The Amazing Spider-Man [2012] ★★★

Early reviews have been inordinately pissy for the new Spider-Man movie. And there’s no arguing that the movie is too long at 136 mintues, and feels a lot like a replica (the last Spiderman was only 5 years ago and the series didn’t need a reboot so early). Know what? Audiences won’t give a damn. In an era of cynical, cash-in sequels, “The Amazing Spider-Man” has a heartbeat that resonates just as strongly as its box-office ka-ching. Director Mark Webb (Web, Get it?) and his film making team keep their focus on the human side of this Marvel Comic hero: that means screwed-up crybaby geekboy Peter Parker (Nicely played by Andrew Garfield) over the superhero he becomes after a spider incident one day. Even when the movie is just running in place, you can still feel its pulse. Take that doubters. In retelling the origin story of Spider-Man so soon after Sam Raimi’s version hit theatres only 10 years ago, it is almost impossible not to compare both movies. No worries. Andrew Garfield “(The Social Network”, “Never Let Me Go”) is a first rate casting choice. He has a genuine, almost effortless charm and his attitude seem very reminiscient of the Peter Parker of the comics. At some point, I even felt his interpretation of the role rang more true than Maguire’s. Whether in costume, or simply sorting out his issues at school and with his well meaning aunt and uncle (played by two greats: Sally Fields and Martin Sheen), Garfield is in terrific form. But Parker is going to need a woman companion. That would be Emma Stone, terrific in “The Help”, and who does a pretty good job here as Gwen Stacy (and not Mary Jane as some might think). Looking for a villain? try Rhys Ifans, who portrays Dr. Curt Connors, the tragic scientist who hopes for a better society, but eventually turns into a raving mad supervillain halfway through (the dude’s no match for Alfred Molina’s “Doc Oc” though). Spidey’s battle with that beast is one of the highlights of the movie, and it looks pretty damn dazzling in 3D. If this isn’t enough to satisfy fans of the comics, I don’t know what will. My only problem with it is its fake marketing campaign. The movie has been marketed several times as “the untold story of Spiderman”. I beg to differ. The story is almost similar to Raimi’s version and the issue of Peter’s parents is never fully explored here, making it even more mysterious than it was before. But in spite of it all, the “new” Spider-Man defies all odds and delivers a rollercoaster ride from start to finish. I didn’t think I could care for yet another Spider-man movie, but I did. Sure the attack dogs will be out in force. They see the film’s budget (an estimated $215,000,000) and the huge box office take after only one day as evidence that the film makers are in it for the money. Screw them. My guess is that when the summer blockbuster season is over,  “The Amazing Spider-man” is going to look like one of the few that are touched by human hands. Just sit back and behold.

Rating: 3/4

14 replies »

  1. I still consider “Spider man 2” to be the finest among them all. This was quite enjoyable, and i liked how it gave a more logical explanation about why this whole thing started,Garfield was really good..and i was impressed by Webb’s direction. I think Raimi’s vision was more creative though, and this one was indeed more human..however, i think the Spidey\Villain battle felt so quick and with no obstacles, i expected more dazzling shots and more complications..at the end, i enjoyed this a lot, but felt that the reboot added nothing to the franchise,.Batman’s reboot was completely different and never seen b4 for example 😛 anyway, this was a very good review! 3\4 it is. 😀 (jeez is this a comment?)

    • haha no I totally agree with you! It was an unnecessary reboot but it worked, shockingly. I liked The Lizard, and the overall mood of the movie. It doesn’t add anything to the franchise like you said, but it’s still pretty entertaining!

  2. As a movie it was pretty good yes! at least it didn’t “ruin” it and that’s the thing that matters.

  3. This is better because it stuck to the comics. Sure as a Web Head, it was pretty much eXpected how it all fell to play but it gave me hope that the upcoming one will be brilliant. What made me really happy was that he had the web shooting machines and wasn’t some mutant like the old ones. As long as it stuck to the comics, its all good. Nice review.

    • Definitely. It stayed true to the comics, and that’s what I liked about it. I think doubters should give a try. It’s not a great superhero movie, but it’s a solid one. I couldn’t ask for more.

  4. Personally, I thought it was ace.

    Andrew Garfield makes for a much more believable\likable Spiderman. Marc Webb’s direction and visual style is more inventive and entertaining to watch than Raimi’s, the supporting cast is stronger compared to Spiderman 2’s (Emma Stone > Kirsten Dunst, and I’d pick Rhys Ifans’ complex The Lizard any day over Alfred Molina’s horrible Doc Ock), the story and motivations behind Parker’s decisions make more sense, the cheesiness has been toned down, and most important of all:
    There is little to no useless, half-baked, facepalm-worthy, illogical silly teenage drama concerning Parker’s secret identity and Spidey’s relationship with New York. This, especially I think, was handled very well.

    But that’s just my opinion 😛

    • Let’s just say that I agree with 90 % of what you said :p I think doubters are in for a treat here. I had no expectations whatsoever, and I enjoyed it a lot. I think Garfield is here to stay!

  5. I watched it yesterday and I found it way better than the previous ones. The story might be similar yeah but I felt like watching a whole new thing..
    I hate Tobey Maguire and his single faced performance and Garfield surely surpassed him in my opinion. I actually loved the fact that the battle scenes were quick and that his identity was revealed to Gwen and her father without having to see a lot of useless drama… The whole movie is somehow more realistic.
    There is another part coming right? That’s what I concluded after watching the last scene where Dr. Connors enters his prison cell – which was on our way out by the way since we thought the movie has ended.
    From where I see it, they took the risk but nailed it… 3/4 from me as well 🙂

    • I forgot to add in my review that there is an after credit scene. Im glad you got to see it though. Yes from what we learned so far, there will be a sequel. The movie is already a huge success in the states. I can’t wait!

  6. Spiderman does shit on his own. Never killed a villain himself. 4 movies and I have never seen him do anything. 1st movie : Goblin killed himself by accident. 2nd movie : The freaky professor sacrificed himself to stop the destruction tool he created. 3rd movie : Harry kills himself to save Spiderman. 4th : Gwen’s father kills himself helping Spiderman who was losing. Never considered him a Superhero. Just a fag who gets himself into serious problems and people rush to help him.

  7. To be honest I haven’t seen this one yet. I’ve always thought that the spider man movies would end in a final 4th installment, predicting aunt May will die, and Peter & MJ will get married. Then this came out and i felt it was a slap in the face. You know, when a movie you’re used to makes so much changes, and you think “well, this new s**t will no doubt fail, i definitely aint watchin” After seeing, this review, im convinced i was wrong about this movie.and im gonna get the iTunes version as soon as possible. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s