Spider-Man 2.

So although my hits didn't exactly go back to how they once were, they at least improved once I used the classic link. So I'm sticking with the classic link. Anyway, Spider-Man 2, enjoy!

Spider-Man 2 came out two years after the first one, Raimi was back to direct but the film was written this time by Sargent, the guy who wrote most of the awful dialogue in the first movie, oh God. Thankfully it wasn't entirely his story, as three other people worked on the story too.
With Spider-Man's origins in the first movie, the second one has more focus on Parker attempting to balance his life with that of Spider-Man's which has always been a central part to the character. The villain this time is Doctor Octopus who is played by Alfred Molina, and I'm honestly not as excited for him as I was for Dafoe because Dafoe as Green Goblin is simply perfect.

Now although Spider-Man 2 didn't go through quite the hell to get to our screens that the first one did, Spider-Man 2 still went through many rewrites and many writers, giving the film the possibility of many shapes and colours until Raimi finally settled on a story that took elements from Superman II and the Spider-Man story 'Spider-Man No More!'.


Spider-Man 2 was a box office smash and a critical success. There were heaps of praise for Molina's Doc Ock and just the general opinion that Spider-Man 2 builds upon and improves every aspect of the first movie - it is overall regarded as one of the best superhero movies, ever.


And do I agree? Eh.. I'm probably not going to be all that popular after this. But, well, let's dig into Spider-Man 2 and find out!


Well the special effects haven't improved a whole lot in two years. The CGI on the tentacles is certainly much better than it is on Spider-Man. But once again despite it not aging all that gracefully, the action is still excellent and a perfect blend of comicbook action and blockbuster set piece. Even Aunt May gets to kick some ass in this movie! And that train scene, the greatest sequence in any of the Spider-Man movies. But seriously, why does Parker spend this movie revealing his identity to everyone?


Once again, I like the way the movie makes everything fit together, it does a good sense of showing us just how much Parker struggles to balance his lives, rather than simply telling us like other movies do. They bother to show us every little detail, so we really get a sense and picture of the struggle not just of Parker but the immediate world around him after the resonance from all the things that happened in the first movie. It is also nice that it feels like an actual sequel, rather than one of those movies that tries to pander to a new audience, even despite calling itself a sequel, since apparently it's okay for people to jump in half way through a series (it isn't).


And once again it's much about the birth of the villain as it is about Spider-Man, only Spider-Man has now already been established of course. Oscorp has a real problem with creating villains. Every super powered character in these movies is a victim of SCIENCE! Maybe the Christians were right all along... Doc Ock's origin is certainly much more dramatic than Green Goblin's was. But I'm not sure if my suspension of disbelief can really swallow sentient evil tentacles since the movie plays it so straight it just becomes a little ridiculous. Spider-Man works as a character because he is always played a little tongue in cheek. Plus they did the whole villain talking to himself thing again, but it just seemed kinda stupid here because it's already been done once and by a much better actor. But overall I thought the tentacles were pretty cool, if not really silly.

The movie itself not only came out two years after the first movie but is set two years after it too. In that time Peter has gone to college, got a job and his own place, MJ has finally made it to show-business and is now getting married to an Original (I wonder who gets this), Harry has taken over Oscorp and grown an obsession with Spider-Man and vengeance for his father.


There is also this whole subplot of Peter Parker giving up on being Spider-Man but it's over way too quickly for it to really mean much, his life improves, his life starts to suck - equilibrium is restored. It just feels like filler really, if they had given it more time to show more of an impact it could have worked but I don't feel it did. And why do his powers vanish? I don't get it. His powers are controlled by desires? Since when?


And there is also this subplot where Parker won't date MJ because he believes his enemies will target her but...are we watching the same movie? This chick is always in danger with Spider-Man's villains even without them dating. Silly Peter.


I can't tell if the pacing is better, or worse. I mean Spider-Man and Doc Ock clash much earlier on in the movie and much more frequently which is great, but could this have worked better if they gave more time to Doc Ock like they did Green Goblin? This is true of a lot of the movie, the movie just gets on with it, which is great, but there are a lot of moments that could have been truly classic, if the movie had just given them more time to have an impact. Plus the whole movie is just so goofy, but it feels less natural and more forced so it just doesn't work in the end. Spider-Man was campy Spider-Man 2 is just a bit stupid.


So do I recommend this? I'm sorry but Sargent really isn't a good writer, not only is the dialogue still completely unnatural dumps of information, the entire plot this time just feels like a poor mans version of the first movie and just so much of this film is silly and nonsensical. This movie relies so heavily on plot convenience, everything just seems to fit together a little too conveniently. It's a fun little movie, don't get me wrong, but it just isn't that good. I mean I'm glad it feels like a genuine sequel for once and there are bigger laughs, bigger set pieces but I just don't think it works as well overall.

Think About It!

-Locke