(A) Sinister take on Spider-man 3

And to think, I almost dedicated that film to the memory of Cap (may he rest in peace).

Like Righty before me I will post my two cents on the Spider-Debacle that the cerberus (and attendant sirens) were unfortunate enough to see Friday evening, opening night no less.

Spider-man 3 is a complete trainwreck. I won't go all fan-boy on the lot of ya, I'm not as well-versed in comic lore as I would like to be (patience, I'll get there young grasshopper) and I can't quite pick out all the "that's not how it was in the comic-books" plot points and characterizations. But what I do know is a decent film when I see one. There might have been a good film nestled somewhere in that tangled web (get it? like a spider web? hehe. ugh. see what lengths i've been forced to go in order to not feel dead inside?) but I haven't the foggiest idea how one might go about fixing things. The procedure would sorta be like separated siamese triplets connected at the head. The damn thing can't very well function on its own, but separate them and chances are all three will endure a slow painful death. Like most of the audience at the theater Friday evening.

Its strange. because for the most part i think the film is well-done. the action sequences are actiony. the casting was pretty damn good. Toby makes for a geeky Parker. Franco's Osborn is all noble hamlety 'I'll revenge you father!', The Sandman looks like he walked off the damn pages of the comic book and Aunt May is spot on. The others... aren't quite terrible. Lemme just say this, I don't hate Dunst, but I do believe she needs a helping hand in order to turn out something worthwhile. An auteur director say, or a script for the ages. Sometimes she just clicks, like in ESotSM. She made a decent kiddie vampire too. But as MJ she just sorta... doesn't do things for me. Maybe its the pouting, maybe it is the music numbers (as Righty already painfully noted). Whatever it is, I'm not buying it. Not in. Decidely out. On the next train to, um, Gwen Stacy island?

Moving on there is one character (and actor) about whom the less said the better. I hate the comicbook iteration of him (and the endless retconing of his backstory... who are you already!?) and definitely loathed the on screen adaptation. Thankfully he doesn't turn up for almost 2 hours and is dispatched with promptly. But not before his child-like dragon-howls made me expect to hear a South Parkian 'Timmy!" at any moment.

I think the film is most successful when it is trying to be fun. When it makes fun of itself and remembers its origins as a cartoony, geeky comicbook. The humor on display when Peter Parker goes emo and transforms into Conor Oberst and winks, snaps his fingers, points, and sashays about the street is the wince worthy self deprecation that is a Spider-man hallmark. The web-slinger works best, in my mind, when his raw, superhuman strength and agility is balanced on a tight rope with his more human failings. As this franchise continues (and it will, I have no doubt) it will be interesting to see who replaces Toby. I have a feeling we are going to get a Michael Keaton style argument years down the line, as in who made the best Peter Parker (even though for my money, and i'm sure to accrue an enormous amount of flack for this, Val Kilmer is my Batman/Bruce Wayne combo du jour).

Over-all I can't imagine this film being truly loved by the masses. Which won't stop it from making more money than everything this side of HP5 and Pirates3. It might be even more terrible on your home entertainment system, so if you want to see it I suggest you do so now. Don't expect much, and sit back and enjoy some neat special effects. However, if F4: Rise of the Silver Surfer is somehow worse than this, well, it will be sweet relief to lay back and have our planet devoured by Galactus.

Jealous of you big guy, damn jealous. wish i had my own heralds... *grumble* ... wish i could eat planets myself... *grumble grumble*