Showing posts with label Bill Nunn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Nunn. Show all posts

Sunday, 6 January 2019

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

“Where do all these guys come from?”

The critics didn’t like this film; I went in knowing that. So I’m left wondering what parts low expectations had in what I made of the film, but I liked it; perhaps more so than Spider-Man 2, and that certainly isn’t what you’re supposed to think.

We’re told this film is an overcrowded mess with too many villains. Well, it isn’t. Both Sandman and Venon are tied in well to Peter Parker’s character development and play important roles, as does Harry Osbourne.  Gwen  Stacy plays an important role too; the film packs a lot in but doesn’t feel rushed. Instead, it actually justifies its long running time.

The core of the film is, of course, the symbiote as a symbolic representation of Peter’s dark side- the arrogance, the selfishness, the temptations that lurk within us all. From a situation of seeming perfection at the start of the film- things are going well for Peter in his love life, studies, work and Spider-Man is insanely popular- we immediately know that the bubble is bound to burst and, importantly, Peter starts to show some neglect for MJ’s work problems before the symbiote even affects him, but as soon as he puts in the dark costume (it’s a shame they didn’t use the proper version of the costume, as Benom looks pretty similar, but heigh-ho...)

Yes, Venon gets relatively little screen time, but a version of Eddie Brock is well used, Harry (whine, conveniently, we already know) is well used and Flink Marco (Sandman) is given a tragic backstory and an important role into being (rather crudely) retconned into Ben Parker’s killer. He’s well portrayed by Thomas Gaden Church and, while both he and Venom have limited screen time, I liked the way both were used. This isn’t a Joel Schumacher Batman film; all the characters are properly developed, however minor, including May, Jonah and the rest of the supporting cast.

So ignore the criticisms; this is a fine film. It also has a top cameo by Bruce Campbell as a snooty French maitre d’, and the CGI with both Sandman and Venom deserves an awful lot of praise. It’s sad that this is the last of the Sam Raimi films; I wish they had more of a wisecracking Spidey, but the trilogy is excellent on the whole, and ends on a high.

Wednesday, 22 June 2016

Spider-Man (2002)

"You're not Superman."

I'll be generous; this film is well-made, well-acted, looks good, has a decent plot and it was amazing at the time (unbelievably the first ever Spider-Man film was released as late as 2002) to see Spidey on-screen. Tobey Maguire is a good Peter Parker and the film faithfully translates the comics well, particularly visually. But... even at the time it was a little disappointing that the film was so serious and totally lacking in Spidey's signature quips.

Now? Well, several years of witty, cool Marvel Cinematic Universe films make this film seem stuff and awkward. It's quite good, but forgettable, and feels like a relic of a different era. The most interesting thing about it in 2016, sadly, is that Cliff Robertson, who plays Uncle Ben, also played Shame in the 1960's Batman series.

Still, there are lots of things to praise, from the costume to the realisation of Spidey's web swinging to the casting of J.L. Simmons as a perfect J. Jonah Jameson. Doing an origin story for a superhero film is generally not a good idea but they get away with it; nice to see the radioactive spider being updated to a genetically engineered one. And Willem Dafoe makes a splendid Green Goblin.

It's just that, well, these days we expect our superhero films to be a bit less serious. Not a bad film, but surprisingly dated..