Printable View
The emo Parker was quite funny. But otherwise, the story wasn't really that well done at all. I mean, why the hell did they put Sandman in there? There was really no point and the movie was pretty long too - 2hrs 30mins. I bet if the beginning introductory scenes were cut, they could've saved a load of money. But as for the action scenes, they were top notch and well done.
I do not think so
it's just so so .....
:blink::blink::blink:what should i understand when you say "so so ....." ???:blink::blink::blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by james221
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese
i hate it when they do that.
wow it is in Egypt now <:o)
since 2nd may m8
Spiderman 3 is one of the movies I wouldn't be able to watch a second time ... that would be a punishment, like watching Dallas or another soap opera for two and a half hours.
it was pretty good, probably would have thought it was as good as mym 2006 did, but i wasnt on heroin or any other drugs at the time...
cheers
thx for all posts
The action and storyline was fine, but I thought the acting was horrible...specifically Tobey Maguire. The emotional scenes were the worst, especially when he was crying or showing remorse.. :frusty:
Is it worth the money to watch the movie or wait for shrek and pirates?
Regards,
Sonusunny
Its worth the money but I think Pirates gonna beat it. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by sonusunny
I was very disappointed. The plot was too busy, the whole sandman thing was unnecessary. They should have focused more on the fight between peter and his buddy. On the whole, I'm evil so I'm an emo jazz dancer was ridiculous!
Shrek III is good, however Spid. 3 is so so)
300 or SP3 both sux ... I'm From Egypt also ...