Garrett’s Grumblings – A Defense of Spider-Man 3
Before I get into the crux of this article, let me say a few things. One, as most people who listen to our air waves know, I was a Binge listener LONG before I became a part of their team. In the time before they started Binge, Law and Moreno would talk about movies they had seen, as has been their MO. And more times than naught, I would laugh along with their general feelings toward the subjects. But sometimes, I would be on the bus going to college while listening to their critical consensus of a movie and almost yell out loud, ‘you have to be kidding me.’ Now I would not go as far as request a written dissertation on the subject. But we all have opinions, and even those who are paid and/or allowed to have their opinions read by more than most tend to lean one way, while the reader leans another. So I would like to personally thank Brian from California for feeling so passionately against what I said about today’s subject, even going so far as pausing last week’s podcast after I made an off hand comment and requesting this article. However, don’t expect one on why I don’t like Deadpool.
Secondly, I want to go on record as saying I am not here to say, unlike 2004’s previous entry Spider-Man 2 -which is looked at by many, me included, as one of the greatest comic book movies of all time- that I feel each and every decision made on its follow up was a wise one. There are things done in this movie, by powers that be and otherwise, that are genuine WTF moments, and I am not afraid to point them out as I see fit. Spider-Man 3 is what I would classify as an undoubtedly inconsistent film. However, what I need to say in my defense is that a lot of Spider-Man 3 is actually very consistent with the overall aesthetic of Spider-Man 2. So the fact the second film has a 93% consensus on Rotten Tomatoes while the third has a 63%, is something I will undeniably question as we move along.
Let’s get the villain argument out of the way first. When revolting against Spider-Man 3, many people like to point out, first and foremost, that its overcrowding of villains makes it feel like a jumbled mess. Now I could get into all the back story of how Venom was pretty much thrown in director Sam Raimi’s face at the very last minute as an almost mandate to include, but that would be throwing out excuses, and that is not what I am here to do. However, I would argue the journeys each and every one of these villains, or perceived villains takes, is what makes me go with it. As per formula for these types of films, for a villain to work, they have to see themselves as the good guy of the story. When we are introduced to Sandman, he is in a state of despair, as his home life isn’t anything worth bragging about, and all he wants is the love of his family. It should be noted that Sandman actor Thomas Hayden Church was coming off an Oscar nominated performance in Sideways, and was a great get for Raimi to have portray this character. Not only does he look like he literally leapt off the page onto the screen, Church plays his descent into madness perfectly, and that villain trope of feeling he is in the right works much more than it gets credit for. Spider-Man is getting in the way of his happiness, and he feels by getting rid of him, Sandman (or Flint Marko if you want to get technical) can finally be happy. That, my friends, is the mark of a good villain.
As far as Venom goes, and leaving out the excuse of ‘the studio made Raimi do it,’ I will say this is one of those bad decisions I pointed out earlier. However, that’s not to say I did not see what Raimi was trying to do with him. As many who read the comics know, Venom -real name, Eddie Brock- was a bad ass who looked like he would kick your teeth in if you looked at him funny. And for this role, Raimi cast, Topher Grace(?) Now at the time, Grace was riding high on the cloud known as That 70’s Show, and again, this was looked at as quite a get for Sony Studios. But the question is, was he even worth it? I would in all honesty say all the hate sent Grace’s way is unwarranted, and I will tell you why. You look at Grace, and he is an almost mirror image of Tobey Maguire. What Raimi is showing is where things could go wrong if Peter Parker lets the symbiote suit overtake his emotions. I find this storyline’s resolution, as quickly thrown together as it is, to be as good as it can be given the time Raimi had to establish it. Which quite frankly needed a whole other movie to do it justice.
This leads me to Harry Osbourne. A character whose relationship with Peter was established in two previous films, we finally see them come to blows in the beginning stages of Spider-Man 3. But while the other two are villains within the story, Harry is nothing more than a foil for Peter to work over until the film’s final frames. Now is his ‘film amnesia’ a plot device of convenience? Absolutely, and I have always railed against this particular way of storytelling as something that is second only to a main hero looking up to the heavens and yelling as a main pet peeve of mine. But to me, it is worth it for the film to give him that last bit of heroism in its final frames. Comic enthusiasts, please do not come to me with, ‘but that wasn’t his arc in the comics’ talk. I realize this because I was a big Spider-Man reader back when I used to read comic books. But one thing I have ALWAYS stuck with when it comes to the relationship of the two mediums is there can be two universes. One within the page and one that’s onscreen. For the story that Raimi was trying to tell, I think Osbourne joining Spidey in that final battle was just as glorious as his defeat of Doc Ock in the second. It made for a moment of zen and triumph for movie goers. Or, it was intended to.
Next thing I would like to cover? ‘The strut.’ Yes, we all know ‘the strut.’ The other thing about Spider-Man 3 people like to revolt about. But I enjoy it, and I think I have a good defense for doing so. Peter Parker has NEVER, EVER been cool. In fact, he is the mirror image of many who liked him when I did, in that he was a nerd who was always picked on and awkward. Getting a symbiote suit will NOT automatically give him the power and meaning to be a powerful force in confidence. If this scene is awkward, it’s because it was meant to be. I find it strange that people hate this scene so much. It is almost as if they want a Nolan-esque darkness in tone that comes with it. Peter Parker is dark? Let’s have him kick a puppy and throw someone in the ocean. Here, Peter is acting this way because he feels like he is being ‘cool,’ yet we all know by watching him that he isn’t. I have a feeling Raimi himself knew this feeling growing up, and by having Peter shove Mary Jane, he did just enough to get the darkness growing inside of Peter out there. I will say it again, and not as an excuse. If Raimi did NOT have the mandate set on him to include Venom, this would be a non discussion.
One more small thing I would like to mention before closing this article out, and that is the inclusion of Gwen Stacy, played here by a blonde wig wearing -and miscast- Bryce Dallas Howard. There is little to no doubt that this inclusion is a major bit of fan service. Or, maybe not. Raimi was, as many know, a huge reader of the comics. He included Easter Eggs like Betty Brant -Spidey’s first girlfriend in the comics- in a scene or two as a secretary working at the Daily Bugle in the first film. Nothing more, nothing less. So maybe his including of Stacy here was more ‘Raimi service’ than fan service. And I will say it again: cinematic universes should be seperate from literary ones. So if Raimi wants to use Stacy as a jealousy pawn in a half assed love triangle with Peter and Mary Jane, so be it. Not everyone holds the books as a sort of bible of comic book literature, therefore isn’t going to understand it, and I like Raimi’s sense of making characters his own.
This is not an article proclaiming Spider-Man 3 as being the prototypical comic book movie. There are flaws, and there are problems. From Avi Arad coming in and making Raimi put all in one film which should have been split in two -a right he has being the money man, after all- he created a film that is uneven and off kilter. All of these storylines I outlined were done as well as they could be done given the time alotted. But the hate I see thrown Spider-Man 3‘s way is at times deafening, and I feel not warranted. There are threads introduced in the first two films of the trilogy that were closed off here. And let’s not forget that Raimi had plans for The Lizard way before Marc Webb came into the fold. But the result of this shoot made him cantankerous toward the material. Despite that, Spider-Man 3 is not soulless, and I would take it over the two Amazing films any day of the week. But that is a discussion best saved for another time.
So thank you, Brian from California. But as the great Lou Brown said in Major League, ‘don’t ever fucking do it again.’