Rating: 
Summary: Watchable But Doesn't Exceed Specification
Review: * Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN is a big-budget attempt to do for the
Spider-Man mythology what the modern BATMAN movies have done for
the Batman mythology, and in fact takes much of the same
approach.Raimi's story remains true to the core elements of the Spider-Man
myth: student Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is bitten by a
mutant spider and acquires super powers, including great strength,
heightened senses, and the ability to spin webs. (In the
Marvel Comix series the webs are artificial, but in one of the
number of liberties Raimi takes with the mythology the movie Peter
Parker can actually shoot the webs out of the skin of his forearms.) Parker has to conceal his secret identity from Mary Jane Watson
(Kirsten Dunst as a redhead) and his Aunt May (Rosemary Harris),
while selling photos of Spider-Man's adventures to obnoxious
newspaper editor J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons), who has a
irrational hatred of the "web-slinger" but knows he sells papers.
However, Spider-Man has worse problems than Jameson in the
form of the "Green Goblin", a psychopathic super-villain
who is actually Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe), father of Parker's
good friend Harry Osborn (James Franco). As far as the plot goes, it's so dictated by the Marvel Comix
scenario that it is impossible to really say much about it.
If you buy the Spider-Man concept, you basically have to buy
the story. To be sure, there may be those who dislike some
of the tweaks in the movie, but I thought they made good sense. The weakest part of the movie is the dialogue. After I'd made
it into the last half of the flic I began to wonder: "Is there
*any* dialogue in this thing that actually rings true?" It
all has a cheesy sound, and if anyone ever spoke like that
in the real Universe you'd wonder what planet they were from. And then I laughed: "What else could I expect from Sam Raimi,
one of the all-time kings of B-video productions?" Indeed, in
a sense the cheesy dialogue of the movie tends to match the
cheesy dialogue of most comic-book scripts, and in that sense
the movie is also being faithful to its roots. Still, I wish
it would have been played with more of a wink, and I felt
sorry for the cast to have to try to deliver such lines with
a straight face. Some of it I had to fast-forward through
since it was so obvious, and I didn't miss anything. What I liked the most about the movie was the action
visuals. To be sure, they had some cheesiness too, but
the scenes of Spider-Man web-slinging through
New York City can actually make a viewer a bit dizzy. So, all
in all, this is an OK if not spectacular flic, and I will no
doubt pick up on the 2004 sequel, which I understand will
introduce Doctor Octopus.
Rating: 
Summary: A GREAT FILM: DRIVE, PASSION, FLASH & RESONANCE
Review: As a kid, I read the SPIDERMAN comic books and, I'm glad to say that the movie followed the thrust of the comics quite well.
Unlike many of the other marvel comics, Spiderman was really a teenager trying to do the right thing, yet still being viewed as a villain by powerful people (i.e. like the head of the major newspaper making Spiderman out to be a villain). His choices resulted in hurting not only people he loved, but the common man and woman. In addition, the villains always seemed to have more and be respected more than Spiderman ever could. All of these themes and hard points are also covered in the film, which makes it great for comic book fans. In addition, to make it marketable we've got all the usual CGI effects, as well as some cool scenes and a popular cast (i.e. Tobey McGuire, Kirsten Dunst and Willem Dafoe). SPIDERMAN was suppossedly the highest grossing film for 2002. The first movie shows how Spiderman became who he was and details his first set of challenges. Note that SPIDERMAN 2 is soon coming out.
Rating:
Summary: Good but overrated
Review: This was a pretty good movie.I liked it, not as much as other blockbusters but it's good. Some parts maybe a little overdramatic or just a little corney but the movie still survives and the acting is good. William Dafoe did a nice job and James franco was great, as for ol Toby, I liked him ever since I saw him in "PleasantVill." The music is great and it gets a good hero's theme. But it might not have deserved the praises it got. Perhaps it was big because it was the first comic book film in years. The graphics are cool. Overall it's pretty good and I can't wait for the sequel come out in May, 2004.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie but off from origin.
Review: I happen to love most of the comic based movies that come on screen. I liked spider man a lot. Tobey M. does a good job of being a 'nerd boy' who wakes up one morning being better at everything. There are a few details I didn't care for in the movie. Peter Parker is is supposed to be a genius. He is the one that stays up late at the lab and studies and researches when everyone else is asleep. In the movie, the most that his intelligence is used when he mentions some trivia on spiders and mentioned to Norman Osborn that he understood the paper that Norman had written on Nanotechnology. (Originally he was bitten by a radioactive spider in the lab he was researching at.) The finger bristles used for climbing is ok. His climbing wasn't explained in detail by comics. But I HATED that he was shooting webs directly from his wrists. Origin is that he invented wrist mounted cartriges to go along with the rest of his spider abilities. If he was getting the DNA crossed with a spider, his wrists would not be the part of his anatomy spinning webs. The movie itself is fun to watch. It is just the little details that get me.
Rating:
Summary: AWESOME!!!
Review: Spider-man is an epic thriller that will have you on the edge of your seat. Tobey Maguire is an excellent actor in all the movies he acts in. This movie was awesome!! P.S. Jamie from toronto...don't you dare ever say that Lord of the Rings is dumb.
Rating:
Summary: Scores emotionally, but if only the effects were better...
Review: Watching "Spider-Man," I was reminded of the first time I saw "Batman." I walked away from that movie awed by the visuals, but completely unmoved by the characters (even Jack Nicholson's over-the-top performance was a caricature, not a character). But "Spider-Man" did something very unusual for films in this genre: it made me care for the people in it far more than I cared for its spectacle. And, in reflection, that's a good thing, since the spectacle here isn't all that spectacular. More about that later - for now, let's just say that "Spider-Man" is perhaps the most emotionally involving comic-book movie ever made. That is in no small part due to Tobey Maguire, who is absolutely perfect as the all-too-human Peter Parker, a nerdy young man who is bitten by a "super spider" and develops superhuman capabilities. At first, he simply tries to cash in on his newfound powers, as any teenager probably would, but he's reminded tragically that someone who has his capabilities should be using them to better the world, not to rule on "WWF Smackdown." This is, of course, the essential "backstory" that all comic book characters have, and this one really clicks. Batman is a borderline personality, and Superman is too good for his own good; in "Spider-Man," we have a pretty normal guy who's only abnormal in his capabilities, which makes him darned easy to relate to, and admire. It's all about motivation when it comes to comic books. Batman is motivated by emotional pain, and Superman is motivated by his too-good-to-be-true nature; it's very difficult to see either character's life playing out much differently than they do. But Peter's destiny is chosen, not by his psychological problems or emotional programming, but by himself. He can be what he wants, and he wants to be a super-hero, but more importantly, he chooses to be a super-hero in a way that doesn't hurt his loved ones. This means sacrificing things that most young men wouldn't be prepared to do without, most prominently the love of his life, Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst). At first, Peter's too shy and insecure to do anything but pine away over her, but as his confidence grows, Mary Jane begins to see him in a different life, and eventually falls for him. But Peter chooses not to make himself avaiable to her for a simple reason: he's made all too aware that the only way to defeat Spider-Man is to hurt his loved ones. The comparisons to other superheroes come up again. Batman is too screwed-up to have a normal relationship, and Superman is physically incapable of one without giving up his powers. But Peter would be perfectly capable of having having a normal love life, and probably would be a heck of a catch for any woman with half a brain, and chooses not to because it would endanger her. There's real humanity and pathos in that decision, and Maguire's performance really brings that out. There's also real humanity in the central villain, Norman Osborne (Willem Dafoe), a corporate magnate who inadvertently releases a lot more than his physical potential when he tests out his company's performance enhancing drug. His personality splits between the marginally likeable Osborne, and the Green Goblin, who's the kind of villain that likes to roll off long, evil laughs and lines like, "he must be instructed in pain and loss." Osborne's son Harry (James Franco) is Parker's best friend, and even after Spider-Man finally defeats him, Osborne's dying wish is that his son never finds out about his secret supervillain side. Of course, Peter, being the honorable guy that he is, honors that dying wish, even when Harry threatens revenge against Spider-Man. How long has it been since we saw a villain in one of these movies with real humanity? Only Lex Luthor, and perhaps Jim Carrey's Riddler, come close. All the rest, including Nicholson's Joker, are just cartoon characters - fun to watch, but ultimately empty and uninvolving. This all makes for a good basic drama, built on nice dialogue and fine performances - a rarity in films of this sort, which almost invariably succeed as spectacle and fail miserably as drama. But "Spider-Man" has the opposite problem - it succeeds as drama but fails a spectacle. The fight sequences play well, but whenever Spider-Man takes to the air, and the CGI effects cross the screen, it plays like a video game - flat, graceless, and obvious. Spider-Man looks no more real or graceful than Sonic the Hedgehog, and the effect is even more pronounced on a television screen. Many recent films, notably the latest Star Wars prequel, have shown that CGI can create animation that has real weight, realism and elegance. I don't know any other reason, save budgetary concerns, that would drive the filmmakers to settle for such obvious, silly effects here. In the end, the effects don't ruin this film - the basic goodness of the story and the quality of its telling preclude that - but with better visuals, this would have been a total triumph. As it is, I'm sure that the immense success of this film will enable the producers to hire a more competent visual effects shop for the upcoming sequel. And if that sequel is able to replica the human impact of "Spider-Man," then that movie will truly be something to see.
Rating:
Summary: Welcome to the Marvel Movie Universe....
Review: The way Sam Raimi directed it. The Production design and general look of the movie really does make this look like a movie was set in the Marvel Universe (as created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby). It looks like the every day world of New York City but the apperance of Oscorp and the Daily Bugle show that it is not. It is a world that can only be found in the pages of a Marvel Comic, put on film with a good cast and a good story. This is how all Marvel Movies should be made. But so far, the only other Marvel film that has been as good as Spider-Man, has been the Hulk.
Rating:
Summary: Can't wait for the sequel!!!
Review: Any true fan who saw the movie doesn't need me to tell how great this or that was or the beauty of this was... and how great the acting was...do I? Great Film..simple as that! Can't wait for the others.
PS--the Goblins mask made him even more sinister!
Rating:
Summary: Amazing Spider-Man
Review: For all of the comic book super hero movies being made recently, Spider-Man is definately the best. The acting, special effects, and plot line are all superb. Everytime I watch it (which is quite often), I still find myself in awe about the whole experience. Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and Willem Dafoe were brilliantly cast in the three pivotal roles. Each one exemplified the parts brilliantly while not being overly done. After all, it is only a comic book fantasy. Mr. Maguire perfectly captured the role of a high-school outsider pining for the affections of a girl who seems to be out of bounds. And is an absolute delight to behold as he screams with glee at his new found abilities. The writers captured the story of Spidey to a t. Spider-Man has such heart and soul that any person could see themselves in the shoes of Peter Parker. After all, who among us has never dreamed of being something more, wished they had asked that girl out, or fantasized about doing the daring dos that our friendly neighborhood web-slinger can do? With the coming sequels on the way one can hope and expect that they will all live up to the original.
Rating:
Summary: An Unforgivably Stupid Movie
Review: With this movie, director Sam Raimi assembles a great cast, then bafflingly fritters away their talents on an almost completely uninspired story and some wincingly bad visual effects. Casting Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man might have seemed an odd choice at first, but it proves a masterstroke; his performance is hands-down the best (indeed only) good thing about this movie, and all three stars in this review go to him. He is amazingly funny and sympathetic as the put-upon high school uber-dork Peter Parker, yet also graceful, buff, and lithe as alter-ego Spidey. Parker/ Spidey is the only character with anything even remotely resembling depth. The scenes where he realizes he has super powers (thanks to that infamous spider bite), experiments with them, and figures out what to do with them are probably the best in the movie, and he is given a nice personal motivation to propel him into a life as a vigilante crime-fighter. Sadly, it all goes downhill from there. Kirsten Dunst (with frightfully dyed red hair) is cast as his love interest Mary Jane Watson, but she literally has nothing to do in the movie except get in trouble, scream, and be rescued (and this from a director who co-created Xena?). Here and there, she and Maguire have scenes where they actually talk to each other and exhibit chemistry; some of these are good, some are painfully laborious. Check out Bring it On for evidence that Dunst can do a lot more; that she can breathe any life at all into her two-dimensional character is a testament to her talent. The biggest disappointment is Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn/ Green Goblin who is so flat and badly done and over the top that trying to watch his scenes is just excruciating. I found myself glad I had waited to rent this movie on DVD and could therefore fast-forward over his scenes. Raimi indulges in every stupid villain cliche in the book, from the greedy military-industrial scientist to the ridiculous costume/ mask design to the rocket-propelled surfboard to his Evil Maniacal Laugh--he is the kind of villain spoofed pretty much every week on Kim Possible. When he actually started singing "The Itsy Bitsy Spider," I just about threw rotten tomatoes at my TV screen. The Jekyl-and-Hyde dual personality fails to give him any depth because both his human self and his monster self are completely lacking in charm, complexity, or plausible/ original motivation. The supporting characters range from decent (Uncle Ben and Aunt May) to overbearing (the newspaper editor) to dull (Peter's best friend Harry); again, I found myself fast-forwarding through a lot of their scenes, never a good sign. Overall, this movie suffers mostly from a profound lack of subtlety: everything is loud, forced, obvious, and dumb. Many of the visuals disappoint: for example, the shots of Spidey swinging among the New York skyscrapers are about as organic-looking as an animated character in a video game. There are a few fun moments, mostly early on, like some 'person-on-the-street' reactions to this new super-hero (a subway guitarist is particularly funny), but scenes like this are sadly fewer and further between as the movie plods its way through a hackneyed and totally predictable plot. With a better story and a fresher vision, this movie might have been achingly good, but Raimi and scriptwriter David Koepp seem determined to reach for the lowest common denominator rather than something even a little higher. Almost every member of the cast can be seen in better work. For those wanting an eyeful of Maguire, rent the far superior Pleasantville, or better yet, check him out this summer on the big screen in Seabiscuit, a terrific movie that lets his substantial talents really shine. I wince at the thought of him in Spider Man 2, which I fear will only be broader and dumber than its predecessor.
| 
