“Busy. But more appealing than the first one.”
Somehow, for this second installment of Marc Webb’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2, I’m kinda feel several elements are being pushed forcibly, especially regarding the PLOT. Yes, the PLOT. The plot is cramped, containing several plot holes, lots of characters, and (again) unanswered subplots that just blurring the film’s main premise. You don’t need to be a movie-pro to see the studio’s interference on this one; they just put their “hidden” hands on many aspects on this movie, hence making this a slapdash studio version. I understand at the time that Sony tries to build their own Spidey universe by setting up the Sinister Six movie and a Venom spinoff after TASM 2. And of course the consequence of this, is sacrificing appeal and potential of TASM 2.
Luckily for this movie, both Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone’s performance was SO GREAT so that it’s still interesting to watch. They succeeded in building the same chemistry like Maguire and Dunst did in previous Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films. Garfield, especially, really nails it as Peter Parker as if he was born for the role. His nerdy and goofy appearance shines throughout the whole movie. The rest of the supporting casts: Jamie Foxx, Sally Field, Dane deHaan are fine. Although I must to say, Foxx’s performance here (pre-Electro) is too over the top ala Jim Carrey’s The Riddler from Batman Forever (1995). Goofy, but too cheesy. Anyway, my main problem perhaps is the intepretation of Paul Giamatti’s Rhino. Giamatti’s a great character actor and they just turned him into a f’in joke...? How can you forget the emotional acting skill of him in 12 Years of Slave (2013) compared to this one...? Giamatti’s great actor, just give him great lines and good direction...! Or else, if you just want to tease the Rhino in the film, just give his character an interesting backstory rather than just him busting out on the street and yelling tons of non-sense in Russian. Or much better, just don’t use him at all till the TASM 3...! Saving time, make the plot more concise and also it’s saving money right...? *wink wink
The visual effects done in this movie are stunning and jaw dropping (just like other Marvel movies, though) especially at the climax. Marvel is known for selling their CGI actions / light and sound show, but it’s okay as long as they serve the purpose of the story well. Speaking of the story, it’s more or less okay, but unfortunately it concerns to lots of backstory and sub-plots you do not ever really need to care. And since this is a Spider-Man film, you can expect some tear-jerking scenes in this film. You probably would relate yourself easily with certain characters, feel their emotion, pain, joyfulness, embarassment; since the movie’s premise is quite grounded as if it were based on anybody’s life that certainly WOULD happen to you too.
The marketing of the movie is somewhat okay, making the Daily Bugle site then fill it with easter eggs mentioning villains like the Shocker, revealing the fate of the Indian doctor from the first movie, a brief nod to J. Jonah Jameson’s existence in this universe, and other things whatsoever I don’t really care.
For its faithfulness to the comics, I think Marc Webb has done a great job and won’t disappoint the fans. He, for better or worse, bravely to loosely adapt (or borrow to be exact), one of the most famous / classic Spider-Man storyline of all time. Electro’s physical appearances and mechanized Rhino are a direct rip off from the Ultimate Spider-Man comic version. I also appreciate how Webb try to explore the back story of Peter’s parents like in the comic did (while Raimi didn’t), although it doesn’t really pay off in the end.
Besides of some good aspects of this film, other thing that I feel hurting this movie is that Marc Webb already spoiled us and showed us everything in the trailer. They gave us three different trailers, several TV spots, and even a 10 minutes extended clip as a marketing / promotion material. This is now a common mistake from all movie trailers for which they already show us all their money shots to attract people; thus lowering the quality of the story. Or even worse, they tell you the story in mostly the same order and summarizing it into a 2-3 minutes theatrical trailer. If you’re a comic geek like me that grew up reading comic books, you’ll easily know the fate of several characters in this movie just by seeing the trailer. I think for the next installment (or any other movies), they just need to make the trailer simple, easy to understand but also interesting at the same time.
The bottom line is, I’m quite like this movie despite all of its problems. It’s better than the first one; they manage to reach out to certain aspect that is never touched before by Raimi; however, its standard as a perfect Spider-Man movie can’t match Sam Raimi’s genre-defining Spider-Man 2 (2004).
3 out of 5 points.
Post a Comment