The Amazing Spider-Man OFFICIAL Rate & Review the Amazing Spider-Man! - Part 1

[Nathan]

Even though J.K. Simmons played the role perfect and is one of the few best portrayals of a comic book character?

Even though I thought he was funny as hell, I didn't like that he was nothing but pure comic relief. Especially with Tobey being so lifeless. Jonah out-funnied freaking Spider-Man. That's just wrong. Basically, every time I laughed at Jonah, it only amplified my disappointment of Tobey's Peter/Spider-Man.

It was also disappointing that he really didn't even have any kind of development. Even with TAS Jonah you get to learn why he doesn't like Spider-Man, because his wife died by the hands of a masked mugger. So he mistrusts everyone who hides their face. With this Jonah, he tries to bust Spidey's balls just for the heck of it.

 

[Web face]

True, but to contrast this, Webb's villain isn't as developed as he should have been.

I agree that Lizard wasn't developed that well (the deleted scenes would have helped a TON though), but Connors staying alive in the end at least gives the slim chance that he might have more development in future installments of this series. He might have a larger purpose in the series than just being the Lizard.

 

[Nathan]

I actually hope that Peter goes to him when he needs help with genetics.

 

[OcStat]

He does, but to be honest, it kind of hurt the movie at times. Peter is supposed to be the most relatable superhero of them all, what's he doing handling holograms is Oscorp, trying to find the cure for limb regrowth? And the scene when he invents the webshooters is there as little more than fan service. They could have been integrated into the story some more. It's an example, IMO, of things they put in just for the sake of being new, but not necessarily useful.

I disagree. Peter is relateable because he is a teenager. THAT is the crux of Spider-Man,why the character took off and why Ultimate Spider-Man worked. Him being smart is an important part of the character, and I always thought Raimi sidestepping that was a mistake (though I see why he did it for his movie, and his reasonings validate your opinion). But really his relateability comes from the drama of being a teen and dealing with life and death, girls, that teenage isolation, and arrogance (before he learns power and responsibility), hiding things from Aunt May, etc. I thought ASM did a great job showing Peter's smarts. He has his little gadgets around the house, and the important thing: it alienates him from his peers.

The way he handled Harry was magnificent, I thought. And he held it up for two movies. It was one of the many things that made SM3 such a must-see. Too bad he blew it, though.

Harry's story arc is the best thing about Raimi's trilogy, and the thing I always anticipated the most for SM3. It's why I still enjoy the movie as much as I do, Raimi still executed those parts of the film (mostly) well.

Even though J.K. Simmons played the role perfect and is one of the few best portrayals of a comic book character?

The first 2 films yeah, but you gotta admit that by SM3 it was obvious there was nothing for Jonah/Simmons to do but comedic relief.

Actually I think the Scorpion would be a great way to show a different side of JJJ and give him more depth, too bad Raimi didn't jump on that, doubt Webb will either...he should though.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

Other than the portrayal of Spider-Man, you have:

• A Peter Parker who shows he is smart
• A much better love interest played by Emma Stone
• More realistic web swinging
• Better CGI
• A villain that does not die!
• Great chemistry between all the characters, and much better dialogue
• A lot of elements you can theorize on (which of course will be answered in the sequels)
• The build up to Norman Osborn--he isn't really in the movie, but his presence is really felt throughout the film "behind the scenes"
• Flash Thompson has a bigger role, and shows himself as a Spider-Man fan
• Spider-Man gets badly hurt, and it affects him. Raimi's Spider-Man seemed invincible at times.
• Stan Lee's cameo
• Foreshadowing and planning for future films... I know you said not to list something that applies to sequels being set up, but Raimi never planned too much for sequels *cough* killing Green Goblin and Doc Ock...
• New Yorkers helping Spider-Man made more sense this time. Less Random.
• He doesn't call himself Spider-Man as soon as he dons the costume. I like how he goes through a few stages of creating the costume as well. First just a jacket and hat, a red mask with sunglasses, and finally the Spider-Man costume.

Eh, I feel that this is a little over-positive in some points. They did explore his intelligence a bit, like how he created all that tech on his door and the web-shooters, But that's more creative than smart, imo. The algorithm stuff was cool though, so this is a valid point. As for the "becoming Spider-man" sequence, I felt that it was a bit rushed and I just love how Raimi PP sat down and came up with a costume. (And the Human Spider was much better imo.) Speaking of that, he probably wore the Human Spider costume first in the Raimi film because he was spending weeks making the final product. I think that sort of answers the question on how he made that perfect costume. The NY help scene felt cheesy and just put in there, and it was instantly forgettable imo. In the Raimi film it made sense because you had the junk boat and the people on the bridge helping out and doing all they could w/o any previous encounter with SM. The randomness made sense. People barely knew what was going on in ASM and just decided that SM must have been the hero. (Except for Ray of course, who somehow immediately spread the word) The build-up isn't that great to me because that's ALL THEY DID. Most of the time they were just setting up for the sequel. I came out the movie saying "What's next?" It wasn't completely satisfying. Even the end he hints at Peter getting back with Gwen, which of course will happen in THE SEQUEL. I think that the film should have been a little more coherent. It felt like a set-up with a Lizard story, imo.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Eh, I feel that this is a little over-positive in some points. They did explore his intelligence a bit, like how he created all that tech on his door and the web-shooters, But that's more creative than smart, imo. The algorithm stuff was cool though, so this is a valid point. As for the "becoming Spider-man" sequence, I felt that it was a bit rushed and I just love how Raimi PP sat down and came up with a costume. (And the Human Spider was much better imo.) Speaking of that, he probably wore the Human Spider costume first in the Raimi film because he was spending weeks making the final product. I think that sort of answers the question on how he made that perfect costume. The NY help scene felt cheesy and just put in there, and it was instantly forgettable imo. In the Raimi film it made sense because you had the junk boat and the people on the bridge helping out and doing all they could w/o any previous encounter with SM. The randomness made sense. People barely knew what was going on in ASM and just decided that SM must have been the hero. (Except for Ray of course, who somehow immediately spread the word) The build-up isn't that great to me because that's ALL THEY DID. Most of the time they were just setting up for the sequel. I came out the movie saying "What's next?" It wasn't completely satisfying. Even the end he hints at Peter getting back with Gwen, which of course will happen in THE SEQUEL. I think that the film should have been a little more coherent. It felt like a set-up with a Lizard story, imo.

Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man never really showed off his smarts. He had some dialogue with Doc Ock, and talked about the "papers he read." But we actually see Andrew put his smarts to use. He goes through Dr. Connor's book and reads through his dad's notes to come up with an algorithm. He knows how to operate Oscorp technology, too.

As far as New Yorkers helping out Peter in TASM, I'm sure they knew what was going on. There was a giant Lizard attacking the city, and climbing up the Oscorp tower. They figured out that the guy with Spider powers must be going to the same location. Also remember Captain Stacey stopped his team from going after Spider-Man, so at that point the police was on his side. The crane operators were probably informed by Ray, and helped out Spider-Man.

For SM1, I never understood why the Goblin never just threw a pumpkin bomb at the people throwing stuff at him.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Peter Parker is smart though in Raimi's trilogy, even if not really showing as much as creating webshooters or a lock in his room.

Still, its much better to show, not tell.

By using more practical effects, but that's mostly given credit to Webb for doing this, not really the film.

That's like saying "By having good performances, its mostly given credit to the actors, not the film." The practical effects ARE A PART OF THE FILM. So they count.

It's only a leverage because of it being ten years later with better graphics having improved for film. No one really complains about the graphics in Superman: The Movie because it's a great film.

Technology has improved, but the better the CGI, the less the movie will age years to come.

True, but to contrast this, Webb's villain isn't as developed as he should have been.

He wasn't as developed, but Dr. Connors was a great character in the film.

The question was for this single film alone.

Okay, but when I say you can "theorize" on something, that still counts for this film alone. It makes it more interesting, trying to figure out what is going on now could say about what WILL happen eventually.

Because nothing happened to him in the '02 film, lol.

What's your point?

Killing Green Goblin obviously was planned in using the Goblin legacy throughout the trilogy. Even if not planned in the first movie, it had to be an idea while writing Spider-Man 2 which continued with Spider-Man 3.

Peter doesn't call himself Spider-Man first in Raimi's film as well.[/QUOTE]

Its not like he ever says "Who am I? I'm Spider-Man". He didn't come up with the title, but by the time he dons the costume, he is officially "Spider-Man." In TASM, he is still referred to as "the vigilante" until the bridge scene.

 

[AF3619]

Its not like he ever says "Who am I? I'm Spider-Man". He didn't come up with the title, but by the time he dons the costume, he is officially "Spider-Man." In TASM, he is still referred to as "the vigilante" until the bridge scene.

i think he was unofficially called spiderman because Gwen says "you´re spiderman"(1:45)
[YT]p-lPr6uHrcc[/YT]

 

[Picard Sisko]

i think he was unofficially called spiderman because Gwen says "you´re spiderman"(1:45)
[YT]p-lPr6uHrcc[/YT]

She was kind of cut off there, so I don't know if she was going to say "Spider-Man." But if that was the case, then I guess she took Bruce Campbell's job.

 

[Smegger56]

i think he was unofficially called spiderman because Gwen says "you´re spiderman"(1:45)
[YT]p-lPr6uHrcc[/YT]

She was kind of cut off there, so I don't know if she was going to say "Spider-Man." But if that was the case, then I guess she took Bruce Campbell's job.

I can't give Gwen credit for the Spider-Man naming here. This could be left open for interpretation. She says he's something, but it's not clear as Picard Sisko says she's cut off. I tried listening a few times, but ant make it out.

But regardless, for me, he doesn't become Spider-Man until the bridge bit anyway. That was the moment he becomes the selfless hero. He becomes 'Spider-Man'.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I can't give Gwen credit for the Spider-Man naming here. This could be left open for interpretation. She says he's something, but it's not clear as Picard Sisko says she's cut off. I tried listening a few times, but ant make it out.

But regardless, for me, he doesn't become Spider-Man until the bridge bit anyway. That was the moment he becomes the selfless hero. He becomes 'Spider-Man'.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Still, its much better to show, not tell.

When there is a scenario to show, then yes, I'd agree with you. But what we got in Raimi's film is Peter just stating facts out of the top of his head and we never got that in TAS-M.

That's like saying "By having good performances, its mostly given credit to the actors, not the film." The practical effects ARE A PART OF THE FILM. So they count.

It's still a choice by the director. It doesn't make the film anymore better except for trying to make it look as real as possible. With that, I wouldn't count it as making the film any more 'positive' than the '02 film.

Technology has improved, but the better the CGI, the less the movie will age years to come.

If the movie is great, then the CGI won't really matter as I made for example, Superman: The Movie.

He wasn't as developed, but Dr. Connors was a great character in the film.

Only better than Venom and Sandman, imo, but that's not saying much.

Okay, but when I say you can "theorize" on something, that still counts for this film alone. It makes it more interesting, trying to figure out what is going on now could say about what WILL happen eventually.

So you couldn't theorize what could happen in Raimi's film either?

What's your point?

You said Raimi seemed invincible at times, but that's not true. Spidey did get beaten even in the first movie and actually was beaten the most in the trilogy in the first film.

Its not like he ever says "Who am I? I'm Spider-Man". He didn't come up with the title, but by the time he dons the costume, he is officially "Spider-Man." In TASM, he is still referred to as "the vigilante" until the bridge scene.

Voicing over in the end of the name he was given earlier in the film and just rolled with it. But he still nonetheless didn't give himself his own name.

 

[Picard Sisko]

When there is a scenario to show, then yes, I'd agree with you. But what we got in Raimi's film is Peter just stating facts out of the top of his head and we never got that in TAS-M.

So Peter stating random facts off the top of his head is better than Peter actually using his skills to figure things out?

It's still a choice by the director. It doesn't make the film anymore better except for trying to make it look as real as possible. With that, I wouldn't count it as making the film any more 'positive' than the '02 film.

So by that logic, good performances and good special effects do nothing to make the movie more "positive?" Everything counts.

If the movie is great, then the CGI won't really matter as I made for example, Superman: The Movie.

CGI isn't as important as a good plot, but it certainly enhances the experience. Think of the original Star Wars films, 2001: A Space Odyssey, etc.

Only better than Venom and Sandman, imo, but that's not saying much.

Green Goblin wasn't that much better than the Lizard IMO.

So you couldn't theorize what could happen in Raimi's film either?

You could theorize on Raimi's film, but not to the extent of TASM. You could guess how the Spider bite gave him powers, why he somehow got organic web shooters in his two wrists, what those little pointy things in his fingers were, etc. But these were things that weren't really going to be answered or further examined in the sequels, and weren't that important. You could theorize on when Harry would become the Green Goblin I guess.

Voicing over in the end of the name he was given earlier in the film and just rolled with it. But he still nonetheless didn't give himself his own name.

Point is, one second he is Peter Parker, next thing you know he is Spider-Man. In TASM, even after he has the full costume and everything, he doesn't become "Spider-Man" until he saved the kid from the burning car.

 

[Anno_Domini]

So Peter stating random facts off the top of his head is better than Peter actually using his skills to figure things out?

Using his webbing in locating Lizard was nice, but that is only one thing Peter actually used to figure something out. Not a big deal. Especially when it didn't really work.

So by that logic, good performances and good special effects do nothing to make the movie more "positive?" Everything counts.

Not really. Both films even had great performances, except for the love interest and we both already agreed Stone's Gwen Stacy was better.

CGI isn't as important as a good plot, but it certainly enhances the experience. Think of the original Star Wars films, 2001: A Space Odyssey, etc.

Sure, it enhances somewhat, but I don't give lesser points to a film either that has been upped by a reboot with better effects.

Green Goblin wasn't that much better than the Lizard IMO.

I can respect your opinion because you obviously really enjoy this film, but to someone who prefers Raimi's first two films, you know why I disagree with Lizard.

You could theorize on Raimi's film, but not to the extent of TASM. You could guess how the Spider bite gave him powers, why he somehow got organic web shooters in his two wrists, what those little pointy things in his fingers were, etc. But these were things that weren't really going to be answered or further examined in the sequels, and weren't that important. You could theorize on when Harry would become the Green Goblin I guess.

The bold is what I was referring to; nothing about the spiders.

Point is, one second he is Peter Parker, next thing you know he is Spider-Man. In TASM, even after he has the full costume and everything, he doesn't become "Spider-Man" until he saved the kid from the burning car.

Next thing he becomes Spider-Man? Not really. That montage showed Peter was saving people before he was really dubbed 'Spider-Man' even.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Using his webbing in locating Lizard was nice, but that is only one thing Peter actually used to figure something out. Not a big deal. Especially when it didn't really work.


Not really. Both films even had great performances, except for the love interest and we both already agreed Stone's Gwen Stacy was better.



Sure, it enhances somewhat, but I don't give lesser points to a film either that has been upped by a reboot with better effects.



I can respect your opinion because you obviously really enjoy this film, but to someone who prefers Raimi's first two films, you know why I disagree with Lizard.



The bold is what I was referring to; nothing about the spiders.



Next thing he becomes Spider-Man? Not really. That montage showed Peter was saving people before he was really dubbed 'Spider-Man' even.

We had Peter operating Oscorp technology, he was the only one in the group who knew about Cross-species, has the cool lock on his door that is remote controlled, and although he didn't create the webbing formula, he knew how to create the web shooters. Not really common knowledge if you ask me.

As for everything else, we could go back and forth for weeks, but we once again we're heading into opinion territory. Let's just say we both make good points and agree to disagree in some areas.

 

[mayo23]

He also knew what was wrong with the freezer off the top of his head.

 

[Anno_Domini]

We had Peter operating Oscorp technology,

Hrm? When was this?

he was the only one in the group who knew about Cross-species,

After research and reading Connors' book.

has the cool lock on his door that is remote controlled, and although he didn't create the webbing formula, he knew how to create the web shooters. Not really common knowledge if you ask me.

Two things I already mentioned in the first place, lol.

As for everything else, we could go back and forth for weeks, but we once again we're heading into opinion territory. Let's just say we both make good points and agree to disagree in some areas.

Okey-dokey.

 

[Chris Wallace]

In the interest of fairness, I'm going to list the things I did like:
Some of the action sequences were pretty slick. Especially the school fight. That was probably the best part of the movie. I liked the Lizard's plot overall; his wanting to overthrow humanity was fairly consistent with the comics. Besides, if we wanted to watch a mindless, rampaging reptile terrorize New York we could watch Godzilla '98.
That said, I won't go into a comprehensive debate about what I didn't like because I don't see the point. I will, however, touch on something I've found utterly infuriating; the hypocrisy of the reboot fans. I've been repeatedly attacked on Facebook, been called various bodyparts simply for expressing my opinions. I've endured 5 years of RELENTLESS Raimi-bashing and never once have I resorted to name-calling or personal attacks. And I think about some of the complaints I've read against the Raimi trilogy; ok-you don't like organic webbing because it diminishes Spidey's genius. But it's perfectly fine to see him wearing a web-shooter that he didn't truthfully invent, made out of parts he shouldn't have access to, which contains an UNLIMITED supply of organic webbing! (Another complaint was that we didn't get to see him run out.) You wanted a simplified costume, closer to the comics, and more plausibly designed by an inexperienced teenager. But there seemed to be very little complaint about a suit that was the EXACT opposite. There was SO much complaining about the amount of time Tobey spent unmasked. But more people saw Peter Parker's face over the course of this ONE movie than in the previous trilogy combined. You wanted a story that was closer to the comics but eagerly embraced a movie that drew about a third of its inspiration from Ultimate and made up the rest. As I've said before the Raimi series wasn't without its flaws but I feel it was better than this movie all around.

 

[Rise_-]

I don't think just because you've "endured" years of Raimi bashing it makes it right for you to completely outright bash another take on everyone's favourite Webhead, that's just childish. If you don't like it, that's fine.

There's people that like both too, y'know. I love Raimi's and Webb's.

 

[Rise_-]

And what's wrong with the Ultimate comics? Are they not comics or something?

I'd rather they look at them if they want a contemporary take, which they have gone for than comics from the 60s. I'm really bugged by "purists"...

You're never going to see 100% of what was in the source material in the actual movie, there's going to be variations, etc.

At least they didn't make Gwen a **** like in the Ultimate comics, she's more how she was in the TSSM show, which I loved.

 

[OcStat]

BOTH series of films have picked and chosen what they want from the Amazing and Ultimate lines.

 

[Rise_-]

Eh, TASM took a lot more. Can't think of much of what the previous trilogy took apart from a younger Brock.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Eh, TASM took a lot more. Can't think of much of what the previous trilogy took apart from a younger Brock.

MJ and Harry in High School.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

In the interest of fairness, I'm going to list the things I did like:
Some of the action sequences were pretty slick. Especially the school fight. That was probably the best part of the movie. I liked the Lizard's plot overall; his wanting to overthrow humanity was fairly consistent with the comics. Besides, if we wanted to watch a mindless, rampaging reptile terrorize New York we could watch Godzilla '98.
That said, I won't go into a comprehensive debate about what I didn't like because I don't see the point. I will, however, touch on something I've found utterly infuriating; the hypocrisy of the reboot fans. I've been repeatedly attacked on Facebook, been called various bodyparts simply for expressing my opinions. I've endured 5 years of RELENTLESS Raimi-bashing and never once have I resorted to name-calling or personal attacks. And I think about some of the complaints I've read against the Raimi trilogy; ok-you don't like organic webbing because it diminishes Spidey's genius. But it's perfectly fine to see him wearing a web-shooter that he didn't truthfully invent, made out of parts he shouldn't have access to, which contains an UNLIMITED supply of organic webbing! (Another complaint was that we didn't get to see him run out.) You wanted a simplified costume, closer to the comics, and more plausibly designed by an inexperienced teenager. But there seemed to be very little complaint about a suit that was the EXACT opposite. There was SO much complaining about the amount of time Tobey spent unmasked. But more people saw Peter Parker's face over the course of this ONE movie than in the previous trilogy combined. You wanted a story that was closer to the comics but eagerly embraced a movie that drew about a third of its inspiration from Ultimate and made up the rest. As I've said before the Raimi series wasn't without its flaws but I feel it was better than this movie all around.

That's stupid. ASM ran in the sewers and in school w/o his mask. He fought the Lizard maskless! Did you give your review already, if so, could you post it?

 

[Picard Sisko]

And what's wrong with the Ultimate comics? Are they not comics or something?

I'd rather they look at them if they want a contemporary take, which they have gone for than comics from the 60s. I'm really bugged by "purists"...

You're never going to see 100% of what was in the source material in the actual movie, there's going to be variations, etc.

At least they didn't make Gwen a **** like in the Ultimate comics, she's more how she was in the TSSM show, which I loved.

to everything you said.