Just over twenty years after Action Comics #1 began the superhero genre, Marvel Comics reworked superhero conventions and helped renew interest in the genre. Similarly, just over twenty years after Superman: The Movie propelled the first superhero into blockbuster cinema, the first blockbuster adaptations of Marvel superheroes were released, instigating the twenty-first century superhero blockbuster boom.373 The success of director Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, which was the top-grossing domestic release of 2002, and its sequels (2004 and 2007), was central to this wave of films.374 Two contexts that are frequently deemed instrumental in facilitating the production and popularity of twenty-first century superhero blockbusters are the increasing prominence of digital filmmaking technologies, and the attacks on the World Trade Centre on 9 September 2001.375 In this chapter, by applying my approach to an analysis of Raimi’s Spider-Mantrilogy, I explore how the films’ aesthetics of adaptation harness digital filmmaking technologies and engage with the twenty-first century sociopolitical climate. Since each film in the trilogy is directed by Sam Raimi, for the sake of clarity and to ensure against confusion with subsequent Spider-Man films set in other continuities, I will refer to it as Raimi’sSpider-Man trilogy.376
373The first blockbuster to be adapted from Marvel superheroes was 2000’s X-Men.
374 Spider-Man grossed $403,706,375 domestically and $821,708,551 worldwide. Spider-Man 2 grossed
$373,585,825 domestically and $783,766,341 worldwide, while Spider-Man 3 grossed $336,530,303 domestically and $890,871,626 worldwide. The immense popularity of Spider-Man contributes to its representational status among films at the beginning of the twenty-first century superhero blockbuster boom. All figures from Box Office Mojo, <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/>, accessed on 04 July 2014.
375 For example, Andreas Rauscher argues that digital effects are one of the key factors that facilitated the new-
wave of superhero adaptations in the 2000s, Hassler-Forest argues that superhero films are, more than any other Hollywood genre, attuned to and reflective of discourses of neoliberal capitalism in the post-9/11 landscape, and Burke explores the extent to which these two frequently identified contexts have influenced the popularity of the twenty-first century comic book movie. Andreas Rauscher, ‘The Marvel Universe on Screen: A New Wave of
Superhero Movies?’, Berninger, Ecke and Haberkorn (ed.), Comics as a Nexus of Cultures, pp. 21-32; Hassler-
Forest, Capitalist Superheroes; Burke, The Comic Book Film Adaptation, pp. 24-54
376 Individually I will refer to the films as Raimi’s Spider-Man, Raimi’s Spider-Man 2and Raimi’s Spider-Man 3. The
Spider-Man films that were released subsequently are The Amazing Spider-Man (Marc Webb, 2012) and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Marc Webb, 2014). Spider-Man also features in Captain America: Civil War (Anthony and Joe Russo, 2016) and the forthcoming Spider-Man: Homecoming (Jon Watts, 2017 (details correct at time of writing)).
168 I begin by outlining the key ways that Marvel reworked superhero genre conventions in the 1960s. I demonstrate this fresh approach to the superhero through analysis of Spider-Man’s comic book debut, and explore the pliability of Spider-Man’s traits by surveying some subsequent comic book and screen incarnations. Throughout this discussion, I highlight pertinent comparisons and distinctions between Superman and Spider-Man.
I proceed to explore ways in which Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy use digital filmmaking technologies to metamorphose Spider-Man’s traits. To consider the opportunities that digital filmmaking technologies offer live-action adaptations of superhero comics, I expand my review of literature’s discussion of ontological and conceptual relations between drawn and photographic images by adding CGI to this exploration. Since discourses of cinematic realism often provide key criteria through which CGI is evaluated, I outline how these issues impact the construction of digital images. While interrogating discourses of indexicality that are pervasive in discussions of cinematic realism, I also move away from these criteria by looking at conceptualisations of cinematic realism based on movement. Besides questions of realism, I explore ways in which CGI contributes to the films’ meanings. The appearance, movement and narrative function of CGI in Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy are then considered together in an analysis of the superhero’s and his supervillains’ bodies.
I move from my analysis of bodies to an examination of space. It is through this discussion of space that I explore ways in which the films’ aesthetic construction communicates their sociopolitical perspectives. Rather than framing this discussion in terms of how the films directly engage with the context of 9/11, I consider the films’ broader engagement with sociopolitical ideas, while observing more specific comments on contemporary contexts that can be read into this wider discourse. The films’ use of CGI continues to be a key concern as I discuss the presentation of New York’s external spaces. Looking at how the relationship between these spaces, Spider-Man and New York’s citizenry is articulated in action set-pieces, alongside the cultural makeup of this citizenry, reveals how the films conceptualise New York and its community. This exploration of social identity develops as I proceed to
169 analyse nostalgic stylisation of key internal spaces, paying particular attention to what roles these spaces present to Peter Parker/Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire). I restrict this analysis to spaces presented in the first film, to enable assessment of whether meanings are created through the ways these spaces are situated in close narrative relation to one another.
Finally, I consider ways in which the sequels reposition Peter/Spider-Man on his spectrum to develop the exploration of roles that he can adopt. This analysis is undertaken concurrently with an examination of the trilogy’s presentation of Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), which enables interrogation of the ways in which the films frame femininity. This last section picks up and foregrounds a concern that recurs throughout the chapter with how serialisation can complement the adaptive practices of superhero blockbusters.