Sorry, this movie sucks
As Good As It Gets
This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.
Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
When I first heard about this reboot, I wondered "Why?" Then, after seeing some press about it, I decided to give it a chance. After seeing the movie, I can now confidently say, "Why?" Don't get me wrong, I think Andrew Garfield makes an excellent Spider-Man and I always like seeing Emma Stone act, but this movie doesn't really add anything new to the franchise. In fact, at times it feels like the same movie as the first Spider-Man. I like The Amazing Spider-Man, but it's not really that. . .wait for it. . .amazing. Boom! See what I did there?
This movie is one of the most forgettable, boring cash grabs I've ever seen. As a fan of the original Spiderman movies, I was sorely disappointed seeing this. The acting is truly atrocious and the music is so bland I can't remember a single track from the film. Everything from the characters and the plot is so cliche it's hard to handle how lazy it is.I can say some good things about this, however. The cinematography is better than I imagined, and the special effects look good. The sound desingn is also alright. That's it.I wanted to like this movie, but I just couldn't. Don't spend your money to buy a copy of this, it really isn't worth it.
'The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)' promises the 'untold story' and yet gives us largely the same origin as before, oddly borrowing some specific elements that surely wouldn't be included if they hadn't been in the '2002' incarnation, while removing most of the connecting tissue between the events and thus severely reducing their impact. Peter Parker - here, a skate-boarding hipster who's idea of awkward is to talk too much but always manage to say the right thing - is bitten by a random spider, that isn't set up as being genetically modified, while visiting a lab and within a couple of scenes he is crawling about the walls with ease. It's almost like they couldn't be bothered to retell the origin story and so decided to rush through it, making the entire endeavour rather redundant as it's almost assumed you've seen the prior trilogy anyway. Even when the web-slinging action starts - which is well done for the most part and compounded by some believable visual effects - you just don't care. Plus, it doesn't help that the film is painfully generic, too, both in terms of the story-telling and the directing. At with least Raimi's trilogy, even when it was at it's worst it was still interesting. 5/10
I was deeply unhappy when I heard about the filming of The Amazing Spider-Man, I believe in original ideas and with something as broad as Spiderman at least giving it a decent length of time before "Rebooting".It was too soon, the quality of the McGuire trilogy is irrelevant it was simply too soon to be starting again. Yet another origin story, another introduction to Gwen, another uncle Ben death scene and another villian.Andrew Garfield is dull, he simply didn't cut it as Spiderman and I consider Emma Stone to be one of the most overrated actresses in Hollywood so the newly reborn franchise wasn't off to a great start in my eyes.So at over two hours at least they gave the movie a chance to shine, alas it doesn't though it's not the complete train wreck I expected.In this outing (And origin) Parker takes on The Lizard played by the always excellent Rhys Ifans who is simply too good for this movie.It has its moments but for $230 million it damn well should have had considerably more.The Good:Crane scene was greatLizard looked decentDennis Leary & Rhys IfansThe Bad:I really don't like Andrew GarfieldWeak soundtrackWas simply too soon after the last "Reboot"Things I Learnt From This Movie:Some Lizards can grow limbs back at will...........at will!?Along with super powers spider bites also provide personalities