Spider Man 2

I've been laboring to figure out why I wasn't as fond of "Spider Man 2" as I probably should be. The movie benefitted from a will-written script. The actors played their parts well. The direction, the music, the special effects, they were, as Henry Rollins is wont to say, striking. Why, then, did it leave me cold?

Now I could be glib about it and say simply that Peter Parker faces the same dilemma that Superman faced in "Superman II", but faces it in a less interesting way, but that doesn't quite cover it. What makes his dilemma less interesting?. He's a superhero, so is Superman. I pondered and pondered, for many sleepless minutes, when help from an unexpected source rescued me.

"Kill Bill, Volume 2". Bill's discourse on Superman, late in the film:

"An essential characteristic of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero, and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When he wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic that Superman stands alone. Superman did not become Superman, Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears, the glasses, the business suit, that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak, he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race."

It is this distinction that to me made the difference. Peter Parker's unwillingness to include Mary Jane in his risky, web-slinging hero-life struck me as unnecessary and even a little patronizing. Surely M.J. knows how much risk she's willing to take on for her friendly neighborhood lover-man. Why not give her the chance to beg off instead of making the decision for her? Parker's main problem really is that he doesn't have a problem; he only thinks he does. Now this is true of a lot of people roaming the planet, but because the solution to the problem is for Parker to say to himself, "Could you stop being a dork for five seconds and recognize that when a woman who looks like Kirsten Dunst wants you, and there is no real reason to say no, you should stop trying to think of a reason to balk and kiss her?" I kept saying to the screen. "You don't have to give up your powers, Parker. You just have to cut the shit."

Contrawise, in order to be with Lois Lane in "Superman 2", Superman has to give up being Superman and transform himself, forever, into Clark Kent. To follow Bill's reasoning, Superman needs to become the character he'd assumed as a critique of a weak, cowardly, unsure human race in order to marry Lois Lane. Consider for a moment how huge that is--a man willing to become what he's mocked for a lover. The length of Superman's fall becomes clear to him shortly after he renounces his powers, when a bully in a diner beats poor Clark Kent to a pulp. He sees his blood for the first time, and jokes they should hire a bodyguard. Lois says to him "I don't want a bodyguard. I want the man I love." Clark Kent replies, "I know, Lois. I wish he were here."

Now that's irony. Big buttery slabs of irony. Superman became Clark Kent so that he could be with Lois, yet in doing so he parted with the identity that Lois fell for. The joke is on Superman, and how painful it must be for him (in every way) to endure the punch line.

So there it is. Thanks, Bill, for clearing it up.