"I mean, Marvel has certain hard and fast rules, like about the spider bite — you have to have Peter get bitten by a radioactive spider, and Uncle Ben’s death has to transform Peter Parker into Spider-Man, you know what I mean? He has to learn a lesson by that. But I’m trying to find new inflections and new context so that the story feels new. Because I do think the character is different; you want to honor the iconic elements of Spider-Man but you also want to reinvent the world around him so that it feels interesting and new, and that’s a tricky line to walk."All evidence would indicate that the Spider-Man reboot is going to be a big success à la The Avengers. I've read positive comments on line, it's doing well at the box office, all well and good, but hints in the previews suggest that the script has taken some liberties with the traditional version of Peter Parker's accession to arachnid abilities.
The Amazing Spider-Man director Marc Webb in a Movieline interview.
Sam Raimi's version is completely faithful to the original, simple, iconic version: a radioactive spider bites Peter, bang, done. (And Tobey Maguirre's WTF experience when he wakes up the next morning and looks in the mirror is a great little moment in the first movie.) But the previews for the reboot hint about a deeper, darker aspect to this transformation, suggesting that Peter's parents had somehow genetically modified him in order to create the potential for his wall-crawling abilities.
Sigh...as with the now-infamous plan on the part of Michael Bay to reboot the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as aliens, why do these people want to mess with success? After all, Spider-Man's origin isn't really the radioactive spider bite - it's actually the moment of trauma when his actions cause the death of Uncle Ben, that discovery of consequences and responsibilities. Why diminish that moral epiphany?
On the other hand, I have to give credit to Marc Webb's comments in the opening quote. Isn't the whole purpose of doing a reboot is to "find new inflections and new context" - otherwise, why bother? Sadly, the answer to that question may also be "in order to make millions of dollars by springboarding off a proven box-office commodity that may have another mile in it."
Regardless, I'll undoubtedly catch The Amazing Spider-Man in commercial release, so that I can experience it in 3-D, and see what they've actually done to the story. And who knows, maybe I've done the film an enormous injustice. After all, it looks like they went back to the original web-shooters, so they're not completely evil.
- Sid
This is going to be a great movie in 3 D! All those Spidey stunts and webs flying around.....8 thumbs up!
ReplyDeleteYou know, I'm a little envious. Due to the difference in our personal interests, you're not worried about whether or not the movie is going to be right, and as a result you can appreciate it entirely on its own merits - or even just as eye candy.
ReplyDelete- Sid
And yes, "eight thumbs up" was cute.
ReplyDelete- Sid
You can be sure that if there was a movie where gym training or yoga was featured prominently, I would be all over it with a critical eye! If they made some glaring errors - such as performing an exercise incorrectly or showing an illogical sequence of yoga poses - I would offer a strong reprimand to the film makers.
ReplyDelete