The Amazing Spider-Man Review (Spoilers)

[mattzimmer]

Also reviews for the latest episodes of Arrow, The Looney Tunes Show, MAD, Once Upon A Time, Revolution, Fringe, Grimm, The Simpsons, Bob's Burgers, Family Guy, American Dad, The Cleveland Show, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Haven, The Office, Parks And Recreation, 30 Rock, American Horror Story: Asylum, and 666 Park Avenue

Comments

[90scartoonman]

The Amazing Spider-Man - Waited for this to come out on DVD too, and I don't regret it. Here's the weird thing, I like taking things on their own rather than compare them to other things, but in this case, comparing it to Raimi's first film actually makes me go EASIER on this film and the unnecessary changes it made to the Spider-Man story (if this came out first, I'd be PISSED there was no Jameson, but I understand them not wanting to use him because of how awesome Simmons was). I still like Spider-Man and Spider-Man II much better than Amazing Spider-Man, though. I found this movie hard to get into, and while the cast is strong, I actually had a similar problem that you had with Spectacular Spider-Man, in that I felt this Peter Parker was too selfish and even when he was standing up to Flash, it's not as though he himself were directly bullied. And Spider-Man was almost a non-entity, whereas in the Raimi film, he was a clear presence among New York everyone was talking about. Maybe it just took too long for him to get his powers, but I saw more Peter Parker here and now a lot of Spider-Man, and that was a problem to me. The origin was rushed, and I can see what you're saying about Uncle Ben's death, I like the delayed response in the classic origin/Raimi film. He lets a guy go, his uncle dies, he goes after the guy, and THEN it hits him that he could've prevented the whole thing when he finds out it's the same guy. All his rage turns into guilt, which hammers home the idea that he NEEDS to be responsible and be a hero. In Amazing Spider-Man, I didn't feel his real need to be a hero until he saves the kid on the bridge.

I like secret identities, and while I'm not against revealing his to Gwen (the Ultimate Spider-Man comics did the same thing with Mary Jane), I didn't find him trying to hide his dual life in this movie that compelling because there weren't enough people to hide it from.

I'm glad they transformed Flash into a good guy since that happened in the comics. The man fought in Vietnam and was best man at Peter's wedding.

Stan Lee's cameo cracked me up, it's in my top three.

Peter deciding to break his promise to George happened too quick for me, it would make sense for it to be in the beginning of the next film. Here's the problem, though, how WILL the deaths be spaced out in this trilogy? I thought George's was too soon as well, but if they plan on killing Gwen, there's a problem. If George is killed in the second and Gwen is killed in the second as well, same beats, too much tragedy for one family. If George is killed in the second and Gwen is killed in the third, it's an INCREDIBLY depressing trilogy with Ben, George, and Gwen dying in each movie. So what do you do?

They denied the guy at the end being Osborn, but they did say he has a connection to Oscorp. As much as I didn't like this movie, it does have the potential to make for a good trilogy because of the questions it doesn't answer (what happened to Peter's parents, the guy who shot Ben, the Osborn issue, etc), whereas Spider-Man 3 was horrible because it resolved some plotlines while undoing some good characterization.

The camera thing was dumb and convenient, too. At least Osborn finding out his identity used the cut thing to give it away, and they played the suspense of "Does he know?" longer.

[mattzimmer]

Simmons was the best portrayal of Jameson of all time. He is the only version of Jameson I actually like. The character is usually destestable. And yes, there was more than a little Spectacular Spider-Man selfishness to Peter here. You make excellent points about when and where that happened in the film.

I don't think the dual identity thing was even on the film's radar. It was an interesting choice but I don't think they botched it because they never even really attempted it.

Flash was one of the best things about the movie. I did NOT know he was the best man at Peter's wedding. THAT is awesome.

I don't even understand WHY they have to kill Gwen. They took LOTS of liberties with her in this film. Why should they even HAVE to kill her off?

Spider-Man 3 wasn't horrible. It wasn't as good as the first two movies but it wasn't terrible, just so-so.

Agreed about the camera.

[90scartoonman]

Another thing about the changed origin I didn't like was there was no abuse of power. In Raimi's film, when Peter gets his powers, the first thing he does is try to cash in on it, and that SAME night, he does the irresponsible thing and doesn't use his powers to stop the guy who eventually killed his uncle. In TASM, the spider powers weren't a factor, and Peter doesn't really seem affected by the spider bite one way or another until Ben's death.

That's the problem with the dual identity thing, yeah, they didn't attempt it, but that just makes it feel all the weirder. It's a more Peter Parker-focused story, but it's still a story about a guy getting super powers and dressing up as a spider! Downplaying that isn't the best course of action, I'd say.

Yeah, Flash actually ended up being a decent man when he actually grew up (and being a fan of Spider-Man probably helped).

They don't have to kill Gwen, you're right, but I can see why they'd want to. Mary Jane will be in the next film, and they can really put Peter through an emotional wringer by offing Gwen.

I really didn't like Spider-Man 3 for many reasons, and the "third movie curse" usually happens because it's a different director, but in this case, Raimi has no excuse! Actually, I guess he has the excuse of having Venom forced on him, but there were WAY too many plot conveniences in the movie. The Venom symbiote comes out of nowhere, Venom and Sandman just happen to run into each other and team up, and Harry's amnesia/having his butler all of a sudden reveal the truth is lazy writing. The drama between Peter and Mary Jane felt forced, too. Peter was all ready to propose to her, but he was too into himself to even listen to her problems, which I hated.

[mattzimmer]

I also hated how Uncle Ben never outright said "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility". What were they thinking when they left that out?

I just don't see WHY Gwen has to die. The films and cartoons take liberties with comics all the time. Why not about this?

Excellent summary of Spider-Man 3's problems but I STILL liked it better than this film.

[90scartoonman]

Yeah, I mean, did they think the power and responsibility thing was too corny or something?

Gwen doesn't HAVE to die, but that is one of the things she's best known for, it makes for good drama/angst, and if it weren't for The Dark Knight pulling a similar stunt, it would shock the HECK out of audiences.

[mattzimmer]

Great Power and Great Responsibility is one of the few NON-corny things about Stan Lee's Spider-Man. It's iconic.

That's the sort of thing that would be expected though and spoiled well in advance. I don't think modern audiences would be surprised by it at all. Rachel Dawes was a new character so her death could happen without being expected.

[90scartoonman]

Iconic in the comic books, sure, but when an uncle is telling his teenage nephew not to be a screw up, it is corny to hear him say (doesn't mean they should've excluded it, though). I'm not sure who was the first person to have Uncle Ben say it, it may've been Stan Lee later, but in the original issue, it was said in the captions, not by any character.

Why don't you think modern audiences would be surprised if Gwen dies? I feel it would still be more surprising than Rachel because she wasn't Bruce's girlfriend at the time and the fact that it was a different actress hurt it a bit. With Gwen, I don't think that many non-geeks would even know about her death, unless they looked it up (or read some of the stuff Emma Stone has been saying about it). If they only know Gwen from Spider-Man 3 and the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon, they'd never see her death coming.

[mattzimmer]

You're assuming that modern audiences aren't savvy enough to know Spider-Man's history. Frankly, the day of the non-geek audience member is long gone. They could have gotten away with it twenty years ago, but now? EVERYONE who sees comic book movies is a geek on some level and has heard about stuff like this.

[90scartoonman]

Hm, you're right, audiences are a lot more connected now, but I still don't think that's everyone. TONS of people went and saw Avengers, but how many of them know Hawkeye normally wears a purple get-up with a mask? Or, if we're talking between movies, I'm sure a bunch of people went home between the first Iron Man and the second Iron Man and already knew James Rhodes was going to become War Machine, but not necessarily the entire audience.

I was also thinking about the teen and child crowd. Those whose first exposure to Gwen was Spider-Man 3 or Spectacular Spider-Man. Even if they do find out about her death, they probably don't see Gwen as "the girl who dies". She's still alive in the Ultimate Spider-Man comics and has been since it started over ten years ago. In fact, Gwen Stacy is more alive now than she's ever been.

[mattzimmer]

I'm betting most people knew about Hawkeye's original costume. He's been in TV cartoons before and EMH debuted before the movie did. Same deal with Rhodey as War Machine due to the various Iron Man cartoons. And people who DIDN'T see those cartoons probably found out all about the history beforehand on the internet and the like to catch up before they saw the movie.

If Gwen is no longer known as "the girl who dies" what is the point of killing her off in the movie in the first place?

[90scartoonman]

"Most people" is a broad statement. It's certainly a larger percentage of the audience now than, say, the people who were first being exposed to Batman during the Batman/Batman Returns/BTAS era because the info wasn't as readily available then, but I still don't think the majority of superhero movie audiences do a ton of research. It'd be interesting to see just how much the average superhero movie goer knows.

The point of killing off Gwen is to make this trilogy more darker and angstier than the Raimi trilogy, and more in line with Nolan's Batman. It'll be at least a little different, though, since we'll get Mary Jane in the next Spider-Man movie.

[mattzimmer]

Killing off Gwen will not put the trilogy in the same league as Spider-Man 3's ridiculous angst. It could, like that movie's emo cr*p, actually hurt it.

[90scartoonman]

Spider-Man 3 was too narmy, I don't even consider it angst...more like emo crap, like you said. Hm, maybe "angst" is the wrong word, and I don't want to say gritty. Nolan's Batman movies were...dressed down...with a tone of melancholy.

[mattzimmer]

Now THAT'S a way to turn a phrase!

[90scartoonman]

It's hard to be specific, but I like to be. When people say something "sucks", it's not very constructive or specific. Heck, I don't even think the "cheese" and "camp" are the problems with Batman and Robin.

[mattzimmer]

I like the word "sucks" because it's such a hard sounding word. There is a reason the F word feels so good for some people to say and that's because it sounds so harsh. Well, sucks works for the same reason as it literally rhymes with the F word but you can say it on television (even kids cartoons).