Add News     Print  
Article List
Actress Emma Stone attends ‘The Amazing Spider-Man 2’ Be Amazing Day volunteer Day at I.S. 145 Joseph Pulitzer on April 25, in the Queens borough of New York City. (AFP)
‘Amazing Spider-Man 2’ overstuffed Charming interaction of Garfield, Stone

LOS ANGELES, April 26, (RTRS): Spider-Man is back, bigger and slightly better — but only slightly, and with too much emphasis on “bigger.” There are a few well-tuned moments in Mark Webb’s “The Amazing Spider-Man 2,” from the charming, charismatic interaction of stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone to the occasional flash of excitement in its wide-screen action.  To get to those, however, you have to wade through a two-and-a-half-hour running time that encompasses three costume-clad villains, two shadowy string-pullers, four distinct climaxes and still finds room for every single cliche of big-budget franchise screenwriting. The genesis of this latest iteration of the Marvel Comics character on the big screen came in no small part thanks to prior series director Sam Raimi wanting more money, as well as Sony’s reluctance to lose their rights to the character back to Marvel by not moving forward with the property.

This latest series effort continues down the road of choosing long-term corporate strategy over present-moment storytelling, more intent on setting up Sony’s already-announced spin-offs than it is in telling a clean, clear story. The script, credited to Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Jeff Pinker, is much like every other previous Kurtzman-Orci script, from “Transformers” and “Star Trek” to “Transfomers 2” and “Star Trek Into Darkness”: Jammed so full of bits of business to please the boardroom that there’s almost nothing left for the audience; as screenwriters, Kurtzman and Orci always confuse activity for action and stuff for storytelling. Tedious fidelity to the source material — almost always a fatal flaw for these comic-book films — also means that the film’s biggest “game-changing” plot element is something that happened in the Marvel Comics back in 1973: I’m not saying new viewers will see it coming, but since it’s technically been coming since when Nixon was in power, they’re hardly to blame.

Jamie Foxx plays the big bad guy: Nebbishy, needy Max Dillon, an electrical-engineering employee of series mega-company Oscorp, who falls into a tank of genetically-modified electric eels and emerges as the voltage-shooting villain Electro, incandescent blue and easily led.  Dane de Haan, who can manage to be simultaneously menacing and pathetic, endearing and threatening, is Harry Osborne, old friend to Garfield’s Peter Parker and young heir to the Oscorp empire, who winds up twisted by science and hubris into the Green Goblin. Foxx’s performance, swaddled in special effects as it is, is fine; it’s too bad that his character’s arc and manner is lifted wholesale from that of Jim Carrey’s Riddler in Joel Schumacher’s “Batman and Robin,” and that Electro’s best visual FX trick is also lifted entirely from Dave Gibbons and Alan Moore’s work in the seminal 1986 comic “Watchmen.”

The cinematography, by mega-pic DP Dan Mindel (“John Carter,” “Star Trek,” the upcoming “Star Wars: Episode VII”), is not quite as clean and crisp and clear as you might hope; it’s a little too quick, a little too caffeinated.  The score, by Hans Zimmer and a cast of luminaries including Pharrell, Johnny Marr and Junkie XL, is more of the same as well: Bass-heavy booming that often drowns out the dialogue, straight off the rack. Garfield and Stone are, just as in the first film, a highlight; it makes you wish the two would find almost any other project to be in, so that their funny, warm interactions wouldn’t have to be perpetually interrupted by Kurtzman and Orci’s by-now worn-out versions of world-threatening peril.

Garfield is especially great as Parker and Spider-Man, even if he is a little too old to be a convincing high-school senior. Garfield also works superbly when the script, wisely, slows down to show the Spider-Man character’s traditional moments of saving civilians from mayhem and interacting with the blue-collar Big Apple, from bodega clerks to NYFD firemen, as a fellow New Yorker trying to get by.

The highlights can’t make up for the low points, however, from cliche countdowns for the action out of Bad Screenwriting 101 to the kind of sequel-setting throat-clearing designed to make comic-book movie fans quit contemplating the film they’re watching and start anticipating what’s to come. (Between the runaway rumor-industrial complex of most film sites to the obligatory post-credits scene, superhero films now do Pavlov one better, teaching fans to salivate, slack-jawed, for bells that are years from actually being rung.) “The Amazing Spider-Man 2,” is just good enough to make you painfully aware of all the ways it’s not good at all. It’s a fine way to make money. It may not be the best way to make movies.

Next week, you shouldn’t have any trouble finding a theater showing “The Amazing Spider-Man 2.” Sony has said that it would roll out its Marvel superhero sequel in more than 4,000 theaters nationwide on Friday, May 2. That’s saturation-level and the biggest opening of any film this year - but not a record. The widest domestic release ever was for “The Twilight Saga: Eclipse,” which Summit Entertainment debuted in 4,468 theaters in June 2010. “The Amazing Spider-Man” opened in 4,318 theaters in July of 2012. “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. Marc Webb returns to direct with a script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Jeff Pinkner. Jamie Foxx, Paul Giamatti and Dane DeHaan co-star as baddies Electro, the Rhino and The Green Goblin, respectively. “Amazing Spider-Man 2” rolled out in roughly 15 markets last weekend and brought in $47 million. It opens in nearly 25 more territories this weekend, including Russia, Korea and Japan.

Read By: 1683
Comments: 0

You must login to add comments ...
About Us   |   RSS   |   Contact Us   |   Feedback   |   Advertise With Us