Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Review: Spiderman 534

I skipped out early this morning and went to see the first showing of Spiderman in my local theater. The Sam Raimi directed spiderman is the first of the summers blockbusters and stars Toby Maguire as the webslinger, Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin and Kirsten Dunst and the lovely Mary Jane. And guess what? Its one of the best comic book movies I've ever seen. I loved it. And I'll try not to lone-gunman-are-dead the review, but if you're super paranoid, just skip out, go see the flick, and enjoy it.
So I love spiderman. The wisecracking sarcasm. The realistic portrayal of a young man coming of age and juggling real world problems with the fantasticly unreal problems of being, well, a spiderman. I just love it. I love the comics. I loved the cartoons when I was a kid. And I went into this biased as hell: with Sam Raimi helming one of the classics, I had the highest hopes of any movie since Episode I. And this time around there was not a drop of disappointment.

First off lets talk about the cast. Toby Maguire was great in The Cider House Rules. He's just a solid actor. But I was seriously wary of him in the role of the webbed one. He seemed like a flimsy choice. He needed to pull off the one liners, but still convince us of his love for Mary Jane. But he pulls it off admirably. From the goofy glasses wearing scenes in the beginning to his badass battle scenes towards the end, its a solid showing. The best scenes in the whole movie are the ones where we see Peter Parker coming to grips with his new spider powers.

Now I'm gonna skip in a bit with a statement about staying true to comic books. Yes- some of the details have been changed from the books. Like most noticably, the nature of Spiderman's webbing. But whatever- this is story telling and it works for me.

Kirsten Dunst does a good job in what could have been a bland role in the hands of an actress who was just a pretty face. Mary Jane is convincing, and since she is in many ways the thing that grounds spiderman, its a tough burden. And the other biggie is of course the head of Oscorp, Mr. Norman Osborn, Willem Defoe. he does allright, but most of his maniacal scenes are covered by a mask that leaves him little room for any actual facial expressions.

So the plot: Boy loves girl. Boy gets bit by radioactive spider and develops super powers. Boys friend's dad inhales nano gas that makes him super powerful, and super crazy. Boy explores powers and eventually must save city from the attack of the newly crazed buddy's dad, all while dealing with the loss of his family. It's spiderman in a nutshell, and it's just damn solid.

The special effects are smooth. From the ads I was a little concerned since spiderman looked a little fake leaping around. But within the context of the movie it usually worked for me. They looked unnatural, but frankly seeing spiderman leap off inflatable balloon floats and swinging around flagpoles suspended by spiderwebs is already pretty unnatural so I let the suspension of disbelief win out on this one.

Danny Elfman hasn't sounded this good since Batman. I loved the score. It doesn't really feel original, but it sure fits like a glove.

In short, its a great movie. I won't comic-book-guy the details that were missed in the transition from paper to film, but I think they did a great job of making an entertaining movie, and staying extremely true to what I think Spiderman is all about. And goddamn it, the raw sense of excitement as he discovers his abilities is enough to make every guy wish he had those powers- swinging from building to building and howling like a mad freak. God I loved it. Congratulations to everyone involved- you win.

All that, and I even scored tickets to the 12:01 showing of star wars on opening day ;)

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review: Spiderman

Comments Filter:
  • Big fan (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dirvish ( 574948 ) <dirvish@ f o undnews.com> on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:40PM (#3458711) Homepage Journal
    It is great to see that such a big fan enjoyed the movie so much. I can't wait to see it. I am heading to the theatre for the 7:45 pm show. I wonder...if Spiderman is really good will it give Attack of the Clones a challenge this month? Star Wars is unquestionably huge but there are also a lot of Spiderman fans and a lot people that feel burned by Phantom Menace.
  • Finally (Score:2, Interesting)

    by First_In_Hell ( 549585 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:40PM (#3458714) Homepage
    Finally a review from someone who as actually "seen" the movie rather than a lot of the speculation going around. I think Taco is right on the money, this appeals to the guys that loved the comics . . . it is a dream come true.
  • by Misha ( 21355 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:40PM (#3458721) Homepage
    so anyone familiar with the comic book will like it, but how about someone like me, who simply never read them? sure, flame me, but you could say i am from a different generation. still, is the movie good?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:42PM (#3458731)
    i just got back from it myself, and i thought it was outstanding. my biggest fear was the it would suck like so many other super-hero movies, but it really came through in a big way.

    even better, one of the opening teasers was for the incredible hulk next summer, which looks damn cool as well.

    definitly go see this movie, you wont be disappointed!
  • by IronTek ( 153138 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:42PM (#3458733)
    And I'll try not to lone-gunman-are-dead the review

    That's got to be the phrase of the day somewhere! People on the boards were quite unhappy that Slashdot posted that (and as soon as it happened on the east coast, no less!)!

    To use it as a description for how much or how little will be given away in the review is truly, truly amazing! Caused me to laugh, anyway!
  • Webslinger.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by booyah ( 28487 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:49PM (#3458791)
    Or would you just go so far as to say he is a Web Master? Gives all those poor lonely cube monkies more hope eh?

    Ha Ha Green Goblin, I'll PHP your ass!!!

  • Free Comic Book Day (Score:5, Interesting)

    by totallygeek ( 263191 ) <sellis@totallygeek.com> on Friday May 03, 2002 @02:50PM (#3458792) Homepage
    Don't forget that Saturday, May 4 is "Free Comic Book Day". Most comic shops will give you a free comic book. Here [missingleftsocks.com] is some information on that subject.

  • Re:It's Spider-Man. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Alzheimers ( 467217 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @03:15PM (#3459004)
    As long as we're nitpicking...

    I'm gonna be pretty ticked if the theme song doesn't go something like...

    Spider-man, Spider-man
    Does whatever a spider can
    Spins a web, any size
    Catches thieves, just like flies
    Look out! Here comes the Spider-man!

    Is he strong? Listen, Bud!
    He's got radioactive blood.
    Can he swing from a thread?
    Take a look overhead.
    Hey there, there goes the Spider-man!

    In the chill of night,
    At the scene of the crime
    Like a streak of light
    He arrives just in time

    Spider-man, Spider-man
    Friendly neighborhood Spider-man
    Wealth and fame, he's ignored
    Action is his reward

    To him, life is a great big bang-up
    Wherever there's a hang-up
    You'll find the Spider-man!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03, 2002 @03:15PM (#3459007)
    The comic book was kind of like a comic book for people who don't read comic books. I've never been a comic book fan, but I loved reading Spider-Man.

    Ironically, my wife is dying to see this movie, and she usually hates these movies. Even she's clued into the fact that the nature of this character is just a little bit different.

    Certainly casting Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in this was smart -- geekheads may feel a little apprehensive, but if it can bring my wife into the theater it's going to bring a lot of other people who wouldn't ordinarily see a movie like this.
  • Why PG-13? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Hell O'World ( 88678 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @03:18PM (#3459036)
    My 4 year old really wants to see this movie, and I'm wondering why a movie with a potential audience going way down in age, would they aim for a teenage rating? I wonder if I should heed that "Parents Strongly Cautioned"? I'll probably take him, but it'll probably scar him for life :)
    Or at least give him a few good nightmares.
  • by revscat ( 35618 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @03:27PM (#3459076) Journal
    Stan Lee has an editorial [nytimes.com] in today's New York Times (free reg required blah blah blah), wherein he talks about Spidey's long-lasting appeal. Short on depth but fulla Stan Lee goodness, it's worth a read.
  • Nitpicks. (spoilage) (Score:2, Interesting)

    by redtoade ( 51167 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @03:43PM (#3459161) Homepage Journal
    1. Mary Jane as white trash... huh?
    2. Very slow on the ground. You can tell this when all the kids at the matinee start talking... nothing to keep their attention.
    3. no web cartridges? damn. How many plots rely on him running out of web fluid?
    4. Stan Lee cameo... give me a break. Wasn't Jack Kirby involved with Spiderman? Where's his credit?

    Other than that, I couldn't keep the smile from my face. Will see it at least 2 more times I'm sure.
  • Non-Comic Comics. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03, 2002 @04:25PM (#3459433)
    Isn't it odd how good comics are always billed as "comics for people who don't read comic books"? Maus, Sandman, Strangers in Paradise---all found an audience outside the pale geeky norm (well, maybe not Sandman) because they were good.

    This trend is a little dubious---do you think of The Godfather as a "movie for people who don't watch movies", or The Lord of the Rings as a "book for people who don't read books"?

    Bah. I'm going to go in my corner and complain some more about the stigmatization of comics,

    --grendel drago
  • by Chris Blaise ( 3174 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @04:35PM (#3459489)
    Other way around.

    If you're NOT familiar with the character by reading the comic books, you'll probably like the movie.

    I'm not sure how anyone who has read the comic books can call this movie a good Spider-man movie. Maybe "Pete Parker, Spiderman", but it's definetely not the same character Stan Lee and Steve Ditko created back in the day.
  • Re:Why PG-13? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by John_Booty ( 149925 ) <johnbooty@NOSPaM.bootyproject.org> on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:13PM (#3459787) Homepage
    If they give the film too light of a rating, the crucial older crowd won't want to see it. And with a slightly older rating, that practically guarantees all the younger kids will want to see it. It's win/win for the studios.

    I remember hearing Spielberg say they put certain things into E.T. for just this reason, to avoid the dreaded "G" rating. Of course, that may have just been his excuse for taking them out of th newly-released version. :)
  • Mr Cranky Review (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:35PM (#3459928)

    BEWARE: Possible spoilers

    At the end of this film, as Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) stands face-to-face with Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) and realizes that he can finally have his dream woman, he instead decides to walk away and leave her with nothing more than the infamous "let's be friends" line, a line that no real man has every uttered to a woman in his entire life. Finally, we understand what's been bothering Parker throughout the whole film: He's gay.

    While it takes Parker a long time to admit this to himself, the clues are ever-present. First of all, what heterosexual guy pines to put on a skintight leotard and run around the city in it? You can only be gayer by dressing up as a large, pink triangle. Despite his claims about being deeply attracted to Mary Jane, the lack of a visible erection in his form-fitting suit during their encounters is testament to his gayness. And, of course, Spider-Man just loves to get other men sticky. In fact, the web that emerges from his wrist after a spider bite is simply a metaphor for the uncaring society that keeps his gayness in check.

    Certainly, residents of San Francisco's Castro district will tell you about their famed Green Goblin festival, so the fact that Spider-Man is battling the Green Goblin (Willem Dafoe) suggests a sexual complexity to his inner conflict. Even Parker's roommate, Harry (James Franco), who is dating Mary Jane, says to Parker: "You never made your move." Well, of course he didn't. Parker lives with Harry and it's obvious from Parker's every move who he really wants.

    Throughout history, spiders' use in art has always been seen as representative of a need for the phallic extension to dominate. Peter Parker's oft-closeted alter ego is the cinematic representation of the penis given full power. While one might interpret this phallic power as being directed outward, toward the female, the very interpretation of a "spider" "man" thwarts such an interpretation. "To spider" literally means to extend, while the "man" is quite obviously the object to which the spider is applied. Clearly, if Peter Parker could have come to grips with his need for the hot, sweaty man-love, his exploration into the culture of the superhero would have been redundant and thus entirely unnecessary.

  • by RestiffBard ( 110729 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:47PM (#3459995) Homepage
    very very happy. I thought tobey was great. but then I like tobey maguire in any role. As far as the way the movie was put together it just seemed better than batman. Batman was great but it was always so super comical, the sets were unreal, the costumes were jsut abstract. thats it batman was abstract and impressionistic and I think Spider-Man is more realistic (I'm talking the look, the fact that there's a guy swinging from skyscrapers is not what I'm talking about) as for the CG. well there is one spot that looks a little funny but only for a sec. Also what right do we ahve to complain? Stan Lee exec produced it. He's even in it if you look real close.
  • by sunhou ( 238795 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:51PM (#3460014)
    Oops, posted my review over on the other slashdot article about Spidey today before seeing this story, where it is more appropriate. Here it is again, slightly modified.

    I got my first Spidey comic when I was about 6 (27 years ago), and have been a fan my whole life. Spidey (and Fantastic Four and Superman) were part of what fueled my interest in science as a kid, since they were always inventing all sorts of cool stuff.

    Going into the Spider-Man movie, I was sure there was no way it could live up to my hopes/expectations. Whenever I have this high hopes about a movie I'm always disappointed. I was even kinda bummed about the whole organic webshooters versus mechanical.

    I watched the movie this afternoon. I had some little nits to pick here and there, but overall as a whole, the movie was way better than I expected.

    They did so many things right. The bit with "the burglar that changed his life" was done perfectly, and that's what I most expected them to do poorly. That whole section of the movie, as he was figuring out who he was and what he could do, was very well done. There were some scenes you could tell were computer-generated, but the for the most part, the excitement of the movie made it easier to tolerate. And the movie would have been worse without those scenes, or if they had tried to do them physically with stuntmen.

    The main characterization I felt was missing was that it would have been nice to have seen more background of the relation between Spidey and his Uncle Ben. Although I guess even in the original comics, we never really got that (although we heard about it plenty over the years).

    Anyway, I loved it. I can't wait for the DVD. I'll probably bring my dad to watch it this weekend, since he used to be a bit of a Spidey fan too.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:56PM (#3460045)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Boycott cancelled? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trickster Coyote ( 34740 ) on Friday May 03, 2002 @05:58PM (#3460056) Homepage
    This sounds great. I think I'll rush out to see this right away!

    Uhh,... the MPAA boycott has been cancelled, right?
  • Spoilage Warning (Score:2, Interesting)

    by proverbialcow ( 177020 ) on Saturday May 04, 2002 @02:45AM (#3461841) Journal
    I loved it, too, except at the very end where Mary Jane inexplicably expresses her undying love for Peter. Where the hell did that come from?

New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman

Working...