The Amazing Spiderman

Logline: Peter Parker finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. Curt Connors, his father's former partner.

Cast: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Dennis Leary, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen, Sally Field, Irrfan Khan

Directed by: Marc Webb

To add on to yesterday's article, Jennifer Lawrence just signed on to do Ends of the Earth, another great screenplay choice. Can't wait.

--- Back on topic.

I chose The Amazing Spiderman because if you know me personally, you'd know spidey is my favorite superhero. I was more pumped for this than I was The Avengers. That being said, I don't really know much about comics, so my review will be completely based on the film alone.

Summary

Much like Sam Raimi's version of Spiderman in 2002, the story begins with Peter Parker living with his grandparents. To add a twist to the old, we actually see his parents leave and their departure has something to do with the plot later on. Peter sneaks around Oscorp, finds himself in a room in which Doctor Curt Connors - a partner of his father in the past - had been working on a device to mutate/heal/recreate limbs of animals & eventually humans. Peter touches things he shouldn't, a spider crawls in his coat from the room, bites him, and we all know what happens from there.

Review

I will always be biased towards Spidey. I loved this movie.

However, I can honestly say I felt more satisfied after watching the 2002 version. I think this is mainly because that story had a lot more meat packed on it, and its plot was original and never been done before. This 2012 re-boot visits a lot of old plot points, so you can kind of see them coming, and when they happen it's kind of been there, done that. You know? It isn't all too bad, though. It certainly didn't ruin the movie for me.

There were also a few scenes that didn't sit well with me. For instance, when Peter Parker throws a football and it makes the foul posts on the field bend because it's thrown so hard. And then the scene with the basketball net exploding seemed kinda hokey. I think this is nitpicking though, again, neither ruined the movie for me.

The chemistry between Garfield and Stone was amazing. Garfield played shy and nervous better than I've ever seen on the big screen before, and Emma Stone was sweet, edgy, sophisticated, and intellectual. Makes for a great mix and a weird romance when Peter starts shooting webs. Plus, the web-twirl-kiss was pretty awesome.

The Lizard looked AMAZING. As a villain, we could care for him because Connors was only trying to heal himself. A man would go to great lengths if he knew he could re-grow his own arm that he'd lost many years prior. As Lizard, the CGI was beautiful and the chaos was... chaotic.

Spiderman follows typical structure, but does it with style and flare. Three huge blockbuster movies this summer: The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises, The Amazing Spiderman. All three used the same technique to keep the audience on the edge of their seat. Add a time to a place - make something like a bomb to go off at that time, and you create the ultimate stakes and urgency needed. Hey, it worked all summer, who am I to knock the formula.

Topic of the Day

Reboots.

After Spiderman 3 in 2007 I couldn't wait for the next one to come out. Who was going to be the villain? Who were they going to cast? etc etc. When I found out they were going to reboot the entire franchise, as a fan of the series, I was disappointed. I get that there were different series of comic issues, so there are many spins to put on the story of Spiderman, but I just didn't get it. Why reboot a series that's been doing so well, so soon? Just 5 years after? Really? They didn't need to wait that long. And, just for the record, I'm brave enough to admit that I enjoyed the third - even with the jazz dance.

So, after watching the rebooted version, I can kind of see why they did it. Going back, what else could they have done with a 4th movie? It had the possibility of being stale. Now, what they did, was add something to make the series much more meaningful. They added the storyline of his father and made it so Peter will one day discover that his father was actually murdered - and then shit will hit the fan and it will become the most personal Spiderman to date.

Trouble with rebooting a great movie is - you have to revisit plot points which will seem unoriginal and you have to live up to the hype of the old with brand new additions (it can't all be the same). This makes it so things get left out - things fans really enjoyed. Jameson not being in it disappointed me. So, for the first film, fans had to suffer through the issues that a reboot inevitably has to have.

However, this sets up the second film perfectly as expectations for the sequel of this film will not be the same as the sequel from the first in '02. It's a different story, but it took The Amazing Spiderman to distinguish that, now the second has room to pave its own path. Feel me?

Consensus

Although not as meaty as the first Spiderman in 2002, The Amazing Spiderman still packs a solid punch. Well acted, well scripted, and well directed, this reboot paves way for a whole new series that I personally cannot wait to see unfold. This will go down as one of the most underrated movies of the summer, unfortunately - it's pretty damn amazing. 

8.3/10