Showing posts with label Andrew Garfield. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Andrew Garfield. Show all posts

Thursday, July 6, 2017

In Defense of the 'Amazing Spider-Man' films

Image result for The Amazing Spider-Man series

This weekend sees the release of the next installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Spider-Man: Homecoming. This new film is a collaboration between Marvel Studios and Sony, the latter of whom still hold the rights to the character as they have had for many years now. However, thanks to a deal that they made in 2015 with Marvel Studios, Spider-Man: Homecoming is very much a part of the MCU, with the webslinger having made his long-awaited series debut in last year’s Captain America: Civil War. It’s also worth noting, though, that this is the second major reboot that the character has had in half a decade. Some may express a bit of concern about this happening as often as it has in this timeframe, but based on its current critical reception, it looks like Spider-Man: Homecoming will turn out to be another big success for Marvel Studios and their legendary Cinematic Universe, while also serving as a bit of redemption for Sony and their own Marvel output. However, today on Rhode Island Movie Corner, I’d like to make an argument in defense of the previous film incarnation of Spider-Man, the one that ended up putting a major dent in Sony’s reputation when it comes to their handling of the character. I’m, of course, referring… to the Amazing Spider-Man films. Obviously, this first attempt at rebooting the Spider-Man film franchise did not go over too well with audiences, especially after the second entry in the series was both a critical and commercial underperformer. And, basically, that’s exactly why we now have this second reboot; the first one was that big of a disaster amongst critics and audiences. However, I still have a soft spot for these two films, despite them now being mostly remembered by the internet as nothing more than a failed attempt to copy Marvel Studios’ success.  

But before I get into the films themselves, let’s start with a little history. Of course, as many of us know, the friendly neighborhood webslinger’s first major outing on the big screen was Sam Raimi’s original Spider-Man trilogy. Prior to this, there had been several attempts at a Spider-Man film, even one directed by James Cameron. Finally, Raimi was brought in by Sony, who had bought the film rights to the character in 1985. The first installment of this new series, simply titled Spider-Man, was a huge hit when it was released in 2002. It was the first film ever to gross over $100 million during its opening weekend at the U.S. box-office. Thus, it is now generally regarded as one of the major catalysts in the modern-day resurgence of the superhero film genre, alongside 2000’s X-Men and 1998’s Blade. Two years later, Raimi and his crew returned for a sequel; Spider-Man 2. And while it didn’t outdo its predecessor at the worldwide box-office, many viewed it as a superior sequel and, thus, it became one of the most beloved entries in the superhero genre. It was then followed by Spider-Man 3 in 2007 and… well, you already know what happened with that one. While it was another box-office success for the franchise, even to the point where it became the highest-grossing entry in the trilogy, it only did ‘okay’ with critics and was mercilessly SAVAGED by audiences for its mishandling of the famous ‘alien symbiote’ storyline from the comics, which saw Peter Parker adopt a darker persona. Said storyline is also known for the creation of one of his most infamous adversaries, Venom, who in the film was ultimately relegated to a minor supporting role after being written in by studio demand. Still, despite the polarizing reaction, plans were still in place for a fourth film. However, in 2010, it was announced that Raimi was stepping down from the project because he felt pressured by Sony into getting it done by a 2011 release date.

Image result for Sam Raimi Spider-Man

Thus, in 2012, Sony decided to instead reboot the Spider-Man franchise. Director Marc Webb, who was fresh off 2009’s critically-acclaimed romantic drama indie (500) Days of Summer, was brought in to direct the first installment of this new Spider-Man series, The Amazing Spider-Man. Andrew Garfield, fresh off an award-nominated performance as Eduardo Saverin in The Social Network, was cast in the title role while Emma Stone was brought in to play Peter Parker’s original love interest from the comics, Gwen Stacy, who had previously appeared in a minor supporting role in Spider-Man 3 played by Bryce Dallas Howard. Upon release, the film did manage to hold off most of the skepticism that had been surrounding it; it did fine with critics and it grossed over $750 million worldwide. Still, there were some dissenters out there, and part of the reason why is admittedly understandable. Because to be perfectly blunt… The Amazing Spider-Man is basically just a retread of the original Spider-Man. It’s the same general story of an unpopular high-school student who gains superpowers after being bitten by a radioactive spider. His uncle dies, he falls in love with one of his classmates, a close colleague of his becomes the main villain, and the film ends with Peter having to sever any chances of a romantic relationship with his love interest. Sure, the film adds in the plotline of Peter’s parents, skirts around Uncle Ben’s famous ‘With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility’ line, and the part where Peter breaks off his relationship with Gwen does go differently than before because she immediately realizes why he’s doing this. But at the end of the day, this origin story isn’t that different from the 2002 film’s origin story. I mean, to be fair, that was just an unfortunate side-effect of this film’s status as a reboot that came out only a decade after the release of Raimi’s first film. On that note, thankfully the new series with Tom Holland has decided to skip past the character’s origin, which is good seeing how we’ve already seen it twice now on film since 2002.

Still, I’d argue that this film does just enough to differentiate itself from Spider-Man’s previous onscreen incarnation. I mean, if anything, it’s not like this is a direct ‘carbon copy’ of Raimi’s film. The biggest change comes with the increased role of Peter’s parents, Richard and Mary Parker. Having only been mentioned in the Raimi films, the first Amazing film opens with Peter’s parents leaving him at Uncle Ben and Aunt May’s while they go off on an important business matter, only to never return. Thus, most of the film’s plot revolves around Peter learning more about his parents’ secrets and why this led to their disappearance which, in turn, ultimately leads him on the path to becoming Spider-Man. Now, admittedly, despite what I just said, the film doesn’t really focus too much on what happened to Peter’s parents save for a brief flash of a newspaper article mentioning that they were killed in a plane crash. Afterward, it basically just turns into a Spider-Man story that only occasionally ties everything back to Peter’s past. However, it does seem like there was initially going to be a greater focus on Peter’s parents based on the film’s several deleted scenes. These scenes include, among other things, some additional character development for Dr. Curt Connors, Richard Parker’s colleague, and an expanded role for their seemingly sinister superior, Dr. Kafka, who straight-up disappears from the film after the big action sequence on the bridge. Some of these scenes even appeared in the trailer, only to then not appear in the final cut. As we’ll soon see, that’s basically one of the biggest dilemmas with these films. Clearly, a lot of material was left on the cutting room floor, perhaps so that it could be saved for the sequel. On that note, thankfully, the plotline with Peter’s parents returned in the sequel and was given more attention there than in the first film.

Image result for andrew garfield and emma stone spider-man

Ultimately, though, the main reason why I liked these films more than the Raimi films (which, to be clear, I still like by the way) is that I just liked the characters in this series more, especially Peter and Gwen. While I do feel that both Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst were solid in the Raimi films, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone totally have them beat when it comes to chemistry. I mean, after all, these two were a couple in real-life, and that is indeed apparent in the several scenes where they’re together. As for Andrew Garfield’s performance in the role of the iconic webslinger, I much preferred his take on the character over Tobey Maguire’s. And, for the most part, it seemed like most critics were happy with Garfield’s take on the character as well. However, there have been some who felt that he wasn’t that good when it came to portraying Peter outside of the suit. They argued that he was whiny and that he didn’t look the part of a high-school nerd. And I’ll admit that, yes, Tobey Maguire was perhaps better when it came to conveying Peter’s nerdy qualities when he wasn’t in the suit. However, I don’t really agree with the ‘whiny’ argument, which in the first film mainly comes into play when Peter argues with Uncle Ben in the scene before his death. And the main reason why is one that gets brought up by several cast and crew members in the film’s behind-the-scenes material; at the end of the day, Peter is just being a teenager. At that age, teenagers will often find themselves lost at times and, thus, make questionable decisions. And that’s exactly what Peter does at times in this film, as a lot of his inner turmoil is, of course, based around him not knowing why his parents left him at such a young age. In short, I fully appreciate how this new version of Peter was characterized overall, which I would argue makes him more sympathetic than Maguire’s Peter.

But if there’s one clear thing that Garfield did indeed do better than Maguire, it’s being Spider-Man. Spider-Man is a character who is well-known for the comedic quips that he spurts when he’s fighting crime, and Garfield had that part down perfectly. Sure, some may argue that he didn’t do this that much in the first film save for the scene where he confronts the carjacker (“You’ve found my weakness. It’s small knives!”) but at the very least, things only got better in the sequel, where Garfield truly shined in the role. By comparison, Maguire never really got the chance to use Spidey’s trademark quips. I don’t know whether it was because of Raimi or the screenwriters, but Maguire’s Spider-Man was much more serious in tone. Thankfully, there were a few instances here and there where Maguire did throw out some quips at his enemies. It’s just that they really were few and far between. The first instance of this that I can recall came in the second film when he’s fighting Dr. Octavius at the bank. When Octavius remarks that Spidey is getting on his nerves, Peter then proceeds to joke that “he has a knack for that”. The other major instance that I can think of comes in Spider-Man 3, during his first fight with Flint Marko AKA the Sandman. When he first confronts Sandman, he informs him that he’s ‘the sheriff around these parts’. Then, after the fight, he goes to the roof of a skyscraper to empty out the sand in his costume, where he poses the question, “Where do all these guys come from?”. I will say that, at the very least, Spider-Man 3, which was co-written by Raimi and his brother Ivan, did allow Maguire to be more comedic in the role of Peter. However, considering that part of this included his infamous ‘emo’ phase (which really wasn’t as bad as the internet constantly puts it out to be; if anything, it was far from being the film’s biggest problem), that’s up for debate. Garfield, thankfully, never went ‘that far’ when playing the character.

Image result for emma stone spider-man

The real standout of these films, though, was Emma Stone in the role of Gwen Stacy, who is hands down the best on-screen love interest that Spidey has ever had in these films. Again, nothing against Kirsten Dunst, as she had good chemistry with Tobey Maguire and even a solid character arc in the second Raimi film as she navigated through her complicated love life. But at the end of the day, Mary Jane Watson was mainly just a damsel in distress who was constantly being saved by Peter. Gwen, meanwhile, was by no means a ‘damsel in distress’. Sure, she got cornered a few times by the Lizard in the first film and was captured by the Green Goblin during the finale of the second film, but she also played an active part in helping Spider-Man defeat his enemies. She helped to develop the cure for the Lizard’s mutagen in the first film and helped make Peter’s web-shooters resistant to Electro’s attacks in the second film. Heck, during a scene in the first film when she’s confronted by the Lizard, she straight-up wards him off with fire. But easily one of her most defining moments in these films came at the end of the first film which, like the ending of the first Raimi film, had Peter breaking off his current romantic relationship with her. Except in this instance, instead of it ending with Peter just walking away, Gwen immediately realizes why he is doing this; during the final battle, her father, Captain George Stacy, is killed by the Lizard. With his dying breath, he makes Peter promise to ‘leave Gwen out of it’, knowing that he’ll make many enemies as Spider-Man in the future. However, by the end of the film, it seems as if Peter and Gwen’s relationship might not be over after all. Though as we’ll soon see in the second film, this relationship becomes quite complicated.

The two are backed by an excellent supporting cast. Denis Leary is a major standout as Gwen’s father, George Stacy. Given his status as a New York City Police Captain, he provides a nice contrast to Peter’s actions as Spider-Man while also getting some of the best lines in the film, from “38 of New York’s finest versus one guy… in a unitard” to his response to when Peter tells him about Connors transforming into a giant Lizard (“Do I look like the mayor of Tokyo to you?”). And I won’t lie… I teared up quite a bit when he died. Sure, his role in the sequel was odd, to say the least, as he mainly appeared as a vision of Peter’s, forcibly reminding him of the promise that he made to him. Still, he was easily one of the best parts of the first film. Meanwhile, Martin Sheen and Sally Field are both fantastic as this series’ iterations of Uncle Ben and Aunt May. Their takes on these classic characters are a bit more authoritative in tone compared to Cliff Robertson and Rosemary Harris’ performances in the Raimi films. They still are the loving surrogate parents in Peter’s life but they do take on a stricter parenting role whenever he gets into trouble, especially Uncle Ben. And on that note, while it is pretty much the same as the scene from the first Raimi film, Webb does do a good job when it comes to handling Uncle Ben’s death in this film. Heck, I’ll even admit that perhaps I found this one to be just a tad bit more heartbreaking seeing how this happened while Ben was looking for Peter after an intense argument between them. And as for Sally Field as Aunt May… well, recently she’s distanced herself from these films, stating that it wasn’t ‘her kind of film’ but that she did it for her friend, producer Laura Ziskin, who had also produced the Raimi films. The Amazing Spider-Man would ultimately be one of the last projects that she worked on before her death in 2011. Field also stated that she felt that there wasn’t much depth to the character; a shame, really, because I’d argue that she gave it her all in the role, especially in the sequel.

Image result for dr. connors amazing spider-man

As for the main villain, Dr. Curt Connors AKA the Lizard, I think that he was the series’ best ‘sympathetic’ villain since Dr. Octopus in Spider-Man 2. After all, that’s a common starting point when it comes to some of Spider-Man’s adversaries in these films; not all of them are just straight-up ‘bad guys’. In fact, almost all of them have a personal connection to Peter in some way, shape, or form. In this instance, Dr. Connors was a close friend of Peter’s dad who worked alongside him at Oscorp. And when we first meet him, we learn that he and Peter’s father were experimenting with cross-species genetics to try and find cures for diseases along with other potential scientific breakthroughs, including the possibility of humans being able to regenerate limbs. Connors himself only has one arm, hence why he’s fully determined to make his experiments work. While there was some material with Connors that was cut from the final film, including a scene where we see that he has a son, Rhys Ifans does a great job in making Connors a sympathetic character who’s trying to heal himself as much as he wants to heal the world. But, after one failed test, he becomes a diabolical creature and his goals become corrupted as he works to turn all of New York into lizard beings like himself. Dr. Connors had previously appeared in the Raimi films as well, played by Dylan Baker. Sadly, for Baker, he was never given the opportunity to become the Lizard, though, apparently, he was being set up to do so in the unmade fourth film. Thankfully, we finally got to see this character fully realized on the big screen in the first Amazing Spider-Man, and I think that it was also good that they started out with him instead of re-doing a villain from the Raimi films. Obviously, they re-did Green Goblin in the second film but, again, that was the second film. At that point, I’d argue that it was okay for them to try and do a new take on a previously seen character.

Finally, one of the other major things that I think the Amazing films do better than the Raimi films is its action sequences, namely whenever Spidey is swinging through the city. Admittedly, the first Raimi film has become rather dated in terms of its effects; you can clearly tell whenever a digital double of an actor is used during a fight scene. Thankfully, the Raimi films did improve from an effects standpoint as they went on. Thus, by the time that the Amazing films came around, Spider-Man’s web-slinging became more fluent than ever from a visual perspective. The second film, especially, featured some of the best Spider-Man swinging sequences ever put on film. With that in mind, I do think that Webb managed to improve as an action director the same way that Christopher Nolan did between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. In Nolan’s instance, while Batman Begins was a great return to form for Batman on the big screen after almost a decade, its biggest shortcoming was its poorly edited fight sequences, which I attribute to it being Nolan’s first big action film. Thankfully, Nolan stepped up his game three years later with some exceptional fight sequences in The Dark Knight. Now, for the record, I’m not saying that Webb pulled off a Dark Knight-level leap in quality when it came to the second Amazing film. But, like Nolan, this was a case where the first Amazing Spider-Man was his first big action film. And while the action was solid enough in the first film, Webb managed to take it one step further in the sequel. For one thing, the sequel has action sequences that are set during the day instead of at night like in the first film. Seriously, the only major daytime action sequence in the first film… was one that took place within a school.

Related image

On that note, now it’s time to talk about that infamous sequel, 2014’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Like Spider-Man 3, it experienced an extremely polarizing response from critics and audiences that leaned more towards the negative. And while it was one of the top-grossing films of the year, with over $708 million worldwide… it was ultimately the lowest-grossing Spider-Man film to date. Thus, the following year, Sony made a deal with Marvel Studios to co-produce a second reboot franchise, which would allow the character to finally make his long-awaited debut in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This also meant that all of Sony’s plans at the time to continue the Amazing series ended up falling by the wayside. But as for me, I was in the minority of people who did like The Amazing Spider-Man 2. And after re-watching it again as research for this post… I found that I still liked it. Hell, scratch that, I love it. As I noted before, it improved upon its predecessor in terms of the action sequences and visuals, effectively becoming the best-looking Spider-Man film to date. And just like its predecessor, it benefitted greatly from the lead performances of Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. Garfield fully embraced Spidey’s comic persona while Stone’s Gwen continued to be his best on-screen love interest. Sure, the two do spend most of the film apart from each other after they break up due to Peter’s guilt over not sticking to the promise that he made to her father. But when they do share romantic scenes, boy are these two cute together. The scene where the two rekindle their relationship on top the Brooklyn Bridge is especially heartwarming… though also a bit gut-wrenching when you know exactly what’s about to happen to them. But I’ll get to that later…

Remember how there was quite a lot of material left on the cutting room floor with the first film? Well, it’s an even bigger problem with this one. Once again, several scenes that were even featured in the trailer ended up being removed for various reasons, and in this instance, it does indeed impact the overall narrative. This includes a scene where Peter’s best friend Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan) informs him that his father’s company, Oscorp, has been watching him and his family for years and, in what is perhaps the most notable (or ‘infamous’, depending on your point of view) deleted scene of the bunch, Peter is reunited with his long-lost father, who is revealed to have survived the plane crash, which we see happen in the film’s opening sequence. There were also a few scenes featuring Shailene Woodley as Mary Jane Watson, but her scenes were cut because Webb wanted to focus more on Peter and Gwen’s relationship instead of the one that would obviously occur between Peter and MJ. But unlike the previously mentioned deleted scenes, these haven’t been released yet, and now that Sony has moved onto a new series, it’s unlikely that we’ll ever see them. To me, this film feels very much like Iron Man 2, which also tried to set up a lot of material for future films to the point where it ended up being detrimental to its main plot. But whereas Iron Man 2 didn’t do ‘terribly’ with critics and was part of the continually-developing Marvel Cinematic Universe, Sony didn’t have the same kind of leeway with the Amazing films. Thus, several big-name actors ended up being vastly underutilized in roles that were clearly meant to be expanded upon in future films. This includes Felicity Jones as Harry’s assistant Felicia, who would’ve become the vigilante Black Cat from the comics, and B.J. Novak as scientist Alistair Smythe, who was well-known in the comics for creating robots known as the Spider-Slayers.

Image result for amazing spider-man 2

Ultimately, though, the film ends up facing the same dilemma as Spider-Man 3; a narrative that featured several main villains, three to be specific. However, while I do think that both films clearly bit off more than they can chew by having all these villains in one film, I still think that Spider-Man 3 was more problematic when it came to it having ‘too many villains’. And that’s because, after about 2-4 viewings of that film, I’m still unsure as to who the main villain of that film was. At first, it seemed like it was going to be Harry Osborn AKA ‘New Goblin’, but he’s put out of commission for a bit due to a sustained bout of amnesia. Then, there was Sandman, and for the most part, he was the ‘main threat’ of the film, especially given the big personal connection that he has with Peter as it’s revealed that he was the one who killed Uncle Ben. But then, like Harry, he too exits the film for a decent amount of time before coming back at the end. And then, of course, there’s Venom… who’s only in it for like ten minutes or so before he’s killed off. Amazing Spider-Man 2, at the very least, was a bit clearer as to who the main villain was; Electro. Sure, there’s a point in the film where he’s taken into custody for a bit, but by the end, he’s still ultimately the big threat for Spidey to stop. As for Harry, he slowly but surely changes into the Green Goblin by the end of the film; in other words, he was clearly meant to be one of the ‘big baddies’ in future films, though he does play a major part in this film’s finale. And as for the film’s third villain, Rhino, he was only meant to be a ‘book-end’ villain, first appearing at the beginning of the film and then returning at the end. I mean, to be fair, while Spider-Man does have a wide array of adversaries in the comics, not all of them are big enough to be ‘main villains’. And it seems like Spider-Man: Homecoming is doing a similar thing; Michael Keaton’s Vulture is the main villain while the film will also feature characters like Shocker and the Tinkerer in smaller roles.

And overall, I was fine with the villains in this film. Paul Giamatti was delightfully hammy in his brief appearance as the Rhino; again, a brief appearance, but it did result in a fun opening sequence and ending, even though the latter cuts to the credits before the fight gets underway. As for Jamie Foxx as Electro, the film continued the series’ tradition of sympathetic villains who weren’t ‘bad guys’ just because they’re evil. In the case of Electro, he starts out as a lowly Oscorp employee named Max Dillon who is led to believe that he’s Spider-Man’s best friend after Spidey saves him one time. After transforming into the electrically-powered being Electro, Max is confronted by Spider-Man again, and even though Peter attempts to peacefully subdue him, this fails and the ensuing battle leads to Max’s opinion of Spidey being forever tarnished. Sure, maybe this happens rather abruptly… that and Foxx’s take on the character is very reminiscent of Jim Carrey’s portrayal of Edward Nygma AKA the Riddler in Batman Forever, complete with a whole subplot that focused heavily on the fact that his transformation occurred on his birthday. In fact, there are a lot of overly goofy moments in this film, more so than just anything that Electro does. Thus, one of the major criticisms of the film was its tendency to have some noticeable tonal shifts. I do see where people are coming from with this, but it ultimately didn’t bother me that much. Plus, going back to what I said before about how this film had some of the best Spider-Man action in any film to date, the creation of Electro does lead to some awesome electricity-based visuals and action sequences. And I also don’t mind the changes that were made to Electro’s overall design. I mean, to be fair, I don’t see how they could’ve put Foxx in a green and yellow spandex suit complete with a lightning-bolt shaped mask; that would’ve made things even sillier if you ask me. And finally, with Dane DeHaan as the new Harry Osborn AKA Green Goblin, I thought that he was an interesting new take on the character, as we see traces of both his long friendship with Peter and his eventual descent into anarchy. If he had been given another film to work with, I think his take on the character would’ve become even better.

Image result for amazing spider man 2 sinister six

On that note, what were the plans then if the franchise hadn’t stalled out with this film? Well, obviously, there would’ve been a third (and maybe even a fourth) Amazing Spider-Man film, once again directed by Marc Webb and starring Garfield and DeHaan. But perhaps the most notable planned follow-up was a spin-off that focused on Spider-Man’s most notorious group of adversaries from the comics, the Sinister Six. The film was set to be written and directed by Drew Goddard, to the point where he even dropped out of handling show-running duties on Daredevil to work on this film. And the lineup for this gang of villains was directly teased in the credits of Amazing Spider-Man 2. This included, of course, returning characters Green Goblin and Rhino along with two characters that were teased in the film itself during a scene set at Oscorp that showcased their technology; Doc Ock and Vulture, the latter of whom will finally make his big-screen debut in Spider-Man: Homecoming. Finally, the other two confirmed villains were Kraven the Hunter, who would’ve debuted in the third film, and either Chameleon or Mysterio as implied by a bright-white mask. Ultimately, though, as we all know, this film, along with a planned Venom spin-off (that, apparently, is now back in development with Tom Hardy set to star in the lead role), were both canceled after the Marvel Studios deal was made official. It’s a shame, really, because I was interested in seeing both these films. Sure, it probably would’ve been difficult to try and make a film based around villainous characters and not superheroes, but I’m sure that it could’ve been done. Instead, we ultimately got our first big villain-centered comic book film in 2016 with DC’s Suicide Squad. And while that film also didn’t fare too well with critics, I still think that we’ll eventually see a good supervillain-led film in the future.

Anyway, back to Amazing Spider-Man 2… amidst all the goofy moments in this film, there are also some genuinely brilliant moments as well. Early on, there’s a scene where Peter saves a young kid from bullies and then proceeds to befriend him, complimenting his wind turbine science project and so on and so forth. This kid, Jorge, later returns at the end of the film where he dresses up as Spidey before the real Spidey comes back after being on a brief hiatus. In short, this was arguably the greatest on-screen instance of Spider-Man being the kind of role model to younger audiences that he’s always been known for. There’s also the scene where Peter talks with Aunt May about his father’s secrets which, as noted before, is a prime example of how Sally Field was truly giving it her all in the role despite her eventual thoughts on the films. Finally, of course, there’s the tragic finale in which, like in the comics, Gwen dies after sustaining injuries from a long fall. Say what you will about the rest of the film, but this moment is handled perfectly, thanks in no small part to Garfield and Stone’s excellent performances. Sure, it’s not exactly like it was in the comics, where the Goblin drops her from the George Washington Bridge, but we already got a scene like this in Raimi’s first Spider-Man film (with thankfully less tragic results). Instead, it occurs within a clock tower, and there’s even a neat little Easter egg where the clock stops at 1:21; #121 is the issue of Amazing Spider-Man in which Gwen died. Simply put, this was a truly emotional and heartbreaking scene that, along with all the other previously mentioned ‘brilliant’ scenes, is why I take issue whenever someone says that this is one of the worst superhero films of all-time… far from it. This is NOT the 2015 reboot of Fantastic Four, even though both films were clearly affected by hasty studio interference. And this is also NOT Batman and Robin, even though both films do have plenty of corny moments in them. Now, for the record, I do understand if some consider this to be a ‘middle-of-the-road’ entry in the genre, but worst? No way!

Image result for tom holland andrew garfield spiderman

Which is why I’m still a bit disappointed that this series had to end with a whimper by being replaced just like the Raimi films were. Now, don’t get me wrong, while I do prefer Garfield’s take on Spider-Man over Maguire’s, I did love Tom Holland’s portrayal of the character in Captain America: Civil War. Like Garfield, Holland had Spidey’s comedic quips down perfectly, and I also loved how this new take on the character is really focusing in on his high-school years, more so than Maguire and Garfield’s iterations combined (“I can’t go to Germany… I’ve got homework!”). And again, it looks like Spider-Man: Homecoming is shaping up to be the best Spider-Man film since Spider-Man 2, thanks in no small part to the influence of Kevin Feige and his team at Marvel Studios. But I must ask… why then couldn’t they just continue the Amazing films but do what they’re doing right now and have Feige and his team brought in to rework things so that the series could continue at a smoother pace? After all, as I’ve noted numerous times, Feige and his team clearly know what they’re doing. The Marvel Cinematic Universe wouldn’t be where it is today, in the middle of Phase III and building up to what will surely be an epic conclusion to the current age of the franchise in Avengers: Infinity War, without them. Now, I’ll admit, maybe they figured that the plans for future Amazing films were just too messy at that point to be salvaged, but given how many characters have been ‘redeemed’ through their roles in the MCU, I bet that they could’ve saved it. But, of course, that didn’t happen, and it does make you feel bad for Marc Webb and Andrew Garfield, both of whom are talented at what they do. It’s a shame, really, that both were ultimately hindered by a pair of films that were severely affected by studio influence. 

Image result for amazing spider-man peter and gwen


Well, even though the internet has mostly forgotten about them by now, I still really enjoy the Amazing Spider-Man films. In fact, I won’t lie… I have a stronger personal connection to them than I do the Raimi films which, again, I do still like. For one thing, the Amazing films were the first Spider-Man films that I ever saw in theaters. Yes, I’ll admit that I didn’t see any of the Raimi films in theaters, mainly because I was too young for them at the time. I did catch a few glimpses of the first Raimi film back in 2002, but that was at the drive-in and it was a situation where my dad and brother were seeing it while my mom and I went to see another film. The Amazing Spider-Man was my first true Spider-Man film seen in theaters. In fact, that instance was a special one for me as it was the first time that I ever went to an early screening. One of my local radio stations had a contest where they were giving away tickets to an IMAX screening of the film in Providence to those who called in and correctly named a film that the hosts used an audio clip from. And as fate would have it, I won on the day that the audio clip came from Marc Webb’s first film, (500) Days of Summer (how fitting!). And I remember this because my mom called it in for us (I had just been dropped off at school) and when she told the hosts that I gave her the answer, one of them joked that the film was rated R… even though it wasn’t. And I guess that part of the reason why I loved Amazing Spider-Man 2 so much is that I saw it at one of those ‘perfect times’. It was the last day of my freshman semester at college and the film was exactly what I needed after a rather rough second semester. In conclusion, yes, I know that I’m in the minority when it comes to liking these films. But remember, film is subjective; thus, it works in different ways for different people. Case in point, a lot of people my age are still very fond of the Raimi films, which in turn impacted their thoughts on the Amazing films. And, heck, I’ll even admit that back then, I was as skeptical as most people were about these films when they were first announced. But at the end of the day, I was surprised to find that I really connected with these films, more so than I ever did with the Raimi films.

Monday, November 14, 2016

11/12/2016 Double Feature Short Reviews

Well, this past weekend ended up resulting in something that I didn’t expect going into it; a double-feature run. If you’ve been following this blog for a while, you’ll know that I usually don’t go to see two new films in one day. It’s usually just one film a week for me and the only times that I do partake in a ‘double-feature’ day are my annual post-Christmas double-feature runs that I do with my best friend and fellow film critic Matt Goudreau (writer for The Young Folks and The Nerd Stash). But this past Saturday, I wound up seeing not one but two films in one day. I had gone to see one film with my mom late in the afternoon but wound up running across Matt as I leaving the theater. He was there to do his own double-feature run and I ended up joining him on his second screening. So, with that in mind and given the fact that I’m currently focusing more on some of the other projects that I’m working on right now, namely Disney Month posts, I decided to do what I usually do on a ‘Double Feature’ day; a quick pair of short reviews for the two films that I saw that day. So, without further ado, here are my quick thoughts on the two films that I saw on November 12th, 2016. They are…

ARRIVAL

Image result for Arrival poster

First up is Arrival, the newest film from director Denis Villeneuve. Villeneuve has recently become one of the most well-regarded directors in the industry thanks to films like 2013’s Prisoners and 2015’s Sicario. Next year, he’ll be taking on his biggest project yet in the form of the long-awaited sequel to the 1982 sci-fi classic Blade Runner; Blade Runner 2049. But before that, he has a different sci-fi story in the form of Arrival, which stars Amy Adams as a linguist who is recruited by the military to try and translate the language of an alien race that has arrived on Earth via a series of shell-like ships to determine if they’re friendly or not. What follows is a very interesting sci-fi story that does hold your interest throughout. Admittedly, it is a slow burn (though, at the same time, never overstays its welcome at a runtime of just under two hours) and it did take me a bit to figure out the big ‘reveal’ but once I did, I found myself liking it; it results in a solid conclusion. From a technical perspective, the film does showcase Villeneuve’s talents as a director. The cinematography is solid, the film is well-edited, the score by Villeneuve regular Johann Johannsson is excellent, and the cast is terrific all-around, particularly Amy Adams in the lead role. Though there are also some solid supporting performances from the likes of Jeremy Renner (who works well with Adams as the deuteragonist), Forest Whitaker, and Michael Stuhlbarg. In short, Arrival is a smart sci-fi film that does take some commitment to get into probably but will ultimately leave you satisfied for sticking with it.

Rating: 4/5

HACKSAW RIDGE

Image result for Hacksaw Ridge poster

Hacksaw Ridge is Mel Gibson’s first directorial effort in a decade. Gibson, of course, is known as being one of the most prolific actors in the film industry. He was a major action star thanks to the Mad Max and Lethal Weapon franchises and then began to transition into directing in the early 90’s. His most famous directorial effort is 1995’s Best Picture winner Braveheart and he also had a commercially successful, but highly controversial, hit with 2004’s The Passion of the Christ. But then over the next few years, his career started to go downhill as the result of various embarrassing incidents, most notably the time in 2006 when he got arrested for drunk driving and spewed Anti-Semitic remarks. But like I always say, sometimes you got to separate the art from the artist. Now it seems like he’s starting to make a career comeback and it will no doubt get a major boost from his return to the director’s chair. This WWII biopic tells the true story of corporal Desmond Doss (Andrew Garfield), a Virginia native who enlisted in the army but then proceeded to attract a considerable amount of backlash when he refused to hold a rifle because of his religious beliefs. After nearly going to jail on the charge of insubordination, he manages to be granted his request of not having to carry a firearm into battle and instead serve as a combat medic. And during a battle in which he and his platoon found themselves having to combat Japanese forces stationed near a cliff known as ‘Hacksaw Ridge’ (hence the title of the film), he managed to save 75 soldiers and would go on to be awarded the Medal of Honor. He’s the only conscientious objector to do so.

While some parts of the film come off as being a tad melodramatic, namely in the beginning when Doss is romancing his future wife Dorothy, Doss’ peaceful ways in staying true to his beliefs is an extremely admirable trait, especially from the perspective of our current times. The film takes a while before it gets into any scenes of warfare and thus gives a solid amount of time to develop Doss as a character, from the extremely traumatizing incident during his childhood that led him to truly embrace God to him not giving up after being subjected to much physical and mental abuse from his fellow soldiers. But once the film does get into the actual warfare… in one word, damn! These are easily some of the best war combat scenes ever to be put on film but bear in mind that they are very, VERY intense. That’s usually the case with Gibson’s directorial efforts, after all. In fact, this may even surpass Saving Private Ryan in terms of how violent the action sequences are. Through it all, though, this is truly an epic war film backed by the terrific action sequences, an outstanding performance by Andrew Garfield in the lead role, and a solid supporting cast that includes Sam Worthington and Vince Vaughn as Doss’ superiors in the army, Teresa Palmer as Dorothy, and Hugo Weaving as Doss’ tragically broken father who constantly deals with the demons that came from partaking in World War I. In conclusion, it's safe to say that Gibson has a major success on his hands in what will surely be a major awards contender. It’s a hard-hitting war film (though, really, what war film hasn’t been hard hitting?) that is based around the admirable courageous actions of its main character; one who never fired a single bullet. 


Rating: 4.5/5

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Thoughts on the Marvel Studios/Sony 'Spider-Man' deal


As we all know, one of the biggest reasons why Marvel Studios started out the Marvel Cinematic Universe with some of their lesser known characters like Iron Man and Thor was because they didn’t have the rights to all of their characters at the time. Mainly, ‘Spider-Man’ was with Sony and ‘X-Men’ and ‘The Fantastic Four’ were with Fox. So that meant that Marvel had to go with what was, at the time, referred to by some as their ‘B-list’ heroes but of course as we all know they have gone on to achieve massive success both critically and commercially with a franchise that is still going strong today. Meanwhile, Fox and Sony have spent the last few years doing their own thing with the Marvel characters that they own. Fox recently got the ‘X-Men’ franchise back in top form with ‘Days of Future Past’ and now all eyes are on the new ‘Fantastic Four’ to see if that film can also deliver. But as for Sony, they’ve had less success than either Fox or Marvel Studios recently, mainly due to their extremely polarizing decision to reboot the ‘Spider-Man’ film franchise just five years after the release of the third Sam Raimi-directed ‘Spider-Man’ film. But last night, a major news bombshell was dropped when it was revealed that Sony and Marvel had reached a deal that would allow everyone’s favorite neighborhood web-slinger to appear in the MCU, something that comic book fans have been waiting for since the very beginning.


First off, let’s go over the details of this new deal. For the record, this deal does not mean that Marvel ‘got back’ the rights to Spider-Man. Sony still owns those rights and will be in charge of distribution, financing, and ultimately having final creative control over future ‘Spider-Man’ films. However, according to this new deal, Spider-Man will make his official debut in the MCU in one of the upcoming ‘Phase 3’ films. And then on July 28, 2017, Sony will release a new ‘Spider-Man’ film but this time Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige will produce the film along with former Sony Pictures Chairman Amy Pascal, who recently resigned from her position at Sony following the controversy surrounding the studio hacking scandal. At the same time, the studio’s proposed spin-off films, ‘Sinister Six’, ‘Venom’, and a film centered around some of the series’ female characters, are apparently still in development presumably not to be produced by Feige. However, it’s also been revealed that this new film is going to recast the role of Spider-Man and that ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ lead Andrew Garfield will not be returning for the new film nor will director Marc Webb. In short, the ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ film series that has polarized many comic book fans ever since it was first announced has officially come to an end and I will admit that I am a little disappointed by that.

Now I’ve made it perfectly clear that I am a big fan of both ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ films… and I know that this put me in the minority when it came to that stance, especially after ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ ended up being one of the most polarizing films of this past year when it was first released while also ending up as the lowest-grossing ‘Spider-Man’ film to date. Nowadays, the film isn’t as polarizing as it was when it first came out and now it is officially deemed by the internet as a major disappointment… something that I’ve been constantly been reminded about anytime there a piece of news surrounding the future of the franchise comes out and believe me, folks, it’s gotten really annoying. I’m not saying that the ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ films are perfect. The first film will never escape the fact that it was a rushed reboot and it’s clear that the filmmakers didn’t realize the biggest problem of ‘Spider-Man 3’ when they made the second film. Not only that but it has also been very much proven that Sony made a lot of changes to the two films to the point where certain plot-points and scenes that were even featured in the trailers were cut out entirely. Still, to the series’ credit, it did do some things better than the Raimi trilogy, namely better action scenes and visuals and far superior leads in Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone.


But in the end, I will say this… this new deal with Marvel is the right move for both Sony and the Spider-Man film franchise and this is because it is now being co-handled by the studio that has proven time and time again that they know what they’re doing. Of course, if you’ve been following me since the beginning, you know that I’ve showered the MCU with nothing but praise time and time again. And for the record it does deserve a lot of that praise giving its excellent track record of films that, if anything, were incredibly entertaining films even if some weren’t really as good as others; in my opinion, there has yet to be a ‘bad’ MCU film. Sony, on the other hand, clearly hit a major roadblock when ‘Amazing Spider-Man 2’ didn’t meet their expectations both critically and commercially. There have been numerous rumors these past few months about the status of their ‘Cinematic Universe’, from shifting release dates around to even rumors that Sam Raimi was going to return to direct another one of these films. For the record, I was supportive of Sony’s ‘plan’ for future films and spin-offs, namely the proposed ‘Sinister Six’ and ‘Venom’ films because I wanted to see how those would’ve turned out. It seems like those two spin-offs are still happening but at the same time I do feel bad for both Andrew Garfield and Marc Webb who clearly were stuck in a not-so-great situation and I do wish that they could’ve gotten, if anything, one last chance so that their franchise can go out on a high note instead of a low one.

So now let’s start speculating about how Spidey is going to be incorporated into the MCU, more specifically which MCU film is he going to appear in? I think it’s safe to assume that he won’t be making a cameo in the post-credits scenes for either ‘Age of Ultron’ or ‘Ant-Man’ given the fact that both of these films are coming out fairly soon (just three months in the case of ‘Age of Ultron’. So given the fact that, in the comics, Spider-Man was a key player in the ‘Civil War’ storyline, it’s incredibly likely that he’ll be appearing in ‘Captain America: Civil War’ after all to play the same role he did in the comics. Though with that said, it’s a little disappointing if this is true because back when it was confirmed that ‘Cap 3’ would be ‘Civil War’, they were touting Black Panther to be the one who would take over Spidey’s role in the story, obviously because at the time, this deal wasn’t official yet. Who knows? Maybe they’ll have the same overall role in the story but each of them will side with either Cap or Iron Man. At the same time, I’d actually also be interested to perhaps see Spider-Man make a cameo appearance in one of Marvel’s TV shows, either ‘Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.’ (which I would be extremely excited about given that it’s my favorite show on TV right now) or one of the upcoming Netflix shows, the latter of which could definitely work seeing how it takes place in New York.


As for the new Spider-Man film, believe it or not it now beats the record previously set by the first ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ film as one of the quickest franchise reboots ever; in this case of this new film, now just three years after the last film. But this time, I’m pretty sure we’re not going to get the origin story again; after all, we’ve already seen the whole ‘getting bit by a spider’ and the ‘death of Uncle Ben’ plot-points twice now. We don’t need to see that again. And here’s a suggestion… sometime in the near future (not in the first new film but in a sequel), why not introduce Miles Morales as the next Spider-Man like in the comics? Sadly, it seemed like they weren’t going to do that with the ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ films, even after Garfield was supposedly going to step down from the role after the third film. But now that those films are no longer happening, it seems much more likely this could happen. As for who’ll direct this film, I noted before that there were rumors that Sam Raimi was going to return but unless Sony apologizes to him for trying to rush him into making a fourth film, I doubt he’ll be back for this one. The other major rumor is that Phil Lord and Chris Miller are being approached to do it and well, given their phenomenal track record, I’d be in full support of that decision.

So I know a lot of people are excited about Spider-Man ‘coming home’ to the MCU but for the record, this doesn’t mean that Marvel got the rights to the character back. Sony’s still in control of that and instead, Marvel Studios and Sony are going to work together on all future Spider-Man related film projects and overall, this is probably the best deal they could’ve made and not just have Marvel 100% get back the rights. After all, Sony hasn’t been having a good run recently when it comes to their films and Spider-Man was basically their last major film franchise left. So with this new deal, both sides get something out of it instead of one of them being left out in the cold. Now Spider-Man can finally appear in the MCU, something that fans have been dying to see happen, and by all accounts it looks like future ‘Spider-Man’ films are going to turn out much better than before now that Feige and his team now have a say in how the films turn out. Still, you do have to feel bad for Andrew Garfield and Marc Webb given how everything went downhill for them because of what happened with ‘Amazing Spider-Man 2’. Part of me wishes that these were the new films that Feige and co. would work on instead of just rebooting the film franchise AGAIN!! Still, even as someone who still loves ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ films, I can’t really complain about this deal that much because it’s clear that Spidey is going to have a much brighter future now in film. Now if only Marvel and Fox can get along…


R.I.P. ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ films (2012-2014). I’ll still defend you till the day I die.


Saturday, May 3, 2014

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014) review

The_Amazing_Spider_Man_2 movie poster

Like many others, I was fairly hesitant about 2012’s ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’, the first in a new reboot series immediately following in the wake of director Sam Raimi’s decision not to return for a fourth ‘Spider-Man’ film. It was just five years since Raimi’s last Spider-Man film, ‘Spider-Man 3’, and although that film wasn’t as well-received as the two that came before it, I have the feeling that many people were still looking to give the franchise another chance… but that ‘second chance’ never came because of what we can pretty much now refer to as the ‘quickest reboot ever’. But, I was very much surprised to find that I really enjoyed ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’, more so than I did with two of Raimi’s films (a trilogy of films that, for the record, I still do really like). Sure, the film had the obligatory disadvantage of having to retell the origin story of Peter Parker all over again but the main reason why I enjoyed it so much was because I really found myself emotionally invested in the characters, particularly this series’ takes on Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, who formed one of the best superhero film couples of all time. So now, with the origin story out of the way, the filmmakers are now allowed to go a different path than what we’ve seen before from this franchise.

And that brings us to the first sequel, ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’. Now, sometime ago I had listed this film as my most anticipated film of 2014, and there were a few main reasons as to why I was more excited for this over something like ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ or ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’. While I’m not a comic-book reader, I find that my favorite comic book superhero is Spider-Man, a character that directly appealed to the underdogs, which made him a very relatable character even with his superpowers. Plus, I really got excited for the film after watching a leaked video of the Comic-Con trailer and of course, the official trailers continued to get me pumped for it. But, with all of this anticipation, there soon began to emerge a lot of doubt and worry surrounding the ‘scope’ of the film and whether or not the film was getting to be way too overcrowded. That has certainly been a key topic for debate amongst the critics who have reviewed the film because, according to Rotten Tomatoes, it is currently the lowest rated film in the entire franchise at 55% (at the time I’m writing this). Well, to those 45% of critics who didn’t really like the film that much, I say this… prepare to disagree with what I have to say about this film because this, ladies and gentlemen, was the Spider-Man film that I have been waiting for and one that delivered on so many levels.

Taking place sometime after the events of the first film, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) has continued to fight crime in the city of New York as the masked superhero Spider-Man. However, at the same time, he finds himself struggling to deal with his romantic feelings towards Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), having promised her father, Captain George Stacy (Denis Leary, who briefly reprises his role for this film as a ‘ghostly vision’), before he died that he would ‘keep Gwen out of it’. As Peter tries to figure out what to do about their relationship, he soon finds himself facing off against a new enemy; Electro (Jamie Foxx), formerly a mild-mannered engineer at Oscorp named Max Dillon who idolizes Spider-Man after he is saved by him, obtaining his powers after falling into a tank of electric eels. Things get a bit more complicated when Peter’s childhood friend Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan) returns to take over Oscorp in the wake of his father’s death as Peter continues to discover some of the company’s darkest secrets, some of which connect back to the disappearance and death of his parents and some of the things that his father was working on.

I’m going to start by addressing the key aspect of the film that everyone’s been worried about with the following statement; folks, this film isn’t as ‘bloated’ as you may think. While watching the film, I found myself wondering why a lot of people were saying that this film is ‘overcrowded’ because aside from one or two characters who felt like unnecessary additions and were only in there just because they played major roles in the comics (though if you don’t know who they are, you’d never tell they were important because they’re only in a few scenes), it really isn’t. The marketing may be promoting that Spider-Man is facing three villains, but at the end of the day, Electro is still the main villain. The Green Goblin only comes into play in the final battle and Rhino (Paul Giamatti) is only in the film for a few minutes. The film still focuses enough of its attention on the main characters (e.g. Peter and Gwen and their relationship) and you can at least see that the filmmakers are looking to expand the universe more, and I do like the ideas that they are going with for future films, specifically that ‘Sinister Six’ spin-off movie that they are planning to do.

But, for the record, the whole ‘universe building’ idea actually isn’t that much of a factor in regards to this film’s overall story. Remember how in the first film that the whole subplot of Peter’s parents that was basically the main focus of the marketing and yet the final film really didn’t do much with that? Well, it’s sort of the same scenario here with the whole ‘universe’. They don’t really go into it much until the very end of the film, to the point where it’s sort of an afterthought. Believe it or not, this film’s story is actually really self-contained up until the end when they are like “hey folks, here’s what we have in mind for the future films in the franchise”. It makes you wonder what exactly goes on in the editing room for these (one of this film’s editors was also an editor on the last film) because I have the feeling that there were definitely some scenes that were cut (That scene in the trailers where Harry tells Peter that Oscorp had him under surveillance? Not in the film.), meaning that both of these films are cases where there was more to their stories, but in both cases, certain scenes ended up on the cutting room floor.

But on a more positive note, I really have to hand it to Marc Webb because the direction here is excellent. I find this to be similar to how Christopher Nolan went from ‘Batman Begins’ to ‘The Dark Knight’ in that in both cases, these two directors had never really done action films before when they did their first films in their respective franchises. By the time that they got to their second superhero film, they were much more confident in their direction than they were the first time around, which really shows in the final product. Webb did a really solid job with the first film, and in many ways, this film is even better. The action is fantastic; it’s some of the best I’ve ever seen in any superhero film. The visuals, especially in regards to all of the scenes where Spider-Man is swinging around, are top-notch. The film also has a really nice tone to it; the first film was a bit more serious in tone (which didn’t really fly well with some people, but I thought it worked pretty well for that film), whereas this one is much more lighthearted and full of great humor. I’ve heard some say that it goes into ‘Schumacher Batman’ territory at some points, but aside from one questionable line of dialogue from Electro (“It’s my birthday, now it’s time to light my candles”), it’s like the whole ‘overcrowding’ thing in that I just don’t really see the connection.

Equally terrific here, just like in the previous film, is the cast. With this film, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone prove that they are the definitive Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Gwen Stacy of the film franchise, respectively. Garfield is once again fantastic as Peter/Spidey, still maintaining the proper wisecracking personality of the character as he done so well in the first film; in fact, I’d say he’s even better here. Stone is also fantastic as well, and the chemistry between the two is just as great as it was in the previous film, even if their relationship does go into the ‘on again, off again’ territory for a lot of the film. But, when a key scene happens (which you probably already knew about seeing how the marketing (and the spoilerific internet, for that matter) have pretty much given it away), it is handled really well and I’ll admit that I was fighting back tears when it happened. Dane DeHaan is also a major standout in this film as Harry Osborn, providing an interesting and a bit more sinister take on the character compared to the Harry from the Raimi films. As the main villain, Jamie Foxx does a pretty darn good job as Electro. I liked his backstory, which helped make him a pretty sympathetic villain (Spider-Man films have a pretty solid track record when it comes to those kind of villains).

‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ is the Spider-Man film that I have waiting to see for quite some time and it did not disappoint. While this film’s supposed ‘bloated’ nature has been heavily debated by many people, the final film actually isn’t as crowded as you think even if some characters were rather unnecessarily added in and, at the same time, a bit underutilized. Sure, the whole ‘universe building’ they’re planning to do wasn’t really delved into that much with this film, but as a whole, I’m still really excited to see what they are going to do next (especially considering the ‘Sinister Six’ movie they plan on doing, which is certainly teased at in this film). This film features incredible action and visuals, excellent humor, and a terrific cast from top to bottom. No, I don’t think that this movie is ‘perfect’, but for what’s it worth, it’s a very entertaining and well-made superhero film. This is definitely one of those cases where I’d say that this film is much better than what some critics are saying. It’s one that I highly recommend.


Rating: 4.5/5

Saturday, April 26, 2014

Comparing Spider-Man (2002) to The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)


So, with ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ coming out, I was looking into what I could possibly do for a Spider-Man related post for this site in time for its release. But, I found that I didn’t really have much options seeing how I’ve already done full reviews for all four films back in 2012 when the first reboot came out. But I finally found an idea for a post based off of another post that my friend Matthew Goudreau had just done. So today, I’ll be doing something along the lines of the Nostalgia Critic’s ‘Old vs. New’ videos and will be comparing the first of Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films, 2002’s ‘Spider-Man’, with Marc Webb’s ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’. Now this is something that I normally don’t do because when it comes to film franchises and their reboots, I feel that it’s a little unfair to compare a reboot to the original film because I think that it should be looked at as its own thing and that is certainly the case with the ‘Spider-Man’ reboot. Still, I thought it would be fun to do this as these two are actually my personal favorite entries in the Spider-Man film franchise. So let’s us begin…

BEST PETER PARKER

Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN


Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield did phenomenal jobs as Peter Parker, both of whom came off as being very sympathetic, charming, and likable. But if I had to choose which one of their performances I like the most, I prefer Garfield’s take more than Maguire’s. And I’ve heard a lot of people complain about how the character was portrayed in the reboot, not by Garfield’s performance but through the writing; how he is sort of stalking Gwen Stacy, how he treats Uncle Ben and Aunt May like crap, and how he doesn’t really do much to hide the fact that he has powers. Well, I view his behavior in this film in a different way… he’s being a teenager. Admit it folks, we’ve all been through that rebellious phase, haven’t we? That’s how I interpret Peter’s actions in this film. I mean, with the Raimi films, Peter graduates from High School right after Uncle Ben’s death so by that point I feel that he’s already matured past his rebellious phase, whereas the Peter in the reboot is still in High School so it’s understandable that he hasn’t really matured yet.

And as for the thing about him not really keeping his identity secret… well, this happened a few times in the first Raimi film too, so it’s not like this hasn’t happened before. Like remember when Peter accidentally launched a web at a lunch tray, something that apparently no one nearby actually saw? This is a case where both versions of Peter Parker haven’t done the best job of hiding their big secret. Now, I was still in High School at the time this film came out so I found myself relating more to Garfield’s Peter. But even now that I’m out of High School, I still find that Garfield’s Peter is a little more defined of a character. After all, the reboot has the advantage of adding in the plotline about Peter’s parents and we can certainly see how much of an impact their departure has had on him. The scene where he’s arguing with Uncle Ben and says “Where’s my father?” is pretty damn heartbreaking. So, while I do think Maguire did a great job in the Raimi trilogy, overall I feel that Andrew Garfield was the better Peter Parker… but there’s more to this role than just being a great Peter Parker.

BEST SPIDER-MAN

Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN


Again, just like with the last category, I do that Maguire was also great as Spider-Man, but this is a character that is known for being a very wisecracking superhero and I hate to say it, but I don’t think that Tobey Maguire really got that part of the character down that well in the Raimi films. A lot of his wisecracks (what few there were actually, now that I think about it) were rather mediocre. Plus, as we saw from ‘Spider-Man 3’, sometimes the humor got a little bit too goofy. Garfield, on the other hand, really got the wisecracking aspect of the character down perfectly and I’m not just talking about the scene where he’s dealing with the carjacker (“You found my weakness… it’s small knives!”). There were a few other instances of his wisecracking nature, like when he’s fighting the Lizard in the High School (“Someone’s been a bad Lizard!”). I just feel that he just made it work much better. Plus, as shown in the trailers for ‘Amazing Spider-Man 2’, it’s clear that Garfield is continuing to maintain that attitude (“I was cleaning the chimney…” “We have no chimney…” “What???”). So, overall, going back to what I said earlier, while I do like Maguire in the Raimi films, I feel that Garfield is the superior lead.

BEST VILLAIN

Winner: SPIDER-MAN (2002)


Rhys Ifans was really good as Curt Connors AKA ‘The Lizard’; he’s one of those villains who were actually a bit sympathetic given the whole situation with his goal of trying to regenerate limbs because he himself lost an arm. But, at the end of the day, you just can’t top Willem Dafoe’s performance as Norman Osborn AKA The Green Goblin in the first Raimi film. Sure, it’s incredibly over the top, but it’s just a very fun and entertaining performance and Dafoe really gets into the role. Plus, I do think that Dafoe’s role was better-written than Ifans mainly because there was apparently scenes cut that featured his family. This would have really helped when it came to making him a more sympathetic villain. It’s still there in the final film, but this would have helped convey that just a bit more. This is actually a rather close decision, but because of that material that ended up on the cutting room floor, Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin is the better villain, not the best in the entire film franchise (see Doc Ock in ‘Spider-Man 2’ for that), but still a very entertaining one.

BEST LOVE INTEREST

Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN


There really isn’t any contest here. It’s nothing against Kirsten Dunst, as she did do a really good job as Mary Jane in the Raimi films. But as Gwen Stacy (a part that’s done much better here than in ‘Spider-Man 3’, I might add), Emma Stone was just the superior female lead in almost every way. She wasn’t just the ‘damsel in distress’; she was very charming and likable but also very smart. When New York is being infected with the Lizard’s chemicals, she helps develop the antidote for it. When the Lizard confronts her in Oscorp, she wards him off with fire. And when Peter tells her ‘he can’t see her anymore’, she immediately realizes that it was because her father made him promise to ‘keep her out of it’. Thank god this character turned out the way she did, not just through the writing but from Stone’s performance in the role. Of course, she also had terrific chemistry with Garfield, making them one of the best superhero film couples of all time whereas Maguire and Dunst’s chemistry was a bit forced at times. In fact, I’d say that her character, and performance, might just be the best aspect of the film.

BEST SUPPORTING CAST

Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN


Both films have terrific supporting casts, so this was a tough decision. The first film had Cliff Robertson, Rosemary Harris, James Franco, and of course, the man behind everyone’s favorite hot-headed publisher J. Jonah Jameson, J.K. Simmons. The reboot has another really great supporting cast; Martin Sheen, Sally Field, Ifans, and Denis Leary. So why do I prefer ‘Amazing Spider-Man’s supporting cast over the original? Well, I just like the characters in the reboot more, not just this version’s Peter and Gwen. I also liked some of the qualities of these interpretations of the characters when compared to the Raimi films. I liked how Sheen and Field’s versions of Uncle Ben and Aunt May were a bit more authoritative, which you really didn’t see from Robertson and Harris in the original film. Don’t worry, they’re still the loving surrogate parents, but I liked that they were a bit strict at times, and that’s because they care about Peter and they’re worried about him (we’ll get to a certain aspect of Uncle Ben’s role in both films in a bit). I also like that they gave George Stacy (Leary) a much more substantial role than he was given in ‘Spider-Man 3’; Leary had such a great presence in the role and when his character died, it really sucked. So again, this one was rather hard to pick, but because I prefer one movie’s characters more when compared to the other film, I have to go with the reboot’s cast.

BEST SCORE

Winner: SPIDER-MAN (2002)


Believe it or not, this was closer than you think; I actually think that James Horner’s score for the first ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ is actually a bit underrated. I really enjoy it, especially the two motifs that Horner did for the film. The first is a more somber tune that plays during the sadder parts of the film and the other is a very heroic melody that I feel really fits the character well as he swings through New York (both motifs are used to perfection in this track from the score: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze3HwnWWJ-s). But, let’s be honest, just like with Hans Zimmer’s music for the ‘Dark Knight Trilogy’, as good as it is, it just can’t beat the original which, in both cases, was done by Danny Elfman. Elfman also had a great motif that he used for the Raimi Spider-Man films and as much as I like the motifs from Horner’s score, Elfman’s motif, which I’ve heard is referred to as the ‘Responsibility’ theme (which is a pretty fitting name (here’s the link for those who may not be familiar with it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_pkajOdsIA)), is just straight-up iconic and I’ll admit that Elfman’s score was just a tad bit more memorable than Horner’s score, which as I said I do like, but in the end I have to go with Elfman’s score. You just can’t beat that motif.

BEST COSTUME

Winner: SPIDER-MAN (2002)


I’m not going to lie… I am not the biggest fan of the costume they gave Garfield for ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’. I mean, I don’t think it’s a bad costume, but there’s a certain part about it that I just can’t get over. When the first image of the costume, minus the mask, came out, I thought it looked really good. And then a pic of the suit with the mask was released on the internet… and I just couldn’t get over the eyes. I mean, I’m fine with having it look different than the costume from the Raimi trilogy, but I just couldn’t get over how the eyes looked on the costume. I can’t really explain why, but I just felt that it looked a little off when paired with the costume as a whole. So this round goes to the Raimi trilogy costume; I literally don’t have anything bad to say about it… it just looks terrific. Although I have to say, I really love the new look of the costume for ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’. Now that suit looks awesome. But, of course, I’m not comparing that version of the costume to the original film, so I’m still sticking with the Raimi version.

BEST PORTRAYAL OF UNCLE BEN’S DEATH

Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN


Now this is a pretty darn tough one as both death scenes were handled very well in both of these films, but in the end, I give the edge to ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ mainly for the reason that we actually see it happen onscreen whereas in the original film, Uncle Ben was shot off-screen. I feel that this makes the reboot’s death a little more impactful especially considering that in this film, it happened while Uncle Ben was out looking for Peter and not only that, but he went out in a fairly heroic way, actually trying to stop the thief that ended up shooting him. Both scenes are real tear-jerkers and as they were followed up in both films, you can definitely see the guilt that Peter has about it, as he regrets how, in both movies, he was rather rude to Uncle Ben the last time he talked with him. I mean, maybe the one in the Raimi film is a bit more meaningful, but in the end, I found myself shedding more tears when Martin Sheen’s Uncle Ben died because I was more emotionally connected to the characters in the reboot and while Cliff Robertson was terrific in the first ‘Spider-Man’ film, I feel that Sheen’s take on the character felt more ‘fatherly’ in tone.

BEST PORTRAYAL OF ORIGIN STORY

Winner: SPIDER-MAN (2002)


Now this isn’t because the reboot, being a reboot of course, had to basically tell the same story again. I mean, in a way, I think that the reboot’s origin story is a bit more substantial given that it adds in the storyline of Peter’s parents and their sudden departure… too bad they don’t really delve into that much. For what was probably the biggest selling point of the actual marketing, they don’t really do much with it. From what I can tell, all that they do with is flash a newspaper article stating that they died in a plane crash and not much else after that. Just like with Dr. Connors and his family, it feels like this aspect of the story ended up getting cut in post-production. But like I said earlier, despite this not being very relevant within the film itself, you could still see the impact that their absence in Peter’s life has had on him which again is why I find Garfield’s Peter to be more sympathetic. You find yourselves wanting to know what happened to them just as much as he does. Ah well, hopefully we’ll see more of that in ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’. But, because this element of the origin apparently ended up being cut, I do have to give this point to the first Raimi film, as it really did handle the origin story really well from all aspects from Peter’s talk with Uncle Ben, where he says his famous line, ‘with great power comes great responsibility’, to Peter’s eventual decision to become a vigilante in memory of Uncle Ben. Still, for what it’s worth, the reboot at least did a good job at handling those aspects of the origin as well.

Ultimate Winner: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (5-4)



I loved ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’, and because of its rather rushed origins, I wasn’t really expecting to love it so much but I did. The big reason for this was that I really liked this film’s cast of characters more and I found myself really connected to them on an emotional level. I thought Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone were far superior leads compared to Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, who for the record were both still really good, but I felt that Garfield’s Peter/Spidey was more relatable and sympathetic and Stone’s Gwen was the better female lead and not just a damsel in distress for Peter to rescue. Their chemistry was fantastic and they were both very likable in their respective roles. I also liked the supporting cast of the reboot more (even if they don’t have J.K. Simmons as Jameson) and felt that Uncle Ben’s death in the reboot was handled much better. Sure, this film will never escape the fact that it was a pretty rushed reboot. I mean, five years after the last Raimi film was just way too early to move on to a new franchise. But, in the end, I felt that ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ truly was… Amazing!