 |
| S P I D E R - M A N 3 |
| 2 M A Y 2 0 0 7 |
 |
 |
|
| Web of vengeance In Spider-man 1, the theme of the story was “with great powers come great responsibility”. Part 2 expanded on it, highlighting Peter Parker’s (Tobey Maguire) struggle with the “responsibility” portion. In Part 3, they’ve moved on to another theme: revenge. Actually, Parker's no stranger to it; he "accidentally" killed his uncle’s murderer in Part 1. Part 3 reveals the “real” murderer of Ben Parker (Cliff Robertson), Flint Marko a.k.a. Sandman (Thomas Haden Church), bringing another wave of emotional turmoil for Parker. This also ties with Parker’s best friend Harry Osbourne’s (James Franco) revenge sub-plot, which finally reaches a resolution. Out for blood too are Parker’s working rival Eddie Brock (Topher Grace) and The Sandman, who ironically blames Spider-man for his ailing daughter. Suffering from the sidelines is Parker’s girlfriend Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), feeling alienated by the whole superhero business. Oh, did I mention that Parker also gets possessed by a sinister “symbiote” from outer space? Part 3 is pretty packed with subplots, but they all serve the purpose of highlighting the abovementioned theme. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| R E V I E W S |
| Best viewed on Java-enabled Internet Explorer with a screen resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels. |
| E M A I L : bmf@bigmoviefreak.com Creative property of W. L. Kwa. A completely personal and non-profit endeavor. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| I would also like to mention James Franco's Harry Osbourne a.k.a. Goblin Jr., who was great in the previous Spider-movies. His character grew from nice rich brat in Part 1 to troubled but confident entrepreneur in Part 2, and now an angrier, more vengeful and more tortured Harry in Part 3. But instead of making him a straight-out, nutty villain, the writer put a twist to his story at the end, which will jerk the tears from all women who like their men sexy-bad. |
| 1 |
| Call me a sentimentalist, but I like the Spider-man movies because of the drama rather than the action. I like the fact that Peter Parker is no saint, unlike another fellow who flies around in his red gay underpants. He's an imperfect character even though his heart is good, which makes him a very real person. I can't say the experience is the same for everyone else, but I think most of us went through Parker's phase during our twenties, and made more or less the same stupid mistakes as he did. Of course, some of us learned from our mistakes and became all the wiser for it, while others went on to become assholes like Eddie Brock. Parker's non-Spidey experiences moved me on a personal level, and that makes him my greatest, most favourite, most real movie superhero of all time (after Christian "Grammaton Cleric" Bale's Batman). |
| Anyway, back to the movie. There's only so much drama and sadness a person can take, so thank goodness to J. K. Simmons, Bruce Campbell (in his most hilarious Spider-man cameo ever) and yes, even Tobey Maguire's "dark Peter" performance (I know some people out there who may not have liked it, but I did) for tickling our funny bones in between all the weeping. There’s also a nice little red herring for comic book fans, with the introduction of Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), a well-known character from the comic books. She adds a little uncertainty and tension in the plot, making us fans guess who's going to live or die every moment she's on the screen. |
| Not forgetting also Kirsten Dunst’s heartbreaking turn as Mary Jane Watson. Many critics have been arrow-ing her since Part 1, citing her performance as being “whiny” and “annoying”, which is funny since Watson’s also facing the same situation in the movie. Honestly, I don’t know what their problems are, but Dunst has been pretty good in every movie I’ve seen, from Interview with a Vampire to Bring It On. She has this unique cheeky and optimistic demeanour, while still able to break hearts when the scene requires it. I also don’t understand how her Watson character can be “whiny”. Unlike Parker she has an abusive parent, her acting career (in the movie) sucks, she’s the loneliest of all three leads (Harry still has his imaginary dad and the butler to keep him company), and she still puts up with Parker’s crap. So, you can't really blame her for whining a little. |
| Sadly, the things that kept Spider-man 3 from attaining perfection are the action and the special effects. Apart from the first thrill of finally watching Spidey swing on the big screen, the action in Part 1 was at best above-average and not as memorable as the Doc Ock train battle in Part 2, which is one of the best action sequences I’ve ever seen. Unfortunately, the action in Part 3 is the worst of the lot. It reminded me quite a bit of The Mummy 2, with its super-fake CGI and hyper-frantic action where I could barely tell what's going on. The Sandman's effects also looked like it has been recycled from Imhotep's sandstorms. In terms of the much anticipated appearance of Venom, a popular Spider-man villain, I wasn't too impressed by his design in this movie. He looks too small and too cute. They should have stuck closer to the comic book Venom’s appearance, which looks like what the Hulk would have been if it was Peter Parker who was exposed to gamma rays instead. |
| Nevertheless, Spider-man 3 is a great start to the year’s summer blockbuster season, and a fitting end to Sam Raimi’s reign on the series, should the director and cast decide not to return in future installments. I don’t know what else they could do with Spidey’s story after this, but I’m crossing my fingers that there won’t be a, gasp, Spidey Jr. come Spider-man Returns, circa 2015. - BMF |