FRIDAY FILM REVIEW: The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012)
DIRECTOR: Marc Web
STARRING: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Sally Field. Michael Sheen, Dennis Leary
GENRE: Fantasy, Action
CERT: 12A
REVIEWER: Gemma
Now colour me sceptical, but I like numerous others was a bit taken aback at Sony announcing a “re-boot” of Spider-man. It has only been ten years since the first film came out and five years since Spider-man 3 hit the screens. For me, I suspect that there was some sort of clause in the agreement that Sony had with Marvel that after “X” number of years, the rights would revert back to them. And now with Disney buying Marvel, Sony didn’t want to lose the rights. Couple that with the successful reboot of the Batman franchise, Sony must have thought they were on to a winner. To that I say “HA!”
Yes, this film is going to make oodles of money at the box office, but if you have seen the Toby Maguire and Sam Raimi original films first, you may come out of the cinema like me, with the feeling that although it was a good film it brought nothing knew to the franchinse. In fact, for me it was missing that little bit of oomph that made me go “WOW! That was a fun movie!”. The Amazing Spider-Man has all the tried and tested bells and whistles, but it was missing that suckerpunch I felt when I saw Batman Begins, the reboot to the Batman franchise.
Now the plot seems to be going down the root of the original comics. Instead of having the iconic Mary-Jane Watson as the love interest in this movie, the writers have decided to go back to the early comics and have Gwen Stacy (Stone),as Peter Parkers (Garfield) first girlfriend. Knowing a bit about the origins of the Spider-man comics, I think I know what the knewly announced Trilogy arc is going to be, but I’m not going to spoil it for the non-comic reading fans. All I will say is that it has great potential for fantastic series, if carried out right.
So, let me get back to this film and what I thought of it.
The original plot has been covered before, how Peter was bitten by the spider that gave him his powers, the events leading up to Uncle Ben’s murder, and how Peter came up with his idea for his alter ego all are tweaked slightly in this film. The problem is you are limited on what you can do as these are all staple parts of the mythology of Spiderman.
Another issue is the roster of villains that Spiderman can go up against. Raimi had already used five of the biggies: Green Goblin, Doc Oc, Hob Goblin, Sandman and Venom, so the writers/directors decided to use one of villains only hinted at in the Raimi films, The Lizard/ Dr Curt Connors. Maybe they decided to take a leaf out of Christopher Nolan’s, the genious behind the reboot of the Batman films, book and have a less famous villain and keep the Green Goblin for the second film? I don’t know, but even this is a pretty weak plot. The motivation for Dr Connors is really woolly and I just couldn’t buy into it.
The pacing of the film as a whole is pretty much a stop-start affair. You can see the big set pieces, but there is filler inbetween it that just slows the pace down.
I saw the film in IMAX 3D, hoping to feel as though I was Spidey(or Spider-man to the non-comic book fans), swinging through New York, but even then it fell flat. Other films I have seen in 3D, IMAX and IMAX 3D managed to take advantage of the technology, but this just didn’t.
So I then turned to the characters in order to see if there was anything new to them. Now, remember the only characters that appear in both Raimi’s films and this one are Spidey, Aunt May, Uncle Ben and Dr Curt Conners. Since this is Spidey’s film, I’ll talk about Andrew Garfields portrayal.
Many people will argue with me, but for me Garfield lacked that certain something to make me root for him. He did give it his all when dealing with emotional parts, but I felt nothing. The pivotal part in the evolution of Spiderman came across like a teenager having a strop. This is the catalyst for what Peter/Spidey stands for. Give Garfield his due, he gave it his all, he just didn’t pack that punch.
What was frustrating was the fact that there were moments of pure genius hidden within the film. The part with the car jacker still made me laugh, with Spidey aprhending the car theif in the middle of his heist. It was a well set-up gag and at one point my mind was drawn to the lead in Kick-Ass. The only down side is that this scene has almost been shown in its entirety through trailers and TV spots.
Sally Field and Michael Sheen’s portrayal of Aunt May and Uncle Ben are ok. Again, there is only so much you can do with these characters. I did think that Sheens’ portrayal of Uncle Ben came across as a bit of an ass. The film makers tried to make him a bit more of the comedy relief, but it failed. While in Raimi’s film, Uncle Ben came across as the concerned elder, Sheen’s Uncle Ben was a bit hard on Peter.
After thinking it over, I think I know what this film really lacked and that was conflict and heart.
The linchpin of Raimi’s films was the relationship between Peter, Harry Osborn and Mary-Jane. Peter’s friendship with Harry caused a lot of conflict, both with the fact he is Norman Osborns’ son and the fact that both of them had feelings for Mary-Jane. It is this plotline that gives us something to invest in. With the new film, we don’t have that. Spidey’s relationship with Gwen Stacy just seems to be a stepping stone to the great love affair we all know is on the horizon.
It’s a shame because Emma Stone is an excellent actress. She would have been better playing Mary-Jane in a later film, than Gwen. Maybe the film makers have a greater storyline for her in the sequels. I hope so, because this was just disappointing.
For anyone who hasn’t seen Raimi’s original spin on this story, this will probably be a great film to go and see. No doubt they will love it. Even those who didn’t like Tobey Maguire or Kirsten Dunst will prefer this, as they haven’t been through this origin story before. I couldn’t help but compare Raimi’s film with this one. In the end, I found myself saying “Yeah, they have tried to give their own slant on the film, but it’s not enough to make me feel that it’s really any different.”
It seems that the film makers hoped to replicate Nolans reboot of Batman in this film, but it’s a very pale imitation. The reason being, Nolan managed to re-invent the Batman mythology, this is just going over the same old ground. It could be down to the limitations on how you can re-invent Spider-man as his origin story is so well known. With Batman, we all know that he saw his parents being murdered, but there is scope from this event to becoming the icnonic Batman that can be open to interpertation. With that, all I can say is “Roll on The Dark Knight Rises.”
RATING: 
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN ONLINE
Website | Facebook
VIDEO TRAILER
14 Comments
Hmm, I’m getting fed up with all the remakes. Not sure I’ll bother with this one, and Andrew Garfield does nothing for me, he looks very scrawny, even too skinny.
I will agree that the recent Batman movies I the best ever made. And I LOVE Christian Bale.
Reply
Only 7 days till the dark night rises comes out. I’m getting fed up too
Reply
Oh, I totally disagree with you on this one. I felt that Toby turned Spidey into a total cry-baby wimp and this version put the spice back into him and the love interest. I do agree regarding Emma Stone, though. Great casting and too bad she’s wasted on Gwen–I am in the camp of those who absolutely HATED Kirstin Dunst’s character.
Both my hubby and I felt that it was a vast improvement over the previous trilogy (of sorts) and neither of us felt that we needed something different–we were happy to get the taste of the previously wimpy, crybaby character washed away.
Reply
I do admit liking the 80′s cartoon, but andrew garfields character came across like the numerous guys in films like twilight. I felt for maguires peter when he lost his uncle, i couldn’t in this one.
And I agree about Kirsten Dunst. She wasn’t the best Mary-Jane.
Reply
I loved this movie! Yes, I loved the Raimi version of Spiderman 1 & 2, but the third one was so terrible – I only saw it once and would now prefer to pretend it does not exist. I frankly love comics and superheroes, and was iffy about this new one coming out, but I really enjoyed watching it.
Andrew was a great spider-man, and dorky like in the comics, but he and Emma also look young enough to be students, more than Tobey and Kirsten do. Plus, he actually made the web-sling material himself, which is much closer to the comics. I definitely look forward to the next one.
Reply
I did go “yay” on the web shooters he made himself. Loved that about the comics and cartoons.
As for spiderman 3? I have erased that from my mind. Don’t know what they were taking but man! And the masacre they did on venom!!!
I just felt it was too soon and as i said in my review I missed the conflict brought about by peter and harry osborns friendship. Always thought that was better than the Mj peter thing
Reply
I’m with Carolyn I think it’s a bit daft that we’re having yet another remake. Agree on Batman remakes being awesome, but I liked Toby I have to say…
Reply
I think they should have did a Bond and continued the story with a diferent actor as Spidey…. but that’s just me
Reply
I completely agree with you!
Reply
I mean… I want Black Cat! Always liked her better than MJ in the tv show. lol! True she is a bit like Catwoman, but still….
Reply
I think this review has cemented my decision on whether or not to see this film. I’m still so torn about seeing it, as I love the movies with Tobey Maguire as spidey, Andrew Garfield does nothing for me and I agree with Carolyn, he looks too scrawny!
If you think this film can’t compare with the previous Spiderman movies then I don’t think I’ll bother! I wish they hadn’t rebooted the franchise so soon, I just think it’s a marketing ploy to put Spiderman into the next Avengers film.
Great movie review as always Gemma
Reply
If you loved the original series, then I wouldn’t bother. Its another origin movie. The only new thing really is the villan and Gwen Stacy. I still think they should have did a bond and continued on with the story than done a reboot.
As for the reasons behind it, it may be partially down to getting SPidey into the next avengers movie, but I think its more to do with Soney wanting to hold onto the rights of Spidey so they can hold Marvel over a barrell
Reply
My boyfriend is a comic book lover so he knows that this earlier story of Spiderman is actually really important to the storyline that made Spiderman. I really loved this movie, it was the best super hero movie I have ever seen. They appealed to a younger audience with this one since Parker is more of a teenager having to learn how to be Spiderman instead of how the original was done where Spiderman was already fully confident in what he was doing. I loved watching this younger Parker struggle with being Spiderman and all of his little mistakes along the way. Plus Gwen is pretty damn important to Spiderman’s story arc. Gwen was his first love and the whole Mary Jane thing was actually never suppose to happen the way that it did.
When the writers put Mary Jane in the comic book she was suppose to be a side character. Interesting to Parker just a little but he was still upset over Gwen’s death. The writers only kept Mary Jane around because the readers actually responded really well to Mary Jane so she became the main love interest for Parker. However, I’m a firm believer that you will never forget your first real love so Gwen does have a role to play and while she didn’t have to do much in this movie she will be pretty important as this reboot continues because her death causes some major plot points and emotional stress to Parker and the Spiderman character…at least if they go on the comic books.
I thought this was the way Spiderman should have been done the first time around. This really shows who Parker was before becoming Spiderman and that is super important. These days the back story to superheros has just been skipped over so I’m glad they are taking the time to do Spiderman the justice it deserved the first time around.
Plus in this one Spiderman had funny moments which was majorly lacking in the first take on Spiderman. In the comics he is funny as he defeats the bad guys and the first trilogy didn’t portray that. So I believe this is actually doing the comics and the real story justice.
Sorry for my rant.
Thanks for your great movie review.
Reply
Hey Alexa, no need to be sorry and I do get why they chose to have this as the stoey arc and I agree that the gwen stacy arc is important. Its like the death of Bruce Waynes parents have a big part to play in his path to batman.
However, as with all comics, there have been redifning origins for most if not all the characters in comics. Different writers take different views. Raimi did his(pardon the pun) spin on the origin story
I think what I missed the most in this movie is the Peter Parker/Harry Osborn relationship. I was never really fond of mary-jane, but the conflict between peter and harry really interested me.
Raimis films were far from perfect and lets be honest, 3 was really bad! What they did to Venom was a travisty! It was just that I felt that there was little new to this story. There was no new slant to the origin of peter parker and spiderman.
Look at the batman films by Nolan. They are fantastic films! They went back to the origins of both batman and bruce wayne and gave us something new. They erased the bad taste left behind by batman and robin.
Thats what I wanted from Spiderman. Regardless of whether its MJ or Gwen, the majority of the film.seemed to go over very similar ground.
This is my opinion only. I’m glad that you liked the film and I am happy you felt free to leave a comment. I like dicussing films. I admit to knowing enough about origins of superhero comic books to get me by. I will never be able to go down to the minute detail that real fans will. This reciew was based on my opinions of the film only
Reply