What made this movie a let down for the majority of the fans?

[The_Shadow]

that is NOT minor. okay sure they couldnt tell if it was a bird or a man by the weight but why 1) have a test site with no covering and 2) no covering but have no security cameras or anything to see that there was a guy inside? it would have been better if they found out "hey theres a guy in there" scientist B goes "sh1t! we cant stop the machine!", he gets turned anyhow, at least we know they didnt just turn on some machine and went home without even looking at what happened.

You are nitpicking with no basis but to nitpick. 1) Why SHOULD they have? Is It a rule? Maybe the nature of the experiment needs a open space. Who knows, who cares. It doesn't take anything away from the movie unless people Insist It must 2) I dunno... Maybe since It was fenced In with no trespassing signs they figured they didn't need It. *shrug* They were experimenting on the molecular level.... You don't need cameras trained on that because they couldn't see It anyway.

 

[dark_b]

and from another review:

"The movie shows that eventually, even the most loyal franchises fall victim to commercialization and a loss for what was originally important and special. No one bothered to look at the script and say "you know what, we need to work on this a little longer". Instead the took what was too much, threw a ton of money at it, and released. Quality over quantity will always survive the test of time. I don't care how much money this movie will make, over time more and more people will realize that this is the weakest entry of the first three films and the problems that lead to this downfall.
Bottom line, I am a huge fan of Spiderman and the mythology, and I felt let down."

rewatching the intro to #3 is painful because it highlights some of the best parts of the first 2 movies..... and it shouldnt be this way.

theres another review on ign saying how venom sounded like a baby raptor, heh cant help but agree. the audience laughed when the giant doughboy godzilla/sandman started pounding on peter, venom's little squeeks/yelps as he tied spidey down onto the column wasnt supposed to be a comedic moment, it was dramatic, but it came off as a joke, maybe thats what raimi wanted, since he doesnt care much for venom anyhow.

this was the only proble mthat i had with venom after i thought about it.

 

[christpunchers]

you have got to be joking, SM3 has it's problems but SR is just plain DULL.
I was disappointed (on first viewing) of SM3 but was entertained I almost feel asleep during SR

.

heh funny that you mentioned that, i think half my theater was sleeping during SR. but at least it was during a hot summer day and the coldness of the theater cooled me down.

 

[christpunchers]

You are nitpicking with no basis but to nitpick. 1) Why SHOULD they have? Is It a rule? Maybe the nature of the experiment needs a open space. Who knows, who cares. It doesn't take anything away from the movie unless people Insist It must 2) I dunno... Maybe since It was fenced In with no trespassing signs they figured they didn't need It. *shrug* They were experimenting on the molecular level.... You don't need cameras trained on that because they couldn't see It anyway.

you see thats the problem. its not a rule, but did not you see how they fleshed out the villians of the first 2 movies? how is it not possible for raimi to explain what sort of tests were being ran that resulted in the sandman? its so sloppy and convienent that the test site had no monitoring so even if say, a stray cat fell into the test site they would not even know. and just wtf were they testing? come on man, dont deny that the writing was very sloppy. im not nitpicking, because im sure dozen of other casual movie goers were giggling thinking about stupid that scene was, how sandman was so easily created just by pure luck and chance, and we didnt even get to know just WTF they were trying to test with that pit of sandman.

 

[The_Shadow]

you see thats the problem. its not a rule, but did not you see how they fleshed out the villians of the first 2 movies? how is it not possible for raimi to explain what sort of tests were being ran that resulted in the sandman? its so sloppy and convienent that the test site had no monitoring so even if say, a stray cat fell into the test site they would not even know. and just wtf were they testing? come on man, dont deny that the writing was very sloppy. im not nitpicking, because im sure dozen of other casual movie goers were giggling thinking about stupid that scene was, how sandman was so easily created just by pure luck and chance, and we didnt even get to know just WTF they were trying to test with that pit of sandman.

No one In my theatre was giggling, and neither was I.
Easily created? Pure chance? You mean just like Spiderman and Green Goblin was in the first movie? You mean just like Doc Ock was in the second movie?

 

[christpunchers]

buddy norman was a mad scientist and so was ock. they at least TRIED to explain how why things were done and how it resulted in the powers that the villians possess. All they did for sandman was he fell into some pit where a bunch of "scientists" are conducting some sort of giant dough mixer test with ZERO CAMERAS to monitor the site. they rushed his intro and basically turned him into just some random joe who dropped into a vat of goo.

 

[LadyVader]

No one In my theatre was giggling, and neither was I.
Easily created? Pure chance? You mean just like Spiderman and Green Goblin was in the first movie? You mean just like Doc Ock was in the second movie?

Do NOT compare the origin of Sandman and Venom to the origin of Doc Ock. Doctor Octopus had a great origin story they spent plenty of time explaining it. He was hurt trying to be the ultimate scientist, in a quest for glory and ultimately he was a slave to his own creation. There's nothing of the sort in Spiderman 3. Things just happen. And i know we're supposed to go along with it but just because Doctor Octopus DID have such a good origin story I feel compelled to ask Raimi... WHA HAPPENED!?

 

[The_Shadow]

buddy norman was a mad scientist and so was ock. they at least TRIED to explain how why things were done and how it resulted in the powers that the villians possess. All they did for sandman was he fell into some pit where a bunch of "scientists" are conducting some sort of giant dough mixer test with ZERO CAMERAS to monitor the site. they rushed his intro and basically turned him into just some random joe who dropped into a vat of goo.

You think they expected what would happen? Norman and Otto had a direct hand Into thier change. I'm sure both of them went Into It hoping they'd turn into Madmen. Sandman was no different then the formula that gave Norman superhuman strength, and fused the arms onto Otto and blew out hte inhibitor chip. Im done arguing about this lol. If this Is the worst thing you can debate about this movie your expectations are way too high.

 

[The_Shadow]

Do NOT compare the origin of Sandman and Venom to the origin of Doc Ock. Doctor Octopus had a great origin story they spent plenty of time explaining it. He was hurt trying to be the ultimate scientist, in a quest for glory and ultimately he was a slave to his own creation. There's nothing of the sort in Spiderman 3. Things just happen. And i know we're supposed to go along with it but just because Doctor Octopus DID have such a good origin story I feel compelled to ask Raimi... WHA HAPPENED!?

What I mean Is that It Is a chance happening that created ALL of the characters. I'm not saying that any are worse, or better expalined than the other. What I mean Is, a chance occurence, that happened for all of them with unexpected results. The only character that knew what he was doing, and knew the result, was Harry.

 

[dos_acoustic]

This movie was a let down for most people because they were expecting Venom, Venom, Venom! I on the other hand was expecting Sandman and GG2. Would have been a much better movie if Rami would have been able to spin his magic web with these 2 characters like he had planned. Unfortunatly the studio steps in as they usually do, force Venom on Sam, and we get the Spidey 3 we have.

 

[dark_b]

This movie was a let down for most people because they were expecting Venom, Venom, Venom! I on the other hand was expecting Sandman and GG2. Would have been a much better movie if Rami would have been able to spin his magic web with these 2 characters like he had planned. Unfortunatly the studio steps in as they usually do, force Venom on Sam, and we get the Spidey 3 we have.

dont try to twist things. we knwo everything about venom. venom was in hte movie like we all expected it. sandman was the suprise.

 

[klown23]

People overhyped and expected too much. ESPECIALLY Venom.

You're right man... Not enough Venom, not enough Sandman, not enough symbiote, not enough black suit background story (fighting bums and robbers)... Too much pieces of puzzles missing to makes it perfect.

I really hope for a 3.1 DVD, cause i'm sure with 15 minutes of bonus stuff, they could make this movie perfect. So sad that Sandman and Venom didnt get much of caracter development.

And what the hell happened to those deleted scenes? Eddie brock drives a motor cycle? Sandman's daughter stop her dad at the end? Symbiote gripping Peter's face? Chris Tucker's cameo? Raimi's cameo?

Next time Raimi, don't put 3 villains in the same movie

 

[dos_acoustic]

dont try to twist things. we knwo everything about venom. venom was in hte movie like we all expected it. sandman was the suprise.

What am I twisting? Sam said that he didnt want to do a Venom story. If i recall i remember Sandman being the first one revealed. I also recall Sam and Tobey talking about him before. Im not making this a " Venom V.S Sandman " thing. I like venom and would like to see him in a movie but he needs his own movie. He was cheated. As was GG2 and Sandman because they all had to share the spotlight. You can see how this was a Sandman/GG2 movie. It felt like they just forced to throw Venom in there. It was a bad move to have him do they whole Venom thing. He stated that he did not like Venom. Its like asking an atheist film maker to make a film about jesus. Your not going to what you want.

IMO I thought the movie would have been perfect as GG2/Sandman/Black Spider. Leave Venom for a director who knows a little more about him and would give you a whole movie about Venom.

 

[Grievous]

I thought it was too jam packed

 

[Spiderine]

Basically everyone is saying the same thing here. Character development and rushed story. Additions of characters which was obviously not necessary. Maybe I set the bar too high but this movie never had the same feel to it as the last two IMO. I always expected things to play out a certain way and it never did. Never saw Gwen's reaction to Eddie getting plastered over the papers for being a fraud. His hatred for Peter was totally BS and we should have seen more of his collapse. I could have cared less about Venom and Sandman. The whole approach was all wrong.

 

[Spiderine]

And WTF was up with Sandman's non existent dialogue. Who made this script? He was the main villain with nothing to say. 3 years to work on this thing and you could never tell.

 

[Razerblaze]

I am a huge fan of the first 2 movies and I was completely pumped to see the 3rd, but after hyping about it for years, I walked out of the theater completely bummed out. I felt like I just sat through an episode of Days of our Emo Lives. Everyone cried and there was just WAY too much unneeded drama for my taste. Some Drama is perfectly fine, as is a certain amount of love story which the first 2 movies nailed in the perfect amount of each. The 3rd movie on the other hand just overdid it, which took away from time that could have been better spent on actually developing the villains. Sandman falls into a pit where some goverment experiment is trying to do something with sand (which it looked like they failed anyway as the sand looked exactly the same afterwards)? And Venom looking like a black Ninja Turtle with teeth and more like a freaking sock puppet when he talked than anything else? Venom is one of my favorite comic book characters and Raimi completely drpped the ball on him IMO. He looked wicked in the promos and trailers, but when I saw him on the big screen it looked ridiculous.

Here's hoping that Christopher Nolan doesn't screw up the new Batman trilogy since it looks like that is the only other franchise with potential to break the trilogy curse. (Even though I thought x-Men 3 was far superior to Spider-Man 3 as much as it pains me to say it.)

 

[deathshead2]

Now you guys know how it feels to be let down by a movie. Me I hated spider-man 2. Biggest let down I ever had at a movie. Because throughout the whole movie spider-man didn't act like spider-man to me. But Sm3 now thats spider-man. He acted the way I always wanted to see him, except for the emo part even though I thought it was pretty funny. Sm3 is just one of those movies where you've got to turn your brain off. Sure alot of the plot was like a sci-fi channel movie, with random things happening. But hey thats what happens when you only have 2 hours to tell a story and have to tie up plot points. Overall this movie and 300 have been the best movies i've seen so far this year.

 

[shigsy2003]

All I ask for is more Eddie screen time.

 

[Hotwire]

A short list of the things that let me down.
1. Venom was wasted!
2. The Sandmanzilla thing at the end.
3. The whole movie felt rushed.
and...
4. Where did Peter get that symbiote sample?!?! This was never explained in the film. He never saw the symbiote up to that scene, he just knew the suit was black now.

 

[Alexia Dark]

I'm too lazy and short of time to go back and read this entire thread.

So I will just say that the answer is 'Complete failure of plot, character development and motivations, and any respect for the comics or voices of the fans'. Some will say about the last part 'But we wanted Venom!'

But did we want Eddie Brock to be a complete jackass with absolutely no moral conflict? Did we want Sandman to be a cliche moral villain who killed Uncle Ben? Did we want emo hair?

I'm pretty sure the answer is 'no'. But all of you 'But teh action wuz awesome!11!!!1!' people may correct me if you wish.

 

[Tony Stark]

This thread should be called:

"What made this movie a let down for the majority of the FANBOYS?"

It's pretty clear now that most people like this movie.

 

[Alexia Dark]

But Sm3 now thats spider-man. He acted the way I always wanted to see him, except for the emo part even though I thought it was pretty funny. Sm3 is just one of those movies where you've got to turn your brain off. Sure alot of the plot was like a sci-fi channel movie, with random things happening. But hey thats what happens when you only have 2 hours to tell a story and have to tie up plot points. Overall this movie and 300 have been the best movies i've seen so far this year.

I correct myself. I feel the need to respond to this.

My problem with 'He acted the way I always wanted', was that, to me, Peter Parker was lost in the process. I felt in no way sympathetic to him. He was just an ass who thought he was the best thing in the world and was all-knowing. That by itself wouldn't be too bad if we were able to see the reasoning for his actions. Gimme an internal monologue, an 'I'm sorry, MJ, you're right. It was stupid of me to assume that I know what you're going through. I'm doing this because I love you and I want to help you through this', not a last minute 'B-but... I... I... I love you! WAAAAHHHHH!!!'

I'm a life-long fan of Spider-Man. Asking me to turn my brain off is akin to asking me to take every moment of joy I felt and continue to feel while reading/watching anything GOOD about Spider-Man, and throw it in the trash (you know, where the 'script' belongs).

About 'that's what happens when you have only 2 hours to tell a story'. Tell it to Nolan.

 

[Marvin]

Do NOT compare the origin of Sandman and Venom to the origin of Doc Ock. Doctor Octopus had a great origin story they spent plenty of time explaining it. He was hurt trying to be the ultimate scientist, in a quest for glory and ultimately he was a slave to his own creation. There's nothing of the sort in Spiderman 3. Things just happen. And i know we're supposed to go along with it but just because Doctor Octopus DID have such a good origin story I feel compelled to ask Raimi... WHA HAPPENED!?

oh please

it's true one cannot compare the fleshed out ballance of doc ocks birth...to the simple "unmonitored" happenstance of sandmans!

that being said what would u say to comparing sandman and spideys births?

there's is different kinds of character creation devices...

 

[Alexia Dark]

One of them apparently being 'senseless coincidence'?