The Plot Holes in Spider-Man 3

DyeLorean

...and the plot thickens
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
8,646
Reaction score
4,265
Points
103
This movie is flawed-

a) JJJ knew that MJ left his son to be with Peter? What happened with his son, didn't even try to get MJ back?

b) Connors should at least make some kind of relation between the black goo, and the fact that Spider-Man turned black and more agressive.

c) MJ knows that Norman Osborn was the Green Goblin?

d) Why did Bernard wait so long to tell Harry about something he knew about Norman's death? What does HE know? Yes, it was his glider, but so what? There's something here I don't understand

e) In the first movie, why didn't the burglar said something like "I didn't kill him" or whatever?

f) Connors isn't a biologist?? WTF?

g) How does Venom knows about Sandman's daughter? As far as I know, Spider-Man didn't know about that, so why the symbiote should?

h) What happens after Venom's transformation? He knows Peter is up there in the bell tower... Peter is perhaps naked up there... where does Venom go? Where does Peter go? MAJOR PLOT HOLE in my opinion

i) Flint Marko turning into sand... except for the daughter's chain

What else? Correct me if I'm wrong in any of the above
D!
 
Peter webslings home in the nude


This film really came off as a 21st century George Lucas film, especially with the "I killed your uncle" thing.
 
3. i guess peter told mj. but then why doesnt she know why harry is angry at him. that part doesnt make sense.

and the bell tower, i dont know
 
oh the bell tower, okay, brock is homphobic and is scared to see naked men. so he doesnt go up there knowing he will see peter full frontal.
 
f) Connors isn't a biologist?? WTF?

lol good point, how the hell is he going to grow himself an arm if he knows very little about genetics?? Physics and Biology are two different animals.
 
I'm sure they could find a new way for Connors to grown an arm, with a twist. He doesn't have to be a biologist, I guess. I mean if Uncle Ben's death could be changed, the origin of the Lizard could be as well.
 
brock being "new at the bugle"

Yes, that is a BIG plot hole. I remember Robbie mentioning Eddie in the first Spider-Man film. Of course, they could have meant a different Eddie, but what are chances? I assumed at the time that they meant Eddie Brock. I think everyone else did too.
 
In the climatic battle in the abandoned building in the first movie, Spidey gets hit with a pumpkin bomb in an almost EXACT fashion as Harry did in Spider-Man 3...

Only Peter's face wasn't scarred or disfigured...Harry was.
 
Yes, that is a BIG plot hole. I remember Robbie mentioning Eddie in the first Spider-Man film. Of course, they could have meant a different Eddie, but what are chances? I assumed at the time that they meant Eddie Brock. I think everyone else did too.

yea that was ****ing stupid.... and easily fixable if anyone had paid any attention that they said "eddie" in the first movie........
 
a) JJJ knew that MJ left his son to be with Peter? What happened with his son, didn't even try to get MJ back?

His son moved on to better babes. And, JJJ didn't fire Peter because he needed the Spidey pictures.

b) Connors should at least make some kind of relation between the black goo, and the fact that Spider-Man turned black and more agressive.

Aside from Brock's picture, Black Spidey, wasn't really that public. No one really knew that he killed Sandman. Or that he thought he killed him.

c) MJ knows that Norman Osborn was the Green Goblin?

No. Remember the line:
MJ: Whats with you too?
Peter: Its complicated!

She may have found out when Harry suddenly appeared in her apartment as a bad guy but she didn't know beforehand.

d) Why did Bernard wait so long to tell Harry about something he knew about Norman's death? What does HE know? Yes, it was his glider, but so what? There's something here I don't understand

Bernard didn't tell Harry for the same reasons Peter didn't say anything. He didn't want Harry to know what his father had become.

e) In the first movie, why didn't the burglar said something like "I didn't kill him" or whatever?

There was too much going on. He wasn't thinking straight.

f) Connors isn't a biologist?? WTF?

I'll give you that.

g) How does Venom knows about Sandman's daughter? As far as I know, Spider-Man didn't know about that, so why the symbiote should?

He did his research. :huh:

h) What happens after Venom's transformation? He knows Peter is up there in the bell tower... Peter is perhaps naked up there... where does Venom go? Where does Peter go? MAJOR PLOT HOLE in my opinion

Peter runs away naked. And, Venom goes to learn about his new powers and then find Sandman!
 
Yes, that is a BIG plot hole. I remember Robbie mentioning Eddie in the first Spider-Man film. Of course, they could have meant a different Eddie, but what are chances? I assumed at the time that they meant Eddie Brock. I think everyone else did too.

In the first movie they were prolly talking about Eddie Brock SR.

Why else would Eddie make it a point to say "Eddie Brock JR." In EVERY FREAKIN' SCENE!!!! :dry:

:oldrazz:
 
according to the movie novel

c) peter never told MJ that norman was the goblin nor that harry knew his secret

g) since the symbiote was a part of peter, it gave all the info it had on peter to eddie, and the black suit also gave the person more awareness of where a person was

h) peter may have put the black clothes he bought at the store somewhere and went back to it. also venom did not take out spiderman at the church because he wanted to humiliate him just like parker had humilitated brock
 
In the first movie they were prolly talking about Eddie Brock SR.

Why else would Eddie make it a point to say "Eddie Brock JR." In EVERY FREAKIN' SCENE!!!! :dry:

:oldrazz:

Maybe people confuse him with his dad a lot? :huh:
 
I'd really have to say there are too many in this movie to comprehend. Brock being new, the bell tower, Peter knowing fire destroys the symbiote, the butler, Peter forgiving Sandman after everything that had happened before, etc, etc, etc. Overall, this film made no sense, and ruined the potential of ALL the characters that were in it.


~HoH~
 
Bernard didn't tell Harry for the same reasons Peter didn't say anything. He didn't want Harry to know what his father had become.
How does he know it wasn't Spider-Man who killed him? What if the wounds were from the glider? So what? Still don't get it

He did his research.
He read the script.

And, JJJ didn't fire Peter because he needed the Spidey pictures.
?

Aside from Brock's picture, Black Spidey, wasn't really that public.
Yes it was.
"Photo by Eddie Brock" remember?

Peter runs away naked. And, Venom goes to learn about his new powers and then find Sandman!
Yeah, that makes sense. Specially when Venom knows Peter is on the bell tower. Meh.

D!
 
Wait, wait wait....The major plot hole that has been bothering me is how did Sandman and Brock know about MJ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? How come they knew to kidnap her ? ? ? ? ? That's really confusing.
 
according to the movie novel

c) peter never told MJ that norman was the goblin nor that harry knew his secret

After seeing Harry in a Goblin-kind of suit and with the pumpkins, she should at least be a little curious about Norman trying to kill her.

D!
 
Wait, wait wait....The major plot hole that has been bothering me is how did Sandman and Brock know about MJ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? How come they knew to kidnap her ? ? ? ? ? That's really confusing.

The symbiote knew everything about Peter.

D!
 
i can not belive that some here mentioned that eddie from spiderman 1 is a mistake. are you guys serious? one of the problems was that eddie said almost 3 or 4 times brock JR. even in the church to god. this was obviouly from raimi to explain it to you.

coem on this movie big problems but this is not a plot hole.

about the bomb exploding. we already knew this when the first teaser was realesed. nothing to peters face. ahaha and ha.
 
A lot of fans wanted to see the new villains and new characters. Even though there are more Spiderman films coming up, they wanted to wrap it up as they were uncertain whether the original cast would re-sign their contracts or whatever. Therefore, a lot of new characters seemed rushed.
 
but they didnt explain that.:cwink:

True, but Eddie/Venom gives you hints about it. Not too obvious for the not so bright audience.

I don't know if it counts as a plot hole, but more lack of explanation.

D!
 
Well, not everything needs to be explained in the movie. For example, no one said 'Venom', but everyone knows Venom would be in the movie.

There are scenes in the movie which are self-explanatory. I think Sam assumed the audience knew about the background of Spiderman.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,783
Messages
21,811,773
Members
45,626
Latest member
SunStorm333
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"