The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - Grading & Discussion

[JacksonArcher]

If I were Sony/Columbia, I'd scrap plans for Sinister Six and Venom or at the very least put those plans on hold. Focus all your energies onto Amazing Spider-Man 3, which is what the franchise desperately needs. Fix your own franchise before dovetailing into (unnecessary and possibly unwanted) spin-offs.

I think Marc Webb is a talented filmmaker, but he needs better writers and a better script. I would ditch Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman and whatever script they are writing/wrote. Hire a new writer that has some talent and a proven track record of success. The Sam Raimi movies had the benefit of Alvin Sargent, who was a stupendous writer. Sony/Columbia should take a page from WB's book and hire someone like Chris Terrio. Amazing Spider-Man 3 needs a breath of fresh air. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Webb gets kicked to the curb, but something tells me Sony will hold onto him. Which is fine - but they really need to find a better writer(s) or else the series is going to continue to experience a downward slide in both quality and box office sales.

 

[MacLeod]

One thing to bear in mind though is at the Worldwide Box Office the rankings in terms of takings (unadjusted) are

Spider-Man 3
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
Amazing Spider-Man
Amazing Spider-Man 2

So it is possible that ASM3 could take more than ASM2, the more worrying trend is that these films are taking less than the Ramis trilogy

 

[BillJ]

I'm not sure how a movie that has done 700 million in business worldwide is a train wreck? When it is all said and done, it will turn a profit for Sony.

 

[BillJ]

One thing to bear in mind though is at the Worldwide Box Office the rankings in terms of takings (unadjusted) are

Spider-Man 3
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
Amazing Spider-Man
Amazing Spider-Man 2

So it is possible that ASM3 could take more than ASM2, the more worrying trend is that these films are taking less than the Ramis trilogy

There has been five of these movies in 12 years. The downward trend shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

 

[DarthTom]

There has been five of these movies in 12 years. The downward trend shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

I was thinking the same thing. Just like with Trek the franchise is suffering content fatigue. It needs a rest.

 

[JacksonArcher]

There has been five of these movies in 12 years. The downward trend shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

I was thinking the same thing. Just like with Trek the franchise is suffering content fatigue. It needs a rest.

Really? Only two movies in the last couple years and it needs a rest? Both movies were financially successful enough. Star Trek Into Darkness got a lot of flack from fans (and understandably so) but it actually got decent reviews, as did the first Abrams movie.

If anything, I think after the next movie it needs to go back to TV. That's where Star Trek truly belongs and can flourish. It needs someone like Ronald D. Moore or Bryan Fuller to revive it, but that's just me.

As for Spider-Man, that's a case where I can understand franchise fatigue playing a factor. I think the last two movies being not very good also probably had something to do with it. I actually think there's merit in spin-offs like Sinister Six (if anything because have we ever seen a superhero movie without a superhero that focuses solely on the villains?) or even Venom since the Eddie Brock character is really interesting and badass if done right. I just think Sony needs to get their flailing Spider-Man franchise back on track before focusing any energies onto spin-offs.

$700 million worldwide isn't necessarily a train wreck, but it definitely signals a downward slide. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 didn't do well critically, either. It doesn't bode well for the future of the franchise. The Amazing Spider-Man 3 NEEDS to be good now or else the franchise, at least in its current incarnation, is doomed. Although it might not matter anyway - I'm sure Sony/Columbia will do a soft reboot after the third installment since Webb & Garfield have already said they don't intend to return for the fourth one. Although if Amazing Spider-Man 3 flounders... I'd wait a decent amount of time before doing yet another Spider-Man movie. Franchise fatigue would have unequivocally set in at that point.

 

[Skywalker]

The problem with that is that it appears Sony can't wait a decent amount of time before doing another movie. Supposedly the terms of their agreement with Marvel stipulates that they have to release a new Spider-Man movie within five years of the last one in order to hold on to the rights.

 

[TremblingBluStar]

The problem with that is that it appears Sony can't wait a decent amount of time before doing another movie. Supposedly the terms of their agreement with Marvel stipulates that they have to release a new Spider-Man movie within five years of the last one in order to hold on to the rights.

Well, that and Sony isn't exactly healthy financially. Other than Spider-Man, they don't have much for proven winners at the box office.

 

[BillJ]

The problem with that is that it appears Sony can't wait a decent amount of time before doing another movie. Supposedly the terms of their agreement with Marvel stipulates that they have to release a new Spider-Man movie within five years of the last one in order to hold on to the rights.

But currently they are averaging one every two-and-a-half years.

 

[Skywalker]

Okay. Not really sure what you're trying to get at. One every two-and-a-half years is well within their rights.

My point was that if they do ASM3 and the returns continue to diminish, then Sony can't just let the property rest for a decade or so and then reboot. They'd have to have another movie out within five years (unless they work out some kind of extension with Marvel) or they'll lose their license. Five years isn't really enough time between movies to give audiences a break, as evidenced by the "Another one?" reaction to ASM1.

 

[Captain Craig]

So it is possible that ASM3 could take more than ASM2, the more worrying trend is that these films are taking less than the Ramis trilogy

And making less with factors such as 3-D, IMAX, Inflation and further expansion of global markets. The TASM series is selling fewer tickets as well. Some folks at SONY are worried and should be. Not only for their jobs but their damn near only cow still producing some milk.

I'm not sure how a movie that has done 700 million in business worldwide is a train wreck? When it is all said and done, it will turn a profit for Sony.

It's curious how a tentpole film like this has opted to not post a public budget figure...this time. We know TASM cost $230m, they posted it. The Raimi films, posted budgets also. Even if we take them with some grain of salt it's a good way to gauge train wreck or not. They've not posted it cause it's very likely more. SONY spent more from S1-S2-S3 so to think they didn't spend more on TASM2 isn't right. While it's rarely known it's clear they've spent millions on marketing, hundreds of would be my guess.

The revenue streams on Spidey are limited. They don't get merchandising, Marvel/Disney gets that. They can expect a dwindling return BluRay/DVD sales I'd wager as well as not being able to command a higher fee for streaming, rental and premium cable deals.

When you spend more the threshold for success is higher. SONY publicly said, studio chair Amy Pascal that they fully believed TASM2 would be a $1 BILLION dollar installment.

Sony Pictures' Amy Pascal made the ambitious statement that the studio is not just anticipating that THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 is going to be huge, but they are expecting it to be almost as big as THE AVENGERS. That's right; Sony has set a box office goal for their superhero sequel of $1 billion in worldwide gross.

Ergo, $700m-ish WorldWide is quite a train wreck.

 

[Mr Light]

Not to mention, if the ASM movies are losing $50m with every new entry, what is a spin-off not featuring Spidey gonna gross?