(2.5 of 5 Giant Roosters)

The very concept of a Spider-Man superhero requires the suspension of disbelief. The third and latest installment of the adventures of the Marvel legend, however, combines Sixties comic kitsch with the dark drama reminiscent of more recent graphic novels. This movie is a prime example of how expensive CGI too often replaces good acting and a good script. The movie is entirely too long, and tries to deal with too much. As much as I anticipated seeing the movie, I was longing for the credits to roll about 45 minutes before they actually did. Even with such a long run time, there was very little exposition, basically alternating from "somebody is falling" sequence to "love troubles" scenes. Almost like a highlight reel instead of a movie.

As happens all too often in our star-driven entertainment industry, the supporting cast offered better acting than the big names. Topher Grace, Rosemary Harris and JK Simmons-- one of the best character actors in Hollywood-- performed as well as anyone could hope, even while Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst and James Franco-- all terrible actors-- took up most of the screen time and most likely got the bigger paychecks. At a sold-out screening at the Palms Hotel here in Vegas, Maguire received nothing but laughter when he twice tried to cry for the camera. Kirsten Dunst was stuck in pout mode, while James Franco smiled his way through the whole movie. No acting required. Where was the director?

Perhaps the best aspect of the bloated gloss-over was Emo Spider-Man. Yes, Emo. A black costume, hair combed down over eyes, and ne'er a smile in sight, Peter Parker reveals his dark and selfish side. Not that he does anything truly bad, except exact emotional revenge on his girlfriend, but it was funny, at least. The audience loved him when he was naughty, just like everyone liked Jim Carrey's The Mask character so much more when he donned the titular facial covering that transformed his whole outlook on life.

Some might say that the action-drama superhero movie cannot be judged to the same standards as other movies. I think that is nonsense. However, one need only compare Spider-Man 3 to others in it's genre, such as the X-Men movies, Batman Begins, Batman (1989), or Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2, to see that this is a less-than-stellar piece of cinema.

Despite all of it's weaknesses, the movie will most likely be considered a success; not because it's a great movie, but because it will make money.