The Amazing Spiderman Review

Let me just start out by expressing my love for the Sam Raimi Spiderman movies.  Excluding the third, his Spiderman movies are some of my favorite superhero movies ever made.  As a result, I really didn’t feel that this franchise needed to be rebooted and I was concerned it would be a straight remake, which thankfully this isn’t.  While I wouldn’t describe this new Spiderman movie as “amazing” for a few reasons, it is a much better film then I expected but still isn’t different or ambitious enough to justify restarting this franchise so soon.

After being bitten by a spider that gave him arachnid like abilities, brilliant loner Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) searches for answers about his father’s life work while protecting the city as the masked hero Spiderman.  Due to my loyalty to the Raimi Spiderman films, I had a lot of trouble envisioning anyone other then Tobey Maguire playing Spiderman, but in retrospect I will admit Maguire was an odd choice for the role and Garfield’s Peter Parker seems to be the superior version of the character.  Actually, I felt that much of the casting in this movie was better then in the Raimi films.  Emma Stone does very well as the love interest Gwen Stacy, and Martin Sheen’s Uncle Ben is one of the best parts of the film, as this new Uncle Ben is a much funnier and lovable character than the one in the first movie.

As far as the actual content of this film, my overall impression was everything in it was fine.  The action sequences in this movie were satisfying, but not particularly robust or memorable.  The villain in this film served his purpose, but was not very interesting or deep, especially when you compare him to past villains like Norman Osborn or Dr. Otto Octavius.  Even the climax of this film did not have much of an effect on me despite the fact that the stakes were so high going into it.  Quite possibly, this is because, in a lot of ways, I have seen this movie before, and despite a different villain and a few changes in characters, it is impossible to shake the feeling that this is very similar to the Raimi films, but ultimately not as successful as those films were.

Had the Raimi films never existed, it would be much easier to like this movie.  Since this movie is really not a different or edgy take on the Spiderman story, it is hard to escape the fact that you know his origin story going in, so nothing really has the impact it did in Spiderman.  This movie had the potential to change the tone of Spiderman movies for the better, but in the end it just settled for changing the actors.

Rating: 3 out of 5

24 thoughts on “The Amazing Spiderman Review

  1. Steve July 21, 2012 / 1:22 pm

    I’m sorry but they’re not getting my money. Absolutely no justification for this movie other than to take the money of superhero addicts. What’s in it for me at this point so soon after the others? Nothing.

    • Andrew King July 21, 2012 / 5:33 pm

      It’s a little more of the same, with new actors. Pretty good, but nothing “amazing” really.

    • Eric Paolini July 21, 2012 / 9:23 pm

      I have avoided this version because of the money grab aspect. I don’t know why but Sony had to reboot this franchise otherwise it would lose the rights back to Disney who now owns Marvel. How that agreement was reached is beyond me but we will be forced to see more Spiderman than necessary. The fact that this was successful in the box office all but assures more Andrew Garfield Spidermans.

      • Andrew King July 21, 2012 / 9:34 pm

        I have also heard that there would be more, and I actually would see another Andrew Garfield Spiderman, but I would hope is was a little better then this one. That being said I am not sure it would be as Mark Webb will not be the director for the next one even though I thought he did a good job visually.

  2. ergohence July 21, 2012 / 2:27 pm

    It’s interesting to have the perspective of a loyal Raimi fan. I was quick to disregard those films and thought the new tone and direction were far superior. For a long time Spiderman 2 was one of my favorite superhero movies, but I don’t think it holds up against the improvements to the genre of the last decade and certainly not to the portrayal of Garfeild’s Peter parker.

    • Andrew King July 21, 2012 / 5:36 pm

      There are things about the new film that are much improved for sure, but I felt that as a complete movie the first and second were better. I think if you went and compared Spiderman 2 to this new one, something that I plan to do in the near future, I think Spiderman 2 would hold up quite well, mostly because it was very story driven, and I believe it told a much better story then The Amazing Spiderman.

  3. ianthecool July 21, 2012 / 5:56 pm

    You’re right, this may nhave been more enjoyable without the other films. Or not. Peter Parker was pretty whiny.

    • Andrew King July 21, 2012 / 5:57 pm

      He seems a little less whiny in this one I thought and a little more “brooding”. I do really like the first few films.

  4. sirenscalling July 22, 2012 / 8:15 pm

    I saw this movie last week, and it wasn’t the movie I had trouble with. The theatre I saw it at was terrible! the had issues with camera half the time and the sound was turned up twice as loud as it needed to be. I would’ve been happier watching it off my computer at home!

    All in all, I felt like this movie moved very slowly, and it was hard to keep my attention focused on the screen compared to say, the phone in my pocket. I liked the actors much better, though that isn’t saying much cause I was much younger during the last Spiderman explosion. I DO remember the crazy guy with the robot arms (Octavius?), but hey, I think I was eight. Only so much I’d remember.

    I do think it was a good idea to change the villain, but it didn’t anything new or better to the table. Scientist goes crazy, uses his ideas on himself, wreaks havoc. I almost would’ve been happier if Godzilla was seen rampaging the city, but all I got was a mini Godzilla with split personality issues.

    I definitely agree with the three stars.

    • Andrew King July 22, 2012 / 8:24 pm

      I’m glad it was not a rehashing of all the old material, but I thought the new villain was kind of weak. What I would say is most of the things I liked about this movie were on a scene to scene basis, while the Raimi movies were better complete packages. Of all of them my favorite is the second because I thought Dr. Octavius, or “Doc Ock” was really one of the best characters in the series.

  5. Ashley Hagood July 23, 2012 / 1:03 am

    I agree. I suppose it would be very cool to have a completely new take on Spider-man after the Raimi films — after another decade goes by, please! — but this one had too much of the same in terms of the balance between humor and darkness, etc. It needed to have a vastly different “feel” than the Raimi films to be worth it, in my opinion. And like you said, villains like Dr. Octavius were much more intriguing and had more depth than the Lizard. I hadn’t thought of that bit… great point!

    • Andrew King July 23, 2012 / 1:19 am

      Having just watched Spiderman 2 around an hour ago, I have to say it isn’t perfect but it does hold up pretty well, and in my opinion has a much better sense of humor than this film.

  6. Mike July 23, 2012 / 2:12 am

    I have no plans on seeing this and to be honest, will not likely rent it either. It just doesn’t make sense to reboot this franchise at this point. I did catch part of the Raimi directed part 3 today on TV, wow, not good at all. Nice write-up on the new film though.

    • Andrew King July 23, 2012 / 2:24 am

      I really didn’t like the third one, but actually today I watched my favorite of the films, the second one, and actually I am feeling a little more that a reboot is justifiable, because although I love those movies, it is amazing how quickly they begin to look dated, even though it still is a little soon for the reboot.

      • Mike July 23, 2012 / 4:16 am

        Good point on them looking dated. My wife and I got a laugh at how bad the floating skateboard scene was during the 3rd film. It just looked so badly done.

      • Andrew King July 23, 2012 / 10:57 am

        That third was just a disaster in my opinion. And such a let down, I thought it would be so good.

      • Mike July 23, 2012 / 4:08 pm

        After the second film, which I enjoyed, I felt the series ran out of steam. I sure wish Raimi would go back to his roots and do some more horror.

      • Andrew King July 23, 2012 / 4:24 pm

        Funny you say that, because as I watched this film with a friend and fellow blogger, we both saw it actually had some horror sensibilities to it, particularly in the hospital scene where they try to remove the metal arms from Octavius. If you revisit it I am sure you will see it as well.

  7. booksaremyrealities July 23, 2012 / 7:03 am

    I have not seen it as i am hesitant to go and see it as well.. it does not sound inviting.. i mean i heard friends say that it is boring, probably because we have seen movies like it before they just added some twist here.

    • Andrew King July 23, 2012 / 10:59 am

      It is pretty standard I would say, the reason to watch it would be the writing is pretty good and there are a few scenes that I found very memorable. Other then that, I’d say rent it maybe.

      • booksaremyrealities July 24, 2012 / 3:44 am

        yes i might go and rent it and watch it… i am still curious still as to how it differs from the other spider man movies.

    • Andrew King July 24, 2012 / 7:39 pm

      Thanks for reading. It’s always good to have someone validate your opinion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s