Spider-Man 3

After a gap of seven years, I watched the third "Spider-Man" movie again and I have to admit that it is even worse than I remember. It is incredibly cliché and the screenplay is sometimes even stupid. Important storylines are closed simply or with an easy plot twist, which is not even believable. The potential of new characters, especially Venom, is completely wasted. It's not a complete disaster, but at times it's not even great entertainment. What a pity. Hopefully, "The Amazing Spider-Man" will maintain a good level with its future installments. (05/04/2014)

The garishness of the coarsest, er... grain. The longer the film goes on, the worse it gets, and the soap opera-like romantic plot is definitely one of the worst things poor Spider-Man has ever had to contend with. In the scenes where he's supposed to be evil and obsessive, Tobey Maguire shows that he's more good at overacting than acting, and Mary Jane's jealous exit is an ordeal. Yet Sandman would have been a decent villain if he had been given more space, as his birth scene is one of the best ever seen in a comic book movie. Seriously, no irony. Most of all, Spider-Man 3 looks like an attempt to make "something like Tim Burton's Batman Returns" that didn't work. (11/05/2015)

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)

The first two episodes boasted that unique Raimi’s signature that makes me appreciate them as modest little-big movies created out of pure love for the original comics. Compared to them, the third one is fake, pompous and seemingly hungry not for the support of the fans but for a big chunk of money... A blockbuster that is noisier, more megalomaniacal and more sprawling than its two predecessors, mocking itself in a figuratively and emotionally overblown finale that juxtaposes a heartfelt life confession and a tearful J.K. Simmons haggling with a little girl over how much she wants for her camera. Raimi’s direction is still better than good, the action sequences have the proper charge and the illegibility of the main character saves everything, but this is no longer the original Spiderman, it lacks personality and a surprising motif, just like all current comic book adaptations. 65% (21/07/2012)

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)