I say Shrek 3.
SP3 was absolute shit. One of the worst movies I've seen in the past couple of years.
I say that the majority of people who've want to see it, already have. I'm probably gonig to be wrong, but I think the box office will fall after two weeks because well, last time Spiderman came out there wasnt an massive amount of movies out there like there is now.
Originally posted by Smasandian
I say Shrek 3.SP3 was absolute shit. One of the worst movies I've seen in the past couple of years.
I say that the majority of people who've want to see it, already have. I'm probably gonig to be wrong, but I think the box office will fall after two weeks because well, last time Spiderman came out there wasnt an massive amount of movies out there like there is now.
Word of mouth is spreading so badly I may not ever go and see it in the end. 28 Weeks Later anyone? 😉
Yeah, it was absolute shit.
From the emo parker scenes, from the sandman (why the hell was he there), horrible acting from Dunst and Maguire, action scenes werent even that good, and horrible story. Dont forget the horrible dance scene.
It was absolute shit
Only redeemable part of that story was Bruce Campbell and Venom looked cool....but that could be just me liking it because I've been waiting for Venom since the first one.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Yeah, it was absolute shit.From the emo parker scenes, from the sandman (why the hell was he there), horrible acting from Dunst and Maguire, action scenes werent even that good, and horrible story. Dont forget the horrible dance scene.
It was absolute shit
Only redeemable part of that story was Bruce Campbell and Venom looked cool....but that could be just me liking it because I've been waiting for Venom since the first one.
I agree and disagree with you.
Emo-Peter was handled completely wrong and WAS shit (that includes the dance scene). That should've been much more serious.
As for the acting, I'd say it was mediocre. By now means "absolute shit." I mean, I guess it's personal preference, but when I think of "shit-acting" I think of Jamie Kennedy in Son of the Mask or Stone Cold Steve Austin in the Condemned.
And how could you not see why the Sandman was necessary? It was kind of obvious to me. It was for Peter's character development. They wanted him to confront the hatred he had for his Uncle's death one final time and put it behind him/move on. It was a huge step for him and arguabley essential for the character of Spider-Man.
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I agree and disagree with you.Emo-Peter was handled completely wrong and WAS shit (that includes the dance scene). That should've been much more serious.
As for the acting, I'd say it was mediocre. By now means "absolute shit." I mean, I guess it's personal preference, but when I think of "shit-acting" I think of Jamie Kennedy in Son of the Mask or Stone Cold Steve Austin in the Condemned.
And how could you not see why the Sandman was necessary? It was kind of obvious to me. It was for Peter's character development. They wanted him to confront the hatred he had for his Uncle's death one final time and put it behind him/move on. It was a huge step for him and arguabley essential for the character of Spider-Man.
I put things into revelence when it comes to movies.Same with acting. Obviously, Kennedy and Austin are worst offenders of acting but Maguire, Dunst are just as bad. They made thier characters seem like whining little bitches. It was annoying.
Couldnt they do all those things alot faster instead of making it an essential badguy? With Sandman in the movie, the movie had way to much crap to put into a movie that was less than three hours long. IF they stuck to the original storyline of Venom....Spiderman 3 would of been alot better.
Originally posted by Smasandian
I put things into revelence when it comes to movies.Same with acting. Obviously, Kennedy and Austin are worst offenders of acting but Maguire, Dunst are just as bad. They made thier characters seem like whining little bitches. It was annoying.Couldnt they do all those things alot faster instead of making it an essential badguy? With Sandman in the movie, the movie had way to much crap to put into a movie that was less than three hours long. IF they stuck to the original storyline of Venom....Spiderman 3 would of been alot better.
How about you shutup about crappy acting? They did great in these movies. You can think it was crap all you want, doesn't mean you have to keep repeating yourself. And just stop acting like wannabe critics.
From the looks of Friday B.O. numbers, PotC: At World's End should be able to best S-M3 relatively easily - unless the film is utter shite. S-M3 is looking at a comparable second week drop as XM3: The Last Stand, which will give it a second frame of somewhere along the lines of $60 mil. Shrek 3 comes out next weekend so it won't hold well into the third weekend, and PotC comes out the weekend after.
"Spider-Man 3" still rules worldwide box office
Sunday May 13 1:06 PM ET
Spider-Man kept up his box office heroics for a second weekend, as the worldwide total for the third film in the superhero trilogy hit $622 million, the film's distributor said on Sunday.
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20070513/117908679200.html
Shrek 3 will be a force to reckon with too. And that's due out this Friday.