More Spiders

Had enough of multiverses? Too bad, because there's still 2023's Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse for me to talk about. It's not a bad movie, though not quite as good as its predecessor, Into the Spider-Verse.

My favourite stuff was in the first third or so of the movie when it focused on Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld) (from whose point of view the movie mostly is), Miles Morales (Shameik Moore), their relationship, and their awkward teenage lives.

As for the bulk of the plot, though, I was surprised by just how much this movie resembled other multiverse stories. Like the recent Flash movie, it has the City on the Edge of Forever premise about the bad things that need to happen to preserve a better future. Like Loki in the recent season two of Loki, Miles finds himself periodically physically overcome by a jittery time anomaly. Like the Time Variance Authority, a society of interdimensional Spider-People police the multiverse (they even have a version of Miss Minutes). Their civilisation is also reminiscent of the civilisation of Ricks on Rick and Morty, the show that seems to be largely at fault for the multiverse trend.

At an hour and twenty minutes, Across the Spider-Verse is a long movie and the runtime really doesn't feel justified. There are a lot of repetitive scenes about Miles and Gwen agonising over their secret identities, and Miles getting into trouble because he's unreliable and always late, the same kind of stuff Tobey Maguire was doing twenty years ago.

The animation style has a lot of distracting noise but not so distracting that I didn't notice the characters seemed to have oddly limited expressiveness this time. Maybe I've just been watching too much hand-drawn animation lately.

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is available on Netflix in the US.

X Sonnet #1802

With oven eyes, invasive squirrels'll cook.
A mischief sold as moral right was taped.
Where critters change their vests, they'll steal a look.
On darker deeds, a clumsy joke is draped.
Alone, the cleaning man discovers song.
A quiet day would still console the lass.
Persistent chills recall a brittle wrong.
A frozen pipe was broke as banshees pass.
Offensive clouds condemn the very air.
Above, about, corruption rolls the mould.
Pervasive gunk betrays the coward's stare.
Acidic sap encased the captive's hold.
To make an even ground, the lives were cut.
But mem'ries yet torment the seer's gut.

Home is Where the Spider Is

Some kids feel like they have the weight of the world on their shoulders while other kids feel like they have the weight of three worlds. You might say that about Peter Parker in 2021's Spider-Man: No Way Home. The fallout from the events of the previous film turns out to be worse than expected but not as bad as what comes from Peter's attempts to rectify the situation. It comes together in a sequence of big, rising tension that's surprisingly effective. I hated the previous film in the MCU Spider-Man trilogy and, since this one comes from the same director and writers, I wasn't expecting much. I'm so happy to have been surprised.

The previous film, Far From Home, felt weak due to a broad comedic tone that drained any real feeling of stakes or tension from every turn of events. No Way Home dispenses with that tone right away as the immediate consequences of the world learning Spider-Man's identity come into play.

A tense scene in which Spider-Man (Tom Holland) has to save MJ (Zendaya) from a suddenly hostile crowd turns into a death-defying chase sequence above and below the city that ends with a long take in Parker's home. He and others shuffle in confusion through hallways as he tries to shut all the windows to the suddenly congregating helicopters while trying to focus on the more down to earth relationship issues between May (Marissa Tomei) and Happy (Jon Favreau). The physical tension of these scenes blends well with the more long lasting psychological tension as Peter's friends and family adjust to the new, constantly changing normal that brings disaster in a steady stream. There seems to be no respite until Peter has the bright idea of visiting Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch). But actually that's when his real troubles begin.

It kind of reminded me of the beginning Raimi's Spider-Man 2, which I watched again recently. The first half hour of that film so brilliantly establishes just how desperate Peter's (Tobey Maguire) financial situation is. There's a feeling of authenticity to his poverty that the new films can't match. But this is a common problem in media because there is a wealthy class now that is very good at convincing itself that it's poor, which makes it difficult for them to research or contemplate actual poverty. But speaking of Raimi's Spider-Man films, they certainly have a palpable presence in No Way Home, as does the Mark Webb series.

The best point of comparison for what this movie does would be to look at the Doctor Who anniversary specials. As far as I know, that's the only other time the various incarnations of the same character in a popular screen franchise have met. No Way Home certainly seems to have taken notes and uses the opportunity nicely. It's not just a fan service stunt, the characters have meaningful interaction that is kind of touching. They try to give each other advice based on what they've learned as well as endearingly rejoice at meeting someone who understands their solitary struggles.

There are a few logical aspects of the plot that don't make sense (other critics have covered them well enough I won't go into them here) but they never override the film's positives the way they did in Far From Home. The result is one of the best in the now well established nostalgia genre of films with a very effective story in its own right. It certainly made me want to see Doctor Strange 2 even more though I am worried about the reshoots Raimi was compelled to do by Disney. People have been complaining Book of Boba Fett is too "Disney-fied"--I don't think that's true, I just think people expected Boba Fett to be a psycho killer for reasons never supported by the canon. But the MCU has shown repeatedly the dangers of Disneyfication to diminish dramatic effect. I really want Doctor Strange 2 to be a good Raimi horror movie.

Spider-Man: No Way Home is available in theatres.

The Average Spider-Man

For some reason, Sony's not releasing the new Spider-Man film until January seventh in Japan. I guess that's better than Ghostbusters: Afterlife, another Sony film, which isn't being released until February. What gives? Sony's a Japanese company and Covid's not nearly as bad in Japan. I guess I'm not bent out of shape about it--I hated Spider-Man: Far From Home and the new one has the same director and writers. I guess it goes to show how much I like the character that I'm willing to shell out money to see it. Or maybe I'm just happy that it managed to beat out China's propaganda film, The Battle at Lake Changjin, to be the top grossing film of the year. But, really, the entertainment media look like a bunch of saps for having faith in the numbers China reported for Chiangjin and Hi, Mom. You're really trying to tell me there are more people in China who wanted to see a cheap period war film than who wanted to see No Time to Die or even Venom 2?

Anyway, whatever my love for the character, I realised I'd never gotten around to watching 2011's The Amazing Spider-Man. This is despite the fact that I like Emma Stone and I thought Andrew Garfield was amazing in Never Let Me Go. I guess I was sore about them booting Sam Raimi. Well, now Raimi's making one for the real MCU, though I heard Disney's demanded a lot of reshoots of him. Yeah, though he can make a Spider-Man or Evil Dead 2, Raimi does now and then make a Spider-Man 3, but I'd still say the price for allowing an auteur his freedom is well worth it in the long run. Eighty years from now, a lot of the MCU movies will have about the same status The Egyptian or The Robe has now, those massive sand and sandal epics of the 1950s most people don't remember who were born after 1960.

And The Amazing Spider-Man stands as testimony of just how boring a film can be when it's produced by people whose concerns are limited to marketability.

Garfield and Stone do give good performances, particularly Garfield, who manages to make all of the many moments his Peter Parker is at a loss for words completely distinct and reflective of internal motives. It's great, too, seeing a Spider-Man movie again where the love interests seem like they're sexually attracted to each other instead of just accepting couplehood by default. Altogether, though, The Amazing Spider-Man feels very small.

A big part of it is the cinematography, which is much darker than the Raimi films or the Jon Watts films. It seems more appropriate for a Batman movie but Batman movies are more stylish than this. This movie's whole style concept just seems to be "darker". And that extends to Spider-Man's costume which includes big sunglass lenses for the eyes.

But, just like the Raimi and Watts films, he spends way too much time with the mask off. It's especially egregious in the Jon Watts movies when the mask's eyes are more expressive. The filmmakers never let the audience get used to the idea that this is his normal face, that Peter Parker's face is the disguise. After it worked so well with Deadpool, there's no excuse for it now.

Anyway, the performances are all good in The Amazing Spider-Man except they never overcome the lifelessness of Webb's direction. Garfield has a lot of time to spend with Sally Field and Martin Sheen who create a distinct dynamic for the Parker household. But the scenes are shot like those general purpose, stock videos sold to advertisers.

So, if Sony knows what's good for it, they'll never waste time revisiting this iteration of the character . . . The Amazing Spider-Man is available on Netflix in Japan.

The Common Spider

So you think just anyone can be Spider-Man? Well, you could be right according to 2018's Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, a beautifully animated film with engaging voice performances. The screenplay is rigorously formulaic in ways that detract from the story but the visuals and performances more than make up for it.

A bizarre technological experiment results in a variety of alternate universe versions of Spider-Man appearing in one version of New York. But this New York already has two Spider-Men--a blonde Peter Parker (Chris Pine) with a remarkably happy life and a newly minted Spider-kid, a cop's son named Miles Morales (Shameik Moore).

But blonde Parker's killed early in the film and the untested Miles must take up the Spider-mantle. Like Tom Holland in the MCU films, Miles goes to a private school. I wonder when it was decided Spider-Man needed to come from a wealthy background. I guess it gives him the same advantage Bruce Wayne had and it better explains his ability to create sophisticated gadgetry. Still, I miss the idea of the character going to a public school.

A version of Steve Ditko's cover for the first issue of Spider-Man appears in the film because Spider-Man in the film's main dimension is a celebrity with his own tie-in products, including comics.

Unfortunately, Ditko's art for the interior pages isn't used. But that's a tiny quibble--the film's visuals are fantastic, a really neat blend of cgi and 2D animation while also using comic homage editing and panelling like Sin City.

Mahershala Ali plays Miles' sketchy uncle Aaron, a far cry from Uncle Ben. When Miles tells him about a cute girl at school--who turns out to be Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld)--Aaron advises Miles to put a hand on her shoulder and say, "Hey" in a seductive manner. This was one of a few moments in the film where I instantly knew, "Oh, we're going to be seeing this again and it's going to suck." And indeed, it's a gag repeated throughout the film to persistently awkward effect but none worse than its appearance in the film's climax as an emotional beat.

The main villain is Kingpin (Liev Schreiber) who owes a lot to Vincent D'Onofrio's portrayal of the character in the NetFlix Daredevil series. Which is a nice enough shorthand considering most of the film is busy dealing with multiple versions of Spider-Man.

Nicolas Cage plays a version of Peter Parker called "Spider-Man Noir". Played mainly for gags, it's fun hearing Cage doing impressions of actors from the 30s and 40s. The Wikipedia note for his character is amusing for the wrong reasons: "Cage based his character on the films of Humphrey Bogart, specifically the voices of actors from that era such as James Cagney and Edward G. Robinson." Yes, James Cagney and Edward G. Robinson from the films of Humphrey Bogart. I mean, if you'd just said the films of Humphrey Bogart that could be anything, I guess you need to specify with actors who are not Humphrey Bogart? Maybe whoever wrote that thought Humphrey Bogart played other actors?

There's also a forgettable anime parody version called Peni Parker (Kimiko Glenn) and a really great Looney Tunes homage called Spider-Ham (John Mulaney).

And there's an alternate Peter Parker called Peter B. Parker (Jake Johnson) who reluctantly becomes Miles' mentor. This Parker's life hasn't turned out so splendidly as blonde Parker's and there's a nice chemistry between this washed-up Spider-Man helping a new one come into his own. It's formulaic but also sweet and it's nice seeing them teach each other to have some self-esteem. Their final lines to each other are awkwardly staged and punch a little too hard but the relationship between the two is established well enough by the actors and the wonderfully expressive animation that it works.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is available on NetFlix.

A Bit About Stan Lee

Stan Lee passed away yesterday. Many celebrities and artists and critics are saying things about his work, many of them fairly accurate, like how he is largely responsible for creating the more "down to Earth" superhero of Marvel in contrast to DC's more godlike beings. It's all been said before, really. But it's true.

I've been a fan of Spider-Man since I was a little kid. As a kid, the cool factor impressed me--the web shooters, the wall crawling. It's as we get older that we start to appreciate our superheroes being more human, I think. Spider-Man had that covered too.

None of the movies or TV shows have quite captured the tone of the original comic. Maybe the Tom Holland version comes closest but the films are all a bit too operatic. I still dearly love this moment from 1963:

Even after Uncle Ben has died and he's learned what a responsibility he has--he still has to make money. And he's clumsy and a little unethical about it sometimes but always really innocent, really like a kid. I suppose, in addition to providing kids with an entertaining escape he also made them feel better about making mistakes; big mistakes and also dumb little mistakes, making it a little easier for readers to look at themselves honestly, forgive themselves, and move on. He was a superhero whose life was messy in ways that weren't necessarily glamorous.

I guess there's no danger of Stan Lee being forgotten any time soon. I'm glad.

Comic Con Report, volume 4: The Wrong Audience Edition

I didn't notice the gender swapped Alex DeLarge when I took this photo by the expensive pizza cafe at Comic Con but I applaud her now, wherever she is.

I don't know if I've ever mentioned how much I love the door staff at Comic Con, the people who stand by the badge detectors or just hold the doors. Many of them have no clue about geek culture but are unselfconsciously vocal and seem to have a great time. On Sunday a middle aged black woman stationed at one of the doors was loudly and enthusiastically misidentifying costumes. She gave a shout out to "Gladys Knight!"--a Princess Leia. When a woman walked by dressed as Captain Marvel the door lady yelled, "Mockingjay Lady! I see you, Mockingjay Lady!" Captain Marvel gave her a strained smile. When I walked by I was greeted as, "Laurence Fishburne! Hey, Laurence Fishburne, I see you!" I'm white, by the way. I was tempted to stop and ask her just who she thought Laurence Fishburne was.

I was wearing a brown fedora, long sleeved grey button down shirt, brown denim trousers, and carrying a brown messenger bag. Maybe she thought I was Cowboy Curtis, Fishburne's character from Pee-Wee's Playhouse. That was on Sunday--most days at the Con I was wearing a sport coat and bow tie along with a fedora which usually gets people to ask me, "Are you Indiana Jones or Doctor Who?" That's an ambiguity I'm comfortable with but on Sunday I was coming from the Maritime Museum where the work I do, particularly in this recent heatwave, can be strenuous and dirty so my normal attire is fedora, shirt, and trousers. I knew I'd get pegged as an Indiana Jones cosplayer, which wouldn't bother me except I know the hat is wrong, the shirt is the wrong colour, the bag is wrong, etc. If I'm going to cosplay as Indiana Jones, I want to do it right, not get the pitying acknowledgement of a bare minimum effort. I tried to head it off by wearing a grey shirt and I'd recently added a chinstrap to the hat (this is required for volunteers on the ships) but no such luck. Several people kindly complimented my effort to look like Indiana Jones, I even received a courteous nod and smile from a guy who was wearing a just about perfect Raiders replica outfit. Oh, well. At least one person thought I was Laurence Fishburne.

The highlight of the Marvel Games panel, which I saw on Thursday in Hall H, was that the moderator, Greg Miller, and Yuri Lowenthal, who voices Spider-Man in the upcoming game called Spider-Man unexpectedly found themselves wearing exactly the same outfit.

I don't play a lot of video games nowadays, when I do I usually just replay Skyrim. But Spider-Man looked like a fun game though the gameplay looked precisely like Arkham Asylum.

The Marvel Games panel was one of two I sat through in Hall H between Doctor Who and Better Call Saul, the other being Dragon Ball Super, an upcoming movie in the Dragon Ball franchise.

The panel featured English dub voice actors Sean Schemmel (Goku) and Christopher Sabat (Vegeta), who seemed to be well known to fans of the franchise. I wouldn't know, as much as I love anime, with a special fondness for 80s anime, I've never gotten Dragon Ball. Usually with things I don't like I can at least sort of understand why it appeals to other people but Dragon Ball is like a dog whistle to me, it's a sound I just can't hear. There were two surprise panellists, famous pro-wrestlers named Kofi Kingston and Zack Ryder--Kingston tried to describe what he loved about the franchise. He talked about the pleasure of pushing oneself to a "limit" or past a "limit". I feel like there are plenty of movies and shows with that concept, though, without featuring big weird lumps of muscle. I guess you need to really love muscle to appreciate it. Anyway, if you want to see the panel, don't let me discourage you, the whole thing's on YouTube here.