the 'big deal' about don jon was basically just that it takes two hilariously pretty young actors and has them do something other than awkwardly meet and eventually live happily ever after
it deals with male emotional insecurity in a mostly-frank way, which is something hollywood almost never does
it's not some kind of amazing film but it was pretty interesting
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
Yeah, I like Bunraku, but it really needed a better heart, or...something. Maybe just one more set designer to improve things a little further. It just can't quite cross the threshold to become something truly lavish. It's weirdly cast, and pretty, and has some decent ideas, and maybe some brilliant ones too.
Bunraku is a lot like an art installation piece that the builders thought could be a fully working roller coaster at some point.
I watched Don Jon last night, it's on netflix now. I didn't think it was bad but could some one explain to me what all the fuss was about, as I recall people saying it was great?
It smashes the patriarchy.
How does it smash the patriarchy? It's a pretty good movie, and it's an admirable enough effort, but it's not terribly groundbreaking, and it doesn't really have anything new to say.
I think it's nice that a young actor with some clout chose that movie as a first project, but I also think there's a certain amount of fawning going on.
It's well done, and well acted, but beyond being a positive effort, there isn't that much there. Not that there needs to be.
I can't help but feel you missed the entire point of that movie.
I thought Josh Hartnett was going to be in that Sin City sequel / prequel whatever coming out.
I...think so. I'm not really all that inclined to show up for more Sin City, personally. But I'm sure he'll be paid well for it.
+1
Options
NocrenLt Futz, Back in ActionNorth CarolinaRegistered Userregular
Watching an old French version of Beauty and the Beast 1946. The castle wall scons are actual arms that hold the candlelabras (and point the way) and the carved faces in mantel are actual faces that turn and blink.
Wondering if Disney used this as inspiration.
Annnnnnd the Beast just showed up. Yep.
0
Options
FakefauxCóiste BodharDriving John McCain to meet some Iraqis who'd very much like to make his acquaintanceRegistered Userregular
Watching an old French version of Beauty and the Beast 1946. The castle wall scons are actual arms that hold the candlelabras (and point the way) and the carved faces in mantel are actual faces that turn and blink.
Wondering if Disney used this as inspiration.
Annnnnnd the Beast just showed up. Yep.
That movie is extremely influential, well beyond Disney.
Just saw The Railway Man. It's half great film, half shitty film. I really don't understand some of the choices the director and screenwriters made (I know it was adopted from Lowmax's autobiography,) especially with Nichole Kidman (not to her own fault.) She's given no personality besides "concerned" and a lot of it throws the movie off-balance. I'm a Stellan Skarsgård fan and his part is just meh, too. It's at its best when it's just focused on Firth and his counterpart, but that's not nearly enough of the film.
Also, did not enjoy the score at all. The ripped off The Thin Red Line in the trailer, but the chants aren't in the movie. Instead, it's like from a much older period of film-making where every scene has to have a piece, even if it doesn't quite fit and gives away everything about the scene.
Still go see it if you're into Colin Firth being all Colin Firth-y, but it doesn't blow you away like the trailer hints it could.
I watched Don Jon last night, it's on netflix now. I didn't think it was bad but could some one explain to me what all the fuss was about, as I recall people saying it was great?
It smashes the patriarchy.
How does it smash the patriarchy? It's a pretty good movie, and it's an admirable enough effort, but it's not terribly groundbreaking, and it doesn't really have anything new to say.
I think it's nice that a young actor with some clout chose that movie as a first project, but I also think there's a certain amount of fawning going on.
It's well done, and well acted, but beyond being a positive effort, there isn't that much there. Not that there needs to be.
I can't help but feel you missed the entire point of that movie.
I dunno, that's basically my feelings and I don't think I missed the point of the movie. There's not a ton of movies about the topic sure, but it's not exactly an eye opening concept. It's watching two pretty douchey people learn what sex/relationships are actually about. Well actually just one douchey person, because Scarlett Johannsen's character doesn't seem to learn anything. And it's like, great, you learned to be a normal person.
I mean yeah there's a decent amount of "subtle" (most of it beats you over the head honestly) stuff to drive the message home about both gender's warped views on the subject but I just think if you take away the message, the movie doesn't stand well on its own because the story/characters just aren't that interesting. Recast it with some less charismatic actors, and have it not be JGL's directorial debut and I don't think it would get the same praise it has.
I don't mean to rag on it, again I think it's a perfectly fine movie, it's just that minus the message there's not much there and when the message is something I thought most people already understand it just feels a bit pointless to me. I guess I just wasn't the target audience.
I mean tell me if I'm missing something, that's why I made my original post asking what the big deal was.
Ash of Yew on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
I watched half of Equilibrium again last night.
I like the action scenes.
But everything else is pretty much nonsense, stupid nonsense or godawful nonsense.
Lucky Number Slevin was on last night and it got me wondering, what happened to Josh Hartnett's career? He appears to have done very little since 30 Days of Night
He peaked with Slevin.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
But everything else is pretty much nonsense, stupid nonsense or godawful nonsense.
I don't mind most of it but there is this one scene where they find a hidden stash of paintings and what not including the original Mona Lisa and every time I watch it I end up shouting that they're dumb and this whole film is dumb and I can't watch it.
Equilibrium was like a dumb persons idea of a smart persons movie. The action is decent, but the overall story/plot is dumb as a bag of hammers.
An apt description, though I personally found the action scenes rather eh. Mostly in that I didn't give a shit about their result.
They are a little static/emotionless (which with the movie is kind of funny when you think about it). I do like the bit at the end its a little story of riki "The president has the best gunfu!", but its mostly a movie that sets up set pieces that are kind of devoid of any kind of lasting context.
Watch as the main character guns down literal waves of masked men!
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I watched Don Jon last night, it's on netflix now. I didn't think it was bad but could some one explain to me what all the fuss was about, as I recall people saying it was great?
It smashes the patriarchy.
How does it smash the patriarchy? It's a pretty good movie, and it's an admirable enough effort, but it's not terribly groundbreaking, and it doesn't really have anything new to say.
I think it's nice that a young actor with some clout chose that movie as a first project, but I also think there's a certain amount of fawning going on.
It's well done, and well acted, but beyond being a positive effort, there isn't that much there. Not that there needs to be.
I can't help but feel you missed the entire point of that movie.
I dunno, that's basically my feelings and I don't think I missed the point of the movie. There's not a ton of movies about the topic sure, but it's not exactly an eye opening concept. It's watching two pretty douchey people learn what sex/relationships are actually about. Well actually just one douchey person, because Scarlett Johannsen's character doesn't seem to learn anything. And it's like, great, you learned to be a normal person.
I mean yeah there's a decent amount of "subtle" (most of it beats you over the head honestly) stuff to drive the message home about both gender's warped views on the subject but I just think if you take away the message, the movie doesn't stand well on its own because the story/characters just aren't that interesting. Recast it with some less charismatic actors, and have it not be JGL's directorial debut and I don't think it would get the same praise it has.
I don't mean to rag on it, again I think it's a perfectly fine movie, it's just that minus the message there's not much there and when the message is something I thought most people already understand it just feels a bit pointless to me. I guess I just wasn't the target audience.
I mean tell me if I'm missing something, that's why I made my original post asking what the big deal was.
Pretty much, yeah. It's not at all a bad movie, it's just not that revolutionary, and it does get a bit of a goodwill boost because of the people involved. I'm going to put the next bit in a spoiler as it may shock some people:
If we say that's it's not the best thing ever, it doesn't mean that we hate it. There's, like, a fucking spectrum, Internet.
But I feel that if 'you're not getting it' and wild hyperbole are going to be the responses if the movie is questioned, then I'm fine with conceding that I'm a total plebe and should learn 2 movie, or something.
or you could say the movie plays with several ideas at once instead of saying that it definitely is or is not this one thing
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I enjoyed Man of Steel for what it was, instead of being annoyed at it not being a launching point for WB & DC to start a revolution in live action blockbuster hero movies.
It's just, there are certain things that make Superman who he is, and I'm not talking about his powers, but the movie seems to discard them for no other reason than to be edgy.
don jon does seem like its trying to satirize your stock hollywood romcom (I mean, the when jon and barbara go to see whatever that jokey rom-com movie is, the real joke is that actual hollywood would greenlight that film immediately), but it doesn't really pay that off by dealing with barbara's unrealistic expectations the way it deals with jon's.
which isn't really a problem per se because the movie is after all about him; also his insecurity is more interesting as a subject of a film and comparing porn addiction to have unrealistic expectations about relationships is probably unfair, but it still kinda feels like there was something there that they missed
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
also I think I've posted this before, but watching equilibrium and complaining that it's not much as a political drama is like watching west side story and complaining that it isn't an accurate portrayal of urban gangs
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
+2
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
It's not much as any kind of drama, political or otherwise.
Guess its "praise" back in 2000 was justified in 2000. The animation doesn't hold up to today's standard, and the plot is serviceable. But it seems like the movie is split between what type of audience it wants to capture: kids vs adults. The imagery is gory from time to time and partial visible nudity is obviously there to entice the audience. But some of the characters just do not give me that serious tone which the imagery is trying to show me. The male protagonist in the team of 3 is the stereotypical surfer dude with the IQ the size of a Higgs boson. He serves as the light element in this grim dark tale, but there is no sophistication to his jokes. It amounts to farting and being a "slave" to his stomach desires.
It did give me an inkling to dig up the old Gen 13 comics, but reading a bit on Wiki tells me that the relaunch of 52 axed the separate universe from the DC universe. The main protagonist (Catlin Fairchild) is now a supporting character in the Superboy series instead.
I've always thought that if DC wanted to go the "Universe" route, they could do a lot worse than the Stormwatch series from the now-defunct Wildstorm brand - specifically elaborating on the "different ideologies" for each team concurrently.
So you'd start off with a plain "Stomwatch" teamup and going into the "Change or Die" storyline, depicting Bendix going mad and suppressing the formation of other teams - causing the survivors to splinter into their various factions. You'd have:
Authority (those with powers have an obligation to proactively change the world for the better through any means necessary)
WildCATs 3.0 (those with powers have an obligation to use the fruits of those powers to better society through existing corporate and political systems)
Team Achilles (those with powers have an obligation to resist interfering with normal humans' right to self-determination)
Tao's Group (those with powers should use their powers to line their own pockets)
Gen13 (Lynch attempts to prevent a group of teenagers becoming pawns for the other groups)
Maybe even Sleeper as well (Holden goes undercover in Tao's group, but his handler gets shot so no-one knows he's a double agent to clear his name... and he finds out he's actually good at being a bad guy...). Apparently that was actually optioned a while back with Tom Cruise attached. Have Phase 1 run through the Coup d'Etat storyline (Authority decides X country is too corrupt and ousts the government, with various responses to the resultant civil war by the other teams), leading into Phase 2 which is the various teams responding to a global invasion from Sliding Albion.
Equilibrium was like a dumb persons idea of a smart persons movie. The action is decent, but the overall story/plot is dumb as a bag of hammers.
I wouldn't say it's dumb, just that they were a little to blunt about a point the movie was trying to make. Totalitarian states destroy culture and other civilizations to protect and establish themselves.
That and I never understood Brandt; he's an agent who is constantly expressing exaggerated human emotion and yet it's christian bale that is ousted as the man who's stopped taking the crazy pills.
I'm not even sure what to think of Amazing Spider-Man 2, except it being a misnomer.
Well for starters it commits the very sin Spider-Man 3 was lambasted for, have a villain show up and fought right at the end, which would have fit much better if he got his own movie and was basically sneak peaked here. But then they couldn't kill off Gwen Stacy in that iconic way and have the ending feel very jumbled. And then they introduce another villain - well he was the thug at the start but you know what I mean - in the form of Metal Gear Rhino, where Spider-Man gets over his understandable funk of Gwen dying and the movie ends with the fight scene starting. Again that's something that you could have put in a whole movie.
Peter is full of angst in this even before the end, seeing ghostly apparitions of George Stacy and worrying about that promise, which the movie then constructs to prove George correct with the above spoiler. And also with that very shoe-horned intrigue about his father. He finds Richard Parker's top secret lab and reveals the truth: Norman Osborne was in contact with a foreign military (which one is left unstated) to weaponise his research, and framed Richard so he looked like a traitor. And this was the important thing Richard was desperate to upload while the plane was crashing at the start, rather than, you know, evidence about Osborne's actions? Why couldn't he leave it uploading when he made the video? And the "twist" that the spliced spider's DNA contained Richard's doesn't really feel relevant, especially when it's eels that give Electro his powers. And after that revelation, it's forgotten as we have to move into the final part. It's really clumsy world building.
Why is Harry so desperate to get the cure for Soap Opera Disease immediately? Norman spent his life searching for a cure - along with finding the time to develop genetic research and cybernetics and weaponising them and so on - and he made it to 63. Harry seems to believe that as a 20 year old he has weeks to live, and the movie seems to reinforce this. The movie at least gets that he's clutching at straws, and that's why his hair brained scheme of just injecting Spider-Man's blood feels silly but he's too desperate to listen, and Peter fails to explain this or offer to have his blood screened and analysed so maybe they can reverse engineer what happened and deliver an effective treatment. Admittedly the slimy corporate guy's maneuvering would have scuppered this suggestion anyway to underline the tragedy in a better script, but this doesn't even occur to Peter, allowing to set up a weak rationalisation that Gwen's death is his fault, despite being more the victim of desperate happenstance and Gwen's conscious decision to help out, despite Peter's desperate pleas for her to stay away. Tangentially I was kinda hoping they'd spare Gwen and let her be Peter's Oracle, I thought she worked like that. I mean he doesn't always have to be with Mary Jane. Alas.
Where did Electro get that suit, with a styled lightning bolt and all? And I'll accept him converting his body into electricity and back, but the suit as well? Dude should be naked. Also Peter somehow senses something is wrong when Electro first appears in Times Square despite him being at least a mile away. I didn't think his Spider Sense was that strong. And depsite getting there at top speed, Gwen manages to turn up shortly after him?
And finally, to pluck from Cinema Sins, Discount Josef Mengele. You'll know who I'm talking about.
All in all, ehhhhhhhhh. The time before you hit fridge logic with this one seems unusually short, and especially in the same week in which I watched the Winter Soldier which was a much stronger presentation all round.
I'm not even sure what to think of Amazing Spider-Man 2, except it being a misnomer.
Well for starters it commits the very sin Spider-Man 3 was lambasted for, have a villain show up and fought right at the end, which would have fit much better if he got his own movie and was basically sneak peaked here. But then they couldn't kill off Gwen Stacy in that iconic way and have the ending feel very jumbled. And then they introduce another villain - well he was the thug at the start but you know what I mean - in the form of Metal Gear Rhino, where Spider-Man gets over his understandable funk of Gwen dying and the movie ends with the fight scene starting. Again that's something that you could have put in a whole movie.
Peter is full of angst in this even before the end, seeing ghostly apparitions of George Stacy and worrying about that promise, which the movie then constructs to prove George correct with the above spoiler. And also with that very shoe-horned intrigue about his father. He finds Richard Parker's top secret lab and reveals the truth: Norman Osborne was in contact with a foreign military (which one is left unstated) to weaponise his research, and framed Richard so he looked like a traitor. And this was the important thing Richard was desperate to upload while the plane was crashing at the start, rather than, you know, evidence about Osborne's actions? Why couldn't he leave it uploading when he made the video? And the "twist" that the spliced spider's DNA contained Richard's doesn't really feel relevant, especially when it's eels that give Electro his powers. And after that revelation, it's forgotten as we have to move into the final part. It's really clumsy world building.
Why is Harry so desperate to get the cure for Soap Opera Disease immediately? Norman spent his life searching for a cure - along with finding the time to develop genetic research and cybernetics and weaponising them and so on - and he made it to 63. Harry seems to believe that as a 20 year old he has weeks to live, and the movie seems to reinforce this. The movie at least gets that he's clutching at straws, and that's why his hair brained scheme of just injecting Spider-Man's blood feels silly but he's too desperate to listen, and Peter fails to explain this or offer to have his blood screened and analysed so maybe they can reverse engineer what happened and deliver an effective treatment. Admittedly the slimy corporate guy's maneuvering would have scuppered this suggestion anyway to underline the tragedy in a better script, but this doesn't even occur to Peter, allowing to set up a weak rationalisation that Gwen's death is his fault, despite being more the victim of desperate happenstance and Gwen's conscious decision to help out, despite Peter's desperate pleas for her to stay away. Tangentially I was kinda hoping they'd spare Gwen and let her be Peter's Oracle, I thought she worked like that. I mean he doesn't always have to be with Mary Jane. Alas.
Where did Electro get that suit, with a styled lightning bolt and all? And I'll accept him converting his body into electricity and back, but the suit as well? Dude should be naked. Also Peter somehow senses something is wrong when Electro first appears in Times Square despite him being at least a mile away. I didn't think his Spider Sense was that strong. And depsite getting there at top speed, Gwen manages to turn up shortly after him?
And finally, to pluck from Cinema Sins, Discount Josef Mengele. You'll know who I'm talking about.
All in all, ehhhhhhhhh. The time before you hit fridge logic with this one seems unusually short, and especially in the same week in which I watched the Winter Soldier which was a much stronger presentation all round.
I'll tell you one thing:
The film is set in present day, and Peter graduates at what 17/18? and was 5 years old when his parents got killed? I dunno about you but I was impressed that the plane at the beginning had a better cellular and wifi reception to upload a large video file that most connections 13 years later struggle to do in twice the timeframe
Posts
it deals with male emotional insecurity in a mostly-frank way, which is something hollywood almost never does
it's not some kind of amazing film but it was pretty interesting
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
The scene that sold me on the film.
It's still an odd film, but it's enjoyable.
Bunraku is a lot like an art installation piece that the builders thought could be a fully working roller coaster at some point.
Gremlins 2 isn't a stupid film. It's fairly smart. It's just ridiculous and silly and over the top.
I mean, really, this is the fire alarm:
(only audio I could find of it)
How can you not love that?
I can't help but feel you missed the entire point of that movie.
MWO: Adamski
I...think so. I'm not really all that inclined to show up for more Sin City, personally. But I'm sure he'll be paid well for it.
Wondering if Disney used this as inspiration.
Annnnnnd the Beast just showed up. Yep.
That movie is extremely influential, well beyond Disney.
Also, did not enjoy the score at all. The ripped off The Thin Red Line in the trailer, but the chants aren't in the movie. Instead, it's like from a much older period of film-making where every scene has to have a piece, even if it doesn't quite fit and gives away everything about the scene.
Still go see it if you're into Colin Firth being all Colin Firth-y, but it doesn't blow you away like the trailer hints it could.
I dunno, that's basically my feelings and I don't think I missed the point of the movie. There's not a ton of movies about the topic sure, but it's not exactly an eye opening concept. It's watching two pretty douchey people learn what sex/relationships are actually about. Well actually just one douchey person, because Scarlett Johannsen's character doesn't seem to learn anything. And it's like, great, you learned to be a normal person.
I mean yeah there's a decent amount of "subtle" (most of it beats you over the head honestly) stuff to drive the message home about both gender's warped views on the subject but I just think if you take away the message, the movie doesn't stand well on its own because the story/characters just aren't that interesting. Recast it with some less charismatic actors, and have it not be JGL's directorial debut and I don't think it would get the same praise it has.
I don't mean to rag on it, again I think it's a perfectly fine movie, it's just that minus the message there's not much there and when the message is something I thought most people already understand it just feels a bit pointless to me. I guess I just wasn't the target audience.
I mean tell me if I'm missing something, that's why I made my original post asking what the big deal was.
I like the action scenes.
But everything else is pretty much nonsense, stupid nonsense or godawful nonsense.
He peaked with Slevin.
pleasepaypreacher.net
pleasepaypreacher.net
I don't mind most of it but there is this one scene where they find a hidden stash of paintings and what not including the original Mona Lisa and every time I watch it I end up shouting that they're dumb and this whole film is dumb and I can't watch it.
pleasepaypreacher.net
An apt description, though I personally found the action scenes rather eh. Mostly in that I didn't give a shit about their result.
They are a little static/emotionless (which with the movie is kind of funny when you think about it). I do like the bit at the end its a little story of riki "The president has the best gunfu!", but its mostly a movie that sets up set pieces that are kind of devoid of any kind of lasting context.
Watch as the main character guns down literal waves of masked men!
pleasepaypreacher.net
Pretty much, yeah. It's not at all a bad movie, it's just not that revolutionary, and it does get a bit of a goodwill boost because of the people involved. I'm going to put the next bit in a spoiler as it may shock some people:
But I feel that if 'you're not getting it' and wild hyperbole are going to be the responses if the movie is questioned, then I'm fine with conceding that I'm a total plebe and should learn 2 movie, or something.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Only about halfway through but for some reason this movie just keeps making me so angry...
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
MWO: Adamski
I guess the gunjedi are the only reason they maintained power
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
which isn't really a problem per se because the movie is after all about him; also his insecurity is more interesting as a subject of a film and comparing porn addiction to have unrealistic expectations about relationships is probably unfair, but it still kinda feels like there was something there that they missed
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Guess its "praise" back in 2000 was justified in 2000. The animation doesn't hold up to today's standard, and the plot is serviceable. But it seems like the movie is split between what type of audience it wants to capture: kids vs adults. The imagery is gory from time to time and partial visible nudity is obviously there to entice the audience. But some of the characters just do not give me that serious tone which the imagery is trying to show me. The male protagonist in the team of 3 is the stereotypical surfer dude with the IQ the size of a Higgs boson. He serves as the light element in this grim dark tale, but there is no sophistication to his jokes. It amounts to farting and being a "slave" to his stomach desires.
It did give me an inkling to dig up the old Gen 13 comics, but reading a bit on Wiki tells me that the relaunch of 52 axed the separate universe from the DC universe. The main protagonist (Catlin Fairchild) is now a supporting character in the Superboy series instead.
So you'd start off with a plain "Stomwatch" teamup and going into the "Change or Die" storyline, depicting Bendix going mad and suppressing the formation of other teams - causing the survivors to splinter into their various factions. You'd have:
Authority (those with powers have an obligation to proactively change the world for the better through any means necessary)
WildCATs 3.0 (those with powers have an obligation to use the fruits of those powers to better society through existing corporate and political systems)
Team Achilles (those with powers have an obligation to resist interfering with normal humans' right to self-determination)
Tao's Group (those with powers should use their powers to line their own pockets)
Gen13 (Lynch attempts to prevent a group of teenagers becoming pawns for the other groups)
Maybe even Sleeper as well (Holden goes undercover in Tao's group, but his handler gets shot so no-one knows he's a double agent to clear his name... and he finds out he's actually good at being a bad guy...). Apparently that was actually optioned a while back with Tom Cruise attached. Have Phase 1 run through the Coup d'Etat storyline (Authority decides X country is too corrupt and ousts the government, with various responses to the resultant civil war by the other teams), leading into Phase 2 which is the various teams responding to a global invasion from Sliding Albion.
Wasn't Powers picked up for a TV show?
edit: wait, Powers is Bendis. And yeah, TV show.
I wouldn't say it's dumb, just that they were a little to blunt about a point the movie was trying to make. Totalitarian states destroy culture and other civilizations to protect and establish themselves.
That and I never understood Brandt; he's an agent who is constantly expressing exaggerated human emotion and yet it's christian bale that is ousted as the man who's stopped taking the crazy pills.
The final fight scene is still as fresh, innovative, intense and jaw dropping now as it was then.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
Layer Cake got Daniel Craig the role of James Bond, and is also an excellent movie.
I guess what I'm saying is, merit-wise, just go watch Layer Cake instead.
I'm not even sure what to think of Amazing Spider-Man 2, except it being a misnomer.
Peter is full of angst in this even before the end, seeing ghostly apparitions of George Stacy and worrying about that promise, which the movie then constructs to prove George correct with the above spoiler. And also with that very shoe-horned intrigue about his father. He finds Richard Parker's top secret lab and reveals the truth: Norman Osborne was in contact with a foreign military (which one is left unstated) to weaponise his research, and framed Richard so he looked like a traitor. And this was the important thing Richard was desperate to upload while the plane was crashing at the start, rather than, you know, evidence about Osborne's actions? Why couldn't he leave it uploading when he made the video? And the "twist" that the spliced spider's DNA contained Richard's doesn't really feel relevant, especially when it's eels that give Electro his powers. And after that revelation, it's forgotten as we have to move into the final part. It's really clumsy world building.
Why is Harry so desperate to get the cure for Soap Opera Disease immediately? Norman spent his life searching for a cure - along with finding the time to develop genetic research and cybernetics and weaponising them and so on - and he made it to 63. Harry seems to believe that as a 20 year old he has weeks to live, and the movie seems to reinforce this. The movie at least gets that he's clutching at straws, and that's why his hair brained scheme of just injecting Spider-Man's blood feels silly but he's too desperate to listen, and Peter fails to explain this or offer to have his blood screened and analysed so maybe they can reverse engineer what happened and deliver an effective treatment. Admittedly the slimy corporate guy's maneuvering would have scuppered this suggestion anyway to underline the tragedy in a better script, but this doesn't even occur to Peter, allowing to set up a weak rationalisation that Gwen's death is his fault, despite being more the victim of desperate happenstance and Gwen's conscious decision to help out, despite Peter's desperate pleas for her to stay away. Tangentially I was kinda hoping they'd spare Gwen and let her be Peter's Oracle, I thought she worked like that. I mean he doesn't always have to be with Mary Jane. Alas.
Where did Electro get that suit, with a styled lightning bolt and all? And I'll accept him converting his body into electricity and back, but the suit as well? Dude should be naked. Also Peter somehow senses something is wrong when Electro first appears in Times Square despite him being at least a mile away. I didn't think his Spider Sense was that strong. And depsite getting there at top speed, Gwen manages to turn up shortly after him?
And finally, to pluck from Cinema Sins, Discount Josef Mengele. You'll know who I'm talking about.
All in all, ehhhhhhhhh. The time before you hit fridge logic with this one seems unusually short, and especially in the same week in which I watched the Winter Soldier which was a much stronger presentation all round.
I'll tell you one thing: