Obviously, there’s no movie Catwoman vs. Spiderman, much less a sequel. No, this is a review of this summer’s two big superhero movies: “Catwoman”:http://imdb.com/title/tt0327554/ and “Spider-Man 2″:http://imdb.com/title/tt0316654/.
Everybody has seen Spider-Man, so I don’t need to review the plot here; nobody saw Catwoman, so I’ll summarize briefly. Halle Berry plays a shy graphic designer for a cosmetics company; she discovers this company’s new product has horrible side effects, and is killed by Sharon Stone. Ms. Berry is brought back to life by an exotic Egyptian cat, and becomes the ultra-agile and sexy Catwoman. Fighting ensues. Etc. Etc.
Catwoman is actually quite entertaining, despite the vicious reviews. The fact is, it’s a relatively silly movie with lots of fussin’ and fightin’, like many of the successful summer flick of yore. It’s also got Halle Berry in skintight leather (it’s more than that — there’s so many cut-outs in Halle’s leather pants that it’s difficult to imagine that they can retain structural integrity). What’s wrong with that? It’s hard to believe American’s won’t pay $100 million to see Halle shake her ass.
In contrast, Spider-Man 2 has Toby McGuire in skintight Lycra. Not quite as sexy, at least if you’re of my persuasion. Fortunately, the last 15 minutes extensively feature Kirsten Dunst in a soaking-wet sundress.
Spider-Man 2 is not an old-fashioned summer superhero flick. It’s a real film, with internal struggle and personal growth and extended dialogue and all. For my taste, this actually kinda made it slow, not as much fun as it should have been. This is even though it had more big fights than Catwoman. Not as much fun as the first one, that’s for sure.
So that’s my take: see Catwoman now, see Spider-Man 2 later if you feel like it. Other reviewers disagree. World 1, Wade 0. Oh well!