Read on Twitter
#FilmTwitter
Why Spider-Man 2, after 16 years, is still the best Spider-Man film: a thread.
The most common thing for a superhero film to be about is: can a normal person become as great as a superhero? This applies to Batman & #39;89, Spider-Man 1, Man of Steel, Iron Man, and so on.
Why Spider-Man 2, after 16 years, is still the best Spider-Man film: a thread.
The most common thing for a superhero film to be about is: can a normal person become as great as a superhero? This applies to Batman & #39;89, Spider-Man 1, Man of Steel, Iron Man, and so on.
Spider-Man 2 is about something else; it provides pure humanization that no other adaptation has: can a SUPERHERO become as great as a normal person?
Unlike other iterations, Raimi& #39;s brings the hero UP to the level of Peter, rather than the reverse. That& #39;s what makes it special.
Unlike other iterations, Raimi& #39;s brings the hero UP to the level of Peter, rather than the reverse. That& #39;s what makes it special.
No matter how cathartic others are, the conclusion is more about becoming "super": a normal person *finally* being as cool as Spider-Man, by believing in their ability to have cool powers, or getting to the point in the script where they can use them. It doesn& #39;t seem as real.
Real life isn& #39;t that easy. Spider-Man 2 isn& #39;t about that.
Spider-Man loses his powers because he no longer believes that Peter can have needs. The necessity of them makes Peter experiment w/ being normal - he realizes that Spider-Man has needs too that he can& #39;t live w/o.
Spider-Man loses his powers because he no longer believes that Peter can have needs. The necessity of them makes Peter experiment w/ being normal - he realizes that Spider-Man has needs too that he can& #39;t live w/o.
Spider-Man is not his trump card; it& #39;s his conscience. Being him is a burden he doesn& #39;t know how to reconcile.
He& #39;s only liberated through love. MJ is the person capable of recognizing PETER as the one she loves, not Spider-Man: she sees HIM in the hero, not the reverse.
He& #39;s only liberated through love. MJ is the person capable of recognizing PETER as the one she loves, not Spider-Man: she sees HIM in the hero, not the reverse.
She& #39;s able to make his needs real again in his own life - through her, he& #39;s able to see what she sees. That& #39;s why all he says to her is, "thank you."
I& #39;m not a Raimi shill: I don& #39;t like Spider-Man 3 all that much. But this moment is still the pinnacle of superhero films for me.
I& #39;m not a Raimi shill: I don& #39;t like Spider-Man 3 all that much. But this moment is still the pinnacle of superhero films for me.
It reconciles what none of the others can: it doesn& #39;t turn a guy into a hero, but a hero back into a guy. It makes Peter the subject of his own life.
Peter is what makes the Raimi film so optimistic, where other adaptations are obsessed only w/ the possibility of *Spider-Man.*
Peter is what makes the Raimi film so optimistic, where other adaptations are obsessed only w/ the possibility of *Spider-Man.*
