Let me start out by answering the big question: is Spider-man 3 as good as Spider-man 2, the series’ standard for geeky greatness? The answer is no, unfortunately. The newest sequel doesn’t have near the pitch-perfect emotional complexity of the last. That said, Spider-man 3 is not a total disappointment...
Picking up not long after where Spider-man 2 left off, we finally see Peter Parker in a happy place. His relationship with M.J. is going better than ever, he’s found balance in work and school, and the entire city is in love with his superhero alter-ego. Of course things go awry fairly quickly, as Spider-man is introduced to not one, not two, not three, but four enemies. And therein lies the big problem with Spider-man 3: with so many villains, so many stories, so many conflicts, there is little time to devote to developing any one of the arcs very well. The movie has, in a sense, a bad case of villain-itis.
There are things to recommend for the movie, though. The acting is good, especially from the three main leads (Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and James Franco), who seem more natural and at-home in their roles than ever. (Dunst’s performance is particularly refreshing, since I can’t stand her in most everything else she’s done…). The quiet moments between Peter Parker and M.J. are especially welcome, and serve as a nice break from the chaotic, sometimes clumsy action scenes. I also really liked the internal struggle of good and bad that Peter Parker observes in himself; there just wasn’t enough of it to say that it was really thought-provoking or meaningful.
I feel about Spider-man 3 roughly the same way I felt about last year’s X-Men: The Last Stand: so much potential, so many interesting stories, so little time to explore any of them very well. In a world where so many of our popcorn movies are devoid of any complexity, you still wish that Spider-man 3 wouldn’t have tried to be everything for everyone.
5 comments:
I am really sad that Spiderman was not as good as we'd hoped (I am speaking as if I saw this with you when in fact I still haven't seen it at all). I enjoyed your review and as always I am sure it was fair and accurate.
However, in defense of my friend Peter Parker, I have to take issue with you giving it only three stars. As a reminder, you also gave, among others, Serenity, Bridge to Terabithia, The Pursuit of Happyness, and Monster House three stars. Even after reading your review I think it should get a least *** 1/8 stars.
OK, let me make a correction: on further reflection, I'm changing my rating of "The Pursuit of Happyness" from *** to **1/2. I'll only give the movies half-star increments, ok? I stand by my three-star reviews of all the rest, including "Spider-man 3." Do I need to remind you that *** is still a recommendation?
Ok, let's compromise: ***+
You heard it hear first, folks. "Spider-man 3" officially gets a ***+ from me. And Ammon gets a ***$!? for his persistence.
Now that I have seen it... even with the Spidey factor, I think *** was a fair critique. The action was great. I loved the fighting scenes. However, what the film had in action it lacked in substance. Too many characters, no development. I never felt connected with the Sandman and the forgiveness scene felt awkward.
Venom was cool but where in the world did he Spidy powers?
The Green Goblin's son was weird, too many emotional swists.
Anyway, I know no one will read this now except for Jay - and I will be calling you soon.
Post a Comment