GameNow WP Theme

Dark Light
Spider-Man

Peter Parker is bitten by a radioactive spider and develops spider-like abilities.
Genre: Feature Film-Action/Adventure
Rating: PG13
Release Date: 6-SEP-2005
Media Type: DVDFor devoted fans and nonfans alike, Spider-Man offers nothing less–and nothing more–than what you’d expect from a superhero blockbuster. Having proven his comic-book savvy with the original Darkman, director Sam Raimi brings ample energy and enthusiasm to Spidey’s origin story, nicely establishing high-school nebbish Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) as a brainy outcast who reacts with appropriate euphoria–and well-tempered maturity–when a “super-spider” bite transforms him into the amazingly agile, web-shooting Spider-Man. That’s all well and good, and so is Kirsten Dunst as Parker’s girl-next-door sweetheart. Where Spider-Man falls short is in its hyperactive CGI action sequences, which play like a video game instead of the gravity-defying exploits of a flesh-and-blood superhero. Willem Dafoe is perfectly cast as Spidey’s schizoid nemesis, the Green Goblin, and the movie’s a lot of fun overall. It’s no match for Superman and Batman in bringing a beloved character to the screen, but it places a respectable third. –Jeff Shannon

Buy “Spider-Man “ For Only $2.82

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
5 Comments
  • Amazon.com Customer
    March 5, 2010
    #1
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

    … From an artistic point of view this movie is garbage since it has no merits(*sigh* no I do not write this merely to impress, I fully grasp the concept of artistry as I believe any thinking individual rightly should). The gravest of all sins committed, even above that attrocious rethinking of the classic Green Goblin costume, is that the studios saw fit to assign David Keopp scripting chores on such a major motion picture. He is an unoriginal man likely to have a boring life since he sees fit NOT to imbue his work with any noticible personal touch, rather he seems content merely to regurgetate what he’s seen in other movies ( and not doubt the tenets of screenwritting as preached in Robert Mckee, and Syd Field books).
    The screenplay is crassly, so stupidly, so utterly banal, and shameless one wonders if in fact the writer (writers I should say…) were fully conscious of their actions , intending to pass this off as a malicious joke on the American public. You will find, thinkers, that there is NOT ONE single original idea in the whole of this expensive Xerox. One need not reach far back into the annals of film history to see from which works it pilfered thus I will not name them, having full confidence in your film memory.
    The direction is boring, as is Tobey Maguire in the lead. Kirsten Dunst resgisters, but only as a non-entity. Her character was sorely underwritten.
    The cacophany of sound that Danny Elfman passes off as a score shows how the poor the material is, since even the man who wrote the great score to Batman cannot work wonders without first being inspired.
    One more grave failing is perhaps the cornerstone of its appeal to the masses. Spiderman is an ‘accessible’ hero( unlike Superman who is perfect for ex.). The ‘accessible’ superhero is an awful concept since it DESTROYS all that is worthy in the hero by giving him flaws, the underlying message being one of reassurance to the average that they may continue about their way, complacent, unmotivated to strive for greatness, since even those men we laud as our champions share our same basic failings, and may be prone to caving into temptation at any given time. This is the anathema of nobility. Sadly, it’s popularity has spread in our culture not like AIDS to which there have risen many pleas for a cure, but like a disease much liked in its giving both the great, and the small a common bond.
    To provide a balanced review, I will write that on the plus side, William Dafoe is quite good as Norman Osborn, and is the only one in the cast who plays his role, however lousy, with something approximating true conviction. It is he alone that raises this movie ‘several rungs in hell’ for me; it is the only thing about this movie in which I do not find much fault.
    At this point you may wonder, “What did you expect? Shakespeare”? Yes. We all should, as a collective body demand only the very best in order to recieve it. Telling ourselves that we should settle for what we’re given in order to not offend others, or simply shrugging our shoulders will lead only to our film industry’s downward spiral( or rather continued downward spiral) allowing for mediocorities like this to arise like so many weeds, in place of say American Beauties, or Magnolias ( which are at the very at least have a view point dictated by their authors and not everyone else, a concept rendered beautiful by our society’s protestations to even a single man declaring himself seperate and of an unlike mind)…

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • troop766
    March 5, 2010
    #2
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

    i’ve seen this movi in theaters twice.and both times
    i saw a new error in the movie.{this is based on the
    ultimate spider man}1.norman osborn and the spider thing
    at the begining, is conected.also dr. octopuse is
    in their somewhere.2.mary jane was never taken to the
    brooklen bridge,{refence to other comic book}it’s
    gwen stacy.mar is taken prisoner at her shcool.
    3.the made ben parker WAY to old. and he dies in his
    house.4.the murder does not get killed,and he
    lifts an ice cream vender,not the wressling bose.
    5.when spidey wressles,his face is NEVER seen.
    i’ve got more but,i think i’ve proved my point.
    so if you havn’t seen the movie,and your expecting
    a based on the comic book movie,you’ll be disapointed.
    don’t get me wrong,this is an asome movie.
    but with all these other movies coming out that are
    on books{harry potter,lord of the rings,etc},
    you’de think stan lee would have done the same.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Liz
    March 5, 2010
    #3
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

    To see how bad they let us down. i was expecting much more. I wanted my money back after seeing the film. The best part was the first hour. After that it went down hill.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Vader
    March 5, 2010
    #4
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

    Ok, Spider-Man was named the summer blockbuster for 2002 and it was a great movie and more than $400 million- but does that mean it was better than Star Wars Episode II- Attack of the Clones?

    Not a chance.

    Spider-Man was ruined by William Dafoe as the green goblin. Sure, the visual effects in spider-man were compelling but it was not better than Attack of the Clones.

    Spider-Man was predictable and basically a glorified verison of the cartoon.

    If you want to see real action and adventure- see Lord of the Rings or Attack of the Clones- both are better than Spider-Man.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Anonymous
    March 5, 2010
    #5
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

    Granted the first say 15 minutes of this movie was ok, but the rest has led me to label this movie one of the biggest disapointments and over praised movies ever. As a casual fan of spiderman I thought the visual effects seemed childish to the mastery of the visual art as presented in Star wars attack of the clones. Further the love story was even worse. The best movie of 2002 was not Spider Man. That honor i would humbly give to Atack of the clones or the Oedopian Minority Report.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Leave a Reply:




Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes