MovieChat Forums > Spider-Man 2 (2004) Discussion > Good Sequels That Sowed the Seeds of The...

Good Sequels That Sowed the Seeds of Their Series' Destruction

posted 8 years ago by TMC-4
4 replies | jump to latest

https://dejareviewer.com/2014/10/14/10-good-sequels-that-sowed-the-seeds-for-their-series-destruction/

5. Spider-Man 2

Its Fatal Flaw: Botching Harry Osborn’s story

For a while, Spider-Man 2 was my pick for the best superhero film. And then its sequel came out and forced me to rethink that position. In hindsight, you can see a lot of Spider-Man 3’s flaws creeping into Spider-Man 2. The long Aunt May monologues, the Mary Jane Watson drama, and the extremely sympathetic villain. All of these things were handled very well in that movie, and it’s only in comparing it to Spider-Man 3 that I notice how those could have gone wrong.

But even the first time I saw Spider-Man 2, I was troubled by the way it handled Harry Osborn’s story. Here’s a guy who’s obsessed with killing Spider-Man only to finally learn that his hated enemy and his best friend are the same person. And in that moment of crisis when Peter Parker could have defused the situation, he clumsily brushed it aside because of Doctor Octopus’ more imminent threat.

Harry and Peter didn't speak to each other between the second and third films. Peter could have gone right back to Harry after defeating Doc Ock and explain everything to him. But no, the movie instead set up a contrived situation in which these two old friends wouldn’t speak at all between the second and third films, giving Harry time to go insane and decide to kill Peter.

Spider-Man 3 didn’t need that unnecessary distraction. Venom would have been enough of a threat.

Imagine if Harry and Peter had just patched things up between them when Peter suddenly starts acting more aggressive and it’s up to Harry to stop the Alien Symbiote from completely sapping Peter’s strength and soul. Now that would have been a great continuation of Harry’s story.

[–] jedi-jones 8 years ago

WTF? Harry being a good guy is a good evolution of his character? Totally wrong and unfaithful to the comics.

"Pretentious" is a three-syllable word for any thought too big for little minds.

[–] MaximumMadness 8 years ago

...No.

This is just wrong on so many levels.

And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?

[–] manchof1 8 years ago

This article is stupid, there wouldn't be a movie if Peter and Harry kissed and made up so soon.

[–] Xaeden 8 years ago

First of all, Venom was not considered as a villain when crafting Harry's story in this movie. Raimi was pressured to include the character after they had started production on the third film, forcing him to try to work Venom into their existing story about Peter's hubris. So Spider-man 2 did not poorly set up that bit in Spider-man 3, Spider-man 3 had a curve ball thrown into it that slightly monkey wretched what Spider-man 2 had set up.

Second of all, the contrived argument is a weak one. People say this all the time; "It's contrived because they didn't just speak to each other and if they spoke to each other all of this could be resolved." Okay, but that's a common facet of real life; how many problems exist in the real world because two people chose not to talk things out? A lot. Why does this happen? People are insecure, they're afraid... so why shouldn't they also be those things in fiction? Just because there's a manufactured element to the decision to include a real human problem, people scoff, but how is going in the other direction--where everyone always acts perfectly and resolves things easily--somehow better?