Spider-man 3 - On Going Developments (1 Viewer)

[Patrick H.]

Actually, wouldn't you know it, the IMDb had a story the other day that Lucas himself had dismissed the current Spider-Man as "silly" with "nothing to it" in some interview he gave this week.

On one hand, I'm not inclined to put a lot of stock in his opinion of somebody else's work...but on the other hand, if George "Yippee" Lucas thinks your movie is dumb enough to comment on it publically, that doesn't exactly vouch for its quality, either...

 

[Edwin-S]

The guy who brought us STAR WARS: The Phantom Menace sure has stones to refer to another creators film as "silly" and "nothing to it". On the other hand, he may be the best person to judge such matters, considering the quality of his prequel trilogy.

 

[TonyD]

so, 182 mil for 7 days.

 

[Edwin-S]

Seems to have dropped off quite a bit.

 

[Tim Glover]

Dropping rather fast. The biggest opening in history is falling behind in regards to 5, 6 day totals behind Revenge of the Sith, Pirates Dead Man's Chest, and I think Spiderman 2?

As good as Sam Raimi can be and how high we here had placed him on the Director's ladder, this won't define him but it certainly earns him a "caution" label or at least a filter BEFORE final production.

 

[Chris]

Lucas' comment, and I've heard it in full, is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be. He goes on to say "and people say my films are 'silly' " and he says that's what people want - fantasy. It's a tongue in cheek chide at those who put all sorts of message & meaning into blockbusters. And, AFAIAC, he's right.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Raimi has always been inconsistent- when he's on his game it's Evil Dead 2, A Simple Plan, or Spiderman 2. When he's off it's Quick and the Dead or For the Love of the Game.

 

[Ray H]

What I'm interested in is what the filmmakers and the studio executives feel about the movie. Sure, it's making a ton of money, but do they recognize the film as a creative failure? How does Raimi or the stars feel the film's negative reaction?

 

[TravisR]

I can't speak for anyone (but I will try to anyway ) but I would imagine that Raimi is too close to the movie right now to make a call of how he 'really' feels about it. After spending years working on it, it's probably like his baby and he loves it. In a few years, I'm sure he'll have a better persepctive of how he feels about it- be that good or bad or average.

I'm sure Sony doesn't care what anyone says because it's a big hit no matter what.

 

[Brent M]

Well said. A lot of people are just cherry picking the word "silly" out of his full comment and blasting him for it, but I don't think he was really being overly harsh towards Spider-Man 3. Hell, calling it silly is downright tame compared to what most of the critics are saying about the flick.

 

[Edwin-S]

I read his comments and he stated, "that they thought STAR WARS was silly" (with a wink)....."but it isn't". The question that has to be asked is who are "they"? Was it other directors that called his film silly? Or was it paid critics? There is a big difference between the two.

 

[TravisR]

I've seen alot of people that didn't offer that professional courtesy to Lucas and the Star Wars prequels. So why should Lucas have to say nice or non-commital things when everyone trashes him?

 

[Edwin-S]

Were those people other directors?

 

[Brent M]

Who cares? Like I said, people are cherry picking the word "silly" out of Lucas' comments and making a mountain out of a molehill. I'm pretty sure Raimi himself will be the first to say that this flick was a big step backwards from Spider-Man 2 when he gets far enough removed from it. All Lucas did was make an innocent remark and some people act like he committed a mortal sin when it's nothing compared to the criticism he's had to endure over the years.

 

[PopBodhi]

Well, after all the "pissy" internet reviews, to quote a respectable media entity, Spider-Man 3 has hit the jackpot again! It's #1 this weekend and has made $17,000,000 more than S2 had taken at this point during its release. Of course great reviews by Newsweek, CNN, Time, Rolling Stone, Fox News... didn't hurt. For you naysayers, I'll quote some industry insiders:

"Any studio would be happy to have a movie opening with $60 million, let alone a second weekend with $60 million." Spider-Man 3 shattered records with $151.1 million in its first weekend, making a big decline virtually inevitable since so many people already had seen the film. "When you're in that stratosphere, we had to assume we would be in the range of a 60 percent drop," said Rory Bruer, head of distribution for Sony.

I believe this film is a spectacular addition to the first two films and I'm thrilled it is holding up at the box office.

 

[GuruAskew]

Like "Snakes on a Plane" and "Grindhouse" this is obviously yet another case where internet popularity/approval (or lack thereof) really has no bearing on reality.

I've seen people say "a 60% drop, the negative word of mouth got out!" but as far as I'm concerned the internet bitching about this movie is like shooting spitballs at a freight train.

 

[Chris]

I've heard the full audio of Lucas's comment, and I think his statement was in no way negative to S3. It was more a matter of: Look, people will say bad things about ANY big picture, and of course it's silly.. so what, didn't people say Star Wars was silly?

I've heard the audio clip at least two or three times, and that's the way -I- took it. I didn't think that was much "bashing" at all.

 

[Don Solosan]

"If Spiderman 3 made me "think" then I thought the end message was -terrible-. Sandman -KILLED- Peter Parker's uncle, killed numerous cops in his rampage, killed a few dozen people as he flung things around and tried to kill Mary Jane as part of a conspiracy plot with Venom in an attempt to kill Spiderman."

I just sat through this again, and nowhere in the film do you see Sandman kill anyone (other than Uncle Ben, accidentally, by his admission). He's clearly painted as a thief, not a killer -- and he's tormented by the reality of his life. The circumstances of Uncle Ben's death parallel Spidey's killing of the crook in the original film, so the idea that Spidey forgives himself first, then Sandman, makes some sense.

 

[PeterTHX]

Didn't seem to me he killed any police officers. He knocked everyone around quite a bit, but no deaths were implied.

It was also shown that the death of Ben was accidental, and Peter probably was too stunned and exhausted to try to take him on. Though I wondered if this was changed because during the battle you clearly see Harry crash into a water tower which pops a few bolts. Sandman disappeared for a while during the battle. Something was cut.

 

[Simon Massey]

Didnt he kill the cop that he threw from the truck into the front windshield of the car behind ? I certainly dont remember him getting up or moving


I dont think anyone criticising the film is denying that the film is a huge success box office wise. I dont think it was in any doubt, but I seriously doubt it will reach the heights of the first or second film in the box office. Over 300 mill though (which is likely) is still a great success. But there are clearly a lot of valid criticisms that have been made regarding this film, most of which have largely been ignored or gone unanswered by those praising the film.