Spider-Man

Wow!, as they ofttimes say in comic books, Spider-Man is getting some super reviews. Stephen Hunter in the Washington Post calls it an exuberance, a celebration, a hoot, a kick and a half. Tobey Maguire, who stars in the title role, is being singled out for particular praise -- with many reviewers admitting that they had reservations when they first heard he had been chosen for the role. Maguire is perfect ... a perfect stand-in Everyman, says Jack Mathews in the New York Daily News. Tobey Maguire is an arresting Spider-Man, writes Sam Allis in the Boston Globe. He continues to seduce us with his unnerving stillness. He is a minimalist whose unblinking blue eyes portray na?vet?, irony, and heartbreak. Eleanor Ringel Gillespie in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution comments that Maguire is flat-out terrific. A.O. Scott in the New York Times likes the writing, direction, and the performances so much that the only thing he has to complain about is the special effects -- which aren't bad, he notes, it's just that they look like a waste of money. He concludes that the movie is, like Maguire, disarmingly likable, and touching in unexpected ways. On the other hand, critics are giving mixed notices to Willem Dafoe's performance as the archvillain. Joe Morgenstern in the Wall Street Journal remarks that Dafoe either has no interest in, or no grasp of, the sort of charmingly malign wit that Gene Hackman brought to Superman, or Jack Nicholson to Batman. But Peter Howell in the Toronto Star writes that the Green Goblin is the best villain Dafoe has ever played. Of the leading critics, only Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times seems to find it disappointing -- particularly the special effects. Spider-Man as he leaps across the rooftops is landing too lightly, he writes, rebounding too much like a bouncing ball. He looks like a video game figure, not like a person having an amazing experience.