User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1252 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. BKM
    Jul 5, 2012
    5
    Reboots are all the rage these days (I suspect we'll have an Avengers reboot at some point) so it's not surprising that the Spider-Man franchise has been torn apart and rebuilt with a new director, cast and villain. But was it really necessary to start from scratch so soon? While that can be debated, the film itself is a letdown thanks in large part to its attempts to present a darker and hipper Spidey than we are accustomed to. Peter Parker rides a skateboard? He barely even has to try to win the affections of Gwen Stacey? None of this feels true to the web slinger's roots. But the biggest problem is that Marc Webb and his creative team haven't made the franchise their own. Ultimately The Amazing Spider-Man feels too carefully plotted out and safe when it needs to take risks and find its own identity. Expand
  2. Jul 5, 2012
    8
    I didn't have high expectations for this moving coming in considering the other Spider-Man series starring Tobey Maguire finished not all too long ago. However, this movie exceeded my expectations. The movie had good emotional depth to it, and Andrew Garfield's performance was both superb and awkward (in a good way - Peter Parker is quite nerdy). I was surprised that he was capable of this sort of role, because he doesn't look like a Peter Parker type, but it worked quite well and added a good amount of humor to the movie. I would have rated this movie higher had it been the original Spider-Man rather than a reboot (some things felt repeated from Spider-Man 1). Expand
  3. Jul 5, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is a great take on Spider-Man. The movie did a few things wrong, but it got it right where it counts.

    My first impression when I saw the movie is that they did a good job making Spider-Man seem amazing. From the way he moved to the way the people reacted to him just made him seem amazing. The story was very good, but be warned: If you are walking into the movie
    expecting a fantastic hero vs villain story, you will be a little disappointed. While the Lizard vs Spidey fights are good, that is not what the majority of the film is about. The majority of the film is spent establishing Spider-Man's origin. That is what the film is about. It's about Peter Parker's rise from High School nerd to the amazing Spider-Man, and the film does a spectacular job at that.

    The characters are done very well. I would say Peter Parker's characterization and his interactions with Gwen Stacy was the highlight of the film. In short, this is a film in which the plot serves the characters rather than the characters serve the plot. All in all, this is a very good movie, and a great Spider-Man movie. Whether you've been a long time Spider-man fan or just looking for some good superhero action, this film is a must see.
    Expand
  4. Jul 5, 2012
    6
    This film is ok and quite enjoyable, Garfield is a good spiderman and peter parker and the on screen chemistry between him and stone is good. The CGI is good and for once in an action film you can actually see what is going on rather than the usual blurry sequences we get these days. its about time film makers slowed things down just a touch so we can see the action and enjoy it. This film manages it. When the film was over some guy next to me was clapping, for my money this film in no way deserves this show of appreciation but it is a good effort. One of the better comic book films and i preferred it over raimis efforts. Expand
  5. Jul 5, 2012
    9
    defiantly worth t least a seven out of ten. I thought that no super hero movie I saw would seem any good after watching the avengers, but this while not as god as the avengers, is still a decent movie, and in my opinion better than the original. It is a worthy contender for the dark knight rise, but I don't expect it will be as good as that will. I can't really be bothered to go into detail
  6. Jul 5, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The main problem with this film is that it is to the Spiderman legacy what Superman Returns was to the Superman legacy: Pleasantly executed but completely pointless. The trailers would have you believe this film focuses on the 'untold story' of Peter Parker's background, but aside from the fact the Parker's dad was a scientist and they died in a suspicious car crash, this aspect of the film is completely wasted because it's never explored fully. You're left with the impression Parker's untold story was just a rouse to get people to come and see the film, and you can almost feel Webb's eagerness to get this out of the way so he can concentrate on the business at hand: remaking Rami's first film. So Uncle Ben gets bumped off by some unknown petty criminal again, this gives rise to Peter's sense of responsibility again (though the emotional transition is not as believable as in the Rami's movie), Peter gets his powers from a genetically modified spider again (this time just in a different location) and Peter decides he can't fulfill his love interest because of his new gig as Spiderman...again. Yes, there's mechanical web-shooters instead of biological ones, and this Peter is slightly more cool than Toby Maguire's, and we have Gwen Stacy instead of MJ. But that's about it, those are the differences you're paying your money for!

    The relationship between Garfield and Stone however does work very well; the pair have a more natural chemistry than Maguire and Dunst and that translates effortlessly, though both are far too wise and articulate to be believable as high school students.

    I know some fans like the predictability element of superhero films, but I just wish that this film would have been braver. Nolan's Batman Begins, for example, was a true origin story, offering the audience something new. This film takes no risks and as such do not be under the impression this is an origin story - it's the same film as the 2002 original but with a much less engrossing villain (even the split personality/voices in the head is copied from Rami's Goblin here) If you care about Spidey, you'll end up feeling slightly ripped off by the whole thing.
    Expand
  7. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This movie is hard to talk about. The fact that it is really different from the Sam Raimi franchise was a plus for me because I personally didn't care about the previous franchise. So I gave this film chance because I knew that it would play off the original comics and I must say the "Amazing Spider-Man" amazed me. From the action sequences to the humor to the chemistry between Garfield and Stone was also pretty good. So see this movie in theaters and you shouldn't be disappointed. Expand
  8. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I honestly think this is the best Spider-Man movie made yet. I really liked how they focused on developing characters more and the emotions even though it dragged on the first hour and a half introducing everyone. Andrew Garfield played the part way better than Tobey Maguire ever did. He really was Peter Parker/Spider-Man. I also liked how they used Gwen Stacy as the love interest instead of Mary Jane Watson. It was really nice not to see her as the typical damsel distress that the hero always has to saves. Expand
  9. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This film is Great. The character of Peter is less annoying and more realistic this time around thanks to the great acting of Andrew Garfield. The origin story is better and weighs down the movie less than the original outing. Although i loved the Green Goblin from the original film, the Lizard is by far a better antagonist, this is probably due to the performance given by Rhys Ifans. All in all this is a great superhero film, you couldn't ask for much more (apart for some more time before a reboot.) Brilliant Action, Brilliant character development/design and brilliant casting. Expand
  10. Jul 4, 2012
    0
    Simply put, it was boring - all of it. The acting, the special effects, the same old storyline. Save your money folks. Go see the vampire killer Abe Lincoln. At least it was fun!
  11. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Way better than the previous Spider-man films. Much improved screenplay, beyond blockbuster-quality-acting. Visual effects were clean. Cinematography was commendable.
  12. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Awesome movie! This was a great addition to the grand collection of Marvel movies. Great action, great background on Parkers story and even a great Stan Lee scene!
  13. Jul 4, 2012
    7
    It was good, but not great. I am a Spidey-fan, and I loved seeing him again on the big screen. The cast is great. Garfields Peter Parker AND Spider-man is the best I have seen. Stone is great as Gwen, showing the best girlfriend in a Spider-Man movie, plus Ifans as Connors/Lizard. The cast is brilliant, love it very much.

    The story, not so much. Sure I loved how Peter got his powers,
    and how he experience it. But the rest is just, not that interesting. The one thing I am must irritaited of, is that many thing that you saw and heard from the trailers, are not in the movie. For example: It was all planned that Peter got the powers. So story isn´t that great. But what I thought was the good parts i this movie was; The cast, fantastic! The story has been modern more alike. Bringing the origin of Spidey and the Lizard very good.

    So here are the plus and minuses about the movie:

    Plus
    The cast
    Modern-era
    Bringing the Origin of Spidey and The Lizard good

    Minuses
    Story, could have been so much more. Expected alot from the trailers.
    Expand
  14. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    I thought the movie was...amazing (excuse the pun) unlike its predecessors it stayed true to the original storyline. Andrew Garfield did a good job and portrayed Peter Parker well enough. In 3D the experience was fantastic and i would certainly recommend it. The only negative i can say is that other characters seem to lack depth (perhaps there wasn't enough time). The best thing about this movie is the potential, there are several enemies that did not feature (Green Goblin, Venom) and there's enough in this series for at least 2 more films providing they're equally (or better) than the first film.
    As always it's a Marvel film DO NOT LEAVE IMMEDIATELY AT THE END.
    9/10
    Expand
  15. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    I liked Tobey's version when it came out, but now that I've seen Andrew's version, I think they raised the bar. Raimi's trilogy (at least at first) seemed to stick to the well-known origin story. This one modernizes it a bit and, understandably, they tried to stay away from comparisons to the original film as much as possible. I'm not crazy about all the changes, but I think they worked well. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy sells her role much better than Kirsten Dunst sold Mary Jane Watson. And I have to agree with reviewers who said the chemistry between the leads was much better in this version. I saw no problems with the CGI or effects. I think they were faithful to the characters of Uncle Ben, Curt Connors, and even Captain Stacy. There's an obvious back story they left unfinished so looking forward to more. Expand
  16. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    The Amazing-Spider Man surpasses the original trilogy. The cast was well-chosen and they all give a lot of credibility to the characters. Andrew Garfield nails Spidey! So, great character development. The action sequences were great. The Lizard is just vicious, they could have added a bit more of humanity to the character while as Dr. Connors, but in the end they still did a better and more believable villain than the previous trilogie did, with the exception of Spider Man 2. I thought the CGI effects showed how a man would actually look if it turned into a lizard, and having the snout in the head didn't matter, I think it would give some sort of crocodilish/dinossaur look to him. They provides us great humour, they don't overuse it like in Raimi's films, offering a much more emotional and "darker" side of the story. Overall I give it a 9 just because they could have showed a bit more humanity to Dr. Connors, a moment with his kid or wife before the transformation but still he is a believable villain as the Lizard, and I like the fact it alters his persona. Expand
  17. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: 9.5 This film is a terrific "reboot" of the spider-man franchise. While we did have some retread of familiar ground, the necessary story elements that were repeated were done in a slightly fresher approach. From the spider bite origin of our hero to the inevitable death of Uncle Ben each classic moment was given a fresh coat of paint and melded into the modern story nicely. Even though I did enjoy Toby's portrait of the web head, Andrew Garfield fits the bill as BOTH high-schooler Peter Parker and Spidey himself. Garfield able to maintain every bit of the character in and out of the blue and red costume that made his portrayal feel more like the comic book character than ever before. The changes in the costume were not distracting in the least, the main villain was well thought out and acted plus all of the supporting characters built the frame work for what could be a terrific series of Spider-man Movies for today's audience. It may not be the big "explosive" blockbuster that was Avengers, but it is full of fun,heart and excitement all the same. Go see it and finally see why SPIDER-MAN has been such an enduring comic book character all these years. I look forward to more films in this newly minted franchise. Expand
  18. Jul 4, 2012
    1
    The Amazing Spider-Man is Sony pictures second trap to draw you back into theaters at top dollar to watch a freak show of them butchering this classic story into small disgusting chunks of it's former self. While I can not give away the context of the story it's straight forward that what Sony told originally in the first spider man trilogy of films that was true to the spider man saga, they have instead replaced with garbage bits of story twists simply for the sake of saying "oh this is something different. trust us it's not the same movie you paid for a few years ago." And to that respect it isn't the same movie as the Sam Remi films, it's something more disheartening and sad. Since i can't go into detail i will simply say if you are familiar with the spider-man canon and enjoy the story telling associated with the original work, do not see this film. It has nothing to do with the original spider-man comics we all know and love. it's a chopped up remix of non canon waste produced to sell tickets.The only enjoyable aspects of this film revolve around the action which not even Michael Bay could destroy, and Garfield as Peter Parker looks more familiar to the original Peter Parker that Steve Ditko illustrated.Those are weak points of enjoyment i was able to squeeze from this film. Sadly, This disastrous method of film production will continue as long as you purchase tickets to Sony licensed marvel films. Once the license is returned to marvel studios can we hope this fantastic timeless and beloved story can be told right. Go see something else it's not that hard. Or hell buy marvel comics. Expand
  19. Jul 4, 2012
    0
    I dont even know where to start. The acting was very poor and this is just a reboot, It had no comparison to the previous Spider Man movies. The originals were the best. This new cast never gives you any feeling for the good or the bad people. Had SI FI which I dont like for the most part but it just didnt fit in with this movie, which is like watching a B rated movie. Maybe it is, any way..............The actors look like they are reading off of Q cards. You dont get the sense of feeling towards themselves that people get when they are in love with there partner. Advice: wait till it comes out on tv or a Premium movie Chanel you may have. Don't waste you money.There are so many things wrong with this movie im just going to stop Expand
  20. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    By properly placing Gwen Stacy into the story, this version of Spider-Man stays closer to the original Stan Lee stories and has the potential, over two or three films, to deliver the real goods on this character, unlike the Raimi films. It is the Gwen story that makes Spider-Man Spider-Man and by leaving that out, Raimi bypassed something fundamental.

    Whereas Rami was fun but light and
    simplistic, this version takes a grittier more realistic approach. The web slinging is filmed more frequently with stunt men and less frequently with CGI, and includes some first person camera scenes of those acrobatics, and so feels much more visceral and real. At one point you can even see as Spider-Man rises to the apex of his swing and before he descends again, the webbing go loose and then pull taught. It's that sort of realistic granular detail that gives this version more credibility than the others, which in turn makes every dramatic event hit with greater emotional punch. It's not just the web slinging; the fights, the characterizations, the relationships between characters, all are handled in a more nuanced realistic way. So when bad things happen to characters, it hits you harder emotionally.

    Even the pre-credits ending (there is a scene post credits), which seems light-hearted, has dark overtones for those who know what waits down the road. And that's another thing. Raimi's Spider-Man's tone is so different from the comics that you could not even tell the proper story in Raimi's version. It wouldn't fit. It would seem completely out of place. This version, by sticking closer to the comics realistic (and I know it sounds odd but the comic is more realistic than the Raimi films), is setting things up and establishing a tone that will allow the actual story, as originally written in the comics, to be delivered in a sequel.

    I admit that Spider-Man 2 was a great romp, but it wasn't really Spider-Man. This is the first true Spider-Man movie. At last, after 50 years, it appears we are finally witnessing - starting with this film and following with a sequel or two - the core narrative of Spider-Man dramatized on screen.
    Expand
  21. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    I don't understand all of the hate for this movie it really is the oddest thing its almost as if we watched a completely different movie. I loved this movie and almost everything about it and before I start I am a very huge fan of the Raimi spider-man trilogy and always have been. I thought this just completely blew the first Spider-Man movie out of the water. Better everything, Better acting, Better direction, an overall better movie. I'm already super excited for the sequel. Expand
  22. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A huge step forward for Spiderman as an integral character in the Marvel movie universe. Only two things I didn't like were 1.) Parker's nonchalant attitude when receiving new powers. Dare I say good ole droopy-face Tobey had better writing on suddenly receiving crazy, life-changing powers.The new movie simply glazes over this part with a series of "teenager growing up" hijinx. 2. The cranes. I know there had to be some way to make more drama as Spidey swings to the Oscorp tower, but this is really an unfortunate way to include normal everyday people in the mix with Spidey. The beauty of Spiderman in NY is that most of the people he saves never have any other impact on his life. So this random dude, who had his kid rescued, just happens to have the connections at that one moment to get everyone on a crane in (no time)? Sorry, but even a heightened sense of disbelief won't save that scene. Defintely not the best superhero movie of the summer (Avengers...so far) but a solid movie. Expand
  23. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Let me start with a little background before I get stuck into The Amazing Spider-Man. Now, I was a massive fan of Sam Raimi
  24. Jul 4, 2012
    7
    Stayed much truer to the original comics than its predecessor. Garfield plays a much more believable Peter Parker, and his chemistry with Stone is spot on. The dialog is cute and amusing, but at times Twilight-esk. The action sequences are "meh". It's Peter and Gwen's relationship that make this movie good.
  25. Jul 4, 2012
    4
    Tone is all wrong. Awkward only plays effectively until the awkward situation is resolved. This movie is as awkward as the main characters who never grow out of it. This movie has no sense of fun and no sense of Spider-Man or Peter Parker. Keep asking yourself...what does this kid want...and see if you find an answer. The movie was actually boring and the most satisfying moment was watching the credits role. Even the after-credits teaser was lame. Really?? Expand
  26. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Is it amazing? In terms of grasp on character, yes it sure is, from peter parker or his alter ego all the way to a small part like flash thompson, every character gets a little defining character moment to show their a real human being not a dumb stereotype. Is the action amazing? Very nearly its strong but needs a little work though one scene in slow mo in a library is both greatly choreographed and hilarious. Special effects are mainly very good, the lizard for the most part becomes a very believable creation you believe he's dr connors and the most amazing thing is that even when he's talking It dosent seem weird it makes more sense to the character. Their are flaws but mainly their nit picks. He way this film makes you believe and want to cheer for the love, the relationships, the action is just fantastic, this is a foundation which an amazing sequel could be built upon. Expand
  27. Jul 4, 2012
    1
    This film was boring, drab and there was no real adventure. The first half sucked. Nothing to write abt villain. A superhero movie needs an equally strong and emphatic villain. This movie lacked that.
  28. Jul 4, 2012
    7
    A pretty good movie I may say myself however the still think Spiderman 2 is the best Spiderman film ever made. The 'Amazing' Spider-Man is a pretty solid movie especially to all you newgens can't be stuffed watching Maguire's acting. The cast is solid but I feel that they wasted the Lizard's character. Its not that the actor is bad but I don't feel that did much to try and flesh him out like Doc Oct.

    7/10
    Expand
  29. Jul 4, 2012
    10
    I had my doubts when I first heard that they were rebooting Sam Raimi's beloved Spider-Man and opting for a "younger" cast but, after seeing what this new cast and crew are capable of I am glad they did. The Amazing Spider-Man delivers in every category. Raimi's Spider-Man was great but, it time to put that behind use. Go see The Amazing Spider-Man, it's awesome.
  30. Jul 4, 2012
    10
    The movie was very good overall, I enjoyed the movie a lot. The movie had elements based on the original Amazing Spider-Man comics (i.e. mechanical web-shooters), and had some elements from other comics such as Ultimate Spider-Man (Richard Parker and Dr. Connors). The story was great in my opinion and I think the cast was better too. Emma Stone fit the role of Gwen Stacy more than Bryce Dallas Howard or Kirsten Dunst, and Andrew Garfield played a perfect role of Peter Parker. Expand
  31. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    It's a good movie, not perfect, but entertaining as hell. The Amazing Spider-Man is as good as Raimi's "Spider Man" (Not as good as "Spider Man 2"), but it is certainly more angsty and smaller in scope.

    If you're ok with that, then prepare for a Marc Webb experience :)
  32. Jul 4, 2012
    4
    I don't care about the reboot. This is just a tremendously mediocre movie. Incredibly poor pacing and a weak script. Shame, because all the actors are game and most of the CGI is well-done. The second half of the movie descends into the ridiculous, the characters other than Peter Parker are written so lifeless and one-note. I thought there was plenty enough to distinguish this from the last franchise, but I think it's very fair to compare them if you give this one a fair shake standing on its own. This movie, however, does not stand well on its own, Ironically, this one apparently stayed more true to several of the details of the comics but lacks any of the energy and wonder of a comic book. The first movie of the last series had this is spades. Just a really disappointing effort, and the first recent Marvel movie I disliked more than I liked. Expand
  33. Jul 3, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Does The Amazing Spider-Man usher in an exciting new chapter in the franchise or signal yet another reboot?

    I have joined millions of moviegoers in condemning the horrid Spider-Man 3, a film that put the once-proud franchise into a coma with a single dance scene. But there were more issues to that film than just the sidestepping: the product felt tired and bereft of imagination, as if our hero needed a partner or a major shakeup. Throwing too many substandard enemies at one hero never solved anything, but that's exactly what we got. Something needed to change, but was a reboot really necessary? That was Sony's call; and so five years after Tobey Maguire and company were shown the door, the lights dim for The Amazing Spider-Man.

    Sadly, The Amazing Spider-Man is too drawn out, uninspiring, and downright boring. Its disappointment is so profound that it's a far cry from Spider-Man 1 & 2 and the worst superhero movie since Green Lantern. You all know the story: Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is bitten by a genetically-enhanced spider and wakes up with enhanced abilities. Yet, this is where the similarities between Sam Raimi's films and the current one end: webbing emanates from a man-made source, Mary Jane has been replaced by Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), and even Parker's biological parents are Oscorp doctors who pass off young Peter to Aunt May (Sally Field, Norma Rae) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) before meeting an untimely end. Fast forward several years, and both Parker and Stacy are high school classmates, not twenty-somethings as were portrayed in the Raimi films. Stacy has inexplicably landed a cushy internship with Oscorp and its chief researcher Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who is seeking to reconstruct severed human limbs (including his own) in an effort to prolong human life. Connors worked with Parker's father (Campbell Scott) on the same recipe, only to see his work stifled with a missing formula that Peter discovers in dad's old briefcase. And just like the comics, Connors tests the newly-completed serum on himself, turning into the superhuman monster The Lizard. Rattled by the death of Uncle Ben and the news of Connor's transformation, Peter must balance his new powers with the realization that everyone close to him is at risk of the same violent ends if he remains Spider-Man. On the surface, it seems many of these resets would signal a new-found respect by Sony to remain faithful to the Marvel universe. But, consider this blasphemous alteration: almost everyone in the city knows Spider-Man's true identity, from a young boy stuck in a burning van to the police captain running the manhunt for the webslinger (Dennis Leary). There's even a suggestion that Aunt May herself has put two and two together after seeing Peter return home bruised and battered near the movie's ending. Why screenwriter James Vanderbilt would at first show such respect for canon then throw grenades like this into the middle of his script is beyond me. Either he assumes we're not fully vested with the character to begin with, or we're just ignorant moviegoers who consume and forget when the lights kick on. Either way, this insult doesn't help indie Director Marc Webb, who tries his best to paint pretty action scenes (such as several first-person views of Spider-Man slinging his way through the city) but fails to achieve anything new or exciting. And while our promising cast does its best with Vanderbilt's sub-par script, bad screenplays always trump good acting, a fact which is demonstrated in some of the cheesiest dialogue I've heard from the franchise ("I've been bitten - so have I," says our leads as Parker shares all). While capable actors, Garfield and Stone have little chemistry together and seem like an odd pairing from the start. Moreover, the story takes too long to develop, forcing audiences to wait 45 minutes before seeing any real action, none of which is satisfying or even inventive even in 3D. In fact, many of them feel like retreads of Raimi's efforts, demonstrating the incredible command he had of the character.

    Anyone who tells you this film is exciting or even a well-drawn character-driven story has obviously not seen The Avengers. Had The Amazing Spider-Man debuted sometime in the spring, perhaps my reaction would have been different. Once again that was Sony's call to make, and their product is so much the worse for it. Why they decided it was time to reboot, rather than reload, will confound moviegoers until one considers the contract, which requires the studio to produce a film every so many years, or lose the rights to Marvel. Therefore, The Amazing Spider-man is essentially a contract extension, doomed by a boring and plodding script and a post-credits scene that felt incomplete and largely ineffective. Let's hope Marvel can someday wrestle Spider-Man away from Sony, because very little about this version is inspiring or even worth the time.
    Expand
  34. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is, as I said in the title, an excellent restart to the story. The acting, visuals, and story were all well-done and VERY enjoyable to watch. Speaking of the acting, Stone and Garfield were both a great joy to watch on film, mostly because they have this great screen chemistry and I can't wait to see them at it again in the next one (If there is one). This movie is very enjoyable and fun to watch, and I recommend any one of any age to go see this! I saw it in IMAX 3D, and not that I think it is the best way to see it or anything, but I thought it looked amazing on the IMAX screen so I recommend checking that out if you have the means to as well. Expand
  35. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This film was excellent. Superb acting, on par with the comics, very emotional, and 'amazing' action. Garfield puts Tobey to shame. The film was tainted by over-marketing though, a mistake I pray Sony does not commit again.
  36. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Please don't listen to reviewers bashing this because it's a reboot. It's leaps and bounds above Raimi's films. Trust me....this is the real deal. It's a wonderful adaptation, and one of the best superhero films ever made. Better than The Avengers.
  37. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Last year X-Men (First Class)reboot was very fantastic, and The Rise of the Planet Apes was also very good! This year, Marc Webb dared to begin another Spider-Man Franchise, and to my surprise; was amazingly done.Not as good as Batman Begins but is as good as last year X-Men: First Class.

    Fresh and old plot-lines were mixed up to gave the audience an exquisite story of old-brand new spidey hero. Again, heroism brand of spider-man focus on his relationship to his family, friends and peers, and of course our superhero is one-hell of a lover-boy; new love interest which an ingredient of fresh story and is a sample exploits an untold story which I think the major flaw of the movie because it doesn't elaborates the secret behind his parents death which I hope can be lighten to us the next spidey-movie.

    Overall, Andrew was great to replicate what Tobey done and Emma and other cast were good. The story maybe a shadow of the Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Franchise but is still effective enough to let you bite. Action and web-slinging choreography and other visual effects were great even the background music, especially Coldplay's "Till Kingdom Come" track.
    Expand
  38. Jul 3, 2012
    6
    This version of the Spider-Man franchise is definitely better than the original, but it gets hung up on some of the same problems. The cast was my favorite part of the movie, lead by Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Martin Sheen, Sally Fields, and Rhys Ifan. Each of them did a wonderful job of making their characters feel very real and genuine. The effects were really good as well (except for the lizard, which looked really weird). My big problem with this film is that it spent a little too much time on exposition and it relies on some of the same old super hero cliches and sentimentality making the movie seem "cheap" at times. It's also follows a very similar path as the original Spider-Man, and even though the filmmakers pulled it off, I wish they could have taken it in a different direction. But the bottom line is that it's an entertaining, better than average super hero movie, and I'm kinda looking forward to a sequel. Expand
  39. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Fantastic movie! It kept my attention from beginning to end, which is hard to do for a movie that is over 2 hours long! The story was the best ever for Spider-Man, and everything was easy to understand and follow. Intense action sequences and very little to no swearing. Be sure to stay through half of the credits, there is a surprise at the end for a plot for a sequel!
  40. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    Dont even bother reading the extremely negative reviews. I was very skeptical going in, but what a hell of a start for a new trilogy. The best part about this fresh start, is the 'darker' direction Sony decided to roll with. And as for Garfield, I'm actually surprised at his performance. Any true Marvel fan will appreciate this movie. Well done. Can't WAIT for the Venom tie in.
  41. Jul 3, 2012
    7
    Five years after the last Raimi Spider-man film which was an utter disappointment comes The Amazing Spider-Man to bring the hero back into gear. But is it better than its predecessors? The answer is yes and no. The Amazing Spider-Man shows a new Peter Parker, who instead of a nerd, is actually a chill hipster dude who skateboard. Yeah, um that's not who Peter Parker is supposed to be. But putting that aside, Spider-man was almost perfectly done. One-liners and just taken in a plain humorous sense in some parts of the movie. But, the movie did try to get serious in many scenes like when Uncle Ben dies and that part was actually well done and creates more emotion to Peter's and his uncle's relationship which wasn't so strong in 2002's Spider-Man. The origin story has been told before but this one was well done to say the least. The Lizard looked weird and honestly, didn't even look like a lizard. The action in this movie is really well done also because the camera follows Spidey really well and Andrew Garfield did a decent job as his role. Emma Stone is perfect as Gwen Stacey, probably even better than Garfield as Peter Parker/Spider-man. She is much more of a likable character than Mary Jane ever was in the previous movies. This movie was far from being AMAZING but it sure was pretty fun to watch and all Spidey fans should check it out and give it a chance. Expand
  42. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    This movie was surprisingly great, as I did have my doubts about it. Great new cast, Peter Parker and Gwen have great on-screen chemistry (although I will always be a fan of MJ). Also, the beginning was great, as it more properly explained the origin of Spider-Man (although the amount of time before he gets his powers it a bit stretched out). I love how he uses artificial webs instead of the previous trilogy where the webs magically came out of Parker's wrist. The Lizard was also a much better villain than I had expected, as he is physically more than Parker could ever handle, leading the scenes with him to be a thrill ride of wondering what would come next. Overall, a great movie. Any fan of Spider-Man, heck, any fan of action or comic books in general should see this movie. Even if you don't know about the masked web slinger, this movie will explain it all to you. Expand
  43. Jul 3, 2012
    7
    It's very hard for me to assign a number rating to this film, but I think a 7 is as close as I can get to the truth. I'd like to give it higher, but I don't think I could justify an 8. This is a pretty good movie. Nowhere near as good as the Avengers, but it definitely holds its own. The acting is great; Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have great chemistry and Rhys Ifans is great as Dr. Connors. The action scenes are great and I think Garfield does a far better job at showing the wise-cracking side of Spidey than Tobey Maguire did.

    Where this movie falls down for me is that I don't feel it knows what it wants to be. While I think overall it is darker than the original trilogy, there are some moments that feel very cartoonish. Which would be fine, but it clashes with the dark tone of the film.

    tl;dr This film is good. See it if you like Spider-Man.
    Expand
  44. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie truly is amazing. It really is one of the best superhero movies I have ever seen. I disagree with what the critics are saying by giving it a measly 67 out of 100. I like that this movie stays more true to the original comics that it is based on. Spider-Man is now more of a wise-cracker, making jokes in a dangerous situation (unlike the Spider-Man of a certain other film trilogy I know). I also like that the story is darker, and less romantic (unlike a...oh scratch it you know the drill). The main villain is now not a true villain, but a guy who wants something back. This is what makes it so much more original than a lot of the other superhero movies, whose villains are filled with anarchy. The CGI is excellent. The Lizard (main villain) might be up to the level of how Davy Jones and Gollum looked in their respective films. There is only one real problem that I have with this film. Towards the end where Lizard is about to take over the city by turning everyone into reptiles, he intoxicates some S.W.A.T. team people by turning them into lizards like himself. However, these people do not help the lizard at all in the rest of the film. This leaves a plot hole in which you don't know what they did from there. You only see them changing back into their human form at the very end. This plot hole does not change my opinion on this movie however. To me it is still an excellent film, and I cannot wait for the sequel! Expand
  45. Jul 3, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This reboot of spiderman is in no way bad, but definitely has room for improvement. To start off, everything looks great, the web slinging, spidey in his suit, and the Lizard. Andrew Garfield is a much better Peter Parker than Tobey Maguire, and I loved all of his smart quips during fights, its just a classic Spider-man thing and I really loved how Garfield played this role. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy was likable, but overall was much more under developed compared to Parker and Dr. Connors. Speaking of Connors, he was awesome...until he became the Lizard. The Lizard was a good choice as the leads villain, but just didn't pose a huge threat to Peter or Spidey as I had hoped he would. My major problem with the movie as whole, however, was that Peter never found the guy who killed Uncle Ben, and I realize that maybe he realized what he was doing was immature as Capt. Stacy (played by a surprisingly good Dennis Leary) knocked Spidey for beating on criminals of the same type, but the director could have at least had more closure to the whole story arc, and it just abruptly ended as the Lizard came into play. All in all, a solid superhero movie that has room to grow into something great and I can safely say that I am looking forward to where this iteration of Spider-man goes in the future. Expand
  46. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Obviously, this movie is based on the amazing spider-man cartoon that's new and that's why we won't see Mary Jane until the next movie; when aunt May thinks Peter needs a girl and so the neighbor happens to have a daughter [Mary Jane] and Aunt May introduces her to Peter. But I wonder how they are gonna do with the other girl [Stacy] that happens to fall in love with Peter after she failed a test and Peter becomes her tutor. Man, spidey is surrounded by too many girls now. Lets see, Gwen, Mary Jane, Stacey, and of course our favorite super hero that happens to have the same powers captain America has BlackCat.

    The amazing spider-man is an amazing movie with lots of action. I really like it. Although, Peter Parker seems to be revealing too much of his powers during this movie. If I had seen what happened in real life I would say, "he is definitely not human.' I mean seriously, the train, the basketball, will someone in the movie say, "oh this guy I met the other day is definitely Spider-man. But the way he was web swinging was awesome because I felt it was more than just swinging. There was jumping from wall to wall, there was spinning on the wall while a bunch of birds flew behind him (that was cool). And of course Lizards mouth could had been a lot bigger, like a crocodile's mouth. It would had been amazing to have seen spidey trying to keep the mouth open as his head is so close to it. The thing I love about spider-man the most is that he is the most fun super-hero to watch. Although some people say a giant or Hulk can kill spider-man and that he is really not that powerful. I think he is awesome because his powers are very limited. That's exactly what they did in this movie. They didn't make spider-man so powerful, otherwise he wouldn't be fun to watch. And even though people say hulk or a giant , that's not true. Why? Because spider-man is smart. I think something they should do in a next movie is make a stronger villain for the web-head. In the movie I would like to see spider-man play a dragon ball z video game so that he can learn a really good lesson I learned from that game: "When you depend too much on your strength, you leave yourself wide open.' And lets also include Black Cat so that we can have two super-heroes fighting side by side. I always love to have movie ideas because when I really enjoyed the movie I spend some time imagining the characters in my head and interacting with them. I've imagine myself with powers and creating funny moments in my head too.
    Expand
  47. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    It is a great film filled with human emotion and multiple conflicts. Webb makes a film more worried about characters then action. This is not to say that the action scenes are not masterfully crafted and beautiful looking. These characters are dear to us similarly to the ones of 500 days of summer. The only other super hero movies to have the same effect is Nolan's Batman series. You know that when you can compare a film to Nolan's Batman series it is a great film and this one is the best of the year so far. Expand
  48. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is as stylish and slick as it is emotionally grounded in the world we live in. Director Marc Webb takes the superhero genre and doesn't try to make it larger than life. Instead, he makes it down to Earth, in a way that Joss Whedon couldn't do with The Avengers and in a way that Christopher Nolan couldn't do with The Dark Knight. Spider-Man is back.
  49. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    Lets just say, i wasnt expecting much from this move from the start. But holy cow was i wrong. I was sure Toby McGuire was the only one that could play Spider Man that good but Andrew Garfield was spectacular as well as the other actors. The action was more intense than the originals. The movie made me laugh, feel sad, had me in awe, just an amazing movie. Easily my favorite of 2012 so far and now we'll see what Batman brings to the table July 20th. Expand
  50. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Saw the midnight premiere and was blown away by how great the movie was. The movie went into so much more detail than the original trilogy. The characters are amazing and the relationship between Peter and Gwenneth is done very well. The movie is fun and exciting. Get your tickets!
  51. Jul 3, 2012
    8
    It wasn't a bad movie. Overall it was great. But the origin story was so boring. Its a story I've heard a million times over the years, and just 10 short years ago in the last spider-man movie. I wish they would have left out that part and focused more on either enhancing the rest of the movie, or adding in more.
  52. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    This is a much more human spider-man, he felt like the geeky Peter Parker with his actions and his position in school as well as his body language and communication with people including his love interest Gwen, He underwent a more natural development of his powers as well as emotional growth over the course of the film for given reasons. Unlike the Toby McGuire counterpart, He also had a sense of humor which is one of Spider mans strong points as that made him one of my all time favorite marvel characters. The villain for this film was also much more menacing than any of the enemies the original Spider man movies ever had, The character behind the lizard was unfortunately not as interesting as the rest of the cast though. The combat sequences were excellent with very impressive CG visual effects(minus the face he actually looked like the goomba from Mario Bros the movie.) They did an incredible job in emphasizing Spider Mans agility and use of the web during his battles, and again his witty lines never fail to further keep him consistent to his comic book self.

    I gotta say with all the down talk this movie is getting i was a bit worried myself about on whether or not it would be worth watching, but after seeing it, i actually wouldn't mind a second run if the opportunity arises, It is a great movie.
    Expand
  53. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    I went into this with low expectations but really really enjoyed what it had to offer. Honestly, Im a huge spiderman fan regardless growing up in the 80s and 90s but this really was better then the avengers. The CGI is flawless and imax 3D make this movie look absolutely amazing. The story was very compelling and the star studded cast was fantastic from Dennis Leary to Emma Stone who should be nominated for some type of award.

    There were its share of cheesy moments but this is a super hero movie and it is to be expected. Also, if I had to complain about anything, it would be the terrible music and sound throughout the movie. Truly, music can really make or break certain parts and this movies sound music wise was pretty terrible. Regardless for any super hero fan, an absolute must see
    Expand
  54. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Everything about this movie is better than and more creative than any Spider-Man movie before it. Andrew Garfield is a fantastic Parker and a superb Spider-Man. Definitely Amazing!
  55. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    It was truly amazing. I love the first 2 Spider-man movies, so I'm glad the new spider-man franchise started that good. Great performances, effects and action, and the best 3D since Avatar.
  56. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    First, I like a lot, how close to the comic. I did not like to see that in Raimi's trilogy, good old Spidey networks launched "organically" so to speak. Why, what sense does it make the gesture mythical fingers to operate the spinner, if no action button? I liked that idea in the previous films, really.
    In "The Amazing" spinner turns the classic story almost becomes the original comic
    book, the character of Gwen, a new Spiderman, which I must admit, I have a lot more hook that, although good-natured, soseras Tobey. And many new surprises. But the main idea is that this reboot of the franchise, is a TOTAL facelift for the character, fresh air in the form of new faces, and what about the new suit ... SPECTACULAR. In an address with Marc Webb "500 days" as collateral, which is a relief. I would like to see this movie in the hands of a pseudo-Joel Schumacher. Finally, for fans of Spider-Man, mandatory viewing. And sure hope so, that anyone who values ​​and marvel comics, from the former to the latter, this movie will like, a lot.
    PD: Sorry but i'm spanish, and i use the traductor for this review.
    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACHÚS
    http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5q7moV3Gk1qi89r1o1_500.gif
    Expand
  57. Jul 3, 2012
    5
    A less involving remake of a movie that should have been left alone. While I think The Amazing Spider-Man did a fantastic job of representing Peter Parker, the rest of the movie just sort of flopped about, switching between humor and drama so abruptly and randomly, you are left wondering if you should be feeling sad or amused during scenes. The movie never really got going or got me as the viewer involved, so most attempts at drama failed. Additionally, the movie is incredibly long and drawn out, and I found myself wishing it would end.

    Don't get me wrong, the movie is not terrible. It is well made and well written. There's just... something about it that makes it very distant from the viewer. It took too long to get going and even then never really established itself.
    Expand
  58. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    I attended the midnight premier of The Amazing Spiderman last night and I'd have to say that it is the best Spiderman movie to ever hit theaters. It is far superior to the previous Tobey Maguire trilogy. The acting is great by Garfield and Stone and the actor playing Dr. Connors plays the role perfectly. It seems that the negative reviews for this movie are coming from people who are grasping for attention by saying they disliked the movie. This is a great movie for any Spiderman fan. Expand
  59. Jul 3, 2012
    6
    For a reboot, it was okay. The Lizard was okay, but I'm wondering if the producers knew that the Lizard was not that interesting in the comic version prior. The actor (Andrew Garfield) did alright while Spiderman, but while Peter Parker, makes me sad for the actor and I guess for young Peter. Aunt May is supposed to be about as innocent as a senior citizen in the big city can be; Sally Field honestly didn't fill the shoes as well as her predecessor Rosemary Harris (btw, I like Sally Field, this just wasn't her part). Emma Stone and her character were actually the bright lights of the casting. Even Martin Sheen (whom I love as an actor) didn't really add to or improve on the prior Ben Parker. Last note: The standard Marvel teaser at the end of the credits - total flop - did nothing to make me want to see any upcoming Marvel movies, did not whet my appetite for more ... nothing. Best thing about it was that it lasted perhaps a minute.
    If I knew then what I know now, I'd have saved the money and waited for DVD.
    Expand
  60. Jul 3, 2012
    8
    I just finished watching this film, and I have to say that I really enjoyed myself. Here are some good things about the film: Webbs' version of Spider-Man was more faithful to the comics. Spider Man felt more agile and fast than Sam Raimi's version and was more easier to follow in his action scenes, also the chemistry between Peter and Gwen is spectacular as Garfield and Stone gave good performances. Although they didn't have to repeat Spiderman's origins again, they tried to change it up a little and they succeeded in doing it. The Lizard also made a good villain and Rhys Ifans was convincing as both Dr Connors and his alter ego. And here are cons of the movie: The action sequences of the film was definitely not on par as with Raimi's Spider-man films, especially Spider-Man 2's train fight scene. Although the action was good and easy to follow, they were kind of short. The action scenes lasted 2 minutes tops and some even less, although they are quite frequent during the second half of the film. Overall, it was a great film that provided more closure to Parker's origins and also was a subtle coming-of-age film that showed Parker's change of character from a nerdy high school student, to a morally-driven hero. I give this film an 8 out of 10. Expand
  61. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man, above all else, has heart. If you take away the brilliant acting of the main characters in Amazing Spider Man you're left with a far grittier and human take on the webslinger's story. Gone from this reboot is the campiness of the Raimi/Macguire rendition - replaced with the believable awkwardness of an adolescent dealing with something much bigger than himself. Fortunately, we don't have to take away the tremendous job of Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. While the supporting cast was largely terrific in their roles, Garfield and Stone slipped into their roles flawlessly. I had mixed expectations going with how Garfield would do, but any doubts were quickly quelled. Garfield's unbelievably awkward and emotional performance was believable - a commodity in most super hero flicks - without coming across as the typical whiny protagonist. Stone, once again, knocked it out of the park as Gwen Stacey playing showing true chemistry with her nerdy counter part. The story wasn't fantastic, but very serviceable give the need to once again delve into the origin of the arachnid hero. However, the dialogue was fairly good throughout but truly shined in parts. I would love to dive deeper and deeper into this, but the bottom line is The Amazing Spiderman is a very good movie and borders on great when firing on all cylinders. Webb has set a solid foundation in place to get the most out of his new franchise. I can only hope that, like most super hero series, we won't have to suffer through diminishing returns. Expand
  62. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This Movie By far was better than the entire Raimi trilogy. The story was compelling and the action scenes were great. Not to mention Spider-Man cracking jokes is awesome (Just like he should be) As for the 3D effects they were quite good especially The first-person shots. That's when the 3D shined, But the 3D is great throughout the entire film. I also like the relationship with Gwen and Peter. Also the fact that Spider-man is a Vigilante to The police which was actually very very compelling. Also the ending was top notch!. You should stay after the credits when the film is over ;) Expand
  63. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    A lot of people give this film hate simply because it was an early reboot, which I admit was a ridiculous move by Sony, and I was having doubts about this movie. But I saw it at the midnight showing and was blown anyway. Andrew Garfield is perfect as Spider-Man, although he does play Peter Parker with is awkward demeanour a lot better. Emma Stone is completely likeable and a great replacement for MJ and their romance is very well done. Rhys Ifans was the only lacking part for me, he acted a bit too much like Willem Dafoe did in the 1st Spider-Man. And I didn't really like the design of the lizard in this one. But the CGI for everything else was spectacular, especially in the last action sequence. The ending wasn't that fantastic it left a lot of questions unanswered, but overall it was a great movie. The origin story seemed to put off a few people so I can't wait to see what they do next! Expand
  64. Jul 3, 2012
    2
    I dont even know where to start. The acting was very poor and this is just a reboot, It had no comparison to the previous Spider Man movies. The originals were the best. This new cast never gives you any feeling for the good or the bad people. Had SI FI which I dont like for the most part but it just didnt fit in with this movie, which is like watching a B rated movie. Maybe it is, any way..............The actors look like they are reading off of Q cards. You dont get the sense of feeling towards themselves that people get when they are in love with there partner. Advice: wait till it comes out on tv or a Premium movie Chanel you may have. Don't waste you money.There are so many things wrong with this movie im just going to stop. Expand
  65. Jul 3, 2012
    3
    Wow. It's pretty bad. It barley held my interest. I found myself at times wishing it was over. The kid that plays spiderman has one of those faces you just want to punch...like Jamie Oliver. The tree points I gave it went to the cgi which was really good. The subplot about his parents it totally unnecessary, but maybe they have something big planned. Reminded me of a direct to dvd spiderman movie.
  66. Jul 3, 2012
    7
    Different twist in building an origin of the superhero, some emotional scenes and new swinging action of the skinny Spiderman is not enough to wipe out Tobby Maguire Spiderman image from your head. Though exciting fun is there to make people come to cinema and I watched in a full packed Hall. Complete review @ http://bit.ly/KK1QuK
  67. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    I'm very happy to say that the reboot of spiderman follows the comics much more firmly in the way spiderman developed his powers, the general storyline with him being inspired to be a hero, and the witty comedy directed at bad guys. With an ending some will hate and others will love, this spiderman movie may be the best of them all.
  68. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    I just finished watching the midnight showing and I can proudly say that this movie is an improvement over the previous ones. The way he gets his powers and why he has them are much more explained. The villain is amazing and the actors are great. There's also some comedy which put together with everything else makes this a fantastic movie.
Metascore
66

Generally favorable reviews - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 29 out of 42
  2. Negative: 2 out of 42
  1. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Jul 5, 2012
    70
    This might be a fun summer blockbuster if only it even remotely needed to exist.
  2. Reviewed by: Marc Savlov
    Jul 3, 2012
    30
    In short, the character is a lot like the way Stan Lee first envisioned him, but the trilogy's screenwriter Steve Ditko would probably loathe this new, unsatisfying, and hollow-feeling entry into the new cinematic Marvel Universe.
  3. Reviewed by: Joshua Rothkopf
    Jul 3, 2012
    60
    On the whole, it's passable stuff, a surprise, given how mechanical the masked character seemed.