Spider-Man 2 (2004) User Reviews

Classic Spins: Re-living Spider-Man 2 in 2023

[pawanpunjabithewriter · 8/10 · 19 July 2023]

I recently delved into a spree of superhero movies, but amidst the modern glitz, I felt it was time to revisit a true classic - Spider-Man 2. The movie presents a timeless story with solid tent poles and a strong focus on character development.

Upon rewatching, I found myself enthralled once again, appreciating its ability to be repeatedly enjoyed. The visuals, though impressive in their time, might not stand up as strongly in the year 2023. Nonetheless, they still manage to convey the essence of the narrative effectively.

While the antagonist could have been portrayed with greater strength, the character's development and writing were commendable, adding depth to the plot. However, it is the protagonist, Peter Parker, who steals the show with his compelling performance, leaving a lasting impression on the audience.

In conclusion, Spider-Man 2 remains an awesome classic that stands the test of time. Despite minor visual limitations, the film's engaging story and well-crafted characters ensure you won't be bored, making it a worthy watch for both fans of the superhero genre and newcomers alike.

Takes every element from the first film and improves on it!

[MinorityReporter · 8/10 · 27 April 2005]

It only happens very rarely that a sequel surpasses the original (Terminator 2, Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back) and after the relative disappointment that was the original my expectations for the second film in the series had decreased. When I finally did sit down in the cinema to see this film I was a bit anxious. But my anxiety was quickly put to rest because Spider-Man 2 took the premises from the first film and improved upon them all. The first Spider-Man film a well meaning picture but quite as good as it could have been the second film is a good film for both hardcore fans like myself and the broader audience.

First off, the acting in the second film has improved tremendously. Tobey Maguire feels more right in the second film. I found him quite shallow in the first film but in the second one he seems to have developed more depth. More nuances have found their way into his acting in the second film making the character more believable and less of a square. Kirsten Dunst is never a good actress but I found her a little less annoying in this film than in the first and therefore I felt I could tolerate her presence. James Franco is decent but still has a problem with portraying nuances which basically means that in order for his performance to work he has exaggerate every emotion his character feels. As it is with most superhero movies the villain is the most interesting character and Sam Raimi couldn't have picked a better actor than Alfred Molina to play Otto Octavius aka Doc Ock. I'm a big fan of Willem Dafoe but I didn't like his performance in the first Spider-Man film very much and therefore I was delighted when Alfred Molina turned out to be a far better villain than Willem was. His performance was both menacing and nuanced and even though the character isn't always directly in control of his actions (making him somewhat misinterpreted) Molina's performance makes the character highly credible and undoubtedly the most interesting character in the film.

The effects have improved which is logical considering that it has been 2 years since the first film hit the cinemas. Also I found that Doc Ock was much better suited for flashy moves and cool fights than Green Goblin ever was so in that aspect the film is far superior to the first film as well. Especially the train fight will, I think, go into history as one of the best hero/villain showdowns in history if not the best. The computer effects have become slightly more subtle making the film seem more polished. There were still a few unfortunate scenes were the CGI was pretty obvious but overall the effects have improved dramatically and received a well earned Oscar.

The musical score continues in the same epic fashion from the first and Danny Elfman does an exceptional job as usual. The score is both thrilling and epic but it is also subtle when it has to be and that aspect of the score works wonderfully as well. Elfman has some experience in super hero scoring (having done both Batman and Hulk aside from Spider-Man) and it shows as the score is very appropriate and fitting. Two thumbs up on the music.

In terms of story telling the second film is also far better than the first. I found the first film to be very unoriginal in terms of its story. Anyone who has just an ounce of knowledge into the myth of Spider-Man knows the story beforehand and thus the film becomes very predictable and boring quite frankly. The second film did not have this problem. It was a breath of fresh air. The story seems to flow more from the heart this time around. Raimi proved in the first film that he could take a situation from the comics and translate it reasonably to the screen. In the second film he proves that he can make a highly original story as well and make it entertaining. It should also be added that Spider-Man 2 has a lot more of the humor like the kind that appears in the comics. J.K. Simmons who was one of the elements in the first film returns in his role and he is absolutely hilarious. He truly embodies the spirit of J. Jonah Jameson. There is also a very funny elevator scene which should be mentioned.

Some people complained that Raimi has turned mainstream with the Spider-Man films. That is a load of rubbish and Raimi proves it by adding some elements from his cult films, the Evil Dead series. He even lets Bruce Campbell tell Spider-Man off as if to symbolize that he hasn't forgotten where he came from.

All in all Spider-Man 2 surpasses the first film in the franchise in almost every way imaginable Spider-Man 2 is twice as engaging, entertaining and heartfelt than the first film in the series.

9/10

This movie has a criminally low rating

[ditkovich_rent · 10/10 · 4 January 2019]

7.3/10? Seriously? Most mediocre MCU films get a better rating than that. This movie is up there with The Dark Knight as one of the best superhero movies. This movie was loved when it came out, now it's cool to hate on the trilogy. Spider-Man 2 improved on all aspects of Spider-Man 1. Peter is struggling to be Spider-Man, and the movie illustrates that very well. The action is better than lots of movies today, most notably the train fight scene. Danny Elfman provides an unforgettable soundtrack. This movie and the trilogy shouldn't be overlooked as some cheesy 2000s movies, because they paved the way for the MCU as we know it today.

Just rewatching in 2020

[koyushun · 10/10 · 14 April 2020]

I was a kid when I watched this in cinema back in 2004 I just want to say after all these years after a few version of Spider-Mans and all the MCU movie. This one is hands down the best Superhero movie. It has everything done within 2 hours. Perfectly caught up what it left of from the previous Spider-Man and Toby Maguire will always be my Spider-Man.

Another excellent superhero movie

[0U · 24 February 2020]

This is a movie that surpasses the original one on many different levels! It has a better villain, a better story and, most of all, a better message. The movie is about Peter Parker who loses faith in what he does, so he loses his powers. Tobey Maguire is magnificent in this movie and he plays so well off of all the other actors in the movie. Alfred Molina is great as the villain and, as always, J.K. Simmons steal every single scene in which he is present. This is really one of the best superhero movies that has ever been made.

Boring, tedious and dark

[heatherrrrrr · 6/10 · 18 July 2004]

I have to admit, I'm not a huge comics fan. But I really liked the first Spider-Man movie. This one was just so boring! There were hardly any good action scenes, most of the movie was people standing around talking about the same things over and over. The back and forth "I love you, no I don't, yes I do." between Peter and Mary Jane is so excruciatingly boring after the first scene with them that I wanted to get up and leave. I really don't understand why so many people like this movie more than the first one. There were just so many things that made no sense about the characters and the plot. It was way too long, and had many unnecessary and completely puzzling scenes. It seemed like the director was trying to turn a comic book movie into some kind of artistic statement, and to me it just didn't work.

The first movie had a lot of funny lighthearted moments, this movie just didn't have the same kind of sense of humor, and I really missed that.

Kirsten Dunst and Tobey Maquire's faces are so emotionless in some scenes. Its like they're so tired of having to do the same scenes over and over again, just in different outfits and locations, that the lines have become meaningless to them. James Franco has such a small range as an actor, he's just awful in the scenes that are supposed to be emotionally intense. I think he would be better suited to acting in soap operas. And god help us, if there is another one, he'll be the bad guy. Because his father just conveniently hid all his Green Goblin stuff in a secret room that they never showed in the first movie.

Long and Boring

[ratt · 6/10 · 3 July 2004]

Uh I just saw spiderman 2 as a team outing. It's not that good.

I mean it's OK. But there are times where I thought I was watching a B rated horror movie (in terms of the style of cinematography and cheesy dialog, I was thinking Army Of Darkness, which the main character of that movie happened to play the usher). That aside, I think they were going for a comic book feel on that. So then, 80% of the movie is slow ass crap. Which is either the love story situation, or the whole 'those who have a gift must use it for good' melodrama. There were times were I was borderline about to just walk out and finish it later when it comes out on DVD.

Though it woulda been hilarious if when Harry, who was whining about his dad the entire movie, at one point when he see spiderman is Peter and goes "You killed my father! (for the 500th time)" instead of Peter going "there are bigger things going on than you and me..." but rather said "Dude, get over it already."

They also coulda delved a bit more into why Peter was losing his powers. I was guessing that it was related to being totally stressed out. But the powers mysteriously come back at peak stress. Oh wait, lemme guess it's because "he believed in himself." (yawn)

Spiderman 2 was dumbed down for kids. I don't think action movie goers care for the 2hr chick flick that this movie was, nor do kids. Love stories are always introduced for one primary purpose: it's inexpensive. Not that this movie was low budget, but if you chopped out 30 mins of the "filler", you would have had a better impact.

Ah well... All in all 6.5/10.

Go watch this movie right now

[gusgusedu · 10/10 · 2 November 2020]

This movie it's not just a good superhero movie, but a great film. The source material has been analyzed, and overall studied so It would make the fans happy, but a great superhero movie understands that this is not just for the fans, It's for the whole public, so the screenplay and the dialogue that sometimes sounds a little corny is very well writen. The CGI effects still looking good at this point, watching Spider-Man swinging around it's just amazing. Peter Parker's story arc it's perfect, for the people he interacts with he is just another nerdy guy who doesn't understands the meaning of puntcuality, but for us (the audience) he is the perfect protagonist. This movie is made by someone who understands the character and undertsands about cinema, and that man is Sam Raimi.

Spiderman? More like Superman half the time..

[Rob_Taylor · 6/10 · 9 July 2004]

As sequels go this one isn't bad. It's entertaining, the characters get more development, the CGI is more intense, the perceived "threat" is more deadly etc. etc.

But somehow , despite a reasonable first half, I felt let down by the second half. The warning signs were there all along, thinking about it, but I ignored them because, up until the half-way mark, the film was pretty good and I was enjoying it. But once the movie crossed into the nonsense-filled second half, all those "ignored sillinesses" of the first half flashed back to haunt me. As a result, the pleased expression on my face darkened into a scowl and the movie lost me by the three-quarter mark. I was just glad when it finished.

Spiderman, the CGI creation doesn't look any more real than he did the first time out to me. Additionally, it grated on my nerves that he was apparently able to defy the gravitational constant and swing around the city like he had a jet-pack strapped to his arse. It was like Van Helsing all over again.

And since when was Spiderman indestructible? Or able to stop buildings from falling? Maybe I missed those comics as a kid but I don't remember him having those kinds of powers. Agility, yes. Spiderlike wall-climbing ability, yes. Super strong webs, yes. Regeneration, yes. But not being immune to damage or able to resist tons of pressure.

Then there's my perennial favourite gripe - physics. If you put a comic-book character into a supposedly "real world" situation, then you better stick to physics at all times or your movie ends up looking dumb. My example here is dumping what amounted to a small star in the Hudson River. Not only do we not get the steam-flash explosion that would probably have been as devastating as the star going up itself, but we don't even get a hint of warm water. Not even a tiny hot-spring effect. Just the star and Doc Ock serenely sinking to the bottom of the river. Bah!

Other items which surprised me were the face pulling exploits of Tobey Maguire when he was stuck on the front of the train. Talk about ugly! I haven't seen a face that contorted since the decompression effects in Total Recall! And they say he can't act!

Speaking of faces. What's with Kirsten Dunst? Her face when acting out any kind of emotional scene (other than terror) was, as my partner put it, "a face like a half-p***ed cat!" Not pretty!

So, the movie loses it after the halfway mark. If you can put up with the nonsense then it's a pretty good film, livened up by Bruce Campbell and Ted Raimi cameos and some nice gags and one-liners. But don't expect anything but silliness from the second half.

Outstanding sequel.

[kirk-246 · 10/10 · 15 July 2009]

The first and third 'Spider-Man' movies were simply fantastic.But it gets even better with 'Spider-Man 2'. It's full of action, has plenty of adventure, and is full of award winning special effects.Like any other super hero sequel, there's always a new villain.The villains name in 'Spider-Man 2' is Dr. Octopus.AKA Doc Ock.He has 4 mechanical tentacles that can flip cars and throw people at great distances.Does he remind you of anything? Of course he does.What does he remind you of? An Octopus... Duh.It may sound kind of stupid, but Doc Ock's character actually helps the movie become a 2 hour roller-coaster ride of a movie.Just remember that Spider-Man can do whatever a spider can.

Huge Disappointment

[mpeterson-6 · 5/10 · 2 July 2004]

I honestly feel that I must have seen a different movie than the one critics and audiences are eating up by the spoonful. The flick I saw had horrible dialogue - lows including the Henry needs a hero speech, every time Harry Osbourne spoke to himself about his hatred for Spiderman, Molina's nonsensical fusion speech... the list goes on forever - also the action was largely uninspired and overly CG, the Villain's plot super lame(he's going to destroy the city because he is a incompetent scientist and can't get his experiment right?) and worst of all, the picture was plain boring.

I had high hopes for the film as I loved the first one and Raimi appeared to be shrewdly stealing the plot from Superman 2 (a great sequel), but in the end, the movie turned out flat and uninspired.

Spiderman, like Superman, should be the fun, light-hearted superhero movie where you jump out of your seat to cheer for the hero. Aside from the "Go get 'em, tiger" line at the end, I never once felt like cheering for our hero.

The best one out of the trilogy.

[drawlife · 10/10 · 28 September 2014]

Sequels are very tricky. They're very hard to crack open, but every so often we do get a sequel that is better than the original like Empire Strikes Back, The Godfather Part II, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Aliens, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, The Dark Knight, and others.

Spider-Man 2 is one of them. The common thing among mostly all sequels is that bigger is better, that's not always the case, and that's where director Sam Raimi comes in, he does the opposite. He makes it smaller, more personal, but with big impactful moments.

Here we see a damaged Peter Parker, still full of guilt with the death of Uncle Ben, he's getting fired all the time and late to school because he's busy protecting New York as Spider-Man. His relationship between Harry and Mary Jane are deteriorating as he keeps disappointing them. In the end, he gives up his duties as Spider-Man, only to return to action when Doctor Octopus is threatening the city.

This movie in many ways is a coming of age story for Peter Parker. With a moving romantic subplot, Peter learns to accept his responsibilities as Spider-Man in the long run, and puts that first above all his desires including Mary Jane, and he also finds closure by telling Aunt May the truth about what happened on the night of Uncle Ben's murder. Tobey Maguire brings much depth and complexity to Peter Parker. A very fine performance by him showcasing the right amount of emotion in every single scene.

Alfred Molina is excellent here as Dr. Otto Octavius, also known as Doctor Octopus, whom Peter deems as his idol in the beginning of the film. What makes him such as awesome and likable villain, is that film allows you to like him from the beginning, and to see his downfall to villainy, then to a redeemable hero at the end makes an engaging story. Give credit to Raimi and his writing team, as they provide Doc Ock much needed flare.

Kirsten Dunst here is pretty good as Mary Jane. Peter and Mary Jane also get a lot time bickering at each other here. It's a very complicated and complex romance as she wants Peter and Peter wants her, but he can't cause of his duties as a crime-fighter. James Franco is great playing the a-hole friend. As an audience member it's very sad to see their friendship deteriorate as Harry questions Peter's loyalty to him or to Spider-Man.

The action serves the story here, it seamlessly transitions to action set pieces while still serving the narrative. Not to mention they are awesome. All the fights between Spidey and Doc Ock are an adrenaline rush, particularly the subway train fight. But with that being said, if you took out all the action sequences in this movie, you still have a very intriguing and moving story to watch. That's how good this film is.

Raimi and his crew of filmmakers did a tremendous job with Spider-Man 2. There are real human moments in this film, one of them involves Spidey and a group of civilians in the train. A real nice, tender, and human scene. Rosemary Harris as Aunt May even has a substantial role in the film as Peter's moral compass and she also has an action sequence in the middle of the film. J.K. Simmons is even better as J. Jonah Jameson this time around and has the film's funniest moments.

Everything in this film clicks on all cylinders. The music by Danny Elfman is better than ever, and also provides the film with lots of tender scores. The visual effects are better, Spidey's web-swinging abilities are better, the romance is better, the action is better, the sound mixing and editing is better, the story, the acting, just everything. It's pretty much a perfect film.

I for one thought it deserved just a little bit more from the Academy Awards other than winning the well deserved special effects award.

10/10

Review 1: Spider-Man 2

[stewienator · 28 June 2007]

Spider-Man was almost the perfect comic book movie and perhaps released at the best time. When audiences get bored with what genres normally cook up (mostly horror) we the viewers always look for the next best thing. For a while, horror movies were all the fad, but these movies can become boring extremely fast and Hollywood must find something completely opposite from horror to try and keep our attention. So, what might be completely opposite from horror? Well first, lets make a list of what is opposite from horror. Happy is one, action is another; good guys always winning might be another. So, what might be a good opposite for horror is a comic book movie. Now, a lot of money comes from what Hollywood had to offer for comic book movies. Some are failures (Electra) and others are hits. For the most part, most of them are hits. Spider-Man 2 is one of them. We begin with Peter Parker continuing his job as Spider-Man, but all is not well. Peter's friend, Harry Osborn, hates Spider-Man and wants him dead. Because of Peter's relation with taking photographs of Spider-Man, Harry has problems with Peter that only continue to grow worse as the movie goes on. The main villain of this movie is Dr. Otto Octavius who later becomes Dr. Ock. In a freak accident, he is connected to his invention of arms that are suppose to help him with an even bigger invention. His wife is killed in the process and the arms attached to him seem to have complete control of what he does. Deeply grieved, Dr. Ock runs away and hides, but not for long. He comes to terms with what he has become and starts his life as super villain. As usual, it is up to Spider-Man to save the day, but something is not right. Spider-Man seems to be losing his powers and has no control of what is happening to him. It is true that this film is better than the first entry, but only by a little bit. It seems though, that scene were Peter saves the people a train was little over it when everyone on the train discovers he is Spider-Man. Overall: A-

-Ben Russell

My favourite film of all time

[J49afc · 10/10 · 10 December 2020]

Inspired by the recent news about Tobey's likely return to playing the web-slinger in the MCU's Spider-Man 3, I rewatched this film. An IMDb score of 7.3 for this film is one of the biggest injustices I've seen on this website. In my opinion this is THE definitive and THE best superhero film of all time.

This trilogy of films is my childhood. I've loved Spider-Man as long as I can remember and he has always been my favourite superhero. These films came out at just the right time when I was growing up so watching this films just brings it all back. And that's not to say my judgement of this film is blinded by nostalgia- this is genuinely an amazing film that holds up in the present day.

The story is an interesting one, with Peter grappling with the personal consequences of being Spider-Man and feeling the subsequent effects, all whilst he fights the best Spider-Man villain ever to be put on screen, Alfred Molina's brilliantly menacing Doc Ock. The sequence in which Spider-Man returns and fights Doc Ock on the train is for me, the best superhero fight scene of all time and my favourite cinematic sequence ever. You can feel every punch, every wince and every scream- something that unfortunately, today's comic book flicks are devoid of.

And it's not just all action and no heart- when it wants to tug on the heart strings it yanks them. The scene with Uncle Ben is so painful, raw and acted to perfection. It makes me tear up every time. There's also the usual Raimi campiness, with quips and funny moments giving the film a real charm about it. All of this is underlined by Danny Elfman's brilliant, bombastic and booming score that really does sound like the audio equivalent of a comic book.

This film is a 120 minute thrill ride with heart-stopping action and heart-wrenching drama. The best superhero film ever made and my favourite film of all time.

A Fan's Dream Come True

[RPruitt · 10/10 · 30 June 2004]

I went to the midnight show last night and was completely blown away !! I am 30 years old and had begun reading the Amazing Spider-Man back when I was 11 and leaving the theater last night, I felt like I was a kid again- I was amazed, I was in awe, I really felt... satisfied.

Every scene crackled. There was an energy, there was an effort put into every moment of the movie. No scene went on too long, no plot holes fell through. It was the comic, come alive.

Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire did a great job of making Peter Parker sympathetic, you feel for him, you wince with him, he is the boy, becoming a man, and you watch it, and you keep watching it.

Even as a long-time fan who knew where some of the story lines were going- with MJ, with Harry Osborne- to see HOW the movie chose to play out these stories, provided great surprises for me, I almost wished I didn't know... I can't wait to see the reactions of my friends who haven't followed the Spider-man comics, the twist of the story and the hints at what is to come...

A great movie. Great fun. Great story. Great action. A blockbuster movie. You leave the theater, definitely feeling like you got your money's worth !

When Peter Parker struggles with his life, suit changes.

[Mysterygeneration · 7/10 · 23 December 2021]

Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 outstrips its predecessor and has a perversity and quick-wittedness that hardly seem to belong in a comic-book movie. Tobey Maguire is a good choice for the title role, since his faraway look and sleepy voice seem rather more l'uomo vague than dynamic crimebuster. Alfred Molina makes for a much better supervillain than the first movie's Green Goblin. There is something weightless and flimsy in the spectacle of Spider-Man swinging between scrapers. The cinematographer, Bill Pope, finesse a crisply shot New York with comic-book overlay.

The Best Comic Book Movie. Ever!

[wwalter1959 · 10/10 · 1 November 2007]

This movie is by far one of the best movies of all time! The movie had pretty much everything you need for a prefect film: Script: 10/10! OUTSTANDING! Director Sam Raimi did an excellent job giving full attention to the Dilemma of Peter Parker. He balances all the action, comedy, and drama perfectly.

Acting: 10/10. Tobey Maguire was very good being a character that doubts himself and has to choose between wanting a normal life and wanting to live as a superhero. Kirsten Dunst is very good in her roll as Mary Jane Watson. James Franco is amazing as the bitter Harry Osborn who is seeking revenge on Spider-Man. And Alfred Molina as Doc Ock is fantastic. He was an excellent choice as one of my favorite characters from the comic.

Action Sequences: 10/10. This movie has some amazing action scenes with Doc Ock on the building. But the best effect in the film is the fight between Spidey and Doc Ock on the side of the train.

Comedy: 8/10. J.K. Simmons is amazing as J. Jonah Jameson and adds a lot to the film. Ted Raimi is also very funny. The Raindrops sequence in the movie had a lot of laughs when you see Peter Parker as the nerdiest kid in the world.

This movie has everything you could ever want out of a summer blockbuster. And as far as staying faithful to the comic book 10/10.

PERFECT!!! 10/10

Excitement and entertainment!

[veed_santos · 7/10 · 17 April 2010]

Now this is a super-hero movie, filled with crazy action scenes, great effects, funny moments and a little cheesiness. I can't explain why I like Spider-man movies so much, I even liked the 3rd movie which I admit it wasn't very good, but it was entertaining and it even managed to be very emotional for me.

Spider-man has always been my favorite super-hero. There's just something about a super-hero fighting crime, struggling to pay the bills and trying to find time to study. It certainly was a hero that revolutionized the basic concept of the rich hero which has a secret base filled with costumes, weapons, gimmicks, wheels, etc. That AND Spider-man's charisma appealed to me, he is a funny character, he wears a funny costume (not too ninja-like that's for sure) and he has awesome powers! He is not an indestructible mutant nor a green beast with infinite strength... or even a guy who bursts into flames or shoots laser-beams outta his ass! He IS a simple hero and has enough to be cool and interesting, spider powers! After all he is your friendly neighbourhood Spider-man! And by the way, the original Spider-man created a hardening, sticky liquid/glue or whatever it is called, making his own web, because in spite of his initial superhuman powers, Peter Parker was also brilliant teenager and used that great intellect to his advantage. That good analysis and perception of his also saved his ass numerous times (I confess I used to be an avid reader of the comics and follower of its never-ending story).

And this movie delivers all that, it shows how great of a super-hero spider-man really is, his crazy-ass awesome villains, his cheesy jokes, his athletic and jumpy fighting style, it's all awesome to be seen! And for action fans, be it chaotic scenes, be it car chases, sword fights or fisticuffs action, there are some scenes in this movie that will for sure please all of you. Starting from the Bank robbery all the way to the train stopping, it's candy for my eyes... Spider-man vs. Dr. Octupus, one of my favorite fights in Cinema history.

I waited patiently with restraint, and what do I get? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!

[jdkraus · 3/10 · 3 July 2004]

This movie is so slow moving. I have never seen a movie so slow. I can't believe this movie is on the top 250. That's ridiculous. This movie is o.k., but several things are against. Immediately, the length is against it. Another thing, the villain, he is so not evil! i honestly liked him, not hating him. I think he could have done more efort like Willem Dafoe did in the prequel. i also hated the darkness of spider-man, his friends against him, losing jobs, having his lover engaged, and his aunt in money crisis. What sucks the most is is that he is unmasked. The effects were great, a 10/10 for those, the action sequences were excellent, and the ridiculous humor was laughable. the cinematography bothered me of being so dark. As i said, the hero should be positive, not negative. Also, the additional was bad, and the dramaitc motion images of him changing his life. Otherwise, an o.k. film. The prequel was much better. "How's the bug," Osborne Jr.

Spider-sequel-tastic

[blacklist-1 · 10/10 · 29 September 2009]

My presumptions of a sequel to a successful original are that they are worn out and are a desperate attempt to cash in on it's predecessor. Look no further for conclusive evidence with the terrible Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to know what I'm talking about.

But every now and again a sequel comes along that just simply changes your perceptions and gives you faith in a continuing franchise where the sequel is just as or in the case of Spiderman 2 better than it's predecessor.

Toby Maquire, Kirsten Dunst and James Franco return with director Sam Raimi who has done a terrific job in making this for me one of the best sequels of all time.

One of the successes Spiderman 2 has is the depth of the characters and stories as there is more than one strand. Toby Maquire has the same natural ability which he possessed in the first film to accurately convey the character of Peter Parker who struggles with his feelings for Mary Jane who becomes frustrated that he can't return her feelings for him, to his fractured friendship with Harry Osborne who harbours a deep grudge against Spiderman to trying to balance his life as superhero, student and employee and struggling with his Aunt May over Uncle Ben's death to finally battling the new villain Oto Octavious played memorably by Alfred Molina and all these story strands thread there way through two hours of pure entertainment.

With the main story and these sub-stories the film could have become confusing and meaningless but thanks to the sublime artistry from Sam Raimi, it flows beautifully and never loses sight of itself.

Which goes to say the acting is as brilliant from the main cast which helps the film has more exploration and depth and the special effects this time round are flawless and much improved on the first.

This has everything for the comic fans and those who just want to be entertained of action (which there is plenty of particularly towards the end) drama, romance and humour mostly from JK Simmons who when he was on screen I was laughing out loud.

Credit goes to all involved and I very much look forward to Spiderman 3.

A damn near perfect summer blockbuster

[bob the moo · 23 August 2004]

Two years on from defeating the Green Goblin, Peter Parker is having a harder time meeting the ongoing expectations of the public. On top of this the double life is taking its strain on his job, his personal life and his ability to even cast webs. Parker decides enough is enough and throws it all in – after all, he is only one man. Meanwhile, A brilliant scientist, Dr Octavius sees his life's work on a fusion reactor explode – killing his wife. Wife the protective device on his computerised arms broken, Dr Octavius loses his grip on sanity and starts to rebuild his reactor using money and materials from crime. With him seemingly intent on destruction, Parker must decide if the needs of others outweigh his own.

With many blockbusters falling at the opening weekend this summer, the title of 'summer's best' was still up for grabs when I arrived at the cinema to watch Spiderman 2 (having only the week earlier given it the miss in favour of lighter fare). Two hours later I emerged having enjoyed one of the most entertaining popcorn films I'll probably see all year. The plot is more than able to fill the running time and, although the action scenes often have large gaps between them, there are no moments where I was bored – even if there are a few moments where the film slightly slows. The complexity of the hero is the main thing – he is an unwilling hero and the strain shows well on him. Even the potentially ponderous thread with Mary-Jane plays pretty well for the most part.

The villain of the piece is similar to the Green Goblin of the first film in that he is a scientist driven to madness by 'voices' who we want to lose as well as feeling for – more tragic than evil. Where Dafoe was great as the Goblin, the silly costume hindered the actor, here Molina has no such obstacle and does very well – carrying off the 'voices' scene without it looking silly – it is only a shame that he has so little screen time as a person (he has little time anyway – but the vast majority of it is throwing cars around). With these complex people as the fronts it is any wonder that the script has no problem being surprisingly strong for a summer action movie. You could read meaning into most of it but it is hard to not see the New York people on the train carrying the prone body of Spiderman backwards as having a bigger significance – a surprisingly poignant movie after a big effects-driven scene. The script also throws in a real mix of emotions – perfect for a film that is more about being an exciting ride than a piece of art. Plenty of it is very funny, some of it is touching, some of it is about character and some of it, well, some of it is about cars being thrown through windows! And of course the latter is what we have come for.

In terms of action, the several big action sequences are very enjoyable and put the skirmishes from the first movie very much in the shade. Part of this is down to the increased intensity of the fights due to the close combat nature of the character but it is hard not to be impressed by the impact of the vastly improved effects. In the first movie I struggled occasionally to get past the fact that some of it (not all but some) looked very much like an average playstation game. Here the effects are great; sure, you can still tell when a mid-shot of a character is real or CGI but they are much more convincing and they are used a lot better – making it easier to accept them as real for the purposes of the film. Of course what really makes the action sequences is Raimi's great direction. He is very able in the smaller moments but he is fantastic in the massive action scenes that he pulls together. At times his direction is very clever and my favourite 'reference' scene is also the one that surprised me that it was rated PG. In a very clear reference to Evil Dead, doctors are hammered by Dr Octopus' arms for the first time – dragged screaming (ED's trees) and tackling it with bone saws (Ash's chain saw). It was a very intense scene and, with it being in a PG, it acts as proof that the BBFC are not as strict as the moaners would have us believe.

Working with this direction, the cast all do really well. Maguire takes the pratfalls, the moral questions, the romance and the action equally as well. He is very much the likable everyman that the film needs Spiderman to be and he is good throughout. Dunst has talked about her desire to do more than just this type of film and, from this, I can see why. Although she has some good scenes, generally she is sidelined and it is to her credit that she does as well as she does with comparatively little to work with. Molina is given too little time and lacks a really strong scene of emotion in the same way that Dafoe did in front of the mirror but he still does well. I didn't feel his pain as much as I really should have done but that was more down to his low screen time rather than his performance. Franco is good but a bit too one-dimensional; given that the third film will be very dependent on him I'm hoping he can step up to the plate more than he did here. Of the support cast, once again it is a wonderfully OTT Simmons who steals every scene he is in – he is so good that I never once saw him as his Oz character – an association I never thought he'd be able to break but he did – and he did it hilariously. Cameos from Campbell, Raimi and Dafoe are all enjoyable and add to their scenes.

Overall this is not a perfect film and I am bemused by its appearance in the top 250 list here but it does basically everything it sets out to do and does it in a manner that puts this years' other blockbusters in the shade. The script is clever, interesting and involving; the characters are complex and pretty well drawn while the film delivers laughs as frequently as it does action. With improved effects and some very impressive action scenes this is definitely the movie to sue in a summer full of misses and average thrills.

I don't quite get it...

[Veektarius · 6/10 · 6 July 2004]

Most of the time when a film is hugely popular, I end up agreeing with the majority, especially when it's an action/scifi flick. With both "Spiderman" movies, I've disagreed.

Perhaps I'm simply too much of a nerd to appreciate the very human spin Spiderman has been given by Maguire, though I should venture to say I've never collected comic books, and my familiarity with this particular series is limited to the old Fox Saturday morning cartoons (remember the days when those were something to look forward to?). I'm sorry, but I don't sympathize with the saintlike, penniless genius who's going through a major crisis and responds in a manner that suggests he's quite in touch with his feminine side. Not to imply anything about his sexuality, of course, but I'm an adherent to old-school macho stoicism, and Peter Parker does not display it, despite pursuing a "great power brings great responsibility" lifestyle. How about the responsibility not to become an emotional wreck? I guess being a superhero is hard on the wallet, but I'm sure there's a way he could make things work without breaking any laws. I don't recall his financial situation being quite so dire in the cartoon, and if it is indeed an affectation of this particular rendering, it is an unnecessary one.

Maguire's attempts were somehow more acceptable in Spiderman (1) when he was a full-scale high school geek. Now that he's a superhero, I have trouble forgiving the unterminable stupid look on his face. Additionally, Kirsten Dunst doesn't make me think of MJ Watson, or a community heartthrob.

The comic book story of the movie takes up half its total showing time at most, and is fairly simple and formulaic. Scientist loses sight of his original philanthropic intentions and commits dire offenses in the name of progress. The film fails to explain why Octavian's AI tentacles have so much stock in the success of his project. I realize they think, but why should they *care*?

The quality of the film, ignoring the genre it's in, is certainly less than most give it. Iffy CGI, an inability to decide exactly what sort of movie it is, comedy/romance/action/drama? leads to unbalanced distribution of time for its scenes. It has a poor ending, as well, suffering from the more forgivable LOTR 3's multiple fades as all the loose ends are tied up. Still, let me be positive for a moment, after all, I rated it a 6. The acting is good, the action well-choreographed, and the drama occasionally moving, and it scores on most of its comic notes, even if Spiderman hits the bottom of an alley a few too many times.

"I believe there's a hero in all of us."

[utgard14 · 9/10 · 29 May 2014]

Being Spider-Man is wrecking poor Peter Parker's life. He's had to give up his chance at love with Mary Jane, he can't hold a job because he's always late, his grades are suffering at college, his Aunt May is struggling with the loss of beloved Uncle Ben, and his best friend Harry blames Spider-Man for the death of his father. All of this leads to Peter deciding to give up being a superhero. But a new threat rises in the form of mad physicist Otto Octavius, dubbed Dr. Octopus by the press, that may force Peter out of retirement.

Sam Raimi's direction is much improved from the first film. This one he seems completely at home with the big budget blockbuster and creates many memorable scenes and images, as he often does in his lower budget work. Comic fans should appreciate the homages to the works of Lee, Ditko, and Romita, The CGI improves from the first film. There's still a little bit of the rubbery animated look of the CGI humans but not as distracting as before. The action is also more impressive. The fight scenes between Spider-Man and Dr. Octopus are well-done. The scene where Spidey saves an elevated train is arguably the movie's highlight. Danny Elfman's music is good but, as with the first film, not in the same league as his iconic Batman work.

The cast knocks it out of the park. Tobey Maguire perfectly captures the essence of Peter Parker, even more so than the first movie. His inherent nerdiness, awkwardness, and struggle to do what's right even at the cost of his own happiness. Kirsten Dunst and James Franco build upon their performances from the last movie. Dunst rises above the damsel-in-distress role she's saddled with quite nicely and by the end finally feels like the iconic Mary Jane ("Go get 'em, Tiger."). Rosemary Harris gets far more to do as Aunt May this time around and she's amazing. She steals every scene she's in. The supporting cast (J.K. Simmons and the rest) are all great. Alfred Molina brings Dr. Octopus to life and treats the character seriously, which is miles above the hammy performance given by Willem Dafoe's Green Goblin in the first film.

When this came out, it was the best superhero movie since Superman '78. I walked out of the theater beaming from ear to ear and feeling like a kid again. It was one of the rare summer blockbusters I went to see more than once. It still holds up and is a high water-mark for Marvel movies, in my opinion. It's followed by a terrible third film and then a reboot series that, while good, misses a lot of what makes this film work so well. This is the definitive Spider-Man movie. Lots of humor, heart, romance, and action all told in a bright, colorful fashion. Everything a Spider-Man film should be.

O-ver-ra-ted (clap...clap, clap clap)

[Margrave · 6/10 · 1 July 2004]

This has got to be the most overrated movie of the summer. Not that it's a bad movie, but the critics just seem to be hailing it as the best comic book movie of all time, and quite frankly, it isn't.

This movie is like the LA Lakers, and the Shaq and Kobe are Doc Ock and his Arms. The third major force, Phil Jackson, is like J. Jonah Jameson. Without these three, this would be a terrible movie.

It brings nothing new to the table, with the exception of Doc Ock. I kept trying to remember awesome scenes from it that DON'T involve Doc Ock, and there aren't any. There isn't enough of him, though. The rest of the movie is a rehash of all the themes touched on in the first one.

A movie about the tough decisions of Peter Parker: whether he can exist as both Peter and Spiderman, the pitfalls of being a hero the world underappreciates, and the bitter truth that he can never have Mary Jane, lest his foes harm her. I liked this movie better the first time I saw it, when it was called Spiderman 1. Roger Ebert slammed Shrek 2 for "saying nothing original." Apparently by the time he wrote his 4 star review for Spidey, he lost interest in the importance of novelty.

How many times do we have to watch Tobey Maguire gazing into a mirror as if yet another Uncle has died? How many times do we have to watch MJ react to petty accidents as if her life has been destroyed? How many times must we hear the same old sappy Heroes and Virtue monologue from the old woman? I put up with it the first time, but it got too old. With Doc Ock the movie is good. Not great. Not even as good as the first. But you have to have meat, and without Ock, this movie is the most boring rehash comic book movie I've ever seen. 6/10

Mature, nuanced and layered; the superhero genre at some of its very best.

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 9/10 · 14 February 2018]

It's hard to decide whether or not I prefer this film to the first, as it tells - in some ways - a more mature, nuanced and layered tale, but what isn't hard to decide is that 'Spider-Man 2 (2004)' is a fantastic movie and easily one of the best sequels of all time. The villain is wonderfully rounded, his motivations constantly clear and his character arc drawn in full before the credits roll, and presents both a physical and psychological challenge for our hero. The story expertly balances the phenomenally fun yet still emotionally resonant web-slinging sequences (a high-speed train in danger provides one of the feature's nicest character moments whereas the whole 'bank' section is amazingly accomplished and thunderously entertaining) with the relatable central dilemma of our very human protagonist. Raimi's directing seems to be stepped up a little, too, as he leans further into his own quirky style - evident in the renowned 'surgery' scene which is one of the best in the entire film. The entire piece just gels together to make a cohesive, complex and rare example of the superhero genre at some of its very best. 9/10