"The Amazing Spider-Man" is indeed "amazing" in some spots, then frustratingly dull at others, occasionally sloppy and overly heavy in one scene, and then thrillingly dizzying and action packed in the next; altogether leaving a movie that is kind of a mixed bag for fans of everyone's favorite web-slinger.

The biggest issue for me was the tone of the movie. At times it aspired to be a gritty, more realistic portrayal of the Spider-Man lore, but at other times it felt like it was trying to be more of a free-flowing adventure yarn similar to Sam Raimi's movies. The issue is that when it tried to go gritty and real, it felt a little dull, flat, and occasionally boring. But then when it tried to be more fun and free-flowing, it felt like the first two Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies and then I find myself asking myself "What's the point?"

It's hard not to compare this movie to Raimi's movies. Because I have such a fondness for Raimi's movies and because our brains are almost hardwired to make instant comparisons between similar (nearly identical) properties, I did spend a lot of the movie wondering what the point of the reboot was. Sure, the creative team behind the movie was trying some new things and new angles on stuff we had already seen, but so much of the story played out almost identical to what Raimi had already done. Everything from when he gets bitten to when he's discovering his powers by climbing walls, to his awkwardness with his web slinging, to the fights on top of buildings... It all felt too close to stuff that we had not only already recently seen, but seen done really, really well.

"The Amazing Spider-Man" excelled when it would occasionally become a hybrid of the two styles and do something altogether different. The best illustration of this is when Spider-Man takes out the car thief while hurling sarcastic barbs with as much ease as he hurls his web. It brought an edgy vibe to Spider-Man that we hadn't seen before in movie form. There was kind of a corniness to Raimi's Spider-Man films and this movie strayed as far from corny as it possibly could.

I liked but didn't love Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker. He gave him a kind of James Dean like vibe, but at times his performance felt so affected by little quirks and mannerisms that it pulled me out of the movie. Sometimes the little quirks worked, sometimes it just made me feel awkward for the actor still learning his craft. His Spider-Man was a lot more on the money, though. He made it fun (and occasionally funny), without being cheesy and annoying.

Emma Stone's performance was spot on. If I had been making this movie, I would have called it "The Amazing Gwen Stacy," because I felt the movie really came alive every time she was on screen. She brought an awe shucks vibe to her performance, while also seeming very much like the girl next door. It's not an easy rope to walk and she did it wonderfully. The chemistry she has with Peter Parker was palpable. Creating chemistry is not always an easy thing to cultivate, but bringing Emma Stone into your movie is at least half the battle.

Rhys Ifans did okay with what he was given, but his character motivation was probably the movie's most obvious weakness. I didn't buy his transformation from scientist who wanted to do right by humanity to a mad-lizard who wanted to destroy it. If he's resentful that he doesn't have an arm, fine, but you gotta put that in the movie. If you want him to always be psycho and have his transformation to the Lizard be the tipping point into cuckoo land, fine, but you gotta built that up. As it is, he goes from slightly awkward scientist trying to do right by humanity to a crazed lizard who wants to turn everyone in New York into someone just like him.

Denis Leary also did a good job as Captain Stacy. The man's a good actor and he did as much as he could with a part that could have easily been a throwaway part.

Martin Sheen and Sally Field both seemed tailor made to play these roles. I almost wish that they had altered the story up a bit to keep Uncle Ben around a little bit longer. I think the trauma of losing him would have had more impact had it happened later in the movie. It would also have given him a chance to impart more words of wisdom into Peter as he began his crusade around the city, instead of doing it via a recorded voicemail message. Sally Field did what Sally Field does; bring a warm spirit to a part that could have easily been a throwaway role. I don't think she even remotely approaches the greatness of Rosemary Harris's Aunt May from Raimi's movies, but she does a pretty okay job.

The effects work deserves a huge round of applause. The effects used in Raimi's movies were good for their time but they really call attention to themselves now. But the computer and practical effects used in "The Amazing Spider-Man" really do a great job of creating the illusion that what you're seeing is 100% real. Yeah, there were a couple of times when the CGI was somewhat obvious, but I was pretty blown away by what they were able to achieve with the effects work, especially any time they would use a first-person camera angle.

James Horner's score was okay but far from memorable. It served its purpose but I can't for the life of me recall a single musical cue from the movie.

The story bits revolving the parents were more tedious to me than anything else. I hate it when I feel like I'm being set up for something and their involvement seemed to set up very little other than the sequel. Yeah, you had their absence informing Peter Parker's character motivation through the entire movie, and you had his wanting to find out about what they did leading Peter to seek out answers, but I think you could have had all that stuff without setting up the parents backstory.

While I feel the finished result was a bit of a mixed bag, I'd like to see where Marc Webb is able to take this story arc. It's gotta be a huge jump going from something small like "(500) Days of Summer" to a huge mega-budget movie like "Spider-Man," so I can excuse him from some of the poor editing choices and weird directing choices that were made. If this movie does financially well enough to warrant a sequel, I'd like to see what he's able to do when he doesn't have the cumbersome origin story to deal with, all while having one of these big budget movies already under his belt.

Rating: 7.5/10