Free The Amazing Spider-Man
Genres: ActionThrillerAdvent
Starring: Campbell Scott, Rhys Ifans, Andrew Garfield, Sally Field, Emma Stone, C. Thomas Howell, Denis Leary
Available Quality: DivX, Hi Def, Hi Def
Director(s): Marc Webb
Country: USA
Year: 2012
Like most teenagers, Peter is trying to figure out who he is and how he got to be the person he is today. Peter is also finding his way with his first high school crush, Gwen Stacy, and together, they struggle with love, commitment, and secrets. As Peter discovers a mysterious briefcase that belonged to his father, he begins a quest to understand his parents disappearance - leading him directly to Oscorp and the lab of Dr Curt Connors, his fathers former partner. As Spider-Man is set on a collision course with Connors alter-ego, The Lizard, Peter will make life-altering choices to use his powers and shape his destiny to become a hero.
 |
The Amazing Spider-Man (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1920x800 px | Total Size: 7110 Mb |
|
|
 |
The Amazing Spider-Man (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1280x530 px | Total Size: 6648 Mb |
|
|
 |
The Amazing Spider-Man (DivX) | Resolution: 640x272 px | Total Size: 699 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "The Amazing Spider-Man". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
KoreanPenguin (23 May 2013)
Andrew Garfunkel
This is just my opinion But I'm convinced Andrew Garfield is a betterPeter Parker than Toby MaguireÂGo ahead and shoot me, punch me,whatever, I think you are all wrong, I loved this movie.I also saw it in Ecuador, with Spanish subtitles, but I still loved it.It really was a return to the Spiderman of the Marvel comic bookseries. In the original franchise, I felt like the movement from highschool-to- college was really fast, but The Amazing Spiderman seemed tostring them together so well. Not to mention the wrist-mounted webshooters. The only thing that felt extremely rushed was how quickly heput his costume together.Did I mention how great Gwen Stacy, played by Emma Stone, was? I hearda wonderful quote, "Mary Jane (MJ) fell in love with Spiderman, butGwen Stacy fell in love with Peter Parker." Isn't that wonderful? Alsovery true!Back to Andrew Garfield played this wonderfully quirky, sarcastic,clever, but clearly doomed to be geeky Spiderman that I felt like theoriginal franchise was just missing somewhere. I couldn't get over howmuch I enjoyed seeing this rendition of the webbed wonder. Rhys Ifansplays The Lizard, and while he wasn't my favorite comic book movievillain, he definitely played a majorly important role in continuing tohelp mold Peter Parker's character. There is an element of mystery inthis movie that I really enjoyed, and although I also felt like thefight scenes were a bit rushed, it ended up being a great movie in theend.***SPOILER ALERT***I was not at all impressed by Peter promising Captain Stacy he wouldleave Gwen alone, as the man was goring out, and dying, to thensuddenly go back on his word There needed to be another element ofresolution to help us get to that point Oh well ***SPOILER ALERT ENDING***The Amazing Spiderman amazingly got a 8/10 in my book.
Tanner Friess (22 May 2013)
Spiderman at its best!
This was spider man at its bests! I sat through the whole movie wantingit to continue! This was way better then the other movies! Great choicefor the characters and they couldn't if cast it better! Can't wait forthe next movie!!! Defiantly going back again! Their was literally nobad parts! But if you go to the movie make sure you stay for thecredits they show a Scence clueing into the next movie!! Their is greatgraphics in this movie as well! The storyline was great throughout themovie and clear! You would think that the movie was going to be badbecause the changed story , but, it was not that different!!!!!! Onceagain this was a great movie , great character and a great and clearstoryline! This is a great movie for all ages and I can't wait for thenext movie!
Pdk3800 (16 May 2013)
A solid winner, best spider man movie to date
In early summer 2007, Sam Raimi directed the 3rd and final film,Spiderman 3. With it's disappointment, Marc Webb,decided to retell thestory in a different way. And it works. Should he have waited.Yes. Was it good. No. It was Great.Originally, I intended not to see this film, I was out of spider man.But it grew on me as its anticipation rose as well. The acting was incredible, the action was incredibleIf you haven't seen it, go now. I would also like to mention that ifthis was the untold story, then it would need more explanation inspider man 3.You'll see why when you see it
Mek Torres (16 May 2013)
A Credible World
For some people, it's questionable for Spider-Man to get a reboot. Thefirst film of Sam Raimi's version was just a decade ago and someconsidered it as a cult classic. Though, one might complain for notbeing too faithful to the comic books. The first film rushes a lot tothe story. Like, Mary Jane was already the love interest and PeterParker immediately left High School. This edition tries to be a lotmore faithful to the comic book. The result is great. The film worksbetter in the drama. The pacing may be too quick in some parts but it'sstill fun and heartwarming as it suppose to be.If you've already seen the 2002 version of Spider-Man then definitelyyou won't find a lot of thing here new. The only things that are newhere is Peter Parker's father and the new ways how Spidey's powerswork. Unlike the original Spider-Man stories, the use of his powers isnot as simple as it looks. Here, he needs a device to shoot a webperfectly. He accidentally sticks at objects. He always cause a lot ofdamage. But it looks credible. What's more credible is when he wasn'tquite a professional swinger at his first fights.In some parts, it paces way too quickly and sometimes it feels rushed.This happens in the third act and the montages when Peter wasdeveloping his costume. The rest is pretty fine, but the quickness ofthe pacing of those parts is still noticeable. There are also partsthat feels forced like Dr. Conners becoming evil because he became theLizard. Aside from those, the film is good in drama. It has plenty ofgenuine emotion and heart. Even in the action scenes. One thing thatnever fails is the message of being a hero. It's not always aboutfighting crimes and saving the day. It's all about the hero'scharacter.Andrew Garfield is indeed the best choice to play Peter Parker. He's atalented actor and he made Peter Parker a realistic character. EmmaStone is also great to her role. She made her character more than justa love interest. In other filmmaking, fans might miss Danny Elfman'smusic but James Horner's score is effective to the scenes. The actionis fun enough and the CGI is works well enough. It has plenty of POVsto make it look exciting in both 2D and 3D.The Amazing Spider-Man is almost the best Spider-Man movie. It has anincredible hero and an incredible villain living in a world that isclose to reality. He is not yet professional to his own powers. He is ateenager who needs to be responsible. The drama is more effective inthis film than the recent trilogy. Although I complain too much aboutthe pacing, the depth of the story makes you think that awesome setpieces and perfect filmmaking doesn't quite matter. Because it's asuperhero film that cares more than just action. The action scenes aregreat but the mind blowing effect here is the heart and the man behindthe mask.
insidewonderland54 (13 May 2013)
I will never recommend this to ANYONE!
*Not meaning to offend anyone just sharing my honest opinion* Really?are you kidding? I wasted my money on this! OK so they talked aboutPeter Parkers parents disappearing about 20 minutes of the movie andfor that 20 minutes was a waste of time since it didn't even tell youwhat happened to them! And WOW i cant believe how ridiculous the death of Peters uncle was!the guy picked up the gun and the uncle just like runs into him orsomething honestly i really don't know what happened there.The only halfway amusing part about it was the old man listening to hismusic and seeing them fight behind him! Oh and Peter never found thekiller of his uncle(unless i missed that part!) and thats lame he neverdid since that was the main reason he even made his suit andeverything! ****I REALLY HOPE HES NOT IN THE NEW AVENGERS*****
Ninaad Kothawade (13 May 2013)
Amazing at times ! -India Rview !
The Amazing Spider-Man The Reboot of the Epic Spiderman Series. Adecade after the first Spiderman was released here comes a more AmazingSpidey. On to the movie its a totally different version than theprevious Spiderman ! The Story is totally different. so are the originsshown ! Marc Webb stays a little bit more loyal to the Comic Books andshow the Starting in detail. The Direction of the movie is quite good.though the pace of the movie is a little bit sluggy ! the pace slowsdown at many points and the Director lets you Get into the situationand Emotions which works most of the times but then other thingsdistract you there ! The Movie is lightning fast at other points and ifyou sneeze you'll probably miss the scene. To the Performances AndrewGarfield has done a Totally "Amazing" Role and totally gives PeterParker a new Bar the geeky side isn't well justified. Emma Stone doesher job and stays Beautiful even Justifies her role ! The SpideyCostume is well detailed and better ! Lizard could have been made morehorrifying and a Better Villain. the SFx is pretty good but less as theaction scenes are to say "Avoided" and the focus has been kept on thestory and Character details ! The Action Scenes are well shot and funto see ! we miss Spidey Mocking and taunting while Fighting ! The Movieis a must see for its 3D well captured every scene and Amazing 3d ! TheSound Track is decent but a little irritating ! There are many humorousscenes in the movie and spidey has been kept realistic ! Though allthese Amazing things of the movie ! The Pace of the movie is Sluggishand Spidey doesn't give you the Heroic feeling which is expected out ofa Superhero ! and Is more Advanced than the previous ! so watch it ifyou like Superhero Movies and 3D boosts you !3.5/5 !
theycallmemrglass (12 May 2013)
Spiderman: The RETOLD Story is enjoyable with plenty of heart but just not fresh enough
I enjoyed this, it offers just about enough to set it apart fromRaimi's trilogy but I didn't feel there was anything really outstandingabout it. There are no moments in the film which made me go, oh wow. Ifit was a decade ago, I might have but not today, now that we aresaturated with CGI effects movies. It simply moves along amicably withspots of charm, a tiny bit of humour, plenty of teenage angst and aheavy dose of anger all of which is framed within a washed out darktoned colour palette as opposed to the vibrancy and rich colours ofRaimi's trilogy.There are some decent big action set pieces but they lack invention andnone of it has the visceral energy and savviness as say Avengers orRaimi's trilogy...oops, you know I did promise myself not to makecomparisons to Raimi. But I cant help it. So much of the this film is aretread of 2002 Spider-Man and Spiderman 2 that I simply cant ignoreit. You really have to be patient with going through all the blastedexposition again. And not just that but an all too similar journey ofOctavia as well, albeit in the form of a Lizard. Having said that, itIS all done well, there is plenty of heart and the performances aresincere. Andrew Garfield is born for the role, he is a major reason forwatching this film. I always felt the wrong actor won the best actoraward in Social Network. Should have been Garfield! But anyway, henails Peter Parker's flippancy, geekiness, and angst perfectly. Hisawkwardness and playful relationship with Gwen Stacy are some of thehighlights of the movie for me. Emma Stone gives Gwen an attractivespark despite ultimately not differing too much to the Mary Jane ofRaimi's films but Gwen has more geek in common with Parker and a littlemore brains too.One of the areas this film disappoints in is dialogue. Not that itsbad, it just lacking some spark. There is a couple of quips fromSpiderman but nothing more and if you've seen the trailers, you'veheard most of them. Its the only thing I'm actually disappointed withthe Spiderman character himself because otherwise I love this versionof the web slinger, he is a lot more vulnerable and less all roundpowerful than Raimi's version. I also see the benefit now of having theseparate electronic web slinger narrative wise, as Spidey depends onit, if it fails, our hero is in trouble...I like that extravulnerability, we feel more anxious for Spiderman here, can he reallycope with the mighty dangers ahead? That's all done well. The Lizard is pretty good but all too similar to Octavious in terms ofmotive and character and the effects are seamless. But I have to makecomparisons again. The Dr Connors/Lizard is a paler version ofOctavious in Spiderman 2 who was by far the more superior and complexvillain. The Connors/Lizard character is a not given enough depth forus to empathise with or even fear for that matter.The soundtrack is serviceable, there is no standout theme forSpiderman, well there is but its a bit meh, certainly not James Hornersbest work. Storywise this film lacks imagination and seems too frightened to takerisks somehow. It introduces a mystery but then completely abandons itand only returns to it midway through the end credits! The rest of thestory is simply old themes already covered in previous films. TheUntold story? More like The Retold Story. Whatever we get of thisuntold story, is absolutely minimal and I get the feeling its meant tobe a story arc which might be spread over perhaps a trilogy of thesemovies.I know I've emphasised the film's negative points but I did still enjoywhat it had to offer and to be honest, most of you might prefer this toRaimi. If Raimi's spider-man is milk chocolate then this is the darkchocolate version.I'd still look forward to a sequel but I'll say this, I don't have anurge to see this again. With films such as Avengers, X-Men:FC,Spiderman 1, 2 and yeah even 3, I have an urge to see them again or atleast anticipate watching it again on Blu Ray. Unfortunately I have nosuch urge with this film.These are my personal comparison ratings for all the Spiderman films inthis millennium:Spider-man 9/10 Spider-man 2: 9/10 Spider-man 3: 7.5/10 (yeah I hadblast with this one, to hell with the haters ) The Amazing Spiderman:7/10
Blackfury_Reviews (11 May 2013)
The Amazing Spider-Man: Captivating Drama! {2.5/3}
In The Amazing Spider-Man Peter Parker, (Andrew Garfield, Boy A), findsa clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared whenhe was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. CurtConnors, (Rhys Ifans, Greenberg), his father's former partner.I was very excited for the new Spider-Man reboot because I love thecharacter. Reboot, remake, or sequel, I love him. That being said, Ithought that of the last three, the second one was the only good one.To be honest I think The Amazing Spider-Man is the best Spider-Man filmyet! Despite what people say that it's just the "same old story", Idon't care. It's supposed to be a retelling of the origin. You knowyou're paying to see that, so why complain? The acting was terrific.Andrew Garfield plays a great contemporary Peter Parker, Gwen Stacy isportrayed effortlessly by Emma Stone, and Rhys Ifans did well with thepoor villain he was casted as. But Denis Leary stole the show as GwenStacy's father overprotective and comedic father.The action isn't even a focus of the movie. It's the drama. And thatmakes it superior to a lot of other superhero films, because it breaksthe mold. It isn't a CG-fest, (but when the CGI is used it all lookstoo real to notice), and keeps everyone at a believable level. And thescore? I liked that too. However the villain is a little one-sided inthe final act, and the script could have been improved, especially inthe overly-expositional dialogue.http://blackfuryonfilm.blogspot.com/
Blackfury_Reviews (11 May 2013)
Finally a mature superhero film. Thank you Marc Webb.
Finally a superhero action film that isn't blown out of proportionswith giant action scenes and big budget movie all-stars. Marc Webbunderstands that pleasing the fans shouldn't be a top priority. Hispriority should be making a good film.Webb starts with a charming, heart-filled and talented cast. AndrewGarfield, who recently got robbed an Oscar for his performance in TheSocial Network. Emma Stone, from widely known good films such as TheHelp and Zombieland. Also throw in Martin Sheen, Denis Leary, SallyField, and Rhys Ifans to portray Uncle Ben, George Stacy, Aunt May, andDr. Connors respectively.Webb also understands that effects should never be the center focus ofa film. So he uses his greatest strength to help reel audiences in:giving characters motivation, conflicts, and consequences to portrayintelligent young-adult drama. This version of Peter Parker is anintelligent, brave, and deep character who slowly grows into the roleof being a superhero. And the new love interest, Gwen Stacy, is anactual character, who is smarter than Peter and actually fights thevillain in an intense encounter.The action is also story driven. There is no mindless explosion becausethere's an opportunity for it. There is no super drawn out fightbecause the budget allows it. Each encounter happens for a reason.Spidey fights the Lizard over a giant sewer conjunction because he'sgoing to take down Connors after the police refuse to. In return,Connors strikes back with his alter ego, and attacks Peter at his ownschool to make sure he isn't surprise attacked ever again. Each fightlasts about a minute or so, giving you a lot of quick, breathtakingvisuals rather than a few dragging, super long ones that lack energy.The only place the film struggles is the final act, where the filmrelies on a giant fight atop a huge, shiny set piece to wow theaudience, after such a smart ride up to the climax, something morepersonal should have been used instead. The villain is then reduced toa CGI monster Spidey must punch. And stemming from this issue is thefact that the villain evil army of 'minions' is forgotten until the endof the film. As a truly intrigued member of the audience, I wanted tosee what the army was doing to New York, that was surprisinglyhappening off-screen.Perhaps in the next Batman or Captain America or even Hulk film we willsee such a mature and (almost) fully careful approach as we did here.
Jakeconnor94 (10 May 2013)
The Amazing Spider-Man
Well let's start off and say this film this reboot was highlyunnecessary I mean it's only been 5 years since we last saw spidey inthe theaters Saying that though I have to admit this was a pretty damngood reboot of The spidey story I'll start with the pros -AndrewGarfield is a much better spider-man More cocky more sarcastic morehumorous -the back-story for Peter is much more improved in this filmand -Emma stone steals every scene and the chemistry with her andAndrew was great Cons -the lizard is a satisfying villain but itdoesn't beat the green goblin from the original spider-man film -thefight scenes are good but only satisfyingly good They could of beenbetter I'm not complaining though for once a good chuck of this actionsummer blockbuster was dedicated to back-story and a storyline which iappreciatedOverall it's a very good reboot of spider-man with in my opinion abetter lead and it looks to be truer to the comics In some ways itbeats Rami's original and in some other ways rami's 2002 classic stillreins supreme
danavenell (10 May 2013)
A boring rushed mess.
It's flat and boring, just copies badly bits from the first films,Uncle Ben's a jerk, Gwen Stacey works at Oscorp (because it reallyhelps with the ending), everyone looks far too old to be at highschool, the director seems completely unfamiliar with the comics, ormore importantly how to shoot a good movie All the acting was horrible,except Dennis Leary. And I think those were good actors doing theirbest, but miscast and trying to inject life into a bad, empty script.I'll give it two points, At least they tried to make Spideywise-cracky, and Spidey in action/just posing looked better than theRaimi movies sometimes.Can't be bothered to write a better review as they couldn't be botheredto make a decent movie. Two more of this version? I hope not.
ron-fernandez-pittsburgh (09 May 2013)
Good remake...but
This is a good re-make or re tread of the original SPIDERMAN. Why there-make I'm not sure, but there several differences and some goodcasting, although ANDREW GARFIELD wasn't all that great and EMMA STONEwas hard to understand because of her almost whisper of a voice. Issomething wrong with her? For those who never saw the original shouldsee this one for some amazing effects and 3-D does work for this one.Good to see SALLY FIELD on the big screen again and not looking none togood which is very realistic. Actually I know this is a cartoon ofsorts, two things bothered me. How did the scientist set up a lair withcomputers, electricity etc. in a sewer????? No one noticed him takingall those items down there and how could anyone possibly have donethat?? OK..A cartoon. Secondly, the hallway and several classrooms weredestroyed by the fight with the Liazard and Spiderman. At the end whenthey're back in school, everything looks completely untouched!!!!! Noway could the damage have been fixed in a few days time. OK..it's acartoon!!
Yuri Rudman (09 May 2013)
If i could give more then 10 i would.
I may not be as sophisticated and and educated about the film industryas some other reviewers here that know who made what and when and why.But i do know a great movie when i see one, this is by far the bestspider man movie i've seen, for one simple reason, i enjoyed it themost, and its been a while since i enjoyed a super hero movie.In my opinion it captures beautifully the fantastic world of spider manbringing you believable characters that are very well played withoutembarrassing to watch crys and silly over the top acting (see the otherspider man movies) it gives you a realistic feeling that is very VERYrare in such movies, though still fantastic and awesome as a super heromovie should be.The main character is original, don't know about you but i'm tiredseeing this movies being a nerds fantasy world, at last we see a superhero that was not a total dimwit before he got his powers, maybe thisis one of the reasons it got so many bad reviews? nerd rage anyone?For me this is the best spider man movie, the action is great, engagingand well paced, the dramatic moments are emotional, all in all this isa complete package of quality stuff.It's hard to say if you will enjoy it, but if you just come to have funand let spider man have a new beginning you will be in for a treat.
Basilisk Cho Ishikir (09 May 2013)
It was A LOT better than I thought it would be.
Compared to the previous movies, this had a Better plot, better CGI,and better action. In terms of plot, this followed the beginning of the of The AmazingSpider-man # 6, with the Lizard. So, Peter deals with the death of hisuncle, the mystery of his father, the lies to Aunt May, and his love ofheroism and Gwen Stacy. Executed greatly, and full of humor and action. However, Andrew Garfield left a LOT to be desired. While he did play ascience nerd, I felt more of a- misunderstood yet surprisingly smartteenager with an Edward Cullen haircut and dreams of being a dancer inthe next Step Up movie type of acting. I felt like the some of the timehe was goofy and other times super serious, but in a bad way. He seemedmore harsh with his "everything can be solved with well-meaning quipsand violence but I'm responsible when I cause property damage" thing.Character- B+, for dynamic, while cliché, offered a fun 2 hours. Plot-A-, solid, yet again cliché, but still good. Errors- Standardcontinuity errors with a few geographical issues. Stan Lee scene-A+,hilarious!All in All, A movie, but after other summer movies, it is just notAvengers standard.
chris smith (08 May 2013)
Just really bad
This is not spider-man this is more like a spoof. I have never felt sobored watching a movie. I actually hated peter parker in this movie andspider-man is a joke. Many scenes show his skills and how strong he isbut when he is in a real fight he gets toss around like a rag doll. Heeven gets shot later in the movie where was his spider sense? A veryweak movie its nothing like what spider-man should be. Very littleaction and a lot of nonsense drama that can be confusing at times. Thespidey suit in this movie looks horrible and it made the whole moviethat much cheesier. They even show peter making the mask and he usessunglass lenses in the mask. How is he suppose to see at night lookingthrough sunglasses? Maybe thats why is kept getting beat up through outthe movie he couldn't see. All in all a big waste of time.
teixcal-imdb (07 May 2013)
Overall disappointing
Fans of Spider-man comics will still be waiting for an adaptation thattruly reflects the mood of the comic-book after leaving the theatrefrom watching "The Amazing Spider-man". As an adaptation the film makesa very good composition of Peter Parker as an high-school student butfails completely in the Peter Parker as an "adoptive son" of hisuncles. The relationship between Peter Parker and May Parker isincredibly misrepresented. As an adaptation, too much liberties aretaken with other traits of the Spider-man character.But, and as a film on its own, leaving aside the supposed adaptationstatus, The Amazing Spider-man is very unbalanced movie. Peter Parkeris never a character one can really relate to. It is too schematic andlacks profundity. Also we never quite understand how other characterslike Gwen Stacy and his own aunt May can be so sympathetic towardsPeter Parker because his behaviour to keep is secret identity a secretcome off as a real jerk. So all the sympathy towards Peter Parker isnever believable. Is like people just decided that Parker is OK andnothing he does can change that. C'mon people, get real. The "origins"scene, when Parker acquires its spider-powers is also a veryunbelievable one. It misses one thing to make it believable: theuniqueness. The way it was enacted, it sounds like anybody can acquiredoes powers if they found themselves in the position Peter is in, thereis no circumstance that let it be a once-in-lifetime occasion and norepeatable to anyone once it happens to Peter Parker. And that kind offinishes everything for a super-hero film. It just doesn't work tothink that any time tomorrow or the next day some other guy walks intoa room and comes out another spider-man. The film is also very lengthywithout any particular reason. It seems that scenes where just includedto play with special effects and 3D. Since the special effects arereally not particularly awesome it works against the film. The attemptto introduce a larger plot to be continued in sequels revolving aroundPeter Parker's parents also does not work because frankly the viewernever has anything in the plot that makes one care for Parker'sparents. Overall the Amazing Spider-man is a disappointing film. It isnot terrible. It is not good. Is "watchable" but leaves no impressionwhatsoever.
xodanielcasterox (06 May 2013)
A more teen-adult, edgier, darker, better spider-man movie.
As a boy I loved the first Spider-man movie. It got me hyped! It got meobsessed with Marvel comic movies. Then the second film came around andit got better. The third...well...I liked it. When I heard they weremaking a reboot I got furious. But when I took some time to calm down,I figured I should give it a chance. It was WORTH IT! This makes up forall the faults the trilogy had and the effects were top-notch. Granted,the effects in Spider-Man 2 got better, they even got an Oscar! But thetrilogy was cheesy. But it was marketed for kids, it's suppose to be.This film was more for mature audiences. I loved Danny Elfman's scorein the first two movies but when I read James Horner was composing thismovie I got even more hyped. And yes, the score rocked. The acting issolid, the action is awesome, the casting is perfect, the villain isNOT over-the-top like Goblin and Doc Octopus which is better; it's justthe right superhero movie we needed. It did Spider-man a justice. Iwill pay to see the future sequels.
RatchetJak94 (06 May 2013)
A Fresh New Start
Spider-Man is my favorite super-hero of all time. I've read the comics(mostly the Ultimate comics, but some of the 60's comics as well),played some of the video games, and watched the cartoons (The 1994 and2008 series being some of my favorite animated shows of all time).I enjoyed Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy (yes, even Spider-Man 3). WhenI heard that the series was being rebooted, I wasn't happy to hearabout it. My expectations were neutral as time went by and when Iwalked out the theater, my expectations were blown away.I don't want to compare this movie to the original trilogy, but I thinkit's necessary to see where this movie improved from the originals.Let's start with the casting. Andrew Garfield is a great successor toTobey Maguire. I can really relate to him like I always do with otherincarnations of the web slinger. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy is evenbetter than Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson. Gwen is a much strongercharacter and the chemistry between her and Garfield as Peter Parker isbelievable. Rhys Ifans is great as Doctor Connors (a.k.a. The Lizard)and I like how he is a "Jekyll and Hyde"-type of villain (kind of likea few other villains... yeah). Martin Sheen and Sally Field as UncleBen and Aunt May, respectively, are also great as well. All thecharacters are portrayed very well and are believable.The visual effects and the action scenes are good as usual, but nothingnew.The musical score by James Horner is also great, although I preferDanny Elfman's score in the original trilogy because they felt morememorable and left a lasting impression. But, who knows? James Horner'sscore may grow on me over time.If I have to name some complaints, it would have to be that some partswere rushed (although it's a minor nitpick) as well as a couple ofparts not evaluated much. I think an extended cut of the movie would benecessary when it's released on DVD, but that's just me.Overall, "The Amazing Spider-Man" is a fresh new start on thefranchise. It has superb acting, thrilling action scenes (especiallythe climax), an amazing score, and being faithful to the comics but atthe same time taking liberties to make it more interesting. Best Spideymovie ever? It's too early to tell but maybe. It's definitely worthwatching and I am looking forward to the sequel.
DustinRahksi (04 May 2013)
Unnessacery, but not bad.
I loved Sam Raimi's first trilogy and was very Skeptical about thisfilm, and thought it wasn't going to be good. Well it was okay, not asgood as the first three films, but better than all the other stuffMarvel has been spewing out.It starts out as a generic high school movie, an outcast gets bulliedand has a crush on a girl, blah blah. At first the movie was prettyboring but it picked up about 40 minutes in, to the point where Ididn't notice the time going by. The origins of Spider-man are toldagain, only in a different way. This film felt like it had more emotionin it than the first Spider-man. Martin Sheen was good as uncle Ben,Curt Conners was nothing new. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone did abetter job than Tobey and Kirsten in the previous entries. I stillprefer Tobey Maguire as Spider-man thoughOver all this film was good popcorn entertainment, but nothing toospecial. It's not the best Spider-man movie but it is a good start forthe next series of films.
Chris_Ilott (03 May 2013)
The Amazing Spider Man is Amazing
=====PLEASE READ. IMPORTANT INFORMATION===== It really was a fantastic film.Great acting and a lot more humour than the original trilogy. A muchmore emotional journey than the originals and it definitely makes itmuch better. I saw it with the family: 3 kids including me; 10, 13 and 15 along withMum and we all enjoyed it. Now for the important information: keep watching until after the firstlot of credits.There is a great little bit after that which I guarantee you willenjoy!
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20