The Amazing Spider-man [Review]

And here we come with the re-boot of the Spider-man films first committed to celluloid, after numerous television shows, in 2002. Re-starting the story of Peter Parker who, as most people know, gets bitten by a radioactive spider and develops superpowers whilst also having to deal with the emotional consequences of the death of his guardian Uncle Ben, whose death was the result of a chain of events that Peter himself helped on their way.

This take on the story adds a few different elements to the 2002 original tale, focussing more on the mystery of Peter’s parents; swapping the Green Goblin for the lizard, Dr Curt Connors transforming himself as a side-effect of trying to re-grow his missing arm; and reinstating some elements of the comics that the first film was less truthful too, such as establishing Gwen Stacy as his first love and having his web generators manufactured rather than biological.

‘The Amazing Spider-man’ is an enjoyable film. Though not much is gained from watching it in 3D aside from a few key moments, one of which is in the trailer, (much of the 3D is just for added depth and there is a missed opportunity in a piece of webbing fired at the screen which stops before it makes true impact into the third dimension), it is a well shot film and mixes light and shade well.

It’s inevitable that comparisons are going to be made with the 2002 version and it’s proving difficult for me to mention sections without referencing back, but I’ll come to that shortly. Andrew Garfield plays a fun Peter Parker who is more of a loner and more autistic in his performance than Maguire but gets across the geeky nature well, and comes across as much more intelligent than his predecessor. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy plays his love interest well but lacks the overt sexiness of Kirsten Dunst but plays the awkward, geeky teen much better away from Mary-Jane’s popularity. Though the chemistry between them at first doesn’t particularly work, by the end of the film, via the well-constructed roof-top first kiss, you feel for them as a couple and though the last scene shared between them isn’t as heart-wrenching as the graveyard scene in the original the emotion is there and it’s hard not to feel upset at the situation and it does tug at the old heart strings.

Graphically the film excels. Reports of the CGI of the lizard being sub-par are misrepresentative with the monster looking realistic even when lip-synched to Rhys Ifans’ voice. OK, it does look like a cousin of the Goombas from the ill-received Mario Bros movie, but it’s actually well created and the physical make-up on the human Dr Connors blends in well. The CGI throughout the film is well made and nothing looks fake or composited in and it’s difficult to tell where the real-world effects and computer trickery meet, so that is a definite credit to the film-makers.

One area that the film does let itself down is in the scoring. Lacking the atmospheric and drama-building score that Danny Elfman brought to the 2002 film, in particular the opening and closing themes, there was nothing that really stood out. The short to-the-point opening credits mimicked the originals but were a mere fraction of the running time and this felt like a missed opportunity.

The storyline of the film, though, was one element that worked for the film. The mystery of Parker’s parents, unresolved in the film and leading onto the inevitable secret, added a new element to the story which helped shift the balance from the mostly unavoidable feel of ticking the boxes that the film had to do to set up the story, knowing a lot of people are familiar with the origin thanks to the film in people’s memories – goes to live with his aunt and uncle. Check. Gets bitten by spider. Check. Uncle Ben dies. Check – but it does at least vary the circumstances in some areas to make it refreshingly different. However, it does try to balance between shortening the origin compared to the 2002 film but avoiding the quick recap that worked so effectively in the second Hulk film, though I’m not entirely sure it worked.

One area the film does improve on is the humour. An early scene set on a subway train, a discussion about meat loaf and Stan Lee’s cameo are three very funny scenes and laughs are scattered throughout the film to counteract the darker tones of this movie, but not on the level of ‘The Dark Knight’ for instance. There are a few misfires including a daft scene with a fly but for every one of those there is one like the turning off of an alarm and the recurring joke of Peter underestimating his own strength.

I think if this was the first celluloid appearance of Spider-man it would be an excellent film. The origin story is told well and leaves enough threads dangling for the sequel. Garfield and Stone bring their characters to life and their awkward teenage romance works well, even if Gwen Stacy does seem to come across as not the sort of person who would be short of romantic history. Garfield’s Parker comes across as intelligent but also a little autistic in his performance, which I’m not sure captures the comic character fully, but there are plenty of wisecracks and he embodies the character well and there are some well-scripted and well-acted moments that will make you smile and laugh. Graphically the film stands up with its CGI and atmospheric shots but the soundtrack is not worthy of the amazing in the film title. The first third of the film could certainly have done with some more pepping up but overall an enjoyable film.

However, and this is where I’m sure people will disagree, it’s not as good in my opinion as the first film. I feel Tobey Maguire portrayed Peter Parker better and the death of Uncle Ben and its repercussions through the characters was handled with much more emotion and impact in the 2002 film. The Green Goblin was a more threatening and interesting villain and the relationship between Peter and Mary-Jane was much slower and more building over the first two films of the original trilogy than the speeded up, rushed relationship we get in this film. With some greater set pieces and having the benefit of being fresh to the eyes of the cinema viewing public, the earlier take on the story trumps this one. Also, though the originals were hardly innocent when it came to Parker removing his mask, in this film Andrew Garfield might as well have posted ‘I am Spider-man’ on his Facebook post as he reveals his true identity to Gwen Stacey on their first date and then to her father not long after, removing his mask more in this film than the character did in the whole of the original trilogy.

Though not handling the emotive storylines and the relationship between the characters as well as the first take ten years ago, there is much to enjoy in the film and I would say, overall, it’s been a successful reboot. Hampered as they are with trying to re-tell the story viewers will have seen only a decade earlier they managed to do a few different things with it, injecting some great humour into Parker’s transformation into spider-man and hitting the right level of awkward with his relationship with Gwen Stacy. Throw in a decent villain for a first film, who in the spirit of the originals turned out not to be a complete baddie as first thought, and some effective CGI and it’s a great summer film, just not as great as the first attempt in 2002. It had a hard act to follow and though not quite reaching the level is not a let-down it’s not quite ‘The Amazing Spider-man’ but far from the average one other reviewers are suggesting.

It does though leave several plot threads dangling such as the mystery of what happened to Peter’s parents and the revenge of Uncle Ben’s murderer, and the identity of the mysterious visitor to Dr Connors’ cell. Though I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Norman Osborn’s face was obscured in an early photograph appearance in the film…

(7/10)