A thought after seeing Spider-Man 3
As I watched “Spider-Man 3” yesterday morning patently bored by endless scenes concerning Mary Jane’s acting-career frustrations or Aunt May’s rheumatic recountings of her idyllic past with dead Uncle Ben, I began to recall that as a boy I was not a regular reader of Spider-Man comics. In fifth grade I did do a trade with a boy named Chris and got a slew of Spider-Man comics from issue 70-something to issue 90-something, but I never spent my own money to buy one even as I paid for dozens of other titles. This web of memory spun on as, on the big screen, Harry Osborn lost his memory again and then regained it again, and an action scene was interupted for a too-long and unclever pas de deux between J. Jonah Jameson and a little girl in a crowd — and then I hit on it.
Spider-Man is a neurotic loser whose gift of incredible power never eclipses his character flaws. And on many levels, those character flaws are ones we mostly associate with gawky high-schoolers. He is somehow trapped in a failed adolescence.
The Fantastic Four are science adventurers, amalgamatic representations of Shackleton and Einstein. They explore the limits of space and time to broaden our understanding and enrich the human race.
Somehow at age eight I must have realized this:
Spider-Man comics were for boys who wanted to be someone else. Fantastic Four comics were for boys who wanted to be somewhere else.
May 7th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Response to the new SM movie seems to be lukewarm. Not as good as the previous two. I’ve only seen the first, which was okay but not great. The FF flick was surprisingly good.
I read the earlier issues of the comic, those drawn by Steve Ditko. They were very good but young Peter Parker’s life did turn into a soap opera.
Maybe they could do another movie in which Spidy meets the FF. Or the X-Men. Or five bad guys instead of just three.
May 7th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Speaking as a “girl” who never read comic books, I was somewhat surprised that I very much liked the Spider-Man movie. I went along to the movie with the guys in my family (husband and son), but found I liked this one better than many of the other action films I’ve seen with them.
I think this was because the characters were conflicted and flawed, and each of them was acting from some deep pain or passion. I could identify with their stories, if not always with their actions. Also, the flaws of Spidey just made him endearing to me – but maybe that’s just a girl thing. Male characters who are flawless don’t seem to need anyone (so what’s a girl to do?), though they may be good role models for young boys.
I did grow impatient with the girlfriend. While I empathized with her career struggles – and was glad to see her ending up as a nightclub singer – I wish she could have played some active role in the main story. It is rather old-fashioned to have the love interest be just a passive victim – though it does allow the men to strut their stuff. The girl’s main talent seemed to be that she could scream really well.
Of course, there were some gaping holes in the movie (such as Sandman’s sudden attack of conscience at the end), but I decided to look the other way on those and just enjoy the ride. Also, I didn’t mind the many villains (as some reviewers have complained) because you really needed all of them to have the great two-on-two conflict at the end.
May 8th, 2007 at 12:17 am
[…] While I’m on about this: […]
May 8th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
I saw the movie last night and thought it was entertaining but not spectacular.
I thought Dallas Bryce Howard was better in this movie than she was in Lady in the Water. Of course her acting was still not worthy of an Oscar.
The overriding theme that I noticed was be true to yourself, when you move away from who you are and made you the person that you are you could hurt the ones that you love.
May 17th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
I saw Spider-Man 3 at the WGA last week. It was unbearably boring and the dialogue was laughable. The special effects seemed almost silly. However, the year old in front of me enjoyed every moment. That’s Spidy’s audience.
Not me. I walked out.
May 22nd, 2007 at 7:49 pm
What a friggin’ disappointment! Being a HUGE Spidey fan, the results of this messy attempt at a cohesive film fell flat. If I had heard one more song out of KD’s lips, I would’ve thrown something at the screen. They had loads of villians to choose from and plot points that could’ve been covered, and this is what they left us with?!?!?!? Thank goodness for Bruce Campbell, who brought some humor to the party. At least he was consistent. But it was a wussy party at best. If the creative team considers a fourth film in the series, then they’d better bring their A-game, and maybe it’s time to let the talented Dylan Baker become The Lizard.
May 24th, 2007 at 11:30 am
This reminds me of what went awry with the Batman franchise: the piling-on of more villains.
I agree with your choice of The Lizard — and I am ongoingly happy to see Dylan Baker play Dr. Kurt Connors pre-Lizard, and hope he actually gets to grow that reptilian arm in the next movie.
If I had to add an additional villain — and I guess I do, the way these things work — I would add either Man-Wolf or the Spider-Slayer, because the former is J. Jonah Jameson’s son and the latter is a robot bought and paid for by J. Jonah Jameson with the sole intent of squishing Spider-Man. Either villain would more strongly tie in this crucial supporting character.
November 30th, 2007 at 8:14 am
Hi there…Man i just love your blog, keep the cool posts comin..holy Friday