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

[ThePhantasm]

Spider-Man 3 would be a great movie if they had toned down the outrageous evil version of Parker a bit, and if they had removed the Sandman character. Just Goblin 2.0 and Venom.

 

[W/ Great Power]

Spider-Man 3 would be a great movie if they had toned down the outrageous evil version of Parker a bit, and if they had removed the Sandman character. Just Goblin 2.0 and Venom.

Even though I liked Sandman, I very much agree

 

[Venom75]

Spider-Man 3 would be a great movie if they had toned down the outrageous evil version of Parker a bit, and if they had removed the Sandman character. Just Goblin 2.0 and Venom.

I'll fully agree. Look,I'm not just saying this as a huge Venom fan,but most eveyone I knew was excited for Venom and the black suit. Even if they didn't know Spider-man or comics that much,they knew Venom. And I think that,if truth be told,most Spidey or comic book fans who hated Venom were probably excited to at least see the black suit finally on screen. And most loved that dark,complex story that came along with the symbiote.The Goblin needed to be there,obviously. But,at least for me,Sandman was the odd man out. He could've easily been taken out and nobody would've really cared. In fact,if it wasn't or him we wouln't have had that goofy "Marko actually killed Uncle Ben" stuff. Peter get the black suit and fight the Goblin during the first half of te film,then Spidey vs. Venom for the secod half. If Raimi wanted Peter(with the symbiote)to focus his hatred on someone then Harry would've been a perfect target. He even could've thrown in Brock and Jameson as other people for Spider-man to be angry and pissed at. We didn't need Sandman at all...imo.

 

[Doc Ock]

Spider-Man 3 would be a great movie if they had toned down the outrageous evil version of Parker a bit, and if they had removed the Sandman character. Just Goblin 2.0 and Venom.

I gotta be honest, I would preferred Sandman to be kept and Venom to be gotten rid of.

 

[spiderman2]

I gotta be honest, I would preferred Sandman to be kept and Venom to be gotten rid of.

I think it would have been better to get rid of sandman and keep venom but at the same time if you had more focus on sandman and goblin and then end the movie with venom being shown to set up sm 4 or something that would have been better then what we got.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

I gotta be honest, I would preferred Sandman to be kept and Venom to be gotten rid of.

I like you

 

[ThePhantasm]

By getting rid of Sandman you also get rid of the awful Uncle Ben retcon. And Sandman, though visually interesting, is a bore in terms of his character arc. Unless you changed his story dramatically, I say out with Sandman, keep Venom.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

By getting rid of Sandman you also get rid of the awful Uncle Ben retcon. And Sandman, though visually interesting, is a bore in terms of his character arc. Unless you changed his story dramatically, I say out with Sandman, keep Venom.

They coulda kept Sandman, and not include the "this man killed my uncle"

 

[Doc Ock]

I like you

Spoiler

By getting rid of Sandman you also get rid of the awful Uncle Ben retcon. And Sandman, though visually interesting, is a bore in terms of his character arc. Unless you changed his story dramatically, I say out with Sandman, keep Venom.

I thought minus the Uncle Ben thing Sandman's story was wonderful, even with more focus on Venom I don't think it would of made it much better. To me, you could tell Raimi didn't care much for Venom...I wouldn't want him to have more focus on a character he didn't like. Venom would of been awesome to have in a later film or spin-off where Raimi wasn't involved.

 

[Leenie]

I gotta be honest, I would preferred Sandman to be kept and Venom to be gotten rid of.

I agree! Most of the stronger moments in Spider-Man 3 (especially action-wise) had to do with Sandman. Also, Thomas Haden Church was a great casting choice.

I went into Spider-Man 3 thinking that Venom would be the coolest. I walked out of the movie surprised at how cool Sandman was. Sure, Venom could have been done much better, but Sandman was really well-done (aside from the sloppy Uncle Ben retconning, which wasn't the worst thing ever, but I wish it had been left alone).

EDIT: And I believe that the sloppy Uncle Ben retconning happened because of Venom/the Symbiote. From a storytelling perspective, it made sense to do the retconning, because of the running theme of revenge and forgiveness. I really do think that Venom/the Symbiote was the main thing that weighed Spider-Man 3 down. I've said it before and I'll say it again ... Spider-Man 3 really should have just been two movies, with one focusing on Sandman, and the other focusing on Venom (and with Harry being an evil jerk in the first film, and then developing his redemption story in the second film). I think that Spider-Man 3 was cohesive for how jam-packed it was, but the story was definitely rushed.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I agree! Most of the stronger moments in Spider-Man 3 (especially action-wise) had to do with Sandman. Also, Thomas Haden Church was a great casting choice.

I went into Spider-Man 3 thinking that Venom would be the coolest. I walked out of the movie surprised at how cool Sandman was. Sure, Venom could have been done much better, but Sandman was really well-done (aside from the sloppy Uncle Ben retconning, which wasn't the worst thing ever, but I wish it had been left alone).
.

It was easy to tell that Sandman's story had been planned far in advance. Other than Flint being a bit too reluctant to be the bad guy in places, his story was very well crafted.

I was already a fan of THC from Wings and Sideways, so I had no doubts that his acting would be spot-on. However, I was a little worried about the sand effects looking cheesy. I'm glad that turned out to be wrong.

 

[JtoDaP]

Saw SM1 today after a couple of years. Still liked the movie really much.

Just the other day I watched AS for the first time, have to say I liked the SM1 better BUT I like Andrew Garfield better as Peter Parker...

A what the hell, I like both moviest:

Soon gonna watch SM 2+3 also after a couple of years.

 

[mclay18]

I haven't watched the first SM in years... I don't think it's held up well. I periodically do watch SM-2... still love it. SM-3 is okay, suffers from too much plot and characters, but there are great scenes that hint at a better movie.

I may sell my copies of SM-2 and SM-3 and get that Triple Feature release Sony did... all three movies in one package.

 

[The Joker]

Spider-Man 3 is on TV here in Ireland. It's thoroughly enjoyable. Flawed but fun.

 

[Young Superman]

This suit still looks great over 12 years later.

It even looked great in animation.

 

[Nardz937]

This suit still looks great over 12 years later.

It even looked great in animation.

Best Spider-Man costume ever seen on screen. The rest don't come close.

 

[LizardMan07]

I felt Spidey was a bit on the chunky side, but the suit was great.

 

[W/ Great Power]

In some scenes, yeah, but I think this is where Spidey's build should be for the most part.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

I felt Spidey was a bit on the chunky side, but the suit was great.

As opposed to basketball stick-man in the new ones.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

I liked Spidey's shape in the trilogy even though Tobey was kinda chubby in the third one, it looks much better in action.

 

[mclay18]

Spider-Man 3 would be a great movie if they had toned down the outrageous evil version of Parker a bit, and if they had removed the Sandman character. Just Goblin 2.0 and Venom.

I just rewatched SM-3. Raimi obviously planned to use Goblin 2.0 and Sandman, but Venom... not so much. You can tell where they inserted Venom and Eddie Brock to satisfy Avi Arad.

Raimi overplayed his hand with evil/emo Peter Parker. The montage with the James Brown song was hilarious (like SM-2's "Raindrops" montage), but the jazz club scene was overblown and unnecessary. I think that scene alone is why a lot of people HATE SM-3. That and the Peter/MJ/Harry triangle spinning its wheels for part of the film.

Also think SM-3 was a victim of inflated circumstances after how SM-2 blew a lot of people away. Even if Raimi had complete creative control, some people would've hated his version of SM-3 anyway.

 

[Venom75]

I was watching a documentary about pop culture after 9/11 and they mentioned how much the first Spider-man was a product of the post 9/11 world. An ordinary man,gains the powers and the courage to save a major city like New York from a dangerous threat. A lot like the firefighters,police and rescue workers all did on that terrible day. Spider-man the film was exactly what the country needed in that trying time. It fits that era so much.

 

[Spidey_62]

I was watching a documentary about pop culture after 9/11 and they mentioned how much the first Spider-man was a product of the post 9/11 world. An ordinary man,gains the powers and the courage to save a major city like New York from a dangerous threat. A lot like the firefighters,police and rescue workers all did on that terrible day. Spider-man the film was exactly what the country needed in that trying time. It fits that era so much.

Most definitely. I feel like that's one of the reasons the first film was such a big hit when it came out. There wasn't any big superhero or character at all in the mainstream consciousness that combated those sinking feelings, the good messages that Spider-Man inherently embodies was something that really struck a chord for people and felt good.

 

[mclay18]

I was watching a documentary about pop culture after 9/11 and they mentioned how much the first Spider-man was a product of the post 9/11 world. An ordinary man,gains the powers and the courage to save a major city like New York from a dangerous threat. A lot like the firefighters,police and rescue workers all did on that terrible day. Spider-man the film was exactly what the country needed in that trying time. It fits that era so much.

The banned teaser poster and trailer for the movie is very poignant in that respect.

 

[Venom75]

I kinda wish that,at least for the first film they would've kept the World Trade Center in there. It would've been a tribute to,at the very least,the memory of the building itself. Plus,it would've been cool to see Spidey swinging by the towers. Then again I can see why it as removed. Considering at the time that 9/11 was still fresh in everyone's minds.