Nothing to set it apart from the 2002 movie

Rating: 6/10 (19 October 2012)

I give this movie a 6. Frankly I was hoping for something much better. I was hoping for something that would really make this movie different from the franchise started in 2002. Something that would really make it worth watching since it's only been 5 years since a Spiderman movie came out. Well you know what they say about wishes, and hopes don't you? You can hope in one hand and take a number 2 in the other hand, and see which one fills up first. Yeah, nothing new or great here.
I guess you could say the story line is a tad different. They put Peter Parker's (Andrew Garfield) parents into the story. They also got rid of Mary Jane, in favor of a new love interest, Gwen (Emma Stone). They also remade Peter as a smart, loner, social outcast type (You know, like one of those kids that just might bring a gun to school), instead of just the nerdy geek with a camera.
Everyone knows the rest of the story by now. A socially awkward boy that lives with his aunt and uncle, gets bit by genetically experimental spider which gives him incredible spider like abilities. His uncle gets killed and he decides to avenge his death, and become a vigilante super hero. In the end Peter has to choose between being a super hero and being with the girl he loves.
I thought that maybe one reason they made this film so shortly after the last Toby Maguire trilogy (2002, 2004, 2007) might be to take a darker more sinister, and less corny version ala the Dark Knight franchise. While this one may have hinted that they wanted to go there in a few scenes it just never does. It still stays pretty corny. If you are going to make a film like this , Please have something original to offer and go for it. This movie to me looks and feels as though it was one of the last 3 films, but with different faces.
Andrew Garfield really adds and brings nothing, and I would say that both him and Tobey Maguire did an equally poor job. Ditching Kirsten Dunst was a good move as she is one of the most overrated actresses in Hollywood, and Emma Stone was probably the best actor in this whole movie so clearing out Mary Jane didn't hinder it. The CGI was overdone and that is one of the pet peeves I have with almost all movies these days.
In the end this movie was completely unnecessary, especially when there was a trilogy put out just 5 years ago. Sounds to me like the studio just wanted to pull one over on us and make a quick buck. This movie looks and feels like everybody involved with the previous movies just threw it together with some out takes of the last ones, and there is nothing to distinguish it as anything any better or worse.
I give it a 6, watchable, but it has nothing really different from the older 3 movies. If you want to watch a great, original, super hero movie, leave this one until you have exhausted all the others and rent Kick-Ass (2010) instead, and keep your eyes open for Kick-Ass 2 in June 2013.
Like my reviews, Hate em? Comments, Hate mail, or want a specific DVD reviewed just e-mail me at: subliminal.lithium@gmail.com