The Amazing Spider-Man Worst, most annoying suggestions you've heard

[TomPiltoff]

Spidey needs his quips/sarcasm. Hell, I'd even take ONE scene where we see his "light heartedness" and humor come into play. Just one. And no, "Here's your change!" does NOT count.

Yeah it does.

 

[Wally West]

The suggestion that Raimi hasn't made a good spiderman film.

Spiderman 2 was, at the very least, a good film. The film had excellent reviews(93% Tomato meter) and an excellent box office ($373 million- $431 million adjusted for inflation). I have no problem with someone saying they personally didn't like it, but it's quite a stretch to call it a bad film.

 

[HughJackFan420]

Hey, I think Church did an excellent job with the role. I think he is an Excellent actor. And I think the sequence where "Sandy" was born was excellent, visually.


I just did not care for how the character was written. And I just do not care for ole Sandy period.

As far as convienent, if that is your way of saying lazy approach to writing, I gotta agree with you.

i agree with the first part i thought Topher did a good job and Thomas Haden Church was a good cast on Sandman. though i would've prefferred Micky Rourke's character from Sin City as sandman b/c he looks more like Sandman in that movie. anyways the only problem w/Spider-Man 3 was how it ended. they should've ended Venom the way they did by seperating Brock from the symbiote. at the end they should've had a cliffhanger of Brock locked in a cell and next to him was Cletus Cassidy. as far as Sandman Spidey should've stuck with what worked before. Flushing Sandman away w/water after Harry helped him out with missle beatdowns instead of them having a cry baby moment of forgiving each other...i mean duh....it's not that hard Hollywood give fans what they want not what YOU think we want.

 

[Wally West]

i agree with the first part i thought Topher did a good job and Thomas Haden Church was a good cast on Sandman. though i would've prefferred Micky Rourke's character from Sin City as sandman b/c he looks more like Sandman in that movie. anyways the only problem w/Spider-Man 3 was how it ended. they should've ended Venom the way they did by seperating Brock from the symbiote. at the end they should've had a cliffhanger of Brock locked in a cell and next to him was Cletus Cassidy. as far as Sandman Spidey should've stuck with what worked before. Flushing Sandman away w/water after Harry helped him out with missle beatdowns instead of them having a cry baby moment of forgiving each other...i mean duh....it's not that hard Hollywood give fans what they want not what YOU think we want.

The only problem with not killing Brock and setting up a 4th film is that it seemed like Spiderman 3 might be the last film in the series, and because of that uncertainty they probably wanted to give the films a sense of closure.

 

[Venom'sDad]

I seriously doubt that Wally West; otherwise, Sam wouldn't just let Sandman go. That still has to be resolved. Sam only brought closure to the Goblin Legacy. That had nothing to do with Venom & Sandman. Sam probably wanted to ensure that the character he disliked(Venom) would never see the light of day ever again. So he laid him to rest.

Rip Venom.

 

[Reikowolf]

"I had no choice"

Did anyone else really get annoyed when after he spends half the time just trying to rid himself of Spider-Man so he can get away with his crimes; he goes on a revenge twist with Venom?

I mean, Spider-Man finishes handing him his sandy butt in the sewer, he reforms and in essence is in the clear; he could just leave town and commit crimes elsewhere outside of spider-man's 'web of control' as it were. Instead the first thing he does is actively hunt down spider-man, then teams up with venom in trying to kill spidey. After all this, at the end he still says "I had no choice"

I mean, it would have actually made more sense if Venom had kidnapped his daughter and made him help in his revenge (the plot to the video game).

 

[American_Hobo]

Whatever the reason are, Venom and Sandman team-up would've been terrbile in my opinion.
Shoudl've been Sandman and Vulture team-up in Spiderman 3.

 

[Minus Shock]

The suggestion that Raimi hasn't made a good spiderman film.

Spiderman 2 was, at the very least, a good film. The film had excellent reviews(93% Tomato meter) and an excellent box office ($373 million- $431 million adjusted for inflation). I have no problem with someone saying they personally didn't like it, but it's quite a stretch to call it a bad film.

I really agree. I mean I give Raimi **** for Spider-man 3, but it wasn't as bad as X-3 was for me. I just hate that he didn't have enough balls to say to Avi Arad or whoever "I don't know Venom, I ain't using him just to bring in the bucks." But Spider-man 2 set the bar for comic movies in my opinion. The subjectiveness of liking Spider-man shouldn't matter because as a film it was really solid. I really hope he returns to Spider-Man 2 form with Spidey 4

 

[Reikowolf]

Vulture in a Spider-Man film would be pretty rad.

imagine the aerial battle sequence they could come up with? That would totally put the bar up there for the next big comic book movie.

Although it didn't feel 'big' Ironman had a promising aerial sequence which is more than I can say for Bayformers 1 and 2.

 

[Wally West]

I seriously doubt that Wally West; otherwise, Sam wouldn't just let Sandman go. That still has to be resolved. Sam only brought closure to the Goblin Legacy. That had nothing to do with Venom & Sandman. Sam probably wanted to ensure that the character he disliked(Venom) would never see the light of day ever again. So he laid him to rest.

Rip Venom.

Maybe I'll have to watch it again, but I got the impression that Peter and Sandman had come to some sort of understanding. I didn't really see anything within the context of that particular story indicating that he was going to be a problem any longer.

Anyway, my point was that they weren't going to end Spiderman 3 with major cliffhangers when it was a 50/50 shot at best that the cast and Raimi would be back for another. And while I can sympathize with your being disapointed in Venom's death( and probably feeling that the character wasn't handled properly to begin with) Killing Brock off pretty much tied up his arc - for better or worse.

 

[Episode29]

Morbius. Seriously people?

 

[Infinity9999x]

The suggestion that Raimi hasn't made a good spiderman film.

Spiderman 2 was, at the very least, a good film. The film had excellent reviews(93% Tomato meter) and an excellent box office ($373 million- $431 million adjusted for inflation). I have no problem with someone saying they personally didn't like it, but it's quite a stretch to call it a bad film.

Raimi doesn't make bad films. SM2 certainly is a very good film. However, it (in my opinion) is not a good Spider-man film. It's an average Spider-man film at most.

Raimi has handled his major characters fairly poorly. MJ was treated horribly, and Spider-man not much better. His characterization of Peter is average, but he simply doesn't understand the duality to the character of Spider-man. Add that to the fact that Raimi has virtually ignored the supporting cast of the mythos, and I find it hard to view the movies as good Spider-man movies.

However, it was even more frustrating to me that Raimi had the audacity to make good movies. Because he did them well, the public loved them, and now they view that as what Spider-man is when it could be so much better.

 

[Venom'sDad]

Maybe I'll have to watch it again, but I got the impression that Peter and Sandman had come to some sort of understanding. I didn't really see anything within the context of that particular story indicating that he was going to be a problem any longer.

You are missing the point... just because they pass hugs & kisses, shed tears together, and said I'm sorry does not mean everything has been resolved. Flint is a killer, a majot threat to the community, and is a fugitive. Spidey can not just allow a known criminal, with powers now, to wonder the streets. That goes completely against, "with great power, come great responsibility". Spoken by the very man, that was killed by the fugitive Spidey let go.... in Sam adaptation.

Look, Sandman has killed a number of officers, never promise anything to Spiderman and virtually told him he will not allow anything to stand in the way of him helping his daughter, so obviously he's not done commiting crimes... oh, and did I mention he's wanted criminal who now has superpowers.

Anyway, my point was that they weren't going to end Spiderman 3 with major cliffhangers when it was a 50/50 shot at best that the cast and Raimi would be back for another. And while I can sympathize with your being disapointed in Venom's death( and probably feeling that the character wasn't handled properly to begin with) Killing Brock off pretty much tied up his arc - for better or worse.

Really, I am more disappointed at Sam killing Norman & Harry than I am him killing Eddie/Venom. However, since the discussion centered around setting up Brock verses closure & uncertainty... I put the sad face next to Venom.

However, maybe it's just me, regardless of the uncertainty of a SM4 film, I still would tell the story I feel needs to be told. If I return, I'll pick up where I left off; if not, than so be it. Rushing a character, not doing proper development, forcing closure, because this may be the last; to me, shows lack of real commitment to himself. I don't know any other way to put it.

 

[Minus Shock]

^
I agree. I feel like the whole movie was kind of pointless when let's Sandman go. I can understand him maybe embracing that it was a mistake, but to me it makes Peter a pretty selfish person. Sandman killed several people after becoming Sandman, and for that he should face justice. If Peter is okay with Uncle Ben, great, but the other peoples families deserve to be spoken for. Does Peter think they don't care as much as he did?

Killing Harry was just a contrived effort to get audience to possibly tear up. The entire last act felt really rushed, but something just bugs me about Bernard telling Harry everything Peter has been telling him for a movie and a half now and suddenly it's okay. I know there are probably explanations but that just bugged me. I wish that was handled differently. I hate that in comic book movies in general the solution is always killing the bad guy, yet rarely is that the first solution in comics.

Eddie Brock/Venom was just unnecessary to me. Really so was Gwen Stacy. All Gwen did for me is wish Peter would dumb MJ and stay with Gwen. Back to Eddie though. I hated that they changed the church scene from Brock asking god to kill himself to killing Peter Parker. It's ******ed to me to ask God to kill another person out of jealousy. Brock asking god to kill him seems like something done out of depression or feeling worthless, which makes for a more tragic character I think. I hated that you see Venom without a head more than you did with a head. Why bother with the character if you aren't going to keep him covered up. I wanted to see some gnarly tongue and such.

 

[Minus Shock]

Double Post.

 

[American_Hobo]

I seriously doubt that Wally West; otherwise, Sam wouldn't just let Sandman go. That still has to be resolved. Sam only brought closure to the Goblin Legacy. That had nothing to do with Venom & Sandman. Sam probably wanted to ensure that the character he disliked(Venom) would never see the light of day ever again. So he laid him to rest.

Rip Venom.

Harry as Rocket Racer rather than Green Goblin was not really an appropriate closure to Goblin legacy.

 

[Wally West]

You are missing the point... just because they pass hugs & kisses, shed tears together, and said I'm sorry does not mean everything has been resolved. Flint is a killer, a majot threat to the community, and is a fugitive. Spidey can not just allow a known criminal, with powers now, to wonder the streets. That goes completely against, "with great power, come great responsibility". Spoken by the very man, that was killed by the fugitive Spidey let go.... in Sam adaptation.

Look, Sandman has killed a number of officers, never promise anything to Spiderman and virtually told him he will not allow anything to stand in the way of him helping his daughter, so obviously he's not done commiting crimes... oh, and did I mention he's wanted criminal who now has superpowers.


Really, I am more disappointed at Sam killing Norman & Harry than I am him killing Eddie/Venom. However, since the discussion centered around setting up Brock verses closure & uncertainty... I put the sad face next to Venom.

However, maybe it's just me, regardless of the uncertainty of a SM4 film, I still would tell the story I feel needs to be told. If I return, I'll pick up where I left off; if not, than so be it. Rushing a character, not doing proper development, forcing closure, because this may be the last; to me, shows lack of real commitment to himself. I don't know any other way to put it.

You make some good points about Sandman, but ultimately he left peacefully. He could possibly have to be dealt with one day, but that's hardly a big cliffhanger, at the very least, I didn't get the feeling it was a plot point that HAD to be revisited.

And as far as killing off Norman, well... I'm totally with you on that one. If there's one thing that bothers me about this trilogy more than any other it, it's that I felt the Goblin wasn't nearly as cool as he could have been. I wish they would've saved GG for a sequel when they had a bigger bugget and could have done his transformation physically via CGI.

 

[Spiderine]

It may have resolved things between Peter and Flint in regards to Uncle Ben's death but the fact that Sandman's daughter is still gravely ill and still needs money and Sandman has made it clear he will do whatever is necessary to get that money certainly makes him a continued threat roaming the street. Does that make it ok for Peter to turn his back again?

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

they should've ended Venom the way they did by seperating Brock from the symbiote. at the end they should've had a cliffhanger of Brock locked in a cell and next to him was Cletus Cassidy./quote]


no.no no no no no no no NO

i love/loved topher's preformance, but he served his purpose in 3, not to mention raimi hates symboites. so...no.

 

[zeptron]

they should've ended Venom the way they did by seperating Brock from the symbiote. at the end they should've had a cliffhanger of Brock locked in a cell and next to him was Cletus Cassidy./quote]


no.no no no no no no no NO

i love/loved topher's preformance, but he served his purpose in 3, not to mention raimi hates symboites. so...no.

That could have been used to set up the Venom movie. That would be better than Eddie Brock somehow coming back to life.

 

[rashad]

One I read on another forum.

Make it rated R, and bring in Carnage.

 

[The Joker]

Any Carnage or symbiote related suggestions are stupid. Not going to happen. Especially with Raimi in control.

 

[Adrian89]

Raimi doesn't make bad films. SM2 certainly is a very good film. However, it (in my opinion) is not a good Spider-man film. It's an average Spider-man film at most.

Raimi has handled his major characters fairly poorly. MJ was treated horribly, and Spider-man not much better. His characterization of Peter is average, but he simply doesn't understand the duality to the character of Spider-man. Add that to the fact that Raimi has virtually ignored the supporting cast of the mythos, and I find it hard to view the movies as good Spider-man movies.

However, it was even more frustrating to me that Raimi had the audacity to make good movies. Because he did them well, the public loved them, and now they view that as what Spider-man is when it could be so much better.

Once again, I must say that I agree with you fellow member. Good point!

One I read on another forum.

Make it rated R, and bring in Carnage.

lol, Spider-Man will never be R rated in my oppinion.

 

[That person]

One word: Hobgoblin. Seriously, WTF?

 

[Minus Shock]

My biggest annoyance is people who know literally nothing about Spider-man, but just kind of know of Venom, Carnage etc and are dying for them. I get effin tired of hearing "Bring in Carnage!!!" My best friend in the world is guilty of that.

Can someone tell me what this fascination is with Carnage in the first place please? So he kills people like T-1000, big whoop. I just don't understand the draw that he has with non-comic readers. It's really bizarre.