Sandman Most Pointless Villian in SM3?

[Dragon]

there appears to be alot of people differing with your point...

And far more differing with you. The fact that you need to bring up other people suggests how little you believe in your opinion.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

And far more differing with you. The fact that you need to bring up other people suggests how little you believe in your opinion.

dude, im just stating the facts.. the posts on this thread and the post in the review thread majority has been saying sandman should have been cut.. believe what you want, be in denile.. thats fine, but don't try to argue with us about it.

 

[paec_djinn]

Venom got too little screen time, definitely. I think that in what little time he had, he did really well to excite viewers. But Sandman's inclusion was very unnecessary.

First of all I didn't like how they just redid the Uncle Ben story just to include Sandman. He's nothing more than a plot device for Parker's revenge story. But one of the biggest issues I had was when he asks Spiderman for forgiveness at the end of the movie when Venom has just been killed. I mean if he wasn't a bad guy in the first place, why would he even bother helping Venom kill Spiderman? And I seriously winced everytime we had a scene of the Sandman, because the amount of times we had to see him was just too much.

 

[Spidey17]

Why Sandman!!! He isn't all that interesting, and Raimi had to make up **** about he had to kill Uncle Ben and have a cancer daughter to have him even be semi-interesting!!! Venom should have had the whole movie to himself, except for the GG thing at the beginning. Venom had no time at all to get under Parker"s skin, which is part of what makes him so great. GG could haved showed up alittle more for the second fight where Spdey has the black suit, but no amnesia please! Why, Sam, why???

 

[Sidepocket]

So which story was "worthy of our time"?

There were no pointless villains in this film. There were only stories that happened. not every story or character's life is enormous with twists and turns. Some people have simple lives with simple troubles. And those simple troubles can lead to very hard situations.

And here's something to ponder. Why would there be only ONE villain running around New York at one time? Some have noted the numerous (and they are NUMEROUS) coincidences. But it's also too much of a coincidence that a hero will only have one villain to face in a given time frame.

Newsflash. That is life, this is a movie.

We take time out of our lives to see movies, and we want to see something interesting and cool.

So whatever is on the screen better be damn well worth our time!

 

[Parquagh]

In the plot I think Sandman was important because he was needed to empathize the point about forgiveness and having always a chance to choose the good option that Harry thought Peter, and as a great visual attractive because of the CGI

 

[Dragon]

dude, im just stating the facts.. the posts on this thread and the post in the review thread majority has been saying sandman should have been cut.. believe what you want, be in denile.. thats fine, but don't try to argue with us about it.

You're not stating a single fact. You're stating your opinion. Because this thread is populated by Venom fans griping over Venom not being the main villain means nothing. That's been happening since the movie line-up was announced. In the review thread, and over at Box Office Mojo, those who liked or loved the movie out-pace your group by more than 3 to 1.

 

[Dragon]

Newsflash. That is life, this is a movie.

And what are movies based on?

We take time out of our lives to see movies, and we want to see something interesting and cool.

So whatever is on the screen better be damn well worth our time!

And that's what most of us believe we got. Sorry you don't.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

So i saw the movie again tonight, sandman bothered me alot less, hes not useless.. but still, if he was left out, venom would have had much more development, and sandman was developed enough, but other then visuals you don't really care about him.

 

[Comicfan]

In the plot I think Sandman was important because he was needed to empathize the point about forgiveness and having always a chance to choose the good option that Harry thought Peter, and as a great visual attractive because of the CGI

That whole forgiveness plot could have been done with Harry or Eddy, even Spidey himself

The whole sandman story was just stupid, him killling Ben, being a criminal because of his daughter (how about getting a job, or starting a fundation), the I´m not a bad guy (but he killed a lot of people *don´t tell me he didn´t because at least a couple of cops and civilians where killed in there* with his sandstorms), and again I´m not a bad guy, but since I saw you swing by I will hit you with a sand sledge hammer and team up with some else to kill you... and sandmas as a cloud...lame... spidey letting him go (HE IS STILL A CRIMINAL!!)...even lamer

 

[psylockolussus]

He might be pointless but he looks the coolest of all!

 

[Dragon]

That whole forgiveness plot could have been done with Harry or Eddy, even Spidey himself

Really? So Harry, Eddie or Peter could've killed Uncle Ben?

The whole sandman story was just stupid, him killling Ben, being a criminal because of his daughter (how about getting a job, or starting a fundation), the I´m not a bad guy (but he killed a lot of people *don´t tell me he didn´t because at least a couple of cops and civilians where killed in there* with his sandstorms), and again I´m not a bad guy, but since I saw you swing by I will hit you with a sand sledge hammer and team up with some else to kill you... and sandmas as a cloud...lame... spidey letting him go (HE IS STILL A CRIMINAL!!)...even lamer

But Eddie Brock becoming Venom and wanting to kill Peter because he lost his job due to his own failings- THAT'S a good story.

 

[conan69]

"I think Raimi just wanted to add an extra villian into the mix. He didn't need to be in the third installment."

Ummmm no that would be Venom. Raimi had a story planned out and was forced to add Venom so certain peopel stop crying and we end up with a uneven and some parts utterly ridiculous sequel.

IMHO Sandman was the best thing about the movie. I loved his scenes.

 

[Comicfan]

Really? So Harry, Eddie or Peter could've killed Uncle Ben?



But Eddie Brock becoming Venom and wanting to kill Peter because he lost his job due to his own failings- THAT'S a good story.

Actually I would have leave that part out of the movie too

we got clousure on Ben death on SM2, when he confesed to aunt may what happened, he needed to forgive himself for the death of his uncle, not forgive the killer (wich btw we get clousure on that in SM1)

 

[Comicfan]

But Eddie Brock becoming Venom and wanting to kill Peter because he lost his job due to his own failings- THAT'S a good story.

And sandman saying he is not a bad guy, but still robing banks, attacking the police, killing people in the process (come on with the things he did, at least a couple of person died on that movie), and teaming up with a bad guy to kill Spidey man, but NOOOOOOOOO he is not a bad guy...

yeah that makes a lot of sense

(not to mention spidey letting a criminal go away)

 

[Comicfan]

So i saw the movie again tonight, sandman bothered me alot less, hes not useless.. but still, if he was left out, venom would have had much more development, and sandman was developed enough, but other then visuals you don't really care about him.

Yeah, I ahve to say, Sandman was in the movie, mostly because he looked cool... nothing more

and people say that THC was the best actor in SM3 I don´t think so, because most of the time we see sandman in the screen is CGI not THC

he had just a few lines, and his delivery was too stiff

 

[David Rice]

This thread need to be changed to "Venom Most Pointless Villian in SM3".

 

[Comicfan]

Ok, this is gonna be a double post, but what the heck:

Sandman was in SM3 only because Sam wanted him to be in the movie, but it didn´t have a good solid story or character development he just stole time from black suit/eddy/venom and harry story

 

[David Rice]

Ok, this is gonna be a double post, but what the heck:

Sandman was in SM3 only because Sam wanted him to be in the movie, but it didn´t have a good solid story or character development he just stole time from black suit/eddy/venom and harry story

The same could be said of Venom. Sandman was suppost to be the main bad guy in SM3. The only reason Venom was in the film was because the producers wanted him there.

Besides Thomas gave a much better performance than Topher did. Topher was not playing Brock, he's is just playing himself.

 

[Comicfan]

The same could be said of Venom. Sandman was suppost to be the main bad guy in SM3. The only reason Venom was in the film was because the producers wanted him there.

Besides Thomas gave a much better performance than Topher did. Topher was not playing Brock, he's is just playing himself.

Yep... I agree with you:

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11620501&postcount=43

except from the preformance, I liked Topher as Eddy (yeah, very similar to erik forman)... but THC I don´t know what to say about his preformance, he delivered a few lines in a very stiff way, and most of sandman screen time he was just a big roaring CGI sand dune not THC

 

[dark_b]

The same could be said of Venom. Sandman was suppost to be the main bad guy in SM3. The only reason Venom was in the film was because the producers wanted him there.

Besides Thomas gave a much better performance than Topher did. Topher was not playing Brock, he's is just playing himself.

venom was in the movie because avid wanted him. sandman was because of raimi.
the problem becomes when sandman is like venom

 

[Dragon]

Actually I would have leave that part out of the movie too

we got clousure on Ben death on SM2, when he confesed to aunt may what happened, he needed to forgive himself for the death of his uncle, not forgive the killer (wich btw we get clousure on that in SM1)

He needed to forgive the killer so that he could be a better person. So that he could realize that if he's going to be a hero and protector, he needs to remeber tha he can misjudge and do that things that are wrong.

 

[Dragon]

And sandman saying he is not a bad guy, but still robing banks, attacking the police, killing people in the process (come on with the things he did, at least a couple of person died on that movie), and teaming up with a bad guy to kill Spidey man, but NOOOOOOOOO he is not a bad guy...

yeah that makes a lot of sense

(not to mention spidey letting a criminal go away)

No one said Sandman isn't a villain. He knows it himself. He meant he's not a bad person in that he's not malicious. And you have nothing to base him killing anyone on.

As for killing Spider-Man, Spider-Man had tried to kill HIM, and was an obstacle to Marko helping his daughter.

And please. Do you really think if Sandman commits a crime Spidey won't be on his ass?

And one last thing- EVERY ONE of the points you raise above happened in the comics with Venom. Did you gripe about that happening then?

 

[Spade]

The same could be said of Venom. Sandman was suppost to be the main bad guy in SM3. The only reason Venom was in the film was because the producers wanted him there.

Besides Thomas gave a much better performance than Topher did. Topher was not playing Brock, he's is just playing himself.

You're kidding me, right? Church kept on extending his jaw and giving pseudo-tough renditions. Sideways with more pondering. His best acting was at the very beginning and the very end, and with the very end...well, the timeframe speaks for itself. If they made this film only with the Sandman, the giant Sandman should have been snipped. Maybe I would think differently with more time. But I really can't see how you think Topher was just acting like himself. I'm glad they had his mask rolled back most of the time. He was completely different from any other portrayl he's provided. Otherwise I would have been accosted to Venom meowing the whole film through (or what little time he had).

 

[Comicfan]

No one said Sandman isn't a villain. He knows it himself. He meant he's not a bad person in that he's not malicious. And you have nothing to base him killing anyone on.

As for killing Spider-Man, Spider-Man had tried to kill HIM, and was an obstacle to Marko helping his daughter.

And please. Do you really think if Sandman commits a crime Spidey won't be on his ass?

And one last thing- EVERY ONE of the points you raise above happened in the comics with Venom. Did you gripe about that happening then?

I know, but venom know he ins´t a nice guy

look I like Sandman, that is why I think they should have saved him for SM4, with a beter story, I didn´t liked how he was shown in this movie