Tomatometer Watch: The Amazing Spider-Man

I'm going with 80%

Jun 26 - 07:11 AM

I am excited for this reboot. Andrew Garfield looks like a much better peter parker than toby ever was. Spider-Man is such a difficult personality to pull off. But i think Garfield can do it.

Jun 26 - 07:58 AM

Gustavo Filgueiras

The problem with Garfield is that he is very tall, Spiderman/Parker is way smaller than him.

Jun 27 - 06:30 PM

Mister Vile

Hmm... i guess i never thought of that. I don't think it will make much of a difference, but we will see.

Jun 28 - 07:35 AM

Daniel Raimondi

i really hope this is better than the other two so i guess 70 or a 65 percent

Jun 26 - 08:54 AM

Michael Patrick

I was skeptical at first upon hearing of the reboot, especially after the bad taste that three left, but I've been won over by the trailers and the casting.

Jun 26 - 08:59 AM

Link O'Fett

I'm very excited for this movie. Spider-Man is my favorite superhero, so I hope this movie will at least be a step above Spider-Man 3...

Jun 26 - 10:06 AM

scifi mark

well i cant imagine it wouldnt be better than the 3rd one

Jun 28 - 09:18 AM

Jeremiah Rancourt

I still liked Spiderman 3 and didn't think the series needed to be rebooted. I would much rather have had the Lizard in Spiderman 4 after all the lead-up that Raimi had given audiences rather than starting over again w/ a new Dr. Connors audiences don't have a connection to. Dylan Baker is probably punching the wall right now.

Jun 26 - 10:33 AM

Josh Leitzel

I knew this would be good.

Jun 26 - 12:37 PM

David E-Brock

I was having a lot of doubts,but the other day they put out a 25 minute splice of all the footage that has been released so far. Spoilers,but it mad me feel a lot more excited about the movie, I now think it is going to be really good...and I am not someone who thinks Emma Stone is the hottest or anything,but holy hell does she look gorgeous as Gwen Stacy.

Jun 26 - 01:25 PM

Lance Reeder

Good to see my optimism for this film vindicated at least early on. I always felt people were being a bit harsh on this film from the onset. I love Raimi as much as the next guy, but his trilogy was hardly perfect even excluding the last installment.

Jun 26 - 05:38 PM

Barney Funk

Raimi's was not perfect but they should have left Spider-Man alone for a while instead of making an immediate reboot with a whole new feel. Kind of jumping the gun if you ask me.

Jun 27 - 05:00 AM

Cody Clark

7 years is immediate to you? Why do we have to wait a long time for another spidey movie?

Jun 27 - 12:52 PM

Janson Jinnistan

It's been five. Which is short when you consider that the 4th Raimi film was scheduled to come out only a year ago.

Jun 27 - 02:58 PM

Bigbrother .

I like this kind of thing actually and I'll tell you why. These films are based on Comic books and what's one of the defining traits of comic book story lines? When something is bad they just erase it and come again until they get it right. If it works in the comics medium isn't it at least worth trying in the comics movie medium?

Jun 28 - 03:35 PM

Big Brother

Heck if Christopher Nolan would have made Batman Begins in 1998 maybe we all could have forgotten the atrocity of Batman and Robin 7 years earlier. P.S. Grant Morrison lost all my respect when he tried to defend Shumakers Batman's.

Jun 30 - 01:39 AM

Martin Tam

I'm thinking 85%-90%. Seems like they did a great job with the chemistry btw Garfield and Stone.

Jun 26 - 07:04 PM

Scott Gustafson

[For the sake of discussion I will only compare this movie with the 2002 SM movie]
I've been a comic book collector for the past 22 years and I never purchased a SM title because I thought he was a one dimensional character and over marketed: Spider-Man, Amazing SM, Spectacular SM, Web of SM, etc. It wasn't until Bendis and Bagley started Ultimate SM in 2000 that I realized how enjoyable SM can be if written and illustrated by professionals.
When I heard that SM was to be directed by Sam Raimi and the screenplay was written by David Koepp, I felt the work was in good hands. Kinda.
Just like the SM comic books, I was hesitant to invest my time on a SM movie back in 2002 because Hollywood has the tendency to take something beautiful and create a clusterfuck the likes of an Exxon oil spill.

The small inconsistencies upset me the most: Peter goes from high school to college in the blink of an eye. What happened to his years of teenage angst? His webslingers are genetic instead of mechanical. In the books SM is always complaining about fixing/refill his webshooters. MJ is his first love interest instead of Gwen Stacy, who, in the prints, is the one thrown of the bridge by the Green Goblin. And what happened to the comedic SM who shouts zingers faster than webbing? I counted two for the entire movie! What irked me the most was that Superman line Aunt May spouted in the hospital scene. As far as the acting goes, JK Simmons and Willem Dafoe were fantastic, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst could have read their lines off a prompter with the same emotion.
All the fanboys wanted to see how the movie compared to the prints, adults wanted some popcorn fun, kids wanted their imaginations fueled and Hollywood needed a cash cow. In the end, everyone got what they wanted, except Marvel, who made the biggest bonehead play since 20th Century Fox gave Lucas merchandising rights. Good job fellas. Then again, when facing bankruptcy, desperate times call for dumbass decisions.

Fast forward a decade (or five years since the last SM) and now we face another SM movie (series?) all because Sony needs to refill their coffers and decides to do so by resurrecting their zombie cash cow before their contract expires. Yay.
The good news (if there is any) is the story line is somewhat relevant to the comics: Gwen instead of MJ, mechanical webshooters, teenage angst and fast, one-liners (hopefully).
The bad news: the Lizard is our villian (Really? Was Electro, the Rhino or Kraven, the hunter not available?), a director who has barely cut his teeth in the Hollywood, three writers instead of one and from the reading of reviews this movie sounds less like SM 2.0 and more like Spider-Man on Broadway.
My prediction is this SM will make bank because the fanboys will want to see how it compares to the prints, adults will want to stuff their faces with butter-drowned popcorn and all the ADHD addled kids will want to emulate a teenager in spandex.
This time I'm not hesitant in the least bit because I'm not even interested. IMO, you can only reheat a meal so many times before it becomes dry and indigestible. Until Marvel/Disney decides to grow a pair and buy the movie rights back, my SM watching days are done.

Jun 27 - 06:36 AM

Jeremiah Rancourt

And down to 81% it goes, as predicted. It'll probably stay around here, though it could go as low as the high 70%s. Its not looking like a reboot inline w/ Batman Begins or even the Incredible Hulk. Unless the movie gets back up to the high 80%s, I'll probably stay home.

Jun 27 - 07:10 AM

Cody Clark

Your relying on a difference of 5% to see a film> Wow, you need to stop relying on critics THAT heavily.

Jun 27 - 12:57 PM

Herson Cruz

It's an 87% if you want to rely just on the Top Critics.

Jun 29 - 11:40 PM

Iron Will

76% and going down fast... screw you Sony for fast tracking this and muddling the product.

Jun 27 - 08:50 AM

Apoorv Burke

Firstly, I've always loved the Spiderman movies because they just seemed to tick all the right boxes and with this one, i am sure it will be even better considering there is even more action and faithful storyline. And dont believe the tomatometer. The critics just say that it doesn't feel a new story but it isn't supposed to be anyway

Jun 27 - 10:41 AM