The Amazing Spider-Man
Spider-Man 4 is tentatively scheduled to arrive in May of 2011. With Sam Raimi, Kirsten Dunst, Tobey Maguire and J.K. Simmons all confirmed to return - but do we really want Spidey back for another go around ???
As for the next villian.....Sam Raimi is thinking of using Morbius. According to Empire via MTV. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Ya know, as a long-time Spidey fan, they have really worn me out on it. What's sad is, most of the better, and better known villains, have been used. They wasted Venom by shoe-horning him into Spider-man 3, which forced them to retro-fit the script for his inclusion. Gwen Stacy was merely used as a rival to M.J., and then literally just disappears, never even being given her own personality or story. Since we're on the topic, I've always had a problem with these movies, as many fans are aware, Spidey was a Pariah in the comics. In all three movies Spidey is cheered and greeted warmly by the public, except for some scathing tabloid article by the Bugle, which most seem to not put much stock in, he is treated essentially the same as Superman or Batman.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
he was all right in the series but i dont think morbius is worthy of the big screen
mayb if they paid any/all penality fees for wesley snipes to appear as blade but like theyd do that |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I wouldn't mind one more, I think the series needs to go out on a better note then Spiderman 3.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
The Spiderman films IMO are nothing Specail, it is a shame I really think it would be awesome if they made Spiderman into a more of a darker series just like they have done with Batman.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by n3wt (Post 494857)
The Spiderman films IMO are nothing Specail, it is a shame I really think it would be awesome if they made Spiderman into a more of a darker series just like they have done with Batman.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
i'll see it if they make another one...i'm a sucker for not just comic book movies but super power movies :yup: but mostly comic book nevermind, that seems to be an unpopular thing to like lately but i haven't seen one comic book movie that i haven't enjoyed. I've seen some BAD ones but they were all very entertaining IMO
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
There is already a thread on this, and they just keep 'em coming, so if you don't agree to replace this thread with this one (no offense), then there will probably be like two more Spidey 4 threads by the end of the year.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
They should just merge them together looks no one has posted in the other thread lately
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Yes.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by Vertical Gunn
There is already a thread on this, and they just keep 'em coming, so if you don't agree to replace this thread with this one (no offense), then there will probably be like two more Spidey 4 threads by the end of the year.
Originally Posted by mikeython1
They should just merge them together...
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Im sure if there was a problem Yoda would close or merge the thread. So for now everthing looks fine.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Yeah. But then again there is another Spider-Man 4 thread, so the problem isn't closed.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by Vertical Gunn (Post 495040)
Yeah. But then again there is another Spider-Man 4 thread, so the problem isn't closed.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I think people take the Spiderman movies too seriously. They are very over the top and work great as comic book movies , you can't mix them with Batman Begins and Dark Knight - those are incredibly more realist.
And then there are people who love Superman : The Movie , but think Spiderman 3 is too wacky. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by Vertical Gunn (Post 495040)
Yeah. But then again there is another Spider-Man 4 thread, so the problem isn't closed.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by Sammieb91 (Post 495044)
What thread is that? I searched for an official one and all there is was a thread about Carnage in Spiderman. I'm kinda sick of repeating myself. There are no other Spiderman 4 threads.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I doubt I'll like it that much, the Spider-Man movies are really overrated.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
The Spider-Man films aren't overrated at all, in my opinion (Nolan's Batman films, though...). I would be very excited for a fourth Spider-Man film. I have liked every Spider-Man film so far.
Even Spider-Man 3... it wasn't great but it wasn't THAT bad. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by Vertical Gunn (Post 495184)
You searched huh? Well so did I and found this.
wow. I searched in both search engines. This web sites and Google's Movie Forums search engine. That thread didn't show up. Thanks Vertical Gunn. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Well if you Ask my kids they will say we love to have 100 more part of spider , but For me i really enjoyed I & II Part but third one make me Feel Really bad . and for me maybe that was end of the spider
|
Spider Man 4 villain/s and Disney takeover of Marvel..
This movie is awaiting its release come 2011. Tobey Maguire is returning as your friendly neighbourhood Spider Man, Kristen Dunst is also back as MJ Watson and Sam Raimi is directing.
There are a lot of avenues for yet another Spider Man movie. Lots of characters and villains are yet to be added and/or introduced in the film franchise. All first three films rocked big time except maybe for the second. I personally didn’t like the second film but it was still ayt.. Now that there’s a fourth one coming up, I don’t know how the filmmakers will keep it all interesting for moviegoers. Some of the villains that had been suggested are the following: The Lizard, Sinister Six, Vulture, Electro, Carnage, and Kraven the Hunter. Interesting list.. Wonder how they’ll play it.. On a different note, I wonder how the takeover of Disney over Marvel will play in the production of the film... Sheesh. Are you guys by any chance anticipating the next Spidey movie or have you got tired of it? Who would you want to be the villain in the next film? Discuss your thoughts here.. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Hey Zed, who drew that picture? I love the smaller Spidey.
|
'Spider-Man 4' Updates: Kirsten Dunst Confirmed & Same-Day IMAX Release In addition to confirming the involvement of the previously announced Raimi and Maguire, Columbia notes that actress Kirsten Dunst is officially reprising her role as Mary Jane Watson, whose future with the "Spider-Man" property was previously uncertain. Additionally, Columbia announced that Spider-Man 4 will hit IMAX theaters on May 5, 2011, the same date as the film's worldwide release. "The last two 'Spider-Man' releases have been available in IMAX theaters, and we're very much looking forward to our return to a wider IMAX theatre network with this exciting new chapter in the continuing adventures of Spider-Man," said Rory Bruer, President, Worldwide Distribution for Sony Pictures Releasing. "The addition of so many new IMAX locations will give even more fans of Spider-Man an opportunity to experience the action and adventure in a unique way." Previously, Sony Pictures heads Amy Pascal and Michael Lynton mentioned that Spider-Man 4 might film in 3-D, citing James Cameron's Avatar as a potential game-changer in the movie scene. While official word of the movie's 3-D component remains to be heard, it's at least a comfort that Spidey will be swinging in IMAX theaters -- even if that was probably a given before this announcement, anyway. Still, between this news and the prospect of a bigger role for Bruce Campbell, Spider-Man 4 is shaping up to be a pretty exciting film. Source: MTV |
Sam Raimi talks Spider-Man 4 villains It doesn’t take a person with high intelligence to work out that Spider-Man 4 director Sam Raimi won’t be revealing any important plot points or possible villains at this stage in the game, but Splash Page tried to get something out of him, and while he didn’t let anything out (as expected) he did talk about the thought process behind choosing the next villain.
“I love the Lizard,” said Raimi. “There’s a great story there in the Marvel comic books about Dr. Connors. I’m less familiar with Carnage.”
Raimi then took a long pause. “I’m not allowed to say at this point,” he confessed. “What we’re trying to do right now is really understand the journey Peter is going to go on this time and have the villain maybe be a counter to that growth, something that he has to overcome,” Raimi said. “Or maybe he has to grow in a way to overcome the villain, because there always seem to be stories of coming of age, of a young man growing up and learning things about life, so once we are identifying the exact movement that Peter has to grow to, I think the villain—and we’re trying this right now; we’re trying to choose a villain based on who would be the proper counter to that growth, so we really have dramatic conflict.” |
Sam Raimi going ‘back to basics’ with Spider-Man 4, talks 5 & 6 Sam Raimi has been interviewed quite a lot recently and earlier this week he was talking about possible villains for Spider-Man 4. Coventry Blog has a quote from him saying that he agrees that there were too many villains in Spider-Man 3, and that he learned ‘limitations’ while filming Drag Me To Hell which he hopes to bring to Spider-Man 4:
Asked about complaints that there were too many villains in Spider-Man 3, he said: “I think having so many villains detracted from the experience. I would agree with the criticism.”
Raimi added that he had learned some new lessons and storytelling tricks from his last film, Drag Me to Hell. “I think I’ve learned about the importance of getting to the point and the importance of having limitations, and I’m hoping to take that into a production where I’m actually allowed to explore with more of the tools to pull it off with a little more splendor. “I hope I don’t lose that edge that I’ve just found. That would be my approach to ‘Spider-Man 4′: to get back to the basics.”
“Every time I make one of the ‘Spider-Man’ movies, I have to ask myself, is the character still intriguing to me?” Raimi told MTV News. “Do I love the character? Am I dying to tell the next story of Peter Parker and Spider-Man?”
“And so far the answer has been yes,” he said. “If ever I feel sated, like I’ve got no more to say or I’m not really super-excited about it,” Raimi continued, “because I know I’ll also love it, but I’ve got to be super-excited about it. If I can’t reach that level of commitment and excitement, I think then there’d be somebody else better to do justice to the story.” “You have to ask me in two-and-half years,” he laughed. Source: Filmonic |
I go to I Watch Stuff.com for my updates and they had this to say about Rami's latest comments:
Though still refusing to describe Spider-Man 3 as a "bullsh*t clusterf*ck" (the only truly accurate way to describe it), director Sam Raimi admitted to the Coventry Telegraph that some of the criticism of his superhero film might have been accurate. Lol. |
Is The Lizard Spider-Man 4’s Only Villain? Less than a week ago, Dylan Baker confirmed that he’d be returning as Dr. Curt Connors in Spider-Man 4. At the time, he said he’d be regulated to a small background role similar to his appearances in the last two Spidey films. Now, comes an insider report from Jim over at Market Saw who’s saying that The Lizard may not only be in Spider-Man 4, but that he’d be the only villain of the movie. This of course would bring the franchise back to its one-villain roots as utilized in the first two movies of the series. Sam Raimi did say that he loves The Lizard… The info allegedly comes from a reliable inside source, but we know that the script is still being worked on by Gary Ross. If true, this wouldn’t be unexpected as the franchise so far has made plenty of effort in tying each film to its predecessors and Raimi made sure to include Dr. Curt Connors in the last two movies. Three villains, as we saw awfully featured in Spider-Man 3 is simply too much, but as we’ve seen in other comic book films, two can work nice if done right. So, whether that means The Lizard is the featured super villain or a secondary one, don’t be surprised to see Dylan Baker grow some scales in Spider-Man 4. Remember though, this next Spider-Man adventure may be the last time we see Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker and Sam Raimi helming behind the camera. With that in mind, is Dylan Baker’s Lizard really the last villain we see Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man duke it out with? Is that an epic enough conclusion to their Spider-Man franchise which may continue with a Spider-Man 5 & 6 starring different actors and helmed by a different director? Spider-Man 4 is scheduled for an early March production start and will hit theaters May 6, 2011. Source: Screenrant |
Spidey 4 rumors continue.....
Spider-Man 4 Villain Is…Black Cat? The past couple of weeks have been filled with a ton of Spider-Man talk with the majority of the chatter being focused on which villain fans can look forward to seeing our favorite web-slinger battle in Spider-man 4. Well, the speculation can subside (for the time being) as the folks over at Mania.com have heard from “reliable sources” that Sam Raimi is in the midst of casting the villains for the next installment of the Spider-Man franchise. Some of the possibilities that we’ve heard were Bruce Campbell as Mysterio, Dr. Connors (Dylan Baker) as The Lizard and the possibility of William Defoe returning as Green Goblin. With Sam Raimi receiving complete control over Spider-Man 4 (unlike Spider-Man 3) he has decided to go in a complete different direction than what was previously discussed and has allegedly chosen the formidable Felicia Hardy, known the fans around the world as the skilled cat burglar Black Cat as one of the villains for Spider-Man 4. Not only is Mania.com revealing that Black Cat is one of the villains, but it appears that they also have a major Hollywood actress as one of the top contenders for the role. Who is said actress? Well, Betty White fans may be disappointed that the Golden Girl star has been passed up, but hopefully the Time Travelers Wife, The Notebook and the upcoming Sherlock Holmes actress, Rachel McAdams, will be a suitable replacement. Why Black Cat you ask? Well Black Cat and conversely Felicia Hardy fit perfect into the formula that Raimi uses when choosing his Spider-Man villains: they must not only pose a threat to Spider-Man alone, but must also be entwined with Peter Parker’s life. Fans of the comic series will remember that Black Cat has spent some time not only as girlfriend to the friendly neighborhood arachnoid, but also changing from a villain to an ally. With Raimi selecting Black Cat as villain number one and looking for someone intertwined in Spider-Man/Peter Parker’s live, does this mean Dylan Baker will get to spend some additional time in the make-up chair as Dr. Connors transforms into Lizard? While reports seem to indicate that this will be a two-villain movie, sources are saying that Dr. Connors will not be appearing as Lizard because they’re currently casting a male for the other villain role, and since Dylan Baker has been cast since the second movie, Lizard is out of the running (confirming what Baker had previous stated). Source: Screenrant |
Update: The Black Cat rumblings for Spiderman 4 is complete and utter bullsh*t. A simple rumor plain and simple.
|
OMG I can't wait!
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I really want to see another Spiderman movie, but only because the third one was so bad I feel like I need a great one to revamp the tainted image of spidey :(.
|
Will Spider-Man 4 Feature Peter and Mary Jane's Baby? If a new casting breakdown is any indicator, we might see some Spidey offspring in the upcoming sequel. Spoiler TV has posted a casting breakdown for Spider-Man 4 that could possibly be for the child of Tobey McGuire's Peter Parker and Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson.
2 or 3 year old boy to play 2 year old, Caucasian with RED HAIR, an adorable toddler with an engaging personality, on set experience preferred. IDENTICAL TWINS ONLY
Spider-Man 4 will go before cameras in March of 2010 for a May 5, 2011 release. Source: Movieweb |
Re: Spider-Man 4
So I take it that Mysterio would be a campy villain? The Lizard seems like a step backwards, since we had a guy made of sand, and an alien symbiote, in the previous installment. The Goblin, really? That's original. IMO, aside from the importance to the Spidey mythos, the Goblin is the goofiest and weakest of the villians. It seems they're running out of viable, well-known villains that could raise the bar. They should never have shoe-horned Venom in the third one, it was a waste.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
rachel mcadams won't be the blackcat!!! but that doesn't mean there won't be a blackcat!
|
Spider-Man 4 Put on Indefinite Hold It seems that our favorite web-slinger won't be slinging any webs on the big screen anytime soon. IESB.net is reporting that production on Spider-Man 4 has been put on hold. It seems that the studio and director Sam Raimi are at odds over who should be the villain in the film. Here's an excerpt from the sites' article:
Raimi is pushing hard for the Vulture to be the big baddie, something he also pushed for in the third film to star alongside the Sandman but didn't get and we all know how that one turned out. Vulture was to do his evil deeds alongside the new Goblin and Sandman. A single concept art sketch can be seen in "The Art of Spider-Man 3" book. Vulture and Flint Marko would have been cellmates who escaped together, with Vulture pressuring the more passive Marko into committing crimes.
On the flip side, who does the studio want to be the villain? Our source says they seem to only be interested in featuring which ever character is selling books right now but basically they have no idea, just not the Vulture. Click here for the site's full article on Spiderman 4 (or shall we say Spider-M4n). Source: Movieweb |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I don't think the studio 'doesn't care' who the villain is and just want the one that is selling the books. Seems a bit one sided.
Also, calling it Spider-M4n is lame. |
Exclusive: Spider-Man 4 is NOT in Trouble! Just yesterday, IESB reported a rumor that Spider-Man 4 "has been been placed on indefinite hold." The site continued by saying that "several department heads working on the Spider-M4n production were notified of the halt last Thursday. Spidey and friends have some issues that need to be dealt with before production can move forward once again." Studio sources tells us this is not true. They are simply on hiatus for the holidays and production will resume in the new year. This is a very common practice on films, and not really surprising. The fourth installment is scheduled for a release in conventional and IMAX theaters on May 5, 2011. Source: ComingSoon.net |
Re: Spider-Man 4
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
|
Where will the reboot take Peter Parker? Sony tweeted this little nugget of info:
Spider-Man: Summer 2012: Peter Parker is going back to high school when the next Spider-Man hits theaters in the summer of 2012.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I liked the 70s show of spiderman,
but i dont like the movies much maybe it uses too much cgi, i hope that in Spiderman 4 they make a radical change in the way the previous movies have been done, just like Batman movies changed. |
[quote=jrs;594136]
Originally Posted by jrs
why ruin Raimi's vision and give us crap.
They can bring back Bryce Dallas Howard, though. I definitely welcome that. ;) |
More on that Spider-Man reboot… There was talk of Sony rebooting the franchise before Spider-Man 4 was announced. This was before Sam Raimi signed on to direct and Tobey came onboard, but their return put those plans on the back burner. James Vanderbilt was the first writer to start work on the script, however David Lindsay-Abaire was then hired to do re-writes (or possibly start from scratch). In July Gary Ross was brought in to do further re-writes, which didn’t look very good at all. Something was obviously not working if three writers were needed to do revisions of the script. With hindsight the news in August that James Vanderbilt had been hired by Sony to write Spider-Man 5 & 6 should have got a bit more attention, however as Spider-Man 4 was developing nobody though much of it. According to the report Vanderbilt’s script would be the blueprint for a franchise reboot should Maguire, Raimi and Dunst choose not to return. Looking back it seems Sony were developing a ‘Plan B’ in case Spider-Man 4 didn’t work out. With the continued re-writes and Raimi signing on to direct World of Warcraft things weren’t certain. Source: Filmonic |
Spider-Man Reboot to Offer a More Gritty Take on the Franchise Some new details are emerging from the fallout of yesterday's bombshell news that Spider-Man 4 is being dropped in favor of a reboot of the whole franchise. Entertainment Weekly is reporting that it seems Sony was planning on rebooting the franchise all along, although earlier than it had anticipated. Here's an excerpt from the article.
According to studio insiders, Sony was working on both Raimi's Spider-Man 4 and the new origin story from James Vanderbilt, who wrote Zodiac. The original plan was to keep the Spider-Man gang together for one last film in 2011 before rebooting the series in 2012. When it became clear that Raimi would not be able to make the summer 2011 release date planned for Spider-Man 4, the studio opted to scrap Spider-Man 4 altogether, and focus solely on the series reboot.
This time around, the series will place Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today's issues.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Re-boots don't always work. Remember Superman? But that was a long dormant series. I've never hear of a studio planning to reboot a series that was still enormously popular.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
A reboot, for a film series that began in 2002? Definition of jump the shark. :rolleyes: Let the body cool for God sake.
|
Originally Posted by will.15 (Post 594331)
I've never hear of a studio planning to reboot a series that was still enormously popular.
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087 (Post 594338)
A reboot, for a film series that began in 2002? Definition of jump the shark. :rolleyes: Let the body cool for God sake.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I think we can say it's enormously popular; even Spider-Man 3, the worst film both commercially and critically, got a 62% on the Tomatometer and made over $330 million domestically. It was certainly a letdown, but I think part of that had to do with the first two being incredibly good.
That said, I absolutely agree that it's a bit stale and that they probably didn't have anywhere to go from there. I'm not sure a really long-running series of Spider-Man films can work all that well. After a few, Peter Parker's gotta grow up a little, and then you're just parading one villain in after another and sort of treading water. Frankly, I think this is true of lots of franchises. Widespread success needs real developments with real weight; anything long-running is going to feel like a soap opera. Heck, just look at any comic book series; how many times do the characters die, come back, save the world, save an alternate dimension, etc? It's bound to get goofy. I don't know if these things can go on very long without become increasingly niche. Anyway, a grittier reboot sounds intriguing, though I'm still bummed that Raimi's done with them. He made two incredibly good superhero films and one sub-par one; I like those odds, and kinda wish he'd take another crack at it. |
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 594443)
I think we can say it's enormously popular; even Spider-Man 3, the worst film both commercially and critically, got a 62% on the Tomatometer and made over $330 million domestically. It was certainly a letdown, but I think part of that had to do with the first two being incredibly good.
As far as its commercial take, I can't see how an established franchise film isn't going to rake in that kind of coin when the studio pours $250 million alone in marketing the damn thing. When that film came out, it was Spider-Man 3 everywhere. Also, let's not forget that after opening weekend, the film saw a 61% drop in viewing. The next week? 50% drop. Methinks word got around. :) |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I think Spiderman had more potential for a long run than either Batman or Superman because he had more memorable villains and growing up and getting older works for that character (up to a point). The problems with the third one didn't require completely abandoning the series. And gritty doesn't work for Spiderman.
|
Originally Posted by Sleezy (Post 594442)
Again, I think the franchise has already jumped the shark. (Daddio-Peter anyone? Green Goblin in a paintball mask?) Regardless, Variety is saying that Columbia Pictures and Sony face a "do-or-die" situation of releasing the film before the rights revert back to Marvel/Disney. So I'm guessing they're in quite a hurry to turn out a film (and hopefully, a profit).
My problems with 3, are as follows; introducing Gwen Stacy only as a plot device to add an annoyance for M.J., then having the character just leave with no resolution or point to the character beyond that. Then there's M.J. herself, they attempt to make her more relatable by giving her her own problems to deal with, but instead they portray her as a borderline narcissist, who spends most of the film whining because she's not a movie star, and that her overly sensitive boyfriend doesn't cater enough to her pity party, so she is almost willing to cheat on him with his best friend. They managed to make her more whiny and annoying than Peter was in the first two movies, BTW, Peter Parker isn't supposed to be a whiner, just a guy with problems. :indifferent: M.J. is not supposed to be a whiny, neurotic, wannabe actress, with Daddy issues either. The shoe-horning of Venom into the script was obviously hindering, but given that the Sandman story arc was weak at best, perhaps it saved us from more weeping pleas for forgiveness, and oh yeah having a sick daughter so justifies a chartacter's actions. :indifferent: Finally, repeating the same climax three films over; M.J. gets kidnapped, big battle, villain has realization, the end, is really tired. I'm not saying they shouldn't try a new direction, but I don't think re-telling the origin is necessary, and I think they should wait a while to do so. |
Originally Posted by Sleezy (Post 594445)
Eh, I think the 62% is incredibly generous, and not entirely honest, I fear (the conspiracy theorist in me can't get over so many rave reviews of the film at its release... payoff anyone?).
As far as its commercial take, I can't see how an established franchise film isn't going to rake in that kind of coin when the studio pours $250 million alone in marketing the damn thing. When that film came out, it was Spider-Man 3 everywhere. Also, let's not forget that after opening weekend, the film saw a 61% drop in viewing. The next week? 50% drop. Methinks word got around. :) |
Originally Posted by will.15 (Post 594331)
Re-boots don't always work. Remember Superman? But that was a long dormant series. I've never hear of a studio planning to reboot a series that was still enormously popular.
Superman III and IV have been disowned as part of the mythos, with Superman:The Move, Superman II (Donner Cut), and Superman Returns being the definitive story with a time line that proceeds like so: The events of Superman:The Movie and Superman II are one inextricably connected series of events, set in motion by the nefarious plan of Lex Luthor to sink California into the ocean. In efforts to subvert Lex's plans, Superman diverts a nuke into space, which frees the Triumvirate of Kryptonian villains, immediately setting in motion the events of Superman II, after which Kal-el learns of the possible existence of the remnants of Krypton and its people, causing him to leave Earth for 5 years in search of the answers to his lost heritage. Superman Returns documents his subsequent return to Earth, and the events that unfold when he arrives, mnostly centered around yet another nefarious real-estate based plan concocted by Lex. Not a reboot. Superman Returns - Sequel Batman Begins - Reboot Oh - this thread is about Spiderman... Sorry! ;) |
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087 (Post 594527)
Okay, the one point of contention I draw is the whole "bad Peter" complaint. Honestly, the scene where Tobey Maguire struts down the street, was the one part me and my sister enjoyed. I think the filmmakers knew that the sight of Maguire acting like a bad ass was preposterous, and decided to milk it for comedic sake. It's camp. "dig on this" :LMFAO: Classic.
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087
introducing Gwen Stacy only as a plot device to add an annoyance for M.J., then having the character just leave with no resolution or point to the character beyond that
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087
BTW, Peter Parker isn't supposed to be a whiner, just a guy with problems.
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087
M.J. is not supposed to be a whiny, neurotic, wannabe actress, with Daddy issues
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087
The shoe-horning of Venom into the script was obviously hindering, but given that the Sandman story arc was weak at best, perhaps it saved us from more weeping pleas for forgiveness, and oh yeah having a sick daughter so justifies a chartacter's actions. :indifferent:
Regarding Venom, it seems pretty clear that he was the product of a money-hungry studio, which is proof-positive that studios should never have creative input. I'm not even a Venom acolyte, and I was upset. You can't take a perennial villain like that and weasel him into an already cramped plot. And you definitely can't make him such a laughable, B-grade sideshow villain.
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087
I'm not saying they shouldn't try a new direction, but I don't think re-telling the origin is necessary, and I think they should wait a while to do so.
|
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famec...baby%20boy.jpg
My husband, Tobey, is getting old -- he will be 35 this year. NOW, I think he could still be Spiderman -- afterall, in the Spiderman comics that I'm always reading in the paper, Spiderman appears to be an older gentleman in his 30's (I'm not sure what his actual character age is, but he's been around forever and never ages a bit.) I would hate to see Tobey Maguire replaced -- I fear it'll be by someone I do not approve physically. I have invested so much emotional property in the Spiderman series of the 2000's, but I can see them starting over from scratch. They did a great trilogy and I am worried about the series getting redundant. If it was up to me, I'd greenlight Spiderman movies with Tobey Maguire until he drops dead on his own web at the age of 140. But that is not gonna happen. Spiderman will live longer and age better than Tobey Maguire (I think...) A reboot has the possibilities of working. But I worry about an endless cycle of reboot after reboot. At least, if it happens every decade (or hell, every 5 years!) A Spiderman reboot in 2022 doesn't sound so bad, followed by another one in 2062 and 2102. But Spiderman (2002), Spiderman (2012), Spiderman (2022), Spiderman (2027) worries me.... (just predicting here). |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I think they are trying to be cheap and save money. Are they just going to repeat the same villians over and over? Batman there wasn't much choice, but Spiderman still had a few rounds left. They never got around to my favorite, Kraven the Hunter, and Green Goblin isn't returning as you-know-who?
|
Originally Posted by will.15 (Post 594711)
I think they are trying to be cheap and save money. Are they just going to repeat the same villians over and over? Batman there wasn't much choice, but Spiderman still had a few rounds left. They never got around to my favorite, Kraven the Hunter, and Green Goblin isn't returning as you-know-who?
|
Originally Posted by FILMFREAK087 (Post 594338)
A reboot, for a film series that began in 2002? Definition of jump the shark. :rolleyes: Let the body cool for God sake.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
For the love of God, Sony don't make Spidey "more gritty and realistic." Are Hollywood producers really so naive, and myopic that they reduce the success of films like The Dark Knight, to the violence and anarchistic rhetoric, instead of thinking that perhaps the success lies with a well written script, clear directorial vision, competent actors, and most importantly a passion for the subject matter?
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I laughed when I read they were going to try and make the next Spidey "more gritty and dark"... this is Spider-Man not Batman. There is a difference, Spider-Man doesn't drive the batmobile and thankfully Batman isn't shooting webs out of his wrist.
I think it would be comical for Peter Parker to go gritty and dark, that isn't the tone for the comic books or the previously made films. I mean, he was a black Spider-Man in the last film... that should be as far as dark as Spider-Man should go. My opinion anyways. |
'Spider-Man 4' Cancelation And Reaction From Around The Web With the surprising news racing around the web that "Spider-Man 4" has been canceled and that Sony plans on relaunching the franchise in 2012 with a new director, a new cast and a completely clean slate, many are still wondering about how the most successful film franchise in the history of the comic book genre came to such an abrupt end. John Campea of Script-To-Screen runs down the issues that caused the cancelation of the franchise and talks to some of the leading voices in the online film community to get their reaction and thoughts on the news. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rWxCcoiBCI Source: AMC Entertainment |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Reportedly, there are also plans to make Superman dark and gritty. Superman doesn't have the look or costume for dark and gritty.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I have a weird perspective on all of this, you see I was not impressed with Raimi's Spider-man movies. I can still remember walking out of the first film feeling disappointed. To me, he never got the basic conventions of the character correct, for instance the fact that in all three films that New Yorkers all seem to pretty much like Spidey. Also, I read Roger Ebert's review of the original, and was shocked to discover that he cited most of my complaints, one being that after the origin story, the film rushes through his first time actually being Spidey, but the last half seemed anticlimactic. Also, Dafoe did the best he could with a hopelessly goofy villain. The second was an improvement, largely thanks to Molina's Doc Ock, but the formulaic sequence of events borrowed from the original were noticeable, i.e.; M.J. being captured, and Peter re-learning his powers. All in all it never felt like Spider-man to me. That said, I don't think we'll see a Spidey movie in 2012, it's already 2010 and nothing has been announced about the project. If most will remember Warner Bros. worked on a Batman reboot from the mid nineties all the way to Begins, and Superman as well.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I dont know if anybody else has mentioned this but they are really thinking of taking Tobey out from Spidey and using Robert Pattison for Spidey. I really hope they don't do this!! I would freak! I hate spider man movies but no, Robert would fail at it.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Where'd you hear that? I don't think it'd happen in a million years. The Pattison thing, that is; Tobey's definitely gone, because they're rebooting the whole thing, as discussed in, well, the last page or so of this thread.
|
I think the Robert Pattinson thing started out as an April fool joke... not sure why it's still going though...
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Will the reboot feature Macho Man as Bonesaw ?
|
News just in...
Sony has announced a deal with (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb to helm the new Spider-Man movie.
Webb's forthcoming Spider-Man film will focus on Peter Parker's private life, says Entertainment Weekly. A previous report had Webb signing for a trilogy, but the studio mentioned only one picture in its official announcement. |
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 595819)
Where'd you hear that? I don't think it'd happen in a million years. The Pattison thing, that is; Tobey's definitely gone, because they're rebooting the whole thing, as discussed in, well, the last page or so of this thread.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Originally Posted by honeykid (Post 596154)
News just in...
Sony has announced a deal with (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb to helm the new Spider-Man movie.
Webb's forthcoming Spider-Man film will focus on Peter Parker's private life, says Entertainment Weekly. A previous report had Webb signing for a trilogy, but the studio mentioned only one picture in its official announcement. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I would love to have seen Cameron's Spider-man, I've read the script online, and yes it would have been different than the comics, but so was Raimi's. He's always pushing the boundaries of visual effects, every movie he has made has surpassed the previous one, and he directed T2, one of very few action blockbusters that wasn't mindless.
Marc who? The 500 Days Of Summer guy? :shrug: I'm curious, but not exactly pumped. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Sony wants to hold on to that franchise for dear life because if they don't keep pumping out movies, the rights revert back to Marvel, which now is Disney. A movie that emphasizes Spider Man's private life? Translation: Less special effects and cheaper to make. Sounds like they want to do Smallville with PP instead of CK.
|
Noooooooooooooooooooooo !!!! :sick::eek:
Spider-Man Reboot Officially In 3D! Sony Pictures has just officially announced that the new Spider-Man reboot will be in 3D. While rumors have been spreading for the past month saying that this might be a possibility, we’ve not yet had actual confirmation of it happening. With Sony setting a release date of July 12, 2012 for the new Marc Webb directed Spidey, they have the ability to freely choose whether to use 3D cameras (like Avatar) or to convert it in post-production (like Alice in Wonderland). Well, we now know it will be coming to theaters in 3D. Here’s the press release:
CULVER CITY, Calif., February 10, 2010 – Spider-Man will swing into theaters worldwide in 3D beginning July 3, 2012, it was announced today by Jeff Blake, Chairman of Sony Pictures Worldwide Marketing & Distribution. The new film which is still untitled will begin production later this year directed by Marc Webb from a screenplay by James Vanderbilt. Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin will produce the film from Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios.
Commenting on the announcement, Blake said, “Spider-Man is the ultimate summer movie-going experience, and we’re thrilled the filmmakers are presenting the next installment in 3D. Spider-Man is one of the most popular characters in the world, and we know audiences are eager and excited to discover Marc’s fantastic vision for Peter Parker and the franchise.” Source: Screenrant |
They don't have a director, a star, or a script, but they know it's going to be in 3D? Doesn't this contradict earlier reports they wanted to make Spiderman less of a spectacle? Do they know what they're doing? I wonder if they saw the huge box office returns of Avatar and now want to go in that direction. The Sony brass are looking like bumbling idiots. Disney is probably rubbing their hands with glee because it looks more like Sony will screw up the franchise. That's fine with Disney because as the new owners of the comic book property, they can make their own film.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I think Sony has absolutely no clue what to do. I was skeptical that a movie that has no director, no cast, and possibly some phantom script, could be released by 2012. I think Sony is pulling a lot of this out of their ass, trying to beat their chests at Marvel and Raimi.
It seems as though they are just jumping on current profitable trends; the teen melodrama of Twilight, and the spectacle of 3-D from Avatar. If this is suppose to rally some kind of confidence, it's not working. These are stereotypical actions of crass executives, who don't have an ounce of creative integrity. All Sony is managing to do is alienate, scare, and piss of the general fan base. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
ugh why does everything have to be in 3D now?! i personally think it takes away from the movie, but thats just my opinion.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Seeing as though most of the high-profile villains have been tapped out by the previous series, and it is now time to differentiate this new one, I think they will have to introduce Lizard. One, because fans have been teased with the possibility since the original film. Two, He's a well-known villain, yet to be introduced. Three, it's a manageable character, both in development and visual effects.
I think if they're going to bother to do this, I should give some ideas of my own, because I know that Sony hangs on my every sentence. XD I think Liz Allan should be his love interest in the first film, because it makes sense, they're both kind of nerdy/shy types. Watching the Raimi ones I always thought that Mary Jane and Peter are two people that couldn't share a toothbrush, much less be on the verge of marriage. Anyway, Liz Allan should unknowingly help Peter with his exploits as Spidey. Gwen being the girl He's crushing on, and M.J. at the periphery as a friend. This can be developed in later installments. Finally, we should see Peter in the lab, like he was in the comics. Also, you could build up to the Lizard. I mean since this is supposed to take place in his first year of crime fighting, so we should have a sub-plot of Spidey dealing with a newly surfacing gang like the rocket skateboarders or something, except not as goofy, or a minor villain like Shocker or Electro. I think the overall theme should be Peter reflecting on the results of his actions, is what he thinks he should do really the best, or is it just a feel good solution? Does he just do it for the thrill, glory, or to impress girls? These are introspective questions a teenager would ask. Peter should also feel torn, having to fight his teacher, Dr. Connors, in order to save lives. Finally, actually have New Yorkers be suspicious of Spidey, this is something Raimi never got right. To me, that's what adds depth to the character, the fact that you have this guilt weigh upon you, as well as being a Pariah. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Bring on Kraven, the Hunter, my favorite! He is not an out and out bad guy so he would work perfect as a supporting villain, while another baddie is the main menace, especially the Lizard.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Spider-Man 3 is still so fresh in my mind, if they get this reboot to happen I just hope they wait awhile and let the Raimi dust settle.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I've never been impressed with Raimi's Spider-man films. Here's why-
#1. What exactly was the Green Goblin's overall objective, I mean I know he says he wants to recruit or corrupt Spider-man, but then what? I mean he killed the board members who wanted to take over his company, so what else did he want? What could he have done with Spider-man that he couldn't without? The first two times they fought he handed Spidey his ass, so it can't be that he saw him as a huge threat. #2 What sets Spider-man apart from Superman, or Batman, is that the general public, as well as the media distrust him, or see him as a criminal. In all three movies, New yorkers seem to be okay with him, even cheering him in several scenes throughout each film. The bridge sequence, as well as the notoriously cheesy train scene in Spider-man 2 being prime examples. This completely undermines the conflict between Peter Parker's guilt-driven escapades, and his status as a social Pariah. #3. All three films were completely fixated on M.J. and Peter, never mind any of the other women Peter Parker had relationships with within the character's decades long history. On top of that, the way Raimi develops, or lack there of, their relationship just didn't sit right with me. These were two people that didn't seem like they could share an apartment, much less be on the verge of marriage. M.J. being a neurotic, whiny, narcissistic, wannabe actress with Daddy issues, and Peter being an overly mousy, Don Knotts-esque, nerd, throughout all three movies. Then they introduced Gwen Stacy, only to be a nuisance to M.J., and she literally just leaves in the third act without any resolution or point to her character. #4. n Spider-man three they tried to portray Peter as being a selfish ass, but because of incompetent writing, they managed to portray M.J. as a chronic whiner, who is almost willing to seek out her old flame because her boyfriend isn't catering enough to her pity party. I suppose they were trying to make her more relatable, but I thought they made her look like a bigger jerk than Peter. Every time she ever opens her mouth in Spider-man 2 or 3 is either to chew Peter out for not being the ideal mate she envisions, or to scream for help. He saved her twice already, and she sounds like a bratty eight year old who's pouting at her Dad for missing her ballet recital. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
The problem is they introduced Mary Jane right away when she was actually a late arrival in the comic book chronology. They did that because at the time they were developing the movie she had become Spiderman's Lois Lane in the comic book. By bringing Mary Jane in too soon, they did it backwards. Peter's early relations with women sour and he gets it on with Mary Jane when he's older and mature.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I am also a big time fan of the webcrawler.. I think the real problem with the film is having more than 40 years of material tochose from.... Sometime they want just to put them all together in a 2 hours movie... then things happens
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Well, they managed to already screw it up even worse. It's rumored that Wizard's Of Waverly Place (cheap Disney kids show rip-off of Harry Potter) star, David Henrie may be getting fitted for red and blue tights. Ugh, if this is true, just wow. Keep in mind, I wasn't a fan of Raimi's, but wow, they have managed to take an entire leap backwards.
Here's his IMDB page. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1273708/ |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Even if they screw it up, it won't be the last Spiderman movie because Disney would love to get the rights back and do their own reboot.
|
Originally Posted by will.15 (Post 606180)
Even if they screw it up, it won't be the last Spiderman movie because Disney would love to get the rights back and do their own reboot.
|
Sony to cast their Spider-Man soon Deadline is reporting that Sony is edging closer to finding its new Peter Parker, having viewed the screen tests of most of the young actors they are seriously considering. Jamie Bell, Logan Lerman, Anton Yelchin, Aaron Johnson, Andrew Garfield and Alden Ehrenreich are all said to be in contention. Frank Dillane (Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince) may have ruled himself out as he is expected to attend London’s Royal Academy of Dramatic Art later this year. Sony wants to lock in its Spider-Man soon so that supporting roles can be cast around him. Production will begin before the end of the year with a July 3, 2012 release date set. The script by Jamie Vanderbilt is still being worked on, and (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb is gearing up for a 3D shoot. Source: Filmonic |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Im hoping this film will be better than the last 3. I would love to see a darker type of spiderman movie just like Batman Begins etc.
|
Originally Posted by n3wt (Post 634250)
Im hoping this film will be better than the last 3. I would love to see a darker type of spiderman movie just like Batman Begins etc.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
Spiderman 3 was a bit dark... and look what happened??
The whole point of the reboot was to startover with a new younger version of spiderman. The previous 3 moved too fast, That's why they are lookinf forward to cast a younger actor. I only hope the villains aren't sympaathetic like the last ones. |
Originally Posted by will.15 (Post 634330)
I don't. Spiderman isn't a dark character like Batman. It will be a very bad movie if they go in that direction. And it will also be idiotic if they go ahead with the suggested dark Superman.
The Reboot mania is getten a tad out of hand. |
Re: Spider-Man 4
Honestly, not sure that I have any interest in a reboot of the Spiderman Series. But we'll see once they are coming along.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I don't have a problem with recasting and whatever, but the earlier comments from Sony about the direction they were going in were contradictory (first it sounded like they wanted to scale back the special effects by making it more like Twilight, then Avatar was a huge hit and it was back to being a spectacle) so I don't know if they know what they're doing and I'm not convinced they have the right director.
|
Originally Posted by rauldc14 (Post 634340)
Honestly, not sure that I have any interest in a reboot of the Spiderman Series. But we'll see once they are coming along.
|
Re: Spider-Man 4
I am not a fan of Spiderman or really any of the Action Hero type of films so this movie will be kinda meh to me.
|
Originally Posted by yaya#2 (Post 634719)
I am not a fan of Spiderman or really any of the Action Hero type of films so this movie will be kinda meh to me.
|
Josh Hutcherson is the New Spider-Man Blue Sky Disney Blog is breaking the exclusive news that Josh Hutcherson (Bridge to Terabithia) has been cast as Sony’s new Peter Parker in the upcoming Spider-Man reboot, which is being directed by Marc Webb (500 Days of Summer). This ends month of speculation about who would play the new Peter Parker/Spidey.
Feast your eyes on a Blue Sky Disney Exclusive...
Sony has settled on Journey to the Center of the Earth's Josh Hutcherson as the newly, high school bound Peter Parker. After several extensive test shoots were performed, Marc Webb and the top Sony $uits decided that Hutcherson was the right fit for the role and an offer was made and has been accepted. Now I wonder who'll be cast as the Lizard? Whoops, I mean, the villain... |
Re: Spider-Man 4
I don't know who his, but he has the right look.
|
I know right. That's what everyone keeps saying. He looks the part... that's probably one of the reasons he passed the screen test.
|
| All times are GMT -3. The time now is 03:55 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums