Did Peter (technically) kill Brock?

[November Rain]

now you make me just sound crazy morg

 

[Morg]

ahhhh, you'll live NR

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

That Eddie couldn't let go of his vessel for getting back at the world is nothing for Peter to feel guilty over. Sad for Eddie, but not guilty.
And let's be real- comic book sensibilities and "I've got to be better than the bad guy" nonsense aside, How much guilt would you feel in fatally stopping someone who was going to kill you or your loved ones?

I think the word I'm grasping for here to explain why Peter would want to save Eddie despite what he did is that Peter has compassion for his fellow man despite their decisions. This is the main difference between him and the vindictive Venom.

 

[Mr Jide]

Sorry, saw this post too late. And I am one who wonders this. That would be a great character development plot point for Peter to deal with, wondering if he could have done some things differently to stop these villains from "perishing".

It was impossible for spidey to save Norman. The glider was coming towards him at full speed and spidey barely flipped out of harms way. It was either spidey or Norman, no grey areas there.

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

It was impossible for spidey to save Norman. The glider was coming towards him at full speed and spidey barely flipped out of harms way. It was either spidey or Norman, no grey areas there.

Well, if Spidey was just a regular guy with gadgets like Batman whom didn't have that Spider Sense, agility and quick reflexes I'd agree with you there. But with said Spider Sense he could have anticipated the danger ahead of time and used webbing perhaps to yank the Glider away causing Norman not to have been killed, or at least caused Norman minor injuries. But wouldn't it have been a neat What If..? story if this occured and poor Harry had to deal with the fact his dad is the Green Goblin?

 

[Spider-Fan]

Why does everyone assume his Spider-Sense tells him everything. Fans act like he can sense any danger and react in plenty of time, when I can give you millions of comic examples of him being surprised and hit, often times by common thugs with no powers.

Peter gets surprised and can sometimes not react quick enough, despite the Spider-Sense.

 

[November Rain]

with response to both the comic and film glider dogde, i think both were involuntary movements purely based on reflex and adrenaline aided by his spider sense, it wasn't a concious decision to dodge, rather a reflex action occuring too fast to really take into account the consequences of them.

 

[Mr Jide]

with response to both the comic and film glider dogde, i think both were involuntary movements purely based on reflex and adrenaline aided by his spider sense, it wasn't a concious decision to dodge, rather a reflex action occuring too fast to really take into account the consequences of them.

That's absoloutly right. Most people will argue that is indeed precisely how the spider-sense works in terms of dodging an attack. The sense auto-pilots his movements without him having to think about where to move or what to do at all. However, as I keep saying these movies are riddled with poor writing. When we see the glider rise up, Peter's sense should have gone off (by source material standards at least) but it didn't. Spidey didn't realise it until the glider was set in motion and only dodged it by the skin of his teeth. According to the events of such careless writing, there's no way in hell spidey could have saved Norman. Part of the spider-sense carries some sort of natural instinct of self-preservation. It would have taken a conscious effort for Pete to ignore it and try to save Norman but Norman would have died anyway and spidey could have been injured or worse in the process)....like someone else said, spider-man isn't God, he has his limitations you know.

 

[Mr Jide]

Why does everyone assume his Spider-Sense tells him everything. Fans act like he can sense any danger and react in plenty of time, when I can give you millions of comic examples of him being surprised and hit, often times by common thugs with no powers.

Peter gets surprised and can sometimes not react quick enough, despite the Spider-Sense.

Unfortunately what you just said is so very true.

 

[Eggyman]

That's absoloutly right. Most people will argue that is indeed precisely how the spider-sense works in terms of dodging an attack. The sense auto-pilots his movements without him having to think about where to move or what to do at all. However, as I keep saying these movies are riddled with poor writing. When we see the glider rise up, Peter's sense should have gone off (by source material standards at least) but it didn't. Spidey didn't realise it until the glider was set in motion and only dodged it by the skin of his teeth. According to the events of such careless writing, there's no way in hell spidey could have saved Norman. Part of the spider-sense carries some sort of natural instinct of self-preservation. It would have taken a conscious effort for Pete to ignore it and try to save Norman but Norman would have died anyway and spidey could have been injured or worse in the process)....like someone else said, spider-man isn't God, he has his limitations you know.

You do keep saying that, fat a$$.

 

[Mr Jide]

Yezzirr

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

with response to both the comic and film glider dogde, i think both were involuntary movements purely based on reflex and adrenaline aided by his spider sense, it wasn't a concious decision to dodge, rather a reflex action occuring too fast to really take into account the consequences of them.

But it's always nice to think of the What ifs...from my perspective that is. I love coming up with scenarios in my head of what if this did or didn't happen. I love using my creativity to figure ways out of tight spots.

 

[November Rain]

like what if spidey 2 had been a decent film?

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

like what if spidey 2 had been a decent film?

Which it was IMHO. Well, save for the fact they didn't have the subway musician from the first movie return and that BJ Thomas song montage.

 

[November Rain]

and i thought you were my friend crouchinggoblinhiddenspiderman

sob

 

[dodus]

That's what makes spidey for me, always wanting to do things and make a difference and alot of the times he cant and he feels responsible for it. Not just going '**** it' and letting sleeping dogs lie.

(disclaimer: I liked the movie.)

But I couldn't agree with you more, that's why that scene more than any other in a Spider-man film to date felt so strange and out of character. Regardless of whether or not he *could* have saved Eddie, he showed none of the typical Spidey second-guessing and remorse, he didn't even react to it really. Sure, Eddie's a bad guy and deserves to die, but that's what makes Spidey Spidey.

 

[drmick]

This is an interesting thread. Kudos to the guy who started it

What is odd, is that in the movie novelisation, Peter is not repsonsible for Brock's death, the symbiote is. Then after Eddie is killed, Peter takes care of the symbiote, which dies from the sound waves alone.

This leads me to believe that the Final Battle was probably re-scripted/re-drafted a million times before we got the version we saw (if not several different endings filmed- Sandman definitely had several endings filmed).

 

[Robotchicken]

I hope the thread title isn't too provovative.

Something about Eddie's apparent death at the end bothers me (apart from Peter seemingly using his power of the Force, Force-Pull, to extract the pumpkin bomb).

Whereas in the first film, the Burglar (the allegedly un-nameable Dennis Carradine) fell while trying to kill Peter, in SM3 Brock was making no such move at the time.

The best analogy I can come up with is this:
Imagine a wild dog (or an escaped lion from the zoo) running rampage on the streets maiming folk. An armed citizen finally comes to the rescue. However just as he is about to shoot, the animal's owner jumps in an attempt to save the animal (rightly or wrongly), and both animal and owner are killed.

Wouldn't the shooter now be guilty of manslaughter (or whatever the equivalent would be)?

And also:

As far as we know Brock didn't kill anybody in the film.

And couldn't Peter have web-zipped Brock out as he was jumping into the symbiote?

Any thoughts?

concerning Venom killing anybody


did you not catch the part were he was pretty much ripping the special forces limb from limb?! that was one of my favorite scenes in the movie, even though it lasted like 8 seconds...lol

 

[dodus]

did you not catch the part were he was pretty much ripping the special forces limb from limb?! that was one of my favorite scenes in the movie, even though it lasted like 8 seconds...lol

You mean like .8 seconds.

 

[Akimych]

You know what!!!

It was Eddie Brock Jr.

SO IT WILL BE ANOTHER VENOM - EDDIE BROCK SR. !!!!!!

HOORAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

agreed

 

[Dragon]

if you can say you felt peter honestly did the best he could in that situation with regards to securing eddie and attempting to save him once he realised he had jumped than fair enough...

I'm saying that Peter had ALOT to think about there. The least of his thoughts had to be Eddie's stupidity.

if eddie would have cut his way through some webbing, jumped into the blast and freed himself from any sort of grip spidey had on him before the bomb went off, i would be agreeing with you.

Well, if you could show me where 99.9 % of the time Peter handles these situations with the cold-precision you're requiring here and in JUST this situation he screws up then you might have point. But Peter (And no one else) can be expected to make every possible move in a fluid situation such as combat- especially when you're combating beings with unknown, unpredictable powers.

parker knew eddie could get drowned by the power of the symbiote and allowed this temptation to occur which ultimately resulted in eddie's death. Pete could have shared a similar fate if the symbiote had bonded with him more sufficiently and he was in eddie's position.

And this is where we part ways. Peter barely knew Eddie. So he couldn't know how deeply entrenched Eddie was in the power of the symbiote, nor did he have time to consider this.

I think this is really nothing more than you believe that people are in charge of their own destinies where i believe certain people should be properly governed in order to keep them from harm at all times, not just a past immediate danger.

Well, I think people born with disabilities both mental and physical need a helping hand, and even without that many facing such challeneges still rise above by believing in themselves. So I think you're doing them a disservice by determining that they need to be "governed".

And anyway- this isn't the case with Eddie. He's not insane in the clinical sense. He's like Charles Manson. An ass that thinks the world owes him what he wants just because he wants it. He doesn't want to work for it and earn it. And he felt the symbiote was his ticket to getting it.

yours puts eddie at fault...

He is at fault.

mine leaves parker laregly responsible for not taking proper precautions leading to eddie's manslaughter although if the situation was handled differently, eddie or the symbiote wouldn't have to die.

Precautions? Peter had seconds- not minutes, not hours to act. Eddie was in the clear and safe. Peter could not be expected to think for him and assume that he would essentially commit suicide. If Peter had taken time, turned his back to secure Eddie, the symbiote would've had time to strike. So, the possibility of Eddie's dumbness had to take a back seat to the REAL, IMMEDIATE threat of the symbiote.

 

[Dragon]

with response to both the comic and film glider dogde, i think both were involuntary movements purely based on reflex and adrenaline aided by his spider sense, it wasn't a concious decision to dodge, rather a reflex action occuring too fast to really take into account the consequences of them.

Now we're in PERFECT agreement here. And from my end, alot of what Peter did at the construction site fell into the realm of reflex as opposed to conscious planning.

 

[Dragon]

I think the word I'm grasping for here to explain why Peter would want to save Eddie despite what he did is that Peter has compassion for his fellow man despite their decisions. This is the main difference between him and the vindictive Venom.

Well, as shown in Spidey 3, Peter did feel bad that Norman was killed. He genuiinely cared about him. But in the end, Spider-Man's story is about personal responsibility. Not just for Peter, but for us all.

And Venom isn't vindictive. Let's remember- he doesn't have a legitimate gripe against Peter. He blames Peter for his own failings.

That's my major gripe with the concept of Venom. If the writers had been on the ball, they'd have created a situation where Peter ACTUALLY did something to ruin Eddie's life. Sure, not on purpose, but his fault nonetheless. Then Venom would actually be an interesting character.

 

[chaseter]

Brock is probably not even dead...but for giggles, Brock killed himself. Peter threw the bomb at the symbiote, not Brock. It was Brock's choice to try and re-bond with the thing before it exploded.

 

[dodus]

I think the word I'm grasping for here to explain why Peter would want to save Eddie despite what he did is that Peter has compassion for his fellow man despite their decisions. This is the main difference between him and the vindictive Venom.

Another way to put it is that Eddie Brock sympathizers have compassion for their fellow man despite his misguided, irrational decisions. Venom-haters don't.