So I saw The Amazing Spider-Man again... · 7:14am May 8th, 2014
First off, check out this review someone else wrote for Amazing Spider-Man 2.
Moving on to my review for the first one...
What did I think?
Suffice to say I'm still not fond of it.
Let me try to break down why I don't like this movie in a relatively brief and readable manner.
First off, Marc Webb's ((500) Days of Summer) direction seems almost bipolar, with it swinging from supposedly 'charming' teeny-bopper high school stuff to stale, turgid conspiracy film to family drama to sci-fi body horror that can only be described as 'David Cronenberg-lite'. It never keeps a consistent tone, and while the fight sequences are often filmed in a vibrant and engaging way, they lack any impact, mostly due to the complete apathy I feel for the main characters.
And what causes this apathy you might ask? The screenplay, which is, in a word, horrible. James Vanderbilt (The Rundown, Zodiac, White House Down), two-time Academy Award winner Alvin Sargent (Julia, Ordinary People, Spider-Man 2) and Academy Award nominee Steve Kloves (Wonder Boys, the Harry Potter francise) give all their characters a strange, almost overwhelming need to be abrasive and/or foolish people, who are always seemingly out to get each other or offend someone in the story. No one (except Uncle Ben and Captain Stacy), feels like a person I'd like to spend any more then a few moments with.
They transform Peter Parker, who from my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the character is a sharp-witted geek, into a mean spirited, misanthrope who constantly demeans/disregards others (especially authority figures) with a snide, supposedly witty insult or come back.
Curt Conners isn't spared either, as apparently neither the writers, director Webb or actor Rhys Ifhans (CBS' Elementary, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1) can decide wither to make him a sympathetic Dr. Jekyll to Lizard's Mr. Hyde, or if he's some kind of mad scientist who uses the Lizard as a tool for his own evil ends.
Plot threads and themes are introduced only to be left hanging, in favor of more and more snark and darker and edgier tone that ends up making the film feel heavy and downcast despite of it's supposedly optimistic ending (more on that when I get to Peter Parker himself).
The so-called 'romantic dialogue' is always strange and awkward, never feeling natural, but more like random natterings, spouted with abandon and at a frantic pace, as if desperately trying to recapture the spark of the likes of Woody Allen, Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, Quentin Tarantino or Aaron Sorkin. Instead, it comes across as stilted and forced, a fact certainly not helped by the hapless attempts at facial quirks and verbal tics, which only help make the bad dialogue feel all the more painful to listen to.
Now, onto the acting.
First off, like I said before, everyone seems to just be at a total loss as to what to do with their characters. Every performance (except Martin Sheen and Dennis Leary) seems just as bipolar and confused as the film itself, swinging through emotions like an epileptic monkey on a vine. But let's try to break it down into pieces for easier digestion.
Andrew Garfield seems to be on autopilot for this film, never really feeling as if he's trying to make this Parker his own. Instead, it just feels like he's being told to act like an abrasive, immature teenager with endless angst, and not a fully fleshed out and complex character. His take on the character (and I blame the writing and direction for this) is to create someone who I continually wish I could punch in the face with a spiked boxing glove, or to push in front of an oncoming train. Any time he shows anything resembling true kindness or selflessness towards another, it always feels as if he's secretly wanting something from that other person, and is only being nice to get what he wants. He causally offends other people, belittling them or outright disregarding them in favor of doing whatever he wants, regardless of consequences. Almost every attempt to make him sympathetic comes off as trite or false, almost as if the writers put it in at the last moment.
On top of that, this version of Peter isn't even that smart really. We only get one real scene showing his intelligence, when he decodes a formula that was a basically already decoded by both his own father and Dr. Conners. All Peter does is put the pieces together. Also, this version of Peter is an outright thief, stealing much of his webshooter tech from Oscorp in order to build it, instead of creating it himself. Instead of a lovable geek or nerd, we're treated to an emo kid who likes to creep around wearing hoodies, and take long distance photographs of his girlfriend without her knowledge.
Now don't get me wrong, I actually think that Andrew Garfield is a great, really talented actor (if you don't believe me, watch The Social Network for how Peter Parker SHOULD have been played)
That reminds me, Emma Stone is flat as unleavened bread in this film. Her take on Gwen feels like an anime Mary Sue come to life, with everything from the fact that her eyes never cease to look like a sad, whiny puppy, to her makeup to her clothing to her hair always being absolutely perfect. Perfectly ironed, perfectly groomed. ALL THE TIME. Her personality is always flat, with the only real emotions being shown at the scene in the rain at the end of the film, where she's actually emotional over the death of her father.
On top of that, she's stubborn as a mule, always back talking towards her father or disregarding the advice given to her. Her attraction towards Peter seems to only be there because it was there in the comics. We never see them interacting before they meet in the schoolyard. Never is it mentioned that Peter had a crush on her or visa versa. One minute they've met, and the next, POOF! It's a love for the ages that's worth completely disregarding the pleading words of her dying father for.
SPEAKING OF WHICH, why the hell did Peter go back on his word? Did you not learn nothing? You disregarded your uncle's advice, and he ended up being shot less then 50 feet away from you. At least the Rami films had the decency to have Peter and Uncle Ben have a logical reason to fight, and that that film's Peter wasn't a total asshole towards Uncle Ben the entire time. In this film, Peter is a jerk towards his parental figures, and, at the end of the film, when a dying Captain Stacy practically begs Peter to stay away from his daughter for her own safety, Peter goes back on his word less than a month later, saying that promises that can't be kept 'are the best kind'. Yeah. Talk to me when this leads to your beloved's skull cracking open like a walnut against the pavement, Peter.
Rhys Ifhans is even more lost then Garfield, playing Dr. Conners as a strange, confused mix of evil mad scientist or good man who simply makes a horrible mistake. The performance swings back and forth, with my sympathy for the character constantly being questioned whenever the previously kind Conners suddenly starts speaking in villainous overtones or waxes eloquent on the superiority of reptiles. This strange interplay is never explained, and the exact nature of the Lizard in relation to Conners is maddeningly ambiguous. Is Conners the dominate or is it the Lizard? Or do they share? Do they share the same goals? Is one simply using the other to futher his own agenda? Never explained. At times, it seems like Lizard and Conners are completely separate, like Banner and the Hulk. At others it seems that they're really just the same personality, just with the Lizard being it turned up to eleven.
Sally Field plays Aunt May as a high strung, vaguely anal retentive control freak, who constantly nags and worries and complains about something or other, which stand out in sharp contrast to Rosemary Harris' dignified portrayal of the character.
Martin Sheen however, plays Uncle Ben perfectly, giving the character a dignity and wisdom that is sorely lacking in the other characters. At times, his dialogue almost feels like he's self-aware of the rest of the screenplay, and is trying to actively point out the flaws, which is such a relief in a film where everyone seems completely blind to their flaws.
Dennis Leary also plays Captain Stacy with swagger and confidence, using even less screen time than Sheen to help provide what also seems to be the only sane man in the film's universe.
Everyone else in the cast just kinda fades into a sea of blandness really, and there's not much to say.
The only positive in this whole thing is Horner's score. It's ornate and beautiful, standing out in sharp contrast to the faceless, empty bombass of most modern action scores. It uses the piano and strings gently and never seems to overstate or blow everything out of proportion. Sure it sounds like most of his other post-Titanic work, but Horner at least has enough style and class to help overcome that hurdle. Of course, a film score, no matter how much I like it, can help save a bad movie for me.
In the end, this film exists solely because Sony was greedy. The film rights to Spider-Man were about to revert back to Marvel Pictures, and so, Sony, desperate to keep the rights and make more money with minimal effort, created this film on the fly. The end product suffers, desperately trying to ape the styles of others, while never understanding what made those other films work.
I give a very weak 1.5 out of 5
So far, you're the only person i've seen who's hated it so far.
Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones. As I really enjoyed this one. The Raimi movies never seemed to click for me, maybe its cause I believe they're extremely overrated (seriously, Spider-Man 2 has more critical praise than The Avengers), despite being just as flawed as Webb's version.
Mary-Jane as an annoying and bland character who only serves to be the D.I.D. Plus Kirsten Dunst's performance lacks any real effort (say whatever you want about Emma Stone, at least she tried).
The Green Goblin is the very definition of a weak villain. His motivation was to kill the guys who sold has company... and he does that in his first scene. His reason for getting involved with Spider-Man is nonexistent. Making him utterly pointless. At least The Amazing Spider-Man 2 gave him a reason to be there and saved him for another movie, so we can see him in his prime.
I can see why you don't like the new reboot, but more often than not, it just seems like you're being bias towards it (you could say the same to me about the Raimi movies). I respect your opinion, but you REALLY don't need to hammer it in like that.
2088229 <This guy.
2088311
Is that a compliment?
2088530 Very much so.
2088229 I really like Spider-Man 2, but it being better than the Avengers? There are really people who say that?
Avengers, in my humble opinion, is the best superhero movie of all time. (And I'm a huge Spider-Man nerd) Others will say Tim Burton's Batman, Dark Knight, or Superman, Man of Steel, but for me it was definitely Avengers.
I love Mary Jane in comics... I can't stand what they did to her in the movies. All she was there to do was break up with Peter, scream a lot and get kidnapped by the bad guys. She serve no other purpose. At least, Gwen was active, she was smart, helpful, understanding. (Plus Emma Stone is a much better actress than Kristen Dunst
)
There are things I really like about Marc Webb's version and there are things I really like about Raimi's version. But there are things I hate about them both too. So, I can't take one over the other. They are both enjoyable.
2088229 except I'm not trying to be biased.
The movie just sucks.
And don't think I'm without critizism for the Rami films (at times there's just too much cheese, Peter mopes a lot, and MJ can be a world class bitch. And don't even get me started on the ending of Spider-Man 2...but at least there, there's humor and everyone's not a total asshole to everyone else. Also, it took me FOUR viewings of the first Rami film to like it. FOUR)
I watched this film again with the explict purpose of wanting to like it. I came in here actively hoping I would be proven wrong, and finally understand why everyone liked this version.
It didn't work.
2088606
Thanks. I can't always tell the different between an insult or a compliment unless someone says it to me in person. That's why I asked.
2088639
Spider-Man 2
- 94% Rotten Tomatoes
- 83/100 Metacritic
The Avengers/Avengers Assemble
- 92% Rotten Tomatoes
- 69/100 Metacritic
... Astounding
But yeah, I agree with everything you said. Though I personally like Webb's Spidey over Raimi's, I do not think that Raimi's films are bad (except for the third one). I'm proud to own both of them on DVD, and I do watch them frequently.
2088640
You just seemed so keen on thoroughly disecting this film and the sequel, but never even touched Raimi's, that's what got me to think that you were bias. Never said you WERE, all the criticisms just made me think so.
If I offended you, then I apologize as it was not my intention.
If you don't like it, then just don't watch it. No ones gonna force you.
2088217 I feel like the only sane man to be honest.
I honestly feel that the people who liked this movie where just desprate for a respectful Spider-Man film after the trainwreck of Spider-Man 3, so they blindly accepted anything Sony threw at them.
So Sony, knowing that they only needed to make one movie in order to keep the rights, cooked up this lazy batch of horrible writing and unlikeable characters, slapped a brand name and sold it like a pimp does a prostitute.
And everyone bought into it like sheep.
...
Sorry about the rant. Kinda got away from me.
2088672 Meanwhile, on IMDb:
The Avengers: 8.2
Spider-Man 2: 7.4
Let it be known that IMDb has a much better rating system, as anyone who has an account with the site can rate/review films. Meanwhile, places like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes are based off running the reviews of the film through an algorithm or something, to come up with a rough estimate of the film's quality.
2088675 I haven't touched Rami's yet because Rami's films weren't the current Spider-Man films.
So really, they weren't immediately relevant to my interests at the time. They aren't the films that I see crawling around tumblr and youtube, being praised every which way but loose and having advertisements plastered on everything within a hundred mile radius.
I'll review them eventually, that's for sure, and don't expect to me to blind to the flaws (for instance MJ in Spider-Man 2 is a complete bitch to Peter for most of it for no other reason then cheap romantic drama)
Has been a while since I've seen this film, so I'd have to watch it again to respond to most of your criticisms.
But I do remember explicitly thinking at the end of the film, "Andrew Garfield is a better Spider-Man than Toby Maquire." You're right, Spider-Man is a sharp-witted geek, and that's what I saw in Garfield, not Maquire. Maquire almost never did anything that demonstrated advanced intelligence, except that one scene in the first one where he mentions a few fun-facts about spiders. Peter never cracked a joke in Raimi's films, and when Spider-Man told jokes, they came off mumbled and unconvincing.
That's why I was so excited to see Andrew Garfield's performance. I will admit that stealing OsCorp tech was out of line, but he still came across as a nerd. His rivalry with Gwen, Conners respect for him, the decorations in his room, the creation of the shooters (if not the fluid) all create that impression. He was also funny and upbeat (after those first couple of scenes), and while I'd have to watch it again to see if he came off as rude, I don't remember that impression the first time I watched it.
2088753 I'll give you a slide because it's been awhile since you've seen it.
But man, everything you just listed there I couldn't find in this film.
What rivalry with Gwen? I honestly just thought they wanted to have sex because getting cut by a giant radioactive lizard is apparently a turn-on in this universe
I never once sensed they had a 'rivalry' of any kind beyond that strange thing that happens when teenagers get horny.
And like I said before, I could never tell if Conners was actually thinking that Peter was a cool guy, or if he was just sizing him up for eating later. It was really confusing.
And while I'll admit this version of Spider-Man cracks more jokes then Rami's, he does them in a tone of voice that never seems good natured. At one point, a cop has him at gunpoint for (illegally) apprehending a car thief. What does Garfield!Parker do? He walks up the cop, takes the cops gun out of his hands and tosses it away like it was a toy, complaining the whole time that 'I did 80% of your job for you' the whole time. You know Peter, last time I checked, that's filed under 'Resisting Arrest' and 'Disarming a police officer', which, to my admittedly limited understanding of the American legal system, is a crime. A major crime.
Yeah I kinda loose sympathy points for him there.
2088672
... Wow... all I can say is... wow...
Yeah, I can see why you would like Webb's more than Raimi's. (Especially Raimi's third piece of shit Spider-Man)
But I think we can all agree. Any Spider-Man movie is better than James Cameron's Spider-Man movie that never was.
2088834 Oh, that's right, you did a critique of that one, didn't you? I'll have to read that.
2088765 The rivalry was, admittedly, not hugely emphasized. But if I recall correctly, there were a few early scenes where you definitely got the impression they were the two mental giants in the classroom just in the way they were treated. Like I said, could be misremembering that.
I felt Conners respected him. I'd have to watch it again to be sure, but that was the impression I got.
Also, you have to bear in mind that most superheroes are walking a pretty thin legal line. Most heroes, and this definitely includes Spidey, have had to resist arrest at some point or another; it's part of the suspension of disbelief. Spidey has been wanted by the FBI before and basically flat out ignored it. Raimi didn't address it a lot, but in most versions of the story, Spidey is usually wanted. The reason the audience tolerates it is because he's doing good and tries to minimize his violence, creating the difference between him and Venom or Punisher. And trust me, that's not the first time that Pete's criticized his world's version of the NYCPD for ineffectiveness.
2089097 I guess it was just the whole tone of the scene.
Especially not helped by that weird dinner table scene where Peter starts talking smack about the NYCPD, even when the only reason he's even doing this is to find his uncle's killer (who by the way is never found)
2089124 True….his crime-fighting motivations weren't as altruistic here.
2088834
Precisely. And I'm definitely going to see the Sinister Six and Venom spin-offs.
2088734
Movies on IMDb are judged by the fans, why else would Superman: The Movie and Man Of Steel be almost tied in ratings (7.4 & 7.3 respectively), despite the huge critical differences (93% & 56% respectively).
2089227 You could claim Critical Dissonance.
Which is when, regardless of how good the final product is, a film critic will demean it on the premise that it isn't 'intelligent cinema', purely because it's a superhero film.
I see it all the time with music reviews. Soundtrack reviews are almost always belittling towards film music, regardless of the actual quality of the music.
Of course, on the other hand, Fanboys will always skew the ratings in an unfair manner as well.
BUT, that being said, overall, the IMDb rating uses more people, and uses more 'normal viewers' then other sites, which at least helps give a better indication as to the quality of the film overall.
You can see a critical praise the newest Lars von Trier film to the ends of the earth. Show it to a crowd of normal film goers, and you'll most likely get a lot of people walking out/grossed out by the film's content and getting a massive case of Darkness Induced Audience Apathy.
2089227 Me too. Mostly because, it's Spider-Man. He's my favorite superhero of all time. Whether his stuff rocks or sucks, I at least want to partake in it and give it my own thoughts and opinions.
2088834
WHAT????!!!!!!!!!!!!
People actually think Amazing Spider-Man is better than the AVENGERS??!!!!!
What are those people on?!
2090499 I'd like to know myself. And maybe get some.
But in all seriousness, Avengers is by far the best superhero film (at least in my opinion) I love Spider-Man, but in all honesty I have yet to see a film that is on that same level. Spider-Man 2, I felt was the closest, but even then there were things that I just hated. *cough* Kristen Dunst *cough*
2089079 You should read the review; it was good (even if the script made Batman on Ice look like The Godfather)
On the topic at hand, I never really got into Spider Man in general (partially because I wasn't exposed to many comics at the time). I enjoyed the first Spider Man movie because, at the time, it was only of the few superhero movies I had actually seen, so I had no previous bias or anything to go off of. I never saw Spider Man 2 and I only saw Spider Man 3 because it was the in-flight movie of an airplane I was on and I needed something to do (not knowing the character very well I thought it was okay). I haven't sat down and rewatched the Raimi films again, but I have seen a few clips from different Youtube videos here and there and... well, it looks cheesy.
I haven't seen Amazing Spider Man, or Amazing Spider Man 2 for that matter (Godzilla , Captain America and Guardians of the Galaxy are higher on my list), so I cannot really judge them. Maybe someday I'll watch them and make my own conclusions, but until then...
2091342 As far as Superhero films go, it's a tie between Avengers and Iron Man 1 for me. I know I probably said Man of Steel was one of my favorites when I wrote about it last year, but as I think about it more those two seem to stand up a little better.
2092762
….Batman On Ice? 
….that exists?! 
Also, I personally wouldn't recommend film as the way to be introduced to Spidey. Go with the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon, or the original comics, or the graphic novel Spider-Man: Blue.
The movies aren't bad, but they aren't how I would introduce someone to the franchise, personally.
2092887 It's what I call Batman and Robin. I'd call it Batman In Name Only, but ASBaR took that title
2092973 Ooooh! ….I'm not sure if that's better or worse than an actual Batman ice show.
But I do know that ASBaR definitely deserves that title more.
2088640
...You killing my childhood.
Just kidding.
I personally enjoyed the movie, but i can see why other didn't like it.
2091342
There are very few Superhero movies that are on par with the Avengers.
VERY. FEW.
(While I personally thought that Captain America: The Winter Soldier was on par with the Avengers, that's just my opinion.)
2096888 I thought Winter Soldier was pretty well done and yeah, I can see why it is on par with Avengers.