SPIDEY 4 becomes AMAZING becomes Marvel's SPIDER-MAN

[eddievalient]

Just got back from seeing it. I went in fully expecting to be underwhelmed, but surprisingly enough, I wasn't. It's not "Amazing", but it is a good deal better than its predecessor. The entire movie almost seemed like an apology for the last one, as if everyone involved realized they'd made a dud and were trying to correct their mistake. While far from perfect, I think this particular iteration of the franchise is about as close to being fixed as it's ever going to get. Where the first film took itself way too seriously, this one is a lot more over the top and overtly comic-bookish and for this series, I think that approach works much better. The fact that it was mostly setup for future films didn't bother me so much because Sony's trying to start their own Spider-Man movie 'verse to compete with Disney's Avengers 'verse so, whether they did it now or later, an exposition-fest like this was inevitable. Now that they've seemingly got most of the setup out of the way, though, I'll expect more from the next one.

[Randall]

Hmmmm... That's about the most positive thing I've heard about it so far. Nice to hear that someone kinda liked it.

[Ben]

Well, like I said...this is excellent franchise blockbuster product moviemaking. It's a perfect McDonald's burger of a movie. Wait for the Blu-ray (where low expectation mediocrity is usually enjoyed more and people routinely ensue up liking pretty bad movies!) but skip the 3D...it's a post conversion jobbie.

[Dacey]

Hmmmm... That's about the most positive thing I've heard about it so far. Nice to hear that someone kinda liked it.

Sadly, that's what most people are doing. "Kinda liking it." No one is walking out of the theater going THAT ROCKED the way they do with a real Marvel movie (or also, in my case at least, with last year's Man of Steel, with my screening on opening day getting a lively round of applause at the end).

One thing I'm not doing before I go is revisiting the original trilogy before I see the new one. All of them (yes, Spider-Man 3 included) would just remind of how inferior these Webb films ultimately are.

[Dan]

An intriguing opinion piece about the trouble Sony is starting to face: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3837&p=.htm

[Vernadyn]

Exposition and set-up are inevitable if you're trying to create a movie universe. I just felt the movie wasn't fulfilling in its own right. Nearly every Marvel Studios film, while clearly sowing seeds for future installments, felt like a satisfying stand-alone movie. The set-up for future stuff took a backseat to the main conflict, while in ASM 2, the set-up was the meat. Iron Man 2 was the one Marvel Studios movie that I felt concentrated too much on setting up future films at the expense of its own status as a separate entity, and it's also my least favorite of the Marvel Studios films.

As a side note, I'm not too miffed that Marvel Studios doesn't have the rights to Spider-Man or X-Men movies. They can only make so many films a year, so it's good that they can concentrate on their current stable, and even take a few risks (Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man) while the other studios can focus on the safer, more established characters. I just wish that the studio executives and creative team behind the ASM movies were, well, better at what they did.

About ASM 2's box-office: Who would have thought that a Captain America movie opening within a month of a Spider-Man movie would make more money in its first weekend? Looks like quality won out this time.

[EricJ]

An intriguing opinion piece about the trouble Sony is starting to face: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3837&p=.htm

What "Franchise fatigue"? The only reason we're getting this is because Sony DOESN'T have a franchise of their own.

About ASM 2's box-office: Who would have thought that a Captain America movie opening within a month of a Spider-Man movie would make more money in its first weekend? Looks like quality won out this time.

(And anybody who doesn't read the label and thinks ASM2 is a Disney/Marvel movie deserves to go see it.)

[Ben]

Men In Black. That's a Sony franchise. 4 is coming, though I thought franchise fatigue set it there after the first movie!

[gaastra]

And men in black is based on the malibu comic, and malibu is owned by----marvel! (Men in black was even in the avengers forever comic!)

Good news- spidey 2 made the same as the first! For a sequal thats good news. (you don't want to make less.)

Bad news-This is the highest budgeted comic book movie ever made and they spent more cost on advertasing then what it cost to make the movie!

In other words sony just wasted alot of money and they need to lower the price down for 3.

[gaastra]

Edit-looks like it made over the first amazing spider-man film some. If they didn't spend so much on it and had the same budget as the first this would be a hit! Still they came make a better sequal now.

[Dan]

There is word wondering if the domestic gross for ASM2 would end up matching the film's budget. While the overseas gross will certainly push it over, that the domestic box office might not make back the film's budget should be cause for concern.

[Buzz Bumble]

Men In Black. That's a Sony franchise. 4 is coming, though I thought franchise fatigue set it there after the first movie!

The Smurfs is Sony ... but "fatigue" set in for that franchise before the first silly movie was even released thanks to being stupidly live-action / CGI mixed. If they had released it as originally planned (GCI animated only) and on time (the 50th anniversary), then it would have been a MUCH better movie.

[Ben]

Well that movie is on the way, Buzz!

ASM2 is not exactly "in trouble" domestically, but a big opening will tail off and it will end up resting on the international take to save it from being a near-miss. Certainly they'll be rethinking how much they can spend on a "sure thing", since a bad movie will have an effect on the next one if they realize audiences are finally waking up and noticing that they're just being given the same movie over and over...!

[Ben]

Interesting fact: the original full title was "The Amazing Spider-Man 2: The Rise Of Electro".

Although it would have further differentiated from the Raimi "2" (like adding Amazing isn't enough!), I'm glad they cut that subtitle from the eventual release materials...it sounds more than lame and the word "rise" in titles always makes me think of fan-fiction for some reason (it seems to be a fan-favorite to use in spin-off titles, for some reason).

[Randall]

I'd always hoped the sequels would follow the comic spin-offs, with Spectacular Spider-Man for part 2, and ending the trilogy with Web Of Spider-Man. It would even be alphabetical, and not mess up our collections!