Topic: "The Amazing Spider-Man" Review by Sam [Mild Spoilers, marked]

After probably one of the most successful trilogies of all time (and one of the worse sequels ever), Spider-Man is back on the big screen.

After being announced in late 2009 that it was to be rebooted, I had mixed feelings. Initially, I felt Raimi still had some more story to tell, but then again, I didn't really like his take on Spidey anyway. After the announcement of Webb I was quite optimistic. This is what franchises need. An, essentially, indie director to come in who is more accustomed to doing more character driven films so even if the movie sucks, you can at least say the characters were interesting. You can teach most people how to direct action, you can't teach them how to tell a good story.

Does this mean I think Spider-Man is a well told story? Fuck no.

STORY, SCRIPT AND STRUCTURE

Now it's plain to see from the first ten minutes that they have tried to separate this film from the origin of not even ten years ago. They did this by shoehorning in some stuff about his parents. More specifically, his dad. I won't go into the details of what is so interesting about his dad because even I'm not too sure. but

  Show
they imply that Richard Parker designed the spider that bites Peter. We're not even told what the spiders were initially designed to do, just that they exist

The main issue I have with having his dad in the film is that he ends up having too many father figures (his dad, uncle ben, connors and even captain stacy at the end) and it ultimately devalues the main relationship in the mythos; the one of uncle Ben.

What I quite hate about this film is that they really downplay Peter's intelligence. He comes across this formula his dad wrote and they really could've had him figure it out himself. He builds the webshooters as though he's baking a cake. They barely explain why he needs to websling around and have a split second scene of him stealing the main component of it i.e. the web. They could've done a lot more with that. Perhaps he makes a prototype then goes back to Oscorp and then re-hones his device....you know? like real science?

Connors has been expertly fucked up in this film. They failed to grasp any of the motives that were present in the comics.

  Show
The key moment of his character. The point at which he arcs was trash. I am still unsure as to why he tried the serum on himself. He was threatened to be fired and even in that scene he himself says it is not ready for humans. In the next scene, he uses it on himself. Connors' whole mythos revolves around his family. Where the hell where they?

The script is quite lazy at times; for example there is a scene that
  Show
shows the lizard finding a camera that says 'Property of Peter Parker' on it
. The death of Uncle Ben is disappointing. He really goes out like a bitch.

Structure wise it's fine though the first hour seemed very slow.

The characters are written adequately even if they may stray away from the comics at some points. Peter in the first half of the film could barely string two sentences together. For Gwen it seemed like they were unsure whether they wanted the character from the original comics or the ultimate series. So naturally, you'd make a mess and clump them together.

Dialogue was a bit cheesy at times, though we see more of the quipping spidey which we missed in the original trilogy. Also, Uncle Ben never says his most important line, but some weird implicated version.

PERFORMANCES

Andrew Garfield is a spectacular actor and I see big things for him. He gave it all he could and he really outshines Tobey (though so could a bath mat). The problem being that he doesn't have much to do dialogue wise. He nails the performance though and the death of uncle Ben (SPOILER) was very well done. Emma Stone is wonderful as usual and you could see how she was cast with the great amount chemistry between her and Andrew. Ifans is also superb in the scenes where he isn't a lizard. It did surface recently that many of his key scenes were cut so he may have put on an even better show, but we may never see it. Martin Sheen just needs to turn up and you know that shit will be cash. Sally Field was surprising brilliant as Aunt May and was, in my opinion, the best 'adult' in the film.

The acting, generally, was great considering how much the script sucked. Let's put it this way: They made the best of what they were given.

CINEMATOGRAPHY

By far the best aspect of the film. It's a very dynamically shot film with a wealth of different shots used. A specific fight scene in the school has a good amount of dollying and whip-panning making the sequence come to life. The film looks great and though the CG lizard looks like a dinosaur with leukaemia the special effects overall were wonderful. The biggest improvement over the Raimi series being that of the webslinging. It looks superb and I recall them making a big deal about having a wealth of practical stunts done during production. And I can see why. It really is an improvement in both the webslinging and action sequences.

The 3d was ok. They used a few of those 1st person shots that frequented the trailer to add the effect of the 3d, but I would see the film in 2d if given the choice now. I specifically remember more than a few scenes that were completely 2d and could be enjoyed without the glasses on.

The only thing I didn't like about the cinematography was that it seemed very dark. I understand it's a darker film in tone and that this should be reflected in the movie itself, but it seems like they did some DI to make it intentionally difficult to see small features in the day time scenes.




Overall, I am disappointed. I had high hopes for this and I felt empty inside after I left the cinema. A kind of...That was it?
It could have been a lot better with the cast that they had. The story was weak and it seemed unnecessary to redo the origin only 10 years after the orginal Raimi attempt.
I have yet to see a good Spider-Man film.

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down

Re: "The Amazing Spider-Man" Review by Sam [Mild Spoilers, marked]

Good review! Thanks!

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: "The Amazing Spider-Man" Review by Sam [Mild Spoilers, marked]

Thanks for the review.

I kind of hated it from the moment we saw little Peter walking thru the house, and it only got worse when I saw the spider research. The film makers literally went backwards even from the Raimi films. In the next reboot, we're probably going to see Peter's sweaty conception in the back of a Buick... in the same vicinity where the spiders are captured.

However, there was some effective humor in it—Peter's freakout at home after being bitten, some of the stuff with Uncle Ben, the Stan Lee cameo—and I liked the acting. But I hated the first police encounter, where Peter turns into an asshole. And I missed JJJ. And I agree about there being too many father figures.

I also didn't like that Peter revealed his secret to Gwen. Instead of being a private crusade against crime, it becomes an attempt to impress a girl. And I really didn't like the funeral and breakup with the girl, just like Raimi's first movie. (Besides, of all people to be worried about loved ones being hurt by the criminals you hunt down, a cop ain't one of them. Better to have made Peter promise to give up vigilantism. Then he has a tough decision in the next movie.)

There's really no reason this couldn't have been another entry in the Raimi series. The chemical webslingers were pointless; the Lizard was worked into Spider-Man 3; and Gwen was used no differently from Mary Jane (except that MJ wouldn't have had any connection to Connors). I don't think anyone would have begrudged the recasting.

However, if you're a kid who has never seen the Raimi-Maguire movies, I actually think this is mostly better than that.

Last edited by Zarban (2012-11-12 20:24:33)

Warning: I'm probably rewriting this post as you read it.

Zarban's House of Commentaries