Post a Reply
Back to the Forum
Is now a good time to say I walked out of the cinema cos I was that bored??
Posted: 22:44 May 07 2007
Review: Spider-Man 3
Written By: Sam Raimi, Ivan Raimi, Alvin Sargent
Directed By: Sam Raimi
Starring: Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, Thomas Hayden Church, Topher Grace
Rating: 12A
Tag-Line: How long can any man fight the darkness... before he finds it in himself?
The third film in Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy has confused me. I’m not entirely sure what to make of it, which could hamper this review. In essence, it’s a good film, dragged down by being stuffed to bursting and a so-so script.
When the film starts, Peter is on top of the world. He loves Mary Jane (and is about to pop the question), Spider-Man is viewed as a hero and is about to receive the keys to the city. It doesn’t last for long. We’re soon introduced to not one, not two but three villains, all of which are out to flush Spidey down the spout. There’s Harry, Peter’s long-time friend come new Goblin; Flint Marko aka The Sandman and of course the alien symbiote, which drops out of space and conveniently lands a few feet of our friendly neighbourhood spider-man. That’s how lazy that explaination had to be.
And that’s one of the biggest problems of the film. There’s too much going on.
The script isn’t great. It’s passable most of the time, but there are some seriously cringe-worthy moments. There are too many instances of kids who can’t act exclaiming stuff like ‘Awesome!’ or ‘Wicked Cool!’ – every time it happened it ripped me out of the action, and that shouldn’t be the case. There’s also a news reporter section that is seriously bad. The lines are bad, the delivery is bad, and it just comes off flat.
Cringeworthy moments include the aforementioned 'wicked cool!' and news reporter, Peter's street-strut, which while making a point, was horrible. Parts of the story are that bad too. Harry bangs his head and for a big part of the film has amnesia, making room for Sandman and symbiote. Great! The symbiote falls out of the sky next to Peter. Original!
There is a lot to like about the film though. The action scenes are excellent. Raimi is at his best directing action, and these are perhaps the best action scenes of the three films. From the first encounter with the Goblin to the finale, they’re all top notch, with some stunning effects work.
The performances are good on the whole too. Tobey Maguire is perfectly at home as Peter now. The newcomers, Thomas Hayden Church (playing Sandman) and Topher Grace (playing Eddie Brock) are excellent, giving their characters depth, especially Church. Kirsten Dunst doesn’t have much to play with. In this film MJ is sullen and whiny, and she’s outshined by Bryce Dallas Howard’s Gwen Stacy. Supporters like Bruce Campbell and J.K. Simmons put in good turns too.
People who loved the first two films will I’m sure find a lot to like in this film. I feel it would have been much more effective to have done the Goblin and Sandman, introduce the symbiote but not do Venom until the 4th movie. That would have given everyone the time they needed.
Overall, I enjoyed the film, but I was pulled out of it so often by things that didn’t hit the right note or didn’t work far too often. I’m not sure how I’d rank it against the previous films either. I can say that it’s not a patch on Batman Begins, or X-Men 2.
It’s well worth the ticket price, but it’s not going to light any worlds on fire.
(Edited by Maffrew 05/05/2007 14:55)
(Edited by Maffrew 05/05/2007 16:16)
11 Replies and 7258 Views in Total.
Posted: 22:44 May 07 2007 
Heh. Well I thought it was a lot better than that 
But I've never walked out of a film, no matter how bad.
But I've never walked out of a film, no matter how bad.
Posted: 08:15 May 08 2007 
I watched the movie last Saturday and I must say I wasn't very impressed. If you went to see it expecting an action packed Spiderman adventure you will certainly be gravely disappointed. This movie seemed more like a Spiderman drama than anything else which wasn't what I was expecting at all.
On the upside the special effects are pretty good but we kinda came to expect that from movies with this type of budget. The story itself was seriously stretched as if in the middle of writing the script the writers got the go ahead for another 3 movies and decided that instead of using all the material they had now they would spread it all out over two movies instead.
Although the actual ending of the movie seriously sucked the fight at the end wasn't bad. But you would expect that after 3 movies Spiderman's abilities would have become second nature to him but for some reason they are not. Take for example the end fight where he is pinned down by Venom and tries to reach for a sharp piece of metal thats obviously too far away. Instead of directly shooting some web to it he stretches and stretches until he finally seems to come to the conclusion this is not Star Wars and he actually doesn't have any force powers at which time he finally resorts to using his webbing in a nick of time. It might work for dramatic effect but it seriously pissed me off.
"Evil" Peter is fun though and although he wants to be ooh so cool he never gets passed the late 1990's "cool" which possibly makes him a bigger "geek" than he already was.
Overall it wasn't a bad movie but we have come to expect better from a Spiderman movie which made it a large disappointment for me.
(Edited by Chambler 08/05/2007 09:08)
On the upside the special effects are pretty good but we kinda came to expect that from movies with this type of budget. The story itself was seriously stretched as if in the middle of writing the script the writers got the go ahead for another 3 movies and decided that instead of using all the material they had now they would spread it all out over two movies instead.
Although the actual ending of the movie seriously sucked the fight at the end wasn't bad. But you would expect that after 3 movies Spiderman's abilities would have become second nature to him but for some reason they are not. Take for example the end fight where he is pinned down by Venom and tries to reach for a sharp piece of metal thats obviously too far away. Instead of directly shooting some web to it he stretches and stretches until he finally seems to come to the conclusion this is not Star Wars and he actually doesn't have any force powers at which time he finally resorts to using his webbing in a nick of time. It might work for dramatic effect but it seriously pissed me off.
"Evil" Peter is fun though and although he wants to be ooh so cool he never gets passed the late 1990's "cool" which possibly makes him a bigger "geek" than he already was.
Overall it wasn't a bad movie but we have come to expect better from a Spiderman movie which made it a large disappointment for me.
(Edited by Chambler 08/05/2007 09:08)
Posted: 09:06 May 08 2007 
So, I guess applegeeks made a nice summary:
Spiderman 3: the quick version
Spiderman 3: the quick version
Posted: 18:21 May 08 2007 
I thought it was alright but I'm not a big fan of any of the Spiderman movies..I just find them watchable. Was impressed with the special effects for Venom though
Posted: 21:44 May 08 2007 
i was really worried about this film - the last time a superhero movie dealt with one of my fave bad guys (bane in the 4th batman film, whatever it was called - ive surgically removed that film from my memory it was that bad!), i was appalled at the treatment he got, and i was worried the same was going to happen here.
i shouldnt have worried - venom was just about perfect in this.
just a pity the same cant be said about the rest of this turkey.
with the exception of venom, bruce campbell's maitre d, and stan lee's walk-on cameo, theres NOTHING here to make me want to see this again.
ive written a massive, incoherent rant that doesnt even touch on a lot of the stuff i thought about this film - i just got bored after spending more time writing than watching the bits i actually enjoyed.
but, if youre interested, its here...
i shouldnt have worried - venom was just about perfect in this.
just a pity the same cant be said about the rest of this turkey.
with the exception of venom, bruce campbell's maitre d, and stan lee's walk-on cameo, theres NOTHING here to make me want to see this again.
ive written a massive, incoherent rant that doesnt even touch on a lot of the stuff i thought about this film - i just got bored after spending more time writing than watching the bits i actually enjoyed.
but, if youre interested, its here...
Posted: 22:25 May 09 2007 Please!
by mad
and stan lee's walk-on cameo,
That cameo was so cheesey and out of place, it just didn't work. Definitely the worst of the cameos he's done in the films so far.
As for Venom, I did like him, he worked. I just wish they'd done it properly and given him a whole film as the main villain, and not a side-show. I liked Topher Grace in the role, and it would have been cool to see them do Venom as a lethal protector, and not just a bag a galactic goo.
Posted: 09:33 May 10 2007 i was asked what i would have done differently with this movie.
by Maffrew
(quotes)
Please!
That cameo was so cheesey and out of place, it just didn't work. Definitely the worst of the cameos he's done in the films so far.[quote]
compared to the rest of the film, that was an oscar-winning performance...
although i have to admit my inner-geek cheered when he walked on.
[quote]by Maffrew
(quotes)
As for Venom, I did like him, he worked. I just wish they'd done it properly and given him a whole film as the main villain, and not a side-show. I liked Topher Grace in the role, and it would have been cool to see them do Venom as a lethal protector, and not just a bag a galactic goo.
one thing would have been to split the venom story into 2 parts, and cover it over 2 films.
first would have been the story of the black!spiderman, having the symbiote take over FAR sooner (the kiss with gwen stacy would have made a hell of a lot more sense if the symbiote was in charge at this point), and show spidey slowly losing control to the symbiote, before regaining charge and getting rid of the symbiote, leaving it open for venoms appearance in the next part.
look on the bright side - venom had a far better role in this than bane did in batman & robin.
Posted: 19:27 May 13 2007
A big dissapointment! The trailer looked excellent, and I thought it'd be way better than the first 2 films, I was soooo wrong! There were some good moments, but overall it was a dissapointment 
Posted: 19:00 May 19 2007
A reasonable film could've been made with either villain as the sole focus - neither felt as though they were really being used to their full potential being squashed together like that.
Unfulfilled potential was a recurring feeling throughout the whole film for me. It's rare that I come across a film that seems to be less than the sum of its parts, but whilst there were some nice individual scenes and ideas in there, they just weren't put together in a way that worked as well as before.
Unfulfilled potential was a recurring feeling throughout the whole film for me. It's rare that I come across a film that seems to be less than the sum of its parts, but whilst there were some nice individual scenes and ideas in there, they just weren't put together in a way that worked as well as before.
Posted: 23:11 May 20 2007 
Am I the only person that went to see this movie just being bothered about big flashy fight scenes? At least I wasn't too disappointed there...
Posted: 11:23 May 21 2007