Spidey on autopilot

Rating: 5/10 (4 May 2007)

I had fun watching Spider-Man 3, but I can't deny that it's a mess.
What the critics are saying is true; this is a stale movie, packed with too many villains and too many supporting characters who are completely wasted. Thomas Hayden Church has a few great scenes as the Sandman, but he disappears for huge chunks of the film, and his storyline never quite comes together. Bryce Dallas Howard has even less to do as Gwen Stacey, and James Cromwell, playing her dad, barely features at all. And Venom - the most famous Spider-Man villain of the 1980s and 1990s - has what amounts to a glorified cameo.
Why on earth is this film so overstuffed, so overwrought, so sloppy? Who thought it was a good idea to include three villains? And who actually believed that the tedious soap opera scenes between Mary Jane and Peter worked? I'm sad to say that they produced groans and derisory laughter in my local theater.
The worst problem with the film is that Spidey isn't even properly characterized. I've been sort of a Spider-Man fan for twenty years now, and I understand the character. He is supposed to be *funny* - witty, sarcastic, charming. Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man is none of these things. He's just a depressed, charmless drag. A total social misfit. He's nowhere near charismatic enough to be Spider-Man, as I envision the character.
So, saddled with a drippy Spidey and a messed-up plot, this movie can only be so good. Even the much-vaunted special effects aren't so great; they look like a super-advanced computer game or cartoon. Frankly, I'm sick of CGI, and I'm ready for a new special effects revolution. I want more real stunts and more "physical" special effects in my blockbusters. For goodness' sake, I actually think the action scenes from 1950s war movies eclipse Spider-Man 3 in the excitement stakes, and that's bad!
I also had major problems with two important plot points. Point one: the symbiote is never properly explained. Point two: some random butler character comes out of nowhere and resolves the most important conflict in the film. Good grief, why?
Despite having all these flaws, Spider-Man 3 delivered about two stars' worth of entertainment for me; I give credit to James Franco, who rises above the material and gives a likable performance. But I still think this movie might kill the now uber-expensive Spidey franchise, or at least blunt public enthusiasm. Audience members in my theater seemed disappointed and lacking in energy. And who can blame them?