Wednesday, June 30, 2004

Reel Life: Flim Review- Spider-Man 2:: Just tooo wicked

Great motivations, characters and essentially great villain make a vast difference in any story or movie. The first “Spider-Man,” was good in my opinion but a bit lacking eh.

His costume was too off, and the character lacked sufficient motivation, Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin got boring long before the finale. The special effects are taken to newer heights and so the villain’s history is much richer, creating more believable motivation, in the second installment, which affords Alfred Molina the chance to play and develope an interesting villain.

In “Spider-Man 2,” Molina plays Dr. Otto Octavius(who later become Dr. Octopus or Doc Ock- as J.Jonah Jameson said in the flick what a coincidence "a guy named Octavius ends up with 8 arms" hmmmmmm), an egotistical scientific genius backed by Oscorp. Neither he nor his ego poses no threat to anyone until later in the movie, when his theory is put to the test, thats when everything goes horribly wrong in a lab accident. When the mechanical tentacles get grafted to his spine becomes, and he loses his wife as well, she is what seems to ground him as a character, after this he submits to the dark side of the machine he created.The doctor’s good intentions become a tad bit warped, by the logic presented to him by the grasping tentacles.

Molina, is apt for the part in his look and he tackles the character well, he never over acts or seems to goof up the part, he keeps the movie rolling, especially whenever its hero Spider-Man or Peter Parker, threatens to bog us down in his sorrows. As Peter Parker, Maguire spends much of his screen time in constant indecision, trying to lead some semblance of a normal life and woo Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) but succumbs to his sense of responsibility.

The villain’s predicament is inextricably linked to the hero’s dilemma. They’re both at odds with themselves, they both have a twisted 8 legged commonality and they both relish the opportunity to escape their normal selves and demonstrate power. Doc Ock has a more colorful role. The first film showed us what Spidey can do and hence gave Octavius the advantage of novelty as well as improved CGI.

Sam Raimi, who directed the first “Spider-Man,” deserves a drink, I would personally buy him one if I met him, he manages to integrate the spectacular and the romantic once more. Especially effective is the emotional finale to a runaway subway sequence; Spidey’s fans get a chance to show their appreciation for him, as they bravely stand up to Octavius. As for Mary Jane, she’s acquired another boyfriend while making the big leap to becoming a New York stage actress, and Dunst revels in the chance to make her more conflicted and vulnerable.

Unfortunately, the ending suggests that the Green Goblin will be back for the next installment, oh noooooo, please we want VENOM...

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I don't agree that Doc Oc gets an avantage over Spider-man because the former's character is more colourful.The basis of my disagreement is that Spiderman's multi-dimensional conflict (which seems to result from past bad decisions), i.e., his feeling of responsibility for the old man's death which inspires his eventual confession to his grandmother or aunt about how he died, his wanting to tell Mary Jane the truth about his identity, the detriment his studies have suffered because of his dedication to his role as Spiderman and at the root of all of this, as you have pointed out, the conflict with himslef, stands a better chance of evoking a sense of recognition from the audience, then Doc Oc's mishap caused be a lab accident. Peter Parker, save his web-throwing, high-flying alter-ego, possesses a volume of versimilitude.
Of course that line of argument could be thrased on the grounds that the basis of the movie is this superhero so from the outset and audience shouldn't expect too much recognition. In that case, what would be the point?

I agree however, that the director has skilfully mixed 'the spectacular with the romantic'.

The review is generally okay and takes the effects-oriented slant it does due to the reviewer's obvious penchant for graphics.