Why make the ending so weird

[Abaddon]

he still proved he's willing to hurt people to save his daughter. who's to say he wouldn't go on and continuing doing that if he saw things weren't working out?

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

he still proved he's willing to hurt people to save his daughter.

Just like any hero is willing to hurt people for his entire family and friends. That’s considered honourable, isn’t it?

who's to say he wouldn't go on and continuing doing that if he saw things weren't working out?

He gave his word. Emotionally anyway, not verbally. If he can't hold on to it. Sure, you can try to lock him up.
We have the power of trust. If we don't have that, what makes us civilized?

 

[Abaddon]

Just like any hero is willing to hurt people for his entire family and friends. That’s considered honourable, isn’t it?

when the family is being threatened, yes.

He gave his word. Emotionally anyway, not verbally. If he can't hold on to it. Sure, you can try to lock him up.
We have the power of trust. If we don't have that, what makes us civilized?

I don't think trust has anything to do with being civilized.

you smell Christian.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

I don't think trust has anything to do with being civilized.

Trust, forgiveness, kindness, sincerity, love - those are some of the things, if not the very main ones that still hold our race together, as fragile as that unity may be.

you smell Christian.

Says the dude with a Christmas hat guy in his avatar.
I’m agnostic.
Christians believe in hell. While I believe heaven and hell is just another nazi system of reward and fear - you behave or you will burn! If there is an afterlife and if there is a god, s/he’s all forgiving.

 

[Abaddon]

Fair enough.

Christmas is just for the gifts.

 

[Blader5489]

he still proved he's willing to hurt people to save his daughter. who's to say he wouldn't go on and continuing doing that if he saw things weren't working out?

"The only thing that's left of me now is my daughter."

I don't know about you, but personally, I interpreted that scene as Marko wanting to spend what little time was left with his daughter. It isn't explicitly stated, but I think it's safe to assume that Marko won't be committing anymore crimes for Penny's health, especially given Peter's mini-speech on choices.

 

[chaseter]

Trust, forgiveness, kindness, sincerity, love - those are some of the things, if not the very main ones that still hold our race together, as fragile as that unity may be.


Says the dude with a Christmas hat guy in his avatar.
I’m agnostic.
Christians believe in hell. While I believe heaven and hell is just another nazi system of reward and fear - you behave or you will burn! If there is an afterlife and if there is a god, s/he’s all forgiving.

Where do bad people go then...Quazi Heaven?

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

Where do bad people go then...Quazi Heaven?

Exactly my point - we are used to the idea that ‘bad people’ must go somewhere ‘bad’ and are not allowed to go to a ‘good place’ where we ‘good people’ go. *choughhypocrisychough*
I’d imagine, since we all die and if there is an after life, we all begin anew with a clean slate, thus all is forgiven.
The grave is the great equalizer and since we all achieve death eventually, punishment and retribution loose their meanings.

 

[DACrowe]

Aw, fanboys. Mmm. Nothing like a high passionate debate about something that was overdiscussed half a year ago. Yes sireeeeeeee, puts stride in a man's step.

 

[DACrowe]

Where do bad people go then...Quazi Heaven?

Aw the good Christian, why forgive when you can cast a stone?

 

[IamProdigy]

Spidey: Aw screw it... (throws pumpkin bomb at sandman) hell no!

Spider-Man should've done something...he's a hero, he should never just let a villain walk away or in that case, float away in a sand-cloud.

Spider-Man 3: Spidey became emo and became a *****.

 

[IamProdigy]

Exactly my point - we are used to the idea that ‘bad people’ must go somewhere ‘bad’ and are not allowed to go to a ‘good place’ where we ‘good people’ go. *choughhypocrisychough*
I’d imagine, since we all die and if there is an after life, we all begin anew with a clean slate, thus all is forgiven.
The grave is the great equalizer and since we all achieve death eventually, punishment and retribution loose their meanings.

Everyone has their own opinions; I'm still in the phase where I'm "thinking" about the after life and just everything(Heaven, Hell, Purgatory). I'm religious, but I stopped calling myself a Christian just because I need to find my own answers. Churches can't help me anymore.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

Spider-Man should've done something...he's a hero, he should never just let a villain walk away or in that case, float away in a sand-cloud.

Spider-Man 3: Spidey became emo and became a *****.

Well, there's nothing I can add that I didn't already say in my previous posts.

 

[DACrowe]

On a slightly more serious note today, the ending is up to the viewer to accept or not. I see most did not.
But it was more of an opportunity for Peter to find redemption for himself and all the evil **** he did this movie by finding forgiveness for someone who has wronged him and letting go of hate, anger and vengence. That meant he also was finding redemption for himself.

Now I personally would have made it so that his daughter is terminally ill and will die no matter what (which i hear is the original concept that was filmed, but cut because Sony thought it was "too sad") and he should have said "All that matteres to me is my daughter and I need to be there for her now," and Peter knows Harry is dying about five floors down and doesn't see the need to get in a fight.

But hey the ending works on a metaphysical level, but not quite on a basic storytelling level by my opinion.

There was my attempt to talk about this seriously for a post.

 

[Secret_Riddle]

He did feel guilty, though. That's why his atonement came at the end of the movie.



Well, we don't know if he killed anyone else; that's just speculation. But I think the fact that his wife resents him, his daughter is going to die, and that he can't even kill himself if he wanted to is punishment enough.



Again, it's not a fact that Marko killed other people. You're right in that it wouldn't be right for Peter to forgive Marko for killing other people, but the movie never says Marko has killed others.



Just like the constant selfish/selfless fest in SM2 was tedious.

God forbid a movie ever follow through on its theme.

1.If he felt guilty, he should have given up what he was doing, not escalated it. Its called basic moral sense.

2.Its not speculation, he flat out pounds 2 cops coming out of a truck, if it didn't kill them, it seriously injured them, and at the construction site he destroys multiple trucks, and we flat out see a army men surrounded by sand before venom like shreds him, Venom and Sandman would both share the guilt there.

3.^^

4. Well many critics called for Spider-Man 2 to be nominated for best original script and best picture oscars, don't see that support for spider-man 3.

 

[ChocheTheHero]

My idea for Sandman & the Uncle Ben´s scene:

Flashback to that scene. When the Spiderman 1´s thug (i don´t remember his name) ran into the car, and yells at Marko (he don´t respond), the thug decides to shoot Ben Parker himself. But Flint freezes in terror, and the another man decides to escape without his partner...

 

[November Rain]

Thank you Blader and Hero12.
Ha! Take that November Rain! Guess I’m not the only one who liked the ending in SM3.

But seriously, I see so many people who missed the point of the film or didn’t learn a thing. It’s so easy to punish someone. It takes a lot more guts to forgive them.
Yes, Sandman didn’t kill anybody but Uncle Ben. And he was penitent. So if one regrets his crimes and has the ability to bother no one anymore, such as sand cloud powers, why not let him go?

this mentality is still flawed

regardless of what he was doing or how he felt about it, the court found him to be a danger before hand and he was wanted for crimes after his transformation. He should have handed himself in to pay for his crimes.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

this mentality is still flawed

This kind of mentality is not tainted by bureaucracy or vengeance pressure.

regardless of what he was doing or how he felt about it, the court found him to be a danger before hand and he was wanted for crimes after his transformation. He should have handed himself in to pay for his crimes.

Exactly what I am trying to say. The judicial system around most of the world doesn’t take into consideration the criminal’s emotions or his dead-end situation. Everyone that I talked to about this matter sings the same old song of indifference.
Here’s an example:
Your family member is mortally ill and the only cure is held in the hands of a bystander on the street. But of course he won’t give it to you willingly for whatever reason and every second counts cause your close one might die at any moment. For Flint it was in the form of a money and guards or policemen, that’s all he knew.
Would you beat him up and steal the cure or go through the long and excruciating legal process hoping for the best that your wife or daughter won’t die during it?
Loaded as it may sound that’s exactly Sandman’s situation in SM3.
The system isn’t always working for us, as it should be.

Needless to say I wouldn’t be exactly popular for jury duty.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Marko even said, "I wish I could take back what I did" or something like that. Blader5489, I really like how you said what you said and I agree with you.

Peter did have a right to forigve him because even though what Marko did was a bad thing, Peter remembered how his Aunt said, "revenge is like a poison. It can take you over, turn you into something ugly." Peter also realised that we have all done terrible things and it's the choices that make us who we are. Flint Marko didn't purposley shoot Uncle Ben, it was an accident. Peter realised that to. That really is some great story telling if you ask me.

This is a big problem for with the ending though, even if he 'accidently' killed Uncle Ben, he still deprived Peter of a loved one, which i dont think anyone could forgive a person for. At the end of the day, Sandman went with the intention of commiting a crime, therefore he is guilty in my eyes. I would have preferred it if Peter had said "I'm never going to forgive you, I cant, but just know, i'll never hold it against you any longer."

Even that would have been a stretch, but it would have been much more realistic IMO.

 

[November Rain]

This kind of mentality is not tainted by bureaucracy or vengeance pressure.


Exactly what I am trying to say. The judicial system around most of the world doesn’t take into consideration the criminal’s emotions or his dead-end situation. Everyone that I talked to about this matter sings the same old song of indifference.
Here’s an example:
Your family member is mortally ill and the only cure is held in the hands of a bystander on the street. But of course he won’t give it to you willingly for whatever reason and every second counts cause your close one might die at any moment. For Flint it was in the form of a money and guards or policemen, that’s all he knew.
Would you beat him up and steal the cure or go through the long and excruciating legal process hoping for the best that your wife or daughter won’t die during it?
Loaded as it may sound that’s exactly Sandman’s situation in SM3.
The system isn’t always working for us, as it should be.

Needless to say I wouldn’t be exactly popular for jury duty.

I would probably beat up the policeman to save my family but then happily accept the consequences of my actions.

the whole of the second film was about parker accepting the consequences of him being spiderman (apparently). It's entirely undone if flint doesn't accept the responsibility of wanting to keep his daughter from dying.

what about all the public damage he did, or willingly abducting an innocent woman with the help of spidey, or even nearly battering him to death or all the police officers he killed/brutally injured. He doesn't even come to terms with what he has become and what effect that has on his lifespan/health etc...

it's completely unrealistic and proves nothing.

lesson learnt: you can do what you want when no one can stop you and you think its in the best interest of a loved one? Or maybe not because that's what dark spidey and harry were doing and they changed..

it's weak

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

I can honestly say here to you now, if in a similar situation a Flint' like character would've killed my wife. I would've forgiven him.

 

[November Rain]

The only reason flint was out was to protect his daughter and raise money for her meds.


So what if spidey used his publicity to fund raise for children in her condition?

he would no longer have a reason to go out and he could be forgiven for uncle ben's death and peacefully serve out his time.

Spidey's forgiveness is seen and repaid with an act of kindness showing he has the responsibility to wield with his great power (by keeping his daughter safe with his rep, he keeps the people of new york safe by keeping flint in jail).

 

[November Rain]

I can honestly say here to you now, if in a similar situation a Flint' like character would've killed my wife. I would've forgiven him.

you can forgive someone but they still have to answer to the law of the land.

that's real life.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

it's weak

It's not weak it's bold.
That's why no bold man or artist or hero like Sam Raimi will ever be widely accepted by their own time.

And it’s not about doing what you want if you can. It’s about forgiveness.
It’s not about them it’s about you. Can you forgive someone for that?

 

[November Rain]

Why spend a whole film talking about one being responsible for their actions to have it completely annulled in the next.

spiderman is fundamentally based on a hero's responsibility not only to himself but to his loved ones and his city.

sandman is still going to be commiting crimes hurting people for the sake of his daughter, how is spidey letting him go responsible?