The Amazing Spider-Man (The Movies)

[Carbo]

That doesn't really excuse the movie's flaws.

[Stacy]

Really don't feel like posting with an opinion that seem's be the opposite, but, aw, sod it.

I have just seen it and I really enjoyed it, personally its one of the best films I have seen this year along with the Avengers (which was excellent but really overrated, I mean its really, really good, but come on).

You guys maybe be factually right there are probably some flaws to it, but I was enjoying it so much I didn't notice and I wasn't expecting it to be that enjoyable.

I am not that big of a Spiderman fan and I thought it was really good.

Martin Sheen (especially Sheen) and Sally Fields did a really good job as Peter Paker's Uncle and Aunt.

So yeah I enjoyed it, I personally would recommend it.

[Johnny Boy]

I just saw it today and I thought it was pretty good. The only thing I can say I had problems with is Uncle Ben's death scene (and that's obviously not a spoiler because every Spiderman fan knows that Uncle Ben dies). I felt like Garfields screaming and crying when Uncle Ben got shot was really forced, but that's a minor nitpick. Other than that I thought the rest of the film was great. I can't wait to see what they do with the Green Goblin if he shows up in the sequel.

Edited July 3, 2012 by Dark Energon Johnny

[Balding Spider]

Just got back from the movie, I thought it was good but not the Spiderman specticle others have stated it was. But man did I have some issues with this, I mean Peter came across as a snarky jerk way too much. And I really felt they dropped the ball with the Lizard, and I'm not talking about the CGI.

Edited July 3, 2012 by Balding Spider

[Sami]

Just got back from the theater. While I doubt I'll enjoy it more than The Dark Knight Rises, I can definitely say I personally prefer it over The Avengers. Don't get me wrong, I'd still say The Avengers is the better film, and it's definitely more easily recommendable, but my love for Spider-Man and complete apathy for every other Marvel superhero served to make this a more enjoyable flick for me.

I'm going to piggyback on what Carbo and Alex said in regards to the beginning being absolutely stellar. The dialogue is all really natural and I had no qualms with any of the actors; I actually liked the casting even more than I had expected. I thought Uncle Ben's death was particularly great, funnily enough, but I won't go further into that for spoilers' sake. I also really enjoyed watching Peter grow comfortable with his powers, and I thought it was fun watching him have trouble controlling everything at first and slowly get better by the end of the movie. I also really appreciated that there were no idiotic, plot-hole filled scenes like this fantastic little scene from the 2001 film. I liked how Peter was really freaked out by his powers at first, and I thought the train scene was absolutely hilarious as a result.

While I will say the pacing kept the latter half of the film from really living up to the buildup, I still really enjoyed it. I liked the Lizard as a villain, the action was fantastically shot, and I thought the climax was great. I wouldn't quite say the middle part was bad, it just wasn't quite spectacular. It was good, and I'm okay with that.

Would I say it's better than the Raimi films? Well, color me predictable, but yeah. I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more. While I really couldn't be bothered to argue why I enjoyed it a lot more than Spider-Man 2 (as my issues with that movie, for the most part, have to do with preference), I would definitely not step down from a dissection in comparison to the 2001 film. This is, simply put, a much better movie. The villain wasn't extremely goofy, all the characters were actually characterized properly this time around, the action scenes were much more fluid and well shot, the dialogue was infinitely better, and I didn't notice any blatant plot-holes like that god damn cafeteria scene which has baffled me ever since I was a kid. Everyone seems to agree that Spider-Man 3 was total shit regardless, so I don't think anyone will dispute that this easily trumped that.

In regards to the high school scenes: As someone who hated Transformers and the beginning of Chronicle, I'll say I quite enjoyed them. I thought it touched on Peter's life as a loser without being too stereotypical and silly. I also really liked how Peter conducted himself around others. He wasn't a ridiculously awkward weirdo like in the 2001 movie, but moreso someone who was just kind of awkward because he's not really tough enough to back up his words.

So yeah. I liked it a lot.

[lounge]

It was okay. Men in Black 3 and Avengers were waaay better though. It definetly wasn't spectacular. I have to say after seeing the movie I would've rather they didn't reboot it. As I was watching it, I just felt like I don't care about seeing the origin story again. Everyone knows it. The love interest I didn't care for that much. I will admit the actors are way better than the original cast. But still, having to sit thru the origin story again didn't really grasp me with attention. The only things I was looking forward while watching were the jokes and action scenes. Cause at least the jokes are funny.

Seeing the high school scenes I just couldn't stand. I don't know why, I'm just sick of seeing kids in high school. Just looking at the kids annoy for some reason. Nobody in high school today would act the way those kids act in the film. It just felt kind of dated. There's this one scene where Flash is bullying this nerdy kid hanging him upside down, and everybody's laughing, even girls. That whole scene felt just dated to me. Overall it was good but not really memorable for me. I would've preferred they continue the story from the third one even with the same cast, cause I did really love the third film.

[Speederino]

Saw it last night. My thoughts?

....

....

PSYCHE!!! It was actually pretty damn good. Not Spider-Man 2 good, but good. Certainly way better then what I first envisioned when they announced they were rebooting the franchise. The only thing I really didn't like was Lizard's character design. It wasn't even the CGI that bugged me, he just looked really...off. More like Killer Croc's retarded little brother instead of this fella:

Aside from that, I don't really have anything negative to say. So instead, here's some things I *really* liked:

- Martin Sheen was perfect as Uncle Ben, even better than Cliff Robertson's portrayal.

- The dichotomy between Andrew and Ema work off each other very, very well.

- I quite liked Spider-Man's trademark humor in here. I didn't think it felt forced at all

- Captain Stacy. When I first saw the trailers, I was worried they were turning him into Jameson. But he really comes into his own here.

I saw it in 3D, btw. Some of the 3D effects were really damn good, especially anything involving web swinging (And the ending shot was really cool). But other times, it was barely noticeable. In fact, I took the glasses off during a few of the school scenes and noticed they were purely in 2D.

[Carbo]

The 3D in this movie was completely unnecessary, I only went to see it because of IMAX sound.

Honestly, the more I think about the movie in retrospect the more angrier it kind of makes me. I said yesterday that I enjoyed it, but to be honest after looking back on it, I don't even know why. I'm having such a hard time finding redeeming qualities in this movie or anything that stood out. Andrew Garfield's performance belongs in numerous other movies with characters who know what they are and aren't undermined by terrible editing. Everything that isn't bad is only mediocre, and the good parts are undermined by terrible pacing.

The worst part is, looking back at the trailers, every significant twist or event in the movie is already explained in the promotional material, including things that they cut out of the movie for the sole purpose of creating the most ridiculous sequel hook in the history of post-credits scenes, and setting up twists for the next movie which we are already aware of. Every time the movie sets up a new plot point, you know what's going to happen, because the trailer already showed them. Even the final battle. I guess sacrificing a movie's consistency is fine if it means we get to have stunning trailers with epic music right?

I don't even know why I liked this movie. Somehow I walked out of the theater mildly satisfied after seeing it yesterday but already after the first day I can't help but look back at it and realize how soulless and inept the entire production was. I don't get bitter about movies as often as this but quite frankly, I detest this movie and what it stands for.

[Sami]

I don't even know why I liked this movie. Somehow I walked out of the theater mildly satisfied after seeing it yesterday but already after the first day I can't help but look back at it and realize how soulless and inept the entire production was. I don't get bitter about movies as often as this but quite frankly, I detest this movie and what it stands for.

Funnily enough, this is exactly how I feel about the entire Sam Raimi trilogy. Rebooting the series and starting over from scratch is the best thing that could have possibly could have happened, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm finding it really hard to see why this movie is soulless or inept as a result. The movie's far from flawless, but I wouldn't call it detestable.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Desudash Demonhoof

[Octarine]

All this talk is making me wonder if I should go back and re-watch the Raimi movies before I see Amazing. I'm pretty sure I only thought they were okay at the time, even the second one, but I haven't seen any of them in forever. Maybe I'd appreciate them more now that I'm older and more into superheroes than I used to be; I dunno.

[Stritix]

I might see this movie tomorrow...

Should I? I liked the original trilogy.

[Speederino]

^ Definitely give it a shot, yes.

[Winston]

Haha, I am one of the biggest Spider-Man fans on this website, don't get me wrong, but the movie wasn't THAT good. It was O.K., isn't my favorite Spidey movie, isn't my least favorite either. It wasn't a bad movie at all, I enjoyed it, but some moments of the film really bored me.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Winston

[Brad]

Just got back from the theatre. Personally, I felt the movie was actually pretty good! Andrew is a brilliant Spider-Man and is far better than Tobey imo, and Emma was a wonderful Gwen. Their chemistry was brilliant too. The story started off super strong, but I felt sometime in the middle it sorta lost it's footing somehow - somewhere it found it again though. Spider-Man's humour made me and the entire theatre laugh, though the small knives scene still felt forced. Finally, my main gripe about the movie was The Lizard - I've wanted to see him come to life for a long time, and though I felt it was understandable due to the format and audience they're trying to reach... I often felt the design was more humorous than scary. Which is sad really. Oh, and dat soundtrack. Seriously awesome. The movie wouldn't have been it's best without it. Way to go, James Horner.

Overall? Far better than Spider-Man 3, personally believed it to be better than Spider-Man, but Spider-Man 2 still holds the pedestal for the best Spidey movie yet. Let's hope Webb signs on for the sequel and the new writers don't ruin this good start to a brand new movie universe for Spider-Man.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Zero-Boom

[TrueBlue]

The 3D in this movie was completely unnecessary, I only went to see it because of IMAX sound.

Honestly, the more I think about the movie in retrospect the more angrier it kind of makes me. I said yesterday that I enjoyed it, but to be honest after looking back on it, I don't even know why. I'm having such a hard time finding redeeming qualities in this movie or anything that stood out. Andrew Garfield's performance belongs in numerous other movies with characters who know what they are and aren't undermined by terrible editing. Everything that isn't bad is only mediocre, and the good parts are undermined by terrible pacing.

The worst part is, looking back at the trailers, every significant twist or event in the movie is already explained in the promotional material, including things that they cut out of the movie for the sole purpose of creating the most ridiculous sequel hook in the history of post-credits scenes, and setting up twists for the next movie which we are already aware of. Every time the movie sets up a new plot point, you know what's going to happen, because the trailer already showed them. Even the final battle. I guess sacrificing a movie's consistency is fine if it means we get to have stunning trailers with epic music right?

I don't even know why I liked this movie. Somehow I walked out of the theater mildly satisfied after seeing it yesterday but already after the first day I can't help but look back at it and realize how soulless and inept the entire production was. I don't get bitter about movies as often as this but quite frankly, I detest this movie and what it stands for.

No offence, but you seem to be overthinking things a little. You enjoyed it and that's what matters, right? It just strikes me as odd that you go from "I enjoy it" to "I detest it" so quickly, even if you did list some of the flaws.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Ringo ~

[MegaMan_EXE]

After seeing it:

It was awesome, but 2 problems:

1. Peter was a bit of a clutz. I know he's a nerd and struggling and such, but he could've been better

2. The killer of Uncle Ben plot forgotten. Oh well, I guess it'll be addressed in the sequel. I hope!

[Carbo]

No offence, but you seem to be overthinking things a little. You enjoyed it and that's what matters, right? It just strikes me as odd that you go from "I enjoy it" to "I detest it" so quickly, even if you did list some of the flaws.

To be perfectly honest with you, I like to think it's because I tried to convince myself I liked it. I was cautiously optimistic for the entire movie despite every single promotional material released leaving me more and more skeptical. I was looking forward to this reboot a lot when I heard it'd be a lot more of a return-to-roots rendition which could have salvaged a lot of movie franchise's rut, but even they failed with that promise, and I already left the theater with a lot more flaws to count in my head than pros.

While it's true that I did enjoy several moments as a spur of the situation, when actually observing the entire package and the more I think of the movie's many, many flaws, the more apparent it is to me that there was no reason for me to enjoy it. The trailers used to fill me with relative excitement, and watching them now they look ridiculous. The scenes just don't work with each other and the entire atmosphere reeks of cynical halfheartedness with no ambition behind it. When I ultimately sat down to write my thoughts on the movie, hoping I could start off with the assurance of it being a passable enough movie that I at least thought I found enjoyment in, I just figured I'd write about what the actual product offered and I'd make mention of several issues I had. But the more I wrote, the more critical I was, and I had to struggle with coming up with anything that was good about it. There was nothing in there for me to like apart from the action scenes. It left me incredibly cold towards the package, and I can't get behind my original opinion.

While there are a lot of Spider-Man fans who've said "yeah this is a good movie", I'm afraid I really need to chalk myself up on the board who found this movie doing a disservice if anything. I don't feel compelled in checking it out again at all, and I don't see it retaining the timeless factor it could have had. I don't know, maybe I'm just disappointed, and it's frankly a sad day when I actually find myself seemingly side more with MovieBob's opposite-end spectrum opinion, but try as I might, I'm just not finding anything good or worth talking about in it.

[Jacky]

Loved it. Have to restate the fact that the parts where Peter was just learning his powers and kept breaking shit was great, the school battle, the SM2 train scene of this movie, was fucking rad. Dat web cocoon and Stan Lee cameo. Garfield was excellent as Parker, I enjoyed seeing a genius level and sarcastic outcast Pete, Gwen was very likable and fun to not have a damsel in distress for once, her being Emma Stone in mini skirts and thigh highs wasn't so bad either. <3 She really SNAPED into the role, she killed it. Captain Stacy was pretty awesome as well, especially during the final battle. also, CROTCHHHHHH. Flash became a total bro, liked that they included him being a Spidey fanboy, nice touch.

also

CHOCOLATE MILK KILLED UNCLE BEN

Edited July 5, 2012 by The Amazing Jacky

[Nintendoga]

Sounds like the movie is good, gonna catch it this weekend to avoid rejection after being told the movie sold out.

Also for those of you who have seen the move, you may want to look at this interview, it talks about how they made the film, yadda yadda, yadda, but also not only is this the first in a planned trilogy, but

They also want to do a movie concerning the Sinister Six and Venom. They only have a trilogy planned, but if things go thier way, there might be 6 movies in the franchise, with the last one doing the Sinister Six.

http://io9.com/59234...ific-rim-photo/

Arad: There are so many ways to paint these villains, all of them. As you know, one of the great sagas in the Spider-Man universe is of course the Sinister Six. I think "Avengers" did okay the last time I looked....

So are you suggesting you're going to do five Spider-Man movies introducing each villain and then the sixth movie will have the Sinister Six?

Tolmach: It seems like a good model.

Arad: It all depends on the stories that one wants to tell, because Spider-Man is really more a depth kind of a story, we have to be careful how many villains we can service, because a relationship with a villain has to be such that it's a story on his own. We attempted to do multiple villains—you've been there—you just need screen time to do it.

It seems a little unlikely that there's going to be 6 Amazing Spider-man movies, but we'll see.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Nintendoga

[Conando]

A lot of what you guys wrote about was settled in the game.

The problem is that you shouldn't have to buy the game in order to get the whole story.

[Match]

2. The killer of Uncle Ben plot forgotten. Oh well, I guess it'll be addressed in the sequel. I hope!

Not forgotten. He realized what he was doing was wrong. That's part of the dynamic character of Peter Parker that I enjoyed in this one.

[batson]

I thought the movie was about as good as the first two Rami films, which is pretty darn good.

And the really amazing thing about the movie was how well the 29 year old Garfield was able to play a teenager. I swear, i cant recall the last time i saw an actor that age get the body language and tone of voice of someone going through puberty so accurate.

[Yoko/葉子]

The movie was simply incredible, the casting was obviously replacing everyone, but the choices worked quite well. The Lizard was always one of my favorite villains so I squeeled (internally) like a school girl when I found out he would be the villain. The Stan Lee cameo was ROFL hilarious, the dry sense of humor was excellent. The mice "Fred" and "Wilma," lol. The train scene was funny with learning how to control hyperactive reflexes. I would have preferred if The Lizard had his face design from the comics, but it was still damned awesome!

[turbojet]

Saw the movie yesterday, and I am of the opinion that it is way better than the original trilogy.

Went to see it with my girlfriend who does not like Spider-man or super hero movies in general, but she went regardless("If I have to watch shiny vampires and shirtless werewolves and some pale ass ho give birth to a demon spawn, you can sit your fine ass down and watch this movie with me, dammit!"). I came in exited for the movie and walked out excited for the sequel. I already have my bid in for whom plays Mary Jane.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead from Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. You know you want it, too... or Karen Gillan from Dr. Who.

When it comes to super hero movies, there is a balancing act that needs to be perfected: Hero vs. villain. What I mean is how much of the movie should focus on the protagonist or the antagonist. Batman Begins was 90% Batman kicking ass and 10% villains(Ra's Al Ghul was part of Batman's origin so itself like he was more involved). Iron Man was 95% about Tony Stark and 5% about his antagonist. Thor had a bit more of a balancing act to it as Loki needed a bit more focus since he was going to be the main villain of the Avengers. Then there are superhero movies that allow the villain to drive the plot which is a trope that basically states that villains make the plot. The Dark Knight irrefutably belongs in this category because Batman's story is already told and now he is just trying to stop the Joker and the Crime Syndicate. Some people even believe that Batman was not even the main character. Amazing Spider-man irrefutably belongs in the former category which is a shame because the Lizard is one of Spider-man's more interesting villains.

However, I'll say this about the origin and the creation of Peter Parker aka the first part of the movie. Holy shit, did Marc Webb nail it? The interaction between the characters was superb. Gwen Stacey is not a token damsel in distress as she actually has character unlike a certain red head. Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker was excellent and it was nice to see that the characters could actually act. Dennis Leary was even good in this as his reluctance to Spider-man or even a vigilante was somewhat justified. Hell, when Uncle Ben died(thank god for Martin Sheen because he made you give a damn when he died), Eugene "Flash" Thompson, himself, walked up to Peter and asked if he was okay. Now go back to the Raimi movies and what was his role other than being a bully? Yeah, the movie caters to the comics which is a good thing(and oddly parallels Spectacular Spider-man). Hell, at the end of the movie, you see Flash and Peter just hugging it out like best buds and the former wearing a Spider-man shirt. Oh wait, Flash was a huge fan of Spider-man?

Oh, wait, that was part of his entire character.

Now on to the negatives.

this movie needs to slow the fuck down and pace itself. Jesus.

This was a comment I made a month or so back about a clip from the movie and it holds up to the movie pretty much. Around the middle, things start to come too fast and the action starts to pick up way too fast. This movie would have heavily benefited from not taking away parts that were obviously in the movie before the editing. For example, do you recall Dr. Connors saying "Are you ready to play God, Peter Parker?" as if it were his catchphrase in the trailers? Hell, the game has Parker say it to him as if it were a reference and Connors says it twice and even cites a biblical passage. Yeah, that was not in the movie. As a matter of fact, a lot of the characterization of Connors was absent so thus is transformation was rushed and his actions had no context as Carbo pointed out. This relays my previously insertion about superhero movies being a balancing act. They should have either A.) kept the scenes in the movie that were about Connors, B.) show other crimes happening throughout the movie, or C.) chosen a completely token reprehensible villain that does not have the Lizard's benevolence and at least allude to him being up to something later. To compare to Batman Begins, the villains in the movie were not that prevalent and did not need a certain amount of characterization. Scarecrow was merely a fly on the wall compared to the Joker. He was just a villain for a character driven Batman to stop. Why did this work and why doesn't Connors work? Scarecrow was never really an iconic Batman villain as to what Lizard is to Peter Parker. When Batman's main villains are complete criminals and murderers with a few sympathetic ones(Freeze and Two Face come to mind although the latter becomes completely irredeemable), Spider-man's main villains are deeply personal to him and his life as Peter Parker and are mostly sympathetic. Lizard is one of those villains and the movie tries to at least tell the audience that he is one of those villains, but due to the rushed editing, it is completely lost on the audience and it just looks like that Connors took the serum and just went bonkers because he already seemed like he was on the edge of doing so. I liked the touch that was shown when dealing with Uncle Ben's killer and how it is a driving point to Peter's transformation to find him(he is still looking for him and never does find him, but he is still looking), but it is telling when I say that Uncle Ben's killer seems like more of the antagonist than the Lizard which says a lot.

Otherwise, I'd enjoyed the movie much more than the original trilogy. Now that it is done.

Rant Time

Oh yes. Now to address those who liked the Raimi movies and do not see why fans accuse them of not being true Spider-man fans(I am not going to do that here), Raimi showed no damn respect to the source material or it's previous adaptations. No honestly, Japanese Spider-man has more fucking resemblance to the series and it has Peter Parker owning a giant fucking robot. When I see Raimi's plans for Spider-man 4, I bless the Spider-gods that they undercut his bullshit before he ruined the Black Cat(she was going to be the daughter of the Vulture and be called the Vultress and the Lizard was going to get the Sandman treatment despite his appearances in the previous movies...I am not making this shit up). Not to mention the campy ass narm-filled bullshit such as some random Asian lady singing the Spider-man tune while doing her best Asian lady stereotype(It's funny because she is Asian like Skids and Mudflap is funny) or the over the top depiction of J. Jonah who seems to belong more in an insane asylum as a mental patient than the chief editor of a newspaper(it was not J. K Simmons fault, but more the writing). The movies seemed to be making fun of the Spider-man universe than actually taking it seriously. Not to mention that he turned Harry Osborne's crippling parental abuse and drug abuse that was revolutionary in the 60s because nobody wanted to say that drugs were bad at the time into a complete joke(Oh, MJ dumped me, daddy's dead, and Peter Parker hurt my feelings...I'm going to drink my sorrows away because that makes me an alcoholic when I only done this...once). Sure, Spider-man is fun and games for the character and his jokes, but the actual stories and plots are very serious. It was supposed to be a deconstruction of the ideal superhero. Not just some retelling.

Then those who say that Spider-man 2 was character driven...what the fuck? For whom? Doctor Ock should have never gotten the characterization that he received in the first place because he was more or less the irredeemable, selfish character that the ASM probably would have fared better with than the Lizard. Doctor Octopus was never sympathetic and was the typical megalomaniac that fared better than being some tragic monster. No adaptation in Spider-man made him seem any more than a complete monster Before you pull Spectacular Spider-man out of your ass, no. He was using the idea of the tentacles were influencing as an excuse to not be sent to prison which allowed him to retain some sort of control and his motives were entirely reactionary to how Norman treated him. Mary Jane is still a loathsome bitch and Peter Parker is a whiny and irresponsible bitch("But I don't want to be Spider-man anymore Uncle Ben"....Oh my God, I wanted to put a hit on Raimi just for that).

Edited July 5, 2012 by turbojet

[Sami]

Actually, I do have a legitimate question for all you guys who are fans of Spider-Man 2, because this aspect of the movie legitimately baffles me:

Why did he start losing his powers? The spider bite altered his DNA, giving him his powers. Alright, cool. Suspension of Disbelief covers that aspect of the story. But, uh... the only thing that really built up to him losing his powers was Mary Jane's relationship with John Jameson. I get that he was heartbroken, but what the fuck does that have to do with his genetic structure? Did the genetically altered spider chilling up in the great big web in the sky just decide to revoke his powers because he had a bit of self doubt? Is the complete rewriting of one's DNA just a side-effect of heartbreak?

It makes almost as much sense as the organic webbing; but this time around it's actually a pivotal plot point that creates a gaping plot hole large enough to drive a pick-up truck through, and not just a small (but incredibly annoying just because it really shouldn't exist in the first place) nitpick.