Sunday, 19 April 2026

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2004: Alfred Molina in Spider-Man 2

Alfred Molina did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Doctor Otto Octavius aka Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2.

Spider-Man 2 follows the continued adventures of Spider-Man aka Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) this time against Doc Ock.

Molina plays the villain this time around working within similar contexts to Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin/Norman Osborne from the first film though to do different ends. Similar in the sense that both films, very much fitting the style of Sam Raimi, involve a transformation towards evil. With Otto we meet him also attempting a risky experiment that will create an amazing breakthrough at Oscorp, although a difference being he’s technically an employee as a researcher being funded by now head of the company, Harry Osborne (James Franco). Molina’s first scene actually does a lot as we initially meet him as the somewhat reluctant host for Peter who is writing a paper on Otto’s work. Molina I think key, and really what is the backbone to where the character goes, is the initial coldness and kind of disregard for taking the time as he speaks of his work as far beyond any other requirement, only relenting when Harry reminds him of his financial support. There’s something there that Molina eventually expands on, though we first get an important reprieve where we see Otto lighten up when he finds out that Peter is the “Smart but lazy” student his friend has told him about and has lunch with his wife Rosie (Donna Murphy). Molina and Murphy for that matter I think importantly give no sense of where the film is going to go, instead convincingly playing with genuine chemistry a long loving married couple who still have fun chatting up about their old days and their differences as science and poetry focused people. They really are lovely together and exude such a strong sense of the relationship in just one scene to show it very much as the humanity of Otto. An element he even shares with Peter as he encourages him to take a forward approach romantically with such a sincere little grin of someone who is so in love he’d only want someone else to share that as well. It’s great work because Molina and Murphy work would be convincing in a feel good or even drama about the different yet connected couple, and don’t play the relationship as thin given it will be wiped away by the plot. 

Speaking of, we get Otto demonstrating his self-sustaining fusion reaction, which naturally requires the use of four giant mechanical arms grafted to his body, and we get the introduction from Otto. Molina opens as the slightly corny scientist with a bad joke and his general presentation, before starting the experiment with the arms where Molina fashions a direct intensity in his eyes and we see essentially the strength of his ego in the moment. A pivotal moment actually to play the seed of the character before we take the next step, less so as a Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hyde as we saw with Norman Osborne and more so the man letting his worst element be taken to an extreme. An extreme that comes as the experiment goes terribly wrong, needing to be shut down by Spider-Man, Rosie dies, and Otto loses his protection from the influence of the arms leading to the arms to massacre the hospital staff that attempt to remove them. Where we make the shift very much more so to the Raimi style villain where there is a degree of arch to it, as we honestly begin Molina’s work as Doc Ock with a dramatic “Nooooo” at seeing what has happened and an announcement of anger that infuses both the losses he’s endured and the monster he seemingly has become. This might sound like a criticism but trust me it is not. Rather what Molina does is find ownership in the more operatic qualities that really aren’t all that out of sorts for a man finding himself both grafted to metal arms but also influenced by them that reinforce his worst impulses. Where we see the moment of the arms "building him” up and Molina’s terrific in playing into this frenzy as he goes with every suggestion to continue with the experiment but to only make it bigger without any thought to the consequences. 

Molina finding a pathway into then creating the villain as essentially showing that intensity but now as the man who has come to believe anything he does is perfectly fine as long as it is in service to his vision. In turn we do get quite a lot of fun of Molina then playing basically as the ego without any bounds and someone who comes to even enjoy his villainy as he goes about robbing banks, threats and kidnapping to meet his demands. Molina finds a juicy material in more ways than one honestly, as even some of his head movements are so specifically of this comic book effect that it is utilized in the ideal way where he presents the comic book heel in such a dynamic fashion. While also making him quite entertaining in playing up those egotistical moments of the villain playing around essentially such as when he purposefully sets up a train for destruction to exhaust Spider-Man with such aplomb, or coming to threaten Harry with the biggest smiles of someone just totally living in being the monster beyond himself by giving into those impulses. Molina getting to have fun with the fiend and thriving within the style of the film, yet never becoming too much that you lose the core of the character at any point. Molina successfully connects the “arch” elements with that sense of expanding ego leading to the finale where Doc Ock tries the experiment again only leading to greater destruction. When Doc Ock sees Peter, not Spider-Man, trying to talk sense into him, Molina’s moment of clarity is fantastic where we see the push and pull essentially between going with arms and his ego, to that humanity of his scene with his wife and Molina finds genuine pathos in the man realizing he’s gone off the deep end. Leading to a genuinely moving moment where he insists on stopping the experiment insisting he won’t be remembered as a monster, where Molina’s reaction embodies a loss of the ego, genuine sorrow in where it has taken him, but also a different new type of determination as he goes about righting his wrong. Molina delivering a strong performance that succeeds in managing to take ownership of the more overt comic book tone to make an entertaining villain, however without going so far that we lose the thread that provide the necessary grounding to make his strange journey believable within the tone of the film. 

62 comments:

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Any other upgrades.

Harris Marlowe said...

Thoughts on the script and direction?

Perfectionist said...

Luke: In regards to "Just Close Your Eyes" being my favorite Christian theme? Absolutely. An incredibly unique, star making theme. But contrary to popular opinion, I love SOTY's version too. That's the one that I think hits harder in the full version. The second verse, and bridge flowing into the final chorus in the SOTY version is just absolutely majestic. Purely as entrance themes:
1) JCYE(Waterproof Blonde)
2) Takeover(his TNA/AEW theme)
3) JCYE(SOTY)

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

I need to revisit Raimiverse movies at some point, but I'm always happy to see Molina get a high rating.

Matt Mustin said...

I should rewatch this again to finalize my exact rating but obviously I'm a fan of this performance.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: After you've re-watched Troy in its Directors Cut, could you give your top ten sword fights which Jonathan asked a while back.
I also want to get your thoughts on the Hector vs. Achilles duel from the theatrical cut to see which soundtrack you prefer.

Michael McCarthy said...

I’m actually starting to think Hoffman is keeping his win.

Matt Mustin said...

Michael: Me too.

Anonymous said...

Yah, he's very entertaining and effective here. If this was anyone's introduction to Molina as an actor, than it's quite a good introduction.

Also speaking of Raimi....has anyone here seen this year's "Send Help"? I was skimming the comments sections around it's release date, and I couldn't find it being talked about.

Calvin Law said...

I certainly wouldn't mind Hoffman keeping his win, it's a hilarious performance. Love Molina here. I actually kind of think he's made his mark on then role so much that I can't really envisage anyone else playing Doc Ock.

Robert MacFarlane said...

A little thought experiment for everyone: Name your #1 Supporting Actor performance in each decade. For me:

1930’s: Wolheim in All Quiet on the Western Front
1940’s: Robinson in Double Indemnity
1950’s: Bogart in The Caine Mutiny
1960’s: Dalton in The Lion in Winter
1970’s: Shaw in Jaws
1980’s: Malsmjö in Fanny and Alexander
1990’s: Landau in Ed Wood
2000’s: Ledger in The Dark Knight
2010’s: Pitt in The Tree of Life
2020’s: Faist in West Side Story

Perfectionist said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Perfectionist said...

Robert:

1930’s: Pat O'Brien in Angels With Dirty Faces(I would like to be more well versed here, but O'Brien is glorious either way)
1940’s: Robinson in Double Indemnity
1950’s: Mifune in Seven Samurai
1960’s: Yamazaki in High and Low/Nakadai in Yojimbo
1970’s: Hurt in 10 Rillington Place/Cazale in The Godfather Part 2
1980’s: Hauer in Blade Runner
1990’s: Landau in Ed Wood
2000’s: Ledger in The Dark Knight
2010’s: Hoult in Mad Max Fury Road
2020’s: Danielsen Lie in The Worst Person in the World

BuscemiFan said...

Hi Louis. First of all, big fan. Secondly, could I ask your for somewhat detailed thoughts on Chris Penn in The Funeral? I've gathered he's a 3 but I'd like to hear more about how you felt about him.

Calvin Law said...

Robert:

1930s: Pat O'Brien in Angels With Dirty Faces
1940s: Ralph Richardson in The Heiress
1950s: Anthony Quayle in Ice Cold in Alex
1960s: Tsutomu Yamazaki in High and Low
1970s: John Hurt in 10 Rillington Place
1980s: Kevin Kline in A Fish Called Wanda
1990s: Robert Forster in Jackie Brown
2000s: Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight
2010s: Steven Yeun in Burning
2020s: Ke Huy Quan in Everything Everywhere All At Once

Calvin Law said...

BuscemiFan: He gave his thoughts here - https://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2020/03/alternate-best-supporting-actor-1996.html

'Penn - 3(Penn here gives what is basically a wannabe Pesci performance. If Pesci had played this part it probably would've been amazing. Penn though goes big, but isn't nearly as effective or visceral in that regard. Where the problems most come in though is he needs to create something for the conclusion through his performance, which sadly he doesn't pull off. He has a fine moment in the explosive conclusion in the sorrow he expresses, but he doesn't find the nuance needed within the intensity.)'

BuscemiFan said...

Thanks Calvin, not sure how I missed that.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Robert:

1930s: O'Brien, Angels with Dirty Faces
1940s: Robinson, Double Indemnity
1950s: Hayakawa, Bridge on the River Kwai
1960s: Courtenay, Dr. Zhivago
1970s: Shaw, Jaws
1980s: Lloyd, Back to the Future
1990s: Forster, Jackie Brown
2000s: Ledger, The Dark Knight
2010s: Pacino, The Irishman
2020s: Quan, Everything Everywhere All at Once

Shaggy Rogers said...

Robert:

1930s: Thomas Mitchell - Stagecoach
1940s: Orson Welles - The Third Man
1950s: Barry Fitzgerald - The Quiet Man
1960s: Tom Courtenay - Doctor Zhivago
1970s: John Cazale - The Godfather Part II
1980s: Nicol Williamson - Excalibur
1990s: Joe Pesci - Goodfellas
2000s: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
2010s: Ben Foster - Hell or High Water
2020s: Robert De Niro - Killers of the Flower Moon

Shaggy Rogers said...

Revisiting Spider-Man 2, it's almost surreal to see Sargent's presence on the screenplay for a superhero movie. I think it's the only case of a respected and Oscar winner screenwriter who actually succeeded.

PS: Raimi's film remains the best film of Spider-Man. It even surpasses the two Spider Verse films by the Lord Miller duo.

Luke Higham said...

I'll revise my top 5 prediction.
1. Pacino
2. Hoffman
3. O'Toole (His scene with Pitt should be enough to get him a 5)
4. Nolte
5. Molina

Shaggy Rogers said...

Hey guys
Update on my Top 10 prediction of Louis' supporting actor in 2004:
1. Pacino
2. O'Toole
3. Hoffman
4. Nolte
5. Molina
6. Carradine
7. Cort
8. Dafoe
9. Madsen
10. Church

Louis Morgan said...

Harris:

The screenplay I think is best looked at as the contrast to the first film, a film I definitely like but essentially was a starting point for where it could’ve been taken further, as realized in this film and within the extremely prolific Alvin Sargent. Which saying Spider-Man 2 and Ordinary People were written by the same person might sound strange but it actually makes quite a bit of sense if you look at certain scenes in particular. But more on that in a bit. I think where we see the obvious progression most in this film as a sequel, though I think importantly the film does feel like an expansion, is within the plot. As I always found it comical in the original film that Norman had an evil plan the problem is he immediately succeeds and then vaguely wants Spider-Man to join him to do what exactly? This film has a far stronger foundation even though technically redoing the same setup, but as the Godfather Part II even showed it can be all about the variation even if technically it is a re-do. In this case having a clearer target in the Doc Ock’s story with each set piece feeling naturally connected to that. All that works, in combination with a dynamic villain, who is entertaining with a purpose, and I’ll say how it intertwines Harry’s personal story all works. That would be something, but more so what makes it work all the more is all of that working alongside Peter’s own story of trying to balance his life, with actual money concerns, including his Aunt’s, while also trying to be Spider-Man. Devoting genuine time to it, with those interpersonal moments genuinely feeling of the depth, with the Aunt May yard sale scene again technically about superheroes yet the emotional honesty feeling like right out of Ordinary People. The writing gives time to it and we really feel Peter’s story. My one negative that continues is I think Mary Jane is the weakness of the whole trilogy, and I think was written too much as essentially an obstacle, something that potentially could’ve been rectified in the third movie…but we know how that went. She very much is in service to Peter’s story a little more than I think was needed, having said that, it does work on the Peter side of things though I’ll acknowledge it being the weakest aspect of the film and the trilogy as a whole. Beyond that the writing finds the balance, there is plenty of comedy that works but the film will stop to have an earnest moment, give it time let it sink in, and am I throwing shade at maybe a whole series of films that seems allergic to earnestness...yes.

Raimi’s direction I think is a particularly successful realization of making a live action comic book, which I think can be used as an excuse at times for being just ridiculous. Raimi does not do that; rather , he empowers the film by utilizing a visual eye, not in a stupid overt way like Ang Lee’s Hulk, to evoke a comic book frame without forcing the idea. Which isn’t just Spider-Man specific moments, but frames within the action where we get that dynamic quality of the best comic books. Raimi in turn uses this style to craft several striking set pieces, the ultimate Super Hero one being the train scene which is just beautifully done with every choice from both the intensity to the quietness of the after moment. And I would be wrong if I didn’t mention Raimi going full Evil Dead at the right time with the Hospital scene which was the perfect time for it and is wonderful in playing up the horror of the arms. Combining with the more overt though it also is a deft touch here for again the comedy and the dramatic moments. Not forcing either of us, rather letting each exist within the right moments and playing good comedic timing when needed, but allowing there to be that quiet earnestness that doesn’t cover up what exists in the script. Raimi obviously knows how to “jazz” up a scene but here he knows frankly when not to. The balance being the key to making a comic movie that is thrilling, entertaining but also convincing within its own world.

Louis Morgan said...

And also the long awaited thoughts on Community season 1, fully enjoyed as I do a good sitcom with a properly high laugh per episode ratio that increased throughout, particularly in the second half. Thought it had particularly enjoyable fun with the ridiculousness of the concept of these situations in Community College yet still related to it in some way. Just had a great time with it, so definitely continuing forward with the series.

Main Cast Ranking:

1. Gillian Jacobs
2. Joel McHale
3. Danny Pudi
4. Donald Glover
5. Alison Brie
6. Yvette Nicole Brown
7. Ken Jeong
8. Jim Rash
9. Chevy Chase

Aharkin said...

Having rewatched the film, what are your thoughts on the rest of the supporting performances from J.K. Simmons, Willem Dafoe, James Franco, and Hal Sparks?

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Louis: Would you be willing to give thoughts on the main cast now, or would you want to wait until later on? Glad you've enjoyed it so far, seasons 2 and 3 are a definite step up in quality, with the former being one of my all time favorite seasons of any show.

Like Robert mentioned before, the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons episode is one that is essential, and not available on streaming.

Could I have your thoughts on these Season 1 episodes? Also curious about any episodes you loved other than the ones I've highlighted below:

"Debate 109"
"Comparative Religion"
"Contemporary American Poultry"
"Modern Warfare"

Robert MacFarlane said...

Tahmeed: Actually, Peacock added the episode back, it was just Netflix that removed it.

Matt Mustin said...

If you thought Gillian Jacobs was MVP of the first season, just wait.

Robert MacFarlane said...

I’m really looking forward to you seeing Cooperative Calligraphy from season 2. Top 5 episode of TV right there.

Harris Marlowe said...

Louis: Regarding Sideways, I have my own feelings on this, but why do you think Maya decides to forgive Miles? And realistically, how much of a future do you think the two have together?

Marcus said...

Louis: What are some long-term Oscar predictions you may have, ie actors or directors winning or being recognized within the next 10-20 years?

Calvin Law said...

Louis: for these casting choices for Pulp Fiction which were in genuine consideration at one point or the other, how do you think they'd have turned out?

Daniel Day-Lewis as Vincent
Laurence Fishburne as Jules
Holly Hunter as Mia
Mickey Rourke as Butch
Christian Slater as Pumpkin
John Cusack as Lance

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

Louis: Your present roles for Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer and Elliott Gould?

Perfectionist said...

Concerning Spider Man 2, while Mary Jane truly is a flaw... The thing is that I really don't carry any deep hatred for her as a person, more so I hate how naive Peter's kinda is in the love aspect of his life. I can sympathize, why she's SUCH a mess(there's a deleted scene with Dunst, that they definitely should have put in, that gives some depth to why she's the way she is), but my God, regardless of sympathies, that's not the person, you would want to get into relationship with. That's not a person, that's in healthy mindset for a committed relationship. Have to distinguish between a high school crush and love by this point. You can sympathize, have pity, but you have to acknowledge where you are, and where they are, that they are not good for you.

Perfectionist said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tim said...

Robert:

30s) Claude Rains - Mr Smith goes to Washington
40s) Henry Travers - It's a Wonderful Lifw
50s) Karl Malden - A Streetcar named Desire
60s) Melvyn Douglas - Hud
70s) John Cazale - The Godfather Part 2
80s) Kevin Kline - A Fish called Wanda
90s) Ralph Fiennes - Schindler's List
00s) Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
10s) Jeff Bridges - Bad Times at the El Royale
20s) Ke Huy Quan - Everything Everywhere

A said...

Robert:

From what I've seen:

30s: Frank Morgan - The Wizard of Oz
40s: Lionel Barrymore - It's a Wonderful Life
50s: Karl Malden - A Streetcar Named Desire
60s: Tsutomu Yamazaki - High and Low
70s: Robert Duvall - Apocalypse Now
80s: Treat Williams - Smooth Talk
90s: Elias Koteas - The Thin Red Line
00s: Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
10s: Song Kang-ho - Parasite
20s: Ke Huy Quan - Everything Everywhere All at Once

Tim said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1okRE4I_nOw

Thoughts on this? I agree with every word here, and i thought i was the only one ...

Matt Mustin said...

Robert: I'll start with the 70s.
70s: Robert Shaw-Jaws
80s: Dennis Hopper-Blue Velvet
90s: Gene Hackman-Unforgiven
00s: Heath Ledger-The Dark Knight
10s: Joe Pesci-The Irishman
20s: Ke Huy Quan-EEAAO

Louis Morgan said...

Tahmeed:

I’d say wait as I plan to keep watching in relatively short succession.

Debate 109 - (The Pierce/Britta aside I thought was just fine. But yes the main debate story is quite hilarious with just taking it to the extreme in each moment, particularly the final tradeoff between goodness and evil based on Jeff’s actions. All that is great and quite hilarious. I also enjoyed Abed’s observations.)

Comparative Religion - (I mean Hall’s mustache alone makes the episode worth watching as is the Forest Whitaker bit. Otherwise matching basically building towards a brawl within a Christmas episode context, not the most obvious result, but quite entertaining in managing to pull it off in a particularly steeped in a character fashion.)

Contemporary American Poultry - (I mean if you’re going to do a Goodfellas parody you better do it well…and it does. Absolutely hilarious in how it goes to that extreme particularly in that shift in the control from Jeff to Abed and everyone going along is just classic character insanity that I love.)

Modern Warfare - (If I was “meh” on every other episode, which I was not, it would’ve been watching all of them to get to this as the shift to Jeff waking up on the post-apocalypse warzone I knew it was going to be a classic as it went from one hilarious scenario to another within the action genre, with the highlights for me being Ken Jeong (which this is easily the most I’ve ever liked him) coming into the fight as the ringer in the form of Det. Tequila from Hardboiled, to the double whammy of the dean confrontation where we get both Die Hard and Rambo Part II in such glorious fashion.)

My other favorites were:

Environmental Science
Physical Education (Guess I just love a good Color of Money parody)

Harris:

I always took it as she saw enough in him from reading his novel to give him a second chance, perhaps combined with the fact that clearly she knew the type of person Jack was from the outset. I also always got that Stephanie was more so an acquaintance of hers than any kind of best friend making it more possible to move on from it.

I think there is a future essentially if Miles could get a win in life, and maybe she would be enough of the win that he even accepts not being a published writer.

Marcus:

Director:

Villeneuve makes a historical epic that gets him the PTA, Nolan, Coens treatment.

Park finally gets his due with a nomination only…somehow.

Adam McKay continues to torture us with Oscar recognition.

Actor:

Chalamet wins for his worst performance.

Mark Ruffalo breaks the supporting actor record (with a horrible performance as he goes bad/good/bad/good with nominations.)

Mads Mikkelsen finally gets a nomination due to greater non-English recognition.

Calvin:

Daniel Day-Lewis as Vincent - (So weird to think of him in the role despite his goat range. And really there’s “breezy” elements about Vincent that I’d say are the one thing I have seen Day-Lewis struggle with to a degree and I just don’t ever see him as “dumb” which Vincent is in a few moments. Maybe he would’ve been amazing, but this is one of the few roles where I think Travolta was probably the better choice, plus the dance scene wouldn’t have been the same.)

Laurence Fishburne as Jules - (Also would’ve been a great fit as he too can do intensity with style and some comedic flavor.)

Holly Hunter as Mia - (Don’t really see her in this type of role despite her talent level her presence just doesn’t seem fitting to the “trophy wife” type.)

Mickey Rourke as Butch - (Though I like Willis in the role, I think Rourke would’ve been better, would’ve brought more pathos in certain moments but also just as much cool. It's so easy to hear him say “Zed’s dead” in my head.)

Christian Slater as Pumpkin - (At that time I feel he probably would’ve gone way too big for the role.)

John Cusack as Lance - (Would’ve stood out in the wrong way I think, particularly at that time where in some roles Cusack could seem a little lost.)

Anonymous said...

Louis: How do you feel about John Oliver's work in Community so far?

Louis Morgan said...

Ytrewq:

Harrison Ford:

John du Pont
Lewis Strauss
Colt Seavers
Frank Tassone

Rutger Hauer:

John du Pont
Prof. von Franz
The Killer
Count Pierre d'Alencon

Elliot Gould:

John du Pont
Isidor Isaac Rabi
Edward (A Different Man)
Burt Fabelman

Anonymous:

I honestly don't love Oliver as an acting presence, feel he's always pretty much the same within a presence to begin with that I don't love, and this is no different for me. I would say I think he's fine in that he gets through the scenes to the degree he needs to as a slimy professor, but I really wasn't terribly upset when he was mostly not in the show.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: Your ratings and thoughts on the cast of Normal?

Louis Morgan said...

Lucas:

Odenkirk - 3(It's feeling a bit like Cranston right after Breaking Bad where he ended up taking all the lead roles he could get but in turn maybe isn't making the best choices in terms of transitioning to a cinematic presence. As Odenkirk I guess is fashioning himself as alternative Liam Neeson again with a slight comedic undercurrent, but his comedy here is very light. The drama angle is just so rote and underwritten that Odenkirk doesn't have much to work with but in turn I don't think he makes much of what he does have with it. He's a likable presence on screen but I really think he should look into finding juicy supporting roles in far better scripts than this one.)

Winkler - 3(A somewhat enjoyable subversion of his presence that they barely even use. He's good at the "friendly" smarm but there's just not much there beyond it.)

Headey - 2.5(She's okayish in the role in at least being convincing to place, but didn't really get much within where the part goes as she's make enough of an impact in either segment.)

Jolly and Fletcher - 2.5(Both are just kind of forgettable and leave no major impact of any kind.)

MacLellan - 2(Thought his schtick got hold immediately.)

Shinkoda - 2(There were maybe moments for something more here but ends up playing in super stiff way.)

McLeod - 2.5(Manages to find at least a little genuine emotion in there however too much of where the character goes in terms of action feels extremely poorly developed on a script level.)

Razor said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the Coyote vs. Acme trailer?

Louis Morgan said...

Razor:

Didn't exactly sell me or not sell me given we mainly saw slapstick bits with a pretty thin plot shown. That can be enough if slapstick bits are funny...although side note looks like Cena and Forte are kind of playing into the silly tone, which doesn't mean they'll be bad...but the work of a proper straight man should never be undervalued.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: Speaking of Community, your thoughts Joel McHale in Spider-Man 2? Also, what are your thoughts on Rosemary Harris in the film? I couldn't find them anywhere

Anonymous said...

Louis: thoughts on the trailer for Clayface?

Matt Mustin said...

I liked everything about that Clayface teaser.

Robert MacFarlane said...

Clayface is basically my favorite teaser of the year.

Tony Kim said...

Louis: What do you regard as your greatest strength as a writer? And what do you think it is about your writing/perspective that attracts readers and makes them seek your opinions on various things?

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

Michael is getting middling reviews and that makes me very satisfied.

Luke Higham said...

Ytrewq: Couldn't agree more. :)

Louis Morgan said...

Lucas:

McHale's a quick bit very much within the Raimi slightly heightened comic book moment, and works for me in just playing up the overly smiley yet at the same time smarmy bank employee. Although I do like the slight hesitation he brings to denying the "prize", even if he still denies it all the same.

Harris's performance is good rest of the time in bringing a quiet warmth to her Aunt May as she also did in the first film. But her greatness is in the scene I've talked about so much. As Harris brings so much to the subtext in the scene where she projects both her love for Peter but also her love for what he does as Spider-Man essentially at the same time. There's the natural combination where she doesn't outright and say it yet you completely get that sense of support and encouragement. Contrasting that is her moment of accepting the foreclosure with a certain exasperation but strength that feels very honest and real despite again being a superhero film. Harris is given more to genuinely do here and does not waste a moment of it.

Anonymous:

Very much emphasizing that body horror, with a very fitting musical choice there and contrasting the literal Clayface against his original actor's face was quite the captivating sell particularly the final moment. And while we've seen some bad movies out of the "giving the villain their own movie" choice from studios I will say Clayface is at least one character who could carry his own movie in the right hands and from this impression maybe those are the hands he's in.

Tony:

I would like to think it is that I try to give articulate reasons for my opinions as clearly as I can and I try not to simplify them. And even in the cases where it is very much a "gut" distaste, or a "gut" love, I will say so. As for the second question, maybe it's the first, but I wouldn't quite presume to know however certainly appreciate it.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Did Thewlis go up at all for Prisoner Of Azkaban.

Shaggy Rogers said...

RIP Dean Tavoularis

Shaggy Rogers said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the song "Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head" in Spider-Man 2.

Matt Mustin said...

Louis: Do I have any unclaimed requests?

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

He'd remain a 4 for me.

Matt:

I believe you do have one.

Shaggy:

I think honestly a better fit use of the song than the original scene where it is a little random. As the song manages to be symbolic of Peter's apparently carefree life as he just goes along in normalcy and how it would to be normal, with I think the most important moment being the sirens to eating the hotdog as the "careless" man where nothing is worrying him.






RIP Dean Tavoularis, legendary production designer.

Tim said...

R.I.P. Dean Tavoularis

Tim said...

your thoughts on Sandra Hüller in Project Hail Mary? Also, i hear James Ortiz is eligible for Supporting Actor?

Anonymous said...

1930 Thomas Mitchell stagecoach
1940 Walter brennan the westerner
1950 toshiro mifune Seven samurai
1960 Walter Matthau fortune cookie
1970 Robert Shaw jaws
1980 Sean Connery indiana Jones and the last crusade
90 Kevin Spacey the usual suspects
2000 heath ledger the dark knight
2010 j.k. Simmons whiplash
2020 Ke huy quan everything every where all at once