"Spiderman 3"...WHY?!

Spiderman 3 is a boring mess. The story is a mishmash of plotlines, centering around the three (yes, THREE) villains -- Goblin Jr., Sandman, and Venom. Overlong, the film languishes in its many plots, opening with Spidey wounding his friend Harry Osborne, now the reborn Green Goblin, then sauntering to the Sandman, and the Venom super-spidey suit.

There's no discernible momentum until Mary Jane calls it quits with Peter, who's been quite an ass, though she herself has been a needy baggage for 4 reels. In any case, this sets off a battle between Harry and Peter, and FINALLY some action. Had the movie begun here and run for a tight 85 minutes, cutting out the Sandman character altogether, it would've been awesome. As it stands, this bloated ($300 million) mess has probably killed its franchise.

* * *

Also, I need to remind myself that I get sick if I eat too much popcorn.

Comments

  1. Oh, the movie was OK, I guess. I had low expectations and a free ticket.

    Myself, I almost left before the previews were over. I know the movie was PG-13, just like the last Star Wars was, but surely they know there are going to be kids at a super hero movie?! I think I've about had it with the theater experience.

    ReplyDelete
  2. :-) It's particularly nice to watch a movie with a group of friends.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm with Jeff, I had low expectations. I'm far enough past my comic-reading days that I enjoy what they do well from the comics and don't care too much about the things they don't. I even think some of the changes are an improvement, such as having the webbing come right out of his hands (his DNA did get rewritten, after all) instead of having him just happen to invent high-tech web shooters in his spare time. I agree they incorporated too many villains but I was oddly impressed with the way they got away with the absurdly short transformation of Harry Osborne into an insane villain. They (probably correctly) assume that the filmgoer already saw William Dafoe as Norm slip gently into madness in the first film -- so anything beyond a few seconds of transformation for Harry (in the worldview of modern moviemaking) would have seemed tedious, I guess.
    I liked the Bruce Campbell bit.
    Still haven't seen the ending - had to leave early to pick up my daughter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, one thing that was really weak. I think Kirsten Dunst is an incredible actress, but the movie required her to do a couple of completely unbelievable things. She sees Harry show up suddenly as a super-villian. And she just what he commands, though glaring at him like a really mean guy, I mean like whatever. Maybe the ending I missed makes it more plausible.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Review: The Southeast Christian Church Easter Pageant

Driving for the Cure...? (Or, how I got blacklisted...)

No, I don't have Connective Tissue Disorder