Show Posts
11
Discussion Board / The Amazing Spider-Man Review
« on: July 21, 2012, 07:22:03 pm »
I find this movie is highly underrated, and thus the reason I went through all the time to provide you with reasons to see this movie whose title 'Amazing' is rightfully earned. I'd love to hear from you too, you can even make your own review here! I just love Spider-Man, and feel like Rami's movies did not do him justice. So, without further talk, I introduce you to my review. This movie, to me, is not worth missing on the big screen!
CONTAINS SPOILERS
Filling the shoe's of such a loved film trilogy like Rami's Spider-Man movies is hard to accomplish. For this reason, Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man is highly, and easily criticized by most. However, most don't know the true stories that Stan Lee and Steve Ditko originally created.
"The already-told-story" is a play on the movie's franchise quote "The untold story." Contrary to the belief that this movie has already been done before, it is a vastly different approach on Peter Parker's (And Spider-man's) persona and past. There is a dramatic shift to this story which makes you realize that this is nearly a whole different character than the old Spider-man movies, Thus the reason why those unfamiliar with the comics (original story) are not easily adjusted to this new character. The old franchise failed to introduce several of Peter Parker's biggest life changes and even his real personality. For example, they ignored the fact that his parents disappeared when he was at a young age. They also went straight to the most popular love interest of Peter Parker, instead of starting with the original character Gwen Stacy. Another mistake was the worried and dramatic tone of Peter Parker. Yes, he is still a responsible person but he is also a Teen-ager. In the stories Peter was a young and independent character, who at the same time was responsible and kind hearted. Did I forget to mention one of the most dramatic mistakes? Peter Parker's gift of knowledge. This was in no way shown to the full effect in the old series, for example the fact that he actually made his web-shooters instead of deriving them from the spider. The part I loved the most about the new movie was the use of Spider-Man's sarcastic and clever approach. This was never shown in Rami's movies, and this was such an important aspect to the entire story. The mask practically created two completely different characters. A normal kindhearted and sometimes shy teenager who could slip into an exciting, thrill seeking and rambunctious super hero with one cover of a suit. Sadly, Rami failed to define the story's greatest qualities.
Villain:
The perfect choice of enemy, The Lizard, whose human mask is played by the thrilling Rhys Ifans. One of the first villians of spider-man. In the comics he had apparently lost his arm during a war, Dr. Curt Connors felt like he lost a half of himself. Obsessed with regaining his lost limb. A sort of 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' situation approached him, with a sympathetic human on one side and an uncontrollable cross species on the other. A perfect tie with Peter Parker's past, since Connors was a fellow scientist of Peter's 'lost' father. Though what disappoints is that Connor's past was never identified, in the story he had a wife and child. His son in which he had actually eaten as the lizard, this would have brought an interesting dramatic element and an increase in dark pattern to the movie that I would have loved to see. But otherwise, this villian's option is by far my favorite.
The lizard's physical appearance is an amazing testimate to CGI. He truely has the presence of what a humanoide lizard would perhaps have. The defined jaw bones of a human that enable him to speak, the reptilian eye splits to give a horrific and uncivilized spirit, and the detailed green scalings that animalize him. He has the perfect balance of human and lizard, both parts being equally presented.
Action:
I would have liked to see a bit more action, but this can be excused due to the fact that this is a reboot and they're better explaining the real orgins of the character. But this isn't 'Gladiator' or '300', known for their incredible action that sometimes overlapses the plot. Though, when there is action in The Amazing Spider-Man, it is truely amazing. Spider-man's trademark of spine bending. waist twisting, and silhouettic-like moves is incredible to see. Especially when the stunt men of the movie are actually doing most of these moves, with the working intention that creates a realistic feel to the character who is HUMAN-spider, not just a spider. The intensity and fluidity that the character defines reminds you of a real spider, but with the body restrictions of a human.
Swinging through the city, sliding off of buildings, twisting free from bullets, slinging off of cranes, racing through alleys, bending below a giant lizard, all done without a mistake so as to please the eyes. The action was one of the best parts of this movie. My favorite though, would have to be the sensation of falling down to the streets from web strings, and swinging right back up through the buildings into the free air of the city. An experience you CANNOT miss on the big screen.
Soundtrack:
The music of a movie is one of the most important elements, though not too many realize this. It defines or improves the mood in a scene to share with you that emotion.
Elfman's version of music for Spider-Man was a beautiful classic, but James Horner brought a more modern feel to the soundtrack. Elfman's score had a main focus on Spider-Man it seemed. Whereas this score was blending Spider-Man and Peter Parker in symphony together. It's very emotional, exposing the troubled boy under the mask. Yet, when the trumpet plays the theme in? the begining a heroic feeling grows. Horner won both aspects in this movie. It seems this is a polished version of Spider-Man's music, but at the same time I am broken two ways. Two completely different themes, in which I am won over by both.
Plot:
Something I must bring up as one of my favorite plot changes was Uncle Ben's death. Something I feel was far more dramatizing and humanly realistic. Webb's film was much more grounded than Raimi's and because of this I felt the relationships were more genuine, and realistic. The Uncle Ben of Raimi? film's never went into the full effect of his character. He was so cookie cuter nice that you knew he was going to die just because he was "Too nice to live". But what Webb gave Ben was a plainly shown 'heavier' personality than I've seen in many of his other incarnations. The character seemed so real and it truely felt like he had an actual 'role' in Peter's life because of the time given into his character. For this reason, his death was a tragedy rather than a sad event. And this did actually bring me to tears, knowing that Uncle Ben was the only and last replacement of a loved father in Peter Parker's life, and that Peter thought this his doing.
A hilarious mistake that some critics come across is the idea that Marc Webb has 'copied' Christopher Nolan's batman series in the fact that is it darker than the last Spider-Man. Yes, it seems darker only because it exposes a darker reality. And I think it might be hard for some people to digest that reality can be extremely harsh. Things are also much more graphic, in Uncle Ben's death for example. Instead of being forced from a car and shot dead in coincidence, Peter's uncle (in this Spider-man) was shot from across the street after looking for him. Peter comes upon him and tries to stop a heavy blood flow caused by the bullet, it is quite unpleasant but exposes the dark reality of a real death. This happened all because Peter ran away, so he sits there sobbing with the stained impression that he in fact killed his Uncle. Peter had actually seen the death take place, as a result of his selfish choice. So you see, this does not mean it is copying the Dark Knight just because it is darker. It only reveals things in a more realistic way that can be hard to accept due to it's dark nature. And remember that it's not the character's who are darker, it's the events.
I will avoid going into detail of the story, to evade spoilers, so I will give a quick conclusion. The character's were all brought up with an explaination of their backround, except for Dr. Connors who I felt was still a bit unexplained. But the plot itself was very engaging, though somewhere in the middle it took a bit of a slow stride. I felt like I was watching a whole new movie, rather than a reboot.
Realism:
One of the reasons the movie is worth its 'Amazing' title is Webb's talent to keep a realistic environment. For example, whenever Peter Parker comes back from a violent fight, Aunt May is there waiting for him with a troubled face as his body is patterned with dried wounds and bruises. Speaking of the character, Aunt May isn't the clueless woman who goes to sleep every night thinking Peter is always just there in the house. She, like any real parent, would excessively worry about him. It pains your emotions to watch her eyes widen and tear as she see's her only family member bloodied and bruised, and her under the impression that he is going out and getting beaten because he is unable to explain to her what happened. Something that reminded me of the reality in this story was the bully, Flash Thompson. He wasn't just a brainless, bulky athlete who spends his time provoking nerds at school, the typical stereotype of a bully. He had a humane emotion to him, as shown in the scene where he morned the death of Peter's uncle in quote "I'm sorry about your uncle" with a serious tone.
Acting:
What even critics cannot condemn is the perfect casting. Andrew Garfield, a british actor known for his work in 'The social network', is a brilliant pick for Peter Parker (Spider-Man). He provides a younger (in teenage years) and more physically fit finesse than Tobey Maguire. I also feel he defines emotions better than Maguire, as Tobey tends to go a little 'over-board' on his expressions (for example crying) and this usually becomes awkward. I will not give further examples, or else I feel I would take up the whole page. Emma Stone, commonly known for 'Easy A' and 'The Help', plays the clever and beautiful Gwen Stacy. It is impossible for one not to compare the chemistry and the relationship of Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) and Peter (Andrew Garfeild) versus Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) and Peter (Toby Mcguire). A more fluid relationship sharing love but also sarcasm, as opposed to just a simple 'perfect love' mood. This gives a more believable feel to it as well, it isn't just a fictional dramatic 'love you then hate you' or a relationship of perfection. All actors, including the many unmentioned, I feel fit perfectly to their roles. It feels very much like Webb had taken them straight from the comics.
This movie I rate 9/10
Truly Amazing, worth seeing twice in theaters and buying on blu-ray and/or dvd , but with some minor flaws of course.
And there you have it, now you can rate (on a 1-5 scale) how much you enjoyed the movie yourself (on the poll above). And also, you can even post your own review here or comment on my review. Or you can simply discuss the characters, movie, villain, acting, ect!
CONTAINS SPOILERS
Filling the shoe's of such a loved film trilogy like Rami's Spider-Man movies is hard to accomplish. For this reason, Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man is highly, and easily criticized by most. However, most don't know the true stories that Stan Lee and Steve Ditko originally created.
"The already-told-story" is a play on the movie's franchise quote "The untold story." Contrary to the belief that this movie has already been done before, it is a vastly different approach on Peter Parker's (And Spider-man's) persona and past. There is a dramatic shift to this story which makes you realize that this is nearly a whole different character than the old Spider-man movies, Thus the reason why those unfamiliar with the comics (original story) are not easily adjusted to this new character. The old franchise failed to introduce several of Peter Parker's biggest life changes and even his real personality. For example, they ignored the fact that his parents disappeared when he was at a young age. They also went straight to the most popular love interest of Peter Parker, instead of starting with the original character Gwen Stacy. Another mistake was the worried and dramatic tone of Peter Parker. Yes, he is still a responsible person but he is also a Teen-ager. In the stories Peter was a young and independent character, who at the same time was responsible and kind hearted. Did I forget to mention one of the most dramatic mistakes? Peter Parker's gift of knowledge. This was in no way shown to the full effect in the old series, for example the fact that he actually made his web-shooters instead of deriving them from the spider. The part I loved the most about the new movie was the use of Spider-Man's sarcastic and clever approach. This was never shown in Rami's movies, and this was such an important aspect to the entire story. The mask practically created two completely different characters. A normal kindhearted and sometimes shy teenager who could slip into an exciting, thrill seeking and rambunctious super hero with one cover of a suit. Sadly, Rami failed to define the story's greatest qualities.
Villain:
The perfect choice of enemy, The Lizard, whose human mask is played by the thrilling Rhys Ifans. One of the first villians of spider-man. In the comics he had apparently lost his arm during a war, Dr. Curt Connors felt like he lost a half of himself. Obsessed with regaining his lost limb. A sort of 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' situation approached him, with a sympathetic human on one side and an uncontrollable cross species on the other. A perfect tie with Peter Parker's past, since Connors was a fellow scientist of Peter's 'lost' father. Though what disappoints is that Connor's past was never identified, in the story he had a wife and child. His son in which he had actually eaten as the lizard, this would have brought an interesting dramatic element and an increase in dark pattern to the movie that I would have loved to see. But otherwise, this villian's option is by far my favorite.
The lizard's physical appearance is an amazing testimate to CGI. He truely has the presence of what a humanoide lizard would perhaps have. The defined jaw bones of a human that enable him to speak, the reptilian eye splits to give a horrific and uncivilized spirit, and the detailed green scalings that animalize him. He has the perfect balance of human and lizard, both parts being equally presented.
Action:
I would have liked to see a bit more action, but this can be excused due to the fact that this is a reboot and they're better explaining the real orgins of the character. But this isn't 'Gladiator' or '300', known for their incredible action that sometimes overlapses the plot. Though, when there is action in The Amazing Spider-Man, it is truely amazing. Spider-man's trademark of spine bending. waist twisting, and silhouettic-like moves is incredible to see. Especially when the stunt men of the movie are actually doing most of these moves, with the working intention that creates a realistic feel to the character who is HUMAN-spider, not just a spider. The intensity and fluidity that the character defines reminds you of a real spider, but with the body restrictions of a human.
Swinging through the city, sliding off of buildings, twisting free from bullets, slinging off of cranes, racing through alleys, bending below a giant lizard, all done without a mistake so as to please the eyes. The action was one of the best parts of this movie. My favorite though, would have to be the sensation of falling down to the streets from web strings, and swinging right back up through the buildings into the free air of the city. An experience you CANNOT miss on the big screen.
Soundtrack:
The music of a movie is one of the most important elements, though not too many realize this. It defines or improves the mood in a scene to share with you that emotion.
Elfman's version of music for Spider-Man was a beautiful classic, but James Horner brought a more modern feel to the soundtrack. Elfman's score had a main focus on Spider-Man it seemed. Whereas this score was blending Spider-Man and Peter Parker in symphony together. It's very emotional, exposing the troubled boy under the mask. Yet, when the trumpet plays the theme in? the begining a heroic feeling grows. Horner won both aspects in this movie. It seems this is a polished version of Spider-Man's music, but at the same time I am broken two ways. Two completely different themes, in which I am won over by both.
Plot:
Something I must bring up as one of my favorite plot changes was Uncle Ben's death. Something I feel was far more dramatizing and humanly realistic. Webb's film was much more grounded than Raimi's and because of this I felt the relationships were more genuine, and realistic. The Uncle Ben of Raimi? film's never went into the full effect of his character. He was so cookie cuter nice that you knew he was going to die just because he was "Too nice to live". But what Webb gave Ben was a plainly shown 'heavier' personality than I've seen in many of his other incarnations. The character seemed so real and it truely felt like he had an actual 'role' in Peter's life because of the time given into his character. For this reason, his death was a tragedy rather than a sad event. And this did actually bring me to tears, knowing that Uncle Ben was the only and last replacement of a loved father in Peter Parker's life, and that Peter thought this his doing.
A hilarious mistake that some critics come across is the idea that Marc Webb has 'copied' Christopher Nolan's batman series in the fact that is it darker than the last Spider-Man. Yes, it seems darker only because it exposes a darker reality. And I think it might be hard for some people to digest that reality can be extremely harsh. Things are also much more graphic, in Uncle Ben's death for example. Instead of being forced from a car and shot dead in coincidence, Peter's uncle (in this Spider-man) was shot from across the street after looking for him. Peter comes upon him and tries to stop a heavy blood flow caused by the bullet, it is quite unpleasant but exposes the dark reality of a real death. This happened all because Peter ran away, so he sits there sobbing with the stained impression that he in fact killed his Uncle. Peter had actually seen the death take place, as a result of his selfish choice. So you see, this does not mean it is copying the Dark Knight just because it is darker. It only reveals things in a more realistic way that can be hard to accept due to it's dark nature. And remember that it's not the character's who are darker, it's the events.
I will avoid going into detail of the story, to evade spoilers, so I will give a quick conclusion. The character's were all brought up with an explaination of their backround, except for Dr. Connors who I felt was still a bit unexplained. But the plot itself was very engaging, though somewhere in the middle it took a bit of a slow stride. I felt like I was watching a whole new movie, rather than a reboot.
Realism:
One of the reasons the movie is worth its 'Amazing' title is Webb's talent to keep a realistic environment. For example, whenever Peter Parker comes back from a violent fight, Aunt May is there waiting for him with a troubled face as his body is patterned with dried wounds and bruises. Speaking of the character, Aunt May isn't the clueless woman who goes to sleep every night thinking Peter is always just there in the house. She, like any real parent, would excessively worry about him. It pains your emotions to watch her eyes widen and tear as she see's her only family member bloodied and bruised, and her under the impression that he is going out and getting beaten because he is unable to explain to her what happened. Something that reminded me of the reality in this story was the bully, Flash Thompson. He wasn't just a brainless, bulky athlete who spends his time provoking nerds at school, the typical stereotype of a bully. He had a humane emotion to him, as shown in the scene where he morned the death of Peter's uncle in quote "I'm sorry about your uncle" with a serious tone.
Acting:
What even critics cannot condemn is the perfect casting. Andrew Garfield, a british actor known for his work in 'The social network', is a brilliant pick for Peter Parker (Spider-Man). He provides a younger (in teenage years) and more physically fit finesse than Tobey Maguire. I also feel he defines emotions better than Maguire, as Tobey tends to go a little 'over-board' on his expressions (for example crying) and this usually becomes awkward. I will not give further examples, or else I feel I would take up the whole page. Emma Stone, commonly known for 'Easy A' and 'The Help', plays the clever and beautiful Gwen Stacy. It is impossible for one not to compare the chemistry and the relationship of Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) and Peter (Andrew Garfeild) versus Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) and Peter (Toby Mcguire). A more fluid relationship sharing love but also sarcasm, as opposed to just a simple 'perfect love' mood. This gives a more believable feel to it as well, it isn't just a fictional dramatic 'love you then hate you' or a relationship of perfection. All actors, including the many unmentioned, I feel fit perfectly to their roles. It feels very much like Webb had taken them straight from the comics.
This movie I rate 9/10
Truly Amazing, worth seeing twice in theaters and buying on blu-ray and/or dvd , but with some minor flaws of course.
And there you have it, now you can rate (on a 1-5 scale) how much you enjoyed the movie yourself (on the poll above). And also, you can even post your own review here or comment on my review. Or you can simply discuss the characters, movie, villain, acting, ect!
! On top of it rears a cryptic horse with pegasus wings! Glaves beautiful rainbow going above the entrance of the catwalk and two outstanding crystal tree's on each side!
