Just finished watching "The Amazing Spider-Man" Movie again and wanted to claim my opinions about the flick. First off, I think the actors of the screening were good choices, based on each character of the Marvel comic, Spider-Man. I think I would rate the movie 7 out of 10, as there was action-packed, but still focused on the main theme of the movie, which usually results in a good movie. One thing they could've explained and emphasized on more, was Peter Parker's development into becoming "Spider-Man" such as him learning about his abilities, to use and harness them, customizing his suit, and so forth. That probably would've opened up the story and character more in the movie. What did you guys think about the screening?

I am a bit biased, since I can't stand Toby Maguire as an actor, just so everyone knows.

That being said, I found ASM to be a great movie. I loved the humor and the action. I appreciated the movie telling a story about Parker and Stacy, without throwing MJ in there since she is more well known. The only true thing I didn't like were the alterations to the origin due to technology differences of the mid 20th century and today (though, those were obviously necessary changes, and I don't hold it against them for making said changes.)

@ckuakini said:

"One thing they could've explained and emphasized on more, was Peter Parker's development into becoming "Spider-Man" such as him learning about his abilities, to use and harness them, customizing his suit, and so forth. That probably would've opened up the story and character more in the movie."

I think the studio spent less time on the development of Spider-man, because of the previous films. They knew that the general public have probably only seen the films and aren't deeply attached the characters like we are, and they found a way to cut costs by foregoing a deep development that most people would find repetitive. That's just my personal take, of course.

I personally like the ASM. Unlike @BigMaraSpence, I personally liked the technological changes they made to the origin of the movie. I also think the actors chosen were perfect. I think Andrew Garfield did an excellent job of showing us the goofy, funny, nerdy, side of Peter Parker without being a total loser the way Toby Maguire was.

@vicske77: I agree with you all the way. But in some cases I think Peter should've had spider web strings in his DNA to shoot them spontaneously like the previous Spider-Man Movies, instead of him building a device to do so. You agree? I know the storyline takes place from "The Amazing Spider-Man" Comic which talks about Peter Parker from Earth #616, but the whole technological device with the spider web's kind of corny.

@ckuakini I'm personally on the wall about the web devices. I think its more realistic to have the devices which is something I like. But, at the same time since the spider bite enhanced his senses, made him stronger, and he has the sticky hands why not just be able to spin webs as well.

I basically feel the same way @vicske77: feels about the film. I do have some issues with the plot:

• What was the deal with that scientist? He gives Dr. Conners some crap, he gives Peter a dirty look, he's on the bridge, and the he's never heard from again. Did he die? What happened to that guy?
• Did Peter give up on searching for Ben's killer? He spends a good portion of the movie desperately searching for this dude, and then it was never referenced again after Lizard went to the bridge. Some closure on this part of the story would've been awesome (as it's kind of a big deal to the whole Spider-Man story), but they just sort of forgot about it.

I also had some issues with the way Sony marketed the film. The whole basis for the posters/trailers/etc. was how we were going to witness "The Untold Story." What untold story? His parents? How they were mentioned in the beginning and were never referenced to again until the very end? Even at the end, nothing was resolved. We just got a brief mention buy a shadowy figure, and then nothing after that. We were promised an "untold story," but in the end, not only did we not get this story they spoke of, but we got even more questions about it.

Other than these issues (I'm just nit-picking here, but the more I think about it, the more inquisitive I get), I truly did enjoy the movie. I loved all the characters, and I felt that each actor did an excellent job in their respective roles.

@Gambit1024: Yeah, I really wish Sony let Webb tell the story he wanted to tell. I think the movie was great, but it was cut and edited to s###. There's over 17 minutes worth of deleted scenes, one of which, Dr. Ratha dies in.

Yea now that I think about it, What did happen to that scientist? In regards to Uncle Ben's murderer, at the very end of the movie they do show his wanted poster still on Parker's cork board. Maybe a hint that he is still looking for the guy. That could be a stretch though. I also think they left his parents story unanswered because I feel its going to have a bigger role in the overall story of the ASM series. I think Kurt Connors and Oswald are going to end up having to do something with his parents death so how.

@The_Tree: Agreed. Webb's a very talented director, and I know that the movie would've been ten times better if he was the one calling all the shots. I do know about those deleted scenes (still haven't seen them), but the fact that those didn't make it in the final cut, especially the one concerning Ratha's fate, just burns me up. Don't introduce a plot-line only to have nothing be done with it. Know what I mean?

@vicske77: I get what they're trying to do with his parents' story and I dig it, but I just think that it was stupid to market this film as if this was the one where all the "untold" stuff was going to be told.

@Gambit1024: Oh, he's incredible, I loved 500 Days of Summer and Amazing Spider-Man. I'm really hoping he gets more creative freedom with Amazing Spider-Man 2. I totally get what you mean, if the storyline's worth starting, it's worth finishing.

@The_Tree: See? This is why we're friends :P

@Gambit1024:

I thought it sucked.

@TheCannon said:

I thought it sucked

Now stay there until you apologize.

@wr3h said:

@TheCannon said:

I thought it sucked

Now stay there until you apologize.

Okay, I apologize for saying I thought it sucked. I should of said it was God Awful.

I thought it was pretty good. I'd say either on par with, or a little tiny bit worse than Spider-Man 1. Gwen was the best part, Emma Stone nailed her part.

@TheCannon said:

@wr3h said:

@TheCannon said:

I thought it sucked

Now stay there until you apologize.

Okay, I apologize for saying I thought it sucked. I should of said it was God Awful.

Loved this movie!

my only concern was the mutated rat , peter just left did he ever web up the ugly little bugger? is he going to be vermin? (completely ridiculous rumor i just made up)

@wr3h You didn't add anything, only quote me.

@TheCannon said:

@wr3h You didn't add anything, only quote me.

:D

Amazing Spider-Man was a bit below average.Peter stuttering and kept on breaking stuff with his powers late into the film was annoying.The film was kinda average.I hated how Peter didn't keep his promise about keeping away from Gwen Stacy.When the film was over, the audience looked kinda bored.Only half stayed for the credits.

I didn't like the realistic take of the film.The film ties to be realistic but then there's the giant lizard.

it was pretty good.i loved this movie.