Michelle Loves and HATES The Amazing Spider-Man!

The Amazing Spider-Man 2012 Movie Review

I saw this movie the night before it opened and wanted to wait a few days before putting pen to paper. Or what’s the equivalent phrase for typing on my keyboard? It is almost impossible to write this review without comparing The Amazing Spider-Man to Raimi’s trilogy. All I will say is I absolutely loathed most of the first one (Green Goblin and Web Swinging scenes are just horrible), loved the 2nd and didn’t think the 3rd one was nearly as bad as everyone says.

Is rebooting a franchise that is less than five or six years old a good idea? Perhaps, no, but who cares?  The movie gets so much right, but what it gets wrong, is really wrong and sinks the entire effort. I cannot talk about the bad without providing major spoilers, so be warned. Let’s start with the spoiler free good.

Everything about this effort feels better and more grounded than Raimi’s efforts. Rhys Ifan’s as Curt “The Lizard” Connors was spot on. The make up work on the Lizard looked great on iMax. The early images did not do it justice. I loved the fact that you could see a bit of the “man” and the “human” underneath the make up and the CGI. The action sequences in the last 3rd were breathtaking on iMax. While Rhys does a great job with Connors, the writers really don’t do a good job of making him a more well rounded character.

Rhys Ifan’s Interview

That’s the whole point of the lizard that he is half man/half lizard and he always had some of the Connors humanity in him. Director Marc Webb does a perfect job of walking that fine line with one of the more difficult characters in Spider-Man’s rogues’ gallery. I liked that we did not get a rehash or re-imagined Goblin this time out. Although with the inclusion of Gwen Stacy, there is absolutely no way they can do a sequel without having the Goblin in it and having the 2nd film end on a down note.

Emma Stone comes across as a saner, cleaner version of Lindsay Lohan. I love Stone and think she’s great here as the beautiful Gwen Stacy, she’s a female version of Peter Parker.  Unlike party girl MJ, Gwen is a serious scientist who doesn’t sit around waiting to be rescued.  Stone has really good chemistry with Andrew Garfield.

While Webb does a fabulous job of showcasing Garfield’s Peter Parker as smart. We see his inspiration for and creation for the famous web shooters and watch as he solves Conner’s complex equations. There was a lot of Spider-Man’s snarky personality. One thing that didn’t translate well to film is the idea that Peter uses the jokes to hide his complete lack of confidence in what he’s doing. So if you don’t know this, he may come across as bit of a cocky jerk.

The movie is perfectly cast, Martin Sheen lends a lot of weight to Uncle Ben and while Sally Field doesn’t have much to do as Aunt May, its always nice to see this classic, classy actress on screen in any capacity.  Dennis Leary was fantastic as Captain Stacy and watching he and Peter argue at the dinner table was a real treat. James Horner’s Score is sweeping and beautiful, especially in the closing moments. Love this costume but it was unnecessarily “dark and gritty”, but the gloves where distracting. The Amazing Spider-Man has a lot going for it, namely a great build up in the first act and a fun close, but it is the middle portion where the movie almost falls apart.

Major Spoilers Start Here!

The issue with the middle portion of the movie is, Webb and the 6 people who wrote this movie clearly had an idea of what they wanted to do with Peter Parker as a character but they have no idea who Spider-Man is or what makes him tick.  I loathed the idea that Peter walked into a room where there were a hundred, maybe thousand other spiders that were treated with radioactivity. So now the idea that Peter is the ONLY one who has ever or ever will be bitten is just silly. It totally destroys the specialness of the idea that it was ONE unique spider that caused the birth of Spider-Man.

I have issues with the idea of Osborne being responsible for the creation of Spider-Man – and now the death of his parents. Do we really need that added layer of conflict between the two? No, there was always more than enough to stoke the flames of hatred there.  Starting and ending with Norman being a Psycho who also knew Peter’s secret. Don’t even get me started on how many times Peter is unmasked in this movie, or the laughable moment how Connors finds out – really, REALLY?

Perhaps the most unforgivable thing Webb and the writers do here is completely change who Spider-Man is (at his CORE) and his entire motivation for existence. You can fluff off the “With Great Power Comes Responsibility Line” all you want, but Spider-Man is driven, DRIVEN by his GUILT over Uncle Ben’s Death.

Not only should he feel guilt for letting the criminal go. But Ben was out looking for Peter, who stormed out like a spoiled child, when it happened. This should have ratcheted up the idea that he should feel responsible for protecting everyone. Instead his motivation isn’t to help people because he did nothing, it’s because he’s angry and wants REVENGE.  Peter doesn’t seem to feel an ounce of remorse, or guilt, he never seems to even find the guy who killed Uncle Ben. He’s out attacking bad guys in the hopes that its the guy responsible for killing his Uncle. Spider-Man isn’t BATMAN! Not ALL heroes have to be revenge seeking, dark characters!

He doesn’t seem to care about helping other people until this amazingly awful, on so many levels, scene where he rescues a kid trapped in a car.  After wasting 20 minutes of film time, this is when the “light bulb” goes off in his head that yeah; maybe he should use his powers to help people – even then we don’t see him really swinging about helping out where he could. How weak and stupid is this? This moment of “revelation” doesn’t come until deep into the 2nd act.  So the fact that he saved some strange kid has more of an impact on the direction of his life than the death of his freaking Uncle? It really ruins most of the good work Webb and Company did in the first act and really makes the 3rd act feel sort of hallow and perfunctory.

I’m a Spider-Man expert, but I had no idea what the heck was going on with the teaser ending. Who was that guy and why should I care? They didn’t name who he was.

I started this review ready to rave about how much I loved this movie but the more I think about how awful the middle portion is, as someone who collected Spider-Man comics for 20 years, this major shift in his character just bugs me to no end, primarily because it is a completely unnecessary and stupid change.

Final Grade C




  1. This has to be the STUPIDEST and most Biased full-of-shit review I’ve ever read on Any movie on this site. The fact that this woman knows Nothing about Spider-Man, and yet calls herself a Spider-Man EXPERT of 20 years of comic-book lore is INSULTING!! 

    First off, let’s talk about the Norman Osborn topic: If she knows the comics truely, Norman Osborn was ALWAYS the Bad Guy since Day 1, even before Peter Parker met him! Sam Raimi’s version of how they were friendly at first is just Dumb! Especially Tobey’s character must be stupid to not see how evil Willem Dafoe’s face just looks lol. Even in wikipedia, it says: “being directly responsible for numerous tragedies in Spider-Man’s life” So it wasn’t just Gwen Stacy. Green Goblin IS THE JOKER OF SPIDER-MAN! 

    # 2, if you think there was only ONE radioactive spider in the comics, you’re brainless! Even in Raimi’s 2002 Spider-Man there were 14 genetically radioactive super spiders! Don’t you REMEMBER?? Only 1 escaped and bit Peter.. just like in this movie! It’s a comic book movie, not logical rocket science. The fact that ANYBODY could’ve been Spider-Man makes the mythos even more fascinating. 

    #3. Since you’re a Spider-Man expert, you should KNOW that Spider-Man was first born BECAUSE of his Uncle’s Death, he felt Guilty, which eventually turned into Responsibility and that famous lesson (which his Uncle never verbally told him like that). And Spider-Man never killed the killer of his Uncle like in Spider-Man 1, he was eventually caught though. Once again, CHECK UR SOURCES! In wikipedia archives, it says: “His death at the hands of a burglar that Spider-Man declined to pursue earlier forever propelled Peter into the role of a superhero.” So Peter didn’t start caring about helping other people until a lil later. So that bridge scene with the lil boy was not stupid, it was awesome and meaningful as the Turning Point of the evolution of Spider-Man. And this also goes to show that you know Nothing about Batman.. FYI, he NEVER became the Dark Knight to track down his parents killer.. he was already KILLED! If u watched Batman Begins, the killer was arrested, and sent to prison since Bruce Wayne was a boy! The other part when he was killed before Bruce even started training is the movie version (don’t know if it was in the DC Comics).. but Bruce became Batman to HELP Gotham’s helpless citizens by inflicting fear on those who prey on the fearful. And Finally 

    #4.. You not understanding the teaser ending PROVES MY POINT FURTHER, that you’re not a REAL Spider-Man fan. Face it.. you’re just like those girls who flip the pages of the comic books just to see the pictures, then claim “I read the comics too!”.. pathetic. You see guys? THIS is the reason why ASM is getting some lower reviews, because of crappy ill-informed and biased critics who just wanna bash it because it’s a “reboot”. If this movie came out first 10 years ago, Raimi’s Spider-Man 1 film would’ve gotten an F-rating at RottenTomatoes, FACT!

    1. I think you are the stupidest most biased, full of shit poster who has ever posted on this site. So there.

      1. In the original Comic Series, Norman Osborn was NOT the primary Spider-Man bad guy, check YOUR facts. In the Ultimate Universe version yes, but in the REAL Spider-Man no.  In the ORIGINAL Universe Norman had nothing to do with Peter’s parents, nor the original Spider-Bite. Unless this was just retconned in in the later 90s when Spider-Man went to hell.

      2. Yes, again in the ORIGINAL there was just ONE Spider who was NOT part of the experiment. Again, if you want to argue in the Ultimate Verse version, then sure. But frankly, as much as I loved the Ultimate verse Spider-Man it pisses me off that idiots like you now think that’s the OFFICIAL cannon when it is NOT.

      3. What is your point here? You just state exactly what my criticism of the movie is. What the f are you talking about? I never said Spider-Man killed his killer. Learn some reading comprehension. And again in the ORIGINAL he does catch the Ben’s Killer, its when he unmasked when Peter realizes his mistake that this was the guy who is responsible for his Uncle’s murder.  Again in the ULTIMATE Universe version this may be different I didn’t start reading Ultimate Spider-Man until issue 15 or so.

      Again, your point number 3 is so f’ing retarded it boggles the mind, you are pissing and moaning at me about things and points I NEVER made. If you want to be an ass and yell at me, at least be ON TOPIC and yell me based on things I actually wrote.

      Your last line makes NO SENSE, I did not compare this movie to the earlier trilogy and I thought Spider-Man 1 WAS garbage and caught a bunch of flack for it. FACT! So what’s your point?

      1.  To be fair, Although it is titled “The Amazing Spider-Man, this movie was based off of the Ultimate Marvel Universe version of Spider-Man.

        1.  Yes, all modern versions of Spider-Man and all Marvel characters seem to be based off the Ultimate Universe now. Even though that universe is currently a mess.

          1. No matter how much of a mess it is, I’m pretty sure the Ultimate Universe is supposed to be the canon one.

          2.  What are you smoking? The Ultimate Universe is Not Canon Marvel in any shape or form. It’s just the material being used in Movies and Cartoons because it’s “convenient” and they think that’s what kids today are reading. It is NOT cannon.

          3. Actually, it depends on how you define “cannon” If you define cannon by what you like more, than we cant come to a definition that all of us will agree on. If you count cannon based on what came first, then the original spiderman comicbook series is cannon.

            But if you consider cannon to be what Stan Lee considers cannon, then the ultimate universe version is cannon.  You see, whatever Stan Lee makes into a movie NOW will forever become the cannon of Spiderman. He made the Ultimate Universe one. Therefore, he clearly wants that to be the cannon of spiderman’s origin forever. Probably because its actually a BETTER STORY than the original.

            Things evolve, they get better, get over it hipster.

          4.  I’m far from being a hipster. But Stan Lee considers this cannon? Really, where did you read that? For the record just because he does his cameos doesn’t mean he has anything to do with the movie.

            Stan Lee had NOTHING to do with the Ultimate Universe it is pretty much all Brian Michael Bendis. And Spider-Man as he exists now in the Movie and TV Verse is all Ultimate Universe which is not Canon and I’m tired of Marvel trying to force it down our throats because they are scared of the vast history created in the original version. Its not about being a Hipster, it’s about sticking with the original thing and not some arbitrary universe they created 10 years ago.

          5. I honestly don’t even know what some of these folks are saying. Since when is canon what someone likes more? Huhn? Marvel 616 is canon, period (at least until the Marvel editorial board comes out and pronounces otherwise, which I wouldn’t hold my breath for). Ultimate universe is cool at times, but it’s an ALTERNATE universe. Anyone who reads Marvel for 5 minutes knows that. It’s incredible how the internet has enabled this free-for-all mentality where people think because they think it and feel it it MUST be true, (or just as valid as the truth). No offense Matt, but Stan Lee “made the Ultimate universe”? Where the heck did that even come from?

      2. Alright so you “claim” you’re a spider-man expert of the past, and yet you Don’t even know WHY Spider-Man became Spider-Man, and that the responsibility didn’t come later. Why won’t you ask Stan Lee about all of that? And maybe you didn’t understand me, when I say Green Goblin is the Joker of Spider-Man, I don’t mean the MAIN villain, I mean the most annoying and consistent villain.. the archenemy that you just can never get rid of, like the Joker in Batman (but Oh I forgot! You know absolutely nothing about Batman).

        And I don’t think we’re on the same page here. Everyone and their grandma Knows that only 1 spider bit Peter, but why in the world would Scientists go thru all the trouble and money to just create one spider? If you have a problem with that, go take it up with the creators, I’m pretty sure that has been modified over the years. In TAS of Spider-Man in the 90s (what I watched as a kid), a single spider got zapped from some radioactive laser and bit Peter, but since then it’s been a group of spiders, and 1 that escaped and bit Peter. that’s been popularized since 2002’s Spider-Man, so your hatred of this movie on that point alone makes no sense. Hate Sam Raimi for that.. smh.

        And of course you don’t understand what I’m saying.. your review is as unfocused as Spider-Man 3 was. Did you have something to do with that movie being made? I said Spider-Man never killed his Uncle’s killer (watched him die actually) like 2002 Spider-Man, he just never caught him until later, that’s why the movie doesn’t show that. Should they show Gwen Stacy dying too? Hell no, because that will happen later too, so be patient!

        And I won’t bother to re-clarify myself. Your pathetic excuse for a review needs some work.. but you probably don’t care because you got paid loads of money to come up with this from the top of your head. God, I wish I had your Job! All you do is watch movies, and talk crap about them, read and reply angry fans’ comments, and laugh your way to the bank. Must be great being you! Just next time, make sure to warn us that your review will contain shit, instead of spoilers.. and everyone will be fine 🙂

    2. dude, you lost me at “Even in wikipedia, it says…”

      even middle schoolers are instructed NOT to use wikipedia as a source -____-

      1. You’re a dumbass… wikipedia’s credible now. Your teachers were just telling you that to stop you from plagiarizing without getting your work from MORE sources. But this is popular culture you twat, not science or biology. I doubt wikipedia lies in popular fiction, OR celebrities. My God, some of you guys try to sound smart, but you’re just coming off as lame. Do you want me to bring you the copy of the comic books where I got my sources from/>

        1. Weren’t you complaining about ad-hominem attacks over on the other site? Calling someone a “tw*t” is clearly an example of an ad hominem argument. (It’s also pretty unclassy.)

          1. I called some random girl a twat because it’s kinda annoying when someone barges in a convo.. sorta like what you’re doing now. And there’s no need to censor such a silly word Glenn..smh. I realize that Michelle’s followers are starting to crawl out of their holes now.. So this is my cue to leave. I’ve made my point. ALL of you cannot deny this: If this movie came out 10 years ago, it would have been hailed as the greatest Spider-Man movie..and if Raimi’s campy-ass Spider-Man 1 came out this year, the bashing and negative reviews would’ve Doubled! For this too-soon reboot to even get a 72% fresh tomato average, means it’s doing a pretty damn good job. Because the only Strong negative reviews are that it’s been done before. And I can’t wait to see the box office results by the end of the week, as I’m sure everyone’s seeing it

          2. Hey there Gamer Guyd. Obviously, you’re posting on an open forum, so you must be aware that other folks are going to read your comments. As such, you have to expect that (or at least not be surprised by) people calling you out for blatant hypocrisy. Secondly, I have no problem with using the word “twat” where it’s merited. Calling someone onstage at a punk rock show a “twat” might be silly and funny, but in this context, it shows a glaring lack of class. If I’m being generous, it could just be a lack of maturity on your part. THAT’S what I was pointing out.  (Oh, and call your mom or your sister a “twat” and see if they think it’s “silly” by the way.) Thirdly, I never saw Michelle’s reviews before today so I can hardly be called a “follower.” Fourth, in my opinion, Raimi’s version was not campy at all. It actually showed a stunning respect for the source material while attempting to translate its tone to the big screen. To say it was campy suggests that it was deliberately presented in an ironic, over-the-top, garish, flamboyant, and “jokey” fashion. Yes, it was colorful and comic-book like, but campy? No, I don’t think so. Finally, while I don’t think anyone should be condemning this new movie out-of-the-gate, I do think you might want to check your impulse to defend multi-billion dollar corporate product by calling other people “twat”s.

          3. Well, with ‘twat’ aside, Spider-Man 3 was definitely campy, and you can’t deny that. They tried to make it all “dark”.. but when everyone, my friends and my girlfriend are laughing their butts off, and i’m burning with embarrassment watching the movie, it’s definitely campy and cheesy. The whole emo dancing in the bar just messed itup even SM2 was campy, the whole chinese lady playing the Spider-Man theme song on her crappy violin, the Bruce Campbell scenes, Bone Saw McGraw of SM1.. c’mon dude, who are you kidding?! Those movies had camp written ALL OVER THEM! Sure I loved the movies and thought they were great, but that was when I was 12-14 years old. Times have changed, and ever since the Dark Knight came out, Hollywood wants to go back to that serious tone of some superheroes, whether it’s good or bad. Spider-Man was always a gritty story, with a humourous main character making light of dark situations. That’s how i saw it when I was growing up at least.

        2.  So, again your debate technique needs work. Do you think calling people Dumb Ass, other names, screaming every other word and screaming FACT! makes you correct? It just makes you look even more stupid when mostly everything you say in “defense” of this movie is wrong. FACTUALLY. But people like you don’t care about FACTS.

        3.  Yes, please post up some scans….

          1. Some scans?? lol You’re the spider-man expert, right?! Just go to the special features disc of Spider-Man 1 (2002) and find the complete archives list! The Uncle Ben story was first in Amazing Fantasy #15 of August 1962, which coincidentally wasdo you seriously think I pull them out of my ass like you do? Listen, I’m tired of this banter.. and you must love it since you seem to have all the time in the world, being a critic and all. If there’s 2 things I always back up, is Spider-Man and Harry Potter:) the debut of Spider-Man. I get all my sources from Comic strips, . What,

          2.  Ok, this is the last time I respond to you, because you sir, are an asshole. No, really you are. Own it, be proud. You back up what you say? Screaming FACT! isn’t backing up what you say. You haven’t backed up anything and now you contradict yourself by mentioning the original universe when your argument was all about the Ultimate Universe. So which is is it? Ultimate Universe or Original that’s canon in your small mind?

            If you are going to mention the original AF 15, then please by all means point out where ALL the Radioactive Spiders where in that issue? Point out where Spider-Man spends a lot of time seeking revenge for Uncle Ben – he catches the killer right after the deed and that’s when he realizes his mistake. He doesn’t spend days, weeks or whatever hunting him down.

            And for the last time, I LIKED 2 3rds of this stupid f’ing movie, I just don’t like how they destroyed the essence of who Spider-Man is to get there. You claim to be a fan, how can you actually just accept that?

          3. Well then if you’re a fan as I am, can’t you accept both worlds from the Amazing, and Ultimate? It’s still Spider-Man! And what i was saying is based more on Ultimate, with the more of the ‘Amazing’ backstories. Raimi’s films were just a fuckin mess, except SM2,, period

          4.  See that? We can part as friends. My issue was never which universe is canon, it was that IMHO I thought they messed up the central character of Spider-Man. I still enjoyed most of the movie.

          5. What, do you seriously think I pull them out of my ass like you do? Listen, I’m tired of this banter.. and you must love it since you seem to have all the time in the world, being a critic and all. If there’s 2 things I always back up, is Spider-Man and Harry Potter:)

  2.  I actually own the famous Harry Osborne LSD issue.

  3. I thought your review was pretty accurate. That scene with the lizard finding out spider-mans identity was a face   
    palm moment.

    1. The film was generally good – but it was FULL of facepalm moments:
      – Conners moving into the sewers to do his work when he had the whole lab to himself. Why…er so they can have a cool fight in the sewers of course.
      – Conners going to fight Parker in the school for no compelling reason other than….er.. have a fight in the school with all his friends in the scene.
      – Conners carefully explaining every step of his master plan in detail then leaving it on autoplay in a unguarded sewer location so anyone could stumble on it and know exactly what he was planning.
      – Conners deciding that his whole motivation was simply to turn everyone into a Lizard (seriously????)
      – The Anti-Lizard-Antidote-Machine that conveniently reversed everything and acted like a microwave oven. *Ding* “You aintidote is cooked”
      – The after credits scene “We forgot to give the audience a payoff to the secret about Parkers parents that we spent sooo much time establishing in the 1st act then just completely dropped in the second half of the film….oh look lets just give them some cliched mysterious villain type guy instead….Mwahahahahahaha…”   ugh.

      1. dude really? were you even paying attention?

        Connors had to move into the sewers because a. he had just gotten FIRED. When he told Peter he gave everyone the week off he was lying. Everyone was gone because when Connors lost his job they all got transferred elsewhere.  If connors were to stay there working he would have been easily found out, besides the fact that after that day his access card would stop working because he was FIRED.

        also, recording his master plan? That is what scientists do, they record every single little detail.

        also, leaving it where anyone could find it? Bro, he put it in a very hard to reach spot in the freaking SEWERS. Who wanders around the sewers? The only way that peter found it was by following the tracks that connor left from it to the school.

        Connors decision to turn everyone into a lizard follows perfectly. He first has an unhealthy fascination with lizards. He then turns himself into a freak. But HE HAS HIS ARM BACK, that which he wanted for years. plus now hes fired. Instead of doing what is hard, admitting that he is a total failure, he rationalizes that being a lizard is better than being a human. Then, because hes rationalized that its better for him, but he also still feels like a freak and knows that hes going to have to live in the sewers for the rest of his life if he remains a lizard man, he decides that its better for everyone to be a lizard, and, were humans not sexier than lizards, and were lizard people not INSANELY AGGRESSIVE, he would probably be right, becuase he is stronger, faster, and smarter while a lizard.

        The antidote machine makes sense because humans, given enough money and time, will always create systems that automate all the work for them and make them just have to push a button. Oscorp is a multibillion dollar organization and Connors was having to make up serums and antidotes multiple times a day. He was being paid to do this to save Osbournes life, so obviously osbourne will “spare no expense” In order to speed up Connors work process by having such a machine invented.

        Finally, the villian at the end has a lot to do with all of the unexplained things in this movie and were they to reveal anything about peters father, or norman osbourne, or that villian, they would ruin the other two mysteries. trust me 😉

    2. I thought that moment was very realistic. Spider man had a good plan to photograph evidence of the lizard to give to the police cheif. But then he was a dumbass and left his camera behind for the lizard to find. What kind of a person buys a $500 camera without putting their name on it?

      Made perfect sense.

  4. Just watched Spider-Man 3 for the first time since the Blu-ray release. Wow, it IS terrible. While I liked it well enough at the time, there is just so much wrong with it. How could I have overlooked all the gaping flaws in it. Oh, because I finally loved the Goblin. But they destroyed MJ’s character in 3 and Peter was a prick BEFORE he even got the venom suit.

  5. Ok Lady, it’s time for you to stop talking now. It’s my turn to talk.

    There are so many things wrong in this review that I don’t know where to begin. Let’s start from the top shall we? For a Spider-Man “expect” you are certainly a moron for saying that the 3rd Spider-Man was “not that bad”. Spider-Man 3 is the reason we have a reboot. That film sucked more ass than George Michael. For a Spider-Man “expert” did you not think there was something severely wrong with how Venom was portrayed? No? Ok. I apologise to the ACTUAL Spidey fans for bringing this up in advance. I really am truly sorry to you people, but what about the emo Peter Parker dancing down the street? Nothing wrong with that? I’m guessing that was your perfect Spider-Man, yes?Next point. You slate Marc Webb for and the others for not understanding how Spider-Man ticks? I think you’ll find that Andrew Garfield’s Spider-Man is the best and most accurate Spider-Man that has been seen on screen so far. Without Marc Webb and the rest of the cast, that wouldn’t have been possible.

    I’m not even going to comment on your review of Peter’s relationship with Uncle Ben. Did you even go and watch the same film as everybody else? Did you fall asleep? You’re not blind because you can clearly see your keyboard in order to write this completely inaccurate review. “No remorse”… you really are a moron. You clearly missed Peter’s tears throughout the film. 

    I have to congratulate you on realising that Spider-man is not Batman, though. Did that take you the whole film to figure out? It’s called the mourning period. Where you lash out at everything, anything and everyone. It’s not rocket science.”He doesn’t seem to care about helping other people until this amazingly awful, on so many levels, scene where he rescues a kid trapped in a car.” You must have also missed the scene at the beginning of the film where Peter comes to the rescue of a kid being bullied by Flash Thompson? This was BEFORE he even had powers, too. Oh and that time in the basketball court? Ringing any bells? Nice one contradicting yourself also. First slating Webb’s work and now saying he did such good job in the 1st act.”I’m a Spider-Man expert, but I had no idea what the heck was going on with the teaser ending. Who was that guy and why should I care? They didn’t name who he was.” <—- This is THE most stupid paragraph I have ever read, in my life. 1. You're not a Spider-Man expert. You're not even an expert. 2. You said it yourself. IT'S A TEASER. Please pick up a dictionary and start reading.This review is ridiculous to say the least. Anyone who dislikes this film but enjoyed Spider-Man 3 and calls themselves a Spider-Man "expert" should NOT be allowed to review a Spider-Man film. In future, please stay the hell away from your keyboard. Instead, write your thoughts on a piece of paper and toss them in the bin.Thank you.

    1.  Reading comprehension skills in America are really poor. As the Joker says, “why so mad?” Did I not say I was wrong about Spider-Man 3? That it is unwatchable now. At the time it came out, I just didn’t think it wasn’t as horrible as everyone said it was. But after watching it again today for the first time in years. It is bad. I don’t waste my time reading long missives and attacks when people
      blatently ignore my original point just to bitch for the sake of being
      an ass. You people need to lighten up and I suggest you just don’t read my reviews in the future. I don’t need your “hit” that badly.

      1. Two more inaccurate statements from you, marvellous. 1. I’m not from America and is racist for you to assume so. 2. The Joker didn’t say that, at all. Nice try, though. 

        But not really.

      2. Wow.. I’m not trying to continue poking the dead horse.. but did you just say that Joker said, “Why so mad?” HAHA you didn’t watch the Dark Knight did you? It was “Why so Serious!” Goodness, we should all give you a superhero quiz, and you’d fail woefully… Mrs. Spider-Man Expert!

        1.  I said Spider-Man expert, not Batman. I don’t memorize every line verbatim.

          1. Well then, why didn’t you just write a review on Spider-Man and Spider-Man alone! That’s what bothered me about your review is that you called yourself and spider-man expert, then drew some false sources from Batman to back them up. There have been several other critics who gave this movie negative  reviews as much as the positive ones, but I actually respect their opinions because their beef is with the movie “The Amazing Spider-Man”. and Not an idea of what Spider-Man is, while comparing him with other superheroes that are not similar

          2.  Wow, you just really grasp! Did I actually mention Batman in this review other than to say Spider-Man is NOT Batman? Jesus, you really are retarded aren’t you?

          3. Hi Michelle, while your efforts to reason with the internet mob is admirable and understandable, you and i both know it is “ultimate”-ly (haha) fruitless. These people would rather die than admit that they’re mistaken about anything.

          4.  Well, you know the old saying about arguing with “fools.” I normally don’t respond, but feeling feisty this week 🙂

      3. the joker says, “Why so serious?” -______-

        but i did agree with you on the idea of Osborne being the cause of damn near every woe (with the exception of uncle ben…or is he? lmao) including him becoming spiderman. It takes away from spiderman being the average joe (not born super or being a billionaire) and having these powers serendipitously. That being one aspect that made his character truly likable and relatable.

        1.  Don’t you like “Why so mad?” better… Just saying 🙂

        2. no he is still serendipitously spider man.

          He got bit because he stuck his nose where it shouldnt have been, not because Osbourne was trying to turn him into spiderman.

        3. Furthermore, this version makes so much more sense.

          In what world does the first movie’s story make any sense?

          “Hey, we have spent hundreds of millions of dollars creating these ridiculously dangerous spiders. Lets just put them in little easy to escape glass containers RIGHT THERE where all our touring high school students, who will obviously be hopped up on hormones can mess with them, or where our competitor could easily break in and steal them.”  

          No way in H in real life they would leave the radioactive spiders in the open there, and furthermore, no way in H would they NOT notice immediately if one got out and futhermore, no WAY they would be able to escape that easily.  And beyond that, in the first movie it doesnt even make sense that somehow the spider could give Peter its powers by biting him. However, since the spiders in this version were made just so that they WOULD change a humans genes, it makes sense.

          Also, In this version they were in a quarantined room that you were supposed to wear a hazmat suit when entering that was locked in a limited access part of the lab.

          It actually MAKES SENSE this time.

          It happened serendipitously also because the businessman just HAPPENED to have the file that Peter would recognize and just HAPPENED to be on the way to the very room where the spiders were and just HAPPENED to need to take the two scientists guarding the room with him at that very time. How was that not serendipitous?

  6. Does this get published? In print? ‘Cause there are a whole bunch of spelling and grammatical errors and the writing style is quite… simplistic. It reads more like a Tumblr/forum post than a magazine review. Nothing against the author or their opinions, it just struck me as odd…

  7. no offense to you, but the teaser ending was supposed to be a hint as to who the new villain in the sequel is going to be. and i think you’re an idiot. this movie made me feel the entire spectrum of my emotions. 

    1. I know that but I missed the name, so who was it supposed to be? Oh, and great say no offense and then call someone an idiot? I’m not supposed to take offense? How about I call you a moron?

  8. WTF is with the repeated iMax references? It’s IMAX. Always been IMAX.

  9. I didn’t even notice this reply until now lol! No comments to say to you sir..I get my sources from comic books. and To argue about comics books is like arguing about which decade was better, they’re always changing! This isn’t Harry Potter where it’s just 7 books and what’s in the book stays permanent.  I arrest my case

  10. I’d just like to point out that while Uncle Ben’s death is what motivates Peter at first, it’s not what drives Spiderman. Guilt, really? That’s a pretty sucky reason for a hero to be a hero. Yes, it’s a major part in him realizing the error of his ways, but it’s his Uncle (and his dad)’s ideology about responsibility that drives Peter. It just takes Ben’s death for Peter to realize that his Uncle was right. Okay, it looks like he’s only out for revenge, and to a certain extent that’s true, but in his mind he thought he was also helping people by getting these guys off the street. It’s not like he caught a thug, discovered he wasn’t the guy who killed Uncle Ben, and the let him go. No, he still took the thugs to the cops. When he’s talking to Captain Stacey at the dinner table, it clearly shows that he thinks he’s really helping others, but he was being immature in the way he went about it, which is understandable – he’s only seventeen, after all. The Captain just opened Peter’s eyes and made him see that he wasn’t as great and noble as he thought he was.

  11. Alright, I think I’m done beating up this review and the critic. But now I’m interested if other reviews from this critic are at the same level as this one.I’ll be looking Forward to Michelle reviewing “The Dark Knight Rises” when that comes out

    1.  Only in your own mind did you beat anyone up.  Anyone with any reading comprehension and critical thinking skills could pick you apart, as it is essentially like running mental circles around a 5 year old.  You have no ability to reason rationally.  You use emotional responses with no proof as your “facts”.  Assumptions you make have no basic logical flow.  You refuse to provide credible sources to back up your statements.  The best part is you half ass research answers and then get them WRONG!  Anyone who knows ANYTHING about Marvel’s multiverse will tell you that 616 is Prime Continuity, and 1610 (Ultimate Marvel) is an alternate reality.  Wikipedia, the source you refer to most often, will even confirm that.   

      1. Thanks for further Proving me right Daniel. Your reading skills are quite below average aren’t they? So you’re gonna deny everything I said about Spider-Man? If so, you don’t even know what it is. You probably starting “Getting into the franchise” when 2002’s SPider-Man came out. I feel sorry for you. Go, run along now back to your lil hole and don’t reply me. I hate talking to smart aleck losers

        1. Sorry this response took so long, but yes, everything you said about Spider-Man was wrong except the fact that you actually spelled the name correctly as Spider-Man, not Spiderman.  My reading skills have always been exceptional, actually.  Here is a tip on your writing skills (assuming you read this).  In a debate or discussion, you must prove your points with factual references from a recognized authority.  I posted the original source material, which you refused to acknowledge.  As my posting of the actual comic MUST be fact, and it supports my stance, as well as that of the author of this review, we are right and you are wrong.  Your stubborn insistence that you are correct because you say so is much like a child insisting that rain makes worms, or old fruit is what makes bugs.  The adults all know you are wrong and most of them laugh at you, while the rest try to figure out a way to make you not look so stupid to the rest of us.

  12. I also find it SAD that your “rebuttal” agrees with most of the things I said. I’m not sure you were reading the right post.. but then again,alot of the youth today love to attack first, and think later

Comments are closed.