In this day and age, “adults” are also big kids who still see Spider-Man movies, and The Amazing Spider-Man faces the challenge of making both the old and new generations satisfied with a revised vision of an iconic hero. If you fall into the camp of ‘big kids who still love their Spider-Man films,’ know right from the get-go that Amazing Spider-Man covers a familiar origin story – albeit in different fashion than Sam Raimi’s game-changing film did in 2002. If you can’t get behind that idea – even in the slightest – then this movie simply is not for you.
However, for all others:
We pick up the familiar tale of Spider-Man with a re-imagined version of Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), a high school geek who exists in the contemporary age of smartphones and social media, in which “the geek,” as an archetype, has become something slightly cooler and more accepted than what it used to be. Garfield’s Peter Parker – with his skateboard, contact lenses and vintage punk band tee-shirts – is definitely the epitome of modern “geek chic”; as such, the goofy nerdisms of Stan Lee and Steve Ditko’s 1960s Peter Parker have been replaced with deeper emotional troubles centered around Peter’s status as an orphan who never answered the question of his parents’ disappearance.
The chance discovery of his dad’s old research into cross-species genetics (a replacement for the outdated radiation experiments that originally created Spider-Man) sends Peter to the beehive-shaped halls of Oscorp, where his high school crush Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) interns alongside the brilliant but disabled Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who was once Peter’s father’s closest associate. That meeting results in Connors and young Parker bonding over scientific theory – and of course, Peter stumbles into the chance accident which leaves him endowed with super powers – abilities which the young man at first squanders for selfish gain, resulting in a life-altering tragedy close to home.
Meanwhile, facing coercion from his shadowy employer Norman Osborn, Dr. Connors takes a big risk testing a promising new serum, which has the unfortunate side-effect of transforming him into a humanoid Lizard. With a super-powered monster on the loose, only Spider-Man is up to the task of stopping the threat. But as both his personal and super hero lives begin to collide at every turn, Peter fears that tragedy may strike home all over again.
Amazing Spider-Man arguably gets more right than it gets wrong, but it is far from being a perfect film. At its core, the movie seems to be, in fact, two films: The hour-long teenage character drama that director Marc Webb ((500) Days of Summer) invests great time and care in telling – followed by a standard superhero blockbuster, complete with 3D CGI battle sequences and an overly-formulaic structure. The point of debate amongst fans will be the question of which half of the film is the better one, and the answer will largely depend on the preferences and expectations of the viewer.
Martin Sheen, Sally Field and Andrew Garfield in 'Amazing Spider-Man'
For my money, the first hour of Amazing Spider-Man is the more interesting half, as it presents a version of the character we haven’t seen before. Webb creates the world of Peter Parker – and the characters that inhabit it – in a way that few people before him have. In this film, Peter Parker feels like a fully-realized person; the home he shares with his Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Field) feels like a real place, and the high school he attends feels like one you could walk right into. Andrew Garfield owns the leading role, offering a mix of lanky physicality, sharp wit and carefully measured emotion – traits that are effective on both sides of the mask, and help him to wall-crawl right out of the shadow of Tobey Maguire. The rest of the cast is just as strong; on the whole, the players in this new version far outshine the original ensemble.
Raimi’s film always felt somewhat emotionally distant, while Webb grabs hold of personal turmoil and emotional connections as his primary point of interest. The chemistry between the principal actors – Garfield, Sheen, Field and Denis Leary as Gwen’s father, Captain Stacy – is very palpable and engaging, so that we actually care when reckless super-Peter has his big angry blow up at Uncle Ben and Aunt May, or when he causes tension at the dinner table trading quips with Cpt. Stacy – or the emotional punch we get as Peter listens to the last voice message his Uncle left him, professing fatherly affection. Garfield and Stone have even better chemistry, and indeed Amazing Spider-Man is often at its best when watching the two young leads trading snappy flirtatious dialogue or (in one scene) maturely discussing the dangers of Peter’s heroics. Stone is a much better heroine than Kirsten Dunst’s Mary Jane (smart and feisty, rather than hapless and dramatic) – though she’s still given little to actually do besides to stare into her co-star’s eyes in key scenes (which she does well).
Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone in 'Amazing Spider-Man'
When the first hour is up, and the film inevitably transitions into the superhero blockbuster we’ve been waiting for, the rough seams quickly start show. The studio had to know that an indie director like Marc Webb would be somewhat out of his element handling such big-budget action fare – but to his credit, Webb (with a good deal of assistance, no doubt) manages to keep things together – if only barely.
The Spider-Man action in the film is better than ever, thanks to some improved conceptualization (Spider-Man actually moves and fights like a spider) and a whole lot of superior technology. The cinematography is gorgeous and there are well-staged practical stunts that help avoid an over-reliance on CGI – and even the effects-heavy portions of the film (like the character of The Lizard) are handled reasonably well. The 3D effects are phenomenal whenever Spider-Man suits up to do some web-slinging, but are almost non-existent in the domestic scenes. You could go an hour before really needing to put on the glasses.
Pacing and editing are the two biggest issues in the film – and this is very apparent in some of the rushed set pieces that are wedged into the second and third acts. Example: a second-act sewer battle seeks to build tension and suspense, only to come to an abrupt end – followed by a speedy and awkward transition into a high school battle sequence. The entire character of “Curt Connors” becomes an extraneous narrative concern as the Spider-Man action ramps up, and a lot of the primary plot threads that galvanize the movie get pushed off onto an inevitable sequel, so that time and space are freed up for Spidey to pound on (or get pounded by) the mostly arbitrary villain that is The Lizard.
The Spider-Man action is cooler, but totally at odds with the deeper story that precedes it; the initial character and world building are handled much better than the hollow and cartoonish Raimi film, but those threads are ultimately left dangling without much resolution or acknowledgement. What we’re left with is a pastiche of scenes that are, generally speaking, all interesting, impactful or ‘cool,’ but when looked at as a whole, are clearly the rough stitch-work of an inexperienced tailor.
Whether that “tailor” is Webb, screenwriters James Vanderbilt (Zodiac), Alvin Sargent (the original Spider-Man trilogy) and Steve Kloves (the Harry Potter films) – or simply some meddling studio executives, we may never know. But whatever the case, the fact is that The Amazing Spider-Man is somewhat at odds with itself. And while that might be a fitting metaphor for the character himself, as a film seeking to justify its own new beginning, Amazing Spider-Man ends up being a solid relaunch, rather than a “good” or (wait for it) “amazing” one. The potential is there for a much bigger, better, Spider-Man movie universe to come, even if this movie doesn’t fully realize that potential.
For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant team check out our Amazing Spider-Man episode of the SR Underground podcast.
If you want to talk about the movie in detail, head over to our Amazing Spider-Man Spoilers Discussion, or rate the movie for yourself below.
Loading ...-
The Amazing Spider-Man is now playing in theaters. It is Rated PG-13 for sequences of action and violence.
Head to Game Rant for our review of The Amazing Spider-Man tie-in game!
Our Rating:
3.5 out of 5
Stephen King ‘Zombie’ Film ‘Cell’ To Be Directed by ‘Paranormal Activity 2′ Helmer 
‘Arrow’ Season 1 Finale Review 
J.J. Abrams Planned ‘Star Trek’ TV Show; Rights Issues Led to Jump to ‘Star Wars’? 
‘Riddick’ Full Trailer: Riddick Gets Unchained (Plus New Images) 
The soundtrack sounded cheap and unoriginal too.
I agree. I was loving the techno feel from the trailers and was hoping they would stay in that direction. Nothing was memorable about the score.
I would give it 3 out of 5. I loved the more modern take and the cast, so I was expecting great things after the first few minutes, but from there on I was disappointed. The Lizard felt like a very half-hearted crossbreeding of Green Goblin and Dr. Octopus, not nearly as convincing as either of them. The actually spider bite and web-shooter plot elements were glossed over without sufficient explanation. Yet another film that just did not feel to me like it worked as a whole. But again, great cast, great Spidey costume. It had its moments. I agree with the review that the “domestic” scenes were far better than the “superhero” parts.
I LOVE this review! I was “discussing” this movie with a co-worker who HATED it. After a discussion about the movies and the comics, he did not like the reboot because Uncle Ben didn’t say “With great power comes great responsibility.”
Yes, the first half of the film was better. The Lizard was generic, but the effects were good. I loved the handling of Captain Stacy, even if it was rushed (and the comment about the people close to you dying…if they get some good screenwriters to explore the original story, the next movie or two could be amazing.)
I expected this movie to really be awful, and the reasons it surpassed my expectations, I credit to Marc Webb. However, I can see Sony counting its money and releasing a “Batman and Robin” piece of crap on the public in 2014. I hope I’m wrong, but I still believe Spider Man 3 was THE WORST Spider Man film was because of studio influence…
Nice Review!Check out mine!
I love the obligatory continuation of the destruction of the Rami films, and how it’s managed to be done by this reviewer while at the same time tactfully jumping around language that subtlety admits that despite being “solid,” this reboot couldn’t cut the mustard.
Methinks there’s something to that.
I just watched this movie and was bored out of my mind. nuff said.
Me too. I kept looking at my watch. Not because I was in a hurry, but because I wanted to note how long this movie was taking to go where we know it’s going. The Raimi movie had the origin of Spider-man and Green Goblin in under twenty minutes. Spider-man had learned about responsibility and was in his finished costume in under an hour. This movie dragged. Really? Couldn’t there have been an “origin” in about 15 minutes? The whole parents thing was so annoying. It was front and center, taking up time, and going nowhere (untold story indeed), except as a promise (or “threat”) of sequels. That couldn’t have waited?
I agree with Nostelg-O, it took to long to take from A to B. Also, we didn’t see the first suits spider-man made before turning as it is now. I liked on how Raimi did it.
Wow, you are so correct !
I love the Raimi movies (now more than ever), but I’ll grant they are what they are. They are “cartoony.” But I think it works. It allows for a lot of implausibility and nonsense. Going the “reality” route begs scrutiny, and it doesn’t stand up.
I’m not saying there couldn’t be a different take on Spider-man, or even a darker take. In fact, I’d welcome it. But it appears that Webb has no handle on a large production. Surely there are tons of promising directors with experience. Raimi, Nolan, and Peter Jackson had all made strong impressions with several independent films. In the end their movies look like their movies. They sound like their movies. The soundtrack was so “off.” It sounded like some prepackaged hero theme and didn’t fit (what would?). The designs were off. I think the only “vision” Webb brought to this production was Peter’s wooing of Gwen with his open mouth misdirecting smiles and glances (although I liked his last line). Otherwise, there was a random haphazard look to everything, as if the director just accepted everything anyone came up with, without any input. No style.
That may be what Sony wanted. Someone malleable. The movie made minor changes, but really also made sure to strike the obvious notes. “Mary Jane” is smart and blond. If they were going back to high school they couldn’t have him fall on his face romantically with Liz Allen and/or Betty Brandt? No, the bosses insist on a clear romance.
I watched this last night and I will say that I found it thoroughly enjoyable. The characters were more realistically fleshed out and better acted than previously seen, especially Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacy. So much better than Kirsten Dunst’s Mary Jane, morose joke that she was. Their relationship was really well done. And the Spidey aspect of it was better as well IMO. the look, the attitude even the way he moved, I loved the parkour in this movie. Even the costume, despite what people have said, looks more like something that was home made than the Raimi films. All in all, this was more like the Spider-man I grew up reading.
If Kofi needs a replacement I’m there…everything I was thinking after seeing ASM was thrown into my face from that review…”wait for it”…not amazing” lol…
I don’t know what movie the haters here saw. This reboot blows the Rami movies out of the water. All the comments about “it took to long to get going”. It seems people usually complain that not enough time is spent building up the characters and these movies are all cheap thrills. I guess a lot of folks were just looking for SM 4. I like the 1st two SM movies. They still are good. SM 3 totally sucked (like Street Fighter sucked). There was no going back after that POS.
This new take offers Sony the chance to do what was done with the Avengers characters and create a larger movie universe that can become a sandbox for years to come.
I do agree the “responsibility” quote should have been there, but they introduced to flip side of that coin. If power has responsibility, actions have consequences. Regardless of intention.
Saw the movie yesterday – made me shell out more money for the ticket (so they can show more collections I guess :-/) and I get to see a rehash of a story already told. All that money spent and they can’t tell a new story (of spidey – who has been swinging through sooo many tales over decades?)? Only Gwen is an improvement on MJ in previous versions and some nice 3D effects. In action and desire to see again and again it cannot touch Spiderman 2. Good while you see it – out of mind as soon as you walk out of the hall (except for Gwen perhaps..). (Aside: As to Avengers I heard the audience was snoring away (India) … thank God I didn’t waste my money on that).
I saw this one Friday and really liked it. Overall this was much more like the Spiderman I grew up with. The Raimi films never did cut it for me. And Andrew Garfield, while not perfect is a much better Peter Parker. And Gewn Stacy is much better than Kirstine Dunst’s Mary Jane. I did not care too much for the CGI on the Lizard, however. The 3D was pretty good. Spiderman 2 was pretty good, best of the first three, but that was Alfred Molina as Doc Ock. Macguire was never Peter Parker.
I’d give it a 4 out of 5.
(Some spoilers): Couldn’t disagree more about the action and set pieces. I think Raimi’s style of kinetic direction was miles better than Webb’s. When Raimi’s camera follows Spidey webslinging his way through the canyons of New York, I felt as though I was at the end of that string. Webb’s camera was more static, content to show Spidey from a fixed location. Cliff Robertson was better than Sheen. Dafoe better than what’s his name. And Maguire better than Garfield. In fact, Garfield’s constant squinched up face-making, curled upper lip mugging and bird like head movements when courting Gwen Stacy was downright distracting and I started to think there was something wrong with him physically. Now, Emma Stone was breathtaking. That gal has unbelievable screen presence and was able to make the most out of a limited part. Another thing that bothered me is that it seemed as though they found every excuse they could to remove Spidey’s mask. Garfield as Spidey spent more time unmasked than covered up. It showed no confidence in the character, in my opinion. There were little improvements, like web shooting but also “Puh-leeze” moments of disbelief, like how Parker can just walk into an advanced lab experiment and get rained on by spiders, or how he can walk off with technologically advanced materials like the web liquid. There was one scene that I thought was excellent, however, andthat was when he constructed the web in the sewer to use it as a communication device as a real spider does. Good idea, that.
Glad someone else felt the same as I did on Garfield’s facial expressions.
The reason for getting “rained on by spiders” was because he made the #1 mistake while being in a science lab of any kind. He grabbed a thick strand of the webing being spun which grabbed the spiders attention thus making them crawl up. When they did they got zapped back down which made them fall on Pete. As for the walking out with anything besides the spider that bit him. If you actually paid attention to the costume creation scene he ordered it. it was originally just meant to be for construction purposes. But with his scientific genius (which he also has in the comics & cartoons) he took out the key components & created web shooters using mostly just the chemicals, projectile machenisms, & a a couple wrist watches.
Dafoe & what’s his name played two entirely different characters sooooo there’s really no comparison, you’re better off going by the original Curt (who barely made an appearance in SM2) & this one. As far as Uncle Ben & Pete go the new models are more realistic & far exceed the old. Uncle Ben’s death felt forced & was easy to brush off and forget in the first movie. In this one they actually set it up quite nicely & were able to actually make me care about what happened to him & the reactions of those close to him. Peter & Spidey both were major improvements. Peter was more relatable (which is what Marvel is known for) and wasn’t such a whinny b****. The original just made me think that a little kid lost his dog but eventually got over it. This one actually reflected how most people act when they lose someone because of misplaced actions & bad judgment (one giant rush of mixed emotions beyond just sad & whimpery). Spidey is better than ever his slimmer appearance fit better with his speed & agility making his movements look more fluid. He also had just the right amount of quipage with just the right timing & delivery, something Toby could never pull of.
If anything I think that the reason many people making negative comments is due to the fact that the Rammi Trilogy is still fresh, andthey spent more time comparing while watching than just watching then comparing later. My main gripes with this film were more or less is the fact that they kinda rushed things with Gwen & Captin Stacey. It would’ve been better had they both not found out at all who Spidey is especially since Pete Barely knows Gwen. Which brings me to my second concern, they never establish how much time passes in the movie. (First he’s a kid, now he’s some age in some grade of highschool, now he’s finding things in the basement, he meets Gwen but they don’t know eachother, wait yes they do, Meets Curt, formula’s done & being manufactured in several sized valves in a day, I’m Spider-Man & she’s cool with it, I have SPOILER cuts allllllll over my face by the end of my main fight but they’re all gone by the time the funeral for Gwen’s dad is here SPOILER). The third problem is the fact that Aunt May doesn’t do much to confront Peter, & Peter never really comes up with a plauseable explaination for why he’s out so late, or how he keeps getting injured. His attempts at hiding his injuries are pretty weak at best. The fourth and final flaw I found is the fact that they never fully establist the extent of Pete/Spidey’s powers, and that can also be said about the original trilogy too. They just generally leave it up for speculation. In the comics pretty much all of him can stick to anything & it can be pretty hard to get unstuck, so the gloves help by adding an extra layer to be just the right amount of sticky. His stregnth, speed,and agility, though, increased have their limits (until dawning the black suit(plus that bathroom scene was ripped off from Wolverine)). They also never mention that he also has his own healing factor. It’s not as excessive as Wolverine, Hulk, or Deadpool’s, but he still has one strong enough to heal fractures in a matter of hours, & temporary blindness in days.
But hey that’s my 2 cents anyway. :/
I saw this in IMAX 3D and the 3d itself wasn’t that magnificent. There were some shots and sequences that I thought were cool, but for most of the movie, I wasn’t impressed. I kept taking my glasses off to make sure there wasn’t a smudge on them.
I would give anything to erase the memory of this movie from my mind. With the exception of Emma Stone and Rhys Ifans the cast was dreadful. Martin Sheen and Sally Fields as Ben and May was a slap in the face to true fans of the characters. Garfield couldn’t deliver a witty remark to save his life. It didn’t help that the writers couldn’t even come close to Spider-man’s witty banter. The Lizard was atrocious. Looked way too much like the Goomba from the Super Mario Bros movie made in the 90′s in the face. As far as technology has come this is the best cgi they could come up with? Truly sad. What made the costume designers think that the BMX style boots were a good idea? Makes a true fan wonder how he sticks to walls with such thick soles. The web shooters were a nice addition. Plot wise the story was weak. Same old story being retold. Some parts drug out far too long while others were rushed to the point it left some feeling cheated. The origin story needed a fresh spin on it while staying true to the character so many love. Not the bland mix of Ang Lee’s Hulk and Raimi’s origin stories that we were subjected to. The action was sub par and forgettable. All in all to this die hard and long time Spider-man fan I feel cheated. What should have been an epic movie turned out to be another let down from Sony Pictures. They need to release their rights to the Spider-man franchise back to Marvel Pictures so they can make a true Spider-man movie new and old fans will enjoy and not forget a year or two down the line. I give the movie a 1.5. And in my opinion that’s being generous.
Why is everyone clamoring for Sony to sell the rights to Marvel? Right now, that would be a horrible idea. One, think of the cost of acquiring the rights. It would be very very high. It could cause Marvel to not put so much money into a particular movie, less, lowering the quality. Secondly, Marvel is booked right now until 2017 or so with the Avengers. They have their planned movie dates set. How would they be able to even make a Spider-Man movie with 3 movies coming out a year already? Why put Spider-Man on the back burner? Even if they do rush out a release, that quality could suffer as well. Who says some of the things that Sony added in, Marvel wouldn’t have? The fact is, as of right now, Spider-Man should belong to Sony. As for the future, who knows. Oh, and I doubt even if they brought Spidey aboard, he would be added to the Avengers. It’s already going to be a little over crowded. Imagine the budget just for actor’s pay… Geesh.
This was not the story of the birth a superhero. This was the story of something else entirely that had nothing to do with SpiderMan. It was almost like a strange combination of a lot of movies before it ; SupReturns, BBegins, Ang Lee’sHulk, and a little Twilight dashed in there. Like a cake with all these different ingredients that ultimately ruined it completely. You were really forced to have a renewed appreciation for Raimi’s Spidey films, which were not even really ‘perfect’ films.
Well the villains in Raimi’s films surely out did the Lizard, not a bad take on the Lizard/Conner but the other Spidey movie villains were above that performance imo. I was totally into ASM but it dragged on far too long, if it was a Peter Parker movie I would give it a 5/5 but seeing as how it was named The Amazing Spiderman, and I actually got to see Spiderman thrown in there with his, dare I say it, less screen time…I think it deserves a 3/5.
Far too early for a reboot if you ask me.
I thought this was a better movie than the original. I really enjoyed Aunt May and Uncle Ben and George Stacy…also I thought Garfield was infinitely better than Maguire. He’s younger and pulls off the nerd geek better. Gwen Stacy is hotter and at least more personality than Gwen Stacy…she wasn’t any ordinary damsel in distress.
*Mary-Jane Watson; Kirsten Dunst
I think the main thing I prefer about the original trilogy is Parkers misfortune. I know his parents left/uncle died, but Tobys character being so unlucky gave me a certain connection with him and made some really funny moments.
Also I think the whole leaving plots unresolved was done terribly…I mean when you watch the trailer It really does seem like something epic is taking place that his parents have caused….but…Where was it in the film…Just cause your making a sequel doesnt mean you have to leave huge plotholes…I felt like I was watching an episode of Lost-Meets spiderman
But saying that I did enjoy the film and it was entertaining
its AMAZING how the producers of the movie & fans never seen pass a character of super hero comics classic in its modern lack of SCI-fi logic, get it, he is spider – man, a man like a spider, so he climbs,(how?…because he is a spider…’maan’, ok, so they apply the hair folic like spokes that now stick out, only in his palm & feet? or just through the gloves & shoes when he is not in a full clothing costume. then the notion of web slinging was also in question from the comic book classic, so much of pure man-made invented web spewing threads that made was only recent applied with the added Namo-tech elements, that was made from that one lab he visited ( in SP 3D), almost never ran out, never left a trail & some how lasted long enough to sleep camp over night in a deep Sewer,strong enough to hold two to three vehicles hanging on a line, yet easily breaks when he needs it to, they made also ‘Peter’ be a Mutating being that was so strong , he was a super-man who doesn’t have a directors granted production license to Fly, yet has no weakness like Superman did with celestial elements…although this is not a topic or praise or Geer of superman, Superman was formed through the space travel of pure solar & galactic energy harvest by Natures morphs nurtured powers in a alien-made craft chamber that he traveled in.
Although Spider-man is some how able to be cut or shot/penetrated if he wasn’t sense aware of what was already going to happen any second. Fans of Spiderman just got so into the SWING of the whole solo-crusader of historical organized activities that was friendly enough to help the community, yet now is considered organized CRIME, to the local & Gov. Cops (like in the movies). the same pampas self declaring judgment of a solo-watch-over-us dude, who plays Icon of stealth organized law enforcement that makes the UCLA get over whelmed in disputes, while local cops get framed for doing or accepting the ‘in-just’… yet is not part of the system of outcaste banished isolated of religious imposed version Crime-fighting-heroes.’, but alt least we all can learn to admire an amazing person who swings the night away without drinking & swinging… SUI (just like DUI lol). ” …wooot!!! “.
I just saw the film today I give it a 3 1/2 out of 5, was pretty good. Hope the sequel makes this franchise what it deserves
Although I think this one was better than Sam Raimi`s SP with cinematography, story-line, and CGI.
I`m confused with the ending credit, Dr. Connors apparently was talking with a ghost that left me skeptical. Is Richard Parker a villain ???
I do miss the cartoon, never emulated real-life produced, the Savvy mercenary hang-out buddies known as ‘Spider-man & Friend’. this was never applied in the real-life image movies in ANY trilogy or series, yeah once again, mutant profiles, unlike what actually known as enhanced beings, mutant is a phrase known as a disability genetically, or handy-cap, its a cruel title that stereotype like X-Mens’ say to them selves as “mutants”. when they are actually man-kind enhanced freaks of nature. Not genetically disabled people.
As for ‘Spider-mans friends’ they are also like ‘X-Mens’… Ice-man would be the hardest SCI-fi logic to apply with that trail of ice sheet in mid air Hoover path, if they at least swap that for some kind of short range Nitro spray ghastly thrust, that way it would be turning him into a flying Mercury-man that is actually COLD ICE. Fire-Star would be one HOT dame to any other Fire Starter out there to match. ‘Spider-man & Friends’ would be a team work of also 3D treat for the ratings
There was certainly something missing with this film. I was so emotionally detached toward the end that I no longer cared about who lived or died, or if there was even anything truly at stake. The Lizard’s grand plan to turn everyone into lizards was totally random and out of nowhere. Things dragged along for like 45 min., only to suddenly go so fast that it soon became a film about randomness. Where was the fun aspect of this film? When was Spiderman ever doing something that looked ‘Amazing’? And why in the world did most of the scenes show Spiderman swinging only during the nighttime ? Webb really placed all of his energy in creating the connection between Peter and Gwen… only to coverup the detachment he has from the Spiderman character itself. Not to mention that your friendly neighborhood high school band instructor was chosen to do the film score.
I liked this spider man more then raimi’s take because imo this peter parker/ spiderman was way less whiney and had better smart ass comedic diologue that was more on par with the comics. That reason alone is why I liked this one more.
Just got back from the film. I enjoyed it for the most part.
Overall I like Garfield’s physicality and look over Maquire’s for PP/Spidey. Acting-wise he’s ok, just needs to streamline some of his angsty moments. Some of the ‘awkward’ Peter-Gwen relationship-building moments were a little too drawn out and eye-rolling for my tastes.
Hopefully the character himself is shown to grow up and progress in terms of maturity and confidence, rather then regress like Raimi did between Spidey 1, 2 and 3.
I do like the more ‘cartoony’ (if that is the right term) style that Raimi was going for in the first couple of Spidey flicks. Done poorly and you stray into lightweight forgettable fluff, but done right you approach the kind of Golden/Silver Age comic-book-to-screen vibe that the original Superman achieved. Raimi pulled this off in SM1 I feel. Webb was going for a more modern gritty and realistic tone, and for the most part did a good job of it.
I enjoyed the heck out of the actual Spidey action in this film, however. The CGI, camera and stuntwork really did justice to what I think Spidey is capable of. I felt more connection existed between Spidey and the world around him, the city and his surroundings. Chalk it up to better tech, but it was good to see it applied to good affect onscreen.
The actual storyline had some problems I think. Some plotlines seemed glossed over (or lingered upon unnecesarily), and Dr. Conner’s motivations were a little odd and oversimplified. But overall in terms of style, tone and visual ‘language’ for Spidey action they did a fine job. Not a classic comic book movie by any means, but a good-enough Spidey flick.
I’m sorry, but Peter Parker as a whiny 21st Century emo teen just doesn’t work. If I wanted to spend 2 hours with some emo teenager, I would’ve taken a trip to the nearest Hot Topic. I think I’ll go watch Raimi’s first Spidey film now so I can get the taste of this one out of my mouth.
well the phrase would be a ‘Science geek’… um emo? heh (great choice of profile lol), has nothing to do with this, unless those steel wrest bands caught on to the web while lifting a vehicle… so far he is solo, no-resource as a crusader, very limited action suspense of survival, even bat-man has the local enforcers in favor, captain America had the pentagon ( or should), 007 had the British army as a back up, Peter is all a lone in this fight. for real, the taste will not change as it already served
I have read several reviews on this fun which have said this film is good or great. I have seen it twice and both times sucked equally! I was very disappointed when I seen it opening night, but I thought I’d give it a second chance. Story is terrible, no connection with characters, music and sound horrible. The only things i liked was the spidey suit and the wise cracking Spiderman I love in the comics. I am starting to believe that people who write these reviews are paid by the marketers of the film. If the Amazing Spiderman was truly better than Spiderman 2002 the box office numbers would have shown it. The movie sucks…big time.
When I watched the movie when it first came out, I told my friend we really had to come here or it’ll be sold out, the first show was SOLD OUT so then she was like “We should go to the 6:30PM one.” And we were using the credit card machine to PICK out seats, the line for the cash register was very long, so we went to the machine ALL the seats were pretty much taken until I told my friend look you can sit in front of me, I’ll sit behind you there was about 3 – 8 seats left and we were lucky to get those ones. We got to go the second show 4:40PM, the movie was great the story was actually very nice & easy to follow. Instead of the other 3 Spider-man movies, I say this one is unique because Webb was able to follow the comic, do the right suit, but I still like the other suit. The reason WHY they couldn’t say “With great power, comes great responsibility” Is because they didn’t want to copy the other 3 Spider-man movies. And the reason why they replaced Tobey was because apparently “he was payed 50 million” & he was 30+ years old, you honestly want some guy 30+ years old? He isn’t a very good actor & he can BARLEY show emotion WHY, because he is older & has a wife that’s he is in love with. Emma & Andrew were great since they FELL in love on set, this rarely happens so the love was true & real emotions came out. If the other 3 Spider-man movies came out it would of been better, this movie would probably have been one of the biggest movies why? Because everyone is to use to the older films.
Think about it, the older films were outdated & Spider-man 3 sucks & it felt like it was rushed on if they filmed Spider-man 4 they would of probably made the movie crappy, like look at Tobey he couldn’t even PLAY a bad boy when he had the blue suit on all they did was fix his hair and add mascara it was horrible! The story actually makes sense & is easy to understand, I am a girl and I actually FELT like I was going to cry. There was a HUGE amount of girl audience so it wasn’t “Only for boys, there was also a lot of hot boys watching the film too and Andrew was VERY H0T.
The movie was PERFECT to get to A to B, you guys are just idiots then that was EXACTLY like the Avengers it took so LONG just to get to the fight & it was very boring, I felt like walking away from the movie all I liked was Black Widow & Iron Man, I honestly hate the Hulk & Captain America is just an attention sucking character, all he is is just a “Big Fake Man” hiding under his real self who is a wimpy kid who sucked at Boot-camp. I like to mention Tobey was such a fame hog, all it was really about was “Tobey, this Tobey that!” It was BS all he did was hog the fame. In THIS Spider-man movie the cops would NEVER trust him and kept going after him, they thought Spider-man was BAD this was MUCH better so this means in the second film a lot of people will like him meaning MORE FIGHTING and butt-kicking. It’s exactly like Iron man 2 it took so long just to get to the fights, but I loved the story. As long as it’s a good story that’s sweet, unique, romance, caring, easy to follow then it gets my thumbs up. (y) You don’t see movies like this anymore, appreciate WHAT we have all there is is crappy movies about sex & that BS enjoy it, the number of pervs are increasing = Sex movies.
I can’t wait to see the next Spider-man movie, they should really get more advanced writers to make the story better, follow the comic