\n<\/p>\n
This weekend you\u2014yes, you\u2014are invited to journey across the Spider-Verse with the new animated feature\u00a0Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse<\/em>. The sequel to the Oscar-winning\u00a0Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse<\/em> is a guaranteed box office hit that critics have hailed for its\u00a0clever story structure<\/a> and its \u201cdiverse, agile, breathtaking animation<\/a>.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n While the wider culture has, if ever-so-slightly, begun to question its hunger for more ever more superhero stories (DC Studios is regrouping after the release of\u00a0Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom<\/em>\u00a0this December, and many of the post-Endgame<\/em>\u00a0Marvel movies haven\u2019t really connected with audiences, no matter how much money they\u2019ve made) none of that applies to our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. Indeed, people of their own free will are ingesting these\u00a0repulsive-looking red hamburgers,<\/a> just because Spider-Man is involved. The last live-action Spider-Picture,\u00a0Spider-Man: No Way Home<\/em>, earned\u00a0$1.9 billion<\/a>, and didn\u2019t even open in China.\u00a0<\/p>\n Part of that massive film\u2019s appeal lay in its Spider-Summit: the movie brought together\u00a0Tobey Maguire<\/strong>,\u00a0Andrew Garfield<\/strong>, and\u00a0Tom Holland<\/strong>, all of whom have played Peter Parker in live action films. (This weekend\u2019s animated picture has a different hero, Miles Morales, voiced by Shameik Moore.)\u00a0<\/p>\n After\u00a0No Way Home<\/em>, many in the Spider fandom realized\u00a0they had underrated Garfield during his run as the character. (We present as evidence essays from esteemed sources like\u00a0ScreenRant<\/a>,\u00a0CinemaBlend<\/a>, and\u00a0Inverse<\/a>.) But with that reevaluation in the past, I\u2019d like to go one step further:\u00a0Sam Raimi<\/strong>\u2019s 2007 film\u00a0Spider-Man 3<\/em>\u2014which, at the time of its release, was considered a franchise-killer\u2014isn\u2019t merely \u201cbetter than you may remember it.\u201d The movie is straight-up good.<\/p>\n Raimi\u2019s Maguire-led first\u00a0Spider-Man<\/em>\u00a0film, released in 2002, is a fondly-remembered classic. It and 2000\u2019s\u00a0X-Men<\/em> can be credited (or blamed) for creating the superhero craze that has dominated society for closing in on 25 years. (It\u2019s also one of the finest\u00a0mass culture evocations<\/a> of New York City\u2019s\u00a0post-9\/11 vibe<\/a> ever put to film.)\u00a0Spider-Man 2<\/em>\u00a0was even better\u2014the transformation of Doc Ock<\/a> is one of the purest examples of visual storytelling in the history of cinema. It\u2019s a strong candidate for the \u201csequel is better than the original\u201d argument.\u00a0<\/p>\n So obviously anticipation was sky high for part three. And \u2026 sure, by the standards of the first two,\u00a0Spider-Man 3<\/em> doesn\u2019t quite compare. But what bugs me\u2014and should bug anyone with an appreciation for the four-color art!\u2014is that the primary criticism the movie usually receives is bogus.<\/p>\n Spider-Man 3<\/em> is not hindered with \u201ctoo many villains,\u201d\u00a0as Roger Ebert wrote<\/a>,<\/em>\u00a0a sentiment echoed by\u00a0The New York Times<\/em><\/a>,\u00a0The Guardian<\/em><\/a>, and\u00a0Slate<\/a>. It is enriched by them.The overstuffed, indirect route taken in the third movie \u2014 Peter Parker tussles with\u00a0Thomas Haden Church<\/strong>\u2019s Sandman,\u00a0James Franco<\/strong>\u2019s \u201cNew\u201d Goblin, and\u00a0Topher Grace<\/strong>\u00a0nuisance Eddie Brock, as well as the interplanetary black goo that transforms both Parker and Brock into the rampaging id-being Venom\u2014accurately represents what it\u2019s like to read a comic book. I\u2019d go so far as to say that\u00a0Spider-Man 3<\/em>\u00a0is one of the most true-to-comics comic book movies ever produced.<\/p>\n Snooty-pants types like to talk about graphic novels\u2014but the backbone of this entire medium is the flimsy, floppy, more-expensive-than-they-should be funnybooks released every month. A particular author and\/or illustrator\u2019s run can last years. And while comics marketing will try and hook you to buy in with \u201cit\u2019s all been leading to\u00a0this<\/em>\u201d ads, the truth is that a lot of the time, following a title through its many twists and turns can feel a little desultory. But we true fans know to rejoice in the wheel-spinning. It\u2019s in the crevices of loosey-goosey storytelling where we truly bond with the characters.<\/p>\n Spider-Man 3<\/em> brings this into sharp relief via the many not-always-plot-driven moments that crowd its 129-minute run time: scenes with Ursula, Parker\u2019s landlord\u2019s daughter (played by\u00a0Mageina Tovah<\/strong>), or the vaudeville schtick between J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons<\/strong>) and Betty Brant (Elizabeth Banks<\/strong>). Did you remember that\u00a0Bryce Dallas Howard<\/strong>\u00a0is in this movie as Gwen Stacy? If so, don\u2019t feel bad. I think I may have, too.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n