June 29, 2004

Spider-Man,
Spider-Man,
Does whatever Supe'man 2 did.
Hero faced, with a choice,
Kirsten's dress, it gets moist,
Look out! Here comes the Sequel-Man.

Is it strong? Listen, bud!
This ain't one of those sequel duds.
Does the tale move ahead?
Takes a while, saved by Fred
Hey there, a-no-ther Spider-Man!

There are lots of jokes,
And unint'resting crime
But the end you want
It arrives just in time

Spider-Man, Spider-Man,
Sony had a good sequel plan
Bigger laughs, great CG
There's a start date on Number III,
For me, lost powers were a screw up,
20 minutes could be cut,
But here comes this Spider-Man!

Oh… you want more?!?!

Spider-Man 2 works just fine. It would not be hard to start detailing it to death. For instance, the constantly seen car-through-the-window sequence (which I just saw on Letterman again) makes absolutely no sense in the context of the film. Without giving too much away, Doc Ock is looking for Peter Parker at that moment and Peter Parker doesn't have superpowers. Why the supercharged Doc Ock would need to make a big show of throwing a car through a window - which should have killed Peter Parker and left the Doc shit out of luck - I do not know. But it's a superhero movie and you let that stuff pass.

What all the care that Todd MacCarthy and others are touting in this film can be reduced to is a direct rip-off of Superman 2. As you'll recall, the first Superman film was shot by Dick Donner in a rather respectful, austere comic book style, leaving the comic relief to Lex Luthor's henchpeople. While shooting the first film, he shot half the sequel, then a revolutionary idea by the Salkinds. Dickie Lester came in and shot the second half of the second film, which Gene Hackman did not return for and for which Marlon Brando refused the use of his likeness after a financial dispute with the Salkinds. The result was a lighter, funnier film with a lot of soft lighting trying to make Margot Kidder look like she hadn't aged between films. But it was a smashing success and is considered by many to be the best comic book sequel ever and the best of all the Superman films.

Of course, the Spider-Man saga and the Superman saga are quite different. Still, they must have realized what a good thing Superman 2 was and away they went. And the result will be one of the most liked comic book sequels ever. The downside is that Spider-Man's self doubts and need for romance is not as profound as Superman's, who is truly alone on this earth, by nature and not by choice. And one of the story elements, taken directly from Supes2 - the loss of powers - turns out to be stunningly superfluous and is never really addressed. (In a classic Spidey comic, he did lose his powers. It turned out to be a cold.) And in no way related to Superman 2, there is way too much Aunt May in Spider-Man 2, achieving the nearly impossible… making me want to see less of Rosemary Harris.

That said, the movie is still just fine. Doc Ock is brilliantly executed. The genius of it is that Fred Molina is completely free to give an actor's performance since the four mechanical arms make him powerful, but never really get in the way of his physical expression. The mechanical arms do things that real arms might otherwise do. And they are believably rendered in their moments of great sweep. The character and his actions in the film are utterly irrelevant to the overall story. The ads that say, "the story continues" are accurate. Outside of the fact that there would have been no supervillain, Doc Ock could easily have been cut out of the film. You couldn't just remove him from the final film - as you could the loss of powers - but the supervillain in this tale is only an afterthought in the dramatic narrative. Still, Molina is great in the role, which could have been just plain ugly. He doesn't get the scenery chewing opportunities that Dafoe had in the first film, so without camp to go to, if the writing was off, he would have been screwed. But he isn't.

The center of the film, Peter's inability to live his life as a young man and be Spider-Man is pretty much an extension of the first film, just as Superman's flirtation of Lois Lane became the central story of Superman 2. But even though Spidey 2 throws more ideas at the issue, the impact is less. J. Jonah Jameson's astronaut son, played with all the charm of a day-old pancake by Daniel Gillies, is a cardboard cut-out who never threatens to engage the audience's affections the way that James Franco's moody broody Harry Osborne did in the first film. Despite being a Broadway success, M.J. is still nothing but arm candy. And there is no logic to Peter starving while Harry is still his good pal… a good pal/billionaire would leave a refrigerator full of food without being asked.

But still, the humor that comes through in this film is too winning not to win one over. One gag, which is a cineaste's wet dream, will completely confuse anyone under 35. But there is still something funny about it… enough to get a laugh. Other gags are just plain home runs… so much so that I don't even want to hint at them, lest you have their freshness spoiled. But I will say this… for Peter Parker, home is where some great moments are.

Sam Raimi's hand is surer this time out and the movie looks better in almost every way. Don Burgess was "stuck" on breakthrough film The Polar Express and Bill Pope holds more than his own stepping into the D.P. shoes. The integration of CG and real images is as good here as on any film ever, right up close to matching The Matrixes, which Pope also shot.

The one thing Raimi still isn't quite capable of doing on a master's level is, amazingly, the fight scene. The fight sequences here aren't bad. And Raimi has some beautiful ideas, like integrating the loot into a fight at the bank. But ultimately, the fights have all the classic signals to your brain without that almost indefinable leap to the magic. There is an elevated train fight that is nearly perfect on every technical level. Yet, it just never becomes the legend it should be. (Not to mention the Jesus moment at the end - you'll see - that got an unintentional laugh at both screenings I attended.)

And poor Aunt May… she goes through a physical challenge (again, I don't wish to spoil it) that seems utterly forgotten just minutes later… just an event by the numbers. And when she talks earnestly to her nephew, you can hear birds falling from the trees in sudden fits of narcolepsy.

But I did enjoy Spider-Man 2 both times I saw it. Like I said, it has some iffy details. And, like X-Men 2 last summer, it is being way overpraised by critics in my opinion. They are very similar in quality. Spider-Man 2 is the better film, in my opinion. But it is, like X2, not a great film, reaching beyond its genre. It isn't a Spielberg-made Indiana Jones film. It isn't Burton's visionary Batman. (Nolan will be drier than Burton, but it's no coincidence that they are going back to the darkness that Burton embraced.) It has none of the genius of Altman's Popeye. And it's not Superman or Superman 2.

Comparing this film to Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban is nearly impossible. There are things in Azkaban that I really loved. Given that these are really the only two big summer live-action films so far that are even watchable - both are better than that - I would probably say that Spider-Man 2 is the best big movie of the summer so far.

And by the way, this week's Ebert-ized TV spots for the film are extraordinarily well cut… the movie that spot sells really might be the best comic book movie ever. But the movie is not quite trailer. 20 minutes shorter and… well, who knows?

Spider-Man, Spider-Man,
Standing on line you'll get a tan
Other films, You should see
Fahrenheit, Supe'Size Me,
Come on, sit back and have a good time,
I am all out of good rhymes,
Here comes the Spider-Man!

READER OF THE DAY: The great TAIWAN STEVE is back!:
"Dear David: I knew Michael Moore could success since I saw "Roger & me" for the very first time. I was so happy he got his Oscar for "Bowling for Columbine". And I am very glad to hear "Fahrenheit 9/11" became No.1 movie in US last weekend. More and More start to pick up their camera, make a documentary to change the world, such as "Super Size Me", due to Michael Moore. I think I totally admire him.
Even I haven't see "Fahrenheit 9/11", I still have to say, He's the dude, man! He rocks! And Fat guys can achieve something! Cool!"

And this from DEEP SOUTH PARTY: "Have to take brief issue with your comment that no one will walk away from Spiderman 2 unhappy. I saw it last night and did in fact walk away let down. Not sure if it was the coda ending that seemed more like an afterthought to set up the next sequel and didn't leave me excited or amped up, (Edited For Spoiler), or that Doc Ock looked really cool but was underused, or that MJ was terribly written this time out, or what. The first half of the movie was real good, the special effects were great (again, esp. Doc Ock), but somewhere around half-way the movie took a turn for the worse, the dialogue became more laughable, the story became more ridiculous and plodding (c'mon Parker, lighten up!), and I ended up walking out let down. I mean, a wet Kirsten Dunst (who I still think was terribly miscast) seemed too repetitive of the first one and I could have sworn I wasn't the only one in the theater looking for her nipples again (alas, no nipples for the fanboys this time out). It sounds like I'm in the minority here, but count me as a negative vote from the peanut gallery."

This came from HAM & RYAN: "Long time reader, first time writer. Thought I'd drop you a line on Moore's F 9/11 from a conservative perspective.

You think the film could influence the election, and I think so too. But I don't think it'll be in the way you're expecting.

The most dangerous thing for the Democrats is that they move too far left and revel in the left's hatred of George W. Bush too much. Moore's film is an inducement for them to embrace left wing extremism and to run a very angry campaign. All of which would be to the benefit of the GOP, and would help Bush win re-election.

Some very visible mainstream Democrats have already endorsed the film, including the DNC chairman, but they seem oblivious to how the Republicans could use Moore as a noose around their necks. Moore is too easily discredited, and too easily painted as an extremist to be of much use to them. By allying themselves with him they're playing with electoral fire. I mean, for crying out loud, we're talking about a guy who's referred to the terrorists in Iraq as freedom fighters who are the equivalent of the Minutemen. And that's just one of the many juicy Moore quotes that the GOP could bring out and use as a whip against the Dems. If you take a look at the Bush campaign's 'Coalition of the Wild-Eyed' web ad you'll see the beginning of this strategy."

Finally, this from SHE ROLLS ALONG: "One woman's opinion...

I saw F911 on Friday... and had a really great theatrical experience. As you may recall, I live in the home of the Hanging Chad, the Palm Beach area of Florida. I suspect 90% of the audience at the 4 o'clock show was local, as the "season" is pretty much over and the Abacoa theater is not in a tourist area.

As you know, the early moments of the film are about the stolen Florida election results. Don't even try to argue with me about that... I KNOW what happened. I was in the thick of it, on the front lines, counting the flawed ballots, feeling the pressures to disenfranchise voters from the predominantly black neighborhoods on specious grounds. It still needs to be discussed, so hopefully it won't happen again. [Sorry for the diversion. Now there's a real Hot Button topic.] Back to the film. The audience began to murmur as the election story unfolded on the screen. People began talking back to the screen. I began to grin because I knew this was going to be a unique film going experience.

And so it was. The only time I've had such an interactive movie viewing was when I watched Braveheart's local opening night in St. Andrews, Scotland some years ago. I thought the balcony was going to fall in on us from the stomping and cheering.

Watching F911, I was glad to see that the Democratic congressional and news media cheerleaders for the Iraq war got their exposure for the mealy mouth cheerleaders they are. I was delighted to see that our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan were honored as heroes who deserve better. I was pleased that this is not an anti-American film. I only wish it had been longer or in two parts so that more information, more evidence, some clarifications and corrections could have been included.

F911 raised more questions than it answered. It was flawed in places. Moore is a self-promoting grandstander who stretches the truth to make his points. See? I'm not blind to the situation.

I loved the film despite some shortcomings. There was a standing ovation from the very mixed audience that filled the large screening room. It was a sell out, by the way, as was the next showing. Half the seats were presold, the mgr. told me, when I picked up our tickets. There were was no organized political activity that I could see, as most people seemed there on their own, as we were. But I noticed audience members having conversations with other strangers, talking about various points, pro and con.

Leaving the cineplex, we crossed the street to the stadium to watch a minor league twilight baseball game, between farm teams for the Cardinals and Blue Jays. One couldn't have asked for a more satisfyingly All American Friday...political rabblerousing and baseball, fueled by popcorn and beer.

On a quite different topic, I'm tickled that Manohla Dargis will be writing for the NY Times. Why? I can't access her work at the LA Times because it's been subscription only to read Calendar. I'm registered with the NYTs and read it every day, for free. As you said, she's got strong opinions and eclectic tastes, but is always interesting because of that "big brain" and a real understanding. With Thomson in the UK, I can read him on line too, so I'd be disappointed if he went to LA.

I forgive you for not caring for F911, and appreciate your open mind…"

E ME: It's only Tuesday… really? Yipes!