Friday, January 22, 2010

Spiderman 3

Watched Spiderman 3 last night again for the first time since I saw it at the movies. It’s the weakest of the three, I think; too long, and not quite sure who its real villain is. There’s a choice of three: Thomas Haden Church as the Sandman, who’s connected into the story by seemingly being the man who murdered Peter’s uncle (although the actor isn't actually in the first film); there’s Harry, played by James Franco, Peter’s old friend, whose father was chasing after Peter in the first movie, and there’s the reporter/photographer (Topher GraceTopher?) turned baddie (towards the end) who’s been humiliated by Peter when the latter shows him as having photo-shopped a scoop photo. He just happens to be on the spot when Peter is divesting himself of the black goo that’s invading his life.
But the film suffers from two bigger storyline flaws: the reason the convict becomes the Sandman is purely incidental: a piece of sci-fi stuff that means nothing within the context of the movie. And the stuff that falls out of the sky and turns Peter ‘bad’ when it takes over as his second costume. Where does it come from? We’re never given any explanation, just as we’re given no explanation as to why the convict should turn to sand. Criminal motivation here is a bit less than reasonable!
Apart from all that, Peter Parker is a twat. He's not just a geek, he's a dillbrain in the girlfriend department. He has Mary Jane twisted around his little finger, and manages to trip and stumble and stutter so much in the relationship that she goes off with his best friend. Hello??

3 comments:

bethyada said...

All 3 are villains, but 2 of them are redeemed.

Mike Crowl said...

True. I wonder if they were planning on holding over the reporter/photographer character till episode 4, which isn't going to be made now, I see.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.