Regarding Spiderman 3

I watched a 10 minutes promotional clip of Spiderman 3 tonight, and even from these 10 minutes I was able to to determine that what most people are bitching about, is true: Spiderman-3 has a rushed storyline. Some said that this movie should have been 2 movies, but I disagree. Even 10 more minutes would have saved this movie (142 minutes instead of 132). The devil is in the details, in the small shots that at a first glance don’t feel important, but they do provide a more “realistic” feel to a movie or show.

For example, the scenes of Spiderman’s transformation to Venom, it was rushed like hell. He is one person and then he is another (with all what that encompasses) within 3 minutes. There was no transformation process, just a switch. It just felt rushed in a way that: if you were the director, you had all the right scenes shot, but you also had the studios’ bosses on your ass all the time to shout at you “trim it more, trim it more, film costs money!“.

I sure hope there will be a director’s cut DVD edition where the movie doesn’t feel so rushed.


Adam Scheinberg wrote on May 14th, 2007 at 8:14 AM PST:

Spider-man 3 was WAY too rushed. The fact is, the black suit story could have unfolded across THREE movies by itself. Instead, it was a 10 second novelty. The Sandman storyline was silly because the Flint Marko character is supposed to be someone for whom we feel sorry. And the Harry thing is just silly… why didn’t his butler talk to him… oh, I don’t know… YEARS before?!?!

The entire thing was entertaining as an installment to a series, but the film doesn’t stand by itself. It’s way too much story, and as a result, none of it is well told, not even the Venom parts. I did enjoy Topher Grace though.

Thom Holwerda wrote on May 14th, 2007 at 8:16 AM PST:

What are you guys complaining about. It had Kirsten Dunst in it.


Memsom wrote on May 14th, 2007 at 9:07 AM PST:

Yeah, it feels rushed. The problem is really that the plot lines aren’t really intertwined well enough. There are 3 seperate lines, Harry/Green Goblin (that from the ending of Spiderman 2 should have been a bigger thing in this one), the Sandman storyline (rushed, didn’t really go very much anywhere) and the Venom storyline (including the rival that steals Peter Parker’s limelight.) Add to that the underlying Mary-Jane love thing, and you end up with quite a lot to pack in to the time.

I found that the Sandman part started well, but they never really developed the character past a typical “Batman” ’60’s TV show style villain. The back story was a little vague and the progression to the end role the character had was too fast.

Harry/Green Goblin… looked like it could have been much more. Harry’s story line fizzled. I was expecting him to go all “Hob Goblin” or something, but he realy didn’t go much past 2 fight scenes and a little dialog to establish his amnesia.

Venom – well this part was best done. The film should have revolved around this storyline, but it kept going back and forth between the other two main lines which didn;t really help. It reminded me a lot of Superman 3. Where Richard Pryor has created the Red Kryptonite that makes Superman go bad. Really similar idea. I’m sure Spidey did it independedntly, but, well it was very similar.

The film should have been about an hour longer. That way it would have felt a lot less rushed. I mean, it all comes together at the end, but it also goes all Hollywood ending too. What they needed to do was one of these:

1) Lessen the human element. Remove most of Peter Parker’s real life – including MJ.
2) Remove Sandman and have Harry be the end bad guy with Venom.
3) Remove Harry.

The director did exactly what the director avoided in Spiderman 2… too much information packed into to little time.

Tom Dison wrote on May 14th, 2007 at 9:05 AM PST:

But if the storie line was more developed (see: longer), there would have been more Kirsten Dunst.


Comments are closed as this blog post is now archived.

Lines, paragraphs break automatically. HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The URI to TrackBack this blog entry is this. And here is the RSS 2.0 for comments on this post.