Sandman Most Pointless Villian in SM3?

[ThatDamnNinja]

You think he was more pointless than Venom was?

You may not like Venom, but he definately served more of a point than Sandman did. Every point Sandman DID serve was very forced and artificial. Venom's a much more natural fit for the revenge storyline than Sandman, and it doesn't make a great deal of sense that Peter would become nasty and vengeful without the symbiote. Plus, Venom was a truly malicious villain, which Spider-Man 3 really needed. If Harry and the "practically-a-good-guy" Sandman were the only villains, Spidey 3 would have been utterly toothless.

 

[The Joker]

You may not like Venom, but he definately served more of a point than Sandman did. Every point Sandman DID serve was very forced and artificial.

Well, I can't argue with that. The killing Uncle Ben story was the stupidest, most contrived plot line ever.

Venom's a much more natural fit for the revenge storyline than Sandman, and it doesn't make a great deal of sense that Peter would become nasty and vengeful without the symbiote.

The symbiote is not Venom. I'm talking about Venom himself. As in Brock with the symbiote. He was not any kind of major factor in the story until the end. Whereas Sandman, as contrived as his story was, contributed more than Venom did.

Plus, Venom was a truly malicious villain, which Spider-Man 3 really needed. If Harry and the "practically-a-good-guy" Sandman were the only villains, Spidey 3 would have been utterly toothless.

So, you found the bulk of Spider-Man 3 toothless? Because Venom didn't come into it until the climax.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

edit

 

[co2]

After rewatching this movie on DVD, I get the same frustration I do with the Hulk. There are things I really like about it, but some things I wish I could simply change. Still think the movie would have been better off without the Sandman storyline. Topher was so entertaining to watch as Brock/Venom and he was so ripped off as far as screentime goes. He was wedging toward pretty damn scary and I would have liked to have seen that more realised. Oh well....

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

The symbiote is not Venom. I'm talking about Venom himself. As in Brock with the symbiote. He was not any kind of major factor in the story until the end. Whereas Sandman, as contrived as his story was, contributed more than Venom did.

Venom and symbiote are kind of a package deal. You won't get one without the other.

So, you found the bulk of Spider-Man 3 toothless? Because Venom didn't come into it until the climax.

Yeah, I'd say so, with the exception of the occasionally moments when the handled Peter's inner struggle and the conflict with Harry appropriately. James Franco was great, and the conflict with Harry was necessary, and at times, worked wonderfully, but it couldn't have carried the movie on it's own.

But ultimately, if you only have Sandman and Harry, what is your climax? Spider-Man and Harry teaming up to take down Sandman, before Sandman eventually stops and apologizes? Or perhaps Peter trying to take down both by himself before they both decide to apologize?

Or perhaps reworking the entire story to make Sandman a legitimate villain like they could have done in the first place?

 

[omid17]

i wish venom could have somehow brought up GG and doc ock when fighting with spider man

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

After rewatching this movie on DVD, I get the same frustration I do with the Hulk. There are things I really like about it, but some things I wish I could simply change. Still think the movie would have been better off without the Sandman storyline. Topher was so entertaining to watch as Brock/Venom and he was so ripped off as far as screentime goes. He was wedging toward pretty damn scary and I would have liked to have seen that more realised. Oh well....

Exactly. Both Sandman and Venom were underrealized, but there's no question of which one, at the end of the day, you want to see more and know more about.

Not to diss Thomas Haden Church, he was perfect for the part and did what he could, but film's interpretation of the character was beyond bland.

 

[BobJM]

I love Spider-Man 3 and everything about it. It's, for me, tied with SM2 for the best of the series.

But, what does bug is that in interviews, Raimi says that he wanted Venom to be in SM4 and film it back-to-back with SM3, but he and the writers couldn't think of a proper climax for the finale.

But, why couldn't you just write Venom out of the final battle and have Spider-Man and Harry saving MJ from just a giant Sandman? That seems like a big enough threat to require the both of them. And we could have got better closure for the character. Venom could have reappeared in SM4 after the church scene.

But, I liked SM3 either way, and I'm hoping Tobey, Kirsten, and Raimi come back for another one. One last final one.

 

[The Joker]

Venom and symbiote are kind of a package deal. You won't get one without the other.

That's not the point, though. Venom himself as a villain was a lesser contributor than Sandman was. That's the point.

Heck, first thing he did when he was created was go straight to Sandman for help.

Yeah, I'd say so, with the exception of the occasionally moments when the handled Peter's inner struggle and the conflict with Harry appropriately. James Franco was great, and the conflict with Harry was necessary, and at times, worked wonderfully, but it couldn't have carried the movie on it's own.

But ultimately, if you only have Sandman and Harry, what is your climax? Spider-Man and Harry teaming up to take down Sandman, before Sandman eventually stops and apologizes? Or perhaps Peter trying to take down both by himself before they both decide to apologize?

Or perhaps reworking the entire story to make Sandman a legitimate villain like they could have done in the first place?

The climax should have been like in Spectacular Spider-Man #200, where Harry puts Peter and MJ in jeopardy, only to excise his demons at the last minute and save them both, dying himself in the process. Much better than the deux ex machina with the butler. Another ridiculous plot device.

Much more emotional climax. Venom's exit was devoid of ANY kind of emotion. Green Goblin, Ock, Harry, even Sandman went out on an emotional note.

With Brock, it was like "Oh, he got blown up". Honestly, he didn't even provide that much to the final fight, IMO. Giant Sandman dwarfed him for the bulk of it.

 

[Blader5489]

But, why couldn't you just write Venom out of the final battle and have Spider-Man and Harry saving MJ from just a giant Sandman? That seems like a big enough threat to require the both of them. And we could have got better closure for the character. Venom could have reappeared in SM4 after the church scene.

Why would Sandman kidnap MJ? How would he even be the threat that GG, Ock, or Venom was?

I don't think Sandman was pointless at all. He wasn't the malicious villain that Harry and Venom were, but that was the point. Between Harry and Venom's appearances, the real villain was Peter. Sandman was the target for Peter's aggression, a way of showing just how corrupt Peter had become.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

That's not the point, though. Venom himself as a villain was a lesser contributor than Sandman was. That's the point.

Heck, first thing he did when he was created was go straight to Sandman for help.



The climax should have been like in Spectacular Spider-Man #200, where Harry puts Peter and MJ in jeopardy, only to excise his demons at the last minute and save them both, dying himself in the process. Much better than the deux ex machina with the butler. Another ridiculous plot device.

Much more emotional climax. Venom's exit was devoid of ANY kind of emotion. Green Goblin, Ock, Harry, even Sandman went out on an emotional note.

With Brock, it was like "Oh, he got blown up". Honestly, he didn't even provide that much to the final fight, IMO. Giant Sandman dwarfed him for the bulk of it.

Fair enough. Your ideas could've worked very well, had they made Sandman into more of an actual villain... don't take away audience sympathy for him, just make him more of an actual threat. Make you care about him and what he's trying to do, but make it clear that he's doing it at the expense of others, and that he needs to be both helped AND stopped.

 

[BobJM]

I'm not saying that I thought was Sandman was pointless. On the contrary, I really liked him.

I'm saying that Sandman, in all his rage and lust for revenge against Spider-Man, could be a big enough threat for both Spider-Man and Harry. MJ probably wouldn't have been in the scene, but seeing as to how many people complain about her being kidnapped, I'm not sure many would have cared.

I'm just saying that if anything, Venom was the most pointless villain. He could have easily been saved for SM4, but Raimi and co. felt it necessary to include him in the climax.

 

[omid17]

Why would Sandman kidnap MJ? How would he even be the threat that GG, Ock, or Venom was?

I don't think Sandman was pointless at all. He wasn't the malicious villain that Harry and Venom were, but that was the point. Between Harry and Venom's appearances, the real villain was Peter. Sandman was the target for Peter's aggression, a way of showing just how corrupt Peter had become.

thats bs imo. we say pete yelling at the landlord, we saw pete hit mj and we saw pete blow half of his best friends face off

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

I'm not saying that I thought was Sandman was pointless. On the contrary, I really liked him.

I'm saying that Sandman, in all his rage and lust for revenge against Spider-Man, could be a big enough threat for both Spider-Man and Harry. MJ probably wouldn't have been in the scene, but seeing as to how many people complain about her being kidnapped, I'm not sure many would have cared.

I'm just saying that if anything, Venom was the most pointless villain. He could have easily been saved for SM4, but Raimi and co. felt it necessary to include him in the climax.

I don't think the issue was how to get a proper climax. That could have been done. The issue is "When does Peter remove the suit?" If it's before the climax, then where's Venom that whole time? If it's after the climax, then he's still essentially bad and under the influence of the symbiote during the final battle, making it impossible to get an emotionally satisfying resolution.

I really think that Sandman and Venom was just a poor choice of villains to include in the same story arc.

 

[Blader5489]

I'm saying that Sandman, in all his rage and lust for revenge against Spider-Man, could be a big enough threat for both Spider-Man and Harry.

But that's my point: he isn't a threat. He just wants money. There is nothing climactic to that.

I really think this topic's title is a misnomer because Sandman wasn't a villain at all. He was a victim to his desperation and a target for Peter and Eddie's anger.

thats bs imo. we say pete yelling at the landlord, we saw pete hit mj and we saw pete blow half of his best friends face off

All of which had happened AFTER Peter first put the suit on. The only reason he used that suit in the first place was to get revenge for the only thing Peter would want to avenge: his uncle's death.

 

[BobJM]

His desperation led to him becoming a villain. It's like saying Dr. Octopus wasn't a villain because he was just trying to create a fusion reactor that would make energy cheap and readily available.

Their intentions, no matter how warped they became, may have been good, but that doesn't mean they weren't capable (or didn't do) villainous deeds.

 

[omid17]

His desperation led to him becoming a villain. It's like saying Dr. Octopus wasn't a villain because he was just trying to create a fusion reactor that would make energy cheap and readily available.

Their intentions, no matter how warped they became, may have been good, but that doesn't mean they weren't capable (or didn't do) villainous deeds.

 

[Blader5489]

His desperation led to him becoming a villain. It's like saying Dr. Octopus wasn't a villain because he was just trying to create a fusion reactor that would make energy cheap and readily available.

Their intentions, no matter how warped they became, may have been good, but that doesn't mean they weren't capable (or didn't do) villainous deeds.

But I think there's a key difference there. Ock's ambition would have destroyed the city. All Sandman wanted was money. There's no threat to that.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

His desperation led to him becoming a villain. It's like saying Dr. Octopus wasn't a villain because he was just trying to create a fusion reactor that would make energy cheap and readily available.

Their intentions, no matter how warped they became, may have been good, but that doesn't mean they weren't capable (or didn't do) villainous deeds.

Doctor Octopus was undeniably despicable though. He killed the surgeons who tried to remove the tentacles. He was going to impale Spider-Man before Aunt May stopped him. He shows a blatant disregard for the lives of innocent people. Sandman did nothing of this calibur. I think, as a character, he would have carried more weight, if he was shown as essentially, a well-intention guy, but still a criminal, who, after becoming Sandman, initially wants to use the power to get money for his daughter, but becomes corrupt off of the power, and his goals become less noble, and his actions become less excusable. Of course, with Venom AND him in the movie, there wouldn't have been time to show this.

 

[Blader5489]

I think, as a character, he would have carried more weight, if he was shown as essentially, a well-intention guy, but still a criminal, who, after becoming Sandman, initially wants to use the power to get money for his daughter, but becomes corrupt off of the power, and his goals become less noble, and his actions become less excusable.

But that DID happen. Assisting Venom in trying to kill Spider-Man is a considerably less noble and excusable goal, and shows how just corrupt he had become.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

But that DID happen. Assisting Venom in trying to kill Spider-Man is a considerably less noble and excusable goal, and shows how just corrupt he had become.

In theory, yeah, but the thing about films or books or anything of the sort, is that an event happening, in and of itself, is not enough to prove something. If that was kind of vague, then let me explain:

Yeah, the fact that he did that shows what he had become... but we didn't see the development. We didn't feel that he had become worse or compromised any morals. We didn't see a well-intentioned guy who just wanted to save his daughter lose sight of his goal in pursuit of the destruction of a foe. All we see is him trying to get money for his sick daughter, fighting Spider-Man for trying to stop him, and all of sudden, Woah! He's teamed up with Venom with minimal explanation!

We felt it with Ock. We felt what happened to Green Goblin. We saw Harry's struggle. We caught a glimpse of what Eddie was going through. Sandman's whole story was just mishandled and lost dramatic resonance as a result.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

I really think this topic's title is a misnomer because Sandman wasn't a villain at all. He was a victim to his desperation and a target for Peter and Eddie's anger.

Very nicely put and I like your logic behind it.

To me none of the characters were useless, if you define their purposes in the movie properly.
Like Blader put it and I agree - Sandman was just a victim of his own foolishness and ignorance, never really stepping up to be a villain. He wasn’t supposed to be a villain. He was the symbol of a fallen person, who could be still and was rescued.
Brock/Venom in my opinion was there just to show the inevitability of pure ‘villainism’ - pride, envy and indifference.
And let’s not forget - if Sandman was blinded by grief (arguably selfless), Harry was blinded by selfish revenge. He and Marko’s characters are similar but that is their key difference.
Peter’s journey in the movie mirrors that of Harry’s.
All in all to me SM3 wasn’t as much about a new villain and how should Spidey beat him, as it was about redemption. In that, I believe it was deservingly Harry’s movie, as his was the strongest and most complete story. Everyone else was there for the purpose of exploring the different paths one could take in similar circumstances.

In addition people should also decide what in their opinion qualifies as a ‘villain’.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

Very nicely put and I like your logic behind it.

To me none of the characters were useless, if you define their purposes in the movie properly.
Like Blader put it and I agree - Sandman was just a victim of his own foolishness and ignorance, never really stepping up to be a villain. He wasn’t supposed to be a villain. He was the symbol of a fallen person, who could be still and was rescued.
Brock/Venom in my opinion was there just to show the inevitability of pure ‘villainism’ - pride, envy and indifference.
And let’s not forget - if Sandman was blinded by grief (arguably selfless), Harry was blinded by selfish revenge. He and Marko’s characters are similar but that is their key difference.
Peter’s journey in the movie mirrors that of Harry’s.
All in all to me SM3 wasn’t as much about a new villain and how should Spidey beat him, as it was about redemption. In that, I believe it was deservingly Harry’s movie, as his was the strongest and most complete story. Everyone else was there for the purpose of exploring the different paths one could take in similar circumstances.

In addition people should also decide what in their opinion qualifies as a ‘villain’.

In theory, you're right. If the screenwriters set their priorities straight and cut the fat by taking out scenes that didn't serve the story, and were willing to make a significantly longer movie that did justice to all the characters, then you're right. But as it stood, no one was done right.

 

[arachnid-guy]

Sandmans storyline was so great and very well put togeather. I mean he's a wanted man who is desperatley looking to help his daughter. one of the emotional scenes in the film is when he sneeks into his wife and daughters apartment. he looked so sad in that scene. The Transformation scene I found phenomenal simply because, how great it was put togeather. the little grains of Sand and the going inside Sandmans body seeing his insides change to Sand, I really think that is a great Comic Book moment right there even though he had to swim from the prison and onto a nuclear test site on the Beach in the Comics. great storyline for Sandman!.

You really love EVERYTHING Spider-Man related don't you? I have yet to see a post of yours even slightly negative.

 

[Venom 1988]

You really love EVERYTHING Spider-Man related don't you? I have yet to see a post of yours even slightly negative.

It boggles my mind that he cannot find at least one flaw or problem with these movies, no offence.