SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - The REAL Spider-Man 3 Thread... and SLIMER!

Posted: May 04 2007 04:27 am

Everything I love about TV is pretty much Spider-Man 3 and more. I'm pissed off movies can't be more like it. Don't give me this 90 minute cookie cutter crap. Give me lots of plot, lots of character driven scenes, dramatic scenes, romantic scenes, funny scenes, and ACTION ACTION ACTION!

It felt like Robocop 2 in a lot of ways, but plays better to the audience.

And how awesome was Venom!?

And those endings felt like a major "fuck you" to the critics of 2.

Edit: Man, I get wacky at three in the morning on the best drug of all... Shocked

But I liked it, although, I will say the negative backlash is beginning... I'll also say my packed theater was pretty evenly split between males and females Wink

Edit Edit: I feel like I should warn against some bad CG... Okay, a lot of noticable CG. But I usually liked whenever a CG effect turned into a real effect... Not vice versa though...

Posted: May 04 2007 12:46 pm

that movie was totally awesome... if only they could deny tickets to jerks who talk during the whole movie...

needless to say, i'll be seeing it again tomorrow

Posted: May 04 2007 02:55 pm

To relate this to current events, you might recognize "Steve" as the Ex-/Commodore from Pirates of the Carribean.

Posted: May 04 2007 03:24 pm

I went to the first showing today and I liked it. There was a little bit to much Romance but Venom was awesome for the time he was there. How bout Peter popping his collar and dancing down the street. Douchebaggery but funny nonetheless. There was about 70 guys and 3 girls there. That doesn't seem like the proper mix as what i've read.

Posted: May 04 2007 05:35 pm

I went to go see it in Manhattan, Times Square, and I cut school, with an army of 10 of my dudes and girlfriend, to see it!

The movie theater was literally PACKED TO THE FUCKIN' WALLS. and some idiot kids go thrown out for throwing popcorn everywhere. When there were no more seats available, thay had people stand up in the back. It was fuckin' crazy. Oh, and here, there was an equal amount of women and men.

All I can say is, the movie is one of the greatest things I ever saw.

Posted: May 04 2007 09:09 pm

monachetti wrote:

that movie was totally awesome... if only they could deny tickets to jerks who talk during the whole movie...

That was my experience. But, someone usually shouted just the right inappropriate thing at just the right time.

And no one should ever deny someone else tickets, unless that man is Bruce Campbell. Wink

Title: Scientist Joined: Jan 11 2007 Posts: 210

So I just saw spider-man three.
It's very close to being the worst superhero movie I've seen in a few years.

The is pretty tightly sewn, of course without such holes as the sandman being uncle-bens apparent killer.

Onto the rest of the movie.

[SPOILERS AHEAD GENTLEMEN]

The first half is pretty good, but it's here that you notice that it hasn't even gotten to the black-suit yet and Peter Parker is a douchebag, a really, really big douchebag. The fight scenes and confrontations are good and keep you intertained though it could use much less Peter-Parker Mary-Jane whinefest.
The potential Lizardman is introduced, as well as building up the potential-girl for the next movie, namely:
Gwen Stacy. The first half ends with the black costume taking Peter over and the movie officially becomes "Spider-Dick" Stan Lee shows up too.

The second half of the movie is spent totally campy and pretty much almost killed my faith in the movie, as you realize how fat Peter Parker is when you his double-chin for the sixtieth time in a close up shot. Yes there is bad music, yes Peter jazz dances, yes he dresses like an emo-kid. Yes he pretty much manages to piss off just about every important character in the movie. There are some things wrapped up here, some of the drama between characters and a bit more maturing for peter.

Third half of the movie is where it all comes together, You've got venom, sandman, conflicts, conclusions? What's wrong with it: It's drawn out with too much stuff that just doesn't fit. The end of the movie battle pretty much ruins any chances of Carnage ever appearing, or a sinister six. I'm looking forward to toby maguires ugly mug being out of the next film.

Posted: May 05 2007 05:24 am

A "third half?"

Title: Scientist Joined: Jan 11 2007 Posts: 210

Yes because it drags on forever

Posted: May 05 2007 03:40 pm

I saw it last night, and I was somewhat disappointed. My guess is that Sam Raimi and the screenwriters figured that there's a good chance Tobey won't come back for the 4th movie so he proceeded to stuff too much into one movie. It seemed to drag on for too long when they could've ended it a half-hour earlier and cut out some of the uber-fluff.

The action was good, most of the plot was good, the CG was so/so. The MJ/Peter break-up progressed too quickly because they were cramming in THREE villains while trying to keep the main story (romance) from floundering.

It seems Harry became a good guy way too quickly (one talk from the butler and he's a changed man? riiiiight). How do you kill Spiderman's (arguably) #1 enemy, PLUS The 2nd Green Goblin, PLUS show Sandman ceasing to be a problem for Peter, and THEN not give us an indication of what enemy may come next.

Also, I'm torn about how "black suit" Peter acted. I get that while he's trying to be "badass" he's still really a dork (the 1920's language, the arrogance, etc.), but the piano bit? The jazz dancing? Dumb. Really dumb. The Spiderman canon has always been about a dork who gets powers and struggles with them amidst trying to have a normal, real life. Watching the other 2 movies, you always felt as if this could really happen in the sense that you were identifying with the character. You can't identify with the slapstick crap they were pulling in the 3rd movie, even if it wasn't "really" Peter.

The bottom line: it was cool to see Spiderman, it was cool to see the villains, but Raimi tried to do too much in too short a time and it killed the movie. I never thought I'd say that a Spiderman movie would drag, but it did. It went on forever, and I'm disappointed.

Posted: May 05 2007 04:07 pm

Tobey did say he would do a 4th movie in the series if the script was good and certain people came back, I'm assuming MJ. I don't know what he considers a good script...walking around the streets looking emo with a popped collar doesn't seem like something he would look for in a script. But regardless I consider this an semi-good movie. It's in my top three spider-man movies.

S.Mc. I completely agree with the cramming. It definitly seemed like he was trying to fit to much into what could be his last Spider-man movie. Venom and the Goblin would have been sufficent. Why bring Ben's REAL killer back into it and completely mind fuck Peter.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

Much better than X-Men 3.

Much better.

Being a complete Venom mark, I wasn't too thrilled with how they handled him in the movie, but it was great to see him on the big screen at all, and he wasn't as destroyed as he could have been.

I thought that the second Goblin (who wasn't even good enough to get a supervillan name besides "New Goblin" for his action figure) was retarded, but Sandman kicked ass.

Not the best in the series by a long shot, but not horrendous either. I think the problem is that they tried to cram too much into one movie. I think a better approach would have been to have Venom show up at the end, and use him as the villan for the next movie, and have Sandman be the main focus, with a little bit of Harry (who they should have just gone the way of the ultimate spiderman comics and made him a Hobgoblin, because "New Goblin" is just stupid) to get things moving. Also, that whole brain damage and memory loss part wasn't needed.

Then again, I'm not a movie writer or a director, so what do I know?

The fight choreography was awesome as usual. They really know how to bring out the best of these character's abilities in these scenes. Danny Elfman's score was also excellent, but I would expect no less from the man who gave us the Batman theme.

Agree? Disagree? Argue with me here, people.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

and because I HAVE to double post, I think Sandman was important to why Peter was being so aggressive and tormented.

also, without him, Peter would be just whining about a girl, and couple that with the emo hair, and you KNOW what would happen.

ohyeah, and theres still a piece of the symbiote in connor's lab.

Posted: May 05 2007 09:03 pm

Wait, so Elfman ended up doing the SM3 score? Last I heard, he had walked off the project, called scoring Spider-Man 2 a "miserable experience", and swore he'd never work with Sam Raimi again.

I guess Sony must have found some way ($$$) to convince him to come back into the fold.

Joined: Aug 25 2005 Posts: 287

Syd, Elfman is only credited with doing the "original theme". Everything else was done by some other dude.

The movie... yeah, it was NO "X-Men 3". I wouldn't insult it that badly. But JESUS. Usually I'm all for slow character scenes, but this was like... 90 minutes of Peter Parker crying and then some fights.

Minor, Minor Spoilers:

And what was up with him getting all emo-y? Like, he flipped his hair when he was wearing the black suit and it looked like he had eyeliner on. I want Pete Parker, not Pete Wentz, dammit.

And they laid the cheese on pretty thick in a few places... and this is coming from someone who LIKES the "Star Wars" movies and all the bad romances they entail.

END MINOR, MINOR SPOILERS.

It's worth seeing and it has plenty of good scenes/sequences. The pacing, to me, just felt... off. Bruce Campbell for the motherfucking win, though.

Posted: May 05 2007 10:01 pm

SPOLIERS*****

I'll argue and agree with you Jew how bout that.
I liked Sandman he was pretty kickass. That I can agree with. The big thing he turned into at the end...a little much. They could have easily left him out though, and used Harry to piss off Peter by what he had already done. a.k.a stealing Mary Jane...again...and trying to kill him.

Peter throwing the bomb back at Harry...AWESOME...Sandman saying i'm sorry I killed your uncle, it was an accident...then peter saying oh its alright you learned your lesson, now I;m going to be all non comformist and wear this Straight Edge T-Shirt...not so awesome.

I was honestly surprised they didn't add in Dr. Connors as a bad guy as well. Theres no way if they make another Spiderman movie they will use just Dr. Connors they will have to use another villian as well. Most likely they will use some crappy ones like Rhino or the Vulture. When they should be using Carnage, and should have kept Eddie alive so Carnage could come around how he actually did. Now they would have to think of something ridiculous to get Carnage in the picture.

Sorry for ranting so long and sorry for not arguing more. There was a thing on the news here that said 98% of the movie viewers were women. That and Jew is Dum, like a rok, and he smells of Jewish type things like Hanakauh and....and Kwanza. OOOOooooooo.

Posted: May 06 2007 01:35 pm

Kojjiro the Angry wrote:

Third half of the movie

We call that THE THIRD ACT in the biz. Spidey 3 has a very clear three act structure. Possibly even the dreaded/beloved 9 act structure where the 3 acts each have acts of their own.

greeneyedzeke wrote:

Syd, Elfman is only credited with doing the "original theme". Everything else was done by some other dude.

CHRISTOPHER YOUNG!!! Evil

Douche McCallister wrote:

I was honestly surprised they didn't add in Dr. Connors as a bad guy as well. Theres no way if they make another Spiderman movie they will use just Dr. Connors they will have to use another villian as well. Most likely they will use some crappy ones like Rhino or the Vulture. When they should be using Carnage, and should have kept Eddie alive so Carnage could come around how he actually did. Now they would have to think of something ridiculous to get Carnage in the picture.

Just wait... Lizard is coming. And Vulture will only be done if played by Sir Ben Kingsley.

And am I the only person who thought [SPOILERS] Eddit didn't die? He appeared to fuse with the suit there and as long as a drop remains, he'll be back.

Title: Scientist Joined: Jan 11 2007 Posts: 210

How was the pie?

Also, I'm still hoping tobey maguire and kirsten dunce don't sign on for a fourth spider-man, I've always hated them in those parts.

Posted: May 06 2007 06:50 pm

I don't think that Tobey makes a bad Parker, but Dunst isn't really all that MJ.

Joined: Apr 06 2007 Posts: 35

*SPOILERS*

Awesome movie, though they really fucked up Venom. He didn't get enough screentime, and they fucking killed him off in the end, which really gets me mad. And also, I was wishing Mary Jane would shut the hell up, but other than that, good movie.

Posted: May 06 2007 09:40 pm

Kojjiro the Angry wrote:

Also, I'm still hoping tobey maguire and kirsten dunce don't sign on for a fourth spider-man, I've always hated them in those parts.

Tobey's won me over in the last few years... Hell, he won me over in the first film, but I fuckin' loved him in this one. Kiki... yeah... not so much. I did love how she's kind of a parody of herself in this film Wink

Jonny wrote:

*SPOILERS* ...they really fucked up Venom. He didn't get enough screentime, and they fucking killed him off in the end

See above.

Topher said when leaving "That 70s Show" that this was a role he planned on returning to. It's a franchise role, they'll find some way to bring him back.

Edit: I'm going to bring in "The Law of Jack Slater" - "Characters don't die until the grosses go down". With Dafoe and Uncle Ben coming back in each of the sequels despite being dead since the first film, it is safe to say that just because you "die" doesn't mean you're "dead". Cool

Edit Edit: I'll also bring in "The Rule of Connery and Williams" - Just because the lead actor drops out, doesn't mean he won't come back.

Posted: May 06 2007 10:21 pm

Spoilers..

if i remember correctly (?), they didn't really show Venom die... They showed Eddie dive into the symbiote, then the camera focused on something else, then it went back and you see an explosion. Plenty of time to get away, i think. And yea, there's totally some symbiote in connner's lab.

Posted: May 06 2007 11:44 pm

Who does Williams refer to?

Posted: May 07 2007 01:10 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

Who does Williams refer to?

That would be Robin Williams of "Aladdin" fame.

Posted: May 07 2007 07:34 am

Castelenatta (sp?) did Genie's voice in Aladdin 2 and Robin did 1 and 3.

Was anyone else bothered that even though he was bonded to the symbiote, Brock didn't use plural grammar (i.e. We are Venom)? Come to think of it, I don't think they ever actually named Venom within the movie.