Thread: Spider-Man
View Single Post
Old 05-06-2007, 08:59 AM   #36
Mr. Marshmallow
Not-So-Hopeless Romantic
 
Mr. Marshmallow's Avatar
Gotta love being in love  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Orland Park, IL
Posts: 1,924
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Marshmallow
Default

I'll be honest Ditchy, I think that's a bit too harsh. Not even the critics have ever gone that far down on a movie before, and I've read ALOT of bad reviews from critics over horror movies, unnecessary sequels and etc. I really personally think your not giving the film any credit or support for doing such a hard job.

Everyone was fearing this would be the last Spider man, and the one thing I will give credit to, the one thing that I will firmly stand by is that Sam Raimi did his BEST to wrap the movie up and improve on the flaws from each film. There was no gurantee there'd be another Spidey flick and with that in mind, he did his best to give us a last hurrah.

He did basically everything he could have done: he gave us another classic villain (Sandman), he wrapped up Harry's storyline, and he introduced another large milestone event in Spider man's life (the symbiote and Venom). Some films have tried to wrap everything up and done it in a much poorer fashion.

X-men 3 comes to mind, even though that movie had some down right bad ass sequences like the bridge and the final fight with dark Phoneix. But I really didn't feel rushed with this movie, I think it gave enough time to give enough decent screen time to each problem, and each character.

I personally love Venom and would have loved to see more of him but I was impressed at how strong his prescence became, and I felt that he did a much better job then Dr. Octopus in 2. Both had less then longer time but at least Venom really took control of the screen and made use of his time.

I don't wanna rip apart your review and I will stand firmly by my view that Spider man 3 is an amazing film and an impressive attempt to do so much in one film. Only other thing I have to say is that "Batman Beings" really didn't have 5 villains, it was more like 2: Scarecrow and Ra's Al Gul.

Guys like Falconi and anyone else were just kind of filler, Gul and Scarecrow were the real villains they were leading up to, you can tell because of how Batman movies usually treat gangsters. Once the freaks come in, the gangster get the boot, look at what Joker did to Grisham and the mob in the first movie.
Mr. Marshmallow is offline   Reply With Quote