Like You, Sam Raimi Thinks "Spider-Man 3" Is 'Awful'

[Dr. Skeleton]

Gee, it took Raimi this long to figure it out? Just a reminder of Marvel's trainwrecks. And outta all the things mentioned wrong with this movie, it seems to me nobody had a problem with Peter hitting Mary Jane which almost made me walk outta the theater.

[AJBopp]

Gee, it took Raimi this long to figure it out? Just a reminder of Marvel's trainwrecks. And outta all the things mentioned wrong with this movie, it seems to me nobody had a problem with Peter hitting Mary Jane which almost made me walk outta the theater.

I think it's clear Raimi always knew this, and I think the interview makes that clear.

This wasn't Marvel's trainwreck (if that's how you like to characterize it). It was Sony's, and Marvel did not have final say on the script.

Pete striking Mary Jane by accident while under the influence of the symbiote hardly seems like one of the films greatest flaws to me.

[phonogram12]

IMHO, out of the two, SM3 was the lesser of the movies. Like others have already mentioned, there seemed to be a lot of characters that just seemed to be shoehorned in there because it was clear no thought was really given to their characters other than just to be there. And was it just me or did it just seem like K. Dunst just really didn't want to be there anymore? Or maybe that was just the way Mary Jane was written.

While the plot was severely lacking, ASM2 scores more points in action and performances. I may've mentioned this elsewhere, but Webb seems to be a real actor's director, knowing how to bring out the best in his cast. Despite my love of SM and SM2, with the exception of Molina, Dafoe, and Simmons, the Amazing cast has the original SM trilogy's cast beat.

[spacegoatpurrp]

They lost me at the break out dance routine mid-film but up until then it was okay.

[lancerman]

Oh, bollocks. A director still has the right to their own artistic vision, even if they're adapting characters.

What's your reasoning here? Superhero movies are inherently made by committee and therefore a director's views shouldn't be respected? Edgar Wright got kicked off Ant-Man for that kinda crap.

I don't even know why you mentioned Nolan. Uh, you mean that guy who was like, completely allowed to tell the Batman story he wanted to tell? And somehow by giving him that, he managed to make the best ever superhero trilogy we've ever seen?

I hope it's not about artistic vision, because then I'd seriously have to question Raimi's talent. The guy was making Spider-Man films. Why was he making Spider-Man films? Because a studio wanted to capitalize on a popular superhero. That's the only reason Raimi is doing this. He got asked to use Venom. Why did he get asked to do Venom? Because a studio wanted to capitalize on a popular super villain.

Lets not beat around the bush. Raimi was doing a job first. The studio wanted him to use Venom the same reason they wanted to use Spider-Man and not create their own character. If that was too much for him, he should have left.

And regardless, even if Raimi hated it, it's not hard to do a good movie with Venom in it. It's actually such a basic dark side of a hero story that it's hard to screw up as badly as he did. Peter gets suit, he kicks ass with the powers, it starts to corrupt him and he acts like a jerk, he realizes it, removes the suit, it morphs with a dude who hates Peter, Peter has to literally fight the representation of his dark side, he wins and finds redemption. All Raimi had to do was make it not suck. Like not getting Topher Grace to be a wimpy Eddie Brock, or not making bad Peter completely lame, or making the entire Peter Parker power trip so un-relatable to audiences, or making the film so disjointed. And for a guy who claimed to like Sandman, he didn't do much better with him either. He was okay with Harry, but that was his pet project for 3 films.

Dude stunk up the joint.

[5Eyes]

I hope it's not about artistic vision, because then I'd seriously have to question Raimi's talent. The guy was making Spider-Man films. Why was he making Spider-Man films? Because a studio wanted to capitalize on a popular superhero. That's the only reason Raimi is doing this. He got asked to use Venom. Why did he get asked to do Venom? Because a studio wanted to capitalize on a popular super villain.

Lets not beat around the bush. Raimi was doing a job first. The studio wanted him to use Venom the same reason they wanted to use Spider-Man and not create their own character. If that was too much for him, he should have left.

And regardless, even if Raimi hated it, it's not hard to do a good movie with Venom in it. It's actually such a basic dark side of a hero story that it's hard to screw up as badly as he did. Peter gets suit, he kicks ass with the powers, it starts to corrupt him and he acts like a jerk, he realizes it, removes the suit, it morphs with a dude who hates Peter, Peter has to literally fight the representation of his dark side, he wins and finds redemption. All Raimi had to do was make it not suck. Like not getting Topher Grace to be a wimpy Eddie Brock, or not making bad Peter completely lame, or making the entire Peter Parker power trip so un-relatable to audiences, or making the film so disjointed. And for a guy who claimed to like Sandman, he didn't do much better with him either. He was okay with Harry, but that was his pet project for 3 films.

Dude stunk up the joint.

I can see where your going with idea but your kind of wrong also IMO .. your idea well most of it should have been in the next movie .. The problem was they rush everything, it should have first been about Peter gaining the black suit and Venom in a Spider-man 4 movie- Spider-man 3 synopsis -Again IMO should have been about Peter and Harry, Harry still guided by the voice of his father, while Peter forgetting about Uncle Ben advise because of all the torment he has been receiving , which is why he lost and why he turned to the black suit thinking it gave him the power needed, then him rejecting the suit after realizing in the end he is not truly winning and its changing corrupting him, in the end it should be when Peter started following Ben advised that wins over Harry following his father's advised...

[Pauly T]

If we're going to go all hindsight on Sony plans w/ Spider-Man and leave Raimi's trilogy mostly as is, they should have just left Venom out of SM3, let Raimi finish his trilogy as intended and then use Venom as a springboard to launch a Black Costume Saga trilogy as a soft reboot of the franchise with a new cast and director and definitive direction instead of the hard reboot and retread that was TASM and the muddled rudderless TASM2

If we're going to Monday morning QB Sony and Spidey from square one, they should have just cast Topher Grace and Bryce Howard as Peter & MJ from the start and let Raimi's trilogy be perfect...

[lancerman]

I can see where your going with idea but your kind of wrong also IMO .. your idea well most of it should have been in the next movie .. The problem was they rush everything, it should have first been about Peter gaining the black suit and Venom in a Spider-man 4 movie- Spider-man 3 synopsis -Again IMO should have been about Peter and Harry, Harry still guided by the voice of his father, while Peter forgetting about Uncle Ben advise because of all the torment he has been receiving , which is why he lost and why he turned to the black suit thinking it gave him the power needed, then him rejecting the suit after realizing in the end he is not truly winning and its changing corrupting him, in the end it should be when Peter started following Ben advised that wins over Harry following his father's advised...

I agree with some of that. This is what I realistically would have done.

Coming off the second film Harry is scheming up ways to kill Peter Parker and takes Peter a bank robber named Flint Marko who was captured by Spider-Man and turns him into the Sandman. Sandman is way more powerful than anything Peter has ever come up against and he just flat out can't beat him. Peter gets the black suit and gets a huge power boost and just flat out demolishes Sandman. Harry escapes to fight another day.

Film 4. Harry gets personal and tricks Kurt Connors into being the Lizard to put Peter in a personal mission. So now Peter's fighting his best friend and his mentor. Meanwhile Peter is being a jerk due to the corruption of the black suit and ruins Eddie Brock's life. He loses MJ. In the big fight Peter goes way overboard and cripples Harry and nearly kills Connors even after he turns back. All the city see's is Spider-Man beating up on an old scientist and rich boy Harry Osborne. They turn on him (city against Spider-Man, classic storyline). This is what makes him finally realize the truth about the suit and where he goes to the church tower and tears it off. It falls on Brock. End film

Film 5. Venom terrorizes the city to get Spider-Man. Peter must put his life back together, get back with MJ, win the city back over, try to make amends with Harry, and beat Venom to redeem himself.

[Derek Metaltron]

What with the fondness for certain films today to expand the final story into two today, I think things would have been better if SM3 had been spaced over two films - use the Black Suit as the focus of film 1 and then Venom as the big bad of film 2. Instantly giving Eddie and his alter ego far more screen time in both respects.

[simbob4000]

I think it's clear Raimi always knew this, and I think the interview makes that clear.

This wasn't Marvel's trainwreck (if that's how you like to characterize it). It was Sony's, and Marvel did not have final say on the script.

Pete striking Mary Jane by accident while under the influence of the symbiote hardly seems like one of the films greatest flaws to me.

It was Marvel's. Avi Arad was the one pushing for Venom in those movies, and he was Marvel's guy back then.

[Dr. Skeleton]

It was Marvel's. Avi Arad was the one pushing for Venom in those movies, and he was Marvel's guy back then.

What he said.

[Rogue Star]

Spider-Man needs his own crisis on infinite earths. We need to get every Spider-Man ever into the same movie and end with another reboot. I'd prefer Spider-Gwen or Miles Morales but we'd probably get slapped with another Peter. Lol

[lancerman]

What with the fondness for certain films today to expand the final story into two today, I think things would have been better if SM3 had been spaced over two films - use the Black Suit as the focus of film 1 and then Venom as the big bad of film 2. Instantly giving Eddie and his alter ego far more screen time in both respects.

The funny thing is the first series to do that was Harry Potter. And anybody whose read the books knows that the last one had more content than the the previous two books. So the split made sense and was refer. Twilight, Hobbit, and Hunger Games were just being greedy.

[simbob4000]

It still didn't make any sense with the last Harry Potter, because the first of those split movies could have been called Harry Potter and the Magic Tent. You see that movie and it becomes clear there wasn't enough for two movies, it's just like with the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean movies. That first part of Deathly Hallows also ends on a weird note, don't remember if it's something that felt like it should have been the start of the next movie or what, since I haven't seen it for a few years now, but I remember it being dumb.

[lancerman]

It still didn't make any sense with the last Harry Potter, because the first of those split movies could have been called Harry Potter and the Magic Tent. You see that movie and it becomes clear there wasn't enough for two movies, it's just like with the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean movies. That first part of Deathly Hallows also ends on a weird note, don't remember if it's something that felt like it should have been the start of the next movie or what, since I haven't seen it for a few years now, but I remember it being dumb.

No because literally every scene in the second movie was essential. Half of the first film was essential.