THINK TWICE: DOES THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012) DESERVE TO BE GIVEN A CHANCE? PART IV

 

We are coming to the conclusion of our prolonged opinion piece about the upcoming re-launch of Spider-Man film series.

The director of The Amazing Spider-Man, Marc Webb, believes that there is a room for vast improvement and better understanding of why Peter Parker is who he is and why and how he becomes Spider-Man. Sam Raimi undoubtly did expose the transformation of Peter Parker to Spider-Man, yet, his decision to accomplish the progression in one act restricted him from further exploring the entire complex transitioning phase from a puerile teenager with superpowers to a professional crime fighter.

As evident in Raimi's Spider-Man, Peter was ready to jump from the dull life of an outsider in Queens to an already established superhero in well-made tights in one moment of a brief montage, involving Elfman's heroic music score and comics creators cameoing as enthusiastic respondents.

As from the beginning Marc Webb intended to stay true to the spirit of Spider-man's story in comics and tell the story of maturity with all its authenticity and allegories, in the new film Peter is no more an infallible idealist who reads poems and serves as an inspiration for a parade, but rather a real person that is prone to err and making mistakes, to be morally challenged and emotionally disturbed, while still learning and gaining experience to become an expert in his new routine.

Peter is a tragic hero of the modern society that strives to serve good intentions and virtues, but always remembers that, despite all his powers, there are thing he cannot have control over. When depressed and downbeat, he uses his humor and wit to add some sense of optimism in his outlook at future. His sudden transformation marks every teenager’s puberty and changes in formation, while his growth as a superhero connects with every kid’s maturity to a man with priorities and responsibilities.

Another hindrance for The Amazing Spider-Man to overcome lies in Marc Webb’s decision to recreate the origin of Peter Parker again. The tale of an ordinary teenager that, as a result of the radioactive spider’s bite, gains superpowers and starts to fight crime after the death of his beloved Uncle Ben, was already told back in 2002 and now almost every other person knows it by rote.

However, even centuries ago, one of the greatest philosophers named Aristotle opened eyes to many prospective writers and creators that the real story is built upon answering questions of not what events take place in it, but how and why they take place and also how they affect our characters and their development. As it was noted before, Webb is aiming to show a new portrayal of Spider-Man, different from Sam Raimi’s trilogy, in which Spider-Man never really had the chance to shine and demonstrate his own personality, having to keep quiet all the time and opening the mouth to throw no more than couple of unfunny one-liners here and there.

Nevertheless, with Webb desiring to present the new, more faithful, interpretation of Spider-Man, the Spider-Man we all know from comics (i.e. the one who often throws wisecracks, makes mistakes from time to time and is an actual alter-ego of Peter Parker by all means), how rational is it to implement this vision of the character without really giving us the chance to understand and examine why Spider-Man acts differently this time, why we see this Spider-Man instead of that? This question sheds the light on Webb’s risky decision to not just re-introduce the character, but also his origin, his fundamentals, and to discover in the character what was never done in the previous films.

To show what we see as established on screen, each and every part of it should have its cause and effect or consequence in order to make sense the second or third time we will watch the film and actually turn on our brains. One of Raimi’s most critical mistakes was to skip the whole process of Peter’s struggle to become Spider-Man by inserting a series of quickly edited shots in the first film and further exposing all the feelings from Maguire's never-reacting face expression. And, this turned out to be the advantage taken by Webb, no matter how much risk it involved in the realization.

To go back to the original source of Spider-Man’s stories, what was really so special about particularly this superhero in comics that brought so much attention to him? Yes, it was the fact that readers could relate to his daily problems. Yes, the fact that we were engaged in his life as it reflected ours. These two are already included in Webb’s check list. And, yes we could actually sympathize with Peter Parker and his problems in becoming a superhero. Why? Because, despite all his superpowers and intelligence, he wasn’t ready to be a superhero, unlike stable Superman or mature Batman.

It took Peter a long time to gain enough experience and understanding of how things work, while having to overcome challenges above his level of competence. It took him a long time to get used to his new life, no matter how much he was frustrated about the way things turned for him. The whole process of Peter making continuous attempts at perfecting his craft to become a professional in fighting crime is what the earlier comics were about for the first few years of its run and this is what greatly contributed to Spider-Man’s success and his distinction from other superheroes. And, this is also what was never included in Raimi’s movies, but is now being amended by Webb.

Moreover, the new director sets a goal to fully understand his character and explain him to us by also elaborating on Peter’s parents and their past, which was always an obscure mystery in comics. The unknown past of Peter’s parents both connects to the primary father’s theme of the film and plays a key role in the later establishment of Peter as an outsider because of the feeling of abundance and the new driving motivation for the character to grow and change.

It also gives a better picture of the way story may take shape with Peter trying to unveil the truth about his parents with the inner hope of finding his father, but ending with the death of the person, who actually was his real father figure all that time – Uncle Ben.

These two events lead Peter to become a hero and savior of not only lives of others, but parents of children, which smartly related to the storyline of Doctor Curt Connors, his transformation into the Lizard and consequent danger to his son’s childhood of the loss of father. One thing certain that Webb stated, Peter's parents are not going to be CIA agents, as was written in the original comics. There's still a great chance they will actually figure as former scientists, employed by Oscorp, which well established the connection between Parkers and Connors.

It’s no wonder that The Amazing Spider-Man may step aside from its source material, as what always happens when comics and, most often, books are adapted to fit the nature and pace of the cinematic medium. Even films like Sin City and 300, which didn’t take a risk to demonstrate a new approach to the material, still had changes in their content, whether visually or story-wise.

Back in 2000, Sam Raimi’s decision to use the idea of organics instead of mechanic web-shooters for Spider-Man to spin the web caused a life-lasting debate between organics and mechs advocates. Among from many other aspects that differed Raimi’s movies from comics were Peter’s crawling abilities, Green Goblin’s costume, Mary Jane’s character, a story’s focus on Peter’s love interest and foes instead of himself, and positive general opinion of people about the image of Spider-Man.

The last in the list is believed to be one of the main issues, exposed by the story in the new film, as this time Spider-Man will be having problems, being seen in the eyes of both authorities and public as an outlaw and serious threat to the city. The Amazing Spider-Man also brings its own changes to the story, the first example of which is Spider-Man’s costume, now equipped with practical stuff and modified to look more like a teenager’s piece work. Nonetheless, Spider-Man has gone through many different incarnations and interpretations in all kinds of mediums, such as comics, cartoons, video games and, finally, movies.

It’s no more about how faithful a movie can be in terms of technical and secondary aspects, but how faithful it is to the character’s arc. As previously stated, Sam Raimi succeeded to present Spider-Man’s story on the surface only by switching from weak and powerless Peter Parker to brave and confident Spider-Man in one act.

Marc Webb, with his new vision, decided to undergo certain changes and take high risks for the purpose of unmasking the protagonist’s inner being and thoroughly explore the complex development of both Peter Parker and his alter ego, Spider-Man, in our contemporary world. In the end, the unique story of Peter Parker/Spider-Man has always been about a common guy, living in the real world, who just happens to possess superpowers as a result of being bitten by a radioactive spider.

As it was already mentioned earlier, numerous web sites and blogs shared their reactions regarding the footage, recently presented during the movie's panel at Comic-Con (July 22) and now also Empire (August 14). Examples of these include:

The Washington Post: Interest levels will remain high as we head toward the release date next July. The footage was certainly strong enough to convince the average moviegoer to want to reconnect with one of the most recognizable and beloved superheroes.

Hollywood Reporter: Spider-Man leaves Hall H not only vindicating the reboot, but also taking the title as the Con’s must-see footage and should-have-been-there panel.

The New York Times: By the time it all ended, most of the thousands who remained out seemed more than happy with what they saw of Mr. Garfield, his co-star Emma Stone, their villain Rhys Ifans and the director Marc Webb.

IndieWire.com: For all the strengths of the Sam Raimi series, there were certain aspects of the character that the director never quite got right, and Marc Webb‘s reboot seems to be shaping up nicely. The footage shied away from the origin, and even much action, to mostly focus on character beats, with a relationship with Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) that seems far more three-dimensional and developed than that in the first picture, while Andrew Garfield‘s chemistry with Emma Stone is palpable.

Total Film: The Amazing Spider-Man’s first trailer had us scratching our heads and attempting to figure out how director Marc Webb’s re-spin would distinguish itself from Sam Raimi’s Spidey trilogy. Happily, exclusive new footage unveiled at the Con meant we could all let out a massive sigh of relief. With two extended clips shown – one focusing on Peter Parker, the other on antagonist The Lizard – Webb proved that his reboot isn’t a pointless cash-grab. Darker and moodier than Raimi’s films, but with flashes of web-light humour, the footage well and truly converted us.

Collider.com: ... it certainly has the potential to take the franchise in an interesting new direction.

Thus, the question of whether the new film about Spider-Man deserved to be given a chance or not is of a more concern than whether it will be successful or not, as one may lead to the answer of the other.