Spider-Man 2
Matinee and Snacks
Yes, it's all true. The sequel is better than the original. Now, I
was actually, long term, pretty neutral about the original (my rating
was Matinee) - every update benefit and groovy explanation of his
spidey powers was negated by silly masked monologues. This one is
better, both in terms of the actually complex internal journey of
Peter Parker and the absolutely way-cooler baddie of Dr. Octopus.
Yes, you have to get past the idea that this otherwise brilliant
scientist felt he needed artificial intelligence in his robotic arms,
but jeez, the guy has robotic arms, how the heck else can you justify
them? Alfred Molina is defnitely the high point of this sequel. The
continued lack of chemistry between Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and
MJ (Kirsten Dunst) is the low point. OK, that and the Godspell/Jesus
Christ Superstar moment. You know what I am talking about.
And Harry Osborn's obsession is a little cheesy.
Anyway. Molina. You loved him in, well, in everything he has ever
done. He hasn't gotten to be crazy histronic on screen since The
Imposters, and by golly he is making up for lost time now. The arms
twine about him, realistic, menacing, totally cool. Gone are the
vacuum cleaner hoses with carnival game grabbers on the end. These
are like Audrey II, War of the Worlds (the cool one), and insanely
strong wicked mind-reading snakes all in one. They rule the movie.
When Ock and Spidey go mano a mano-ocho, well, it's honestly anyone's
guess as to who will win, since it's a pretty dang cool fight.
(Hint: check the movie poster.)
The Spider-Man sequel also goes to the trouble of actually making you
care. First you care about Parker's tough, don't-get-no-respect
existence, you care about his feelings for MJ (even if you can't see
it when they are together), and you care about his Aunt May. Few
action movies bother to do that since Batman 1 and Superman 1. We
must reward this behavior with our attendance. Why not Full Price
Feature? Well, there is still some unforgivable silliness (and
plenty of forgivable silliness), and I still just can't stand the
romance angle. That was actually more effective in the first movie;
this is just something to give Parker to agonize about that we can
actually identify with. Few of us have the work ethic to do what he
does and we really feel his struggle when we see the rewards of being
a reviled hero. It's the same shadenfreude of watching Bruce Wayne
wrestle with the deaths of his parents; we love him all the more for
having such a dark side.
So many superhero movies forget that these people have to overcome
something to earn their varied super-ness, or else they are just
creepy elite who happen to fight crime. Nah! Spidey is still of the
people and for the people, something I think we all feel a need for
in these e-commerce days.
Improvements include vastly better computer generated graphics, much
better use of the villain, and slightly more subtle product
placement. And as I said before, Sam Raimi can make something
totally cheesey and/or campy actually really cool, and that is a gift
few directors (besides Peyton Reed) can accomplish in the
producer/multi-writer studio system. Check it.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These reviews (c) 2004 Karina Montgomery. Please feel free to
forward but credit the reviewer in the text. Thanks. You can
check out previous reviews at:
http://www.cinerina.com
and http://ofcs.rottentomatoes.com
- the
Online Film Critics Society
http://www.hsbr.net/reviews/karina/listing.hsbr
- Hollywood Stock
Exchange Brokerage Resource
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 38215
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 1295176
X-RT-TitleID: 1133520
X-RT-SourceID: 755
X-RT-AuthorID: 3661
X-RT-RatingText: 4.5/5
|
