For those who complain about "sympathetic" villains

[JDym]

To some extent, the Spider-man films have been grounded in reality (with the obvious understanding that we're dealing with superheroes and villains). Love (Peter-Mary Jane), family (Peter-Aunt May-Uncle Ben), friendship (Peter-Harry) and other themes are present in these films because Rami and co. (wisely) decided that-- as seen in the comics and cartoons as well-- these things are important in the world of Spider-man.

A lot of people had problems with Doc Ock turning good/sympathetic at the end of Spiderman 2. This is an old argument, but I'll simply say this-- the man was a good guy with good intentions from the beginning, failure and an excess of power changed his motives (which are both components of turning characters into villains in many stories) but then he grasped what was truly at stake.

Now people are having problems with Sandman possibly being softened up by having a daughter and possibly being turned into another sympathetic villain. What exactly do you people prefer? Heartless one-dimensional criminals that are present in piss poor renditions of your other favorite superhero movies and comics? If you're gonna complain about an excess of "sympathetic villains", then why not make a case that Doc Ock, The Green Goblin, Venom AND Sandman (that being, all the villains we're dealing wtih in all of the movies) are also an excess of villains as a result of an accident of some sort?

I apoligize if this topic isn't the most fresh of debates, however, I fear that once we see more footage and get to know more about the movie, that people are going to complain more about Sandman and his daughter (especially after the release of that poster).

 

[JokerNick]

I actually am really looking forward to Sandman's story, I want him to be sympathetic.... GG wasn't that sympathetic in my opinion, yah yah, poor Norman being forced out of his own business, taking the seruim so he wouldn't lose the contract.... I understand, and feel sorta bad for norman, but all in all, he's motivations for taking the serium were purely for financial reasons, he was already rich, I saw it more as being greedy then anything else.....

Doc Ock could have been sympathetic, but he really wasn't, he was insane, obsessing over some fusion experiment the hole time.... again, he was greedy basically, his intentions were to become a "genius" in the publics eye, because his "energy producing" technology....

Sandman is doing what he's doing, for his child, not for some peice of technology, or to save his company, those are trival matters when it comes down to it.... plus having venom, who is not very sympathetic IMO, will balance the movie out....

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

To some extent, the Spider-man films have been grounded in reality (with the obvious understanding that we're dealing with superheroes and villains). Love (Peter-Mary Jane), family (Peter-Aunt May-Uncle Ben), friendship (Peter-Harry) and other themes are present in these films because Rami and co. (wisely) decided that-- as seen in the comics and cartoons as well-- these things are important in the world of Spider-man.

A lot of people had problems with Doc Ock turning good/sympathetic at the end of Spiderman 2. This is an old argument, but I'll simply say this-- the man was a good guy with good intentions from the beginning, failure and an excess of power changed his motives (which are both components of turning characters into villains in many stories) but then he grasped what was truly at stake.

Now people are having problems with Sandman possibly being softened up by having a daughter and possibly being turned into another sympathetic villain. What exactly do you people prefer? Heartless one-dimensional criminals that are present in piss poor renditions of your other favorite superhero movies and comics? If you're gonna complain about an excess of "sympathetic villains", then why not make a case that Doc Ock, The Green Goblin, Venom AND Sandman (that being, all the villains we're dealing wtih in all of the movies) are also an excess of villains as a result of an accident of some sort?

I apoligize if this topic isn't the most fresh of debates, however, I fear that once we see more footage and get to know more about the movie, that people are going to complain more about Sandman and his daughter (especially after the release of that poster).

Couldn't agree more. Raimi took Flint Marko a common thug and made him into a Jean Val Jean-type character. A man who steals to support his family but also to find a cure for himself. He's done some things he's not proud of, doesn't want Spider-Man or Captain Stacy and the N.Y.P.D. to get in his way, but he does it because he has to find a way to find a cure.

If Raimi made him into a merciless villain with no compassion or sincerity, he'd go back to the common thug route, we'll probably get glimpses of that, but I think Sandman and Harry will probably be antiheroes in this movie, whereas Venom will be the villain who isn't unsympathetic at all.

 

[Dr.Dude]

I don't think Eddie Brock will be completely un-sympathetic.... the movie will show the path of a guy who, as Grace has said, is basically a mirror image of Peter Parker if he had been raised in a bad enviroment.... and you'll see as this guy's life slowly fall apart around him.

But --- the sympathy should give way as soon as he bonds with the symbiote. He immediately embraces all the jealousy, revenge fantasies, everything negative inside himself without question and turns into what can only be described as a monster. He becomes a dark representation of everything that Peter could have turned into if he'd let the symbiote take him over.... so even if you'd felt sympathy for Brock before, by the end you'll be rooting against Venom.

But yeah, its definitely true that Venom represents the balance against Harry and Sandman. Those two, while still villainous, will both probably be represented as sympathetic, human characters through-and-through.

 

[Symbiotica]

* * *

 

[Visionary]

Realism, in a fictional comic book fantasy film, yeah, okay? You people are nuts.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

I don't think Eddie Brock will be completely un-sympathetic.... the movie will show the path of a guy who, as Grace has said, is basically a mirror image of Peter Parker if he had been raised in a bad enviroment.... and you'll see as this guy's life slowly fall apart around him.

But --- the sympathy should give way as soon as he bonds with the symbiote. He immediately embraces all the jealousy, revenge fantasies, everything negative inside himself without question and turns into what can only be described as a monster. He becomes a dark representation of everything that Peter could have turned into if he'd let the symbiote take him over.... so even if you'd felt sympathy for Brock before, by the end you'll be rooting against Venom.

But yeah, its definitely true that Venom represents the balance against Harry and Sandman. Those two, while still villainous, will both probably be represented as sympathetic, human characters through-and-through.

Well after watching the new trailer Grace is right, he seems like a mirrored image of Parker. Here is a guy who looks like Parker, has the same taste for women as Parker, but yet Brock is a guy who like you said embraces all jealousy and revenge fantasies. He hates being humiliated, he hates having the world be pulled right from under him like a carpet rug, and that scene where he goes to the church and says "I come here humbled and humiliated..." just shows the man is at a lost. He truely hates Parker there. And really maybe...the Venom costume despite "being at the wrong place, at the wrong time" is a metaphor for the Faust story where Faust sold his soul to the Devil. In this case it's Brock selling his soul to be evil, to let his revenge come alive, and since the symbiote is like a plague or cancer that feeds off of revenge, hate, anger, etc. he becomes what Peter could've ultimately become if he kept the suit.

 

[Eddie Brock]

Sandman is supposed to be a common thug who gets powers, not a father figure.

 

[Symbiotica]

Sandman is supposed to be a common thug who gets powers, not a father figure.

Thank you.

Proof at least one other person out there gets it.

 

[Spawn187]

How about this for realism Pete gets bit from spider catches birdflu and dies................................................................ HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Symbiotica]

* * *

 

[Eddie Brock]

I'm just as fed up with sympathetic villains as the next guy..especially when it's not part of their original character.

 

[ges681]

i think it adds to their creepiness. how a man can be a complete psycho, yet sympathetic to some people at the same time. kinda creepy...

 

[Johnny Israel]

I don't see why some have the problem of not grasping why many on here want villians especially like Sandman to be just a bad person who happened to get powers and thusly a super villian.

Sorry to rehash the point as its been made. But we all know people who are complete dousches who if given powers would just use them to be bigger jerk offs then they are now. Its a realistic want to have villians who are not family men, have nice families, or who you feel bad for. I want a villian who just wanna see get the crap kicked out of and take great enjoyment from that. Norman was the closest to that. You could feel bad for ock cause he had a nice wife, pressure to perform at his job from oscorp, and wanted to help people.

I dont see why its to much to ask for Sandman to be some two bit thug who got lucky in the supervillian power sweepstakes (not a literal sweepstakes for some of you on this board)

Bah i keep going off on stuff thats been said..../rant

 

[Drago]

I don't mind changes from the comic-book to the big screen- Raimi uses the villians in a way that they are thematically grounded in the same situation as Pete, plus he gives good character development and symbolically represents the issues at hand. He's probably the one director I have complete faith in.

For Spidey 3 we may get a Sandman with family-driven problems, but I still think he'll get great development PLUS Raimi may touch on balancing that duality that was established so well in Spidey 2. Harry will get good development and closure, and Brock will most likely have legitimate reasons for wanting revenge on Parker (just like how Parker has legitimate reasons for being Spider-man), only Parker will choose to live without the "darkness" that Brock will choose to live with (showing opposite ends of balancing that dichotomy from Spidey 2).

We're being set-up so that by the end of Spidey 3 Parker realizes exactly how he will handle being Spider-man, balancing both identities the way he sees fit, realizing the repercussions of his actions. It would probably make sense to then introduce a villian- for example Lizard- who in the movieverse would have that same balancing of two identities but be a level-headed villian, fully realizing what the consequences of his actions are- NOT a villian meant to be sympathized with, but still thematically grounded the same way Pete is.

I'm really thinking that neither Venom, Harry, nor whoever the future villian is, will be tragic villians. BUT, if that isn't the case, as long as it's good for the story, I have no problem changing aspects of the comic character.

 

[Drago]

I don't see why some have the problem of not grasping why many on here want villians especially like Sandman to be just a bad person who happened to get powers and thusly a super villian.

Sorry to rehash the point as its been made. But we all know people who are complete dousches who if given powers would just use them to be bigger jerk offs then they are now. Its a realistic want to have villians who are not family men, have nice families, or who you feel bad for. I want a villian who just wanna see get the crap kicked out of and take great enjoyment from that. Norman was the closest to that. You could feel bad for ock cause he had a nice wife, pressure to perform at his job from oscorp, and wanted to help people.

I dont see why its to much to ask for Sandman to be some two bit thug who got lucky in the supervillian power sweepstakes (not a literal sweepstakes for some of you on this board)

Bah i keep going off on stuff thats been said..../rant

It's good to have a tragic villian, but not all the time... it would get old if we saw another rehash of the scientist/failed experiment thing. I think the only reason Raimi did it was because in Spider-Man 2 he was given complete creative control over the film (unlike Spidey 1), and he wanted to cover someone whose destiny isn't what they had planned- same reason that Spidey 2 goes back and does somewhat of an origin story again... he wanted to cover that part of the spider-man story in a way he saw fit (which he probably couldn't do as much with Spidey 1).

Back to villians though- I think Spidey 3 will show us some good villians who aren't tragic characters. While I really like tragic villians, it would get really old really quickly if that's all we saw.

 

[Wiim0te]

Well after watching the new trailer Grace is right, he seems like a mirrored image of Parker. Here is a guy who looks like Parker, has the same taste for women as Parker, but yet Brock is a guy who like you said embraces all jealousy and revenge fantasies. He hates being humiliated, he hates having the world be pulled right from under him like a carpet rug, and that scene where he goes to the church and says "I come here humbled and humiliated..." just shows the man is at a lost. He truely hates Parker there. And really maybe...the Venom costume despite "being at the wrong place, at the wrong time" is a metaphor for the Faust story where Faust sold his soul to the Devil. In this case it's Brock selling his soul to be evil, to let his revenge come alive, and since the symbiote is like a plague or cancer that feeds off of revenge, hate, anger, etc. he becomes what Peter could've ultimately become if he kept the suit.

I agree. Great post.

 

[FaT_tONle]

At least it's a motive (the kid) for all those Bank robberies... not a motive for kidnapping Gwen and teaming with Venom though :-(...

 

[SpiderB]

Sandman is supposed to be a common thug who gets powers, not a father figure.

But even a common thug has moments of vulnerability. Sandman won't be a "good guy gone bad" like Doc Ock was. He's still a hardened criminal. But what if there's a side to his story that we never saw in the comics? That he has a daughter? He's a human being, is it so weird to think that he might have a child? Lots of criminals have families, you know.

Sandman will still be the street-tough criminal we know from the comics. He's not a good guy. But he also has a daughter, and his love for her is what shows us that he's human and he's not just some one dimensional comic supervillain.

 

[The Shape]

Psssh....who's complaining??

 

[Spider-X]

sympathetic characters breed more emotion from the audience...one dimensional "evil for the sake of it" villians are much less interesting. and it's more realistic to have a sympathetic villian, most "bad" people in this world (as in reality) are a product of something horrible happening to them as well...it's an exaggeration of reality and it makes the characters more accessible to more people.

i like it.

 

[Eddie Brock]

i didnt mind so much with Ock, but this is Sandman
he is a common, low-level thug, who gets very lucky

 

[Mauser9910]

I like the Spider-Man villains to have if not loveable at least relatable side, making them not one dimensional villains.

Otherwise it'd be DC-like, "Oh I'm evil, I'm sooo eviiil..."

 

[Eddie Brock]

true, but The Joker and Lex Luthor can be portrayed excellently without being sympathetic

 

[TheVileOne]

Great writers like Geoff Johns did great things with the Flash Rogues gallery and made them more than just stupid thugs.

Is everyone here forgetting that Sandman was an Avenger once?

Sandman having a family isn't going to automatically make him a good guy. For all we know he could be a total deadbeat f'n dad and a *****e that thinks he's trying to make good or provide for his family but doing it the wrong way.

Did you people complain this much when The Vulture was trying to steal money to get his sick grandson money for his cancer treatment?

Or when Electro wanted to retire with his girlfriend?