The Amazing Spider-Man Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

[davejames]

Thought it was pretty good... but unfortunately I have to agree it's got some issues and doesn't work nearly as well as I was hoping it would.

Despite the gritty look and more naturalistic pacing, the story was still just as simplistic and one-dimensional as in the previous Spidey movies. And the big "untold story" surrounding his parents didn't really amount to a whole lot.

And yes, the Lizard did make for a very boring villain. Much like with the Goblin in the first movie, I couldn't help but wish the director had just focused on Spidey alone and ditched the cheesy supervillain stuff. Peter learning how to use his powers while dating a cute girl, catching dangerous criminals, and evading the police is all you really NEED for an origin movie.

As for Spidey himself, I'm a bit conflicted. Garfield gave a great performance and was easily the most compelling part of the movie... but in the end I'm not sure his dark and moody Peter Parker is the way I really WANT the character to be. It just felt a bit off somehow, and really made me miss the light-hearted and geeky Peter Parker of the previous movies.

I will say the new costume looked absolutely fantastic in action though. And the scenes between Peter and Gwen were just as sweet and charming as everyone said.

But ultimately... I have to admit Raimi did it better.

 

[Roshi]

It made me forget the sour taste that SM3 left.

 

[Trekker4747]

Peter Parker is an above average high-school student (apparently) going to an Advanced Placement high-school for the science curriculum. (Maybe, it was hard to tell as it was called a "science school" but also had your usual high school shenanigans going on it) and the twitchy, nerdy, outcast.

Really?
So he's what then the King Nerd of all NERDS?
Essentially even the "dumb" jocks at Nerd high are AP student caliber material then?

Until I see it tomorrow I'll reserve full judgement but just this type description piles onto the reasons why you don't tinker with an already perfect origin OR retell it again so soon when it was done so recently and that one adhered so closely to the perfect original origin.

I dunno. It was hard to tell, it seemed like a regular high school most of the time but then the name of the school had "Science" in it and Gwen Stacy had a job at Oscorp -something pretty meaningful for a high-school student to have.

 

[clint g]

Peter Parker is an above average high-school student (apparently) going to an Advanced Placement high-school for the science curriculum. (Maybe, it was hard to tell as it was called a "science school" but also had your usual high school shenanigans going on it) and the twitchy, nerdy, outcast.

Really?
So he's what then the King Nerd of all NERDS?
Essentially even the "dumb" jocks at Nerd high are AP student caliber material then?

Until I see it tomorrow I'll reserve full judgement but just this type description piles onto the reasons why you don't tinker with an already perfect origin OR retell it again so soon when it was done so recently and that one adhered so closely to the perfect original origin.

I dunno. It was hard to tell, it seemed like a regular high school most of the time but then the name of the school had "Science" in it and Gwen Stacy had a job at Oscorp -something pretty meaningful for a high-school student to have.

For what its worth, it seemed like it was based on one of the specialized science high schools in new York city. I went to one of them growing up and even in a school like that you had your "nerdy" people and your jocks, its just that the jocks were pretty smart.

 

[Captaindemotion]

This poll arguably needs a halfway point between 'Good' and 'Excellent'. because it didn't, I voted 'Good' as I don't think that this movie reached the excellence of The Avengers, the last movie I saw. However, there was still much about it that was very good.

While I liked Toby Maguire as Spider-man, I much preferred Andrew Garfield's performance, from his look, to his voice, to his ability with a wisecrack. Altogether more like the Spider-man in my head. I liked Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben, though I think Rosemary Harris was a better Aunt May than Sally Field (who, to be fair, I think was sidelined in order to make this movie less like the Raimi ones).

There was good chemistry between Garfield and Emma Stone, though I'm in the minority who liked Kirsten Dunst. Dennis Leary made for a more vital Chief Stacy than James Cromwell. The SFX were, inevitably, an improvement on the Raimi era and I liked how Webb used the 3-D. Also, being kind of an old-school Spidey fan, I was happy to see a larger role for Flash Thompson and the return of mechanical webslingers.

The big thing going against this movie was the familiarity. While they did all they could to make it different from 2002's Spider-man, there's only so much you can vary Spidey's origin story. And we again got a good-intentioned scientist, who becomes a father figure to Peter, transformed by his own creation. Admittedly, the emphasis on Peter's parents and the mystery which looks to span the next movie (or two) did give it some distinction and the now-compulsory post-credits scene was intriguing.

I'd say it's much better than 3, at least as good as Spider-man but not as good as 2. Worth seeing anyway.

 

[DarthPipes]

I liked the Flash Thompson stuff too. The return to high school was good for the Peter character and the brawl with the Lizard there was pretty wicked.

It's inevitable that this new series leads up to a confrontation with the Goblin but if Sony thinks people are going to be looking forward to the return of Norman Osborn, I think they are sadly mistaking. The Green Goblin isn't the Joker, as much as Sony would like to make him.

 

[Amasov]

Where to start? First and foremost, I allow me to start with the praises. James Garfield was everything I always wanted for Peter Parker and Spider-Man,

Not THE James Garfield? Woah. I didn't expect that. Didn't think he had it in him.

Holy shit, that is impressive. I may have to see this now.

But seriously, I'm finding it difficult to get excited about a reboot. But it is Spider-Man, so I'm sure I'll see it sooner or later.

Listen, if Abraham Lincoln can hunt down vampires, then Jimmy can most certainly play Spider-Man.

 

[AvBaur]

Looks like the movie's a huge success at the box office: http://www.hitfix.com/news/box-office-amazing-spider-man-sparks-with-35-million-tuesday

I'd say a sequel is all but certain.

 

[trekkiebaggio]

I haven't read through the thread yet so I'm just going to offer my opinions on the film. I'll save commenting on the direction of sequels and other stuff later. I'm not going to compare them with Raimi's Spider-Man films because this is a whole new adaptation and it doesn't really matter if one is better than the other. They both have good points and bad points, and they could make 10 new Spider-Man films every year and I'd probably go see them all.


Now Spider-Man is my all-time favourite and I was super excited, it was the most excited I've been since Star Trek. It didn't disappoint. It wasn't a perfect film by any means but I really enjoyed it.

Firstly Andrew Garfield was amazing as Peter Parker, he portrayed each facet of the character perfectly. I'm a huge fan of Emma Stone as well and I thought she made a really good Gwen.

The only cast member that disappointed me somewhat was Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben.

I loved the action, it was intense and I loved the emphasis of the impact of the webbing.

I liked The Lizard, thought he was pretty menacing and Rhys Ifans conveyed the tragic nature of the character.

I REALLY liked how they incorporated wrestling.

I liked how they included the stuff about his parents, it seems a part of the characters history which kinda gets glossed over.

I also loved that he had an Elvis poster on his bedroom wall.

For stuff I didn't like...it felt a bit rushed to me, like almost like they had to reach certain story points and they were going to reach them no matter what.

I also thought some of the stuff which happened at school may have raised some suspicion.

Overall though I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I'm looking forward to where they go with it in the sequels.

 

[captcalhoun]

i loved it. it was better than the 3rd Raimi flick by a country mile, i'd even say it was better than the 2nd.

it's definitely better than Raimi's first because that rushed Parker out of high school WAY too fast.

plus it also gets points for a. having civvies help Spidey in a better way that bunging rocks and shit at Gobby for no reason than 'hey, New Yorkers are awesome' and b. quips from Spidey.

it's clearly setting things up for more installments, but that's not a bad thing. i also smirked at the vaguely silghouetted Norman Osborne figure in the OsCorp tower.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

It was a fun movie that I feel was basically buoyed by it's acting. It was very well cast, Andrew Garfield was great, I really believed him as an awkward teen kid. Chemistry with Emma Stone was palpable. Dennis Leary, Martin Sheen, Sally Fields, all very good. Uncle Ben's death had real resonance.

They did their best at trying to make the origin seem different than the Raimi, but the whole story still feels too familiar. It just hasn't been that long. While I realize there's actually a length of time between Raimi's first movie and this one, people still remember the sequels, I don't feel there's been that generational crossover.

I also think this movie would have been much better with more focus on the Peter/Gwen/NYPD/Capt-Stacy angle and less on the supervillain. That character stuff was so much better than the "story" (yet another lab experiment gone wrong, *yawn*).

I really did enjoy it, but I can already tell I'm not going to remember this as a really great movie at the end of the year when I think about summer movies. Kind of reminds me of a Marvel Studios movie like Thor or Capt America. Fun, entertaining, charming, formulaic, It'll start fading from memory pretty soon.

 

[stj]

Hmm, seems like this one will wait til DVD. No doubt giving Spiderman the comicky wisecracks will be entertaining. But I've got a powerful image of Andrew Garfield from Red Riding that's going to interfere with seeing him as a high school student.

Also, Rhys Ifans instead of Dylan Baker? Shouldn't the Director-Gods know something about acting?

 

[Agent Richard07]

I've had little to no interest in this movie. It's always felt like one of those direct-to-video sequels with new cast members, except this one isn't direct-to-video. Still, it's Spider-Man, so I plan to check it out next week. I expect it to be fun.

I saw the movie and I'll stand by what I said earlier. It was an average superhero movie and an unnecessary reboot, but it was fun and I had a good time.

- Andrew Garfield was alright. No real issue with him. In fact, the Spidey wisecracks were pretty good. I had an issue with the big hair though. Does every "hot guy" in Hollywood have to have big hair?

- I liked Emma Stone, but she did come off more like Emma Stone made-up-to-look-like-Gwen Stacy. I wasn't fully immersed in the Gwen Stacy character. The same thing happened with Kirsten Dunst.

- Did I mention that she and Garfield had great chemistry? Well, I won't because it's been mentioned a million times already. Besides, I didn't really notice.

- Rhys Ifans played a good villain.

- Martin Sheen is always good to see.

- Sally Field as Ant May... Now that was an interesting choice. I'm used to the character being a lot older and greyer. And I couldn't believe that sally Field is at that point where she's "Aunt May" Time flies and we all get old. On the way home, I decided that she was a good choice given that they'd need someone who could stick around in case they want to churn out more movies over the next several years.

- Loved all the Peter Parker action. Maybe they should have called him Peter Parkour.

- I also loved the web-slinging. Lots of good work there, that rivaled the grace and quickness of a scene from a good martial arts movie.

- I've thought long and hard over the years about how Spider-Man's web-shooter could work and how it could hold enough webbing. I couldn't come up with anything good, but what I saw here was believable. It was glossed over pretty quickly, but here's what I got... Oscorp manufactures a small crazy glue-like contraption that can shoot hundreds of meters worth of thin, tensile filaments that resemble spider silk. Then, Peter used his Spidey sharpness to make a wrist shooter that incorporated the Oscorp webbing he bought. I also assume that they'll evaporate eventually. I think that about does it. I remember when the first Spider-Man movie came out, a lot of people loved the organic shooters because they had issue with a teenager being able to invent and make a web shooter. What we got here seemed to work well enough though.

- The movie was directed by "Marc Webb"? That's pretty funny actually.

And not to nit-pick, but I'm not too fond of the gold plating on the eyes. Makes Spider-Man look jaundiced.

OK, the gold lenses weren't so bad. They were hardly noticeable in the movie itself.

 

[Trekker4747]

Looks like the movie's a huge success at the box office: http://www.hitfix.com/news/box-office-amazing-spider-man-sparks-with-35-million-tuesday

I'd say a sequel is all but certain.

Well it's certain no matter what if Sony wants to keep the film rights to SM.

 

[DigificWriter]

I'd say a sequel is all but certain.

A sequel was already certain, since it was greenlit in principle about a month or two after the first one finished shooting.

It IS possible that TASM2 would've been scrapped had the first one underperformed at the BO, but given that the second's release date has already been set in stone, that doesn't strike me as being very likely, meaning that, even had TASM not lived up to expectations BO-wise, we would still be getting at least one sequel.

 

[Trekker4747]

On the age of Sally Field/Martin Sheen and their expected age. I think their age here works better as it never made sense to me Peter's aunt and uncle would be at retirement age and beyond when he was a teenager. Considering that they're his aunt and uncle and not his great-aunt and uncle they shouldn't be too much older than his parents were given that one of them is a parent's sibling. Even ten years older than the parent would still place his aunt/uncle at a fairly "young" age. So I thought Field and Sheen worked here for that aspect alone.

(But, instead of Martin Sheen they should have used his vastly more talented, but under appreciated, brother Joe Estevez. )

And I agree with other comments that The Lizard's goals and villainy was stretched. He came up with a solution that can regenerate limbs/organs with the side-effect of turning him into a Lizard so naturally being a scientist his goal ends up to be to gas one of the largest cities in the world to turn everyone into lizard-monsters. It's quite the leap and I don't think the push from his boss really worked to make The Lizard's actions justifiable. He goes from wanting to do the the proper thing with increased testing to just shooting the shit into his arm. What?!

 

[DarthPipes]

I thought Peter's dynamic with Captain Stacey added a lot to the film.

 

[StarTrek1701]

My Verdict: Terrible

Where to begin? The first hour of the movie is worthless retreading, slow as molasses. Raimi did a spectacular job in introducing Spidey the way he was. This one, however, was boring as trite. Garfield, Stone, Ifans and Leary did terrific jobs with what was given to them, but besides their great acting, this movie was absolute shit. dont have to say exactly what I found shit, all I know is that I was not entertained the slightest.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I think the familiarity isn't just due to the rehash of the origin but the Lizard's story seemed to hit a lot of the beats of the Green Goblin. I didn't mind though, it was fresh enough, and I liked that the story took its time. I liked the way they handled Pete learning and handling his power. Funny that now it actually seemed weird to have mechanical webshooters!

Some random shit:

It was nice to see C. Thomas Howell in an A-list picture even if only for a small role.

Emma Stone was pushing it a little for a high school senior (though not off the deep end) and damn if I didn't feel old seeing Sally Field as Aunt May.

My little six-year-old niece (who wanted to see this over Brave) thought the Stan Lee bit was hysterical.

From what I understand of NY, the Stacys' apartment would be quite desirable, it seemed pretty huge.

 

[AvBaur]

Emma Stone was pushing it a little for a high school senior (though not off the deep end)

She's actually five years younger than Andrew Garfield. I thought both of them looked a bit too old, but no more than the kids on Glee or something.