Spider-man 3

Last night I saw a movie，which was called Spider-man 3. I think the spider-man 3 isn't good to see. The spider-man 2 is bettter than the spoder-man3. The great thing about Spiderman 2 (the best of the trilogy) is how focused it was.
But the spider-man 3 movie is good to see.

There is no getting around the fact that Spider-man 3 is the weakest of the three films in the franchise, at least in terms of script and story. As is the case with other superhero sequels, this film suffers, from among other things, introducing too many characters into the mythology.

But the script also has some leaps in logic, a few contrived coincidences and a plot hole or two that seem excusable at first glance, but start to nag after the final credits have rolled. Clocking in at well over two hours, there are times when it feels like a good twenty or thirty minutes have been trimmed from the film in order to make for a more reasonable run time, resulting in a poor sense of character development, and a frantic pace where there should be a bit more exposition.

The first act takes special care to introduce Sandman as a morally complex, tragic villain, but most of that is jettisoned as the story moves into the second and third acts. Likewise, Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), Peter's rival who will eventually don the black costume and become Venom, seems to make a huge leap from annoying twerp to murderous psycho.