The Amazing Spider-Man movie poster

It’s nice to see the producers of the Spider-Man franchise finally take advantage of Stan Lee’s penchant for adjectives by naming the latest installment after the wall-crawler’s flagship comic book.  Hopefully other comic titles like Spectacular Spider-Man and Web of Spider-Man will follow as sequel titles, rather than just tacking on numbers as the Sam Raimi trilogy did.  To be fair (and ironic), Spider-Man 2’s working title was Amazing Spider-Man.

Why the Raimi films ultimately shunned the adjective approach could’ve been fear of living up to said adjective.  Why make critics’ jobs easier by giving them headlines for negative reviews?  “INCREDIBLE HULK INCREDIBLY BORING!”  “FANTASTIC FOUR NOT FANTASTIC!”  (Hence this review’s generic headline.)

So does the new film live up to its amazing title?  Read on, true believers!

This reboot isn’t as radical as the serious Nolan Bat-films compared to the campy Burton/Schumacher flicks, but there are differences.  Mechanical web-shooters replace organic ones.  Love interest MJ and secondary antagonist Jonah “Spider-Man is a menace” Jameson are gone (though the Daily Bugle makes a cameo).  In their place are Gwen and her police captain father, George “Spider-Man is a menace” Stacy.

The big change of course is the web-slinger himself.  Andrew Garfield plays Peter Parker with more anxiety and less nerdiness than Tobey Maguire did.  This Parker is vulnerable but not fragile like Maguire’s version.  He’s tormented by the mystery of his parents’ abandonment, which explains how he came to be raised by his aunt and uncle, and this torment comes across in Garfield’s naturalistic performance that always feels spontaneous.  Thankfully Parker isn’t all teen angst (see The CW for that).  Affection for Gwen, concern for Aunt May – these are all equally convincing.  I can buy him in costume shooting off wisecracks as fast as he can shoot webs.  The few times Maguire tried this, the one-liners fell flat.  Garfield is so good that I didn’t even realize he’s British until later when I heard him on The Tonight Show in his native accent.

The Lizard, AKA Dr. Curt Connors

Making his first full appearance on the big screen is the classic villain The Lizard, AKA Dr. Curt Connors.  He’s mentioned in the first movie and seen in the others, but only as Connors, not Lizard.  Rhys Ifans portrays both in the latest feature, but you got to feel for Dylan Baker who originated half of the role in the Sam Raimi films.  Imagine being cast in a blockbuster as a major villain a la Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde, but then only getting to play Jekyll.  How did that phone conversation go down?  Perhaps like this:

SPIDER-MAN 2

SAM: “Congrats, Dylan, you’re playing Curt Connors in Spidey 2.”

DYLAN: “Great!  When do I transform into the Lizard?”

SAM: “Not this movie.  We’re setting you up for the next sequel.  It’ll be more dramatic that way.”

DYLAN: “Oh, OK, cool.  That’s cool.”

SPIDER-MAN 3

DYLAN: “Hey, Sam, Dylan here.  So I just read the script and I see Connors’ scenes, but where are the Lizard’s?”

SAM: “We tried to fit him in, Dylan, we really did.  But we have two baddies this time and if we squeeze in another, you won’t get the screen time you deserve.”

DYLAN: “Oh.  I guess that makes sense.  Next sequel?”

SAM: “Next sequel.”

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

DYLAN: “Sam, I just heard the great news — The Lizard is gonna be the villain in the new movie!  And he’s the only one!!  When do we start?”

SAM: “Um.  Yeah.  About that…”

You’d think acting with one arm tucked in a trench coat for two movies would earn you a promotion, but no.  Welcome to Supervillain Recast Club, Dylan.  Say hi to Billy Dee “Harvey Dent but not Two-Face” Williams.

Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield star in Columbia Pictures’ The Amazing Spider-Man.

The relaunch recycles storylines from the previous trilogy, such as the hero’s origin and his relationship with a scientist mentor (Dr. Connors/Dr. Octavius) who evolves into a sympathetic bad guy (Lizard/Dr. Octopus).

Several subplots are given short shrift.  Aunt May mourns her husband’s murder but doesn’t seem to care that his killer escaped.  Other stories are completely dropped, like Connors’ gripe against his amoral boss who vanishes midway through without explanation.  Characters aren’t the only things pulling a disappearing act.

A climatic battle atop the Oscorp building topples a gigantic antennae toward the crowded street below (it’s the money shot in the trailer).  The antennae and its impending smackdown are so immense that it’s unrealistic that ol’ web-head wouldn’t try to stop it or save innocent people from being crushed.  Yet he and the filmmakers forgetaboutit.  If the antennae was 20-feet tall, this would be nitpicking, but the thing is the size of a mini-skyscraper and impossible to ignore.

So does Amazing Spider-Man live up to its adjective?  Hard to tell.  I was lucky enough to see it at the red carpet premiere (read that story HERE ) which was definitely amazing, enough so to cloud my judgment. In the moment, I thought I was watching the Casablanca of superhero cinema.  With distance though, I’ve concluded that it’s better than Spider-Man 3, partially equal to Spider-Man 1, but Spider-Man 2 remains the best.  Too bad it didn’t retain its “amazing” working title.

“I wish I could remember where I parked my Spider-Mobile.”