BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Spider-Man rocks, I promise

 
  

Page: 12(3)

 
 
autopilot disengaged
18:50 / 25.06.02
i am making
a list

of the reasons

i didn't like it

in my
big
supervillain
notebook.
 
 
CameronStewart
19:26 / 25.06.02
Spider-Man: A Review by e.e. cummings.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
21:43 / 25.06.02
Please? can someone slap autopilot around the face with a fish until he realises he just completely missed the point of the film?

*sigh*

Pretentious twat.... (note: if there was a sarcasm button, i would be pressing it)
 
 
higuita
09:28 / 26.06.02
It was ok.

I was glad they remained reasonably faithful. JJJ was good. Didn't like the goblin cossie much - particularly when it was rolling around on dafoe's face and it looked like he had a squint. Dafoe overacted horribly and not in a good 'I'm Jack Nicholson playing a psycho' way. Organic webbing? Don't get me started. And Aunt May wasn't frail enough. I wanted more from Flash, too.
Oh and the cgi pooed - v plastic.

Otherwise it was ok. Randy Savage was good. Toby Maguire, despite having a face you want to punch, was good despite my initial suspicions. No arguments about MJ.

Standard summer blockbuster 'cram 'em in the cinema with lots of explosions, bad guys, good guys and a familiar plotline' fare.
And why kill off the goblin so soon? Fucks sake, you'd have thought they'd have learned this one from the Batman farce. "Oh shit, we've killed all the good ones off. Let's use Mr Freeze and Poison Ivy." Not the scarecrow, oh no. Bastards.

Did they get the boom out of shot for the main release? The pirate I've got has some v bad things bouncing around at the top of the screen.

I preffered attack of the clones.


No, really.
 
 
CameronStewart
12:54 / 26.06.02
>>>Organic webbing? Don't get me started.<<<

Oh, jesus.


>>>Did they get the boom out of shot for the main release? The pirate I've got has some v bad things bouncing around at the top of the screen.<<<

This is very rarely the fault of the filmmakers, and almost always the fault of the projectionist or transfer house. Films are shot with a "bleed area" around the edge of the frame, in which things like the boom mike can be seen. If the film is properly projected or transferred onto video, the bleed area is matted out. If you can see a mike or cables or whatever, it means the film has been incorrectly framed, not that the director is a boob and didn't notice the mike (particuarly in these digital times when an accident like that could very easily be digitally rubbed out).
 
 
Mr Tricks
22:21 / 26.06.02
Check Out The Sexual Habits of the North American Wall Crawler!
 
 
Mr Tricks
22:21 / 26.06.02
 
 
videodrome
23:58 / 26.06.02
Well, the Goblin isn't dead. Neither is the Joker, or Pengiun, or Catwoman...

But really. Harry's the next Goblin. See? Easy.
 
 
The Natural Way
11:04 / 27.06.02
The "organic webbing" comment was vceering off into "it's just NOT realistic" territory.

And that thar's baaaad territory, infested w/ teen-dorks.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
11:14 / 27.06.02
That's where autopilot lives as well.
 
 
The Natural Way
11:38 / 27.06.02
Hold on....we don't know why autopilot disapproves yet.
 
 
higuita
14:30 / 27.06.02
Guess the pirate must have been a dodgy copy.

Although sliding off into fanboy territory is to be avoided for all sorts of good reasons, I just prefer things to stay the way they were. I don't give a flying insect about realism. My trusty webslingers ain't broke...

And I know the goblin etc aren't dead, but I just felt there was a bit more mileage in the original goblin and Willem Dafoe than the one film. Being blockbuster filmworld, a Willem Dafoe return is unlikely and what's more unlikely is that you can have a summer smash where the bad guy gets away at the end. Audiences like the bad guy splatted or converted, apparently. Sigh.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
14:36 / 27.06.02

Hold on....we don't know why autopilot disapproves yet.

Oh, I do. I do.

*sigh*
 
 
A
04:10 / 28.06.02
mr y-
"And why kill off the goblin so soon? Fucks sake, you'd have thought they'd have learned this one from the Batman farce. "Oh shit, we've killed all the good ones off. Let's use Mr Freeze and Poison Ivy." Not the scarecrow, oh no. Bastards."

Right on. I really wanted to see the Scarecrow, too. that would have been fantastic.

Runs Wince: Babality-
"The "organic webbing" comment was vceering off into "it's just NOT realistic" territory."


I remember reading an interview with Sam Raimi where he said that the reason for the organic webshooters was that it's more believable that Spiderman would grow tham along with getting all the other superpowers than it is that a high chool boy could come up with a chemical that the 3M corporation couldn't at all.


Fuck. I'm posting about organic webshooters on the internet. Kill me.
 
 
higuita
08:30 / 28.06.02
I'm very sorry. It's my fault - let's just pretend it never happened and move on.

[taps fingers]

Um. Kirsten Dunst looked nice in that wet t-shirt.
 
 
Shortfatdyke
15:04 / 30.06.02
bear in mind i'm an old spiderman fan: 'fraid i'm going to have to against the flow here....

i enjoyed the film. because i switched my brain off - once i'd switched it back on, i remembered some really offensive stuff.

like
a little bit of homophobia, the kirsten dunst/mj character playing the damsel in distress all the way through the fucking film - and that wet t shirt scene (which, after all, was where she was potentially going to be raped by a gang of latino (of course!) men) was dodgy in more ways than one.

i found a lot of it quite exhilerating - the way and the speed at which spidey moved around the city was amazing. stoatie said that it's like being 10 years old again when you see the film - that's really accurate, because when i was 10 i didn't see this kind of shit going on.

so what i wanna see next is a movie of the fantastic four. be really nice to see a strong female superhero character. because, like, i want something to relate to too, please.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
00:25 / 01.07.02
SFD, what homophobia do you speak of? I haven't seen the film for about two months, so my memory is a bit off. I don't recall any instance in which any of the protagonists do or say anything homophobic. Are you talking about maybe the kids who picked on Peter? I'm drawing a blank.
 
 
Shortfatdyke
06:28 / 01.07.02
flux - the comment spidey makes to 'bone saw', the wrestler: "i like your costume - did your husband make it for you?". it's pathetic, really, more than anything else, but it's still saying that queers are less than heterosexuals. i was talking about the film afterwards and wondering if i could/should just sit back and enjoy what was basically a very entertaining film without being 'political' - i certainly went there to enjoy it and had no intention of ticking off a political list, but this stuff jumps out at me. what with that and the sexism the film just says to me: this can never ever be you, you are on the sidelines.
 
 
RiffRaff
06:50 / 01.07.02
"i like your costume - did your husband make it for you?"

It could be argued that, because of Bonesaw's crazed machoness, Spidey decided that a comment targeting his sexuality would be the most effective in getting him riled up.

(shrug)
 
 
that
08:59 / 01.07.02
That is doubtless the case, RiffRaff. But it is still homophobic. The *hero* of the film uses implications of queerness completely gratuitously to 'insult' Bonesaw and to get a laugh from the cinema audience. This plays into any homophobic tendencies the audience might have, and makes homophobia look morally ok, because it is the *hero* of the film who is making the joke. Just because some people are offended if you imply they're queer, does not make it ok to use implications of queerness as an insult. And just because people do it is real life, does not mean that Hollywood, at least in this one area, could not set a good example. Keeping gratuitous homophobia out of films is the least they can do,

Also, the film started off with fat-phobia. Peter Parker says that he'd even rather be the fat kid eating a doughnut on the bus - that's how much he wants to be near M.J. Watson. So, the implication is: fat is bad, but hell, I'd even be *fat* if it meant I got to be near her...
 
 
that
09:00 / 01.07.02
that should, of course, have read "*in* real life", not "is real life"
 
 
A
12:55 / 01.07.02
i kinda figured that he meant he was even lower on the social scale than the tubby chap was, but i guess the way you see it makes just as much sense. hmmmm...
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
13:17 / 01.07.02
I don't think Peter was being homophobic - I think he was taunting the guy by turning his homophobia against him. And when Peter makes the comment about preferring to be the 'fat kid', I don't think it's out of any kind of malice for overweight people, it's more that he's acknowledging that in the eyes of his prejudiced peers, he's even lower on the totem pole than the 'fat kid'. I think both of these examples have more to do with the prejudices of people in Peter's environment that what Peter himself feels - it seems to me that the film did a good job showing that Peter is a pretty sensitive and empathetic guy, and the chances that the character has any serious issues with fat and/or homosexual people seems very slim.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
23:45 / 01.07.02
Or conversely, you could argue that the stage where Peter Parker is using his powers to be a wrestler and get the cash money is one in which he's let it all go to his head and is being a jack-ass...
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
01:42 / 02.07.02
Yeah, that's a good point too. I really do think the film has a very strong anti-bully stance, and that in both cases, the idea set forth is that homophobia isn't good, and that you shouldn't pick on people for being different from you. I can understand SFD's point of view, that to many minds, Spider-Man turning someone's homophobia against themselves can be read as Spidey just mocking the guy for being gay, but I'm pretty confident that was not the message that Sam Raimi et al are trying to get across.

I do agree with what SFD has to say about Mary Jane - even though I think that character is well written as a normal-popular-beautiful-girl with far more depth than that character type is normally allowed in most any genre, she plays the damsel-in-distress role way too many times. By the third time Spider-Man has to come save her, she starts to seem more like a prop than a person.
 
 
yawn - thing's buddy
09:51 / 22.07.02
I honestly thought this film was rubbish.

Derivative guff, without any innovation or anything recognisably ‘new’.

Why didn’t they play up the biology aspect? The Spidey Sense could have been explored more fully – this may have set it apart from all the other cgi-candy this summer.

Script was shockingly dull. Really. Company executive scenes, trouble in the boardroom, sub-batman tripe. The Editor of the newspaper – oh dear – that line about Julia Roberts totally out of place.

As for the action: The only sequence that really engaged me was the ‘shit costume’ scene, when he tested out his new found skills etc. What was all that nonsense with the big floating animal balloons etc. Haven’t we seen this one trillion times before?

Motivation for crime fighting (re:death of his uncle, which peter was part responsible for!!!! How sad) was awful – more sub batman crap. ‘With great power comes great responsibility’ – fingers down the throat rubbish.

Romance between MJ and Peter was flat and limp and the end sequence of them warbling away to eachother was ass-achingly boring.

End fight – yawn.

Killing off GG – stupid.

Aunt May – bitch.

Stupid stupid film.

Danny Elfman score – heard it all before. Anyone notice the massive swoosh in the score when Elfman’s name came up in the titles? – tosser

Titles: too long.

It was such a tired affair – I actually wondered why they bothered. Also, this superhero in the movies stuff is becoming tedious to the extreme. I mean, I saw an advert for Daredevil before the movie. Reminds me off all the shite which appeared around Batman in 89/90 – yknow, Shadow etc.
 
 
The Natural Way
11:39 / 22.07.02
Yawn: Motivation straight outta the comic; along w/ all that "great power..." Jazz. Pure Stan Lee.

And killing off GG also faithful to comic. Norman Osborne bites it on the wrong end of his bat-glider.....Harry threatens revenge.... Voila! A coupla sequels down the line and you gotta new GG, but this time w/out the armour....and with the scales!

Not so amazing: "you mess w/ one New Yorker, you mess w/ us all!" and the American Flag and the shit CGI and the Green Goblin's spacky laugh. Grumble.

But, overall: fine and pleasant.
 
 
yawn - thing's buddy
12:03 / 22.07.02
yeah - 'responsibility' line - pure stan lee, but rather dull these days. spose I'm just bored of morality built into the pop spectacle all the time. Superheroes: gimme Paradax or Zenith anyday.

green goblin - fair enough about comic being same but the way everything played out was so obvious and tedious. What's strange about this adaptation was that when Spiderman appeared first (in comic form) it was a breath of fresh air, a whole new take on the genre etc. wheras this film was the complete opposite - safe, pandering, derivative (visually and thematically)

motivation: okay, accepted, same as comic - but is that good enough for today's audience? me not think so. I went with a friend who's kindov aware of comic books etc and she thought it was mighty dull. Kids probably would have liked it, I'm sure, cept without the tedium of romance.

I've basically had it with CGI candy. I'm pukin my eyes out!
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
12:58 / 24.07.02
I'm officially very old, because teenagers droning on and on about their problems now bores the everloving shit out of me.

Everyone around Peter Parker. Paper thin and very dull. Oh look, here's the school bully, oh look, here's Aunt May. Peter Parker rather dull and lacking in charisma. The only person who is in anyway interesting is old Norman/GG. I also think that on top of the whole Peter Parker becomes Spidey arc that including him going to work at the Daily Bugle was a mistake and should have been left for a sequel. As it was there wasn't much Spidey vs. GG action.

But the scenes with Norman talking with himself as GG were really good. It's just a shame that they were so good that the director stopped them halfway through and went for the plain evil GG.

And the "you take on one of us, you take on all of us!" stuff was just shit.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
14:29 / 20.09.02
Not worthy of a new thread, but I just read that Michael Chabon is writing the script for the sequel: "The Amazing Spider-Man".

Very cool.
 
  

Page: 12(3)

 
  
Add Your Reply