Review of Spider-Man (1977) by Gimly M — 16 Apr 2015

Though my final rating of The Amazing Spider-Man (or TAS-M, as it shall henceforth be known) will be based entirely on the films own merits, it's impossible for me to review it without comparing it to the Raimi/Maguire trilogy that began in 2002, so I may as well begin with those points.

For the sake of unbridled clarity, I'll preface it with this; I thought TAS-M was absolutely superior to last decade's Spider-Man film, especially if you're taking the trilogy's horrific 2007 entry, Spider-Man 3, into account.

The effects are better, the acting is better, the Spider-Man portrayal is more accurate to his Comic Book counterpart, there's less cheese (but better humour), it added an all together bearable romance to the mix this time around, and had what was probably the best Stan Lee cameo to date.

TAS-M was certainly darker than the earlier films, but it wasn't actually "dark", which is befitting of a Spider-Man tale. That said, TAS-M lost some possible cohesion on its predecessor. Though hitting a decent 2 hour 17 minute run time, I still couldn't help but feel that some elements were rushed. Again, this is purely comparative to Spider-Man rather than the point of the film itself, but I will admit that the original live-action webhead movie seemed 100% complete, whereas TAS-M is more akin to a simple set-up, though a fantastic one.

Andrew Garfield is not only a superior Spider-Man to Toby Maguire in every conceivable way, he is also able to earn the role completely on his own merits. Though with Marvel counterparts Thor and Iron Man, I actually couldn't see anyone but Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Hemsworth taking the leads, in TAS-M I perhaps wouldn't be devastated in future if somebody else was to take the role from him. Not that he failed in any way, just that (again comparitive to MCU) I didn't feel that he necessarily IS Spider-Man.

Emma Stone impressed me as Parker's love interest, perhaps I haven't given her enough credence in the past. Denis Leary initially frustrated me as the Police Captain, but as the film drew on, both the character and actor grew on me. Martin Sheen's only failure was that he was perhaps to big for the film. Though it has already raked in around four million dollars, he seemed sort of dumped in the middle of this mildly-cult affair, and was a little out of place, though still performed admirably. Sally Field as Aunt May was, I felt, the only major flaw TAS-M had, character-wise. She's an adequate actor, but I at no point believed her in the role of Parker's Aunt and guardian, sorry Marc Webb.

Rhys Ifans, was, as always, fantastic! I've loved the guy ever since I saw him as Adrian, Son of Satan in Little Nicky all the way back in Primary School (2000). The Lizard was a great villain to have, and the Spider-Man franchise has now visited the three nemeses that (in my opinion) are Spider-Man's most important foes (Lizard, Green Goblin and Venom).

There are occasions where I felt that TAS-M lost its grip a little. There are several moments in which Parker essentially gives his identity as Spider-Man away, committing superhuman acts willy-nilly all over the place. We're also somewhat uncertain as to Lizard's motivations, and where exactly on the bad-guy spectrum he sits. There's also as I mentioned before, a lack of a "completed" feeling from TAS-M. I have to keep my hopes that though there will be many villains in the future, the story of TAS-M will essentially keep itself small, covering ground slowly and with great forethought in the new series to come.

Though TAS-M was not exactly up there with the likes of The Avengers or The Dark Knight, it was a decent two hours of cinema, that has more than earned its prospective sequel.

63%.

-Gimly.