The Critics' Reviews of Spider-Man 3 Thread

[Village_Idiot]

the problem I had with Brandon Routh as Superman is that he played mild manor Clark Kent just fine but he also played Superman as mild manor Superman , he had to be the most boring Superman ever , personality wise

 

[Dark Knight]

That's not surprising.

The movie was an action fest packed with cheese.

Yeah.....thats what I'm hearing from relatives and some friends who have seen it. The adults said it catered to mostly the kids and alot of it from the middle to the end turned cheesy. I'll be seeing it soon enough.....

 

[Warhammer]

Yeah.....thats what I'm hearing from relatives and some friends who have seen it. The adults said it catered to mostly the kids and alot of it from the middle to the end turned cheesy. I'll be seeing it soon enough.....

Ouch.
Bad idea going into the movie expecting it to be bad.

 

[Dark Knight]

Well I am WAY over 13 and "like" has turned to love with Spider-Man 3. But first I had to let go of my expectations and nit-picks... which got easier each time.

This movie is like the proverbial onion, many layers. I've seen it 4 times now, twice on an IMAX sceen, and it just keeps getting better and better.

Well....I'm basing my take on what I am hearing personally from relatives, young cousins under 18 and friends that are over 21. Like I said....I'll be seeing soon....and we'll see how it compares to the first two.

 

[Dark Knight]

Ouch.
Bad idea going into the movie expecting it to be bad.

Not really expecting it to be bad....I'll just be comparing it to the first two.

I'm not a big fan of the 3 supervillian thing. I wanted to see Venom though.

 

[majemma]

i like it more than the first two but rami may have purposely cut venoms close-ups short wich i did not like

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Actually what you consider articulation is merely an attempt to justify what was essentially an over sentimental piece of soap opera garbage. Your so called 'analysis of a movie' is expanding a simplistic plot and paper thin characters to a far larger scale than ever shown or intended by the film makers. Now it may sound like I infinitely dislike Superman Returns, but I did happen to enjoy it's different take on the genre, I am however able to establish fact from fiction and I can assure you what I saw on the screen was far closer to the truth than yours ever was.

Probably the best damn critique I have heard of that piece of trash!

 

[majemma]

no over all this movie was awesome even VENOMS short screen time and the somber emding

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Awesome is hardly the word. People all to often get caught up in the effects and action sequences. The main reason people didn't like The Hulk, arguably the best Marvel movie done to date. But many people didn't like it because they wanted to see Hulk smash. But it was very well written, acted (mostly) and directed.

Where as SM3 was just the opposite. The action sequences and effects are the only saving graces for this poorly done film.

 

[Artistsean]

to me the only problem was time.
There wasn't enough time in the movie to go deeper than they did. The movie was still really good, just as good as part 1 and 2, and much better than films like Daredevil or Fantastic Four.
The film should have maybe been split into two just to give more time to each character and to the story.
I would have liked to have seen more development for Eddie Brock and Venom, and more development for MJ and Peter. But that meant that they needed to do two movies instead of one, and the people were only signed up to Spider-man 3.
I would have liked more development, but it wasn't like the time destroyed the movie. It was still great.
I also wish there was more time to see where the characters are going.
I wanted to see Peter and MJ get engaged, I'd like to see them married or at least as an official couple without all the dramma. In 1-3 it was all about the will the finally end up together. 1 was about Peter likeing MJ and she not knowing, part 2 was Her liking him but him pushing her away. Part 3 was them finally together but will it work.
I'd like to see part 4 with them working and what that is like. Peter coming home from being Spider-man, walking on the ceilling talking about his day and MJ giving her opinion. and Vis Versa.
I'd like to see their relationship actually working.
I'd also like to see Aunt May discover Peter is Spider-Man because it is such a great idea and works so well in the comics. It would also give Aunt May something to do in part 4.
There is so much the characters could still do, if only they had time to do it all. So I hope they have more sequals and that the same people return to do it.

But I really did like it. It may have been "easily the worst of the 3 Spider-Man films" but that isn't saying much because they were all so good, and if this one isn't as good as the other two its only slightly not as good. Like a few inches not as good. But not horrible or bad at all. It was actually really great.

 

[Artistsean]

stupid computer.

while I have messed up with a double post. Let me go on.

I think the character Eddie Brocke should have been introduced in one film and then became Venom in a second film. Giving his character more time to develop and show just how much and and the alien hate Spider-Man and Peter.

It would have been cool to see more character development with Gwen too (and to see Peter apologize to her). I can see why the film packed in so much story though, because they didn't know if anyone would be around for another Spider-Man. But I really hope they do, there is so much they could do with the characters. Plus Peter has a butt load of enemies not yet used like the Beetle, Rhino, Electro, Kraven the Hunter, Chamelion, Vulture, and so on.

 

[StylishHokie21]

Apparently, he did.

I don't think so. I don't consider Superman staying in the hospital to be the "climax."

 

[majemma]

Awesome is hardly the word. People all to often get caught up in the effects and action sequences. The main reason people didn't like The Hulk, arguably the best Marvel movie done to date. But many people didn't like it because they wanted to see Hulk smash. But it was very well written, acted (mostly) and directed.

Where as SM3 was just the opposite. The action sequences and effects are the only saving graces for this poorly done film.

I AM NOT one those people i liked the movies story more than anyuthing my fav parts are the depth in the story and character i don't give a crap about cgi unless its is making venoms head move or sandman come to life otherwise...its all about character and emotion which was very good in this movie...

 

[Sun_Down]

Awesome is hardly the word. People all to often get caught up in the effects and action sequences. The main reason people didn't like The Hulk, arguably the best Marvel movie done to date. But many people didn't like it because they wanted to see Hulk smash. But it was very well written, acted (mostly) and directed.

Where as SM3 was just the opposite. The action sequences and effects are the only saving graces for this poorly done film.

Thank you. I hate seeing mindless popcorn flicks make bank and get sequels when the smart, well-crafted movies get passed over.

 

[majemma]

Thank you. I hate seeing mindless popcorn flicks make bank and get sequels when the smart, well-crafted movies get passed over.

UUUUMMM you are not addressing this towards me i hope....i felt the film was great for the characters who i have come to love over the yrs of seing each film and the action which is always grreat!!!! AND the emotion (peter crying) i like all of the elememts!!! the movie worked on all levels sdespite a few nitpicky things

 

[StylishHokie21]

Awesome is hardly the word. People all to often get caught up in the effects and action sequences. The main reason people didn't like The Hulk, arguably the best Marvel movie done to date. But many people didn't like it because they wanted to see Hulk smash. But it was very well written, acted (mostly) and directed.

Where as SM3 was just the opposite. The action sequences and effects are the only saving graces for this poorly done film.

The Hulk?

 

[Shmoil]

I think this movie holds up very well when compared to the other two. Mainly because there are no solid complaints about this movie that can't be found in the other two. Some say this movie is too cheesy. Well, what wasn't cheesy about the first one, from Dafoe's leap and hiss onto that table thing after first being gassed, to Peter trying the different gestures to shoot his web. And the second? Come on, the Doc Ock emergency room scene? What the hell was that? And the screaming woman later, and Aunt May's super strong grip on her umbrella. Right. Old ladies are that strong, you're right.

And some other complaints, like the lack of Venom, and how he should have been given his own movie. Honestly, I like Venom, he's cool, but there's no storyline that can be done with him having his own movie. His motivation is revenge, and in order to properly portray that motivation, you must show why he wants revenge. A whole movie about Venom would have made no sense, or if it did, it wouldn't have made sense well enough to be an actually good movie. So some say that this movie should have set up Venom, then the next one should have been about him. I agree. I think that would have worked, but fans begged for him and Avi Arad loves giving fans what they want, so here we have him crammed into a movie.
Personally, I loved the Sandman character in this movie. I only wish he had been in it more, as he was far more interesting than Venom. And while on the subject of villains, how about that Doc Ock. Don't get me wrong, I love Spider-Man 2, and Doc Ock, but the idea that one of the most intelligent thinkers, one of the most brilliant geniuses of the time, didn't have a mind strong enough to deal with his four arms was ludicrous, in my opinion. Not to mention the terrible writing for his character. "Voices..in my head...". Who the hell is he talking to? He's the only person around, so who is he trying to tell about the voices? And while I'm on it, why does he spin around to check to see if the inhibitor chip is still functioning. And then he doesn't even touch it. How convenient for the cameraman, Ock just happens to turn around. Then the whole "We'll rebuild it...bigger and better...." while he rears up and poses. Who the hell is he posing for? It's like he knows that there's a film crew there watching. And you consider Spider-Man 3 cheesy?

And then there's the dancing, emo Peter Parker. .... Yeah, I have no defense for this one. It's corny, cheesy, ****ty, and everything this forum says it is. But it is still pretty damn funny. And it's not like Dark Parker is only the emo dancer, he also goes off on his landlord, pretty much molests Harry, and throws Mary Jane to the ground. Oh, and he really tries to kill Sandman. So really there is no argument that "Dark Peter was reduced to an emo dancer", because frankly that is not true. So please, don't even try.
But yes, the flipping of the hair, the buying of the new suit, and the dancing was ******ed. I do agree. But I would consider it very shallow for someone to think that just that could ruin the movie.
Many here, who for years loved Sam Raimi, now call him the worst director ever, and bash him to no end. Why him? Why Sam Raimi, the man who succeeded twice, and then (when the studio intervened in the story) makes a movie that doesn't meet expectations. I think that it has been so long since Spider-Man 2 that people have forgotten what the Spider-Man films are like. Were you expecting a Godfather caliber movie? Or a Citizen Kane? Or an Apocalypse Now? The other two Spider-Man movies weren't nominated for Best Picture, why did you expect this one to be?
Now I must make my point clear, I'm not saying that the Spider-Man movies aren't great. They are great movies, the best of Superhero adaptations. The new movie included. But I think (hope) that some of our dashed hopes will enlighten Hollywood. Never has there been an entirely serious non-campy Superhero movie. Never. Not the Superman movies, not the X-Men movies, not even Spider-Man or Batman Begins. I still love these movies (possibly not X-Men 3......), and I believe that an amazing Comic-Book movie is yet to be made. Someday a superhero movie will be developed that is so realistic and gritty, yet true to a character, that it will blow everyone out of the water.
Many of us expected Spider-Man 3 to be that movie, and now because it isn't 100% perfect, many here despise it, and I think that that is childish. Wake up. This was still a great movie, but if it wasn't what you thought it was, then it is a wake up call. There is so much more I could say about this, but this post is probably breaking a length record or something by now, so I hope someone reads this because I really put my heart into it. Hope you enjoyed it!

-Shmoil

 

[MST3KPIMP]

Superman Returns for all it's flaws is an actual movie and a well made one at that with characters that have some resonance. Spider-man 3 is a product designed to cater to children or very apolegetic adults. The most significant character was Harry whereas everyone else was just there to kill time with no real fleshing out but usually ackwarrd humor or empty emotions. Superman Returns is a solid movie that will most likely have a superior sequel which would put Superman in a pretty healthy place in the hearts and minds of fans. Right now Spider-man is like junk food in our culture.. more of a quick temporary thrill with little nutritional value... but even even junk food has some requirments for it to be embraced and right now the public is not too impressed with this product.

 

[SLYspyder]

I think this movie holds up very well when compared to the other two. Mainly because there are no solid complaints about this movie that can't be found in the other two. Some say this movie is too cheesy. Well, what wasn't cheesy about the first one, from Dafoe's leap and hiss onto that table thing after first being gassed, to Peter trying the different gestures to shoot his web. And the second? Come on, the Doc Ock emergency room scene? What the hell was that? And the screaming woman later, and Aunt May's super strong grip on her umbrella. Right. Old ladies are that strong, you're right.

And some other complaints, like the lack of Venom, and how he should have been given his own movie. Honestly, I like Venom, he's cool, but there's no storyline that can be done with him having his own movie. His motivation is revenge, and in order to properly portray that motivation, you must show why he wants revenge. A whole movie about Venom would have made no sense, or if it did, it wouldn't have made sense well enough to be an actually good movie. So some say that this movie should have set up Venom, then the next one should have been about him. I agree. I think that would have worked, but fans begged for him and Avi Arad loves giving fans what they want, so here we have him crammed into a movie.
Personally, I loved the Sandman character in this movie. I only wish he had been in it more, as he was far more interesting than Venom. And while on the subject of villains, how about that Doc Ock. Don't get me wrong, I love Spider-Man 2, and Doc Ock, but the idea that one of the most intelligent thinkers, one of the most brilliant geniuses of the time, didn't have a mind strong enough to deal with his four arms was ludicrous, in my opinion. Not to mention the terrible writing for his character. "Voices..in my head...". Who the hell is he talking to? He's the only person around, so who is he trying to tell about the voices? And while I'm on it, why does he spin around to check to see if the inhibitor chip is still functioning. And then he doesn't even touch it. How convenient for the cameraman, Ock just happens to turn around. Then the whole "We'll rebuild it...bigger and better...." while he rears up and poses. Who the hell is he posing for? It's like he knows that there's a film crew there watching. And you consider Spider-Man 3 cheesy?

And then there's the dancing, emo Peter Parker. .... Yeah, I have no defense for this one. It's corny, cheesy, ****ty, and everything this forum says it is. But it is still pretty damn funny. And it's not like Dark Parker is only the emo dancer, he also goes off on his landlord, pretty much molests Harry, and throws Mary Jane to the ground. Oh, and he really tries to kill Sandman. So really there is no argument that "Dark Peter was reduced to an emo dancer", because frankly that is not true. So please, don't even try.
But yes, the flipping of the hair, the buying of the new suit, and the dancing was ******ed. I do agree. But I would consider it very shallow for someone to think that just that could ruin the movie.
Many here, who for years loved Sam Raimi, now call him the worst director ever, and bash him to no end. Why him? Why Sam Raimi, the man who succeeded twice, and then (when the studio intervened in the story) makes a movie that doesn't meet expectations. I think that it has been so long since Spider-Man 2 that people have forgotten what the Spider-Man films are like. Were you expecting a Godfather caliber movie? Or a Citizen Kane? Or an Apocalypse Now? The other two Spider-Man movies weren't nominated for Best Picture, why did you expect this one to be?
Now I must make my point clear, I'm not saying that the Spider-Man movies aren't great. They are great movies, the best of Superhero adaptations. The new movie included. But I think (hope) that some of our dashed hopes will enlighten Hollywood. Never has there been an entirely serious non-campy Superhero movie. Never. Not the Superman movies, not the X-Men movies, not even Spider-Man or Batman Begins. I still love these movies (possibly not X-Men 3......), and I believe that an amazing Comic-Book movie is yet to be made. Someday a superhero movie will be developed that is so realistic and gritty, yet true to a character, that it will blow everyone out of the water.
Many of us expected Spider-Man 3 to be that movie, and now because it isn't 100% perfect, many here despise it, and I think that that is childish. Wake up. This was still a great movie, but if it wasn't what you thought it was, then it is a wake up call. There is so much more I could say about this, but this post is probably breaking a length record or something by now, so I hope someone reads this because I really put my heart into it. Hope you enjoyed it!

-Shmoil

damn great post

 

[MST3KPIMP]

I think this movie holds up very well when compared to the other two. Mainly because there are no solid complaints about this movie that can't be found in the other two. Some say this movie is too cheesy. Well, what wasn't cheesy about the first one, from Dafoe's leap and hiss onto that table thing after first being gassed, to Peter trying the different gestures to shoot his web. And the second? Come on, the Doc Ock emergency room scene? What the hell was that? And the screaming woman later, and Aunt May's super strong grip on her umbrella. Right. Old ladies are that strong, you're right.

I think many will watch the 1st 2 movies now and see the consistant camp and lack of logic and decide that the whole trilogy is perhaps not so respectful to Spider-man.

 

[DyeLorean]

I don't consider Superman staying in the hospital to be the "climax."

The climax in the movie should've been a good GOOD action sequence near the end.

I do however find the Superman in hospital part as the most interesting and original part in the whole movie. The homage Bryan Singer tried to make, turned out being a modern remake of the original Superman. Not that there's anything wrong about it, but most people... (I should stop and write this in a Superman forum, sorry).

Getting back on the subject... errmmm... I'm sorry, I lost it

D!






Edit: Ah yes, some (most) of the critic reviews that are not giving good ratings to the movie are explaining the same reasons we are daily discussing in this forums.

 

[Visionary]

I think many will watch the 1st 2 movies now and see the consistant camp and lack of logic and decide that the whole trilogy is perhaps not so respectful to Spider-man.

Lack of logic, okay, in the realm of comic book films, sheesh? The thing is, most people who see these types of movies, are smart enough to know they're watching a movie of fiction, all except comic book fanboys. Who hasn't accepted that Spidey's comics are fill with camp, starting with Spidey himself.

 

[StylishHokie21]

The climax in the movie should've been a good GOOD action sequence near the end.

I do however find the Superman in hospital part as the most interesting and original part in the whole movie. The homage Bryan Singer tried to make, turned out being a modern remake of the original Superman. Not that there's anything wrong about it, but most people... (I should stop and write this in a Superman forum, sorry).

Getting back on the subject... errmmm... I'm sorry, I lost it

D!






Edit: Ah yes, some (most) of the critic reviews that are not giving good ratings to the movie are explaining the same reasons we are daily discussing in this forums.

Yeah...they should have, but Singer thought about making a soap opera instead of a Superman movie.

Anyways....back on topic. I think the critics were a little too harsh on this movie, IMO.

 

[StylishHokie21]

Superman Returns for all it's flaws is an actual movie and a well made one at that with characters that have some resonance. Spider-man 3 is a product designed to cater to children or very apolegetic adults. The most significant character was Harry whereas everyone else was just there to kill time with no real fleshing out but usually ackwarrd humor or empty emotions. Superman Returns is a solid movie that will most likely have a superior sequel which would put Superman in a pretty healthy place in the hearts and minds of fans. Right now Spider-man is like junk food in our culture.. more of a quick temporary thrill with little nutritional value... but even even junk food has some requirments for it to be embraced and right now the public is not too impressed with this product.

The public is not too impressed? I don't think you speak for everyone. Plenty of people loved the movie.

 

[Jerry!]

I think this movie holds up very well when compared to the other two. Mainly because there are no solid complaints about this movie that can't be found in the other two. Some say this movie is too cheesy. Well, what wasn't cheesy about the first one, from Dafoe's leap and hiss onto that table thing after first being gassed, to Peter trying the different gestures to shoot his web. And the second? Come on, the Doc Ock emergency room scene? What the hell was that? And the screaming woman later, and Aunt May's super strong grip on her umbrella. Right. Old ladies are that strong, you're right.

And some other complaints, like the lack of Venom, and how he should have been given his own movie. Honestly, I like Venom, he's cool, but there's no storyline that can be done with him having his own movie. His motivation is revenge, and in order to properly portray that motivation, you must show why he wants revenge. A whole movie about Venom would have made no sense, or if it did, it wouldn't have made sense well enough to be an actually good movie. So some say that this movie should have set up Venom, then the next one should have been about him. I agree. I think that would have worked, but fans begged for him and Avi Arad loves giving fans what they want, so here we have him crammed into a movie.
Personally, I loved the Sandman character in this movie. I only wish he had been in it more, as he was far more interesting than Venom. And while on the subject of villains, how about that Doc Ock. Don't get me wrong, I love Spider-Man 2, and Doc Ock, but the idea that one of the most intelligent thinkers, one of the most brilliant geniuses of the time, didn't have a mind strong enough to deal with his four arms was ludicrous, in my opinion. Not to mention the terrible writing for his character. "Voices..in my head...". Who the hell is he talking to? He's the only person around, so who is he trying to tell about the voices? And while I'm on it, why does he spin around to check to see if the inhibitor chip is still functioning. And then he doesn't even touch it. How convenient for the cameraman, Ock just happens to turn around. Then the whole "We'll rebuild it...bigger and better...." while he rears up and poses. Who the hell is he posing for? It's like he knows that there's a film crew there watching. And you consider Spider-Man 3 cheesy?

And then there's the dancing, emo Peter Parker. .... Yeah, I have no defense for this one. It's corny, cheesy, ****ty, and everything this forum says it is. But it is still pretty damn funny. And it's not like Dark Parker is only the emo dancer, he also goes off on his landlord, pretty much molests Harry, and throws Mary Jane to the ground. Oh, and he really tries to kill Sandman. So really there is no argument that "Dark Peter was reduced to an emo dancer", because frankly that is not true. So please, don't even try.
But yes, the flipping of the hair, the buying of the new suit, and the dancing was ******ed. I do agree. But I would consider it very shallow for someone to think that just that could ruin the movie.
Many here, who for years loved Sam Raimi, now call him the worst director ever, and bash him to no end. Why him? Why Sam Raimi, the man who succeeded twice, and then (when the studio intervened in the story) makes a movie that doesn't meet expectations. I think that it has been so long since Spider-Man 2 that people have forgotten what the Spider-Man films are like. Were you expecting a Godfather caliber movie? Or a Citizen Kane? Or an Apocalypse Now? The other two Spider-Man movies weren't nominated for Best Picture, why did you expect this one to be?
Now I must make my point clear, I'm not saying that the Spider-Man movies aren't great. They are great movies, the best of Superhero adaptations. The new movie included. But I think (hope) that some of our dashed hopes will enlighten Hollywood. Never has there been an entirely serious non-campy Superhero movie. Never. Not the Superman movies, not the X-Men movies, not even Spider-Man or Batman Begins. I still love these movies (possibly not X-Men 3......), and I believe that an amazing Comic-Book movie is yet to be made. Someday a superhero movie will be developed that is so realistic and gritty, yet true to a character, that it will blow everyone out of the water.
Many of us expected Spider-Man 3 to be that movie, and now because it isn't 100% perfect, many here despise it, and I think that that is childish. Wake up. This was still a great movie, but if it wasn't what you thought it was, then it is a wake up call. There is so much more I could say about this, but this post is probably breaking a length record or something by now, so I hope someone reads this because I really put my heart into it. Hope you enjoyed it!

-Shmoil

Dude, it didn't even have a conclusion for Sandman at ALL. He just flew away, not to mention Peter let him just leave, after battling for his life and MJ's for the last ten minutes. All those things that you mentioned from the first two movies, none of them ruin part or all the movie. Some are just nitpicking. Like that one where you said Ock spins around to check the chip, and how its convenient for the cameraman? Its a ****ing movie. Thats like beyond nitpicking, I'm not even sure what to call that. Like there are people in the theater going "Oh dammit, he turned around ? Screw this movie, thats BS Raimi." The emergency room scene in SM2 worked though, not sure what you were watching.

I'm not saying Raimi is a horrible director, and i don't know all the details over how much control he really had, over this movie but if he did have control to change things he should have. If he didn't then most of the blame falls to the studio. Because they know that no matter what, Spiderman fans will still eat this movie up. But overall the film doesn't even come close to being as good as SM2, or even SM1 for that matter. We got two good films, and with the exception of Batman Begins, the best superhero film with SM2, its not wrong or stupid or naive of the fans to ask for a quality third film, especially since it may be the last one from Raimi, Dunst, Maguire etc. Its a shame. Hopefully a director's cut is released, that should make it a little better, but the flaws are at the foundation of the movie really.