1. Tobey vs. Andrew
Mr. Garfield, on the other hand, is dream casting. He nails the awkward high school outsider plus the wisecracking hero fans missed from the Raimi films. Garfield is also aces during the film's dramatic beats, which is good since the reboot has him crying more often than Demi Moore in Ghost.
Round One: The Amazing Spider-man (2012)
2. Green Goblin vs. The Lizard
This is a close match because both of these villains underwhelm. A pair of scientists who use themselves as guinea pigs and go all "I'll get you, Spider-man!" when the experiments go wrong. Both are played by renown character actors lost completely once they enter evil-mode. Rhys Ifans is replaced by a CGI dinosaur, while the mad genius of Dafoe disappears behind an immobile mask.
I'll give this round to Green Goblin because A) at least Goblin has some personality B) Dafoe is menacing out of costume whereas Ifans spends most of the film moping about his arm and C) Lizard's evil scheme to gas all of New Yorkers into becoming reptiles is truly lame.
Round Two: Spider-man (2002)
3. Kirsten vs. Emma
Stone isn't quite convincing as a high-schooler, and despite her obvious chemistry with Garfield their love scenes remain pretty lifeless since Gwen Stacy is so underwritten. Nevertheless, with due respect to Dunst, I'm giving this point to Gwen Stacy by a hair because she gets to be an active participant in the films action, and Emma Stone's formidable comedic chops elevate the movie at every turn.
Round Three: The Amazing Spider-man (2012)
4. Origin
The reboot follows the beats of the original so closely from the bite to Uncle Ben's murder to the triumphing over school bullies that it only serves to highlight how much more energetic and fun it was in Raimi's hands. The ways in which it stands apart from the original - mechanical webbing instead of biological, a dour prologue involving Peter's mysterious parents - remain unexplored, and seem like thankless legwork for sequels.
Round Four: Spider-man (2002)
5. Uncle Ben + Aunt May
Round Five: The Amazing Spider-man (2012)
6. Harry Osborn vs. No Harry Osborn
Round Six: Spider-man (2002)
7. J. Jonah Jameson vs. Capt. Stacy
Round Seven: Spider-man (2002)
8. Romance
Round Eight: Spider-man (2002)
9. Action
It doesn't help that Amazing Spider-man is determined to ape the brooding color palette of Nolan's Gotham City. The drabness of the visuals only serve to drag down the film's energy further. Raimi's action scenes don't really soar until Spidey 2, but they are still head and shoulders above Webb's adequate but anonymously filmed action beats.
Round Nine: Spider-man (2002)
10. Ending (Spoilers)
2012: Peter promises Gwen's dying father he will stay away rather than expose her to danger. Then two scenes later he's all, "Haha, Denis Leary, you're dead! Imma date your hot daughter!"
Also a shadowy man with a hat reminds the audience to care about the secret of Peter's parents. Why?Maniacal laugh! That's why.
Round Ten: Spider-man (2002)
"And after 10 rounds, the winner, by a definitive 7 to 3 knockout..."
Sam Raimi's Spider-man
I think a lot of people misunderstood the post I wrote last week defending the concept of quick reboots. I wasn't cheering the idea of shamelessly rehashing the same story over and over to grab a quick buck. I was making the point that if a reboot gives a fresh, worthy take on the material what does it really matter if it comes 5 or 10 or 15 years later?
If Batman Begins had been released within 2 or 3 years of Batman and Robin I doubt people would have complained. If, on the other hand, Batman Begins had featured The Joker getting dunked in a vat of toxic chemicals and Bruce Wayne having an affair with a blond reporter - and it did it all without Tim Burton's visual flair - then I imagine audiences would have been curious why anybody bothered.
The Amazing Spider-man has a lot of room to improve, but they didn't flub the basic components of the story and Garfield makes a terrific hero. As long as the reboot is following Raimi's films so closely, here's hoping they copy the part where the sequel is a huge improvement over the first.
Interesting run-down, I agree with a lot of it, with a few exceptions.
ReplyDeleteI think The Amazing Spider-man handled the origin so much better. The scene where Spiderman is fumbling around breaking things with his new found strength was pretty spot on. And the whole manifestation of the spider senses kicking in and how it was almost horrifying also rung a note with me. I also appreciated that they played up the science angle a lot more and he made his web shooters. Although I am disappointed they didn't later have him run out of webbing or something, that's always a good moment of suspense for Spiderman.
I'm also ok with going in the direction of Captain Stacy. The death of Captain Stacy was an important comic eveng, and if you're using Gwen Stacy it's super important. J. Jonah Jameson can come later, but JK Simmons fucking owned that role. I think trying to add Jameson to the first installment of a reboot would have been a HUGE MISTAKE.
Hmm, I also actually preferred the coreagraphy for the action sequences in Webb's rendition. The lithe movements of the actor were more "realistic" (yeah I know) to me in this one. And, the battle scenes were more enjoyable with the quipping of Spiderman. I just liked the way the movement was done in these, to be honest. But I should probably re-watch the Raimi one.
While Spider-man may have been a better "movie" as I think you're arguing, that's not really what I'm looking for I guess. I want a good SPIDER-MAN. And I think The Amazing Spider-man gave me a MUCH better Spider-man. My basic intial reaction was that I felt Raimie was more concerned with making a good movie, and Webb seemed to focus more on the character. It panders to my particular preference.
I get a lot of what you’re saying. I think Marc Webb had the right idea with a lot of his story choices, but for me it comes down to execution. Sam Raimi is just so much better at pumping life into the material. A lot of Amazing Spider-man “worked” in the sense that I never lost interest or saw the film just face-plant like Spidey 3. But it never really reached take off speed.
ReplyDeleteWhile I was watching the high school battle between Lizard and Spidey, for example, I was appreciating the seamlessness of the effects without getting caught up in it. Just sort of sitting back and saying, “Oh yeah, this is very well done.”
I agree with you that the effects are noticeably superior to the ’02 film. Spidey always has weight and believability in this film and he had something of a cartoon problem here and there in the first. But I’m willing to trade some believability because of the jolt Raimi’s direction brought to the action.
I really wanted to give that round to Denis Leary. I was very impressed with his work and the way his character was handled, but there’s no denying JK Simmons.
So, yeah, Amazing is not a disaster. I think Webb’s more than earned another crack at the franchise. But I can’t deny I had an empty feeling leaving the theater.
I guess I had these HUGE expectations going into Raimi's Spider-man. I'm like "I love Spider-man, I love Raimi, what can go wrong?" And I left a bit disappointed. I mean Raimi likes comic books, right? He should love and revere the sanctity of the character. Characterizations go a long way for me.
ReplyDeleteHeck, I liked Fantastic Four even though it suffered on MANY levels because I thought that Johnny Storm & The Thing were amazingly spot on.
That's what Marvel Studios has managed to find the magical formula on. They stay true to the characters we know and love, without taking ridiculous liberties, and weave a great movie around it. Iron Man is actually an example of where the movies have actually added to and improved the character overall.
As a fan of comic-books, I just prefer watching a comic-book adaptation that appears to come with a bit of nostalgia and love in its heart. When I watched Raimi's Spider-man I thought, Eh that was ok. And when I was reading some Spider-man comics later I was like "AUGH, THAT WASN'T EVEN SPIDERMAN... That guy would totally not even bother Wolverine".
Raimi made a solid movie, and he did a good job with the overall arc of Harry Osborne and his eventual death that played into the comics as well. There were a few things he did really well. I just thought he could have done better.
In The Amazing Spider-Man I didn't walk away wishing for anything above and beyond what was given to me. I was satisfied, and entertained. The whole scene with the car thief was quintessential Spider-man, I loved watching it.
P.S. Although I was angry about the whole idea that him and Gwen might pick back up. That was a total cop-out. I mean seriously, we know you have to break up, and promising her dying father is the best way. What are you going to break up with her later because it's "just not working out". That part was infuriating.
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen the new version yet, but I enjoyed this feature. I agree that J.K. Simmons was perfect in his role in the original franchise.
ReplyDeletedude i think the amazing spider-man would be infinity% better cuz he is far younger than the old Tobey McGuire. Marc Webb had made good 3d scenes which i loved, i'll only agree 45% with u.
ReplyDelete