Every action
has it consequences, and every achievement has its own setbacks. Batman Begins popularized the film
reboot, not to be confused with a remake.
Just earlier today, I was discussing the difference between the two with a
friend and fellow comic book fanatic. We both came to an agreement that a
remake is often a re-iteration of a film from a past era, like the many horror
remakes released in the past decade. A reboot, however, often revitalizes an
established franchise or property based on a single source material. Hence, Batman Begins is not a remake of Batman or any of the three sequels, but
a reboot of the franchise set in its own continuity.
Plus, I
notice that a lot of remakes tend to re-use the same title as the original work,
though not all the time (i.e. Internal
Affairs vs. The Departed). In
some cases a franchise can have both a remake and reboot, the abysmal 2001 Planet of the Apes is a remake of the
original 1968 film of the same name whereas Rise
of the Planet of the Apes is a reboot of the property with its own
liberties due to the backlash associated with the Burton film. I brought up
reboots because Batman Begins has
essentially popularized it, especially for comic book adaptations, and I notice
that this along with origin stories is starting to grate on audiences and fans
alike. The Amazing Spider-Man falls
under both categories.
I’m of the
argument that there are so many reinterpretations of a comic book license in
the actual medium alone that I’m fine with any amount of reboots to keep the
franchise going while not affecting the integrity of a particular run, such as
the Raimi Spider-Man trilogy, which
not only lost its way by the third film in its own right, but was never the
most relevant portrayal of the character in my opinion, so I welcomed a
different take on the mythos.
The Amazing Spider-Man is a reboot of the Spider-Man
property, and stars Andrew Garfield, replacing Tobey Maguire from the previous
continuity. The film essentially does its own take on the character’s origin
with remains relatively faithful to the source material while taking its own
small liberties for the advantages of this particular version. Peter Parker is
shy, he puts up a wall with people, but also enjoys skateboarding and is most
likely a parkour practitioner, the script essentially modernizes the character
and eliminates a lot of the stereotypical notions associated with the archetype.
Peter Parker is still very much a nerd, but not like his portrayal in his
original iteration and the Raimi films, which contrary to popular belief, is an
extremely outdated standard for the most part.
The love
interest of this film marks the triumphant return of Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone),
Peter’s original girlfriend in the comics, who is often misrepresented or
dismissed in various adaptations. She’s intelligent and sympathetic, and the
chemistry between the two feels more tangible than Peter and Mary Jane from the
Raimi films. The villain of this film is Dr. Curt Connors AKA The Lizard (Rhys
Ifans) who begins as a mentor and slight father figure for Peter prior to his
transformation, which warps his logic and moral compass. Aunt May and Uncle Ben
of course return for this new take, played now by Sally Field and Martin Sheen.
Martin Sheen’s
Uncle Ben was a major strong suit for me in this film and while I did like the
late Cliff Robertson’s portrayal of the character, I prefer how Ben is written
in this film, especially in instances where he puts Peter in his place, as any
good parental figure should when warranted. To elaborate, when Peter makes a
mistake in the original Spider-Man,
like when he leaves Ben to work on the house while Peter was out having fun
with his newly discovered powers, there’s not even so much as a slap on the
wrist. In this film, when Peter forgets to pick up his aunt and ignores Ben’s
phone call, Ben forces him to apologize and gives him a stern lecture. It just
seems more realistic to me, and I know this in the context of a main
protagonist who will dress up in red and blue and swing around New York City
like a wildberry Tarzan. However, I still feel it fleshes out how things work
in this world, and helps get me invested.
I notice that
viewers unaware of the politics behind how the movie was made tend to like it
more than those who do, and it also comes down to a matter of preference, camp
or no camp, fantasy or grounding it in some form of reality. To me, The Amazing Spider-Man works better for
me as an adaptation and the tonal whiplash I’ve heard criticisms on do not
affect me, although I do feel that The Lizard’s ultimate plan does feel
straight out of a Silver Age title. I prefer to the original Raimi film, but
still hold Spider-Man 2 in first
place. 8 out of 10.
