The Critics' Reviews of Spider-Man 3 Thread

[The Joker]

Blind ambition? But creation of successful fusion WAS his ambition. I can see someone cutting corners when they're working on a project, by focusing on the rewards coming afterward. Money, fame what have you. But for Ock, the only success he was seeking was for his experiement to work. So only impatience with seeing the fruition of his experiment would cause Ock to get sloppy.

That's not what I meant. By blind ambition, I mean he was turning a blind eye to the obvious dangers around him in his ambition to succeed. He refused to believe it was not working.

He called this project his dream and something he'd been working on his whole life. Since he spent that long working on it, it hardly speaks of an impatient man, does it??

He just made a mistake and miscalculated.

And this is really making my point. There IS no definitive and even reasonable explanation to why Ock got to Peter while sitting in a cafe with MJ. There are attempts to justify it. But no real logical reason that can't be debunked if one is so inclined. In Spidey 1, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to find who the Goblin is. But no one did. Like the criticisms against Spidey 3 this all boils down to a convenience that you're either willing to buy into or not. And my saying this isn't a put down to Spidey 2. It's that I'm saying that people griping about Spidey 3 not being perfect are letting things go with the previous films. Perhaps those coincidences and conveniences are more to your liking, but they remain no more plausible.

You're preaching to the converted here, my friend. The coincidences in SM-3 are not something I ever criticized this movie over. I was just arguing over this one particular plot point that someone pointed out in Spidey 2.

That's all

 

[OverMyHead]

Ock wasn't the patient type? He waited at least a whole day before confronting Peter. He accosted Harry at night. Several scenes passed, both night and day, before Ock confronted Peter.

If Ock was that impatient, he would have just went straight to Peter's apartment after his meeting with Harry. It's not like Peter's address was a secret.

I can't see him taking the trouble to tail Peter thru New York to some cafe, unless he knew Peter was going there to meet MJ. I mean, how else did Ock even know he was there?? He must have been watching/tailing Peter.

He could scare Peter, but could he scare Spider-Man into meeting him?? Having a hostage ensures Spidey would show up, and Peter would co-operate and not double cross Ock and run to the Police for protection.

Yep; I truly hated the scene. He throws a car through the window of a cafe, just to ask Peter one question and then, clomp away like a jackass, hahaha!

 

[The Joker]

Yep; I truly hated the scene. He throws a car through the window of a cafe, just to ask Peter one question and then, clomp away like a jackass, hahaha!

You chose your username well. That scene did go over your head. He didn't ask Peter a question, he issued him an ultimatum.

 

[Dragon]

That's not what I meant. By blind ambition, I mean he was turning a blind eye to the obvious dangers around him in his ambition to succeed. He refused to believe it was not working.

He called this project his dream and something he'd been working on his whole life. Since he spent that long working on it, it hardly speaks of an impatient man, does it??

He just made a mistake and miscalculated.

That would be the very reason he'd be impatient in that last critical stage.

And- the reason he'd been working his whole life is because until the day he actually performed the test, the technology didn't exist. It took his whole life to get to where he could even make the test. Until then it was all theory and hope. I'm sure that if he could have fired the reactor sooner, he would have.

And finally, let's note that the Ock that worked his whole life on this experiement isn't the same man who tossed a car through the window of a cafe. Circumstances made him a bit less patient and a little more irritable.

You're preaching to the converted here, my friend. The coincidences in SM-3 are not something I ever criticized this movie over. I was just arguing over this one particular plot point that someone pointed out in Spidey 2.

That's all

Fair enough.

Anyway, people arguing coincidences in Spider-Man is pointless. Coincidence or FATE/DESTINY as Stan called it is the entire point. Spider-Man was born out of fate- being bitten by a radioactive Spider, and his Uncle being killed by a criminal he allowed to escape. His enemy being the father of his best friend. The woman he loved being alone in his apartment when the Goblin came for Peter. All coincidental- or fate.

 

[christpunchers]

Really? I think it's just the opposite when you remember that the "alien goo" is a sentient lifeform capable of amazing feats. And further, it needs to conjoin itself with another lifeform in a symbiotic, and even parasitic relationship. So, it's entirely possbile that it commanded its own trajectory to land in the vicinity of other living beings- and even sensed and was drawn to Peter's superhuman form. I don't think that's lazy writing.

Heh i doubt thats what the producers thought, they just wanted to introduce the thing asap without much backstory thats why the meteor landed right next to pete. I understand that us fans want to make the movie more logical but come on, that IS lazy writing. Dont back up the lazy script with something that was never explained in the movie or the novel.

 

[The Joker]

That would be the very reason he'd be impatient in that last critical stage.

And- the reason he'd been working his whole life is because until the day he actually performed the test, the technology didn't exist. It took his whole life to get to where he could even make the test. Until then it was all theory and hope. I'm sure that if he could have fired the reactor sooner, he would have.

Theorey, yes. Hope?? Not so much. He seemed pretty darn certain he knew what he was doing:

Peter: "Are you sure you can stabilize the fusion reaction?"
Otto: "Peter, what have we been talking about for the last hour and a half? This is my life's work. I certainly know the consequences of the slightest miscalculation"
Peter: "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to question you"
Otto: "Rosie, our new friend thinks I'm going to blow up the city. *Laughs* You can sleep soundly tonight".

He was that confident that he could even joke about the possible tragic consequences of his work being unstable. As I said, I don't think it was impatience, but just the reluctance to believe he could have miscalculated. Not easy to admit your life's work is a failure. Especially to yourself.

And finally, let's note that the Ock that worked his whole life on this experiement isn't the same man who tossed a car through the window of a cafe. Circumstances made him a bit less patient and a little more irritable.

Of course, he was a villain now. All those ruthless and violent tendencies he had were all fleshed out 10x more.

Fair enough.

Anyway, people arguing coincidences in Spider-Man is pointless. Coincidence or FATE/DESTINY as Stan called it is the entire point. Spider-Man was born out of fate- being bitten by a radioactive Spider, and his Uncle being killed by a criminal he allowed to escape. His enemy being the father of his best friend. The woman he loved being alone in his apartment when the Goblin came for Peter. All coincidental- or fate.

I agree.

If we can accept a man made out of living sand, a few coincidences shouldn't be much of a leap, should it?

 

[LostSon88]

Apoligies for going off topic but I thought Marvel fans should know (if they didn't):

THOMAS JANE HAS INFORMED AICN THAT HE HAS PULLED OUT OF PUNISHER 2.







Okay...back on topic.

 

[StylishHokie21]

Pulled out? What?

 

[Visionary]

We cannot accept a man made out of living sand...because Spider-Man is real...for I have seen him.

 

[Infinity9999x]

You chose your username well. That scene did go over your head. He didn't ask Peter a question, he issued him an ultimatum.

That scene had one of my favorite lines. "I'll peel the flesh off her bones." That was classic Ock.

The only thing I didn't like was that, if Peter wasn't Spider-man he'd be dead, so why did Ock chuck a car at the guy and then hurl him into a brick wall hard enough to kill a normal person? I wondered if by that point Ock was just so off his rocker that he didn't care, or if maybe he had some inkling that Pete may have been Spidey.

 

[chaseter]

It's pointless arguing with Doc Ock well over Doc Ock...he is the knower of all things Dr. Otto Octavius aka Doc Ock aka Doctor Octopus.

 

[The Joker]

Hahaha, thanks chaseter

Another review: http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2007/05/16/ae/ae02.txt

Not a particularly good one.

 

[Inkerman]

Hey, either way, it was a very cool movie!t:

 

[pjspider1C]

Does anyone else think Spider-Man 3 would've gotten horrible reviews no matter what Sam Raimi & his crew did? People had really, really, really, really high expectations for this movie... and I'm wondering if they were so high that they would be disappointed no matter what Raimi delivered...

 

[Mr Jide]

Well, as many bad reviews as sm3 got, it got roughly the same amount of positive reviews with over $700million in the bag to boot. Great movie, big money, the negative reviews aren't even an after thought to sony. They did an awesome job with this movie, better than any other comic book movie.

 

[Spidey_87]

Does anyone else think Spider-Man 3 would've gotten horrible reviews no matter what Sam Raimi & his crew did? People had really, really, really, really high expectations for this movie... and I'm wondering if they were so high that they would be disappointed no matter what Raimi delivered...

Yeah, the critics would still have bashed the film no matter what was in it. I still say that SM 3 is an excellent movie, my favorite Spidey yet!!! With May being the month of 3's, I'm waiting to see if Pirates follows the typical critic review pattern: the first is ok, the second is excellent, and the third is complete crap

 

[shinlyle]

Personally, I loved SM3. It got some bad reviews, sure, but it still had 61% positive....that means more people liked it than didn't.

Now, PoTC:AWE(ful) doesn't look to be faring so well.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pirates_of_the_caribbean_3/

I'm torn, because I want Spidey 3 rated higher than Shrek 3 (success) and Pirates 3(so far, so good), but I wanted all three to be decent films, as I enjoy each franchise.

Still, Spidey rules.

 

[The Caped Knight]

I'm a little confused, I just recently watched a Spidey 3 releated tv spot (Similar to the one for movie 1 & 2) Where it says Critics say "SPIDER-MAN 3 is the best movie of the trilogy" Amazing, etc .

 

[shinlyle]

I'm a little confused, I just recently watched a Spidey 3 releated tv spot (Similar to the one for movie 1 & 2) Where it says Critics say "SPIDER-MAN 3 is the best movie of the trilogy" Amazing, etc .

Alot of critics said that...and some didn't.

I think the critics were either going to love this, or hate it...I didn't see many in the middle.

 

[StylishHokie21]

Agreed! Check out this review. This guy pretty much sums up how I feel.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5G8LTe9m07Q

He isn't really a critic, but he might as well be.

 

[ghost_x]

I'm a little confused, I just recently watched a Spidey 3 releated tv spot (Similar to the one for movie 1 & 2) Where it says Critics say "SPIDER-MAN 3 is the best movie of the trilogy" Amazing, etc .

That would be known as a Marketing Ploy, my friend. Sony are infamous for their made up quotes on posters

 

[shinlyle]

Agreed! Check out this review. This guy pretty much sums up how I feel.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5G8LTe9m07Q

He isn't really a critic, but he might as well be.

WOW. He pretty much summed up exactly how I felt about it.

Also, I still don't get the hatred over the 2 seconds of flag-footage. Do people have that little to do that they can endlessly gripe about Spider-man walking by a flagpole which displayed (dramatic pause) the American Flag...while fighting in New York....which is in America? People really do love to gripe about stuff, huh?

 

[StylishHokie21]

WOW. He pretty much summed up exactly how I felt about it.

Also, I still don't get the hatred over the 2 seconds of flag-footage. Do people have that little to do that they can endlessly gripe about Spider-man walking by a flagpole which displayed (dramatic pause) the American Flag...while fighting in New York....which is in America? People really do love to gripe about stuff, huh?

Yeah...the flag shot is one of the most ridiculous complaints I have ever heard of. Like he said...does it ruin the whole movie? Absolutely not. Some people just need to get over it already.

 

[ghost_x]

Did anyone forget Spiderman hangs on an American flag in the first as well?

 

[shinlyle]

Did anyone forget Spiderman hangs on an American flag in the first as well?

Still...not a big deal. Were he hanging from an flagpole with another nation's flag on it...then I could see some complaints...(unless he were at at UN building)