RKMBs Forums .::Robegories::. Media Spider-Man 3 review (Spoilers, without Ads!)

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
Is it any wonder Harley sends me all that hate mail about Joe!

---

Hey! I never said "Joe"! I said "Redsox fan"! It was supposed to be in code!

---

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
I think its why I was so put off by her being in 3, yet having very little impact on the story.

Gwen was as key in what made Spiderman who he is, as Uncle Ben.

If you were to pick the top five defining moments in Spidermans early years, you'd be hard pressed to not have Gwens death at number two (with Bens death at number 1).

---

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:
Did we see the same movie?

Seriously.

The only thing that I might agree with you is that Sandman was superfluous. And even that wasn’t enough to detract from my enjoyment of the movie. As for Stan Lee’s cameo – it’s Stan Lee for fuck’s sake! His cameo is s’posed to come with a big vat ‘o cheese. That cannot seriously be considered a legitimate gripe.

---

Quote:

---

As for MJ and Pete’s drama – I completely disagree with you. I thought it made totally sense, and to me, it did not seem forced at all. The angle with Harry and the jealousy also worked well and was in line with the comics- as was his death. The whole symbiote lead up was well done, even if the Venom part seemed a little rushed. And as NWM said, was there a body? No. And this is comic books for crying out loud – like a comic book death is ever permanent. I honestly can’t believe that so many of you found so many faults with this movie and found no enjoyment from it whatsoever.

---

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
PS:
Just thinking about it, did anyone else see similarities between the Sandman storyline and Mr. Freeze in Batman and Robin?
Both were comitting crimes because of someone they were trying to save, but neither were particulary sympathetic characters!

_{Now see who admits that they have seen that film}

---

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
I think its why I was so put off by her being in 3, yet having very little impact on the story.

Gwen was as key in what made Spiderman who he is, as Uncle Ben.

If you were to pick the top five defining moments in Spidermans early years, you'd be hard pressed to not have Gwens death at number two (with Bens death at number 1).

---

Agreed. That Raimi is a fan and din't use Gwen (and have her killed in the 1st flick) never made sense. MJ could've been briefly introduced then, or saved until movie number 2. I admit, I still liked that she was introduced here - and I found Howard's Gwen look here uncanny btw- but her character could've been so much more significant had they used her in the first movie and killed her off then.

---

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:

Agreed. That Raimi is a fan and din't use Gwen (and have her killed in the 1st flick) never made sense. MJ could've been briefly introduced then, or saved until movie number 2. I admit, I still liked that she was introduced here - and I found Howard's Gwen look here uncanny btw- but her character could've been so much more significant had they used her in the first movie and killed her off then.

---

Quote:

---

Joe Mama said:

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:
Did we see the same movie?

Seriously.

The only thing that I might agree with you is that Sandman was superfluous. And even that wasn’t enough to detract from my enjoyment of the movie. As for Stan Lee’s cameo – it’s Stan Lee for fuck’s sake! His cameo is s’posed to come with a big vat ‘o cheese. That cannot seriously be considered a legitimate gripe.

---

I don't have an issue with a Stan Lee cameo per se. But put that together with the ridiculous shot of Spider-Man in front of the American flag and that ridiculous "Key To The City" ceremony and every other forced, rushed, wasteful, heavy-handed thing about this flick and the Stan Lee cameo just becomes another eye-rolling moment.

---

Quote:

---

Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said:

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:

Agreed. That Raimi is a fan and din't use Gwen (and have her killed in the 1st flick) never made sense. MJ could've been briefly introduced then, or saved until movie number 2. I admit, I still liked that she was introduced here - and I found Howard's Gwen look here uncanny btw- but her character could've been so much more significant had they used her in the first movie and killed her off then.

---

This is one of those annoying and anal fan comments. There is no way they introduce and then kill off the love interest in a superhero film. Also they won't use a love interest that hasn't been a regular in the comics since 1973 over a love interest who has been a constant part of the comics for 3 decades.
They have no obligation to slavishly follow the events in the comics.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
I'm with Harley here. While there are certainly nits I could pick with this movie, it was a hell of a lot of fun and more true to classic Spider-man than not.

Furthermore, as far as "comic book" movies go, the flaws in this particular film (the Butler Ex Machina, the retconned origin) were no more egregious than in any other movie of the genre, including, but not limited to, Batman Begins, the first Superman film and any of "X" films.

In a film like this, I'd rather have a rushed plot and one or two extra action sequences instead of endless static shots of the hero just hanging in space mooning over his ex girlfriend and illegitimate kid (yeah, Singer, that was directed at you) while the director hits us over the head with a Jesus/adoption allegory.

I do agree that I the "hero in front of the flag shot" was misplaced...but only because that goddam Singer should have already had it in a fucking SUPERMAN movie.

---

Quote:

---

Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said:

Quote:

---

harleykwin said:

Agreed. That Raimi is a fan and din't use Gwen (and have her killed in the 1st flick) never made sense. MJ could've been briefly introduced then, or saved until movie number 2. I admit, I still liked that she was introduced here - and I found Howard's Gwen look here uncanny btw- but her character could've been so much more significant had they used her in the first movie and killed her off then.

---

This is one of those annoying and anal fan comments. There is no way they introduce and then kill off the love interest in a superhero film. Also they won't use a love interest that hasn't been a regular in the comics since 1973 over a love interest who has been a constant part of the comics for 3 decades.
They have no obligation to slavishly follow the events in the comics.

---

Quote:

---

Joe Mama said:


What can I tell you? It was forty-five minutes of rambling plot disguised as "set-up" followed by an hour and fifteen minutes of scrambling to a conclusion that was disappointing and unsatisfying, kinda like what sex with Nowhereman must be like, minus an hour and fifty-five minutes (oooh, snap!).

---

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:

Quote:

---

Joe Mama said:


What can I tell you? It was forty-five minutes of rambling plot disguised as "set-up" followed by an hour and fifteen minutes of scrambling to a conclusion that was disappointing and unsatisfying, kinda like what sex with Nowhereman must be like, minus an hour and fifty-five minutes (oooh, snap!).

---

As the film as 2 hours 20 mins long, I'll take that as a compliment!

---

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
Oh whats the matter Joe, you just cant do maths properly and have to result to aping your boyfriend Rob.

---

Quote:

---

Joe Mama said:

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:
Oh whats the matter Joe, you just cant do maths properly and have to result to aping your boyfriend Rob.

---

I expect a bit more from you than to nitpick over a movie's running time to deflect a well-placed putdown. Did I make any spelling errors, you weak-chinned git? Go back to fat jokes - they're more your speed.

Besides, everyone knows you and Rob are soulmates.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:


If I have a minor quibble with it, its that you already had the hot, hot, HOT Elizabeth Banks right there as Betty Brant, who is also one of the Peter's exes in the book. Instead of bringing in Gwen, they should have just expanded the role of Betty and used her to make MJ jealous.

---

Lucas told me he has seen all the summer movies since his company, Industrial Light and Magic, does most of the special effects. The only one they didn't work on was "Spider-Man 3." What did he think of it?

"It's silly. It's a silly movie," he said. "There just isn't much there. Once you take it all apart, there's not much story, is there?"

Well, it's not "Star Wars."

"People thought 'Star Wars' was silly, too," he added, with a wink. "But it wasn't."

Quote:

---

Pig Iran said:
Funny, I was just thinking how you could compare the 3 spidey films with the original 3 star wars films....1 is a grail, but everyone usually likes the 2nd one more and the 3rd one, while good, had some really silly shit in it...

---

Quote:

---

Nowhereman said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:


If I have a minor quibble with it, its that you already had the hot, hot, HOT Elizabeth Banks right there as Betty Brant, who is also one of the Peter's exes in the book. Instead of bringing in Gwen, they should have just expanded the role of Betty and used her to make MJ jealous.

---

Now that would have made a lot more sense.
There you already have an established character, someone who MJ might even know, but Gwens position in the movie was forced.
We have never seen her before, seen her in the movie for 5 minutes and already MJ is suspicious/jealous.

---

I just got back from seeing it. Fucking weak. Okay, parts were good but overall too much was forced. I have no problem with Gwen being in the movie. However, like Eddie Brock, she should have just been introduced to the films (as Pete's lab partner). It could have been left at that. In my mind the character who's position was forced was Venom's. The Sandman as Ben's killer story should have been played up along with Peter/Harry (memory loss? WTF?!) and MJ's jealousy of Peter's success as Spider-Man. But no, Venom should have waited for a 4th movie. That whole storyline had more potential and would have worked perfectly with Gwen and Captain Stacy. Then Peter could have met and gotten to know Peter and...okay I'll stop. Venom and Sandman work great independently, but they have no business being in the same movie together.

Bruce Campbell was hilarious though.

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

"People thought 'Star Wars' was silly, too," he added, with a wink. "But it wasn't."

---

Quote:

---

Stupid Doog said:
I saw it on Sunday and for the most part I liked it. I liked that they gave Gwen Stacy the 70's era Mary Jane role (model/hot party girl) but I don't like how they handled the relationship thing. Plus I agree with everyone else that said Venom should have been saved for the fourth movie

---