On Sun, 5 May 2002, Gautam Mukunda wrote:

> > >
> > > s
> > >
> > > p
> > >
> > > o
> > >
> > > i
> > >
> > > l
> > >
> > > e
> > >
> > > r
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > s
> > >
> > > p
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > > c
> > >
> > > e
> > >
> 3. If they had really played out the Gwen Stacy storyline - where Peter
> _did_ have to make a choice, and lost his girlfriend because of it, that
> would have been amazing.  As it is, the dropping two things at once was,
> first, _way_ too reminiscent of Batman Forever and, second, obviated the
> moral dilemma that Peter was facing, and that could have made it a really
> good movie, instead of just an entertaining one.

Batman notwithstanding, I think that this is one of those comicbook
cliches that needs to be allowed to stand, in the first Spider-Man movie
anyway.  One of the key elements of superhero fantasy is the hero's
refusal to allow the villain to dictate the terms in which moral dilemmas
must be solved.  In real life we must sometimes choose the lesser of two
evils, but for superheroes it's finding a way to beat that dilemma that's
a part of what makes them super.

Gobby's purpose is to force Spider-Man to concede that he has to choose
between himself and others and that in both choices he'll find despair.
As a superhero it's Spidey's call to renounce the choice as a false one
and to find a third option.  Yes, it's a fantasy, but I think it has a
moral:  that sometimes (maybe not always, but sometimes) if you think you
have to choose between two evils, maybe it's because you're not trying
hard enough.  Compare this with the case of Osama, who wants the US to
choose between protecting itself and protecting Israel.  With our image of
ourselves as the do-good superpower of the world, we refuse that choice
and try to find another way, even if it comes at the price of greater
risk.  Just as Spidey exposes himself to greater risk by trying to save MJ
and the kids both.

Some innocents will still get hurt (I find it interesting the Gobby points
this out to Spider-Man), but it's reaching for the better solution that
makes Spider-Man who he is.

It also sets him up for a fall in the future, a failure of strength or a
case of hubris that can temper his character and relieve the audience of
the tedium of endless Hollywood happy endings.  I'd like to see that
happen, and it would be consistent with the Spider-Man series to make it
happen.  But not in the first movie.  It already has enough downers to set
it apart from the Batman & Superman franchises, so the moviemakers need to
pace themselves when it comes to adding new ones.  :-)

Marvin Long
Austin, Texas

"Never flay a live Episiarch."  -- Galactic Proverbs 7563:34(j)

Reply via email to