The "I hated Spider-Man 3" Thread!

[omid17]

I also remember the book having a better story

in the book they had a lot more scenes with Venom beating the crap out of Spidey

 

[The Master Planner]

I actually agree with that, as i mentioned(somewhere on here) this is the very few times i thought the book was better than the movie. i gues the reason why as afan i was able to enjoy the third movie more than other ppl was because i had read the novel(and did a school project on the book) before i saw the movie.
It was funny because ppl were like"didn't u kinda spoil the movie by reading the book?" and I was all "heck no! I'm even more excited to see it now!"

The book was much better than the movie. In retrospect, you should have told your friends, "No, the movie did a great job spoiling itself."

 

[spida-man]

The book was much better than the movie. In retrospect, you should have told your friends, "No, the movie did a great job spoiling itself."

nah.. because despite what some ppl say, Spidey 3 kicked @$$

 

[Silver Spider]

nah.. because despite what some ppl say, Spidey 3 kicked @$$

 

[The Master Planner]

nah.. because despite what some ppl say, Spidey 3 kicked @$$

You're not being sarcastic when you say that are you?

 

[spida-man]

You're not being sarcastic when you say that are you?

i'm never sarcastic about spidey 3 kicking more @$$ than what alot of haters rember. now i'm not directing this torwards anybody here, but alot of ppl think spidey was bad for alot of dumb reasons. I say that thinking clearely isn't one of their strong suits.

 

[The Joker]

i'm never sarcastic about spidey 3 kicking more @$$ than what alot of haters rember. now i'm not directing this torwards anybody here, but alot of ppl think spidey was bad for alot of dumb reasons. I say that thinking clearely isn't one of their strong suits.

I reckon they think the very same thing about those who think Spidey 3 is a good movie

 

[Venom 1988]

i'm never sarcastic about spidey 3 kicking more @$$ than what alot of haters rember. now i'm not directing this torwards anybody here, but alot of ppl think spidey was bad for alot of dumb reasons. I say that thinking clearely isn't one of their strong suits.

Yes a lot of "dumb reasons" like plot holes and lack of character development. Yup I'm obviously am not a thinker

 

[spida-man]

Yes a lot of "dumb reasons" like plot holes and lack of character development. Yup I'm obviously am not a thinker

maybe if u would have ask me what i meant by "Dumb reasons".. and i clearely said i wasn't talking about ppl here.

 

[spida-man]

I reckon they think the very same thing about those who think Spidey 3 is a good movie

yea i agrre, but before ppl start trash talking to me just know i don't mean anybody here, u all have good arguements, however there are some things i heard that actually are dumb reason to not like Spidey 3.

 

[Venom 1988]

maybe if u would have ask me what i meant by "Dumb reasons".. and i clearely said i wasn't talking about ppl here.

My bad then

 

[The Master Planner]

Well spida-man, what do you mean by "dumb reasons?" Just so your not-so-friendly neighborhood Master Planner can dissect it with my trusty tentacle blade.

 

[Blader5489]

All three movies had the same kind of flaws, so it's not fair to just criticize SM3 for those problems. Plot contrivances, coincidences, cheesiness, emo-ness, too much MJ, too much Peter Parker...these things have been a part of the trilogy since day one.

The only flaw that's exclusive to SM3 would be the underdeveloped villains, but that can be easily remedied by an extended cut (if the book and the known deleted scenes are any indication).

 

[omid17]

All three movies had the same kind of flaws, so it's not fair to just criticize SM3 for those problems. Plot contrivances, coincidences, cheesiness, emo-ness, too much MJ, too much Peter Parker...these things have been a part of the trilogy since day one.

The only flaw that's exclusive to SM3 would be the underdeveloped villains, but that can be easily remedied by an extended cut (if the book and the known deleted scenes are any indication).

i always thought the sequel should be better than the first and the third should beat both 1 an 2, but for SM3 it wasn't better, you know. So thats why i was kinda ticked off because each movie should turn out better, SM3 didn't have that imo

 

[spida-man]

Well spida-man, what do you mean by "dumb reasons?" Just so your not-so-friendly neighborhood Master Planner can dissect it with my trusty tentacle blade.

The excuse i hate the most is "SM3 was a love story"

OMFG that pisses me off so freakin darn much when ppl say they liked the first 2 films but hated the third because it was a "love story"
such a dumb excuse for hating SM3, I mean honestly come on now..

 

[spida-man]

My bad then

No problem

 

[Blader5489]

i always thought the sequel should be better than the first and the third should beat both 1 an 2, but for SM3 it wasn't better, you know. So thats why i was kinda ticked off because each movie should turn out better, SM3 didn't have that imo

I can understand that, but people are complaining about things that have been staples for the entire trilogy--the Peter/MJ melodrama or the cheesy brand of humor, just to name a couple of examples.

 

[omid17]

I can understand that, but people are complaining about things that have been staples for the entire trilogy--the Peter/MJ melodrama or the cheesy brand of humor, just to name a couple of examples.

those were minor and like you said they had moments like that in the previous spidey films, but i just didn't expect it to drag you know, before SM3 came i really thought that Venom was going to be insane in this moive, not the symbiote, not eddie, only Venom. He is such an awesome villain and the most famous spidey villain, i really thought that they were going to have a bunch of scenes with him and him and Spidey, i was too hyped for this film and expected a lot, and that what pretty got me ticked off even though it's my fault for getting my hopes high, for me 7 min of him just wasn't enough for such a cool Villain, thats the pretty much the only biggest reason why i was disappointed with this film

 

[spida-man]

those were minor and like you said they had moments like that in the previous spidey films, but i just didn't expect it to drag you know, before SM3 came i really thought that Venom was going to be insane in this moive, not the symbiote, not eddie, only Venom. He is such an awesome villain and the most famous spidey villain, i really thought that they were going to have a bunch of scenes with him and him and Spidey, i was too hyped for this film and expected a lot, and that what pretty got me ticked off even though it's my fault for getting my hopes high, for me 7 min of him just wasn't enough for such a cool Villain, thats the pretty much the only biggest reason why i was disappointed with this film

understood, but for some strange reason i still enjoyed the movie alot, and i feel that if there are future spidey movies, that we haven't seen the last of venom(if he could survive the electrocution/explosion in the US-M comic, he can survive a little pumkin bomb)

 

[omid17]

understood, but for some strange reason i still enjoyed the movie alot, and i feel that if there are future spidey movies, that we haven't seen the last of venom(if he could survive the electrocution/explosion in the US-M comic, he can survive a little pumkin bomb)

don't get me wrong this movie was still good and was worth the $10 i spent for the midnight showing, but it could have been better imo

 

[Silver Spider]

I don't understand all the anger at villains being underdeveloped. Harry has had great development throughout the trilogy, so the New Goblin's out. The symbiote had a major effect in the movie on every main character's life; although Eddie could have used the few extra deleted scenes, but otherwise Venom's development was good. Sandman had less development, but he's never been a really deep character in the comics, so why should he upstage everyone else in the movie?

 

[Blader5489]

those were minor and like you said they had moments like that in the previous spidey films, but i just didn't expect it to drag you know, before SM3 came i really thought that Venom was going to be insane in this moive, not the symbiote, not eddie, only Venom. He is such an awesome villain and the most famous spidey villain, i really thought that they were going to have a bunch of scenes with him and him and Spidey, i was too hyped for this film and expected a lot, and that what pretty got me ticked off even though it's my fault for getting my hopes high, for me 7 min of him just wasn't enough for such a cool Villain, thats the pretty much the only biggest reason why i was disappointed with this film

Yeah I understand that, and like I said earlier, I think the one aspect in which SM3 falters where the other two succeeded was with the handling of the villains (except for Harry). If the book is any indication, a Spider-Man 3.1 could fix this problem to some degree. Even still, I can appreciate the movie for taking a different direction from the previous films. While SM1 and 2 were pretty conventional superhero vs. supervillain stories, SM3 instead uses its villains as to gauge Peter Parker's growth--after all, Peter himself is the main villain of the movie.

 

[omid17]

I don't understand all the anger at villains being underdeveloped. Harry has had great development throughout the trilogy, so the New Goblin's out. The symbiote had a major effect in the movie on every main character's life; although Eddie could have used the few extra deleted scenes, but otherwise Venom's development was good. Sandman had less development, but he's never been a really deep character in the comics, so why should he upstage everyone else in the movie?

they should have left Sandman for SM4. It was obvious in SM2 that Harry would have a bigger role in SM3. They should of had only 2 villains( that's still more than one villain, unlike the previous spidey flicks) and have the story with him forgiving Harry for what he did to him because of the suit, the story would still be about forgivness, and leave Sandman and Lizard for SM4

 

[omid17]

Yeah I understand that, and like I said earlier, I think the one aspect in which SM3 falters where the other two succeeded was with the handling of the villains (except for Harry). If the book is any indication, a Spider-Man 3.1 could fix this problem to some degree. Even still, I can appreciate the movie for taking a different direction from the previous films. While SM1 and 2 were pretty conventional superhero vs. supervillain stories, SM3 instead uses its villains as to gauge Peter Parker's growth--after all, Peter himself is the main villain of the movie.

true but i still think they could have only used 2 villains, instead of jumping for 3. Have Harry, symbiote and Venom would have been better imo

 

[Silver Spider]

Yeah I understand that, and like I said earlier, I think the one aspect in which SM3 falters where the other two succeeded was with the handling of the villains (except for Harry). If the book is any indication, a Spider-Man 3.1 could fix this problem to some degree. Even still, I can appreciate the movie for taking a different direction from the previous films. While SM1 and 2 were pretty conventional superhero vs. supervillain stories, SM3 instead uses its villains as to gauge Peter Parker's growth--after all, Peter himself is the main villain of the movie.

It's funny you say that, because that's what I've always thought about Doc Ock in SM2, which I liked about that. One thing I've loved about the Spiderman movies that makes it different than other superhero movies, is that defeating supervillains is not the point of the story. The villains are like subplots that help his coming-of-age.