The Amazing Spider-Man : Le Destin d'un héros
Original title: The Amazing Spider-Man 2
- 2014
- Tous publics
- 2h 22m
When New York is put under siege by Oscorp, it is up to Spider-Man to save the city he swore to protect as well as his loved ones.When New York is put under siege by Oscorp, it is up to Spider-Man to save the city he swore to protect as well as his loved ones.When New York is put under siege by Oscorp, it is up to Spider-Man to save the city he swore to protect as well as his loved ones.
- Awards
- 4 wins & 30 nominations total
Featured reviews
I can't say I went in to the theater with high hopes. I did enjoy the first installment of this unnecessary reboot, almost anything seemed like a step up from "Spiderman 3", and Garfield felt way more natural than Maguire, and Emma Stone is always welcome. But after seeing the first trailer I thought it seemed like a total mess, and I wasn't convinced by Electro one bit. Unfortunately I was spot on, I hoped to at least get an enjoyable time at the cinema with my friends, but ended up feeling quite uncomfortable and laughing throughout most of the film.
Garfield and Stone has their chemistry and does their best with the incredibly thin script and cheesy one-liners, but their potential quite beautiful scenes together gets lost in the over-full and messy plot. I can't buy an emotional scene that is interrupted by heavy dub-step and a blue electric guy.
Oh Jamie Foxx, how did you go from Django to this? Before he goes all CGI-Electro he tries to play the nerdy unseen scientist (with a worse comb-over than Christian Bale's 'Hustle'-look). As Electro it's hard to say how much is his fault, and what can be blamed on the rest, I'd go with the rest. You don't sympathize with him nor do you believe how fast he becomes this super-villain.
Everything that Dane DeHaan did so well in "Chronicle" just feels unnatural and (maybe not misplaced, but wrong) here. And his character development is way too rushed and quite unnecessary for this film, it just becomes another sub-plot standing in the way of what really matters.
Sally Field does good work as Aunt May, but leaves no lasting mark. Paul Giamatti's Russian criminal is just in the way and only gives a couple of dreadful and laughable scenes. And then there's the mad German scientist named Kafka and I rest my case.
The action and visuals isn't bad, but still doesn't make up for the low "trying to be Marvel"-comedy and horrific soundtrack, a soundtrack that almost itself destroys the film throughout the exhausting 142 minutes. And sometimes it feels like the movie is taking us as an audience to be stupid, with pointers to what is going to happen. I would like to say that you might enjoy it if you just try and see it for what it is, but it's hard, but hopefully possible! It had an interesting start, with a glimpse inside the past and Peter's parents, but it's left underdeveloped, as is almost everything else, to make room for all its action and villains.
It's amazing how the difference between two big-budget superhero-movies can be so huge, if you put this against "Captain America: The Winter Soldier", a great and, opposed to this one, original film.
Oh how I wish that Marc Webb could have continued with a "(500) Days of Summer"-esque movie instead, he could keep the sub-plots starring Garfield, Stone and DeHaan, and it could very well be a great film, and probably not such a waste of talent.
Garfield and Stone has their chemistry and does their best with the incredibly thin script and cheesy one-liners, but their potential quite beautiful scenes together gets lost in the over-full and messy plot. I can't buy an emotional scene that is interrupted by heavy dub-step and a blue electric guy.
Oh Jamie Foxx, how did you go from Django to this? Before he goes all CGI-Electro he tries to play the nerdy unseen scientist (with a worse comb-over than Christian Bale's 'Hustle'-look). As Electro it's hard to say how much is his fault, and what can be blamed on the rest, I'd go with the rest. You don't sympathize with him nor do you believe how fast he becomes this super-villain.
Everything that Dane DeHaan did so well in "Chronicle" just feels unnatural and (maybe not misplaced, but wrong) here. And his character development is way too rushed and quite unnecessary for this film, it just becomes another sub-plot standing in the way of what really matters.
Sally Field does good work as Aunt May, but leaves no lasting mark. Paul Giamatti's Russian criminal is just in the way and only gives a couple of dreadful and laughable scenes. And then there's the mad German scientist named Kafka and I rest my case.
The action and visuals isn't bad, but still doesn't make up for the low "trying to be Marvel"-comedy and horrific soundtrack, a soundtrack that almost itself destroys the film throughout the exhausting 142 minutes. And sometimes it feels like the movie is taking us as an audience to be stupid, with pointers to what is going to happen. I would like to say that you might enjoy it if you just try and see it for what it is, but it's hard, but hopefully possible! It had an interesting start, with a glimpse inside the past and Peter's parents, but it's left underdeveloped, as is almost everything else, to make room for all its action and villains.
It's amazing how the difference between two big-budget superhero-movies can be so huge, if you put this against "Captain America: The Winter Soldier", a great and, opposed to this one, original film.
Oh how I wish that Marc Webb could have continued with a "(500) Days of Summer"-esque movie instead, he could keep the sub-plots starring Garfield, Stone and DeHaan, and it could very well be a great film, and probably not such a waste of talent.
I'm an unabashed die hard fan boy for Spider-Man. There I said it. You can call me a homer for anything Spider-Man. I wasn't a happy camper when I heard they were rebooting the films that I fell in love with. The first two Raimi films for me were great. The sequel still holding up today as one of the best superhero movies of all time. The first Amazing Spider-Man was a bit jarring for me. I walked out of the film not knowing what I thought about it. I enjoyed Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man but his Peter Parker didn't click with me. I also had some nit picky things about the film as a whole (Gwen instead of Mary Jane, lackluster villain). But watching the film a few more times I realized that I liked it.
I do research on films that I'm excited for. This film came out weeks earlier in the UK and Europe. And the reviews were mixed which was sinking my high hopes. I didn't like the fact that there were three villains (More on that later). But it seemed like they were choosing the right actors for parts and surrounding the film in talent. After much heart and headache reading people thoughts and reviews for me, I'm okay with saying I liked much of this second Spider-Man film.
Andrew Garfield is Spider-Man and it seems he's embraced the part much more this time than in the first film. His Spider-Man is having fun being the savior of the city. He's making the quips, the jokes and the all around energy of his Spider-Man feels directly out of the comic book. I am finally sold on his Peter Parker. Director Marc Webb finally lets the smart but dorky Parker shine in a few scenes that are hilarious and engaging.
I'm still not an Emma Stone fan but she is a good counter to Garfield's Parker. They have excellent chemistry. You can tell that these may be Webb's favorite scenes to shoot. When they are on screen this huge summer tent pole film because a small drama about two people with a unique love story.
The villains, there are three of them but not really. Let me explain. Rhino played basically as a cameo by Paul Giamatti is really only on screen to show Spider-Man in action at the beginning and end of the film. His main adversaries are Jamie Foxx's Electro who starts off as a man who is saved by Spider-Man. He then becomes a obsessed fan only to in perfect comic book fashion have a horrible accident that grants him superpowers. Foxx is okay, I wouldn't say he is awful. He has some good moments and contrary to what has been written I think he only has one cringe worthy line.
Dane DeHaan is one of if not my favorite actor working this moment. His method style works so well in many of the films he's in and here it's perfect. His Harry Osborn is less cartoon-y than James Franco's from previous films. He's creepy, spoiled, arrogant but dealt with a lot of adversity. His chemistry with Garfield feels genuine. It doesn't feel forced like it could have been. They are long time friends who have been distant but because of new circumstances are forced back together.
The action is fun, fast and so Spider-Man if that means anything. The way they use his spider sense was very cool. I want to see more of that. The small nods to the comic book are fantastic. There are nods here and there to the upcoming sinister six film which doesn't cloud the film. It's just there in the story that this is apart of a large story in the future. I was trying to count the nods to the comic books. The only issues I had with the film was Peter's search for what happen to his father was kind of just there to fill time. Also the great Sally Field as Aunt May got only a few scenes. She was great on screen but mostly wasted.
Because this film is dividing fans I think I've pinpointed the problem. I'm a fan of the comic books and this film feel like a few issues of the comic books aka a mini-series. There are multiple stories, with multiple villains and a lot going on. I'm okay with the finally product and eager to see the film again. For Garfield's performance, the chemistry with Stone and the action scenes this film is a fun ride for any fan of the neighborhood web shooter.
I do research on films that I'm excited for. This film came out weeks earlier in the UK and Europe. And the reviews were mixed which was sinking my high hopes. I didn't like the fact that there were three villains (More on that later). But it seemed like they were choosing the right actors for parts and surrounding the film in talent. After much heart and headache reading people thoughts and reviews for me, I'm okay with saying I liked much of this second Spider-Man film.
Andrew Garfield is Spider-Man and it seems he's embraced the part much more this time than in the first film. His Spider-Man is having fun being the savior of the city. He's making the quips, the jokes and the all around energy of his Spider-Man feels directly out of the comic book. I am finally sold on his Peter Parker. Director Marc Webb finally lets the smart but dorky Parker shine in a few scenes that are hilarious and engaging.
I'm still not an Emma Stone fan but she is a good counter to Garfield's Parker. They have excellent chemistry. You can tell that these may be Webb's favorite scenes to shoot. When they are on screen this huge summer tent pole film because a small drama about two people with a unique love story.
The villains, there are three of them but not really. Let me explain. Rhino played basically as a cameo by Paul Giamatti is really only on screen to show Spider-Man in action at the beginning and end of the film. His main adversaries are Jamie Foxx's Electro who starts off as a man who is saved by Spider-Man. He then becomes a obsessed fan only to in perfect comic book fashion have a horrible accident that grants him superpowers. Foxx is okay, I wouldn't say he is awful. He has some good moments and contrary to what has been written I think he only has one cringe worthy line.
Dane DeHaan is one of if not my favorite actor working this moment. His method style works so well in many of the films he's in and here it's perfect. His Harry Osborn is less cartoon-y than James Franco's from previous films. He's creepy, spoiled, arrogant but dealt with a lot of adversity. His chemistry with Garfield feels genuine. It doesn't feel forced like it could have been. They are long time friends who have been distant but because of new circumstances are forced back together.
The action is fun, fast and so Spider-Man if that means anything. The way they use his spider sense was very cool. I want to see more of that. The small nods to the comic book are fantastic. There are nods here and there to the upcoming sinister six film which doesn't cloud the film. It's just there in the story that this is apart of a large story in the future. I was trying to count the nods to the comic books. The only issues I had with the film was Peter's search for what happen to his father was kind of just there to fill time. Also the great Sally Field as Aunt May got only a few scenes. She was great on screen but mostly wasted.
Because this film is dividing fans I think I've pinpointed the problem. I'm a fan of the comic books and this film feel like a few issues of the comic books aka a mini-series. There are multiple stories, with multiple villains and a lot going on. I'm okay with the finally product and eager to see the film again. For Garfield's performance, the chemistry with Stone and the action scenes this film is a fun ride for any fan of the neighborhood web shooter.
8/10 - I know I am definitely in the minority on this one, but I for one feel that this 2014 sequel is not only not the "worst Spider-Man movie," but actually improves on its predecessor by doubling down on heart, the swoon-worthy chemistry between Garfield and Stone, and jaw-dropping visual effects.
I don't get the hate for this movie. Was it the ending? the death scene? green goblin?
TASM1 I can understand that one was bland.
Fans just love to nitpick and don't know what they want.
Its a sad, fun movie all the way. Like all spiderman movies , shows, comics. Peter is trying to figure stuff out while nothing goes right. He fights crime, gets a big baddy and wins.
Same thing happened in this movie, but for a price.
Fans just love to nitpick and don't know what they want.
Its a sad, fun movie all the way. Like all spiderman movies , shows, comics. Peter is trying to figure stuff out while nothing goes right. He fights crime, gets a big baddy and wins.
Same thing happened in this movie, but for a price.
As the story unfolds, and all conspiracies behind Oscorp unwind, the life of our lovable web-swinger gets more adrenaline full and also more complicated. There is a bit of a sense of DeJa Vu, specially when Peter Parker is trying to balance his personal life and his super hero life. But the aspect in which this movie really shines (like his ancestor) is in the characters, however this time the emotional weight is much more present,and the scale of both the drama and action is much bigger. Andrew and Emma were just as great as in the previous movie, and the chemistry between them is fantastic. Jaime Fox also nailed it as Electro, even thou the character itself was not the best written character, but his performance was so great that i was able to overcome the writing. Dane DeHann was equally great as the Green Goblin, at first i didn't like the idea of Harry being the Green Goblin instead of Norman Osborn, but it was a good choice and it matched perfectly with the plot and tone of the movie.(Also Dane has a knack for playing psychopaths) As to be expected there are plenty CGI scenes but it really didn't bother me because the action sequences were done in a very creative way. The Score, composed by Hans Zimmer,is amazing and somewhat contemporary, so it fits the themes of each character and moment. Overall the movie was much more intense and heavier than the first installment, as our main character deals not only with supernatural challenges but also emotional dilemmas.
Which Actors Almost Played Spider-Man?
Which Actors Almost Played Spider-Man?
Spider-Man has been one of the biggest superhero franchises to hit the big screen in the past two decades. Who was almost cast in the three different iterations of the superhero tale?
Did you know
- TriviaThe humorously hateful news boss J. Jonah Jameson, one of the most iconic characters in Spider-Man's mythos, was never mentioned in The Amazing Spider-Man (2012). In this sequel he is spoken of frequently but never appears. The producers claimed they could not find an actor to measure up to J.K. Simmons' legendary portrayal of this character in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films. Stan Lee, the writer who came up with the idea for these characters and makes cameo appearances in all the films, has often said he would volunteer to play Jameson if he (Lee) were 30 or 40 years younger. Ironically, when casting Spider-Man: Far from Home (2019), they could still think of no one better than Simmons, so he resumed his role as Jameson.
- Goofs(at around 41 mins) When Harry Osborn and Peter Parker are walking though the park, the camera crew and boom are reflected in Harry's mirrored sunglasses.
- Quotes
Aunt May: What happened to your face? It's filthy.
Peter Parker: It is?
Aunt May: Yes!
Peter Parker: Oh, yeah, yeah, I was cleaning the chimney.
Aunt May: We have no chimney.
Peter Parker: Whaaat?
- Crazy creditsDuring the end credits, several schematics can be seen of the Rhino suit, the Green Goblin glider, the metallic Vulture wings, the mechanical Doctor Octopus tentacles, and other obscure weapons.
- Alternate versionsThe German theatrical version plays the German song "Ohne zurück zu sehen" by Tim Bendzko over the end credits.
- ConnectionsEdited into The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Deleted Scenes (2014)
- SoundtracksTheme From Spider-Man
Written by Bob Harris (as J. Robert Harris) and Paul Francis Webster
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- El sorprendente hombre araña 2: la amenaza de Electro
- Filming locations
- Rochester, New York, USA(Sytsevich car chase)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $200,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $203,605,622
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $91,608,337
- May 4, 2014
- Gross worldwide
- $716,934,779
- Runtime2 hours 22 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content