Mcu ant man had a fucked up production director changes and it took like 9 years. Also Edgar Wright was on to direct and did quite of bit of shots in the movie because they chopped his up and reshot it and added there own
I think a good place to split the movie into two if they could have would have been when venom was actually made when he screams into the camera it should have ended with a to be continued then the second movie could have continued and ended the sandman story then focused on venom
This is why shit like Netflix anime adaptations are so terrible and the Marvel movies, for all their shallow spectacle, are lauded. You can tell the actors and the creative staff behind these cash grabs are genuinely having a good time and want to make the best thing possible. Even someone like Molina who came back for No Way Home just for a paycheck, you can tell he enjoyed stepping back into the role on some level...and Willem Dafoe DEFINITELY was all over a reprisal of Goblin.
THe birth of the Sandman was one of the best storytelling moments of the entire series..... and it turns out it's cause it was what Sam wanted to do in the first place. Sam Rami knew Sandman how to make Sandman, how to Direct Sandman, and how to visually show Sandman. if the Studio hadn't done so much micromanaging We might have gotten a Much better SPiderman 3
Sam Raimi was just great with most of the setpieces. Everything with Otto in the second was amazing. Spidey 3 is flawed but has some really creative action beats. Granted some of the digital doubles look sketchy but scenes like Harry attacking Peter were expertly choreographed and well put together. Black suit Spidey beating the dogshit out Flint was awesome as well!!!
Sony: "This guy made us two blockbuster movies, let's mess with his concept! There's no way that can go wrong" I really feel sorry for the team. You can see the amount of love they put into the first two movies and even in the third, as much of a mess as it is, you can see the parts where they knew exactly what they wanted. It had tons of potential. If only Sony understood that they can't just force characters into a script like that... They could've just teased Venom at the end and make the forth one about him.
In the end Sony wasn’t wrong about venom. He’s a premier spider character and pretty much has been on an upturn since the 90s where he was the main guy since nobody else was around
Sony, like 90% of other studios, should learn their goddamn place and shouldn’t interfere in the creative process at all. There should be some rule about that, because we’ve lost many potential diamonds due to studio interference. I always point to The Wolverine vs Logan to prove this point. Same exact team behind both, one is a decent but overall generic mediocre movie, and the other, where they were unleashed to do whatever they wanted, turned out to be an incredible masterpiece.
@@creed8712 Did the OG comment say otherwise? The problem was shoving him in the last 15 minutes of the movie when the majority was spent on Spider-Man having the Symbiote and fighting Sandman and his best friend.
Honestly even though Venom was forced in, Raimi's original intended vision for Venom being something that very literally eats away at the person physically (which is why there is previs shots of a black suited Tobey seeing an almost alive version of it in the mirror) would have been an amazing way to keep the strong horror notes and define Venom enough even with the lack of scenes. You can still see notes of it in the final shot of the symbiote where it's all bony and trying to reform itself now Eddie's been pulled out, and I think that's also why it's the best Venom scene in the entire film by far, cos it clearly hints at something that could have been and also Venom is actually scary for that half second of screen time.
The earlier designs for Venom where he conformed to the victim's body and you could see them under the symbiote, most notably when their mouth was open, I think made Venom scarier. We're so used to seeing Venom with exaggerated facial features, like his teeth and tongue that if you were to make those traits more subtle it actually makes him creepier due to it delving into the uncanny valley.
To further expand on that I think there's even some props that shows Eddie's skull and the mouth is just like Venom implying he was being literally absorbed and disfigured by the suit.
@@Webshooters1 I feel like that had leftovers in the final movie, if you look at Eddie's teeth when he says "I like being bad" you can see he has fangs which is probably the symbiote doing that to him
In the original ending Raimi wrote, the suit comes off of Eddie and all that is left is a skeleton, the autonomous goo monster pins Peter down and says on its own "Never wound what you can't kill".
That sounds both absolutely fascinating and horrifying at the same time, I’m not the biggest spider man as my entire exposure to the series was just the old cartoon, but that cartoon was amazing and the way it portrayed Venom was terrifying to me as a kid. The idea of a crazy space parasite that can’t easily be removed taking control of my body was enough to give me nightmares, and if they took this idea and ran with it they could’ve made a really creepy movie that made Venom way cooler.
@@rn6312 true and the production process probably wasn’t Wha Happun levels of bad. That said I remember people destroying the game at the time despite sharing most of the open world conceit of the previous game.
I think the scene where Eddie becomes Venom at the church would've been an appropriate point to split the script, purely because it would make for an interesting cliffhanger and drum up hype for the big battle against Venom.
Sam raimi and the writers have talked about this. They were going to end the movie with Eddie getting the symbiote and continue the venom storyline in spiderman 4. Sony/Arad disallowed that idea stating that they needed venom and spiderman to have a physical confrontation in spiderman 3. This movie had every opportunity to be great but Arad stopped it at every step of the way.
@@FatherOMalley Geez, Sony/Arad couldn't just wait for a potential part 2 where the confrontation would be more impactful as well as provide more scenes with Venom doing his thing instead of cramming so many things in just 2 hours? Maybe blackmail Sandman into helping him or else he'll kill his daughter (something that was in the Spider-Man 3 game and made more sense for why Sandman would ally with Venom). It really sucks how we missed out of a good Spider-Man 3 movie solely because Arad wanted to put Venom in so badly.
Topher Grace left That 70s Show to film this movie So not only did this film kill the first major spider-man film series, it also indirectly killed That 70s Show
The third film actually made a lot of money. The issue was that Raimi couldn't find a proper script despite numerous writers before the film was ultimately cancelled.
@@KasumiKenshirou Probably, although it would've been nice for the show to not lose two of their biggest stars during the last season. Probably would've been significantly better, and Randy would've had a smaller role (if they even still added him at all)
And 1. I just finished watching the Sam Raimi trilogy this week and the first two still hold up very well. They might even be better now that I am older :3 I can't wait to see what he does with Dr. Strange 2
To be honest I think it's more about too many subplots rather than specifically too many villains. Spiderman 3 juggled sandmans plot, new goblin harry plot, Peter and MJ, Eddie Brock and Gwen Stacy and the symbiote suit/venom plot. All at the same time. Amazing Spiderman 2 only had two actual villains in electro and harry goblin. Rhino just bookended the film with an opening and closing fight. One the other hand in terms of subplots Amazing Spiderman 2 juggled Peter and Gwens plot, electro's plot, complicated Harry Osborn/goblin plot, Peter's dad's espionage plot. All at the same time. And then a depression plot right at the end while also setting up a cinematic universe. Spiderman No Way Home also has multiple subplots but organises them so a quarter of the movie focuses on each without them all happening at the same time. It also makes so the multiple villains are just all part of the same subplot rather than each having their own. So (SPOILER WARNING) part 1 is the identity revealed subplot sort of ending in the spell. Part 2 is the capturing all the villains subplot ending in the Dr strange fight. Part 3 is the finding cures for the villains subplot ending in the goblin fight and aunt may death. Part 4 is then the other Spidermen subplot ending in the final fight and final spell. You then have the Peter, Ned and MJ subplot being the only one to run all the way through linked to the identity reveal plot. No Way Home is incredibly well constructed where the other two weren't.
@@the0thersyde725 I really agree there. So the matter there Ill try to be very carefull to avoid spoiling just in case. The matter is really knowing if you are going to have a large team off villains or just charcters in general, wich ones are the ones to lead the changes and wich ones have the role off supporting or fighting back. I was feeling either Oc or Osborn would be the leaders. ANd then Electro shows the deal off someone not wanting the change, with the other two being more off a reaactionary or complementing things for extra backup, something akind the muscle. yet it feels like they are given enough stuff so they arent needless or too overshadowed. SOmeone had to be the 'leader' but the others had to be given enough respect
I feel like making this a two-parter would have been the best decision. Just make the first movie about the Symbiote Suit, end the movie with the church bell scene, setting up Venom for the main antagonist for the fourth movie. Hell, lose the "amnesia" plot and you could potentially have enough time for a better origin for the symbiote and let Raimi throw in the Vulture for his swansong before passing Spiderman 4 to a new director who loves the newer comics and gets Venom better.
Why not let Raimi do his original vision of SM3 instead of shoehorning in a character he doesn't know much of. Let him do the vulture and Sandman plot that he wanted.
Yeah, if they just wanted Venom for a spinoff, wouldn't it have been fine to only have the symbiote suit in the Spidey films? Sam Raimi seemed to have a handle on that part, goofy emo Parker aside. Makes more sense than forcing Venom into an already overstuffed movie. Then killing him off. Wait, so what WAS Sony's plan there? How were they going to have their Venom movie if he's already dead?
@@thegodofalldragons I agree,the Black Suit Spider-Man vs. Sandman fight is one of my favorites in the entirety of the live action Spider-Man movies,Sam Raimi got the Black Suit right,the problem was Peter Parker and Venom.
In my opinion i found spider man 3 to be pretty decent, it really have things in it I really like, and it's always great people are finding enjoyment out of something and not just hateing on it just because of a specific crowd telling you you're required to hate it.
For a sequel to 2 extremely beloved movies, you can do a lot worse (X-Men Last Stand). I do think SM3 deserves a lot more than to be rememberd as a "so bad, it's good" movie. The movie does enough great stuff alongside the messy stuff to justify its existence. I see it in many ways simillar to The Dark Knight Returns. A sequel that doesnt reach the height of its predecessor, but is still great and worth watching. Allthough I probably like TDKR more.
It double sucks that 3 turned out the way it did, because it not only killed the Raimi series it ALSO killed The Spectacular Spider-Man series since Sony sold off their animated show rights to buy themselves time to get the reboot off the ground...
Omg a new mutans what happened would be awesome. I was so hyped for the first teaser trailers shown and then the whole disney/fox buyout and reshooting fiasco was disappointing.
@FiveByFive I supremely disagree with that. It was a mess of a movie with obvious reshoots and even more obvious studio interference that change writers and directors, and even direction of the movie more often than certain AAA game developers, and shoved in MCU connections... all resulting in the movie being pretty bad and kinda boring. Though I admit it had some interesting ideas, that were not executed to their fullest
Actually no reshoots ever occured for The New Mutants. They were planned, but by the time Fox stopped screwing around and was ready to do them the cast had aged out of their roles
Sam is one of the few filmmakers who has seen runaway success and humbling failure with a huge budget, and a non budget. He always bounces back tho and that’s why he stays winning.
Since you mentioned Avi Arad (probably misspelled it) in the video, I think it’s only fair I mention that around the time Spider-Man 3 was being produced/coming out, the comic Ultimate Spider-Man had a story-arc where Sam Raimi was making a Spider-Man movie, and Peter gets mad because he thinks it’s kind of a dick move to do a movie about him; more importantly, Avi Arad actually appears in the comic and is portrayed as kind of a dumbass
Tobey maguire was also mentioned as imposter by spidey from earth 616 Gave me the impression Marvel wasn't happy about these movies. Probably 'cause Sony owned the whole stuff
There's something positive to be said about a director willing to accept fault for his lesser work, even if most of the issues with the movie weren't his fault.
Yeah with Raimi owning up to his part (and unjustly taking on more) of the blame, I not only am giving him the benefit of the doubt, but actively looking forward to his Dr. Strange
There was simply no room to flesh out Eddie or the symbiote with everything else going on, They should have just let Raimi make his version and ended Spider-Man 3 with Peter using the symbiote to defeat sandman and a part 2 picking up after that fleshing out eddie and Peter relationship with Peter discarding the symbiote and eddie getting it eventually leading to a showdown with venom and Spider-Man where it ends with Peter thinking he has gotten the symbiote from eddie but eddie somehow retaining or getting a peice back setting up his solo film
To be fair to Raimi, for someone who claimed they didn't understand Venom, he got the basics of the origin story down. And casting Topher as an anti-Peter makes sense, but Venom being a hulking beast is already very anti-Peterish. It's a shame to see how badly Raimi got screwed over during the production of this picture, it's even more of a shame to see how much he beats himself up over it. Dude directed two of the best movies of all time, he shouldn't hold this one stumble against himself. Either way, I'm sure he'll do great with Doc Strange 2. The fact that he's directing is the only real reason I'm excited for that movie. And hey, if Spider-Man 3 hadn't failed, we might not have gotten Spider-Verse or No Way Home, so there's that at least. Also, can we all just agree that the score slapped? And the black suit itself looked awesome!
I remember being a kid and loving the first 2 movies, so I was excited for the third and saw it in theaters. When I walked out of the theater I was left feeling extremely confused at what I just watched and wondering why it felt nothing like the other 2 movies. As an adult, I love it for the memes.
This is another story I knew everything about it going in, I've had this knowledge for about a decade now, with new details bubbling up every few years, especially after Sony and Avi kept doing new dumb stuff to further remind people. I always feel bad for Sam Raimi, because everyone knows him as a nice guy, and he legit TIRED with this, but the process and the backlash really affected him. Cut to now, he's doing Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, his second favorite character, and with Kevin Feige, a man who always had his back in those early days. Hell, Spider-Man 3 was Feige's last major Non-Marvel Studios movie before becoming the studio head, the things he had to go through with Avi Arad, Bryan Singer, and later Ike Perlmutter to get here. This story had a happy ending of storts, but with the antagonist still out there, planning for the future... Wait, Sony Pictures doesn't plan all that well lol
I mean, I get the original films have their fans, I've never really cared for them cause Tobey never really figured out spider man, great Peter, not great Spider Man. I will say I feel once he acquiesced he should have made the character to the best of his ability and the changes cause he didn't get it probably doomed the film (also not being 2 parts, venom really needs a set up cause the suit thing...) Beyond that, for spider man 4 I really agree with Sony wanting Lizard cause they had cameoed Dr Connors in the Raimi films and there's only so long someone would stick around without a payoff. As someone who loved Dr Strange 1, I'm really not looking forward to what's going to be a change in tone and character, (granted I listen to a podcast with the first films writer so... take that with a grain of salt). I'm worried a film my parent loved will go to a sequel she can't stand through no fault of her own, and that's just....bleh.
@@jacklindsey8400 I'll be honest, Tobey's Spider Man really grew on me on recent rewatches of 1 and 2. Just getting super powers wouldn't turn you into any less of a nerd, and it really adds to it hearing his nerdiness come out when he's Spider Man. It really drives home how Peter Parker and Spider Man are the same guy just with a mask on, and how he's an everyman, not some god above everyone else.
I wonder what Sam Raimi’s original version would of looked like? I think the film could of been really interesting if they stuck to it just being Harry and Sandman. it could’ve really played off the Spiderman 3’s theme of forgiveness and maturity. With Harry holding a grudge on peter for playing a hand in killing his father, and peter holding a grudge on Sandman for playing a hand in killing Uncle Ben. Furthermore, if you think about it perhaps this can coincide with Raimi’s vision to further flesh out his characters; Maybe Harry and Peter could now sympathize and further understand each other more with both of them holding grudges, their characters would both have the arc of learning forgiveness and leaving the last behind them. They could shown Sandman being a kind caring father and humanize him more. I know its stupid to think about what couldve of been, but its interesting food for thought.
Raimi's original vision is he wants Peter Parker To Fall in the Sin of Pride in which he did in the Actual Film but it was a bit too rushed since the film had too many characters, if venom/topher grace/gwen stacy wasn't in the movie the first half of the film would've focus on Peter slowly becoming egotistical due to his success as spider man, Sandman's Origin and Harry's slowly becoming evil, also Thomas Haden Church revealed in an Interview that Sandman and Harry Osborn will be the villains for the film, he also stated that Vulture would appear in Spider Man 3 for a few scenes then he would be the main villain for Spider Man 4
The movie could of been a lot better if the villian of Spider-Man 3 was Mr. Spider-Man himself. Being consumed by the symbiote he gives in to a violent nature kills the Sandman. Harry ultimately becomes the hero that would save his friend in the final act by helping Peter get rid of the symbiote. Peter is forced to confront the fact that he allowed himself to go down a dark path once again and the movie ends with the iconic Spider-Man quits cover scene but with Spider-Man throwing away the Black Suit symbolizing that he has finally gotten over his pride and spite.
It would've been better and very emotional. As you said, the theme of forgiveness would be the focus (Harry towards Peter and Peter towards Sandman). And it isn't stupid to think about what could've been. We all wish Arad didn't interfere with the development of the movie.
10:33 Topher Grace is actually a pretty big fanboy who does fanedits (including the Star Wars prequels and Hobbit films) as hobbies in his spare time, so it makes perfect sense to me he would instantly "get" how the fanbase would react to his Venom.
So you’re telling me that the guy who convinced Kojima to dump David Hayter after about a 20 some odd years relationship is the same guy who put Spider-Man 3 (and other movies) on the fast track to shitsville; That’s incredible. Maybe Avi Arad should retire before he ruins into the spider-verse 2
Hayter and Kojima didn’t have a relationship; Kojima had a much closer relationship with Akio Otsuka, while Hayter was just the dub voice (remember, Japanese is Kojima’s first language). Kojima wanted Kurt Russle to play Snake in MGS3, and it was Kojima who came to Arad for help finding a replacement Snake.
@@jamjox9922 Kojima wanted to use facial capture for MGSV. He felt he needed a live-action actor who could convincingly act through his facial expressions. He spoke about this with Avi Arad (also the producer of the MGS movie), and Arad recommended Kiefer Sutherland. Many fans took umbrage with this, because they had grown attached to Hayter’s performance as Snake. Some think there was a conspiracy that explains the recast, but really, it’s as simple as Kojima wanting a big name actor for Snake, and because he’s Japanese, he doesn’t have the same attachment to Hayter’s voice as Western fans do.
@@jamjox9922 so sometime after metal gear solid 4 but before mgs5 there were talks about a metal gear solid movie possibly being made. Kojima got introduced to avi and I’m guessing he would’ve had a hand in making it because they apparently hit it off pretty well; Good enough for Kojima to discuss his plans for msg5 or maybe what the story of the movie should be. There’s quite a few articles from around 2013 that give direct quotes that avi suggested the person he recommended for a serious and dark performance was keifer Sutherland over David hayter. Kojima apparently agreed and so on and so forth.
Whoever directed the scene with Peter Parker Emo dancing through New York. They created something truly special and got referenced in the Into the spider verse movie the Peter in that movie didn’t like to talk about that.
As it is, Spiderman 3 is a messy hodgepodge with a lot of great ideas that's brought down by clear studio interference. But as a meme machine, its a friggin masterpiece.
You know considering this movie came out the same year as Shrek the Third, The Simpsons Movie, TMNT and the first Transformers movie It really reminded me how... mixed that year was for big blockbuster movies
8:43 Im currently studying film at college and I would like to say, a major what if here - firstly, though, for context, I recently rewatched Spiderman 3 and honestly, we give it crap for all the right reasons but its still enjoyable nonetheless. Here's where the what if comes into play: if Raimis carefully reread his script and rewrote it with key scenes from the finished script, combined it with the draft two parter script, we could have gotten a two parter out of this - as McMuscles pointed out. Now, follow me, in the final movie, when Eddie becomes Venom at the church, he emerges in the black suit as Venom, and then he lunges for the camera. That scene right there should have been the cut off of the film with a "To Be Continued..." it would leave audiences guessing on what was going to happen next and leave them speechless on the emerges of Venom.
Spider-Man 3 wasn't the best in terms of overstuffing villains, but one thing it excelled at was tying various arcs from the past two films and giving them proper conclusions.
@@rna151 I mean Harry's arc is peppered throughout the entire trilogy, it's never the focus but it's very engaging even in 3 and is host to a lot of the best moments in the third film. Sure the butler thing is kind of stupid considering he could have said it at literally any point in 2, but Harry was also almost zealous in worshipping Norman in 2 so I doubt he would have even believed it. Hell even in 3 Peter tells him at the start of the film, so I think it's fair that it's only when hes lost everyone that he's actually willing to listen to the obvious (because let's be fair, if Harry was actually in his right state of mind, he'd have cast aside Norman as soon as he found out he was the goblin, someone who almost killed Harry too).
@@rna151 I mean if you think about how obvious it was that norman was the goblin to everyone even the public then you realise harry is blinded by his anger
I still cry when Peter finally learns about the truth of Sandman and Uncle Ben and says "I forgive you." Seeing him finally let go of his guilt and bitterness after receiving such a genuine, humble apology was such a nice way to cap off everything.
This movie juggled 3 different villain storylines. The Sandman storyline, the Harry storyline, and the venom symbiote storyline. This feels like 3 different Spider-Man movies at once.
8:35 What? Its pretty obvious. When Peter tears off the suit and it lands on Eddie, creating Venom. After that, the fourth movie has Venom as the main antagonist. Fans were speculating that this would happen back in 2006/2007!
Sam Raimi have always been very outspoken about how much he detested Venom, and it clearly shows in this movie with how tacked on Venom's appearance is.
He never said that. He only said that Venom was after his time and couldn't get him like he could Vulture, Sandman, Green Goblin, Doc Ock, etc. He tried to make it work but it just wasn't a character he was familiar with and thus unable to relate to.
I remember being in 5th grade and so excited for this movie to come out because the 2nd one was so good. Still liked it, but I learned not to overhype anything ever again.
while the film is definitely a mess personally I do have a soft spot for spider man 3 because it did really have things in it I really like(minus emo peter), it's a shame because some of the plot threads are really good but they got tangled up and not having a satisfying conclusion for them but moments like sandman' s birth showed the potential this film had to be great. Personally I found amazing Spider-Man 2 to be worse
Yeah, I can personally forgive some of the goofiness and such, there is a charm to it. I can't forgive obviously dumb things like the way they handled the situation with Harry in the entire film, the conflict between MJ and Peter coming off as remarkably petty and just letting Sandman go as if he's not gonna rob a bank next week after he's gone since he's pretty much invincible. Amazing Spider-Man 2 comes off even worse because so much of it's problems entirely stem from trying to expand it into a bigger story that it was in no way building up to, and that was just marketers hubris right there rather than passionate mishandling.
When they killed venom at the end, my friend insisted that Eddie Brock was still alive "because if there's no corpse he ain't dead" (given sandman's miday fakeout). My other friend and I really got on him for that because Eddie was vaporized, there is no possible corpse to leave.
People on the internet back then: "Wow, these things are terrible things" People on the internet now: "Wow, Spider-Man 3/Amazing Spider-Man 2/Jar Jar Binks/the Virtual Boy/Snakes on a Plane/Batman & Robin/the Wii U sure were underappreciated things we now celebrate and pretend some of us all heralded in high regards!"
Yeah, Spider-Man 3 isn't great; in fact, when I think over the whole thing I always get annoyed at all of the things that could've been better. But, would I still watch it over other 2000s superhero misfires like Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and X-Men 3? Oh yeah. There's probably a few MCU films I'd rate it higher than, too. My disdain for it has softened a little, especially now that it's not Toby's very last go at the character anymore.
@@saltystick_99 I shit you not, I met a co-worker that said the SW prequel are better than we give it credit for, and (I SHIT YOU NOT) he said the pod racing and Jar Jar elements he liked. So whilr the Virtual Boy was my exaggeration, the Jar Jar statement was an actual experience I had. To each their own, tho...
Sand man in this film, is imo one of the best villain scenes ever. And his script was WAY too short. And was neglected. But I still love the films. Simply legendary.
Here's hoping No Way Home learned from Spiderman 3's mistakes since both movies have a bunch of Spiderman's villains in them. Heck, Sandman's in both movies.
Raising the stakes every installment is one of the chief reasons why series die and reboots are so popular, giving the people more of what they wanted while resetting the power creep back to the start so it doesn't get in the way of more narrative-driven fun adventures of the characters people crave.
Am just glad it’s been public knowledge, for over a decade, that Spider-Man 3 was dragged down by studio inference and not Sam Raimi. He doesn’t deserve to be blamed for the way this turned out.
Honestly, massive props to Alvin Sargant for wrangling that film together the best he could. He was forced to make that script bloated as all hell, but he did manage to weave the unwanted Venom plot in pretty well with the personality change of Peter affecting every existing story like his relationships with Mary, Harry, and Sandman.
The MCU spider-man movies are ok but I kinda dislike how many of them relied on Spider-Man having to latch onto another character for support instead of truly standing on his own (Ironman/mysterio/dr strange/other Spider-Mans).
I remember watching Spider-Man 3 in the movie theater when I was seven and it single-handedly made Spider-Man my favorite superhero. Despite its flaws, I love watching it over and over again. I also watched No Way Home and I highly recommend it! Best movie experience I’ve ever had in my life.
I recall the Spider-man animated series from the 90's, me and my brother would watch it every saturday when it was featured on 'Live and kicking' (A games/contest & cartoon show for kids) back in 1994/5 The advantage an animated show has it can take time to include characters, expand their character before their arc begins, this happened with Norman Osbourne, Curtis Connor (aka Lizard man) and Wilson Fisk. A number of these characters appeared episode or two before, or their arc was split across the series (connor was a reoccuring character) allowing them to develop their characters further. This was no different to Eddie brock, he's introduced as a rival, and is even quite imposing, but is only venom after Peter has had his run with the symboite. The difference between that and the movie is that the series had more time to develop that, also as well showing the symboite as a source that is dangerous, and not campy. There were too many villains in this. It's true fans wanted Venom, but Venom also needed more time to be setup. One of the reasons why Venom is popular is because he had the time to evolve from villain to a anti-hero, even within the show when he realised that Carnage was a vile creature, and even sacraficed himself in the end (leaving Parker to wonder in his monolouge ending about how people can still change for the better) Without all that Venom in the animated series itself would had been forgettable. Spider-Man 3 was never going to fully flesh out Venom, not with camp and with competing screentime with other characters. I don't think sandman himself was perfect, but you can tell he had a lot of character moments and sami saw how he can garner sympathy for the character via the special effects. A two parter probably would have worked, but if they were serious about having Venom in, they should had included eddie from the first film and have their rivalary built up over time (though you can argue there was enough of that with Harry Osbourne)
Sandman was amazing in this movie. His transformation still sends chills down my spine at how prefect it was done. He could have done the same with Vulture and do it with black suit Spiderman. I think i would have had one of the villians almost kill him and knock him into a lab where the symbiote gets on him and you see hints its from space in the lab or on the news in the background. Have the symbiote have him fight Harry and almost kill him making him question the suit but not get rid of it.
That's a great idea. Start off with Harry trying to kill Peter who's trying to stay alive. Then Peter gets the symbiote and Harry realizes what actually happened with his dad. He wants to try to make up for it, but at this point the suit has taken over. They clash and Peter almost kills Harry before he realizes what's happening. Peter fights the suit and manages to destroy it. He and Harry go off into the sunset, the whole experience bringing them closer together and realizing what it means to have a friend. The film would end with Eddie coming across a strange black goop. He touches it and it instantly covers him. Venom jumps toward the camera and cut to credits.
While I understand Raimi's vision, I never understood the mindset of intentionally bastardizing a character the writer didn't like for an adaptation. Sam did it with Venom, Joss Whedon did it with Wonder Woman, Steve Kloves did it to Ron Weasley, and James Gunn did it with Scrappy Doo. If you want to include parodies, Team Four Star did it with Broly and Tifa. If you're going to do an adaptation, you should put your personal bias against a character aside and improve on what you felt was wrong with the character instead of making them a joke.
Right, Raimi was the wrong man to do a Spider-Man 3 that included Venom. He should have dropped out of doing the film if he wasn't going to do the character right.
Something I remembered about myself as a kid and Topher Grace being in this movie. These films were coming out back when I was a kid, around 7, 9, and 12/13 for 1, 2, and 3 respectively. For whatever reason when the first two came out, I saw Toby Macguire and thought he was or was related to Topher Grace. I don't know if they just had a similar enough look, or demeanor/vibe but I still thought so. My family even called him Eric Forman as an in-joke to my silly kid mind making that connection. I then started seeing the differences and quickly realized that it wasn't Topher. Fast forward to 2007 when Spiderman 3 came out and lo and behold! Eric Forman was actually in the movie! The family In-joke got that much funnier to us. It was nice to remember and look back on this little piece of the past. Great video, Matt.
Taking Venom out of this movie would make it infinitely better. Sure, there’s still a lot of undeniably dumb shit, but I believe Spider-Man 3’s biggest problem is how separated its two main plot lines feel.
I find it poetic that they used lizard and then vulture for new reboots which were the 2 villains being talked about for Raimi’s 4th movie, in my opinion proving how Vulture can easily be a better villain
It's weird they couldn't find a place to split the film into two. Unless they meant without re-writes. Seems like...obvious to have Part 1 be about Black Suit and end with its removal/taking over Eddie. And Movie 2 is the Venom story? I'm no filmmaker but...that seems like an obvious splitting point?? Have Sandman beaten by Black Suit in part 1 and have Evil Harry the side villain in movie 2 ?? You would have to write it but it would probably fix the balance issues and would make easier to re-write. Part 1 is all about revenge. And part 2 is just about the dangers of falling to that revenge darkness. Just my thoughts...
Sandman and Harry Osborn carry some of the BEST and more emotional moments of the movie, I wonder how this movie would've turned out if Raimi had more creative freedom.
Well there's one way they could have solved the problem Remy could have said" okay I'll introduce the black suit but whoever's directing the Venom movie to take the black spider suit off of Peter" I think that would have solved a lot of problems.
Ive always been a spider-man fanatic, i went to see each one of those movies with my older brother since i was just a kid at the time. Even through the awkward moments of 3 i still remember enjoying it, especially toward the end.
Loved the use of Spiderman 2 music and Bully Maguire. This was a fantastic Wha Happun. I really feel bad for Sam Raimi. Executive meddling needs to end.
The messed up part about what Kirsten said is that in a recent interview regarding No Way Home, she said she doesn't want to be MJ anymore because she feels her MJ would be too old for the series 😭
Sam Raimi is going to direct Dr Strange 2? this is the first i heard of this, now i'm definitely excited to see that movie. I'm so happy he will be able to have a take on both of the most famous Steve Ditko characters. I just hope Disney lets Raimi do his thing and let Dr Strange 2 be a "Raimi movie"
I just want to thank you for including the Battle Network songs in your videos. Didn't think I hear something like that in a Spider-Man video, but I will never complain about hearing Battle Network music!
even with all its short comings the movie is still entertaining to watch and id happily watch it again over most other early 2000's super hero movies that came out at the time.
I don't know why but I thought he was going to talk about the spider man 3 game and all the talk about the movie was preamble and that he would eventually say "and all this ended up affecting the game"
I actually watched The Amazing Spider-Man yesterday and it felt more like a Batman movie to me. So much of the movie felt grim and gritty that it didn't feel as much of a Marvel movie as it did a DC movie. I know it might make sense to do that when the Lizard is the main villain, but it just felt off.
Never understood this logic executives have "This person/group have made hit after hit, making more money each time. For this new project let's take away control from them and force all this stuff on them"
It does seem pretty counterintuitive. I can only guess that their mindset went something like "guy make popular movies = $$$. Guy make popular movies with characters we want to make spinoffs for = $$$$$$$."
Venom being from outer space just kind of ruins the grounded feeling of the previous two movies. It would have been better if they took a similar route with the origin from the Ultimate Spider-Man comics.
Still baffles me that even with Spider-Man being on the top again with the MCU, Sony still tried to put their hands on the creative side again. Amy Pascal pretty much saved Spider-Man by partening with Marvel because they were about to fuck it up again after The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I feel bad for Andrew Garfield being caught on that mess, because he was an amazing Peter Parker and Spider-Man that was put to the side, so Sony could poop 73787433456 spin-offs. Thanks God Avi Arad is not involved anymore, after fucking up the same franchise TWICE, it was time to take him away.
I personally loved Sandman, I felt his story arc was short but concise and say what you will about Harry´s redemption: The team up between spidey and the new goblin was epic.
They could've easily split the movie into a two-parter by ending part 1 when Eddie becomes venom when Peter gets the ooze, or when Peter rips it off then transition into a final swing.
Technically the Lizard was next in line since they set that character up in multiple movies. A Vulture/Lizard film would have been fine, sounds like Raimi and the studio were done fighting each other.
I have had the distinct privilege of loving this movie when it came out because I was a kid, and never interacting with it again until I was old enough to understand why it's one of the best "So bad it's good" experiences. I've literally only had positive experiences with this movie so I get to love the whole Trilogy with zero guilty pleasure lol
I worked at the movies during the "2007 summer blockbusters" at the time. That was spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean 3. I rememeber the amount of groans from guests of all three movies, but mainly from Spiderman and Shrek. I gave out so many refunds. 😅
SPIDER-MAN 3 THE GAME - th-cam.com/video/dQC3Ri3_nHY/w-d-xo.html
Another wreck you might enjoy is jurrasic park 3. It would be good timing since dominion comes out in june
You should do a what happened for the ps vita
...Now do Amazing Spiderman 2
Mcu ant man had a fucked up production director changes and it took like 9 years. Also Edgar Wright was on to direct and did quite of bit of shots in the movie because they chopped his up and reshot it and added there own
I think a good place to split the movie into two if they could have would have been when venom was actually made when he screams into the camera it should have ended with a to be continued then the second movie could have continued and ended the sandman story then focused on venom
"if a director doesn't love something, it's wrong of them to make it when so many other people love it"
I would love Hollywood to learn this lesson
Same thing applies to comic books too. The guy who hated the Titans should not have been in charge of the comic run in the 2000s.
Every Netflix director adapting an anime needs to have this branded upon their heart.
If only...
They'll only learn it if people stop going to see their movies
This is why shit like Netflix anime adaptations are so terrible and the Marvel movies, for all their shallow spectacle, are lauded. You can tell the actors and the creative staff behind these cash grabs are genuinely having a good time and want to make the best thing possible. Even someone like Molina who came back for No Way Home just for a paycheck, you can tell he enjoyed stepping back into the role on some level...and Willem Dafoe DEFINITELY was all over a reprisal of Goblin.
THe birth of the Sandman was one of the best storytelling moments of the entire series..... and it turns out it's cause it was what Sam wanted to do in the first place. Sam Rami knew Sandman how to make Sandman, how to Direct Sandman, and how to visually show Sandman. if the Studio hadn't done so much micromanaging We might have gotten a Much better SPiderman 3
It would've been a much better movie if it was only about Spidey vs. Sandman. In my opinion, any way.
Sandman is a little too silly for me
Gotta be careful where you fall
@@myhatelect most comic book villains are silly...its part of the charm.
Sam Raimi was just great with most of the setpieces. Everything with Otto in the second was amazing. Spidey 3 is flawed but has some really creative action beats. Granted some of the digital doubles look sketchy but scenes like Harry attacking Peter were expertly choreographed and well put together. Black suit Spidey beating the dogshit out Flint was awesome as well!!!
Sony: "This guy made us two blockbuster movies, let's mess with his concept! There's no way that can go wrong"
I really feel sorry for the team. You can see the amount of love they put into the first two movies and even in the third, as much of a mess as it is, you can see the parts where they knew exactly what they wanted. It had tons of potential. If only Sony understood that they can't just force characters into a script like that... They could've just teased Venom at the end and make the forth one about him.
In the end Sony wasn’t wrong about venom. He’s a premier spider character and pretty much has been on an upturn since the 90s where he was the main guy since nobody else was around
Sony, like 90% of other studios, should learn their goddamn place and shouldn’t interfere in the creative process at all. There should be some rule about that, because we’ve lost many potential diamonds due to studio interference. I always point to The Wolverine vs Logan to prove this point. Same exact team behind both, one is a decent but overall generic mediocre movie, and the other, where they were unleashed to do whatever they wanted, turned out to be an incredible masterpiece.
@@alexman378 SONY SUCKS! They've actually been doing this crap since the mid 90's. Just look at Johnny Mnemonic.
@@creed8712 Did the OG comment say otherwise? The problem was shoving him in the last 15 minutes of the movie when the majority was spent on Spider-Man having the Symbiote and fighting Sandman and his best friend.
ikr the original story seemed fine enough.
Honestly even though Venom was forced in, Raimi's original intended vision for Venom being something that very literally eats away at the person physically (which is why there is previs shots of a black suited Tobey seeing an almost alive version of it in the mirror) would have been an amazing way to keep the strong horror notes and define Venom enough even with the lack of scenes.
You can still see notes of it in the final shot of the symbiote where it's all bony and trying to reform itself now Eddie's been pulled out, and I think that's also why it's the best Venom scene in the entire film by far, cos it clearly hints at something that could have been and also Venom is actually scary for that half second of screen time.
The earlier designs for Venom where he conformed to the victim's body and you could see them under the symbiote, most notably when their mouth was open, I think made Venom scarier. We're so used to seeing Venom with exaggerated facial features, like his teeth and tongue that if you were to make those traits more subtle it actually makes him creepier due to it delving into the uncanny valley.
To further expand on that I think there's even some props that shows Eddie's skull and the mouth is just like Venom implying he was being literally absorbed and disfigured by the suit.
@@Webshooters1 I feel like that had leftovers in the final movie, if you look at Eddie's teeth when he says "I like being bad" you can see he has fangs which is probably the symbiote doing that to him
In the original ending Raimi wrote, the suit comes off of Eddie and all that is left is a skeleton, the autonomous goo monster pins Peter down and says on its own "Never wound what you can't kill".
That sounds both absolutely fascinating and horrifying at the same time, I’m not the biggest spider man as my entire exposure to the series was just the old cartoon, but that cartoon was amazing and the way it portrayed Venom was terrifying to me as a kid. The idea of a crazy space parasite that can’t easily be removed taking control of my body was enough to give me nightmares, and if they took this idea and ran with it they could’ve made a really creepy movie that made Venom way cooler.
At first I wasn’t sure if you were going to cover the movie or the game.
Already covered the game on Spider-Matt
The game is pretty decent... its the movie that falls really short.
Same
"I'm going to die!"
💥
@@rn6312 true and the production process probably wasn’t Wha Happun levels of bad. That said I remember people destroying the game at the time despite sharing most of the open world conceit of the previous game.
I think the scene where Eddie becomes Venom at the church would've been an appropriate point to split the script, purely because it would make for an interesting cliffhanger and drum up hype for the big battle against Venom.
Sam raimi and the writers have talked about this. They were going to end the movie with Eddie getting the symbiote and continue the venom storyline in spiderman 4.
Sony/Arad disallowed that idea stating that they needed venom and spiderman to have a physical confrontation in spiderman 3.
This movie had every opportunity to be great but Arad stopped it at every step of the way.
@@FatherOMalley Geez, Sony/Arad couldn't just wait for a potential part 2 where the confrontation would be more impactful as well as provide more scenes with Venom doing his thing instead of cramming so many things in just 2 hours? Maybe blackmail Sandman into helping him or else he'll kill his daughter (something that was in the Spider-Man 3 game and made more sense for why Sandman would ally with Venom).
It really sucks how we missed out of a good Spider-Man 3 movie solely because Arad wanted to put Venom in so badly.
@@JayRedGear it could have been the undisputed genre defining trilogy of the 2000's. The first two movies are still top tier though.
Topher Grace left That 70s Show to film this movie
So not only did this film kill the first major spider-man film series, it also indirectly killed That 70s Show
Blame studio interference for shoving venom in here.
:(
The third film actually made a lot of money. The issue was that Raimi couldn't find a proper script despite numerous writers before the film was ultimately cancelled.
Sorry but Topher grace wasn't great as Eddie Brock/venom anyway
@@KasumiKenshirou Probably, although it would've been nice for the show to not lose two of their biggest stars during the last season. Probably would've been significantly better, and Randy would've had a smaller role (if they even still added him at all)
"It was so awful, having been the director of Spider-man 3"
It's ok, Sam. You were the director of Spider-man 2
And 1. I just finished watching the Sam Raimi trilogy this week and the first two still hold up very well. They might even be better now that I am older :3
I can't wait to see what he does with Dr. Strange 2
If you haven't seen Spider-Man No Way Home, see that, sit through all the credits and you will get your first look at Dr Strange 2.
and the evil dead movies
@@johndevitt5619 🤓🤓🤓🤓
Nice to know No way home finally broke the curse of Spider-Man films having multiple villains turning out badly, and it only took them their 3rd try .
Talk about "Third time's the charm!"
To be honest I think it's more about too many subplots rather than specifically too many villains.
Spiderman 3 juggled sandmans plot, new goblin harry plot, Peter and MJ, Eddie Brock and Gwen Stacy and the symbiote suit/venom plot. All at the same time.
Amazing Spiderman 2 only had two actual villains in electro and harry goblin. Rhino just bookended the film with an opening and closing fight. One the other hand in terms of subplots Amazing Spiderman 2 juggled Peter and Gwens plot, electro's plot, complicated Harry Osborn/goblin plot, Peter's dad's espionage plot. All at the same time. And then a depression plot right at the end while also setting up a cinematic universe.
Spiderman No Way Home also has multiple subplots but organises them so a quarter of the movie focuses on each without them all happening at the same time. It also makes so the multiple villains are just all part of the same subplot rather than each having their own.
So (SPOILER WARNING) part 1 is the identity revealed subplot sort of ending in the spell. Part 2 is the capturing all the villains subplot ending in the Dr strange fight. Part 3 is the finding cures for the villains subplot ending in the goblin fight and aunt may death. Part 4 is then the other Spidermen subplot ending in the final fight and final spell. You then have the Peter, Ned and MJ subplot being the only one to run all the way through linked to the identity reveal plot.
No Way Home is incredibly well constructed where the other two weren't.
Those villains are not new, everybody already knew them. That is the big difference
@@ParanoiaXYZ Well, even if they were known there was the risk off not giving them enough screentime or relevance.
@@the0thersyde725 I really agree there. So the matter there
Ill try to be very carefull to avoid spoiling just in case.
The matter is really knowing if you are going to have a large team off villains or just charcters in general, wich ones are the ones to lead the changes and wich ones have the role off supporting or fighting back. I was feeling either Oc or Osborn would be the leaders. ANd then Electro shows the deal off someone not wanting the change, with the other two being more off a reaactionary or complementing things for extra backup, something akind the muscle.
yet it feels like they are given enough stuff so they arent needless or too overshadowed. SOmeone had to be the 'leader' but the others had to be given enough respect
I feel like making this a two-parter would have been the best decision. Just make the first movie about the Symbiote Suit, end the movie with the church bell scene, setting up Venom for the main antagonist for the fourth movie. Hell, lose the "amnesia" plot and you could potentially have enough time for a better origin for the symbiote and let Raimi throw in the Vulture for his swansong before passing Spiderman 4 to a new director who loves the newer comics and gets Venom better.
Why not let Raimi do his original vision of SM3 instead of shoehorning in a character he doesn't know much of. Let him do the vulture and Sandman plot that he wanted.
That’s what I’ve been saying! It would’ve been perfect!
Yeah, if they just wanted Venom for a spinoff, wouldn't it have been fine to only have the symbiote suit in the Spidey films? Sam Raimi seemed to have a handle on that part, goofy emo Parker aside. Makes more sense than forcing Venom into an already overstuffed movie. Then killing him off. Wait, so what WAS Sony's plan there? How were they going to have their Venom movie if he's already dead?
@@alio6051 compromise is key fans had been wanting to see venom since the first film
@@thegodofalldragons I agree,the Black Suit Spider-Man vs. Sandman fight is one of my favorites in the entirety of the live action Spider-Man movies,Sam Raimi got the Black Suit right,the problem was Peter Parker and Venom.
I always enjoyed Spider-Man 3 despite it's issues so it's cool seeing it have a resurgence online as of late.
In my opinion i found spider man 3 to be pretty decent, it really have things in it I really like, and it's always great people are finding enjoyment out of something and not just hateing on it just because of a specific crowd telling you you're required to hate it.
For a sequel to 2 extremely beloved movies, you can do a lot worse (X-Men Last Stand). I do think SM3 deserves a lot more than to be rememberd as a "so bad, it's good" movie. The movie does enough great stuff alongside the messy stuff to justify its existence. I see it in many ways simillar to The Dark Knight Returns. A sequel that doesnt reach the height of its predecessor, but is still great and worth watching. Allthough I probably like TDKR more.
A worthwhile exploration of the philosophical core of Spider Man 3.
th-cam.com/video/UD0cNRsJugg/w-d-xo.html
It’s still not good.
It double sucks that 3 turned out the way it did, because it not only killed the Raimi series it ALSO killed The Spectacular Spider-Man series since Sony sold off their animated show rights to buy themselves time to get the reboot off the ground...
The new Mutants is another perfect example of studio interference and meddling. I'd love to see a "what happun" of that
New Mutants that was the "X-Men Dream Warriors" film right ?
And Fant4stic
Omg a new mutans what happened would be awesome. I was so hyped for the first teaser trailers shown and then the whole disney/fox buyout and reshooting fiasco was disappointing.
@FiveByFive I supremely disagree with that. It was a mess of a movie with obvious reshoots and even more obvious studio interference that change writers and directors, and even direction of the movie more often than certain AAA game developers, and shoved in MCU connections... all resulting in the movie being pretty bad and kinda boring. Though I admit it had some interesting ideas, that were not executed to their fullest
Actually no reshoots ever occured for The New Mutants. They were planned, but by the time Fox stopped screwing around and was ready to do them the cast had aged out of their roles
Sam is one of the few filmmakers who has seen runaway success and humbling failure with a huge budget, and a non budget. He always bounces back tho and that’s why he stays winning.
@@geoffreyknight2312 I don’t care.
Since you mentioned Avi Arad (probably misspelled it) in the video, I think it’s only fair I mention that around the time Spider-Man 3 was being produced/coming out, the comic Ultimate Spider-Man had a story-arc where Sam Raimi was making a Spider-Man movie, and Peter gets mad because he thinks it’s kind of a dick move to do a movie about him; more importantly, Avi Arad actually appears in the comic and is portrayed as kind of a dumbass
Ohhh, interesting
Art echoes life in this case.
Tobey maguire was also mentioned as imposter by spidey from earth 616
Gave me the impression Marvel wasn't happy about these movies. Probably 'cause Sony owned the whole stuff
@@Kill_Binho considering they tried to wipe the X-Men out of spite that Fox had the rights? Probably
@@redwaldcuthberting7195 I feel like that was just the writer protesting. They were less cooperate in the early 2000s as there kinda niche
It's great that, despite Spider Man 3, Sam Raimi's legacy is remembered fondly.
There's something positive to be said about a director willing to accept fault for his lesser work, even if most of the issues with the movie weren't his fault.
His legacy is ongoing! Dr Strange 2 is coming and I am thrilled!
Yeah with Raimi owning up to his part (and unjustly taking on more) of the blame, I not only am giving him the benefit of the doubt, but actively looking forward to his Dr. Strange
There was simply no room to flesh out Eddie or the symbiote with everything else going on, They should have just let Raimi make his version and ended Spider-Man 3 with Peter using the symbiote to defeat sandman and a part 2 picking up after that fleshing out eddie and Peter relationship with Peter discarding the symbiote and eddie getting it eventually leading to a showdown with venom and Spider-Man where it ends with Peter thinking he has gotten the symbiote from eddie but eddie somehow retaining or getting a peice back setting up his solo film
To be fair to Raimi, for someone who claimed they didn't understand Venom, he got the basics of the origin story down. And casting Topher as an anti-Peter makes sense, but Venom being a hulking beast is already very anti-Peterish. It's a shame to see how badly Raimi got screwed over during the production of this picture, it's even more of a shame to see how much he beats himself up over it. Dude directed two of the best movies of all time, he shouldn't hold this one stumble against himself. Either way, I'm sure he'll do great with Doc Strange 2. The fact that he's directing is the only real reason I'm excited for that movie. And hey, if Spider-Man 3 hadn't failed, we might not have gotten Spider-Verse or No Way Home, so there's that at least.
Also, can we all just agree that the score slapped? And the black suit itself looked awesome!
I remember being a kid and loving the first 2 movies, so I was excited for the third and saw it in theaters.
When I walked out of the theater I was left feeling extremely confused at what I just watched and wondering why it felt nothing like the other 2 movies.
As an adult, I love it for the memes.
This is another story I knew everything about it going in, I've had this knowledge for about a decade now, with new details bubbling up every few years, especially after Sony and Avi kept doing new dumb stuff to further remind people.
I always feel bad for Sam Raimi, because everyone knows him as a nice guy, and he legit TIRED with this, but the process and the backlash really affected him. Cut to now, he's doing Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, his second favorite character, and with Kevin Feige, a man who always had his back in those early days. Hell, Spider-Man 3 was Feige's last major Non-Marvel Studios movie before becoming the studio head, the things he had to go through with Avi Arad, Bryan Singer, and later Ike Perlmutter to get here.
This story had a happy ending of storts, but with the antagonist still out there, planning for the future... Wait, Sony Pictures doesn't plan all that well lol
I mean, I get the original films have their fans, I've never really cared for them cause Tobey never really figured out spider man, great Peter, not great Spider Man. I will say I feel once he acquiesced he should have made the character to the best of his ability and the changes cause he didn't get it probably doomed the film (also not being 2 parts, venom really needs a set up cause the suit thing...)
Beyond that, for spider man 4 I really agree with Sony wanting Lizard cause they had cameoed Dr Connors in the Raimi films and there's only so long someone would stick around without a payoff.
As someone who loved Dr Strange 1, I'm really not looking forward to what's going to be a change in tone and character, (granted I listen to a podcast with the first films writer so... take that with a grain of salt). I'm worried a film my parent loved will go to a sequel she can't stand through no fault of her own, and that's just....bleh.
@@jacklindsey8400 I'll be honest, Tobey's Spider Man really grew on me on recent rewatches of 1 and 2. Just getting super powers wouldn't turn you into any less of a nerd, and it really adds to it hearing his nerdiness come out when he's Spider Man. It really drives home how Peter Parker and Spider Man are the same guy just with a mask on, and how he's an everyman, not some god above everyone else.
I always felt that Rami, whose proof of concept and undeniable skills, was blackballed after this movie. Makes no sense.
The credits of No Way Home made me think Arad died.
@@SnakesGames Oh yeah it did, he's important overall, but damn, that was a bit extra lol
I wonder what Sam Raimi’s original version would of looked like?
I think the film could of been really interesting if they stuck to it just being Harry and Sandman. it could’ve really played off the Spiderman 3’s theme of forgiveness and maturity. With Harry holding a grudge on peter for playing a hand in killing his father, and peter holding a grudge on Sandman for playing a hand in killing Uncle Ben. Furthermore, if you think about it perhaps this can coincide with Raimi’s vision to further flesh out his characters; Maybe Harry and Peter could now sympathize and further understand each other more with both of them holding grudges, their characters would both have the arc of learning forgiveness and leaving the last behind them. They could shown Sandman being a kind caring father and humanize him more. I know its stupid to think about what couldve of been, but its interesting food for thought.
It's never stupid to wonder
Raimi's original vision was to have sandman and the vulture as the villains. It was also going to have the forgiveness theme.
Raimi's original vision is he wants Peter Parker To Fall in the Sin of Pride in which he did in the Actual Film but it was a bit too rushed since the film had too many characters, if venom/topher grace/gwen stacy wasn't in the movie the first half of the film would've focus on Peter slowly becoming egotistical due to his success as spider man, Sandman's Origin and Harry's slowly becoming evil, also Thomas Haden Church revealed in an Interview that Sandman and Harry Osborn will be the villains for the film, he also stated that Vulture would appear in Spider Man 3 for a few scenes then he would be the main villain for Spider Man 4
The movie could of been a lot better if the villian of Spider-Man 3 was Mr. Spider-Man himself. Being consumed by the symbiote he gives in to a violent nature kills the Sandman. Harry ultimately becomes the hero that would save his friend in the final act by helping Peter get rid of the symbiote. Peter is forced to confront the fact that he allowed himself to go down a dark path once again and the movie ends with the iconic Spider-Man quits cover scene but with Spider-Man throwing away the Black Suit symbolizing that he has finally gotten over his pride and spite.
It would've been better and very emotional. As you said, the theme of forgiveness would be the focus (Harry towards Peter and Peter towards Sandman). And it isn't stupid to think about what could've been. We all wish Arad didn't interfere with the development of the movie.
The third Spider-Man game was so faithful to the films it followed their path of shitting the bed after an amazing second installment
Nah its not a bad game... you compare it to some other SM games and it goes more on the good side.
@@rn6312 It's a 10/10 for this alone - th-cam.com/video/ngORPZj4wwY/w-d-xo.html
@@southpaw117 lol
10:33 Topher Grace is actually a pretty big fanboy who does fanedits (including the Star Wars prequels and Hobbit films) as hobbies in his spare time, so it makes perfect sense to me he would instantly "get" how the fanbase would react to his Venom.
So you’re telling me that the guy who convinced Kojima to dump David Hayter after about a 20 some odd years relationship is the same guy who put Spider-Man 3 (and other movies) on the fast track to shitsville; That’s incredible. Maybe Avi Arad should retire before he ruins into the spider-verse 2
Hayter and Kojima didn’t have a relationship; Kojima had a much closer relationship with Akio Otsuka, while Hayter was just the dub voice (remember, Japanese is Kojima’s first language). Kojima wanted Kurt Russle to play Snake in MGS3, and it was Kojima who came to Arad for help finding a replacement Snake.
@@jamjox9922 Kojima wanted to use facial capture for MGSV. He felt he needed a live-action actor who could convincingly act through his facial expressions. He spoke about this with Avi Arad (also the producer of the MGS movie), and Arad recommended Kiefer Sutherland.
Many fans took umbrage with this, because they had grown attached to Hayter’s performance as Snake. Some think there was a conspiracy that explains the recast, but really, it’s as simple as Kojima wanting a big name actor for Snake, and because he’s Japanese, he doesn’t have the same attachment to Hayter’s voice as Western fans do.
@@jamjox9922 so sometime after metal gear solid 4 but before mgs5 there were talks about a metal gear solid movie possibly being made. Kojima got introduced to avi and I’m guessing he would’ve had a hand in making it because they apparently hit it off pretty well; Good enough for Kojima to discuss his plans for msg5 or maybe what the story of the movie should be. There’s quite a few articles from around 2013 that give direct quotes that avi suggested the person he recommended for a serious and dark performance was keifer Sutherland over David hayter. Kojima apparently agreed and so on and so forth.
Holy shit, I totally forgot about that and Avi Arad is producing the MGS adaptation.
@@ForceWave-1139 first language? I wouldn’t say he can speak any others lol
Whoever directed the scene with Peter Parker Emo dancing through New York. They created something truly special and got referenced in the Into the spider verse movie the Peter in that movie didn’t like to talk about that.
I hate Raimi blames himself for the failure, it wasn't his fault, it was Sony's with their constant persistence of adding Venom and removing Vulture.
As it is, Spiderman 3 is a messy hodgepodge with a lot of great ideas that's brought down by clear studio interference. But as a meme machine, its a friggin masterpiece.
The Spiderman action figure saying "I'm going to put some dirt in your eye" almost killed me for laughing too hard
It's always so humbling to hear just how much blood sweat and tears goes into this projects
You know considering this movie came out the same year as Shrek the Third, The Simpsons Movie, TMNT and the first Transformers movie
It really reminded me how... mixed that year was for big blockbuster movies
8:43 Im currently studying film at college and I would like to say, a major what if here - firstly, though, for context, I recently rewatched Spiderman 3 and honestly, we give it crap for all the right reasons but its still enjoyable nonetheless. Here's where the what if comes into play: if Raimis carefully reread his script and rewrote it with key scenes from the finished script, combined it with the draft two parter script, we could have gotten a two parter out of this - as McMuscles pointed out. Now, follow me, in the final movie, when Eddie becomes Venom at the church, he emerges in the black suit as Venom, and then he lunges for the camera. That scene right there should have been the cut off of the film with a "To Be Continued..." it would leave audiences guessing on what was going to happen next and leave them speechless on the emerges of Venom.
The “seeya later chump” clip never fails to make me laugh
Imagine Sam Raimi had full reign over Spider-Man 3. It would of been a perfect superhero trilogy.
Spider-Man 3 wasn't the best in terms of overstuffing villains, but one thing it excelled at was tying various arcs from the past two films and giving them proper conclusions.
Did it? I mean the whole Harry Osborne plot basically amounted to Butler Ex Machina.
@@rna151 I mean Harry's arc is peppered throughout the entire trilogy, it's never the focus but it's very engaging even in 3 and is host to a lot of the best moments in the third film.
Sure the butler thing is kind of stupid considering he could have said it at literally any point in 2, but Harry was also almost zealous in worshipping Norman in 2 so I doubt he would have even believed it.
Hell even in 3 Peter tells him at the start of the film, so I think it's fair that it's only when hes lost everyone that he's actually willing to listen to the obvious (because let's be fair, if Harry was actually in his right state of mind, he'd have cast aside Norman as soon as he found out he was the goblin, someone who almost killed Harry too).
@@rna151 yeah it didn't do a good job of any of those things but Raimi still knows how to shoot an incredible action sequence
@@rna151 I mean if you think about how obvious it was that norman was the goblin to everyone even the public then you realise harry is blinded by his anger
I still cry when Peter finally learns about the truth of Sandman and Uncle Ben and says "I forgive you." Seeing him finally let go of his guilt and bitterness after receiving such a genuine, humble apology was such a nice way to cap off everything.
I’ve been binge watching what happened videos since I found this channel a few days ago.
same. I can't believe its been around for so long and I've never seen it. it's right up my alley frfr
Man do I LOVE your "What Happened" videos. So good!
This movie juggled 3 different villain storylines. The Sandman storyline, the Harry storyline, and the venom symbiote storyline. This feels like 3 different Spider-Man movies at once.
I've been up all night watching old what happuns and you drop this gem 🙏
8:35 What? Its pretty obvious. When Peter tears off the suit and it lands on Eddie, creating Venom. After that, the fourth movie has Venom as the main antagonist. Fans were speculating that this would happen back in 2006/2007!
Man u playing my jam in the vid.
The Ultimate Spider-Man theme makes me feel a certain way.
Sam Raimi have always been very outspoken about how much he detested Venom, and it clearly shows in this movie with how tacked on Venom's appearance is.
He never said that. He only said that Venom was after his time and couldn't get him like he could Vulture, Sandman, Green Goblin, Doc Ock, etc.
He tried to make it work but it just wasn't a character he was familiar with and thus unable to relate to.
I remember being in 5th grade and so excited for this movie to come out because the 2nd one was so good. Still liked it, but I learned not to overhype anything ever again.
while the film is definitely a mess personally I do have a soft spot for spider man 3 because it did really have things in it I really like(minus emo peter), it's a shame because some of the plot threads are really good but they got tangled up and not having a satisfying conclusion for them but moments like sandman' s birth showed the potential this film had to be great. Personally I found amazing Spider-Man 2 to be worse
Yeah, I can personally forgive some of the goofiness and such, there is a charm to it. I can't forgive obviously dumb things like the way they handled the situation with Harry in the entire film, the conflict between MJ and Peter coming off as remarkably petty and just letting Sandman go as if he's not gonna rob a bank next week after he's gone since he's pretty much invincible. Amazing Spider-Man 2 comes off even worse because so much of it's problems entirely stem from trying to expand it into a bigger story that it was in no way building up to, and that was just marketers hubris right there rather than passionate mishandling.
*bully McGuire
Radioactive Spider Matt.
Also no dissing Sky High on my watch Matt. That film is the awesomeness.
When they killed venom at the end, my friend insisted that Eddie Brock was still alive "because if there's no corpse he ain't dead" (given sandman's miday fakeout). My other friend and I really got on him for that because Eddie was vaporized, there is no possible corpse to leave.
People on the internet back then: "Wow, these things are terrible things"
People on the internet now: "Wow, Spider-Man 3/Amazing Spider-Man 2/Jar Jar Binks/the Virtual Boy/Snakes on a Plane/Batman & Robin/the Wii U sure were underappreciated things we now celebrate and pretend some of us all heralded in high regards!"
Jar Jar and Virtual Boy?
Give this man his account back, Scott the Woz. You can't make the Wii U cool.
I haven't met anyone saying that about Batman & Robin
Let alone Jar Jar
Yeah, Spider-Man 3 isn't great; in fact, when I think over the whole thing I always get annoyed at all of the things that could've been better. But, would I still watch it over other 2000s superhero misfires like Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and X-Men 3? Oh yeah. There's probably a few MCU films I'd rate it higher than, too. My disdain for it has softened a little, especially now that it's not Toby's very last go at the character anymore.
@@saltystick_99 I shit you not, I met a co-worker that said the SW prequel are better than we give it credit for, and (I SHIT YOU NOT) he said the pod racing and Jar Jar elements he liked. So whilr the Virtual Boy was my exaggeration, the Jar Jar statement was an actual experience I had.
To each their own, tho...
Thank you Matthew, very cool!
Sand man in this film, is imo one of the best villain scenes ever. And his script was WAY too short. And was neglected.
But I still love the films. Simply legendary.
They should have just let Raimi do what he wanted, we would have gotten to Venom eventually
I recall hearing some "interesting" stories about Wesley Snipes and the Blade movies. Might be some "What Happened" worthy stuff there.
Your videos are se good.
The script is amazing and the editing is also well done.
Here's hoping No Way Home learned from Spiderman 3's mistakes since both movies have a bunch of Spiderman's villains in them. Heck, Sandman's in both movies.
Its really good man
Oh it's like a night and day difference
@@nomorepartiezz how much are you being paid for this?
Raising the stakes every installment is one of the chief reasons why series die and reboots are so popular, giving the people more of what they wanted while resetting the power creep back to the start so it doesn't get in the way of more narrative-driven fun adventures of the characters people crave.
Am just glad it’s been public knowledge, for over a decade, that Spider-Man 3 was dragged down by studio inference and not Sam Raimi. He doesn’t deserve to be blamed for the way this turned out.
I knew it was going to be either this or Amazing Spider-Man 2. Sweet!
Honestly, massive props to Alvin Sargant for wrangling that film together the best he could. He was forced to make that script bloated as all hell, but he did manage to weave the unwanted Venom plot in pretty well with the personality change of Peter affecting every existing story like his relationships with Mary, Harry, and Sandman.
Something No Way Home managed to do was make me not only appreciate Spidey 3 more, but the Amazing films as well!
Honestly the mcu spider-man films are extremely overated
@@Superman22010 I'd agree, right up until NWH. Which imo has fully recontextualised the previous films as an origin trilogy.
@@Superman22010 the villains are great, Vulture and Mysterio... MCU spidey himself I absoluty dislike.
@@michaelhuit NWH didn’t “recontextualize” anything. That was always the point of the movies.
The MCU spider-man movies are ok but I kinda dislike how many of them relied on Spider-Man having to latch onto another character for support instead of truly standing on his own (Ironman/mysterio/dr strange/other Spider-Mans).
I remember watching Spider-Man 3 in the movie theater when I was seven and it single-handedly made Spider-Man my favorite superhero. Despite its flaws, I love watching it over and over again. I also watched No Way Home and I highly recommend it! Best movie experience I’ve ever had in my life.
I recall the Spider-man animated series from the 90's, me and my brother would watch it every saturday when it was featured on 'Live and kicking' (A games/contest & cartoon show for kids) back in 1994/5
The advantage an animated show has it can take time to include characters, expand their character before their arc begins, this happened with Norman Osbourne, Curtis Connor (aka Lizard man) and Wilson Fisk.
A number of these characters appeared episode or two before, or their arc was split across the series (connor was a reoccuring character) allowing them to develop their characters further.
This was no different to Eddie brock, he's introduced as a rival, and is even quite imposing, but is only venom after Peter has had his run with the symboite.
The difference between that and the movie is that the series had more time to develop that, also as well showing the symboite as a source that is dangerous, and not campy. There were too many villains in this.
It's true fans wanted Venom, but Venom also needed more time to be setup.
One of the reasons why Venom is popular is because he had the time to evolve from villain to a anti-hero, even within the show when he realised that Carnage was a vile creature, and even sacraficed himself in the end (leaving Parker to wonder in his monolouge ending about how people can still change for the better)
Without all that Venom in the animated series itself would had been forgettable.
Spider-Man 3 was never going to fully flesh out Venom, not with camp and with competing screentime with other characters.
I don't think sandman himself was perfect, but you can tell he had a lot of character moments and sami saw how he can garner sympathy for the character via the special effects.
A two parter probably would have worked, but if they were serious about having Venom in, they should had included eddie from the first film and have their rivalary built up over time (though you can argue there was enough of that with Harry Osbourne)
Sandman was amazing in this movie. His transformation still sends chills down my spine at how prefect it was done. He could have done the same with Vulture and do it with black suit Spiderman. I think i would have had one of the villians almost kill him and knock him into a lab where the symbiote gets on him and you see hints its from space in the lab or on the news in the background.
Have the symbiote have him fight Harry and almost kill him making him question the suit but not get rid of it.
That's a great idea. Start off with Harry trying to kill Peter who's trying to stay alive. Then Peter gets the symbiote and Harry realizes what actually happened with his dad. He wants to try to make up for it, but at this point the suit has taken over. They clash and Peter almost kills Harry before he realizes what's happening. Peter fights the suit and manages to destroy it. He and Harry go off into the sunset, the whole experience bringing them closer together and realizing what it means to have a friend.
The film would end with Eddie coming across a strange black goop. He touches it and it instantly covers him. Venom jumps toward the camera and cut to credits.
While I understand Raimi's vision, I never understood the mindset of intentionally bastardizing a character the writer didn't like for an adaptation. Sam did it with Venom, Joss Whedon did it with Wonder Woman, Steve Kloves did it to Ron Weasley, and James Gunn did it with Scrappy Doo. If you want to include parodies, Team Four Star did it with Broly and Tifa. If you're going to do an adaptation, you should put your personal bias against a character aside and improve on what you felt was wrong with the character instead of making them a joke.
Right, Raimi was the wrong man to do a Spider-Man 3 that included Venom. He should have dropped out of doing the film if he wasn't going to do the character right.
Now that you covered Spider-Man 3, perhaps you could cover The Amazing Spider-Man series. More specifically, Amazing Spider-Man 2.
I love how Topher's quote about his worry is credited as "Eric Foreman" still
Something I remembered about myself as a kid and Topher Grace being in this movie.
These films were coming out back when I was a kid, around 7, 9, and 12/13 for 1, 2, and 3 respectively. For whatever reason when the first two came out, I saw Toby Macguire and thought he was or was related to Topher Grace. I don't know if they just had a similar enough look, or demeanor/vibe but I still thought so. My family even called him Eric Forman as an in-joke to my silly kid mind making that connection. I then started seeing the differences and quickly realized that it wasn't Topher.
Fast forward to 2007 when Spiderman 3 came out and lo and behold! Eric Forman was actually in the movie! The family In-joke got that much funnier to us. It was nice to remember and look back on this little piece of the past. Great video, Matt.
Loving the Ultimate Spider-Man game menu music in the background
Taking Venom out of this movie would make it infinitely better. Sure, there’s still a lot of undeniably dumb shit, but I believe Spider-Man 3’s biggest problem is how separated its two main plot lines feel.
Big ups for incorporating that bad ass MvC Spiderman theme into the video!
I find it poetic that they used lizard and then vulture for new reboots which were the 2 villains being talked about for Raimi’s 4th movie, in my opinion proving how Vulture can easily be a better villain
This show is amazing and you’re really cool. The amount of research you do for entertainment purposes is inspiring.
It's weird they couldn't find a place to split the film into two. Unless they meant without re-writes. Seems like...obvious to have Part 1 be about Black Suit and end with its removal/taking over Eddie. And Movie 2 is the Venom story? I'm no filmmaker but...that seems like an obvious splitting point?? Have Sandman beaten by Black Suit in part 1 and have Evil Harry the side villain in movie 2 ?? You would have to write it but it would probably fix the balance issues and would make easier to re-write. Part 1 is all about revenge. And part 2 is just about the dangers of falling to that revenge darkness. Just my thoughts...
Sandman and Harry Osborn carry some of the BEST and more emotional moments of the movie, I wonder how this movie would've turned out if Raimi had more creative freedom.
Well there's one way they could have solved the problem Remy could have said" okay I'll introduce the black suit but whoever's directing the Venom movie to take the black spider suit off of Peter" I think that would have solved a lot of problems.
Ive always been a spider-man fanatic, i went to see each one of those movies with my older brother since i was just a kid at the time. Even through the awkward moments of 3 i still remember enjoying it, especially toward the end.
I remember watching Spider-Man 3 in theaters and kind of enjoying it at the time.
It took me 2 years to realize you changed it from Wha Happun to What Happened.
Loved the use of Spiderman 2 music and Bully Maguire. This was a fantastic Wha Happun. I really feel bad for Sam Raimi. Executive meddling needs to end.
The messed up part about what Kirsten said is that in a recent interview regarding No Way Home, she said she doesn't want to be MJ anymore because she feels her MJ would be too old for the series 😭
I am so glad you included music from Ultimate Spiderman. Massive nostalgia throwback!
Sam Raimi is going to direct Dr Strange 2? this is the first i heard of this, now i'm definitely excited to see that movie. I'm so happy he will be able to have a take on both of the most famous Steve Ditko characters. I just hope Disney lets Raimi do his thing and let Dr Strange 2 be a "Raimi movie"
Danny Elfman is on music so the team is back together. Sam and Danny are a team I'll always love to see behind any movie
Sooo, what's your thoughts about Doctor Strange 2?
I just want to thank you for including the Battle Network songs in your videos. Didn't think I hear something like that in a Spider-Man video, but I will never complain about hearing Battle Network music!
Tobey is still my Spider-Man.
even with all its short comings the movie is still entertaining to watch and id happily watch it again over most other early 2000's super hero movies that came out at the time.
This is the video where he started spelling "What Happened?" in the thumbnail
I can't stand it, tbh
I don't know why but I thought he was going to talk about the spider man 3 game and all the talk about the movie was preamble and that he would eventually say "and all this ended up affecting the game"
I actually watched The Amazing Spider-Man yesterday and it felt more like a Batman movie to me. So much of the movie felt grim and gritty that it didn't feel as much of a Marvel movie as it did a DC movie. I know it might make sense to do that when the Lizard is the main villain, but it just felt off.
Never understood this logic executives have
"This person/group have made hit after hit, making more money each time. For this new project let's take away control from them and force all this stuff on them"
It does seem pretty counterintuitive. I can only guess that their mindset went something like "guy make popular movies = $$$. Guy make popular movies with characters we want to make spinoffs for = $$$$$$$."
They try to do things harder, not smarter. Is not surprising their plans backfire baddly
Venom being from outer space just kind of ruins the grounded feeling of the previous two movies. It would have been better if they took a similar route with the origin from the Ultimate Spider-Man comics.
Still baffles me that even with Spider-Man being on the top again with the MCU, Sony still tried to put their hands on the creative side again. Amy Pascal pretty much saved Spider-Man by partening with Marvel because they were about to fuck it up again after The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I feel bad for Andrew Garfield being caught on that mess, because he was an amazing Peter Parker and Spider-Man that was put to the side, so Sony could poop 73787433456 spin-offs.
Thanks God Avi Arad is not involved anymore, after fucking up the same franchise TWICE, it was time to take him away.
Instead, Amy Pascal fucked up Ghostbusters 2016.
So yeah...
One episode of what happened always leads me to a spiral of like 10 more
I personally loved Sandman, I felt his story arc was short but concise and say what you will about Harry´s redemption: The team up between spidey and the new goblin was epic.
OMG the ultimate Spider-Man music in the background! The NOSTALGIA!
waiting for "What Happened to Wha Happun?"
They could've easily split the movie into a two-parter by ending part 1 when Eddie becomes venom when Peter gets the ooze, or when Peter rips it off then transition into a final swing.
Technically the Lizard was next in line since they set that character up in multiple movies. A Vulture/Lizard film would have been fine, sounds like Raimi and the studio were done fighting each other.
"Add Venom into the story" they said. "It'll sell more toys that way" they said.
I have had the distinct privilege of loving this movie when it came out because I was a kid, and never interacting with it again until I was old enough to understand why it's one of the best "So bad it's good" experiences.
I've literally only had positive experiences with this movie so I get to love the whole Trilogy with zero guilty pleasure lol
I worked at the movies during the "2007 summer blockbusters" at the time. That was spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean 3. I rememeber the amount of groans from guests of all three movies, but mainly from Spiderman and Shrek. I gave out so many refunds. 😅
I actually really enjoyed Spider-Man 3. Shame so many people hate it. It's not perfect, but it is very entertaining.