Spider-Man 3: too little, and too much

Throughout the course of movie history, whenever a third chapter of a series is introduced that isn't self contained (James Bond), or filmed simultaneously with the other entries (Lord of the Rings), it fails to prove up to par with the others. Having more or less been entranced by the brilliance of the first two Spider-Man entries, I had no reason to doubt the third. Sam Raimi, the director who made the first two so special, was still attached, as well as the cast and crew. A story had been clearly set up and followed throughout the first two, and the third was going to be the denoument. It would be impossible to lose it this late in the game right? Right?...... Well, it wasn't lost, but the ball definitely got fumbled a few times and the victory was rather tainted by poor playing. (Maybe the fact that I need football methaphors to write this review should say something in and of itself.)
The movie is good, but only good. The other two were made special in that they had a great balance of action, character development in both heroes and villains, and that little bit of cheese typical of the comic book genre. Perhaps the strongest element of them was that unlike another series (*cough*the first Batman series*cough*), this one kept the focus of the movie upon Spider-Man himself, not the villains or anyone peripheral to the plot. Characters in those movies were there for the purpose of enhancing the story of Peter Parker's growth as an individual. This one seems to have decided that after facing a genetically boosted madman who flies a glider and a scientist with metallic octopus arms, Spidey's life is pretty boring.
This movie chooses to introduce two new villains, a new possible love interest, and a new alien symbiote outfit for Spidey. Not to mention subplots about the new villain Sandman's personal history, the struggles of his girlfriend Mary Jane, and oh yeah, the continuing arc of Harry Osborn seeking vengeance on Pete (Harry is still under the impression Spider-Man killed his dad in the first one). Sound like a lot? It is.
Bottomline: I found this movie highly entertaining, and overall a good experience. However, I also found it somewhat disappointing. After my first viewing of the two previous entries, I was ready to go right back in the theater and see it again. Such is not the case with this one. I cannot go out and recommend it to everyone, as I do not feel it is up to par for everyone to enjoy.
The main problem is that they have so many characters that seem to be there for no other purpose than lip service to fans. The character of Gwen Stacy (played by Bryce Dallas Howard, Opie Cunningham's daughter) was actually Peter Parker's first love interest in the comics, but her role in the movies has more or less been filled by Mary Jane. Why have her show up now? If you have her, make her an important character, not a plot device. Perhaps the biggest letdown is the needless addition towards the end of the villain Venom.
Venom has always been seen as Spider-Man's deadliest foe in the comics. Heck, it was seeing the ferocity of this character in action that got me back into buying Spider-Man comics when I was in High School. I had his little mini-series and everything. Retrospectively, I realize he wasn't that great of a character, but fun nonetheless. Therefore, if he is to be a villain in a movie, shouldn't he get his own film to play out as the baddie? Like Gwen Stacy, why put such a well known character in the story if they serve no purpose? (And on a slight note, why place some pretty boy in the role? Rather than being vicious, he comes across as more of a young punk.)
Spider-Man 3 is a popcorn munching movie with a lot of good action scenes, but it just doesn't seem to have the drive of the first two. There's too much needless plot, and too little character development. Since it's already made millions a fourth one is inevitable, so let us hope they take a better approach on the next web-slinging adventure.