Today's Column: will Spider-Man be our new Iron Man?

Told you I'd write that column? Well, here it is:

Wordt Spider-Man de nieuwe Iron Man?

What, another column in only two weeks, you may ask? Well, I had the time available to pen one and there was an opening because the guy who was supposed to deliver one this week didn't do so (for shame!). Plus, my editor recognized this as a current topic that needed to be posted before the news felt too far in the past. So, good for me.

As you might be able to discern from this overly long piece, I don't believe Spider-Man joining the ranks of Marvel Studios is a bad thing at all. I just know there's a lot of factors to take into account to make it work properly, without getting the feeling the webhead is hogging all the glory from his fellow superheroes (something Robert Downey Jr's Iron Man felt to be doing at times). And I have faith that Marvel will consider all possible angles, while my gut tells me they had it all worked out already, as they're champions in planning their universe thoroughly ahead. That said, I do believe re-introducing the audience to the beloved webslinger in the next Captain America movie is not the smartest move. It feels too much like 'oh, Spider-Man played a pivotal role in the Civil War comics, so let's use him in that screen adaptation to stick closer to the source material and earn points with the fan base' or a similar thought along that line. But this is not necessarily the Spider-Man we've come to know. It won't be Andrew Garfield. It's a new guy, which - unfortunately - does require a bit of an origin story to make it flow seamlessly. And such a story is better suited in his own film, rather than in somebody else's. Even though I recognize audiences have grown tired of Spidey's origin story, which has been retold a little too often in recent years. But you still gotta have it if you're talking about a new Spider-Man. A younger Spider-Man. Might they even consider going a vastly different route and eliminating Peter Parker for the new webhead on the block Miles Morales altogether? Now that's an interesting thought. Though definitely one that would polarize the fan community and make for quite some heavy flame wars all over the web. Whose side are you on? That's inspiration for another column right there.

Today's News: women take over, men get left behind

Quite the girl power news all of a sudden:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156794/bridesmaids-regisseur_beoogd_voor_ghostbusters_

Since reuniting the original cast and crew seems ever more unlikely - since one half is dead and the other has lost heart accordingly - starting from scratch might very well be the best bet for the Ghostbusters franchise (other than just let it be, which is not how Hollywood works). The studio now seems intent on adding some flair by making the next generation of exterminators of ghostly apparitions an all-female team, as opposed to the old guard which was entirely male. Shrewd manoeuvring. It makes the new Ghostbusters appear different enough, while thematically and in terms of content, nothing much changes at all. I don't see the zany comedic approach of old traded in for a major new plot direction just because the protagonists have swapped genders. The more things change, the more they stay the same, would be the best way to describe this apparent state of affairs. However, I must call for some consistency by saying the studio had better go all the way now and also hire a female writer and director. But if they insist on Paul Feig for the director's chair, that would constitute a missed opportunity. Feig already seems to be Hollywood's go-to-guy for comedies involving mostly female characters aimed at a predominantly female demographic. Basically the girls are still told what to do by a guy. Why not stray away from this routine for Ghostbusters? Because so far it's making the studio money, obviously. So you bet Feig stays on, and he'll likely bring Melissa McCarthy (and probably Sandra Bullock too) with him, as she's Hollywood's go-to-funny-gal, basically the female equivalent of (a younger) Bill Murray. You might be inclined to believe the new Ghostbusters is heading into new territory by the sex reversal, but so far, it seems you are wrong in that assessment.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156803/sony_wil_vrouwelijke_spider-man_spin-off

On the other hand, the same studio (Sony) does seem hellbent on entering new territory for the Spider-Man franchise. However, it becomes increasingly clear they still don't have a long term strategy as how to handle the character's universe they are so eager to translate to the big screen. Initially, it seemed pretty straightforward with Amazing Spider-Man 2, 3 and 4 in the works and possible spin-off worthy characters introduced in those films along the way before acquiring their solo features. Now, however, the spin-offs seem to overtake the main character's story line. The Sinister Six and Venom movie - the latter of which was revealed to be titled as the woefully uninspired and spoilerific Venom Carnage this week - will now debut well before Spider-Man's third film. Which means half the team of villains as well as the titular symbiote will be introduced to new audiences in their own film, while Spider-Man seems relegated to a side role. Seems like a terribly illogical way to approach things, likely to confuse audiences. To top it all, Marvel's top boss Kevin Feige commented on the lack of superheroine centered flicks thus far and the intention to remedy that, after which Sony swiftly announced they're also planning to make just such a film, dealing with a character from the pages of Spider-Man's history. They wouldn't say her name. You know why? Because they don't know who they're gonna pick. It's become apparent Sony desperately wants to make the big bucks by following Marvel's Avengers example, but they have no clue as how to carefully construct such a universe as they are in such a hurry to catch up with Marvel proper. As a result, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 already turned out to be a mess, more concerned with introducing as many characters as possible than with delivering a balanced plot. Considering their current suggestions, Sony seems about to repeat that film's mistakes. I sympathize with the poor superpowered girl on who will be bestowed the honour of starring in the first superheroine film in this studio's current chaotic affairs, as well as the female target audience that needs to be enticed into liking superheroes via the movie of a studio that can't be bothered to get their spidershit together. Better make it a Spider-Woman movie at least, as most of the incarnations of that character don't share as many ties with the webslinger and could prove to stand on their own in greater capacity.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156813/eerste_trailer_left_behind

And now for something completely different: the Rapture. Works on men and women both and does not discriminate in terms of race, religion and ideology either, or so Left Behind seems to suggest. Admittedly, the premise is intriguing: what would the effect, both emotional and existential, of the Rapture be on those who turned out not to be eligible to join their Creator? The result in Left Behind seems to be a fairly average break-down of society, after which the film feels the need to focus on the microcosmic tale of a father and a daughter coping with their loss and just trying to survive. Not the most original or effective way to deal with such a world shattering event. Casting Nicolas Cage as the protagonist also doesn't seem to be the safest bet considering the number of lousy movies he has made over the last few years, many of them also dealing with Heaven, Hell and the human condition (e.g. both Ghost Rider movies, Season of the Witch and Drive Angry). Cage of late seems to be the go-to-guy for religious B-fare. From the looks of this trailer, Left Behind seems to risk being the stuff to be added under said category in the not too distant future.

Today's Review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2

The Amazing Spider-Man 2: ***/*****, or 6/10

Now that Marvel Studios' long term strategy has shown to pay off in the most lucrative manner imaginable, it's no surprise to see rival studios owning their own pieces of the Marvel pie try their luck with a similar concept. As such, Sony faces the most challenging job at universe building, as they own the rights to a franchise based around a single character: Spider-Man. Fortunately for the studio, Spidey has a wide array of friends and foes, allies and adversaries, to choose from in order to construct a larger shared realm which may at some point include movies that do not need the wallcrawler's presence to stand on their own feet. However, such characters, good guys and bad, will need to be introduced first to familiarize the audience with their personalities and groom them for their own solo debuts in later years. And so the crafting of a larger Spiderverse begins with The Amazing Spider-Man 2, which hosts a plethora of new characters and a threesome of rogues to enrich Peter Parker's life. Problem is, for a freshly rebooted franchise which, after a single movie that can be described as 'adequate' at best, still needs to prove to the audience the validity of the rebooting process, the time to start such universe building simply isn't ripe just yet. As a result, the second Amazing Spidermovie feels like a convoluted, incoherently structured piece that aims to be more than 'amazing', while the audience still waits for that moniker to make good on its promise.

In the sequel, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) has come to terms with his powers and responsibilities acting as New York's superhuman guardian, haunted by the vision of Captain Stacy, as he struggles to uphold his promise to the deceased father of the love of his life, Gwen (Emma Stone), to stay out of her existence in order to keep her safe from the harm that comes with being Spider-Man. A strong-spirited and intelligent young woman, Gwen is determined to embrace the dangers involved with dating Peter, or otherwise to move one with her career and leave him in the cold. This results in many a scene of fairly engaging and recognizable lovers' quarrels that reveal director Marc Webb's strengths in directing the identifiable romantic affairs of the younger generation. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone is still solid, though the same cannot be said for the writing of the former, as Peter has moved on from being a socially awkward nerd to a rather self-absorbed punk. Though his red-and-blue clad alter ego is modelled after his comic book counterpart more closely and convincingly than ever – webslinging moves, wisecracking puns and all – Peter feels like he has changed in character a little too much too fast, his occasional dickish behavior courtesy of a new team of writers. While Stone's performance remains a joy to behold, Garfield's oftentimes evokes more irritation than affection.

Spidey's knack for getting those he cares about in trouble is quickly proven as he's confronted by no less than three new villains in this movie, each with his own personal baggage and history that needs some exploration (especially if they are to be found worthy of reprising their roles for later projects). The main antagonist, the volatile and hotheaded Electro (Jamie Foxx), is given the most balanced bit of background, in which he is revealed kind of as Peter Parker-gone-bad. A lonely and socially isolated geek, his involuntary plunge in a vat of genetically engineered electric eels (if you feel this sounds silly, ask yourself whether it would if it involved spiders instead) grants him powers beyond his wildest dreams, but as he hopes to finally stand out from the crowd, those masses that worship his idol Spider-Man reject him, forcing him to go on a electrostatic rampage aimed at New York's favorite webspinner to get back at the world. Though Foxx's performance, some times over-the-top while at others more contained, leaves something to be desired, as does his rather two-dimensional anger directed at Spider-man, Electro's colourful but lethal sparkle shows make for a fancy visual style not seen in a Spider-Man movie before.

What has been seen before however is Harry Osborn, Peter's long time friend and occasionally Spidey's nemesis. In Raimi's trilogy of movies, Harry was given an arc all his own over the course of three movies, building up to the conflict to be and Spider-Man's emotional disarray that came with it. Not so in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, where the same story is roughly being told in a single film, in a much abbreviated form that does not do justice to the many decades of comic book lore in which this close friendship annex hateful rivalry slowly but surely evolved. When his father Norman (Chris Cooper), the head of OsCorp Industries, dies as a result of a degenerative illness that runs in the family, Harry (Dane DeHaan) gets reacquainted with his childhood friend Peter as he offers his condolences. A more elaborate backstory is inferred, but as it is only the subject of the briefest conversation it is hard to truly care about the relationship between Peter and Harry. The latter swiftly becomes CEO of OsCorp where he finds himself thrown in an arena of board intrigue and backstabbing conspiracies to remove him from office, as he tries to find a cure for what killed his dad and all too soon will end his life prematurely too. The only thing standing between him and an untimely demise appears to be the blood of genetically engineered spiders, company property that was deemed lost, so Spider-Man's blood appears to be the only cure still available. As the disease starts to corrupt both his body and mind, Harry's friendship with Peter turns sour when his buddy will not help him get in touch with the wallcrawler to acquire that pivotal transfusion. Eventually more drastic measures must be taken for survival and Harry transforms into the maniacal Green Goblin, hellbent on wrecking Peter's life, especially when he discovers his secret identity. DeHaan proves quite up to the task of portraying the sympathetic Harry, who grows ever more frustrated as his quest to save his own life is thwarted by both those on his payroll and his oldest friend. He also visibly shows to have had a blast playing the crazed Goblin, making DeHaan's contributions to the acting front more sizable than Garfield's haphazard performances, though both characters are admittedly driven by less than stellar writing.

Last and least of the trio of baddies is Rhino, a Russian criminal played by Paul Giamatti (who also makes it abundantly clear he's enjoying himself tremendously), whose presence feels more of an afterthought added by the studio to get that universe building going, as he adds little of relevance to the plot otherwise. Appearing only in the beginning of the film as a violent smuggler who's ridiculed by Spidey, and at the end donning stupendously large battle armour, the character proves the finest example of how not to introduce characters meant to form part of a larger whole later on, if you want the audience to invest in them. It is made clear in the climax of the film Rhino is the first member of Harry's team of villains meant to destroy Spider-Man, a plot line which is already stated to carry over in the next entry into the series, as well as in the announced Sinister Six spin-off. However, this attempt to foreshadow such future fare backfires on The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as a film on its own. 

 

If you compare the first few trailers with the final product, you'll notice the film feels to be lacking not only many scenes but also entire story threads that would have driven the plot into a very different direction. Scenes between Harry, his father and Peter promised much more intricate relations between the characters than what was ultimately seen on screen. Likewise, characters' scenes were filmed but dropped, including the introduction of Mary Jane, while others were shortened dramatically, like Harry's secretary Felicia Hardy (who fans will know as Spidey's love affair/part time enemy Black Cat) suffered. The undeniable fact is, with multiple foes, a tumultuous love life and relationship with assorted family, plus a continuing search for his roots and the fate of his parents carried over from the predecessor, there was more than enough going on in the plot of the film already without the studio's obvious insistence of setting up future films as well. As a result, few of the many plot lines get their chance to stand out amidst the convoluted whole that now is The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Of course, there's some fine action scenes and shows of superhero spectacle, while the webslinging never looked better. But in most other respects, the film too often feels like coming up short considerably. Arguably, Sony will make more time to craft the upcoming films into a more coherent and consistent whole, as the element of universe building was rushed into this movie's plot while production was already underway. For now however, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has ended up a Spider-Man film that quickly branches off into an advertisement for upcoming Spider-Man films, hurting its own ending, despite the otherwise tragic climax, which under less padded conditions might have made this the emotionally most powerful Spiderfilm as yet. Robbed of its right to exist as a separate entity, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 failed in that regard, nor does it bode well for Spidey's future.

And to make matters worse, some viewers will be treated to a version of the film with end credits containing a scene for the next X-Men film, which causes this movie to feel even more like a commercial for future superhero flicks, even wholly unrelated ones...

Today's Column: are we tired yet of the Avengers-approach?

After yesterday's sad events, spirits may be lifted a little bit with an extra lengthy column I wrote for MS this week:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154600/column_zijn_we_al_moe_van_de_avengers-aanpak

My point that Marvel might be endangering its own construct by relying on its star actors too much was fortuitously underscored this week, when word leaked that Chris Evans means to quit the acting business altogether in favor of turning towards directing, as I posted in this bit of news last week:

 http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154691/chris_evans_wil_stoppen_met_acteren

Fortunately he's under contract at Marvel and he still has two movies to go (Avengers: Age of Ultron and Captain America 3 it seems), so there's still time for Marvel to avert a crisis. For now. Phase 2 seems secure, but it seems a sure thing Evans will not return for Avengers 3. So what's Marvel to do without the iconic Star Spangled Avenger? Recasting is an option, as is killing off his character. But it's just one actor among many who may jump ship earlier than Marvel would like, and you can't recast or replace them all without potentially annoying or needlessly confusing the audience. But let's find out how the viewers will respond to two different takes on the same character (Quicksilver) first. Maybe it will go unnoticed by all but the avid comic book fans, maybe people will understand not all Marvel superheroes belong to Marvel Studios proper in terms of copyright (fat chance!), or maybe they will simply not care about the whole matter (the wisest choice no doubt). But it seems a given that even Marvel's ambitious 'Avengers-approach' to building a coherent cinematic universe will be in need of a reboot somewhere down the line, and maybe earlier than anticipated.

Today's News: Spidey loses his Webb

Yesterday's hottest news today on my blog!:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154451/webb_niet_terug_voor_amazing_spider-man_4

All good things come to an end, and for most directors, the number three is that magical line where they tend to call it quits. There's exceptions of course, like Michael Bay on Transformers, but then, that is not a good thing. It doesn't happen very often that a director working on a major franchise continues to work in that capacity beyond three movies. Sam Raimi stepped down as director on the previous Spider-Man trilogy at a point where that was still intended to feature more than just three movies (but as history willed it, Spider-Man 4 was dropped by the studio in favor of the current rebooted series). Marc Webb seems to follow closely in his footsteps in this regard. You'd think Webb might want to show off and do at least one more of these films just to stick it to Raimi, but such frivolous thoughts of competition apparently do no enter his mind. A job as advisor is enough for him when he has finished his trilogy, he says. And who can blame him? We gotta cut these directors some slack when doing three movies in a row and then deciding to call it a day. They spend years and years working on the same characters, the same type of films, propelled by the same high expectations by the studio and the general audience alike. That takes its toll. Webb will have spent the better part of a decade doing Spider-Man when he's done. Maybe he'd like to spend more time with the wife and kids for a change? Though no doubt he liked his experience on the first movie - and the paychecks that accompanied the job - well enough to have at it two more times, there comes a point where any director needs something new to keep thoroughly engaged. Directors are creative people that continuously crave new challenges and different types of projects. If they keep regurgitating their energy for doing the exact same thing for ten years, quality of the end results is bound to suffer, and nobody will be the wiser. Raimi's much maligned Spider-Man 3 already seemed to suffer from such deterioration, and we have yet to see how well Webb will cope on his third Spidey movie. Nevertheless, since these new Spider-Man movies too make the studio stupendous amounts of money, you can't blame them for wanting to keep the momentum going. Especially when they see how great Marvel Studios is doing with their Avengers approach, which they have now copied with the intention of exploring and expanding Spider-Man's universe, for the moment seemingly ad infinitum. Not only have they slated two more Amazing Spider-Man movies after next month's second installment, villain spin-offs Sinister Six and Venom are also in the works, whether the audience wants them or not. Hey Webb, how about doing Venom when you're done with Spider-Man? He's just like Spidey, except in black and evil, so totally different. There's your creative challenge right there!

Today's News: a deluge of more Spidey pics and posters

Here's another bunch of Spider-Man images I posted on MS:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153149/meer_nieuwe_posters_en_shots_amazing_spider-man_2

Are you getting tired of Spider-Man yet? I gotta say, this is really an agressive, in-your-face marketing campaign that Amazing Spider-Man 2 is witnessing. It seems there's new material made available every other day. And we still have more than three months to go before the movie hits, so I don't expect it to get any less any time soon, which means the movie's release will be hard to miss. New images is one thing, but what's the point of so many different posters? One possible answer in this case is building up (unconscious) franchise awareness. The 'Enemies will unite' tagline on the Electro one-sheet is a rather overt reference to the recently anounced upcoming Sinister Six spin-off movie, the groundwork for which is being laid right in this film. TAS-M2 introduces three(!) baddies from that notorious team of super villains from Spidey's rogue gallery, and if you count Lizard from the previous installment as another (though that has not yet been confirmed), you only need to spawn two more in TAS-M3 before the Six can have at the webslinger in the fourth film (also alreayd announced) and their own adventure afterwards (an all-bad guy movie would be a new one even for Marvel). As the trailers revealed - subtlety is not one of this franchise's strong suits - the identities of the missing pair have also been established already. But of course, the danger with so many characters is risking a convoluted, overcrowded movie. Remember how well (or not actually) Raimi's Spider-Man 3 fared in that regard, when it also let loose three antagonists on our hero? At least director Marc Webb will have a decent blueprint on how not to do things storywise.

And if a Sinister Six movie wasn't enough, it seems Spidey's archenemy Venom is getting his own solofilm too, though no word yet on how this character is gonna get introduced prior to that happening. The proposed project certainly won't build on Raimi's third Spider-movie (thankfully!). Since Venom needs to be (re)introduced through a Spider-Man film first (otherwise you completely ignore the origin of the character and his motivations), everybody's guess is he will pop up in TAS-M3 too, which means he could possibly replace Lizard as a Sinister Six member. But why then the privilege of a solo film? After all, it seems unfair and overkill if we would see Venom both in his own film and the proposed Sinister Six flick, unless he would be replaced by another villain in the latter, rendering the Sinster Six Venomless but justifying a Venom movie more strongly. As you can see, Sony Pictures' intended development of the Spider-Universe is already rife with questions about the future of characters not yet introduced, and that universe at present still consists of only one film. But a constant stream of images, posters and the occasional new vague comment from the director and execs keeps the fans' discussions and controversies going and ensures it will survive for a few more years. Are you getting tired of Spider-Man yet? If not, you probably will eventually, if those Spider-fans can't shut up about it until solid information is finally released.

Today's News: Spidey slinging into more action on novel poster threesome

Here's some more MS news for ya:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/152901/nieuwe_posters_voor_the_amazing_spider-man_2

The marketing campaign for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 continues to throw more goodies our way in rapid pace, even though the release of the film is still a good three point five months away. I must say, I both love and hate this particular set of posters. I like the dynamic pose of the protagonists on these, rather reminiscent of actual comic book cover art, especially the one showing Spidey in typical web slinging fashion (top). They're bound to get more enthusiastic attention than the rather dull posters of Sam Raimi's trilogy of movies, which in typical Hollywood fashion showed just a bunch of heads, or at best, a full shot of Spider-Man in a fairly energetic posture. The poster that shows an extreme close-up of Spider-Man's mask with a reflection of an angry Electro in his eye (bottom) certainly can be taken as a nod to some of the posters of the predecessors, where you would have the identity of the movie's main antagonist revealed in a similar fashion, except much smaller.

However, I'm bugged by the laziness of these posters, applying the same elements in slightly different order and size. Whereas there's a respectable diversity in the way the titular character is displayed, you'll notice Electro assumes an identical pose on all three one-sheets, as the exact same piece of imagery is used. A similar thing is happening with the video boards on all three posters, showing the same characters in precisely the same shots. It's like some member of the promotional team just had him/herself a ball photoshopping these posters by rearranging the way said elements are portrayed, the only piece showing any originality being our friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man himself. Given there's still three months of marketing to be done, you wonder whether releasing a single new poster of Spidey versus Electro would not have sufficed for now, so more money and attention could be spend on following posters showing Rhino and Green Goblin too (even though there's a hint at the Goblin present here, poor Rhino is totally neglected on these posters!). Assuming such posters won't be released later on, which remains to be seen as this film's promotional campaign seems to go all-out. Even though the blatant similarities on these posters are kinda disappointing for movie/comic nerds nitpicking at home on their computers for lack of existential purpose, it probably won't matter where theater marketing is concerned. I doubt many theaters, save for the really big ones, will get all three of these anyhow, considering there's been a few TAS-M2 (much shorter!) posters released already - though at my theater we didn't receive any yet - and I doubt these will be the last of them. Besides, it's only posters: it's the actual movie that counts. I'm certainly looking forward to it, though I'm kinda hesitant about the presence of three baddies (plus hints to various others) all in a single film. Didn't work out so well the last time...

Today's News: more Spidey pics, and a trailer soon slinging our way

Look what I found online to post on MS:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/152139/nieuwe_fotos_amazing_spider-man_2_online

These pictures are getting increasingly oriented, as was to be expected. The shooting process is now over and done with (excluding eventual pick-ups), so the first finished (or nearly so) effects pop up in the promotional material as evidenced here. We now know who the new villains are and which actors will be playing them - in case you simply can't care less and/or missed this bit of news, it's Electro (Jamie Foxx), Rhino (Paul Giamatti) and the Green Goblin (either Chris Cooper or Dane DeHaan) - so now we are dying to see what they can do to the poor webhead. These few pictures are just the tip of the iceberg as the marketing machine slowly but surely starts to crank out more and more intriguing stuff with the intent to drag us along in the typical Hollywood hype surrounding this type of excessively expensive (but often equally lucrative) blockbuster flick. Pictures are one thing, but what the audience wants is trailers. And they're getting one pretty soon, as we've been teased with little snippets of it for a week now. These days, simply releasing teasers and trailers for a big budget film like this is apparently not enough, you have to release teasers for the trailers themselves too. It feels like commercial overkill, as it's likely the trailer will be seen by most people who would visit the film itself in theaters sometime along the next five months anyway, but the marketing execs take no chances, spending even more top dollar bombastically announcing the upcoming trailer event which like the film itself should not be missed by anyone since it's gonna be oh so special; a thing the studio system tries to convince us of in the case of pretty much all summer blockbusters, with most of them failing to live up to such hype. Of course, with such a thorough marketing campaign, the more money is lost if the movie flops (e.g., John Carter). Not that the movie will flop, considering the Marvel logo alone is enough to draw record breaking attendance levels in these days.

Oh well, the trailer is up tomorrow, folks! Be sure to plan your life accordingly so as not to miss this must-see online spectacle! Or simply wait till you see it in theaters somewhere before the end of April next year. Or ignore it altogether and go into the movie without knowing what's gonna happen, as people used to do in the old days. Now the ability to be surprised about a blockbuster's content, that was truly amazing!

Today's News: three new Amazing Spidey pics (sort of)

Here's some old news I posted on MovieScene. Blame circumstances for not allowing me to find the time to update this blog more regularly at present.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151546/nieuwe_fotos_the_amazing_spider-man_2

Pretty teasy pics. Trying to get us more interested and even pre-hyped up for this reboot sequel. Apparently there's emotional friction between Peter (Andrew Garfield) and Gwen (Emma Stone), as there would be after the events of the previous installment, which witnessed a personal loss for the pair of them and a solemn promise suggested to be broken soon because of their continuing mutual love. I personally hope whatever is going on between them isn't going to cause Gwen to do something that gets herself killed, as is her fate. If you think you got spoilered now, don't blame me. Chances are good Gwen Stacy died in Spider-Man lore well before you were born, dear reader. However, I like Stone's Gwen, way more than I ever liked Mary Jane or Kirsten Dunst. I hope we'll stick to her for at least one more film.

Then there's a new picture of the movie's main villain, Electro (Jamie Foxx). I'm still not entirely happy with his look, but this is about as close as you can get to his look from the Ultimate Spider-Man line of comics without getting too ridiculous: plus, it certainly beats the goofy lightning bolt costume he wore in the regular Spidey-verse. Either way, Foxx is a solid actor, which for me is the main thing in this case.

Then there's the funny picture of Spider-Man playing fireman. A good chance he's squaring off against said antagonist in this scene, keeping in mind the natural dynamics between water and electricity. Of course, the hat isn't necessary, but it serves as a reminder of A: the fun aspect of the Spider-Man comics and movies, and B: the fact that Spider-Man has always had a tumultuous relationship with public service institutions like this. Remember his arduous affair with the police in the last film? Wearing this hat could help him improve his public image with the good people of NYC, while using a fire hose to save their city from an electric guy. After all, the Spider-Man movies, new and old, are rife with the matter of a vigilante protagonist who seeks to use his powers for good despite being disliked for it by government agencies, but still winning the love of the everyday people he protects and serves for all his valiant efforts. This shot hearkens back to the likes of the train scene in Spider-Man 2, the cheesy 'if you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us' line from a random passersby in Raimi's first Spider-Man, and the myriad examples of big-ass American flags in all of the Spidey movies to date. Like it or not, it comes with this particular red, white and blue hero's mythos. And let's face it: it's not nearly as in-your-face as a superhero wearing the American flag all over his costume!

Today's News: Spidey slings into action two more times

Here's a bit of news of mine that the guys at MovieScene posted two days too late, oddly enough:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/148014/nog_twee_amazing_spider-man_sequels_in_de_planning

There's a word for this type of thing: overkill. And in Sony's case, there's also the element of 'not learning from past mistakes' involved. After all, the same studio kicked production of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 4 into gear before Spider-Man 3 had started to break box office records: in fact it had barely arrived in theaters at all. The negative backlash for that film, coupled with the age old 'creative differences' - i.e., a big falling out - between studio and director caused that project to backfire, making the studio lose a fair bit of money, not to mention the webhead's fanbase's respect. Yet here we are again: Amazing Spidey 2 hasn't even finished production yet, but Sony smells money. Lots of it apparently, giving the huge step they are taking with announcing no less than two (!) additional sequels. They're trying to make it look like they're thinking long term here, but compared to their rival Marvel Studios they only seem to be showing the exact opposite, namely a lack of careful planning.

Marvel is breaking new ground with establishing an extensive Marvel Cinematic Universe, comprehensive for new or casual viewers yet increasingly appealing for (comic book) fans, in giving us films we can both enjoy on their own and in a broader context. They do so in phases, breaking down the establishment of this universe in smaller units of four or five separate films while working up to a big film (currently The Avengers 2) each time. And so a vast universe grows on the big screen, without becoming overly convoluted but instead accessible for all, even to those who haven't seen any or all of the other Marvel films. Sony however has a hard time properly handling a single character (though it must be said, since Spider-Man is undoubtedly the most popular and well known of the Marvel superheroes, the stakes are high, and so are the expectations the audience carries). It started out successfully under Raimi's care until he went overboard with Spider-Man 3, adding to many characters and plot lines to a single movie, which ended feeling disappointing in most of them. The box office certainly wasn't hurt because of that fact though, as the third movie ended up the highest grossing in the franchise. However, critics and fans responded mostly negatively to the film. Had Sony waited patiently for the general reception of the film they might not have rushed pre-production of Spider-Man 4. Instead, they did, to dire consequences for the project and Raimi's involvement with the franchise.

A movie scrapped, a director leaving the studio, the stars refusing to participate without Raimi; it's not illogical the studio opted for a reboot to start fresh, even though that wasn't what the fans wanted. And so we got The Amazing Spider-Man within a decade after the premiere of its counterpart in the first Spidey trilogy. It too left a lot to be desired, but once again proved a box office smash. So there's a definite precedence for the sequel currently in production, but there's seems to be little for two more sequels. Or is there? Maybe Sony has actually taken a hint from Marvel's approach to its movies and the studio has developed a long term plan, but so far there's nothing to suggest that (and there probably won't be until TAS-M2 hits theaters). It just feels Sony is making the same mistakes all over again, except doubly so this time (though it's likely prepping part 4 will be on hold until part 3 is well underway). So far, the statement Sony clearly makes with regards to "its" Spider-Man is that the studio won't let go of the rights to the character. Ever. It's no surprise, considering Spidey's webshooters might as well shoot money for the studio execs, but for the legions of fans who were hoping Marvel and Sony would come to see eye to eye and join forces to incorporate Spider-Man into the Marvel Cinematic Universe - and to see him become an Avenger in his own right - the news of Sony's pair of sequels will come as a disappointment. Spider-Man will just have to continue going his own way in his own universe, without counting on back-up from his fellow superheroes when super villains are roughing him up. And us, the audience, just has to hope Sony won't fall into its own pitfalls again, since there's no web to catch them if they do. There's only the option of rebooting the franchise yet again, something nobody wants at this point (let alone five years in the future). Or maybe Sony ought to make it easy on itself and sell the Spidey rights back to Marvel after all...

Today's News: The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Just posted this tidbit of news regarding the latest casting choice of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 over on MovieScene.nl:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/142309/dane_dehaan_als_harry_osborn_in_amazing_spider-man_2

It's an interesting bit of casting, but I fear poor Dane might feel his career is getting repetitive, since his newly accepted role shares more than its fair share of similarities to his breakthrough role in Chronicle. However, Peter Parker better be sure to see that flick to realize what he's in for if he upsets his closest 'frenemy'...

Uncle Ben dies again

The Amazing Spider-Man: ***/*****, or 7/10

One of the most respectable and thoughtful things about this year's biggest Marvel movie, The Avengers, is the way it was set up in the first place, introducing the various superheroes individually before assembling the team itself, thus establishing a shared, epic cinematic Marvel universe very close in feel to the comic books it is based on, yet not so convoluted as to alienate audiences unfamiliar with the wondrous world of Marvel Comics. It was a huge gamble, but fortunately for the studios involved and for the many fans of the characters and their films, it payed off big time, smashing many box office records, thus paving the way for a 'Phase 2', another large scale five year plan, not only adding sequels to the Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and Avengers films, but also kickstarting more Marvel projects to tie in with this brave new world on film, including Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man and Nick Fury movies. Such foresight and careful planning unfortunately can't be detected in the Sony Pictures' franchise of that other much beloved Marvel character, Spider-Man, who after an initial hugely successful trilogy of movies ingratiously was denied a third sequel because of creative differences between the studio and the top people involved, making the former take the much dreaded 'reboot road' instead, restarting the movie franchise all over again only a decade after it first originated. It's a kick in the groin, not only for the webslinger himself, but also for his legions of fans and even regular audiences across the globe, who now get treated to another take on a character who's origin story is no secret to anybody.

Of course a different approach had to be taken to avoid the new flick, now titled The Amazing Spider-Man (and so at least respecting Spider-Man's first own comic book series of the same name), feeling too much of a déjà vu compared to what we've seen before. Warning! Spoilers! Undoubtedly inspired by the success of the recent rebooting of the Batman franchise, the studio opted for a darker beginning for the otherwise merry and witty superhero, heavily involving the absence of his biological parents – something Raimi's trilogy largely ignored – who left their little son Peter Parker (now played by Andrew Garfield) to be raised by his Aunt May (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and were supposedly killed in a plane crash shortly after their departure. Drawing inspiration from the Ultimate Spider-Man line of comic books, Peter's parents were involved in shady genetic experiments involving the crossbreeding of humans with animal species, which is of course what the origin of Spider-Man is all about. Unfortunately the subplot concerning Peter's mommy and daddy is largely left unresolved the moment Peter's investigation into his past leads him to his father's close colleague Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), a one-armed scientist working for the sinister Oscorp Company, further attempting to crossbreed species, in his case humans and lizards, in an admittedly somewhat silly, comic-y attempt to regrow his lost limb, with dire consequences.

However, under the direction of Marc Webb (I'll refrain from using 'nomen est omen' remarks here, since that has been done to death already), whose director's credit of importance prior to this gig only included the acclaimed romantic comedy (500) Days of Summer, it's not all creepy experiments and traumatic childhood incidents that form the prime ingredients of Peter Parker becoming Spider-Man. Clearly establishing Peter, performed by Andrew Garfield of The Social Network fame, to be a typical high school kid, Webb also finds time for lighter scenes developing the romance between him and Gwen Stacy (the beautiful and talented Emma Stone). Peter's previous movie girlfriend Mary Jane Watson is left out altogether in favor of having him hook up with his original lady love from the comics, even though this might confuse audiences since Gwen was already featured in Raimi's Spider-Man 3 (then played by Bryce Dallas Howard). Stone plays off wonderfully against Garfield's Peter Parker: unlike ex-Peter Tobey Maguire, he seems more appropriately aged to convincingly pull off a high school teenager, and he does a better job at playing both Peter and Spidey, carefully balancing between being too much of a nerd and too cool a superhero to believably be a nerd in real life. However, unlike Stone, Garfield is found guilty of overacting in his display of various ticks and goofy mannerisms when first feeling spider powers within: but playing a regular human being, Stone just has it easier, while the task of carrying the picture falls on Garfield's shoulders, which he does it adequately enough. The lighthearted scenes of teen angst and young love between the pair form a stark contrast with the gritty look into Peter's family issues, but they are a necessary part of recreating the Spider-Man persona, since the webslinger was always a lighter, easy going and cheerful superhero to begin with. In fact, it's clear Webb has more experience with romance and teen drama than he does with superheroism, considering the scenes between Garfield and Stone on many occasion feel more compelling than the action stuff, which of course is also a major must-have for any superhero movie. Plus, the smart and ambitious blonde Gwen is a welcome reprieve from the naive, childhood traumatized redhead Mary Jane from the previous films: unlike the latter Gwen does not find herself in grave danger at the hands of nasty supervillains at least twice per film, at which point her only solution seems to scream for her hero to come and rescue her very loudly. Apparently there was still some room for improvement left in Raimi's otherwise superior tackling of the franchise, which Webb eagerly accepts by making Gwen an independent young woman who's at least as smart as her boyfriend and shows much more tact and discretion when the going gets tough.

And tough it gets for poor Peter Parker. First, he has to contend with the bite of a genetically enhanced spider, which is what you get for sneaking into a lab which is clearly marked off-limits due to biohazards. The result is Peter not only gets superhuman strength and reflexes and the ability to walk on walls (even when wearing shoes), he also gets a lot grumpier, to the point of treating his loving Aunt and Uncle in a very ungrateful manner (the many occasions where he immediately plunders the fridge when coming home, all the while ignoring their sound advice, are a good example of his douchery), as well as breaking an excessive amount of stuff both at home and in school. Obviously, this leads to the obligatory life lesson that with great power must come great responsibility, a value the audience already had learned in obnoxious preachy detail in Raimi's films, but is also too important an element in Spider-Man's origin to be ignored. And so, Uncle Ben bites the dust again, shot dead by a thief, and Peter knows he shouldn't be an ass and help people with his new found abilities instead of acting like a dick. Only took an hour of the film to set this up, thus making half the film a redundancy for retelling things that didn't need retold, except for the mounting sexual tension between Gwen and Peter. Fortunately, from here on out Webb gets the opportunity to develop the story more as he sees fit, now that the back story is firmly on people's minds again (though it can only be called arrogant on the studio's part to think it never was in the first place). However, there's still plenty of unresolved things left, so we can only assume the truth about Peter's parents is left for the unavoidable sequel. Considering the dull way it was handled here, that's not something to look forward to too much.

After Uncle Ben has died, Peter looks for the criminal who did it, acting like a vigilante and beating up people who were not at all involved, though many of them were caught in the act of unlawful behavior anyway. This gets him on the radar of police captain Stacy (Denis Leary), Gwen's father, who feels nobody but law enforcement should clean up society's sinister side. This ideological conflict between Peter and Stacy is one of the movie's strongest additions to the overall Spider-Man film franchise, though in itself it's not entirely new, considering a similar difference of opinion was witnessed in the previous trilogy between Peter and newspaper edition J. Jonah Jameson (a beloved normal human character from the comic books who was present throughout Raimi's films, but sadly remains completely absent in The Amazing Spider-Man), but is handled on a more serious note here instead of ending in skits of comic relief as it did before. It also adds fascinating but underused conflicts of interests for Gwen, who has to choose between her loyalty to her father and her love for her boyfriend. However, Spider-Man's main problem in this film lies not in the police issuing a warrant for his arrest, but in a scientist losing his objective thinking because of his obsession for personal enhancement on a genetic scale.

Like Gwen Stacy, Curt Connors was already introduced in the previous Spider-Man films, but was never put to full use. Originally, Raimi had planned a fourth Spider-Man film which would see him evolve into the bad guy Lizard. Ironically, Raimi left, but Lizard stayed and is now the first supervillain Webb's new Spider-Man faces. As an introductory nemesis, Lizard may not have been the best choice, especially considering the rather ridiculous diabolical ploy of his to release a bioweapon that would turn the population of New York City into lizard people like himself (and what is the silly deal with him attracting all those little lizards in the sewers? I'll have you know under normal circumstances lizards would just die in such an environment. Shenanigans!). However, in relation to the subplot taken from Ultimate Spider-Man concerning Peter's father dabbling in biogenetics and the personal connection between Peter and himself this implies, he's the logical choice, considering the other available Spidey foes, Norman Osborn/Green Goblin and Otto Octavius/Dr. Octopus, have already been used in Raimi's films (though one of them does get his fair share of references and possible sequel set-ups in this film). Rhys Ifans portrays the “mad scientist” affectionately as a sympathetic but obsessed man who too desperately means to improve his body, which affects his mind as he finds his judgment impaired when his solution transforms him into a huge lizard man. Oddly enough, unlike the Lizard of the comics, he seems to fully retain his mental faculties instead of becoming more beast than man, which makes it all the harder to accept his final weird wicked scheme. However, the creature he ends up becoming does make for a decent amount of action scenes, including a rampage on a bridge, a high school confrontation between him and Spider-Man and an impressive though overly digital final battle on top of a skyscraper when he fights both Spidey and Captain Stacy. However, Webb ultimately disappoints where action is concerned, considering there's not nearly as much fight sequences as one would expect from a superhero movie, mostly because of the excessive focus on retelling Spidey's origin story and dragging his parents into the mix. At least the action that is present feels dynamic enough, but we would have wished for more. Better luck next time.

And there will unmistakably be a next time, considering the amount of unresolved plot lines and the extra scene after the main end credits which sets up the next movie's bad guy very similarly to the way The Avengers did, except the precise identity of this villain still remains somewhat of a mystery (quite frustrating if you're a long time avid comic book fan like me). However, it's clear this new Spider-Man franchise, like its predecessor but unlike the superior Avengers franchise, doesn't look much further into its own future than a few years down the road, a tactic that, if not changed soon, will undoubtedly lead to yet another unnecessary reboot in the next decade. Unlike the many superheroes that form the Avengers, Spider-Man still stands alone, so if it's amazement you're after in your marvels, this is not where you should look for it.

And watch the trailer here:

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/theamazingspiderman/

The Amazing Spider-Man trailer impressions

Latest trailer for the arachnid epic spins a web of questions: will it be Amazing, or just Spider-Man?

Now that the first official trailer (not to be confused with last year's lenghty teaser, which was based more on characters and showed little actual Spidey), is out, I find my common sense tingling as to whether this premature reboot will deliver an equally carefully weighed balance of characters and FX, as well as humour and drama, as Sam Raimi's first film did ten years ago. After all, it's only been five years since Spider-Man 3 and people undoubtedly will still link this movie to the ones that came before, even if they're aware Amazing Spider-Man will restart the franchise. Judging from the trailer footage, some elements from the previous film(s) have been retained, either to help guide the audience back into this side of the Marvel Universe, or to confuse viewers with leftovers from the previous trilogy mixed with a retelling of how Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) became Spider-Man.

So what glimpses did the trailer offer? With regard to familiar characters and situations we have been introduced to in Raimi's Spider-films we will be refamiliarized with:

-Curt Connors: the one-armed college teacher and scientist was first introduced in Spider-Man 2, played by Dylan Baker. In both the second and third film, he served as a sort of science mentor to Peter Parker, helping him to remember that with great power (i.e. Peter's scientific mental capacities) also comes the responsibility not to be lazy. He also provided vital plot information when he got the dubious honour of serving a purely expositionary role explaining away the symbiote and its need to bond with a host to feed off his negative emotions when Peter donned the black suit in the third film. It's obvious his appearances in both films helped pave the way to the rise of Spidey's reptilian nemesis Lizard. The fans have been expecting the poor doctor to transfrom into his green alter-ego for a while now, and it finally happens in this film, so the patience has payed off (if you like Lizard of course). However, this is not the Curt Connors we know: played by Rhys Ifans this time, it's a reimagining of the same character, which means his relationship with Peter will also have to be reimagined, this time via Peter's father Richard instead of just college. In fact, when this movie will establish Spider-Man's origins all over again while retconning the previous films completely, that means Lizard will be Spidey's first super-powered antagonist. I'm not sure Lizard is compelling enough as an introductory bad guy. At least he has the personal connection with Peter to create more emotional impact for his character, but will he be as much of a believable threat as Spider-Man's quintessential arch enemies Dr. Octopus or Green Goblin were in Raimi's films? We'll have to wait and see...

(By the way, like any other Spidey fanboy I can whine about Lizard's look in the film and say this isn't the Lizard I grew up with (which it isn't), but I'm not gonna do that. There's only so many ways you can portray a human/lizard hybrid on the big screen and have him seem realistic and expressive enough to make you feel anything for him. Let's see him in action first before shouting yay or nay.)

-Oscorp Industries: speaking of the Green Goblin, the trailer clearly establishes Oscorp to be present in more than just a cameo role. Connors has a job there, but does this mean one of the Osborns makes an appearance in this film? That would most likely alienate audiences who feel this movie builds on what came before (as Lizard seems to do here). After all, both founder Norman Osborn (the first Green Goblin) and his son Harry Osborn (the second Green Goblin), who also happened to be Peter's best friend, met their demise in Raimi's trilogy. So who's running Oscorp in this film? Either Norman Osborn will be re-introduced, and possibly be set up as a potential main villain for the next Spider-Man film, or the matter will be ignored entirely and the name Oscorp will serve largely as a sort of bonus to the fans without being addressed as a major plot point other than being Connors' employer, as well as Richard Parker's (more on this below). As for who has Peter's back at school when he gets bullied, it won't be Harry. It seems unlikely Norman, or even Harry, in a similar fashion to Connors, would follow up on traits established in the previous films, thus suddenly being alive again, which would be the main reason the writers decided to leave both of them out. Incidentally, we may not find out much about the Osborns' role at Oscorp, since it seems Spider-Man and Lizard do a good job destroying its headquarters while duking it out together there in what will undoubtedly bt the epic conclusion of this film.

-The Stacy family: but let's shy away from the bad guys for a while and focus more on Peter Parker's personal life. Mary Jane is nowhere to be seen. Gwen Stacy has replaced her as Peter's love interest. This too points to the fact this movie will be a complete and utter reboot of the franchise, since MJ and Peter were still very much in love last time we saw them despite all the issues between them in the third film (and boy, were there many!). Gwen already appeared in the third film (played by Bryce Dallas Howard), but only as a date for Peter to annoy MJ with. This time around, Gwen (played by Emma Stone) is the Original Spidey Girlfriend, as ironically she was in the comics, a looooong time ago (she got viciously killed off by the Green Goblin in 1973). This means the relationship between Peter and Gwen will also be re-established.The big question then is: will Gwen be aware of Peter's dual life as Spider-Man, and how will she find out? Judging from the trailer, she knows, given the shots of Peter and Gwen discussing Lizard and Peter's involvement in his existence. At least Gwen is more intelligent than Mary Jane, considering it took her only half a movie to find out about Peter's secret identity, wheras MJ only found out at the end of the second film. Gwen may not be as blond as she seems...

Also revamped will be the relationship between Peter and Gwen's father, police captain George Stacy. It seems the movie will focus a lot on this duo's dynamics; George (played by Denis Leary) feeling Spider-Man is a masked vigilante taking matters into his own hands instead of letting the cops do their jobs, which doesn't sit well with him and eventually makes him issue an arrest warrant for our poor friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man. This is a darker take on Mr. Stacey than we're used to: in the original comics he seemed more of a dear old man, who might not have agreed with Spider-Man, but he didn't openly oppose him in this brutal a fashion. Stacy also appeared in the previous film (played by Zefram Cochrane James Cromwell), where he undoubtedly had less problems with Spidey's approach after he saved his daughter's life. This new version of Stacy as a younger, tougher man seems more in line with the Ultimate Spider-Man comics, in which he was murdered by an impostor wearing a Spider-Man costume, which led Gwen to hate Spider-Man. Could it be the new movie takes this route and sees Captain Stacy killed and Spidey somehow being implicated, leading to tension between Peter and his girl Gwen? Or will Spidey save Gwen's life once more, making Captain Stacy his fan? Or could it even be that Gwen actually dies as she did before, with Peter being unable to save her and Stacy declaring war on him? And what role will Lizard play in all this? Interesting line of questions, and proof that the writers most likely did well shying away from the Mary Jane routine.

-The Parkers: it's obvious that this movie will be a total reboot, which is why it will also see the family dynamics of the Parker family retold. Both the teaser and the trailer have made it very clear that this will involve the fate of Peter's parents. Raimi never felt the need to get them involved in his origin story, and he just ignored them: Peter lived with his aunt and uncle, his parents are gone/dead/whatever, and that's that. So far so good. But not this film, which will tell us more about his parents, though it will deviate completely from the 'secret agent' history in the comics: orginally Richard and Mary were agents involved with SHIELD who were lost on a mission against the Marvel super villain the Red Skull, but that's definitely not gonna happen. After all, the copyright involving both SHIELD and the Red Skull is not in the hands of Sony Pictures who own the Spider-Man movie rights at present. Both names have already been heavily featurd in other recent Marvel movies, and will be again for sure (need I say Avengers here?).

Judging from the trailer, it's likely the movie will turn towards the Ultimate Marvel Universe some more and will feature Peter's parents, or at least his father Richard, as scientists working on sleazy genetic experiments under the employ of Oscorp. What this will mean for Peter and Spidey's origins remains to be seen, but it's possible his father messed with his genes in this movie as well, and Connors could be involved. The trailer establishes Richard and Connors being colleagues, which would also help to set up a personal relationship between Peter and Connors that is completely different from the one in the previous films. Plus, it could mean Richard was partially responsible for the creation of Lizard. The trailer clearly states that Peter himself definitely will be somehow, considering the shots in the trailer of Peter and Connors talking physics together, indicating Peter will provide Connors with the formula that will turn him into that big ol' reptile creature, thus once again making Spidey feel bad and having his excessively strong sense of responsibility leading him on a quest to set things right again before people start dying, given the line 'I gotta stop him because I created him'. As for who's responsible for Spider-Man's existence, it seems Connors knows something: ''If you want the truth, Peter, come and get it', he says in the trailer. What exactly the truth is, we won't know for sure until the movie hits theatres, but judging from the teaser, there at least is a genuine spider involved.

Besides his parents, Peter's aunt and uncle are naturally back, and it seems their role as Peter's moral compass hasn't changed much, though it hasn't yet been established how Uncle Ben will die, which he will of course, since this is basically the event that defined Peter's role as Spider-Man. If Ben lives, 'shenanigans' says I.

So there you have it: a lof of old stuff in a new form, and this is just from the trailer! It seems the director has his job cut out for him making a comprehensive feature film out of a character mess like this without turning people off about what they think they know about who Spider-Man is supposed to be. If we go solely with a 'nomen est omen' attitude, Marc Webb will surely create an action-packed blockbuster funfest of a movie worthy to compete with the celebrated “original trilogy” (though the third movie sadly did little to merit such a description). This first trailer shows that at this point it can go either way: it might be a brooding, character-driven 'Spider-Man Begins' with enough humour to convince audiences Spidey is still that fun webslinging crime fighter with his usual merry attitude, or it might be 'Spider-Man Rising', with too much emphasis placed on the shady parts of the Parker family legacy, re-explaining the already overly familiar origin story by adding extra baggage to it and ultimately failing to find the right mix of fun and drama to capture audience sympathy (which would be Spider-Man 3's problem in a nutshell). Mr. Webb surely must remember that with a great budget also comes great responsibility., and with a great character come great expectations...

And if you haven't yet, you can watch the trailer(s) for the Amazing Spider-Man here:

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/theamazingspiderman/