Did Peter (technically) kill Brock?

If there was a witness and some footage you could charge Spidey with accidental manslaughter or even 2nd degree (he probably could cut it down to second) but in movie and commic morality logic...nah, he did try and save Eddie and offered him a reprieve twice and pulled him out and screamed for him to get away from the symbiote when it went boom. He's scott-free.

But by the way he pulled the pumpkin bomb out becaue it is apparently motion sensetive or something as that is how Harry pulled out bombs earlier in the movie.
 
well isn't that the point of this thread?

to look at it from a technical point of view?

regardless of how the scene is portrayed, i doubt there is anyone who could argue that in a court of law, spidey commited manslaughter.

which means he technically killed someone, which i feel is the point of this thread.
 
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
he said eddie brock didn't kill anyone, not venom....

as in the harmless human being who died at the end of the film the one that dissapeared once he attached with the symbiote.
 
I'm saying that Peter had ALOT to think about there. The least of his thoughts had to be Eddie's stupidity.
But do you feel he did his best? Personally all peter was thinking about was killing the symbiote, harry wasn't on his mind (or at least a priority), otherwise he wouldn't have had that long chat with sandman instead of helping his friend and he didn't properly.

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.
I can't show you because in my eyes, he screws up a lot during this film and a couple of times in the second movie and only a pretty much once in the first film showing that he's progressively getting worse.

The thing is that spidey had shown in the first film during a burning building scene, world trade's fare, the tram scene:

the second film during the lil kids save, robbers car chase burning building scene, aunt may bank fight, ock clock tower scene, train sequence, final save of mj:

in all of these scenes, spidey has displayed the ability of dealing with a crisis, saving someone's life and securing them by removing them from the potential harm zone (in most cases, removing them clear from this region).

Now in eddie's case, after he drags him out, he spends a good few seconds in awe of the symbiote's size but fails to realise that eddie is actually just as close to the symbiote as he is (ie still within the danger zone). So his first failure to me is for some reason not removing somebody from harm's way. The second instance is not restraining properly the assailant so they can't do anymore harm, either to him, others or themselves and this is what leads to eddie's demise.

IF spidey was truelly overwhelmed with what was going on and didn't have time to do things properly, you'd see it in his eyes with regret and he'd beat himself up but he doesn't. It's not particularly complex, they manage to show spidey doing this all the time in the cartoons (even in the last venom confrontation in the alien saga).



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.
he openly talked to eddie and eddie was doing some crazy talk, how much more does one really truelly need to know when he's already trashed the place, attacked you, wants you dead and has kidnapped your girlfriend and is making sexy innuendo during a serious scene, he's obviously deluded. The audience can clearly see he's drunk on the power, why can't pete? There was no need to give him the opportunity to give in to temptation, simply restrain him in one swift move, similar to his chucks and web nets shown against ock in the second film.



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".
I'm sorry but people who are a danger to others and themselves due to disabilities DO need to be governed and hopefully are.

Obviously this doesnt refer to all disabled people. You know what i mean here dragon.

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.
Anybody that wants somebody dead because he got caught faking some pics and stole his imaginary girlfriend and goes on a spree of destruction has mental issues in my eyes.
:o


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.
This whole seconds thing is all giggidy.

He's acted quickly at other times to secure people's safety. Either he was negligent and didn't go through the proper proceedings of failed to see eddie's life as potentially worth saving. I don't buy the whole 'he didn't have time' reasoning, webbing someone up takes less than a second. What was to stop him hitting the bars to buy himself time, to turn round and web up eddie, just like he used to buy himself time to thrown a pumpkin bomb?

Watch the scene again, eddie wasn't clear and safe, eddie's just slightly ahead of parker when the bomb was thrown. You make it sound like he was at the other side of the room. Having a civilian on the front line where the hero is i don't believe is a safe and clear location. Was he away from the bomb radius, yes but spidey didn't even know he was going to throw a bomb at that point so that point is kinda out.

parker was hitting those bars, the symbiote had no real means of attack, it was potentially secure and open for any onslaught dealt to it. It was pretty much defenseless.
 
But do you feel he did his best? Personally all peter was thinking about was killing the symbiote, harry wasn't on his mind (or at least a priority), otherwise he wouldn't have had that long chat with sandman instead of helping his friend and he didn't properly.

Of course Harry was on his mind and a priority. But he had to deal with Marko as well- He had to be prepared to either reason with or fight Marko (We all saw the kind of damage sandman can do if he's ticked off). And yes, he did his best. This reminds me of a cop show I saw many years back where some nut grabs a child and is threatening to kill him with a hammer. So an off-duty cop grabs his weapon and faces him down. He could see that the man was unstable and likely would injure the boy. So the cop took aim and killed the guy. People were afterward asking why he didn't shoot the hammer out of hand and ridiculous things like that. It's easy to criticize when you're not in such a situation.

I can't show you because in my eyes, he screws up a lot during this film and a couple of times in the second movie and only a pretty much once in the first film showing that he's progressively getting worse.

I'd say he's gotten better.

The thing is that spidey had shown in the first film during a burning building scene, world trade's fare, the tram scene:

the second film during the lil kids save, robbers car chase burning building scene, aunt may bank fight, ock clock tower scene, train sequence, final save of mj:

in all of these scenes, spidey has displayed the ability of dealing with a crisis, saving someone's life and securing them by removing them from the potential harm zone (in most cases, removing them clear from this region).

And none of those situations are the same as in Spidey 3. And he struggled in many of them as well. But for the most part, he was dealing with one threat and had ample time to do so.

Now in eddie's case, after he drags him out, he spends a good few seconds in awe of the symbiote's size

And this is a perfect example of what I'm saying. You're expecting Peter to not be HUMAN. He's never seen anything like this before. It IS awe-inspiring and scary.

He's thinking- "WTF is this thing- and how do I stop it- Okay- before it attacks again- BAM- shake it up with more harsh sound- okay- a pumpkin bomb should kill it-"

Then he goes about taking those actions. Now, read back the thought process i just wrote, and see how long it takes for that sequence to unfold.

There's no time in that plan to think- "What's Eddie going to do?" "I should tie him down so he doesn't leap back at the symbiote and get killed"

I mean, does that even sound like a REASONABLE pattern of thought?
A reasonable concern? He might as well have said- "I also better spin a tight grouping of walls around this area so Sandman can't get back in to attack me"

but fails to realise that eddie is actually just as close to the symbiote as he is (ie still within the danger zone). So his first failure to me is for some reason not removing somebody from harm's way.

Again- nothing outside the bars is harmed. Eddie was in the safe zone.

The second instance is not restraining properly the assailant so they can't do anymore harm, either to him, others or themselves and this is what leads to eddie's demise.

Peter had to deal with the greatest threat. Without the symbiote, Eddie was harmless.

IF spidey was truelly overwhelmed with what was going on and didn't have time to do things properly, you'd see it in his eyes with regret and he'd beat himself up but he doesn't.

Peter beats himself up for things he's responsible for. Even things that he really isn't responsible for. He's never EVER beat himself up for a villain's stupid choices. Again, he regrets the loss of life, but doesn't blame himself. and he shouldn't. Point to an example of when Peter has blamed himself for a villain's nuttiness.

It's not particularly complex, they manage to show spidey doing this all the time in the cartoons (even in the last venom confrontation in the alien saga).

I have no idea of the situations you mean, so I can't comment on this.

he openly talked to eddie and eddie was doing some crazy talk, how much more does one really truelly need to know when he's already trashed the place, attacked you, wants you dead and has kidnapped your girlfriend and is making sexy innuendo during a serious scene, he's obviously deluded. The audience can clearly see he's drunk on the power, why can't pete?

Peter can see- but there's nothing he can do about it. Just as in spidey 2, He doesn't web up Ock when he has to focus on shutting down the reactor.
And what you're speaking of are the functions of EVERY criminal. They all have to be a little crazy to commit the crimes and threaten lives for the trivial reasons they do.


There was no need to give him the opportunity to give in to temptation, simply restrain him in one swift move, similar to his chucks and web nets shown against ock in the second film.

Who would consider it "tempting" to be blown up with an alien creature? Of course Peter wouldn't consider this.

I'm sorry but people who are a danger to others and themselves due to disabilities DO need to be governed and hopefully are. Obviously this doesnt refer to all disabled people. You know what i mean here dragon.

True. But if they suddenly perform some erratic act, no one can be to blame for not knowing. If Peter knew Eddie had some history of craziness that would be one thing. But he didn't, and couldn't.

Anybody that wants somebody dead because he got caught faking some pics and stole his imaginary girlfriend and goes on a spree of destruction has mental issues in my eyes.
:o

Your view is limited. Behavior you don't condone isn't always reflective of insanity. Abusers in relationships cause physical harm and death over the same insecurities that Eddie displays. But that's not necessarily insanity.

This whole seconds thing is all giggidy.

He's acted quickly at other times to secure people's safety. Either he was negligent and didn't go through the proper proceedings of failed to see eddie's life as potentially worth saving. I don't buy the whole 'he didn't have time' reasoning, webbing someone up takes less than a second.

And in that second that he was webbing up Eddie, the symbiote would have grabbed Peter. And Eddie's life WASN'T worth saving. He committed murder with no remorse and would have done more. There's no saving someone like that.

What was to stop him hitting the bars to buy himself time, to turn round and web up eddie, just like he used to buy himself time to thrown a pumpkin bomb?

He couldn't just keep hitting the bars and hoping it would work. For all he knew the symbiote could've built up a tolerance to it. He had to act fast to stop it. Eddie wasn't a priority

Watch the scene again, eddie wasn't clear and safe, eddie's just slightly ahead of parker when the bomb was thrown. You make it sound like he was at the other side of the room. Having a civilian on the front line where the hero is i don't believe is a safe and clear location. Was he away from the bomb radius, yes but spidey didn't even know he was going to throw a bomb at that point so that point is kinda out.

Okay. Actually YOU need to watch the scene again. Eddie is BEHIND Peter. It's only the editing that makes it appear he's in front, simply because he's so quickly back in range of the symbiote. Peter yanks Eddie free and has his BACK to the Symbiote when Eddie lands. It's physically impossible for Peter to have yanked Eddie that hard and for Eddie to land IN FRONT of Peter. In the shot when Eddie yells at Peter when Peter starts tossing the pumpkin bomb- Eddie is BEHIND Peter. Yeah, there are shots where it looks like Eddie is in front, but again, that's just to show how quickly Eddie gets back to the symbiote. Similar to Ock throwing Spidey in front of him, and Spidey ending up behind him. And again- Eddie should have run away. Should the folks in the World Trade Center have waited for the rescuers to carry them out?

parker was hitting those bars, the symbiote had no real means of attack, it was potentially secure and open for any onslaught dealt to it. It was pretty much defenseless.

Potentially SECURE? What was securing it? It wasn't defenseless. It took a few seconds to basically grow in size as this was its first moments without a human host. The Symbiote is CLEARLY lunging at him (It moves into a close-up to the camera bearing its fangs!) before Peter hits the bars the last time. And it would have recovered again and attacked if Peter hadn't tossed the bomb.

You really need to understand what combat is like to get this. things are happening too fast and unpredictably for anyone to plan things as you're suggesting. Most of the time, when a fight is over you don't remember alot of what you did because you're running purely on instinct.
 
If you guys think Spidey really killed Brock, I guess Ms. Hilton has a new cellmate.
 
Brock killed himself.

Then Harry killed himself also.

It seems to be that Peter is just as responsible for Venom/Brock's death as Venom was for Harry's.

Venom certainly had no intention of killing Harry from what was shown. Thus Venom did not murder Harry.

And I'm having difficulty remembering the sequence of events, so for those of you who have a copy, didn't Harry assault Venom firsst (i.e. Harry threw the first blow)?
 
Then Harry killed himself also.

It seems to be that Peter is just as responsible for Venom/Brock's death as Venom was for Harry's.

Venom certainly had no intention of killing Harry from what was shown. Thus Venom did not murder Harry.

And I'm having difficulty remembering the sequence of events, so for those of you who have a copy, didn't Harry assault Venom firsst (i.e. Harry threw the first blow)?[/quote]

Yeah Harry hit Venom with his board when Venom had Spidey tied down to the pole. Look it up on Youtube. (Emo Spider-man 4) or something..
 
there's clips of all the fights on youtube, feel free searching for them, they are easy to get to if you want to refresh but please don't post them here.
 
there's clips of all the fights on youtube, feel free searching for them, they are easy to get to if you want to refresh but please don't post them here.

Yeah I know, and it sucks because of the new video posting thing they got on here. (Should be an annoucement up top^^)
 
Yeah Harry hit Venom with his board when Venom had Spidey tied down to the pole. Look it up on Youtube. (Emo Spider-man 4) or something..

Aaahhhhh...... then Harry should never have harmed what he couldn't kill!!! :)
 
Yeah I know, and it sucks because of the new video posting thing they got on here. (Should be an annoucement up top^^)
i knwo what you mean, i'm very tempted to post the fight anywho but it's honestly not worth it. It would certainly help illustrate some of the points i've been trying to make.
 
Then Harry killed himself also.

It seems to be that Peter is just as responsible for Venom/Brock's death as Venom was for Harry's.

Venom certainly had no intention of killing Harry from what was shown. Thus Venom did not murder Harry.

And I'm having difficulty remembering the sequence of events, so for those of you who have a copy, didn't Harry assault Venom firsst (i.e. Harry threw the first blow)?

No.. Harry sacrificed himself. There's a difference. Just as there's a differnece between killing and murder.

And as Venom was the aggressor and initiator of the entire melee, It was HE who made the initial assault. Harry's action were in defense of others.

And, as Venom intiated the event, then he's responsible for EVERY DEATH- including his own and the symbiote.
 
Some pretty impressive logical backflipping, just to hate on Venom.
 
I can't believe this is so heated.

It goes like this.

It was about choice and needed to happen. Peter CHOSE to forgive Sandman because he knew what vengence and selfish hate can do. Harry chose to be selfless and dredeemed himself, Eddie chose to be "bad' and intentionally murdered cops, Harry Osborn and refused to let go of his hate and died trying to keep its physical form (the symbiote).

It was thematically neccesarry, but Raimi made sure that Peter did everything possible to save Ddie. He tried to reason with him twice and even after this monster has tried to kill him, his girlfriend and mortally wounded his best friend, Peter still yanked Eddie out of the suit and out of danger while he tried to destroy the alien symbiote.

I don't think Peter's moral code applies to an alien lifeform that has come to earth to apparently feed off of people's aggression and hate. He throws the bomb and in teh ehat of battle to quickly destroy the symbiote before it regroups does not realize that Eddie would be STUPID ENOUGH to lunge after the bomb. Eddie did so and Peter yelled for him to stop. He didn't and he died with the symbiote before Peter could react.

Case closed.

Sure in court this could be seen as an act of manslaughter but in Hollywood movie logic and comic book superhero logic or even Greek morality plays, it was not his fault and was a fitting and ironically just conclusion to the story of the man who was Edward Brock....Junior.
 
to be fair, pete only yelled Eddie's name and that was well after he was already in the air, lunging towards the symbiote.

and there is evidence to support that eddie did indeed start leaping before the bomb was actually thrown.

but apart from this, you're saying that yes, Parker did commit manslaughter and did unintentionally kill eddie so i guess we are all on the same boat.

Another point to add, is that it's not really a heated discussion, I gone back and forth with dragon before, there's no malice and as you can see from our posts, there is no general rudeness that has ever been given to one another, it's all gravy, just a difference of opinion
 
to be fair, pete only yelled Eddie's name and that was well after he was already in the air, lunging towards the symbiote.

and there is evidence to support that eddie did indeed start leaping before the bomb was actually thrown.

But there is. The shot when Peter BENDS his arm to toss the bomb- Eddie yells "Peter- what are you doing?" and he's still on the ground.

Eddie reaching the symbiote before the explosion is a trick of light.

but apart from this, you're saying that yes, Parker did commit manslaughter and did unintentionally kill eddie so i guess we are all on the same boat.

It isn't manslaughter. You'd have to able to at least prove that Peter KNEW Eddie would throw himself into range of the explosion.

Another point to add, is that it's not really a heated discussion, I gone back and forth with dragon before, there's no malice and as you can see from our posts, there is no general rudeness that has ever been given to one another, it's all gravy, just a difference of opinion

True. Despite our being on opposite sides of this debate, there's no question you're extremely sharp and observant. You'd make an excellent Defense Attorney.:woot:
 
Another point to add, is that it's not really a heated discussion, I gone back and forth with dragon before, there's no malice and as you can see from our posts, there is no general rudeness that has ever been given to one another, it's all gravy, just a difference of opinion

Which is why you guys are always a pleasure to debate with. You keep it civil and make it interesting.
 
tis a shame others can't follow from our examples.

It's not that i can't see your points of view, rather than i have my own and i see these types of threads as a piece for people who haven't made up their minds to use other members who pay particular attention to things to help them gather up evidence to make an informed decision on things other than saying..

it sucks or it's cool
 
No.. Harry sacrificed himself. There's a difference. Just as there's a differnece between killing and murder.

And as Venom was the aggressor and initiator of the entire melee, It was HE who made the initial assault. Harry's action were in defense of others.

And, as Venom intiated the event, then he's responsible for EVERY DEATH- including his own and the symbiote.

Then Eddie sacrificed himself.........

And the actual moment where Harry is impaled happens so quickly, that I get the impression that this too might have had different endings scripted and possibly even filmed.
 
But there is. The shot when Peter BENDS his arm to toss the bomb- Eddie yells "Peter- what are you doing?" and he's still on the ground.

Eddie reaching the symbiote before the explosion is a trick of light.
eddie reaches the symbiote just after the bomb but in order to do so, one must believe he leapes just before spidey released the bomb since he would be moving at a slower momentum to just reach the symbiote in time. The actual scenes don't tie up so there is an anomaly there already.
It isn't manslaughter. You'd have to able to at least prove that Peter KNEW Eddie would throw himself into range of the explosion.
I've just properly looked up manslaughter on wikipedia and although it may not be the best reference place, i found this


Involuntary manslaughter, sometimes called criminally negligent homicide in the United States or culpable homicide in Scotland, occurs where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to recklessness or criminal negligence.

[edit] Criminal negligence

Negligence consists of conduct by an individual which is not reasonable -- that is, the individual did not act with the care and caution of a reasonable person in similar circumstances. This "reasonable person" is fictitious, of course, but reflects the standard of conduct which society wishes to impose. Violation of this standard may lead to civil liability for the consequences of the negligent behavior.
Negligence rises to the level of criminal negligence where the conduct reaches a higher degree of carelessness or inattention, perhaps to the point of indifference.

[edit] Recklessness

Recklessness or willful blindness is defined as a wanton disregard for the known dangers of a particular situation. An example of this would be a defendant throwing a brick off a bridge into vehicular traffic below. There exists no intent to kill, consequently a resulting death may not be considered murder. However, the conduct is probably reckless, sometimes used interchangeably with criminally negligent, which may subject the principal to prosecution for involuntary manslaughter: the individual was aware of the risk of injury to others and willfuly disregarded it.
In many jurisdictions, such as in California, if the unintentional conduct amounts to such gross negligence as to amount to a willful or depraved indifference to human life, the mens rea may be considered to constitute malice. In such a case, the charged offense may be murder, often characterized as second degree murder.
In some jurisdictions, such as Victoria, British Columbia, recklessness is sufficient mens rea to justify a conviction for murder.


now based on that, it all kinda depends on whether or not one believed parker took reasonable precautions that a 'reasonable person' would in the same situation. I think you're given the impression that under the stress, you deem him pulling eddie out of the 'blast zone' was reasonable enough.

But let's look at it this way

Those bombs do not belong to peter, he was unaware of the time of bomb that would be used (in all fairness it could have been a sliver device that popped out), he's not aware of the fusage time or the magnitude of this so called blast range. IN all fairness, the device he used may had taken out the whole floor level, its range was certainly bigger than the perimeter parker originally sent up (as seen by fires outside of the blast zone and the bars being bent back by the force of the explosion).

Now considering this and he acted with the use of devices he is not familiar with with an unknown blast radius, throwing such a device in order to detonate and cause harm to another lifeform without this knowledge COULD be seen as wreckless. What is also potentially wreckless is leaving a unprotected civilian in potentially the blast range of device that nobody is aware of the potential damage it might cause. Especially one who has shown a record of attachment to the symbiote and has also shown himself to be a danger to others (or desired a serious wish for harm to be inflicted to others).

Now if these were parker's bombs, i think you may have me trumped here but operating devices one is unfamiliar with, especially explosive ones may easily be deemed as wreckless behaviour, especially with unsecured civilians around and because of this i think spidey is potentially accountable for involuntary manslaughter.
 
Then Eddie sacrificed himself.........

No. Eddie did not sacrifice himself. He probably didn't even expect to die. He was trying to preserve his source of power and means to do damage.

Harry was protecting the life of a human being.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,301
Messages
22,082,381
Members
45,882
Latest member
Charles Xavier
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"