User Score
7.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1424 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

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. Jul 18, 2012
    4
    Repetitive.Boring. Zzz. I saw this movie in 3d hoping the action might pop out at me... Well if I seen it in 4d I would have still fell asleep.Don't get me wrong people, but this is a supposed to be a "superhero" movie. Not a drama, love story, or an old folk tale. In video game terms...This movie has no replay value. Trying to tell the same story with less action is something I just don'tRepetitive.Boring. Zzz. I saw this movie in 3d hoping the action might pop out at me... Well if I seen it in 4d I would have still fell asleep.Don't get me wrong people, but this is a supposed to be a "superhero" movie. Not a drama, love story, or an old folk tale. In video game terms...This movie has no replay value. Trying to tell the same story with less action is something I just don't get. I like Andrew Garfield as an actor. I even like what he did with the role. But the director forgot to say Take 1... Action! Expand
  2. Jul 20, 2012
    9
    I spent a good time. This Spider-Man is maybe funniest than the others and i prefer the both actors : andrew Garfield and Emma Stone than the others. In many ways, this is an improvement.
  3. Jul 20, 2012
    6
    So the reboot machine keeps on churning out films from our childhood but here we have a reboot, or should i say remake, of a movie series that only ended 5 years ago. Granted Spider-Man 3 felt like it was stuff to the brim with too many characters and too much going on to be coherent so going back to basics is a good idea but not necessarily back to the origin story as even though thisSo the reboot machine keeps on churning out films from our childhood but here we have a reboot, or should i say remake, of a movie series that only ended 5 years ago. Granted Spider-Man 3 felt like it was stuff to the brim with too many characters and too much going on to be coherent so going back to basics is a good idea but not necessarily back to the origin story as even though this does have some interesting ideas, you can Expand
  4. Jul 21, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It was a safe, solid action film which did not push any boundaries. I would have given this higher but it was just too similar to the original film and was done too soon in my opinion. Could still be a solid series of films as long as they try new story lines but I understand why this one was quite similar to the first Spiderman as it is about his origins. Expand
  5. Jul 21, 2012
    6
    The film was good, don't get me wrong. The characters were much better, and much more likable than Raimi's version, but I feel it was too soon.

    The world is the same, the story and structure is very very similar, it terms of effects nothing has changed, and the first person shooting was quite annoying. My original score was 7 but I'm bringing it down to 6 because of the so called "3D",
    The film was good, don't get me wrong. The characters were much better, and much more likable than Raimi's version, but I feel it was too soon.

    The world is the same, the story and structure is very very similar, it terms of effects nothing has changed, and the first person shooting was quite annoying. My original score was 7 but I'm bringing it down to 6 because of the so called "3D", which just seemed to make the screen darker with no REAL added value.
    Expand
  6. May 4, 2014
    7
    Very decent spider-man film, sadly the main problem i have with the film is the fact that it really feels, slow, boring and doesn't have that FUN witty Peter Parker/spider-man charm also the Villain, The Lizard was pretty terrible their wasn't any really reason for me to FEEL anything for him. Otherwise its a good film with amazing visuals and a brilliant cast with cool little hints at 2Very decent spider-man film, sadly the main problem i have with the film is the fact that it really feels, slow, boring and doesn't have that FUN witty Peter Parker/spider-man charm also the Villain, The Lizard was pretty terrible their wasn't any really reason for me to FEEL anything for him. Otherwise its a good film with amazing visuals and a brilliant cast with cool little hints at 2 whats to come from Marc Webbs spider-an film series. Expand
  7. Apr 8, 2013
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is the Spider-Man film that we were all waiting to see. It has a fantastic cast that all give great performances, a great score to accompany it, and great action sequences that can only be put as simply: amazing.
  8. Jul 23, 2012
    7
    Most of the negative reviews on here are really uninformed reviews. While this movie is titled "The Amazing Spider-man;" this movie seemed more like a strange mixture of both series "The Amazing Spiderman" and "Ultimate Spiderman." Most people are familiar with "The Amazing Spiderman" series because it's been printed since the 1960s. So if things seem unfamiliar about this movie it'sMost of the negative reviews on here are really uninformed reviews. While this movie is titled "The Amazing Spider-man;" this movie seemed more like a strange mixture of both series "The Amazing Spiderman" and "Ultimate Spiderman." Most people are familiar with "The Amazing Spiderman" series because it's been printed since the 1960s. So if things seem unfamiliar about this movie it's because the writers picked out elements from ultimate spiderman. I personally didn't like the fact that they mixed the two comic series together, because I was expecting there source material to be the comic they named it after not two different comic series.

    This movie is actually really good I wouldn't say it's completely superior to the first three movies but it does excel in several places where the first three movies didn't. First of all the cast is far superior in my opinion. While the first three movies had great actors it just didn't seem like they were that into the making the movie and it really showed in their performances , not to mention there were some really strange casting decisions ( I.E. Eddie Brock/ Venom being play by the guy from that 70s show).

    Secondly the plot is far more comic accurate than most probably give it credit for. The villain actually has amotives and goals he wants to achieve, and they're well thought out. What I mean is that the lizard man initially is running his experiments to find a way to genetically engineer genes into people so they can grow back limbs and stuff like that, but of course something horribly wrong happens and he becomes a monster; however, as the monster he feels real power and thinks humans are weak overall. These thoughts lead him to trying to figure out a way to either eliminate or modify humans. The green goblin in the first movie just did everything because he was crazy; it never really feel like he had any motives besides I want to kill people for the heck of it. What I hated about the first trilogy is that at the end of every movie they killed off the main villains. I know this sounds nit picky but it almost seemed like they did it just because it was convenient. Instead of placing one scene at the end of the movie where it shows norman osbourne being locked up in a prison or something like that they just killed him off so they never had to mention him again in the next two movies.

    Thirdly the character development is phenomenal and the talent really gets the heart and soul of the characters spot on.

    The main negative thing about this movie is occasionally it feels like it drags on and this is in part of the character development. There are a lot of tear jerking scenes in this movie that just don't really feel necessary. These scenes are in there to make you feel more invested in the characters but they could have accomplished this by doing scenes that were more entertaining in my opinion.
    Another thing where this movie fails is that it feels less fun than the original 3. If there is anything the first 3 did right is that it didn't take itself serious at all really and that's why they were pretty entertaining even pretty bad at the same time. The most nit picky thing I didn't like about this movie is that the physics were really ridiculous, for example there is one scene where he throws a football at normal speed and it hits and bends the goal post; that's physically IMPOSSIBLE the only way he could accomplish that is if the football was first indestructible and then he threw it at like 500 mph.

    Overall this isn't the best comic movie I've seen but it definitely isn't the worst. The actors deliver believable great performances and the story is very true to the comics. Definitely give it a try at least.
    Expand
  9. Jul 28, 2012
    10
    I love marvel comics and specially the superheroes. This movie is great. It's my favorite movie. I recommend it to the people who like action and some comedy. It is a fantastic movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  10. Jul 30, 2012
    9
    I love Spiderman movies ever since 2007, this should be on sales now! The movie is more than 2 hours of entertainment, making me impressed of the whole story.
  11. Jul 31, 2012
    8
    Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, and everyone else in the cast is fantastic. The special effects are some of the best ever. What is really amazing though is that the story of Peter Parker becoming Spider-Man is just as fresh and emotional as the first time it was told 50 years ago. (and the last time we saw it less than 10 years ago.)
  12. Aug 1, 2012
    9
    I watched this recently, and I think 80% of the time the movie was catching your eye, so you don't really ever get bored, also funny sometimes. (Sometimes, not a lot)
  13. Aug 2, 2012
    10
    Best Spider-Man yet. The younger casting of Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone paid off big time! They were much more believable in their roles than the Spider-Man franchise has ever given us. Though the villain was not that exciting, this is the first superhero movie that I've ever seen that I honestly want to see again. Usually the genre is a little boring to me, but this movie is top-notch.
  14. Aug 3, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Tis movie isn't amazing but it is one of the best of the spiderman movies. there are some memorable moments but thre are some ridiculous scenes, like the scene with the construction workers giving spiderman a lift. the cgi wasn't the best but it was still good. The movie dragged a little and the lizard shared similarities to the 2002 Spidermans Green Goblin in an overall score.
    Story-7
    Cast-8
    Sound-8
    Animation-6
    total-8/10
    Great
    Expand
  15. Aug 5, 2012
    9
    my roomate's step-mother brought in $15301 last month. she has been making cash on the computer and moved in a $482100 condo. All she did was get fortunate and put into work the information given on this web NuttyRich.com
  16. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    This was a great movie, despite what people have been saying that 'Its just another spiderman film' well, they are right, it is, but thats just it, all spiderman films have been brilliant and given the spectator a very great feeling at the end of it, just as I had during, and at the end of it. There were a few very minor errors I noticed, so minor that I can't even fully remember them,This was a great movie, despite what people have been saying that 'Its just another spiderman film' well, they are right, it is, but thats just it, all spiderman films have been brilliant and given the spectator a very great feeling at the end of it, just as I had during, and at the end of it. There were a few very minor errors I noticed, so minor that I can't even fully remember them, overall, it was an 'amazing' film. Expand
  17. Aug 20, 2012
    9
    After the atrocity that was spider man 3 i didn't know what to expect from this one. Not only can I safely say that this redeems itself for that steaming pile of pig s**t I can also say that this is a great super hero movie in its own right and in my opinion is better than The Dark Knight Rises. (But not quite as good as The Avengers, The Dark Knight or Spider Man 2)
  18. Aug 12, 2012
    5
    I'm sorry, but the reboot just didn't work for me at all. The story was just all over the place, and it moved so slowly. I understand that they were going for a character piece here, but they're focusing too much on every plotline that it's just hard to hold on too. Also, I know they're trying to go on a more darker approach to the Spider-Man storyline, but another main reason forI'm sorry, but the reboot just didn't work for me at all. The story was just all over the place, and it moved so slowly. I understand that they were going for a character piece here, but they're focusing too much on every plotline that it's just hard to hold on too. Also, I know they're trying to go on a more darker approach to the Spider-Man storyline, but another main reason for Spider-Man's appeal to audiences is the wonder and joy of discovering and using these powers, and it's utterly lacking in this movie. Yes, there's some humor on Peter using the powers for the first time, but it's hardly wonder. And Jesus, the new Spidey costume sucks. Andrew Garfield was pretty good as Peter Parker though. Oh well. Hopefully they learned from their mistakes in time for the second movie in 2014. Expand
  19. Aug 21, 2012
    9
    I expected less from this movie, but it was well made and deep and I'm willing to rewatch it. The Amazing Spider-Man is very entertaining and there isn't anything really bad about it
  20. Aug 29, 2012
    9
    Firs of all, it's a good Spiderman movie. Don't compare it to the other ones, because it's stupid - this is amazing Spiderman. Andrew Garfield played a pretty good role, so did Emma Stone - I was really surprised. It had a good plot. And Spiderman was how he should be, always making fun of his enemies and everything. It was great movie for me. Although I liked the first Spiderman movieFirs of all, it's a good Spiderman movie. Don't compare it to the other ones, because it's stupid - this is amazing Spiderman. Andrew Garfield played a pretty good role, so did Emma Stone - I was really surprised. It had a good plot. And Spiderman was how he should be, always making fun of his enemies and everything. It was great movie for me. Although I liked the first Spiderman movie better. But this is a new movie, and it's a new Spiderman and it's a good one. Expand
  21. Nov 18, 2012
    5
    Spiderman at his worst. It was like Twilight trying to become a super hero movie. Gwen Stacy's only importance was that she worked at a top secret laboratory, despite being a high schooler. Her role as a love interest seemed very forced because she didn't help Spiderman get stronger at all. Heavy emphasis on how cool Uncle Ben is was over done because it took nearly half of the movie forSpiderman at his worst. It was like Twilight trying to become a super hero movie. Gwen Stacy's only importance was that she worked at a top secret laboratory, despite being a high schooler. Her role as a love interest seemed very forced because she didn't help Spiderman get stronger at all. Heavy emphasis on how cool Uncle Ben is was over done because it took nearly half of the movie for him to die, which shows how much it dragged on for. Aunt May is a withering grandma who only wants eggs, a joke that excuses Peter Parker from telling her anything that goes on in his life. Dr Connors is a desperate in-debt scientist whose role is to be a Spiderman's personal problem because Peter gave him the formula to be a lizard; absolutely no style. And Peter Parker himself, a cool skateboarding high schooler who gets beat up only because he stands up for others; nothing nerdy about it. When he's Spiderman, he seems very weak. Gets shot in the leg and can barely walk; Gets surrounded by a bunch of thugs and runs away. Marc Webb's directing is very straightforward, which is good for his other movies, but not for this first action movie. Viewers should take note that most of Spiderman is viewed in the dark, perhaps for Webb to push a darker theme for Spiderman. However, Spiderman isn't Batman, and Spiderman's Personal/Hero life really isn't as complicated. Raimi, please come back. Expand
  22. Dec 14, 2013
    9
    Amazing Spider-Man is truly amazing movie superhero, if i can compare with sam raimi movie, the different look in costume, story, character, by the way i enjoy watch this movies...so entertaining...can't wait the sequel...good job Marc Webb
  23. May 4, 2014
    8
    The Amazing Spider-Man is not a perfect film, by any stretch of the imagination. It isn't a groundbreaking one, either, by virtue of being a reboot. However, the film that we got was far better than I expected it being, and is in my opinion, the best Spider-Man movie we have to date.

    For the rest of this review, I'll be referencing the original Spider-Man from 2002, directed by Sam
    The Amazing Spider-Man is not a perfect film, by any stretch of the imagination. It isn't a groundbreaking one, either, by virtue of being a reboot. However, the film that we got was far better than I expected it being, and is in my opinion, the best Spider-Man movie we have to date.

    For the rest of this review, I'll be referencing the original Spider-Man from 2002, directed by Sam Raimi, which I will refer to as "SM1." I'll be referring to this film as "TASM."

    Being a reboot, it improved, and even managed to fix, a lot of problems that SM1 had. The biggest overall difference is the tone of the film itself. It's more grounded in reality than SM1. It's still a fantastical film, what with a teenager having super-powers, and giant lizard people, yet the tone the film establishes, despite these fantastical elements, works very well. This is thanks to the caliber of acting and the dialogue itself.

    Characters are played believably. The character of Peter Parker is one of an average, teenage high-schooler. He's smart, but not obnoxiously smart. He's nerdy enough to be overlooked and bullied by the popular crowd, and he doesn't have to rely on tired nerd stereotyped that were outdated in the 1960s, ala SM1. Andrew Garfield's performance, both as Parker and Spidey, works very well. We believe that he's an average high schooler in this world, and we also believe he's the wise cracking, mask wearing web slinger thanks to his overall range of acting. You buy his emotional scenes just as much as you do his comedic ones, again, thanks to the well written dialogue alongside his shining performance.

    Garfield stars opposite of Emma Stone, who plays Gwen Stacey. Gwen's character may not steal the show as much as Garfield's but she's easily one of the best actors in the film. She's just as believable as Garfield is on screen, and so is the romance that occurs between the two.

    Marc Webb had previously directed an off-beat romantic film, called (500 Days of Summer), and his talent with that genre shows here. The on-screen chemistry between Garfield and Stone is almost so real you can feel it, and both actors turn in amazing performances while doing interesting things with established characters from the source material.

    The pacing of the film is a little off. Considering this is a reboot, it retreads tired ground we've seen in SM1. That doesn't mean that these new takes on old scenes are bad, mind you. In fact, I prefer most of them. It's just that it takes a decent amount of time for the movie to actually kick off and get started as a kick-ass superhero flick. The grounded tone may help the pacing a bit, but not enough to save it from dragging on just a tad bit too long in the first act.

    The scenes shown when Parker gets his Spider-Man powers are hilarious as they are intriguing. It was great seeing him adjust to all of these sudden changes, as well as producing his own wrist mounted web shooters and the webbing they use. Considering Garfield is believable in this role, it's not a stretch to imagine that Peter would be capable of doing such a thing.

    The costume design reflects this notion, as well. While some aren't too happy with the costume in this film, I'd say it works well for what the director was trying to achieve. The thin lines on the suit help to accentuate Spidey's more slim tone, and he doesn't look beefy in comparison to Maguire's build in SM1, and overall, it compliments the character of both Parker and Spider-Man.

    Every main character in this movie is developed very well. We get to see a glimpse into all of their lives; their workplaces, their schools, etc., and how they act and react to and around people, and all the performances are believable. Character development, especially on Peter and Gwen, as well as Cpt. Stacey, is done exceptionally well.

    This movie would have perfect character development if it weren't for the villain. Without giving anything away, after some pretty gnarly stuff goes down with his character, we're not too quite sure what his general intentions are after that. Not enough time was spent on his character, and this is a 2 hour film. It's a shame.

    The action scenes work surprisingly well, sometimes opting for practical effect which look amazing, and wonderful CGI scenes that are just as serviceable. Most of the action takes place during the night time, which is kind of a shame for Spidey, whose costume works very well during the day, but as a whole, the film and its effects are enthralling to watch.

    All in all, I'd say this is a great superhero film. It's not as grounded as Nolan's Batman trilogy, yet it's not as campy as Raimi's Spidey films. It hits a perfect balance somewhere in between. The humor, characters, action, romance; everything in this film just works, and I highly recommend it to both fans of the character and those looking for a solid summer film to watch, in general. It's a great film, let only down by poor development on the villain.
    Expand
  24. Oct 1, 2012
    2
    Worst Spiderman movie. Ever. End of story.
    Whoever wrote this movie's plot (I don't even want to know his name) should be ashamed. I can only feel disappointed in all the people that actually went to see the movie. It's just so terrible. Almost nothing new or relevant is revealed. I'm surprised nobody sued these people. The acting is a bit childish, and the cheesy romance played by Andrew
    Worst Spiderman movie. Ever. End of story.
    Whoever wrote this movie's plot (I don't even want to know his name) should be ashamed. I can only feel disappointed in all the people that actually went to see the movie. It's just so terrible. Almost nothing new or relevant is revealed. I'm surprised nobody sued these people. The acting is a bit childish, and the cheesy romance played by Andrew and Emma is like a new version of Twilight, and I think I speak in name of all people when I say we don't want another Twilight. If you haven't seen this movie so far, then you've done good.
    Expand
  25. Jul 26, 2013
    5
    Watching it again I realized this filmed was completely flawed albeit mostly entertaining. Aside from Uncle Ben, everything in this rings completely false.
  26. Jan 5, 2013
    6
    Out of all the 2012 superhero movies, this one was my least favorite and a big disappointment. I was hyped for two years for this and went to the midnight release and The Amazing Spider-Man at times was great and other times when it was complete trash. The positives though go to the well chosen cast, they were all great and I enjoyed each of the scenes they were in. Unfortunately thisOut of all the 2012 superhero movies, this one was my least favorite and a big disappointment. I was hyped for two years for this and went to the midnight release and The Amazing Spider-Man at times was great and other times when it was complete trash. The positives though go to the well chosen cast, they were all great and I enjoyed each of the scenes they were in. Unfortunately this movie loses serious points because this is the most rushed movie I watched in my life. There are so many scenes that had potential but aren't just ruined, they are destroyed by editing, that's where I start getting fumigated. There are a lot of plots that lead to no where, so theres more points taken off. The Lizard is also a wasted villain with no special back story or meaning to the character, it felt like he was just thrown in there. This movie isn't bad, but it surely ain't amazing, so far this is not a good start for a reboot, and I think Sony is to blame for a lot of the problems in this movie. I recommend this for any Spider-Man fan, but I can't guarantee you'll love it. Expand
  27. Oct 10, 2012
    8
    This movie is truly Amazing. It sucks you into the story, and creates realistic and relate-able characters. While some users here might say the first half was boring, I heavily disagree. The first half does nothing but develop characters, establish important plot points, and reel you into a semi-realistic action/tragedy/comedy story-line. This movie, in terms of acting, is leagues ahead ofThis movie is truly Amazing. It sucks you into the story, and creates realistic and relate-able characters. While some users here might say the first half was boring, I heavily disagree. The first half does nothing but develop characters, establish important plot points, and reel you into a semi-realistic action/tragedy/comedy story-line. This movie, in terms of acting, is leagues ahead of the classic trilogy, and does not at ALL sound "forced". Now while I can respect what the original actors tried to do, they just didn't deliver as greatly as Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, and all of the other actors did. This movie is simply phenomenal, and I can, without question, call it my favorite super-hero movie of all time. Here's to hoping that the sequel will be even more amazing. Great work, Marc Webb. Expand
  28. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    The original spiderman movies are some of my favorites of all time, so how does this one measure up? It's a good movie that does certain things well (the fight scenes and choreography are fantastic- I believe they are just as good as in the original films), but I feel that Peter Parker is less likeable than he should have been. The movie just isn't as compelling as the originals. As wasThe original spiderman movies are some of my favorites of all time, so how does this one measure up? It's a good movie that does certain things well (the fight scenes and choreography are fantastic- I believe they are just as good as in the original films), but I feel that Peter Parker is less likeable than he should have been. The movie just isn't as compelling as the originals. As was expected, many of the plot lines are left unraveled by the end of the movie (in fact, no plot lines are wrapped up at all in the course of the movie), so let's hope that we can get some answers soon- otherwise most of this one is just a bunch of cryptic mumbo-jumbo. Expand
  29. Oct 27, 2012
    4
    Absolutely horrible. Riddled with nauseating cliches from beginning to end. This may be the worst and most unnecessary reboot ever. There is absolutely no originality in the plot. Even the soundtrack is ridiculously annoying. I'd have thought these directors could learn from the Nolans and the Snyders on how to make good superhero movies. The only high point in this movie is Emma Stone'sAbsolutely horrible. Riddled with nauseating cliches from beginning to end. This may be the worst and most unnecessary reboot ever. There is absolutely no originality in the plot. Even the soundtrack is ridiculously annoying. I'd have thought these directors could learn from the Nolans and the Snyders on how to make good superhero movies. The only high point in this movie is Emma Stone's solid acting. Garfield tries and his moments too, I'll give him that. The CGI is absolutely horrendous. It's like they're using software from 1999. Dr. Lizard has got to be the most un-terrifying bad guy ever. The 3D gimmicks are off-point and cheesy. Really, I have no idea how this movie got into production in the first place. Biggest letdown of the year. Expand
  30. Dec 9, 2012
    6
    It's a dumb, predictable popcorn flick where every scene has a painfully obvious meaning and you always know what's going to happen next. I hate that kind of cinema but the funny thing is, the action here is actually thrilling (the crane scene was amazing!), the added psychological depth makes Parker a compelling character, and, perhaps most importantly, Garfield totally nails it. ThereIt's a dumb, predictable popcorn flick where every scene has a painfully obvious meaning and you always know what's going to happen next. I hate that kind of cinema but the funny thing is, the action here is actually thrilling (the crane scene was amazing!), the added psychological depth makes Parker a compelling character, and, perhaps most importantly, Garfield totally nails it. There are worse ways to spend two hours. Expand
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.