Before
I commence with this review, I must confess, I've never been one for comic books.
That's not to say I hate them. I just never got into them as much as my friends
did growing up. Suffice to say, I entered Spider-Man (based on the Stan Lee comic)
having never read the comic on which the movie is based. Sure, I know the basic
history and origins of the character, but I'm hardly an expert on Spidey mythology.
Most of my anticipation for the film was based on the fact that it was directed
by Sam Raimi, a film maker I've admired for quite sometime.
Spider-Man,
for the few of you who are not familiar, is the alter ego of shy and withdrawn
high school student Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire). Constantly picked on and virtually
ignored by the girls at school, Parker finds himself blessed (and cursed) after
being bitten by a spider while at an arachnid exhibit on a field trip. Shortly
thereafter, Parker discovers the ability to scale walls and shoot webbing from
a tiny hole in his wrists. With his new powers comes new responsibilities, as
Parker becomes Spider-Man. With every superhero comes a super villain. In this
case, it's the Green Goblin (Willem Dafoe). The Green Goblin wreaks havoc all
over the city, and it's up to Spider-Man to put a stop to his evil deeds.
Tobey
Maguire is terrific here. You'd never guess by watching him, that he and Raimi
really had to persuade the studio to give him a chance at the lead. His shy, nerdy
Peter Parker is picture perfect, exhibiting all of the anxiety and humiliation
that come with being a teenager (for most of us anyway). And while this isn't
a story about duality (Maguire has the same squeaky voice as both Parker and Spider-Man),
Maguire has gone through an impressive physical transformation to bring Spidey
to the big screen. On the other hand, Willem Dafoe's character is about duality,
and he plays the Green Goblin with absolute glee, making us all but forget about
his boring turn as a bad guy in the dreadful Speed 2. And despite being hidden
by that mask, his performance shines through. Kirsten Dunst is certainly cute
as the damsel in distress, but her character never really gets to develop. She's
more of an ornament here, but I'm sure we'll see more of her in Spider-Man 2.
God
bless Sam Raimi. From Evil Dead to A Simple Plan, I've always admired his work,
and have always felt a bit mystified as to why this guy has never become an A-List
director. All his films exude energy, slick execution and limitless creativity.
Spider-Man is no exception. This is a colorful, breezy effort, and the two hour
running time is over before you know it. Spider-Man is far lighter than Tim Burton's
Batman pictures, but then so is the comic book on which it's based. Sam also goes
back to his independent roots with some sly winks to the audience and even gives
pal and Evil Dead star Bruce Campbell a little piece of the action. If there is
a problem here, it's that Raimi had too much money at his disposal. In his past
efforts, smaller budgets forced him to be more creative making for some exciting
and bold screen moments. With Spider-Man, that creativity, in a sense, was limited
due to unlimited funds.
Spider-Man
is far from perfect. Holding the picture back from it's full potential is a below
average screenplay by David Koepp. Thank God Raimi is around to supply visual
flair to what must have been an absolute boring read. This marks the second time
in the last few months a Koepp screenplay has been bailed out by expert execution
(the last was David Fincher's Panic Room). While it could be argued that this
adaptation of Spider-Man is a mere set up for the sequel, that's hardly a decent
excuse.
I also
feel the need to comment on the plethora of digital effects. Yes I know, CGI is
really the only way to go in a picture like this, and the truth is, the digital
effects look just fine on their own, but they hardly mesh with the live action
stuff. The shots of Spidey swinging through the city and Parker jumping from building
to building are hardly seamless. At one moment, Spider-Man is like watching a
cool live action movie, but then the next, it's as if we're watching a commercial
for the video game.
Much
has also been made of the costume design in this picture. The Spider-Man outfit
is just fine, and a pumped up Toby Maguire has filled it out nicely, but the Green
Goblin would have been more effective had a prosthetic been used rather than an
a full head mask. Thankfully, Dafoe is able to transcend this obvious limitation
through his lively performance.
And
finally, I am sad to report that Danny Elfman's score is hardly memorable. He
is capable of far superior work, and for whatever reason, his Spider-Man score
doesn't measure up to the visuals it's backing. This is a stock score, and a definite
low point on Elfman's spectacular resume.
As
a superhero picture, Spider-Man is moderately enjoyable. Superman remains my favorite
of all superhero adaptations. As a Sam Raimi picture, Spider-Man is colorful and
lively, but unable to match the director's best work (see Evil Dead 2 or A Simple
Plan). In fact, as a film, I was more entertained by Raimi's ode to superhero
flicks, Darkman. There is no meat and potatoes in this story. It is merely a set
up and (like Unbreakable from a couple of years ago) ends with it's hero just
barely discovering his destiny. This hardly makes Spider-Man a dud, however. True,
I walked out of this picture wanting more, but I still had a good time, and anxiously
await the inevitable sequel.
