Would the movie have been better without Venom?

[Spider-ManHero12]

I agree with a lot of you here:

In retrospect, I would have introduced the symbiote in SM3, had Peter wear it most of the movie, have him realize it was a symbiote near the end and have Doc Conners contain it in some way to be studied. Peter goes back to the ol' red and blue for the remainder of the pic. Eddie Brock is introduced in SM3 and has the whole film to show everyone how he operates. Refine the Sandman storyline and finish up the Harry plot.

In SM4, have Doc Conners experimenting with lizard DNA, during one of his experiments, the container holding the symbiote falls and is opened allowing the symbiote to escape and find Peter, but instead of finding Peter first, it finds Eddie, thus creating Venom without Peter's knowledge. Then you can have Venom turn the city against Spider-man by impersonating Spidey. He can tease Peter with revealing his identity and there could be some good fightin' for all throughout the movie.

Now, I can see the problem in doing this with the actor's and Raimi's contracts, but it would have given enough time for Sandman in 3, Venom in 4, and set up Lizard for 5.

Just my two cents...

your idea is good but I don't think that would really work because of a few reasons. the first reason is because it wouldn't be staying true to the Comics by having the Symbiote escape the container because it broke and then go find Eddie Brock. remember how in Web of Spider-man #1 Peter when to the bell tower and got the Symbiote suit off him? well as told by Venom in Amazing Spider-man #300, the Symbiote dripped down onto Brock which happened in the film as well. I know there has to be some things that Sam makes up to put in the Film which is fine by me and I love the things that Sam comes up with because Sam has to add some of his own things. but there still has to be some Comic Book moments in there and in particular the most important ones and for Venoms character, it is an important one. now if Venom wasn't in this film but he was in it in Spidey4 similar to your idea then I don't think it would have been nessicary just because of Screentime (thats what some people are complaining about). Venom had a real good amount of Screen Time in the film so that we enjoy the Venom we got and I personally loved the Venom we got and I'm not a bit mad about the screentime. Me being a huge Venom fan myself, he was treated awesomley and was made awesomley. As I have said befor in this thread, if Venom wasn't in the film, the film would have still been amazing but Venom just adds more coolness to the movie with the Symbiote Saga.

 

[fabman]

Emotional Peter was not the problem with the film, uptight fanboys were.

WORD! I loved the movie, and fanboys really just seem to find something to hate. Even if they don't really hate it, they want to. Maybe because they haven't got enough Venom and are still cryin' in their room...

I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR: I don't wanna offend anyone!

 

[Toxin72]

This movie absolutely needed venom. Venom is one of the best characters to use for a revenge story and without venom alot of conclusions in this movie would not have been as satisfying imo. Also to the people that say avi forced venom on raimi thats really not the whole truth or anything close to it. The original script as you know featured sandman and the vulture. Well after avi and everyone read the script avi brought up the idea of maybe using venom. So alvin sargent starting writing a script that used venom while sam and ivan kept working on the vulture story. It was later agreed that the venom story was the best one seeing as how eddie was a more prominent figure in the life of peter parker than the vulture was. Now the venom story was at one point a two parter but because they couldnt find a good way to conclude the first part they made the whole story into one movie. hopefully this will end the arguments of avi forcing sam to use venom. If you want a source for this info you can find it in the spider-man chronicles: the art of spider-man 3.

 

[AIRWOLF]

I guess it would have worked without Venom. But I guess since the theme was of revenge, Venom suited well to the story because he's all like crazy about getting his revenge on Spidey.

 

[TLH]

Movie contracts aside, I would have left Venom out, had Parker with the Symbiote for the whole film fighting Sandman and Harry, and at the end doing something over the top awful--like temporarily turning into Venom and biting Sandman thus killing him, or killing Harry. Something extreme that would force him to get rid of the symbiote and setting up a Venom cliffhanger.

 

[Showtime]

The movie would have been better without Sandman, and a much better developed Venom.

 

[Blader5489]

The movie would have been better without Sandman, and a much better developed Venom.

And what exactly is a "much better developed Venom"? Raimi highlighted the important parts of Brock's character: a mirror image of Peter Parker that lacks Peter's sense of responsibility. We could have gotten more scenes with Brock's life going down the toilet (like the scene at the Stacy house). But like I mentioned somewhere else, Venom himself can't show up until Peter has torn off the black suit, which is the climax of the symbiote story.

It's easy to say "I want more Venom!" but where are you going to put him? With or without Sandman, you can't tell the symbiote story and include Venom all in the same movie and expect him to show up earlier than the final act.

 

[Untilteld]

YES, it would of been.

 

[Showtime]

And what exactly is a "much better developed Venom"? Raimi highlighted the important parts of Brock's character: a mirror image of Peter Parker that lacks Peter's sense of responsibility. We could have gotten more scenes with Brock's life going down the toilet (like the scene at the Stacy house). But like I mentioned somewhere else, Venom himself can't show up until Peter has torn off the black suit, which is the climax of the symbiote story.

It's easy to say "I want more Venom!" but where are you going to put him? With or without Sandman, you can't tell the symbiote story and include Venom all in the same movie and expect him to show up earlier than the final act.

A much better developed Venom story would not involve what you saw in Spiderman 3, that is one clue. When you talk about a better developed Venom story, you're talking about a better developed Brock. It goes hand in hand. What do you mean where are you going to put him? He should have been the only villian Spiderman was facing at the end, there was no need for Sandman. You could easily concoct a story that included Venom and GG2 as the villians, without Sandman.

 

[Anti-Venom]

Would the movie have been GREAT without Venom? Probably not.
Would the movie have been BETTER without Venom. Probably.

Before the movie was coming out, it seemed like a great idea to have Venom in the last movie in this trilogy. But looking back...it would have been better to save him for a later movie.

But then again, they didn't really spend THAT much time on Brock. They still wouldn't have much time to develop him even if Venom was cut.

I think the ideal SM3 movie has Harry, the symbiote...and maybe Venom.

 

[Dangerous]

Sandman was the only villain that actually looked like who he was intended to be.
Venom's inclusion was forced by Arad and as a result was a CGI suckfest coupled w/ a wholly underdeveloped character.

Basically there was no need for Venom in SM3, without him the film would have been miles better.

 

[Blader5489]

A much better developed Venom story would not involve what you saw in Spiderman 3, that is one clue. When you talk about a better developed Venom story, you're talking about a better developed Brock. It goes hand in hand. What do you mean where are you going to put him? He should have been the only villian Spiderman was facing at the end, there was no need for Sandman. You could easily concoct a story that included Venom and GG2 as the villians, without Sandman.

I think you missed the point of my post. It's not about "what you saw in Spiderman 3," it's about what is inherent to telling Venom's story, regardless of whether it's the comics, cartoon, or movie. The symbiote story is as important to Venom's origin as Uncle Ben's death is to Spiderman's origin. So if you are going to introduce Venom in SM3, you must tell the symbiote story, all of which essentially breaks down to this:

Act 1 - Introduce symbiote, Eddie Brock, and the circumstances as to how Peter comes into contact with the symbiote. Ends with symbiote bonding with Peter.

Act 2 - Symbiote augments Spiderman's abilities but also brings out his darker traits. Peter enjoys it for a while before he comes to his senses and tears it off. Ends with symbiote bonding with Brock, forming Venom.

Act 3 - Venom wants revenge on Spiderman. They fight.

No matter what you do, Venom will always come in at the final act of the story. When I asked "Where are you going to put him?" I was asking how you could introduce Venom any earlier than the final act. Because, IMO, you really can't.

EDIT - Also, what constitutes "a better developed Brock"? I thought Raimi, given the constraints of making a 2 hour movie, did a pretty good job at highlighting the important parts of Brock's character and what drove him to revenge. Like I said, a few more scenes (like the deleted scene where he visits Gwen's house) would have helped out to flesh out his character, but I think we got the gist of it. What else would you add for him to be "better developed"?

 

[Slipping_Halo]

I would have preferred further development of Eddie Brock and the cliffhanger ending definitely. It's obvious they are going for another three movies anyway and they'd be stupid not to do everything they can to keep the cast and crew for the next ones. This way the story is more developed and doesn't seem so rushed. You can still have the inner turmoil and Peter acting like a jerk and the Sandman not being so evil and all that stuff. Peter faces his wrongdoings and learns his lesson, but there's karma to pay for it because Venom is coming. now he has to face the repercussions of what he's done which is Venom-the personification of the terrible things in Peter. Lizard, Electro, Mysterio, any of these guys could have been in it to raise the stakes. People were clamoring for Venom and they got something rushed.

 

[Toxin72]

Im about to type word for word a few paragraphs from the book the spider-man chronicles: the art of spider-man 3 about the vulture:
With most of the story arc's framework laid, the brothers (sam and ivan raimi) the brothers perceived and important new element. Although one villain sufficed in the first two pictures, spider-man 3 was shaping up differently. In order to teach peter the true depth of the act of forgiveness, Sam and Ivan needed a character in the final battle that could not let go of his need for vengeance and is therefore destroyed by this hatred. With this in mind, the Raimis created a storyline that intertwined sandman and adrian toomes, a.k.a. the vulture.
Whereas sand man is dangerous yet conflicted and misunderstood, the vulture is dangerous, opportunistic, and cunning. Sandman keeps his emotions in check; the vulture wears his on his wings. One of the emotions he wore was an insatiable quest for revenge. When spider-man thwarted one of adrian's illegitimate business endeavors, he landed in prison. From that day forward, he stewed in jail, pining for the day he would enact his vengeance.
That day cam when sandman, in need of an accomplice with some brainpower, broke his old cellmate out of jail with the hope that the vulture would mastermind a crucial mission. With the sandman's operation overlapping with the vulture's thirst for revenge, the winged one obliged, and the twosome joined up to complicate peter's plight in the third act.
At the height of this conflict, during the final battle of the film, a humbled spider-man offers the vulture the olive branch of peace. Unable to accept it because of the hatred in his heart, the vulture meets his demise, illustrating to peter the ramifications of a heart hardened by an inability to forgive.

This was how the vulture was going to play into the story. I think a big reason they changed villains is because eddie/venoms story is better to use in this regard and I think they pulled it off well in the movie with venom.

 

[Blader5489]

Haha... definitely seems like Eddie/Venom was basically a cut-and-paste job over the Vulture, even though Brock's story is a much better fit for the movie.

Still, I'm glad it was explicitly stated Raimi's need for a second villain (outside of Harry): "a character in the final battle that could not let go of his need for vengeance and is therefore destroyed by this hatred." Perfectly sums up why Venom had to die.

 

[Cat_Woman108]

I think they should have introduced Eddie Brock in Spider-Man 3, and kept all the scenes in the movie, but added more stuff in part 4 and saved Eddie becoming "Venom" for part 4.

They really rushed through Eddie's character developement though. I think they should have split eddie's descent into despair into two movies sort of like the origin of Darth Vader a la Star Wars ep 2 & ep 3.

 

[drmick]

I think they should have introduced Eddie Brock in Spider-Man 3, and kept all the scenes in the movie, but added more stuff in part 4 and saved Eddie becoming "Venom" for part 4.

They really rushed through Eddie's character developement though. I think they should have split eddie's descent into despair into two movies sort of like the origin of Darth Vader a la Star Wars ep 2 & ep 3.

I doubt that there is anybody out there who would disagree (please do if you do!).

But the whole three-film contract effectively meant that they had to wrap up most storylines. (Though strangely leaving the Lizard plot hanging).

 

[XXTBWCXX]

No matter what you do, Venom will always come in at the final act of the story. When I asked "Where are you going to put him?" I was asking how you could introduce Venom any earlier than the final act. Because, IMO, you really can't.

That is true, and people should understand this...Venom couldn't hold up in a movie where he's the main villain...Venom never had a good story because all he wants to do is kill Pete...the stories to tell are the symbiote and Eddie Brock, and to me, they fleshed out those two characters enough...I loved how the symbiote was in the movie and I liked how Raimi made the symbiote crawl around like a spider and then form into some kind of hand before it gets ahold of Peter. And Eddie Brock, Jr. was fleshed out fine; he's the type of character that you don't have to know much about, he's not someone like Norman Osborn, Harry Osborn, Otto Octavius, Lex Luthor, Joker, etc., he's just a badass who only wants revenge after becoming Venom, and that's what he does...could Brock possibly have gotten a bit more screen time? Yes, but I'm glad they didn't flesh out the character in 2 or even back in 1, because Brock should've only gotten screeen time in the third one, so I'm fine with that...the only thing I was mad at was that Venom didn't have enough screen time...him being in the final battle was fine, because the movie needed a build-up with so many storylines, but I would've liked Venom to have at least fifteen minutes and make the final battle longer than Venom's merely seven minutes (six minutes in the battle itself). And also, Venom's death was needed...just like Doc Ock's death in number 2, the deaths of the villains plays out along with the themes for it...and, to me, I probably won't watch anymore Spidey sequels (unless Raimi and Tobey are in it for the fourth, and if the Lizard is the villain), so seeing my all-time favorite villain in the third movie was alright with me.

But here's hoping for a Spider-Man 3.1 very soon with more Venom in it...I'm not saying have Venom in earlier, but say, if the extended cut has perhaps 20-30 more minutes to it, then give Venom at least double the screen time that he originally has.

 

[XXTBWCXX]

Sandman was the only villain that actually looked like who he was intended to be.
Venom's inclusion was forced by Arad and as a result was a CGI suckfest coupled w/ a wholly underdeveloped character.

Basically there was no need for Venom in SM3, without him the film would have been miles better.

I disagree with you...without Venom, the story with Sandman and New Goblin would be quite boring...the symbiote story made it much longer, so without the symbiote being involved, that's like forty-five minutes less, and it'll be a very short movie.

 

[Kmack]

YES. Where's the frickin' poll?

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

That is true, and people should understand this...Venom couldn't hold up in a movie where he's the main villain...Venom never had a good story because all he wants to do is kill Pete...the stories to tell are the symbiote and Eddie Brock, and to me, they fleshed out those two characters enough...I loved how the symbiote was in the movie and I liked how Raimi made the symbiote crawl around like a spider and then form into some kind of hand before it gets ahold of Peter. And Eddie Brock, Jr. was fleshed out fine; he's the type of character that you don't have to know much about, he's not someone like Norman Osborn, Harry Osborn, Otto Octavius, Lex Luthor, Joker, etc., he's just a badass who only wants revenge after becoming Venom, and that's what he does...could Brock possibly have gotten a bit more screen time? Yes, but I'm glad they didn't flesh out the character in 2 or even back in 1, because Brock should've only gotten screeen time in the third one, so I'm fine with that...the only thing I was mad at was that Venom didn't have enough screen time...him being in the final battle was fine, because the movie needed a build-up with so many storylines, but I would've liked Venom to have at least fifteen minutes and make the final battle longer than Venom's merely seven minutes (six minutes in the battle itself). And also, Venom's death was needed...just like Doc Ock's death in number 2, the deaths of the villains plays out along with the themes for it...and, to me, I probably won't watch anymore Spidey sequels (unless Raimi and Tobey are in it for the fourth, and if the Lizard is the villain), so seeing my all-time favorite villain in the third movie was alright with me.

But here's hoping for a Spider-Man 3.1 very soon with more Venom in it...I'm not saying have Venom in earlier, but say, if the extended cut has perhaps 20-30 more minutes to it, then give Venom at least double the screen time that he originally has.

I disagree with what you said about Venom not having any good stories and about having more screen time. Venom had awesome stories in the Comics. not so much today because the Symbiote has bonded with Mac Gargan but Eddie Brock is reaturning as Venom in June. but anyway, back when Venom first appeared he had awesome stories such as "the Sand and the Fury" which he rang Aunt Mays doorbell and Peter see's Eddie Brock on the front porch. it was truly an awesome issue and I think it was Amazing Spider-man issue#317. back on topic though, even in the early 1990's Venom had great stories. The Venom in Spidey3 was great because the aspects of Venom from the Comics was in the film. that is one of the reasons I love the Venom in this film. now I said this befor a little while back, it's not about screentime that much, it's more about if he is done right and I really think that was the way it was in the film and I really couldn't be happier.

 

[TwilightPro101]

YES. Where's the frickin' poll?

Wondering the same thing.

 

[Toxin72]

I disagree with you...without Venom, the story with Sandman and New Goblin would be quite boring...the symbiote story made it much longer, so without the symbiote being involved, that's like forty-five minutes less, and it'll be a very short movie.

I agree with you because without venom the whole point of the movie would have been ruined. Venom represented what happens when you let hatred completely consume you and in a movie about forgiveness a character like this is needed imo.

 

[Araneae]

I think it could've gone without Venom. The inclusion of the black suit, I felt, used time that could've been used to develop Sandman some more or even devote some time to Harry or the Peter/MJ relationship. Venom just felt forced to me.

 

[Killing Joke926]

Actually if they never put SandMan into the movie, Venom could have covered more screentime; giving enough time to build up on his character. That way, Venom could have been a better character/worthy villian, give Peter more screentime to explore his inner demons as Peter Parker and SpiderMan, let the symbiote have a more of an affect in the story, Gwen Stacy could have had a better role, and overall have the movie all of us fans deserve.

P.S. I also think that it would have been better to bring Eddie in at the first movie to build up more of a complex rivalry between him and Pete.