Spider-Man Strikes Back (1978)

disgusting, overrated, pointless

Best movie of this year hands down!

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Spider-Man Strikes Back is nowhere near as good as the movies in Sam Raimi's excellent trilogy. But it's still pretty darn enjoyable.It doesn't have a lot in common with the comic books, but neither did the Hulk series from the 70s, and that one is considered one of the best shows based on a Marvel comic book.Nicholas Hammond is good as Peter Parker (the hair is hilarious, though...the 70s was a tacky decade), and aside from the visible web shooter and belt, the suit doesn't look any worse than Christopher Reeve's Superman outfit. J. Jonah Jameson is very funny, and the fight scenes and stunts are exciting to watch. I felt more dizzy watching this than any of the scenes in the new ones.I can't remember anything offensive in it, the fight scenes are bloodless, and there's no nudity, except for some ladies in bikinis. If you have small kids, it's probably better to show them this than the scary movies in the Raimi trilogy.

At the New York State University, one of Peter Parker's tutors has accidentally given three students all the materials they need to create an atomic bomb. While Peter Parker tries to find out what's happened, the police suspect him of the crime, and Peter has to deal with an attractive journalist determined to get an interview with Spider- Man. Then dastardly millionaire Mr. White shows up, and will stop at nothing to get his hands on the atomic bomb. Spider-Man must defeat this scheming villain and stop him blowing up the World Trade Centrer. Nicholas Hammon returns as Peter Parker A.k.a Spider-man and this time even better, Spider-Man Strikes Back (1978) is for me what the first Superman movie was which is good and serious and it knows when it wants to make you laugh especially during that motorcycle chase sequence or even Spider-man beating some guys up with some western music in the background, the acting is very good and some of the effects a little bit better although the spider-web still looks like a bad rope and the villains are still kinda weak but then again it's a 70's made for TV film and for that they did a pretty cool job with it.

I am sorry, but this movie was worst the then first one. How can you have a superhero movie without a super-Villain? Where is the web slinging! Why do he need transportation to get around?(helicopter to go the the roof of a building????). With a low budget and boring storyline, this movie is not even worth a rental! Hammond is too old to play Peter Parker, and where is Mary Jane, and Betty Brant? How is it that the Spiderman in the comics can take on Doctor Octopus, but in this made-for-TV movie, he gets his A*S kicked by TWO thugs? My children of 15, 11 an 8 saw this movie and threaten to call Child Protective Services for being cruel for making them watch this joke of a movie...Please, and I do mean please....I am asking all network media bosses only for one thing....If you going to make a Superhero movie for TV make sure that you stick to the original ideal of the comic and make sure that the Superhero has a Super-Villain to fight with.

Although this isn't terrible for a low-budget TV movie, it doesn't really work. This is mainly for one reason: Spider-Man hardly gets to do anything! Most of the movie is Peter Parker stumbling into an incident involving a nuclear bomb, and stuttering to people when they ask him about Spider-Man. A good effort was made here, but it just doesn't have a Spidey feel to it. They should have gotten one of the comics' writers to come up with a story for this one. Oh, well.