Spider-Man 3

User Score
6.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1238 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Apr 22, 2014
    6
    The final movie in the trilogy, while not as bad as some make out, is certainly the weakest. Much of the action and comedy is still there but by pitting Spider-Man against three enemies (rather just one as in the first two movies) the film loses its focus. Each of the enemies back stories are developed in too much detail and the web-slinger comes close to being a guest in his own movieThe final movie in the trilogy, while not as bad as some make out, is certainly the weakest. Much of the action and comedy is still there but by pitting Spider-Man against three enemies (rather just one as in the first two movies) the film loses its focus. Each of the enemies back stories are developed in too much detail and the web-slinger comes close to being a guest in his own movie that is arguably trying to be too ambitious. Expand
  2. Jul 16, 2012
    4
    I loved the first two, but this was a HUGE disappointment. The action and the visual effects were the best in the series, but the acting was soooo unconvincing and many of the sub-plots in this movie were just cliched and silly. The jazz club has to be one of the stupidest scenes I've ever watched. Venom had so much possibility for Spider-Man 4 (before Sony scrapped it) they shouldn't haveI loved the first two, but this was a HUGE disappointment. The action and the visual effects were the best in the series, but the acting was soooo unconvincing and many of the sub-plots in this movie were just cliched and silly. The jazz club has to be one of the stupidest scenes I've ever watched. Venom had so much possibility for Spider-Man 4 (before Sony scrapped it) they shouldn't have killed him off! I wanted Spider-Man 4 to be better, but Sony seemed to think that a reboot would be better than a sequel that made up for the atrocities of this film. PATHETIC! Expand
  3. Dec 5, 2011
    6
    Sloppy writing, poor editing and underused characters and poor development pull this Spidey sequel into the dirt.

    While it tries to do the simple, and deliver what fans have come to expect rom a Spidey movie, the film fails to deliver anything truly engaging. The film makes a fuss of introducing three villains for Spider-man to defeat. However it feels like director Sam Rami had a good
    Sloppy writing, poor editing and underused characters and poor development pull this Spidey sequel into the dirt.

    While it tries to do the simple, and deliver what fans have come to expect rom a Spidey movie, the film fails to deliver anything truly engaging. The film makes a fuss of introducing three villains for Spider-man to defeat. However it feels like director Sam Rami had a good idea for three more Spider-man movies but was convinced to shove all of the plots into one movie. As a result the entire film suffers. The plot that suffers the most is the Venom storyline. Venom is the movie's villain and only appears fully in the final hal hour of the movie. As a result, he goes under developed and does the same evil plot every Spidey villain has done, kidnap Mary Jane and lure Spidey into a trap. It hasn't worked for the villains in the last two movies and drains the movie's final showdown of any drama. Speaking of the end, this is where all of the plots come together and are resolved, messily. In the midst of the chaos, Peter gets colosure with best pal Harry and manages to forgive baddie Flint Marko for the death of his uncle. Oh, and he manages to kill defeat Venom and sort his relationship issues with Mary Jane. This movie had real promise and falls flat down on it's face. Oh Spidey, you really tangled this one up. The Reboot can't come soon enough.
    Expand
  4. Jun 22, 2012
    5
    People usually pick on Spider-Man 3 by saying that "Venom was portrayed terribly", or "Spider-Man was a sissy". But what was really wrong with this movie was that everything felt fake. NY didn't seem like NY. Peter didn't act like Peter. Spider-Man didn't act like a Spider-Man. And Sandman was meant to be the villain of the film but was wedge to work with Venom. Basically to much went on.People usually pick on Spider-Man 3 by saying that "Venom was portrayed terribly", or "Spider-Man was a sissy". But what was really wrong with this movie was that everything felt fake. NY didn't seem like NY. Peter didn't act like Peter. Spider-Man didn't act like a Spider-Man. And Sandman was meant to be the villain of the film but was wedge to work with Venom. Basically to much went on. Too many villains, and too many moments repeated from the previous movies. Expand
  5. Jun 3, 2012
    6
    While it definitely has a lot of flaws, I don't think Spider-Man 3 is the abomination that a lot of people say it is. I'll talk about the good stuff first. Firstly the film looks amazing, the special effects are the best out of all of the three films. The web action looks awesome, Sandman looks awesome and Venom looks brilliant! People complain that he wasn't bulky enough but I thought heWhile it definitely has a lot of flaws, I don't think Spider-Man 3 is the abomination that a lot of people say it is. I'll talk about the good stuff first. Firstly the film looks amazing, the special effects are the best out of all of the three films. The web action looks awesome, Sandman looks awesome and Venom looks brilliant! People complain that he wasn't bulky enough but I thought he was fine. The only exception to the great special effects is the scene when Harry attacks Peter near the start of the film, its quite obvious that the makers had trouble animating the web swinging action when Peter is not wearing his suit. Another good thing about this film is that in some scenes it really does nail to darker tone that the film was going for, when Peter first gets the black suit it leads to some great and intense moments...now the bad stuff. It's obvious that this film cannot decide on a tone. At some points it's going for a really dark tone but in others it seems to be trying to make you laugh, or trying to be dark but failing and making us laugh when we shouldn't be. The acting isn't too bad but there's nothing special and the writing, while still better than Spider-Man 1, it has some cheesy and cheap lines and it makes some characters react to things in unrealistic ways. There's a lot in this film, so it does feel a bit bloated from time to time, especially in the ending. The ending to me felt like they makers were just having to tie up the loose ends one by one and it didn't feel natural. I could go on but I don't think I need to. This film can be enjoyable in some parts but you just cannot ignore all of its flaws. Expand
  6. Nov 11, 2013
    5
    Okay, I'm gonna say that "Spider-Man 3" is just disappointing. It's a complete mess. The story was under-plotted, has too many plot holes, does not have the emotional satisfaction as "Spider-Man 2", and was just really bad. The only positive thing I can say about this film is the action and the visuals.
  7. Jul 9, 2012
    6
    Personally I think Spider-Man 3 wraps up everything nicely. It is a great movie to end the Raimi series of Spider-Man with New Goblin, Venom and Sandman. The script and storyline is good, though the movie is not as good as it's predecessors due to the amount of villains the movie is trying to handle and the bloopers. The ending was also a misfire, I expected more from it, perhaps a speechPersonally I think Spider-Man 3 wraps up everything nicely. It is a great movie to end the Raimi series of Spider-Man with New Goblin, Venom and Sandman. The script and storyline is good, though the movie is not as good as it's predecessors due to the amount of villains the movie is trying to handle and the bloopers. The ending was also a misfire, I expected more from it, perhaps a speech from Peter about his life as Spider-Man. Expand
  8. Jul 19, 2012
    4
    This third installment of Sam Raimi, Spider-Man is a real waste of money, of course with respect to director Sam Raimi, but unlike Spider-Man 2, this does not have good story, not a good enemy, as in my opinion venom should have a very good job and not just out and about when it will end the movie, I say that if sam Raimi does not make the same mistake, what you can do is, first, not muchThis third installment of Sam Raimi, Spider-Man is a real waste of money, of course with respect to director Sam Raimi, but unlike Spider-Man 2, this does not have good story, not a good enemy, as in my opinion venom should have a very good job and not just out and about when it will end the movie, I say that if sam Raimi does not make the same mistake, what you can do is, first, not much to emocionarce special effects, since what is in each one, Spiderman 3 has very good special effects, with a budget that spent 250 million dollars, is to have well thought out story, and if not found leave behind that and find another thing, as does the genius of nolan, which in its delivery of Batman Begins and the Dark Knight, has had a very good story, apart from very good enemies.

    Well in conclusion, Spider-Man 3 is a waste of money to have gone to see a film like this to the movies, and that now is not very cheap to say.
    My calificasion for Spiderman 3, Sam Raimi is 4/10.
    Expand
  9. Aug 12, 2012
    4
    A major disappointment, mostly from the fact that it completely contradicts the first two movies. One of the biggest reasons why Spider-Man is one of the most appealing superheroes is because of his self-sacrificing nature. The shift that suddenly he becomes "Mr. Big Shot" in this movie feels not only inconsistent, but it feels like we missed watching a Spider-Man movie that took placeA major disappointment, mostly from the fact that it completely contradicts the first two movies. One of the biggest reasons why Spider-Man is one of the most appealing superheroes is because of his self-sacrificing nature. The shift that suddenly he becomes "Mr. Big Shot" in this movie feels not only inconsistent, but it feels like we missed watching a Spider-Man movie that took place between "2" and "3". Not to mention that there's just simply too much crammed into this. Venom has no place in this movie whatsoever, and the revenge storyline between Peter and the Sandman was just so poorly handled. Boo. Expand
  10. Feb 9, 2013
    5
    Weakest of the three by far! I don`t know how dancing makes Venom look bad ass. I was really disappointed in this movie when I watched it. I hate Superman movies, and this movie moved into Superman company for me.
  11. Nov 28, 2012
    6
    A film you really wish possessed as good of a second half as it did a first half. Spider-Man 3 almost crashes and burns.
  12. Jan 17, 2013
    5
    I expected more action. The two other movies are great.
  13. Aug 5, 2013
    6
    The film plummets from the success of the masterpiece its predecessor was, but Spider-Man 3 still manages to entertain with humor and an emotional story, even if it had a bloated running time and lacked the memorability of Spider-Man 2.
  14. Dec 2, 2013
    5
    This film tried to hard to be everything all at once. Much like X-Men: The Last Stand, there are too many characters and not enough time to fully develop them. I was happy for the inclusion of Venom as a villain, but as he was a secondary character, he wasn't as fun or interesting as he should have been.
  15. Nov 13, 2013
    4
    Spider-Man 3 gets exterminated.
    The film begins sound until trying to do too much all at once. The first mistake is attempting to introduce two new villains along with an already iconic one, and it completely collapses when Peter Parker nearly becomes a villain himself. The movie gets lost and doesn't find its way back home.
  16. May 1, 2014
    6
    I will always love Spider-Man, he was the first childhood superhero that I loved and grew up with. When I watched Spider-Man 3 the first time on DVD, I thought it was a great movie and the best of the trilogy. I even thought it was the best movie ever. (Keep in mind I was a kid, like 8 or 9 years old.) Then later on when I heard that people said that it had too many villains and too manyI will always love Spider-Man, he was the first childhood superhero that I loved and grew up with. When I watched Spider-Man 3 the first time on DVD, I thought it was a great movie and the best of the trilogy. I even thought it was the best movie ever. (Keep in mind I was a kid, like 8 or 9 years old.) Then later on when I heard that people said that it had too many villains and too many subplots, I thought they were crazy. Then, I re-watched it a year or two later and saw it as a well-experienced movie viewer.

    The reason why Spider-Man 3 wasn't the best it could have been was because, in my opinion, it didn't take itself seriously and felt a bit silly. (Emo-Peter Parker and him dancing all over NY with his stupid hair style? The effects of the black symbiote made him a "finger-snapping hipster" at worst, nothing else. Oh my god, those scenes for me ruined the movie more than the villains. Everytime I rewatch the movie, I skip those scenes. Really, what were they thinking?) The movie didn't feel too overwhelming or overstuffed to me...or maybe it was. I think most of the characters could've been expanded upon and developed better and fleshed out more (Venom/Eddie Brock, The New Green Goblin/Harry, Peter Parker, Mary Jane, Aunt May, etc).
    The visual effects, in some scenes, withstood the test of time better than the previous films. In other scenes though, the CGI felt a bit sloppy and crude (Venom and the symbiote and Harry and his glider). The music and soundtrack feel dramatic and iconic, throughout the whole movie it just adds to the experience. "The Birth of Sandman" scene was one of my favorite scenes from the film. It also combines the best of the film's music and CGI. Venom, the most complained about villain, wasn't too bad but his character development was rushed. Venom, with his rich story/background and the loads of good source material, should have been better. Topher Grace didn't look as muscular or evil or charismatic (depending on which iteration/version) as he should've been. Harry and Sandman were both fine though. Sandman was really great.

    Spider-Man 3 was too rushed. Sam Raimi didn't want to include Venom and Gwen Stacy, that was the idea of Avi Arad and the executives at Sony/Columbia. The production, the crew, and the director were rushed and that affected the overall product. Spider-Man 3 could've been the best Spider-Man movie of the Sam Raimi trilogy, maybe the best of both trilogies, but it just messed up. I wonder what would've happened if Sam Raimi didn't listen to everyone suggesting ideas; maybe things would've turned out better. What would've happened if we had a Spider-Man 4? 5? 6?

    Many people compare The Amazing Spider-Man 2 to Spider-Man 3, but the only similarity is that they each have three villains. Spider-Man 3 had Eddie Brock, who became villain at the last part of the film, and Harry Osborn, who became a hero at the last part of the film. And Sandman just leaves, and tells Spider-Man he's sorry. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has Rhino, who only a villain for 10-15 minutes. It also has Harry Osborn (again?) and Electro. Both of the latter are added in nicely and not squeezed in.

    Spider-Man 3 is OK. The conclusion of the trilogy should have been better, but I'm satisfied enough with what we got.

    If you want to read more of my in-depth reviews about movies and TV shows, please click on my name or on "All this user's reviews". Please read them and like them, I'd appreciate it. I put real effort into these reviews. I've also reviewed the other films in the original Sam Raimi trilogy, and the two films in the new reboot.
    Expand
  17. Dec 31, 2014
    6
    Despite its overstretched plot, "Spider-Man 3" is not as bad as the audience make it out to be, for the movie still dazzles when it comes to action and CGI.
  18. Apr 28, 2014
    6
    The highly anticipated follow up in Sam Raimi's masterful series ups the ante with 3 villains and the introduction of the black suit. The villains showcased in this movie are Sandman played by Thomas Hayden Church, New Green Goblin potrayed by James Franco and finally Venom played by Topher Grace. On paper this sounds amazing but in reality.... it wasn't. Too many plot points plague thisThe highly anticipated follow up in Sam Raimi's masterful series ups the ante with 3 villains and the introduction of the black suit. The villains showcased in this movie are Sandman played by Thomas Hayden Church, New Green Goblin potrayed by James Franco and finally Venom played by Topher Grace. On paper this sounds amazing but in reality.... it wasn't. Too many plot points plague this movie and it turns into a mess story wise. Luckily the action makes up for it to not make it a total disaster but by far the weakest movie of Raimi's trilogy and probably the weakest Spidey film to date. Expand
  19. May 17, 2015
    6
    The film is good, but not to compare with the last two, the film has plenty of action, but has some script failures, and the relationship between Mary Jane and Peter Parker was not so good, the film has some villains and none of them was very interesting.
  20. Aug 27, 2014
    5
    This movie isn't great and it's not horrible. In the end it's just a disappointing sequel to Spider-Man 2. They didn't spend much time with Venom or Sandman as they felt very rushed and didn't have enough character development.
  21. Aug 7, 2015
    5
    Spider-Man 3 es decepcionante. El final de la trilogía de Sam Raimi parece una novela cursi y mediocre. La historia es confusa, demasiadas historias, demasiados villanos, demasiados personajes, hacen que esta tercera parte sea incomprensible. Sin mencionar que Spider-Man 3 cuenta con varios momentos cursis y ridículos, la transformación de "Peter bueno a un Peter malo" deja mucho queSpider-Man 3 es decepcionante. El final de la trilogía de Sam Raimi parece una novela cursi y mediocre. La historia es confusa, demasiadas historias, demasiados villanos, demasiados personajes, hacen que esta tercera parte sea incomprensible. Sin mencionar que Spider-Man 3 cuenta con varios momentos cursis y ridículos, la transformación de "Peter bueno a un Peter malo" deja mucho que desear, el resultado final es un Peter emo que sabe bailar y tocar el piano. Ridícula, Cursi y decepcionante. Imaginemos que esta tercera parte no existe, quedémonos solo con Spider-Man y Spider-Man 2. Expand
  22. Jan 26, 2015
    6
    [Portuguese] O jeito do Homem-Aranha agir ao entrar em contato com a simbiose foi no mínimo estranho e constrangedor até pra quem ta vendo. A Gwen Stacy totalmente modificada e o Venom magrelo misturado com mais dois vilões (não precisava de tudo isso mas ok) tornaram esse filme somente legal, e já estava na hora de acabar as sequências deste Homem-Aranha.
  23. Apr 22, 2015
    4
    The Spider-Man series, which debuted in 2002 and continued in 2004 and 2007, represents the first superhero cycle to complete a trilogy with the same primary cast and production team it had at the beginning. If nothing else, that assures viewers of a certain degree of continuity. However, while it could be argued that Spider-Man 2 had too little plot for its substantial running length, theThe Spider-Man series, which debuted in 2002 and continued in 2004 and 2007, represents the first superhero cycle to complete a trilogy with the same primary cast and production team it had at the beginning. If nothing else, that assures viewers of a certain degree of continuity. However, while it could be argued that Spider-Man 2 had too little plot for its substantial running length, the opposite could be said of Spider-Man 3. It's really two movies crammed into one, the first of which is a lot better than the second. Spider-Man 3 starts out strong but before it finishes, many viewers will desperately wish it had called it quits an hour earlier.

    One has to consider that the film's problems - and they are numerous - may be the product of the franchise's runaway popularity. In each of the first two films, director Sam Raimi was careful to limit the villain count to one (unless one counts Daily Bugle editor J. Jonah Jameson, brilliantly played by J.K. Simmons). Here, it triples, and the focus on the bad guys limits the amount of time we have for the soap opera that is Peter Parker's life. Expectations for this movie were sky-high and one wonders whether the pressure to fulfill them caused the director to overreach his grasp and miss the point that bigger and louder do not always equate to better.

    The film's setup is effective and feels like a continuation of the previous Spider-Man stories. The most kinetic action scene is the first one, as Harry and Peter tussle through the streets of New York. Although Sandman's introduction is lame, Thomas Haden Church plays the character so movingly that might have been possible to ignore this plot device if it was the only weak one in the movie (which it isn't). The most glaring stumbling block is Venom. He's one bad guy too many. Not only is the creature poorly realized but its introduction into the story causes everything to be crowded, rushed, and overlong. Spider-Man 3 feels like it should end around the 1:40 mark, but like the Energizer Bunny on a rampage, it keeps going.

    The climactic battle is a disaster. It's not exciting and it requires two contrivances too excruciating to ignore (one involves a butler that would make Alfred look dumb; the other involves Sandman's eventual fate). It's unforgivable that the film's last action scene should be so vastly inferior to the first one. The special effects aren't even all that impressive. There are several instances in which it's all-too-obvious that Spider-Man and his nemeses are computer generated. This is sloppier than anything in either Spider-Man or Spider-Man 2.

    There are also unnecessary characters. I guess Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard) has been added as a nod to comic book fans, but she serves no purpose other than to make us wonder whether Mary Jane is still an interesting character. Her father (James Cromwell) is equally underused. Bruce Campbell gets a nice extended cameo, but why do his scenes seem like Monty Python outtakes? And, as I have already mentioned, everything about Venom is a mistake. At the very least this villain deserved its own movie rather than being awkwardly shoehorned into a film that starts out being about Peter, Harry, and Sandman.

    Audience reaction to the film at the midnight opening screening was negative, bordering on hostile, meaning that the core group of fans did not like what they were seeing. It's easy to understand their displeasure. Compared to the other two movies in the series, this one is a misfire. It's for completists only, and even they are likely to feel let down. Spider-Man and the first sequel were breezy adventures - easy and fun to sit through. Spider-Man 3 is a chore. The effective moments require a lot patience to uncover and some of what has to be shifted to get to them is not worth the effort. People love trilogies because it's said that good things come in threes, but this series would have looked better and felt more satisfying had the filmmakers stopped at two.
    Expand
  24. Apr 17, 2016
    6
    Oh what a shame to waste such a great opportunity, such a stellar cast and such potential on an incredibly underwhelming film like this. This movie had so much going for it, the first two installments were home runs, amazing films, they had everything to make a great ending to Raimi's trilogy. But Sony has a tendency to rush things with their movies and also rush directors in the wrongOh what a shame to waste such a great opportunity, such a stellar cast and such potential on an incredibly underwhelming film like this. This movie had so much going for it, the first two installments were home runs, amazing films, they had everything to make a great ending to Raimi's trilogy. But Sony has a tendency to rush things with their movies and also rush directors in the wrong ways because the want more and more money. They were so concerned with making more money that they pushed the director to shovel in unnecessary sub-plots and villains that no one asked for and just discombobulated everything and ruined the movie. There is still some good about it, Tobey Maguire still nails it as Spiderman, except the dancing scene, so does the cast from the previous ones, there is great action scenes, the black Spiderman aspect is interesting but not developed enough and the sandman is a pretty good villain with a decent character development. But the Harry becoming the new goblin, the Gwen Stacy love triangle and Venom being shoehorned in with an awful casting choice for him aspects were so incredibly bad and unnecessary, they confused everything and made this potentially great film a complete mess. I give it a passing grade despite all these negative points, simply because of spiderman, the cast from the previous ones, the great action scenes it had and most of all the potential it had, the little sparkles of greatness that showed up once in a while. All of these positives made this mess worthwhile, just to see Tobey Maguire as Spiderman one last time. Expand
  25. Jul 21, 2015
    6
    Spiderman 3 may have great action and special effects but the film is just so flawed the amount of plot holes, unlikable characters, multitude of plot points creating an incoherent story, illogical character action and motivation, rushed villain origins, to many characters and villains, miscast, character arcs ruined from the second film,emo Peter and just a complete lack of any logic.
    5/10
  26. May 2, 2015
    5
    I dont hate this movie as much as most but it was a huge let down. It had so much potential to be one of the greatest movies! but its a shame it turned out how it did, still with having things to love
  27. Jul 21, 2015
    6
    The movie was good but a scene left me a bit bitter about how little modal and ridiculous action Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker with many egos as always but you spend too TCO than other films and could not face two enemies at once which is the least important. But the good deed will always remain.
  28. Apr 18, 2016
    6
    I agree with what someone of this board said... this kind of movie should be done for he broad masses or for the fan base... sadly, i feel it doesn't satisfy any of them. As a movielover, i dont need corny and cheesy dialogues, or for the fx to overlap the stoyrline, or predictable plots (i really hate that the Sandman was the "killer" of Ben), or an overthrown of supervillains one afterI agree with what someone of this board said... this kind of movie should be done for he broad masses or for the fan base... sadly, i feel it doesn't satisfy any of them. As a movielover, i dont need corny and cheesy dialogues, or for the fx to overlap the stoyrline, or predictable plots (i really hate that the Sandman was the "killer" of Ben), or an overthrown of supervillains one after the another, I appreciate and I'm thankful (as a movielover) for the popcorn kind of movie -as it allows me (is it all the profits come from the tickets or also from the snacks for a movie that lasts over two hours)-, i appreciate the sometimes well executed comedy (honestly, the scene of the dancin' is, as a lack of a better word, amusing), and some action. As a fan, I hated (as much as I like Haden and Grace) the casting for the villains... why don't you make a movie about spidey and venom, the brock's approach to aunt may and the battle in the beach? Venom is really really deep and funny and cinic (please, can anyone hire Todd Mc Farlane as a writer for the next film?)why don't you make a movie about the Harry's obsession to tell the world who's Spidey, introducing Liz, Raxton and even, Norman jr.? the hatred, the complexity... Is it me or in the movie left a piece of the alien symbiote in Connor's lab? Expand
  29. Jan 22, 2016
    4
    It's not such a bad movie and in fact not the worst movie in 2007 because I already know what movie took that spot. This third installment is not as bad as you wanted it to be.
  30. Feb 21, 2016
    5
    This is basically The Amazing Spider-Man 2 before TASM 2 it's what happens when a studio takes control away from the people making the movie and its a shame that this was the follow up to the greatest Spider-Man adaptation on film. But if you want to laugh and have a good time with friends i'd say this would be a perfect film to watch in a so bad its good film party.
  31. Mar 18, 2016
    6
    Talking about Peter Parker's relationship with May Jane, Sandman's revenge, Venom's fall, Edward Brock's vengeance and Harry Osborn's situation with his father and its the relationship with Spiderman, Spiderman III is one of the most hated films ever, with not enough action and more stupid attitudes of Peter Parker and almost more thriller than love than the originals.
  32. Mar 23, 2016
    5
    The three main recurring characters get stuck in a rut and the same can be said of the film itself in “Spider-Man 3.” After the significant improvement of the second installment over the first, new entry reps a roughly equivalent dip in quality and enjoyment, with Spidey now giving off the faint odor of running on fumes.

    A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One
    The three main recurring characters get stuck in a rut and the same can be said of the film itself in “Spider-Man 3.” After the significant improvement of the second installment over the first, new entry reps a roughly equivalent dip in quality and enjoyment, with Spidey now giving off the faint odor of running on fumes.

    A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One can feel the effort required to suit up one more time, come up with fresh variations on a winning formula and inject urgency into a format that basically needs to be repeated and, due to audience expectations, can’t be toyed with or deepened very much.

    Big problem with third Spideyis the script, the very same element that elevated the second yarn. Four years back, vet scenarist Alvin Sargent, with a story assist from Michael Chabon, enriched the premise from all angles — emotion, humor and villainy. This time, the magic has eluded Sargent and the Raimi brothers, director Sam and co-writer Ivan, the result being a story that would have provenmore satisfactory for a late ’60s cartoon-hero TV show than for a new-century blockbuster.

    At the outset, everything is so hunky-dory that New York City looks like Pleasantville. Thanks to Spider-Man, crime is virtually non-existent, Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) is a burgeoning musical theater star, and Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), still studying science at college, is dorkier than ever.

    But evil begins to reassert itself on several fronts. As Peter and Mary Jane gaze at the stars from their spider-web hammock overlooking the city, a modest “War of the Worlds”-like meteor crashes nearby and emits a gooey black silk that slithers and slides of its own accord.

    A hard-outside/soft-inside criminal (Thomas Haden Church), who turns out to have been responsible for the murder of Peter’s beloved Uncle Ben, escapes from prison and, through a process that defies comprehension but is undeniably eye-catching, turns into a shape-changer named Sandman who can blow through the caverns of Manhattan or become a giant hulk with fearsome pummeling power.

    And then there is Harry Osborn (James Franco), who, still blaming Spider-Man for the death of his father, decides to emulate the great green one by engineering a new designer Goblin outfit and flying board and taking to the skies to avenge his old man.

    Peter acquires yet another adversary in the person of Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), an aggressive street photographer who vies with Peter to capture the revelatory shot that will reveal Spider-Man for who he really is, a coup that will land the winner a full-time job from editor J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) at the Daily Bugle. The rivalry turns into outright war when Eddie morphs into one more Marvel supervillain, the fanged Venom, whose skills eerily match those of Spidey.

    Early going is enlivened by a couple high-wire action sequences, a Goblin attack and especially a vertigo-inducing scene in which an out-of-control construction crane demolishes part of a nearby skyscraper, sending platinum blonde Gwen (Bryce Dallas Howard), a classmate of Peter’s, heading toward the pavement, only to be saved at the last second by guess who.

    But the dramatic temperature is brought way down by Mary Jane, who’s become a real drag. Fired, in a poor scene, from her Broadway play, she pathetically begs for attention, becomes petulant when Spidey plants a public kiss on Gwen after saving her, then seeks solace from Harry.

    In all his dealings with her, Peter still acts like the prim, naive high school kid he was when first seen in the series five years ago, as if he hadn’t learned anything through all his subsequent trials. Scripting of the many domestic scenes between Peter and women, specifically Mary Jane and Rosemary Harris’ Aunt May, is very dull and unimaginative.

    Script’s one big idea is to have Peter/Spidey explore his “dark side,” a gambit of tiresome psychological value but with the obvious side benefits of temporarily suspending his goody two-shoes personality and giving him a new, black costume. All the ploy really amounts to is an interlude in which Peter struts around Gotham with a trendy new haircut ogling women and humiliating Mary Jane with some aggressive nightclub antics.

    Given the setup, Spider-Man in the end has to contend with multiple villains in a gigantic action climax that, unfortunately, is too reminiscent of the first film’s Roosevelt Island episode thanks to the similar imperilment of Mary Jane. Still, Sandman is a strange and visually interesting baddie endowed by Church with a melancholy undercurrent.

    Grace, who could plausibly have played Spider-Man himself, provides a spark with something extra as Spidey’s first major adversary his own age.

    Technically, pic is fully on a par with the previous entries, which means the visual effects will have fans wide-eyed throughout.
    Expand
  33. Apr 11, 2016
    5
    I don't hate this movie, when it came out, it was my favorite Spider-Man movie, but as time went on I realized it is very flawed. It has an overly crowded narrative and events that play out don't get the full amount of time to really make sense, The biggest problem is this movie tried to do too much and gets a lot wrong, but... it does get a lot right, the effects are the best in anyI don't hate this movie, when it came out, it was my favorite Spider-Man movie, but as time went on I realized it is very flawed. It has an overly crowded narrative and events that play out don't get the full amount of time to really make sense, The biggest problem is this movie tried to do too much and gets a lot wrong, but... it does get a lot right, the effects are the best in any Spider-man movie, some of the best superhero fights, and some good performances and interesting ideas that don't get to play out, but are there. Expand
  34. Mar 27, 2016
    5
    The three main recurring characters get stuck in a rut and the same can be said of the film itself in “Spider-Man 3.” After the significant improvement of the second installment over the first, new entry reps a roughly equivalent dip in quality and enjoyment, with Spidey now giving off the faint odor of running on fumes.

    A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One
    The three main recurring characters get stuck in a rut and the same can be said of the film itself in “Spider-Man 3.” After the significant improvement of the second installment over the first, new entry reps a roughly equivalent dip in quality and enjoyment, with Spidey now giving off the faint odor of running on fumes.

    A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One can feel the effort required to suit up one more time, come up with fresh variations on a winning formula and inject urgency into a format that basically needs to be repeated and, due to audience expectations, can’t be toyed with or deepened very much.

    Big problem with third Spideyis the script, the very same element that elevated the second yarn. Four years back, vet scenarist Alvin Sargent, with a story assist from Michael Chabon, enriched the premise from all angles — emotion, humor and villainy. This time, the magic has eluded Sargent and the Raimi brothers, director Sam and co-writer Ivan, the result being a story that would have provenmore satisfactory for a late ’60s cartoon-hero TV show than for a new-century blockbuster.

    At the outset, everything is so hunky-dory that New York City looks like Pleasantville. Thanks to Spider-Man, crime is virtually non-existent, Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) is a burgeoning musical theater star, and Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), still studying science at college, is dorkier than ever.

    But evil begins to reassert itself on several fronts. As Peter and Mary Jane gaze at the stars from their spider-web hammock overlooking the city, a modest “War of the Worlds”-like meteor crashes nearby and emits a gooey black silk that slithers and slides of its own accord.

    A hard-outside/soft-inside criminal (Thomas Haden Church), who turns out to have been responsible for the murder of Peter’s beloved Uncle Ben, escapes from prison and, through a process that defies comprehension but is undeniably eye-catching, turns into a shape-changer named Sandman who can blow through the caverns of Manhattan or become a giant hulk with fearsome pummeling power.

    And then there is Harry Osborn (James Franco), who, still blaming Spider-Man for the death of his father, decides to emulate the great green one by engineering a new designer Goblin outfit and flying board and taking to the skies to avenge his old man.

    Peter acquires yet another adversary in the person of Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), an aggressive street photographer who vies with Peter to capture the revelatory shot that will reveal Spider-Man for who he really is, a coup that will land the winner a full-time job from editor J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) at the Daily Bugle. The rivalry turns into outright war when Eddie morphs into one more Marvel supervillain, the fanged Venom, whose skills eerily match those of Spidey.

    Early going is enlivened by a couple high-wire action sequences, a Goblin attack and especially a vertigo-inducing scene in which an out-of-control construction crane demolishes part of a nearby skyscraper, sending platinum blonde Gwen (Bryce Dallas Howard), a classmate of Peter’s, heading toward the pavement, only to be saved at the last second by guess who.

    But the dramatic temperature is brought way down by Mary Jane, who’s become a real drag. Fired, in a poor scene, from her Broadway play, she pathetically begs for attention, becomes petulant when Spidey plants a public kiss on Gwen after saving her, then seeks solace from Harry.

    In all his dealings with her, Peter still acts like the prim, naive high school kid he was when first seen in the series five years ago, as if he hadn’t learned anything through all his subsequent trials. Scripting of the many domestic scenes between Peter and women, specifically Mary Jane and Rosemary Harris’ Aunt May, is very dull and unimaginative.

    Script’s one big idea is to have Peter/Spidey explore his “dark side,” a gambit of tiresome psychological value but with the obvious side benefits of temporarily suspending his goody two-shoes personality and giving him a new, black costume. All the ploy really amounts to is an interlude in which Peter struts around Gotham with a trendy new haircut ogling women and humiliating Mary Jane with some aggressive nightclub antics.

    Given the setup, Spider-Man in the end has to contend with multiple villains in a gigantic action climax that, unfortunately, is too reminiscent of the first film’s Roosevelt Island episode thanks to the similar imperilment of Mary Jane. Still, Sandman is a strange and visually interesting baddie endowed by Church with a melancholy undercurrent.

    Grace, who could plausibly have played Spider-Man himself, provides a spark with something extra as Spidey’s first major adversary his own age.

    Technically, pic is fully on a par with the previous entries, which means the visual effects will have fans wide-eyed throughout.
    Expand
  35. Jun 1, 2016
    5
    I don't hate this movie as much as most people, but I don't like it. It is extremely crowded and ruins some of the great characters the trilogy was building up and gives them lazy drama to further the story. But when this movie shines, it really shines.
Metascore
59

Mixed or average reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 40
  2. Negative: 2 out of 40
  1. The wow factor works overtime with state-of-the-art effects sequences that often are as beautiful as they are astonishing.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    50
    A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One can feel the effort required to suit up one more time, come up with fresh variations on a winning formula and inject urgency into a format that basically needs to be repeated and, due to audience expectations, can't be toyed with or deepened very much.
  3. 75
    Overly long and complicated, it's packed with crowd-pleasing moments and satisfactorily wraps up the trilogy - without quite capturing the magic of the first two installments.