Why, Raimi? Why?

[pedro parkero]

I guess I was just looking for more of a concrete source. I wouldn't consider myself a "Venom-lover" compared to others on this board I'm sure, but I do enjoy the possibilities he brings.

I guess it might prove useful then to prepare the more "classical" Spidey-fans for the possibility that he may not necessarily come and go as quickly as they'd like him to.

Well, yes, I may be one of the guys who feel that Venom really has no business appearing in this movie and should've been left out, but I also hate a waste as much as the next guy. If he's appearing here, then I hope he will pull his own weight in the story. I don't want him to turn into a third wheel (or something that can be left out) because if he did, then the movie wouldn't be solid, and I want my Spidey movies to be perfect...

And for the newbies out there, I'm talking about Venom, not Brock. I like what Brock brings to the table, but I don't think there's time enough in the movie for Venom, unless it's at least 2.2 hours, or they make a crapfest like X3...

And yes, I also believe that killing another villain, much a big star like Venom, is unnecessary.

I also think Venom is the only one of the Spidey characters that has the potential for a spin-off movie, because of the ridiculous fanbase. I admit he's cool visually, though somewhat boring personality-wise...

But like I said, too bad Brock's looking to die in this movie...

 

[Aiden]

oh God no
that would suck

by the way: your sig is wrong, its 05/04/07, not 04/05/07

No, we will see it also on the 4 May 2007 but we write it so 04/05/07 and not like the US.

What he said

 

[spideydave]

I personally believe this will be the best one. Since Alvin Sargent whos written some of the best scenes in the past films, who is an Oscar nominated writer, Is writing the whole script. Raimi did say Venom would be in the last half hour of the film. So its big enough for me! Just trust it you guys! Wait til the Full Trailer and wait for the film! Raimi likes to challenge himself with these movies. And thinks as an artist trying to better himself.

 

[Mr. Vice]

Don't worry people, Spider-Man 3 will be 3 times better than Spider-Man 2 (no pun intended.)

 

[TrueBeliever]

When I'd first heard Rami wasn't interested in Venom, I was upset. But after seeing his comments on the character and bringing him into the film on Yahoo (linked through the SHH front page), I understand what he was thinking.

He appreciated the sixties and seventies characters above what was offered for Spidey fans in the nineties. I can understand that. Those classic spidey villains had more character, in my opinion.

Now, I'm not saying Venom didn't need to be in this series. That'd be stupid. But Venom didn't have to come so early in the series. They're treating the franchise as if this is the last film and they needed to throw all their bombs into one spot, which worries me. What also worries me is the quote both Rami and Maguire stated, that they're concluding some story lines and if there are more stories to tell, they'll tell them. What's that supposed to mean?

I'm just saying they could've paced the stories out a little better, or followed Spider-Man continuity, things could've worked out just fine. I'm not sure of the original "sixties and seventies" continuity, but I know Lizard comes up before Venom.

Regardless, this will be a great film, I have no doubt about that. I just wonder how this will affect the following three films.


As always, I still say: "Sinsiter Six for Spider-Man 6!"

 

[Cmill216]

What also worries me is the quote both Rami and Maguire stated, that they're concluding some story lines and if there are more stories to tell, they'll tell them. What's that supposed to mean?

I just wonder how this will affect the following three films.

Okay, I touched on this very same subject a while back (at least two months ago), so I'm just going to quote myself D) with my views on this:

Honestly, as far as the future of the franchise goes, I am as uncertain about it as Sam seemed to be. I think they are packing this movie full, because Sony doesn't know if they truly want to go for 6 films. Maybe they want to get in while the franchise is hot, and not have to deal with possible future diminishing returns. Just go out with a bang, and exit stage left having made one damn good trilogy.

People love to talk about future Spidey films, ONLY in terms of the villains (which proves most fanboys have no business giving their two cents about making films). In reality, it's all about the hero, and what the film's theme does to and for the hero.

Look at it like this (and I'll also use a non-Spidey example):

Spider-Man 1 - The origin
Spider-Man 2 - The "Spider-Man No More" storyline
Spider-Man 3 - The dark side of power/the symbiote

Now look at X-Men:

X-Men - The origin
X2 - The mutant registration act
X3 - The cure

Now, I'm not saying that this is all these franchises could have done. But you have to look at the big picture. You can't just say, "Well, they can have the Lizard in this film, and then Venom and Carnage, or Mysterio, and blah blah blah".

They've missed one of Spidey's defining arcs (The death of Gwen Stacy), but have already taken care of three others (The Goblins, the origin, and the "giving up of powers for personal wants").

I'd like to hear what LOGICAL places they can go from here. I'm not saying there aren't stories (there probably are), but are there stories available for them to truly continue to build upon the film legacy, or would it just become overkill? It's not about the villains. The villains just play their parts in the big thematic picture.

What does the Lizard bring to the table that we didn't see with Ock or Norman? That father figure thing? Done.

Mysterio? Please. Electro? His powers are too generic in the film world. Same goes for Mystique....I mean, Chameleon.

I am not doubting that there will be an SM4. It wouldn't surprise me. But I don't see a whole lot of places for them to go. Just my opinion.

It's not about cliffhangers and "setting up this villain or that villain" or any of that. It's about the film. What is the film about?

Example: Batman Begins very smartly used the Scarecrow as a villain. Why? Because he operates on fear, one of the very themes of the film.

It's not about telling good "hero vs. villain" stories. The villains are pawns in the overall game of chess (and chess = the film).

Sony is not stupid when it comes to this franchise. If they feel like they can't deliver the full, complete goods, they'll stop. Especially considering the budgets can only go up for Spidey films (the law of outdoing yourself with each subsequent film).

 

[GoldGoblin]

^Maybe they could do the same thing with spidey,and make it where he has to tell his identity to the government,and if he doesn't comply,they send someone(a villain)to capture him.

Like Kraven,but then Dr.Connors turns into the Lizard in the movie.

 

[TheVileOne]

It means that Spider-man 3 is NOT definitively the end of the movies or the characters as they are now.

 

[Ironmanfan]

How the hell can you do a Venom only movie and have a Villan throughout the entire picture. Spidey has to wear the suit... turn bad... get rid of the suit... and then you get a Villian. What do you suggest you fill the first half of the god damned movie with. I may be a NOOB but you are a complete dumbass. Think before you come up with this ****. Its Logical to have multiple Villians in a Venom Movie because you gotta have Spidey wear the suit to fight someone.

 

[WTFimVENOM]

Why are ppl still complaining about Topher being Brock??? Why should Brock be played by somebody huge and muscle clad??? Brock didn't get ripped until after he got f***ed over by Parker and Spiderman!!! WTF?!?! Why are ppl complaining??

 

[Galactical]

Look at the date this thread was made.

 

[WTFimVENOM]

Im not the one who revived it, I say lets put this thing to death

 

[Galactical]

Go for it.