Same great cast/formula. Special FX, action, comedy, drama all great. A bit longer than the other two (2.5 hours), and it seemed to close up the franchise. All in all a great romp. Dragged at times.. 4.5 digits.
posted by:
|
San Diego
|
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Tue, June 12, 2007 - 10:39 AMI disagree. I'd still give it a couple toes up, but the disney-fication ending was too cheesy for me. Loved the sandman parts, but the last hour was a little bit too hokey for me. -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Tue, June 12, 2007 - 3:24 PMAs time passed, and I spoke with others, I suppose there were more disappointing elements: More Peter than Spidey, etc. I read that Sony's set to make 2-3 more.. -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Thu, July 5, 2007 - 4:48 AMI liked Sandman- but the sopa opera stuff seemed to drag the movie down-was too long for a theater viewing - but I will add it to my Spidey collection -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Sat, November 3, 2007 - 1:29 PMWow, how could it have gotten this bad. Did Brett Ratner secretly direct this thing?
The screenplay was awful, far worse than the other two and littered with two many coinicdences and silly moments without any of the pathos that made the last one great. The direction was lazy as if he was overconfident and was barely trying. Too many subplots, poorly woven together - it kept jumping around too much and the acting was so-so. -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Sat, November 3, 2007 - 6:18 PMSo which is the best/worst of the 3's? Superman 3, X-Men 3 o or Spiderman 3.
Superman Returns = Superman 3 because as far as it was concerned only the first 2 movies really happened.
-
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Sun, November 4, 2007 - 8:25 AMWow, that's tough. They all had potential but sucked in their own ways.
I might say SpiderMan 3, because it had so much to lose going in. Coming off the previous one (interesting that in all 3 cases, part 2 was the best), Spidey dropped the biggest ball. -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Mon, November 5, 2007 - 9:03 AMI would have to agree with this one. In the case of Superman, we had a new director and actor taking the helm and updating the store. True they screwed up Lois and even trashed Luther a bit, but in the end, it was a well-worthy part 3 to two already good comic films.
In the case of X-Men 3, at least they too had a good basis to come off of and already existing strong characters. True, the ending was a little cheap and they truly f**ked up Dark Phoenix and for some reason felt the need to kill everyone, but nonetheless, Brett Ratner did not ruin the series.
However, being a HUGE Spider-man fan, I was greatly disappointed that they pulled a Batman Returns with the third movie. Seeing as how both Sandman and Venom were strong enough villains to have their own movies, there was no reason to add in Goblin #2. Nor did we need Spidey saving Gwen Stacy either. In the end, I was disappointed quite a bit, especially considering that Spider-Man 2 is one of the best comic book movies ever created.
Oh well, one can only hope that the Batman franchise continues to improve with Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale in the driver seats. -
-
Re: Spider-Man 3
Mon, November 5, 2007 - 7:11 PM"Could be worse. Could be raining."
Or we could have had to deal with Fantastic Four:3. If they keep the trend of making each one 10 times better than the last then by the time they make FF:VI they may make all the way up to "just sucks".
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
