The Amazing Spider-Man Review (Spoilers)

[Professor Smooth]

Theaters around Japan got a special advanced showing of the Amazing Spider-Man last night. The screenings weren't heavily advertised in advance. People who stayed past the credits of Men in Black III were notified that there was going to be an advanced screening on June 23rd, but no more details. Showtimes weren't made available until late Thursday.

Including myself, there were six people in the theater last night for the screening. It was kind of surreal.

On to the movie itself...

Let me just say, right off the bat, that if this were the Spider-Man movie that we got in 2002, it'd have been nearly perfect. Modified costume aside, there's very little to nitpick. All of the actors nail their respective roles. Peter Parker felt like Peter Parker, not Toby Maguire playing Peter Parker. The special effects are a huge step above even Spider-Man 3. Not necessarily flashy, but well done and believable.

But...

This isn't what what we got in 2002, but that doesn't mean that the 2002 movie didn't happen. Upon release, it was one of the biggest movies in history. I have very little doubt that at least 95% of the audience has seen the original. Which is why I can't understand why they devoted about an hour to retelling the origin story.

Don't get me wrong. The new version of the origin story GREAT. Superior to the 2002 version in every way I can think of. But kind of unnecessary. The origin could have been handled in a flashback and cut about 45 minutes out of the film's running time. But, still, it's handled REALLY well.

I kept thinking that they were going to pull a swerve early in the movie. When Peter gets his ass kicked by Flash (who is AWESOME in this movie) I thought for sure they'd show that he was already Spider-Man (and was just hiding his secret identity). But nope. He gets his ass handed to him by Flash, has a run-in with the spider, and gets payback a little later on. No multiple back-flip, though.

It's a good movie. It's definitely the best version of the origin story ever put on a screen. The material is handled with a lot more seriousness than in the Sam Raimi versions. The characters are all true to their comic book counterparts. There's no winking at the camera (except for perhaps the Stan Lee cameo). Toby Maguire and Kirsten Dunst don't make cameos.

It's just the decision to devote so much of the film to the origin that baffles me.

3.5 out of 4 stars if you've seen the original
4 out of 4 if you haven't.

UPDATE:

Watching ASM was one of the weirdest movie-going experiences I've ever had. Nearly empty theater aside, something just felt off. And I finally figured it out.

Watching Amazing Spider-Man is like watching a movie from an alternate reality. Amazing Spider-Man is the movie that would have been made if the legal rights to the character had been tied up until 2009.

In this alternate universe, X-Men does well beyond expectations. X2 does even better. But Hulk, Daredevil, and Ghost Rider aren't big enough hits to justify the creation of Marvel Studios. Marvel continues to license out their characters to whichever studio bids the highest (and those studios are free to continue changing little things like basic costume/character designs). Batman Begins, Superman Returns, but Spider-Man is tied up in legal webs. Finally, the success of the Dark Knight finally prompts the interested parties to setting the legal issues surrounding Spider-Man.

THAT is the Amazing Spider-Man. A comic book movie that is not influenced by the movies that were influenced by Spider-Man. It doesn't feel dated. It's a good movie. It just feels like a good movie that is from some weird alternate reality.

[Brendocon]

Really liked the streamlined origin and the fact that decided not to clog things up by including J Jonah and loads of the other things that made the Raimi version seven and a half hours long.

Though it has to be said that montaging things to the sound of Coldplay should be ******* illegal.

[spiderfrommars]

I really liked it. I'd say only Spider-man 2 was better, but I might eventually change my mind. I watched the original trilogy again recently and was surprised by how goofy they were. To be honest, in the 2002 film I feel Raimi got a few things straight out wrong. And I can't help feeling Maguire never loved the character.

The new film takes a fair few liberties (Connors isn't the comic's nice guy family man, Stacey is in high school) but it feels closer to the comics than ever. Spidey's physique is straight out of the Ditko strip and the wisecracking is front and centre where it should be.

Plus the webslinging scenes were really beautiful (though you would expect that from a 2012 film).

I could've done without the parent subplot. It seemed an attempt to set this apart from the original, but it didn't go anywhere and I always thought it was pretty pointless in the comics too. And the Lizard was a surprisingly by the numbers villain.

But as much as a Spider-man 4 would've been nice, I've been up for this ever since they cast Andrew Garfield and the franchise has a new lease of life now IMO.

It's just the decision to devote so much of the film to the origin that baffles me.

While watching it felt one of the longest origins in a superhero movie. I think in Batman Begins and Spider-man 1 it was nearly an hour till we saw the full suit. This felt longer but the writing really was very good.

Though it has to be said that montaging things to the sound of Coldplay should be ******* illegal.

Except it's one of the good ones (written for Johnny Cash I believe) and a cute scene.

[bumblemusprime]

Really liked it. There was a lot that rubbed me wrong about the 2002 version. No chemistry between Dunst and Maguire, Maguire's deer-in-headlights look, the whole "fall-in-love-with-the-alter-ego" thing.

This was far better, barring some of the cheese, the "um uh ahhh" Bendis moments and the absence of Simmons as JJ. A nicely arrogant Peter, sparks with Gwen, Captain Stacy as a sympathetic and interesting figure, and even though it's totally ancillary to the origin, they made something of Peter's parents.

[Kaylee]

I really enjoyed it too likeable characters, nippy story, none of it really dragged, lead actor was cute. Win win

[spiderfrommars]

the absence of Simmons as JJ.

It'd be nice if they brought Simmons back in the next movie - he was perfect - but I doubt they will.

[Yaya]

Eh, could have done without the whole origin retelling. The kid who plays Spiderman is better than that schmuck Tobi McGuire.

Had it been the first film, I would have dug it more.

So yeah, meh.

[Brendocon]

And there's a whole batch of kids growing up for whom that is the first film.

So YAY.

[snarl]

Got round to seeing this.

I loved it.

Long origin story worked really well.

Emma stone is a total babe. Andrew Garfield is very good. Iggy is a l8r like ultimate slider-man...

Which I hadn't touched then read religiously over a 2 week period starting from about 2 years ago to .





Brew day

[snarl]

Yeah, my phone just ****** me over. To finish, I am looking forward to the follow up. I think pound for pound Spidey is the best superhero