Sandman Most Pointless Villian in SM3?

[Blader5489]

what it work if they endend sm3 with venom meeting marko for the first time. And right after Venom says " Interested? " to be continued...

And then you have to wait God knows how long to see any kind of resolution.

 

[omid17]

And then you have to wait God knows how long to see any kind of resolution.

do think the POTC director made a smart move how he ended the second one?

 

[Blader5489]

I don't watch POTC, so I wouldn't know, but I assume the second movie had some sort of closure to it.

 

[omid17]

I don't watch POTC, so I wouldn't know, but I assume the second movie had some sort of closure to it.

trust me i hate POTC movies, how they continued 2 to 3 turned out to be good ( judging by the box office)

 

[JerseyJoker]

It is easy to figure out that Sandman was not only picked cause a favorite of Sam and Tobey, but as you can obviously see, looks AMAZING on screen.

The birth of the Sandman scene should alone get Spidey 3 a Oscar nomination for best cgi in a movie.

Other than that, yeah, neither him or Venom have a lengthy stay in the movie, more of a here i am and...whoops you thought i was dead, but here i am again. But in the end, the story of Spidey 3 is about Peter/MJ/Harry more so than Spidey/Venom/Sandman.

Plus maybe if they didn't have to cut out a sublot, Sandman would have had a more important role, but hell, in the end, he teaches Peter a important lesson.

 

[IamProdigy]

The birth of the Sandman scene should alone get Spidey 3 a Oscar nomination for best cgi in a movie.

I'm pretty sure Transformers will win an Oscar before that does.

 

[JerseyJoker]

First i just said nom.

Second, if it does, then the men behin the CGI for Spidey 3 would be robbed. Cause that scene alone like i said should earn them a nom, not even going into the countless other amazing CGI in the picture.

No matter what you say about the movies themselves, the CGI in each movie has gotten better and better and just seemless.

 

[JerseyJoker]

-double post-

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

I think all of us (Venom-haters vs Sandman-haters) will acknowledge that the producers severely under-estimated the ability of Harry and Franco to be a (if not the) major villain in this film.

So what you're saying is that Harry is in a whole other league and that what we're discussing here is only second best? Hmm...alrighty then.
But I believe they still did mean for Harry to be more important than Sandman and Venom combined. Look at the first marketing posters. They pimped Dock Ock for SM2. Sure Venom was kind of like spoiler material but no villain poster for SM3?

 

[Moviefan2k4]

My only beef with "Spider-Man 3" was that Venom was way too rushed. The black suit / Venom story should've been saved for part 4. Cramming it all into this one was simply overkill.

As for Sandman, he was actually my favorite villain in the film. I'm not a purist when it comes to comics; all I want in a "Spider-Man" film is great action, a dramatic story with a clear focus, and sympathetic characters. Marko, Harry, Gwen, and even Aunt May were all wonderful this time around. Tobey & Kirsten were once again fabulous as Peter & MJ. Topher's version of Eddie was definitely menacing, but I think he toned it down too much. From what I recall, Eddie was nearly psychotic without the symbiote, and being Venom just made him worse.

Thomas Haden Church was an actor I'd never even heard of before, but he did a marvelous job (pardon the pun) as both Marko (pre-accident) and the Sandman. I actually enjoyed Raimi connecting Marko with Ben Parker's murder; it was a way to keep things a little more focused on Peter (especially with everything else trying to dominate the story).

 

[chaseter]

Can you people please get over this "it should have ended with Venom in the church" bs? That was never an option. Please stop wallowing over impossibilities.

Please stop wallowing in a film that you think is high and mighty. We can have opinions and the majority of fans and critics were let down by this movie. This movie should have been better...plain and simple. It's ok to try to think of ways to make something better.

 

[Blader5489]

Please stop wallowing in a film that you think is high and mighty.

We can have opinions and the majority of fans and critics were let down by this movie. This movie should have been better...plain and simple. It's ok to try to think of ways to make something better.

But the ways you're thinking of were never possible. It was never an option to save Venom for SM4. It was never an option to end the film with him in the church. Got it?

It is a waste of time to cry over something that was never feasible to begin with.

 

[chaseter]

But the ways you're thinking of were never possible. It was never an option to save Venom for SM4. It was never an option to end the film with him in the church. Got it?

It is a waste of time to cry over something that was never feasible to begin with.

I never ever want to see you gripe or nitpick over anything because us wanting a change or suggesting a possible alternative was never possible because the certain people working on it never thought of it. I also don't want to see you suggest plots, characters, etc... for SM4 or further because the possibilities for your suggestions to be incorporated into that movie are low enough to also make it never possible.

 

[Blader5489]

I never ever want to see you gripe or nitpick over anything because us wanting a change or suggesting a possible alternative was never possible because the certain people working on it never thought of it.

Good God...how are you not getting this?

Avi Arad wanted Venom in THIS movie. He didn't want him in SM4, he didn't want him as a cliffhanger; he wanted him as a villain in Spider-Man 3. There was never an option of "saving" Venom for a future movie.

Furthermore, your point of "certain people working on it never thought of it" is completely wrong. They DID think of it. They did think about breaking the movie in half with Venom's birth being the midpoint between the two. But that offered absolutely no resolution to the events of SM3 - it leaves every plotline completely up in the air.

Griping over a deleted scene is one thing, but whining over something that was never going to happen from the get-go? GET. OVER. IT.

 

[<(o_o)>]

What became or will become of Sandman? Will he continue to rob & steal since Spider-Man let him get away, maybe he'll seek help to become normal again, or maybe he could always return as either a friend or foe of Spider-Man's.

 

[chaseter]

Good God...how are you not getting this?

Avi Arad wanted Venom in THIS movie. He didn't want him in SM4, he didn't want him as a cliffhanger; he wanted him as a villain in Spider-Man 3. There was never an option of "saving" Venom for a future movie.

Furthermore, your point of "certain people working on it never thought of it" is completely wrong. They DID think of it. They did think about breaking the movie in half with Venom's birth being the midpoint between the two. But that offered absolutely no resolution to the events of SM3 - it leaves every plotline completely up in the air.

Griping over a deleted scene is one thing, but whining over something that was never going to happen from the get-go? GET. OVER. IT.

Yes because Avi Arad makes all the creative decisions and is the ultimate say in everything And do you have proof that these certain people thought of everything we have mentioned on here? I guess I missed the 1,000 page long art concept book.

Those two sentences contradict each other...why would they think of something if it was never an option

We were just simply stating our opinion on how we thought the movie could have been better...and you get huffed up asking for all this to "get over it should have ended with Venom in the church BS." Like I said, it is an opinion that we can post as many times as we want. But for you to get called out on your anger over a viewpoint that clashes with yours and you become defensive is silly. It was an option at some point and Avi butted in. But alas, what if he hadn't? Is is dumb to waste our time thinking of such an alternative instead of yelling at people who thought the movie needed improvement?

I guess wanting Venom to be a cliff hanger is more ludicrous than wanting Ben to take over protecting the city......................................................................................................................................(SM sequels forum for those who don't get the joke)

 

[Blader5489]

Yes because Avi Arad makes all the creative decisions and is the ultimate say in everything

Ultimately, yes. You can't do anything without the producers approval.

We were just simply stating our opinion on how we thought the movie could have been better...and you get huffed up asking for all this to "get over it should have ended with Venom in the church BS." Like I said, it is an opinion that we can post as many times as we want. But for you to get called out on your anger over a viewpoint that clashes with yours and you become defensive is silly. It was an option at some point and Avi butted in. But alas, what if he hadn't? Is is dumb to waste our time thinking of such an alternative instead of yelling at people who thought the movie needed improvement?

Yes, quite dumb. You're arguing over an alternative that was never going to happen. Because of studio mandate, Venom had to be in this film and all loose ends had to be tied up (i.e. Venom had to die). Whining that he should been saved for a different movie is pointless because that was never going to happen. Because of the producers, Venom was going to be in this movie and he was going to die. Complaining about the exact opposite is a waste of time, and is akin to saying "They should have had Lizard and Black Cat in SM2."

I guess wanting Venom to be a cliff hanger is more ludicrous than wanting Ben to take over protecting the city......................................................................................................................................(SM sequels forum for those who don't get the joke)

Except SM6 is years away, so any ideas for it are fair game. Whereas you're arguing over an impossibility for something that can't be changed anyway.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

Yeah, 'should've's are pointless. Accept what the movie has and move on.

 

[chaseter]

Yeah, 'should've's are pointless. Accept what the movie has and move on.

(this is to everyone that loved this movie)

Yes, everyone accept this movie for what it is, and lets move on...to another board perhaps Since we can't discuss possiblities, alternatives, and the creative thought processes behind this movie...lets discuss how AWESOMEZ it was I guess a 30% drop on RT, a huge drop in second week theatre gross, still not being able to beat its two predecessors, and a huge discourse from fans is enough reason for everyone on here to accept Spider-Man 3 for what it is...

This place will turn into the X3 boards, 6 people straggling around talking about how great it was and dissecting every blink for the subtle film nuances that Arad forced in. This is an exact repeat of X3 on here, a lot of people voice their concerns, a few say get over it, and the movie sinks into the abyss that was horrible trilogies. Sorry but I love Spider-Man...and if we all just sit around and eat what crap they feed us (Spider-Man Friend or Foe, Spider-Man 3, Spider-Man battle armour action figures, etc...) then they will keep making the mediocre crap because we keep buying it. The chances may be slim but at least there is a chance that someone working in the process of the Spidey movies sees the hardcore fans concerns and does something about it...look at Heroes for an example of the creator noticing fans concerns. But nothing will change if we all sit around on here and and talk about how great Venom was for 10 minutes and how awesome 1 phrase giant Sandman was (GRAAHHHHHH)

Sorry for my rant, it has been a long and tiresome week. And that was directed at nobody particularly...

 

[Mr.E.Nygma]

(this is to everyone that loved this movie)

Yes, everyone accept this movie for what it is, and lets move on...to another board perhaps Since we can't discuss possiblities, alternatives, and the creative thought processes behind this movie...lets discuss how AWESOMEZ it was I guess a 30% drop on RT, a huge drop in second week theatre gross, still not being able to beat its two predecessors, and a huge discourse from fans is enough reason for everyone on here to accept Spider-Man 3 for what it is...

This place will turn into the X3 boards, 6 people straggling around talking about how great it was and dissecting every blink for the subtle film nuances that Arad forced in. This is an exact repeat of X3 on here, a lot of people voice their concerns, a few say get over it, and the movie sinks into the abyss that was horrible trilogies. Sorry but I love Spider-Man...and if we all just sit around and eat what crap they feed us (Spider-Man Friend or Foe, Spider-Man 3, Spider-Man battle armour action figures, etc...) then they will keep making the mediocre crap because we keep buying it. The chances may be slim but at least there is a chance that someone working in the process of the Spidey movies sees the hardcore fans concerns and does something about it...look at Heroes for an example of the creator noticing fans concerns. But nothing will change if we all sit around on here and and talk about how great Venom was for 10 minutes and how awesome 1 phrase giant Sandman was (GRAAHHHHHH)

Sorry for my rant, it has been a long and tiresome week. And that was directed at nobody particularly...

I just totally agree and couldn't say better what you said and that I quoted in bold! This is the reason why I boycott the SM3 DVD, and that I bought SM1 and 2.

One thing though, the fan edits some times do incredible jobs (Batman Forever Red Book Edition or batman & Robin De-Assified) to make the movie look watchable. SM3 is not THAT worse, but there was potential, so varied fan edits can be interesting to watch, how we can change this into something more.

But giant Sandman was just plain stupid, I mean the ridiculous Godzilla-like, grunting around, like his brain was washed away because there was no substance in this movie.

 

[Blader5489]

a huge drop in second week theatre gross

Which is to be expected of a movie with an enormous first week gross. You can't sustain those numbers for long, there just aren't enough people for it.

 

[Mr Jide]

First i just said nom.

Second, if it does, then the men behin the CGI for Spidey 3 would be robbed. Cause that scene alone like i said should earn them a nom, not even going into the countless other amazing CGI in the picture.

No matter what you say about the movies themselves, the CGI in each movie has gotten better and better and just seemless.

What has that got to do with the effects being better than TF? TF had superior effects to all 3 spidey films. If TF win, it'll be well deserved.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

Sorry for my rant, it has been a long and tiresome week. And that was directed at nobody particularly...

I didn't in fact take your comment personally and know that the following is not meant as a comeback but instead is an explanation to my opinion. So let me rephrase my last post:
I have nothing against stating your own opinion on how you liked or didn’t like Spider-Man 3 but as soon as people start listing their own fantasies that’s where I draw the line.
Now I know I can’t make you say things in a certain ‘correct’ way but the way I see it ‘should’ve’s are a waste of time and just plain insulting to the movie’s authors. I personally judge a movie by what I did and didn’t get from it, not by my own pre-established expectations. If you really want to use your dislike for a movie constructively do a fan-fic. But in any case in my eyes there’s no justifying your wallowing in your own discontent. Just let it all out and move on, do something useful with your life.

 

[IamProdigy]

Which is to be expected of a movie with an enormous first week gross. You can't sustain those numbers for long, there just aren't enough people for it.

Well, imo, I think there was a huge drop in the box office for the second week is because Spider-Man 3, after viewing it, most people realized that it wasn't as good as most people had hoped.

And you can't say that it's like every movie, their numbers always drop; they do drop, but not as big of a margin that S-M 3 had in its opening week.

 

[Blader5489]

Well, imo, I think there was a huge drop in the box office for the second week is because Spider-Man 3, after viewing it, most people realized that it wasn't as good as most people had hoped.

And you can't say that it's like every movie, their numbers always drop; they do drop, but not as big of a margin that S-M 3 had in its opening week.

SM3 made 1/3 of it's total domestic gross in its opening weekend alone. There is no way for those numbers couldn't drop a week later.