Review of: The Amazing Spider-Man (In 3-D)

When I heard they were rebooting the Spider-Man film franchise, within 5 years of Sam Raimi's trilogy of films, I rolled my eyes.  Sure, Spider-Man 3 was moderately awful, with subpar interpretations of Venom and a shoehorned in Gwen Stacy, with the most interesting villain (Sandman) sidelined into a subplot that barely went anywhere. And "Emo Peter Parker" and his big dance number... the less said about that, the better. I originally had no intention of going to see the newest incarnation of Marvel's flagship hero franchise.  A few things along the way changed my mind, and I went to go see it yesterday, and I'm prepared to review it.  First, Andrew Garfield's introduction to the panel at Comic-Con, his gasping, stuttering speech about what the character meant to him as a fan made me interested to see what that actor could do with the character of Peter Parker.  Then, the announcement of the casting of Emma Stone came out.  Like most people, I'm most familiar with her as a redhead in film, so I thought "Oh. Mary Jane Watson."  When I heard that she was going to her natural hair color of blonde to portray Gwen Stacy in a fashion true to the comics, I was sold. I'd give The Amazing Spider-Man a shot.

Apparently, the reboot happened because Sam Raimi refused to
continue the franchise, not being allowed the time he'd need to not make Spider-Man 4 not suck.

I decided to see the film in 3-D, since the showtimes for that were most convenient for me, and my wife (who can't see 3-D) had no interest in the reboot. I'd privately hated the whole 3-D trend in blockbuster movies, but, to be fair, I'd never really given it an honest chance.  Now that I have, I can say from my own personal experience, that I despise the current 3-D filmmaking fad.  I hate the gimmicky shots that are included in otherwise decent filmmaking, I  hate the blurry, half-assed effect of some of the scenes meant to showcase the technology... I don't mind it so much when it is subtle depth-of-field stuff, but it rarely is.  If you already hate 3-D, this film won't change your mind.  On to the review of the film itself.

 The first film in any (re)launch of a superhero franchise basically is split into the origin story and the first fight with a supervillain. For anyone who just wants the quick 'n dirty summary of my thoughts on the movie, The Amazing Spider-Man knocks the origin portion of its story out of the park, and falls a bit flat on the supervillain battle portion.  The beginning two-thirds of the story are good enough that I recommend the movie overall, but this falls into the category of "couldn't stick the landing."  Andrew Garfield is flat-out awesome as Peter Parker. He captures the awkwardness and quiet geekiness of the teenager who feels out of place wherever he is.  He's the "outcast" sort of geeky kid who manages to get in trouble with authority without any sense of edgy rebellion, and still gets ignored by girls and beaten up by bullies.  Making him a skater would normally make me groan as an attempt to "modernize" a classic character, but it works for this Parker, and translates well into his specific style of acrobatic tricks once he gets his powers.

The best thing about the new Spider-Man is the great casting of the two leads.

The best parts of the film are when Peter gets his powers, but before any conflict with the Lizard. From his accidental use of spider-sense to protect himself instinctively to fighting street thugs while cracking jokes, he is the best representation of Spider-Man on screen in these moments.  The confidence he finds behind the mask, and the drive he has to do the right thing driven by responsibility and guilt are spot-on. There is an awesome article I read a few months back that makes the case for Spider-Man being an even better hero than Batman, with a point-by-point comparison between the two icons. I still prefer the Dark Knight, but the points made in that article (found here) regarding Spidey are proven through the excellent portrayal in the entire beginning/middle of the movie. You can get the rest of the film wrong, and get that right and have a very good Spider-Man film.

It is unfortunate, then, that the rest of the film just isn't very good.  Rhys Ifans is great as Dr. Curt Connors, but after he becomes The Lizard, special effects and style trounce substance, and much of the tragic quality of this villain is lost in the flash.  Denis Leary is wasted, basically playing himself as police Captain George Stacy, in contrast to Emma Stone who is great as his daughter Gwen.  The biggest shame is that the over-the-top, effects-heavy and video-gamey action sequences that dominate the last act of the story are predictable and without any charm or personality.  We're no longer shocked when Peter is beaten up, his costume ripped and bloody since we've seen it before. No longer inspired when normal folks come to his aid even though the city inexplicably seems to consider him a greater threat than criminals and supervillains, we've seen that, too.  I wanted more of the Spider-Man who I saw fighting crime at the beginning, being a total smart-ass. It is clear in the comics that Parker cracks jokes partially as a defense mechanism to hide the fact that physical confrontation with dangerous criminals is scary, even if you have super-powers.





I want to see more of this incarnation of Spider-Man, who has the web-shooters he built himself filled with cartridges of web-fluid, and whose origin is, in many ways, a truer vision than Sam Raimi's take on it ten years ago. I want to see more of Gwen Stacy, and I hope the franchise has the balls to lead her to her eventual tragic fate. I want to see less of action sequences meant to showcase 3-D technology or to preview how awesome the video game is going to be.  The Lizard was almost there in moments when the movie wasn't just showcasing his physical strength and agility, but the mark was missed, and I hope the same won't happen with the Green Goblin. Norman Osborn is mentioned, but not seen, in this film and the mystery of what, exactly happened to Peter Parker's parents bookends the film in setting up both Peter's childhood and the eventual sequel.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Blog Gadgets

(Ultimate) Spiderman in the News: Much Ado About Nothing.

Comic books have been in the news a lot lately, and all too often, this is as a result of the convergence of our politically polarized society and popular culture, as I wrote about during the “Superman renounces US citizenship” hullabaloo. The latest round in all this centers on an event that the majority of comic book fans seem to care less about, but has appeared on the evening news and in articles written all across the web and old media. This is the biggest story that doesn't really matter to anyone in the geek world. I am, of course, talking about the death of Spiderman and his replacement by a young teen of mixed african-american and latino descent. On its surface, it seems like this is a big story. One of the most popular characters in comics is killed off, and his identity and costume is picked up by a new person.

Miles Morales, the new face of Spider-Man and scourge of racists who don't read comic books anyway. There may be instances of forced "political correctness" worth getting mad about. This ain't one of 'em.

Fact is, most of us couldn't be bothered to care. Most of the people making a big deal of the whole “death and replacement of Spider-Man thing” aren't comic fans. You can tell because there's no mention of the most important word in the whole fiasco. That word is “Ultimate.” The Ultimate Marvel Universe is an alternate, parallel universe unaffected by and that itself does not effect Core Marvel Universe Canon. What this means to non-geeks is that Marvel Ultimates stories are set in a world that by design have no association with the original visions of the characters, their comic books, their stories. Characters in the Ultimate Universe change appearance, origin, powers and personality, and some of the changes are there to “update” characters, while others seem frustratingly arbitrary.

The idea behind the Marvel Ultimates line is essentially the same reasoning behind this fall's massive DC relaunch/reboot. After decades of history and complex plots, comic books were deemed too intimidating to attract significant numbers of new readers. No influx of new fans, younger people with changing expectations and without the jaded grumbling common to older fans means inevitable attrition. Old fans get frustrated and stop collecting, or as years pass, simply die, and there is no generation waiting in the wings to replace them. Too many young people don't want to jump in on the middle of a story, and as a result, potential converts of kids who saw various Marvel Universe movies are opportunities wasted. This is the logic behind the creation of a 2^nd Marvel Universe. The blank slate, lack of established canon that needs to be followed and enthusiasm for new creators to tell stories with familiar characters in their own way on its surface makes a lot of sense.

"Updated" art and costumes, redesigned characters and Colossus is gay!
With jokes about "Will and Grace," the hamfisted portrayal of the gay superhero would offend everyone...
If anyone cared.

Thing is, most comic geeks today hate Ultimates and couldn't care less about whatever happens in it. In the early launch (2000-2005) of the Ultimate Titles, they sold like crazy. Traditional, “core” Marvel books were dying on the vine, and the idea of a relaunch seemed to be a runaway success. Several popular video games tied in nicely with the new setting, and it didn't hurt that Marvel Ultimate Alliance (and its sequel) were really good fighting games with RPG elements. The new wave of Marvel films plays it real close to the vest on which canon they are a part of, incorporating just enough from each Universe to satisfy fans of either. The problem is, the Ultimate Marvel books themselves had a crisis of identity. Having already alienated fans who didn't like certain characters seemingly randomly changed from their classic characterizations, new fans were slowly turned off when the writers who launched the new line in the first place left to work on “core” titles.

The energy once brought to Ultimates brought new life into previously slumped comic books, and the Ultimate Universe responded by borrowing more and more from the core continuity. Core and Ultimate Marvel were each starting to look like each other, and the Ultimate books did not benefit from the comparison, or the change in philosophy. To the uninitiated, Marvel comics appeared schizophrenic, and the Ultimate titles got the worst end of it, in addition to the lion's share of the blame. Fast forwarding to present day, core Marvel titles outsell their Ultimate equivalents, and with film and game tie-ins, the brand appears healthy again. In order to keep both lines relevant, Ultimates had to get back to what made people like it in the first place. It had to be more “different.” In this context, new writer Jeph Loeb interpreted “different” as “kill everybody.”

"Relaunch it again! Kill more heroes! See! We have characters from popular movies!
Love us again! LOVE US!!! *sob*"

The last few years have been marked by so many catastrophic events and character deaths that most of the remaining few who hadn't already thrown their hands up and given up on Ultimates threw in the towel. Titles that owed their success to failing books in the mainstream continuity resorted to increasingly desperate-seeming tactics to remain relevant. This is why when word came down that Peter Parker was being killed off the reaction went something like this: “What? Oh, Ultimate Spider-Man... I'll go back to not caring now.” Sales spike every time these cries for attention hit the shelves, but it seems that no matter how many popular characters are killed, a few issues later, sales are down again, and most comic book fans are happily ignorant of the happenings in the Ultimate continuity.

This is why this is such a non-issue. So what if the new Ultimate Spider-Man is a minority? Nick Fury has been Samuel L. Jackson with an eyepatch for over a decade in that world. The chest-thumping from conservative politicians and pundits make a whole lot of noise about it, with vaguely racist undertones, and most comic book fans are thinking: “What? Who? You think this matters? That's not even funny, it is kind of sad...” There's a story here, but it is a story that is aimed at people who couldn't care less about comics, because to the vast majority of the people who do care about comic books, there is no story here. Political commentators have taken up arms to defend... well, no one. The fact that so much (including this article) has been written and said on a subject that matters to so few says less about the comic book industry, and more about how disconnected politicians and cultural commentators have become from the rest of the population.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Blog Gadgets