What’s it about?
Peter Parker finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. Curt Connors, his father’s former partner.
What did we think?
Anthony Sherratt says: My dad summed it up with: “the only thing I got out of that movie was sore eyes from the glasses”.
The plot has more holes than a spiderweb, Peter isn’t as likeable as previous incarnations and it feels as if the director was chosen merely because his surname is Webb. Not even strong performances from Emma Stone, Martin Sheen and Sally Field can save a film that only teens unfamiliar with the character will like.
I think the only Amazing thing about this movie is the fact no one stopped and looked at the script and said “wait a minute… half of this doesn’t make sense and the other half is stupid”.
This stank of poop the moment they announced it.
I liked it because:
(a) No Tobey Maguire
(b) Having Spidey and the villains share similar origins seemed more plausible
(c) No Tobey Maguire
Honestly I thought it was better than the original Spiderman, the movie gives a better backgrounding of the characters.. but then again, I may just be baffelled by Andrew Garfields good looks.