My problems with Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy.
My thoughts of how I think the Raimi trilogy failed.
This is my take on how I believe the Sam Raimi trilogy failed.
This article is honest opinions, do not take them offensive and if you decide to comment, please be respectful.
The continous argument-- no wait, the never-ending argument. Many feel that Sam Raimi's Spider-Trilogy was the better between Marc Webb's latest installment of our favorite Wall-Crawling-Hero. I have been known to defend The Amazing Spider-Man movie and voice my opinion over the Raimi trilogy, sometimes in a brutal way, and even though I believe The Amazing Spider-Man is the better of all four movies, I still love the Raimi trilogy.
Now, with two major points, I will specify moments where I feel the Raimi trilogy failed, points which really make me feel differently than others about this trilogy.
1. The acting.
I go back and watch Sam Raimi's first Spider-Flick and have this dull feeling when I try to find chemistry between the actors. There was only a few moments where I felt Tobey and Kirsten did decent. One of my favorite moments was when Peter caught MJ when she slipped on a puddle of soda. I wanted more of that, only greater intimacy and stronger acting.
Rosemary Harris' Ant May was probably one of the best actors in the entire trilogy. She had the look and that sweet, loving Ant May feel about her. Rosemary Harris was spot on, now if the rest of the cast would have done as good, maybe I would have different feelings for this trilogy.
Rosemary Harris' Ant May and James Franco's Harry Osborn, to me, was the best actors of Raimi's Spidey-Flicks. Sadly, until the third movie, we didn't get much of Harry. And then, Harry dies at the hands of his own glider and a tiny Venom. That is a big mistake in my world. I enjoyed Harry's dark side and plotting, and I honestly think he really shouldn't have been cut out. I felt that he gave Peter things to think about, especially with the death of Norman. James Franco was the strongest, to me, male actor of the trilogy-- whereas, Tobey ***should*** have came in first.
William Dafoe's performance was good (good as in "okay," however, his performance was much MUCH better than Tobey's and Kirsten's), I admit, but sadly, just like Harry, I felt like there wasn't enough of him in the movie. And as Goblin, we got a Power-Ranger suit...
Cliff Robertson delivered nicely as Uncle Ben, but AGAIN, we hardly saw him. And I will say this, I enjoyed Martin Sheen's performance in The Amazing Spider-Man much, much more, even if we didn't get the "responsibility" line.
Moving on now...
2. The stories.
Huge complaint here: Peter out of high school too soon.
This complaint speaks for itself. We all know Peter spent most of his time in high school in the comics, and in this trilogy, he is out of school not even half way through the first movie. Big mistake here.
Moving on to my next complaint.
One of the things that really annoy me about Raimi's trilogy is that there is never really an on-going plot. In each movie, there is just a story. The Harry and MJ plots are the only ones that continue after Raimi's first Spider-Movie. Harry's anger toward Spider-Man for the death of Norman, and Peter's fight to win the girl of his dreams. Some will probably disagree with this, but I'm just saying, it really annoys me as a Spider-Fan.
In Spider-Man 2, I would have liked to seen Spider-Man an out-law for the death of Norman, since Harry blames his father's decease on him. To me, if really would have gave it that "part two" feeling. But Harry is the only one who believes Spider-Man is Norman's murderer. Did NYPD even investigate? And in Spider-Man 3, everyone loves Spider-Man. To me, this is a big plot hole.
And now...probably my biggest complaint of all.
Peter loses his powers.
A lot feel that this was a big emotional point in the movie, but to me I see it as unneeded. First of all it makes me think its a "substitute " for us fans because we didn't get web-shooters in the first flick. To me its like they want drama during fights, like if they would have given Peter web-shooters, but they didn't, and now they're stuck with... let me put it this way, its like when they were writing the script they said "Hey, we need some drama in these fight scenes. Oh I know! Spidey loses webbing! But how can we do that when there isn't any web-shooters like in the comics? Oh here we go! Why don't we just make him suddenly lose all his powers! Yeah let's go with that!" Do I make a point here? I can't help but feel this way. Peter has always been a stressed-out guy, which makes him relatable, but how can self-esteem cause him to lose his powers? It doesn't make sense, and trying to make sense of it gets on my nerves.
Now, let's head to the third installment, Sam Raimi's final Spider-Man movie.
My biggest complaint here is Sandman. Now before start thinking stuff, let me say this, I enjoyed Thomas Church's performance. However, the Sandman is not needed. I feel if Venom would have been the main villain, this mess of a movie would have been a lot better. But the biggest down-fall of the Sandman, he's Uncle Ben's murderer. This I...I shouldn't have to say any more *sigh*.
Moving on to another huge plot problem: The annoying, the unneeded, Peter's blonde love-- GWEN STACY! She's what...five minutes in the entire movie? I will agree that the scene where she's about to fall to her death and Spider-Man saves her is pretty cool (and we all know, when she dies she falls off a building in the comics, so why not kill her there? Okay, that was a joke...), but again GWEN STACY SHOULD NOT EXIST IN THIS TRILOGY. If you're not going to have her with Peter and MJ in high school, then she is not needed. This take on Gwen Stacy is utterly TERRIBLE. Gwen Stacy was always more important than just "a girl in his class."
Now I'm going to move on to...*gulp* Venom/Eddie Brock.
I think it would have been better to have gone with a different Eddie Brock story-line. Like one from the Ultimate comics, where Peter and Eddie are childhood friends. I think this route would have given the story more depth, which it clearly lacked. Venom (can someone tell me who is supposed to be labeled with "main" villain here?) was only in the last ten minutes of the movie. That's how you spell out failure, 'cause the whole story is about the symbiote, am I right?
That about wraps it up, other mentionable problems (in other words, "nit-picks") with the trilogy would be:
Bitchy Mary Jane *eye roll*...
The weird people Peter lives beside in his apartment building ("RENT!!!")
"Fix this damn door" line.
Peter suddenly taking interest in Betty Brant.
And cookie eating Peter.
I'll say this again: I am not trying to offend anyone, these are personal opinions that I have sat and thought about for a while. Thank you to whoever took their time to read this, means a lot! And please no Raimi/Webb arguments. And I'll say this once more: These are PERSONAL opinions. Don't forget it, PERSONAL opinions. Thanks for reading :)
: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct
. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us
for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE