The Amazing Spider-Man is set to hit theaters on July 3rd. Sony Pictures has screened the film to a few media outlets already, and the reviews are out! The reviews are mixed, but I still can't wait to see it! It looks like it's going to be a solidly entertaining movie. I guess it all depends on if you're willing to accept the changes director Marc Webb has made. What I like about what I'm hearing about the reviews is that the film actually focuses more on the characters and story.
Here's some experts from a bunch of reviews below from around the web. Chech them out and let us know if they change your opinion on seeing the film.
SFX: "But as the film to kickstart the franchise afresh, The Amazing Spider-Man more than succeeds. It may not have the non-stop action and spectacle of Avengers Assemble, but it does have characters you can fall in love with, and bags of charm. You feel the series is in safe hands with Webb, Garfield and Stone. And in an extra scene in the end credits, it also delivers an enticing cliffhanger that should definitely leave you wanting more..."
Twitch: "The Amazing Spider-Man certainly delivers the minimum required of its expensive genre, and those who just want another fix of super hero action with a bit of heart will probably have a good time with it. But, it’s never at all jaw-dropping, stunning or even particularly exciting. It’s the type of film that’s not painful to watch and equally easy to shrug off."
The Hollywood Reporter: "This somewhat darker depiction of your friendly neighborhood superhero inserts a touching portrait of adolescent angst into an otherwise predictable dose of CGI-fueled action, with stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone breathing new life into Stan Lee’s 50-year-old creation. .. While the two leads deliver the goods and manage to combine a frisky sense of first love with the movie’s gloomier arc, they are well-served by a terrific supporting cast, with Sheen as Peter’s tough-loving guardian angel, Denis Leary as Gwen’s overprotective policeman dad and Ifans as an increasingly mad scientist whose reptile leather fetish yields disastrous results."
The Evening Standard: "Webb's film is slow on plot, skimpy on character development. It takes 45 minutes for Peter's Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) to be murdered, an hour till we see the spider suit. Then Peter goes from dorky to cocky without passing charm on the way. Brittle Gwen turns gooey the moment he turns up at school battered from fighting crime. So, chicks dig scars, right? The "RealD 3D" is fine for the flying sequences, confusing in the fights, and gives that awful cardboard-cutout look to narrative scenes. Webb saves up most of the emotional punch for a downbeat, wet-eyed ending in which Garfield and Stone are superb. Then there's a completely nonsensical scene cueing up the inevitable sequel."
The Daily Mail: "There isn’t a lot that hasn’t been seen before, and although the special effects are impressive, they’re no improvement on Spider-Man 2, which remains by far the best of the franchise. Director Marc Webb, hired on the strength of his indie romcom 500 Days Of Summer, does a competent job, helped by his two talented leading actors, but doesn’t bring anything fresh to the party. The writers don’t make Parker’s abandonment issues interesting or original (they come across as a trivialised versions of Batman’s), and the screenplay could have done with more humour."
The Guardian: "It’s the successful synthesis of the two – action and emotion – that means this Spider-Man is as enjoyable as it is impressive: Webb’s control of mood and texture is near faultless as his film switches from teenage sulks to exhilarating airborne pyrotechnics. It’s only towards the end, when there is no choice but to revert to CGI – as Rhys Ifans’ Lizard goes on the rampage – that The Amazing Spider-Man gets a little less amazing."
The Telegraph: "On paper Gwen might be the love interest, but in many ways she’s the main character, giving us a human perspective on the superhuman drama. (Garfield and Stone have a plausible, pensive chemistry together, and for once that actually matters.) Gwen’s father, a police captain, is out to stop both Spider-Man and his arch-foe The Lizard (Rhys Ifans), a scientist whose genes get spliced with reptilian DNA. Here, the girlfriend’s dad is just as much of a threat as the supervillain.
While Raimi got fanboys drooling with Kirsten Dunst in a rain-soaked vest top, Webb’s leading lady remains clothed and dry. Instead, the camera ogles Garfield, whose enviable glutes are showcased quite magnificently in his skin-tight bodysuit."
Empire: "..It takes the high school bit of Raimi’s flick, expands it to three acts, then sutures in a scientist/green alter-ego thread, this time in the shape of Rhys Ifans’ Curt Connors/The Lizard. The result is a mixed bag, beset by muddy plotting and decent (not jaw-dropping) action set-pieces but enlivened by a focus on people and strong performances, especially from Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone.
This is solid rather than spectacular blockbuster filmmaking. When Parker finally suits up, we get a return to the irreverent wisecracking of Stan Lee and Steve Ditko absent from Raimi: this is your sarcastic, neighbourhood Spider-Man (“Oooh, my weakness is small knives”), nonchalantly sneezing webbing to apprehend villains or beating up street hoods — to use Andy Townsend parlance — for fun.
Graced with great performances from Garfield and Stone, The Amazing Spider-Man is a rare comic-book flick that is better at examining relationships than superheroism. If it doesn’t approach the current benchmark of Avengers Assemble, it still delivers a different enough, enjoyable origin story to live comfortably alongside the Raimi era."
Variety: "While this is essentially a remake of Raimi's perfectly good "Spider-Man" (2002), the lure of (excellent) 3D and Imax showings should help rev up fanboys, even if they feel it's something they've already seen; still, such auds might be disappointed by how long it takes to get to the action.
The screenplay, surprisingly compact despite the 136-minute running time, is co-written by James Vanderbilt ("Zodiac"), "Harry Potter" scribe Steve Kloves and Alvin Sargent, who also worked on Raimi's version. Following that earlier template, the film roughly falls into two halves, the stronger of which is the first, set before the birth of Peter Parker's unitard-wearing alter ego.
Some elements have disappeared (most notably the Daily Bugle newspaper, with Peter now shooting photos for … himself?), and some concessions have been made to fit the new villain, Oscorp employee Dr. Curt Conners, aka the Lizard (Rhys Ifans), into this origin story. Yet it's still essentially a coming-of-ager/romance hybrid, albeit one that feels even less comicbook-like than Raimi's."
Alerts From GeekTyrant
Choose a movie, show, actor, director, topic, or GT author to receive email alerts about.