In Reply to: Thought III was better than I or II -- Me Too posted by Mr Underhill on May 18, 2007 at 12:43:40:
>>> "Equally there are enough weaknesses in this film that I would normally be happily be pulling it to pieces, but the film's positive elements meant that I could skate over them rather than dwelling on them." <<<
No offense, but I couldn't skate over the glaring faults as did you and Jon.
>>> "I thoroughly enjoyed it, two hours of mindless entertainment - well, what do you expect of a comic!" <<<
I've been a fan of the Spidey comics since the earliest days. There's mindless and then there's brain-dead; the third film has FAR too many precious coincidences to be entertaining for anyone who cares about logic in a film or even a broadly drawn comic book. Sadly, the problems with Raimi's third effort boils down to sloppy screen writing and complacent direction.
I realize that you don't especially care for the social relevance stuff ("insight into the human condition"), but it's what contributed to the first two films success at suspending disbelief and I would assume the resultant popularity of those films. Note: Suspension of disbelief is essential to the appreciation of character driven cinema, and the Spiderman series is unequivocally character-driven even if not "high art" cinema.
Cheers,
AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Sorry, but Spiderman I & II, while not perfect, were far better than III. - Audiophilander 09:54:50 05/22/07 (1)
- RE: Sorry - Mr Underhill 16:20:38 05/23/07 (0)