I wasn’t impressed with The Amazing Spider-Man. I can’t say that it was a bad film by any stretch of the imagination, and it certainly had some highlights and wonderful things about it, but for the most part, I thought it was incredibly sloppy, awkwardly paced, unimaginative, and forgettable. Now, I’m not such a person that sees Sam Raimi’s original trilogy as infallible, being that I liked TASM more than Spider-Man 3, but I do go so far as to say this newest adventure doesn’t hold a candle to Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2.
But director Marc Webb is returning to helm the second feature, which could be great for a sense of completeness, but also problematic as the list compiled below explains.
I have hope for The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I really want it to be successful, as Spider-Man films hold a very special place in my heart (Spider-Man 2 is my favorite superhero film). So, if Webb proves me wrong and creates a fantastic sequel, I will gladly shake his hand and tell him that he made me eat my words. But he’ll have to get over the following, first…
5. We Didn’t Get the Movie We Were Promised the First Time
Now, I don’t know if I can fully blame Webb for this. I understand he has to follow the lead of the producer when it comes to the content of the picture, what has to be said, what has to be cut, etc. etc. But it doesn’t stop the fact that his name is attached to the title, and if he’s coming back for seconds, he might as well expect the same. Do we want that? Or do we want a director who will fight for the picture they shoot, and not to back down merely to supply fodder for sequels?
I’ll just repeat again that I’m not trying to slander or ruin Webb’s name as a director. I don’t know how he goes about shooting a film. I don’t know his method. I can’t say anything on the matter. But the film advertised and the film viewers saw were not identical, by any means. Subplots were abandoned, characters re-imagined for the sake of convenience and time, and the editing just proved to be incredibly sloppy and rushed.
I’ll be going to see The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (if that’s what it’ll be titled), but I’ll definitely be going in knowing that the picture I’m promised could just be to get me to go in differentiating it from Raimi’s trilogy.
We are currently seeking Spider-Man contributors on WhatCulture. To find out more about the perks of being a Spider-Man contributor, click here.
7 Comments
I get where you’re coming from when you say Peter didn’t learn his lesson by not keeping the promise he made to Capt. Stacy, but there is a case to be made that his full character arc won’t complete until the second or even third installment (similar to DKR).
I didn’t have a problem with Peter breaking his promise because to me he is still a brash young man that follows his heart even though he knows he probably shouldn’t. His young love, quasi-self destructive decision is a totally relatable emotion to me. I was lukewarm to the film overall because it felt incomplete, but I’m glad Webb is returning because I think Gwen’s eventual death will pay off in a very powerful way, thanks to Garfield’s talent and Webb’s ability to get the most out of on-screen emotion.
Normally, every film should have a completed arc for their character. In Peter’s case, he would have one had he just not issued that ONE line that defeats the purpose of all his development.
If Peter hadn’t said that, and then in the second film he breaks his promise and starts up a new relationship, then it would have been okay. But by leaving us with that in this movie, it’s a deterrent to everything we’ve seen before.
While I agree with you that he’s a brash, young man, the movie goes out of its way with the bridge scene to amplify the fact that he’s changing into the hero he’s destined to become.
I think you are absolutely wrong… his character didn’t develop just because he made one decision based on emotions. I’ve made mistakes since I was a kid but that doesn’t mean I’m exactly the same person I was when I was younger. How long did it take you to develop into the person you are? Ands this movie takes place within the time span of what? A few months? I think he showed development and a sense of responsibility by giving up his quest for vengeance after his dinner w/ the Stacy’s and his encounter w/ the lizard and saving those people on the bridge. I think his character development is more realistic than a drastic overnight change.
So, you’re saying that after all of Peter’s changes in the movie, thrusting him into the role of someone with immense responsibility, that at the very end of the movie, his promise to Gwen doesn’t defeat the entire purpose of his journey?
I thought Peter DID develop. That’s the issue I had. He has great strides in development and then makes a decision that completely and entirely goes against EVERYTHING he learned prior.
It’s like if American History X went with its original ending. We get Norton’s character reshaping his life after being a racist bigot, and then once his brother is killed, we return to him shaving his head and revealing his swastika tattoo again. And while that movie has an obvious message to it, TASM’s primary theme is “Who am I?” and they constantly shove it down viewers’ throats.
Peter develops then undevelops for the sake of either:
a) continuing the story for sequels in a sloppy way, which is something a movie shouldn’t do by its own merits or
b) leaving the audience with a falsified feeling of closure
That’s poor screenwriting.
I get what you’re saying but I don’t think one selfish decision totally negates his character progress. He still has his sense of responsibility but he’s in love! He just made the decision to be w/ Gwen quicker than it took tobey maguire’s peter. He eventually ended up w/ mj. I think the comparison to American history x is a bit extreme. He’s not going back to the person he was. He’s just making a decision because he’s in love. How would you have had them get back w/ Gwen? Like the raimi movies did w/ peter and mj?
Making that decision because he’s “in love” is a pretty cheap way at bringing them back together. You can only do one of two things. TASM went with the safe idea of bringing Gwen and Peter back “together” at the end, negating his development. Raimi’s Spider-Man didn’t do that. It went the other way. They made up for it in the sequel.
Of course, you can prefer the TASM ending to the original, but it does appear to be completely out of character and asinine for someone who dealt with Gwen being mere inches away from death at the hands of the Lizard numerous times, and after promising her dying father he’d steer clear for her sake.
I can tell you exactly why Peter hasn’t “learned his lesson” in regards to keeping his promise to Captain Stacey. It’s because that lesson was not taught to him this movie. There is no reason for Peter to “know better” yet. By the end of Amazing Spider-Man Peter has been Spidey for, let’s be generous and say 2 months. I suspect it was considerably less than that. So what happened during this movie that taught him this lesson that he is supposedly ignoring at the end? Captain Stacey asked Peter to make what was essentially an impossible promise. Especially for a god damn teenager. The lesson you’re talking about, that his responsibility extends to the well being of his family and loved ones is a lesson he is going to learn in the next film. That wasn’t the lesson he learned in this first film. This first film has only given Peter his first taste of the notion that with great power comes great responsibility. He took responsibility for the Lizard, he took it upon himself to stop him. He’s still learning though, he’s still young. He’s a teenager, and as such we should expect him to make plenty of mistakes along the way. To want Peter to be a paragon of responsibility by the end of the first film demonstrates an immense misunderstanding of the character of Spider-Man and his history. The lesson you want him to have learned is a lesson he doesn’t learn until the death of Gwen. Right now Peter still lives in a world where Super Villains aren’t really a thing. The Lizard is an anomoly in Peter’s world. Now that the Lizard is gone what is Peter supposed to be afraid of? That some mugger, burglar or carjacker is going to learn his secret identity and go after his loved ones? There is no Doctor Octopus yet, there is no green goblin. There’s no electro, shocker, rhino or vulture. The threat level is pretty much nil. I don’t think there’s anything about the ending that in any way contradicts the character development of Peter over the course of the film. He’s at the very beginning of his journey. He’s a stupid teenager who thinks he has a handle on things and is going to learn, as we all do, that he really doesn’t. He’s going to learn it in a spectacularly painful way.