Reboot? Re-imagining? Rip-off? How you feel about the idea of “The Amazing Spider-Man,” this summer’s super hero action-adventure film starring Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, may depend on your feelings about the Marvel Comics characters and comics the movie is based upon.
A new trailer for the July release will be in theaters Feb. 10. It is already making the rounds online, though, and it does offer the first glimpses of the Lizard, the main villain in the film, some customary Spidey wisecracking, full views of the new movie costume, and some hints that this may be a darker, edgier version than director Sam Raimi offered us.
Big Shiny Robot! got its two biggest Spider-Man fans … Jerk-bot, a self-proclaimed “traditionalist,” and Kill-tacular-tron … to get their views on the spot. While the two may agree about their love for the Web-slinger, their opinions of the trailer couldn’t be more different. In fact, a debate ensued.
Presenting the case against is Jerk-bot, better known as local movie/geek columnist and reviewer Jeff Michael Vice.
OPENING STATEMENT
First off, let me just say that you cannot and must not judge a movie by its trailer. As a longtime fan of the characters and the comics, I am hoping that “The Amazing Spider-Man” will be if not a good movie, then a fun one.
Let me confess, however, as a longtime fan, I am especially harsh when it comes to adaptations, be they animated or live-action. And I am somewhat of a traditionalist. While I do enjoy Brian Michael Bendis’s Ultimate version, I still prefer the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko/John Romita ASM comics … and even the current, Dan Slott/Humberto Ramos ones.
Say what you will about Sam Raimi’s trilogy of films, they showed love and appreciation for the classics. “Spider-Man 2” is about as perfect a printed-four-color-page-to-the-big-screen movie adaptation as there is. Watch it again, after reading those earlier comics, if you don’t believe me. (And skip over “Spider-Man 3” … )
And let me also confess that I am not an Andrew Garfield fan. Thus far, he has conveyed more general cockiness and sheer doucheyness than a likable personality in his performances. Peter Parker? I think not. (Though I will admit that I was wrong about my initial casting misgivings in regards to Chris “Captain America” Evans and Chris “Capt. Kirk” Pine.)
THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE TRAILER
I’ll take these, point by point …
IT’S DARK … TOO DARK.
Having read Spider-Man comics for more than two-thirds of my life, I realize that they are filled with tragedy, drama, pathos, bathos, what have you. It’s part of what makes Peter Parker and his wall-crawling, web-slinging alter ego
so relatable. He rises above the challenges in his life, and never gives up.
However, this new trailer not only looks dark … in term of its nearly constant nighttime and indoors settings … it also looks more brooding than Christopher Nolan’s Batman films. Since this was shot in the 3D format, it’s going to give people eye strain if nothing else.
THERE’S NOTHING NEW (OR NU) IN IT.
Sam Raimi and company already did all this before. And better. Don’t believe me?
Peter Parker being bullied by Flash Thompson and standing up to him? Check.
Spidey being physically beaten and unmasked? Check.
Our hero being hounded by the police? Check.
A would-be father figure who turns into a green arch-villain? Check.
A tentative first web-swing into action? Check.
And so on …
AMALGAMATION, INC.
We were promised new, “fresh” interpretations of the characters, but …
Capt. George Stacy (Denis Leary) taking the place of J. Jonah Jameson as Spidey’s harshest critic. That role was also Aunt May Parker. Speaking of whom, where is SHE in the trailer? (The character is being played by Sally Field, who is at least as big a name as Leary.)
Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) taking the place of Norman Osborn and Uncle Ben Parker as that aforementioned father figure. (Uncle Ben is being played by Martin Sheen, who, again, is nowhere to be seen.)
CLONE SAGA ALL OVER AGAIN?
Again, appearances are deceiving, but those black-and-white flashback bits horrify me. Angst-y, I-miss-my-dead-parents bull pucky is all the rage in films directed at teen/tween audiences, but unfortunately, it also brings to mind criticisms of George Lucas’s Star Wars prequels, which were explored in a lengthy stand-up comedy routine by Patton Oswalt.
Plus, while the dead parents angle was done in Bendis’s Ultimate title, it was first brought up during the dreaded Clone Saga in various Spidey titles. We longtime fans are still recovering from that awfulness.
WOKKA-WOKKA.
Tobey Maguire may have failed to convince as the wisecracking Peter, but at least his attempts at humor were funnier than the stupid taxi bit in the trailer. If that’s the best “funny” moment in the movie, we’re in trouble, folks.
IN CONCLUSION
All along, I have had the feeling Sony Pictures rushed this film into production simply to hold onto the characters and property, and that we might get a bad or at least mediocre movie. This trailer has done absolutely nothing to allay those fears for me.
That being said, I will be among the first … if not the first … to eat my words. I have done it before (again, see the Star Trek and Captain America movies for evidence of that).
However, I have two words for you if you’re being a Pollyanna about this trailer: “Green Lantern.” I was right all along about THAT one, wasn’t I?
P.S. If this is as bad as I now fear, I will welcome the inevitable cinematic rebooting as “Ultimate Spider-Man” that we’ll get. Hopefully with Miles Morales under the mask. Which is what they should be doing in the first place.
And now for the counterpoint, provided by Kill-tacular-tron.
OPENING STATEMENT
I would also like to remind everyone of what Jeff said in his opening statement, judging a movie based off of a trailer is bad form. I am going to try and share my hopes for the film, and what things excite me about the trailer. I will do my best to counterpoint Jeff, but really it is going to be difficult to make any solid arguments based off a trailer.
Spider-Man is my all-time favorite superhero. I probably have a lot more invested in these movies than John Q. Public. “Spider-Man 2” is still one of my favorite films, and probably the all-time-best superhero movie. At least, in my humble opinion. I grew up on Spider-Man: The Animated Series. The early 2000s is when I first ventured into the comic’s world with (Joe) Straczynski’s Amazing Spider-Man run. I probably became a fanatic while reading the Ultimate Spider-Man series.
My love for the character is what I bring to this argument. Although I’m a cinephile, I am by no means a professional movie critic. I will be approaching my side of this argument from a Spider-Man fanatic’s point of view.
REGARDING THE TONE
Last week I received my Comic-Con preregistration packet. The cover story for the included magazine was “The Amazing Spider-Man.” It contained interviews with (director Marc) Webb and (actress Emma) Stone. I was particularly interested in hearing what Webb was hoping to achieve with his rendition of Peter Parker. In the interview he explains that he wants to avoid the same world that Sam Raimi created. Webb felt that, since Raimi did such an amazing job, there was no reason to try and break new ground with the Golden Age Peter Parker.
This is where the seemingly hybrid version of the character comes into play. There are a lot of things I can pick up on from the Ultimate Universe. For instance, Gwen Stacy definitely seems to know Peter Parker is Spider-Man. Mary Jane is privy to this same information in the Ultimate Universe. It has made for some excellent stories. Peter isn’t carrying this burden by himself and often needs a helping hand. Or occasionally a pep talk.
Another similarity to the Ultimate Universe, a great deal of Peter’s life revolves around Oscorp. Norman creates the spider that gives Peter his super powers. He also employees characters that turn into villains, Otto Octavius being one of them. I don’t think Curt Connors working at Oscrop is a bad thing. In fact, I think it tidies up the premise a bit. This brings me to the next point.
THERE ARE NO NEW IDEAS. THERE ARE ONLY NEW WAYS OF MAKING THEM FELT
To say that this Spider-Man movie is treading on similar ground as Sam Raimi’s is kind of a no-brainer. Unfortunately, Sony decided to do another origin story. I, like most fans, would have rather seen another version of Spider-Man without repeating the introduction. That being said, I think with any movie involving Spider-Man you are going to see:
Peter being unmasked at some point.
The police hunting him. Being the “public menace” is a pretty large theme for the character.
His first web-slinging excursion. This is an origin story, full of many firsts.
I see the point Jeff is trying to make, although it’s hard for either of us to make a definitive stand without seeing the film.
SO FRESH AND SO CLEAN
A lot of the ideas shown in this trailer feel very fresh to me. Although Captain Stacy is taking on a similar role as Jameson, he is now taking on the more logical position for his character. Would a police captain be happy that a masked vigilante is running around town making him look bad and possibly putting a lot of lives in danger? I wouldn’t think so. This also creates a more interesting dynamic between Gwen and Peter (knowing he’s Spider-Man) if her Dad hates him.
I would much rather Webb stay true to the characters he is creating on film, rather than the continuity from the comics. How many movies have been ruined by the addition of one-dimensional characters to appease the fan boys. “X-Men 3,” anyone? Hell, even “Spider-Man 3” suffered from that very same problem. Remember Venom?
SMART-ASS
Honestly, any wisecracking from Spider-Man is going to make me happy. There was a serious lack of it in Raimi’s trilogy. I’ve always imagined Peter’s delivery as very dry. Only the Web-slinger finds himself amusing. But, I do agree with Jeff. I hope what we see in the trailer isn’t the “best-of” stuff.
IN CONCLUSION
Being a fan of Spider-Man, I am super-stoked to see this film. I had my reservations earlier on when I first saw the costume. Even the first trailer left me wondering what to expect. It’s probably not the best approach, but I now have high hopes. The darker tone is kind of exciting for me. It almost hints at the overall story involving the Stacys, and the tragedy that falls on their family because of Spider-Man.
I, like Jeff, will be the first to admit it if this movie turns out to be a big stinker. I guess the one thing we can agree on: We both hope this movie turns out better than “Spider-Man 3.”