Sam Raimi's 2002 adaptation of the "Spider-Man" comic books was a phenomenal success and whether or not to green-light a sequel was a "no-brainer" for the studio. However, sequels always bring higher expectations and often, as the sequel to this film shows, disappointment. With "Spider-Man 2", Raimi pulls off that rarest of cinematic successes. It is a sequel that is better than the original.

The strength of the "Spider-Man" films lies in the central character. How Peter Parker deals with this stroke of fate and the stress on him being an ordinary man, and a young one at that, in an extraordinary position of responsibility creates a great deal of sympathy and depth. It is a role that Maguire is ideally suited for and his performance makes this more than just a simple blockbuster. It is a light-hearted drama. It has been described as "subversive" by some and that is an apt description. It sits right at the top of the great summer blockbusters of this decade, a list that includes "Batman Begins" and the "Bourne" series.

But, it certainly doesn't shirk on its duty to entertain. Sam Raimi is a born entertainer and he doesn't pull any punches here, quite literally. The action comes thick and fast. All of the set-pieces are eye-popping and inventive. The first hour, in fact, is spectacular. There is stunning action, breathtaking visuals, interesting character development and lots of brilliant humour.

It opens as a pretty light-hearted affair and this is not really an example of a sequel going "darker". The birth of this film's villain, as it was in the prequel, is the result of a tragic accident and there is no suggestion that he is truly evil. The second hour is grittier, but not darker. It is a completely satisfying film that never bores, but Raimi can't quite hold himself back at points. The final scene should be awfully melodramatic, because it is, but it is forgiven on the basis of the rest of the film.

The other failing is that the villain, Doctor Octopus, brilliantly played by Alfred Molina, doesn't get nearly enough screen time. The main focus of the film is Parker's struggle with himself and his desires, but it comes across as pretty much the only focus. There is an interesting "Jekyll and Hyde" duality in the "Doc Ock" character, but this isn't really explored. There aren't enough internal struggles to make the character believable at points.

Though, this should not take away from the many positives of the film. Mention must be made of J.K. Simmons, who is brilliant as J. Jonah Jameson. If this performance were in an offbeat comedy, he would have got an Oscar nomination. And don't forget Bruce Campbell's cameo as the "Snooty Usher".

All in all, that makes for a completely entertaining two hours. In every way, this film justifies a sequel. In fact, it's a "no-brainer". What a shame that the sequel turned out to be exactly that.