There's two things I want to blog about, namely Spider-Man 3 and DC's weekly 52.
First, on Spider-Man 3. For the most part, in general, I liked the film. It's not as good as Spider-Man 2 in my opinion but for a film that has three villains, it did okay. Did it have plot holes? Sure. Did it have unnecessary scenes. A few. But overall, it was a good film. Is it worth a repeat viewing? No, but that's just me as the movie has a lot of build-up that will seem boring watching a second time. The biggest weakness of the film is probably Eddie Brock and Venom, both in terms of acting and their role in the film but that was a decision forced on Sam Raimi. Comic geeky-wise, it's just strange to see Spider-Man wholly accepted by New York, but it works in the context of the movie. And if Peter Parker was a jerk during the whole movie, that was intentional. I'm just surprised that people could sit through two hours of a jerky Peter Parker and only a few minutes of "redeemed" Peter Parker.
Now on to DC's 52. A weekly comic, by US standards, is a tall feat. But 52 wasn't just a weekly comic, it was an exciting weekly comic. The run just ended this week and did I like it? Yes. It's far from a ten out of ten but it was definitely above mediocre. One of the weaknesses of the series was that a fourth of it (roughly the equivalent of three months) was used for build-up and you could lose readers by that time. The biggest flaw, however, was in meeting reader's expectations. Don't get me wrong, I liked the series, but it didn't deliver in what it promised to do: fill in the gaps of the missing "year" in the DC universe. It's a compelling read mind you for B and C-lister super-heroes but it didn't really explain the current status quo of the DC universe, which was what fans were expecting from the comic. As long as you can live with that, it's a good series.
Post a Comment