Comic Book Adaptations: Marvel

An entertaining, albeit unoriginal, superhero flick. This proves 3 things about making a successful and awesome superhero movie:

1) Get a great cast - Robert Downey Jr. WAS Tony Stark and completely owned the movie; Jeff Bridges, Gwenyth Paltrow, and Terrence Howard rounded out a great supporting cast.

2) Amazing special effects - seriously, some of the best I've ever seen, only made better on the big screen.

3) Writers/Director completely immersed in the source material - Favreau's direction and the script weren't the best, but the passion for the character/world were apparent throughout and you could tell everyone had a blast making this.

Hopefully this'll serve as the proper springboard for Marvel Studios' 'Avengers' series and the blueprint for more successful comic book-screen adaptations. After crap like Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Elektra, and the Fantastic Four series, I'm glad someone finally came to their senses and delivered a truly awesome movie.

Going into this movie, I didn't really know what to expect. Riding off the coat-tails of Iron Man's success, it seemed like this had the same formula as that film (stellar casting, nods to the source material, hints toward the future, etc...) to make it a fitting companion piece. The only thing holding this back is the baggage dumped upon it by Ang Lee's mostly disappointing predecessor. It's unfair to compare the two, since they're two separate animals, but I felt this film captured that balance between the character drama and full-on action scenes that the other film never obtained.

Leterrier knows how to direct an action scene, and do it well - all 3 action set pieces packed that necessary punch and built upon the others as the film progressed. His faults, however, lie in giving the tender moments of the film the same care and panache as those action scenes. Like I said earlier, that balance was definitely struck, but wavered in its effectiveness - whether this is due to the chemistry between Norton and Tyler, who share their best moments in silence (right before he goes to bed at her place, in the helicopter before the climactic battle), but can't click when there's dialogue.

Speaking of the acting, Marvel struck gold with this one. Edward Norton embodied everything about Bruce Banner, the tormented soul who's never fully at rest almost in the same way that Robert Downey Jr. wrapped himself up in the glory and panache of Tony Stark in 'Iron Man.' That makes all of the difference in these new Marvel joints, they're casting actors, not personalities. Tim Roth and William Hurt chew as much scenery as possible when they're on screen, and it's a joy to watch (was I the only one that laughed at the fact that "Mr. Orange" is in the movie when they mention a Mr. Blue and Mr. Green? Where's Mr. Pink?). I really dug Tim Blake Nelson's role and hope it gets developed further in either a direct sequel (which I hope happens) or the Avengers film itself. Liv Tyler ultimately ends up being the odd woman out on this one - it's not that she isn't good, but doesn't excel in her part to the same degree as her fellow cast members.

Seeing Lou Ferrigno and Stan Lee in plot-driving cameos was a good kick, as were the nods and winks to the TV series (theme music, shots of the green eyes, and butchering of the famous quote) and setting up S.H.I.E.L.D. and Captain America's continued and future involvement in the Marvel films, respectively.

This film hit the mark greater than the previous incarnation, but still was far from being perfect. It was worth seeing in theaters and definitely has me jonesing for another watchable and enjoyable Marvel Comics flick.

The painfully disappointing follow-up to one of my favorite superhero flicks ever. Maybe it was a result of studio or fanboy pressure (as seen with the unnecessary inclusion of Venom), but this one fails on many levels. Spidey's campy, I understand that, but the form of camp here (Emo Parker, ftl) betrays the tone set up by the last two films and would even seem out of place in the ultra-campy '60s Batman series (apart from the awesome Batusi). Then you've got the obnoxious performances by Maguire and Dunst, who play everything with such melodrama and pomp that it's hard to take anything seriously. Now this could be tied back to the poor screenplay, which tries to weave as many plot threads into the story as humanly possible, not leaving enough space for character development. Harry's vendetta against Peter is undercut by his "Harrison Ford in 'Regarding Henry'"-level mental retardation which has to battle for space against the Gwen/MJ/Peter, Harry/MJ/Peter, and Eddie/Gwen/Peter love triangles, Sandman/Uncle Ben storyline, and Symbiote/Emo Peter/Venom storylines. Some of these elements worked (Sandman, Harry/Peter/MJ, and parts of the Symbiote storyline), while the others fell flat - it's a mixed bag.

Ultimately, what would be a great collection of ideas to stretch into 2 or more films is derailed by jamming them all into one sloppy 2-hour package, leaving the series with little choice but to change directions. Currently, Spidey 4 and 5 are being developed by Raimi and Zodiac scriptwriter James Vanderbilt, but no one's sure if Raimi will pull out of directing like Tim Burton did after 'Batman Returns' and serve as producer or if the full cast will return. With the competition coming from the new series of films being developed by Marvel Studios, Nolan's 'Batman' series, and Snyder's 'Watchmen' adaptation, the 'Spidey' series would need to do something fast to reclaim its title as the premier superhero franchise of the 21st century.