“The Amazing Spider-Man” swung into theaters just in time for the Fourth of July, which awkwardly fell on a Wednesday this year. One would assume a holiday centered on blowing things up and drinking wouldn’t fall directly in the middle of a week, but apparently our founders were not forward-thinking enough to sign the declaration on “the first Friday of July.” But I digress — there’s a movie waiting to be reviewed.
As the new writer of an old column, it seemed all too appropriate for the first column to cover director Marc Webb’s restart of Marvel’s storied “Spider-Man” franchise. There was ample pressure on the director of “(500) Days of Summer” to make this movie better than the webbed hero’s first foray onto the big screen back in 2002. “The Amazing Spider-Man” did improve upon a few of the weaknesses in the original “Spider-Man” but was still missing that special something “Spider-Man” needs to contend with any of the other superhero movie franchises (except for “Green Lantern.” Ryan Reynolds is the only reason that movie is remotely watchable).
Andrew Garfield (“The Social Network”) was called up to fill the shoes for “The Amazing Spider-Man” previously inhabited by Tobey Maguire. Garfield played the role of Peter Parker well and seemed to be very comfortable with it. His version of the character seemed much more fluid than Maguire’s. He still held to the stereotypical reserved, angst-ridden high schooler personality that is part of Spider-Man canon, but Garfield seemed more interesting and relatable overall. There is no doubt Garfield has the potential to completely overshadow Maguire’s Spider-Man if he stays with the franchise.
Anyone who has seen the trailers knows New York’s favorite genetically modified human goes toe-to-toe against the originally named villain The Lizard. Rhys Ifans (Xenophilius Lovegood in “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1”) delivers a quality performance, yet his character could have used more originality, and he at times felt like the reptilian version of Doctor Octopus. Considering the writers were forced to search for a villain unused by the previous trilogy to at least add some originality to the newest movie, The Lizard wasn’t a poor choice of villain.
The rest of the movie is marked by a new love story. “The Amazing Spider-Man” decided to trash MJ’s character (thank you, Marc Webb) and go with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) instead. Everyone knows the on-again, off-again story of MJ and Peter Parker already. This is something new and (hopefully) without the monotonous “I can’t be Spider-Man and be with you” character development black hole into which the last trilogy fell.
So there’s Andrew Garfield’s great performance, the inclusion of a new villain and love story, a more polished backstory and, finally and rather notably, the correction of a mistake the last trilogy couldn’t take four seconds to distinguish: Spider-Man doesn’t shoot webs out of his wrists because that was never one of his powers. He has to build a gadget to do it. Props to Marc Webb for getting this crucial original detail right.
Unfortunately, “The Amazing Spider-Man” has one fatal flaw that has a vastly negative impact on what would be an average to above-average superhero movie: The original “Spider-Man” was released in 2002, and the subsequent movies were released in 2004 and 2007. It was far too soon to make another movie. Based on the box office totals from “Spider-Man,” you watched it 10 years ago and probably have a few times since then.
Overall, “The Amazing Spider-Man” is a decent movie. It’s not great, but it was enjoyable to watch and provided a few hours of entertainment. If you really love Spider-Man, or haven’t seen “Spider-Man” or “Spider-Man 2” recently, go see it. You’ll enjoy it. If you want to see something new and exciting, then “The Amazing Spider-Man” isn’t even close to the movie for you, and you will leave feeling like you just rewatched the original “Spider-Man” without the annoying bits.
