Spider Man 3: A review

This review is part straight review, part response to the grumblings of critics, fans, and anyone who saw the film and didn’t like it. I think it makes for great discussion. So, let’s talk.

SM3: A Review

The Spider Man film franchise has, thankfully, become to modern American culture what the Greek myths were to their culture, or the Nordic folk-tales were to theirs. Ripe with the elements of good story telling and rich with symbolism and imagery, the newest installment of Director Sam Raimi’s trilogy one-up’s the other two films and places itself near the forefront of the genre’s best. Finally, American film has a folk- hero who unabashedly confronts moral issues with thought provoking sincerity, all the while engaging with fervent fans by way of fast paced, exhilarating action sequences and lots of explosions.

Indeed, the film is an incredible example of the marvels of modern CG. And yes, it is a collection of Hollywood star power. And yes, it is the product of one of the most successful film franchises ever. But even so, Spider Man 3 has the qualities to stand alone as a great film. Granted, without an understanding of the evolution of the Spider Man character and the previous films this movie would not make a lot of sense; but, that is the case with any trilogy. The Return of the King would make little sense to someone who doesn’t understand the first two films; the same with Return of the Jedi.

The film is the latest in the adventures of boy-wonder Peter Parker, again played by Tobey Maguire, the college student who was, in the first film, bitten by a spider and who subsequently was granted superpowers. But if you are reading this, you likely know that already.

In “3” Peter is forced to face his old friend Harry, who still hopes to avenge his father’s death. Harry’s character, played by James Franco is one of the more engaging characters in the film. Franco seems to have a confidence and energy about him that was lacking in the previous films, likely due to his recent success in other films. Unfortunately, Spider Man must also fight the villainous energies of the Sandman, played adequately by a glossy eyed Thomas Hayden Church (Sideways), and Eddie Brock, played by a humorous but oddly cast Topher Grace (That 70’s Show, In Good Company), who is transformed into a villain called Venom, Peter Parker clearly has his work cut out for him.

Many critics have warned that the numerous villains cause the film to get bogged down in the middle act. This is true only as long as viewers allow themselves to lose sight of what the film is truly about: the character of Peter Parker/Spider Man. It has rightly been observed that there simply isn’t enough time in the film (even though it is 139 minutes long) to fully develop so many characters with the preferred intensity, (particularly the character of Venom who, as a longtime favorite of Spider Man fans, was apparently an addition to the script that Raimi didn’t want but was included to appease fans in case this is the final film). However, that is not the goal of the film-makers.

In Parker we see a character who is faced with the continued ramifications of his lifestyle, ramifications more serious even than those in the second film, and who is faced with having to grow up when he seems unready to do so. Thus when Mary Jane is forced into hurting him he breaks down and becomes emotionally unstable, even hurtful and violent. Viewers cannot lose sight of the fact that in the two young leads we are watching characters who are college students. They are young and will often act accordingly.

Critics and fans alike have condemned Raimi’s decision to make Parker into what appears to be an “emo-kid” in the middle of the film (for the sake of not spoiling the plot too much I won’t go into details)- in fact, looking surprisingly like Connor Oberst of Bright Eyes- who struts arrogantly around the streets and bars of New York City, surmising that all the women want him. This little jab at American sub-culture is utterly good natured and certainly should not be taken too seriously. And yet, it makes sense. Go to a local university or college, go to a local club or bar, go to a sporting event even, and you will see that this is exactly how young people often act. Sure, it is a bit over the top for humor’s sake, but not much; surely, being the geek that he is Parker would have considered such behavior “cool“ or socially becoming. College students: look around, don’t kid yourselves. I am one of you, after all.

This change occurs while Parker is forced to struggle with an evil symbiote from space which has fixed itself to him and caused him to transform into something slightly dark: as I mentioned, he becomes arrogant and loses sight of what his purpose is. This is the same creature which later transforms Brock into Venom. This new Spider Man begins to seek revenge of his own when he learns that his uncle’s murderer is still alive. Angrily our hero pursues his enemy in hopes of destroying him, in so doing losing the battle with his inner demons, finally giving in to his impulses he had long kept at bay. While under the influence of this symbiotic creature Spidey finally forgets what his uncle reminded him in the first film: “with great power, comes great responsibility.”

It is through this mini anti-aristeia mid film that Parker learns about himself, that we learn about him, and by which he takes one more step in his understanding of good and evil. And it is a moment not native only to this film. Heroes in many tales have had similar moments of self inflation: Beowulf as he stands upon his fallen foe, Robin Hood and King Arthur in numerous instances, and consider the myriad of characters in the Lord of the Rings who for a moment think too highly of themselves, or even Turin in Tolkien‘s latest published work. Indeed, the climax of most tales’ lies in these moments of self absorption. The good guys come out of the moment understanding their fallen nature, as Parker does, or Samson, Saul/Paul, and King David did, and with a newfound vendetta against that which bound them. The bad guy is held by his own pride, and so cares not for others, but instead acts upon some impulse like anger or a desire for revenge and is thus in opposition with the forces of good– generally made up of the majority of the other characters. It is as ancient a formula in story telling as Romeo and Juliet’s dreaded double suicide. And that is because it works.

Spider Man 3 is a movie about the powers of good vs. the power of evil. That being said, there are profound instances of imagery in the film.

At one point we see a humbled and dejected Spider Man perched atop a cathedral overlooking the city as a brilliant sun sets behind him in shades of orange and red. He proceeds, amidst the clangs and chimes of the cathedral bell to attempt to shed the black suit in which he had been living. It was a scene reminiscent for me of the “Voyage of the Dawn Treador” where Aslan helps Eustace shed his dragon’s skin, a scene also ripe with imagery and which also deals profoundly with themes like forgiveness.

There are also several moments of choice, both for Parker and other characters which are, in many ways, similar to scenes in Peter Jackson’s aforementioned epic trilogy. Again, we see Parker, as Frodo did, grappling with the theme of responsibility, a theme which seems to be eternally present in such films. In the end, it is a decision of mercy and grace which Parker makes that carries the most moral weight in the film. Because he understands the depravity of man, as he experienced in himself (this time), Parker is able to forgive someone, and to make a moral statement absolutely necessary in our modern times. By way of comparison, it is not unlike the mercy Frodo shows to Gollum.

But my favorite piece of imagery in the film is one that many viewers found implausible and even ridiculous. Early in the film the symbiote which overtakes Parker, and later Brock, causing them to change for the worse and with which Parker is forced to struggle, crashes onto earth by way of a falling star near where Parker is star-gazing with Mary Jane. We see a black, sticky looking creature ooze out of a whole and attach itself to Peter’s motor bike.

I have head many people complain at the nonsense of this. However, I saw it as a wonderful piece of imagery, even metaphor, for the way evil pursues good. We see this dark creature seeking out the greatest example of good the story knows, hoping to extinguish his light, hoping to wreak his good work. And, as evil does in all of our lives at times, it works. For a while.

In the spiritual world there are few explanations for such things except that evil and good are at war. Spider Man, like any good tale of it’s kind, whether Nordic folk tale, Greek Myth, or cinematic epic, exposes this battle and confronts it. That is why movies like the Spider Man franchise must continue to be made.

Though it does have problems here and there– yes, the acting isn’t always great, the villains are under developed, and the script borders on cheesy several times– these are the kind of films our theaters need. Whether young or old, athletic or couch potato, nerdy or suave, comic book fan or not, we can all learn something from this film. But we must learn to watch with our eyes open.

I give Spider Man 3 *** out of 4.

If this is the Big Three’s ( Maguire, Dunst, and Raimi) last hoorah, then I thank them for several years of great fun, great stories, and great lessons. We forgive you for the few shortcomings. After all, isn’t that what Spidey taught us to do?


4 thoughts on “Spider Man 3: A review

  1. bmat11288 says:


    a cliche response to a movie review but it’s too true– this made me want to go see it.

    thanks for keeping your eyes open, for being so good at pulling everything together in spiritual significance.

  2. A Jon Kern says:

    Compelling. Your parents must be very proud of you.

    Maybe you should take the girl in the previous comment to this movie…

  3. Is that your dad above? He he, he sounds like my dad. 🙂

    I just got back from Spiderman 3. I agree with you that the many villians and subplots thereof weren’t as confusing or distracting as I had been led to believe they would be. And overall I really enjoyed the film. But what I actually found frustrating was the ambiguity of the moral message. The film seemed to be making several points — that we all have the ability to choose between good and evil, that forgiveness is the only way we can be free, that we have to consider others more important than ourselves, that power corrupts, that pride goes before a fall — all good points, but somehow not wrapped up in as tight a package as I would have liked. When I studied preaching at seminary, they taught us the Big Idea method of writing a sermon. I.E., the congregation should all be able to give the same, succinct answer to the question, what was the sermon about? At the funeral at the end, when Peter Parker does the voiceover, it jarred me that he talked about choice rather than pride or forgiveness. I felt that the film should have chosen one theme to focus on, so that the final voiceover would feel more organic.

    I also found it a little cheap to use the church/cathedral as the setting of Peter’s escape from the black icky stuff (what was it called?). If the scene was limited to Peter shedding the symbiote (that’s it) to the ringing of the bell that would have been fine, but what was up with Eddie’s prayer to the crucified Christ that he kill Spiderman, and the answer (?) to that prayer in Eddie himself turning into a supervillian in the church. Maybe it’s my own belief in Christianity that makes this annoying to me. But I also think that it was a case of too many points trying to be made out of the same image: Did the church represent salvation, forgiveness, revenge, corruption — what? And surely even to a non-believer it’s a little bit jarring to casually cut to the image of Christ on the cross as Eddie prays that Spiderman would die. Or maybe I’m just missing something.

    I did enjoy the film, though. I would probably also give it 3 out of 4 stars.

    Thanks, David, I enjoyed reading your review!


  4. Morbid says:

    I liked this film for the same reasons. It’s not perfect by any means, but it certainly doesn’t deserve as much foul talk as it’s receiving. It’s the best third installment of any comic-to-film franchise yet. How anyone can compare this to that trash heap labeled X3 is beyond me.

    I keep reading that there were too many villains, too many subplots, and that there wasn’t enough development. That’s nonsense. There’s enough for the film’s premise, and everything contributes to Peter’s self-discovery. Nothing deviates from that. The problem is that Spiderman 3 suffers from the expectation that each new villain will be given lengthy onscreen time to fully flesh them out. But there are plenty of movies with multiple plotlines and even bigger casts, like Payback, just to name one. You just don’t hear the same gripes with movies like that because it isn’t a comic book movie.

    I do have to point out though that some scenes were flat-out ridiculous. There should have been a better set-up for the symbiote to appear. Regardless of what you think that meteor represents, it just isn’t plausible and it was all too sudden. I was hoping they’d use the Venom saga from the 90’s cartoon as a reference, since they already introduced Jameson’s son in the second film. That way they could’ve ditched Peter and Mary Jane’s stargazing for something more interesting.

    Peter’s breakdancing was flat-out stupid. The black suit never made him a macho clown, it was only supposed to dehumanize him. Watching him act like a jerk was funny, sure, but having him strut, dance on tables and jam on a piano makes it hard to take his struggle with the symbiote seriously. And while you do get the sense of his will to get even with everybody, including Mary Jane and Harry, it’s eclipsed by pointles attempts at being humorous. Couldn’t Peter simply heckle MJ during her performance?

    And though I liked the final battle at the end of the movie, it was poorly set up. Again, they really should’ve omitted Pete’s dance groove, and Harry and MJ in the kitchen. With that time, they could’ve given us an explanation as to how Brock learned about Flint Marko’s daughter. And Harry could’ve had a better reason to go help his friend than the butler simply setting him straight. Seriosuly, the butler waited till the last friggin minute to tell him all that? It’s almost enough to make you wonder if the New Goblin subplot was worth it. It was, but barely.

    Still, I gotta say it wasn’t a terrible movie. Under the circumstances, they did the best they could with the script, especially where incorporating Venom was concerned. I would’ve preferred not having him in it, but nevertheless, everything was weaved together so brilliantly, albeit with the exception of some plotholes and annoying sequences. Spiderman 2 will always be better, but I think I like 3 a little more than 1 simply because I had the most fun watching it. Let’s just hope that if Raimi does more installments, Marvel doesn’t make the same mistake by interfering with his scripting.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s