Columbia Pictures | Release Date: July 3, 2012
7.0
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1663 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,158
Mixed:
339
Negative:
166
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)
6
drlowdonJun 7, 2013
With the Sam Raimi directed trilogy still fresh in our minds it is impossible not to make comparisons when watching this latest reboot of the franchise, particularly since the movies opening forty-five minutes again takes us throughWith the Sam Raimi directed trilogy still fresh in our minds it is impossible not to make comparisons when watching this latest reboot of the franchise, particularly since the movies opening forty-five minutes again takes us through Spiderman’s origin story. Most viewers will be already be familiar with this story and so it is questionable whether so much time needed to be spent on it but it still makes for watchable cinema.

From then on the movie goes in its own direction and in some ways The Amazing Spiderman is an improvement over its predecessor. Being released ten years after the first of the previous trilogy the special effects and CGI are obviously a big improvement with Spiderman himself moving far more convincingly and The Lizard looking very realistic. Emma Stone, as Gwen Stacy, is also far more likable than Kirsten Dunst’s Mary Jane Watson while Andrew Garfield is close to matching Toby Maguire in the lead role. The plot involving Peter Parkers parents also provides a little more depth to the overall plot of the movie and its future sequels.

On the down side this reboot, while having its moments, was not quite as funny as Raimi’s origin story and seeing the Webbed Crusader on screen does not have quite the same impact it once had. This is certainly a decent start to this new franchise however and I am hopeful it will deliver more in the future.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
OZxQBJul 20, 2012
Fantastic movie for comic fans. Better storytelling and characterization than the recent Spiderman movies in my humble opinion. If you've never seen a Spiderman movie, watch this one and skip the others. I hope this one becomes a franchise.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
DarkEnergonJul 25, 2012
The best Spiderman film to date, with a dream cast (Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone and Martin Sheen in particular) a compelling, to-the-point origin story, a fun soundtrack and some awesome fight scenes. While it does follow the same cues asThe best Spiderman film to date, with a dream cast (Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone and Martin Sheen in particular) a compelling, to-the-point origin story, a fun soundtrack and some awesome fight scenes. While it does follow the same cues as Raimi's original Spiderman movie, that's simply because it's Spiderman's origin, it draws from the same comic book that Raimi's film drew from, so similarities are bound to occur. But overall, I believe this film far outdoes Raimi's Spiderman, the characters in this Spiderman are just so...I guess...loveable :/ And let's face it, the lack of Tobey Maguire makes would make any series reboot a winner, there's something about that guy's acting that stirs about the urge in me to lamp him one, quite an issue when I only ever see him on expensive, fragile screens.
It does annoy me that they went with the age old, "Cop fights superhero because he doesn't want him taking the law into his own hands" bullsh!t we've seen a million times before, but I do like the way they tie that off towards the end.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SensibleGamerJul 21, 2012
At the end of the day , regardless of how hard director Marc Webb tries to veil it , you simply cannot escape the fact that the Amazing Spider - Man is nothing more than old wine in a new bottle . Director Webb's decision to re - visitAt the end of the day , regardless of how hard director Marc Webb tries to veil it , you simply cannot escape the fact that the Amazing Spider - Man is nothing more than old wine in a new bottle . Director Webb's decision to re - visit Spidey's origin , has in my opinion backfired . It lacks the maturity and slick sense of style so very characteristic of Christopher Nolan's Batman films , being overly - reliant on traditional comic book movie cliche and somewhat unimaginative set - pieces . The performances of the entire cast - Garfield and Stone in particular - are worth a mention as they keep you invested in some otherwise dull moments . At the end of the day , I can't help but feel that The Amazing Spider - Man could have been so much better had the creators not decided to take an overly - conservative approach and instead would've dared to think outside - the - box the way Nolan did with his Batman films . Nonetheless , it's still decent fun if you've got a few hours to spare , just don't set your expectations sky high Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
josephbalentineJul 19, 2012
There is a thin line between great CGI and over the top CGI, and this movie is trying to woo both sides. Spiderman has always been a great movie to watch with the whole family, and while it moves up to being a teen film it still stays true toThere is a thin line between great CGI and over the top CGI, and this movie is trying to woo both sides. Spiderman has always been a great movie to watch with the whole family, and while it moves up to being a teen film it still stays true to family fun. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
grandpajoe6191Aug 27, 2015
"The Amazing Spider-Man" is an excellent reboot to the long-standing Sam Raimi series, as Marc Webb directs a well-crafted, easily understood movie for all ages with an enjoyable chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone to watch.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
vini1904Aug 14, 2012
An excellent film, creative, good acting, great storyline and a good dose of emotion. The hero comes very close to human, he makes mistakes, gets hurt, suffering, one of the best films of the spider.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
BasilZeroOct 1, 2013
Despite the reboot being at first a weaker plot and character setup compared to the original trilogy. The reboot does a quite remarkable job. There are some points where you would expect certain key characters to be present over othersDespite the reboot being at first a weaker plot and character setup compared to the original trilogy. The reboot does a quite remarkable job. There are some points where you would expect certain key characters to be present over others however despite that the replacements are nicely done. The action sequences in the movie were quite nicely done however due to the recent release of deleted scenes it was apparent that the movie could of gained a bit more ground if those selected deleted scenes were added in as they provided a better insight to the overall storyline. Regardless of that fact, The Amazing Spider-man was a fantastic movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
StevenFMar 6, 2013
That was fast.. this reboot, that is, Sony are now bound to hold the record for the quickest franchise reboot in history, and many may now ask, did Spider-Man need a brand new set of films?
Personally, no. The last film in the original
That was fast.. this reboot, that is, Sony are now bound to hold the record for the quickest franchise reboot in history, and many may now ask, did Spider-Man need a brand new set of films?
Personally, no. The last film in the original trilogy starring Tobey Maguire and directed by Sam Raimi was a mess to say the least, but Iron Man 2 was a bit of a shambles, it didn't get a reboot.
Although it is clear that there wasn't much necessity to restart this superhero, thats not to say this isn't a good film, because its actually a great film, with a few inkling flaws that stick out, but this tells an excellent origin story that the original never did.
New director Marc Webb tells an interesting story here, he goes right back to basics with our hero Peter Parker being left by his parents to his Aunt May (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) after a interestingly vague opening, thus sets a motion many mysterious and unexplained events that will truly hold you to enjoy this film.
We are then introduced to an older Peter, (played by Andrew Garfield) who brings a new sense of spirit and light-hearted,pop-cultured nature to the role. He longs after Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone) who is in his class and who is also working at Oscorp, where Peter is then bitten by a genetically modified spider, he then realises that he has incorporated superhuman abilities and uses them to his advantage. Working at Oscorp also is Dr. Curt Connors, who is attempting to re-grow is amputated arm by combining genes, with disastrous results.
When tragedy strikes, Peter seeks revenge, now donning a custom-made spidey suit. He soon attracts attention to himself through the police and of course Dr Connors, and as he continues to explore his abilities, he shows his emotional attachment to Gwen.
This love story is Webb's strongest point of the film, not just between Gwen and Peter, but the overall reaction to situations within the film, it feels more real and life-like and brings the movie in a different direction than its predecessors. The one low point has to be the pacing of the story, as it never seems to be told as a stand alone film, it always seems to be building to something we, the viewer know we won't see in this film, whether its unanswered questions or unexplained plot developments that are not acted upon, it always seems that, 'yeah, we're gonna leave that to the sequel'...why? Why not tell the story now and develop later?
But this aside, it has excellent acting in the form of the two young leads, and a strangely enjoyable emotional depth that Marc Webb delivers with excellent confidence, perhaps not a mind-blowing reboot, but certainly an excellent restoration of the franchise.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Super8mmAug 8, 2012
Being a fan of the old Spiderman movies i was curious as to how this one would turn out. Once I heard that Andrew Garfiled was going to be Spiderman I got excited. His performance in The Social Network was Amazing. Also Marc Webb the directorBeing a fan of the old Spiderman movies i was curious as to how this one would turn out. Once I heard that Andrew Garfiled was going to be Spiderman I got excited. His performance in The Social Network was Amazing. Also Marc Webb the director of 500 days of Summer which I loved directed this film, and Emma Stone is playing Gwen Stacey, so far this movie looks great. Then I saw it and was blown away. The acting was great, and the chemistry between Andrew and Emma was awesome, The special effects were brilliant, and it was a great spin on Spiderman which I loved. Many people find it different from the original. But it's suppossed to be different, its a reboot, not a remake. Why would you want to watch the same movie twice. Anyway this movie was very entertaining and I loved it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
brunogabrieleDec 29, 2012
Well, I really loved it. I wasn't keen on these Marvel heroes like Spider-man or Hulk, but I liked this movie, and it attracted me. I just wanted to keep on watching. I also like when things are realistic.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
Bruce722Nov 29, 2012
This was an outstanding movie and, in my opinion, better than the Spider-Man films of a decade ago. I enjoy the way Andrew Garfield portrays the Peter Parker character much more than Toby McGuire. He is not such a dweeb, is more charismatic,This was an outstanding movie and, in my opinion, better than the Spider-Man films of a decade ago. I enjoy the way Andrew Garfield portrays the Peter Parker character much more than Toby McGuire. He is not such a dweeb, is more charismatic, wittier, and just a better actor in general. And thank you to whoever decided to use Emma Stone as the romantic/love interest. Not only is she one of the best young actresses in Hollywood but she is absolutely stunning. Much more believable for the role of the beautiful "damsel in distress" than Kirsten Dunst. I'm sorry but I am not a fan of Dunst and don't understand why people find her attractive. I also thought the rest of the cast was great. Denis Leary and Martin Sheen almost stole the show. The director also made the physics more realistic. With the exception of a football bending a goal post in half, the physics felt more authentic throughout, not only the combat but also just the gliding through the city shooting out webs. I also liked the plot development. I had a friend mention how they prolonged the "origin" too much for his tastes but I actually enjoyed that a lot. If they are making this into a trilogy, there's plenty of time for Spider-Man moments but you can never come back and capture the beginning stages of the superhero and the person behind the mask. Ultimately, the only thing that held this movie back for me was that it felt like we've seen it before. Other than some minor alterations to the story and obviously different actors, this was very similar to the one a decade ago and more than anything, it FELT like the older one. I thought it was better but not by much, mainly because it had the same overall feel and tone. I would've much rather had them take the Spider-Man story they had here and made it a little darker and more intense and dramatic. There is plenty of potential there but they don't take advantage of it. Instead, you essentially have yet another little kid/teenager superhero movie. Out of all of the superhero movies being made, it's definitely the least mature of them and that holds it back for me. Give Christopher Nolan this story and he'll make it amazing. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
oxanaAug 24, 2014
Strong 3 1/2 stars.

Very enjoyable. Good plot elements and plenty of that giddy feeling you get when a superhero blooms. However, I found that Peter's discovery of his abilities was somewhat... dismissed and not really focused on. That
Strong 3 1/2 stars.

Very enjoyable. Good plot elements and plenty of that giddy feeling you get when a superhero blooms.

However, I found that Peter's discovery of his abilities was somewhat... dismissed and not really focused on. That seemed to be a persisting theme in the movie; it moved fluently and didn't feel empty but nothing was really delved too deeply into, be it people, their evolution or backgrounds.

For whatever reason I thought the Lizard could have been created a little better. There was something off about him, I don't know what, as he looked just as good as the rest of the movie but something kept bothering me about him.

All in all a great movie, with very nice soundtrack and good actor performances. Definitely able to stand in comparison to the other recent Marvel movie endeavors (although I wouldn't yet compare this to the most successful ones).
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
TheDarkSoulJul 22, 2012
An entertaining film. It's been done before, but Marc Webb makes a lot of effort to change what we see in the story ie: Mechanical web slinger in stead of organic, Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane. The Lizard was a good villain, if rendered inAn entertaining film. It's been done before, but Marc Webb makes a lot of effort to change what we see in the story ie: Mechanical web slinger in stead of organic, Gwen Stacy instead of Mary Jane. The Lizard was a good villain, if rendered in terrible CGI. Yet, the film is a good reboot, and while not up there with the Raimi films, it was very good. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
lasttimeisawAug 8, 2012
Watched a 2D version in the cinema, and now the aftertaste is quite irony since the redux deliberately put an
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
nascentSep 29, 2015
Surprising good film. Despite re-covering stuff that was already handled well in Rami's Spiderman, this has good actors, decent action, especially for the heavily cgi stuff, and an interesting plot. I'm glad it had a different villain to theSurprising good film. Despite re-covering stuff that was already handled well in Rami's Spiderman, this has good actors, decent action, especially for the heavily cgi stuff, and an interesting plot. I'm glad it had a different villain to the previous trilogy, and that it was handled well.

The most notable difference from this film and the Rami films, is that there is a strong emphasis on Peter Parker as a brilliant scientist, and also his web shooter devices. While it's strange that we must accept he can walk on walls and stick to anything, but has to bio-engineer an impossibly fantastic weapon that does the web shooting for him, I understand this is more in line with the comics, and so thus needs to be appreciated, even if suspension of disbelief takes one too many hits.

I think the biggest flaw of this film is it's release so close the the Rami films, which really made superhero films what they are today. As everyone knows this was mostly a film to retain the Spidermany Rights, and thus had to be made when it was, but in an ideal world this would've been made at a much later date, to better distance itself from Rami's trilogy.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
neowiz73Oct 4, 2012
Sally Fields as aunt may just doesn't seem right... she is a great actress. but as Aunt may, I just don't see it. This movie was too drawn out and unnecessary really, I really enjoyed Tobey Maguire as spidey more-so. Not sure what to makeSally Fields as aunt may just doesn't seem right... she is a great actress. but as Aunt may, I just don't see it. This movie was too drawn out and unnecessary really, I really enjoyed Tobey Maguire as spidey more-so. Not sure what to make of the suit in this movie either... Although the premise of having Gwen Stacy as his first girl friend went along with the comic book series. I wished we could all just agree to forget about spider-man 3 and just let Sam Raimi remake it. but this time keep venom out of it until much later on. But I would say this one is just as bad as Spider-man 3, but on the other side of the spectrum. Where Spider-man 3 tried to bite off more than Sam Raimi could chew in a single length movie. This one is the utter lack there of. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ryanofearthJul 25, 2012
A LITTLE HARD TO BE IMPRESSED BY A LACK OF RE-IMAGINATION. I saw this with low expectations, but, like many, wanted to see what
they had done differently from Sam Raimi's trilogy. I honestly believe
it would have been great to see the story
A LITTLE HARD TO BE IMPRESSED BY A LACK OF RE-IMAGINATION. I saw this with low expectations, but, like many, wanted to see what
they had done differently from Sam Raimi's trilogy. I honestly believe
it would have been great to see the story continued, rather than
restarted and barely re-imagined. The pacing was painfully slow, and
took way too much time to gain momentum with a story that was too
bubble-gum pop to be taken seriously, and with about as much substance
as watching an episode of Pretty Little Liars. The chemistry between
Andrew Garfield and Emma stone was a high point, though at times Peter
seemed a little too twitchy, and a little annoying when in costume. The
second half of the film was much more enjoyable after being bored by
the first, with some nice special effects. Unfortunately the film
score, which should have complimented the screen action, lacked. I did
however enjoy one of the last scenes with the blue snow and felt that
the music in that scene was perfect for a great looking shot. All in
all I wouldn't spend over $10 to watch this, and with the lack of
action wouldn't bother with 3D but will probably watch it again when it
comes out on DVD.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
DemoraseAug 6, 2012
Realistically, this movie probably isn't worth more than a 7, mainly because of the redundancy with the first Spider-man movie. Yes, The Amazing Spider-man promised us an "untold story", but turns out it was just false promises, it ends upRealistically, this movie probably isn't worth more than a 7, mainly because of the redundancy with the first Spider-man movie. Yes, The Amazing Spider-man promised us an "untold story", but turns out it was just false promises, it ends up being an almost copy of the first film, just improved. The biggest improvement it brings to the table is the romance, or should I say the love interest. Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was a joy, she was an actual character that could stand on her own and not just a pretty prize like Mary Jane in the original trilogy. The interactions between her and Peter were really cute too (also great chemistry between the two actors), you get the feel they were partners supporting each other, which you didn't get at all in the Raimi trilogy, Mary Jane was more of a burden on Peter than anything else. It's simply put the best romance I've seen in any superhero movies to date. Special effects were pretty good too, especially Spider-man swinging, and the pacing was very good, I was never bored or wondering what was the point of a scene any time during the film. The weakest point of the movie was the villain though, he came across as very cartoony (and frankly stupid) which really clashed with the otherwise realistic interactions between the characters, his plan wasn't very smart either. Ultimately, this movie suffers from not departing enough from the original movie, which depending on how much you like the character, or how fresh the original is in your mind, may or may not be a problem. For me it just wasn't but I can see how it could be for some. Overall though this is still a very solid superhero movie in my opinion. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
dragonbillzNov 28, 2012
I felt like I was watching a repeat of a story told not long ago. I feel like there was no need to reboot this story. My kids were watching this movie with me and they were familiar with the Spider Man story as well. I felt the movie fellI felt like I was watching a repeat of a story told not long ago. I feel like there was no need to reboot this story. My kids were watching this movie with me and they were familiar with the Spider Man story as well. I felt the movie fell short at some points and we were bored waiting for the next action scene to come along. I think there was too much focus on Peter Parkers backstory and love interest. Usually when you do a reboot there have been major advances in technology and you can use this to tell the story better thru technology. I felt like the first Spiderman gave you more excitement when Spidey was swinging thru the city of New York at lightning speeds and bouncing off walls. I think the first film was better. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
pcgamereviewerOct 24, 2012
Unlike the original triology movies, actually follows and doesn't spit on, Stan Lee's created universe! That's about all I can say about this movie other than it having a much better cast too - each actor looks and plays the roles much betterUnlike the original triology movies, actually follows and doesn't spit on, Stan Lee's created universe! That's about all I can say about this movie other than it having a much better cast too - each actor looks and plays the roles much better than the predecessors - without a doubt about it! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
DTDunnNov 14, 2012
An entertaining film, but about a subject matter than has been done perhaps one too many times. My spidey-sense tells me they need to give this franchise a long rest.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
bosnianNov 12, 2012
Far from perfect (or Spiderman 2), but not bad either (like Spiderman 3). Everything seems to work well, there is just nothing exceptional. Decent summer movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
aznassassinNov 24, 2012
Presents itself as a more accurate interpretation of the webslinging hero and coupled with some nice action scenes and a more-likeable Peter Parker, its a solid film. A solid film full of discrepancies. While it does present itself as anPresents itself as a more accurate interpretation of the webslinging hero and coupled with some nice action scenes and a more-likeable Peter Parker, its a solid film. A solid film full of discrepancies. While it does present itself as an excellent reboot to the franchise, The original Spider-man movies and esp, Spider-man 2, despite the occasional cheesiness and non-canon elements, does convey a more Spider-man vibe to it - it feels like Spider-man, genuine Spider-man as opposed to this version which, while decent, does feel detracted from the overall feel of Spider-man. The world itself apart from Parker, Uncle Ben and Gwen Stacey, lack character and feels more like a well-shot action film that coincidently has Spider-man in it. Seriously, if you placed a different main character in the movie and just have Spider-man as a side line character, the film would be fine. Its a great film but ultimately, it just doesn't have the feel and distinct 'Spidey-ness' of the original films. Spider-man 2 remains my favourite. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
A_NorthernerMay 11, 2013
It is too easy to compare Marc Webb's Amazing Spider-Man to Raimi's first effort, primarily because for the first half at least they are the same film, or are at least both films telling the same story. Pages and pages have been written onIt is too easy to compare Marc Webb's Amazing Spider-Man to Raimi's first effort, primarily because for the first half at least they are the same film, or are at least both films telling the same story. Pages and pages have been written on the reboot debate so I won't add to them only to say that I think I enjoyed the updated take on the origin story more. The conspiracy behind Peter's parents deaths adds some complexity to the story and Peter's first experience of Spider-Man's abilities is made into an amusing sequence. Credit for that must go to Andrew Garfield, who improves on Maguire's take on Parker no end, proving that Peter can be geeky without being too pathetic. Perhaps it was setting the story in high school, with the sympathies that come with being different in that environment, that makes Garfield's Peter more likeable.

Once the origin of Spider-Man is complete, the film moves through the gears and the budding romance and chemistry between Peter and Gwen is sincere and likeable. With a supporting cast including veterans Martin Sheen and Sally Field, there is no shortage of strong performances.

The film is a bit heavy handed with it's vigilante right or wrong mantra and I was hugely disappointed with Rhys Ifan's Lizard. Ifan's performance as Connor's is decent enough but for me visually the Lizard didn't fit closely enough with the character's traditional appearance. Maybe it was an attempt to make the character realistic in a Christopher Nolan manner but rather than look like a lizard (with a lizards head) he looks like a generic green monster that could appear in any film.

An enjoyable, if unnecessary, return to Spider-Man's roots with a fresh bunch of characters that is worth a watch even if just for a comparison with the original trilogy.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
potatoes351Apr 26, 2014
I heard many mixed things about this film so I went it with middling expectations. I was a huge fan of the Sam Raimi Spiderman trilogy due to the fact that it was the first superhero film I saw and they were released as I grew up. Now withI heard many mixed things about this film so I went it with middling expectations. I was a huge fan of the Sam Raimi Spiderman trilogy due to the fact that it was the first superhero film I saw and they were released as I grew up. Now with Amazing Spiderman its a bit darker, less cheesy and I have to say a lot better.
Peter Parker, played by Andrew Garfield, is the geek we have come to know and love, but his geekyness has moved with the times. He is now what a geek would be seen as in modern society. He is quiet, has a hobby that he loves to do and he is interested in stuff at school. He is no super nerd like Toby Maguire's Parker but the stuff he likes, he knows very well.
He has a thing for Gwen Stacy, played by Emma Stone, and she sort of has a thing for him too so the awkward chemistry between the two is already set in stone even before he gets his superpowers unlike the Peter/MJ romance from before.
After finding out new information about his parents death Peter seeks out Dr. Curtis Connors, his fathers partner at Oscorp. Peter gets bitten by a spider on the subsequent visit, gains powers and BAM! Spiderman is born! Curt however is researching animal DNA to bond with human DNA in order to overcome obstacles humans face. When he combines his DNA with that of a lizard, he transforms into the films villain...The Lizard.
So there are as many as three or four stories going on in The Amazing Spiderman at one time, so that justifies the 2 and a half hour run time pretty well but there are a couple of problems with this. The whole story about Peter investigating his parents death gets put to the side and is never brought up again after only being going about 40 minutes, leaving it unexplained. The vengeance on Uncle Ben's death is also dropped, which despite it being dropped for bigger more important things, is still a little stupid because the whole point of getting revenge on Ben's killer was to teach Peter that revenge isn't the answer and so that was never realised. Curt Connors is also not really explored as a character, he is very two dimensional up until his transformation and then he is just a straight up no holds barred bad guy for no apparent reason apart from to move the plot along.
The rest of the film is excellent though and exactly what a Spiderman film should be. Andrew Garfield is a much more Spidey-like Spiderman than Toby Maguire was, Emma Stone's Gwen is actually pretty interesting compared to Kirsten Dunst's boring MJ. Everything has been stepped up a gear and yes the film has its shortfalls, but as a whole product, The Amazing Spiderman is the best Spiderman film to date and one of the best superhero films I have seen in a while.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
DarianAug 10, 2012
While Sam Raimi's earlier version was more poignant, I think I prefer this latest incarnation in terms of the cast, choreography, and overall production.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
dheerajiJul 20, 2012
I really enjoyed this movie. But I'm a little confused about where it fits in with the rest of the Spider-Man movies. Seems like a lot of overlap with the Spider-Man (2002).
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
OfficialMar 8, 2014
I'm actually really pleased with this reboot. It's darker than the original Sam Raimi movies, it's not as cheesy, and I would say this movie comes in match with "Spider-Man 2". However, I did not find the lizard too interesting - it couldI'm actually really pleased with this reboot. It's darker than the original Sam Raimi movies, it's not as cheesy, and I would say this movie comes in match with "Spider-Man 2". However, I did not find the lizard too interesting - it could have been better developed. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
lahaine2012Nov 4, 2012
The Amazing Spider-man was an almost decent summer flick, which seemed as if it could possibly surpass the original Spider-man films. It did for some parts, but ultimately collapsed by the end. I must admit, this adaptation of Spider-man wasThe Amazing Spider-man was an almost decent summer flick, which seemed as if it could possibly surpass the original Spider-man films. It did for some parts, but ultimately collapsed by the end. I must admit, this adaptation of Spider-man was a friskier and wittier one, which moves at a clip; and Peter Parker's scientific ingenuity and sharp comic sense are well fleshed out. Marc Webb (of (500) Days of Summer) knows how to direct romantic elements which is possibly the films high point, even more so than the action sequences which were uncreative and gravely disappointing. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy replacing Mary-Jane) can be considered improvements of their predecessors. And though it was a fun watch, and the beautifully dizzying cinematography and effects kept me glued, I can't help but feel a great sense of Deja vu. Seeing that the original film ended only a few years ago, why bother with a remake? It didn't break new ground nor radically set itself apart from the original, so why bother? This was simply rehash that didn Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews