Why was it made?

Rating: 4/10 (26 August 2012)

Spider-man at this point is crawling in circles. The Amazing Spider-man makes no contribution to the Peter Parker continuum. There is nothing new or noteworthy about the 2012 Spidey. Instead of utilizing a fresh, innovative approach, Marc Webb and his writers replicate the formula drafted in the original film and redundantly make us witness the transformation of Peter Parker from outcast to superhero again. We saw this spiel only ten years ago. In comparison, see what Christopher Nolan envisioned for the Batman reboot: a realist, dark approach in stark contradiction to the Schumacher pluff. Here there is no appreciable difference between The Amazing Spider-man and the Sam Raimi trilogy. It's not a reboot; it's a recycle.
And if you're going to recycle, then at least improve upon the original. It doesn't; its fatal sin is actual regression. The Maguire-Dunst combo was more dynamic and likably than Garfield-Stone – poor Emma was miserably miscast. In an era, where the audience is accustomed to dynamic heels, what we get is an over-sized CGI-ish lizard lacking all nuance and substance; a completely forgettable, default villain.
It's not all bad though. The 3D aspect is one redeeming quality of the film especially in the latter scene where spidey is soaring through the rainy sky coming to the rescue. It's a fun moment.