Spider-Man 3

This is a wonderfully imagined, heartfelt piece of pop entertainment that soars not only for its spectacular eye candy, but also during the moments when its protagonists simply stand still and talk to each other. How many comic-book movies can you say that about?

There are delicious bits aplenty in Spider-Man 3 for those who care to notice.

What saves Spider-Man 3 from becoming well, "Superman III," is the fact that it's still a solid film that packs a punch when it comes to turn on the spectacle.

The main flaw is an over-abundance of villains, a bout of narrative greediness that sees them marching out of their lairs like so many evil-doers-on-parade.

Given how bogus the movie is whenever it departs from formula, it's not surprising that the funniest bit (in which Peter Parker becomes a disco smoothie) is stolen from Jerry Lewis's "The Nutty Professor" or that the best special effects, involving a gigantic Sandman, dimly echo "King Kong."

Though aspects of it are entertaining, the presence of all these mismatched pieces give Spider-Man 3 an ungainly, cumbersome feeling, as if its plot elements were the product of competing contractors who never saw the need to cooperate on a coherent final product.

"Spider-Man 2" was a textbook example of how to make a sequel: Deepen it, make it funnier, give it more heart and come up with a strong villain and a good story. Spider Man 3, by contrast, shows how not to make a sequel.

Spiderman 3 review I saw this movie in theaters may 4 2007 one of my favorite movies of all time seen 11 billion times I love everything about it I love films panvision and Dolby vision it’s made everything looks great 5 star 10 out 10 star 100 out 100 star

Greetings from Lithuania. "Spider-Man 3" (2007) was a deeply flawed film from the original trilogy. It is the weakest one by far due its inconsistency in tone and honestly just a poor script. It felt like they run out of ideas when it came to a third and wanted it to make even more light and kids friendly. Almost none of the funny bits lands, and it all felt like there were villians first, and then some plot was put around them. The conveniences in plot are mind-blowing, like characters appearing in a place and time when they need to for plot to advance. And don't even start with the whole "Bully Maguire" sequence - it was truly way to much even for a film that clearly didn't take itself to serious.Overall, some very impressive CGI characters did made it for a spectacular looking film. It is still entertaining enough to watch.

Do I still thinks it the best one?- No as looking back at it I felt they tried to be more dazzle with this one as they didn’t want to disappoint with the idea’s they had in stock.I felt the characters still kept evolving but I felt it needed to clutter a little as it added more characters than it needed but what I will say is I liked how they added flashback images into the intro of the previous 2 films to show how far they have came in the trilogy and journey. My only con wasn’t a fan of the Eddie Brock and Venom as I felt Topher Grace just tried too much of going on about being a big fan of the character which kind lost it little to much of a boyhood fan of the comics.

At the onset of his third big-picture treatment, we find young Peter Parker in an unfamiliar predicament: he's genuinely happy! Almost annoyingly so, in fact. Even his longtime love interest, Mary Jane Watson, seems to think he's laying it on too thick and tries to tell him as much in a series of awkward, abbreviated conversations between crime-fighting bouts. Parker pays no mind, of course, produces a string of awful motivational speeches when she needs emotional support and swiftly swings himself straight back onto the singles scene. Well, that didn't take long. Now Spidey is sad again! Just in time to tangle with three(!) competing super-villains, a rival in the workplace and a major league identity crisis. Not unlike its predecessors, Spider-Man 3 has way too much going on, a problem that's ballooned with each subsequent installment. The first two films manage to succeed in spite of this weakness, persevering with a great shared cast, strong character moments and well-earned payoffs. In those films, Pete's best pal Harry Osborn slowly works his way through a patient, simmering villainous turn. Here, he's abruptly hot-shotted in the opening action scene, carelessly reset and cast aside until the finale. Venom is birthed and dispensed in less than an act. Sandman's arc has enough emotional heft to single-handedly carry the counter narrative, but he always feels like a third wheel. Gwen Stacey pops in and out of the frame at random. There's just no room for these subplots to breathe amidst all the frantic competition, the race to grab every last thread and hurriedly weave them into something loosely resembling a story. Maybe with a touch of nuance and panache, a skilled director could have worked a little magic and turned this troubled script into an acceptable early-period superhero flick. Sam Raimi is anything but a nuanced director. At best, he's capable but limited, habitually caught in the act of winking at his own shortcomings in uniquely entertaining ways. No wonder he's best regarded for his gleefully deranged horror movies, where over-stressed people behave irrationally (and a little comically) in high-pressure situations. Under ideal circumstances, Raimi can incorporate his eccentricities into the fabric of a film without negatively affecting its story, but not with so many other jobs on his plate. I'm not sure if the hammy over-acting is his fault or the stars’, but I tend to lean toward the former because it's so hopelessly widespread. Nothing feels natural in this film, from the janky dialogue and clumsy delivery to the rushed primary character arc and dated special effects. I can still remember how this felt in the theater, bad enough that I avoided revisiting it for nearly fifteen years, and it hasn't improved with time. I can see bits and pieces of promise dotted here and there, hints that the overachieving Spider-Man 2 wasn't just a fluke, but they're drowned by the hurry to expand an already-crowded universe and get everything back to an unconvincing status quo in time for the closing credits. Disastrously inept.

Хуже фильма про человека-паук я еще не видел...