Review

SPIDER-MAN review

Published at: May 7, 2002, 9:15 a.m. CST

I’ve been terrified of SPIDER-MAN. As a matter of fact, I don’t think I’ve ever been more afraid of a film in my entire life. The first geek thing that I latched on to was SPIDER-MAN. It was my nursemaid. It was my gateway to Hulk which took me to Gorgo which took me to Star Trek which took me to Bruce Lee which took me to Star Wars which took me the rest of the way.

But it all started with that SPIDER-MAN cartoon and The Electric Company. I danced in diapers to that theme. I drank my first 7-11 Slurpee from a plastic cup with Spidey on the side. I’ve read 40 years of Spider-Man comic books. I know that the real origin of the character was when Jack Kirby brought FLY-MAN to Stan Lee and Stan didn’t like FLY-MAN, which went to Atlas Comics (if memory serves… or maybe it was Charleston Comics), but it got Stan thinking… I know this, because that was the story as Stan Lee told it back in that big white collection of Greatest Marvel Stories that had a typewriter on the cover and a bunch of super-heroes leaping off the page atcha.

I was all excited about SPIDER-MAN with little to no fear till I heard a rumor that Kevin Smith didn’t like SPIDER-MAN… That terrified me.

Then Moriarty saw it, his love for the film didn’t still my panicky heartbeat. James G and I often don’t see eye to eye on films. Sometimes he gets carried away… and other times I get carried away. We see the films in different environments… There’s a vast gulf of difference between seeing movies in Los Angeles and Austin. The audiences or very different. His is usually more cynical and snide. Austin is usually more willing to embrace and cherish. We don’t really have an explanation for it, but we have both felt the difference in each others’ theaters.

I was raised in a Comic Book shop. I learned to read with Spider-Man and Forrest J Ackerman. Stan Lee’s voice is sometimes found in my internal monologues. I definitely hear his voice anytime I read the text in the blocks of my old Silver Age Marvel Comics.

Last night, I was talking to Quint, who was stunned that I still hadn’t seen SPIDER-MAN. Anybody that knows me has been stunned. It is simply way out of character that the weekend had passed and I hadn’t seen SPIDER-MAN.

I told him that my recent trip to New York to shoot a commercial for Apple was partly responsible. I did have an offer from a reader while I was up there to see the film in New York, but I wanted to see SPIDER-MAN with my father and my best movie-going buddy. I needed to see the film with those whom I love seeing movies with most. I wanted the insulation in case I hated it. In case the film just began unraveling.

I knew the problems going in. I know SPIDER-MAN chapter and verse. Mechanical Webshooters, that Goblin Costume, Mary Jane / Gwen Stacy, Aunt May wasn’t gaunt enough, CGI and no matter what… it wasn’t going to be one of the great SPIDER-MAN stories. Sure, the origin was there, but they were prepared to squash the whole history of Norman Osborn/Green Goblin/Peter Parker/Spider-Man into one feature and leave out Captain Stacy and Gwen ta boot. Also, Ben Parker wasn’t killed in a car jacking, it was a break in. As a result, I was just perturbed. But I knew I was perturbed, and I didn’t want to be perturbed, I wanted to love the film, but I could feel me wanting to lash out at Spider-Man, and that wasn’t right. I didn’t want to be a nitpicking asshole. I really didn’t. I didn’t want to be that fanboy that goes in with luggage to rip and shred and tear a beautiful thing apart. In any adaptation, there will be changes. Tom Bombadil won’t be there. And sure Flash Thompson won’t be a blondish-reddish haired jock, but more of a dark haired thug… and his sweater will be gone. I loved his sweater and that hair.

I was scared. Then I heard that rancid piece of shit Aerosmith song. And that horrible, "fly on the wings of a herooooooo" elevator crap. I read Roger Ebert’s review which scared me. Suddenly it was Friday and I didn’t want to see SPIDER-MAN so urgently. Suddenly, I was scared. Terrified. I wanted to believe in Raimi, and as I saw Talk Backs come in, I could see lots of people loving it, and some hating on it, and I really didn’t want to hate it. I really really didn’t want to hate it.

But I could feel myself getting ready to hate it. I felt… unstable.

I decided to see it today at 5pm at the Alamo Drafthouse North. Thank God for the Drafthouse. Never in my whole life have I loved a theater more. Father Geek, Patch and I march to our seats, I order some Hot Tea with Honey and Cream to put any tooth agony to rest. About twenty minutes before the showing, the video projector starts up and there was a theater sized version of Stan Lee… And Stan was telling us in the theater about the origin of the phrase, "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility!" I smiled. Hearing Stan Lee speak is… just one of the great relaxing things in life. Like cool blades of grass and clouds crossing the sky… Stan Lee’s voice makes everything cool.

Next, the opening titles of the old 1960’s SPIDER-MAN cartoon came on… I was beginning to get jazzed up. Next was some of Nicholas Hammond’s Spider-Man movies. Many might have hated these, but for me… I saw them at the same age that I saw those Doug McClure Edgar Rice Burroughs movies and folks… I loved em then, and they bring back fond memories when just seeing a guy in a Spider-Man costume was enough. Next came the opening titles and an action sequence from the Japanese SPIDER-MAN show. I watched in gleeful joy as Spider-Man and his trusty singing Cowboy sidekick rescued a little Japanese partner from an evil queen bitch and her foot clan. Suddenly she unleashes her 300 ft tall monster, and Spider-Man gets into his flying ship which transforms into a 300 ft tall Spider-Man Shogun Warrior Style Robot and I suddenly realized… I had let go of my nitpicks.

I was ready to see a SPIDER-MAN movie.

I was suddenly giddy. I was at my happy place. I had forgotten all those problems I had listed above and I was just ready to see Sam Raimi’s SPIDER-MAN. I mean, I’d seen badly animated Spider-Man cartoons that I loved. I’d seen Nicholas Hammond Spider-Man movies that I loved. Not to mention the Japanese SPIDER-MAN, which nothing on this planet could ever top… but I was willing to let Raimi try. But I really didn’t think that Raimi was going to release a 300 ft tall Robot piloted by Spider-Man… But maybe that was kept under wraps.

The opening titles were a tad underwhelming, but I liked the little glimpses of things under the webbing… from Spidey’s costume to the Goblin to New York itself.

When we finally start on Mary Jane hearing Puny Parker’s narration, I was smiling. Every geek everywhere has that girl, that girl that they love, but can’t admit to the world, to the girl and to themselves that this IS that girl. Making Mary Jane that girl for Peter. Changing her character to being the girl next door, instead of the girl that Aunt May was trying to set him up with was… Ok. I could stand that change because as it was introduced in the film, I bought it. Suddenly, Mary Jane was a childhood crush, an unrequited love, the grass that was always greener.

Right from the start, this is just the comic book come to life. Some of the details were obscured, some of the characters and situations might have wound up different from where they started in comics, but this ain’t comics, this is a new medium. From Peter’s goofy misinterpretation of her smile and wave outside the Field Trip… To his horror at Harry Osborn using his information to make time on M.J. It was working for me.

Watching Willem first hand Franco his backpack, talking to him in the Rolls about not being ashamed about being who he is. All good stuff. I liked that. I like the Good Guy meeting the Bad Guy in the first few minutes of the movie. I like that both characters hadn’t been re-orchestrated as being responsible for each others’ creation. I love that Osborn wasn’t turned into a fucking joke like Gene Hackman’s Lex Luthor. Or Timothy Dalton’s bad guy in Rocketeer. Two movies that almost got as close to perfection as this for me. However, their complete lack of understanding for how to handle a supervillain ruined it for me.

Peter getting bit by the spider… his sleep… his self-discovery… his first experience with Spider-Sense… "Go Web!" His first swing and not understanding the geometry of it… His fight at school, while still not the perfection of the boxing match fight with Flash Thompson from the old books… it still served the same point, and the Spencer Tracy Father Flannigan days are over and this is a modern re-telling.

The scene where Peter is attempting to design his superhero/wrestling costume… GLORIOUS. Now this is the moment where the tears started forming out of my face. I was just so ecstatic and happy about Peter designing his costume…. Marker and pencil and colors and whatnot. JOY. Elation. Never saw Batman do that. Never saw Superman do that. Hell… Never saw Rocketeer or the X-Men or Blade or any of the other heroes do that. This boy had to make his own costume. PERFECT. YES! YES YES YES YES YES!

That ride to the ‘downtown library’ with Uncle Ben… Brutal, I knew what was coming. BONESAW McGRAW!!! Holy sweet Jesus on a pogo stick, Randy MACHO MAN Savage should just change his wrestling name to BONESAW McGRAW and become the most famous wrestler ever. "BONE SAW IS REAAAADDDYYYY" His lawnmower on gravel voice just felt like the best drug ever. I literally started hopping up n down in my seat. Bruce Campbell’s Ring Announcer… Ahhhhhhh YESSSS! Bruce ruled!

Not stopping the thief. The addition of the thief saying, Thanks… Knowing what was coming. Having the Death of Ben happen immediately outside, Peter having to learn web-swinging to pursue the killer. Peter leaving Ben as he draws his last breath while over hearing the Police man detail the pursuit of the perp responsible. BRUTAL, I was literally in tears. I think the amount of tears that I was unleashing with this film came with the baggage I brought with me. The baggage of screaming at Studios to just get it fucking right for 6 and a half years… The baggage of 40 years of Spider-Man comics, media, toys and whatnot… The baggage of being afraid of hating it, and those fears being completely fucking unfounded. The baggage of knowing how much Uncle Ben meant to Peter… How Ben was his father figure. Sitting next to my father watching that sequence, looking at him and imagining the worst. Bricks hitting me. Hard.

Watching Spidey terrified, angry, fear filled pursuit of a high speed car chase dazzled me. It was erratic, it was everything but graceful, it was a frantic pursuit by a hurt teenager trying desperately to come to grips with his powers. It was perfect. More dramatic than I could ever of believed.

His pursuit into the building. The fight with the criminal. Great. The look on Peter’s face when he realizes… crushing, but the worst… the sucker punch that took the air out of me… Him returning home to Aunt May, Aunt May not knowing how to react and just weeping into his arms. I remember that scene. It was when my mother died, it was my reaction to my father. Moments that change things forever.

Peter crying in his room after his Graduation ceremony… missing Uncle Ben badly that day. We were driving back from the Woody Allen screening last week, I said, "God Mom would’ve loved that!" I looked out the window and two tears just rolled. Those moments where you miss the ones you love most are the moment you know they would wish to most be a part of. Again, perfect.

The montage of Spidey’s career… God, the whole Green Goblin testing center bit…. Anytime Willem Dafoe was on screen for the rest of the film. Let’s just take a stop to this review to examine why in fact, Willem Dafoe is just an upper echelon God in the history of Comic Book to Film Adaptations. First off, while now having a split personality, he still wants to live a normal life. He still wants to run a happy company, but the world just keeps spitting on him, facilitating the need to Goblin out. The mirror scene has been mentioned by anyone with a brain as being genius, and I will add my praise for that, but the scene between he and Harry talking about M.J. is perhaps the most violating discussion between a father and a son about a girlfriend I’ve ever seen, and I thought I had lived a few of these pretty badly, but at least my father was right and I was just stupid at the time. Here… Here, my God… I was actually taken aback… and as a killer to Thanksgiving? OUCH!

Ok, no more plot talk… I loved the film. Loved it. Loved it. Loved it. I’ve been waiting 30 years and 5 months for this movie and I have to say, I don’t want to wait this long to the next one. TREMENDOUS!

Criticisms?

The effects? I agree, absolutely none of the CG Spider-Man stuff looked human. In fact, I’d go so far as to say it actually looked SUPER-HUMAN… Almost even like the motions of a man that had been genetically altered by a super-spider bio-engineered and radiated to super levels. Yup, if I didn’t know better, I would think all that web-slinging couldn’t be done. Kinda like that Kryptonian flying… or a Death Star run… or Warp Speed… or a Bong Saber… or the Emerald City… or all that other fakey looking shit I’ve seen in the past 100 plus years of cinema. You FX pricks… to quote Cameron… YOU HAVE TO LOOK WITH BETTER EYES THAN THAT!

Roger Ebert… Ok, why doesn’t Peter Parker just drop Mary Jane on the Cemetery grounds and fuck her? Why can he not be her boyfriend. NO, it isn’t that he’s impotent, Mr Sensitivity. But I’d be wagering a guess, that Harry Osborn, whose father Parker had just killed and whose funeral they were all at btw, had just told him he was the only family he had left, and the idea of hooking up with Harry’s girlfriend (ex or otherwise) at his Father’s funeral would be… Inappropriate. OH… And then there is the knowledge that every superhero has, that anyone close to them, will be used against them, so you can’t allow anyone close, because you would be putting them in danger.

Valid criticisms?

Ok, this isn’t the best comic book story of Spider-Man. However, it is the best Superhero move bar none. And one helluva starting place for a franchise I hope stays going as long as Tobey Maguire can play young… Hell, I figure he’s got a good 20 years of playing Peter Parker as he becomes a Man… The Man Ben Parker would’ve loved to see him become.

Most of my short-comings on this film come from the script, but given Raimi will be over-seeing from the get go the creation of the next story. Given this film was a fricking great as it was with such a weak script by Koepp as a blueprint… Well, hoo-fucking-ray!

When the cartoon theme of SPIDER-MAN finished playing and the house lights at the Drafthouse came up, I had to pee fiercely. As I stood there in the stall, I just smiled with tears rolling down my face. This has been the superhero film I’ve been dreaming of for years. My whole life. This is the first one that even approached my dreams of what the comic felt like in my brain. I mean, when Spidey hurled the web at the brilliant J.K. Simmons’ JJJ mouth and said, "Hush kiddo, Mommy and Daddy have to talk now!" or whatever that line was… OHMYGOD, I cheered. That’s Spider-Man. In a way that nobody has ever captured a comic hero to perfection. I was in LOVE. LOVE.

Sam Raimi! Bless you. Tobey Maguire… Long Life, take care of yourself. Willem Dafoe… You sir Win! Kirsten Dunst… Um, 512-467-8747. Avi Arad… We may line up on opposite sides of the fence from time to time. But I’m telling you, if you manage to get Mark the latitude from those brats at Fox to make DAREDEVIL the way he wanted to. If you protect the character of THE HULK and get that to screen right. If you can force Fox to go back to the 1st Draft by Michael France of THE FANTASTIC FOUR and get those squareheads to budget it properly with a real director like Robert Zemeckis… And I get to still see my second Spider-Man movie in two years… Well then, all is forgiven. Hehehe… Good work though my man. Good work.

Last but not least. To Stan Lee, Steve Ditko and all the others that have done so much for Spider-Man over so many years. Thank you. Thank you from a beating heart of a fan that loves this character like no other. Thank you and all those that made this movie work so perfectly for me. Thank you.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • May 7, 2002, 9:29 a.m. CST

    Not perfect but pretty darn good

    by banjoguy

    Great review, Harry! I saw it Monday afternoon and loved every minute of it, minor flaws and all. Of course the CGI doesn't look real, it looks like a comic book! IT'S SUPPOSED TO!! A great film, and hopefully the great box-office won't ruin the sequel.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:29 a.m. CST

    FIRST FIRST FIRST

    by SoulJacker

    This film will rock.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Fathers and sons

    by holidill

    I loved Spider-man the movie. Just like you Harry, My dad first introduced me to reading through his collection of Spider-man comics. He had been collecting since they first came out. Now these priceless heirlooms were passed down from father to son. They are now in storage at a self-storage facility where the temperature is regulated and no one can get to them. I'd rather have them there than in my house where anything can happen. I continued the collecting of Spider-man, but then other comics showed themselves to me. But Spider-man was always there. I wish I went with my dad to the movie, and who knows, we still may be able to. Of course I'm gonna take my girlfriend first. Thanks Harry for a good review.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:34 a.m. CST

    Spiderman was okay at best

    by mdmel5

    Harry.. I agree 100% with Ebert on this movie. It's okay, but nothing special. The acting was good, special effects fair, and the action scenes were okay. I saw Attack of the Clones and maybe that spoiled me. It's absoulutely sensational. Get your tickets now to this film. I loved it!

  • May 7, 2002, 9:35 a.m. CST

    DOH!

    by SoulJacker

    WHERE'S MY COAT??? SPIDEY RULES!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 9:36 a.m. CST

    So what you're saying is you were weeping at the bathroom st

    by TboneAustin

    I'm telling you, I live in Austin. If I were at Alamo North, walked into the men's room to see a fat man weeping while pissing, I would have needed a gurney to wheel me out of the theater from laughing so hard. Oh, and I loved Spiderman too, just don't think I would weep at the pisser for it.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:38 a.m. CST

    Harry got it right!

    by Megaladon

    Spiderman was excellent. I will being seeing it at least a couple of more times. I'm glad Harry enjoyed it.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:39 a.m. CST

    FIRST

    by KINGJUAN

    I'm first I think, I have never posted any messages before on this website until today and I beleive that I'm first. LOL

  • May 7, 2002, 9:39 a.m. CST

    Anyone bringing up that stupid StarWars vs. Spidey debate can le

    by TboneAustin

    Isn't that subject enough?

  • May 7, 2002, 9:42 a.m. CST

    About as close to perfection as we could have hoped...

    by Homer Jay

    Let's get real folks...Spider-Man is about as close to perfection as we could have hoped for. Even if someone like a Scorsese or Spielberg would have directed this it wouldn't have been as good. Raimi is a fanboy like the rest of us and the glee with which he directed this was obvious in every frame. I was truly giddy thru most of the film but it was the last sequence that brought me to tears; Spidey swinging assuredly and expertly through the city and stopping on the US flag before swinging thru the camera.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Spiderman pretty good.

    by Alpha Dodger

    The film was good solid entertainment. Did not like the washed out photography. CG of goblin did not work that well either. Liked the human elements and little details like spidy designing his own suit etc. Toby was perfect.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:44 a.m. CST

    "Real directors like Robert Zemeckis????"

    by Portnoy

    Zemeckis is the safest director in Hollywood. He doesn't know how to make a great movie. All he knows how to make are 'good' movies. Uggg.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:48 a.m. CST

    You got it right harry!!!! i wish i was 12 when i saw this.

    by gambit800

    my kids loved it as well. i wish i could go see it every day!!! btw, i saw it twice and no hulk teaser.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Here's why it's NOT the best comic-to-film adaptation

    by thegrunter

    I write one of my now-none-too-frequent posts to AICN with the full knowledge that my lone dissenting opinion will get excoriated as AICNers buzzed from finally, finally, finally seeing the summer's first guaranteed blockbuster, like hype-vampires still dripping from their first kill of the night, storm the talkbacks and proclaim their undying devotion to the latest installment of spandex-clad superheroics to hit the multiplex. I've only decided to write today about the subject because someone has to let the air out of the hype balloon and deal a blow to these "sheeple" proclaiming "Spiderman" to be the best comic book adaptation ever. It isn't.* Here's why: - Most folks online seem to confuse over-writing with good writing. "Spiderman" is rife with over-writing - the clearest two examples of which are the overwrought declarations of love: one by Peter Parker to Mary Jane in Aunt May's hospital room and one by Mary Jane to Peter Parker at Norman Osborne's funeral. These snippets of dialogue could easily be shortened to a simple, convincingly played "I love you." Instead we get a melodramatic gush of dialogue that translates - for the average movie-goer - into "long," "talky," or "boring." A more economical use of words in the script would have gone far to streamline the film and make it move and hold together more seamlessly. As the film stands now, too much screen time is spent developing a backstory for the characters that goes nowhere. Why play up Mary Jane's troubled home life if it's not going to be addressed later in the film? How were the class-ist comments of Norman Osborne at the Thanksgiving table necessary to the advancement of the plot? All of this character clutter could have easily been excised from the script and the story would have been the better for it. - Another perhaps more subtle example of script trouble would be the first person voice-over of Peter Parker at the beginning of the film. As a seemingly omnipotent narrator describing his own entrance in the film, Peter Parker makes comments about the high-school stereotypes slumped in the seats of the yellow school bus, making quips about how his story "begins, as do all stories, with a girl," until the camera zeroes in on Parker huffing and puffing, running after the bus. Why use a first person narration to comment on the visuals taking place on screen? This isn't "American Beauty" with an audience-aware Lester Burnham narrating the events of the last few days of his life from beyond the grave. This is Peter Parker for some reason talking at the audience from an awkward and unnecessary point of view (as if from the stage of "This Is Your Life, Peter Parker") that simply isn't consistent with the remainder of the film. Were "Spiderman" one long reminiscence about the character's origin from Peter Parker's point-of-view (think Louis

  • May 7, 2002, 9:53 a.m. CST

    You're in an Apple commercial?

    by Christopher3

    Will wonders never cease? No wonder Quickie-time trailer links always show up here.

  • May 7, 2002, 10 a.m. CST

    Who Cares what Kevin Smith likes?

    by dehayd

    I know this is tantamount to geek heresy, but honestly, why should anybody take his opinion on superhero movies seriously? Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy, Dogma, Jay and Silent Bob. Um, sorry, no superheroes here. That Superman script wasn't all that hot. Daredevil? Big deal. A fanboy who's directed some (overrated) non-genre movies is still a fanboy. Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike him as a person, but I think the fan community gives this guy far more credence than he deserves.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:03 a.m. CST

    Kevin Smith, stop whining!

    by Ronin004

    Seems to me the reason Smith didn't like Spider-Man was because he didn't get to direct it. Yeah, he's a comic book fan with his own ideas as to how the thing should look and he was burned on Superman, but what exactly were his reasons for disliking the film? All I've heard is that he's made some flippant off-hand remarks. I for one think Raimi did a hell of job with Spider-Man. Go Sam!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Roger Ebert gets paid for his reviews...

    by skycrapper

    He has to. I mean how in the hell can he blast this movie and like that piece o' crap Spawn. Just think about it.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Right on, Harry

    by Johnny Ahab

    I don't always agree with you on your reviews, Big Man, but I felt you called this one absolutely correctly. I've been following the flaming talkbacks all weekend, and couldn't believe how incensed and over the top some of the naysayers are. But then again, everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, and you can't deny how any film affects someone personally. But like Harry, I read comics very young and they proved a lifeline for me in an unhappy childhood in football/jock-centric Ohio where I was not a jock. And Spidey of course was the guy I loved. Identified with. Couldn't wait to get my hands on the next issue to escape the misery of home and school. So for me, like Harry, there was an emotional connection to the story, and I so appreciated Raimi & Co. focusing on the HUMAN ELEMENT before the spectacle. I didn't weep, but my heart raced through most of the film and I left the theater feeling exhilarated. It took me back to some of the happier parts of a not-so-happy childhood, and I'm thankful that the film meant something to me personally. I'm sure there a hell of a lot of people who connected in the same way. And for those of you who didn't, well, better luck on another film.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:07 a.m. CST

    I corresponded with Roger Ebert about Spiderman...

    by Powerring

    I have watched Roger Ebert since his PBS days. Oh, those were the days! Thos guy would have no commercials to interrupt the banter, and they would often exude joy at a great film. Fastforward to the past 5 years. Roger seems to have become cermudgeoned, and have a serious ajenda with pop culture. He goes to movies to hate them, not to enjoy them. I pointed out to him it was odd coming from a guy that endorsed "INFRAMAN" and supported all the Star Wars films. Other critics, rightfully so ripped PM, and he didn't. Nonetheless, he has taken criticism to the level that it is uncool to like comic films or anything popular. My disdain for Roger's opinionalysis of movies came shortly after he ripped "Gladiator" and now Spider man. I think he just doesn't get IT. Every movie in existance can get hated or downplayed. -OR- you could get some popcorn, sit back and enjoy the ride. I told him that Spider-Man was clearly the most fun comic movie since Superman II. It was faster paced than X-men and exuded sheer joy at new powers. The public has voted with thier dollars. ON his show, he THUMBS DOWN'ed the movie...from him, that is the absolute scale. It's him saying "DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE, IT'S CRAP!!!!" ROGER EBERT REPLIES: It was kind of nice. I liked the Peter Parker stuff and gave it 2.5 stars. Do you require slavish adherence to your enthusiasm? Best, RE Roger, Roger. Roger. That was just mean. It underscores that you have truly lost touch with films and the public. It shows you have no more heart, and love to hate. Maybe it's time to retire before you mislead the public any further. I AM GOING TO SEE SPIDER-MAN AGAIN, JUST TO SPITE HIM. I LIKED IT THAT MUCH. :)

  • May 7, 2002, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Maybe these so-called "bashers" aren't bashing the web-sling

    by thegrunter

    I wonder whether these starry-eyed fanboys that always seem to populate the AICN talkbacks after any and all genre films, gushing about the genius of the latest formulaic blockbuster that Hollywood has just squeezed off and bitching endlessly about the "bashers," have ever stopped to consider that some people might actually not be criticizing the film because it was popular. I bashed "Spiderman" above (if "to bash" means "to critique") because it has many, many inexcusable flaws. Personally I didn't give a crap what the rest of the audience thought about the film. I was disappointed in the final product. I didn't have a good time in the theater. What monetary success or box-office records came thereafter had nothing to do with my assessment of the film.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:09 a.m. CST

    If Uncle Ben dies......

    by Andy Andy

    then who makes that delicious rice? I don't plan on seeing this. Maybe on video, but this just doesn't "do it" for me. Yes there are people like me out there! I live in Austin and I haven't had the good fortune of seeing a movie with Harry Knowles in the audience. The thought of seeing him a few rows up, bouncing up and down one minute, then weeping the next, seems kind of funny. That's worth the price of admission alone. Anyway, good review.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:12 a.m. CST

    Harry! What did you think of the Elfman score?

    by _pi_

    Please say you loved it and become the coolest man alive!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Oh and by the way....

    by Andy Andy

    I dont want to sound like a total geek, but with the exception of transporters, the science of Star Trek is all pretty concrete. If we were to travel great distances, we would have to literally "warp" space. So dont compare that to getting bit by a radioactive/mutated spider, saying that is just as contrived. because its not.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Didn't expect to like it, was surprised I did.

    by MichaelSean

    Going in to Spider-Man, I was fully prepared to be Phantom Menaced. Like Harry, Spider-Man was my initial gateway into all things geeky. I still remember my first Spider-Man comic. We were taking a train trip from Oklahoma to Chicago and my father bought be a stack of Spider-Man and Fantastic Four comics to keep me occupied. At the time, it was a toss up for me as to which superhero was cooler, Spider-Man or The Thing. Eventually Spider-Man took first place in my heart. And to this day, though I don't live in such a geek world as I used to, I still collect Spider-Man comic books. So given what this movie had to live up to for me, I was expecting to be disappointed. And while I had some minor quibbles, I will say it's the first movie I've seen in quite some time that I'm anxious to go back to. I saw it on Friday, saw it again Sunday and will probably go back one more time some day this week. And one of the true joys of seeing the movie is that I now have a 6-year-old son who was introduced to the joys of Spider-Man in an entirely different way. What worked for me? The concentration on character development. Unlike so many movies these days that feel they have to slam us head on into the action and never let up, this movie took the time to tell its story. I hate feeling rushed from scene to scene and that feeling like I missed something critical. This movie didn't do that to me. The organic web shooters. Okay, so I'm not a purist. I thought this actually made more sense than mechanical web shooters. This was one instance where they improved on the original. The costume. They did it. They managed to make Spider-Man a flesh and blood 3-dimensional figure and not have him look completley silly. Bravo! And no black costume...thank God. I always hated the black costume. The Goblin on his glider. Amazing. Took me back to the Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz. Truly menacing. The bittersweet ending. I agree with Roger Ebert much of the time, but this was one instance where I could not disagree more. To me the ending made perfect sense. Peter realized that being Spider-Man was a responsibility he could not abandon. But he also realized that his being Spider-Man could potentially put the people he loved the most in danger. How could he be Spider-Man AND have Mary Jane in his life as anything but a friend? It made sense to me. Minor quibbles. Yeah, the CG stuff looked CG. But that's the movie making world we live in right now, so I just accept it. As for seeing it as super real as opposed to real, I guess my eyes aren't that good. But I let it slide. I didn't HATE the Goblin costume, but I would have prefered something a little more natural and a little less Power Rangers. Kirstin Dunst was far more Gwen Stacy than she was Mary Jane Watson, despite the red hair. But these are minor points in what was, overall, a terrific film. After that 3-month crapfest that was last year's crop of summer movies (When I'm on my deathbed, Tim Burton, I'm going to want the 2 hours I spent in Planet of the Apes back.) it's nice to kick off the summer and NOT be disappointed. Oh...and one last thing. Please, don't go all Batman on us! Doc Ock is quite enough for the next film. Spider-Man does NOT need to do the 2 villain thing. -- Sean

  • May 7, 2002, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Good review Harry

    by superdave

    Sider-Man rocked!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:18 a.m. CST

    Harry is right!!

    by SoulOnIce

    Spider-Man was awesome, stupendous, amazing, spectacular, sensational. Anyone who differs is a moron. And anyone who comoplains that Aunt May wasn't gaunt enough needs to get laid...fast.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:18 a.m. CST

    If you ever loved Spider-Man

    by Wino-Forever

    I can't imagine how you couldn't enjoy this movie. It's not as thematically weighty as X-Men, but was never supposed to be.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Elfkiller, you clever little gnome...

    by Strawhenge

    Your parody of Harry's writing style, unencumbered by grammar, syntax, punctuation and other inconsequentials is, in a word, GENIUS! From his jarring and ill-placed vulgarities to his clumsy, mixed-metaphor-laden "geek-speak" with all of it's misapplied adjectives and badly-chosen, often misspelled adverbs, you have captured the very essence of the man. Please include me when you perpetrate your coersive prank. I cannot imagine how in Heaven's name you plan to force a website to sexually assault the Headgeek, but I wanna be there!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:28 a.m. CST

    "King Kong Sucked BALLS! You're All a Bunch of Stop-Motion W

    by Pallando Blue

    [from The Geek Annals, circa 1933] "Jesus Christ did that goddamn monkey movie smell like a three-week-old corpse's full bowels left out on in the sun! OOOH it had a big gorilla! And dinosaurs! Shit, some cheesy special effects and you fucking assholes eat it UP! That stop-motion SUCKED ASS! My little brother could animate a fight better with his Lincoln Logs! YOU COULD SEE THE ANIMATOR'S FINGERPRINTS IN THE MONKEY'S FUR! What, did you think it was waving in the breeze?? IDIOTS! GOD you assholes make me sick, but watch, a soulless piece of glossed-up shit like this will go make big bank, while Carmine Gallone's wonderful musical 'Going Gay' goes hunting for an audience. That is a CRIME! And you fucking basement-dwelling virgin geeks are the CRIMINALS, you STOP-MOTION WHORES! ...Hey, looks like I'm FRIST"

  • May 7, 2002, 10:31 a.m. CST

    Thanks, Harry!!...

    by Otter

    Nice review; thanks for mentioning the mirror scene, which by far explained what exactly Osborn was going through. Thanks for realizing why Peter DID what his did at the cemetary, and thanks for mentioning the shutting up of JJ; that , by far, was one of the funniest parts of the movie.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:34 a.m. CST

    bad movie = no web made hang glider...

    by BurlIvesLeftNut

    Man Spider-Man was awesome. Saw it again last night and loved it even more. I am with Harry, this is the most emotional film experience I have ever had. EXCELSIOR!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:39 a.m. CST

    Spiderman was fantastic-Harry, Timothy Dalton was a great villia

    by Tarl_Cabot

    Spiderman:Best popcorn movie since "Raiders of the lost Ark"...Timothy Dalton was always a great Bond to me and his villian in Rocketeer was very cool and seperated him from the one dimensional Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan; a Nazi spy posing as a movie star? Comon! That's brilliant! Imagine any contemporary star who was really an Al Queida terrorist sleeper agent? I just love the premise of Dalton's Character-and that line was great:"It wasn't lies Jenny, it was acting"! Genius! I loved that movie and it almost made up for the fact that there was no Bond that summer-well not really..:(

  • May 7, 2002, 10:40 a.m. CST

    loving spider-man the movie is like loving a girl with baggage..

    by grammarcop

    (1) you love her in spite of her faults, (2) you resent her because of her faults, or (3) you remain conflicted and angry that she is not pure (as purity is defined in your eyes).

  • May 7, 2002, 10:41 a.m. CST

    haters...

    by Batguy

    Haters, naysayers, nitpickers... For any of you that hope that your favorite comic character will make it to the big screen, you should recognize that Spider Man has achieved a great thing: it has kept more true elements of its comic source material than nearly any other adaptation to date, except for maybe Superman I. Although some Hollywood elements found their way in (the Goblin suit, Macy Gray... aghh!! Total alck of talent!) Raimi and crew managed to pull off a decently faithful film. Although I don't prefer the Marvel characters, I must agree with what Harry and many others have said - this is the best comic-to-film adaptation so far. Better than X-Men, because it allows more development for the hero. Better than any of the Batmans, because the Goblin is not allowed to hog the spotlight. This is Peter Parker's story, and it's a damn good one. I'm surprised Harry didn't mention JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson. He was soooo perfect. If you want to flame me, have the balls to do it by e-mail. SDC

  • May 7, 2002, 10:42 a.m. CST

    haters...

    by Batguy

    Haters, naysayers, nitpickers... For any of you that hope that your favorite comic character will make it to the big screen, you should recognize that Spider Man has achieved a great thing: it has kept more true elements of its comic source material than nearly any other adaptation to date, except for maybe Superman I. Although some Hollywood elements found their way in (the Goblin suit, Macy Gray... aghh!! Total alck of talent!) Raimi and crew managed to pull off a decently faithful film. Although I don't prefer the Marvel characters, I must agree with what Harry and many others have said - this is the best comic-to-film adaptation so far. Better than X-Men, because it allows more development for the hero. Better than any of the Batmans, because the Goblin is not allowed to hog the spotlight. This is Peter Parker's story, and it's a damn good one. I'm surprised Harry didn't mention JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson. He was soooo perfect. If you want to flame me, have the balls to do it by e-mail. SDC

  • May 7, 2002, 10:46 a.m. CST

    I asked this question in the official Spider-Man TB, I didnt get

    by XTheCrovvX

    Ive been searching viewaskew.com like mad, cant find anything, so i ask again, where the hell is this ever-so-controversial Kevin Smith negative Spider-Man review?? Someone provide a link so i can confirm the wretched truth for myself?? Would appreciate it muchly. btw, speaking of negative reviews, i DID read Ebert's review. Short and simple, what little respect i had for the fat fucking slug was just pissed out of the window. Revolution is my name.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:49 a.m. CST

    P.S.

    by XTheCrovvX

    Thank you Harry for FINALLY putting the whole cgi issue to rest. About time somebody put these goddamned cgi haters to rest.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Best Super-hero movie ever

    by I Speak Jive

    Hands down. It had everything in proper proportions: drama, comedy, action, cheesiness. Tobey McGuire nailed it, as did Willem DaFoe. Thank you Sam Raimi!

  • May 7, 2002, 10:54 a.m. CST

    oops

    by CapedCrusader

    This is batguy... That e-mail is no longer valid. Reply to this one.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:59 a.m. CST

    I'm Not Actually The Founder, But I'm Using His Name, An

    by The Founder

    My brother went on and on about this film, and god knows why he reads comics, because they are, well silly, and unreality, but I ended up seeing Spiderman, and it was pretty good to me. I can't believe I'm reading some of the most silliest reasons why some didn't like the movie. You GEEKS SHOULD BE ON YOUR KNEES THANKING GOD THAT YOU GOT A COMIC FLICK AFTER ALL THE YEARS THIS CHARATER HAS BEEN OUT. I just don't see the problems some of you had with his film, it seemed like the cartoon or comic or whatever came right out of the book or the animation. if you wnat charater developemt or fleshed out characters, then rent some Academy nominated or winning films, because Spiderman was good.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:59 a.m. CST

    neither rock nor blow

    by benway

    pity most of the people around here 'think' only in terms of 'rocking' or 'sucking', 'loving' or 'bashing'. the sad truth is that SPIDER-MAN is particularly inapropriate for such a geek-simplified attitude since it's an OK film with several BIG faults on the level of script: plotting, dialogue, etc, NOT on the geek level of 'bad CGI' (which isn't that bad at all), organic shooters etc. It is also decently directed (but not MUCH more than a level of competence, and bits of LOVE shining through the cliches), well acted (but you GOTTA hate the decision of hiding Dafoe's Goblin-like face with that idiotic LIFELESS plastic MOTIONLESS THING!) and I can see why after a couple of summers of humiliatingly BAD 'blockbusters' evereybody is so anxious to embrace a film in which the audience is not treated like morons ALL of the time, but only occasionally! I agree with thegrunter, even with the brave (for this place)statement of prefering BATMAN RETURNS to this sappy and simplified story of a potentially great film. But if it were so brave, dark and visually inspired as the Burton's secon Batman it would never attract such numerous CROWDS...( and NO, I'm not bashing it's commercial success, just saying that it is rarely accompanied by the artistic one, as it was say in LOTR where Jackson was able to merge originality and inspiration with CROWD-PLEASING: Raimi, sad to say, was mostly successful in the latter)

  • May 7, 2002, 11:06 a.m. CST

    Why All The Macy Grey Hate?

    by The Founder

    I'm no fan of her music, but she don't deserve all the hate she's getting, I mean she was in the film for like 6 or 7 seconds, and no dialogue what so ever. Some of you find sh!t to b!tch and moan about for no other reason then you can. GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 11:10 a.m. CST

    great review for a great movie, harry

    by sanjuro

    Agree with you 100%. Ebert, I love the guy, but he's got some serious emotional problems -- that last paragraph just about screams as much. I love that you and you only illuminate the whole fake-looking CGI vs real-looking CGI debate -- THE GUY'S A FUCKING SPIDER!!!! It's not like he's supposed to look like friggin' Li Mu Bai hopping around buildings, Roger. TOBEY MAGUIRE IS A NEW GOD OF CINEMA. LONG LIVE TOBEY MAGUIRE. Oh, and is it me, or did Kirsten Dunst, God bless her gorgeous soul, kind of look out of it the entire movie, sorta like Brad Pitt in Sleepers? Just my opinion...

  • May 7, 2002, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Not the best superhero movie ever made

    by RickP66

    X Men is definitely superior to this film, in every aspect.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:24 a.m. CST

    "UNBREAKABLE" is the best superhero movie ever made!

    by Metatron

    You can't tell me this formulaic popcorn "flick" can hold a candle to M. Night's rich character study.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Kevin Smith review...

    by Homer Jay

    Kevin Smith never actually wrote a formal review of Spider-Man. He was supposedly asked on a Q&A panel if he saw Spider-Man and if so did he like it. He replied "Yes, I saw Spider-man." The questioner asked did you like it? Smith supposedly simply replied again "Yes, I saw Spider-Man."

  • May 7, 2002, 11:26 a.m. CST

    I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed Spider-man.

    by Sod Off Baldric

    This was, hands-down, the best comic book inspired film that I have ever seen (and that is just my opinion...not saying that everyone should feel that way). Seeing Spidey web-swing through New York gave me chills. I had the biggest, goofiest grin on my face throughout the whole film. And my little bro (who is ten years old) had a blast...I lost count of the times I heard him whisper the word "sweet." This was a great start to what could potentially be a great summer movie season.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Harry, take a Prozac, for your own sake!

    by Pvt Gibson

    Does anyone else worry bout Harry's psychological state of mind? Fear, anxiety, tears rolling down cheeks while taking a piss. And you wonder why you're never taken seriously...

  • May 7, 2002, 11:31 a.m. CST

    I can't believe how much the hype has blinded most of you

    by ZakChase

    "Spider-Man" is a very good movie, but it's certainly not great. It has a lot of heart but is a little weak in the brains department. "X-Men" is a superior film in almost every way. And for those that say "Spider-Man" is better than "Superman" -- pull your head out your ass now before you suffocate yourself. That movie was perfect in structure and tone. That's why "Superman" is still considered an out-and-out classic more than twenty years later. Can any of you honestly say that "Spider-Man" will be too? Oh, and I WANTED to cry when Ben died. But I couldn't because Koepp didn't properly establish the Ben-Peter relationship.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Sam Raimi pointed at the center field fence...

    by maj_kong

    ...and knocked one out of the park. I tend to be pretty critical of movies, and *Spider-man* does have some flaws. But, the good parts are SO good (and often great), that the flaws are forgiven. I've seen plenty of brilliant movies, but it's been a long time since I've seen one this FUN. I've seen it twice now. Both times, I felt like a kid, from the opening credits (which I thought were great -- almost Hitchcock-y) to the closing ones. Hats off to Raimi and company for delivering an "event" movie with heart and soul.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:35 a.m. CST

    WHERE CAN I FIND THIS JAPANESE SPIDERMAN CARTOON?????

    by Z-Man

    I must know! And is it really intended to be Spider-Man, or just a character alot like him?

  • May 7, 2002, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Glad you had as much fun as we did.

    by rabid_republican

    Although I was more psyched than afraid, Harry's sentiments on Spiderman match mine quite nicely. There is something about the film's ability to change things and yet remain true to the essence of the original story that kept me enthralled. I'm not sure what movie the detractors were watching. I said it once and I'll say it again: Best. Comic. Movie. EVER.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:43 a.m. CST

    Spiderman: Regarding the hospital scene and the funeral scene (s

    by Lobanhaki

    Somebody once said, if your scene is about what it's about, you're up a creek without a paddle. The final scene is more about Peter protecting MJ than him rejecting her declaration of love. It defines Peter more than her. The hospital scene is about his declaration of love for her, even though it's supposed to be about her asking him what Spiderman thinks of her. That he never says the words just makes it more powerful. The best scenes in any movie are those that are perfectly legitimate parts of the story but play roles unexpected by the audience. For example: usually, when a bad guy dies, it's time for celebration, but in Spiderman, that is subverted. As the Green Goblin dies he reverts to Norman Osborn, and makes a poignant last request, which both sets up a future conflict, and which adds to the sense of Peter's burden, that he just had to kill his best friends father. Ironically enough, in protecting his friend, he earns his emnity, and that only makes things worse. See, I don't think the scripts to bad in most places. I think there could have been certain lines and scenes that worked better, but that the ideas and the conflicts of the story work perfectly. I think David Koepp is a more subtle writer than people give him credit for.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:45 a.m. CST

    I guess I should turn in my geek card

    by coop

    I am sorry to say I haven't seen Spiderman yet and I probably won't be seeing it for a few weeks. The next film I will be seeing is AOTC and then maybe a week or two after that I will try to find the time to see Spiderman. Does this make me a bad geek?

  • May 7, 2002, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Harry, just a little too much love here

    by Fearsme

    I liked the movie as much as the next guy, but being brought to tears by it? The weird ass 'yelling at the studios for 6 and a half years' quote. I dont get the personal stake you or anyone else has in this movie. Christ, you guys act like you were personally involved in the development of the film. The fact that you were factornig in the development process into your feelings about the movie shows that the you're hardly judging the movie solely on it's own merits. Im glad you liked the film, but this over the top personal stake you take on all these films still seems a bit bizzare. It makes you love a film so much more when it works (a la Spiderman) and hate it that much more intensely when it fails (a la Batman Returns). That kind of bi-polar attitude turns everything into a love or hate mentality, when there are many levels in between. And dude, i realize that in this modern age, it's supposedly OK for men to get weepy, but take a cure from Frank Sinatra: "Real Men don't get misty"

  • May 7, 2002, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Elfman's Score... Uninspired or what?!?

    by Geek Monthly

    MAN! Spiderman was HOT! I almost ate my foot it was so sweet! Raimi came thru like we always knew he would & it was seriously COMIC BOOK PERFECT! The only thing I'm wondering was why no one is talking about the score! For me, it was pretty damn uninspiring. A big mish-mosh of Elfman (Except for Petey crawling up the building for the first time! Those cues were GREAT!) that just seemed to reaffirm what the Elfman haters have been saying for years. Now it's possible that they thought it might be "too cliche" or something if they had SOME kind of underlying Spidey theme in there, but I feel for me that it defnitely hurt the flick in the end! Remember when you walked out of Batman, that theme was GUSHING thru those damn geek veins of yours! You HAD TO GET that soundtrack! I dunno. Maybe it's more subdued & upon further viewings will stand out more... We'll see I guess! I just wondered what you guys think! Anyhoo, other than that crappy little nitpick, make mine RAIMI, MARVEL, LEE & DITKO, J. JONAH, MJ, BRUCE, & SPIDEY FOREVER!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 11:54 a.m. CST

    "Greatest" Comic Book Movies

    by Voice O. Reason

    First, let me say that I loved, loved, LOVED this movie. But, it did have a few weak spots that might have been improved upon. Tese "weak" spots have already been discussed at great length, so I don't feel the need to go into them. What prompted me to write this was the constant comparisons between Spider-Man and various other comic book super-hero adaptations. In my opinion, not written in stone, Spider-Man is not the best super-hero comic book adaptation. Nor was X-Men (I laugh at THAT idea...X-Men was too damn short, and the battle scenes were very dull and unimaginative). Batman might have been great, if not for the fact that the movie was more about sets, costumes, and Jack Nicholson's ego. Blade? Certainly AWESOME fight scenes, but the plot and character development are as weak as dead baby kittens. UNBREAKABLE? Yeah, good movie, but was a work that was indigenous to film, and not ever actually a comic book. SPAWN was just plain BAD. Superman was THE masterpiece of the genre, leading the almost equally good SUPERMAN II. So here's my top four: SUPERMAN, SUPERMAN II, SPIDER-MAN, BATMAN RETURNS. That's just my opinion, but I'm sticking to it.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:55 a.m. CST

    I agree with Harry over what he loves about the movie...

    by Batutta

    ...but I can't overlook the weak script the way he does. It was connect the dots screenwriting, with lots of weak dialogue, in particular the stuff between MJ and Peter. Also, lines like "Spider-Man will pay!" may work in comic book but in a movie it sounds like, well, comic book dialogue. If the script were as good as everything else the movie would have been phenomenal. As is I put it second behind Superman and tied with X-Men for best superhero movie.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Advice for the inevitable sequels....

    by Clavius

    I LOVED Spider-Man immensely! Truly one of the greatest if not THE greatest superhero flick ever. But to Mr. Raimi and co. in regards to the sequels, I just have one thing to say. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, ONLY ONE VILLIAN PER FILM!!!!!! For the love of God, do NOT De-evolve this franchise into the swill that Batman became. Doc Ock, Kraven, The Lizard, The Vulture, Hobgoblin, Electro, Mysterio, Venom et. al. all deserve their moment in the sun and not relegated to become insignificant background characters. (i.e. Bane)

  • May 7, 2002, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Cider-Man Rules

    by The Engineer

    This is the best comic book movie ever. The first Superman and the first two Batman movies are all good, as was X-Men purely based on the portrayal of Wolverine, but I can't think of a comic movie that has ever lived up to my love of the comic the way this one did. And Tobey was fucking awesome! However, in the nature of this talk-back, I have a question. How can you tell if a lab rat has gone insane? When Oscorp's dissenting scientist explains how the rats exposed the vapor went insane, I had to question this. Do they have rat psychologists?

  • May 7, 2002, 12:09 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man has ONE decent wisecrack

    by Terry_1978

    And it's directed toward JJJ. I wanted him to make fun of the Goblin or something, ya know? But he really didn't do that in the flick. That's the only real complaint I have...everything else....nice.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Well spoken Harry!!

    by Daryl van Horn

    I know exactly how you felt and I agree completely. This was made by people who 'got' it, thank heaven. I do not understand why some people are so angry and aggressive here. And stop using the word 'SUCK' all the time please. It's such a stereotype it's really becoming sad. Oh, and if you don't like a film fine. But don't give your opinion like it's the ultimate truth. You don't think it's the best comic adaptation ever? Fine. Say "I don't think so". Do NOT say "IT ISN'T!". It's all just opinions here okay? I'll say why it beats the others for me personally.. - Superman 1 - Brilliant first half. Second half destroyed by toupet wearing Luthor, laughable 'real-estate plot', bumbling oties with his own THEME, stupid booby blond secretary and "oh let's turn back time when we don't like what happened". - Superman 2. First 80% the closest to the comic superman I've ever seen. Ruined by Supes throwing big s-symbols, and soppy memory-kisses. - Supe 3 & 4: the less said, the better. - Batman 1 - Great look, feel, vibe, set-up, backgrounds. Keaton doing great. But overall story dissappointing. Didn't like how the Joker was handled, or how he was the killer of batman's parents or that he was more "Kingpin" than Joker. - Batman 2: Actually enjoyed it a lot but dove too deep into silliness...can't take it too seriously really. The origin of catwoman...she falls out of a window and is suddenly a ninja-level fighter...oookay.. - Batman 3: CANDY FACTORY...Chris O'Donnell ptuuuiii...yech...dirty taste..in...mouth...Lee Jones playing Two Face as a Joker impersonation. Batman 4......hhaaa haa haaaa (maniacal laughter) X-Men: Number two in my book. Only weighed down below Spiderman to me because it was shortened so much and felt a bit rushed. Hope the studios have faith now. Brilliant otherwise. Spiderman was entertaining, true to the source, yet changed enough so it suited new audiences and a different medium. It had great action, good character development and entertained newcomers and old fans alike. Hat's off. If Daredevil and Hulk are even half as good, I'm a happy guy.

  • See my post from last night in the other talk back. Pretty scary... Anyway, I'm glad to hear you liked it Harry. I have to agree with other posters here re: the score. Elfman missed big time with this one. That was the only minus for me in this flick. I didn't like the music at all. In fact, I thought the most moving parts of it were when the soundtrack went completely silent. Kind of a back-handed complement but that's what I remember most.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:31 p.m. CST

    The studios are winning

    by BudWhite

    Now that the studios know that most of us have lowered our standards and will accept and even love such a mediocre film as spiderman, they know they don't have to try too hard with any comic book film they make. Get a guy in a costume, have him say a couple of lines, and make sure it's in focus. Voila! We just made 100 million bucks. Bad script, bad dialogue, contrived as can be, and too much CGI. It's not better than X-Men and it pales next to BLADE.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:38 p.m. CST

    harry's got it

    by robbiesincox

    now, i never aggree with harry's reviews. what he had to say about blade 2 runied the movie for me. i was expecting hard-core action beauty, i got talky mediocracy. but he nailed everything i felt while watching spider-man. that was the best writing he's done to date. way to go, man.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:41 p.m. CST

    Breasts, breasts and MORE BREASTS!

    by timmer33

    No matter what people think about this film, the pressure is definitely on Ep. II, X-Men II and Spiderman II! 114 Million in one damn weekend. That's unbelievable. I'd hate to be Bryan Singer right now. And George Lucas. Ooh Boy, is the pressure ever on you guys right now.

  • May 7, 2002, 12:55 p.m. CST

    CGI

    by Sofa King

    I've been saying what Harry said every since I saw the movie- He's a SUPERHERO- he's SPIDERman, not just 'man'. Roger Ebert gave a rather stupid review of Spiderman- it's a comic book, not a physics lesson, Ebert. As for the music- I can't really say it sucked because I never really noticed it. Of course, that in itself does kinda mean that it could have been better.....

  • May 7, 2002, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Hell yeah, Harry!!!!!!

    by ThePope

    Finally! Harry you are a true voice of reason. This whole 'CGI looks fake' gibber-jabber makes me want to punch something. What the fuck does Ebert know about being nimble anyway. The only agile thing he's ever done was to hurry back to the buffet line right before closing time, no offence Harry. He's a SUPERhero he does SUPER-stuff, that simple. I too held a smile throughout the whole movie, I too turned to my buddies when he was making his costume and said "This is fuckin' awsome", I too had to pee desperately when the film was over. I loved the story, the score, Toby Mcguire, Defoe, the effects, and quite frankly I couldn't have been more pleased with the film. "Along comes a villen with a diabolicle choice."-->GREAT FRIGGIN' LINE!!!! Defoe is the KING! Hope to see you at Alamo some time Harry. Keep up the good work!

  • May 7, 2002, 1:05 p.m. CST

    ALL YOU MOTHERFUCKERS ARE GOING TO PAY.

    by Vegas

    What the fuck is wrong with you people? Hating Spider-Man? WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT TAKE TO PLEASE YOU MOTHERFUCKERS? Can you not simply sit back and enjoy a fucking movie anymore? If you hate movies so fucking much that all you can do is come in here and whine and moan and suck the scabbing cock of fanboy BITCHDOM, then WHY THE FUCK DO YOU EVEN GO TO THE MOVIES ANYMORE? If it's not fun anymore, STOP GOING. Believe me, you're not going to be missed, either at the theater or especially in here. You haters are all a bunch of shit-stick trout-fucking cum-blasted cock-balling whore-munching puss-toking smegma-spouting fecal-faced bile-ridden SHIT-SKINNED MAGGOT-FUCKERS. And I mean that in a BAD way. Stop being so fucking bitchy when you go to the movies, or else stop going to the movies at all, you FUCKS.

  • May 7, 2002, 1:09 p.m. CST

    I know, my spelling is atrocious.

    by ThePope

  • May 7, 2002, 1:23 p.m. CST

    damn straight!!

    by zacdaddy

    great review harry!! and vegas, very good point. when i go to see it for the second time (on IMAX), because you cant see it just once, if i hear any of you little shits on here bitching about it, im pummeling you in the parking lot. have a nice day.

  • May 7, 2002, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Nice Job, Harry

    by MrrSpidey

    Like you, I have loved this character since I bought issue #5, Dr. Doom, in October, 1963. I too, have been waiting for a well-made version of this character to hit the big screen. I enoyed the movie very much, though I did have some quibbles with the script (I think some stuff must have been cut out for time). The casting was great, I didn't have as much problem with the CGI as some (if you want to see how real human beings swing, check out the SPIDER-MAN TV show), and I thought the "tone" and "look" was just right. Can't wait to see the next one. They done right by "Ol' Webhead!"

  • May 7, 2002, 1:30 p.m. CST

    Harry, in a stall, with his junking hanging out, crying...

    by sicboy041

    SCARY FUCKING THOUGHT MAN!!! SCARY!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Thank you, Homer Jay...and a musical correction for Harry...

    by XTheCrovvX

    That isnt Aerosmith doing the Hero song, its Chad from Nickelback and that guy from Saliva...but i agree, that song is high in cheese value. And yet, i hate myself, because ive been humming/singing that song to myself ever since friday. Revolution is my name

  • May 7, 2002, 1:44 p.m. CST

    thegrunter

    by Shaz_bot80

    Overblown, self-centered, and opinionated. So what if you didn't like the damn movie? Some one did! It's impossible to make movies for ALL you shit-head fanbays out there. RELAX!

  • May 7, 2002, 1:45 p.m. CST

    Harry is...

    by Jive Amiable

    After being a regular visitor to this site for awhile, I've read all kinds of opinions about Harry, both positive and negative. I've reserved judgement for the most part because I've agreed with people on both sides at different times. Reading Harry's review of Spider-Man brought it all home to me: Harry isn't just the voice of Aint it Cool, he's the soul. By openly acknowledging the emotional impact the movie had on him he's willingly setting himself up for shots from the 'intellectuals' and tough guys who swarm around this site like ants on an apple core. I apologize if you can't relate, but Spider-Man is more than an event movie for some of us, it's the visual expression of childhood imagination (which is much more firmly connected to the heart than the mind). All of the non-professional (to be polite) film critics may have their points, but Spider-Man is beyond than kind of criticism for some of us. I SAW Spidey (yeah, I call him that in my mind sometimes, that's my point) swing through NY like he's done so many times years ago after my head had hit the pillows. Peter and Aunt May, Uncle Ben and Osborn acted like themselves, just as they should. For me (and I bet many others like me) this film could not have had a lot of middle ground, it's either the Web-head or it's not. Were there shortcomings and failures? Well, smarter people than I assure me that there are. But I SAW Spider-Man on that screen, I saw Peter and MJ and others who I've seen in my mind a million times since I was a kid and it was really them. Did I cry at the urinal? Not my style. But when Spidey swung away through the streets of NY at the end I had the same look on my face as my 9 year old son did next to me, and that says it all as far as I'm concerned. Good review Harry.

  • May 7, 2002, 1:58 p.m. CST

    Jive, you are soooo wrong

    by Fearsme

    Look, im glad the man had fun. God bless him for the inner child that still lives within him, but i still claim that weeping over this is nothing that anyone should be proud of. I'm glad that you, like HArry can openly weep at MOVIES BASED ON F-ING COMIC BOOK Characters!!! do you realize the absurdity of that statement. It's not Schindler's List, or even Terms of Endearment, its F-ING SPIDEMAN! Jesus tapdancing Christ. Movies are meant to be enjoyed, i enjoyed SPiderman, but to cry over SPiderman can nly be equated to a 12 year old girl crying as she sees NSYNC in concert: Idol worship unable to be processed through any other emotion other than tears of joy. I don't care how far men have progressed getting in touch with their emotions, crying over a movie like Spiderman is pure, unadulterated idiocy. And if a movie like SPiderman affects your life that much, good for you, but i'm not going to apologize for pointing and snickering. It's what i do when i see 12 year olds freakin out over O-TOWN, and it's what i'm going to do here.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Never say FIRST!

    by MrPeanut

    Because then you end up being third or lower, and just look like a dumbfuck. This isn't a contest, kids.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:06 p.m. CST

    The two villians debate: Think Unbreakabe: a soldier villian and

    by Tarl_Cabot

    It could work well-it didn't work in Batman but it did with the Lex Luthor/General Zod and the mastermind/henchman combo in the Bond movies. The SKILL of the writer will make the difference and we should give him a chance. Batman was lame because they asummed we like the baddies more than Batman and neglected his character completely. Tobey can't play Spiderman forever and they can't represent all of Spidey's enemies so lets hope for a great Trilogy-I'd rather see 3 GREAT movies than 5 or 6 lame sequels to a great introduction of Spiderman. May 7, 2004 is on looking like a plan!

  • May 7, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST

    If you didn't like this movie... you're just being a jer

    by gutterfolk

    Spider-man was a good film from start to finish. That's it.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:16 p.m. CST

    Nothing at all wrong at crying at SPIDER-MAN.

    by Nordling

    If you love a movie that much, let it rip. Fuck everyone else until they die. At least he's passionate. The world could use more of that. Maybe if people could get a little passionate about stuff like this, we wouldn't be in the spot we're in. Ad for the record, when Uncle Ben died, I cried too. I could give a fuck. I lost a dad. I know what that's like. Fuck them with a baseball bat. Fuck them until they die.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:18 p.m. CST

    what i loved about this movie

    by sniperwolf0085

    now let me put my two cents in i am a big spider-man fan I love the comics and I love everything about him I thought this movie was the best comic movie to date superman was alright at best batman was great i loved it but as I grew up I saw how weak the movie really was joker was terrable I mean all he does is dance this is not the joker comic fans know also batman fight with the joker what fight it was terriable now that is where the other films felt short now back to spider man this is one thing no I mean no other film has gotten so well and that is the person peter was so real my older sister went with man and she was already sad for him when he was running for the bus already she knew he had a tough life and so did I I started crying when uncle ben died awww man that just really got I had tears but everything about peter was great and gg was also great how norman tired not to know what he was really doing when he knew all along how he tried not to but at the end had to his reletioship with harry great so dead on james franco made a great harry now to the cgi I thought it could have been better like when he is jumping the rooftops that was not to good but the rest when he is in the spidey suit dont say man I couldnt connect with him your not supposed to you idoit I mean damn the guy gotten bitten buy a radioactive spider you dont know what that is like and you dont know how to swing from buliding to buliding that is the part when we are just onlookers we are supposed to go wow man look at that I dont think i could ever do that when he is just parker is when we relate caues we also want that girl in our lives I mean it really makes me mad when the people on here just seem to be nit picking for the dumbest shit like the other day some guy was mad caues the cut the scene where mj puts the mask all the way on

  • May 7, 2002, 2:21 p.m. CST

    And if you don't like how harry writes , then fuck off!

    by MrPeanut

    This is HIS site, and you can disagree with him all you want, but keep the insults to yourself. It's funny to see all you assholes disrespecting the man whose pockets you are lining and ego you are stroking by visiting this site to bitch about him. Harry views his films with nothing but enthusiasm, and while that may blind him to their flaws occasionally, at least the man can actually enjoy himself at a amovie instead of being a hateful little troll whose only joy in life is pissing on something that other people genuinely liked. You wanted to hate spider-man and you did. Congratulations. Now get on with your life and get the fuck off this site if you dislike the owner and his opinions so much.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:41 p.m. CST

    It's the Spider-Man movie and he'll cry if he wants to..

    by Strawhenge

    Can somebody please explain to me this stigma that surrounds comic books and their characters? As Fearsme points out, it is utterly absurd to be moved to tears by "MOVIES BASED ON F-ING COMIC BOOK Characters!!!" yet one assumes from his post that he finds tears acceptable in the face of such fare as "Schindler's List" and "Terms of Endearment". The former, of course, details the real-life atrocities committed by the Nazis and one man's sacrifice in the name of decency. Suppose now that a film was made based on Art Spiegelmann's "Maus". Would an emotional response by males still be deemed the equal of a teenager wetting herself at the sight of a boy-band? We're still talking about "F-ING COMIC BOOK Characters", but does the fact that they are based on Spiegelmann's own parents mitigate things at all? Seriously, why do comics STILL labor under these stereotypes that dictate they cannot be taken at all seriously, are suitable reading only for children and basement-dwelling carb-addicts, and are the greatest barrier to sexual activity since the chastity belt? Is it the pictures? William Blake's "illuminated" manuscripts had illustrations on virtually every page, and Blake is afforded a level of scholarly respect on par with Shakespeare? The subject matter? Heroes and villains, good vs. evil are both ooooold hat from the Odyssey through Le Mort D' Arthur to Sherlock Holmes, yet these works are rarely derided. Anybody have an answer?

  • Or one of Harry "respecting the c1it"??

  • May 7, 2002, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Thanks, Harry!

    by Blanket-Man

    I find it terrifying to type this, but I agree with just about every word ya said, Big Guy! As May 3rd loomed, I found fear creeping into my excitement to see this movie. More and more, I worried that the flick I'd waited for since 1974 might not live up to my expectations. But, dammit, it did! The best thing it has going for it is Raimi's obvious love for the characters, and for the comics. Ya done good, Sammy! And thanks for nailing it in your review, Harry!

  • May 7, 2002, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Objective

    by Metlar

    This is actually my first post to this web site - and I hope it's not my last - But I have to start off by asking - Is this Harry guy a homosexual? That was about the gayest review for a movie I ever read. This guy should really keep his melodrama in the closet with his dresses. That being said - let me say this. "Spiderman" didn't suck. That's the best I could say about it, and that is the opinion I had from the moment the credits rolled in the theater where I saw it on opening day, so it had nothing to do with its box office success. What dissapointed me was the fact that I must have read about 2 dozen interviews with Raimi before the movie was released where he said that he HAD to make some changes, but on the whole he was'nt going to do anything too drastic because he did'nt want to dissapoint Spidey fans. When I heard this I was hopefull - but those hopes were shattered when I saw the movie. This was a story loosely based on the character of Spiderman created by Stan Lee. I would have accepted subtle changes - but this was just too much. Most of my frustration could have been avoided though with two changes - 1 - axe that ridiculous goblin mask and 2 - Kirsten Dunst should have played the same part under the name of Gwen Stacy and died when GG threw her off the bridge. Just those two points would have made it a MUCH truer adaptation. So like I said - it did'nt suck - but it could have been much better.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:57 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man was INCREDIBLE!

    by taramacc

    First of all, I know what you mean, Harry, about being afraid of this movie. While I've never been an avid reader of the "Spider-Man" comics, I know the story line from my general comics knowledge and from watching Spidey, Iceman and Firestar on TV as a kid. I'm very protective of my comic book heroes. It pained me that the Batman cartoons were so much better than the movies (shouldn't it be the other way around?) and, while I loved X-Men for the sheer fact that it was actually MADE, I still had some problems with the cheesey lines (I will not repeat that Storm/Toad travesty) and the few inaccuaracies that made me cringe slightly. When TNT started showing the Witchblade series, I held my breath, afraid that they would turn Sara Pezzini into something less than a bitchy New York cop with a bad-ass guantlet. Again, while I was generally pleased (and will religiously watch the second season this summer), I had a few problems with the story lines and the character development of people OTHER than Sara. So I felt very much as you did, Harry, going into this movie. But, like you, I came out with that very special glow that only a few select movies can give you. For one thing, I saw this movie at Union Station's AMC Theater in Washington DC. I like this theater because full audience participation is a given. If you don't like people yelling, cheering, and clapping during a film, go somewhere else. I also had a large group of people with me, most of them comic book fans like myself with a few people who just like action flicks mixed in. Well, what about the film itself? I was completely blown away. From the trailers I was afraid the CG stuff would look too fake, but it didn't! Either the technology is just getting better or my eyes are getting worse. The entire set-up, from the geeky Peter Parker and his unrequited love of MJ to his discovery of his powers...amazing. I especially liked the glasses. As someone with truly awful eyesight, I can relate COMPLETELY. And "I hunch." Great!!!! Someone, I think it was the Wall Street Journal, said that Willem Dafoe's acting left much to be desired. What movie were they watching???!!??? If he seemed cheesey as the Green Goblin, well, comic book villains always have a decent helping of cheese. Goes with the territory. The WSJ shouldn't send people who've never read a comic book to review these kinds of movies. While I can't speak to the accuracy of Dafoe's portrayal, I haven't read any complaints yet. All of the right comic book elements were in this movie, even the burning building with a baby in it!!!! There were a few people in the back of the theater who obviously didn't know the story line and who clapped when Peter let the thief get in the elevator...not my section. We knew what was going to happen. That particular twist was done VERY well. I was also a little concerned about Kirsten Dunst, who I've always been a little lukewarm on. She really surprised me in this movie, though. Even in a supporting role, I felt I got to know MJ through her portrayal. From the very beginning we see that she's got a heart and she doesn't want to see anyone get hurt. But I didn't think she was a tool or a totally sappy, wimpy chick. (Read: She was more than just eye candy!) I'm glad we'll see more of her in later movies. Problems with the movie? Well, obviously, I was nonplussed with the musical score. They need to get someone other than Elfman for the sequel. My only other comment is largely based on my inability to stomach sappiness for very long. So Peter's heartfelt discussion in Aunt May's hospital room with MJ made me put my head down and laugh. BUT it did not make me want to be sick, so it wasn't too bad. That's all I have to say. All the good reviews I've read are right on, especially yours, Harry. I hope that Spider-Man's success means we'll see better and better adaptations of comic book heroes in the future.

  • May 7, 2002, 2:59 p.m. CST

    hARRY! ok..it`s your decision...and my two cents

    by drjones

    a COMMERCIAL?????????????????????????? hOlY SmoKes!!! f*** F**** F*** capitalism...$$$$$$$$ cash... NO...ahhh...now i get it...you do it because you`re a passionate apple lover...ok :)

  • May 7, 2002, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Cuttting down on space

    by Achilles

    Just review the movie, dude. No need to preface an actual review with a couple pages of drivel. No one cares about your emotional turmoil over a comic book movie. It was a good flick, though. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Now bring on Star Wars

  • May 7, 2002, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Cutting down on space

    by Achilles

    Just review the movie, dude. No need to preface an actual review with a couple pages of drivel. No one cares about your emotional turmoil over a comic book movie. It was a good flick, though. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Now bring on Star Wars

  • May 7, 2002, 3:04 p.m. CST

    Ben Reilly? = Spiderman2: Spider Clone

    by Malchizedik

    i think they should just skip the all the interim shit and get right to the ben reilly clone story line. That's when spiderman got good anyway.

  • May 7, 2002, 3:44 p.m. CST

    Nordling: "Fuck everyone else until they die."

    by twan_deeth_ree

    Man, you are a poet. Seriously. Thou speaketh the truth. You don't go jumping on somebody's ass because they cried at a beautiful rendering of one of their childhood fantasies. That's why we love Harry, because he does shit like that and then has the courage to tell us. I thought the image of Harry crying at the pisser was kind of beautiful, that a movie can make a grown-up (kind of) feel like a kid again. Isn't that one of the reasons we love these things? Ya know, movies? Spidey kicked ass. Period. The scene where he was chasing down Ben's killer, landing on his car, jumping the bridge, etc. was just perfect. It felt almost interactive. Like an Omnimax movie or a rollercoaster. I couldn't stop smiling throughout the whole movie, and have been needing to see it again since. Hope this is good news for the rest of the summer.

  • May 7, 2002, 3:44 p.m. CST

    "When the cartoon theme of SPIDER-MAN finished playing and the h

    by Lenny Nero

    If that's not a valid review, I don't know what is.

  • May 7, 2002, 3:45 p.m. CST

    It was good, but the Dafoe character was mildly bungled when..

    by Lizzybeth

    .. they didn't keep up the split personality to the very end. Dafoe was oh-so-very-good in the mirror scene, but if only they had continued in that direction! Osbourne LIKED Peter, in some ways better than his own son, but there was no conflict whatsoever when he figured out Peter's identity. No reluctance? No struggle? They didn't explore that dynamic at all. Boo, I say. If they had kept it up to the end, if it had been a half-sane Norman/Goblin who died in the end, it would have been all the more tragic, and the ending scenes at the cemetary would have been much better.

  • May 7, 2002, 3:48 p.m. CST

    DIFF'RENT STROKES FOR DIFF'RENT FOLKS....

    by empyreal0

    I stil can't get myself to like Osbourne/the Goblin. I just don't see the difference between him and a Power Ranger villain when he's in the costume. His moves were WAY too exaggerated. I know you're supposed to overact a little when you're covered up like that, but control yourself!! Oh, and how can you take "I'll get you next time Spidermaaaaaaaan..." seriously? Could have been a fun line - came off horribly campy. And when he's out of the costume, he's Jeremy Irons in Dungeons & Dragons. I don't know about you, but I never believed for a SECOND that he was insane. I could believe in Tobey's performance - everything! From his discoveries of his powers, to his akward affection toward MJ, to his reluctant determination. But DaFoe was BAD.

  • May 7, 2002, 3:51 p.m. CST

    THE FIRST HALF FUCKING ROCKED...THEN IT SLOWLY WENT SOUTH...

    by Lt. Torello

    I'm glad you had a nice time with your dad and all, Harold, but it's time to join us back on earth and face some cold questions. First, why doesn't Green Goblin simply unmask Spiderman when he knocks him out? Second, how many times were people going to keep stepping into rooms at just the wrong moment? Third, why does every badguy death have to be an "accident?" Why can't Spidey get a little payback? Fourth, why invoke Ben Parker's name during the final slugfest if the Green Goblin had nothing to do wit Uncle Ben's death? Fifth, is MJ that goddamn stupid she doesn't recognize Peter's voice under a thin layer of latex? Sixth, what the hell does the Green Goblin want? I thought the Joker had a fuzzy agenda, but the Goblin has nothing! The orgin story was a shitload of fun and was everything I had hoped for...but then it turned into the standard David Koepp low-IQ product I was fearing. You and Moriarty both need to watch this thing again without the childhood memories and wishes for the-film-that-might-have-been. And be honest after your second viewing!

  • May 7, 2002, 3:51 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man! The best yet!

    by caphunter

    Loved your review, Harry. I have also followed the story of Spider-Man since I was a small whipper-snapper. I'm 43 years old and I have to admit that this was, by far, the best adaptation of a comic book super hero I have ever seen through all my years. The first Superman was as close to excellent as one could get- given the limited technology of the time- and I thought Christopher Reeve was the personification of Superman. But, like you, they truly screwed up Lex Luthor by treating him like a dork (with a bimbo and a bonehead as sidekicks). Hardly the true threat to our hero that he was in the comics (now Vin Diesel would be interesting for the next movie but that's another story). Anyway, I felt the CGI actually added to the film as opposed to pulling it down. No mere human could move like that and the CGI, to me anyway, made it all believable. This was an outstanding film! As long as they stay true to the characters and follow the comic version as closely as is applicable to the medium, they should never fail. Let me add this last testament

  • May 7, 2002, 3:59 p.m. CST

    HA HA! You dorky visual effects flamers got dissed by Harry hims

    by CoolDan989

    Hope that gives you guys a clue as to how nerdy and critical you sound. On a positive note, I loved Spider-Man, and I'm glad Moriarity and Harry loved it too. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don't see how anyone can hate it, quite frankly. All I know is I'm definetley picking up the DVD.

  • May 7, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man Is What Going to the Movies Is All About

    by SilentClerk13

    Harry, you did, I think this review has made me a life-time member of Ainitcool News, even though I was before. The only thing that pisses me off is these ineffectual,uninteresting,mind-numbing critics(Cough,Cough Roger Ebert,Cough) who try, stress the word TRY and identify the faults of Spider-Man and criticize the most minimal of problems. Attack a movie that isnt worth a shit before condemning a movie like Spider-Man to hell. Great job Spidey. SPIDER-MAN WILL KICK THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF STAR WARS EPISODE II AT THE BOX OFFICE. -george

  • May 7, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man Is What Going to the Movies Is All About

    by SilentClerk13

    Harry, you did, I think this review has made me a life-time member of Ainitcool News, even though I was before. The only thing that pisses me off is these ineffectual,uninteresting,mind-numbing critics(Cough,Cough Roger Ebert,Cough) who try, stress the word TRY and identify the faults of Spider-Man and criticize the most minimal of problems. Attack a movie that isnt worth a shit before condemning a movie like Spider-Man to hell. Great job Spidey. SPIDER-MAN WILL KICK THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF STAR WARS EPISODE II AT THE BOX OFFICE. -george

  • May 7, 2002, 4:11 p.m. CST

    Nice words Harry. I loved the movie too.

    by Psyclops

    I never really read comic books as a kid. Don't get me wrong, it's not that I didn't want to, it's just that I had this psychotic addiction to movies and television that I just never got around to reading any of the classics like Batman, Superman, Spider-man, The Hulk, Daredevil, you know... the good stuff. I had heard of these characters and eventually became familiar with them through the various toys, cartoons and cheesy '60s television shows that I was exposed to growing up. In fact, the only Spidey comic book I ever purchased was in the late '80s, I must have been about eight or nine years old and I remember Spider-man was wearing this cool black suit instead of his traditional blue and red get-up. Of course, now I know exactly what that black costume was and how the seeds were planted for Venom and Carnage (would like to see a movie with those two battling it out), but as a kid it was just a cool black costume. I usually end up learning more about these characters whenever a film project is announced. Anyway, back to my point... I saw Spider-Man without any baggage because, like I said, I was never really a big comic book fan. I know about those damn organic webshooters and how the Gwen Stacey character was Peter's first love and I know about the crappy Goblin suit (I was in the World Unity Fair sequence so I got to see both costumes up close and personal), but you wanna know something... none of that stuff bothered me one bit. By the time the film had ended, I was jumping with joy at how friggin' cool it turned out to be!! Sam Raimi rules and I hope the sequel is just as good if not better!!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 4:22 p.m. CST

    by HeeHeeHee

    What a poorly written & ill-conceived review, after all that wait. Why can&#39;t Harry buy a book about writing on film, or writing in general? I wonder, does Harry have some histrionic disorder that causes him to have such irrational moodswings during so many movies? Crying one minute, jumping for joy the next. This isn&#39;t a virtue (OH, but he REALLY LOVES film!), it&#39;s a neurosis. Strawhenge: Since when was William Blake all about Good Versus Evil? The difference between most mainstream comic books and, say, Maus, or, say, an actual literary novel, is not the medium. The difference is the fact that they are written purely for entertainment. They&#39;re basically pulp novels. Only an intellectual snob would consider it somehow wrong to enjoy disposable entertainment, but only an idiot would consider it "Art" or "Literature." I, personally, enjoyed Spider-Man. The action scenes were certainly to be desired & the Green Goblin&#39;s suit made him look like a Power Ranger&#39;s villain, but all-in-all, it was a decent flick. Much better than <i>X-men</i> (which I think is highly over-rated).

  • May 7, 2002, 4:25 p.m. CST

    Feeling Like a Kid Again.............OH WAIT

    by SilentClerk13

    Yeah,its me again,just your everyday 15 year old film lover from Miami.OK, I gave you my opinions and there babbling reviews, now heres my view on Spider-Man.At this current moment,it the #1 film of 2002, other than Y Tu Mama Tambien but its right at its heels, right there.Watching Spider-Man at Muvico Paradise 24, opening day, 9:05 PM showing, that was just beautiful. Getting the best seats in the house came secondary, the best seats they were. The whole movie was just bad-ass and cool. It reminded me of when I went to see Terminator 2: Judgement in the theaters when I was like 4 years old. It took me back, I gotta tell you. After the film was over, my cheeks were still hurting from smiling so much. It was a dream come true.....WHAT A FILM. The last 20 seconds of footage send chills down my body. Very cool admiration to America as well. It made my night. -george

  • May 7, 2002, 4:31 p.m. CST

    SpiderMan and blowing chunks

    by spudster

    Never read a SpiderMan comic or any comic book for that matter. Watched the cartoon religously as a kid and loved it. The movie -- didn&#39;t hate it, but definitely glad I saw a matinee. Many, many weak elements. I don&#39;t care if a movie follows a book, comic book, or broadway play exactly, but at least make it unique and interesting. I enjoyed certain elements which Harry pointed out in his review: the wrestling match, the introduction of Mary Jane, Willem Dafoe, and the entire lead in to Parker turning into SpiderMan. What I didn&#39;t like, almost everything else. Too many weak plot points, and too many underdeveloped scenes especially for a movie supposedly going through three installments. Anyway, my rating: See it on the big screen because some scenes need to be viewed at that size to really appreciate them, but do yourself a favor, see a matinee.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:12 p.m. CST

    To paraphrase the mighty Slipknot, Harry&#39;s not afraid to cry

    by XTheCrovvX

    I thought it was established years ago that its quite all right for men to cry. I mean, fuck, you heard the man...this movie was his childhood dream come to complete and total fruition. Does that count for nothing in the face of bullshit "I am the big man with the big swingin&#39; dick" posturing? Drop the act, guys. Let the man appreciate film in his own way. Shit, I&#39;m proud that the guy has enough trust in his audience to share that without fearing the backlash. Let&#39;s try not to abuse it, huh? And P.S., the next rat bastard piece of shit who calls Harry or ANYBODY gay based solely knowledge that he cries during movies or anywhere else should be hung by his testicles with barbed wire from the top of the Empire State Building. Look for &#39;em hanging around in Spider-Man 2, they&#39;re the homophobic sumbitches that even Spidey wouldnt waste time to save.(oh look, i managed to work in the topic after all). Revolution is my fucking name.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Speaking of his Apple commercial, I saw one of his Earthlink pos

    by TheMatarife

    Yeah, last years spring break, I went to New York. I was walking around the Times Sqaure area, and there was a portico with a bunch of earthlink posters on it, including our buddy harry&#39;s one. I was totally shocked. Harry is now a mainstream bankable phenomenon.

  • I can only hope that his entire post was merely a parody of everyone&#39;s least favorite troll, elfkiller. Otherwise this man needs to have his reproductive capacity terminated immediately, thus sparing future generations from his banality.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Did anyone else see the HUGE 35mm print?

    by bruin8UCLAp

    Did anyone else see the huge 35mm print? It was shown on a converted IMAX screen, but instead of the letterbox phenomena, this print took up the WHOLE SCREEN! None of that pan and scan crap either, this was a specially designed print! Anyhoo, loved how Raimi got the spirit of the characters and especially the story down right. The film was--as they say--pitch perfect.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:36 p.m. CST

    The brutal rape of elk_killer12.

    by Nordling

    He screamed as I shoved my stiff penis into his face, smashing through cartilage and bone. I gyrated in the eye socket, dimly aware of his struggles. When that ceased to satisfy me, I cracked open his spinal cord and masturbated to the fluids. It made a nice lubricant. As his body went into its death throes, I entered from the rear, taking pleasure at his passing. THIS IS HOW YOU TREAT A TROLL.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:38 p.m. CST

    From now on, let&#39;s rape a troll.

    by Nordling

    This is how they should be treated. Forcibly take them and do as you will. Show the world what they&#39;re made of. Let&#39;s all rape a troll.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:39 p.m. CST

    CGI

    by Uroboros

    Sorry..the criticisms regarding the CGI are still valid, regardless of what Harry thinks. Unless of course getting bitten by a spider means that Peter can now, walk on walls, have super strength, AND weigh as much a a real tiny spider. This fault is plainly obvious in the scene where he&#39;s jumping off the street thugs. He doesn&#39;t look like a human male with super strength; but a cartoon character obeying some loony toons version of physics. As for the ending. Well is Parker really only offering his friendship to MJ cause she&#39;s his best friend&#39;s girl? Please..that nonsense. MJ wants him..he&#39;s wanted her for years. He didn&#39;t have to jump her bones right there..but this crap about only being able to offer her his friendship silly. And if he&#39;s doing it to protect those he loves; well then Peter might as well give up on having any relationship right there and then. Cause if it&#39;s not MJ it will be some other girl. Who unfortunately he&#39;s only be able to offer his friendship. And since when does just being her friend maker her any less of a target from those that might harm those he loves. He still loves her..he knows it and the villain who next finds out he&#39;s Spider-Man will just as easily find out his feelings for her. Of course the whole scene was probably there to set up the conflict for the next movie. It&#39;s obvious she has an inkling he&#39;s Spidey from the kiss she gave him. Twice.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:45 p.m. CST

    To Thegrunter

    by Barron34

    Hey, I can&#39;t respect someone who begins his post with something to the effect that the dialogue in Spiderman was "talky" and need to be more "economical", and then proceeds to write an endless post on why the movie sucks. So, the professional screenwriter&#39;s dialogue was talky and uneconomical, but your super-long post wasn&#39;t either? How stupid.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Way to stick it to Ebert&#39;s stupid criticism!

    by EL Duderino

    God I realize that Ebert has made some pretty petty arguments before (like how Erin Brockovich didn&#39;t have bright enough colors or something like that), but that remark about Peter&#39;s decision to reject Mary Jane was just plain STUPID! His review was in no way a legitimate critique, even when it came down to the special effects issue (we&#39;re not THAT far ahead yet ya&#39;ll, they still looked quite good for being CGI!). What do I think should have been changed? For one thing I think the Green Goblin&#39;s origin and reason for hating Spiderman could have been improved. How many times can one use the whole "the project is about to be cancelled so now I must be the guinea pig" reasoning? I SPECIFICALLY remember that type of action in Hollow Man, and I know it&#39;s been in a dozen other films, though I wish I could name them. Either way its hackneyed. Also the entire "bargain" that Green Goblin gives Spidey has been given by so many others it fails to be original at this point. Spidey rejecting his bargain does not make me believe that he would be that enraged and vehemently pissed off at Spidey. But thats basically it, everything else was great and I&#39;m seeing it again this friday! Great Review Harry, glad you enjoyed it!

  • May 7, 2002, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Just saw it...

    by EliCash

    Well it was over-hyped, and some of the early positive reviews I just can&#39;t agree with. I am more inclined to agree with Roger Ebert on this one. I really liked the Peter Parker stuff...it was actually quite touching. But where Spider-Man failed...and I was not expecting this from Sam Raimi...was in the action. It seemed a touch pedestrian..and it wasn&#39;t because of bad CGI. I just thought that they lacked a bit of energy. Actually it was probably a lack of good music from Danny Elfman. Even the trippy music from the old cartoon was better than what Elfman provided for this film. I would recommend the film..but not whole-heartedly. It&#39;s certainly not bad, it was fun at times, but for me the best comic-book movie ever is still the first Superman. That&#39;s my opinion.

  • May 7, 2002, 5:50 p.m. CST

    Spiderman on KAZAA???

    by scorpio2049

    Does anyone know which Spiderman movie works on Kazaa? I&#39;ve tried a few, but they&#39;re blank. Thanks! The movie was great! Go web go!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 5:57 p.m. CST

    What was Mary Jane thinking ...

    by Editor Bill

    At the end, Peter tells Mary Jane that they can only be friends. He turns and walks away. MJ starts to think, then gasps and turns to look at Peter as he walks away, lost in his thoughts. What did dhe realize? Did she figure out his secret?

  • May 7, 2002, 6:11 p.m. CST

    this flick is great cuz it captures the essence of SPIDEY

    by Tall_Boy

    from his high-flying free wheeling webslinging to hitting you over the head with the "Parker&#39;s life really sucks" moments that are intergral to any solid Spider-Man tale, this flick hit all the right notes. Aside from a few minor changes the flick still captured what Spider-Man *is* on the comic book page. While I love "Batman Returns" its Tim Burton&#39;s twisted vision of Batman. Rami stayed true to the comic book spirit. face it, this flick nailed it.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:12 p.m. CST

    Spidey keeps on rolling

    by jokrsmile

    The movie kicked ass and continues to do so. Another $11 million on Moday! That&#39;s unheard of!! It&#39;s on pace to break the $200 million mark faster than any other movie.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:17 p.m. CST

    why it works. why it&#39;s BIG

    by ARZAK

    I just realized (no big revelation maybe) that this movie speaks personally to every kid or former kid who sat in his room drawing super heroes and wishing he could be one. Sam made it for all of us. It&#39;s a love letter comics and the people who love them. This movie is Richard Gere reading the Silver Surfer to his girlfriend in Breathless. And for the rest of the audience he makes it fun for them. It has a heart and yeah it&#39;s rough around the edges. It&#39;s those rough edges that give it soul and take it beyond abeing slick machine. The montages of the costume design and the eccentric clips of New Yorkers reacting to the web slinger. This movie is in the little things and there are allot of them. A bag of tiny jewels, that&#39;s what this flick is. And the Goblin costume was cheddartastic... saw it twice opening weekend... first time I&#39;ve done that in years. Me and all my friends all started singing the Spider-Man theme spontaneously on the drive home. That&#39;s NEVER happened before.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:24 p.m. CST

    Great Review

    by NeoZeo

    I have been reading your review for a while now Harry, and never felt the need to write a Talk Back until now. This was a PERFECT review of the movie (at least in my opinion). This movie ROCKED.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:33 p.m. CST

    My Only Problem...

    by stevid

    Great movie...BUT WHY MACY GRAY, WHY! Elfman=great as usual...but it&#39;s like they hand selected the shittist bands known to man to compile on the soundtrack...AND MACY GRAY WITH A LARGE ROLE...GRRRR!!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 6:34 p.m. CST

    SW vs. S-M vs. LotR

    by Aronld Scazziger

    LotR winz

  • May 7, 2002, 6:35 p.m. CST

    What would have really been cool...

    by Virgil Sollozzo

    If they gave Harry and Norman that bad-assed striped Osbourne hair from the comics. What the hell kind of effect is that supposed to simulate? wavy hair? sideways cornrows? what? Sandman from spider-man has it too. Spider- Man was great, i will see it again at least once, hell i saw blade 2 twice and that shit aint half as good as this. All of you should really stop bitching, because in the world of superhero movies, this as close to perfection as we will ever see( at least until BATMAN:yEAR oNE) AND IT IS ALL DOWNHILL FROM HERE. Especially in the case of the Hulk, but even that might be decent with Ang Lee on board. Speaking of Ang Lee, should not his film "The Ice Storm" replace American Beauty as THE "skewered look at suburban family lives" movie? am I wrong? Maguire was Excellent, as was the whole cast, I loved the Goblin being a Darth Vader meets the Joker type of Villain, and that rooftop scene was cool where he tried to get Spider Man to join up with him, it was like Empire Strikes Back right after Luke gets his hand chopped off. ( But Except with Spider-Man and Green Goblin, how much cooler is that shit?)The movie over all acheived the perfect balance in tone, it had the grit and sophistication of modern comics mixed with the cheesiness and wonder of old comics. It was the perfect medium between "Spawn" and "Batman and Robin" except far better than either of those films. And lastly, to all you purists , any idiot would prefer the armor to the halloween costume of the comics, I mean would you ride on a glider stories above manhattan with nothing to protect you but a rubber mask and cotton unitard? I dont think a billionaire scientist would.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:41 p.m. CST

    goblins costume

    by yphrumt

    i went in to this movie not knowing a hell of a lot of the spiderman universe, but also not really a stranger. i wasn&#39;t a huge fan of the idea where parker had the webslingers kinda genetically imbedded into his skin, but i read somewhere that it was done that way cuz nobody believed that parker could just invent the web shooting device and chemical on his own. but really, does that mean there are holes in his sleeves where the web comes out? what if the hole isn&#39;t lined up correctly? does spidey get like a sleeveful of web? and does this web dissolve after time like in the comic book or does it stay forever like a real spiderweb. are there webs flopping around buildings all over new york catching birds and stuff everywhere now? my biggest complaint though, was goblins costume. is it just me or did it look like some bad villian from power rangers? i think maybe some cgi could have been in order to maybe make his mouth move or something. anyway, i&#39;m a newbie to this site, but hope to become a reg sooooo be good to each other, and to yourselves ;)

  • May 7, 2002, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Mattman Returns, thank you for being the voice of reason

    by KingKrypton

    "Here&#39;s a thought. Maybe the Spider-Man bashers simply didn&#39;t like the movie. Maybe they have no agenda whatsoever. Maybe they just have their own set of tastes, and Spider-Man didn&#39;t fill it. I personally find it difficult to believe that anyone could like this movie, and particularly baffling that so many do. That doesn&#39;t mean I&#39;m going to start spouting their agendas. Everyone has an opinion and is welcome to it. It doesn&#39;t mean they&#39;re a plant for a major studio. Unless thinking that somehow makes you feel better." Thank you so much, sir. You&#39;ve laid it bare for all to see. Those who dislike SPIDER-MAN aren&#39;t rabid STAR WARS fans with an axe to grind, nor are they people who hate the character in particular. In fact, I&#39;m willing to bet that everyone who disliked the movie are fans of the comic books, and felt that the character got the short shrift. I felt that way when I read the Peter David novelization. Yes, I am excited about AOTC, but I&#39;m not going to use that as an excuse to rip on SPIDER-MAN. I just don&#39;t like the story of the Spider-Man film; it&#39;s too glum and lifeless for my tastes (it needed a LOT more joy and verve than what it got). And I&#39;m speaking as a comic book fan.

  • May 7, 2002, 6:57 p.m. CST

    Tears? It brought tears?

    by SoonerSean

    It was an okay summer movie, but standing in a stall crying and it&#39;s not because of the great sense of release of an over-filled bladder? Man... I&#39;m a dedicated Spider-Man from way back, but tears? Real tears???? From watching this movie? Yeepers.

  • May 7, 2002, 7:06 p.m. CST

    I think Harry was just using a metaphor...

    by Ritter

    I don&#39;t think her really had tears rolling down his face, its just that he really enjoyed the movie. Anyway, I felt it was a good review, and I felt that the movie was great as well. Of course, others may feel differently, and they are entitled to their opinions. Harry right though, about how this may be the closest comic-to-movie adaption we&#39;ve ever seen, because Rami is a HUGE comic fan and I doubt any other director would have that warmth toward the characters.

  • May 7, 2002, 7:20 p.m. CST

    Spacehunter has gotta be elf killer

    by Virgil Sollozzo

    no one else can post in quite that special way.

  • May 7, 2002, 7:27 p.m. CST

    JK Simmons Stole The Show!

    by BlondeScrnwriter

    I think I&#39;d have to agree with most all of Harry&#39;s points on this review (except I did enjoy the opening credits). I went with friends to see this opening night, however, I had to take my mother to see this one later on in the weekend. After all, she was the one who took me to a toy store when I was six to "meet Spiderman". And I, of course, never forgot that. I think possibly my favorite performance was that of JK Simmons. It blew my mind! It was if the comic book had just opened on a very large screen in front of me and the characters began to come to life. Tobey was wonderful as was Dafoe. Can&#39;t tell you how much I loved the line: "Follow the cold chill running down your spine.". Can&#39;t believe I am actually saying this, but I can&#39;t wait for the sequel. Selina http://www.blondescreenwriter.com

  • May 7, 2002, 7:34 p.m. CST

    Bashers loud, but irrelevant

    by Editor Bill

    Every BB, newsgroup and chatroom has them. They are loud, rude and a definite minority. They insist that anything that is NOT their cup of tee is bad. Do not assume that just because the bashers are plentiful *here,* that their views are plentiful in the *real world.* This movie was great, the best comic-book movie ever. I supose some could disagree, but then, not everyone has taste. ;-)

  • May 7, 2002, 7:41 p.m. CST

    Spider Man II news

    by coop

    THIS JUST IN: Sony has announced that the sequel to Spider-Man will be released on May 7, 2004, directed by Sam Raimi and starring Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

  • May 7, 2002, 7:42 p.m. CST

    Just one thing to say about Spacehunter&#39;s BS

    by jokrsmile

  • May 7, 2002, 7:43 p.m. CST

    Just one thing to say about Spacehunter&#39;s BS

    by jokrsmile

    Jar Jar Binks says it all!!!

  • I don&#39;t think we, genre fans or especially Spider-Man fans, could have been moore vindicated or ask for more. I think the major thing everyone agrees on was that the CGI wasn&#39;t perfect. Outside of that, not only was it exciting, touching, well-paced, well-balanced, and well-acted, but best of all: it WAS Spider-Man. This is what we&#39;ve been waiting for, not just since Raimi&#39;s specific version went into production, but in fact since we&#39;ve been promised a Spider-Man movie since the late 1980&#39;s. And I don&#39;t even agree that enough of the dialogue was corny enough to matter. Where was this bad dialogue? Must&#39;ve missed it because I was having too much fun watching the movie (although my own problem with the "You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us" bit was that it may have been too obvious a nod to 9/11. But little matter). Bring on the sequel. No, better make that nine or ten. GREAT GREAT GREAT GREAT GREAT. And worth repeating: it WAS the Spidey that we know and love... completely. This movie shows that sometimes things just fall into place the way they should. Just one more thing: as for the obvious sequel opening suggested by the ending, please don&#39;t have Harry become the 2nd Green Goblin in the next film. Completely new villian, please... and just ONE, if you would. Thank you.

  • May 7, 2002, 7:45 p.m. CST

    AMEN Harry

    by NormanFell

    Couldnt&#39; have said it better myself; has anyone else noticed that Ebert is becoming a fuddy duddy---hated the Mummy, didnt like Spider Man. Maybe that obnoxious partner is rubbing off on him. He doesnt desrve a grand ol&#39; name like Roeper! Long Live Richard Kline!!!

  • May 7, 2002, 7:52 p.m. CST

    Pallando Blue--that was beautiful

    by Z-Man

    does anyone even read this far down?

  • May 7, 2002, 7:54 p.m. CST

    Just crap

    by Stu_Pedaso

    If Harry liked this hairball, I really wonder how bad EPII really is

  • May 7, 2002, 8:22 p.m. CST

    Glad to see....

    by ManosTHOF

    ...that Spacehunter "IQ 3" was allowed computer time during his incarceration. Next thing you know, he may graduate to sharp objects. Congrats, bud!

  • May 7, 2002, 8:24 p.m. CST

    lovedittoomuch

    by sokitome

    i think harry is too kind on the screenplay. i mean cmon that line to jk simmons was one of only two lines of smack by spiderman. ONLY 2 lines. I would have liked some wisecracks while he was beating up on the guys that robbed that armor truck or the guys that attacked mj or the fight against flash or anything. cmon i also didn&#39;t mind the bad cgi or the action it was cool but how can you say that was the best comic book movie when they left out so much of spiderman&#39;s character not peter parker but i mean SPIDERMAN&#39;S characteristics. I still loved the movie but it wasn&#39;t perfect. I would have to put this at number two...sorry Supes is still the best movie but this is a close second. and whoever said xmen was better than this movie is just wrong.

  • May 7, 2002, 8:25 p.m. CST

    Roger Ebert&#39;s Review/Harry&#39;s Comment

    by corben22

    I read Ebert&#39;s review, and it was the first thing to quench my anticipation for the film, right up until I read the comment where he said "Peter tells Mary Jane he just wants to be friends. "Only a friend?" she repeats. "That&#39;s all I have to give," he says. How so? Impotent? Spidey-sense has skewed his sexual instincts? Afraid his hands will get stuck?" Right then I realized his review was a piece of crap, without having even seen the movie. Perfect? No. Best Super Hero flick of all time? Arguably. Well worth the price of admission and a friggin thumbs up? Oh hell yeah. Bless ya Harry for noting that EBERT has no fucking clue anymore... do the math-(2.5 stars out of 4 is a thumbs down???) Makes me wonder how much Lucas paid him. Fuck you Roger Ebert. Fuck you up your stupid (popcorn eatin) ass.

  • May 7, 2002, 8:40 p.m. CST

    spider man movie

    by fun guy

    yeah i agree it was really a good movie! I liked the whole thing. who&#39;s going to be the bad guy in the next one

  • May 7, 2002, 9:24 p.m. CST

    Morgoth, if there is hope for me and you to get along..

    by Virgil Sollozzo

    then there is hope for all the world just yet. Good to see you share my enjoyment of what is, as you rightly put it, "the best comic movie ever". Hey did you agree with my "Ice Storm " statement? Thats an overlooked movie.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:25 p.m. CST

    The Phantom Spider Manace

    by Stolen_ID

    Why didn&#39;t they have Stan Lee write the dialog for this movie? I doubt that anyone will ever quote dialog in this movie they way you can quote dialog from Batman or X-men.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:31 p.m. CST

    JOIN US NEXT TIME ON THE ELECTRIC COMPANY, WHEN SPIDEY SAYS WEEE

    by ol' painless

    Which makes me ask, when do we get an Electric Company Movie? Till that wonderful day, I will have to content myself with that lousy "Very Special Guest" SPIDERMAN. Who is this guy anyway? He carries on like he&#39;ll get his OWN movie one day . . . shit, he can hardly spell!

  • May 7, 2002, 9:32 p.m. CST

    what the...?

    by demian

    where did this connie chung comment come from...? i don&#39;t get it...

  • May 7, 2002, 9:32 p.m. CST

    Nordling&#39;s Basement

    by Damer1

    Somebody needs to check that guy&#39;s basement for bodies. He is definately disturbed. Spiderman was very enjoyable. I was glad I saw it opening night but I did not feel the need to cry at the urinal after the movie. That&#39;s a bit much. "You are taller than you look." HUH!! Please don&#39;t attempt to explain that line as a part of Peter&#39;s transformation. It was just plain bad.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Preach it brother

    by plumpxmasgoose

    I agree with Harry on everything, except I still have not heard anyone bitch about the fact that Uncle Ben and Aunt May said "ass". WHAT THE?!? Call me a purist but....it&#39;s Aunt May and Uncle Ben; for the love of PETE! And the CGI was great; what do you expect? He moves like a two legged spider should, have you ever seen a two legged spider? I didn&#39;t think so! (me too, but pulling their legs off doesn&#39;t count)

  • May 7, 2002, 9:38 p.m. CST

    God, I hate you people.

    by Tres Skeek

    Your support of increasingly bad movies over the last ten years is without a doubt ruining Hollywood. And Harry&#39;s review? Never have I seen anyone go so far out of the way to justify the murky piece of shit that the Spider-Man movie is.

  • May 7, 2002, 9:54 p.m. CST

    Why does EVERYONE nitpick about unimportant shit?

    by madman

    Spiderman was an exceptional film, right up with Batman, the Blade movies, & X Men as the best comic movies made. This is at the top because you could feel the care and love the cast and crew had for the material, like how Singer and the X Men crew had respect for the material. What I dont get is everyone bashing Spiderman for retarded unimportant shit. Macy Gray? Oh my god, she sang like two lines and was interrupted by GG. Big fucking deal... Blatant Dr Pepper ad? Okay, should he have practiced his webs on a can with the logo blurred out... Cingular ad? New York is COVERED with ads! What does it matter if it&#39;s a Spiderman sponsor... The movie echoed the Superman origin? In setup, yes it did, but Spiderman was actually interesting and not boring as hell. You actually get to see Parker learn his powers and the thrill he got. And when Spidey goes to the city, it&#39;s after his mistake partly killed his uncle, while Supes goes to the Arctic and watches Krypto TV for 12 years and goes to the city. Spidey is an interesting origin, where Supes is a poor movie with an awesome score (Supes movies also butchered Luthor)...The Matrix ripoff? Did I miss this "direct rip?" In the school fight Tobey does the back bend to dodge a punch and in the fire he leapfrogs and spins in the air to avoid the razor bats. What is the big ripoff? Spiderman - arguably the best comic movie ever...

  • May 7, 2002, 10:19 p.m. CST

    Bruce Campbell as...

    by stevid

    I was thinking about it, and maybe i&#39;m not the first...but does anyone else think Bruce Cambell would make a great Hydro Man? He&#39;s got the look, and the attitude, and Bruce would make the character his own anyway. The only problem is that Hydro Man may be considered minor in comparison with other villains. Oh well, just a thought.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:25 p.m. CST

    99% of people love spider-man, the other 1% are...

    by magic_ninja

    fat ass loser movie geeks who have to trash on anything popular to make themeselves appear "different". I hate all these fuckwads with their lame opinions. What&#39;s really funny is that they go see these movies alone because no woman in their right mind would ever be seen in public with them.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Bruce Campbell as Hydro Man? Hmm...

    by axelfoley

    I dunno. Hydro Man&#39;s some blond dude. If any Spidey villain, I think, and I&#39;m embarassed to say this, that Bruce could make a good Kraven the Hunter. Why not use him? I think it would be good.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:39 p.m. CST

    Hell Yeah

    by HotGaNitGaNabs

    Finally, I have decided to post on this site. I just needed to give my two cents on the Spider-Man movie. I loved every minute of it, and when it was over, only five minutes passed before I really wanted to see it again. Hopefully later I will post some more in depth view points, but for now that is all I need to say.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:43 p.m. CST

    Bruce can ONLY play...

    by Kraken

    Mysterio... think about it, he&#39;d be perfect. Pissed of "B" movie actor... he has a great voice that you wouldn&#39;t need to see his face until the un-masking. It&#39;s the only other role that he could use his smart aleck charm with, venom, craven, all these people are too serious and evil. MYSTERIO!!! PS: Eric Stoltz for Carnage... MUST HAPPEN (hopefully Raimi will read this talk back, slap his forehead and say "damn, this kid is dead on right")

  • May 7, 2002, 10:50 p.m. CST

    I agree harry!

    by HollyS

    I thought spiderman rocked becuase of the GREAT acting by Tobie Maguire and Wilem Difoe. The storyline was great and it flowed through the whole movie! I am not the kind of person to realy look at the special affects. Personaly think the story line and the acting is what realy counts. It was great and I plan on seing it again. Nothing against special affects but if the movies storyline isnt great, no matter how well the affects are it wont apeal to me. My girlfriend thought the movie was awsome and she usualy doesnt go see anithyng scifi. And i&#39;m glad you where not disapointed! I cant wait till the sequel.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:53 p.m. CST

    I second that opinion....

    by ManosTHOF

    ....on the Mysterio / Bruce suggestion. That would be almost destiny. I hope Bruce is cast as something in the next movie at least.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:54 p.m. CST

    You&#39;re right...

    by stevid

    I was thinking Bruce Campbell as Hydro Man, then Kraven was brought up...but Mysterio would be perfect...but hell just so long as he plays a MAJOR role in a future Spider-Man movie...right? It&#39;d be the big role he&#39;s deserved for so long...but then again to his fans he&#39;ll always be...ASH.

  • May 7, 2002, 10:57 p.m. CST

    Can&#39;t people have an opinion?

    by EliCash

    So there were some who hated Spider-Man. So what? That&#39;s no need for some of you to generalize and call them fat geeks who can&#39;t get girlfriends and go to the movies alone. I didn&#39;t hate Spider-Man, but I didn&#39;t love it either...it was solid entertainment, but failed to make it in to my top films of all time. Some people really loved it and good for them. However I do think that the hype has something to do with it. And just because the king of fat geeks Roger Ebert didn&#39;t love Spider-Man is no reason to shit all over his review and label him a sell-out or slave to Star Wars. Maybe that&#39;s how he REALLY felt about the film, ever think about that? To me, Superman 1 is still the best super-hero movie regardless of the ridiculous "Can You Read My Mind" musical interlude. And who can honestly say that Elfman&#39;s score was better than Williams&#39; brilliant Superman theme. Too bad that Spider-Man didn&#39;t deliver on this. I really wanted Spider-Man to thrill me, but instead it merely entertained me for a couple of hours. And hey, I really liked the Peter Parker scenes...it was nice to see a big budget film slow down and tell a believable human story. But I agree with Ebert that the action scenes left alot to be desired. Maybe they will get the action right with the sequel. (Which by the way I WILL be seeing.)

  • May 7, 2002, 11:02 p.m. CST

    GOOD JOB HARRY! YOU DA MAN

    by THE PROFESSOR

    GOOOOOOOOOOOD MOVVVVVVVVVIIIIEEEEEEEEE FUCK YOU NAYSAYERS

  • May 7, 2002, 11:04 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man is the best comic book adaptation ever

    by Corky St. Clair

    It&#39;s fantastic. All these criticisms are retarded. And I read someone say that the final fight in Superman II is better than any fight in Spider Man. Are you fucking kidding me? That sequence is such utter shit it&#39;s painful. I actually bought the DVD just so I could show friends who come over how comepletely awful and laughable the ending is. Crappy blue screen? Bland and slow action? A guy on skates getting blown around? Ice cream splatting in someone&#39;s face? A pedestrian suddenly playing the trumpet in support of superman? If you think that steaming shit sequence is better than spider-man, your opinion means less than nothing.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:06 p.m. CST

    Harry you pushover

    by Messyjoe

    Harry you are so easily seduced by an almost good movie. So you can accept 30 year old actors playing high school kids, the one bomb that blows out 8 windows from inside out, etc. as good enough, no, even great? Your standards, whatever they are, are slipping my man. This should have been magically good and it isn&#39;t. Yet I hold hope for the next one. Keep the faith.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:32 p.m. CST

    HARRY YOU GO MAN

    by khaleroo7

    I posted my review on damageReady.com and the main talkback. I think the movie was grand. Harry, good call on Peter&#39;s decision to walk away from MJ. That&#39;s exactly it, my man. Good for you. Harry, take care of yourself, because can you believe it? It might be this summer that people rememember more than any other for great movies. Holy Man, and what might be the best Star Wars movie (as my source told me) of all of them is just around the corner! Woah... Fun stuff. Enjoy the ride!! Khal in T>O>

  • May 7, 2002, 11:49 p.m. CST

    HOLY SHIT, just read this poll.......

    by axelfoley

    On CNN.com, there&#39;s a poll that asks whether or not you&#39;re going to see AOTC opening weekend. The majority of people on it said they were either going to see it the second weekend it comes out or not see it at all! Keep in mind how bias CNN has been in kissing Star Wars&#39; buttocks all week.

  • May 7, 2002, 11:49 p.m. CST

    30 year old actors playing high school students?

    by RogueScribner

    Kirsten Dunst is 20, James Franco is 24 and Tobey Maguire is 26. And considering the film was shot over a year ago, you can subtract a year from all of those ages. True, they are adults, but none of those actors are even close to 30. Tobey is the oldest of the bunch and he played a high schooler more convincingly than people ten years younger! What does age have to do with anything anyway? Did the actors act well? Were they believable in their roles? That&#39;s all that matters. And the answer to those questions are a resounding YES, BTW. --------------- If I ever saw a large man crying at a urinal I would slowly back out of the restroom. =) L8r

  • May 8, 2002, 12:37 a.m. CST

    CAPS AND SWEARING IS NOT AN ARGUMENT

    by khaleroo7

    When I read comments like the one previous to this, I feel contempt. Why? Because you&#39;re probably 20 years old, and yet you act old and bitter. Harry is a huckster? It seems to me that he is just being honest and enjoying it. He saw the movie TODAY. Why don&#39;t you go somewhere else and kick around some rocks rather than bother us with your tired, insipid and way-off-the-mark surly thoughts. YOU FUCKIN HO!! LOL

  • May 8, 2002, 12:39 a.m. CST

    Did we watch the same Spider-man movie?

    by The_Guru

    Because , honestly .. the one I saw sucked horribly. from the opening credits (where it looked like Kafka threw up on screen) throughout the rest of the whole putrid thing. I will not be going to see it again, and I don&#39;t think I even want it on DVD... I just want it to go away. Harry, I am sorry you had a rough childhood, but get therapy, and stop letting crap movies make your eyes water.

  • May 8, 2002, 12:43 a.m. CST

    Last Comment was For Shade, et Others.

    by khaleroo7

    So anyway, sorry for the craziness. I really mean that a well thought-out argument, even an enthusiastic one, will go much farther in making your point. I&#39;ve watched some people who get bitter about movies, and they&#39;re usually _in_ the industry, because they become a slave to it. If I was Harry, I&#39;d actually think twice about being that involved, or he might end up sounding like our buddy Shade, and who needs that?

  • May 8, 2002, 12:47 a.m. CST

    So I Had This Long, Rambling Post And Lost It... OR... "Vulgar D

    by jollydwarf

    Yeah, probably better that I had some illegal operation that shut down my Internet connection. Anyways, time to do it Larry "With these ellipses marks I thee Wed" King-Style!...Fuck Connie Chung. She ceased to be relevant when Bloom County ceased its run (real obscure, I know)...Was it me, or did it look like everyone being interviewed by her looked like they were a mere force grab away from the Dark Side forever?...I would&#39;ve enjoyed the interviews more conducted on TRL by that &#39;too-much-poonanny&#39; subdued Carson Daly...the Celebration II footage looked like "Trekkies 2: Electric Bantha Poodoo"...Did you see the kid with the "Jesus Christ: Episode I-In the Beginning" T-Shirt? Star Wars Geeks and Jesus Freaks DO mix, I guess...Someone mentioned in the old Spiderman TB that Episode II simply won&#39;t break it&#39;s opening weekend record, and that&#39;s because people still let lame Stand-Up routines dictate their tastes...I swear that at least one third of the people who sat through Episode I at least once still don&#39;t understand that it happened BEFORE "A New Hope"...their knowledge of Star Wars begins and ends with Bill Murray and Klingons...yes, I know what I just typed...speaking of lame stand-up and Connie Chung, I see her and Rosie and Craig Kilborn interviewing each other in Hell for eternity, with Carrot Top and David Blane being forever bumped to the next show!...was it me or did that ignorant cunt give everyone "Morning Latte" flashbacks from SNL, only with added homicidal vibes?...if this movie gets bested at the box office by Spiderman, look out for Chewbacca and the Falcon in Episode III!...oh shit, looks like I&#39;m rambling even MORE now...oh well, "Walk on home, boy...."

  • May 8, 2002, 12:52 a.m. CST

    It was a hard movie to watch

    by spider-ham

    I&#39;ve been waiting for Spiderman- the movie since the 70&#39;s. (if anything to wipe that annoying TV show from my mind.) I&#39;m a big spider fan as my handle gives away. However I didn&#39;t see it opening day. I work close to my parents, and thus I visit them for lunch every day. We are very close. My plan was to go to my parents for lunch, and then play hooky from work and see Spider Man. Friday morning at 11:30, I showed up at my parent&#39;s for lunch like normal. They have a long drive way. At the gate I saw my dad laying on his back near the house. As I hit the gate I dialed 911. I got to my Dad and he wasn&#39;t breathing nor had a heart beat. I told EMS my address and situation quickly as I began CPR. Even though I have hemiplegia, and worried that I couldn&#39;t do CPR correctly despite taking classes every two years, I did prefect CPR. To the book, everything prefect. The first ambulance arrived within 4 minutes. It wasn&#39;t ment to be because he probably had been dead for two hours before I found him and probably died instantly. He was 53 years old and in good health. I ended up seeing Spiderman yesterday. I cryied like a baby through any scene dealing the death. There were a lot of them. Over all, I feel the movie is the greatest superhero movie ever made. I&#39;m just way to depressed to talk about the film. My point is, please, if you have a parent who you maybe haven&#39;t gone to a movie with in a long while. Take them out. Treat them. You&#39;ll be glad you did.

  • May 8, 2002, 1:05 a.m. CST

    Yep....

    by zillabeast

    Spider-Man was the shit!!! Vote Quimby!!!

  • May 8, 2002, 1:17 a.m. CST

    Spider-Ham Dude!

    by khaleroo7

    Sorry to hear that man. You&#39;ve got friends here. I am sure your Dad loved you very much...and you him - and that all anyone can hope for in this life. You take care.

  • May 8, 2002, 1:26 a.m. CST

    Spider-man is the best comic film, ever.

    by The Daredevil

    I agree with Harry, Spider-man is without a doubt THE BEST comic film in history. It beats Donner&#39;s Superman, and Burton&#39;s Batman. Heck, it even beats Singer&#39;s X-Men (although X-Men is the 2nd best comic film imo). Sam Raimi has crafted a movie where you feel emotionally attach to the characters, and the story is action-filled and yet retains a human touch. Tobey Maguire&#39;s Peter Parker is unbelievable. He makes us feel empathic toward him and what he has to go through. Willem Dafoe&#39;s Norman Osborne is a villain who&#39;s more than one-dimension, unlike Hackman&#39;s Luthor and Nicholson&#39;s Joker. His relationship with Parker and son Harry made the story very interesting. Kristin Dunst is a babe, nuff said. Regarding the criticisms of CGI. It&#39;s true that occasionally they look fake, but MOST of the time, the CGI Spidey swings like a man who has superhuman agility and strength, which is exactly the point. They don&#39;t distract me from the movie at all, and I think it&#39;s just so much nitpicking. Green Goblin&#39;s helmet couldn&#39;t be a bit more organic-looking, but I think a Halloween mask would&#39;ve been far worse. Organic webshooter is cool, and I think Raimi made the right choice. The bottom line is, despite some minor complains, I think this movie is terrific from beginning to end. I already can&#39;t wait for Spider-man 2 in 2004.

  • May 8, 2002, 1:42 a.m. CST

    Spidey dissers

    by RogueScribner

    I understand comments like "I didn&#39;t like this movie" and "It was okay, but not great". I don&#39;t understand comments of the "it sux" and "what a crapfest". Not every person will like every movie. But some people in this talk (and the prior one) are so hateful towards this movie that I have to wonder if either they are just trolling the boards or if they went into this film with unrealistic expectations. There is no such things as a perfect (comic) book to screen translation. The best anyone can ever hope for is if the spirit of the source material made it to the big screen. I believe in SPIDER-MAN&#39;s case that it did. Disregard the MJ/Gwen Stacy debate, or the organic/mechanical web shooters, or the way Uncle Ben died or any of the other trivial details. A movie has to stand alone from outside source material or it will be a failure before it&#39;s even begun. Does it work as a film, unto itself? That&#39;s the question. The SPIDER-MAN movies shouldn&#39;t been seen as new canon for the Spider-man universe but rather a companion-piece. I thought the movie was very fun. I went into with zero expectations, just hoping it would be good. Within the first few minutes I got sucked into the story and I had one helluva ride with Peter Parker and friends. As Harry said, this may not be the best Spider-man story ever told, but it stands right now as the best Spider-man movie ever made, and in my opinion, the 2nd best comic book movie ever made. Is there room for improvement? There always is for every film. Hopefully some of those improvements will see the light of day in the next installment. If SPIDER-MAN 2 does nothing but match the quality of the first movie, I&#39;ll still be happy. Just be glad this movie didn&#39;t turn out like SPAWN or BATMAN & ROBIN and let&#39;s look forward to further adventures of the Spider-man (next installment May 7, 2004!)!!! L8r

  • May 8, 2002, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Why "Spider-Man" was so disappointing

    by Fixxxer

    I wanted to love "Spider-Man." I wanted to love it a whole lot. But as it ended, I found myself with the same indifferent, empty feeling I had after watching most movies I&#39;ve seen this year -- movies like "Murder By Numbers," "Frailty," "Time Machine." Like all those movies, there was plenty about "Spider-Man" to like -- but it ultimately didn&#39;t get the job done. The one really remarkable thing "Spider-Man" accomplishes is that the origin story is actually the best part of the film. This is a first in the annals of comic book films. The first 40 minutes of this film are so entertaining, filled with so much heart and glee, I was kind of hoping Peter would never don that red and blue suit. When he did, the movie just became another boring exercise in special effects, one that wears out its welcome around the 95 minute mark. A two hour movie was not necessary here. The major problems: Kirsten and Tobey had ZERO chemistry. Kirsten Dunst plays most of this movie like a zombie. The last scene of the movie, while not badly written, becomes laughable thanks to Kirsten&#39;s ridiculous...stilted...line readings. What happened to Kirsten Dunst? She debuts with a great performance in "Interview With the Vampire," then turns to "Bring it On," "Get Over It" and now phones in her performance in "Spider-Man"? What happened? Major problem No. 2: The Green Goblin. Norman Osborn&#39;s character development basically amounts to nothing. We have no friggin&#39; idea what that suit or sled is designed to do, but we do know that it sure looks cheesy when a bright green metal guy is flying it through the air. I found Gobby to be a thoroughly uninteresting villain, especially when half his dialogue is spoken from behind a metal mask. That quaint little rooftop chat between Spidey and Gobby where neither one is visible underneath their costumes...ugh. The problem with these comic book movies is that they all seem to try not to be too far removed from reality, to not be so cartoonish...but the story they&#39;re telling IS cartoonish. Raimi just doesn&#39;t pull it off here. He does pull off some nifty visuals; few things could beat the pure joy of watching Spidey swing from building to building. That is exhilarating. But then we get this horribly uninteresting climax aboard the bridge. The Gobber takes out a military installation, but the most devious plan he can come up with is this bridge scenario? I don&#39;t know, it just didn&#39;t seem...grand enough. This is a $140 million movie. I want Venom and Carnage in a knockdown, drag-out battle to the death with Spidey, not this pedestrian crap. That being said, I didn&#39;t hate the movie. I didn&#39;t love it either. I just wish it was better. Why you all are calling it the greatest comic book movie, I&#39;ll never know. The original "Superman" is really the only movie that ever pulled it off -- it was a great comic book movie, but more than that, it was a great movie, period. "Spider-Man" certainly won&#39;t be in contention for any Oscars other than technical ones (and I think "Minority Report," "Two Towers" and "AOTC" will have it beat in the visuals department), and I doubt it will be regarded as a classic in 20 years like "Superman" still is today. But we&#39;ll see.

  • May 8, 2002, 2:07 a.m. CST

    I

    by ubergeek00

    "I

  • May 8, 2002, 2:16 a.m. CST

    AOTC will be the highest grossing film of 2002

    by JMYoda

    "It&#39;s unavoidable. It is it&#39;s destiny...." Sorry GEEKED out for a min there. As I was saying since George Lucas demands high standards for the theaters that have the film opening weekend (lesser theaters and drive-ins will get it later) and since the film opens on a Thursday, not Friday there is no chance it could beat Spidey&#39;s $114 mil weekend. HOWEVER I have little doubt that "Attack of the Clones" will be the highest grossing film of the year. Spiderman was ultra hyped like &#39;The Phantom Menace&#39; (who knew the title was talking about the film itself?) and &#39;the Lost World&#39; which BTW had the high total for opening weekend until &#39;Harry Potter&#39; and yet tapered off rather quickly to finish with $229 mil). Don&#39;t get me wrong Spidey will make a mint and be in the top three by years end but Star Wars is the most bankable property on the planet. Heck TPM was considered a HUGE disappointment by the majority of the core die-hard fan base (including me) and critics alike and yet managed to make $431 mil domestically and almost a $925 mil worldwide. You don&#39;t get those numbers without major repeat business from everyone, not just die-hard fans so it shows even a shoddy Star Wars film can out do everything else at the Box Office. Oddly enough among casual fans and kids/teens (the later is the #1 money making group) TPM was a hit and they saw it multiple times. Since all indications seems to look towards AOTC being a more Star Wars-ish film and a big improvement over the last one (if not still in nearly the same class as the disappointment) it will easily blast Spidey out of the water money-wise since I predict there will be a sharp decline on Spiderman by time AOTC is out. However not to worry Spidey fans the film will still bank between $250-300 mil domestically and you can rest assure there will be sequels, hopefully with ILM doing the FX. Not to mention it&#39;s a huge critical success with all the major critics except of course for Ebert who has gone loopy in the last few years. I mean he gives &#39;Spiderman&#39; and &#39;The Scorpion King&#39; the same rating (** 1/2) AND &#39;Tomb Raider&#39; (The WORST film of 2001) and &#39;Fellowship of the Ring&#39; (The BEST film of 2001) the same rating? (***) Not to mention he hated &#39;The Usual Suspects&#39; and &#39;Gladiator&#39; Geesh!) My guessed is AOTC will do a bare min of $300 mil domestically and probably about $400 mil whether it&#39;s good, bad or great.

  • May 8, 2002, 2:19 a.m. CST

    Virtual-Man rocked!!!!

    by Moops

    he moved fast and stuff so it&#39;s the best superhero movie ever!

  • May 8, 2002, 2:34 a.m. CST

    Watch out Titanic? Are you kidding?

    by Andy Andy

    Let me explain something to those of you who don&#39;t know anything about demographics. Titanic was a phenomenon. A one of a kind event that probably won&#39;t happen again in our lifetimes. It managed to capture the two biggest demographics: adult males, and (more importantly) teenage girls and adult women. Women saw that damn thing in DROVES. they took their boyfriends. then they took their girlfriends. THEN they took their other girlfriends. Add to that the fact that it came out in the winter, when NOTHING comes out. It was free and clear to make a mint until April. Spiderman is a phenomenon too, but for a different reason. It managed to surpass even Titanic in terms of demographic appeal. EVERYONE wanted to see it. Kids, teenagers, men, women, even seniors. I know because i saw every type of person you can imagine at the theater. Does that mean it will surpass Titanic? My goodness no. Not even close. The reason why is because this is a movie that appeals to mostly males. Females saw it, but you cant honestly expect them to see it over and over and over. Senior citizens, you know- the guys who have been waiting &#39;40 years&#39; to see Spiderman- do you think they will see it again? I highly doubt that. So who does that leave? Your typical summer blockbuster audience- kids and adult males. And i&#39;m sorry for those of you disagree, but those people will FORGET about Spiderman after May 16th. Its inevitable. Time for the next blockbuster of the summer. If this movie came out during a slow period, like january, sure, but there is just too many things competing for Spiderman&#39;s core audience.

  • May 8, 2002, 2:38 a.m. CST

    Spiderman is no Titanic- continued

    by Andy Andy

    And for those of you who point to the fact that it made 11 million on Monday- sorry, that dog just dont hunt. The simple explanation is, Spiderman has been THE top story since Saturday. Breaking box office records, blah blah blah. Monday (and possibly Tuesday) is just the result of all of the buzz surrounding this movie right now. Trust me, this will all die down.

  • May 8, 2002, 2:41 a.m. CST

    TOP TEN REASONS THIS MOVIE BLEW

    by dinobravo

    What the heck is wrong with you muggin&#39; people?! This movie stunk. Why? Here&#39;s my top ten reasons: 10)World Trade Center-it&#39;s bad enough ET digitally erased the rifles from the bike scene but now we&#39;re erasing entire buildings? 9)Randy Savage- This guy did liquor runs for Abe Lincoln in college. The scene with him in it, I couldn&#39;t help but be distracted by all the wrinkles and bags. Nasty. 8)J. Jonah Jameson- The nazi guy from Oz is a good actor but he played this character way too cartoonish for my liking. Where&#39;s R. Lee Ermey when you need him? 7) The intro and its score- this was a shameless rip-off of the 1989 Batman intro. 6) the length- this movie was way too long 5)Kirsten Dunst- she simply is not pretty enough to be Mary Jane. 4) The changed origin- what&#39;s wrong with the one in the comics. The first 20 minutes looked like a commercial for Columbia University. 3) Harry Osbourne- I know he&#39;s supposed to be an awkward, dull and confused character but he came out totally lame. He should have at least a fraction of the personality his father had. 2)Where&#39;s Gwen Stacy? 1) Is it just me, or did this whole movie seem like a trailer for a bigger and better film?

  • May 8, 2002, 3:11 a.m. CST

    DinoBravo is exactly who I was talking about

    by RogueScribner

    He can&#39;t separate the comic book from the movie so the movie automatically sucks. His expectations for the film could never be lived up to because there is no way in hell all of the glory of 40 years of comic books can be crammed into a 2 hour movie. It&#39;s just not realistic. I get the feeling the only people who truly hate the film are comic book diehards and people who don&#39;t go for this type of movie anyway. L8r

  • May 8, 2002, 3:20 a.m. CST

    Harry, you are blinded by love.

    by jondean

    Harry, come on! The movie sucked and doesn&#39;t come close to Batman. You let your bias prevent you from becoming a reputable critic. You know that most who read these article are Spidey fans and want to hear a good review so you give them what they want so they will continue to feed your empire. The only other reason for your good review is that you are profoundly superficial and shallow expecting nothing more from a movie than to fullfill your bias for stupid shallow causes.

  • May 8, 2002, 3:42 a.m. CST

    I can&#39;t wait for the DVD!!!!!!!!!!

    by droll-1

    When we got to del Rio Sunday evening, we went out to eat, then went to see Spider-Man. Being a long time Spidey fan, I was really looking forward to it (but with some trepidation...what if it sucked?) It was perfect. I loved it. My grown son loved it. Heck, even my wife, who really expected to hate it,(no sci-fi, fantasy, or animated films for her) liked it. This is one that I can&#39;t wait to own the DVD. I hope they cram that sucker full of special features. It was very true to the original storyline in the comic book, and the liberties that it did take for the sake of expediency were actually improvements. Ton of fun.

  • May 8, 2002, 3:48 a.m. CST

    Kevin Smith never said he "hated" the fucking movie, people.

    by LlGHTST0RMER

    He was doing one of his infamous Q & A sessions at a college a few weeks ago. One of the students asked him if it was true that he had seen Spider-Man, and what did he think about it? The answer came like this... KEVIN: "Yes, I saw Spider-Man." STUDENT: "...And..?" KEVIN: "Yes, I saw Spider-Man." He didn&#39;t officially go into detail, and he certainly didn&#39;t attack the flick. He wouldn&#39;t elaborate, apparently, on his comment. Obviously, he didn&#39;t rave about the thing, either, and it was clear it wasn&#39;t what he had hoped for, but to hear some of the other TalkBackers here tell it, he&#39;s leading some sort of jealousy-driven charge against the film. Well, folks, he ain&#39;t. So could we please stop raking Moves over the coals for it?

  • May 8, 2002, 3:59 a.m. CST

    Don&#39;t worry, true believers. The DVD will be out in Novembe

    by LlGHTST0RMER

    And come next May, I&#39;ll be revisiting this TalkBack and the other one, cutting and pasting like a motherf...er, reminding those of you who said this is "the best comic adaptation movie EVER." I&#39;ll ask you then what you think of the film, and see how bored you&#39;ll already be with it. Hell, I could do this as early as, I dunno, December or January, but I&#39;ll give the flick the benefit of the doubt and allow it a little extra time. Personally, I could still watch X-Men any day of the week and twice on Tuesday. In my eyes, that&#39;s the one that seemed to be the best movie born from a comic book. Trample all over me now, kids. I&#39;ll be patient.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:08 a.m. CST

    God I loved this movie

    by A_Dead_Soul

    I watched spider man at an old theatre named the Ritz... Sure the screen was small and the seats squeaked but it was still the perfect environment... I never cry at movies... Ever. but this one got me a little misty. I think anyone who was ever picked on in high school can identify with peter/toby. Seriously, organic webslingers notwithstanding this film rocked. It didn&#39;t just capture the spider man comic, it captured the part of us that wants something special to happen, the part that screams for salvation from the humdrum everyday lives we lead... that is why this movie was great. not because of the special effects, not because of the fight scenes... but because it made everything bad in our lives go away for a little while, and swept us into it&#39;s reality... Still Dead Shade

  • May 8, 2002, 4:09 a.m. CST

    Peter&#39;s original last name...

    by droll-1

    Wow, Amazing Larry. It&#39;s impressive how you can post a pretentious putdown of persons that actually SAW the movie and criticize them for liking it, but you&#39;re too intellectual to even see it. What a poser. I suspect the difference between the folks that think Spiderman is the best movie from a comic book is that they think that Spider-Man was the best comic book character to base a movie on. Trivia: Anybody else out there old enough to remember that Peter Parker was not Spideys original secret identity. When the Spidey character first appeared, his characters real name was...are you ready for this...Peter Palmer. Took Marvel a couple of issues to decide that Peter had enough problems without saddling him with that handle.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:13 a.m. CST

    another overlooked analysis

    by Joker Venom

    I dont think Harry could have put it any better, I felt like a kid again after seeing Raimi&#39;s spiderman. of course it wasnt going to stick to every detail of the comic book, but it kept the "soul", if you will, of the whole spider-man saga. I respect everybody elses opinions good or bad, but it justified as much as it could for a 2 hour movie. Seriously, how much storyline can you put in a movie of that length. Bottom Line, it worked in a more personal approach through peter parkers eyes and did a hell of job in the process.

  • i love it dearly. i love it so much. it&#39;s not just the best comic book movie, it&#39;s one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) action pictures of all time. Sam Raimi has made a phenomenal piece of cinema here, and i&#39;m glad to hear that it struck a strong chord with you, too.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:29 a.m. CST

    RAIMI&#39;S SPIDEY&#39;S did the trick

    by Joker Venom

    its so true as Dead Soul put it, for the first time in a long time i didnt laugh when an actor cried in a movie. I dont know what it was, but i just cant take actors seriously when they cry in movies, that all changed after uncle ben died. After you watch all the shit peter parker goes through you can help but not to feel bad. I didnt cry or anything, but as dead soul put it, i got "a little misty".

  • May 8, 2002, 4:54 a.m. CST

    The Green Goblin is Jet Jaguar!

    by BloodDonorMan

    While I was watching the Spider-Man movie today, I noticed that the Green Goblin reminded me of someone...that same pointy conehead, that same goofy and teethy metallic smile-it&#39;s Jet Jaguar!-the UltraMan wannabe from 1974&#39;s Godzilla Vs Megalon! It&#39;s nice to see he&#39;s still getting work!

  • May 8, 2002, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Harry&#39;s Spider-Man

    by Roboteer

    About that personal and heartfelt fanboy review, I can only say "DITTO!" Nice to hear a mention of Jack Kirby as part of the Amazing Arachnid&#39;s origin. I understood he came up with the original costume design as well. No offense to Steve Ditko, but sometimes Spidey succeeded DESPITE SD&#39;s eccentric renderings. Kirby was the guy who along with Lee developed virtually the entire Marvel Universe. Because he bailed though, it&#39;s like he never existed. I&#39;m glad Lee lived to see Peter Parker make it big, but his lack of false modesty (or any other kind) sometimes pisses people off. "I saw a fly on the wall and that gave me the idea" indeed! Only if that fly was named Jack. For those who complained Kirsten wasn&#39;t good enough .... it&#39;s a shame former redhead Claire Danes didn&#39;t get the MJ part. Trust me, she would have nailed the closeups. But she&#39;ll get her shot in the action realm as a last minute replacement for young Mr.Connor&#39;s gal pal in T3. Happy viewing.

  • May 8, 2002, 9:45 a.m. CST

    It all started with....

    by DarkFire

    LotR-FOTR...then SpiderMan...next will be SW: Epi II, followed by MIB II, Reign of Fire, Sum of All Fears, LoTR-TTT, Star Trek 10: Nemesis, Matrix II, Matrix III, LoTR: RoTK....face it folks--it&#39;s a wonderful time to be alive. No movie will be perfect, there may be some movies that aren&#39;t on this list or some that you might not enjoy...but dammit! Hollywood by and large is in high gear right now, and we are reaping the benefits! R E J O I C E ! ! !

  • May 8, 2002, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Harry jerks off the industry yet again

    by heywood jablomie

    I am tired, too, of his "I was really thinking this movie was gonna suck...[repeat 50 times]...but then...oh my God!...hold the phone!...stop the presses!...gee! your hair smells TERRIFIC!" reviews. This is the guy who gave an encouraging chuck on the chin to JASON X, which is as bad a movie as has come out of a studio since Herbert Hoover sat at the big desk in D.C. I like AICN&#39;s encouragement of cool little things, but when it comes to popcorn fare, the site has become another facet of the hype machine--a Premiere that smells like an unshaven, unwashed geek.

  • May 8, 2002, 10:40 a.m. CST

    Movie mistakes

    by Andy Andy

    I just read on the Drudge report that 77 mistakes have already been spotted in the movie, such as "disappearing rucksacks, clothes that are dirty one minute and clean the next and smashed windows that self-repair". I dont care what you say, that is just plain sloppy. Good story, cheesy special effects (if you have to justify the special effects and make an argument for them, they are not any good), and lousy editing. And this is the best action movie of all time?

  • May 8, 2002, 10:40 a.m. CST

    In defence of Smith

    by SilentJames

    Smith is a friend of Harry&#39;s so he trusts his opinion. And as for experience w/ super heroes well he has revitalized the Green Arrow and made those books some of the best comics DC has put out in recent years, He won awards for his Daredevils AND is signed on to write a Black Cat series as well as THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN! So i think kevin knows what he&#39;s talkin about here

  • May 8, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Just awful

    by 9000rpm

    Spiderman will have the most precipitous drop ever as the word gets out: Spiderman is BLAND, as exciting as a bowl of cold oatmeal. I won&#39;t even watch this again on DVD. Waste of time.

  • May 8, 2002, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Nailed it and it sticks.

    by TAOEH

    Harry, You have never been so on target about this film. This is the best review you have ever written. Okay so I&#39;m 48 years old and I am feeling the energy of this movie and later after the film I am realizing how this really snagged my heart. There were some parts of the film that could have been treated much worse, overall I thought it was so well thought through. Whoever organized the choreography and taught the actor to stand, move, gesture did such an amazing job. When Spidey is in the final battle his grace is uncomparable. It is the most masculine of ballet ever. Winner all over it.

  • 7-10 aren&#39;t in my opinion even worth addressing. As for the others: 6) "Spider-Man" was just about two hours. Just how short IS your attention shan? Didn&#39;t some of us claim that the otherwise great "X-Men" could have been longer with more character development and whatnot? "Spider-Man" was a perfect length. 5) Kirstin Dunst not pretty enough???! That statement is like saying "Albert Einstein isn&#39;t smart enough." If Kirstin isn&#39;t pretty enough, I guess they just should have created Mary Jane through CGI too because a pretty enough actress simply doesn&#39;t exist. 4) Nothing was wrong with the origin in the comics - for the time. However, now there&#39;s really no big deal about a lab creating radioactive rays in 2002, so I highly doubt any decent high school would take a field trip to a lab just to watch them do that. Also, does anyone in hindsight believe that a SPIDER could survive after being zapped by radioactive rays, let alone long enough to bit someone? I thought the new spin(no pun) on the origin was great. If you&#39;re referring to the fact that in the comics there was more between Peter&#39;s first wrestling match and when he fails to stop the robber (in which he has some success in show-business) uh... weren&#39;t you the one who said the movie was too long? 3) That was kind of the point. 2) Didn&#39;t we all already go through this? 1) No, that&#39;s "The Phantom Menace."

  • May 8, 2002, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Raimi hit with a very solid effort!

    by windowpainter

    First off, this flick has a geat comic book feel to it. Raimi/Koepp may have changed some details about spiderman/peter parker, but they are acceptable for launching into a new series of films. This is not the comic book, this is now something bigger. I am not so stuck on some previous ideology of spiderman and his world, that i can&#39;t accept a new take on it. People that like spiderman and can&#39;t enjoy this film, in my opinion, are far removed from their childhood and are not able to let go of things. The CGI was amazing...can you think of any better way to properly realize spiderman other than to wait for another number of years for CGI to perfectly mimic human movement? I don&#39;t think any other director could have taken such a project and mold it into something better than we have seen with Raimi&#39;s spiderman. People may comment about cheesy dialog, well i say go look at a comic book...that is how the dialog is written. I will admit that sony certainly had their fingers deep inside the cookie jar for that ridiculous macy gray &#39;product placement&#39; but i can let that one thing go, as i am sure raimi had to oblige the suits who wanted to do some advertising on the expense of spiderman. I certainly look forward to the sequel and I am sure we will see the envelope pushed to the next level. I for one, think we will see Bruce Campbell as a villian in the sequel. If you think about it, it would work well with Raimi at the reigns. Bruce could make a wicked comic book villian. I know all you evil dead fans realize how bruce could be a wonderful adversary to spidey. bruce as DOC OCT??? we shall see!

  • May 8, 2002, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man, Raimi did a fine job!

    by IT'SONLYAMOVIE

    By far this is the best comic book film, better than all the Batman and Superman flicks. Unlike Batman this film&#39;s focus was on the hero but did not stint on the villain. The casting was perfect: Maguire, Defoe and Dunst were fine. Raimi knows how to direct action and the scenes of the Goblin flying around the city battling Spider-man were cool. The GCI was what is was, but in many current films the realism of effects are more inconsistent. I also loved how Parker slowly got used to his powers in the first half. The Goblin was just as strong as Spider-man and he brutally whipped his ass at points, which also made this different form most comic flicks (except maybe Superman II where he fought fellow Kryptonions). A little too much romance, but I understand this is to pull in the female audience, but even this was handled quite seriously and not too mushy. Add in the authentic New York backgrounds (a current, gritty New York, not a fantasy city) and you have one very good summer popcorn movie.

  • May 8, 2002, 1:27 p.m. CST

    WHERE IS JONAH&#39;S "HITLER" MUSTACHE ?!?!

    by SilenceofFreedom

    Why has no one brought this up yet ? It was distracting. I mean, I didn&#39;t read the comics that much, but are they not doing it because of the "hitler" referance ? God, that guy would&#39;ve had Jameson right on if not for the mustache.

  • May 8, 2002, 1:35 p.m. CST

    I raped a troll with a pencil once.

    by Vegas

    Then I spun that fucker around til his hair stood on end!

  • Sad. Really. Pathetic. Hollywood needs to ignore the loud geeks and the movie might get better.

  • May 8, 2002, 2:14 p.m. CST

    NEED MORE WISECRACKS NEXT TIME! SPIDEY AS SADSACK SPOT ON...

    by Godot's Child

    This franchise is on solid ground with McGuire and Dunst. They can only improve... though they only get to do that wonderful "Peter Parker discovers his powers" scene one time... the action needed Spidey&#39;s wisecracks and there were only a couple very short ones... Spiderman is where PP gets in touch with his inner wise-ass! Bring it out next time, Sam!

  • May 8, 2002, 2:16 p.m. CST

    Movie: Pretty Good/ Dialogue: Pretty Bad

    by wadew

    Saw this tonight. overall i liked it. I thought the CGI was pretty good, i especially liked the webslinging(best sequence being the end)and the acrobatics. IMO the thing about this movie is that they really dropped the ball with the dialogue. A lot of stuff was just badly written or badly delivered. The writing in the comics right now is ten times better. ....and they got to work on this script for how many years? ....and it went through what? 2,722 drafts? they especially blew it with Spider-man&#39;s dialogue. He&#39;s a wisecracker. He&#39;s supposed to be funny. He gives you nothing in this movie. Pete as Spidey doesn&#39;t have much to say, and when he does...Tobey&#39;s just off or it&#39;s just not a good line. Ex. Goblin- "Are you in or out?" Spider-man- "It is you who is out, GOBBY!" ....and i still think the Goblin outfit is horrible. The glider was great, but the costume....guh. One more thing that bothered me was how "the burglar" died . They should&#39;ve stuck with the comics on this one. Wouldn&#39;t it have been so much better if Pete had beaten him within an inch of his life and forced himself not to kill the guy who murdered his uncle ? Instead he tripped....and fell out of a window. i&#39;d give it 2 and a half stars. It felt like spider-man, but it could&#39;ve been so much better.

  • May 8, 2002, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Prepare for a bunch of crap movies...

    by ThuferMMA

    I saw Spiderman on an Imax screen (this was cool, but the sound was way too loud, and I wonder if the image is cropped to make it fit the Imax aspect ratio better), and I liked it. Yet I know that Hollywood is going to completely miss the point that the reason Spiderman did so stunningly well is that there haven&#39;t been any movies really worth seeing for two or more months preceding its release. Of course the sequel is already in the works, of course there&#39;s going to be a series on TV. I&#39;m sure the day that 114 mil. number came out pants were wetted all over Hollywood, and anybody that had ever been turned down on any comic based project had their phone ringing off the hook. Prepare for a bunch of crap movies... I&#39;m guessing they will rush the sequel as well and turn it into crap, then its box-office failure will signal the beginning of the end of this latest fad.

  • May 8, 2002, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Y Tu Spider Tambien

    by johnquay

    In the sequel, Peter Parker and Harry Osborn should hook up with a hot older woman and drive down with her to a Mexican beach where they all three get it on simultaneously. Caramba! Seriously though, I think the movie&#39;s flaws don&#39;t detract from the overall fun. Consider what the movie&#39;s up against: a live-action translation of a beloved comic-book fantasy; to my mind, an almost impossible task to pull off. Spider-Man is a great character, but in broad actual daylight, an actor in that suit threatens to look ridiculous. How do you play those operatic, larger-than-life fantasy elements (that are the lifeblood of comics) in a real-life setting? How do you pitch the always-ends-in-an-exclamation-point! dialogue? How do you stay faithful to the involved "origin" story without putting the audience into a snooze? Any movie adaptation of this material is forced to compress, alter, tweak, etc., plus you&#39;ve got the studio demanding that the movie play it nice and PG-13 safe. So give thanks for a good cast, a respectable script (that actually has some things to say about heroism), a great kissing scene, and a flick polished enough to make me want more. I give it a B+. To you guys who say Kirsten Dunst ain&#39;t pretty enough: go back to your pop-up porn sites, you never kissed a real girl in your lives. And if you&#39;ve scrolled this far down to read me, god bless you.

  • May 8, 2002, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Tim Burton got it so right with Batman Returns?!

    by 007-11

    Grunter, what the fuck? The Penguin is a disfigured pervert with greasy hair, bad teeth, and a layer of filth that just don&#39;t wash off. Catwoman is a revenge crazed sociopath who could give a fuck about the rainforest. Granted there were good performances but how in the name of all that is holy did Tim Burton get it so right?

  • May 8, 2002, 3:54 p.m. CST

    In regards to Bruce Campbells future role in Spider-man

    by 007-11

    Him as Mysterio sounds like a great idea, but someone mentioned on an earlier talkback that he should play Kurt Connors, a guy missing an arm. Like the Mysterio thing it&#39;s the ultimate in-joke.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:03 p.m. CST

    the suit

    by trkane

    i thought the spidey suit was the bomb. very cool looking. HOWEVER, harry and others mentioned the &#39;nice little details&#39; like peter designing the suit. christ, he drew a picture. how the crap did he get that goddamn suit? if they would&#39;ve shown a 5 second snippet of him sending away for it or sewing it (although then it would look a lot more like ross/busiek&#39;s suit from MARVELS), or something, i&#39;d&#39;ve been happy. as far as i&#39;m concerned, how he got the suit is a complete mystery, not a nice littel detail. just like they gloss over the goblin mask. maybe it was necessary to gloss over that stuff, but don&#39;t laud the taking of shortcuts as attention to detail.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    I hate to over-post, but....

    by 007-11

    everyone needs to go read Pollando Blue&#39;s post right now! Damn that shit was funny.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Look with better eyes?

    by Andy_Christ

    More like look with uncritical eyes. The effects were, at least, rendered well. But the animation just was not perfect. Superhuman my ass. The fight with Flash was superhuman. The web-slinging sequencess were MASSLESS. It&#39;s subtleties in animation that make or break it&#39;s realism, and the more realistic the rendering, the more realistic the motion has to be. Remember Pixar&#39;s "Geri&#39;s Game?" Did you notice how the motions looked a little weird, particularly whenever Geri touched anything? I did. Because he had no mass. (Not weight, MASS) He stopped instantly. He changed direction instantly. A frame or two of deformation when he rests a hand on the table would eliminate this criticism. A little more decceleration when spiderman&#39;s limbs or arms change direction of their motion would make his swinging sequences look as real as his fight sequence did. Don&#39;t make excuses. Even though it isn&#39;t a very major problem, it did mar what could have been a PERFECT illusion. Don&#39;t make excuses for it, Harry. Accept it and try to overlook it, but don&#39;t grope for reasons why it SHOULD be that way, because it should not. (I liked Brotherhood of the Wolf in spite of it having the same problem to an even greater degree.)

  • May 8, 2002, 4:15 p.m. CST

    The Vanisher re Wisecracks

    by Andy_Christ

    If they were there...can you quote one? Probably not. Sure they WERE present, just not at all memorable. Which probably explains all the dorks on here asking where were the wisecracks.

  • I don&#39;t get it? Don&#39;t people go to work during the week? This is making my conspiracy theory look more and more plausible.

  • I&#39;m interested to see if anyone has any ideas.

  • May 8, 2002, 4:35 p.m. CST

    This Movie Rocked... And anyone that says "X-Men" or Batman Retu

    by KOLOBOS REXX

    Let&#39;s get real here, folks. Ok, maybe you didn&#39;t like everything in the film, but so what? It was undoubtedly the best comics-to-film adaptation EVER MADE. It is fairly impossible to say most other comic-films even came close. Let&#39;s go through them, though, anyway... "BATMAN"/"BATMAN RETURNS": Ok, we get some nice, gloomy production designs, a stiff-necked, neurotic Batman, and a useless supporting cast. Nicholson&#39;s Joker didn&#39;t have a damned thing to do with the comic. "I was already nuts before I was disfigured, so this is just a reason to act totally flamboyant and do whatever I feel like"... That&#39;s motivation? How about tying in Napier/Joker to Bruce&#39;s parent&#39;s deaths, just so we can justify the hero letting him, and essentially causing, the villain&#39;s death? Yeah, that&#39;s all just great. Howzabout the Penguin? from a short and fat but dapper genius struggling to be elite and respected among the criminal community, since polite society rejects him, to some perverse, bile-drooling, nose-biting, dirty longcoat over soiled longjohns circus freak? This guy was NOT the comic. He was some horrid amalgamation of the Phantom of the Opera, Quasimodo, and Dr. Caligari, minus all the good parts of those characters. He wore the trademark suit for like, 5 minutes in the film, then ditched it for the longjohns again! The monocle was seen only in the ads, and he actually REFUSED the cig-holder in the film! And Catwoman? Some metaphysical, raised from the dead, pissed at her boss/men psycho-feminist revenge fantasy. Give me a freaking break. Need I go further into the other Bat-films? A loony, way-over the top Riddler, Joker-wannabe Two-Face(real waste of a potentialy great character there...) howsabout the utterly dumb Bane, campy, nappy Poison Ivy, and saddled with awful one-liners Mr. Freeze, who could have worked, if they&#39;d played up his pathos instead of the jokes. So, what about any of that was better than Spidey? I&#39;ll continue: "X-MEN": A good film, but too short, too focused on Wolverine. Storm sucked. Cyclops and Jean Grey: Good. Prox. X/Magneto: Done well. Sabretooth, Mystique, Toad: Cool, but no development whatsoever except the hinted Logan/Sabretooth connection. Again, too short, battle-scenes were skimpy, short, uninvolving. The story: Zzzz. Magneto wants to mutate the world&#39;s leaders, so they&#39;l like mutants better? Yeah, ok. The whole thing felt less like a big-budget comic-adaptation and more like a middle-ground B-film with some prominent actors. Granted, that was 20th Century Fox&#39;s fault, hopefully, bigger budget, better story next time. Superman 1+2: Christopher Reeve: Great. Gene Hackman: Could have been better if they&#39;d have let him be a real threat. The Phantom Zone Villains: A trio of leather-pajamas bullies, only one of whom actually came from the comics, and didn&#39;t even look right on that basis, though Terrance Stamp was and is awesome, easily the best part of the film. Everyone else: All awful, especially Margot Kidder. Action: Stagey and goofy, with pretty terrible effects, even for the time. Accurate adaptation: Up until the parents croak. I mean, Supes uses some plastic shield-net thing, turns invisible, and reverses time... Did these folks even read the comic? Cripes. Dare I even go onto parts 3+4? You know you don&#39;t want me to. "Nuclear Man" anyone? Yeah, right. I&#39;m all for Brendan Fraser playing Supes and Clark, since he can actually do both. So there ya go. If you naysayers ever actually read the Spidey comics, you would have known how dead on the characters were, that all the main characters were quite well-developed, that a millitary battlesuit looks a lot better than the rubber mask and tights would have, that Gwen Stacy only had purpose in dying(and later being cloned), and that Harry Osborn is destined to be even scarier and nuttier than dear ol&#39; dad. As far as a sequel goes, I&#39;m all for Jeffery Combs for Doc Ock. You really couldn&#39;t find anyone else that could play a demented genius as well as he. So, in closing, hey, you&#39;re more than welcome to not like the movie for any reason you want... but psuedo-justifications and flawed, unsupported logic don&#39;t make you sound smart... Ya just look like a jackass. "Have A Nice Day, and Thanks For Playing." Later, Kids!

  • May 8, 2002, 5:14 p.m. CST

    AOTC and Shaggins

    by jokrsmile

    Here&#39;s my theory on who&#39;s giving away AOTC&#39;s profits. It&#39;s gotta be Lucas himself!! He must feel guilty for unleashing that piece of crap TPM on us a few years back. He&#39;s dispersing funds amoung movie goers so they can see REAL movies....like Spider-Man. And he should! Especially after making the public suffer through the ramblings of Jar Jar Binks!! The only other thing that&#39;s plausible from your postings is that you&#39;re a complete psycho.

  • May 8, 2002, 6:10 p.m. CST

    Negative reviewers, please put down the crack pipe

    by HJSimpson

    I have actually seen reviews of Spider-Man referring to certain aspects as "cartoonish." Hey assholes, that&#39;s a freakin&#39; compliment. This movie was very good, and I can&#39;t believe the smegma-masters who think Superman is some kind of litmus test for good superhero movies. Fuck faggot-ass Superman, fuck gay-droid Star Wars Melvin Eugine Punymeiers, Spider-Man rules! Dissenters are cordially invited to go fuck themselves!

  • That goes out to you Jokrsmile. You guys have no scruples. Truth be told from what I can gather this movie is ordinary and yet it&#39;s making huge sums of money in short order. Fucking thieves.

  • May 8, 2002, 6:44 p.m. CST

    Plants, Weeds, and More On Spiderman

    by Barron34

    I think that the previous poster who pointed out that many people who are writing negatvie posts here on Spiderman are studio goons trying to stop the Spiderman juggernaut. Studio goons who log-on to attack a film in hopes of cutting down it&#39;s business are not mere Plants, but are full-blown Weeds. ******Admittedly, there are some weaknesses to the film: some poor CGI, especially the "masslessness" of Spidey that another poster has mentioned. Also, Spidey needs more and better wisecracks, which are part of the character&#39;s trademark personality. Raimi should hire some comedy writers to give his next script the once-over and to add soem good jokes and wisecracks. The ones in the movie were weak and infrequent. They need to punch up Spidey&#39;s personality when in costume, and jokes would help. ******Which brings me to my next criticism: the movie was often more interesting when Spidey was out of costume than in. I think that part of this problem is poor CGI, but another part is that Spidey&#39;s face is completely hidden by his mask. The mask prevents us from seeing Spidey as a real person. With stronger jokes and better dialogue, this weakness can be overcome by creating a stronger and distinct personality for Spidey that will overcome the mask and the facelessness. Some of the best moments in the movie are when Spidey is "half-unmasked:, such as the half-masked kiss with Mary Jane, and the final fight with the Green Goblin, where his mask is torn and half his face is masked, while the other half is visible. ******Lastly, Dafoe was great as the Goblin (the mirror scene was brilliant, a classic movie moment and a career highlight for Dafoe), but I think that his motives and actions needed more explaining. I know the guy is crazy and that his company is going down the tubes, but a lot of his behavior was not well-explained, especially his hate for Spiderman. ******Anyway, those are some criticisms of what is essentially a great comic-book movie. We should root out those Weeds and give the finger to their studios by going to see Spiderman again this week or this weekend. Hollywood should be punished when they fuck with our cherished genre characters (Ang Lee&#39;s upcoming Hulk, anyone?), but they should also be rewarded when they do a great job with one of our favorites. Sam Raimi and company did a great job with Spiderman by sticking to the essence and the human heart of the character, and they should be rewarded for that with even more box office success. Let Hollywood know that geeks are not to be trifled with....go see Spiderman again!

  • May 8, 2002, 6:52 p.m. CST

    BTW, I Am A Regular TalkBacker

    by Barron34

    I think that most of the Plants and Weeds are from rival studios other than Columbia who are trying to stop the Spiderman juggernaut. Spiderman is a freight train, and the rival studios are panicking, I bet. I doubt that Columbia has to bother trying to send Plants here to hype the movie; the movie is already super-hyped and a massive box office success. If there are any Plants here, I would certainly guess that they are negative posters from rival studios.

  • May 8, 2002, 6:55 p.m. CST

    The Great Story Challenge

    by The Rayven

    This TB goes out to Harry as well as the entire TB community - or at least the ones to like to bitch about seemingly every movie that comes out. There&#39;s a difference between an honest opinion and outright venomous writing (as if jealous at another&#39;s career or angry at their own spurned attempt at a career in film). I&#39;ve been reading comments on this site for a while, and to be quite honest, I&#39;m sick and tired of folks writing in complaining about why this movie sucked and why that flick bombed. I don&#39;t read a lot of praises here, and I think it&#39;s indicative of the world we live in now - one that seems to be overrun with crazed idiots who think they are the expert on everything. As I&#39;ve written before, I&#39;m a wannabe filmmaker myself, and I&#39;m under the impression that many of the "bitchers" here have no idea just how much work goes into writing a script, securing financing, or making an actual movie - especially with the added pressures of making a movie that will make money. Yet seemingly everyone says "it should&#39;ve been done like this" or "they got it so wrong!". My question is - how would you do it better? This is the crux of the challenge, and Harry, I really think it would be cool if you or someone spearheaded something like this. My challenge is for all the negative TB&#39;ers who always bitch about how a movie sucked or how something was done wrong - why don&#39;t you write your own script? Seriously, why don&#39;t you prove to everybody that you know as much about what makes a movie good, and write your own script, or at the very least, the story? We could find a way to post the entries here and set it up so that TB&#39;ers can read them and rate each other on the scripts. It would basically be like Project Greenlight, except it&#39;s not really a contest. It&#39;s more of an experiment. The entries wouldn&#39;t have to be original; for those who disliked "Spider-Man", they could write their version of the movie - we could all see what would be a good "Spider-Man" movie in their eyes. This could go for "Star Wars", "X-Men", etc. or could be an original. The point is, what would you do different, since you didn&#39;t like the movie that was released. It&#39;s put up or shut up time, harry, and I think it&#39;s something that needs to be done in an attempt to hush the constant "bitcher". Now of course, they may overlook th challenge for fear of having their precious work torn apart by like-minded hyenas, but that&#39;s the reality professional screenwriters, producers, and directors face everyday. If someone has enough gall to bash a movie, then I say show us how you would&#39;ve done it. Will people respond to this challenge? Only time will tell. But wouldn&#39;t be great to see realized? Who knows? We might actually find some great stories or better versions of existing movies out there, and help launch the career of the next great screenwriter. Think about it the next time you sit at the keyboard to bash a movie - how would YOU do it? C&#39;mon, let&#39;s make it happen. I&#39;m game. That&#39;s all for now... quote The Rayven... nevermore.

  • May 8, 2002, 7:20 p.m. CST

    Plants who would be Shaggins

    by jokrsmile

    Shaggins if you had clue one as to what you were talking about I&#39;m sure we&#39;d all be amazed. But since sold out shows and lines that wrap around buildigs for Spider-Man don&#39;t take the steam out of your lame theories, the next obvious answer must be that the audiences desire a new hero and not tired ideas from the mind of Lucas. Spider-man has endured for over 40 years. This movie brought out fans young, old, male and female. Star Wars could only hope to have such a wide and diverse audience. Instead AOTC will get the 20-35 yr. old male true die hards and a handful of geeks like you. Face facts Lucas has lost his edge and it doesn&#39;t appear he&#39;s going to find it anytime soon. Then again why should he when he&#39;s got fans like you.

  • May 8, 2002, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Go go web!

    by Cajun Lightning

    I loved the way they balanced poking fun at comic books and loving them in this film. The first act was great. Peter&#39;s reactions to everything were so funny and real. His first line of business as a super human is to become an underground wrestler in order to pick up chicks. Awesome. And then as the movie went on, it started just rolling with the goofy comic book stuff it was poking fun at in the first half. The scenes at the Daily Bugle, the first fight with Green Goblin...it was all so cornball and bright and just FUN. And Peter was right there with us, having a blast and scratching his head at all of it even as he practiced his one liners. Which is exactly what Spider-man is supposed to be. The every man&#39;s window into a comic book world. They done good.

  • May 8, 2002, 8:18 p.m. CST

    Jeez, 14 paragraphs before the actual review begins ...

    by adrianmole

    Great flick, though

  • May 8, 2002, 9:18 p.m. CST

    So-So Movie

    by chicagofilm

    I have not read any of the Spider-Man comics, so my perspective is probably different than most of the people here. I came into this film as a fan of the original "Batman" and "X-Men" and had heard many glowing things about "Spider-Man." The first third worked for me. I enjoyed the setup and the chance to see Peter Parker&#39;s character develop. The film had a nice amount of depth for me to latch onto. However, unlike Harry, as soon as DeFoe came on screen, I started to lose interest. Don&#39;t get me wrong, I thought his performance in "Shadow of the Vampire" was great, but in this movie I didn&#39;t enjoy him as the villian. He came across as simply a stupid adversary for Parker to face. I honestly thought the middle half of the movie was too long and boring in stretches. The ending did redeem the film for me as we get to clearly see how the orgins of the sequel are formed.

  • May 8, 2002, 10:10 p.m. CST

    Anyone else remember when........

    by axelfoley

    the Goblin puts Spidey to sleep and brings him to that rooftop. While he talks to him, he leans back on this window sill, like he&#39;s shooting the shit with Spidey over a beer or something when he was supposed to be a psycho villain who wanted to see Spidey see things his way.. I loved it.

  • May 8, 2002, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Problems

    by shelbyleonard

    Okay, let&#39;s see. SPOILERS below... Likes? 1) The acting. Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, Willem Dafoe, all of them - really good. Especially the three leads. You can&#39;t go wrong with Tobey, my favorite twenty-something actor out there. Likewise with Dunst. Dafoe was positively frightening, which was just what was needed. 2) The overall story. I had no problem with what was included and not included (Gwen and whatnot), and I liked the shortcuts they took (organic webs in particular). 3)Costumes, set design. Well-done and really NY-feeling. 4)The handling of time. Great uses of montage and time hints within the script (school graduation, thanksgiving, etc.). Dislikes? Hoo-boy... 1)If you&#39;re a super-villian and you know your nemesis&#39; secret identity, wouldn&#39;t you expose him as the first order of business? I understand that the GG is supposed to be insane, but he seemed to be certainly coherent enough to want to hurt SM in the best way. Hello... Expose him. He had SM laying ON THE GROUND and unconscious! Take his bloody mask off! lol 2)The end of the plotline with MJ and Peter. MJ LOVES PETE?? How?? He said two or three really nice things to her over the course of six months, but that doesn&#39;t seem to qualify her loving him. And I don&#39;t get his rejection of her at all. Even if he is Spider-Man and he doesn&#39;t want to endanger her, I think he would want to tell the one person he trusts most about who he really is. Every hero has someone like that: Batman and Alfred, Superman and Ma/Pa Kent. It keeps them from going crazy and it keeps them real. Hopefully Peter will realize that for SM2. 3)Yes, the CG did look superhuman. But for some reason, the physics were off, or SM moved somewhat like rubber, or something, because my brain didn&#39;t register it as being real at all. I have a theory that it isn&#39;t the actual Spider-Man figure that I didn&#39;t like and it&#39;s the camera angles they show him in, swooping and twirling shots which could never be possible in the real world. It just made my little red "UNREAL" alarm go off in my head. But That&#39;s Just Me, Aaron

  • May 8, 2002, 10:21 p.m. CST

    The Definitive Guide to enjoying Spiderman: The Movie

    by McBane

    BAH! Its 3AM and I have shit to do later today. But instead, I am gonna sk00l some of u and show u why some of the negative stuff said about Spidey is fly crap || 1. Yes there were continuity errors. Lots of them. If you noticed then you weren&#39;t paying enough attention and should go watch the film without worrying about little things like that. 2. CGI Spiderman looks unrealistic. Show me a REAL young man who can shoot webbing from his wrist, can hold up a cable car full of children in one hand AND can stick to walls and I&#39;ll show you my 24 CARAT, solid gold, fully functioning penis. 3. Kirsten Dunst isn&#39;t pretty enough to play MJ. You are gay. You don&#39;t like women. Thats why she aint pretty to you. 4. The Goblin Glider/Costume looks stupid AND shouldn&#39;t have been battle armour with non-movable mouth. I&#39;d say thats more feasible then Gobby wearing tights. ESPECIALLY with his perchant for using explosive bombs. Its a departure from the comic but live with it. Costumes a good comic book film do not make. 5. Spidey needed more wisecracks. THE DUDE&#39;S UNCLE HAD JUST BEEN KILLED, PARTLY AS A RESULT OF PETER&#39;S NON-INTERVENTION! I don&#39;t really think he was in the mood to make many jokes. He is also finding his feet and his confidence. Plus it would have been very difficult to pull off a wise-cracking spidey at this stage, considering the fact he has huge emotional turmoil going on in pretty much every action scene. 6. Organic webbing is gay. Hell no. Going organic shaved 10 to 20 minutes off the movie. Thats what you would have needed to set up mechanical shooters. OK I agree a huge dimension of the film was lost wit organic shooters. Spidey used to always run out of webbing in tough fights as well as have different web cartridges for different enemies in the comics. But the enhancements to the plot of having organic shooters I believe, adequately replaced this. 7. Why didn&#39;t Gobby unmask SPidey when he knocked him out. Errrrr cos Gobby is insane. Gobby has no interest in unmasking spidey. He merely wants him as an ally at that point. Even tho he and Osborn are connected, they are two distinct personalities. I think if Osborn had any control over Gobby, he would have tried to stop him LOBBING BOMBS AT HIS SON AND MJ. Considering what Osborn told Peter not to tell Harry at the end. 8. Gobby/Osborn&#39;s motives were unclear. Are they? Assuming that Gobby and Osborn are distinct personalities but connected, then its clear that what Osborn wants the Gobblin wants. SO whenever Osborn gets into a situation he can&#39;t handle, Gobby becomes the dominant personality and kills/destroys whatever stands in osborn&#39;s way. Osborn wants power and thats what Gobby gives him. 9. Gobby is a stupid adversary for Spidey to face/Defoe sucked. Maybe but its the comic/The Green Goblin HAS to be overacted to portray his clear insanity. The guys cackles for chrissakes! I think he has real emotional and mental issues so that needs to really be driven home. 10. Poor dialouge. Some of it was cheesy but I thought that was of no real consequence. The basis IS a comic book and most of the offending stuff was pretty much lifted straight from the comic. When extreme characters react to extreme situations, extreme(ly bad) dialouge is always a possibility. 11. Not enough action/too much talking in parts. Peter Parker is a boring character. He is a geek. A geek with new found powers, U show him as spidey all the time, then Spiderman&#39;s origins get lost. In this film, there is NO DOUBT why spidey has become what he has become. Everything links together so beautifully in the film its almost criminal. I can see why spiderman just isn&#39;t for some people, but most of the nitpicks are ludicrous! || Can&#39;t be bothered to type out the remaining 10 or so points that need addressing, but u get the idea. If u need anymore gudance, mail me and I&#39;ll explain in words even you can understand. -McBane-

  • May 8, 2002, 11:23 p.m. CST

    Spidey mistakes

    by retardsandwich

    OK, whoever saw this movie enough times to catalog in detail 77 fucking errors has to stop masturbating in his own feces. And if people on this talk back want to start ripping Spider-Man a new asshole because of it, let&#39;s look at movie-mistake.com&#39;s top 10 list of all-time mistakes and see how many great films are on there. The Matrix - No. 1 with 146. Half the film takes place inside a fucking computer, which HAVE ERRORS FOR CHRIST&#39;S SAKE!!! FOTR - No. 3 with 113. Jurassic Park. T2. The original fucking Star Wars. I mean, Spider Man&#39;s not one of the best action films of all time, but I defy the average filmgoer, who sees it one time, to find even half of these supposed 77 (and counting, OOOH BOYY!) mistakes. You know why the mistakes in these films don&#39;t matter? Because the momentum is there, you&#39;re involved, you&#39;re rolling with the story, not looking for the fucking boom mike to dip down into the frame. To me, Spider-Man was one of those movies. It entertained me, and I don&#39;t even know who the fuck Gwen Stacy is. If that makes me a heathen, I don&#39;t care. I don&#39;t hear anyone on this site bitching about how FOTR has so many mistakes. Christ. Some of you people baffle me. Take a bite of my sandwich.

  • What is up with this fascism?! Anybody who dares say anything slightly negative about Spider-Man is a studio flunkie trying to put water on that movie&#39;s fire? What a great conspiracy theory! Stop flattering yourselves, numbnutzes, nobody is being hired to log onto this site and bash movies. You think putting a negative post about a movie on this or any site will prevent it millions of people(most of whom never even heard of this site) from seeing Spider-Man again? Now, anybody with a hotmail or yahoo account is a spy working with the studios? I have a hotmail account, and I thought this movie was disappointing, does that mean I&#39;m a spy too? The ending was horrible. Whoever said this movie felt like a trailer for a better movie was right because that was how the ending left me feeling. Anybody who thought the studio made the right decision by wussing out and not including Gwen Stacy is out of their mind. "We&#39;ve been through that before." Well, unless you were reading comics in the 60&#39;s you haven&#39;t "been there before". Neither have the millions of people who never even heard of Gwen Stacy. This was an ok movie but it could have been better. Bottom line: the studio sold out.

  • May 9, 2002, midnight CST

    the 2 things in the movie that turned my 10.0 into an 8.0:

    by The Killer-Goat

    1) The music. I didn&#39;t want to watch Batman, I wanted to watch Spiderman, but Danny Elfman&#39;s formulaic methods seemed to prompt and foreshadow every single scene in almost the exact same way as Batman 1 and 2. I agree with the earlier reviews that I wish Elfman could have been more creative. It made some of the serious and dramatic bits a little campy, recollections of some unintenionally hilarious moments in Darkman... But, this movie delivers lines and respects the source material and characters WAY more than the Batman movies. I was sooo impressed they managed to include so many points and moments from the comics. 2) The initial Goblin/Spiderman fights made me think of some Power Ranger commercials, due to dialogue and prancing body language (you know, the over-exaggerated gestures, head bobbling, etc). But the final conflict REALLY made up for it. And btw, if the only thing people can repeatedly blast in this movie is the "Mess with one of us..." line, BE F**KING THANKFUL!

  • May 9, 2002, 12:11 a.m. CST

    My own thoughts

    by HollyS

    I have skimmed through some of peoples other thoughts of spiderman. Some where just downright mean with no basis to there hate of the movie, while others just seemed to concentrate on the look of the movie and the lack of action sequences of the film. Others where just strange. But it seems that most people just look at how a movie looks on the outside rather then whats within. Its true we should enjoy a film with action in it but this one did have a great storyline and great acting which made it such an attraction to old fans and new fans like myself. I also see people fighting over whos gonna make more money AOTC vs Spiderman. And yes i do think CNN is kissing Luca&#39;s butt. But thats beside the point. lol....but realy i think that it shouldnt matter and as someone else said in this board its a good year for all these scifi and fantasy films and it should be a fun time for all of us scifi lovers out there. So lets just have fun watching and not comparing and thinking whose gonna make the most money. As for AOTC...I will post my own opinions once i see that film myself.

  • May 9, 2002, 12:30 a.m. CST

    for Fantastic Four, they need a real director like...

    by SchlockHound

    Joe Dante! and have it set in 1963.

  • May 9, 2002, 12:31 a.m. CST

    Shelby, re: your dislikes... (Spoilers, for those who care)

    by The Killer-Goat

    Shelby, you really need to mention Spoilers in your talkback if you&#39;re going to dissect a film, just out of courtesy. I sympathize with your dislikes, but there were a few things you just needed to look for: 1) Remember, Osbourn paralyzed him first only to make the offer to "join the darkside" in typical villain fashion, not expose him or destroy him...until he kicked off Gobby&#39;s maniacal hatred later. And also don&#39;t forget the dual personality-consciousness. Unlike the comics, in the movie Goblin seems to show initial &#39;respect&#39; for a fellow adversary. Formula. 2) I agree the romance might have seemed to burst spontaneously at the end, but again, it&#39;s "romance": who knows why ANYONE falls in love? They threw in soap opera for the swooners. But we&#39;ve also seen it theorized that she picks up on his identity by the end of the film, and that solidifies her "feelings". In the comics, MJ knew for YEARS after Peter became Spider-man, before surprising him with her knowledge. Also, regarding the other heroes you mentioned, which of their enemies knows who they really are? Parker&#39;s just panicked and scared for anyone he cares about. Maybe resolved in the next movie? 3) Can&#39;t argue with you here, in some of the swinging shots he was a little too rubbery (like the Boss Nass in TPM). There&#39;s also the issue of a camera that, despite Spidey&#39;s uncanny velocity and agility, somehow manages to keep him in the center frame of almost every shot. To have that kind of precision, either the camera is computerised, or the person is. It distracts...a bit.

  • May 9, 2002, 12:35 a.m. CST

    Oops. Sorry Shelby, I&#39;d have to chide Harry first about Spoi

    by The Killer-Goat

  • May 9, 2002, 1:08 a.m. CST

    My Spider-man review and... well, views

    by Spidey424

    I&#39;ll let you all know right away that I loved the movie. Were there flaws? Of course. What movie doesn&#39;t have them? Enough to demote the overall feature? Definite negative to that, in my opinion. Which is, really, this whole post. My "opinion". So don&#39;t get all down my throat, bashers. Okay. This is lengthly, so try to stick with me. Yes, I&#39;m new here. And, honestly, I probably won&#39;t post further than this message. But I want to put my say in my view of this movie. I am also not a comic fanatic, but I know enough ground work about Spider-man that I could notice the changes. To put it bluntly, I liked the changes. End of that front. The opening scenes take me into the movie immediately, finding myself identifying with PP and his life quite well. I loved the whole series of PP being bitten and gaining his powers. Simply wonderfully put together. Oh, and PP standing on that rooftop trying to get the webbing to shoot from his wrist was hilarious. One of my favorite moments. As others did, I enjoyed PP designing his costume. It just added a little something to the film. One of my tip top favorite scenes had to be Uncle Ben&#39;s death. PP&#39;s emotions completely torn ascue, his violent, erratic, and passionate pursuit of Ben&#39;s killer is near tangible. LOVED IT. The Osborne/GG scenes were great. W. Dafoe was wonderful. Kirston was a good MJ, and she gave MJ a deeper character, I thought. The popular girl with an ever-ready smile, that was most of the time just acting. Anyone notice in the backyard scene when she was talking with Peter? She was so solemn and real, then when Flash came with the car, she flipped the switch and went into popular, always happy MJ. I like the added depth to her character. I just have to say it. Tobey McGuire was simply fantastic. He was my central point of gravity in this film. His performance did justice to the character. No doubts. From beginning to end. JJJ was a natural hoot. He was perfect. This film is filled with wry humor, despite the lack of Spidey wise-cracks. I see Spider-man 2 having more of Spider-man&#39;s sarcastic wit. This was, remember, Spidey&#39;s first real experience in heroism. Spider-man 2 will have less to explain. I honestly believe that if they had gotten all the material they&#39;d wanted in Spider-man 1, it would have been 4 hours long. I&#39;m satisfied with how they made it, very satisfied. CGI. What an argument this is. I thought the effects were good. A bit quick in some parts, and quite noticable a sparse few times, but very, very good for today&#39;s standards. For all of you bashing the CGI, I ask you: Do you have ANY idea the amount of work that goes into those effects??? I am in the graphic art business and have some knowledge of what goes into those "bad" effects. An unbelievable amount of work. That&#39;s what. Spider-man&#39;s effects were quite well done and I commend them for a good job. I imagine in the future the effects will be much more advanced, but these were satisfactory. I thought the script was fine. Very comic-ish and suiting. I fully agree with a previous poster&#39;s comments on the script. About the scenes being about one thing, yet at the same time, being about something else. PP and MJ in the hospital scene(PP indirectly speaking out his feelings to MJ by way of Spider-man), the GG/Osborne and Spidey in the final battle(PP/Spider-man warring physically with the GG, yet also warring with Norman Osborne, his best friend&#39;s father). Both great examples of that double meaning and direction within one scene. As for the movie&#39;s ending, I understood it. Unlike Ebert and others. The reason PP leaves MJ hanging in the breeze is obvious, I won&#39;t bother re-telling it either. Harry and other posters have already covered it. In closing, Spider-man is a great movie and I am in suspense for the sequel arriving two years from now. I am seeing this movie a second time Friday, and I&#39;ll probably go a few more times after that. I&#39;ve never done that before. That is how much I truly enjoyed the movie. I&#39;m definitely purchasing this DVD. Spider-man is highly recommended. As is the Based-on book by Peter David. Great Read! That&#39;s all I have to say...

  • May 9, 2002, 1:15 a.m. CST

    The CG problems were animation problems...

    by Darth_Inedible

    I can only assume that they don&#39;t have any top notch keyframe animators at Sony because most of it looked pretty wierd. They tried to over-exaggerate everything, poses and movements, etc to either cover up the bad work or make it look "exciting", but predictably it just looks wierd and out of place. The only web swinging shots that looked good were the ones after the Goblin attack where Spidey was carrying M.J., it looked like someone swinging on a line which was good. A few more nicely animated, *plausible* shots like that where the audience could suspend disbelief would have been much more exciting than the overwrought stuff they used. Spiderman is a really tough animation problem, you can&#39;t motion cap him for obvious reasons, you can&#39;t simlulate him and make it look interesting. The only way to make it look good is to animate it by hand.

  • May 9, 2002, 3:15 a.m. CST

    I Want To Thank The STAR WARS Guys For Reminding Me That Each Of

    by Buzz Maverik

    ...I mean, I don&#39;t know how I got into SPIDER-MAN when I&#39;d already seen THE ROAD WARRIOR in &#39;81. They didn&#39;t check. I got lucky. But you STAR WARS guys have saved me the embarassment of being carded, or whatever they do (knowing Lucas, it has to do with microchips and midgets) on May 16 when I would have tried to get into ATTACK OF THE CLONES. I actually violate this law all the time because I&#39;m something of a maverick. Get this, I saw both THE MATRIX and THE PHANTOM MENACE and both the Wachowski Brothers and The Lucas Brothers accepted my money. I put one over on them!

  • May 9, 2002, 3:49 a.m. CST

    I often cry while taking a piss.................

    by RedScab

    ....but thats because it burns so bad. I took my last final and I promised myself I would go see Spiderman as soon as my finals were over. It was a good film, best superhero film ever NO WAY!!! Is it up there with Superman and Batman yes it is, is it better NO! It will be very interesting to see how the next two films turn out hopefully this franchise won&#39;t go to shit like Batman and Superman did.

  • May 9, 2002, 4:01 a.m. CST

    Spidey has a good movie!

    by Punkcheesmo

    Sam Raimi was more than the perfect man to direct and co-script the Spider-man movie. Ever since the Evil Dead movies, you can tell in his intense direction, he has always had a little bit of comic book inspiration in him. He understands the comic book world, and translated that knowledge into a film that doesn&#39;t do a single, harmful thing to the legend of Spider Man. Friends of mine complain that the movie is hokey, and cheesy...but read any comic book and I&#39;m sure you will find a very similar tone in them. Like the comic books, the movie is a wonderous fantasy, where a geek can wake up one morning and say, "I have super powers...I&#39;ll go fight crime!" and not have a single doubt in his mind of his current path. Willem Dafoe is a stand-out as the tortured Green Goblin, (once again, Kudos to Raimi and Dafoe for pulling off the tricky and rewarding, "mirror- image talk" scene. Beautiful!) My only complaint, acting wise is Kirsten Dunst, who delivers her lines passively, as if she didnt want to be in a comic book movie. And in comment to the CGI, it doesn&#39;t look real, but it doesn&#39;t have to look real. I was just basking in the image of spider-man, weightlessly and carelessly swinging from skyscraper to skyscraper with clumsy...grace? It was fun! The movie was fun. And I agree with Mr.Knowles, I&#39;m eager for the sequels. Good job Sam Raimi! No wonder why we hail to the king! P.S: Bruce Campbell rocks!!

  • ...you&#39;re wrong. Because everyone who was disappointed in Episode I (i.e. 99 percent of the audience) is going to drag themselves to Episode II in hopes of washing the bad taste out of their minds, and Episode I made over $400 million in North America alone. Imagine what this one will do if it&#39;s actually good (though that&#39;s a big if). As for SPIDER MAN, I thought it was pretty good. Not perfect (for one thing Mary Jane in this movie just isn&#39;t Mary Jane) but overall everyone comported themselves well.

  • May 9, 2002, 8:25 a.m. CST

    He cried???

    by Obsidian72

    You know, I liked this movie. It&#39;s great and I recommend it to anyone who asks if they should see it. Still, I can&#39;t see crying over it. I&#39;m not Mr. Big & Macho. I have shed a tear during a movie. But not this one. Harry, man, I love your reviews but get a grip on the emotions:)

  • May 9, 2002, 10:15 a.m. CST

    let&#39;s look here...

    by liquid

    1)how can u accept a movie that cops to the standard, "batman 60&#39;s tv show" sleeping gas bit...? 2)i cant stand my superheroes being defeated so easily(as in the above scene)...u can? 3)the fight scenes were pedestrian at best...isnt that half of what this genre is about? 4)the "squeals" spidey unleashes when being punched in the final scene...this is acceptable to u?...spidey came across as tough & heroic maybe 3 times in the movie...NOT ENOUGH i LIKE the doubt, the confusion, the growth petey/spidey shows...but he needs to step up everytime when it&#39;s needed...i didnt see that 5)mary jane(kirsten)seemed tired & haggard during the most important scene(the hospital "love" speech)...& she wasnt brave or daring, & she was WAY too lucky(catching the rail)in the "hanging" bridge scene... why would u truly love this person, unless it was a simple childhood crush on one of the first girls u ever saw? people...i hate to take away enjoyment, but whats acceptable to some of u---is unacceptable to me--- that said, the cgi wasnt nearly as bad as the commercials...

  • May 9, 2002, 11:34 a.m. CST

    Bill Paxton will be Doctor Octopus

    by riskebiz

    I just saw pictures of Bill at the Spiderman premiere in his large black sunglasses and it occurred to me that Raimi will cast his "A Simple Plan" leading man as Doc Ock, he sort of looked the part. Personally, I prefer his other lead actor from that movie as Ock and that&#39;s Billy Bob Thornton. I think Billy Bob would chew scenery as Doctor Octopus.

  • May 9, 2002, 11:52 a.m. CST

    by sbill03

    I myself live in the uk and I am not expected to see spider man until the 14 june [fuck that] I got my first copy of spider man the opening weekend I watched with critical eyes as all I have read and heard is critical reviews abouthow this wasnt done that way and how that wasnt done this RESPECT TO RAIMI AND FOX [1.]I am glad my favourite comic character has come to the silver screen [2]The film has been pissing moaned about by all you lady boys about the cgi GROW UP ITS ABOUT A BOY BITTEN BY A RADIOACTIVE ahem TOXIC SPIDER!!!! [3] the casting was excellent tobey mcguire my hat goes of to him he is just like the original spidey in the 60s rounded head not the Todd Mcfarlane pointed cheek boned mother fucker[4] Organics webshooters worked like I say Mcfarlanes impression of peter parker was to move the character along and give him a kick into the 21 century sam raimi has stook to what he believes works and this is an excellent adaption [5]we all have spiderman the movie exactly how it should be in our heads raimi cannot cater for everyones impression but his version has nailed it for me [6]THIS IS A SUPERHERO MOVIE AND WHEN I SAT DOWN READING COMICS THAT DONT VISUALLY MOVE ONLY WHEN I TURN THE PAGE I USED IMAGINATION TO CREATE THE STORY WITH WHAT I HAD [7]this movie appeals to me my girlfriend my brother,parents and any future kids I have and they will all sit down and watch this because its a great story of the geek who has nothing and then has to cope with every thing all at once annd at the same timedoes some ass kicking BE THANKFULL THIS WAS TAKEN OF CAMERON AND STOP FUCKING MOANING AND GO WATCH AGAIN WITH THE VISION YOU HAD AS TEENAGER AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND IT JUST ANNOYS ME BECAUSE I AM CHUFFED MY HERO IS ON THE SILVERSCREEN AND ALL YOU CAN DO IS PICK IT APART AND SLAG IT OFF SPIDERMAN IS A VERY COOL FILM AND FOR ALL YOU CRITIC WANNABEES GO WATCH SOMETHING THAT IS A BIT SLOWER AND PICK THAT APART SO ALL THE TRUE FANS DONT HAVE TO LISTEN TO YOU PISSING WHINGING ASS COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU DIDNT GET OR DIDNT LIKE over and out

  • What I don&#39;t understand is why hollywood even bothers. Look, at the end of the day people are going to see Spiderman... on DVD, if they even bother to buy it that is. Don&#39;t you people realize that even small children will see just how bogus all the hype was? Tell me then if this is the case... what&#39;s the point of the hoopla? If its about making as much money as possible why not simply steal Lucas&#39; money and not even bother to hype the movie you used to launder it. That&#39;s like a bank robber waving his swag bag infront of the police! Why not just let Star Wars destroy all competition? What&#39;s the point of destroying something perfect that we can all enjoy - that is the untouchable glory of Star Wars. Why sully it with second rate crap like Spiderman? Don&#39;t get me wrong, I like my superheroes too, but Spiderman? Come on, let&#39;s face it Todd McFarlane was the most useless artist at Marvel and Spiderman the most ridiculous character. I mean think about it. Some dumb ass comes up with the most stupid idea - a man with Spider senses. WOW. What a phenomenon! Yeah everyone wants to see this movie now!------------------- Listen plants, consider yourselves lucky that I am not George Lucas because I would postpone indefinitely the rest of the Star Wars prequels at very short notice and watch with relish as hollywood fraudsters implode in the vaccum.

  • First of all, you claim you "like superheroes," but the fact that you not only don&#39;t like Spider-Man (not "Spiderman" btw which shows just how much you know) leads me to seriously wonder. While there many differing opinions on Todd McFarlane, he did re-energize the character at Marvel in the late 1980&#39;s; however, he DID NOT CREATE the character, which is the impression you seem to be under. Spider-Man was created in the early 1960&#39;s! I think that puts McFarlane in diapers (if he was even born yet at all) Steven Ditko, as anyone who&#39;s at least knowledgable enough about Spider-Man to have an objective opinion knows, was the original illustrator. And you said "some dumb ass" came up with Spider-Man. Uh... PAL... that "dumb ass" as you just called him was Stan Lee, the man who single-handedly not only created the Marvel Universe as we know it was the whole idea of superheroes as we now accept them. As for Spider-Man... we love other heroes like Superman because they stick up for the "little guy." Spidey, meanwhile, IS the little guy. He&#39;s the Everyman or superheroes, and why he&#39;s mine and many people&#39;s absolute favorites. I don&#39;t know if anyone&#39;s still even reading this board this late in the game, but while we&#39;re at it what&#39;s all this crap about "plants?" That&#39;s call paranoia, people. I haven&#39;t seen anything remotely suggesting this pertaining to "Spider-Man" in the mainstream press. So that&#39;s my two cents, and Shaggins... when Christmas rolls around, you might want to ask Santa Clause to bring you a clue.

  • May 9, 2002, 4:03 p.m. CST

    the twit that would be shaggins

    by jokrsmile

    Here we are agian reading the ramblings from Shaggins. He comes to belittle Spider-Man and fans of the movie. All the while other die hard Star Wars fans are telling him to shut up because he&#39;s making asses out of the Star Wars faithful. Fans will be fans and will always root for their favorites to succeed. Some fans even push the boundaries of good taste and common sense. And then there&#39;s Shaggins!! He truely lives in a Galaxy far, far away!!

  • "positive" swamping this film with reviews. But, There are enough spiderman fans in spain, italy, and the uk to make this the biggest grossing film, i have no doubts it will hit 500 million by labor day here in the us. Though I have not seen it yet, I want mention since a sequel is on the way, i would like to see DR DOOM or SANDMAN as a villian. Dr Doom to be played by ? and Sandman to be played by The Rock... still thinking on doom.. any ideas fan people?

  • May 9, 2002, 8:12 p.m. CST

    CGI Comic Homage?

    by mummyjune

    I felt I was seeing the pages of the comic come to life in the CGI. The colors of the costume had the vivid look of an inked and colored page that flowed with motion. Intentional or not, it was an homage to the origins of the character.

  • May 9, 2002, 9:47 p.m. CST

    Uh, Towely... got some bad news for you.

    by LlGHTST0RMER

    >>"I do believe Spiderman will sink Titanic&#39;s 500 Million take once it goes europe... There are enough spiderman fans in spain, italy, and the uk to make this the biggest grossing film, i have no doubts it will hit 500 million by labor day here in the us."<< Actually, Titanic grossed $600 million dollars, not $500 million. And that was just the domestic take. The worldwide total came up to $1.8 billion. (Yeah, _B_illion.) This is almost twice the amount of its nearest competitor, The Phantom Menace, which came in --if I&#39;m not mistaken-- just a little bit short of $1 billion. (If anyone can correct me on that, feel free.

  • May 9, 2002, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Spidey vs. Titanic

    by RogueScribner

    SPIDER-MAN will not sink the TITANIC. As much as I enjoyed SPIDER-MAN, I know it will never reach those heights. TITANIC was a PHENOMENON people!!! The likes of which hasn&#39;t been seen since GONE WITH THE WIND. It could be another 50 years before a movie does business like that again. So quit holding your breath for something to knock TITANIC off it&#39;s mantle. It won&#39;t happen!!! L8r

  • May 9, 2002, 11:21 p.m. CST

    The acting was good???

    by SadPanda

    Yes, I agree the acting was good. From everyone EXCEPT KIRSTEN DUNST. She was HORRIBLE. Awful. I cringed everytime she spoke. Not since Jake Lloyd in TPM have I seen such utterly horrid acting. I actually loved the movie except for her and she managed to bring my 10 down to an 8.5 just from her performance alone. I loved how in the movie she played a bad actress, because she was obviously type casted. I saw this with some friends and when she told Peter she wanted to be an actress I shouted, "well now&#39;s a good time to start!" and the audience laughed in agreement. I couldn&#39;t help but die laughing when later she said the people at her audition told her she needed acting lessons. HI-FUCKING-LARIOUS. But hey, she has big boobs. Which were so splendidly displayed in the scene where it&#39;s raining.

  • May 10, 2002, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Truth time: Spiderman is CRAP

    by Shaggins

    Hey Jokrsmile. Will you just be quiet? And to the other one who defends the dumb ass that invented Spiderman - there are about say 50 or so people in the world who feel that Stan Lee has 0% talent, is corrupt and set up a company that steals the ideas of talented youngsters. I think that I have a clue after all - don&#39;t you? Oh and BTW people Spiderman&#39;s gross if fake and so is Titanic&#39;s so what&#39;s the point of arguing about them?

  • May 10, 2002, 2:08 a.m. CST

    Spidey movie defines the term DERIVATIVE

    by Robertblood

    I do not beleive that there was a single scene in this film that did not remind me of a scene from Superman, Superman II, X-Men or Batman. Whether Mary Jane lifts Spidey&#39;s mask like Batman&#39;s cowl, or Parker arrives to get a job at the Daily Bugle just like Clark Kent tries to get a word in edgewise with a fast-talking editor at the Planet. Even spidey&#39;s wall-crawling reminded me of Toad from X-men, as did Parker&#39;s cage match with Macho Man. It drove me crazy. I thought I was playing a game of "Guess which four movies I stole this scene from". A shocking suprise disappointment from a director who once was one of the most original directors we had. Maybe we should all begin watching the Evil Dean films again to see which Three Stooges scenes he was copping (they will nevertheless remain classics since doing a gore version of the stooges is genius in itself).

  • May 10, 2002, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Spidey Rules!

    by NikonGuy

    Like Harry, I&#39;m an old fart who grew up on the static but thrilling Saturday morning Spider-man cartoons. Unlike Harry (and the rest of you), I put comic books aside after I passed puberty. That doesn&#39;t mean that I don&#39;t like a good graphic novel now and then (do any of you actually remember buying and reading a first edition of Dark Knight?), but I don&#39;t make comic books my life. That said, I have been waiting for years for a decent live action rendition of my friendly neighborhood Spider-man. There was that vain attempt in late in the 20th century to bring him to TV, but it sucked. I followed the production news of our 21st century Spider-man sporadically, but was well enough informed to know that there were significant production and script problems for years! I was not in the least confident that this was going to be a great comic book movie (like Batman and the X-men were -- oh yeah, Superman II sucked!). I, like Harry, was afraid to see it. I didn&#39;t want to be disappointed. But my 13 year old son, who doesn&#39;t read ANY comic books, went to see it with some friends the day after it opened. His ecstatic review and immediate desire to buy all the Spidey issues on the stands piqued my interest. I gathered up my fellow IT-geeks for an apres work viewing this past week. None of them were big Spider-man fans. We were just highly paid computer programmers and web designers looking to see a fun movie. This was indeed a fun movie. This was the most fun I&#39;ve had at a movie since Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade ("I named the dog Indiana!"). Okay, so maybe it doesn&#39;t treat the comic history as holy writ. Get over it. Okay, so maybe the CGI didn&#39;t look realistic. Duhhh! The damn movie was fun! I knew little of the Mary Jane/Peter Parker relationship, but I know a shirt-load about an unrequited crush on the pretty red head next door (okay, she lived on the next street, but the feeling is the same). I know the feeling of being ass-kicked by the school bullies until I gained my own "super powers" (my uncle taught me the Judo and hand to hand techniques he learned as a Marine during the Viet Nam war). There was much to this movie -- more than you will want to read from me in this short space (father/son relationships sadly missing from modern movies, ethics and morality without cheesieness or heavy-handed religous supernaturalism, fear, strength, love, angst). I have no confidence in George Lucas anymore. The further from Star Wars we can keep him the better off that franchise will be. But I really think that Sam Rami and the production execs did a fine freaking job on bringing the legend of Spider-man to the big screen....Good job...

  • May 10, 2002, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Go Web!!! Fly!!!! Shazaam!!!

    by RedRum1977

    First off I must say thank you to those that made my Spidey dreams come true. Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, without you there would be no comics cartoons and definitley not this movie which seems to carry more attention that the situation in the Middle East. Thanks to you Sam Raimi for having the balls to accept the challenge and making a great film. And but not lest to you Harry for creating this site for us cinefiles to have our say on what we see on that silver screen! Now that is over I really want to address the nitpicking that&#39;s been happening about this movie. Ok I know that it&#39;s not the best film in the world but even Citizen Kane and the Seven Samurai hell even the Seventh Seal had they&#39;re flaws and these are really my most beloved movies but I don&#39;t go in a film looking for them and when I come out I don&#39;t raise comments about them unless they were major like Phantom Menace. The whole CGI debate is getting wierd cause if you think about it while technology has advance it&#39;s not perfect so Spidey looked a little to animated... News Flash he a comic book character and he&#39;s more agile than any other hero!! There is no human out there that can pull off many of Spidey&#39;s moves. Yeah the stunt double was sweet but come on he/she couldn&#39;t do eveything. Let it be!!! One talkbacker wanted to know why Pete didn&#39;t tell MJ his secret and brought up Superman/Batman and that they had someone to keep them in check and not go insane. Well Peter, even though he has MJ that doesn&#39;t mean he has to tell her. Think about it Superman didn&#39;t have tell Ma and Pa Kent about his secret hell they found him and seen as he grew he was changing Batman on the other hand had Alfred yes but at the same time you can&#39;t have a batcave and your butler not know about it!!! Alfred was a main factor in Bruce becoming Batman. But Peter Parker was and is totally different. He&#39;s still coming to grips that he is a hero. I say that was great that he didn&#39;t tell MJ. Tell that truth weren&#39;t you just pissed when Batman reveals himself in every fucking movie!! I&#39;m glad Goblin didn&#39;t unmasked because he needed an ally not a nemesis at the beginning. Other than Elfman&#39;s score (you dropped the ball on this one Danny) I loved every bit of it. Like I said I don&#39;t go to see a movie to find flaws unless there big one&#39;s and the score for me it. So if you went to see this movie and enjoyed the hell out of then Lee, Ditko, and Raimi and the Spidey Crew&#39;s work wasn&#39;t in vain! But if you hated well there is always the sequel in 2004 or Episode II which if all reports are true looks like the Flanneld-One whipped it out and pissed on ya&#39;ll fanboy heads!!! Excelsior!! p.s. A special thanks to Nicholas Hammond For wall crawling and web-slinging was the shiznit!!! Everybody! Spider-man, Spider-man, does whatever a...

  • May 10, 2002, 1:10 p.m. CST

    The effects thing

    by Palhaco

    Great movie. Awesome movie. I liked and/or loved everything about it except for: 1. The texture of the Spidey&#39;s mask. Maybe it&#39;s just unavoidable, but whenever he spoke, it just looked/sounded like he was some freak wearing a colorful pantyhose over his head. Maybe that&#39;s the best that can be hoped for in a live-action movie. 2. I didn&#39;t care for, but could ignore the "too-clean" (i.e., sterile)CGI. What I couldn&#39;t ignore was where Spider-Man&#39;s motions were so obviously fake. I&#39;m NOT talking about, "Oh, nobody could move that fast -- it looks fake!" I&#39;m talking about moments where he looks like an animated mannequin; this is where it looks fake not BECAUSE of what he&#39;s doing, but just by looking at "him", it&#39;s clear you&#39;re looking at a computer-animated puppet. It&#39;s fake because it LOOKS FAKE -- not because the action itself is impossible. 3. Too much of it seemed episodic. Things happen just a little too quickly for them to really sink in. This is probably more a script/editing problem than anything, and the actors almost totally make up for it. To a certain extent, it&#39;s just a current flaw/trend to many movies. Peopledontwanttoseeamovietheywanttoseeavideogame. Eh. Considering everything, I still think it&#39;s a great movie, and can&#39;t wait for the next one.

  • May 10, 2002, 1:41 p.m. CST

    Thank you, Harry

    by Michelangelo

    You said what needed to be said. Thank you for that. And a special appreciation for setting Roger Ebert straight. See you at Star Wars!

  • May 10, 2002, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Bad movie vs Good Movie

    by badbunny9

    I want to take one moment here before my personal rant to make a disclaimer. I have not ever read a Spider-man comic book. I have seen the cartoons and I have listened to every guy I know dissect the comics but I have never actually read them. That said, I just want to point out that once you get past the hype and the expectations and all that connected to this movie, Spider-man was a good movie. Opinions will vary, I know. Some people loved Moulin Rouge and some people hated it. You&#39;re going to find differences of opinion on every movie. Sure, the music wasn&#39;t what it could have been and the cgi was fairly obvious, but I for one was willing to let all of that go. I cared about Peter Parker and Mary Jane and even Norman Osborne for heaven&#39;s sake. Maybe they weren&#39;t the smartest characters in the movies and maybe they spouted some campy lines but dammit, I cared! That&#39;s saying something. Raimi managed to do something that Brian Sommers couldn&#39;t do with X-Men and that was truly believe that these characters interacted and CARED about one another. The thing that worked best for Spider-man was that it didn&#39;t try to be a crash bang super hero action flick. Spidey wasn&#39;t larger than life. He was us. And if you remember, I believe that was Spider-man&#39;s appeal in the first place. So stop with the crap about how Peter Parker wasn&#39;t cool enough to have all that screen time devoted to him or that the love of his life was Mary Jane instead of Gwen Stacy or his webshooters were organic. The movie captured the heart and soul of what I (and many others) believe Spider-man is. And isn&#39;t that more important than the nitpicks or the music or the special effects? That&#39;s all I have to say about that.

  • May 10, 2002, 3:57 p.m. CST

    Why your review of Spider-Man was awesome

    by bctudor

    I loved your Review, you went through exactly the same feelings that I did, except I saw it on Opening day. Anyway, I have been awaiting this movie for 20 years and I was so pleased with the outcome. I too was ready to be nitpicky, but I put that aside and went in and watched a movie to enjoy it and to see one of my childhood ICONS larger than life. I just wanted to say thank you for writing such an honest and heart-felt review. Brian

  • May 10, 2002, 4:01 p.m. CST

    People, People - Can We Just All Calm Down?!

    by laurar

    I&#39;ve been in and out of this site for a couple of years. This is my first time even having the desire to get involved in one of these discussions. (Clearly, I&#39;ll do anything to avoid work.) I realize this is very much a "guy" sight, and often it gets a little too techy, geeky (not always in a bad way), and frankly just a little too macho. I come to read Harry&#39;s reviews only on certain movies. Why? Because even though he may have been the geek, nerd, whatever, Harry LOVES movies. Movies are a living, breathing experience. I&#39;ve never been able to comprehend people who can&#39;t understand the passionate involvement which makes watching a movie an event forever stamped on your psyche. So yes, it is important where you see the movie, and who you see it with....Haven&#39;t you ever seen a film and loved it at the time, saw it later and thought "This stinks!"? Isn&#39;t it true, some films were never meant to be seen anywhere but on a giant screen? I agree, Harry often seems caught up in the moment and will gush over a film that I think ridiculous - but to say he&#39;s promoting himself or selling out? A true movie lover can only sell their souls so far... A true movie fan may not understand Harry&#39;s grammar or his obsession with sci-fi. But we do understand what he means when he writes of the adrenaline rush that sweeps us along as we watch a movie that defies our expectations. I never read Spiderman comics. I often have issues with the big blockbuster mindless summer movies. I watched this movie and felt like a child of 12. I cringed, jumped, cried (yes, real tears and yes, I was embarassed) and genuinely had a wonderful time. I immediately wanted to know how Harry felt - what was his experience? He made me love the film more by helping me see it through the eyes of the child who lived and breathed the book and the ecstasy of the adult seeing his vision materialize on screen. I understand some people not liking the film, and granted much of the critism is valid. Folks, please remember - its a movie, its a summer blockbuster, its a "serial"...it was never meant to be "Casablanca" or "American Beauty". (Please, for whatever reason, they were the first 2 films that came to my mind. For you nitpickers, I&#39;m not naming them as the top 2 films of all time.)

  • May 10, 2002, 4:43 p.m. CST

    Good news for Spider-Man fans and Kazaa users...

    by CoolDan989

    BoxOfficeGuru says that Spider-Man is on track to gross about 220 million by this Sunday or Monday. WOO-HOO! Another record that Spidey will break! And for Kazaa users...Spider-Man is finally up for download! Search for Spider-Man and download the two files that have "Kaosama05" under Artist. It&#39;s real, I swear to God! I&#39;m watching it right now! (The quality is good, but it does have Japanese subtitles and audible audience reactions, so be warned.)

  • May 10, 2002, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Shaggins = paranoia

    by jokrsmile

    Face it Shaggins your a SW fanboy who&#39;s got his panties in a wad because you can&#39;t face reality. Time and time again you spout off about this grand conspiracy that you brewed up in that little brain of yours, and yet you offer no hard evidence of any kind to back up your theory. You just can&#39;t accept that people are tired of Lucas and his all style no substance movies. But like I posted before, I guess as long as Lucas has fans like you we&#39;ll keep getting steaming piles of crap just like TPM.

  • May 10, 2002, 9:13 p.m. CST

    wasn&#39;t this sold as an action movie?

    by DMmustang03

    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&#39;s unrelenting philosophy... "If it makes a lot of money, make it again."

  • May 11, 2002, 11:11 a.m. CST

    Hey, Shaggins...

    by spider15

    Glad you acknowledge that you&#39;re only about one of fifty people in the world that believes that Stan Lee has no talent (although I honestly question it&#39;s even THAT many). More people than that are probably of the sincere opinion that Elvis was abducted by aliens. Lee is "corrupt," and steals ideas from other, younger creators? I have NEVER heard this suggested to any serious extent. Anyone who runs a company the size of Marvel Comics is going to sometimes do things that not everyone likes. And sadly its a known fact that in entertainment on the whole, and for that matter any business, ideas get stolen. But again, I have NEVER heard from ANY remotely reliable source that Lee was guilty of what could be interpreted as plagerism or corruption to any degree worth harping over. Now, let&#39;s be sure: many of his ideas DO come from other sources. He acknowledges that the Hulk combined elements of "Frankenstein" "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" and "Dr. Jeckle & Mr. Hyde." Thor he didn&#39;t actually create at all - that&#39;s a real character from ancient Greek mythology. As for Spider-Man, DC had a short-lived, anarchid-based character, the Tarantula (not to be confused with Spider-Man&#39;s enemy of the same name), decades earlier. But that&#39;s not the point. He offered characters elements which had never been seen in comics before. Look at the Fantastic Four: the public knew their real names and location, and they fought among themselves, as did the Avengers. The groundbreaking elements weren&#39;t so much in the characters he created; they were in the fact that they had dimensions which had never been seen before in superhero comics. As for Spider-Man, the best comic book character in the history of the world... his powers are cool. His wise-cracks are funny... but what makes the character so infinitly intreguing is the fact that he needs to constantly struggle. He&#39;s the Everyman: he has to worry about his paying his rent, the health and well-being of his family and friends, and relationships. Superman is loved by everyone and Batman can always go back to his mansion... but Spider-Man lives in a world where SOME people like him, while others spit on him and call him a menace or worse. Yet he keeps doing the right thing over and over with almost no promise of reward... As for the origin, in which he failed to stop the buglar who would then kill his uncle(portrayed in the movie of course)... if Peter Parker had been some arrogent blow-hard who already thought the world owed him something (like Flash Thompson) it still would have been intreguing that he would get the reality check from that one incident which would lead to him becoming a crime-fighter. But Parker was a loser who believed that the good things which were long overdue to him had finally arrived with the spider-powers, so nothing else was his concern anymore. Than his own failure to act costs him someone he loves. This element of the character remains compelling in 2002 - in 1962, for a "kid&#39;s" comic book, it was miles ahead of its time. So Stan Lee, like anything or anyone else is no need of defense, is going to have his naysayers. They&#39;re simply WRONG.

  • May 11, 2002, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Just saw it the othe day

    by Purple Monkey

    I went into this movie as unbiased as I could be. I care little to nothing for Spider Man the character or comic books in general, and I had absolutely no expectations one way or the other. I must admit that, overall, I felt Spider Man was pretty crappy. I honestly thought X-Men was a better movie (again, something I cared very little about going in). Spidey problems. Dialogue: horrible, atrocious, and worst of all, boring. Acting: mediocre, but mostly due to the awful dialogue. Green Goblin: that costume was very problematic. It was hard to take him seriously as a villain. The effects and CGI were great (people really need to stop complaining about that), but the action scenes were horribly designed, and ultimately felt tensionless. That being said, this was better than crap like Tomb Raider, The Mummy, etc. If I liked Spider Man before, I&#39;m sure it would be awesome. But I didn&#39;t, and instead I found the movie very hard to get into.

  • i will pay for panic room and walk in to see spidey.. ok, on with the quoties: me>> i have no doubts it will hit 500 million by labor day here in the us."you >> Actually, Titanic grossed $600 million dollars, not $500 million. end you <<. did you take into account the weeks up until labor day? or the entire YEAR it took for titanic to make that 600 million?!? also, i was matching the 500 million from europe to the us, not totaling it, but thats ok, your a star wars fan, you guys long since forgot how to count since Lucas has brought back the prequels, he has been screwing you into believing huge numbers with millions of production of each new star wars toy! well, thats ok, i still love you. want to get high? :)

  • May 11, 2002, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Never read the comics but loved the movie...

    by magdaline

    I think a lot of the people who are bashing SM don&#39;t realize that the people behind it have a massive audience to try to please and entertain for two hours, and not just a bunch of fanboys who&#39;ve been following the comic series for the past 40 years. I don&#39;t mean that in an offensive way, but seriously. How else is anyone else really going to enjoy it? Who cares if they left out Gwen Stacy or if Peter didn&#39;t make his own webshooters, or even what colour Flash Thompson&#39;s hair was? The important thing is that they&#39;ve got the attention of people who normally wouldn&#39;t go see a movie like this had it not been played to them. Little kids, their parents, screaming shrieking fangirls who swoon over Tobey Maguire. Ashamedly, I admit, people like me (somewhat guilty of melting every time he came on the screen). I&#39;ve never read the comic series, and I&#39;m sorry I haven&#39;t; it&#39;s a very good story. Sure, we all have our nitpicks, but sad to say, movies aren&#39;t really meant to depict the "real" story. They&#39;re based on things, and if cutting characters and changing plot elements around means making people happy, then so be it. That seems to be the way Hollywood works nowadays(*coughcoughARWENcoughcough*). It takes a lot of balls for someone to make a movie in light of getting so heavily criticized from fanboys and asshole movie critics like Ebert. Say whatever you want about Spider-Man, I thought it was good and can&#39;t wait for 2004.

  • May 11, 2002, 9:21 p.m. CST

    Is there an excellent DIRECTOR in the house??

    by timoburke

    Well, "Spider-man was better than just OK, but it fell unhappily short in the areas of special effects, directing and score. "Spider-man"&#39;s special effects were uneven, which is startling for a franchise of this caliber. The climbing was great as were the Peter Parker-on-a-wire scenes. In contrast, many of the Spider-man-costumed scenes portrayed a Spider-man whose movements were as obviously computer-generated as Stuart Little&#39;s. Specifically, flips betrayed an unrealistic center of gravity making him look toy-like. Attempts at &#39;enhanced speed&#39; came off merely as looking somehow not-quite-right. As a result, my emotional involvement in these poorly special-effected scenes was thrown back in my face -- disengaging me from my enjoyment until better-produced scenes came along to re-engage me. Another example of unevenness came during Spider-man&#39;s very first pursuit of a bad-guy. The director showed us a Spiderman with appropriately nearly-out-of-control swinging (he was just starting out), but then had Spidey drop down, behind the guy, on a string in his famous upside-down crouch. This sophisticated move was jarring and out-of-place after all the effort just frames before to show how difficult the newly-found powers were for him to govern. With these fine actors, I believe a better director (sorry, Sam Raimi) could have brought forth more diverse sub-text from Toby Macguire, fewer "crazy/beautiful" echoes from Kirsten Dunst and more instances of true menace and less caricature from Willem Dafoe. The impression I have is that these actors fell back on themselves because they were not provided enough good direction. Finally, Danny Elfman&#39;s score utilized the same five/three/five-note horn crescendo/decrescendo/crescendo for action sequences that the Batman movies laid claim to years ago. There was absolutely no memorable "Spider-man"-defined theme. For some reason Mr. Elfman&#39;s usual orginality was not expressed in this film. This was a pleasant-enough movie that could have been incredible. What a shame. I hope the next one shows that these mistakes have been learned from. Timolin Burke Santa Monica

  • May 12, 2002, 8:57 a.m. CST

    It&#39;s nice to see everybody&#39;s got something to say about

    by ProfessorUnrat

    ... because it&#39;s really a terrible important and huge milestone in film history, isn&#39;t it? Somehow I took the wrong turn at some article about the re-issue of Monsier Kurosawas The 7 Samurai and my very very old PC almost broke down loading all these talkbacks on one of the most unimaginative franchises ever, the cinematic remake of a comic-book-first that, to begin with, wasn&#39;t really very original as well. Although I must say I loved Spiderman as a kid ... as much as I did love Star Wars I-III...as a kid. All of which I watched again last month and just couldn&#39;t stand it. (All of those who diss Natalie Portman for being wooden should take a look at the general acting in those three blockbusters. Good riddance, even Alec Guinees couldn&#39;t turn the crappy dialogue into something remotely unflinchable.) Damn it, I didn&#39;t want to talk about Star-Wars now. I didn&#39;t even want to post some talk-back, let alone read all that stumpfsinn. But again this was my youth and I respect that and I liked being a fan and the same goes for Spidey, I wouldn&#39;t wanna miss it in retrospect. And I guess I even envy every fan and geek on the planet who still embraces this part of his life with such a verve and thus continues to make that tubbish donkey Lucas or that finally-being-clever-enough-to-sell-out Raimi a few bucks. But could you all actually stop getting on my nerves? I grew up bitter and world-weary and I&#39;d rather watch something a little less crappy than Spiderman or Star-Whores or Bollocks of the friggin rings to ease that pain. P.S.: Don&#39;t take this personal and excuse my English as it&#39;s not my mother-tongue.

  • May 12, 2002, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Spiderman, Spiderman, Does everything a Spider Can!

    by JMYoda

    Finally got out to see the film yesterday (Saturday). I enjoyed it thoroughly. I&#39;m not as overwhelmingly spastic about it as Harry who bought everything hook line and sinker including the effects but I can definitely say it&#39;s a damn good time at the movies and a great start to the series. I&#39;d rank it over X-men (which I really liked except for Berry as Storm *shudder*) and right up with Superman 1&2. (Unbreakable is still the comic book movie high-water mark.) What wasn&#39;t so hot: Some of the effects looked more like a videogame then anything. Since the switch to CGI Dykstra just isn&#39;t at the top of his game, the cartoony effects are fine for Stuart Little but Spidey needed ILM quality FX&#39;s throughout. However the FX&#39;s didn&#39;t ruin it for me and some of the FX, particularly the swinging stuff was way cool. I could have done with out Randy Savage (who I hate) and his half-nude whores, I mean aside from that this was a decent film for kids so why ruin that? William Defoe was fantastic as always (the man is an acting God) but dear sweet Jesus was that costume horrible. Did they get it at some firesale for a Japanese TV studio? As awesome as Defoe was whenever he was in-costume it inspired more laughter then fright. Kirstin&#39;s performance was a little flat but Tobey made up for it. BTW how does MJ afford those hot outfits when her dad is an out of work drunk?...... Anyway the good stuff: Tobey was pitch perfect as Peter Parker, the scenes where he discovers his powers AWESOME! Designing his costume, AWESOME! Clift Robertson was as good as Glen Ford in Superman (teh highest compliment I can give!). I said my all-time fav Spidey line just as he did "With great power comes great responsibility." having Pete brush him off knowing what was coming... TORTURE. The first half was the best, the origin of Spidey was told as beautifully as the origin of Superman. The second half only suffered because of Green Goblin&#39;s cheesy outfit. The thanksgiving dinner scene was sooooo tense. May slapped Osborne&#39;s hand and I thought he was gonna go psycho right then. Oh and the final scene of the film was brilliant. Having Peter get what he&#39;s always wanted (MJ&#39;s love) and then reject it knowing it would put her life in danger if all the baddies knew he loved her... POWERFUL. AND I HATE HATE HATE Roger Ebert for cheapening such a brilliant scene with his immature adolescent bullshit. I swear in half his reviews he doesn&#39;t have a fucking clue. I guess had he ripped her clothes off and banged her right on Uncle Ben&#39;s grave Ebert would have gave the movie ***1/2 stars... He is worthless as a critic. His reviews are only fit for wiping stink nuggets off my arse. Just the fact he hates AOTC (after loving TPM) has given me knew hope that it&#39;ll be a good Star Wars film...

  • May 12, 2002, 12:20 p.m. CST

    ProfessorUnrat = TROLL

    by JMYoda

    After all if you don&#39;t like Spidey and Star Wars why the hell are you on a *Spiderman* talkback? I&#39;ll tell you why BECAUSE YOUR WORTHLESS TROLL! Now go away! Oh and I laugh at your mentioning of Kurosawa and "The Seven Samurai" in a pathetic attempt to appear intelligent. I love Star Wars (except for TPM) and Spiderman and yet I have every film Kurosawa made in my video collection as well as every film by John Ford, Frank Capra, John Huston, Alfred Hitchcock and every single other great director you can think of. So take your phony elitist bullshit and find somewhere else to troll.

  • May 12, 2002, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Spidey fastest to 200 Million

    by Neo77

    I just checked out Boxofficemojo.com and it&#39;s seem that our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man has broken another record with another 72mil. It&#39;s cume is approximately 223mil in ten days. Spidey kicks Major Ass!

  • May 12, 2002, 1:25 p.m. CST

    Well, Jive Monkey (if that&#39;s really what the JM in JMYoda st

    by ProfessorUnrat

    ...it&#39;s a tragedy my pathetic attempts at appearing intelligent have failed me as I&#39;m horribly aware of the fact that only seemingly very intelligent men ever seem to score. I&#39;m very happy for you though as you succeeded nicely at what I&#39;ve only been trying in vain. And all this by just simply adding the likes of Ford, Capra, Huston and Hitchcock to the afore mentioned Kuroswa.

  • May 12, 2002, 3:18 p.m. CST

    ProfessorUnrat = TROLL #2

    by JMYoda

    You just proved your a troll. You hate Spider-Man yet you RETURN to this board a second time? How sad that you have nothing better to do then read about movies you hate and flame those who like them. I only mentioned those great directors because your trolling bait was the subtle assersetion that people who love blockbusters such as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and Spiderman are childish and unlike you don&#39;t appreciate great filmmakers like Kurosawa. Oh and I won&#39;t even respond to your pathetic and immature "Jive Monkey" comment/flame (any SW fan can tell you what JM stands for). What are you twelve years old? If you still wish to post and continue to make yorself look like a major ass, feel free. I can now rest assured knowing your last two posts and mine will leave little doubt as to who here is intelligent and who is childish, therefore I plan to waste no more time on you. You&#39;ve been exposed for the pathetic little troll you are so my work is finished. I feel good.

  • May 12, 2002, 5:41 p.m. CST

    Jiving Yoda # 2

    by ProfessorUnrat

    Ok, thus you have proven that Yoda really kicks ass. I respect that in a Jedi even if I find the use of the word "Troll" for depicting somebody rather peculiar, considering Yoda himself looks like a cross between something Tolkien came up with after a post-heavy-dinner- nightmare and an opossum with muppet-personality-disorder. And thanks for not even mentioning my bad jive-monkey-joke. You are right, I came back here although I think these talkbacks are quite a waste of energy and talent but I had a lazy sunday and I was wondering If someone would really sink so low as to answer to my rants. Do you guys really have to take all of this so seriously? I don&#39;t hate Spiderman - The Movie, as I haven&#39;t seen it, and even If I didn&#39;t like it afterwards, who cares? There are some who like and some who don&#39;t, it&#39;s not that ones are Nazis and the others are Jews, or is it? I just wanted to pass out the message that you really should be glad there are a lot of people who feel different than you, cause otherwise you would feel like a very small screw in the engine. And the same goes for the people who simply hate every new blockbuster because it&#39;s strirring up some controversy. You should all get a life, and me too. And thanks for not answering this one, Jive, I like getting the last word.

  • May 12, 2002, 9:47 p.m. CST

    Larry Drake as Doc Ock

    by Harami

    Just saw the LA Law Weakest Link(damn those celebs are stupid)and boy would Larry Drake make an excellent Ock. He was the only one who really got his questions right and looks like he really has the intellegence as well as the menace/insanity part (he played a mentally challenged person on LA Law) perfect. And of course as many have mentioned he looks the part (especially with glasses) almost exactly. He also has the further advantage of working with Raimi (as a bad guy in a superhero flick no less), further evidence of his potential as a bad guy. A wierd thing is his name popped up as possible casting for Doc Ock way before Raimi was even considered as director. Oh yeah and he&#39;d come cheap. :)

  • May 13, 2002, 12:29 a.m. CST

    The costumes were awful

    by fatzombie

    I mean where were the hell were the nipples?!?

  • May 13, 2002, 12:39 a.m. CST

    thatsfdup

    by holoholojoe

    the best comic adaptation is still THE CROW, then SM, BM #1, SUPERMAN, XMAN, & UB. how can folks forget THE CROW. it reflects Barr&#39;s vision exactly!

  • May 13, 2002, 5:51 a.m. CST

    Bring in....&#39;The Thing&#39;

    by workshed

    He was always my favourite of Spidey&#39;s superhero chums who popped up from time to time. Do they have the CGI to bring him to life? I&#39;m not so sure but if they could it would be a great opportunity for Maguire to deliver a slew of great lines as I remember &#39;Thing&#39; and &#39;Spidey&#39; were always winding each other up.

  • May 13, 2002, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Not terribly good....

    by Kafkan1

    I liked Spiderman... in about the same way I liked Harry Potter. It was fun and invoked enough of the source material&#39;s magic that it was worth the money, but it was far from being a great movie. I went expecting to like it quite a bit more than I did and, with the exception of Dunst&#39;s scene in the rain, I was disappointed. The CGI looked hokie, the plot was merely so-so, and the dialogue was painful. The dialogue in the last scene, especially, was so tin-ear awful that I&#39;m amazed all the reviewers who have blasted Lucas over the years for this same problem, failed to comment. My God, I wanted to get up and walk out, I was so embarrassed for everyone involved. I literally blushed for them, it was so bad. It almost ruined the movie as a whole. I rated this one a 5.... with 4 being my cutoff level for "worth the $7 I spent". Burn that last scene and it might rise to a 6, but it&#39;s hardly something I&#39;d feel any urge to rewatch. I wasn&#39;t half the movie X-Men was, and ranks somewhere around the third movies of the Batman and Superman franchises, in terms of all-time comic book adaptations. I can&#39;t figure it out, either. I really liked the Spiderman comic books, McGuire is a talent, and Dunst is gorgeous. What&#39;s not to like..... well, what&#39;s not to like besides the uninspired direction, the listless plot, and that awful, awful dialogue. How that movie continues to dominate the box office is completely beyond me.

  • May 13, 2002, 7:44 p.m. CST

    Another great Spiderman Review

    by JediSean

    Go here: http://www.geocities.com/SeattleBoi21/new_millennium.html It&#39;s on this really awesome new entertainment website made by a guy from Seattle!

  • May 15, 2002, 3:49 a.m. CST

    length

    by dalael35

    Over all, I really liked this movie. I went to see it with my daughter, who echoed my sentaments exactly when she said "I have GOT to see that again!" as the credits rolled. I do however have a couple problem with it, most of which are forgivable and didn&#39;t change my enjoyment one bit. Like not seeing Spidey&#39;s mouth moving whenever he talked, or the fact that his scientific genious was never demonstrated (which I&#39;m sure will be corrected in future installments of the Spider-Man series). The only real problem I had, was with the somewhat hurried pace of the second half. The first half, the origin story, was exactly long enough to tell what story it needed to tell. However once he fully became Spider-Man, it seemed kind of rushed. Not enough time was taken to truelly establish Green Goblin as a super villian, and I would have loved to see a lot more of Spidey and Green Goblin having it out. They also never establish exactly why he was wanted by the authorities. I mean, considering all the good he was doing, he wouldn&#39;t be so wanted by the police solely based on what one newspaper was saying about him. I did like how at the end they briefly showed that slight tendency towards ruthlessness that Spidey gets from time to time. One thing he has in common with Anakin, and yes even Luke, is you should never ever piss him off. But, regardless, I&#39;ll still be taking my daughter back for a second screening.

  • May 21, 2002, 4:45 a.m. CST

    little cuties

    by samsquanch

    The theatre was really crowded, I got ok seats, but we were right behind a crew of about nine 12 year old girls. i started growling, dreading the giggles and the pre-pubescent rudeness, expecting the worst. my girlfriend and I knew they were there to see the new and improved Tobey-bod in a skintight suit, I wanted to tell them to leave. When Peter Parker asks MJ to pose for a picture, she asks him not to make her &#39;look ugly&#39;. He replies &#39;that would be impossible&#39;. the little girls in front of us let out a collective &#39;aaaawwwwww!&#39;. Sweet. it gave me a warm feeling of shame, it was the only outburst from them the entire time. Sorry girls. btw, I just saw Episode II, and it made me realize that I have to see Spiderman again. If only to get the bad taste out of my mouth. Spiderman is the movie this old comic geek has been waiting for his entire life.

  • May 22, 2002, 12:36 a.m. CST

    SPIDER-MAN

    by Ribbons

    I don&#39;t know what the big deal is over web shooters. If anybody&#39;s as dumb as me and they&#39;re just reading this review which has to be over two weeks old, listen up: The people that complain organic web-shooters detract from Peter&#39;s ingenuity, and subsequently, those who argue that they kept the movie as "believable as it needed to be" don&#39;t get it. James Cameron didn&#39;t create the idea for natural webbing to flow from Peter&#39;s wrists as a way to conveniently suspend disbelief, their whole purpose is to symbolize Peter&#39;s maturation. Kudos to Sam Raimi (or David Koepp...or whoever)for taking that concept and adding the whole cafeteria scene. While the film may have moved away from the mood set during the first act of the movie, it was a great way of foreshadowing, intentionally or not, that Peter&#39;s newfound powers were making a new man out of him, and would force him to grow up. As for any nitpicky trollers who think Spidey&#39;s webbing should&#39;ve come out of his butt if they REALLY wanted the film to be realistic, well, thank goodness some continuity was spared.

  • May 22, 2002, 10:27 p.m. CST

    lunch room scene

    by elizabethpersson

    I agree with previous posts that Spiderman the movie has some really serious directorial/technical issues. Forgive me if the following listing is not grammatical: (1) The lack of lip/jaw movement for Spidey and Goblin WAS INCREDIBLY DISTURBING. It was like I was back in 1968 again, watching "Ultraman". We know all along that Spidey has a mouth right underneath his cloth mask. The fact that has face does not move at all isn&#39;t mysterious, it&#39;s inhuman and inauthentic. During Goblin&#39;s rooftop "man-to-man" talk, Raimi lets us see Norman Osborne&#39;s eyes under holes in the rigid mask, holes large enough to see actor Dafoe&#39;s cheek muscles -- which do not move as Goblin speaks. This was so disturbing to me that I could not even hear what the character was saying. OK, so Raimi didn&#39;t use the actor&#39;s "live" voices recorded when the scene was filmed. They should still move their lips. Hasn&#39;t he heard of looping? (2) The balloon scene was not just unoriginal, but the CGI was horribly executed -- as if the balloons were rendered in a different medium and pasted in. (3) The smart commentator who explained Spidey&#39;s "lack of mass" is so right. Animators (and supposed live action directors) forget that we viewers live in a world where every physical body has inertia. When characters move without it, we don&#39;t really "feel" their actions. At least Spidey&#39;s final swing through the city did look and feel right. None of the fights did, except the first one, with Flash. Regarding the script: like all action stories nowadays, there is too much going on, it should be 1/2 hour shorter -- but all those details give us all something to bitch and moan about in our posts, right?? I don&#39;t know the Spidey comics very well, but it seems to me that Peter did not do a very good job of hiding his identity: surely anyone in Peter&#39;s Midtown High class would have remembered Petey&#39;s trick with the cafeteria tray when news of the mysterious Spiderman started showing up in the Daily Bugle?? (Of course, all the Jedi Knights -- who can supposedly read minds -- still haven&#39;t put two and two together about Emperor Palpatine and Darth Sidious.) I&#39;m sorry to put in a G. Lucas comment. I wish his post 1983 work would disappear and we could pretend that Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was a Star Wars film.... At least the Lees (Stan and Ang) still exist, so the Dark Side won&#39;t cloud all of our minds.

  • May 22, 2002, 10:29 p.m. CST

    mass

    by elizabethpersson

    Andy Christ was the smart person who explained how "mass" works in animation. Sorry that I did not properly acknowledge andy in my previous post.

  • May 23, 2002, 2:59 a.m. CST

    I Jus Can&#39;t Find A Single Reason To Stop Enjoying Spider - M

    by JustAnotherFan

    I&#39;ve seen the movie about six times since it was released and I still love it. I didn&#39;t cried as much as Harry did, and maybe I was not jumping up and down in my sit, but I enjoyed it enough to watch it a seventh time :) And I think the reason to keep enjoying it is because I&#39;m not going to the teather to check out every lil thing about the movie, All I want is to be entertained for 2 hours or maybe more. Of course I&#39;ve found out some mistakes (after six times... I had to!) and I&#39;m pretty sure CGI doesn&#39;t look real... but I&#39;ve found out some answers to this too! 1.- Sam Raimi is a Human!! he&#39;s able to make some mistakes sometimes! and even so, he&#39;s got a great movie, a good story, a cute Peter Parker... what else should I ask for? 2.- Well.... maybe CGI looks fake because... IT IS FAKE. What&#39;s your problem about it guys? believe me! They made the casting looking for someone who had really been genetically altered because of a radioactive spider, but they couldn&#39;t find him! So they had to make it up with a computer. That&#39;s the truth and nobody can do anything about it. Now I have to say that I&#39;m bitting my nails expecting the second movie.... and expecting i can recreate that part of the movie when MJ kisses SM while he&#39;s hanging from his web in that alley... but in my dreams and in spite of MJ would be me. So now that i have that pictured out in my mind, I&#39;ll go to bed. BYE! =)

  • May 25, 2002, 4:32 p.m. CST

    it was great, but i still prefer x-men

    by priestmolester

    the reason: only an idiot of a director (such as joel schumacher) could have fucked this one up. spiderman&#39;s origin is probably one of the simplest stories to tell, without having to resort to scientific jargon or the theory of evolution. it has only TWO main super-powered characters, as x-men had TEN. brian singer is a superior intelligence as far as i&#39;m concerned for having succeeded so brilliantly where everyone else had failed, and i think of him everytime i look at wolverine and rogue experiencing an touching, realistic, emotionnal moment in that glorious film (but spiderman still kicks major ass! never before in my entire life had i heard people actually APPLAUSE at the end of a movie (people up in canada usually don&#39;t do that). another hand for willem dafoe&#39;s breathtaking performance, please!).

  • May 29, 2002, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Kevin Smith sucks, Spiderman rules, and to the Hulk ball guy

    by Bronzewood

    Kevin smith&#39;s opinion on Spiderman sucks, he&#39;s a big loser fan boy who loves to sell out hardcore. Spiderman fucking rules I don&#39;t care what anyone fucking says. And the loser who posted about the Hulk balls, quit telling us about your dirty fan boy Hulk ball lust. Maybe you and Kevin smith should hang out and talk about super hero dongs.

  • May 29, 2002, 3:57 p.m. CST

    Thank God

    by deusdragonex

    I would like to thank "spider15" and "JustAnotherFan." Although I may have overlooked, these are the only two people whom I have seen put a HYPHEN(-) in the title SPIDER-MAN!!!!!!!! There is a hyphen there, it isn&#39;t Spiderman its Spider-Man. Sorry for nitpicking but that has bugged me for years. Anyway Spider-Man was a great movie(better than X-Men)and I can&#39;t wait for the sequel.

  • May 29, 2002, 4:02 p.m. CST

    sorry

    by deusdragonex

    I just realized that I overlooked "VladamirMondingo" in my thanx for spelling Spider-Man with a hyphen. Thank you VladamirMondingo from the bottom of my heart.

  • May 29, 2002, 4:32 p.m. CST

    WOW!!!!!

    by deusdragonex

    Oh Man!!! All of this Spider-Man vs. Titanic bull is killing me. Regardless of what they gross, or what the critics say Titanic is always going to get better results. Why? Cause it ACTUALLY HAPPENED!!. Real people died during the sinking of that big hunk of dog crap, so people feel they are obligated to see it, as if they are paying their respects to the people who lost their lives. But the truth is, and it seems no one wants to come to grips with it but, Titanic sucked the fat one. It was WAYYYYY too long and the best part was the thing sinking. Spider-Man has Titanic beat by a long shot.

  • May 31, 2002, 7:01 a.m. CST

    IS SPIDERMAN GOOD

    by evil_gardengnome

    IS SPIDERMAN GOOD?

  • June 4, 2002, 10:42 p.m. CST

    score

    by Coolius_Montero

    I just got the spider-man score and I must say it&#39;s friggin awesome.

  • June 6, 2002, 2:40 a.m. CST

    Kudos to Sam Raimi

    by girlonfilm

    The talent of Sam Raimi as a storyteller and visual artist truly shines in this film. I have enjoyed his work since his low budget days in Michigan beginning with the "Evil Dead" trilogy. After this big success in "Spiderman", I hope he decides to give back to the film community in Michigan by assisting young filmmakers to follow in his footsteps. I saw a link on the website "Dark Horizons" about a little indie production being filmed in Michigan called "Dorks and Dice" . I went to the film&#39;s website and it looks cool! I emailed the producer and she informed me that the director, Brett Pierce, and production designer, Drew Pierce are the sons of Bart Pierce, photographic effects artist on (of all things!) "Evil Dead". Check out their website at www.dorksanddice.com and see for yourself. Michigan film rules!

  • June 6, 2002, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Boring

    by dogfish112

    I was bored and very underwhelmed. I&#39;ve seen this movie before. It was called Superman.

  • June 6, 2002, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Nonsese, Deusdragonex (sp?)

    by Lunginmeat

    If being based on a real life event factored into the TITANIC grosses that much, why is it that the STAR WARS films are right behind it in box office earnings, not to mention HARRY POTTER and all the other top 10 moneymakers which are NOT based on true stories?

  • June 8, 2002, 7:10 a.m. CST

    Spiderman - The greatest comic book movie

    by llamajake

    Harry, you were totally right. I saw this last night and I nearly cried liked a baby. It was so perfect, few films can actually put you in the place of the hero but this achieved it. Roll on Spiderman 2

  • June 12, 2002, 2:50 p.m. CST

    To "Lunginmeat"

    by deusdragonex

    Y&#39;know you are absolutely correct, there is a hole in my theory but I am going to try to back that theory up. Movies like TITANIC become so popular because they are based on actual events, no matter how good they actually are, that much we&#39;ve covered. But movies like STAR WARS and SPIDER-MAN become popular because they are good movies. And they deal with things that people really want to see. For example: STAR WARS was a story about good vs. evil with a few plot twists in it. SPIDER-MAN was about a regular teen coming across something and he had to learn how to cope with that. Now HARRY POTTER became popular because of the book, the movie had nothing to do with it.

  • June 13, 2002, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Great Movie!

    by wonton dude

    I&#39;m in no way related to the studio. I&#39;m just a regular teen movie goer wanting to add my personal thought for this movie. This is truly an excellent superhero movie with a heart. It gave me the feeling that I had never experienced watching any other movies before. Very powerful indeed! I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and I&#39;m patiently waiting for the DVD to be released for me to own.

  • June 14, 2002, 10:47 p.m. CST

    Spidey In the UK

    by real5y

    Don&#39;t no whether I&#39;m the first in the Uk to post on this movie after having seen it, just read Harry&#39;s review, and thought I better write wjhile it&#39;s still fresh in my mind, but please bear with me people as it is 3.20am as I write this. Firstly, let me set the scene: Like Harry Spidey was the first thing in my childhood world who gave me the &#39;tingle factor&#39;. Hell, I&#39;ll just come out and say it, I wanted to BE Spidey as a kid, and if I&#39;m honest, I still do. Secondly, I was more nervous than Harry I think about seeing this picture. I mean, your messing with a LEGEND here. I mean who knows what might happen? So, like Harry,I needed loved ones close by. My partner the delectable Natalie, knowing how much Spidey meant to me, and seeing me dither about going to see it said &#39;We&#39;re going now, we&#39;ll take the kids, lets go!&#39; Now to put this into perspective, Natalie has only been out of HOSPITAL for little over a week after a MAJOR operation - but she insisted - God I love her, she is my Mary Jane. So I went to see it... Now my kids are Wesley 11 and Holly 13 - THEY loved it. Natalie, not a huge fan of these things admittedly, well she liked X-Men but I think that had to do with Hugh Jackman more than anything else, hehehehe. She didn&#39;t like it. I take my hat off to her though, going to see a movie she thought she wouldn&#39;t like after all she&#39;s been through but still being really happy for me and tolerating all my post movie chatter afterwards because I... I... I F@*&%$G LOVED IT!!!!!!!!! At last a superhero movie (Not even sure I can call it that) that was as REAL as you could get without falling flat on it&#39;s face. This was OUR world it was in. Not some fucked up pastiche. This was NEW YORK. This was SPIDERMAN!!!! Tobey Maguire was a genius piece of casting. They hired an ACTOR not a cardboard cutout. They made the characters real people - I mean lets face it, comic books are one thing, but you don&#39;t speak with an exclamation mark at the end of every other sentence in a movie. And Dafoe... Jesus, Dafoe! HE IS THE MAN &#39;It was murder at work, I bought a fruitcake&#39; Only Dafoe could bring the right amount of deadpan and internal struggle to that part. Not to mention sheer menace. For those of you who doubt see this movie. There are weaknesses, but they are weaknesses that can be built on, not discarded. Do you ditch your best friend because you don&#39;t like blue eyes? Of course not. Harry, I don&#39;t know whether you&#39;ll reply to this, but from one Generation-Spidey to another after reading your review. The way you felt, the way I FELT. If your ever in the UK and you need a friend, give me a call, we can share a few beers, watch some movies and talk about Spidey and remember the days when we, in those long summers of childhood, were Spiderman - In our minds reading the comic books, in our hearts when playing Spidey and in our dreams when we went to sleep... We need more films like this (And LOTR for that matter), in a time when we need heroes that are the humans we know we should be and possibly aren&#39;t. This movie made me remember that - for that I will always be grateful and I will try harder from now on after all... &#39;With great power comes great responsibility&#39; In the words of Stan Lee &#39;&#39;NUFF SAID&#39;.

  • June 16, 2002, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man

    by BreakOn

    I just saw "Spider-Man" today and I thought it was great. Tobey Maguire nailed the Peter Parker/Spider-Man role, Willem Dafoe (who is a really good actor when he wants to be) was interesting as the Green Goblin and Kirsten Dunst was really hot. I thought the movie was well written (managing the difficult balance between crowd-pleasing action and darkness). Sam Raimi is a good action director and handled the effects scenes well. Even the CGI effects were (mostly) very good. I liked "Spider-Man" better than the "X-Men" (which I found disappointing - I hated the ending of that movie). Obviously, any movie which features such a well-loved and influential character there will be fans who hate it or disagree with elements but, c&#39;mon! The characters been around for forty years! Of course elements have to be changed or dropped. "Spider-Man" was a great movie and in my opinion could make a really good franchise. I look forward to the sequel.

  • June 17, 2002, 9:49 p.m. CST

    the spider man movie was fucking awsome and Tobey Maguier is SO

    by Tobey-M's girl

    The spider man movie was so awsome i went back to see it 18 times!(not to mention i have memorized all the word in the movie)and Tobey Maguier is Sooo HOT! that i am totally obssesed with him and 4 all of u geek fucks who are talking shit about spider man/Tobey maguier are just horny fucking geeks still living in your parents cellar downloading pictures of Sarah Michell Gellar! and trash talking extreamly awsome movies with extreamly HOT actors (such as Tobey Maguier)is the only pleasure that you fucking geeks have i your pathetic lives!!!

  • June 19, 2002, 12:43 a.m. CST

    that was one kick ass movie

    by goku son

    that move dilevered all the chills and thrills that it promised and the story line was very cool but what realy pissed me of was that they fucked up on the goblins wepons and his look like he only had pompkin boms razor bats and smart boms but he never had machine guns they fucking hollwood alwasy have to fuck up a good movie by being in actre with details and i liked the fact that he could make his own webs insdead of web shoters but it would have made the movie beter if he ran out of webing and thubled of the building and trying to reload his webing or have the goblin cruch his web shoters loke in the show any way i plan on seeing the movie all summer and sneak in to see it agin on top of that it is worth seeing or downloading this was the best movie of all time goku son

  • June 19, 2002, 12:44 a.m. CST

    that was one kick ass movie

    by goku son

    that move dilevered all the chills and thrills that it promised and the story line was very cool but what realy pissed me of was that they fucked up on the goblins wepons and his look like he only had pompkin boms razor bats and smart boms but he never had machine guns they fucking hollwood alwasy have to fuck up a good movie by being in actre with details and i liked the fact that he could make his own webs insdead of web shoters but it would have made the movie beter if he ran out of webing and thubled of the building and trying to reload his webing or have the goblin cruch his web shoters loke in the show any way i plan on seeing the movie all summer and sneak in to see it agin on top of that it is worth seeing or downloading this was the best movie of all time and the sound track kicked ass goku son

  • July 3, 2002, 9:52 p.m. CST

    Spider-Man.- -He&#39;s So Hot Right Now.

    by Deep Blue Sky

    - -Spider-Man.

  • July 11, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Spiderman is the best. Fuckig spectacular, and the best bit of a

    by The Highlander

  • Aug. 5, 2002, 2:22 a.m. CST

    weak.

    by Jon E Cin

    I do not see what all the hype is about. It definately was not the better then X-men. I thought it was a little too cheesy. The Green Goblins costume looks like a power ranger!!!! So Lame! It wasnt a bad movie..just not as good as everyone says it is. I guess its because they are just so relieved that it didnt suck. The effects were nice i must say.

  • Dec. 6, 2002, 2:47 p.m. CST

    Last!

    by 2LeggedFreak

    Spiderman is my all time comic book hero..Superman comes nowhere near to him because spidey is who I identified with as a nerdy kid. Conversely though I would still rate Superman as one of my favourite movies of all time and Spiderman the Movie isn't. The only reason I can think is that this is an origin story that I have seen a million times on the printed page whilst I had never come across the depth of the Superman origin we saw in the movie or seen anything like Supermans first night (helicopter sequence has to be THE best superhero seaquence ever). So Spidey isn't there yet but Raimi has laid a great foundation to do something hugley original in the next film with established characters and I hope that Spidey 2 will be better than Superman 2. I am a bit worried about the villains actually and it will be interesting to see who we get. The worry I've got is that the best ones are a leetle simlar..Goblin..scientist gone mad after a faild experiment...Octopus..scientist gone mad after a failed expriment...Scorpion...criminal gone mad after a failed experiment. Having said that the best story ever surely has to be spidey going after the radio active isotope to save Aunt May. We can only hope.

  • Dec. 9, 2002, 7:06 a.m. CST

    Sorry, your not the last...

    by Conan_the_Humble

    Just wanted to say that...