Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Dennis Leary, Martin Sheen, Sally Fields
Director: Marc Webb
Initial Release Date/s: 06/13/12 [Japan] & 07/03/12 [United States]
Running Time: 136 Minutes
For
a DC man, it's difficult for me to praise a Marvel film, like what I'm about to
do.
Looking back at it's former franchise, this latest reboot of the Spider-Man title is a distant forerunner. Granted that the previous franchise's first installment was one of the greatest things to happen to the comic book film genre and summer box-office opener standards, while its following sequels weren't as explosive. This quick comeback is one to be remembered, for several summers to follow.
As a child, his parents, due to mysterious reasons, abandoned Peter Parker [Garfield]. He is personally left, by his parent, in the parental custody of his father's brother, Ben [Sheen], and his wife, May [Fields]. Even after turbulently confusing childhood, Peter manages to become a well-learned teenage boy, with an affinity for photography and a crush on a delightfully cute schoolmate, Gwen Stacy [Stone]. The story picks up when Peter discovers a leather satchel that belonged to his father, which had a secret compartment with research notes that had a peculiar equation written on one of the papers. He later finds out that his father, who was a scientist, worked with this man named Curtis Connors [Ifans]. When Peter tries to visit Dr. Connors in his office, at Oscorp, he stumbles upon this room with genetically engineered spiders that are spinning these industrial-strong webs. Due to his awkward clumsiness, he causes a stir in the spider's den, which leads him to the iconic "spider bite" that transforms him to (you guessed it) Spider-Man. Curtis Connors, on the other hand (pun intended) was continuing the research that him and Peter's father were doing, before he went away.
The film was NOT the debacle, which I thought it would be. Instead it weaved an intricately intriguing lattice-of-a-plot by harnessing it's characters' development elegantly, which is very rare nowadays. The casting may have looked a bit iffy, when they initially came out in early trailers, but the end product was something to lo' and behold. As a comic book fan, this is something that really caught my eye, and undying attention. Though the film may not have been 100% faithful to the old panels'n'pencil, it was still a very interesting take on such an iconic franchise.
I don't usually dwell into the romantic aspect of an action film, but the director, Marc Webb, did an excellent job in directing the chemistry between Peter and Gwen. Both performers played off of each others' character, so well. It's gonna be hard for non-comic fans to see Gwen die (Almost every comic fan knows this) in either the next, or following sequel. The production house should really work hard on how to properly "off" her, and introduce Mary Jane into Peter's life. Emma Stone should really be commended for her role, in this film, as she managed to bring in her quirkiness and perfect comedic timing. The awkward humor brought in by Andrew Garfield was something to also be noteworthy of, because it brought a sense of juvenility to the story of a young Peter Parker.
I also liked the subtle nods to several things in the Marvel, particularly the Spider-Man universe, without really over saturating it with needless references to giveaway as to what will occur in the sequel. This gives the film a teasing atmosphere for what is to come in future installments. I would really love to see how this coincides with the Avengers film franchise, since I see a lack of the Stark Tower in the fictional Manhattan skyline. And, it's always amusing to see Stan Lee lend his presence to a Marvel film.
Another aspect that surprised me the most was how much the film made Los Angeles look like New York city. Yes, over the course of shooting the film was reportedly being shot, on location, in Los Angeles. Especially when news got loose that South Grand Avenue was being used for one of Spider-Man's stunt scenes. The only thing about the digitally modified skyline of NYC, was Oscorp. Tower. It looked like a CGI-sore-thumb sticking out.
The (unbiased) spats I have for this film are with how rushed they were in trying to reboot the Spider-Man film series. But then again, the last one, which was five years ago, was too horrendous to even try to remember. Another spat goes to Aunt May. Sally Fields is one of the most outstanding actresses to date, but the managing of her character could've been better. Hopefully, future installments will put more depth into her character, and the iconic grey hair in a bun. My cinephilic senses are tingling, and they tell me that this film has proven base as to how superhero movies should be handled in the coming future. Let's hope that the future sequels, will not repeat a half-decade-old mistake.
Looking back at it's former franchise, this latest reboot of the Spider-Man title is a distant forerunner. Granted that the previous franchise's first installment was one of the greatest things to happen to the comic book film genre and summer box-office opener standards, while its following sequels weren't as explosive. This quick comeback is one to be remembered, for several summers to follow.
As a child, his parents, due to mysterious reasons, abandoned Peter Parker [Garfield]. He is personally left, by his parent, in the parental custody of his father's brother, Ben [Sheen], and his wife, May [Fields]. Even after turbulently confusing childhood, Peter manages to become a well-learned teenage boy, with an affinity for photography and a crush on a delightfully cute schoolmate, Gwen Stacy [Stone]. The story picks up when Peter discovers a leather satchel that belonged to his father, which had a secret compartment with research notes that had a peculiar equation written on one of the papers. He later finds out that his father, who was a scientist, worked with this man named Curtis Connors [Ifans]. When Peter tries to visit Dr. Connors in his office, at Oscorp, he stumbles upon this room with genetically engineered spiders that are spinning these industrial-strong webs. Due to his awkward clumsiness, he causes a stir in the spider's den, which leads him to the iconic "spider bite" that transforms him to (you guessed it) Spider-Man. Curtis Connors, on the other hand (pun intended) was continuing the research that him and Peter's father were doing, before he went away.
The film was NOT the debacle, which I thought it would be. Instead it weaved an intricately intriguing lattice-of-a-plot by harnessing it's characters' development elegantly, which is very rare nowadays. The casting may have looked a bit iffy, when they initially came out in early trailers, but the end product was something to lo' and behold. As a comic book fan, this is something that really caught my eye, and undying attention. Though the film may not have been 100% faithful to the old panels'n'pencil, it was still a very interesting take on such an iconic franchise.
I don't usually dwell into the romantic aspect of an action film, but the director, Marc Webb, did an excellent job in directing the chemistry between Peter and Gwen. Both performers played off of each others' character, so well. It's gonna be hard for non-comic fans to see Gwen die (Almost every comic fan knows this) in either the next, or following sequel. The production house should really work hard on how to properly "off" her, and introduce Mary Jane into Peter's life. Emma Stone should really be commended for her role, in this film, as she managed to bring in her quirkiness and perfect comedic timing. The awkward humor brought in by Andrew Garfield was something to also be noteworthy of, because it brought a sense of juvenility to the story of a young Peter Parker.
I also liked the subtle nods to several things in the Marvel, particularly the Spider-Man universe, without really over saturating it with needless references to giveaway as to what will occur in the sequel. This gives the film a teasing atmosphere for what is to come in future installments. I would really love to see how this coincides with the Avengers film franchise, since I see a lack of the Stark Tower in the fictional Manhattan skyline. And, it's always amusing to see Stan Lee lend his presence to a Marvel film.
Another aspect that surprised me the most was how much the film made Los Angeles look like New York city. Yes, over the course of shooting the film was reportedly being shot, on location, in Los Angeles. Especially when news got loose that South Grand Avenue was being used for one of Spider-Man's stunt scenes. The only thing about the digitally modified skyline of NYC, was Oscorp. Tower. It looked like a CGI-sore-thumb sticking out.
The (unbiased) spats I have for this film are with how rushed they were in trying to reboot the Spider-Man film series. But then again, the last one, which was five years ago, was too horrendous to even try to remember. Another spat goes to Aunt May. Sally Fields is one of the most outstanding actresses to date, but the managing of her character could've been better. Hopefully, future installments will put more depth into her character, and the iconic grey hair in a bun. My cinephilic senses are tingling, and they tell me that this film has proven base as to how superhero movies should be handled in the coming future. Let's hope that the future sequels, will not repeat a half-decade-old mistake.
Now all I have to do, is wait until
the "Rising," and give my final verdict as to which film deserves to be personally called:
"Superhero Film of the Year."
Verdict: A Must See!
No comments:
Post a Comment