Great movie, poor FX

Rating: 5/10 (12 May 2002)

Spider-Man was always my fave comic character after The Thing from the Fantastic Four, so I have been waiting for this film for a LONG time. With Sam Raimi directing, you know it's gonna be good, and Spider-Man certainly was. Unfortunately, the "special effects" sucked big-time.
What is with all the CGI in movies today? "Spider-man" during the action sequences especially, looked like a cartoon. I don't care if you do it with a pen, pencil, or computer - it's a DRAWING. A cartoon. And it shows. CGI "special effects" are making movies look like crap. The action sequences in "Spider-Man" looked like scenes from a Playstation videogame.
"Superman" and "Superman 2" were made almost 25 years ago, and their special effects completely blow away the cartoons in the new "Spider-Man." Think about that - FX have degressed so much that a 25-year old film has better effects than one of today's blockbusters. Compare the scenes - Superman's first scene, Spidey's first scene; Superman's big battle with the supervillians on the streets of Metropolis/Spidey vs. The Green Goblin in NYC on the Queensboro bridge; the final shot of Superman and the final shots of Spiderman...it goes on. In every case, the FX of Superman were real flesh and blood FX, and the FX of Spider-Man were fake looking cartoons.
Otherwise, "Spider-man" was a really good movie, nice direction, good acting and casting, Bruce Campbell, the "car" (whoever doesn't get that one should do their Raimi homework), and other nice pluses. Jameson was great but seriously underused. But really, these asinine cartoon FX have got to go. They are making movies look horrible. The sad thing is, many people don't seem to care, and the computer geeks that sit at their computers and draw these FX actually think they look good. They don't.
Some people may say, "they wanted a comic-book feel," but they don't understand that when you spend $120 million on a film, it's not supposed to LOOK like a comic book or a cartoon. The 1967 Spider-Man cartoon had "special effects" as good as the new movie, only drawn differently. And say what you want about the cheesy 1978 TV series - at least it was REAL FLESH AND BLOOD and not a CARTOON!
For me, the best parts in "Spider-Man" were when Spider-Man was OUT of costume as Peter Parker. Because those scenes weren't a cartoon. Anyone who wants to see real FX, watch the first two Superman films (heck even 3 and 4). "Spider-Man" was a good film that could have been great if only it had real special effects.