Spider-Man 3 Why do you think Sam Raimi dislikes Venom and his origin story??

[MessiahDecoy123]

Any ideas?

 

[Nardz937]

For starters, Raimi was mostly familiar with the 60's and 70's Spider-Man. You can tell that Venom really didn't fit into his universe that he created inspired from that era. In Spider-Man 3, you really felt that he was forced in.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Venom wasn't just forced in, the character and his origin story were dragged through the mud.

I'm not sure why people resent the character so much.

 

[OcStat]

Venom could have been done well, we know Raimi wasn't very fond of the character, and he was more or less forced into using him. I think if Raimi had an idea for a story with Venom as an antagonist that came about naturally (that rare thing in Hollywood) he would have been more inclined to use him properly.

It totally could have worked if they tried harder. Spider-Man in the 80's just progressed from the 60's and 70's, much like Raimi's films could have done. I don't think the trilogy was necessarily pigeon holed into representing one era of the comics. Raimi has the horror chops to make it work, he proved what he was capable of with the church scene, he needed the free reigns to really dig into it's potential.

Spider-Man 3 should have been 3 and 4, with Spider-Man having the black suit for the entirety of the film, focusing on his conflict with Harry, the resolution of which would make him get rid of the suit and follow that up with Venom. Not to imply I that I resent Spider-Man 3 or something, but the characters of Spider-Man, Harry Osborn, and Eddie Brock could have been portrayed more accurately if that was their game plan.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Venom wasn't just forced in, the character and his origin story were dragged through the mud.

I'm not sure why people resent the character so much.

Nardz answered the question well. Raimi was passionate about Silver Age Spidey and didn't want to drop a 90s tale in the middle of his world. While I still blame Raimi for his childish attitude once the decision was made, I don't fault him at all for having a favorite era. That's quite common among comic books (not just in Spider-man's case) and just getting Raimi's take would have been preferable to having VINO and GINO haphazardly jammed in like they were.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

For starters, Raimi was mostly familiar with the 60's and 70's Spider-Man. You can tell that Venom really didn't fit into his universe that he created inspired from that era. In Spider-Man 3, you really felt that he was forced in.

Agreed. It also because Venom terrible villain and Raimi say he thought he was weak when he read his stories in comics.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

What makes Sandman so much better than Venom?

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Harry's goblin and sandman weren't particularly great villains either

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Raimi actually put some effort into Sandman.

Sandman was easily one of the few highlights of Spider-Man 3.

 

[The Joker]

Two main reasons;

- As already mentioned Raimi is old school 60's and 70's Spider-Man, and has a natural inclination towards the characters and stories of that era
- Venom has a weak back story and a pathetic reason for hating Spider-Man. The movie actually improved Venom over the comic book version. In the comics Eddie Brock hates Spider-Man because Eddie published a news story about Sin Eater's identity that turned out to be false when Spidey caught the real Sin Eater. He got fired and his life went to crap, and he blames Spidey for that. All Spidey did was catch a serial killer. He didn't even know Eddie from Adam. They never met. Spidey was not an obstacle to Eddie writing a good honest news story. Brock didn't blame the *****e who lied to him, or the editor who fired him. No he blames the guy who caught a notorious killer. It's just plain idiotic. The cop out excuse for that is because he's crazy.

In SM-3 Raimi made an actual connection between Peter and Eddie (as did all adaptions of Venom in the various animated shows, even in the USM comic), and he gave him real reasons to hate him. Peter exposed Eddie's fraud, roughed him up and humiliated him, and dated the girl Eddie was infatuated with.

Infinitely better than comic book Venom. Comic book Venom has one of the stupidest motives in comic book history. He's also one of the most overrated characters ever. Why is he considered a top Spidey villain, who some rank beside Goblin and Ock? Because he has similar powers to Spidey? Whoop dee doo. He knows Spidey's identity? Big deal. What's he ever done with that info? Stalk him? Scare MJ once? Yawn.

He's a classic example of style over substance.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Two main reasons;

- As already mentioned Raimi is old school 60's and 70's Spider-Man, and has a natural inclination towards the characters and stories of that era
- Venom has a weak back story and a pathetic reason for hating Spider-Man. The movie actually improved Venom over the comic book version. In the comics Eddie Brock hates Spider-Man because Eddie published a news story about Sin Eater's identity that turned out to be false when Spidey caught the real Sin Eater. He got fired and his life went to crap, and he blames Spidey for that. All Spidey did was catch a serial killer. He didn't even know Eddie from Adam. They never met. Spidey was not an obstacle to Eddie writing a good honest news story. Brock didn't blame the *****e who lied to him, or the editor who fired him. No he blames the guy who caught a notorious killer. It's just plain idiotic.

In SM-3 Raimi made an actual connection between Peter and Eddie (as did all adaptions of Venom in the various animated shows, even in the USM comic), and he gave him real reasons to hate him. Peter exposed Eddie's fraud, roughed him up and humiliated him, and dated the girl Eddie was infatuated with.

Infinitely better than comic book Venom. Comic book Venom has one of the stupidest motives in comic book history. He's also one of the most overrated characters ever. Why is he considered a top Spidey villain, who some rank beside Goblin and Ock? Because he has similar powers to Spidey? Whoop dee doo. He know Spidey's identity? Big deal. What's he ever done with that? Stalk him? Scare MJ once? Yawn.

He's a classic example of style over substance.

The same thing can be said for Sandman though.
This is why I've said before that Harry should've become Venom and it would have been way more compelling.

 

[The Joker]

The same thing can be said for Sandman though.

Not really because Sandman isn't lauded as one of Spidey's top tier villains. Nobody is under any illusions that he is anything but a thug with powers. He is what he is and he works. His hatred of Spider-Man also makes sense. Raimi gave a bit of pathos to the character with the sick daughter. Something the comics have since adapted. Raimi also originally planned to have him and the Vulture working together.

The movie was never going to be resting on Sandman's shoulders in the villain department. He just has not got the chops to be a solo antagonist.

This is why I've said before that Harry should've become Venom and it would have been way more compelling.

I suggest you watch the Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon if you want to see rubbish like that.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Not really because Sandman isn't lauded as one of Spidey's top tier villains. Nobody is under any illusions that he is anything but a thug with powers. He is what he is and he works. His hatred of Spider-Man also makes sense. Raimi gave a bit of pathos to the character with the sick daughter. Something the comics have since adapted. Raimi also originally planned to have him and the Vulture working together.

The movie was never going to be resting on Sandman's shoulders in the villain department. He just has not got the chops to be a solo antagonist.

I suggest you watch the Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon if you want to see rubbish like that.

In the context of Raimi's movies it makes more sense than a shoe-horned Eddie Brock. We would've already had a well-developed character who has grown to resent Peter Parker and Spider-man. It's not like the proto-goblin storyline was all that good anyway.

And on the Sandman and Vulture thing, even as team-up its just two b-list villains. Vulture's in the same boat as Sandman.

Would I have preferred Raimi's original untouched plans though? Of course! But I think the movie could've been significantly streamlined even with what he was forced to work with.

 

[The Joker]

In the context of Raimi's movies it makes more sense than a shoe-horned Eddie Brock. We would've already had a well-developed character who has grown to resent Peter Parker and Spider-man. It's not like the proto-goblin storyline was all that good anyway.

I would take Harry being any version of a Goblin rather than turning him into a totally different villain altogether.

If you thought there was fan uproar over Venom being short changed with screen time and killed, it would be a drop in the ocean compared to if they copped out of Spider-Man 2's ending of Harry finding the Goblin lair, and instead turning him into Venom, while completely ignoring Brock altogether, not to mention the Goblin legacy for which Harry is infamous for.

And on the Sandman and Vulture thing, even as team-up its just two b-list villains. Vulture's in the same boat as Sandman.

True, but Toomes has more meat to his character than Sandman. Some b-listers are stronger than others character wise. But you're missing the point. Two b-list villains is better than one. They are more capable of carrying a movie together than on their own.

Would I have preferred Raimi's original untouched plans though? Of course! But I think the movie could've been significantly streamlined.

I think we all agree on that. There was too much baggage with the Venom and symbiote storyline.

But Avi Arad just had to stick his nose in.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Well to be fair lots of directors are forced to work with story elements they're not especially fond of.

But it's their choice what to do next with what they're given.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Well to be fair lots of directors are forced to work with story elements they're not especially fond of.

But it's their choice what to do next with what they're given.

True. I guess Raimi was trying to stick it to Avi rather than rolling with the punches

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

In addition to Raimi's issues with Venom in general, there is a specific issue with his inclusion in Spider-Man 3. Venom's origin is very lengthy and involved. This after Spider-Man's 2 ending had already promised us Green Goblin II.

Some of the specific details can be changed, but the basic Venom storyline is this:

1. An origin for the Symbiote.
2. Peter comes in contact with and bonds with the Symbiote.
3. Peter discovers that the Symbiote gives him improved physical abilities.
4. Something happens that makes Peter desperate enough to use the Symbiote.
5. Peter's mind is negatively affected by the Symbiote and he chooses to get rid of it.
6. Meanwhile, Eddie Brock has to be developed and given a reason to hate Peter separately.
7. Peter discards the Symbiote and it ends up bonding with Brock, becoming Venom.
8. Venom seeks revenge on Peter and they have a fight.

Going through all that takes a lot of time. That's a movie in itself. Trying to force it into an already existing story involving the Green Goblin and Sandman results in a really bloated film without a lot of cohesion. Vulture doesn't have that problem as he has a much simpler backstory. Vulture is also a better fit in a team with Sandman than Venom is.

Raimi did the best he could under the circumstances, and quite frankly I'm amazed that Spider-Man 3 turned out as good as it did. It could have easily ended up being an unwatchable mess like TASM2. Raimi deserves a lot of credit for salvaging something watchable at all.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Nardz and Joker are on a roll.

What makes Sandman so much better than Venom?

He's a compelling villain.
The Ditko/Lee (annual not necessarily included) work, Untold Tales of Spider-Man, Marvel Team-Up v1 #001, Peter David's Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man (post Civil War), Marvel Two-in-One issue having Ben and Flint together, Fantastic Four, and of course; The Spectacular Spider-Man animated.

Clearly a flawed character, a thug, and may not seem as interesting as the idiot with the slimy tongue, but at least he can work when the writer handles him, nothing too convoluted and awfully contrarian on repeated basis.

Venom sucks when he is forced on someone. He was forced on David Michillinie, who had other plans for the symbiote/new host combination seemingly less idiotic than Eddie, and more compelling.

 

[Batsfan1]

I wonder if the original idea for Spiderman 3 was to have Vulture promising Flint Marko that he could cure his daughter if he helped him get his revenge on everyone that wronged him, like maybe the people who stole his technology from him, maybe Oscorp or something like that.

God bless you all! God bless your families and everyone else in your lives! God bless everyone!

 

[Big Al]

I wonder if the original idea for Spiderman 3 was to have Vulture promising Flint Marko that he could cure his daughter if he helped him get his revenge on everyone that wronged him, like maybe the people who stole his technology from him, maybe Oscorp or something like that.

God bless you all! God bless your families and everyone else in your lives! God bless everyone!

Seems plausible.

 

[zeptron]

I remember when Spider-man 4 was still in the works, people were so sure that Carnage would be in it. Considering how Raimi handled Venom, I still have to wonder what made people think that he would handle a much more vicious character like Carnage any better.

 

[ItchyWebShooter]

I remember when Spider-man 4 was still in the works, people were so sure that Carnage would be in it. Considering how Raimi handled Venom, I still have to wonder what made people think that he would handle a much more vicious character like Carnage any better.

Carnage was never even considered, it was just what all pre-pubescent fanboys like myself concluded was the next step.

 

[PeterBenParker]

I believe Raimi said he couldn't connect with him or whatever, which I still feel was a BS argument because any given writer can take a character they dislike and make something worthy out of 'em.

Case in point: Greg Weisman and Venom.

 

[The Joker]

I believe Raimi said he couldn't connect with him or whatever, which I still feel was a BS argument because any given writer can take a character they dislike and make something worthy out of 'em.

Raimi did like the version of Venom he came up with.

Case in point: Greg Weisman and Venom.

That was essentially Ultimate Venom with some tweaks.

 

[ItchyWebShooter]

Raimi did like the version of Venom he came up with.

FWIW, so did I for the most part. I know that's not a popular opinion though.