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

[Dragon]

The fact that Raimi said he was not going to do a Joker-Burton thing with Spider-Man.

And he isn't. Batman killed the Joker. Peter doesn't kill Marko.

The fact that the producer doing the commentary during the mugger scene says this "scene is so intergral to the character".

And this would mean WHAT EXACTLY to your point?

He had the bag get over it. Raimi would loss sleep over it, because unlike you posting on here, he actually gets paid. Money is going to make sure his writers and producers make a story that makes sense.

But he didn't lose sleep over the gun disappearing in the actual scene. Yeah. Of Course.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Oh. So Marko is just punching Ben in the spot where he got shot. Of course.

He died from a gunshot wound. And Marko doesn't move the whole time. Nor does he have a gun in his hand.

Here's an idea- THOSE AREN'T THE ACTUAL CAMERA ANGLES. Those are from the vantage point of the Wire Image photographer. JEEZ!!!!!

Never claimed they were. However they are the motions the actors were making (remember what I said about "d'uh moments"). Maybe he is punching Cliff, maybe there is a total other reason he turns around. But doesn't it seem ausipcious that Flint Marko just stands there as the guy gets in the car. And turns to watch him as he passes, then looks down right when Cliff collapses.

I'm not saying that is 100% what happens. However Ben is holding Fint's arm the whole time, not something you typically do to a gun you pulled a gun on.

If he got shot by a mugger, and everyone just sees Cliff standing there with Flint as the car drives off...who do you think the witnesses peg as the killer.

By the way ballistics only work if you have another crime to compare them to. Shows like CSI are very convienent in how they display evidence coming together. Killers rarely have MOs, rarely use the same weapon twice, and rarely have evidence easily accessible from previous crimes. Eye witnesses generally are what lead to arrest.

 

[Dragon]

The fact that even the pictures released of Spider-Man 3 show Flint Marko without anything in his hands.

You can't see his right hand (his gun hand, note the carjacker pic) in ANY OF THE PICTURES!!!

You are a non-stop laugh-fest my friend.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

And he isn't. Batman killed the Joker. Peter doesn't kill Marko.

Marko dies at the end supposedly as does[BLACKOUT]Aunt May and Harry[/BLACKOUT]. No reliable spoilers have come out directly stating how or that Flint was the killer...only that he has a "small role" in the event.

And no that is not what he meant...he was refrring to who would kill Peter Parker's Uncle...now your just using bent logic...oh wait you always were.

And this would mean WHAT EXACTLY to your point?

The scene isn't forgettable like you claim.

But he didn't lose sleep over the gun disappearing in the actual scene. Yeah. Of Course.

That's not the directors or writers fault. It's the editors fault. When a movie is made several takes are done of a scene, never all the same. Chances are he mistakenly dropped the gun during the stunt and they accidently filmed it and kept it. Little things like that go unnoticed (such as the plane in Ben Hur) however it doesn't mean the next Ben Hur features jetliners .

Raimi probably did get on someone for that, or at least the head editor did. So no missing an entire scene, is not the same as missing a minor editing problem while viewing the final cut.

 

[Dragon]

He died from a gunshot wound. And Marko doesn't move the whole time. Nor does he have a gun in his hand.

Oh yes. You can tell if he's moving in a STILL IMAGE.

Never claimed they were. However they are the motions the actors were making (remember what I said about "d'uh moments"). Maybe he is punching Cliff, maybe there is a total other reason he turns around. But doesn't it seem ausipcious that Flint Marko just stands there as the guy gets in the car. And turns to watch him as he passes, then looks down right when Cliff collapses.

Okay. So we've been told by someone who read the script that Marko kills Ben. We hear in the trailer that Marko kills Ben. We see Marko and Ben in an obvious position for Marko shooting Ben in the stomach. But that can't be what's happening, because you don't want to be.

And you have no idea how much action occurs between Marko shooting Ben and the other guy getting in the car.

I'm not saying that is 100% what happens. However Ben is holding Fint's arm the whole time, not something you typically do to a gun you pulled a gun on.

But it's something you'd do as a reflex action after you've been shot at close range. And it's clear in every shot that Ben has already been shot. He's collapsing.

If he got shot by a mugger, and everyone just sees Cliff standing there with Flint as the car drives off...who do you think the witnesses peg as the killer.

If he got shot by "the mugger", Ben would be looking in his direction, which he never does. And even Marko would be looking at "the mugger" with shock, especially since at such close range, "the mugger" could have shot Marko.

By the way ballistics only work if you have another crime to compare them to.

You mean like removing the slug from Ben's body?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

You can't see his right hand (his gun hand, note the carjacker pic) in ANY OF THE PICTURES!!!

You are a non-stop laugh-fest my friend.

Actually in one photo you can clearly see through to his right hand, try again.





So let me ask you....is he shooting at Ben Parker's feet

 

[ShadowBoxing]

You mean like removing the slug from Ben's body?

He would have to commit a second crime with the same gun, and they would have to have the ballistics from that crime on record.

 

[Dragon]

Marko dies at the end supposedly as does[BLACKOUT]Aunt May and Harry[/BLACKOUT]. No reliable spoilers have come out directly stating how or that Flint was the killer...only that he has a "small role" in the event.

There's no "reliable spoilers" that Marko dies either, or that he has a "small role"

And no that is not what he meant...he was refrring to who would kill Peter Parker's Uncle...now your just using bent logic...oh wait you always were.

Quote where Raimi said Marko isn't the killer.

The scene isn't forgettable like you claim.

One has nothing to do with the other.

That's not the directors or writers fault. It's the editors fault. When a movie is made several takes are done of a scene, never all the same. Chances are he mistakenly dropped the gun during the stunt and they accidently filmed it and kept it. Little things like that go unnoticed (such as the plane in Ben Hur) however it doesn't mean the next Ben Hur features jetliners .Raimi probably did get on someone for that, or at least the head editor did. So no missing an entire scene, is not the same as missing a minor editing problem while viewing the final cut.

You clearly know nothing about how movies are made. The director HAS TO WATCH AND APPROVE ALL CUTS. They'd never print a film based on the editor's work.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Okay. So we've been told by someone who read the script that Marko kills Ben.

No, the AICN script review never claimed this. Only a poster on Tokoypop...and he was working off the spoilers in another script review (which never pinned Marko as the killer).

So no, as of yet no reliable source has confirmed him as the killer. flat out wrong

 

[Dragon]

He would have to commit a second crime with the same gun, and they would have to have the ballistics from that crime on record.

Damn you're just too easy.

The police recover the gun from the warehouse- fire it into a tank of water (Which is how they get a slug for comparison) then compare the slug to the slug removed from Ben's body for matching markings. Got it?

 

[Dragon]

No, the AICN script review never claimed this. Only a poster on Tokoypop...and he was working off the spoilers in another script review (which never pinned Marko as the killer).

So no, as of yet no reliable source has confirmed him as the killer. flat out wrong

WHAT AICN SCRIPT REVIEW???? I'm talking about the script summary that was posted here back in February, that people have been posting here recently even though it's not supposed to be.

This is the same summary that told us about Harry vs. Peter, Spider-man Day, the armored car robbery, how Spidey gets the symbiote, how Spidey loses the symbiote, how Brock gets it, that Brock had been dating Gwen, etc. etc. It's definitely reliable.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

There's no "reliable spoilers" that Marko dies either, or that he has a "small role"

Actually AICN proves very relaible. And they have to pinned Marko as the killer.

You clearly know nothing about how movies are made. The director HAS TO WATCH AND APPROVE ALL CUTS. They'd never print a film based on the editor's work.

Only if they ask for a final cut. Many directors don't. Ratner for example, does not. Also, the director of BEN HUR misses an AIRPLANE. This is very typical stuff to get into the final cut. Such as how the glass on the counter of X2 is still there after being blown to bits. Directors miss minor editting problems for the same reason we miss them, they are very minor and usually take several viewings before they stick in our minds. However it's highly unlikely he'd forget the mugger was carrying the damn bag he gave him to carry at the begiing of a scene. God you're a dense idiot.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Damn you're just too easy.

The police recover the gun from the warehouse- fire it into a tank of water (Which is how they get a slug for comparison) then compare the slug to the slug removed from Ben's body for matching markings. Got it?

That would not prove Marko was the killer, only that the gun in question was not used to shoot Uncle Ben. And so your back to sqaure one. Besides chances are like your precious and flawed CSI, they won't bother explaining how and why they have the forensics evidence. You'll just be expected to believe them.

 

[Dragon]

Actually AICN proves very relaible. And they have to pinned Marko as the killer.

If you trust AICN, what are you talking about? Regarding the script summary- if they reveal the ending and other vital plot twists, they'd naturally mention that Marko wasn't Ben's true killer.

Only if they ask for a final cut. Many directors don't. Ratner for example, does not.

Dude, please stop playing yourself. I work in film production. The director always makes final approval, unless he simply doesn't give a damn. And on a 200 million dollar film the director doesn't sit out the final screenings.

Final cut is something different. It means the director can refuse studio wishes and edit the film his way. Ratner not asking for it doesn't mean he isn't there to make sure the film looks right.

 

[Kai2006]

I think the black suit did change him and turn him evil. Mary Jane is sad, and I think he hurt Sandman and Harry both thats why he wants to get rid of it

 

[Dragon]

That would not prove Marko was the killer, only that the gun in question was not used to shoot Uncle Ben.

That is unless the gun they find on Marko matches the ballistics of the slug in Ben.

Do you even kind of think this stuff through?

 

[dark_b]

why is flint wearing years the same shirt? this is not a cartoon where teh characters wear all the time the same clothes. after 3 years you dont have the same shirt on.

 

[muscaremy]

off topic ..... but thers a plane in ben hur..... its been so long can someone describe so next time i see i pay attention to it

 

[Spider Man]

Dragon, you're kinda getting pwned here. Think about it. They're accomplices, but have you ever considered that the mugger turned on Marko? He's got the loot...It was probably Marko's job to get the car. Marko (being the misguided, sympathetic villain in this flick) doesn't have the heart to do it. So, the Mugger shoots Ben (with Marko's gun) and takes off in the car, leaving Marko there to be blamed for it. Marko, of course, takes off without the loot and with no car.

Meanwhile, our mugger is trying to escape. If he gets caught then he'll get charged for robbing the place while telling the cops Marko did the shooting.

There could be several possibilities, but for the purpose of the story it would prove better for Marko NOT to be the killer.

It will show just how far the symbiote/revenge drives Peter to hunt down the killer, only to realize that his misuse of power almost caused him to kill the wrong guy (he would have certainly killed him under the symbiote's influence.)

Peter then realizes what kind of a monster the symbiote is turning him into. It's destroying his relationships as Peter and clouding his judgement as a hero.

To sum up...it wouldn't make sense for Marko to be the killer because what did he get out of the deal? Nothing. He has nothing to do BUT run. Marko=mistaken killer. Provides motivation and plot device to show corruption of Symbiote Spider-Man. Alternately, gives Marko motivation to exact revenge on Spidey.

If Marko WAS the killer, it'd ruin his character altogether. No one would feel bad if Spidey gave him his comeuppance. So, why make him responsible for it? To show that Peter wouldn't kill him even though he killed Uncle Ben? As Spidey, that's likely, but I believe their initial encounter is while Pete is wearing the symbiote, so what stops him and brings him back to his senses? OH, that's right...because he didn't kill him.

"I think we may have found your killer." He doesn't say definitely, and thus Peter takes it as fact and as the audience, we reason as Peter does. If we hear something that's probable, most go with it until we're proven wrong later in the story. It's intentional misdirection. It's also a plot device. Anyone discussing scripts or stories NEEDS to study plot devices and characters. Without it, your predictions fall to crap. As seen by Dragon here.

 

[stillanerd]

Dragon, ShadowBoxing, sorry to interrupt you're lively debate but, ShadowBoxing is right about the theif/carjacker taking off with the money. I just checked the DVD and, if you go to chapter 13, 47:13, you can clearly see that the theif/carjacker has the moneybag--it's bright yellow so you can't miss it --under the crook of his left arm. So the carjacker WAS in possession of the stolen ticket proceeds. Either the carjacker and Flint divied-up the money before the car was stolen or, after Uncle Ben was killed, the carjacker took off with ALL the money leaving Flint with nothing.

 

[Dragon]

Dragon, ShadowBoxing, sorry to interrupt you're lively debate but, ShadowBoxing is right about the theif/carjacker taking off with the money. I just checked the DVD and, if you go to chapter 13, 47:13, you can clearly see that the theif/carjacker has the moneybag--it's bright yellow so you can't miss it --under the crook of his left arm. So the carjacker WAS in possession of the stolen ticket proceeds. Either the carjacker and Flint divied-up the money before the car was stolen or, after Uncle Ben was killed, the carjacker took off with ALL the money leaving Flint with nothing.

I've been saying all along that the carjacker had the money. My point- is that if Sam Raimi let slip things like the carjacker's gun being knocked out of his hand and then magically reappearing in the next shot, he's not going to care about what would amount to a minor point in a film released 5 years later. You know the term for it stillanerd- in comics we call it a RETCON. The overall movie audience won't give a crap.

And yes- I DID say that they might have divided the money. Or maybe they didn't. I also said that maybe the carjacker double-crossed Marko and left him while he was moving Ben's body. It doesn't matter. None of this means that Marko wouldn't have shot Ben to get his car.

Secondly, I've also been saying that the scenario which I made up in all of ten seconds wouldn't be accurate. i'm just saying it's a simple explanation as to why Marko would've shot Ben, and not been with the carjacker when Peter caught up to him.

 

[Dragon]

Dragon, you're kinda getting pwned here. Think about it. They're accomplices, but have you ever considered that the mugger turned on Marko? He's got the loot...It was probably Marko's job to get the car. Marko (being the misguided, sympathetic villain in this flick) doesn't have the heart to do it. So, the Mugger shoots Ben (with Marko's gun) and takes off in the car, leaving Marko there to be blamed for it. Marko, of course, takes off without the loot and with no car.

First off, if you'd read my previous posts- you'd see I said that the carjacker might've also left Marko. Secondly- it's far more ridiculous to believe that the carjacker, who had a gun, took Marko's gun, shot Ben (When in the Wire image shots it's clear that Marko is shooting Ben) Marko took back his gun and got left- and kept the murder weapon.

There could be several possibilities, but for the purpose of the story it would prove better for Marko NOT to be the killer.

It will show just how far the symbiote/revenge drives Peter to hunt down the killer, only to realize that his misuse of power almost caused him to kill the wrong guy (he would have certainly killed him under the symbiote's influence.)

Do you know anything about Spider-Man? Because the point isn't that he was going to kill the wrong man- IT'S THAT HE WAS GOING TO KILL ANYONE.

Spider-man does not kill. In the films' he's never taken a life. Every villain dies of their own actions. Again, in the comics we learned this when he wouldn't kill the Goblin, even though he was absolutely guilty of killing Gwen.

In the case of Marko, despite his killing Ben, Peter should only be out to bring him to justice. NOT KILL HIM. That's the lesson he learns.

If Marko WAS the killer, it'd ruin his character altogether. No one would feel bad if Spidey gave him his comeuppance. So, why make him responsible for it? To show that Peter wouldn't kill him even though he killed Uncle Ben? As Spidey, that's likely, but I believe their initial encounter is while Pete is wearing the symbiote, so what stops him and brings him back to his senses? OH, that's right...because he didn't kill him.

You're wrong. Spidey's first encounter with Sandman is in the red suit. And Spidey learns about Marko killing Ben before he gets the symbiote. That's why he's sleeping in his costume when the symbiote ataches itself to him. Because he's obsessively searching for Marko.

And Peter's being taken over by the costume isn't merely presented by his wanting to kill Marko. It's also because of how he treats MJ, Gwen and how he deals with Harry.

The vessel they use to make Sandman sympathetic is with his daughter. He killed Ben trying to save her. And maybe Marko feels remorse for killing Ben.

"I think we may have found your killer." He doesn't say definitely, and thus Peter takes it as fact and as the audience, we reason as Peter does. If we hear something that's probable, most go with it until we're proven wrong later in the story. It's intentional misdirection. It's also a plot device. Anyone discussing scripts or stories NEEDS to study plot devices and characters. Without it, your predictions fall to crap. As seen by Dragon here.

"I think we may have found your killer"? What the hell are you talking about?
No one says that. I think anticipation for this movie is causing mass insanity.

Captain Stacy says: "We have some new information- THIS IS YOUR UNCLE'S ACTUAL KILLER".

That's pretty frickin' definite.

And there's no need for misdirection with Marko, because that isn't the important twist in the film.

 

[Spidey03]

Here is my view:

Maybe Sandman aka Flint Marko is just indirectly responsible for Uncle Ben's death...remember before catched he had been kinda boss of the NY underworld.

i.e.
The robber has stolen the money and is looking for a way to escape.
He's nervous and while running out of the building he calls a contact man or sth. else by his mobile phone. But what happens?! - The boss himself appears.
By his 'cool' nature Flint Marko tells the excited and nervous robber to escape by s.o.'s car (maybe he points at Ben who's waiting for Peter but don't want the robber to kill Ben, because of high risk of attention by people,police...).
He hectors uncle Ben to give the robber the car,etc. and suggests him to leave the scenery immeditately. (remeber the Photos on the net which are showing some conversation between Ben and Sandman)

But then Ben said sth. like "I know u, Flint Marko..!" (in kinda slight "pighead manner") -> And while leaving (turend backwards to the scenery:car-Ben- robber) Flint Marko says "Kill him!"

btw. the picture i'm reffering to

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Here is my view:

Maybe Sandman aka Flint Marko is just indirectly responsible for Uncle Ben's death...remember before catched he had been kinda boss of the NY underworld.

i.e.
The robber has stolen the money and is looking for a way to escape.
He's nervous and while running out of the building he calls a contact man or sth. else by his mobile phone. But what happens?! - The boss himself appears.
By his 'cool' nature Flint Marko tells the excited and nervous robber to escape by s.o.'s car (maybe he points at Ben who's waiting for Peter but don't want the robber to kill Ben, because of high risk of attention by people,police...).
He hectors uncle Ben to give the robber the car,etc. and suggests him to leave the scenery immeditately. (remeber the Photos on the net which are showing some conversation between Ben and Sandman)

But then Ben said sth. like "I know u, Flint Marko..!" (in kinda slight "pighead manner") -> And while leaving (turend backwards to the scenery:car-Ben- robber) Flint Marko says "Kill him!"

btw. the picture i'm reffering to

unle bens killer wouldnt have enough time to shoot uncle ben and steal the car, sandman shot uncle ben, uncle bens killer took the car, sandman must have ran or walked away and of course they ae ganna go after the car because they think the guy in the car shot uncle ben.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Does anyone else find it odd that a) not a single photo looks remotely like a muggering and b) in the trailer he knows who Ben Parker is.