My spider senses are tingling... yes this movie truly not the most amazing Spiderman movie ever.

Rating: 6/10 (20 May 2013)

To each its own, for me, I have mixed feelings about Spiderman 3. Yup, that film was quite bad, but it's watchable. If you haven't watch Spiderman or Spiderman 2 (2004), watch those first. After that, try this mediocre film. I felt that it try to cram too much into one film. First off, the movie has three villains. OK, the new Green Goblin (James Franco) makes sense, they set it up at the end of the last movie that Harry Osborn saw his father's weapons and he was out for revenge for what happen in 2002's Spiderman. Harry tries to make Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and Mary Jane Watson (Kristen Dunst)'s life a living hell. Harry Osborn go through some many mood swings in the movie, it's annoying. First, he wants revenge on Peter, then get Amnesia, then happy go lucky with Peter, then back to revenge, and finally back with speaking terms with Peter. Plus, all this could be solve if only Harry's stupid butler told him what happen to his father that night, in the beginning of the movie. It's too much for a character, as there is yet another love triangle between them. Not only that love triangle, but another love triangle between Peter, Mary Jane, and Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard). In my opinion, I would take Gwen Stacy over Mary Jane anyways. At least she was not a boring plainest damsel in distress, in contrast to the already annoying helpless Mary Jane. Bryce Dallas Howard is one sexy lady. The next villain is the Sandman (Thomas Haden Church) who is pretty good for his Flint Marko role. In my opinion, he should have more screen time, then he got. The fights were damn good between him and Spiderman. The part about the movie that gets me most is where Peter forgives Sandman for accidentally shooting Uncle Ben. Because even if he's doing it for his daughter, the guy is still a violent criminal. He punches people out of cars and into busy traffic and generally acts very destructive. Sure, he doesn't intend to hurt anyone while he runs around with a loaded gun or smashes everything around him with several tons of force, but that's kind of an inevitability. Sandman does nothing but prove he'll endanger anybody he feels like using a sappy excuse. And Peter's reaction is, "You're right, you're a great guy and you should keep on doing that'. Come on, movie. Last is Venom AKA Eddie Brock play by Topher Grace who looks nothing like Venom from the comic book. I just don't see him playing Venom with his wimp comedian style. Venom was an extraterrestrial symbiote badass and he was only in the film for the last ten minutes. Director Raimi was actually going to have Vulture and Sandman in Spiderman 3, but Sony wanted Venom and it hurt the film. In no way, does the particle accelerator, Green Goblin serum or the extraterrestrial symbiote scenes explain beyond making the villains. It would been really cool to have the technology be part of the plot. What mainly annoys me about Spider-Man 3 is that it goes way overboard trying to clarify who's good and who's evil so it loses its effect, like a comedian explaining a joke to the audience beforehand. The movie has some unnecessary comedy scenes such as Emo-Dancing Peter. I admit this is a stupid thing that was added into the movie. I don't fully understand the whole reasoning behind it as to why it was written in. The symbiote wasn't supposed to make Peter emo, it was supposed to make him aggressive. This movie was heavily marketed as a drama, where Peter becomes evil. There are a few scenes where he is, like his fight with Sandman, his fight with Harry, and his confrontation with Eddie at the Bugle. But for the most part, it was more stupid than evil, but not enough to ruin the movie. But the dance scene that occurred from it, I seriously could not see this as a part of something Spiderman related. Am I the only one to notice that everyone in the movie bawled like an emo infant. Should have called it Crying-Man 3. The movie has this lack of coherent writing, structure, and half-way decent effort for the movie. Going back and forth between at least 3 different stories all at the same time, without giving enough weight or attention to any of them in order to make them the least bit involving, or interesting. It's not Stan Lee's writing. I did not like Stan Lee's cameo in this one. He might as well have looked right at the camera. Who the hell just walks up to someone and talks like that? Although at this point he is probably about as old as those old men who strike up random conversations in the grocery store. There is also the cameo of Bruce Campbell as an French maître d'. His scenes were pretty funny, but not needed. Overall: The movie visuals are great, the story was pretty bad, but altogether it's alright for what it was market for. A comic book popcorn flick. At less, it's not the The Amazing Spider-Man (TV series) from the 1970s.