ROTTEN TOMATOES: Box Office Guru Wrapup: Spider-Man 3 Demolishes Records in Historic Debut Comments

Box Office Guru Wrapup: Spider-Man 3 Demolishes Records in Historic Debut

by Gitesh Pandya | May 06, 2007

Summary

In the most lopsided box office victory in history, the hugely anticipated super sequel "Spider-Man 3" swung into theaters and monopolized the marketplace breaking the all-time records for both opening day and opening weekend in the process. Back to Article

(1-85 of 85 posts) | Reply

Jack Noff writes:
on May 06 2007 07:47 PM

wow, that's a lotta cash. could you imagine how much it would have made if it wasn't a total turd?

(Reply to this)

CMPunk>you writes:
on May 06 2007 08:32 PM

In reply to this comment (#864039)
[b]Please[/b]
Quit crying and just confess that it made more money in 3 days then you will even dream about.

Oh and it was quite the good movie. "total turd" wow I think I heard that one back in 2nd grade and it wasn't funny.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 06 2007 09:00 PM

Yeah, now that you're in 3rd grade I believe "stink fest" is the more widely accepted description, right? ...and when I dream of money, it's usually in the billions + so I have no idea what you are talking about!!

I won't be the last to tell you this, but EVERYONE expected Spiderman to make that much money, so what the hell is your point? On the other hand, NO ONE expected it to be as lame as it turned out to be. Yes, this is just my opinion, but go look around the forums and you might see just why it is many people agree with me. Those who didn't like it, generally seem to have the same gripes, and all the fans continually defending it never really seem to address these issues. Nor do they offer any contrary points for why the movie was a success (other than it had "cool" action, and has made lots of money). It is now only 2% from being "rotten", so please don't go asking people to 'confess' to how much money the movie made, it's pointless. Lot's of uninspiring dribble has proven to make huge amounts of $$$ for people before, for instance just look at Jesus, Oprah, and Paris Hilton.

(Reply to this)

Decade_e_a writes:
on May 06 2007 09:55 PM

[b]heh[/b]
Big surprise... it made a lot of money. I believe with the 2nd one being so goddamned popular and the teaser coming out more than a year before, it's a no-brainer. Plus, the pirates movies suck anyway, and Spiderman 3 wasn't THAT bad. Think about all the other mindless banter thats been coming out lately. Think about every Michael Bay movie ever made. Spiderman 3 isn't the tri-fecta masterpiece of superhero history.... but it's really not that bad.

>>===aaron==>

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 06 2007 10:35 PM

[b]regarding the trailers attached to Spiderman...[/b]
Which trailers seemed to get the best response from the audience? In the cinema I saw Spiderman in, 'Transformers' really seemed to win people over - the sound effects in that trailer are quite impressive, reminds me of those sound blasts from the second SW prequel. Everyone was expecting Pirates so no real surprises there, and Bourne Ultimatum was pretty sweet too, but again, it was Transformers that really had heads turning IMO.

(Reply to this)

screwhead100 writes:
on May 06 2007 10:44 PM

[b]pirates 3[/b]
is going to take all those records right back........the open ending to pt.2 almost guarantees huge numbers.......not to mention they added Chow Yun-Fat to get the asian crowd more of a reason to go see it..........

dont get me wrong, these numbers are huge especially for luke warm reviews but pirates 3 will shatter ALL of them......

(Reply to this)

selke99 writes:
on May 06 2007 11:23 PM

[b]In my opinion...[/b]
Just wanted to comment on Spidey3. Maybe it was reading the negative critics and people who had seen it, but I didn't think it was all that bad. But it was definitely the worst of the 3. But for the first 2/3s, I thought it was on par with the first 2. But the last part, after Brock turns to Venom, the movie seemed really rushed, almost like Raimi was close to a deadine and had to turn something in. Venom really doesn't get much treatment. I didn't like the last scene with Flint and Peter, and the Butler, uh, what the hell??? Peter turning pseudo-suave didn't really bother me, I thought they were well done. Raimi and Maguire needed to show Peter's bad side and I thought they did a good job of that. And to people bashing Dunst's singing: I think there are better MJs out there, but her singing was not that bad! You could tell it was all pre-recorded and polished, but I didn't think it was a big deal. Gwen Stacey was hot, I wish they had more for her character, but there was just too many characters and storylines for this one. The re-writing of Ben's death didn't bother me as much as I thought it would while watching the movie. The "awesome" and "wicked cool" kids were f$cking annoying( I read they were sons of Raimi and his brother who was also in the movie as Simmons' assistant), as was the female TV reporter. I like Topher, but he seemed to play Brock similar to his smartass character in the 70's show. I'm not sure if Brock was like that in the comics; I thought he was more dark. And about Peter crying at the end; Toby's a great actor, but he looks like an idiot crying. He looked the same in the first one when he cried over Ben's body. All in all, I liked it enough to own the DVD (unlike X3, which I thought was entertaining but something I would forget about and not care to see again). Just my worthless 2 cents. Unfortunately I did not get a Transformers preview.
The last thing was the ending made me feel kind of empty. The first ends with MJ possibly figuring out Peter is Spiderman and Peter feeling redemption from his uncle. The second end with Peter finally getting MJ, but fades with her worried face. This one just kinda ends. Needed something like the previous movies, or Batman where they tease the next villan. I can see maybe this being the last of a series, but after this bank, they're definitely making about 10 more!

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 07 2007 12:13 AM

In reply to this comment (#864041)
Actually it is the other way around the people that hate it cannot givve a valid reason why it sucked and the people that liked it are the ones making the great arguments. Try again.

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 07 2007 12:15 AM

In reply to this comment (#864041)
Wow bigot, nice comment about jesus, your opinion is officially not valid and your right to talk has been revoked.

(Reply to this)

sean928 writes:
on May 07 2007 12:42 AM

In reply to this comment (#864046)
actually i agree, i read the comics and i loved the 1st two movies, but this one was lame. no one who liked it can give a good reason other than the graphics and the fact that his suit turns black. and wow...all 30 min of spiderman is awesome...how about the full 2 hrs of shitty acting, rushed story and crappy dialoge...." go get her buddy"? hes supposed to be the new freakin goblin. and whats up with all the crying in this movie, my wife even thought this was more of a chick flick than a spiderman movie. if they do make another one, less of peter and more of spiderman. honestly, i was very dissappointed.

(Reply to this)

lrm8 writes:
on May 07 2007 12:44 AM

i'd put spiderman 3 a touch above the fantastic four level, but under X3. X3 didnt do enough, but it didnt do anything wrong, whereas spiderman 3 tried to do so many things and did ALOT wrong. there were just too many ridiculous things going on in the movie. Venom got shafted, and even though i dont mind them changing him from the comic books, he wasnt done justice, and topher grace is the complete wrong guy to play him, he sounded like a bad clint east wood impersonator... it really showed that raimi didnt like the character at all...

sand man's first scene was cool, but the rest sucked, and the last action scene wasnt up to par. harry was actually the best villain in the movie, and franco wasnt half bad, but we had all seen the best part of the movie (the goblin-spidey scene) about three months ago...

but, there were just too many ridiculous things. the butler, mj singing twice, the jazz club scene, harry's amnesia, changing the uncle ben story, the way sandman left the movie (where did he go at the end of the movie, the bahamas? what happened to his little daughter?), peter being a bad boy by asking the neighbour to bring him cookies... on and on and on...

it wasnt elektra bad, but considering how good the first two were, it is definately a huge disappointment in my opinion...

(Reply to this)

sean928 writes:
on May 07 2007 01:00 AM

i agree. i read the novelization of spidey 3 and it was a tad better than the movie but not much. the book even seemed darker than the movie nd seemed to go in deeper detail with eddie brock than the movie did, i also agree theat franco did a good job, but with the spidey movies i think less is better they spent too much time focusing on peter and less on the overall story and the villians. i think the goblin suit could have been a bit more like the goblin instead of a sadistic snowboarder. and relavint to that they should have stuck to just sand man and possibly the goblin, and save venom for the next movie were they could have focused more on the development of the character and the corruption the black suit put on peters attitude and personal mind set, it did feel rushed. hopefully if they do make a 4th (which i hear they will) they need to focus more on the villian(s) and the role they play against spiderman, not just how they relate to peter parker.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 01:37 AM

In reply to this comment (#864046)
lol. this guy. talk about selective reading.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 07 2007 02:50 AM

[b]aknddon3[/b]
You really haven't been looking around the forums properly have you, well, either that or you're illiterate? I'm just wondering too, how old are you? I think your love for Spiderman 3 probably gives this away, nevertheless one thing I have noticed about you is that you keep popping up in a lot of topics posting the same comments 3-4 times in a row, with people then subsequently dismissing you as a bit of an idiot with not much to say. Go have a look, or maybe you should get your arse back in the cinema because I have a feeling Spiderman 3 is going to see a big drop in earnings next week, and only you fanboys can save it!

(Reply to this)

curtis writes:
on May 07 2007 03:46 AM

Spider man 3 Sucks. It will fall hard in the next coming weeks. i am glade to see hat alot of people did not like it.

(Reply to this)

~*Admiral Snowstorm*~ writes:
on May 07 2007 03:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#864042)
Completely correct. I really couldn't agree more. Fantastic post.

(Reply to this)

daycare writes:
on May 07 2007 04:10 AM

It seems like everwere big movie site seem to Dis like Spider man 3. People were booing when the movie ended. What is going on. The reaction is not good for this at all. Something tell me we are look at a hue boxoffice fall next week.

(Reply to this)

loudharley writes:
on May 07 2007 04:13 AM

I enjoyed it.I dont know what people expect from these types of movies.I will say though it did have a few to many story lines ,even still i enjoyed it.sorry guys,i thought it was good.

(Reply to this)

selke99 writes:
on May 07 2007 05:00 AM

Bruce Campbell and J.K. Simmons were hilarious in this one.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on May 07 2007 05:19 AM

[b]148 million is all?[/b]
I was suprised this film didn't make 200 million in three days. It was up against nothing. Even next week it doesn't really have any competition.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 07 2007 05:21 AM

Bruce Campbell reminds me a lot of John Cleese

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 07 2007 06:04 AM

Well, I'll chime in and say that while it was the worst of the three (2 is still my favorite) I enjoyed it well enough. It was a bit overstuffed plot-wise and I certainly would have liked more Venom, but overall it's not a bad way to kick off the summer moviegoing season. I found the acting uniformly sound, if nothing spectacular. Agree that I could have done without the kid's comments, and even Stan Lee's cameo seemed a bit silly. But hey, it's a comic book movie, what are you gonna do?

(Reply to this)

Vikingus writes:
on May 07 2007 06:15 AM

Ah Yes, ze Bruce was very good in zis movie. Actually that was a bigger highlight. When credits rolled people were applauding, typical new york crowd, easy to please. I didn't know how to feel about the movie at first, I wasn't feeling fulfilled, something was missing and than I realized I was confused and didn't really know what just happened. Too much was going on with many shots too long and many of them (more important ones) way to short to expend the movie on a right level. It kinda felt like a Titanic and Batman and Robin rip off, if you know what I mean.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 06:16 AM

In reply to this comment (#864052)
The fanboys who haven't renounced the film for its many embarrassing blunders, that is. Seriously, the previous films had a balance that adults and kids could equally appreciate. So one wonder why the film that claims to finally address all the darkness and inner complexity is the most dumbed down one, seemingly designed to alienate the adults.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 06:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#864042)
Michael Bay probably wouldn't have done much better with the story had he directed it, but I bet the darkness would have been more pronounced and far less cheesy. And Venom would have been more of the heavy weight we were hoping for, rather than a wise cracking nemesis monster with big teeth and little punch.

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on May 07 2007 06:27 AM

i liked the movie, and that's the only opinion that matters to me. the end

(Reply to this)

lockdicer writes:
on May 07 2007 06:41 AM

[b]biggest surprise ever[/b]
i actually think silver surfer has a chance of being better than this - wouldn't that be the biggest irony ever considering the last movies (spiderman 2 compared to FF1)

i would probably shit my pants if i saw silver surfer has a tomatometer of over 80%

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 06:46 AM

In reply to this comment (#864060)
Come on, man. Why do people always do that? Dismiss a film's flaws with an offhand "well, it's a comic book movie." There are three kinds of comic book movies. There's the bottom feeder, which just used name recognition to get in an audience for a very poorly executed rendition of a mythology never seriously observed by the helmers. (Spawn, Elektra, Catwoman) Then there's the Middle Path, where they try to capture the cool while being soft on the substance just to secure a PG:13 rating. (X Men, X:3, Fantastic Four) These are sometimes ok, but seldom really good, often cheesy with cool effects laced around a story that the diehards hate. Then of course there's Elite, the catagory that Batman Begins and Superman: The Movie and Spiderman 2 fall under. It's the film that pays a great deal of respect for the character and his mythology. These films triumph in story as well as in effects, with the story often enhancing our appreciation of the action. The diehards usually love these. Because the stories have substance and intensity, not just big explosions and a loud soundtrack.
The point? Well, the point is that a comic book movie can be held to the same standard as any other film. They are not children's movies. And even if they were, the kids deserve the honor of a good story as well. Look at a film like Happy Feet and tell me a children's movie can't have depth and social significance. To me that's what makes a film literary. And comic book films are derived from a form of literature, worthy of our respect.
So in response to your question, "it's a comic book movie, what are you gonna do?" Well, what you can do is expect better. What you can do is not settle for crap.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 06:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#864065)
I hope you've a lot of toilet paper then. 'Cuz FF2 is definitely gonna be better than this s&*t!

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 06:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#864067)
Man, you've got a serious bone to pick with this movie, huh? Did it kill your dog or something?

(Reply to this)

synergyred writes:
on May 07 2007 07:01 AM

Wow! That's a lot of cash!

Personally, I enjoyed the movie, but I agree that the first two were superior. Glad to see them finally get MJ's hair an attractive color. Next movie, let's go for Gwen Stacy's too!

(Reply to this)

Vitamin M writes:
on May 07 2007 07:02 AM

I love Spiderman and I enjoyed the film even though it was the worst of the three but I will have to say I don't understand the mass appeal of the series to generate so much money. but good for them.
and the dancing/piano playing/strutting Peter Parker was one of the strangest/funniest scenes I've ever seen.
anyway I'll be there again for Spiderman 4. even if the cast and crew are completely overhauled which may be what the series needs.

(Reply to this)

RainNIU writes:
on May 07 2007 07:04 AM

Enjoy the movies fanboys.

I accept people's opinions of the movie, but it's not healthy to preseverate on the negative.

Like an ex-girlfriend - get over it.

(Reply to this)

HJPotter writes:
on May 07 2007 07:05 AM

[b]Face it, S3 rocked.[/b]
I just have to hang my head and sigh (to keep from jumping out of a window) when I hear someone say that X3 was better than S3, because you really need your head examined.

Taking the time to write about everything that was wrong about X3 would take 3 pages worth, because that movie was the biggest disappointment, from a fan's perspective, that I have ever experienced. How anybody could like X3 after the greatness of X1-2 is beyond me, but like I said, there's doctors for that kind of treatment.

Now let me say this, all around S3 was not better than S2, but it killed S1 which is definitely the weakest link of the series.
Minor Spoiler Ahead!
The best action of the series, continued great acting by Maguire, Dunst and Franco, nice story angle, great sequel progression, cool parrallel scenes from S1 and S2 (dark Peter walking down the street and being noticed, M.J. walking away from Peter at Harry's funeral), great comic book treatment and awesome special effects.

Granted S3 was far from perfect, with it's sometimes lame fakey acting by extras (the news reporters were a disgrace), overkill dark Peter dance number, and worst of all a tacked on Venom who got the severe short end of the stick, including a less than robust climax.

There is three sentences of mostly minor problems with S3, but looked at as a whole it was a great movie. Face it people, I did not really understand why you loved S1 so much when it was extremely flawed (but as a fan I could over look some mistakes and recognize that it was the first of the series, hoping the sequels would improve, and they definitely did), yet it made tons of money, S2 built upon and improved everything that was great about S1 yet that made less money, and now this so called "awful" S3 shatters every box office record possible in it's first weekend. People are just inconsistent in their devotion and opinions. X3 was better. . . all I have to say is that I'm sure Professor X agrees with you in his reposessed comatose body.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 07:07 AM

I think people need to take a deep breath and call down. The movie was a letdown, but isn't deserving of all the hate people are throwing at it. People aren't really giving it a fair shake, because it wasn't the movie THEY wanted. Which is fine, I suppose, everyone is entitled to their opinion. The sad thing is, the only person hurt by not giving the movie a fair shot is you, since you're the one on this website all pissy about a Spiderman movie. I liked it a lot more the second time I saw it, because as a fan boy my expectations were wiped clean and I could enjoy the movie for what it was.
And for everyone who uses the point that "eveyone on this website hates the movie so it must be bad", you need to realize that most of us on this website are movie nerds, and we have heated opinions about our favorite films. We hardly represent most of America. Stats show that 50% thought this one was better than the first or second movies. So for every fanboy on here like Matanuki or whatever his name is, who has nothing good to say about the movie, there is someone out there who absolutely LOVED the movie. I'm in the middle.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 07:15 AM

In reply to this comment (#864068)
[b]Raimi killed the spider![/b]
If by dog you mean my faith in this franchise, then yeah, my dog is dead. Because I don't think anyone expected this film to succumb to the trilogy curse. But in retrospect, it was destined by the fact that you have a director working with a flagship villain that he openly hates. What's with this burgeoning trend in hollywood? Singer's never read a comic book, they give him the world's oldest superhero franchise and Marvel's best ensemble saga to direct. Raimi hates Venom, the franchise's most anticipated villain, and they give him the reigns to it. What's next, take Batman from Nolan and give him back to Schumacher?

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 07:24 AM

In reply to this comment (#864073)
Don't hate me because I hated this movie, Merlin. Or whatever your name is. ;-)

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 07:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#864074)
I agree, they shouldn't have made Raimi do Venom, but it isn't Raimi's fault he views the character differelty than you or I do. If you look at why Raimi likes the other characters, and the opportunities he took to explore their personal relationship to Peter, you can see why he wouldn't like the remoteness of the Venom character. But that isn't his fault, they made him put Venom in the film. And he did a fine job in my opinion, even though Venom didn't have a lot of screen time. Here is my main point: if you don't LOVE the comics, and don't have a dog in this fight (which you say you do), then who gives a rip if we don't seen Venom as much? The general viewing public doesn't care. They saw enough of Eddie Brock to satisy that need. Afterall, Eddie Brock IS Venom, so seeing him is in some ways seeing Venom. It is only us fanboys who want to see more and more and more and more.....

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 07:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#864075)
I don't hate you because you hated the movie, I'm just picking on you. ;)

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 07:40 AM

In reply to this comment (#864077)
Yeah, I got that. Ditto here.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 07:46 AM

I just don't get the thing about us fanboys that makes us unable to dismiss certain aspects of the film that we didn't like, but instead dismissing the film in it's entirety. Sure, I prefer the Venom story of the comic. I was really hoping for that one scene in the comics where MJ meets Venom, mistaking him for Peter in their own apartment. That's an awesome scene, much better than her running into him in the taxi. But whatever, so he changed it. From the perspective of the layman, nothing changed. They are being introduced to the character for the first time. The important thing is, the character stays the same. The moral compass of movie franchise stayed the same, and I can forgive the filmakers for diverting fromt he comics because I can appreciate where they are going. I love that Batman lets the bad guy die in "Begins", but Spidey is the direct opposite and actually FORGIVES Sandman. I LOVE that we can go to a movie, and it has a very, very positive message. To me, that is worth much more than loyalty to the comic.

(Reply to this)

tycox writes:
on May 07 2007 08:05 AM

[b]NO MORE SPIDER MAN[/b]
IT WAS BAD ENOUGH THEY THOUGHT THEY DID GOOD WITH NUMBER TWO BUT GOOD LORD PART THREE WAS THE CRAP OF THEM ALL!!! YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT WITH ALL THOSE STUPID ASS LOVE CONNECTIONS IN SPIDER MAN 3 THEY COULD OF AT LEAST HAD A FEW SEX SCENES TO SPICE UP OUR BORDOM!!!

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 08:16 AM

In reply to this comment (#864080)
oooooo, the most intelligent review of the movie yet.

(Reply to this)

skasforfags writes:
on May 07 2007 08:16 AM

SPIDERMAN SPIDERMAN DO WHAT A SPIDER CAN

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on May 07 2007 08:44 AM

the guy who compared spiderman 3 to X3 isnt that far off. SP3 is at 61% X3 was at 57%, not that big of a difference, and considering how good X2 and SP2 were, i think its a fair comparision.

as for SP3, the villains got screwed over i think... venom definately didnt get his due (we didnt even get to see his real face for more than 1 second) and with sandman, while played well by haden church, i think raimi went too far with trying to get us to care for him. the dying daughter angle? doc ock was great because you could see him before he went crazy and you saw why he did, with sandman all we get is "im not a bad person, i just had bad luck"... and i dont mind the forgiveness aspect of the movie, i think it was refreshing to see that angle, but it was poorly executed in my opinion. you dont even see what happens to his daughter which is the reason he turns to crime...

harry's arch of the story, minus the butler, the amnesia, and the chubby checkers dancing, was probably the best thing about the movie, and i dont really want to dump on dunst, but again she was the weakest part of the film (but she had alot of things going against her, scriptwise all she had to do was mope and be miserable, and compared to a totally hot and perky bryce dallas howard, dunst didnt really stand a chance)

basically, if they had made two 1 3/4 hour movies instead of one 2.5 movie, utilized their villains better, and cut down on the cheese factor (they really overdid it in this movie)... for the next movie, lizard, carnage, kingpin, shocker would all be fine, but kraven rhino mysterio would be too cheesy, and i think its time for the franchise to grow out of its cheese phase

SPOILER ALERT
hopefully, they can bring back venom and make him the REAL venom (maybe a piece of the symbiote survives or the small amount that dr conners has with him infects somebody else...
END SPOILER

(Reply to this)

nogard46 writes:
on May 07 2007 09:15 AM

[b]Talk about boxoffice PWNAGE!!!!![/b]
I've pretty much given up on this site, The T in RT should be Tards as in Retards! People who have no idea what they are talking about, but since it is a free speech county they can open their mouths and excersize that right.

SPIDERMAN 3 is as good as it gets, we see all the lose eneds tied up from 1 and 2. There wasn't as much character development because most of it was done in 1 and 2, so if you need to know whats been going on go rent 1 and 2!!!

Listen people Spiderman will NEVER be as dark and serious as what some of you want it to be, its SPIDERMAN!! friendly and cheesy at times, read the DANG comic book! And on top of that its a a summer blockbuster movie for all ages! So quit bitching, it won't get better than this!

I can't wait to see it again! Now I wonder how much they will beg and plead for Toby to do another one! Maybe they will have to get him a solid gold private plane like Richie Rich

(Reply to this)

unbreakable_samurai writes:
on May 07 2007 09:16 AM

I don't know why everyone is down on this film, I thought it was very good, actually my favorite film of the year so far. Mabey my expectations were lowered after listning to everyone say how bad it was but I really enjoyed it. It was stuffed with a lot of story lines and darker than the first two but I thought it was very well done. Howard and Church were good additions. But one thing I did not like was Topher Grace who was miscast as Venom.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 09:50 AM

In reply to this comment (#864084)
I wouldn't call someone who didn't like it a 'tard', but I do think people are being a little over-critical on this movie. I was at first, as well. The only reason I'll defend it is that I saw it a second time, and it was much, much better. I found the crowd to be the major thing that annoyed me the first time I saw it.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 07 2007 10:10 AM

In reply to this comment (#864084)
"SPIDERMAN 3 is as good as it gets, we see all the lose eneds tied up from 1 and 2. There wasn't as much character development because most of it was done in 1 and 2, so if you need to know whats been going on go rent 1 and 2!!!"

So, errr... I can find out all about Venom, Sandman and Gwen Stacy in parts 1 and 2???
On a separate note, [##spoiler##] there's no reason Eddie Brock can't come back for S4, they'll probably just say the blast fused the goo and Eddie together, thus Venom becomes apart of Eddie for good. That's kinda what ticks me off about comics though, nothing is forever, they can just make up some pseudo-science or fantasy, spiritual, mystic mumbo jumbo as a plot device to continually progress the story in any way they please.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 10:17 AM

In reply to this comment (#864087)
That's kind of the point about comics though. It would suck if they had to make up villains every comic for 40 years.
I think Spiderman 4 should have Venom and the Lizard. It'd just be way too easy to make the Lizard, seeing as Connors has been in two movies now. And it'd also be way too easy to bring Venom back, especially with the substance Connors kept. I think those two villains would make a perfect movie. You'd satisfy the people who thought 3 was too busy, the people who didn't like how quick Venom's appearance was, and could fill time with character development. Then you could put the story together about why and how Eddie Brock works out to get all huge, so he can compete with Spiderman. It'd be awesome. Man, I kinda want to write that one.....

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 10:28 AM

In reply to this comment (#864088)
I'll write it with you. But we gotta shop for a director that doesn't hate our flagship villain.

(Reply to this)

nogard46 writes:
on May 07 2007 10:41 AM

In reply to this comment (#864087)
key word is "MOST" I didn't say all! look up the difference. Again TARDS!

the major characters were fine, Pete, Harry, Marry, Aunt May.

and honestly what more do people want from Venom and Sandman, they've always been 2 demensional chacters, Eddie is just the epitome of evil, the darkness unleashed at a safe kid friendly level.

And honestly did you guys really want to see more of Eric Formen trying to be tough??

Now wait til we get Carnage now thats gonna be scary! A pure Psychopath unleashed! hey everyone put me down for a vote for Sam Rockwell for Cassidy!
Hes perfect! Crazed Pycho with no remorse! He can take your babys candy and lift your gradma's purse with a smile! Gotta love it!

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 07 2007 10:56 AM

In reply to this comment (#864066)
I said that only in the respect that I thought the little bits of cheese could have been left out, not because I thought the movie was horribly flawed. I actually enjoyed it pretty well and will probably see it again. Maybe what I should have said is "it's a Sam Raimi comic book movie" because all of Sam's movies (with the possible exception of A Simple Plan) have a touch of cheese in them. Doesn't make it good or bad, just not for me. Maybe he put those kids in there for all the kids in the audience.

And I don't settle for crap, and this movie was far away from crap.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 07 2007 10:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#864090)
Well, I guess I'm a tard because I actually thought Topher did a pretty good job. I'm not a fanboy and I wanted to see more of Venom because I thought he was a pretty cool character.

(Reply to this)

Derbeste writes:
on May 07 2007 11:12 AM

[b]Two reasons people are bitching[/b]
After all the hype and the iconic aura surrounding spiderman in general....people were expecting something MORE than a movie......

Then they got a movie. News flash....the film wasn't meant to be life altering. It was meant to entertain. It did just that imo. Seriously....are you REALLY going to tell me that you've NEVER spent $8-11 on worse movies you came out of thoroughly enjoying?

If so.....I just rolled my eyes and dismissed you.

Secondly, Most (I stress MOST...not all) people that read the reviews of critics and feel compelled to comment on them somehow feel their opinion is just as good....if not better.

And they may be.....

But it ALSO means you believe your opinion carries MUCH more weight than it actually does.

Thus making most commenters elitist assholes.....maybe even myself (O.o).

If you enjoyed the movie.....you still have good taste in movies. If you didn't, you were probably expecting too much and I'm sure you feel your taste in movies is somehow "better".

Just remember.....being more difficult to entertain doesn't make you smart. It just makes you (and your "life") more boring.

(Reply to this)

Paul_Is_Drunk writes:
on May 07 2007 11:32 AM

In reply to this comment (#864079)
[b]Exactly![/b]
"I was really hoping for that one scene in the comics where MJ meets Venom, mistaking him for Peter in their own apartment."

That was the money scene I was hoping for.

Venom was a truly scary villian, and for some reason he came across as really camp in this movie. It was a good movie, but just not as good as 2. Right now I can see myself owning the DVD, but I get the feeling the mishandling of Venom is going to bother me more and more over the years as the movie version becomes the version integrated in the popular conscoiusness of our society.

(Kinda like people still think the Joker is the one to kill Batman's parents).

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 11:41 AM

In reply to this comment (#864093)
Man, you've got to be kidding. People who didn't like this film think they're better or smarter than everyone else by default of them not liking it? Never mind the actual arguments people are making for not liking it, right? It's easier to just write them off as elitists who think their opinions carry more weight and yada yada yada. Last I checked this was a movie forum where people express their reactions to the creative product. And isn't that, aside from the name callers with nothing real to say, all that we're doing here?
And this comment about us expecting more than a movie. How so? The people who dislike this movie have clearly stated their reasons for not liking it, most of which have been grounded in their preference for the comic's story arcs being more respectably realized. They don't want "more than" a movie. They just want a good one.
Now, I'll leave it to you to make broad derogatory generalizations about the people expressing their appreciation or dislike of this film. Meanwhile some of us here would rather stay on topic and continue discussing stories.

(Reply to this)

hugz4thugz writes:
on May 07 2007 12:55 PM

[b]Spider-man doing Spider-man Sh*t[/b]
This movie may have been the best Spider-Man movie. I'm not sure what everyone was expecting, but this movie was all about Spider-man doing Spider-man sh*t. Sure it was campy and corny in parts, but Spider-Man has always been corny as hell. If you ask me the other two were way more of a bore (especially number 1). This movie had everything you could ask for in a Spidey flick: Awesome fight scenes, Emo spidey killin it, Franco being straight badass and doing the twist, Venom (although they clearly miss handled him), hilariousness, and JJ being JJ. Man this movie was great. It may not have been as good as no. two, thanks to the ending (but even no. 2's ending was kinda whack), but still a good fun time. Not sure what people wanted from this movie, but I got my moneys worth. Fo Real b*tches

(Reply to this)

Mavtactic writes:
on May 07 2007 01:14 PM

[b]Spiderman 3 MADE 151 MILLION OFFICIALLY[/b]
oKAY

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 07 2007 01:42 PM

In reply to this comment (#864052)
No sorry but you are wrong, you haters have yet to actually defend your point. I liked the movie, it was not as good as the second but better than the first. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, it is funny because even if it drops it is still going to make a shitload of money. So how does it feel to be a 12 year old and thinking that your opinion actually matters?

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 07 2007 01:50 PM

No movie could ever live up the hype this movie had. Hell it could of been better than the Godfather yet still not live up the hype made for it.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 02:05 PM

Hype can kill a movie, but so can emo Peter. I'll be interested to see how this one does in it's second weekend. If it drops more than 55%, then I'd say word of mouth was generally negative.

(Reply to this)

Z-Man writes:
on May 07 2007 02:09 PM

In reply to this comment (#864100)
That's pretty unrealistic. You have to go down from 151 million and 55% is not that bad for such a opening weekend-oriented box office run. I have yet to hear anything bad about this movie (I enjoyed alot) outside of this website. Word of mouth doesn't have a chance in killing this movie.

(Reply to this)

~*Admiral Snowstorm*~ writes:
on May 07 2007 02:23 PM

Yeah, anyone who thinks word-of-mouth will slay this movie has lost their marbles. If anything, it'll just make people more curious.

"Hey mate, Spiderman 3 was terrible."
"Really? Well the first two were amazing so I want to go see how they could butcher such a great series."

You get the idea. The only thing that would have killed this movie is lack of hype, negative or positive, at all, and it sure isn't lacking in that department.

(Reply to this)

the_don_of_yreka writes:
on May 07 2007 02:23 PM

In reply to this comment (#864089)
I would love see you guys do this. Fanboys unite! As, for a Spidey 4, I believe its time to switch directors. I love Sam and all but why not let someone else do spider-man. But having someone new for this film saga will help in the long run.
I would love to direct the next spidey flick, but Sony is going for someone has already got the box office pull.

As, for this film, I liked it. End of Story.

(Reply to this)

ayato72 writes:
on May 07 2007 02:32 PM

[b]151 million is the new record for now at least[/b]
saw it on opening day, not as good as the first. but better than the second. I hope pirates 3 dosnt do as good because pirates 2 was a piece of crap. Also all you SM3 haters out there, you have to realize that these movies are not made for faithful comic lovers like me and all of you, they are made for dazzling action scenes and huge money at the box-office.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 02:34 PM

In reply to this comment (#864101)
I understand that 55% isn't that much, but generally speaking, the more over 50% drop you are, the worse word of mouth is. A good movie might not drop over 50% in it's second weekend, especially if there is no other competition (which Spiderman 3 will face....no competition). I just threw a number out there, but the first two dropped 37% (first one) and 48% (second one). I hear SOME bad word of mouth from friends, but mostly the bad stuff is on the web, you're right. Still, 55% would be a sizeable drop. Priates dropped 54% though, so it's tough to tell when you have a record opening....if everyone sees it the first week, who is left to see it the second week?

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 07 2007 03:00 PM

In reply to this comment (#864098)
And why exactly doesn't a 12-year-old's opinion matter? It certainly matters to him or her. And once again what seems to get lost by everybody (not just you, EVERYBODY) is that you don't have to defend an opinion. I can say Spider-Man is the best or worst movie ever made in my opinion and I have no reason or need to defend that, because it's what I feel. Now I may have reasons and will certainly share them if asked (sometime even if I'm not asked) but they are still just "my" reasons, which you (and I mean you collectively) may or may not agree with. Doesn't make anyone one right or wrong, just different. But if I don't like a movie and have no particular reason other than it just didn't appeal to me, then that is also valid. Doesn't make it a bad movie, just makes it a movie I didn't like.

Can't we all just get along and respect that people are not going to agree with us all the time? Doesn't make them horrible people, just different. If we were all the same, life would be pretty damn boring.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 07 2007 03:04 PM

In reply to this comment (#864106)
Actually, if we all were the same, at least we'd always get univerally good movies. ;)

(Reply to this)

Derbeste writes:
on May 07 2007 03:25 PM

In reply to this comment (#864095)
[b]Let's analyze that[/b]
"by default of them not liking it"

Default is your word. Not mine. In fact, by virtue of the fact I put MOST (and even specific NOT ALL) implies "default" isn't even close to my intent. Try again.

"Never mind the actual arguments people are making for not liking it, right?"

elitist assholes can make arguments too. It's supid assholes that can't. hehe. Besides...once again your comprehension of my point is skewed. They can make arguments. But I haven't heard many at all so far. Only those that were expecting something iconic and got a summer popcorn flick....you know.....like the others. Again....take away the hype and I haven't heard many say why the movie was truly BAD.

"It's easier to just write them off as elitists who think their opinions carry more weight"

Much like you just did to me? My opinion is that MANY (you know NOT all by default) of the haters here think their opinions are better than anyone elses. When in reality, they need to devalue another's opinion to make them feel better about their own. Read the forums. If you like a "bad" movie, watch the reactions of posters here concerning your taste. It's laughable.

"Last I checked this was a movie forum where people express their reactions to the creative product. And isn't that, aside from the name callers with nothing real to say, all that we're doing here?"

First off, It is the "name callers" that I am addressing (for the most part). Secondly, where did I say they couldn't? Isn't that what I'M doing? But just because you are doing so, doesn't make you immune to criticism in turn. Case in point....my opinion just got criticized too. I can back up my criticism....can you?

"And this comment about us expecting more than a movie. How so? The people who dislike this movie have clearly stated their reasons for not liking it, most of which have been grounded in their preference for the comic's story arcs being more respectably realized. They don't want "more than" a movie. They just want a good one. "

Take away the hype and think....was this REALLY a bad movie? Even critics fully ADMIT that their perception of a movie is greatly influenced by expectation. The hype around this movie was historic. Therefore, so were the expections. There was almost no way it could have lived up to itself without become "more than a movie" (yes...I took a little license there). Basically, they wanted a legend....and got entertainment....and it wasn't good enough for them. While those of us who went to be entertained......were.

"Now, I'll leave it to you to make broad derogatory generalizations about the people expressing their appreciation or dislike of this film. Meanwhile some of us here would rather stay on topic and continue discussing stories. "

It is QUITE on topic to call into the question the rationelle by which people come to there opinions. Bias is everything in ANY discussion.

When you call it "off topic", what you MEAN is....You didn't agree with me. There is no way to prove an opinion false. Therefore, you merely tried to devalue my intent. You failed. And ironically, You used "broad derogatory generalizations" about me to do it because you dislike my opinions.

I stand by what I said. Those who went in to the movie trying to get "art" or some sort of religious experience out of a comic book summer flick.....went for the wrong reasons imo. I believe that MANY (remember? not ALL?) of the haters here did just that. They are the same people that hate on anyone that liked FF, X3, or any movie by Michael Bay. These people DO have the attitude that they are somehow smarter or more insitefull than those do like said movies. I see so many that even go after critics past reviews to devalue them as a critic. (He gave this movie and that movie a good review! He is the suxxorz! He can't be right ever ever again! Now any movie he likes will suck too!)

Still others are so polarized that there can never be any middle ground. If it wasn't AMAZING.....it sucked.

It's rediculous in my opinion. It is that attitude that I'm addressing. It is that attitude which I believe we are seeing in SP3 moreso than it truly being a "bad movie".

I'm expressing MY opinion. If you feel I'm wrong, feel free to respond again. But this time, try telling me WHY I'm wrong about SP3. What made it BAD? What made it unentertaining? What made it NOT worth my $8?

....or is anything I say already wrong by default?

P.S. did I really just type all that? O.o

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on May 07 2007 03:28 PM

just a note about the actresses:

dunst: real blonde, red head in the movie
howard: real redhead, blonde in movie
elizabeth banks: real blonde, brunette in movie

howard would have made a better mj i think

(Reply to this)

tanukizilla writes:
on May 07 2007 03:53 PM

148 mil.=no surprise. Called that along time ago.
I actually enjoyed SM3 alot. Sure, the movie had it's flaws, but most can agree that SM3 was entertaining. It was pure popcorn movie. I gotta love me some dancing emo peter parker.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on May 07 2007 05:31 PM

Comparing the like and dislike to Spider-man 3 could be like comparing getting a blow job from Paris Hilton. Some may like it and others might hate it. But after it's over, life will still go on.

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 07 2007 06:27 PM

In reply to this comment (#864100)
He is not emo if he was emo he would be cutting himself and staying in his room listening to the crappy ass Fall Out Boy

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 07 2007 08:08 PM

In reply to this comment (#864108)
My point is not that you are "wrong" about Spiderman 3. Like you said, there's no right or wrong when it comes to our opinions regarding a creative product. But I think we flock to these pages to express our passions regarding these stories that we all, for better or worse, have a common interest in. The posts I've read that praise this film, the ones that offer insight into why they liked it and even those that didn't, were fun to read, at times more fun than the movie, and have, in many instances, been full of take away value and strong, accessible points. I just happen to find myself aligned with the camp that hoped for an entirely different movie, one that, in my opinion and the opinion of many others, would have been much better.

Now, trifling over my word choices has scored you no floor points. You're absolutely right however that expectations were a historic high for this film. But what I don't think is that a film fit to stand up to those expectations was beyond Raimi and company's grasp. I submit that the first two films, while both flawed, were ingenious in setting up the perfect scenario for a bookend that could have remedied the problems diehards have had since the beginning while at the same time remaining true to what casual moviegoers have come to love about it. So saying this could have been a much better film is not wishful thinking. Not in my opinion anyway.
It's just saying that while there indeed were some great action set pieces in the film we were given, they tried to accomplish too much with a story that could have done more with less, short changing a flagship villain and proving this time with the excessive cheese that a balance between extremes should take precedent over a director's personal preference.
My beef is not with anyone liking the film we were given. I value your (the collective 'your') opinion of the movie much more than I could ever care for your assumptions about my reasons for not liking Raimi's Spiderman 3. That's what I mean about going off topic.
I didn't write you off in any way, man. And it wasn't your opinion I attacked, just the "people who didn't like this movie" theme of your post.

Nuff said. ;-)

(Reply to this)

Paul_Is_Drunk writes:
on May 07 2007 09:52 PM

In reply to this comment (#864112)
[b]Hahahahaha @ Aknddon3[/b]
Everytime I see Aknddon3 on this site, I know he is going to say something wildly spiteful that will piss at least one person off who - by using reason - will try to persuade him that he (or she?) is wrong.

I used to think Aknddon3 was a basement dweller who lives to troll this site, but now I think he's actually a diabolical genius who does this to incite hatred in visitors that don't know better and laughs his ass off by people that fall for it.

Congrats Aknddon3, you may actually be smarter than I originally assumed.

(Reply to this)

Infernal writes:
on May 08 2007 12:13 AM

All who did and did not like this film, you can have your opinion but stop trashing the opinions of others. Just state your opinion and your support for it.

Some imbossiles feel the need to respond to a good ol' "I loved this movie!" with a "It was lame, you idiot!".

Mental.

Completely mental.

Everyone has their own thoughts.

Well now that I'm here and my point is made, in my opinion, I thought this was a very good movie. Tied with the second one for the best. Great performance, great villains. Personally, I find it a bit stupid that people have to have it completely like the comics. And that they can't let the movie go in a different direction at all.

But I guess that's their ways.

I read the comics, thought they were boring, loved the movies.

Same with the X-Men series. The comics (in my opinion) were trash and the first film was alright, the second getting better, and third the best.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 08 2007 01:49 AM

In reply to this comment (#864114)
I'm actually trying to conclusively prove that Aknddon3 is actually Stephen Hawking and this is all some kind of experiment all us Sub-180 IQ's can't fathom.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 08 2007 06:29 AM

In reply to this comment (#864116)
I would responde to Aknddon's comments, but I'm too busy sharpening my razor blades and playing "This Ain't a Scene, It's an Arms Race" over and over on my iPod while I cry about my miserable life.

And I know it's off topic, but Fall Out Boy is a pretty good band, and I'm not sure could ever classify them as emo.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on May 08 2007 06:30 AM

In reply to this comment (#864107)
Yeah, but wouldn't it just be the same movie over and over :-)

(Reply to this)

Si-Fi writes:
on May 08 2007 11:21 AM

[b]Amazing Film[/b]
Firstly im not going say whether Spider-Man 3 is better than the other two Films as I see them as a series (although I know they are seperate films) and as soon as I get Spider-Man 3 on DVD I will watch them in sequence in one sitting.

I thought Spider-Man 3 was very emotional, very clever and technically mind blowing.

Thoroughly enjoyable despite its flaws, I went to see it twice.

Thats my opinion and im not going to attack anyone elses, it would not change their mind and what would that achieve anyway?

(Reply to this)

aknddon3 writes:
on May 09 2007 01:24 AM

In reply to this comment (#864117)
Fall Out Boy a good band? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, oh god i think i just died, that has the be the stupidest statement of all time.

(Reply to this)

JUDGE DREDD writes:
on May 09 2007 11:36 AM

Box office means nothing to me, thats just how much money it made. Doesnt mean a films good or not, just means people wanna see it.

Was Titanic good??? or dirty dancing???? HELL NO!!!!! but it made shit loads of mulla!

Box office is a pointless statistic that i wish film studios kept to themselves. When i pay �6 to see a crappy movie the last thing i want to hear about is how much cash they made from us all!!!

Just rubs salt into the wound!

(Reply to this)

killermonkey8822 writes:
on May 09 2007 06:10 PM

In reply to this comment (#864058)
i agree.......... either way it was a pretty dissapointing movie overall......... but i don't know anybody that went to go see anything else besides spider-man 3 but whatever

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on May 10 2007 05:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#864121)
Goddamn that's beautifully stated. My sentiments exactly, bat-fink. I bought two tickets to SP3 and I've since been trying to put together a Matanuki's 11 to steal back the money.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Disturbia

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links