How to fix Spider-man 3 for a "Director's Cut".

[TheCollector86]

re-film the complete movie.

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by GP Legend

In fact, I think Sony/Avi Arad forced Raimi to use Venom. I remember reading Raimi never cared much for Venom and didn't want to use him.

I think Raimi probably decided that he was prepared to use him in return for he and his brother being granted co-authorship of the film.

Originally Posted by DisneyBlu;10219347I

Venom hating Peter because Peter steals his non-girlfriend and shows him to be a punk at work...

Really Venom should have been used together with the Lizard, as my understanding is that Eddie Brock produced a true exclusive exposing Connors as the Lizard. Which Peter convinced others was actually a fake in order to protect his friend, thereby destroying Brock's career. Which gives Brock a far more legitimate reason to hate Parker.

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Plus I love the emo Peter stuff. Sue me.

Those scenes don't bother me at all. Everybody else seems to hate it.

Spiderman 3 should have been Sandman and Green Goblin II only. Then Spiderman 4 could have been a good Lizard and Venom film.

[JeffTheMovieGuy]

Cut out Jazz Club including the big dance number.

Cut out 30 Seconds to Mars Peter as well.

[Show spoiler]

Venom as well as Green Goblin should have been a build up from the end of the first film till the 3rd.

Green Goblin shouldn't look like a Power Ranger nor a qualifier for the X-Games. What's good for the Spider is good for the Goblin don't care how much it looked like a Halloween mask should have been like Peter's.

[Show spoiler]

There are complaints of Dane Dehaan's Goblin but at least he had some noticeable Goblin-like features.

[Show spoiler]

[jbloggs]

It's time for a re-re-boot

[Moviefan2k4]

Raimi's main reason for changing the Sandman's origin was two-fold: (1) the character didn't have much of an established past in the canon; and (2) Raimi saw each "Spider-Man" film as a chance to teach Peter a new lesson. In the first one, that lesson was responsibility, and in the second it was duty. Raimi linked the Sandman to Ben Parker for one main reason: to teach Peter about undeserved mercy. He accepts Flint's semi-apology, reconciles with Harry, and even tries to save Eddie from the symbiote. He also forgives himself for placing his own desires above everyone else's...which really is harder for most of us.

[Monkey_Boy]

Personally, I always thought we would see The Lizard in part 3. Doc Connors is mentioned in the first, shown in the second, and, for me, was being set up as the villain for the third. Not like Harry, but a man only trying to fix his disability, and accidentally becoming a villainous lizard creature in the process. I was so flippin' disappointed when I found out that Harry was the only friend of Peter's that would become one of the villains. I mean, what was the point of introducing Connors? He became a worthless character in the movies who, like Gwen, seemed to have been added in as a mere wink & a nod to fanboys than important in Peter's life.

After typing that, I will admit that I also like Disneyblu's "treatmeant" of Harry becoming Venom. At first, I might've had a bit of a problem with it, but it would have made a lot more sense than adding a new character into the arc. I thought the addition of JJJ's son was going to lead into the Venom storyline, since he played a part in the animated series in order to sub for The Infinity War explanation of the suit. (With Marvel doing that very storyline now, we could've got the REAL origin of the black suit, but noooooo! Spidey belongs to Sony!) Except this opportunity was wasted on a meteor landing silently next to Peter's scooter, thus wasting ANOTHER character appearance.

[welcometothepartypal]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

Raimi's main reason for changing the Sandman's origin was two-fold: (1) the character didn't have much of an established past in the canon; and (2) Raimi saw each "Spider-Man" film as a chance to teach Peter a new lesson. In the first one, that lesson was responsibility, and in the second it was duty. Raimi linked the Sandman to Ben Parker for one main reason: to teach Peter about undeserved mercy. He accepts Flint's semi-apology, reconciles with Harry, and even tries to save Eddie from the symbiote. He also forgives himself for placing his own desires above everyone else's...which really is harder for most of us.

I see what you're saying but it really does take away the emotional impact of the first film. He should have left that part alone.

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by Monkey_Boy

Personally, I always thought we would see The Lizard in part 3. Doc Connors is mentioned in the first, shown in the second, and, for me, was being set up as the villain for the third. Not like Harry, but a man only trying to fix his disability, and accidentally becoming a villainous lizard creature in the process. I was so flippin' disappointed when I found out that Harry was the only friend of Peter's that would become one of the villains. I mean, what was the point of introducing Connors? He became a worthless character in the movies who, like Gwen, seemed to have been added in as a mere wink & a nod to fanboys than important in Peter's life.

I think the Lizard would definetly have appeared in a subsequent Sam Raimi Spiderman film. I suspect that Raimi was sceptical that the computer effects of the time would have been good enough for such an outlandish character, and that was why he delayed an appearance. In the excellent Spiderman 2, even a cgi Doc Ock manages to stick out like a sore thumb.

[thegoat]

Originally Posted by DisneyBlu

- Harry should have become Venom.

This makes a lot of sense. He could have started out with his father's glider and then been found by the symbiote after Peter blows up half of his face. Brock could still become Venom at another point in the series after Harry dies. It's also a shame that they didn't use Jameson's son to set up the symbiote since he had already been introduced and it would have been easy enough to explain that he had unintentionally brought it home (instead of a random asteroid in the park).

As far as MJ goes, I mostly like what they did with the film. Peter has the girl, and everything is going great for him. Then he screws it up. It's a nice contrast with the first two films.

I'd cut Harry's amnesia because it's contrived, though I do love that it allows us to see a bit of their friendship. They seems to come from different world in the first film with a lot of tension already between them. Peter resents Harry for dating MJ and basically having an easy ride while Harry resents Peter for his intelligence and the attention he gets for it. In the second, Harry resents him for his relationship to Spidey.

[SymbioticFunction]

Actually watched this tonight with my wife. We both thought that rumours of it's extreme suckiness were greatly exaggerated. Considering that it has to cover Sandman, Green Goblin II, black suited Spiderman, & Venom all in one film, it actually does fairly well imo. That the evil version of Parker/Spiderman also comes across as quite a bit silly should come as no great shock to anyone who watched the previous two films or other Sam Raimi pictures. I see no great reason why Raimi should actually apologise for the film, I've seen far worse on many an occasion. It's much more Beyond Thunderdome than Blade Trinity and I certainly don't recall the Wachowski siblings apologising for the Matrix sequels. btw Thomas Haden Church is genuinely amazing throughout. Film trilogy scores:

Spiderman - 4/5
Spiderman 2 - 4.5/5
Spiderman 3 - 3.5/5

[TylerDurden]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

Actually watched this tonight with my wife. We both thought that rumours of it's extreme suckiness were greatly exaggerated. Considering that it has to cover Sandman, Green Goblin II, black suited Spiderman, & Venom all in one film, it actually does fairly well imo. That the evil version of Parker/Spiderman also comes across as quite a bit silly should come as no great shock to anyone who watched the previous two films or other Sam Raimi pictures. I see no great reason why Raimi should actually apologise for the film, I've seen far worse on many an occasion. It's much more Beyond Thunderdome than Blade Trinity and I certainly don't recall the Wachowski siblings apologising for the Matrix sequels. btw Thomas Haden Church is genuinely amazing throughout. Film trilogy scores:

Spiderman - 4/5
Spiderman 2 - 4.5/5
Spiderman 3 - 3.5/5

Matrix 2 is on par with the first film, Matrix 3 is a turd fest.

[JeffTheMovieGuy]

Originally Posted by thegoat

This makes a lot of sense. He could have started out with his father's glider and then been found by the symbiote after Peter blows up half of his face. Brock could still become Venom at another point in the series after Harry dies. It's also a shame that they didn't use Jameson's son to set up the symbiote since he had already been introduced and it would have been easy enough to explain that he had unintentionally brought it home (instead of a random asteroid in the park).

Imagine if it were as dark and serious like what happens to the astronauts in Species 2.

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by TylerDurden

Matrix 2 is on par with the first film...

Not in my opinion.

[spf781]

Burning the negative would be a step in the right direction.