The Critics' Reviews of Spider-Man 3 Thread

[ghost_x]

Actually, I'll just go ahead and give it to you b/c I don't feel like cheking later.

Superman's arc is about finding a place in the world, getting past his loneliness, and finding a place in Lois's life.

Lifting the rock is not the climax to this. The climax starts when Richard accepts Lois's love of Superman, takes her to the hospital, and Lois resolves her bitterness there...the climax then ends with Superman's visit to his child and acknowledging that he's his son.

In SR's case, there is no falling action. The climax is literally the last few scenes we see in that movie, culminating in the wonderful, silent exchange outside Lois's apartment which settles Superman's place, resolves Lois's bitternes and need for forgiveness, and opens Superman to a new emotional realm.

It wasn't that hard to see.

Singer, is that you?

 

[StylishHokie21]

Actually, I'll just go ahead and give it to you b/c I don't feel like cheking later.

Superman's arc is about finding a place in the world, getting past his loneliness, and finding a place in Lois's life.

Lifting the rock is not the climax to this. The climax starts when Richard accepts Lois's love of Superman, takes her to the hospital, and Lois resolves her bitterness there...the climax then ends with Superman's visit to his child and acknowledging that he's his son.

In SR's case, there is no falling action. The climax is literally the last few scenes we see in that movie, culminating in the wonderful, silent exchange outside Lois's apartment which settles Superman's place, resolves Lois's bitternes and need for forgiveness, and opens Superman to a new emotional realm.

It wasn't that hard to see.

That's what the climax was? Damn...you could have fooled me.

 

[bosef982]

Singer, is that you?

Forgive me for being able to articulate myself and not reduce my analysis of a movie to the too-often-posted platitudes of hyperbolic geekgasms marked with multiple exclaimations points followed by a sharp jibe to anyone who disagrees.

 

[bosef982]

That's what the climax was? Damn...you could have fooled me.

Apparently, he did.

 

[Dark Knight]

LOL, I found both SR and SM3 to be disappointing. But I'll take Superman lifting the rock over "emo pete".

I have been hearing the samething about Spidey. The under 13's liked it alot more than the older crowd.

 

[The Joker]

I have been hearing the samething about Spidey. The under 13's liked it alot more than the older crowd.

That's not surprising.

The movie was an action fest packed with cheese.

 

[WorthyStevens]

Would people stop referring to Pete as EMO Spidey?

You don't see him cutting himself, nor listening to Fall Out Boy and the like, nor acting depressed and suicidal.

He's just a darker Peter.

 

["V"]

Unfortunately, Superman Returns and Spider-Man 3 were both very disappointing.

Hopefully The Dark Knight will raise the comic book bar again.

 

[MasterChief2829]

I'm 15 and I loved it better than the first two... stop making up your own facts. My friend's brother who is 21 also believed it to be better than the first two as well.

 

[Super Kal]

Actually, I'll just go ahead and give it to you b/c I don't feel like cheking later.

Superman's arc is about finding a place in the world, getting past his loneliness, and finding a place in Lois's life.

Lifting the rock is not the climax to this. The climax starts when Richard accepts Lois's love of Superman, takes her to the hospital, and Lois resolves her bitterness there...the climax then ends with Superman's visit to his child and acknowledging that he's his son.

In SR's case, there is no falling action. The climax is literally the last few scenes we see in that movie, culminating in the wonderful, silent exchange outside Lois's apartment which settles Superman's place, resolves Lois's bitternes and need for forgiveness, and opens Superman to a new emotional realm.

It wasn't that hard to see.

wonderful silent exchange?
new emotional realm?

maybe you should watch the PC/Mac parody featuring the DC/Marvel franchises more, because that hits a lot of stuff right on the nail.


as far as Spiderman 3 goes, It was so much better than Superman Returns, it's not even funny.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Superman Returns was not disappointing like Batman Begins it did its job and that was to get fans back into the films. So they did complete the mission they set out to do. Now will Superman or Batman do Spider-Man numbers? No but they are good films none the less.

 

[Super Kal]

Superman Returns was not disappointing like Batman Begins it did its job and that was to get fans back into the films. So they did complete the mission they set out to do. Now will Superman or Batman do Spider-Man numbers? No but they are good films none the less.

Batman may be an excellent film, but Superman Returns will always suck, no matter what way you look at it...

Spiderman 3, however, will always have an edge over SR.

I'm not any kind of a Marvel fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed Spiderman 3. It actually got me interested in other Marvel franchises, like Iron Man and Fantastic Four.

 

[Dark Knight]

Superman Returns was not disappointing like Batman Begins it did its job and that was to get fans back into the films. So they did complete the mission they set out to do. Now will Superman or Batman do Spider-Man numbers? No but they are good films none the less.

Who's comparing SR, BB, and Spidey 3??

BB was a more adult orientated film and thats why it didn't blow everyone away at the BO. If it was meant more for the under 15's like the Spidey films were...than it would have made alot more. BB was a better overall film though than SR and the Spidey films IMO.

 

[Tony Stark]

well, that's why you didn't like SR. Because you could'nt even pinpoint where the climax was considering you thought it was when he was lifting the rock....

**shakes head**

A climax is not a purely physical moment of tension. It is the point where all of the character's issues are now resolved and come to heed. Lifting the rock wasn't that...

...I'll give you a chance to figure it out by yourself.

To quote Lex Lutor, "WRONG!!!!"

from dictionary.com

Climax:

2. (in a dramatic or literary work) a decisive moment that is of maximum intensity or is a major turning point in a plot.


The words "resolved" and "climax" are polar opposites. Go study your English literature.

The climax of Superman Returns was lifting a rock the size of Metropolis, made of kryptonite. Funny how in the first Donnor Superman a piece of Kryptonite the size of an egg plant kept him from stopping a nuclear missile, but in SR, all he had to do was try hard and he could lift a mountain of it.

 

[Warhammer]

David Edelstein from New York Magazine said it best when said "the three villains here don’t add up to one Doc Ock."

 

[Tony Stark]

Would people stop referring to Pete as EMO Spidey?

You don't see him cutting himself, nor listening to Fall Out Boy and the like, nor acting depressed and suicidal.

He's just a darker Peter.

I only referred to "emo pete" as a tounge and cheek reference. Saying I'll take that more than a 2 1/2 hour bore fest called Superman Returns where you don't care about any of the characters, and the "fiendish plot" is to make a resort island out of kryptonite.

 

[Warhammer]

wonderful silent exchange?
new emotional realm?

maybe you should watch the PC/Mac parody featuring the DC/Marvel franchises more, because that hits a lot of stuff right on the nail.


as far as Spiderman 3 goes, It was so much better than Superman Returns, it's not even funny.

It's kinda funny, but also biased as hell.

Batman may be an excellent film, but Superman Returns will always suck, no matter what way you look at it...

Spiderman 3, however, will always have an edge over SR.

I'm not any kind of a Marvel fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed Spiderman 3. It actually got me interested in other Marvel franchises, like Iron Man and Fantastic Four.

Superman Returns was not crap. IMO, it is a vastly superior superhero film to Spider-Man 3 and many late superhero films. People only say that SR sucked, solely on the fact that they didn't see what they wanted to see. Trust me, I definitely did not want to see a somewhat plot rehash of Superman: The Movie, the son of Superman, Superman not fighting a big villain, or Superman becoming a stalker/home-wrecker, but to truly be a movie fan and/or critic, you can't judge a movie on what you wanted to see (not as much emphasis on the drama aspect, no heavy duty fighting, etc.) going in to the film, but you have to go into the film with eyes open, bias aside, and judge what is THERE. Superman Returns was superiorly directed by Bryan Singer, and consisted what Spider-Man 3 strongly lacked, substance. I agree, and the various movie critics agree that Superman Returns was a very good movie. It's many cons keep it far away from Batman Begins or Spider-Man 2, but it is still miles ahead of Spider-Man 3. The post-cinematic bliss will wear off soon, then people will truly judge Spider-Man 3 like they did X3.

 

[Captivated]

I have been hearing the samething about Spidey. The under 13's liked it alot more than the older crowd.

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.

 

[WorthyStevens]

It's kinda funny, but also biased as hell.



Superman Returns was not crap. IMO, it is a vastly superior superhero film to Spider-Man 3 and many late superhero films. People only say that SR sucked, solely on the fact that they didn't see what they wanted to see. Trust me, I definitely did not want to see a somewhat plot rehash of Superman: The Movie, the son of Superman, Superman not fighting a big villain, or Superman becoming a stalker/home-wrecker, but to truly be a movie fan and/or critic, you can't judge a movie on what you wanted to see (not as much emphasis on the drama aspect, no heavy duty fighting, etc.) going in to the film, but you have to go into the film with eyes open, bias aside, and judge what is THERE. Superman Returns was superiorly directed by Bryan Singer, and consisted what Spider-Man 3 strongly lacked, substance. I agree, and the various movie critics agree that Superman Returns was a very good movie. It's many cons keep it far away from Batman Begins or Spider-Man 2, but it is still miles ahead of Spider-Man 3. The post-cinematic bliss will wear off soon, then people will truly judge Spider-Man 3 like they did X3.

I don't see where people are saying there's no substance with this movie. There's plenty of it.

 

[ghost_x]

Forgive me for being able to articulate myself and not reduce my analysis of a movie to the too-often-posted platitudes of hyperbolic geekgasms marked with multiple exclaimations points followed by a sharp jibe to anyone who disagrees.

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.

 

[Warhammer]

I don't see where people are saying there's no substance with this movie. There's plenty of it.

What is your definition of substance?

Mine is the lack of substance in Sandman. His sympathetic portrayal was not emphasized enough for me to give a damn. How about Eddie Brock/Venom? He was a character that was not clearly focused on. He was clearly rushed, and didn't even have any build up with Peter. The whole fake picture to the church scene was so sloppy from a writer's prospective. He should've had a movie to himself, to really shine as a villain. He was a terrible villain, a mere fraction of what Doc Ock was. How about Peter and the symbiote? No substance as in, we were promised to see a "dark side" of Peter, and we only got a little 2 minute montage of someone being full of shyit, rather than being "dark", an ultra-campy bar scene, and an (actually good, save the music) 2 minute fight scene. I could go on and on.

That's just my honest opinion, though.

 

[Tony Stark]

Superman Returns was not crap. IMO, it is a vastly superior superhero film to Spider-Man 3 and many late superhero films. People only say that SR sucked, solely on the fact that they didn't see what they wanted to see. Trust me, I definitely did not want to see a somewhat plot rehash of Superman: The Movie, the son of Superman, Superman not fighting a big villain, or Superman becoming a stalker/home-wrecker, but to truly be a movie fan and/or critic, you can't judge a movie on what you wanted to see (not as much emphasis on the drama aspect, no heavy duty fighting, etc.) going in to the film, but you have to go into the film with eyes open, bias aside, and judge what is THERE. Superman Returns was superiorly directed by Bryan Singer, and consisted what Spider-Man 3 strongly lacked, substance. I agree, and the various movie critics agree that Superman Returns was a very good movie. It's many cons keep it far away from Batman Begins or Spider-Man 2, but it is still miles ahead of Spider-Man 3. The post-cinematic bliss will wear off soon, then people will truly judge Spider-Man 3 like they did X3.

Sorry but the cinematic bliss wore off Superman Returns the day it was released. The thing just barely broke the 200 million mark and considering how much it cost them to finance it, it was a huge dissapointment.

The problem was the movie went nowhere. Brandon Routh just did an impersonation of Christopher Reeve playing Superman, rather than trying to bring anything original to the character. Heck Dean Cain and Tom Welling put their own signature on the character, why did Routh have to resort to imitating Christopher Reeve? It only spotlighted that he is not Christopher Reeve and never will be.

People are complaining about the SM3 script? Compared to SR, SM3 is oscar material. Clark gets to Metropolis and the first thing they do is, "hey Clark lets go to a bar", then he sits around a bar for 15 or 20 min. Then they have Lex Luthor standing around with his entorage saing "wait for it", and I'm sitting there thinking "I'm waiting, I'm waiting! get on with it!"

Then after he saves the airplane, they go right back to doing nothing. Then Jimmy says, "hey has anyone checked out what Lex Luthor is doing?".

Seriously people were paid millions of dollars to write that crap. And the big sinister plot was to make a resort island out of Kryptonite. Sheez, that's stuff even Roger Coreman wouldn't be dumb enough to write.

Superman Returns wasn't as bad as Batman and Robin, but that's about all I can say about it. Superman Returns made the Hulk an exciting movie, that's how bad it was.

 

[Tony Stark]

***accidental double post****

 

[Warhammer]

I see what you mean, but at the end, Singer's directing made his film better than Spider-Man 3. That's just my opinion, though. (As well as a vast majority of movie critics, but that doesn't matter.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Looks like SM3 has stabilized at 61% critical rating on RT. User rating keeps going down though, it's now at 65%.