This movie had the potential for being the best Spider-man movie ever. But Sam Raimi just couldn't resist ladling in too many helpings of Christian and patriotic imagery. When the crowd cheers for Spider-man, we start to feel a surge of emotion. The American flag kills that. It is too much, too unnecessary, and too unrelated to Spider-man's triumph. He's not saving America, he's just saving his best girl. And Spider-man did not need to be clinging to a cross when he tears off his black uniform. He's not acting as a Christian here. For all we know, he's Jewish.

Worse, both of these symbols recall earlier superhero films, in which the same symbols were used to good effect. In Superman II, the Man of Steel was restoring America when he returned the American flag to the White House. In Daredevil, the cross Daredevil clings to is a reminder of his Christian upbringing. In Spider-man, both symbols are painfully out of place.

The redemption of Harry Osborn would have made a satisfying climax. When Raimi adds the forgiveness of the brutal murderer Sandman to the mix, "I've made some mistakes, too. Go and sin no more.", instead of responding emotionally, we sense we are in the presence of hypocrisy, that this is not an event that grows out of the character of Peter Parker, but is a cynical attempt to use our most personal and powerful emotions to sell us popcorn.

There is a great film somewhere inside Spider-man III, crying to get out. It is too bad that market forces mitigate against a director's cut that is twenty minutes shorter than the original release.

In the weakest of the summer blockbusters, the problem is too many writers and not enough story. Prince Charming, even backed up by all the other fairy tale villains, is not a strong enough bad guy to build any credible suspense. The much praised bra-burning brigade comes to nothing, plotwise. And at the climax, essentially Shrek says "Boo" and everybody falls all over themselves to turn over a new leaf. The greatest menace in the film is dirty diapers, and as a father of five I can testify that changing diapers is just part of the routine of taking care of a baby, not the horrible, disgusting experience that Hollywood invariably makes it out to be. If you missed this one, you didn't miss much.

There is a lot to like here, much that is exciting, beautiful, clever, and touching. The trouble is that there is too much that is confusing, time wasting, pointless, and muddled. It is not that I doubt director's Gore Verbinski's assurance that if you watch the trilogy through often enough, it all makes perfect sense. I believe him. I just don't think it is worth the time and trouble it would take to figure it all out. It was his job to give us enough clues so we could following the action the first time. I often complain when lazy film reviewers criticize a film for making the audience think. Thinking is fun. David Lynch's Dune, for example, baffled some critics, but my pre-teen daughters were able to follow the story with no trouble at all. But if Shrek has too little plot, Pirates has too much plot.

The film starts with a chilling, touching scene. But then we get a long exposition that is singularly unhelpful in telling us what has gone before or what we should be looking forward to in the story to come. Even worse, the characters we left at the end of the second film are in the Far East trying to get a ship. The question that kept bothering me was: if they didn't have a ship, how did they get to the Far East?

Ah, well, this is probably the best of the three blockbusters, and I'll certainly want to see it again. There are some terrific action sequences that Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. would die for. Be sure to stay for the credit cookie, which is essential to the enjoyment of the film.