Click HERE for the rest of the heyallright movie review archives.

Spider-Man 3
Reviewed by Theo Michelfeld
Posted: May 5, 2007

Wanna see the wheels come off a great movie franchise? Neither did I. As a matter of fact, I brought a pretty vulnerable heart into Spider-Man 3. I loved the first two films, in particular Spider-Man 2, which is a tour de force by any standard, quirky and agile like its hero, brilliant and busy like its villain. That film proves how good a superhero movie can be… also, how good a sequel, and a Hollywood summer blockbuster can be. Well, three years and $250 million later, and this latest installment proves only that inspiration cannot be bought, or waited out. Too bad. Spidey deserves better.

Ironically enough, Spider-Man 3 is about Peter Parker’s failure to cope with the pressures of success. At the beginning of the film he greets his good fortune with arrogance, which quickly chases the good fortune away. To make matters worse, he then becomes human host to a black, binding, symbiotic goo from outer space that brings out his naughtier impulses. For instance, he starts wearing his bangs in his eyes, playing un-invited blues piano, and demanding cookies and milk from his landlord’s daughter. Welcome to the dark side.

Folks, with two beers in me, I’ve been a bigger jerk in my life than Spider-Man ever crosses over to in this so-called struggle within. No symbiotic goo, just beer. That’s all I ever needed to turn myself into a temporary but ultimately redeemable asshole. Of course, maybe if giant corporations were using my image to sell toys and happy meals, I would have been required to put down my beer, and seek out some symbiotic extra-terrestrial goo, some convenient, creeping CGI entity to suggest that wickedness comes oozing out of meteorites. It wasn’t me that lied, cheated, and stole. It was the goo.

The black goo is a problem for me, folks, in case I hadn’t made that obvious. It keeps the film from ever being clear about the thing it pretends to explore. Consider this: Until now Spider-Man hasn’t faced any truly evil villains. His adversaries, in the first two films and in this one too, are victims of technology and heartache, drunk on power and run amok. Spider-Man spends as much time trying to save them as trying to stop them.

Now, for once, he is up against a thoroughly evil and unredeemable foe. And the foe is just not that tough. Yes, the goo does eventually get bored with Spider-Man’s mild rampage of mischief and bind itself to a more sinister host. And in the manifestation of the fanged creature Venom, it does finally become something of a threat to the heroes, to mankind, et cetera. But like Darth Maul in Star Wars Episode I, this villain does very little succeeding in doing bad deeds. That’s an enormous mistake that only mega-budget franchise films seem to make. Lame or low-profile action flicks don’t dare serve up a bad guy that doesn’t do anything but look mean and get himself killed. Meanwhile, remember how much damage Darth Vader did before he ever crossed swords with Luke Skywalker? Now that’s a villain. That’s how it’s done, folks.

Furthermore the source of the goo, its methods and motivations, and the means of destroying it, are never adequately explained. Folks, that makes for a very preposterous vanquishing. Earlier this year I accused the film Ghost Rider of playing way too fast and loose with its rules of supernatural engagement. Now this film pulls the same storytelling no-no. People, this is why video games have become more popular than movies. In video game conflicts, at least you get to know what the buttons do.

I predict the black goo will eventually come to be seen as the Yoko Ono of this once great franchise. Meanwhile Spider-Man 3’s more active villain, Sandman, is relegated to little more than a sub-plot. Too bad, because Sandman is the best thing about this film. Portrayed by Thomas Haden-Church, he wears a convincing mournfulness about his own particle-shifting condition, and actually pulls a few good old-fashioned bank heists before pursuing a bogus grudge against the hero. Spider-Man also battles his half-psychotic best friend Harry Osborne throughout the film, and has several weepy non-CGI interfaces with his girlfriend Mary Jane, and his Aunt May. Somehow it all takes two-and-a-half hours. In fact the film merely alternates between dizzying set pieces and unconvincing soul-searching, without ever gathering itself into a plot. This is what happens when the money machine takes on a life of its own. Clearly this film was sallied forth before the filmmakers were ready with ideas. Millions will be made, for sure. And no one gets hurt, except the dignity of a screen hero.

This morning I went to see that hero in action. Two-and-a-half hours later, I was ready to stick a fork into the whole weary Spider-Man juggernaut. This film is directed by Sam Raimi, who did brilliant work with the first two movies, and once made a little horror masterpiece called The Evil Dead, which I would point to as my favorite example of the creative spirit triumphing over budget limitations. Now, ironically, this same director, given a $250 million budget, has made a triumphant example of the creative impotence of money. Let’s hope he moves on to something that captures his interest. And let’s hope the money train leaves Spidey alone for a while. Because this ass-kicking is hard to watch.

Copyright © 2007 Theo Michelfeld