Thwip!

The Amazing Spider-Man

Crit

Yeah, I know--but I hadn't been to any of the 3D summer blockbusters, and given the religious convictions of my youth--a strict Marvelite, with nothing but contempt for DC--it would be wrong for me the see the new Batman flick first.

Well, I liked some things: for example, that Peter Parker is science-savvy enough to develop his own web, and the delivery device thereon, in contrast to the first-generation Spidey films, in which the web-spurting is part of the mutation from his fateful spider bite. Andrew Garfield, though he must be close to 30 now, does the teenage angst bit pretty well. Occasionally the 3D enhanced the web-swinging thrills, though it struck me as a difference only in degree, not in kind, from the earlier films. And I liked that the adversary was the Lizard, who, if I'm not mistaken, was the first supervillain in Spidey's debut in Amazing Tales. Oh, and Stan Lee's cameo is terrific.

But mostly: feh. Godawful slow pace makes it seem as if the story is playing out in real time. Emma Stone contributes little but a pretty face. The involved backstory is completely unnecessary. It's always nice to see Campbell Scott and Embeth Davidtz, who (briefly) play his parents (with what seems like a pretty clear option for a sequel), but establishing an arachnid connection in Richard Parker's scientific research is just narrative clutter. And another thing: if a radioactive spider is good enough for the comic book, it should be good enough for the movies. Why does the spider have to be genetically manipulated some way? Bring back the mysterious mutative powers of radiation!

Trailers

• Here Comes the Boom--Another guy whose popularity I don't get: Kevin James.
• The Dark Knight Rises--Gee, looks kinda dark.
• Total Recall--Heavy doses of Minority Report and Blade Runner. Colin Farrell in the Ahnuld role.