The Amazing Spiderman and The Dark Knight Rises (Trailers)

For superhero geeks like me, the arrival of not just one but two of the trailers for next year's big superhero movies is deeply exciting (albeit in a slighlty pathetic way).

First up there is the (teaser?) trailer for The Amazing Spiderman. It comes across more as a full trailer rather than a teaser, with hints of the overall story (a reboot rather than a sequel - hardly surprising given the quality of Spiderman 3) that seem to suggest a darker tone that the Raimi movies. Of course, we don't get to see the Lizard (the nemesis for Spiderman for this movie) properly but there is nothing wrong with building up anticipation about the monster in a movie like this one. Furthermore, there does seem to be a real sense of mystery in the trailer, particularly around what happens to Ma and Pa Parker. In terms of the glimpses we get of the actors, Garfield looks the part as Parker, while Martin Sheen seems pitch perfect to be Uncle Ben. The only real downside I can see is the Spidey FX at the end of the trailer - it all has the feel of a cartoon. Of course, the whole thing is meant to be 3D and Spiderman as a character is arguably impossible to realise without extensive CGI, but it is possible to go too far and I hope the lessons of Spiderman 3 have been taken on board by the people producing this version of the Spidey legend. It looks intriguing, but it doesn't quite convince me that they have nailed it. Time will tell.

Then we have the teaser for The Dark Knight Rises - which is a genuine teaser, in that it gives remarkably little away. There is footage (or rather glimpses) of the first two films, making this very much a sequel. There is also footage of what's to come, including an exhausted and punished looking Batman being roundly cornered by Bane, but most strikingly there is Commissioner Gordon, lying on a hospital bed, apparently dying or severally injured - and begging for the return of the Dark Knight. It may just be me, but for all the world Gordon looks like someone dying of radiation sickness. But whatever the explanation for the scene, this makes me want to know more - a lot more - about what is going on. Furthermore, it feels confident. Unlike The Amazing Spiderman this is an attempt to reboot, or effectively start, a franchise. This looks and feels like the next (and final) chapter in an ongoing story. And given the number of people who watched The Dark Knight there are probably a fair few people who are bought into this ongoing story.

But for me, while I'm not 100% convinced by these trailers, 2012 looks like it could be an awesome cinematic year for me, being a massive fan of both Spiderman and Batman. In fact, both films being out on the big screen in the same year as fresh Doctor Who appearing on the small screen, this could be the ultimate year for my geekiness. Maybe after that I'll grow up. Or, more likely, lament the fact that we can't have the same every year.

Spiderman The Musical: Turn Off The Show

I think we can file this one under "seriously, what were they thinking?"

Troubled Broadway musical Spider-Man: Turn Off The Dark has officially opened to mostly harsh reviews.

Although critics agreed the latest reworked version was clearer, most blasted the show.

A Spiderman musical on broadway, in part scripted by those tools from U2, just plain doesn't work and gets shitty reviews from critics? Who'd have thought it? I'm a big fan of Spiderman, but even I can see that this had "shit idea" written all over it from the outset.

The New Spiderman

New decade, new Spiderman:

British actor Andrew Garfield is to play comic book superhero Spider-Man in the next outing of the film series, it has been announced.

Hmmm. I’m not going to comment on whether or not I think Garfield is a good choice as Spiderman – after all, I was very circumspect about both the casting of both David Tennant and Matt Smith as the Doctor, and I was wrong about both of them. However, I can’t help but feel that the replacement of both the star and the director of a film franchise if often not a sign of rude health for that franchise. Particularly if that franchise is about a superhero.

Furthermore, the success of the Spiderman films to date has, to a very large extent, been down to the star and the director. To lose them would be a little bit like the sequel to The Dark Knight starring someone other than Bale as Batman, and with a different director to Nolan.

Yet… yet it would take a lot to argue that Spiderman 3 was anything other than a disappointment. Raimi threw plotting out the window in favour of set-pieces showing of the latest Visual FX, while Tobey Macguire looked like a smug, puffy-faced Peter Parker and seemed incapable of playing the more malign version of the hero required by the film. And since this film – which is looking at the formative years of Parker – appears to be an almost necessary reboot, perhaps it is the best thing for the franchise.

For fans of the series, I guess we have to cross our fingers and hope that this is the Spiderman equivalent of Batman Begins rather than Batman Forever…

The Best Films of 2000-2009

So, just as my list of the best songs of the past decade revealed my musical preferences, so this list will indicate what films I prefer to watch. Basically, if it has zombies or a superhero in it, I'll watch it...

10: 28 Days Later

Ok, it is a massive rip off of The Day of the Triffids, but it is a well-written, well-acted and brilliantly directed zombie movie that manages to combine scares and horror with interesting, sympathetic characters. The sequel is almost as good. And it introduced the concept of the running zombie, that has changed the genre forever.

9: Garden State

I'm not a big fan of the romantic comedy. However this is a romantic comedy. But it is a romantic comedy involving fucked up people. No, wait, scratch that. It is a romantic comedy involving very human people. And it involves people being dumb in a very human way. As part of a genre that seems to represent the very definition of crap, Garden State tries to do something a bit different. And succeeds.

8: Dawn of the Dead

Obviously the remake. The original was released over 30 years ago. It manages to equal the brilliance of the original by adhering to the basic pattern but not slavishly following it. It also is one of those films where Anyone Can Die - even with the implication at the end that everyone is going to die. It also has one of the best introductions to a movie I have seen in ages. When the apparently lead couple go to sleep in the evening, everything appears to be Ok. When they wake up in the morning, there is hell on earth.

7: Shaun of the Dead

Proof positive that a British comedy doesn't have to be written by Richard Curtis, star Hugh Grant and be total crap. Sure, it is Spaced of the Dead, but so what? That's part of the reason why it is so great.

6: Anchorman

It is a moronic, idiotic comedy. Yet it is a moronic, idiotic comedy that absolutely works. It has become a genuinely iconic movie that has become more than just a film. If you have seen it, I can almost bet that you have a favourite quote from it. Or at least a scene that brings a smile to your face.

5: The Darjeeling Limited

On paper, this might not sound like the best material for a great film. A group of dysfunctional, wealthy brothers go on a train trip in India. But what materialises is a wonderfully funny and poignant film. The lead characters are flawed without being arseholes, the locations are wonderful and the soundtrack is awesome. Comes heartily recommended from me.

4: Rec

A Spanish zombie movie with a very short run time. Again, might not sound that promising. But this movie truly is like being hit in the face with a brick - when the nightmare starts, it does not let up. And the final scenes in the top apartment, when the rug is swept from under the viewers and there is am implication that there is a great evil at work, is staggering. The best horror movie in a decade where there had been no shortage of great horror movies.

The US remake is shit, mind.

3: Spiderman

X-Men launched the new superhero wave in cinema, and it was a great film in its own rights. However, Spiderman was a far more affecting and human film. Everything about it is, on some levels, genius. Tobey Macguire, with his wide-eyed innocence, was an exceptional Peter Parker. Willem Dafoe, as the Green Goblin, was compellingly unhinged. And Kirsten Dunst managed, in this film anyway, not to be completely annoying as Mary-Jane. The direction is outstanding, and the plot is the very definition of what a superhero movie should contain. There is a certain brilliance to Spiderman that has not been found in any of the sequels, or any of the superhero movies that have followed. Not even the one at Number One.

2: The Wrestler

When I first heard about Mickey Rourke playing a washed-up wrestler, I'll be honest with you: it sounded awful. It sounded like the sort of film that I would pay money not to watch. But I was not so much surprised by this movie as staggered by it. It is one of the most affecting movies I have ever seen, and Rourke's performance is sensitive, well observed and utterly convincing. This film should have swept the board at the Oscars. However, it isn't number one since it lacks the ambition of the film that is at the top...

1: The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight is far from flawless. Yet it is my movie of the decade for three reasons. Firstly, it gives us the definitive version of the Joker and one of the greatest screen villains in history. Also, it shows that a superhero movie can be more than its comic book origins might suggest. Which leads neatly onto the third reason - with its relentless paranoia, constant escalation and displays of meaningless, brutal violence, it sums up this decade perfectly. That's what I mean by the ambition of The Dark Knight. It is about a man who dresses as a bat, but so, so much more.

Drag Me To Hell

Sam Raimi is now best known as the director of the Spiderman film series. But prior to that he was also a horror director, and The Evil Dead trilogy stands as an energetic, surreal and grisly entry in the horror cannon. With his latest film marks a return to his beginnings. And make no mistake about it, this is a return with relish.

Oh, spoilers ahead.

The film is about a bank loan operator called Christine. She makes the mistake of shaming an old gypsy woman with really manky nails and a gammy eye. The gypsy woman responds to the cuss by attacking her, sucking on her chin, and cursing her. After that, the gypsy woman dies. That doesn’t stop her from sharing a bed with Christine, vomiting bugs and embalming fluid on Christine’s face and (at one point) slamming her forearm down Christine’s throat, as well as popping up at random times with a demented scream. As you do.

But having this ghostly stalker is not all that Christine has to deal with. She is attacked repeatedly by a poltergeist with the shadow of a human goat. She also is forced into various social mistakes, like spewing blood from her nose onto her boss and belching out a fly when she first meets the in-laws. And if that wasn’t enough, an all-purpose mystic from an ethnic minority (this film isn’t afraid of a borderline racist cliché) informs her that this is all pre-cursor to being dragged to hell. I’ve had bad weeks; nothing compared to this though.

If the above synopsis doesn’t give it away, Drag Me To Hell is a horror movie. And it is an insane horror movie that goes for the jugular with the gloves off. Subtle it isn’t, but Raimi has clearly decided that they were going to go for as many shocks as possible. The film is like 90 minutes of someone shouting “boo!” at you at the top of their voice just when you least expect it. And whilst the story is hackneyed and the script probably written in crayon on chew-proof paper, Raimi has the balls to go through with images and ideas that a lesser/more discerning director would have dismissed as over-the-top. Eye balls going down throats, demon possessed lackeys doing jigs over flames and a bit of kitty-killing, Raimi has clearly decided to try to create the ultimate horror movie. Not the best one, not the scariest one, but he has decided to throw everything he can into this film, and push every idea to its logical conclusion.

The result is a great film to go see at the cinema, and a film it is definitely worth seeing. Once. You won’t be rushing to see this film again, but you won’t regret going to see it at least once.

Drag Me To Hell: about as subtle* as the title would suggest it will be. Which turns out to be no bad thing.

*If you do want a subtler story with similar themes (and more of a discussion around justice and the nature of curses) then read Thinner by Stephen King. Don’t watch the film version, though – for the love of God, do not make that mistake…

An Alternative Spiderman 3

Right, I am on holiday this week. And amongst the many ways in which I'll be celebrating not having to attend work this week, one is geeking out. So be warned, this is a geek post. It represents a level of geekiness probably more associated with those on the autism spectrum. So if you come to this blog for politics based swearing, then this post won't be for you. However, if you are a geek or if you like the Spiderman film series, read on.

I was disappointed by Spiderman 3. Sure, it looked good, but it had all the soul of Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning and appeared to have been scripted by a hyper-active seven year old with a crayon. And as a result, my (fevered, slightly demented) brain came up with an alternative. So here is my version of Spiderman 3 - a plot synopsis by a hyper-active 29 year old with a crayon. Let me know what you think in the comments section. Or not. I am easy either way...

The film begins with life going well for Peter Parker – he is considering proposing to MJ, his studies are going very well, and the City is finally accepting Spiderman. The same can not be said for Harry Osborn. He wishes to hunt down Peter and wreak his revenge. He employs a disgraced, ex-army weapons expert called Jason Philip Macendale, Jr, to help him make sense of his father’s weapons.

Peter attends one of Dr Connor’s lectures, where Connor goes off spec and has a free discussion about life in space. At this point, a tiny meteor from space lands in Central Park, unnoticed. However a black substance leaks from the meteor – the Symbiote – and takes over a nearby tree. Peter then goes into the Bugle offices, only to find that his role has been half given to a flash, arrogant new photographer called Eddie Brock. Peter is angered by this, but can do nothing about it. His day gets worse when Osborn – now in the guise of the Green Goblin – attacks him. They fight across the city, with the demented Goblin apparently striking a mortal blow against Parker. The Goblin dumps Parker in Central Park, where the Symbiote finds him and saves him. He goes home, where he (much to the chagrin of MJ) gorges himself and then falls asleep. The next day, Harry visits MJ to commiserate her on the death of Peter. She is confused, and points out that Peter is still alive. However Peter is nowhere to be seen – he is out in New York, testing his new Symbiote costume in the city.

Spiderman continues to serve the city, but takes increasing risks – leading to further condemnation from the Bugle. As Parker, he is getting more arrogant, more angry, and more flirtatious. MJ confides in Aunt May, who agrees to talk to Peter. Peter dismisses her, saying he is finally becoming himself. He is also attached by the Goblin again, but this time is able to soundly beat the Goblin. Osborn is enraged, and takes some advice from Macendale. Macendale tells him to hit Parker where it hurts. Since Osborn loves MJ, he elects not to hurt her. Instead he decides to go after Aunt May.

Aunt May is kidnapped by the Goblin and her house is destroyed. Spiderman hunts down the Goblin. He saves Aunt May and embarks on a bitter fight with the Goblin. He beats Harry to a pulp, and leaves him in his apartment with a pumpkin bomb. The bomb explodes, and Spiderman assumes that Harry has been killed. He is unaware that Brock has photographed the event – and that Macendale has saved his employer, albeit with Osborn now in a coma.

The next day, Peter feels guilty about the death of Osborn and gives some of the Symbiote to Connors to study. He is horrified by the front page of the Bugle, which links Spiderman with the explosion at the Osborn place, and vows to get Brock. He doctors Brock’s photos, so they look like fakes. He then presents his doctored photos to the staff at the Bugle, and Brock is sacked. What Peter is unaware of is that Brock, a devout Catholic, was supporting his young family and under a lot of pressure from his wife. She throws him out of their home, and he takes refuge in a church.

MJ, horrified by Spiderman’s apparent murder of Osborn, searches through Peter’s stuff and finds proof that he doctored photos to discredit Brock. She confronts him, and he argues with her, pushing her over. She storms out, and then Peter takes a call from Connors. Connors explains that the Symbiote is also a parasite – it gets into the Host’s mind, fills them with adrenaline, boosting their confidence, before consuming them. It also seems to react badly to loud noises. Peter tries to pull the Symbiote off him, but to no avail. Then he hears the chiming of a nearby church bell. He goes to the bell tower, where the deafening noise allows him to wrench the Symbiote from his body. He flees the church, then collapses at home. The Symbiote finds Brock sleeping in the Church, and possesses him.

The next day, Peter tries to contact MJ but to no avail. He goes to Brock’s house to apologise, only to learn that Brock is missing. He goes to the Church where Brock prayed, and realises that Brock may have been possessed by the Symbiote. The Brock/Symbiote attacks Parker, and he only just escapes with his life when Brock controls the Symbiote. The rage in Brock and the Symbiote grows until the Symbiote completely controls Brock’s mind and gives Brock the answer he requires to how to hurt Parker – MJ.

Desperately worn out, Peter rests at home, only to learn on the news that MJ’s parents’ house has been attacked by the Symbiote. He goes there as Spiderman, and sees a challenge for him to face the Brock/Symbiote. The challenge is signed Venom. He realises Brock and MJ will be in the Church. Before he goes there, he visits Harry to try to get help from his enemy to assist the woman they both love. He makes Macendale wake Harry from his chemical coma so Macendale can tell him what is happening to MJ. He then goes off to the Church. Macendale does explain to Osborn what is happening, and gives him a stark choice. He can be pumped up with his father’s drugs and almost certainly die with 24 hours but have superpowers, or he can live out the rest of his days as an invalid. As Harry loves MJ, he goes for the former option.

Venom taunts MJ, talking about how much it will hurt Parker. MJ tries to reason with it, but Venom is utterly consumed by rage. Spiderman arrives, and Venom goes to kill him. MJ takes this opportunity to escape, but is confronted by Harry/the Goblin.

Spiderman finds the church bell is now covered with the Symbiote. The Symbiote leaves the bell and forms Venom. It fights with Spiderman, and badly hurts him. In the meantime, Harry offers to fly MJ away, proposing his undying love to her. She refuses, saying that she loves Peter – and points out that if he truly loves her, he will go to protect her – and her love – Venom. Harry realises she is correct, and goes off to challenge Venom.

Spiderman and the Goblin fight Venom, but he is too strong for them. Spiderman is half-dead by this point, having been thrown into walls and half strangled. The Goblin and Spiderman realise that the only way they will defeat Venom is by trying to separate Brock and the Symbiote. Spiderman distracts Venom for a moment by confessing to doctoring the photos, and the Goblin pins Venom to the wall with his Glider. The Goblin tries to tear the Symbiote off Brock, but it does not work. Realising they will never defeat Venom without sacrifice, Harry decides to detonate his Pumpkin bombs and kill both Venom and himself. Spiderman initially refuses, but Harry tells him he is dying anyway and that he needs to save MJ. Spiderman takes MJ away, and Harry detonates the bombs – destroying himself, Venom and the Church.

MJ realises that Peter has been badly injured but can’t seek medical help whilst he is in costume. She wrenches off his costume, covers him with her coat, and gets him to a paramedic just as he collapses.

The next day, the police visit Harry’s residence and tell Macendale – who is pretending to be a relative – that Harry has died. Macendale tours the Osborn Armoury, grinning madly, realising that all these weapons are now his…

MJ visits Peter in hospital, and finds Aunt May is already there. Aunt May vanishes back home, leaving Peter and MJ together. Peter apologies for everything he has done, and MJ forgives him, as she knows the Symbiote was controlling him. As the film ends, they embrace.

Iron Man

Went to see Iron Man the other weekend. Genuinely, I was not sure what to make of it. Movies based on Marvel heroes range from superb, to mediocre, to “I would rather pluck out my eyeballs and burn them to tattered shreds in battery acid than watch that film again” bad. Iron Man had the potential to fit into any of those categories.

And so much of the film was shit. Robert Downey Jr played Tony Stark very well; mainly because Stark is an arrogant, playboy dick and you can imagine playing that role is not that much of a stretch for Robert Downey Jr. The action sequences are not so much typical superhero fights as examples of weapon porn; not least the last, climatic fight, which is basically “I’ve got a bigger suit that you have” willy waving. Finally, the politics of the film at screwed up to say the least. It seems to suggest that Middle Eastern terrorists are bad. Really bad. They’ll shoot you in the chest and kill your cell mate/new found best bud. But they are nowhere near as bad as big, fat American businessmen. Because not only are they paying those Middle Eastern terrorists to try to kill you, they will also come along and effectively steal your heart from your chest, before fighting you to the stars and back. Thank Christ for those drunken, flippant and arrogant millionaire playboys. They are the real heroes.

Yet, despite the oodles of shite in this film, it works. Seriously, it all comes together and works really well. It is mindless pap that makes you feel you have lost a couple of IQ points over the course of viewing the film, but at least it is enjoyable. You come out feeling entertained, and that you have seen a proper, old fashioned blockbuster. The film feels like a comic book on the big screen, and works because of that.

And that, surely, should be the point of a comic book adaptation; to be fun and be entertaining. Yeah, with a Batman film you can go a bit darker – it is basically about a guy with post-traumatic stress disorder. However, if you try to ground Superman in the real world, the result is just deeply boring. Likewise, the Hulk should be going “Hulk smash!”, not “Hulk psychoanalyse self whilst fighting unconvincing CGI Hulk dogs.” Also, if you want to make a comic book film about revenge and the darkness within even the minds of heroes, you need to spend a bit more time getting the people to care about those heroes. Otherwise you end up with the emotionally flaccid Daredevil.

Iron Man shows the way to go with almost all superhero movies: make them big, populist blockbusters. Because telling big, populist stories is how the source materials became popular enough to make them into blockbusters in the first place.

Joking Apart

Since the Spiderman film series seems to have lost what made it great, anyone who is still interested in watching a decent superhero movie needs to turn to the rebooted Batman series - at least if they don't want to watch excerably crap or terminally dull movies. Of course, to date the only film released in this series is Batman Begins but The Dark Knight is released next summer - you can see the trailer here.

I'd imagine, given the legions of Bat fans out there, that elements of the film will prove to be very controversial. And one aspect that immediately stands out as strikingly different from previous presentations is the physical appearance of the Joker. Frankly, he looks like a refugee from a Cure concert who slept in s skip all night after getting pissed on meths:


It is very different from other, more sanitised presentations:

And, indeed, the cliched, camp version:

So, no doubt, some will complain about the way the character looks in next year's film. But actually, the new look Joker actually makes sense if you think about it. The guy is a psychotic, disturbed, mass murdering psychopath. He is the nemesis of Batman, who in himself is quite a dark character. Why would he look like a stylish clown? Or like an old man with white paint over his moustache?

The new Joker looks dangerous, and looks unpredictable. It bodes well for The Dark Knight: hopefully it will be a dark experience; a thousand miles away from standard superhero pap and a million miles away from some of the previous movies claiming to represent the Batman story.

28 Weeks Later

Went to see 28 Weeks Later last night and was both surprised and relieved to find that it is actually a decent film. Unlike the relative disappointment of one of the summer's other big sequels, 28 Weeks Later is very much in the style of the film that spawned it but also takes the time to tell a decent story as well.

Oh, and spoilers ahead.

It starts well - with a reserved and quiet opening conversation that neatly sums up the scenario of the original movie but also sets up the atmosphere of the film. It is aspiring to be thoughtful as well as horrific and nerve racking.

Then the Infected* attack, and there is a pulse pounding scene where Robert Carlyle's character just manages escape against all the odds. The fact that, from the initial 5 or 6 characters we are introduced to, only one appears to survive shows just how hopeless it all appears in the face of an Infected attack.

However then the tone of the film changes again, and the action moves to the Isle of Dogs, where - under the watchful eyes of a US led NATO force, there are attempts to rebuild the UK. These scenes remind me of the protagnosists in the shopping mall in the original Dawn of the Dead - trying to get on with live in an artifical and conditionally safe environment, and trying to ignore the devastation all around. And the way these scenes are filmed is very interesting - the use of CCTV and sniper scopes stress the cost of their freedom from the Infected: they are constantly under the watchful and intrusive eyes of others.

Then Robert Carlyle's apparently dead wife returns - causing both an awkward moment for Carlyle character and the revelation that whilst she is infected and carrying the Rage virus, but not displaying any of the symptoms. But as you might expect, things go badly wrong, and within minutes her husband is infected and she is dead in one of the most unpleasant silver screen killing scenes I can remember in a long time.

And from there we see the increasingly desperate - and murderous - attempts of the NATO forces to contain the latest outbreak. Several people do escape, but their route out is an ordeal. Included in the survivors are the Carlyle characters son and daughter, and the impetus is to get them out of the city and away from the Infected to discover the cause of their family immunity from the virus. But their trek across London is nightmarish owing to both attacks from the Infected and also the US military. And this section of the film also has my favourite scene - when a helicopter takes on the Infected.

Needless to say that the two kids do make it - but the film has the intelligence to question whether their escape is a good thing and suggests that the draconian and lethal actions of the NATO forces were actually necessary and right to protect the rest of the the planet from the virus. It is a thoughtful and intelligent film that dares to suggest that mass murder might be a better option that the *good guys winning*, and the downbeat ending is entirely befitting of the apocalpytic tone and nature of the rest of the film.

So to paraphrase the tag lines from the Austin Powers sequels - "if you see one sequel this summer, see Spiderman 3**. However if you see two, see 28 Weeks Later as well."

*And they are not, strictly speaking, zombies as they are not dead. They are people infected with the Rage virus so in effect are just very ill human beings. It is actually key to both films that the Infected are not dead - after all, it is only the Infected starving to death that stops the initial carnage caused by the outbreak of the Rage virus.

**Mainly because it is visually stunning and will come across far better on the big screen than it ever will on DVD.

Spiderman 3

I loved the original Spiderman film. It is tightly paced, ambigious, well acted and possibly the best big-screen adpatation of a comic book I think I have ever seen. Spiderman 2 was OK - a very good superhero movie, but a little long and ponderous compared to the superior original. But despite the difference in quality between the original and the sequel, I had high hopes for the third film in the series.

Empahsis, I'm afraid, on "had high hopes".

It is not a bad film, and it is visually stunning. But there is one glaring failing in the film. As this review points, out, it is the script:

"A pity a more sizeable chunk of the reported $250 million budget didn't go towards a decent screenplay. Far too many characters are squeezed into the bum-numbing 140 minutes and most of them suffer from a woeful lack of development as a direct result: Gwen Stacy abruptly disappears; Eddie Brock's back story is thinner than a size zero model; Harry's butler Bernard appears from nowhere to save Spidey's skin with a hackneyed disclosure and a revelation centring around Flint Marko and Spidey's Uncle Ben is so contrived, it would insult even the limited intelligence of yer average WAG."

Quite. Sometimes, less is more. The original film was so great because it took time to flesh out Peter Parker, Mary-Jane Waston and Norman Osborn. There is too much going on in Spiderman 3 to allow time to get to know any of the characters, and the over-whelming desire to tie up every remaining plot strands means that the script relies on patronising moralising, lazy plot contrivancies and all the emotional depth of a Police Academy movie.

I'd recommend people see the film at the cinema, since the spectacular visuals of the film will be far more impressive on the big screen that they ever could be on DVD. And I would imagine, what with the boat load of cash this film will undeniably make will probably make a further sequel inevitable. But if they are going to make a further Spidey flick, then I would ask the producers to sit down and think about what made the first film so great. They need a disciplined, well thought out script and the best way to do that is to minimise the plot threads in the story. Focus on just one villian, and you will have a convincing and realistic nemesis for Spiderman. If you have three villians, you will end up with half-baked concepts and characters no-one really gives a crap about. Venom should have been the ultimate villian in the Spiderman film series, not an after thought in a disappointing second sequel.

Spiderman 3 - a missed opportunity.