Why are people ragging on “Amazing Spider-Man 2?”

Seriously. I’m wondering what the hell people want from films anymore.

Remember Nicholas Hammond? That was my first live action Spider-Man, and the TV was ghastly from the top down. Bad stories, bad acting, bad effects, just bad.

And now we have the current sequel to “The Amazing Spider-Man” that is, to my mind, 110% better than the previous entry. I found it to be a compelling combination of genuine drama, beautifully played by Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone (not to mention Oscar Winner Sally Fields) and thrilling action sequences that seemed, in the way they were portrayed and Spidey quipped his way through them, to be lifted directly from the pages of the comic.

Jamie Foxx was a marvelous Max Dillon. So he was a classic geek: so what? It provided a nice contrast to what he eventually became. And Dane Dehaan was marvelously creepy as Harry Osborn. And sure, the Rhino was only in for a few minutes, but so what? Gives the third film somewhere to start from.

I thoroughly enjoyed it and I just don’t understand why I’m seeing reviewers bitching about it.

PAD