Laceyvision Strikes Back

Laceyvision goes to the movies in order to hide in the back row and make dank, embarassing criticism inside his coat to fuck-awful blockbuster Spider Man 3, disappointing indie drama The Oh In Ohio and even more disappointing rom-com The Baxter.

Spider-Man 3

The recent Hollywood desire to turn every film into a trilogy may be financially motivated but it has not been without it's benefits. Third outings had previously been crippling to big-name franchises, either killing them outright or being seen as the point in which they went off the boil. They were seen as blatant money-grabbing opportunities, often with little of the original talent returning on either side of the camera. It's only really since Lord Of The Rings that it's become apparent modern audiences are willing to follow characters and film-makers through multi-film narratives - as such, third films now represent a kind of closure that makes them often the most fervently anticipated of the whole series. That as unusual a film as Pirates Of The Caribbean has now spawned two sequels with all of its talent and charm intact is marvellous, frankly. And whatever your opinion of the Harry Potter films, the continuity of the series is already its strongest asset with 3 films still to come. This upkeep in quality has yet to make it over to the superhero genre, however. Where those films style of storytelling would seem to lend itself easily to the idea, Superman Returns (a supposed sequel to the first two Superman films) was little better than the original Superman III (it didn't have Richard Pryor in a huge cowboy hat so it's probably worse, in fact), and Batman Forever and X-Men III - The Last Stand have all been a great big awful load of bollocks. And now, Spider Man 3 can be added to the list.

It's not as epic or spectacular a failure as those other films. In fact, there's a lot of good bits in it, enough certainly for the film to accrue quite a lot of goodwill on the part of the viewer. I spent some time trying to think around it from different angles, to find some way of giving it a good review, but I'm sad to say that there's simply too many glaring idiocies in the script for the film to ever engage, entertain or move as much as it's predecessors. And it's trying so hard, it's sad to watch. The plot, if you stand some distance away from it and squint your eyes a bit, seems fine. Peter Parker is happy with Mary Jane Parker at last, and planning to ask her to marry him. Then a whole shitload of problems turn up at pretty much the same time - a photographer trying to steal his job, a bankrobber made of sand who may have been his Uncles ACTUAL killer, and an alien goo which clings to his suit and somehow turns him into a super-pillock. Any closer inspection reveals how much the whole story relies on coincidence, re-configuring important aspects of the original film (how lame is it to mess with the history of a character that you set up just two films ago? it's insulting, really), and how much it's mired in the kind of tedious Peter Parker/MJ relationship dross that has really, really been done to death by now. The ending of the second film (and the start of this one) implied that a lot of Parkers insecurities were solved and we might get a film about a happy, functional, mentally-well Spider Man doing battle with whatever villains were thrown up in this one. And yet the same stupid problems (ALL OF WHICH COULD BE SOLVED QUITE EASILY IF PETER JUST TALKED TO HIS GIRLFRIEND A BIT MORE AND IF SHE WASN'T SUCH A TOTAL BITCH, TWO THINGS WHICH REQUIRE FAR TOO MUCH SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF BY THIS STAGE IN THE SERIES) occupy so much of the screentime that one villains backstory is restricted to a sign reading "Danger! Particle Physics Experiments Inside This Fence!" and his climactic team-up with the other villain is limited to a five second scene in an alleyway where one says to the other "shall we, like, team up?". None of the characters arcs in this film really make sense. It's been said that there's "too much plot" in the film, but that's not quite the truth - at it's length, it could easily sustain as many plotlines as it does, it just prioritises them badly. The Spider Man films have always had strong, stirring endings, but this one literally ends with a bunch of people crying and saying sorry to eachother. Against a picturesque sunset. It should be called "Spider Homo", just incase any Spider Man fans have accidentally watched it.

After all the buildup in the series towards Harry Osborn assuming the mantle of the Green Goblin, it's incredibly frustrating when his first encounter with Spiderman leads to a concussion and then half a films worth of amnesia. Yes, this film is so bad, it has to resort to "amnesia" as a plot device. Or as a device to regurgitate the plot of the first two films, so we get to see him turn evil and attack Spider Man allover again. Hooray, eh? No. In a film as frenetic and confusing as this one already is, there's no need to go over things already established in the previous two films. No need at all. Stop it. The fact that Harry only goes evil for about ten minutes undermines his climactic "salvation" to the point where I doubt even the six year olds in the audience will give a hoot about it. You can't really fault the acting here - all the main players are comfortable in these roles and play them perfectly now, but it's hard to stay emotionally involved with them in such a bloody stupid film.

Actually sitting through the film isn't as painful an experience as thinking about it afterwards, but no amount of spectacular effects, dance routines, amusing cameos or action scenes are going to kid me on that it's any good, but many of the scenes singled out for criticism so far have been ones I enjoyed. I frankly found it relieving and an accurate reflection of Parkers character that when he "turns evil" (like Superman in Superman III - another scene from that film which towers over anything from Superman Returns) he turns into a stupid prat with messed up emo-hair using his spider-sense to throw moves like John Travolta in a bar full of people who probably think he's a completely ludicrous tosser. That's exactly what an evil Peter Parker would be like, and I'm glad they didn't just make him stubbly and over-violent. People will complain about the dance routines in Spider Man 3, but this one is one of the few moments in the film where Sam Raimi remembers he's a fun and stylish film-maker. Another is the cameo from Bruce Campbell as a "french" waiter, a hilarious turn with little relation to the rest of the film but welcome all the same. In fact, most of the humour in the film is great. One thing that's great about Spider Man is that you can make fun, kid-friendly films about him without short-changing the character. Unlike Batman, this really is an all-ages product. There's no need to saddle it with all the darkness and emotional baggage that served Batman so well. Also, it may have cost a squillion pounds, but some of the effects just look shit. Fuck off, Spider Man! 1/5.

The Oh In Ohio

There's a certain strain of US independent film which this really wants to be a part of - the low key bittersweet ensemble comic drama with big name stars taking supporting character parts and quaint music and bare emotions and lessons learned etc etc etc. It's a little bit undercooked to really fly with the likes of Thumbsucker or Little Miss Sunshine, with many unresolved plot threads and glib moments, but it's also got a lot of charm and some good performances. Paul Rudd, making his second appearance in this column, plays the down-at-heel husband of Parker Posey, whose inability to achieve orgasm has turned their once promising relationship (two good looking successful types married straight out of high school) into a bitter sham. Mischa Barton, Heather Graham and Danny De Vito all pop up as the couple drift apart and come to terms with life without eachother and specifically "with" other people (in a sex way). It's annoying that the supporting cast are so interesting, because while they are used where necessary to pad out the narrative, they're all sort of ignored by the ending which pretends that the failing marriage of Rudd and Posey was the only plotline we cared about, when in fact it was probably the least interesting onscreen relationship. They might have a touching dinner where it's finally made clear they'll never get back together, but so what? Where's the extra ten minutes where all the various plot threads which distracted from that are given some kind of resolution? This film aspires to use the end of their marriage as a catalyst to make lots of points about sex and life and love, with some moments so manipulative I was surprised they didn't have a subtitle saying "start crying NOW!" at the bottom, but never actually remembers to make those points - this is halfway between a nonsensical sex comedy and a profound sex drama (like the brilliant Shortbus) - it's just a nonsensical sex drama elevated by a cast it doesn't quite deserve. 2.5/5.

The Baxter

Michael Showalter isn't really known at all in the UK, but a friend from America introduced me to him with the film "Wet Hot American Summer", a very likeable pitch-perfect spoof of 80's coming of age teen dramas, starring Showalter alongside Niles off Frasier and Paul Rudd. Showalter and Rudd re-enacted that recent spat between David O'Russell and Lily Tomlin on the set of "I Heart Huckabees" to amusing effect on some website recently, so I decided to see what else they'd done together and came across this romantic comedy. The setup seemed like another interesting spin on genre conventions - taking as it's main character not the brave, romantic hero who runs into a wedding in order to stop it and make a heartfelt speech to win back his childhood sweetheart (etc etc), but the awkward fool left standing at the altar. The "Baxter", as it were. Showalter is as convincingly earnest and good-hearted as this preppy, repressed accountant needs to be, but just doesn't have the comedic chops to take on such a large role. The underwritten supporting cast (Rudd, disappointingly, turns up for about two minutes, which appear to have filmed when he was drunk on a day off. They are the films best two minutes, though) and various other flaws could have been forgiven were there a performer of some calibre really having fun with the socially awkward aspects of the character - a Ferrell or a Carrell would really make this film - Showalter just makes his Baxter into a bit of a boring prick. Where the film keeps hinting that he might muster up the balls to tell his irritating, bland wife to stop treating him like a fucking doormat, all he manages is one little rant at her before getting jilted at the aisle and going to find the nerdy secretary girl he "should have been with all along". But it's a pretty worthless happy ending if she's nothing more than his second choice. Also - weddings! So much comedic potential in weddings. These people have been and should be here funnier than "My Best Friends Wedding", for goodness sakes. The Baxter is an interesting concept let down by an insufferably banal execution, and far too much focus on the least interesting character. 1/5. Actually no, 2/5, because I really fancy the secretary girl out of it.

About this entry

By Michael Lacey
Posted on Tuesday, May 15 2007 @ 1:48 am
Categorised in Film
21 comments

Comments

I just COULD NOT BELIEVE the whoe Harry amnesia thing. Talk about a copout. And it's just so Raimi can still cram in dull-as-hell scenes with Harry, MJ and Peter and everyone can pretend everything's all right. That was the first sign that they shouldn't have even done this movie. The second is that the symbiote/black suit stuff just HAPPENS to land next to Peter Parker. This wasn't a film for people who like good films, that's for sure. Spiderman 2 was though.

Even Return Of The King had third movie-itis. After the brilliance of the first two films it suddenly became apparent that Peter Jackson had way too much stuff left to cram into one movie and so a lot of it felt like a car crash, and then he annoyed general audiences by having the end go on for 20 minutes (it's truer to the book but probably should have been on the Extended Edition only).

By performingmonkey
May 15, 2007 @ 1:58 pm