SPIDER-MAN 2
** 1/2 (out of ****)
a film review by
Richard A. Zwelling
I'm starting to feel like a black sheep here.
Critics almost unanimously praised Harry Potter and the Prisoner of
Azkaban. I thought it to be one of the worst movies I have seen this
year (which isn't saying much), fraught with poor acting, horrible
pacing, and computer-generated effects that generated minimal
emotional effect (if any).
A great majority of critics, and most of my friends, hailed Kill Bill:
Volume 2 as a step up from its predecessor. Not only did I disagree,
but I found Kill Bill: Volume 1 to be a potential Top 100 all-timer
for me, while Volume 2 will be lucky if it doesn't make my ten worst
list at the end of this year.
Now comes Spider-Man 2, which has similarly garnered almost unanimous
(and very high) approval from critics and friends. I hate to stand
out, but if I must, I must.
Let me start with a complaint that might sound overtly harsh: if I
have to see one more repeat of that stupid transitional shot sequence
of Spidey zooming from building to building while the camera goes in
front, behind, above, and under him, I am going to scream bloody
murder. It was slightly exhilarating the first time (in the first
movie, by the way), but now it's just irritating.
Tobey Maguire returns in the dual role of awkward adolescent Peter
Parker and web-slinging vigilante superhero Spider-Man. He urges to
tell the truth about his identity to his beloved Mary Jane (Kirsten
Dunst) and thus build a solid relationship with her, but he knows that
this would result in putting MJ in harms way, so he remains silent.
Dr. Otto Octavius (Alfred Molina) is a well-respected physicist who
has a brilliant idea for utilizing a rare metal for fusion to the end
of providing abundant and cheap energy for the city. Of course,
Octavius suffers from huge ego and minimal self-restraint, and the
idea goes awry, resulting in Octavius's transformation into the
octoped "Doc Ock".
The foundation is now set for a deeply involving story that poignantly
explores the confusion and ambivalence of adolescence, the inevitable
consequences of hubris, and the conflict within a protagonist who
wants to lead his life as he sees fit, without interference from the
outside world, and yet cannot deny that his gifts imbue him with
certain obligations he cannot so easily dismiss.
Without a well-designed script and sufficiently nuanced dialogue,
these elements exist flatly without resonance, maybe striking a chord
here and there, but never leaving an indelible mark on the psyche.
Such is unfortunately the case with Sam Raimi's direction and the
screenplay based on the comic book concept from S tan Lee and Steve
Ditko.
Whatever the film's intentions, I never felt the exhilaration or
unique dynamic for which I felt this story had potential. Often, I
felt myself drowning in elaborate, but overdone CGI that I did not
find as convincing as others have. Despite the fact that I could feel
the film reaching for a "wow" response, I never shook the feeling that
I had seen this sort of thing a thousand times before. Same stuff,
better technology. (Then again, in my opinion, after seeing the
virtuoso CGI display in The Lord of the Rings, not much surprises me
anymore in the way of modern special effects).
Not only did I find the dialogue to be nothing special, but I actually
cringed at its banality. The love declarations are saccharine and
cloying, the morals spoken in blunt, trite aphorisms.
In addition, the lighting schemes, shot selections, and acting
displays radiated an intangible, yet very present mainstream ambience
that I felt detracted from the story's more grave, tragic material.
The more dramatic moments seem lifted from a soap opera, rather than
from an effective narrative.
Although there are some standout moments of action and some
well-executed, death-defying stunts, I felt the more racy sequences
growing repetitive as the film plodded along. By the end, I was
craving the sort of minimalist film that has no budget and takes place
in just a few rooms, because I needed a serious respite from
mind-numbing eye-candy overload.
I would think that I am turning into a bitter old man at the age of
24, since I cannot seem to think positively of many films this year.
If it weren't for my viewing many other films from the past and
realizing that I was truly enjoying them, I might be convinced it is
true.
This is one of the most disappointing years for film (both mainstream
and independent) in recent memory. At this point last year, I had
three four-star films on my yearly list. On my current list, I have
zero, and I see no prospects on the horizon that look like serious
contenders to break the drought.
Immense disappointments include: The Passion of the Christ, Kill
Bill: Volume 2, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, The Stepford
Wives, Fahrenheit 9/11, and now Spider-Man 2.
Let me conclude by saying this: it's gonna be really sad if the most
memorable film event from 2004 ends up being the extended-edition DVD
release of my #1 film from 2003.
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 38219
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 1295419
X-RT-TitleID: 1133520
X-RT-AuthorID: 7583
X-RT-RatingText: 2.5/4
|
