Spider-Man 3

Honestly, it’s tricky one for me to judge; on one hand it’s such a fun film to sit, watch, and laugh at, and on the other hand, a lot of the things that make it so enjoyable are what make it less “traditionally good”. I’ve heard criticism that it’s too structurally messy, that there’s too many characters, and that the central figures do things that seem out of character. All fair judgments, and honestly, probably true. And yet, for me, its pitfalls and shortcomings are easily overlooked. I like that there’s more recognizable in-universe characters, and I like that they do things that don’t always make sense — why should they always be predictable? Art is subjective and humans are biased; I’ll admit, I love Spider-Man, just like the rest of the human population, so I give it the grace and empathy that I think Spider-Man embodies. Though this may not be the most technically or narratively sound iteration in the franchise, it’s one that I will never hesitate to put on if I need a pick-me-up, or a trip down memory lane.

The story (spoilers)

Obviously you’ve seen this a million times and know what the story is, but just as a refresher, and because mapping it out really does show how much is going on, I’ll recap. Feel free to skip this section if you’ve seen it recently.

Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), now likely in his mid 20s, is happily in love with, and planning to propose to Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). Harry Osborn (James Franco) resents Peter because he thinks he killed his father, so he’s out to kill Spider-Man, empowered by the Goblin gas left behind Goblin Senior. An altercation between the two leaves Harry with a brain injury, resulting in short-term memory loss (he can’t remember that he killed his father).

Things are great with Harry now, what could go wrong? Police chase escaped convict Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church) to a science facility where he is accidentally genetically vaporized into sentient sand, becoming The Sandman. Eddie Brock (Topher Grace) threatens Peter’s photography job at the Daily Bugle. Peter’s affinity towards classmate and lab partner Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), alongside some seriously questionable Spider-Man decision-making, causes a rift in him and MJ’s relationship.

As it turns out, the police got it wrong, it was actually Flint Marko who killed Uncle Ben! Peter spirals into a rage and just so happens to come across everyone’s favorite black alien Symbiote. He dons the black suit for the first time, and it’s awesome, but it makes him dark and broody. Harry kisses a remorseful MJ, and then miraculously cures his brain injury, bringing his memories back. He gets back at Peter and they end up fighting once again, Harry ends up with a faceful of explosive and a badittude. Peter gets rid of the black suit, it’s changing him too much. Eddie Brock is there and Venom latches onto him.

Eddie/Venom seeks out Sandman and proposes a team up to kidnap MJ and try to kill Spider-Man. Spidey asks Harry for help who eventually reluctantly does help, and they win the day, but Harry dies.

Yeesh. You got all that?

Look, sure, reading that back on paper… it’s a lot, and it sounds like it doesn’t really connect. But something about when you’re watching it on the screen, a character you grew up with and idolize, it’s just magical. Yeah it’s cringe at times, but it’s leaning in to it! Sure, it’s sort of unnecessarily throwing in too many characters — but that’s cool! I want to see Venom and I want to see Sandman, and I think both actors do a great job of embodying those roles.

In truth, it’s very hard for me to see its faults, I get swept away by the memories, the scale, the memes. It’s very hard for me to judge as a standalone film, because I’m so enamored by the trilogy as a whole, and the character itself.

Perpetual comparison

How do you judge a film without comparing it to other films you’ve seen? Or, even, to scenes you’ve experienced in your real life, online, or on television? Poorly, that’s how. I mean, that’s the point of film, isn’t it? It’s a mirror that shows you a glimpse of a new world, one that is close enough to your own, filled with characters you might recognize and relate to, saying something about our existence on this floating rock. Judging a film in a vacuum chamber is, quite simply, impossible, unless you were born today and it’s the only film you’ve ever seen.

The Spider-Man films are no exception, in fact they are under constant comparison by nature of there being seemingly infinite source material and adaptations— comics, TV shows, video games, fan edits, etc. Notably, if you saw Spider-Man 3 when it came out, you’d really only be able to compare it to the comics, the previous two films (plus other Japanese renditions), and animated TV shows. That’s still quite a bit of influence, the average viewer would likely have been going into this one with set expectations.

Does it live up to those expectations? Hell no. But does that make it a bad movie? I don’t think so.

Its immediate predecessor, Spider-Man 2 (2004), is widely considered the best live-action Spider-Man films, and more broadly one of the best superhero movies — that’s what the numbers say, at least. That’s a tough act to follow, the cards were stacked against this one from the get go. I don’t think this is unique to just this film, I think this phenomenon started with Spider-Man 3 and has just kept going ever since.

The way I see it, the Raimi Trilogy (the unifying name of these first films directed by Sam Raimi) is so cherished, that all subsequent iterations of Spider-Man on the silver screen (save for the Spider-Verse films) can do nothing but fall short. Kind of like the Star Wars trilogy, every other rendition just isn’t the same.

Don’t get me wrong, the follow-ups were, and continue to be, unique and enjoyable in their own ways, Andrew Garfield’s suave and agile Peter Parker, and Tom Holland’s involvement with the larger Avengers cast, are both cool in their own ways. But they’re just not the same.

That’s nostalgia for ya.

Technically…

Put your feelings for story and structure aside for a minute. What I love (maybe most) about this movie is the cinematography — simply, how the picture actually looks. This film was made just on the cusp of the digital age, when shooting on film was still a genuine option and not a special request. This one was shot on film; it gives it equal parts vibrance and grit, which I feel imparts a sense of both spectacle and realism. It’s a fictional world that looks and feels real, not at all dissimilar to Christopher Nolan’s Batman films (also shot on film).

I won’t bore you with my keynote speech for the film preservation club, but — just watch this movie, then watch like Spider-Man: Far From Home or any modern Marvel movie and tell me you can’t see, nay, feel the difference.

On top of all that, the movie is littered with Raimi’s unique visual nuggets, like the close-up eye shots and canted frames, and almost has a horror undertone with the Venom sequences.

Acting and direction is top-notch here too. Either they’re having the time of their lives (this scene with a sharply dressed Tobey Maguire comes to mind), or they’re just so checked out and fully giving in to Raimi’s vision. Topher Grace and J.K. Simmons give my favorite performances, especially in the scene where they’re talking about flagpoles, I just find it so funny.

If you liked this

I’d recommend you check out Send Help (2026). It came out earlier this year and is also directed by Sam Raimi. It stars Rachel McAdams (Mean Girls, The Notebook) and Dylan O’Brien (Maze Runner, Teen Wolf).

It’s no Spider-Man, but it does feel like a Raimi movie the further along you go, and it’s just generally a fun time. Kind of like Castaway meets Among Us (the game).