The Amazing Spider-Man (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 12:40:10 PM)

Post your comments on this article




BelfastBoy -> (19/6/2012 12:40:10 PM)

Cool, am I the first person to notice this review is online? Right, well, am going to commend Freer for a balanced, spoiler-free review that pretty much describes the film I was imagining - competent, lacking a wow factor, well cast but ultimately a completely pointless reboot of a franchise that didn't actually need rebooting. (Why's it so hard for studios to realise that they don't need to keep endlessly redoing origin stories? He's bitten by a spider, we get it! Why not just preserve what continuity there is, and just recast / recruit new crew members where necessary?)




homersimpson_esq -> (19/6/2012 12:41:22 PM)

Can I please point people to this thread - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3127568 - before commenting here.

Let's review the film, not review the review.

*looks tentatively at the Prometheus thread*

Ahh, who am I kidding...




homersimpson_esq -> RE: (19/6/2012 12:42:28 PM)

^My comment was a general catch-all. Didn't see you had replied already BelfastBoy.




MonsterCat -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 12:44:15 PM)

OK, my interest level is starting to rise now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BelfastBoy

Why's it so hard for studios to realise that they don't need to keep endlessly redoing origin stories? He's bitten by a spider, we get it! Why not just preserve what continuity there is, and just recast / recruit new crew members where necessary?



Yeah, this.

And it's not as if Spider-Man 3 was an embarrassment of Batman & Robin proportions.




homersimpson_esq -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 12:45:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

OK, my interest level is starting to rise now.


Emma Stone makes my interest level rise too.




MonsterCat -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 12:47:46 PM)

Ryan Gosling pretty much has the same effect on me.

I'm assuming that you were using interest level as a euphemism. [:D]




guysalisbury -> What a Shame (19/6/2012 1:00:01 PM)

I was really hoping for a 4 star review. Think ill wait for a few of you peeps to go and see it and see what you all think. Not a huge fan of Stone but Garfield is great. My main reason for wanting to see this is the Lizard who was a great villain in the cartoons. Lets just wait and see :)




Medion -> RE: (19/6/2012 1:09:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BelfastBoy

Cool, am I the first person to notice this review is online? Right, well, am going to commend Freer for a balanced, spoiler-free review that pretty much describes the film I was imagining - competent, lacking a wow factor, well cast but ultimately a completely pointless reboot of a franchise that didn't actually need rebooting. (Why's it so hard for studios to realise that they don't need to keep endlessly redoing origin stories? He's bitten by a spider, we get it! Why not just preserve what continuity there is, and just recast / recruit new crew members where necessary?)


The point is to bring the character back to what was central to his popularity i.e. the awkward nerd and the wisecracking superhero; fitting that into the continuity of the original 3 films doesn't work.




adambatman82 -> RE: What a Shame (19/6/2012 1:10:28 PM)

I saw it last night and was largely impressed. It is a little underwhelming compared to the scale and spectacle of the average good blockbuster, but this is something different. It's character driven, and the action almost seems shoe-horned in, in a way. It is an interesting and well made take on the Spidey origins tho, in spite of any niggles I might have.




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: What a Shame (19/6/2012 1:42:12 PM)

Very good,solid review from Empire.




Cool Breeze -> RE: What a Shame (19/6/2012 1:45:55 PM)

Ok I'll go first......BUT HOW CAN THEY SAY THIS IS BETTER THAN SPIDERMAN 3 WHEN THEY ALSO GAVE THAT THREE STARS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[:D]




Jamie_M -> Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 2:04:09 PM)

I wouldn't read too much into this 3 star review, remember,, this is the site that gave Superman Returns 5 STARS??? Total film, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Times and every rother review on the internet have all been far more positive.




giggity -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 2:18:40 PM)

Hopefully these good-decent reviews will continue, and will also hopefully put an end to this incessant bitching that happens on forums and comment sections whenever Amazing Spiderman is mentioned.




PearceyHUFC -> Seriously? (19/6/2012 2:27:12 PM)

All i can say is that i cant agree anymore with the comment posted by Jamie_M ! Spot on! 3 is too low




Rebenectomy -> RE: The Amazing Spiderman (19/6/2012 2:33:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PearceyHUFC

All i can say is that i cant agree anymore with the comment posted by Jamie_M ! Spot on! 3 is too low


What did you think of the film?




Filmfan 2 -> RE: Seriously? (19/6/2012 2:36:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PearceyHUFC

All i can say is that i cant agree anymore with the comment posted by Jamie_M ! Spot on! 3 is too low


Congratulations, you win The Absurd Post of the Day Award!

I'll take the above back if you've actually seen the film, but how can you post a comment like that otherwise?




jace007 -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 2:51:53 PM)

I agree and something I said before on PROMETHEUS: Either this reviewer was getting hints from a comic book fanboy and trying to look clever by quoting Bagley; or he was instructed to give TAS a 3 star rating to boost more hits).

I'm giving it 5 stars as I am a fan of the character and know Garfield,Stone & Leary will rock. Is it me, or was Rhys Ilfans not mentioned at all?




Jamie_M -> Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 3:10:25 PM)

Sorry guys, I forgot to point out that I WAS lucky enough to actually see the film last night and I thought it was excellent. Put it this way, its 1000 times better than Spiderman 3,( and we all know how bad that was) yet empire also gave that 3 stars?? Before throwing it on there own list of worst movies of all time!!
This movie deserves better than a 3 star review in my opinion,
every other review has been far more positive.




adambatman82 -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 3:18:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jace007

I'm giving it 5 stars as I am a fan of the character and know Garfield,Stone & Leary will rock.


That's really interesting. Do you rate all films you haven't seen before doing so?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jace007

Is it me, or was Rhys Ilfans not mentioned at all?


He's not really worth mentioning tbh. He's the single biggest problem for me, in that he's uneventful and the only real bit of miscasting.




chris kilby -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 4:07:25 PM)

Three stars? Uh-oh...




MonsterCat -> RE: The Amazing Spider-Man (19/6/2012 4:13:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jace007

I agree and something I said before on PROMETHEUS: Either this reviewer was getting hints from a comic book fanboy and trying to look clever by quoting Bagley; or he was instructed to give TAS a 3 star rating to boost more hits).



Are you capable of saying things that are not ill-advised and dumb?




homersimpson_esq -> RE: Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 4:17:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jamie_M

Sorry guys, I forgot to point out that I WAS lucky enough to actually see the film last night and I thought it was excellent. Put it this way, its 1000 times better than Spiderman 3,( and we all know how bad that was) yet empire also gave that 3 stars?? Before throwing it on there own list of worst movies of all time!!
This movie deserves better than a 3 star review in my opinion,
every other review has been far more positive.



Hi, did you read the link I put above? The one that has in its content that not all 3 star reviewed films are equal?

Awesome. As you were, then.




rawlinson -> RE: Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 4:23:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: homersimpson_esq

Hi, did you read the link I put above? The one that has in its content that not all 3 star reviewed films are equal?

Awesome. As you were, then.


Can't you find a way so that thread comes up before someone posts? A "By posting in this thread you agree not to be an absolute arse" page.




chris kilby -> RE: Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 4:30:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson

"By posting in this thread you agree not to be an absolute arse."



Good luck with that.




Woger -> RE: Only 3 stars?? (19/6/2012 4:56:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: homersimpson_esq


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jamie_M

Sorry guys, I forgot to point out that I WAS lucky enough to actually see the film last night and I thought it was excellent. Put it this way, its 1000 times better than Spiderman 3,( and we all know how bad that was) yet empire also gave that 3 stars?? Before throwing it on there own list of worst movies of all time!!
This movie deserves better than a 3 star review in my opinion,
every other review has been far more positive.



Hi, did you read the link I put above? The one that has in its content that not all 3 star reviewed films are equal?

Awesome. As you were, then.


Should that not be "all three star films are equal, some are more equal than others"

Also Empire, when are you going to see The Dark Knight Rises?




Cyberleader -> (19/6/2012 6:27:17 PM)

Only 3 stars? You sound like you love it- yet 3 stars is such a down mode...




SlashJnr. -> Happy 50th birthday Spiderman, with a cracker of a film (19/6/2012 7:24:35 PM)

Having been privileged enough to see the Amazing Spiderman last night I was totally blown away. Although a fan of Raimi's efforts, I've got to say Webb's Spidey is much closer to the comics (in my opinion) and the entire film was simply Amazing (apologies for the cliche). I rarely disagree with Empire's reviews but although the reviewer does point out the best of the film (the relationship between Stone and Garfield, not to mention Uncle Ben and Aunt May as well as the wit). Yes, the action sequences take a kind-of back footing a bit, but after all, the difficulty for this film is that it has to not only tell Spidey's origins and then deliver a solid comic-book action-packed tale but also that it has to tip-toe around the highly-acclaimed previous installments (that it strives to take a different route to). All in all, the film is rip-rawing success, from the humanity of Peter to the relationships between the characters (especially those concerning parenthood and companionship which are, in my opinion, the best in a comic-book movie to date), to Spiderman's 'birth' and exploits. Rhys Ifans as the Lizard/Connors, was also brilliant. The ambiguiety of the Lizard/Connors' relationship and affiliation (good vs evil) is handled excellently, and whilst I was horrified with the redesign of the lizard, it worked, remarkably well. Overall, not only has Webb has crafted a fantastic film and I look very forward to any sequels and hope that Garfield's stint as Spiderman continues to be of such high quality (which it seems to be, Garfield is put simply, Peter Parker in real life. BEST CASTING EVER). And so, from a HUGE Spiderman fan since youth, this film gets a solid 5 stars from me.




jodybriggs -> sigh (19/6/2012 10:23:08 PM)

patently unnecessary reboot. just fox cashing in by milking it's few comic licences to death. i hope this kind of turn around doesn't become an acceptable norm for more studios.




SUPER_movie_FREAK -> I knew it! (19/6/2012 10:57:42 PM)

I was thinking a few weeks back what rating this would be given. I guessed it would be 3 stars because that’s what the average blockbuster gets these days, and I was right. Sounds better than the Spider-Man 3 train wreck. However from the trailer it doesn't look anything special or spectacular. Plus it is a pointless reboot. Why they couldn't just carry on the series from the 3rd one (so we didn't have to go through the whole origin story) with a new cast and director (a la the James Bond franchise) is beyond me. I probably won’t see this. I’ll wait to see The Dark Knight Rises (which isn’t your average blockbuster).




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875