MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The S&M Of SM3 In Review

How do I dislike thee, Spider-Man 3? Let me count the ways …
Been There, Done That
You Take Yourself So Seriously
Some Ideas Cannot Be Written Off As Noble Failures
Self-Parody Is Franchise Suicide
Coincidence Is One Thing, But …
Basil Exposition Not Only Lives, But He Appears Out Of Nowhere
Thought You Knew What Was Happening? FUCK You, You Don’t!
The Full Spoiler Heavy Review

Be Sociable, Share!

63 Responses to “The S&M Of SM3 In Review”

  1. anghus says:

    Every Spiderman film has had a good dose of cheese.
    it all goes back to the ‘raindrops’ segment in #2. Some people love that kind of stuff, some people can’t stand it.
    From what i understand from those who have seen it, it contains the same level of cheese from 2.
    An no offense, but the drama in the first two films was equally hollow. Why are we expecting Sophie’s Choice now in the third installment.
    Why do we apply the same dramatic standard to popcorn films as we do legitimate cinema?
    I just want to have fun for 2 hours. Kirsten Dunst has always been a terrible actress. yet, we’ve forgiven her in the first two films.
    It seems like third sequels is where people start bitching about the holes that have always been there. We just become less forgiving as they churn out similar product.

  2. cjKennedy says:

    I liked Spider-Man 2 (though admittedly I haven’t watched it again since I first saw it) and 3 was one of the few summer movies I was looking forward to. It’ll be too bad if Poland is right, but I guess it’s not the end of the world.

  3. LYT says:

    Not necessarily…the Star Wars prequels, for instance, got better as they went along. As did Lord of the Rings.
    You might not agree…but I think you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks Superman III — to cite the most obvious predecessor — is on the same level as parts one and two.
    Why do we apply the same dramatic standard to popcorn films as we do legitimate cinema?
    Because no rule says they can’t be both. Raiders of the Lost Ark, for example.

  4. eugenen says:

    Why do we apply the same dramatic standard to popcorn films as we do legitimate cinema?
    Do people really think this way? Admittedly I’m a fan of the Spider-Mans (and I haven’t seen 3 yet), but I don’t think cinema gets much more “legitimate” than these adventures. I’m not sure there’s a much higher calling for the artform, either. See also Raiders of the Lost Ark, Terminator 2, etc.
    Damn, the phony-ass popcorn/”legitimate cinema” divide makes my blood boil.

  5. anghus says:

    Because you, and many other people online, are of the lunatic fringe who takes film far too seriously, dare i say, sucking the joy right out of it.
    Thanks for naming Raiders and Terminator 2.
    That’s two films in over 25 years. You’re referring to the cream of the crop. Most films aren’t. But again, this is the lunatic fringe, the rabid small online percentage who demands that every film be like Raiders.
    if every film was as good as Raiders, what standard would Raiders be held to?
    When making an all ages film, like Spiderman kind of is (i.e. a film that appeals to both adults and kids), you have to make it accessible dramatically to all crowds. That means that coincidences occur and story is often times just the basics, because a 12 year old’s ability to comprehend duality is somewhat limited.
    I’m not saying there is no craftsmanship involved in popcorn films. But, can you seriously say that a movie like Spiderman 3 shares the same purpose as a film like Children of Men, or Babel? Or the Departed?
    Because we hold films to the same standard, rating them against one another as if it was a contest, we expect Spiderman 3 to be on par with every other film released this year, when in fact it’s a disposable piece of entertainment, just like the other two were

  6. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    I love how people turn on stuff like SPIDEY 3 after wetting their collective pampers over the previous outings – like the difference between them is like oil and water.
    Sorry it’s called ‘Nerd Realization’ and it happens to most eventually. Usually around the time when 5-7yrs pass between seeing the first and third films. A rude and unpleasant wake up call that guys in tights and fugly unimaginative boring CGI action scenes are the playground of those peter pan types who don’t pay tax, won’t have kids and still buy their clothes as a ‘complete set’ off store mannequins.

  7. Aladdin Sane says:

    I kind of thought SM3 may turn out to be more of the same…Oh well. I’ll see it next Monday afternoon, and then probably never see it again.
    I was hoping the dark stuff wouldn’t fall into parody, but alas it is not to be.

  8. David Poland says:

    I don’t expect great drama… quite the opposite. It is the attempt to be a serious drama that screws up this film the most.

  9. eugenen says:

    this is the lunatic fringe, the rabid small online percentage who demands that every film be like Raiders.
    I don’t understand this. Who’s demanding that “every film be like Raiders”? Truly great films of any stripe only come along every once in a while. But I’d put the best of Cameron and Spielberg up there with the best of Scorsese, or Innaritu, or what have you, any day of the week. I haven’t seen Spider-Man 3, but I’d certainly put the first film on a par with Babel or The Departed. I think it’s a great movie, rich and moving, in the best superhero tradition. But you don’t have to like Spider-Man; my only point is that (in my view) great “popular” cinema (or “popcorn,” if you prefer) is as worthwhile, as rewarding, and as difficult to do well as the stuff people are more apt to call “art.” Is some of it lame and dumbed down? Of course. But on the other hand, I thought “The New World” was kind of lame too.
    BTW, I’m really glad we’re now employing the vernacular of the political blogs to label people’s cinematic POVs. “Lunatic fringe”? Really?

  10. EndangeredDiabolik says:

    Dave, you nailed some of the points about “Spidey 3” I’ve been unable to articulate. Well done.

    I did find it odd you didn’t mention how an (arguably) major character’s story line was essentially dropped at the end, with any sense of conclusiveness whatsoever. We’re not even sure what becomes of the character. It was bad enough the respective character’s motivation was weak to begin with, but the anti-climax of the character’s storyline was, well, sloppy and amateurish, frankly. I was very, very surprised with that.

    Anghus made a good point regarding the “cheese,” and how it is great fun; I, for one, loved the “Raindrops” sequence in the second film, but I think a lot of people will find there’s just a tad too much of it this time around.

    Overall, I thought it was the weakest, but that certainly isn’t to say it’ll suffer at the box office.

  11. Blackcloud says:

    “[T]he Star Wars prequels, for instance, got better as they went along. As did Lord of the Rings.”
    I think they went in opposite directions: the prequels got better, LOTR got worse. Although there it’s more like a trough in the middle followed by a recovery. Let’s not make a graph.

  12. jeffmcm says:

    The “Raindrops” sequence is the best part of either of the first two Spider-Man movies.
    I always think it’s funny when DP has to review a movie multiple times, even before it comes out, to express whatever he has in his head.

  13. anghus says:

    “I don’t understand this. Who’s demanding that “every film be like Raiders”? Truly great films of any stripe only come along every once in a while. But I’d put the best of Cameron and Spielberg up there with the best of Scorsese, or Innaritu, or what have you, any day of the week”
    I could not disagree more.
    Speilberg makes entertaining films, and has excelled in making the very ‘all ages popcorn flicks’ i mentioned. But he is also easy. I’m of the school that Spielberg’s serious dramatic efforts are kind of laughable.
    Raiders = Good
    Munich = Comedy
    And while i like James Cameron and am eager to see what he does next, i wouldn’t put anything he’s done against a slate of more serious filmmakers. Cameron seems more like a technically minded OCD sufferer. He’s a fantastic popcorn filmmaker who, in my opinion, lacks a real depth as a Director.
    Billy Zane’s performance in Titanic immediately comes to mind.
    Back to my original point: we need Speilbergs, Cameron’s, Raimi’s as well as Scorcese’s and Cuaron’s. But let’s stop grouping them together.
    “I haven’t seen Spider-Man 3, but I’d certainly put the first film on a par with Babel or The Departed”
    Wow. Bold claim.

  14. EDouglas says:

    I have a feeling I’m going to be on my own in the boat of people who think Spider-Man 3 was better than the previous two (which I generally liked but didn’t love)… and the cheese factor in 3 is probably the funniest part of the movie. (I refuse to say more cause I don’t like spoiling movies that I know few people here have had a chance to see)

  15. EDouglas says:

    I read about half the review, David, and it’s clear to me that you’re overthinking Spider-Man 3 in ways that most probably didn’t bother to overthink 1 or 2 (something that I got chastised for doing)… for the third one, I just sat back and enjoyed the ride, realizing that all the stuff I didn’t like about the first two (the melodrama and corniness) would still be there. Most of the things you criticize I don’t think will bother the normal moviegoing audience and I think the issues you take with the movie are far less distracting than some of the ones I took with “Pirates: Dead Man’s Chest”…a movie you raved about (IMO undeservedly, since unlike Spider-Man 2, it didn’t better the original).
    Unlike Spider-Man 2, I’ll definitely be seeing 3 again in theatres.

  16. Nicol D says:

    “Why do we apply the same dramatic standard to popcorn films as we do legitimate cinema?”
    As many posters have thankfully also answered, because great popcorn cinema is legitimate and can be every bit as worthy as so-called ‘legitimate’ cinema.
    The Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Superman The Movie, The Wizard of Oz, It’s a Wonderful Life, The Searchers, The Road Warrior, Red River, ET and yes…Spiderman 2 are all popcorn films that blow away anything nominated for best picture this year or last for craftsmanship and insight into various forms of human behaviour.
    The Departed is also a popcorn film, just one that is arguably better crafted than others.
    In fact, if you look at interviews with many famous directors, in many cases it was the B movies and popcorn films they loved that got them into loving film.
    Just because something is ‘pop’ does not mean it is any less sincere or insightful. It just means more people can relate to or enjoy it. As Paul McCartney used to say, its not like he and the Beatles hoped their albums wouldn’t be hits. They wanted to reach the broadest demo possible because it meant they were touching people.
    Nothing wrong with pop at all.

  17. David Poland says:

    Not really, Ed.
    I don’t go into any movie, especially a comic book movie, to think about it in some deep way. But when you walk into any movie and the heroine is a budding Broadway musical star who can’t sing and the show is unavoidably ham-fisted, the eyebrow lifts.
    In Spidey 3, unlike the first two, it lifted over and over and over again and by the third act, the thing was just a giant mess.
    No doubt, the public could just watch the effects and go brain damage, but I think there will be more dissatisfaction with this one than the other two, however expressed.
    I didn’t even point out that Spider-Man 2 could now pretty much be eliminated from the trilogy and not lose a major storypoint, other than Peter and MJ finally getting together, though I was never convinced of that being a legit piece of drama at the end of Spidey 1. But Doc Ock’s impact on this series is non-existent. And nothing from 2 really matters to 3.
    Of course, you could say that of Pirates 2, even without seeing Pirates 3. It seems like aside from new characters, P2 was just spinning the giant wheel to get to 3, where resolution lives. However, P2 delivered what it promised without complication. I can see why you didn’t like that, but I don’t penalize a thrill ride for being a thrill ride. I do, however, penalize a thrill ride for trying to be a drama and failing miserably at it.

  18. Eric says:

    Haven’t seen Spider-Man 3 yet, and I’m trying to avoid spoilers, so I shouldn’t really be reading this thread. But I can’t help it.
    If your eyebrow wasn’t lifting, as you say, throughout the first Spider-Man, then you really weren’t paying attention. I cringed– physically cringed!— at the whole “You take on Spider-Man, you take on all of New Yawk!” thing.
    These movies have been corny from the beginning, even for the comic book genre. Batman Begins is the best example of a superhero movie that remains at least somewhat grounded.
    Just my opinion. And I say that they don’t all have to be Raiders of the Lost Ark, but they should at least aspire to be.

  19. I am one of those movie freaks who wishes to enjoy popcorn movies just as much as the latest arthouse. I put The Devil Wears Prada in my top 5 of 2006!
    It’s like with music (I am a music reviewer for a publication here). A lot of people seem to think that “pop music” is crap and/or shouldn’t be mentioned in the same breath as a lot of music that is considered classic or whatever. But making a good pop song is just as hard as making a good rock song or good hip-hop song. The amount of times I’ve seen music critics dismiss a pop act one minute and then hail the latest solemn-man-with-guitar the next is painful. Although the best critics, just like in films with popcorn movies, are the ones that can tell good Madonna music is just as praiseworthy as good Bruce Springsteen. or whatever. If a popcorn movie is good, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be praised alongside the best.
    I doubt for a while we’ll see a movie like Jaws or Raiders of the Lost Ark nominated for Best Picture because there is this mentality amongst a lot of people that movies all about suffering and death and grief and anything that Innaritu constantly talks about in his films are just better by default or something. It pisses me off.

  20. cjKennedy says:

    So-called popcorn movies get a bad rap because of their perceived lack of seriousness. There are also plenty of bad ones and when one is bad, it can’t fall back on an important message. Plenty of people will give a mediocre film a pass if they agree with what it’s saying.
    But a great popcorn movie that really works with an appreciative audience? It’s one of the great cinematic thrills.

  21. teambanzai says:

    I bought my ticket for opening night at Arclight a couple of weeks ago and now I’m not going. It just seemed like the more I saw the more it was just a lot of the same story lines from the first two, so when something else came up I dropped seeing Spiderman without thinking twice.
    Now I’m not expecting anything great from a popcorn movie but if you’re going to go to the trouble of making a third movie why keep doing the same things?

  22. Nicol D says:

    “Now I’m not expecting anything great from a popcorn movie…”
    I can’t even fathom the non-logic behind that statement.
    You weren’t expecting anything great, yet you still bought a ticket at the advance booth two weeks ago?

  23. Tofu says:

    I’m finding it hard to swallow when I read of people deciding not go, let alone cancel advance tickets, or even going on the following Monday.
    Spider-Man 3 is the opening event of Summer 2007, and you are either there on opening weekend, or you aren’t posting on message boards about movies.
    Not that I’m trying to impose some fascist tract here, I just find it difficult to believe.
    The first two Spider-Man flicks are simply the two biggest overrated popcorn flicks I’ve personally ever known. Both aren’t very rewatchable, and the second had the worst editing of the year.
    Yet, I was looking forward to 3, all the same, expecting the same disappointment. It is odd. On one hand I want to enjoy this one over the previous installments, but am at the same time enjoying the overdue backlash that should have come with the second flick.

  24. jeffmcm says:

    “the second had the worst editing of the year”
    You must not have seen SAW. Or ALIEN VS. PREDATOR, or CATWOMAN, or BLADE TRINITY…and so on.

  25. Sandy says:

    I’ll still go opening weekend but I’m so tired of MJ/PP that I will close my eyes when Kirsten is onscreen..I am so totally there for the FX.

  26. Hallick says:

    “Why do we apply the same dramatic standard to popcorn films as we do legitimate cinema?”
    We don’t, but if we did, the answer to your question would probably be “because it’s all storytelling”.
    Were the characters great? Was the plot great? Was the action intense and inventive? Were the jokes actually funny? Did I cringe a lot or not at all? Did I want most of the cast to die, and in extreme cases, die FOR REAL? There isn’t a whole lot of difference in the experiences. The basic failings fail both types of films.

  27. LexG says:

    Is there a less charismatic “leading man” in all of Hollywood than Tobey Maguire? For that reason probably above all others, I haven’t been able to get into this franchise. He’s dull. It’s like making Matthew Modine play Batman, and even that’s an insult to the sparkling effervescence of Modine. Dull voice, dull hair, dull looks. Funny, ’cause I’ve always heard rumors that at least in his early Hollywood years, dude was a MAJOR hound; NONE of that comes through on the silver screen– Guy makes Jake Gyllenhaal seem as edgy as Tom Sizemore or Mickey Rourke.
    I like Dunst fine, and this one scores enthusiasm points for me with the inclusion of Thomas Hayden Church, but I can’t help thinking they cast underwhelmingly from the get-go with James Franco: Cool, handsome guy, and fine as Peter’s rich kid pal in the original, but even in 2002 I wouldn’t have laid odds on Franco growing into an actor of gravitas and screen-grabbing intensity to be the villain for future sequels. And Topher Grace????? Again, this is the douchebagiest superhero franchise imaginable. Compared to the Superman or Batman movies, where you’ve got guys like Brando and Hackman and now Spacey, or Freeman and Caine and Tom Wilkinson and Tommy Lee Jones, Spidey just seems like a junior high play.
    And what’s with the SPIDER-MAN SHEEN????? SO pink, so 1982 Columbia. Pink flesh tones, pale faces, reddish hues…. SNORE. I hope Raimi jacks up the colors or something with this, but the movies look Scotch-Guarded into nobility, all boringly A-list and proper. I’ll give them props for not shooting in cheap, dark Canadian forests, but as “New York movies,” how about a little edge and grit?

  28. Hopscotch says:

    I’ve always felt in the minority by my slightly-positive, but no ways gushing, feelings towards the first two spiderman’s. It appears I’m not alone anymore. I fell asleep in the second one.
    I’ll likely see this one (why fight it), but opening weekend is a no-go for me.

  29. teambanzai says:

    Okay I can clarify it for you. When I say I’m not expecting anything great I mean I’m not expecting a Citizen Kane. I love popcorn movies and I have very low expectations for them I just want to be entertained and with the recent exception of Poseidon I’m rarely disapointed.
    So when I bought my ticket I had every intention of going and having a good time as I did when the last two opened, but as the date got closer and something came up I realized I’m just not that excited about Spiderman 3. Nothing I’ve seen or read about So the eleven bucks I paid doesn’t really bother me. I will probably go Saturday.
    As for Spiderman 3 being the opening of the summer yes it’s the first summer movie to open, it’s certainly not the event of the summer there’s a lot better films on the near horizon.

  30. LexG says:

    Teambanzai, thanks for clarifying your Friday night plans for the rest of us. What day are you planning to wash your whites?

  31. Sandy says:

    My, now I’m rethinking whether I should go – 9:45am show on Sat. and I’ll be surrounded by screaming kids. But $6 is a bargain price.

  32. jeffmcm says:

    “there’s a lot better films on the near horizon”
    There are?

  33. Hopscotch says:

    So when is they “can’t wait to see Lucky You” thread begin?
    Man, I’m just dying to hear the reviews on that one. I hate to kick someone when they’re down, but those TV spots are cringe-worthy.
    Frankly, I’ll probably see Paris Je’taime this weekend, knowing full well the advance word has been pretty so-so, but it’s got a piece by the Coen Brothers, and that’s all I need to know.

  34. crazycris says:

    I’m afraid Dave nailed Spidey 3 with that review!
    I went to see it last night (for once we get the movie in Belgium before the US and UK! yay!), just expecting to enjoy a decent popcorn movie and start the summer with a bang. I even drove 1/2h to see it in English (instead of in French in my city’s cinema). Boy was I disappointed! Wish I had saved on the gas!!!
    “Dark” Peter Parker… pffffffffffft!!! Lame, unconvincing… The story is all over the place. The plot is spread too thin. There are things that just don’t make sense…
    I will admit to having liked the end. And the special effects are indeed amazing! The money on them was well spent.
    Spidey will make a boatload of cash over there (US) on opening weekend… but as people who aren’t major fans of the franchise begin hearing how lame it is, I don’t expect to be as big an event as previously predicted. Definitely no repeat viewings.

  35. teambanzai says:

    Why Friday of course!

  36. whatnokiss says:

    You juveniles who ridicule him HAVEN’T even seen it yet – so stop accusing him of what you’re guilty of when you tell him not to tell the truth!
    You “oh poor me I can’t bare to listen” & offended by the truth, winey little Spidey geeks are going to LOVE the CGI – but you’re going to HATE what they did to the rest of it.
    I know – cause unlike the rest of you – I saw it last Thursday at the Grove, and I can’t keep my vengent little mouth shut any longer!
    About three people in the fanboy section half-heartedly clapped when it sucked its last breath and died, literally … while the rest of us Spidey fans were already in the restroom volmitting! or else cutting our hearts out just like they did to Spidey.
    It’s so obvious they thought this was the last one they could come up with, they didn’t even leave a bad guy alive for a fourth outing.
    OH Gee – hope I didn’t spoil it for ya!!!
    (And yes, you whiney types are also reading this same comment on Jeffs blog as well. Because Jeff and David are both right together on the mark this time. David’s overview of all the problems it has is near perfect. So now go cry me a river.)

  37. jeffmcm says:

    Troll alert.
    Probably associated with a rival movie.

  38. whatnokiss says:

    You are SO wrong jeffy-mcm.
    But then … it WAS your ONLY possible come back wasn’t it?
    (You always accuse, when you don’t have any clues.)

  39. jeffmcm says:

    …Says the screenname who has never appeared here before.
    Is it Don?

  40. whatnokiss says:

    Give it up Jeffy…
    You’ll NEVER understand it.
    As you never understand anything that doesn’t already agree with your own precipitous, preposterous, and precocious preconceptions.
    How can you possibly jump to such ilogical conclusions??? Oh ya, I forgot. You’re you.
    This may be my first time signing on here, but its not the first time I’ve seen you type before. You are like the “school bully of blog sites”.
    Get a life! This DOESN’T make you exist – it’s just an illusion…
    Enough said – get on with it.

  41. jeffmcm says:

    Uh huh.

  42. bipedalist says:

    “(And yes, you whiney types are also reading this same comment on Jeffs blog as well. Because Jeff and David are both right together on the mark this time. David’s overview of all the problems it has is near perfect. So now go cry me a river.)”
    Wells is right about what exactly? Panning a movie he was prevented from seeing by the studio? At least the studio let Poland in. There is nothing to be right about in Wells’ case except to trow a rock at a tank. They dared turn him away and he unleashes his (rather pathetic) wrath. Nice try but who cares? Nobody cares. While early negative buzz from DP or Wells could potentially hurt a film, trying to take Spidey down will have zero effect.

  43. whatnokiss says:

    We aren’t the ones who took him down. Sony did.
    And that “zero effect” you speak of?
    THAT would be the sound of repeat ticket sales.
    (So how about you go buy more than your fair share of tickets and then maybe you and your “head in the sand” Spider friends can create another illusion for yourselves and make it look a little like less of a mess. See, I really work for Sony – and that would all help us out a bit.)
    Ya right! For someone who says “who cares?” you sure do whine a lot.

  44. jeffmcm says:

    And you decided to make your inaugural post on two web sites an identical scabrous non-review review of a movie you hate?

  45. whatnokiss says:

    Geez jeff, how many times do I have to repeat myself here?
    Let’s see, allow me to use your own eloquent response…

  46. jeffmcm says:

    I simply refuse to believe that a person who’s never posted before would behave in such a manner. That’s all.

  47. jeffmcm says:

    If you would like to send me your apparently huge list of grievances, I will provide my email address. I think that’s an appropriate response.

  48. bipedalist says:

    “Ya right! For someone who says “who cares?” you sure do whine a lot.
    You are shrieking in circles. My point: Spidey has a built-in audience. It makes no nevermind what people on the web say about it (especially blowhards who haven’t even seen it yet). Sometimes it makes a difference with a film. Audiences are chomping at the bit to see a blockbuster. They will flock to it.

  49. whatnokiss says:

    Thanks Jeff, that’s being a gentleman. You can send your address now, but sending you my list would be redundant of Jeff and David.
    Go see the film Friday and then you’ll have a better basis for comparison. Then we’ll share notes privately. (I work for people who would be concerned if they knew this was me.)
    And as for you “bipedalist”…
    Your shrieking accusation is remeniscent (did I spell that right?) of someone who is not in to circles (as in out of the loop)…
    Which means – STOP saying ‘who cares’ when its just too damn obvious that we ALL do!
    We ALL want better movies.
    BECAUSE we all care!
    (Is that not why you rant and rave here?)
    Stop the cut & paste of what we type.
    We all know what we each said, my stars there’s only 3 of us here. It’s not like the whole world is watching and leaning on our every word, OK?

  50. jeffmcm says:

    Cutting and pasting lends to clarity.

  51. Cadavra says:

    “(did I spell that right?)”
    Oh, NOW you care?
    FYI, it’s “reminiscent.”

  52. crazycris says:

    Oh boy! this is bordering on the nasty!
    Can we keep our tempers down and wait until more people have seen the movie so we can have an intelligent discussion about its pros and cons?
    Cause even though it was a major disappointment, Bipedalist is right, that’s not going to have any effect on opening day numbers, not with all the rabid fans out there (ok, exaggerating a bit!) and all the people hungering for the first blockbuster of the season. But I do expect numbers to drop off significantly and rather quickly…
    And whatnokiss… did we see the same ending? ‘Cause not everyone dies like you said!

  53. jeffmcm says:

    You mean…maybe Whatnokiss didn’t see the movie?

  54. whatnokiss says:

    OH … Now see what you went and did…
    I guess I’ll just have to prove it with another spoiler, … Uh Huh!
    Mary Jane doesn’t get hit by the falling taxi, Spidey learns how to ride New Goblin’s skate board better than New Goblin does, New Goblin has a change of heart and then dies protecting Spidey and MJ, and Venom can’t handle the sound of new age chimes when they are made with skyscraper building materials and falls apart with the help of a left over Goblin hand-grenade.
    And YES, all the bad guys died…unless you consider J.Jameson is a bad guy, he lives.
    But really – the BEST part in Spidey was Bruse Campbell’s french maitre d’. He is hilarious in the vien of Peter Sellar’s accent with John Cleese’s epic timing. Worth $10 bucks just for that classic comedy performance. Too bad it keeps interfering with Parker trying to propose to Mary Jane…which she doesn’t even get to hear about due to her own depression and her whiney lack of self-esteem.
    Had enough boys?

  55. jeffmcm says:

    And you’re calling _me_ a bully?

  56. whatnokiss says:

    “I can only accuse others – of what I myself am guilty of.”

  57. crazycris says:

    SPOILER (sorry, but have to reply to whatnokiss having seen a different movie ending than me)

    I repeat… NOT ALL THE BADGUYS DIE!!!
    unless you’re considering the sandman a good guy…

  58. whatnokiss says:

    Oh I’m sorry – you didn’t pick up on the nuance Cris.
    The oh-so-sad and remorseful Sandman, tearfully apologizes to Opey for attacking innocent people and then “commits Sandman suicide” – by letting himself turn into a completely unorganized dust-storm and by letting it all his little pieces get blown across the four corners of the world…(by a whirlwind from a New York sewer breeze)…never ever ever ever to come back together and hurt anyone else again! Sniff, sniff… Oh, Auntie Em!
    How did you miss THAT???

  59. jeffmcm says:

    “I can only accuse others – of what I myself am guilty of.”
    In other words, ‘I know you are but what am I’, right?
    Try harder.

  60. whatnokiss says:

    Sorry to let you down Jeff,
    – but wasn’t even really trying.
    The correct translation is;
    “I can only accuse others (you – of being a bully) – (because) of what I myself am guilty of (being a bully as well).”
    In other words – “It takes one (me) to know one(you).
    Get it now??? Or should I go slower?
    (Next time I’ll add more words to the diatribe, so you don’t get confused … OK?)

  61. whatnokiss says:

    Just to be clear – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    The quotation applied to me – not you.
    So don’t take things so personally dude.
    It’s not always about you.
    (Now get up, and dust yourself off, and everything will be OK. But be nice and don’t fight back – or next time I won’t let you up.)

  62. jeffmcm says:

    I don’t understand why you have a vendetta against me. Please direct any future comments of this type to my personal email address, Thank you.

  63. brack says:

    All right, this thing messed up on me before, but I’ll try again.
    What I don’t like about your review Dave is that you only stress the negatives and none of the positives.
    Boy do I miss Roger Ebert’s reviews. He’s the only reviewer who is truly fair when he reviews films. Even when I disagree, at least I know where he’s coming from, and doesn’t come off like a complaining nitwit like most critics do, hence why I don’t read many reviews.
    I guess I like reading your reviews, Dave, because your reasons for liking or disliking movies are so strange that I have to read what you’re going to write next. Ever since your review of The Thin Red Line made me go see it, and me having been so disappointed with the film, I couldn’t believe someone could really see stuff the way you do.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon