On My Shelf: Spider-Man 3 (2007)
For a long time after we saw it in the theater, my measuring stick for movies was, "Was it as bad as Spider-Man 3?"
Spider-Man 3 was one of the biggest movie disappointments I've experienced in my life (and I say this in spite of at the time having already seen X-3, which was a horrendous disappointment -- and even in light of having seen the The Matrix sequels, and, since then, having seen all three "The Hobbit" movies). The first Spider-Man movie was good, the second movie was very enjoyable (enjoyable enough to really really get our hopes up for the third movie) and then third movie crashed and burned. Burned BIGTIME.
Plot: Peter Parker is still Peter Parkering around, but then some Venom (black suit monster) stuff crashes on a meteorite near him! And kind of doesn't do anything for a while! And then it turns out the guy who killed Peter's Uncle Ben was really the villain SANDMAN! And Peter feels messed up about that. And then Peter makes some really bad relationship choices (and comes across as an idiot.) And then Mary Jane makes some bad choices, too! And then Harry Osborn turns into Green Goblin (three times!) and then nothing interesting happens for a really long time -- and then all three monsters kind of crash together at the same time and the movie is abruptly over! And then Sam Raimi shook the dust of this movie off his sandals and never tried to make a fun movie ever again.
I actually haven't seen the movie since it came out in theaters. Recently, we got mildly excited about the idea of the new Spider-Man reboot (until we saw it, of course)... and that made me think that maybe, just maybe, I should give Spider-Man 3 a chance. Perhaps, in the light of all the terrible movies that I've seen in the last ten years, it looks a bit better.
Well.... no. It doesn't. It's still bad.
But now I think it's bad for different reasons than I did initially. Initially, I just couldn't get over the let-down of how it didn't live up to any of the expectations that had been building up over the years between it and Spider-Man 2. I thought there was some bad acting, and I recall being really upset about Kirsten Dunst's hair (although I don't know why).
Watching it now, I just feel a mellow sadness at the missed potential -- and THE HORRIBLE MUDDLE THAT IS THE STORY IN THIS FILM.
All the pieces of a good movie are basically there -- but they're all jumbled up and edited so, so poorly. In fact, I would almost say that this movie could have been saved in editing. Almost.
PROBLEM 5: MARY JANE
The problem with Mary Jane is that Mary Jane's character arc makes her seem like a terrible person. Mary Jane and Peter Parker are in love, as we've been informed by previous films. Mary Jane gets jealous when she sees Peter kiss another girl (which is a pretty reasonable response). However, Mary Jane is also portrayed as being an inexplicably hated actress on Broadway -- portrayed as being furious about how much more famous Spider-Man is than she is -- and is very easily buffaloed into almost cheating on Peter with an old friend.
She seems to be saying, "I just hate him so much..."She's frustrated by how poor Peter is, she doesn't want to listen to him talk, she's constantly like, "But what about MY NEEDS?!", she's annoyed by his fame, she's a bad actress and she isn't entirely trustworthy with other men. AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE OUR LIKEABLE HEROINE? (**Spoiler: They do abruptly reconcile at the end of the movie... but it is EXTREMELY ABRUPT, and it's really not clear why they reconcile.**)
Problem 4: GWEN STACY
The character Gwen Stacy is featured in this movie as Peter's alternative love interest when he is under the evil influence of the Venom suit. I question the need for a named character (much less Gwen Stacy -- who comic-book readers will know was Peter's original girlfriend who died tragically as he was saving her from the Green Goblin. Why include Gwen Stacy in the story at all if you're not going to have the Green Goblin break her neck? If nothing important happens with her, her name needs to be Jane Q. Normal and she can slip in and out of the story without causing any ripples whatsoever). Instead, we're treated to a pleasant, bland Gwen, who realizes "Venom" Peter is just using her to make Mary Jane jealous and immediately exits the film. Including her character in the film in the first place was pointless and unnecessary.
There was even a scene where Gwen is falling and Peter saves her.
Why not, instead, have Gwen die and provide Peter's character with
some inner turmoil and angst?Problem 3: PETER PARKER - IDIOT.
Peter Parker is supposed to be a hapless everyman -- not an idiot. For this story to have worked, Peter had to be infected by the "venom" suit (i.e. the bad personality-amplifying alien suit) early in the story, so that all of the dumb things he does, and all of the cruel things he wants to do to his enemies, are really a result of the suit (even if he does have some latent desires to do those things, when he is his normal self, he should have the sense to avoid doing evil and stupid things. But this Peter Parker is downright brain-damaged in his approach).
Why is my girlfriend so mad at me? Derp!Problem 2. TOO MANY VILLAINS. The main villain should have been Venom -- the evil black suit from outer space that (when Peter wears it) amplifies all of Peter's worst traits. It could have accentuated the problems he was already having with Mary Jane... etc. etc. Instead, Venom is watered down. All he does is make Peter dress in black and punch a bit harder than normal. And he doesn't really become a thing until halfway through the movie -- and when Peter wants to shake it off, he pretty much easily shakes it off.
The worst thing Peter does under the influence of Venom is
take part in a wholly inexplicable music number. Apparently,
Aunt May not only taught him to play Jazz piano, but some sexy dance moves.And then, we have Sandman. Sandman is immediately ruined by being given a sympathetic backstory -- i.e. "he's just a guy who was trying to do what was right for his sick daughter!" If you need that to be part of the story, fine, but don't tell us that right off the bat -- the first time we saw Sandman should have been when he was running from the police and falling into the scientific experiment that turned his body into sand. Give us the sympathetic backstory later to make Peter Parker torn about whether he should exact revenge on him or not. (If, that is, he even needs a sympathetic backstory.)
Does this look like a guy who needs a sympathetic backstory?AND, then we have to wrap up Harry Obsorn's story. In the course of this film, Harry becomes the Green Goblin -- is brain damaged and forgets he's the Green Goblin -- then becomes the Green Goblin again, fights Spidey while Spidey is under evil Venom's influence, gets burned in an explosion, stops being the green Goblin -- and finally BECOMES GREEN GOBLIN AGAIN to help wrap up the story. The whole "Harry Osborn/Green Goblin" sub-plot could easily have been totally removed from the film and been the plot in some other Spider-Man movie. OR, if you DESPERATELY need him to make an appearance, tease the fact that he's finally followed in his Dad's footsteps and become the Green Goblin at the beginning of the film -- and then have him unexpectedly save the day as GOOD Green Goblin at the end!
Coincidentally, this is also my face while watching this movie.AND we have the dumb schmoe who the Venom suit ultimately takes over -- Eddie Brock (as played by Topher Grace of That 70's Show). Eddie is portrayed as cartoonishly greedy, selfish and stupid, so you're not upset when (under the influence of the suit) Peter is mean to him -- and when he himself is taken over by the suit, you're not really concerned about whether he can be cured or not, because he's so "I'm so eeevvilllll" that you're really just waiting for him to die (in spite of the fact that, ostensibly, this movie is about Spider-Man learning to forgive people). Obviously, after Spider-Man removes the suit, it needs to take over somebody else so it can fight him -- so, since (by mis-using Gwen Stacy) you've demonstrated that you don't care about comic-book accuracy -- just have the darn suit take over HARRY OSBORN! He already hates Peter/Spidey, so it would have made sense for the suit to attach itself to him -- and given us a way to dispense with the stupid, one-dimensional character of Eddie Brock. That would have been a twist, wouldn't it?!
Pictured: Dumb, dumb, dumb.Ultimately, the real villain in this movie is Peter Parker's terrible choices (like kissing another girl in front of his already insecure-feeling girlfriend. You don't need spidey-sense to suspect that THAT MIGHT BE A REALLY BAD IDEA). Take some already bad choices, and the amplification of his bad nature by the Venom suit, and YOU HAVE A PLOT. If you need a sub-plot, throw in Harry and have him taken over by the Venom suit. So, we didn't really need Sandman, Eddie Brock or Green Goblin!
1. THE ENDING (Spoiler!)
So, the three big dumb villains' plots crash into each other, and out of nowhere, the ending is happening -- in which we go from reconciling with a friend (Harry/Goblin), violently murdering an enemy (Venom/Eddie Brock), and forgiving an enemy (Sandman). So, really, instead of an ending, we get three endings, and none of them are in the least bit satisfactory.
Pictured: All the dumb storylines crash into each other.Additionally, the story as-written had not been building up to this climax, so you're kind of just like, "What? Huh? This is happening now?... Okay, I guess..."
ONE MORE THING...
In the most confusing plot element of all, during his second Green Goblin iteration in this movie, they spend a long time setting up how Harry is going to attempt to seduce Mary Jane with this play he has written for her. He's charming AND he has the money to produce this play for her... and both of these plot devices GO NOWHERE. After Mary Jane rejects him, Harry Osborn bursts in on her in full Goblin mode and basically threatens her life to get her to break up with Peter. Under duress, she does so. However, after that point, Harry never messes with her again and Mary Jane has ample other opportunities to tell Peter that it was Harry/Green Goblin who made her break up with him and that she didn't really want to... but for no clear reason she doesn't -- not even at the end of the movie. SO WHY WAS ALL THIS HARRY OSBORN ROMANTIC/EVIL COMPLICATION IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
I don't remember why he bops her on the head. I guess
it makes just about as much sense as anything
else in this movie.It seemed like it was in there to give a reasonable explanation for why Mary Jane was acting so weird... And yet it doesn't, and isn't. Honestly, this feels like a half-written plot element that they forgot to take out of the final script.
ULTIMATELY...
I don't think the acting is as bad as I originally did -- mainly because I think what comes across as "bad acting" in spots is actually just a bunch of actors trying to make sense of a weak, nonsensical script. The story is the problem -- or, really, the lack thereof -- and the fact our heroine becomes shrill and unlikable, and our hero becomes a bumbling buffoon, and there are more unnecessary characters in this film than you can shake a stick at. I understand that Sam Raimi's original story was apparently compromised by the studios... but, I still don't understand why it had to be this bad. Okay, you're like, "I want Sandman to be the main villain!" and the studio is like, "No, we insist that Venom be the main villain!" So, you're mad about that. But does that mean that you just throw the pieces of the script up in the air and film whatever falls face up, and ruin everybody's careers?
"Except for mine! Thanks for the ride, idiots!"I would really like to see a re-edit of this film that removes almost all of Green Goblin, considerably edits Sandman, and re-orders the Venom stuff. It might almost be watchable.
Sam Raimi, would you explain this movie to me? Be honest! Why did this happen the way it did? Was it entirely spite on your part ("I don't want to make this movie now that I have to use a different villain, but I'm contractually obligated to... So I'll just make it as bad as possible!"), or did the studio take it out of your hands and make into what it is?
Until I get a response from Sam Raimi, all I can say is, this movie is bad and muddled and has while it has many features of a "good bad movie" -- ultimately, it's too boring in the middle to be "good bad". Only worth watching if you desperately need closure after Spider-Man 2, but even then it's going to be a pretty sour experience. Maybe somebody can give us a 30-minute "Closure Edit" of the film. Until then, though, it's...
NOT RECOMMENDED
Spider-Man 3 was one of the biggest movie disappointments I've experienced in my life (and I say this in spite of at the time having already seen X-3, which was a horrendous disappointment -- and even in light of having seen the The Matrix sequels, and, since then, having seen all three "The Hobbit" movies). The first Spider-Man movie was good, the second movie was very enjoyable (enjoyable enough to really really get our hopes up for the third movie) and then third movie crashed and burned. Burned BIGTIME.
Plot: Peter Parker is still Peter Parkering around, but then some Venom (black suit monster) stuff crashes on a meteorite near him! And kind of doesn't do anything for a while! And then it turns out the guy who killed Peter's Uncle Ben was really the villain SANDMAN! And Peter feels messed up about that. And then Peter makes some really bad relationship choices (and comes across as an idiot.) And then Mary Jane makes some bad choices, too! And then Harry Osborn turns into Green Goblin (three times!) and then nothing interesting happens for a really long time -- and then all three monsters kind of crash together at the same time and the movie is abruptly over! And then Sam Raimi shook the dust of this movie off his sandals and never tried to make a fun movie ever again.
I actually haven't seen the movie since it came out in theaters. Recently, we got mildly excited about the idea of the new Spider-Man reboot (until we saw it, of course)... and that made me think that maybe, just maybe, I should give Spider-Man 3 a chance. Perhaps, in the light of all the terrible movies that I've seen in the last ten years, it looks a bit better.
Well.... no. It doesn't. It's still bad.
But now I think it's bad for different reasons than I did initially. Initially, I just couldn't get over the let-down of how it didn't live up to any of the expectations that had been building up over the years between it and Spider-Man 2. I thought there was some bad acting, and I recall being really upset about Kirsten Dunst's hair (although I don't know why).
Watching it now, I just feel a mellow sadness at the missed potential -- and THE HORRIBLE MUDDLE THAT IS THE STORY IN THIS FILM.
All the pieces of a good movie are basically there -- but they're all jumbled up and edited so, so poorly. In fact, I would almost say that this movie could have been saved in editing. Almost.
PROBLEM 5: MARY JANE
The problem with Mary Jane is that Mary Jane's character arc makes her seem like a terrible person. Mary Jane and Peter Parker are in love, as we've been informed by previous films. Mary Jane gets jealous when she sees Peter kiss another girl (which is a pretty reasonable response). However, Mary Jane is also portrayed as being an inexplicably hated actress on Broadway -- portrayed as being furious about how much more famous Spider-Man is than she is -- and is very easily buffaloed into almost cheating on Peter with an old friend.
She seems to be saying, "I just hate him so much..."She's frustrated by how poor Peter is, she doesn't want to listen to him talk, she's constantly like, "But what about MY NEEDS?!", she's annoyed by his fame, she's a bad actress and she isn't entirely trustworthy with other men. AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE OUR LIKEABLE HEROINE? (**Spoiler: They do abruptly reconcile at the end of the movie... but it is EXTREMELY ABRUPT, and it's really not clear why they reconcile.**)Problem 4: GWEN STACY
The character Gwen Stacy is featured in this movie as Peter's alternative love interest when he is under the evil influence of the Venom suit. I question the need for a named character (much less Gwen Stacy -- who comic-book readers will know was Peter's original girlfriend who died tragically as he was saving her from the Green Goblin. Why include Gwen Stacy in the story at all if you're not going to have the Green Goblin break her neck? If nothing important happens with her, her name needs to be Jane Q. Normal and she can slip in and out of the story without causing any ripples whatsoever). Instead, we're treated to a pleasant, bland Gwen, who realizes "Venom" Peter is just using her to make Mary Jane jealous and immediately exits the film. Including her character in the film in the first place was pointless and unnecessary.
There was even a scene where Gwen is falling and Peter saves her.Why not, instead, have Gwen die and provide Peter's character with
some inner turmoil and angst?Problem 3: PETER PARKER - IDIOT.
Peter Parker is supposed to be a hapless everyman -- not an idiot. For this story to have worked, Peter had to be infected by the "venom" suit (i.e. the bad personality-amplifying alien suit) early in the story, so that all of the dumb things he does, and all of the cruel things he wants to do to his enemies, are really a result of the suit (even if he does have some latent desires to do those things, when he is his normal self, he should have the sense to avoid doing evil and stupid things. But this Peter Parker is downright brain-damaged in his approach).
Why is my girlfriend so mad at me? Derp!Problem 2. TOO MANY VILLAINS. The main villain should have been Venom -- the evil black suit from outer space that (when Peter wears it) amplifies all of Peter's worst traits. It could have accentuated the problems he was already having with Mary Jane... etc. etc. Instead, Venom is watered down. All he does is make Peter dress in black and punch a bit harder than normal. And he doesn't really become a thing until halfway through the movie -- and when Peter wants to shake it off, he pretty much easily shakes it off.
The worst thing Peter does under the influence of Venom istake part in a wholly inexplicable music number. Apparently,
Aunt May not only taught him to play Jazz piano, but some sexy dance moves.And then, we have Sandman. Sandman is immediately ruined by being given a sympathetic backstory -- i.e. "he's just a guy who was trying to do what was right for his sick daughter!" If you need that to be part of the story, fine, but don't tell us that right off the bat -- the first time we saw Sandman should have been when he was running from the police and falling into the scientific experiment that turned his body into sand. Give us the sympathetic backstory later to make Peter Parker torn about whether he should exact revenge on him or not. (If, that is, he even needs a sympathetic backstory.)
Does this look like a guy who needs a sympathetic backstory?AND, then we have to wrap up Harry Obsorn's story. In the course of this film, Harry becomes the Green Goblin -- is brain damaged and forgets he's the Green Goblin -- then becomes the Green Goblin again, fights Spidey while Spidey is under evil Venom's influence, gets burned in an explosion, stops being the green Goblin -- and finally BECOMES GREEN GOBLIN AGAIN to help wrap up the story. The whole "Harry Osborn/Green Goblin" sub-plot could easily have been totally removed from the film and been the plot in some other Spider-Man movie. OR, if you DESPERATELY need him to make an appearance, tease the fact that he's finally followed in his Dad's footsteps and become the Green Goblin at the beginning of the film -- and then have him unexpectedly save the day as GOOD Green Goblin at the end!
Coincidentally, this is also my face while watching this movie.AND we have the dumb schmoe who the Venom suit ultimately takes over -- Eddie Brock (as played by Topher Grace of That 70's Show). Eddie is portrayed as cartoonishly greedy, selfish and stupid, so you're not upset when (under the influence of the suit) Peter is mean to him -- and when he himself is taken over by the suit, you're not really concerned about whether he can be cured or not, because he's so "I'm so eeevvilllll" that you're really just waiting for him to die (in spite of the fact that, ostensibly, this movie is about Spider-Man learning to forgive people). Obviously, after Spider-Man removes the suit, it needs to take over somebody else so it can fight him -- so, since (by mis-using Gwen Stacy) you've demonstrated that you don't care about comic-book accuracy -- just have the darn suit take over HARRY OSBORN! He already hates Peter/Spidey, so it would have made sense for the suit to attach itself to him -- and given us a way to dispense with the stupid, one-dimensional character of Eddie Brock. That would have been a twist, wouldn't it?!
Pictured: Dumb, dumb, dumb.Ultimately, the real villain in this movie is Peter Parker's terrible choices (like kissing another girl in front of his already insecure-feeling girlfriend. You don't need spidey-sense to suspect that THAT MIGHT BE A REALLY BAD IDEA). Take some already bad choices, and the amplification of his bad nature by the Venom suit, and YOU HAVE A PLOT. If you need a sub-plot, throw in Harry and have him taken over by the Venom suit. So, we didn't really need Sandman, Eddie Brock or Green Goblin!1. THE ENDING (Spoiler!)
So, the three big dumb villains' plots crash into each other, and out of nowhere, the ending is happening -- in which we go from reconciling with a friend (Harry/Goblin), violently murdering an enemy (Venom/Eddie Brock), and forgiving an enemy (Sandman). So, really, instead of an ending, we get three endings, and none of them are in the least bit satisfactory.
Pictured: All the dumb storylines crash into each other.Additionally, the story as-written had not been building up to this climax, so you're kind of just like, "What? Huh? This is happening now?... Okay, I guess..."ONE MORE THING...
In the most confusing plot element of all, during his second Green Goblin iteration in this movie, they spend a long time setting up how Harry is going to attempt to seduce Mary Jane with this play he has written for her. He's charming AND he has the money to produce this play for her... and both of these plot devices GO NOWHERE. After Mary Jane rejects him, Harry Osborn bursts in on her in full Goblin mode and basically threatens her life to get her to break up with Peter. Under duress, she does so. However, after that point, Harry never messes with her again and Mary Jane has ample other opportunities to tell Peter that it was Harry/Green Goblin who made her break up with him and that she didn't really want to... but for no clear reason she doesn't -- not even at the end of the movie. SO WHY WAS ALL THIS HARRY OSBORN ROMANTIC/EVIL COMPLICATION IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
I don't remember why he bops her on the head. I guessit makes just about as much sense as anything
else in this movie.It seemed like it was in there to give a reasonable explanation for why Mary Jane was acting so weird... And yet it doesn't, and isn't. Honestly, this feels like a half-written plot element that they forgot to take out of the final script.
ULTIMATELY...
I don't think the acting is as bad as I originally did -- mainly because I think what comes across as "bad acting" in spots is actually just a bunch of actors trying to make sense of a weak, nonsensical script. The story is the problem -- or, really, the lack thereof -- and the fact our heroine becomes shrill and unlikable, and our hero becomes a bumbling buffoon, and there are more unnecessary characters in this film than you can shake a stick at. I understand that Sam Raimi's original story was apparently compromised by the studios... but, I still don't understand why it had to be this bad. Okay, you're like, "I want Sandman to be the main villain!" and the studio is like, "No, we insist that Venom be the main villain!" So, you're mad about that. But does that mean that you just throw the pieces of the script up in the air and film whatever falls face up, and ruin everybody's careers?
"Except for mine! Thanks for the ride, idiots!"I would really like to see a re-edit of this film that removes almost all of Green Goblin, considerably edits Sandman, and re-orders the Venom stuff. It might almost be watchable.Sam Raimi, would you explain this movie to me? Be honest! Why did this happen the way it did? Was it entirely spite on your part ("I don't want to make this movie now that I have to use a different villain, but I'm contractually obligated to... So I'll just make it as bad as possible!"), or did the studio take it out of your hands and make into what it is?
Until I get a response from Sam Raimi, all I can say is, this movie is bad and muddled and has while it has many features of a "good bad movie" -- ultimately, it's too boring in the middle to be "good bad". Only worth watching if you desperately need closure after Spider-Man 2, but even then it's going to be a pretty sour experience. Maybe somebody can give us a 30-minute "Closure Edit" of the film. Until then, though, it's...
NOT RECOMMENDED
No comments have been added yet.
