Why is "Spider-Man 3" So Depressing!?

[Spider-ManHero12]

^
No,it was Raimi.

It was Sony....

 

[Anno_Domini]

^
Did Sony also want New Goblin too.

This would be my argument if people continue to say it was all on Sony.

 

[Frodo]

I would say the ending is depressing but the tone of the film shifts from dark to high camp. Basically ,as Ricard Roeper said in his review of Spiderman 3, "It has an identity crisis". It was a film made via a suggustion box of different ideas, and in an attempt to please all factions during the production. BR and Hulk at least had a singular vison. In other words, the tone of each film remained consistent through out.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Hulk is a great movie if you take out his dad becoming a villain and the mutant dogs. Over the years, I've come to really enjoy the film as it shows Hulk being more of an anti-hero than how The Incredible Hulk portrayed him. Hulk showed how the true contrast, in a comic book movie, of the Jekyll/Hyde comparison, and I've come to understand that. Hulk v the military would've been the ideal idea for the movie, imo.

Totally not on topic, but meh, haha.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Exactly. He obviously wanted to take his father's mantle as seen in the end of Spider-Man 2, and him becoming a flying ninja made no sense, even if you bring up the argument that he just wanted to kill Peter. Even if he just wanted to kill Peter, don't you think he would've wanted Peter's last sight to see the face of the Goblin once more? Green or orange, that's not really the point as Harry could have definitely taking liberties to change the look, but still keep it as a Goblin just for pleasure when Peter sees his biggest enemy "come back to life"

I have to agree. If Harry just wanted to kill Peter, then why not just find his house and bomb it?

I would say the ending is depressing but the tone of the film shifts from dark to high camp. Basically ,as Ricard Roeper said in his review of Spiderman 3, "It has an identity crisis". It was a film made via a suggustion box of different ideas, and in an attempt to please all factions during the production. BR and Hulk at least had a singular vison. In other words, the tone of each film remained consistent through out.

I agree. That's the film main problem on a structural problem. The film's story loses all of its momentum each time the big villain is defeated to make way for the next one.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I have to agree. If Harry just wanted to kill Peter, then why not just find his house and bomb it?

That's the thing. Harry went through all that trouble in taking the serum, but yet goes out to kill in a snowboarding outfit, and it just feels so "out there" and doesn't make sense. He could have very well just bombed Peter's apartment as you mentioned, but the fact that he takes steps in trying to kill Peter, you'd think that Harry would spend some time on those last steps to put on the Goblin suit.

But, in any case, Harry Osborn fits more into the movie than Sandman and Venom combined.

 

[Victarion]

Or Sam could have justified the New Goblin by showing Harry overcoming the hallucinations of his father. The realization that his dad murdered people would keep him from becoming GG2. The fact that Spider-Man in turn murdered Norman without turning him over to the police and the courts would be the driving factor in Harry pursuing Spider-Man.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Or Sam could have justified the New Goblin by showing Harry overcoming the hallucinations of his father. The realization that his dad murdered people would keep him from becoming GG2. The fact that Spider-Man in turn murdered Norman without turning him over to the police and the courts would be the driving factor in Harry pursuing Spider-Man.

And entirely missed the point of the character.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Or Sam could have justified the New Goblin by showing Harry overcoming the hallucinations of his father. The realization that his dad murdered people would keep him from becoming GG2. The fact that Spider-Man in turn murdered Norman without turning him over to the police and the courts would be the driving factor in Harry pursuing Spider-Man.

....

And entirely missed the point of the character.

Yep.

 

[Godzilla2014]

....



Yep.

Glad to know I'm not the only one who thought that.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Besides, to "get over" his hallucinations would mean...he stopped taking the serum. Wasn't that the entire reason of how he was hallucinating his father? The effects from the serum was messing with his head from that secret room at the mansion? That's what I took out of that scene in Spider-Man 2 when he found the room.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Besides, to "get over" his hallucinations would mean...he stopped taking the serum. Wasn't that the entire reason of how he was hallucinating his father? The effects from the serum was messing with his head from that secret room at the mansion? That's what I took out of that scene in Spider-Man 2 when he found the room.

He hadn't taken the serum yet when he saw his dad in Spider-Man 2.

 

[Anno_Domini]

He hadn't taken the serum yet when he saw his dad in Spider-Man 2.

No, I'm talking about the effects from the room that was slipping out. There's really no other reason why Harry would be hallucinating...unless he was that drunk, but then again...he wasn't a real drunk in Spider-Man 3.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Spider-Man 3 is depressing....and I bet the first six minutes of The Dark Knight Rises will blow the entirety of S-M 3 out of the water....yep...waiting in line gives me time to post this, haha.

 

[Call Me Darkman]

The studio cut like 30 minutes of footage AND there was a different ending with Sandman's wife and kid at the construction site. We covered all of this back in 2007, so it surprises me that people still ask questions.

Spider-Man 3 is a butchered version of what Sam Raimi intended. Hopefully, one day, Sony will release the Director's Cut.

 

[GoldGoblin]

Why was Rami's SM4 gonna come out in 2011?Why was it gonna take him 4 years to make it?Two years is how long these movies should take.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

Why was Rami's SM4 gonna come out in 2011?Why was it gonna take him 4 years to make it?Two years is how long these movies should take.

Because of sony. They couldnt agree on a script. Raimi was pushing for the Vulture, Sony was pushing for the Black Cat. The script they came up with was god awful and Sam asked for an additional time to perfect it (so we didnt get another rushed script like we did in SM3). He wanted to push the release date from 2011 to 2012, but Sony said no so he left along with Dunst and McGuire.

Also to that whole New Goblin argument, he couldnt focus on Harry as much because instead of the plot being about protecting Mary Jane (like he intended), he had to attempt at developing the Black Suit. Harry wouldnt have gone into a coma and you cant say for sure what they would have done with him.

I honestly think Spider-Man 3 is so depressing because Raimi had a story but the studio shoe horned it at the last minute and his heart just wasnt there.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Harry was going to still be a Goblin, as he was going to team up with Spidey against Sandman and Vulture. That idea stayed in the film, but it was Venom instead of Vulture. And Sandman's retcon would've still been there. That right there shows that it wasn't all Sony and Avi Arad that messed up S-M 3.

Also...Sony wasn't pushing for Black Cat. They were pushing for Vulturess, although I still won't say that Sony was the only one with the idea of Vulturess.

 

[El Payaso]

The studio cut like 30 minutes of footage AND there was a different ending with Sandman's wife and kid at the construction site. We covered all of this back in 2007, so it surprises me that people still ask questions.

Spider-Man 3 is a butchered version of what Sam Raimi intended. Hopefully, one day, Sony will release the Director's Cut.

I didn't know that about Sandman. But throughout the movie the only thing Sandman does about his daughter was opening that reliquary with her picture with the same sad music going on, over and over again. That was about the development of that plotline.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

Harry was going to still be a Goblin, as he was going to team up with Spidey against Sandman and Vulture. That idea stayed in the film, but it was Venom instead of Vulture. And Sandman's retcon would've still been there. That right there shows that it wasn't all Sony and Avi Arad that messed up S-M 3.

Also...Sony wasn't pushing for Black Cat. They were pushing for Vulturess, although I still won't say that Sony was the only one with the idea of Vulturess.

No they were pushing for Black Cat, or at least Felicia Hardy. What I took from it anyway was that the Vultress was kind of a way of compromising. And I never said Harry wasnt going to be a Goblin, but the whole movie would have been thematically different without the inclusion of Venom. You act like script writing is just a cookie cutter process. Even if Raimi had no love for the character he still had writers that had a job to make it all mesh together and have a deeper moral.

Spider-Man 2 was about your dreams and how we change and sometimes have to give them up inorder to do whats right. Peter dreams of having a happy life with Mary Jane, but being Spider-Man got in the way of it, so he quit. Naturally the world started falling apart around him and he realized he needed be Spider-Man even if it meant giving up what he wanted the most. In the end he was rewarded by getting what he wanted. Doc Ock wanted to create a renewable source of energy for the world but was lazy with his calculations (putting everyone in danger) and he paid for this mistake with his wifes death. Instead of putting his dream behind him, he did it again on a bigger scale, putting the whole city in danger. In the end he chooses to make up for his mistake by sacrificing himself to stop his creation and his rewarded by dying a hero. Harry wants to kill Spider-Man because he believes he robbed him of the chance to ever please his father. In the end even after he finds out Spider-Man is his bestfriend he still refuses to change and his punished with the loss of his sanity.

Spider-Man 3 follows a theme of revenge and forgiveness. The only problem is, while under the influence of the Black Suit, Spider-Man chooses to seek revenge and attempts to murder Sandman (for shooting Uncle Ben) and Harry (for stealing Mary Jane), and in the end faces no consequences. Harry makes the right choice at the end but is still forced to sacrifice his life to save Peters (i guess you could argue his insanity made his death necessary but he really wasnt manic like Norman was). Sandman commits countless crimes and tries to murder Spider-Man but instead makes peace with him and is allowed to survive (i dont like his character arc but i guess he didnt go out trying to hurt anyone). Venom is just out for revenge and rather than choosing the forgive Peter he refuses to change and is punished with death (I dont think his death in the film however is fitting, it seems to much like fan service to show how addicting the symbiote is. I prefer the novelization where the suit consumes his body and leaves behind only a skeleton before turning into a giant monster. It symbolizes how if you don't learn to forgive your grudges will eventually consume you, in his case literally.)

Anyway my point was the Spider-Man and Harry vs Sandman and the Vulture might have been better. We could have actually gotten a chance to see Harry and Sandman's motives. Peter wouldnt have been under the influence of the Symbiote and the Justice system at the end probably would have made more sense. Plus symbolically the Vulture works a lot better as the face of unchanging evil than Sandman or Venom. Sometimes the smallest changes can make the biggest difference.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It was pretty damn cookie cutter if they just placed Venom into Vulture's spot and kept some of the elements such as the two on two battle royal as well as Venom being the so-called leader during the finale while Vulture was also planned to have been the mastermind, but granted, he would've been the mastermind for a longer period which would've begun once Sandman broke him out of prison. So, yes, I make it sound like the idea was just placing another villain into the place because it turned out like that.

I mean, for the most part, Sandman's story would've been the same and Vulture was meant to be pure evil, which is what Venom was. Nothing really changed except adding in the plot of the symbiote and maybe a few changes to Harry while adding the Stacys(although, that could've still been there since Captain Stacy would have had to been in the film for Sandman's plot...and since Raimi had "another girl" in the film, it could've still been Gwen since her father was in the picture).

Either way, Vulture, Venom, whoever...the movie would've still been awful because I would not have let that retcon go pass without saying anything about it.

 

[MaryJaneOrDie]

It was pretty damn cookie cutter if they just placed Venom into Vulture's spot and kept some of the elements such as the two on two battle royal as well as Venom being the so-called leader during the finale while Vulture was also planned to have been the mastermind, but granted, he would've been the mastermind for a longer period which would've begun once Sandman broke him out of prison. So, yes, I make it sound like the idea was just placing another villain into the place because it turned out like that.

I mean, for the most part, Sandman's story would've been the same and Vulture was meant to be pure evil, which is what Venom was. Nothing really changed except adding in the plot of the symbiote and maybe a few changes to Harry while adding the Stacys(although, that could've still been there since Captain Stacy would have had to been in the film for Sandman's plot...and since Raimi had "another girl" in the film, it could've still been Gwen since her father was in the picture).

Either way, Vulture, Venom, whoever...the movie would've still been awful because I would not have let that retcon go pass without saying anything about it.

I can agree there but i didnt say it wasnt a cookie cutter plot (well i think i did but thats not how i meant it). I meant it doesnt work like that. You can just say Venoms equal to the Vulture, because even though he was their characterizations are different. I really think the movie would have been better without the symbiote plot or the build up to Venom. In the novelization Sandman had contact with a doctor who said he had a cure but kept ordering Sandman to steal for him, maybe vulture was going to be like that. Those interactions really helped develop his character.

 

[Majik1387]

Hahahaha people think Vulturess was all Sony? Give me a break. I love Raimi and all(not his Spidey movies), but that had his creative control all over it.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I can agree there but i didnt say it wasnt a cookie cutter plot (well i think i did but thats not how i meant it). I meant it doesnt work like that. You can just say Venoms equal to the Vulture, because even though he was their characterizations are different. I really think the movie would have been better without the symbiote plot or the build up to Venom. In the novelization Sandman had contact with a doctor who said he had a cure but kept ordering Sandman to steal for him, maybe vulture was going to be like that. Those interactions really helped develop his character.

The doctor Sandman was contacting was filmed as well, which were never used. The symbiote/Venom plot, Sandman's plot, even Gwen Stacy's would've been fine if just they had kept all the scenes that Raimi filmed that were exactly from the novelization. The needed scenes from the book were filmed by the director and either he or Sony replaced them with god-awful scenes.

Vulture may not have been exactly like Venom's story in the movie, but that same evil force would've been in the film, but a much more manipulating force, one that Venom should have been. So, in this scenario, Vulture > Venom, and I bet it's mostly because Sam Raimi actually cared for Vulture.

Hahahaha people think Vulturess was all Sony? Give me a break. I love Raimi and all(not his Spidey movies), but that had his creative control all over it.

I do think that, even if he wanted Black Cat to be in Spider-Man 2, it's hard to not believe he turned Felicia into the Vulturess....once you make a huge mistake such as Sandman's retcon, that he wanted, it shows that you would really alter anything to fit the story, which he was known to do for his Spider-Man trilogy.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Why? Topher Grace's inclusion. His "acting" has a way of deflating otherwise good scenes.