Spider-Man 3 REVIEW

“Spider-Man 3” is the biggest and longest film of the series, as it works hard to tie up most of the loose ends from the other movies. The good news is that the ultimate payoff is very strong - but man, was it ever a clunky ride getting there! Don’t get me wrong, this film does not suck by any means (especially compared to other top-tier Marvel movies like “Fantastic Four”), but the bad news is, it is simply not worthy of it’s predecessors.

The foremost issue with “Spidey 3” is that the screenplay is trying to accomplish too much. There’s the Harry Osborn revenge plot. There’s the ongoing Peter/Mary Jane strained relationship. There’s the Daily Bugle shenanigans, this time throwing Eddie Brock, a competitor for Peter, into the mix. And the new sympathetic villain, the Sandman. And, let’s not forget that well-hyped oozing metaphor, the black alien costume. Too many balls in the air to effectively juggle, and the result is a well-meaning hodge-podge of scenes so deliberately charted in service of the overall plot and themes, the whole thing feels artificial in a way the other “Spider-Man” films don’t.

Harry Osborn himself is treated purely as a device; undercutting the epic scope his realization scene lent “Spidey 2”. Furthermore, when he comes after Peter early on as the New Goblin, the manner in which the story temporarily disposes of Harry in order to clumsily make time for the Sandman and Brock in the spotlight is all too convenient. Even more convenient are the actions of the butler character working at Harry’s mansion, who it turns out has been withholding vital information, seemingly only until it’s right for the story’s timing. (I could be wrong, but I don’t even remember this butler from the other movies.) There are many, many more examples of this sort of thing. The whole existence of the Gwen Stacy character here is a case in point. The problem is that you can see the architecture of the plot – it feels constructed. Not to throw this movie to the wolves, but it’s a little reminiscent of “X-Men 3” in this respect.

On the positive side, “Spider-Man 3” does manage to generate sympathy when it matters, especially in the case of the Sandman character, who despite being manhandled by the writers, comes out on top thanks to the actor playing him, Thomas Hayden Church. The movie also boasts nice cult/Sam Raimi casting, including Bruce Campbell as a Clouseau-type maître d’, the director’s brother, Ted Raimi, and Stan Lee in his career capping cameo. When someone eventually edits together a tribute montage of all his movie cameos, this will be the capper. Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst are completely at home in their roles, and all the supporting characters we’ve come to expect are back, and in fine form – even if they’re not given much to do this time. (Crowd pleaser J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jamison suffers particularly on this front, as does Rosemary Harris’ Aunt May, delivering one too many motivational speeches.) But, many will relieved to know that the extremely popular villain Venom looks good on screen – that is, when he finally shows up in the eleventh hour.

The fight scenes are many, and are sometimes impressive, but really they are almost too video gamey in their rapid, artificial camera swooping. They do, however, manage to be kinetic when it matters. More impressive are the scenes of massive disaster in New York City, most notably one involving an out-of-control crane cutting through a nearby skyscraper. Spidey of course saves the day from these rampant mishaps, but he is aided in no small part by the fact that everything seems to fall for a long, long time before hitting the ground in this film. No one is crushed by the debris that Spidey can’t catch because it takes so long to get there that everyone can get out of the way. Even slower to fall is an all-important ring that Peter manages to lose hold of while he’s far, far up in the air. Perhaps this is just good cartoony fun, but it does begin to illuminate the bigger problems with the movie.

But again, less forgivable are the glaring plot devises and overly restated themes. Just as Spider-Man has to struggle against adversaries who are shapeless in nature, working to maintain a human form, the filmmakers seem to be having the same battle with the screenplay. The human moments are there, but you can practically see them battling to direct the story towards those important plot points, forcing the humanity to take shape. The film’s messages about revenge and selfishness are admirable, maybe even daring and certainly rare, but those older than twelve years old will feel as though they are being beaten over the head with them. (Eddie Brock is a dark counterpoint to Peter Parker – We get it!!!)

Although Spidey has always been a classic underdog character, “Spider-Man 3” sets him up as an extremely popular hero with the mainstream, and on his way to finally marrying MJ. When it all falls apart for him, we root for him to get back on top where he was, ala any given Tom Cruise movie arc. This arc, while opposite of the wall-crawler’s traditional roots, is the logical next story to tell in this series. But it does seem to have been a tougher nut to crack than anyone may’ve anticipated.

Add to that the fact that Sam Raimi seems to be taking more liberties in terms of wacky set pieces, and even more long-term fans are likely to be alienated. For example, Peter’s macho-man strut down the street in this film is funny, akin to the “Raindrops Keep Fallin’ on My Head” sequence in “2”, but when Peter starts dancing on tables in a later scene, it’s too much.

You can tell everyone was probably stretched too thin creatively. Having heard that this film went into prep as soon as “2” was released, they probably made this movie too soon. I suspect a little rest probably would’ve helped a lot. Least to blame are the actors. Navigating the ever-shifting waters of a production of this nature is murder on talent, but these veterans still manage to project the wounded souls and desires of their characters, despite the contrivances they are stuck playing out.

Ultimately, it’s hard not to like these films, even this one. Although they are undeniably first and foremost enormous cash machines for Sony and Marvel, the “Spider-Man” franchise has given us a sense of good-natured fun while we spend time with characters we’ve come to care about, and enjoy being with. I’ve finally settled into the grove of these films, but now it appears this may be it (at least for the Raimi/Maguire incarnation of the character). But we’ll see. For many, seeing Venom hiss his way to vengeance will be enough. For others, merely seeing Spidey soar the NYC skyline again will appease them. For me, for all my dissecting and complaining, and while I wish the whole thing could’ve gotten to it’s finale a lot more smoothly, I can’t dislike this movie. For the true heart of Spider-Man is there, and that’s the great power of “Spider-Man 3”. It’s those with the great responsibility to that power who fell a bit short this time.

- Jim Tudor