Escape to the Movies: Untangling Spider-Man

[medv4380]

The film itself may or may not be good, but it's certainly not been given a fair shot by a slice of nerddom, Bob included, despite the retcon he pulls here. Mainstream critics have been more lenient and the film seems like it'll make money and you know what? Spider-man works best as the underdog, and I can't help but feel a bit good for that.

Making money is relative in for movies. Enough hype and advertising and a bad movie can make a bit of it. I have a standing Bet that it doesn't meet expectations this weekend. Which would be it making less than 130M for the Mon-Sun box office. It's previous expectation before the critics came out was for it to make at least 100M off of the Fri-Sun box office. Right now it's tracking behind Transformers which is just bad given ticket inflation should be putting it ahead of Transformers by quite a bit.

As for who's the more long term Spider-man fan? Where the same age so I'll just defer to my father who's 60 and been collecting it from the start. If it wasn't for retirement, the clone saga (he liked the Ultimate Clone Saga and views it as an appropriate apology for the mess of the original), and the fact that I bought him an unlimited pass to Marvel digital comics he'd probably still be collecting. He has a similar opinion of what they've done in this Movie. Bob is just more vocal about it, and that's just how Bob and most Movie Critics are.

 

[Dastardly]

Spoiler

Gwen: "You shouldn't make promises you cannon keep"

Parker: "But those are the best kind of promises."

That smacks us in the face of immaturity. Obviously, it was set up on purpose because Gwen is now on a one-way track towards death due to Peter's arrogance, but it could be handled better.

This is setting up a major storyline, though. It's supposed to be Peter going back on his word. And, yeah, we can all understand why he would do that: Love is so intensely important to us, especially as young adults. But this starts things down a road that leads somewhere seriously bad later on (if you don't know from the comics, I won't spoil it. Just know that it was something that changed Spider-Man just as much as Uncle Ben did).

This movie isn't about the heroic fall. This is the start of the journey. Uncle Ben's death pushes Spider-Man to use his powers to fight crime... but for perhaps the wrong reasons at first. Dr. Connors's transformation pushes Spider-Man to fight crime for more than just himself, and starts to teach him about unintended consequences. His interaction with Capt. Stacy is an attempt to drive home that point...

...but as we all know, Peter Parker has a habit of not learning his lesson until someone dies from it. In fact, death-guilt is Spider-Man's primary moral fuel. The Spider-Man we all know has learned this over and over, but re-boot Spider-Man hasn't learned it yet, not completely.

 

[Buizel91]

So every teen romance in a movie is ripping off Twilight now? As for the lizard goes he took a drug and it caused him to turn insane/evil, you know the very same story the green goblin followed in the first movie, as for we he wants to turn everyone into lizards, well he wanted to improve the human race before this start this is just his drugged up brain mutilated the idea or it's because he's running more on instincts and instincts say to propagate the species.

What happened to Uncle Ben's Killer? Why does this plot thread need to be open still?

I'd rather have that open, not so it can get resolved later but because it makes the character, it's not I got my revenge lets move on now, he actually had to let it go and go a proper route of forgiveness for himself.

I thought the killer was the last guy Spidey had contact with, who got hanged upside down just outside the Police station, Captain Stacey turned around and looked at him. could be wrong though.

Also Bob, this is no where near a bad film, sure i would of liked to see more Spidey action, especially the bridge scene, and the acting could of been a bit better, but over-all, it was an awesome film.

Connors clearly has split personality issues, and if you actually pay attention, you understand why he is doing the things he is, he took a drug, and the drug is taking over, it's not hard to work out at all.

Andrew Garfield, i feel, pulled Spidey off incredibly well, Maguire definitely made Spiderman feel like he did in the original cartoons/comics, but bob this is the year 2012, And to be honest, a more up to date look for Spiderman is more than welcome! Garfield i think made an excellent Spiderman right down to the sarcasm and jokes, which were kinda missed in the other trilogy.

My only complaints are this, no JJJ, Not alot of Spidey action (however the Spidey action that is there is amazing), the acting wasn't the best i've ever seen, but was still good and they managed to pull it off, could of been a lot worse. Spidermans actions over the film seem a bit all over the place, but if you can keep up it makes perfect sense (I'm guessing bob went to the loo a few times during this film, cause he missed out A LOT of stuff)

All in all guys, Bob had a nerdrage moment, if you read this give it a chance, it's not the best film in the world, but it certainly isn't as bad as Bob makes it out to be.

Oooh, and don't even get me started on the Twilight comparison.

 

[Dastardly]

Heck Parker doing nothing to stop a bully would be right in line with him needing to learn "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility". Instead we have the kind of Geek that would go out of his way to pick a fight when he has the chance, or opportunity.


... Maybe if they pulled off a proper Parker then maybe they could have done it, but they failed and now we have a Parker who has a questionable moral compass.

This is reading in a whole lot of stuff that's just not there. Firstly, if you get the chance to interact with teenagers for any length of time (I'm a middle/high school teacher), you'll start to notice some differences between "TV geeks" and actual "geeks."

Firstly, they're no longer alone in the world. The internet has helped them realize there are others like themselves, even if there aren't a ton in their own little corner of the world. They're less prone to cowering. This does, however, make them feel like they're being robbed of power.

Today's "geek" is more likely to try to take back some of that power. Standing up to someone who is clearly being a bully is part of that, even in situations where it's ill-advised. Who'd have thought a kid might do something that displays a lack of clear foresight, right? But above all, Peter Parker is not just "a geek."

He's a kid whose parents left and died. He's being raised by people who, while loving, are not his parents. And he's young and ready to rebel against authority, just like anyone in his age group. Peter Parker has more struggles going on than just being something of a social misfit, so not all of his behavior is based on the "He's a geek!" aspect of the very one-dimensional original.

Like an actual living teenager, he is a melting pot of conflicting wants, needs, expectations, hormones... Instead of the original Peter Parker, who is a student that seems to behave more like a 30-year-old, this one actually behaves like a kid who happened into some super powers.

And that's the problem here. Sure, if a 30-year-old man acts like this, there's a serious problem. And if a 12-year-old kid drinks from a bottle and craps his pants, there's a problem, too. His behavior is normal for a socially-awkward kid from a broken home. He's not a grown-up yet.

And that's the Spider-Man struggle that often gets ignored. It's not just about "Power vs. Responsibility." It's also about that kind of Power and Responsibility being thrust upon someone a bit too young, a bit too quickly, and how that plays out over time.

 

[Orekoya]

Overall, I didn't either love or hate this movie, it was okay. Actually it was because of moviebob's overwhelmingly negative review lowering my expectations that probably allowed me to enjoy the film as much as I did so thanks for that. Most of my friends ended up hating the movie and they heard nothing but good things, one of them was in a theater that cleared out booing it. Still though, there was one lingering sensation from the movie:

Spoiler: A horrible comparison to be made, shield your eyes.

While waiting the film my roommate uttered out loud, "So the Lizard is a goomba now?" I looked at him and he clarified "From the movie." Once it clicked I couldn't unsee it.

 

[medv4380]

Heck Parker doing nothing to stop a bully would be right in line with him needing to learn "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility". Instead we have the kind of Geek that would go out of his way to pick a fight when he has the chance, or opportunity.


... Maybe if they pulled off a proper Parker then maybe they could have done it, but they failed and now we have a Parker who has a questionable moral compass.

Like an actual living teenager, he is a melting pot of conflicting wants, needs, expectations, hormones... Instead of the original Peter Parker, who is a student that seems to behave more like a 30-year-old, this one actually behaves like a kid who happened into some super powers.

And that's the problem here. Sure, if a 30-year-old man acts like this, there's a serious problem. And if a 12-year-old kid drinks from a bottle and craps his pants, there's a problem, too. His behavior is normal for a socially-awkward kid from a broken home. He's not a grown-up yet.

The Columbine School Massacre was done by Teenage Geeks with an Axe to grind. When Jeremy Jahns gave TASM a Positive review and compared Parker to a serial killer the only thing that comes to mind is the Columbine Massacre. You are over generalizing Teenagers in thinking that they are all the same and would all act out in the same manner.

 

[Dastardly]

The Columbine School Massacre was done by Teenage Geeks with an Axe to grind. When Jeremy Jahns gave TASM a Positive review and compared Parker to a serial killer the only thing that comes to mind is the Columbine Massacre. You are over generalizing Teenagers in thinking that they are all the same and would all act out in the same manner.

Wait wait wait... I'm saying it's possible for kids to behave this way for a variety of reasons, you're saying it must mean they're the next Columbine kids, and I'm the one over-generalizing teenagers?

I'm saying this is within the normal bounds of teenage behavior. That leaves a world of possibilities for who Peter Parker can be. You are the one insisting this behavior can only have one interpretation (a pretty nutball one, at that). Baffling.

 

[antipunt]

Untangling Spider-Man

MovieBob gives us a more detailed look into The Amazing Spider-Man.

Watch Video

I still get this feeling that you're going out of your way to hate this movie. Like, far out of your way. And I think you're allowing your (totally justified) hatred of Sony cash-in to color your perception of the folks that actually worked on the movie.

1. The "dangling plot threads" you've mentioned are a result of this movie not being conceived as a one-off. If the movie had introduced and resolved every thread, you'd be complaining that it's too cluttered. Believe me, I'm not a fan of the Parker-Parent-Conspiracy storyline as a whole... but I can see that they're laying out breadcrumbs to lead down that road later. Connors is one of those, in some ways.

2. I'm really, really not seeing your problem with Peter Parker. He's still an outcast geek here. He's just not the 60's "lie down and take it" kind of geek. If you get any opportunity to interact with high schoolers (and recent graduates, who aren't much different), you'll see that in this modern age, geeks don't feel quite so powerless. They're more likely to react with a bit of anger, and to fight back even knowing they don't physically stand a chance. They're also more likely to hide any fear or embarrassment behind sarcasm, and to start slacking off in academics. You're wanting Parker to be a sort of nerd or geek that, by and large, doesn't exist anymore.

3. The lesson he learned was the same power/responsibility spiel, just played out differently. Instead of being explicitly told that, he learns it via consequence -- by acting in a self-serving way he not only got Uncle Ben killed, but he also accidentally created the Lizard (via a failed attempt to resolve his parental abandonment issues), which resulted in a lot of destruction and ultimately a very important death (no spoiler). (See, his spider powers weren't the only powers he was misusing.) The power/responsibility theme is really just a "selfish vs. selfless" dichotomy -- The more you have to give, the more you have to give.

This feeling of characters being unfocused? I really think it's a matter of wanting too much archetype. Consider that, in many countries, candy and soda aren't as extremely sweet as ours in the US... and that can lead us to find their candy or soda "bland." When we're hyper-saturated with hyper-saturated flavors (or characterizations), we can lose our "taste" for subtlety.

In this case, I don't think you're not capable of detecting subtlety, I just think you're very much against assigning any of it to this movie. Perhaps subconsciously, you're dismissing even the possibility that it could be happening.

*clap clap clap*

Bravo; well said. I liked this film -much- more than Tobey's. Tobey kind of represented an 'over'-nerd, which didn't sit well with me, especially in this generation. A nerd doesn't have to be a glasses wielding GUFAW.

Also, some of us actually enjoy more authentic feeling relationship based events; in Spiderman, Tobey and Kirsten's relationship was heavily put aside. And for good reason; it sucked =X

Also this:

Spider-man. Quips. It's a massive part of his character. He's loud, and they managed to do that in this one. When Peter was in the suit, he was a quipping loudmouth. Out of the suit he was this withdrawn nerd, except around Gwen, May, and Ben, and less so with the latter two.

 

[Nomanslander]

You know I just read the Roger Ebert review and the man liked it, and I have a feeling when Batman Rises comes out I'm going to have to hear more made-up criticism from Bob just because he already decided to hate the movie month before release. lol

Oh, and all three of the Sam Raimi Spider-man = garbage....Okay, two was alright just because of that subway car scene, AND THAT'S IT, garbage none the less.

 

[medv4380]

The Columbine School Massacre was done by Teenage Geeks with an Axe to grind. When Jeremy Jahns gave TASM a Positive review and compared Parker to a serial killer the only thing that comes to mind is the Columbine Massacre. You are over generalizing Teenagers in thinking that they are all the same and would all act out in the same manner.

Wait wait wait... I'm saying it's possible for kids to behave this way for a variety of reasons, you're saying it must mean they're the next Columbine kids, and I'm the one over-generalizing teenagers?

I'm saying this is within the normal bounds of teenage behavior. That leaves a world of possibilities for who Peter Parker can be. You are the one insisting this behavior can only have one interpretation (a pretty nutball one, at that). Baffling.

You're saying that Parkers more Passive personality isn't a valid one which is more Baffling. When other look at it , like Jeremy, and see someone who would become a killer then they've screwed up Parker.

 

[RTK1576]

Bob, we have to have a talk.

First off... TWO video reviews? I get why you might discuss the movie you reviewed further in a Intermission column, but you couldn't devote your time to another movie coming out? You had to have TWO reviews on how bad the Spider-man reboot is, along with sequel ideas for a movie that you flat-out hate? And all this after having discussed your less-than-confident opinion of the Spider-man reboot in previous postings?

Do you see why some people might not be trusting your opinion at this point?

For the movie, your opinion is your opinion. I haven't seen the movie, and just because other reviews have been more positive doesn't mean you're not correct to point out the movie's flaws. But you've done yourself a grave disservice, Bob. You're FIXATING on this movie. Normally you move on after a rant of two, but the level of vitriol this time, combined with your higher-than-average focus on it, is hurting your arguments, making me think of bias and fanboy rage and other probably-unfair counter-arguments to your debate. Instead of debating the film, I'm wondering what bug has crawled up your shorts. That's not the way to win converts or keep fans, Bob.

The film might be as bad as you say it is, and I might end up agreeing with all your points (I doubt it at this stage, but you never know). But the way you're going about it is to your deteriment. If you go this direction on The Dark Knight Rises, considering the less-than-confident opinions you've stated there as well, I'm not sure I'm going to be able to stick around, Bob.

 

[acillies45]

I'm not sure if things have been said already on these two points, but if they have, I'll restate them (sorry for the possible repeat):

1. Peter in this movie seems much more like a possible outcome from what happened with the one in the comics. His parents left him when he was young! His dad was basically like 'See yah!' and ditched him. Obviously he had reasons to and it probably saved Pete's life, but still, I think anyone may be messed up by that. In the comics, they rarely mention it. This movie seemed to just think that it was an important issue to bring up.

This is also what makes him more of a deep character that the dumb sparkly vampire: He has a reason to be kind of turn-offish. His parents freaking abandoned him. Cullen just is creepy and 'mysterious' and not a very deep character.

2. The Lizard is something else that people have talked about being 'wrong'. (Spoilers possibly) In the scene where he is talking to himself, my friend got pissed because it 'copied' from the Ramey movies with Green Goblin. But people seem to forget that this guy actually had this problem in the comics. He was a relatively good guy before the serum and after he had two different personalities (as did the Green Goblin). I'm just kind of pissed that people didn't like this character. Obviously there were some hanging threads, but if there are sequels, I'm sure they'll touch on some of those.

Untangling Spider-Man

MovieBob gives us a more detailed look into The Amazing Spider-Man.

Watch Video

I still get this feeling that you're going out of your way to hate this movie. Like, far out of your way. And I think you're allowing your (totally justified) hatred of Sony cash-in to color your perception of the folks that actually worked on the movie.

1. The "dangling plot threads" you've mentioned are a result of this movie not being conceived as a one-off. If the movie had introduced and resolved every thread, you'd be complaining that it's too cluttered. Believe me, I'm not a fan of the Parker-Parent-Conspiracy storyline as a whole... but I can see that they're laying out breadcrumbs to lead down that road later. Connors is one of those, in some ways.

2. I'm really, really not seeing your problem with Peter Parker. He's still an outcast geek here. He's just not the 60's "lie down and take it" kind of geek. If you get any opportunity to interact with high schoolers (and recent graduates, who aren't much different), you'll see that in this modern age, geeks don't feel quite so powerless. They're more likely to react with a bit of anger, and to fight back even knowing they don't physically stand a chance. They're also more likely to hide any fear or embarrassment behind sarcasm, and to start slacking off in academics. You're wanting Parker to be a sort of nerd or geek that, by and large, doesn't exist anymore.

3. The lesson he learned was the same power/responsibility spiel, just played out differently. Instead of being explicitly told that, he learns it via consequence -- by acting in a self-serving way he not only got Uncle Ben killed, but he also accidentally created the Lizard (via a failed attempt to resolve his parental abandonment issues), which resulted in a lot of destruction and ultimately a very important death (no spoiler). (See, his spider powers weren't the only powers he was misusing.) The power/responsibility theme is really just a "selfish vs. selfless" dichotomy -- The more you have to give, the more you have to give.

This feeling of characters being unfocused? I really think it's a matter of wanting too much archetype. Consider that, in many countries, candy and soda aren't as extremely sweet as ours in the US... and that can lead us to find their candy or soda "bland." When we're hyper-saturated with hyper-saturated flavors (or characterizations), we can lose our "taste" for subtlety.

In this case, I don't think you're not capable of detecting subtlety, I just think you're very much against assigning any of it to this movie. Perhaps subconsciously, you're dismissing even the possibility that it could be happening.

Also I would like to add "Well Done" to this comment. Very well thought out and I agree with the vast majority of it.

 

[tstorm823]

I really wish Movie Bob would read this comment, because when someone can make a correlation between Peter Parker's and Edward Cullen's hair styles but can't understand that the Lizard is (and always was been) a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde character, they should either rethink what they're doing or stop lying to themselves.

 

[medv4380]

The film itself may or may not be good, but it's certainly not been given a fair shot by a slice of nerddom, Bob included, despite the retcon he pulls here. Mainstream critics have been more lenient and the film seems like it'll make money and you know what? Spider-man works best as the underdog, and I can't help but feel a bit good for that.

Making money is relative in for movies. Enough hype and advertising and a bad movie can make a bit of it. I have a standing Bet that it doesn't meet expectations this weekend. Which would be it making less than 130M for the Mon-Sun box office. It's previous expectation before the critics came out was for it to make at least 100M off of the Fri-Sun box office. Right now it's tracking behind Transformers which is just bad given ticket inflation should be putting it ahead of Transformers by quite a bit.

It's at $125 worldwide right now. Even if it has a budget comparable to Transformers, which the whole thing was engineered NOT to do, this one is at the very least recouping expenses which, in turn means sequels are coming up, since the point of the exercise was to not let the franchise rights go to waste.

...

The Bet only concerns Domestic numbers. International numbers always make strange bed fellow anyways. Alice in Wonderland goes from an OK film to making over a Billion.

Oh, and Transformers Budget was 150M and TASM is upwards of 220M. They are released in the same window of time so they very much are comparable films.

 

[Ashoten]

What? uh yeah that is a cheap shot comparing it to twilight. You yourself have said that twilight is jut a rip off of Archie comics. That is a pretty weak comparison to make. I think your stretching to make these connections that match up with the rumors you heard about this movies production. Every movie borrows ideas and personalities form every other movie made.

Peter has a reason to be mopy and sad. his parents more or less abandoned him as a child and he remembers them enough that it haunts him into young adulthood. I though Peter Parker was a believable teenager, he tries hard to make his Aunt and Uncle happy but still is driven by his inner demons to investigate the death of his parents. That is not a shallow one dimensional character. His mummbly line delivers seem to fit that personality of not being committed his priorities. Does he want revenge? or does he want to help people that need him? Only odd thing is that there is no "Refusal of the call" that all heros must go through for some reason. Unless you count the revenge subplot as that.

Additionally I though the cinematography was pretty great. There was a lot of careful usage of subtly in colors and angels and close ups. All of which served to focus on the emotions in each given scene.

Also Flash Thomson was a real person and not just a stereotypical bully. Being aggressive to show off to others but also able to show sympathy and compassion to Peter when Uncle Ben dies.

The "With great power comes great responsibility" line was in there but it was clumsily rewritten to avoid sounding like the first trilogy. This was unnecessary and could have just been delivered like normal.

Yes the lizards motivations are probably the weakest part of the script. Another 20 minuets of time with him could have been helpful. Maybe a directors cut can fix that.

 

[medv4380]

The film itself may or may not be good, but it's certainly not been given a fair shot by a slice of nerddom, Bob included, despite the retcon he pulls here. Mainstream critics have been more lenient and the film seems like it'll make money and you know what? Spider-man works best as the underdog, and I can't help but feel a bit good for that.

Making money is relative in for movies. Enough hype and advertising and a bad movie can make a bit of it. I have a standing Bet that it doesn't meet expectations this weekend. Which would be it making less than 130M for the Mon-Sun box office. It's previous expectation before the critics came out was for it to make at least 100M off of the Fri-Sun box office. Right now it's tracking behind Transformers which is just bad given ticket inflation should be putting it ahead of Transformers by quite a bit.

It's at $125 worldwide right now. Even if it has a budget comparable to Transformers, which the whole thing was engineered NOT to do, this one is at the very least recouping expenses which, in turn means sequels are coming up, since the point of the exercise was to not let the franchise rights go to waste.

...

The Bet only concerns Domestic numbers. International numbers always make strange bed fellow anyways. Alice in Wonderland goes from an OK film to making over a Billion.

I have it on good authority that the rest of that billion can still be traded for goods and services. Pretty sure that Sony (which happens to be a Japanese company, by the way) will still greenlight a sequel if the movie makes money worldwide, even if it doesn't in the US alone.

I'd still take your bet on US figures, though.

And again, my point had nothing to do with your bet, I said that the film will make money and then you jumped into a paralel dimension where most of the money it'll make doesn't count because you made a bet with some people about this not reaching 130 million this week in the US, which it will totally do.

Under your logic then The Green Hornet was good, and almost made twice its money back. When the number that's always used is the US domestic 98M vs the 120M budget. If you can't make your money back on the domestic market then the movie is viewed as a failure, and that looks like if it does many any money domestically it will be by the skin of its teeth.

You're free to place a bet as well, HSX is free and doesn't carry any of those risks of actual loss of real world money. Theirs another one where you can bet real money but that's much riskier.

 

[Ashoten]

The story of the movie is actually mashing together several of the different Spider-Man continuities.

In The Amazing Spider-Man comics, The Lizard is a different personality than Curt Connors and does on several occasions try to turn the world (or New York at least) into giant lizards like him. And to be fair, in the original run of the comic, no characters actually say "With great power, comes great responsibility," a narrating text box says it at the end of the very first issue.

In the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon (Easily the best Spider-Man cartoon ever but only 24 episodes), Gwen Stacy and Peter are childhood friend who are in high school together and Gwen is working as an intern for Dr. Connors.

In the Ultimate Spider-Man comics, Dr. Connors was friends with Richard Parker, Peter's father, and it's he who accidentally creates Carnage using Spider-Man's DNA and Richard Parker's research.

So yes, while it is not the perfect "Amazing Spider-Man" movie, it gets more correct than Bob gives it credit for.

Additionally, George Stacy has always been a police captain.

Thanks you for bringing that up. I knew most of the movies plot sounded familiar to Spiderman or at least comics in general but I could not remember where.