Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Site Forums > Article Discussion > Weekly Movie Review: Spider-Man 3
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread: Weekly Movie Review: Spider-Man 3 Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Jun 1st, 2008 10:54 AM
Girl Drink Drunk You guys are pussies. Sure it was bad movie, especially compared to the previous installments, but it was still watchable.

Oh, and sorry about not noticing that this threads been dead for a while, mods and staff
Apr 16th, 2008 11:04 PM
Riot.EXE anyone notice the glaring movie continuity error in the movie pretaining to Eddie Brock himself? He's introduced as being a new employee to the bugle, however, in the second movie...he was the one that was supposed to be doing the photography for that big party with J Jonah Jamesons son, but was unavailable, so Peter was tapped to do it instead. So...apparently...someone forgot that the guy worked there already
Mar 28th, 2008 02:21 AM
dj boobs Spot on, except you gave it about 1 & 1/2 pickles too many.
Mar 27th, 2008 07:18 PM
blacksamster I was so angry that I had to sit through this movie... also, I've been hearing a lot about how Spiderman 2 is the greatest suphero movie blah blah (here and on various movie reviewing/ranking websites), which utterly confuses me, because I saw it when it first came out and remember absolutely hating it. I dunno. Different tastes? Or a psychic line from the future trying to warn me not to want to see another sequel? If only I had listened...
Mar 27th, 2008 02:41 PM
ginmortal It was fucking horrible, I do regret that I spent the money to see it, I regret that I spent the time to see this piece of crap, I regret that topher grace (what kind of name is that?) played venom (aside from Dolph Lundgren who else fits the "eddie brock profile"??) I mean, overcrowding, poor character development, laughable acting at best, emo parker, flying skateboards, this is an utter piece of shit, the only thing that stands out was the sandman, the only guy that actully did some acting. I don't think I could stomach watching this again.
Mar 27th, 2008 01:40 AM
Jaimas During the "dance" scene in the movie, I recall specifically looking around and seeing people shift, uncomfortably, in their seats. It was ridiculously awkward. I also specifically recall the scene in which Parker slaps Mary Jane, because there was not a single person in the theatre who didn't laugh at it.
Mar 26th, 2008 11:10 PM
IXCE I think everything has already been said but god I can't stop talking about how I was so disappointed with this movie. I was also worried about the film when I heard that there would be 3 villains in the film. I was at least hoping that Venom would just appear just as the credits roll to make people wait for the next Spidey flick.
Mar 26th, 2008 08:45 PM
Drunken_Lemur408 Did anyone else notice that third tier characters were allowed monolouges? The butler and Stan Lee did not deserve that much screen time.
Mar 26th, 2008 02:38 PM
goldenbane I hated the dancing crap. Why on Earth did they include that? It felt like it took 12 hours to get through it. MJ was such a fucking bitch in this movie, that she really didn't deserve the screen time she got.

I don't know if any of you noticed this...but this wasn't "Spiderman" this was "Tobyman." I think Spiderman appears...in full costume...red or black...for about 3 minutes. The rest of the time he's either unmasked, out of costume, or "so torn up he's basically just Peter Parker." If there is a 4th movie, and that fat idiot Toby McGuire is cast again...he better keep that fucking mask ON. I don't need to know that he's playing Spidey. Put that fucking mask on, keep it on, and go fight crime!
Mar 26th, 2008 08:48 AM
Kilgore Cod Like most people who saw it in theaters, I was very disappointed when I first saw it. I saw it a second time on DVD and I found it much better than I had originally thought. When you take away all the studio bullshit, the multiple forced villains and the questionable acting, you're left with a very good story about losing something important to you and fighting to get it back. IMO the movie should had just stuck with Sandman as its sole villain. I really liked how the character was portrayed and it could had rivaled Doc Ock as the best superhero movie villain if done properly.

Raimi had stated numerous times that he pretty much hates the Venom character and had no desire to put him on screen. Alot of today's comic fans forget that the Venom character didn't exist until 1988, so he's still a relatively "new" character in comic history.

I'd have no problem if there was an entire re-casting of the main roles for Part 4. Both Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst have outlived their usefulness. The magic they had from part 1 is clearly long gone.
Mar 26th, 2008 03:03 AM
Captain PirateFace I say remove all previous characters including spider man from the series and just have Bruce Campbell kicking random peoples asses saying random cool shit.
Mar 26th, 2008 01:06 AM
captain516 Sandman should've gotten a bigger role, 'cause the guy playing him was fantastic. I couldn't help but laugh at Harry's "flying skateboard", and the final battle was mediocre at best.
Mar 26th, 2008 12:54 AM
Jonny#5 Not the worst comic movie I've ever seen (those fantastic four movies take that "prestigous" award), it was still lousy. I guess it made sense that the movie sucked, since it seems that the studio was making the project a living hell for Raimi. I wouldn't be surprised if he made the movie suck on purpose as a way of saying to those executives "f*** you".
Mar 26th, 2008 12:19 AM
GRUMPYNZ And how idiotic is Harry conveniently getting amnesia for most of the movie?! And what a lame way to wrap-up the whole Sandman thing (without giving away any spoliers in case someone reads this review and still wants to see this shit-fest of a movie).
Mar 25th, 2008 05:07 PM
Butters I skipped this one after hearing about there being three villains. I saw X3, and didn't want to make the same mistake twice.

My friends told me about it after they saw it, and they were disappointed. It seems like, when it comes to movies, the "third" one tends to be the one that blows in comparison to the previous two.
Mar 25th, 2008 12:03 PM
Herratik Proto, I'm with you. One of the best scenes IMO was when peter "accidentally" backhands MJ at the jazz club. That says a lot about this movie. I think Raimi was a victim of the dreaded "studio interference" (although why he couldn't call the shots on this one, after two huge successes is still a mystery) I was most disappointed for the same reason I hated X3, they took a great 3-part story arc and completely ignored it to shoehorn in more characters. Venom should have been hinted at in the last 10-15 minutes and then.... Spidey 4: Enter the Lizard, S5: Venom. Now, if I ever get to see Deadpool killing sybiotic dinosaurs in Manhattan, while Spidey and the FF help out? I might forgive Marvel and Raimi for S3.
Mar 25th, 2008 11:26 AM
BakaGaijin I really think they should've stuck with 2 villains for part 3 and then did Fantastic Four/Spiderman crossover films for the Venom story. Maybe a 3rd FF film that has a plot not centralized around the suit, but something with space and aliens and the symbiote. It ends with Peter meeting the FF, getting the black suit, and then the 4th Spidey movie would be about Peter shedding the suit and it ultimately becoming Venom.
Mar 25th, 2008 10:15 AM
Grishnak The whole problem is, I think, that the producers forced Raimi in a direction he did not want to take... The original script did not include Venom (aaargh, McFarlane!) and was supposed to have the Vulture as the OTHER villain. So all the symbiote costume storyline was somehow forced in there... And the Vulture was supposed to be performed by none other than Ben Kingsley... Now, Ghandi as the Vulture? I would have paid a pretty penny to see that!
Mar 25th, 2008 09:47 AM
mr_evilmonkey Why was Kiersten Dunst cast as Mary Jane in the first place? She is about as attractive as an old shoe at the side of the road. the comic book MJ is supposed be a frigging lingerie model.
Mar 25th, 2008 09:37 AM
argonath After a good first movie and a great sequel, I knew the fuck up would be coming. When I heard Sandman was in it, I thought "Cool. Seems like a strange choice to base the whole movie on, but...cool." Then I heard Venom was in it, and that's when my bullshit meter went fully into the red. When the New Goblin was announced as well, the movie went completely off my radar. I eventually caught a matinee at the second-run theater ($2 Tuesdays, woohoo!), and I'm glad I waited. Too crowded by characters and too much pop culture got in the way of the story.

And when the fuck is the Lizard going to get some screentime? Jesus, they've been setting that character up for 3 movies now.
Mar 25th, 2008 05:20 AM
D-MoN And the real kicker is I liked the Sandman cheracter. Apart from the utterly rediculous connection to Peter Parker I thought the guy playing him was cool and I wanted to see an entire movie with just him and Spider Man duking it out. Maybe introduce the black costume and at the end give us a glimpse of the dark side of it's powers. That would have been a good movie but they were so concerened with ramming as much possible crap in there as possible that the potential for a great cheracter and a neat rivalry was totally pissed on so we could get Venom.. yes Venom. Venom was pretty cool but I gotta back Prot here. The whole fucking thing was so forced and so played that instead of seeing something like the first two movies which were totally unbelievable yet at the same time played out in a natural way we got to basically watch a video game on screen, ascending level by level with no cheracter development.

And the Emo shit.. for fucks sakes... can't these Goddamned Emo kids just show the backbone they do on their blogs and fucking kill themselves so we don't have to be subjected to the even smaller, whinier (if that's possible) offshoot of Goths.
Mar 25th, 2008 05:14 AM
D-MoN This movie had all the potential to be great and then they had to stuff every possible thing into it and still used Kristin Dunst, the ugliest chick possible they could have picked to play Mary Jane. It was ass. Total ass. What a fucking disapointment.
Mar 24th, 2008 11:54 PM
saturnknight downloaded the movie, hated it. Bought the novel, it was much better. The multi character development is more possible confined in the 2-300 page novel based on the movie. and getting a grasp on what the chatacters are thinking makes it more understandable
Mar 24th, 2008 11:45 PM
Jaimas Fuck, Mary Jane was awful. By this movie, she already knows Peter's Spider-Man. She has absolutely no fucking reason to treat him like a total fuckface. She's as guilty in this shitfest of a movie as Peter Parker is.

I believe that the spirit of Joe Quesada infected this movie.
Mar 24th, 2008 10:44 PM
Molly I liked it. Always something going on..because there are a million characters but still. Could have been better, could have been worse. But it didn't bore me.

The "emo" thing is annoying. I guess because his hair is black he MUST be emo. He was like..a womanizing asshole. Not exactly emo.

And, yes, he cried. His wife-to-be broke up with him. The entire world must be made out of stone hearted bad asses who would clearly not flinch if such a thing were to happen to them.
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:55 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.