Seen Spider-Man 3? What Did You Think?
by Alex Billington
May 4, 2007
Now that the epic Spider-Man 3 has finally made its debut in over 4200 screens nationwide, we want to hear your thoughts! What did you think? Better than the first two? Worse? How was the experience at the theater? Was Spider-Man 3 the start of the summer movie season you were hoping for?
Just drop by, leave a comment, create some discussion! To start it off, I thought Spider-Man 3 had some issues and wasn't the best in the franchise, but if I were to order them myself, I'd say 2 was best, then 3, then 1.
Reader Feedback - 65 Comments
Maybe i need to watch Spidey 3 again when its on DVD, but i was actually very disappointed. There were points in the movie (you will know what i mean when you see it) where you wonder what movie you are watching because it is just so out there. I think they tried to hard to stretch this one out, seemed a little too long. Sandman was semi interesting IMO, gwen stacy was unecessary, Harry i thought was very strange in this one, Tobey seemed bored in parts...i dunno, it had some really awesome special effects, and some really funny parts, but it just left me with a strange feeling in my stomach...i dont know, maybe that will change if i watch it again. I give it 7/10 just because its Spidey and you can't absolutely hate the movie. I rank them as follows, the best is spidey 2, then spidey 1, then spidey 3......any comments?
Pcgamerma on May 4, 2007
Really disappointed. I think people on both sides of the camera are ready to move on and it shows in the poor quality of this flick. I did laugh at the movie, not because it was funny, but because it felt right to make fun of it. 3/10, for three reasons: Thomas Haden Church, J.K. Simmons, and Bruce Campbell.
m0nk3y80y on May 4, 2007
I think it is a decent movie, but without a doubt the least of the series. One of the strengths of the previous films were the quiet pieces between charcters like Peter, MJ, Aunt May, Harry, etc, but I think they overdid it here. It is out of character for me, but I would have liked more action scenes (seriously, Sandman and Venom looked great!) This movie had a different tone to it, too dark i think, and a few too many storylines and villains for my taste. I have a bunch more qualms with the film, but I don't want to get into it. I did enjoy myself, but I wish my desire to talk about it right now was based on how much I loved it and not where I think they could improve. I think most Spidey fans will think its good enough, but not be completely satisfied. Just a quick note on the end (no spoilers). It's an ok ending, and if it proves to be the end of the series, I think I can live with that. I've been prepared for this being the last installment, but I hope Maguire, Dunst, and Raimi come back for one more so I can get comlplete closure instead of moderate closure. Just asking those who saw the film, is it fair to say it is like 'Return of the Jedi,' in which we do get an ending but there is just something more we need from the characters to make the experience truly great?
Charlie on May 4, 2007
Maybe Jedi is a bad example. X3 better? It did lack the similar punch that the first two had, even though the ending wasn't truly terrible.
Charlie on May 4, 2007
Does anyone else feel like Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin are to blame for Spider-Man 3 downfalls??? Sam Raimi made a terrific introduction to start the franchise, and had complete creative control over Spider-Man 2(the best of the series), but in this third installment, this not the case... Sam's producer's (Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin) had a hand in altering this sequel with the incorporation of Venom and Gwen Stacy. My problem isn't with the character's being added to the film in an out of context view of the comics(where some "geeks" might place blame), but with both characters written into the script as an after thought. Venom has only 10-15 minutes of screen time, which is unbelievable underdeveloped, such as the scene where Sandman and Venom decide to team-up(which only lasts for about 10 seconds). And as for Gwen Stacy, she could have easily been just an extra, with no real involvement in moving the story forward what-so-ever. Sorry, if it sounds as if I didn't enjoy the film... I just felt like this was two complete films... shoved into one.
TheGuyInThePJ's on May 4, 2007
I personally thought this was the best or second best. in order i would put the movies 3,1,2 or 1,3,2 i loved the comedy and i thought the parts that were cheesy were perfect representations of a real comic book
Max on May 4, 2007
Awful. I cannot believe you put this crap ahead of number one. My review: http://therecshow.com/2007/05/04/spiderman-3-a-review/ favorite line: "Kirsten Dunst is as appealing as a cold cumshot on your dead grandmother's ass." That says it all for me.
Ray on May 4, 2007
I don't think that it's a great movie, but it's not too bad either. There are some parts of the movie in which you can tell production is bad. I still like more the second one. Will see if in DVD I can change my opinion.
Mau on May 4, 2007
My friend Dan and I thoroughly enjoyed the film. Venom was certainly under-used, as was Gwen Stacy. But I thought they did a good job on Peter's "battle within" (which after all is the movie's tag line) and wrapped up the trilogy appropriately. The audience at our screening (7:15 p.m. on Friday night) appreciated the funny moments in the film. And I'm not talking about unintentional humor.
Edward on May 4, 2007
I enjoyed the movie... But in the end, I couldn't help but feel disappointed. Venom was tacked on. A lot of the script felt like it was duck taped together at times... And there are scenes in the film that did not add nor subtract from the film (in other words, there was no reason for them to be there). Overall, I'll give it a 7/10. It definitely was not better then Spider-Man 2... But in my opinion, it was much better then the first Spider-man film.
B33 on May 5, 2007
Disappointing. Too cheesy at times (Peters on-going disconess, Eddie Brock whenver on screen...). Too kiddy at times (the whole parade-thing). I found myself laughing at parts that weren't intended to be funny (too many too list). I loved Spiderman 2 but this one fell way off the map. If it wasnt for Bruce Campbell, Bryce Dallas Howard, and JK Simmons, this movie wouldve been a pure dud (right up there with X-Men 3). Also couldve used less time , oh say, one hour less. I see why there are so many deleted scenes in films. This seemed like a Spiderman version 3.66 out Tuesday on Blue-Ray (comes with free ticket!).
JRod on May 5, 2007
[...] Soon after the initial waves of fans got their fix, the opinions began to roll in. Many sites sought out the opinions of their readers; FirstShowing.net collected comments as did ComingSoon.net’s Blog. And of course, the forums at RottenTomatoes were filling up quicker than the line to claim Anna Nicole’s baby. What was the overwhelming theme of the fanboy reaction to Spidey 3? Disappointment. [...]
This movie rocks! Dont know why people are criticising this too much .. its a great summer movie. It was funny and the action/CGI spectacular. There are 4-5 action sequences in the movie (as opposed to 1-2 of them in Spidey 2), so never a dull moment. And as for the movie's ending, well it was not a typical Happily-ever-after fairytale (or hollywood) ending - life goes on for Peter/Spidey, he's still got problems and needs to deal with that. Just like in the comics (and real life for everyone else). If people wanna watch some oscar-worthy stuff , watch Driving Miss Daisy or something.
Livomaximus on May 6, 2007
I was pretty underwhelmed. Check out the review on my blog if you'd like.
Will on May 6, 2007
The movie was disappointing. Gwen stacy is nothing like her comic persona and could have easily been replaced by an extra. Too many villains. Omg....i so hated the cliche of the messed hair when the black suit was introduced. Why not give him a mustache he could twirl? Only redeeming character that the film could not do without? Bruce Campbell. Sandman was good. Venom hardly there to do anything. Harry was interesting. Don't make another. It will cost too much to bring everyone back and then they won't have anything left over to make a good script or effects. 6/10
Heckle on May 6, 2007
Was not impressed at all , gwen should have been in the first movie and died. Not enough storyline with the black costume and it should have been more of the shape shifter type for peter parker also. even tho it is the movies could have still done it like the comics with getting rid of it and it hiding in his closet as the red and blue and then going to the church.
Mike on May 7, 2007
I've already watched the movie. It was great, aside from the last part. It was like I'm expecting more than just a simple ending of the story. Well, the fight scenes were great! And I liked it when Harry and Spidey helped each other...
kei on May 7, 2007
The movie felt more like the 80s cartoon than any other in the series. Disappointed, but felt it was at least worth my $9 and I'd probably buy it on DVD, which all the producer care about anyways.
grendel on May 7, 2007
It seems to be the popular thing to say that this movie sucked. It is a Spiderman movie, the comic books have all of the soap opera type stuff in them and Spiderman often fights a number of villans. I loved the Peter Parker dorky dancing stuff and the fight scenes. Great movie! I want to go see it again. It is not Citizen Kane guys - enjoy it for the silliness and action.
mac on May 7, 2007
I actually liked this one the most out of the 3. People are complaining about how cheesy and ridiculous this one gets...and it's as if they didn't see the first two. Does anyone not remember "Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head", the subway people carrying him like Jesus, MJ running with her wedding dress, or the "it rides up in the crotch" elevator scene with Hal Sparks. And I liked all those scenes...this is how the series works. To expect anything different is just absurd. To bring it down to its most basic level, you go to a Spider-Man movie for the action, and this one delivers more and on a better scale, so on that alone its worth seeing. In terms of story there are times in the first 2 when I felt like not enough was going on...so with this one I'll take too much going on rather than not enough. Did it have its faults? Yea, big ones, but so did the first two. Spider-Man 2 is not the masterpiece some claim it to be. This one at least knows what it is and has fun with it. Overall, a fun, well told trilogy.
chrisg on May 7, 2007
Just like the rest of the real spidey fan's I was disappointed, Venom, the ultimate vitious character known to the spidey universe, was OBLITERATED by 1 pumpkin bomb. When Harry just got an ugly scar. They was extremely lame and i very angered how easily the deadly venom died, Sandman=pussy, end of story. I had waited almost a year since i saw the preview during Superman Returns, and I feel i waisted my life for this crappy movie. I am a huge spidey fan and it hurts to really saw that movie sucked 🙁
Synister on May 7, 2007
I like my heroes to be heroic. I like my villains to be villainous. I didn't particularly want to see grown men weeping like little girls. It was, in a lot of ways, a chick flick for boys. The redemption of TWO of the major villains was a disappointment, but less so than the lack of Venom followed by the, not just death, but *vaporization* of Venom. Way to leave it open for a different director to actually use the character well at a later time. The movie was too long to sit through comfortable, while remaining too short to handle the excessive amount of sub-plots, none of which were really tied together. There were far too many musical numbers... and a dance number? Are you kidding me? I mean, ok, I get it... sort of, but... really? What? Also, Kirsten Dunst can't really sing, so less of that is so much more. I've always been wary of the superhero movies that feel some bizarre burning need to add more and more villains to go up against the hero. Three(ish) made this just way too convoluted. Also, with Sam Raimi's penchant for killing off characters, it seems like things are going to be a whole lot rougher to transition into. This one, more than either of the others, felt very formulaic. "We have to add more villains... and more minutes... and some relationship turmoil... and emotion... weeping... grief... MORE MORE MORE." Um. No. Thanks anyway, though. They should just sign Joel Shumacher up to direct the next 3 movies. At least that way I won't even be tempted to go see them. Unfortunately, no matter who's at the helm I think that Spiderman 2 was the pinnacle and now would be the best place to stop.
FyreGoddess on May 8, 2007
i saw this movie twice. and the second time wasn't any better!!!! first i must say spiderman 2 is one of the best films ever. and bruce cambell is fantastic at everything. however this movie, even though i can't get enough spiderman, was toooooooo long. for spiderman 4 i think we need to get the sinister 6 as villians and if that isn't enough we can throw in the clone saga. no to mention we can kill aunt may and have come back to life in spiderman 5...hahahah! what the hell. spiderman 1 was great. 2... even the best of the bunch. 3 was soooo disappointing. VENOM is huge and he had all of what... 12 minutes and vaporized to boot!!!!! sandman boo hooo. i am sorry... i forgive you. are you kidding me... this is a chick flick. not to mention gwen stacy was in here why. i think she was beautiful but she did nothing for the storyline. how did spidy know the church bells would bother the sybiote? just a big coinscidence...hahahha! now topher did great with the character but the venom angle should have been a whole movie not 12 minutes of afterthought and write in. i feel as if joel whats-his-face did this movie and ruined what was so ahead of all other superhero movies. sad day for spiderman fans. and egad!!! what the hel was the disco dancing about walking down the road! thank god for bruce cambell!!!!!!
dave "sabreman" courtney on May 8, 2007
I'm not really sure (Correct me if I'm wrong), but doesn't Dr. Curt Connors still have a sample of the Symbiote, meaning that Venom could still make a future appearence? Or, would this probably mean nothing...? Just a thought, and was curious.
Cornflak on May 10, 2007
Spider Man 3 was WAY overhyped, I was VERY disappointed. I want my money back. All the sheep er people flocking to see this film have bought into all the hype. Trust me folks this film isn't that good. Save your money for other movies like POTC 3 At Worlds End, Transformers, Die Hard, Fantastic Four 2, etc. Word to the masses that still just have to go see Spidey, many of you will be coming back disappointed. You were warned.
Larry King on May 11, 2007
What the hell was up with venom, he was on it for like one minute! and did they really have to put spiderman in front of a giant american flag. I didnt pay money to see american patriotism.
L-Unit on May 12, 2007
This was the best movie between the all 3 ...there were very funny parts and really cool stunts and stuff... It was a little bit strange the way they filmed it ..its was too damn DARK. but as a spidy fan i loved this movie. sorry that i have a bad english. SPIDERMAN RULS
Paranormal on May 12, 2007
spider-man 3 has spidey fan divided between the one that love it and the ones that hated it because it was too gushy and too mushy...im one of those that didnt like it but didnt love it either so that leaves me somewhere in between..why? gwen stacy was underused and served no purpose to the storyline(more than likely it was to drive a wedge between peter and mj)...venom had like 5 minutes of screentime and every time he talk we had to see topher grace face. someone once said that the producers(avid arad and laura vinski(sp?)..push sam raimi into a corner to put venom in the movie n thats essentially what happen. sam didnt want venom in the movie in the first place because for some reason or another he didnt like the venom character. i think this was the studio and producers answer to fan deman to have venom in the movie and this is the result we get... when i saw this movie opening night at 12:30am i saw some ppl leaving halfway through the movie and im guessing it was due to peter starting to disco dance like john travolta did in saturday night fever or grease or whatever movie from the late 70's...n yes @ 2 1/2 hrs long..it did seem long and honestly i was thinking of walking out the theater myself...because to me it didnt feel like a real spider-man should be i.e. spider-man 1 & 2.
cptkirkjr on May 12, 2007
this movie i though sucked really bad .....peter was suppose to turn evil when wearig the black suit not be a copy of the mask dancing around so that was really lame ...then the whole emo look ..with the messy hair and the bad suit that was suppose to be him evil ? ...the walking around struting was funny just to show how dumb he actually looked ...as for venom well he just sucked i thought he is way bigger , stronger yet he is suppose to be fast and he looked like a crappy spiderman clone ...everyone cried in the movie and at the end i was dissapointed ...why not keep the goblin outfit no they had to make a paintball mask looking one ...the sand man was cool but still made no sence at time he was really big then small or normal ..
lazyslacker on May 13, 2007
Spider Man 3 sucked!!! I want my money back!!!! Sam Raimi what were you thinking??? Or were you thinking at all?? Most overhyped movie EVER!!!!!!!!! Anyone knows that Venom should have more screen-time, except for Sam Raimi that is. Could have done without the stupid disco scene stuff. Raimi owes a good many Spider-Man fans an apology. Spider Man 3 was not as good as the first two Spider Man movies.
Matt on May 13, 2007
This movie did seem a bit long but I felt it was pretty decent. I would have liked to have seen more venom, topher played him well. They are going to be doing 3 more films, after that I don't know. I'm sure we will see venom in the next one and perhaps the return of the sandman. There is also dr. conners villain character as well. I don't think we have seen the last of spiderman. The franchise makes to much money.
transformers fan on May 13, 2007
i thought spiderman 3 was great. i look at some people's reasons as to why they thought it sucked, and i can understand everyone has their own opinion, but it all seems unfounded. the most popular complaints i read are these 1) "spiderman 3 was too dark" ok, of course it's supposed to be dark, anyone who read the venom saga in the comic book would know that it's pretty much a dark horror story, which it should be. 2) "spiderman 3 was too corny" well then, you obviously didnt see the first two. remember people, peter parker is supposed to be a nerd, that's his character in the comic. the parade scene was exactly like something you would have seen in the comic, and the whole american flag scene, well that obviously symbolizes spiderman at teh height of his career as an accepted super hero right before his fall into darkness. the first two had way cornier scenes. and lets not forget the steryotypical ending in the first movie, as peter parker proclaims outloud "i'm spiderman!" and flies towards the screen. or the second one, with mj running around in that wedding dress with that stupid ass smile on her face. the third one at least has an ending that compliments the movie. dark and uncertain. at people who say "venom wasn't in it very long" well, the movie was supposed to mainly be about peter parkers inner struggle. if you payed any attention you would notice that the doctor still has that venom symbiote making his re-appearance inevitable. and the sandman is not a pussy, his is exactly how he is supposed to be in the comic. not a good guy, not a bad guy. overall i thought this movie was great as it had kick ass action scenes and spent more time exploring the inner conflicts of the characters, which sums up to make a great movie. of course, if you're one of the many close-minded sheep that like to see nothing but action, well you missed the ball. go see smokin aces or something. spiderman 3 took the franchise to a new level, which obviously went above the heads of most people who can't comprehend anything beyond a sterytopical web slinging action scene.
chris on May 16, 2007
5 mins of Venom screen time?!?!?! Damn you Raimi! Here's the solution, lose 4 of the ultra-gay scenes between Harry and Peter, 2 scenes of the pretentious crap with Aunt May, 35 minutes of Peter dressed like an emo strutting along and dancing in jazz clubs, and have Kirsten Dunst take her top off so I have something to look at while I listen to her bitch bitch bitch. There, with all that crap out of the movie, your free to add at least 4 more fight scenes, tonnes of desperatly needed Venom footage, and enough room at the end for Peter and Harry to have gay sex before he dies.
Taephit on May 18, 2007
You fools would complain even if Venom had 30 minutes of screen time!
Mr. XYZ on May 19, 2007
It was great, but not as popular as part 2. Good action, but too much story. Part 4 will be much better, i hope.
Justin on May 19, 2007
Wow...never been so disappointed about a movie in my life. Taephit you are completely right, all the gay emo shit and his dancing down the street nad in the jazz club, horribly stupid, anyone who liked this movie should be killed. So little action in the movie, i mean the action that was there was pretty good, but still not enough. and why the hell did venom keep taking off his mask revealing the hella gay Topher Grace and his gay ass voice, and idk am i wrong? doesnt Tobey look gay when his mask is always ripped halfway off? he should just keep it on whenever he is spiderman, he took it off to much and showed you his gay kinda puffy stupid face.
KingJames88 on May 19, 2007
Chop out 20 mins and MAYBE Spider-man 3 would of been decent. Way to much camp. Way to many stretches of the imagination. In short, they just stopped taking it seriously and it shows.
Will on May 19, 2007
People are saying that venom is obliterated and can't come back for another movie, but most are forgetting about the sample left in the lab. Part of the alien is still alive, which could allow for a sequel that would actually provide interest with Venom, rather than a 5 minute spot.
K on May 21, 2007
If everyone thought that spiderman 3 was bad. LOOK OUT! we have three more on their way 😀 Things i would change in spidey 4: 1. more nudity- gwen stacey, either do something productive for the story or just show us your tits, just stop wasting my time! 2. a black spiderman- No, not like the suit, no real african-american black, imagine spiderman rips off his mask and its like Morgan Freeman under there or something, that would be so cool! 3. more screen time for the butler- Did anyone else think that the osborn's butler was just way cool!?! i didnt even know they had a butler!? after two movies it was like he exploded onto screen. People, we all know this movie sucked the gay right out of liberace's anus, but i have to admit, it was worth my $10.25
spermlad! on May 23, 2007
whats with sam raimi, does he have a 'killing off characters' fetish or something? so far he's on 5, keep up the good work boys!
procrastin...eh, ill finish the name later on May 23, 2007
hey guys i wish they showed alot more venom i was really disappointed in that ...i wish harry didnt die although u knew it was coming...lol i liked when peter was all dark and the subway fight...i thought the dancing was kinda rediculous...but man i know that doc conners still has the symbiote thing but thats not the thing that bugs me...half of my friends said they saw eddie brock get turned to a skelton when the explosion go off but i didnt see it...but there are 3 type of those pumpkin ball thingys. 1. the one he throws and that little device thingy comes out and chases spiderman 2. the one that turns people into pure skelton and kills them. 3. the explsion kind...so i dont think they put 2 of the bombs in one..at least i hope not...and after u saw venom get "vaporized" u can still see alittle bit of the symbiote going down inside a crack...so i know for sure we will see the creature venom again but i want venom to be wiht EDDIE BROCK!....i thought tropher did awesome playing him in this movie...i dont want the symbiote to go onto someone else in the movie and than he becomes venom even though it does that in the comics..but it has venom has eddie brock for a long time....so i wish eddie brock didnt die and if they dont have him (troper) returning as venom if they make another movie with him...i think it would be absoluty rediculous!
Yoda on May 23, 2007
This movie sucked pretty hardcore. Waited in line for 7 hours and that was more fun than the movie. 1. WAY too many conflicts. They should've focused on just one (Venom, since he's such a bad-ass, or Spidey and the symbiote suit because it has more of an internal struggle and helps to develope Peter Parker as a character) 2. MORE VENOM. The dude's a baller. In the comic books he has this monster tongue and messed up teeth, but in the movie they dont have either. They have Topher Grace sitting there being a sissy. He doesn't match the Venom persona at all. 3. Shorter. If the fourth movie's gonna suck as much as this one, I don't wanna waste another 2.5 hours of my time. 4. They need to make it darker. I know that's difficult with a move like Spider-Man because a lot of the peopel that go to see it are like ten, but still that's why Batman Begins was such a good movie was because it was rated R so it allowed them to make it a little darker and it really helps to develope Bruce and the other characters. So, you lose a small fraction of the child audience (most of them will go see it anyways) but you also appeal to the older audiences. Again, it's tricky, but i think they might be able to do it. 5. Get somebody really hot and just parade them around the screen the whole movie. Revolution.
Teh Pwnage on May 25, 2007
just a note Batman Begins was NOT R. i agree with u on the #1 issue in that there was too many conflict i sometimes felt lost..cause one many theres a bad-ass action sequence the next..its one of those low key moments...*bleh*
Tirado on May 25, 2007
wow....movie really sucked..was starting to think that it was a chick flick......i was so disappointed that i hardly saw venom...also, a bunch of the scenes were to cheesy for me and i just laughed at them.....spider man 2 was so much better
pirateluvr on May 26, 2007
This was a huge disappointment for me. I was really looking forward to see Peter Parker's struggle within himself, just to see it come and go in like four scenes. I was expecting a struggle like Anakin's struggle with the good and the dark side. In that you could see his struggle and you could understand why the dark side appealed to him. This movie was just boring and cheezy. Just because you can create all these villains doesn't mean they will all play a pivotal role.
juan on May 28, 2007
I thought this film lacked all the action that the other 2 films had. If i had my way with this film i would have shortened all the jibba jabba and got a few more action parts for venom.
benju on May 28, 2007
this was titanic in tights!!!!!!
dave on May 31, 2007
I thought that Spiderman 3 was an awesome movie. I loved how they showed that sometimes a super hero needs to be saved. It shows a great lesson on forgiveness, and it has some awesome action scenes. It was a long movie and I thought it was great (Peter and Harry fought over Mary Jane as always). I think that people need to stop looking for whats wrong with everything...I'd like to see some of the critics make that kind of movie. Sure, ya...people are complaining that they crammed too many villains into the movie...but you can NEVER make all the audience happy. There will always be someone looking for something to criticize. It wasnt as action packed as the others, but Peter was having a battle with himself on which side to be on...the dark side or the good side, and those are the most important battles that determine your destiny. The ending wasnt entirely complete, but it was good because it left you wanting more like the second pirates movie and it wasnt the predictable hollywood fairy tale ending. The movies are not going to "copy" the comics exactly because the producers and directors incorporate their imagination into them...and everyone imagines it differently. Anyway, I think that I would rate the movies as 1 (you can never beat the first one :D), 3, 2. I would give Spiderman 3 a 9/10 simply because the first one deserves a 10 and it was the best......"With great power comes great responsibility..."
grace on Jun 2, 2007
so disappointed, enough to write, i never do this...this movie had so much potential, the best way i can put it is if they had a story with the attention to detail and was well though out like batman begins, you'd have everyone ranting and raving. yes, i know, its totally different, you cant compare batman and spiderman but like people have been saying- this story to me says people involved may have lost interest or arent taking it seriously. something seems to have gone seriously wrong. who knows what politics go on behind the scenes with decision making... i hate bashing this but the potential was so untapped. this hurts mr. lee! i grew up with spiderman, i had high hopes. yes there should have been funny moments but there's tasteful funny and then this! you laugh cause it sucks, its embarrasing and you cant believe they actually jus did "that". -black costume story line was so undeveloped, guess thats what u get for reading the comics -i wish sandman wasnt in it. as unrealistic as the characters may be, sandman is a whole 'nother level of "fakeness" i'd personally prefer not to see. generally sandman sucked in it. not the acting, jus generally in the story. -harry and venom- there was so much potential with focusing on the 2 of them! i have some cool possible scenarios in my head i'd much rather have seen(i think many others would too!) -i hated sandman as a giant and when he was flying. why the heck was he flying?!? really really sucked. so many stupid cheesy scenes-1 example-the reporter and news broadcast as there fighting in the last scene-that kinda summed up the movie for me-weak and cheesy. how could you incorporate such cheese in the the final big scene? and not jus that but the scene could have been so much better in to many ways to mention. they could have got some redemption with a well thought out, non-chessy final scene- it hurt. there were some good things-the first fight with peter and harry was awesome and i thought it would continue. but my high hopes slowly but surely came crashing down. it was many different degrees of down hill from there. -really wanted that black costome character development with peter and then a bit(much more then they gave) with eddie. lastly-like someone said-they should have put in more of the butler! he did "explode"on to the screen! lol
sm on Jun 3, 2007
Spiderman 3 was an excellent movie thats all there is to say about it
Nicolas on Jun 4, 2007
I know at this point, sadly, that this movie has already been ripped 10 million new asshole's. But, I'll go ahead and throw in my three cents anyway. This movie was two things. #1 a descent movie apart from the franchise, but also#2 totally half assed and disgracefully disappointing in comparison to the previous films, ecspecially part two. But quite to the contrary, I know that everyone, even myself admitedly, approached this installment as Spiderman 2, Part 2. Which, needless to say, is some what of an unjustly bias expectation in which part 3 was doomed to fail. The top three unanomous pet peev's of Spiderman 3,( as if it wasn't already known at this point), was A. the Sandman, B. Venom/Eddie Brock and C. the warped Spidey. First off, the Sandman was met with mixed feelings. Some people felt that he was a total waste and there was no believible justice given to his motivation, which was basically "My daughter is sick" and some cheap, sappy balling. The same goes for his mutation into "THE SANDMAN". Those who follow the comic series know that Flint Marko is in jail prior to his freakish superhuman endowment, at which point he is given information from an inmate/cellmate, (I can't remeber which), about a secret series of underground sewage tunnels whch lead him to a condemed, yet tentatively opperable radiation plant on some undisclosed "BEACH" coastline. So, after successing his escape from the penatentury,(I can't remember the name), he is laying out in a sigh of relief on the beach, when suddenly, with such classic Marvel universe conveniance/coincedence, the active unmanned plant goes into meltdown and explodes, bombarding Flint with radiation and inexplicably merges his gene molicules with the sand. Thus, spawning an organic sand humanoid. So its understandible why Raimi narrow it down to something quicker and more simple, because otherwise the movie would have to had been another 45 minutes longer(As if it wasn't already overcompressed). And even though it was a cleverly substituted way to re-invent his origin, it probably should have been done differently and with a little less covenience than just having him running from the cops and suddendly fall,(Okay, there was a security fence that he climbed over first), into a pit where incidently, a partical eccelerator happens to be and even more inncidently right when a silicon test happens to be in progress. Again, really innovative and spectacular to look at,( infact only a one time movie oppurtunity, really), but way too over convenient and cheating to the true classic spiderman mythology. One other thing I have to point out about the Sandman that surprisingly no one else seems to have mentioned is the abscence of the all famous "MACE" in mist of the battle sequences. The whole way through the movie, I kept waiting for it, but it never emerged. To me that was particarly dissapointing about SANDY. Plus, the battle sequences themselves were not really long enough or broad enough. Other wise Flinty/Sandy could have been far more impressive and mind blowing, even though it was still pretty impressive and unique to hear and look at. And finally, the whole plot revelation suggesting that Marko(polo) was the one who really "murdered" Peter/Spiderman's uncle. I had kind of mixed fillings about this choice of detail, because it just seemed like way too convenient of a way to tie Sandy and Spidey together. In other words, they just needed an excuse to have Flint Marko in the movie. On the other hand, it did add an interesting detail to the Sandman character. Oh, also the final battle sequence, I felt,(as did a lot of other pissed off fans apparently) was a little cheeseball with the whole "STATE PUFF CINEMEN MAN" climax. Which I thought was way to predictible and just looked more like a mutated version of the giant gingerbread man from Shrek 2 than a sand monster. Not to mention that they insisted on making him slow moving and dumber than shit. But other than that, he was semi-descent. Now on to Venom. This was a huge mixture of opinions. There are a lot of people, though few and far between, who don't even like the charactor. But even those who worship Venom, including myself, were disappointed with his emphasis. Particularly the end of the movie, which actually, has raised a lot of debate over his demise. Some people were so royally pissed of over his "suggested" vanquishing that there is now rumors that he survived. Which may just be be wishful thinking. "SPOILER" I am ofcoarse refering to the shot where Spiderman hurls a pumpkin bomb into the enlarging creature that is the symbiote and Eddie Brock leaps into the growing mass as if to somehow save the specimen and for a brief instant a skeleton can be seen, suggesting his death and ultimately Venoms death. Though many people are in disagreement to this. Another huge peeve is Venom's lack of screen time, which could have been more justified had they not suggested his death and could have served as a tantilizing preview for Spiderman 4. And one big thing that pissed me off, similar to what I mentioned about Sandman, is the abscence of the infamous double prongued, slimy roving tongue. Not to mention the elongated fangs and profuse salivation of the mouth.( okay, so they did have fangs, but none too impressive) Then there was the talking, which was just corndog to a lot of people. Not to mention his seemingly forced alliance with Sandman which occurs in less than 15 seconds from the time they bump into each other in an alley way. Sandman: Hey, who the hell are you:Venom:RRRAAAAAHHHHHHHRRRRRGGHH:Sandman: I'll fuck you up:Venom: Hey, take it easy big boy:Sandman:What the fuck do you want:Venom: Help me kill Spiderman:Sandman: Okay!!.... ?????? The other thing is the lack of believibilty in Character transition from Eddie Brock to Venom. It just didn't feel ample enough in emotion. I don't know if it was the lack of screen time or insufficient performance by Topher Grace, not that I have anything against the actor, or Thomas Hayden Church for that matter. Either way, I really hope this wasn't the last Venom, as it wasn't even a satisfying first. If they plan on bringing back Eddie Brock in the next film or in a further prequel, they better make sure they get it right. In other words, DON"T FUCK IT UP NEXT TIME, ASSHOLES. Here's my suggestion. get specially effects legent Stan Winston(Jurrassic Park, Alien's, Predator, The Termiantor, etc.) on the next film. Just imagine what he could do with a cross between a CGI and an animatronic prop of Venom. Now finally, on to the wall crawler himself. The biggest beef everbody seems to of had with Spidey was his antics as a dorked up Damien, "shooting" suavely cheeseball gesture's at every babe walking the street. Then his sudden transformation into John Travolta/Patrick Swayze at a nestalgic karaoke club. On a quick side note, (by the way), did Gwen Stacey( Bryce Dallas Howard) look like a hot porn star to anyone else? I'm just wondering. Not that I'm saying she came off as a whore, because she didn't. The whole time she was in the film, with all do respect to Bryce Dallas, I wanted to sodomize her, I mean really fuck the shit out of her. I could practically smell the perfume resinating off her tight feminine busty figure. She also had some nice big titties. Sorry, I had to get that sleazy male note off my chest. I haven't really been that dirty with this commentary up to now, so I thought I'd just get it out on the table already. Because she was that hot and she did more than a good enough job making her self heartmeltingly likeable without coming off as a skank, as I said just a minute ago. In my opinion, no offense to MJ/Dunst, Stacey/Dallas should have been the Spidey babe in the franchise, cause she's a fuck load more beautiful than Kirsten Dunst(cap) and heartwarmingly sweet in her few minutes on film. In contrast to Dunst in this film, who was just winey, bitchy and at odds with her self image as her (lipsinking)career on Broadway is met with a bad review and a miss informed termination from the lead role in a play(hah hah). Sorry, thats fucked up. Like I sayed , no offense MJ/Dunst. But I'm getting carried away here, back to Spiderman. I got to say that I really didn't mind Raimi's innovative twist on the darkside of Peter Parker. I actually enjoyed the whole "Emo" sequence of the film and I don't agree that it's where the movie faltered. The beef I had as far as Parker/Spidey, for one thing, was the way he acquire's the symbiote, which was again in complete defiance to the spiderman mythology. "SOILER" In the film, once again just to compensate for time, the meteor/meteorite just happens to crash land(if you call that a meteor crash) right next to Spidey and Mj somewhere in central park as they neck on a spidey web/ two person hammock and watch an inexplicably abundant sequence of shooting star's. Which would at least explain the meteorite, even though crash landing 15 feet away from Spidey and Mj was way to convenient. Plus, Peter/Spidey's sense's aren't even stimulated by the impact. No, instead, the tarantula like slime just crawls up and attaches itself to the back of Peter's scooter like FLUBBER. That tarantula slime effect was cool, by the way. It felt like a homage to Evil Dead , ecspecially when it attaches it self to Spidey's arm and cast's a ghoulish shadow sillouette on the wall with the lightning. But anyway, in the comic book however, Spidey is out swinging through the city one, patroling the street's as usual, when from quit a considerable distance away, his spidey sense is tingled by a fast moving object, aka "the meteorite". So, he proceeds toward the area of impact to investigate. Approaching the crater, Spidey itches with his scintific intrigue and curiosity, being the dork that he is and looms over. A green glowing mass can be seen pulsating ligh off the crater surface. As Spidey edges forwar in timid awe, suddenly a black slime emerges violently and abruptly from the meteorite and consumes Peter, then... well you know the rest from here. But this might or might not have taken too much time from the film. I can't really say in this case, though the case of Sandman was obvious. Oh, and one further note on Gwen stacey. Though I "really" liked her breif role in the film, I felt the whole crane sequence , though spectacular, was not only unnessesary, but totally forced and over-coincidental, not to mention ludicrous. This is one seen that really could have been left out. Then the budget could have been better spent in some other "badly" needed places in the film, like the ones I mentioned. Because this seen undoubtedly cost a fuck lpoad of money with amount of effects and stunt work that was done. But again, getting off track,(she really was that fucking hot). The other place where spidey really suffered was his dissapointing lack of evil in the the film, prior to attaining his balck makeover. Okay, so he does try to kill Flint Marko and his best friend. I still wasn't convinced. Not to be too gratuitous, but I really felt he needed to be evil, almost beyond reason. He should have violently attacked/abused Mj through the course of the second half. The same thing with his vendetta with Flint Marko, I mean come on, the guy "murdered" his uncle. Does anyone remember the promo poster for the movie where Marko is looking up at the skyline as if in the middle of the city with what looks to be an orphan holding a teddy bear standing behind his shin as if protecting her from a lurking Spiderman. This lead believe that at some in the film, prior to his acquisition of the black suite/Symbiote, in a sheer unthinkable act of compulsive revenge, attempts to either hurt or even kill the ailing daughter of Flint Marko to recipricate the pain of his Uncle's "murder". I think that could have made for one the biggest and most profound twists of the movie, not to mention a good lead to one of the films best fight sequences, which could have been packed with vendictive emotion's and PG-13/R borderline style violence. That would have been hard core and would really make the audience hate Spidermans new found self image, which might have even had the audience rooting for Flint and would have better justified sympathy. That , I think, would have been really powerfull."SPOILER" But instead, we see our hero fight, then forgive, the Sandman in 7 minute's flat. We go from spiderman being pound on a steel beem by a "The Mutant GingerBread Man" to Sandman contending some teary-eyed soap opera excuse to Spiderman about his uncle, "SPOILER" revealing that his gun went in his hand while pointed at Uncle Ben, thus shooting him inadvertantly. After words, he is "ridden with guilty". So thats why he just left him to bleed to death on yhe sidewalk. Ah well, thats the movie. So really, one of the most consistant places this movie suffers is with over-coincidents and abrupt plot revelation, some of which are far to obscure to justfy relivance. They are set with Columbia Picture's to make a total of six Spidey movies, which I am looking forward to seeing. I don't know wether or not Raimi will be involved with any further installments. Either way,I just hope they don't fuck up in the way of Spiderman3 again. Even though I did kind of like the movie. One thing I do know about Part 4 that's already got my cock standing on end is at least one of the villans will be Doctor Curt Conner's/The Lizard. Who is indeed seen in both part 2 and 3 with right arm missing. You comic book fan's know what I'm talking about. For everyone else, I highly recommend reading up on his back story. I guarantee by the time you're done reading it, you're cock will be bursting through you're zipper and you lady fans will be soaking through you're tight ass little panties for hour's. So in conclusion, I'll just say this. Spiderman 3, in the end, was not a terrible film, but it definately sucked in comparison to first two. Maybe, we should'nt invest too much time anticipating sequels to movie that are thus far so beloved, ecspecially on this particular cailber of movie's. Because the amount of expectation just become's to risky and can often set us up for this kind of infuriating dissapointment. In the end, after the amount of wait, it just comes as a big slap in the face to fans and makes feel cheated out of the time that they waited for it. So with that said, I hope really hope we can all approach part four and it's follow ups with a little less obcessive bias. I bid you adew, so long, fair well, alfederzane, good night. And remember, "With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility"!
CHECKERFACE/Mr. Anonimity on Jun 5, 2007
does anyone else wonder if venom could have survived?
Brandon on Jul 4, 2007
VENOM WASNT SUPPOSE TO DIE!! HE WAS SUPPOSE TO STAY ALIVE cuz in 4th spider man when carnage comes venom was suppose to help him to defeat carnage....but now venoms dead well sandman and spiderman will team up and deafeat carnage or lizard but i give it a 5/6 cuz venom couldve been better and i expected alot from him
josh on Jul 6, 2007
um...josh....did u happen too miss the scene where doc connors is talking to peter on the phone bout the symbiote?......even thought venom got 'vaporized'...theres still the sample that peter gave to doc connors..
Hernam Tirado on Jul 6, 2007
yea i did miss dat part i only saw the endding
josh on Jul 6, 2007
Ok so Harry dies in Spider man 3 and we seen that venom was gone not dead but gone.Alright they never showed venom dead all you saw was the symbiote . I think that venom should be in the forth movie so everybody can see the big battle between venom,spider-man,and carnage.Hell i want to see that battle i think that they would make more profit from the forth movie it would be worth it. I hope they do it is a perfect idea.
David on Aug 5, 2007
S3 was a good movie... for ppl who dont know much about spiderman, BIG special effects and multiple bad guys...good CG - BUT!!! YOU CAN NOT (Repeat) CAN NOT KILL AN ARCH NEMESIS OF A CHARACTER!!!! [R.I.P. VENOM/Eddie Brock] I think that I speak for all the true fans of spiderman when I say; I WILL HATE SAM RAMI (or who ever decided it) FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE FOR DOING THIS TO VENOM!!! By killing venom (after 15 min screentime), they lost allot of fans and trust in future movies... And TBH I think that he went out like a BIT*H!!! Topher Grace... OMG were to start... i did not like him playing as Eddie and Venom... he was to skiny, Eddie was always in good shape and had a big posture. They realy disapointed allot of true fans with the overall appearance of Venom!!! For Example; the voice of venom WTF was that about, it sounded nothing like venom just like the kid from the 70's show ~_~ 'sigh' All true fans know what Im talking about when I say: what about "We are Venom"(alien like voice) Anyway I can go on for hours.... After I saw the movie I was went in a deep depression fol like 3 weeks... ~_~ but thats me... One more thing; dont expect Venom to return to the big screen very soon, they did not just kill venom but they destroyed the history of the marvel storyline. To repair this it wil take them like 15 to 20 years. hope I made a point...
Mo on Sep 1, 2007
hey man venom survived! "a character apperared to die will return in the 4th movie" its only venom not harry he IS dead! u can see something like a figure after the explosion on the right corner.(watch it) he will return and i think topher was great in sm3 as brock and venom! and its not only symbiot in connors labor but in the church on brocks jacket do u remember? he isnt dead and even when he is dead there will be an uncut version of sm3 on dvd there are 20 minutes more with venom cuz this scenes were to rude and brutal. it would be much better PS: WE WILL RETURN!
we_are_venom on Sep 3, 2007
mary jane got kidnapped once againand will be kidnapped in the next one
Darrin on Jan 29, 2008
Gross. 3rd one was the worse. Topher Grace was cute though. Hated the whole emo-eyeliner-black look after wearing Venom's suit. Isn't that too literal.
Cas on Mar 12, 2008
All and all, it was an OKAY movie. Some parts where just weird ( like towards the end, (spoiler) how the bulter dude said something along the line of: ' I loved your father harry, blah, just like I love you" 0.o okay..... Theres a creepy old man at your house, harry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!RUN!!!!!!!! But other than that and a few other things, it was just okay.
strandom on Apr 20, 2008
fucked up with Venom unfogivoble for me sry was a masive Venom fan in my teens wen he was 1st introduced could have gone along way with him he is a franchise in his own right 1 bad ass anti hero who on a reguler bases kicks spidys blue and red butt
nivek on Jun 24, 2011
Sorry, no commenting is allowed at this time.