The Energon Pub

by **Bun-Bun** » Sat May 05, 2007 1:12 pm

Bombus distinguendus wrote:sorry to say but noone like the shocker.

Mob's mum does

Saw the movie yesterday, it was OK.
not great, definitly way to much crammed into a single movie.

Fortunatly I didn't expect much from Venom since Raimi has said over and over that he doesn't care for the character and only used him cause fans (and probably the studio) kept hounding him.

Sand man was pretty 'meh' as well, and Goblin2, well, the less said about him the better.

And as for Bruces cameo, yeah I had already read the novelization for the movie and I knew that had to be where Raimi was going to use him, it was just too great. Infact Bruce was probably the higlight of that movie.

News Credits: 1093 · by **Alex Kingdom** » Sat May 05, 2007 2:04 pm

Cujo wrote:
zoso504 wrote: By the way, Bruce Campbell's cameo in this one was the best ever!!! Did anybody else start laughing their ass off before the camera even panned to him?
i was laughing as soon as they panned to him it was great =) but what does he have to do with spiderman i mean i know he was in the first two movies also as cameos was he the voice of spiderman in the cartoons or something??????

No he was the star of the Evil Dead movies, the movies that made Raimi famous and Raimi's childhood friend, that is why he cameos in all three movies.

Cujo wrote:oh and if harry had healing ablities wouldnt that mean he can't........ die?? so couldnt him and his dad still "come back from the dead????

Nope, because no matter how good your healing is when you're dead, your dead. You can 'get better' from death just because you have accelerated healing abilities.

Yours AK

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sat May 05, 2007 2:16 pm

Alex Kingdom wrote:
Cujo wrote:oh and if harry had healing ablities wouldnt that mean he can't........ die?? so couldnt him and his dad still "come back from the dead????

Nope, because no matter how good your healing is when you're dead, your dead. You can 'get better' from death just because you have accelerated healing abilities.

Yours AK

But...But...

Also of note. I just realized after watching the first movie again, that Norman dies from getting forked in the nads. Bad way to go.

by **Unicron's_head** » Sat May 05, 2007 3:44 pm

I saw the movie yesterday and i thought it was preety good.
I'm gonna use a 1-5 rating for each area of the movie.

The acting was a 4. Parker's emo scene was imo retarded...one thing i never thought i'd see in a spiderman movie is him dancing. I thought that the Sandman's acting was a little dry and unconvincing. Harry Osbourne did very well through the whole movie until his death. Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

The special effedts were great i give it a 5. The crane scene was short but exciting. The Venom transformation scene was cool.

The story was confusing, sappy and drawn out. There was too much focus on Parker/MJ or Parker/Gwen or Osbourne/MJ. IMO The writers cooked up the idea that Uncle Ben was killed by the wrong man for an excuse to use the Sandman. I give the story a 2.

News Credits: 2 · by **Insurgent** » Sat May 05, 2007 3:46 pm

Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

Don't mark Venom down because he saw little screen time. He may not of been in it much, but he still acted in that time.

by **Monkey078** » Sat May 05, 2007 3:51 pm

Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sat May 05, 2007 4:01 pm

Monkey078 wrote:Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

You are officially my favorite new guy. Mainly because you mirror exactly what I thought of it. Especially on the ordering of the movies from best to worst.

News Credits: 3 · by **Barricade** » Sat May 05, 2007 4:45 pm

Nightwatcher wrote:
Monkey078 wrote:Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

You are officially my favorite new guy. Mainly because you mirror exactly what I thought of it. Especially on the ordering of the movies from best to worst.

i see how it is

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Sat May 05, 2007 4:59 pm

Nightwatcher wrote:
Monkey078 wrote:Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

You are officially my favorite new guy. Mainly because you mirror exactly what I thought of it. Especially on the ordering of the movies from best to worst.

I think he meant the >s as arrows. Something like 2 is better than 3 is better than 1.

Because that's how it should be.

Sam Raimi made Doc Ock cool.

by **Unicron's_head** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:01 pm

Insurgent wrote:
Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

Don't mark Venom down because he saw little screen time. He may not of been in it much, but he still acted in that time.

I wasn't trying to...Venom is my favorite Spiderman character. Hell i even wore a Venom logo shirt to the movie! He was good in the time he had on screen

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:20 pm

Shadowman wrote:
Nightwatcher wrote:
Monkey078 wrote:Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

You are officially my favorite new guy. Mainly because you mirror exactly what I thought of it. Especially on the ordering of the movies from best to worst.

I think he meant the >s as arrows. Something like 2 is better than 3 is better than 1.

Because that's how it should be.

Sam Raimi made Doc Ock cool.

I doubt it. He made Ock cool...For the 15 minutes he was in a 2 hour movie. The second movie was horrible to be honest. Corny beyond belief and the villian was thrown to the back burner in favor of a dumpy love story. He was spider-man for what? 25 minutes of that movie?

by **Monkey078** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:22 pm

Shadowman wrote:
Nightwatcher wrote:
Monkey078 wrote:Hi, I'm new and didn't find an introduction thread, so this is going to be my first one. Hopefully it's constructive.

I saw the movie last night, and I have to say, it's better than most people say. I friend of mine gave it a flat out F grade. I'd give it a good, solid C. Venom's design was very disappointing. They butchered the mouth. That's the part of Venom that catches the eye. The big, sharp, crooked teeth in a huge opening that salivates almost constantly.

When Topher Grace's face was shown, I actually liked how his teeth had become bigger and crooked, but as soon as the symbiote went back over his face, they were gone! Venom's mouth, though more realistic to a regular human's head, just didn't look like it was his.

The acting was good for the most part. The guy that played Jameson did a fantastic job in all of the movies and Topher Grace did an outstanding job bringing Eddie Brock's brooding, cut-throat attitude to the screen. Bryce Dallas Howard was good in what little time she had on screen, and Thomas Haden Church actually brought a tear to my eye in the scene where he had to re-manifest himself out of sand for the first time.

The only bad acting was from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. They just seemed very bored playing the characters again.

If I were to rate it from the other Spiderman movies, I'd go 1>3>2.

You are officially my favorite new guy. Mainly because you mirror exactly what I thought of it. Especially on the ordering of the movies from best to worst.

I think he meant the >s as arrows. Something like 2 is better than 3 is better than 1.

Because that's how it should be.

Sam Raimi made Doc Ock cool.

No, I meant it as 1 was the best, then 3, then 2 sucked. I really have no idea why people thought 2 was so good. I remember leaving the theater saying "that was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I'm never watching that pile of crap again." and to this day, I haven't.

by **zoso504** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:31 pm

Yeah because Spider-man 2 ends with Spider-man saving the day, getting the girl, and clearly loved by all but Harry Osborne. You're right that's just like the similarly upbeat ending of Empire, the Rebels all but beaten and on the run, Han Solo frozen is carbonite an sold to a crime lord and Luke (sans hand) coming to terms with discovering his father is the right hand man of the Ultimate evil in the universe. Yeah Spider-man 2 is so much like Empire I'm shocked I didn't notice that myself Rolling Eyes

Yours AK

Haha, AK, you're so funny! I wish all my posts were like yours. I was talking about Spiderman 2 to Empire Strikes Back in the sense that a sequel completely outdoes the first film in terms of quality and in story and that Spiderman 3 was like Jedi Returns because it was lackluster. Did I even quote your statement? How do you know I was talking about you, and even if I was, that I was in any way condescending? Just because you have 11,000+ posts doesn't make you B.M.O.C. In my book, you're now a chump who needs to learn a little rhetoric. I'll give you a freebie: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/analogy

Yours zoso504

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:35 pm

He misunderstood you. No reason to get uppity. That and I think you're completely wrong.

And Monkey078... I think I need to send you a medal or something.

News Credits: 3 · by **Barricade** » Sat May 05, 2007 5:58 pm

Unicron's_head wrote:
Insurgent wrote:
Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

Don't mark Venom down because he saw little screen time. He may not of been in it much, but he still acted in that time.

I wasn't trying to...Venom is my favorite Spiderman character. Hell i even wore a Venom logo shirt to the movie! He was good in the time he had on screen

bwahahahahahahahahahaha i wore my venom tshirt to the movie too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 :grin:

by **Unicron's_head** » Sat May 05, 2007 6:08 pm

Cujo wrote:
Unicron's_head wrote:
Insurgent wrote:
Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

Don't mark Venom down because he saw little screen time. He may not of been in it much, but he still acted in that time.

I wasn't trying to...Venom is my favorite Spiderman character. Hell i even wore a Venom logo shirt to the movie! He was good in the time he had on screen
bwahahahahahahahahahaha i wore my venom tshirt to the movie too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

XD Great minds think alike!

News Credits: 2 · by **CyberTooth** » Sat May 05, 2007 6:49 pm

Alex Kingdom wrote:Here's a thought might this story line have been better told over two movies rather than in the one? I know no one (Raimi, Maguire and Dunst) other than Sony seems very keen to make another movie, which is probably why they tried to cram so much in this one, but that is the main problem with this movie. It had too many ideas and not enough time to fully explore them. There was more than enough to keep Spidey busy what with the new Golbin, Gwen Stacy, Eddie Brock, Sandman and the symbote suit without having Venom created and destroyed within the space of about half an hour. This could have been the 'Empire Strikes back' of a four part series of movies, ending with Parkers life in tatters after the symbote has turn him into everything he ever hated, the Press and the City turned against him, Mary Jane in the arms of Osborn, and a brand new super-villain (Venom) on the loose and out for his blood. The fourth move could see him reconciled with Harry, win back Mary Jane and Defeat Venom, maybe with another villain thown in for colour, the Lizard maybe seeing as hes already featured as Dr Connors in both Spider-man 2 & 3. Its only an idea but I personally think that would have worked better and would have been a more fitting ending to what has so far been an awesome series of movies. As it stands I hope they don't make any more Raimi or no Raimi, I that's coming from a massive Spider-man fan.

Yours AK

This is almost identical to the thought pattern a friend of mine and I discussed yesterday. IF they wanted to carry on the Spider-Man story a while longer, they should attempt to bring in another animated series in a limited run span of maybe a season or two. Personally though, this movie had a decent "it's done" feeling.

by **Cybertron Optimus** » Sat May 05, 2007 7:36 pm

I saw it last night and it was awesome, my new favorite movie.

News Credits: 34 · by **Supreme Convoy** » Sat May 05, 2007 11:33 pm

In general, I walked out of the theater feeling bummed out.

There are some elements that I liked. Flint Marko/Sandman is great. Just like Doc Ock, he has a convincing motivation to what he's doing.

Pretty much all the action scenes are amazing to watch.

I love the whole Evil Dead feel with some of the symbiote scenes. Especially when it's crawling out of the ground, looking like Ash's chopped off hand.

Bruce Campbell is teh awesome.

I also didn't like the Saturday Night Fever and Jazz scenes. I think the audiences responded so much to "Rain Drops Keep Falling on My Head" in Spidey 2, the filmmakers felt we needed more scenes like that. Didn't work so much this time around.

Is it me or did all the Peter/Mary Jane scenes have the worst dialogue? It seriously reminded me of Hayden Christensen & Natalie Portman in Episode III.

And the butler? Deux ex machina. Nuff said.

News Credits: 49 · by **Senor Hugo** » Sun May 06, 2007 1:04 am

Just got back from seeing the film. All I have to say is wow, I have no clue if I should be happy, or disappointed with the film.

Sandman was done perfectly, the motivation, the actor picked, the look, the CG was phenomenal. Venom was also done very well, I was glad to see Venom done in a manner that really was true to the source.

Peter laying the pimp hand down on Mary Jane in the bar. It was hilarious, so hilarious that in the theater, unbeknown to himself, my roommate yelled out "yes!" as it happened.
Now, for the stuff that sucked about the film.

Also, that painting of Norman in the chair. I can't stress enough how much I want that painting.

Emo-man, Emo-man, does whatever the emo can, writes some poetry, mourns alone, slits his wrists and dies.....alone.

Yeah, the whole film rang out emo. Granted we knew it was coming, but still.

They actually killed off Eddie, his skeleton right in the explosions fireball.

The Godzilla music every time Sandman showed up.

The old fashioned 1920's cop chase after Marko in the Marshlands.

The fact that Peter NEVER used his spider-sense throughout the entire film.

The dialog was terrible.

The whole disco-strut crap.

Gwen Stacy, nothing more than a plot point. Hopefully if we ever get Spider-man 4, she'll have a bigger role, and that they get rid of Mary Jane.

The use of the same 4 female extras throughout the scenes.

News Credits: 34 · by **Supreme Convoy** » Sun May 06, 2007 1:17 am

Senor Hugo wrote:The whole disco-strut crap.

Oh yeah... at the theater we went to, NO ONE knew what movie it was referencing. People claimed they were ripping off movies from Grease to Austin Powers. Even our good friend, who's a film major, didn't know what movie it was :roll:

News Credits: 1093 · by **Alex Kingdom** » Sun May 06, 2007 1:48 am

zoso504 wrote:
Yeah because Spider-man 2 ends with Spider-man saving the day, getting the girl, and clearly loved by all but Harry Osborne. You're right that's just like the similarly upbeat ending of Empire, the Rebels all but beaten and on the run, Han Solo frozen is carbonite an sold to a crime lord and Luke (sans hand) coming to terms with discovering his father is the right hand man of the Ultimate evil in the universe. Yeah Spider-man 2 is so much like Empire I'm shocked I didn't notice that myself Rolling Eyes

Yours AK

Haha, AK, you're so funny! I wish all my posts were like yours. I was talking about Spiderman 2 to Empire Strikes Back in the sense that a sequel completely outdoes the first film in terms of quality and in story and that Spiderman 3 was like Jedi Returns because it was lackluster. Did I even quote your statement? How do you know I was talking about you, and even if I was, that I was in any way condescending? Just because you have 11,000+ posts doesn't make you B.M.O.C. In my book, you're now a chump who needs to learn a little rhetoric. I'll give you a freebie:

Yours zoso504

Oh yeah, sorry about that. Now I look back at you post I see you made it 100% clear what you were referring to:

zoso504 wrote:Spider-man 2 was the "Empire Strikes Back" and this was the "Jedi Returns."

Being the only person in this entire thread who had referred to Empire Strikes Back I though maybe you might be referring to my point, how silly of me. :roll:

Thanks for the dictionary definition by the way, in return here's your word of the week Ambiguous. It can be used in the following sentences.

"My post was ambiguous"
"due to the Ambiguity of my post people misunderstood my point"
"I cant expect people to understand me if what i say is ambiguous"

Yours AK

by **zoso504** » Sun May 06, 2007 3:39 am

Once again, AKAK, your wit exceeds my own. Next time I'll copyright my insult so I'll cash in whenever you steal it. But seriously duder, I wasn't at all talking about what you said, I posted in response to the topic because in some reviews Spiderman 2 was referred to as the best sequel since ESB and I, personally, thought Spidey 3 was like Jedi Returns. Both comments were just an aside that needed absolutely no explaination until you went on your pompous little rant. I would've been happy to explain it to you had you just asked. But next time I post, I'll be sure to have a 'Works Cited' just so you can understand everything. Let's leave it at that before this gets out of hand. Boohoo.

Also, that painting of Norman in the chair. I can't stress enough how much I want that painting.

YES. HAHA I forgot! That painting was awesome.

News Credits: 1093 · by **Alex Kingdom** » Sun May 06, 2007 5:16 am

zoso504 wrote:Once again, AKAK, your wit exceeds my own. Next time I'll copyright my insult so I'll cash in whenever you steal it. But seriously duder, I wasn't at all talking about what you said, I posted in response to the topic because in some reviews Spiderman 2 was referred to as the best sequel since ESB and I, personally, thought Spidey 3 was like Jedi Returns. Both comments were just an aside that needed absolutely no explaination until you went on your pompous little rant. I would've been happy to explain it to you had you just asked. But next time I post, I'll be sure to have a 'Works Cited' just so you can understand everything. Let's leave it at that before this gets out of hand. Boohoo.

Yeah whatever. Maybe I should have asked you exactly what you meant, but to be totally honest if you're gonna post ambiguous comments you should be prepared for them to be misunderstood, and prepared to explain yourself without snotty insults. Yeah maybe I was a little 'pompous' apologies for that, but that's no reason to act like a dick about it. It's people like you who remind me why I don't post here anymore.

Cya.

News Credits: 2 · by **Insurgent** » Sun May 06, 2007 7:14 am

Me, Unicron's Head, Me wrote:Now on to Venom...I don't want to but i give him a 2 due to very little screentime which was a huge dissapointment.

Don't mark Venom down because he saw little screen time. He may not of been in it much, but he still acted in that time.

I wasn't trying to...Venom is my favorite Spiderman character. Hell i even wore a Venom logo shirt to the movie! He was good in the time he had on screen

Then bump his score up from 2. :grin:

There was too many fidgity kids talking through it and someone in the back kept moo-ing. I need to see all three movies together, in order, in the comfort of my own room to judge them accordingly in order.

The Energon Pub

Spider-Man 3. My Review=Rants, Raves,SPOILERS

Who is online