Spiderman 2 critics

After reading both critics I think it's amazing that people can watch the same movie as me and come out with a completely different view. I have seen Spiderman 2 and agree with each person. I guess it's true that every person has a mind of their own.

I felt that Gilchrist focused a lot on the physical aspects of the movie. For most of his article he talked about how many of the scenes were too drawn out. He thought that a lot of the plot was beat into the audience while leaving out more important moments in the movie. He said that the first movie was a much better adaptation of the comic, in contrast to Ebert who thought the opposite. Gilchrist did say he liked the movie but couldn't help but be critical of it.

Ebert thought the movie was a masterpiece. He said that after he saw the first movie he was disappointed but after seeing this movie he thought that Raimi, movies director, did a marvelous job. He said that he thought the action and adventure depicted the characters dreams and wishes as does the comic. He was estastic about the fact that the movie concentrated more on the superheroes personal feelings rather than the superpowers. For example, he says the movie does a great job showing that the superpowers are actually a burden on Peter Parker. One of his last points was that the special effects were great. They made him feel apart of the movie and the action.