THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: Tangled Webs

“There is only one plot in all of fiction: Who am I?”

-          - Miss Ritter (Barbara Eve Harris), The Amazing Spider-Man

In early 2010, Sony Pictures was in a massive dilemma. Three years earlier, Spider-Man 3 had been released to wild box-office success but little to no love (and from some, massive amounts of hatred) from fans. Screenwriter James Vanderbilt was tasked with working with Sam Raimi, director of the Spider-Man films, to craft two more Spider-Man films with Raimi planning to film one more himself and then hand the series off to another director. Raimi’s Spider-Man 4 would tell the story of Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson parting amicably (which I’m sure Kirsten Dunst was happy with) and soon, Peter meets and falls in love with Felicia Hardy (who in this version would not be the Black Cat). However, her real father would turn out to be The Vulture, to be played by John Malkovich. In a battle, Peter would actually kill the Vulture, which in turn would cause Felicia to refuse to speak to him. Peter would again vow to be Spider-Man no more. This, of course, would have been a cliff-hanger for Spider-Man 5. Tobey Maguire signed a deal with Sony Pictures that would have paid him $50 million for both films. However, as with Spider-Man 3, Sony disliked Raimi’s choice of Vulture, an old-school Spider-Man villain and would rather have him choose more ‘90s –based villains. Realizing he was going to be pulled into another situation to merely please the studio rather than make the film he wanted to make, Raimi walked. Loyal to his director, Maguire left as well.

Without their series’ star and director (Raimi would later move to Walt Disney Pictures and make the upcoming Oz: The Great and Powerful; Maguire would stay mostly out of the limelight, but returned to star in a 3D version of The Great Gatsby), Sony began making plans for a reboot titled The Amazing Spider-Man. When the announcement was made by the studio, fans were stunned and believed that Sony was merely making a cash grab. Playing nice, Raimi issued this statement with the official press release, “Working on the Spider-Man movies was the experience of a lifetime for me. While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction and I know they will do a terrific job.” Many fans scoffed at this, but Raimi wisely didn’t want to ruffle feathers with people like the late Laura Ziskin (whom the film is dedicated to, along with production designer J. Michael Riva).

Sony launched a massive campaign to find their new Peter Parker, who due to the film’s high school setting, would have to be a new, fresh face. They found it in one of their own films for 2010, David Fincher’s The Social Network. American-born, British raised actor Andrew Garfield, Eduardo Saverin in The Social Network, was chosen from dozens of actors considered for the role. Bypassing the hip Mary Jane Watson, the new film had to find a new leading lady to portray the intelligent Gwen Stacy.  A rising star at the studio, Emma Stone, who had starred in films like Superbad, The House Bunny, Zombieland and Easy A was chosen to play the new Gwen Stacy. Ironically, Stone had co-starred with the Gwen Stacy of Spider-Man 3, Bryce Dallas Howard in The Help. It also doesn’t hurt that Miss Stone is a vision of perfection, just the essence of beauty and -- With these two locked in, Sony began looking for established stars such as Denis Leary (Captain George Stacy), Martin Sheen (Uncle Ben) and Sally Field (Aunt May). Choosing a new director wasn’t easy as well, but fittingly, the job went to Marc Webb (director of 500 Days of Summer).

At a young age, Peter Parker was left to his Aunt May and Uncle Ben by his parents (Campbell Scott, Embeth Davidtz) who subsequently disappeared. In high school, he’s an outcast with no friends. Haunted by the desertion of his mother and father, he finds a clue that leads him to OsCorp Tower and meeting intern Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). After he wanders from a tour group and is bitten by a radioactive spider, he soon develops spider-like powers. Though he soon delights in getting even with school bullies, he learns that these newfound abilities come with a price – the death of his Uncle Ben; a death could have prevented. In order to take responsibility for his inaction, Peter becomes a masked vigilante, Spider-Man.

At the same time, Peter learns about Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), a geneticist who used to work with his father. Connors is experimenting with “cross-species genetics”, specifically reptiles. Connors lost his arm and through these experiments seeks to gain it back. Intrigued, Connors agrees to speak with him and Peter’s keen mind impresses him. After Peter fills in an equation to his key formula, Connors moves forward with human trials and self-tests a serum. Although it initially proves successful, Connors soon morphs into a giant, angry lizard obsessed on the destruction of mankind. Meanwhile, Gwen’s father, Police Captain Stacy issues an arrest warrant for Spider-Man, believing him to be an outlaw. With time running out and his loved ones at stake, Spider-Man must find the Lizard and put an end to his evil plot.

I’m very divided on this film. I enjoyed the first two Spider-Man films and while I don’t have the same amount of hate towards Spider-Man 3, the less said about it, the better. Considering what was going to be the story for Spider-Man 4, I applaud Sam Raimi for not being controlled by the studio. It’s disheartening too, to see this story play out without the original Curt Connors from the Spider-Man sequels, Dylan Baker. I think he would’ve been great. Also, considering Raimi is at heart a horror film director, he would have had some fun in scaring the crap out of audiences with the first real Spider-Man monster villain, the Lizard.

In the comics, Curt Connors is a good man with a loving family, a surgeon of war who lost an arm in the line of duty. When he turns to genetics, it’s not to boost his own ego; he genuinely wants to help people. When Connors unwillingly transforms into the Lizard, he becomes a monster. So whenever in battle, Spider-Man not only has to defeat the Lizard but restore the humanity in Curt Connors. In The Amazing Spider-Man, Curt Connors is played somewhat similarly to Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2: egocentric and insane. Connors is not given a family, so there’s nothing to remind audiences that Connors is a good man, even at his worst. Also, the worst-written scene in the movie is a confrontation between Peter and Connors where Connors says, among other things, “There’s rumors of a new species in New York, it can be aggressive if threatened.” Why doesn’t Connors just shake Peter by the shoulders and say, “I’m the Lizard! There’s nothing you can do to stop me! Stay out of my way!” It’s that over-the-top and on-the-nose, it’s ridiculous.

I think that Andrew Garfield’s performance in the film is great but if I can make a comparison to Superman Returns and Brandon Routh: he’s a great Spider-Man but only a good Peter Parker. Let me explain. In Superman Returns, Brandon Routh plays the double role of Clark Kent and Superman. As Superman, he’s fantastic; easily able to carry the torch from Christopher Reeve. But as Clark Kent, he comes up short; Christopher Reeve played Clark Kent as a bumbling, stuttering fool whom no one would suspect of being Superman which was half the fun of the movie. Routh played Kent too cool, too swift and not nearly as nerdy enough. I get that Peter Parker is supposed to be an outcast; it comes off quite well. But at his core, in the deepest darkest part of his psyche, Peter Parker IS A NERD. Glasses, out-of-style clothes, shyness and wimpiness – a “professional wallflower”. Here, in The Amazing Spider-Man, he’s just a nice guy outcast. He doesn’t look nerdy in the slightest.

However, when Peter’s in the Spider-Man suit, Garfield’s clearly having a ball. He’s having way more genuine fun in one movie than Tobey Maguire had in three. I was glad to see the filmmakers found a way to get around Peter building the web-shooters himself. When asked about using organic web-shooters in 2002, Sam Raimi answered that it was more credible than a high school boy to be able to produce an adhesive that 3M couldn’t make. In The Amazing Spider-Man, Peter simply peruses the adhesives from OsCorp and adapts them for his own use. We only see glimpses of Peter making the suit for himself, but it was more fun in the original Spider-Man seeing him draw up designs and finally settling on the one we know and love, but that’s just me.

There has been a lot of controversy lately regarding the cut of The Amazing Spider-Man that went out to theaters. Marketing materials suggested that the film would tell “The Untold Story” of Spider-Man and that his “Greatest Secrets” would be revealed. However, it appears that most, if not all, of this “untold story” was deleted from the final film. Lines like, “Ready to play God?”, “Do you have any idea what you really are?”, “If you want the truth, Peter, come and get it!” are nowhere to be heard in the film. Notably, a scene where Peter finishes the formula that his father and Curt Connors started ends up in an entirely different location. There have been suggestions that Sony was unhappy with this version of the film and cut it down so it resembled a “traditional” Spider-Man film. Evidence of this includes the dropped plotlines of Peter’s search for his parents, Peter’s search for the gunman who killed Uncle Ben and an entire character, Dr. Connors’ OsCorp superior Ratha (Irrfan Khan), goes missing. Scenes from marketing hint at a possible scene that was cut from the film that supposedly involved the Lizard killing Ratha in the sewers, with Spider-Man catching up only when it’s too late. While dying, Ratha hints that Peter may not know the whole story about his parents (while searching on the Internet, Peter finds an article stating his parents died in a plane crash; which raises the obvious question, “Why is he just now doing this?”). Sony can spin this all they want with their “new trilogy” talk, but it ends up crippling this film and only it’s wildly entertaining second half can keep it from ruination.

Ultimately, the real tragedy of the film is the comparisons people will make to the 2002 Spider-Man. Many feel that this reboot was too soon and not enough time was taken to distance both films from each other. The two versions of the exact same origin story are reduced to mere dueling banjos. In my opinion, Sam Raimi’s film held up the origin story so well, there was generally no need for the reboot to even consider adding it to the story. Heck, practically everybody knows the ins and outs of how Peter Parker became Spider-Man. What the new film should have done was simply retell the origin story through the film’s opening credits ala The Incredible Hulk. Taking its cues from the Bill Bixby TV series, the film opens with the traditional Hulk origin story silently as the theme music broods. That way, when the credits finish, the film can go ahead and tell the story it wants to tell having caught everyone who didn’t see the Ang Lee film, the TV show or read a Hulk comic.

I know this seems like a hit piece against this movie and I assure you, I enjoyed it. However, the film has a lot of flaws that cannot be ignored. Still, the cast was extremely talented and did very well, the special effects were dazzling, and with the origin story out of the way, the Spider-Man film series can really progress in a real “new direction”. Spider-Man’s undoubtedly a great character, the greatest Marvel has to offer, and the fact that he’s been around for 50 years gives fans the hope that he’ll be around for another 50 years.