Don't forget to add the part about Mary-Jane being a total bitch. She has a go at Peter Parker for bragging about himself too much instead of comforting her over her failures on stage, (apparently her bad singing takes precedence over his saving dozens of people's lives everyday). Why does Parker even bother rescuing her anymore if she's just going to be a self-centred old moo the whole time?
Book me today! I also review weddings, funerals and bar mitzvahs.
I disagree with the above comment, Spiderman's a hero because he saves people whether they are grateful or not. It's part of the job.
Yes MJ was bitchy, but Peter also acts like a complete self-righteous douche. The guy punches her in the face. Blame bad writing.
The thing I don't get about this movie... was all the Narm during "Peter trying to be cool" scenes intentional and trying to show that Peter was acting like an idiot or just the scriptwriters trying too hard to be cool?
It was definitely intentional. Because it's Sam Raimi, he made Army Of Darkness, and Peter's evil scenes were all about that (plus, if it wasn't intentional, the women he was hollering at on the sidewalk wouldn't have reacted the way they did). For my part, I laughed my ass off in that scene, though I don't think anyone else quite shared my sensibilities about it.
Otherwise, yeah, all this. Great action scenes, the bit with Bruce Campbell, and, that's about it.
Productivity is for people without internet connections. -Count Dorku
@maninahat: Er, she's angry at him for bragging about himself, not for doing the stuff he's bragging about. How is that being bitchy?
Leave a Comment:
Spider Man Three
The best way I can describe this movie is wasted potential.
It's not bad by any means. It's still got the spark from the previous two Sam Raimi movies. And it's hard to argue with the sheer coolness of the action scenes. There's some real interesting creative choices here. The "Peter Parker goes evil" montage is way up there for being weird and yet still surprisingly entertaining in a mainstream way.
The big problem is that for every interesting choice there's a bunch more that are, well, stupid is pretty much the nicest way to put it. The first two movies had, as villains, two very smart guys who went a little crazy from messing with super-science. The third has three villains so poorly fleshed out they can't equal Doc Ock even when they're all put together. We have one guy with a sick daughter, a stupid Ret Con, and powers gained apparently by randomly wandering into a scientific experiment. Another makes a Heel Face Turn based on information he really should have been given at the beginning of the movie. The last one shows up in one big scene at the end of the movie for twenty minutes.
None of these characters are impossible to redeem, plotwise- they're just a little flat. I can see what the writing was going for. The huge fight scene at the end of the movie is quite excellent. The problem is that the rest of the movie seems to have been written with that fight scene as an explicit goal. In going for this fight scene, many a Plot Hole was created and many shortcuts were taken in the script. Conflict is created artificially via the Idiot Ball- most of the issues could have been solved simply by the characters doing a better job of communicating with each other.
In short, the script needed a few more rewrites, and a lot more cut scenes. Adequately expressing all the issues and characters would have required two movies. And cutting the scope of this one down to focus on fewer characters simply would not have pleased the fanbase. Having been whetted with the promise of an epic final fight between Spidey, the Goblin, Sandman, and Venom, how could the movie not give them that? Or worse, ask them to wait until Spider Man 4?
For the fanbase, of course, this movie is great. The plot inconsistencies are par for comic books, after all. But those expecting more should look elsewhere.