Today's News: Star Wars and superheroes galore

Good start of the week, though maybe lacking in diversity.

Nieuwe foto's Star Wars: The Force Awakens

I still hate to admit it, but I'm getting more and more optimistic about this new Star Wars film. Though I'll never forgive J.J. Abrams for what he did to Star Trek, it does seem increasingly more evident that his mentality in just right for the competition. Or maybe he just knows how to utilize the classic trilogy's well remembered and much beloved aesthetics to get the fans hoping he's doing the right thing. After all, in terms of plot and characters we still know next to nothing. It just looks grand. But since Star Wars was always better known for its fabulous looks rather than its complex storytelling, all things considered he seems to be doing more right than wrong thus far. And thanks to these wonderful pictures, we know just a little bit more than we did before their release. Adam Driver is playing a baddie on the Imperial side. I doubt anyone would have thought differently, but at least that's now confirmed. It's safe to say less fans would have guessed Lupita Nyong'o is playing a digitally enhanced space pirate, though these pics dont tell us what she looks like just yet. The expected visual effects work aside, the best thing about this photoshoot is how clearly it shows J.J. is also using a lot of practical effects, another thing most will fondly remember from the Old Trilogy and lament the lack of in Lucas' own Prequel Trilogy. The bizarre menagerie of exotic aliens and droids, as well as the elaborate sets for strange new worlds, look nothing if not spectacular. But whether it will all be put to good use...? We won't know until December 18.

Freeman gecast in Captain America 3

I didn't see that coming. Such a British actor in such an American blockbuster, but basically it's a terrific presence in a kick-ass series of films, so it's by no means a bad match. But who will Bilbo Freeman play? I honestly haven't a clue. What I've read from the plot suggests this particular version of Civil War isn't limited to US soil, but is played out on the global level. So Freeman could be portraying some representative from another nation, likely the United Kingdom. But that's just rampant speculation on my part. Though I have a tough time seeing him play a superhero character (which isn't something I would actually have issue with), he may surprise us all again and prove to be doing just that. Captain Britain perhaps? Considering how few different nationalities are found among the current line-up of Marvel Cinematic superheroes, it wouldn't hurt the story to introduce a few that are not from the USA. Even though that might make for an overly crowded film. But hey, so far the only non-Americans on the Avengers rostar are the Russian Black Widow, the Asgardian Thor and (spoilers!) now Scarlet Witch from that fictional Eastern European country. Sure, Civil War introduces the Wakandan Black Panther, but that's still not many characters to make for a worldwide event. Of course, it's the actions of the superheroes on foreign soil that makes things global and politically delicate and therein likely lies the rub which will soon involve Martin Freeman's character.

Beoogde regisseurs voor Spider-Man bekend

Can't say any of these names sound particularly appealing to me for directing Spider-Man. I get that they all directed films involving teenagers and comedy which is an important market and demographic for Hollywood, but to just give them the lead of a very expensive superhero flick? Let's hand the reigns of Spider-Man to the guy who made Pitch Perfect? That doesn't sound like the smartest line of thinking to me. Marc Webb directed a film similar to those on the resumé of these guys, (500) Days of Summer, prior to helming both Amazing Spider-Man films. Look at how well that turned out... rebooting the character (again!) less than five years later. Not that I blame Webb for the lackluster quality of both films, which is mostly to blame on aggressive involvement from a studio without a sense of direction for the future. But this time I would go for someone more snazzy, more experienced with this sort of subject matter, even though teens and comedy are definitely parts of the mix. How about Edgar Wright? He's done teenagers and superheroes before, and he's apparently not doing anything since he left Ant-Man. Sounds like a prime choice!

Nieuwe poster Ant-Man

Speaking of Ant-Man, here's his new poster. Looks good, but the formula for these posters is now a given. Hero(es) on the foreground, faces of supporting cast and a bit of setting in the background. And there you have it. And in this case, it doesn't look as visually striking or intriguing as with, say, Guardians of the Galaxy or Thor: The Dark World. It will do the job, sure, but this poster lacks the inspiration of the teaser poster, which was basically all white with a tiny Ant-Man in the middle. That was daring and fun. This is a routine job. Let's hope the movie is not.

Today's News: a bit of everything

This week's crop of news, courtesy of yours truly and the Internet:

Nieuwe trailer Ted 2

Little is added to what we already knew of this film's plot, but a big can of raunchy jokes has been opened here. Makes you wonder how much more of this we're in for when the actual movie hits theaters, since all manner of bodily fluids and sexual positions have been adressed in this three minute red band trailer alone. One thing this preview makes amply clear is that we shouldn't expect too much from the plot; as if we did. Yes, it's pretty intriguing from a philosophical view point, basically being a retelling of that classic episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, The Measure of a Man. To what extent does artificial intelligence qualify as 'life'? And what are its rights under the law as dictated by man? All wildly fascinating stuff, make no mistake. But hey, we're talking about a live teddy bear in this case, so forget about any of it sticking for very long. It's not meant to be taken seriously by nobody. The only sticky stuff present in Ted 2, as overtly indicated by this trailer, will be sperm and alcohol.

Butterfield favoriet voor Spider-Man

Butterfield is as good a choice for a younger Peter Parker as any, to my mind. His name certainly sticks out from the others on the shortlist, him having had the most big screen production experience and critical accolades that come with it. That said, do we want a younger Peter Parker? This is Spider-Man after all, not Spider-Boy. True, but in most every incarnation of the character, he started out at high school. He also did in both the Raimi trilogy and the recent Amazing Spider-Man reboots, but in both cases, the actor that portrayed the wallcrawler definitely felt older than the character was supposed to be (since in both cases, he was). So maybe it's about time we let the younger generation try its had at webslinging. No kids on the current Avengers slate, so let's diversify a bit and add one. It's sticking close to the Ultimate Universe the Marvel Studios movies have a knack of imitating. It might make the impact of the upcoming events in Captain America: Civil War hit home harder. Restricting superhero activity is one thing for adult superhumans, but what about teenagers? Requiring them to register their powers to the government, thus limiting their life options from an early age, does feel rather harsh. Hopefully a teenage Spider-Man played by an actual teenager does add some such intriguing new layers of superhero logistics and laws, if played right. And I'm fairly confidant Butterfield can play it right.

Nieuwe posters Fantastic Four

I'm still not convinced these four are right for their respective parts, though. And from the buzz online, it appears I'm not alone in that hesitation. So far the responses to the trailers and other promotional material has predominantly been on the negative side. Maybe it has something to do with Marvel's apparent campaign of smearing the quartet's name because Marvel Studios doesn't own the rights to the franchise anymore. That would be quite cynical and detestable, considering the FF's illustrious history at Marvel since 1963. However, I haven't followed most of the recent FF stories, so I don't know if rumours are true. I just know what I see, and I see these trailers and I'm simply not feeling overly excited by them. Other than the lack of chemistry of the actors and the characters I'm fearful of (which hasn't been proven yet), I can't quite put my finger on it. The actors are fine in their own right, and I know from readint the comics there's plenty to like about the characters in general. Maybe it's the director? Rumours again are not kind. Josh Trank apparently isn't the most easy of directors to work with. Which forms a decent segue to...

Trank stopt met Star Wars

... this bit of news. No more Star Wars for Trank. Much like Gareth Edwards and Rian Johnson, he seemed like a fine choice. A talented young upstart, fresh from his first critical and commercial success. And therein no doubt lies the problem, as other than Chronicle, Trank has nothing to his name just yet. Sure, he directed a likable indie superhero flick, but handling a big blockbuster movie, especially one that comes with high expectations and related pressure, is another thing entirely. Word is things didn't go so smoothly on the set of Fantastic Four. So that might have made the right folks at Disney/Lucasfilm a tad nervous. You're not giving Star Wars to someone who can't even emotionally handle a small property like FF. Especially when there's ample time to find a successor. So the second entry in the Star Wars Anthology series is now in need of a new director. But what about Fantastic Four 2? Fox has already been planning that sequel for some time, with Trank slated to direct it. There's no word yet on whether Fox and Trank will part ways. Which again makes you wonder how much of these rumours are true. A grain of salt is a good thing to take with all this stuff for sure. The Internet may be playing Jedi mind tricks on us.

Eerste teaser Fifty Shades Darker

And here's a mind trick for the members of the female audience who're into this sort of thing. A thirty second tease of Jamie Dornan putting on a tux and a silly mask, followed by a moaning sound. Not very subtle but it will do the trick. Less than two years to go until the release! Make sure to note it in your agendas and plan your lives accordingly, ladies! Even though nobody will honestly accuse Fifty Shades of Grey of being a good film, I'm sure the womenfolk will gobble up the sequel vigorously. But hey, men do the same with "their" franchises like Fast and Furious and all those darn superhero movies, so let's not get overly sexist here. Just remember, guys: in about three years time this will all have blown over and we can resume the everyday course of life as it nothing happened. It's not like anybody is talking about the Twilight movies and books anymore these days. Thankfully.

Today's Column: anybody want a Dark Claw movie?

This month's column went up early. Superheroes again. They keep me talking it appears.

Disney, koop DC alsjeblieft!

Of course the tone of this piece is meant somewhat sarcastically. Sure, I'd love to see a Dark Claw movie or any other feature related to the wonderful Amalgam universe, but it's definitely not gonna happen. Ever. And I don't think all movie studios owning superhero copyrights joining together, either out of their own volition or because they're bought up by a larger corporation, would be a preferable solution. One studio owning all the superhero franchises isn't a monopoly we would want. Say what you will about various studios owning various pieces of the various superhero universe puzzles, it guarantees some diversity. If Marvel hadn't sold the rights to Spider-Man and similar large, popular and well known properties, we likely wouldn't have gotten Iron Man, Thor or Guardians of the Galaxy, and seeing as how well that turned out, that clearly would have been a great loss. Now that Spider-Man has returned to Marvel's fold, we have yet to see whether he's not gonna reap too much of other characters' glory, even though the fact Marvel is still working on titles like Captain Marvel, Inhumans and Black Panther is reassuring to some extent, as they seemingly mean to keep the diversity flowing.

But what about the fanboys' dreams of 'interpublisher' crossovers between characters belonging not only to rival studios, but also to rival publishers? They'll stay dreams. I doubt that would change even if a major player like Disney managed to buy the rights to the DC characters after all. Which certainly isn't inconceivable, considering the various properties they bought up in recent years. It often feels with all these companies buying companies, you'll one day end up with one humongously big fat supercompany on top, controlling every franchise. Maybe that'll be Disney in the not too distant future (they don't own the business genius of Scrooge McDuck for nothing, you know). But seeing as how they have yet to do crossovers between Indiana Jones and Marvel, or between more similar brands like the Muppets and Disney's own iconic characters, I doubt they'd go so far as to do a DC/Marvel crossover, let alone Amalgam. (Then again, there already is a comic book which serves as a crossover between Star Wars and Indiana Jones, courtesy of Harrison Ford's presence in both of them.) But if it ever happened, would it be good? An Amalgam adaptation, maybe. It's hard to mess up a fabulous hybrid notion like Dark Claw. A giant crossover between the Avengers and the Justice League? No way, far too many characters and their assorted baggage to make for a sensible plot line. Only the hungriest fanboys would understand it completely, but general audiences couldn't make heads or tails of it all. Let's see whether DC knows how to join its own characters together with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice first. Not to mention it has yet to be determined whether Marvel can pull a similar trick with having more than one group share the screen, as will be the case when the Avengers and the Guardians of the Galaxy join forces in Avengers: Infinity War Parts I & II.

And otherwise, let's just keep dreaming about these little fanboy fantasies of ours. I'm still dreaming of the release of more than only two Dark Claw comics...

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: big bad breaking! And then some

It's been a good start of the week for movie news, mostly because of one single bomb Marvel dropped.

Marvel past releaseplanning aan voor Spider-Man

And here it is. Or rather, here's the follow-up, as the main news item that Marvel has gotten Spider-Man back in the fold was posted by a colleague of mine (bastard!). But here's the first few ramifications for Marvel's Phase 3, with many more likely to follow in the next few years. Good thing about such major nerdgasmic news is it gives one inspiration for a column (or two), which I hope to pen this weekend. So I'll reserve my actual opinion on whether Spider-Man at last joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe is a good idea or not - for it's definitely not all sunshine in Marvel land with the webhead swinging his way through his fellow superheroes - for that opinionated piece to follow. Unless one of my colleagues beats me on that front as well. Not an unlikely scenario, since anything Marvel has a tendency to get people talking or in this case typing. That said, I am looking very much forward to seeing what take on the new webslinger will be applied to the new movie(s). I wasn't a fan of the way Sony handled the Amazing Spider-Man movies, nor of how they ended Raimi's trilogy. My nerd sense is telling me there's plenty of room for improvement. From the details, it's likely Marvel will turn to their Ultimate Universe for inspiration, a move I don't lament at all. I'm currently re-reading Ultimate Spider-Man - coincidentally, as I started doing so two weeks before this news broke - and it once again proves an utterly delightful and catchy read, that also goes to illustrate many an excellent possibility of hooking up Spidey with other Marvel names, without hurting any of them. I can only hope the new movie, plus Spider-Man's appearance in those of others, will turn out half as well as those comics did.

Eerste trailer serie Bloodline

Looks decent, but I have a hard time envisioning this as a long running show. The concept seems too limited to continue for more than a season or two, and from what I gather, it's Netflix' intention to keep it going as long as desirable. Then again, I once had similar reservations about this series called Breaking Bad, and look how positively that turned out against everybody's expectations. Of course, every character has a background you can delve into, but it feels like there's only so many startling family secrets you can reveal until it eithers gets boring or ludicrous. But what do I know, I've only seen this trailer, which no doubt totally limits our imaginations for this show. There's undoubtedly more to it than what's pictured here. Still, I can't help but get a distinct Festen vibe from this. A family tearing itself apart when the black sheep of the bunch starts digging up shady past events certainly sounds very familiar to those who'll recall the classic Thomas Vinterberg film. However, even if the basic premise is remarkably similar, we can expect there to be a lot more going on in a 13-episode season than in a two-hour movie. There better be, if Netflix hopes to keep this show going.

Lawrence en Pratt beoogd voor Passengers

Here's a premise that probably is better suited for a two-hour movie than for an entire season of episodes. Man accidentally wakes up in cryosleep on a spaceship during a voyage that ought to take decades. Man knowingly wakes up woman for companionship on trip. Whatever happens, happens. As to what happens exactly, I dunno. I can think of a thing or two, either involving bloodshed or sex, or both. It's one of those intriguing notions that gets the mind working after only two sentences of conceptual layout. But as for me, a Sci-Fi geek, you had me at 'spaceship'. As for who can play these characters, Lawrence and Pratt are decent choices, at least one of them sizzling with talent. However, I would have gone for someone else than the current go-to, default hot actor and actress in Hollywood. Both of them seem kinda omnipresent today. For a movie that largely revolves around two people only, I'd say it's better not to cast movie stars, but "real actors" instead, to avoid getting that feeling of seeing Pratt and Lawrence talking to each other for hours (even though that is what is going on, but we need to be able to suspend our disbelief and pretend they're somebody else). A project like this seems better suited to lesser known (but not necessarily lesser talented) actors. Even though that would make it a tougher sell to most audiences, who just want to see Pawrence and Pratt talking to each other for a few hours. But that's what people invented talk shows for.

Lionsgate wil meer Hunger Games

Speaking of Jennifer Lawrence, Lionsgate wants to see more of her. Or at least, they want to see more of that precious dough she keeps making the studio doing her Hunger Games thing. Or they want more material that carries the Hunger Games signature, potentially without the principal talent, since I imagine Lawrence is kinda done with the series when it ends. But studios are never done making huge piles of cash. So when something sells, you keep it selling as long as you can. And so the studio is looking for new ways to "flesh out" (read: ruthlessly exploit) their top franchise after it has properly come to an end. They're looking at both prequel and sequel opportunites, it's stated. Meaning, they don't care about the actual contents, they're just considering any and all ways that keep the franchise running for longer than the source material allows for. It works for Harry Potter and Warner Bros, their argument reads. We don't know that it does actually, since Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them hasn't been released to popular or financial acclaim (yet). Plus, author J.K. Rowling is in full cahoots on that new series of films, while it remains to be seen whether writer Suzanne Collins is as enchanted by the notion of more Hunger Games. So for now, it's only a studio's dream of more money without any material to back up the reality behind that line of thinking. May the odds be ever in their favor.

Eerste trailer Hitman: Agent 47

Or they can just start their franchise over again entirely. Seems to be working for Hitman, since this trailer already looks better than all of the previous film. Of course, that film wasn't a hit in any way the first Hunger Games was, hence the option for rebooting. There's (fortunately!) a form of unwritten decency protecting the audience against rebooting a franchise the moment the first take on it has been completed. Otherwise we would have had three more Lord of the Rings trilogies by now. But when a film failed to connect to its audience strongly enough to warrant a sequel, yet still holds potential for making more money, a reboot is always just around the corner. Often for the better, since in many cases a reboot improved upon its predecessor and ushered in a new era for the franchise. Time will tell whether that holds true for Hitman: Agent 47 as well. It's still a videogame adaptation too, after all. They usually have more running against them than films based on other media properties.

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 Triple News: Heroes and villains

My increasing lack of spare time continues to wreak havoc on my regular, timely updating of this blog. So here's another bit of triple news, some of it days old by now. Expect this sort of thing to occur more often in the future.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154042/nieuwe_posters_game_of_thrones_seizoen_4

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154006/nieuwe_trailer_the_amazing_spider-man_2

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153971/heroes_terug_op_televisie

Of all the cancelled shows they just had to resurrect the series that least deserved it in my opinion. I disliked Heroes from the pilot on, and couldn't be bothered to
watch beyond the first season. It was severely overhyped
and dreadfully uninspired. Anyone who knows his superhero comics had an easy time recognizing just where they stole the various characters, powers and plot lines from. The show also exceeded its fair share of hommages to similar works, so it was hard to consider it paying tribute to (better) thematic forebears as it blatantly appropriated such names for its own uses. I had a hard time swallowing this show's popularity, but fortunately I got to enjoy a surprisingly similar but superior show called The 4400, which debuted only a year or so prior to the release of Heroes, but also was copied by that show abundantly. That series hardly got any audience love at all, and also ended up prematurely cancelled. I would much rather have seen that series return, as it's highly frustrating to know it left us with so many unanswered questions. Not the first show where that happened though. Enterprise, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Caprica, V and the notorious Firefly... all terrific shows that deserved more episodes but were denied. But apparently Heroes was just popular enough for the network to try again five years later, same people beind the scenes involved. At least it's for only 13 episodes. God forbid it catches on well enough to end up getting more. The shameless intellectual theft that characterized the previous show already seems to continue unabashed, as the title Heroes Reborn is suspiciously similar to the line of comics from the same name that witnessed alternate versions of the Marvel Universe superheroes, after they supposedly died in their regular universe. Won't be the last time Heroes takes a note from Marvel. Again.

Game of Thrones, now there's a fabulously well crafted show not likely to get cancelled anytime soon! Both its general popularity and anticipation for the upcoming fourth season are ever stronger on the rise. To tease us a bit more, HBO released a bunch of moody character posters of the most beloved established characters that are yet alive. But will they be for much longer? Their grim faces aren't accompanied by the ominous exclamation 'Valar Morghulis' for nothing... some of these (or all of them, mayhaps!) are bound to die in the near future. Most likely excruciatingly, knowing this show's nature and HBO's delightfully sick, depraved mind. Of course I spoiled myself big time by reading the books so I know just who are the goners here, but I like the suggestive way HBO handles this marketing campaign, knowing just what buttons to press to ensure its spectators keep on spectating. It's like the contemporary equivalent of a high profile Roman gladiatorial match, and these are the contestans. Who will kick the bucket? Place your bets! But never bet against a lady with three pet dragons.

And Spider-Man got himself another trailer. This time it's a full three minutes and it basically shows you the events of the movie in a nutshell. You know a promotional campaign is nearing its end when they resort to giving so mcuh plot away, even though half of it is old news by now. I doubt we'll be getting any more trailers for The Amazing Spider-Man 2. We've got several of those, various behind-the-scenes videos, many a poster and banner: it should suffice to get people's attention. Best thing Sony can do now is sit back and watch the money flow its way. And prep the third movie of course, since this one is bound to break a few more of those annually smashed box office records. Whether the moniker 'amazing' is warranted still remains to be seen, considering the previous installment didn't exactly fit that description. That said, this one does look more appealing in my mind, though with a severe risk of overdoing it in terms of the number of present characters.

Today's News: rise of the sustainable superhero

Another MS newsflash from mine own hand:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153835/nieuwe_behind-the-scenes_featurettes_the_amazing_spider-man_2

Not much novel actual content from the movie itself here, except for some new snappy gags showing off Spidey's trademark sense of humour (sorely missed in Raimi's trilogy of Spider-films). Otherwise these are typical puff pieces, in which the cast and crew reminisce about how great it was to make this movie, how much they adored each other on set and how lucky they are to have these jobs. Which is the usual sort of thing for featurettes like these to show. They serve as little more than promotional pieces reminding you of how much you want to see this movie by displaying little new material but showing mostly 'the good times' from the set so you get the idea that these people have the greatest jobs imaginable, and therefore the resulting final film is a work of love, instead of mere business. The 'Sustainability' video is interesting in this regard too, as it reveals how much studios aim to appear as if they care about more than just the huge sums of money that are involved, in this particular case by 'going green'. Producing big blockbuster movies is after all a hugely wasteful exercise, and there's definite room for improvement there. Now that public sentiment towards ecological thinking turns ever more in the direction of widespread embrace by vast audience numbers, studios hop on this bandwagon to show the folks that are likely to buy tickets they care about the environment too. Especially in the case of giant multi-million dollar projects like this one, public relations are of the utmost importance, so the studio must appear as likeable and openminded as possible. You didn't think they were going green because it actually is the most responsible and sound thing to do, right? They're doing this because the audience needs to like their new movie in every way imaginable, and ecological thinking is "all the rage" right now. Sounds harsh? Maybe it is, but time must tell whether the current Hollywood fad of sustainable filmmaking leads to actual permanent changes in the industry and its general short-term way of thinking. That said, it's still a change in the right direction and as such a laudable objective. But I doubt most audiences will care really much about all this hard work on the sustainability front when they sit down in theaters to watch The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They just want to see their webslinging hero wisecracking around as he's kicking bad guy butt. Bad guys like the Green Goblin. See, there's some subverted ideological overtones 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/