RAMI "CONFIRMS" Sandman as....

[Robin91939]

I refuse to believe Raimi would do something like that. He won't trivialize Spidey's ENTIRE origin having had him go after (and even KILL) the wrong guy. I'm not trusting that Raimi "meant" the Sandman in that quote. I'll believe it when I see the movie. Even if it's true, Sandman will NOT be made the killer, he'll have been an accomplise, nothing more.

But then, where did Marko go after the murder? Wouldn't he stick with The Burgler? It doesn't add up.

Hell, even if it IS true, I'll live. It's just a movie.

I don't kow how you can read the quotes he said, and NOT believe that he was talking about Marko. He talked about Harry...finished. Then stated ANOTHER villian, then named Brock.

So you have Harry plus Brock. That makes TWO villains. We have THREE in the movie. The third being SANDMAN.


And yes, I really hope that he is JUST an accomplish.

-R

 

[DocLathropBrown]

He didn't kill him.

Technically, he did. He scared the guy out of the window.

 

[Parquagh]

in ultimate spider-man, the symbiote messed with spider-man's mind, and he thought this criminal was the same guy who killed his uncle.

well in this movie spider-man has the symbiote, and we saw pictures of uncle ben being killed by flint marco with a white dream like background. It doesn't take a genius, to see where they got the idea.

Man you make good points, I believe this will go Ultimate but what Raimi says just makes us more confused.... To be a dream or not to be.... there's the enigma...

Oh and if it's not a dream I also hope he's just the accomplish or the boss of the murderer

 

[The Kid]

why are you pretty sure? you know quite often stuff is shot indoors on a stage, and made to look like it's outdoors.

it was shot on location in New york. i'm just telling the truth here.

link to the images: http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryLis...&str=&styp=&sfld=&nbc1=1&sortval=3a&PageNum=4

 

[batman7289]

what the hell r u talking about

 

[Parquagh]

Guys I think that if it is a dream or not a dream sequence it can be filmed both in a Studio or outdoors....

 

[The Kid]

We'll see. Raimi practically confirms it here but, we'll see.

 

[Marvel Man]

UNCLE BEN'S killer.

He said quote:

"One of the other villains [Sandman], we've tried to weave the story into Peter Parker's personal life in as important of a way as we could. In a way that will hopefully make more of the first two pictures. Give us insights into what we've seen before."

So, basically he said that Sandman was made to connect to Peter as being the murderer or atleast involved in the murder of Ben Parker. The scene shot is not a dream/nightmare sequence resulting from Peter's reaction from the symbiot.

That kind of bites.

-R

As much as i dont really like that idea, it will work out better for the good because then it will be more of a personal vendetta for Peter now.

 

[The Kid]

Wasn't everyone singing and dancing about sandman because he supposedly had no personal connection to Peter?

 

[Robin91939]

Wasn't everyone singing and dancing about sandman because he supposedly had no personal connection to Peter?

Exactly my worry.


It's like the Joke being the killer of the Waynes...unnesecary.

-R

 

[ultimatefan]

So, basically he said that Sandman was made to connect to Peter as being the murderer or atleast involved in the murder of Ben Parker. The scene shot is not a dream/nightmare sequence resulting from Peter's reaction from the symbiote.

I'm not jumping to conclusions. I said that he is EITHER the killer or INVOLVED with the killing. Never did I jump to conclusions.

-R

It´s an interpretation, not an exact quote.

 

[3 Dev Adam]

"You made me!"

 

[GL1]

Exactly my worry.


It's like the Joke being the killer of the Waynes...unnesecary.

-R

That's the difference between movies and comics... Spider-Man and it's sequel were so great because everything connected, each of the villains had a personal relationship with Peter Parker, making the final fights powerful. Movies don't have a six issue build up so they need to make the conflicts resonate in some other way, and the way that has made the SM franchise successful is linking it through Peter's personal life, and it's worked beautifully.

If not for the fact that we've SEEN Uncle Ben's killer, and it's not Church, I wouldn't mind the connection. Maybe he was the driver... that'd be cool. Maybe he was one of MJ's attackers in Part 1. Maybe Flint was calling the shots for someone. Meh. It could work...

 

[Spider-Bite]

it's a lame cop out way to deepen the character though, and it takes away from the first movie. besides what are the odds of the same guy who killed Uncle Ben becoming a villain, who by coincedence the nephew of the guy he killed becoming a superhero with powers? who by coincedence has a best friend who's father becomes the green goblin? who by coincedence has lunch with this guy wholater becomes doctor octopus?

It's like winning the lottery, and getting struck by lighting in the same week, only to have both happen again on the fifth anniversary of when it happened last time.

 

[Katsuro]

it's a lame cop out way to deepen the character though, and it takes away from the first movie. besides what are the odds of the same guy who killed Uncle Ben becoming a villain, who by coincedence the nephew of the guy he killed becoming a superhero with powers? who by coincedence has a best friend who's father becomes the green goblin? who by coincedence has lunch with this guy wholater becomes doctor octopus?

It's like winning the lottery, and getting struck by lighting in the same week, only to have both happen again on the fifth anniversary of when it happened last time.

Exactly how I feel. It's like, for some reason, only people connected to a superhero are capable of gaining powers. I was looking forward to a villain that was just some guy, in no way connected to Spider-Man. This movie will mark 5 straight villains (GG, Doc Ock, Sandman, GG2, Venom) all with a personal connection to Peter, and not a single villain without.

I mean, I get them wanting to have a villain with a personal connection to the hero, but the thing is... they already have that!!! Harry more than fills that void, and we even have Venom! Why do all three have to be connected to him? it's ridiculous.

I'm also wondering how the hell they're gonna write him finding out. It's one of the main things that makes me think it's a dream. I cant imagine how something like this would be revealed. I'm sure Uncle Ben wouldn't be the first guy Sandman ever killed, so how would Spider-Man come to find out about this?

still hoping it's a dream.

 

[Spider-Bite]

It's possible that the audience might be led to believe that peter's hallucinations are real, but then later on we find out that they are not. that way we, the audience gets taken for the same ride peter gets taken for.

 

[Red]

Do'h.

 

[Yurka]

It better be a dream, that would really piss me off if it wasnt

 

[XCharlieX]

Exactly how I feel. It's like, for some reason, only people connected to a superhero are capable of gaining powers. I was looking forward to a villain that was just some guy, in no way connected to Spider-Man. This movie will mark 5 straight villains (GG, Doc Ock, Sandman, GG2, Venom) all with a personal connection to Peter, and not a single villain without.

Hmmm there was one solution i thought about. The connection was Oscorp really in 1 and 2. If they want to make sense of more villains id suggest they tie it in with Oscorp in an indirect fashion since theyre one of the first companies to stumble upon very strange science.

There was another idea i had where Harry introduced venom into the world via his labs to get spiderman back, but who knows what the actual film will do.

 

[Cinemaman]

I am fine with Sandman being Ben's killer

 

[lordofthenerds]

I've been pretty sure that Sandman is Uncle Ben's killer ever since those set pics since the script summary told us that this would happen a long time ago.

 

[XCharlieX]

So what happened to the guy with the flat top and blonde highlights? Mr Church looks nothing like him.

 

[pedro parkero]

It's possible that the audience might be led to believe that peter's hallucinations are real, but then later on we find out that they are not. that way we, the audience gets taken for the same ride peter gets taken for.

Yeah. Maybe it's one of those instances where Raimi yanks our chains...

 

[JackBauer]

*sigh* when will these people understand that a villain does not have to have a personal connection with the hero for the hero to have a motivation to fight him? a hero's supposed to fight all villains, doesn't matter if they killed their uncle or it's just a random guy.

 

[GL1]

it's a lame cop out way to deepen the character though, and it takes away from the first movie. besides what are the odds of the same guy who killed Uncle Ben becoming a villain, who by coincedence the nephew of the guy he killed becoming a superhero with powers? who by coincedence has a best friend who's father becomes the green goblin? who by coincedence has lunch with this guy wholater becomes doctor octopus?

Coincedence written off with the same suspension of disbeleif that allows a boy to get spider powers by being bitten.

But I ask, what's a better way to deepen the character? Why should we care about Sandman any more than the random thugs Spider-Man fights in montages. The little girl poster has me thinking that they may delve into his personal life, but if the only reason we have to care about sandman is that he has a daughter, then he's just a really expensive thug, and should have screen time to reflect that... not be a main villain.

Again, why should we care about Sandman? I haven't read too many comics with him in it, so unless the movie gives me a reason, I probably won't. What's the right way?