This poll arguably needs a halfway point between 'Good' and 'Excellent'. because it didn't, I voted 'Good' as I don't think that this movie reached the excellence of The Avengers, the last movie I saw. However, there was still much about it that was very good.
While I liked Toby Maguire as Spider-man, I much preferred Andrew Garfield's performance, from his look, to his voice, to his ability with a wisecrack. Altogether more like the Spider-man in my head. I liked Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben, though I think Rosemary Harris was a better Aunt May than Sally Field (who, to be fair, I think was sidelined in order to make this movie less like the Raimi ones).
There was good chemistry between Garfield and Emma Stone, though I'm in the minority who liked Kirsten Dunst. Dennis Leary made for a more vital Chief Stacy than James Cromwell. The SFX were, inevitably, an improvement on the Raimi era and I liked how Webb used the 3-D. Also, being kind of an old-school Spidey fan, I was happy to see a larger role for Flash Thompson and the return of mechanical webslingers.
The big thing going against this movie was the familiarity. While they did all they could to make it different from 2002's Spider-man, there's only so much you can vary Spidey's origin story. And we again got a good-intentioned scientist, who becomes a father figure to Peter, transformed by his own creation. Admittedly, the emphasis on Peter's parents and the mystery which looks to span the next movie (or two) did give it some distinction and the now-compulsory post-credits scene was intriguing.
I'd say it's much better than 3, at least as good as Spider-man but not as good as 2. Worth seeing anyway.