Spider-Man 3 Retrospective

Yes, I know it's a little early for a retrospective, considering the film in question came out 5 days ago. But I just saw Spider-Man 3 for the second time today and it solidified my thoughts a bit more.

Most importantly, the second go-around didn't really change my overall view of the film: that it has got its moments, but is considerably inferior to the other two. However, the bashing that it is receiving in some quarters is completely out of all proportion - it's nowhere near Superman III on the travesty scale, for example.

Warning, for the approximately three people on the planet who haven't seen it yet: SPOILERS.

One thing I kept thinking during my second watch was that I really want to do a re-edit of the film. It couldn't iron out all the flaws, certainly, but I do think the flow could be improved. I don't like how once the black goo has infected the Spidey suit Peter can still take it off easily, and turn back into nice Peter. I think the black suit should've latched itself onto him and stayed on him until he rips it off in the bell tower. With a bit of re-ordering of scenes, that could probably be worked out.

What editing couldn't really solve is the slow start. While the film takes a while to get moving, that's mainly because Spider-Man 2 really came to a nicely resolved conclusion, except with the Harry storyline. It means that at the start of this instalment some time has to be taken to restart the forward momentum of the plot. I would have just liked a fairly basic Spider-Man rescue to open the film, not really related to the rest of the plot but just to get the audience in the mood.

One part of the set-up I might jettison is the first scene where we meet Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church), soon to become the Sandman. The scene sets up his relationship with his daughter and estranged wife, but it slows down the beginning too much if you ask me, creating the need for some cumbersome cross-cutting. It does make the character of Marko more sympathetic but I could live without it.

On the subject of Sandman, I didn't really like him as a villain. Church gave an excellent performance, as I'd expected after Sideways. I just didn't feel he really belonged in the Spider-Man movie universe. Somehow, a guy who has four mechanical arms attached to his body (i.e. Doctor Octopus) seems more plausible and less outlandish than a guy who can literally turn into sand. I also didn't think the effects were that great at all. The Sandman 'birth' scene was good but I think a lot of that is down to the music and the performance rather than the believability of the CGI, which was never really top-drawer in my opinion. On top of that, I really didn't like Sandman's ability to turn into a sand cloud and fly around at will, a power which seems to have been made up by the filmmakers.

Moving on to one of the major bones of contention, the dance sequence. Personally I do find it pretty funny but I also think it's a bit too cheesy and goofy to completely work. But it is the only point in the film where Tobey Maguire is really able to have some fun in the role, and he revels in it. Going by the evidence of Spider-Man 3 it really looks like Raimi is dying to make a musical, and I'd prefer that he scratched that itch before making the next Spidey, if he does indeed return.

Now, Venom. For one thing, as I said in my review, in his full form I think he looks amazing. The design of the creature was absolutely nailed. He's not in it enough unfortunately, and even when he is, there are certain aspects that I found really jarring. One, of course, is the really perfunctory "let's team up" scene between him and Sandman. More importantly to me, I don't think he should have talked, or if he did it should have been a really growly, animalistic voice. I also didn't like that Venom's 'mask' kept receding and showing Brock's face underneath, as it really lessened the menace, and Topher Grace is completely ill-suited to that aspect of the character.

Despite the clunkiness of many elements of the film, I still find it highly enjoyable. No sections have bored me either of the times I've seen it. I love the frequent little touches of humour - not the broad goofy stuff like the "Evil Peter" hairdo, mind, but things like the door jamming routine and the cookie girl - which reminded me of the earlier films and showed that Raimi hasn't completely lost touch with them.

The climactic action scene kind of sums Spider-Man 3 up. I like it, but there are certain aspects that really get on my nerves. One such example is the British TV news reporter. Another is the aforementioned moments when Venom speaks. Also Sandman seems to be in the fight just because he's one of the villains and therefore has to be; when he later shows up, rather out of the blue (after having been apparently defeated), he says he was forced into everything, but that doesn't stack up. He may have been trying to get money because his daughter's ill but that doesn't mean he has to help Venom put an innocent civilian (Mary-Jane, again) in peril. Also, his dumb, groaning giant sand creature form reminded me of Mongo, the giant gingerbread man fro Shrek 2, which made him seem kind of laughable. Nevertheless, despite the problems with the sequence, it is still engrossing and fun, and I absolutely love that shot in which Spidey and Venom fall towards the ground, fighting each other all the way down.

Interestingly, the cinema didn't seem very busy today. For the Wednesday after the release of a blockbuster that has broken so many records, that's kind of surprising. It's going to see quite a drop in its second weekend, by the looks of it.