Bookmark
 
 
 
 
Sports Terminal
 

Spider-Man 2 (2014; Rated Rated PG-13)

Spider-Man 2
B+
 

“Too long and overstuffed, but the visuals pop and the cast is superb.”

-Richard Roeper

Spider-Man 2 Review

Spider-Man 2

(2014; PG-13)

In theaters:
Friday, 2 May 2014

Genre:
Action, Adventure, Fantasy

Director:
Marc Webb

Cast:
Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx

COMMENTS(30)
 
Post a Comment
 

Dan said on Monday, September 08, 2014 4:34:54 AM
Great review i really liked this movie despite all its flaws that a lot of people including you have pointed out.

Evan said on Thursday, June 05, 2014 12:21:42 AM
As someone who collects the comics, I have to admit this was my favorite Spider-Man movie so far. While Raimi brought the campy fun in his series, the cheesiness in his movies was unbelievable and Kirstin Dunst's Mary Jane who runs around screaming most of the time cannot hold a candle to Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy who is not your stereotypical damsel in distress but instead a smart woman with a strong personality who actually makes Spider-Man/Peter Parker a more dynamic character. I think Marc Webb has done a terrific job and his films are something I find more emotionally satisfying. And I'm glad they didn't just sweep Peter's parents under the rug as if they didn't exist. It did get a bit convoluted but overall, I thought it was a well-done film. Although a striking weakness was character underdevelopment for the villains especially Electro. They really shortchanged Electro's character.

Vincent said on Monday, May 26, 2014 2:02:52 AM
Mr. Roeper, thank you for your review. While I am in the most likely small-pool of viewers who thought this was the best Spider-man movie of any, I was not bothered by the negatives you pointed out. Mostly because you stated the flaws but did not continue to drive at them unnecessarily like many other reviewers. I know this is not a perfect movie, however, everything about it, to me, says 'this is what a spiderman movie should be' as opposed to the beloved Raimi films (specifically Spider-Man 2). For all I know this could be just my view but I feel like this movie is being crushed by so many critics and for that reason I am glad to see you offered your criticism which was arguable and logical without nitpicking.

Robert William Lysiak said on Saturday, May 24, 2014 2:14:24 AM
Way cool I love it! Watching Spider-Man troll super villains makes him so baller swaged!
Great cast, good story telling to make Peter Parker's life just as cool as Spider-Man's, this is a fresh reinterpretation, in the third one Toby McGuire should play venom ha!

Renee said on Thursday, May 15, 2014 8:10:22 AM
A team up of villains isn't too hard to focus on, a fair amount of time was spent on their conflicts and fights, why is everyone's attention spans freaking out over this movie? A delightful cameo of Rhino at the end, and everyone is angry? This movie, IMO had it all. Better chemistry, better pacing, superb acting, a better balance of action, drama, suspense and humor. The beginning established the huge and immense surroundings of New York City from the ground up and the triumph of Spiderman's return in the end. The middle? Fantastic, intense, and fun. I enjoyed the entire ride, and while many will agree to disagree, I thought I was watching the comic book itself. That feeling you get when you can see the action leap off the pages? Exactly how I felt watching The Amazing Spiderman 2. Everyone was there for a reason. No loose ends, no glaring plotholes. Yet people are choosing to see the negative as always. No film is perfect, but damn. Break away from the expected once in a while (films that usually have just one villain and one boring, predictable plot, ahem, MOST superhero movies) and let your mind connect the dots. Harry and Peter are friends. You really dont need the director to hold your hand on that one. Foxx portraying a man of severe mental delusions and lonliness hit me on a gut level. Anyway, The Amazing Spiderman 2 is a captivating film that gave us the Spiderman we deserve. A+. "Clever things make people feel stupid, and unexpected things make people feel scared!" - Fry, episode: "When Aliens Attack", Futurama.

Jared said on Monday, May 12, 2014 9:12:13 AM
To Mark: Comic book nerd here, Spider-man's webbing dissolves after approximately an hour.

James said on Friday, May 09, 2014 1:48:08 PM
This movie was hard to watch. I'm really surprised by any positive reviews -- and I LOVE superhero movies. And I love the Spider-man character. But I looked at my watch about 5 times wondering how much longer I had to sit there ... hoping the director and writer were going to turn it around and surprise me in the 2nd and 3rd acts. Garfield and Emma Stone were good in their roles (Stone is really quite charming). But the material and story line were really weak. Jami Foxx is an outstanding actor, but I felt embarrassed for him, especially as he set up and over-played the nerdy wimp Max Dillon character. PAINFUL to watch IMO. Dane DeHaan was more frightening as Harry Osborn than as the Green Goblin -- which looked ridiculous. And as another reviewer pointed out, there was NO chemistry between Peter and Harry. That relationship had not been established -- so it was not believable at all. Simply put there to move the plot along.

And finally, I'm not familiar with the Sinister Six story line (which actually sounds interesting), but the film makers failed in establishing that sub-plot enough for me to care. To me, it looked more like desperation: They reached a point where they realized they hadn't given the franchise enough of a foundation with the missing / dead Parker parents, so they bring in the Sinister Six idea at the last minute.

Audiences demand more than outlandish special effects -- which EVERY movie has. So, in my view, film makers need to take character and plot development more seriously. For what it is worth, my grade of this film is C-.

rodger dodger said on Monday, May 05, 2014 3:47:45 PM
Wow. I think I might have lost what respect I might have had for you Mr. Roeper after hearing your review on what seems like an endorsement of Amazing Spider-man 2. I'm sorry, but I cannot give a film a B+ because of great visual effects. Every Hollywood scum piece these days have great visual effects, including Pompeii and Need for Speed. And to assume that Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone make a better pairing than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst almost seems blasphemous. I'll come halfway and agree that even though they play different characters, Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy is more likable than was Dunst's Mary Jane. However, Andrew Garfield cannot hold a candle to Tobey Maguire. Garfield stands out as this Twilight-esque pretty boy superhero, which if that is your cup of tea, might be fine if he was not playing Peter Parker/ Spider-Man. Stan Lee himself commentated that Spider-Man is the every teenage boy out there who has problems like the rest of us: He has trouble talking to girls, problems paying his rent, and so on. Nothing what the filmmakers have put on screen for this reboot movie series have shown that they understand this essence of the character. That being said, those mere two bright spots of the film (Emma Stone and VFX) are too bogged down by the horrendous acting and writing that permeate the majority of this film. I for one despise a film that tries to dumb-down itself for mass consumption. And ASM2 does a lot of dumbing down. I honestly don't see how smart people can watch this film and not have their intelligence insulted in one way or another. Scenes with Spider-Man vs Electro, Rhino are uncomfortable to watch because of this, and I am not even referring to the waste of good acting talent on this hollow characters. If anything ASM2 should be applauded for, is that hopefully it will bring an end this film studio purgatory in which the famous web-slinger has been ensnared. This is the 'Batman Forever' of the Spidey franchise so far, and given how the caped crusader films went, they are one "Batman & Robin" away from having to bury this franchise for a decade.

Reply from Richard Roeper
Well, you only 'might" have had respect for me going in, so I guess we were about to part ways forever anyway!

I'm not sure why some folks seem compelled to say they've 'lost respect' for a reviewer when they disagree with him. It's such an insanely superficial and knee-jerk reaction. I've lost all respect for commenters that say that! JK

RR

norman said on Monday, May 05, 2014 7:34:28 AM
Mr. Roeper, Robert Ebert by far was my favorite critic, God rest his soul. His endorsement of you, as a partner upon the loss of Gene Siskel speaks volumes. Please never give in to negative comments and take solace that you are one of the best.

norman said on Monday, May 05, 2014 6:29:33 AM
Mr. Roeper, Robert Ebert by far was my favorite critic, God rest his soul. His endorsement of you, as a partner upon the loss of Gene Siskel speaks volumes. Please never give in to negative comments and take solace that you are one of the best.

 
Comments: 1 - 10 of 30

1 2 3 |
   Page: 1 of 3
 
POST A COMMENT
 
 
  indicates required field
Name:  
Email:  
Website:  
YouTube
Response URL:
   ?
     
Comment:  
     
Enter text as shown:  
     


NOTE: Your comment will be approved before it is posted.
 
 
 
Nuts on Clark
 
Related Links
Chicago Sun-Times   |   Rotten Tomatoes   |   Hulu   |   Hollywood.com   |   IMDB.com   |   Filmmaking.net   |   TV.com   |   Filmspotting   |   perezhilton   |   ReelzChannel
©2014 Richard Roeper. All Right Reserved | Web site design and development by Americaneagle.com
Questions and Comments   |   Site Map   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Use   |   RSS