Columbia Pictures | Release Date: May 2, 2014
6.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1432 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
807
Mixed:
406
Negative:
219
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)
5
EpicLadySpongeJan 22, 2016
This Amazing Spider-Man has shown us what Peter Parker had tried. The elements are still in there... it's just ain't what the first Amazing Spider-Man had that made it earned the 7 score.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
TVJerryMay 4, 2014
Maybe I should stop reviewing comic book superhero flix, because I've lost all patience with the genre. The predictable stories, ho-hum opponents and noisy action all play out in this sequel. Luckily, Andrew Garfield (in the title role) hasMaybe I should stop reviewing comic book superhero flix, because I've lost all patience with the genre. The predictable stories, ho-hum opponents and noisy action all play out in this sequel. Luckily, Andrew Garfield (in the title role) has loads of charisma and charm that makes watching him enjoyable. Toss in his chemistry with Emma Stone and you have a bearable love interest. Other than that, there's nothing new or special. Another downside of these films is the unnecessary length (1:42 in this case) that includes too much unnecessary drama and villainous posturing. I was never bored, but just tired of the uninspired formula. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
LeZeeAug 31, 2014
The second movie in the new Spider-man movie series that directed by Marc Webb. I doubt his potential after seeing this movie. I feel someone should take his position before it become too late. In the history of the Spider-man movies, fromThe second movie in the new Spider-man movie series that directed by Marc Webb. I doubt his potential after seeing this movie. I feel someone should take his position before it become too late. In the history of the Spider-man movies, from all the 6 this one is the worst. Commercially it has done a great business that grabbed around $800 million all over the world, but failed to deliver another quality movie for the fans. The movie engaged with the too much character and subplots. The subplots were not placed in the right spots, kind of random appearance brings the chaos in understanding the story. I had a high hope on this movie and it did not supply well. Frankly, I kind of lost interest in Spider-man. Maybe because it was too soon to reboot, I guess.

‘‘You want to be the hero.
And now you gotta pay the price.’’

The first movie gave a decent re-start for the refreshed Spider-man movie series. And what happened here in this second installment was a disaster. The first thing is it was nearly a 2 and half an hour movie that brought me lightly a headache to carry on thus far. Actually, it was 10 minutes shorter than what it is now, but in the end they have developed a bit longer to show the opening scene of the third movie. When a movie got a powerful hero, it should have equally matched antagonist. If they are matched, then the fight between them are the next thing to bring the best out of it. I think the Electro man did not click as they have expected, at least not to me. The strength he had was something beyond spider-man, but did not unleash him in a perfect manner. Though Jamie Foxx was not bad in that avatar, the filmmakers kind of wasted his presence for not so good scenes.

Remember the original Spider-man was the modern superhero movies, I mean it was done using computer graphics. Afterwards 'Batman', 'Iron Man', 'Thor' and all were followed. I like the version with Tobey Maguire in it, though my rating declined by movie after another in the trilogy. This reboot series had a good opening, but failed to get the momentum going. Especially all the emotions were looked fakes that do not appeal like the original movie series did. Yes, it had a wonderful box office and that does not mean the movie is good, either worst. But expected a little better, especially in the negative characters. Andrew Garfield was good, not awesome, because most of his masked parts were CGI. Emma stone was another let down and could not help comparing her with Kristen Dunst, because she was no way near, at all. The Dane DeHaan role had the same issue and I don't know why people did not get better space in the movie that ran 140 minutes long. Like I said subplot spoiled everything I think. The digital 3D and stunts were poor. Yeah, there are many things to complain about it than to praise, but all the answer should come in the next sequel. If that makes bigger, not commercially, I mean with a good story, graphics and performances then there will be no problem. But if it fails, I had to say 'bring back the fourth installment of the original movie series'. Definitely not worth a watch, but anyway most of the guys going to watch it or already watched it.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
TheQuietGamerMay 9, 2014
Spider-Man is back in what may be the biggest superhero movie ever as far as content goes. Director Marc Webb packs a plethora of plot-lines into the movie, yet thankfully manages to keep everything straight. From Parker's personalSpider-Man is back in what may be the biggest superhero movie ever as far as content goes. Director Marc Webb packs a plethora of plot-lines into the movie, yet thankfully manages to keep everything straight. From Parker's personal relationship turmoils, to super villain battles, revelations into the past of Peter's parents, and even setting up events and characters for future movies, there's a lot going on here. There are times when it seems like maybe Webb would have been better off leaving some of these plot lines behind in order to full flesh out some others, but overall I think it turned out excellent in the end.

Spider-Man fans are in for a real treat, and the future of this series looks bright. It's not the best Spider-Man movie, but it's still one fantastic one. Admittedly the shear amount of content and plot threads shoved into this movie are going to be off-putting to some, but I for one was most assuredly entertained. That's why I highly recommend the movie, and why my total score for the movie is a 9.5/10=Amazing.
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
Compi24May 4, 2014
Its leads, set pieces, and score may be incredibly promising, but due to a handful of sharply flawed character choices, an unbearably cluttered narrative, and some general lunacy interspersed throughout, "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" neitherIts leads, set pieces, and score may be incredibly promising, but due to a handful of sharply flawed character choices, an unbearably cluttered narrative, and some general lunacy interspersed throughout, "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" neither undershoots nor exceeds the film's acceptable predecessor. Expand
3 of 10 users found this helpful37
All this user's reviews
3
MovieGuysMay 11, 2014
The first thing I thought when the credits rolled for "The Abysmal Spiderman 2" was, "I paid money to see this?" This is the worst of the Spiderman movies ever. It is one of the most non-sensical, not cohesive, incoherent, and confusingThe first thing I thought when the credits rolled for "The Abysmal Spiderman 2" was, "I paid money to see this?" This is the worst of the Spiderman movies ever. It is one of the most non-sensical, not cohesive, incoherent, and confusing movies I have seen since I can remember. The whole story was nothing but cliché after cliché after cliché. I give credit to the people involved in this tragedy for piling on the most clichés possible in this movie. And the love story between Peter and Gwen: ugh, I might as well have watched a bad soap opera. The villain in this one, Electro, played by the wonderful Mr. Jamie Foxx, is wasted in this movie and seems like more of an afterthought. How Foxx accepted being in this movie is beyond reason. And who wrote the script? They should never be allowed in Hollywood ever again. This is literally some of the dialogue in the movie, and believe me, there are no spoilers here. "I can't let you do this. It's too dangerous." "Is that all you got?" "Wait, wait! I know my way out." "It's going to be okay" "I will destroy you, Spiderman!"

The only thing that I did like in the movie, which is preventing me from giving it a 0, are the slow motion scenes. They are impressive from a technical standpoint, if only they weren't followed by a scene with a (wait for it) cliché!
Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
5
BrianMcCriticMay 3, 2014
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a disappointment this film is two different films in one. The good half starts with Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spiderman, the best Spiderman by far. It continues with Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey and the chemistry between her and Peter is magic and the best part of this film. One last positive goes out to Sally Field as Aunt May, she had some real emotional scenes with Peter. Now for the negative's the villains in this film are 90's Batman villains from The Riddler I'm sorry Electro to Mr. Freeze aka Rhino yes Rhino's that bad. The Green Goblin maybe the best villian, but he suffers from no real character development. Overall it's strange to say but if I could have gotten two and a half hours of the love story with scenes of Spiderman helping kids that maybe a 9 or 10 but with the pointless villains dragging it down it regretfully gets a 5. Garfield and Stone deserved better than this. C+ Expand
5 of 12 users found this helpful57
All this user's reviews
3
Meth-dudeAug 16, 2014
The acting was really bad and there was no action.The only good actor in the movie was Jamie Foxx and he was not at his best.Visually amazing,the movie just failed at being good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
ThegodfathersonMay 3, 2014
The Amazing Spiderman 2 is awesome. For the most part. TAS2 is a bigger and bolder Spiderman movie, although I didn't find the vibe and sense in its predecessor, Andrew Garfield reprises his role as Peter Parker, still slinging through theThe Amazing Spiderman 2 is awesome. For the most part. TAS2 is a bigger and bolder Spiderman movie, although I didn't find the vibe and sense in its predecessor, Andrew Garfield reprises his role as Peter Parker, still slinging through the beautifully recreated city of New York, buildings look awesome- and in 3D, even better. But this time, ASM 2 introduces 3 villains- Green Goblin, Electro and Rhino. All of those which are being played by Dane DeHaan, Jamie Foxx and Paul Gimmati. The film does a good job of representing Spiderman and his origin. But, it can be a long movie. ASM 2 is really slow, and it never expands on who Richard Parker or any origin of any villain is. If you want an Electro origin story- imagine Jamie Foxx screaming in a pool full of eels. Dane DeHaan is Harry Osborn aka The Green Goblin, his acting was top notch but still not better than the James Franco in Spiderman 2. Paul Gimmati gives the best acting from the bunch, Rhino is looking better than ever, but the movie never explores on his story, instead it gives you some unnecessary tear jerks. Well, this is not what I expected, watching all of the series, I think Sam Raimi had more to accomplish than Director Marc Webb. But remaking a series is hard, and Webb gave it his best. However, if you want to watch a colourful, energetic and well shot Spiderman movie- than go for it. If not, it's better to buy this one on BluRay. ASM is bigger and bolder but not better. Expand
8 of 11 users found this helpful83
All this user's reviews
4
grandpajoe6191Aug 27, 2015
"The Amazing Spider-Man 2" fails from what its predecessor had succeeded in; a butt-load of new characters, a overly complicated plot, and some pathetic moments thanks to a pitiful script really lets down a movie that could have been better.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
imthenoobAug 3, 2014
The words Sucks Major Ass describes it perfectly. From the stupid sub plot with Peter's parents (which has absolutely zero relevance to the film), The even dumber visions that Peter has of Gwen's Dad, The pathetic villains and their laughableThe words Sucks Major Ass describes it perfectly. From the stupid sub plot with Peter's parents (which has absolutely zero relevance to the film), The even dumber visions that Peter has of Gwen's Dad, The pathetic villains and their laughable portrayals (I hated the Rhino and found absolutely zero use for him in the film, Jamie Foxx was laughably bad as Max/Electro, and I thought what they did to the Green Goblin was a huge injustice despite loving the actor who portrays him).

Overall, Amazing Spider-Man 2 was a huge freaking drop off from the first film and I would strongly recommend avoiding it at all costs.
Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
5
marcmyworksJun 25, 2014
The amount of detail put into this film is incredible, whether it be a simple photograph of Gwen and Peter to the complex intricacy of the web-shooters. The draw back is the over saturated plot and clear merchandizing moments, as they are aThe amount of detail put into this film is incredible, whether it be a simple photograph of Gwen and Peter to the complex intricacy of the web-shooters. The draw back is the over saturated plot and clear merchandizing moments, as they are a plenty. Peter Parker loves Gwen, but is torn in his duties as Spider-Man, this probably should either have been the real focus of the film or it should have been about the villain army master scheme. Both seem to be too much for this one film to handle. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
ydnar4Aug 27, 2014
The Amazing Spiderman 2 was just as good as its previous film in my opinion. Its got lots of action and it continues to craft a better story throughout which I felt that Marvel failed to do in the first set of films. I see Andrew Garfield asThe Amazing Spiderman 2 was just as good as its previous film in my opinion. Its got lots of action and it continues to craft a better story throughout which I felt that Marvel failed to do in the first set of films. I see Andrew Garfield as a better Spiderman than Tobey Maguire. He continues to struggle in balancing the two sides of his life until they collide and we get a massive twist in the end. Just another great Marvel film. They are really on a role right now. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
CineAutoctonoDec 8, 2015
The seculea reboot of Spider -Man was slightly surprising , plot, the script for the humorous time so Spider -Man tells Sparky to Electro LOL, that funny , but it will not be necessary to Andrew Garfield to be Spider -Man , Tom Holland triedThe seculea reboot of Spider -Man was slightly surprising , plot, the script for the humorous time so Spider -Man tells Sparky to Electro LOL, that funny , but it will not be necessary to Andrew Garfield to be Spider -Man , Tom Holland tried to secure his style play Spider -Man , at its debut in Captain America: Civil War. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
TokyochuchuDec 2, 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 does amazing things throughout it's run time, providing badass cool battles and nice romantic moments in equal measure. The film is well on it's way to easily being the best Spider-Man movie when it suddenly decidesThe Amazing Spider-Man 2 does amazing things throughout it's run time, providing badass cool battles and nice romantic moments in equal measure. The film is well on it's way to easily being the best Spider-Man movie when it suddenly decides to summon the ghost of Spider-Man 3 and tries to cram about 4 Spider-Movies into one. The ending is unbelievably wasteful, rushed and crass in it's sequel bating. Which ultimately knocks at least one point off the movie's score for me. Shame. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
foxgroveMay 2, 2014
Ludicrous plotting doesn't spoil an otherwise entertaining Marvel adventure,although it isn't as good as the first instalment. This sequel benefits from the continuance of gifted actor Andrew Garfield as the titular character. His ability isLudicrous plotting doesn't spoil an otherwise entertaining Marvel adventure,although it isn't as good as the first instalment. This sequel benefits from the continuance of gifted actor Andrew Garfield as the titular character. His ability is almost wasted in such a generic movie. In the past he has demonstrated superlative talent in such powerful dramas as 'Boy A' and 'Red Riding' and one can only hope that he returns to more substantial roles soon.
What we have here is a known entity which will delight its fan base. A slick package with all the usual components fabulously integrated including out standing visual effects,sharp editing and eye catching cinematography. The film is never dull or boring, although it is slightly drawn out, and the romantic interludes are predictably sweet, if forgettable. It's all very undemanding stuff and the over sensitive may even shed a tear or two. A surprise sequence near the end of the film, involving Emma Stone, is a knockout of a scene.
Expand
17 of 30 users found this helpful1713
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
3
GreatMartinMay 2, 2014
Batman is a man and Superman is a man but as portrayed by Andrew Garfield in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" he is more of a boy who could be graduationg from from high school instead of collage. Emma Stone, younger than Garfield in real life,Batman is a man and Superman is a man but as portrayed by Andrew Garfield in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" he is more of a boy who could be graduationg from from high school instead of collage. Emma Stone, younger than Garfield in real life, looks and acts more mature and is certainly prettier than Garfield!
There are a few villains in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2", one or two too many, just as there are too much of everything from web flying to electric charges via Jamie Foxx as Electro to a high police car count of crashes and shootings..
As any super hero movie these days special effects are over done as is glass breaking and the running time.Just cutting back all the hugs Dane DeHaan gives Garfield would shorten the movie.Also we are all of a sudden in the world of Transformers with Paul Giamatti as a mechanical rhino!
This is not one of the better super hero movies and at 2 hours and 22 minutes is way too long
Expand
0 of 8 users found this helpful08
All this user's reviews
6
lasttimeisawMay 7, 2014
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My latest cinema-going of a 3D spectacle of the second chapter of the Amazing Spider-Man, whereas its first instalment THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012, 6/10), a reboot of Sam Raimi’s sensational SPIDER-MAN trilogy, is a hit-or-miss in general, but the Garfield and Stone pair does stand out with their affable affinity and spontaneous chemistry, so when it is time for Stone’s Gwen Stacy to take a bow and exit the franchise, as fans know it from the start, her fate is presaged by the comic books,

read rest of the review on my blog, google cinema omnivore.
Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
eagleeyevikingMay 4, 2014
Too much characters and subplots amongst other cons threaten to overwhelm the movie but the entire cast led by the talented Andrew Garfield (and the visual effects team) once again saves the day.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
JacobMay 24, 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is almost a good sequel. The film focuses on the dilemma of Peter Parker rather than excessive action, has a good cast with a good villain, and some fun action that isn’t excessive. There are two things that hold thisThe Amazing Spider-Man 2 is almost a good sequel. The film focuses on the dilemma of Peter Parker rather than excessive action, has a good cast with a good villain, and some fun action that isn’t excessive. There are two things that hold this movie back from being spectacular one of which isn’t the movies fault and that is marketing. The marketing for this film made it seem bigger than it really was. Had the film just been advertised as Spider-Man fighting Electro I wouldn’t have expected too much out of it but the marketing set the bar too high with excessive trailers, giving away villains that play minor roles, having trailers feature scenes that out of context seem bigger than they really are, and it doesn’t hurt that the film’s catch phrase was “His Greatest Battle Begins.” However, upon a second viewing I’m be more excepting of it and if you are lucky you haven’t been exposed to the excessive marketing for the film and don’t know anything which is how it should be. My second major gripe is the ending, which feels rushed and sloppy in comparison the rest of the film. Had the marketing not built this movie up so much, given stuff away, and misrepresented the film by showing various scenes out of context and had the ending been better written this could have been a spectacular film just as good if not better than the original and could rival and/or surpass the first two films in Raimi’s version of the character. As it is it’s a fun action film that is nowhere near the disaster that Spider-Man 3 was. If you are a fan of Spider-Man check this one out but if you are getting tired of Spidey this film won’t do much for me. If you go to see it though lower your expectations and don’t watch any trailers just know that its Peter Parker dealing with problems and fighting Electro and you’ll probably be entertained outside of the ending. But if you’ve seen the excessive marketing prepare for a major disappointment. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
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
TheApplegnomeAug 17, 2014
This second installment of the Spiderman reboot is a bit greater than it’s predecessor, but it suffers with the same deficiencies.

Well the CGI is incredible, and the action is okay, but not as great as I would define as awesome. The
This second installment of the Spiderman reboot is a bit greater than it’s predecessor, but it suffers with the same deficiencies.

Well the CGI is incredible, and the action is okay, but not as great as I would define as awesome. The soundtrack is a bit more epic than it’s predecessor, but I miss a more greater one. The negative aspects are of course the bad ending, the slow amount of action, the weird story and the bad actor Andrew Garfield as Spiderman. I'm actually surprised that this movie isn’t that epic as I would want it to be, because it got two awesome writers: Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, who gave us Star Trek (2009) and other great films.

My conclusion of The Amazing Spiderman 2 is that it’s greater than the first movie, but it still suffer with bad directing and writing.

The Amazing Spiderman 2 get a 6.7/10
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
moviemitch96May 4, 2014
Definitely a worthy and entertaining sequel to the first "Amazing Spiderman" film. Like its predecessor, this one sticks remarkably close to the comics and certainly brings back a few nostalgic (and tragic) moments. The action and effectsDefinitely a worthy and entertaining sequel to the first "Amazing Spiderman" film. Like its predecessor, this one sticks remarkably close to the comics and certainly brings back a few nostalgic (and tragic) moments. The action and effects were great, if not, a little excessive at times. Andrew Garfield once again fulfills his role nicely, as does Emma Stone. Jamie Fox pulls of a decent performance as Electro, and Dane DeHaan makes for quite an impressive and sinister Harry Osborne. Overall, with the great effects, performances, and story that's remarkably loyal to the comics, this makes for one of the best and most fun Spiderman entries so far! Expand
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
3
LamontRaymondMay 2, 2014
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
30 of 52 users found this helpful3022
All this user's reviews
7
Rox22May 2, 2014
More or less on par with the first movie. Some things are better, somethings are worse, but on the whole they balance out.

The obvious flaw here is the script. Like many have said, it feels like a collection of scenes haphazardly pieced
More or less on par with the first movie. Some things are better, somethings are worse, but on the whole they balance out.

The obvious flaw here is the script. Like many have said, it feels like a collection of scenes haphazardly pieced together. This makes the transition from scene to scene feel unnatural.

I was worried that the movie would have villain saturation (like in Spider Man 3) but no. Electro was the focus. It is obvious that the other villains are simply put in as a teaser to the Sinister Six movie. Fair enough but that makes one wonder why they got top billing in all the ads and posters? Also, Peter's parents feel needless and that story arch takes up far to much screen time.

Now for the positive: I love Garfield as Spider Man/ Parker, he really does fit the role (even if he is a tad too old.) The action scenes are allot of fun and the effects are first rate. Electro is fantastic and Foxx did an amazing job. Rest of the cast also play their roles well.

Overall:
Spider-Man 2 feels a bit erratic, but still allot of fun to watch. A bit more post production and sterner script approval was clearly needed and I hope they learn from this and not repeat for the next movies.
Expand
10 of 13 users found this helpful103
All this user's reviews
5
diogomendesDec 28, 2014
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. *POTENTIAL SPOILERS, IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THIS MOVIE, PLEASE LOOK AWAY*

This it, guys. One of the most controversial movies of 2014, and the one that I was more hyped for: The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Let's be clear, I was immensely excited for this super-hero flick. I'm a Spider-Man fanatic, I simply idolize this lovable character. I watched cartoons when I was younger, I had toys (and I still have some but I don't use them anymore). I read some comic books, my favorite one was always the Ultimate version. It was more realistic and it was darker, and that's why I found it to be pretty enjoyable to read. The new Spider-Man series - Amazing Spider-Man - are based off of that version. "The Amazing Spider-Man" featured an appealingly dark tone, which I loved very much. Some people said that the filmmakers "nolanised" the film, just because it's dark. That's just absurd. So Nolan is the only person who has legitimate reason to attach a dark atmosphere into a live-action movie? No, it's not a rip off of Batman trilogy, because while Batman fights crime without making jokes, Spider-Man in these new movies does the exact opposite. Anyways, the film was still pretty good and allowed director Marc Webb to learn some techniques in filmmaking, since the guy has a small track record (only 3 movies, if I'm not mistaken). Man, I was blown away by his directing. Every shot is handed carefully and he seems to understand what the characters are and what they're going to be. That led to the success of the first movie, and after that, I was really looking forward to its sequel. Oh man, what a disappointment. Before I saw the film, I subscribed to a YouTube channel named "SevenWebHeads", which purpose was to literally give latest news about the webslinger and other cool stuff. With each video, I was getting hyped for the film, and more, and more, and even more... until I saw the movie with my friend. Oh my god, I was thrilled. The first time I saw the film I was thrilled and confused at the same time, and I'll explain why I was. Thrilled, because the movie is awesome when it comes to action sequences and special effects. Confused, because the plot of "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is overstuffed with characters and story arcs. Though I really liked the film and I initially gave it a 9/10. I saw the score on Rotten Tomatoes website drop significantly, until it became a rotten score and I was like shocked. I mean, really? Then I saw the movie multiple times, until I realized that the movie was not that good... unfortunately. However, I don't think it's bad. My god, people really like to jump on the bandwagon and complain about everything. I mean, just because Spider-Man is not in Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) doesn't mean you have to automatically hate this installment and bash it. Some people say that it was terrible. It wasn't terrible, in my opinion. It was decent! Some many youtubers like Mr. Repzion, Yourmoviesucks.DOTorg, and some others hated it and nitpicked the movie to death. I don't judge them because they disliked the movie. I only ask: What is so wrong about this movie? Sure, the story could've been a lot better, some characters were just in the movie to... I don't know their purpose seriously. If Black Cat was mentioned in the newspaper (pretty much like Jameson), that would've been great and it would have spared a character. I mean, what Felicia Hardy is doing in the film. Seriously? She's there because... ah... because...... I don't know, seriously. I think they wanted to tease the upcoming installments, but it was so unnecessary. With that being said, yes, the movie has a lot of flaws and writing issues, but there's also some redeeming qualities attached to it like for instance, the cast is phenomenal.

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are so cute together, they have such great chemistry, but that's not only because they're dating in real life but because these actors know how to perform. In the scene when Gwen Stacy dies, Garfield gives such powerful performance in that scene, making me feel sad for both characters. And Chris Cooper also has some screen time has Norman Osborn and I simply love Dane Dehaan in this movie. Another good thing about this movie is Spider-Man himself. He's much more confident with his abilities than he was in the first movie, he now makes little quips (even if they were unnecessary to the context of the scene) and he's even more agile Now, the action. When I first saw the movie, right in the beginning of it, in the chase scene, I felt like I was watching the classic Spider-Man cartoon and that was just awesome.

Final Score to The Amazing Spider-Man 2: 6/10. This movie isn't half bad. Sure, there's overabundance of characters and subplots, too much product placement and a bloated runtime, but overall, it was pretty enjoyable and even if the movie didn't fulfill your expectations, at least you have to give credit for Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone performances.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
MrMovieBuffMar 15, 2015
'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' suffers from the same issues that 'Spider-Man 3' (2007) suffered from...too many villains, too many subplots and a bloated run time that doesn't seem to end. Didn't Sony learn from their first mistake? Obviously'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' suffers from the same issues that 'Spider-Man 3' (2007) suffered from...too many villains, too many subplots and a bloated run time that doesn't seem to end. Didn't Sony learn from their first mistake? Obviously not.

If you ask me, apparently it took four screenwriters to write this movie...I bet Sony secretly hired them as one writer without one of them knowing about the other. One screenwriter probably wrote that Electro is going to be the main villain, the other probably had the Rhino, and the last one may have had the Green Goblin in mind. They all went to Sony Studios and tried to sell their scripts, but when they found out about each other, there may have been some kind of conflict. Whoever is in charge of Sony probably told them to calm down and said that they will use all of these ideas leaving director Marc Webb to juggle all of these stories.

Now, here's the truth, Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man' (2002) and 'Spider-Man 2' (2004) are absolutely unbeatable to this day. I thought 'Spider-Man 3' (2007) was still good, but I understand why not many people liked it.

I thought 'The Amazing Spider-Man' (2012) was just as unnecessary as most people thought as it was made just five years after the last film and it was obviously Sony's attempt to retain the rights away from Marvel. But honestly, I thought 'The Amazing Spider-Man' (2012) was good, not great...but it was better than I expected, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone really stole the show in that film.

In here, the actors still do a good job managing with a sub-par script, and director Marc Webb tries to juggle as much as he can. Paul Giamatti is absolutely unrecognizable as the Rhino, but he is criminally underused, Jamie Foxx becomes a comic relief as Electro, the main villain of the film. Dane DeHaan is a great actor with a bright future, but his Harry Osborn felt forced.

Honestly, this movie tries to throw so much at you, you struggle to keep up with it, it's like watching three films at once or something. It jumps back and fourth unevenly between; Peter and Gwen, Peter finding out about his parents, Aunt May (Sally Field) becoming a nurse for no reason, Spider-Man fighting Electro and Peter's friendship with Harry. It's too long and there's too much.

Maybe 'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' is not going to be remembered as one of the most exciting films of 2014.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
quincytheodoreMay 2, 2014
Swinging with high voltage visual effects and fantastic soundtracks, The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Rise of Electro perches above its peers. In a more video game or comic inspired illustration, the overall colorful tone works wonderfully,Swinging with high voltage visual effects and fantastic soundtracks, The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Rise of Electro perches above its peers. In a more video game or comic inspired illustration, the overall colorful tone works wonderfully, especially in larger scales fights such as in Times Square, it's baffling not many movies do battles in the famous location. Its multitude of talents does a great job in bringing the characters to life; chemistry between them is definitely present. Regardless of some flaws, narrative might get crowded sewing numerous plots and villains, the movie will most likely satisfy fans and casual viewers alike.

The story tells origins of Electro and Green Goblin, played by Jamie Foxx and Dane DeHaan respectively, both of which have awkward relationship with the titular hero. Their stories are a bit foreshadowing, even more so to those who have knowledge of the comic or seen the previous trilogy and this might just be too predictable for some. Nevertheless the movie does a decent job on modernizing the villains and keeping them grounded without being too comical, it's a good choice not to put Electro in green yellow spandex. Jamie Foxx certainly has charisma for the main villain, although the fanatic aspect of the character in early parts is odd. It's a bit silly and too old-fashioned for an origin tale, he then becomes more appropriately menacing later on, partly due the blue CG face.

Dane DeHaan is a suitable cast for Harry Osborn, I daresay even better than James Franco who previously donned the green cape. He's an eerie reminiscence of young Leonardo DiCaprio, even with similar hairdo. He takes the role of Harry into a darker more obsessed persona, one with volatile and conniving nature. Most of the movie is oriented in Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) and Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) as they struggle with emotion and passion. Both of them showcase personal touches; it's apparent that Garfield admirably tries to fill the protagonist role. Spider-Man is a closer more relatable superhero as he endures doubt, guilt, and even the things ordinary folks go through daily, Garfield plays to this strength pretty well. Props to Sally Field and Chris Cooper as parental figures, each the polar opposite of the other, complementing the hero and villain, respectively.

Graphic differs from the usual gritty mainstream superhero flicks, New York is displayed in all its vibrant wonder. At first, it seems a tad close to video game, but I fancy the distinct feel. When the movie talks about hope aplenty, it helps to view the world in radiance. Action is great, often taking camera angles close to Spider-Man, slowing down just barely at the moment of impact. The use of audio matches pretty well, Hans Zimmer is a master in this regard. Many techno dubstep tracks focused on Electro blazing in the background and electrically pumping adrenaline, it may appear ludicrous at first, but it fits the movie brilliantly. Pop and rock songs litter the movie, played just in the right time. The production value is aggressive and undeniably entertaining.

The story sadly may stutter throughout the movie, there are just too many angles to show. From the romance between the two, origins of villains, the lingering past, the pace sometimes take too long on certain element and not enough on some. Not to mention the transition can be cumbersome, it doesn't help that the usual coincidence and practical cliché plots still persist. The flaws are there, yet its entire cast and production value overshadow them. Its simple premise of one overcoming their crisis is emotionally captivating, effectively presented and thoroughly entertaining.
Expand
10 of 14 users found this helpful104
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 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews