Mild spoilers: Disappointing but not terrible

Rating: 7/10 (19 April 2007)

I'm not going to sugarcoat it, Spider-Man 3 is disappointing. It's not terrible, but it's no Spider-Man 2 either. For my money the second film was the best of the three. With Spider-Man 3 they've dropped the ball. The most obvious comparison is X-Men 3. First film established well but had its flaws. Second film built character arcs, introduced new characters in a fluid way with exciting action and a solid story, third one forgot about the characters, largely wasted new ones and just went for spectacle. A fun ride to a certain extent but I had loved number two and three let me down, I expected more. Spider-Man 3 does the same.
Spider-Man 3 is far too busy. For the first half hour it's ridiculous, doesn't know where to look as there are so many characters to introduce, re-establish, etc. There's so much going on and new characters Flint Marko, Eddie Brock and Gwen Stacy are all thrown in with no real intro. Where has the character development of S-M 2 gone? There are too many characters and not enough investment in them. Even the returning characters often seem tacked on. The ever-great JK Simmons' J Jonah Jameson still provides random comic effect, Aunt May appears out of nowhere once or twice.
And the lack of development extends to the leads. You don't care about the relationship between Peter and Mary Jane in this one. Harry has the best through-line but only after a movie-device so hackneyed Ratner would think twice!
Comedy: They've turned Spider-Man 3 into a cartoon. It feels a bit like watching Batman Forever (though no neon). The J Jonah Jameson comedy moments have gone from the amusement of his acerbic character to full on sitcom ridiculousness involving Ted Raimi, Elizabeth Banks' Miss Brant, JJ, pills and a vibrating, electrified desk. As a SNL skit this could work and it is kind of funny but these scenes feel out of place in this world.
Then there's comedy Peter. New suit, new confidence, new attitude. The scene starts, the song works, it's fun. He makes a gesture to a passing woman, it's fun. He strolls down the street you think okay, having a bit of fun, time to move on. But no, let's continue this for another five minutes. This really overstays its welcome.
And then there's Bruce Campbell. I love Bruce as Ash, I loved Bubba Ho-Tep, and I laughed at his cameos in Spidey 1 and 2. Here you feel the Campbell cameo is coming and... its so ludicrous it takes you out of movie again. Sure, he's funny but like the JJ desk sequence it is so extended and daft it suddenly feels like you're watching a Peter Sellers movie.
The film is now so jokey, so surface, no texture that you wonder how the same people could be behind 2 and 3. I'll tell you this: Alvin Sargent may get a writing credit but most of this must have come from Sam and Ivan Raimi, there's very little to connect the script of 2 to that of 3.
The old guys: Maguire overplays the part this time, he's becoming a caricature. Also when asked to look sad he just looks constipated. And his playing of dark Peter - atrocious, not a believable character for a minute.
Kirsten Dunst is fine as Mary Jane. She has the character down and handles it well.
James Franco is the best thing in the whole movie. He has the thankless task of dealing with the aforementioned ubercliche plot-turn in his character but ultimately he gets the only real development in the story and it's interesting, its well handled on the whole and Franco does a nice job with it. A whole movie with him as the main antagonist would have been a joy, or maybe one of two - so we have one new character - but no, let's have three and under use both of the other two. Which brings me to...
The new guys: Thomas Haden Church is marvellous. He is in a different movie. He is believable, sincere, up to Alfred Molina's standard but without the juicy part. Every time he comes on screen the movie hits a different stride. My money's on Sargent did most of the Sandman character. He works perfectly, but he's sadly underused.
Topher Grace is fine, but criminally underused. He's in the cartoon version, but then he's Venom! The sad thing is as Brock we barely meet him. He is a one dimensional side character there purely as a device to get Venom in. Sad, he deserves better, because then, when he's finally Venom, he's mostly lost in the effects.
Bruce Dallas Howard is perfect and wonderful as Gwen Stacy. She does the best she can to give Gwen a full character despite having zero to work with and she pretty much succeeds. But again she's not a character, she's a device to add tension to the Peter/Mary Jane, Peter/Brock story lines. That she comes out of it as well as she does is testament to her abilities.
The effects: The Sandman effects are stunning and for the most part they are closer to the high standard of 2, and much better than S-M 1.
Set pieces: Okay, entertaining but nothing to match the tension and excitement of the train bit and the Ock bank battle in 2.
Ultimately Spider-Man 3 will entertain you for much of its running time and it's not an awful film, it's not even bad. It's okay, maybe even edging on good. But it's disappointing because with the talent involved and coming off the excellent second film, and with the work Church, Howard and Franco especially are trying to give, it could have been so much better. But the clutter got the better of it.