Confused Matthew's "Spider-Man 3" Review

[Spider-Fan]

SM3 wasn't trashed by critics like Transformers 2 is being trashed. Want me to gather ratings from sites to prove it?

 

[KILLING JOKER]

SM3 wasn't trashed by critics like Transformers 2 is being trashed. Want me to gather ratings from sites to prove it?

You wanna go ahead and quote the section of my post where I said that? Cause I never did. I'm fully aware SM3 got spilt reviews. It was nearly half and half on Rotten Tomatoes. You've got a 10% slight edge for positive over negative but other than that 10% Nearly HALF the critics did not like the movie.

Out of 42 top critics 24 of them gave it a negative review. That's over half of the top critics saying they did not like it. And the ones that did not like it were less than kind about it.

"Spider-Man 3" is, in short, a mess. Too many villains, too many pale plot strands, too many romantic misunderstandings, too many conversations, too many street crowds looking high into the air and shouting "oooh!" this way, then swiveling and shouting "aaah!" that way. -ROGER EBERT

"Spider Man 3," by contrast, shows how not to make a sequel. The film takes three bad stories and tries to fashion a narrative out of them. It can't be done. It also takes established and warmly regarded characters and has them behave in ways that make no sense in terms of what we know about them. -Mick LaSalle

In an apparent effort to put a stake in the heart of the franchise that threatens to swallow his career whole, "Spider-Man" series director Sam Raimi has delivered an overlong, visually incoherent, mean-spirited and often just plain awful "Spider-Man 3," a tangled web of special-effects overkill and self-indulgence that all but destroys the fun and goodwill created by the first two movies.-Ann Hornaday

I mean if these critics, and I could have listed more thought it was that bad then I mean......maybe it was. I certainly feel the right to hate it as much as I do if they have the right to.

I mean if you think 60% is good mark from critics I'd have to disagree. That's like throwing a party for 200 people and only 112 of them decide to stay. Wouldn't really call that a success.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

You wanna go ahead and quote the section of my post where I said that? Cause I never did. I'm fully aware SM3 got spilt reviews. It was nearly half and half on Rotten Tomatoes. You've got a 10% slight edge for positive over negative but other than that 10% Nearly HALF the critics did not like the movie.

Out of 42 top critics 24 of them gave it a negative review. That's over half of the top critics saying they did not like it. And the ones that did not like it were less than kind about it.

"Spider-Man 3" is, in short, a mess. Too many villains, too many pale plot strands, too many romantic misunderstandings, too many conversations, too many street crowds looking high into the air and shouting "oooh!" this way, then swiveling and shouting "aaah!" that way. -ROGER EBERT

i never ever listen to ebert. did you hear his review of x-men origins? it's like he wasnt even watching the movie.

 

[Spider-Fan]

You wanna go ahead and quote the section of my post where I said that? Cause I never did. I'm fully aware SM3 got spilt reviews. It was nearly half and half on Rotten Tomatoes. You've got a 10% slight edge for positive over negative but other than that 10% Nearly HALF the critics did not like the movie.

Out of 42 top critics 24 of them gave it a negative review. That's over half of the top critics saying they did not like it. And the ones that did not like it were less than kind about it.

"Spider-Man 3" is, in short, a mess. Too many villains, too many pale plot strands, too many romantic misunderstandings, too many conversations, too many street crowds looking high into the air and shouting "oooh!" this way, then swiveling and shouting "aaah!" that way. -ROGER EBERT

"Spider Man 3," by contrast, shows how not to make a sequel. The film takes three bad stories and tries to fashion a narrative out of them. It can't be done. It also takes established and warmly regarded characters and has them behave in ways that make no sense in terms of what we know about them. -Mick LaSalle

In an apparent effort to put a stake in the heart of the franchise that threatens to swallow his career whole, "Spider-Man" series director Sam Raimi has delivered an overlong, visually incoherent, mean-spirited and often just plain awful "Spider-Man 3," a tangled web of special-effects overkill and self-indulgence that all but destroys the fun and goodwill created by the first two movies.-Ann Hornaday

I mean if these critics, and I could have listed more thought it was that bad then I mean......maybe it was. I certainly feel the right to hate it as much as I do if they have the right to.

I mean if you think 60% is good mark from critics I'd have to disagree. That's like throwing a party for 200 people and only 112 of them decide to stay. Wouldn't really call that a success.

60% is still over 50%, meaning more than half liked it. Getting over 50% is not in the same league as Batman & Robin. Batman & Robin has a less than 20% (if I remember right). That means WAY less than half the critics liked it. Same for Transformers 2.

Not the same ballpark

 

[KILLING JOKER]

60% is still over 50%, meaning more than half liked it. Getting over 50% is not in the same league as Batman & Robin. Batman & Robin has a less than 20% (if I remember right). That means WAY less than half the critics liked it. Same for Transformers 2.

Not the same ballpark

*sigh* Look, I was talking about the failure of the film being in the same ballpark as Batman and Robin. That's including overall reaction to the film not just critics. It's infamous for being hated among the Spider-man fans. You guys, like it or not, are in the minority.

If a documentry were to come out 20 years from now talking about the Spider-man films, it surely would include that SM3 was largely disliked by the fans. Not the general public but by the fans. You guys keep going on about the average movie goer and people who know little or nothing about the comics. We are in a forum for fans of superhero movies not the general public and how they found Spider-man 3 entertaining.

My argument is not that the general public hated it or that the critics hated it (although nearly HALF did hate it) but rather that most real Spider-man fans hated it or disliked it. You guys are a minority which is why there is a thread titled "Am I the only one who liked Spider-man 3?"

 

[Spider-Fan]

*sigh* Look, I was talking about the failure of the film being in the same ballpark as Batman and Robin. That's including overall reaction to the film not just critics. It's infamous for being hated among the Spider-man fans. You guys, like it or not, are in the minority.

If a documentry were to come out 20 years from now talking about the Spider-man films, it surely would include that SM3 was largely disliked by the fans. Not the general public but by the fans. You guys keep going on about the average movie goer and people who know little or nothing about the comics. We are in a forum for fans of superhero movies not the general public and how they found Spider-man 3 entertaining.

My argument is not that the general public hated it or that the critics hated it (although nearly HALF did hate it) but rather that most real Spider-man fans hated it or disliked it. You guys are a minority which is why there is a thread titled "Am I the only one who liked Spider-man 3?"

That was not your argument. Your argument has been that the film has a B&R level rep, which you're wrong about. Even among Spider-Man fans, few will say it was B&R. You're in a very small group of fans who say that.

 

[KILLING JOKER]

That was not your argument. Your argument has been that the film has a B&R level rep, which you're wrong about. Even among Spider-Man fans, few will say it was B&R. You're in a very small group of fans who say that.

I said it was in the same ballpark and I stand by that. No matter what I say, at the end of the day, it's a bad movie. I'm not going to debate anymore over HOW bad it was or that it wasn't THAT bad or whatever. Fact is, it's bad but I'm not going to conduct a poll with Spider-man fans all over the world to prove it to you. Cause even if I did you'd still say "It wasn't that bad." "It made money." "They're doing another one so...." blah blah blah. It's a pointless debate. Go on liking it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I said it was in the same ballpark and I stand by that. No matter what I say, at the end of the day, it's a bad movie. I'm not going to debate anymore over HOW bad it was or that it wasn't THAT bad or whatever. Fact is, it's bad but I'm not going to conduct a poll with Spider-man fans all over the world to prove it to you. Cause even if I did you'd still say "It wasn't that bad." "It made money." "They're doing another one so...." blah blah blah. It's a pointless debate. Go on liking it.

You not liking the movie is not an issue to me. It's your opinion. However, you made a sweeping generalization of how people perceive the film, which was a generalization created by your own personal opinion. This is the part of your argument I took issue with.

You can go on hating the movie. I won't lose any sleep over you not liking it. But, you were not just arguing how much you hated the film. Don't make sweeping generalizations you can't back up.

 

[KILLING JOKER]

You not liking the movie is not an issue to me. It's your opinion. However, you made a sweeping generalization of how people perceive the film, which was a generalization created by your own personal opinion. This is the part of your argument I took issue with.

You can go on hating the movie. I won't lose any sleep over you not liking it. But, you were not just arguing how much you hated the film. Don't make sweeping generalizations you can't back up.

What you call a "sweeping generalization" I call stating the obvious but let's agree to disagree. You could say SM3 is not as bad as Batman and Robin and I'll go along with you but if you say it was not a major let down to a large scale of people then you are just plain out of the loop. Just spend a little time looking around the web looking for Spider-man 3 related things. It is HATED by a very large group of people. Much like Batman and Robin.

Which makes me think too. SM3 has only been out a couple years and it has the rep of being a sucky, sucky film. If you recall Batman and Robin seemed to get more and more noticed for it's awfulness as time went on. Time was not kind to it. So, let's give SM3 another 10 or 12 years. You can bet it will be more hated than it is now. Time just does that. A movie either ages well or it suffers. SM3 will suffer.

 

[El Payaso]

LOL.

Just because you don't agree with someone's review makes him wrong? Killing Joker, you are on my list of people not to take seriously.

Just because you don't agree with someone's review makes him on your list of people not to be taken seriously?

 

[TMC1982]

No, Batman and Robin did not destroy the franchise or else there wouldn't be Batman begins of The Dark Knight. It forced the powers that be to seriously reconsider what they were doing with Batman.

And I have to disagree with you about both "Hulk" and "X-men 3." Neither were bad movies. A little dissapointing? Yes but nowhere near as bad as SM3. In the long run, I can easily say that Ang Lee did a much better movie than that new crap with Ed Norton. "X-men 3" was just not nearly as bad as people made it out to be. I found it pretty entertaining but I will admit that I am not the biggest X-men fan so as far as what they did with the characters, I really didn't care. As far as Spider-man goes, I am a huge fan and I will pick it apart but that's my right as a fan of the character.

Batman & Robin destroyed the original franchise that began in 1989 (if you want to look that that particular prespective). Therefore, the reputation was so sullied, that a reboot was virtually a requirement.