Gilchrist did not like the movie at all. He focuses on the fact that he felt certain aspects of the movie were drawn on for too long. He did not seem to be entertained by this sequel, but rather bored. He goes as far to say that one particular scene "drags down the flow of the picture". While he does give the film some credit, he states he felt like it continued to repeat and dwell on information the audience already knew and to take jokes too far to the point that they weren't even funny anymore. Gilchrist states that the film had "glaring flaws" but he also says that "its a pretty great film." He admits earlier in his review that he had extremely high expectations for the movie, which may have skewed his opinion.
Eberts, on the other hand, found Spiderman 2 spectacular and has nothing but good things to say. At the very beginning he describes it as "the best superhero movie". The main focus of Eberts review is how he admires the way Raimi incorporated both the superhero action along with the human story aspect. He attributes this meshing of two ideals to the success of the film. The connotation of the words in his review are all very positive and he doesn't really mention anything he found wrong with it. Unlike Gilchrist, Eberts found the movie captivating. He describes Raimi's "masterpiece" as almost "effortless".
No comments:
Post a Comment