Leave me suggestions in the comments. Note: comic characters are not ALWAYS superheroes. Note #2: pre-existing characters only. No Unbreakable…
The Amazing Spider-Man
The untold story begins.
Peter Parker is an outcast high schooler was abandoned by his parents as a boy, leaving him to be raised by his Uncle Ben and Aunt May. Like most teenagers, Peter is trying to figure out who he is and how he got to be the person he is today. 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 father's 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.
I got a lot of grief when this opened from Spider-Man fans for giving it a 2.5 star review.
I was WAY too generous.
Garfield and Stone do have legitimate chemistry. They're terrific together. AMAZING SPIDER-MAN does not make me excited for the sequel, but it does make me wish these two would star in an old school Tracy and Hepburn-style romantic comedy. That would be very interesting.
Y'know what's NOT interesting? This movie. It's ugly, sloppy, dumb, and slow, and a huge step down from all three of the Raimi movies (yes, even the third one). It's just one bad choice after another. There's a slo-mo skateboarding montage. There's characters who show up, do nothing, and vanish. (Irrfan Khan,…
I don't care what anyone says, this is my Spidey and I love it, warts and all.
Before I continue I feel the need to emphasise that I in no way factor in the debate about the necessity of a reboot this soon, nor will I compare them to Raimi's three films as I consider these factors irrelevant to my opinion of this film. Films should be judged in their own right, if they're good, they're good, if not, too bad.
This film has some problems that lie mainly within the script and the pacing. It tells the origin of Spider-Man well enough, but it skirts over some of the 'getting to know you power' bits too quickly. The focus…
Your father was a very secretive man, Peter.
I am in shock at how good this film was and at the decisions that were made in doing the reboot. Those decisions are what makes the film so good. I have to say that I think this film is better then the first Spider-Man. Was a reboot necessary? No, but who cares. I don't watch films because they are necessary, I watch them to be entertained.
The decisions made that surprised me is that the film probably has less action, less villains and less characters in general then Spider-Man 3. So obviously if all you want is more action and villains you're not going to like this much.
I'll remind you what happened. Richard Parker said just about the same thing then that you are saying now. The clock is ticking, Dr. Connors.
My original review can be read here.
This is the first time I've rewatched Amazing Spider-Man since seeing Life of Pi. I forgot that Irrfan Khan was in Amazing Spider-Man. I forgot that Peter Parker's father was named Richard. Every time Khan said "Richard Parker" I was looking for the tiger.
Two or three minutes into the "The Amazing Spider-Man," I shifted in my seat, worried that the film was about to make no connection with me whatsoever. My shifting was for not as "The Amazing Spider-Man" is an excellent superhero film. Providing a personal, emotionally resonant, and somewhat low-key origin to the beloved-by-many character, the film is solidly-crafted, ideally-cast, exhilarating, and moving. Though it slips into well-worn, super hero operatics in its final act, this film, with its heart of a quieter film and its soul of a monster movie, is an undeniable pleasure.
As a big fan of Sam Raimi's films with everyone's favorite wall crawler and web slinger (yes, even the third one), I was more than skeptical when it came to this reboot. Hence it was no surprise I didn't like this film on a first watch and things didn't change with this rewatch either.
Why do the origin story again, just tweaked a bit, when it was already perfectly done by Raimi? Because Sony was afraid to lose the rights to Marvel, if they didn't come up with something. And because it is a reboot so they need to restart the franchise and make some easy money while at it. What they came up with though is half-baked and disappointing…
Pues si esta es la buena no me quiero imaginar qué clase de inmundicia será la segunda.
Bland, dull, boring I'm surprised I like Spiderman 3 better
Going into this movie, after watching the famous “Sam Raimi” trilogy, I honestly had low expectations. The Raimi trilogy wasn’t at all amazing however it was good popcorn entertainment when each of the films were released. Ok, apart from Spider-Man 3 with the whole “Emo-Spidey” look, not good.
Anyways back to this review. This adaption to the Spider-Man comics is one of a kind, I cannot wait for the sequel. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone take the leads as Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, respectively.
Starting out, it shows a young Peter Parker being left with his Aunt May and Uncle Ben when his parents have to go away and take care of some business. These scenes are quite dark…
I actually liked this one better the second time around. Has plenty of problems -- unsatisfying villain, as is often the case in superhero movies; junk science, as is the case in almost any movie; poorly integrated "mythology" subplot that doesn't really serve its purpose of piquing interest but mostly annoys in both its obviousness and its half-assedness (does Irrfan Khan's Osborn lackey survive? How can you just drop a character from the movie like that with no resolution?); bizarre oversights (I guess no one in the police thought to run a check on who's bulk-ordering the Oscorp biocable?); and more -- but most of those problems end up feeling trivial thanks to the ease with which the cast carries…
Although I question the very existence of the film based purely on the fact that I feel five years is not a large enough passage of time to necessitate a reboot, it is a good film, however you look at it. It is a cinematic stunner, wonderfully created, with characters taking importance over chaos, however brilliantly awesome that chaos may be. The first half of the film does feel rushed, and some plot lines don't quite justify their inclusion, but it is full of wonderful moments that remind me why I like Spider-Man so much. Isn't that worth it in the end?
This film really puzzled me when it came out in cinemas. A reboot to a series that was still fresh in my memory from not that long ago. I have a special place for the first Sam Raimi Spider-Man film, it was the first proper super-hero movie I watched and I was still a teenager at the time. I loved it! And it is fair to say that my currently of the Super-hero genre would not exist today if it weren't, in part, to that original film.
So I was reluctant to watch this reboot feeling that it would be retread of something I've seen before and I would probably not enjoy it as much as the Raimi version.
Teniendo en cuenta que en las películas de Spidey dirigidas por Raimi me daban ganas de matar a todos los protagonistas, que con la primera me salí del cine y con la segunda me quede dormido, esta sale ganando al menos en mi caso, me ha gustado la actuación de Andrew y en general me he entretenido, y aunque tenga sus momentos WTF y se haga hincapié en algunas cosas de forma innecesaria me ha parecido al menos un entretenimiento decente.
When I first heard rumours of a new Spiderman, I could not understand it. Why remake a movie just ten years after a relatively successful trilogy that, as far as most of us were concerned, was good enough as far as Spiderman goes?
Well, after seeing this a few times I've realised it was a fantastic decision. Andrew Garfield is a completely different Spiderman to Tobey Macguire, and Emma Stone makes a much better girlfriend than the cringey and over dramatic Kirsten Dunst. Stone takes on a much more modern and independent approach.
The Amazing Spiderman takes Spidey to incredible new levels of excitement and breathtaking CGI. It almost makes me upset how we almost let it lie at the original trilogy - in which only the first one was actually any good - and never realised its true potential.
Did I mention Andrew Garfield has one of the most perfect faces in the universe?
- Superman II
- Swamp Thing
- Superman III
- Three Giant Men
- The incredible Paris Incident
- All Superheroes Must Die
- Alter Egos
- Angel Wars: Guardian Force - Mission 1: About…
Not another list of the last five Marvel movies, but an attempt at creating The Superhero List To End All…
- Fast Times at Ridgemont High
- Batman Returns
- Howard the Duck
- Morning Glory
Everybody has either a film star or character that they had a crush on during their formative years. So which…