Skip to main content

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
(2018)

(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.


The multiverse premise is a simple but effective means – in that it's by now a broadly familiar shorthand – for screenwriters Lord and Rodney Rothman (the latter one of three directors along with Bob Persichetti and Peter Ramsey) to team up various Spider-Man alts that have appeared over the years, albeit they're drawing on an already complex and stuffed-to-the-gills comic-book Spider-Verse. Probably the least persuasive onscreen is SP//dr alias Peni Parker’s anime-styled incarnation via a biomech suit, first featured in 2014 and here voiced by Kimiko Glenn. 


Peter Porker/Spider-Ham (voiced by John Mulaney) is the most absurd, a porcine "cartoon" – the word used as an insult – version of the character (first appearance 1983) who even gets away with overtly quoting the Warner Bros Looney Tunes his design references.


Perhaps most intriguing is Spider-Man Noir, voiced by Nicolas Cage (first appearance 2009), a black-and-white 1930s iteration who cutely, due to his monochromatic vision, becomes obsessed with a Rubik's Cube. They're on the periphery of the action, though (we also encounter Oscar Isaac's Miguel O’Hara/Spider-Man 2099 in the post-credits scene, wackily interacting with a rudimentary 1967 Spider-Man cartoon, with original voice Paul Soles). 


Centre frame, though, is Miles Morales (Shameik Moore), passed the Spidey baton when his universe's Peter Parker (Chris Pine) is killed by Wilson Fisk/Kingpin (Liev Schreiber); this Peter isn't in the movie very much, but there's an appealing reverence towards the previous Sony movies via a montage of near-quoted sequences applied to his reality (Sony's own pre-existing filmic Spider-Verse). Indeed, a perhaps inevitable consequence of the preponderance of other Spideys, most particularly Jake Johnson's middle-aged, beer-gut wielding, pizza-fuelled Parker, is that Miles isn't given a proper chance to assume the web-slinging mantle – amid much, possibly slightly overdone inability to even climb walls/stop sicking to things – until the climax. 


The flip-side, however, is very much a positive, in that the relationship between past-it Peter, less than dedicated to upholding his great responsibility following the failure of his marriage to Mary Jane Watson, really bears fruit, each gaining from his interaction with the other. 


Then there’s Spider-Gwen (Stacey, voiced by Hailee Steinfeld), who also first appeared in 2014, possibly the most stylish rendering of the various webslingers, although a distant third to Miles and fat Peter in prominence by virtue of lacking a crucial tie to Miles beyond his adoration (appropriately, ingenue Miles has to admit they're just friends). 


The villains might be considered less than essential in all this, incidental to the pervading Spider love-in, and to an extent, that's the case. But Kingpin's at least serviced with a relatable emotional motive for tearing the worlds asunder (to regain his lost love). He isn't just bent on destruction. 


There isn't much to Doctor Olivia Octavius Octopus aside from gender-swapping, however, meaning that the real kernel of conflict comes from Peter's discovery that his uncle Aaron (Mahershala Ali) is the Prowler (I might not have followed this thread completely, but I'm assuming the genetically-modified spider in the subway station must have come via Aaron's contact with Octavius or more tenuously Oscorp).


Most commendable about all this is that, even though Into the Spider-Verse is ostensibly a staple-gunned plot of various villains and Spideys, it makes remarkable cohesive, engrossing viewing purely on a narrative level. The emotional beats for Miles, from comedic dorkiness to familial tensions to rising to the challenge, all land effortlessly. There's a remarkable deftness throughout in juggling the comedy – and downright daftness at times – with the seriousness of the action and the characters' emotional arcs (as noted, even Kingpin is afforded heft). 


As for the animation, it's vibrant and invigorating in all the right ways. Perhaps occasionally, it becomes a little too abstract for its own good – the particle accelerator climax is a fully-seized opportunity for weightless comic-book leaping hither and thither, but there's a point where that's all it ends up being, detached from anything tangible and thus feeling more like the final act to your average overblown live-action superhero movie – but that's very much the rarity. 


The decision to remind us of comic frames through a limited four-colour palette and touches such as repeated (written on-screen) dialogue and sound effects evidences the most fun had in transposing the medium since Ang Lee's Hulk (although Into the Spider-Verse is receiving very much the positive reception for such affectations, where Hulk, at least at the time, was largely spurned). Rendering-wise, I'd only really take issue with the Stan Lee cameo, as he ends up looking rather flintier than I'm sure was intended. 


I suppose one might see Miles Morales (first appearance 2011, lest I forget) being consigned to an animated debut as a snub to the character, certainly given the way that, however well this ends up doing, the grosses will only be a fraction of Sony's main player. On the other hand, much as I loved Spider-Man: Homecoming, this version is undoubtedly the more inventive, creative piece, showing clearly that Sony doesn't need the Kevin Feige magic touch to make their comic-book character crown jewel, the one they’ll never let go off, a success. Just attract people with a passion for the character who know what they’re doing. Hopefully Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse will garner a sequel sooner rather than later. 

Oh, and Spidey Bells? Instant classic.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.