Escape to the Movies: You Are Wrong About Spider-Man 3

[theNater]

Yeah, but his ability to fly is only relevant if he landed within sight of where the hole in the sky opens, which I just don't believe happened. He landed on a rocky beach next to a florid field with no visible signs of human development. I just don't believe that's within line of sight of downtown New York. I mean, he wasn't there when Stark and Cap figured out where Loki was gonna set up, so it's not like he knew where he had to go.

He could have plausibly been in Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge. Human development is actively kept away from it(cause, y'know, wildlife refuge) and it's Brooklyn-adjacent.

 

[sumanoskae]

I would agree that people seriously overstate this films problems; it's nowhere near as great as 1 and 2, but it's still a good film overall, I'd say. While Spiderman 3's primary issue is a structural one, it's substance is still, for the most part, top notch.

Example: Harry finding out that his dad took his own life and sacrificing himself to save Peter; this makes no fucking sense. Harry should have found this out easily or his butler should have told him, (What the hell, man?) but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't genuinely tragic to see Harry and Peter as best friends for the first time since movie 1, only for Harry to be the person who ultimately pays the price for Peters mistakes. This story arc could have been fantastic if it was just cleaned up a little bit, and that describes the film as a whole; lots of good ideas getting in each others way.

I'll say this, if Spiderman 3 is endearingly flawed, The Amazing Spiderman is painfully average. It could be argued that there is less technically wrong with The Amazing Spiderman, but I cannot imagine anyone would compare it's heart or ambition to ANY of the original trilogy.

The Amazing Spiderman does nothing but go through the motions in an acceptable fashion, which would be less annoying if it wasn't so fucking unnecessary; there is nothing about it that the original trilogy didn't do at least mildly better, or at most MUCH better.

So yeah, I'll take Spiderman 3's messy, scatterbrained attempt at a story with real humanity over Amazing's clean, manufactured drivel any day.

Better yet, I'll just rewatch Spiderman 1 and 2; they're not that fucking old.

 

[MrJoyless]

I went back and reread or wiki'd the whole venom backstory and maximum carnage nonsense. It's all garbage it really is. Venom as a concept is neat but no writer to this date has been able to add any depth to venom or eddie brock. YOu will never see a section of marvel knights or selfcontained Graphic novel about venom. There's just nothing to say.

Wait...what???

Venom is the ultimate jilted lover, Eddie/Venom HATE Spiderman to the point where Eddie/Venom almost ends up sacrificing his (ex?)wife so he can try and kill Spiderman. I love characters whose motivation is utter savage uncompromising revenge, and man does Venom want their revenge.

THAT is why maximum carnage is so great. Venom conquers their rage and hatred of Spiderman, to the point where Venom actually thanks Spiderman for saving someone they cared about. Venom actually matures as a chaotic good type of character in maximum carnage, to the point where he actually teams up with the marvel version of a "religious" do good pair(cloak and dagger).

It is tragic that no one has pushed venom further as a character, he has depth once you get past all the die Spiderman die kill Spiderman kill that was the early part of his bio.

 

[mrdude2010]

I disagree with him taking Spider Man 3 over The Dark Knight Rises, but yeah, it really wasn't a disaster. It wasn't good, but it wasn't a disaster.