Spider-Man 3 DVD sales are 'disappointing'

[Infinity9999x]

But, c'mon, after viewing the movie themselves, I bet most of the cast were thinking, "Why did we even participate in this cluster****?"

No, the cast of Batman and Robin thought that. If anything the cast probably though. "Not too bad. Could've been better, but not too bad."

Because honestly that's what the movie was. Was it great? No. Was it horrible? No. It was simple good. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't Batman and Robin, or Ghostrider even.

 

[redfirebird2008]

No, it wasn't Batman & Robin. It was Batman Forever, meaning still a craptastic, campy MESS of a film. Batman & Robin is one of the worst movies ever made. Batman Forever was a foreshadowing of what was to come. Thank goodness the new writer for SM4 is not Sam Raimi or his brother. It's the guy who wrote Zodiac, meaning that the film should have some much-needed grit.

 

[Spiderine]

That is true.

 

[ultimatefan]

Well congratulations, you're officially the only person who watched that film that enjoyed the way that scene was resolved.

That makes me another then.

 

[webhead731]

This movie comes no where near Batman Forever. I can't believe you guys are even saying that.

 

[Leenie]

This movie comes no where near Batman Forever. I can't believe you guys are even saying that.

I second that!

I think that people are seriously overreacting.

 

[hatebox]

Spiderman 3 was better than Batman Forever.

But not by much.

 

[chaseter]

I was dissapointed with SM3 but in the same leagues as Batman Forever...WTF!?!?!?!?

 

[redfirebird2008]

I was dissapointed with SM3 but in the same leagues as Batman Forever...WTF!?!?!?!?

Yes, to me it is in the same territory. Everyone has different opinions. Here's my perspective. I'm a Batman fan and to me, CHEESE IS CHEESE. Is it worse for cheese to show up in a Batman film? Yes, but Spidey 3 is LOADED with crappy, cheesy dialogue, really convenient and cheesy plot devices, and just flat-out cheesy characters. It's the equivalent of Batman Forever in my opinion. The good news is that they have a new writer coming for Spidey 4 so it should be a lot better.

 

[Blader5489]

No, the cast of Batman and Robin thought that. If anything the cast probably though. "Not too bad. Could've been better, but not too bad."

I don't know where people are getting this, the cast clearly liked the movie and liked working on it. The only exception is Dunst, who has obviously become bored with the role.

Yes, to me it is in the same territory. Everyone has different opinions. Here's my perspective. I'm a Batman fan and to me, CHEESE IS CHEESE. Is it worse for cheese to show up in a Batman film? Yes, but Spidey 3 is LOADED with crappy, cheesy dialogue, really convenient and cheesy plot devices, and just flat-out cheesy characters. It's the equivalent of Batman Forever in my opinion. The good news is that they have a new writer coming for Spidey 4 so it should be a lot better.

Except the cheese in SM3 wasn't meant to be taken seriously; it's humor. You can infer as much from two things: a) the movie is distinctly serious, and clearly separates its funny moments from its serious ones; b) the director is ****ing Sam Raimi.

It's the opposite for Batman Forever, where the cheese wasn't meant to be funny, it was meant to be serious.

 

[webhead731]

Exactly!^

The "cheesey" stuff in this was MEANT to be funny. Him dancing? Funny. There's no way the team was like "let's make him dance and make it an all out serious scene!"

It was meant to make people laugh. It made me laugh. It was just about as funny as the Raindrops scene in Spider-Man 2. Why he was dancing was kinda sick though (which is great for the darker side of him). If you think about it, he was happy and stuff because:
1. He kicked Harry's ass, maybe killed him.
2. He got Eddie fired from the job.
3. He "killed" Sandman.

He didn't get the Symbiote, felt good, and danced. He did some pretty bad things to make him like that. And in the Jazz Club, that was all to piss MJ off.

Batman Forever was meh, Batman and Robin was so bad I can't even explain. Spider-Man 3 was a great sequel, especially for a third.

 

[batman11]

I don't know where people are getting this, the cast clearly liked the movie and liked working on it. The only exception is Dunst, who has obviously become bored with the role.

The only time I ever saw a hint that anyone other than Dunst was unhappy, was when Tobey was on Letterman during opening week. Tobey seemed kinda embarrassed when they were talking about it, and replied kinda weirdly to questions about the dancing.

Sorry for such a vague description, but I'm doing this off memory. I'll see if I can find it on youtube.

EDIT: Actually, it was really funny what happened at first, lol Topher came out pretending to be Tobey.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I don't know where people are getting this, the cast clearly liked the movie and liked working on it. The only exception is Dunst, who has obviously become bored with the role.



Except the cheese in SM3 wasn't meant to be taken seriously; it's humor. You can infer as much from two things: a) the movie is distinctly serious, and clearly separates its funny moments from its serious ones; b) the director is ****ing Sam Raimi.

It's the opposite for Batman Forever, where the cheese wasn't meant to be funny, it was meant to be serious.

Actually, no. Jim Carrey's Riddler and Tommy Lee Jones' Two-Face were NOT meant to be serious. That's exactly what was wrong. It was a fundamental mis-interpretation of the characters and it was portrayed on the screen in a goofy manner ON PURPOSE. Go ask Joel Schumacher and he'll tell you that the studio wanted him to do a more campy version of Batman, similar to the Batman TV series with Adam West. Batman Returns was so dark that it caused a big drop off in box office from Batman '89. The studio wanted a more kid-friendly film, and so Schumacher gave them exactly what they asked for.

As for Spidey 3, the cheese I'm talking about is NOT the dancing scenes. I'm talking about the constant crying by various characters. Every major character cries in the film. It's a cheap cop-out in the script because they couldn't come up with any real reasons for us to feel sorry for the characters. "Make 'em cry and the audience will automatically care." WRONG. It came off ridiculous to me that even the villains were bawling like babies. The dialogue between MJ and Peter during the SERIOUS scenes was utterly ridiculous, and certainly cheesy. Was it intentional? No. It was just bad writing. The tag-team thing at the end came off ridiculously cheesy too, and I don't think it was intentional either. The dancing thing definitely was intentional, but the other 90% of camp in the film was unintentional in my opinion.

 

[IamProdigy]

Spider-Man 3, Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, Superman III, Superman IV, Superman Returns, Hulk, Ghost Rider = all in the same category for me. All of those movies sucked.

 

[weezerspider]

Spiderman 3 is nowhere near Forever and for sure not near Batman and Robin. It was disapointing but it was not that bad. I think a lot of people think its so bad because there was so much hype about it for years and then they see it and its the worse Spiderman yet. That puts a really bad taste in people's mouths, but it was not that bad.

 

[Blader5489]

Actually, no. Jim Carrey's Riddler and Tommy Lee Jones' Two-Face were NOT meant to be serious. That's exactly what was wrong. It was a fundamental mis-interpretation of the characters and it was portrayed on the screen in a goofy manner ON PURPOSE. Go ask Joel Schumacher and he'll tell you that the studio wanted him to do a more campy version of Batman, similar to the Batman TV series with Adam West. Batman Returns was so dark that it caused a big drop off in box office from Batman '89. The studio wanted a more kid-friendly film, and so Schumacher gave them exactly what they asked for.

Yeah, I'll get right on that.

As for Spidey 3, the cheese I'm talking about is NOT the dancing scenes. I'm talking about the constant crying by various characters. Every major character cries in the film. It's a cheap cop-out in the script because they couldn't come up with any real reasons for us to feel sorry for the characters. "Make 'em cry and the audience will automatically care." WRONG. It came off ridiculous to me that even the villains were bawling like babies.

First of all, the crying complaint is grossly exaggerated. The only time Peter and MJ actually cried was when Harry died (unless you also count Peter shedding a tear over his uncle's death). Harry never cried. Marko never cried. Eddie never cried.

Secondly, I have never thought of crying as a means of trying to evoke sympathy from the audience. To me, crying is always an explanation of what that character's feeling. I have never "automatically cared" about a character because he/she was crying.

The dialogue between MJ and Peter during the SERIOUS scenes was utterly ridiculous, and certainly cheesy. Was it intentional? No. It was just bad writing.

I don't know what you're actually referring to, since Peter and MJ talk about in this film. In any event, I don't think the dialogue was any kind of step down from the previous films; if anything, it was on par with SM1 and 2.

The dancing thing definitely was intentional, but the other 90% of camp in the film was unintentional in my opinion.

Then I hope you felt the same way about the previous movies, as there has been an equal amount of camp in all of the films. The only difference with SM3 is that the camp was obviously meant to be funny. In the first two movies, the cheesiness was a bit too subtle and made you think it was meant to be serious, not funny.

I think the Evil Dead comparison here is apt.

 

[hatebox]

First of all, the crying complaint is grossly exaggerated. The only time Peter and MJ actually cried was when Harry died (unless you also count Peter shedding a tear over his uncle's death). Harry never cried. Marko never cried. Eddie never cried.
.

What are talking about? What about the now infamous bridge scene were MJ dumps Pete and he bursts into tears? It's the same bit where the whole cinema starts laughing...

Marco cried at the end also.

 

[Blader5489]

What are talking about? What about the now infamous bridge scene were MJ dumps Pete and he bursts into tears? It's the same bit where the whole cinema starts laughing...

He burst into the tears? I think you need to watch that scene again. His voice breaks, but that's it. There isn't a single tear in that scene.

Marco cried at the end also.

You consider that crying? Again, there wasn't a single tear shed.

 

[Mr. Socko]

I actually enjoy quite a bit of both Spider-Man 3 and Batman Forever. . .

 

[redfirebird2008]

What are talking about? What about the now infamous bridge scene were MJ dumps Pete and he bursts into tears? It's the same bit where the whole cinema starts laughing...

Marco cried at the end also.

And Eddie cries in the church when he asks God to kill Peter Parker, which is one of the damn lamest scenes in cinema history. Piss poor writing. And MJ and Peter both cry at various points in the film, not just at the end as Blader is trying to claim.

As for SM1 and SM2, there's plenty of cheesy melodramatic crap especially in SM2, but at least the plot is coherent in those two films. SM3 crammed 3 villains into the plot and failed miserably. They even had a BLATANT "let's join up" scene between Venom and Sandman because they couldn't come up with an effective reason to team them up. Lame writing, once again. Convenient plot devices galore! To be fair, Avi Arad is partially to blame because he forced Venom on Raimi. However, that doesn't excuse Raimi and his brother from the seemingly EXPANDED use of melodrama. SM2 was teetering on the edge of being ridiculous with the romantic melodrama, and SM3 just went too far. It came across way too cheesy.

 

[Blader5489]

And Eddie cries in the church when he asks God to kill Peter Parker, which is one of the damn lamest scenes in cinema history. Piss poor writing.

What are you talking about? There is no crying in that scene, he isn't bawling his eyes out. Just for the record, how do you define crying?

I'd also like to point out that making a claim like "one of the damn lamest scenes in cinema history" is pretty bold considering you probably haven't seen every movie in history.

And MJ and Peter both cry at various points in the film, not just at the end as Blader is trying to claim.

No, they don't. If you don't prove proof then your argument is empty.

They even had a BLATANT "let's join up" scene between Venom and Sandman because they couldn't come up with an effective reason to team them up. Lame writing, once again. Convenient plot devices galore!

Effective reason? Venom wants to kill Peter out of revenge. Sandman wants Spider-Man out of the way. I think that's a pretty "effective reason" for them to team up.

 

[batman11]

I think we're having conflicting reports of crying here. I think what is firebird is trying to say, is that the characters, at some point in the film, had tears in their eyes. What Blader is saying, is that the tears never actually left the eyes, hence they weren't really "crying". Am I close to the pin or in the bunker?

 

[chaseter]

I think we're having conflicting reports of crying here. I think what is firebird is trying to say, is that the characters, at some point in the film, had tears in their eyes. What Blader is saying, is that the tears never actually left the eyes, hence they weren't really "crying". Am I close to the pin or in the bunker?

And whoever is arguing that, from what you broke down, is really just wow. HAHA an argument over the logistics of 'crying'.

 

[Blader5489]

I think we're having conflicting reports of crying here. I think what is firebird is trying to say, is that the characters, at some point in the film, had tears in their eyes. What Blader is saying, is that the tears never actually left the eyes, hence they weren't really "crying". Am I close to the pin or in the bunker?

I don't know. I just think that saying there was too much crying in the movie, and then branding every moment of sadness as a crying scene, is a bit of a reach.

 

[batman11]

And whoever is arguing that, from what you broke down, is really just wow. HAHA an argument over the logistics of 'crying'.

Well, they didn't go into specifics, but yeah, in general, they were arguing about crying. LOL t: