April
30
Spidey Preview
Ok, Nora and I went to see Spider-Man 3 on Thursday night. She adored it. I got a headache, and truth be told, I couldn't wait for it to be over. The movie is harmlessly charming and gorgeously made. (It had better be, at that price.) Nora adores Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco and Topher Grace. They sure are easy on the eyes.
But give me something, anything new. That would be Sandman, played achingly well by Thomas Haden Church, and executed with brilliance by Sony Imageworks. If you know anything about VFX, you know that all those swirling grains of sand were---expensive. But nothing tops the last installment's building-side duel between Spider-Man and Doc Ock. There's some tipping point where a big movie just topples under its own weight. It's all too much, too big, too grand. All human scale stops registering.
There are some summer flicks I can't wait to see. I was tired of Pirates last time around, and Shrek too. It's unlikely they're going to surprise me, even though I am always interested in Chow Yun Fat. (Casting has always been Jerry Bruckheimer's great strength.) I'm still curious to see what Paul Greengrass does with The Bourne Ultimatum. And a Brad Bird original --Ratatouille--is irresistible. Evan Almighty with Steve Carell as Noah actually looks funny enough to make back its outrageous $175 million cost--clearly, dinero was lavished on all those digital animals--and a lot of water. Mucho dinero.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
THANK GOD! I thought I was the only one hated Spider Man 3. The third time around was once too many. But I wasn't a fan of the previous two either. I find them all rather tepid and hollow at the core. The script for SM3 is disjointed and all over the place with three weak villains who aren't really that bad...they're just misunderstood. And that alternative so-called evil Spider Man created by that space goo isn't evil or bad at all. He's just a more confident, slightly more aggressive version of the regular Spider Man. Where's the dramatic conflict in that? And where did the half billion dollars go? I sure didn't see it on the screen.
Then again I've never been a comic book geek and the appeal of Spider Man especially baffles me. Let me get this straight, he's a super hero who has saved mankind from total destruction several times, yet he's a hopeless nerd who's terrifed to speak to girls. HUH? I'm sure I'm thinking like a guy but if I was a super hero I would have so many women I wouldn't have time to save the world. I guess that's why I like those Blade films. A clueless nerd he's not.
And I agree with Howard Stern who said recently can't Spider Man do better than Kristen Dunst? She's for me is one of those: "Just-how-did-she-become-a-movie-star?" stars. If anyone can explain her appeal, please do so
Posted by: Sergio | May 01, 2007 at 08:03 AM
I have never understood the mentality that complains about comic book movies for being too comic bookish. If you don't like the kind of archetype driven shallow narratives that come from comic books, don't go watch comic movies. If Spider-Man's perpetual shallow "teen angst" doesn't appeal to you, don't go. You aren't the audience the film is aimed at, even Kant argued that any given work of aesthetics had to be viewed within its own context. Not that this is what you are saying Anne, but it does seem that Sergio is coming from that perspective.
Also, don't take me as being to combative Sergio. I couldn't agree more that Kirsten Dunst is one of those actresses I completely lack any positive sentiment toward. I don't find her cute or sexy, she elicits neither pathos nor comedic joy from me. I merely find her "blah." Except for when she annoys me during those times she appears to be in some kind of THC influence haze. I'm not saying she actually partakes, just that when she acts she acts like someone who does.
Posted by: Christian Johnson | May 01, 2007 at 10:13 AM
Now hold on there! I didn't say that I hated films based on comic books. There are several of them that I really like. I mentioned before I'm a HUGE fan of the Blade series which I thought were really good. Batman Begins was one of the best films I saw in 2005 and I'm looking forward to the next one being filmed now. I'm great admirer of Ang Lee's The Hulk, which everybody else hated, but I thought was truly unique and orginal and was a genuine attempt to capture visually the comic book aesthetic. And I LOVE A History of Violence, Sin City and From Hell, all based on comic books as well.
It's that I DON'T GET this Spider Man I'm-a-nerdy-geek-with-angst-scared-to-talk-to-women cornball stuff that sets my teeth on edge and I find very hard to buy into. Unlike Batman who's a more interesting, complex character with a lot of inner turmoil that he's trying to deal with
Posted by: Sergio | May 01, 2007 at 12:30 PM
I loved the first two Spider-Man movies. They were well-written and executed. And I'm fond of the actors. It must not have be easy for Kirsten Dunst to make this clammy adjunct role interesting. The misunderstood villains lacked threat, I agree. There was no redemption in store for Doc Ock. I enjoyed some of the comedy bits in this one, including Spidey-dark. Two installments were fine, and this is it, there's no more to be mined here. They did the best they could.It's just the law of diminishing returns. I want to see what Sam Raimi does next!
Posted by: Anne Thompson | May 01, 2007 at 12:44 PM