A strong departure from the silliness of the first film, "Spider-Man 2" is, definitely, the best super-hero film ever made!

Rating: Null/10 (1 July 2004)

Since `Super-Man' flew into the big screens in the late seventies there have been many a try at other famous (and not so famous) comic book heroes. Among them were `Batman' (1989-98) and its sequels, `Dick Tracy' (1990), `X-Men' and its sequel (2000-03), `Spider-Man' (2002), `Daredevil' (2003), `Hulk' (2003) and `Hellboy' (2004). Out of these there have only been a few real successes: `Dick Tracy', `Batman Returns' the `X-Men' films, and `Hulk'`Spider-Man 2' leaves them all  even the good ones  choking in its dust.
Not that they were all bad films  no, `Batman Returns' and `X-Men' were great movies, and `Hulk' and `Dick Tracy' were visually amazing. Still, none of the above films were really able to capture the attention of audiences who weren't fans of the comics. `Spider-Man 2' does just that. It doesn't leave any questions unanswered, assuming that everyone in the audience knows the story already, as `Hellboy' did often and the `X-Men' films sometimes too. We get to know each character intimately, they're people, not just caricatures of the original characters. And yet, it still winks at the comic book fans in the audience, with lines like `How bout Dr. Strange'?' `Good, but taken!'
The plot picks up two years after the first film ended, with Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) still in love with Mary-Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), and still too afraid to tell her because of the risks. His friend Harry Osborn (James Franco) has grown older, now more confident and in control of Oscorp, his dead father's company (which doesn't make much sense, because in the first film Norman Osborn was let go, so Harry couldn't be the heir anymore). Harry is also an angry alcoholic, and dreams of exacting vengeance on Spider-Man for killing his father (who, as we all know, was The Green Goblin of the first film). Also, Parker's Aunt May's (Rosemary Harris, who gets a lot more screen time in this one) mortgage has just been foreclosed.
Could things get worse for Spidey? Of course, I haven't even mentioned the villain yet. Dr. Otto Octavius (Alfred Molina), a brilliant scientist, is working on a plan to generate fusion that can give lots of cheap power to the city (`the power of the sun in the palm of my hand'), something he's been dreaming of doing in years. To work with the fusion he creates four mechanical tentacles, which he can control because of a chip that gives the power to his brain, not the AI of the claws. When his experiment goes awry, the chip is destroyed and the machine part of him takes over, he becomes a criminal  Dr. Octopus (Doc Ock').
I loved Ock's whole story arch. It all fits together perfectly: Octavius is a good man, but he has a bit too much pride and is a little stubbornly determined to carry out his dream. So when the AI takes over it taps into these flaws and uses them to brainwash Octavius into once again carrying out his fusion plan  now knowing how dangerous it is. We never really get a straight answer as to why the claws (who become characters themselves) want to work on the fusion as well, but I guess we can assume that they want to because its their function, its why they were made.
Soon after Octavius starts wreaking havoc on New York Parker decides to end his days as Spider-Man to pursue what he really wants  a life with Mary-Jane. She's engaged now though, but she's soon drawn back to Parker once he's given her more attention and affection. Meanwhile, Harry strikes up a deal with Dr. Octopus: if he delivers Spider-Man, Harry will in turn provide for Ock's experiment.
In a way the film has two different stories  the Peter Parker/Mary-Jane romance and the Spider-Man/Doc Ock/Harry tale. The two stories don't merge until the end, and when they do the drama reaches a high point: Spider-Man's secret identity is revealed to more than a few vital characters, the city is torn apart, etc. What's surprising is, you'll find yourself more concerned and interested in the romance story than Spider-Man and Doc Ock's battles (not that the latter isn't done well either).
Everything that made the first film silly and stupid has disappeared from the second (including writer David Koepp  whose script looked good but was ultimately hollow). The writing is sharper, the acting is far better, the action is more exciting, the special effects have improved greatly and the drama is more engrossing. In the first film the drama was just the obligatory filling between action scenes, but in `Spider-Man 2' you'll find all of it interesting.
The actors  especially Maguire, Dunst, Franco, Molina and J.K. Simmons  lift the film even further. Maguire is maturing along with his character, Dunst embodies her part, Molina makes an excellent villain, Franco is great and Simmons is hilarious. The film is not flawless though. I thought two sequences lasted just a bit too long. The scene where Octavius awakes in a hospital room and his tentacles go bezerk should've been much shorter, with all the screaming and yelling it goes from frighteningly intense to silly parody. The second was the train scene, when Spider-Man must save a subway train from crashing. This one wasn't as bad it was just a little repetitive (but it ended well).
The ending of the film was great too  it, of course, leaves it open for a sequel. Not in a cheesy, obvious way (see `Jurassic Park III'), but more in a short reference that fits well with the flow of the film.
When the actors said that `Spider-Man 2' was better than the first they weren't lying. A super-hero movie for everyone, a recommendation to all. I anxiously look forward to `Spider-Man 3', 8.5/10.