What could be more fun (or visually compelling) than swinging through the steel canyons of New York City full speed, flipping through the air to land on a dizzying skyscraper, which you effortlessly cling and crawl upon because you have the physical powers of a spider?

Well that’s Spider-Man, a character people love because the superhero is no less a nice metaphor for freedom and power.

But there’s also the ying to that yang.

What makes Spider-Man somewhat more relatable as a human being than the more wholesome, virtuous Superman or the wealthy, morose Batman, is that Peter Parker (Spider-Man’s real identity) is just an earnest, affable mixed-up guy with some heavy personal issues.

Parker, played by Tobey Maguire, is neither virtuous nor brooding. He’s just a geeky middle-of-the-road kid who tragically blames himself for the death of his beloved Uncle Ben, usually does a thankless job fighting crime, deals with on-again off-again relationships with various love interests and friends who are adversely affected by his superhero gig, and manages a thankless, low-pay career as a newspaper photographer.

He’s the everyman who never gets any credit for the good he does. No matter how hard he tries, the worst in life always seems to happen to Peter Parker.

Studio people know comic book characters make bank at the box office, especially the big three (Superman, Batman and Spider-Man), so that’s why fans are treated to film after film, year after year, decade after decade. That’s not counting books, toys, apparel, breakfast cereal and underwear.

Advertisement

In Greek society, the Olympian gods and heroes inspired people spiritually, prepared them for battle or confrontation, and taught them values for living life. In American society, our mythological heroes have the same purpose, only now they also make mucho dinero for the man in the suit.

Well, in the web-slinger’s new movie, “Spider-Man 3,” Parker gets a new black suit, in the form of an alien symbiote from outer space, which essentially makes him pull a Darth Vader and go dark side on his friends and loved ones.

There are also three villians to contend with this time around, in the form of a hulking Sandman (Thomas Hayden Church), a murderous Venom (Topher Grace), and a new Goblin (James Franco); in addition to the prerequisite drama involving girlfriend Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) who just can’t decide whether she loves Parker or not.

I liked the original “Spider-Man” film. I had been brainwashed by an animated ’60s show and comic books as a child, so watching the live movie was like going to Disneyland for the first time. I was seeing a real live Spider-Man swooshing through New York City as I had imagined it would look like in my young mind.

Then came the 2004 sequel, starring talented genre veteran Alfred Molina as the tentacled Doc Ock, and a smarter script courtesy of Academy Award-winning screenwriter Alvin Sergeant (“Ordinary People”). Here, Parker was wrestling with personal desire over his responsibility as a superhero, and Sergeant struck a nice balance in tone between the comic pulp and the human drama.

This time around, the characters and plot seem half-baked, despite taking almost three hours to tell the story. The film also can’t decide whether it’s a comic book movie or a serious high-brow character drama. The smart dialogue in the more intimate dramatic scenes involving Parker’s relationship with Watson and best-friend Harry Osborn, doesn’t gel with the kind of glib line deliveries in the action sequences one would expect from a pro-wrestling match.

The villians are also pretty weak here, with the exception of the Goblin character. The much touted introduction of Venom, an evil, stronger version of Spider-Man, doesn’t match the character’s marketing hype, and he practically exists for a split-second, as opposed to the spectre of menace a good cinematic villian should present throughout the whole of a picture (such as Molina’s Doc Ock in “Spider-Man 2”).

Bryce Dallas Howard is a talented young actress, but really comes across as two-dimensional here as rival love interest Gwen Stacy. I wanted more screen time for Howard and juicier dialogue, but the script doesn’t invest in this character.

Then there are these awkward dance/musical sequences that fall flat, including a silly jazz club dance, and Watson and Osborn getting down to Chubby Checker’s “The Twist.” Witness the ill-concieved “Saturday Night Fever” homage involving a smug Parker strutting down Fifth Avenue in a new designer suit.

The film’s myriad plotlines are also introduced throughout the story rather quickly, and resolved too easily and without any sense of satisfying emotional payoff.

“Spider-Man 3” is the weakest of the trilogy, but there are moments in the film that truly excite. What works here are the action sequences, which get more and more photorealistic and visually impressive with each movie.

The film also works best when dealing with the personal relationship aspect of the Spider-Man mythos.

I enjoyed the intimate dramatic scenes between Parker and Watson, despite much of the romantic stuff being somewhat predictable. In these areas, the script is grounded, realistic and compelling.

Despite the bad, the film still manages to be a fun ride, if a not the rich cinematic experience I remembered “Spider-Man 2” was.

Neil Nisperos can be reached at 737-1059 or nnisperos@lompoc

record.com.

(Three out of four stars.)

Neil Nisperos can be reached at 737-1059 or nnisperos@lompocrecord.com.