← Back to Reviews
in
In May 3, 2002, Marvel and Sony released Spider-Man to much critical acclaim, eventually spawning two sequels. I will apologize in advance, but it is impossible for me to talk about The Amazing Spider-Man without looking back to these films. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man was the first time that the superhero, created in 1962, appeared on screen in an official feature film, but most importantly, it was the first Spider-Man film I saw.
20 years later, and we've seen the release of 8 live-action Spider-Man feature films and two animated ones, all within roughly four separate series, or "universes" (Raimi, Webb, Watts/MCU, etc.) That is more films than they've made Batman or Superman films within similar spans. Why? It is almost as if Sony was in a quest to find something that they feel wasn't achieved by the Raimi series or the Webb series, and maybe even the Watts/MCU series.
Maybe that's why I pushed back a bit when this came out, not seeing it until last week. I just wasn't interested in seeing another take of the character less than 5 years after the last Raimi film. Not because of any particular allegiance I felt to that series, but just because it felt like walking down the same road again. But, being the weird completist that I am, as I am getting ready to watch Spider-Man: No Way Home, I decided to finally give this a shot and close the Spider-Man cinematic circle, so to speak.
The Amazing Spider-Man follows Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) as he tries to juggle his newfound spider-powers with his regular life as a high school teenager. This is complicated by the mysterious disappearance of his father years before, who was employed by Oscorp to develop a regenerative serum along with Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans). Caught in the crossfire of his life are his Uncle Ben and Aunt May (Martin Sheen and Sally Field) as well as his love interest, Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone).
So it was indeed like walking down that same road again. The film goes through the already known origin story of Peter being bitten by a genetically enhanced spider while "allowing" the murder of his uncle at the hands of a nameless burglar. Been there, done that. Most of the time it feels as if the journey through these familiar road was led by a guide who was in a hurry, going through a list of Spider-Man checkboxes to cover ("there he is, bitten by the spider... oh, and there he is, Uncle Ben is shot"). As a result, most of these moments feel neutered and with little room to breathe.
Where the film ends up shining is when it manages to lean into the characters of Peter and Gwen, and their interactions together. Even if at times it feels like a bit of a stretch to see them as high schoolers, Garfield and Stone have an undeniable chemistry and they are both great in their roles. Most of the cast is solid as well and they would work better, if only their characters were given the space to grow instead of using them as moving pieces for the potential sequels.
Marc Webb's direction is competent, the special effects are decent, and again, the performances of the two lead characters elevate the rehashed material above what one would expect. Even though most of what I've written feels negative, I don't regret having walked down this road, even if there wasn't a lot of new things to see. Maybe for someone who hasn't experienced the Raimi films first, the journey will feel significantly better.
Grade:
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN
(2012, Webb)
(2012, Webb)
"Ever since you were a little boy, you've been living with so many unresolved things. Well, take it from an old man. Those things send us down a road... they make us who we are."
In May 3, 2002, Marvel and Sony released Spider-Man to much critical acclaim, eventually spawning two sequels. I will apologize in advance, but it is impossible for me to talk about The Amazing Spider-Man without looking back to these films. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man was the first time that the superhero, created in 1962, appeared on screen in an official feature film, but most importantly, it was the first Spider-Man film I saw.
20 years later, and we've seen the release of 8 live-action Spider-Man feature films and two animated ones, all within roughly four separate series, or "universes" (Raimi, Webb, Watts/MCU, etc.) That is more films than they've made Batman or Superman films within similar spans. Why? It is almost as if Sony was in a quest to find something that they feel wasn't achieved by the Raimi series or the Webb series, and maybe even the Watts/MCU series.
Maybe that's why I pushed back a bit when this came out, not seeing it until last week. I just wasn't interested in seeing another take of the character less than 5 years after the last Raimi film. Not because of any particular allegiance I felt to that series, but just because it felt like walking down the same road again. But, being the weird completist that I am, as I am getting ready to watch Spider-Man: No Way Home, I decided to finally give this a shot and close the Spider-Man cinematic circle, so to speak.
The Amazing Spider-Man follows Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) as he tries to juggle his newfound spider-powers with his regular life as a high school teenager. This is complicated by the mysterious disappearance of his father years before, who was employed by Oscorp to develop a regenerative serum along with Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans). Caught in the crossfire of his life are his Uncle Ben and Aunt May (Martin Sheen and Sally Field) as well as his love interest, Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone).
So it was indeed like walking down that same road again. The film goes through the already known origin story of Peter being bitten by a genetically enhanced spider while "allowing" the murder of his uncle at the hands of a nameless burglar. Been there, done that. Most of the time it feels as if the journey through these familiar road was led by a guide who was in a hurry, going through a list of Spider-Man checkboxes to cover ("there he is, bitten by the spider... oh, and there he is, Uncle Ben is shot"). As a result, most of these moments feel neutered and with little room to breathe.
Where the film ends up shining is when it manages to lean into the characters of Peter and Gwen, and their interactions together. Even if at times it feels like a bit of a stretch to see them as high schoolers, Garfield and Stone have an undeniable chemistry and they are both great in their roles. Most of the cast is solid as well and they would work better, if only their characters were given the space to grow instead of using them as moving pieces for the potential sequels.
Marc Webb's direction is competent, the special effects are decent, and again, the performances of the two lead characters elevate the rehashed material above what one would expect. Even though most of what I've written feels negative, I don't regret having walked down this road, even if there wasn't a lot of new things to see. Maybe for someone who hasn't experienced the Raimi films first, the journey will feel significantly better.
Grade: