Vulture concept art

[chaseter]

They had a hard time connecting Vulture to Spider-Man??? WTF!? You could have just made him another one of Uncle Ben's killers like you did with Sandman

They are just sugar coating wanting Venom in there to sell more tickets.

I also love the explanation of what Venom really was yet they never explained it in the movie...how sad.

 

[UltimateJustin]

So they decided AGAINST the Vulture because they couldnt connect him to Peter, when by most people's standards every villian having a connection to Peter is pushing it by now. I'm always amazed when people get stupid ideas in their head that they cant let go of, little things that make no sense that keep them from doing their best. Like, have to get Metal Gear Solid out in 2001 because thats the year of the snake, so you need to rush to finish it by the holiday season? What if... JUST DONT CARE THAT 2001 IS THE YEAR OF THE SNAKE. Can't connect one of three villians (when the other two ARE connected) to Peter Parker, even if he is all ready going to be connected to Spiderman? How about... DONT THINK THAT YOU NEED TO JUST BECAUSE YOU LIKE TO. Its totally possible for someone to have an emotional impact on Peter even if he met them as Spiderman.

Thats the worst part about SM-3, that it is a decent movie with its moments but you know the whole time that it should have been better and could have been better if not for the weird OCD producers who cant get on with their day until they connect every villain to Peter.

 

[XXTBWCXX]

See, reading that passage from the book enlightens the major problem with Raimi's take on Spider-Man (which I still love, regardless). While I'm no fan of the Vulture, it bothers me that he essentially dismissed the idea simply because he couldn't establish a connection between the villain and Peter. It's not necessary.

Raimi is way too hung up on these personal connections. They're great when they work (Goblin, Ock) but sometimes are really stretching it (Sandman). There's nothing inherently wrong with having a villain simply be a villain, an antagonist for Spider-Man. Someone he's just trying to stop, to throw in jail, someone inherently bad that he comes in conflict with simply because they are a criminal and he is a crime fighter. He could've made SM3 a leaner, better movie by throwing out the manufacturer hero-villain connection (Sandman) and focusing on one that has existed in the lore and makes sense on its own terms (Venom).

Well since Norman Osborn and Otto Octavius was so close to Peter's life, I think Sam Raimi didn't want to change that aspect coming into the third movie to finish off a trilogy; so the addition of a random villain wouldn't be as well as to have all of the villains close to Peter's life, just like 1 and 2, and to show that even someone close inside Peter's world can be evil; so the substitution of Eddie/Venom worked perfectly(but I still argue over the time!!!) and even though I mostly disagree with Sandman's storyline, it made it, again, related to Peter. But with Spider-Man 4, if we get Sam Raimi's wish, we will see Lizard, and either an introduction or see them as villains(Vulture and Electro), and their stories shouldn't even be related to Peter at all and I don't think it will...older Peter needs to deal with villains outside his little world.

 

[chaseter]

That whole quote is just full of sh** and I can smell it a mile away.

 

[Blader5489]

Do you guys only read what you want to read?

They didn't abandon the Vulture just because they couldn't find a personal connection Peter, they did it because, without that connection, it would have taken a whole story to establish Vulture. And with a script as busy as SM3's, there was no room for the Vulture to get his own entire subplot.

 

[chaseter]

Do you guys only read what you want to read?

They didn't abandon the Vulture just because they couldn't find a personal connection Peter, they did it because, without that connection, it would have taken a whole story to establish Vulture. And with a script as busy as SM3's, there was no room for the Vulture to get his own entire subplot.

They manufactured a connection with Sandman...is it so hard to do the same with the Vulture? I will be honest...Vulture sucks to me and I am glad we got who we got...but to sit there and lie to the fans is utter BS. I also love how they explain the symbiote-Peter-Venom connection yet they never said one word about it in the movie. This movie was overloaded and the Vulture-Sandman plot movie may have been a better quality film...we will never know.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Do you guys only read what you want to read?

They didn't abandon the Vulture just because they couldn't find a personal connection Peter, they did it because, without that connection, it would have taken a whole story to establish Vulture. And with a script as busy as SM3's, there was no room for the Vulture to get his own entire subplot.

So in order to not take a whole story to establish the Vulture they take a whole story establishing Eddie Brock. The vulture could have just been an actual vulture who flew into a random experiment designed to not turn birds into people that went horribly wrong and the movie wouldnt have suspended audience disbelief any further.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

Do you guys only read what you want to read?

They didn't abandon the Vulture just because they couldn't find a personal connection Peter, they did it because, without that connection, it would have taken a whole story to establish Vulture. And with a script as busy as SM3's, there was no room for the Vulture to get his own entire subplot.

Um...no. The script wasn't too busy at that point. At that point it was only Sandman and Vulture vs Spider-Man, plus the Harry plot. It wasn't until after Vulture was canned that the much bigger, much more complex black suit/Eddie/Venom plot was introduced.

Instead of setting up Vulture as a criminal previously busted by Spidey and out for revenge, they opted for a much more complex story involving an alien symbiote and a grudge that should've been brewing for 3 movies but was forced into half of 1.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

Well since Norman Osborn and Otto Octavius was so close to Peter's life, I think Sam Raimi didn't want to change that aspect coming into the third movie to finish off a trilogy; so the addition of a random villain wouldn't be as well as to have all of the villains close to Peter's life, just like 1 and 2, and to show that even someone close inside Peter's world can be evil; so the substitution of Eddie/Venom worked perfectly(but I still argue over the time!!!) and even though I mostly disagree with Sandman's storyline, it made it, again, related to Peter.

But see, that's the issue. Even if Raimi felt the need to have the villain have an emotional connection to Peter, that quota would be automatically filled by Venom anyway. He felt that BOTH villains (3, if you count Harry) had to have personal connections to Peter. Which is the definition of overkill.

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

sometimes i think sm3 would have worked out better with vulture...and a lead up to venom (although it would be almost impossible to get the cast to come back to finish the venom story)

 

[UltimateJustin]

sometimes i think sm3 would have worked out better with vulture...and a lead up to venom (although it would be almost impossible to get the cast to come back to finish the venom story)

Dont start the Venom story when you are wrapping up the trilogy. Sandmand and Vulture are introduced and their stories and Harry's are wrapped up, then build Venom up for the finish of the sixth if you want to keep the next trilogy classy, or Venom in four, Carnage in five and Sinister 6 in six if you just want to have fun and "go nuts". Also, then they wouldnt need to same cast.

 

[chaseter]

I would have been perfectly happy with a Sandman, Harry, Vulture story only if they left a symbiote cliff hanger. I think Venom is more interesting than Vulture but SM3 was too full in the first place. I just wish it would have been Sandman and Harry. Sandman is a big enough threat to deserve a team up between friends anyways. But alas...we get what we get.

 

[Iceburgeruk]

We all know they will end up with Vulture trying to flap his way into a relationship with aunt may.

"You don`t scare me vulture!"

"Don`t I? I roshamboed your aunt!"

"Oh god no!!!!"

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

Who the3 hell did the research for that Venom backstory!? Venom was never an employee of the Bugle in the comics I used to read.

 

[matthooper]

Who the3 hell did the research for that Venom backstory!? Venom was never an employee of the Bugle in the comics I used to read.

You're right, he was a columnist for The Globe. But it was better for the movie that he was a competing photographer at the Bugle. The comic backstory for Brock would make no sense for the Spider-Man movie world.

However, Brock did work for the Bugle in Spider-Man TAS.

 

[Lord]

Where's the concept art?
It was moved or deleted.

 

[Venom 1988]

Here

I'll edit my original post.

 

[Lord]

Thank you, the vulture actually seems interesting

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I genuinely believe the original plan for Spidey 3 - Sandman and the Vulture escape prison and go after Spidey, and the Vulture ultimately dies because he can't let go of his anger and hatred - would have been great. Especially with Ben Kingsley as the Vulture. And I'm saying this as a fan of Spider-Man 3.

 

[Chris Wallace]

No black suit, Vulture and Sandman with Harry as the GG2. That was Sam's original idea until Arad and the studio had to open their big mouths.

I like SM3, but Raimi's original story would have been amazing. They still could have had Harry joining with Pete at the end, which was my favorite part of SM3.

This.

 

[zeptron]

Yeah, I think we would have gotten a much better movie if the studio weren't so interested in getting symbiote fanboys in theaters.

Vulture would have been a better choice because he's much less complicated than Venom and him and Sandman's stories would have been merged and they would have shared scenes together and we wouldn't have three completely unrelated villains.

Not to mention that Harry had already been setup in the first two films. So no time to develop him was needed. All they had to show was that he turned bad and was redeemed.

Vulture would have also manipulated Sandman into committing crimes which would have made the latter's villainous actions make more sense. I think he would have also been a former Oscorp employee which was where he got his equipment from. So I think he would have had some kind of connection to Harry. Makes sense considering they were gonna have an air battle between those two.

The villains in SM3 just simply didn't work with one another. Venom had no right being in. There was no room for him in the established storyline and so the whole thing had to be restructured just to fit him in.

And this is coming from someone who likes Venom more than Vulture.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

The "villains must have direct connection to Peter" thing would be too much after SM3. Sandman worked nicely IMO, but they should tell enough is enough and look at Batman & Joker, no connection to Bruce Wayne

 

[The Joker]

Sandman's connection was the worst and most contrived of the bunch.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

You know of what could have been the original plot for Spider-Man 2 (in case it wasn't a rumor) to connect Octavius to Peter?
"Otto Octavius, one of Peter Parker peers, upset that Peter won the girl Octavius is madly in love with....$#%^ happens"
Imagine applying that plot to Vulture

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I happen to think Sandman's connection was damn good, tbh. It's still the same lesson in the end.