The Critics' Reviews of Spider-Man 3 Thread

[FlawlessVictory]

161 reviews in and as of 3:25 EST it's now at it's lowest, 61% on RT. User rating has also gone down to 74%. This is very shocking to say the least.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

161 reviews in and as of 3:25 EST it's now at it's lowest, 61% on RT. User rating has also gone down to 74%. This is very shocking to say the least.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Critics underwhelmed by "Spider-Man 3"
Friday May 4 1:51 PM ET

Sony Pictures spent more than $250 million making "Spider-Man 3," but all it got was a loud yawn from some major critics on its opening day.

The superhero saga, which debuted across North America on Friday, is on track to become one of the biggest box offices successes of all time. But tell that to the Washington Post or New York Times.

"Plain awful," said the Post. "Plods along," said the Times. "Pure camp," said Richard Roeper at the Chicago Sun-Times.

To be fair, a majority of critics did like the movie, According to Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com), a Web site that aggregates reviews, about 62 percent gave it the thumbs up. But the first two films in the series earned almost unanimous praise.

And the favorable critics were sometimes begrudging or proudly contrarian. Newsweek said the "ambitious mishmash" was the "nuttiest" in the series.

Rival newsmagazine Time liked it for reasons that might disgust the young male moviegoers that studios crave, noting, "It sets a world's record for so-called tough guys shedding tears."

The Sony Corp .-owned studio need not worry too much. The critics couldn't unleash enough venom on such recent releases as "Norbit," "Wild Hogs" and "Ghost Rider." But moviegoers ignored them, and those movies all managed to top the charts with big numbers.

"Spider-Man 3" has a good shot at being the biggest- grossing film of all time. Industry observers believe it could break the three-day opening record of $135.6 million set exactly a year ago by "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest."

At the very least, Sony just hopes to beat the $114.8 million start for "Spider-Man" in 2002. The second one opened on a Wednesday, which makes direct comparisons difficult.

"Spider-Man" grossed $403 million in North America, about $30 million more than the 2004 sequel. The second film cost about $200 million to make, nearly double that of the first.

Sony says the new one cost $258 million, although the Hollywood gossip machine places the figure about $100 million higher given that the film finished months behind schedule.

As with its predecessors, "Spider-Man 3" stars Tobey Maguire as both the titular crimefighter and as earnest newshound Peter Parker, and Kirsten Dunst as his disenchanted girlfriend, Mary Jane. Sam Raimi directs.

Spider-Man gets to explore his dark side, thanks to some extraterrestrial black goo that infects his personality, and to combat three villains, played by series veteran James Franco and newcomers Thomas Haden Church and Topher Grace. His nerdy alter ego must also fight to keep Mary Jane.

This was all too much for some scribes. The New York Post said the 140-minute film was "overly long and complicated," while Entertainment Weekly said it was sometimes a "dispirited spawl." And these were friendly reviews.

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20070504/117831186100.html

 

[explode7]

Well at least its on track to break those Pirates records.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

It's Brock sir, Edward Brock Jr. I'm here humbled and humiliated to ask you for one thing... I want you to kill these critics.

 

[J.Howlett]

The verdict on Spider-Man 3 won't be decided until next weekend and the weekend after that. It'll make around 120 million this weekend but the mixed to almost negative word of mouth is going to hurt it....and with Shrek and Pirates on the way, the 400 million dollar total Sony really wants might be out of reach.

I can just sense this one.....

 

[FlawlessVictory]

It's Brock sir, Edward Brock Jr. I'm here humbled and humiliated to ask you for one thing... I want you to kill these critics.

LOL t:

 

[explode7]

Thats what I meant when I said spiderman 3 has 4 villains. The critics being the fourth one.

 

[Paradoxium]

161 reviews in and as of 3:25 EST it's now at it's lowest, 61% on RT. User rating has also gone down to 74%. This is very shocking to say the least.

At this rate, 300 might become the best reviewed Comic book adaptation of 2007. It has the exact same score of 61% and a 6.2/10 average rating as Spidey right now. But the user rating is much higher at 86%.

Only time will tell.

I said the magic number is 150 reviews before it stabilizes, and I am pretty certain it won't go higher 65%. It has 161 reviews, and 200 is usually where it tops off. Assuming ALL THE REVIEWS are fresh from 161 to 200, it won't make 70% on the tomato meter - only 69%.

 

[explode7]

Dont forget FF2 is still to come out this year so that could be the most critically aclaimed comic book movie in this year if spiderman is not. And from what I've seen so far it looks like its on par for this.

 

[Paradoxium]

I completely forgot about F4. Are there anymore comic book adaptation besides that this year?

 

[Karea07]

Dont forget FF2 is still to come out this year so that could be the most critically aclaimed comic book movie in this year if spiderman is not. And from what I've seen so far it looks like its on par for this.

if ff2 gets better reviews then this film then the world is a very crazy place lol

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I completely forgot about F4. Are there anymore comic book adaptation besides that this year?

Stardust

 

[nacho]

Did anyone see Joel Siegel's review yet?

http://www.yahoo.com/s/573531

He says the movie is "too good!"
oh em gee

I luh him now.

 

[WorthyStevens]

The verdict on Spider-Man 3 won't be decided until next weekend and the weekend after that. It'll make around 120 million this weekend but the mixed to almost negative word of mouth is going to hurt it....and with Shrek and Pirates on the way, the 400 million dollar total Sony really wants might be out of reach.

I can just sense this one.....

The movie just opened today. There is no word-of-mouth yet.

 

[J.Howlett]

Worthy,

There's enough right now from the midnight screenings to start a chain reaction. The general audience may feel differently but the core group, so far, are not happy with what they've seen...and it could affect next weekend big time.

We shall see.

 

[Karea07]

Did anyone see Joel Siegel's review yet?

http://www.yahoo.com/s/573531

He says the movie is "too good!"
oh em gee

I luh him now.

I like that one

 

[SPider-T0rch]

blahhh i actually thought roeper would like it. well it doesn't matter. what i feel about the movie is more important to me than some other person's opinion and i thought it was AWESOME. i loved the campiness like when pete was doing that weird disco walk down the street. that was so immensely corny, i loved it. i really liked that with such a dark tone, this movie was able to pull of even more laughs than the 1st two movies. thumbs up from me.

 

[Carp Man]

Just took a peek at Rotten Tomatoes. 61 % fresh. 73 % fresh users. Spider-Man had a 90 %. 89 % user. Spider-Man 2 had a 93 %. 91 % users. These are the same critics who loved the 1st 2. So it's not that they are against Spider-Man.

 

[Mike059jig]

Users 73%??..WOW so it ain't just the critics

 

[Carp Man]

Users 73%??..WOW so it ain't just the critics

It was 76 % this morning. As more are seeing it and voting it has dropped 3 %. And it was 64 % critics this morning, so that has dropped 3 % also.

 

[spideyfan23]

The critics are on crack. So are most of the "core" fans. So far, all the complaints I've heard about the film from the geek fan boys I cannot even begin to take seriously. Need examples? Well, how about these for starters;

"It was too long!"
"They wasted the Venom character!"
"I never heard Venom refer to himself as 'we' or "Venom'!"
"Too many people cried!"

First off; the film needed to be long to fit everything in! As far as I'm concerned, it felt too "stuffed" to begin with. It could have been ten minutes longer, in my opinion.

Second, the character of Venom wasn't "wasted". I'm so sick of Spider-Man fans putting Venom on a pedestal. Don't get me wrong...I like the Venom character...but, he's not all that!! He made his appearance, he was a bad-ass...that's good enough. The main story...the one Raimi was interested in forcusing on...the one that touched me...was the story of Peter struggling against his inner demons. That's something that I could identify with more than I could a story of an alien symbiote who attached itself to Parker's nemesis and seeks to destroy him.

Third, who cares if Venom never referred to himself as "we"? Is that a legitimate complaint?

Fourth, I cannot, absolutely cannot for the life of me understand the complaints regarding the emotion displayed in the film. There are some life-altering events that take place in the movie...things happen that deeply and profoundly affect all of the characters...is it wrong for the characters to show emotion when confronted with events that will forever change them and alter their destinies? Is it wrong for Peter Parker to show moments of weakness and show that he, like all of us, despite being a superhero, is a human being? I don't think it is...but, judging from the reaction of the "tough-guy" gangbanger, poser, geek crowd I saw the film with last night...apparently, Raimi and company committed cardinal sins by doing this.

My main objection with the response from the so-called "fans" and the general public, is that they object to the humanity in the story. They object to seeing people cry...they object to seeing emotion...they laugh at what are supposed to be tender moments...they snicker at what are supposed to be moments of heartbreak and tragedy. For example...the heart-breaking scene in which Mary Jane is forced to "break-up" with Peter. This is probably the wirst thing that could happen to Peter in his life...and he responds appropriately; by showing his emotions, nearly weeping, and begging her not to do what she's doing. And how did most of the men in the audience respond? With snide comments, jeers, and shouts at the screen of such choice phrases as , "You can do better, Peter!" These fools just don't get it. The first two films were all about how Peter has been in love with Mary Jane since he was a child...they are destined to be together. Their love will transcend. But, to today's "crowd"...a generation of people who think, for the most part, that love means nothing...this point is lost on them.

I thought that the greatest thing about "SPIDER-MAN 3" was the fact that it shows what heartbreak is all about...it shows how love can render you to a state of almost helplessness...it shows how giving into your hate and misery can transform you into a monster...it shows how the loss of a loved one (to death or a parting in a relationship) can cripple your very soul...it shows how fragile the human heart and soul really are, and how our inner struggles can be overcome with not just forgiving ourselves, but forgiving each other as well. And how does the general public respond to all of this? With laughter...with mocking comments...with hate. Because, in my opinion, most people have never experienced true love...they're never allowed themselves to give in to their emotions...they've never experienced the real loss of love. So, they can't begin to fathom the beauty, power, and pain of this experience.

Sorry for the long-winded rant...but, people just tick me off sometimes.

As far as the critics...their complaints were mainly that the film was "too complicated" or "too sprawling". Give me a break. I'm sorry, Roeper...is your feeble little brain too tiny to follow more than two plot lines at once? Is your ADD so powerful that you can't handle more than one villain at a time? Again, give me a break...

 

[dodus]

^^Haha, good post. I've got my own issues with aspects of the movie, but never would I dream of being upset at a movie simply for having a lot going on.

 

[BrollySupersj]

I just wanna say that this movied ROCKED!!!! I was not one ounce disappointed. Venom, Sandman, The Black Suit, it was perfect.


10/10

 

[eat aliens]

The critics are on crack. So are most of the "core" fans. So far, all the complaints I've heard about the film from the geek fan boys I cannot even begin to take seriously. Need examples? Well, how about these for starters;

"It was too long!"
"They wasted the Venom character!"
"I never heard Venom refer to himself as 'we' or "Venom'!"
"Too many people cried!"

First off; the film needed to be long to fit everything in! As far as I'm concerned, it felt too "stuffed" to begin with. It could have been ten minutes longer, in my opinion.

Second, the character of Venom wasn't "wasted". I'm so sick of Spider-Man fans putting Venom on a pedestal. Don't get me wrong...I like the Venom character...but, he's not all that!! He made his appearance, he was a bad-ass...that's good enough. The main story...the one Raimi was interested in forcusing on...the one that touched me...was the story of Peter struggling against his inner demons. That's something that I could identify with more than I could a story of an alien symbiote who attached itself to Parker's nemesis and seeks to destroy him.

Third, who cares if Venom never referred to himself as "we"? Is that a legitimate complaint?

Fourth, I cannot, absolutely cannot for the life of me understand the complaints regarding the emotion displayed in the film. There are some life-altering events that take place in the movie...things happen that deeply and profoundly affect all of the characters...is it wrong for the characters to show emotion when confronted with events that will forever change them and alter their destinies? Is it wrong for Peter Parker to show moments of weakness and show that he, like all of us, despite being a superhero, is a human being? I don't think it is...but, judging from the reaction of the "tough-guy" gangbanger, poser, geek crowd I saw the film with last night...apparently, Raimi and company committed cardinal sins by doing this.

My main objection with the response from the so-called "fans" and the general public, is that they object to the humanity in the story. They object to seeing people cry...they object to seeing emotion...they laugh at what are supposed to be tender moments...they snicker at what are supposed to be moments of heartbreak and tragedy. For example...the heart-breaking scene in which Mary Jane is forced to "break-up" with Peter. This is probably the wirst thing that could happen to Peter in his life...and he responds appropriately; by showing his emotions, nearly weeping, and begging her not to do what she's doing. And how did most of the men in the audience respond? With snide comments, jeers, and shouts at the screen of such choice phrases as , "You can do better, Peter!" These fools just don't get it. The first two films were all about how Peter has been in love with Mary Jane since he was a child...they are destined to be together. Their love will transcend. But, to today's "crowd"...a generation of people who think, for the most part, that love means nothing...this point is lost on them.

I thought that the greatest thing about "SPIDER-MAN 3" was the fact that it shows what heartbreak is all about...it shows how love can render you to a state of almost helplessness...it shows how giving into your hate and misery can transform you into a monster...it shows how the loss of a loved one (to death or a parting in a relationship) can cripple your very soul...it shows how fragile the human heart and soul really are, and how our inner struggles can be overcome with not just forgiving ourselves, but forgiving each other as well. And how does the general public respond to all of this? With laughter...with mocking comments...with hate. Because, in my opinion, most people have never experienced true love...they're never allowed themselves to give in to their emotions...they've never experienced the real loss of love. So, they can't begin to fathom the beauty, power, and pain of this experience.

Sorry for the long-winded rant...but, people just tick me off sometimes.

As far as the critics...their complaints were mainly that the film was "too complicated" or "too sprawling". Give me a break. I'm sorry, Roeper...is your feeble little brain too tiny to follow more than two plot lines at once? Is your ADD so powerful that you can't handle more than one villain at a time? Again, give me a break...

*STANDING OVATION*

My thoughts exactly. After reading through the complaints about this movie on this forum, it's obvious that many people are just looking for something to complain about. As for critics, they all watch movies with sticks lodged up their ass, generally speaking. Nothing new there.