Cinemusings

THREE YEARS LATER... SPIDER-MAN 3
Written by Felix Vasquez Jr.

Many would agree that the comic book movie has somewhat run its course in film. We have seen all the big guns of the comic book genre tackled on the big screen and we're now being reduced to watching obscure superheroes and indie comics be adapted and fans are pretty exhausted. Even those who are die hard readers. One thing is for sure though: the fad is not dying any time soon even though they breed surefire controversy.

Such an example is the upcoming reboot of the "Spider-Man" movies. Upon reading the news many fans of the films and comics shouted from the rooftops at the sheer gall Sony studios had of wanting to restart the series. So far Sony is planning to completely revamp the big screen vision for the web slinger kicking out director Sam Raimi, and the entire cast and basically starting over from scratch. Obviously it's to cut the cost of salary, but they insist it's to completely rethink the direction the series is going in. Sony surprised many by this decision after talks ensued for months about their meetings with director Sam Raimi about plans for part four of the original franchise and even had the original cast contracted for parts four, five, and six.

Believe it or not it's been three years since "Spider-Man 3" was released. Thanks to an alliance with Sony, indie horror director Sam Raimi was able to come out of left field and storm the box office and critics with his vision of one of the most popular superheroes of all time, Spider-Man. From out of the gates, "Spider-Man" was a huge success raking in millions and Raimi proved that he could really stretch his abilities and pay some service to the fan boys in spite of controversy. I mean there was the organic web shooters petition launched by legions of comic readers, and the casting of Tobey Maguire who fans protested upon learning of his casting.

In spite of the ballyhoo, Raimi made Spider-Man a household name yet again and continued his reign with two more films. Things seemed to be going well for the director who'd taken it upon himself to make the movies his own pet project enlisting his brothers to help in the writing and even cast them to make appearances in the film. And then there were three. "Spider-Man 3" seemed to have everything going for it. Raimi could do no wrong at this point. Except there were some definite warning signs that it had every chance to fail. Sony released the concept art for the character Venom and there was incredible hype surrounding the famous comic book villain's introduction in to the big screen universe. Fans even took to bootlegging the teaser trailer that featured only a two second look at the forming of the character.

In the bootleg you could hear crowds roaring at the glimpse of the alien menace and jaws dropped across the world. People obviously cared more about Venom than they did Sandman who was, in reality, the primary villain of the piece. Then suddenly before the movie was actually brought in to theaters there was news that Raimi adamantly opposed the inclusion of Venom and that he had no actual desire to include him (or Carnage) in the storyline for the film series. Another big red flag were reports that Sony had bullied Raimi in to including the famous villain whether he agreed to it or not. Upon making its debut in theaters "Spider-Man 3" managed to break many records and was a hit grossing over three hundred million dollars domestically. Just one problem: The movie was awful and it managed to disappoint many fans of the film series. I hated it so much I trashed it in my review and included it on my list of the Worst Films of 2007.

At this time it's become heavily debated on whether "Spider-Man 3" was actually bad, but it's this man's opinion that yes, Raimi bombed out big time with the third leg in his Spider-Man series. It's not "Batman & Robin" bad, but definitely "Superman IV" bad. I can still remember watching it in theaters sitting there and slumping in my seat more and more as it went on and thinking "Is it me or does this movie just blow?" By the time I was walking out of the theater I couldn't believe what I'd seen. So what went wrong, exactly? Where to start?

First, let me preface this article by including my conspiracy theory. After watching "Spider-Man 3" three times I was able to come to this conclusion: Raimi made the film really bad on purpose. If you go over the movie with a fine toothed comb there are some interesting elements that indicate Raimi had composed some really ridiculous scenes in the movie purposely and it was to get back at Sony. Sure, it sounds like I'm being an apologist for the man, but if you've ever read an interview with him you'll see that in actuality he's a pretty smart cookie and if you've seen some sequences there's no way any sane human being could have possibly assumed they would be taken seriously. The fans of the third film (they're a considerable minority) attribute it to Raimi's penchant for dark and goofy comedy, but then why are the first two films so stern and dramatic?

"Spider-Man 2" was so dramatic that a good portion of the children in the audience I was in were bored senseless. "Spider-Man 3" watches like a prank from the director, a big flip of the bird to Sony for basically strong arming him in to making the film their way without him, and there are many instances where the man just seems to not even be trying at all. You can tell right from the opening scenes where Peter (as Spidey) is web slinging across New York and is instantly attacked by Green Goblin 2 aka Harry Osborn. The attack is big and epic and rather fast. Spidey is web slinging, he's attacked by surprise and we get the hint that Harry is obviously avenging his father, but then... what happened to his Spider senses? In the first two films he's able to anticipate a sucker punch from school bully Flash Thompson, and in a famous moment Peter tackles Mary Jane to the ground as a car is thrown in to a coffee shop window almost crushing the romantic duo.

What happened?

"Three Years Later... Spider-Man 3" Part Two>>>

2/21/10

Reproduction and reprinting should only occur with express written permission
and proper credit to Cinema Crazed and its authors.

Have something to say about this article? Pop on over to Cinema-Lunatics
and speak your mind in our Answer Back! Forums >>