'The Amazing Spider-Man' Review By Forrestgump1

It's definitely not "Amazing" in anyway, borrowing much of its major plot points from Sam Rami's version also suffering from a mediocre Villain. Garfield was a good fit for the role. But the film ultimately just does not compare to past spidey adventures
  • OVERALL
    2.5
    WORTHY
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
Its been only 11 years since Sam Rami's 2001 hit "Spider Man" hit theaters and paved way for the new era of superhero films. That was followed up buy (arguably one of the best sequels of the decade) "Spider Man 2" and then in 2007 (only a mere 5 years ago) "Spider Man 3" broke Box Office Records. Now when i would think we would we be discussing and reviewing Sam Rami's Spider Man 4, were instead talking about a completely different story and basically a reboot or remake. Replacing Maguire and adding Andrew Garfield was probably the only good thing i could really protest about the film. Although i still see Spider Man as being Toby Maguire's character. Andrew was a good fit. But the film follows way to much in the shadow of Sam Rami's beloved version. My biggest problem of all was the death scene of Uncle Ben, In Spider Man when it happened it felt genuine heartfelt and i wanted to cry, When Ben cries out one last time for Peter. In this?...well needless to say it was dreadful and awful, the scene felt really rushed and uninspired and that is when the film in general started to lose my attention. My next dilemma i had with the film, is the presence of an actual villain... I mean the Lizard? come on!. There was no other better more capable villain..worthy of taking on the mask crusader. Apparently not. Its clear now that director Marc Webb was in way over his head while directing this film, instead focusing on the relationship between Peter and Gwen and his Aunt and Uncle rather than the fight sequences audiences are paying for..we know the story. With a few minor exceptions The Amazing Spider-Man was all to the same and was truly not needed.

Story: (3/5) - This film being advertised as the untold story, Is stretching the truth a little. I mean take away the Green Goblin and Mary Jane, pretty much this film is identical. Although it adds the fact that Peter Parker is a skater and the idea of how he discovered his powers (this time on a train). While Audiences are completely familiar with the Gwen Stacy love story (she did appear in Spider-Man 3). That really gets highlighted on here. It also leaves out Norman Osborne and Harry. This film Peter really did not have a best friend to rely on and talk with. Acting: (4/5) - the performances were probably the best thing about the film..other than some minor instances (Stan Lee's Cameo). But Andrew Garfield (Social Network) truly shows off his acting chops here. While Emma Stone is always beautiful and fits the character as well, if there is one thing, the team behind Amazing Spider-Man should be thrilled about..is the casting. Directing: (2.5/5) - Marc Webb's last film was the romantic comedy 500 Days of Summer. That movie was fantastic. He truly shows how much 'love' is in this movie choosing to focus more in-depth on the relationships between Aunt and Uncle and Peter and Gwen. While those scenes are shot fairly well, the action sequences were kind of bland. Visuals (4/5) - i opted for the 3D version of this film, because the trailer had done a good job at persuading me while its not perfect. Its still did a terrific job using the 3D to its advantage.

Overall (2.5/5) - It's definitely not "Amazing" in anyway, borrowing much of its major plot points from Sam Rami's version also suffering from a mediocre Villain. Garfield was a good fit for the role. But the film ultimately just does not compare to past spidey adventures. Im sorry for all those Spider-Man fans out there who were hoping for the next best thing, sadly the film fails to equip any memorable qualities that we loved so much about the original. But i do have hopes for the future in this spidey franchise, after a brief scene in the credits. I believe the sequel will fare much better, because it won't touch as much on the relationship aspect, but more on the action and story-telling aspect, and just in fact maybe have a Villain worthy to grace the screen with our web-hero. Some of the story's aspect work like the back story to Peter's parents, but even those little things still felt to much of all the same and Green Goblin (in my opinion) was a way better opponent to our hero, than some dumb Lizard. Even Doc OC was a better foe than Lizard. If the film had a more reliable and fun Villain i may be writing a different review. So as it stands to reason i did not really care for this version of our web hero, but lets hope in the future of this new franchise that we can get a story worth telling on the big screen.

C

ReviewedByNate

RatedPG13

RunTime138mins

Thanks For Stopping Buy ...

Do you like this review?

Comments (8)

  1. T. King (Red Camera Man)

    @forrestgump1: Good review. This movie didn't appeal that much for me either. I too agree about Uncle Ben's death scene. I didn't feel anything during that scene in this movie. His death scene in the 2002 film was way more sad and emotional.

    2 years agoby @redcameramanFlag

  2. Dark-White-Knight

    I strongly agree on your thought about Uncle Ben's death scene, less of an impact that was shown in the original Spiderman, there was no last comment or statement Uncle Ben said to Peter, which to me was a huge negative, where it affected the film, well for me of course. I really didn't feel sympathetic for this spiderman time around, but still an enjoyable film.

    2 years agoby @Dark-White-KnightFlag

  3. Corey W.

    @forrestgump1 I'm not upset, I just think your points for not liking it are stupid. I don't understand how someone can not like a film because it has similarities w/ Raimi's version. Of course it's gonna have similarities, they are both adapted from the same comic-book. But hey, to each his own.

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag

  4. Forrestgump1

    @corey i apologize if i made you upset with my review..i just could not get into it..and i see your points..and im glad you enjoyed it..it just was not for me.

    2 years agoby @forrestgump1Flag

  5. Dan

    Good review.

    2 years agoby @dan1Flag

  6. Corey W.

    And they used the Lizard first because he was Spidey's first big foe. Lizard came before Goblin and all the others. It's part of the story.

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag

  7. Corey W.

    And Spider-Man came out in 2002, not 2001.

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag

  8. Corey W.

    How was it borrowing plot points when it's based off a comic-book? In no way was this identical to 2002 version. This wasn't a remake either. It was a reboot, and one that was far cleaner than Rami's. This one took it's time w/ the origin while the 2002 flick rushed a little. It was a good film but this one is far superior.

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag