In September 2005, I wrote this review about Spider-Man 2.
Having been totally bowled-over by that movie, I knew that this sequel would have to do a lot to equal it (it certainly couldn't be topped). They say that lightning sometimes strikes twice, but I'm afraid that it hasn't done so on this occasion.
Spider-Man 3 is a good movie. The characters are well drawn out, developed and engaging. Most reviewers have complained that the director, Sam Raimi, has tried to out-do himself by getting Spidey to fight three different villains, as well as cope with a strange substance that takes over his body in a pretty nightmarish fashion.
The film is at times, very funny, exhilarating and unpredictable, but it just doesn't stir the emotions in the same way as its predecessors. Maybe it was because "2" was so much better than the original, that I warmed to it so. With "3", because the stakes had been raised, I sort of knew what to expect.
My major complaint though was a lack of originality. The idea of Spider-Man's personality being reversed, as it were, reminded me of what happened to Superman in his second outing - whilst the Sandman was too reminiscent of the sand creature in The Mummy to register much interest or credibility.
Still, it is a thoroughly entertaining and at times, surprisingly dark movie. As one review wrote, the director (whomever he may be on the next outing) would do better to concentrate on one villain and then ensures that he/she incorporate some villains who really haven't been explorer before on celluloid.
There were also some pretty young kids in the audience, which I don't think was a great idea as there were some pretty intense fight scenes (of which, I think the first was the most thrilling).
Recommended.
My Rating
****
Comments