As presented in The Amazing Spider-Man (2012), Andrew Garfield… MoreAs presented in The Amazing Spider-Man (2012), Andrew Garfield presented himself to be a promising candidate in portraying the web-slinger. Once again he has proven his worth as we are given a confident, courageous and slightly cocky (not in a bad way this time) Peter Parker with his alternative life. It is a shame that Garfield isn't the strongest when it comes to rather emotional scenes. Director Marc Webb clearly specializes in having a convincing and loving relationship between specific characters. Emma Stone is the brave and gorgeous Gwen Stacey who is Garfield's other half (in film and real life) and the true chemistry between both performers undoubtedly plays superbly within the film.
If you are someone expecting a decent story from this picture, you might be better off elsewhere. With sequels needing to seem and act bigger than their predecessors, this story ends up slightly all over the place. Within this film it constantly jumps from the relationship with Parker's love, to the search for his parents past, arguing with Aunt May (Sally Field) and battling villains. The story expands into numerous varieties that viewers could slowly lose interest, this is due to most events featuring a lack of focus.
Going back to the topic of false advertisement, the villains are advertised to ally together and destroy Spider-Man. Instead they encounter and attack him one at a time, draining any anticipation for the big battle that never happens. These lackluster duels could be from how quickly they start and end, as well as the lack of character development from the films fiendish foes. The most tedious example is Rhino (Paul Giamatti) who only appears as Russian thug within the film's opening and reappears in his battle suit at the extreme end. Aside from his stereotypical and slightly unconvincing Russian accent, this villain has no development and is hardly in the film; therefore you really just don't care.
Next on the agenda is Electro (Jamie Foxx), who had the potential for being the real spark that escalated the films story and quality. Instead we are given a performance where you admire Foxx's character before his transformation and then have to cope with constant flashes of dodgy lightning for the remaining 2 hours. Out of the villains, Dane DeHann's portrayal of Harry Osborn is as strong as the film's protagonist until he becomes the Green Goblin. Whilst lacking the power, intimidation and menace that Willem Dafoe so perfectly executed in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man (2002), this last second foe literally appears after one massive battle and easily becomes subdued, further questioning the point in featuring this third force of evil.
Despite the unsurprising strength in the characters and relationship between Garfield and Stone, it's a real shame the web crawler cannot stand alone with too many broken legs. With hit and miss visual effects, a slightly scrambled story and disappointing villains, these errors need to be taken into consideration so that future installments don't just rely on very few good performances.
What makes this one seem more disappointing is that there is too many… MoreWhat makes this one seem more disappointing is that there is too many villians that there isn't enough focus compared to Dr Octopus and the Green Goblin. Another complaint about this film was the lack of fights. Personally, I believe that the intensity was focused more between friends, rather than battles to the death. Next time, it would've been better to focus on just the one villian, instead of three at once.
A far more loyal film towards the comics than Sam Raimi's trilogy.… MoreA far more loyal film towards the comics than Sam Raimi's trilogy. However, it doesn't mean that this film is better than Raimi's. Even though Tim Burton's Batman films were more faithful to the comics, Christopher Nolan's trilogy is widely considered the better out of the two. And in this case, even though I liked this new one, I grew up with Sam Raimi's trilogy and to have a reboot come about so shortly is more than not called for. Even though Andrew Garfield gave a strong performance, I just still prefer Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man. While the Lizard is an impressive villan with Rhys Ifans' superb portrayal, it ultimately doesn't top Alfred Molina's Dr Octopus or Willem Dafoe's Green Goblin. Overall, this reboot doesn't live up to being "Amazing" as its title implies, but it's still Spider-Man and even though it may not top Sam Raimi's trilogy, this introduces another way of watching the web slinger on the big screen.
P.S. Because of J.K Simmons' brilliant portrayal as J.Jonah Jameson in the trilogy, if they ever bring that character into this reboot franchise, I feel no one else can really top his performance, so they'd better have Simmons or no one for that role.
The sequel to the superb 2004 entry, Spider-Man 2 is bigger and is… MoreThe sequel to the superb 2004 entry, Spider-Man 2 is bigger and is more emotional. Tobey Maguire reprises his role as the web slinger. This time, he is to confront a new and improved villian. Personally, the main focus of this film should be Alfred Molina; who's portrayal of Dr Octopus gives off pure power, sophistication and terror. This is possibly the highlight in the Spider-Man trilogy.
Sam Raimi- The Director of the 'Evil Dead' Trilogy, has created a… MoreSam Raimi- The Director of the 'Evil Dead' Trilogy, has created a superb beginning chapter for Spider-Man. What it succeeds in is the dark atmospheres and the strength in characters. The highlights are Toby Maguire and Willhem Dafoe. While Maguire gives off a truely confident and heroic role, Dafoe presents a powerful and sinister villian.