Why Spider-man Movies Need to be Careful

Why Spider-man Movies Need to be Careful

Am I the only one who noticed this? Spider-man movies need to watch their steps in the future to not make this mistake that all the Sam Raimi Spider-man movies did.

Editorial Opinion
By TheWingedWonder - Nov 01, 2011 05:11 PM EST
Filed Under: Spider-Man

Just to increase suspense and kick this all off, I would like to point out that this is my first article on ComicBookMovie.Com. I've been a visitor to this site for a bit over a year now and am glad that I have finally gotten around to contributing. So, let's continue on with the good stuff.

Let us all take a moment and fondly remember the Sam Raimi Spider-man movies. One of my favorite parts of those movies was seeing the villains come to life. The Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Sandman, Venom, and "New-Goblin". Although they may not have been realized in the best way possible, there they were up on the silver screen and there was naught we could do about it.

The big mistake made with all these villains, the one fudge-up they all have in common, is their relationship to Peter Parker, a.k.a., the Amazing Spider-man. We are led to believe throughout the Spider-man films that Spider-man is alone in this world of super-heroism (at least in New York) and so he alone is responsible for defending the fair city from the likes of super-villainy. We are also led to believe that the five fore-mentioned instances of super-villainy are the only ones to have occurred. I may be jumping to conclusions here, but this is what I have drawn from what I have seen in those movies.

Now, as I said earlier, the one thing all these villains share is their relationship to Peter Parker. In Spider-man, the Green Goblin, a.k.a. Norman Osborn, is the father of Peter's best friend. This by itself was believable, seeing as Mr. Osborn is in charge of a large scientific company that is doing all kinds of crazy experiments to try and make a super-soldier. When you watched it, you were all like "Oh, that is believable." And then you threw up when you saw the Mighty Morphin' Goblin Ranger zooming around on his glider.

In Spider-man 2 we are introduced to Otto Octavius, who eventually becomes the villainous Doctor Octopus. Peter happens to be doing a term paper on Octavius. Peter's best friend happens to be the head of a mega-corporation that is sponsoring Octavius' newest scientific venture, which happens to be taking place in New York. You overlook all these coincidences because the rest of the movie is superb and it all flows smoothly, but the fact that Peter was able to meet Octavius just before the accident and actually BE THERE while it occurred is mighty lucky of him. Not to mention the fact that the ONLY two people Spider-man fails to save are Octavius and his wife. Ah well, I enjoyed myself, Molina was a good Ock, so it's fine.

And then we have Spider-man 3. Here is the big one. 3 villains all stuffed into one adorable, emo little package. "New Goblin" is Peter's best friend. This makes sense to us because it has been building since the first film and so it is actually expected. At first Flint Marco seems like he'll be a solid villain who is just out to do what he is out to do, but it turns out he accidentally killed Spider-man's uncle. Oops. And Venom. Erm. Yeah, Eddie Brock worked with Peter for a short time. That, however, is not the biggest convenient coincident. The symbiote, housed in a meteor, happens to crash right next to the only super-powered being on the planet. I can understand why it is attracted to him once it is there, but anybody who has a basic understanding of probability knows that this happenstance is virtually impossible.

The big mistake all the Spider-man movies up to now have made? ALL of the super-villains are intimately connected with ONE person, who also JUST SO HAPPENS to be the only super-hero on the planet. I understand why this was done in the movies, it adds quite an element of drama into the story and a healthy dose of a multi-layered conflict between the two characters. However, for me and perhaps anybody else who may have noticed, it really starts to edge over the line of suspension of disbelief. I am happy to see all of these characters on the big screen, even if they are not reaching their full potential, but let's stop and think for a moment on all the villains that DON'T have a personal connection to Peter. Yep, you guessed it. Pretty much all of them.

The Lizard is the villain in the upcoming "The Amazing Spider-man". His personal connections to Peter are quite obvious in the comic books, but we cannot say for sure how the movie will portray a relationship, if any. I only hope that in the future installments of the franchise, the writers, directors...whoever the heck is in charge, doesn't pull all of this same stuff. Sandman didn't have to kill Uncle Ben to amp up the drama. Not to mention, Harry doesn't have the education or experience to run OsCorp effectively.

SPIDER-MAN 4: Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige Reveals Whether Jon Watts Will Return As Director
Related:

SPIDER-MAN 4: Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige Reveals Whether Jon Watts Will Return As Director

Former SUPERGIRL: WOMAN OF TOMORROW Frontrunner Meg Donnelly Hopes To Play MCU's Gwen Stacy/Spider-Gwen
Recommended For You:

Former SUPERGIRL: WOMAN OF TOMORROW Frontrunner Meg Donnelly Hopes To Play MCU's Gwen Stacy/Spider-Gwen

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Altair
Altair - 11/1/2011, 6:21 PM
I see what you mean and I agree wholeheartedly. But, you're looking too far into it.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/1/2011, 6:36 PM
@HeroKiller
Thanks! As for your own fansite, you should just write about what you care about! That is what I plan on doing...I will probably be writing mostly Editorials and Fanfics because I am always one of the last people to hear all this breaking news XD
But, definitely, just write whatever it is that gets your blood flowing!
Supes17
Supes17 - 11/1/2011, 7:15 PM
They need to be careful alright
Paulley
Paulley - 11/2/2011, 3:00 AM
agree with you.. but SM3 was a complete screw up so it was to be expected that they were going to mess everything up completely....

But yes why they didnt have JJJ son bring the symbiote back from space i have no idea.... geeze even the 90's Cartoon figured that out as a good replacement to the source material... (unless anyone actually wanted all the Beyonder stuff lol)
Arachnus
Arachnus - 11/2/2011, 7:40 AM
Great Article and I agree strongly. The result of making _all_ of the villains intimately connected with Peter Parker is sappiness. In the comics, Doc Ock wasn't a good guy gone wrong or Peter's mentor, he was just a bad guy. Part of Spider-man being a superhero on patrol, I think, is confronting people and situations unfamiliar to him and dealing with them on the spot. This unexpectedness feels more like real life and will connect better with audiences, I predict. Part of the fun of following Spider-Man's story is "experiencing" the mystery with him, and not necessarily knowing all of the details about the next villain before he shows up as a villain.
mapleleafsfan93
mapleleafsfan93 - 11/2/2011, 8:13 AM
i strongly disagree the sam raimi spider man is good there was nothing wrong. now for the new spider-man movie i am not looking forward to this film and i am a big spider-man fan. now unless the new spider-man movie is better and unless they can prove to me that they can make a better spider-man then sam raimi the last 3 sm film were good
Neno
Neno - 11/2/2011, 9:29 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuUuTChh9QA&feature=related
ThreeBigTacos
ThreeBigTacos - 11/2/2011, 12:12 PM
@mapleleafsfan93: the last the movies were good? Maybe 1 and 2.. but 3? cmon now. Rewatching them now-a-days, you can just smell how cheesy all three were and how much more of an improvement this new one is going to be.
webheaded
webheaded - 11/2/2011, 1:37 PM
I agree. I loved Raimi's movies, but love it or hate it, the coincidence of it all was in the back of your mind... The Amazing Spider-Man is looking insanely promising though. The movie is said to be a "more realistic" approach to the Spider-Man story. That sounds to me like your problem's gonna be fixed, seeing as though we're getting a much more realistic and serious universe this time.
Great article by the way, i'd love to hear from you more often (:
er101
er101 - 11/2/2011, 2:28 PM
Nice article, welcome to our humble abode!! Ironically my first article was based upon the spider-man movies as well.

@fangz there has been lots of debate within fans about whether Ditko left because of the goblins identity or whether he didn't get along with Stan Lee, it's just one of the things we will never know.
Moonwalker1991
Moonwalker1991 - 11/2/2011, 5:18 PM
Nice article. I agree, the drama was a bit much in some areas, but perhaps it was necessary at the same time. I actually liked the villains' connection to Peter, particularly Goblin and Doc Ock. It brought an emotional approach to the films, though by the time we learn Sandman "killed" Uncle Ben, that was the last straw so I totally agree with that. I admired Doc Ock redeeming himself in the end by sacrificing himself to save the city, that I liked. But Spiderman 3... fell apart.
Moonwalker1991
Moonwalker1991 - 11/2/2011, 5:19 PM
I agree with Arachnus
Minghagz
Minghagz - 11/2/2011, 8:41 PM
Good job on the article but I'm not so much concerned with the coincidental connections as I am with how they ruined certain characterizations in the film. Maybe the problem were some of the actors they chose in the films. Also some of the tweaks in the story didn't sit well with me but sometimes it was an easy overlook. I myself have low expectations for TASM, which may be a good thing because then I might come out of the theater satisfied that it was better than I had hoped.
headlopper
headlopper - 11/3/2011, 4:55 PM
SM 3 sucked! Hated it!
Loved 1 & 2.
And I hope this new one bombs.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/3/2011, 6:22 PM
Great first article, man. :)

I don't think their connection to Peter is that big of a deal. I think it lends a little more dynamic to the conflicts.

To me, the big problem was making them all sympathetic villains. With the exception of Venom, you were basically made to feel sorry for the villains, like they were doing evil because of something out of their control.

Doc Ock: His arms were controlling him and driving him crazy.

Sandman: He was robbing banks and being a douche to try and save his daughter.

New Goblin: Believed Spidey killed his father.

Norman: Yes, even Norman was driven insane by his experiment. Sure, it was selfish to do it in the first place, and he was already kind of a dick. But being a dick doesn't make you a villain.

Brock was the only person that tried to hurt Spidey BEFORE he went to villainy. You really had no reason to like him even before he got the symbiote.

Anyway, the sympathy thing got old after Spidey 2.

Again, welcome to the site. :)
Minghagz
Minghagz - 11/3/2011, 9:22 PM
@CorndogBurglar
I have to agree with you on the Doc Ock statement. SM2 was always kind of cheesey to me because of the fact that Doc Ock's arms were controlling him and driving him crazy. I would have preferred him just turning to the life of crime and becoming villainous after seeing what great power he had from the arms. Don't get me wrong though, I liked SM2; I just didn't like that part of the plot.
Minghagz
Minghagz - 11/3/2011, 9:25 PM
Oh and Sandman was just unnecessary. SM3 should have just focused on Venom (w/ a different actor and a better written script).
halvor311
halvor311 - 11/3/2011, 10:51 PM
Very well written article, but I could not disagree more. I don't agree with your first criticism of the "Green Power Ranger" first of all because I was a big Power Rangers fan and have been re-watching the series and the only thing the Green Goblin and the Green Ranger have in common is their color. With Octavius, it makes perfect sense that Harry "happens" to run the company because it was his Dad's company. He was taking it over and as CEOs tend to leave the company and everything to their kids, it is an obvious choice, and as far as Octavius goes, OsCorp is a huge company that specializes in making things, this means science, and this means that scientists will want to work with them in order to realize their dreams, and Peter Parker as an avid science junkie is likely to know about it and be interested and of course he will want to see Octavius's masterpiece. It's really no coincidence and this is the first article I've read that sees it that way, not that I don't respect your opinion. And finally with Spider-Man 3. I agree that bringing the symbiote in with the space ship is a better way of doing it, but the idea that it being improbable is what the problem is? It is more likely that you will get hit by a car than by lightning, but people do still get hit by lightning, so it's not a stretch to think the meteor would land close to Parker. I do however agree with your take on Venom and Sandman. I really hope they get Venom right if they do him again if this next movie is successful. Great article. Look forward to hearing more from you.
TheWingedWonder
TheWingedWonder - 11/4/2011, 2:55 AM
@halvor311

Valid opinions all, except I do have one comment. The amount of meteors that don't burn up in the atmosphere and happen to be the size of the one in the movie are rather rare, especially compared to the frequency with which lightning strike. Lightning is striking the Earth near constantly, where as a baseball size meteor (excluding the extremely rare coincidence that it happened to be the ONLY meteor carrying a parasitic alien life form) actually making it to the Earth's surface happens....not constantly. Much less than constantly. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but I know it ain't often.
superherofan21
superherofan21 - 11/4/2011, 11:05 PM
Yeah, I've always thought about the major coincidence of the entire franchise. I'm glad that someone finally made an article about it. Thank you, you have a lot of good points.
Iphro78
Iphro78 - 11/6/2011, 11:59 PM
If I remember correctly, when the symbiote landed weren't Peter and M.J. chillin' near by? Maybe it was attracted to the first person it saw fit to attach itself to, which was of course Peter.
shift21
shift21 - 11/7/2011, 3:09 PM
good points WW, but these coincidenses happen all the time in movies, stories, everything. Spider-Man is built on these improbable events and without them, there'd be no story to tell, and there'd be no Spider-Man.
comiccow6
comiccow6 - 11/9/2011, 2:09 PM
TASM is gonna fix the mistakes. Is it weird that I think Gwen Stacy is going to be Curt Conners adopted daughter?
smallvillechic90z
smallvillechic90z - 11/14/2011, 12:55 AM
WHAT REALLY BUGS ME ABOUT THIS MOVIE AND THE ANDREW GARFIELD IS THE SUIT, HES WEARNG SNEAKERS??? WTF... AND HIS SHOULDERS, HE LOOKS LIKE THE ALIEN FROM SIGNS, SUCH A FUQIN RECTANGULAR BODY! TOBY AT LEAST HAD A BUFF BODY AND BIG SHOULDERS AND A SMALLER WAIST. ANDREW GARFIELDS, YEA HE GOT A LIL BUFF BUT HIS SHOULDERS ARE 25 INCH WIDE AND SO IS HIS WAIST... GROSS...
View Recorder