Cannes Film Festival 2013

'Amazing Spider-Man' first reviews say it has solid action and unexpected depth

Critics praise Andrew Garfield's performance as Peter Parker

<p> 'Amazing Spider-Man'</p>

 'Amazing Spider-Man'

Credit: Sony

Are you a fan of Spider-Man?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

It may not open until July 3, but U.K. critics have already sounded off on the upcoming reboot "The Amazing Spider-Man," starring Brit Andrew Garfield at the wall crawler.

The first reviews are mostly mixed, but overall appear to lean toward positive. Those supporting the film seem to do so in a subdued way, without too much enthusiasm. Most critics agree that "The Social Network" co-star Garfield was a good choice, and that he makes a strong impression in his debut as Peter Parker. Emma Stone is also being praised for her work as Gwen Stacy, in particular over at Empire

The Guardian says, "Director Marc Webb is aided by a terrific performance from Andrew Garfield, who brings a genial unflappability that allows him to negotiate the often-ludicrous demands of the superhero plot line."

Want More...

Spider-Man?
  • Spiderman3_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.
The reviews also largely seem to dispel the notion that Webb ("500 Days of Summer") was going to turn the story into a live-action video game full of MTV-era visuals. Instead, according to The Guardian, "Webb successfully treads a fine line between keeping the hardcore superhero-movie fans happy and injecting a dose of meaningful affect." The review also praises the film's 3D effects. 

SFX points out that the film relies less on noisy 3D effects, and more on story, explaining "The most amazing thing about this Spider-Man is how much heart and genuinely warm storytelling it has...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."

Yet some reviews contend that the film is too slow and plot-heavy. The London Evening Standard's 2-star review complains that "Webb aims for a new realism, stripping away the brio of Sam Raimi's 2002 version with Tobey Maguire. He also dispenses with much of the character and sass that always made this character fun," adding "Webb's film is slow on plot, [and] skimpy on character development."

Although the paper gives it 4 out of 5 stars, some Marvel fans may be disturbed by the Telegraph's observations comparing the film to a certain vampire-friendly franchise. "Ever since 'Twilight' tipped off Hollywood to the spending power of girls and their mothers, a range of increasingly expensive films aimed at that audience has materialised. Perhaps it was only a matter of time before a superhero suited up with them in mind, although it remains to be seen how die-hard Spider-fans will react to their hero courting a different — some would say rival — demographic."

Are you excited for "The Amazing Spider-Man"? Do you think it can match Raimi's first two films?
 

Trending Now on HitFix Boards
Topic Started By Latest Post Replies
sandylewis90
11 days ago
2
sandylewis90
30 days ago
1
Discuss In Theaters and Coming Soon on HitFix Message Boards »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Dave I

    If the biggest complaints are essentially that it has too much depth and focuses too much on the plot then I can live with it. A lack of character development or a movie comparatively following the footsteps of Twilight and (paraphrasing) aiming movies at young girls would be troubling.

    I suspect Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield will both be great, and Marc Webb was solid in "500 Days" so none that worries me. My main reason for possibly skipping it in the theater is that yet another origin of an already established character, in a high-school-reboot nonetheless, is so unnecessary and redundant as to be boring. I hope it does well enough. I'm sure it will make enough money. I'll probably catch it on video and see what they do after they get the (entirely unnecessary) reboot/high-school/origins retelling out of the way. Sorry, I cannot get beyond that, at least not enough to actually pay money for it. Maybe next time.

    -Cheers

    June 20, 2012 at 4:09PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I As an aside to Hollywood (just in case you're listening), you can target movies to girls as well as boys without making them a "boy" movie or a "girl" movie. Sure, there are things generally aimed at one gender or the other. So sure, you can probably add action and a love story and family matters. However, I think we all want the same thing. A great plot, appropriate pacing, great acting, believability, appropriate fun, appropriate depth and gravitas.

      So yeah, just make a great @#$%ing movie that is not too far to either end of the spectrum and people will probably watch it. Adding Emma Stone and giving her something meaningful to do was not a bad move. In fact, that seems to generally be a good idea, she happens to be great. But no, don't try to turn comic or action movie into a "chick flick" or feel like you have to strip away good storytelling because it's just a comic/action/horror/guy/etc. movie. Quality trumps tropes.

      -Cheers

      June 20, 2012 at 4:13PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      malicious You are so gonna watch this movie - why fight it?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:16AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I Am I going to watch it? Maybe on video. Otherwise, no, not unless my kids want to see it.

      As for why fight it? Honestly, to throw out a voice expressing that I do not approve and hoping eventually enough of us can sway the studios to come up with a better plan, or at least not just cater to demographics per se and focus on what actually makes movies special. They will still make a lot of money and it will be more sustainable than plugging it into some equation of what to add to meet current trends.

      So no, I"m not going to see this in the theater. No way.

      -Cheers

      June 27, 2012 at 11:34AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    jdstorm

    Anyone Who's seen Spiderman-2 knows that it has lots of "Chick flick" elements. A love Triangle. a Wedding an annoying yet sympathetic female protagonist. A Killer Water Soaked Kiss.

    Yet it is Arguably the best Superhero movie ever.

    June 20, 2012 at 11:46PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Dune Buggy

    I'll admit that I'm surprised about the early positive reaction but my mind isn't changed from reading it. I just don't see a point in rebooting this franchise aside from a cash grab, no matter how I look at it.

    Most hardcore comic book fans already hate this movie, have since it was first announced. Even the slight implication that this is somehow geared towards a larger demographic than them inflames their rage even further.

    Unfortunately for them, they are not the audience anymore. I wish the movie well, but like Dave above, I can't get behind it either. I'm still holding out hope for some original ideas on the big screen in the future.

    June 21, 2012 at 1:35AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      malicious I think you need to read Dave's comment again.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:15AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I No, Dune Buggy's right. I wish them the best, but it's not for me and I am definitely not behind reboots. Maybe the second one after they have the "we need to reboot the series so we can retell his origin... again!" out of their system.

      -Cheers

      June 27, 2012 at 11:35AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    jared

    I was a fan of the comic until they absolutely destroyed the book with stupid idea after idea and an idiotic way to end the marriage afterward. It became the worst comic I'd ever had the misfortune to read. Seeing this movie stuff just reminds me of that garbage. The weird thing is, I was watching Spider-man three and that's when that miserable stuff was going on. what was that, 3 years ago?

    June 22, 2012 at 10:43PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Breaking News

Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web