The Amazing Spider-Man

9

lkalibaMay 30, 2014

Fantastic Movie for the Summer! The Amazing Spider-Man is packed with action and romance and is lead by an amazing performance from Andrew Garfield who makes this film entertaining most of all.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Meth-dudeAug 16, 2014

The movie was ok for the visually stunning part but for the acting and the action scenes the movie just failed.There was not enough action and when there was some of it,it was filmed like ****

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

diogomendesDec 8, 2014

Although the story sometimes succumbs to some of the 2002's Spider-Man plot points, "The Amazing Spider-Man" is a satisfying installment in Marvel canon thanks to its fantastic cast, well-handed direction and an appealingly dark tone.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Viper8787Apr 27, 2014

An alright superhero movie. I was never a big fan of the first Spiderman movies and not a fan at all of Spiderman in general. He is one of my least favourite superhero's. There were some cool action scenes in this movie to keep me entertainedAn alright superhero movie. I was never a big fan of the first Spiderman movies and not a fan at all of Spiderman in general. He is one of my least favourite superhero's. There were some cool action scenes in this movie to keep me entertained enough but nothing to special at all.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

BronsonApr 27, 2014

This movie surprised me. After the fiasco that is Spider-Man 3 I just about lost hope for the Spidey Franchise as a whole. So once i heard they were rebooting the franchise just 5 years after Spider Man 3 you could see my concern. But I amThis movie surprised me. After the fiasco that is Spider-Man 3 I just about lost hope for the Spidey Franchise as a whole. So once i heard they were rebooting the franchise just 5 years after Spider Man 3 you could see my concern. But I am very happy to report that this film was great. Andrew does a great job as Peter and the chemistry between him and Emma just bring this movie to life. Rhys Ifan's as Dr. Curt Connors a.k.a. The Lizard was the one weak spot in the movie. I didn't feel any emotion or life in this CGI villain. But other then that this is a good film. Two thumbs up.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

breadheadMay 1, 2014

great movie, with intense action and good characters. My favorite Actor was Andrew Garfield He's amazing in this film, and The writing was good. This movie was stellar movie with a stellar cast and great writing to keep you interested

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

AaronWasserman2May 3, 2014

This movie came out a while ago and so ill keep it simple for anyone who hasnt seen it yet. Its a good movie. period. It makes for one awesome summer flick! very enjoyable!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

TheMetacritiqerMay 25, 2014

If you could fully trust the title of this movie then I wouldn't be writing this review. While it isn't "amazing", it sure was great. The main draw are the action sequences. Obviously, viewers are limited in terms of feeling like spider manIf you could fully trust the title of this movie then I wouldn't be writing this review. While it isn't "amazing", it sure was great. The main draw are the action sequences. Obviously, viewers are limited in terms of feeling like spider man (because, well, it's a movie) but the camera angles give a great sense of swinging like Tarzan across New York City. I especially liked when it would be in a first person perspective. It all gets quite action packed when Spidey fights the big lizard. Spider man climbs atop ceilings, slides, and dashes to evade the destructive force of his opponent. There's is a lot of walls being smashed. So unless you must see explosions in action movies (there aren't much) then you'll be satisfied with the fight scenes. Andrew Garfield gives a very good performance (He's the actor who plays Spider Man). It's comical when he first starts to use his powers. So all of that's great but there are some bad stuff. Some parts are not original. It's been far to many times when the bomb or device is stopped at the last second. And Gwen only falls for peter because he's a superhero. So occasionally you might feel like you've seen this before. But those complaints aren't significant enough for you to not see it. This is definitely one of my favorite superhero movies.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

SpiderPlayerMay 17, 2015

Good movie has great special effects, the relationship between Gwen Stacy and Peter Parker is good the story so that is good, but does not show very well the Spider Man responsibilities.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

jacob4May 25, 2015

An awesome reboot that has the potential of being better than Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy. Complete with a new cast such as: no more Toby Maguire but now Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker who looks more better looking than Toby Maguire. SureAn awesome reboot that has the potential of being better than Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy. Complete with a new cast such as: no more Toby Maguire but now Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker who looks more better looking than Toby Maguire. Sure Kirsten Dunst was hot as Mary Jane but Emma Stone is hotter with blond hair as Gwen Stacy. And a brand new villain most Spider-Man fans were excited to finally make a live-action appearance, The Lizard! Even though the Lizard didn't look like the comic book one, it still looked pretty good, except it needed a more believable lizard head and snout, and a ripped lab coat. So get ready for an action packed reimagining of one of Marvel's most iconic superheroes and his supporting characters. It's kind of a remake of Sam Raimi's first Spider-Man movie except without the Mary Jane, Peter never finds Ben's killer, and no Norman or harry Osborn as the Green Goblin, until the sequel. For all those fans who were let down by Spider-Man 3 here's a movie that'll make the Spider-Man universe cool again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

ydnar4Nov 22, 2014

I enjoyed the revived Spiderman even more than the any of the films from the original trilogy. This film focuses more on the Spiderman that we see in cartoons and comic books and Andrew Garfield just seems more suited for the role than TobeyI enjoyed the revived Spiderman even more than the any of the films from the original trilogy. This film focuses more on the Spiderman that we see in cartoons and comic books and Andrew Garfield just seems more suited for the role than Tobey McGuire did. He could never win the fans bad after the dance scene in Spiderman 3. I like the addition of Gwen Stacey as a main character as they are following the storyline that should have been followed during the first 3 films.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DanRourkeAug 20, 2014

Reboot time! The 2002-2007 Sam Raimi Spiderman franchise came to a close once SM3 disapointed many fans. So long story short the franchise was rebooted. July 6, TASM came . Andrew Garfield starring as Peter/ spiderman and Emma stone starringReboot time! The 2002-2007 Sam Raimi Spiderman franchise came to a close once SM3 disapointed many fans. So long story short the franchise was rebooted. July 6, TASM came . Andrew Garfield starring as Peter/ spiderman and Emma stone starring as gwen stacey. The main villian in this movie is Dr. Conners aka the lizard. Overall the movie was a decent film. I give a 7.8. I did enjoy it though!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

samir31Dec 22, 2014

Great movie. Very underrated, not a 10, but 7.1 is too low so I'm trying to get the rating higher. I enjoyed the darker tone this movie took, and this was better that the 2002 Raimi movie, in my honest opinion. Many people forget that thisGreat movie. Very underrated, not a 10, but 7.1 is too low so I'm trying to get the rating higher. I enjoyed the darker tone this movie took, and this was better that the 2002 Raimi movie, in my honest opinion. Many people forget that this was a solid movie because of how bad the sequel turned out. The whole Amazing Spider-Man franchise is not a failure, and if they return to the realistic and dark tone of this movie, the 3rd one could be amazing. Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield deliver fantastic performances, and their scenes together were very cute and heart warming.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

IAMGEOFFREYSep 3, 2014

I really love this movie, its great! Spider-man is undoubtedly my favourite super-hero in the marvel universe, and probably out of all the super-heroes there is at the moment! I loved the new actor and the new plot too, it was a remake offI really love this movie, its great! Spider-man is undoubtedly my favourite super-hero in the marvel universe, and probably out of all the super-heroes there is at the moment! I loved the new actor and the new plot too, it was a remake off the first spider man with Tony Maguire, and I didn't think it would work before I watched it but let me tell you I've never been more wrong! Also, some great music in it!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

JohnMasterLFeb 27, 2015

Un reboot excelente, muestra el origen y el desarrollo de Spiderman de una manera distinta, mas humana y dramática que la trilogía de Sam Raimi, es de las mejores películas de Spiderman que existen (pero no supera a Spiderman 2 de Sam Raimi)

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

PeterParkerNov 9, 2014

After The Avengers and X-Men: Days of future past,The Amazing Spider-Man it's the best superhero movie of all time.A great movie and great actors.The best Spider-Man movie with the second movie of Sam Raimi's trilogy.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

WamblyHadesNov 12, 2014

Soy un gran gran de las películas de Raimi, y esta me pareció muy buena película. Buena historia (más apegada al cómic), buena acción y buena actuación por parte de Andrew Garfield y Emma Stone. Aún así, en mi opinión, no logró superar alSoy un gran gran de las películas de Raimi, y esta me pareció muy buena película. Buena historia (más apegada al cómic), buena acción y buena actuación por parte de Andrew Garfield y Emma Stone. Aún así, en mi opinión, no logró superar al Spider-Man de Sam Raimi, y varios factores como un Peter más rebelde y un traje con un diseño bastante distinto al original, además de la carencia de una buena música (como la de Danny Elfman de la trilogía de Raimi), hizo de esta no se sintiese como una película de Spider-Man. Aún así, disfruté mucho viéndola. Saludos.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

JohnKristoferDec 23, 2014

.This Summer Witness yet Another Spider-Man movie so Sony Can Retain The Rights To It's Character.The Amazing Spider-Man is dark and more mature than the original but lacks story.It brings back the moments that we already saw in the original.This Summer Witness yet Another Spider-Man movie so Sony Can Retain The Rights To It's Character.The Amazing Spider-Man is dark and more mature than the original but lacks story.It brings back the moments that we already saw in the original film and brings back Thing we like about the character Peter Parker/Spider-Man.Andrew Garfield is great being Peter/Spider-Man and Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy.Spider-Man looks so good when he's fighting a villain and New York is Just so good too.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

WheelzFourReelzJan 4, 2015

The Amazing Spider-Man is a very enjoyable reboot with fun action and some likeable characters. However, the villain was very weak and there were some moments that were so implausible that they were stupid. Still, the movie is fun andThe Amazing Spider-Man is a very enjoyable reboot with fun action and some likeable characters. However, the villain was very weak and there were some moments that were so implausible that they were stupid. Still, the movie is fun and definitely worth your time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DBPirate1129Jan 11, 2015

Definitely doesn't reach the height of the Sam Raimi films and while it may be too early for a Spider-Man reboot, it's worth seeing for any Marvel fan anxious to see another film involving your friendly neighborhood, Spider-Man.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

aaronbartuskaJan 12, 2015

This unnecessary Spiderman reboot is saved from being a CGI-filled mess by the performances of Stone and Garfield. Their romantic chemistry is one of the only reasons to see this film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

BernolsvenJan 26, 2015

[Portuguese] O humor do novo Homem-Aranha é simplesmente incrível e a Gwen Stacy é completamente amável, personagens carismáticos como estes junto a um inimigo que faz jus a toda história dos quadrinhos deixaram esse filme quase perfeito.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

UltimateBubFeb 1, 2015

For a Spider-Man reboot, this is actually pretty good. The origin has some small flaws though, and some scenes are a little lame, but any way, this is quite a good movie. It stands out for its cast and innovative storytelling. It's justFor a Spider-Man reboot, this is actually pretty good. The origin has some small flaws though, and some scenes are a little lame, but any way, this is quite a good movie. It stands out for its cast and innovative storytelling. It's just different, in a positive way most of the times. It's not better than the first 2 Spider-Man films, but it's far from being the worst.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

homer4presidentMar 13, 2015

A third of the movie is a mediocre remake of the 1st Spider-Man movie. Another third of the movie was a bad teenage soap opera. The few action scenes were cliche and predictable. The Lizardman looked cheesy as hell. I didn't see much humorA third of the movie is a mediocre remake of the 1st Spider-Man movie. Another third of the movie was a bad teenage soap opera. The few action scenes were cliche and predictable. The Lizardman looked cheesy as hell. I didn't see much humor and fun in the film like I did in Sam Rammi's Spider-Man movies. It was boring.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

SmykleMar 12, 2015

The amazing spider-man was good but not as good as the spider-man movie in 2002. And iam a big spider-man fan i read comic books of spider-man i watch his movies and when i herd that there was going to be a spider-man reboot i was ok with it.The amazing spider-man was good but not as good as the spider-man movie in 2002. And iam a big spider-man fan i read comic books of spider-man i watch his movies and when i herd that there was going to be a spider-man reboot i was ok with it. And when i saw the trailers i though it was going to be better then spider-man trilogy. But when i saw the movie they took out cool lines that some characters said but in the movie those lines or not in the movie at all and that all was bugs me. The good things in this movie is Gwen. stacy her and Peter where perfect togather i loved watching them on the screen and i liked how they added the parents story line like form the comics but then peter forgets about it after he gets his powers and that also bugs me as well. The action is awesome and great specail effects and you have a great solid cast of acters as well. i realy enjoyed this movie but the movie does have some bad things in it as well. The degin of the lizard looked like carp i did not like it at all. And points through out the movie he all was did some thing that no human can ever do and people at his school could tell that his spider-man and he is not keeping his secret identi save. And theres some parts of the plot the they just dont bring up again. But i really injoyed this movie and i would have to give a 8/10 and you ment me wondering why did you like the spider-man movie in 2002 better but you gave it the some rating well i will tell you i can give 2 diffrent movies the same rating and i can still pick on over the other. thanks you guys for reading my review for the amazing spider-man.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

solomsApr 17, 2015

Finally, a good super-heroes movie! I love spider-man and Andrew Garfield is much better than Tobey Maguire. I didn't like Tobey Maguire's Spider-man series, but this one is fantastic.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MovieManiac83Apr 22, 2015

Where to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engineWhere to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engine ran out of fuel. One could argue that, over the span of three pictures - 2002's Spider-Man, 2004's Spider-Man 2, and 2007's Spider-Man 3 - Sam Raimi took the character as far as he could go. In fact, the third film in that series might have been one too many. When it came time to develop a fourth installment, Raimi departed over "creative differences" and Sony was left with a movie that needed to go forward but no driver behind the wheel. So they followed what has become an accepted approach in Hollywood: when in doubt, remake and reboot. So, a mere ten years after Raimi brought one of Marvel's most respected titles to the screen, that vision has been scrapped for a modification. The Amazing Spider-Man isn't sufficiently different from the 2002 movie to make it interesting and it ignores two major seismic shifts that have rocked the superhero genre since then: Nolan's Batman trilogy and The Avengers. Both of those have made it almost impossible for something with the limited ambition and lazy writing of The Amazing Spider-Man to satisfy. Oh, there's little doubt it will be deemed a success on a business level, and die-hard fans of the comic book will probably respond favorably, but there's something inherently depressing about what this movie says about the state of summer blockbusters in general and superhero movies in particular. Namely, how can audiences respond to something that offers no more than a re-telling of a story we have seen done at least as well so recently?

The Amazing Spider-Man provides a regurgitation of the title character's origin story, as if we couldn't remember it from ten years ago. There was a simple elegance and charming naiveté to the way Raimi presented the story. Yes, the suspension of disbelief curve was high but that's a given with a superhero movie. Here, the matter is complicated by sloppy screenwriting. In addition to swallowing the fact that a spider bite from a "super spider" can imbue Peter Parker with powers, you have to accept that the guy is a master thief. After all, he breaks into the inner sanctum of a top secret genetic research think tank with only a fake I.D. badge. It's random, repeated acts of stupidity like this that damage the movie's ability to establish its own fragile pseudo-reality. The viewer accepts a lot of impossibilities in a superhero movie, but there are limits.

The first half of The Amazing Spider-Man is almost a point-by-point remake of Spider-Man. Let's go through the checklist. Peter is shown to be a nerd in school. Check. Peter gets bitten by a radioactive spider. Check. Peter feels sick then wakes up with new powers. Check. Peter explores his new powers in selfish ways. Check. Uncle Ben gives Peter a lecture about how "with great power comes great responsibility" (although he doesn't use those exact words this time around). Check. Uncle Ben is murdered as a result of Peter's inaction. Check. And so forth... It's a little like hearing an inelegant cover of a familiar song.

The second half replicates the rhythms of Spider-Man with a different villain. This time, it's The Lizard (Rhys Ifans) instead of The Green Goblin. They're largely interchangeable and the final battle is different primarily because the special effects are better. Really, though, after having watched Spider-Man fight The Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, and Venom, what more can be done with these generic battles? As well executed as they are by director Marc Webb (making his tent-pole debut after previously helming 500 Days of Summer), there's a repetitive quality that is perhaps unavoidable. The Avengers changed the game when it comes to superhero smackdowns and, because The Amazing Spider-Man is unable to ascend to that level, the fight scenes seem a little quaint and one-dimensional. I wrote in my review of The Avengers that it "raised the bar to a level where the more 'traditional' approach of having a single superhero tangle with a supervillain or two may no longer be enough... When something has been dialed up to an '11,' isn't there an inherent letdown to turning it back to a '7'?" A '7' may be generous where The Amazing Spider-Man is concerned.

For me, this is as deflating a movie as I have seen all year. Not the worst, to be sure, but a project so utterly unnecessary that it made me want to gnash my teeth in frustration. Rebooting Spider-Man, while a questionable endeavor in its own right, offered an opportunity to do something unique with the character. Take it to a place where it hasn't been.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

UrbanlistenerApr 17, 2016

Pretty good movie, it is not original nor exceptional in any way, but its still enjoyable. Andrew Garfield does a great job as Spiderman, the rest of the cast is also very good, the special effects are top-notch and there is some interestingPretty good movie, it is not original nor exceptional in any way, but its still enjoyable. Andrew Garfield does a great job as Spiderman, the rest of the cast is also very good, the special effects are top-notch and there is some interesting aspects that were not seen as much in the Raimi trilogy. The villain is... not that great. Very undeveloped, cliché and incoherent in his quite ridiculous criminal ambitions. There is some writing problems with the script, the movie sometimes feel discombobulated and lazy in the way the story is told. But overall, mostly because of the spiderman aspect and the fun it provides with its action scenes, the movie is watchable and a cool reboot of the franchise.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

TheDude-Jul 18, 2015

The Amazing Spiderman is a mediocre film while it does have sweet visuals and a likable protagonist the main problems are that the film is tonally bipolar, the villain is weak the origin story is the exact same thing we have already seen.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Epik_NinnjaMay 25, 2015

A reboot already? How rediculous! Well, aside from the fact that this reboot could have waited at least another three years (how can you reboot something after five years?), it's a pretty decent movie. I say decent, as I'd give it a 6.5/10.A reboot already? How rediculous! Well, aside from the fact that this reboot could have waited at least another three years (how can you reboot something after five years?), it's a pretty decent movie. I say decent, as I'd give it a 6.5/10. It's cool to see a new take on his origin, and with a villain not in any previous Spider Man movie (The Lizard). The action is good and so is the CGI. Still, the writing feels weaker than the last Spider Man origin story. I just didn't care for it as much.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

NatT96Aug 19, 2015

It was not bat at all! I enjoyed this to an extent. The action scenes and drama actually worked compared to the second. I was immediately not a fan of the character, but hell he at least did some really cool stunts that was damn nice. As forIt was not bat at all! I enjoyed this to an extent. The action scenes and drama actually worked compared to the second. I was immediately not a fan of the character, but hell he at least did some really cool stunts that was damn nice. As for the plot however It was forgettable r, literally I had to re-watch it because I could only remember the ending.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

AaronDWassermanJun 26, 2015

At first I was so against this reboot. But then I saw this and I am all for Garfield and Webb. This film may not have a strong antagonist, and an origin for Spidey was recently seen not too long ago, but you can't deny it's done well.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

BoogeeFilmGuyJul 15, 2015

This film was not bad. However, it wasn't good either. I thought it was kind of boring in places, and the action scenes weren't the best. Although I did think Andrew Garfield did a decent job as Spider-Man and again, I didn't hate it. I'dThis film was not bad. However, it wasn't good either. I thought it was kind of boring in places, and the action scenes weren't the best. Although I did think Andrew Garfield did a decent job as Spider-Man and again, I didn't hate it. I'd give it a 6 out of 10, 5 out of 10 if you're not a die-hard Spidey fan.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ZebunkerDec 20, 2015

Comic books fans unite! Another repeat or re-do of an origin story. I bet you don’t know what will happen. Ah, crap! You already know this story. And who says there is no originality left in Hollywood?

What the web-head brings to this oneComic books fans unite! Another repeat or re-do of an origin story. I bet you don’t know what will happen. Ah, crap! You already know this story. And who says there is no originality left in Hollywood?

What the web-head brings to this one is a rather generic action-fair with tired worn-out heroes, villains and plot devices. The supporting cast is nice but the whole experience leaves you wanting more and a day later you’ve forgotten most of it. The stingy exciting sensation of watching a new Spiderman movie goes away quicker than a dose of Bengay. Comic fans can only hope that with the great power of being able to make any comic book story you want that the next creation has more responsibility to the wonder and amazement of comic stories not just microwaving leftovers for a nice, safe bank return.

Spoilers below.

Best Actor

Andrew Garfield’s first time out as Spiderman is marred with inconsistent acting between scenes and different locations. Buying that he is a highschool aged kid is hard to swallow at times. He does best in the scenes with his not Mary Jane, Jane by the name of Gwen Stacy. While she does have two first names, like any reputable country singer would she’s a good match for Andrew Garfield on screen.

Worst Actor

The ying to Peter’s yang is Emma Stone. Movie goers might be awed by her pretty eyes but wonder why a highschooler has so many wrinkles. That’s because she was 24 when she played this role. She’s even harder to buy being a teenager than the older Andrew Garfield was. Even more so thanks to her tight fitting outfits and sleazy overdone office secretary makeup and hooker boots. She acts in a decent manner, it’s just her character is pointless other than being a love interest for Peter and a symbol of what great power can get you. Free sex. Take that Flash Thompson.

An honorable mention is casting Rhys Ifans as a one-armed scientist. He does a decent job playing the villain but it’s just that decent. He turns much too quickly to the dark side. O, wrong movie. But having the character fight with his possible bad past and the effects of being a big alligator now could’ve been played out more. It’s done much nicer in cartoon versions of this story. Also, why not cast an actor that really only has one arm? It would be a great opportunity for somebody to play a unique role. It’s a missed opportunity. Somebody’s gotta raise a hand for disfigured people. Right?

Best Scene

When the credits show up? The action is so-so. It’s nothing to call home about. Not that Peter Parker would bother calling. The way he treats his aunt, I tell ya! Kids these days! The scope feels rather pulled back from the more epic battles in the Tobey Spiderman films. It’s what you might expect. Spiderman gets beat up a lot and instantly seems to heal. He feels bad for Ben for like 5 minutes then bad guy shows up. The best parts were actually with the love story of Peter and Emma. They had really good chemistry together on screen and it was more fun to watch than most of the movie sadly. That’s not something you want to say about an action movie.

And Dennis Leary getting killed is a highlight. Who did not stand up and cheer in the theater for that moment! Would’ve been nice if he got ran over by a Ford truck though.

Worst Scene

The end sequence where Spiderman must race as fast as he can to save Gotham before Joker can release the toxic gas into the city. O, wrong movie again!

Spiderman has to go down to the big OsCorp building that is a discount Empire State building to stop the alligator man from turning everybody into ….alligators? Guess so. But, Spidey can’t get there fast because he just got shot by a trigger happy cop. That’s right after the police captain tells everybody not to shoot. A shaking your head moment for sure.

Well Spiderman has to go down this super long road but can’t web sling off the super tall buildings for convenient plot reasons. So, in an audience grumbling move a construction foreman that Spiderman interacted with earlier, when Spiderman said his kid from a car, calls all his other buddies to move cranes so Spiderman can web sling to the danger makes you want to hit your face with a dirty needle.

What are the chances that there are dozens of cranes all down the road, at the same time? With people around to drive them. Plus, people that all can be reached by walkie-talkie at night after work is over and who must be all somehow work for the same company so they can communicate. It’s like a tutorial mission out of a video game. It’s that bad.

Hits
- Not too many 360 spinning shots.
- Dennis Leary gets killed! Not by a Ford truck though 
- The suit does not suck.

Misses
- Too long. Bad CGI.
- Stop with Stan Lee cameos.
- Kinda “b-word” boring.

Grade C… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

CineAutoctonoJul 21, 2015

He restarted franqicia Spiderman but I 've never seen Andrew Garfield presented as this superhero but good performance , this is worth recognizing his talent. Congratulations , Andrew !

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

kyle20ellisMar 17, 2022

That said though, from personal opinion The Amazing Spider-Man was not a bad film, or at least nowhere near as bad as has been said(again personal opinion), but it doesn't live up to its name. For me, the first two Sam Raimi Spider-Man filmsThat said though, from personal opinion The Amazing Spider-Man was not a bad film, or at least nowhere near as bad as has been said(again personal opinion), but it doesn't live up to its name. For me, the first two Sam Raimi Spider-Man films are better, and while Spider-Man did plod and had too many villains all but one of which were underused personally it wasn't that bad. The Amazing Spider-Man did have things to like, it is very stylishly made and has some very impressive special effects, even if the Lizard takes some getting used to. The action sequences- of which there are a lot in the second half- mostly are exciting with some cool stunts(the one exception is the climax which seemed like it was played and written too safe) and very creative use of Spider-Man's powers, and there are some parts in the story that work, the dynamic between Peter and Uncle Ben is really quite emotionally powerful, the romance between Peter and Gwen is somewhat sweet and the part where Spider-Man saves the little boy is tense and heart-felt. It was also very intriguing with the mystery of Peter's parents which was done quite well. The performances on the whole are also good, Sally Field and especially Martin Sheen are great as Aunt May and Uncle Ben, and Emma Stone is a charming and amusing Gwen. Rhys Ifans does bring some creepiness to Curt Connors/The Lizard if not the tragedy(the writing didn't help him though) and Denis Leary is delightful in how churlish he is. On the whole too there is some good chemistry between the actors. I never really warmed to Andrew Garfield though, he did seem too quirky for Peter complete with some forced humour and wasn't enough of a nerd, he wasn't a whole lot better as Spider-Man either, he had charisma but did come across as rather smug and not brooding enough for such a serious tone to the story here. Irrfan Kahn's performance and his character is little more than an extended cameo, not very much to work with and Kahn does little with it. The story does have its fair share of well-done moments but does suffer from an over-familiarity that feels like a more seriously toned rehash and uneven pacing, sluggish in the first half and while much better rushed in some of the second half. The script is never terrible nor is it ever exceptional, there are sweet and emotional moments as well as tense ones but too much of the humour is forced and it interferes with the serious tone. James Horner's score is nowhere near among his best, some of it pedestrian, some of it over-the-top, neither of which Danny Elfman's scoring had. And the film really rushed Connors'/Lizard's character arc, there was real potential for him to be a multi-layered character but here he came across as a one-dimensional villain with no real motivation. Overall, watchable but not close to being amazing. 5.5/10 Bethany Cox… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

gdiego135Jul 7, 2016

Just to let you know this game only has boss battles, you start with a boss battle and then it's just boss after boss after boss, until the end. But the fights are EPIC, I played on Promenade (Easy) because it's fairly difficult, but I willJust to let you know this game only has boss battles, you start with a boss battle and then it's just boss after boss after boss, until the end. But the fights are EPIC, I played on Promenade (Easy) because it's fairly difficult, but I will now go back and play on Furi (Normal) so I can get trophies. Anyway you have to really time all your moves perfectly, dodging and blocking, it gets really intense, and at times theirs plasma flying everywhere. but once you master the gameplay you'll feel like a true bad ass taking down a boss on harder difficulty. Also the graphics look really nice, it's a very unique art style, and the music is quite amazing as well, also the voice acting is great, although you play as a silent protagonist, the other characters have top notch voices. My flaws with this game is that it's just boss fights, like why can't their be weaker enemies you fight to make your way up to a boss, like God of war or other great games. Also their is really no story, your just in a high security prison and now you need to break out. THATS IT. But yeah the gameplay is **** awesome I do reccomend just wish it was longer, and had a story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

aadityamudharApr 18, 2016

I loved it and hated it at the same time. I don't think it was as good as Spider-Man or Spider-Man 2...Spider Man 3 sucked, so it was better than that one. I think if you're going to reboot a series so soon, you should only do it if theI loved it and hated it at the same time. I don't think it was as good as Spider-Man or Spider-Man 2...Spider Man 3 sucked, so it was better than that one. I think if you're going to reboot a series so soon, you should only do it if the former sucked and needed to be redone. I don't think the 2002 Spider-Man needed to be redone. I'm all for more Spider-Man movies with a new actor in a new universe, that's just fine, but 75% of this movie was just his origin story that we just saw in 2002 Spider-Man. I was just sitting there thinking "yeah, I know, move on already" for 90 minutes. Yeah, a few details were different...I think they could have changed more. I could also tell that this movie was very geared towards teenagers and the MTV crowd, and that made it seem stupid to me. The Twilight preview before the movie didn't help. Neither did the girls screaming "woo" in the theatre when Peter and Gwen kissed. Please. I also HATE cheesy 3D tricks, and this movie ended with the stupidest "this would look cool in 3D!" trick ever. It it so stupid and cheesy and not quality cinema. I don't give a crap about 3D! I just want to see a movie with real characters and a story, not watch Spider-Man shoot a web right at my face just because it would look cool in 3D. So enough venting, there were things I liked. One thing I did like was that they did a more humorous take on Spider-Man. This one definitely was funnier that the previous series. They also were obviously going for a more realistic character, as even as Spider-Man he was still clumsy, and his climbing and jumping was more human and less overdone with CGI. They also allowed the suit to look like real clothing, and not digitally enhanced. You could see wrinkles and I think even a zipper. How "perfect" the spidey suit always looked in the previous movies always bugged me. So, I kind of liked the new one, even though it seemed unpolished, since that's what they were going for. Overall it was entertaining and worth seeing, but most of the movie was unnecessary and redundant.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

EpicLadySpongeJan 22, 2016

This isn't Spider-Man anymore, this is.... the Amazing Spider-Man! I wouldn't call this amazing, but it's still decent anyways from Spider-Man fans and moviegoers.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

BarneyOnMTJan 5, 2016

WHAT I LIKED: The ironically named 'Marc-Webb's' Spider-Man may not be as true to the source material as Raimi's trilogy, but it's more refined because of it. Here we get a more delicately told origin story, love story, and characterWHAT I LIKED: The ironically named 'Marc-Webb's' Spider-Man may not be as true to the source material as Raimi's trilogy, but it's more refined because of it. Here we get a more delicately told origin story, love story, and character development that everyone can get into. 'The Amazing Spider-Man' is full of excitement and genuinely emotional moments - largely thanks to Andrew Garfield's fresh and modernised portrayal of a conflicted Peter Parker.
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: As ever with Spider-Man, it can't quite entirely shake the odd silly elements that plagued the first ones also. For example, the odd villains, and the 'schoolboy hero' who wont ever do the thing the audience wants - which almost passed more in previous versions that took themselves less seriously.
VERDICT: A more serious Spider-Man thanks to Andrew Garfield. Whether you like that or not is the question, but it's arguably a more interesting film because of it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

gameguardian21Mar 14, 2016

I was pretty disappointed in this reboot. All this is was to make a excuse to retell the story. While some parts I liked, the dialogue was awkward, and it didn't feel like spider man to me.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

FuturedirectorMar 18, 2016

The amazing Spiderman doesn't work with the other Spider-Man's. But the story-telling is interesting, with a great plot and unforgettable characters, with a new Peter Parker and a new villain..., this is an AMAZING Spiderman

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

RufjakMar 21, 2016

Amazing movie! I like Andrew Garfield more as Spiderman than Toby. Perfect sarcastic superhero as Spiderman should be. Great action scenes and wonderful Emma make this movie even better.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Cinemassacre94Mar 20, 2016

Where to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engineWhere to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engine ran out of fuel. One could argue that, over the span of three pictures - 2002's Spider-Man, 2004's Spider-Man 2, and 2007's Spider-Man 3 - Sam Raimi took the character as far as he could go. In fact, the third film in that series might have been one too many. When it came time to develop a fourth installment, Raimi departed over "creative differences" and Sony was left with a movie that needed to go forward but no driver behind the wheel. So they followed what has become an accepted approach in Hollywood: when in doubt, remake and reboot. So, a mere ten years after Raimi brought one of Marvel's most respected titles to the screen, that vision has been scrapped for a modification. The Amazing Spider-Man isn't sufficiently different from the 2002 movie to make it interesting and it ignores two major seismic shifts that have rocked the superhero genre since then: Nolan's Batman trilogy and The Avengers. Both of those have made it almost impossible for something with the limited ambition and lazy writing of The Amazing Spider-Man to satisfy. Oh, there's little doubt it will be deemed a success on a business level, and die-hard fans of the comic book will probably respond favorably, but there's something inherently depressing about what this movie says about the state of summer blockbusters in general and superhero movies in particular. Namely, how can audiences respond to something that offers no more than a re-telling of a story we have seen done at least as well so recently?

The Amazing Spider-Man provides a regurgitation of the title character's origin story, as if we couldn't remember it from ten years ago. There was a simple elegance and charming naiveté to the way Raimi presented the story. Yes, the suspension of disbelief curve was high but that's a given with a superhero movie. Here, the matter is complicated by sloppy screenwriting. In addition to swallowing the fact that a spider bite from a "super spider" can imbue Peter Parker with powers, you have to accept that the guy is a master thief. After all, he breaks into the inner sanctum of a top secret genetic research think tank with only a fake I.D. badge. It's random, repeated acts of stupidity like this that damage the movie's ability to establish its own fragile pseudo-reality. The viewer accepts a lot of impossibilities in a superhero movie, but there are limits.

Tobey Maguire has been replaced by Andrew Garfield. No big deal. With the mask on, you don't notice the difference and Garfield is more convincing than Maguire as Peter. Okay, Garfield is too old for the part (a 28-year old playing someone in high school), bringing up thoughts of Grease, but Maguire was 26 when he put on the costume. Uncle Ben is now Martin Sheen instead of Cliff Robertson, and that's an improvement. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine a worse casting gaffe than Sally Field as Aunt May. She may be Mrs. Gump but she's not Peter's guardian. Sorry, but it's hard to beat Rosemary Harris (although I suppose she's too old by now). Mary Jane has been ditched as the love interest, replaced by original comic book girlfriend Gwen Stacy. Hair color is the differentiating characteristic. Emma Stone, like Garfield, is too old for a high school kid, but at least 23 is closer to believable. Stone and Garfield are supposedly an off-screen item, which makes it odd that Maguire and Kirsten Dunst displayed better on-screen chemistry.

The first half of The Amazing Spider-Man is almost a point-by-point remake of Spider-Man. Let's go through the checklist. Peter is shown to be a nerd in school. Check. Peter gets bitten by a radioactive spider. Check. Peter feels sick then wakes up with new powers. Check. Peter explores his new powers in selfish ways. Check. Uncle Ben gives Peter a lecture about how "with great power comes great responsibility" (although he doesn't use those exact words this time around). Check. Uncle Ben is murdered as a result of Peter's inaction. Check. And so forth... It's a little like hearing an inelegant cover of a familiar song.

The second half replicates the rhythms of Spider-Man with a different villain. This time, it's The Lizard (Rhys Ifans) instead of The Green Goblin. They're largely interchangeable and the final battle is different primarily because the special effects are better. Really, though, after having watched Spider-Man fight The Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, and Venom, what more can be done with these generic battles? As well executed as they are by director Marc Webb (making his tent-pole debut after previously helming 500 Days of Summer), there's a repetitive quality that is perhaps unavoidable.

Not the worst, to be sure, but a project so utterly unnecessary.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Shadow1May 3, 2016

I love this film . In this film good scenes and awesome action moments and about this film there is game The Amazing Spider-Man . The Amazing Spider-Man better than Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 . I love it . I doesnt watched The AmazingI love this film . In this film good scenes and awesome action moments and about this film there is game The Amazing Spider-Man . The Amazing Spider-Man better than Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 . I love it . I doesnt watched The Amazing Spider-Man 2 , but I think The Amazing Spider-Man better than The Amazing Spider-Man 2… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

ReelViews94Mar 23, 2016

Where to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engineWhere to go with Spider-Man? That's the billion dollar question that has plagued Sony Pictures. One of their flagship franchises, Spider-Man is a proven money-maker that could not be allowed to lie fallow simply because the creative engine ran out of fuel. One could argue that, over the span of three pictures - 2002's Spider-Man, 2004's Spider-Man 2, and 2007's Spider-Man 3 - Sam Raimi took the character as far as he could go. In fact, the third film in that series might have been one too many. When it came time to develop a fourth installment, Raimi departed over "creative differences" and Sony was left with a movie that needed to go forward but no driver behind the wheel. So they followed what has become an accepted approach in Hollywood: when in doubt, remake and reboot. So, a mere ten years after Raimi brought one of Marvel's most respected titles to the screen, that vision has been scrapped for a modification. The Amazing Spider-Man isn't sufficiently different from the 2002 movie to make it interesting and it ignores two major seismic shifts that have rocked the superhero genre since then: Nolan's Batman trilogy and The Avengers. Both of those have made it almost impossible for something with the limited ambition and lazy writing of The Amazing Spider-Man to satisfy. Oh, there's little doubt it will be deemed a success on a business level, and die-hard fans of the comic book will probably respond favorably, but there's something inherently depressing about what this movie says about the state of summer blockbusters in general and superhero movies in particular. Namely, how can audiences respond to something that offers no more than a re-telling of a story we have seen done at least as well so recently?

The Amazing Spider-Man provides a regurgitation of the title character's origin story, as if we couldn't remember it from ten years ago. There was a simple elegance and charming naiveté to the way Raimi presented the story. Yes, the suspension of disbelief curve was high but that's a given with a superhero movie. Here, the matter is complicated by sloppy screenwriting. In addition to swallowing the fact that a spider bite from a "super spider" can imbue Peter Parker with powers, you have to accept that the guy is a master thief. After all, he breaks into the inner sanctum of a top secret genetic research think tank with only a fake I.D. badge. It's random, repeated acts of stupidity like this that damage the movie's ability to establish its own fragile pseudo-reality. The viewer accepts a lot of impossibilities in a superhero movie, but there are limits.

The first half of The Amazing Spider-Man is almost a point-by-point remake of Spider-Man. Let's go through the checklist. Peter is shown to be a nerd in school. Check. Peter gets bitten by a radioactive spider. Check. Peter feels sick then wakes up with new powers. Check. Peter explores his new powers in selfish ways. Check. Uncle Ben gives Peter a lecture about how "with great power comes great responsibility" (although he doesn't use those exact words this time around). Check. Uncle Ben is murdered as a result of Peter's inaction. Check. And so forth... It's a little like hearing an inelegant cover of a familiar song.

The second half replicates the rhythms of Spider-Man with a different villain. This time, it's The Lizard (Rhys Ifans) instead of The Green Goblin. They're largely interchangeable and the final battle is different primarily because the special effects are better. Really, though, after having watched Spider-Man fight The Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, and Venom, what more can be done with these generic battles? As well executed as they are by director Marc Webb (making his tent-pole debut after previously helming 500 Days of Summer), there's a repetitive quality that is perhaps unavoidable. The Avengers changed the game when it comes to superhero smackdowns and, because The Amazing Spider-Man is unable to ascend to that level, the fight scenes seem a little quaint and one-dimensional.

In all fairness to Webb, most of The Amazing Spider-Man's flaws are not his doing - they come from the screenplay. His direction is assured and his handling of the special effects is smooth. The romance has its share of cute moments and there are some effective dramatic exchanges. Another point worth mentioning relates to James Horner's bombastic score, which includes yet another instance of self-cannibalization.

For me, this is as deflating a movie as I have seen all year. Not the worst, to be sure, but a project so utterly unnecessary that it made me want to gnash my teeth in frustration.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

SrPepeNov 13, 2017

Una buena película con un villano poco convencional y una interesante trama. Posiblemente aparece el mejor cameo de Stan Lee de todos. Sin embargo, pasa sin pena ni gloria.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

KayVen17Jan 11, 2022

Damals konnte ich ihn nicht leiden. Ich wollte krampfhaft Tobey zurück. Trotzdem bin ich nach wie vor positiv überrascht. Er hat zwar Sachen die mir sauer aufstoßen. Zum Beispiel gefällt mir trotz guten Martin Sheen die Darstellung von OnkelDamals konnte ich ihn nicht leiden. Ich wollte krampfhaft Tobey zurück. Trotzdem bin ich nach wie vor positiv überrascht. Er hat zwar Sachen die mir sauer aufstoßen. Zum Beispiel gefällt mir trotz guten Martin Sheen die Darstellung von Onkel Ben nicht. Auch die Erzählung der Eltern ist nicht so mein Geschmack. Klar gibt es Comic-Handlungen mit dieser Interpretation der Eltern. Trotzdem gefallen sie mir auch da nicht.

Trotzdem ist die Chemie zwischen Emma Stone und Garfield super. Leider finde ich Garfield als Peter zu "cool". Hört sich seltsam an, aber da gefällt mir die verpeilte Art von Tobey besser.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

Aaron_WassermanJun 1, 2016

As good as Raimi's Spider-Man 2. However to me Andrew is the better Spider-Man. But the lame part to this movie is the lizard. Waste of a villain. However, the good far outweigh the bad.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

MasterRileyJul 23, 2016

The Amazing Spider-Man doesn't quite live up to Sam Raimi's original but it still manages to be a good origin story for a new Spider-Man. The chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is great, it allows for their relationship toThe Amazing Spider-Man doesn't quite live up to Sam Raimi's original but it still manages to be a good origin story for a new Spider-Man. The chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is great, it allows for their relationship to really work on screen. The writing is also really good, as well as the music, the special effects, and the comedy. Definitely would recommend watching it for any web heads out there.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

CinemaphileJul 29, 2016

Serial Comic Book Cinema, the genre de jour, is entering its fourth decade of popularity. Much like the Westerns of the 50's, present day studios greenlight any superhero project that aims at the Summer demographic sweet spot and that canSerial Comic Book Cinema, the genre de jour, is entering its fourth decade of popularity. Much like the Westerns of the 50's, present day studios greenlight any superhero project that aims at the Summer demographic sweet spot and that can also be linked to toy and fast food merchandising. Unlike its muddled plot, the raison d'être for The Amazing Spiderman is crystal clear, Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios wanted to return to the Spiderman revenue well.

While Warner Bros and Christopher Nolan successfully reinvented the Dark Knight, sophomore director Marc Webb fails to accomplish the same with the Web Slinger. Webb's not so amazing Spiderman does capture the frenetic angst of adolescence, but like some teens, this film doesn't know who it is or what it wants to be. Webb's incarnation of Spidey succeeds best as a teen romance; Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone's chemistry are The Amazing Spiderman's only redeeming quality. However, spot-on casting and clever banter cannot save this film from itself.

In contrast to Sam Raimi's Spiderman, Webb's is darker, gorier and more violent, i.e. more Nolanesque. Webb's biggest mistake is that he doesn't fully commit to the newest incarnation, retaining Peter Parker's smart-alec quippage and furnishing the obligatory hyperbolically mad pseudo-scientist bent on molding New York in his own image. Yes, we get to see Curt "The Lizard" Connors on the silver screen for the first time, but we've seen this formula dozens of times. To add insult to injury, it's hardly been 10 years since the first Spider-flick, yet we're subjected to the retelling of Spiderman's origin for no apparent reason other than to give Peter Parker parents and link Peter's transformation to that of Connors'. Derivation from the source material in any media is acceptable, but with one caveat - it should be original and insightful. Again, this is where the solid performances of Martin Sheen and Sally Field must bail out this foundering enterprise. Despite the rehash of Peter Parker having to learn responsibility the hard way, Garfield, Sheen and Field are compelling enough to make the retelling barely palatable.

Mildly entertaining as it is, I cannot recommend that you spend good money to see this film. Wait for cable or broadcast television.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

dislexicpotatoApr 14, 2019

Andrew Garfield does a great job as Spider Man, although he's a little too good looking to pull off the Peter Parker. The film has plenty of ideas that are pulled off well and the chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is superb.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

JP32Nov 3, 2017

There is a fundamental problem with The Amazing Spider-Man. The handling of Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker is all wrong. There is something non-negotiable about the character of Peter Parker, something essential to his personality. He has toThere is a fundamental problem with The Amazing Spider-Man. The handling of Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker is all wrong. There is something non-negotiable about the character of Peter Parker, something essential to his personality. He has to be uncool. Tobey Maguire brought to the role a sweet, boyish naiveté. Garfield's version is a sulky male-model.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

alejandro970Apr 2, 2020

Well meaning reboot of the spider saga that Sam Raimi left behind. Andrew Garfield cast as well a Peter Parker closer to conceived by Steve Ditko, outcast, friendless. The sequence actions works fine, the hard lesson of power andWell meaning reboot of the spider saga that Sam Raimi left behind. Andrew Garfield cast as well a Peter Parker closer to conceived by Steve Ditko, outcast, friendless. The sequence actions works fine, the hard lesson of power and responsibility is it's right place. So bad for the loose ends, but finally Garfield deserved a chance.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

BroyaxJan 8, 2017

J’ai l’impression que c’est le problème des films de super-héros issus des « comics » écrits par des simples d’esprit pour un jeune public simplet : il n’y a tout simplement pas assez de matière pour en tirer des films qui dépassent les deuxJ’ai l’impression que c’est le problème des films de super-héros issus des « comics » écrits par des simples d’esprit pour un jeune public simplet : il n’y a tout simplement pas assez de matière pour en tirer des films qui dépassent les deux putains de plombes.

Les effets spéciaux sont là, le pognon est là mais l’histoire ? ou plutôt une tentative d’ébauche de début d’histoire ? nan, y a que dalle. Dans ce cas, il aurait fallu se limiter à l’heure et demi syndicale voire 1h25, générique de 10 mn inclus. De quoi privilégier l’action spectaculaire comme ils savent (au moins) le faire… la plupart du temps.

Encore faudrait-il que ce soit filmé agréablement… à l’instar d’un Sucker Punch, trop long, trop con lui aussi mais au bon filmage (au moins !). Ce qui n’est pas du tout le cas ici avec cette réalisation un peu trop cut et zoomée pour être honnête.

Pour le reste, les acteurs sont aussi nuls que le pseudo-scénario, aussi bêtes et crétins qu’il est possible de l’être. Amazing ? oui, de ce point de vue, c’est amazingment con (pour parler franglais), super-con même ! et chiant comme la pluie aussi.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

MonkiReviewsDec 16, 2017

A great new version of Spider-Man. I think the actors did a great job, and Spider-Man, seemed like Spider-Man! The special effects have improved from the last 3, probably the best special effects yet to be honest. The villain was a greatA great new version of Spider-Man. I think the actors did a great job, and Spider-Man, seemed like Spider-Man! The special effects have improved from the last 3, probably the best special effects yet to be honest. The villain was a great choice too, especially because he wasn’t a repeat of one the the last few villains. It is worth a watch.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

SonicHD7May 31, 2017

Abandoned by his parents and raised by an aunt and uncle, teenager Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), AKA Spider-Man, is trying to sort out who he is and exactly what his feelings are for his first crush, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). When PeterAbandoned by his parents and raised by an aunt and uncle, teenager Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), AKA Spider-Man, is trying to sort out who he is and exactly what his feelings are for his first crush, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). When Peter finds a mysterious briefcase that was his father's, he pursues a quest to solve his parents' disappearance. His search takes him to Oscorp and the lab of Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), setting him on a collision course with Connors' alter ego, the Lizard.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Dragonfly44May 5, 2018

This movie isn’t bad.
It’s just way too overshadowed by the much superior Spider-Man trilogy from 2002-2007. Rating - 75%

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

KelvinSelimorApr 24, 2022

The Amazing Spider-Man. He is new and modern. Andrew Garfield coped with the role of a spider. It does not look like a Tobey Maguire spider, and that's good. A more dynamic and more teenage film gave a great start for the new Spider-Man series.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

CoreGamer1408Apr 18, 2023

Garfield is such a likeable actor for sure so maybe thats it? He is my personal draw for this movie and not this version Spider-man. I could watch Garfield all day for sure.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

ty92Sep 25, 2021

This movie was incredible in 3D watching it on my PSVR. It's now my second favourite Spider-Man movie. It's a must own on 3D Blu-ray.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

CTHReviewsFeb 3, 2018

I have no clue why people hated The Amazing Spider-Man. This film actually handles its characters in a realistic way, SHOWS how smart Peter Parker is instead of only TELLING us, and has one of, if not the greatest comic book movie loveI have no clue why people hated The Amazing Spider-Man. This film actually handles its characters in a realistic way, SHOWS how smart Peter Parker is instead of only TELLING us, and has one of, if not the greatest comic book movie love interest with Gwen Stacy. She doesn't sit on her ass waiting for Spider-Man to save her, she actually helps him on his mission! When do we ever see that?! I love this movie. One of the best comic book movies of all time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

FilipeNetoNov 8, 2019

Visually grand, with great CGI and sound effects, great soundtrack and costumes ... but there's a lot of work to do in everything else.

Following in the wake of the ream of comic book heroes that DC and Marvel have been promoting, this filmVisually grand, with great CGI and sound effects, great soundtrack and costumes ... but there's a lot of work to do in everything else.

Following in the wake of the ream of comic book heroes that DC and Marvel have been promoting, this film is just one more, and addresses, as it has been done before in the cinema, the iconic figure of Spider-Man, a one of the most remarkable and famous cartoon heroes ever. It has spawned at least one trilogy (around 2000) and has now been recycled to make a few more movies and a few million dollars in profits.

This movie, like many others, tells how teenager Peter Parker became Spider-Man, with all the moral and psychological conflicts associated with such a radical transformation. However, we have seen this so many times that it was difficult to show anything substantially better without changing the character's story, which would be sacrilegious. So the movie just shows what we already know and finally selects a powerful villain from the long list of enemies the character has accumulated over decades of comics, and gives us the decisive confrontation between them.

Andrew Garfield is a decent Peter Parker, but I confess he hasn't always convinced me. He has some annoying face movements, but he does what he needs to do. Emma Stone looked a lot better to me as an actress, but of course this wasn't the movie for her to shine. So he just made a good romantic match, having a good chemistry with Garfield. Rhys Ifans is equally good as a villain. Martin Sheen and Denis Leary also did well.

The film is directed by Marc Webb, who did not know, but who seems to have done a decent job. The problem is that you didn't bet as much as you should on creating a good story and developing the characters and the work of the actors. The concern was, from the beginning, the CGI and the visual and sound effects. And in fact, in this respect the movie is truly excellent. It's a visual show from start to finish, with sweeping New York views, great costumes and photography, and immense camera movement, which gives a feeling of speed and agility to Spider-Man, who flies and jumps like never before. before in the cinema. The soundtrack is also excellent, as epic as you'd expect in such a movie.

I think the movie loses a little compared to other movies with other characters. It is not a movie that stays in memory or can be said to be grand or excellent. Good dialogues are missing, a handful of more complex and developed characters, a more interesting and less trite story. It's a good and entertaining movie, has good production values, good actors and is visually spectacular, but that's basically it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Max_SpideyApr 24, 2018

[PT-BR] The Amazing Spider-man é um filme "ok", a origem do personagem ficou decente, temos uma boa interpretação de personagens clássicos, como a Tia May e Gwen Stacy.
O Peter Parker interpretado por Andrew Garfield não me agradou tanto,[PT-BR] The Amazing Spider-man é um filme "ok", a origem do personagem ficou decente, temos uma boa interpretação de personagens clássicos, como a Tia May e Gwen Stacy.
O Peter Parker interpretado por Andrew Garfield não me agradou tanto, talvez por eu gostar mais do jeito nerd do Peter(igual ao Peter das HQs clássicas)do que o do Peter um pouco mais descolado(HQs ultimate), o vilão é o Lagarto, que eu não é um bom vilão, seria muito melhor adicionarem uma mulher e um filho ao Connors, assim ele tendo uma maior profundidade e o Peter tendo o peso em sua consciência de não machucar seu amigo Connors.
A trilha sonora não tem o mesmo tom heróico que existe na trilogia de Sam Raimi, porém ainda sim é boa.
As cenas de ação são boas,e o filme contém um bom CGI.
Para um reboot que eu não esperava muita coisa, até que o filme não saiu tão ruim, porém a sua sequência...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DubtrayDec 17, 2021

Cool interpretation of Spider-Man. Story keeps you engaged and interessted enough to care. Feels a bit more youthful than the original interpretation but more mature than the MCU-version. Some good actor performances. Solid superhero movieCool interpretation of Spider-Man. Story keeps you engaged and interessted enough to care. Feels a bit more youthful than the original interpretation but more mature than the MCU-version. Some good actor performances. Solid superhero movie with some storyflaws.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

bimmybob2001Aug 3, 2018

I thought Andrew Garfield did his best, and I even liked some of the Action in the Film. but my Biggest Problem with htis film is that it just Rehashes a lot of things from the Sam Raimi movies. the Director even said before the Films releaseI thought Andrew Garfield did his best, and I even liked some of the Action in the Film. but my Biggest Problem with htis film is that it just Rehashes a lot of things from the Sam Raimi movies. the Director even said before the Films release that they were doing something new.....which they did Not. also the Villain should've been Improved… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

ValBalNov 21, 2021

Decided to rewatch it before "No way home". I think Garfield does a good job at portraying a teenager but most actors look too old to be high schoolers and sometimes I just found myself not fully believing the struggles that these kids wereDecided to rewatch it before "No way home". I think Garfield does a good job at portraying a teenager but most actors look too old to be high schoolers and sometimes I just found myself not fully believing the struggles that these kids were going through because of that. Other than that Garfield sells an idea of a science genius skateboarder who looks cool and acts cool. Not so much of a nerdy loser but it's okay, this is a different version. I didn't like how they show Uncle Ben's death but then it's never mentioned after that although the effect of what that death meant can be felt in Peter's responsibility to save people of his city. Not a huge fan of the lizard's design and his plan also felt pretty generic and dumb. Spider-man action was great. Dynamic, fun and heroic.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

ErikTheCriticOct 5, 2018

Though the villain in the movie is severely underdeveloped with unclear motivations, the new reboot has exciting thrills and a great portrayal of Spider-Man by Andrew Garfield.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

sparrowuckdudeDec 7, 2018

fantastic movie better than the raimi trilogy and i recomend every one to watch it

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

mikefaiscaMay 19, 2019

Great spider man, mediocre Peter Parker, greath chemistry between Gwen and Peter, good cgi and good suit.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

OnaskOct 21, 2018

Película entretenida, sin más. No marca ni un antes ni un después en el personaje ni mucho menos. Un villano y un Spider-Man decentes. Peter Parker y Gwen son bastante infumables, especialmente el primero (que de repente es un tipo guapo yPelícula entretenida, sin más. No marca ni un antes ni un después en el personaje ni mucho menos. Un villano y un Spider-Man decentes. Peter Parker y Gwen son bastante infumables, especialmente el primero (que de repente es un tipo guapo y guay que hace cosas de tipo guapo y guay).

Te intenta hacer soltar la lagrimilla al final de manera desastrosa, pero perdonable.

Recomendada para pasar el rato.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

GenuineBruv2021Oct 25, 2018

This movie isn't a bad movie at all, it feels like a fresh new take on Spider-Man while at the same time it also feels like repetition. I really hate the sub plot with Peter's parents, it really isn't interesting at all to me. I like AndrewThis movie isn't a bad movie at all, it feels like a fresh new take on Spider-Man while at the same time it also feels like repetition. I really hate the sub plot with Peter's parents, it really isn't interesting at all to me. I like Andrew Garfield's portrayal of Peter Parker/Spider-Man, but the movie suffers from some tonal issues. The movie tries to be dark and depressing at times and it comes off as lazy and rushed. The train scene in the beginning of the movie is so badly edited its almost irritating, the villain's motivations are down right stupid. Dr Conners wants to turn the whole city into lizards for some reason, it just doesn't make sense, and it takes too long for the movie to get going. It spends most of the run time setting things up and it becomes boring after a while. The acting is solid and there is a lot of chemistry with Peter and Gwen (the actors were dating at the time so that's why). This movie does feel like a breathe of fresh air in a way. Overall The Amazing Spider-Man is a good movie with some major flaws that mostly have to do with the plot and pacing of the movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

coolwaliJun 23, 2020

A susprinsgly heartfelt movie that plays to a more comic-book Spider-Man. Garfield and Stone's chemistry and charm steal the show

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

Mar3148VMar 14, 2021

Ludicrous. What a waste of amazing talent.

Except Tony Perkins Junior as the Human Spider.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MurphyBrandonSep 15, 2019

The movie is not completely terrible, but Tobey Maguire and Tom Holland are both better as Spiderman than Andrew Garfield.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Deanfm123456789Mar 3, 2019

After 3 Big Successes of Superhero Films, We get a Reboot of a good Franchise, This Franchise Obviously was a Huge Step down for the original Trilogy, which was even better than this **** franchise, There nothing even good about it besidesAfter 3 Big Successes of Superhero Films, We get a Reboot of a good Franchise, This Franchise Obviously was a Huge Step down for the original Trilogy, which was even better than this **** franchise, There nothing even good about it besides the swinging scenes, So this will obviously be the 2nd worst Spider-Man Movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

DerekReideApr 7, 2019

Here's what I have to say to the Sony ruined franchise. It's watchable, but it's bad.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

BrunoVn00Mar 31, 2019

Why did this movie exist? It is a soulless product obviously made just to keep the movie rights to Spider-Man away from the hands of Marvel Studios. The Bad:
-This is a pointless movie that basically tells the exact same story as the firstWhy did this movie exist? It is a soulless product obviously made just to keep the movie rights to Spider-Man away from the hands of Marvel Studios. The Bad:
-This is a pointless movie that basically tells the exact same story as the first Sam Raimi Spider-Man, just switch MJ with Gwen, switch the Green Goblin, an Oscorp scientist that tests his experiment on himself and becomes the bad guy, with the Lizard, an Oscorp scientist that tests his experiment on himself and becomes the bad guy. Then at the end Spider-Man fights the bad guy, Spider-Man wins (this isn't a spoiler, ain't that obvious?)and you know the rest. This movie was marketed as "the untold Spider-Man story" and the only thing untold is the story of Peter's parents but really that is just pointless.
-This is a tonally inconsistent movie. This was marketed as a dark, "realistic" movie, like this tried to be like the Dark Knight I guess, but that doesn't fit with Spider-Man's character. Yes, fans praise that this new Spider-Man is now more comic book-accurate than Tobey's Spider-Man as now he says cheesy one-liners when fighting, but, that doesn't fit the tone this movie tries to give! So some parts tried to be dark, but then it becomes silly and cheesy and so on.
-Andrew Garfield doesn't fit the nerdy, socially awkward personality that Peter Parker is generally known for. The movie tries for a while make him look like he's that way but it just doesn't work. Garfield is a competent actor but he's not a good fit for the character.
-The villain is weak and has no motivation and he looks dumb as the Lizard. He's not memorable, he's not intimidating, he's just nothing.

The Good:
-The scenes between Gwen and Peter are actually pretty well written and acted, that's expected from the director of 500 Days of Summer, don't you think?

It's not a terrible movie but it doesn't come close to be as good as the original trilogy. Hope the sequel is better and hopefully doesn't somehow make the worst elements of this movie even worse...Oh wait...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

park3rOct 29, 2019

filme tesudo do krl, tem vilao meio ruim mais o andrew mandou o papo jogando o fino

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

TomtagApr 14, 2019

It wasn't as good as the earlier franchise but it had revealed more thinga we should know about Spider-Man

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

MLR_9902Jun 11, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Amazing Spider-Man opens with a young Peter playing hide and seek with his father. I find this funny since Peter spends the whole movie looking for a father figure, he finds the spider trying to find closure with Campbell Scott's Richard Parker his actual father, he loses Martin Sheen's uncle Ben because he takes the father he has for granted, he creates The Lizard by trying to fix Rhys Ifans' Dr. Connors' arm (or his 'broken piece') in doing this Peter tries to fix his own fatherless void (in other words Peter's 'broken piece'). In doing all of this another father figure, Denis Leary's Captain Stacy loses his life. One might say The Amazing Spider-Man is about father-less voids and filling those voids, or one might say it is about fatherhood, or one might say that the opening scene is a metaphor for Peter's character arc and his motivation, 'a young Peter Parker goes looking for his father'. So Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker has 'daddy issues', what do 'daddy issues' or abandonment do to a kid? Well Garfield's Peter Parker starts the movie as a very unlikeable character, he's irresponsible, he skateboards down the hall acting some what 'rebellious', he's got a chip on his shoulder and he is definitely not afraid to show it. The whole point is that Garfield's Peter Parker is selfish. He starts this film completely and utterly selfish, I understand why this film loses Spider-Man fans because he is still this selfish kid after he dawns the Spider-Man suit. We as audience members usually associate the dawning of the suit as the completion of a character arc, like in the Sam Raimi movie, but this is not the case with The Amazing Spider-Man, after he finally makes the suit he becomes even more of an unlikeable character, laughs it about the entire time, he forgets Sally Field's Aunt May's eggs. He tells a police officer, "I just did 80% of your job and this is how you repay me?", he then takes the police officer's gun and throws it away and makes his escape. He shows up late and dirty to Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy's family dinner and causes an argument with her father Captain Stacy. He is pretty much only Spider-Man to find Uncle Ben's killer, he doesn't like cops, he doesn't like authority. He has no intention of helping anyone but himself, like I said, selfish. Spider-Man's motivation isn't guilt at this point, it's vengeance, vengeance on Uncle Ben's killer, vengeance on anyone who ever makes him look small. This is why he tortures the car thief, it's the bullying victim becoming the bully. You're probably thinking that's not Spider-Man-like or heroic at all, but that's the point. This is why Captain Stacy says things like, "He's hunting down a bunch of criminals that all look the same, like he's got some personal vendetta, but he's not protecting innocent people. Mr. Parker" Peter isn't protecting innocent people, he's doing anything remotely heroic and the film knows it. He isn't acting like Spider-Man... Not yet, Peter Parker truly becomes Spider-Man at the bridge scene. This is were Spider-Man and The Lizard finally meet and this forces Peter to finally act like a real hero. Peter is trying to save a kid in his car that has been tossed over the bridge by The Lizard. Now this kid gives off a familiar vibe. The kid is like Peter. Spider-Man is trying to save this little boy, Peter is trying to save this boy, He does this by giving the kid the mask, this gives him courage to climb up the car that's literally hanging by a thread to Peter. The mask, Spider-Man's mask gives the boy courage to be saved by Peter, The mask gives Peter the courage to save the boy. In this moment Peter is not selfish, he really is a hero, but what happens next? Spider-Man brings the boy back to his father. Spider-Man reunites this boy with his father, Peter gives the boy something Peter can never have again, he acts completely out of selflessness for the first time in the film, by doing that he's finally able to truly call himself "Spider-Man". This moment on the bridge is the birth of Spider-Man and every thing Spider-Man stands for. Watching Peter go from an egotistical, selfish, vengeful person, to becoming a selfless hero is a very powerful and amazing character arc. This is what I really like from this Movie. Peter is always facing the consequences of his selfishness, the death of Uncle Ben and the lecture from Captain Stacy help him realise who he is truely meant to be. Personally I believe the writing of this film is really good, but it is not great. As I was watching I saw many flaws and plot holes in the film. Basically the main problem for the film is the writing. It's great at times but really lazy at other times. Otherwise the rest of the film is pretty good. The acting is great from all the cast. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have great chemistry. Any scene with them two in it is great to watch. Marc Webb is a great director. The score is brilliant. If I could, I would give this movie a 7.5, It's not a 7, or an 8… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Ahmedrizwan11Jul 10, 2019

Every scene in this movie is amazing. it is way better than the original. i found it very interesting and the movie was amazing.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Freddie2004Jul 22, 2019

The Amazing Spider-Man- A slow and dark reboot of the comical Sam Raimi trilogy that succeeds in bringing an interesting origin story but undoubtedly fails in the final 3rd act on providing a compelling final showdown between Peter and theThe Amazing Spider-Man- A slow and dark reboot of the comical Sam Raimi trilogy that succeeds in bringing an interesting origin story but undoubtedly fails in the final 3rd act on providing a compelling final showdown between Peter and the poorly designed Lizard.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

rubinowabrukiewAug 20, 2019

The culmination of Raimi's trilogy was the biggest box office hit in the history of Spider-Man's adventures. However, it did not convince a director of previous films to continue the series. Sony decided to reboot. And here at the beginning IThe culmination of Raimi's trilogy was the biggest box office hit in the history of Spider-Man's adventures. However, it did not convince a director of previous films to continue the series. Sony decided to reboot. And here at the beginning I will say that I am a supporter of reboots, I always give a chance to fresh visions of new creators. The problem is that Marc Webb's idea was not innovative in any way, the guy shot completely the same as his predecessor, introducing minor changes and at the same time the lack of consistency between the following events. The theme of the mysterious death of Parker's parents is badly done (more time has been devoted to it in the sequel, but it's not a compensation, it's a proof of lack of sense in presenting it in the first installment). Andrew Garfield in the lead role is the total opposite of the figure presented by Tobey Maguir a decade earlier. He is a popular guy at school, who's got chicks, skateboarding and always has control of the situation. It's a denial of a comic book character that doesn't even work in the within the framework of this particular film. Originally, Peter Parker lost his uncle Ben due to, among other things, bad use of his powers, which results in after all, the essence of being Spider-Man, because "with great power comes great responsibility". Here Peter simply does not use his skills for any purpose. In turn these actually good elements of the newer genesis, which do not bring shame to production, are mechanical web shooters. The affair is outlined quite a bit just like the old one, brought to the forefront and damn tiring. The Lizard has a good timing, but is still accompanied by CGI making, that great action scenes lose their quality because in my opinion they are visually closer to one of Michael Bay's ninja turtles than opponent for Spider-Man.
As a result, the "Amazing Spider-Man" is a more consistent production than that of the "Amazing Spider-Man 2", but it's still soulless and boring story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

senbladeOct 12, 2019

Лучшее воплощение паучка в кино, - восхитительное, шедевральное и неповторимое. Эндрю Гарфилд великолепно вжился в роль, представив публике глубокого и объемного персонажа.Лучшее воплощение паучка в кино, - восхитительное, шедевральное и неповторимое. Эндрю Гарфилд великолепно вжился в роль, представив публике глубокого и объемного персонажа.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

foss1kDec 6, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Actor selection is awful. I mean no offense but in original trilogy Peter looked like real loser and his future girlfriend was really nice, all seemed real and emotional. Here what can i see? Some Justin Bieber is main character playing role of guy who is clever scientifisist and loser. And most annoying, choosing among all beautiflul and pretty girls author decided to pic the most ugly for him.. ANY of them is better and prettier! Also, I hate the point of appearing spider-man's web is artifficial. In original trilogy it was natural and It looked cool like really his DNA changed partly with spiders. Since when his girlfriend clever than he is? one i liked is his first reaction for new abilities and stunning, it was made better, while original Peter's behaviour was like it was normal things. About minuses. Previous Peter was wearing galasses because he could not see withouth, in Amazing Spider Man Peter wearing it just for style, he keeps wearing it even when he's got an abilities. Now it's not fixing eyes problems? He doesnt look ugly or feel unconfidence, he takes whatever he wants and his future girfriend looking for opportunities to talk to him when is not interested in it. It is completely reversive part of original Spider-man, but with the same idea. First time I can see spider man who's escaping the fight he began... with no mask face to face. Peter like an idiot with emotions having conversation with father-cop and father-cop like an psycopath screaming to him seating next to him at the table, btw his girfriend invites him to dineer just from scratch and he meets her family where he let her know he's spider man.. fuuuuuuu. If I were 10 yo I 'd like all this but now I can see **** moments in products and believe me this is not all I've seen. Many of them I did not say here. Even stupid one would not guess Peter is spider man who comes at home like boxing bag. One I liked more is his decision keep meeting with mary jane after her father's death and despite his promise to him. you can say whatever you want but i see it like normal. that's why I put 1. because there's only one phrase I liked most - the last one before film end. And I cant see the sense to review second part because next text will get half of this one, and I dont like to write same reviews.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

JACK15qApr 5, 2020

Amazing movie. Good acting and story telling. Amazing ending. It had my attention from begging to end.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

RanGom007Nov 12, 2021

Mark Webb's dilogy showed what an amazing spider-Man is. Almost 10 years have passed, and these films still remain the best incarnations of the great hero in cinema. Sony please bring Andrew Garfield back to the role of the friendly neighbor!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Dovakinxr7Aug 21, 2020

O filme tem bons efeitos especiais,romance do filme é bom, tia may é a melhor que eu já vi dos filmes do Homem-Aranha.
O filme falha no Homem-Aranha que está descolado demais(skatetista e tudo mais) e o roteiro achei bem abaixo do esperado.O filme tem bons efeitos especiais,romance do filme é bom, tia may é a melhor que eu já vi dos filmes do Homem-Aranha.
O filme falha no Homem-Aranha que está descolado demais(skatetista e tudo mais) e o roteiro achei bem abaixo do esperado.
Basicamente o filme todo é bem mediano sabe? Nada de UAU e nem de TERRÍVEL...Fiquei meio decepcionado, mas seria mentira dizer que o filme é ruim, ele apenas foi abaixo do esperado.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

tellmikeyyJul 27, 2022

Andrew Garfield delivers one of the best portrayals of Spider-Man but not the best version of Peter Parker. Wasn’t the biggest fan of his shy-can’t finish words- lines but his intelligence, wit & charm worked well. Movie didn’t really flow atAndrew Garfield delivers one of the best portrayals of Spider-Man but not the best version of Peter Parker. Wasn’t the biggest fan of his shy-can’t finish words- lines but his intelligence, wit & charm worked well. Movie didn’t really flow at times & there are certain personalities and plot points I would have done differently. Fighting sequences are great, score is good, Gwen/Peter dynamic is iconic & Lizard is pretty decent as the villain.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

HeraldozkaNov 25, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Filme incrível manteve minha atenção do inicio ao fim, adorei a atuação do garfield adorei a atuação do casal, já assisti aos dois filmes e digo que é o meu aranha favorito de longe, o garfield é incrível o universo ficou bem gostoso de se assistir, senti uma vibe muito boa vinda dele mesmo com muitas partes desleixadas nos dois filmes que se tornam irrelevantes.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

pur__0_0__Apr 6, 2021

I'm gonna be absolutely clear with this one - I absolutely love this interpretation of Spider-Man, except for the fact that he occasionally doesn't act like him. And I really wanted to like this movie. I played its game and it was really fun.I'm gonna be absolutely clear with this one - I absolutely love this interpretation of Spider-Man, except for the fact that he occasionally doesn't act like him. And I really wanted to like this movie. I played its game and it was really fun. But the movie, well, let's just say it had a lot of potential.

Finally Peter Parker is shown to always have a passion for photography. He's beaten up for not taking a picture of a bully bothering a schoolmate. If I were him I'd have taken a picture and shown it to the Principal and gotten that bully suspended, but let's assume this Peter Parker isn't as bright. Later he visits Oscorp, gets bitten by the spider and becomes Spider-Man.

I really like how they showed Spider-Man slowly turning into Spider-Man. In the beginning he is unable to understand why he has all these powers, then he starts seeing everything is sticking to him and he reacts on his own. Afterwards he is upgrading his suit accordingly to suit the needs. He makes his own device to shoot webs. The Sam Raimi trilogy had convinced anyone who didn't read the comics that Spider-Man's webs come out of his body, but it's not true. This movie clarified it.

The main antagonist of this movie is Lizard. As someone who has read the original The Amazing Spider-Man comic where Spider-Man encounters Lizard for the first time, I can guarantee you that that story should have been used here. It was way better than the "Spider-Man finds enemy in the gutter" plot. In the comic he goes to the jungles in Florida and finds Dr Curt Connor's family over there. Also originally Dr Connors used to DRINK the medicine to become Lizard, not inject it. I don't see why he'd choose to go by the more painful method.

And of course Uncle Ben dies. But unlike Spider-Man he didn't die in a climactic moment. He just died of his own stupidity. And later on no one gives a damn about his death. It doesn't make any difference at all.

The Amazing Spider-Man is an underexplored idea that should have been using a lot more stories than it did. Rather than entire squishing everything in the sequel, this should have added one more concept from the sequel, more preferably establishing that Peter and Harry were friends. That would have given content to this movie and made the sequel more convincing.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

ShkvyapotapokJun 19, 2020

There is no development of the protagonist, events do not affect him at all, he is an egoist, he thinks only of himself, his girlfriend is a dummy, not a character, he’s just a doll that is needed only for the plot to work. Development inThere is no development of the protagonist, events do not affect him at all, he is an egoist, he thinks only of himself, his girlfriend is a dummy, not a character, he’s just a doll that is needed only for the plot to work. Development in terms of how the character develops. Regardless of who he is or whether his fans know, the character must always develop. Based on the events that occurred earlier - the character must come to some conclusions, conclusions and other things. Garfield Spider does not. And this is the main minus of the whole film. It is essentially useless.

All events did not teach the hero anything. Any film should teach the protagonist something. In our case, this is responsibility. It is clear that no one would repeat the ending of the film Raimi. But one could dodge. One way or another, the hero must come to something in the end. As I understand it, they were planning to teach Parker responsibility in the second part. But this is a bad decision, because it completely depreciates the entire first film, because, as I said earlier, the character has not learned anything, therefore this film is not needed. It turns out that the first film was wasted.

The film did not go to me because of the ending. Because she depreciates everything that happened in the film before her. The hero did not learn anything, the events of the film went to nothing, both for him and the viewer. That's all. The film itself, to the end, is not bad. The ending spoils everything.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

Onlyclassicvg1Dec 30, 2020

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…

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Cementer200Sep 22, 2020

I liked The Amazing Spider-Man. it is a good reboot of spider-man. the story is your usual spider-man origin story.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

akshatmahajanNov 16, 2021

I skipped The Amazing Spider-man franchise due to so much negative reviews from fans but then decided to give it a try. Actually, I liked the movie. It was fun to watch except that it's execution was not that much solid. Overall, it was funI skipped The Amazing Spider-man franchise due to so much negative reviews from fans but then decided to give it a try. Actually, I liked the movie. It was fun to watch except that it's execution was not that much solid. Overall, it was fun to watch and if you don't compare it with the original trilogy, you will enjoy it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

Xolt3cNov 18, 2020

The Amazing Spider-Man is more of an excuse for Sony to keep the rights to the character than an actual movie. It’s only a remake of Raimi’s Spiderman trilogy. We had already seen the origin story done as well as it could be. There was noThe Amazing Spider-Man is more of an excuse for Sony to keep the rights to the character than an actual movie. It’s only a remake of Raimi’s Spiderman trilogy. We had already seen the origin story done as well as it could be. There was no reason to do it all over again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MrPajamasSep 26, 2020

Amazing Spider-Man is a reboot of the series and surprisingly quite hilarious, although Andrew Garfield didn't do nearly as good a job here as Tobey Maguire. The story is good and the negative is beautifully crafted in terms of CGI. I'm notAmazing Spider-Man is a reboot of the series and surprisingly quite hilarious, although Andrew Garfield didn't do nearly as good a job here as Tobey Maguire. The story is good and the negative is beautifully crafted in terms of CGI. I'm not going to lie that I'd rather this never came about and I'd rather be for Raider's Spider-Man 4, but otherwise it's a good movie that I can recommend.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

Gorbunov2004Nov 29, 2021

Как по мне отличный перезапуск и Эндрю Гарфилд лучший человек паук.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

geewahJan 11, 2021

Garfield isn't a bad Spider-Man and most of action scenes are great, it's just that we all by now know the origin story pretty well

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

The Amazing Spider-Man

User Reviews