Is Spider-Man 3 the most disappointing superhero film ever made?

[TeeKay]

BvS No contest. I remember those forums. Lawd have mercy.

 

[Solid]

I'm not sure if the reception BvS got was worse than SM3 at the time.

 

[Babillygunn]

BvS easily gets the call in this.

 

[Drizzle]

I'm not sure if the reception BvS got was worse than SM3 at the time.

The reception to BvS was way worse. I know that citing Rotten Tomatoes is a lazy example, but SM3 is still sitting at a fresh rating with 63%. I don't think BvS ever went above rotten besides the first couple of hours when the review embargo dropped.

 

[B]

The reception to BvS was way worse. I know that citing Rotten Tomatoes is a lazy example, but SM3 is still sitting at a fresh rating with 63%. I don't think BvS ever went above rotten besides the first couple of hours when the review embargo dropped.

I think they're talking about the general public/fan's reception as opposed to paid movie critics.

From what I can recall it seemed like SM3 was a lot closer to widely being a generally disliked film, whereas BvS had more of a Marmite type opinion.

 

[B]

For me, SM3 isn't the most disappointing. Batman vs Superman was easily the most disappointing because you'd probably 2 of the top 3 most popular comicbook characters of all time, finally on the big screen together for the first time & the film wasn't fitting of that sort of historic cinematic event IMO.

BvS also should have been off the back of multiple DC movies further down the line, DC/WB tried to ride the coat tails of the MCU's success & it blew up spectacularly in their face trying to do too much for 1 film, too soon.

 

[Drizzle]

I think they're talking about the general public/fan's reception as opposed to paid movie critics.

From what I can recall it seemed like SM3 was a lot closer to widely being a generally disliked film, whereas BvS had more of a Marmite type opinion.

I suppose that can be attributed to the first two Raimi films being as celebrated as they were made people more volatile towards Spider-Man 3, whereas Batman v. Superman was following up Man of Steel, a movie that audiences were more or less lukewarm towards, so expectations for BvS weren't that high.

 

[Erzengel]

Because BvS tried to do too much too soon, one of the things that wasn't too soon was the actual meet up. That didn't need a multiple movie set up. We've seen Superman before. We've seen Batman before. We just never saw them interact on screen. Now Death of Superman? Yeah, that needed more of a setup.

 

[B]

I suppose that can be attributed to the first two Raimi films being as celebrated as they were made people more volatile towards Spider-Man 3, whereas Batman v. Superman was following up Man of Steel, a movie that audiences were more or less lukewarm towards, so expectations for BvS weren't that high.

I don't know about that, the expectations for BvS were always going to be high simply because it involves Batman & Superman, it's the same as SM3, doesn't really matter how good or bad the 1st 2 films were, the mere fact that it's a film featuring Spider-Man & Venom is enough to make expectations high.

 

[B]

Because BvS tried to do too much too soon, one of the things that wasn't too soon was the actual meet up. That didn't need a multiple movie set up. We've seen Superman before. We've seen Batman before. We just never saw them interact on screen. Now Death of Superman? Yeah, that needed more of a setup.

I'd no problem with Batman & Superman sharing a film, but I'd liked to have at least seen some sort of Affleck Batman film precede it having the ending essentially be the beginning of BvS with Bruce witnessing Superman fighting Zod setting up a conflict.. maybe even a Wonder Woman film as well & cut her out of it completely.

Having Doomsday & killing this Superman in his 2nd cinematic outing was single handily the dumbest thing BvS did overall IMO.

 

[MbJ]

Even if we're discounting reviews, BVS' reception tells a pretty strong tale. It had one of the highest opening weekends of all time, only to immediately collapse the following weekend in one of the most drastic second week drops for a superhero film. That gives it the dubious honor of currently being one of only two movies on the list of Top 10 Biggest Opening Weekends of All Time to not have made at least a billion overall, which is due to the toxic word of mouth (for reference, the only other movie on the list that failed to hit a billion is Detective Chinatown 2, which was a Chinese movie that didn't see wide release in most places outside Asia).

Make no mistake, there was a crazy amount of hype behind it that disappated for a lot of people when it actually opened. I recall a similar situation with Spider-Man 3, but I can't honestly say if the response was worse.

 

[DlAMONDZ]

Expectations were monstrous for Spidey 3 hence why it broke the opening day AND opening weekend records. Something BvS didn't do

There's no argument for BvS being more disappointing

 

[Herofan]

I like Spider-Man 3 more than 1, think it's kind of good, but it is still a huge drop off from and disappointment after 2, I would say one of the biggest and at least a bit bigger than with TLS.

Sadly, I would say that, though a different continuity, The Amazing Spider-Man was then also a huge drop off from Spider-Man 3 .

 

[psylockolussus]

X3 for me.

 

[Another_Fool]

No, X3 was the bigger disappointment. At least Spider-Man 3 still felt like the first 2 films despite it being a bit of a bummer, and frankly as big of a Spider-Man fan as I am, I was never as high in the first one as a lot of people were. So in a way Spider-Man 3 didn't feel like a major letdown. Spider-Man 2 was more an outlier to me because it was remarkably better than 1 and 3.

X3 on the other hand had all the momentum from the 2nd film, Cyclops promised to have a bigger role and an adaptation of the Dark Phoenix tale. Then Singer left along with his crew, Vaughn goes in and out and Ratner of all people was the one to pick up the pieces of a troubled production. And what we got felt like a rushed product in comparison to the first 2 films which were a more deliberate pace. DOFP did a lot for me to now tolerate it's existence but I hated X3 for a very long time.

 

[Drizzle]

No, X3 was the bigger disappointment. At least Spider-Man 3 still felt like the first 2 films despite it being a bit of a bummer, and frankly as big of a Spider-Man fan as I am, I was never as high in the first one as a lot of people were. So in a way Spider-Man 3 didn't feel like a major letdown. Spider-Man 2 was more an outlier to me because it was remarkably better than 1 and 3.

X3 on the other hand had all the momentum from the 2nd film, Cyclops promised to have a bigger role and an adaptation of the Dark Phoenix tale. Then Singer left along with his crew, Vaughn goes in and out and Ratner of all people was the one to pick up the pieces of a troubled production. And what we got felt like a rushed product in comparison to the first 2 films which were a more deliberate pace. DOFP did a lot for me to now tolerate it's existence but I hated X3 for a very long time.

This. Spider-Man 3 at least still had Raimi at the helm. After the promising note X2 finished on, Singer leaving to do a disappointing Superman movie that was basically just an homage to the 1978 film combined with Brett Ratner taking over and delivering the big drop in quality that was X-Men: The Last Stand basically made 2006 a huge letdown for superhero films.

 

[B]

Superman Returns is also not a bad shout for maybe not the most disappointing, but certainly right among the nominees. Superman Returns was so long in development with such an iconic character basically being absent from the big screen for nearly 20 years with the best they could come up with being as @Drizzle said, a homage to the 1978 film.. & a poor one at that.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Superman Returns is also not a bad shout for maybe not the most disappointing, but certainly right among the nominees. Superman Returns was so long in development with such an iconic character basically being absent from the big screen for nearly 20 years with the best they could come up with being as @Drizzle said, a homage to the 1978 film.. & a poor one at that.

Yeah, I still occasionally see people defend SR and I honestly don’t see what there is to like about it. Routh had no personality and barely spoke, Bosworth played Lois like an A-hole, and Spacey’s Luthor was some bizarre attempt to blend the Hackman version with the comic book version and somehow felt like neither. That movie was just a failure all around, IMO.

 

[Drizzle]

Superman Returns is also not a bad shout for maybe not the most disappointing, but certainly right among the nominees. Superman Returns was so long in development with such an iconic character basically being absent from the big screen for nearly 20 years with the best they could come up with being as @Drizzle said, a homage to the 1978 film.. & a poor one at that.

Yeah, I still occasionally see people defend SR and I honestly don’t see what there is to like about it. Routh had no personality and barely spoke, Bosworth played Lois like an A-hole, and Spacey’s Luthor was some bizarre attempt to blend the Hackman version with the comic book version and somehow felt like neither. That movie was just a failure all around, IMO.

I'll admit, I enjoyed Superman Returns on the first watch because it was the first big screen incarnation of the character in my lifetime back then so that was where the excitement came from. But after I left the theater a few hours later, I realized that the best part of the movie was the Donner-style opening credits. People can say what they want about Man of Steel. It's very far from perfect but I thought that was a more fulfilling experience than what Singer gave us.

 

[BatLobster]

I honestly think if Spider-Man 3 were released today, under the banner of the MCU, there'd be people calling it one of the better superhero films. Maybe just tweak it to be a bit longer, and a more comic-accurate looking Venom ala the Hardy movies, and an open-ended ending where Eddie and/or the symbiote survives to placate the fanboys.

I think people were collectively harsher back then, because there was all this pressure on each comic book film to be the greatest thing ever, due to them being a more rare 'event' (even though they were growing in popularity). I think if you just view Spider-Man 3 as a bit of an MCU romp with some great action sequences and actual emotional depth rather than a sequel to two of the defining superhero films of the era, it becomes a lot better. Certainly with its flaws, but even the idea of it having too many characters and plotlines seems a bit quaint now....uh hello Infinity War/Endgame? Even the comedy of it, which people hated at the time... basically all the MCU films are full-on comedies at this point. Sure, it's a particular flavor of Raimi camp, but that part has actually aged kinda well with all the Bully Maguire memes. Taika Waititi or James Gunn could put a dance sequence into one of their MCU films and I bet nobody would bat an eye.

I will say, I think SM-3 was pretty ballsy in just making the choice to have Peter be an unlikable d*** for most of the film. It was a valid examination of what being a superhero might actually do to inflate the ego of your average nerd, even though it did make it more difficult to empathize with Peter which puts it in stark contrast with the first two.

As far as the poll, I will say at the time if 'felt' like SM-3 was the most disappointing thing of all time based on all the reactions, but ultimately I think, no. There have been greater disappointments. The bigger disappointment of 3 to me is that it prematurely ended the franchise when I think Raimi had more left he wanted to say.

 

[zeptron]

Batman vs Superman for me.

In the 00s, if you were to say that an Aquaman movie or a movie starring D-list characters such as the Guardians Of The Galaxy would have been better received and made more money than a film starring Batman and Superman, people would have laughed at you.

 

[Doctorwho12]

X-Men 3 is more disappointing!

 

[Spider-Fan]

Not even close. I think based on public perception, it is BvS

 

[Drizzle]

I honestly think if Spider-Man 3 were released today, under the banner of the MCU, there'd be people calling it one of the better superhero films. Maybe just tweak it to be a bit longer, and a more comic-accurate looking Venom ala the Hardy movies, and an open-ended ending where Eddie and/or the symbiote survives to placate the fanboys.

I think people were collectively harsher back then, because there was all this pressure on each comic book film to be the greatest thing ever, due to them being a more rare 'event' (even though they were growing in popularity). I think if you just view Spider-Man 3 as a bit of an MCU romp with some great action sequences and actual emotional depth rather than a sequel to two of the defining superhero films of the era, it becomes a lot better. Certainly with its flaws, but even the idea of it having too many characters and plotlines seems a bit quaint now....uh hello Infinity War/Endgame? Even the comedy of it, which people hated at the time... basically all the MCU films are full-on comedies at this point. Sure, it's a particular flavor of Raimi camp, but that part has actually aged kinda well with all the Bully Maguire memes. Taika Waititi or James Gunn could put a dance sequence into one of their MCU films and I bet nobody would bat an eye.

I will say, I think SM-3 was pretty ballsy in just making the choice to have Peter be an unlikable d*** for most of the film. It was a valid examination of what being a superhero might actually do to inflate the ego of your average nerd, even though it did make it more difficult to empathize with Peter which puts it in stark contrast with the first two.

As far as the poll, I will say at the time if 'felt' like SM-3 was the most disappointing thing of all time based on all the reactions, but ultimately I think, no. There have been greater disappointments. The bigger disappointment of 3 to me is that it prematurely ended the franchise when I think Raimi had more left he wanted to say.

For what it's worth, I'd rather watch Spider-Man 3 than some of the lower tier MCU films like Thor: The Dark World or The Incredible Hulk. I agree, Spider-Man 3 probably would have been better received if it were an MCU movie released today as is. But if No Way Home is any indication, looks like Spider-Man 3 is going to be a retroactive MCU movie anyway.

 

[henzINNIT]

The disappointment of Spider-Man 3 was relative to the high of Spider-Man 2. I think it's easier to look back more favourably now, because SM2 is still considered a high benchmark in the genre, and it's easier to recognise how difficult it would have been to top it. The following years of Sony incompetence have also made it easier to appreciate the pressures going on behind the scenes. I think Sam Raimi still made magic happen in places, and it makes me a little sad when he talks about letting people down with it.

I think X-Men: The Last Stand is a far worse film, and a far steeper drop from its predecessor. It's a competent action movie that quietly massacres its characters. It's a film with quite an ugly heart, not for explicitly bad ideas, but because it is thoughtlessly constructed, and it doesn't know or care about its characters.

I get the argument for BvS too. Though Snyder gave us plenty of hints in advance that the film might suck, the sheer waste of potential for that iconic crossover is staggering.