Spider-Man 3 (2007)

3 Responses

  1. Jon-Luc Aragon says:

    You’re mostly right, but to be fair, it seems like it was Sony’s meddling in the production process that caused most of the unnecessary characters and story angles (like Venom) to be included, not Sam Raimi.

    • Vincent Leo says:

      One of the downsides of getting a review out when a film is new to theaters is not knowing the behind-the-scenes causes for a film going wrong. Obviously, at the time, people like Raimi and the actors are busy trying to promote the movie, so they’re just trying to say positive things at the time rather than criticizing for when things go bad. That’s one of the great things about reviewing the 1980s movies, but one of the flaws of the new releases, where I have to decipher the problems as they appear on the screen, and the track history of the makers. I should probably do a retrospective review on this one.

      • Jon-Luc Aragon says:

        Good points. And yes, a lot of the time the whole story doesn’t come out until months (or even years) later. I thought Spider-Man 4 was guaranteed to be made until all of a sudden it wasn’t and it was revealed how difficult it had been for Raimi and company to make the film they wanted to make. I still remember where I was when I read that Spider-Man 4 had been cancelled and I knew the reboot wouldn’t be as good (and it wasn’t). I agree that a retrospective would be good for this one, maybe even for 1 and 2, to see if they still hold up after the MCU and The Dark Knight trilogy (which I think they do).

        Oh, and thanks for turning on comments for your old reviews! I wasn’t able to post here before. It’s cool to go back and read them after all this time then post my own two cents.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *