The short version was that I had a great time at the film. Then again, it’s hard NOT to at a Marvel screening. More detailed, spoiler free comments following:

Is it better than “The Avengers?” No. “The Avengers” remains, to me, the new gold standard of Marvel superhero films. Literally years in the making, it’s pretty much unfair to make comparisons.

Is it better than the first “Spider-Man” film? If you’re looking for fealty to the source material, then no. The story, along with Marc Webb’s direction (was any director more aptly named for a project?) provides us a darker, more emotional story…so emotional, in fact, that Uncle Ben’s death almost come across like an afterthought. The main emotional story involves Peter Parker’s feelings of abandonment by his parents. That’s pretty potent stuff: so much so that everything else takes a back seat to it. Peter’s core lesson of “With great power comes great responsibility?” Never spoken, although Ben Parker talks around it. Peter’s wrestling career driven by a need for money? Gone. Peter’s realization that his negligence allowed Ben’s killer to escape? Instantaneous rather than delayed. It’s almost as if the filmmakers are saying, “We know all this; let’s move along.” Even so there’s still a sizable delay until Spidey shows up in his modified (from the original) costume, complete with what look like racing stripes.

On the other hand, what fans feared would be a simple regurgitation of previous stories turns out to be a wholly original endeavor (if you ignore the Spidey annual years ago that actually did explore the fate of the Parkers). In a way, it’s more outer-directed than the previous film. “Spider-Man” was Peter Parker’s exploration of himself: his lessons, the sides he wanted to take, the sacrifices he had to make. “Amazing Spider-Man” is more outward: Peter trying to make sense of the world he’s living in; a world where his parents abandoned him, leaving him in the care of Gidget and Josiah Bartlett.

A mid-closing credits sequence is absolutely essential viewing, because otherwise you’re left sitting there at the end going, “But wait…what about…?” At least the filmmakers acknowledge that issues remain unresolved, presumably to be further explored in subsequent films.

And the Lizard looks kinda silly. Not Gorn-level silly, but silly. But what’cha gonna do? He’s a humanoid lizard. There’s one brief scene where, like the comic book, he’s wearing a lab coat. I can see the story rationale for him ridding himself of it; he’s trying to leave humanity behind. But he looked cool in the coat; made him unique.

The film also suffers from the same thing the first three did: perpetual maskectomy. The need to see how many times Spider-Man can lose his mask, presumably so we can see the actor’s face for the truly emotional bits. Say what you will about “V for Vendetta”–at least they didn’t feel the need to unmask him every twenty minutes so we could see Hugo Weaving emote.

But all of this pales in comparison to the quality of the acting. From top to bottom, the actors take the film squarely on their shoulders and singlehandedly, under Webb’s direction, make the film worth your while.

First there’s Andrew Garfield, with an impeccable American accent and David Tennant hair (especially when he takes the mask off–it all stands straight up.) And just as Tennant’s lifelong love of the Doctor shone through in his portrayal of the time lord, so too does Garfield’s love of Spider-Man shine through on every frame. This is a guy who’s living the dream and it makes his performance literally irresistible.

Then there’s Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, dressed as if she just stepped out of the 1970s with knee high boots and mid-thigh skirts. The Peter/Gwen relation is underwritten, but the chemistry of the two actors carries it to such a degree that you can readily believe the actors have hooked up in real life. Sally Field and Martin Sheen bring a new vitality to Aunt May and Uncle Ben, who in previous incarnations going all the way back to “Amazing Fantasy #15” always seemed like they had one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel.

And then there’s Dennis Leary’s Captain Stacy. This is not the older, avuncular version of George Stacy from the original series, nor even the younger one from “Ultimate.” It becomes quickly apparent why the movie doesn’t require J. Jonah Jameson; Stacy fills the role of authority figure who despises Spider-Man and his vigilante tactics. And what’s interesting is that, whereas with JJJ you just figure it stems from jealousy or a desire to sell newspapers or both, Leary actually manages to sell the audience on his POV. You get where he’s coming from. He has no patience with what he sees as some asshole taking the law into his own hands, and really, after the Martin/Zimmerman case, who can blame him?

And they’re aided and abetted by great special effects. They’ve traveled lightyears since Spidey hit the big screen ten years ago. Not only is the web swinging seamless (long time fans will welcome back the mechanical web shooters. Me, I never had a problem with the organic web spinners, but then again, having done it a decade earlier in Spider-Man 2099…) The filmmakers seem to take pride in seeing just how much they can twist Spidey into a spidery pretzel as he soars through the air.

Do you need to see it in 3D? Well, it’s not a movie that I’d describe as a MUST see in 3D, like “Hugo.” On the other hand, there are plenty of sequences where you’ll find yourself saying, “Man, I wish I was seeing this in 3D,” so I figure you might as well.

Ultimately, (no pun intended), despite the script shortcomings, “Amazing Spider-Man” proves an irresistible endeavor, exploring emotional depths in a fresh, original manner, buoyed by terrific performances and versatile direction. A must-see for Spidey fans.

PAD

Share this: Tweet





Like this: Like Loading...