SPIDERMAN HOMECOMING; Full-Tilt Review

“Can't you just be a friendly neighborhood Spider-Man?”

Tony Stark

"With great power..."

Synopsis:

Following on from the events of Civil War, well-meaning high school student Peter Parker excitedly awaits his next mission with the Avengers, unaware that he has been essentially 'shelved' from the most dangerous assignments because Tony Stark isn't confident he's ready for the big-leagues. Elsewhere, salvage specialist Adrian Toomes is all but put out of business by Stark Industries, and so turns to selling illegal weapons created from alien technology to support his family. When Parker stumbles across Toomes' operation the stage is set for a super-powered battle of wills with far-reaching consequences.

For your consideration...

Spiderman Homecoming does not exist within a vacuum. Most will realise that this is the third reboot in 15 years (that's a reboot every 5 years for the slow of math). I've always maintained that re-boots not only deserve to be, but in all fairness should be, considered alongside previous incarnations. After all, if you don't feel confident that you can improve on what's already come before, then why are you rebooting something? The first of Sam Raimi's Spiderman films was a film for adults pretending to be one for children (complete with an attempted rape, a bone-crunching final and a hero who fails to 'get the girl'). His second Spiderman was a children's film pretending to be for grown-ups (featuring a villain who 'learns the error of his ways' and redeems himself saving the hero, as well as some sickly-sweet soul searching). Raimi's third entry failed in just about every way, but by now Raimi had proved once and for all that superheros could be big business. Marc Webb's (oxymoron alert) 'Amazing' two efforts somehow turned everybody's favourite unassuming teenager into a prick; there's more to updating a character than giving him a skateboard and an attitude (he was more of a Bart Simpson than any Peter Parker). It was therefore with a mixed reception that Marvel finally managed to buy back Spiderman's rights from Sony and announced yet another reboot by launching the character into it's expanding MCU (the Marvel Cinematic Universe). There were those who were happy to see the character back in safer hands, those who were upset that they would never see the close of Marc Webb's announced trilogy (idiots mostly), and those who thought a third reboot was simply too much too soon. Even Kirsten Dunst,Raimi's leading lady, waded in to the debate. "We made the best ones, so who cares?... They’re just milking that cow for money.". It was a fair comment, and in most instances she'd be dead right; the first 2 Raimi films would be hard to top, but let's not forget the movie business is still a business and I'm sure she's taken the odd job 'for the money'. However, on this occasion Ms. Dunst may have to eat those well chosen words... The first thing that needs to be said about Spiderman Homecoming is this; it's by far the best Spiderman movie to date, and one of Marvel's strongest entries. Secondly, it's very, very funny. Most of the Marvel films to date have been an entertaining combination of whip-smart banter and explosive mayhem, with Guardians of the Galaxy thus far being the most humerus. However, Spiderman goes one step further to the extent it's probably first and foremost a comedy and a super powered adventure second. That's certainly no bad thing... I once said the time for a perfect Spiderman has come and gone, but I was (as the scores might suggest) dead wrong, although I do feel vindicated in the accuracy of some of my points. I said Marc Webb's Nolan-esque take on the character was a step totally in the wrong direction, and for a character like Spiderman it should sway more into the comedic realms of Kick-Ass (which in so many ways essentially was a Spiderman story). Homecoming is EXACTLY that, thanks to a terrific script credited to no less than 12 writers, which would normally result in disaster. Read-on, Spidey fans...

Script: 1/2

Despite the fact that the script is incredibly entertaining, there's no disguising the fact that, so far as the plot is concerned, it's pretty silly. However, that said, you're not watching a Spiderman film for the plot, right? By placing Spiderman into the Marvel universe (a God-send in so many ways), it does mean having to embrace some of the more 'wild' elements of that franchise, including alien technology. But with Marvel's favourite son back on home ground and in safe hands, it's a very small price to pay... On another note, it always bothered me how anybody was supposed to overlook the fact that a teenager on a low to modest income could afford to create the Spiderman outfit and web-shooter tools (a point that became laughable in Marc Web's gritty attempt). In Tony Stark the Marvel universe finds it's answer, and it's at once such an obvious and shrewd move. Naturally, Stark is responsible for essentially bankrolling Peter Parker and providing him with the tech, and it becomes suddenly believable that the suit would be blue and hot-rod red (this from a flashy and extravagant billionaire who designed himself a gold suit). Minor grumble; too many gadgets for my liking, but it feels a reasonable fit for the MCU. Wasn't overly sold on the suit's internal-voice, but it proved a great way of keeping the character talking and provided the occasional laugh.

Pace: 2/2
While I was watching the film I always felt like we were moving from scene to scene with such speed and efficiency that by the time it ended it had felt like a relatively short experience. I was surprised to read that actually the film was just over 2 hours in length. While I adamantly stand by my opinion that most stories can be told successfully in 90 to 120 minutes, Homecoming obviously stands as proof to the fact that a well told film will justify it's length. Thankfully, none of this time is spent wasted on an origin story (not even Civil War bothered). The Marvel head-sheds, quite wisely, have figured out most people know the whole 'uncle Ben thing' pretty well by now, and instead just get on with telling the story at hand.

Acting: 2/2
Not sure how else I can put this, but Tom Holland IS Peter Parker. He's perfect; he's nerdy, he's self deprecating, he's enthusiastic, he's innocent, he's witty, he's good natured while never being a goody-two-shoes. He's not wet like Toby McGuire was (his moping got tedious after a while), and he's not too-cool-for-school like Andrew Garfield. And, shock-horror, he's pretty close to actually being of genuine high-school age- that's a first and it makes a huge difference. McGuire and Garfield were both clearly adults, adults in peril. Holland looks like a kid, sounds like a kid, acts like a kid- he's just a kid doing the right thing in the face of real danger, and all the more braver for it. That's what Spiderman should be about!... In Raimi's first Spiderman, Willem De Foe chewed the scenery with relish and gusto, and made for the perfect Green Goblin. There will never be a better Goblin, why try? Wisely, Marvel didn't bother. Instead, they've found a perfect foil in Michael Keaton, and rather than dial in a zany Beetlejuice-styled performance, Keaton again proves his range by making Adrian Toomes a very nuanced character. He's ruthless but not an entirely unlikable, he's a character that started with honest intentions and, true to life, found himself on a slippery slope. He's justified his crimes (he has a family to support), he had the opportunity (the alien technology from his clearance days) and he had the motivation (forced out of work by Stark Industries). Ruthless but not cruel, nothing he does ever feels for the sake of causing suffering, although he's clearly dangerous. It all comes from an honest emotional place, who hasn't at some point felt like they're put upon by 'The Man'? And, in a refreshing turn, Toomes, AKA The Vulture (although in the film nobody ever calls him this) is one of the few villains in the Spiderman rouge's gallery who isn't the result of a failed science experiment.

I don't think it's saying too much to point out that, once again, the villain learns of Spiderman's secret identity (after all, it's only happened in every film so far; Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Harry Osborne, Venom, Sandman, Lizard, Hobgoblin). So naturally, Parker also learns who Adrian Toomes is (in one HUGELY shocking twist which I did not see coming). In the scenes that follow with Holland and Keaton sans-masks, the air is electric and both actors show the standard of their game; Holland looks genuinely heartbroken and terrified all at once, and because he's (importantly) "just a kid" he looks all too vulnerable. Keaton is totally conflicted- all seething rage and reluctant adoration. It's a Hell-of-a scene, and sets up the dramatic tone for the remainder of the film. On that subject, like Ant Man before it, Homecoming's stakes are relatively small. There is no doomsday bomb, no city-sprawling gas-cloud, no alien invasion. Ant Man (while not the best film in the Marvel cinematic franchise) was, in the end, a man trying to save his daughter from a maniac: as an audience we can relate to those stakes much easier than, say, the Avengers saving the world from aliens. Spiderman's stakes concern an attempt to steal a shipment of powerful weapons, but that's about it. But, given the smaller-scale, and Spiderman's relative inexperience and the terror he feels confronting the Vulture, that's significant enough. This is about bravery, loyalty and dedication, and what is at the end of the day (super powers not withstanding) "just a kid".

Other mentions; Robert Downey Jr is always a delight as Tony Stark, although his long-suffering assistant 'Happy' Hogan, as played by Ironman director Jon Favreau, has more screen time in his function as Parker's minder. Marisa Tomei gets a few laughs as a MILF-style aunt May, and Disney heartthrob and teen model Zandaya is a 100 miles from her usual glam image as one of Parker's fellow students (I dare not say more). Laura Harrier plays Parker's popular but sweet natured love interest Liz, while Jacob Batalon is a joy as Parker's nerdy best friend; he and Hollander have a warm and believable chemistry which the film does well to exploit.

Aesthetic: 2/2
The effects are (despite earlier misgivings) all good, and the suit design has grown on me some. The Vulture (never my favorite villain) here has a cool makeover, and the scenes where he's flying around while fighting Spiderman are all serviceable. Most of this sort of action we've seen a lot by now, no matter how good this reboot is there's no denying a strong sense of deja vu in the visuals. What makes it different this time round are the characters and situations at play. That said, the film does include a few novel touches; by moving much of the climax to very high-up in the air (beyond the 'playground' of buildings seen in most of the other films) there's a genuine sense that Spiderman is out of his element and in great danger, and it's also funny to see Parker suffer from a bout of vertigo, a joke that works all the better for Holland's youth. In fact, his relative inexperience is a cause for many of the funniest moments- it's refreshing to see that, just because he has the suit, this doesn't make him the fully-fledged and capable hero that McGuire and Garfield instantly became (although I admit things on occasion did go wrong for McGuire). But yes, the budget and effects are well utilised, and the smaller scale means that the spectacles somehow feel more grounded in reality.

Intention: 2/2
Homecoming is the first film that nail's it's target audience, in the purest sense. It's a film about a teenager, for teenagers. But, by extension, teenagers being the middle-audience, there's something here for everybody. It's funny (very funny), it's sweet natured (while never saccharine) and it's exciting (especially if you're too young to remember the first 3 films). Familiar themes and characters are given fresh overhauls, but are never so different that they're somehow offensive to long term fans. As a child I grew up on Spiderman, and I personally thought the changes were not only made with good intentions but entirely necessary; I've seen Aunt May as doddery, I've seen MJ as the perfect cheerleader type, I've seen Flash Thompson as the mindless brute, I've seen Harry as the best friend. I honestly didn't have high hopes for Homecoming, like a lot of people I thought it was a film the world didn't need, even if Marvel would likely do better than Marc Webb (I really, truly, hated those films). But, happily, I was wrong. Another feather in Homecoming's cap is how it essentially stands alone. Sure, it references events from Avengers Assemble and Civil War, but in such a way that, even if you have no prior knowledge, the film feeds you this information easily. Sure, it also features Tony Stark, and 'Happy' Hogan, both to great effect (Stark's relationship with Peter is particularly poignant in parts, hysterical in others, not to mention an excellent way to introduce Spiderman into the MCU) but, again, it's set-up in such a way that anyone can enjoy this film without an encyclopedia-like knowledge of all the other Marvel output. This didn't feel like a 'tent-pole' film; it wasn't there just to set-up more cross-overs, an issue that plagues many of the Marvel films. Nor does it suffer from the twin plagues of too many characters and establishing too many plots. No, Homecoming is Homecoming, it's that simple. Refreshingly, anyone can enjoy this on it's own merits.

Final Word: 9/10

Let's hope “friendly neighborhood Spiderman” is less a disparaging remark and more of a statement of purpose for the wall-crawler's future films, because it's this smaller scale which is one of the films most vitalizing and promising strengths. Will something be lost in seeing Parker transform from a well-meaning but fledgling hero into a sure-footed mega-hero on par with the other Avengers, as it was in the dreadful Kick-Ass sequel? We will have to wait and see, but the future is looking bright. It was very brave for the studio to have the entire climax of the film take place without use of the iconic Spiderman suit, (for reasons I can't discuss just yet), but like Tony Stark chastises “If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it”. And with those words, Marvel invest everything they have in the character of Peter Parker and not the cash-cow image of Spiderman, a conviction that pays off in spades. I've heard Homecoming described as "Harry Potter meets Avengers", and while that's not entirely inaccurate it also fails to capture the films level of success or significance: Homecoming didn't try and rework that old line "with great power comes great responsibility"; it lived it. Homecoming isn't just the title, it's the Marvel welcome the character deserves. A joy from start to finish. Kudos Marvel, one right out of the park.

"YOU ONCE SPOKE TO ME ABOUT INTELLIGENCE..."

Peter Parker (Spiderman 2).

I had to see it to believe it... Fuck me; Mecha-Rhino! And so it came to pass that the Spiderman franchise came crashing down.

Words fail me.

"HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THIS?"

Dr. Curt Connors (The Amazing Spiderman, 2012).

Here's the new outfit, which has already cropped up a fair bit around the web.

 

My first thoughts were "a backward step in terms of the realism that the first film seemed intent on gunning for" but on reflection I think I quite like it... 

Admittedly I did like the first rebooted suit, but it's actually kind of fun to see something closer to the comics, and does this also mean that the next film will play tonally different- perhaps lighter? Will our next Spiderman film feel more like Marvel's ultra-successful Avengers film? Perhaps, and no bad thing.

On closer inspection, gone are the basket-ball textures of the first and instead we are given a more spandex-based leotard, more along the lines of what would readily be available to a typical high school kid.

It only seems like a few weeks ago that I was covering the lead up to The Amazing Spiderman, how time flies?

"DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT YOU REALLY ARE?"

Curt Connors (The Amazing Spiderman, 2012).

I watched the new Spiderman film.

Well, I didn’t just ‘watch’ it; I bought it on its DVD release date. See, the thing is I’d gotten quite excited by the hype, and it was always my partner’s intention to take me to the cinema to see it for my birthday in August. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen, we literally missed it by two days, and I’d been going crazy to see it since then. It was on sale for £10, and I thought to myself “it’s going to be at least £6 to hire, and I don’t live anywhere near a DVD rental store, so may as well just buy it.”

Long story short, know anybody who wants to buy The Amazing Spiderman on DVD? Watched once.

It was an unusual film for several reasons, from the relatively short time between its production and Raimi’s films (the first being 10 years ago, the third being just 2007), the legal implications of the studio holding onto the franchise, and the departures made from the previous efforts. I’m not giving anything away by saying I found it a below par film (the review is already posted), but I wanted to take the time to explain some of the highs and lows of the film… Now, I realise that every film should be judged on its own merits, but a comparison between this new film, by aptly named director Marc Webb, and Sam Raimi’s origin film is unavoidable: any reboot (especially one this close to the previous effort) will always be compared to what has came before, it will be the yard stick by which its success will be measured. I don’t find that unfair, it’s the pitfall of rebooting any franchise.

Anyway, I’m not here to ‘rag’ on The Amazing Spiderman, my review has already done that; instead I’m here to explore the differences and similarities of both Raimi’s and Webbs versions of Spiderman, and offer my insights (as they are) into where they either hit or miss the Marc (couldn’t help the pun). To help make things easier, I tackle each subject separately, and as evenly as I can. As a warning, there may be spoilers, especially for those of you out there who aren’t nerds and don’t read comics. You have been warned.

Hope you find it at the very least ‘a little bit interesting’, and as always I welcome debate.

Don’t be a stranger…

Missing Parents

So, the first departure Webb makes from Raimi’s take is quite significant, and probably the largest change in the entire film. The shame is that, so far as this first instalment goes, it’s a largely unused plot device- clearly something that will be fully explored in the sequels.

In the Raimi film, Parker’s parents are out of the picture, and nothing more is made of the subject. Such is life Peter, get over it. Webb’s film, however, tantalisingly links Peter’s deceased parents, both cutting-edge scientists in the field of genetics (aka; creating superhumans), with Oscorp- and ultimately its shady director Norman Osborne (who for the unenlightened will become Spiderman’s biggest enemy Green Goblin). No denying that it’s a smart step into new territory, and one I expect could pan-out well. I kind’a like the idea that the Oscorp tower could become ‘bad guy central’ and be responsible for a whole host of genetically engineered supe- villains.

So, in this respect, Webb’s film comes up on top, although that may be a little unfair seeing how Raimi took his background directly from the comics. But who said life was fair?

Webb 1, Raimi 0.

Uncle Ben & Aunt May

Whereas Raimi takes his cue for these loveable ‘old timers’ straight from the comics, Webb (in keeping with his attempt at a more gritty take) bravely breaks with tradition. Gone are the folksy and quaint Ben and May, and instead we have a more young-at-heart and modern relationship.

Webb’s Ben is savvy and protective of his wife, and even has the brass to get in a full-on argument when he and Peter don’t see eye-to-eye. A real highlight is Ben’s relationship with; his head is screwed on well enough to realise he’s being bullied at school, and he displays real guilt at Peter’s discovery of his father’s science notes. May, a far cry from the sickly sweet white-haired Raimi version also has sass, and when the inevitable death occurs genuinely behaves like a woman in mourning.

So, again the points have to go to Webb. It’s a very promising start.

Webb 2, Raimi 0.

Bitten By The Bug

This is where Webb’s attempt at realism starts to go wobbly, like a fat chick on a bouncy castle. I know what you’re thinking “Paul, it’s a superhero in red and blue spandex, how real can things be?” but that’s not my issue. Instead, with the discovery of his father’s Oscorp ID, Peter bluffs his way into a high security facility. Not only that, but he manages to sneak away from the tour group to secretly shadow an important company executive, and despite his poor eyesight manages to see (from quite a distance) the exact code used to access one of the most fortified units in the building. Even if I accept all of that, which I did (I was willing to suspend my disbelief), I drew the line at super-smart Peter snooping around inside a bio-hazard room, after watching two guys leave in bio-hazard suits. You just wouldn’t do it, not at the risk of boiling the skin off your bones, or giving yourself Cancer.

It’s such an easy script issue to avoid. I could understand it if Peter had to hide in the room to avoid detection, without noticing the big danger sign pasted over the door. In fact, that makes the whole thing sadly tragic. But no, seems that Peter the boffin fancies himself as invincible even before becoming a superhero.

Raimi’s ‘missing spider’ may seem just as unlikely, but at least it’s through no fault of Peter’s, and the world Raimi constructs was never meant to be taken seriously; it’s an almost timeless homage to the golden age of comics and was never meant to reflect the real-world. When you embrace the fantasy then you don’t have to fight so hard for the realism.

With that in mind, Webb 2, Raimi 1.

Out On A Line: Web Shooters vs. Mutations

Surprisingly, despite Webb’s attempts to make the comic work in a real-world setting, he brings the character back to his comic roots with the invention of the web-shooters. An odd choice, when Raimi’s films neatly side-stepped the ‘how does a high school kid come up with something like that’ issue by having them develop as a mutation, a direct result of the spider bite responsible for all of Peter’s other arachnoid-inspired powers.

Sadly, where Raimi’s fantasy would almost allow for the suspension of disbelief required to pull this off, Webb’s does not, and it’s inclusion here confuses me- especially given the drastic changes made concerning Peter’s parents, uncle and aunt. Admittedly, the Raimi method did polarise hard-core nerds, but there is no disputing that it worked. Instead, we have a 17 year old high school kid constructing cutting edge tech in his bedroom (yes, I know the actual webbing is made by Oscorp, but he still had to make the web-shooters). I don’t truck with the hardcore nerds who can’t cope when something isn’t exactly how it is in the comics, sometimes change is necessary, mediums work in very different ways (books, comics, films, games) and I say this as one of the few people who actually preffered the ending in the Watchmen film over the one from the graphic novel.

Now we’re neck-a-neck, Webb 2, Raimi 2.

Peter Parker

A film can live or die by its lead role. Would Commando have worked without Schwarzenegger, or Groundhog Day without Murray? Even a bad film can be elevated by a charismatic lead (I point you to almost any Christopher Walken movie).

Raimi’s Peter may have occasionally been pathetic, but he was always likeable- and consistent, which is a big deal. Webb’s Peter is less defined, and swings between mean-and-moody skater dude with a cock-sure attitude (unafraid to stand up to the school bully in front of a crowd of people) and stuttering girl-shy dweeb.

Much has been said of Andrew Garfield’s attempt on Peter Parker, especially concerning his on-screen chemistry with Emma Stone (with whom he struck up an off-screen romance), but I have to admit I found him infuriating. Less the way he was written, because he gets some pretty funny lines and his Spiderman is a lot more wise-cracking than Toby Maguire. Unfortunately, and this could just be me, I found Garfield incredibly self-absorbed and slap-worthy, especially during the romantic scenes.

But that could just be me, and I guess it’s hard to be completely subjective. I’d give my points here to Raimi, but I’ll have to leave this one for you ‘”dear reader” (Stan Lee homage). By now you will have seen enough on the adverts and Youtube to know how you feel on the subject, alter the score accordingly.

I also have an eversion to hair that’s still immaculate on the removal of a skin-tight mask… Webb 2, Raimi 3.

School: It’s A Hard Knock Life

Highschool was never a big thing in the Raimi films, and it was nice that the whole of Webb’s film was set in those early years. It’s all pretty convincing and well handled, if you can live with the fact that these 17 year olds look a lot like they’re in their mid to late twenties.

Where I again have problems (and sadly I said the same thing in the Raimi film), is after Peter develops super powers. You’d think, with all the hype about Spiderman going round that someone would think to tie that with the guy in school who can jump ten foot into the air during basketball, or dent the American football goal posts by slinging a ball from the stands. It’s hard to explain that shit away. Similarly, you’d think Peter’s webbing-related fiasco in the school dining room in Raimi’s film would raise a few eyebrows…

So, I have to give the points to Webb on this one. Webb 3, Raimi 3.

Budding Romance: Gwen Stacy vs. Mary Jane Watson

Anyone who reads the comics will know the real love of Peter Parker’s life is Gwen Stacy, whose life is tragically cut short during a confrontation with the Green Goblin, while MJ was the silver medal. Raimi decided, for whatever reason, to merge Gwen and MJ into the one character, and this worked fine for his films- you get both the high-school sweetheart angle and the red-head model. Talk to any nerd, and you’ll find a divide between the ones who fell for Gwen’s innocent charm and those who drool over the feisty curvaceous MJ.

I’ve always been more partial to Gwen, and in the Raimi film MJ shared her more sweet-natured traits which makes her more likable in my eyes (MJ’s first appearance in the comics portrays her as a bit of a diva- she becomes a more likable character as the comics go on). So, the prospect of seeing a real version of Gwen Stacy was very appealing, and from the promo she looked the spitting image of the comic character. So it’s with a heavy heart that I write that I found her ‘mumble-can’t finish sentences’ relationship with Parker hugely irritating. No doubt it was meant to be sweet, quirky and hip, but (for me at least) it missed the mark. Having said that, the three-way relationship between Peter, Gwen and her father (played by the ever-gruff Denis Leary) was entertaining, and without giving too much away it’s a shame it won’t continue into the sequels.

On balance, Raimi’s MJ is more engaging and more sympathetic than Webb’s Gwen (who just also happens to be the villain’s intern at Oscorp- not bad for a 17 year old, huh?). Having said that, she looks the part and it’s nice to see her in the film, even if it’s in a flawed way. Webb 3, Raimi 4.

A Death In The Family

OK, so I don’t think I’m giving too much away by telling you that (shock, horror!) Uncle Ben is killed, and that Peter Parker had it in his power to prevent it. This time around, the death is related to a simple liquor store robbery, with the whole absurdist wrestling scene removed (eluded to later). Personally, I wasn’t a fan of the wrestling scene in the Raimi film, and the sudden brutality of Webbs scene in the street just rings so true in today’s age. No final words, no gasping, no holding hands. All the cliché’s of storytelling are stripped away, and instead we are left with just a simple death, and that’s so much harder to watch. And where is the killer? Already 2 blocks away, lost in a concrete city maze…

Webb 4, Raimi 4.

The Vigilante Days

After the death of Uncle Ben both Webb’s and Raimi’s Peter go in search of revenge. For Raimi’s Peter, luckily he was able to apprehend the criminal on the very same night. Webb’s Parker, as fitting for a real world scenario, is denied his justice- which will no doubt be addressed in the sequels.

I quite like Webb’s approach to this, but again it hardly seems fair to hold it against Raimi for sticking to the source material. You can’t help but feel that this wasn’t necessarily an intuitive move for Webb, but an attempt to make his film different.

Webb 5, Raimi 4.

The Villains: Curt Connors vs. Norman Osborne

Curt Connors, aka The Lizard, was always my favourite Spiderman villain. He appealed to me because he was actually monstrous (and looked like a dinosaur), whereas most of Spiderman’s foes were simply people in suits. I was particularly a fan of the Todd McFarlane drawing, with the long snout full of crocodile teeth. Again, I was very interested to see how this translated to the screen, and the news that Rhys Ifans was due to play the character was interesting. Willem DeFoe’s Norman Osborne was ham-fisted scenery-chewing villainy at its best, and would always be a hard act to follow (I honestly don’t think even Raimi managed to top this), so the odds were already stacked against the reboot…

Shame then that Ifans (a usually interesting actor) was given no chance to shine in a role that was both underwhelming and poorly developed, despite a promising revelation that linked him to the disappearance of Peter’s parents (and is then never revisited)! The CGI of the beast-form was also unconvincing, and without the ripped lab coat and feral mouth the design was also bland- it looked more like the Abomination from the end of Edward Norton’s Hulk sequel than the reptilian creature from the comics. A real missed opportunity.

Webb 5, Raimi 5.

One Smart Kid: Nerd vs. Genius

To begin with, I assumed that (in Webb’s film) when Peter gives Dr Connors the formula required to complete his experiment successfully that he’d found it in his father’s paperwork. My girlfriend told me that I was wrong, that “Peter obviously figured it out on his own” while sitting on the roof of his house with his head stuck in a book on genetics. Naturally I told her that was ridicules, “he’s just a high school kid, how could he possibly fix a leading scientist’s equations by spending the afternoon reading a book?” We’ll see I told her, in my usual smug way. Guess who was wrong?

Me.

Turns out that his father’s seemingly important paperwork had nothing to do with the plot of the film (I expect that comes into the sequels), and yes, Peter Parker, high school dweeb, cracked the formula Dr. Connors spent fifteen years of his life attempting to perfect. Am I the only one who finds that hard to except? Why do this if you are trying to ground your story in reality? Oh wait, I forget, this is the same kid who builds himself web-shooters…

Peter Parker was never meant to be a genius. He’s just a very, very smart kid (emphasis on the word kid), something Raimi understood. He could follow other people’s theory’s, but he wasn’t up to correcting their mistakes!... Having said that, in Webb’s film he did kind’a cause Connors to become a monster, so maybe he isn’t all that smart after all- but that’s beside the point.

Parker is a boffin, not a genius. Webb 5, Raimi 6.

Aesthetics

Something about Raimi’s Spiderman suit always bugged me; could be the eyes, maybe even the silver web treatment on the suit. Whatever the reason, it always ‘felt’ more like a toy to me than an actual character. Webb’s Spiderman suit (despite the pointless little changes to the layout of the red patches that are barely noticeable, and probably only there to put more distance between the films) actually ‘feels’ real. Webb’s Spiderman also seems able to pull off the character’s more supple and bendy poses, which may only be down to Garfield’s more slender frame. Whatever the reason, I actually prefer Webb’s take on the suit.

When it comes down to the rest of the design, I’m torn. Both largely achieve what they set out to accomplish. Raimi’s timeless suburban neighbourhoods look like they leapt straight out of the pages of the comic book, while Webb’s gritty urban streets and towering skyscrapers set the stage to a more real life tale a’la Nolan’s Batman reboot (forgetting for now that the script fails to deliver on that promise). I can’t honestly choose one setting over the other as both feel just as important and relevant to me.

I would point out that the pointless 3D moments in Webb’s film add nothing to the narrative, and the effects, while not terrible, lack the wow factor you would hope for in a blockbuster whose main character is a guy who can swing high through the city on ropes. Aside from a little more ‘weight’, they don’t really stand much better than those in Raimi’s film, now ten years old.

As I’ve already pointed out, I feel a crushing disappointment at how badly they translate the Lizzard to the screen, although there can be no denying it’s fun to see Spiderman grapple with a character so large and powerful (most of his foes till this point have been at least human in scale and form), and the fight through the school is undoubtedly the film’s best action set piece. I realise there was a small sub-set of fans that were disappointed by the Green Goblin’s suit in Raimi’s films, but that still felt more faithful than Webb’s Lizard- and the casting of DeFoe was masterful and pitched perfectly.

When it’s all said and done, I like aspects from both films, but I’d have to award Raimi’s film the points. His world is more unique and better crafted, and his use of CGI has aged pretty well (considering).

Webb 5, Raimi 7.

Soundtrack

Can you remember the Raimi Spiderman soundtrack? Yes, no, sort of? Some can, others can’t, and I appreciate that. I really liked it. Trust me, nobody will remember the new Spiderman soundtrack. It’s all clipped indie songs, low bass and ambient noise, nothing you’ll ever hum to yourself in the car or tap your feet to. In a superhero film you need a theme, something bold and swelling- especially when you’re lead character is in a red and blue suit.

Final score? Webb 5, Raimi 8.

So that’s pretty much where I stand on the subject of comparison. I don’t touch on just how dull the second act is, or how disappointed I was in the third; all that after a promising start. It’s one of them films that, no matter what I say, if you want to see it you’ll see it anyway. Actually, I recommend you do because it’s probably best described (like so many of Spiderman’s foes) as a ‘failed experiment’, the proiduct of an intelligent mind close to success, but corrupted in its core…

My advice to Mr Webb? Not that he'll read this I'm sure, but here goes... To quote Webb's own Ben Parker "You owe the world your gifts. You just have to figure out how to use them"...

THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN; Carlisle's Final Word.

"I am issuing an arrest warrent for the masked vigilante known as Spiderman!"
George Stacey (The Amazing Spiderman, 2012).

 

 

 

 

 

Script Logic; 1/2

 

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 0/2

Final Score; 4/10

 

 

Final Word;
A deeply flawed attempt to reboot the franchise, so flawed that it deserves it’s very own article to explain that in better detail (yes, I'm writing one) A slick aesthetic design can’t make up for a shockingly lack-lustre script, dull pace and weak central villain. While admittedly some of the new touches are very interesting, not enough is done to prevent the “seen it all before” issue central to its conception.

 

"YOU'RE A WANTERD MAN, PETER PARKER..."

Gwen Stacey. The Amazing Spiderman (2012)

Oooooh, a 4 minute trailer!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtdgzQWmQFg&feature=relmfu

Just some thoughts on the content.

Obviously, watch the trailer first.

BAD
Meh, getting the feeling I've seen this bridge scene before somewhere? Oh wait, I remember, wasn't there a moment almost exactly like this in the first Raimi Spiderman film?... And giving the kid his mask, I'm not feeling it- forced sentimentality is the worst. And what is it about this guy? He seems to be whipping that fucking mask off every chance he gets! You're wearing the bloody thing to hide your identity- keep it on or don't bother wearing it!

GOOD
I like this costume actually, and I think he moves well in it. Certainly a leaner Spiderman than in the Raimi films, truer to the comics. I like the shape of the eyes too, and 'love it or hate it', he has his web-shooters back.

BAD
Why are the police actually shooting at Spiderman? They don't look like rubber bullets judging by the damage to the wall. Seems a little excessive, no? Considering he's not actually killed anybody or knocked off a bank. Do the police in New York city not have anything better to do with their resources? five hundred men IS excessive, I doubt that many went out looking for the Reservoir Dogs.

GOOD
Nice to see Spiderman getting a bit lippy with the criminals now, rather than the wet-blanket approach of the previous films.

BAD
What the hell have they done with the Lizard? It looks more like the Hulk. Actually, more like the thing that the Hulk fights at the end of the Edward Norton version (was it Abomination?), or even Thing from Fantastic 4. That's disappointing. I can see why they've upped the scale, it certainly looks different to anything in the previous films this way, and it looks very dangerous, but the face just looks a bit, well, 'wrong'. I miss the long crocodile mouth of McFarlane's artwork. At least we see it in a ripped lab-coat for a few moments.

GOOD
Mmmmmm, hello Gwen Stacy. She was always a better love interest than MJ.

BAD
Put away the skateboard you fucking Emo.

WTF?
What the hell was the giant cloud-explosion on top of the tower? Is that plot related?

VERDICT:
Still out. I think this film is on shaky ground, but I'm hoping for the best.

Did you know? For the first Spiderman films, which were eventually handled by Sam Raimi, directors approached for the job include James Cameron and David Fincher. Fincher?!? Now THAT would be a film worth seeing!

"HEY, WEB HEAD!"

 "Commencement: the end of one thing, the start of something new." 

Green Goblin. Spiderman (2002).

OK, so anyone I've spoken to before now knows I wasn't exactly over enthusiastic at the talk of a re-boot. I mean, come on, it hardly seems that far back that we got the Raimi films, does it? And in the early release pictures the new suit looked, well, a bit camp (the red looked pink for a start), and why hire an English actor in his mid-twenties to play an American teenager?...

I don't often change my stance on things like this, but I'm actually looking forward to this now.

1/ First off, the suit no longer looks pink, thanks to the on-set tendency for dark lighting. And anyway, end of the day, it's a body tight red and blue gimp suit- it's always going to look a little camp. I'm glad to see a leaner body shape too, and I was never all that impressed with the outfit in Raimi's films anyway- what was with all the silver?

2/ As much as I think Defoe nailed the Green Goblin (the ultimate Spidey villain- bonkers suit or not), my personal favorite has always been The Lizard. While I'm not really an Ifans fan, I have nothing against him and look forward to seeing the final reveal of the creature... I'm hoping to see the more feral McFarlane style monster, so long as they don't drop the ball with the CGI.




3/ Let's face it. On re-watching them the Raimi film's weren't actually all that good were they? Sure, it was nice to see Spiderman on screen, and compared to the benchmark it really didn't have much superhero competition. Times are different now, so maybe it's not such a bad time for a serious re-boot after all?

4/ The parent mystery. Seems a strange place to take the Spiderman origin story, but I'm game. I don't want a remake, I want something different.

I realise I'm probably just writing this for myself. That's OK.



Don't get me wrong, there is still plenty of opportunity for disaster.

I dislike the guy in the lead, Garfield, I don't think he's up to much and I thought his breakout role in Never Let Me Go (or whatever it was) was amateur level. And casting agents- for God's sake, hire an American for an American role! While you're at it, stop paying people in their late teens to play high school kids! If you want to tell the high school years, cast younger, or alternatively (originality, shock horror) Just tell the story of him as an adult, everyone already knows the origin! For me, I quite liked the kid in Kickass, he'd have made a fairly decent Parker- and let's face it, he basically was.



The Lizard (as yet still under wraps despite some grainy leaked test footage) could look awful, and that would sink it. Harsh but true. The CGI for Spiderman leaping around could also prove to be shockingly bad...

Is the girl playing Gwen Stacey (the love interest) going to be irritating? Are they going to stay true to the comic and kill her off, or will she perhaps live to the inevitable sequel?



Why complicate things with the Web-shooters? Yeah, they're in the comic, so what? They were a stupid thing, (controversially) well side-stepped in the Raimi films. In a realistic world, how does that work? And how will they explain Parker's funky new costume this time round? That rarely holds up to scrutiny.

On a final point, thanks largely to Nolan's Batman re-boot, the mood for superheros seems to be dark & edgy, I just hope this dosn't follow suite, but unfortunately that seems to be a very likely possibility, judging by the trailer. While realism and grit is all fine and good, let's not forget that this is Spiderman, not The Crow. Dark worked for Batman because Batman is dark, not all characters need that treatment- just look at the balance struck in the first Ironman film, that worked a treat.

Anyhow, them be my thoughts on the subject, feel free to express yourselves. I'm now down on record as officially excited and you can all tell me how wrong I was if this thing falls flat.

So long, web-heads!