Would the movie have been better without Venom?

[Blader5489]

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

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. My point is that Peter felt Marko deserved to die, but he never actually would've killed Marko (or attempted to, as it turns out) if the symbiote hadn't given him that push. That's the entire point of the symbiote: that it's taking these feelings Peter would rarely, if ever, act on and it's manifesting them into Peter's 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.

In the preview for ASM #542, Peter is quite clearly beating the crap out of Kingpin.

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.

No argument here. Which is why I think USM is overall superior to the 616 comics, and why I always ignore the people who think these movies need to be even more true to the comics.

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.

If Peter isn't wearing the black suit, he's not being influenced by it. Peter was his normal self when he tried to justify "killing" Marko to Aunt May.

Peter does not kill, or try to kill.

Peter does not try to kill because he is normally able to restrain himself from acting on those primal feelings. That's the whole significance behind the symbiote: that bring those primal feelings to the surface, that it's unleashing Peter's dark side.

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.

So, without that third villain, how exactly does Harry die?

 

[BlackSuitSpidey]

Sandman would kill him then right? Anyway, I thought Venom was okay. Not perfect, not terrible just okay. I thought that he made for a way more interesting fight at the end though. I coul've lived without Venom in this movie.

 

[Blader5489]

Sandman would kill him then right?

So Sandman would have accidentally killed two of Peter's loved ones?

 

[Frodo]

So, without that third villain, how exactly does Harry die?[/QUOTE]

He could die a couple ways. For example he could have died as he did in the comics or Sandman could have killed him. Those are just suggestions but you don't need a third villian for Harry to have died imo.

 

[Anwar]

If Sandman killed him, it'd make him less sympathetic and the whole point of him is that he's a sympathetic guy who only ever killed ONE person and it was by accident (Ben). He never killed anyone else, hurt them but not killed them.

Harry dying from the faulty formula would be good, but it would leave us wondering why it took so long to kill him but otherwise a good way to go out. His desire for revenge literally ate him alive but he repented in the end.

 

[Spiderine]

Possibly could have been.

 

[Blader5489]

Harry dying from the faulty formula would be good, but it would leave us wondering why it took so long to kill him but otherwise a good way to go out. His desire for revenge literally ate him alive but he repented in the end.

But it was never said that the Goblin formula would eat away at a person. That never happened to Norman and it was never even mentioned in SM1.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Sandman would kill him then right? Anyway, I thought Venom was okay. Not perfect, not terrible just okay. I thought that he made for a way more interesting fight at the end though. I coul've lived without Venom in this movie.

I thought Venom was perfect in the Film. He delivered what He was meant to and that is beating the crap out of Spidey and showing what would have happened to peter if He had let the Symbiote take over Him. Venom is my favorite Villian of all time so seeing Him on Film was amazing IMO.

 

[Dr. Manhatten]

It would've been better if they saved him for another movie and focus less on the symbiote storyline and looked towards another direction. I really like the movie but the Venom storyline just felt like a bad studio compromise

 

[Anwar]

But it was never said that the Goblin formula would eat away at a person. That never happened to Norman and it was never even mentioned in SM1.

In the comics Harry altered the formula to make him more powerful than Norman, but while it did that the enhanced formula was also toxic and ultimately killed him after he saved Peter from a death trap he left him in.

Since Movie Harry isn't supposed to be scientifically adept, him making a formula that killed him makes even more sense than the comics.

 

[Anwar]

It would've been better if they saved him for another movie and focus less on the symbiote storyline and looked towards another direction. I really like the movie but the Venom storyline just felt like a bad studio compromise

I agree, the movie's plot of darkness and revenge is perfect for Venom, but Raimi had meant the plot to be about someone other than Venom meaning that if they had done this and then done the Venom story later the audience would be all "why are they doing another story about Peter's darkside and why are they using alien goo as a plot device? They did this story already and he didn't need a plot deivce to go dark."

So they should've saved the revenge story for the Venom movie and have this one be about something else that ended Raimi's trilogy.

 

[spiderfan970]

I think that the movie would have been great, had there been no symbiote or gwen at all. The theme of forgiveness could still have remained intact and it would focus more on Harry and Peter. Also, sandman (whom I believe to be the stronger character of the two villains) would've had more time to develop his back story. I feel like there are two main themes in this movie that are constantly fighting for screen time. The first being the theme of revenge, the second being the theme of forgiveness. I firmly believe Venom and the symbiote should have been the main focus of SM4. Oh well, that's just my opinion.

 

[Anwar]

Only problem with that is that if they did this movie without Venom or the symbiote, then when they did do it for a later Spider-Man movie everyone would be "Why are they doing another movie about a Dark Spidey? They already did that and in that movie they didn't need alien goo to act as a plot device, the darkness from from himself and already defeated his inner demons so why are they doing it again?"

It robs Venom of its' potency.

 

[dodus]

Agreed...Venom is the dark movie. Sandman and symbiote didn't really mix.

 

[Blader5489]

Agreed...Venom is the dark movie. Sandman and symbiote didn't really mix.

Well, Sandman is just the catalyst for Peter's transformation and eventual redemption. You could have had any Spidey villain fill that role. The studio merely chose Sandman because of the visual FX that would accompany the character.

 

[Frodo]

Raimi also knew Sandman more then Venom and thought he could give him an intresting backstory. In the Spiderman 2 commentary he and Maguire both state that Sandman would be a good villian to use in the next one.