Monday, July 16, 2012

The Amazing Spider-Man Review

Is it a reboot? Or a preboot? Or is it this Untold Story?
I've never really been a comic book fan (though I've occasionally perused a Batman comic or two in the bookstore), but I'd still argue that the character of Spider-Man has played a large role in my exposure to pop culture, particularly due to growing up with the original Spider-Man trilogy. I remember seeing the first film in a Blockbuster rental in 2003, Spider-Man 2 on cable in 2005, and finally the overwhelmingly disappointing Spider-Man 3 in theaters upon its release five years ago. Looking back on them now, I can see them through both the rose-colored glasses of a kid, and the more discerning pop-culture eye of a college student. And while they're all somewhat silly and flawed, to be sure (especially the egregiously  overpacked and undercooked Spider-Man 3), they're still a hell of a lot of fun, and also nice pieces of filmmaking, mainly due to the clever and ingenious direction of cult horror master Sam Raimi. Anyways, the point is, once Spider-Man 4 was shut down due to creative differences between Raimi and the studio 2 years back (probably because he was still a little sour because of Venom being forced on him in 3, as well), a supposedly "grittier" reboot was announced with a new director and cast almost immediately afterward, with Marc Webb (director of the delightfully genre-defying and quirky rom-com (500) Days of Summer) signing on very shortly thereafter. Then we got a likable cast together, a shooting schedule, and finally, some trailers. Still, through all this, I remained very skeptical of this new take on the wall-crawler. It seemed almost emo in its approach, and I also found the choice to release it in summer 2012 (where it will inevitably suffer future comparisons to The Avengers and the forthcoming The Dark Knight Rises (NOTE: Check back for a review on that later this week)) highly questionable. Nevertheless, last week, I got my ticket (through the original Spider-Man Blu-ray movie money, FREE MOVIE FTW), and sat down to watch this supposedly "Untold Story" of Peter Parker. My verdict after the pic.

By combining a TERRIFYING LIZARD with a SWEET BOY, thus creating: the LIZARDMAN!!!
First things first, the whole idea of The Amazing Spider-Man being this amazing "Untold Story" is mostly a load of BS. Despite some noteworthy plot differences, the main trajectory of this reboot primarily adheres to the same plot points and character arc that Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker faced 10 years ago, radioactive spiders, murdered uncles, mad scientists, secret identities and all. This is the one major complaint I had with the film, and the ending in particular kind of pissed me off in this regard. It's ultimately what keeps the film from becoming a totally new take on the character, and makes comparisons to Raimi's film inevitable from here on out. So, in this vein, before I actually review the film on its own merits, I must expand on the first three.

I do indeed like the Raimi films quite a bit, despite feeling that Tobey Maguire was actually TOO geeky to correctly play Peter Parker, Kirsten Dunst was static and boring, and James Franco was only good when Harry Osborn wasn't consumed with desire for vengeance. Spider-Man suffers from cheesy effects and a script written by the dialogue-challenged David Koepp, but still succeeds at being a fun, if melodramatic, take on the web-slinger, complete with a delightfully campy and insane performance from Willem Dafoe as archvillain Green Goblin. 2 is unquestionably the best of the trilogy, giving us a more believable romance, some interesting side hooks that expand the mythology, an actually realistic depiction on balancing the life of a superhero with that of a normal dude (a weird oasis of realism in a desert of over-the-top comic book silliness), and a confident and expertly motivated antagonist in Alfred Molina's Doc Ock. 3, as I said above, is where it all came crashing down. Raimi attempting to thread the story far too thin, with too many plotlines, villains, and melodramatic scenes. In addition, scenes and characters that should have been played dark (Venom and the black suit) are instead played for awkward comedy, with a fatally miscast Topher Grace in an all-too-brief role as Spidey's symbiotic foil. I can speak positively of the first 30-45 minutes of the film, and of Thomas Haden Church as Sandman, but in all, once the symbiote appears on the suit, the movie goes off the rails. And that failure, coupled with awful rumors of Anne Hathaway as the "Vulturess" in Spider-Man 4, makes me feel that a reboot may not have been totally unjustified.

So, after all these words, on to the general topic: On its own terms, how did I feel about The Amazing Spider-Man? After low expectations, and a free ticket, I feel that, as a matter of fact, The Amazing Spider-Man was surprisingly good, and that despite the lack of a need for a reboot and similar plot points, it retroactively justifies its own existence. After co-screenwriter James Vanderbilt's original script was described as being akin to Batman Begins, I was concerned that this new take on the character would be overly and unnecessarily dark, and that the nerdier aspects of Peter Parker in Raimi's film would give way to an overly punkish and emo one. NEWSFLASH: SPIDER-MAN DRESSES UP IN A UNITARD, SWINGS FROM MECHANICAL WEBSHOOTERS (at least in Webb's version), AND CAPTURES CRIMINALS AND BATTLES RIDICULOUS BATSHIT INSANE JEKYLL+HYDE VILLAINS WHILE SNARKING AT THEM AND PROFITEERING BY TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS OF HIMSELF. No matter what you do, this would be inherently silly when placed in a gritty, totally realistic setting, so rather than going for realism, Webb and co. wisely went the route of last summer's Rise of the Planet of the Apes, starting out realistic, and as the more traditional comic-booky elements of Spider-Man began to take shape, they gradually increased the sci-fi wattage, hoping that by the time Spider-Man is battling a big green lizardman on top of the Oscorp tower while attempting to stop him from turning New York's entire population into lizardmen using chemical gas (which is, BTW, the FOURTH time in a comic book movie that this was the villain's evil plot, after Batman 1989, X-Men, and Begins), we've fully suspended our disbelief, and for the most part, it works. However, it does take one really useful leaf out of the Christopher Nolan book, and that is in the transformation of the character of Peter Parker. Whereas Tobey Maguire wasn't Spider-Man, and then Uncle Ben was murdered and he was, Andrew Garfield (who gives an ACES performance in this, with all the stuttering, shyness, and snark that both Parker and Spidey should have) slowly but surely becomes the hero. Uncle Ben (played excellently and with feeling by none other than Winning Sr., Martin Sheen) is murdered, he goes on a quest for vengeance, is inspired (by a WRESTLING ARENA, wink wink) to use the Spider as a symbol, the same way Bruce was in Begins to use bats by a childhood terror, makes the webshooters for travel, begins to look for his uncle's killer, and is eventually, by the arrival of the Lizard and through forced superheroics, fully convinced to become a superhero. It's a far more emotional and human take on the character, only bolstered by the way more charming and convincing romance. Emma Stone is irresistibly charming in virtually everything she's in, and Gwen Stacy is no exception, sharing great chemistry with Garfield and succeeding as both a romantic and intellectual equal for Parker. Rhys Ifans is OK as Curt Connors, but the Lizard (despite being my favorite Spidey villain) never really succeeds as more than a plot device, and the CGI is occasionally a tad hammy (and I shall forever bemoan the largely absent "ALLIGATOR IN A LAB COAT" image from the comic books). James Horner's new theme will one day be highly spoken of (maybe never quite as iconic as Elfman's theme for Raimi's movies, but nevertheless good), the effects and action sequences are thrilling, and the drama is quite satisfying, with Webb's sensibilities from his last film clearly carrying over, and totally justifying him as director of a tentpole franchise. 

The mystery of Ben Parker's killer, mixed with the romantic set-up, the Parker family conspiracy, the references to Norman Osborn (and maybe to a "Night Gwen Stacy Died" direction for a sequel), and the promise of more deftly balanced drama and action definitely bring together enough material for a nice little franchise here. The Amazing Spider-Man may not be "the Untold Story", necessary, or even wanted, but it's good fun, and sometimes, that's enough. After Doc Ock's outing in Raimi's first trilogy, it's probably #2 out of the 4 Spider-Man movies.

I will not dance in a jazz club in black tights and cut my emo hair....
The Amazing Spider-Man gets an 8 out of 10.

No comments:

Post a Comment