Customer Reviews


1,993 Reviews
5 star:
 (933)
4 star:
 (486)
3 star:
 (271)
2 star:
 (137)
1 star:
 (166)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


435 of 530 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 22 months ago by Kyle Shultz

versus
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Stale and uninteresting.
It's amazing to me the following these movies have. It's not that the movies are so terrible but that they are just barely adequate. There's no point to this series. There's a reason I stick to the cartoon and comics. They simply can't make a good Spidey series all the way through. The Tobey series lost all my interest because it got way too crazy but even those first two...
Published 1 month ago by soundstudio


‹ Previous | 1 2200 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

435 of 530 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


50 of 60 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


9 of 10 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 5 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Stale and uninteresting., August 17, 2014
It's amazing to me the following these movies have. It's not that the movies are so terrible but that they are just barely adequate. There's no point to this series. There's a reason I stick to the cartoon and comics. They simply can't make a good Spidey series all the way through. The Tobey series lost all my interest because it got way too crazy but even those first two movies haven't aged well. The movie looks nice here but that's about where the good ends. The acting I found to be passable but it had it's fair share of over the top moments. The action, there's not much to say, it's very forgettable.

Spidey seems to do some more wise cracking but that's one of the few things they got right. They don't even have the photography aspect with the daily bugle which is a huge part of the character. I didn't care about Gwen Stacey, never have never will. I guess basically this movie is just pointless. They do the origin story again but it's not as good. After that we get some annoying romance and a fight with the lizard. Skip this series but if you're a Spidey fan you already knew that didn't you.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars This deal worked for us!, May 3, 2014
By 
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
My 9 year old is into Spider-Man, so he wanted to buy this movie on amazon, so I opted for this package and it worked fine. They sent us an email with a code and I went online to schedule us to see Spider-Man 2 (I still had to pay $6 - fandango charges a $2.50 handling fee) We saw Spider-Man 2 today and it was pretty good! We liked it better than the first one. I guess we also get $5 off Spider-Man 2 when it comes into amazon prime, which is good cuz we'll probably get it. REALLY good CGI effects!
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


4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Ok as a standalone diversion, but unnecessary, inferior and one of the weakest superhero films of late, July 8, 2012
Considering this film both as a standalone and in comparison to the previous series, the discerning viewer will likely keep asking the same question many others disappointed by it are asking - why? The entire production screamed mediocre, despite another sprawling budget. I kept trying to consider performances both on their own and inevitably in comparison to the other films - since, after all, they were just released a few years ago. I felt virtually every actor and actress lead in the first film was stronger. I love much of Sally Field's work, but she felt completely miscast in this movie. Andrew Garfield was fine as Spiderman, but in my opinion not nearly as engaging or interesting as Tobey Maguire. Martin Sheen is hard to beat, but frankly I would probably still argue Uncle Ben was better played by Cliff Robertson.

The storyline itself (and its minor changes) felt thrown together. I thought numerous aspects of this film felt like they were designed to directly compete with the previous series - which also undermines uncritical fans who keep claiming comparisons aren't fair. In my opinion this film often felt like it was trying to compete with the earlier series. For example. . .

(Minor spoilers ahead)

Before the closing credits there are extended scenes of Spiderman web slinging around the city, moving between buildings, etc. We saw this sort of thing in the previous series . . .however in this one the tricks and stunts he performs are pushed to the extreme and just looked, in my opinion, ridiculous. . .and the CGI doesn't keep up. Those scenes and some of the fighting have that "speeded up" CGI look - I suspect you know what I mean. Think back to Spiderman 3 - I felt it suffered from it as well. Too much is going on and it starts to look like old 1950s stop motion. Some of the fight scenes just did not look convincing. Compare this film's CGI to the climatic scenes in "The Avengers" - the quality is, in my opinion, very different.

I was also left a little perplexed as to why the Lizard was chosen as the main villain. Granted, they were trying to do a few things differently (far too few, in my opinion), but the Lizard? I do not read comic books anymore, but I do not recall the Lizard being a key villain while I was growing up. . .even the Beetle might have been a better choice. That's just a personal opinion - I think the larger issue was the manner in which the character was developed in the script. Rhys Ifans does what he can with the material and he is clearly a competent actor, but I found little interesting about the overall portrayal of the villain of this film. I was never quite sure I understood why he was executing his dastardly plan, and frankly didn't care. This movie eventually just lost me..

I watch a lot of movies, but I have zero loyalty to the first Spiderman series. I evaluated this film first on its own merits, and then in comparison to the other films - which are both inevitable things to do. If the previous films had never been made, this film would still feel like a very weak link in what has been a surprisingly good 2012 summer movie season. There was little that was "amazing" - though overall it isn't terrible. . .ultimately it just felt like a pure Hollywood money grab. It reminds me of some of Roland Emmerich's films, which I always wanted to love but ultimately felt a bit betrayed by. Granted, every mainstream film is ultimately about making money, but are the highest paid writers in Hollywood this incapable of either originality or improvement? Jeez the Marvel, DC and assorted other comic universes are huge. Please, at least pick something original to the screen and write a script worth watching.
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
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


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Superhero movies don't always have to be dark, July 1, 2014
Out of all five live screen adaptations of Spider-Man we've had at this point in time, The Amazing Spider-Man is my least favorite Spider-Man movie. Yes, I hate this more than Spider-Man 3. Yes, I know it would be redundant to copy and paste the 2002 Spider-Man movie, but the character is nowhere near as dark as Batman. My favorite thing about this movie is Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy. She is MILES better than Bryce Dallas Howard. Howard wasn't the problem though, it was the story and script. Stone's Gwen Stacy is much more interesting and competent. Honestly, there is nothing much else I like about this movie. I certainly missed Danny Elfman who composed the first two Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies. I feel this is a love or hate movie. I, unfortunately, hate it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Bad, Long, Boring, Barely 3D, No Chemistry, November 28, 2012
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)
When I saw this film in IMAX 3D my friend who came with me feel asleep half way through. That pretty much sums it all up.

The direction was horrendous. There was no chemistry whatsoever between any of the characters and given the caliber of the cast, it wasn't their fault. The choice of Andrew was way off. The dialog in some scenes was amateurish at best.

The action was TV level quality and too few for an action film.

The 3D when I saw it in IMAX 3D was flat. I even took the glasses off several times to make sure, and I could have easily watched the film without all the way through. On this Blu Ray, it's the same. Flat, barely evident at any time. The teaser trailer had more depth!

The best scene was the last 22 seconds where you almost have a POV of Spider-Man as he shoots through I construction crane. Then it ends.

This would be Spider-Boy, not man. We've yet to see in any of the offerings a grown character that has some purpose in society. The story is old, and done 1000X better by Raimi.

But ultimately, I'm the fool. I've basically spent over $40 on a film I just want to step on and throw out an open window! Lean from me, don't believe the over-hyped (probably fake) reviews where some have given this 4 and 5 stars. Are they touched in the head, or just getting paid to write positive reviews?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2200 | 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.