REVIEW - THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

I enjoyed Sam Raimi’s take on Spider-Man. Was it perfect? No. Did it seem to mostly understand what makes Peter Parker so interesting as a character, and bring that to the forefront? Yeah. Did the third film stumble? You bet your bippy. How does Mark Webb’s version hold up to what Raimi was able to accomplish? Fairly well.

Let me put it this way: it’s not as good as Spider-Man 1 or 2, but it’s better than 3.

The absolute best thing this reboot of the series has going for it is the actors. Andrew Garfield gets Peter Parker.  He really does. Maybe he’s not as much of a button-shirted, glasses-wearing nerd as Peter is traditionally presented, but the awkward outsider basics are there for the most part. Sally Field is a very good Aunt May and Martin Sheen serves his purpose in the role of Uncle Ben. To top it off, Emma Stone is infinitely more likable as Gwen Stacy than Kirsten Dunst ever was in the role of Mary Jane. It’s not even really a comparison.

Peter and Gwen have a great chemistry.

I’ll admit it. I fell for some of the more high school, cutesy, teenage love moments (and there are quite a few of them).  Heck, one of in particular had me grinning from ear to ear.

Don’t worry, the theater was dark - no one saw.

Where the movie doesn’t succeed is the story. For the most part it’s a mess. First off, I can’t say that I feel like I needed to see Uncle Ben’s death again – even a slightly tweaked version of it. There’s no reason to rehash Spidey’s origin story. There really isn’t. Especially if nothing new is really being added. Everyone is aware of where Spider-Man came from at this point. The whole bitten by a radioactive spider thing is firmly entrenched into the lexicon. He can be like James Bond. He can just have adventures, and he can just fight new bad guys. He doesn’t need to jump off a building and fire his webbing for the first time again.

Speaking of that, the obvious direction the sequel is heading in means that we’re going to get more Norman Osborn. I’m not particularly nuts about the idea of seeing Norman Osborn again. I like Norman Osborn, don’t get me wrong, but Spider-Man has one of the most extensive rogues galleries in the world of comics. Do something different. There’s a lot to work with. He isn’t Captain America. There are more than two guys for him to go up against.

I didn’t need more Uncle Ben and I don’t need more Green Goblin. Plain and simple.

Aside from that the plot in the Amazing Spider-Man moves a little too briskly. I appreciate that the idea of Peter being a scientist is brought back to the fold. Homemade web shooters? That’s awesome. Unfortunately his scenes with Dr. Connors – especially in the lab – feel way too silly.

Plus the character of Dr. Connors is all over the place. Rhys Ifans is decent in the role, but the film doesn’t flesh him out enough and because of that the little twist at the end never feels justified in my opinion.

Some of the action is fun though. There’s no denying that. Spidey’s little quips are right on the money and the movie looks pretty great.

 Spidey manages to work himself into quite a few of the classic panel poses while swinging over the city and the fights aren’t edited so awkwardly that you never know what’s going on. This isn’t a Transformers movie. Also the POV stuff while Spidey’s swinging over the city works a hell of a lot better than I expected it to.

All in all The Amazing Spider-Man is a mostly fun popcorn flick and not much more. While it treads into completely silly territory a lot more than I would have liked it to, I left theater feeling satisfied.

I guess.

For the most part.

Except for Peter’s Kevin Bacon-esque, Footloose inspired skateboard dance-off.

That didn’t satisfy me at all.

-STEVEN