sign in
register
Watch
Netflix fuboTV Disney Plus
+10
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Netflix fuboTV Disney Plus
+10
JustWatch

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

2014
Sci-fi
Fantasy
2h 22m
Peter Parker runs the gauntlet as the mysterious company Oscorp sends up a slew of supervillains against him, impacting on his life. (imdb)
Directed by:
Marc Webb Marc Webb
Written by:
Alex Kurtzman Alex Kurtzman Roberto Orci Roberto Orci Jeff Pinkner
+2 more
Starring:
Jamie Foxx Jamie Foxx Paul Giamatti Paul Giamatti Embeth Davidtz Embeth Davidtz Marton Csokas Marton Csokas Colm Feore Colm Feore Campbell Scott Campbell Scott Sally Field Sally Field Emma Stone Emma Stone Andrew Garfield Andrew Garfield Felicity Jones Felicity Jones B.J. Novak B.J. Novak Dane DeHaan Dane DeHaan
More
Franchises:
The Amazing Spider-Man, Spider-Man
Genres:
Sci-fi, Fantasy, Action, Adventure
AKA:
The Amazing Spider Man 2
Country:
USA
Language:
English
imdb More information at IMDb
See title update history
Suggest an edit
Show Less
Your probable score
?

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

2014
Sci-fi
Fantasy
2h 22m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 31.9% from 3613 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(3613)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
xakkmasterXakkMaster
Rated 25 May 2014
74
48th
OK, so the Spider-Man part of the movie is great. Garfield is fit to play this role. He and Emma have undeniable chemistry too, which makes the development of their relationship all the more touching. However, as has always been my personal issue with the franchise, the numerous villains feel rushed and their motivations are weak. Foxx does decently with his role, but they should have put more focus on him & left the Harry plot to heat up on the back-burner until the next film. Still enjoyable.
Rated 25 May 2014
beedubBeeDub
Rated 11 Apr 2016
78
40th
Not terrible, just disappointing. I quite enjoyed the reboot, but this was an unfocused mishmash of too many characters, villains, subplots, and sequel setups. Still, I'm sad we'll never get a proper follow-up to this. On to the next reboot!
Rated 11 Apr 2016
leonardisLeonardis
Rated 04 May 2014
82
39th
I honestly don't see what all the complaint is about. Sure it's long, sure it's a bit crowded, but The Amazing Spider-Man 2 doesn't lack ambition, entertainment, good acting or even a good screenplay. Sharply directed and very visual. While there are some flaws, this is a good Spider-Man movie. Stands really well as an imperfect character study more than anything.
Rated 04 May 2014
cagedwisdomcagedwisdom
Rated 24 Apr 2014
50
38th
This rebootchise has a cheesy villain problem. It's camp and cheap in weird places, and you can't do that and also try to score dark tone points. Has to be one or the other. Needs consistency, focus, a better script, and less unfunny humor - in particular, Spidey's self-banter. Certain scenes are good and within a better whole could have been something pretty special. It sets up some potential for the next film, so if they put out a solid third act this will end up looking better in retrospect.
Rated 24 Apr 2014
billyshearsBillyShears
Rated 09 Oct 2018
50
21st
All the spider-man stuff in the spider-man movie is good, what a shock (ha). I only watched this because the Spider-Man PS4 game is so good and I needed to ruin my spidey tingling. God awful music ahead. Dane DeHaan has the worst hair. I’m trying to cram too much in here and it’s some sort of commentary on this mess I guess.
Rated 09 Oct 2018
juntakinte99juntakinte99
Rated 13 Dec 2021
70
38th
With a young cast & indie director, it should've felt like a coming-of-age film that happened to be about a superhero. But like Batman Forever, this movie is overproduced; featuring multiple villains (one comic, one darkly gothic), a hero learning of his past, and a romance. And that doesn't even count deleted scenes, like Shailene Woodley as Mary Jane. A marginal recommendation for the appealing cast, and one scene that recreates one of the most famous moments of the Spider-Man mythology.
Rated 13 Dec 2021
barthalenBarthalen
Rated 28 Apr 2014
65
44th
It's getting closer to what unfolds in my imagination when I think of the term 'Spiderman Movie', but it's not quite there yet. Main issues: the uneven pacing, unresolved conflicts and somewhat weak motivations from most characters to do things. Spidey is also too passive, there is no interesting story motivating him to do anything but punch criminals. And Peter's story is too soap opera-y. But like a sucker I'm still looking forward to the 3rd installment. The Sinister Six? My body is ready.
Rated 28 Apr 2014
ozymandius10ozymandius10
Rated 05 May 2014
40
5th
Too many villains, terrible pacing, and horrible music choices. How a movie can blaze through plot points so quickly and still seem long is baffling to me. The Rhino was completely unnecessary, and the relationship between Peter and Harry was explained in like 2 minutes (and boy howdy is Dane DeHaan bad in this). It's honestly difficult for any of the actors to elevate this bad script. A horrible disappointment, and I long for the day when Sony can't hurt Spider-Man anymore.
Rated 05 May 2014
dresd_r_e_s_
Rated 02 May 2014
3
65th
I actually like the "new" witty Peter Parker compared to Maguire's shy version. Obviously there is great chemistry between Garfield and Stone and that definitely highs the experience, although, in between the great action, you miss the real motivation, the real hurt and anger, for this to kick in. Still, it's all good fun, better than the first one, and I'm looking forward to the next installment.
Rated 02 May 2014
fredericg54frederic_g54
Rated 24 Apr 2014
7
57th
A surprising improvement over its 'let's pretend we've never seen it' predecessor. It kinda zips along as it pleases, full of unexplained plot holes and unlikely character motivations, but the relationships are more fleshed out and there's no denying the entertainment value the film offers. Then again, I haven't gotten out much lately so going to the theater was a welcome change.
Rated 24 Apr 2014
jessforrestjessforrest
Rated 25 Apr 2014
65
47th
-5 points for the amount of dubstep
Rated 25 Apr 2014
cinemaasiaCinema_Asia
Rated 05 May 2014
65
42nd
The most emo of all spiderman films. At any moment you expect Harry Osbourne or Peter Parker to whip out razor blades and commence the cutting. Garfield weeps like a bitch no less than 4 or 5 times in this..I lost count. The action is ok I guess, it's all obvious CGI which gives everything the appearance of a Playstation game. Emma Stone is well, Emma Stone..a generic blonde co-star #1343. Giamatti is campy as hell. Foxx is the only decent villain. The script decisions and editing is odd.
Rated 05 May 2014
therealj_roTheRealJ-Ro
Rated 03 May 2014
70
42nd
A visual upgrade, but a downgrade execution-wise. I enjoy Garfield's take on the character, but sometimes find his goofy schtick overdone. They treated the end of Gwen's story arc properly and with a darker edge than the rest of the flick would suggest (which can be both good and bad, as you'd like to see a consistent tone throughout). Electro's personality and motivations baffle me a bit. Feels like some trailer material was cut from the final film. It's a mixed bag, but see it if you're a fan.
Rated 03 May 2014
easydiffeasydiff
Rated 04 May 2017
36
26th
Nothing movie with nothing villains and nothing plots for nothing stakes. The web-swinging looked cool.
Rated 04 May 2017
trixrabbiTrixRabbi
Rated 05 May 2014
67
24th
You got what you wanted, nerds. Now all the kids in the audience are crying and your precious canon is intact. I hope you're happy.
Rated 05 May 2014
macswellMacSwell
Rated 04 Sep 2014
50
25th
Garfield and Stone have strong chemistry and make an affable pair in Peter and Gwen, and the film only gets by on the back of their relationship. The villains are the main problem - Electro is unconvincing in every imaginable way, Green Goblin is lazily tacked-on and Rhino's little more than a one-note joke. Additionally, the CGI action scenes are fairly humdrum and far too showy, and the ending is rushed due to so many superfluous scenes earlier on.
Rated 04 Sep 2014
luna6ixLuna6ix
Rated 20 Jan 2017
77
62nd
Just not as good as the first one. I dug Foxx as Electro, but Lizard was simply a better villain. I'll still say that this Spider Man series is better than the one Raimi put out, even if it hurts me to say so, and Garfield looks like he really shouldn't make a good spider-man, but he does. So this one ends up being decent, but not great.
Rated 20 Jan 2017
henrikHenrik
Rated 21 Mar 2019
30
8th
Lots to hate: An overstuffed plot that takes forever to set up and develop it's conflicts and characters, very few and bland action scenes, its overall patronising and PG feel, Sally Field's mopy face, Dane DeHaan's whining and his evil grin as the Goblin, Giamatti's cameo as Rhino, and that fucking stupid kid in the end!
Rated 21 Mar 2019
hellboy76hellboy76
Rated 12 Sep 2015
66
51st
It's not bad, its just not the epic this character deserves. Easily the most charismatic of the Marvel heroes, he languishes in sub par action flicks with paper thin villains.
Rated 12 Sep 2015
difontaineDifontaine
Rated 10 May 2014
65
40th
Well that was a lot of film. I felt Garfield and Stone held this madness together but wow. If you liked it or hated it that's fine, I can see both arguments. The good outweighed the bad for me.
Rated 10 May 2014
twincinematwincinema
Rated 19 Sep 2014
35
14th
A big pile of red and blue garbage.
Rated 19 Sep 2014
nothingsgoodNothingsGood
Rated 02 May 2014
25
15th
Given a proper re-write or two, it could have been the Empire Strikes Back of comic book movies. Instead it's the Spider-Man 3 of The Amazing Spider-Man series, just with less dancing.
Rated 02 May 2014
letskillrobotsletskillrobots
Rated 06 May 2014
13
31st
Realizing that I could have watched one of the LOTR flicks in the same time was a real bummer.
Rated 06 May 2014
sirsassSirSass
Rated 23 Jul 2015
45
23rd
I just wanted me some Giamatti.
Rated 23 Jul 2015
ytadelYtadel
Rated 12 May 2014
3
28th
If you were to show someone the first and last twenty minutes of this movie and tell them to just imagine the middle part, I could see them thinking it's pretty good. It launches fun; it ends exciting. But this may be damn near the "second act problems"-est movie I've ever seen, with its middle section a glacially-paced, zero-excitement near two-hour tumor of what I conservatively estimate to be 400 million subplots. The middle stretch of this film is just plain bad.
Rated 12 May 2014
vandelay1Vandelay1
Rated 04 Jun 2017
43
42nd
watchable
Rated 04 Jun 2017
vv238vv238
Rated 18 Sep 2018
20
14th
The most amazing thing about this Spider-man is just how terrible the script is. It is a nonsensical mess of poor pacing, head-scratching plot, and horrendous character motivation. Almost everything else is bad, too.
Rated 18 Sep 2018
dakota99Dakota99
Rated 16 Aug 2018
5
42nd
Webb's sequel was overly ambitious in a lot of areas. Whether that was too many subplots, made for TV drama between Peter and Qwen. Electro and the green goblin being under cooked. It still remains to be seen how much Sony forced themselves into this as their absurd attempt to shove the Sinister Six was very annoying. They took chances, and it's still thoroughly entertaining, but sadly I think this could've been an excellent addition to the Spidey franchise, instead of killing it.
Rated 16 Aug 2018
matthew_parkinsonMatthew Parkinson
Rated 02 May 2014
10
2nd
With a crowded plot and character motivations that change from scene to scene in order to make each individual moment "work," The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is more or less a complete disaster. Its characters undergo short, confusing arcs -- if they get any at all -- and make no sense, the actors can't do a good job because their characters' motivations are too confusing or they're not given enough time to perform, and the action isn't good enough make up for this.
Rated 02 May 2014
josh_forrestJosh Forrest
Rated 24 Apr 2014
25
19th
Spidey's nonchalant attitude pissed me off more than I remember from the first movie.
Rated 24 Apr 2014
kgbelliveaukgbelliveau
Rated 10 May 2014
80
51st
Not as strong plot wise as it's predecessor, as it tries to go in too many directions at once. It relies heavily on quick paced action scenes to transition between heavier themes. DeHaan is probably the most impressive,his demeanor chilling and eerie right from the start. Garfield and Stone are amicable but don't do much to add more depth to their characters. Heavy on the CGI and heavy on the foreshadowing the Amazing Spiderman 2 is simply just another comic book film with tonnes of action
Rated 10 May 2014
morphinapgmorphinapg
Rated 05 Dec 2021
95
94th
I think this movie gets WAY too much hate, and some of it is focused on the most unimportant things, like Rhino for example, which is nothing but fun action to open and close the movie. I think the story and characters are designed well, but were designed as set up for a third movie that never happened. The spider-man action is the best it has ever been, and love that they did the Gwen storyline justice. Not as good as the first overall, but still way better than people give it credit for.
Rated 05 Dec 2021
peaceanarchyPeaceAnarchy
Rated 05 Aug 2014
72
32nd
It's fine. Kinda bland and overlong and forgettable, but it has its moments and the leads make me care enough about them to tolerate it all while watching.
Rated 05 Aug 2014
martrynmartryn
Rated 01 Aug 2015
71
54th
I liked the way this ended, more or less. It fails to top the first Andrew Garfield Spider-Man, though, and pretty much paved the way for Spidey to come home to the Avengers, so at least we've got that going for us. Middle of the film felt real meh, and I hated Jaime Foxx as the villain.
Rated 01 Aug 2015
lawlaw
Rated 25 May 2019
5
0th
I initially gave it a higher rating on account of its budget, but then I asked myself, was there ANYTHING I actually enjoyed or at least appreciated about this? The answer is no. It has zero value except as something to gawk at.
Rated 25 May 2019
wxlWXL
Rated 08 May 2018
75
60th
Don't get me wrong, this movie is bad. But there is something about Emma Stone's performance that makes this movie both entertaining and super rewatchable.
Rated 08 May 2018
unjmsUnjmS
Rated 26 Apr 2014
69
15th
The pacing in this movie is bad, really bad. While i did enjoy the overall story and the charisma of the movies visuals this movie was very hard to sit through. Every story line seems rushed, filled with potholes and underdeveloped.) But at the same time the movie is unfolding and crawling at a snails pace. With some better allocation of screen time and the removal of pointless scene/charecters*coughrhinocough*this movie could have been alot better
Rated 26 Apr 2014
lightning17Lightning17
Rated 09 May 2014
76
61st
The visuals and performances are excellent, and it definitely exceeds the first in the series, but it is weighed down by too many undeveloped villains. All that aside, this may be the most heart wrenching and heart breaking superhero film I have ever seen.
Rated 09 May 2014
knuthknuth
Rated 02 Jan 2015
55
12th
Oh well, I had a hangover... Part two
Rated 02 Jan 2015
anaakianaaki
Rated 11 May 2014
20
5th
Almost unwatchable. I would ask how this got made, but we all know why: merchandising. Too many villains, rushing plot, not giving time to the dramatic moments only to jump right into action. Horribly cheesy dialogue (even for Spider-Man). And the music/score doesn't match the tone of any of the scenes.
Rated 11 May 2014
noisebloomnoisebloom
Rated 07 Feb 2021
39
5th
As mediocre as The Amazing Spider-Man was, the sequel is an absolute trainwreck, bloated with scenes that don't develop the plot, a nonsensical story, and an overall dissatisfying take on the character.
Rated 07 Feb 2021
jack_parsonsjack parsons
Rated 04 May 2014
7
41st
Finally! A Peter/Spidey portrayal that is a worthy comic book derivative. The humor has always been subpar or missing, but I feel like the personality was spot on this go around. I don't quite understand the hate, I enjoyed nearrrrly everything. A very well done emotional arc with Gwen, too. Elektro, on the other hand, was a mess. A better written villain was needed.
Rated 04 May 2014
desertpunkDesertPunk
Rated 03 May 2014
77
66th
I will dub this score and review the first of many in a series I'd like to call "Goin Against that Grain." No, this isn't a great movie. It stumbles and struggles under its own weight. But I've never seen a movie before that made me feel like I was back in 3rd grade, picking up a new Spider-Man comic and reading it twice before I even got home. I can forgive a lot of things if you can bring me some of the magic of comic books that I've lost. Gritty messes masquerading as comic book movies don't.
Rated 03 May 2014
pluggedinPluggedIN
Rated 03 May 2014
80
82nd
More so here than in the first film, our hero is a fellow we can cheer. A guy who's settled into being ... good. He's got humor and pluck and a never-give-up spirit. He cares for family and friends. He takes time to bolster everyone he meets. But more than anything he wants to do the right thing, no matter the cost. And that applies to everything from putting himself in the line of fire while saving a city, to simply upholding a private promise. (pluggedin.com)
Rated 03 May 2014
quez2goquez2go
Rated 09 May 2014
71
48th
This movie has received a lot of criticism and to some extent I get it, but I found it very entertaining from start to finish. It may be the most comic book in style of any superhero movie I've seen, which makes a bit over the top at times, but I think it pulls it off. I like Marc Webb's Spider-Man movies, definitely preferable to The Dark Knight Rises, Spiderman 3, and of number of other mediocre to bad superhero movies over the years. Electro was fairly poorly done to be fair.
Rated 09 May 2014
badfurdayBadFurDay
Rated 09 Jan 2021
5
40th
Weird how the whole movie drags only to rush the finish. Pacing issues ruined it more than anything else, the tone is a bit too dark but the character does feel like og comic book spiderman more than in any spidey movie before this one. It was fun to watch though, but in a world where the MCU exists this doesn't cut it.
Rated 09 Jan 2021
guy-piranhaguy piranha
Rated 26 Apr 2014
60
40th
It's like riding a rollercoaster that get's stuck for half an hour on every turn. The on-off, ultracliché romance bullshit is even more tedious than in raimi's installments (how did they manage that?!). The action scenes are nicely...rendered(?), but make an excruciating use of slow motion. The laughably weak "villains" feel more like necessary props to the stupid lovestory, which almost redeems itself by evoking a real emotion other than nausea in the finale. But too little, too late.
Rated 26 Apr 2014
emirhanshnEmirhanShn
Rated 22 Oct 2018
70
34th
After the success of the first film, it is a serious low quality film.
Rated 22 Oct 2018
chiptbhtvChiptbhtv
Rated 03 Oct 2017
30
10th
If you're in the market for a quality Spider-Man film, you're in the wrong place. This movie fails to deliver on so many levels, it's almost laughably bad. But not quite. It's just straight up unwatchable.
Rated 03 Oct 2017
uhrmacherUhrmacher
Rated 08 May 2014
55
0th
I went in expecting mediocrity and got one of the worst films I've ever seen. It is impossible to understate the awfulness of this script. Horrendous dialogue, every possible cliche and tension building side events that a 12 year old at summer camp would revise before putting in writing. It's a 2.5 hour version of a theme park motion simulator ride. In the words of the great Mike Stoklasa, "loud fucking noises!"
Rated 08 May 2014
antidood1antidood1
Rated 03 May 2014
60
34th
There's lots to love and lots to hate here. In terms of visual spectacle, this movie blows all the previous ones out of the water. It's very poorly paced, the attempts at light-hearted humor are even more terrible than in the first one, and the backstory for the main villain was ridiculously bad. I had the most fun when Paul Giamatti and Marton Csokas hammed up their roles to ridiculous levels. The script is wobbly and overcrowded with subplots. This is a messy movie, but it's fun nonetheless.
Rated 03 May 2014
kramyessevKramYessev
Rated 03 May 2014
75
72nd
Erratic and half an hour too long, but enjoyable and the best entry in the franchise since 2. All the cast do a great job and hopefully 'that moment' signifies a darker future for adaptations, as it did for the comics.
Rated 03 May 2014
moribunnyMoribunny
Rated 20 Dec 2014
15
7th
Will Americans never get sick of this crap?
Rated 20 Dec 2014
vdecraimVdecraim
Rated 22 Aug 2014
70
42nd
This movie has it all. Maintenance closets, crazy german scientists, biological weapons, exploding power plants, and HOLY SHIT THOSE FIGHTS ARE AWESOME!
Rated 22 Aug 2014
joseywalesjoseywales
Rated 10 Nov 2014
66
46th
I feel 66 is a bit higher than I wanted to rank this, but I compare it directly to Raimi's Spider-Man 3. Sure the Spidey/Green Goblin/Gwen thing was done perfectly, but the Electro/Rhino stuff was fluff and the Peter Parker thing was too Twilighty.
Rated 10 Nov 2014
montycircusMontyCircus
Rated 03 May 2014
60
69th
Spider-man has always been my favourite superhero, so I'm a bit of an easy sell when it comes to these movies. This one...gets better as it goes along. I wasn't really enjoying it that much for most of its running time, but by the end it left me hungering for more. Not as good as the first two Tobey Maguire flicks (the joke is: this is the second best Spiderman 2...ever!), but if you liked the first Amazing Spidey, you'll like this one as well. (Last seen July 2023)
Rated 03 May 2014
myfavchordsmyfavchords
Rated 02 Jul 2016
65
16th
How can you make a film about Spider-man and make it boring? Somehow everyone involved here manages to make a boring movie. The script is not very interesting and the action scenes seem like they have been done before. Overall this film is disappointing.
Rated 02 Jul 2016
sirstuckeySirStuckey
Rated 07 Sep 2014
70
56th
A lot of things in this movie were annoying me. It was a tad too CGI looking and Peter Parker/Gwen Stacy teenage relationship was obnoxious. Then the ending saved it all and elevated it quite a bit in my eyes. Garfield is a great Spider-man, or at least he is written more like Spider-man than Maguire was. I still don't buy him as Peter Parker considering how cool he looks.
Rated 07 Sep 2014
thedicemanTheDiceman
Rated 09 Mar 2015
40
19th
Passes the time.
Rated 09 Mar 2015
entertainmeEntertainMe
Rated 02 Jun 2014
48
23rd
I enjoyed some of the action, some of the humor, and some of the score, but I have many questions. Why is the editing so sloppy, alternating rapidly between light-hearted and dark scenes? Why are there so many plotlines that converge weakly, or not at all? Why are the villains and supporting cast so caricaturish and underdeveloped? Why does the film run well over two hours in spite of all this?
Rated 02 Jun 2014
nobambanobamba
Rated 24 Feb 2022
60
62nd
The not-too-bad Spider-Man. I liked this better than the first one since the pacing was faster and we don't get bogged down too much with backstory. I'm not sure who Foxx pissed off to get such crappy lines. Unlike Marvel films, I like that there isn't a need to have an action sequence every 5 minutes. Garfield takes off his mask less frequently this time, but now he's using his powers in public as Peter. Mary Jane cut plz. Fav scenes: I like his de-escalation attempts even if they don't work.
Rated 24 Feb 2022
indyatmnINDYATMN
Rated 01 Mar 2022
76
46th
Stone& Garfield's scenes work well & the climax was unexpected to me (& I know the comics), but there's problems, starting w/ Foxx's stilted dialogue & goofy portrayal. Then there's Garfield's Spiderman. While Spiderman was always a smart aleck in battle, there's something about Garfield that seems condescending & smug. I know he wants to cheer Foxx up, but why lie to him & say "You're my eyes & ears"? & Goblin's extreme hatred of Spiderman is built on little cause. The spy parents? Unnecessary.
Rated 01 Mar 2022
superargoSuperargo
Rated 07 May 2014
61
46th
Better than its joyless predecessor, but still a badly directed jumble of too many bad guys, too many half-baked plot threads, too few coherent ideas, too little passion, and very little (if any) genuine knowledge of the source material. Kinda loud, kinda frenetic, kinda headachy; only really perks up during the final movement. These Spideys are not the good Spideys--the Raimi Spideys are the good Spideys.
Rated 07 May 2014
ofterdingenOfterdingen
Rated 09 May 2014
69
73rd
The first and final 30 minutes are perfect superhero-fodder. What's inbetween is generic Spider-Man footage.
Rated 09 May 2014
muutanetmuutanet
Rated 16 Aug 2014
59
48th
The script was weak and villains unbalanced. And was it necessary to be that long? Although the Sam Raimi versions were more focused to teen audience I prefer them.
Rated 16 Aug 2014
iamdwgIamdwg
Rated 22 Oct 2016
86
77th
Even though it's amazingly complicated and convoluted, the visuals in this film are among the best we've ever seen from any Spider-man movie...ever. The 3D definitely extended that, too. I love what they were doing with the cinematography, too, as it had some of the best web-swinging action. And that shouldn't be overlooked!
Rated 22 Oct 2016
qthealmightyQtheAlmighty
Rated 03 May 2014
84
71st
Where the first fails, the second more than makes it up. Maybe I was just itching for a good superhero sequel, but this was grand. The beginning is a bit shaky, akin to the first, but what remains is well-paced and uses a blend of humor, joy, camp, action, and sadness with its cast, music, and story to make something that not only hit the spot as a superior sequel, but was simply also a great superhero movie, Spider-Man movie, theater movie, and just MOVIE overall more than it might have been.
Rated 03 May 2014
ladymcdeathladymcdeath
Rated 28 Jul 2014
32
18th
I did not like this fucking movie. Whoever edited this piece of shit needs to be transferred to fucking Alaska. Garfield is still good, and I understand the tone the movie set and it was right, but fuck man, this movie was so god damned jumpy and all over the place. Blah.
Rated 28 Jul 2014
psimpsim
Rated 04 Jan 2022
66
18th
Watching this years after the fact, I was surprised to find at least a third of a genuinely good movie buried inside this mess. I liked the action more than anything from the Holland era, and the soundtrack is great as well. Garfield and Stone have great chemistry, and I'm always down for the doomed friendship between Peter and Harry. It's a shame that pretty much anything involving the (multiple, ugh!) villains sucks so bad.
Rated 04 Jan 2022
walkaboutwalkabout
Rated 09 Aug 2014
35
6th
No. No!
Rated 09 Aug 2014
browncoatBrowncoat
Rated 14 Jun 2014
60
28th
"The Amazing Spider-Man 2" feels like a film in two minds. It can't decide if it's a romcom, or a generic action film with a 2D bad-guy. To be honest, it does the romcom thing better. Scenes with Gwen Stacy (Stone) are heartfelt and sincere, whereas the action feels like it's there to just fill the time, or provide a convenient time-lapse in the romantic thread. The action on the other hand is bland and rarely builds any excitement for that much show.
Rated 14 Jun 2014
duderDuder
Rated 18 Dec 2021
50
12th
This moved a bit more towards a comic book movie than the first, still some amazingly good shots, but it was way too long. It took so much time to develop some characters, and didn't go that far. Especially Osborn story line was very weak.
Rated 18 Dec 2021
mfitzgeraldM.Fitzgerald
Rated 06 Aug 2015
41
30th
The script to this movie is amazingly bad. Nobody learned from Spider-Man 3 about having too many villains, and there are random plotlines that go nowhere including: Aunt May becoming a nurse, two airplanes about to crash with no major characters involved, and Peter deciding to solve the mystery of his dad for some reason. There's seriously like 7 or 8 different plotlines without any attempt to connect them and form a cohesive story.
Rated 06 Aug 2015
thesaberfoolTheSaberfool
Rated 05 May 2014
39
29th
There's a really good first draft of a screenplay here if you were to remove the pointless Electro character. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone is great and does a good job of setting up the pivotal scene in the final act. Unfortunately, the fact that this event occurs so late in the film leads to a very rushed conclusion. Webb's direction is also iffy at times, as you can tell he's often searching desperately for an iconic "hero shot" that never quite comes together. Still kinda fun...
Rated 05 May 2014
nicktheoNickTheo
Rated 04 Jun 2017
50
10th
So,the opening 20 minutes or so,the last 15 or so ,Stone's and Garfield's chemistry and for the most part the action scenes...that's what's good(and sometimes great)about this movie.The rest is boring with a large chunk of it having zero action and the stuff that are on screen(Peter's dad's story,Harry's descent into madness and Electro's whole thing) are painfully uninteresting.Not only uninteresting but stupid and ridiculous at times.Still I like this Spider-Man,Garfield does a great job.
Rated 04 Jun 2017
magdabagmagdabag
Rated 04 May 2014
83
51st
Ok, this movie was pretty good, but i have one problem....IT'S TOO LONG!!!!!!! I mean i was already almost an hour and a half into it and he hadn't even fought Electro yet,but other than that it was pretty good. The special affects were awesome and the acting was spectacular!!!! It was sad,funny,and well written.
Rated 04 May 2014
gideonGideon
Rated 27 Jul 2014
1
16th
This flick is utter crap and frankly I don't have time for crap anymore. Especially with budgets like this one. Make the pain stop!
Rated 27 Jul 2014
damildamil
Rated 24 Aug 2014
70
67th
Plot is a convoluted mess. Villains are pretty weak. Music is pretty obnoxious. And yeah, it functions very much as a set-up for future entries. But I didn't really care! It was entertaining & I didn't need it to be perfect. Garfield continues to be a great choice and the chemistry between him and Stone is still appealing. DeHaan was good - up until the end. I didn't think much of Foxx's performance, but his character was pretty superfluous. The action scenes and visual effects were really good.
Rated 24 Aug 2014
reasonReason.
Rated 12 Oct 2014
15
1st
15 for the number of plot threads in this film
Rated 12 Oct 2014
dougiedDougieD
Rated 03 May 2014
50
15th
Suffers from the same problems of Spider-Man 3 (too many villains, overly busy plot). There are quite a few things I liked on their own, such as the chemistry between Garfield and Stone, Webb's direction of the romance scenes, and the action set-pieces - but put together they don't add up to create a good movie. There are just too many villains vying for screen-time, and none of them are particularly exciting. Overall, it's not bad but it's the weakest Spider-Man film.
Rated 03 May 2014
bionicninjasBionicNinjas
Rated 23 Apr 2015
30
12th
Really quite terrible.
Rated 23 Apr 2015
kurochocoleKurochocole
Rated 05 Aug 2014
68
19th
Visually stunning. Everything else is a complete mess.The script is too coincidental and irrational. The dialogue was cringe-worthy. Recommended to anyone who is 16 years old and below.
Rated 05 Aug 2014
rihreyrihrey
Rated 23 Feb 2020
35
29th
there were parts i actually thought were quite better than what the first film had to offer, but the messiness was also pretty constant at times, so i feel it ends up being just a bit worse (than the first one lol).
Rated 23 Feb 2020
foxyrussianFoxyRussian
Rated 18 May 2014
51
16th
Spider-Man's "Greatest Battle", is apparently trying to get back with his girlfriend. Spider-Man 2 is a poorly handled, cliched love story between Peter Parker and Gwen. Any superhero actions are subplots to this poorly written love story. Green Goblin and Rhino are sadly only used to sell the Sinister Six spin-off.
Rated 18 May 2014
bjhudsonBJHudson
Rated 30 May 2014
50
33rd
skinny greasy boys
Rated 30 May 2014
methad1methad1
Rated 28 Jul 2014
55
24th
Stop ruining Spider Man!
Rated 28 Jul 2014
gordonbombayGordonBombay
Rated 23 Jul 2014
70
46th
Finally they got Peter Parker right. Funny, yet troubled... and not a single jazz hand in sight, so that's a plus. I just don't get the whole obligatory sequel equals at least two villains. Who the fuck cares about Electro? I haven't cared less about an electrician since Martin Lawrence in Black Knight. The movie lives in the moments between Peter and Harry Osborn played by Dane DeHaan. And SPOILERS: The geeks get what they want from a movie involving Gwen Stacy, Spiderman and Green Goblin.
Rated 23 Jul 2014
spookymaskSpookyMask
Rated 05 Jul 2015
60
34th
There are genuinely some great character moments in this movie. Which is why it is such a shame that the rest of the movie was a flop. Weak character motivations, events happening by pure coincidence, and giant leaps in logic drag the film down. It's almost as if it as edited in a blender.
Rated 05 Jul 2015
philamentalphilamental
Rated 03 Aug 2021
64
44th
A lot of people like to shit on this movie, but while it is certainly flawed it's still better than Raimi's '3'. The main issue is obviously the bloated and ill advised attempt to cram too many villains into one storyline and just like Raimi's '3' the end result is quite messy. That said Garfield and Stones are just perfect as Parker and Stacey and adorable and believable together making the climax extremely effective. I definitely would have been up for a concluding part of the trilogy myself.
Rated 03 Aug 2021
hologramhologram
Rated 17 Jan 2015
65
12th
Emma Stone makes you smile. Mostly CGI wankery without a soul.
Rated 17 Jan 2015
emir_hanEmir Han
Rated 28 Jan 2015
69
16th
Huge disappointment when you think about there was so much potential to make Amazing Spider-Man sequel work. Lots of villains, subplots, unexplained events turned this flick into some sort of a dull, too factitious product, even for a super hero picture. It's funny that people were criticising Raimi's latest Spidey film just because of abundance of baddies. Well, compared to it, Spider-Man 3 becomes a masterpiece.
Rated 28 Jan 2015
obdurateObdurate
Rated 28 Jul 2014
70
41st
I think I enjoy it about as much as the last one. It shouldn't have thrown in Harry as a villain and just left it until next time, and that godawful cliffhanger ending actually pisses me off, but I enjoy Garfield as Spidey, and enjoy the two reboots more than the original trilogy. It's dark but still mildly humorous, the action is fun and the visuals are impressive. The Gwen subplot gave some emotional impact, and all-in-all, I had a good time.
Rated 28 Jul 2014
cmonsterCMonster
Rated 02 May 2014
46
23rd
Something about Spider-Man makes for great riffing, even more so than other superheros which are already good fodder. A nearly empty theater and a few clever friends made this much more fun than it deserved to be. Some problems, but the only thing that couldn't be saved by our jokes was the shoddy music and sound work in general.
Rated 02 May 2014
giuseppeGiuseppe
Rated 21 Aug 2014
67
28th
Move along, people. There's nothing to see here. Well, actually there is something to see here: a superhero film with an even less impressive antagonist than the previous installment in the series.
Rated 21 Aug 2014
cinematicespCinematicESP
Rated 16 May 2014
61
8th
What a mess. Tonal problems galore. The good: the Garfield/Stone chemistry, pre-Goblin Dane DeHaan, Electro. The bad: post-Goblin Dane DeHaan, Paul Giamatti's hammy attempt at a Russian accent, but most of all, DR. KAFKA.
Rated 16 May 2014
michaelsmichaels
Rated 17 Mar 2015
70
53rd
There's a lot going on here, for both Peter Parker and Spiderman. The narrative isn't focused thanks to way too many subplots; the villains are kinda thrown in randomly, undeveloped and hence wasted. But the action is fun, there's legit chemistry between Garfield and Stone and that helps their characters to become real. I was entertained - which is what I wanted from this movie.
Rated 17 Mar 2015
mohkoMohko
Rated 25 Apr 2014
55
40th
Such a mixed bag. There were parts I enjoyed but the final fight was just a huge pile of cliches on top of each other. Also film's score was one of the worst I can remember.
Rated 25 Apr 2014
dylanwilson6dylanwilson6
Rated 20 May 2014
70
50th
It was enjoyable enough, but some poor choices kept this back from being one of the better superhero movies out there. First off, Garfield as Spiderman is much better than Toby ever was. I enjoyed the other movies better, but there is no denying that Garflield's sarcastic and fun play with Spidey fits so much better. Other thoughts; THANK GOD HE STOPPED USING BING! Also some amazing staring shots of Dennis Leary.....you get lost in his eyes.
Rated 20 May 2014
glumpy99glumpy_99
Rated 25 Apr 2014
49
10th
Disappointing sequel takes the promising beginning established in part 1 and squanders it on a vapid retread of everything that was wrong with Part 3 of the Raimi trilogy -- endless, dreary dissections of Parker's love-life, combined with a fairly toothless development of his relationship/rivalry with Osborn (played by DeHaan as a DiCaprio in training). Oddly truncated end scene with Giamatti, and brilliant work by an underutilised Foxx, provide some fun, but not enough for a recommendation.
Rated 25 Apr 2014
gnalkhereGnalkhere
Rated 10 Jul 2015
35
5th
that bit in the end where the web looks like it's trying to grab onto gwen like it's a hand made me physically go "are you kidding me?"
Rated 10 Jul 2015

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...