News
|
FILMSSpider-Man (2002)How long did we have to wait for this movie to come out? How many times did we read about it in the newspapers or the entertainment publications? How many times were we told that Spider-Man was making his way to the silver screen, only to discover the next day they had scrapped the treatment, fired the writer, and started from scratch? How many inane Internet bulletin board messages did you read where the topics were "who would make the best Spider-Man" or "they better not use organic web-shooters!"? How many actors were considered for the role of Peter Parker? There was a lot of Hollywood crap surrounding this film. Lots and lots. Titanic lots. The only one that I can think of that has more Hollywood-pooh around it right now is the (tentatively) scheduled Superman flick. So the question really is: Was it worth it? Was it worth years and years of being teased and tormented by the press? Is Spider-Man everything it should be. Does the comic-adaptation work and does it deliver one of Marvel's most-loved heroes safely to the big screen? The answer: a resounding yes. Yes with extra sauce on it. Yes with cream on top. Yes, please may I have another. (Two sequels are already planned, so yes, you may have another indeed.) (Warning: Spoiler-man, spoiler-man, does whatever a spoiler can....um, yeah. Spoilers ahead.) Spider-Man tells the origin story of young, awkward Peter Parker (Maguire) and his transformation into Spider-Man after being bit by a genetically enhanced spider. (A slight deviation from the comic, but that's OK. Knowing what we now know about radiation, it would've seemed downright silly to modern audiences had they kept the spider "radioactive.") After neglecting to stop a thief, Peter Parker's life is irreversibly changed because, had he stopped the thief, he could've saved his Uncle Ben's life. Peter quickly realizes that with great power comes great responsibility. But everyone should be fairly familiar with the storyif you're not, then shame on you, go see the movie. If you are, well then, great! You'll enjoy the film even more. And to all of you rabid fanboys out there who draw a line in the sand over the controversy of organic webshooters vs. mechanical webshooters, just relax. I'm only roughly familiar with the "canon" of the comic, but it makes much more sense in the film version for Spider-Man to have organic webshooters. And director Raimi even brings it into the story in a realistic way. The action is fast and (mostly) graceful, the romance is genuine, the tragedy is real, and the bad-guy is menacing and horrible. Tobey Maguire has rapidly become one of my favorite actors. I thought he was notable in Pleasantville, good in The Cider House Rules, and amazing in Wonderboys. Kirsten Dunst does a good job at portraying Mary Jane, and does even a better job wearing a wet T-shirt. Willem Dafoe is so creepy as the Green Goblin, I almost want to say that his scary Goblin mask is redundant. It's important to note that this film will not only appeal to Spider-Man fans. I've heard from a great many people who've never read the comic, and who don't read comics, that Spider-Man was a great flick. And, the Box Office receipts prove it. $200 million in five days? There's a helluva lot more people going to the theater than are buying the comic, I can tell you that. Tangential side note: I work over at Science Fiction Weekly and every fourth week there's a science column. The week Spider-Man was released, Wil McCarthy wrote an interesting article on "The Physics of Spider-Man." Check it out. |