REVIEW: Spiderman 3
I loved it.
They did a great job of putting three antagonists in the story and tying up all the loose ends in the finale. That’ quite an accomplishment. There was also the right blend of soap opera and action in the film, very suitable for Spidey.
Great special effects. Great credit sequence. The villains were all handled well.
My only complain was Spiderman did more of his stuff without his mask. It was really a bit too much, if you ask me. I know actors hate wearing masks because they want to show their acting, but please, this is a Spiderman movie. And Peter Parker gets plenty fo face time as it is.
The humor was all well handled. All in all, I think I like this one the best of the three. They managed to continue the story in a logical, believable way while bringing closure to the Harry Osborne story.
I tried to go see it at 9:00 last night, figuring we wouldn’t have a problem since it was showing every 15 minutes at the theater. When we got there a sign out front said every show was sold out until 1:15 AM. This one is going to shatter the box office this weekend.
Posted by Paul T on 05/05 at 05:04 AMI saw it yesterday (Fri. 4:15PM). The show I saw wasn’t sold out, but I bet some of the later shows were. The movie starts every 30 min. here.
I did like 3, but I think I still like Spiderman 2 better. Spiderman 2 was MUCH better than Spiderman. The opening credits in Spiderman 3 did a great job of “catching” the audience up on the events in the first 2 movies.
I need to watch Spiderman 3 again because there was so much information & plot development that once will certainly not be enough. I was less pleased than you with how loose ends were tied up. Maybe for those arcs from the first 2 movies that’s true, but for me not so much so for new story lines introduced into 3.
What happened to Harry’s fortune? What happened to Flint’s daughter? Flint is just allowed to storm
away? What happened to the “new” girl, Gwen, in Peter’s life? Will Peter & Mary Jane ever learn to communicate with one another? Why was the lab staff introduced into the mix?Posted by on 05/05 at 07:52 AMThey left things open for another movie. Yes, the Sandman gets away, but could anyone stop him?
I think Gwen was turned off by what Peter did in that bar, so she may be gone for now.
I got a kick out of the homage they did to Saturday Night Fever where he’s sauntering down the street.
Posted by James Hudnall on 05/05 at 09:04 AMUmm…
Did you guys see the same film I did?
Listen, it’s not like it’s the worst film ever made by Hollywood, but it’s far from the best and most Spidey fans will NOT agree that it was the best of the three.
The film had serious issues…
A) A disjointed Peter Parker acting nearly schizophrenic at times = Tobey Maguire couldn’t figure out how to act other than stoned as Petey/Spidey so he borrowed Tommy Lee Jones Two-Face shtick;
B) A horribly corny cameo by Stan Lee that shows for the millionth time that dialogue which works in a comic book doesn’t always translate well onto the silver screen;
and C) It was just overall an instance of too many running characters and subplots. There’s too much going on to develop anything well and therefore we get no character development that’s above average/mediocre in the film.
No question Bryce Dallas Howard blew Kirsten Dunst out of the water. Her Gwen Stacy was a fresh breath of air and the girl you’d like to marry versus a nearly vain-glorious yet not Marilyn Monroe glamorous MJ. Gee, who’d you think most people think Peter SHOULD have ended up with from the beginning as far as this series goes?
Although the Harry Osborne arc finished as I’d expected, there are still issues here. Once again, a BAD Goblin(?) costume and topping that an unexpectedly experienced/great first-time villain! All in the space of a few days? Something’s not ringing right with that logic. And such convenient exposition by the Osborne family butler, too!
As for Sandman, gee did we have to tack on the little subplot of the sick daughter ON TOP OF a guilty conscience about killing Peter’s ***** by accident? Pure schmaltz that just wasn’t needed.
Listen, I really think—and most people who saw this film will agree with me I think—that the script for this film was written over one long weekend. It sure doesn’t feel like it got any revision. (And the sad thing is that this script was STILL probably written better than anything was by Marvel during the whole Civil War debacle..) My coworker this morning was kind of wandering along with me if Sam Raimi perhaps had a kegger weekend with his older brother, Ivan? This sure wasn’t great screenwriting!
Posted by on 05/05 at 09:45 AMWell, ome on. He was sort of possessed by the suit in this movie. So his behavior made sense to me. I agree the Stan Lee cameo was very forced and corny.
But I think they handled all the subplots [petty well, considering what a juggling act that is. It may look easy to you but it’s hard work, and as I writer, I can tell you. They did not hack out this script.
I do agree that they didn’t need so many villains. Sandman and Hobgoblin would have been fine and they could have saved Venom for later.
I also agree that Mary Jane was a self centered whiner. He was supportive of her and she was the ungrateful one. Gwen was a lot more appealing as a character. Maybe they wrote it that way knowing Dunst wanted out of the role. So they made it so they could find someone else for Parker next time. I mean, didn’t Parker break up with Mary Jane at least once before in the comics?
However, I think you are being too hard on it. Once you see it again, I think it will grow on you.
Posted by James Hudnall on 05/05 at 01:02 PMI enjoyed it…and they’ve been teasing us with the presence of Curt Connors for three films now…are we going to see The Lizard next time round?
tw: audience21 BTW, did you notice Willem Dafoe in the <a>audience</i> at the jazz club during the scene where Peter acts out? If it wasn’t him, it was someone who sure looked like him…
Posted by on 05/06 at 04:25 PM
Next entry: David Blaine-ish
Previous entry: Psuedo-science vs Real Science
