The Amazing Spiderman review

                Time flies by when you’re having fun, and since 2002, when Sam Raimi first realized “Spider-Man” for the big screen, we have had a glut of superhero franchises rise and fall in its wake, culminating in the record shattering success of “The Avengers." “Spider-Man 2” was met with high praise from both fans and critics and was widely considered to be one of the greatest superhero movies ever made up to that point. “Spider-Man 3” was marred by highly publicized studio interference, making for a messy film that left fans and critics disappointed and was widely considered one of the worst superhero movies ever made up to that point. After having his vision for the franchise ripped away, Raimi left Spider-Man and the same studio has now recruited “(500) Days of Summer” director Mark Webb to take over with a new reimagining of this iconic character.

                “The Amazing Spider-Man” takes us back to the familiar territory of Raimi’s origin story back in 2002. Andrew Garfield, costar of  “The Social Network”, now plays Peter Parker as he clumsily tries to get the attention of a girl (again), while dealing with high school bullies (again) as well as trying to fit in his at-home responsibilities with Aunt May and Uncle Ben (again). What this movie does change is slight things such as a subplot dealing with Parker's abandonment from his parents, his father’s secret past, and instead of the more-familiar Mary Jane character, his puppy-dog affections are now directed towards Gwen Stacey, as played by Emma Stone.
               When trying to find out more about his father, Peter investigates a highly advanced lab ran by Dr. Curt Connors (Ryse Ifans), an amputee scientist who is working on the genetic splicing of animals, such as reptiles, to regrow limbs. During his investigation Parker finds himself in an enclosure of genetically modified spiders...and you can probably guess what happens from there.  

                The first 45 minute of this film slowly delays the action to delve into Parker's awkwardness and to set up his guilt-inspired vigilantism. Like Christopher Nolan’s Batman reboot, the tone of this movie is decidedly much more somber and serious than the previous incarnations. Instead of the earnest, dorky portrayal of Toby Maguire’s Spidey, Garfield plays him brooding, aggressive, and hot tempered. But what keeps this from being “Spiderman Begins”, is a script full of narrative inconsistencies, subplots that are raised to make the characters do things, only to be dropped entirely once they aren’t needed anymore, and a serious lack of development and proper motivation for Curt Connors as the slithering Lizard villain.
              Emma Stone is very nice to watch as Gwen Stacey and Martin Sheen is terrific as Peter’s Uncle Ben, but I found Garfield’s portrayal as Spider-Man to be uneven and confused, which I blame more on Webb’s shapeless direction and a screenplay that feels like it was built by committee. 

                Some fans seem to be rejoicing in the fact that this interpretation is less campy than Raimi’s trilogy, and certainly it does build a more grounded reality for this superhero to exist in. However, in trading wide-eyed enthusiasm for existential angst--by a director who frankly doesn’t have the experience or chops to pull it off-- what results is a slow moving, ponderous film that is far more interested in tonal exteriors than tightly crafted storytelling.
            In all, “The Amazing Spider-Man” rings enough of the expected genre bells to make an acceptable melody, but not without hitting enough wrong notes to keep me from wondering what’s amiss. 

Grade: C-

Originally Published in the Idaho Sate Journal/July-2012