Comparing two films that both make use of the same source material can get in the way of judging each on its own merit. However, I think in the case of everyone’s favourite red and blue webslinger, a little look back at Spider-Man (2002) only helps make this new film’s merits clearer to see.
This is because the two adaptations are satisfyingly unique in their independent ways. Sam Raimi’s original feels much closer in tone to the comic book material whereas this new version moves away from fantasy, instead attempting to anchor itself more in the real world. With the 2002 film only ten years old, a complete re-telling of the same story requires justification and thankfully the new direction taken by The Amazing Spider-Man is just about distinct enough to make a solid case for its existence.
Andrew Garfield is fantastic in the leading role. His portrayal of Peter Parker helps to establish the film’s style right from the off and draws a firm line under his predecessor. Everything about Tobey Maguire’s Parker screamed “VICTIM!” – he was skinny, shaky-voiced, socially nowhere. Even the bus driver hated him. His transformation from utter loser to muscular masquerader was such an epic zero-to-hero dream that it lifted the character into the make-believe realm. Garfield’s Peter Parker however is a much more realistic geek – ok, he gets picked on, but he doesn’t pity himself and actually seems fairly comfortable with his photographer-nerd status. After the transformation, he is more amused by his new powers than burdened and never quite overcomes his awkwardness despite them – he still skateboards and he still studies, he just does these things on the roof now.
The female interest of 2002 Spider-Man was MJ, a one-dimensional damsel in distress who screamed a lot and looked pretty – and pretty ineffective when the bad guy showed up. She was the hero’s trophy and little more. In this film, the object of Peter’s affections is somewhat less objectified. Gwen Stacey is Peter’s brainy classmate and head intern at Oscorp. As well as screaming a lot less than MJ, she also plays quite a major part in the final battle. The presence of a more substantial and better-rounded female character is welcome in a film trying to move clear of the adolescent wish-fulfilment that characterised the old Spider-Man.
Half the battle of taking a comic book story and revising it in the modern fashion is achieved with a script grounded in the grit of modern lexicon. Cutting clichés and throwing in the odd reference to a current trend in technology goes a long way to reining a superhero back down to earth. The new Spider-Man definitely heads in the right direction. Uncle Ben’s famous “with great power comes great responsibility” line is dropped in favour of a more convincing speech peppered with the same sentiment but packaged in a less cheesy manner. Similarly, 2002 Peter’s long, embarrassingly slushy speech to MJ about the way she makes him feel bears no relation to the stuttering ums and erms of 2012 Peter’s attempt to ask Gwen out. It’s much sweeter this way and has a far better sounding ring of truth to it
The ‘Fantasy vs. Reality’ dichotomy between the two films is also manifest in their direction. In Spider-Man, Raimi’s camera is a character in itself; the dutch angles, ambitious tracking and montages of overlaid shots all conjure the fantastical sense that the camera can and so will go anywhere it chooses. On the other hand, The Amazing Spider-Man’s director, Marc Webb organises his film in a much more functional manner. The cameras are set up to capture the action as unobtrusively as possible, leaving the actors to tell the story. Although Webb’s directorial prints are generally invisible, one thing did catch the eye: use of shallow focus to move between objects/people in the foreground and background – an increasingly rare find in modern blockbusters – which works especially well in the final shot. Even the lighting of the two films is distinct. Raimi’s film is lit thoroughly, seemingly with all angles covered so as to leave as little shadow as possible, giving it a simplistic and stark look with bright primary colours highlighted. Conversely, The Amazing Spider-Man does not concern itself with making each shot look like a drawing. Its selective approach to photography lets shadow take care of itself, providing a more natural look.
Finally onto the music, which draws a conclusive line between the two films and demonstrates very clearly how they sit in relation to each other. The 2002 film was scored by Danny Elfman, the go-to composer for comic book adaptations of the last 20 years (see Hulk, Hellboy, Tim Burton’s Batman films etc). Elfman employs strong themes and character motifs in the style of Hollywood’s golden age. This is perfect for the bold good vs. evil fables that all the big superhero comics present. The music for Spider-Man is some of my favourite of his work, a score often overlooked in favour of the sweeping gothic melodrama of his collaborations with Burton.
Nevertheless, having someone like Elfman score the new Spider-Man would contradict and confuse the style that the film is going for. Instead, James Horner is brought in and provides a much less attention-grabbing accompaniment to the story. While there are clear repeated themes, Horner has approached this film with an ear to colour the visuals without intruding on the action. An unnoticed score is a step in the right direction if realism is the aim. What helps tie in even more strongly to the real world is the use of pop music dropped in during time-lapse montages – particularly when Peter is testing out his newfound powers while skateboarding. It contextualises the film in the present day and infers the kind of music that the on-screen characters might listen to.
Altogether, The Amazing Spider-Man does just enough to make a resurrection of a recently abandoned franchise seem reasonable. In no way is it as radical a revision as Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight films are to the Batman story although it would definitely benefit from a similarly stronger push away from its source material now that the hero has been introduced. The real test for Marvel and co. will be the inevitable follow up.
Jon Bates Writes 