Skip to main content

A Spider-Verse of Possibility


Miles Morales was created in 2011 by Brian Michael Bendis and Sara Pichelli as a way of bringing some diversity to Marvel Comics and to rejuvenate the Spider-Man hero. The Black Hispanic teenager who picks up the mantel of Spider-Man was received warmly by many, including the late Stan Lee; though some reacted to his addition to the Marvel canon with disapproval, to put it lightly. They cried the usual complaints that hold no water about political correctness without understanding what this meant for the kids who actually read Spider-Man comics, kids from backgrounds unlike theirs who recognize and resonate with this Spider-Man in a way they never did with Peter Parker. Diversity matters in the stories and characters we consume, and no movie illustrates that quite as well as Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, appropriately enough, Miles Morales’ first movie.
Produced by The Lego Movie’s Phil Lord and Chris Miller, Into the Spider-Verse seemed like a strange project since its announcement. Sony already had a Spider-Man in Tom Holland, and one who with his connection to the MCU had a lot of promise going forward. So developing a new Spider-Man movie in animation, concurrent to that seemed like an unusual and confusing move. Yet as Into the Spider-Verse makes clear, there are tons of Spider-People across the spectrum of Marvel Comics, and who’s to say their stories aren’t as worth telling as Peter Parkers’?
Miles Morales (Shameik Moore) is a New York teenager struggling to fit in at his new prep school. Against the wishes of his police officer father (Brian Tyree Henry), he spends a lot of time with his uncle Aaron (Mahershala Ali) who encourages his graffiti art. When he gets bitten by a radioactive spider and subsequently witnesses the death of Spider-Man, he tries without much success to take up the role of the friendly neighbourhood hero. But as a result of a catastrophic scientific experiment conducted by the villain Kingpin (Liev Schreiber) gone wrong, parallel universes have been opened on Miles’ dimension, and an alternate older Peter Parker (Jake Johnson) emerges to become his teacher, as well as a few other Spider-people from across the multiverse.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a film that took so much unbridled joy in being a comic book movie. Certainly it’s the most unashamed of the comic book style since Ang Lee’s Hulk, incorporating panel transitions, thought balloons, and establishing text, though cleverly only after Miles is bitten. It really delights in being able to be big and weird too, and is more stylish than any movie from either Marvel or DC, with some sequences looking like they come from an Edgar Wright film (Scott Pilgrim most notably of course).
A lot of this comes down to the animation, which is magnificent. Like The Peanuts Movie it manages to find a great medium between CG and something approximating traditional animation, yet it’s completely its own, capable of being vibrant and stark, dark and rough, downright surreal, and accommodating to different styles; which becomes necessary for the introductions of Spider-Noir (a perfect Nicolas Cage), looking like something out of a Frank Miller comic, Peni Parker (Kimiko Glenn) and SP//dr, who are anime, and Spider-Ham (John Mulaney), animated like a Looney Tune. All of these characters, as disparate as they are, work great, and the film is that much more visually impressive for their presence. This is an extremely energized movie, quick and sharp in its action scenes but never losing focus. The team fights could rival any of those from any Avengers film. And every frame seems to be in motion, rich with creativity and detail -it’s genuinely some revolutionary technique on display.
All of this would be wonderful on its own, but Into the Spider-Verse is also telling Miles Morales’ story, and does an excellent job with that. Due to exceptionally economic characterization, you quickly understand his insecurity and his family dynamic, so that when he’s trying with difficulty to be Spider-Man you know why he’s so motivated without having to say anything. Shameik Moore truly gives an impassioned performance too. As for Jake Johnson, he’s great as the older Spider-Man, a divorced, cynical bum with little real passion or interest in mentoring Miles. It’s such a different interpretation of Peter Parker, and I love that it’s not entirely taken as a joke, as the temptation might have been. The film emphasizes the real personal drama he’s been through. Hailee Steinfeld is superb as Gwen Stacy (Spider-Woman or Spider-Gwen, whichever you prefer), certainly a break-out character with the most awesome suit of the bunch. Henry and Schreiber give their characters unexpected depth, Ali is great (better here than in Green Book), and the cast also features Chris Pine, Kathryn Hahn, Zoe Kravitz, and Lily Tomlin.
The message of the movie is a powerful one, and it’s intrinsically tied to that theme of why diverse representation is important. Each incarnation of Spider-Man has something different to offer in their story, abilities, personalities, and convictions, but they’re all heroes. And they all can exist simultaneously and in harmony. It’s a very touching sentiment -almost as touching as Stan Lee’s cameo which in light of his death, is much more meaningful and poignant -his best one.
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse celebrates comic books like few other comic book movies have. Its’ style, animation, creativity, performances, writing, and strong humour make it the best animated movie of the year, and the most fun I’ve had in a movie this year. But it’s love of the medium it’s adapting and earnest encouragement of opening up its multiverse to all, actually makes me want to read some of these series and further get to know these diverse characters and stories. And I’m not a comics fan, so for a film to do that, it’s something special!

 Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more