The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Better 3 Villains: TASM2 Or SM3?

Who Had Better Villains? TASM2 or Spidey 3?

  • Spidey 3 (Venom, Sandman, Harry Goblin)

  • TASM2 (Electro, Rhino, and Green Goblin)

  • Both Films Villains Were Good

  • Both Films Villains Sucked


Results are only viewable after voting.
I'd have to go with Spider-Man 3. At least all of the villains were tied into the main theme of forgiveness. Venom is created and defeated because Eddie Brock Jr can't forgive Peter (even though he was a jerk anyway and deserved to be fired in any situation, but I digress). Peter needs to learn to forgive Sandman (even though the dude does deserve to get put into prison for what he's done). And Peter and Harry need to learn to forgive each other.

What was the point of Electro in The Amazing Spider-Man 2? What does the theme of mortality have to do with him? Does he serve as a way for the film to talk about certain themes? No - he's there for the spectacle and to serve as the cliched sympathetic character who becomes a villain.

Harry was the only villain who was related to the theme of mortality - he's trying to escape his ultimate destiny: death. His desire to sell his soul to cheat death is what costs him in the end.

Exactly.

Peter doesn't learn a thing from his encounter with Electro. He is just an idiot who built a ridiculous obsession out of a 20 second meeting with Spider-Man. Peter forgets about him after Electro is defeated on their first encounter.

He doesn't team with Harry out of desperation. He teams with him simply because Harry offers him Spider-Man. Before that he threatened to kill Harry when he showed up at Ravencroft.

He's not a bridge for anything. He doesn't link Peter and Harry in any meaningful way. In fact he has no meaningful connection to any character in the movie. That's why he's tucked away in prison for the bulk of the movie until they're ready to bring him out and use him for the action set piece in the finale, and come up with that hilariously silly scenario of teenage Harry busting him out of a maximum security prison.

Thematically he has no place in this movie. Electro was there for one reason only; action scenes. Same as Rhino.
 
Last edited:
Electro also works to distinguish peters actions as spider-man and the consequences of those actions, to reiterate that he cannot save everyone and even when he can do something, sometimes it just isn't enough. This is in contrast to Harry, where the omission of action led to Harrys descent into evil.

From a film perspective, Electro worked as a visual treat, and a road to connect harry, peter and gwen through outside means.

Overall, electro's story is that of loneliness, of insanity, and ultimately, of a power struggle, quite literaly in every sense of the word by the end of the film.

He exploded

But Electro's connection to Peter, Harry, and Gwen is tenuous at best. Peter only met Max for like thirty seconds before their Times Square encounter, Harry only knew him for a few hours, and Gwen merely talked to him once in an elevator. He has almost no relationship with the characters. Even Spider-Man only has two brief clashes with him because he gets shoved into a prison, minimizing his presence and overall use in the movie.

I do agree that Electro and Harry are opposites in that they are created by different circumstances - Peter failing to save Electro and Peter choosing not to help Harry for the time being.

However, any villain could've been in Electro's position if the writer's wanted to write them that way. The writers didn't justify why Electro was specifically in the movie.

In TASM, the Lizard had a reason to be there. He and Peter were both missing pieces of themselves and trying to fill those pieces in: the Lizard is doing that through his scientific experiments to regrow his arm, while Peter uses Spider-Man as a way to deal with the trauma he's suffered. They are kindred spirits forced into conflict when they try to set out to rectify the injustice in the world. Green Goblin would not have been a good villain for TASM, neither would Dock Ock or Electro or any other villain. The Lizard is in the movie because he has to be for the story to work.

Furthermore, Electro's arc is completely dropped at the end of the movie. Peter stops trying to save him. He never once tries to talk him down during the power plant fight (which I loved he did during the high school Lizard fight in TASM). The movie seemed to forget that Peter's a hero first, action star second.

Peter's arc with Electro is never completed because he never tries to make up for his failure, and Electro ends up having zero thematic resonance at the end of the movie. When the climax rolls around, he's just the blue guy Spider-Man has to defeat to save New York. Peter doesn't learn anything in order to overcome Electro - he uses brawn and scientific knowledge to defeat him, but doesn't learn anything about becoming a better hero. Peter doesn't try to become the better man.

In Spider-Man, Peter accepts Uncle Ben as his father figure, and is not fooled by Norman's attempts to convince him to be a son to him. In Spider-Man 2, Peter learns to sacrifice his dreams to do what is right, and instead of beating Doc Ock to a pulp at the end, he outright convinces him to help him save New York (which is what he could've tried with Electro). In Spider-Man 3 (I can't believe I'm praising this movie), Peter learns to forgive Harry so they can take on Venom and Sandman together and win, then forgives Sandman at the end when he realizes that everyone has done bad things, and the "bad people" might feel as terrible as he does, ending their conflict and years of torment for both.

Also, I find it hard to take Electro seriously as the main villain because he's such a reactive character. Most great villains - Darth Vader, the Joker (Batman & TDK), Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Doctor Octopus, and the shark in Jaws - are proactive presences. They are the ones who initiate the conflict and continually challenge our heroes.

In TASM, the Lizard's first appearance causes Peter to actually INVESTIGATE what happened to Connors and prove that he has become a monster. The villain forces Peter, already a proactive character by then, to alter his goals and take on a new challenge.

Electro never does this. He gets pushed around constantly as Max, which is fine, but when he becomes Electro, he gets promptly locked up and never escapes until Harry, the most proactive character of the movie by far, breaks him out. Electro then becomes Harry's lackey and initiates a very late in the game battle. For a main villain, Electro has no effect on the lives of Peter and Gwen until the final thirty minutes.

Seriously, Peter immediately forgets about his first fight with Electro and never once investigates what happened to that lowly Oscorp worker he once met. The only thing he does afterward is try to figure out how to make his webshooters resistant to electricity, but that scene is very brief.

It's bad writing when the supposed main villain barely determines the progression of the plot.
 
Last edited:
Though I completely prefer TASM series of movies over the Spider-man series, I'm going to have to say that SM3's three villains were better. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved the three villains in TASM2, but I feel like goblin and rhino were a little rushed and didn't have enough time to emotionally grasp the audience and allow us to fall in love with them. However, this could be a great setup for TASM3 and the sinister six rumor that could possibly be the truth.
 
Spider-Man 3 by a mile, the big problem was that they realy needed more time each, i'm not saying they were perfect, Venom/ Eddie could have been better handled, even though the source material also has problems regarding his origin, while Sandman shouldn't have been Ben's killer.

Harry's arc in Amazing Spider-Man 2 was incredibly rushed and didn't give the plot enough time to breathe, with him and Peter still being such big friend coming as a little non-sensical, as they were around what? 7 in the "old days"? Rhino was such a mess, and Electro, well, he was a mess with a bit more screen-time. The villains in Raimi's films have always been cheesy, and that usualy works better for them, but in Webb's series it just doesn't work at all.
 
Spider-Man 3 by a mile, the big problem was that they realy needed more time each, i'm not saying they were perfect, Venom/ Eddie could have been better handled, even though the source material also has problems regarding his origin, while Sandman shouldn't have been Ben's killer.

Harry's arc in Amazing Spider-Man 2 was incredibly rushed and didn't give the plot enough time to breathe, with him and Peter still being such big friend coming as a little non-sensical, as they were around what? 7 in the "old days"? Rhino was such a mess, and Electro, well, he was a mess with a bit more screen-time. The villains in Raimi's films have always been cheesy, and that usualy works better for them, but in Webb's series it just doesn't work at all.

It's interesting you say that because I realized a lot of people have a problem with the cheesiness now, compared to then.

I feel like it might have been seen too many times on screen now, and it's become an element of CBM that the GA is getting tired of.
 
It's interesting you say that because I realized a lot of people have a problem with the cheesiness now, compared to then.

I feel like it might have been seen too many times on screen now, and it's become an element of CBM that the GA is getting tired of.

I disagree, it was always part of Sam Raimi's style and it worked in his films, they don't work with Webb's because it's not as well handled, Batman & Robin was hated then and it is now, and that film is full of cheesiness.
 
I disagree, it was always part of Sam Raimi's style and it worked in his films, they don't work with Webb's because it's not as well handled, Batman & Robin was hated then and it is now, and that film is full of cheesiness.

Do you mean not handled well as in being poorly timed in the context of the situation?
 
Do you mean not handled well as in being poorly timed in the context of the situation?

Style, context, etc. Semantics are difficult to discuss, what makes a comedy adventure like Back to the Future work? What makes something like The Last Airbender fail? The execution of a scene can be more difficult to talk about than other more obvious problems regarding a plot.

If you want an example, what makes Margaret Hamilton's portrayal of the witch of the west work so well in the original Wizard of Oz film, yet Kunis miserably fails when trying to do the exact same thing for Oz the great and powerful?
 
Last edited:
Spiderman 3 villains, and by some way, I am not a hater of either movie, they both have their good and bad points, but the villains in Spiderman 3 reasons to be there and had genuine conflict with Spiderman.

Only Harry had any of this in TASM2 and all he did was get a 30 second battle with Spiderman which was soon over shadowed by Gwens death.
 
If I'm gonna be compeltely honest with myself, I'd say SM3 had better villains, overall.

DeHaan Goblin > Franco Goblin

However,

Venom > Rhino

Sandman > Electro

I feel weird saying it.
 
I break it down like this:

Main villain--Sandman vs Electro. While Flint Marko looked like he walked off the pages of the comic, he was a bit too sympathetic. We instantly knew that he wasn't a villain at heart, just a really confused guy who was motivated primarily by love for his daughter. Electro had a sympathetic aspect, but we also saw narcissism, obsession, and aggression in his personality. Thus, it was easier to accept him as a villain. His powers/visuals also topped Sandman.

Advantage: Electric Comb-over.

Secondary villain:--Goblin vs Goblin. This is unfair since Franco's Goblin had been built in the previous Raimi films and SM3 was the payoff. Dane Dehaan did an excellent job, and had a better look than the SM3 Goblin, but that character was just finding its footing in TASM 2. SM 3 Goblin takes this one.

Advantage: "So Good" Goblin.


Marginal villain--Rhino vs Venom. Neither character was done well at all, including their looks. Neither character had much of a reason for being in their respective movies. However, Paul Giamatti was hilarious with his small amount of screen time. Blowpher can't act at all, so the character with the good actor wins this round.

Advantage: Pacific Rim Rhino.


Final tally: 2-1, TASM 2.
 
I break it down like this:

Main villain--Sandman vs Electro. While Flint Marko looked like he walked off the pages of the comic, he was a bit too sympathetic. We instantly knew that he wasn't a villain at heart, just a really confused guy who was motivated primarily by love for his daughter. Electro had a sympathetic aspect, but we also saw narcissism, obsession, and aggression in his personality. Thus, it was easier to accept him as a villain. His powers/visuals also topped Sandman.

Advantage: Electric Comb-over.

Secondary villain:--Goblin vs Goblin. This is unfair since Franco's Goblin had been built in the previous Raimi films and SM3 was the payoff. Dane Dehaan did an excellent job, and had a better look than the SM3 Goblin, but that character was just finding its footing in TASM 2. SM 3 Goblin takes this one.

Advantage: "So Good" Goblin.


Marginal villain--Rhino vs Venom. Neither character was done well at all, including their looks. Neither character had much of a reason for being in their respective movies. However, Paul Giamatti was hilarious with his small amount of screen time. Blowpher can't act at all, so the character with the good actor wins this round.

Advantage: Pacific Rim Rhino.


Final tally: 2-1, TASM 2.

How can one say Venom wasn't done well at all?

This right here is just like the comics.

[YT]7n01E7M8HTM[/YT]

Also besides his dize, in terms of design this looks more faithful:

3649180-venom_wallpaper_870x423.png


5-1.jpg


then this:

Hot-Toys-The-Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Rhino-5.jpg


Marvel-Comic-Book-Art-Spidey-Rhino.jpg


1124479-rhino__28ultimate_29_001.jpg


I'm not saying Venom is perfect but he was at least done better then Rhino.
 
Lol, Levi, you should know LV has a hard on for hating Topher Grace.


I will say though, Venom was definitely a million times better than he ever has been in the comics.
 
How can one say Venom wasn't done well at all?

This right here is just like the comics.

[YT]7n01E7M8HTM[/YT]

Also besides his dize, in terms of design this looks more faithful:

3649180-venom_wallpaper_870x423.png


5-1.jpg



.

Almost nothing about that is like the comics. Peter and the symbiote had an actual history from the Secret Wars, it didn't just find him conveiniently one day and let him take it off at will until, for some unexplained reason, he no longer could. Raimi killed the drama of the bell scene before it started.

Eddie Brock was a former athlete who had spent years trying to alleviate his crippling depression by hardcore weight training over a lack of parental love (his mother died in childbirth and his father treated him with indifference) as well as a failed marriage and failed career. Eddie then descended into violent mental illness by attributing all of his troubles, and his failed efforts to recify them, to Spider-man. That doesn't resemble the cheap, lazy fake photo story all all.


And a faithful visual design? LOL!! By choosing the single-expressioned, goofball, floppy-armed Blowpher, Venom was destroyed before filming even started. It wasn't the explosion that killed Venom, it was Sam Raimi's falure to properly adapt a character because he didn't personally like it.
 
Last edited:
Lol, Levi, you should know LV has a hard on for hating Topher Grace.


I will say though, Venom was definitely a million times better than he ever has been in the comics.

Next year will mark a full decade of bashing Blopwher and the hack "writing" of Venom in SM3. Join me for the celebration.
 
Next year SM3 will be 8 years old, and the production of it 9. Also, thanks but no thanks, I like Topher.
 
Next year SM3 will be 8 years old, and the production of it 9. Also, thanks but no thanks, I like Topher.

I first heard about the Blowpher casting rumors in 2005, and I joined SHH specifically to vent in an appropraite place. For nearly a year, I hoped that those rumors were just the typical internet fodder, because I couldn't believe that Raiimi, after the wonderful castings of SM1 & SM2, was clueless enough to let a clown from That 70s Crap play a hulking, psychotic supervillain. I was wrong in thinking he couldn't be that clueless, as I was wrong in thinking that someone at Sony would surely be aghast and put a stop to it. I was right to assume that it would stop Spider-man 3 from rivaling it's predecessors, and that it would kill any chance of a Venom spin-off from that franchise.
 
Venom and the black suit was the best thing about SM3, and yes I know that's not saying much
 
Aside from some bad lines, I really like the second Peter and Harry fight as well.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"