Post by Elric3960 on May 26, 2002 18:15:55 GMT -5
I want to start by saying that I've been a Spidey fan since I was 6 years old. I wanted to like this film for the same reasons that people like Ana's SO did, so I take no pleasure in stating how disappointed I was afterwards. The following is a list of the problems that I had with the film. Please feel free to attack any or all of the following points:
1. The original "spider incident" was a random accident in that it was so small that it couldn't be seen when it was near a radiation experiment. Peter himself didn't notice it until it bit him. Making the spider a genetically engineered creature, having it conveniently escape its cage and biting Peter while he was distracted by MJ was too contrived and formularized for my taste. I also didn't like how he could generate his webs naturally instead of designing webshooters that ran out of web fluid at the worst times like the comic book hero did. The latter made him physically as well as emotionally human while the former makes him appear to be a monster IMHO.
2. Having Peter's physique dramatically change, having him do a number of extraordinary things in front of his classmates, and not having any of them make the connection between Peter and the recent arrival of the mysterious superhero who just made the scene stretched the film's credibility to extremes to say the least! Yeah, it's just a comic book, but Stan Lee's original intention was to bend the rules of comic book storytelling, not reinforce them!
3. Having corporate slime and military buffoons be responsible for Norman Osborn become the Green Goblin was not only unfaithful to the original concept, but made the Goblin less of a villain and more of a victim. While this was an interesting twist on the tragic villain concept, they didn't follow-up on it by giving us a chance to feel sorry for either Osborn or the monster he became. It was just a gimmick whose sole purpose was to give Spidey a flashy arch-villain to fight. For those of you who say "So what?" read the last sentence in point #2.
4. NYPD Captain Stacy and his daughter Gwen were missing from the story, which not only made MJ the only love interest in Peter's life but weakened Peter and villainized Spidey more than they should have been. Capt. Stacy knew who Spidey really was and didn't reveal it to Peter, which added to the pathos of the story. Gwen died at the hands of the Green Goblin and Spiderman in the original story due to Spidey attempting to do what Superman did miraculously with Lois Lane for decades: defying the laws of physics by catching a person who has fallen from a great height at an accelerated speed without causing any internal damage in the process! In this film, he did it three times! In the comic book, it was done once with tragic results!
5. When Spiderman fought with the burglar who killed his Uncle Ben, they threw in a fight on a stolen taxi cab, the same raggedy taxi cab that appeared in virtually every Sam Raimi film since Evil Dead! If it advanced the plot, it would have been acceptable. Instead, it came off as basic CGI trickery and directorial handwriting at the expense of good storytelling! Adding insult to injury, the burglar died! True, he stumbled to his death, but Peter was still legally responsible for his death and he showed no remorse whatsoever! When the Goblin died in a similar manner, it was a factor in Peter deciding that he couldn't have anyone get personally involved with him for fear that they would die because of him. That was faithful, the other scene was not.
6. Although Raimi's buddy, Bruce Campbell as the wrestling referee, could be credited for being the first person to call him The Amazing Spiderman, Peter still felt the need to give the tag line "I'm Spiderman!" at the end of the film a la Darkman, Raimi's personal creation! WHY? Did Raimi think that we forgot his name? Was he giving us another directorial signature for moviegoers to "marvel" at? The next time that I see Raimi's name on a movie marquee, I'll avoid it like the plague!
While I won't say that this was a bad film, I'll conclude by saying that it could have been a better film if someone other than Raimi directed it. Just because he could create cinematic "comic book stories" of his own doesn't mean that he could be faithful to somebody else's imagination and conceptions.
1. The original "spider incident" was a random accident in that it was so small that it couldn't be seen when it was near a radiation experiment. Peter himself didn't notice it until it bit him. Making the spider a genetically engineered creature, having it conveniently escape its cage and biting Peter while he was distracted by MJ was too contrived and formularized for my taste. I also didn't like how he could generate his webs naturally instead of designing webshooters that ran out of web fluid at the worst times like the comic book hero did. The latter made him physically as well as emotionally human while the former makes him appear to be a monster IMHO.
2. Having Peter's physique dramatically change, having him do a number of extraordinary things in front of his classmates, and not having any of them make the connection between Peter and the recent arrival of the mysterious superhero who just made the scene stretched the film's credibility to extremes to say the least! Yeah, it's just a comic book, but Stan Lee's original intention was to bend the rules of comic book storytelling, not reinforce them!
3. Having corporate slime and military buffoons be responsible for Norman Osborn become the Green Goblin was not only unfaithful to the original concept, but made the Goblin less of a villain and more of a victim. While this was an interesting twist on the tragic villain concept, they didn't follow-up on it by giving us a chance to feel sorry for either Osborn or the monster he became. It was just a gimmick whose sole purpose was to give Spidey a flashy arch-villain to fight. For those of you who say "So what?" read the last sentence in point #2.
4. NYPD Captain Stacy and his daughter Gwen were missing from the story, which not only made MJ the only love interest in Peter's life but weakened Peter and villainized Spidey more than they should have been. Capt. Stacy knew who Spidey really was and didn't reveal it to Peter, which added to the pathos of the story. Gwen died at the hands of the Green Goblin and Spiderman in the original story due to Spidey attempting to do what Superman did miraculously with Lois Lane for decades: defying the laws of physics by catching a person who has fallen from a great height at an accelerated speed without causing any internal damage in the process! In this film, he did it three times! In the comic book, it was done once with tragic results!
5. When Spiderman fought with the burglar who killed his Uncle Ben, they threw in a fight on a stolen taxi cab, the same raggedy taxi cab that appeared in virtually every Sam Raimi film since Evil Dead! If it advanced the plot, it would have been acceptable. Instead, it came off as basic CGI trickery and directorial handwriting at the expense of good storytelling! Adding insult to injury, the burglar died! True, he stumbled to his death, but Peter was still legally responsible for his death and he showed no remorse whatsoever! When the Goblin died in a similar manner, it was a factor in Peter deciding that he couldn't have anyone get personally involved with him for fear that they would die because of him. That was faithful, the other scene was not.
6. Although Raimi's buddy, Bruce Campbell as the wrestling referee, could be credited for being the first person to call him The Amazing Spiderman, Peter still felt the need to give the tag line "I'm Spiderman!" at the end of the film a la Darkman, Raimi's personal creation! WHY? Did Raimi think that we forgot his name? Was he giving us another directorial signature for moviegoers to "marvel" at? The next time that I see Raimi's name on a movie marquee, I'll avoid it like the plague!
While I won't say that this was a bad film, I'll conclude by saying that it could have been a better film if someone other than Raimi directed it. Just because he could create cinematic "comic book stories" of his own doesn't mean that he could be faithful to somebody else's imagination and conceptions.