ggspot81 What the hell did they do to this movie. Jamie Fox, "wow", so. Wrong for this movie. Booo

alexlachance Andrew Garfield put on the Spider-Man suit once again in the second movie of sequel. Emma Stone also appeared in this one with less interesting parts. She came back as his girlfriend at the beginning for braking up in the first minutes of the film and dying at the end. Who do that? There's a non written rule that prohibits to kill a beautiful women in a movie and even more when it's a important character. I was frustrated when I saw it. Once again it's a too important death. Some franchises are not killing enough characters but Sony are making too dark movie.

supersilvertoon Can we bring Tobey Maguire back please. I love Andrew Garfield and all but as Spiderman he lacks any real emotion as being the Spiderman character he is supposed to fill. Spiderman is a teenager still in high school and Garfield looks like a grown 25 year-old man. The motivation and reasoning for the blue electro "no-one-cares-about-him" villain portrayed by Jamie Fox is completely abysmally stupid. "Spiderman doesn't remember me from that one random time I said hi to him and even though I LOOK NOTHING LIKE I DID BEFORE he should remember me". Shut up. This villain character sucks and is forgettable in every way possible. I'm glad Gwen died in this movie honestly. It's a perfect representation of this catastrophe that was "The 'Amazing' Spider-Man" franchise. Was it enjoyable? not really as the SGI for Jamie's character made it look like he had an extra 20 chromosomes and was not believable whatsoever. Even at the age of 13 I didn't understand why electro dude hated Spider-Man so much. It made no sense. You ruined my favorite superhero and I will hate you forever for it. Waste of money and time, but it is the perfect example of what NOT to do in a movie. Thanks

barberoux-15943 Maybe I should have expected this movie to be bad. The previous Spiderman movies with Toby Maguire were coated in a syrupy view of life. Virgin youth fighting cartoonish villains in a rich man's landscape. This one is more of the same, just worse. Andrew Garfield portrayed Peter Parker as an impatient, sullen teen laying around his room. Then swinging about in New York with a whole different personality. Emma Stone portrays his girlfriend who graduates high school and in the next scene in a high tech Oscorp corporate job. What? The movie portrays a rich man's landscape where those to be envied are the 1%ers and the battlefield is New York where this week's monster villain sprays bullets at random, but no one is actually killed. Blocks of New York are destroyed but no one is actually killed. No one is shown homeless due to the goings on. Ridiculous. Maybe it is the intended audience they are appealing to, teens and man-children. I can suspend belief and enjoy Sci-fi movies but the landscape has to be just a bit believable. Consequences happen, except in Marvel movies. Poor Jamie Foxx is one of the villains, unrecognizable under makeup after the transformation. He is cast as a nerd, a nobody. See nerds are still acceptable to make fun of, to be the focus of human meanness. Previously that person would have been a Stepin Fetchit or some ethnic class but that is no longer PC to do but the meanness is still there. The desire to ridicule, the need to have a justification for offensive behavior. It's fun for the audience to make fun of people. You just have to pick the ones no one will object to. So the nerd. Jerry Lewis made a whole career out of it. Typically the action sequences were filled with CGI that ignores any real physics but are fun to watch. Human interactions are sappy, banal, and adolescent. It would be nice to see a special effects movie peopled by complex adults. I guess the audience isn't there.