My Recent Reviews
Watemon has written 5 reviews.
Utter disaster.
Bryan took what could've been a compelling film series, bastardized it and turned it into generic Hollywood crap.
As an adaptation, X-Men has no integrity, completely changing every character they...
[+] Read Full Review
Bryan took what could've been a compelling film series, bastardized it and turned it into generic Hollywood crap.
As an adaptation, X-Men has no integrity, completely changing every character they...
[+] Read Full Review
Utter disaster.
Bryan took what could've been a compelling film series, bastardized it and turned it into generic Hollywood crap.
As an adaptation, X-Men has no integrity, completely changing every character they introduce into the film. Rogue, Wolverine and to some extent Storm's characterizations have been altered beyond repair. Anyone who grew up watching the 90s animated series knows that Rogue had much more of a purpose beyond the useless role she plays in this film. Wolverine, save for his name and abilities, is by no means reminiscent of his comic counterpart. Everything that made Wolverine the most popular X-Men character was removed and erased for his film role, making him a poor, sappy shell of what he could've been.
Magneto, who previously was a nigh-invulnerable mutant, is made into a frail character who does nothing more than manipulate others into fighting for his "cause" which is nothing more than attempting to annihilate the humans -- which was never Magneto's goal in the first place. Mystique's gotten the Hollywood treatment, made completely naked and given fight scenes to arouse young teens.
Bryan Singer turns the X-Men film franchise into a Hollywood sellout, abandoning everything that makes the X-Men stories and characters unique in order to create what HE believes to be better treatment for the material as a film. That's an overall insult to the original material and the fans who enjoyed the 90s cartoon and the comics.
FOX could definitely take some pointers from Spider-Man, which box office sales grossed $403,706,375 statewide, compared to the X-Men's $6,762,378.
The X-Men films may be entertaining to those unfamiliar to the franchise, but the films are sell-outs, they have no integrity and have utterly destroyed the spirit of the original comics.
If you want to watch some entertaining X-Men, go to the 90s cartoon, don't waste your time and energy on the films.
Bryan took what could've been a compelling film series, bastardized it and turned it into generic Hollywood crap.
As an adaptation, X-Men has no integrity, completely changing every character they introduce into the film. Rogue, Wolverine and to some extent Storm's characterizations have been altered beyond repair. Anyone who grew up watching the 90s animated series knows that Rogue had much more of a purpose beyond the useless role she plays in this film. Wolverine, save for his name and abilities, is by no means reminiscent of his comic counterpart. Everything that made Wolverine the most popular X-Men character was removed and erased for his film role, making him a poor, sappy shell of what he could've been.
Magneto, who previously was a nigh-invulnerable mutant, is made into a frail character who does nothing more than manipulate others into fighting for his "cause" which is nothing more than attempting to annihilate the humans -- which was never Magneto's goal in the first place. Mystique's gotten the Hollywood treatment, made completely naked and given fight scenes to arouse young teens.
Bryan Singer turns the X-Men film franchise into a Hollywood sellout, abandoning everything that makes the X-Men stories and characters unique in order to create what HE believes to be better treatment for the material as a film. That's an overall insult to the original material and the fans who enjoyed the 90s cartoon and the comics.
FOX could definitely take some pointers from Spider-Man, which box office sales grossed $403,706,375 statewide, compared to the X-Men's $6,762,378.
The X-Men films may be entertaining to those unfamiliar to the franchise, but the films are sell-outs, they have no integrity and have utterly destroyed the spirit of the original comics.
If you want to watch some entertaining X-Men, go to the 90s cartoon, don't waste your time and energy on the films.
Posted may 23, 2007 4:45 pm pt
Another X-Men that just, I'm sorry I have to say it, sucks.
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier...
[+] Read Full Review
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier...
[+] Read Full Review
Another X-Men that just, I'm sorry I have to say it, sucks.
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier is not the most powerful psychic in the world, and susceptible to the control of a lesser experienced mutant? How come Rogue is STILL a useless character, who can't do anything more than get in the way and *attempt* to help the situation?
I would never expect these comic book films to be "exactly" like the original material (like 300 or Sin City), but I do expect the adaptations to keep to the spirit of the characters, at the very least.
Magneto's just another boring antagonist, the main conflict is simply recycled from the first film, and you're given almost no reason to care for any of these character, except once more Wolverine.
This film is another example of how the production team thinks their ideas are better than the original material created for these characters that originally made the franchise famous. For instance, taking away Rogues entire back story, making her weak and useless, Colossus being younger instead of the likes of Cyclops and Jean -- and RUSSIAN. Why is it all the work done to create these characters has gone to waste, substituted by lesser material?
Despite all my attempts to ignore my expectations for the series, and watch the films as their own standalone series, I am unable to do so, forever recalling what the films could've been as opposed to what we're given.
I'll never get over Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry's casting as Wolverine and Storm. I'll never get over the bastardization of Magneto's character, one of my favorite villains in the Marvel Universe. I will also never get over how Bryan Singer has continually insulted fans of the original X-Men material, by giving us HIS vision, thinking it's better than what we fell in love with. None of these characters, save a select few, even resemble their comic counterparts, and those they managed to get right (Cyclops, Xavier), in some cases barely make an appearance in this film.
The only thing I think Bryan Singer managed to do right was accurately depict Jeans Firebird as the Phoenix entity, something Brett Ratner couldn't even do right in the sequel.
We're given another convoluted story, priority screen time to only Wolverine's character - once more, and no reason to care for these characters as they never develop, and serve only as an excuse for expensive special effects.
FOX should take some lessons from the superior adaptations of Tim Story's Fantastic Four and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. You can't watch all of Marvel's films and believe they exist in the same continuity, save for Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. Is it really that hard to do a comic book film right?
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier is not the most powerful psychic in the world, and susceptible to the control of a lesser experienced mutant? How come Rogue is STILL a useless character, who can't do anything more than get in the way and *attempt* to help the situation?
I would never expect these comic book films to be "exactly" like the original material (like 300 or Sin City), but I do expect the adaptations to keep to the spirit of the characters, at the very least.
Magneto's just another boring antagonist, the main conflict is simply recycled from the first film, and you're given almost no reason to care for any of these character, except once more Wolverine.
This film is another example of how the production team thinks their ideas are better than the original material created for these characters that originally made the franchise famous. For instance, taking away Rogues entire back story, making her weak and useless, Colossus being younger instead of the likes of Cyclops and Jean -- and RUSSIAN. Why is it all the work done to create these characters has gone to waste, substituted by lesser material?
Despite all my attempts to ignore my expectations for the series, and watch the films as their own standalone series, I am unable to do so, forever recalling what the films could've been as opposed to what we're given.
I'll never get over Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry's casting as Wolverine and Storm. I'll never get over the bastardization of Magneto's character, one of my favorite villains in the Marvel Universe. I will also never get over how Bryan Singer has continually insulted fans of the original X-Men material, by giving us HIS vision, thinking it's better than what we fell in love with. None of these characters, save a select few, even resemble their comic counterparts, and those they managed to get right (Cyclops, Xavier), in some cases barely make an appearance in this film.
The only thing I think Bryan Singer managed to do right was accurately depict Jeans Firebird as the Phoenix entity, something Brett Ratner couldn't even do right in the sequel.
We're given another convoluted story, priority screen time to only Wolverine's character - once more, and no reason to care for these characters as they never develop, and serve only as an excuse for expensive special effects.
FOX should take some lessons from the superior adaptations of Tim Story's Fantastic Four and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. You can't watch all of Marvel's films and believe they exist in the same continuity, save for Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. Is it really that hard to do a comic book film right?
Posted may 23, 2007 4:11 pm pt
Another X-Men that just, I'm sorry I have to say it, sucks.
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier...
[+] Read Full Review
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier...
[+] Read Full Review
Another X-Men that just, I'm sorry I have to say it, sucks.
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier is not the most powerful psychic in the world, and susceptible to the control of a lesser experienced mutant? How come Rogue is STILL a useless character, who can't do anything more than get in the way and *attempt* to help the situation?
I would never expect these comic book films to be "exactly" like the original material (like 300 or Sin City), but I do expect the adaptations to keep to the spirit of the characters, at the very least.
Magneto's just another boring antagonist, the main conflict is simply recycled from the first film, and you're given almost no reason to care for any of these character, except once more Wolverine.
This film is another example of how the production team thinks their ideas are better than the original material created for these characters that originally made the franchise famous. For instance, taking away Rogues entire back story, making her weak and useless, Colossus being younger instead of the likes of Cyclops and Jean -- and RUSSIAN. Why is it all the work done to create these characters has gone to waste, substituted by lesser material?
Despite all my attempts to ignore my expectations for the series, and watch the films as their own standalone series, I am unable to do so, forever recalling what the films could've been as opposed to what we're given.
I'll never get over Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry's casting as Wolverine and Storm. I'll never get over the bastardization of Magneto's character, one of my favorite villains in the Marvel Universe. I will also never get over how Bryan Singer has continually insulted fans of the original X-Men material, by giving us HIS vision, thinking it's better than what we fell in love with. None of these characters, save a select few, even resemble their comic counterparts, and those they managed to get right (Cyclops, Xavier), in some cases barely make an appearance in this film.
The only thing I think Bryan Singer managed to do right was accurately depict Jeans Firebird as the Phoenix entity, something Brett Ratner couldn't even do right in the sequel.
We're given another convoluted story, priority screen time to only Wolverine's character - once more, and no reason to care for these characters as they never develop, and serve only as an excuse for expensive special effects.
FOX should take some lessons from the superior adaptations of Tim Story's Fantastic Four and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. You can't watch all of Marvel's films and believe they exist in the same continuity, save for Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. Is it really that hard to do a comic book film right?
Look, if you want an example of the X-Men done right, don't watch the movies, or even the Evolution cartoon (which is pretty good), check out the 90s cartoon. After FOX cancelled it, their ratings dropped 34%. It was accurate and it was entertaining, even more so than Evolution, and lasted about 5 seasons.
As I said, there was much opportunity for Singer to do things right, but he chose not to.
How far will Bryan Singer go to ruin these characters? How come Lady Deathstrike and Wolverine have no history, much like he has no history with Sabretooth? How come Xavier is not the most powerful psychic in the world, and susceptible to the control of a lesser experienced mutant? How come Rogue is STILL a useless character, who can't do anything more than get in the way and *attempt* to help the situation?
I would never expect these comic book films to be "exactly" like the original material (like 300 or Sin City), but I do expect the adaptations to keep to the spirit of the characters, at the very least.
Magneto's just another boring antagonist, the main conflict is simply recycled from the first film, and you're given almost no reason to care for any of these character, except once more Wolverine.
This film is another example of how the production team thinks their ideas are better than the original material created for these characters that originally made the franchise famous. For instance, taking away Rogues entire back story, making her weak and useless, Colossus being younger instead of the likes of Cyclops and Jean -- and RUSSIAN. Why is it all the work done to create these characters has gone to waste, substituted by lesser material?
Despite all my attempts to ignore my expectations for the series, and watch the films as their own standalone series, I am unable to do so, forever recalling what the films could've been as opposed to what we're given.
I'll never get over Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry's casting as Wolverine and Storm. I'll never get over the bastardization of Magneto's character, one of my favorite villains in the Marvel Universe. I will also never get over how Bryan Singer has continually insulted fans of the original X-Men material, by giving us HIS vision, thinking it's better than what we fell in love with. None of these characters, save a select few, even resemble their comic counterparts, and those they managed to get right (Cyclops, Xavier), in some cases barely make an appearance in this film.
The only thing I think Bryan Singer managed to do right was accurately depict Jeans Firebird as the Phoenix entity, something Brett Ratner couldn't even do right in the sequel.
We're given another convoluted story, priority screen time to only Wolverine's character - once more, and no reason to care for these characters as they never develop, and serve only as an excuse for expensive special effects.
FOX should take some lessons from the superior adaptations of Tim Story's Fantastic Four and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. You can't watch all of Marvel's films and believe they exist in the same continuity, save for Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. Is it really that hard to do a comic book film right?
Look, if you want an example of the X-Men done right, don't watch the movies, or even the Evolution cartoon (which is pretty good), check out the 90s cartoon. After FOX cancelled it, their ratings dropped 34%. It was accurate and it was entertaining, even more so than Evolution, and lasted about 5 seasons.
As I said, there was much opportunity for Singer to do things right, but he chose not to.
Posted may 23, 2007 4:09 pm pt
My only complaint about this movie is that the whole just feels wrong. I gave this movie an honest chance, sat down and watched it without any prejudice, only to find out weeks later that I couldn't even recall the plot of the movie or any major...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
My only complaint about this movie is that the whole just feels wrong. I gave this movie an honest chance, sat down and watched it without any prejudice, only to find out weeks later that I couldn't even recall the plot of the movie or any major elements.
"X3" is just a big snooze of a "blockbuster hit", there's nothing about this movie that's enjoyable to watch. The only thing this film had going was its expensive budget and high-end special effects.
The characters were shallow and poorly written:
Storm has turned into the "everything's in black and white character", unable to empathize with anyone who would ever contemplate taking the cure. Not to compare this Storm to her comic book alter ego, but Storm of all people should be the one to understand, considering she used to not be able to control her powers. Irregardless, Storm is reduced to this racist character condemns all other mutants who look to change "who they are". Well Storm, my "powers" do not define who I am, just like my skin color or my heritage, does not define who I am. Storm speaks the mind of a racist in this film, and it's sad that the writers would take her in this direction.
Magneto's another example of poor writing. Magneto and Xavier are supposed to be opposites in their vision for mutants. Essentially they are both the same compassionate individuals who feel an obligation to guide their people, they just have different viewpoints and different powers. To see Magneto abandon Mystique after turning human was another uncharacteristic turn taken by the writers.
So I don't spend this entire review talking about the characters, I'll move on.
You given almost no reason to care for any of the characters other than Jean and Wolverine. By the end of my second watch through this film, I would've preferred Jean kill everyone just so we would never have to suffer through another ill-conceived chapter of this dieing film series.
Scott's killed off before we're given a chance to care, and the writers spent so much time making Xavier out to be the bad guy that his death has almost no impact, though the effects were somewhat nice... As stated earlier, Storm's a racist and Bobby has romantic thoughts over another girl and Logan fights with Xavier at every turn at how to best handle Jean's situation. This movie was more of a fight between all the protagonists than it was the actual protagonists, and let's just say it doesn't help sale the plot.
The overarching conflict of the story is, I'm sorry to sound like an actual film critic but, wholly unoriginal. Let's look at the series as a whole: the first film is about stopping Magneto from making all humans into mutants, the second film is about stopping the genocide of either race, than the third film is about making all mutants into humans. It's the same fight over-and-over again. Within the original material there is a wealth of stories, plot and character development available to adapt into a compelling movie. Instead they give us recycled material and wasted potential as they completely destroy the Dark Phoenix Saga and what made that original story arc unique.
The production team should have remembered that they're adapting material that's already thought up for them. Instead of wasting time trying to develop their own plot that just won't properly develop in the first place, they could have spent that time and money seeing how they could adapt from what they already have. Nothing is retained and in a failed attempt to be "original" all we get is the same thing we've been given in all the previous films. Sir Ian McKellen as an utterly uncompelling villain repeatedly going after the same goals, Wolverine as the main protagonist who offers hardly anything unique to story as he was written, a useless governing body that fails to realize the consequences of their actions and how they effect other people than themselves (I guess that's more true to life than we realize), and the misuse and underdevelopment of countless characters that are introduced to the film to serve as excuses for special effects.
My suggestions:
Don't make Magneto the bad guy or main antagonist for every movie. It gets redundant after 8 years and seriously limits the amount of story opportunities.
Work off of different themes every now and again. By X2 I think it's been adequately established that mutants are an increasing minority that will never be accepted. There are a wealth of themes and plot points available in the regular continuity to choose, if not then, at least make up a new one, you can only run off the same theme for so long.
Develop the characters you introduce. Over the past 3 films, Wolverine is the only character to undergo any serious (or even marginal) development. The other characters are there as support and really never learn anything nor grow from the experiences of the story. If a series is to work, the characters need to be shown growing and developing.
Being an adaptive work, take more from the original material. Whether or not X-Men copies the comics exactly doesn't determine whether the film is good, but who says it wouldn't help make it better? There is so much that's already been done for them, that if they followed it instead of ignoring it, they could bring characters to the big screen that people love. When you ignore Rogue's backstory completely, you change the character that she was and the reasons why people are her fans. Rogue was a (literally) strong female character with southern background and hidden isolation issues. The Rogue on-screen is a borderline emo character that serves as only another weak character that serves almost no purpose on screen. There is a reason why X-Men was famous before the film franchise, stick those reasons instead of ignoring them, and you've got a reason for more people to enjoy the film.
I'm a true X-Men fan, I unfortunately missed the comics run of the 60s to late 80s, but was fortunate enough to experience the 90s FOX cartoon and the later story arcs. Personally, the Dark Phoenix Saga is my favorite story arc of all time in the X-Men. I'm overall disappointed to see the direction Bryan Singer took the franchise overall, but seeing Bryan Singer actually depict Jean's fire bird got me anxious to see how he would depict the Phoenix.
The franchise overall is a good example of the production staff thinking their idea is better than the original material. As a fan of the original material, that's insulting, and the franchise has suffered for it, overall.
"X3" is just a big snooze of a "blockbuster hit", there's nothing about this movie that's enjoyable to watch. The only thing this film had going was its expensive budget and high-end special effects.
The characters were shallow and poorly written:
Storm has turned into the "everything's in black and white character", unable to empathize with anyone who would ever contemplate taking the cure. Not to compare this Storm to her comic book alter ego, but Storm of all people should be the one to understand, considering she used to not be able to control her powers. Irregardless, Storm is reduced to this racist character condemns all other mutants who look to change "who they are". Well Storm, my "powers" do not define who I am, just like my skin color or my heritage, does not define who I am. Storm speaks the mind of a racist in this film, and it's sad that the writers would take her in this direction.
Magneto's another example of poor writing. Magneto and Xavier are supposed to be opposites in their vision for mutants. Essentially they are both the same compassionate individuals who feel an obligation to guide their people, they just have different viewpoints and different powers. To see Magneto abandon Mystique after turning human was another uncharacteristic turn taken by the writers.
So I don't spend this entire review talking about the characters, I'll move on.
You given almost no reason to care for any of the characters other than Jean and Wolverine. By the end of my second watch through this film, I would've preferred Jean kill everyone just so we would never have to suffer through another ill-conceived chapter of this dieing film series.
Scott's killed off before we're given a chance to care, and the writers spent so much time making Xavier out to be the bad guy that his death has almost no impact, though the effects were somewhat nice... As stated earlier, Storm's a racist and Bobby has romantic thoughts over another girl and Logan fights with Xavier at every turn at how to best handle Jean's situation. This movie was more of a fight between all the protagonists than it was the actual protagonists, and let's just say it doesn't help sale the plot.
The overarching conflict of the story is, I'm sorry to sound like an actual film critic but, wholly unoriginal. Let's look at the series as a whole: the first film is about stopping Magneto from making all humans into mutants, the second film is about stopping the genocide of either race, than the third film is about making all mutants into humans. It's the same fight over-and-over again. Within the original material there is a wealth of stories, plot and character development available to adapt into a compelling movie. Instead they give us recycled material and wasted potential as they completely destroy the Dark Phoenix Saga and what made that original story arc unique.
The production team should have remembered that they're adapting material that's already thought up for them. Instead of wasting time trying to develop their own plot that just won't properly develop in the first place, they could have spent that time and money seeing how they could adapt from what they already have. Nothing is retained and in a failed attempt to be "original" all we get is the same thing we've been given in all the previous films. Sir Ian McKellen as an utterly uncompelling villain repeatedly going after the same goals, Wolverine as the main protagonist who offers hardly anything unique to story as he was written, a useless governing body that fails to realize the consequences of their actions and how they effect other people than themselves (I guess that's more true to life than we realize), and the misuse and underdevelopment of countless characters that are introduced to the film to serve as excuses for special effects.
My suggestions:
Don't make Magneto the bad guy or main antagonist for every movie. It gets redundant after 8 years and seriously limits the amount of story opportunities.
Work off of different themes every now and again. By X2 I think it's been adequately established that mutants are an increasing minority that will never be accepted. There are a wealth of themes and plot points available in the regular continuity to choose, if not then, at least make up a new one, you can only run off the same theme for so long.
Develop the characters you introduce. Over the past 3 films, Wolverine is the only character to undergo any serious (or even marginal) development. The other characters are there as support and really never learn anything nor grow from the experiences of the story. If a series is to work, the characters need to be shown growing and developing.
Being an adaptive work, take more from the original material. Whether or not X-Men copies the comics exactly doesn't determine whether the film is good, but who says it wouldn't help make it better? There is so much that's already been done for them, that if they followed it instead of ignoring it, they could bring characters to the big screen that people love. When you ignore Rogue's backstory completely, you change the character that she was and the reasons why people are her fans. Rogue was a (literally) strong female character with southern background and hidden isolation issues. The Rogue on-screen is a borderline emo character that serves as only another weak character that serves almost no purpose on screen. There is a reason why X-Men was famous before the film franchise, stick those reasons instead of ignoring them, and you've got a reason for more people to enjoy the film.
I'm a true X-Men fan, I unfortunately missed the comics run of the 60s to late 80s, but was fortunate enough to experience the 90s FOX cartoon and the later story arcs. Personally, the Dark Phoenix Saga is my favorite story arc of all time in the X-Men. I'm overall disappointed to see the direction Bryan Singer took the franchise overall, but seeing Bryan Singer actually depict Jean's fire bird got me anxious to see how he would depict the Phoenix.
The franchise overall is a good example of the production staff thinking their idea is better than the original material. As a fan of the original material, that's insulting, and the franchise has suffered for it, overall.
Posted may 23, 2007 10:45 am pt
The reason why Spider-Man 3 doesn't work is because of what the fans were expecting as opposed to what Sam Raimi gives us.
I, personally, would've preferred Gwen Stacy (and her father) to die, as they are so doomed in the original...
[+] Read Full Review
I, personally, would've preferred Gwen Stacy (and her father) to die, as they are so doomed in the original...
[+] Read Full Review
The reason why Spider-Man 3 doesn't work is because of what the fans were expecting as opposed to what Sam Raimi gives us.
I, personally, would've preferred Gwen Stacy (and her father) to die, as they are so doomed in the original material, and the film's main villain to be Venom. Instead, Sam Raimi gives us a film about Sandman, with a small cameo by the unnamed Venom, and the alluring Gwen Stacy in a less-than-supporting role and James Cromwell for a grand total of three scenes.
This doesn't make Spider-Man 3 a bad film, but based on what we were shown in advertising, the film was naturally over-hyped. I expected everything in the film to happen more or less along the lines of the comic book, and truthfully the film would've been more emotionally tense and less melodramatic had they done so. The storyline does not coherently flow from Peter Parker's life to the goings-on of Flint Marko, the use of Bernard at the end was sloppily written exposition (and the only thing I utterly disliked), and the film focusing on the Spidey and the illustrious black suit should've been about Venom by association, but instead the film focuses on Sandman.
Those were my expectations, but not was delivered. But why the low rating?
The production team spent so much time doing EVERYTHING right: Bryce Dallas Howard as Gwen, Topher Grace as Eddie, James Cromwell as Capt. Stacy; and so much time designing everything PERFECTLY: the Venom on-screen is Todd McFarlane's originally designed Venom, but existing in this real world space, and Sandman was also masterfully done. Sam Raimi had gotten everything right, that the film was full of so much unused potential. The only impression I get watching this film is that Sam was fighting the studio. The studio wanted a film about Venom, Raimi wanted a film about Sandman — and it shows almost the entire way through.
Spider-Man and Venom are the most perfectly designed comic book Hero and Villain translated to film of all time, and I was ecstatic to see Gwen Stace and Mary-Jane on-screen together. But the possible gold mine had not been tapped, all the talent and money had been wasted to give us what, at best, is a schizophrenic plot line riddled with sometimes sloppy development, even for Sam Raimi.
Instead of compromising and giving us what we and the studios were expecting (and waiting for a separate film to use Sandman), Sam Raimi was stubborn and fought his way through this production; Spider-Man 3 had a lot working against, and though it is enjoyable to watch as a member of the Spider-Man film franchise (at the top of my list in comic-book movies), as a standalone film, it suffers from too much...
I, personally, would've preferred Gwen Stacy (and her father) to die, as they are so doomed in the original material, and the film's main villain to be Venom. Instead, Sam Raimi gives us a film about Sandman, with a small cameo by the unnamed Venom, and the alluring Gwen Stacy in a less-than-supporting role and James Cromwell for a grand total of three scenes.
This doesn't make Spider-Man 3 a bad film, but based on what we were shown in advertising, the film was naturally over-hyped. I expected everything in the film to happen more or less along the lines of the comic book, and truthfully the film would've been more emotionally tense and less melodramatic had they done so. The storyline does not coherently flow from Peter Parker's life to the goings-on of Flint Marko, the use of Bernard at the end was sloppily written exposition (and the only thing I utterly disliked), and the film focusing on the Spidey and the illustrious black suit should've been about Venom by association, but instead the film focuses on Sandman.
Those were my expectations, but not was delivered. But why the low rating?
The production team spent so much time doing EVERYTHING right: Bryce Dallas Howard as Gwen, Topher Grace as Eddie, James Cromwell as Capt. Stacy; and so much time designing everything PERFECTLY: the Venom on-screen is Todd McFarlane's originally designed Venom, but existing in this real world space, and Sandman was also masterfully done. Sam Raimi had gotten everything right, that the film was full of so much unused potential. The only impression I get watching this film is that Sam was fighting the studio. The studio wanted a film about Venom, Raimi wanted a film about Sandman — and it shows almost the entire way through.
Spider-Man and Venom are the most perfectly designed comic book Hero and Villain translated to film of all time, and I was ecstatic to see Gwen Stace and Mary-Jane on-screen together. But the possible gold mine had not been tapped, all the talent and money had been wasted to give us what, at best, is a schizophrenic plot line riddled with sometimes sloppy development, even for Sam Raimi.
Instead of compromising and giving us what we and the studios were expecting (and waiting for a separate film to use Sandman), Sam Raimi was stubborn and fought his way through this production; Spider-Man 3 had a lot working against, and though it is enjoyable to watch as a member of the Spider-Man film franchise (at the top of my list in comic-book movies), as a standalone film, it suffers from too much...
Posted may 20, 2007 4:05 pm pt
