|
Great
Scott! They've done it right! From the web-woven opening
credits to the last strains of the cartoon theme as the
copyrights roll, Spiderman joins the pantheon of
underpanted heroes whom the movie forum has portrayed as
mightily as their bulging quadriceps (at this movie's release
date, that being only Superman and Batman - the OG's, the
goodfellas, the Super Best Friends).
Directed by Sam Raimi and starring Tobey Maguire, Willem
Dafoe, James Franco, JK Simmons and Kirsten Dunst's Tits.
It's always a dice-throw re-forging well-loved characters;
Spiderman's new movie franchise ambassador had to win over
audiences in his first 5 minutes screentime - sweeping the
field for lowbrows and hardcases alike - or go the way of
Leno-chinned Nicholas Hammond, the vacuous, Gilligan-hairdo
nerd of the late-70s tv series, The Amazing Spiderman,
which was as exciting as swallowing chalk. Tobey Maguire,
running late after his bus, browbeaten by schoolmates, and
lamenting in voiceover his teen-boy problems, was a winner
right outa the gate! For a younger generation unversed in
the "reality-based" predicament of Peter Parker/Spiderman,
this was a refreshing take on superheroics; not all of them
fall from the sky in rockets, or are millionaire playboys
- ironically, Tobey Maguire wins us over simply by being
an Everyman!
As
Parker, Maguire exudes that perfect mix of ingenuous Nice
Boy-ishness that falls easy prey to achingly good-looking
chicks (who are evolutionarily programmed to bleed those
suckers dry), and as Spiderman, Tobey shows us that not
all heroes were Born To Do It; that easing into the role
is every bit psychological as it is physical. The movie
opens with him questioning 'who he is' (the eternal misfit
query that keeps psycho-analysts in high-thread-count bedsheets),
and wraps with him stating, "Who am I? - I'm Spiderman!",
an affirmation carrying the power of realization that to
turn the tables on the achingly good-looking chicks, just
reach down and grab a nut.
In
his previous film roles, Tobey came perilously close to
becoming either Freddie Prinze Junior or Jason Biggs. Thankfully,
this outing has unmired him from that buttcheeks-exposed-lowbrow-laughs
career track; yet, though his credits run the gamut of boring
movies (The Ice Storm, Wonder Boys, Pleasantville),
Tobey's acting skills have always been apparent and, unlike
Freddie Prinze Junior, I have never wished for ten minutes
alone in a room with him, just slapping his face as hard
as I can.
In the 60's comics, Parker was bitten by a "radioactive"
spider - in this movie, it is upgraded to a "genetically-mutated"
spider, reflecting each era's fears and misunderstandings.
The decision to have Spiderman internally generate his webbing
seems more rational now, than his creation of web-cartridges
in the 60's. It always intrigued me why Stan Lee (Spiderman's
creator) balked at the webbing aspect, giving his young
hero super-strength, an inexplicable "spider-sense"
and even the power to walk up walls (which is impossible
in this world's gravity; the ability for insects and arachnids
to walk on walls has little to do with how sticky their
appendages are, but rather volume-to-surface-area ratio
and the correlating force of gravity per square inch), yet
no endemic webbing - a spider's trademark. (Spiders spin
their web via spinnerets located anally, so did Lee consider
this and veto it? - though any movie featuring a hero generating
web from a butt-spinneret would probably have to cede to
new ratings codes, such as, "Silky Fecal Issuance"
or "Disturbing Anal Visual", or "Christ,
Is He Doing What I Think He's Doing?"
An exhilarating feature of this film was the web-swinging
(non-existent in the soporific Amazing Spiderman
TV series, due to its technical difficulty). Movie technology
has lent literal wings to stunts and visuals which were
impossible in the days of Adam West running around a pier
with a Wile E. Coyote bomb over his head, or Reb Brown decimating
the legend of Captain America throughout that ineffectual
doink of a movie. Truly this is the correct era
to begin making films of "super" heroes, for only
now can movie-makers convey a "superiority" that
George Reeves could never achieve by lying on a table and
being chroma-keyed onto a swishing skyscape. (And I've got
two words for Nicholas Hammond scurrying up the side of
a building: suspension cables.) Not only are the headrush
web-swinging sequences in Spiderman technically seamless,
thanks to legendary effects-man, John Dykstra, the athleticism
displayed by the stuntmen and/or CGI composites is awe-inspiring.
Aficionados may lament that there is a CGI
jerkiness to the man-spider's swinging - but this nonhuman
factor somehow only enhances the arachnoid element in this
spider man. It's a letdown, yes, knowing that Tobey is not
even onscreen when Spiderman is barreling along, but it's
better than watching "crooks" with pencil-moustaches
shooting at George Reeves with their hats on, while he poses
arms-akimbo-legs-apart, then crushes their guns like the
movie-clay models they are ("one-trick-pony" in
the dictionary, there's a picture of George Reeves as Superman.
Bullets bounce offa him, yet ever wonder why he ducks
when they throw their guns at him?).
Comic
artists put Spidey through rigorous contortions on the far
side of yoga, his slim figure complying to action lines
which would seem impossible to emulate in reality - but
here, in three dimensions, motoring, rollercoastering,
was this amazing spider-man in bodyswerving full-motion
- momentum, inertia, gravity accounted for, swinging in
free-fall, pushing off walls with running feet, loosing
another web-cable to follow another violent arc - and assuming
all those positions that you thought only a Baywatch bim
and three tubes of lubricant could force you to achieve.
So
Tobey accounted for. Now who better in this planetary
system to play Spiderman's greatest arch-nemesis, the Green
Goblin - than Willem Dafoe? Face carved from crazy and body
ripped like Jesus in crucifixion pose, Willem owned this
role, as the Green Goblin owned the tormented id of
Norman Osborn, his businessman alter-ego. Like the first
(Keaton-starring) Batman movie, the makers of Spiderman
made the same mistake in killing off the bestest, baddest
villain in what is surely merely the first installment of
a major franchise. The Green Goblin (who appears in countless
Spiderman comics as an incessant bane to Parker's attempts
at leading an unassuming life) meets his death by movie's
end
when we all know that there is yet so much
cheese to be mined from Willem. Like Jesus, I wept.
James Franco, as Dafoe's barely tangible son and Peter Parker's
almost-incorporeal pal, Harry Osborn, phoned in his role
on a cellphone that kept cutting out. In the comic world,
Harry Osborn wildly grabs the party reins when his father
is incapacitated by Spiderman, and becomes the second Green
Goblin. By movie's end, Franco, in a valiant attempt to
become three-dimensional, vows that Spiderman will pay for
killing his dad, but I don't think any of us can visualize
the fey Franco carrying the torch of Divine Wicked that
came so rapturously naturally to Willem. Probably the biggest
crime this wisp of smoke could perpetrate would be to join
a boyband and pretend to be The Hard One.
At the heart of this movie is
well, "heart".
Raimi did not skimp on characterization, playing hard the
emotional ties between Norman Osborn, his son Harry, Peter
Parker and Kirsten Dunst's Tits. The unflowered romance
between Parker and Kirsten Dunst's Tits fuels the story,
yet is not so overpowering that Willem can't get in some
good old-fashioned diabolical cackles and throw exploding
casaba melons, precipitating web-slinging action to save
damsels in tight dress.
J.K. Simmons (renowned That Guy, following in the unlimelighted
footsteps of R. Lee Ermey, J.T. Walsh and T.T. Boy - never
noticed how many That Guy's have initials instead of first
names
) hilariously dominated the role of J. Jonah
Jameson, Chief of the Daily Bugle newspaper (even
his character had initials!), who wages a literary
vendetta against Spiderman for the sake of newspaper sales,
and also delineates between libel and slander for the next
time we want to confuse someone into being insulted and
paying us for it.
Can
anyone deny the integral role played by Kirsten Dunst's
Tits?; ubiquitous, delinquitous, nasty-perky, herky-jerky,
firm yet forgiving, relentlessly real, cruel but fair. Iridescent,
flame-red locks, throaty delivery, heart-glowing smile,
yet camera unable to focus on anything BUT those mounds
of necessity, those pillows of slavery. When walking home
from work, in adhering to Hollywood protocol, Kirsten Dunst's
Tits takes the darkest possible alleyway during a rainstorm
and wears no bra, and is subsequently attacked by wiggas,
in order to be rescued by hero, as denoted by said protocol.
Spiderman has the advantage that most of us who wear sunglasses
indoors gainfully employ: behind that mask, we know
what he's lookin' at! After impressing her by kicking white-rapper
butt, he hangs upside-down passively, allowing her to ease
his mask off his mouth, in the same manner she would ease
dark-nylon stocking from betwixt milky thigh. With rain
streaming down his roundish head and delineating her pinkish
curves, they lock lips in a tongue-roving, erotogenic, nerve-jangling,
storm-driven kiss, rivaling easily the heat of Scarlett
& Rhett in Gone With The Wind, or Rourke &
Basinger in Nine ½ Weeks, and even Christopher
Reeve and Michael Caine in Deathtrap. The subliminal
metaphor was not lost on this disciple of heady foreplay:
Fear, Sweat, Violence, Surrender. And all of it - wet! The
Human Procreation Arc.
An
outstanding Movie Compleat, though I would be remiss in
my role as sage, prophet and topless dancer were I not to
mention the film's one small shortcoming: a sudden characterization-wrap-up
which should have realistically been saved for a sequel,
if it should have been used at all.
In the last five minutes of the movie, Kirsten Dunst's Tits
unexpectedly profess undying love for Peter Parker - this
sotto voce affirmation, as arousing as it was,
has to be questioned if we are to retain an ounce of
dignity as MEN. For we must ask, was Kirsten Dunst's
Tits professing her love for Parker only because she had
run out of options? Let's examine: She's thrown the leg
over a jock in high school, and a rich guy in post-teens.
Norman Osborn's summation of why Kirsten Dunst's Tits was
with his rich son - for the money - is proven correct when
she leaves him. If she was never really attracted to him
(as proven by her juvenile game-playing throughout their
short relationship), what did she see in him that prompted
her sexual congress with him in the first place - his inherent
spinelessness and wraith-like quality? Their lovemaking
must have been downright cephalopodean. [N.B. cephalopod
- animal with no backbone.] It still beats me how women
have the audacity to vilify a man who accuses them of being
shallow - whilst they are being shallow. Here is
a female character who dated a jock and a rich guy - if
either one of their personalities was "right"
for her, she would theoretically have stayed with them without
any thought to money or looks or status - yet, ultimately
they were not "right" for her - which means
that the months she spent with each of them must have been
for a reason other than their personalities. The
reasons?: the jock's status and sexual prowess and Harry's
looks and money.
Suddenly, she rationally assesses that "Peter has always
been there for her"? But that's not 'love',
as defined by Hoyle
is it? "Love",
as you've been indoctrinated to believe, is not meant to
be that rational; you don't compile a pros-and-cons list
- you either DO IT, you're either IN IT, you either EAT
IT
or you don't. Peter Parker was definitively in
the Friend Zone with Kirsten Dunst's Tits. Ladies and gentlemen
of the jury: once you're in the Friend Zone - you're there
for Life! After enough lost opportunities, you become the
Geek Whose Chance Of Getting Into My Panties Are As Improbable
As Yngwie Malmsteen Playing Something Listenable. It is
sudden jolts of unreality like this that lead us to realize
why "love" is a myth; why the Disney-propagated
illusion of "finding love" is a lie; why the fantasies
of "being in love" and "loving someone"
are as intangible now as the first time some teen bim said
it to you and confused you into taking her roughly from
behind.
This too, is a caveat to all the young dobies who
believe the "moral" of those final few minutes:
that being the beige Guy Next Door will get you laid if
you bide your time in the Friend Zone. No. It won't. We,
as the audience, saw Peter's web-slinging bravado, but to
Kirsten Dunst's Tits, Parker merely groveled and adenoidally
apologized and was a peripheral character in her middle-background
for years, except for the scene where he bested her jock
boyfriend - but for a woman who looks like Kirsten Dunst's
Tits, obviously that's all it takes to get her juiced -
as proven by the fact that she was dating the jock in
the first place. What else are we to presume? (O, they'll
crow about misogyny and giving Respeect to them and how
they're not shallow, yet put a shiny stone on their fingers
- a non-utilitarian trinket, dug from the earth and
given imaginary value - and watch them get teary-eyed and
open-thighed
)
Speaking of open-thighed, Bon Jovi's Slippery When Wet
album (when it careened to the top of the charts in the
early 80s, making millionaires of five young taut-buttocked
lads from the underprivileged climes of Jersey), gave dorks
and douchebags false hopes in the same manner, inspiring
a nation's untalented nerds to Aquanet their hair and learn
to enjoy the womanish feel of spandex against their thighs,
in the vain hopes that they too might score all the bikini
models they could eat and all the sports cars they could
drive into swimming pools. But when the dust of the 80s
cleared, we were left with a bunch of untalented gronks
facing bankruptcy who looked like transvestites.
So
too, movies which play on the emotions of the Geeky Guy
give him false hopes that he too could be more than
a ninety-pound doormat. But a word of advice, Pasty-Boys
- don't take on the school jock, cos he'll invariably
beat you senseless in front of the very babes you are too
afraid to ask out. The relationships you forge with people
whom you are regularly in close proximity with, pretty much
remain that way throughout your life, as anyone who has
attended class reunions will attest. Once a nerd, always
a nerd. Rarely does one coalesce the brute force of will
to steer the boat against the current. The only way to reinvent
yourself is to isolate yourself from all the social factors
that molded you into the person you never wished to become.
That's the lesson that I hope Geeky Guys will take
from this essay
that, and the fact that Bon Jovi had
a bitchin 80's 'do.
And if you still want to cling to the fantasy that a Pasty-Boy
can score a vermilion goddess if his Love is True, you'd
better pray that somewhere out there, there's a radioactive
ferret with your butt-cheeks' name on his teeth.
END
|
|