Sandman Is Not A "Villian" in SP3.. He is a Victim of the Black Suit

[ShinyBlackSuit]

Everyone is already saying that Flint Marko as Ben Parker's murderer is a leap in logic, and I also agree. Obviously, Raimi is setting up the Sandman/Spider-Man conflict as a case of mistaken identity, whereby Peter Parker will feel even more guilty for abusing his powers to exact vengeance on the wrong man.

If you watch the trailers closely, you'll notice that Flint Marko is holding up shopping bags before he gets confronted by Spidey in the black suit. What kind of villian runs around errands, no doubt for his family? Also, the teaser poster featuring Sandman is of him protecting a child holding a stuffed animal. So he is obviously not a "villian" in this picture.

And lastly, the final shot of the Sandman in the Theatrical trailer is of him reaching out for help as he gets drowned in a torrent of water. Obviously, we are meant to sympathize with the Sandman character, and his persecution at the hands of the Black Suit serves further to villianize the symbiote and Peter's actions while under the influence of his new alien powers.

Adieu.

I am a detective, Adieu.

 

[christpunchers]

Good post, the suit will destroy parker's judgement.

 

[Kato]

lol, I agree with you somewhat in the concept but these aren't shopping bags. I believe these are money bags he probably stole from the bank and this is what spiderman gets a hold of and is framed that he robbed it instead (as shown in the newspaper clip) by Eddie Brock.

 

[Tanin]

Oh I agree Sandman will turn into Spider-Man's victim, Marco isn't all innocent either.

He is a bad guy in the film but Peter will take it too far.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Everyone is already saying that Flint Marko as Ben Parker's murderer is a leap in logic, and I also agree. Obviously, Raimi is setting up the Sandman/Spider-Man conflict as a case of mistaken identity, whereby Peter Parker will feel even more guilty for abusing his powers to exact vengeance on the wrong man.

If you watch the trailers closely, you'll notice that Flint Marko is holding up shopping bags before he gets confronted by Spidey in the black suit. What kind of villian runs around errands, no doubt for his family? Also, the teaser poster featuring Sandman is of him protecting a child holding a stuffed animal. So he is obviously not a "villian" in this picture.

And lastly, the final shot of the Sandman in the Theatrical trailer is of him reaching out for help as he gets drowned in a torrent of water. Obviously, we are meant to sympathize with the Sandman character, and his persecution at the hands of the Black Suit serves further to villianize the symbiote and Peter's actions while under the influence of his new alien powers.

Adieu.

I am a detective, Adieu.

You make some very good points.

And in fact your right Sandy isn't the villian of the story . The Real Villain is "The black Symboite aka VENOM"

Sandy/Flint is a missed understood villian .

 

[christpunchers]

I would like it if Raimi made sandman a criminal TRYING to reform. He was put to prison for stuff that he did in the pass, regular thug stuff, stealing, robbery, holding up ransoms, but now he wants to change. The only choice that he has to save his ill daughter is by stealing, not just to cure himself. He needs the money but he doesnt want to hurt anyone in the process.

 

[hyzak]

yez!! i think the symbiote/venom is the main event in sp3!

 

[Boom]

Everyone is already saying that Flint Marko as Ben Parker's murderer is a leap in logic, and I also agree. Obviously, Raimi is setting up the Sandman/Spider-Man conflict as a case of mistaken identity, whereby Peter Parker will feel even more guilty for abusing his powers to exact vengeance on the wrong man.

If you watch the trailers closely, you'll notice that Flint Marko is holding up shopping bags before he gets confronted by Spidey in the black suit. What kind of villian runs around errands, no doubt for his family? Also, the teaser poster featuring Sandman is of him protecting a child holding a stuffed animal. So he is obviously not a "villian" in this picture.

And lastly, the final shot of the Sandman in the Theatrical trailer is of him reaching out for help as he gets drowned in a torrent of water. Obviously, we are meant to sympathize with the Sandman character, and his persecution at the hands of the Black Suit serves further to villianize the symbiote and Peter's actions while under the influence of his new alien powers.

Adieu.

I am a detective, Adieu.

I thought you were leaving if Venom wasn't in the trailer .

 

[The Caped Knight]

yez!! i think the symbiote/venom is the main event in sp3!

Which is why he wasn't shown yet in any of the trailers . He's The Main villian . Not Sandman .

 

[Equint77]

can I just say.....

early sandman was a criminal..... I like the Flint Marco in ASM #4...

I'm not a fan of him having a family cause non of these characters need sympathy... Peter? Yes... Harry? Yes

Sandman? Doc Ock? HELL NO!!

Giving Ock and Sandman a family doesn't do anything.... hell when Ock had his wife he didn't even mention her after she died... so what was the point of having her?

Can't we just see villains who are villains by nature.. not by accident or circumstance?

No victims.. just a guy with wierd powers stealing and committing crimes... simple but effective. Another thing I'm not a fan of either..... SM having fans... the whole point of Peter always debating spider-man is cause the city for the most part doesn't trust him.

He's not the Fantastic 4.

 

[BobJM]

This is what I think:

Sandman is not Uncle Ben's killer. When Spider-Man fails to capture Sandman, the symbiote begins to implant hallucinations into his mind to further motivate his hunt.

Sandman is a criminal, but not a murderer. His recent string of robberies are because of the fact that his daughter is dying and he needs money to help save his family.

While his actions are slightly justified by this, Spider-Man takes it too far and nearly murders Sandman in the subway.

 

[The Caped Knight]

This is what I think:

Sandman is not Uncle Ben's killer. When Spider-Man fails to capture Sandman, the symbiote begins to implant hallucinations into his mind to further motivate his hunt.

Sandman is a criminal, but not a murderer. His recent string of robberies are because of the fact that his daughter is dying and he needs money to help save his family.

While his actions are slightly justified by this, Spider-Man takes it too far and nearly murders Sandman in the subway.

BINGO [You've got it .]

 

[christpunchers]

Yeah that whole "spiderman day" is such a joke. Theyre playing up this movie to the a finale of sorts..... sort of disappointed in how theyre cramming in EVERYTHING POSSIBLE since this COULD be the last movie for a while to come. #4 may be completely different.

 

[BobJM]

BINGO [You've got it .]

YAHTZEE!

 

[bosef982]

can I just say.....

early sandman was a criminal..... I like the Flint Marco in ASM #4...

I'm not a fan of him having a family cause non of these characters need sympathy... Peter? Yes... Harry? Yes

Sandman? Doc Ock? HELL NO!!

Giving Ock and Sandman a family doesn't do anything.... hell when Ock had his wife he didn't even mention her after she died... so what was the point of having her?

Can't we just see villains who are villains by nature.. not by accident or circumstance?

No victims.. just a guy with wierd powers stealing and committing crimes... simple but effective. Another thing I'm not a fan of either..... SM having fans... the whole point of Peter always debating spider-man is cause the city for the most part doesn't trust him.

He's not the Fantastic 4.

No. Because most villians are villians by circumstnace and accident. Otherwise, they're just uninteresting.

 

[BobJM]

can I just say.....

early sandman was a criminal..... I like the Flint Marco in ASM #4...

I'm not a fan of him having a family cause non of these characters need sympathy... Peter? Yes... Harry? Yes

Sandman? Doc Ock? HELL NO!!

Giving Ock and Sandman a family doesn't do anything.... hell when Ock had his wife he didn't even mention her after she died... so what was the point of having her?

Can't we just see villains who are villains by nature.. not by accident or circumstance?

No victims.. just a guy with wierd powers stealing and committing crimes... simple but effective. Another thing I'm not a fan of either..... SM having fans... the whole point of Peter always debating spider-man is cause the city for the most part doesn't trust him.

He's not the Fantastic 4.

The only time that works is if the villain is only used in the opening scenes to provide an early action scene.

 

[tzarinna]

Oh man head,it's a spinin.

 

[Equint77]

No. Because most villians are villians by circumstnace and accident. Otherwise, they're just uninteresting.

yeah... i understand that... and that's the basis on almost all marvel characters...

I'm talking about making villains into sympathetic characters.... i don't see the reason why Raimi has to make everyone have some sort of personal attachment to peter..

Doc Ock was becoming his "friend" before the accident....
Now Sandman is the one who killed uncle ben.... if that's really the case or not... who knows...

But it's an unecessary pattern.... The Osborns... I totally understand and there's just for having sympathy for Harry and even Norman.

When will it end? Will Eddie Brock have a puppy that Peter became attached to in the street? It's getting ridiculous IMO.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Yeah that whole "spiderman day" is such a joke. Theyre playing up this movie to the a finale of sorts..... sort of disappointed in how theyre cramming in EVERYTHING POSSIBLE since this COULD be the last movie for a while to come. #4 may be completely different.

Actually The Whole "Spider-man day" serves a purpose. Peter's will be so happy that he's finally earned the respect of the general citizens of New York [Despite JJJ writting Bull**** about spidey in The Bugle to sell newspapers] That Peter will get cocky and overconfindent as Spidey [That will be his down fall, so by the time the Black Symboite appears and begins to take control of Parker [Both in his appearence and Characteristics] . The Humanity that Peter has will begin to fade away causing the Symboite to bond with him and transforming him into a monster named Venom .

 

[Equint77]

The only time that works is if the villain is only used in the opening scenes to provide an early action scene.

it can work..

would it be wrong for Sandman to show up to NY right after he got his powers and just started causing havoc robbing banks and committing crimes around the city... we get to see his origin in some sort of flashback or we witness his origin early in the film. Bottom line is he could be a bad guy.. peter fights him... goes overboard and still get the same result... minus a family being thrown in there.

There's already too much being put in this movie.... I don't think we need a "sandman is a victim" angle. Just my thoughts.

 

[Equint77]

Patiently waiting Spider-man Begins in 2015................

 

[Equint77]

Actually The Whole "Spider-man day" serves a purpose. Peter's will be so happy that he's finally earned the respect of the general citizens of New York [Despite JJJ writting Bull**** about spidey in The Bugle to sell newspapers] That Peter will get cocky and overconfindent as Spidey [That will be his down fall, so by the time the Black Symboite appears and begins to take control of Parker [Both in his appearence and Characteristics] . The Humanity that Peter has will begin to fade away causing the Symboite to bond with him and transforming him into a monster named Venom .

they can still do that without the "spider-man day"..... I'm already used to Raimi completely destroying the mythos and continuity of the characters.... if anyone's gotten cocky and happy it's Raimi.... he's lost touch with a character he claims to have grown up a fan of.

 

[Eddie Brock]

leave it to Sam Raimi to turn SANDMAN of all people into a "sympathetic" villain
Sandman is easily one of the least complex Spider-Man villains (and that isn't necessarily a bad thing)

Raimi is taking it overboard, though
so Sandman:
A. killed Uncle Ben?
B. has a dying daughter?
there are too many dynamics for such a simple character

 

[bosef982]

Patiently waiting Spider-man Begins in 2015................

Oh, gag me.

 

[gambitfire]

I must say i love the thread good idea ShinyBlackSuit

yeah... i understand that... and that's the basis on almost all marvel characters...

I'm talking about making villains into sympathetic characters.... i don't see the reason why Raimi has to make everyone have some sort of personal attachment to peter..

Doc Ock was becoming his "friend" before the accident....
Now Sandman is the one who killed uncle ben.... if that's really the case or not... who knows...

But it's an unecessary pattern.... The Osborns... I totally understand and there's just for having sympathy for Harry and even Norman.

When will it end? Will Eddie Brock have a puppy that Peter became attached to in the street? It's getting ridiculous IMO.

I agree the Doc Ock situation wasn't necessary but having them become villains for the sake of being villains is even more ridiculous.

In this case i think the reason they have him "connected" is because of what the idea behind this thread, In the end he may very well not be connected but it it served it's purpose to the point, i dunno well see come May.