Jim Doom has been invited.
Jim has entered the room.
Jean-Claude Van Doom: hello
Jim: I got booted. Did my last few posts show up? I was trying to respond to
Fin Fang Doom and nothing was showing up.
Fin: Yes, they did.
JCVD: They finally did all as one.
Jim has left the room.
JCVD: Big rush. Goodbye again.
Jim has been invited.
Jim has entered the room.
JCVD: So, favorite moments or other favorable comments?
Jim: Did Fin post anything after “the last fight was Goblin/Venom vs. Spidey…”
Fin: Shall I continue?
Jim: If you want. But I think it’s absurd to say that Harry’s arc and the Sandman’s arc were the same thing. Like with Peter, they all fit into a theme of revenge and redemption, but each had its own nuance that was hardly interchangeable.
JCVD: I’d concur with that. Also, I really enjoyed the final fight as a two vs. two match.
Fin: Certainly, but with simple changes to the script…
Jim: That’s like saying they could have taken out Harry too because that was Peter’s arc.
Fin: But then it wouldn’t be a theme, now would it?
Jim: You’re right, which is why I don’t agree with your point. Thanks for coming around to my way of thinking.
JCVD: let’s call that a stalemate and move on.
Fin: I want to say one more thing.
Jim: Is Colonel still around?
Fin: I don’t think including Sandman was a bad idea. I just think the movie could have conveyed essentially the same ideas in a much more concise manner by leaving him out.
JCVD: So, on to the positives?
Jim: It wasn’t nearly as good as I hoped, nearly as good as 1 or 2, but still better than most superhero movies.
Fin: I thought the movie was incredibly funny…
Jim: Even though I thought it was handled kind of poorly, I really enjoyed Harry’s redemption and I didn’t even see it coming until Peter showed up in his window.
Colonel Doom: I really don’t know if I thought it was that much better than The Punisher or Fantastic 4
JCVD: The Punisher!?! That’s on the rare list of movies I had to quit watching because it was so terrible.
Jim: I meant to say “NOT nearly as good as 1 or 2.â€
JCVD: Until it disappeared below all the superhero stuff, I thought the relationship aspect was very well done.
Fin: I thought the relationship stuff was handled very poorly. I really kind of wanted MJ to die at the end
Jim: JCVD – what did you like about the relationship stuff? Fin – what did you think was poor about it?
JCVD: It’s incredibly difficult to be in a working relationship, even with someone you love absolutely. That’s obviously compounded by MJ’s struggles and Peter’s success. So it was a very realistic portrayal of how people would react in an exaggerated situation.
Fin: I guess my dislike of the relationship stuff stems from my dislike of MJ. She just didn’t seem like someone I’d want to be in a relationship with for most of the movie. Then again, I’m not in love with her, and Peter is.
Colonel: Yeah, but she was quite annoying
JCVD: I would still say that Kirsten Dunst was miscast, but she did a good job in this movie, much better than the first two.
Colonel: I mean, she was living her dream, on Broadway!
Jim: She was annoying, but I felt the situation was presented believably.
Colonel: Believable in that girlfriends can at times act inexplicably
Jim: and that Peter’s love of attention could leave Peter to stray.
JCVD: See, that side of the movie was well done!
Jim: Peter needs to ditch the whiner for that fox Gwen Stacy!
Fin: For reals.
JCVD: I love how they hired a blonde and dyed her hair red to play MJ and hired a red head and dyed her hair blonde to play Gwen.
Fin: And they made Gwen the supermodel after MJ was essentially Gwen for the first two movies.
JCVD: Time for closing thoughts?
Fin: I was thinking the same thing
JCVD: Cue the music!
Colonel: Spider-Man 3 was decent but unlike 1 and 2 I’m not looking forward to another one.
JCVD: It was probably the most enjoyable bad movie I’ve seen, aside from Lone Wolf McQuade. Somehow I doubt Spider-Man 3 joins the first two in my DVD collection.
Jim: I agree with the Colonel and JCVD. I was pleased with a lot of it, including the general direction of the characters, but really disappointed by sloppy and unsophisticated writing. I normally wouldn’t hold an action movie up to such high standards if not for how great the first 2 were. And again, I want to clarify, I thought the first 2 were GREAT MOVIES, not just great comic book movies. They showed that the genre of the source material did not have to be a hindrance on the film adaptation.
JCVD: “Comic book” isn’t a genre, it’s a medium. It’s superhero, jerkface.
Fin: I really enjoyed Spider-Man 3, but to be fair I’m quite the Spidey apologist. The action in the movie was by far the best of the franchise…but admittedly, the drama was not. It had quite a change in tone from the first two films, but I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing. Campy can work for Spider-Man, and campy can work for Sam Raimi. It was really long, though.
JCVD: Just like this review.