View Single Post
Old July 7 2012, 09:00 PM   #146
Warped9's Avatar
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: The Amazing Spider-Man Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Just saw it. It was fair, just okay. there are some things I liked and other things I didn't.

What this movie didn't have was the charm of Raimi's films. Raimi nailed the original source materiel sensibilities. This one goes mostly for angst and something of that Twilight feel. On that score I give Raimi the nod. Webb's film makes me think of Smallville. It's okay for what it is, but it's not Superman.

Toby McGuire vs. Andrew Garfield. It depends on what you want. McGuire felt like he stepped out of the comic pages as Peter Parker. Garfield did a good acting job, but to me he didn't really feel like the Peter Parker I'd immediately recognize.

Kirsten Dunst vs. Emma Stone. Kirsten Dunst was suitable for the way MJ was portrayed, but I'd have to give the nod to Stone for giving us a character I actually liked. Dunst's MJ seemed like she was all over the map emotionally while Stone's Gwen impressed me as more consistent. She was also portrayed to be smarter.

Rosemary Harris vs. Sally Field. Again it's a matter of perspective. Harris gave us the Aunt May of the comics. Field gives us a nice aunt, but not one I recognize as Aunt May.

Cliff Robertson vs. Martin Sheen. It's a draw.

Green Goblin vs. The Lizard. Overall I'd have to give the nod to Curt Connors and The Lizard as a more interesting villain. I think it's really a fine line, but Connors' motivation is simply more clearly laid out then Norman Osborn's.

Instead of J. Jonah Jameson we got Captain Stacy. J.J. was a riot. Capt. Stacy was just another cop who could have been anyone.

Like a lot of superhero films the hero keeps getting unmasked...and often enough the one who learns the hero's identity gets killed. Okay this time Connors isn't killed (but Stacy was) and that isn't a good threat to be hanging over Peter's head.

I didn't like the convoluted and contrived retconning of Spidey's origin. Filmmakers love to make everything cute-and-tidy. Peter Parker was an orphan living with his Aunt and Uncle. Done. We don't need to know anymore. We can simply assume his parents were lost somehow and Ben and May Parker took Peter into their care. But now we have to tie Richard Parker into Spidey's origins and connect it even more cutely with his first opponent, The Lizard. And we spend a whole hour on this.

Some of Spidey's quips were fun, but I also thought it was overdone at times.

The new suit looks like crap. Yeah, a skinny Spider-Man does evoke the early images of the character way back in '62, but the new design is crap and the overall finish of the outfit looked cheap too. Sorry, but Raimi's version nailed it in making the classic design work live-action. At best one could have tweaked the tone of the red and blue, but everything else works. The eye pieces of the new suit looked bad as well. And what the hell was with the red flashes when Spidey shoots his web??? Sure, this is window dressing, but the suit is a fail.

Overall it's an okay movie, and it wins on certain specific points and moments, but overall I much prefer Raimi's films, particularly the first two. Yeah, this one is better overall than SM3, but that wouldn't have been too hard.
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote