Is it a new superhero classic or a mediocre hodgepodge of genre tropes? Hit the jump to find out.
A mere five years after the conclusion of Sam Raimi’s (mostly) well received Spider-Man trilogy, 20th Century Fox has given us a reboot of everyone’s favorite angst-driven web slinger. When it comes to reboots, Hollywood has a spotty record to say the least. Last year’s Rise of The Planet of The Apes, was a smashing success, while 2008’s The Incredible Hulk was deemed a mediocre attempt. Going into The Amazing Spider-Man, I hoped for the best and looked forward to the nitty-gritty rendition of this iconic character that director Marc Webb (500 Days of Summer) had promised. To my chagrin, one of Marvel’s best contributions to the pantheon of comic fandom has been reduced to an androgynous regurgitation of the Twilight series. It was a devastating site to behold.
Andrew Garfield plays the role of the Peter Parker this time around. I enjoy Andrew Garfield as an actor. His performance as facebook CFO Eduardo Saverin, in 2010’s The Social Network, was ideally executed. As Peter Parker, Garfield has transformed a pop culture archetype for thriving through adolescence into a selfish individual with few lovable qualities. Granted, Peter Parker uses his “spider-like” abilities for his own gain at the start. Over time he comes to embrace the idea of selflessly using his abilities to aid others. The Amazing Spider-Man attempts to showcase this transition through a more “realistic” version of his origin story. There’s just something about the choices they made here that seemed to foster feelings of resentment rather than empathy. That is a colossal failure.
Where is the empathetic geek? I can’t find him.
In this film, Peter Parker looks like an Abercrombie and Fitch model, but acts like an individual afflicted with social anxiety disorder. He’ll mumble through conversations with girls one moment then pose as an omnipotent figure against a setting sun the next. It feels shallow and purely stylized. The whole point of Spider-Man is to make a connection with him on an emotional level. Without that, he’s just a guy in a suit. It’s honestly my disappointment to say that this movie’s version of Spider-Man is definitely the latter.
The plot of this film is nothing special. It’s a retelling of the same origin story we’ve seen or read a hundred times over. Peter Parker is bit by a medically altered spider, he gets special powers, his Uncle Ben (played by Martin Sheen) is gunned down by some thug Peter failed to stop, then he agrees to use his abilities for… yada yada yada. There’s nothing special or especially horrible about this story, it’s just bland and forgettable. The only inexcusable error here, is the death of Uncle Ben. That moment is supposed to be an intimate and heartbreaking one. It should be completely understandable why Peter takes up the mantle of a hero by its conclusion. Instead, we skip over the essential “with great power comes great responsibility” moment in exchange for an inexplicably eloquent cell phone message. It feels distant and cold. There’s no sense of love or compassion that comes from it. Uncle Ben’s sentiments seemed rushed and conveniently placed to accommodate the film’s pacing. By the time it concluded, I felt as if I had been denied one of the truly iconic moments in the history of comics.
Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) & Aunt May (Sally Field)
The rest of the film’s plot is routine. Spider-Man’s primary foe is Curt Connors, who eventually becomes The Lizard, this time around. He’s played competently by Rhys Ifans, but it’s nothing notable. Fans of the comics know that Curt Connors is a scientist who rigorously works with reptiles to unlock the secrets behind limb regeneration. As a man who’s missing one arm, he takes a fanatical approach to these studies that ultimately lead to his genesis as The Lizard. This causes him to become a massive green terror that threatens New York City. It’s a basic threat that’s established here. The final conflict between this reptilian nemesis and Spider-Man is lackluster. I won’t discuss it here to stay spoiler free.
By this point in my review, you may have noticed a complete absence of positive criticisms. While I don’t regret this opinion, there was one component of Spider-Man I found enjoyable. Emma Stone’s performance as Gwen Stacy was easy to love. She was big-eyed, charismatic, and beautiful. You can’t ask for more than that in a film like this. I’m looking forward to seeing Emma Stone in other genre films and dramas. She’s damn enjoyable. That being said, her interactions with Peter Parker were unbearably tedious. The two of them spend too much of their time shuffling their feet and stumbling through incomplete sentences. Clearly, it’s meant to be cute or endearing, but it’s not.
The Amazing Spider-Man was supposed to be a fresh new take on a classic hero. Peter Parker was going to build his own web shooters (that he ultimately stole), his relationship with Curt Connors was going to be complex and suspenseful (it wasn’t), and the love story was supposed to surpass that of Spider-Man 2 (it didn’t even match it). Ultimately, the Amazing Spider-Man gives us a soulless presentation of a treasured story. It’s an inexcusable product, especially when you consider the quality of all the Marvel films that have been released over the past three years. It’ll likely get a sequel, but here’s the one point to take away from this review, you don’t have to see it.
FORGET IT
The Amazing Spider-Man is directed by Marc Webb. It’s distributed by 20th Century Fox. It stars Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Martin Sheen, Sally Field, Dennis Leary, and Rhys Ifans.
Kevin's Cavalcade of Cinema 