Was Sandman even a big character in the comics or animated show?

[riggs]

Yeah, but how many were there when Sandman was created in 1964? If anything these morphing characters are rip-offs of the likes of Sandman rather than vice versa.

I don't doubt that - but the Green Goblin and Dr Octopus were around then too yet they still seem like original creations today. I didn't say Sandman was a rip-off, he just doesn't stand out like the Goblin and Doc Ock. But again, I don't want to sound like I'm saying he's a bad character - I'm really looking forward to seeing him in the new movie.

 

[Dragon]

I'm not saying that he's as good a villain as Ock or the Goblin. I said he's a major villain. Ock and GG aren't Spidey's only major threats.

The Goblin and Ock are master criminals. Sandman is a petty crook. He's muscle that the likes of Ock would (and did) hire. But that's also a good thing. Not every villain should be a crime boss or evil genius. It's redundant. Raimi said himself that one of the things that made him interested in Sandy is that while he has an immense power, he's not a diabolical scientist out to take over the world. He's just a guy looking to make money off of his powers.

But make no mistake. He's always been portrayed as a tough customer no matter who he fought (Like I said, he kicked the entire FF's ass by himself). And he's had some great battles with Spidey.

 

[Christian]

sand man was not tht big in the comics, overall he hasent even been in that many issues... but thts not to say he wontbe good in the movie.. i think he is a great choice for a movie villain
only problem i had was that he was too farfetched

like GG, Doc Ock were farfetched... but it was more believable than a mans bodt turning to sand..

with that said.. i still think it will work out very well

 

[bbf2]

this thread raises an interesting point.

but can we use sheer numbers?

Number of appearences
Sandman = 120
Venom = 179
Green Goblin (Harry) = 154

Dock ock = 126
Green Goblin (Norman) = 99

source (spiderfan.org)

So you can see for pure number of apperances his right along with the numbers of spidey's other movie villians.

But in the issue of pure numbers I think at 179 proves Venom deserves his own movie with the Webhead!

Did you look at the actual comics listed? About 40% of Sandman's appearances are in Fantastic Four comics.

And don't forget that in quite a few of the Spidey ones are from when he was a hero.

The other thing that sucks about Sandman is he has almost no story arcs to himself. There are almost no comic issues dedicated to Spider-Man versus Sandman alone. (I checked, and could only find two: His initial appearance and one in the 70's with his new costume. Plus a few crappy Mackie ones where he dies and then eats people on the beach....yeah...) In all the other appearances as a villain that I found, he's part of the Sinister Six, the Frightful Four, in one arc paired with Hydro-Man (and merged into a monster with him....weird...) And then for another early two issues he's with The Enforcers. Electro, Mysterio, Vulture, The Scorpion, the Chameleon, and most of Spidey's other villains at least had a few two to four issue story arcs as villains. Sandman doesn't.

In fact, after his first Spider-Man appearance, the Sinister Six annual and two issues with the Enforcers, he appears in over twenty Fantastic Four comics and only appears in ONE Spider-Man comic (his solo one) between 1964 to 1980. He appeared a few times between 1980 and 1984, in which he was in a few issues with the Frightful Four, a couple issues with Hydro-Man, and then a few issues of Marvel Team-Up. Then in 1984 he turned into a good guy and stayed that way until 2000. (Ock forces him to rejoin the Sinister Six in 1990, but he tries to help Spidey.....for like one second before Ock OWNS him)

He's almost as big of a Fantastic Four villain as he is a Spidey villain. He's appeared in tons of F4 comics, and actually has some emotional connection with the Thing, who was his friend when he was a hero and actually was hurt when he turned back into a villain. When Sandman turned into a hero and then back....Spider-Man didn't give a DAMN. I have the comic where Spidey finds out that Sandman turned back into a villain....he seriously didn't care at ALL. It was like "Oh, ok, I guess I have to dodge this sand fist now." And then when he disentigrates and Spidey thinks he's dead, in Peter Parker #22, Spidey also doesn't really care. He just goes "Ah, well." Sandman has never, ever had any emotional impact on Spider-Man, and never had any story arcs as a villain.

 

[SingItWithMeNow]

i cant beleive 4 pages was made out of this

 

[Dragon]

Did you look at the actual comics listed? About 40% of Sandman's appearances are in Fantastic Four comics.

And don't forget that in quite a few of the Spidey ones are from when he was a hero.

The other thing that sucks about Sandman is he has almost no story arcs to himself. There are almost no comic issues dedicated to Spider-Man versus Sandman alone. (I checked, and could only find two: His initial appearance and one in the 70's with his new costume. Plus a few crappy Mackie ones where he dies and then eats people on the beach....yeah...) In all the other appearances as a villain that I found, he's part of the Sinister Six, the Frightful Four, in one arc paired with Hydro-Man (and merged into a monster with him....weird...) And then for another early two issues he's with The Enforcers. Electro, Mysterio, Vulture, The Scorpion, the Chameleon, and most of Spidey's other villains at least had a few two to four issue story arcs as villains. Sandman doesn't.

In fact, after his first Spider-Man appearance, the Sinister Six annual and two issues with the Enforcers, he appears in over twenty Fantastic Four comics and only appears in ONE Spider-Man comic (his solo one) between 1964 to 1980. He appeared a few times between 1980 and 1984, in which he was in a few issues with the Frightful Four, a couple issues with Hydro-Man, and then a few issues of Marvel Team-Up. Then in 1984 he turned into a good guy and stayed that way until 2000. (Ock forces him to rejoin the Sinister Six in 1990, but he tries to help Spidey.....for like one second before Ock OWNS him)

He's almost as big of a Fantastic Four villain as he is a Spidey villain. He's appeared in tons of F4 comics, and actually has some emotional connection with the Thing, who was his friend when he was a hero and actually was hurt when he turned back into a villain. When Sandman turned into a hero and then back....Spider-Man didn't give a DAMN. I have the comic where Spidey finds out that Sandman turned back into a villain....he seriously didn't care at ALL. It was like "Oh, ok, I guess I have to dodge this sand fist now." And then when he disentigrates and Spidey thinks he's dead, in Peter Parker #22, Spidey also doesn't really care. He just goes "Ah, well." Sandman has never, ever had any emotional impact on Spider-Man, and never had any story arcs as a villain.

Uh.. I kind of don't get your point here. It doesn't matter how many appearances in Spider-man comics he's made. He only has to appear in ONE movie. Generating ONE story. And he certainly has the power to accomplish this. And, for that matter, many of Venom and Doc Ock's stories involved other villains. So this doesn't weaken Sandman as a character or threat.

 

[bbf2]

Uh.. I kind of don't get your point here. It doesn't matter how many appearances in Spider-man comics he's made. He only has to appear in ONE movie. Generating ONE story. And he certainly has the power to accomplish this. And, for that matter, many of Venom and Doc Ock's stories involved other villains. So this doesn't weaken Sandman as a character or threat.

But....the question of the thread was "Was Sandman even a big character in the comics or animated show?" It has nothing to do with how he works in the movie, I was just answering the question posed by the thread.

And in response to your second point, in Venom or Doc Ock's stories with other villains, they were usually the MAIN villain. Doc Ock was almost always the leader. Failing that, they at least had several standalone issues to fall back on. Sandman was only the main villain in TWO issues of Spider-Man. In the Frightful Four, the Wizard was the leader and Sandman was just muscle...I'm pretty sure the Trapster outranked him. In the Sinister Six he was just muscle for Doc Ock. It's not just the fact that he appeared with other villains, its the fact that almost ALL of his appearances are with other villains and almost none of them feature him as the main guy, just a guy who's throwing an occasional sand punch when the smart guy asks him to.

And that's just one of his many problems: the fact that he only appeared once between 1964 and 1980 and then turned into a good guy from 1984-2000 is a bigger problem. (I have no problem with him turning into a good guy, I think it was a good character move and he should have stayed that way. All I'm saying is it doesn't help with his ranking in terms of being an important Spider-Man villain)

 

[The Joker]

Uh.. I kind of don't get your point here.

I think he's trying to say that Sandman's appearances have been for the most part him as a lackey or second stringer. Hardly making him worthy as a main villain for SM-3 characterwise.

I think Raimi picked him strictly for the visuals. Venom cannot generate near the amount of damage Sandman can with his powers.

Yes, he's also a break from the scientist villains, but then lots of villains could have been used to break that trend.

And, for that matter, many of Venom and Doc Ock's stories involved other villains. So this doesn't weaken Sandman as a character or threat.

Well I disregard Venom from that because most of his stories are crap anyway. But any of Ock's stories that feature other villains have Ock as the leader/leading threat. Meaning Ock is usually running the show, whereas Sandman is usually a second string lackey.

 

[Dragon]

Sandman isn't a second stringer. In fact, he's never been a "willing" follower. His appearances as a member of the evil FF usually involved his not being willing to take crap from The Wizard, leader of the evil FF. And in his teaming with the Enforcers, Sandman was the leader.

As far as character, Sandy has had character exploration. Just not so much in Spidey comics, except for the stoyr from a few years back that ended the Peter Parker Spider-Man series.

 

[bbf2]

Sandman isn't a second stringer. In fact, he's never been a "willing" follower. His appearances as a member of the evil FF usually involved his not being willing to take crap from The Wizard, leader of the evil FF. And in his teaming with the Enforcers, Sandman was the leader.

As far as character, Sandy has had character exploration. Just not so much in Spidey comics, except for the stoyr from a few years back that ended the Peter Parker Spider-Man series.

I give him credit for the Enforcers appearance, but like I said, that was in 1964. He had a drought from 1964 to 1980, and then was a hero from 1984 to 2000.

As far as character, Sandy has had character exploration. Just not so much in Spidey comics, except for the stoyr from a few years back that ended the Peter Parker Spider-Man series.

The fact that he had character exploration outside of Spider-Man actually helps our point: he makes a better FF villain than Spider-Man villain. He received great characterization in a "The Thing" story that actually showed the ramifications of his turning evil. (as opposed to Spidey who couldn't care less.)

That Peter Parker story where he split into different people was bizarre and terrible, and having an evil Sandman eat the others ones in order to make him evil is the opposite of character development.

 

[Dragon]

I give him credit for the Enforcers appearance, but like I said, that was in 1964. He had a drought from 1964 to 1980, and then was a hero from 1984 to 2000.

Have you actually read those stories? Because I have every Sandman appearance into the mid-70's and they were all pretty cool. Was every story a classic? No. But no character has a flawless run. But I'd certainly stack everyone of them over EVERY appearance by Venom.

The fact that he had character exploration outside of Spider-Man actually helps our point: he makes a better FF villain than Spider-Man villain. He received great characterization in a "The Thing" story that actually showed the ramifications of his turning evil. (as opposed to Spidey who couldn't care less.)

Yeah, but since as you say, the character development wasn't that great (I mean, turning him into a hero that would join the Avengers? Please).

That Peter Parker story where he split into different people was bizarre and terrible, and having an evil Sandman eat the others ones in order to make him evil is the opposite of character development.

I didn't think it was terrible. A little weird maybe, but again- the likes of Venom wants to kill Peter because he can't face the fact that he sucked at being a reporter. Is that supposed to be character development?

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Sandman isn't a second stringer. In fact, he's never been a "willing" follower. His appearances as a member of the evil FF usually involved his not being willing to take crap from The Wizard, leader of the evil FF. And in his teaming with the Enforcers, Sandman was the leader.

As far as character, Sandy has had character exploration. Just not so much in Spidey comics, except for the stoyr from a few years back that ended the Peter Parker Spider-Man series.

sam is ganna make sure sandman is ganna look great.sandman was actually very cool in the comics,sandman and venom were great.

 

[bbf2]

Have you actually read those stories? Because I have every Sandman appearance into the mid-70's and they were all pretty cool. Was every story a classic? No. But no character has a flawless run. But I'd certainly stack everyone of them over EVERY appearance by Venom.

I've read every appearance of Sandman in a Spider-Man title. I can't speak for his Fantastic Four or Marvel Team-Up appearances, but he only appeared four times in Spider-Man titles into the mid seventies: his original appearance, two issues of him and the Enforcers versus Spidey and the Human Torch, the Sinister Six annual, and then a solo one in his new costume a few years later. I never said they were poor quality, they were all OK. The point is there weren't many, and most of his appearances until 1980 were in other titles.
I'm just trying to establish his worth as a strictly Spider-Man villain, and when he only appears five times in Spider-titles until 1980, that's a problem.

Yeah, but since as you say, the character development wasn't that great (I mean, turning him into a hero that would join the Avengers? Please).

I don't have a problem in terms of character development with him becoming a hero. In fact, I think it was a good idea since before that happened the character had no dimensions or motives whatsoever. But it severely hurt his status as a "Spider-Man villain," which is what we're discussing.

I didn't think it was terrible. A little weird maybe, but again- the likes of Venom wants to kill Peter because he can't face the fact that he sucked at being a reporter. Is that supposed to be character development?

It's not GOOD character development, but at least it makes him a Spider-Man villain and its still some sort of thing created by the character himself. It fits the definition of character development, even if it's poorly written.

Sandman turning evil again wasn't a natural progression of the character, or even caused by the character himself. It was because the Wizard made a "Turn People Evil" device, and then later the evil Sandman created by this device physically ate the other Sandmen. That doesn't fit the definition of character development.

 

[Dragon]

I've read every appearance of Sandman in a Spider-Man title. I can't speak for his Fantastic Four or Marvel Team-Up appearances, but he only appeared four times in Spider-Man titles into the mid seventies: his original appearance, two issues of him and the Enforcers versus Spidey and the Human Torch, the Sinister Six annual, and then a solo one in his new costume a few years later. I never said they were poor quality, they were all OK. The point is there weren't many, and most of his appearances until 1980 were in other titles.
I'm just trying to establish his worth as a strictly Spider-Man villain, and when he only appears five times in Spider-titles until 1980, that's a problem.

His worth as a Spider-Man villain? Pretty easy to establish.

1. He was introduced in Amazing Spider-Man #4
2. He has a unique, dangerous and visually exciting ability.
3. A single story in 2 hour feature film format can easily be generated.

I don't have a problem in terms of character development with him becoming a hero. In fact, I think it was a good idea since before that happened the character had no dimensions or motives whatsoever. But it severely hurt his status as a "Spider-Man villain," which is what we're discussing.

Since, as you say, Sandman's appearances were largely in titles other than Amazing Spider-Man, how can you say whether his character development was lacking in dimension? And, please elaborate on how many non-arch villains received much, if any character development in the interim. (When I say Arch-villains, I'm referring to villains who were considered the identifiable mirror image villains for a particular superhero E.G. Ock and the Goblin for Spidey. Dr. Doom for the FF, Loki for Thor etc.)

How much development did Electro have? Scorpion? In fact, how many Spider-Man appearances did they have in that same period? What about the Lizard? Who exactly aside from Ock and the Goblin qualify as a strictly Spider-Man villains? Electro fought Daredevil. Scorpion fought Captain America and Daredevil.

And I disagree totally that making Sandman a good guy worked. If he, based on his experiences and actions as a villain could "turn-around", pretty much anyone could. Why not Electro? He even had an actual trade before becoming a villain. Why not Scorpion?

Sandman turning evil again wasn't a natural progression of the character, or even caused by the character himself. It was because the Wizard made a "Turn People Evil" device, and then later the evil Sandman created by this device physically ate the other Sandmen. That doesn't fit the definition of character development.

That story explored Sandman accepting his true nature, which is the defination of natural progression in character development. He was essentially reconciling himself to being a criminal. Now, no, that's not the best writing. It's simply a way of explaining why Sandamn went from criminal, to hero, and back again. It isn't the worst, based on some of the writing over the Marvel's history either.

 

[bbf2]

His worth as a Spider-Man villain? Pretty easy to establish.

1. He was introduced in Amazing Spider-Man #4
2. He has a unique, dangerous and visually exciting ability.
3. A single story in 2 hour feature film format can easily be generated.

The question is "Was Sandman a big character in the comics?" It DOESN'T MATTER if you can make a story out of him for a movie, I'm talking about about the comic character. (The fact that they have to give him a family and make him related to Uncle Ben's death should speak against him, though, but they changed Ock as well so I won't hold it against him.)

The fact that he was introduced in ASM#4 and ASM Annual #1 are really the only things he's got going for him. I can't really say anything negative about the four issues Sandman appeared in, 1963/1964. I think this is one of the main reasons he is thought to be a core Spider-Man villain is simply because of those two issues (and the Enforcers issues to some extent). If he was introduced into Spider-Man comics in his NEXT Spider-comic appearance, in 1976, and then not again until the Frightful Four in 1980, he wouldn't be considered a Spider-villain any more than, say, the Wizard.

Since, as you say, Sandman's appearances were largely in titles other than Amazing Spider-Man, how can you say whether his character development was lacking in dimension? And, please elaborate on how many non-arch villains received much, if any character development in the interim. (When I say Arch-villains, I'm referring to villains who were considered the identifiable mirror image villains for a particular superhero E.G. Ock and the Goblin for Spidey. Dr. Doom for the FF, Loki for Thor etc.)
How much development did Electro have? Scorpion?

There's a difference between "character development" and "ranking as a Spider-villain." Character development can help, but it's not really what I'm talking about. I apologize for saying that I thought his character development early on was bland, that was purely based on early Spider-comics and probably confused my point a bit. Like I said, I don't think he had terrible character development, my point is that he's just not that important of a Spider-villain. Character development helps, but most of Spidey's villains don't have fantastic character development.

In fact, how many Spider-Man appearances did they have in that same period? What about the Lizard? Who exactly aside from Ock and the Goblin qualify as a strictly Spider-Man villains? Electro fought Daredevil. Scorpion fought Captain America and Daredevil.

The amount of Cap/DD issues that Electro or Scorpion respectively appeared in is about five, some of which Spidey appeared in. The amount of FF comics Sandman appeared in is MUCH more numerous. Just look at their profiles on Spiderfan, they speak for themselves. (I don't want to get in to too much defending of Scorpion, I don't consider him a top tier villain either.) But Sandman pales in comparison to Electro, the Vulture, etc.
All those characters appeared CONSISTANTLY as villains from 1964 to the present. Sandman only appeared as a Spider-villain in 1963/64, then one appearance in the 70s, 1980-1983, and then 2000-2003 although he could resurface. Look at his spiderfan profile, the first half is a sea of FF comics with an occasional Spider one thrown in, and much of the last half is from when he was a hero.

Electro, for example, appeared many more times in Spidey comics and always as a villain. Plus, he's had THREE three-part story arcs in Spider-Man comics devoted to him. Some were in the Sinister Six and one was in the Frightful Four, but he also has plenty of one-issue stories with him as the main villain and the three story arcs devoted to him.

Consistancy is only one thing, but emotional impact and connection is another important thing for someone's ranking as a Spider-villain. Sandman has never made Spider-Man feel any emotion or connection other than “Oh no, I need to dodge this sand fist!” Believe me, I’ve looked. Obviously GG and Ock are the king of this, but even the other villains have had more impact on him.
1. Mysterio made him believe Aunt May was dead, and forced him to confront the Burglar who killed Uncle Ben
2. The Vulture killed Nathan, (Aunt May’s fiancé), sucked Spider-Man’s youth (which was dumb as hell but there’s no denying that it had an effect), and poisoned Spider-Man to a degree where he was literally seeing the afterlife and had to be saved by Doc Ock.
3. Scorpion has the connection with JJJ (which isn’t the best, but its more than what Sandman has in this regard)
4. This isn’t Electro’s biggest area, but he learned how to disrupt Spidey’s wall clinging abilities which messed with him, and more importantly in one of his three part story arcs he beat Spidey so bad that he was begging for his life or else he’d fry the crowd. After that happened, Spider-Man became enraged and obsessed with Electro and spent nights trying to find him.

And I disagree totally that making Sandman a good guy worked. If he, based on his experiences and actions as a villain could "turn-around", pretty much anyone could. Why not Electro? He even had an actual trade before becoming a villain. Why not Scorpion?

Who knows. Not my point.

That story explored Sandman accepting his true nature, which is the defination of natural progression in character development. He was essentially reconciling himself to being a criminal. Now, no, that's not the best writing. It's simply a way of explaining why Sandamn went from criminal, to hero, and back again. It isn't the worst, based on some of the writing over the Marvel's history either.

"Reconciling himself to being a criminal?" He was hit with a "Turn People Mean" device! The only reason nobody raised a stink about it was because nobody cares about Sandman. But you’re right, there have been worse storylines and I won’t hold it too much against him, but since it’s the only Spider-Man storyline to focus on him it was worth mentioning.

All in all, he’s not a terrible Spider-Man villain, and I agree that he’ll work in the movie, because of the great special effects. If I were to rank the top 20 Spider-Man villains based on the factors I’ve listed above, I’d probably put him around number 16 or 17. (after the big guns and the rest of the original Sinister Six and some others, but before Shocker or Rhino or Morbius or whoever.) But for the purposes of the thread….he only appeared in a few Spider-Man comics as a villain, so no, he was not an important character.

 

[Venom4SM4]

And they are so right. I am soooooooooooooooo glad Ock is not a masked villain. Molina's facial expressions when doing his villainous deeds were class. Definitely a huge plus towards his performance.

What was Dafoe's most effective/memorable scene in SM-1?? The mirror scene most people will say. Why?? Because we can see his face expressing and emoting. It's not hidden behind that ridiculous looking mask he had to wear.



Oh I beg to differ He and GG have had the biggest impact on Spidey's life more that ANY other villain. And they do with style.

His greatest arch enemies. Bar none. And that's a fact.



Huh?? A C-list villain is a mastermind?? Rhino is a C list villain and he's as dumb as a post. Sandman is not the sharpest knife in the drawer either.

He's C-list because he's simply a thug with powers, with no aspirations greater than petty theft.



I never saw him as very popular. In fact I don't think I've ever seen anyone express love or excitement about any of his stories, save for the Sinister Six ones. I don't think thats because he was in them.

Nobody gave a damn when Marvel turned him good for years. Nobody missed his villainous antics.

Retire Ock, the Goblins, even Shocker or Rhino, and fans b1tch about it. People are still demanding the Hobgoblin return to regular continuity. He hasn't been seen in years.

Doc ock wasnt to big in the 90's he kinda passed the torch to venom in 89 lol most sm fans considered him a overweight elton john look alike. And as for Sandman he was never that popular...if he appeared in the 90's toon he woulda been alot more well known.

 

[Venom4SM4]

I think he's trying to say that Sandman's appearances have been for the most part him as a lackey or second stringer. Hardly making him worthy as a main villain for SM-3 characterwise.

I think Raimi picked him strictly for the visuals. Venom cannot generate near the amount of damage Sandman can with his powers.

Yes, he's also a break from the scientist villains, but then lots of villains could have been used to break that trend.



Well I disregard Venom from that because most of his stories are crap anyway. But any of Ock's stories that feature other villains have Ock as the leader/leading threat. Meaning Ock is usually running the show, whereas Sandman is usually a second string lackey.

Venom's early storys were great but his later ones were bad....he's not the most popular SM villain for nothing.

 

[Venom4SM4]

Have you actually read those stories? Because I have every Sandman appearance into the mid-70's and they were all pretty cool. Was every story a classic? No. But no character has a flawless run. But I'd certainly stack everyone of them over EVERY appearance by Venom.



Yeah, but since as you say, the character development wasn't that great (I mean, turning him into a hero that would join the Avengers? Please).



I didn't think it was terrible. A little weird maybe, but again- the likes of Venom wants to kill Peter because he can't face the fact that he sucked at being a reporter. Is that supposed to be character development?

Uh ok you need to learn about venom I think, Brock was a good reporter....a guy came to him claiming to be the Sin-Eater but was a fraud and screwed him, when spider-man found the real Sin-Eater Brock's career was over and do to his mental state he blaimed Spidey.

 

[The Joker]

Doc ock wasnt to big in the 90's

Yes he was. And I'll gladly prove it to you if you wish. One of the most major Spidey/Ock stories occurred in the 90's.

he kinda passed the torch to venom in 89 lol

Yeah, KINDA. Not completely.

And Venom extinguished the torch with a myriad of crappy stories.

Terribly written villain.

most sm fans considered him a overweight elton john look alike.

I've been a Spider-Man fan for 14 years, and this is the first I've heard of this.

Sour grapes from a Venom fan me thinks

Venom's early storys were great but his later ones were bad....he's not the most popular SM villain for nothing.

He's not the most popular Spider-Man villain.

And IF he was, I would piss myself laughing. As Dragon said above, what has he got going for him?? Weak motivations, weak stories, the only thing that is remotely good about him is his appearance.

Kids seem to dig slobbery tongued monsters with brain eating fetishes.

Venom is like a nicely wrapped present, but open it up and there's nothing but an empty box inside. No substance.

 

[Dragon]

The question is "Was Sandman a big character in the comics?" It DOESN'T MATTER if you can make a story out of him for a movie, I'm talking about about the comic character. (The fact that they have to give him a family and make him related to Uncle Ben's death should speak against him, though, but they changed Ock as well so I won't hold it against him.)

The fact that he was introduced in ASM#4 and ASM Annual #1 are really the only things he's got going for him. I can't really say anything negative about the four issues Sandman appeared in, 1963/1964. I think this is one of the main reasons he is thought to be a core Spider-Man villain is simply because of those two issues (and the Enforcers issues to some extent). If he was introduced into Spider-Man comics in his NEXT Spider-comic appearance, in 1976, and then not again until the Frightful Four in 1980, he wouldn't be considered a Spider-villain any more than, say, the Wizard.

Ridiculous. The Wizard was introduced in Strange Tales as a Human Torch villain and made several appearances there, including a team-up with Paste Pot Pete who became the Trapster. Graduated to a full FF villain by appearing as leader of the evil FF. His only early encounter with Spidey was ASM Annual #4 when he and Mysterio team-up up to fight Spidey and the Torch. so he was there a a torch foe.

Now- if you compare the number of times Sandman fought Spider-Man between his first appearance and his retirement from villain in 1982, it's about equal with Electro, Scorpion, and The Lizard for the same period, again since Scorpion fought Captain America, Daredevil and even Ms. Marvel in that period and Electro fought DD and ironcially, joined the evil FF as well.

For example: Sandman fought Spidey in : ASM #4, Annual #1, ASM #18, 19, Marvel Team-up #1,2 ASM #154, Marvel Team-up #39 & 40, FF #218, ASM #213-215

Electro: ASM #9, Anuual #1, ASM #82, Marvel Team-Up #56, ASM #187, SSM#39,40, FF #218...

So, as you can see, Electro fought Spidey less times than Sandman.

The amount of Cap/DD issues that Electro or Scorpion respectively appeared in is about five, some of which Spidey appeared in.

No he didn't. Spidey didn't appear in any of the battles except in the case of Marvel Team-Ups.

The amount of FF comics Sandman appeared in is MUCH more numerous. Just look at their profiles on Spiderfan, they speak for themselves. (I don't want to get in to too much defending of Scorpion, I don't consider him a top tier villain either.) But Sandman pales in comparison to Electro, the Vulture, etc.
All those characters appeared CONSISTANTLY as villains from 1964 to the present. Sandman only appeared as a Spider-villain in 1963/64, then one appearance in the 70s, 1980-1983, and then 2000-2003 although he could resurface. Look at his spiderfan profile, the first half is a sea of FF comics with an occasional Spider one thrown in, and much of the last half is from when he was a hero.

There were huge gaps of time between appearances by Spidey's classic villains. Sometimes several years. As I pointed out above, Electro only made a handful of appearances over a nearly 20 year period, again, while appearing in other Marvel titles. So it could hardly be stated that one villain is more a Spidey villain than any other. The only real qualification is being introduced in Spider-Man, having appeared in major story arcs (Sinister Six certainly qualitifes as such) and being a great villain. Sandman is.

Electro, for example, appeared many more times in Spidey comics and always as a villain. Plus, he's had THREE three-part story arcs in Spider-Man comics devoted to him. Some were in the Sinister Six and one was in the Frightful Four, but he also has plenty of one-issue stories with him as the main villain and the three story arcs devoted to him.

Again, as pointed out above. Nope. As for the three issues arcs, considering Marvel's policy of padding story arcs since the 80's, a three issues arc doesn't mean much. Probably could've been wrapped up in 1 or 2 issues.

Consistancy is only one thing, but emotional impact and connection is another important thing for someone's ranking as a Spider-villain. Sandman has never made Spider-Man feel any emotion or connection other than “Oh no, I need to dodge this sand fist!” Believe me, I’ve looked. Obviously GG and Ock are the king of this, but even the other villains have had more impact on him.
1. Mysterio made him believe Aunt May was dead, and forced him to confront the Burglar who killed Uncle Ben
2. The Vulture killed Nathan, (Aunt May’s fiancé), sucked Spider-Man’s youth (which was dumb as hell but there’s no denying that it had an effect), and poisoned Spider-Man to a degree where he was literally seeing the afterlife and had to be saved by Doc Ock.
3. Scorpion has the connection with JJJ (which isn’t the best, but its more than what Sandman has in this regard)
4. This isn’t Electro’s biggest area, but he learned how to disrupt Spidey’s wall clinging abilities which messed with him, and more importantly in one of his three part story arcs he beat Spidey so bad that he was begging for his life or else he’d fry the crowd. After that happened, Spider-Man became enraged and obsessed with Electro and spent nights trying to find him.

Not one of those "events" had any lasting meaning in spidey's life, and certainly wouldn't be used in a movie script. They were just adventures that occured and Spidey moved on from.

"Reconciling himself to being a criminal?" He was hit with a "Turn People Mean" device! The only reason nobody raised a stink about it was because nobody cares about Sandman. But you’re right, there have been worse storylines and I won’t hold it too much against him, but since it’s the only Spider-Man storyline to focus on him it was worth mentioning.

What is this "turn people evil" device you're talking about? In ASM vol. 2#4, when Sandman "comes out" as a villain, he says turning good was due to his own agenda, and he was even upset at Trapster for blowing his cover. Also, the Thing says that he never fully bought into the Sandman's turning good, and had been watching him the whole time.

All in all, he’s not a terrible Spider-Man villain, and I agree that he’ll work in the movie, because of the great special effects. If I were to rank the top 20 Spider-Man villains based on the factors I’ve listed above, I’d probably put him around number 16 or 17. (after the big guns and the rest of the original Sinister Six and some others, but before Shocker or Rhino or Morbius or whoever.) But for the purposes of the thread….he only appeared in a few Spider-Man comics as a villain, so no, he was not an important character.

Well, , I've shown, that's debatable. But in the end, for sam Raimi's purposes, how many appearances he made or his "importance" as a Spidey villain don't matter in regards to effectiveness as a villain for a single big budget movie.

 

[Dragon]

Uh ok you need to learn about venom I think, Brock was a good reporter....a guy came to him claiming to be the Sin-Eater but was a fraud and screwed him, when spider-man found the real Sin-Eater Brock's career was over and do to his mental state he blaimed Spidey.

I'm sorry, but Venom has the absolute worst, cheesiest, silliest, most lame reason for being a villain of every villain (or at least major villain) ever created.

Some were just born criminals. Others suffered tragedies. Losses of loved ones, crippling accidents. Eddie Brock got fired from a job.

 

[riggs]

I'm sorry, but Venom has the absolute worst, cheesiest, silliest, most lame reason for being a villain of every villain (or at least major villain) ever created.

Some were just born criminals. Others suffered tragedies. Losses of loved ones, crippling accidents. Eddie Brock got fired from a job.

I don't see it that way. I see him in a similar way to Spidey - he's been given the same powers and the same choice as Peter did. However Eddie decides to use these powers for petty revenge, like Peter did at first, instead of for good.

Peter was told by Uncle Ben that with great power comes great responsibility. Eddie didn't learn that lesson and he's become the very thing Peter almost became. This makes him a very intimidating villain because Peter can see a lot of himself in Venom and that's more than just his similar powers.

 

[lizard855]

No sandman was not a big charecter in the comics but he is going to rock this movie with all those visual effects

 

[Dragon]

I don't see it that way. I see him in a similar way to Spidey - he's been given the same powers and the same choice as Peter did. However Eddie decides to use these powers for petty revenge, like Peter did at first, instead of for good.

Peter was told by Uncle Ben that with great power comes great responsibility. Eddie didn't learn that lesson and he's become the very thing Peter almost became. This makes him a very intimidating villain because Peter can see a lot of himself in Venom and that's more than just his similar powers.

Peter didn't use his powers for "petty revenge". He tracked down a murderer to bring him to justice. In neither the comics or film did he intend to kill the burglar. But even if he had, he'd have had a much better reasion than Eddie.

And Eddie has nothing to seek revenge for. Spider-Man didn't do anything wrong. Eddie did. He deserved to be fired.

If they had made Spidey actually make some sort of mistake that damaged Eddie's life, then that would be a good idea. Then Spidey would actually be guilty of creating Venom. But such as things are, I maintain his motivation is weak.

 

[bbf2]

Ridiculous. The Wizard was introduced in Strange Tales as a Human Torch villain and made several appearances there, including a team-up with Paste Pot Pete who became the Trapster. Graduated to a full FF villain by appearing as leader of the evil FF. His only early encounter with Spidey was ASM Annual #4 when he and Mysterio team-up up to fight Spidey and the Torch. so he was there a a torch foe.

I said the Wizard as a hyperbole in order to insult him.

Now- if you compare the number of times Sandman fought Spider-Man between his first appearance and his retirement from villain in 1982, it's about equal with Electro, Scorpion, and The Lizard for the same period, again since Scorpion fought Captain America, Daredevil and even Ms. Marvel in that period and Electro fought DD and ironcially, joined the evil FF as well.

For example: Sandman fought Spidey in : ASM #4, Annual #1, ASM #18, 19, Marvel Team-up #1,2 ASM #154, Marvel Team-up #39 & 40, FF #218, ASM #213-215

Electro: ASM #9, Anuual #1, ASM #82, Marvel Team-Up #56, ASM #187, SSM#39,40, FF #218...

So, as you can see, Electro fought Spidey less times than Sandman.

ASBM#4, Annual 1, and ASM 18/19 all occured in the same amount of time...1963/64. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with Sandman's four appearances there. But they all happened at the same time.
I don't really care about Marvel Team-Up, that's a bit of a free for all, I'm just talking about Spider-comics. And I don't really care about FF comics either.

So breaking it down:

ASM #4, Annual #1, ASM #18, 19: All from 1963/44
ASM #154: His only other solo appearance, his only appearance in the 70's.
ASM #213-215: All in 1981. Big gaps between these appearances here. I don't think he appeared in 213. 214 and 215 were with the Frightful Four, which is something I guess, but if he's fighting Spidey as a subsidiary of The Wizard I don't think it counts as much, personally.

Electro's appearances are more spaced out, and ASM 9, 82, and 187 are all

ASM #9,
Anuual #1:
ASM #82: Solo appearance
ASM #187: Solo appearance
SSM#39,40, and you forgot 42: Frightful Four (No props for this)
You forgot one more solo appearance: SSM 66

I mean, I guess they're not THAT different, but Electro having four solo appearances in the same time with Sandman only having one is something. There's nothing wrong with appearing in other titles and not too much wrong with appearing in supervillain teams, but Electro has stuff going on for him besides that. Plus it was more spaced out than Sandman, who's had most of these appearances all at the same time in 1963/4.

But how they did from 1963-1983 isn't really the important part. This is pretty negligible. The important thing is...after those appearances, Sandman became a hero and stopped fighting him. Electro then went on to appear consistantly throughout the 80's and 90's, during which he had more solo appearances and three different three part story arcs. I'd say even if they're pretty much the same during this period....Electro appearing for 20 MORE YEARS as a consistant threat is a pretty DAMN big thing to tip the scales in his favor.

No he didn't. Spidey didn't appear in any of the battles except in the case of Marvel Team-Ups.

OK, I don't have them, so I don't know. But occasionally fighting other heroes a couple times isn't the hugest deal, but Sandman fought the same one (The FF) over and over and over. My main point in bringing that up is to show that the "appearance numbers" that guy posted were pretty bogus, with his unusually high amount of FF appearances and with all his hero appearances.

There were huge gaps of time between appearances by Spidey's classic villains. Sometimes several years. As I pointed out above, Electro only made a handful of appearances over a nearly 20 year period, again, while appearing in other Marvel titles.

The longest Electro has been without fighting Spider-Man is six years. Not quite the same as Sandman not being a villain for 20 years.

So it could hardly be stated that one villain is more a Spidey villain than any other.

Really? So you don't think Doc Ock is a bigger Spidey villain than the Shocker? Or that the Vulture is a bigger Spidey villain than the Tarantula?

The only real qualification is being introduced in Spider-Man,

OK, so Darkseid is strictly a Jimmy Olsen villain and not a JLA or Superman villain. Got it.

having appeared in major story arcs (Sinister Six certainly qualitifes as such)

He was only in the Sinister Six for one issue. One issue is not a "story arc."

(Unless you're talking about the 2001 Mackie Sinister Six....and if you mean that, then your argument is that Sandman only became a good Spider-villain during Mackie's run, which I don't think you want to get into)

and being a great villain. Sandman is.

I think Swarm is a great villain, but that doesn't make him a "big Spider-Man villain."

Again, as pointed out above. Nope. As for the three issues arcs, considering Marvel's policy of padding story arcs since the 80's, a three issues arc doesn't mean much. Probably could've been wrapped up in 1 or 2 issues.

"Nope?" Uh, Electro had four issues devoted to him in the period you described, not to mention several during the 80's and 90's. Regardless of whether you think it was "padding," the fact that Electro had three 3-part story arcs to him (which I've read and enjoyed immensely, they gave Electro character depth and motivation without lessening his impact as a villain and fleshed out his character) is still pretty damn big, especially if you're going to argue with numbers.

Not one of those "events" had any lasting meaning in spidey's life, and certainly wouldn't be used in a movie script. They were just adventures that occured and Spidey moved on from.

For the last damn time, it doesn't matter if it would be in a movie script. This thread is about SANDMAN IN THE COMICS and whether he was a big Spider-Man villain.

In any case, Spidey also "moved on" from having his child stolen and from thinking he was a clone, doesn't mean it didn't have significant impact at the time. (And I would hardly call killing the elderly an "adventure.")

What is this "turn people evil" device you're talking about? In ASM vol. 2#4, when Sandman "comes out" as a villain, he says turning good was due to his own agenda, and he was even upset at Trapster for blowing his cover. Also, the Thing says that he never fully bought into the Sandman's turning good, and had been watching him the whole time.

Peter Parker Spider-Man v.2 #12. A backup story that explains why he was evil in that case. This new, Wizard-manufactured Sandman was lying when he said he was a villain the whole time, considering the considerable amount of issues where we were privy to Sandman's inner thoughts and struggles where it was obvious that he was actually a hero.

Well, , I've shown, that's debatable. But in the end, for sam Raimi's purposes, how many appearances he made or his "importance" as a Spidey villain don't matter in regards to effectiveness as a villain for a single big budget movie.

For the last time, look at the name of the thread. We're talking about whether or not he was a big character in the comics. It doesn't matter how well he would work in the movie. This thread is asking if he was a major villain in the comics.