MOVIE REVIEW: STAR TREK

MOVIE: Star Trek
MPAA RATING: [PG-13]
MOD-BLOG RATING: 4.75 out of 5

THE SHORT VERSION: A roller-coaster of a movie which starts with established Trek canon and then goes off in its own direction. Good acting, good writing, good effects, but stretches suspension-of-disbelief to its limits at times.

THE LONG VERSION: Star Trek has used up most of its 9 lives. We've had 5 series (Original Series, Next Generation, Deep Space 9, Voyager, and Enterprise), 6 original-cast movies, 4 next-generation movies, and countless spin-offs in novels, comic books, cartoons, etc. The quality of the product has steadily declined since the end of Next Generation, and skepticism from fans and non-fans has grown to unsustainable levels. So what do you do, if you are Paramount and eager not to lose this cash cow?

Apparently, you throw everything away and start over... as best you can within existing canon.

This new Star Trek movie is a reboot of the franchise which begins with a Star Trek staple - time travel. After a disaster on the home planet of the Romulans (an emotional offshoot of the Vulcans), a mining vessel goes back in time to avenge themselves upon the Federation. Their first act is to destroy the first ship they come across, which just so happens to be captained by George Kirk - father of James T. Kirk from the original series. From this kickoff point, we see the origin and development of the Original Series crew of the Enterprise through Starfeet Academy to taking their places on the bridge of the old ship. Several other key foundations of the earlier Star Trek universe are also wiped out along way, and it is made quite clear by another surprise cameo that this Star Trek is a different history than the one we knew before. Nothing is secure here, except that the Enterprise crew will come together before possibly being torn apart.

Overall, this is a solid film with a carefully thought-out story designed to be acceptable to existing Trekkies/Trekkers, but also accessible to those new to the series (or more likely, to those who grew fed up with the series long ago). The effects are amazing, including significant upgrades from the 1960s-designed Enterprise, but can be distracting at times (especially the random strobe effects that seem to appear all the time on the bridge). The actors do a great job representing the same characters as the original series, but bringing their own spin onto them. Zackary Quinto is especially memorable as Spock - believable as a young Leanard Nimoy while not being restricted to a copy of Nimoy. This film is up to a 21st century level of sexiness, and there are a few swears that parents will want to be aware of before allowing young children to see the film, but both are handled carefully and are consistent within the story.

The only major flaw in the film is the extent to which credibility is stretched at times. From the "major changes" mentioned earlier - which include a fundamental revision to all Trek canon - to mysterious technobable weapons which have no relation to any known physics, this Trek pushes the limits of audience suspension-of-disbelief at times. Likewise, coincidence upon coincidence piles up in such unlikely combinations that even the characters feel required to comment upon them. At times, this takes the audience out of the film, until the next time a phaser is fired and you are reminded this is just a popcorn flick.

MOVIE REVIEW: Fanboys

MOVIE: Fanboys
MPAA RATING: [PG-13]
MOD-BLOG RATING: 3.5 out of 5

THE SHORT VERSION: A solidly funny, if occasionally raunchy, film if you are a Star Wars fan or love one. Especially fun if you are steeped in science fiction movies, and can identify all the in-jokes and cameos.

THE LONG VERSION: I am a die-hard STAR WARS fan. I grew up in the furor and the insanity surrounding the original trilogy. I was too young to see the first one in the theater (first saw it when it came to WPIX in the late 80s) but saw both EMPIRE and JEDI with wide eyes and soaring heart. I loved the story, the characters, the amazing effects. I bought lots of the toys, most of the books (both canon and spin-offs), and spent an embarrassing amount of time trying to merge the Star Wars, GI Joe, and Transformers universes during my play-time. I am one of those fans who knows pretty much all the trivia from the universe (not so much the actors surrounding it) and who has strong opinions about the difference between a "Dark Jedi" and "Sith Lord". (No, they are NOT the same thing.) So, I was very excited to see FANBOYS, a movie which focuses in on the extreme end of Star Wars fandom. The movie was only in limited release in theaters, but is now out on DVD for all to see.

The basic plot of the movie begins 6 months before the release of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. Five STAR WARS fans are friends in their mid-twenties, and are eager to see the next "masterpiece" coming from George Lucas. There is only one problem. One of them has been diagnosed with untreatable cancer, and will not live to see opening day. So what is their solution? Travel cross-country and break into Skywalker Ranch to steal a copy of the movie.

The movie is funny - not rollicking, laugh-out-loud funny, but I was entertained the whole time. It has a solid cast who seems to understand the archetypes of the Star Wars fan, and the writer and director handle the mythos with care. The movie is full of cameos from science fiction icons - from William Shatner to Carrie Fisher - and there are almost constant inside jokes for those who are familiar with classic sci fi films. There is even a running joke/plotline dealing with the rivalry between Star Wars and Star Trek fans. And the film ends with what is a mostly happy finish.

The only real downside to this film is a plethora of sex jokes, most of which were unnecessary. Still, this is the Kevin Smith generation - he even makes a cameo, along with Seth Rogan - so it is not unexpected. Still, families with children should probably avoid this one and take the PG-13 rating seriously.

But if you grew up with Star Wars, this is a must-see movie. More likely than not, you'll see yourself somewhere in here. If you ar NOT a Star Wars fan, then there is probably something with Matthew McConaughey out there for you to watch.

MOD-BLOG REVIEW: The Incredible Hulk

Movie: The Incredible Hulk
MPAA Rating: [PG-13]
Mod-Blog Rating: ****/5

The Short Version:

This relaunch of Marvel Comics's character owes very little to Ang Lee's version of a few years back. This one instead is almost a big-screen remake of the TV Hulk, complete with themes of alienation, loneliness, and always being on the run. The characters are pretty strong, the acting good, and the plot works within its own universe. The only real problem is the main villain who fights the Hulk in the last act as a monster as large and as strong as the Hulk. The villain neither fits the Marvel comics mold to satisfy old-school fans, nor really is convincing in its own right. Thus, the viewer is left somewhat unsatisfied. That being said, it is a very fun film and worth your time to see. Just don't go expecting anything on the level of the Iron Man or Spider-Man films. Parents with young children should also be aware there are several scenes which could easily inspire nightmares. While the Hulk is a favorite of young-'uns, best to wait for this version until they can really differentiate between fantasy and reality.

The Long Version:

Ang Lee's Hulk may be the most-reviled of the Marvel Comics films to come out, since Spider-Man revitalized the genre. It is by no means the worst by most objective estimates - I'd argue Punisher or Daredevil (non-directors cut) takes that particular cake - but it managed to alienate the majority of its audience by ignoring most of the comic-book canon and then also failing to truly be a super-hero movie. The director himself pitched it as a Greek tragedy, and that is exactly what he provided. Unfortunately for him, the Hulk comes out of a much later tradition - the horror story Frankenstein, which many consider to be the start of the "horror of science gone wrong" tradition of storytelling. It is not about how parents spoiled their child or about the fickle quality of fate, but rather about the dangers hidden within the promises that modern science makes.

This time around, rather than try to salvage something out of Ang Lee's Hulk, Marvel essentially called a do-over. They hired a new director and brought in Edward Norton who not only plays Bruce Banner (the Hulk's alter ego) but also wrote or rewrote the majority of the script. The new effort owes far more to the popular television series than to the comic books. This Bruce Banner is not a conflicted abuse child, but a man haunted by a dark secret and a power that he can not control. He is constantly on the run both from the military men who want to exploit the Hulk's power (remember, it is the most powerful being in the Marvel universe) and from his own runaway emotions which could trigger a transformation at any time. He hides himself away in South America, urban America, the wilds of Canada - anywhere he can hope to avoid his twin nightmares.

But, of course, it would not be much of a movie if the Hulk stayed in the shadows, and ultimately Bruce Banner is drawn back to New York City in hopes of finding a cure. Instead, he finds a new foe in the Abomination (a creature almost as powerful as the Hulk) and a chance for redemption as the city is saved from one rampaing monster by another rampaging monster. If anyone missed the pure visceral thrill of seeing the Hulk smash everything in sight in the first film, will be very satisfied in this one.

But ultimately, that final act is the Achilles Heel of the film as well. The Hulk is a full CGI creation - as is required by an 8-foot-tall, 8-foot-wide creature which tear thru a city like jagged glass thru a bare foot. So is the Abomination. And neither is known for their eloquence. So, the last 1/2 hour or so of the film is two computer-generated puppets grunting and beating the stuffing out of each other. It is hard to get completely absorbed into the action when you know nothing onscreen is real, and when every action is so over the top. It is a lot of fun, but simply not "real".

The other thing to be aware of is that the transformations in this movie are fairly horrific for a film which could be regarded as targetted at children. Please take the PG-13 rating seriously, as the bone-crunching transformation of either the Abomination or the Hulk could easily give nightmares for years to come. And the level of violence is well above that of a Saturday morning cartoon.

But overall, this one is a winner. Don't expect a masterpiece, but take it in if you want some good old fashioned mayhem.

MOD-BLOG Review: WALL-E

Movie: WALL-E

MPAA Rating: [G]

Mod-Blog Rating: 5 out of 5

The Short Version:

Pixar's newest film stars the last robot on an abandoned Earth, who is given the chance to find love, friendship, and the path to save the very human race. The film is well-made with amazing visuals and a strong story. But it is really the characters which make this film work, especially WALL-E himself. The film is strongly reminiscent of Forrest Gump in its central theme that if you put love, loyalty, and sweetness first, you don't need great intelligence to do the right thing and make a big difference. The only downside of this film for some may be its implied environmental and poiltical messages, which I did not find problematic at all. Highly recommended and safe for children of all ages.

The Long Version.

Pixar took a BIG chance with their newest movie WALL-E, by creating a film where the first 1/2 hour to 45 minutes has almost no dialogue in any normal sense of the word. WALL-E is the last robot of a fleet of them designed to clean up a garbage-strewn Earth, in order to prepare it for the return of the human race. Having been alone for eons, the little robot has exceeded his original programming and grown a personality... a personality which is desperately lonely. The long stretches without music or words could have been grating in a lesser film - I am reminded of some of the Benji films from my childhood - but works well because of strong character work on the part of WALL-E. The trailers and teasers you have probably seen are excellent but still don't really scratch the surface of how adorable and captivating this little droid is.

The first act ends when WALL-E is visited by a probe from long-lost humanity out in space. The probe itself - a far more advanced droid named EVE - shows a little personality of her own, and soon WALL-E is following her all over trying to establish a connection... a friendship. Strong emotions on the part of both are shown clearly without words, mouths, or even human eyes to work with, showing the depth of Pixar's animation skill. And when EVE leaves the planet to race back to humanity with important news, WALL-E tags along on a voyage of exploration, danger, and discovery where he eventually saves the human race.

I was most stricken by the fact that WALL-E's closest cousin movie-wise has to be Forrest Gump, which is the story of a man of severely low intelligence who manages to make himself great thru upholding simple values. One of WALL-E's messages is clearly the same. WALL-E is not a profound thinker - he barely understands the larger world around him. But he has a fundamental core of love, loyalty, and sweetness which carries him thru the plot in a logical way. Even his final act of heroism is done not out of a sense of dedication to a higher ideal, but for the love of EVE.

This is a film that I think everyone in the family can enjoy. It has a sweet innocence for the kids and higher concepts for the adults. In fact, an underlying political message about the environment and our couch potato culture are the only things which some may find grating. But the story is not preachy and thoroughly enjoyable. Highly recommended.

MOD-BLOG REVIEW: Prince Caspian

Movie: The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

MPAA Rating: [PG]

Mod-Blog Rating: 4 out of 5

The Short Version:

This big screen adaptation of the second book in C.S. Lewis's Narnia books departs from the original far more than the earlier effort. But it is a fun movie with good characterization and a strong plot. This movie is much darker than the predecessor, as well, so parents of small children may wish to be especially careful of bringing them along. Christian themes remain, but as with the books are not overt and the general moral should be enjoyable to peoples of all faiths (and no faith).

The Long Version:

Of all of the Narnia books, Prince Caspian is generally regarded as the weakest. When C.S. Lewis wrote "The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe", he did not intend it as a series of children's books. And he resisted calls from his editors for years to write one for the profit of it. But one day, the muse took him and he quickly wrote this sequel. The unplanned nature of the story is fairly evident in the book in weaker characters, a plot which is pretty much a long walk followed by a short battle (a criticism often made of Tolkien as well), and a sense that Aslan's appearance is almost an afterthought.

When the filmmakers set out to adapt the book, they sought to correct many of these weaknesses and bring out some of the thoughts Lewis mentioned after the fact. This has lead to a significant departure from the original plot including a new (bad) attitude in Peter, a raid on a castle that never existed in the original, and brings together the main characters and the eponymous Prince Caspian much earlier. It also, strangely, gives Aslan even less screen-time than in the book. This has lead to some outrage on the part of Lewis purists.

But, the changes work and each provides a specific piece of the puzzle missing from the book. (Peter's attitude finally lets us think about what it was like to go from being adults in Narnia to children in England, the raid on the castle explains why the bad guys act as they do in the final battle, etc.) The whole is stronger than the original in many ways. The themes of perseverance in the face of evil, courage, and following your heart (God) even if no one else believes remain clear. And the additions also allow for highlights of the depth of Lewis's imagination (and WETA's workshop) by showing some things only implied in the original (for example, heroic creatures which were shown as evil in the original).

However, the movie is not perfect and the changes make the tone far darker than the first movie. Some parents who were happy to bring their young children to "The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe" may want to keep them at home and bring them back in a few years. Real deaths are shown (without gore), good characters are lost in apparently unjust ways, and some of the visuals certainly lend themselves to nightmares (the images of the walking, warring trees, which are far less anthropormophic than Peter Jackson's Ents seem designed to terrify toddlers). This should not be taken as a criticism, per se. These images and choices are essential to the drama.

Overall, "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" is an excellent movie worthy of your time.

Movie Review: AUGUST RUSH

First, a moment of pause. This is Mod-Blog's 5,000 post.

[Pause]

AUGUST RUSH is an inspiring movie staring Freddie Highmore, Keri Russell, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Terrence Howard, and Robin Williams. Evan Taylor (Highmore) is given to an orphanage where he grows up not knowing his mother or father. He can hear music in the world around him and believes that through the music of the world, he will be able to connect with his parents. The film runs with this theme with an amazing soundtrack. The soundtrack is not such that you should run out an buy it, but rather that it is so closely woven into the film, it is almost a character itself.

Lyla Novacek (Russell) and Louis Connelly (Meyers) have a random meeting with the end result being Evan Taylor. Lyla's father, wanting to protect his family's reputation, breaks them up and tricks Lyla into thinking that Evan is dead when in reality, he has sent Evan to an orphanage to be forgotten. Terrence Howard plays Richard Jeffries, a social worker trying to make a difference, especially with Evan. Evan loses the contact information of a person he is supposed to call and instead finds himself wandering around New York City. While he is walking around, he finds a boy playing a guitar on the street who introduces him to "Wizard" (Williams), a used-to-be beggar who now has made an enterprise of finding street kids, teaching them to play, and then making money off of them. When "Wizard" sees Evan's talent, he tries to groom Evan as one of his own, putting obstacles in his way of reconnecting with his parents. The story continues building, blending the separate story lines into one story using music as a catalyst along the way. While the film would be a decent feel-good movie without the music, the music is what makes this movie worth seeing. If you haven't seen August Rush yet, you should.

August Rush is rated PG for some thematic elements, mild violence, and language. It is 113 minutes long. The Kids-in-Mind review can be found here

MOD-BLOG REVIEW: Semi-Pro

Movie: Semi-Pro

MPAA Rating: R (Copious language and brief sex scene)

The Short Version:

Funny, mindless film with a weak foundation in the history of the ABA (yes, someone actually wrestled a bear!) A lot more profanity than needed, but the story has heart and is much more of an ensemble piece than the trailers indicated.

The Long Version:

Will Farrell seems to have found his "default role" playing sports figures with more ego than talent. While some comedians try to stretch themselves with each movie (Jim Carrey and some stages of Robin William's career come to mind), Farrell has found a comfortable place playing outrageous characters who would not fit into anyone else's body. (If you doubt me, check out BALLS OF FURY, which was clearly intended as a Will Farrell vehicle and was barely watchable without him.)

In this movie, Farrell plays "Jackie Moon", a one-hit-wonder of 70s music who parlayed the money from his single gold record into ownership of one of the ragtag teams that make up the American Basketball League (a short-lived competitor to the NBA). He loves his team and the town of Flint, Michigan, and his dream is to bring the "Tropics" to the NBA. Unfortunately, while the NBA wants to absorb the ABA, it will only take the top four teams... and the Flint Michigan Tropics are renowned for being in LAST place. The story details Jackie Moon's attempts to break into fourth place and achieve the other goals set by the NBA for admittance.

The story has a lot of heart, making you truly want the band of misfits to achieve. And unlike Anchorman and most other Will Farrell films is truly an ensemble piece with Woody Harrelson and Andre Benjamin bringing in decent comic and dramatic performances. Nearly every bit character is given their chance to shine, including a brief cameo by Tim Meadows (proving ex-SNLers make sure everyone can make the rent this month). It is a fun, mindless film.

Unfortunately, it also really earns its [R] rating with copious profanity, a brief sex scene, and some not-entirely-comic violence. What truly mystifies me is why they felt the need to make the film a hard R. A reshooting of two scenes and switching out few F and S-words with comic equivalents ("Great ceaser's ghost!") and they could have had a nice PG-13 film which probably would have doubled their opening weekend (currently estimated at about $15 million).

Review: Home of the Brave

I just got done watching Home of the Brave starring Samuel L. Jackson, Jessica Biel, Brian Presley, and Curtis Jackson. Upon renting it, I was not sure whether it would be a story with more of a sad focus or more of an action movie like The Kingdom. While there are battle scenes, most of the movie is a follow up at home with four reservists who have come back from Iraq and are trying to integrate back into their civilian lives. While I do not know anyone well enough who has struggled making the adjustment back, I suspect that Home of the Brave does a decent job of showing the struggle. With Iraq being a hot issue right now, it would be easy for a movie like this to be overly anti-war. While it is not pro-war, I think it does a fair job of not leaning either way with the anti-war leanings mostly being due to keeping the characters true to their role. Be forewarned, this movie has a bunch of language. See the Kids In Mind review here. While I wouldn't purchase this movie, it was definitely worth seeing.

Review: The Invasion

I saw The Invasion last night with my brother-in-law. Although I have not seen either the 1956 or 1978 versions of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, I enjoyed the movie. Plot-wise, the movie wasn't very special. It is, for the most part, your basic "Save the planet from destruction" type movie. At one point in the movie, I actually chuckled at how ridiculous it had gotten.

That being said, there were two things that I found interesting. First, there was a new camera / time line trick I had not seen before. Twice during the movie, the screen did a split. In one pane, the movie continued the current scene. In the other pane, it showed what happens directly after the current scene. I don't know that I would have enjoyed watching a movie that continually used this as your mind has to meld both future and present together at the same time, but it was interesting nonetheless. The second was how they intertwined philosophy and current events into the plot. This movie was not a philosophical heavy movie, but it did have just a touch in there to add some substance to the basic plot.

All-in-all it's worth seeing if you have an interest in camera / time line work or want to see a fun movie with just a touch of philosophy in it. That being said, it's definitely one you can wait for to come out on DVD.

This movie is rated PG-13. The Kids-In-Mind review can be found here.

The Simpsons Movie was good

CRChair and I saw the Simpsons movie yesterday and it was very good. Not great, in my opinion, but very good. It was like a very long episode - in mostly the good ways, since we love those episodes. It was not perfect, and yes, you do see Bart's doodle for approximately 1 second so parents may want to screen this before letting their chidren see it. I was going to write a long review, but I think this one at AICN says it about as well as I could, though he loved it a bit more than I did.

And one reason I’m glad I saw this with the crowd I did is because they were into it. They were with the film all the way through. Everyone reacted to different things. Some of the biggest moments got deservedly outsized reactions, and some lines had maybe one or two people in the whole place laughing, but it was a kick to see what people responded to with this one. It’s fun because we all love something different about THE SIMPSONS at this point. If you’re a fan of it, I’m sure you’ve got specific scenes or jokes or characters or images that define why you are a fan. A lot of what I really respect and enjoy about the show is represented in the approach they’ve taken to putting this together, and realizing that... the creeping sensation of watching someone get something exactly right... is one of this summer’s most pleasant surprises.

The other thing that is nice is the movie keeps up the tradition of respecting Ned Flanders as an honest man trying to do good, despite all peer pressure. The last few seasons the writers have played with that formula and weakened the character considerably. This time, it is front and center (except for one line) and it is a welcome return. Cynicism only really works in the presence of at least one truly sincere person.

MOD-BLOG REVIEW: Transformers

Movie: Transformers
MPAA Rating: [PG-13]

The Short Version: A loud, brash movie which is a lot of fun, but contains very little in the ways of plot, character, or coherence. But if you want to see giant transforming robots fighting, this is the biggest and best way to see it. Just be sure to check your brain at the door.

The Long Version: The Transformers - toys that transformed from vehicles, gadgets, or animal into humaniform robots and back again - were as much a part of my childhood as Star Wars. I met my best friend while playing with Soundwave, and shared my love for the changeable toys with most of my male friends until sometime in high school when I outgrew the toys... officially, at least. I still kept buying the toys and enjoying changing them back and forth.

Now, Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg have brought these mechanical behemoths to the big screen in a live action/CGI extravaganza. The plot of the movie - such as it is - is based on the "All-Spark", the robotic source of life. This giant cube has fallen to Earth, and is being pursued by two sides in an ancient war: the heroic Autobots and the evil Decepticons. Both are capable of transforming into seemingly common devices like cars and jet planes to hide in plain site. They first trash a base in Qatar and then come to America where they destroy most of an unnamed American city.

Overall, it is a fun movie. We saw it with a large crowd that laughed, cheered, and applauded at the end of the film. Many of the big names from our childhood are back, and many of them appear to have grown up with us as Megatron is even more vicious than anything in the cartoons or comics. The only negative to this spectacle film - aside from no real attempt at characterization, plot, or logic - is the rapid-fire editing and many cuts which make it very hard to follow the action at many points. Still, if you want a classic Big Summer Movie, this is the one for you.

Reader Reactiom: Long-time reader Bowhuter also wrote in with these comments: "...the death of American soldiers, the downing of black hawk helicopters, and the crashing of planes into buildings. After seeing what my father and my friends went through emotionally on 9/11, I may forever be of the opinion that showing a plane crash into a building is, “too soon” after the event to portray on film. That being said, the movie starts in Iraq with a bunch of soldiers. Throughout the movie there are references to real life events like, “we lost that chopper in Afghanistan. I am sure, my friend was on it.” We are constantly reminded of our soldiers in the Middle East the entire movie. The worst part is that too many soldiers die in the movie in similar ways to how they actually die in the “War Against Terror”. ...I felt like I was watching “Black Hawk Down”, not some light and fun cartoon-made-movie. ...the simulated loss of life is very disturbing and too close to real life."

Mod-Blog Review: Spider-Man 3

Movie: Spider-Man 3

MPAA Rating: PG-13

The Short Version: Fun, but uneven movie. Ignoring the Spider-Man canon more than either of the ones that came before it, it tries to fit too many villains and storylines into too little time. However, even with its weaknesses, it is better than any of the other summer movies currently out there.

The Long Version: This time out we are at a rare moment in Peter Parker's life. He is in love, Spider-Man is beloved by the public, and none of his close friends are sick or dying. This, of course, requires that before the end of Act 1, everything gets thrown into chaos. While romance deepening between MJ and Peter, a mysterious meteor lands next to the happy couple and an oily-black substance begins stalking the web-slinger. At the same time, in one of the weired retcons (retroactive changes in continuity, a rewriting of history that tends to plague DC more than Marvel) suddenly the police find out that the thug Peter faced in Spider-Man 1 was not actually Uncle Ben's killer. Now, the oily-black substance "bonds" to Peter and causes him to revel in vengeance against the new target of his anger, while at the same time Harry Osborne finally steps into his father's... uh... boots (?) to take his revenge against Spidey.

It is a good summer movie, don't let the mixed reviews out there fool you on that. If this were the first installment of a Spider-Man franchise, we'd all be hailing it as a great example of comic-book adaptation. That being said, the critics have a point. The film is not nearly as good as the original or as Spider-Man 2 (though Shadowmom liked it better than 2). The movie is amazingly uneven. The first 1/2 is a solid mix of drama and action, and then at just about exactly the halfway point suddenly things switch gears and you can tell the director is rushing to fit everything else into the already-long running time. (Be watching for a Spider-Man 3.1 or 3.5 with MANY more scenes inserted). Still the drama works and the action is amazing. The problem is that it doesn't always fit together. And ultmately, that is what made the first two Spider-Man movie, the first 2 X-Men movies, and the Batman Begins movie work so well.

But fear not, Sony has already committed to a Spider-Man 4, even though none of the principle actors have done so. But with a guaranteed blockbuster, it seems unlikely that anyone but Raimi would really say no to a 4th outing. At least until Toby Maguire is too old or the actress who plays Aunt May dies.