DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Movie Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk-17/)
-   -   "Spider-Man 3" reviews thread. (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/498544-spider-man-3-reviews-thread.html)

LivingINClip 05-07-07 02:49 PM

I don't buy into the Raimi being "too nice a guy". Danny Elfman didn't even want to work with him after the second one. I think the film suffered for a few reasons.

1: Raimi really didn't know what he wanted to do with it.

2: The studio pissed him off and forced more characters in the film than he wanted.

So, I place the blame on both of them.

MrBob 05-07-07 03:16 PM

I already posted my opinions on the film earlier, but I would like to reiterate that the best way to describe this movie is "Wasted Opportunity." The movie itself is okay and entertaining for the most part. However, compared to the first two movies, which I thought were great, it is just lacking in almost every way.

So if you are looking to watch a big budget popcorn flick, then Spiderman 3 will serve that purpose well. Even during the slower parts there is a lot of humor both intentional and unintentional, to keep you entertained. But if you are looking for a movie on par with the first 2 Spiderman movies, don't waste your time on this movie. You will only leave disappointed.

rennervision 05-07-07 03:36 PM


Originally Posted by LivingINClip
I don't buy into the Raimi being "too nice a guy". Danny Elfman didn't even want to work with him after the second one.

Maybe Sam started wearing the black Spiderman suit.

mdc3000 05-07-07 04:33 PM


Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
1. Raimi was contracted into doing a third one. Big word being contracted.
2. Raimi, like every individual, still needs to put bread on the table.
3. If you're contracted into doing a film and the powers that be tell you to do something, you do it if you still want to work in Hollywood (a.k.a. Fincher on Alien 3). That way, everyone in Hollywood thinks highly of you and you're not blackballed out of there.


All true, but I still believe that Sam stands behind the film he made... While Raimi isn't in a league with the likes of Spielberg as far as power in Hollywood, he's hardly in the same situation as Fincher was with Alien 3 (a director just starting out, trying to make a name for himself). Some elements were forced upon him, but I don't think he shit the bed on purpose out of spite. After facing the facts that he had to do certain things, I'm sure he tried his best but it ended up not being good enough.

I hate to be one of the detractors who keep posting stuff like this - I wanted to be the fucking spokesperson for how kick ass this movie was but it just didn't happen....

The Bus 05-07-07 05:55 PM

As someone who thought the first movie as awful and boring, and the second one was very good, should I see this movie? I have no high expectations other than to be entertained: I've never been a fan of the character. Is this worthy seeing in theatres? Signs tend to point to "yes" although I should keep my expectations in check.

Ranger 05-07-07 06:06 PM


Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Ridiculous. Comparing this movie to Batman and Robin, Catwoman, Superman IV, etc. and Peter to Jar-Jar Binks is such absurd hyperbole.


I hated X-Men 3 with a passion. I thought it completely betrayed the characters, the fans, and everything Bryan Singer worked for.
The second quote appears to be hyperbole too.

I remember there being quite a few hyperbolic complaints just about making Sandman the killer of Ben.

Ranger 05-07-07 06:12 PM


Originally Posted by The Bus
As someone who thought the first movie as awful and boring, and the second one was very good, should I see this movie? I have no high expectations other than to be entertained: I've never been a fan of the character. Is this worthy seeing in theatres? Signs tend to point to "yes" although I should keep my expectations in check.

I'm not a big fan of Spider-Man either, but I enjoyed the first two very much. I might enjoy the third a bit more when it is on dvd but one theater viewing was enough.

I probably would say to wait for the dvd and skip the theater, but if you don't plan to see other movies this summer, then you might as well give this a try but keep in mind of the two main complaints in this thread - emo pete and venom being underused. The movie does has its good moments - sandman, action scenes, harry.

DVDho78DTS 05-07-07 07:00 PM

I enjoyed the film greatly. -screwy-

chess 05-07-07 09:14 PM

I'm in the camp that thought SM2 was the single greatest superhero adaptation ever, and I had a lot of concerns about this film based on the production leaks.

3 villains...including Venom, who I didn't think would translate well on screen.

Sandman killed uncle Ben? Huh?

Gwen Stacy? Isn't this movie getting a bit crowded?

But hey, this is Sam Raimi, and he's hit it out of the park twice and got the benefit of the doubt. I didn't hate the movie...it was mostly fun...but my fears were well founded as none of the above worked. B-

cranberries fan 05-07-07 09:49 PM

I would rank this one 2nd best of the first 3 films (2 being the best,then 3 and 1).I love all that action and Dark-Pete is so funny,my grade is just B.

FantasticVSDoom 05-07-07 09:53 PM


Originally Posted by The Bus
As someone who thought the first movie as awful and boring, and the second one was very good, should I see this movie? I have no high expectations other than to be entertained: I've never been a fan of the character. Is this worthy seeing in theatres? Signs tend to point to "yes" although I should keep my expectations in check.

I thought the first one was ok, and didnt really care for the second one but I actually had a fun time with this one. So did the wife, who absolutely hated the first 2. Everything everyone has said is true, and its what I enjoyed about it. My biggest complaint was the length, but then again, what else is out right now that is worth seeing?

Ranger 05-07-07 10:29 PM

Yeah, these long movies are annoying for theaters but they're great for dvds at home.

My ass was sore the whole time. My bladder was giving me a lot of pressure, but around the second half, it relaxed up and told me not to worry and just enjoy the movie.

Brent L 05-07-07 11:42 PM

Here is a fantastic John August blog posting that goes over so many of the coincidences in SP3.

And for those of you who don't know, John August is a screenwriter, and his credits include Go, Charlie's Angels, Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride, The Nines, and the upcoming Shazam! as well.

Giantrobo 05-08-07 04:23 AM

I just got back and I can't add too much that hasn't been said. I generally liked it but I think I agree with some of the negative comments. :(

This film suffered from "Hulk-itis"...too much "human story stuff" and not enough ass kicking and thrills. Don't get me wrong, I get Peter's tough life and what thrills they gave us were cool. I mean for all the hate of Sandman he was well done in this film. Venom was also pretty good looking. I think the problem was that the great success of SM2's "human story" led someone to believe that "More will be better" in terms of Peter and his personal shit and they were wrong in how it was handled in SM3.

I also agree with those who said we needed more for Ursula the Russian Super's Daughter. I think she's the sweetest and most intersting female in whole series.

Xander 05-08-07 10:32 AM

I thought it was decent. I do agree with some of the criticism. I really wish they had done Raimi's original vision. Introduce the sandman and the black spidey suit. Resolve the Harry/Goblin story arc. At the end, Peter gets rid of the symbiote and Eddie gets a hold of it, leading into an awesome 4th film. That would have been plenty of plot, instead of shoe-horning in Venom into this film and making a mess.

Groucho 05-08-07 10:39 AM


Originally Posted by BrentLumkin
Here is a fantastic John August blog posting that goes over so many of the coincidences in SP3.

His site is hammered, so I found a cached copy:

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:...ohnaugust.com/

The full text (spoilerized):

Spoiler:

The perils of coincidence

Like several million people worldwide, I saw Spider-Man 3 this past weekend. And like a substantial percentage of these viewers, I got frustrated by the number of unlikely coincidences in the movie.

There’s nothing wrong with coincidence, per se. Almost every movie is going to have some incidents where one character just happens to be in the right place at the right time. In fact, many movies are built around a “premise coincidence.” In Die Hard, John McClane just happens to be in the building when the villains attack. That’s okay. McClane’s being there is part of the premise. Likewise, in the original Spider-Man, Peter Parker just happens to get bitten by the radioactive spider. No problem: it wouldn’t be Spider-Man otherwise.

The premise coincidence is one flavor of what I’ll call a Fundamental Coincidence: an accidental confluence of time, place and motivation which greatly impacts the story.

In a romantic comedy, when The Guy would have proposed to The Girl except that he just happened to overhear a conversation he interpreted the wrong way, that’s a Fundamental Coincidence. In the first Spider-Man, Norman Osborn just happens to be transformed into The Goblin just as Peter is becoming Spider-Man. That’s a Fundamental Coincidence, but we accept it because it feels true to the genre.

WARNING: MINOR SPOILERS FOLLOW. (Mostly things you’d glean the trailers or ads, but still.)

Let’s look at the Fundamental Coincidences in Spider-Man 3:

* The asteroid carrying the symbiote (utlimately, Venom) happens to land near Peter Parker. Peter doesn’t hear it, doesn’t investigate.
* The symbiote happens to attach itself to Peter’s scooter.
* Flint Marko happens to fall into the sand pit at exactly the moment the scientists test their billion-dollar Dyson vacuum.1
* Flint Marko happens to have been the man who killed Uncle Ben. (A retcon.)
* Eddie Brock happens to be the only person in the church at the moment Peter tries to get rid of the black suit.

Any one (or two) of these Fundamental Coincidences would probably go unnoticed, particularly in a superhero movie, where credibility takes a back seat to spectacle. But put together, they make the plot feel rickety, particularly when you factor in the large number of what I’ll call Minor Coincidences — things that don’t fundamentally change the story, but feel convenient all the same.

1. The police chief decides to tell Peter about Marko now, even though he’s known the details for some time, apparently.
2. Sandman’s first attack just happens to coincide with Spider-Man getting the key to the city.
3. Eddie Brock is newly arrived at the Daily Bugle, and wants Peter’s job.
4. Gwen Stacy happens to be Peter’s lab partner.
5. Gwen Stacy happens to be in the skyscraper during the crane accident.
6. And she’s the police chief’s daughter.
7. And she’s Eddie Brock’s love interest.2
8. And Gwen happens to be at the fancy restaurant on the night Peter wants to propose.

Again, you could have several of these coincidences in any movie and no one would mind. It’s largely expected that familiar faces will become imperiled in a summer action movie, so #5 feels right. Likewise, the eventual discovery of Venom’s weakness is accidental, but that plays into the genre. No foul there.

My point is not to rip on Spider-Man 3, but to urge readers to look at their own scripts with an eye towards coincidence. If you’ve written a treatment, search for the following phrases: “at the same time,” “accidentally,” “luckily,” “unfortunately,” and “meanwhile.” They’re often a tip-off that you have events happening by coincidence. There’s almost always a better alternative.
Causality trumps everything

Given a choice, try to find cause and effect. One event happens because of something else we’ve seen — ideally, something the hero himself has done.

Instead of having the hero accidentally overhear a key conversation, get him actively trying to listen. Or have an interested third party steer him in that direction — perhaps for his own reasons. At every juncture where a reader could ask “Why did that happen?”, try to have an answer that isn’t, “just because.”

Although there are some convenient twists in the Harry Osborn plot (amnesia, for starters), the causality is clear: the New Goblin wants revenge on Spider-Man for killing his daddy in the first movie.3 It doesn’t feel like coincidence that Harry is flying around on his hoverboard. With two other villains desperate for scenes, the timing might not be opportune, but it’s clear why it’s happening.
Look for correlation

Rather than ask an audience to swallow a bunch of little implausibilities, try bundling them together.

In Heroes, imagine if each character had a completely unique origin story: Claire got her powers from a shaman; Sylar is an alien; Peter has a magic ring. You’d get frustrated pretty quickly, because a lot of screen time would go towards explaining why and how. Instead, the creators wisely decided the characters all had some mysterious gene mutation activated by an environmental change. The audience is willing to make that one big leap,4 because they’re not asked to make similar leaps each time a new character is introduced.5

For Spider-Man 3, I don’t have any magic answers on how to correlate these disparate threads — other than trimming one out, which wouldn’t be a bad place to start. But had the script dropped on my desk a month before shooting, here are a few thoughts I would have put out there in terms of the many coincidences:

* Both Venom and Sandman are forms of disembodied consciousness that control their host subjects — people and sand, respectively. That seems thematically promising.
* One asteroid feels random, while a meteor shower feels like an event that needs a superhero.
* Could this meteor shower overlap with Marko’s transformation or escape? Even if it’s just in the background, it makes them feel more united.
* Could Spider-Man be pursuing Marko at the start?
* Could we see the symbiote choosing Peter, because he’s the strongest creature around?

Chop it out

Often, the best answer when faced with a nagging coincidence is just to remove it.

* Do we really need the Uncle Ben retcon? It doesn’t have a lot to do with Marko’s sick-daughter motivation.
* Couldn’t Eddie Brock already be a stringer for the Daily Bugle? If he and Peter already have history, great.
* Does Gwen Stacy need to be Peter’s lab partner?
* Do we even need the police chief?

Again, my point isn’t to rag on Spidey, but to urge reader-writers take a hard look at the role of coincidence in their own scripts.

Some coincidence feels genuine. In real life, we do accidentally bump into old friends at the mall. And surprise in general is a good thing — catching your reader off-balance is a worthy goal. But if a significant portion of your plot depends on chance, that’s a good indicator something’s not fully baked. The best time to tackle these problems is in the outline, asking yourself not only what happens next, but why.

1. It’s never clear what they’re supposedly doing, or why they wouldn’t have, say, a lid on the pit. Or a videocamera to monitor the experiment. ↩
2. Revealing both of these points of information in one piece of dialogue was a particularly bold choice. ↩
3. I kept waiting for Peter to point out that Harry’s dad was a psychopath, but oh well. ↩
4. And a familiar leap, frankly, because of X-Men. ↩
5. Note that both the D.C. and Marvel universes do have multiple, often conflicting means of empowering their heroes and villains. This is good and fascinating, but I suspect it’s one reason it can be harder for a casual reader to pick up these titles. The time investment needed to get up to speed is significant. Quick: Is Scarlet Witch a witch? Ummm…Sort of. ↩

Shannon Nutt 05-08-07 11:11 AM


Originally Posted by BrentLumkin
Here is a fantastic John August blog posting that goes over so many of the coincidences in SP3.

And for those of you who don't know, John August is a screenwriter, and his credits include Go, Charlie's Angels, Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride, The Nines, and the upcoming Shazam! as well.

I'll take "Movies that are all WORSE than Spider-Man 3" for $100, Alex. :)

Seriously, August is so full of BS. You can take ANY movie and come up with that many coincidences if you examine it long enough. Heck, you can take any person's life and come up with a ton of coincidences. You have to have a certain "suspension of disbelief" in a movie...otherwise the film would never get anywhere.

Goldblum 05-08-07 12:17 PM


Originally Posted by Shannon Nutt
I'll take "Movies that are all WORSE than Spider-Man 3" for $100, Alex. :)

Seriously, August is so full of BS. You can take ANY movie and come up with that many coincidences if you examine it long enough. Heck, you can take any person's life and come up with a ton of coincidences. You have to have a certain "suspension of disbelief" in a movie...otherwise the film would never get anywhere.

I thought his article was well reasoned and something screenwriters should strive for. He mentions that viewers need a "suspension of disbelief" and every film has some coincidences and that is ok. I agree with him that too many, however, is detrimental.

Groucho 05-08-07 12:23 PM


Originally Posted by Goldblum
I thought his article was well reasoned and something screenwriters should strive for. He mentions that viewers need a "suspension of disbelief" and every film has some coincidences and that is ok. I agree with him that too many, however, is detrimental.

Agreed. The coincidences in Spider-Man 3 just screamed "tacked on plot element". I would argue that the best movies (plot wise) are those that rely the least on coincidence.

I did think August's suggestions for making it better were shit, though.

Shannon Nutt 05-08-07 12:50 PM


Originally Posted by Goldblum
I thought his article was well reasoned and something screenwriters should strive for. He mentions that viewers need a "suspension of disbelief" and every film has some coincidences and that is ok. I agree with him that too many, however, is detrimental.

I wouldn't have such a problem with August's rant if he were noted for writing good screenplays himself...he isn't, so he shouldn't be so quick to judge others. It's like the pot calling the kettle black.

Groucho 05-08-07 12:54 PM

Of the films listed by BrentLumkin, the only one I've seen is Go, and it was a hell of a lot better written than Spider-Man 3.

Supermallet 05-08-07 03:02 PM


Originally Posted by Ranger
The second quote appears to be hyperbole too.

Way to take something out of context. If you read the rest of my post, you'll see that I said X3 is still well made enough to NOT be put in with the likes of Batman & Robin, Catwoman, and Superman IV. It's my personal opinion that the movie was terrible beyond words, but I'm not confusing that with the general perception of the film. My point was that some people here might not have liked Spider-Man 3, but it's not in the same group as those truly awful movies.

Dr. DVD 05-08-07 03:11 PM

GO was a movie full of conincidences, all about it more or less. Still better thought out than SM3 though.

EDIT: While I thought it was lackluster, I don't want to give off the impression I thought it was abysmal. It is at least made with some competence, as opposed to the company in which everyone seems to want to place it. What about the coinicidence that Darth Vader happens to be attacking Leia's ship not only over the planet where his son lives, but where he grew up as well? Or that Anakin's mother dies right when he arrives to start him down the dark path? Or that Anakin and Obi-Wan happen to fight on a planet covered with lava that could badly burn him? Or that Boba Fett happened to be a clone of the man who was the template for the stormtrooper army that could wipe out the Jedi yet fall to teddy bears?

Lara Means 05-08-07 05:22 PM


Originally Posted by LivingINClip
(3) We have a butler that we never seen, to turn Harry around.

The butler is definately in both Spider-Man 1 and 2.

Ranger 05-08-07 05:39 PM


Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Way to take something out of context. If you read the rest of my post, you'll see that I said X3 is still well made enough to NOT be put in with the likes of Batman & Robin, Catwoman, and Superman IV. It's my personal opinion that the movie was terrible beyond words, but I'm not confusing that with the general perception of the film. My point was that some people here might not have liked Spider-Man 3, but it's not in the same group as those truly awful movies.

It was the "completely betrayed" part that I thought was hyperbole.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.