The Amazing Spiderman - Indeed

What a great surprise this movie was! The first hour is essentially a relationship drama which gave the characters real depth and meaning. Nothing like the original movie and good for it. Superb acting and great directing only add to the awesome script. But teenage boys beware - you will be bored for the first half of the movie!

Is this an honest opinion or a sell job? I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but you did not explain or support anything you wrote and the compliments seem forced and a bit over the top.

I was enjoying your review till the raging spoilers. Maybe warning or spoiler tags please

__________________

Going to see it in about an hour....

I loved it and so did the person I saw it with. I didn't like it as much as the original with Green Goblin, by Sam Raimi, but I found it to be a lot of fun, with great special effects, and awesome 3D! My favourite moment was when he dodges the cop's bullets effortlessly, while standing right in front of the gun. That was great. And the outro at the end was rapid-fire brilliance. It was like I was flying with him through the air and every alleyway. Very cool stuff. I loved the surreal feeling it gave me.

But it's true, of course, the movie doesn't have much character depth to it, although they tried to give it some, so it certainly doesn't have it all.

I give it three and a half spiderwebs out of five.

Caution, don't watch the original Spider-Man or you will be spoiled for TASM. I love how we live in a day and age where we can take a recent movie franchise, redo it, and not only will people get excited for it, they will worry about being spoiled. There were no surprises in this movie. Oh sorry to break it to you, this movie ended nearly the same as the first one.

Spoiler alert:

Well, considering the character you mentioned doesn't have the same trajectory in the Raimi entry they were in, I think I had a valid point. Spiderman has a huge and vast canon (before the movies) so counting on Hollywood following a predictable formula and retracing the beats of Raimi's film, doesn't mean spoilers are moot. Especially when most aren't familiar with the comics. Uncle Ben dying would have been a different matter as it's an established and inherent part of Spiderman's origin.

I think a lot of people are, justifiably, worried about being spoiled by The Dark Knight Rises, too. Especially if Batman does die, hey why don't you write a review of that and tell everyone exactly which characters die?

Your neg rep makes me like your review even less.

**NO SPOILERS INCLUDED** (Just me going on and on about how great The Amazing Spiderman is)
I really do not want to spoil the movie for anyone who is yet to see The Amazing Spider-Man, so I'll try to make this short and sweet.

The Amazing SpiderMan is a MUST SEE!!! I, as many know, LOVED Tobey as Spiderman in the first trilogy and as you may have heard me say in the past, I was a bit skeptical of this new beginning of Spider-Man introducing new characters and actors as characters but after seeing it (TWICE IN ONE DAY) here is my verdict:

The Amzing Spiderman is just that- AMAZING! I LOVE this new start. The beginning does take a bit but its truely worth the time because it gives us a real emotion depth on Peter Parkers history. Then the movie is fantastic action wise and it's NOT just because of the special effects, the planning of this movie was so well thought of and you can tell in every scene that everyone gave their best.

You have no idea how much I want to gush on and on about this film but I know with it just coming out this month there are many who have to see this still.

One more thing, Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield are deff going to have a long bright future in acting ahead of them. Emma has always blew me away with her perfect take on to her roles but this movie just really gave me a true insight to their future. I see good things to come!

So everyone who hasn't seen it, try to get to the theaters ASAP!

__________________

I like your rambling, gushing review lundy. Reminds me of my nerdgasmic review of The Avengers.


And now I'd like to take the chance to shamelessly pimp and plug my own Spider-Man review

JayDee's Amazing Spider-Man review

__________________

Emma did rather well; she must love City Lights because she's got those eyes down pat.

I'm here today to let the world know a few things, okay? There seems to be a damaging stereotype that us British are extremely positive people. We are considered polite, well mannered and...

Wait... Sorry, I've been told that completely wrong. Apparently we're cynical bastards. Fair enough. Rather accurate.

Spider-Man. You've an image in your head right? If you do, there's a very good chance that was etched into your mind with the help of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy that crawled, climbed and leaped its way into cinemas throughout the last decade. Whilst the third movie was somewhat... controversial, the first two grabbed the hearts of the public and the scores from the critics. Aided by the X-Men films, it is generally accepted that the films shaped the formula for a modern comic book movie and completely revitalised the dying genre. Shame about Daredevil, that set it back a few years.

But, as the trilogy ended with a whimper of a jammed firework rather than the bang everyone was expecting, Sony decided it was time to try again. The Amazing Spider-Man was announced, and it promised to deliver a fresh new experience that would establish a whole new trilogy. I'll admit, I was excited at first. I mean, I'm a massive Spider-Man fanboy, and I had watched the previous movies to death. I still leap on people who write Spider-Man without a hyphen. Still, the raving fanboy inside me had a few niggles with the older movies, particularly the characterisation of Spider-Man himself. Tobey portrayed an excellent Peter Parker, but his super alter-ego lacked the same juvenile humour and trademark irritating dialogue that helped him distract so many bad guys in the comic books. But, we were told this movie would draw a lot from the comic books. Peter's web shooters, his witty banter, the origins of his parents...

Hold on. His parents? A bead of sweat ran down my forehead. It was starting to sound a bit "gritty Hollywood reboot" to me. Batman style. Oh no. Not to Spider-Man. Not to this well-established comic book world of wonder and responsibility that was so keenly managed beforehand. And the trailers began to roll in, each one piecing together more of my fears. Peter was no longer a lovable nerd, but a hipster who in any high school in 2012 would have a small following of girls who want to be with him and boys who want to be him. Casting lists were uploaded, changed, cropped, added to. Characters emerged, and disappeared. No more Jameson. No more Harry. But I decided, I would reserve judgement. I would go to the cinema and experience what the director had envisioned. Not in 3D mind, I'm not paying an extra tenner for a headache.

Credits roll. Goosebumps hit me. I am momentarily taken over by child-like glee. I'm seeing Spider-Man! I like Spider-Man! Pass me some more popcorn! And to be fair, the joy continued for a short while.The back story was well set up, with believable acting, even from a kid (which, let's be honest, is a rarity. Harry Potter 1, anybody?). Cutting forward to the pretty-boy teenager was a smooth one and to begin with, Andrew Garfield's interpretation of this awkward lovable nerd was cute. His lines were delivered well and his character well established. Gwen too shows off some fierceness, a well needed break from the spinning wheel of different emotions that was Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane. As the story progressed, I felt like I could really feel the warm bond between Peter and his lovable Aunt and Uncle. In fact, I think Martin Sheen was the stand out performance of the whole movie, but being the character that he is, this was obviously going to be short lived. It's hard to maintain a good character when you're dead.

So far, so good with all the actors. Until we see this greasy, blonde British man who I'm meant to believe is Curt Connors. Now, this character is a personal favourite of mine, especially after the incredible "Spectacular Spider-Man" cartoons from a few years ago. But all traces of this character have been burned from the face of the Earth. Gone is the doting family man. Gone is his secret desire to fix his body. Instead, we have a shallow, one dimensional character who's personality aggressively shifts from scene to scene. His portrayal of the Lizard was, to be frank, laughable. Pure cliched drivel, from the moment he begins to record himself in his secret base about becoming "better than man" to his generic villain lines screeched at Parker, leaving no trace of humanity or... well anything to him.

And this starts a trend. Gwen suffers from the fate of personality shifting as well, and it most definitely shows. The feisty blonde becomes awkward innocent teenager, and her intelligence ranges from science genius to rodent with a suicide wish as the movie carries on. Her relationship with Peter is such a missed shot, so flawed and unbelievable. After their 4 sentences of dialogue between each other and a horrible scene that's meant to constitute a "date", he tells the girl he barely knows his biggest secret. Bravo, Mr. Director. I've never actually felt genuine rage flow through my veins at a movie before.

The whole movie just collapses on itself as it progresses. Such a promising start leads to such a heart-crushing disappointment. The way Spider-Man is portrayed as an actual, creepy half-spider, half-man is just so bluntly wrong, and doesn't even flow well with (in my opinion, the highlight of the movie) the scene where he jokes around with a car thief. It's trying to get in too many versions of well known characters whilst trying to establish something new, and it just means that the whole thing falls flat on it's face. It's a shallow film that feels cold and distant, set in a city where nothing happens and inhabited by no-one. Every set feels tight and claustrophobic, the Lizard looked more like the head of a phallus, Norman Osborn as the head of an evil corporation was so cheesy and over-the-top, and as the movie carried on I just wanted to be sat on my arse at home watching Spider-Man 2 for the 32nd time.

To conclude, I'd have to say that, well, it's just not a movie worth seeing. There was so much potential, a wealth of history and characters to take from the comics, but in avoiding everything that the old trilogy was, all the film managed to do was side-step the magic that made the Sam Raimi films so likeable. And it's a damned shame. No film has left me feeling so sour in a long time. And I've seen X-Men: The Last Stand.

If you liked this review, please consider following my twitter, GuyReviewsAll.

Nice review. Don't "tweet" (is that the right term?) but stick around here and post some more. Felt similar to the film.

The new Spiderman Andrew Garfield, is a great actor, half english, half american, just like Paul Gambaccini. ( Pop expert, broadcaster , Dj and friend of Freddie Mercury.). And i chose him for that role, because he looks just like him.

Completely agree it was a bit boring in he beginning but it really did add more character development

I haven't seen it yet but hope to next weekend before it drops out of main theatres.

I liked the first Spiderman with Toby Maguire and thought he did a good job of playing the Peter Parker angst but it got cloying by the third movie. Also the presentation of 'bad' Peter was too creepy/vain and I felt really distracted rather than added to the movie.

That said, I'm ready for a re-boot and excited to see the new presentation with the original origination story.

Having been just five years since we last saw Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man, The Amazing Spider-man is a highly enjoyable superhero movie with only a couple of minor flaws. It is immediately evident that some details are different, however this tale follows the familiar Spider-man story. A scientifically altered spider bites Peter Parker, causing him to gain spider-like powers of enhanced strength and agility, heightened senses and the ability to climb walls. He is then determined to a life of crime fighting by the death of his beloved uncle. Along the way, he finds love and must eventually face off against a super villain who threatens New York City.


In this reboot, Andrew Garfield makes a terrific Peter Parker. Some of the movie’s best moments are in the first half as we see how he gains his powers and learns how to deal with them. Ironically, the first half of the film, which covers much of the same ground as was covered in 2002′s Spider-man, is actually the most entertaining half. Watching Peter come to terms with his powers is more interesting than watching yet another superhero do battle with yet another supervillain in the heart of a major city.


The rest of the cast is equally good. Emma Stone plays Gwen Stacy, Peter’s original love interest from the comic books. Sally Field and Martin Sheen play Peter’s Aunt and Uncle. Sheen and Garfield share a couple of nice moments together, despite the sappy dialogue that Sheen is given. Dennis Leary does a good job as the police captain and Gwen’s father.


One aspect of this version of Spider-man that is a definite improvement over Raimi’s version is that when in costume, Spider-man seems less like a computer generated cartoon. This is most likely a combination of more shots with an actor actually in the costume, coupled with improvements in special effects in recent years. In any case, where it was blatantly obvious when Spider-man was computer generated in the older films, here the line is more blurred and it adds to the feeling of realism.


In General, comic books have a longstanding tradition for rebooting comic book heroes and altering continuity. This would best describe this movie. A different, but similar tale of a boy named Peter Parker who became the amazing Spider-man. Overall, it is definitely worth a watch. Please bear in mind that there is not much content in 3D.

The Amazing Spiderman



Is it really amazing?

The biggest hurdle this film has to jump is that it can't seem like a cash grab to keep the studio owning the rights to the character before it reverts back to Marvel. So the question I ask myself and I ask those who've seen it. Did it feel like this movie needed to be made, or more importantly, does this story need to be told again only ten years after Sam Raimi's Spiderman? The answer, for me, is no.

The problem is the film treads familiar ground for too long, we've seen this story before. What does this film offer that differs from the original series? Well, the main thing is that his parents are more present and that gives a mysterious element to the film. Clearly all a ploy to set up a new trilogy. There are a lot of things introduced into this film that scream sequel. It's a thin ice, on one hand it will ultimately serve the viewer better down the road...if they care to continue the journey. At the end of the day, the feeling that I got with this film was this: an excuse to keep the franchise at Sony.

One of the biggest missteps this film has is the relationship between Gwen Stacey and Peter Parker. The fault lies within the script and the chemistry between the two. On their own, they are both great, together, it's a mess. I never bought the relationship from the set-up, to the conclusion. It felt forced and when they were together, I was asking myself why do they seem so awkward on screen? So the casting works on varying levels. Leary is given little to do, but this isn't his story anyway, then we have Rhys Ifans as Dr. Curt Connors a role that was played by Dylan Baker in every Raimi Spiderman film. Had Baker been the villain in the 3rd Spiderman, maybe we'd be enjoying their fourth collaboration and not this revamp. Ifans relationship to Peter in this film is lacking and his turn to the villain is underwhelming. There are scenes that feel ripped out of the original, specifically Connors battling his inner self exactly like Dafoe as the Green Goblin. It felt out of place as it only happened I think once, maybe twice. I never really found Spiderman to be in any danger during this film. We have a giant lizard creature attacking him and I never felt any suspense. This leads into another fault of the film.

The action sequences are messy. Not once did I think "Oh, that was cool/interesting/neat/new/inventive" anything along those lines. Marc Web (yes, his last name is Web) was the wrong man for the job. He had a brilliant debut film 500 Days of Summer and I figure Sony was trying to go the Marvel route and try out more "unconventional" directors for the gig. Yet his inexperience shows a bit with the action sequences, all of them lack the thrills the original trilogy had.

So where does this film succeed? As I said before, when they are not on screen together, both Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield are quite good. The scenes showcasing Spiderman swinging through the city are huge improvements over the original trilogy. They look real, feel real and he moves like the character would in the comics. I surprisingly liked the more realistic feel to this one. It works for and against it at times. Finally, as I mentioned earlier, there is a bit of mystery added to the overall story here. Peter's father, his story and his relation to future possible villains in something that I am actually looking forward to.

Despite feeling underwhelmed with the entire production, it does feel a bit more polished than a thrown together superhero film. This is no Iron Man 2. But I would have much rather of seen another Raimi entry, a redeeming entry to the 3rd, than this one. This would probably be on par with the original Spiderman, but the question of whether or not this particular story, one which we are way too familiar with, should it have been told again? My answer is no.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

TASM was completely unoriginal, predictable, generic, and boring. It was overly long, had many plot flaws, and added nothing to our understanding of Spiderman on screen that we didn't get from the last franchise which came out recently. Did this reboot really need to be made? No, and I wish it hadn't.

What were you honestly expecting out of a reboot of one of the most famous origin stories in the world? I personally enjoyed it a lot more than the Tobey Maguire films. Andrew Garfield is a much better actor, the action was great, and the story was handled incredibly well and tied in to the original comic lore better than the Sam Raimi trilogy. 3.5/4 stars