Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Spider-Man: No Way Home' started by Arachnerd, Apr 19, 2021.
I still enjoy the hell out of Spider-Man 3, flaws and all.
Interesting. I’m not sure if it will but it could definitely happen. Personally for me I like the ASM movies so this can only add to that simply to see Andrew on screen again. SM1 and 2 are classics and I hated SM3 but have started to soften my stance on it.
HC and FFH are the opposite for me. I liked both movies to start and I’ve disliked them more and more as time has gone on.
It has some really good stuff in it with some great action, and the Sandman forgiveness scene at the end is genuinely touching. With some script revisions it would’ve been a great movie, imo. On par with the first two.
If they had just left Raimi alone to tell the story he wanted it would have been great. But no Avi Arad was all like "Teh fanboys want VeNoM!!!".
Yup. The symbiote stuff had no business in that movie, especially with the fact that Raimi already had what he wanted in mind before Arad came in and messed it all up.
But Sandman actually feels more forced into the movie in the end as people mentioned earlier. Also the revelation that he was Uncle Ben’s real killer was stupid as hell
Yeah but that was all a product of the inclusion of the symbiote. Raimi originally had a story with Sandman and Vulture. But they had to scrap Vulture for Venom. So then the whole theme of the movie had to be rewritten. They had to find a way to include Sandman in the revenge theme.
Granted they could have come up with something better than the Uncle Ben bull crap. But it was a dominoes effect of the symbiote baggage being lumbered onto the movie.
TASM3 got cancelled because fans voted with their wallets by not supporting TASM2.
SM3 was the highest grossing Spider-Man movie and they still cancelled it despite that. They are not the same.
Raimi's Spider-Man 4 was scrapped because the writer attached couldn't deliver a decent-enough story for him to work with on time and Sony rebooted the series IMMEDAITELY after Raimi bailed in disgust. I've read what was in the outline; it makes SM3 look like an Oscar-winner by comparison and would've DESTROYED the Peter/MJ relationship that was built up for 3 previous movies.
Might I ask if you know what Raimi’s original Sandman plot line was? To me, it seems like Raimi would’ve put the Sandman retcon in regardless as a means to personalize the conflict between Sandman and Spider-Man. To be honest, I think it’s really unclear whether a Venom-less Spider-Man 3 would’ve been that much better than the movie we got especially since I would argue the problem with Spider-Man 3 was more Raimi’s bad script than the inclusion of one character he didn’t care for. I really can’t say.
If you are referring to the same outline I've read in the past, that is fake. Other than some character inclusions and storyboards, nothing about the plot has really leaked from this.
Was it ever proven fake?
What was destroying the Peter MJ relationship is MJs depiction through out the series. This is not the MJ I know…. Also it’s hard to really root for MJ because Dunst was unlikable and the character was never one you could root for. Also take into account that Tobey just looked drained in the role at this point. It showed in his performance as well.
It was time for them to move on at that point. Now that time has passed…maybe they can continue along but at that particular moment. Tobey just didn’t have the same spunk in his performance by the time SM3 rolled around.
I’m no big fan of Arad, but I’ll defend his insistence on using Venom since the alternative was The Vulture who was a character many fans couldn’t care less about. I think Venom actually was the perfect villain for the third film as he was a nice change of pace from doing the old scientist mentor figure that turns bad because of an accident cliche’ that previous movies had done already. I obviously don’t speak for all fans, but I’m much less interested in a Spider-Man 3 that has Vulture and Sandman than I am that has Venom. If anything, if Avi Arad had forced Raimi to cut Sandman and just had him focus on Venom and Green Goblin then I bet you that Spider-Man 3 would end up a much stronger film.
Please dm e the story, beginning to end
While there are areas in SM3 that don't handle the Black suit story very well. I actually think the Black suit stuff is the least of the film's issues personally. The horror aspects of the black suit story would probably be up Raimi's ally really. While Harrys subplot suffers the most from things that probably didn't need to be there. Like losing his memory, the butler, ect ect. And Sandman is there because Raimi wanted to play with Sandman. Simple as that really.
Seeing Raimi make villains like Vulture and Sandman more popular with a great story would have been more impressive to me than to have Venom in there for the sake of popularity. I'd rather have a director use the villains they want to use to tell a great story than to use one because he's popular.
With that being said, I'm very impressed that Spider-Man 3 is as good as it is with all the stuff that was forced on Raimi. I genuinely loved Black Suit Spider-Man and thought Venom looked awesome in the film.
Was it ever proven real? The most traction it got was on random reddit boards and 4chan. It's never been backed up by any real evidence, other than someone posting information online.
What is real are statements released by people who worked on the movie. The most story wise we've gotten are the storyboards that Jeffrey Henderson released on his website.
That’s fair, and I understand where you’re coming from especially considering Raimi’s Doc Ock is still arguably the most liked version of the character but even as someone who likes Raimi’s Sandman and loves his scene where Peter forgives him, I have to admit he just wasn’t needed in the film, and if you removed him from the story and just focus on Peter grappling with the Symbiote, Venom, and Harry it would make for a much better movie, imo. And as much as love Raimi as a filmmaker, I simply don’t feel Vulture is a terribly compelling antagonist to follow Doc Ock, especially since I suspect Raimi likely would’ve made him once again a older mentor figure to Peter which has been done with Ock already. Getting Venom in the third movie allows for you to tell a different type of story than what has been done before in trilogy and tell the story of a someone who’s around Peter’s peer who chooses to use his powers irresponsibly. I think Raimi’s poor screenwriting is the biggest enemy of Spider-Man 3, not Venon or Avi Arad, but I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Brah if they even resurrect Spider-Man 4 with Raimi, Maguire and Dunst....
I wouldn’t hold my breath as Sony seems more than happy with the current Holland franchise but I can definitely see Maguire coming back in a cameo in Strange 2 which just so happens to have Raimi directing.
We know from the Making of Spider-Man 3 book that wouldn't have been the case. Vulture would have been a criminal that was previously busted by Spider-Man and he would have been Sandman's cellmate.
Ah, in either case, I wouldn’t have cared to see that version either. Vulture has never been that compelling a bad dude, imo.
People who are pooh-poohing this now.... wait until NWH wraps up its theatrical run and people falling back in love with the previous two actors.
Sony will be doing SOMETHING with Maguire and Garfield in the future, even if it's not a Raimi SM-4 or TASM3.
That's fair. Did you like Keaton's portayel in Homecoming? I feel that despite me rather wanting a Spider-Man 3 that featured Vulture, I really like the blue-collar, underground weapons dealer version we got with Keaton.
I'm a broken record with this lol but I would be all for a Spider-Girl movie with Tobey and Kirsten returning.