The Amazing Spiderman 2 - Attempted Cinema Review

EDIT: (I spent all day writing this review, analysis, thing and i've got a headache just thinking about it all. I fear this review borders on the kind of incoherence and structural collapse that you'll see in the film. If i were any kind of smart i'd pretend that was an intentional metaphor but in fact this is just an unfinished rant on a truly baffling film. Hopefully it will inform or entertain you on some level)

It took me a while to really confirm my own opinion on this especially with all the others flying around and people's eagerness to tear this film to shreds. Let's clarify the overall opinion of this review and possibly negate any point in reading past these opening sentences. Amazing Spiderman 2 is not a good film and i do not recommend it, however it is also not the Antichrist abomination many are making it out to be. There is plenty wrong with this film from the writing to the pacing to editing, but it is not completely devoid of any enjoyment and some people against all odds have enjoyed it.

As a background statement, i didn't think the first Amazing Spiderman was as bad as many condemned it to be. This sequel seems to be trying to rectify those mistakes many highlighted and appeal to the howling mass of different opinions that have arisen since that first film. The problem with this is that AS2 then becomes a complete mess of different people's desires. Both the filmmakers and the angry outspoken fans have had some terrible ideas that made it into this movie.

The tone of the film is incredibly difficult to comprehend. It is one minute a deadly serious gritty thriller, then a light-hearted family-friendly superhero flick, then a complex emotional character study with broken relationships and finally a hammy action movie more reminiscent of Sam Raimi's classic comic cheesy trilogy. I wish i could say it happened in that order as well but it doesn't. It's like five different interpretations of the same film spliced randomly together.

Unfortunately from this point on in the review, features i deem good or bad are intensely debatable because different people became invested in the different styles of film crushed together. The basic plot is a debate all of it's own but essentially i gathered it to be a continuation of Peter's guilt about dating Gwen when her father's dying wish in the previous film was for them to stay away from each other. This causes relationship issues between the two as Peter tries to respect this wish and protect her while Gwen tries to nail down a definite direction for her life and yet the two are still hopelessly in love with one another.

These scenes are okay in my opinion due to Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone's natural chemistry and the worst of the writing staying out of the relationship parts of the story.  I still have issues however with Peter Parker's character in the Amazing Spiderman series, who still acts far too cool and suave for a supposed nerdy science student. There is a moment when he turns up late to his own graduation and casually snogs Gwen Stacy on stage right in front of his family, fellow graduates and unimpressed tutors. It is one of the most out-of-character moments i think i've ever seen on film. There's reboot level of changes then there's making someone a completely different character.

Aunt May must be so proud...

Garfield thankfully still excels in the actual Spiderman persona, there's just no switch or difference between his Peter Parker attitude and his Spiderman. The film is also lacking greatly in the humour that elevated the first. There are a handful of amusing moments but most of it has been spoiled in the trailers. Speaking of which, early footage shows a subplot about Oscorp spying on Peter which is never anywhere in the actual film...Trailers also led me to believe this would be a clusterfuck of villains bad enough to rival Spiderman 3. That is not the case as the film centers mainly on Jamie Foxx's Electro with the new Green Goblin remaining in origin building territory until the film's finale.

Which leads us to the worst of the films writing in these new villains. Their motivations are flimsy, unnatural and contradictory. Max Dillon (Electro) is set up reasonably well as a character. A dorky Oscorp technician ignored by everyone until a lifesaving encounter with Spiderman sparks an obsessive fandom with the only person to ever really notice him. Peter should be able to really relate to this guy if he had ever not been the slick skateboarding heartthrob he's been from the beginning. So Max eventually befalls his experimental accident and supervillain transformation, being turned into a bald glowing blue humanoid with control over electricity.

We're lead to believe that Max is unaffected mentally by the accident as he staggers out into the city, afraid and confused by his own new powers. He remembers Spiderman and just wants help despite the city's police turning violent towards him. Next comes the gaping ravine in logic oddly coupled by the only close to subtle piece of filmmaking in this production. I assumed fame or at least infamy and notoriety would be Electro's motivation and this is hinted at with Times Square's myriad of screens all showing footage of him once he is noticed by the police and news reporters. He gazes up at his own image on the gigantic screens and for once he is the center of attention, until Spiderman arrives and all the screens change focus.

This could have functioned fine as a motivation but it's instead ignored and Electro ultimately attacks because...Well Spidey forgot his name...or it's claimed he "set him up" somehow or perhaps because the cops shoot at him, even though they already had a few times earlier to no effect. It becomes really unclear and from this point on Electro irrationally despises Spiderman, acts and talks like an insane supervillain spouting electricity based cliche monologues. All his dialogue just slips away into nonsense even with the dubstep soundtrack reinforcing his unclear motivations with expositional gritty whispers. The first in many features making me feel this film is being deliberately hammy but then contradicts itself with a new style and tone five minutes later.

Spidey goes from this guy's idol and lifesaver to arch nemesis in a matter of minutes...

 Dane Dehaan's acting is good for the script he's been given (most of the actors actually perform well considering), i think he gives up on it towards the end though and begins hamming up his Green Goblin parts which might have been the best possible outcome considering his equally nonsensical origins. Harry learns he has a genetic disease that killed his father. Knowing that Peter takes photographs of Spiderman he tries to make contact with the web-slinger in order to ask for a sample of his blood, hoping that the superhuman qualities will save him from his disease. Peter and consequentially Spiderman are reluctant to give this away, unaware of the potential side-effects but there's a chance for tension and drama here since Harry is his friend and time is given to establishing this fact. So Peter has to make a choice.

Here are the four possible outcomes of this scenario as i see them.
1. Peter gives Harry the blood and it cures him with no side effects, their friendship is intact, rainbows and smiles all around. No consequence or impact for the film. Pointless.
2. Peter refuses Harry's request and the genetic disease worsens and kills him, inflicting Peter with a huge sense of guilt for letting one of his friends (or only friend it would seem in this movie)
die. This obviously prevents any Green Goblin antics but actually has an impact on the film.
3. Peter gives Harry the blood and it mutates him into the Green Goblin, landing Peter with huge guilt for turning his friend into one of his greatest enemies. Though Goblin would have no motivation to attack Peter in this scenario, i've always gathered Goblin is like the Joker of Spiderman and insanity can gloss over much of his actions. More importantly this has an impact on the film's story and consequences for the characters.
4. Peter refuses to give Harry Spiderman's blood greatly damaging or destroying Harry and Peter's friendship. Harry then discovers that his family's company Oscorp has had a cure to the disease all along despite his father Norman Osborne never utilising this to save his own life. Harry finds the cure and injects himself with it but for some reason still mutates into the Green Goblin and now has motivation to attack Spiderman. This choice's only impact on the film is giving Spiderman another villain to fight.

Which one of these sounds the most convoluted and far-fetched? Because that's what the film goes with. Leaving the cinema i got a feeling very reminiscent of the kind of incoherence i hadn't seen since the Star Wars prequels yet similarly this film will try to bombard you with action and visual spectacle to distract you from its flaws.

Taken from the PS4 version of the film...

There is also an entire subplot about Peter's parents, assassination attempts, Oscorp and the downright stupid change to the lore that makes the Parker bloodline unique and only he could be Spiderman, which is not only a huge "chosen one" cliche it kills the already strained ability to relate to this nerdy, unpopular character (who isn't at all unpopular in this film). I'm only mentioning it briefly at the end because it bored my bollocks off but it takes up a tedious amount of the film and seems set to show up more in the inevitable third film.



 

Captain America: The Winter Soldier - Cinema Review

If you were like me and hoping that the shield corruption, moral conflicts and commentary on intelligence organisations hinted at in the trailers would play a big part in this film then you'll be pleased to hear those hopes are realised. One of The Winter Soldier's biggest achievements is making a superhero film with the expected mainstream large action sequences as well as an effective espionage thriller. Some of the tense atmospheres of distrust created are potent and will have you second guessing the motives and allegiance of almost every character on screen.

For those less interested in those affairs, the film still delivers on the big-budget marvel action movie side of its persona. Less so than other avenger-centric films perhaps but i feel the extra time devoted to plot and character conflict only makes the action better and it suitably tapers so that the second half of the film is much more action packed than the first.

I can't go into too much detail with the plot because i don't want to spoil things but the film does well focusing on about three or four major characters and exploring them all very well. The acting is also solid on all accounts especially from Samuel L Jackson. Tonally despite a rather dark distrustful atmosphere with quite a lot more violence than other Avenger franchise films, the story still finds time for plenty of injections of humour that help balance everything nicely.

The film is fairly long but it doesn't feel like any scenes are superfluous or time is wasted. From the very first shot the filmmakers are setting up characters and story and for a central character who is so defined by events in his past there aren't too many flashbacks either.

The complex web of betrayals, mystery and corruption is mostly watertight with only one or two minor plotholes emerging in the later scenes of the film. The leaps of logic and realism that can sometimes disengage in these types of films are also few, which considering the substantial, epic scale of events and characters is an achievement.

A few notes about Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow however in regards to character and treatment. In Avengers she was very cold, calculating and detached but in Winter Soldier they've made her much sassier with her far outnumbering the other characters in terms of quips and comical lines. These aren't bad and the acting is still very good it's just a minor gripe about character inconsistency that struck me whilst watching.

They've also made her much less "assier" (thought of that all by myself, i'm here all week, etc) by which i mean far less sexualised than in other films which is a refreshing step forward.
That said there is some interesting sexual tension between her and the titular hero which is mostly underlying and doesn't outstay its welcome but is another well implemented layer to the film weaved into much of the film's comedy.

Overall this is an excellent different direction to take the character in yet remaining a solid story with plenty of action, comedy and intrigue to appeal to fans of the Avengers franchise or action movie fans in general. I was worried that this vast arc of movies planned to live well into the future would be stretching the characters and appeal too thin but if Winter Solider, Iron Man 3 and arguably Thor 2 are any indication, the post-avengers films are only improving.

Video Games Saved My Life

I am an avid video gamer in my twenties who also suffers from depression. I have been playing video games for most of my life, often for long stretches of time taking up entire days. I have also long since lost count of the times my favourite pastime has been blamed for crimes ranging from theft to mass murder. This article feels like throwing a grain of sand against a grand tidal wave of negative press but in a way that justifies the need for it even more. Consider this a piece of much needed positive coverage for video games from someone who has actually played more than one.

The main fear I see portrayed on news reports and discussed on panels of exclusively non-gamers is that gamers will lose the ability to differentiate reality and the world of the video game they are playing. Many people seem disturbed by how immersed gamers can become but I see that and instead think “good” Good that they lose themselves inside video games so that they have a respite from the real world, which I have observed to be more sick, deranged, violent and poisonous than any video game I have ever played.

The thought of witnessing all the injustice, cruelty and random merciless chaos of life relentlessly without release, without break seems more likely to drive a person insane and dangerous than the most realistic, immersive video game I can imagine. People blame video games for crimes committed when in fact I wager that they have delayed or even prevented far more.

During my childhood I was frequently bullied both at school and at home and often the only thing I had to look forward to was the unrivalled blissful escapism of video games. Forgetting who I was and losing myself in these worlds where things were simpler, fairer and more controllable. As a teenager I became severely depressed and this would go undiagnosed until my early twenties. Years of crippling self-hatred, constant doubt and an inability to enjoy life made me thoroughly miserable and I have plenty of memories where I’m surrounded by friends, partaking in some leisurely pursuit I should have been fully enjoying and instead of fun or happiness I simply felt empty.

How does one escape from something that is tied to your very being? A nightmare in your veins? A slow draining rot of the mind? Films, books, television and music work to a certain extent but nothing could match the immersion and scope of video games. Amongst the upsettingly few memories of times I have genuinely enjoyed with friends are also a great many memories of adventures taken, emotions experienced, connections made and satisfaction gleaned from achieving something which I knew was ultimately meaningless but found immense pleasure in all the same because I was immersed. For a while I could feel that my only problems were the challenges faced in video games. Challenges I could actually succeed in.

Forgetting who I was, losing that reference point for all my loathing and self-destructive impulses and instead believing I was an acrobatic time-controlling prince or a cybernetic commander of a cutting-edge spaceship or even just a quick little blue anthropomorphic hedgehog, was often the only release I got from the crushing paralysis present in the rest of my life.

Which brings me to the point of this article in which I confidently state that video games have not only saved me from the darkest, depthless emptiness I’ve ever felt but they have given me some of the happiest times I can recall in an existence otherwise starved of such sensations. I would wager that many people in similar positions would claim the same. There is no news to be found in people who are content with something, so the vast majority of gamers go unheard, primarily because they haven’t broken the law.

I don’t believe the media and politicians are completely devoid of logic in their distrust of the medium of video games ( just mostly) but I ask them to broaden their thinking in that a person who cannot detach and dissociate themselves at all from such an experience is in need of help far more generally in life. An inability to separate fact from fiction can prove problematic and potentially dangerous in all walks of life not just in the context of video games. Essentially, someone capable of the crimes often causally linked to video games has far bigger problems than what video games may or may not contribute to. 

Someone of that disposition is at equal risk in any activity, from video games, to paintball to driving a car, so instead of looking for easy and simple targets to blame, censor, and ban, take up the harder, more complex but also more pressing task of improving mental health care for people with these conditions you are seemingly so fraught with concern about.