Tom Creo

Prometheus didn't make your list?

gp1086

Thought the movie was ok overall. Had some script issues in my opinion and didn't really buy into the Lizard as a villain, but not a terrible way to spend a couple of hours.

Tom Creo

They should put that on the cover of the Blu Ray "....not a terrible way to spend a couple of hours."

gp1086

They can quote me

B5Erik

"Not a terrible way to spend a couple of hours."
-GP1086

"It's not a terrible movie."
-B5Erik

Definitely some DVD/Blu Ray worthy quotes.

fumanstan

I don't think its anywhere close to being a horrible movie.

gp1086

I agree. Read a few reviews and have mostly agreed with them, although the 74% on RT seems a bit high.

taffer

Its not. Just like at the user reviews on this site. 46% of the people gave it four stars or more. Almost 80% gave it three stars or more, and I wouldn't consider three stars to be a horrible movie.

Apple Gooncha

I had a couple of issues with it, but overall found it enjoyable. When it was at it's best, I thought it was very good.

Outside of the 90s animated series I'm not much of a Spider-Man fan but Webb, Garfield, and Stone convinced me to give it a shot.

I didn't consider it too dark and I'm not entirely sure where some of the Twilight comparisons I've seen have come from (even though I did get a trailer for the new Twilight movie before TASM), and I know some people complain that it covered a lot of similar ground as the first Raimi film. Well, to someone that didn't like the Raimi films, I didn't have issues with the story covering some similar areas.

Also, the basketball scene that was released before the movie was easily my least favorite part, but bothered me a little less when standing with the rest of the film and not just on its' own.

Overall, this left me eager for the sequel and if I wasn't already in love with Emma Stone I probably would be now.

RichC2

I'm not a comic reader. As a movie I thought this was better than Raimi's Spider-man and is 2nd behind Spider-man 2 as the best one so far, that isn't saying much as it took me a couple tries to stay awake through Raimi's Spider-man 1.

On the plus: Garfield and Stone are more convincing as high school students than Dunst or Toby. The villain was more entertaining (Green Goblin was fucking horrible) and I liked the tone.

On the down: It's too drawn out, they hammer in the father issues throughout and anytime Parker had a skateboard it made me cringe.

This, of course, ignores the fact I saw an incredibly similar take on the story in theaters 10 years ago.

asianxcore

I don't either.

Either way, I saw the movie over the weekend with my girlfriend and we both enjoyed it.

Even though I didn't like The Lizard, I'm glad we finally got him as a villain after Raimi hinted at it many times in the 2 films of the series.

Mr. Cinema

Saw it today. Definitely not a "horrible movie".

It is a bit darker than the previous series, although Spider-man 2 has bits of that mixed in. Garfield is not only leaps and bounds a better actor than Maguire, but he's a better Parker as well. They could have easily cut about 20 minutes out as it does run a bit long, but it is definitely better than Spider-man 3, and probably a little better than the original. I think I'd also rank it #2 in the franchise.

The action was better than 1 and 3, and on the level of part 2. The Lizard is a brute on the big screen. I'd probably put him 3rd on the villains list, behind Doc Ock, and Sandman.

Thank God we didn't have to endure a Spider-man 4 with John "The Vulture" Malkovich puttering around. I look forward to the next adventure in this series.

Draven

Finally saw it today.

Nothing that hasn't been covered in here but bottom line: it was okay.

I actually liked the "non Spider-Man" scenes far more than any time he was in costume. Which is a huge problem. I didn't need a rehash of the origin. Let's face it - no one in this country needed that rehashed. And they loved showing him swing around town...but I have already seen that happen in three other movies. I did appreciate that he was more "spidery" in this but that's about it.

The crane scene was INCREDIBLY awful, he couldn't keep his goddamn mask on for more than five seconds, and Oscorp security is pretty shitty.

All in all, I got exactly what the trailers promised. A rehashed Spider-Man with nothing new to add beyond Garfield and Stone, who were the only impressive things I saw on that screen.

Supermallet

Finally saw this. It was better than the first Raimi Spider-Man, not as good as the second, but way better than the third. Webb manages not to fuck it up too bad for the most part, although that final shot was painfully stupid in that it was clearly shot for 3D and will look like ass in 2D. Speaking of 3D, I thought it was totally useless. Added nothing at all.

The best part of this was the cast, which was better than any of the previous Spider-Man films. Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Ben and May were good enough that I could have watched a movie just about them. I thought this movie did explore some things better, like the impact of Uncle Ben's death and the nature of discovering that you suddenly have awesome powers, but overall it didn't do anything to justify the reboot.

In the wake of the Avengers and in the lead up to The Dark Knight, Amazing Spider-Man just doesn't do enough to make its own stamp on superhero cinema.

EdTheRipper

I took my son to see this on Sunday. It was alright, but I wasn't particularly excited by it. I think my son was a bit bored with it.

BryKasch

Took the family tonight to see it on the IMAX.

Garfield is way better of a spiderman. Yes the whole skateboard thing we could do without.

Flash thompson, poor flash, so ignored in the movies, while yes he is a blockhead for the msot part, he deserves to be more fleshed out as a whole then he is here.

Love martin sheen as uncle ben. sally field really great actress, but here she falls flat, alot of it is whats shes given dialogue wise.

Emma stone, of course awesome as always, kills dunst as mary jane.

the lizard was the big distraction for me plotwise, his dialogue was very weak, I cared nothing for him one way or another.

yes oscorp security is embarassing

the 3d when it was used was great, but it was few and far between. if your not seeing it on imax, save your money and skip the 3d.

Overall the action was great, better than one, plot was flat compared to raimis origin, but a very good movie. Can't wat to see what the whole thing after the credits is going to lead to.

orangecrush

I saw this the other day and my take away was that Emma Stone is super charming.

Dragon Tattoo

Would you let her spit in your mouth?

Solid Snake

when you say spit..you mean....?

Honestly though...I do actually like Ben and Aunt May in this more. Their impact isn't as well established as Raimi's but..they felt like a real couple.

I wonder if we'll get an extended cut of this film cuz the shit they cut out seems to have given it major plot holes. Won't fix the actually quality of the script but hopefully it could better the film.

gp1086

The more I see her, the more impressed I am. Loved her in Crazy, Stupid, Love.

orangecrush

As a Red Head? Yes. As a Blonde? Only if it was really hot.

orangecrush

He means spit. It is a reference to a thread I started a while back.

islandclaws

2 1/2 stars.

I really didn't think it would be possible for someone to make a Spiderman film that was worse than Raimi's entries. Not that they're necessarily horrible, but they haven't aged well at all (especially the first). But this... this was epic in its ineptitude.

It felt like Webb shot 3 films - a romance, a mystery and an action picture, then he decided to try cutting them all together into something cohesive. The end result is a meandering mess that hits expected plot points because it has to; the story never develops organically.

For one thing, Garfield is terribly unlikeable as Parker. Now, I can't say I've really read the comics much, but was Parker always like this? I can't say exactly what it was, but his awkwardness and wit weren't charming in the least. Maguire, as bad as he was at times, seemed better in the role. This kid is just so... brooding. All the time.

So, he sneaks into Oscorp (when a phone call to Connors explaining who he was likely would've been sufficient), steals a badge, and then when the real guy shows up and starts yelling they throw him out instead of looking into it? Trivial humor like that always feels so strained.

He makes mechanical web shooters (quite easily, apparently) with the stuff he saw at Oscorp. Ok, so then how did he get it? Did he just call up Curt and ask his new buddy to ship over a few boxes of their most top secret goods?

And talk about a fast suit designer! This kid should do side work as a fashion consultant. Also, what the hell was it made out of and where the hell did he get it? Are we supposed to assume he can afford what would likely be a minimum of $1000 for a custom suit? Couldn't they have just let it make a little more sense so I don't have to ask to many questions?

"Oh, hey, I'm so miserable and curious and conflicted about the mystery of my parents. I should really look deeper into what hap.. hey, Dr. Connors, let's chat; here's a formula for free that my dad kept hidden from you (but I'll take credit). What was I here to investigate again? Don't worry, I won't mention it for the rest of the film."

Peter discovering his powers was a one-note mess. After the typical subway thug beatdown, he spends the rest of the time just smashing things. But it's funny! Right?

Dr. Connors sure whipped up that sewer lab in no time. He's going to use that gas dispersing thing to infect everyone! We know this because he drew it and circled it a bunch of times on his desk.

Speaking of Lizard, that's one thing the film got mostly right. I wish he had more of a snout, and that the lab coat stayed on the entire time, but he felt like a genuinely scary villain for Spidey, one who handed him his ass on just about every occasion.

Denis Leary sucked. He and Peter have virtually no relationship outside of two meetings, one of which was post-unmasking with his gun drawn. But when he dies, Peter cries. Ok, because that's believeable...

I did enjoy the aerial views of NYC presented by the film. Raimi's NYC felt like one big set, whereas some of the shots Webb got managed to capture the vastness of the city. Skyscrapers felt tall, imposing. There was a greater sense of danger when Spidey was swinging through the streets.

C. Thomas Howell overacting? Surely, you jest! His cameo only could've been worse if he was in blackface. Wait, did I say worse?

Worst. Credit. Scene. Ever. I guess that's Norman Osbourne?

This was also the worst 3D movie actually shot in 3D I've seen. It added almost nothing aside from the expected depth. The post job on Avengers was light years better.

I felt like they cut out A LOT from this film. There were many moments when it was painfully obvious that Edit Scissorhands hacked away at chunks of the film. Peter first arrival at Gwen's is just one example. The film had some good ideas, and some great visuals, but Webb seems like he couldn't decide what kind of film he wanted to make, and that confusion led to him making a bad one. I'm slightly curious to see how a sequel might go about correcting the errors here, but that's seeming like an insurmountable task at this point.

On a side note, my buddy & I saw this in one of Regal's new RPX theaters (I didn't pay the extra fee, we got lucky and it was starting at the same time as the showing we had tickets for so...). If you're thinking about paying extra to see something in one, don't. It's a waste. The leather seats don't feel any more comfortable than the regular seats, and the picture and sound seemed no better either. It's just a gimmick. I know, I'm shocked, too.

M1000be

*Shrugs*

I loved it.

I never cared for the Rami films, feeling that the direction was lacking. The films just never clicked for me and I hated Tobey as Peter Parker / Spiderman. This one on the other hand, I felt like Webb actually got in touch with the character. I believed that Garfield was Peter Parker / Spiderman. My only complaint? All the actions scenes seem to take place at night. This isn't Batman, Spiderman does come out during the day and there should of been more action sets in the daytime.

chris_santucci

You do raise some valid arguments, but I would wager that the suit creation was sidestepped to avoid showing the same montage that was in the first film (which, btw, shows both Parkers should go into fashion design if the superhero thing doesn't work out).

As for the 3D, agreed! It was a waste of so many people's money. I cannot understand how this film was shot in 3D whereas "Prometheus" was post-converted.

I liked Garfield's take on both characters. His smart-alec Spidey was more in keeping with the books than McGuire, who doesn't seem like the kind of kid who can chime in funny one-liners.

I posted my entire take here. http://www.film-matters.net/2012/07/...an-review.html

I'm quite shocked by the magnitude of negativity. Yeah, I didn't ask for a remake either. But this was a strong film--much better than anyone could have anticipated.