Spider-Man 3
- 2007
- Tous publics
- 2h 19min
Une étrange et sombre entité venue d'un autre monde se lie à Peter Parker et provoque un chaos intérieur alors qu'il affronte de nouveaux malfaiteurs ainsi que de nouvelles tentations et ven... Tout lireUne étrange et sombre entité venue d'un autre monde se lie à Peter Parker et provoque un chaos intérieur alors qu'il affronte de nouveaux malfaiteurs ainsi que de nouvelles tentations et vengeances.Une étrange et sombre entité venue d'un autre monde se lie à Peter Parker et provoque un chaos intérieur alors qu'il affronte de nouveaux malfaiteurs ainsi que de nouvelles tentations et vengeances.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Nomination aux 1 BAFTA Award
- 4 victoires et 44 nominations au total
Avis à la une
And the acting is very good, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst are appealing as Peter and Mary-Jane and Rosemary Harris sparkles as Auntie May. Topher Grace is great as Brock but underused as Venom, but as Sandman Thomas Haden Church was note perfect and the best developed of the villains. James Franco is an improvement as Harry, and Bryce Dallas Howard is delightfully photogenic as Gwen Stacey. I loved JK Simmons as Jameson, in all three Spider-Man movies he stole every scene he appeared in.
However, there are a number of things that made it inferior to the first two. Basically and most importantly, and this was a similar problem I had with Pirates of the Caribbean:At World's End, it all felt a bit bloated. Two reasons made it so. One was too many characters. Primarily the villains, here, we get not one but three villains. While they were well performed, the character development of the villains felt rushed. Venom especially had way too little screen time as a result, and the final showdown between them felt a tad on the contrived side. Whereas you felt the menace of the Green Goblin and the tragedy of Dr Octopuss you are not always sure what to think here. Second, the plot as result to cramming too much in particularly with the idea of Spider-Man turning bad was rather convoluted, and was further disadvantaged by some surprisingly stodgy pacing. Other flaws were that the scripting lacked freshness and authenticity and the film was a bit too long.
All in all, it certainly wasn't bad. As a matter of fact it was enjoyable. But it could've been better. 6/10 Bethany Cox
Anyone who grew up reading Spider-Man should know that putting 40 years of comic history into a movie (or 3) is a hard task. But I feel like they succeeded here. Venom comes across pretty accurately considering how much they had to truncate it, and the Sandman is decent despite some interesting modifications.
The biggest problem I had with this film is that if they do not make a fourth, they leave open too many plot lines. And, as far as I know, no such film is in the works. But that is more an issue of the studio, I think.
The problem with the film is that there is simply too much going on. First off you have the Peter/MJ relationship bumping along, add to that the Peter/Harry story line still playing out, plus we have the addition of the Sandman story and coming in in the final half hour is the addition of Venom. Its too much for the movie to handle, the result of which it all feels half baked. Very few of the characters get the proper amount of time to develop with the worst offender is Eddie Brock and Venom who get zero and so seem to belong in another movie (Venom looks great which makes his under use seem even worse). The real proof the film has too much going on was that there are a couple of times where the plot is moved along by sudden out of left field revelations. The only one I"ll reveal, because its in the trailer, is that Sandman killed Uncle Ben in the first film. Had the film been better plotted the revelation wouldn't have been necessary, nor would any of the others.
There are some bright spots, the majority of the Sandman material is sterling, with the first appearance of Sandman in the sand pit almost perfect, and the sequence that makes up his first battle with Spidey one of the greatest things I've ever seen put on film. The Sandman sequences alone make it worth slogging through the ups and downs of the rest of the movie.
Is it a bad movie? No, just a disappointing one. Its clear that this could have and should have been the best in the series (and maybe the best film of the year) had all of the right pieces been put in place, indeed the final sequences in the film probably would have reduced most audiences to tears had they gotten the rest of the film right.
As I said the film is worth seeing at some point, just don't feel the need to run out with everyone else. Was it worth fighting the crowds the first weekend to see? Not really, but it is worth seeing. Hopefully they'll take a break before they make the next one, maybe they'll make the one that this movie should have been
Which Actors Almost Played Spider-Man?
Which Actors Almost Played Spider-Man?
Le saviez-vous
- Anecdotes(at around 1h 8 mins) On May 4th, 2007, while promoting the film on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno (1992), Thomas Haden Church revealed that he broke three knuckles during the subway scene where he swings to punch Spider-Man and ends up punching a chunk of the wall away. Church said that the effects crew had told him that the brick in the middle was fake while the upper and lower ones were real. Unfortunately, the foam brick had not actually been put in place yet, and when Sam Raimi yelled 'action', Church spun around and punched the real brick on the first take.
- GaffesWhenever Spider-Man removes his mask, his costume (both red and black versions) has a turtleneck collar that goes up to the middle of his neck. Whenever his costume is shown underneath his clothes, the collar is much lower.
- Citations
[last lines]
Peter Parker: Whatever comes our way, whatever battle we have raging inside us, we always have a choice. My friend Harry taught me that. He chose to be the best of himself. It's the choices that make us who we are, and we can always choose to do what's right.
- Crédits fousThe opening credits appear stuck on a series of webs, which display scenes of events of the previous two films. The symbiote crawls around briefly during part of the opening credits.
- Versions alternativesIn 2017, in anticipation for Spider-Man: Homecoming, Sony released an "Editor's Cut" of Spider-Man 3. This cut mostly utilizes an unused score, alternate edits of scenes, a restructured story, and scenes both added and removed throughout. With all of these changes, this version runs 2 minutes shorter than the theatrical version.
- ConnexionsEdited from Spider-Man (2002)
- Bandes originalesOpening Montage
Written by Christopher Young, Danny Elfman and Deborah Lurie
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Spider-Man 3?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- El hombre araña 3
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 258 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 337 281 992 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 151 116 516 $US
- 6 mai 2007
- Montant brut mondial
- 891 697 618 $US
- Durée2 heures 19 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1