With the release of Spider-Man: Homecoming on the horizon, featuring a very different take on the character than what we've seen before, it seems necessary to acknowledge the previous incarnations of Spider-Man that have appeared on the big screen over the years. The films have certainly existed on a wide scale of quality, ranging from fantastic to almost unbelievably bad. While the first Spider-Man films opened the doors - along with the first X-Men films - they later turned into almost shameless movies that could barely be considered movies.
They were products so that Sony could keep the rights and shove in as many things as possible to make interesting trailers, which the DC films have now co-opted, which creates films of a similar quality to The Amazing Spider-Man 2. With the character now back at Marvel Studios (where he belongs), I have a lot of confidence in Homecoming to be a good movie. But for now, let's look back at some not-so-good movies, and a couple of good ones.
SPIDER-MAN
The first Spider-Man film holds a very strange place in my heart.
Whenever I watch this film, there's definitely a nostalgic aspect to the experience, but that's faded over time. I don't really love this movie, but I like it just fine. i more respect it than anything, because it sets (for the most part) the perfect tone for a comic book movie. There are some serious elements, and the character are grounded in very understandable, human places. At the same time, the tone is very goofy and light, which fits the source material well. Since this film was made in a time before superhero movies were everywhere, they didn't know how to be self-referential yet.
What I didn't expect to identify as the best element of the film is the cast. Tobey Maguire might make goofy faces, but he does play the aloof, socially awkward nerd very well. Even though he has a best friend in Harry Osbourne - played in a very bored style by James Franco - he very clearly doesn't fit in. There's a real sense of victory and elation when he discovers his powers, and while the effects don't really hold up anymore, the action sequences are a lot of fun. Fun is the key to this film. The atmosphere is consistently light, and while the humour isn't laugh-out-loud funny, the characters gel really well together. The stand-out performance without a doubt comes from Willem Dafoe, who chews the scenery so heavily, and yet somehow also has the most dignified character and presence on-screen.
Maybe this film's biggest detriment is that it is so goofy. This film came around at a time when comic book movies were still trying to find their footing in Hollywood, and striking a balance between lightness and darkness in tone was difficult. This film certainly has a tone that's appropriate for its central character. That tone helped the set the tone for almost all of the future Marvel movies, really. Some of the changes that it makes from the source material feel unnecessary, but this was before the time when accuracy to the comics meant anything. Given Sam Raimi's background in horror, a darker tone might almost have been expected for this film, but it's very earnest in its lightness. It feels genuine, and while it isn't perfect, it's a love letter to the title character.
Overall, this film is effective above all else. It became not quite a template, but a benchmark of the superhero genre, and in terms of crafting an origin story and building up characters, this was a promising start to a franchise. It proved that comic book movies didn't have to be dark and brooding to be taken seriously, and could be light-hearted without going being of the same quality as Batman and Robin. The nostalgic attachment I have to this film does keep me coming back to it with a positive view; this film transports me back to the basement of my childhood home every time. It's silly, it's dated, and it's certainly not the best Spider-Man film out there. But it works for what it is, and its shortcomings only left room for improvement in the sequel.
SPIDER-MAN 2
I never thought that the one with the octopus man would be the best one.
What I think makes this film work so well is how it builds off its predecessor in the perfect ways. The character development, the villain, the story, it all feels like a natural progression. On top of that, the film does an excellent job of fixing the issues that existed in the first Spider-Man. The dialogue was kind of cheesy? It's more natural here. The effects could be better? The effects still hold up today in Spider-Man 2. The characters feel more real, they deal with the consequences of the first film, and the drama among the characters is almost as compelling as the superhero action.
The villain is also a huge improvement, and undoubtedly the best aspect of the film. Willem Dafoe's campiness as Norman Osborne is gone, replaced by Alfred Molina as Dr. Otto Octavius - or Doc Ock. He's the perfect villain in many ways; a result of his own hubris, and a reflection of Spider-Man in an accident creating a personal tragedy. The relationship that develops between Peter and Otto creates a strong backbone to Dock Ock as villain, and his story makes his death feel like less of a defeat and more of a tragedy. There have been very few villains who have matched up to him in superhero films, in terms of menace and memorability. The rest of the supporting cast - especially JK Simmons' legendary performance as J. Jonah Jameson - help to make the world around Peter more entertaining.
This film also adds new depth to Peter Parker. Very rare is the superhero film, especially in the early 2000s, that would offer legitimate emotional insight to its protagonist, let alone having him give up his powers. That is a really interesting arc to follow, and the resolution of the arc is very satisfying. The fact that the personal conflict is so important to teh film's story helps to give it more weight. I never really cared about the romance with Mary Jane, and even now I don't find myself too invested in whether they end up together or not. But it does leave the film on a very inspiring and uplifting note, which is what I think Raimi always intended for his Spider-Man films.
Spider-Man 2 is a real achievement in superhero filmmaking. It's the only legitimately great Spider-Man movie that's ever been made, and since all of the Spider-Man movies follow the same basic plot - someone with a personal connection to Peter gets powers in a science-related accident, Peter tries to balance being Spider-Man with his relationship drama, and the film ends with a funeral - this one works the best. The effects and action sequences, especially in the train fight, still hold up today. The relationship drama is underwhelming, but the drama in general adds a lot of human weight to the story. With a film this good, expectations were high for Spider-Man 3.
SPIDER-MAN 3
Spider-Man 3 is not a good movie. It's a great movie. That distinction is very important.
Everything about this film is just a joy. Objectively, this film doesn't hold up under much analysis, but this is a prime example of how the emotional connection that someone forms with a film can be more important than analysis. I have so much fun watching this movie, or talking to people about this movie, or even just thinking about this movie. Watching this movie with someone for the first time is one of the most entertaining experiences in the world. It's all crafted in such a fundamentally silly way that it's impossible to take seriously. It's Revenge of the Sith-level quotable, too; I get endless joy out of seeing Tobey Maguire say "Look at little Goblin Junior. Gonna cry?"
Remember when I talked about natural progression for Spider-Man 2? There's none of that here. Everything about this movie is so bizarre, in terms of story, characters, and even down to how the film is put together just doesn't quite fall in line with its predecessors. One of the biggest issues is the retroactive continuity, a trope which always bothers me. Sandman is revealed to be Uncle Ben's real killer, which just feels like an empty attempt to create a personal connection between him and Peter. But villains don't need to have a direct personal connection to the hero to be effective, and since there are two other villains with personal connections that actually work, But this film jumps around so much between barely-developed plots that it's hard to give anything of quality too much credit.
While a light atmosphere was always an essential aspect of the Spider-Man films, this one goes way too far over into outright goofiness. The "emo Peter" sequences are worthy of their meme status; they're beyond ridiculous, even though they weirdly fit the character. The Peter Parker that was established in the first two films would not be anything resembling "cool" when infected by an alien symbiote, and the scenes of him dancing through the street reflect that. The movie does try to be darker than the first two, and there are times when it does achieve that. Peter is pushed into a place he never would have gone. When he reaches the point where he rips the symbiote off of him, it feels like a victory, and while the final fight is overblown and ridiculous, it's fun. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films are, above all else, fun.
What's all the more frustrating is that Spider-Man 3 easily could have been a good movie. There is a strong thematic backbone to the story; Peter and Harry facing their darkest selves. Ironically, Sandman - the intended main antagonist of the film - is the least interesting part of the film. Removing that could have streamlined the story and made for a better experience. But that will remain hypothetical, just like the would-be fourth film in this series. Given how quickly the rebooted series fell apart, I would have loved to have seen where Spider-Man 4 would have gone. But instead, this film's troubled production just caused everyone involved to lose interest, and before Sony could lose the film rights of the character back to Marvel, they decided to go the route of a reboot.
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN
The Amazing Spider-Man is a prime example on how opinions on films can change over time
This film came around at the time where I wanted superhero films to be darker and more serious, so I jumped right to the conclusion that this film was an improvement over the original. I was a stupid teenager, sue me. But now, I see this film as little more than a shallow re-tread of Spider-Man from a decade before, and one that didn't even bother to do something different. There are some elements of Spider-Man's origin that can't be changed for the story to be told properly, but the fact that the same story was told so similarly - and so soon after the original - doesn't do a lot to forge a new identity for this series.
If this film is anything, it's just kind of bland. The story doesn't stand out as anything special, the characters aren't very well-defined, especially the villain. The film isn't presented with any specific style or vision; it just feels like it's trying to be The Dark Knight but with Spider-Man. The problem with that approach is that Spider-Man isn't rally a dark character. By design, he's supposed to be lighter and more fun, and Raimi's films understood this. The dark, gritty approach is dead on arrival, because Spider-Man's origin is so inherently silly. The guy was bitten by a radioactive spider, and he fights crime. Judging by his suit alone, he's not associated with darkness in any specific way, so I don't know why so much of this film takes place in the middle of the night.
The actors do stand out among the mediocrity, though. Although Andrew Garfield isn't a very good Peter Parker because he's too cool and likeable, he still gives a good performance. He's a really great actor, I just wish he'd been given a better script or been more in line with the character. Emma Stone is also great, and the chemistry that they share is pretty much the only reason to watch this. While his character makes no sense, Rhys Ifans does a solid job as a more tragic Curt Conners, and the film did take the first few steps to create a new world. But they probably would have been better off putting Oscorp Tower in The Avengers (which was supposed to happen) and not trying to craft a whole universe around Spider-Man alone.
Really, The Amazing Spider-Man's worst crime is just being bland. The sub-plot about Peter's parents doesn't make his story any more emotionally affecting, and the fact that the film barely explores it just makes it feel like an empty, surface-level addition to make it different from the original films. The action isn't especially impressive - even though the effects are solid - and the story feels so choppily edited, like huge chunks of important information are missing. I'd really like to see the original version of this film, because it was so heavily re-structured in post-production. I kind of feel bad for Andrew Garfield, because he was clearly so passionate about the character, and he was saddled with such sub-par material. But this certainly isn't as bad as it gets.
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2
I'm shocked that Sony somehow made the same mistake as before, and over-stuffed this film with too many villains and far, FAR too many plotlines. Much like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, this film was so focused on making a franchise that it forgot to be a film. It's a real shame too, because after the bland re-hashing of The Amazing Spider-Man, this film had an opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction. And in some ways, it did. But it shot itself in the foot in so many more ways and made so many strange creative decisions, all of which resulted in an entire franchise, with several sequels already planned, to collapse in on itself.
This film is really just a series of scenes loosely tied together. The tone shifts so radically from scene to scene, and it almost feels like each of them were directed by a different person (and not particularly competent ones). The darkness and seriousness of the first film has been abandoned, but a more vibrant colour palette certainly didn't do it any favours. The film looks nice, I guess, but there are so many logical ravines that the characters and sub-plots fall into, because the film is simply trying to balance so much. I once re-wrote the story of this film and cut about half of the sub-plots, and the story flowed a lot more smoothly. It's kind of funny that if you remove the main villain - Electro - you actually have a much more interesting story.
There's really not a whole lot to say about this film, because almost nothing about it works. The acting isn't particularly great, the story is muddled and convoluted, and the world-building is very weakly implemented. There's a lot of potential to this film and this universe, but the filmmakers just dropped the ball, likely because Sony forced them to include a bunch of useless shit. That's happened before, with Spider-Man 3 but at least Spider-Man 3 is a lot of fun to watch. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 isn't exactly a miserable experience, but it's not quite goofy enough to enjoy ironically. It's the kind of movie you can re-watch a couple of times, but every time will only bring new problems to light.
This film was so bad that it made Andrew Garfield hate his life and forced Sony to give their most profitable property back to Marvel Studios. Spider-Man being back with Marvel seemed like an impossibility until this film was released, but this film was just so incoherently bad that they had no choice. This film killed an entire franchise, one that likely would have been extremely profitable or a DC-esque disaster. Interest in Spider-Man had kind of been dying out for a while when this movie came out, and this film being such an unexpected disaster put the final nail in the coffin.
* * * * *
Because of the tumultuous history of Spider-Man on film, and the fact that there seemingly isn't a whole lot of demand for him anymore, I'm surprised that I'm looking forward to Spider-Man: Homecoming as much as I am. The character deserves to have an adaptation that reaches his full potential, and it looks like we might finally have that with Tom Holland. The fact that he's now i the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and we'll be able to see him throw down with the Avengers when Infinity War rolls around, I'm more excited than ever to see what Spider-Man's future will bring.
They've already hit rock-bottom, so really, the only way to go is up.
Comments
Post a Comment