Saying Spiderman III will be a success is like saying a Royal Flush in poker is a decent hand. It’s one of the most obvious and boring things that can be said. Now, if Iran were to host the Annual Zionist Conference at the MGM & Mirage casinos that would be something interesting.   Anyway, that being said I was looking forward to seeing Spiderman III - so much so that I actually went to the theater to watch it.

Maybe it was the theater’s crappy screen or the bad speakers but right away I could tell this wasn’t going to be like the first two movies.   There was this air of self-righteousness and this ridiculous need for Peter Parker to look within himself and struggle to find his identity and yada yada yada. If I wanted to watch a movie exploring the human condition, I wouldn’t be watching Spiderman III. I go to Spiderman or a James Bond movie because they are simplistic good vs. evil movies with a lot of special effects and thrills but hardly any depth or subplots to be had. It's like learning to play online poker; there’s just not the same depth in online poker or online baccarat as there is in real life.   I want to spend the same amount of time thinking about Spiderman’s underlying themes as I want to spend thinking if 21 is a good hand in blackjack – that is to say, not even a moment.

I just don’t get it. Why gamble with such an obviously successful formula? I read Spiderman comics when I was kid and one of the more interesting elements of Spiderman is the character of Peter Parker and his internal struggle to identify with himself and the world at large. But even that is done in a pretty rudimentary way. Again, it’s a comic, not For Whom the Bell Tolls. It’s much harder on the screen to make comic book “self-actualization” seem real. The reason it worked with the comics is because I was 12 and it’s much easier to immerse yourself in the world of Spiderman than it is for you to watch a world being made for you.

Enough of that. Spiderman III had enough bells and whistles to make online craps table look like graveyards and there were some thrilling moments to be sure. I was sorely disappointed by whatever-that-guy’s-name-is that played Venom. He was so whiny that it made Venom seem underwhelming and pathetic when he’s anything but. The sand fellow was OK but I didn’t appreciate the nonsense at the end where he and Spiderman shared a brief moment and would have enjoyed it more had they kissed as he floated away.

For the record I’m an American but I don’t live in America. I was watching Spiderman in a country that generally loves Americans. The reason I say this is because at the climax of the movie there’s a scene when Spiderman leaps to the top of a building and is silhouetted by an American flag; I swear to god that moment lasts for fifteen minutes and even the pro-America crowd at the theater complained. What was the point of that scene? Is it to show that Spiderman is American and thus good or is to show that America has Spiderman and is thus good? Is this really our best foreign policy tactic? You think some guy in the Middle East somewhere is going to put down the Kalashnikov after seeing this? I doubt it. I maintained a poker face as much as I could but it was difficult.

Sam Raimi made some really unbelievable choices for this movie. It’s like he had 21 in blackjack and kept saying “hit me” even after he lost. There’s always hope for Spiderman IV. Just stick with the good vs. evil, Mr. Raimi, and if you want to debate the human condition on film find the right vehicle.