Based upon the comic book series created by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
Story by James Vanderbilt
Screenplay Written by James Vanderbilt and Alvin Sargent and Steve Kloves
Directed by Marc Webb
***1/2 (three and a half stars)
I have to say that when it comes to going to the movies, I love surprises and I really love being proven wrong in the most positive fashion.
What I am referring to at this time is the release of "The Amazing Spider-Man," from Director Marc Webb, only his second feature film after his strong debut feature "(500) Days Of Summer" (2009), and furthermore, just a mere five years after the release of Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 3" (2007). When this particular re-boot was originally announced, I was more than a little skeptical as I felt that Hollywood was simply chasing the dollar, feverishly bent upon making a new Spider-Man movie whether the world needed one or not. When I learned that not only were the Hollywood powers-that-be feverishly bent upon making a new film, but that they were truly going to hit a re-set button, taking Peter Parker all the way back to high school, giving us the classic origin story all over again, my heart sank quicker than if Spider-Man himself ran out of his trusty web shooting fluid and plummeted to the Earth.
Dear readers, I am certainly not against the idea of a new Spider-Man movie. Not at all. Look at the cinematic world of Batman. After Director Joel Schumacher stupendously destroyed the series with his truly, truly awful "Batman and Robin" (1997), a film so horrendously misguided that I even witnessed a kid wearing a Batman T-shirt walk out of the still projecting film on opening day (!), just under ten years later, we were all graced with Director Christopher Nolan's revolutionary re-telling of the Caped Crusader. With Spider-Man, and under the directorial hand of Sam Raimi, we could see first hand just how difficult creating a Spider-Man movie actually was regardless of the terrific, creative, inventive talent at the helm. Raimi had three tries at bat and for my tastes, he only struck a home run with the masterful "Spider-Man 2" (2004). For me, Raimi came up considerably short with his other two installments as the first film from 2002 was about half of a good movie before it became bogged down in the same summer movie pyrotechnics that have bombarded audiences for years and years and the third film was just an overstuffed, bloated mess. Even though making a new Spider-Man movie was inevitable, the rapidly fast track to which it was taken all seemed to be so stupid, so unimaginative, so unnecessary and frankly, so greedy that I could feel myself already beginning to hate a film that had not even been filmed yet. Was there really such a crime to waiting a while longer?
Well, the new film is here and I am so happy to announce that it is a very, very good film with the potential to become a terrific series in its own right. Yet, while it does not quite reach the pinnacle set by Raimi's "Spider-Man 2," I do think that Webb has Raimi beat by figuring out how to make an effective, entertaining and emotional Spider-Man experience on his first try at bat. Unlike the lush comic book style of Raimi's series, Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man" conjures up a darker, grittier, more character driven film, and one more apt to spending time in quiet rather than colorful, explosive cataclysm. I entered this film feeling resistant and I exited looking forward to a future installment. Mr. Webb, job well done!
"The Amazing Spider-Man" stars Andrew Garfield as the shy, introverted, gawky and orphaned Peter Parker, who lives with his loving Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Field) and spends his friendless days at Midtown Science High School where he is endlessly bullied by Flash Thompson (Chris Zylka) and is deeply in love with the gorgeous Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). From here, Webb hits all of the Spider-Man touchstones of his origin story. Peter Parker, visiting a Science Laboratory (in this case the mysterious OsCorp facility), is bitten by a radioactive spider, thus merging both DNA strands to give Peter superhuman, arachnid fueled powers.
Peter's metamorphosis, combined with his adolescent growing pains and continued questions over the unexplained deaths of his parents, gives way to hubris and leads to the tragic death of Uncle Ben by the hands of a criminal Parker could have stopped. Discovering a newfound sense of purpose, Parker becomes a masked, wall crawling, web-slinging vigilante, enrapturing the pubic and enraging the police, most notably Captain George Stacy (Denis Leary)--Gwen's Father!
But then, there are those aforementioned questions about Peter Parker's parents, whom he has not seen since their abrupt departure when Peter was just four years old. Perhaps the answers lie within OsCorp, and most specifically, the one-armed Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), once a close colleague of Peter's father and one who will soon succumb to his own sense of hubris as he transforms into The Lizard.
As I watched Marc Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man," and felt so surprised as to how successfully I had been drawn into this experience, I found my thoughts making a comparison to Director David Fincher's American adaptation of Stieg Larsson's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, which arrived so soon after the release of the Swedish film trilogy. As you all know so very well, I was extremely skeptical of that film as I fel tthree excellent films already existed and I just could not think what an American version could add or know hwo different it could possibly be. What Fincher did so successfully was to not only imprint his own artistic stamp upon the proceedings, he very wisely did not set up his film to compete with the original films. His version was not designed to erase the originals but to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. I feel that Webb has accomplshed the same feat with his version of Spider-Man. He is not interested in trying to make you forget abut Sam Raimi's trilogy at all. He wants to tell the same story in a different way and for my money, his version resonated with me much more strongly than most of Raimi's output.
In addition to the special effects, which felt to be much more seamless than in Raimi's trilogy, from a visual standpoint, "The Amazing Spider-Man" possesses a darker, more "real world" look than Raimi's films, which always contained the glow of comic book panels leaping to vibrant life. In it's own way, "The Amazing Spider-Man" sort of approximates Nolan's "Batman" series by its visual attempts to place these larger than life heroes into a more grounded, realistic context. And I think that this is where Webb's experience with independent film has served this big budget re-boot extremely well. Unlike Raimi, who often allowed the special effects and extraneous details to overtake the human element of Spider-Man, I was so pleased that Webb kept his focus upon the characters, their interior lives and motivations from beginning to end. Webb certainly takes his time with his re-telling of Spider-Man and I believe it is nearly an hour into this two hour and fifteen minute film before we see Peter Parker in his full Spider-Man regalia. While this may cause a certain amount of seat shifting for those who just want to get into the action, I found myself feeling emotions I did not feel much at all during Raimi's first and third installments. All of the sound and fury of special effects and actions sequences mean nothing without fully developed characters and with "The Amazing Spider-Man," Webb worked tremendously well that the characters were given time to take root and grow before any razzle dazzle occurred. And a great amount of his success rested in the excellent casting choices, which also grounded the iconic figures into a certail relatable reality.
For instance, I loved Martin Sheen and Sally Field's rapport as they convinced me of their romance and history. Sheen's specialized brand of gravitas served the scenes between his Uncle Ben and Peter Parker extremely well. Ifans also did terrific work by making Curt Connors exist as a real human being with foibles, aconflicted nature and deep regrets as well as ferocious intelligence. He truly elevates what could have been yet another standard movie villain into something much more.
But, the shining star of this film is indeed Andrew Garfield. Like Webb, Garfield is not interested in trying to make audiences forget about Tobey Maguire, who was so perfectly cast in Raimi's trilogy. But, he obviously realized that he had something to prove. Remarkably, Garfield carved out his own niche with this character and superbly made this role his very own through his almost ballet-like physicality, his sharp sense of humor, and strong sense of pathos. Like Maguire, Andrew Garfield has found the soul of Peter Parker, most especially when exploring Peter's metamorphosis, which unleashes a certain dark side to hs personality, a topic handled so terribly in Raimi's "Spider-Man 3." Through Garfield, we can see Peter Parker's thirst for revenge against his tormentors and a sense of hubris that threatens to spin out of control. It is through that struggle to maintain inner balance that "The Amazing Spider-Man" functions much less as a superhero movie and as more of a coming-of-age film, where the growth and development of Peter Parker is in a constant state of evolution.
So, what we have now are two great performances of the same character that, in a way, complement each other rather than compete with each other. Returning to "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" for a moment, Garfield's performance was so strong, so thorough, so complete that his success reminded me of Rooney Mara's blistering performance as the inimitable Lisbeth Salander in the American version. Mara could not possibly erase what Noomi Rapace achieved with her untouchable performances in the Swedish trilogy but they stand confidently next to each other.
Now, this is not to say that "The Amazing Spider-Man" is without flaws. A fairly minor quibble, but a quibble nonetheless is the fact that Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone look MUCH TOO OLD to be portraying high school students, a fact made blindingly obvious when they are seen among their "classmates." For a film that is brave enough to play with the legend of Peter Parker by focusing the story and building narrative around the fate of his parents (a plot point I never grew up with when I read the comics as a child), why not at least move the school setting to college? I think that would have been a tad more convincing overall and maybe they can improve that for the next installment.
Another issue was the wonderfully talented Emma Stone, who does show her trademark spark and wit and also elicits a terrific chemistry with Garfield. Even so, there's really not much for her to do but stand around and look pretty and Stone is a young actress who has shown over and again that she is just so much more than a pretty face. Perhaps, even her role could be stronger in any follow up.
As it stands, Marc Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man," has...ahem...amazingly shown that there is a wonderful new cinematic life for our hero, despite any questionable roads it took to arrive in our theaters at this time. I just hope that for the inevitable second installment, the power-that-be decided to keep Marc Webb at the helm, ensuring this new vision remains strong and intact. If not, my cinematic "spidey-sense" tells me that any potential longevity would be greatly endangered. Webb has shows how to remain artistic and provide the thrills and excitement as well. And don't you think that Spider-Man deserves a great film series of his own in the first place?
"The Amazing Spider-Man" is a terrific place for a new beginning.
No comments:
Post a Comment