Spidey sense tingles with excitement

SPIDER-MAN 2 (2004)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2004)

"Spider-Man 2" is as close to the spirit of the comic-books than the original. It has all the trials and tribulations that Peter Parker endured while being the crime-fighting, wall-crawling hero, Spider-Man. Let's face it: working two part-time jobs, attending college and fighting crime is quite a workout for any young man, no matter how ambitious. This sequel is busy with character details and large-scale action. It has more story and bigger obstacles to confront but it isn't as surprising as the original.

Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is shown right at the start to be consumed with problems. He works part-time at a pizzeria but never seems to deliver it on time, even when he changes into Spider-Man (a minute later means free pizza for anyone). He also works part-time for sturdy, no-nonsense J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) but is in danger of losing that job because he can't get any good pics of Spidey. Peter is also failing science classes and failing to acknowledge his love for Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst), who is about to get married to an astronaut. His best friend, Harry Osborn (James Franco), questions Peter's loyalty when all Pete photographs is the web-crawler, the same person that killed his father. And to compound the weight on Peter's shoulders, his Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) may lose her house for failure to pay the mortgage! Oh, did I forget to mention that our friendly neighborhood arachnid has trouble spinning his web and keeps falling from enormous heights?

"Spider-Man 2" also has a new, threatening villain, namely Dr. Octavius (Alfred Molina), a truly ambitious scientist. He has a new scientific discovery: combining fusion with nuclei to generate an energy source similar to the sun. This energy source will help keep electrical bills down. To control the source, Octavius uses four mechanical tentacles fused to his skin, generated by a transmitter which allows him to maneuver them. I am still not clear why four tentacles are needed, but scientific questions should not logically be asked of any comic-book movie. An accident overrides the system, causing the transmitter to short out and leaving the tentacles to do what they wish. Octavius becomes a monster on six legs (known as Doctor Octopus), tormenting most of New York City and robbing banks to fund the ultimate fusion reactor. But how can Spidey fight him if he has chosen to relinquish his crime-fighting duties?

"Spider-Man 2" is not an action spectacle, certainly not as hair-raising or as fast-paced as the original. Rather director Sam Raimi and novelist Michael Chabon attempt to fashion the human characteristics and foibles of Peter Parker. Very wise move. There are many welcome scenes where Peter merely talks to his aunt (who has some idea of why people need heroes), Mary Jane, Dr. Octavius, Harry, his seething pal, and so on. There are some witty exchanges between Parker and his landlord who insists that Pete pay his overdue rent. But something is missing, perhaps some aura or level of surprise. The movie starts in fits and spurts, like a broken engine. There is a blandness in the direction when Raimi aims for those endless close-ups of Maguire's cherubic, sincere face. The movie feels inert at times, hardly as invigorating in the dialogue scenes as it is in the high-powered action scenes.

There are moments to savor, though. An intense fight sequence aboard a speeding train where Spidey fights Doc Ock results in a truly hair-raising, heart-stopping moment where Spidey...well, I wouldn't dream of giving that away. Doc Ock's T-Rex-like rampage where he climbs on buildings and swings those tentacles with enormous force are true marvels of special-effects (though I could have lived with less cars thrown against the screen). And Peter and Mary Jane's relationship unveils new angles - can he ever admit to her the truth of why they can't be together? And what about Harry Osborn's own strong dislike of Peter's devotion to Spidey? Honesty is one of the virtues that this movie insists upon - it builds character for a superhero.

Don't get me wrong: "Spider-Man 2" is entertaining in its own way and more character-driven than we have any right to expect (Molina makes an inspired Doc Ock). My Spidey-sense just tells me that it could have been so much more.

Web-Crawler does what he does

SPIDER-MAN (2002)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2002)

The Spider-Man comics were always my favorite comics in my childhood. The reason was because it dealt with a superhero who was more nerdy than Clark Kent, and less adept socially, even with dearest Mary Jane Watson. The fact that he lived with his aunt and uncle, practiced web-shooting at night, and paraded around New York City fighting crime only to return to his bedroom is what made it click with me on a personal level. I have been waiting for many years for a real movie about good old Spidey, and finally it has come. So how is it? "Spider-Man" is one of the best superhero movies since the original "Superman" with Christopher Reeve. Yes, it is loud and frenetic but so were the comics, and it never loses sight of its human dimension.

The central human dimension is in the character of Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), the socially inept high-school senior who is always bullied and tormented by his peers. He has a special fascination with arachnids and with his next-door neighbor, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), a red-haired beauty with sunny smiles who slowly becomes attracted to Peter. One day, on a class trip to a lab, Peter is bitten by a radioactive spider. He gets pale and collapses once he gets home to his Uncle and Aunt Parker (both played by Cliff Robertson and Rosemary Harris). The next day, he notices he has rippling muscles, an ability to scale walls and jump from one rooftop to another, and to shoot spider-web from his skin. Naturally, he keeps these superhuman abilities secret, and hopes that they may increase his chances with Mary Jane. Of course, she is interested in Harry Osborn (James Franco), son of the troubled tycoon Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe).

While Peter discovers his powers and obtains them accidentally, Norman Osborn is about to lose his corporation and subjects himself to dangerous green vapors that split his identity. Hence, the Green Goblin is born, a maniacal sociopath intent on exploding half of New York City with his gizmos and bombs. Outside of losing a corporation he created, I was never clear why Norman was so willing to destroy everything in his path. Now that Spider-Man is known in the news for his heroics, Spidey has to fight the Green Goblin and stop his menace to society.

I cannot resist discussing this film in light of September 11th but in a strange manner, "Spider-Man" is almost a heroic nod to that horrible tragedy in New York, establishing the hero who must save New York from a terrorist, and what else could Green Goblin be? A thrilling sequence where Spider-Man tries to save a cable car full of children and Mary Jane at the same time is followed by New Yorkers on a bridge chanting and raving to the Green Goblin, literally saying, "We are all New Yorkers and will stick together. You fight one of us, you fight all of us!" Well, it is not verbatim but you get the idea. I have a feeling this scene was shot post-September 11th. And there is the last shot of good old Spidey swinging through New York past a prominently displayed American flag. The "Superman" movies focused on these patriotic images because they dealt with a superhero of the world, not just of a metropolitan city. Spider-Man has always been a New York hero, but enough digressions.

"Spider-Man" has lots of goodies in store for the audience. I really sensed (a spidey sense?) that Peter Parker, as played by the perfectly cast Tobey Maguire, enjoyed his newly discovered powers and has fun with them as if he was a kid who got a brand new toy. Maguire shows the feckless and determined charisma of Peter Parker and how he shapes himself into being strong and devoted to saving others, not to mention his love for Mary Jane. If there is one problem with the character, it is when he dons the red and blue costume. Spider-Man can't possibly show emotion behind that mask. We hear him talk and we imagine he is horrified during many horrifying sequences where the people of New York are put in harm's way, but there is little sense of individua lity. He swings through the streets with such lightning speed that it may well be a video game or an animated cartoon. If nothing else, this has always concerned me about a big-screen adaptation because we all know what Spider-Man can do, so how do you show him in action if it doesn't necessarily look plausible? Maguire is at his best without the costume, sharing his complete sincerity and love for everyone else he meets (he is so sincere that he makes Tom Cruise blush).

We begin to understand how Mary Jane takes a liking to Peter as well, and how can she not? Kirsten Dunst is breezy and sweet as Mary Jane, exuding all the giggles and loving smiles one expects from the character. I would have loved if there was more of her character's home life (she lives with parents who are always shouting at each other) but it is a genuine pleasure seeing her onscreen (she has certainly matured since "Interview With a Vampire" - an actress I never thought could tackle Mary Jane but she delivers here).

Willem Dafoe is as menacing and sorrowful as he can be in the best tradition of Jekyll and Hyde as Green Goblin. The mask is also fearsome to look at, and could easily give the Joker a run for his money. His cackle and brooding mannerisms are really something to behold. I also loved a mirror sequence where Norman switches from Green Goblin to his normal self, aiming to stop himself from doing more harm.

"Spider-Man" is not as good as "Superman" if only because it is not as richly layered or as complex with its human characters (compare how many scenes there are of newspaper editor J. Jonah Jameson to Perry White, and you will get a rough idea). However, this Spidey is superior and more fun than "Batman" or "X-Men" and is consistenly entertaining and expertly staged and acted. Director Sam Raimi is having lots of fun here, as he did with another comic-book type character, Darkman. All I can say is that I am glad Spidey finally made it to the big screen.

Wolf Man's got nards and a rubber mask!

THE MONSTER SQUAD (1987)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Fred Dekker's "The Monster Squad" has become something of a cult favorite for former 80's teens and perhaps today's audience though I can't say for sure. So is "The Goonies," though that Richard Donner movie was a box-office hit which "Monster Squad" was not. Dekker's film is not even half as fun as "Goonies" and that is a problem for an alleged kiddie flick - "Monster Squad" is an uneven, unmemorable, insufferably bland picture that can't make up its mind of what it wants to be. "The Goonies" was hardly the most memorable movie experience but it knew what it was.

So there is some business about an ancient, powerful amulet that Dracula (Duncan Regher) wants to get his hands on. This amulet is a force of "concentrated good" and it creates a balance of good and evil when it isn't powerless, which it is one day out of every century. The amulet also opens a portal by which Van Helsing had hoped to send Dracula and his gang of Universal Monsters into Limbo in the opening sequence. Dracula wants to shroud the world in darkness. Kids from the Monster Squad, that is experts on Universal Monster Movies, find Van Helsing's diary which will allow them to open the portal and get rid of the Monsters who are haunting their idyllic suburbia. Only problem is that the diary is written in German, and only a conveniently located German neighbor (Leonard Cimino) can translate it. But it would help if the incantations are read by a virginal female in a church. Atheists could have a field day with this.

Right off the bat from the first reel, something feels off in "The Monster Squad." There is no real sense of urgency or danger and the kids are a mixed bag at best, though Michael Faustino as "Monster stole my twinkie" Eugene or the late Brent Chalem as Fat Kid stand out. The old reliable Universal Monsters are also a shade disappointing. The Wolf Man (Jonathan Gries) has nothing more than a hardly emotive rubber mask, The Gill Man looks more threatening than the beloved creature from the Black Lagoon but he's not on screen much, and Regher's Dracula is no better than the ridiculous interpretations from low-budget stinkers of the 1970's like "Dracula vs. Frankenstein." Tom Noonan brings some sympathy to Frankenstein's Monster that is enough to make one wish he were the star of the show. Gill Man could've been afforded a little sympathy when the creature, in the 1954 flick, never wanted to harm the female lead. Here, Gill Man doesn't have many scruples.

"The Monster Squad" is all over the map with a slim story and slimmer motivations for its characters, especially a generic Dracula (since when did the good Count ever want to shroud the world in darkness?). In many ways, this is my kind of comical creature feature flick as I adore the Universal Monsters but Dekker is lost in a haze of throwing everything but the kitchen sink (he helmed the far more upbeat and terrifically paced "Night of the Creeps"). No magic and no real sense of fun make for a dull Creature Feature.

May the Fourth Be with You

STAR WARS VII 2ND TEASER RIGHT HERE WITH COMMENTARY!

STAR WARS VII 1st TEASER!

STAR WARS EPISODE VII CAST REVEALED: A FEW SURPRISES AND MORE...

By Jerry Saravia

LATEST NEWS: Luke Skywalker is a Sith?

Director J.J Abrams and some unnamed puppet creature from "Star Wars Episode VII"

Unnamed and non-CGI pig creature from "Star Wars Episode VII"

June 19th, 2014 - Watch the video for updates on new casting members and Harrison Ford's ankle injury.

 On April 29th, 2014, a cast photo was released to the public for the in-production film of the eagerly anticipated "Star Wars: Episode VII," due for theatrical release in December 2015. It is no surprise that actors Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were officially confirmed to return as Han Solo, Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia, respectively. This is big news in the Star Wars universe because the original trio have not played these roles since 1983's "Return of the Jedi." Peter Mayhew is of course returning as Chewbacca (confirmed a couple of weeks ago), not to mention Kenny Baker as R2-D2, Anthony Daniels as C3PO, and new cast members who include Adam Driver (HBO's "Girls"), Oscar Issac ("Inside Llewyn Davis," "Drive"), Domnhall Gleason (who appeared in the last two "Harry Potter" flicks), Daisy Ridley (a new fresh face from Britain), and John Boyega ("Attack the Block"). There is also Max Von Sydow, a major surprise, and I bet he will be playing some sort of older Jedi, perhaps carrying on the tradition of Christopher Lee and Alec Guinness, or maybe an archvillain. It is all up in the air at this point. I neglected to mention Andy Serkis of "Lord of the Rings" fame is also cast, although as what is unconfirmed. In fact, aside from Solo, Leia and Luke, there is no information on the characters these other actors will be playing.

My hope for this movie is that Leia will be "the other." She's got to use a lightsaber at some point. No word yet on Billy Dee Williams returning as Lando Calrissian, or any other cast members (I am sure there is more that will still be revealed). More updates are forthcoming and will be mentioned and added to this page. Stay tuned, and consider my interest renewed in this series.

Unpleasant Million Dollar Hotel

NIGHT AT THE GOLDEN EAGLE (2001)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

If you wanted to see a film set in skid row then "Night at the Golden Eagle" is the film for you. Seeped and drenched in solarized, sepia colors, "Night at the Golden Eagle" is an attempt to see the seamier side of life. I don't object to such films unless there is no core of humanity or degree of human sensibility. The Golden Eagle hotel is not a place I'd spend a night in.

The film is set in an L.A. fleabag hotel, the kind where those with lost dreams reside (think "Million Dollar Hotel"). One of the dreamers is Mic (Vinny Argiro), a former crook who wants to live the good life in Vegas. He's reunited with another former crook, Tommy (Donnie Montemarano), who's just gotten out of jail and his first thought is to steal a car. The hotel they stay in is festering with all forms of lowlifes and dreamers to be sure. There is a sneering pimp (Vinnie Jones from "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels"), two hookers (Ann Magnuson and Natasha Lyonne), a former tap-dancing legend, Fayard Nicholas, another lost soul who spends an eternity watching TV in the lobby, and I am afraid to say, not much more.

"Night at the Golden Eagle" doesn't aim to dwell into these hotel guests because the characters are nothing more than types, not real people. I like some of the camaraderie and growing friction between Mic and Tommy and their aspirations to live the good life in Sin City, but they never grow beyond the one-dimensional stage.When a murder takes place that involves one of these crooks, their growing banter quickly becomes tedious because we barely care about them (and one of them could care less about the murder). The prostitutes, including a pubescent girl, are reduced to fodder for those who think prostitutes are not real people. In fact, writer-director Adam Rifkin doesn't invest much emotion into anyone - they are all stereotypes who have as much purpose as several chia pets on a window sill. Either Rifkin is afraid to explore the nature of his subjects or he'd rather just shock the audience - the latter is common amongst young filmmakers today in light of the ironic edge every noir film seems to possess.

I do not resent a film that intends to present a time and place and nothing more. But even in plotless films such as, for lack of a better example, Godard's "Breathless" or Fellini's "8 1/2" or Scorsese's "Mean Streets," the people populating those films inspired some curiosity, some level of interest. In "Night of the Golden Eagle, the characters of the mean streets of L.A. would be better off occupying a video game, not a movie. "Grand Theft Auto," anyone?

Shoot it in 3 days, or else!

CORMAN'S WORLD: EXPLOITS OF A HOLLYWOOD REBEL (2011)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

It is often forgotten that Roger Corman helped launch the careers of many distinguished actors and directors back in the day. The king of B movies has also been active himself for more than 60 years, ranging from producing and directing sci-fi to fantasy to action exploitation pictures to even a couple of "social message films." "Corman's World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel" aims to paint a flattering portrait of a low-budget producer who already made his 100th film by the time "The Wild Angels" was out in cinemas in 1966.

"Corman's World" covers a lot of ground as it explores the business mind behind what became the staple of low-budget filmmaking. Making a film on a shoestring budget in 3 days, and using leftover sets to make another entire picture in practically the same amount of time, is the stuff of legend and the kind of quick-thinking and on-the-nose business sense that most other independent filmmakers could only hope to aspire to. Roger Corman's list of credits are practically legendary, from having helmed cult classics such as the original "Little Shop of Horrors" to (one of my favorites) "The Terror" which starred Boris Karloff and an early performance by Jack Nicholson, not to mention "The Cry-Baby Killer"; "Piranha"; adaptations of Edgar Allan Poe including "The Pit and the Pendulum"; "Deathsport"; "Grand Theft Auto"; "Bloody Mama," and too many more to list (400-plus total). Most intriguing is the segment dealing with the controversial 1962's "The Intruder," showcasing a young William Shatner as a racist who tries to stop integration of schools in the segregated Missouri. The film was a box-office failure, one of the few exceptions in Corman's filmography, but it did hint at Corman's willingness to go beyond just sheer exploitation. He was also instrumental in getting foreign films noticed through his company New World Pictures, with films like Ingmar Bergman's "Cries and Whispers" and Federico Fellini's "Amarcord" (some of these films were actually shown at drive-ins!)

"Corman's World" features dynamite, in-depth interviews from luminaries such as Jack Nicholson, Martin Scorsese (who correctly identifies Corman's work as a different kind of "art"), Joe Dante, Ron Howard, Peter Bogdanovich, David Carradine, and even Corman's own wife, Julie. All lavish nothing but praise for a man who was anything but the stereotype of a cigar-chomping, boorish producer - Roger simply knew how to get the best out of actors and directors and hoped they would migrate to "A" movies.

There is a brief, honest and rather mind-blowing section dealing with how Hollywood megahits of the mid-to-late 70's, ostensibly B movies in their own right like "Jaws" and "Star Wars," made huge profits with bigger budgets, eradicating the low-budget model set by Roger Corman and eviscerating the drive-in market. It is upsetting and as Corman astutely pinpoints, there is no reason to spend millions on a movie when the same money could be used in an utilitarian way, such as saving a slum and rebuilding a neighborhood. Now, the old low-budget B movies go direct to DVD or show up on Syfy channel, where Corman makes his mark on occasion. Interestingly, actor's salaries are not discussed, and we all know how much money Jack Nicholson made from his role in Tim Burton's "Batman" (a movie Corman could've directed in about the amount of time it would take for Burton to get his haircut).

If I have to nitpick, I wish there was time devoted to Corman's last directorial effort, "Frankenstein Unbound," one of the most fascinating Frankenstein adaptations ever (based on a terrific novel by Brian Aldiss). Also, his 1994 "Fantastic Four" film (heavily lambasted by comic fans at conventions) could've used a little exposure. These films and many others showed Roger Corman was a force to be reckoned with, a man who loved movies and loved making them. It showed, and it explains why Jack Nicholson sheds a tear for his old mentor. 

Martian warriors destroy Rover

GHOSTS OF MARS (2001)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2002)

The great John Carpenter film awaits a cinema near you. "Halloween," "Assault on Precinct 13," "In the Mouth of Madness" and "Starman" were a few stellar examples but mostly we have been saddled with fascinating experiments like "Village of the Damned," "The Thing" and grave disappointments like "Prince of Darkness" and "Vampires." And like it or not, Carpenter knows how to use his resources to stir and entertain when he does it right. "Ghosts of Mars" is no classic by any stretch of the imagination but it is a marked improvement over "Vampires" and has some nifty ideas and fun performances.

Essentially a western taking place on the planet Mars, we have Lt. Melanie Ballard (Natasha Henstridge) and other members of a police force including Commander Helena Braddock (Pam Grier) and Bashira Kincaid (Clea Duvall) as they travel by train to some mining colony where a supposedly notorious killer, "Destination" Williams, is being held (played by Ice Cube, who continues to surprise me in every film role). Oh, lest we forget there is a male in this small police force played by Jason Statham ("Snatch") who makes sexual remarks to Lt. Ballard at his every convenience. Meanwhile, just as Ballard's force is ready to take Williams and bring him to justice, a force is unleashed that awakens Martian warriors who love to decapitate humans and shout as loudly as Ozzy Osbourne. These ghosts have the ability of taking over the minds of the miners on this colony and all hell breaks loose. Lots of gunfire and karate kicks ensue.

"Ghosts of Mars" should not be mistaken for an intellectual sci-fi film but rather an in-your-face action melodrama with lots of special effects. One of the best effects scenes takes place when an archaeologist, Professor Whitlock (Joanna Cassidy), crash lands on the possessed colony in her air balloon. I also love all the train scenes since they are the quietest scenes in the movie, allowing us to explore the characters' personalities and interaction. For a while, the film aims to be a character-oriented update of "Assault on Precinct 13" by way of Howard Hawks's "Rio Bravo" but when the action scenes start, they take over the movie and become the focus. Nothing wrong with that though I never really thought of Carpenter as an action director, despite his "Escape to New York." His talent lies in horror and some scenes inside the mines made me jump.

On a fundamental level, "Ghosts of Mars" is lots of fun to watch and has commanding actors at the forefront (though I found it cruel to see Duvall and Grier given such short-shrift in their roles). Henstridge plays a woman of authority and strong will and Ice Cube gets to show what a continuingly strong presence he has on screen - both characters could stand on their own as the leads of a movie. Maybe in the sequel.