Movie Review: The Amazing Spider-man 2 - not even remotely amazing at all, actually...

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.  What just happened Sony?  You've got the rights to easily the most identifiable Super-hero (after a certain indestructible extra-terrestrial), with a 60+ year history, and many great and memorable story-lines, not to mention a smorgasbord of interesting and great villains (even more-so than the rogues gallery associated with a certain Caped Crusader).  You've got a talented cast, a hot up-and-coming director, a team of proven screenwriters, a massive budget for jaw-dropping effects...

...and this is the best you can come up with?  Well, 'The Amazing Spider-man 2' is possibly the least satisfying super-hero adaptation that's ever been made.  Yes, even more so than the despised 'Spiderman 3', and even the disappointing 'X-Men: The Last Stand'.  So where does this film go wrong?  Well, I'll start from the beginning.  The film opens with two sequences which, admittedly, are pretty strong.  The first deals with a narrative thread (which was just one that was poorly handled - read completely forgotten about by the final act - in the last film): the fate of Peter Parker's parents.  The next scene is a fun action sequence, as Spider-man, still played with confidence and passion by Andrew Garfield, goes after some Russian gangsters stealing a van loaded with Plutonium.  At this point it's easy to believe that the writers (all FIVE of them - if that's not an indication enough of problems to come!) have finally nailed a tone which befits a super-hero who, beneath his mask, is ultimately a sarcastic teenager from New York; there are some amusing wisecracks, and Spidey moves and fights just like you'd imagine he does from the many years of his comic and cartoon portrayals.  The previous film felt at times it was almost ashamed to be a Spider-man film - while its portrayal of the teenage Peter Parker hit the right notes (thanks again to Garfield's performance), the Spider-man scenes generally didn't meet the potential of the character.  It didn't help that the whole film seemed to take place at night, like the makers felt this would add some 'grit' or 'authenticity' to it; but for the sequel they've gone for a bright palate which is completely right for Spider-man.  However, there are still problems with this scene.  Alright, there is a certain ludicrousness about the whole idea that a van full of Plutonium is going to be driven through crowded, rush-hour New York city - but then this is a film which contains a man who is made of electricity, so I guess you can excuse some of the outlandishness, right?  Where the cracks start to show is in some of the special effects, which verge dangerously close to looking like some kind of live-action cartoon.  It takes the sheen off of what is otherwise a decent sequence.

The first sequence almost makes you think this could be a decent Spiderman film.  Almost...

The film then moves to focus on the relationship between Peter and Gwen Stacy (played by Emma Stone) - Peter is haunted by guilt that he promised her Father (who died at the end of the previous film, remember?) that he would stay away from her to protect her.  One of the saving graces of the previous film was these actors' portrayal of this relationship, which felt like a very well observed and believable burgeoning teenage romance - helped in no small amount by the chemistry between the two actors.  Again, this is probably the sequel's biggest redeeming factor - the scenes between the two are some of the better ones in this film.  Generally, it has to be said that the acting - like the previous film - elevates the whole endeavour; Garfield and Stone, again, are great at the relationship stuff; there's a great and emotional scene between Garfield and Parker's Aunt May (Sally Field); and Dane DeHaan does a good job with Harry Osborn, treading away from scenery chewing and actually making him at times a sympathetic character.  Other actors joining the franchise are under-served by the script to be honest - Jamie Foxx's Max Dillon, who becomes Electro, isn't given enough to do before his transformation to villain, meaning that when it happens there isn't as much of an emotional punch as there could be.

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone's portrayal of Peter & Gwen's relationship is still the strongest point of the film..

But if he, and other actors, aren't given enough to do, this is down to what almost derails the film almost entirely: the narrative.  Now, it's been previously stated by the Studio that they're 'universe building' with this franchise now, setting up spin-off movies for Villain Team 'The Sinister Six' and Venom - while planning two more Spidey sequels; it's pretty obvious what they're trying to emulate here.  In practice, this seems to mean the writers think they can get away with sloppily editing the story, leaving threads dangling in unsatisfactory and confusing ways.  This was a huge problem with the previous film - Peter Parker suddenly forgets about finding his Uncle Ben's killer (which is only one of the most important aspects of the character, for goodness sake!!), the issue of his parents is frustratingly vague, and an entire character just vanishes without explanation, as though forgotten by the director and writers.  One of the criticisms of 'Spiderman 3' is its uneven tone - well this one takes a shift at one point in to territory so camp it is almost on par with the abhorrent 'Batman and Robin'.  Really, what it's the point of a badly stereotyped German scientist who wears make-up for no discernable reason???!?

You'd have thought the writers (like I said, FIVE of them on this film) would have learnt from their mistake - but no, they do the same thing again.  For example, again Peter goes off at a tangent to uncover the fate of his parents, and he does discover something significant: but then it's completely dropped and forgotten about, leaving you thinking what the significance was.  Then there's the introduction of new villains - the fact this film would handle three, like the problematic 'Spiderman 3', has been a source of concern amongst many people since the first trailers for the film broke last year.  As I've stated, Electro could have done with more time on his character prior to his transformation (even though he gets a couple of impressive scenes taking on Spidey), but the introduction of Green Goblin is rushed and unsatisfying.  And then there's Rhino... I'm afraid I'm going to have to share some SPOILERS at this point, so read on with caution!


This is where the film angered me the most.  The trailers have teased a great smack-down between Spiderman and this character, and all through the film I was looking forward to seeing it.  But frustratingly, what you see in the trailers is literally all you get in the film.  It's the final scene of the film, and I don't know who is responsible for this decision - the writers or Director Marc Webb - but they have committed possibly the worst sin you can with a super-hero movie:

YOU DO NOT END A FILM RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF A FIGHT BETWEEN THE HERO AND A SUPER-VILLAIN.  IT IS STUPID, IT IS FRUSTRATING, AND IT LEAVES A VERY BITTER TASTE IN THE MOUTH.

At the end of the film, as the screen cut to black at what could have been the film's high point, I turned to my wife absolutely flabbergasted, beyond disbelief.  I still cannot believe they chose to end the film the way they did.  And, given what came before, it is an ending which robs the final act of it's emotional punch.  You can tell that the writers wanted to make this film the 'Wrath of Khan' or 'Empire Strikes Back' of the franchise - however they undermine this by blatantly foreshadowing what's going to happen by certain lines characters say (you know in old War films where the next solider/pilot/sailor to die is the one who, a few moments before, is showing his comrades a photo of his girl back home?  Well, some of the things certain characters say in this film are on that level of obviousness).  It doesn't help that certain characters do not react in a way which it seems likely they would - if anything, this film could have ended on a much darker and sombre note; it actually would have been better for it, and given what had preceded it the emotional weight it deserved.  It would also have been a more effective 'cliff-hanger' ending than simply cutting to black in the middle of a scene which was just getting going...

In all, between its narrative issues, and a frustrating and unsatisfying ending, 'The Amazing Spider-man 2' is a real disappointment.  It fails to make right the mistakes of the previous film, despite having the same assets - a great cast who elevate the material.  And given the source material they have to work from, this is unforgivable, verging on criminal.  I genuinely believe that based on this film Disney/Marvel Studios should put up some cash and get the rights to Spiderman back from Sony - this isn't just to add Spidey to their ongoing Marvel Cinematic Universe (although that would offer some moments with the potential to melt my geeky brain); simply put, Marvel Studios know how to treat their characters and the wealth of story-lines that go with them.  Sony, on the other hand, are doing a worse job of handling Spidey with each release.  Sadly though, he's their cash cow now, and they'll milk him for all they can get out of him.  I guess it just means that comic book fans, and fans of the character, will have to resign themselves to more disappointing films like this one....

Spidey-sense tingling?  It must have been this review, sorry...