Don's "Spider-Man" Review

[Doktor Evil]

I was referring to those who BLASTED the movie because it didn't adhere to their vision/version of 'Spiderman'; and that really pissed me off. I'm not taking issue however with anything that has been said on these boards or with anyone here. No-one here, fortunately, is like that. For once, and it is indeed a very rare occasion, Hollywood has crafted an excellent movie yet instead of encouragement, we get nitpicking. What royally pisses me off, is that Ebert, that chien galleux has given a higher rating to The Phantom Menace in '99 than to 'Spiderman'. Of course he's a sellout (very long story short, I have first-hand juicy stories about him that I collected when I once was in Cannes a couple of years ago... so trust me).

Again, I have nothing against people who think that they should have sticked with some of the comic book details, as all opinions are valid; but to trash (ie read not to criticize but to litterally verbally demolish) a good movie solely based on that smacks of obese fanboys stuffing themsleves with 99 cents burritos. If someone came along and thought that it was the worst movie ever, than I respect that (ok, I'll frown but I'll respect that person's opinion nonetheless); but doing so on fanboish grounds irritates me no end.

Another detailed that irritates me is that a lot of reviewers balked at the length of the movie, or that some scenes were too long or were too "talky". Well, chalk that one up to the ever-shrinking attention span of North Americans. Everyting must be speedy, go "boom", short, swift, etc. What, you don't think there isn't mindless crap out there already? You want more? That's another great message to send : don't take risks, follow the same formula ad nauseam. And of course, who would want to touch subjects from populare background, as surely the nerd legions will never be satisified no matter what you do. So again, you'll play it safe to appeal to the lowest common denominator. No f****** wonder I'm reading more and more books nowadays. I've got Z movies in my store that may not have the budget of Hollywood movies but that at least have heart.

My comments would apply to any ST fan that would bitch no-end about a really excellent ST movie that didn't follow canon in some way. I'd say get a bloody life! Of course, not following canon in the case of ST resulting in a very good movie would be highly unlikely. I sense that this will be used against me

I think, Tonyg, you took issue because you thought that I attacked the people on this thread, which is absolutely not the case. I would never dream of doing so, lest someone insults me or something, which is an occurence I can't fathom occuring here. I had in mind what I read elswehere, such as reviews on sites like www.aintitcoolnews.com . If I ever open up a burrito chain of restaurants, I'd sure place an ad there

People who live is glass houses shouldn't throw insults

I live in an apartment building; its made out of brown brick.

where the spend a lot of time worry about starship combat rules based on a TV series

Yes, but I don't trash other people for having different opinions on any "hobby" subjects. The most heated remark I've ever thrown at someone was calling a design bit "silly". Politics on the other hand...

[tonyg]

Considering that this thread was convering the same topic and some of us hadviewpoints similar to the ones you mentioned (myself included) your comments did seem to be directed at people on the board, and in a unkind fashion.


THat's why I was so suprised. A lot of people disagree with each other around here about a lot of things, but your comments were something else.

[Phantom]

Have to admit Doc Evil has a point with attention spans and movies. Just look at anything with Vin Diesel in it.

As far as the other points, let's face it MJ is a more famous Spiderman character then Gwen Stacey that's why she is not in the movie, and since they seem to have to kill the villians by then end of the movie two main female leads would have confused things.

But as to blasting those who rated PM higher, well I have to say that I am one of that group. Simply because I am a bigger SW fan then Spidy fan. Personally I am beginning to think that before this really gets heated everyone need to lay off the caffine and take a step back and take a deep breath.

My 2 cents.

[tonyg]

Actually I don't think it's becuase MJ is a bigger character. Just that few people involved with the project are familar with characters from more than 5 years back or so.

As for the "attention span/too slow" thing: It depends. There is a difference between a short attention span and pacing for a film. Action films generally should be faster paced than other films. So you have to judge this point on a case-by-case basis.

[Phantom]

Originally posted by tonyg
Actually I don't think it's becuase MJ is a bigger character. Just that few people involved with the project are familar with characters from more than 5 years back or so.

As for the "attention span/too slow" thing: It depends. There is a difference between a short attention span and pacing for a film. Action films generally should be faster paced than other films. So you have to judge this point on a case-by-case basis.

See the movie again. Stan Lee was one of the producers, I think he has more then a 5 year working knowledge of Spiderman.

A two hour long car race/chase for a movie!!!! That's not entertainment....Its licence to waste film.

[Dave Biggins]

I saw it last night and liked it! One very nice touch was the make-up job on Harry Osbourne after his father's funeral. Was it just me or was he the spittin' image of his father?

All an all, I'd say that it was worth the price of admission!

[Lockhart]

I made a comment to a friend here in Missouri that I would just be happy if the movie was based on the Ultimate Spider-man comic. That is a good book that retells the story in a modern context without messing with too much of the history. The characters that get neo-makeovers usually come out better for it. The redone Doc Ock is phenomenal compared to his venerable version. Still, the comic does have Gwen Stacy in it. She's not your father's Gwen Stacy, but she is Gwen Stacy and Peter's head is starting to turn.

I don't think the movie is based on this comic. I think they just used MJ because she is the girl next door who was always around Peter's periphery during high school. I feel this movie is the best big-screen adaptation since Superman I. It has the right feel for all the characters, and that is what's most important to me as a comic fan. I prefer when characters aren't changed in fundamental ways (Bobby Drake being the same general age as a school-going Rogue for instance), but the way the characters are portrayed is most important to me.

It's kind of why I doubt anybody will ever be a better Superman than Christopher Reeve. He worked out to fill Superman's costume with real muscles, and he worked hard at making both Clark and Superman's personalities come through, even in the bad movies.

Likewise, after seeing this movie, I can't think of another actor who could possibly top Tobey's portrayal of Peter Parker. His body language as Spider-man is also top notch. In the finale he doesn't just act out his anger with piercing eyes.

Lockhart

[tonyg]

Lockhart,

I don't care for the ULTIAME series becuase they DO mess around too much with the histroy of the characters.

Niether MJ or Gwen Stacy fighed much in Spidy's early years.

[tonyg]

Originally posted by Phantom


See the movie again. Stan Lee was one of the producers, I think he has more then a 5 year working knowledge of Spiderman.

Yes, Stan certainly does. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to have much control or input over the product. Stan has been involved in ALL the films and TV series based on Marvel characters. And most of those haven't been very good.

[AllenS]

Well, given the end of the film, there is plenty of room in the next two movies for Gwen Stacy to show up, Peter to fall for her, anda reborn Green Goblin to throw her off a bridge, so maybe people are getting worked up about nothing.

It was a good film, I thought. At least as good as X-Men, maybe better. I enjoyed myself and I plan to purchase the video (or DVD if I'm fortunate enough to own a DVD player by then).

Allen

[Phantom]

I got into a converstion the other night with some friends who also saw the film, and when I mentioned that some people were upset that GS wasn't in the movie and MJ was, they asked who was Gwen Stacy, and one of them was at one point a comic collector (as was I.) Now I did remember GS, when it came up here, simply because I liked the character of her father the commissioner, but had totally forgotten about her until it was mentioned here. It just comes back to the fact that most people (except the ones who seem to have memorized the story) MJ is Pete Parkers girl, ie she is the more widely known charcater. She is the one he married afterall, besides as stated Gwen gets kacked by the Green Goblin and in this story line he is now dead...So unless the next movie is the Attack of the Goblins ghost if they put Gwen in it is only going to change the history of the story further.

Though I can't see any real deviation from the original story line, other then it was a genetically enhanced (instead of an irradiated) spider, and the fact that Uncle Ben was killed in a car jacking and not shot by a burglar. So, I would really like to know what is it that bothers people about the back story shown in the movie? IMO it is the most faithful rendition of a comic to moive I have seen. If I can stomach the whole screwed up sence in Batman where his parents were killed, I think some slack can be cut for a movie that was the closest to the bull's eye to have come out of late.

[Doug Burke]

Saw it yesterday with my 3-year-old son. Loved it! My son even sat quietly through the whole thing.