Read the title - If you don't want to know about the movie, don't read any further! Simple as that! Once you've watched it though, push your partner over and grab your laptop/smartphone/tablet and get back here!
This post is just a follow-up on the movie The Amazing Spider-Man, what worked, what didn't, and what I, the all-knowing leader of the A-Sven-gers predicted (and what, if anything, I predicted incorrectly).
You'll recall in my post "The Amazing Spider-Man" - Will it Translate to "an Amazing Movie?", I wrote this:
From previews, we know/can speculate the following:
- Peter becomes Spider-Man
- He meets Gwen and shares his secret
- Her father, police Captain George Stacy, doesn't trust the masked vigilante, Spider-Man
- Dr. Curt Connors becomes the Lizard, and Spider-Man must stop him
- He meets Gwen and shares his secret
- Her father, police Captain George Stacy, doesn't trust the masked vigilante, Spider-Man
- Dr. Curt Connors becomes the Lizard, and Spider-Man must stop him
All true (Wow, Peter became Spider-Man? What a twist!).
I did mention, however, how Peter would be unmasked a billion times in the movie. While he still wasn't unmasked for a whole train of people, Spider-Man, in any incarnation, has to learn to secure that lid of his properly.
What Was New in "This" Franchise Installment?
I did mention, however, how Peter would be unmasked a billion times in the movie. While he still wasn't unmasked for a whole train of people, Spider-Man, in any incarnation, has to learn to secure that lid of his properly.
What Was New in "This" Franchise Installment?
As mentioned, Mary Jane Watson was completely absent from the film. Historically, that's correct - Peter meets Gwen Stacy first, they date, and he meets MJ later on in his story.
Also absent was J. Jonah Jameson, editor of The Daily Bugle. While the paper was mentioned, and Peter is interested in photography, ol' flat top wasn't in this incarnation, but likely will appear in future installations.
Captain George Stacy (as mentioned, who last appeared in Spider-Man 3) was portrayed in this film by Denis O'Leary - and made his first and last appearance in this film series (hey, I told you there would be spoilers!). What was different from the captain's death in the film was that while he gets a claw-filled beat down from the Lizard on screen, his death in the comics came from Doctor Octopus being a jerk and smashing buildings onto people.
In his dying moments, the good captain tells Spider-Man he knows his identity - and then forbids him to hang out with his daughter.
Contrast this with the comic book, where Spider-Man and Stacy were (almost) developing a Batman-Commissioner Gordon relationship, and you see a different ending for Captain Stacy.
One interesting note is that Peter's parents, Richard and Mary Parker, are mentioned and have screen time, even developing a bit of a backstory. While it took years for Marvel to address what happened to Peter's mother and father, it eventually turns out that they were secret agents (hey, why not) that may or may not have been traitors to America (not, actually, but Spider-Man proves this posthumously). In the movie, it's never stated whether or not they are secret agents, but Richard is a scientist of some sort (if you were a secret agent you wouldn't be telling anyone either). His father's love of science helps influence Peter and his works influence Spider-Man in unique ways - such as contributing to the DNA-enhanced super-spiders like the one that bit Peter, or having drawn up schematics for the web-shooters.
Speaking of web-shooters, in this franchise Peter uses manufactured web-shooters, his webbing isn't a side-effect of his mutation. This angle is one I particularly prefer, because I want to see the scientist side of Peter. Also, it allows for various plot devices, like "I should have refilled my webbing cartridge" or "the impact of the fall broke my web-shooters," that type of thing. And finally, of course, it makes sense as to why Spider-Man makes his trademark rock star hand gestures - to push the trigger on his web-shooters.
 |
| First person to build me a set of these: Wins. |
Was it Worth Rebooting the Franchise?
Simple answer: Yes and No. So is this actually a simple answer? No. Read on.
The Spider-Man franchise needed a pick-me-up after the conclusion of Spider-Man 3. I watched this movie again recently, and I really, really disliked Topher Grace then, and still do now, both in general and as Eddie Brock/Venom (I go by "Topher" because I'm too good to go by "Chris," gimme a break, Christopher). I realize what the producers were doing, Topher vs Tobey, two skinny photographers that both need a tan working for the Daily Bugle, throw a woman love interest in there, and voila, you've got both a good and an evil version of Spider-Man essentially. But that's not Eddie Brock in the comics. The reason why Venom is so wicked in the comics is because he's a 'roid-raging, hulking maniac that gets his already great physical strength augmented by an alien symbiotic suit.
 |
While we're on Spider-Man 3, let's not forget how Sandman beats up a few guards while robbing an armoured car, and is also the real murderer of Uncle Ben (WHAT A TWIST!), but in the end Spider-Man decides to play judge and jury and let this escaped convict go. But now I'm giving you a movie review of a different movie all together (so what, it's my blog, deal with it)....
So in fairness, after that poor showing and an emo Peter Parker, maybe the franchise did need a reboot. We forgave Batman, who appeared in Joel Schumacher's fluorescent-filled Batman & Robin in 1997 and then in Christopher Nolan's reboot Batman Begins in 2005, so perhaps Spider-Man should be given a chance.
When talk of Spider-Man 4 came out the Internet was a buzz with news of the Lizard as the primary villain. And why not, as Dylan Baker had portrayed Dr. Curt Connors in Spider-Man 2 & Spider-Man 3 already, sans arm and everything.
When talk of Spider-Man 4 came out the Internet was a buzz with news of the Lizard as the primary villain. And why not, as Dylan Baker had portrayed Dr. Curt Connors in Spider-Man 2 & Spider-Man 3 already, sans arm and everything.
Well, when the Sony execs decided to reboot instead of continue and news of The Amazing Spider-Man hit the audience, nobody was terribly shocked to see the Lizard as the lead antagonist. The only challenge now would be to reintroduce the character to the audience members that aren't into comic books (or not reading this blog).
Leading this series with a previously unused villain was a good move. It allows the film to find its own footing, not tread down the same beaten path or step on some other actor's performance barely 5-10 years old. I didn't particularly care for the look of the Lizard, I think his head/face looks awkward, but if a human were to go scaly he wouldn't necessarily grow a lizard's snout, so sure, I'll concede that it may be more realistic (if we have to actually consider realism here).
It's speculated that Norman Osborn was the shadowy figure talking with Connors at the conclusion of the film, so Green Goblin will likely appear later on, but if you know anything about Spider-Man or read anything recently in Marvel Comics, Osborn is generally a big player and can't be ignored.
I'll admit, I think rebooting the franchise worked, and it was worthwhile. While watching The Amazing Spider-Man, a chum remarked mid-film, "This is better than Spider-Man 1, 2 and 3 already!" And it was a good film on its own. By actually rebooting the franchise, however, it freed up any film-continuity already established. We know Mary-Jane & Peter will end up together, it happened in the comics. How many more films do we have to endure watching their fractured relationship after Spider-Man, 2 & 3? This isn't a weekly TV drama. By bringing in Gwen we can now watch Peter's love life evolve in a new direction, even if it's ultimately doomed, and he will eventually end up with Mary-Jane (who is now confirmed to appear in the sequel).
My only major gripe, however, is that they chose to do a reboot and not a soft reboot. What's the difference? Pacing. While the pacing didn't suffer horribly in this film, I continue to maintain that they could have omitted the whole Uncle-Ben-Gets-Shot scene from the movie. Even the spider bite. I know these elements are crucial to the mythos of Spider-Man. Watch Tim Burton's Batman. I just watched this film again the other day for the first time in a while, and it's gold. And while this is the first time Batman hit the big screen, the film only gives you Batman's history in a brief flashback. You get it: Parents died. Vengeance. Let's see some gadgets and get another look at that sweet car.
And we saw the same thing with Eric Bana in Hulk, and Edward Norton in The Incredible Hulk. Hulk did a drawn out origin story - too long, as I've opined before - and a soft boot of The Incredible Hulk let you know that this is an independent story, but carried a lot of the same essential elements as the last one (major gamma ray accident + anger = HULK).
But I will say once again, it didn't drag the film down.
Final Thoughts
I'm not really a film critic - I'm sure you've observed that by now after reading this far. If you ask me, "Should I watch this [comic-related] film," I'll likely tell you, "Yes," and then have some hour-long briefing of whether it was actually enjoyable or not, but that you should watch it nonetheless. But I like to think I know comics.
To be fair, it was hard to get excited about a franchise reboot when massive blockbusters like The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises were premiering the same summer. And let's face it, if they did another Spider-Man reboot next year, it would still likely be profitable. It wouldn't be a mega-star blockbuster like the current Batman franchise or The Avengers, but I wager enough kids would continue to go, as well as enough of us nerds. And you'd anger a lot of movie-goers with another origin (myself included), but I still wager it would be profitable. It should be noted, however, that this was the lowest-grossing Spider-Man film produced to date.
The Amazing Spider-Man had some hurdles to jump/buildings to web-swing over, but in the end, however, it was enjoyable and a worthwhile chance to take. I like the new lead, Andrew Garfield - he's a believable enough nerd and social outcast, but he doesn't have to wear a pocket protector to try to convince you. Emma Stone is quickly becoming one of Hollywood's favourites and one of mine as well, and the two of these actors helped breathe fresh life into this franchise. With a new menace in Parker's life and perhaps a more interesting backstory, this franchise looks like it will pick up steam quickly. And when the new installment arrives, I'll be swinging over to see it.
 |
| "But please, no emo Spider-Man...." |
