for spdier-man to destroy. Perhaps Rhino will be such a baddie.


I agree with you on Doc Ock. They got him right for the most part but they made him too tragic and sympathetic. I'm not sure if Raimi had the third film planned out by that point but there was no reason to turn every villain into a good guy.

Dafoe was excellent in his role. Given the fact that he didn't design the costume he did the best he could. Definitely though his character was portrayed too cartoony. I'd have preferred a more organic costume with more purple on it; for instance more of a mask and suit than a full body shield. It's a shame too because Dafoe did most of his own stunts but you would never know that without being told. I don't think the duality was properly portrayed, Norman Osborn seemed too different from the green goblin.

[Edd Grayson]

Doc Ock definitely wasn't sympathetic in the comics and I liked him better there. Same with Sadman, he was just a bad guy. I understand why Raimi wanted to make them sympathetic but I'd like to see a Spider-Man  villain on film who is a really negative character. Rhino seems to be like that but he's not really a main villain like the Goblin or Doc Ock.

I liked the Green Goblin too but like you said he was portrayed too cartoony and I would have wanted the duality aspect dropped entirely.  Norman Osborn in the comics didn't have a good side and an evil "Goblin" that was controlling him, he was the villain himself. I'm sure Dafoe would've been even better with these issues out of the way. Same with Alfred Molina and Doc Ock.


I thought Electro was OK in TASM 2, though I didn't think Max Dillon was that interesting. The Lizard was fine as the first villain but it could've been developed better, if they showed doctor Connors' family it would've been good.