The weakest of the trilogy, but still good fun

Rating: 7/10 (5 May 2007)

Critics have been relentlessly bitchy about Spiderman 3. Even though I see where they are coming from when they say that it wasn't as good as the previous film (it isn't), there are too many villains (there are), too many subplots (there are), and some contrived story elements (there are), the film is just what you would expect in a summer movie: action, adventure, and an enormously entertaining film.
Following up the superb Spiderman 2 was something that might have set this film up to "disappoint" from the beginning. With Spidey 2, you had a magnificent villain, a sincere, human storyline to accompany the action, and a plot that worked seamlessly. The fact of the matter is that Spiderman 3 cannot match its predecessor in those respects. It simply doesn't work all the time, but when it does, it shines and creates some of the most audacious moments in the entire series.
The attempt to up the ante falls flat in some respects. The film is just jam packed with so many subplots and characters that it struggles to keep everything in place. You have Peter and MJ's romance, Peter's revenge story against Flint Marko, Peter Parker "gone bad", Peter meets Gwen, you get the idea. If nothing else, the story line is quite convoluted and it doesn't always work. Eddie Brock, played spot on by Topher Grace, is also seems rushed. His character was one that needed further development, not to mention more "villain" screen time. And don't even get me STARTED on the helpful Osborne butler. Those who have seen the film will know what I'm talking about. All in all, I believe that the film would have worked out better if maybe Venom were eliminated from the script.
That's not saying that Spiderman 3 lacks the sincerity of the second movie, because it certainly has its moments. We see the humanity in Flint Marko (an excellent Thomas Haden Church), or glimpses of a Harry Osborne not bent on revenge, played terrifically by James Franco. The bits that hit spot on in the first films (Aunt May giving Peter money, MJ's abusive parents) aren't quite matched, but Spiderman 3 still has plenty of genuine heart to go around. It also keeps a lot of the humor from the previous films, with an especially brilliant Bruce Campbell cameo. However, these moments are often times overshadowed by a problematic script and story.
But above all, this film is great fun and a visual masterwork. The action is superb and edge-of-your-seat, and absolutely breathtaking in its best moments. Embarrassingly enough, I think I actually gasped out loud in one of those "close call" moments. There is one especially "holy crap" sequence of Sandman coming together that is so brilliant and haunting that I would almost see the film again for that one scene.
Don't let the negative aspects or critic nitpicking turn you away from seeing this film. The fact of the matter is that despite a story that doesn't gel as well as those of the first two and multiple plots that could have been split up into separate movies, the audacious action, superb visuals, and terrific cast that almost makes up for the jam packed storyline make this a great summer movie, if not a completely disposable one. While it may be a step down from Spiderman 2, I can guarantee that it achieves what VERY FEW comic book films have in the past.
And of course, that's not without saying that it absolutely murders, buries, and spits on films like X-Men: The Last Stand. People should stop using the term "disappointment" so loosely when you have films like that.