While certainly one of the weaker films based on the wall-crawler, and with its share of flaws, "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is able to pull through. A very decent sequel.

Rating: 6/10 (6 May 2014)

Marc Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is one of those movies that was destined to conjure up mixed reception from critics and fans. The key ingredients are all there. But it just doesn't quite gel together as it did in the prior film, and certainly not as well as it did to the prior film trilogy that Webb's movies serve as a reboot of. (The Sam Raimi trilogy of 2002-2007) But even when it doesn't gel together perfectly, this film is able to salvage itself and elevate itself beyond its flaws thanks to its abundant strengths.
Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is at an uncertain time of his life. Struggling with his feelings for girlfriend Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone), while still feeling guilt over her father's death, we see him going through the stages of make-ups and break-ups repeatedly, as he is worried his dual-life as Spider-Man could hurt her. At the same time, he attempts to re-connect with his childhood friend Harry Osbourne (Dane DeHaan), who is going through a troubled time in his life after inheriting Oscorp from his late father. These matters are made even more complex by the arrival of a new villain- Electro (Jamie Foxx), a troubled and socially awkward man suffering an unhealthy obsession with Spider-Man who is transformed by a tragic accident into a powerful being made of electricity.
The film has been highly criticized by many, and I will say it is with good reason. The trouble really all comes back to the script by Roberto Ocri, Alex Kurtzman and Jeff Pinkner. (With addition contributions to the story by James Vanderbilt) This movie is one of the most over- complex and over-stuffed juggling acts I've seen since, well... 2007's "Spider-Man 3", which yielded some similar criticism. Too much is happening in the film, causing a lot of development to go out the window. Key plot lines (of which there are many) often only have 2-3 scenes devoted to development and resolution, and it's not very satisfying. It also doesn't help that it feels like a large amount of content was cut from the film for pacing reasons. It feels like there's a lot missing here. I also think our writing team made some bold but foolish choices with how some of the plot-lines and characters are developed, and how, well, cartoonish some sequences come across. I hate to say it, but the writing sucks.
HOWEVER, the film is able to save itself from completely imploding from the poor writing. Yes, the film is salvaged and actually made decent and entertaining thanks to the wonderful cast, fantastic direction, competent production and top-notch visuals and action. I've always firmly believed that a flawed script isn't a death sentence... if the rest of the production is strong, weak writing can be forgiven. And this is a case of just that.
This cast is just plain magical. Garfield really is in his element here. I wasn't a huge fan of his performance in the prior film, but here he absolutely shines. Stone is just lovely in her portrayal of Gwen, making her so likable and so human, you'll fall in love with her almost as much as Peter has. Jamie Foxx is a lot of fun as Electro, making him tragic (albeit not necessarily in a likable way, but in a way that you can pity him) and also quite intimidating. Dane DeHaan is perfectly cast as Osbourne, giving him a lot of depth and pain, yet also a faint glimmer of light and hope inside. And supporting roles by the likes of Chris Cooper, Sally Field and Paul Giamatti are just so much fun and very well-played.
Marc Webb's direction is also a huge step-up. His visual storytelling is so slick and pitch-perfect for this sort of material. I wasn't sure about his earlier work, as I wasn't too impressed by "(500) Days of Summer", but here he shows how capable he is with handling a variety of material- from the pure emotional to the intensely action-packed. I have to say, he has particularly grown in how he directs his action, as I believe this film probably has some of the best action out of all five "Spider-Man" features released during the past 12 years.
The rest of the production is top-notch. The cinematography is absolutely beautiful and even awe-inspiring at times. The set design is great. The costume design wonderful. (I wasn't sure about the new Spider-Man outfit, but it totally works on-screen) Hans Zimmer's score is a good match for the material. (And thankfully, this is probably Hans Zimmer's least "Hans-Zimmer-sounding" score.) And the visual effects are among the best I've seen this year.
I also have to comment on the 3D. I'm not a huge 3D fan. For me, it's a take-it-or-leave-it gimmick. I don't care whether or not I see a film in 3D. But this is definitely one film I'm glad I saw in 3D. While dialog and plot scenes don't benefit much from the added depth, the action sequences certainly do. During the action and web-slinging sequences, I actually felt like I was swinging along with Spider-Man, and I got that same lovely light feeling in my chest, belly and head that roller-coasters me. Easily one of the best 3D viewing experiences I've had.
I do think that the script unfortunately bogs the film down, and sadly makes it arguably the most flawed entry in the franchise. (And probably the second-weakest after "Spider-Man 3") But I cannot deny how strong all other aspects of this production are. The weak script is mostly forgivable thanks to the other elements at play.
I am giving "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" a slightly above average 6 out of 10. It's very flawed, but still quite entertaining. This is a web-swing of fun that is still worth taking for some fans.