The Amazing Spider-Man Review

Years after a less than stellar third installment, Spider-Man swings back into action on the silver screen with a new cast, a new suit and a new look at what some are calling too familiar a tale. Spidey still does what a spider can, but is it enough to bring back the audiences that Spider-Man 3 spurned?


It's weird to think that it's been over ten years since the original Spider-Man film was released in theaters. The movie's (and it's sequel) very positive reception was a huge part of the Superhero Movie Boom we're still experiencing to this day, so it's impact on this type of movie is hard to ignore.

Still, Sony has chosen a strange time to bring back the Webbed-Wonder what with The Superhero frenzy having undoubtedly reached it's apex with release of Marvel's the Avengers earlier this year, and audiences in general seemingly growing tired of the genre itself, not to mention the potential confusion that might stem from such a quick turn-around time on the reboot for audiences that are less in the know the release of this film right now provides potential troubles on the road to success for the new Spider-Man film franchise.

The Amazing Spider-Man tells a familiar story to anyone who has seen the original film: Peter Parker, a bullied "nerd" at Mid-town high is bitten by a genetically altered spider, giving him super-strength, extra sensory awareness and a clinginess that even his status as a highschool geek fails to properly prepare a potential suitor for. Uncle dies, starts fighting crime, supervillain, you know how this one goes. There are a few satisfying additions to the general mythos, lifted from various comic book incarnations, particularly the questions involving Pete's parents and the mechanical web-shooters that the original film opted out of including for fear of alienating the less funny-book inclined members of it's audience. Uncle Ben also manages to stave off his inevitable death for a bit longer in this version, adding a bit more emotional weight to the character's tragic end than it carried before, and watching Pete figure out how his powers work is as humorous and wondrous for the viewer as it is terrifying and embarrassing for him. It was also surprising to see Spider-Man's first dozen or so forays into vigilantism are portrayed as acts of vengeance and little else. There is darkness here -- especially when compared to it's original film counter-part -- but it's under-cut by the lightheartedness necessary for the concept to succeed.

Perhaps it's unfair to compare the film so closely to it's 2002 counter-part, but the comparisons are going to be made. Andrew Garfield plays a convincing Spider-Man and post-spider-bite Peter, but doesn't convincingly portray a nerd, or at least, not to someone who has walked a mile in the pocket-protector. Less nit-picky audiences might be able to ignore the fact that the "geek" turned hero starts the film with a rebelliously dreamy fashion sense and a skateboard strapped to his back, but fans of the character are going to be left a little confused. The confusion will fade, however, once Spidey emerges, and with him the prankster-like sense of humor that he is known for. Spidey mocks and taunts his enemies as he webs them to walls, and Garfield manages to convey an appropriate sense of mirth in beating down his foes that MacGuire's frankly wooden behind-the-mask line readings didn't capture.

The movie in general benefits from it's lack of MacGuire's exceptionally punch-able face and the supporting cast manages to do a good job of supporting the new Web-Head. Uncle Ben in particular has a vague kookiness about him as he imparts his wisdom to Peter, conveying the, "With great power comes great responsibility," message that his predecessor made famous while awkwardly dancing around saying the words in that particular order so as to retain some sense of self.

As far as Spider-Man's rogues gallery goes, the Lizard is an appropriately b-list representative that makes a lot of sense for a fledgling Spider-Person to face down, and from a re-boot stand-point I can see why they chose him: Tackling Goblin again would have made the film more tiresome to potential viewers than (based on the reaction to the film's existence I've seen from the people I know) it apparently already conceptually was. That said, the Lizard is not a terribly engaging threat and though Kurt Connors' growing lunacy does something small to assuage that I find myself during his scenes wanting the action to go back to Parker so he could shoot some webs at something, or at the very least, for Connors to go find Parker so we can see the two engage in another bout of acrobatic fisticuffs.

All in all, the film is a fun ride, but as many have said it might have been too soon to do this story again. Though there's really no way to get a new franchise off the ground than to start at the beginning, it's unfortunate that the changing sensibilities of the super-hero genre of films has, in a way, necessitated this re-boot, but for being essentially the same song as the original, it manages to change the tune enough to keep things interesting.

That said, a few thoughts about a potential sequel:

1) Will they have the balls to actually kill off Gwen Stacey as the original comics did? There actual seemed to be a bit of fore-shadowing towards something to that effect, which was surprising to me.

2) Green Goblin is being set up as a villain by the looks of things, and the stinger after the credits lent a small bit of credence to that theory. Goblin (and moreover, Norman Osborn himself) is one of Spider-Man's most notable enemies, so he's going to come into play at some point, but I think it would be smarter to have Osborn himself pulling the strings on the next film's villain and then, in a potential third film have the Goblin enter. Both to use Osborn in a way that makes sense to use Osborn before blowing that metaphorical load (as the original series failed to do) and to not rush right back to the Green Goblin well and risk alienating another sect of their already jaded audience.

VAGUE NUMERICAL SCORE FOR LAZY READERS: An Optimistic 3/5

Scott Pilgrim VS. The Meaningless Meandering Review

Michael Cera and Edgar Wright prove that love really is a battlefield with their new over-the-top Action/Romance/Comedy based on Bryan Lee O'Malley's hit graphic novels, but is this adaptation a knock-out or does this flick need a 1-up?

Scott Pilgrim is 23 years old, Canadian, unemployed, living with and mooching off his best friend, stringing along an innocent little teenager and generally being a procrastinating douche about beginning his adult life.

Close to home.

At any rate, at some point during his idyllic faux-relationship with the naive little Knives Chau he manages to stumble across his (literal) dream girl, manages to stumble further into a first date, and continues to stumble into her bed, and eventually a relationship. But there's one problem, Ramona has some baggage in the form of Seven Evil Ex-Boyfriends (exes!) who all want to beat his ass. Like, hard.

But Scott's no slouch! He dispatches the first with relative ease manages to get the dirty deets out of Ramona. Now knowing what he's in for, he agrees to fight for Ramona's love and, in the process, maybe even get his shit together!

Now, if the premise for this film sounds a little out there, there's a good explanation for why: Like many films these days, it's based on a comic book, which, from my experience, often have more insane plots than most other forms of media. I mean, as much as I love comic books, let's be honest, they're kind of dumb.

-Not Pictured: The Works of Mark Millar-

So, yes, this Pilgrim's voyage is based on a comic book, but this FILM is a love-letter to video games and nerdom and all of the awesome things I endorse with the very fiber of my being. The original books were FILLED with little nods and what-have-yous to video games, but the fact that this is a film (and thus has sound and non-static visuals) just manages to take it to an absurd new level. There is always, always, ALWAYS something going on. From little touches to very iconic music playing during a dream sequence, to the villains bursting into coins upon defeat, and an announcer screaming KO, this film is a total special effects overload from beginning to end, and because of this it is a BLAST to watch. The one problem with the film's aesthetic, in fact, is that it might be just a little TOO hyper-kinetic for some, it has the potential to be exhausting for those not knowing what they're in for.

Fights are well choreographed and always interesting. Fans doubting Michael Cera's capacity to be an action star will not be disappointed. Though his performance still retains some of his typical Cera flare (or lack thereof, I suppose) he manages to pull off a convincing Scott and actually looks pretty damn cool in some scenes. The rest of the cast does a great job as well, Winstead's very sexy as Ramona (though she plays her a little flatter than I'd read her), Wallace Wells is as hilarious and gay as he should be, and the members of Scott's band Sex Bob-omb, though under-utilized, are a lot of fun, too.

Now, the books are used as a starting point for the plot, but around the time Scott fights the third Ex, things end up being changing around quite a bit. It starts off pretty small, things take place in a different order, or things are happen in a different setting, but actually culminates in an ending that is almost entirely different from that of the books. Now, typically, the comic-book nerd in me would be enraged by the prospect of a film being unfaithful to it's source material, but this movie is such a rush, so fun to watch, and so exciting to look at, I barely batted an eye. That should really tell you something.

Do yourself a favor. See this movie.

VAGUE NUMERICAL SCORE FOR LAZY READERS: 5/5

SMURFS. MOVIE.

Somebody has got some serious explaining to do.

Alright, alright, really I'm not angry. Somebody played a practical joke on some gullible movie studio executive, "Yeah, what the people really want is a Smurfs Movie," he probably said, and the other members of the board pissed themselves laughing, while their boss thought, "You know what, yeah."

Nobody's in trouble, I can't make that clear enough. I'm just going to turn off the lights for a second and I want the guilty party to make this movie stop existing. No one will know it was you, so just do it quickly and we can all get on with our lives.

*Click*

*Click*

Dammit, you guys.

Alice in Wonderland Review

In a firm indicator that the adage, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks," is in fact a universal truth, Tim Burton sets out to once again make the wholesome mildly creepier in his sequel to Lewis Carrol's classic tale of Alice's rather curious adventures.

Woo.

I, eh... I just don't know what to make of this one.

Alright, let's go.

Alice in Wonderland tells the story of the titular Alice's 2nd journey to the eponymous Wonderland and borrows elements from both the original Alice's Adventures in Wonderland as well as it's literary sequel Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There.

The basic plot of the film deals with Alice running away from her own engagement party upon finding that it was her engagement party and falling once again into the rabbit hole. Upon being found by the denizens of Underland (evidently "Wonderland" was a mispronunciation by young Alice (wat)) she is told that she may be the Alice, the one who visited Underland previously and is prophesied (here we go) to save Underland from the tyranny of the Red Queen by recovering the Vorpal Sword and defeating the Jabberwocky on what will be known as the Frabjous Day.

Anyway, Alice sets off reluctantly (and at various sizes) to find the vorpal sword, still not entirely convinced that she's not dreaming, meeting up with various Underland residents (many of whom have been arbitrarily given names, the Caterpillar, for example, is Abselom, now) along the way rediscovering her memories of her past experiences and finding that she has the strength to save the day.

So, yeah, it goes without saying, Burton has taken a few liberties with the Lewis Carrol novels, but that's okay, right? The books were far from epic and consisted of little more than Alice wondering from bizarre situation to bizarre situation and muttering, "how curious". On top of that, making Alice's story grimdark is far from a new concept, so really this isn't a huge problem in and of it self. Plenty of media empires were reinvigorated by taking something silly and campy and making it fuckawesome.

Alas, this is where Wonderland finds it's largest problem. Simply put: this is a film that doesn't know what it wants to be. Despite how appropriate it may be for the film to have multiple personalities, it doesn't really make the viewing experience more pleasurable. The climatic final battle scene, for example cuts back and forth between Alice's tremendous struggle against the Jabberwocky and the rest of the Underland residents own struggle against the Queen's card soldiers which feels like a battle out of Shrek.

And then there's this.

Keep in mind that immediate preceding this scene Alice had (with no prior sword training) single-handedly beheaded what was, for all intents and purposes a fire-breathing dragon, saved Underland from the Red Queen's evil and had a heart to heart with the Yoda-esque caterpillar about her past. It was quite intense... Or at least, it wanted to be.

On top of the issues with tone whiplash, the film suffers from poor pacing and a lack of characterization. Notably, the Caterpillar, who Alice seems to think of as a mentor-figure in her quest only actually appears once and has two very brief conversations with her. Despite this, she panics before the final confrontation and calls out to him for help. Character motivation is confusing and unclear. The Hatter is taken by the Red Queen's cards, and Alice feels it necessary to save him, but why? At this point, she is still quite convinced she is dreaming and that her actions in Underland have no real consequences. Still, she sets out (about an inch tall at this point for reasons I can't be bothered to remember) to save this person who she'd only just met, and who didn't do much for her outside if insult her.

Despite these complaints, the film has some truly impressive moments. Some of the set pieces like the giant chessboard in the final battle and the Red Queen's castle look great. As well as the costume design and stuff. It's just a shame, because if the movie had just been a bit more focused (on either the comedy or the clash of forces) it might've have been quite impressive, as it stands, all it did was drive me mad.

VAGUE NUMERICAL SCORE FOR LAZY READERS: 2/5

My Greatest Achievement

The first time I saw this trailer I presented the following as a potential tag-line:

Mo' Mummy Mo' Problem.

It is, to this day, the funniest thing I've ever said. I am still proud of it.