I've seen a few comments here and there, of people stating Nolan's new epic will turn out to be the next Spider-man 3. Their reasoning? 'Well the first movie was good, the Second one blew it out of the water and became one of the greatest movies ever, and the 3rd one became a total and utter disappointment.' -that is true, for Raimi's Spider-man trilogy.
Let's face it, Spider-man (2002) was groundbreaking for the comicbookmovie genre. It inspired Hulk, Daredevil, Fantastic four, X-men, and more to come out after it. Domestically it engrossed the highest out of the three, and its inevitable sequel indeed blew it out of the water. Spider-man 2 gave a darker twist to the characters as well as the story line. Sure there was still a lot of humor that was seen in the first film, but there was just a deeper meaning to it. It was about Peter going through changes in life, from losing his powers and his girlfriend, and trying to re-adapt to society. In the end Spider-man 2 was the smarter movie. In the end, Spider-man 3 made us wanna re-think our lives. Spider-man 3 starts out with a promise, it really does. But with a forced, unnecessary story involving the Sandman, the third installment takes a steep nose dive into sheer and utter disappointment. I have yet to meet someone who said, 'Oh Spider-man 3 trumps its predecessors' 'Its a tour de force!'
With most of the doubts cleared with the latest trailer, The Dark Knight Rises is shaping up to being one of the best conclusions to a trilogy to date. But some of its haters are persistent, claiming it will be the next Spider-man 3. But I call bullshit on that. And here are my main points:
1. The commitment to the movie
The difference between Spider-man 3 and The Dark Knight Rises is the people working behind the camera. With Spider-man 3, the bigger names working on the production really didn't want to complete the Spider-man trilogy. They all seemed happy enough to have it conclude with two. But just like many other greedy Hollywood studios out there, Columbia conned them into making another one. When people don't want to do something and are forced to do it, their overall effort is a bit tired and lackluster. Raimi was done with Spidey. He wanted to move onto other projects, namely productions similar to his Evil Dead trilogy in the 80s. While they had fun making Spidey 1 & 2, Raimi wanted to move on. But with the overwhelming success of 2004's Spider-man 2 (to which Roger Ebert called the best super hero movie since Superman 2) the studios just had to make another film. Raimi didn't want to, and without Raimi, the cast didn't want to either. And without the cast, the studio knew their project would fail. So naturally, they promised Raimi a hefty paycheck if he directed Spider-man 3. Raimi reluctantly accepted and filming went underway. From the theatrical version one can obviously tell that the filmmakers were getting tired of their work, and the overall product seems forced and unnecessary. Raimi took the George Lucas way out-didn't care about making a good movie; he just wanted the money.
The Dark Knight Rises has a different story. Now yes, Christopher Nolan didn't intend to make a Batman Trilogy. He wanted to leave it at two films and move on. But his reasoning for making the third Batman is much different. Nolan loves directing movies, and one can see that through his resume. Not one of his movies is listed as 'rotten' on Rotten Tomatoes. As matter of fact, his lowest rated movie is at 75% fresh. Thats really impressive. When it comes down to it, Nolan wanted to do The Dark Knight Rises. If I'm not mistaken, he said in an interview that he wanted to tackle the 'third movie curse'. When a man at his level of talent in Hollywood says that, you know you're in for a great film. And lets not forget the man said he would not make another Batman movie if it wasn't as good or better than The Dark Knight.
2. Casting
Another big problem with Spider-man 3 was the casting. While I thought Tobey McQuire, Kirsten Dunst, and James Franco did an awesome job portraying their characters, there was some noticeably terrible casting choices that wenet along with Spider-man 3's production. Namely Topher Grace. First off, where is the logical reasoning in casting Eric Foreman, the main character off of one of the most successful and iconic TV sit coms in history to play Venom? I had a feeling a conversation like this happened:
'Hey, Raimi, we've got most of the original cast back together. But we need a new villain. We're going with Venom.'
'Venom? Nice.'
'Yeah, say...we were thinkin of someone good...'
'You're right. We do need someone good. Get me Topher Grace. Guy can't be too buys nowadays. Its not like anybody's gonna care anyway. We'll make a fortune with this movie no matter what. Hey, why don't we shoe-horn Gwen into this movie? And Sandman too! Oh hell, lets bring back the Green Goblin! It'll be one big family reunion.'
If you care about the movie you're making, you need to be careful about the people you're casting to play the roles in the film. Its clear the casting team for Spider-man 3 just didn't care. Topher Grace isn't a terrible actor, he just isn't the guy play a super villain. I'll admit, Venom looked pretty beast while he was on screen, but when he morphed back into Topher, it just took away the drama and the thrills of having the villain there. Topher Grace was not the right guy for the job; nobody could take him seriously. Bryce Dallas Howard is a very good actress, but she was used wrong in Spider-man 3 as Gwen. That's one of the many reasons why I'm excited for the new Spider-man, because Gwen's character will be used right. In Spider-man 3, it all just felt forced.
With The Dark Knight Rises, the only thing people are really questioning is Anne Hathaway, but in a positive way. People are excited to see her portray Catwoman, and most importantly she's an actress the general population can take seriously. Nolan and his casting team got the right people. Through the trailers, Anne Hathaway looks comfortable playing the Batman anti-hero. I am a firm believer that the film makers made the right choice by choosing Tom Hardy to play Bane. You know an actor loves his job when he devotes his life to a certain role and in Tom Hardy's case, he bulked up to play 'the man who broke Batman's back'. The bottom line is that TDKR casting team really did their homework,and chose the best people to play the roles. As stated earlier, Spider-man 3's casting crew just cared about the $$$, not the quality of the finished product.
3. Sticking to the general theme of the series.
Spider-man 1 and 2 had the same feeling; the same theme. While watching them back to back, you can feel the connection between the two films; they work well together. Spider-man 3 took the franchise in a different and terrible direction. The only trailer released for Spider-man 3 that I felt made it out to be just as good as its predecessors was its teaser trailer. It sent off this chilling dark feature much like Spider-man 2, and with that it pumped my interest. But with the theatrical trailers, the feeling was much different. The tone seemed a little off, and it was all just a little weird. And then the movie was released, and it was painfully obvious the theme had been changed. It is true that the previous Spider-men prior to the abomination called Spider-man 3, there was witty dialogue, and some up beat humor, but it was done with a little class, and there was a deeper darker meaning behind it all. With Spider-man 3, it was just too campy; too corny for most people's taste. And not to mention at times they portrayed Spidey in a completely different way. He wasn't as witty or funny or as heroic as he was in the first two films; in Spider-man 3, Spidey in a way comes off as an unlikable douche. Like I said, it felt as if nobody cared about making this movie.
Finally we come to The Dark Knight Rises. Through all of its trailers, posters, and other footage, its clear that the tone of the movie is parallel with the previous movies: dark and bleak. The characters look and feel the same as they did in the other movies, and there's ascertainment that this third and final Batman won't stray to far off from the meaning of this trilogy. Unlike Raimi, Nolan cares about his third film. He's concerned about keeping the tone the same as the previous movies.
By the end of the day, Nolan's Batmans are the smarter films; they're more in-depth and have a much more darker, deeper meaning to them. Spider-man was more family friendly, and the first two films captured the tone of the character pretty well. The new Batmans have done the same for the Dark Knight detective, and the Dark Knight Rises is shaping up to be another crowd-pleaser.
Still have doubts and think it might be the next Spider-man? Consider this: Nolan is the better film maker; he doesn't get tired of the project. And yes he probably does want that pay check by the end of the day, he just loves making movies. I'm sure the substances comes over the cash for the guy. For him its not about tossing a bunch of CGI onto the screen; its about telling a good story, with good dialogue, and surprising the audience. Spider-man 3 was rushed, misguided and an example of a forced product by Hollywood executives. The Dark Knight Rises will break the curse, and it'll join The Original Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Lord of the Rings and The Bournes as the best trilogies around. And if you think there are two many villains think again. In Batman begins the two baddies were Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul. In The Dark Knight it was Joker and Two-face. and in The Dark Knight Rises, there is two villains yet again: Bane and Catwoman, backing up the idea that the tone for TDKR is the same as the first two films. And not only that, the cinematography looks as dark and mysterious as BB and TDK. With Spider-man 3, they somehow felt that by packing as many villains into the movie as possible would be a great pay off. Don't worry about Batman. This is the movie we need and deserve.