Let downs of that sort are to be expected once in a while, however for “Spider-Man 3”, the danger of disappointment is even greater. With this film, the creative team are attempting to follow “Spider-Man 2”, one of the most successful comic book movies of all time, both commercially and artistically. “Spider-Man 2” had it all: an entertaining story, a terrific villain, and an overall sense of fun that elevated it beyond the usual “Elektra” and “Fantastic Four” level fare.
With “Spider-Man 3”, the idea seems to be not only to succeed the previous film, but to outdo it as well. There are more villains, the story is more complex, and the film itself is physically longer. Unfortunately, as with many things, bigger doesn’t necessarily equal better. In reality, this film doesn’t feel bigger or more intense, just kind of cramped. It’s still a fun ride, but one that could’ve done better with some serious trimming.
As the film opens, life is, for a change, looking up for Peter Parker (Toby Maguire) AKA Spider-Man. He’s a beloved public figure, his hot girlfriend Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) is starring on Broadway… things are just kind of falling into place. However, good fortune is fleeting, and soon Peter is besieged with problems: an unscrupulous photographer (Topher Grace) is horning in on his Spider-Man photography duties, MJ’s performance is panned by critics, and a mysterious black goop has started to bond with Peter, turning his Spidey suit black and giving him enhanced abilities and aggression.
Beyond those worries, as Spider-Man Peter has to contend with a trio of baddies- The New Goblin, who is also his former best friend Harry (James Franco), super-powered thief The Sandman (Thomas Hayden Church), and the rival photographer Eddie Brock, who eventually morphs into Spidey’s arch-nemesis Venom. By any stretch, Peter has his plate full in this one.
Perhaps there is too much story for this particular film. Like with the third X-Men film, there seems to be a sense of undue urgency here- it’s as if those involved feel this could be their last go at this, so they are attempting to fit as much story in as possible and just went a little too far. Consider the Sandman plot: he’s a reluctant criminal who steals to support his ailing daughter., who also may have killed Peter’s beloved Uncle Ben. He’s an interesting character with a decent story, which loosely ties into the overall themes of revenge and forgiveness inherent in the black suit plotline.
Is it absolutely vital for him to appear in this film though? Not particularly- most of the vengeance angle is already covered with Peter’s relationships with Harry and Eddie. Having them repeated in the Sandman story certainly show how Peter’s choices are different from the other two, but that‘s not something that necessarily needs it‘s own plotline to develop. As it stands, each of the four big story ideas, Sandman, Venom, Goblin, and the black suit, could potentially command a ninety minute feature. Trying to fit them all, along with Peter’s myriad relationship issues , into a three hour epic means that they all get a little short changed.
Uncle Ben once told Peter that “with great power comes great responsibility.” Someone needed to remind the producers that they had the power to act responsibly, and give “Spider-Man 3” room to breathe.
|
Anne Hedley
Written by Guest on 2007-05-25 17:21:47
well the Spider films may be the best things since sliced bread BUT I will never watch one. Why ? Nothing aginst the actor at all BT I want to see a face and I want expression which draws you closer to the film in the action and emotion. Take for instance Wolverine in X Men all the human emotions and expressions but not so he is a mutant but the actor has made us believe in him |
Powered by AkoComment 2.0!
Entertainment
Art
