 |
|
|
|
SPIDERMAN 3 REVIEW-A-PALOOZA |
|
|
Movie Reviews by:
Jim "Good Old JR" Rutkowski & Larry
"Bocepheus" Evans
Directed by: Sam Raimi
Written by: Sam Raimi, Ivan Raimi, Alvin Sargent
Starring: Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Thomas Haden Church,
Running time: 140 minutes
Released: 05/04/07
Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense
action violence. |
|
|
|
|
 Movie Review by:
Larry "Bocepheus" Evans
(**½
stars out of 4)
"The
best parts of the film are the action segments and the
weakest are the character bits."
The summer movie season
officially began with the release of Spider-Man 3, possibly
the last film involving director Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire
and Kirsten Dunst. The franchise will go on without them
because Sony has already hired David (Jurassic Park) Koepp
to come up with a script for the film. But before we throw
dirt on this group lets see if the third film is better or
just as good as the last one, the best of the series. Well,
the answer is no but let’s see what the film lacked.
The
last shot in Spider-Man 2 had Mary Jane (Dunst) watching
Peter (Maguire) go into action. She was encouraging him
before he swung out the window but the last thing we saw was
a worried expression on her face. We get no indication of
what that meant here and begin with voiceover narration from
Peter that things couldn’t be better and the city save for
J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons). Pete is about to make a big
choice and ask MJ to marry him. He is doing well in school
and is friends with classmate Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas
Howard). But things change when a meteor lands on Earth and
a black symbiote attaches itself to his bike. Then he is
attacked by Harry (James Franco) and Flint Marko (Thomas
Hayden Church) breaks out of prison.
Director Raimi impresses us with his first action set piece
involving the Pete/Harry battle that we have been waiting
for since the second film. Harry is bigger, stronger and
seems to be better than his father was using the Goblin
weapons systems. The battle rages on the streets, between
them and makes us dizzy but it’s an impressive action
sequence following the long set up.
Unfortunately that action sequence sets up something that
happened in the comics involving Norman Osborn and that
brings in the soap opera elements that are the weakest parts
of the film. Mary Jane’s Broadway debut sets up two musical
numbers involving her character even though in the comics it
is clear that she acts and doesn’t sing. I would believe
that main screenwriter Alvin Sargent came up with the idea
since he has done theater before but am willing to bet that
Dunst didn’t resist the idea.
We
are introduced to Eddie Brock Jr. (Topher Grace) and Captain
Stacy (James Cromwell) in another action piece involving a
crane accident in Manhattan and Grace does an excellent job
establishing that Brock is a little off. We also get to see
the accident that turns Marko into the Sandman but the alien
symbiote is apparently slithering its way to the Parker
apartment.
The
next action sequence involves Sandman and a celebration for Spidey. We get our cameo from Stan Lee here and the dreaded
soap opera elements wander their way back in. That is
followed by a meeting at police headquarters that flips
continuity on its head by changing the life changing moment
of the first film. The reveal comes right out of Tim
Burton’s Batman and seems to exist solely to set up the
revenge aspect of the film.
From
here on in we see the merging of Peter and the symbiote
which leads to a great action underground fight between
Sandman and the black suited Spidey. The after effect of
that leads us to the ‘dark Spidey’ and the change in
personality of Peter. The personality change would have
worked but here Peter’s new attitude is reflected by his
hairdo and a lot of squinting. Raimi also reprises a musical
sequence (the Raindrops Keep Fallin’ On My Head bit in 2)
with the dark clothed Peter bopping thru the streets and
acting like Will Ferrell/ Chris Kattan brothers on Saturday
Night Live. We also end the amnesia angle of one character
before Peter takes him out and expose Brock while he is
under the influence of the symbiote.
Brock becomes Venom (he is never named) the same way he did
in the comic and from here on in the final action sequence
is set up. The huge set piece involves Sandman, Venom, and MJ in peril and Harry (who gets some info that would have
saved a lot of time if he had learned it in the last film)
on a construction site. It’s the best part of the film and
is probably where the bulk of the budget went. We get a
giant Sandman (and yes, he has gotten that size in the
comics), the woman in peril bit in spades, sacrifice and
some quick thinking by Peter to take out Venom.
The
film ends with a funeral (as the first one did) and the
second musical bit with Dunst that suggests all is right
with the world. Raimi doesn’t end with Spidey swinging thru
the city and that as other parts of the film don’t make
sense.
The
best parts of the film are the action segments and the
weakest are the character bits. Aunt May (Rosemary Harris)
has little to do in her scenes save give Peter advice then
wander off and think of more clichés to use. We do get good
performances by Church, Grace, Howard, Simmons and Maguire
but Dunst is a bit off. Bruce Campbell’s scene is funny as
hell and Betty Brant actually has something to do here. We
also get cameos from Cliff Robertson and Willam Defoe. James
Cromwell has little to do here but we know that will change
in future films so we give him a pass.
My
fault with the film lies on the shoulders of the writers.
Sam and Ivan Raimi came up with the story and Alvin Sargent
finished what the duo came up with but among the three of
them none realized that the film was too crowded. Most of
this would have been avoided if the MJ career segments were
shortened or even eliminated since they bog down by the
weight of their own pointlessness. There have been some who
suggest that Venom should be introduced at the end of the
film but there is no way in hell that this film would work
by just using Harry and Sandman as the villains. Sargent has
said that he is done with the franchise and that’s a good
thing. He helped with the structure of 2 but apparently
couldn’t do that here.
As
mentioned in the open this may be the last for Raimi,
Maguire and Dunst. I can’t see much more than could be done
with Dunst so her absence wouldn’t be a great one. Maguire
has flip flopped on his returning and would be a sure bet to
return but Sony may be unwilling to pony up big bucks for
him since he was almost replaced in the last film. Raimi,
however, is another story. He was the number one contender
to do The Hobbit but now seems to not be on the short list
since he has said he would want Peter Jackson’s blessing.
Directors don’t demand the salaries that actors do so a
production deal may keep him involved in some capacity. One
way or the other the franchise will survive due to the
amount of money this film is pulling in.
The
third film in most superhero franchises tends to suck as was
the case of Superman 3 and Blade: Trinity. With the Batman
franchise Batman Returns was weaker than Batman Forever but
Returns does share the same problems that this film does. Is
Spider-Man 3 worse than Superman 3? No, but it could have
been. |
|
 Movie Review by:
Jim "Good Old JR" Rutkowski.
(**½
stars out of 4)
"The film takes
three bad stories and tries to fashion a narrative out
of them. It can't be done."
If the first "Spider-Man" had a script
as weak and muddled as the one for "Spider-Man 3," it's hard to
believe it ever would have been made. But with the series a
worldwide success -- and especially coming off "Spider-Man 2," which
was superb -- the filmmakers can afford a weak entry without having
to worry about being punished. The only ones who may feel punished
are audiences.
"Spider-Man 2" was a textbook example of how to make a sequel:
Deepen it, make it funnier, give it more heart and come up with a
strong villain and a good story. "Spider Man 3," by contrast, shows
how not to make a sequel. The film takes three bad stories and tries
to fashion a narrative out of them. It can't be done. It also takes
established and warmly regarded characters and has them behave in
ways that make no sense in terms of what we know about them. And,
perhaps to give the movie the illusion of scale, it contains many
empty conversations -- scenes in which characters dither and nothing
happens. Word to the wise: Whenever Rosemary Harris shows up as
Peter Parker's beloved old aunt, it's safe to run out and get
popcorn.
Even the special effects take a step backward. Body movements are
awkward. The elastic springing of Spider-Man as he vaults and swings
from the tops of buildings looks unnatural, too often like something
on a computer screen. The effect isn't helped by director Sam
Raimi's choice to film a lot of the hand-to-hand combat in close-ups
in quick cuts, which sometimes makes it difficult to track what's
going on. Only the Sandman origin scene is a standout. It is a
poetic moment in a movie that otherwise is not interested in such
things. The CGI in the scene is some of the most effective ever in a
film. If only the rest of the movie had this tone. If only…..
The fight scenes feel like they take a little from the first movie,
a little from the second, and mix them together. They're more
formulaic than exhilarating, and there's nothing in Spider-Man 3
that comes close to the train sequence from Spider-Man 2.
The climactic battle is a disaster. It's not exciting and it
requires two contrivances too excruciating to ignore (one involves
Harry’s butler offering a valuable piece of information that would
have saved us all a lot of trouble if he would have mentioned it two
movies ago, the other involves Sandman's eventual fate). It's
unforgivable that the film's last action scene should be so vastly
inferior to the first one. The special effects aren't even all that
impressive. There are several instances in which it's
all-too-obvious that Spider-Man and his nemeses are computer
generated. This is sloppier than anything in either Spider-Man or
Spider-Man 2.
Little imperfections in the effects wouldn't matter if the other
aspects of the film were working. But "Spider-Man 3" screws up even
some of the more reliable elements, most notably the relationship
between Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and his girlfriend, Mary Jane
Watson (Kirsten Dunst). Things start well. Mary Jane has a singing
part in a Broadway show, and Peter goes to see her. The reviews are
awful, and that's a potentially interesting and satisfying
direction: Dunst, who does her own singing, really does sound
amateurish. But the movie doesn't build from that in a coherent way.
The script hints that maybe being Spider-Man is going to Peter
Parker's head, but it doesn't commit to that course. It suggests
that maybe Mary Jane is becoming jealous of Peter's success, but it
doesn't follow through on that, either. It just keeps feinting in
various directions, and in the process it distorts Peter and Mary
Jane's relationship. At times, the plotting is so flimsy that it
rolls out the oldest and least forgivable trick in the book: It
depends on Peter and Mary Jane's not talking when they most
certainly would, not telling each other things they definitely would
say. That's just cheap, and it betrays these characters who've been
lovingly built over the course of two features.
Three stories are set in motion in the movie's first minutes: (1)
Harry Osborn (James Franco), Peter's old friend, decides to follow
in his Goblin father's footsteps, and becomes Spider-Man's nemesis;
(2) The criminal (Thomas Haden Church) who killed Peter's saintly
uncle (Cliff Robertson) is transformed, through a process of
disintegration and reintegration, into an unkillable Sandman; and
(3) An alien substance -- black and elastic -- comes to earth in a
meteorite and finds its way to Peter's apartment.
It's all marginally interesting, but there's one thing missing: a
real villain. Harry Osborn is a confused young man, not the essence
of evil, and Sandman, though a destructive force, is as mournful as
Lon Chaney Jr.'s Wolfman. He's not a driven adversary. He's more
like a sad mope.
The most promising plot element is the black elastic substance,
which attaches itself to the body as a second skin and emphasizes
whatever latent, dark traits its wearer might have. But Raimi and
his associates let that element lie dormant for almost half the
movie's running time, when a good story might have been fashioned
from that concept alone. Epics are made from stories that demand the
epic treatment. A story has a certain scale and grandeur, and the
act of doing justice to it results in an epic. That's the right way
to do it.
The wrong way is to decide you want to make a big movie and then,
without much to say, you proceed to throw every possible idea at the
screen in the hope it'll work out. That's what Raimi does in
"Spider-Man 3," which is so clumsy that at times one can sense the
filmmaker artificially slowing down one story in order to pursue
another. Maguire and Dunst are appealing as always, even though
they'd be better off with stronger material.
Actually, the whole world of the "Spider-Man" films is appealing,
which is what saves this entry from disaster. At 140 minutes, it's
not a difficult movie to sit through. It's just difficult to enjoy.
Spider-Man 3 is a bit of a chore. The effective moments require a
lot patience to uncover and some of what has to be shifted to get to
them is not worth the effort. People love trilogies because it's
said that good things come in threes, but this series would have
looked better and felt more satisfying had the filmmakers stopped at
two. |
|
|
SPIDERMAN 3 ©
2007 Sony Pictures Releasing.
All Rights Reserved
Review © 2006 Alternate Reality, Inc. |
|
|
|
OTHER REVIEWS... |
|
RASSLIN' REVIEW |
|
 |
|
Pay Per
Views and House Shows, we layeth the Smaketh- Down on
both! |
|
|
|
KIDS REVIEWS |
|
 |
|
Dozen's of kid
friendly titles arrive every week and we review the one that
stands out. |
|
|
|
YOUR HEADS UP |
|
 |
|
100's of new
comics ship every week, we give you a HEADS UP on them! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
