Nothing But Memory
Posts Tagged sally field

Marvel Movies Project: The Amazing Spider-Man

Movie poster for The Amazing Spider-Man (2012).

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) is generally referred to as a “reboot” of the Spider-Man franchise. Personally, I’m inclined to call it a remake, though, since there is almost nothing about it that is new. The actors are different. The director is different. Many of the characters are even different. And yet, if you’ve seen Spider-Man, which I may start referring to as The Superior Spider-Man, you’ve seen this before. The only new twist is the backstory involving Peter’s parents.

Obviously, the origin story — the spider bite, Peter’s discovery of his powers, Uncle Ben’s death — is the same. That’s expected and it’s fine (except that the similarity makes the “why did they bother?” question even more inevitable). The scenes in which Peter explores and develops his powers are so similar, and yet so inferior, to the first movie it’s almost painful. The addition of a skateboard can’t disguise how much of a cheap ripoff it is. Later, Spidey rescues someone in a vehicle hanging off a bridge … just like he did in Spider-Man. You would think they could at least change up the action setpieces so the audience isn’t thinking about the first movie the whole time, but apparently not.

I hate the fact that this movie exists. I hate this movie. It may actually be a good movie. I can’t tell because I’m too busy being annoyed by it.

From what I could see through the haze of irritation clouding up my mind, though, I don’t think it’s a good movie. The Lizard is visually a very lame villain; one time, I started thinking about this film and couldn’t for the life of me remember who was the villain. That’s a bad sign. Special effects have not improved enough in the last five years for things to look any better here than they did in Spider-Man 3. (But five years seems so long ago, I know.)

I’m not crazy about some of the casting. I can accept Denis Leary as Captain Stacy, I guess. He doesn’t match my vision of the character but he’s quite good in the role as it’s written. Still, I can’t help feeling he’d be better as a villain … maybe it’s his vague resemblance to Willem Dafoe. I do not like Sally Field as Aunt May at all, which makes two Sally Field performance I hated last year, the other being Lincoln. The worst, though, is Andrew Garfield. His twitchy performance is very offputing.

Even Emma Stone, whom I normally like, annoys me in this movie. Peter and Gwen are just too cutesy-awkward. Also, why on earth is he telling her his secret identity on their first date? This makes no sense, especially given her father’s job.

But my main problem with this movie is really just the fact that it exists. Part of this stems from my love of the original Spidey movies (well, the first two). Why go back when there’s no way you’re going to top what’s already been done? Oh right: cash. Most likely, if Sony had not produced another movie they would eventually have lost the rights to Spider-Man. Not only that, re-starting with a new cast keeps their costs down. In the end, The Amazing Spider-Man is nothing more than a cash grab. I understand that Hollywood exists to make money and there’s an element of the cash grab about almost every movie ever made. It’s usually a little less obvious, is all.

And okay, fine, the biggest reason I hate this movie is my love of the Raimi films. There might actually be people in the world who saw The Amazing Spider-Man but never saw Spider-Man. Young, impressionable people! It’s just so wrong.

It’s unfortunate that this project, which has overall been very enjoyable, has to end on such a negative note, but oh well. I made it! This is the last of the Marvel movies — to date. My goal was to finish this (re)watch before the release of Iron Man 3, so, mission: accomplished. I will be back to sum it all up in a wrap-up post in a few days.

From Amour to Zero Dark Thirty: Oscars 2012

Oscar time is upon us once again and this year I’ve actually managed to see all the nominees in the major categories before the show. This may be a first for me! Here’s a quick rundown of some of my thoughts.

Best Picture

This is a pretty solid year for Best Picture nominees! Normally, there’s at least one movie on the list I can’t stand; this year, all nine are a-okay. I wasn’t crazy about Life of Pi but I didn’t think it was terrible or anything. My personal favourite is probably Les Misérables; however, I don’t think it’s the best of the nine. I just happen to love it despite its flaws. The cream of the crop, in my opinion, is Argo, which is a massively entertaining film that is both a funny Hollywood parody and a nailbiting action thriller. Argo looks like the frontrunner right now and I’m hoping it’ll continue its streak on Sunday night. Zero Dark Thirty, with its subtle non-commentary on the hunt for Osama Bin Laden, is my second choice. The most impressive thing about this film is that it neither praises nor condemns those involved. Even the end result, the killing of Bin Laden, is not seen as a good thing or a bad thing. It just is.

I’ve been posting reviews of every movie I see over at Letterboxd since the beginning of 2012. Here are links to my reviews of the Best Picture nominees, in case you’re interested: Amour | Argo | Beasts of the Southern Wild | Django Unchained | Les Misérables | Life of Pi | Lincoln | Silver Linings Playbook | Zero Dark Thirty

Best Director

I’m guessing Steven Spielberg will take this, and I can’t complain about that. I thought he made a few strange choices in Lincoln, but overall I liked his quiet, low key handling of the dialogue-heavy script. No matter who wins, though, the story in this category is that Ben Affleck and Kathryn Bigelow weren’t nominated for their outstanding work on Argo and Zero Dark Thirty respectively. These are both shocking omissions, especially given that Affleck won the Directors Guild award. The guild of directors thinks he’s the best director! AMPAS fail.

Best Actor

As soon as I heard Daniel Day-Lewis would be playing Abraham Lincoln in a film directed by Steven Spielberg, I assumed he would win an Oscar for it. This doesn’t come as a huge shock. But if he does win, which he no doubt will, he will absolutely deserve it. I don’t think any of the other nominees even comes close. It’s unfortunate that Jean-Louis Trintignant from Amour was passed over, however. He was excellent.

Best Actress

This is an interesting category. It’s the one that seemed most up in the air until the nominations were announced and I still find a couple of the inclusions a little odd. Naomi Watts is solid in The Impossible, but she’s out of action for a large part of the movie and I’m not sure how she managed to be included here. Little Quvenzhané Wallis was the sparkplug that made Beasts of the Southern Wild run, but you just know she has no chance of winning. Emmanuelle Riva is excellent in Amour, no question, but I thought she was more of a supporting character to Trintignant’s lead. It seems likely that Jennifer Lawrence will win this. I like her and I very much enjoyed her performance in Silver Linings Playbook. Jessica Chastain would also be a worthy winner for Zero Dark Thirty.

Best Supporting Actor

Five nominees, all previous Oscar winners — this is a solid category. I’m hoping Tommy Lee Jones will win for Lincoln because he was one of the best things about the film. I wish there could have been more than five nominees, though, because there are some excellent performances I feel were overlooked:

  • Ewan McGregor in The Impossible. Somehow, Naomi Watts is getting all the attention for this film, but McGregor is the one who provides its best, most moving moment: his heartbreaking, emotional phonecall home to England.
  • Christopher Walken in Seven Psychopaths. A great actor playing a great character with a lot of depth.
  • Leonardo DiCaprio and/or Samuel L. Jackson in Django Unchained. It might be a bit much to nominate every actor from Django, but these two would both have deserved it. I was saying all through 2012 that this would finally be Leo’s year because he was playing against type. Okay, so I was wrong about him winning the Oscar, but I wasn’t wrong about his performance. Jackson is also phenomenal and adds a lot of punch to a movie that at times lacks it.

Best Supporting Actress

Anne Hathaway is up against, uh, some other people … ? Really, though, this category is puzzling to me. Jacki Weaver was alright in Silver Linings Playbook, I guess, but she didn’t exactly have much to do. Helen Hunt has the nudity nomination. Amy Adams is very good in The Master, but I felt her character could have been more developed. I hated Sally Field’s performance in Lincoln, but I accept that no one else feels that way.

Anyway, Hathaway is good enough that I think she would win against much better competition, but I can’t help feeling the relative weakness of the two actress categories demonstrates the lack of solid roles for women. And that makes me sad.