WILL the Amazing Spider-Man impress audiences once more? Or will it be more of the same old story? Jamie-maree Shipton finds outs.
The Amazing Spider-Man boasts a new origin story, a new love interest, and new talent.
But I couldn’t help but feel like I was hit by a nasty case of deja-vu.
There isn’t a whole lot of ‘amazing-ness’ associated with watching the same movie twice. But that’s what it felt like watching the new Spider-Man movie.
I left with no greater or more in-depth understanding of the origin of Spider-man than what the previous film had already given me.
At every twist and turn I knew where the plot was going. I knew the beginning, middle and end, or at least I could make an educated guess at what would ensue.
For instance the climatic scene of Uncle Ben’s death was almost exactly the same as the Toby Maguire tear jerker: the malevolent actions of Peter Parker ignoring a crime results in Uncle Bill’s murder and the spiral into finding the murderer and discovering his role as a superhero crime fighter.
And the déjà-vu didn’t stop there.
The characters in this new Spider-man movie fit the same mould as every other from the previous releases – apart than the obvious difference in heroine Gwen, played by Emma Stone.
Even then, Stone carries the same jilted love for Parker as Mary-Jane, and wears the same cutesy get-up.
Then there is the villain, and again he is green and a monster. He is also a colleague of Parker’s father and becomes his role model who then betrays him.
Surprised? I wasn’t either.
So much more could have also come out of a movie shot in 3D. I was more conscious of the glasses’ frames sitting on the bridge of my nose than the big 3D action scenes.
Having said all that, I did find Andrew Garfield to be the better Spider-man. The jump between loner to charismatic hero was not so farfetched as it felt with the excessively introverted spider-man of Toby Maguire.
The humorous quirks of this film’s Spider-man is also more true to the quick-wit and sarcasm of the ‘original’ Spider-man stories. Garfield’s wit didn’t feel so manufactured and I assume that’s why I found him more believable.
I’d go so far as to state the film could simply be labelled as a remake.
But one I did enjoy more than the predecessor, don’t get me wrong.
The younger talent and effects revitalises the story, but in the end I’m afraid it is a case of ‘old dog, new tricks’.