Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:48:11 AM
713386 Posts in 53058 Topics by 7725 Members
Latest Member: wibwao
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  A Recent Spider-Man review « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: A Recent Spider-Man review  (Read 2764 times)
BlackAngel
Guest
« on: May 09, 2002, 05:15:52 AM »

Why I was up late night, I don't know.  But a couple of night ago, there was this movie review show, with Entertainment Tonight's Leonard Malton and some old chick.  Anyway, lo and behold, the first movie to be reviewed was Spider-Man.  Now, I'm not big on word of mouth, but they mean it, I'll give it a look over.  That's not the case, though.  It's  what Mr. Malton said on his review that p**sed me off.  He said the human aspect of the movie was genuine and the story stuck close to the comic.  But then he goes on saying when "Peter Parker" put on the webs, and starts jumping from building to building and swinging all around, it's all "cartoony".  Granted, all that swinging and jumping like that has to do with the special effects, but this is SPIDER-MAN we'er talking about here!  HELLO!  No normal stuntman, even if he's been in great shape his whole life, can do a portion moves Webs can do.  It's all about giving the illusion of what Spider-Man can do.  It like saying Mr. Malton would rather him swing like Tarzan in those old movies or like in those Spidey 'toon of the sixities and mid-eighties.

That just my two cents.  What's yours?
Logged
Squishy
Guest
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2002, 08:44:32 AM »

Well, that's the problem, right? If it looks too normal, then it's blah. If it looks abnormal, it looks "fakey." We all know a lot of the FX in Spider-Man are CGI, and once you know how it's done, it will rarely impress you--but that doesn't excuse the assboys who have to pipsqueak, "Awwwwwww that looks so FAKIEEEEE!!!" in a vain quest for the attention Mommy didn't give them...if the movie were made twenty or thirty years ago, dinks would whimper that the stop-motion effects were phoney or the matte lines were visible. Screw 'em.
Logged
Will
Guest
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2002, 09:24:12 AM »

I thought the very first FX scene with P.Parker jumping from building to building looked pretty bad and fake, but everything after that looked fantastic.  It captured the reality of how a body flying through the air and getting jerked around web strands would look: flopping and just barely in control.  It was incredible, and Leonard Maltin is a dickwad.
Logged
chris
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2002, 11:47:05 AM »

I really liked the "cartoony" look of the action scenes because they were a pleasant contrast to all the real drama going on with Parker's life.  Like all superheros, when he puts on that mask he gets to be someone else, a hero.  However, once he takes off that mask, his cartoon adventures end and he has to deal with the death of his uncle Ben (when he's crying in his room), his guilt with Aunt May's grief (and attack), his love for M.J. and his betrayal by Harry.  I believe this movie is doing so well because it is as damn good as they say, and when a "blockbuster" film is excellent a lot of people tend to nitpick or state the obvious to bring it down, because after all it is "a kiddie film".  I was watching a entertainment show the Monday after it opened and some pompous ass was hosting and he smugly laughed when he heard that someone over the age of 12 liked it.  The thing that puts this film above most blockbusters is Raimi put in elements that are sure to entertain every demographic.  But I'm sure people will complain that he stacked the deck.  Damn people.
Logged
J.R.
Guest
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2002, 09:43:03 PM »

I've heard so many complain about the effects, saying they look fake. These are probably people that thought the CGI people in Titanic that moved less realistically than the characters in The Sims looked fantastic. I agree that the first rooftop-jumping scene was lame, but from then on the action was so fun and exciting that you go with it. The CGI Spidey looked ripped out of the comics, and that's fine by me.
Logged
Cullen
Guest
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2002, 09:46:33 PM »

Seeing the previews, I was unimpressed by the cgi.  After seeing the movie, I was still unimpressed with the cgi.

But I'll be damned if that's not the best Superhero movie I have ever seen.  Beat "Batman" and the "X-Men" by several yards.

Of course, I've been a Spidey fan for better than a quarter of a century, so that MIGHT influence my judgement.

Still, everything was perfect.  

____________________________________________________________________

Small side note: I had no idea anyone could be born to play J. Jonah Jameson.  I thought that went against the laws of nature, somehow....
Logged
Lee
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2002, 09:59:25 PM »

Cullen wrote:
>
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
> Small side note: I had no idea anyone could be born to play
> J. Jonah Jameson.  I thought that went against the laws of
> nature, somehow....

I know what you mean. J.K. Simmons did an awesome job. Nobody could have done it better.
Logged
john
Guest
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2002, 03:32:57 AM »

>But then he goes on saying when "Peter Parker" put on the webs, and starts
>jumping from building to building and swinging all around, it's all "cartoony".

 If he wants to see what a real person would look like performing Spiderman stunts, he should check out the live-action series.
Logged
Squishy
Guest
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2002, 04:19:52 AM »

THANK YOU, John. How many people would be happy with THAT?

Part of the reason a given effect in Spider-Man may look "fake" is because Parker's in-motion body comes to a rigid stop without the sort of "give" one expects while climbing, leaping, or fighting. For  example, he sails through the air, landing atop a rooftop pinnacle with enough momentum to send a normal person skidding right off to their death--but he comes to a dead halt. But Parker's body is now strong beyond human standards and of course he has his "stickies"--so his body's not going to react in the same way as a normal body--the way we are conditioned to expect.

It was the same deal with flying scenes in Superman. The very first time Reeve took off, it was a graceful, visible-wire-free glide over an enormous length of set. A perfect effect. Yet half the audience barked at it, because they were expecting the "up, up, and away--WHOOOOOSH!!!" takeoff that prior Superman cartoons and TV shows always had. (Fortunately, they got what they wanted a little while later in the film.)
Logged
Private Joker
Guest
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2002, 11:47:31 PM »

Will wrote:
>
> "Leonard Maltin is
> a dickwad."

I second that.
Logged
Pages: [1]
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  A Recent Spider-Man review « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.