Poor poor Spidey
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 by Travis Cody inWe went to see Spider-Man 3 on Saturday.
Some liked it. Peter Travers of Rolling Stone says "There are delicious bits aplenty in Spider-Man 3 for those who care to notice."
Many didn't like it. Kenneth Turan, LA Times staff writer, says "Though aspects of it are entertaining, the presence of all these mismatched pieces give Spider-Man 3 an ungainly, cumbersome feeling, as if its plot elements were the product of competing contractors who never saw the need to cooperate on a coherent final product."
I was disappointed in it. I was too long. It dragged. It was silly in spots, and not in a good way.
The big free-for-all battle at the end was good. But I waited an awfully long time watching a bunch of boring stuff to get to it. Some of the early fight sequences were edited in a way that made me a little motion sick. I couldn't follow them, they moved too fast.
It took so long to get Venom into the action, that I totally forgot there was supposed to be a second villain. And as far as villains go, Sandman was a wimp.
Speaking of wimps, Harry Osborne was ridiculous.
I realize that the black goop was as much a villain as the others, but it was never really explained where it came from. I don't know the story of black suit Spidey very well because it's been so long since I read the comics. So a better explanation here would have been appreciated. The sequences with Peter's teacher seemed like an after thought, and it slowed down the action.
The first film was terrific. The second was enjoyable. The third is forgettable.
Rats.
Oh No! I love Spiderman - due to my geeky brother's childhood (who am I kidding! And adult) obsession with Marvel comics.
I'll still watch it but I think he was disappointed too, which is quite a bad sign.