Spider-Man 2 Reviewed [updated]

Update: 06/30 15:42 GMT by T : This article has been pulled; the Spider-Man 2 review which appeared here was reposted without credit or permission from chud. (Read it in its original context.) We welcome original feature-length articles, but not plagiarism.

Comments

Re:Raimi and CGI

[ConceptJunkie]

I'll go one step further... this is not a trade-off, it's exactly the right way to make a comic book movie. Back in the early sixties, characters with depth and humanity is what created the Silver Age of comic books and Spider-Man was at the front of the pack. "Spider-man 2" sounds like the anti-"Spawn", a movie about someone you care about with some good action on the side.

While I thought "Superman 2" was the best superhero movie ever until the latest generation of superhero movies started coming out (ironically, all based on Marvel characters), the level of special effects has advanced to the point where the action can match the action of the comics, and when combined with thorough and good character development, will make some my favorite movies ever.

When the special effects help create an immersive reality (hello, Peter Jackson) without overwhelming the story or actors (George Lucas, call your office) then you have the best combination.

Re:Seen it, liked it, but # 3 doesn't look good th

[Osty]

I cant remember 100% my storyline progression but doesnt Harry become the Hobgoblin instead?

I don't remember the exact progression (which came first, GG or HG?), but I do know that Harry takes up the mantle of the Green Goblin. The Hobgoblin was someone else (Googled for it). I thought there were only three Green Goblins (though I couldn't remember other than Norman and Harry). It looks like there were four of them. There were also four different Hobgoblins. Apparently villains in the Spider-Man mythos like to recycle old ideas (see the page above, there are several different iterations of a number of villains).

A differering opinion regarding Kirsten Dunst

[nobodyman]

From Ebert, no less. To wit:

Dunst is valuable, too, bringing depth and heart to a girlfriend role that in lesser movies would be conventional. When she kisses her astronaut boyfriend upside-down, it's one of those perfect moments that rewards fans of the whole saga; we don't need to be told she's remembering her only kiss from Spider-Man.

True, she's been a lot of mediocre teen-movie fare, but to claim that she hasn't had a better performance since Interview with a Vampire indicates to me reviewer hasn't seen Drop Dead Gorgeous.

Re:Raimi and CGI

[mblase]

While I thought "Superman 2" was the best superhero movie ever until the latest generation of superhero movies started coming out (ironically, all based on Marvel characters)

It's not ironic; Warner Bros. (owner of DC Comics) has all but dropped out of the comic-book-movie business since the fourth "Batman" film, and if that was the best they could pull together I'm glad for it. On the other hand, Marvel doesn't have a big media company like WB owning it, so they're making up for the lack of comic book sales since the mid-90s by selling movie scripts (or, to look at it another way, cross-promoting their comic books to increase sales).

Now, Marvel knew going into the game that comic book movies have a terrible track record, so they spent a lot of time and effort getting good scripts and directors for the first X-Men and Spider-Man films, and it paid off. Hulk was a good film, IMO, although not a lot of people loved it. Punisher I never saw. Daredevil I did see, and I frankly regret it. That last movie alone proves that just because Marvel's spending a lot of effort on these films doesn't always mean they're succeeding.

I think Marvel's known all along exactly what you've stated: that good, believable, three-dimensional characters are what brings people back again and again. (Okay, so they probably forgot it for a while back in the 90s, but they're trying.) I'm as glad as you are that they've pushed hard to keep that aspect of their stories in the recent crop of films.

The Importance of Being Earnest

[aethera]

I don't know if the movie touches on the significance of MJ being in this play. It's one of Oscar Wilde's famous comedies, and it's all about the dangers of living a double life.
The short of it; a young country gent(Algernon) goes to city to flirt around and cause trouble, but when in the city goes by the name of Ernest so that no rumours of his city life make it back to his home in the country. One of Algernon's city friends, Jack, travels to the country to dally with Algernon's young ward, and he also uses the name Ernest. Combined with some witty dialogue, a good does of sarcasm, and some smacks at the upperclass, its probably one of Wilde's best works. And Oscar Wilde, along with GB Shaw should probably be up there with Shakespeare among England's finest playwrights.
Summary here
Full text here

Re:Seen it, liked it, but # 3 doesn't look good th

[Artifakt]

If it follows the usual pattern for superhero flicks, Spiderman 3 will have several villains and not just the 2nd Green Goblin. Remember how many bad guys show up in Batman and Robin or Batman Forever? Let's see, we have the Rhino, Sandman, Mysterio and Electro from the early Spiderman comics, or Venom the living spidy suit from the later years. Or maybe Spiderman 3 will also be X-men 3.
Earrghh! I thought I'd outgrown this stuff 20 years ago. Why do I even remember the names of a bunch of Spiderman villians?

In my experience, pretty good actress

[Goonie]

I'd have to say that as well as being cute, she has been a convincing performer in a number of films playing different types of characters:

• The Virgin Suicides: hard to judge, given her main job was to sit there and look stunningly beautiful in a just-post-Lolita kind of way.
• Drop Dead Gorgeous: She played an ambitious small-town goody-two-shoes teen for comedy; was pretty effective in perhaps not the most challenging role.
• Dick: playing a very dumb blonde teenager in a slightly more exaggerated manner; also very believable.
• The Cat's Meow: playing comic actress (and mistress of Randolph Hearst) Marion Davies on a cruise where their relationship came under strain, slightly miscast (she was too young) but did a fair job in a role that required a fair range.
• Spiderman: serviceable in a wallpaper role.
• Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: meaty supporting role of a naive secretary; makes a major plot twist look convincing. Good work.

So, overall, in the things I've seen her in she's been a pretty good performer. I certainly can't recall a performance where she's been a shocker.

In any case, bad directing can make even the best actor look bad. Natalie Portman, besides being achingly beautiful, is a fine actor, and let's consider just how wooden a performance she gave in Attack of the Clones. It'll be interesting 20 years from now to interview her about working with Lucas; I think she might be less than complimentary.