Would the movie have been better without Venom?

[Anwar]

It's better characterization and drama if the char is acting the way they are on some level becasue of their own feelings, and not entirely due to a foregin substance that messes with their heads. It makes for better development in that they have to accept that it was their own feelings (onsome level) and that they could have done something about it if they hadn't given into the darker impulses. That's also why Raimi had Peter be able to take off the suit at first, to portray it as something he could have ogtten rid of or not used, but he enjoyed the power and thus willingly donned it when he was hurt.

 

[The Joker]

The feelings didn't just appear in the cartoon. Peter was angry because Jameson blamed him for attacking the shuttle that John was on, when in fact he saved John's life.

And to add to this, Jameson also put a million dollar bounty on Spidey's head, turning all the city against him.

 

[Anwar]

Well, that wouldn't have worked for this film since the whole city is supposed to love him now, heck even when Brock framed Spidey the cops didn't go after him and stuff.

And there is a difference between feeling PO'ed over being framed, and hating someone so much you want to kill them (I suspect Peter may even have tried to kill Marko even without the symbiote), that was the catalyst for the symbiote to bond with him, his desire for revenge on Marko.

What was going to do in the movie if Jameson put a bounty on him, try to kill Jameson?

 

[The Joker]

Well, that wouldn't have worked for this film since the whole city is supposed to love him now

Is that why we saw a news stand full of people bad mouthing him when they read the headline?

heck even when Brock framed Spidey the cops didn't go after him and stuff.

That's because the frame up lasted all of 3 minutes. Peter sees the headline and goes straight to the Bugle and exposes Brock's fraud.

Flash in the pan plotline. Like most of the stuff in Spidey 3.

And there is a difference between feeling PO'ed over being framed, and hating someone so much you want to kill them (I suspect Peter may even have tried to kill Marko even without the symbiote), that was the catalyst for the symbiote to bond with him, his desire for revenge on Marko.

Peter would not have tried to kill Marko without the symbiote. He didn't try and kill the first guy in SM-1. Nor did he try and kill the burglar in the comics.

Peter was not just PO'ed. He was angry in the cartoon.

What was going to do in the movie if Jameson put a bounty on him, try to kill Jameson?

Why not? He tried to kill his best friend and smacked MJ in the face. What makes Jameson so special that he's exempt from Peter's wrath?

He'd probably rough up or humiliate Jameson, though.

 

[Anwar]

Well, Raimi wanted Peter to experience the exact same feelings of revenge and anger towards someone that Harry felt towards him, which measn that this guy had to have done something to Peter on the same level as what Harryt hinks Peter did to him. And he wanted Peter to feel like that WITHOUT the symbiote.

Take out that, you take out a big part of what Raimi wanted to tell and just make it "Harry tries to kill Peter while Peter is mad because of black goo" instead of "Harry wants revenge on Peter becasue he thinks he took a loved one from him while Peter is experiencing the exact same feelings and ultimately grows as a person by learning to forgive."

The symbiote didn't need to be in this, but I understand why they put it in. If they didn't than when they got someone to do the symbiote story the audience would be "Why are they doing another story about Dark Peter, and why are they using alien goo as a plot device? They already did a story about Peter's dark side without needing a plot device and he beat his inner demons."

 

[Frodo]

Well, Raimi wanted Peter to experience the exact same feelings of revenge and anger towards someone that Harry felt towards him, which measn that this guy had to have done something to Peter on the same level as what Harryt hinks Peter did to him. And he wanted Peter to feel like that WITHOUT the symbiote.

Take out that, you take out a big part of what Raimi wanted to tell and just make it "Harry tries to kill Peter while Peter is mad because of black goo" instead of "Harry wants revenge on Peter becasue he thinks he took a loved one from him while Peter is experiencing the exact same feelings and ultimately grows as a person by learning to forgive."

The symbiote didn't need to be in this, but I understand why they put it in. If they didn't than when they got someone to do the symbiote story the audience would be "Why are they doing another story about Dark Peter, and why are they using alien goo as a plot device? They already did a story about Peter's dark side without needing a plot device and he beat his inner demons."

I agree . I think Raimi's original concept would have worked without the symbiote but I see why they used it. I think Your idea would have been better from a storytelling point of view . Right there you would have eliminated the emo stuff, the dancing, smacking MJ etc and you could have had a pretty moving story about someone really struggling with their pain. I think a Sandman/Hobgoblin story would have been a good film. Then you could add MJ's issues and Aunt May having to really deal with Uncle Ben's killer. That would have given her a bigger role and the film in general would feel more like the third act of a saga.

 

[Anwar]

Yes, it may have been better without the symbiote.

But then the inevitable truth is that by doing that kind of story without the symbiote, you make the symbiote story redundant as Peter would have already gone through a "dark side" storyline without needing alien goo to act as a plot device to unleash it.

 

[Blader5489]

I just don't see how symbiote = Sandman killing Uncle Ben, as if there was no other way to have a movie featuring the symbiote unless Sandman was also in it and he also killed Uncle Ben.

It didn't have to be Sandman, it could have been anyone. We know that the main reason the studio chose Sandman was because of the visual FX. But I think the symbiote and Peter wanting revenge on his uncle's killer work well together (the former as a catalyst for Peter's revenge, the latter as a parallel to Harry's story as well as bringing the trilogy full circle).

Flash in the pan plotline. Like most of the stuff in Spidey 3.

I'd hardly call it a "plotline." It's just a minor event in the story that pushes the overarching conflict between Peter and Eddie forward. There isn't supposed to be any more to it so I don't think it's fair to criticize it as "flash in the pan."

Peter would not have tried to kill Marko without the symbiote.

With or without the symbiote, Peter would most certainly have tried to kill Marko. You see him spend the whole night listening for Marko's whereabouts (which definitely parallels Harry's story; just as Harry obsessed over Spider-Man so that he could avenge his father's death, Peter obsesses over Marko so that he can avenge his uncle's death). And after the subway battle, Peter talks with Aunt May and tries to convince her that killing Marko was justified.

Peter definitely wanted to kill Marko. All the symbiote did was give him the little push into actually doing it.

 

[Robotchicken]

no, it would have been better without sandman

 

[Venom 1988]

Well, Raimi wanted Peter to experience the exact same feelings of revenge and anger towards someone that Harry felt towards him, which measn that this guy had to have done something to Peter on the same level as what Harryt hinks Peter did to him. And he wanted Peter to feel like that WITHOUT the symbiote.

Take out that, you take out a big part of what Raimi wanted to tell and just make it "Harry tries to kill Peter while Peter is mad because of black goo" instead of "Harry wants revenge on Peter becasue he thinks he took a loved one from him while Peter is experiencing the exact same feelings and ultimately grows as a person by learning to forgive."

Totally agree with this

 

[Blader5489]

no, it would have been better without sandman

I wish there was a head-banging-against-the-wall smilie.

 

[The Amazing Spider-Man]

I wish there was a head-banging-against-the-wall smilie.

There is, you just need to know where to look.

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

Yeah, I do think the film would have worked better without Venom, although I think it was made pretty clear that the Symbiot wasn't suppose to make Peter 'dark' so much as it made him an exact replica of Brock: a slimey, lowly, scumbag. Peter was already struggling with revenge in his heart, but now his mannerisms were twisted, Raimi said Brock was what Peter could have been had he had Brock's childhood, and this was made even clear when the Symbiot literally swapped Peter's nice-guy dorky attitude, with Brock's slimey, chick-picker-uper attitude.

 

[Stevens25]

I think it could've worked,but I like the idea of two villians,at least. Personally,I would liked one of two situations: Use New Goblin and Sandman and save Venom for part 4...or....Have new Goblin and Venom as the two main villains. For the first half of the movie Spidey gets the symbiote and we see's Brock's downfall,then the second half could be Spider-man vs. Venom.

 

[Dr. Fate]

I'm begining to wonder if this movie would have been better without Venom. The movie had too many villains and since raimi didn't like Venom, maybe he should have been the one to get cut out. How do people expect Raimi to do a good job with Venom if Raimi doesn't like him. Do you think you could do a good job with writing stories about characters you didn't like?

The movie would have been better without Venom. Eddie Brock comes in 45 minutes late, receives no real character development, he just wanders around like an unfinished idea, and only gets to be Venom for like the last 15 minutes. Brock/Venom deserved better than that and should have been saved for an entirely different set of films.

 

[The Joker]

I'd hardly call it a "plotline." It's just a minor event in the story that pushes the overarching conflict between Peter and Eddie forward. There isn't supposed to be any more to it so I don't think it's fair to criticize it as "flash in the pan."

I do. It is flash in the pan. It was literally there one minute, gone the next.

With or without the symbiote, Peter would most certainly have tried to kill Marko.

If you seriously believe that, then you don't know the character of Peter Parker.

You see him spend the whole night listening for Marko's whereabouts

Of course. He wants Marko captured and brought to justice. Just like he did with the thief in SM-1.

(which definitely parallels Harry's story; just as Harry obsessed over Spider-Man so that he could avenge his father's death, Peter obsesses over Marko so that he can avenge his uncle's death).

Parrallels, yes. But Harry and Peter handle their anger differently. It takes an alien parasite to make Peter murderous. Harry was going to stab Spidey in Spider-Man 2, before he'd even taken the Goblin formula.

And after the subway battle, Peter talks with Aunt May and tries to convince her that killing Marko was justified.

He was under the influence of the symbiote by then.

Peter definitely wanted to kill Marko. All the symbiote did was give him the little push into actually doing it.

Ah, now you're back peddling. Yes, he may well have wanted to. But Peter, without the influence of the symbiote, would never ever take another person's life, no matter what they did.

 

[Blader5489]

If you seriously believe that, then you don't know the character of Peter Parker.

Sure I do. I said he would have tried to kill Marko. I never said, nor do I believe, that he would have actually done it.

And if you're going to tell me that that's not true to "the character of Peter Parker," then just look at the comics. Aunt May gets shot and now Peter's out for blood...and in that case, there's no foreign substance influencing his behavior.

He was under the influence of the symbiote by then.

No he wasn't. After he drowns Marko, Peter rushes to his apartment and takes the suit off. Then, he goes to Aunt May and tries to justify what he did and tries to convince her (and himself) that Marko deserved to die.

Ah, now you're back peddling. Yes, he may well have wanted to. But Peter, without the influence of the symbiote, would never ever take another person's life, no matter what they did.

I'm not back peddling. In fact, I think you're agreeing with me. Like I said, Peter would have tried to kill Marko but he wouldn't have done it if it weren't for the suit. The symbiote was what pushed him into acting on those desires, something that Peter would have never done on his own. That was the whole point.

 

[The Joker]

Sure I do. I said he would have tried to kill Marko. I never said, nor do I believe, that he would have actually done it.

What's the difference between trying to do it and actually doing it? Answer: He succeeds in doing it by actually killing them.

And if you're going to tell me that that's not true to "the character of Peter Parker," then just look at the comics. Aunt May gets shot and now Peter's out for blood...and in that case, there's no foreign substance influencing his behavior.

Where has it been shown that he's trying to kill Kingpin for arranging May's shooting? All we've seen is that he's hunting him down. Nothing more.

And secondly, the Spider-Man comics are an unmitigated mess right now. Peter descended from the spider gods, Norman Osborn and Gwen Stacy screwing eachother and having kids, Peter unmasking himself to the world etc.

Hardly an indication of being true to the character. It's bastardizing everything Stan Lee created with these characters.

No he wasn't. After he drowns Marko, Peter rushes to his apartment and takes the suit off. Then, he goes to Aunt May and tries to justify what he did and tries to convince her (and himself) that Marko deserved to die.

That's not what I mean. I mean he had embraced the dark side because of the symbiote. He even pulls her hair down emo after he 'kills' Marko.

He felt justified in what he did after wearing it. It was like a drug. That's why he kept putting it back on. He was addicted to it.

I'm not back peddling. In fact, I think you're agreeing with me. Like I said, Peter would have tried to kill Marko but he wouldn't have done it if it weren't for the suit. The symbiote was what pushed him into acting on those desires, something that Peter would have never done on his own. That was the whole point.

No, I'm saying Peter would never try to take a life. He's not the Punisher. He didn't try to kill the thief, he didn't try to kill Norman Osborn when he murdered Gwen etc.

Peter does not kill, or try to kill.

 

[marvelman2006]

Venom was fine, but he should have been introduced into spiderman 2. it would of worked well with peter struggling to compete with brock along with his other problems. now though you introduce brock into 2 you save him turning into venom for the third one. looking back now brock competing with peter would of worked perfectly into sp2

 

[Destroyah]

5. Most importantly the end would have been different. Harry is bad until the end! He still dies, but Sandman saves Peter from Harry and fixes the mistake he made so many years ago. Peter forgive Sandman. End.

I don't blame Raimi. I think the same people are to blame as always.

Corporate Pole Smokers!

i really really like that idea. having Sandman save Peter from Harry and all.
now that! would make a very interesting movie

an yea. poor Raimi the damn Executives sleazed their way into getting what they wanted. damn cockroaches

 

[Spiderine]

I don't know but I would have liked to see his original concept.

 

[Anwar]

The original idea was for the other villain aside from Sandman and Harry to be Vulture, who'd have been some crazed inventor put away and ruined by Spidey who gets broken out of jail by Sandman because he and Flint were cellmates and Flint figured the guy's technical know-how would help him in planning heists and stuff.

He would mainly be there to serve as a plot device and to be the one guy unable to give up his anger and thus die in the final battle.

Raimi only intended to give development time to Sandman and Harry, the other villain, regardless of who it was, was never meant to be anything other than a plot device to push the plot along and maybe get everyone together for a final battle, and then die.

 

[omid17]

i was thinking maby venom wasn't in the movie that much, because he actually was is the entire film. I think the symbiote, symbiote spidey and venom equals to one villain, so maby thats why raimi thought venom didn't need a bunch of scenes.

 

[phillip phonix]

^^

agreed but brock needed more scenes to realy show his hate for peter and how peter had destroyed his life - mabey show brock being turned down for a job or 2

 

[Frodo]

Raimi only intended to give development time to Sandman and Harry, the other villain, regardless of who it was, was never meant to be anything other than a plot device to push the plot along and maybe get everyone together for a final battle, and then die.[/QUOTE]

I think that was Raimi's problem to begin with. He didn't need the third villian to tell a good story. Sandman and Harry were enough . Plus I think Harry served the vengence purpose . In the end his need for revenge ultimatley costs him his life , even though he does reform before he dies. If you'd taken out the symbiote, you could have had more time for Harry and Sandman's story. Though I think the film would still have been crowded with Gwen Stacy thrown in .