Were Expectations Too High for SM3?

[The Joker]

Well, in the comics, Sandman didn't kill Uncle Ben, and to my knowledge, he didn't have a family. He was just a thug who could turn into sand. If you ask me, Raimi actually added some good stuff to a character that didn't have much there in the first place.

I'm not talking about character translation, I'm talking about development. Marko was never really explored as a character. He was stealing for his daughter, whom we saw in one brief scene.

As for the Uncle Ben connection, it was nothing more than a cheap contrivance to connect the villain to the hero.

As for Brock, everything that happens to him in the movie is pretty much the same thing that happens to him in the comics. Again, he's never really been fully multi-dimensional character.

Exactly the problem, and why Raimi never wanted to use him.

Peter's not really a dark person to begin with. Before he got the black suit in SM3, he was a nerd who was full of himself. And seeing as though the suit amplifies the characteristics of it's host, that's what you got - an amplified narcisstic nerd.

The suit amplifies aggression. In the comics and the cartoon, Peter didn't become a dancing twit who changed his hair style.

It's supposed to make him a darker character. He evoked more laughter than anything else in the movie with his stupid behaviour. He was even more funny than good natured, goofy Peter.

That is not right.

 

[Tempest19]

Um, Peter wasn't really dark in the comics- only the cartoon- in the comics he acted more drunk without a care about the damage he causes. It was cartoon Peter that acted like a real ass to everyone he knew. Trust me, I just read 'Birth of Venom' not even a month ago. Unless, that was considered 'bad' back in the day? lol.

 

[pjspider1C]

Wasn't the novel written based on the script?

It was based on one of the later drafts of the script, not necessarily the final script - but the near final script. There's parts in the novel that are significantly different from the movie - specifically where and how Venom & Sandman meet.

 

[Tempest19]

It was based on one of the later drafts of the script, not necessarily the final script - but the near final script. There's parts in the novel that are significantly different from the movie - specifically where and how Venom & Sandman meet.

They actually filmed that dude, I just saw a pic of it. That scene in the film is a reshoot.

Personally I think it would have been best to have a scene with Sandman with his family, we get the sense that Eddie is watching him from afar. Flint walks into the alley and they keep that confrontation scene.

 

[pjspider1C]

It's supposed to make him a darker character. He evoked more laughter than anything else in the movie with his stupid behaviour. He was even more funny than good natured, goofy Peter.

To quote Dr. Connors from SM3 - "It amplifies the characteristics of it's host - especially aggression." Note: he did not say, ONLY aggression.

 

[TLH]

I'm not talking about character translation, I'm talking about development. Marko was never really explored as a character. He was stealing for his daughter, whom we saw in one brief scene.

Wasn't a good portion of this cut for the theatre release? The Sandcastle scene, the doctor scene, and his family/daughter stopping him at the battle royale...etc? I wouldn't blame Raimi for that one. Whoever thought the audience would be unwilling to sit through 10 extra minutes of film is to blame.

 

[pjspider1C]

Wasn't a good portion of this cut for the theatre release? The Sandcastle scene, the doctor scene, and his family/daughter stopping him at the battle royale...etc?

Yeah... all that stuff is in the novel. It would've been nice if everything that was in the novel could be in the final version of the movie... but then you're looking at a 3 hour+ Spidey film. Which, I personally am in favor of, but general movie goers start to get antsy once you start pushing 2 hours.

 

[GoldGoblin]

Since Sandman was considered the main villain before this movie came out some people were expecting him to have character development and action scenes that Doc Ock did.And Sandman didn't even get half of that.

Some people who's favorite villain is Venom started thinking that Sandman would be just a throw away villain,someone spidey defeats in the first five minutes of the movie even though the studio,Raimi,and everyone else said Sandman would be the main villain.

Even I was expecting Venom to have at least one three minute fight with spidey like every other villains in these movies get,and Venom didn't even get ten seconds to do that,so if I was disapointed in Venom's length of fighting,you can imagine how the Venom fans would feel.

If Sandman and spidey had at least on three minute fight somewhere in the movie,and if Venom and spidey had at least one three minute fight somewhere in the movie people wouldn't of been disappointed like they were.

Sandman and Venom were basically treated the way Shocker and Rhino would be treated if they made it into the spidey movies.

 

[pjspider1C]

^ I sort of agree with you. A lot of people wanted a lot of different things from this movie. And if they didn't get it, of course they would ***** and moan about it. Overall though, I still think Raimi did a good job of balancing everything that was thrown at him in this movie.

 

[El Payaso]

Batman Forever has a friend.

You mean Batman & Robin has a soul mate.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

I would think that SM3 was set a little high,especially with Spider-Man in those dramatic poses as seen in promo posters.

 

[The Kid]

You mean Batman & Robin has a soul mate.

Now you're being too lenient.

 

[Catman]

No. The general public don't care nor did they hail sm2 the best comic book movie ever, critics and easily pleased fanboys did that. The general public just wanted to see an entertaining spider-man movie and guess what, the majority of the general public thought sm3 was good enough to make it one of the fastest if not the single fastest movie to make close to a $billion worldwide. SM3 in less than a month has made more money than what sm2 made in 3 years, that says alot.

The problem is, fanboys follow the production of these movies to a point where they're criticising the type of tar used to make a freakin' road and then they get all sorts of crazy ideas and hopes as to how they interpret or think things'll pan out. Upon viweing the movie, they get something very different from what they imagined or at least hoped for without thinking things through logically, thus, setting themselves up nicely for a big bowl of dissapointment.

SM3 was an awesome movie, the best of the series. Too many people around here get way too caught up in the hype to an excessive point where the film now becomes destined to dissapoint if it doesn't match what these crazy fanboys fantasised about.

yeah it's our fault Venom got shafted, the movie makes no sense, and the movie has a cheap cop-out ending

Nope. It's Sony's fault for making Raimi cut like 30 minutes of the movie. Have you been keeping up with all the deleted scenes reported? The 3.1 DVD will change everyone's mind. You'll see!

I've seen better episodes of Power rangers.

Remember when the Green Ranger was evil? Good stuff.

 

[SamuraiSon6]

I doubt anyone cares what I think, since I'm just an evil troll looking to spoil the fun but ok since you ask so nicely:

clearly this movie was rushed out:

We get no explanation for harry's hallucinations.

We don't understand his motivation for becoming goblin jr. so quickly. Yes, he swore spidey would pay. But that was before he learned his father was a murderous evil villain. Let's see him question this... nope, spidey bad. Me hate spidey. He's a cave man.

I don't need to get into how wasted venom was.

Sandman's a whole new pack of confusion especially concerning his remarkable connection to the murder of uncle ben.

good grief. I do not like this movie. It has its merits but not enough for me to like it. sorry.

Weyseed, i personally liked the movie, so obviously i dont agree with you, but i have to say....this is probably the most straightforward honest post i have ever seen of yours

 

[Spider-Bat]

I got everything I expected out of the movie. I was not dissapointed at all.

 

[The Kid]

Weyseed, i personally liked the movie, so obviously i dont agree with you, but i have to say....this is probably the most straightforward honest post i have ever seen of yours

Yeah after reaching 10,000 I sort of don't have much reason to troll as much anymore

 

[dodus]

I don't think expectations were too high. People wanted it to be even better than 2, which was better than 1. Just because that didn't happen, doesn't mean it couldn't have.

 

[Catman]

Yeah after reaching 10,000 I sort of don't have much reason to troll as much anymore

Happens to the best of us!

 

[sundaycall]

Yes I do believe that the level of expectation was too high for this movie.

The question is was it unfair to expect so much?

Yes, I'd agree that it's mostly fanboys and critics who hailed Spider-man 2 as one of, if not the best comic-book adaptation to date, and maybe not so much the general public. Looking at the box-office I don't think joe-public has much of a prblem with this movie, in fact I think general movie-goers are quite happy given the speed at which this movie reached $800 million worldwide.

But although only the minority of movie-goers appreciated and acknowledged the care and skill used to craft a movie using the characters we know and love as well as constucting a good story and a sequel that surpassed the original in all areas, albiet while treading some familiar ground with certain themes (peter vs surrogate father figure), on the other end of the spectrum we were led to expect the same if not more from the latest installment.

And why not? Spider-man 2 took that leap ahead of the first movie, why, considering 3 years of development and the return of all the major creative forces from the franchise, should we have expecting anything other than a movie of the quality of the first 2? The men and women behind the camera and in front of it have always testified Spider-man's longevity as a character and movie franchise based on the wealth of great characters and stories to harvest. So why did this movie stumble ( I don''t consider it a failure by any means, just a step back)?

The fact is we don't have the scapegoats or excuses that other franchises had for failing. We don't have 'a rushed production and development process' like say X3, we don't have 'the filmmakers tried a new and daring direction with the genre' like the Hulk, we don't have 'a brand new creative team and cast' like Batman Forever/& Robin.

We don't have a Brett Ratner or a weak writing team or budget cuts or cases of over indulgence or even inexperienced directors and producters.

This movie had everything going for it bar some (alledgely) uncharactersitic medling from the Marvel bosses, namely the black suit and Venom.

High expectation has a way of making a good movie sem bad, but our expectation was just a relflection of the faith and trust we placed in Marvel and the film-makers to really deliver something fan boys and critics would love and champion. They didn't.

 

[Raiden]

I think SM3 has its flaws, and by no means a perfect movie nor as good as predecessor (I considered SM2 to be the best superhero movie ever made, even better than BB and XM2). However, despite its shortcomings, it isn't a bad movie, and certainly not anywhere near as bad as Batman Forever, as someone claimed. Yes, Raimi definitely bite off more than he can screw by giving us 3 villains, one which he doesn't like very much (Venom). But if the deleted footages were restored, I'm sure the movie won't felt as incomplete nor as fragmented as it is now.

I hope Raimi can come back for #4, and go back to the roots; we need Spidey to go back to basic, and I think it will bring back the magic of SM2.

 

[Mr Jide]

Your logic makes me laugh sometimes. The exact same thing could be said for any praise given to SM-3. Critics and easily pleased fanboys.

Fact is that it irks you that a superhero movie you dislike is given more praise than one you like



Really?? What does it say?? That the box office is the ultimate truth about movies?? Wouldn't that make Titanic the greatest movie ever??

Or maybe it just means that the 3 year gap between Spidey movies has made the audience more anxious. Maybe the inclusion of Venom was a factor.

The fact is that the box office is not a valid indicator about the quality of a movie. Which is why I always found these box office wars between franchises so ******ed.



In your opinion.

Which frankly is no more valid than the critics or the other fanboys

Who said anything about ultimate truth??
To be honest, your desperation to have anything pale in comparrison to sm2 is something that just about gets a chuckle out of me. SM2 is an overrated mediocre piece of garbage save a few scenes. When you praise mediocrity, anything different wether better or worse would have been a dissapointment to those who who took part and still overglorify "mediocre-man 2" anyway.

sm2 (imo) is a weak spider-man movie, borderline garbage and sm3 out performed it, FACT. Now, people I’ve argued with, including yourself are always quick to throw, “Oh but sm2 is great because the majority of critics said so and the money it made blah blah blah”….so what, right? I’m telling you that now, see what its like when the shoe is on the other foot. SM2 being “the greatest” isn’t fact and nor was it given that title by the general audience as some people believe.
SM3 had mixed reviews and took a critical beating, something sm2 didn’t have but those opinions of critics and dissapointing reviews made no difference in detering the general public from seeing the movie. Like I said, sm3 made more money in under a month than sm2 did in 3 years not to mention it’s right behind sm1’s overall cume. Oh you think BO talk regarding this issue is ******ed? Boohoo, deal. Like I said, it says a lot. When a film reaches the masses and is regarded thoroughly as a dissapointment but still manages to make an insane amount of money in quick succession, wether you like it or not, it indicates that the MAJORITY of people enjoyed the movie, thus thinking it was a good enough movie. Come on, $800million in under a month due to “anxiousness” lets not be silly now.
I couldn’t care less who thinks sm3 is the best or not, I believe it is and that's my opinion, never said or indicated it was fact. SM3 isn’t perfect, its very much flawed but less so than sm1 and 2. Unlike sm1 and 2, it felt more like a spider-man movie and was a much more enjoyable film…to me and looking at the worldwide $800million+ its made in under a month, it wouldn’t be crazy to think the rest of the world enjoyed it too.
I know you’re pretty much biased to sm2 anyway simply because Doc Ock is the villain and you’re no fan of venom and during preproduction you had quite a few negative things to say about sandman. Me, I’m a spider-man fan, the film about the title character takes priority over everything else. SM3 making as much as it has is not solely based on the 3 year gap wait or anxiousness, that’s just daft and a poor ******ed attempt to refute that making such money could possibly be due to people actually liking the film. As I’ve been told for half a decade now and as I’m telling you, these spidey movies aren’t solely made with the interest of catering to fans of the comics, we’re a minority percentage and it’s the cash from everyone else that realy contributes to the film’s revenue. Look at superman he’s the most popular superhero of them all. Look at the yearly range from S4 to SR, how many years is that? Surely, by your logic there should have been an over abundance in anxiousness for a contemporary live action superman movie, right? Tell me, how did SR perform, what did people think of it, how much money did it make, all of this is relative. Same could be said for batman, didn't shrek have a 3 year gap too? doesn't seem to be doing as good as expected, oh well but I suppose, instead of coming off as a disgruntled fanboy who seems rather upset that his precious sm2 just good anhihalated financially by sm3 and taking into account that money in some cases as is the case with sm3 does indeed talk, the general public have spoken....a lot, So, how about you understand that my opinions are what they are, nothing more or less and aren’t clouded by delusional hype.

 

[The Joker]

To be honest, your desperation to have anything pale in comparrison to sm2 is something that just about gets a chuckle out of me.

Where's this coming from?? I don't think SM-1 or Batman Begins pale in comparison to SM-2.

So, that knocks that theorey of yours out the window.

sm2 (imo) is a weak spider-man movie, borderline garbage and sm3 out performed it, FACT. Now, people I’ve argued with, including yourself are always quick to throw, “Oh but sm2 is great because the majority of critics said so and the money it made blah blah blah”….so what, right? I’m telling you that now, see what its like when the shoe is on the other foot. SM2 being “the greatest” isn’t fact and nor was it given that title by the general audience as some people believe.

And when have I ever said this?? In fact, I only said to you a while ago that box office and critics mean nothing, when you were b1tching that SM-2 got the number one spot on RT's comic book movie list.

Stop making up BS about me, jide.

SM3 had mixed reviews and took a critical beating, something sm2 didn’t have but those opinions of critics and dissapointing reviews made no difference in detering the general public from seeing the movie.

Same thing happened for Pirates 2, and from the looks of it, Pirates 3, too. And, alot of people consider them average movies.

What's your point??

Like I said, sm3 made more money in under a month than sm2 did in 3 years not to mention it’s right behind sm1’s overall cume. Oh you think BO talk regarding this issue is ******ed? Boohoo, deal. Like I said, it says a lot.

It is ******ed. And the fact that you're using it as your only defence, when I could name several mediocre movies that made a fortune at the box office, only proves how weak your arguement is.

I know you’re pretty much biased to sm2 anyway simply because Doc Ock is the villain and you’re no fan of venom and during preproduction you had quite a few negative things to say about sandman.

I'm not biased. SM-2 out did SM-3 in practically every way, IMO. So did SM-1.

The only thing I think SM-3 had over it's predecssors was some of the special fx. Nothing more.

Venom was a weak villain in SM-3. Under developed, under used, and completely forced. Sandman was under developed, too. His connection to Uncle Ben was completely contrived and unnecessary. Half the time it wasn't even Thomas Church on the screen. It was a giant cgi sand monster or a flying sand storm.

Me, I’m a spider-man fan, the film about the title character takes priority over everything else. SM3 making as much as it has is not solely based on the 3 year gap wait or anxiousness, that’s just daft and a poor ******ed attempt to refute that making such money could possibly be due to people actually liking the film.

So, by your logic, Titanic is the most popular and greatest movie of all time, right?? I mean, it made THAT much money, it must be that great, right??

Right??

Wake up and smell what you're shovelling, Jide.

So, how about you understand that my opinions are what they are, nothing more or less and aren’t clouded by delusional hype. [/SIZE][/FONT]

I understand exactly what your opinions are. Been reading them under your various banned names since 2003.

Most of the time I disagree but respect them. But, when you start applying absurd logic about the box office taking speaking volumes about quality, and actually using that to bash other movies, then I just couldn't resist stepping in.

 

[Mr Jide]

Where's this coming from?? I don't think SM-1 or Batman Begins pale in comparison to SM-2.

So, that knocks that theorey of yours out the window.

So you rate sm1 higher than sm2? That’s a new one.

And when have I ever said this?? In fact, I only said to you a while ago that box office and critics mean nothing, when you were b1tching that SM-2 got the number one spot on RT's comic book movie list.

Stop making up BS about me, jide.

Making up BS? Hardly, there have been a few times where you’ve been all but too quick to inform me that, seeing as the majority of critics hail sm2 as an awesome movie, it…well is because the majority said so. Clearly, your views on that have changed since then…so it may seem.

Same thing happened for Pirates 2, and from the looks of it, Pirates 3, too. And, alot of people consider them average movies.

What's your point??

My point is, $800million+ under a month. I’m not sure you understand just how large that figure is and what an achievement it is to make that in less than 30 days, when a film like sm3 gets the trashing it got. Pirates 2 and 3 are not in the same boat and alot of people? People like who? How many people do you know, spoken to or seen stats of that think pirates 2 and 3 are average movies? People here at SHH? Please, I know at least of 50 people that though Pirates 3 was awesome but what does that mean? Either way, Pirates 3 doesn't look on course to be making $800million+ in less than 30 days.

It is ******ed. And the fact that you're using it as your only defence, when I could name several mediocre movies that made a fortune at the box office, only proves how weak your arguement is.

My argument is hardly weak. I’m not using it as my only defence but I’m emphasisng its use, simply because the money made in such a short period of time is virtually unheard of, very unusual. Phantom menace sucked but it made loads, Titanic is number 1 but it’s not the best movie…imo of course but did they get mixed and bad reviews and go on to make $800million+ in less than 30 days?

I'm not biased. SM-2 out did SM-3 in practically every way, IMO. So did SM-1.

Like you said, in your opinion.

The only thing I think SM-3 had over it's predecssors was some of the special fx. Nothing more.

Well I complteley disagree. SM3 turned out to be the type of movie sm1 and 2 should have been. Better acting, closer comic book feel and a better script (as flawed as it was)'

Venom was a weak villain in SM-3. Under developed, under used, and completely forced. Sandman was under developed, too. His connection to Uncle Ben was completely contrived and unnecessary. Half the time it wasn't even Thomas Church on the screen. It was a giant cgi sand monster or a flying sand storm.

So, I’m not disputing any of that, if you read what I’ve been saying I’ve never said sm3 was perfect, I constantly reiterrate the movie is flawed. However, I know your dislike for venom and sandman and I remember the things you had to say about them, sandman, especially, round the time when slag and symbiotica were regular posters.

So, by your logic, Titanic is the most popular and greatest movie of all time, right?? I mean, it made THAT much money, it must be that great, right??

Right??

Wake up and smell what you're shovelling, Jide.

No Stephen, that’s not what I’m saying and you’re clearly misinterpreting “my logic”. However, your only argument in this matter is that it made as much money as it did based on a 3 year wait as if to say, there’s no way the majority of the GP could have found the movie to have been enjoyable. That right there is weak logic at its best. See, instead of cutting and pasting certain bits of my post, how about you address it in its entirety and you’ll see the bits left out and ignored actually, answer the points you think you’re trying to make. Believe me, I know what and where I’m shovelling, it just seems you’re having a bit of trouble trying to dig your way out.

I understand exactly what your opinions are. Been reading them under your various banned names since 2003.

Based on your responses, I don't think you do.

Most of the time I disagree but respect them. But, when you start applying absurd logic about the box office taking speaking volumes about quality, and actually using that to bash other movies, then I just couldn't resist stepping in.

Well how about making more of an effort to step back and think before you decide to step in. I’m not saying that BO takings is the be all to end all in terms of representing quality, I said this in my first post, which you seem to have conveniently ignored. However, to discount that making $800million+ in less than 30 days couldn’t be down to enjoyabilty but based on waiting 3 years, is a clear sign of the derrangement of the human mind.

 

[shogunrua]

I thought I might have had too high expectations for this movie. I have to be honest, while I were following the production as all of you, I saw so many great things (the trailers, the black suit, Sandman, Venom...), it wasn't well after I wentto see Spidey 3 that I realised that to wrap up all that great potential and give each character the time he deserved, they would have to stretch this movie for at least 3 hours...and damn I think I would have get bored (because one thing I really liked about SP3 is that unlike the first 2 movies, I never got bored).

On the other side, I went to see it with friends of mine, who are absolutely unfamiliar with the Spidey Universe, and they saw the same flaws as I did (character underdeveloped, some very corny moments...), so I might not be as biaised about SP3 as it seemed lol.

But it's just my opinion

 

[Anti-Venom]

Perhaps they were too high. But that is Sony's fault. They hyped up this movie within an inch of its life.

You can hardly expect them to be low after how well recieved the first two films were. There is no reason expectations shouldn't have been high.