SOC
07-05-2007, 07:28 AM
Memo Avi Arad — when you hire a filmmaker as clever and talented as Sam Raimi, and said filmmaker delivers a pair of movies that pull in more than $1.5 billion worldwide ... you DO NOT interfere with his vision for the next one. It's no secret that Venom only appears in Spider-Man 3 because exec producer Arad insisted on it — Raimi was never a big fan of the extraterrestrial villian that's hugely popular with younger fans of the comic. But much of what's wrong with the web-slinger's third outing comes down to the presence of Venom.
First things first — the plot. After almost giving up his superhero tights for good in Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker has now come to terms with his fate, and is actually coming to like the public adulation he's receiving from New Yorkers. And his personal life is on the up too; in fact, his relationship with Mary Jane Watson is going so well he's planning to propose. Even an aiirborne tussle with former best bud Harry Osborne — now in the guise of New Goblin, still blaming Spider-Man for the death of his father — can't bring Pete down. Of course, it won't last. Not with a new villain — The Sandman — in town. And toss in the Venom symbiote and you have one busy, overcrowded plot.
Let's be frank — Spider-Man 3 is pretty disappointing. As the first summer blockbuster of the year, and with such high anticipation, it really is quite a letdown. On the plus side, the set pieces and action scenes are truly amazing and spectacular; the advances in CGI since the second outing have to be seen to be believed. And there are some nice comedic touches, particular from Raimi pal Bruce Campbell as a French maitre'd. But the plot is too busy, and much of it a retread from Spider-Man 2. And with one too many villains, it's starting to move into (*shudder*) Batman & Robin territory.
Never mind. It really doesn't matter what critics say (and reviews so far have been very mixed) — Spider-Man 3 will rake in bucketloads of cash, and there will definitely be a Spider-Man 4 (and probably a 5 and 6, too). But whether Raimi, Maguire et al will be back remains to be seen.
First things first — the plot. After almost giving up his superhero tights for good in Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker has now come to terms with his fate, and is actually coming to like the public adulation he's receiving from New Yorkers. And his personal life is on the up too; in fact, his relationship with Mary Jane Watson is going so well he's planning to propose. Even an aiirborne tussle with former best bud Harry Osborne — now in the guise of New Goblin, still blaming Spider-Man for the death of his father — can't bring Pete down. Of course, it won't last. Not with a new villain — The Sandman — in town. And toss in the Venom symbiote and you have one busy, overcrowded plot.
Let's be frank — Spider-Man 3 is pretty disappointing. As the first summer blockbuster of the year, and with such high anticipation, it really is quite a letdown. On the plus side, the set pieces and action scenes are truly amazing and spectacular; the advances in CGI since the second outing have to be seen to be believed. And there are some nice comedic touches, particular from Raimi pal Bruce Campbell as a French maitre'd. But the plot is too busy, and much of it a retread from Spider-Man 2. And with one too many villains, it's starting to move into (*shudder*) Batman & Robin territory.
Never mind. It really doesn't matter what critics say (and reviews so far have been very mixed) — Spider-Man 3 will rake in bucketloads of cash, and there will definitely be a Spider-Man 4 (and probably a 5 and 6, too). But whether Raimi, Maguire et al will be back remains to be seen.