Rating: 
Summary: something for everyone
Review: I must have been waiting for this film since i was 5 years old.And it was worth the wait!Spider-man was always my favorite super-hero and it was about time a movie was made about him.There are a few things that were changed for the film (basically combining Gwen Stacy with Mary Jane Watson;the web coming out of his wrists instead of web-shooters)but it doesn't take away from the story.The CGI special effects are very poor at some parts,but that isn't enough to take way from the movie-going experience.The entire cast was incredible and I was very impressed with the job Sam Raimi did.I am probably going to see it another time or two while it's still out.If you're thinking about seeing this movie,go for it!Even if you're not a 20+ year Spidey fan like me,you'll still enjoy it!
Rating: 
Summary: Behind Superman and Batman as a top superhero movie
Review: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man is a movie which may actually appeal more to casual fans of Spider-Man, than fans of the comic book. While writing this review I thought of casual and hardcore fans, though I did not think of non-fans. I mean, no one will accidentally walk into the Spider-Man movie. The movie follows the earlier legend of Spider-Man rather than the revised story of the Ultimate Spider-Man comic books. However the storyline the Spider-Man movie follows, follows well, and establishes the origin story of Spider-Man very faithfully to the comic books. Toby Maguire is excellent as Peter Parker, and is very convincing as a young man coming to terms with his superpowers. Kirsten Dunst is also quite good in her role as Mary Jane, while Willem Dafoe is quite a good Norm Osborn. However the best acting performance came from J.K. Simmons as J. Joanah Jameson, who is quite hilarious in his performance. The script is also well written; at times very funny and at other times very touching. When it comes to establishing Peter Parker and Norm Osborn, the Spider-Man movie succeeds fantastically. It is amazingly touching and its characters feel surprisingly human. However when it comes to establishing the character of Spider-Man, the movie falters a bit. Spider-Man in his costume never feels joyful or at all like the smart mouthed Spidey we know. Unfortunately he hardly speaks, and is far too mysterious. I mean this attitude is great for someone like Batman, but certainly not suited to Spider-Man. Any fan of Spider-Man knows that Spidey is full of one-liners and wisecracks. Unfortunately in the movie, Spider-Man is too quiet and believes in action rather than words. I must admit to the fact that the special affects are fantastic. And even though the joy of being Spider-Man is never fully established through dialogue it is thoroughly established through action. Spider-Man looks fantastic swinging past fast moving vehicles, and doing Matrix like moves. The scenes where he utilizes his abilities, are especially well done. All in all the Spider-Man movie is a visual feat, and its unmasked characters are extremely well developed. If I compare it to other superhero movies, I'd put this one behind the Superman and Batman movies. What those movies had though, was a great soundtrack, which the Spider-Man movie sorely misses. Also, those movies' superheroes had a lot of heart when they were in their costumes, while Spider-Man seems too robotic, much like Al-Gore. Like Batman, Superman, and The X-Men movies, Spider-Man does a good job when it comes to the character development of its unmasked hero. In fact I'd take it a step further, and say that Peter Parker is as well developed as Clark Kent was. Unfortunately as Spider-Man, he is more like Al-Gore than Spider-Man. Perhaps the problem was that Peter Parker was still new to being Spider-Man, and had not yet developed his Spider-Man personality. I think that that was the movie's only problem, it's Peter Parker lacked character when he put on the Spider-Man suit. I don't want to close on a negative though. The Spider-Man movie is quite good. It features some good character development, some superb action, witty dialogue (from everyone except for the webslinger), and great direction. This movie will do for superhero fans, what the original Superman movies did.
Rating: 
Summary: Good, but slightly dissapointed
Review: I was first interested in seeing Spider-Man when I viewed the previews on TV. I thought maybe just the reception was bad during the animated sequences, but not so. The effects are just cartoony, maybe thats what they were going for. Anyone, I thought the movie stareted off well-We learn about Peter Parker and how he gains his ability, as well as how the Green Goblin reaches his state. AS time went on though, I became less and less interested. The movie was lacking real dircetion, the Green Goblin doesn't have any goal, he just fills in as you all-purpose villain, just waiting for Spider-Man to stop. There were some small children in the theater, and all of them seemed scared when the Green Goblin was on screen, which is good in some ways, but it also goes over the top with this when he is having his own psychological battles with himself. Also, because of the violence, I would also have to reccomend that no children under 10 see it, no matter how hard they beg. BAck to the movie, everyone delivers great performances, and it is a superb cast. Sometimes the movie seems to lag (it is over 2 hours), and often the "romantic" scenes just fall flat. To sum it up..... 1) Would reccomend children under 10
2)Special effects are mostly cartoony (although there are some good rip off's of "THe Matrix" in it
3)Great cast with good performcanes
4)lags at times. Hope that helps
Rating:
Summary: Sticks On You
Review: I have never read a Spider-Man comic, save one written by a friend of mine, and I've only seen a couple episodes of the TV series, but I am now very interested in them. I was blown away by this film. The story was great, and the effects were stunning. I knew enough about Spider-Man's history to know that Sam Raimi didn't screw this film up. I originally thought that Tobey Maguire, as most people have agreed with, was wrong for the part, until I learned that Spider-Man was a nerdy kid to begin with. After I saw the movie, I realized that Maguire can play a wide spectrum of characters, and his role as Peter Parker/Spider-Man was great. Kirsten Dunst was, I thought, good in most ways, but she seemed a little prone to changing her personality. Willem Dafoe was the best, though. He perfectly played Norman Osborn/Green Goblin, with the scenes where he's arguing with himself very believable. He was very creepy, and that made the movie even better. The only thing that I would have liked to have seen were more fights between Spidy and Gobby. Altogether, this was an amazing film. P.S.
After 9/11, a scene was removed with a giant spider-web between the World Trade Center towers. Personally, I would have liked to have seen this in the movie, as kind of a memory or tribute to the WTC.
Rating:
Summary: The BEST movie EVER!
Review: This new 2002 edition of Spider-Man really rocks! It depicts everything perfectly. The special effects were awesome. Tobey Maguire was the perfect person to play Peter Parker! Also Kirsten Dunst was the perfect person for Mary Jane. The Green Goblin special effects were cool! The end was a sort of sad cliffhanger but I am not going to say what it is!...It is a must-see movie...Spider-Man just opened the door for what will probably be a new line of super-hero movies!
Rating:
Summary: Marvel History in the Making!!
Review: All I can say is WOW!!! From the opening scene to the end credits, I was blown away by the visual effects and storyline. Although there were a few differences between this version and the comic version, the story of Peter Parker and Spiderman are pretty accurate. Maguire does an excellent job playing Peter Parker, as did Dunst, who played Mary Jane "MJ" Watson. Excellent cinematography and special effects!!!
Rating:
Summary: To an Esteemed Friend
Review: Tonight Mr. George, Mr. Casey, and I had the privilege of seeing Sam Raimi's Spider-man. Mr. George informs me that you were disgusted with the film. I am taking the opportunity as a student of film - and one who has excelled in this study, may I add - to chastise you for your egregiously flawed judgment in this matter. I have just returned from iMDB, THE staple resource of movie buffs, and have rated the film a 10 (along with 2486, or 37.2% of other voters), placing the film at the statistically accurate rank of 94 in the Top 250 movies ever (according to iMDB polls, which are better than any stupid critic's short list). The reason for the film's high scores is one apparently lost upon you, and I can only mourn the lack of youthful vim and vigor that your panning of the film reveals. The reason the movie succeeds so admirably, despite what you may have termed its critical shortcomings (ironic, in fact, because many critics did not see the same failings; they overlooked them in light of the following), is that its goal was to bring to life a comic book that provided many a youth with fertile soil to allow his imagination to run wild. The movie was wonderfully acted in the sense that the goal was not to make a serious film (evidenced by the decision to use Sam Raimi as director - see the other films he's made). Neither was the goal to make a comedy. The goal was to bring to life a comic book, in all its glory. This was done perfectly. Frankly, I never liked Spider-man. I always thought he was a weakling. The reason I loved the movie is that despite my previous dispositions, I left wanting to be Spider-man. Movies are supposed to envelope us in a fantastic world, in which, for a brief moment in our slightly less brief and much more unpleasant realities, we find ourselves wishing with all our hearts that we could step into the celluloid. For myself and many, many other people, Spider-man accomplished just this feat, and reminded me again why I began to study film in the first place. I hope you see the error of your ways...
Rating:
Summary: No, That's Spider-man! Ruling New York & Our Thrilled Heart!
Review: Sam is back! The first show that started 9:10 a.m. was not a very happy experience for me, but it's good to see Sam Raimi regain his flair for rousing actions that has been laid aside since the 1990 "Darkman." And looking back from now, it was very fortunate that Cameron didn't take the helm of the production for the hero-image of "Spider-man" is more unconventional than all-American one, which Leo or Arnie might have been struggling to handle. No way. Anyone with some knowledge about comics or TV should have been already seen this wonder boy Tobey Maguire who gains his incredible power of hanging from walls and buildings. Unlike other superheroes, however, "Spider-man" emphasizes on his personality as an ordinary boy, who thinks of his extraordinary spider-like ability as a curse. And I bet you do, even if you got a kiss from Mary Jane in the form of Kristen Dunst while you're hanging from up above, showing only your lips! Yes, Sam Raimi shows again his deft skill at mixing those incongruous elements -- darkness behind heroism and romance between a boy and a girl -- and he even throws unexpected comical moments into this hero's adventure, making his Peter "Spider-man" Parker's character more human than you expect. There's no machismo, no obligatory love scene. But that's what Raimi's style all about, which curiously matches this unusual hero from Marvel Comic. So, don't try to find something similar to "Superman" here (though you get some funny allusions to this popular hero; watch how Tobey discloses his costume baring his breast on the street, the same way Christopher Reeve once did in the first "Superman" film.); the touch of the film is completely different, and though the film itself never forgets to entertain us with its exciting high-speed action sequences, the strength lies in its slightly off-beat presentation of this hero's life in America, and especially New York City. I was greatly amuzed to see the city depicted from a new perspective, that is of course, from high up above the city. Supporting cast is also very good, and my special mention goes to ever-getting gorgeous Kirsten Dunst, whose eccentric beauty goes along well hand in hand with Tobey Maguire's oddly amusing, droll superhero image. And it is only natural that Ms. Dunst's past filmography helps greatly -- you know, she was in "Interview with the Vampire" (she was a child vampire) and "The Crow -- Salvation" (wow ... with another dark hero). Though it doesn't have the groundbreaking special effects that impressed us in, say, "Matrix," "Spider-man" is a great achievement after all, which can be done only by first-rate crew and cast, and this case again, kudos to Mr. Raimi, to whom I really want to say: Welcome back, Sam, and please, please, don't make any more baseball film.
Rating: 
Summary: spiderman?
Review: I thought about giving Spiderman 4 stars but decided against it. This is the most boring action movie I have ever seen. Aside from the horrible CGI, it really really drags. Over 2 hours??? Why? Throw out all the useless, underdeveloped character (Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Harry Osbourne, all the insignificant references to Spiderman comic book personalities), and you might end up with a decent 1 hr 40 min film. And no it did not follow the comic book. Anyone who says that is lying...all the more reason to get rid of some characters. I fear the coming of Spiderman 2, or as I will call it, Spiderman Again. I know it will be rehash becasue of Hollywood's unrelenting philosophy... "If it makes a lot of money, make it again."
Rating:
Summary: Spider-Man swings to the top of the super-movie heap.
Review: Perhaps the best super-hero movie made to date, Spider-Man delivers on the hype with an updated and interesting take on the wall-crawler's origin and a wonderful performance from both Toby Maguire as Spidey/Peter Parker and Wilem Dafoe as the nemesis Green Goblin/Norman Osborn.
The characters seem to stay true to their classic motivations as backed up by some 40-odd years of mythology. There is something for all movie fans in this film, as the love-interest played by Kirsten Dunst as Mary-Jane Watson provides nice counterpoint to the battle scenes with Spider-Man and his various contagonists.
Also, in a small but dead-on role, the actor that plays J.Jonah Jamison, the editor of the paper 'The Daily Bugle' looks like he could have been cloned right from the comic book page, if such a thing were possible. His part is fun and funny.
It seemed like all the actors were having a good time with this project and it shows in the performances.
I wouldn't take my 5 year-old, though. The Green Goblin would scare the teeth out of his mouth!
Go see this movie as soon as you can.
|
