Spider-Man 3

A very inconsistent movie and unnecessarily long. Raimi didn’t learn his lesson from the mistakes in the first two movies he made, far from it, he even makes them again and again, making this extremely painful to watch. The screenplay is bad, real bad. After getting rid of the whole original mythology it creates a brand new one, only much worse. What worked in the first two movies is completely out of place here, landing Parker in illogical situations and what he then does is more than just bizarre (I can’t even call it pretentious) humiliating himself in front of the viewer. I was literally praying for Parker to get into his suit or for the story moves to focus on one of the many villains. The action is great as usual and Venom, as I see it, was pretty good, but there should be hell of a lot more of him. Sandman’s tricks are among the high points of the movie although Flint Marko himself comes across a bit stiff. The biggest surprise was the character of Harry Osborn who became a much bigger hero than Spider-Man himself. (11/06/2007)

Average, sometimes incredibly bad and naive. Raimi wanted everything - depth and fun - and he came up with awkward CGI coloring pages with an unconvincing protagonist and such conspicuous clichés that they can't even be enjoyed. Visually, Spidey offers nothing new, and inside the film rumbles like an empty barrel, despite trying to look very wise and thoughtful. Taken as a whole, it doesn't hold together in any way, and Maguira's performance is truly the culmination... This was simple not very good. (07/11/2008)

My favorite part of the trilogy and apart from Kirsten Dunst, Bryce Dallas Howard is also a nice addition. I have no idea where the mistake was made, but keep the same satisfied audience for five years if they have enough of it. In retrospect, I appreciate many things, including the compactness of the series, the light humor, and the use of a generous number of characters. And I certainly don't feel that there is too much pathos. They’ve taken some of it away compared to the second one, which is much more extreme. And MJ at the theater? A total fairy tale. (13/02/2011)

A triple portion of moralizing nonsense, tastelessly worn-out sentiment, and the fact that all good people will live a happy life, while all the bad ones will burn in hell. Sam Raimi must have had a fever during filming if he thought that this transparent, boring, and worn-out nonsense would satisfy the viewers who were expecting a golden peak after the original first film and its action-packed sequel. Instead of a peak, there is a tragic downfall, Spider-Man has become an idiot pointing finger-guns at passers-by, wearing a dreadful hairstyle, Mary Jane throws wisdom around like a shaman of an ancient African tribe in her twenties, and Harry Osborne sees his deceased father in the mirror. Some of the supporting roles may have been decent, but the rest is an annoying, dull, and visually repulsive (incredibly obvious presence of computers) ride where the beginning fizzles out of your head before you even see the end. (02/10/2007)

Raimi completed his dream series, and even if the whole world berated him for the ending not turning out well, there will always be one comic book fan who will be forever grateful for such a packed finale. In such a complicatedly developed story, nothing had to turn out well at all, and that's why I am even more shocked that this director is perfect for me for the first time in his career. Successful and happy Peter swaps roles with his dissatisfied love, and once again, the problems do not only remain in the superhero realm. Most of us, however, were expecting action, and once again, it takes our breath away. Typical Spiderman villain Sandman, Hamlet-like Harry, and my favorite Venom have finally had their moment of glory, and during the grand resolution, all of my nerves and senses remained tense until the very last moment. Spider's best part and the most amazing farewell to the series that could have happened to the group around Tobey Maguire. (09/05/2007)