"The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is likely to be the poorest grossing "Spider-Man" movie to date. But the film will also be remembered for another first: the film is the first "Rotten" film on aggregate review site Rotten Tomatoes. Every other Spidey flick has managed to maintain 60 percent approval rating from the critics thus far. Interestingly enough, this film is not the worst of the lot from an artistic standpoint. Far from it. That honor still belongs to "Spider-Man 3." Here are a few reasons why the Sam Raimi movie is still the nadir of the beloved franchise.

For those wondering, "Spider-Man 3" has a 63 percent approval on Rotten Tomatoes, so it is clear that the film was far from well-received. One of the most prevalent short-comings of "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is the inclusion of multiple villains. That originated in "Spider-Man 3," which featured a whopping three villains: Sandman, Venom and the Goblin/Harry Osborn. The Goblin was the only one that felt like an organic part of the film. His transformation from a lonely guy who loses his father (who he has a love and hate relationship with) to a man set on revenge against Spider-Man was nicely developed in second film of that trilogy. By the third, his transformation into a villain and eventual redemption presented the viewers with a satisfying arc. Actor James Franco, who has since gone on to do far better acting work, was not always ideal for the role (he was whiny and annoying), but his character was solidly drawn overall. The problem was with the other villains.

Sandman was originally the main villain that Raimi wanted to focus on. He was framed as the second killer of Uncle Ben, which motivated Peter to confront him. The problem is that, while he started off the film as a major story component, he slowly became a background character as the movie developed; in fact this parallels with Electro's treatment in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2." While he also becomes redeemed by the end of the movie, his lack of development after the midway point made him feel like a plot device by the end of the film.

The biggest travesty of all, however, was and remains Venom. Aside from Joel Schumacher's "Batman" movies, there has arguably been no worse screen adaptation of an iconic villain in any other comic book movie to date. Venom is an anti-hero whose loathing for Spider-man develops from his rivalry as Eddie Brock with Peter Parker. Director Sam Raimi did state in interviews that he lost some creative control over the third film and that Venom was not originally a part of the story. And it shows. The inclusion of the symbiote that ultimately manifests itself as Venom feels forced into the plot and everything about it comes off poorly. Peter gets contaminated by it and turns into what has been known as "emo Peter Parker." He treats Mary Jane poorly. He starts dating Gwen Stacey. He does some ridiculous dances that are too campy, even for a Raimi film. The sequence in the jazz club is invariably one of the most awkward moments in the film simply because it feels completely out of context with the superhero film and the other two movies in the franchise.

The rivalry between Brock and Peter is rather rushed as well, as the former sets on killing his rivalry over a job and jealousy over Peter's supposed relationship with Gwen Stacey. The latter is barely developed, as Stacey barely figures into the overall plot (she's really nothing more than a pointless plot device), making it all the harder to care about Brock's emotional attachment or jealousy. The rivalry is no better developed and Brock's antagonism is not earned at all. In fact, it is hard to feel frightened by Topher Grace's Brock at all. He comes off as too frail and lacking to convince anyone that he will eventually become the super villain. When he finally shows up as Venom, the character lacks any of the complexity in the comics and feels like an evil tough guy. Unlike other Spider-Man films, in which the hero confronts the villain multiple times and their relationship is thus able to escalate, Venom gets one showdown with Spider-Man that is rapid and lacking in true suspense or interest.

The film is so loaded with characters that most of them feel like cameos. As noted above, Gwen Stacey seems to be in the film for fan service. Ditto for Mary Jane Watson, who has a strangely underdeveloped sequence with Harry Osborn in which she is supposedly cheating on Spider-Man. That narrative is never developed and the whole sequence just feels like one big mistake that the editing team forgot to cut out.

And did we forget to mention the most ridiculous of all plot devices -- amnesia? In order to get Goblin out of the way for a while, Raimi and company ensure that Harry gets amnesia so that the conflict between Spider-Man and him does not escalate; that facilitates the inclusion of other villains instead of furthering the development of the storyline that should have been the main focus of the movie.

The latest "Spider-Man" film focuses on the impact of being an orphan on its major characters and, while the execution is not always ideal, the thematic cohesion elevates it. "Spider-Man 3" has no major thematic motif that manages to integrate all of the messy sections of the film. Redemption dominates the end of the movie, but it also plays a key role in the second and superior "Spider-Man" movie. And even then, redemption plays no role in Venom/Brock; considering that this is a villain that has actually teamed up with Spider-Man in some comics, it rather shocking to see no attempt made to integrate redemption into his arc at all.

Do you think "Spider-Man 3" is the worst film in the franchise? Is there another entry that you dislike more?