Rant About Sony, Spider-Man 3, and Spider-Man 4

[MaryJaneOrDie]

From what I gather the Pre-Venom Spider-Man 3 would have been a much different movie. I hear a lot of people who whine and say that 3 villains is too much, but I strongly disagree, it can be done. Look at Batman Begins (Falcone, Scarecrow, Raz Al Guhl) the Dark Knight (Scarecrow, The Joker, Two-Face) it just has to be done right. Also I am a firm believer in directors control over their projects, more often than not when the studio backs off we get a better product.

I also believe in "sequel-syndrome" and the idea quality goes down as sequels progress and the movie strays farther and farther from the original (eventually becomes more rooted in the sequel that precedes it and loses the soul it initially had). The best formula in making a sequel is to build upon important themes, that havent been fully realized yet or explored. This makes the film seem like a necessary continuation, rather than a contrivance to the characters and actors on the big screen. Spider-Man 2 is a perfect example, and laid solid ground work for Spider-Man 3.

I remember back in 04 or 05 i saw an article about Spider-Man 3 and its working premise. At the time i thought it was all fictional, but much of it turned out to be true. It didnt give very specific details but it stated how the film was going to focus on Peter protecting Mary Jane from his enemies (Harry, Sandman, and the Vulture specifically). This seems like a logical next step for the series to take. From what I've heard since then the story went kinda like this:
*Harry sets out to avenge his father personally and is in conflict with Spider-Man throughout the movie.
*Sandman has a sick daughter still, but is being manipulated into committing crimes for the Vulture (his former cell mate) and didnt kill uncle ben (because theres no need for the revenge angle without the symbiote being included).
*Vulture is an old man who is put in jail by Spider-Man. He has no connection to Peter Parker, but now has it out for Spider-Man (the kind of person he was worried about going after Mary Jane). He figures out Peter is Spider-Man and kidnaps Mary Jane with Sandman.

This sounds like it would have worked a lot better than what we got simply because when you take out all the contrivances brought by Gwen and the Black suite, you lose all the problems. Mary Jane has something to do so we dont have to sit through her obnoxious character arc. Harry doesnt have to go into amnesia because we dont need to make time to develop Black Suit Peter (Rather the villian that gets shafted in Jail most of the time is vulture and has a fairly generic revenge plot and doesn't need as much development). Most importantly there is no emo Peter!

The studio ****ed that up, but it was the most successful of the trilogy so rather than learning their lesson they decided to ruin Spider-Man 4 too. Raimi wanted to use the Vulture as the main villain since he couldnt use him last time, but the studio told him to shoehorn Felicia Hardy in. The plot they came up with was SO bad its shocking. You've probably already heard this so I wont go into detail about the plot. The point is, the studio killed this franchise just like warner bros killed Burtons Batman. It's sad because I know we'll never get something like that again. I know I might not be on the popular side of the argument but Tobey as Peter Parker had an awkward charm to him that just made him so lovable and relatable. It's a shame we didnt get the 6 films they signed on for :/

 

[Anno_Domini]

Falcone for BB and Scarecrow for TDK weren't exactly main attraction villains. They didn't go as far as New Goblin, Sandman and Venom. Falcone for BB and Scarecrow for TDK were as minor as Maroni was in TDK as well.

BUT...we will see if a movie can do three villains perfectly with TDKR. They have the same scenario going on that Spider-Man 3 had with [BLACKOUT]Bane, Talia al Ghul and Catwoman playing a version much as Harry since she'll be teaming up with Batman down the line in the film.[/BLACKOUT]

 

[Godzilla2014]

From what I gather the Pre-Venom Spider-Man 3 would have been a much different movie. I hear a lot of people who whine and say that 3 villains is too much, but I strongly disagree, it can be done. Look at Batman Begins (Falcone, Scarecrow, Raz Al Guhl) the Dark Knight (Scarecrow, The Joker, Two-Face) it just has to be done right. Also I am a firm believer in directors control over their projects, more often than not when the studio backs off we get a better product.

I also believe in "sequel-syndrome" and the idea quality goes down as sequels progress and the movie strays farther and farther from the original (eventually becomes more rooted in the sequel that precedes it and loses the soul it initially had). The best formula in making a sequel is to build upon important themes, that havent been fully realized yet or explored. This makes the film seem like a necessary continuation, rather than a contrivance to the characters and actors on the big screen. Spider-Man 2 is a perfect example, and laid solid ground work for Spider-Man 3.

I remember back in 04 or 05 i saw an article about Spider-Man 3 and its working premise. At the time i thought it was all fictional, but much of it turned out to be true. It didnt give very specific details but it stated how the film was going to focus on Peter protecting Mary Jane from his enemies (Harry, Sandman, and the Vulture specifically). This seems like a logical next step for the series to take. From what I've heard since then the story went kinda like this:
*Harry sets out to avenge his father personally and is in conflict with Spider-Man throughout the movie.
*Sandman has a sick daughter still, but is being manipulated into committing crimes for the Vulture (his former cell mate) and didnt kill uncle ben (because theres no need for the revenge angle without the symbiote being included).
*Vulture is an old man who is put in jail by Spider-Man. He has no connection to Peter Parker, but now has it out for Spider-Man (the kind of person he was worried about going after Mary Jane). He figures out Peter is Spider-Man and kidnaps Mary Jane with Sandman.

This sounds like it would have worked a lot better than what we got simply because when you take out all the contrivances brought by Gwen and the Black suite, you lose all the problems. Mary Jane has something to do so we dont have to sit through her obnoxious character arc. Harry doesnt have to go into amnesia because we dont need to make time to develop Black Suit Peter (Rather the villian that gets shafted in Jail most of the time is vulture and has a fairly generic revenge plot and doesn't need as much development). Most importantly there is no emo Peter!

The studio ****ed that up, but it was the most successful of the trilogy so rather than learning their lesson they decided to ruin Spider-Man 4 too. Raimi wanted to use the Vulture as the main villain since he couldnt use him last time, but the studio told him to shoehorn Felicia Hardy in. The plot they came up with was SO bad its shocking. You've probably already heard this so I wont go into detail about the plot. The point is, the studio killed this franchise just like warner bros killed Burtons Batman. It's sad because I know we'll never get something like that again. I know I might not be on the popular side of the argument but Tobey as Peter Parker had an awkward charm to him that just made him so lovable and relatable. It's a shame we didnt get the 6 films they signed on for :/

The problem with the way Spider-Man 3 used its three villains is that none are really allowed to be the film's main villain, nor are they related in any way. The story loses its momentum multiple times as each villain is defeated to make way for the next one, and the narrative loses all of its cohesion. None of the villains really come off as scary or intimidating. Harry wants to kill Peter, but he gets his ass kicked to the point of hospitalization each time he fights Spider-Man. Sandman really just wants to get money for his daughter, but he's not developed enough for the audience to sympathize with him. Venom just does the same god damn thing Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus did in the previous two films: Kidnap Mary Jane, get his ass kicked, and die.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

Falcone for BB and Scarecrow for TDK weren't exactly main attraction villains. They didn't go as far as New Goblin, Sandman and Venom. Falcone for BB and Scarecrow for TDK were as minor as Maroni was in TDK as well.

The problem with the way Spider-Man 3 used its three villains is that none are really allowed to be the film's main villain, nor are they related in any way. The story loses its momentum multiple times as each villain is defeated to make way for the next one, and the narrative loses all of its cohesion. None of the villains really come off as scary or intimidating. Harry wants to kill Peter, but he gets his ass kicked to the point of hospitalization each time he fights Spider-Man. Sandman really just wants to get money for his daughter, but he's not developed enough for the audience to sympathize with him. Venom just does the same god damn thing Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus did in the previous two films: Kidnap Mary Jane, get his ass kicked, and die.

I think you both missed my point, but I agree with both of you as you are generally saying the same thing. My point was that the studio has no right to interfere with the script because characters arent interchangeable. I think Vulture could have worked because he would have spent most of the movie in Jail and the rest of the film would be spent developing Sandman and focusing on Harry and Peters relationship. When you put in Venom, you have to put in the Black Suit, and when you put in the Black Suit you have to showcase Peters darkside, and theres just not time for that.

Its like you wrote a recipe about how to make a strawberry milkshake, but then at the last minute your publisher tells you that the people like to drink so you have to substitute milk for beer. Its just not the same and it makes things that would have otherwise worked, not.

I am just mad that we didnt get to see what Raimi actually had in mind for Spider-Man 3 because the studio insisted on Venom, or Spider-Man 4 because the studio insisted on Felicia Hardy.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Spider-Man 3 could've worked just fine with all of those elements if someone understood how to use so many villains into the film. It seems that it takes a genius, I guess, to fit in so many villains into a film.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

It would have also helped if one of the writer's didn't do it as a hobby. The good doctor Alan Smithee, Sr

 

[Venom75]

I'm still a bit bitter about the whole thing. I really liked the film,but it does have so many flaws to it,and everyone knows my feeling about how Venom and the symbiote were screwed over. But I really wish they had saved Venom for part 4. That way,Venom would have had a chance to shine and really be developed in his own film,and also...there would've BEEN a Spider-man 4.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I'm still a bit bitter about the whole thing. I really liked the film,but it does have so many flaws to it,and everyone knows my feeling about how Venom and the symbiote were screwed over. But I really wish they had saved Venom for part 4. That way,Venom would have had a chance to shine and really be developed in his own film,and also...there would've BEEN a Spider-man 4.

Even if they saved Venom for SM4, Raimi had no real love for the character to begin with, so you probably would have been screwed over anyway. But the good thing about Venom is that he is probably the most boxoffice capable villian in the MU that you could create a franchise around. Sony played around with the idea already and would not be surprised if they revisited it.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

Even if they saved Venom for SM4, Raimi had no real love for the character to begin with, so you probably would have been screwed over anyway. But the good thing about Venom is that he is probably the most boxoffice capable villian in the MU that you could create a franchise around. Sony played around with the idea already and would not be surprised if they revisited it.

exactly but that never would have happened. originally spider-man 3 and 4 were going to be filmed back to back but the studio wanted venom in 3 not 4. so blame sony for that.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

exactly but that never would have happened. originally spider-man 3 and 4 were going to be filmed back to back but the studio wanted venom in 3 not 4. so blame sony for that.

They were part of the blame for sure.

 

[Anno_Domini]

When were 3 and 4 ever going to be filmed back-to-back? I thought it was only for 4 and 5 for a moment.

 

[henzINNIT]

^ During the development of Spiderman 3, the scope got so large they considered 2 films. It was dropped as they couldn't find a satisfying half-way conclusion.

 

[Anno_Domini]

That was during the writing, because only Alvin Sargent thought of splitting it into two while writing the thing, but it was never realized, as you said, because there was no satisfying way to end the third film, but 4 and 5, for the longest, was going to be filmed back-to-back.

 

[henzINNIT]

Didn't realise 4 and 5 was ever much of a serious consideration either tbh. By the time it got cancelled, it was pretty much all about 4. I remember talk of a hefty double-feature price tag for Maguire.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

they were signed on to make up to Spider-Man 6. I started to get a bad feeling when it didnt have its own wikipedia page or any posters by the end of 09 and when the release date kept getting pushed back. Its a shame I was looking forward to the adventures of an adult Spider-Man and getting to see what smaller villians would look like on the big screen.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Didn't realise 4 and 5 was ever much of a serious consideration either tbh. By the time it got cancelled, it was pretty much all about 4. I remember talk of a hefty double-feature price tag for Maguire.

Yah, for the longest, there were talks of filming the two back-to-back and got Raimi, Maguire and Dunst all signed up for them. That even was talked about even while Raimi was trying to correct the script, although everything failed and we were given the reboot instead, which is quite ironic, because we are given the film in 2012, the year Raimi wanted the fourth installment to be pushed back but Sony didn't want to.

they were signed on to make up to Spider-Man 6. I started to get a bad feeling when it didnt have its own wikipedia page

 

[zeptron]

The villains in SM3 didn't really fit in with each. Plus Venom is too big a villain to be playing second fiddle to anyone. And even though Raimi didn't care for him, I think the studio could have worked something out by starting the symbiote stuff in a fourth instead of pressuring him to put him in a movie at the last minute and where he had no foreshadowing.

Regardless of how people feel about Vulture, we probably would have ended up with a better movie if Raimi got to do things the way he wanted. Vulture and Sandman would have been connected right from the start and would have shared scenes together. Thus making the teamup between the two actually make sense. And Vulture would have been the first villain in the movie series to be evil beforehand.

I really think people underestimate the potential Vulture has. They're so quick to dismiss him. Raimi could have easily made him an interesting and threatening villain. Especially with an actor like Ben Kingsley playing him. Because of Sony we missed out on what could have been an epic air battle between him and Harry.

 

[Venom75]

What I've often found distasteful is how,after Spider-man 3 alot of people made a big deal about Raimi not having any control,as he did in the first 2. Sony was blasted for that. So,what do they do for part 4? Stick their nose in there again which eventually causes Spidey 4 to be cancelled. Jeez,Sony.

 

[zeptron]

Arad also tried to interfere with Spider-man 2. Not only did he also want Lizard and Black Cat in, but he also wanted to make Doc Ock a younger man that was obsessed with MJ.

 

[Venom75]

Arad also tried to interfere with Spider-man 2. Not only did he also want Lizard and Black Cat in, but he also wanted to make Doc Ock a younger man that was obsessed with MJ.

Oh,that's right. I do remember reading about that.

 

[echostation]

no he didn't want that... Avi Arad is an idiot but that wasn't his idea... Michael Chabon is the one who wrote to make Doc Ock a teenager who is in love with Mary Jane according to his so called "scriptment" with no notes from Avi.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

no he didn't want that... Avi Arad is an idiot but that wasn't his idea... Michael Chabon is the one who wrote to make Doc Ock a teenager who is in love with Mary Jane according to his so called "scriptment" with no notes from Avi.

This is true. Avi also comments on this during the "making of" feature for SM2. He basically says that "thankfully for me, the idea of a love triangle with our main villain didn't go anywhere." He never liked Chabon's version of Doc Ock and Avi fought for the Ock we got in SM2. Fortunately, he got his way. Unfortunately, this happens way too much, lol.

 

[Nevincer]

Raimi's vision for SM3 and 4 were anything but ambitious, I don't know why it's assumed or even defended that if Raimi got his way he wouldn't have butchered the film with the same goofiness that wreaked throughout the studio-influenced versions. The only difference I can think of is that the studio would have lost more money.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Raimi's vision for SM3 and 4 were anything but ambitious, I don't know why it's assumed or even defended that if Raimi got his way he wouldn't have butchered the film with the same goofiness that wreaked throughout the studio-influenced versions. The only difference I can think of is that the studio would have lost more money.

I'm going to agree here, can't blame the studio for forcing Venom for this movie

 

[Thundercrack85]

Three was more than enough.