The Amazing Spider-Man vs Spider-Man – A Comparative Study

Old meets the New


I think the time has come to compare the original Raimi trilogy to the reboot in a rational manner, and judge it on the various major parameters I thought were necessary.

Having repeatedly seen the first four films on both big and small screens and the newly released one three times in theaters, alongside my knowledge of the comics, I've decided to air my views on the matter.

Remember this is my personal opinion, so if you differ from it, it's okay but no absolute remarks like 'this is b***s**t' or 'X is better than Y'. I want solid discussions of why you agree or disagree with my views.

Read on, fellow webheads!

The main cast

Peter Parker

Andrew Garfield and Toby Maguire both play extreme versions of Peter Parker, though I’m in favor of the earlier. Peter Parker of the comics was initially a very awkward teenager but after he became Spider-Man, he became more outgoing and popular. Andrew doesn’t balance the shift well but does it considerably better than Toby, who remains in the same outcast mode throughout his arc (and when he doesn't, we get Saturday Night Fever emo Peter).

Secondly, Peter is one of the greatest minds of the Marvel universe. He was so good he became the right hand man of no other than Tony Stark, widely regarded as the technological mogul of the planet in the Marvelverse. This was severely underused in Raimi’s trilogy, as Peter never ventured into any practical work, being bound to intellectual discussions with Otto and Connors only. In Webb’s version, Peter has web shooters instead of organic webbing and improves them after every confrontation with a villain with countermeasures accounting for his own weaknesses.

Spider-Man

This is one field where the new version is the clear winner. With consistent puns that bring in the laughs (the theory is that Peter masks his angst with witty remarks), great mobility, a good costume and a hero who actually helps those in need (the kid with the science project was excellently done), he’s improved from the angst filled jerk from the original film in a natural manner (though the initial fight ending with his disrobing of the villain in public felt a little off).

Not only that, but his powers are shown in great effect here, including the hard to show on screen spider-sense. On the other hand, Spider-Man in the original trilogy felt like a static figure with the only change being the venom-ified suit. There were no upgrades, no changes and also missing were characteristic Spider-Man elements like the witty remarks and spider-sense. 

 The female lead

While the new series follows the Marvel 616 main universe in including Gwen Stacy as the first major female lead, the earlier series had the most prominent female lead in the Spider-Man comics, Mary Jane.

Sadly, this is a no brainer. Even excluding Kirsten Dunst’s horribly poor performance as Mary Jane, her consistent role as the damsel in distress and no proper character arc led to what I believe is one of the worst female roles in superhero history.

Remarkably for someone derided as being one of the original comic book women to be ‘fridged’, Gwen Stacy had a great character arc by herself and turned the damsel in distress role on its head by being highly active in Peter’s successes against the villains. Whether it was procuring the serum to cure Dr Connors or defeating Electro, she was as much as responsible if not more than Peter in the final victory. And her death came not as just a bargaining chip or angst device for Spiderman as much as it was for her active role in the conflict. 

The supporting cast

Sally Fields held her own as Aunt May and gave a great performance as a foil to both Martin Sheen as Ben Parker and Andrew. Her scenes in Amazing Spider-Man 2 were very emotionally powerful.

Rosemary Harris was also excellent in the original trilogy, though in more of a grandmother fashion. She was Peter's centre and conscience throughout the series and did it capably.

J J Jameson remains the best comic book adapted role I’ve seen so far and Captain Stacy (his counterpart so far in the reboot so far as the 'neutral' dissident of the hero) wasn’t able to reach anyway close to that levels in the only film he was in.

The duty of any supporting cast is to accentuate the main character and both series have has such characters that highlighted the 'hero's' perspectives. Though due to the stronger acting and variety of the original tipped the scales.

The villains
 
Harry Osborn

Raimi created a three part arc with James Franco’s Harry, but the problems (which were one of the sore points in Spider-Man 3) in making his character changes natural and not contrived were prevalent. Undercurrents of a genetic insanity and resentment at being treated like a stepson to Peter were both compelling reasons, but got shafted. And it didn't help that Franco sleepwalked through the role.

Dane DeHaan carried the role through with sheer excellent acting. His desperation at his terminal illness felt genuine and a valid reason for his anger at Spider-Man when his only cure may have been hero’s blood. His change to Green Goblin felt a little rushed but Dane sold it. 

The rest 

Dr Octopus aka Otto Octavius remains one of the greatest screen villains of all time, alongside Heath Ledger’s Joker and Tom Middleton’s Loki. Alfred Molina’s performance as a good man gone astray was captivating. And while William Dafoe was an excellent Norman Osborn, balancing insanity and calm excellently, he veered often towards melodramatic territory and had one of the worst costumes in superhero history.

Sandman also had a good arc and would have worked if the fact that he actually killed Ben in an accident didn’t result in destroying said arc and Spider-Man’s origins in one fell swoop. But the worst offender was Venom. Shoe-horned in at the last second, played terribly by Topher Grace, the villain had no place in that film and it showed.

On the other hand, both Rhys Ifan’s Dr Connors and Jamie Foxx’s Max Dillion had compelling story arcs, but a failure to execute them properly resulted in bland villains. The latter was maybe on the road to becoming one of the best onscreen thanks to an excellent theme of social exclusion, but a campy performance as Electro and a less than good costume detracted from the promising starts.

The plot
 
Content

While Spider-Man was mostly single films joined by continuity, the reboot has been struggling under the weight of developing sequel material while telling a story by itself.

Both have flaws, with non-existent chemistry of the lead pair being one of the great sins of the original trilogy while underwhelming story-lines (the Richard Parker serum research in particular) are the bane of the latter.

Tone

The original Raimi Spider-man films are revolutionary for their time. Superhero movies were a unpredictable property at that time and Marvel characters more so. But it had a complete package - there were all the elements of the mythology in it. Going from warm to cheesy to dark, it felt natural. What were lost were the romantic themes of the comics and some of it's inherent humor.

On the other hand, humor and romance are two of the highlights of the reboot. But what was a little disruptive was how Webb handled the cheesiness inherent to the character's mythos. The final scene with the cosplaying fan was cheesy, but heart-warming while the villains became too campy for no reason.

Visual Effects

The reboot has been following the comic book more closely and has some of the best fight choreography I’ve seen.

Not to berate the original trilogy, which was excellent for it’s time, but the new one feels like it has been directly lifted from the comic books, especially the Electro-Spider-man confrontations.

These scores are all indicative of certain aspects of the films and not the whole. And trying to glorify one over the other based on these scores are a little too redundant.

My favorite movie of the entire Spider-Man franchise is still Spider-Man 2 (mainly because of Molina’s performance and inspite of Kirsten Dunst’s) closely followed by Amazing Spider-Man 2.

My list
1. Spider-Man 2
2. Amazing Spider-Man 2
3. Spider-Man
4. Amazing Spider-Man
5. Spider-Man 3

FINAL THOUGHTS

I’ve felt the reboot has been unfairly derided because of two major things:

1. The ‘Nostalgia Critics’ –
Most people including me fell in love with Spider-Man with the original Raimi series. But while my years of reading experience have made me more discerning, most have remained fiercely overprotective of the original.

2. The combined universe critics –
Again, I do fall somewhat in this group but only so far as that I miss Peter’s interactions with the larger Marvel universe and not because ‘Disney/Marvel Studios can do better Spider-Man movies than Sony’. My best case scenario is that Sony retains the right to do films of the Spiderman verse but a quid pro-quo is established so that Peter can join the Avengers and Marvel characters can guest star in the Spider-Man films.

Remember I said 'unfairly'. There are valid reasons for complaints for both series as I've written in detail above.

Personally I love the more comic book faithful adaptation and the stronger acting of the reboot , but I will always have a soft corner for Raimi’s trilogy.