BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

The Big Spiderman 3 thread

  
  

Page: 1 ... 910111213(14)

 
 
FinderWolf
20:28 / 11.05.07
>> So are you all just glossing over dialogue like, to give one example, "One day Spider-Man will pay. I swear on my father's grave Spider-Man will pay" from the second film, then?

I honestly think it's not all that bad a line - substitute a 'real' person's name (i.e. non-super-hero name) for "Spider-Man" and it's a line that we could hear in any cop movie/drama/epic/gangster movie. And in the world of the movie & of the characters, "Spider-Man" is a real person, a celebrity, just like Donald Trump or whoever else you could think of is in ours.

I do agree that it doesn't have be either super-dark & serious OR super-goofy.... many of us have said here many times that we LOVE the first two Spider-Man films and they've got a great mix of humor and drama. There are tons of wonderful goofy silly fun Raimi Peter Parker moments in 1 and 2 and no one complains about them...because the films are strong films and those moments really work in the films.

Many reviews of Spider-Man 3 have discussed audience members openly mocking and laughing at scenes in Spider-Man 3 that were supposed to be dramatic (most citing the scene where Mary Jane 'breaks up' with Peter, at Harry's demand, and the final scene where Peter and Harry cry as Harry croaks after having redeemed himself). I recall hearing of no such instances in the first two Spider-Man movies. No one laughs in the scene in Spider-Man 2 where, after giving his all, Peter is lifted above the crowds of the subway passengers whose lives he has just saved and they talk to him. I saw Spider-Man 2 twice in the theaters and no one laughed inappropriately anywhere, and people were visibly (and audibly) choked up at many of the film's more emotional scenes... the same holds true, to a slightly lesser extent, for Spider-Man 1. So clearly there must be something going on, since fans almost universally praised 1 and 2 and so many people have problems with 3.
 
 
FinderWolf
20:37 / 11.05.07
>> And this might just be a flat out disagreement of view. I happen to think Rosemary Harris is able to take the lines that an other actor wouldn't be able to rescue and make them sound like the grandmotherly advice we all wish we had. For a nanosecond I thought the 'heroes' monologue might not pay off. In the end, I think she made it much better than the way it was written.

And Peter's corniness makes sense in a bumbling nerdy sort of way. It fits his character. What also fits his character, and you could see it in flickers of Tobey's acting in the first and second movie, was a darkness they never really brought to genuine fruition.

I agree strongly on both accounts.

but of course, people have different opinions and that's all well and good. Like I said earlier, I think enjoyment of the 3rd movie depends on how high your expectations are based off the first two films and how quickly you can shift gears from 'deeply engaging terrific adventure movie that happens to be about comic book characters' to 'fun silly popcorn comic book movie.' That's just my take on it.
 
 
FinderWolf
01:35 / 12.05.07
On a somewhat related note (related to Raimi & Campbell), I've started reading Campbell's autobio IF CHINS COULD KILL and it is really a terrific book. A hilarious and inspiring story of a few kids from Detroit - Raimi, Campbell and a few other cohorts, like Ivan Raimi and other friends, who had the dream of making movies for a living. Seriously: if you ever liked Raimi or Campbell, this book is amazingly entertaining. I still respect Raimi a lot since he's made some great movies, even if I wasn't thrilled with Spider-Man 3. In Spider-Mans 1 and 2, I think he created truly classic films that will stand the test of time, and he put Marvel's movies on the map with a wonderful treatment of the adventures of Peter Parker...not to mention all his other great movies pre-Spidey (I have yet to see A SIMPLE PLAN but it's on my list). And we can all be thankful he made THE GIFT since it's how Raimi met J.K. Simmons and I believe Rosemary Harris as well.
 
 
TroyJ15
22:57 / 12.05.07
I stand by the argument that these film's should at least make sense in their own world if nothing else. Seeing how spider-Man 1 and 2 encompass this world --- 3 seems like I totally unrelated movie just based on how the characters interact and react.
"Realism" is a bad term for this, but the excuse that "Oh, it's just a comic book movie" is an equally bad.
Glad to see more negative reviews pour in. Hopefully someone pays attention to the response.
 
 
FinderWolf
01:21 / 13.05.07
well, whatever anyone's critiques are of the movie, it will be interesting to see what Sony does with the franchise -- do they make more movies like Spider-Mans 1 and 2, or do they make more movies like Spider-Man 3? Or a hybrid of both styles somehow? Considering that 3 made more money than any other movie in history so far, I wonder if they'll figure 'oh, even though the critics universally applauded #2, 3 made the most money, even if it received a mixed critical response, so let's just make more like 3 and not worry as much about the script.'

I continue to find Bruce Campbell's book about his rise to fame & fortune with Sam Raimi one of the most entertaining autobios I've ever read. Highly recommended.

I also wonder if 2 years from now Raimi will give an in-depth interview about studio/producer interference with Spider-Man 3. Too many people to satisfy, too many cooks, etc. Although I hear that Sony producers gave Raimi a lot of latitude with the Spidey films, so maybe that's not the case. Curious to hear what the commentary on the Spider-Man 3 DVD would be, even though I won't be buying the DVD...I could rent it just to hear the commentary. I also read somewhere that Raimi shot a 2 3/4 hour movie and had to cut it down severely in terms of running time for the final released version...maybe that accounts for some of the problems with the film on some level.
 
 
FinderWolf
01:31 / 13.05.07
about the 2nd week box office, Newsarama reports:

>> In what may be the true test of the box office power of Spider-Man 3 – i.e. its second weekend in release – as expected the film once again is poised to be the #1 film in the North America, but has experienced a very significant drop-off in week two. …

According to the box office tracking website Box Office Guru, the film made an estimated $17 million on Friday and is on pace for approximately $54 to $58 million for the weekend.

The 72% drop from its opening Friday to second Friday gross is one of the largest ever for a major studio tentpole release, but not unprecedented. Last summer’s X-Men: The Last Stand dropped 78% of its gross Friday to Friday. Because so much of Spider-Man 3’s opening was Thursday midnight showings and hardcore fans lining up to see it on its first day, the overall three-day weekend drop is expected to soften, but still be in the very high low-60% range.

This doesn’t come as much of a surprise; the film has already shown signs of early sales drop-off, perhaps because of the less-than-stellar critical response and word-of-mouth.

Though breaking the all-time three-day box office record with an official $151.1 million in its opening frame, it’s first full week (seven day) total of $182.1 million ranks just fourth, behind Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest with $196 million last summer, Spider-Man 2’s $192.1 million in 2004, and Star Wars Episode III’s $191.4 million in 2005.

While those second chapters in the Pirates and Spider-Man franchises both opened in July when school is out and weekday grosses are traditionally stronger, both films also faced a more competitive marketplace.

The difference may best be illustrated by comparison to the first Spider-Man chapter that also opened on the first weekend of May (of 2002). Spider-Man 3’s first weekend gross was 32% higher than its predecessor, but its midweek gross was actually 16% less, even with the higher average ticket prices five years of inflation brings.
However, Spider-Man 3 is still also performing strongly globally and is expected to webswing past the $500 million mark worldwide on Friday and then the $600 million mark by Sunday.
---------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Seth
08:29 / 13.05.07
I kinda feel as though I've taken crazy pills when I read people's responses that refer to I and II in contrast to III, especially ones that refer to emotional complexity and real world pain. But also ones that gloss over their atrocious scripts, jarring narrative logic and comic-book characterisation. Something very strange is happening in people's heads...
 
 
miss wonderstarr
08:35 / 13.05.07
Maybe we should all watch I and II again so we're not going on some vaguely-remembered idea of what they were like, whether they were subtle portraits of complicated characters or broadly stylised cartoons, or (maybe likely) somewhere between the two.

And I suggest we drop "real-world pain" as a representation of the argument that I and II had a different approach to character, consistency and "realism". It may have been used once, but I don't think many people are subscribing to the idea that Spider-Man or Spider-Man II involved real-world pain, and the term's being used now to make any argument that I and II involved a different type of emotional drama seem absurd.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
09:24 / 13.05.07
But remember Seth, "One day Spider-Man will pay. I swear on my father's grave Spider-Man will pay" is a perfectly reasonable line! Especially when delivered almost directly to camera with nobody in particular around, and basically addressing the audience.

I know I'd talk about my planned revenge in such a manner.

In fact, I fully expect to see such techniques employed in the next episode of The Wire, and also the Sopranos! In fact I'm pretty sure I remember Al Pacino doing some similar thing in that one gangster movie. Because they are realistic in the same way that I expect Spider-Man to be.

It's some gritty stuff, guys!
 
 
Hieronymus
22:14 / 13.05.07
Suedey, how is it that you keep mischaracterizing other people's statements into some outrageous exaggeration? No one's saying the 1 and 2 haven't had their cheap lines. But what we do keep hammering on, and you keep consistently ignoring, is the character integrity of the three films, and how lost it is in the third.

"One day Spider-Man will pay. I swear on my father's grave Spider-Man will pay" makes sense in the context of the character. A bonk on the head and soap opera amnesia is not only insulting to the character and the plot they've been revving up through 1 and 2 but flat-out insulting to the audience as well.

Where exactly are you getting that anyone is advocating Spiderman as 'gritty' drama on par with the Sopranos or The Wire?
 
 
---
22:31 / 13.05.07
Well I just got back from watching it, and....I liked it!

Reading so many negative reviews and comments helped me I think, because I went into it with absolutely no expectations, and just went in with an open mind. After seeing it and looking back, I'm more or less content with what I saw. Yeah it wasn't as dark and serious as I wanted it to be, and yeah Venom didn't have as much screen time as I'd have liked, and the fight between Peter and the black suit seemed very brief, but it was a good comic book based film for me. When I remember all I've read about this and think back to the film, I try to imagine what a lot of the kids would have thought about this, and I'm sure many will have liked it, and at the end of the day, it is largely aimed at the kids isn't it? So I can drop the things I wanted from this and look at it like I'd think of what I'd want from a comic, and a lot of that was there. It's fast paced, there's a lot going on at the same time, and it doesn't get bogged down with deep narrative parts that leave flat areas in the film. The action was good, Sandman was well done, Venom looked good, the fight scenes were fun to watch and exciting a lot of the time....it was to me a classic comic book ride. (and I didn't notice the disjointed problems that a lot talked of or alluded to either.)

Yes, I'd have liked it darker, I'd have liked Peter to have gone through more than he did on screen, and for it to have been more grown up. Venom would've been brilliant to see more of, and the dialogue between Mary and Peter would've been better if it was more realistic and Peter had a bit more sense about him and saw more of what type of pain she was going through, but in the end, it was a film largely aimed at kids, and it appeared to do what it set out to do, so I can't really complain. I went to watch it, was entertained, I don't feel like I wasted my time, and would happily watch it again because I don't remember feeling bored at any point in the film. Maybe some of us older people get too bogged down looking for an immaculate story and miss who the film is being aimed at, just a personal opinion though.

Oh and Peter being such a nerd : that to me was often funny instead of the total annoyance I thought it'd be, and I was laughing at him being such a goof when he was dancing in the street.
 
 
---
22:36 / 13.05.07
Will also add that I've never been attached or very into the story of the Spiderman films before either, so I don't feel that I've lost anything when it comes to character problems. The main thing being that I never liked the Goblin or Doctor Octopus, so my memory of the first 2 is mainly gone, because without a bad guy that I can be drawn to or take seriously, the film just doesn't work at all for me.

So yeah, nothing lost from the first 2 here, which makes it a lot easier to accept this film.
 
 
Mug Chum
22:40 / 13.05.07
I... err, I liked Harry's amnesia. It was sort of "are you willing to have your own amnesia in this matter?", to which I replied, "God, yes, if I hear this guy going on about his dad, even if in a visually swell fight, I'll find a way to disgrace that man's image even more than that painting did!"*; it wasn't good film-making, but satisfactory to a certain point.

*seriously, you'd figure people would go "Interesting, I never saw him as crazy or anythi(looks at painting) wow, oh ok... oh my... fuckinghellchrist oh fuckin' mighty!" (seriously that was a high point in humor I haven't seen in years; and I thought it was trashly intentional, coming from Raimi).

IF CHINS COULD KILL
best title... EVAARRR!
 
 
Brigade du jour
23:30 / 13.05.07
Re: Harry’s amnesia. Maybe it was awfully contrived but I think it made a certain kind of sense. We’ve just had two films in which there are several instances of surprisingly (for what are, amongst other things, kids’ films) brutal violence, and all the characters get is a bit bloody and bruised. (ok, they’re superhuman and physically very resilient, but still …)

Harry picks a fight with Pete (the equivalent in this story of a drunken 18-year-old man picking a fight with Muhammad Ali) and, despite some impressive aerial moves on his genetically modified skateboard, takes a nasty knock to the head, but doesn’t simply shake it off and carry on fighting like a more experienced super-powered combatant. He falls unconscious and ends up amnesiac.

Well, why not? I, for one, wasn’t expecting that particular little plot development.

And I just have to say to those arguing that this is the worst comic-book movie yet – I take it you haven’t seen X3? Or Superman IV? The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen? I’d hate to depress anyone but I think it does get worse than a sequel biting off rather more storylines than it can chew and failing somewhat to tie them all together. Shit, sorry about the mixed metaphor there – looks like I bit off more than I could chew, too! And my last two posts were so much better …
 
 
Evil Scientist
05:13 / 14.05.07
A bonk on the head and soap opera amnesia is not only insulting to the character and the plot they've been revving up through 1 and 2 but flat-out insulting to the audience as well.

Yeah, but it used to happen every five minutes in the era of Spidey comics that Raimi draws on for a lot of his inspiration when making the films. Not excusing it because it does look cliched to the wider audiance. As a comic geek though I smiled and had a private bet with myself about how long it'd last.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
05:23 / 14.05.07
Good news, Spideyphiles! Though I came out of the flicks on Sunday feeling very disappointed that movie spoiled what was promising to be a great DVD boxset, with perspective and having taken on some different views from this thread, I reckon I'd watch 3 again and give it another try. I guess part of it was just not knowing how to accept the more broadly comic elements ~ not knowing if they were meant to be funny, or if they were just horrible blips where the tone and plot were lost and a different movie seemed spliced in for 10 minutes. (I also don't know Raimi's work, so maybe auteur theory was right ~ maybe it would help me understand this one to have seen more of his previous films).

However, for the record I'd never say I wanted a superhero film (or, probably, any other film) to be "dark". Or "adult". What I keep saying I liked in 1 and 2 was the poignant teen drama. That's different from kiddy komedy and a movie as rollercoaster ride.
 
 
FinderWolf
13:27 / 14.05.07
oh, I agree that Spidey 3 is definitely better than X3, League of Xtraordinary Gents, etc... no question.

>> "One day Spider-Man will pay. I swear on my father's grave Spider-Man will pay" makes sense in the context of the character.

>> Where exactly are you getting that anyone is advocating Spiderman as 'gritty' drama on par with the Sopranos or The Wire?

He's getting it from me saying a character vowing revenge on someone for killing his father could be a line easily at home in a drama or gangster movie, which I still maintain is valid.

However, I never said that the Spider-Man movies WERE The Sopranos, simply that when your father is killed and you're filled with rage, and you want revenge, it's a reasonable thing to say, we've seen lines like that in many respectable dramas or action movies, and I don't think the line is nearly as cheesy for the characters & in the world of the film as Suedey feels. Fair enough...different strokes and such.

But you're right in that he's using a reductio ad abusrdum argument to critique mine, which I feel isn't exactly fair. But hey, it's all good - it basically boils down to 'I didn't like it so much and he did.' No biggie.
 
 
FinderWolf
13:33 / 14.05.07
And for the record, I didn't mind Harry's amnesia at all. I thought that worked, actually - and allowed Franco as an actor to just do his 'charming smile' thing, and gave the movie a reason for Harry not to be hating and attacking Peter the whole time. It also made Harry's 'you're my best friend, Pete, I love you guys!' stuff all the creepier, since Peter knows he's a ticking time bomb and could revert to a violent vengeance-crazed psycho at any minute, as soon as he regains his memory.
 
 
CameronStewart
15:04 / 14.05.07
>>>Maybe some of us older people get too bogged down looking for an immaculate story and miss who the film is being aimed at, just a personal opinion though.<<<

When I saw the film, sitting to my left was my friend (age 29) and to my right was a little girl, maybe aged 8 or 9. At every moment in the film that was silly or jokey, while my friend rolled his eyes and groaned audibly, the little girl laughed excitedly and clapped and tugged on her dad's arm. I looked over at her a few times and she was wide-eyed and captivated through the whole thing. She ate that movie up.

So I kind of find it hard to complain about those bits - particularly in a movie called "Spider-Man" - even though they're not to my personal taste, I know there's another audience that does enjoy them.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
16:23 / 14.05.07
"One day Spider-Man will pay. I swear on my father's grave Spider-Man will pay" makes sense in the context of the character. A bonk on the head and soap opera amnesia is not only insulting to the character and the plot they've been revving up through 1 and 2 but flat-out insulting to the audience as well.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I simply cannot, for the life of me, understand how you can quote that line, justify it as dramatically sound, then moan about something from another film being "soap opera"-style.

In other news, Te just made me pull myself back from the precipice of completely giving up on Barbelith comic book movie threads. That post's like a tiny glint of hope in the otherwise darke gloom of arg.
 
 
FinderWolf
17:46 / 14.05.07
it seems that these debates/discussions are similar to the Star Wars prequels/original trilogy discussions people have (and will have until the end of time). Some feel that the prequels are bad movies and the original trilogy are great, and others say 'well, the originals have some hokey dialogue too, and all 6 of them are kids' movies anyway, they're not supposed to be well-written or have any maturity or sophistication to them.' And we acknowledge that even if you think the Star Wars prequels are bad movies (especially when compared to the originals), it's certainly true that the average 10 year old might think episodes I, II and III are terrific movies, and there's nothing wrong with that.

People talk about differences in quality or opinions about was the writing better in this one or that one, etc., and the familiar refrain is heard 'it's a kid's movie/adventure movie/comic book movie, what do you expect?' Many feel that The Incredibles, for example, is of a much higher quality than, say, Meet The Robinsons (even though they're both kids' movies). But some could easily deflate discussions of varying quality between those movies by saying 'ahh, they're both kids' movies, what do you expect, Shakespeare?'

Anyway, it seems we've pretty much aired all the different views about Spider-Man 3 here quite thoroughly.... I'll keep my mouth shut on this topic unless I feel I can contribute a new angle or something new.
 
 
Ticker
17:56 / 14.05.07
Well I was able to turn to my spouse and say 'and now his father will talk to him again' right on cue. It was the chugging of the booze decanter you see...

I liked it but it felt like too many story lines were jammed in. I was able to see the mirroring they wanted to set up between the characters and even the whole subtext about forgiving sworn enemies to end the needless fighting (You listening America?).

The dance numbers (the first in the doorway of the shop) were a bit much but they were standard silliness. I missed Spidey's usual quips.

It was a better 3rd movie than most and I had a good time. Brucie was superb.

I also liked the examination of Parker's fathead afflication and how he got swept up in the lurv. It was a nice bit of hubris setting up the power conflict. He was already flawed it wasn't just Venom arrivng on the scene.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
17:57 / 14.05.07
Think about it... back in the glory days when Spider-Man came out we were innocent, wide-eyed kids of 30, and now we're jaded 35 year-olds... we need to get back that sense of wonder, man! Find the child inside!
 
 
Brigade du jour
20:50 / 14.05.07
Do you mind, Madam? I'm only 32!
 
 
miss wonderstarr
21:18 / 14.05.07
I was trying to suggest an average I wasn't offering my own age there, btw.
 
 
Mug Chum
21:21 / 14.05.07
even though they're not to my personal taste, I know there's another audience that does enjoy them.

Hear, hear! I won't buy the movie, but it had fun moments. That's the first requirement, no? Imagine if it was bad and boring... the 10 year old in me righteously kicked me in the nuts and enjoyed the fun bits and reminded me that even the most atrocious spiderman film would be welcomed.

(but from 20-40 years old comic book fans I hear from in other places, it forces me to remember myself it isn't a genius masterpiece)
 
 
Lama glama
22:45 / 14.05.07
Brucie was superb.

Seconded! I was very giggly throughout this movie. I haven't seen either of the previous movies in quite a while, but I definitely don't remember the more eccentric humorous moments being as vivid in them.

Spoilers follow:

The movie has been analysed thoroughly in this thread, but I'll just raise a few points.
I felt Gwen Stacey was a bit of a waste of a character and she seemed to inexplicably turn up at Harry's funeral at the end, for no apparent reason. I'd like to see her return in a possible sequel, maybe as the movie-universe's Black Cat.

As with almost everybody else here, I thought the birth of Sandman was beautiful and emotional, but for some reason, the audience I attended with found it hilarious. Stop laughing at the man's sandy anguish!

Venom was wasted, but then I've never really been a fan of the character. Visually he wasn't what I was expecting, apart from the face and the voice wasn't what I was hoping for. The dual tones of the 90's cartoon Venom always impressed me, so when greeted with Topher Grace's dodgy menacing voice, I was a little indifferent.

Good movie though, and no-where near as disappointing or incoherent as I was expecting it to be from this thread and various reviews.
 
 
Feverfew
15:41 / 17.05.07
Good movie though, and no-where near as disappointing or incoherent as I was expecting it to be from this thread and various reviews.

Having seen it this afternoon, that's pretty much my take on it too. Alpha-Emo Peter Parker was a little strange, and Venom was underused, but still, I thought it hit the right notes a lot of the time.

(Especially with the Bruce Campbell and Stan Lee cameos.)

As for where it goes next, for some reason I have the impression that they might consider going for a Ultimate Spider-Man style prequel, but that's just my (really off) intuition.
 
 
FinderWolf
17:20 / 17.05.07
I loved the Stan cameo, too. It kinda got me right here (hits heart) -- Stan saying 'I guess one person really can make a difference' reflecting on Spidey saving someone's life. Well, in this case, two people made a difference - Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, creating a hero that has lasted for generations and will be around for generations to come, inspiring many, both young and old. And that's what heroism is all about, at its core - one person can make a difference. *happy sob* I'm actually serious, I found it fun & moving somehow.
 
 
Axel Lambert
08:46 / 14.07.07
I got the feeling that Peter Parker isn't the movie's main character (as in 1 and 2). Spider-Man 3 is obviously about PP coping badly with fame: this makes him weirdly absent in his relationship to MJ, and later superweird when the black suit boosts his ego. But isn't he seen from the perspective of others most of the time? MJ's, mostly, but to some extent Harry's, too.
 
  

Page: 1 ... 910111213(14)

 
  
Add Your Reply