thejon93
Forever Haunted
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 4,922
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
[Originally Written on Spill.com]
SPIDER-MAN! He's one of the greatest, most well-known comic-book superheroes of all-time. But, of course, you all know that.
He's had a handful of television series (Literally! Five Fingers!), a bunch of paperback novels, a plethora of bands have rebooted the 1967's memorable theme song, there have been about a dozen video-games featuring a playable Spider-Man and, of course, he's been adapted into three major motion-pictures (thus far).
And that happens to be exactly what we're going to be speaking about (or reading about) today (or another day)...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's the second-highest grossing superhero flick (to date). 'Spider-Man' re-tells the story of Peter Parker and his journey into becoming "Your Friendly Neighbourhood Spider-Man".
What else do you need to know?
Well... he's a teenager, he's a nerd, he's an outcast and he's certainly the underdog. Tobey Maguire was definitely perfectly cast in the role of our young hero. He brings a charm and charisma to the character that actors portraying the character in the future may have difficulty uncovering.
Keeping Maguire's Parker from almost complete lonesome is his futureless friend, Harry Osborn, played by James Franco. Now, I say "futureless"... but I'm kinda exaggerating, his character is slightly futureless, but it's only modified by the death of his father. I didn't really like how Franco played the character in this one, I feel he's gotten better as the series progressed, but... I can live with it.
Moving aside now from Harry, we have Mary Jane Watson (played by Kirsten Dunst). Opposite of Harry, I liked her character a lot better in this film than in future films. In this one, however, she really does play this teenage character with such precision, that it makes you believe in the kind of reality that this film is telling. Granted, her screams do get annoying after a while (which is something even the actress herself mentions on the commentary track). She still plays her character quite well, which makes you route for her rescue in the handfuls of dangerous predicaments to which her character stumbles into more times than occasionally.
Moving away from the circle of friends now, we turn to Norman Osborn/The Green Goblin (played quite strongly by the multi-talented Willem Dafoe). Right off the bat, this is the only guy who could've pulled off this roll... especially in that green 'Power Rangers' costume of his. The thing that works about his character, is also something that some people may nitpick. He plays the character very over-the-top. And, in my opinion, it worked very well for it's time when comic-book movies were still beginning to grow into the worldwide phenomenons that they are now. And granted, it still works looking back on it today. He does very well at portraying the split-persona of the Norman Osborn character. And, to this day, I really couldn't have pictured anyone else pulling off this important role as Dafoe had.
Finished with the key players, let's talk about the supporting characters. Firstly bringing up somebody whom I believe gave the best performance of the film: Cliff Robertson as Uncle Ben. Let's be honest, he had the most essential role to play in this film. While Dafoe's character helped steady the comic-book mood of the movie, Robertson's character helps keep the humanity of it. In the few scenes he's given, he brings such a loyal nature to the character and gives him a genuine history, along the way, without even telling it. Rosemary Harris as Aunt May was good (but again got better as the films progressed), Bruce Campbell's cameo was fun for any Raimi fan (same with the vintage Raimi-mobile), the "I Kid You Not" guy was 'Oscar' worthy. But, of course, one that definitely deserves a sentence (at least) is J. Jonah Jameson, played by the great character-actor by the name of J.K. Simmons. When I first saw this movie opening day in theatres, I was laughing my head off for as long as he was on-screen. The whole Daily Bugle crew were great as well. Really another nice comic-book addition to the movie itself.
Moving onto the movie itself now. The story is paced in a way like a comic-book. It places our hero in multiple scenarios, multiple subplots, and we're all there to watch it. It's what you expect, but it's the characters that you want to see pulled off. If they are, you've got yourself a good movie right off the bat.
However, the action sequences... Comic-book? Yes. Boring and robotic?... Sadly, yes.
The action sequences in this film unfortunately suffer from feeling extremely choreographed and rehearsed. Possibly due to the slightly un-advanced CGI from back around then, but that's no excuse. The only action sequence that sticks in my mind is the one where Peter truly (for the first-time) takes on web-swinging. I'm not taking about when he rammed into the billboard, I'm talking about that crazy sequence truly introducing the character (as well as the audience) to the very idea of web-swinging. It was a crazy sequence and one that really sticks in my head to this day. Forget about the lame, cliche-ridden "climatic" battle. The final swing sequence was the true closing point to this film.
Rating: 86% ~ Certainly flawed, but a film that's able to swing through with it's colourful set of characters and truly heroic feel.
Now, believe it or not, I used to think that the first 'Spider-Man' was extremely overrated. Basically, I went through three stages:
-Young: Loved It.
-Middle: Love Lost.
-Now: Like It.
In the middle, that was when I begun to discover "internet" and all of the people who would dare criticize films of my liking. And, for that time, the internet manipulated me into calling it "overrated". Watching movies now with a biased, I would. Criticize every-little-factor of a movie that I could put my finger on.
However, with the discovery of 'Spill', I finally learned that it was alright to have my own opinion...
Which leads me into 'Spider-Man 2'. The 'Spider-Man' film where the majority considers it to be "the best". And honestly, I can see why. I can see what's appealing about this movie.
Although, I for one don't consider it to be "the best (so far)".
In fact, it was only with my biased nature and awareness of the internet that I considered to like this film way more than I really did. Was it entertaining? Yes. Was it a good follow-up to the first? Indeed. But it's lacking something that the first-film had hit so well... Characters.
Now, they do a good job with developing the characters in this one. Certainly. However... I don't care about a lot of them. It seems like they're all just there to serve the story, instead of allowing the story to flow freely along with the characters.
Prime example of a character that I think they completely destroyed in this installment was the Mary Jane character. She's just such a snotty little girl-scout that it makes our hero look a lot less like a hero, and more so *****-wiped.
Again, a prime example of achieving both a true-hero and an interesting love-interest is 'Superman: The Movie'. Never is there a point where Superman's love becomes an irritating jerk. She's smart, intelligent, human, and you understand why Superman saves her repeatedly. He loves her.
Fast forward to 'Superman Returns'. Irritating jerk of a love-interest? Check. *****-wiped hero? Double-checked.
I don't know why this film got off so easily with that element. I know that this film has so much more to offer, but that's part of the main plot! And when Spider-Man comes to rescue her at the end, you could careless. I could careless! You don't see the "damsel in distress" character there. You see the "Come Rescue Me, Dammit!" character. She even makes the arrogant claim at one point, calling to Doc Ock that Spidey ain't so dead afterall (must've been holding the Bible behind her back, preying that it wasn't so).
Speaking of "Doc Ock"... Our villain! Doctor Octopus. Mr. Alfred Molina portrays the classic villain in this film, and he does a great job. Reminiscent of the first installment, Peter bonds with the good doctor. Until an experiment turns bad, kills his wife and turns him into a loony... So, the now evil Doc has a goal that he looks to accomplish in any form; which may even mean killing Spider-Man!
Pretty general stuff, basically. Just like the first. However, this one falls lesser than it's predecessor with one fatal mistake of transforming our good 'ol damsel in distress-to-the nagging beach of all our hero's wonders.
[On a sidenote: Some of the people commenting on this blog post may feel the need to argue about the damsel in distress argument. Although I can see what you all mean, this is fiction. This isn't some kind of mellow-drama with 100% human characters. Once again, this is fiction. With comic-book characters and comic-book action sequences, easy to live with.]
In closing, the action sequences are terrific, the new characters are appealing (especially Mr. Ditkovich and Ursela; whom share some of the best scenes with our hero in the movie), the comedy's great, the special effects are bettered, the Campbell-cameo is better than the last. But... that's not enough for me to call this installment the "best of the franchise".
Rating: 74% ~ A worthy sequel that advances quite nicely with it's story and characters, but loses the interest of one along the way.
Now the latest installment in the now "trilogy" of 'Spider-Man' movies, 'Spider-Man 3' certainly caps-off this line of films (hopefully leading us into a fresh, new line).
Anyhow, 'Spider-Man 3' now reels in a brand new batch of characters. From Captain Stacy, to Gwen Stacy, to Eddie Brock Jr., to Sandman, to the "New Goblin", to Campbell The Butler in the most hilarious scene of the entire movie. As you can tell, we've got a full house-party for this one. And it's crazy!
This is pretty much Sam Raimi going... well, crazy.
There are so many characters, so many subplots, so many action sequence, so many special effects, so many!-
...Alright, you get it.
Like I said, this film is crazy. This film is the very definition of the word: "Summer Blockbuster". You pay your admission, walk in, take a seat, lay everything off your mind and have a good time. This is a fun, cheese-ball, carnival adventure 'till the very end. You've got your Merry-Go-Round, you've got your rollar-coaster, you've got your cotton candy, but... the clock is ticking, so go and make the best of your ticket.
If you are uptight and completely serious about your movies at all times, you are not going to like this movie. However, if you're able to have a fun-time with watching a crazy-event film... you're in for a treat.
As I stated before, this installment caps-off the last two movies (leaving these three installments to be known as a "trilogy"). Once again, you've got Peter Parker (more arrogant than ever before). You've got Mary Jane (who you can tell is trying to get back to being herself). You've got Harry Osborn (What ever happened to 'Oscorp'?). And a whole cast of other un-important characters, who are just fun to have around.
Of these three series of films, 'Spider-Man 3' feels most of all like a golden-age comic-book. Fans who say they don't like this film because they're huge fans of the comics have probably never actually pulled the actual comic-books out of the package to actually read them. So... don't make me laugh.
Now, alike 'Spider-Man', I used to consider this film to be overrated (even though critics were pretty split on it). But... why did it get hated so badly? Well, because there's loads to nitpick.
Personally, I could make this whole segment about what this film does wrong... but we've all heard it before.
"Lack of character development. Long runtime. Cheesy moments. Misuse of characters." And the list goes on.
Of course, during my time of being extremely biased when watching movies, I would repeatedly list these flaws. I would go with them no matter what. Until I realized... What's the point? What's the point of hiding my own opinions? I liked this movie. Even more-so than 'Spider-Man 2'.
It's not boring, it's not overrated. It's entertainment.
Rating: 80% ~ A carnival-adventure that needs no logic.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Whew... I swear, I took about a dozen breaks while writing this piece (didn't want my eyes to turn into scrambled eggs). But, I thought I'd end with a few closing thoughts on the upcoming 'Spider-Man 4' film.
It's nice to see that they have a new screenwriter(s?) working on developing the script (signs of a fresh start). It's nice to see that both Raimi and Maguire are back. And... that's pretty much all I know of it to this point (as far as pre-production and what-not goes).
Basically, all that I ask is that they truly do "start off fresh" with this and (potential) future films. Don't make Mary Jane so important this time around. Instead, focus more on developing Gwen Stacy as Peter's love interest to allow Mary Jane's character to subtly grow back into our liking. Make the villains more chaotic and reckless. With the rumours of The Lizard being brought into the mix, I'm hoping that they go all-out with the character and just have him go completely ballistic. However, it'd be nice to make The Lizard a secondary villain to a main villain. Personally, I'd like to see them add Chameleon into the mix and introduce him as the clever schemer. And it'd also leave plenty of room for a nice 'Darkman' reference style ending. And, in closing, let's hope for the best. [But, while waiting, I strongly recommend you guys check out 'The Spectacular Spider-Man' television series. Honestly, this is my favourite of the whole stockpile of 'Spider-Man'-based television shows and is one that is extremely easy to delve into.]
SPIDER-MAN! He's one of the greatest, most well-known comic-book superheroes of all-time. But, of course, you all know that.
He's had a handful of television series (Literally! Five Fingers!), a bunch of paperback novels, a plethora of bands have rebooted the 1967's memorable theme song, there have been about a dozen video-games featuring a playable Spider-Man and, of course, he's been adapted into three major motion-pictures (thus far).
And that happens to be exactly what we're going to be speaking about (or reading about) today (or another day)...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's the second-highest grossing superhero flick (to date). 'Spider-Man' re-tells the story of Peter Parker and his journey into becoming "Your Friendly Neighbourhood Spider-Man".
What else do you need to know?
Well... he's a teenager, he's a nerd, he's an outcast and he's certainly the underdog. Tobey Maguire was definitely perfectly cast in the role of our young hero. He brings a charm and charisma to the character that actors portraying the character in the future may have difficulty uncovering.
Keeping Maguire's Parker from almost complete lonesome is his futureless friend, Harry Osborn, played by James Franco. Now, I say "futureless"... but I'm kinda exaggerating, his character is slightly futureless, but it's only modified by the death of his father. I didn't really like how Franco played the character in this one, I feel he's gotten better as the series progressed, but... I can live with it.
Moving aside now from Harry, we have Mary Jane Watson (played by Kirsten Dunst). Opposite of Harry, I liked her character a lot better in this film than in future films. In this one, however, she really does play this teenage character with such precision, that it makes you believe in the kind of reality that this film is telling. Granted, her screams do get annoying after a while (which is something even the actress herself mentions on the commentary track). She still plays her character quite well, which makes you route for her rescue in the handfuls of dangerous predicaments to which her character stumbles into more times than occasionally.
Moving away from the circle of friends now, we turn to Norman Osborn/The Green Goblin (played quite strongly by the multi-talented Willem Dafoe). Right off the bat, this is the only guy who could've pulled off this roll... especially in that green 'Power Rangers' costume of his. The thing that works about his character, is also something that some people may nitpick. He plays the character very over-the-top. And, in my opinion, it worked very well for it's time when comic-book movies were still beginning to grow into the worldwide phenomenons that they are now. And granted, it still works looking back on it today. He does very well at portraying the split-persona of the Norman Osborn character. And, to this day, I really couldn't have pictured anyone else pulling off this important role as Dafoe had.
Finished with the key players, let's talk about the supporting characters. Firstly bringing up somebody whom I believe gave the best performance of the film: Cliff Robertson as Uncle Ben. Let's be honest, he had the most essential role to play in this film. While Dafoe's character helped steady the comic-book mood of the movie, Robertson's character helps keep the humanity of it. In the few scenes he's given, he brings such a loyal nature to the character and gives him a genuine history, along the way, without even telling it. Rosemary Harris as Aunt May was good (but again got better as the films progressed), Bruce Campbell's cameo was fun for any Raimi fan (same with the vintage Raimi-mobile), the "I Kid You Not" guy was 'Oscar' worthy. But, of course, one that definitely deserves a sentence (at least) is J. Jonah Jameson, played by the great character-actor by the name of J.K. Simmons. When I first saw this movie opening day in theatres, I was laughing my head off for as long as he was on-screen. The whole Daily Bugle crew were great as well. Really another nice comic-book addition to the movie itself.
Moving onto the movie itself now. The story is paced in a way like a comic-book. It places our hero in multiple scenarios, multiple subplots, and we're all there to watch it. It's what you expect, but it's the characters that you want to see pulled off. If they are, you've got yourself a good movie right off the bat.
However, the action sequences... Comic-book? Yes. Boring and robotic?... Sadly, yes.
The action sequences in this film unfortunately suffer from feeling extremely choreographed and rehearsed. Possibly due to the slightly un-advanced CGI from back around then, but that's no excuse. The only action sequence that sticks in my mind is the one where Peter truly (for the first-time) takes on web-swinging. I'm not taking about when he rammed into the billboard, I'm talking about that crazy sequence truly introducing the character (as well as the audience) to the very idea of web-swinging. It was a crazy sequence and one that really sticks in my head to this day. Forget about the lame, cliche-ridden "climatic" battle. The final swing sequence was the true closing point to this film.
Rating: 86% ~ Certainly flawed, but a film that's able to swing through with it's colourful set of characters and truly heroic feel.
Now, believe it or not, I used to think that the first 'Spider-Man' was extremely overrated. Basically, I went through three stages:
-Young: Loved It.
-Middle: Love Lost.
-Now: Like It.
In the middle, that was when I begun to discover "internet" and all of the people who would dare criticize films of my liking. And, for that time, the internet manipulated me into calling it "overrated". Watching movies now with a biased, I would. Criticize every-little-factor of a movie that I could put my finger on.
However, with the discovery of 'Spill', I finally learned that it was alright to have my own opinion...
Which leads me into 'Spider-Man 2'. The 'Spider-Man' film where the majority considers it to be "the best". And honestly, I can see why. I can see what's appealing about this movie.
Although, I for one don't consider it to be "the best (so far)".
In fact, it was only with my biased nature and awareness of the internet that I considered to like this film way more than I really did. Was it entertaining? Yes. Was it a good follow-up to the first? Indeed. But it's lacking something that the first-film had hit so well... Characters.
Now, they do a good job with developing the characters in this one. Certainly. However... I don't care about a lot of them. It seems like they're all just there to serve the story, instead of allowing the story to flow freely along with the characters.
Prime example of a character that I think they completely destroyed in this installment was the Mary Jane character. She's just such a snotty little girl-scout that it makes our hero look a lot less like a hero, and more so *****-wiped.
Again, a prime example of achieving both a true-hero and an interesting love-interest is 'Superman: The Movie'. Never is there a point where Superman's love becomes an irritating jerk. She's smart, intelligent, human, and you understand why Superman saves her repeatedly. He loves her.
Fast forward to 'Superman Returns'. Irritating jerk of a love-interest? Check. *****-wiped hero? Double-checked.
I don't know why this film got off so easily with that element. I know that this film has so much more to offer, but that's part of the main plot! And when Spider-Man comes to rescue her at the end, you could careless. I could careless! You don't see the "damsel in distress" character there. You see the "Come Rescue Me, Dammit!" character. She even makes the arrogant claim at one point, calling to Doc Ock that Spidey ain't so dead afterall (must've been holding the Bible behind her back, preying that it wasn't so).
Speaking of "Doc Ock"... Our villain! Doctor Octopus. Mr. Alfred Molina portrays the classic villain in this film, and he does a great job. Reminiscent of the first installment, Peter bonds with the good doctor. Until an experiment turns bad, kills his wife and turns him into a loony... So, the now evil Doc has a goal that he looks to accomplish in any form; which may even mean killing Spider-Man!
Pretty general stuff, basically. Just like the first. However, this one falls lesser than it's predecessor with one fatal mistake of transforming our good 'ol damsel in distress-to-the nagging beach of all our hero's wonders.
[On a sidenote: Some of the people commenting on this blog post may feel the need to argue about the damsel in distress argument. Although I can see what you all mean, this is fiction. This isn't some kind of mellow-drama with 100% human characters. Once again, this is fiction. With comic-book characters and comic-book action sequences, easy to live with.]
In closing, the action sequences are terrific, the new characters are appealing (especially Mr. Ditkovich and Ursela; whom share some of the best scenes with our hero in the movie), the comedy's great, the special effects are bettered, the Campbell-cameo is better than the last. But... that's not enough for me to call this installment the "best of the franchise".
Rating: 74% ~ A worthy sequel that advances quite nicely with it's story and characters, but loses the interest of one along the way.
Now the latest installment in the now "trilogy" of 'Spider-Man' movies, 'Spider-Man 3' certainly caps-off this line of films (hopefully leading us into a fresh, new line).
Anyhow, 'Spider-Man 3' now reels in a brand new batch of characters. From Captain Stacy, to Gwen Stacy, to Eddie Brock Jr., to Sandman, to the "New Goblin", to Campbell The Butler in the most hilarious scene of the entire movie. As you can tell, we've got a full house-party for this one. And it's crazy!
This is pretty much Sam Raimi going... well, crazy.
There are so many characters, so many subplots, so many action sequence, so many special effects, so many!-
...Alright, you get it.
Like I said, this film is crazy. This film is the very definition of the word: "Summer Blockbuster". You pay your admission, walk in, take a seat, lay everything off your mind and have a good time. This is a fun, cheese-ball, carnival adventure 'till the very end. You've got your Merry-Go-Round, you've got your rollar-coaster, you've got your cotton candy, but... the clock is ticking, so go and make the best of your ticket.
If you are uptight and completely serious about your movies at all times, you are not going to like this movie. However, if you're able to have a fun-time with watching a crazy-event film... you're in for a treat.
As I stated before, this installment caps-off the last two movies (leaving these three installments to be known as a "trilogy"). Once again, you've got Peter Parker (more arrogant than ever before). You've got Mary Jane (who you can tell is trying to get back to being herself). You've got Harry Osborn (What ever happened to 'Oscorp'?). And a whole cast of other un-important characters, who are just fun to have around.
Of these three series of films, 'Spider-Man 3' feels most of all like a golden-age comic-book. Fans who say they don't like this film because they're huge fans of the comics have probably never actually pulled the actual comic-books out of the package to actually read them. So... don't make me laugh.
Now, alike 'Spider-Man', I used to consider this film to be overrated (even though critics were pretty split on it). But... why did it get hated so badly? Well, because there's loads to nitpick.
Personally, I could make this whole segment about what this film does wrong... but we've all heard it before.
"Lack of character development. Long runtime. Cheesy moments. Misuse of characters." And the list goes on.
Of course, during my time of being extremely biased when watching movies, I would repeatedly list these flaws. I would go with them no matter what. Until I realized... What's the point? What's the point of hiding my own opinions? I liked this movie. Even more-so than 'Spider-Man 2'.
It's not boring, it's not overrated. It's entertainment.
Rating: 80% ~ A carnival-adventure that needs no logic.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Whew... I swear, I took about a dozen breaks while writing this piece (didn't want my eyes to turn into scrambled eggs). But, I thought I'd end with a few closing thoughts on the upcoming 'Spider-Man 4' film.
It's nice to see that they have a new screenwriter(s?) working on developing the script (signs of a fresh start). It's nice to see that both Raimi and Maguire are back. And... that's pretty much all I know of it to this point (as far as pre-production and what-not goes).
Basically, all that I ask is that they truly do "start off fresh" with this and (potential) future films. Don't make Mary Jane so important this time around. Instead, focus more on developing Gwen Stacy as Peter's love interest to allow Mary Jane's character to subtly grow back into our liking. Make the villains more chaotic and reckless. With the rumours of The Lizard being brought into the mix, I'm hoping that they go all-out with the character and just have him go completely ballistic. However, it'd be nice to make The Lizard a secondary villain to a main villain. Personally, I'd like to see them add Chameleon into the mix and introduce him as the clever schemer. And it'd also leave plenty of room for a nice 'Darkman' reference style ending. And, in closing, let's hope for the best. [But, while waiting, I strongly recommend you guys check out 'The Spectacular Spider-Man' television series. Honestly, this is my favourite of the whole stockpile of 'Spider-Man'-based television shows and is one that is extremely easy to delve into.]
