Spider-Man 3 (US - BD RA)
Cheer up Spider-Man, Gabe liked your latest movie, even if nobody else did...
Feature
Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is finally happy living his life as Spider-Man. The city of New York finally loves him, Mary Jane Watson (Kirstin Dunst) is finally by his side, and his former best friend Harry Osborn (James Franco) has lost his memory, forgetting about his anti-Spidey crusade. All this goodness leads to the sin of Hubris, a feeling of invincibility which is magnified when Peter discovers an alien symbiote has grafted itself to his costume and multiplies his powers. The affections of a new girl named Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard) don’t hurt either.

But blue skies begin to grey when Mary Jane loses her job on Broadway, Harry’s memory begins to return, a rival photographer named Eddie Brock shows up at the Daily Bugle, and the cops inform Peter that his Uncle’s actual kill, Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church), has escaped from prison. Marko becomes the invincible Sandman after an accident during his escape, and to beat him Peter must wear the new black suit, despite its negative effects on his emotions and mind.
Spider-Man 3 is undoubtedly the weakest film in what by all rights should’ve been the most solid super-hero trilogy of all time, but it is not the unmitigated disaster so many disappointed and hyperbolic fans and critics say it is. The film’s problems are rather obvious, and have been since the day three villains were announced as staring—there is simply too much plot for a two hour and twenty minute film. The final product is bloated and unfocused because, apparently, no one had the balls to say ‘no’ to any of the creative heads.
Director Sam Raimi makes some bad editing choices that often halt the already packed narrative (Mary-Jane and Harry’s dancing cook-off, though a cute scene, really does not belong in the film, for example), and his need to stay true to the tone of the Silver Age comic is a major hindrance (too much episodic soap opera for too little run time). Producer Avi Arad, who was apparently the man who forced Raimi, his brother Ivan, and Alvin Sargent to squeeze Venom into the already lumpy narrative, attempts to please modern fans at the risk of logic and organic flow. The moneymen at Sony, meanwhile, continued to throw cash at the project based on the returns of the first two films, and never stopped to notice how awkwardly things were coming together. In the end they spent so much money they’re ashamed to admit an actual price tag.

Had someone realized that there was no way to fit all this crap into one standard length feature, we may’ve found ourselves in the presence of two great Spider-Man sequels, rather than one sparkling disappointment. We all know there’s a bunch of deleted footage somewhere out there, we’ve seen glimpses of it in trailers, why not pull a Kill Bill and squeeze out dual sequels? Had this film been only about Peter’s inner battle with the suit, and outer battle with both Flint Marko and Harry Osbourn, we might’ve had a moving character study, and the last act battle might’ve featured some genuine emotional payoffs. Eddie Brock and Venom should’ve been a tease for a fourth feature, fan expectations be damned.
The character of Venom was already controversial in the fan community. Classic fans see the character as everything wrong with 1990s comics (a hulking monster with a weak back story, produced for the simple act of whoopin’ Spider-Man’s ass), while younger fans have viewed him as the prototypical antihero of the era (a hulking monster with a weak back story, produced for the simple act of whoopin’ Spider-Man’s ass). The point both camps seem to miss, and a point that the ‘90s Spider-Man cartoon series handled with surprising dexterity, is that Venom is the Anti-Spider-Man. By changing the character of Eddie Brock from a muscle bound adult to a Peter Parker doppelganger he suddenly becomes an interesting study of everything Spider-Man could’ve been had he made the wrong choices (in all facets of life, not just super-heroics). Raimi’s film only half realizes this fact, teasing its audience with the possibility of a super villain of real depth.
Actors returning from the first two films continue filling out their characters efficiently, even Kirsten Dunst (hated by fanboys the world over), and the new cast is inspiring all around, in both looking and acting the part, but due to the film’s bloated nature no one gets a real chance to shine. Thomas Hayden Church is fantastic in all his scenes, even the last act stuff that doesn’t make any sense, and is the flabby features greatest fatality. Topher Grace sells a loveable bastard better than most, and even his truncated performance leaves one to wonder if Raimi picked the right guy for the original wall-crawler. Then there’s Bryce Dallas Howard, the shining grace of Shyamalan’s latest flops The Village and Lady in the Water (I liked them both), a big time up-and-comer who finds herself as little more than a screaming damsel with a pretty face.

However, the problem in saying ‘no’ to someone like Sam Raimi is that it would’ve most likely resulted in the deletion of two of the films best and most Raimi-esque sequences—the ‘evil-Peter’ montage (which really should’ve been set to the Beegee’s Stayin’ Alive), and the chaotic and silly barroom dance. Despite the fact that the vast majority of viewers seem to have hated these scenes, they are impeccably Raimi, and Raimi was something missing from the first two films. Apparently most fans would prefer a murderous Dark Peter Parker, but Sam and Ivan’s Army of Darkness and Crime Wave inspired goofiness is shockingly bold-faced for a mainstream action flick, which I see as a good thing. Most of the audience seems to have missed the joke, which would be that Peter Parker is an incurable nerd, and that his idea of ‘cool’ is hopelessly lame (that whole ‘emo hair’ thing was a joke). I say your loss, my gain.
Despite an abrupt jump into the last act of a completely different film, and the brutally pruned side plots robbing Spider-Man 3 of the emotionally satisfying ending the series needed (lets not even talk about Deus Ex Butler’s last minute revelation, oy), the movie still has its fair share of wonderful moments. Besides the aforementioned Raimi-tastic scenes, there’s a series of increasingly acrobatic fisticuffs, the best Bruce Campbell staring sequence since the cancellation of Brisco County Jr., and a spirited turn from James Franco. The finest achievement of all is the birth of Sandman sequence, which may very well be the most moving piece of computer generated animation, like, ever. Yes, Spider-Man 3 has some issues, and it isn’t quite the follow up we were all expecting from this creative team, and the price tag was ridiculously steep, but there is still a solid inkling of the charm, grace, and drama we came to love the first two times around. I like to think of it as an entertaining face-plant with oodles of re-watchability.

Video
This is my first Blu-ray review, and only the second movie I’ve watched on my new player, so my nit-pick eyes haven’t quite adjusted to the abilities of high-def. My DVD eyes tell me this is the best thing since…um, it’s pretty much the best thing ever so far as video quality goes. Spider-Man 3 is actually a great disc to pop the eyeball cherry with because of the film’s overall colourful nature, and the intricacies of its villain’s biological make ups (e.g. grains of sand and runny tar stuff).
If I get my face about a foot from the screen I can see ever-so-slight jaggies on the crispest of lines, and a few artefacts on faces, but this has more to do with my set’s limitations as an older HD model than the disc’s shortcomings. There’s no compression noise, the minute grain is as fine as…sand, and the details are as sharp as Ginsu knives. The best things about the disc are the popping bright colours, and deep, rich blacks. If I were to really look for some problems I’d say there’s a little bit of edge enhancement throughout, but really nothing to complain about.

Audio
Well here’s the part where the readers make comments about how unqualified I am to review Blu-ray titles, blah blah blah. I don’t have the ability to get the full benefit of Dolby TrueHD technology. I’m sorry. The Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 track, however, is still so alive and teeming with wonder that I seriously doubt I could possibly be more impressed by anything else.
When I saw the film in the theatre (AMC Roseville in Minnesota) the right stereo speaker was on the fritz, so it’s good to finally hear Spider-Man’s web-swinging, Sandman’s granule attacks, and Venom’s raptor like screams in full on digital surround. The track is simply gigantic and each and every channel is consistently aggressive. The bass levels are so much that I actually had to turn my sub down a bit, but it wasn't ever overtly muddy. It’s quite remarkable that things never get garbled considering the sheer amount of sound attack during the larger fight sequences, but even in chaos the track is clear.
Then there’s the rather controversial matter of the film’s score. The legend states that über-composer Danny Elfman and director Sam Raimi had a major falling out during the production of Spider-Man 2, and after Elfman was asked to emulate a certain cue from Hellraiser enough times he apparently shouted, “I can't get any closer and I'm not going to imitate [Hellraiser composer] Christopher Young. Go f**king hire Christopher Young!”, so Raimi did. Young’s Spider-Man 3 score is, I’ll hazard to say, better than either of Elfman’s previous entrées in the series (Elfman and Raimi’s antagonism really shows on episode two). From the black suit’s bombastic, James Bond-esque theme, to the Sandman’s deliciously awkward motif, Young captures the essence of the production’s bloated grandeur even better than the Raimi’s frazzled plot.

Extras
Spider-Man 3 takes a step back in the extras field to the less impressive arena of the first Spider-Man release, which featured a collection of slightly fluffy featurettes that merely satisfied. There is no massive Spider-Man 2 styled documentary this time around. My guess is that there is a Spider-Man 3.1 on the horizon for next summer, and the really good stuff is being saved.
Disc one starts with two commentaries, one featuring Raimi and cast members Topher Grace, James Franco, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Bryce Dallas Howard, and Thomas Haden Church, the other featuring producer Avi Arad (boo), producer Grant Curtis, producer Laura Ziskin, editor Bob Murawski, and visual effects supervisor Scott Stokdyk. Raimi’s previous Spider-Man commentaries weren’t up to his Evil Dead entertainment levels, and he always sounded exhausted, but here in the company of a bunch of zealous actors he seems to have rediscovered his ‘groove’. The track is quite entertaining, though for the number of participants blank space is surprisingly prevalent. No one ever acknowledges the film’s major shortcomings flat out, but there is plenty of discussion about the fact that the script was unfinished when filming began, and alternate versions of the story (some with the Vulture instead of Venom, one with Gwen Stacy held captive at film’s end) are discussed. Besides the silent streaks, my only problem with the track are the scripted moments, where someone asks Raimi a random question about the folks behind the scenes so he can struggle to read their names off a loudly crumpled sheet of paper. The producer/editor/effects dude track is pretty lifeless, but technically very informative, and surprisingly enough contains less empty space.
The first disc taps out with a blooper reel, an HD photo gallery (totally worthless), a cute music video for an awful and maudlin song by Snow Patrol, and some trailers for other Sony Blu-ray releases.

Then comes disc two, which amounts to around two hours of featurettes. Most of these behind the scenes snapshots reek of cable television EPK, and none go into the behind the scenes issues and intrigue in the slightest, but they are all informative and some are even entertaining.
‘Grains of Sand: Building Sandman’ covers mostly the special effects work behind the character, which are most likely the film’s most impressive aspect. The utter volume of sand created in the computer is enough to earn these guys the Special Effects Oscar this year (assuming the WGA strike doesn’t postpone it indefinitely). ‘Re-Imagining the Goblin’ and ‘Covered in Black’ follow the first featurette’s lead, and mostly deal with the trails and tribulations of character design and special effects work. I’d like a little more information about the writing efforts, and the casting process, as well as some information about the ill-fated Ben Kingly Vulture character, but the effects info is rather stimulating, and the featurettes themselves never dry.
‘Hanging On: Gwen Stacy and the Collapsing Floor’ whacks two birds with one stone, covering the introduction of Bryce Dallas Howard’s character, and the effort that went into the spectacular chaotic crane scene she first appears in. Apparently, Howard is just as sweet as she looks, and everyone on set was positively enamoured with her willingness to do her own stunts. This leads into ‘Tangled Web’, which briefly covers the film’s various love triangles and soap opera antics.

‘Fighting, Flying & Driving’, ‘On Location in New York’, ‘Wall of Water’, and ‘On Location Cleveland: The Chase on Euclid Avenue’ are all looks at the various stunts and action scenes found in the film, with an emphasis on the particle effects. It seems that the only parts of the film that were properly planned for were these set pieces, and one gets the feeling that nobody quite knew where they’d be fitting in the final feature. I’m still not sure how a movie can cost this much, but these featurettes give me a better idea.
‘The Science of Sound’ is probably the most interesting of the mini-docs, and is the only one presented in full 5.1 surround sound. It covers the efforts of the foley artists, composer Christopher Young, and the digital sound designers, along with the final mixing process. As someone who has tried his hand at simple stereo music mixing, I’m always fascinated by the fact that these professionals can make something perfectly audibly balanced from such total pandemonium. ‘Inside the Editing Room’, on the other hand, is not nearly as fascinating as it should’ve been, as the errors in editing are one of the final film’s greatest problems. I was foolishly hoping for more information about the supposed plethora of deleted footage.
Everything zips up with various trailers and TV spots from around the world.

Overall
It might be worth mentioning that I’m writing this overall positive review while wearing an Evil Dead II T-shirt. I’m a very big fan of Sam Raimi when he doesn’t try to be someone else, and I see Spider-Man 3 as a very Sam Raimi movie. It has problems, and it is a disappointment when compared to the previous two entrees, but overall it’s very entertaining, and unlike, say, X-Men 3, its charm outweighs its belly flops. As an introduction to the capabilities of a high-definition, I couldn’t have done much better, but the extra features lean from quality into quantity, and are a step back from those of the original Spider-Man 2 DVD release.
* Note: The above images are taken from the Blu-ray release and resized for the page.
Review by Gabriel Powers
Advertisements
Existing Posts
Already $15 for the 2 disc edition here
i already have Spider-Man 3 on DVD.
i enjoyed this a lot more than most people did, even if it was disappointing compared to the first two [I'd call the first one one of the five or six top superhero films of all-timee, and the second one the best], but it easily ranks higher than every superhero film released after Batman Begins. I definitely prefer this to c**p like Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, or X-Men the Last Stand.
Young and Williams both have massive egos, Williams is just more eloquent when expressing his (read: pretentious).
I don't get the appeal of the black suited spider theme. this a dark character showcasing the unpleasant side of it's host right? so why then is the theme a loud heroic french horn statement? it really takes one out of the movie when watching it.
but then again Young like Elfman on the 2nd movie had his score butchered, although not as bad as Elfman had it. at least Young got about 55-60% of what he wrote in the movie. hopefully there'll be a complete bootleg floating around the web so I can download and hear the music like the way Young intended.
and did anyone catch the enormous ego on the composer on the DVD. you'll never hear John Williams say that he hit a homerun with a theme, people are suppose to praise a composer's work not the other way around
but then again Young like Elfman on the 2nd movie had his score butchered, although not as bad as Elfman had it. at least Young got about 55-60% of what he wrote in the movie. hopefully there'll be a complete bootleg floating around the web so I can download and hear the music like the way Young intended.
and did anyone catch the enormous ego on the composer on the DVD. you'll never hear John Williams say that he hit a homerun with a theme, people are suppose to praise a composer's work not the other way around
Thanks for the clarification mc!
It's good to know that Young's and Raimis relationship is strong. It would be interesting to see what new themes he had.
It's good to know that Young's and Raimis relationship is strong. It would be interesting to see what new themes he had.
Wolfmother wrote: I like the pic of Gwen Stacy, a pale white chick, between two black ladies. I don't know the reason for this at all...
The girl on the left of Bryce is Samoan or of Latin-American descent, I think.
The girl on the left of Bryce is Samoan or of Latin-American descent, I think.
I myself feel that part 3 is superior to Spider-Man 2. It does have it's flaws however, but it's my favorite of the trilogy.
"i also liked it. sandman was a great choice, though severely underused. and where the hell is the lizard? venom could've been an entire film on his own. not difficult. and would've pleased fans a helluva lot more than what was thrown out of a bile duct and in front of my eyes. i still enjoyed it though. i enjoy every comic book movie. sadly. although have never... and WILL never see catwoman or elektra."
-jo3
-jo3
Wolfmother wrote: I like the pic of Gwen Stacy, a pale white chick, between two black ladies. I don't know the reason for this at all...
Must be a vague reference to Bryce Dallas Howard's interracial sex scene in Manderlay. No, I'm kidding......
Must be a vague reference to Bryce Dallas Howard's interracial sex scene in Manderlay. No, I'm kidding......
Ha Ha, well I like Larry Franco too!
Gabe, I just noticed...the first time you mention James Franco in the main body of the review, you mis-state his first name as "Larry".
Actually, Spider-Man 2 is the weakest entry in these movies. That one was nothing but a weak, boring episode of "Days of Our Lives" that just happened to have Spider-Man in it. SM3 was, by a large margin, much more entertaining and enjoyable to watch than its immediate predecessor.
movieguy85 wrote: Nice review... now all you have to do is get an HD DVD player so we can start seeing those reviews pop up here!
Blame it on the studios, they simply aren't sending us any. You'd think they'd want to publicise HD DVD as much as possible given the stiff competition from BD, but it's just not happening (at least not in the UK).
Blame it on the studios, they simply aren't sending us any. You'd think they'd want to publicise HD DVD as much as possible given the stiff competition from BD, but it's just not happening (at least not in the UK).
So again, there wasn't much character developement...there were lots, and lots and lots and lots and lots of coincidences (uncle Ben's killer, the black blob, saving the blonde chick, Brock at the right place...u get it)...there were two musical numbers!! and a Peter Parker that thinks he is a combination of Bruce Wayne/John Travolta in SNF...
Oh, by the way, Superman IV is a really entertaining movie...yes, more than this...TOO BAD!!!
Oh, by the way, Superman IV is a really entertaining movie...yes, more than this...TOO BAD!!!
Given my love for the first two films, I was hugely disappointed in and even a little angry with this film. Like others above have stated, they really seemed to phone it in on this one.
Makers of these huge summer tentpole films have got to realize that the "everything and the kitchen sink" approach, just doesn't work, that's what killed the original Batman franchise.
I agree wholeheartedly with Gabe that Venom should have been hinted at the end as a setup for the fourth film and spent more time on Sandman, a great silver-age Spidey villian who gets short-shrift here.
I want to say though, Gabe raises some compelling points in his review that actually make me want to re-examine it. I had written off ever watching it again, but perhaps a different mindset is in order. I may have to Netflix it to give it one more chance.
If I can elevate it in my mind to "guilty pleasure" status (of which I have an enormous number of films in my collection that fall into THIS category) then it might be worth adding to the first two films in my library.
I mean for God's sake, I own Superman IV (from the Ultimate box set, there's no way in hell I'd buy that load by itself).
Makers of these huge summer tentpole films have got to realize that the "everything and the kitchen sink" approach, just doesn't work, that's what killed the original Batman franchise.
I agree wholeheartedly with Gabe that Venom should have been hinted at the end as a setup for the fourth film and spent more time on Sandman, a great silver-age Spidey villian who gets short-shrift here.
I want to say though, Gabe raises some compelling points in his review that actually make me want to re-examine it. I had written off ever watching it again, but perhaps a different mindset is in order. I may have to Netflix it to give it one more chance.
If I can elevate it in my mind to "guilty pleasure" status (of which I have an enormous number of films in my collection that fall into THIS category) then it might be worth adding to the first two films in my library.
I mean for God's sake, I own Superman IV (from the Ultimate box set, there's no way in hell I'd buy that load by itself).
Nice review... now all you have to do is get an HD DVD player so we can start seeing those reviews pop up here!
I agree it's not as bad as X-Men 3 but I'm still not buying it
(at least not right away) I'll get it when it's $9.99 or less.
Big Raimi fan as well, hopefully he has moved on and the cast goes with him....Spider-Man 4 could be ugly.
(at least not right away) I'll get it when it's $9.99 or less.
Big Raimi fan as well, hopefully he has moved on and the cast goes with him....Spider-Man 4 could be ugly.
Devon wrote: I would assume it would be normal for executives to be so crazy over a score that they hated in the first place, but then wanted the 3rd movie to sound like it. What is weird is the complete lack of input from Raimi.
Couldn't he decide what he wanted? Instead of having 4 separate composers, could he not choose one? Or did Sony just completely take that over?
From what Elfman said it would seem Raimi didn't know what he wanted. Which is a shame since I really enjoyed the music from the first and second (fantastic Doc Ock theme) films, and it would have been great to see what Elfman could have done with this one.
Well, Elfman wanted no part in "Spider-Man 3", and so Raimi had creative control over the score when he hired Christopher Young to score it. The problem was, deep in post-production, Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores because Young came up with brand-new themes for MJ, Gwen Stacy and Aunt May (which didn't have the same kind of sound Sony wanted, so they dropped those). In a interview with Film Music Weekly about the SM-3 score, Young talked about the fiasco and said that he would've been happy to rescore the scenes using Elfman's themes, but he was still writing music for the big battle at the end -- that's where Lurie and Debney came in (and Bartek as well). As far as I know, Raimi had no complaints and Young has said that he would be happy to come back to score "Spider-Man 4".
Couldn't he decide what he wanted? Instead of having 4 separate composers, could he not choose one? Or did Sony just completely take that over?
From what Elfman said it would seem Raimi didn't know what he wanted. Which is a shame since I really enjoyed the music from the first and second (fantastic Doc Ock theme) films, and it would have been great to see what Elfman could have done with this one.
Well, Elfman wanted no part in "Spider-Man 3", and so Raimi had creative control over the score when he hired Christopher Young to score it. The problem was, deep in post-production, Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores because Young came up with brand-new themes for MJ, Gwen Stacy and Aunt May (which didn't have the same kind of sound Sony wanted, so they dropped those). In a interview with Film Music Weekly about the SM-3 score, Young talked about the fiasco and said that he would've been happy to rescore the scenes using Elfman's themes, but he was still writing music for the big battle at the end -- that's where Lurie and Debney came in (and Bartek as well). As far as I know, Raimi had no complaints and Young has said that he would be happy to come back to score "Spider-Man 4".
I like the pic of Gwen Stacy, a pale white chick, between two black ladies. I don't know the reason for this at all...
It was a pretty good movie, just not as good as the first two. I agree that there was too much put in one movie. If Harry's revenge plot had been kept for another movie, S3 would have been a much more balanced movie.
Still, it was a lot more enjoyable than say, Superman Returns.
Still, it was a lot more enjoyable than say, Superman Returns.
Not the best summer blockbuser of 07(Bourne Ultimatum), but even with it's bulging flaws Spidey 3 was an average entertaining film. Still I wouldn't buy it.
"which would be that Peter Parker is an incurable nerd, and that his idea of ‘cool’ is hopelessly lame (that whole ‘emo hair’ thing was a joke). I say your loss, my gain."
I got the joke and the way you put makes it even more funny, but the rest of this movie was embarrassingly bad. I am not a big spider-man fan or a big super hero fan in general, but Spider-Man 2 was a solid film that fufilled it's goals pretty well. This film's tone was so completely off that most of the jokes fell flat and the dramatic parts as well. Rosemary Harris and Thomas Hayden Church were the only ones who took this movie seriously. I felt like everyone was winking into the camera as if to be saying "Hey look at us playing these roles, aren't we great." I don't know, but it was by far the worst movie I've seen this year. There were so many good ideas being presented, but I think you are right in saying that no one had the guts to tell the boys at the top "no" at some point.
I got the joke and the way you put makes it even more funny, but the rest of this movie was embarrassingly bad. I am not a big spider-man fan or a big super hero fan in general, but Spider-Man 2 was a solid film that fufilled it's goals pretty well. This film's tone was so completely off that most of the jokes fell flat and the dramatic parts as well. Rosemary Harris and Thomas Hayden Church were the only ones who took this movie seriously. I felt like everyone was winking into the camera as if to be saying "Hey look at us playing these roles, aren't we great." I don't know, but it was by far the worst movie I've seen this year. There were so many good ideas being presented, but I think you are right in saying that no one had the guts to tell the boys at the top "no" at some point.
LLcruize wrote: I enjoyed this film too. I thought it was cramped, but still a good watch. I loved the bad-Peter sequence, it was so not what you expected and you have to love it when a film can do that to you. I thought Bryce was absolutely gorgeous. She made Dunst look like a dishrag in comparison. Not sure if they intended that to be the case, but whoever was doing Dunst's hair and makeup for 2 and 3 kept making her more and more washed out and haggard looking. Bryce's stunning eyes and smile were a refreshing sight given how gloom and doom they had Dunst looking. She looked great in the first film, not sure why they went the direction with her look like they did.
I never noticed that, but it is true, she does seem to look less "put together" as the series went on.
mc_serenity wrote: As for the score for "Spider-Man 3", I very much enjoyed it -- well, mostly Christopher Young's sections. The third movie also encountered problems with the music, but in this case Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores. Parts of Young's score was dropped (mostly where Sony wanted the MJ/love theme or Aunt May themes to be present) and both Deborah Lurie and John Debney were hired to write cues that integrated Elfman's themes into the picture. For proof of that, look at the end credits, where both Debney and Lurie are are co-credited with Elfman.
And even in some instances, cues from the first two Elfman scores were just tracked in and to top it off, Elfman collaborator Steve Bartek re-recorded sections of the first two scores to fit certain scenes. So, like "Spider-Man 2", "Spider-Man 3" had a mashed-up musical score. I would've liked to hear Young's complete, unedited score for myself.
I would assume it would be normal for executives to be so crazy over a score that they hated in the first place, but then wanted the 3rd movie to sound like it. What is weird is the complete lack of input from Raimi.
Couldn't he decide what he wanted? Instead of having 4 separate composers, could he not choose one? Or did Sony just completely take that over?
From what Elfman said it would seem Raimi didn't know what he wanted. Which is a shame since I really enjoyed the music from the first and second (fantastic Doc Ock theme) films, and it would have been great to see what Elfman could have done with this one.
I never noticed that, but it is true, she does seem to look less "put together" as the series went on.
mc_serenity wrote: As for the score for "Spider-Man 3", I very much enjoyed it -- well, mostly Christopher Young's sections. The third movie also encountered problems with the music, but in this case Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores. Parts of Young's score was dropped (mostly where Sony wanted the MJ/love theme or Aunt May themes to be present) and both Deborah Lurie and John Debney were hired to write cues that integrated Elfman's themes into the picture. For proof of that, look at the end credits, where both Debney and Lurie are are co-credited with Elfman.
And even in some instances, cues from the first two Elfman scores were just tracked in and to top it off, Elfman collaborator Steve Bartek re-recorded sections of the first two scores to fit certain scenes. So, like "Spider-Man 2", "Spider-Man 3" had a mashed-up musical score. I would've liked to hear Young's complete, unedited score for myself.
I would assume it would be normal for executives to be so crazy over a score that they hated in the first place, but then wanted the 3rd movie to sound like it. What is weird is the complete lack of input from Raimi.
Couldn't he decide what he wanted? Instead of having 4 separate composers, could he not choose one? Or did Sony just completely take that over?
From what Elfman said it would seem Raimi didn't know what he wanted. Which is a shame since I really enjoyed the music from the first and second (fantastic Doc Ock theme) films, and it would have been great to see what Elfman could have done with this one.
thank you!!! it's so nice to see that i'm not the only one who appreciated this film...
i loved all three films in the trilogy, and personally can't say for certain which one was my absolute fave, just because they all flow together so well... my only gripe with the film was the lack of attention given to venom, and sandman's characters... i wish raimi focused more on sandman, and developed eddie brock's relationship to pete... "venom" should've been saved for the next film (or two)... but that's just my opinion.
still loved it... even with the dance numbers (hell, those parts made the movie for me.)
i loved all three films in the trilogy, and personally can't say for certain which one was my absolute fave, just because they all flow together so well... my only gripe with the film was the lack of attention given to venom, and sandman's characters... i wish raimi focused more on sandman, and developed eddie brock's relationship to pete... "venom" should've been saved for the next film (or two)... but that's just my opinion.
still loved it... even with the dance numbers (hell, those parts made the movie for me.)
I think that "Spider-Man 3" is a good movie. Its fun and dark in equal parts. The only thing I dont like is the dancing scenes, but that takes up 5 minutes of a 2 and a half hour movie. I think that this is better than "Spider-Man" but not as good as "Spider-Man 2". Im glad to own this film and I enjoy it, even if others dont.
I thought they nailed the Dark Peter storyline, and yes, I even enjoyed the part where Dark Peter is boogeying down the sidewalk. It's worth reminding y'all that while under the influence of the dark suit, Spoiler SPIDEY TRIES TO KILL SANDMAN which Aunt May later says is very un-Spider-Man-like. On the other hand, I'm glad they didn't have Pete/Spidey go completely dark, because then you would lose the contrast with Brock/Venom who is a truly corrupt character.
I do agree, though, with those who complain that Sandman and Venom aren't very deep characters.
I do agree, though, with those who complain that Sandman and Venom aren't very deep characters.
I liked the movie too. My only criticism would be that they tried to jam too much in but otherwise, it was a refreshingly quirky blockbuster.
I too was one of the few who found the movie very enjoyable -- yes, it's overstuffed with plot and filled with contrivances, but I still found it to be a nice bookend to the trilogy nonetheless.
As for the score for "Spider-Man 3", I very much enjoyed it -- well, mostly Christopher Young's sections. The third movie also encountered problems with the music, but in this case Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores. Parts of Young's score was dropped (mostly where Sony wanted the MJ/love theme or Aunt May themes to be present) and both Deborah Lurie and John Debney were hired to write cues that integrated Elfman's themes into the picture. For proof of that, look at the end credits, where both Debney and Lurie are are co-credited with Elfman.
And even in some instances, cues from the first two Elfman scores were just tracked in and to top it off, Elfman collaborator Steve Bartek re-recorded sections of the first two scores to fit certain scenes. So, like "Spider-Man 2", "Spider-Man 3" had a mashed-up musical score. I would've liked to hear Young's complete, unedited score for myself.
As for the score for "Spider-Man 3", I very much enjoyed it -- well, mostly Christopher Young's sections. The third movie also encountered problems with the music, but in this case Sony wanted a similar sound to Elfman's scores. Parts of Young's score was dropped (mostly where Sony wanted the MJ/love theme or Aunt May themes to be present) and both Deborah Lurie and John Debney were hired to write cues that integrated Elfman's themes into the picture. For proof of that, look at the end credits, where both Debney and Lurie are are co-credited with Elfman.
And even in some instances, cues from the first two Elfman scores were just tracked in and to top it off, Elfman collaborator Steve Bartek re-recorded sections of the first two scores to fit certain scenes. So, like "Spider-Man 2", "Spider-Man 3" had a mashed-up musical score. I would've liked to hear Young's complete, unedited score for myself.
I enjoyed this film too. I thought it was cramped, but still a good watch. I loved the bad-Peter sequence, it was so not what you expected and you have to love it when a film can do that to you. I thought Bryce was absolutely gorgeous. She made Dunst look like a dishrag in comparison. Not sure if they intended that to be the case, but whoever was doing Dunst's hair and makeup for 2 and 3 kept making her more and more washed out and haggard looking. Bryce's stunning eyes and smile were a refreshing sight given how gloom and doom they had Dunst looking. She looked great in the first film, not sure why they went the direction with her look like they did.
At any rate, I have this one waiting to be opened for my b-day. It is the standard DVD edition, waiting for all this format war c**p to be done with before I upgrade.
At any rate, I have this one waiting to be opened for my b-day. It is the standard DVD edition, waiting for all this format war c**p to be done with before I upgrade.
Venkman007 wrote: It wasn't horrible, just disappointing.I would have to agree with you on that.
I don't get how this film was too cramped up. The storyline was fine. 2 of the villians didn't really seem villiany. *SPOILERS* Harry was a good guy, only bad in like 2 scenes. Sandman turned out to be good from the beginning, he "just had bad luck." Venom was the only guy who was BAD. *SPOILERS END HERE* I think this was the best Spidey film, because I didn't really like the plotline of the 2nd film. It was an explosive finish to the series, they shouln't make anymore because there is nothing more to show. The story just ended.
The people that complain about the tonal shifts are the ones that probably don't like Sam Raimi (or for that matter Cohen Bros.) movies. His voice was missing from the first film especially, and still stunted on the second one. Spider-Man 3 is as Sam Raimi a film as we've seen in a decade. It's not an excuse or an implication of someone elses opinion being wrong, it's just a taste thing, and Raimi is a strange flavor.
As far as the scores go, I admit that I haven't heard the full SM3 score, and that Young's score is a bit imposing, but I liked the jazz music fist fight along with the over the top brass of the black suit's theme.
As far as the scores go, I admit that I haven't heard the full SM3 score, and that Young's score is a bit imposing, but I liked the jazz music fist fight along with the over the top brass of the black suit's theme.
nice rev Gabe....godd to see it - especiali since 'm goin to write one for my DVD site to
...
oo..and i think, that SPider 3 was bether than Spiderman 2 -which was by far the worst part of teh series.

oo..and i think, that SPider 3 was bether than Spiderman 2 -which was by far the worst part of teh series.
Sorry but that bad Peter sequence is unforgivable. It had no place in that movie at all. It was completely out of place and the tone was way off considering everything that surrounded. Maybe if ANY of the films had even a trace of wit to Peter (he's supposed to be funny people!) it might have worked. Actually no it wouldn't have since the whole point of the symbiot plot was to darken Peter. That's how it was originally written and that's how they freaking ADVERTISED THE MOVIE. Instead it's a big joke? Where's the point of the story then? It's not a comedy movie/franchise. That was supposed to be the whole point of the movie. Complete and utter MISS.
I still liked it, even though I didn't think it was as good as the first two. The first film was more of a classic. Gave a nice Spidey intro. The second one had plenty of action. The third one was still awesome.
Great review, but I didn't like the movie. It just seems like they gave up on trying to tell a story and threw everything in that they could. Why more Mary Jane drama? Maybe people would like Dunst more if her character actually did something besides whine.
I actually prefer the Elfman scores over Young's. When his material comes in it's very jarring. It doesn't flow that well with Elfman's material, and the jazzy stuff during Peter and Harrys fight really stuck out badly. Thanks Gabe for discussing the music, many people don't so it's nice to see it in a film/DVD review.
Oh, and amnesia?
I guess I probably would have liked it more if the first ones didn't set such a high standard.
The comedy worked as people did laugh in the theatre I was in, but the emo-hair scene took place after a serious fight, so it didn't fit. It seemed silly. I would assume more people would have gotten the humor if it was a thread throughout the series, instead of popping up in this one.
I actually prefer the Elfman scores over Young's. When his material comes in it's very jarring. It doesn't flow that well with Elfman's material, and the jazzy stuff during Peter and Harrys fight really stuck out badly. Thanks Gabe for discussing the music, many people don't so it's nice to see it in a film/DVD review.
Oh, and amnesia?
I guess I probably would have liked it more if the first ones didn't set such a high standard.
The comedy worked as people did laugh in the theatre I was in, but the emo-hair scene took place after a serious fight, so it didn't fit. It seemed silly. I would assume more people would have gotten the humor if it was a thread throughout the series, instead of popping up in this one.
It may not be a classic like 1 or 2, but it's still a very well made superhero movie that I enjoyed a ton.
have you heard the complete score for the second spider movie? not the horrible treatment of the music in the movie but the full complete score with everything that was rejected
you should be able to find it on the torrent sites
you should be able to find it on the torrent sites
I loved it but after seeing no deleted scenes on the DVD cries out a 3.1, but how much lnger can the film be? I mean 2hrs 20mins is the running time if there is an extra 20mins that'll be okay but and extra 30 might push it.
Bouncy X wrote: well you can feel even less alone, i'm one of those few who actually liked this one as well.
i'm sure it helps that i'm not a comic book reader at all and my only exposure to spider-man are the movies and a handfull of episodes from the 90s cartoon. i have no pre-conceived notions or expectations from either of the movies so i liked them for what they are...over the top, "popcorn" summer movies.
and while i agree the story was overstuffed, it wasnt a problem for me, i liked the movie fine. everyone's entitled to their opinion so i wont go bashing those who felt it sucked or worse.
and like you, it seems i'm of the few who realize the whole dancing "cool" Peter was meant to be stupid and laughable. I mean some of the women he pointed at were laughing at him so if the movie characters are laughing, obviously the filmakers werent trying to pass this off as serious. lol
anyway.....i liked the movie fine and i really enjoyed the 4 way battle at the end. i wasnt expecting to be "emotionally involved" with anything because well..its a movie about a guy who has spider powers, i just wanted a fun action movie and thats what i got.
I pretty much agree with everything you said there.
I too liked this movie. I don't know where all the bad press/reviews come from.
Was the movie over-stuffed? Yeah a bit, but I think Sam Raimi included enough of each sub-story to get the point across. However I feel that if the movie just ended up introducing Venom at the end, rather than making him a fairly big part of the Third Act, people would have felt cheated. So it's sort of a Catch-22.
And yeah, Bryce was a bit wasted in her role. Much the same way the hackers were in the Transformers film. However, if there's further Spider-Man installments, I'd say that she'd get more exposure.
The special effects for all villians were great. The CG effects for the Sandman were very good. Tons of particle effects there.
As for comparisons to the first two Spidey films, quite frankly, I didn't care so much for either. Oh, I liked them, but it just don't see them as the masterpieces that a lot of Spidey fans see them as. I thought that Spidey 3 was indeed the best of the trilogy as the critics have said.
i'm sure it helps that i'm not a comic book reader at all and my only exposure to spider-man are the movies and a handfull of episodes from the 90s cartoon. i have no pre-conceived notions or expectations from either of the movies so i liked them for what they are...over the top, "popcorn" summer movies.
and while i agree the story was overstuffed, it wasnt a problem for me, i liked the movie fine. everyone's entitled to their opinion so i wont go bashing those who felt it sucked or worse.
and like you, it seems i'm of the few who realize the whole dancing "cool" Peter was meant to be stupid and laughable. I mean some of the women he pointed at were laughing at him so if the movie characters are laughing, obviously the filmakers werent trying to pass this off as serious. lol
anyway.....i liked the movie fine and i really enjoyed the 4 way battle at the end. i wasnt expecting to be "emotionally involved" with anything because well..its a movie about a guy who has spider powers, i just wanted a fun action movie and thats what i got.
I pretty much agree with everything you said there.
I too liked this movie. I don't know where all the bad press/reviews come from.
Was the movie over-stuffed? Yeah a bit, but I think Sam Raimi included enough of each sub-story to get the point across. However I feel that if the movie just ended up introducing Venom at the end, rather than making him a fairly big part of the Third Act, people would have felt cheated. So it's sort of a Catch-22.
And yeah, Bryce was a bit wasted in her role. Much the same way the hackers were in the Transformers film. However, if there's further Spider-Man installments, I'd say that she'd get more exposure.
The special effects for all villians were great. The CG effects for the Sandman were very good. Tons of particle effects there.
As for comparisons to the first two Spidey films, quite frankly, I didn't care so much for either. Oh, I liked them, but it just don't see them as the masterpieces that a lot of Spidey fans see them as. I thought that Spidey 3 was indeed the best of the trilogy as the critics have said.
It wasn't horrible, just disappointing.
I liked it too.
WOW, another wonderful review.
I did hate the "JAZZY" bad-peter scenes, Stayin' Alive may have changed my mind though. The JAZZiness had no relevance or reasoning, I would have loved anything by the Bee Gees there. I felt the same about Bryce, she was wasted in the role, she has shown in her previous roles to be a full and rounded performer and could have handled much more of a meatier role.
Keep up the excellent reviews, is Envy one of the ten commandments? NO, I do not think so...
I did hate the "JAZZY" bad-peter scenes, Stayin' Alive may have changed my mind though. The JAZZiness had no relevance or reasoning, I would have loved anything by the Bee Gees there. I felt the same about Bryce, she was wasted in the role, she has shown in her previous roles to be a full and rounded performer and could have handled much more of a meatier role.
Keep up the excellent reviews, is Envy one of the ten commandments? NO, I do not think so...
well you can feel even less alone, i'm one of those few who actually liked this one as well.
i'm sure it helps that i'm not a comic book reader at all and my only exposure to spider-man are the movies and a handfull of episodes from the 90s cartoon. i have no pre-conceived notions or expectations from either of the movies so i liked them for what they are...over the top, "popcorn" summer movies.
and while i agree the story was overstuffed, it wasnt a problem for me, i liked the movie fine. everyone's entitled to their opinion so i wont go bashing those who felt it sucked or worse.
and like you, it seems i'm of the few who realize the whole dancing "cool" Peter was meant to be stupid and laughable. I mean some of the women he pointed at were laughing at him so if the movie characters are laughing, obviously the filmakers werent trying to pass this off as serious. lol
anyway.....i liked the movie fine and i really enjoyed the 4 way battle at the end. i wasnt expecting to be "emotionally involved" with anything because well..its a movie about a guy who has spider powers, i just wanted a fun action movie and thats what i got.
good review btw.....i agree about the extras, while there's over 2hrs of stuff, it seems to be holding back so yeah...Spider-Man 3.1 is surely on the horizon. lol
i'm sure it helps that i'm not a comic book reader at all and my only exposure to spider-man are the movies and a handfull of episodes from the 90s cartoon. i have no pre-conceived notions or expectations from either of the movies so i liked them for what they are...over the top, "popcorn" summer movies.
and while i agree the story was overstuffed, it wasnt a problem for me, i liked the movie fine. everyone's entitled to their opinion so i wont go bashing those who felt it sucked or worse.
and like you, it seems i'm of the few who realize the whole dancing "cool" Peter was meant to be stupid and laughable. I mean some of the women he pointed at were laughing at him so if the movie characters are laughing, obviously the filmakers werent trying to pass this off as serious. lol
anyway.....i liked the movie fine and i really enjoyed the 4 way battle at the end. i wasnt expecting to be "emotionally involved" with anything because well..its a movie about a guy who has spider powers, i just wanted a fun action movie and thats what i got.
good review btw.....i agree about the extras, while there's over 2hrs of stuff, it seems to be holding back so yeah...Spider-Man 3.1 is surely on the horizon. lol


Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13
Disc Details
Release Date:
30th October 2007
Discs:
2
Disc Type:
Blu-ray Disc
RCE:
No
Video:
1080p
Aspect:
2.40:1
Anamorphic:
No
Colour:
Yes
Audio:
PCM 5.1 English, Dolby TrueHD 5.1 English, Dolby Digital 5.1 French, Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 Spanish, Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 Portuguese, Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 Thai
Subtitles:
English SDH, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Korean, Thai, Chinese (Traditional Mandarin), Chinese (Cantonese)
Extras:
Audio Commentaries, Featurettes, Bloopers, Photo Galleries, Music Video
Easter Egg:
No
Feature Details
Director:
Sam Raimi
Cast:
Toby Maguire, Bruce Campbell, James Franco, Bryce Dallas-Howard, Kirsten Dunst, Topher Grace, Thomas Hayden Church
Genre:
Action, Adventure, Comedy and Sci-Fi
Length:
139 minutes
Ratings
Awards


Amazon.com
FOLLOW DVDACTIVE
Follow our updates
OTHER INTERESTING STUFF
Thrilling Reviews





Latest Reviews





Latest News





Most Talked About




