baffled spider-sense

Rating: 6/10 (23 July 2012)

Well, this one gives you a mixed, baffling feeling after you leave the theater. It's certainly not bad entertainment (on the contrary) but something seems incomplete here. Some certain highlights make up for that, but I feel some points must be made:
I think more and more marvel fans have now some secret prayers: ''Oh please, let Paramount buy the rights of Spiderman and X-Men...let them join the Avengers..'' and ''oh, please, let Nolan direct a Marvel hero!''. Well, it seems that both Webb and Universal look into those prayers, but not very sure of which route to take. There is a ''realistic'' approach , (earthly colors, casting, plot(web blasters and stuff)) and at the same time an ''avengers'' approach (you get to laugh quite often and even an after credits scene where you think S.L.J. is in the shadows). However, this Spiderman is neither Nolanesque or Avengeresque and Peter's quest(ion) is present: Who am I? It is obvious that this is just the first one of movies to come, so no quick judgments. After all, BB has little in common with TDK, part from a director's vision. However, more baffled moments are there: Webb seems eager to please everyone with the cost of losing the movie's personality: He wants to please the comic fans with numerous winks (from swinging shots to lab coats) and the twilight generation (well, it IS a better love story than Twilight...). Raimi's Spiderman was Raimi's, with it's own personality, pros and cons. If Spiderman 3 was a waste of time, money and Venom, Spiderman 2 still the remains THE best spider-movie. Webb needs to show himself more and give this spider-man a heart of its own. As for the rest, Andrew Garfield will take care of everything. At certain points, you just want him without the suit, as he is the sole heart of the movie. Of course Mrs. Stone is a joy to watch, but Gwen is just another baffled moment. One simple example(of many): How come a self confident and courageous girl (she even confronts the lizard) be MORE SHY than geeky peter?? Ifans makes an excellent choice as Dr. Connors, while lizard...well..not so much (just another contradiction of the film). It's not the best CGI out there, and the productions decision to make him more like a man-lizard (instead of lizard-man) is awkward at times. And of course, the transition from the ethical scientist to the bioterrorist Lizard is biased and sloppy. In general, the movie gives an impression of a lot of deleted scenes and more questions raise than answered.
All in all, I don't want to say it's ''not good'', but it certainly lacks personality and heart. A general discussion point must also be made: This entertainment these days is not about originality (all major ''coming soon'' movies are either remakes or reboots or sequels) but how old material will be played out again. This one is either a BB (here's hoping for Norman Osborn to show up) or a ..Hulk (rememberd only for RDJ in the end). Let's hope Webb is only warming us up and is not actually baffled himself of which route to take.