Customer Reviews


1,858 Reviews
5 star:
 (856)
4 star:
 (452)
3 star:
 (257)
2 star:
 (131)
1 star:
 (162)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


416 of 509 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The Amazing Spider-Man - point by point
I read a lot of reviews for this movie before watching it myself. In the end, they all boiled down to a few basic criticisms, which I kept in mind as I made my own appraisal. Here are the major problems people seem to have had with Marc Webb's "Amazing Spider-Man", along with my responses.

1. The reboot was too soon.

This more or less depends on your...
Published 21 months ago by Kyle Shultz

versus
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Meh
Like quite a few others, I felt this reboot was kind of pointless. The previous trilogy is (for the most part) excellent and still fresh in our minds. This reboot doesn't really bring anything new to the table. Yes, the special effects are great and the 3D works well, but the previous trilogy still looks great, too. I have to admit that after seeing the trailers for...
Published 17 months ago by Terry Foster


‹ Previous | 1 2186 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

416 of 509 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The Amazing Spider-Man - point by point, November 5, 2012
I read a lot of reviews for this movie before watching it myself. In the end, they all boiled down to a few basic criticisms, which I kept in mind as I made my own appraisal. Here are the major problems people seem to have had with Marc Webb's "Amazing Spider-Man", along with my responses.

1. The reboot was too soon.

This more or less depends on your point of view. True, the last Spidey movie was in 2007, a mere five years ago - more than long enough to warrant another Spider-Man film; not exactly long enough to call for a complete reboot. On the other hand, I think a lot of people would agree that it's been more like eight years since the last GOOD Spider-Man film. I loved Raimi's work with the character, though I do criticize him on some minor points. But in the end, he really dropped the ball with Spider-Man 3, running a lot of good characters into the ground and painting himself into a corner with two hours of very messy plotting. In the end, whether a reboot was necessary per se is a matter of personal preference. But even if you think it wasn't necessary, is it fair to write off the new movie completely as a result? I don't believe it is.

2. We've heard it all before.

Yes and no. This is another interpretation of Spider-Man's origin story. But it's very different from Raimi's first Spider-Man film. More importantly, it's a well-done interpretation. At the heart of this "origin story" is Peter Parker's development from a somewhat geeky, trouble-making teen into a true hero. This transition happened far more quickly in Raimi's first movie, mainly because Maguire's Peter had a more strongly-developed moral compass to begin with. Neither version is objectively inferior in my opinion, but I do have a personal preference for the deep character drama achieved by Webb. The point is, yes, this is the spider-bite story again, but it's a good spider-bite story.

3. The hype about "secrets being revealed" was a big lie.

Yes, it was. This is most definitely not "the untold story". Significant-sounding lines from the trailers such as "Do you think what happened to you was an accident?" and "If you want the truth about your parents, Peter, then come and get it" didn't even feature, which I'll admit kind of annoyed me. That amounts to false advertising in my opinion. I was very happy with what I got, but it wasn't what I was promised. The thing is, there is some big mystery going on in this movie with Peter's parents. However, their story doesn't feature very heavily in this first movie. The elements of it that do were given away in the trailers. So don't bother watching this solely to find out more about Richard and Mary Parker. Their story will have to wait until the sequel.

4. The villain was weak.

My main problem with this film's take on Dr. Curtis Connors was that it diverged so heavily from the comics. The Connors I remember was an intriguing villain because he was a father and a husband who transformed himself into a monster in a quest for healing. Billy Connors and his mom aren't around here. Instead there's a bachelor, British-accented Connors who frequently runs the risk of going boldly where so many villains have gone before. Fortunately, Rhys Ifans' performance is good enough to prevent this happening most of the time. Connors' motivation makes sense overall, though little time is given to truly flesh it out. Perhaps if his mysterious connections to Norman Osborn had been explored in greater detail, he would have been more memorable.

5. The Lizard's design was flawed.

Most people who didn't care for the Lizard's look seem to describe it as "too human". The face certainly is. It wasn't really that scary. I've seen alternate designs which the production team ultimately abandoned which I think would have been a lot better. So basically I would agree with this criticism, but for me it was a minor quibble.

6. It had too much teenage angst and Twilight-esque drama.

Actually, it had none. The teenage interactions were more mature than I'm used to seeing in film or TV, with even Flash Thompson evolving from a typical bully into a likable character over time. There are a few moments of stereotypical rebellion from Peter, but they lead rapidly into the tragic events that change him, so they're quickly forgotten. Despite the early publicity saying that this movie would be "darker", I don't think I'd describe it that way. It's a little less cheesy and a little more gritty in parts, but there are enough moments of clever humor to give the viewer a break from the gradually building tension.

The Amazing Spider-Man does have flaws. But in my opinion, its good points are so good that they cancel out the missteps. Andrew Garfield brings the wisecracking, geeky, sometimes mischievous Peter Parker from the original comics to life better than anyone I've seen (or heard, in animation) thus far. He nails the sense of humor that was frequently lacking from Maguire's Spidey. I had my doubts about Emma Stone as Gwen, but her acting was superb as well. She and Garfield have great chemistry on screen, which bodes well for the future. Really all the main cast was terrific, but I must make a special mention of Dennis Leary's Captain Stacy. He truly did a fantastic job. The special effects in regard to Spider-Man's web-slinging and other stunts were breathtaking, and clever cinematography draws the audience into the action effortlessly. The music was forgettable for the most part, but served its purpose in the more dramatic scenes (much like the soundtrack to The Avengers).

In short, watching this movie was a delight for me as a long-time Spider-Fan, even with the memory of Raimi's better efforts fresh in my mind, and I'm very much looking forward to the sequel (teased at the end of this movie by an intriguing mid-credits scene). Worth buying, worth watching, and worth re-watching. It's a fun, engaging superhero film, and deserves to be judged on its own merits, which are considerable. Please don't let the unfair amount of negativity surrounding this movie scare you away from it. If you give it a chance, you won't be sorry.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


46 of 56 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fitting Reboot of a Comic Legend, November 26, 2012
By 
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
After watching the first five minutes of The Amazing Spiderman, I knew I was gonna like it; after the first hour (which includes a lot of exposition without being tedious) I actually preferred this one to the Raimi versions mainly cuz I think it possesses an intensity and believability that the previous films lacked.

Marvel seems to be producing more mature, rebooted versions of all their super-hero series and I actually prefer this variation on the Spider Man story as well, especially the disappearance of the pointless Mary Jane obsession (which always made me respect Spidey a little less). I suspect that a more scientifically savvy audience appreciates an ever evolving origins story and I also enjoyed the initial dealing-with-new-superpowers interlude which was very amusing and again just seemed a much more realistic reaction from Peter Parker to his new abilities. Exceptional performances for Peter and Gwen are what truly make this production stand out from every other action-packed big-budget flick out there, not to mention a truly scary and menacing super-villain causing some sequences to play a little like a horror film. The tragic loss of his uncle is intensely emotional making the motivation for becoming a vigilante seem more credible, while the use of fantasy tech to supplement his powers added to this as well. love Martin Sheen as uncle Ben, never been much of a Sally Fields fan but apparently the producers were looking for star power to offset the use of mostly unknowns in the starring roles (which I think was a stroke of brilliance by the way).

The FX action sequences are seamless, gorgeous, captivating and again convincing (hitting on this alot I know but I think it's an essential factor). It's the details that make the difference, like while on the job at dizzying heights getting a call on his cell from aunt May reminding him to pick up eggs on his way home. The wise-cracking Spidey is not only back but actually funny with flawless comedic timing throughout and the gratuitous Stan Lee cameo was priceless. This is a new Spider-man, a better one, one whom you will be emotionally invested in by the dramatic ending which brilliantly wraps up an all-around excellent, excellent film! :o)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars UNNECESSARY REBOOT, BUT STILL ENTERTAINING!, April 29, 2014
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
I'm a big fan of all three Raimi Spider Man films and when I heard they were doing a reboot I was skeptical, but being a fan of the character for over 40 years I decided to go see this film.

The Good: 1) We get the wisecracking Web Head from the comics, 2) The special effects are excellent, 3) A better Gwen Stacy. 4) Mechanical web shooters 5) The best Stan Lee Cameo ever!

The Bad: 1) This wisecracking Web Head is a little too mean spirited and Peter is way too cool to be the nerdy outcast from the comics. 2) The Lizard is poorly designed, he isn't sympathetic like in the comics and that takes a lot away from the character. He is much more interesting if he can't control his changing into The Lizard and having a family gives the character complexity. 3) They don't utilize the fact that his web shooters are mechanical and even though they weren't organic in the comic books, I prefer that route in the live action films. 6) When uncle Ben dies, it isn't heartfelt and Peter doesn't show enough emotion about it.

Toby McGuire may not have been the perfect wise cracker in the Raimi films, but he was engaging to watch when not in Spider Man mode. This was key to making a super hero film that was entertaining through out the entire film. (like Robert Downey as Iron Man).

I know a lot of people complained about Spider Man taking his mask off all the time, but if you think about it that mask would have to be extremely uncomfortable and hot, so I think that is just a realistic observation by the filmmakers, but some times emotions are needed to be seen and you can't see expressions through the mask.

The Amazing Spider Man is a very good film, but I won't watch it nearly as many times as the Raimi Spider Man films. It just isn't as much fun or as good. The Blu Ray has a very good transfer and some interesting bonus material, but nothing like the Raimi Spider man films received on their 2 disc DVD sets.

Looking forward to seeing Spider Man 2 on opening day. :-D

Update *** Went to see the 2nd film in this series and I was pretty disappointed. My review for that film will come soon.....

End of Update****
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Meh, February 27, 2013
By 
Terry Foster (Ann Arbor, MI USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Amazing Spider-Man (Four-Disc Combo: Blu-ray 3D/Blu-ray/DVD + UltraViolet Digital Copy) (Blu-ray)
Like quite a few others, I felt this reboot was kind of pointless. The previous trilogy is (for the most part) excellent and still fresh in our minds. This reboot doesn't really bring anything new to the table. Yes, the special effects are great and the 3D works well, but the previous trilogy still looks great, too. I have to admit that after seeing the trailers for this, I wasn't terribly excited to see it. They highlighted a lot of the corny humor from the movie and it didn't bode well to me. It turned out to be slightly better than I was expecting, but still rather forgettable. I didn't care much for the characters, especially the villain, which doesn't even really come across as a villain - just some monster that Spiderman has to take care of on his way to figuring out who he is. But the ride was still kind of fun.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars good amazing spiderman 3d movie, January 11, 2014
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Amazing Spider-Man (Four-Disc Combo: Blu-ray 3D/Blu-ray/DVD + UltraViolet Digital Copy) (Blu-ray)
It was a decent 3d movie. It also has about 10 minutes behind the scene special features about 3d in 3d.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A Great NEW LOOK AS A SUPER SPIDER!!, April 4, 2014
By 
Brenda K. Brooks (Gilbert, AZ United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
Great Movie and a much better actor playing the part of Spiderman.. Can't wait to see the next one!! You will love this fiilm
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Another movie for the collection!, April 3, 2014
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
Another keeper for our family movie night collection. This one is good for the older kids, but the littler ones enjoyed it too.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars 'Secrets have a cost. They're not free. Not now, not ever.', November 27, 2012
By 
Why we needed another Spiderman series after the recent (2002/2007) Tobey McGuire run is probably the same reason we keep getting remakes of foreign films (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, etc): they make money. And it looks like the public will never tire of Marvel Comic Book stories, so might as well settle in and give them a try. It is an evening's entertainment approaching 3 hours of visual shenanigans that are pretty entertaining.

There are some differences between this Spiderman and the last - aside from cast: the stories are different although they both claim to show the origin of this magic transformation of a lonely confused young man trying to figure out who he is until he discovers some super secrets and the power to change into a humanoid spider-gifted hero. It all starts out well enough - Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is shy and unable to relate to about everyone except his aunt and uncle (Sally Field and Martin Sheen do a fine job here). He fails at a run-in with the high school bully Flash (a hunky and promising Chris Zylka), is noticed by the perky Gwen (Emma Stone) who is involved in Peter's introduction to scientist Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) who is an old friend of Peter's strangely disappeared father (Campbell Scott) and mother (Embeth Davidtz). Peter is smart, discovers a formula in his father's briefcase, and ultimately is able to transform himself into Spiderman - his nemesis being The Lizard who is actually Dr. Connors taking a potent experimental solution. After a lot of flying around on buildings and throwing spider web tendrils at everything including The Lizard, Peter is hunted as a threat until Gwen's policeman father (Denis Leary) eventually bonds with the insecure Peter in a life saving situation. Then we are given footage of what is up for the sequel...

The human (read `credible') parts work the best - Garfield and Stone make a fine pair and Sheen and Field give fine cameos. Once the transformation takes place the film becomes a lesson in special effects and that is fun enough to watch. It just goes on far too long...and there is more to come. Makes you wonder when the next cycle of Spiderman will come along. Grady Harp, November 12
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Good 3D Spider Man Movie., December 3, 2013
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Amazing Spider-Man (Four-Disc Combo: Blu-ray 3D/Blu-ray/DVD + UltraViolet Digital Copy) (Blu-ray)
classic movie story, as usual the Spider man movies are good, I wanted the 3D movie also. This is a newer story, I like this one also. Acting was good, effects were great. I liked the 3D effects in this movie also, that is always important to me. Glad I bought this movie.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


188 of 276 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The 'Amazing' in the title is justified, July 2, 2012
By 
Tommy Sixx Morais (The Great White North) - See all my reviews
There are only so many ways you can tell a superhero story, especially through a movie and you have the dodgy task of taking a popular superhero with the elements of his story try to breathe new life into it and adapt it to the big screen in a way that can reach a wide audience; families, kids, teenagers, adults and generations while at the same time making it appeal to the die hard superfans and collectors. This is the hard task that the 2012 reboot of the Spider-Man franchise The Amazing Spider-Man is attempting to achieve.

Superhero films have received a revival in interest new since the first decade of the new millennium and throughout the 2000's to the current day. It's become a popular trend in Hollywood and already we've seen plenty of superheros head to the big screen; some with great mainstream success at the box office (X-Men, Spider-Man, Batman) and some poorly received (Daredevil, Superman Returns, Green Lantern). Spider-man is one of those superhero characters that caught on most as a movie franchise and was successful enough to spawn two sequels. The trilogy of Spidey films of the 00's was mostly well received but when attempts of re-singing actors for a fourth title failed there was only two options: 1) Give up on making more Spider-Man films in the near foreseeable future or 2) Get some fresh faces to replace the already established actors and come up with an alternate take on the story of one of the greatest Marvel characters and superheroes of all time. This reboot is a different Spider-man altogether and in this case it's actually a good thing. Garfield as Spider-Man was what was going to make or break this movie and his Peter Parker is a fresh one with slight twists that I think audiences will approve of. The retelling of the Spiderman story works here because they did an actual reboot, using the same characters and comic universe but it's a different take it's obviously not a remake yet it's not a re-imagining either being that this character has already plenty of history to chose from. If you watched any of the 3 previous ones you will be able to tell that the angle and tone they have here are very different. The back story already is quite different, they explain more about Peter Parker's parents, in this one his love interest is Gwen Stacy not Mary Jane Watson (and very different from the Gwen Stacy we saw in 2007's Spider-Man 3 too), the villain (Dr. Curtis "Curt" Conors/The Lizard), the way the events happen (how Peter gains his powers etc.) is not quite the same and the way its presented is unique which is all a plus in my book.

A lot of us were wondering how Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) would fare as the lead role compared to Tobey McGuire (as if there weren't going to be any comparisons) and that it would directly make the biggest impact on the fate (and perhaps sequels) of this reboot. I must say I was impressed. MacGuire was cast for the trilogy of Spider-Man films from 2002-07 and I think most would say Tobey pulled off the job really well, came off as likeable and people tend to identify him in his role of the spandex web-slinger. Looking back McGuire was suitable and a good choice for the role but Garfield brings something else to the table, portrays the role different with more flair, more attitude. Not as shy and innocent as Macguire's portrayal of Spidey. Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man you can sense from the get-go is in ways better or improved on MacGuire's if comparisons must be made. He doesn't look as weak, is a bit more like the High-Schooler you would imagine, has the smart comments, is more aggressive and is taller and fills the suit better. Enough has been said, Garfied makes a rather convincing Peter Parker, student and Peter Parker as the masked hero. Those are both different Spider-Man overall, different takes on the same character and each have their positives but in the end I think I'd take Garfied over McGuire any day (no disrespect to Tobey intended I thought his take on the role was excellent and certainly put his stamp on the character). Emma Stone was very believable as Gwen Stacy and has that edge of the character she portrays and she looks the part, she has actual chemistry with Garfield and although we know her more for her comedy acting roles (Superbad, House Bunny, Easy A and others) she has no problem playing a more serious role and I could well see her do more of this type of acting. Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Fields) were nicely cast although I had grown very fond of the actors who played them in the trilogy of Spidey films and thought they were more effective than they are here. Rhys Ifanswas fantastic as Dr. Curt Conors/The Lizard and although there are lots of special effects for his transformation to being the Lizard I thought the human counterpart was played quite well and made his background story come through nicely. Also notable was Denis Leary as Captain George Stacy, Gwen's father.

The fighting and action scenes are probably the greatest improvements over the first 3 titles. Not that it was bad in any of those films but the way they captured the action in this one was fantastic and simply superior and are bad-er and mean-er. Those sequences were well executed which is important in a superhero movie. The stunts came off looking somewhat less surreal yet amazing to watch. Instead of the hero shooting web from his wrists they go back to the original story with the artificial web-shooters which was a good idea. We even manage to feel something for the villain and the Lizard's backstory was always one of my favorites and the character looks fantastic on the big screen with details and texture; this is one cool looking villain, I cannot imagine Lizard being done better. I was very happy when they chose Kurt Conors as the villain and the result turned out fantastic, at least they didn't take one of the previously seen villains for this first chapter in the cinematic saga. Not that I'm against using a previous bad guy again but someone else was a good choice to begin. Something that I thought was particularly great is that we saw Peter Parker as a child a further glimpse at what made him who he is. In fact the first few minutes are of an "origin of Peter Parker" scene that gives the viewer more insight on the character. What they did with the story, the hero, the villain, the romance, the stunts is commendable, especially considering that this is taking an already successful movie franchise and trying to revive and do something different yet interesting with it that would keep fans an moviegoers excited about it.

On a quick note I don't have much to say on the film's 3D probably because while it's not bad, it's not a big presence and the focus was mostly on the story and as a result there are very few times when the 3D stands out in any way.

There are similarities between this film and the original Spider-Man but there is plenty of differences too (there's only so much you can change) and it doesn't come off as watching the same movie twice this series is moving forwards. Ultimately the fans will decide how this film will go down in movie history (and superhero movie history). All I have to say is I got my money and time's worth with The Amazing Spiderman, I was certainly not disappointed, I was pleasantly surprised and found it very enjoyable; definitely worthy of the "Summer Blockbuster" title. It think it's safe to say that the "amazing" in the title very well reflects the viewing experience as a whole and that this is one that fans and non-fans will enjoy. The highest rating, highest recommendation. *****
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2186 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

Details

Search these reviews only
Rate and Discover Movies
Send us feedback How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you? Let us know here.