Columbia Pictures | Release Date: May 2, 2014
6.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1449 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
814
Mixed:
412
Negative:
223
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
8
CTHReviewsFeb 3, 2018
Still don't know why this got such horrible reviews. Is the Goblin just shoved into the end? Yeah. Does Max Dillion come off as too dorky before he becomes Electro? Yeah. But the strengths of this movie are still very strong. The creativityStill don't know why this got such horrible reviews. Is the Goblin just shoved into the end? Yeah. Does Max Dillion come off as too dorky before he becomes Electro? Yeah. But the strengths of this movie are still very strong. The creativity of the action sequences, the chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma stone is still solid, and even some setups for future movies weren't that bad either. It still fit in with what the first movie started. Not great, but still a very solid movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
JunelKeanJul 9, 2017
The friendly neighborhood web-crawler is back in The Amazing Spiderman 2. Would it be as amazing as what we would expect from the title? Well yes, for some of the parts, but as a whole, this movie's plot is convoluted, filled with subplotsThe friendly neighborhood web-crawler is back in The Amazing Spiderman 2. Would it be as amazing as what we would expect from the title? Well yes, for some of the parts, but as a whole, this movie's plot is convoluted, filled with subplots clashing everywhere and introduction of too many villains, including a sneak peek or set-up for the Sinister Six.

Marc Webb is on hands with this material, returning as the director. And Alex Kurtzman of Star Trek is serving as the scriptwriter with two others. Their clunky storytelling is the major issue here. All of the subplots they included are clashing poorly to create a cohesive plot: there is the intimate relationship of Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, the introduction to many villains (DeHaan, Foxx & Giamatti), too many endings, plus there is a subplot involving Peter's dad, which feels out-of-place.

Indeed Garfield's portrayal of Spiderman is the selling point of the movie. His chemistry with Stone is the proof of how successful and convincing they are as a couple and love team on screen.

VERDICT: Although the StoneField chemistry is here, the highs are being eaten by the lows.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MonkiReviewsDec 16, 2017
The movie felt rushed. The story was to much put into one. The villain wasn!t entertaining, the script needed work, and the special effects seemed like a downgrade. Also, it isn’t very memorable. It is my least favorite Spider-Man movie. IThe movie felt rushed. The story was to much put into one. The villain wasn!t entertaining, the script needed work, and the special effects seemed like a downgrade. Also, it isn’t very memorable. It is my least favorite Spider-Man movie. I would still recommend you watch it though, it isn’t bad, but not good either. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
mrdr4gonDec 15, 2017
Mixed in the truest sense of the word. The visuals, direction and the central performances are all fantastic, but the script being worked from is one of the worst scripts ever in a superhero movie. The whole thing seems like it's been **** upMixed in the truest sense of the word. The visuals, direction and the central performances are all fantastic, but the script being worked from is one of the worst scripts ever in a superhero movie. The whole thing seems like it's been **** up by studio interference beyond recognition. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
inaneswineNov 14, 2017
With Peter and Gwen's relationship bearing more resemblance to the Twilight franchise with every passing moment, the monotony of the story is occasionally broken up by an array of impressive visuals and quirky humour. Nonetheless, nobodyWith Peter and Gwen's relationship bearing more resemblance to the Twilight franchise with every passing moment, the monotony of the story is occasionally broken up by an array of impressive visuals and quirky humour. Nonetheless, nobody should be too excited about this film other than the most die-hard Spiderman fans. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SrPepeNov 13, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Lo bueno de esta película es la muerte de Gwen, luego de eso me parece muuuuuuuuy aburrida. Además porque Peter se *** en la promesa con su suegro tan rápido?! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
RagnamaximaOct 15, 2017
A below-average movie that saddly doesn´t reach it´s potential and ended up bitting more than what it could chew. There are some highlights though. The CGI es pretty solid, the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is undenniably charming andA below-average movie that saddly doesn´t reach it´s potential and ended up bitting more than what it could chew. There are some highlights though. The CGI es pretty solid, the chemistry between Garfield and Stone is undenniably charming and the OST is pretty good. But saddly that doesn´t excuse the incoherent plot, lack of action scenes and a pretty unsatisfying climax. It´s not awful but it´s a low point for the Spiderman movies Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
ReatanSep 21, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 This movie illustrates the story following The Amazing Spider-Man that was shown in 2012. In this film, Peter was worried about the relationship between him and Gwen, and he also did not know whether he should continue to be the spider man or not.

The movie starts with a graduation ceremony, and Gwen gave a speech because she was the top of the high school. I was absolutely moved by her speech especially when she said “what makes life valuable is that it does not last forever, what makes it precious is that it ends”. I could understand that this speech foresaw her death at a later time. Also, her words made me feel like I want to value my life more now. In my opinion, there was another scene that foresaw her death, the scene when Peter was likely to give up searching for the clue of his parents’s death but he didn't in the end. Also the song that he listened to then makes me feel Gwen’s death. The song’s name is Gone Gone Gone, and part of the lyrics say “I love you long after you are gone”. I felt that in the movie, there were some hints that lead to the ending and that interesting. Also, when it comes to love, everyone tends to think of the relationship between man and woman but in this film, it shows many different kinds of loves such as among friends and among families. Especially when Peter met Harry for the first time in a while. Their friendship seemed to be good at first. However Harry realized that spider man’s blood may be able to cure his sickness, and he asked Peter for help as he often takes pictures of spider man. However, Peter doesn't want to do that because he didn’t think it would work well. Because of that, their friendship started to break. I could see that to love or to be loved is not a simple thing, and sometimes it needs greater patience but it makes people grow and become strong. Through some difficulties, Peter grew little by little.

In spite of spider man’s effort, Gwen died in the end. I was so surprised by the this because most movies conclude with a happy ending, so I expected that she would not die. In terms of that, this movie is a bit different from others and new to me. Moreover, although she died, she motivates Peter to help people as the spider man. He was very depressed after she passed away but the words that she left saved him from the dark, and encouraged him. I am sure that these points make this movie “amazing”. The unpredictable climax made me think the of the importance and difficulties of love.

In terms of the quality of an image, it was definitely an improvement from first one. For example, the biggest change that I realized was the introduction of photography which makes us feel like we are the spider man. Thanks to the photography, audiences could fly among many buildings in New York like spider man. I felt like I was more into the story than before. Moreover, I saw the 3D version of it, so it was thrilling and really fun. I thought it felt like it was not just a movie, but the attraction of the theme park.

Next, In this movie, two bad guys appeared, and there are two fight scenes. One of them is electron. He used to be a normal person who had a kind heart, but he changed into a horrible guy who can use electricity freely. His change showed us the feeling that exists in the bottom of the human heart. The battle scene between spider man and him took place in the center of New York so he had to prevent people from electron’s attacks. He tried so hard to save people, and he used some wit to fight electron. For example, he pretended to be a fireman, and by using water, he stopped him. Even the serious fight scene, he tried to make people laugh, and I think the thing like that is peculiar to him, and that is why a lot of people love spider man.

I did not expect the ending, and the more the story went on the more I wanted to know what was going to happen next. Also, it was interesting to see this movie again after knowing the ending because you may be able to find some messages from the characters which are related to the climax that you could not realize at first. To conclude, some points did not change from the first movie and other points did change so it combined perfectly, and made this movie awesome.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
JLuis_001Sep 6, 2017
Frustration and restlessness were the emotions I felt at the end of the screening of this film.
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is an unfinished film, by far the weakest in the whole Spider-Man series.
And this happens because the script is vacuum,
Frustration and restlessness were the emotions I felt at the end of the screening of this film.
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is an unfinished film, by far the weakest in the whole Spider-Man series.
And this happens because the script is vacuum, the plot is a total mistake, there is no depth anywhere, none of the subplots is interesting and all the characters that appear lack of good things to say.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
PresidentTrumpJul 24, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is just bad. The acting is terrible, it's like everyone was locked into a contract that they couldn't get out of and had to do this movie. The chemistry between actors is lacking. It seems like Emma Stone hated the script for her character. You can see she wants no part in it. When onscreen, you can barely tell Peter and Harry are friends and if you know nothing about Spiderman you would assume their coworkers or something that are forced to work together. It's like Andrew Garfield and Dane DeHann hated each other in real life. Aunt May fails to provide any pure emotion in the film. When she's crying it seems like she's tired rather than sad. I think the only real emotion we got was from Jamie Foxx, too bad that was overshadowed by a poor script and bad character writing.

The story is quite lame too. The love story between Gwen Stacey and Peter is pretty forced and off and on to the point it honestly gets annoying (I think Emma Stone thought the same). Electro was a pretty lame villain. He had a lot of potential to be cool, but I don't think anyone honestly cared to write a good script anymore. Gwen Stacey's death was sad, but if I didn't say it was predictable, I would be lying. As someone who occasionally read the comics, I wasn't shocked at all at Gwen Stacey's death. Hell, if you never read the comics it's still predictable. They give her a super long amount of screen time instead of Mary Jane, weird, right? Well, that's because she gets killed. If Gwen Stacey was part of the love triangle between Peter, Mary Jane, and herself it would be more interesting to watch and to see her die because of Peter would be even sadder and less predictable and develop Peter's character in the third movi- oh wait.

Can we just talk about that stupid GODDAMN ENDING!? Okay, they had a Rhino fight scene, hell yeah I love Rhino. I was hyped to see Rhino, they ended the trailer mid fight scene. Dope, so that means I get to see the rest of that fight scene, right? No. No, you don't. The movie ends the same way the trailer ends. Mid fight. Right before Spiderman hits Rhino, cut to black. I thought there was something wrong with the projector at the movie theater. But when the credits started rolling I could hear everyone in the theater click their tounges and moan out "awww man". YOU CAN'T JUST CUT TO A CLIFFHANGER WHEN THATS HOW YOUR TRAILER ENDED. If you PROMISED a Rhino fight scene in the trailer, but that fight never really happens, YOU LIED! GOD DAMMIT I WANTED TO SEE RHINO! I've been typing for a while, and sorry if I overwhelmed you and you stopped reading halfway through so here's a TL;DR.

TL;DR: The acting is lame and the writing, and basically everything felt like no one wanted to be there. They made a predictable death scene. They promised a Rhino fight scene that never happened. Bad movie.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
DavidTejadaJul 22, 2017
This TERRIBLE sequel at least could have been good had Webb deepened in "The truly-untold story between Peter and Gwen" (still some of the most romantic moments in superhero movies). It's not bad just because of some terrible performancesThis TERRIBLE sequel at least could have been good had Webb deepened in "The truly-untold story between Peter and Gwen" (still some of the most romantic moments in superhero movies). It's not bad just because of some terrible performances (DeHann as Harry, for example) and the induction of lots of characters, but also because "Amazing 2" manages some of the worst villains of MCU. It was funny the very beginning the fact that GARFIELD added his sense of humor, but this time he just forces it and even annoys the audience. Another thing is that the actual "actions scenes" are DULL AND SLOWWW!!! completely DISAPPOINTING.

So it's just REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKES as "Spider-Man 3" and even making them look worse.

Some reasons why I did not put this movie a RED SCORE was because of three main reasons:
1) EMMA STONE: even though the movie was very bad, she STILL managed to be in her role of Gwen Stacy. She even improved it.
2) The VISUAL EFFECTS: I gotta admit it, those ones were FANTASTIC
3) THE CHEMISTRY PETER-GWEN: Some of the most touching I've ever seen.

So satisfied that there won't be an "Amazing 3", giving a NEW HOPE to Tom Holland in Homecoming... (42%)
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
MrRetroJul 6, 2017
This week (as from right now) is the opening week of Spider-Man Homecoming, the second Spider-Man Reboot. Me and my brother have been watching all the Spider-Man movies coming up to this rare occasion including the Maguire and GarfieldThis week (as from right now) is the opening week of Spider-Man Homecoming, the second Spider-Man Reboot. Me and my brother have been watching all the Spider-Man movies coming up to this rare occasion including the Maguire and Garfield movies. We've enjoyed all of them even including (hello controversy) the fun mess that was Spider-Man 3. The only one that we found to be not so great, was you guessed it, the Amazing Spider-Man 2. I saw this film when it came out in 2014 and my brother and I enjoyed this movie to death, getting the Blu-Ray the day came out. It even got to a point where my younger brother had to protect the movie from kids on the school playground. Now we've watched it a lot since we got the Blu-Ray, but that was mostly in 2015, and we've haven't seen it since. Now, re-watching it two years later I understand why most people hated it. It is a literal mess with too many storylines going on at once mixed with bad incernations from people like Dane Deehan as Harry Osborn/Green Goblin, which was definitely the worst incarnation to date. It's not the actors fault, it's just the bad writing in the script for him and many other characters including electro, rhino, and Gwen Stacy. Even Spider-Man was written poorly at times. I do agree Spider-Man 3 was a mess, but like I said it was a fun mess, this movie is a boring mess that my brother and I didn't get through the first hour. One last thing crappy about this movie is the fact that I feel really bad for Max Dillon. All he needed was a friend and someone that cared about him besides Spider-Man, and to do that to him on his birthday felt crude. Now I'm done ranting on it, let me tell the things I like about it. The biggest thing that I enjoy about this movie is that it can be very visually appealing with things from Spiderman's suit, which is easily the most comic accurate suit we've had, to the CGI, which I think is often overlooked by most people. One final thing, electro should have done dubstep! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
HeroicAgeJun 2, 2017
I think I'm going to watch Spider-Man 3 9999999999999 more times to wash away this filthy commercial for unreleased films. So yeah, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone fail to save Marc Webb this time.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
8
SonicHD7May 31, 2017
Confident in his powers as Spider-Man, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) embraces his new role as a hero and spends time with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) in between protecting New York from criminals. However, his greatest battle yet is about toConfident in his powers as Spider-Man, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) embraces his new role as a hero and spends time with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) in between protecting New York from criminals. However, his greatest battle yet is about to begin. With the emergence of Electro (Jamie Foxx), Peter must confront an enemy far more powerful than he is. And when his old friend Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan) returns, Peter comes to realize that all his enemies have one thing in common: Oscorp. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
FuturedirectorMar 18, 2016
The cast is strong as Spider-man, stunts are thrilling as they should be, and a surprising entertainment blesses this sequel. But at the end, it is fatally saturated of characters almost as the classic Spider-man 3, and the result gets to beThe cast is strong as Spider-man, stunts are thrilling as they should be, and a surprising entertainment blesses this sequel. But at the end, it is fatally saturated of characters almost as the classic Spider-man 3, and the result gets to be unsatisfying. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
JPKMay 13, 2017
Sony, we need to talk
This movie is great in terms of acting, action scenes, special effects, and jokes, and the blooming romance between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy. But this film has the same problems as Spider-Man 3 (Except there's no
Sony, we need to talk
This movie is great in terms of acting, action scenes, special effects, and jokes, and the blooming romance between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy. But this film has the same problems as Spider-Man 3 (Except there's no stupid dance scenes), The script is overstuffed once again with 3 villains (2 if you exclude Rhino who's barley in the movie), And Sony probably made questionable decisions behind the scenes. In conclusion, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is fun but it's flaws cannot be ignored.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
SomePersonaJan 23, 2017
This movie is so convoluted that you can't really say what the general plot actually is. All of the general plots will usually just say Spider-Man faces his toughest challenge yet or something like that. However, the movie has great actingThis movie is so convoluted that you can't really say what the general plot actually is. All of the general plots will usually just say Spider-Man faces his toughest challenge yet or something like that. However, the movie has great acting and great writing in terms of its moments. The villains feel justified as they are developed slowly and eerily, and the final action sequences are delightfully doomed and dark. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
bfoore90Dec 23, 2014
Pretty good movie overall, can't really see why alot of people didn't like it. Andrew Garfield was incredible as Spider-Man/Peter Parker, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx and Dane Dehaan impress as well. This movie has some flaws fundamentallyPretty good movie overall, can't really see why alot of people didn't like it. Andrew Garfield was incredible as Spider-Man/Peter Parker, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx and Dane Dehaan impress as well. This movie has some flaws fundamentally obviously but its nowhere near the franchise killer like Batman & Robin most MCUbots make it out to be. If anything Amazing Spider-Man 2 provided hope that the franchise was headed in the right direction and kept fans like me, interested in the future or what could have been if it had not been cancelled. Expand
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
6
FreedomFightersJan 9, 2017
It's really a shame, because I love Spider-Man. Having enjoyed "The Amazing Spider-Man," I wanted the sequel to be amazing, but unfortunately, the film is just okay. It's visually stellar, the acting is wonderful (especially Andrew GarfieldIt's really a shame, because I love Spider-Man. Having enjoyed "The Amazing Spider-Man," I wanted the sequel to be amazing, but unfortunately, the film is just okay. It's visually stellar, the acting is wonderful (especially Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, who have amazing chemistry as always), and the action scenes are pretty great (even if there is a bit of shaky camera syndrome with this one), but unfortunately, the writing is really unfocused and filled with plot holes/side plots/oddities, and while the film has its share of villains, the problem is that none of them are particularly interesting characters. Really, in terms of characterization, Peter and Gwen are the only interesting characters in this film! I don't want to say that it's not a great film, but that's the unfortunate truth: though it's pretty entertaining, "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" doesn't quite live up to it's title, so you should definitely temper your expectations with this one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Jack97Dec 17, 2016
Merit to this film range from the terrific visuals to the entertaining action. Faults with it are in the plot and structure. The pacing is all over the place and there's a lack of focus thanks to all the interwoven plot points.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
kaizidokillerMay 3, 2014
First off, I did like the performances from the majority of the cast. Andrew Garfield is a great Spider-Man with his wit and comical moments (though hit-and-miss), and a more human Peter Parker than the first film (if overly sentimental). HeFirst off, I did like the performances from the majority of the cast. Andrew Garfield is a great Spider-Man with his wit and comical moments (though hit-and-miss), and a more human Peter Parker than the first film (if overly sentimental). He and Emma Stone have their moments because they both have excellent chemistry. Dane DeHaan almost steals the show as Harry Osborne, who plays pathetic and menacing equally well. Jamie Foxx couldn't have been the worst choice for Electro. Not only was Electro the most uninteresting villain in the film, Max Dillon's goofy, anti-social behaviour just wasn't a good fit for Jamie Foxx's charisma.

The CGI set-pieces were fun to watch and I like how the film tries to be more dramatic as well, like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films. I appreciate action movies with more narrative than action sequences or set-pieces (like this movie) but with all that said, I'm surprised people actually like this movie. The critics are right, the script was overstuffed. It crams too many subplots and too many characters into a bloating running time. This was the problem with Spider-Man 3 (a movie everyone was disappointed with) and it's a bigger problem here, but Marc Webb gets a free pass from the Spider-Man fanboys who didn't like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies because "it didn't follow the comic books" or whatever.

It jumps back and forth between multiple subplots, between his relationship with Gwen, his relationship with Harry, Harry's illness, Electro's origin, and the origin of his parents. I liked the chemistry between Garfield and Stone but the painfully cheesy dialogues makes their relationship look like a Twilight movie. Everyone hates that franchise but because this is a Spider-Man movie, it gets another free pass. Romance is often a subplot in many movies but the romance is (more or less) the main plot of this film, which is fine if it wasn't cliched and Twilight-esque.

His relationship with Harry feels forced, right from the moment Harry mentioned Peter's braces and Peter mentioned him blow-drying and combing his hair all the time or something like that. The origin of Peter's parents had nothing to do with the main plot at all and became irrelevant once the subplot had been resolved. I guess they had to continue where the first film left off but I honestly couldn't care less about his parents.

How do you cram three villains into one movie without being overcrowded? By barely featuring any of them in the film. Rhino only has four minutes of screen time. It was completely pointless! If that's their way of introducing him for the next sequel, they should've just introduced him in the next sequel. The Rhino footage in the trailer is all that you see from him in the film. And the boy standing in front of him trying to be Spider-Man, what a ****ing embarrassment. When you see Spider-Man swinging a manhole cover at the Rhino, that was the beginning of the fight scene and the end of the movie. I wanted to see a fight scene between the two before the movie started but because the movie bored the **** out of me, I couldn't care less that it ended that way.

There's also more Harry Osborne than The Green Goblin and the The Green Goblin was only there to kill off Gwen Stacy. Heartbreaking? Sure, but also contrived. Still, I can't help but feel like The Green Goblin is another wasted villain. Max Dillon is a character I could've felt sympathy for. He's lonely, socially awkward and under-appreciated. Max Dillon could've been a great character, had they not squandered his potential as soon as he became Electro. At that point, the script needed a villain, even if it didn't make sense because Max Dillon is a huge fan of Spider-Man, almost like a creepy stalker. He doesn't even have a justifying motive for killing Spider-Man. Neither did Harry Osborne because why would a blood transfusion cure his illness? And why is his hereditary illness affecting him at a much younger age than his father? I suppose no one in the audience were supposed to notice.

TASM2 tries to be different from the plethora amount of superhero movies that came out recently by having a deeper narrative, which is fine but it falls short in storytelling. It just seems to drag on for far too long and I was hoping the set-pieces would make up for all of the shortcomings, but there was not enough of it due to a lack of balance. The performances, set-pieces and Marc Webb's direction saves the film from being a complete disaster, but as a Spider-Man fan, I was hugely disappointed. I wanted the movie to be as good as Spider-Man 2 because, in my opinion, TASM was as good as Sam Raimi's Spider-Man in its own merit, but this was worse than Spider-Man 3. At least "emo" Peter Parker was more tolerable. TASM2 is painfully and disappointingly average!

5/10 - For some reason, metacritic registered my score as 0 and I can't change it.
Expand
4 of 12 users found this helpful48
All this user's reviews
7
MasterRileyJul 23, 2016
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is very entertaining and enjoyable to watch. Its got lots of great action, comedy, great effects, great music, great performances, and cool villains. The problem with the film is its over stuffed script, much like SamThe Amazing Spider-Man 2 is very entertaining and enjoyable to watch. Its got lots of great action, comedy, great effects, great music, great performances, and cool villains. The problem with the film is its over stuffed script, much like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 3. Three main villains appear in the movie when just one would have been enough. The film should have focused on Electro being the only villain, rather then throwing in the Green Goblin and Rhino as well. The movie tries too hard to set up the next few films that Sony had planned rather than focusing on making just Spider-Man 2 a great and coherent film. Definitely still an enjoyable watch, just don't expect anything ground breaking. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
BlancheJul 1, 2016
A film with too many villains, generally too many under-developed characters and too much emphasis on the relationship between Peter and Gwen. The ratio was poorly calculated. This film had lots of entertaining moments for sure, but itA film with too many villains, generally too many under-developed characters and too much emphasis on the relationship between Peter and Gwen. The ratio was poorly calculated. This film had lots of entertaining moments for sure, but it flopped in certain moments too. For example, I felt that the main villain should have been far stronger than what was portrayed and the resolution was rushed, which in turn didn't allow the film to realise its full potential. As I said earlier, the amount of villain appearances were ridiculous to the point that they were probably there to simply increase the running time. This made the film generally unfocused and lack in direction.

Certainly one of the worst Spider-Man films but I can't say it wasn't worth watching because there certainly was great CGI and cinematography. Generally it was a decent film, but rather than it being empty or boring it was more of a messy film with too much going on.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
Aaron_WassermanJun 1, 2016
I had to really stretch to give it a 7. There is so many missed opportunities, but so many things so well executed. Andrew Garfield is the highlight of this movie, and the reboot as a whole.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
KoplinsMay 9, 2016
This Movie was good. a lot better than Spider-man 3.
too many villains but everything else is okay.
although its disappointing that there wasn't a sequel to this movie because the movie ended with a cliff hanger.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
aadityamudharApr 18, 2016
It's just so bland and boring.... the film lacks a pulse. There was one genuinely heart-felt moment toward the very end of the film that got me, but the rest? Very blah. The second Captain America film was a thousand times better than thisIt's just so bland and boring.... the film lacks a pulse. There was one genuinely heart-felt moment toward the very end of the film that got me, but the rest? Very blah. The second Captain America film was a thousand times better than this film. The chemistry between the two leads is meager, the bad guys don't inspire fear like those in the the Dark Knight series - not even close. You can't even put those two franchises in the same paragraph. I was a HUGE Spider-Man fan as a kid - what a shame that they can't make a good movie for this character. (Or a good video game, for that matter.) Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
UrbanlistenerApr 17, 2016
In my opinion this movie is far better than the first one, more well-rounded and rich in its character development. Andrew Garfield is still very good as spiderman and every scene with him is great and the cast from the first one is still onIn my opinion this movie is far better than the first one, more well-rounded and rich in its character development. Andrew Garfield is still very good as spiderman and every scene with him is great and the cast from the first one is still on point. The romance between him and Gwen feels more natural and necessary to the plot. Electro is a pretty decent villain, his character is interesting and his story arc and motivations are way more clear and coherent than the villain from the first one. As in the previous film, the CG is excellent and every action scene is very well-made and very enjoyable. The main issue with this film is its abundance of bad guys that spiderman has to deal with and maybe too much sub-plots. It becomes a bit convoluted and confusing at some points, but I still think that every new character and story arcs are more interesting, original, emotionally resonant and more developed than the ones in the first film. Yes, there is a lot of sub-plots, but they all tie in together in a decent way, where you can still follow the main point of the movie, even if sometimes it his harder than it should be. The last 15 minutes are indeed a letdown and seem forced and are an obvious unneeded setup for Sinister six, but the rest of the film felt much more interesting, rich in character development, emotional attachment and cohesion in the villains intentions and plans, than the first one, thus much better and fun to watch. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
AaronWasserman1Mar 26, 2016
I had to really stretch to give it a 7. There is so many missed opportunities, but so many things so well executed. Andrew Garfield is the highlight of this movie, and the reboot as a whole.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
ReelViews94Mar 23, 2016
The fifth Spider-Man feature, which is the sequel to the unnecessary reboot, is all over the place, an undercooked cinematic casserole that blends some genuinely touching moments and well-presented action sequences with bad melodrama,The fifth Spider-Man feature, which is the sequel to the unnecessary reboot, is all over the place, an undercooked cinematic casserole that blends some genuinely touching moments and well-presented action sequences with bad melodrama, overlong exposition, and overexposed CGI. There are too many negatives to keep the experience from being the kind of giddy adrenaline rush one hopes for with a Big Summer Flick.

Sitting through The Amazing Spider-Man 2, I had the feeling that screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and Jeff Pinkner and director Marc Webb were throwing everything they could think of at the audience to see what might stick. There are some good moments in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, especially toward the end, but the whole thing seems to have been assembled by filmmakers tone-deaf to what constitutes compelling cinema. Key relationships are given short shrift. The central villain (to the extent that there is one) is all bluster and no menace. The "resolution" to the mystery of Richard and Mary Parker is an anti-climax. Spider-Man is too obviously the product of computer graphic artists as he swings around New York (an oft-heard complaint about the webslinger from back in Sam Raimi's first installment).

A majority of the movie focuses on events in and around Oscorp, the omnipresent New York City tech corporation that employs Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), the platinum blond girlfriend of Peter Parker a.k.a. Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). Gwen is delightful but the same can't be said of Peter, who comes across as a smart aleck. At least early in the proceedings, Peter isn't likable, although the screenplay eventually humanizes him a bit. Worried that his relationship with Gwen might be putting her life in danger, he breaks it off with her. Loving her means letting her go.

Meanwhile, we discover that Peter's childhood best friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), is back in town, having taken over Oscorp following his father's untimely death. After an awkward reunion scene, it's just like old times for these two, but the artificial manner in which Harry's bosom friendship with Peter is forced upon the audience makes this relationship a non-starter.

While Harry and Peter are busy rekindling their bromance, one of Oscorp's loyal electrical engineers, Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), has an accident. After being electrocuted, he falls into a tank of mutant eels and is repeatedly bitten by them. Instead of dying like any self-respecting overzealous worker, he becomes a supervillain called "Electro." The screenplay never bothers to establish the "rules" governing him nor does it do a good job of explaining his limitations. His motives are also poorly defined; what is his soul's desire beyond killing Spider-Man? Electro recalls The Sand-Man in Spider-Man 3: an imposing bad guy who's just around to add some variety to the battle sequences. I suppose the real villain of the piece is The Green Goblin, but he doesn't show up until near the end. There's also The Rhino but his debut comes even later than The Goblin's. Truth is, for about half the running length, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 doesn't have any villains, which results in a meandering screenplay that tries to stay afloat by tricking viewers into thinking they're watching a superhero soap opera.

As one might expect from a real-life couple, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone display some nicely modulated chemistry, although they never quite match Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst for generating sparks. And, while events conspire to knock some of the petulance out of this too-cocky interpretation of Peter Parker, Garfield never completely loses the "too cool for school" air. Spider-Man's enemies are an underwhelming lot. Dane DeHaan, who was effective in Chronicle, fails to find his footing here. His transformation is more inevitable than tragic and his Green Goblin comes across as a generic homicidal comic book bad guy. Electro is probably about 50% Jamie Foxx and 50% CGI and it doesn't help that Foxx seems to be channeling Richard Pryor from Superman 3.

t's no stretch to say that the final 15 minutes saves The Amazing Spider-Man 2 from being a disaster. In borrowing a storyline from the comics, it does so with the proper level of reverence without becoming slavish. This segment of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 feels a little more real, a little more unexpected, and little more honest than what we have come to expect from otherwise by-the-numbers superhero movies. It gives meaning to an otherwise scattershot production that could have benefited from a less spectacle and better writing.

Even at a hefty 142 minutes, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 hasn’t the time for its surfeit of plot, nor for the sprawling ensemble of supporting characters caught in the sticky web Webb weaves.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Cinemassacre94Mar 20, 2016
It takes something lackluster like The Amazing Spider-Man 2 to remind viewers why movies like Captain America: The Winter Soldier are considered superior. In the superhero genre, it's too easy to become sloppy and fall back on clichés. TheIt takes something lackluster like The Amazing Spider-Man 2 to remind viewers why movies like Captain America: The Winter Soldier are considered superior. In the superhero genre, it's too easy to become sloppy and fall back on clichés. The fifth Spider-Man feature, which is the sequel to the unnecessary reboot, is all over the place, an undercooked cinematic casserole that blends some genuinely touching moments and well-presented action sequences with bad melodrama, overlong exposition, and overexposed CGI. There are too many negatives to keep the experience from being the kind of giddy adrenaline rush one hopes for with a Big Summer Flick.

Sitting through The Amazing Spider-Man 2, I had the feeling that screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and Jeff Pinkner and director Marc Webb were throwing everything they could think of at the audience to see what might stick. There are some good moments in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, especially toward the end, but the whole thing seems to have been assembled by filmmakers tone-deaf to what constitutes compelling cinema. Key relationships are given short shrift. The central villain (to the extent that there is one) is all bluster and no menace. The "resolution" to the mystery of Richard and Mary Parker is an anti-climax. Spider-Man is too obviously the product of computer graphic artists as he swings around New York (an oft-heard complaint about the webslinger from back in Sam Raimi's first installment). And the 3-D recalls the nadir of the technology. For a $3 surcharge you can get blurry images, washed out colors, and very little "pop."

A majority of the movie focuses on events in and around Oscorp, the omnipresent New York City tech corporation that employs Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), the platinum blond girlfriend of Peter Parker a.k.a. Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). Gwen is delightful but the same can't be said of Peter, who comes across as a smart aleck. At least early in the proceedings, Peter isn't likable, although the screenplay eventually humanizes him a bit. Worried that his relationship with Gwen might be putting her life in danger, he breaks it off with her. Loving her means letting her go.

As one might expect from a real-life couple, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone display some nicely modulated chemistry, although they never quite match Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst for generating sparks. And, while events conspire to knock some of the petulance out of this too-cocky interpretation of Peter Parker, Garfield never completely loses the "too cool for school" air. Spider-Man's enemies are an underwhelming lot. Dane DeHaan, who was effective in Chronicle, fails to find his footing here. His transformation is more inevitable than tragic and his Green Goblin comes across as a generic homicidal comic book bad guy. Electro is probably about 50% Jamie Foxx and 50% CGI and it doesn't help that Foxx seems to be channeling Richard Pryor from Superman 3.

It's no stretch to say that the final 15 minutes saves The Amazing Spider-Man 2 from being a disaster. In borrowing a storyline from the comics, it does so with the proper level of reverence without becoming slavish. This segment of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 feels a little more real, a little more unexpected, and little more honest than what we have come to expect from otherwise by-the-numbers superhero movies. It gives meaning to an otherwise scattershot production that could have benefited from a less spectacle and better writing.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews