Spider-Man 3 Would Have Been Much Better Without Venom

Maguire and Dunst in Spider-Man 3

Why Raimi's Original Idea Was Better

Spider-Man 3 already had a lot on its plate, with Peter's inflating ego, Mary Jane's struggling acting career, Harry's plan for revenge, and Flint Marko's personal problems. Adding Venom to the mix made the film too overstuffed for its own good, and as a result, none of these storylines (with the arguable exception of Peter's) are fully developed. Making Brock more of a presence than he initially was took away from other areas of the narrative - most notably Harry's. Given how Spider-Man 2 ended, the younger Osborn should have been the primary focus of 3. The natural progression for the trilogy was to have Peter and Harry's conflict come to a head - rather than have Harry hit his head and forget all about his motivation.

Related: In Defense of Spider-Man 3

Vulture is one of the oldest Spider-Man foes, dating back to 1963. However, it would be hard to argue his fan base is as sizable as Venom's. If Vulture was announced for Spider-Man 3, expectations for the character's big screen debut wouldn't be so high. Relegating Adrian Toomes to a petty crook Your Friendly Neighborhood apprehends in the beginning and returns in the end isn't as severe a screenwriting sin as mangling the execution of Venom. It's clear what Raimi was going for with the surprise casting of Topher Grace (making Eddie a mirror of Peter), but it was a deviation from the source material that upset die-hard readers. Yes, fans like seeing their favorite characters on the big screen, but they prefer it to be done properly more than anything.

Why Raimi Didn't Make Spider-Man 4

Raimi's trilogy was one of Sony's flagship franchises in the early 21st century, so the studio was keen on continuing it. They began development on a Spider-Man 4, with Raimi, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and others all returning. The director once again revisited the Vulture idea and also considered featuring the Lizard (Dylan Baker played Dr. Curt Connors in the last two movies). The script went through numerous revisions, with scribes such as James Vanderbilt and Gary Ross taking stabs at it. Ultimately, Sony pulled the plug on the movie and opted instead to go with the Amazing Spider-Man reboot.

The main reason Spider-Man 4 fell apart is because it was scheduled for release on May 6, 2011, and Raimi was concerned he wouldn't be able to meet that date. Even after four screenplay drafts, he had difficulty cracking the story and didn't want to rush something for the sake of hitting the planned premiere. Especially after 3 turned out lackluster, Raimi most likely saw a fourth film as an opportunity to bounce back and get the series back on track. Remember, this was years before Sony made a deal with Marvel Studios to share the Spider-Man film rights, so they had to be in production on a new movie by a certain time or else the right would revert back to Marvel. Raimi chose to bow out and let a different creative team take a shot rather than risk sullying up his trilogy's legacy even further.


Given that Raimi hit back to back home runs with his first two Spider-Man films (2 was even named one of the AFI's top 10 films in 2004), it's a bit surprising Sony mucked up the third movie as much as they did. Raimi was not warranted the same creative freedom Warner Bros. gave Christopher Nolan on the Dark Knight trilogy, even though he was just as deserving. The downfall of the trilogy can be traced back to Sony's insistence Venom be a part of the third movie, and the studio's been floundering ever since. The Amazing Spider-Man series crashed and burned after two films, once again derailed by too many villains and forced subplots. Hopefully, they've learned their lessons now, and Venom can just be an entertaining comic book movie.

More: Venom Needs To Beat Its Shared Universe Obsession


Key Release Dates
  • Venom (2018) release date: Oct 05, 2018
Jack Black The Thing Kingpin
Jack Black Wants to Play Marvel's Kingpin or The Thing

More in SR Originals