5th anniversary for Spider-Man 3

[sontin]

And the Cartoon-Peter changes his outfit, too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FMXyQjTPROU#t=256s

 

[Anno_Domini]

You mean...the cartoon portrayed an ability that the symbiote actually does? Oh my god!

The ability to shapeshift, from mimicking clothing up to and including complete change of appearance, regardless to the host's actual stature and bodily dimensions as the symbiotes are living tesseracts.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I love how in the 90s series "Alien Costume," Peter makes a reference to Aerosmith and gets a rocker outfit (since Aerosmith made the theme for TAS of course).

 

[Venom75]

I'm not saying the 90's toon was the greatest version of the symbiote story(I think it's a combination of different stories,shows;etc..),but at least it treated the subject seriously. As opposed to Spidey 3. But....

With that being said,I caught Batman and Robin on TV the other day and for the life of me I don't understand how anyone could compare Spider-man 3 to that horrible piece of filmmaking!! Even if the entire film itself is flawed,Spider-man 3 still had alot of good things to it and some epic moments. Batman and Robin was just plain horrible. I mean,every moment of that movie was bad and cheesy. Spider-man 3 was nowhere close to bad. Flawed,yes,but horrible and ranking along side Batman and Robin? No way.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I'm not saying the 90's toon was the greatest version of the symbiote story(I think it's a combination of different stories,shows;etc..),but at least it treated the subject seriously. As opposed to Spidey 3. But....

With that being said,I caught Batman and Robin on TV the other day and for the life of me I don't understand how anyone could compare Spider-man 3 to that horrible piece of filmmaking!! Even if the entire film itself is flawed,Spider-man 3 still had alot of good things to it and some epic moments. Batman and Robin was just plain horrible. I mean,every moment of that movie was bad and cheesy. Spider-man 3 was nowhere close to bad. Flawed,yes,but horrible and ranking along side Batman and Robin? No way.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I'm not saying the 90's toon was the greatest version of the symbiote story(I think it's a combination of different stories,shows;etc..),but at least it treated the subject seriously. As opposed to Spidey 3. But....

With that being said,I caught Batman and Robin on TV the other day and for the life of me I don't understand how anyone could compare Spider-man 3 to that horrible piece of filmmaking!! Even if the entire film itself is flawed,Spider-man 3 still had alot of good things to it and some epic moments. Batman and Robin was just plain horrible. I mean,every moment of that movie was bad and cheesy. Spider-man 3 was nowhere close to bad. Flawed,yes,but horrible and ranking along side Batman and Robin? No way.

I couldn't agree more. SM3 is flawed mainly because it's bloated, Batman and Robin was a complete disaster.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Spider-Man 3 had the potential to be the best comic book film ever made. Batman and Robin... its purpose was to sell merchandise. And I'm not just saying that. All the models, costumes, etc were designed after toys and action figures.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Spider-Man 3 had the potential to be the best CBM as well as finishing off a trilogy that could break the curse. Sucks to think all of that potential.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Spider-Man 3 had the potential to be the best CBM as well as finishing off a trilogy that could break the curse. Sucks to think all of that potential.

That's why its so hard to watch Spider-Man 3. There really is an amazing film hidden somewhere in there, but...

 

[ParkerPeters]

sooooOOOOONY! Makes me upset when studios overstep this far.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Spider-Man 3 had the potential to be the best CBM as well as finishing off a trilogy that could break the curse. Sucks to think all of that potential.

So true. I honestly get depressed thinking about it.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Spider-Man 3 had the potential to be the best CBM as well as finishing off a trilogy that could break the curse. Sucks to think all of that potential.

Agreed on that, different way, but this line is made to agree with

 

[WarriorDreamer]

Yeah, I don't think SM3 would be seen in nearly as bad of a light as it is, had there'd been a Spider-Man 4. I was really looking forward to SM4 to kind of 'make-up' for the disapointment that SM3 was. They could have really had a good shot at writing the wrongs of SM3 and then going out with a bang.

I think it was amost self explanatory would could have happened in SM4. A much more matured Peter, Peter and Mary Jane have been through so much that we see they've learnt from mistakes, etc, a great villain, one who really tests Peter in a new way, maybe questions about how long he can be Spider-Man for could be considered. There is so much material to draw from I do not understand how they couldn't come up with a decent concept.

Heck, I saw a ton of fan ideas on the internet I would be happy to see come to fruition. But anyways, SM3 is what it is. It had enormous hype and I was incredibly excited to see it. Yes, it was a big disapointment story-wise, but it had some kick-ass fight scenes.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Yes, Spider-Man 3 would still have been seen as a bad film. No film can "make up" an earlier film being a disappointment. Rocky Balboa didn't take away the bad taste left from Rocky V.

 

[WarriorDreamer]

Well not take anything 'away' from how bad it was, but at least it wouldn't have gotten as much attention IMO. People would mostly remember probably SM2 & 4, then would remember SM1 AND 3. They would see it as, sure SM3 was very flawed, but at least it finished on a great film, leaving people really great feelings from the series. The problem with leaving it on SM3 is people seem that much more judgemental on the first two because SM3 was the final chapter. (It seems to me.)

I'm with Kirsten Dunst when she admitted she wished she'd known and all the actors, producers, etc that for definite it was the last one. They deliberately left it somewhat open for another movie.

 

[SpideyVille]

Yeah, a good film doesn't make up for a bad one, however I think if they did a SM4, and it was good, the franchise would be looked at much differently. Right now, whenever people think of that franchise, they think of how bad SM3 was, and how it exposed the flaws of the first two. But people seem to forget that SM2 was released before Batman Begins, and in 2004, it was considered the best Superhero movie, next to Superman (1978).

But now, Raimi, Tobey, and Kirsten get a lot more hate and have suffered a loss in reputation because of how it ended. Although I kinda disagree with Dunst. They may not have known it would be the last, but it was ended in a way that suggested it was the last. After all, no one really had contractual obligations, despite the fact that Sony had wanted to do 6 films. But in terms of the stars, it was a question whether they would be back before there was even talk about another sequel.

 

[Anno_Domini]

To a lot of people Spider-Man 2 was better than Batman Begins though. I don't think a film was really hailed as the best CBM until The Dark Knight after Spider-Man 2 was released.

 

[SpideyVille]

To a lot of people Spider-Man 2 was better than Batman Begins though. I don't think a film was really hailed as the best CBM until The Dark Knight after Spider-Man 2 was released.

Very true. My point was more that Batman Begins gave way to TDK, which also paved the way for what superhero movies started to become, later on, which is "dark and gritty". Most superhero movies and shows now try to get that same tone, and movies like the Raimi films are looked at as either being "childish", meaning they are targeted for children, or campy.

But people forget that the hype going into SM3 was a lot like the hype behind TDKR, because SM2 was looked at so highly that SM3 was looked at as this huge event at the time.

 

[Anno_Domini]

The hype was very much the same with Spider-Man 3 and The Dark Knight Rises. Both had sequels that were very amazing and spectacular but in the end only one of the threequels came out to be enjoyable and ended the trilogy on a very high note.

 

[Human Torch]

The hype was very much the same with Spider-Man 3 and The Dark Knight Rises. Both had sequels that were very amazing and spectacular but in the end only one of the threequels came out to be enjoyable and ended the trilogy on a very high note.

And that would be Spider-Man 3.t:

 

[Anno_Domini]

And that would be Spider-Man 3.t:

Mark down your calendars boys and girls...November 1st is Opposite Day.

 

[SpideyVille]

LOL, it really is a tale of two franchises. While my opinion of TDKR has lowered as time has passes, it is without a question still a good film and ended that trilogy on a good note. Those three movies are now looked at very highly, whereas the Raimi films are not because SM3 was nowhere near on par with the previous films.

Ironically, Iron Man was looked at pretty highly for a while until TDK was releases shortly after. But after IM2, that franchise lost a lot of steam. But with all of the hype surrounding the IM3 trailer, along with the success of the Avengers, the Iron Man films as a whole can be right up there if the third one is as good as people expect it to be.

 

[Anno_Domini]

The Iron Man series could end up being exactly like Men In Black, not even joking. The sequels were a downgrade, but the third films could bring the series back up a notch or two.

 

[Human Torch]

Mark down your calendars boys and girls...November 1st is Opposite Day.

It would only be opposite day if I said you had a good reason to continually crap on S-M 3 and praise the equally flawed TDKR.t:

 

[Anno_Domini]

Equally flawed?

Well, I needed a great laugh, but then again, this IS Opposite Day so I suppose TDKR isn't equally flawed

Needless to say though....TDKR was meant with mostly positive reviews while S-M 3 was meant with mediocre reviews which was mostly negative and we know how RT viewed the two films as well.