Sam Raimi favors Morbius for Spider-Man 4.

[arp2008]

Online sources say Morbius and Lizard may be the villians for the next sequel.
Check it out: http://joblo.com/raimi-wants-morbius

[Knightmare10880]

That might just be a great idea, using a villain that most of the general public are unfamiliar with like Morbius would give Raimi lots of room to alter him to fit his story and it could also allow Raimi to return to his Horror Movie Roots. If this does end up being true than count me in.

[Toonimator]

Morbius? Morbius.

Seriously, Morbius?

Lizard's an obvious choice, Doc Connors has been set up long enough.

...but Morbius?

If they're going that route, then they HAVE to put Rhino, Vulture, Electro, and some other staples in a "Spidey fights crime" action montage. If Morbius gets 'co-antagonist' billing over all the much-more-Spidey-related Sinister-Six-type villains (even if they are largely standard bank-robber/thug crooks with fancy suits & powers) and they DON'T appear in some action montage, then I don't know what Raimi's smoking.

[Knightmare10880]

Morbius? Morbius.

Seriously, Morbius?

Lizard's an obvious choice, Doc Connors has been set up long enough.

...but Morbius?

If they're going that route, then they HAVE to put Rhino, Vulture, Electro, and some other staples in a "Spidey fights crime" action montage. If Morbius gets 'co-antagonist' billing over all the much-more-Spidey-related Sinister-Six-type villains (even if they are largely standard bank-robber/thug crooks with fancy suits & powers) and they DON'T appear in some action montage, then I don't know what Raimi's smoking.

Supposedly Riami wants both Lizard and Morbius, I think it would be interesting to see how Raimi handles Morbius.

[howyadoin]

Morbius? Morbius.

Seriously, Morbius?Far as I'm concerned, vampires have been played out for a long time.

Plus, why does there always have to be more than one villain? The Lizard's story is easily enough for one movie.

[mgs]

I think Morbius would provide the nice little horror stuff that Raimi likes to play with (and was previously known for) and I think the Lizard has been set up for a long time now, but I would think he would've learned his lesson with dual villains and such.

I much liked the way dual villains were set up in SM 1 & 2 but not featured like in SM 3.

[Conn Seanery]

I didn't see anything in that article that suggested there would be more than one villain, other than the columnist adding a bracketed "s" to the word "villain" in his opening paragraph. All Raimi said was that he likes Morbius, the rest is speculation.

That said, there is a good theme of genetic enhancement/mutation from animals in all three of their origins. If they do decide to go with two villains (I hope not), maybe Raimi will take the hint from The Dark Knight and only focus on one at a time. Or have some guts and end it on a cliffhanger, Connors only becoming the Lizard at the very end.

[ultramandingo]

.......gonna cash in on some of that sweet twilight teen goth nerd cash

[Matt K]

I could definitly see Morbius done similarly to the 90's cartoon where his origin was tied to Peter's. In fact putting Lizard and Morbius together could work as a what could have been.

[kalorama]

Morbius and the Lizard, two more "villains" who are misunderstood victims of circumstance and science gone wrong that Peter has to save/redeem. Great.

[Tobias March]

Wait didn't we already pretty much 'do' Morbius with Blade II?

[StoneGold]

Far as I'm concerned, vampires have been played out for a long time.

Plus, why does there always have to be more than one villain? The Lizard's story is easily enough for one movie.

And it would be, if they didn't basically use it for Doc Ock.

[Paradox]

Matt K has to fire-up the Wayback Machine:

I could definitly see Morbius done similarly to the 90's cartoon where his origin was tied to Peter's. In fact putting Lizard and Morbius together could work as a what could have been.

Actually, it worked just fine in Morbius' first appearance. The Lizard was involved in that. No idea about the '90s cartoon.

[Zero Hunter]

I just wish they would do something in the begining of the movie with one of the 3rd string villians before launching into the "misunderstood" tragic villain part of the movie. Maybe use something like they did in Ultimate Spider Man with him stopping Shocker from robbing a bank or something. The Ultimate version of Shocker would work pretty well on the big screen.

[mr.brighteyes]

Morbius is a terrible character. I'm all for lizard though. and through in craven while you are at it.

[Wolf-Man]

Non comic book nerds would say, "Why is Spider-man fighting Dracula?"

[GRANT!]

He just says he likes the character. That's no indication he's going to be in the movie.

[GRANT!]

And it would be, if they didn't basically use it for Doc Ock.

Ditto Green Goblin. They have to do something with the Lizard to make his arc stand out. Otherwise it's another Peter has to fight another father figure story.

[GRANT!]

Non comic book nerds would say, "Why is Spider-man fighting Dracula?"

Maybe non nerds will think that is awesome. Vampire movies are popular (though usually very lame).

[Spidey-kid1]

Ditto Green Goblin. They have to do something with the Lizard to make his arc stand out. Otherwise it's another Peter has to fight another father figure story.Theres more then enough to make him stand out. Lizard is one of the only Spidey villains with 'take over the world' potential. Use that plot from the movies and tweak it a bit to make it a bit more believable and we have a pretty good movie. I want Raimi to go back to one villain at a time.

[Conn Seanery]

Lizard is one of the only Spidey villains with 'take over the world' potential.
How's that?

[Matt K]

How's that?

Possibly by creating some device that turns people into lizard creatures ala the Exiles story. Not the way I'd go with the character especially since it worked so poorly in X-Men 1.

[howyadoin]

And it would be, if they didn't basically use it for Doc Ock.Fair point.

Non comic book nerds would say, "Why is Spider-man fighting Dracula?"Hey, Spider-Man did fight Dracula.

[Conn Seanery]

Possibly by creating some device that turns people into lizard creatures ala the Exiles story. Not the way I'd go with the character especially since it worked so poorly in X-Men 1.
I never read Exiles, but from what I remember The Lizard wasn't the type that depended on science as a villain. I could see it if it was more accidental, Connors' regeneration formula getting widespread use based on his own success, with the negative side effects (turning reptilian) coming into play later on.

But unless they're going to change the character drastically I'm not seeing the same world-threat potential, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Most of Spider-Man's villains have smaller ambitions, which works well with Spider-Man's own status.

[ultramandingo]

.......... forget the lizard and spidey - id rather see two n half hours of jk simmons yelling at ted rami .bruce cambell can show up as a nutty bell hop or sumthin

[mgs]

I wonder if Electro has come up in the convo somewhere?


Edit: And they really need to redo Sandman. That whole, 'I forgive you' nonsense, then, floating away into the sky, while his best friend is dying below crap was awful.

[Jared]

I thought Raimi only liked the classic villains from his youth. He wasn't interested in Venom because he was too recent.

I've decided to tell myself that Peter was just acting funny at the end because he was shaking off side-effects of the symbiote. I'm sure in a day or two he woke up and went "I f**king let him go?!"

I want to see a quick scene with (Ultimate) Shocker too, in place of Spidey just nabbing some more random criminals. Maybe give him two scenes with some comedy to bookend the movie.

They do need to something with Doc Connors. If I were going to use Lizard and another villain, I'd make it Kraven, and I'd make him the true bastard villain, since Connors is actually meant to be sympathetic.

[Tobias March]

.......... forget the lizard and spidey - id rather see two n half hours of jk simmons yelling at ted rami .bruce cambell can show up as a nutty bell hop or sumthin

Win.

And more of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruzb7YH0sWQ)

[hoffmandu]

Have they introduced enough villians for the Sinister Six yet?

[Jigsaw]

Morbius is an awesome character, it'll be great to see him onscreen....so long as Raimi doesn't ruin him like he nearly ruined Venom. The Lizard will be a fantastic addition, his character has already been built up over the last three movies, so him becoming the villain is about time.

[GRANT!]

Have they introduced enough villians for the Sinister Six yet?

Well there's Doc Ock, Sandman and someone else could wear the Venom and Goblin costumes. So two more villans.

[Jigsaw]

Bad idea, since Doc Ock is dead...and Sandman isn't technically a villain. Plus, Venom & Green Goblin aren't original members. If Raimi ruins the Sinister Six, I'll hunt him down.

[GRANT!]

I wonder if Electro has come up in the convo somewhere?

Raimi mentioned him a few years ago (http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563359/20070625/story.jhtml)

Edit: And they really need to redo Sandman. That whole, 'I forgive you' nonsense, then, floating away into the sky, while his best friend is dying below crap was awful.

I don't know about a redo. But I wish they did more with him. They didn't even resolve his storyline at the end of the movie. If Thomas Hayden Church came back as Sandman I wouldn't be disappointed.

[GRANT!]

Bad idea, since Doc Ock is dead...and Sandman isn't technically a villain. Plus, Venom & Green Goblin aren't original members. If Raimi ruins the Sinister Six, I'll hunt him down.

Venom and Hobgoblin were members of the Six at one point. I'd prefer if they weren't used but it would be easier to use them then set up new characters.

Sandman isn't technically a villan but he can be persuaded to join (he was threatened to join at one point I think during Erik Larsen's run).

And they could easily bring back Doc Ock. The arms could have taken over completely and pull him into a drain pipe or something.

[Jigsaw]

Venom is dead, so he's automatically out of the equasion.

There's many ways to get Sandman to join, but I just wanted to state the reasons going against him possibly joining. As for Doc Ock, I've never understood how he could ever come back...we saw him drown, and there was no sign of life.

[JCAll]

Once again my dreams of Mysterio with a 100 million dollar budget go up in smoke.

[J. Robb]

After Spider-Man 3, I just hope Raimi favours making a good movie this time.

[howyadoin]

Sandman isn't technically a villan...In the movie, you mean? Or the comics?

[GRANT!]

After Spider-Man 3, I just hope Raimi favours making a good movie this time.

You know he wasn't trying to make a bad movie last time. He just was juggling too much stuff to handle in 2 plus hours.

[GRANT!]

After Spider-Man 3, I just hope Raimi favours making a good movie this time.

You know he wasn't trying to make a bad movie last time. He just was juggling too much stuff to handle in 2 plus hours.

[GRANT!]

In the movie, you mean? Or the comics?


In the movie. He was an antagonist and he did bad things but I wouldn't say he was outright evil. Though I guess you could say the same thing about Doc Ock.

He did have a sympathetic period in the comics though.

[StoneGold]

Ditto Green Goblin. They have to do something with the Lizard to make his arc stand out. Otherwise it's another Peter has to fight another father figure story.

Except Norman was an a-hole who became an even bigger a-hole. Ock was a sweetheart until he went all caca coocoo.

[Paradox]

Jared didn't send me that memo:

I thought Raimi only liked the classic villains from his youth. He wasn't interested in Venom because he was too recent.

One doesn't have to be only interested in classic villains to hate the awful awful character that is Venom. :biggrin:

[Toku King]

It's most likely not true, but I'd be very ok with Morbius and the Lizard. Morbius' first story was when he fought the Lizard and Spider-Man. Still, let's at least ignore the six arms story.

[Toku King]

I thought Raimi only liked the classic villains from his youth. He wasn't interested in Venom because he was too recent.

That's not at all why. It's because Arad handed him Venom comics(granted, Raimi never read a Venom story before), and he thought that Venom was just a piece of wasted potential(which he was) that couldn't be redeemed.

[ultramandingo]

Win.

And more of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruzb7YH0sWQ)

..........woooooo - rami and the coens! - the only version of that ive ever found was a chinese bootleg - allmost makes up for sm3

[Tobias March]

..........woooooo - rami and the coens! - the only version of that ive ever found was a chinese bootleg - allmost makes up for sm3

Seriously? I had it on DVD. I think they released it two years ago?

[Jigsaw]

As I said before, I really hope he doesn't screw up Morbius...

[BeastieRunner]

Can't we just let this die . . . please!? I'd rather see a reboot under the Marvel banner than another Raimi film.

[Toku King]

Can't we just let this die . . . please!? I'd rather see a reboot under the Marvel banner than another Raimi film.

Raimi's done great so far, and I'd love to see the saga continue.

[Toku King]

All he said was that he likes Morbius. That means nothing. He likes Electro, yet he dropped the character out of Spider-Man 2. Same goes for the Vulture(though Sam fought to have him in SM3).

[Phil Clark]

Raimi has done well with Spiderman so far. The only mis-step has been in allowing the studio to force him into using Venom. If he had arrived at the need for Venom in the context of the story he was wanting to tell instead of having to fit Venom into the story he was telling, Venom would have been awesome.

The studio should have learned from that experience, don't force the creative people working for you to do what you want them to do. It never works.

[Captain Trips]

I guess I have gotten tired of the villain of the week scenario (or in this case the villain of the film). And, obviously, this isn't exclusive to the Spider-man franchise. I would prefer a story that deals more with Peter and his final resolution to remain Spider-man or to retire based on what effect the presence of Spider-man has had on the public and society. The one thing that "The Dark Knight" did that was really cool was the theme of escalation. Escalation not only in the terms of the villains, but of the common people who wanted to fight crime as Batman does. Some did it poorly like the guys wearing hockey pads and Batman masks, but one did it right (Harvey Dent). In Spider-man 3 we see how the city of New York loves Spidey, and we have seen how JJJ is trying to vilify him, but wouldn't the effect of Spider-man's existence on the general public be greater? Wouldn't people be trying to emulate him or become super-heros as well? Now, I know that a Spider-man movie shouldn't be as dark and serious as The Dark Knight, but I think this could be something that could be explored.

In Spider-man 2 we see Peter's struggle with living two lives, and how he had to sacrifice one for the other. It was really well done and you cared about what Peter was going through, and that's why I think Spider-man 2 was the best of the films. Obviously a main component of his struggle was that Peter had to sacrifice being with the woman he loved in order to protect her. This is a lesson he learned in the first movie. However, she has gotten captured by every villain he has faced and he's still Spider-man. The last thing I want to see is Spidey having to save Mary Jane from a new super villain in Spider-man 4.

Would he stay Spider-man if normal people were killing themselves attempting to climb buildings or swing on ropes from skyscrapers to be like him? Ok, that is definitely a little dark for a Spider-man film, but what if there was something to do with normal people getting hurt or killed trying to fight crime like he does? "With great power comes great responsibility." Can that responsibility take another form? Can he do more good by hanging it up? Is being Spider-man inspiring good in others or is it having the opposite effect?

The one thing that I have very much liked about the villains in the Spider-man films is that while they have been formulaic to an extent, their agendas have been more about righting wrongs in their own lives than about being power-hungry megalomaniacs. Yet each one has had some strong connection to Peter. Why do they have to have an origin tied to Peter/Spider-man? Why do they have to have an origin at all? Why can't the effect on the general public of all these super-powered people showing up to take on Spider-man be shown? If you almost died on the train that Spidey and Doc Ock were fighting on, would you be happy with Spidey for saving your life, or would you be angry and hate him for putting you in that position in the first place? Would it make you want to do crazy, heroic things, or would you be scared to go outside for fear of being collateral damage in a super powered showdown?

Personally, I have never found the Lizard to be that interesting, and I have no idea how he would translate well to the big screen. If he is the villain for the next movie, and if there is some plot where he is trying to turn all of New York's residents into lizard people, then I really doubt I'll be going to see Spider-man 4. I have liked all 3 of the previous films (yes, the third one had some issues, but overall it was good), but I would really like to see something new.

[Toku King]

Here are my big tips for SM4 to change some stuff:

-No more Mary Jane kidnappings. It's old. It worked in SM1 and SM2, but SM3's capture was basically the bridge scene done worse.

-No retcons. I just pretend that the Uncle Ben twist never happened, but damn

-No Spider-Man taking of his mask. It didn't happen in 1, it was significant in 2, but 3 was just plain silly.

-Introduce villains that don't have a personal connection with Peter. The Lizard should be the last one for a few films. I think that by introducing foes that have never known Peter at any point in their lives helps expand the feeling of a larger universe of characters.

-No more Symbiotes. Sorry, but they messed up Venom. No resurrection of Venom, no Carnage, no Symbiote. Move on.

-No mystics. Everyone knows that the Spider Totem story will never show up, but let's make it that way.

-Make some arch foes. Killing off these villains makes no sense to me when you can hold onto them and reuse their characters. It worked well for the X-Men franchise.

[BeastieRunner]

Raimi has done well with Spiderman so far. The only mis-step has been in allowing the studio to force him into using Venom. If he had arrived at the need for Venom in the context of the story he was wanting to tell instead of having to fit Venom into the story he was telling, Venom would have been awesome.

The studio should have learned from that experience, don't force the creative people working for you to do what you want them to do. It never works.

Gwen Stacey, the web shooter issue, the Parker intellect, the Ben Parker retcon, and the trademark Spidey banter are a some more I can name. Those didn't bother you? Sandman killing Ben aside, those are staples of the Spidey mythos and they are gone. He's Spider-Man, not Superman. Sony I think is more to blame for the screw ups than Raimi and crew. I do not doubt his love of the character, but everything so far seemed more like a homage to the 90s cartoon than the comics.

Ever since Iron Man and the Dark Knight, I guess I've been feeling shafted by the drek called "Spider-Man" movies from Sony.

[Superbeast]

I can see Morbius working. Yes, he's a vampire but he's the living vampire, in that he's drinks blood and has vampiric abilities but wasn't afflicted by a vampire's bite but by a genetically manipulated vampire blood sample. He's basically what Peter Parker might have ended up under different circumstances. Hell, they could just have Michael Morbius looking for a cure for his own haemophilia or anaemia based off Connor's work with previously genetically altered animals.

[kalorama]

I've been largely underwhelmed by Raimi. he hasn't been terrible (ther than SM3) but he hasn't been great either. i would love to see another director come in and bring a different sensibility to the franchise.

[howyadoin]

the web shooter issueOh for Christ's sake, let it go.

[BeastieRunner]

Oh for Christ's sake, let it go.

:biggrin: No!

Just making a point.

[GRANT!]

Here are my big tips for SM4 to change some stuff:

-No more Mary Jane kidnappings. It's old. It worked in SM1 and SM2, but SM3's capture was basically the bridge scene done worse.

That was suppose to be Gwen up there but they realize Harry didn't really have a relationship with her so it made more sense

-No retcons. I just pretend that the Uncle Ben twist never happened, but damn

I never really had much of an issue with it.

-No Spider-Man taking of his mask. It didn't happen in 1, it was significant in 2, but 3 was just plain silly.

It's hard to breathe under that thing.

-Introduce villains that don't have a personal connection with Peter. The Lizard should be the last one for a few films. I think that by introducing foes that have never known Peter at any point in their lives helps expand the feeling of a larger universe of characters.

I wouldn't have a problem with this (but I think it worked pretty well for Doc Ock). Though I think they should try to make the villans engaging as characters with real motives. I think the last movie suffered by really not developing the villans as characters. Spider-man 1 and 2 really let you get to know the characters.

-No more Symbiotes. Sorry, but they messed up Venom. No resurrection of Venom, no Carnage, no Symbiote. Move on.

Venom isn't that interesting. He's basically evil Spider-man. I think the movie had the right idea by making him a lot more like Peter but they didn't really explore it much considering the other eighty plotlines going on.

-No mystics. Everyone knows that the Spider Totem story will never show up, but let's make it that way.

Has this been a problem before in the movies?

-Make some arch foes. Killing off these villains makes no sense to me when you can hold onto them and reuse their characters. It worked well for the X-Men franchise.

The only ones who clearly died were Harry and Norman. The rest sort of disappeared.

[Toku King]

That was suppose to be Gwen up there but they realize Harry didn't really have a relationship with her so it made more sense

So then let's not have a villain that doesn't know Peter's secret identity then, shall we? Besides, they didn't need to kidnap Mary Jane in the comics to use Pete's identity against him.


I never really had much of an issue with it.

The average Spider-Man fan, movie fan or comic fan, hated it beyond belief.


It's hard to breathe under that thing.

:rolleyes:


I wouldn't have a problem with this (but I think it worked pretty well for Doc Ock). Though I think they should try to make the villans engaging as characters with real motives. I think the last movie suffered by really not developing the villans as characters. Spider-man 1 and 2 really let you get to know the characters.

They developed Sandman and Harry very well. The problem is that the issues of supervillains doesn't feel as global as it should.


Venom isn't that interesting. He's basically evil Spider-man. I think the movie had the right idea by making him a lot more like Peter but they didn't really explore it much considering the other eighty plotlines going on.

Looks like someone didn't read Venom's first three appearances.


Has this been a problem before in the movies?

No, but it can be.


The only ones who clearly died were Harry and Norman. The rest sort of disappeared.

.....Huh? Um, we saw everyone but Sandman die.

[Toku King]

Gwen Stacey, the web shooter issue, the Parker intellect, the Ben Parker retcon, and the trademark Spidey banter are a some more I can name.

Oh geez, not this again. :rolleyes:

[GRANT!]

So then let's not have a villain that doesn't know Peter's secret identity then, shall we? Besides, they didn't need to kidnap Mary Jane in the comics to use Pete's identity against him.

I have some issues with that. Because Spider-man is essentially about his secret identity clashing with his super hero identity. So his best stories usually have a personal stake in them. I don't think they can get away with just "a bad guy is threatening the the city." But yeah MJ in danger is getting to be old hat.

The average Spider-Man fan, movie fan or comic fan, hated it beyond belief.

Did you take a poll? Even so general consensus doesn't always make something right or wrong.

I thought it worked in theory because it gave Peter a reason to really hate Sandman and develop the darker side of his personality (which admittedly the movie did a poor job of). If I had to change the movie it'd probably be towards the bottom of the list. I was annoyed by Harry's amnesia subplot then this.

They developed Sandman and Harry very well. The problem is that the issues of supervillains doesn't feel as global as it should.

I think the problem was everybody was competing for screen time and they just didn't gel together. And you didn't get to know Sandman and Venom as well as Doc Ock or Green Goblin (and they never resolved what happened to Sandman's daughter).

Looks like someone didn't read Venom's first three appearances.

I have. They are pretty dull comics. I've gone into endless posts why I don't think Venom is a great character.

No, but it can be.

Considering the most well known Spidey villans are science based I don't think this will be a problem.

.....Huh? Um, we saw everyone but Sandman die.

There were no bodies when Venom and Doc Ock "died." Who's to say Doc Ock's arms didn't drag him to safety or Venom quickly swung away after the blast. It's the Golden Comic Book rule. No body no death.

[Jigsaw]

We saw Venom's skeleton when he exploded, he's gone, dead. Doc Ock's body couldn't possibly have dragged him to safety because he was too deep underwater. The only villain I could see returning would be the Green Goblin.

[Conn Seanery]

We saw Venom's skeleton when he exploded, he's gone, dead. Doc Ock's body couldn't possibly have dragged him to safety because he was too deep underwater. The only villain I could see returning would be the Green Goblin.
The only villain you can see coming back is the one with the clearest death we've seen onscreen in the Spider-Man films, and that actually left a body behind?

[Jigsaw]

Because of the sheer fact that the character himself was actually thought to be dead in the comics, and he was buried, but his wounds healed and he "came back to life," so to speak. Venom was blown to kingdom come, and if anything, only little peices of the symbiote survived.

[Conn Seanery]

Because of the sheer fact that the character himself was actually thought to be dead in the comics, and he was buried, but his wounds healed and he "came back to life," so to speak. Venom was blown to kingdom come, and if anything, only little peices of the symbiote survived.
The same comics that gave you the return of Norman Osborn also showed you how Dr. Octopus' arms have acted on their own for the sake of their master and to what lengths the symbiote will go to survive. I just find it odd that the death you find the most plausible to be overturned is the one that appeared the most absolute of the three.

[Tobias March]

The same comics that gave you the return of Norman Osborn also showed you how Dr. Octopus' arms have acted on their own for the sake of their master and to what lengths the symbiote will go to survive. I just find it odd that the death you find the most plausible to be overturned is the one that appeared the most absolute of the three.


Spider-Man 4 starring Tim Curry in his ill-fiting Legend costume as Mephisto.

[Jigsaw]

The same comics that gave you the return of Norman Osborn also showed you how Dr. Octopus' arms have acted on their own for the sake of their master and to what lengths the symbiote will go to survive. I just find it odd that the death you find the most plausible to be overturned is the one that appeared the most absolute of the three.

While I do think Ock is dead, I wouldn't mind a return, but you have to agree that making Venom return would be bad business. Whether in a comic or not, making a character return from being blown all the way to hell can only end up lame.

[Conn Seanery]

Spider-Man 4 starring Tim Curry in his ill-fiting Legend costume as Mephisto.
If they're going to reboot Spider-Man, that's the way to go. One More Franchise.

While I do think Ock is dead, I wouldn't mind a return, but you have to agree that making Venom return would be bad business. Whether in a comic or not, making a character return from being blown all the way to hell can only end up lame.
I wish we could erase SM3 from the books, but I could see the symbiote coming back (if they wanted to go that way), not Eddie Brock.

Anyway, my point was if you're willing to accept Norman Osborn's resurrection despite his onscreen death, which we might as well say is indisputable, Doc Ock or the symbiote surviving should be less of a stretch to the imagination.

[howyadoin]

While I do think Ock is dead, I wouldn't mind a return, but you have to agree that making Venom return would be bad business. Whether in a comic or not, making a character return from being blown all the way to hell can only end up lame.Venom was lame right from the start.

[kalorama]

The average Spider-Man fan, movie fan or comic fan, hated it beyond belief.

I'm a fairly average Spider-Man fan (or was, at one point) and couldn't have cared less.

[howyadoin]

I'm a fairly average Spider-Man fan (or was, at one point) and couldn't have cared less.I've been a Spider-Man fan for as long as I can remember, and it didn't bother me at all.

Then again, I've seen Batman's origin changed a dozen times...

[StoneGold]

I've been a Spider-Man fan for as long as I can remember, and it didn't bother me at all.

Then again, I've seen Batman's origin changed a dozen times...

I didn't care so much in that it changed the origin, I cared in that it was hamfistedly shoved into the third movie. But then, most things were hamfistedly shoved into the third movie. The symbiote randomly falling from space onto Pete's bike, for instance.

There should have been a more naturalistic way to get Pete angry then making some other guy than the one he kinda sorta almost maybe killed not the guy who actually shot Ben.

[Wolf-Man]

The 3rd Spider-man movie was pretty horrible. They tried to fit too much into it. They should have had movie 3 be the closure of the goblin story only. The 4th could be sandman and the 5th could be venom.

The intro to venom was terrible, what with the whole 'fall from the sky and land 10ft away from the only guy on the planet with spider-power' coincidence.

It should have been brought back from space by the astronaut guy that was dating Mary Jane, and held at an exhibition. Peter gets sent to cover the story, it attaches, hilarity ensues.

Too many villains made it suck.

[Jigsaw]

If they're going to reboot Spider-Man, that's the way to go. One More Franchise.


I wish we could erase SM3 from the books, but I could see the symbiote coming back (if they wanted to go that way), not Eddie Brock.

Anyway, my point was if you're willing to accept Norman Osborn's resurrection despite his onscreen death, which we might as well say is indisputable, Doc Ock or the symbiote surviving should be less of a stretch to the imagination.

It was Sam's fault. Despite me liking the movie to an extent, it didn't live up to the first two, storywise. Action wise, it's perfect, but you can't substitute action for story.

I wouldn't mind the symbiote surviving because it seemed like peices may have been falling everywhere, but Eddie Brock coming back from an explosion like that would be a major piss off for me.

I'd also like it if the villains this time around don't find out Peter is Spidey, it's a shitty idea to have every villain know his secret identity because then, it's not a secret at all.

[Paradox]

Wolf-Man has me remembering:

The intro to venom was terrible, what with the whole 'fall from the sky and land 10ft away from the only guy on the planet with spider-power' coincidence.

I'm not so sure that's worse than "we found a costume repair machine on an alien planet that just happened to have a symbiote in it", but, hey...at that point it's "which do you prefer, a kick in the crotch or a stab in the eye".

[howyadoin]

I didn't care so much in that it changed the origin, I cared in that it was hamfistedly shoved into the third movie. But then, most things were hamfistedly shoved into the third movie. The symbiote randomly falling from space onto Pete's bike, for instance.At least that wasn't as bad as the dancing.

[Toku King]

I have some issues with that. Because Spider-man is essentially about his secret identity clashing with his super hero identity. So his best stories usually have a personal stake in them. I don't think they can get away with just "a bad guy is threatening the the city." But yeah MJ in danger is getting to be old hat.

Villains like Doc Ock in the comics have affected Peter personally without knowing who he was.



Did you take a poll? Even so general consensus doesn't always make something right or wrong.

Um, when everyone you know complains about the retcon, then you tend to assume that it was bad. And, in this case, the audience is right. Just because it's in a film doesn't always make something right or wrong.


I thought it worked in theory because it gave Peter a reason to really hate Sandman and develop the darker side of his personality (which admittedly the movie did a poor job of). If I had to change the movie it'd probably be towards the bottom of the list. I was annoyed by Harry's amnesia subplot then this.

Harry's amnesia was much more close to the comics, and I actually preferred that story over that "Real Uncle's Killer" bullshit. That completely ruins the exact reason why Peter's Spider-Man in the first place, not to mention one of the best parts of the first film.


I think the problem was everybody was competing for screen time and they just didn't gel together. And you didn't get to know Sandman and Venom as well as Doc Ock or Green Goblin (and they never resolved what happened to Sandman's daughter).

Sandman's character was fleshed out enough, and you can't really resolve his daughter's story without killing her. That whole "Sandman's daughter" thing didn't go down easy with me as it is.

I have. They are pretty dull comics. I've gone into endless posts why I don't think Venom is a great character.

And every point you make proves nothing. Venom in the 80s wasn't an evil Spider-Man. He was a fucked up man who thought he was heroic who just happened to have Spider-Man's powers. His second appearance(which you obviously didn't read) had us dive a little more into the twisted mind of Eddie Brock, and it was fascinating. Unfortunately, Marvel just had to sell him out in the 90s.


Considering the most well known Spidey villans are science based I don't think this will be a problem.

So? What's stopping Marvel from changing it?


There were no bodies when Venom and Doc Ock "died." Who's to say Doc Ock's arms didn't drag him to safety or Venom quickly swung away after the blast. It's the Golden Comic Book rule. No body no death.

Oh please. :rolleyes:

[Toku King]

It was Sam's fault.

90% of the reasons people disliked "Spider-Man 3" were not Raimi's fault.

[Agent Helix]

I thought Raimi only liked the classic villains from his youth.

Which.. Morbius is.

He first appeared in '71, which people seem to forget is actually a good while ago.

[GRANT!]

Villains like Doc Ock in the comics have affected Peter personally without knowing who he was.

Yeah usually by kidnapping his girlfriends or Aunt May. But I'm not arguing with you they could have tried to do something different. Seeing Mary Jane get kidnapped again wasn't a highlight for for me.

Um, when everyone you know complains about the retcon, then you tend to assume that it was bad. And, in this case, the audience is right. Just because it's in a film doesn't always make something right or wrong.

I never said it was. But you need to explain better why something works versus "all my friends hated it." For all I know all your friends thought Van Helsing was the best movie ever made. Doesn't mean they are right.

Harry's amnesia was much more close to the comics, and I actually preferred that story over that "Real Uncle's Killer" bullshit. That completely ruins the exact reason why Peter's Spider-Man in the first place, not to mention one of the best parts of the first film.

It actually doesn't. His Uncle still died because of the result of his actions. If he stopped the robber, Flint wouldn't have shot his Uncle.

Sandman's character was fleshed out enough, and you can't really resolve his daughter's story without killing her. That whole "Sandman's daughter" thing didn't go down easy with me as it is.

I feel like the issue should have been addressed better. Even if she was going to die no matter what he did it would have been nice to see him with his wife and daughter again.

And every point you make proves nothing. Venom in the 80s wasn't an evil Spider-Man. He was a fucked up man who thought he was heroic who just happened to have Spider-Man's powers. His second appearance(which you obviously didn't read) had us dive a little more into the twisted mind of Eddie Brock, and it was fascinating. Unfortunately, Marvel just had to sell him out in the 90s.[QUOTE]

I've read more then my share of Venom comics and I know all about how his character works. I always thought that the whole crazy angle was just tagged on because his primary motivation just didn't make any sense.

[QUOTE]So? What's stopping Marvel from changing it?

So we're paranoid about stuff that hasn't happened yet? I'm not losing sleep over it. I really don't think they are going to try to shoehorn a mystical origin on Electro, The Lizard or the Vulture. Maybe Mysterio but I doubt he'll ever be used.

Oh please. :rolleyes:

What? You've read comics for how long and you're seriously rolling your eyes at that one? If they want Doc Ock they can bring back Doc Ock. It wouldn't be the most far fetched thing we've seen in the movies so far.

[Toku King]

Yeah usually by kidnapping his girlfriends or Aunt May. But I'm not arguing with you they could have tried to do something different. Seeing Mary Jane get kidnapped again wasn't a highlight for for me.

No, I didn't mean kidnapping. Villains that don't know Peter's identity have ruined his personal life in effect to their actions.


I never said it was. But you need to explain better why something works versus "all my friends hated it." For all I know all your friends thought Van Helsing was the best movie ever made. Doesn't mean they are right.

Neither does it mean the producers are. As fans, we all know more about how to make the story more than money grabbers.


It actually doesn't. His Uncle still died because of the result of his actions. If he stopped the robber, Flint wouldn't have shot his Uncle.

Oh, bullshit. That just completely ruins the beautiful irony and reason for creating the wrestling story in the first place.



I feel like the issue should have been addressed better. Even if she was going to die no matter what he did it would have been nice to see him with his wife and daughter again.

And add another 30 minutes? No thanks.


I've read more then my share of Venom comics and I know all about how his character works. I always thought that the whole crazy angle was just tagged on because his primary motivation just didn't make any sense.

Nothing you have said there convinces me that you've read early Venom stories.


So we're paranoid about stuff that hasn't happened yet? I'm not losing sleep over it. I really don't think they are going to try to shoehorn a mystical origin on Electro, The Lizard or the Vulture. Maybe Mysterio but I doubt he'll ever be used.

Who says I'm paranoid. Stop putting words into my mouth.



What? You've read comics for how long and you're seriously rolling your eyes at that one? If they want Doc Ock they can bring back Doc Ock. It wouldn't be the most far fetched thing we've seen in the movies so far.

Then that completely ruins his character. SM2's a movie. It doesn't work like comics.

Green Goblin - Very Very Very Dead
Dr. Octopus - Dead
Green Goblin 2 - Stone Cold Dead
Sandman - Alive
Venom - Super Omega Nuclear Dead

[Matt K]

I'm not so sure that's worse than "we found a costume repair machine on an alien planet that just happened to have a symbiote in it", but, hey...at that point it's "which do you prefer, a kick in the crotch or a stab in the eye".

That's why I loved the 90's cartoon origin (they even seemed to be setting up for it in the movies). For those that don't know, it had John Jameson (who was an astronaut) find the symbiote (as a black rock or something) during a moon walk. Everything is fine until they enter Earth's atmosphere and the symbiote gets loose and damages the shuttle. The shuttle lands just outside NYC (or was it in Central Park?) and Spiderman goes to help out and is exposed to the symbiote.

It's a little contrived but works pretty well and is internally logical.

[howyadoin]

Venom in the 80s wasn't an evil Spider-Man. He was a fucked up man who thought he was heroic who just happened to have Spider-Man's powers.When was that? Eddie Brock was disgraced because of Peter Parker, the symbiote was pissed off at Pete, and when they "met", Venom came to be (in Amazing #298, if I remember correctly). Are you saying there's an appearance that predates that one?

[Jigsaw]

90% of the reasons people disliked "Spider-Man 3" were not Raimi's fault.


Their reasons don't have anything to do with mine, and I'm not blaming Raimi solely for SM-3 not living up to the first two films, but he certainly could've done a better job with Venom, Sandman, and how well he sealed off the Goblin saga. Plus, there was too much Mary Jane, and most of the time she was just complaining about useless dribble.

[kalorama]

90% of the reasons people disliked "Spider-Man 3" were not Raimi's fault.

He was the director. Of course it was his fault. It's his job to put the best product on screen. He failed spectacularly.

[Conn Seanery]

Who says I'm paranoid. Stop putting words into my mouth.
You made a list of things they shouldn't ever do again in the Spider-Man films, and included something they not only haven't done but that there's no evidence they have any intention of ever doing. I'd say that sounds paranoid.

[kmeyers]

Their reasons don't have anything to do with mine, and I'm not blaming Raimi solely for SM-3 not living up to the first two films, but he certainly could've done a better job with Venom, Sandman, and how well he sealed off the Goblin saga. Plus, there was too much Mary Jane, and most of the time she was just complaining about useless dribble.

Or singing. That was terrible.

[StoneGold]

Or singing. That was terrible.

And making omelettes.

[Paradox]

Matt K's origin sounds familiar:

That's why I loved the 90's cartoon origin (they even seemed to be setting up for it in the movies). For those that don't know, it had John Jameson (who was an astronaut) find the symbiote (as a black rock or something) during a moon walk. Everything is fine until they enter Earth's atmosphere and the symbiote gets loose and damages the shuttle. The shuttle lands just outside NYC (or was it in Central Park?) and Spiderman goes to help out and is exposed to the symbiote.

It's a little contrived but works pretty well and is internally logical.

It is better. Of course, that's just them co-opting the origin of Man-Wolf so I'm not sure it counts.

[Acecool]

It was Sam's fault. Despite me liking the movie to an extent, it didn't live up to the first two, storywise. Action wise, it's perfect, but you can't substitute action for story.

I wouldn't mind the symbiote surviving because it seemed like peices may have been falling everywhere, but Eddie Brock coming back from an explosion like that would be a major piss off for me.

I'd also like it if the villains this time around don't find out Peter is Spidey, it's a shitty idea to have every villain know his secret identity because then, it's not a secret at all.

I'd like a villain that can keep on tormenting spider-man for a few movies. Some one that pops up like a thorn in his side. Some one dangerous that he Actually needs to keep his identity from.

[Libaax]

Personally i wish it will be more like Spider-man 1. One villain minus kidnapping MJ for the 100th time. Play on the struggling Peter Park and the awesome superhero Spider-man.

Make it like Iron Man. Make it fun like the first Spider-man was. Not just some dark,realationship problems. Spidey has always been fun, banter or no banter.

[Jigsaw]

I completely agree, but the banter should be added in to give it even more of a fun feeling. I think Raimi is still somewhat of the wrong man to be in the seat of director. Tobey Maguire is a pretty awesome actor, and I've seen that he can be funny, but Raimi has only let him be consistently funny in the suit in one film, which was Spider-Man 3. I really hope that the next movie isn't too dark. The only time things should seem dark and gritty is with the symbiote, but not all the time.