I am not really into super hero films. It all seems a bit silly to me. But
seriously, why make a new Spider-Man film? Sam Raimi's seminal 2002 effort (Spider-Man)
was one of the highest grossing films of all time, received critical acclaim on
release, and is probably one of the best comic-book adaptations to date. So why
start afresh? Well, probably because superhero films pull in the cash like you
wouldn't believe, even incredibly lame ones, like the mind-numbing Daredevil
(a film that will make you wish you too were totally blind). Although
the reason may be that Spider-Man is one of the best loved superheroes
in the Marvel canon and deserves a fresh start after things admittedly started
to trail off a bit towards the end of Raimi's trilogy. Whatever reasons lie
behind this re-boot, be glad, because it’s an absolute corker. Although if you haven’t
seen it, spoilers exist herein. You have been warned.
This new outing is no longer in the hands of the capable Raimi, but instead
has (appropriately named) Mark Webb at the reins, and Webb provides strong
direction and gives a darker feel to the story. The general aesthetic of the
film is darker than Raimi's effort as well, however this is no rip off of
Christopher Nolan's gritty Batman reboot, and to accuse Webb of any such
copy-catting is simply unfair. Webb is masterful here and should definitely be
allowed to continue with the series, though his task was unenviable. He had to
cater firstly for those who had seen the other Spider-Man films or
otherwise knew a bit of the story, and also those who were new to the
Spider-Man universe, of which undoubtedly there will be many. The inevitable
result is that a lot of ground from the original Spider-Man is
revisited, for better or worse.
Andrew Garfield is the new face of the title character. Which seems odd
really, since Peter Parker is supposed to be a nerdy loner and Garfield looks
like a Gillette model. Though ultimately he proves to be a good choice for the
role, portraying Spider-Man as more like the trash talking teenager envisaged
in the Marvel comics, and he brings some tangible charisma to the role. Garfield
really gets to the heart of what makes
Spider-Man one of the greatest superheros; the conflict between the boy and the
man, between the renegade and the paragon. All that ‘Great Power, Great
Responsibility’ shit. Yeah, that. More importantly, we see real progression in
Garfield through the film, whereas Toby Maguire's Peter Parker was still
painfully awkward by the third instalment. Does that kid ever grow up? Mary
Jane is replaced as the obligatory love interest in favour of Gwen Stacy,
played by Emma Stone (thankfully the comic book story arc by which Stacy comes
to have three clones was not considered for the movie). Stone is actually fairly
average in her performance, overdoing the whole quirky thing and coming off as
more annoying than anything else, but there is real chemistry between her and
Garfield, and they prove a far more enigmatic pairing than Maguire and Dunst.
Uncle Ben still serves as the catalyst for Peter Parker's transition to unitard
clad Spider-Man, and Martin Sheen is an excellent choice for the part. His portrayal
of Peter's uncle adds real warmth to the script. However, as in the 2002 film,
Uncle Ben has relatively little screen time due to his quick death, which feels
untimely in more than one way, as it would have been nice to see more of Sheen.
Rhys Ifans is just so-so as the villain Dr Curt Connors, and fails to match up
to Wilem Defoe's Green Goblin from the 2002 film (though his costume is way,
way less retarded; god that immovable mask was stupid). Though 'The Lizard',
Connors' evil alter-ego, fits well with the darker tone of the film, and
conveys real menace. One scene in particular towards the end, feels almost like
an homage to the kitchen scene from Jurassic Park which, given the
tension of that sequence, is an achievement indeed. Denis Leary plays Stacy's
hardboiled police Captain father, who naturally doesn’t like Spider-Man on
account of comic book movie cliché. Leary, who was so good in The Thomas
Crown Affair and Recount is similarly great here, and serves to
ground the script which otherwise verges on the wacky science-fictional, with
big man-lizards and far-fetched laboratory settings. A recurring character from
the 2002 film is Flash Thompson, Peter's classroom antagonist. Thompson begins
the film as cartoonishly offensive as in the 2002 effort, however by the end of
the film he actually sympathises with Parker over the death of his uncle, and
it is hinted that the two may even become friends. This is just a minor detail
but adds to the authenticity and feel of the film; the whole thing is more
natural and makes a hell of a lot more sense. Though it is still spider-man,
remember. High-tension wire web-slingers ahoy.
This new incarnation of Spider-Man takes a darker, more gritty approach to
one of the best loved of the big American superhero franchises. Peter Parker is
more human, more relatable and ultimately more interesting. Similarly the story
is stronger, and picks up real traction as the script progresses. Some silly
plot twists do pop up regarding some antigen that causes lizardisation and
Spider-Man webbing up a flesh wound and then running on it because hey why the
hell not, but this cannot really take away from what is a very good movie. And
besides, this is a comic book story after all. No one was expecting High
Fidelity. Lighten the hell up.
No comments:
Post a Comment