Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #678 in DVD
• Released on: 2007-10-15
• Rating: To Be Announced
• Aspect ratio: 1.78:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, PAL
• Original language: English
• Number of discs: 2
• Running time: 133 minutes

Amazon.co.uk

How does Spider-Man 3 follow on the heels of its predecessor, which was widely considered the best superhero movie ever? For starters, you pick up the loose threads from that movie, then add some key elements of the Spidey comic-book mythos (including fan-favorite villain Venom), the black costume, and the characters of Gwen Stacy and her police-captain father. In the beginning, things have never looked better for Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire): He's doing well in school; his alter ego, Spider-Man, is loved and respected around New York City. And his girlfriend, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), has just taken a starring role in a Broadway musical. But nothing good can last for Spidey. Mary Jane's career quickly goes downhill; she's bothered by Peter's attractive new classmate, Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard); and the new Daily Bugle photographer, Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), is trying to steal his thunder. Enter a new villain, the Sandman (Thomas Haden Church), who can transform his body into various forms and shapes of sand and who may be connected to Peter's past in an unexpected way. There's also the son of an old villain, Harry Osborne (James Franco), who unmasked Spidey in the previous movie and still has revenge on his mind. And a new black costume seems to boost Spidey's powers, but transforms mild-mannered Peter into a mean and obnoxious boor (Maguire has some fun here).

If that sounds like a lot to pack into one 140-minute movie, it is. While director Sam Raimi keeps things flowing, assisted on the screenplay by his brother Ivan and Alvin Sargent, there's a little too much going on, and it's inevitable that one of the villains (there are three or four, depending on how you count) gets significantly short-changed. Still, the cast is excellent, the effects are fantastic, and the action is fast and furious. Even if Spider-Man 3 isn't the match of Spider-Man 2, it's a worthy addition to the megamillion-dollar franchise. --David Horiuchi

Synopsis
The Marvel comics hero returns for more high-flying fun in this third instalment in the series. Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is up to his usual Spidey tricks, attending university classes as an awkward geek, then quickly slipping into his red-and-blue suit to save New York City from various villains. And there are villains aplenty. Thomas Hayden Church blows in as the Sandman, an escaped convict whose molecular structure is destroyed in a particle accelerator. The freak accident gives him the ability to form and reform from piles of dust. While the Sandman sifts through the city streets robbing banks, Spidey must also contend with his onetime friend, Harry (James Franco), who has taken up where his father, the Green Goblin, left off. Harry chases Spider-Man down on his goblin glider, hurling pumpkin bombs. But Spider-Man's biggest battle is perhaps within himself, when he is taken over by meteorite ooze--a substance that gives him great power, but also turns him into a vengeful, selfish person. Throw into the mix Peter's new competition at the Daily Bugle--the ambitious, sneaky Eddie Brock (Topher Grace)--and Peter's relationship troubles with Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst), and SPIDER-MAN 3 weaves a tangled web indeed.
Director Sam Raimi's playful style and his delightfully campy screenplay hold true to the spirit of the Stan Lee comics, and he does an excellent job of hitting all the right superhero notes. Raimi has created an action film that is a feast for the eyes, but comes with fully rounded characters and a moving moral lesson to boot. The special effects are astounding, but Raimi makes sure the film isn't all action and no talk--he makes Peter's struggle a human one, and one that we can all relate to, regardless of our web-spinning ability.

Customer Reviews

Can Spidey both save the world from three villains and protect the good reputation of this 3rd movie in the series?
Spiderman gets pinned by nothing less than three villains this time. It is clear that many have complained about this. One can agree that there is a risk of the different character's plots of getting too shallow, but we already knew the story of Harry Osbourne and why he is angry at Parker, so that is one less to be concerned about. Now Sandman, as I recall, was a whole new character that Raimi made dedicated entirely to the movie. Personally I did not mind him getting involved in the plot in the way he did (I will not go further into details for the benefit of readers who has not watched the movie yet,) but some might also think that it ruined a lot of the initial take on the story, which was created in the first movie and furthermore that they abandoned the concept in the early cartoons and Graphic Novels (which I am a bit, but not much acquainted with). This is of course a huge let down especially for the fans of the original Spiderman stories. The bit I was looking forward to in the movie was how they had created Venom and what their take on him would be. I remember sitting in the living room watchin Spidey on the TV fighting this weird substance from Mars, first because it was going to take over his personality and later Brock who attained it. It became my favourite villain in the series. I did not quite feel the satisfaction of Venom's personality in the movie though, mainly because it did not quite fit the story in the TV series. The CGI is a complete other issue, and I believe that they graphically made Venom just like everyone had imagined. The thing with today though is that graphics are not all and people are famishing for some good stories to the animated characters. Today many companies make animated movies and CGI and it has become so standardized that you can not exceed the barrier of the audience just by relying on technology. On the other hand if the animation lacks because of the standard expected today, people are dissapointed as well, but we will save that for some other time. As many other people I also agree on the fact that Parker was ridiculed in the most extreme way as possible. First of all his character does not fit this kind of persona, and secondly, Tobey did not manage to convince me of Parker having changed due to the new outfit. It was a bit misplaced in the movie, but it was quite obvious to see what the director wanted with those scenes. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out I might add. But besides that incident the movie was quite appaling to me and it could definetely have been done better, but many sequels end up being minor movies in which many people might think that it was just made due to commercial reasons. I did enjoy the moments in which one could recognize some of the original ideas, for instance that Venom is vulnerable to high ptched sounds and I do believe that Spiderman 3 had other moments. The soundtrack in Spiderman 3 pretty much sticked to the kind of music played in the other movies and one did not doubt which movie the music belonged to. The same theme song in the start of the other two movies also played in this one, so that was satisfying.

So to sum up:
The CGI was amazing and the way The Sandman forms is very thoroughly made and you are not the least doubting which character you are looking at when Venom is on the take. Spiderman as usual also looked pretty good and the animation in the combat scenes did not falter much either. The story line could have been more thorough and for the more critical fans it might even have been a dissapointment. Since I am a fan of Spiderman I decided to give it four stars instead of three. It could have been better, but compared to other sequels it was quite good.

Should have set everyone's spider-senses tingling
The first two Spider-Man movies were hugely entertaining and well put together slices of blockbuster action. Neither was a cinematic masterpiece but they were well-written, well-cast, well-acted, and most importantly fun. All good things, however, must come to an end.

Probably the most disappointing movie from 2007's summer season Spider-Man 3 opts for the Batman Forever/Batman and Robin failure of cramming in too many new characters, too many villains, too many pointless plot twists. We're left with an overlong jumble of a movie that is utterly charmless in its execution. As many others haver commented the film overdoes the villains, with the arrival of criminal on the run Sandman, jealous symbiote Venom, and a tooled-up Harry Osborne as a new Green Goblin. For a big chunk of the film Spidey himself walks a slightly villainous line as the black costume that will become Venom later in the film corrupts him and makes him "nasty Peter". What this all means is that none of the villians has the chance to be developed like the Green Goblin in the first and Doctor Octopus in the second.

The cast that served the franchise so well in the first two films is a spectacular let down here. Tobey Maguire worked so well as Peter Parker because he looked nerdy and was likeable. The downside to that is that when he's playing dark-Peter Maguire just comes accross like a geek trying to be a hardman. Kirsten Dunst is landed with some of the worst elements of the script and is excrutiating as MJ- no wonder he's dumping her for cute-but-completely-personalityless Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard). Topher Grace is a nice boy but woefully miscast as Eddie Brock/Venom while Thomas Hayden Church is given no room to make you give a damn.

Random annoyances are that everytime there's any kind of big fight everyone takes their masks off. Given the amount of CCTV in NYC how the hell are Peter, Harry, and the others meant to be maintaining any kind of secret ID. The ending with Spidey just allowing Sandman to float away because he realises the nasty villain isn't in fact responsible for Uncle Ben's death (anothe rof the movie's worthless conceits) overlooks the fact that Sandman has just attempted to violently bludgeon him to death and also been part responsible for an attempted murder on his girlfriend.

The material in this movie could, with some tweaking, have been split into two good films. Instead its a big mess where nothing works. Its a humourless disaster of a movie that Sam Raimi and Co really should learn from lest they go down the Batman route and follow this up with a franchise killer.

A victim of its own success?
I was such a huge fan of the previous two Spider-Man movies. The first is my favourite superhero movie alongside Batman, and the second is one of those very rare sequels which can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with its predecessor. So it is with crushing disappointment and a bitter taste that Spider-Man 3 feels so, so far beneath its predecessors.

I know I'm reiterating what others have said, but the problem is twofold; too many enemies (or at least, poor balancing between them) and it goes 'dark'. The Sandman is the most blatant anomaly - they re-worked Uncle Ben's death to give Spidey a personal vengeance motive, but it really doesn't work, and to say it feels crowbarred in is a gross understatement. Further, Sandman simply doesn't feel like a very appropriate enemy given that he's basically invincible and at the end has the ability to grow to about 50 feet tall. I know this is a superhero movie and realism isn't high on the agenda, but even so it's still a little implausible. Had they killed him off when Spidey drowned him and thus created Venom sooner, many of the film's problems would have been eradicated.

Which highlights another problem; Venom - or the lack of him, to be more specific. For such a major and well-loved foe from the comics, he features in the film barely at all, only really getting a look-in at the very end before his inevitable (and rather underwhelming) defeat. He should really have been the major enemy here, but after the re-write of Uncle Ben's death that honour rather uncomfortably goes to the Sandman.

There are yet more issues with the alien symbiote, and Peter's awful descent into darkness. The sequences when he dances down the street or tries to make MJ jealous are utterly cringe worthy and completely unnecessary, and cutting them entirely would have only benefited the film and its generous running time. While the two predecessors weren't without their moments of humour, here the comparative scenes just come across as needless and frankly embarrassing.

What's more is that Peter and MJ's relationship feels so token you wondered why they bothered. Mary Jane's role in the movie is basically to do little more than whinge, make things difficult for Peter/Spidey and inevitably get kidnapped. Again. After Raimi spent two films building the tragic romance between them, it really never has a place here, which seems like such a waste for a relationship which has before now been genuinely interesting and touching.

However, the film is not entirely without merit. As you would expect, the special effects are superb throughout. The action sequences are a dazzling cacophony of speed and colour, but they're never less than nice to look at. The perfectly cast JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson returns for more light-hearted comic relief, and similarly Bruce Campbell returns with a superb cameo as an obnoxious French waiter. The wonderful Danny Elfman score returns and the production as a whole carries the very highest level of polish. It's just a shame proceedings are brought down by a poor plot and inadequate pacing.

Perhaps Spider-Man 3 is not really *that* bad, but following its two excellent predecessors it was never going to fare well if it were anything less than very good, and sadly it is average, at best. Maybe Sony Pictures will consider it a lesson learned the hard way, and make sure the standard of the inevitable third sequel is back on top. As it is, Spider-Man 3 is a moderately enjoyable but disappointing entry to the franchise.