This is going to be a difficult review to write, but I shall try my best. I waited for Spidey 3 for a hell of a long time. Long, long time. I bought my tickets to see it in IMAX two and a half weeks before it opened. Slowly and even more slowly, the weeks went by alongside tons of schoolwork that only led me closer to the anticipated night.
Well, it's half past midnight and I just got home from seeing it. First of all, let's look at the good side of the movie. The special effects were ASTOUNDING. They were incredibly realistic (even if it IS a comic book movie!) and experiencing the amazingly choreographed fight scenes in IMAX was well worth the extra five bucks per ticket. Sam Raimi's directing has also greatly improved, as he was able to balance somewhat of a minor interlocking storyline between three villains and still manage to keep the movie on its feet. I felt the length of the movie (roughly 2 1/2 hours) was perfect--long enough to keep you entertained, and short enough to keep you from not going bored out of your mind. Raimi and the writers even pack some HYSTERICAL humour into the film, with a classic cameo from Bruce Campbell as the Maitre'd of a French restaurant, plus many other laugh-out-loud hilarious scenes. Plus, my favorite part of the good points, is that Spider-Man 3 is a fun, fun, FUN popcorn movie. Lots of fun. Sometimes you look up at the screen and wonder "what in the hell was that?" But it's all good, cause overall, it's lots of fun and you end up not caring if the story makes sense or not. (It does, don't worry) The storyline is much more darker, complex, and mature than the first two movies, and it doesn't seem "Spider-Man" ish, which a lot of people were definitely NOT expecting. I think this is why a lot of people didn't like it. Now the iffy parts. The acting was OK. Yes, just OK. Not good, DEFINITELY not great--just OK. Tobey Maguire had me believing that he had improved from Spider-Man 2 but when we got to the scene with him and MJ on the bridge--oh my, the entire audience was gasping for air because we were all laughing so hard at his terrible fake-crying. Kirstin Dunst's acting skills never really annoy me; I think she's a great actress and while she's certainly not as good as many other actresses in Hollywood, she does a fine "B" job in Spider-Man 3 that works for the movie. I felt James Franco needed some variety, though, as throughout all three Spider-Man films he seems to be acting the same. And, surprisingly, Topher Grace was a lot of fun to watch! It'll be hard to watch That 70s Show again without thinking of Venom! Yet, out of all the performances, Thomas Haden Church comes out on top with a very serious portrayal of Sandman. He blew me away! (pun intended!) I didn't have a huge problem with the corniness of the movie. Yes, I know, the scene with Peter going emo and then gyrating his hips in front of a suit store had me raising my eyebrows, but it was a funny element to the storyline. Sure, we could've done without it, but they got some laughs and that's what counts. There were one or two scenes (particularly MJ and Peter on the bridge) that made me want to get up and leave, but they're over quickly.
The part that bothered me the most, though, is that the "strange black entity" that bonds with Peter--the symbiote--had no real significance in the story whatsoever. It kinda just...happened. There was no backbone to the symbiote story, nothing about it was explained at all, and it just kinda attached itself to Peter's motorbike and then possessed him. It felt very random and, even though it was the whole movie storyline, very out-of-place. This bothered me a LOT.
Overall: worth the trip, and if you get a chance, see it in IMAX. It's FAR from great, but it's a good film, and I liked it better than the first Spider-Man. A very nice kick-off to the summer movie season. Well done, Mr. Raimi!
Well, it's half past midnight and I just got home from seeing it. First of all, let's look at the good side of the movie. The special effects were ASTOUNDING. They were incredibly realistic (even if it IS a comic book movie!) and experiencing the amazingly choreographed fight scenes in IMAX was well worth the extra five bucks per ticket. Sam Raimi's directing has also greatly improved, as he was able to balance somewhat of a minor interlocking storyline between three villains and still manage to keep the movie on its feet. I felt the length of the movie (roughly 2 1/2 hours) was perfect--long enough to keep you entertained, and short enough to keep you from not going bored out of your mind. Raimi and the writers even pack some HYSTERICAL humour into the film, with a classic cameo from Bruce Campbell as the Maitre'd of a French restaurant, plus many other laugh-out-loud hilarious scenes. Plus, my favorite part of the good points, is that Spider-Man 3 is a fun, fun, FUN popcorn movie. Lots of fun. Sometimes you look up at the screen and wonder "what in the hell was that?" But it's all good, cause overall, it's lots of fun and you end up not caring if the story makes sense or not. (It does, don't worry) The storyline is much more darker, complex, and mature than the first two movies, and it doesn't seem "Spider-Man" ish, which a lot of people were definitely NOT expecting. I think this is why a lot of people didn't like it. Now the iffy parts. The acting was OK. Yes, just OK. Not good, DEFINITELY not great--just OK. Tobey Maguire had me believing that he had improved from Spider-Man 2 but when we got to the scene with him and MJ on the bridge--oh my, the entire audience was gasping for air because we were all laughing so hard at his terrible fake-crying. Kirstin Dunst's acting skills never really annoy me; I think she's a great actress and while she's certainly not as good as many other actresses in Hollywood, she does a fine "B" job in Spider-Man 3 that works for the movie. I felt James Franco needed some variety, though, as throughout all three Spider-Man films he seems to be acting the same. And, surprisingly, Topher Grace was a lot of fun to watch! It'll be hard to watch That 70s Show again without thinking of Venom! Yet, out of all the performances, Thomas Haden Church comes out on top with a very serious portrayal of Sandman. He blew me away! (pun intended!) I didn't have a huge problem with the corniness of the movie. Yes, I know, the scene with Peter going emo and then gyrating his hips in front of a suit store had me raising my eyebrows, but it was a funny element to the storyline. Sure, we could've done without it, but they got some laughs and that's what counts. There were one or two scenes (particularly MJ and Peter on the bridge) that made me want to get up and leave, but they're over quickly.
The part that bothered me the most, though, is that the "strange black entity" that bonds with Peter--the symbiote--had no real significance in the story whatsoever. It kinda just...happened. There was no backbone to the symbiote story, nothing about it was explained at all, and it just kinda attached itself to Peter's motorbike and then possessed him. It felt very random and, even though it was the whole movie storyline, very out-of-place. This bothered me a LOT.
Overall: worth the trip, and if you get a chance, see it in IMAX. It's FAR from great, but it's a good film, and I liked it better than the first Spider-Man. A very nice kick-off to the summer movie season. Well done, Mr. Raimi!