Originally posted by steverules_2Have him angry at Harry as well. I mean, if Harry kept tourmenting Peter, that would've been pretty cool.
They didn't need him to be a Uncle B's killer to tie in the dark side of the symbiote, I mean Pete's mood change and the way he was towards MJ was enough of a Tie in...I mean he tried to kill Sandman but they coulda just easily had him try and kill Eddie, that woulda given Eddie an even better motive for wanting to kill Pete 😄
As excited as I was when I first heard about Venom being in this movie, I'm now convinced that he just never would have worked in a live-action film no matter what; Sandman either for that matter.
The villains from the first two were essentially guys who had some physical enhancements and technologically advanced weapons that allowed them to tangle with Spider-Man. As far-fetched as they were, they were easy to buy. Then comes Spider-Man 3 and all of a sudden, we're introduced to a man who's entire molecular structure is altered to the point where he can become sand and a living creature from outer space; while that stuff is easy to swallow in comic books, it just doesn't translate well to the big screen. There's a sort of cheesiness to it that doesn't help the film, like when they tried to make Batman films more comic-bookey like Batman and Robin and Batman Forever.
As a matter of fact, I'm convinced that instead of Sandman and Venom, the perfect villainous duo for the 3rd film would have been Shocker and Scorpion. Think about it: With both these guys, you once again have two villains with the kind of weaponry and enhancements that aren't that far off as the Goblin or Doc Ock so the feel of the movies still feels consistent. With Shocker you have a guy who can blast Spidey from a distance and wear a suit that can absorb his punches, making him a threat at any range. With Scorpion, you have a guy who can match Spidey in strength, speed, and agility like Venom could but you also have that whip-like tail to bash Spidey around like Dock Ock's tentacles did in the second film.
You can still have Harry attack Peter like he originally did, but instead of getting amnesia, he'll lose badly to Peter and just become so determined to take him down that he’ll try to develop a special suit to help gain an edge (ie the Scorpion suit), which he can hire Mac Gargan to test out. You can still have that whole story of Peter finding Uncle Ben's killer, revealed to be a wanted burglar, Herman Shultz (which I think would easier to buy than the Sandman we were obviously supposed to sympathize with) who has resurfaced and somehow obtained his new suit and power gauntlets, becoming Shocker. Gargan can test out his Scorpion suit by fighting Spider-Man, and maybe even nearly beating him, but then go insane once he sees what kind of freak he's become and then start to set his sights to get back at both Harry and Spider-Man.
You can also still have the subplot with Peter wanting to propose to MJ, but instead of making them both so damn whiney about it, the conflict Peter faces is whether or not he can really risk bringing MJ into his dangerous lifestyle, especially after dealing with the Scorpion hunting him down.
Of course, Shocker and Scorpion can eventually team up to take down Spider-Man , with Harry joining to help him after he comes to revelation as how Peter was always his friend or some other such BS.
And MJ (instead of being the damsel in distress for the 3rd ****ing time in a row) can of course do something as well to help them, like maybe distract Scorpion so Spidey can get the drop on him, thus showing she’s perfectly capable of handling Peter’s lifestyle. In the battle, Scorpion will die in the fight, but in his last moments he’ll still try to sting Peter with his tail, which Harry will take instead, redeeming himself, but also putting him in a coma. Shocker will be stripped of suit and arrested and of course you can have that clichéd moment where Peter looks like he’s about to finish Shocker off and avenge his uncle but stops himself from doing it.
And blammo, there's your movie.
Originally posted by Accel
As excited as I was when I first heard about Venom being in this movie, I'm now convinced that he just never would have worked in a live-action film no matter what; Sandman either for that matter.The villains from the first two were essentially guys who had some physical enhancements and technologically advanced weapons that allowed them to tangle with Spider-Man. As far-fetched as they were, they were easy to buy. Then comes Spider-Man 3 and all of a sudden, we're introduced to a man who's entire molecular structure is altered to the point where he can become sand and a living creature from outer space; while that stuff is easy to swallow in comic books, it just doesn't translate well to the big screen. There's a sort of cheesiness to it that doesn't help the film, like when they tried to make Batman films more comic-bookey like Batman and Robin and Batman Forever.
Its a superhero movie. Aliens and villains with powers are never out of place in a superhero movie. They would translate great to a big screen. Its not that hard if they would have been a bit more faithful to the source material.
Sandman wasnt the problem with this movie. The movie would have been fine if Venom wasnt shoved down our throats in the end with a whopping 15 minutes of screen time.
I'm not an overpaid hollywood director or anything and I'm thoroughly convinced that if I was given this budget and the materials Raimi was given I could have made a much better Spiderman film.
The films focus on the dark side of the symbiote was alright with the acception of the dancing and such. As a matter of fact. The movie could have seriously ended right there on the bell tower scene with the scene where the camera zooms up onto Venom screaming.
Then the fourth film could have focused on Venom stalking Spiderman and taunting him.
Other notable changes would be:
A large Venom with THE tongue.
"We"
And no Sandman Uncle Ben killer.
Venom looked smaller and less buff than he was in the comics. It's also gay that both the symbiote and Eddie got killed from one Goblin bomb (or whatever you call it). I was expecting Venom to return in Spider-Man 4 but I don't see that happening. Who's the writer? I want to give him a piece of my mind 😠
Originally posted by Micheal_Myers
Its a superhero movie. Aliens and villains with powers are never out of place in a superhero movie. They would translate great to a big screen. Its not that hard if they would have been a bit more faithful to the source material.
Even in the comics, the idea of the alien symbiote and Venom already kind of strays away from the central theme of Spider-Man, which is science gone awry. Introducing new concepts like aliens and mysticism every now and then in Spider-Man comics is fine considering the character has nearly five decades worth of stories, but when you only have three films to tell a story, it’s better to not deviate from Spidey’s general themes at all. This also includes villains who are victims to their own ambitions and science experiments, like Goblin and Doc Ock. The first two films covered these ideas nicely, but the third film heads off too far from the reality created by the other two.
Sandman fits into the whole “science gone awry” aspect of Spider-Man better than Venom, which makes him a stronger villain thematically, imo, but not by much. The problem is even then he just seems to far-fetched for my tastes. It'd be kind of akin to seeing Clayface appear in the next Batman flick.
There were just so many better characters and routes to explore than Sandman, the symbiote, Venom, and “Dark Peter,” but they jumped the gun and what we got was Spider-Man 3.
I dunno. I dont think straying from "science gone awry" was what made the film bad at all. I think stuffing too many villains in, losing the amount of focus on development that the first two had, and rushing one of the most popular villains in the history of comics with 15 minutes of screentime and an un-accurate portrayal was what disappointed most fans.
I say a spiderman film with an accurate portrayal of Venom as a standalone Villain would have been great.
Re: Spider-man 3 without Sandman?
Originally posted by lord xyz
A lot of people hated this movie, to me, it was just a really big Spider-man movie. It had the same format, creativity and camera shots as the last 2, but everything was amplified.Most of the complaints however, centered around disappointement of the villains. There was too many, not enough Venom, new goblin wasn't developed enough, not enough Venom, Venom was all wrong, not enough Venom, etc. but no complaints about Sandman, except he should've been in another movie.
So I was thinking, what if Sandman wasn't in this movie. He could be in a spin-off TV special, on hiatus til the 4th, whatever. Would that have made this movie what everyone expected and loved?
Seeing it now, I guess Venom and Goblin fans would've loved it more.
Thoughts?
Sandman was the only part of Spider-man 3 that worked, mostly because it was the only part of Spider-man that could work. Venom doesn't work. He doesn't work in the comics. He doesn't work as a foil for Spider-man. He doesn't work on his own. He is the epitome of a a 90s character, in that he only exists because he looks "cool." The guy about as a appealing as a kick square in the junk.
Venom and X-Treme Goblin are a recipe for failure.
Originally posted by Micheal_Myers
I dunno. I dont think straying from "science gone awry" was what made the film bad at all. I think stuffing too many villains in, losing the amount of focus on development that the first two had, and rushing one of the most popular villains in the history of comics with 15 minutes of screentime and an un-accurate portrayal was what disappointed most fans.I say a spiderman film with an accurate portrayal of Venom as a standalone Villain would have been great.
Exactly, Venom works best on his own one on one with Spider-man, It also gives more freedom for Venom to stalk Spider-man and toy with him, if he had been a stand alone villain in 4 he would have been much more of a sinister threat.
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Sandman was the only part of Spider-man 3 that worked, mostly because it was the only part of Spider-man that [b]could work. Venom doesn't work. He doesn't work in the comics. He doesn't work as a foil for Spider-man. He doesn't work on his own. He is the epitome of a a 90s character, in that he only exists because he looks "cool." The guy about as a appealing as a kick square in the junk.Venom and X-Treme Goblin are a recipe for failure. [/B]
I can't say I agree there is always a reason why someone is popular not from the times but something that works, something that at the time of creation was needed; Venom filled the gap for a new breed of villain one just interested in killing Spider-man and more importantly a villain on the same level as Spider-man! (blocking his spider sense and having all of spidey's abilities.) I would also like to point out Venom first featured in the 80's and had plenty of stories before the 90's arose, sadly it was during the 90's he declined some what.
If he was just a "fad" he wouldn't have lasted as long as he did, his reason of hating spider-man is weak granted but he's a very dangerous, psychopathic and at times humorous villain and I belive thats why he's liked so much, also I mean come on the alien symbiote angle is pretty creative you have to admit.
You can't really put Sandman on his own because one of the whole reasons he was so cool was because he didn't want to be a bad guy. He just wanted to get the money to help his daughter and he had cool sand powers. Without someone to coerce him into doing something big he'll probably stick to robbing and running. Not much of a villain.
The same layout as the first film. Symbyote comes to Earth, preferably on the shuttle, then latches onto Spiderman. Sandman attacks, Pete loses all the while some fight is happening with MJ (Add something about Harry here). In his anger/sadness the black suit bonds and he does a similar montage like when he first became spiderman... 'cept with a darker twist on it. Loses MJ, beats sandman an inch of his life beats Harry. Follows to the bell scene. Now 'clean' he goes after sandman and wins. (Add Harry here somehow[Dead or alive]) Ends with Pete and MJ with each other or something. Final scene is Brock, who fell to similar circumstances as the movie, with the 'Venom birth' scene the last thing shown. >.> and more Spider action and less dancing...
they should have just stuck with the symbiote story and leave sandman and goblin out. when theres to many characters in a comic movie it becomes childish. people would rather watch one long story that sticks to one character. 5 mins this villain 5 mins the next one back and fourth makes it childish and none entertaining because there isnt enough time really for a full story on all the characters. they should have saved sandman for the next movie.
It was set up so that Harry would become GG2 at the end of SM2. They couldn't just pretend that didn't happen.
Venom shouldn't have been in this movie to begin with. He is a character with a complex backstory in the comics, and a role that demands that the attention be focused on him. A character like him needed a big build-up and there's no other way to do it except spanning the plot over multiple films.
The story arc that had been set up for two films was for Harry to be come the big bad, not some alien symbiote who hadn't even shown up yet. There was another story going on. But fans wanted Venom so badly and Arad not being patient enough to wait until the goblin story was done, forced Raimi to change up his story and cram in a character that he didn't care for. Venom overshadowed Harry, and was used to sell tickets.
Venom had absolutely no foreshadowing in the movie series (except for that line in SM1 about "Eddie's" pictures, which seems to have been ignored). No matter how they did it, Venom was going to be rushed and Harry was going to get the shaft. We never got that final confrontation feeling for the finale between them on top of a cathedral during a rain, or some epic battle, instead we got a ridiculous combo of villains that don't fit well with one another.
It probably would have been much better if it was GG2, Sandman/Vulture like Raimi wanted it. Because Vulture's much less complicated than Venom and he would have been tied with Sandman from the start and would have shared scenes with him. Plus he didn't have a character arc or descent to evil since he would have began the film as a pure evil villain. That's two villain story arcs going on instead of three completely unrelated ones. It was that they pushed Raimi to put Venom, so, we couldn't see good potential for a multiple villain movie. Sandman and Venom do not go together at all.
Plus Vulture's manipulation would make the Sandman's villainous actions make more sense. One of my problems with Sandman's arc in SM3 is that they build him up as an overall nice guy but he attacks police and civilians and at the end he willingly joins a plan to kidnap an innocent woman so he could kill SM3. Removing Vulture's manipulation just makes him look like a douche.