Rather than create yet ANOTHER thread to review another movie with the knowledge that I would be back here in about a week's time to do the whole thing over again, I have decided to just make a single thread where I create some kind of random commentary about a movie that recently came out in theaters and I had the opportunity to see.

Today's subject: The Amazing Spiderman.

As should be expected of a movie of this nature, it's quality is quite disputed. The major basis of the argument as to whether or not this movie is any good is most likely the three Spiderman movies that came before it. Some people say that this new movie unnecessarily or poorly rehashed the first movies, while others say it's the way it ought to be.

First of all, a quick reality check: The first 3 Spiderman movies are bullcrap.

No, they're not the worst movies EVAAAAR, but if there's one thing way that I can think to describe them, it's that "they're just not Marvel quality". Now, to those DC-cronies might think that "Marvel quality" is an oxi-moron who might be out there, let me level with you very quickly.

The Avengers.

If there's one thing that the first 3 Spiderman movies did wrong (and believe me, it's not just one), it's that they decided to give Stan Lee's comic book canon the middle finger and rewrite the story.

...

DOES STAN LEE EVEN BOTHER TO MAKE A CAMEO IN THESE MOVIES!?

*breathes* Let me compose myself here.

I'm going to go check. Brb.

...

...

...

...Back. Okay. FINE. So he supported those releases with a cameo. I guess he should have or they never would have happened. But STILL. It's one thing to rewrite the canon of a medium and do it well (Star Trek), and it's something COMPLETELY different to rewrite the canon of said medium and do it poorly (Schpidaman).

Now, despite my 30 second masters thesis as to why the first three movies "weren't Marvel quality," some of you will probably still think that The Amazing Spiderman wasn't an adequate replacement to those movies and that they were still better.

WELL SCREW YOU I have to disagree with that,
and here is why The Amazing Spiderman was better.

1-- The Canon: Okay, I will be the first to admit to being a canon crony when it comes to stuff like this. I say that the movie has to either be true to the first media or have a legitimate alternative. Marvel has been known to make solid movies from their comic books, and I must say I'm quite impressed with that. Even so, they've had their issues with canonic accuracy in the past. One of the biggest offenders of this is, as you can imagine, Spiderman. I don't even know if the X-Men movies are considered canonically accurate because I don't even know what the canon is in the X-men .,_., but I digress. When I heard that there was a new Spiderman movie coming out with new actors, new story, new enemy, new EVERYTHING, I was excited. Marvel has been on a freaking ROLL with their movies lately (including First Class. I think X-Men is one of their weakest movie franchises, and yet I loved that movie), and now as far as I was concerned, Spiderman would finally get the "Marvel Quality" he deserved.

2-- Characters:

Tobey Maguire.
vs.
Andrew Garfield.

...

NEXT

3-- Um...EVERYTHING ELSE.

Listen, I could just go on about how everything was better written, directed, performed, paced, and just plain MADE more correctly in The Amazing Spiderman than the original ones, but past a certain point (if said certain point has not already arrived) I'm just going to be reusing points that I've made previously.

Go watch The Amazing Spiderman. Marvel has redeemed the good name of Peter Parker.

(Quick Disclaimer: No, I don't think this movie is Marvel's strongest movie, nor do I think it's even among their best, but I do think that it holds up just fine with the other ones.)