My observations of Spider-Man 3...
(Originally written 12/2/2007)
I was watching it yesterday for the seventh time (that's right; twice in the theaters and 5 times on DVD) and I picked up on something that I hadn't realized before. Let me start from the beginning.
The first time I watched Spider-Man 3, I got so angry that they rewrote the death of Uncle Ben, what with Sandman having been involved. It angered me because Uncle Ben's death is the driving force behind Peter Parker being Spider-Man. See, Peter blames himself for his uncle's death because, as it turns out, the robber that he failed to stop earlier in the night is the same one who shot Uncle Ben. Anyone who reads comics knows and understands this.
However, in the movie, (I guess this is a good time for a Spoiler Alert) it turns out that the bullet that killed Uncle Ben came from Flint Marko's gun, not the robber that Peter failed to stop. This bothered me when I first saw the movie. Why? I'll tell you. It means, even if Peter Parker stopped the robber, his uncle would be dead, at least in the situation that Peter imagined in the movie. Were this to be true, nothing Peter did that night would have saved his uncle, thus, his uncle's death could not be his fault. A equals B, Peter Parker has no motivation for being Spider-Man.
But, at the end of the movie, when the Sandman explains to Peter what happened, I realized that the two events were connected. Sandman tells Peter that when he, Flint Marko, approached Uncle Ben to take the car he, Uncle Ben, tried to reason with Marko. The flashback shows that Marko was receptive to what Ben had to say, until his partner came running out with the cash. At that point, the gun accidentally goes off, killing Ben.
See, Peter's motivation is not shattered. Had Peter stopped the robber earlier, he would not have surprised Flint Marko while he was holding the gun on Uncle Ben and the gun would have, most likely, not gone off.
It could also mean that Peter Parker could have stopped the evolution of the Sandman. Look at it this way. Peter stops the crook, which means that Ben and Marko's conversation would not have been interrupted. Ben convinces Marko to turn his life around. Marko does not get pinched for whatever crime he commits that throws him in jail. This means he does not escape from jail, go on the lam from the cops and never winds up in the experimental sand pit. If anything, the events in Spider-Man 3 would solidify Peter Parker's resolve to be Spider-Man.
Realizing this makes me like this movie even more.
(Originally written 12/2/2007)
I was watching it yesterday for the seventh time (that's right; twice in the theaters and 5 times on DVD) and I picked up on something that I hadn't realized before. Let me start from the beginning.
The first time I watched Spider-Man 3, I got so angry that they rewrote the death of Uncle Ben, what with Sandman having been involved. It angered me because Uncle Ben's death is the driving force behind Peter Parker being Spider-Man. See, Peter blames himself for his uncle's death because, as it turns out, the robber that he failed to stop earlier in the night is the same one who shot Uncle Ben. Anyone who reads comics knows and understands this.
However, in the movie, (I guess this is a good time for a Spoiler Alert) it turns out that the bullet that killed Uncle Ben came from Flint Marko's gun, not the robber that Peter failed to stop. This bothered me when I first saw the movie. Why? I'll tell you. It means, even if Peter Parker stopped the robber, his uncle would be dead, at least in the situation that Peter imagined in the movie. Were this to be true, nothing Peter did that night would have saved his uncle, thus, his uncle's death could not be his fault. A equals B, Peter Parker has no motivation for being Spider-Man.
But, at the end of the movie, when the Sandman explains to Peter what happened, I realized that the two events were connected. Sandman tells Peter that when he, Flint Marko, approached Uncle Ben to take the car he, Uncle Ben, tried to reason with Marko. The flashback shows that Marko was receptive to what Ben had to say, until his partner came running out with the cash. At that point, the gun accidentally goes off, killing Ben.
See, Peter's motivation is not shattered. Had Peter stopped the robber earlier, he would not have surprised Flint Marko while he was holding the gun on Uncle Ben and the gun would have, most likely, not gone off.
It could also mean that Peter Parker could have stopped the evolution of the Sandman. Look at it this way. Peter stops the crook, which means that Ben and Marko's conversation would not have been interrupted. Ben convinces Marko to turn his life around. Marko does not get pinched for whatever crime he commits that throws him in jail. This means he does not escape from jail, go on the lam from the cops and never winds up in the experimental sand pit. If anything, the events in Spider-Man 3 would solidify Peter Parker's resolve to be Spider-Man.
Realizing this makes me like this movie even more.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment