What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
106 Comments
- SinkToTheBeat, on 10/11/2007, -11/+47I thought it was pretty bad. Although a few parts are so corny that you can't help but laugh.
- R34C7, on 10/11/2007, -3/+35Too many subplots leads to a massive cluster-***** of poorly concluded plot lines topped with seemingly unoriginal and corny scripts.
The CGI is orgasmic though... If for nothing else, the graphics are worth seeing. - mrmdc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+32Considering the movie cost $250,000,000 to make.. the story/acting could have been a LOT better.
- falcon1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+28It's entertaining. Not spectacular, but entertaining. Guess there isn't really much else out though?
- kehvin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Why did they have to have Kirstin Dunst sing...TWICE?!
- APHughes, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Because Spider-Man is in the top 3 of the most recognized and popular Superheroes (other 2 are Batman and Superman)
- AttackMantis, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18The movie has a lot of shortfalls. Not as good as the first two IMO.
- amnesiac096, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14Aquaman still reigns supreme in my eyes...
- Warpstone, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15My friend told me to just bring your iPod and listen to music while enjoying the stunning visual effects because the plot and dialog were utter crap.
- Jack9, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Was worth my money. That's a win as far as I'm concerned.
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11In other news... Movie execs claimed they lost $10.5 Billion to movie pirates!
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10
wow!! a new revenue record! coincidentally, ticket prices keep increasing.
these adver-news hype stories would be more interesting if they reported in inflation-adjusted dollars.... - explnx, on 04/27/2009, -4/+12It was extremely disappointing. It sort of felt like too much and too little at the same time, like they cut all the wrong scenes.
- isubeatle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9i was really disappointed in it. Especially when spidey came to the end fight, they just had to throw the American flag behind him. also, i didn't know that if you want to become an alter-ego, all you have to do is flip your hair over your forehead.
- JangoFett, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7It's almost as if Rami crammed as much stuff as possible into this movie because he knows he won't be back for Spiderman 4.
This really should have been two movies. - xobecide, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13I don't know why everyone is praising the visual effects. The chase seen between hobgoblin and spidey screamed "spy kids 3D." Not that I've seen it, but I've seen previews. And when the visual effects feel the same between this and a C-kids movie... there's something wrong.
And if anyone is skeptical about the dialog being *****... recall (or prepare for) :: "Wicked cool." - lovek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Yeah, but I'm not interested in a sequel unless they get Vincent Chase back.
- qwerty1024, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7but at least, unlike Spiderman, Titanic was great for what it was trying to be.
- H0mez, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5That was totally lip sync'ed
- ElevenisEven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5man, maybe the oil companies could start making movies and let us voluntarily throw our money at them, instead of them just raping it out of us
- tuxidomasx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5i gave them my money last night
it wasnt great, but it wasnt bad either
*shrugs* - qwerty1263, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5My brotha Qwerty! I agree.
- timusca, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8At an average of $7 per ticket, that's approx. 88,857,142 people that thought the movie sucked.
- CedEx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4They forgot to remove her fangs from when she did "Interview with the Vampire".
- SurlyDuff, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Now that he's busy on Medean and Matterhorn...somehow I doubt it:- Oh well, maybe Johnny Drama can do it:P
- Senseless, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Just because a movie drags in mucho dinero (see: last 3 star wars movies) does not mean it's good. Christ, 2.5+ hours of boring sappy crap. This is NOT WHAT I GO TO SEE A SUPERHERO MOVIE FOR! Yes, the CGI was awesome - and if they took the last 25 minutes of the movie, added in the shorter previous scenes with the Sandman, etc., and got rid of the rest, it might have been OK. Seriously, this movie completely jumped the shark as soon as that damn jazz bar scene happened, and each and every one of you sitting there knew it deep down inside. I remain an absolute fan of the first 2, but Sam Raimi screwed the pooch on this one.
ps.. Thomas Hayden Church made more of his few minutes and lines than the entire rest of the cast did.. - shuffle2, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5people might as well just hand their money over to the mpaa
- DanteDefiance, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"Batman is infinitely better because his character is grounded by being a regular person."
...a regular person with Billions of dollars? You're an asshat. Batman is amazing, but his draw has nothing to do with him being a "regular guy". He's dark and twisted behind that mask.
Spider-Man is popular because HE'S a regular guy behind the mask. The whole reason he became popular was because, after he took that costume off, he had to deal with all the same day to day ***** everyone else does. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7My god it's a movie. Stop bitching about it sucking like it was a life altering experience.
- kurttrail, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The distributor flooded theatres with prints. I think the studio knew how bad people wanted to see this movie, and how bad this movie was, that if they didn't make their nut before the next blockbuster came out, they'd be out lots of bucks.
Kinda like the last Superman movie, highly anticipated, horrible movie, so the studio flooded theatres with prints.
Just watch, Pirates 3 won't be on as many screens as Spiderman was on its opening weekend.
Plus Pirates 3 has the FSM on its side!
Ramen. - coasterswim, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I don't know where you are from, but those prices are ridiculous.
- netarchitect, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Good. Maybe they made enough money so that they could give everyone's money back. The movie was downright terrible.
- mywhitenoise, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5How many scenes did he cry in? 2.5? He finds out the murderer of his uncle, there was a tear. The girl of his dreams who he was going to propose to, dumps him...that's worth crying over. His best friend dies in front of his eyes, if you wouldn't cry over that, you have no heart, and this is coming from an *****.
- MaximegalonInfo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Big ***** deal... Here is why this is a meaningless stat which says nothing about how "good" or "bad" a movie this is.
1. There are more theaters now, and more of a push to get people in before the movie gets boring, pirated or faces competition. Also, many business want DVD sales to start earlier. Industry execs have learned there is more money to be made by getting people in the theater, and moving on to the next movie ASAFP.
2. There is more advertising and marketing costs in movies today, so huge theater "earnings" means less when you paid a ***** to get the film made. Also there is more ways to advertise today i.e. the internet, so this gives modern movies an advantage statistically over "classic" movies.
3. Inflation. It's easy to make gross more with higher ticket prices. I had to pay about $4.50 to see the Star Wars movies. Is Spiderman 3 better than Star Wars because it had a better opening day?
4. Population is going up. More people means more cash.
I'd love to see a "standard" that takes all these items into account. I suspect Spiderman 3 is only doing average as compared to past Summer blockbusters. - MadMastaZ, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm surprised that it made that much, even though it wasn't that super of a movie. I guess everyone wanted to see the movie because they wanted to see the conclusion of the trio, plus they wanted to see venom (who was totally overrated).
There were some parts in the movie that made it good, like when spiderman turned emo, and him dancing like a retard in the middle of the street.
all in all I would give it a 6/10, because it was okay. 1 and 2 were better. - libertao, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5These earnings were all built on the back of the first two, problems with this one include:
-They should have reversed the screentime ratio of 9 to 1, Sandman to Venom (didn't even give Venom a name!?)
-Maguire mailed this one in--I remember reading he worked out 6 hrs/day for the 1st, in this one he had a freaking double chin!
-Spiderman should not CRY that much. Maybe a somber/depressed moment, but multiple scenes crying??
But I didn't mind the sheer number of subplots--hasn't his balancing act of multiple villains and love interests always been a running theme? It was just handled poorly. - francisidada, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3what planet are u from? kirsten dunst did a good job acting ... u r unbelievable .... she sucks in antoniette and after spidey are career has gone to the rocks .... why was she moody throughout the film, why could she pretend to be happy with spidey ... she had a long face from the beginning to the end of the movie, only after the first scene did she smile. what crappy special effects? godzilla, jurassic park, twister all had better special effects ... i mean every fool could tell spidey was mostly cgi when he flew around ... the makers of this movie should be strung and shot. i paid $12 to see it and bought worth $8, what a waste of my money for crappy film makers to go on being crappy ... i am over with movies no more threequels for me, no shrek, no pirates, only suckers would go for any threequel again .
fool me once shame on you, fool me twice ... shammeee onn .... uhhhh MEEEEEEEEEEEE - hannahmar, on 06/11/2009, -1/+4"Peter's grandmother"
His aunt, I think you mean.
Also, How is Bruce Wayne more of a normal person than Peter Parker? One of them struggles with a regular job and little money and the other one is a billionaire. While they both kick ass they average Joe award goes to Parker. - HelloNavi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Agreed. the acting was terrible, and whoever wrote it needs to be ***** shot.
- qwerty1024, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4sarcasm?
- Boofster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3The movie was not worth this money.
It was hyped and people saw it. I can bet 80% of the return public would say they wouldn't have seen it had they known it would have been so bad. - BinskiBx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Apparently being evil equates to having a Emo Haircut and being into Chicks...This movie sucked!!!!!!
- nawhead, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I thought it was alright too. I watched it just to laugh at it, and I found myself going... "Hmm.. that's pretty cool/funny/sad" at a lot of scenes. I only expected to be like "lame, lame, lame" but that didn't happen. Also, the "bad" Peter Parker scenes was some of the best stuff. But overall, it's a comic book movie. It's not on the level of Batman Begins or X-Men 1, but it had that quirky feel of the Spider-Man comics. I mean did these people who bitch about this movie ever read any Spider-Man comics? The source material is corny as *****. The movie's the same. Great translation. They accomplished the job as best as they could. And Bryce Dallas Howard is HOT. The movie gets a thumbs up for her alone.
- dizznit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2If you're into polished turds, this movie is for you.
- Heavy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4To bad the movie sucked monkey balls!
- Senseless, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2By the way .. that useless excuse for a butler would have saved everyone a lot of pain if he had stopped hiding in the basement every time the green goblin apartment blew up and actually just friggin TOLD Harry the truth .. like in the end of the last movie! OMG, I couldn't believe the way they pulled that out of their nether regions to wrap up the harry vs. peter plot line..
- kirb59y, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Pretty weak, I thought. Seems like there were many different writers who all wanted their scenes in the movie at the cost of a horrible screenplay (Dunst singing??). Also, when you think about it going from $150 mil to $60 million in a weekend with no big new films, you have to wonder how far it will drop this weekend with Shrek 3 coming...
- daridave, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Iam personally more excited for Shrek 3... so... yeah, good movie... but [...]
- kidcodea, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2horrible movie.
- Triffid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Medean? How can you watch that show and not at least look up what they are talking about.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is