Sandman Most Pointless Villian in SM3?

[ProfeZZor X]

I was hoping Venom would have taken a bite out of Sandman, just to give a nod to the comic book fans out there. This could have also played out well, if Raimi was reaching towards killing off one or both of the characters.

 

[ProfeZZor X]

I was hoping Venom would have taken a bite out of Sandman, just to give a nod to the comic book fans out there. This could have also played out well, if Raimi was reaching towards killing off one or both of the characters.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

IMO, Raimi should have given Brock Sandman's back story . Here's what I would have done:

Brock could have been the one with the sick daughter and the ex wife who hates him . He could still be a loser but a loser who's loves his kid . Maybe he's the type of guy who let his wife and his daugther down . He always cuts corners, makes excuses, and blames others for his problems. Money wise he's a dead beat dad but he thinks the world of Penny. That's why he works for gossip rags and makes up stories , for the money.

The line ,"I'm not a bad guy , I've just made bad choices" fits perfectly . Now his daughter really needs the money for her illness . Now There's more of a motivation Brocks for framing Spiderman . He actually needs the money for the story and pictures.

Dark Peter finds out and exposes Brock , thus getting him fired . Now he feels his daughter has been given a death sentance . He tells his ex at the hospital he can't pay the money and she's tells him to leave. He see's his daughter in the bed and is crushed . Now he goes to the church , and blames Peter Parker for not having the money killing his daughter . Brock asks to trade his own life for hers . Then as he's at his lowest he hears Peter taking off the symboite .

Didn't Brock have an ex-wife and kid in the comics anyway?

I don't think that would have worked. not to mention that it wouldn't be staying very true to the Comics. Sandman in the Comics was just a regular crook which is why Sam gave him a much bigger story and made him sympathetic. Eddie Brock is like he was in the Comics in terms of how he lost everything. so making Eddie Brock sympathetic would probably make Venom sympathetic and thats something we don't need. Venom is a cold hearted Villian (only in his first few issues in The Comics, after that he became an Anti-Hero) and he should stay a cold hearted Villian. Eddie Brock has a great storyline which is another reason I don't think Eddie Brock having a sick daughter and an Ex-wife would work.

 

[Frodo]

I don't think that would have worked. not to mention that it wouldn't be staying very true to the Comics. Sandman in the Comics was just a regular crook which is why Sam gave him a much bigger story and made him sympathetic. Eddie Brock is like he was in the Comics in terms of how he lost everything. so making Eddie Brock sympathetic would probably make Venom sympathetic and thats something we don't need. Venom is a cold hearted Villian (only in his first few issues in The Comics, after that he became an Anti-Hero) and he should stay a cold hearted Villian. Eddie Brock has a great storyline which is another reason I don't think Eddie Brock having a sick daughter and an Ex-wife would work.

In the film they barely touch on Brock's character and how he loses everything. That's why alot of non-comic fans who saw the film didn't understand why he suddenly wanted to kill Peter Parker after only being fired.

I think if anything Brock should have been the sympathetic one rather then a character like Sandman who never had any depth to him other then his powers. In his sympathetic story would have made his evil turn by the Symbiote that much better for the film. Then As Venom could be evil and heartless . I wouldn't have had the forgiveness stuff we got with Sandman .

As for the sick daughter ,I just used it as an example because it was one the storylines Raimi used . I would rather make Brock sympathetic then Sandman just because imo Venom/Brock is a better character .

 

[Visionary]

Dude, no one can figure out why the hell Brock/Venom wants to kill Peter/Spidey in the comics, it simply doesn't make sense. It's one of the lamest villain/hero setups in comic book history. "I want to kill you because I screwed up my own life, therefore I blame you."

 

[The Joker]

Dude, no one can figure out why the hell Brock/Venom wants to kill Peter/Spidey in the comics, it simply doesn't make sense. It's one of the lamest villain/hero setups in comic book history. "I want to kill you because I screwed up my own life, therefore I blame you."

Exactly

Can anyone blame Raimi for not wanting to use Venom? No. He's one of the worst, overrated villains in comic book history.

 

[The Shredder]

I wouldnt say Venom is one of the worst comic book villains of all time, but he's definately overrated in terms of his positioning in Spider-Man's rouges gallery. And although I'm not a huge fan of the character, I can certainly see why Arad "suggested" Raimi to insert him into the 3rd film seeing as how this character has been highly anticipated ever since the first film.

 

[American_Idiot]

I would say Venom was the most pointless villain in SM3.

I agree.

Why?

Venom just seemed, for lack of a better word, "rushed". I felt I barely got to know Eddie Brock as a character in this film. Having him walk into a church and pray that God will kill Peter Parker seemed a little ridiculous. Venom speaking in Topher Grace's voice didn't seem quite right. I'd expect something a little deeper/demonic sounding coming out of his mouth; maybe even having it sound like two voices in one. And then, the symbiote retracting almost everytime Eddie spoke made the whole Venom experience less enjoyable for me. What else... Immediately after Eddie becomes Venom, he finds Sandman and asks him to "team up" before he ever faces Spidey one on one. I'm not sure if Sandman and Venom have ever teamed up in the comics, but it's just kinda hard to swallow (i.e. Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze). We saw about 15 minutes of Venom at the end of the film. I couldn't help but think that it would've been better wrap this trilogy up with Harry/New Goblin, and another classic villain (Sandman would've been fine with a few tweaks done to the character), then kickoff the next trilogy with Venom, leading into Carnage.

I understand a lot of people wanted Venom, but sometimes it's best for a director to go with what he feels and not just try and squeeze something in to a film for the fan's sake if it takes away from the overall quality of the film. Spidey 1 & 2 were great, even without Venom, and most fanboys and critics alike agree they were amongst the best superhero films so far.

I'm a Batman fan. I'd love to see Bane included and given the proper treatment in one of Nolan's films, but if he just doesn't fit in with what Nolan's vision is for a great Bat film, then leave'em out. I can deal with it. No offense. but I couldn't help but think while I watched Spidey 3 that Venom was only in there to shut all those "We want Venom!" fans up. It didn't feel ike Raimi wanted him in there.

Don't get me wrong. I think Venom is a cool Spidey villain, a bit over-rated, but "cool" nonetheless. I could have waited another film or two to see him though, maybe even introducing and building up the character of Eddie Brock first.

To answer the question/title of this thread. Did Sandman seem the most pointless? Nah. He just could have been handled a bit different. Sympathetic to a degree but not treated as if he did nothing wrong at all.

 

[drmick]

I agree.

Why?

Venom just seemed, for lack of a better word, "rushed". I felt I barely got to know Eddie Brock as a character in this film. Having him walk into a church and pray that God will kill Peter Parker seemed a little ridiculous. Venom speaking in Topher Grace's voice didn't seem quite right. I'd expect something a little deeper/demonic sounding coming out of his mouth; maybe even having it sound like two voices in one. And then, the symbiote retracting almost everytime Eddie spoke made the whole Venom experience less enjoyable for me. What else... Immediately after Eddie becomes Venom, he finds Sandman and asks him to "team up" before he ever faces Spidey one on one. I'm not sure if Sandman and Venom have ever teamed up in the comics, but it's just kinda hard to swallow (i.e. Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze). We saw about 15 minutes of Venom at the end of the film. I couldn't help but think that it would've been better wrap this trilogy up with Harry/New Goblin, and another classic villain (Sandman would've been fine with a few tweaks done to the character), then kickoff the next trilogy with Venom, leading into Carnage.

I understand a lot of people wanted Venom, but sometimes it's best for a director to go with what he feels and not just try and squeeze something in to a film for the fan's sake if it takes away from the overall quality of the film. Spidey 1 & 2 were great, even without Venom, and most fanboys and critics alike agree they were amongst the best superhero films so far.

I'm a Batman fan. I'd love to see Bane included and given the proper treatment in one of Nolan's films, but if he just doesn't fit in with what Nolan's vision is for a great Bat film, then leave'em out. I can deal with it. No offense. but I couldn't help but think while I watched Spidey 3 that Venom was only in there to shut all those "We want Venom!" fans up. It didn't feel ike Raimi wanted him in there.

Don't get me wrong. I think Venom is a cool Spidey villain, a bit over-rated, but "cool" nonetheless. I could have waited another film or two to see him though, maybe even introducing and building up the character of Eddie Brock first.

To answer the question/title of this thread. Did Sandman seem the most pointless? Nah. He just could have been handled a bit different. Sympathetic to a degree but not treated as if he did nothing wrong at all.

I think Venom in the comics is a great character in terms of design. His actual character is the subject of much criticism (interesting articles here: http://www.spideykicksbutt.com/ ) but so have many charcaters (see the same link for good Goblin criticism.

Your point is well made, but, and I honestly do not mean to be rude, anybody who mentions Carnage as a possibility loses credibility.

 

[dodus]

Man, I'm getting pretty weary of hearing the anti-Venom party line. If you guys can't conceive of an unstable individual blaming a scapegoat for their misfortunes, I dare say you've got some issues with understanding human nature. And, I hesitate to say this, I think it has more than a little something to do with personal politics.

 

[Visionary]

The sad part is, now fanboys are begging for Carnage in SM4, so he can f--- up The Lizard's screentime...they never learn. Use only classic Stan Lee created villains. This means no Carnage (especially in a PG-13 film) and no Black Cat.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

In the film they barely touch on Brock's character and how he loses everything. That's why alot of non-comic fans who saw the film didn't understand why he suddenly wanted to kill Peter Parker after only being fired.

I think if anything Brock should have been the sympathetic one rather then a character like Sandman who never had any depth to him other then his powers. In his sympathetic story would have made his evil turn by the Symbiote that much better for the film. Then As Venom could be evil and heartless . I wouldn't have had the forgiveness stuff we got with Sandman .

As for the sick daughter ,I just used it as an example because it was one the storylines Raimi used . I would rather make Brock sympathetic then Sandman just because imo Venom/Brock is a better character .

I don't think Eddie Brock being Sympathetic would work. I mean Eddie Brock is cocky and sarcastic, so when he loses everything he becomes a poor soul who is desperate for revenge. so when Brock gets the Symbiote, he has the ability to kill Spider-man and thats what he wants to do. if you watch Venom in the battle royal you will see that he doesn't show a bit of Sympathy at all, even when he killed Harry. sure it could still be the same if Eddie Brock was sympathetic but for it to make sense and for it to be better for us fans of the Comics such as myself and for regular movie-goers. I love that Eddie Brock wasn't smpathetic and I think the Sympathy factor works out better for Sandman than it would for Brock because not only did Sandman not have a big story in the Comics but he has a reason for the crimes he's committing.

 

[dodus]

smh12, I think he meant sympathetic as in we can sympathize and feel bad for the things that happened to him, not that he's going to be a nice understanding supervillain.

 

[TheCaptain22555]

I don't think he was pointless, I think he was put in there to be a villain with heart and humanity (kind of like Doc Ock at the end of Spidey 2) whereas Venom was just....Venom. The end was a bit strange but otherwise I think it was just to have a character that acts with conscience.

 

[TheCaptain22555]

The sad part is, now fanboys are begging for Carnage in SM4, so he can f--- up The Lizard's screentime...they never learn. Use only classic Stan Lee created villains. This means no Carnage (especially in a PG-13 film) and no Black Cat.

No Carnage and no Black Cat, but it's cool to have a Felicia Hardy cameo. With all the outcry of Gwen Stacy being around I think they should've just made her Hardy...but oh well. If they continue the trend of putting another woman in there for tension between Pete and MJ then Felicia is the way to go. Or Betty.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Venom wasn't pointless and neither was Sandman IMO. they were both strong characters that had story. Eddie Brock/Venom lost everything and now he seeks revenge and Sandman is trying to find a cure for his daughter. those two things are very good and powerful parts of the Villians.

smh12, I think he meant sympathetic as in we can sympathize and feel bad for the things that happened to him, not that he's going to be a nice understanding supervillain.

oh....my bad.

 

[American_Idiot]

I think Venom in the comics is a great character in terms of design. His actual character is the subject of much criticism (interesting articles here: http://www.spideykicksbutt.com/ ) but so have many charcaters (see the same link for good Goblin criticism.

Your point is well made, but, and I honestly do not mean to be rude, anybody who mentions Carnage as a possibility loses credibility.

I'm with you. I guess you could say I was doing what Raimi did, catering to the Venom/Carnage fanboys who would be reading my post. Honestly, I'd rather Raimi, or whoever directs the next one, stick with the classic villains, but you know as well as I do, the pressure to include Carnage will be on. My point earlier is simply that I think it was far too soon for either of the symbiote villains to be included in a Spidey film; if they must do it for the fans sake, they could've/should've held out a few more films. I'd rather see Venom and Carnage both in the same movie, a la Maximum Carnage, rather than Venom/Sandman or dare I say it, Carnage/Lizard.

I'm hoping for the Lizard next time. And if there must be a second villain, which I'd say is a good possibility, seeings how they are now going to have to try and top the extravaganza that was part 3, throw in either Electro, Mysterio, the Scorpion, or Kraven the Hunter.

Edit: Now that I think about it, Kraven the Hunter would be a perfect second villain to go along with the Lizard. Not only would Spidey have to protect the people from the Lizard, but after finding out the Lizard is his dear friend and teacher, Dr. Connors, he'd have to protect him from the madman Kraven.

Note: Since Venom has already been used, and they'll have to up the ante to keep the public interested, beefin' up the Lizard will probably be necessary. Think twice the size of Spidey, with a tail that can smash/slice right through a city bus.

 

[TheCaptain22555]

Edit: Now that I think about it, Kraven the Hunter would be a perfect second villain to go along with the Lizard. Not only would Spidey have to protect the people from the Lizard, but after finding out the Lizard is his dear friend and teacher, Dr. Connors, he'd have to protect him from the madman Kraven.

Yep, just like in Spidey 3 The Game, but I still want to see...you know who in Part 4...

 

[American_Idiot]

Yep, just like in Spidey 3 The Game, but I still want to see...you know who in Part 4...

Really? I've never played the game, but is Spidey protecting Lizard from Kraven really one of the missions??

 

[drmick]

I'm with you. I guess you could say I was doing what Raimi did, catering to the Venom/Carnage fanboys who would be reading my post. Honestly, I'd rather Raimi, or whoever directs the next one, stick with the classic villains, but you know as well as I do, the pressure to include Carnage will be on. My point earlier is simply that I think it was far too soon for either of the symbiote villains to be included in a Spidey film; if they must do it for the fans sake, they could've/should've held out a few more films. I'd rather see Venom and Carnage both in the same movie, a la Maximum Carnage, rather than Venom/Sandman or dare I say it, Carnage/Lizard.

I'm hoping for the Lizard next time. And if there must be a second villain, which I'd say is a good possibility, seeings how they are now going to have to try and top the extravaganza that was part 3, throw in either Electro, Mysterio, the Scorpion, or Kraven the Hunter.

Edit: Now that I think about it, Kraven the Hunter would be a perfect second villain to go along with the Lizard. Not only would Spidey have to protect the people from the Lizard, but after finding out the Lizard is his dear friend and teacher, Dr. Connors, he'd have to protect him from the madman Kraven.

Note: Since Venom has already been used, and they'll have to up the ante to keep the public interested, beefin' up the Lizard will probably be necessary. Think twice the size of Spidey, with a tail that can smash/slice right through a city bus.

I agree with each of your four paragraphs..... Mostly. The whole which symbiote/which film/which plot probably shows just how difficult it is to do them on film (let's see how Silver Surfer and Galactus fare! The Phoenix, er, didn't).

Increasing the size of the Lizard would be a mistake I reckon, I don't think it worked for Sandman.

<subtley brings thread back on topic but prepares for thread to evolve/degenerate into a Venom thread>

 

[DieSmiling]

Venom was clearly the most pointless -- you could easily cut him out of the movie, save him for part 4, and nothing would even have to change. That makes him pointless.

 

[Frodo]

Venom wasn't pointless and neither was Sandman IMO. they were both strong characters that had story. Eddie Brock/Venom lost everything and now he seeks revenge and Sandman is trying to find a cure for his daughter. those two things are very good and powerful parts of the Villians.

oh....my bad.

It's ok
but Yeah that's what I meantt:

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

Did Sandman just leave at the end of the film?

 

[The Shredder]

Did Sandman just leave at the end of the film?

Basically, yes.

 

[Mr. Socko]

He robbed a bank, broke out of prison, robbed an armored truck, (almost) killed a law enforcer, killed Uncle Ben, yet he just gets to drift away because he is sorry! The other thing that bothers me is how naive everyone is. Sandy tells Peter it was all an accident, and Peter believes everything he says! Wouldn't it occur to Peter that Marko is lying just so he wouldn't try to apprehend him? Wouldn't most people have believed the police's story instead of one told by a lying con who has just fled from prison? Let's not forget at the beginning of the film, Marko has escaped from Prison and at this part, the police hadn't proved he was Ben's killer yet, so he was obviously in prison for some other crime. If he was really sorry, he would have turned himself in.