I've never thought Kirsten Dunst was all that from the get go, and now my opinion of her continues to slide. Anyway, the movie was a solid crowd pleaser, and I actually enjoyed the high swinging action sequences by Sam Raimi. You can probably blame the inconsistent atmosphere of the movie on the script writing.
-- Rice

Kirsten Dunst is okay. Average white teenage looking girl. Not much other than average describe her. The movie itself is generally great. It's not created for the serious fan I agree. (At least those that know of spiderman and the CG was questionable) But you got to know that you need to tell the story of him before anything happens. There's indication for other villians to pop up in the movie. I was reading on Gamepro's review and they said that the scientist that Parker was working with (He wasn't showed working, but he said he was fired by Dr. something because he was always late) later becomes another villian. (Find it out yourself. =P) There's one more that I know of, but I don't think I should give out more info. Anyway, you know there is already links in the movie ready to be connected. So there won't be as much story telling in the coming spiderman. (Which I heard is set for 2004 summer) So just chill and enjoy star war until then. =)
-- Byanlor

1. I must agree that "Spider-Man" did not give that "wow" factor. I would have given the movie a B as well. 2. But the CG? True, the jumping from building to building looked pretty terrible, but the rest was fine. Sure, it looked CG. But, his SUIT looked CG. So, I accepted it. 3. The action scenes? Lame?!?! They captured the very essence of Spider-Man. He moved like Spider-Man. He fought like Spider-Man. He sounded like Spider-Man. He WAS Spider-Man. That's what gave it the B rating.
-- The DogFather