Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I am your avarage comicbook fan who enjoys to read and watch superheroes, wether in your comic or on your screen. I loved the first two spiderman movies, but I still think the x-men movies are done quite better, but that's just my opinion.

So I went to go see Spiderman 3 (it rhymes).

At the beginning of the movie, i thought pretty much everything was done in thesame way as the first two movies, apart from the sometimes painfully annoying soundtrack from Danny Elfman. But when scenes like the restaurant came, I soon found out the movie was a lot funnier than the previous ones, although the slapstick humor might not always be in place. See, spiderman should give some funny commentairies while fighting villians, and not other characters. I also thought they had majorly overdone themselves, in the previous movies we were satisfied with only one villian, but why in godsname did they have to add 3 ? I mean, it's just clear that they didn't want to make any more spiderman movies and just bunched up all the coolest villians they wanted to put in. The story was kind of cheesy, and at the end, enormously corny. I mean the whole forgiving-part was just a scene too much. Why ? Why do all hollywood producers add such annoying scenes. It's frustrating. With the coming of venom, Sam Raimi, a former director of low budget horror movies, has clearly shown what he's good at, scaring people. And he did it well !

Now about the actors, Kirsten Dunst looks like she's sick of her role and puts a mediocre performance. Tobey Maguire, fantastically showing his inner duality by when he's evil just having a retarded smile and a gothic haircut, is just a wimp. Topher Grace, the awakened version of Tobey Maguire, reminded me too much of his performance in That 70' Show with his squeeky little voice. All of the other actors have put on a decent performance. Cheers.

Conclusion : unless you're a spidey fan, don't go to this movie because even I was truly disappointed.

Strange i was'nt disappointed in it and i'm a comic book fan

just that the movie focus more on character plot, i thought it was the best of the three

Maybe I watched too much Wings but Sandman captured my heart.

I was not disappointed at all. Spiderman 3 lived up to all of my expectations. Others as well since to this date Spidey 3 was amassed $747 million worldwide.

spiderman 3 was very good, but whats with the emo rocker peter parker?

i thought they where gonna marry at the end of the movie. well i guess they will save that for the next movie probably

I'm with S.Spidey here, the movie wasn't very good,most of all I DO NOT EVER WANT TO SEE TOBEY DANCE AGAIN.....that alone help destroyed the movie for me.

I wouldn't use the word "disappointed," but I do feel SM-2 was the best of the 3 movies. SM-3 ... my response was similar to how I felt about Jackson's King Kong: I walked out of the theater feeling more exhausted than entertained. There was so much going on at times that I felt like I was missing something; I couldn't take in the action fast enough to really enjoy it.

As for the "bad" Parker: it was funny, as I think it was meant to be, somewhat.

Whether Dunst is tired of her role or not, I'm tired of her (actually, I never liked her as MJ).

I also liked Church as Sandman, though I thought working him into the death of Ben Parker was somewhat contrived. And as for Venom: well, it seemed more like Venom Lite. He should've been a separate SM movie altogether.

I enjoyed the movie. And I'm not even a fan of Spiderman.
However, My wife and I are the only people I know that liked the movie. All my friends and coworkers hated it. I even ask random people sometimes if they've seen it, and haven't found one yet outside of myself and my wife that liked it. She gets the same reaction from her coworkers and friends.
Yeah, the movie drew the people, and made the money, but the fan reaction to it has been nothing towards imposing the amount of money it made. Most of the people felt suckered by it, from the descriptions I get.
The money is made is completle subjective when you take things like that into consideration. For example; Batman Begins made far less money, but was vastly better in every direction. And yet, X Men 3 was utter crap next to either of them, and it made a ton of money too.

All in all, it entertained me for the length of the movie, that's about all I ask for when I see a movie.

Marvel's movies make a lot of money, period. They know exactly what they're doing. However, since churning out nearly a dozen movies for a couple billion, and I can only account 4 movies as being the only genuinly 'good' ones.

I think part of it is in the marketing. They aim these movies at their 5 year old fans, and not their adult fans who typically buy their books for themselves. I dunno, I contribute the comic companies week in and week out. They need to start taking note of who's footing the bills.

Give me something like for V for Vendetta, 300 or Batman Begins, personally.

I liked it, I liked the comedy, I liked the 3 villains, I liked the character development and I liked the action scenes (especially where Spidey saves Gwen when she falls from that building).

I really don't see what the problem is.

i was also disapointed in spiderman 3,it did not ruin my night but i was not happy with it- i was not smiling when i left the movie,out of all the comic movies out there only batman begins and superman returns made me feel the same- dissapointed-well actually superman returns i actually hated,maybe because i am a huge superman fan and it effected me more,but hey everybody has thier favorites

The movie sucked. No more, no less.

I loved the movie.But Venom was not in it long enough at all.He definately should of had a seperate movie to himself.

I'm a huge Spidey-fan and I could not have been more disappointed. I really liked the first two movies for what they were (a horrifyingly cheesy interpretation of Spiderman), but the third one went overboard with its cheapness. The screenplay is so riddled with flaws, holes and cheese that I find it hard to believe that the guys at Sony had the guts to approve it. The comet crashing right next to Peter and MJ, the symbiont that attaches itself to Peter's bike (no spider sense?!) and then disappears for quite a long time, the back story of Sandman, the whining in the park (worst scene in any comic book movie!), the never-seen-him-before butler revealing himself as a plot device, the terribly rushed climax with the symbiont etc. etc. All of this is handled so pathetically that it makes me wonder.....

What's really funny is that practically the whole Venom-story in SM3 can be removed without the disturbing the main plot one bit. THAT'S how tacked on the character really is. Such a shame, Venom/Eddie Brock is wonderful and I hate it that Raimi betrayed both himself (he never liked the character, even though he's now lying about how he has come around), the general audience and, worst of all, the Spiderman-fan. The Studio (probably Avi Arad himself, though) forced him to write Venom into the script, because the audience wants him. Unfortunately, he didn't realize that people also demand quality and respect for the character. And that's exactly what this movie is lacking.

Sam Raimi doesn't respect Venom at all, and I just wish he had given Arad the finger and went with his own script. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I hate Raimi. I was never a fan of his campy sixties Spiderman, but he really blew it this time. I mean, sure, there was still plenty to like about the movie. The improved special effects (excluding the symbiont, which looked like CGI from 2002 or even earlier. I tell you, every element related to Venom and Brock is horrendously cheap. The computer graphics are no exception), good action, drastically improved acting etc. But it's not really enough to save it from being a colossal failure as a followup to the widely loved Spiderman 2.

Spiderman-fans like myself have every reason to be deeply offended by this movie.

Originally posted by endrict
I'm with S.Spidey here, the movie wasn't very good,most of all I DO NOT EVER WANT TO SEE TOBEY DANCE AGAIN.....that alone help destroyed the movie for me.


I found Tobey dancing to be lighthearted and very funny. It was right on for that single bit pf time in the movie.

I don't want to watch this movie soon if it was only for the TERRIBLY CHEESY ENDING. GOD I HATED THE ENDING SO DARN MUCH DID THEY HAD TO PUT THAT UBERTYPICAL HOLLYWOOD-FORGIVING-CLICHE INTO IT ?!

On the other hand, X-men 3 was, in my opinion, a far better movie than spiderman 3. When i walked out of X-Men 3 in the cinema i felt very entertained while after spiderman i felt strange because i kept feeling spiderman 3 was totally different, in a bad way, from the other 2 movies and i kept wondering what made it feel different.

It lacked the charm of the first 2. Worst of the 3, but not a bad film

Originally posted by Scarlet_Spidey
I don't want to watch this movie soon if it was only for the TERRIBLY CHEESY ENDING. GOD I HATED THE ENDING SO DARN MUCH DID THEY HAD TO PUT THAT UBERTYPICAL HOLLYWOOD-FORGIVING-CLICHE INTO IT ?!

On the other hand, X-men 3 was, in my opinion, a far better movie than spiderman 3. When i walked out of X-Men 3 in the cinema i felt very entertained while after spiderman i felt strange because i kept feeling spiderman 3 was totally different, in a bad way, from the other 2 movies and i kept wondering what made it feel different.


Spiderman 3 is a whole better than X3. Both films are good, but as a whole Spidey 3 is better.

I just saw it today, and I think some comic book fans are being a little too harsh on it...

Sure, it was definately the WORST of the three, and as a Spider-Man movie, it was pretty bad. But as a movie in general, I thought it was pretty good, and Sandman was a very sympathetic (sp?) character.

However, I thought Venom was misused in the movie. I think he was ok, but he didn't act like Venom, didn't look like Venom (he looked somewhat like Carnage, only the symbiote was black) and didn't feel like Venom... For my idea as to how Sony can redeem itself with Venom in the future films, go to the thread Return of Venom...???

who saw stan lee?

Originally posted by qqqqqqq
who saw stan lee?

He's the one behind the mask right?

Originally posted by Dinalfos
Spiderman-fans like myself have every reason to be deeply offended by this movie.

Get over yourself ... jeez.



Originally posted by Bat Dude
However, I thought Venom was misused in the movie. I think he was ok, but he didn't act like Venom, didn't look like Venom (he looked somewhat like Carnage, only the symbiote was black) and didn't feel like Venom...

This is the problem a lot of you have, you expect a character that will have an hour or so of cinema life to reflect a character that's had over a decade of story-lines and growth.

What's so hard about accepting that the movie Venom is not the same thing as the comic Venom? (this goes for all comic movie characters) Try to enjoy the film for what it is - an enjoyable story based on, but not actually portraying, the established comic characters.

Originally posted by Dinalfos
the never-seen-him-before butler revealing himself as a plot device
He was in the second one. They probably should of made a separate movie about him.

SP3 was alot better then X3.

Originally posted by endrict
SP3 was alot better then X3. That doesn't say much. I'd put HULK, Daredevil and possibly Catwoman and Electra over X3.

Originally posted by Juntai
That doesn't say much. I'd put HULK, Daredevil and possibly Catwoman and Electra over X3.

But who can trust your opinion? You only eat recycled car batterys.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
But who can trust your opinion? You only eat recycled car batterys. Huh?

Don't deny it.

Originally posted by endrict
He's the one behind the mask right? no..he was the one who talked to petey about heros and stuff

Originally posted by Juntai
That doesn't say much. I'd put HULK, Daredevil and possibly Catwoman and Electra over X3.


Hulk wasn't bad......EWWWW Hell no to the other movies,are u drunk?

Originally posted by qqqqqqq
no..he was the one who talked to petey about heros and stuff

OHHHHHH you mean the waiter right?

Atleast the music in SP3 wasnt that bad....X3 had the same damn song for every fight scene.

Originally posted by endrict
Hulk wasn't bad......EWWWW Hell no to the other movies,are u drunk? X3 was horrible in equal measurement to those others.
And yes, Hulk was bad.

Originally posted by Scoobless
Don't deny it.

I dont even know what he's talking about.

Originally posted by Juntai
X3 was horrible in equal measurement to those others.
And yes, Hulk was bad.

X3 was not horrible, it just had a bad director. I mean, out of all people, why choose that Rush-Hour-guy ?

And Hulk wasn't bad ... it was terrible. But then again i never liked the comics, but seeing that the comics got cancelled due to lack of fans, i can figure out i'm not the only who doesn't like big bad Hulky.

Originally posted by Juntai
I dont even know what he's talking about.

Oh, I think you do!

...

...

...

I think it means you're a robot... but even I'm not 100% sure what the hell I'm talking about.



Anyway... Hulk wasn't bad. It was a good movie, just a little too avant-garde for casual movie goers...

Translation: The majority of people are too stupid to appreciate the Hulk

I was happy with Spiderman 3, I found alot of the scenes funny, and I think that overall it was a great film, the action helped it alot as we haven't seen that much action in a Spiderman movie yet, but all in all I liked it alot.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Oh, I think you do!

...

...

...

I think it means you're a robot... but even I'm not 100% sure what the hell I'm talking about.



Anyway... Hulk wasn't bad. It was a good movie, just a little too avant-garde for casual movie goers...

Translation: The majority of people are too stupid to appreciate the Hulk I've read several trades of Bruce Jone's run on the Hulk, and I understand the character, I just don't think it translated to film well... in the slightest.