Spider-Man 3

Posted by Loukas Tsouknidas (loukas@filmschoolrejects.com) on April 24, 2007

I love Spiderman and I got every reason in the world for it. He’s a geek who finds his niche, becomes the hero and gets the girl. What more could a weirdo like me, who finds books about mullets interesting, ask for to identify with. Unfortunately I love cinema more. “Spiderman 3” maybe a good Spiderman flick but it’s not good cinema. There’s only one thing worse than a bad movie; and that’s a bad movie that passes itself as a great one.

This is a film that allegedly cost $250 to $500 million to make. One wonders how much the writers got, to scribble all that idiotic melodramatic mumbo jumbo. But who needs good dialogue when you got CGI and impressive explosions. Now that’s something I would never complain about.

The action in Spiderman 3 is great. High speed chase scenes with nauseating diving shots right from the begining and a superb final tag team showdown: Venom & Sandman versus Spidey & Goblin Jr with Mary Jane’s life at stake. I loved every shot, every second and every kick and punch given. It was my only oasis in the desert that was the rest of the movie.

Plus, let’s not forget the actors. They all do more than ok with the paperthin characters they are given. Especially Topher Grace in the role of Venom. And to show my good will I have to say the film is well paced and the new villains equally and well presented but… that’s about it with the good stuff.

On with the bad.

There is absolutely no excuse for the simplistic approach to the characters and story, in a film that clearly aims to all kinds of audiences, children and thinking adults all the same. Worst of all, the dialogue. As I said before it’s hard not to laugh at moments that are meant to be serious, since people talk like they are in a cheap comic book from the seventies or some pulp sentimental novel.

I can fully understand and appreciate mindless action or violence but mindless and bland melodrama isn’t my kind of party. It’s like someone is spelling it out for us every time there is interaction between the characters. Even those moments of profound humor are too aware of themselves, like the movie blinks at us and we’re instantly part of the inside joke. Lucky audience!

Peter Parker is a nerd and I respect that. He’s true to himself and as a human being he gets deluded by Spiderman’s popularity. But he’s an old school nerd in a new school world, where cell phones, digital cameras and photoshop scams are everywhere but his phoneless, wooden door shack. Am I supposed to buy that Spiderman is so naive in the year 2007? Ok i’ll buy it, but what about the bit where he plays it extra cool. Jazz music and hip dancing? Very modern, indeed. It’s a moment full of self importance, almosts sounds like: Look, I can have fun with myself! How cool is that?

I had almost forgotten how much the second installment bored me. I want my superhero movies loaded with action, minus those attempts to deep characterization that only a few people are capable of- Christopher Nolan being the obvious one. Spiderman 2 was about a guy who walks on thin air but whines faster than he builds spiderwebs. That guy is back in Spiderman 3 and kills the fun. Sam Reimi directs with flare but he builds upon the very same cliches he supposedly tries to make fun of. That’s uncool… at least.

Spiderman 3, between some great action and good enough performances, goes for the easy tear, the easy laugh and the easy lesson until the very end, when Peter Parker anounces the point out loud like he addresses the classroom. Sorry Pete but i’m not a student anymore and cinema has its own language to make use of, for over a hundreed years now.

Seems to me, somebody went for the easy buck also.

Read more articles by Loukas Tsouknidas