The Critics' Reviews of Spider-Man 3 Thread

[Ultimate_Superman]

Really Daredevil was cut because of Avi. He told the director to cut the movie short and changed the movie around from what it was to what we got. So the director after much protest agreed to the changes only if he could put out his version and so Avi said yes to that. He (Avi) later has come out and admitted he was wrong on how he thought DD should have been done.

 

[Tempest19]

Nope, that would be FOX.

Notice that FOX is the ONLY studio that has done that with their superhero films.

MSJ, I'm willing to bet- although SONY- made the cut himself due to insecurities over the whole FOX thing (Ghost Rider).

But, I have yet to see a MARVEL film- Universal, Sony- that have done that with the films.

Spider-Man 3 is the only real time it has happened at SONY, but even then it was due to the length rather than "send them in and out of the theater as fast as possible."

If you listen to the Director's Cut, it really sounds like both Avi and MSJ are upset about how FOX has been treating the properties... also, isn't Marvel leaning away from FOX now??? If true, that seriously shows Avi's feelings about Fox.

I'm pretty sure it works the same way as TV- Director's Cut, Producer Cut, and Studio Cut. So, I'm thinking Avi was more upset that he let Fox have their way. Because, DD was definitely NOT the only hero film that it happened to- you can add, although some don't know it, FF to that list as well.

 

[HerosOnFilm]

Why is that? I hate when directors or movies do that, its really a shame.

btw I f'n love your Avatar and Signature. I'm a huge Crow fan I absolutely love The Crow I still say that movie is the best superhero movie ever.

It's cool to see another die-hard Crow fan and also to know you're from Chicago too. t:

"Dad gave me this. Fifth birthday. He said, "Childhood's over the moment you know you're gonna die." - Top Dollar

Thanks. I think The Crow was underrated and still holds up today as a great movie based on a graphic novel.

As for DD, in my opinion the DC just made more sense, we got to see what happened to Kingpin, and the movie had a better flow. I don't know why they changed it, but I think some of the other posters here explain why well.

 

[chaseter]

Director's cuts are great additions for the hardcore fan...and coincedentally it is another cash cow for the studio. I could easily sit through nearly 3 hours of Spider-Man...if it serves a purpose and makes this movie better. Spider-Man 2.1 was a far superior movie to the theatrical cut and IMO made the movie even better...if that is at all possible. This franchise, this trilogy, needs a saving grace for the fans that were hoping for too much. The casual audience loved it but the fans were a bit dissapointed. I sure hope they release a director's cut soon...I really don't want to wait 3 years or until they make the 4th film.

 

[Symbiotica]

One other thing I want to point out. Yours truly will be writing a review for the movie.

[...]I also want some proof that Symbiotica didn't write that Observer review. It looks exactly like Symbiotica's type of posts.

[Unsheathes beheading-axe....]

First, I doubt that anyone in their right mind is waiting for *your* review of the film. Who the Hell ARE you, anyways? A nobody, someone posting on these idiotic boards - as if that made you a minor deity or something, as if that gave you credentials. Don't you wish.

But... then there's.... me. Someone with the sheer clout to make you and those like you tremble, even after almost a year away from these boards. You continually discuss me and mention my name, even after so long an absence: I start to believe that you actually miss me. Trust me, during my tenure away from here, I did not spare *you* a single thought.

Well, you've said "BeetleJuice" three times, and at last I have manifested. Happy now...?

I doubt you will be, when I remark that you can be certain I did not write Rex Reed's review, if only because he is far kinder than I would have been. Spider-Man 3 was simply atrocious. It was *silly*, from Peter and Gwen dancing in a nightclub a la Morticia and Gomez tangoing in a nightclub in "Addams Family Values" to Harry's butler confessing that he Knew All. WTF?! Only two of several moments so bizarre, I felt as if I'd done a mild hit of acid.

There were NO villains in this film. Sandman was trying to save his daughter Harry, not a villain. Venom.... OMFG, the mere idea of Gopher's voice issuing out of the symbiote's mask is a laugh-out-loud funny moment. Instead of the fearsome basso roar of rage that should exemplify an angry Venom, we get this thin little tenor voice issuing threats. LOL! Priceless! And so typical. Gopher as "Venom" was nothing short of a disaster; as I prophesied well over a year ago.

And don't get me started on the symbiote's origin or LACK THEREOF.

Peter slicks back his hair and points at girls: We know he's gone to The Dark Side now! You betcha!

In short, CRAP, CRAP, total CRAP. Thank GOD I did not have to pay to see this thing.

Are you absolutely certain you want me back, junior? Keep mentioning my name and I'll remanifest just to put you in your pokey little place: posting away day and night on this website, like the good little fanboi you are. No matter what slop this franchise dishes out, you'll be holding out your little bowl saying "Thank you Raimi sir, may I have another?" and that is so YOU, y'know?

I bet you don't know. I doubt you have the wit to know.

Have a nice day, you maroon.

Love and mastery - over you, at least:

Symbiotica

p.s.: I've read *your* review; please always keep in mind that brevity is the soul of wit. I have a hard time imagining anyone's actually taking the time to parse your morass of apologia, but perhaps there are others more patient out there than I. In short, getting to the point is always a good idea. Kthanxbi.

 

[ghost_x]

What just happened?

 

[christpunchers]

The DD director's cut is just about my top 5 favorite superhero movies. Its subtle, dark, not about cgi or flashiness, the story was focused, no mere coincidences, felt very adult and gritty.

I doubt even a DC version of sp3 can really save it from its contrivanced script.

 

[chaseter]

Symbiotica, symbiotica, symbiotica???

 

[Mr Jide]

What just happened?

PMS is just what happened.

 

[The Joker]

http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/ebertandroeper/

A harsh, harsh video review on Ebert and Roeper.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/ebertandroeper/

A harsh, harsh video review on Ebert and Roeper.

Verdict

Christy Lemire: Too many villains, too many plotlines. I didn't really care about any of them.

Richard Roeper: Spider-Man 3 has an identity crisis.

 

[Storm22]

Woh that's pretty harsh. A bit too harsh imo but they make some valid points.

 

[SLYspyder]

[Unsheathes beheading-axe....]

First, I doubt that anyone in their right mind is waiting for *your* review of the film. Who the Hell ARE you, anyways? A nobody, someone posting on these idiotic boards - as if that made you a minor deity or something, as if that gave you credentials. Don't you wish.

But... then there's.... me. Someone with the sheer clout to make you and those like you tremble, even after almost a year away from these boards. You continually discuss me and mention my name, even after so long an absence: I start to believe that you actually miss me. Trust me, during my tenure away from here, I did not spare *you* a single thought.

Well, you've said "BeetleJuice" three times, and at last I have manifested. Happy now...?

I doubt you will be, when I remark that you can be certain I did not write Rex Reed's review, if only because he is far kinder than I would have been. Spider-Man 3 was simply atrocious. It was *silly*, from Peter and Gwen dancing in a nightclub a la Morticia and Gomez tangoing in a nightclub in "Addams Family Values" to Harry's butler confessing that he Knew All. WTF?! Only two of several moments so bizarre, I felt as if I'd done a mild hit of acid.

There were NO villains in this film. Sandman was trying to save his daughter Harry, not a villain. Venom.... OMFG, the mere idea of Gopher's voice issuing out of the symbiote's mask is a laugh-out-loud funny moment. Instead of the fearsome basso roar of rage that should exemplify an angry Venom, we get this thin little tenor voice issuing threats. LOL! Priceless! And so typical. Gopher as "Venom" was nothing short of a disaster; as I prophesied well over a year ago.

And don't get me started on the symbiote's origin or LACK THEREOF.

Peter slicks back his hair and points at girls: We know he's gone to The Dark Side now! You betcha!

In short, CRAP, CRAP, total CRAP. Thank GOD I did not have to pay to see this thing.

Are you absolutely certain you want me back, junior? Keep mentioning my name and I'll remanifest just to put you in your pokey little place: posting away day and night on this website, like the good little fanboi you are. No matter what slop this franchise dishes out, you'll be holding out your little bowl saying "Thank you Raimi sir, may I have another?" and that is so YOU, y'know?

I bet you don't know. I doubt you have the wit to know.

Have a nice day, you maroon.

Love and mastery - over you, at least:

Symbiotica

p.s.: I've read *your* review; please always keep in mind that brevity is the soul of wit. I have a hard time imagining anyone's actually taking the time to parse your morass of apologia, but perhaps there are others more patient out there than I. In short, getting to the point is always a good idea. Kthanxbi.

Damn, owned. Good ol Mnemosyne

 

[Dragon]

Woh that's pretty harsh. A bit too harsh imo but they make some valid points.

They make no valid points at all. They're just being "personalities". Obviously, a comic movie is beneath them, so they don't have to come up with valid criticisms. Roeper asking what kind of villain Sandman is, and what can he do- while a clip rolls showing Sandman literally wiping up the steeets with the police says how he can't see the forest through the trees. And anyone using Batman Begins as an example of what comic movies should be is suspect in their analysis anyway.

 

[Storm22]

They make no valid points at all. They're just being "personalities". Obviously, a comic movie is beneath them, so they don't have to come up with valid criticisms. Roeper asking what kind of villain Sandman is, and what can he do- while a clip rolls showing Sandman literally wiping up the steeets with the police says how he can't see the forest through the trees. And anyone using Batman Begins as an example of what comic movies should be is suspect in their analysis anyway.

They've given positive reviews to other comic book movies so you can't really assume comic book movies are beneath them. I agree the point they made about Sandman is fairly stupid but what they did say about too much going on, sometimes giving the movie a video game feel and look and MJ and Gwen Stacy being bland characters is partly true imo. They do point out some of the movie's flaws but as I've said 2 thumbs down is too harsh.

 

[highguard]

They make no valid points at all. They're just being "personalities". Obviously, a comic movie is beneath them, so they don't have to come up with valid criticisms. Roeper asking what kind of villain Sandman is, and what can he do- while a clip rolls showing Sandman literally wiping up the steeets with the police says how he can't see the forest through the trees. And anyone using Batman Begins as an example of what comic movies should be is suspect in their analysis anyway.

I totally agree on this last part.

I do not want all my comic book films to be like BB. It was a good movie, for a batman film. That however is not the marvel style or the definitive comic book style. This is the mistake that DC made with their comics. All the heroes had the same basic mold. Hero with no discernable emotional weaknesses and often non relateable to the real world. They were all either super rich or invulnerable.

This is not the Marvel way and I like it. I liked BB I liked Spiderman 3. They are not my favorites but I respect them for the visions of their individual directors.

Now because they liked the tone of BB they want other movies to use that as a mold, no way.

Fortunatley with all the bank Spiderman is making Sony will be immune to those people who don't realize we want variety.

It is the same problem you are getting with DC movies. They don't seem to see the need to develop other properties. They want to go with Superman, Batman and Wonderwoman and repeat their success over and over again and again.

I am still waiting to hear GL's famous line ....In darkest night....

Look at Marvel, Iron Man comes next year, they have GR, Thor, Ant Man and others in developement, a possible Surfer spinoff, a Wolverine and Magneto spinoff. Luke Cage in developement, and several others.

These guys are looking at making movies of all their popular characters so that we the fan boys can "tear apart each film's departure from the source" lol

This is as it should be. Marvel is so far ahead now that we can complain about a 60 million second weekend, I love it.

 

[Dragon]

Now because they liked the tone of BB they want other movies to use that as a mold, no way.

But that's the thing with these guys. They always seem to give a thumbs up to comic movies if they're dark, without taking the time to understand the tone of the material these movies are based on.

 

[Dragon]

They've given positive reviews to other comic book movies so you can't really assume comic book movies are beneath them. I agree the point they made about Sandman is fairly stupid but what they did say about too much going on, sometimes giving the movie a video game feel and look and MJ and Gwen Stacy being bland characters is partly true imo. They do point out some of the movie's flaws but as I've said 2 thumbs down is too harsh.

I'm aware that they've given thumbs up to other comic films. My point is that the still treat the films as though they were beneath them, the way they review kid's movies and so forth. For example, they gave thumbs up to The Hulk and DD, simply because they were dark. They didn't bother to examine story issues and plot problems with those films. And while granted, I didn't like FF, Ebert simply criticized the film by saying the FF were like other characters (Thing=Hulk, Doom=Silver Surfer, Sue =Storm). And even if that were accurate, that isn't a criticism. Every movie character has a similar character that one can point to. Film critics even at time praise characters for being such. But they don't bother to get that indepth with comic films. They merely gloss over them, as this review showed.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

They make no valid points at all. They're just being "personalities". Obviously, a comic movie is beneath them, so they don't have to come up with valid criticisms. Roeper asking what kind of villain Sandman is, and what can he do- while a clip rolls showing Sandman literally wiping up the steeets with the police says how he can't see the forest through the trees. And anyone using Batman Begins as an example of what comic movies should be is suspect in their analysis anyway.

But Roeper really liked Spider-Man 2 and gave a thumbs up to X3 and SR also.

 

[ghost_x]

That is such a common misconception to why people/critics like BB. They didn't like it simply because it was 'dark' or 'gritty', that's ridiculous, it got posititive feedback for it's well written and character driven psychological thriller approach, something unfortunately Spiderman 3 failed to achieve. Nothing in BB was contrived, and for a superhero movie that is a BIG positive factor, hell even when the Tumbler was on the roofs, instead of just your typical hollywood blockbuster of just doing wild blind faithed jumps they had it covered, on the computer screen in front of Bruce their was a scale of the whole city and each buildings rooftop degrees and radiuses so Batman knew the height to make the jump. It's aspects like that which is why Batman Begins got rave reviews and didn't get a thread named 'WTF moments in Batman Begins'.

 

[Dragon]

But Roeper really liked Spider-Man 2 and gave a thumbs up to SR also.

See my above post. My overall point is that they more so look at comic movies as a general genre and judge each film according to their list of componenets they feel a comic movie should have, rather than looking at each film as a unique entity, as with any other film.

 

[Mr Jide]

That is such a common misconception to why people/critics like BB. They didn't like it simply because it was 'dark' or 'gritty', that's ridiculous, it got posititive feedback for it's well written and character driven psychological thriller approach, something unfortunately Spiderman 3 failed to achieve. Nothing in BB was contrived, and for a superhero movie that is a BIG positive factor, hell even when the Tumbler was on the roofs, instead of just your typical hollywood blockbuster of just doing wild blind faithed jumps they had it covered, on the computer screen in front of Bruce their was a scale of the whole city and each buildings rooftop degrees and radiuses so Batman knew the height to make the jump. It's aspects like that which is why Batman Begins got rave reviews and didn't get a thread named 'WTF moments in Batman Begins'.

Aspects like that are great but not really needed. All it does is say, "look at me, I'm force feeding you this stuff because you clearly forgot that your watching a film that is based on absurd fiction...hey, man in batsuit should have given it away but we're happy to indulge..."

 

[ghost_x]

I'm not specifically referring to that, but as an example to how the movie is well written, so much so that such an insignificant factor is covered. Rather than just hoping the audience will ignore the fact that a large funded science experiment is occurring late at night in the middle of a field with a easily climbable gate as security and a team full of scientific morons. It just shows the film-makers aren't insulting the audiences intelligence but are indulging the audiences need of something that provokes thought as well as visual stimulation.

 

[christpunchers]

face it, sm3 was not anywhere as well crafted well written as sm2 or even sm1 for that matter. raimi probably at some point gave in to the execs' demands and just didnt give his best efforts anymore.

 

[Mr. Socko]

True, but I rarely listen to the critics.