The Official "I Loved Raimi's Spider-Man' Thread - Part 1 of 99 Luft - - Part 11

[Johnny-Oh]

I also agree, Raimi is a TRUE visual director and his ability to use the camera to convey emotion is fantastic. I love the scene in Spider-Man 3 when Peter wakes up in the black suit.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

This gif is too mesmerizing I had to post it lol

If people didn't complain so much about the Goblin's mask Raimi probably wouldn't have insisted in showing Eddie's face all the time.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I also agree, Raimi is a TRUE visual director and his ability to use the camera to convey emotion is fantastic. I love the scene in Spider-Man 3 when Peter wakes up in the black suit.

On that note. it's interesting to see how....dull the new franchise is in terms of visual ingenuity despite being inundated with CGI.

 

[Venom75]

This gif is too mesmerizing I had to post it lol

If people didn't complain so much about the Goblin's mask Raimi probably wouldn't have insisted in showing Eddie's face all the time.

Love this moment!! Despite being screwed over character and time wise,the film got Venom's look perfectly. Too bad he only showed his Venom "face" for like,30 seconds. We mostly got Brock's face. I understand Sam Raimi's desire to keep showing the actors faces in this trilogy,but sometimes I think he had their faces shown a bit too much,esp. with Venom and Spider-man.

 

[W/ Great Power]

Love this moment!! Despite being screwed over character and time wise,the film got Venom's look perfectly. Too bad he only showed his Venom "face" for like,30 seconds. We mostly got Brock's face. I understand Sam Raimi's desire to keep showing the actors faces in this trilogy,but sometimes I think he had their faces shown a bit too much,esp. with Venom and Spider-man.

Loved Raimi's Spidey films, but that was certainly an issue.

I went back and watched SM1 the other day and it was one of the few criticisms I had.

 

[Leenie]

The camera work in Raimi's Spidey trilogy is really something that makes those movies unique in comparison to other comic book movies in terms of style, in my opinion.

When one watches the Evil Dead Trilogy, it makes total sense as to why Raimi was hired in the first place for Spider-Man. The camera work really worked in Spider-Man's favor, especially during some of the swinging scenes and action scenes. Even in Spider-Man 3, a flawed movie, had impressive action sequences due to the use of the cameras. The subway fight between Symbiote Spidey and Sandman is the first thing that comes to mind.

Also, the final swing in Spider-Man 1 gave me CHILLS the first time I saw it in theaters. Chills. I know that a lot of people wanted more POV shots, but the final swing in Spider-Man 1 was so great that I never really felt the need for POV shots. It was perfectly done.

 

[W/ Great Power]

Also, the final swing in Spider-Man 1 gave me CHILLS the first time I saw it in theaters. Chills. I know that a lot of people wanted more POV shots, but the final swing in Spider-Man 1 was so great that I never really felt the need for POV shots. It was perfectly done.

Yes!

When I saw SM1 the other day and Spidey swung after the cemetery scene, I thought, "How did I forget about this epic scene?"

It was perfect. You would think that CGI scenes would look at least slightly dysfunctional all these years later, but it was flawless. I especially love the ending where swings off the crane and finishes on the American flag pole.

It's easy to go back and see such details of Raimi's films and understand why Spider-Man became the phenomenon that he did, especially after SM2.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I just re-watched Spider-man 3 this weekend. My mixed feelings seem to grow stronger with each viewing.

I noticed Eddie Brock's lack of compassion during the Gwen's near-death fall via the crane. Plus, he witnesses Spidey save Gwen, so that should have made an impression on him. If his feelings weren't particularly strong from Gwen, he shouldn't have felt much jealously over losing her. If he did indeed love her, then why wasn't he showing concern (which comic Eddie certainly would have done for Ann) when she was about to fall to her death? Either way, that's bad writing.

On the flip side, I gained further appreciation for the Harry-Peter rivalry. James Franco did such a good job showing Harry's gamut of emotions, and their initial fight scene is greatly under-appreciated.

Also, watching JK Simmons as JJJ simply never gets old. I almost know all of his lines by heart now, but I still burst out laughing when he delivers them.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

....Or maybe, maybe Brock was too caught up in getting a good shot and talking himself up to care. He wasn't the most mentally stable of people in the world, you know.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

The way I see it is that Eddie is an extremely self-involved person, he didn't really care about Gwen, he only wanted her to be with him. He basically saw her as a trophy which is consistent with his character, he has a twisted view of the world in which everything has to work good for him or else he takes it by force or cheating.

 

[The Joker]

Brock didn't really love Gwen. It was just obsession. He was a self deluded person who had construed a cup of coffee as an amazing date.

 

[Lantern Venom]

....Or maybe, maybe Brock was too caught up in getting a good shot and talking himself up to care. He wasn't the most mentally stable of people in the world, you know.

Brock didn't really love Gwen. It was just obsession. He was a self deluded person who had construed a cup of coffee as an amazing date.

That's even more proof to me that Raimi didn't understand Eddie at all, given that Eddie's love for Anne was instrumental in him becoming a villain, eventually becoming an anti-hero, then returning to villainy yet again.

I also think it would have been a better idea to use Betty Brant in Gwen's place since the character's function in the story was so minute.

 

[The Joker]

Newsflash; Gwen was not Anne. This was not the comic book Venom background (thank god). Raimi understood Eddie of the comics, that's why he made these changes because the comic book character is AWFUL. This he has openly said in interviews. He researched the character and just did not get what the Venom fans found so appealing about him. Because there is nothing beyond a cool look and power. Shallow things that don't make a good character.

The best thing Raimi ever did was see how bad the comic book character was and make a conscious choice to not do him that way.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Newsflash; Gwen was not Anne. This was not the comic book Venom background (thank god). Raimi understood Eddie of the comics, that's why he made these changes because the comic book character is AWFUL. This he has openly said in interviews. He researched the character and just did not get what the Venom fans found so appealing about him. Because there is nothing beyond a cool look and power. Shallow things that don't make a good character.

The best thing Raimi ever did was see how bad the comic book character was and make a conscious choice to not do him that way.

To let his misunderstanding of the character influence his decision making is completely unacceptable. With any comic book character in any movie, even the most minor ones, there will be people purchasing tickets to see that character most of all. To take unnecessary liberties, especially ones that make a complex character into a shallow joke, is disrespectful to those passionate about the character in question.

 

[The Joker]

It is perfectly acceptable when the character is actually bad and needs a lot of changes, which Venom is and did. He took a one dimensional character who skated to popularity on his looks and powers, and gave him proper depth and an actual valid reason to hate Spider-Man. Unnecessary liberties would mean the character didn't need those changes, when he very much did. I mean how many adaptions of Venom in the cartoons included Anne, or him hating Spider-Man for capturing a killer, or not even having Eddie or Spidey know each other prior to becoming enemies? None.

Raimi's changes were gold. Big improvements.

 

[Lantern Venom]

It is perfectly acceptable when the character is actually bad and needs a lot of changes, which Venom is and did. He took a one dimensional character who skated to popularity on his looks and powers, and have him proper depth and an actual valid reason to hate Spider-Man. Unnecessary liberties would mean the character didn't need those changes, when he very much did. I mean how many adaptions of Venom in the cartoons included Anne, or him hating Spider-Man for capturing a killer, or not even having Eddie or Spidey know each other prior to becoming enemies? None.

Raimi's changes were gold. Big improvements.

It would have been so simple to actually write the rivalry instead of relying of a loose grouping of brain-dead devices to reach the Venom-Spidey battle.

In the first film, we could have seen a couple of instances of Peter's photos costing Eddie story spots in the Bugle, and the financial problems causing a rift in Eddie's marriage.

In Spidey 2, Eddie and Anne are evicted from their tiny apartment only to watch Peter move into it. As Eddie's marriage flounders, he learns that Mary Jane left John at the altar to be with Peter.

Near the start of Spidey 3, Eddie and Ann are nearing divorce because of Eddie's temper and obsession with Peter. One day, she discovers that she's left a family heirloom in the old apartment and returns to it where Peter, under the increasing control of the symbiote, makes a pass at her. Eddie follows her and, in his mind, his fears are confirmed--she's been having an affair with Peter. He tries to fight Peter, but he loses almost instantly and injures Ann in the process. In the hospital, she demands a divorce.

Now we have Eddie blaming Peter for losing his job, his home, and his wife. Those are ADULT problems, not the "my girlfriend likes you better than me" Disney channel crud.

There were endless ways to built one of comics' greatest rivalties, and short of Blowpher flying into a rage because he couldn't find any extra-small tank tops in the boys' section of Target, I can't imagine a story with worse reasoning that Spider-man 3.

 

[The Joker]

One of comic's greatest rivalries? That's as funny as saying Venom is one of comic's greatest villains. Both hilariously untrue. I can't think of one single event in the Spidey vs Venom dynamic that comes close to any of the heights that Spidey vs Goblin, Spidey vs Doc Ock, Batman vs Joker, F4 vs Dr. Doom, Magneto vs Xavier and the other true great comic book rivalries reached. Oh yeah he scared MJ once. He stalked Spider-Man over and over. He knew his secret identity and didn't do anything worthwhile with it. His symbiote has been passed off to any loser who'll take it from Mac Gargan to Flash Thompson to a no name nobody like Angelo Fortunato. Be still my heart.

One of comic's greatest rivalries.....yeah and The Spot is Spider-Man's greatest villain.

You didn't need all that long winded plot filler you just described to create a credible feud between Peter and Eddie as Spider-Man 3 so solidly proved. This is not like the Peter/Harry relationship where it stems on a long standing relationship that turns sour, hence why you need to build that up the Peter/Harry relationship over the course of movies for it to work. Which is why Raimi is the only one to do the Goblin story right.

But with Venom you don't need several movies of build up. All you need is an established connection and valid reason for Eddie to hate Spider-Man, which we got brilliantly in SM-3.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Venom fans overrate how compliacted he is to do on film, and how much time needs dedicated to him. Sorry guys, Venom doesn't need more than 1 film. Can he be done that way? Yes, but the way he worked into SM3 themativally was more than fine. As for character liberties, I don't feel Venom was vastly different from his comics counterpart. He looked like Venom. Had similar motivations as Venom. Same powers. Same weaknesses. The only differences really were Eddie has a personal reason to hate Peter (not Spider-Man), didn't refer to himself as we (though he WAS seduced by the symbiotes power and it was clearly its own organism), and Brock himself was smaller than Venom. He was closer to Venom prior to the addition of the Lethal Protector elements (which McFarlene never gave him early on). Honestly, I don't think Venom was poorly adapted. The short comings of Venom on screen are basically the symbiote landing in the park was lame, the Sandman/Venom team-up scene sucked, and they could have shown Brock's face less when he was finally Venom at the end. Other than that, I feel it was an honest adaptation.

 

[The Joker]

Venom fans overrate how compliacted he is to do on film, and how much time needs dedicated to him. Sorry guys, Venom doesn't need more than 1 film. Can he be done that way? Yes, but the way he worked into SM3 themativally was more than fine. As for character liberties, I don't feel Venom was vastly different from his comics counterpart. He looked like Venom. Had similar motivations as Venom. Same powers. Same weaknesses. The only differences really were Eddie has a personal reason to hate Peter (not Spider-Man), didn't refer to himself as we (though he WAS seduced by the symbiotes power and it was clearly its own organism), and Brock himself was smaller than Venom. He was closer to Venom prior to the addition of the Lethal Protector elements (which McFarlene never gave him early on). Honestly, I don't think Venom was poorly adapted. The short comings of Venom on screen are basically the symbiote landing in the park was lame, the Sandman/Venom team-up scene sucked, and they could have shown Brock's face less when he was finally Venom at the end. Other than that, I feel it was an honest adaptation.

 

[Lantern Venom]

One of comic's greatest rivalries? That's as funny as saying Venom is one of comic's greatest villains. Both hilariously untrue.

Spidey once said, "The villain that keeps me up the most at night is Venom."

Venom fans overrate how compliacted he is to do on film, and how much time needs dedicated to him. Sorry guys, Venom doesn't need more than 1 film. .

Venom needs more time than other villains because his reason for hating Spider-man isn't attached to other goals or some kind of accident that re-wired his brain to be evil like we saw with Gobby and Ock. Even for a guy as unbalanced as Eddie, there has to be an actual backstory that leads to a personal hatred. In SM3, the feud was predicated on Eddie making a foolish mistake and a non-existent relationship. That's the very definition of paper-thin character development.

VINO's presence in the film is an even more egregious error because it took time away from Gobby Jr. and Sandman. I certainly blame Sam Raimi for being so childish with a character because he didn't personally understand it, but I also blame Avi Arad for forcing a character on a director who obviously didn't have the passion or skill to execute Venom on film.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

lol

 

[DCW]

 

[Spider-Fan]

Spidey once said, "The villain that keeps me up the most at night is Venom."



Venom needs more time than other villains because his reason for hating Spider-man isn't attached to other goals or some kind of accident that re-wired his brain to be evil like we saw with Gobby and Ock. Even for a guy as unbalanced as Eddie, there has to be an actual backstory that leads to a personal hatred. In SM3, the feud was predicated on Eddie making a foolish mistake and a non-existent relationship. That's the very definition of paper-thin character development.

VINO's presence in the film is an even more egregious error because it took time away from Gobby Jr. and Sandman. I certainly blame Sam Raimi for being so childish with a character because he didn't personally understand it, but I also blame Avi Arad for forcing a character on a director who obviously didn't have the passion or skill to execute Venom on film.

Dude, that is how is was in the comic. He made a mistake on who the Sin Eater was, and Spider-Man caught the real one, so he hated him. That is paper thin character development and basically the core idea of Eddie being humiliated by Parker is the same.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Dude, that is how is was in the comic. He made a mistake on who the Sin Eater was, and Spider-Man caught the real one, so he hated him. That is paper thin character development and basically the core idea of Eddie being humiliated by Parker is the same.

Nope. Direct from Marvel wiki:

With just months to live, he wanted to break a big story. Brock thought he had found this story when he was accidentally contacted by Emil Gregg, who claimed to be the serial killer Sin-Eater. Then, Eddie wrote front-page exclusives of the Sin-Eater, protecting his identity under the First Amendment, until a crisis of conscience forced him to write an exclusive article revealing Gregg as the Sin-Eater.

Although that edition of the paper sold out immediately, that same day, Spider-Man soon revealed the true identity of the Sin-Eater to be Detective Stan Carter. Gregg was found to be Carter's delusional neighbor, making Brock a laughingstock among his fellow journalists. Fired from the Daily Globe, he was forced to write venomous drivel for a tawdry tabloid. Ann left him, his father disowned him and his future appeared to be over. Brock blamed all of these problems on Spider-Man. Soon after, Brock began an intense physical workout program hoping to reduce the stress his life had become. However, such physical exertions only increased his violent obsession with Spider-Man. Although his body had been honed to near-perfection, Brock’s mind was reduced to an all-consuming vessel of hatred.

http://marvel.wikia.com/Edward_Brock_(Earth-616)

That is the complex tale of a truly tragic, and more than a bit delusional, man.

SM3's VINO is "I knowingly cheated and got caught. Whaaaa!" I would call that B-movie writing, but I'm not sure that a movie with VINO as a main character would have even been quality enough for USA Up All Night.

 

[The Joker]

Spidey once said, "The villain that keeps me up the most at night is Venom."

No doubt a quote from the 90's when awful Venom craze was at fever pitch. A classic example of why the 90's was one of the worst eras for Spider-Man. A lot of stupid things were said and done then.

There's no valid reason why Spider-Man should be kept up nights by Venom when their feud has never gone anywhere interesting.

Venom needs more time than other villains because his reason for hating Spider-man isn't attached to other goals or some kind of accident that re-wired his brain to be evil like we saw with Gobby and Ock. Even for a guy as unbalanced as Eddie, there has to be an actual backstory that leads to a personal hatred. In SM3, the feud was predicated on Eddie making a foolish mistake and a non-existent relationship. That's the very definition of paper-thin character development.

That's exactly why Venom doesn't need more time than the other villains. His motive is singular and straight forward. Kill Spider-Man. He doesn't have other goals like Goblin and Ock, so there's nothing else to focus on.

His backstory is absurdly simple and pathetic, just like him and his motive for hating Spider-Man. There's no character relationships there to explore. He didn't know Spider-Man before he became Venom so there's nothing to develop there in their shallow feud.

Venom is the type of character who you could do justice to in a 10 minute short episode.

VINO's presence in the film is an even more egregious error because it took time away from Gobby Jr. and Sandman. I certainly blame Sam Raimi for being so childish with a character because he didn't personally understand it, but I also blame Avi Arad for forcing a character on a director who obviously didn't have the passion or skill to execute Venom on film.

I applaud Sam Raimi for taking a character who was forced on him by the studio, a character he justifiably and rightly did not like and thought was weak, and make the best version ever of that character.

It takes true talent to do that.

That is the complex tale of a truly tragic, and more than a bit delusional, man.

They are the actions of a world class idiot, and the worst foundations for a feud. How anyone can take his hatred of Spider-Man seriously when they never even knew each other from Adam, and Spidey didn't do a single thing to hurt him.

It's writing of the worst kind. It's no wonder no adaption of Venom has ever used this "complex tale of a truly tragic delusional man" lol. A 5 year old could write something better than that.