Sunday, May 13, 2007
RADIOACTIVE SPIDERS MEET RED KRYPTONITEI thought I could get my review of Spider-Man 3 in before Dr. Lao's. What was I thinking.
As Mainstream Culture (MC) continues to disregard the artifacts of High Culture (HC) and gather its signature works from the world of Fringe Culture (FC), I continue to see fantasias from my childhood become the entertainment fare of millions of adults across the globe. I suppose this is how the whores of Argentina felt after World War I, watching the tango move out of the local brothels and into the dance halls of the moneyed classes.
I made the mistake of seeing the Spider-Man 3 1) in Manhattan and 2) on an Imax screen; the effect was one of overdone spectacle. People in the audience shared their opinions with characters on the screen, as they will, and while I shouldn't have minded, it definitely killed the quieter, more dramatic moments of the movie for me--moments that, as complete suckbag Anthony Lane puts it, "would not pass muster in a TV soap." (I normally disagree with every single world Lane writes, including articles and pronouns, but I have to admit he wasn't too far off with this review).
All was not lost. Rosemary Harris saved the dramatic scenes she was in. Thomas Hayden Church and Bryce Dallas Howard are styled so perfectly as Sandman and Gwen Stacey, respectively, that their makeovers were almost worth eight bucks to see right there (coincidentally, Gwen's signature look, the good-girl bangs, the hairband, and the high boots, have returned as a fashionable look in NYC these days.) Some good action, some good humor (I though the "bad Peter" montage with the funk soundtrack was pretty funny), great f/x, good casting on the character roles. The multiple bad guys didn't upset me, although from what I understand, adding Venom was an afterthought: Raimi had his script ready to go, and Marvel insisted that he put a modern villain in.
But damn if I didn't leave the theater unsatisfied. The action sequences were frequently overdone, and occasionally came close to CGI'd Wrestlemania. And the movie suffers from the "red kryptonite" cliche--in this case, not ONE but TWO characters reverse their personalities, going from good to evil to good or vice-versa. With characters pinballing across the ethical spectrum, coherent drama goes out the window, and actors Maguire and Franco are left with the unenviable option of playing the ridiculous changes for laughs or soldiering on in all seriousness. This conceit hardly seems fresh, since Smallville has done it to death recently on the small screen. Major plot points and character decisions are revealed in unintentionally hillarious scenes (such as Harry Osborne's butler revealing that he knew all about Norman Osborne being the Green Goblin--he just never got around to mentioning this to anyone). Lots of closeups of actors crying kill the fun.
To me, Spider-Man 2 was the best of its kind--exciting action, a playfulness that operated in near-perfect harmony with the more adult drama, characters in sympathetic crises, and a clear awareness of the director recognizing larger cinematic ideas in his story, yet not being bogged down with them. Somehow, the balance is off this time around, and we're left with something like X-Men 3--great special effects, a crowded script, and little reason to care about any of it.
# posted by toner_low @ 11:53 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
I, too, was disappointed overall by "Spider-Man 3", and partly for the reasons cited. But also because it takes characters from the Spider-Man character and uses them in thoughtless ways. In the comic books, Gwen Stacy was the first love of Spider-Man's life. She died about 35 years ago, but her ghost still haunts Peter (to the point where he mentions her while in a drugged haze in the recent "Civil War" mini-series). But in movie her character could have been anyone. The importance the character held in the comics has been tossed aside. Also the idea that Flint Marco was the one that shot Uncle Ben is really, really stupid. I can understand why the filmmakers did it from a thematic point of view, but in terms of comic book history, it's absurd because it totally violates the notion that Peter could have saved Uncle Ben if he had done the right thing and stopped the robber. But since the robber now ISN'T the one that shot Uncle Ben, the bitter irony that gave birth to Spider-Man seems moot.
The "bad Peter" sequence was incredibly funny, but it reminded me too much of the "bad Superman" sequence from "Superman 3" (1983).
And where did Spider-Man's spider sense go? It's non-existant in this film! The villains keep whalloping Spider-Man from behind and from above, and it gets very tiresome (not to mention infuriating).
There were other major flaws to this film (don't get me started on the kiss between Spider-Man and Gwen Stacy, which came out of nowhere, seemed totally out of character for Spider-Man, and only served as a plot point), but there were also some amazing moments as well. A lot of the action sequences were very well done. And the final scene between Sandman and Peter I found to be moving (even if it is built on a bogus foundation).
So it wasn't a total waste, but it weren't no "Spider-Man 2" either.
The "bad Peter" sequence was incredibly funny, but it reminded me too much of the "bad Superman" sequence from "Superman 3" (1983).
And where did Spider-Man's spider sense go? It's non-existant in this film! The villains keep whalloping Spider-Man from behind and from above, and it gets very tiresome (not to mention infuriating).
There were other major flaws to this film (don't get me started on the kiss between Spider-Man and Gwen Stacy, which came out of nowhere, seemed totally out of character for Spider-Man, and only served as a plot point), but there were also some amazing moments as well. A lot of the action sequences were very well done. And the final scene between Sandman and Peter I found to be moving (even if it is built on a bogus foundation).
So it wasn't a total waste, but it weren't no "Spider-Man 2" either.
Interesting.
I actually was intrigued by the very specific wording of the Uncle Ben death business dialogue, when Marco comes clean. Marco seems pretty convinced that he shot Ben, but the wording in his speech is intentionally ambiguous. To a point that he may be unsure if he actually did it. There was a rush. A lot of confusion. A gun went off. But because of how the scene was shot and edited, we never really saw Marco do the deed. My take was that it may have really been the other guy or that Marco's gun went off by accident/in a panic.
So, we see Marco actually being persuaded by Uncle Ben to not use the gun when the theif comes up to him. It looked to me that if Peter had stopped the thief, he might well have stopped the person who jostled Marco and/or maybe shot Uncle Ben. Marco looked like he would have surrendered, run, or taken the car without needing to shoot. After all, Uncle Ben was already out of the car. In fact, if his partner had never shown up with the stolen money, Marco may have just fled. One way or the other, the chances are that some kind of intervention by Peter looks like -- to me, anyway -- it would have prevented Ben Parker's death... or, at the very least, changed circumstances so greatly that the outcome would have been very, very different.
What I took away was that there was some Rashamon going on. The final conclusion (that I came to) was that Peter was faced with a man all too eager to assume responsibility for Ben's death... whether he did it or not, and who didn't let himself off the hook with the fact that his *potential* shooting was in a rushed, physically-jostled, second-degree panic. Spider-Man has always been about taking responsibility, and Marco is more than willing to take responsibility.
There's also a bigger lesson (one beyond the fact that the comic book character and the movie character are two different animals). Peter, I think, learns that you can "take responsibility" for lots of things, but ultimately, no matter how good a person you are, some things wind up out of your hands. Maybe if I had just been on one of those planes on 9/11, I would have been the guy to startle the terrorists, so they could be overpowered. Maybe if Peter had acted, he could have stopped Uncle Ben's death. This is a very simple, cause-and-effect conclusion. But the truth is that a zillion other malevolent things are out there that might have come into play. Sometimes, it's a matter of forgiving yourself. Sometimes, it's a matter of forgiving the Universe.
When Really Bad Things Happen, it's a lot easier to blame ourselves than to be at home with the concept that, sometimes, these things are just going to happen.
But Peter was finally faced with someone who -- accurately or inaccurately -- was taking as much responsibility as was he. I bought it.
Not everyone bought it, but I bought it. I may not be the brightest guy in the theater, but I bought it. Frankly, I have some guilt issues I am working on, and the movie was pretty therapeutic.
As for the cinematic spider-sense, I gave up on that two movies ago. When he was delivering pizzas, his spider-sense and acute reflexes should have made him the fastest deliverer in the biz.
Post a Comment
I actually was intrigued by the very specific wording of the Uncle Ben death business dialogue, when Marco comes clean. Marco seems pretty convinced that he shot Ben, but the wording in his speech is intentionally ambiguous. To a point that he may be unsure if he actually did it. There was a rush. A lot of confusion. A gun went off. But because of how the scene was shot and edited, we never really saw Marco do the deed. My take was that it may have really been the other guy or that Marco's gun went off by accident/in a panic.
So, we see Marco actually being persuaded by Uncle Ben to not use the gun when the theif comes up to him. It looked to me that if Peter had stopped the thief, he might well have stopped the person who jostled Marco and/or maybe shot Uncle Ben. Marco looked like he would have surrendered, run, or taken the car without needing to shoot. After all, Uncle Ben was already out of the car. In fact, if his partner had never shown up with the stolen money, Marco may have just fled. One way or the other, the chances are that some kind of intervention by Peter looks like -- to me, anyway -- it would have prevented Ben Parker's death... or, at the very least, changed circumstances so greatly that the outcome would have been very, very different.
What I took away was that there was some Rashamon going on. The final conclusion (that I came to) was that Peter was faced with a man all too eager to assume responsibility for Ben's death... whether he did it or not, and who didn't let himself off the hook with the fact that his *potential* shooting was in a rushed, physically-jostled, second-degree panic. Spider-Man has always been about taking responsibility, and Marco is more than willing to take responsibility.
There's also a bigger lesson (one beyond the fact that the comic book character and the movie character are two different animals). Peter, I think, learns that you can "take responsibility" for lots of things, but ultimately, no matter how good a person you are, some things wind up out of your hands. Maybe if I had just been on one of those planes on 9/11, I would have been the guy to startle the terrorists, so they could be overpowered. Maybe if Peter had acted, he could have stopped Uncle Ben's death. This is a very simple, cause-and-effect conclusion. But the truth is that a zillion other malevolent things are out there that might have come into play. Sometimes, it's a matter of forgiving yourself. Sometimes, it's a matter of forgiving the Universe.
When Really Bad Things Happen, it's a lot easier to blame ourselves than to be at home with the concept that, sometimes, these things are just going to happen.
But Peter was finally faced with someone who -- accurately or inaccurately -- was taking as much responsibility as was he. I bought it.
Not everyone bought it, but I bought it. I may not be the brightest guy in the theater, but I bought it. Frankly, I have some guilt issues I am working on, and the movie was pretty therapeutic.
As for the cinematic spider-sense, I gave up on that two movies ago. When he was delivering pizzas, his spider-sense and acute reflexes should have made him the fastest deliverer in the biz.
# posted by 
: 11:27 AM
: 11:27 AM << Home
