Rebooting Spider-Man so soon after Sam Raimi's trilogy has seemed like a huge gamble — but soon, we're going to find out for ourselves if it's paid off. The first batch of reviews of Amazing Spider-Man have come out, full of both praise and condemnation.
Thank goodness, it's mostly praise — unless you think "Twilight in Spandex" is a burn. Find out what the early buzz on the street is for the brand new Peter Parker right now. Minor spoilers ahead...
SFX assures you that this franchise is in safe hands:
Any worries that after the much-loved Sam Raimi Spider-Man films (well, the first two anyway…) Sony would reboot the franchise with a loud, vacuous, gimmicky, MTV-edited, soulless crowd-pleaser are dispelled immediately with a summer blockbuster that doesn't have an action sequence for a good half hour. The most amazing thing about this Spider-Man is how much heart and genuinely warm storytelling it has...
It may not have the non-stop action and spectacle of 'Avengers Assemble,' but it does have characters you can fall in love with, and bags of charm. You feel the series is in safe hands with Webb, Garfield and Stone.
However, the London Evening Standard is not as kind, at all:
Webb's film is slow on plot, skimpy on character development. It takes 45 minutes for Peter's Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) to be murdered, an hour till we see the spider suit. Then Peter goes from dorky to cocky without passing charm on the way. Brittle Gwen turns gooey the moment he turns up at school battered from fighting crime. So, chicks dig scars, right?
The Guardian balanced things out, with praise for both the 3D and Peter's new attitude:
Webb successfully treads a fine line between keeping the hardcore superhero-movie fans happy and injecting a dose of meaningful affect. Parker is generally reckoned to be the most "relatable" figure in the superhero canon, but the pastel-bright synthetics of the earlier movies did little to dispel the sense that the comic-book world could only construct its characters out of clunking great blocks of melodrama.
In re-engineering Parker into the introspective, uncertain male more typical of his previous film, Webb is aided by a terrific performance from Andrew Garfield, who brings a genial unflappability that allows him to negotiate the often-ludicrous demands of the superhero plotline. At the same time, Webb also shows an unarguable facility for the more traditional action elements of the story, and the 3D certainly helps: he pulls off some properly nauseating shots as Parker dives off skyscrapers, rescues kids from falling, and the like.
The Telegraph seems pretty impressed with Spider-Man's new found lady-magnet looks and copious shirtless moments, and goes as far to liken it to Twilight in spandex.
"Ever since Twilight tipped off Hollywood to the spending power of girls and their mothers, a range of increasingly expensive films aimed at that audience has materialised. Perhaps it was only a matter of time before a superhero suited up with them in mind, although it remains to be seen how die-hard Spider-fans will react to their hero courting a different – some would say rival – demographic."
Total Film seems pretty split on the flick, but admits they were certainly entertained:
[Marc Webb] gets enough right to sign us up for a sequel, not least a thrilling climactic blast-off. The route there? Bit bumpy. Finally, though, Spider-Man re-begins in style.
The Upcoming remarks that this superhero movie is good, but not as good as the other Marvel movie out this summer The Avengers:
Although Webb does explore Spider-Man's past better, one does feel a little cheated when we reach the closing sequences. A bit more imagination with the ending wouldn't have gone amiss but, having said this, The Amazing Spider-Man is a solid piece of film-making and on par with The Avengers Assemble on being the best Marvel film yet.