The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)

Probable Score

Not Enough Info

Your Score

(0 - 100)

Peter Parker runs the gauntlet as the mysterious company Oscorp sends up a slew of supervillains against him, impacting on his life. (imdb)

More Information and Actions

Cast and Information

Directed By: Marc Webb

Written By: Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, Jeff Pinkner

Starring: Paul Giamatti, Colm Feore, Jamie Foxx, Campbell Scott, Sally Field, Marton Csokas, Felicity Jones, Emma Stone, Embeth Davidtz, Andrew Garfield, Dane DeHaan, B.J. Novak

Genres: Sci-fi, Fantasy, Action, Adventure

Franchises: The Amazing Spider-Man, Spider-Man

Country: USA

Stream it now

Invalid Trailer

Ratings

Collections

Stats

Loading...
loading

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 belongs to 42 collections

1. Superheroes (collaborative: moderated by mpowell - 30 stars)

2. Marvel (collaborative: moderated by mpowell - 14 stars)

3. Films available in HD (collaborative: moderated by kubricksucks - 13 stars)

4. #1 at the US Box Office (collaborative: moderated by BeeDub - 10 stars)

5. Sequel (collaborative: moderated by td888 - 9 stars)

6. Best by different standards (public: sesito71 - 6 stars)

7. Capsules, guest reviews, list candidates... (366weirdmovies) (collaborative: moderated by sesito71 - 5 stars)

8. Availability: Netflix Canada (collaborative: moderated by geohawk - 5 stars)

9. Triumvirate of Oscar Winning Actors/Actresses in the Cast (3 or more) (collaborative: moderated by Dunstan-xxx - 5 stars)

10. Top 3000 movies with the most votes on IMDb (public: fanfic - 5 stars)

11. We Hate Movies podcast (collaborative: moderated by NBD Rab - 4 stars)

12. Nostalgia Critic Episodes (collaborative: moderated by KirkJiggler - 4 stars)

13. Product Placement (collaborative: moderated by Jellysauce - 3 stars)

14. Worldwide box office over $500,000,000 (collaborative: moderated by djross - 3 stars)

15. Big-time Hollywood superhero movies (public: djross - 3 stars)

16. Top 1000 movies with the most votes on IMDb (public: fanfic - 3 stars)

17. Biopunk (collaborative: moderated by mattburgess - 2 stars)

18. Cinema Sins (collaborative: moderated by Phantom Nook - 2 stars)

19. Top 2000 movies with the most votes on IMDb (public: fanfic - 2 stars)

20. Duology (collaborative: moderated by Ag0stoMesmer - 1 star)

21. Netflix Sverige (collaborative: moderated by Jakobostgren - 1 star)

22. Reza Archive (public: reza899 - 1 star)

23. Spider-Man (collaborative: moderated by mpowell)

24. FThisMovie Ugly (collaborative)

25. -Movies (collaborative: moderated by vegetarekt)

26. Modern(-ish) Superheroes Films (collaborative: moderated by amazedemon)

27. Super Hero Movies (collaborative: moderated by anarchistica)

28. Marvel Movies (collaborative: moderated by anarchistica)

29. Curzon Ripon (public: mandy)

30. 2014 Seen in theaters (public: fartblaster)

31. My Movies (public: Thilerion)

32. K&A (public: caffe)

33. Netflix Instant and Popcorn Time (public: TraverseTown)

34. Movie Collection (public: BeeDub)

35. 2014, Worst of (public: Matthew Parkinson)

36. Ryan - Seen in theaters (public: funky89)

37. Bluray Collection (public: SageSledge)

38. My Movie Collection (public: elhenzo)

39. Seen, Not Rated (public: SageSledge)

40. Jona cdtjes (public: medium123)

41. juntakinte99 Spider-Man (public: juntakinte99)

42. Marvel (public: LibraLynx98)

Browse the full list of collections

Show:

All Ratings | With Reviews

Order by:

TCI | Percentile | Date Rated | # Stars (Reviews)

Stars	User	Rating
10	XakkMaster	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.
8	Leonardis	82 _40th
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.
8	BeeDub	78 _39th
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 reboot #2!
7	cagedwisdom	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.
7	BillyShears	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.
7	juntakinte99	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.
6	ozymandius10	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.
6	Barthalen	65 _45th
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.
5	frederic_g54	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.
5	Cinema_Asia	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.
5	d_r_e_s_	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.
5	jessforrest	65 _47th
-5 points for the amount of dubstep
4	easydiff	36 _26th
Nothing movie with nothing villains and nothing plots for nothing stakes. The web-swinging looked cool.
4	TheRealJ-Ro	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.
4	TrixRabbi	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.
3	Ytadel	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.
3	Difontaine	65 _42nd
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.
3	twincinema	35 _14th
A big pile of red and blue garbage.
3	Luna6ix	77 _61st
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.
3	Vandelay1	43 _42nd
watchable
3	letskillrobots	13 _32nd
Realizing that I could have watched one of the LOTR flicks in the same time was a real bummer.
3	Henrik	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!
3	Matthew Parkinson (CineMarter)	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.
3	hellboy76	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.
3	NothingsGood	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.
3	SirSass	45 _24th
I just wanted me some Giamatti.
3	Dakota99	5 _44th
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.
3	Josh Forrest	25 _20th
Spidey's nonchalant attitude pissed me off more than I remember from the first movie.
3	MacSwell	50 _24th
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.
3	vv238	20 _15th
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.
2	Moribunny	15 _7th
Will Americans never get sick of this crap?
2	TheDiceman	40 _19th
Passes the time.
2	PeaceAnarchy	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.
2	joseywales	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.
2	martryn	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.
2	INDYATMN	76 _45th
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.
2	SirStuckey	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.
2	jack parsons	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.
2	kgbelliveau	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
2	UnjmS	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/charecterscoughrhinocoughthis movie could have been alot better
2	knuth	55 _12th
Oh well, I had a hangover... Part two
2	MontyCircus	60 _68th
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.
2	guy piranha	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.
2	quez2go	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.
2	KramYessev	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.
2	myfavchords	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.
2	anaaki	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.
2	noisebloom	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.
2	antidood1	60 _35th
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.
2	EntertainMe	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?
2	Lightning17	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.
2	DesertPunk	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.
2	Uhrmacher	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!"
2	PluggedIN	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)
2	Vdecraim	70 _42nd
This movie has it all. Maintenance closets, crazy german scientists, biological weapons, exploding power plants, and HOLY SHIT THOSE FIGHTS ARE AWESOME!
2	BadFurDay	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.
2	law	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.
2	Chiptbhtv	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.
2	nobamba	60 _61st
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.
2	WXL	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.
2	EmirhanShn	70 _34th
After the success of the first film, it is a serious low quality film.
2	morphinapg	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.
1	Kavu	60 _32nd
Not as good as the first one, but still has its moments. Could've been much better though.
1	walkabout	35 _6th
No. No!
1	gogokain	25 _36th
Finally, on the fifth try, the Spider-Man sequences look, feel, and sound like Spider-Man. The action is great and his personality is spot on. Should have been thirty minutes shorter, cutting out all of the bullshit about his parents and some of the weepy relationship stuff. The villains all have shit motivations, but aren't offensive enough to ruin the movie, like the Lizard was. Jamie Foxx sure was terrible though. The ending also makes you feel, even if you know what's coming.
1	CinematicESP	61 _7th
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.
1	Tripwyre	61 _44th
The movie is all over the place, tonally and story-wise, but what works here is good enough to outweigh some frankly bizarre choices. What a tonal shift from the grounded, dramatically-driven first film. Parts of this still reflect that approach, but it's also a big cartoon, much closer in tone to Batman Forever. Narratively-invasive "world building" is a much bigger problem here than even Iron Man 2, but Garfield and Stone are charming enough that the movie mostly still works. Beautifully shot.
1	Mohko	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.
1	msprague	70 _61st
A bit long and somewhat scattered but still entertaining.
1	Duder	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.
1	Snazz	60 _51st
Surprisingly few action scenes. I liked Foxx as Max, but not as Electro. I still don't see a reason to reboot this franchise, when almost nothing has changed.
1	muutanet	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.
1	chadisdanger	43 _2nd
Whatever. On the plus side I like Garfield (he's a lot more fun than Maguire was), and your mileage for candy-coloured superhero fun may vary, but this was another bland and disappointing experience. The CGI and cutting in the action sequences look like bad video game boss fights, it tries to win brownie points by recreating a big moment but it feels unearned, and not only are there too many villains but none of them feel like humans or even threats. A little focus goes a long way, people!
1	Browncoat	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.
1	Ross	40 _31st
Once again a "spidey" film that is formulaic, uninteresting and overly long. Even if you can accept those problems it is hard to accept a villain that is defined as vaguely as Elektro. The rules for his power (ha ha) seem to switch (ha ha) from scene to scene.
1	andayb	40 _15th
who in their right mind could approve this script? who thought a dark tragedy would fit a spider man flick? a note to studio heads everywhere; spider man is NOT the batman. shocker, I know right?
1	monclivie	60 _21st
Ok, but who do you think pays the bills for all the damages he causes, huh?
1	Ofterdingen	69 _73rd
The first and final 30 minutes are perfect superhero-fodder. What's inbetween is generic Spider-Man footage.
1	Obdurate	70 _40th
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.
1	HyphenateMe	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.
1	moraesfelipe	47 _27th
Not quite a Spider-Man 3 reprise, because Webb can't really fail with style, but a bloated melodrama carried out by the charisma of Andrew & Emma and often forgotten by the excessive quantity of bullet-time shots, two climaxes that are as near as your next vacation and a large amount of disaster movie footage that makes you annoyed, not entertained. Remember Spider-Man 2? Well, this is almost that film, but with a dozen more MacBook dudes instead of one great Sam Raimi.
1	RealMacgyver	90 _94th
Everything I'd heard about this was wrong. Spidey finally makes quips while fighting (Garfield was always spot on casting), it feels like the comic. Yes I'm sad it isn't part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, yes it feels like 4 episodes of the Spider-man TV show and yes a fair chunk is set up for another movie but this is quite possibly the best Spider-man movie so far.
1	Evan Waters	79 _16th
A lot of great individual scenes, but a mess overall, dragged down by a plot that tries to do too much.
1	Giuseppe	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.
1	psim	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.
1	Bown	39 _4th
really really terrible in a way i wasn't expecting at all. the peter/gwen bits are literally one tree hill: the movie
1	dunetails	40 _22nd
A boring mess of a movie. Another CGI vs CGI finale Too much time spent trying to build a secret six franchise instead of trying to give this movie a plot or make it enjoyable. Go watch Raimi's Spiderman 2
1	Gideon	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!
1	Honest_Thief	3 _31st
Great sense of style and some amazing blockbuster action doesn't save help save the movie from its muddled thematics and kitchen-sink approach to plot. I'm surprised they didn't threw in another plot point to drag this for an extra hour of runtime.
1	roofs_runner	57 _20th
Probably the most useless movie of the year. Lazy directing, dry script, plot holes. Even far fetched drama at the end could save it.
1	mandy	3 _2nd
Nothing particularly original or memorable, except for a couple of really cheesy scenes.
1	Roberta	75 _48th
Garfield and Stone's chemistry helped me see in the movies a heartbreaking scene that has been read by me several times and that Raimi forgot thoroughly.
1	BionicNinjas	30 _12th
Really quite terrible.
1	GordonBombay	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.
1	ladymcdeath	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.
1	glumpy_99	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.
1	Superargo	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.
1	hologram	65 _12th
Emma Stone makes you smile. Mostly CGI wankery without a soul.
1	methad1	55 _24th
Stop ruining Spider Man!
1	damil	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.
1	CMonster	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.
1	sammydeedge	75 _50th
Sure this movie is long and at times I could not deny thinking "Oh it's about to end". Also I do question if the dynamic regarding the necessity of some villains. Regardless of these facts, it does not truly bring down this fantastic sequel.
1	Scorpus	58 _18th
A contrived, mediocre story with terrible villains makes The Amazing Spider-Man 2 a huge dud
1	Aureliusz	70 _16th
W 3d bardzoi fajnie sie ogladalo, a koncowka hmm zaskoczyla mnie.
1	Gnalkhere	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?"
1	DougieD	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.
1	thorn969	43 _39th
A perfectly servicable superhero movie. It hits all the right notes without going overboard... but it's not exactly good. It feels almost rote.
1	hsncrspywl	90 _89th
Super bright, colorful, hyper-kinetic. It really feels a lot closer to the vivid imagery and melancholic action of the comics - and there's nothing NOT amazing about a villain using the power of Dubstep music to destroy a hero, and Jamie Foxx really camps up his role, it's a film which isn't afraid to embrace it's silly side while still having big dramatic moments to keep the audience invested.
1	hotsake	46 _29th
Probably the least engaging and most forgettable of the 21st Century Spider-Man films. I wanted to but I just couldn't make myself care. Almost seem more like a mini series than anything else.
1	TheSaberfool	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...
1	magdabag	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.
1	FoxyRussian	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.
1	QtheAlmighty	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.
1	dylanwilson6	70 _51st
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.
1	theWizard	1 _1st
Foxx and Giamatti are laughably bad, but the chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is good enough to salvage it from being awful.
1	LookJabba...	5 _30th
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has received its fare share or negative criticism and I wasn't overly excited to see it. If you've seen the swamp of trailers for this film then there are only few reveals or surprises left. Garfield & Stone once again carry the film effortlessly and visually it's spectacular. Foxx & DeHaan's characters are enjoyable but underdeveloped. There's just too many plot threads and characters poorly thrown together. In some respects the studio hasn't learned from Spider-Man 3.
1	DyanneThorne	30 _13th
So the script-writer was either drunk or insane. That's pretty par for the course. More troubling is the fact, that so was the casting director.
1	shauny18	69 _84th
Loved the first in the 'amazing' series and this one doesnt disappoint. There is alot of story crammed into 2 hrs and 20 minutes so I do think they could have lost 1 of the villains. The effects are a vast improvement on the first film with the epic enounter in Times Square a highlight! The relationship between Peter and Gwen really keeps the story together and you route for them all the way. With a very surprising ending this film is a must see!
1	michaels	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.
1	BJHudson	50 _33rd
skinny greasy boys
1	Kurochocole	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.
1	philamental	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.
1	Reason.	15 _1st
15 for the number of plot threads in this film
1	Emir Han	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.
1	M.Fitzgerald	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.
1	Iamdwg (Interpreting the Stars)	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!
1	metalhank	69 _74th
The style on the two latest movies is more true to the comic book look which seems to be a bitch for some to get over as compared to Raimi's style. The effects and CG are well done, and the action scenes are also well made with plenty of wire work stunts. Garfield plays the webbed man well and is ok at Parker. The rest of the cast are pretty good in their roles as well.
1	NickTheo	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.
1	mwestcott	51 _20th
Garfield and Stone continue to have enough chemistry to keep the film going all their own. However the script is wildly overstuffed. Even comparing to previous films feature the character, the movie is packed to the brim. The performers are fine. Although a little wasted to be sure. (ie Giamatti and Dehann)
1	peyrin	20 _5th
Why does every second Spiderman always end with the bad guy getting electrocuted lol
1	Ametrine	5 _22nd
There is so much I really love about this movie, and so much that just doesn't work at all. It's one of those movies where they had a good idea, but not nearly enough time to do it, so it ends up disappointing.
1	rihrey	35 _32nd
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).

Average Percentile 31.74% from 3396 Ratings