For those who complain about "sympathetic" villains

[ultimatefan]

Tell me you're joking. I own every Ock comic in existence. He was NEVER influenced by the tentacles. They never had A.I. in them. Give me issue numbers, post some pics to back this up.

I gotta see this.



Well I agree somewhat with that analysis. But ultimately they were what set him on the wrong path, when that should have been his own decision. And he shouldn't have redempted on that. Ock chooses his path, Spider-Man chooses his. They don't turn back on it. And never have.

The very first issue, after the accident, I remember a narration baloon saying his mind was affected by the tentacles.

To me the tentacles were more of a manifestation of that side of his personality. They were his ego taking over his better judgement. Doc Ock would never turn back cuz they want to keep him coming back as a villain again and again for future issues. In movies, it´s easier to give the character a final closure.

 

[The Joker]

The very first issue, after the accident, I remember a narration baloon saying his mind was affected by the tentacles.

I can tell you hand on heart that was never said in ASM #3. And if you really want to push it, I'll scan it for you.

To me the tentacles were more of a manifestation of that side of his personality. They were his ego taking over his better judgement.

Well, as I said I somewhat agree. They were like drugs or alcohol, altering his perception of of what is right etc.

Doc Ock would never turn back cuz they want to keep him coming back as a villain again and again for future issues.

Like every other genuinely evil villain.

In movies, it´s easier to give the character a final closure.

They could have done that without having him die a hero. GG2 is a villain that dies a hero. The Lizard is a villain who could die a hero. Heck even Venom or Sandman could.

Ock shouldn't.

 

[weezerspider]

I didn't find GG sympathetic at all. Anyways, Ock was, thats fine with me. If Sandman is, ok, thats fine. I'd rather Sandman not be a sympathetic villain, but as long as the story flows and it is a good one, I'm fine with it. I HOPE Venom isn't , but if he is, I, once again, will be fine with it.

I try not to make these things ruin the movie.

 

[ultimatefan]

I can tell you hand on heart that was never said in ASM #3. And if you really want to push it, I'll scan it for you.



Well, as I said I somewhat agree. They were like drugs or alcohol, altering his perception of of what is right etc.



Like every other genuinely evil villain.



They could have done that without having him die a hero. GG2 is a villain that dies a hero. The Lizard is a villain who could die a hero. Heck even Venom or Sandman could.

Ock shouldn't.

Funny, I don´t own the issue but I clearly remember seeing a scan of it that said that. If I remember correctly, it said the tentacles being fused to his body affected his mind. That´s how I remember it anyway.

Like I said, it was right for that version of the character, which I was fine with. I´m just not as passionate for the comics version of Doc Ock as you.

 

[The Joker]

I try not to make these things ruin the movie.

Oh it didn't ruin the movie for me. But it's certainly one of the flaws of the movie IMO.

I loved every second of Molina's Ock, but some of the character changes were unnecessary.

Funny, I don´t own the issue but I clearly remember seeing a scan of it that said that. If I remember correctly, it said the tentacles being fused to his body affected his mind. That´s how I remember it anyway.

No, the accident affected his mind. Exposure to the radiation fused the tentacles to his body and altered his mind giving him mental control of the arms.

Like I said, it was right for that version of the character, which I was fine with. I´m just not as passionate for the comics version of Doc Ock as you.

It's not just Ock I'm passionate about. It's all the characters. Which is why I wish we had a Spidey who quipped more or generally spoke more. He's hardly an alter ego because he has practically no personality. He's generally a silent character. I'd also prefer a more attractive and spunky MJ, Goblins with better costumes, a story that doesn't revolve around one girl etc.

Like I said, I love the movies, but they are not without their share of flaws.

 

[ultimatefan]

Oh it didn't ruin the movie for me. But it's certainly one of the flaws of the movie IMO.

I.

Fair enough.

 

[Fran]

man, finally...
a new thread...
that's original...
...and actually makes sense.

awesome.

 

[Eddie Brock]

Ock's death was the worst combo of unnecessary and cheesy..

 

[Cdawg751]

I didn't find GG sympathetic at all. Anyways, Ock was, thats fine with me. If Sandman is, ok, thats fine. I'd rather Sandman not be a sympathetic villain, but as long as the story flows and it is a good one, I'm fine with it. I HOPE Venom isn't , but if he is, I, once again, will be fine with it.

I try not to make these things ruin the movie.

It all Depends With Venom...if u feel bad for eddie cause Peter played a role in ruining his life (Humilating Him, Taking His Job, Takin His Girl) An if the Q&A is true an he does die i guess its kinda sympathetic...its how u look at it

 

[Eddie Brock]

i don't want Eddie or Flint dying

 

[Visionary]

Every villain in SM3 is going to die, it's how most studio-heads find their closure in these films.

 

[Fran]

Every villain in SM3 is going to die, it's how most studio-heads find their closure in these films.

too true, my friend.

hey, its my birthday right now! july 30! awesome.

 

[Eddie Brock]

Every villain in SM3 is going to die, it's how most studio-heads find their closure in these films.

yeah, well i can call them something other than "studio" heads, that's for sure..

 

[Spiderine]

too true, my friend.

hey, its my birthday right now! july 30! awesome.

Happy Birthday!

 

[Saint]

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?

Logical fallacy of the false dilemma variety; one-dimensional villains are not the only alternative to sympathetic ones. Any competent writer can conjure a villain with substance who is not "sympathetic."

This thread blows.

 

[bbf2]

Sandman sucks, they can do whatever they want to his origin and I doubt many people would care.

Is anyone actually a Sandman "fan?" I don't just mean being fond of him to the same degree as any other 60's villain, but to the point where he's someone's favorite villain/Spider-Man character, even more than Spidey himself?

I've seen TONS of hardcore Goblin fans, tons of hardcore Ock fans, even some hardcore Lizard and Electro fans......but no hardcore Sandman fans. He's just not that interesting of a character, and you can't delve deep into his motivations and analyze them like you can with the Goblins or Ock or the Lizard, IMO. The ONLY motivation or emotions he's shown are when he was struggling with being a good guy or being a bad guy, which happened way in the 90's WAY after his introduction and was back and forth to an annoying degree.

 

[Jubba]

Topher said that people have had problems with villains being sympathetic and that it was good for him to play a villain that is just "pure evil". SO they acknowledge the problem and are making Eddie Brock / Venom evil through and through with no redeeming qualities, from what I can tell. Sweet.

 

[Drago]

I want a villain so crazy insane that no one feels bad about his sob story. I dont want to sympathize with him I want to watch him lose his mind do mean ass things to people cause there funny then enjoy watching him get is ass kicked. sympathetic villains are simply anti heros.

I do believe that's what we'll see with Venom. I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but that's how it's looking.

Maybe with Harry too, since the CC footage makes it look like Peter attacks him- he was contemplating avenging his father, well he would have a hell of a lot more reason for revenge now, and be really pissed off to boot.

 

[ISHMAEL]

Sandman sucks, they can do whatever they want to his origin and I doubt many people would care.

Is anyone actually a Sandman "fan?" I don't just mean being fond of him to the same degree as any other 60's villain, but to the point where he's someone's favorite villain/Spider-Man character, even more than Spidey himself?

I've seen TONS of hardcore Goblin fans, tons of hardcore Ock fans, even some hardcore Lizard and Electro fans......but no hardcore Sandman fans. He's just not that interesting of a character, and you can't delve deep into his motivations and analyze them like you can with the Goblins or Ock or the Lizard, IMO. The ONLY motivation or emotions he's shown are when he was struggling with being a good guy or being a bad guy, which happened way in the 90's WAY after his introduction and was back and forth to an annoying degree.

you know that's true and i got bashed for saying this about him and doc ock

 

[Tokage]

Is anyone actually a Sandman "fan?" I don't just mean being fond of him to the same degree as any other 60's villain, but to the point where he's someone's favorite villain/Spider-Man character, even more than Spidey himself?

I've seen TONS of hardcore Goblin fans, tons of hardcore Ock fans, even some hardcore Lizard and Electro fans......but no hardcore Sandman fans. He's just not that interesting of a character...

That's kind of the way I felt when Sandman was announced as an SM3 villain -- I was like "Huh? Why him?"

Supposedly Tobey MacGuire likes Sandman the best of any Spidey villain -- that was reported several years ago -- so some people feel that might have been an influence on Sam Raimi to use Sandman in SM3. I'm not sure I believe that because I honestly don't think Tobey was ever that big of a Spider-Man fan to even have a favorite villain. Maybe he just decided he liked Sandman after reading up on Spidey for acting research, but I can't see Tobey being all gung-ho about Sandman.

 

[bbf2]

That's kind of the way I felt when Sandman was announced as an SM3 villain -- I was like "Huh? Why him?"

Supposedly Tobey MacGuire likes Sandman the best of any Spidey villain -- that was reported several years ago -- so some people feel that might have been an influence on Sam Raimi to use Sandman in SM3. I'm not sure I believe that because I honestly don't think Tobey was ever that big of a Spider-Man fan to even have a favorite villain. Maybe he just decided he liked Sandman after reading up on Spidey for acting research, but I can't see Tobey being all gung-ho about Sandman.

I completely agree. I definately remember Tobey saying that he only started reading Spider-Man comics when he was up for the role. Thus, if he declared Sandman as his "favorite villain" it means it was probably just based on him thinking the powers were cool.

Also, Tobey was probably just thinking in terms of making movies when he was reading the comics, so with every villain he read a comic about he was probably thinking about how well they would translate to screen. From an asthetic standpoint Sandman probably works the best since his powers would look cool and he doesn't have an outlandish costume.

Sandman is a villain that has no effect on Spider-Man and never has, other than thinking Spider-Man trying to find ways to beat him. He's never messed with Spidey's mind. Every other member of the Sinister Six has messed with Spidey's head in some way, beat him down, or had some impact in his life.

Ock: Obvious
Kraven: Also obvious, although in one major instance as opposed to many such as Ock's.
Vulture: Killed Aunt May's fiance, Nathan, which was a pretty big storyline. Stole Spidey's youth, which certainly effed him up big time when he thought it was permanent.
Electro: When he powered up in an ASM arc in the late 90s, he had Spidey begging for mercy and completely humiliated. Spidey then became obsessed with finding and paying back Electro, which he never really got to do. He also thrashed Spidey in Marvel Knights and started the Raft prison break.
Mysterio: Made him think Aunt May was dead, got Spider-Man to believe that he was insane, and impersonated Spidey many times which has given him trouble. Plus you gotta give him props for completely effing up Daredevil.

I think the best representative of what I'm trying to say is that....Spidey never really gives much of a second thought to Sandman.

I read the issue when Spider-Man found out that Sandman turned back into a bad guy,(something with Senator Ward) and Spidey didn't really care. He didn't care! He just shrugged it off and started fighting him again. Spidey didn't give two thoughts when Sandman turned into a good guy, and he didn't care when he turned back into a bad guy.

If anything, I'd say Sandman is a better villain for The Thing than he is for Spider-Man. He's fought the Fantastic Four almost as many times as Spider-Man, and The Thing formed a personal relationship with Sandman when Sandy was good, and after Sandman turned bad there was an issue where The Thing had a heart to heart with him and tried to get him to turn back again. But Spider-Man....didn't care. At ALL. He didn't even think "Oh no, now I have a huge threat to worry about again!" He was just mildly perturbed and started fighting him.

Anyway, to get this thread back on topic, my point is: by all means, do what needs to be done to Sandman in the movie. I'm not happy that they put him in the movie and an umimportant character is taking screentime away from the Harry and Venom characters, but he's in it regardless, and apparently he's the main guy. Unlike the other character in these three movies, this is an opportunity to make a character BETTER than he is/was in the comics. Watching him with the exact same motivations and mentality as he did in the comics would be boring, and could never carry a film. If you need to make him sympathetic to make him interesting, go for it.