Awesome. (http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/09/bruce-campbell-reveals-major-r.html)
I really hope he plays who I think he would play :)
This is just about the best possible thing I could hope to hear about Spiderman 4. :D
I dunno. I like Bruce Campbell, but why Mysterio as is being speculated? Other than the fact that I can't come up with many other Spider-Man villains I think he'd be well suited for.
I can't see him as Mysterio because Mysterio is mostly FX. You don't see Mysterio's face, and his voice is probably going to have to be altered to make him seem spookier. I also don't see Mysterio as a wise-guy, which Bruce Campbell does best. It could be done, but I don't know if it's great casting or not.
Ditto for Kraven. He's sort of got the look, but probably not buff enough or agile enough to pull it off convincingly. And Kraven doesn't wise-crack. Unless they play him for laughs, which might work but it's a really poor premise for a movie.
Not Rhino. Mostly because I doubt they'll ever do that in a movie. But, no wise-cracking, either.
Not the Vulture, because he doesn't have the look. Ditto for the Kingpin.
Not the Lizard, who'd probably work best as CGI. Plus no wise-cracking and no face-time.
That leaves one or two guys that might, maybe work. Electro, or the Scorpion. And frankly, Scorpion would be a stretch.
Why Electro? He gets face-time, and you really need that for Bruce Campbell to get across his natural presence. The powers are going to be FX, so you need someone who can strike those dramatic poses and make them look believable. Plus, I don't see anything wrong with an Electro who's trading insults with Spidey and cracking jokes as he's throwing lightning bolts around. He's a big man, which sort of works against him for the role, but they could pull it off.
Any other guesses or commentary?
Yay Bruce Campbell, blah for Mysterio.
Quote from: BlueBard on September 16, 2009, 04:01:33 PM
I dunno. I like Bruce Campbell, but why Mysterio as is being speculated? Other than the fact that I can't come up with many other Spider-Man villains I think he'd be well suited for.
I can't see him as Mysterio because Mysterio is mostly FX. You don't see Mysterio's face, and his voice is probably going to have to be altered to make him seem spookier. I also don't see Mysterio as a wise-guy, which Bruce Campbell does best. It could be done, but I don't know if it's great casting or not.
Ditto for Kraven. He's sort of got the look, but probably not buff enough or agile enough to pull it off convincingly. And Kraven doesn't wise-crack. Unless they play him for laughs, which might work but it's a really poor premise for a movie.
Not Rhino. Mostly because I doubt they'll ever do that in a movie. But, no wise-cracking, either.
Not the Vulture, because he doesn't have the look. Ditto for the Kingpin.
Not the Lizard, who'd probably work best as CGI. Plus no wise-cracking and no face-time.
That leaves one or two guys that might, maybe work. Electro, or the Scorpion. And frankly, Scorpion would be a stretch.
Why Electro? He gets face-time, and you really need that for Bruce Campbell to get across his natural presence. The powers are going to be FX, so you need someone who can strike those dramatic poses and make them look believable. Plus, I don't see anything wrong with an Electro who's trading insults with Spidey and cracking jokes as he's throwing lightning bolts around. He's a big man, which sort of works against him for the role, but they could pull it off.
Any other guesses or commentary?
What about the Shocker
Quote from: jtharris86 on September 16, 2009, 04:38:37 PM
Yay Bruce Campbell, blah for Mysterio. Quote from: BlueBard on September 16, 2009, 04:01:33 PM
I dunno. I like Bruce Campbell, but why Mysterio as is being speculated? Other than the fact that I can't come up with many other Spider-Man villains I think he'd be well suited for.
I can't see him as Mysterio because Mysterio is mostly FX. You don't see Mysterio's face, and his voice is probably going to have to be altered to make him seem spookier. I also don't see Mysterio as a wise-guy, which Bruce Campbell does best. It could be done, but I don't know if it's great casting or not.
Ditto for Kraven. He's sort of got the look, but probably not buff enough or agile enough to pull it off convincingly. And Kraven doesn't wise-crack. Unless they play him for laughs, which might work but it's a really poor premise for a movie.
Not Rhino. Mostly because I doubt they'll ever do that in a movie. But, no wise-cracking, either.
Not the Vulture, because he doesn't have the look. Ditto for the Kingpin.
Not the Lizard, who'd probably work best as CGI. Plus no wise-cracking and no face-time.
That leaves one or two guys that might, maybe work. Electro, or the Scorpion. And frankly, Scorpion would be a stretch.
Why Electro? He gets face-time, and you really need that for Bruce Campbell to get across his natural presence. The powers are going to be FX, so you need someone who can strike those dramatic poses and make them look believable. Plus, I don't see anything wrong with an Electro who's trading insults with Spidey and cracking jokes as he's throwing lightning bolts around. He's a big man, which sort of works against him for the role, but they could pull it off.
Any other guesses or commentary?
What about the Shocker
Ding! The bell ends round one. Then again, he could do Chemeleon pretty well. Newer interpretations allow chemeleon to talk even if he isn't in a costume, so that could work well!
Quote from: BlueBard on September 16, 2009, 04:01:33 PM
I dunno. I like Bruce Campbell, but why Mysterio as is being speculated? Other than the fact that I can't come up with many other Spider-Man villains I think he'd be well suited for.
I can't see him as Mysterio because Mysterio is mostly FX. You don't see Mysterio's face, and his voice is probably going to have to be altered to make him seem spookier. I also don't see Mysterio as a wise-guy, which Bruce Campbell does best. It could be done, but I don't know if it's great casting or not.
Ditto for Kraven. He's sort of got the look, but probably not buff enough or agile enough to pull it off convincingly. And Kraven doesn't wise-crack. Unless they play him for laughs, which might work but it's a really poor premise for a movie.
Not Rhino. Mostly because I doubt they'll ever do that in a movie. But, no wise-cracking, either.
Not the Vulture, because he doesn't have the look. Ditto for the Kingpin.
Not the Lizard, who'd probably work best as CGI. Plus no wise-cracking and no face-time.
That leaves one or two guys that might, maybe work. Electro, or the Scorpion. And frankly, Scorpion would be a stretch.
Why Electro? He gets face-time, and you really need that for Bruce Campbell to get across his natural presence. The powers are going to be FX, so you need someone who can strike those dramatic poses and make them look believable. Plus, I don't see anything wrong with an Electro who's trading insults with Spidey and cracking jokes as he's throwing lightning bolts around. He's a big man, which sort of works against him for the role, but they could pull it off.
Any other guesses or commentary?
There's always the possibility they could tweak the movie interpretation. Maybe we'd get a Rhino that wise cracks a bit?
I like that he's in it, always cool to see more Bruce Campbell, but I'm not sure what role he'd be good for. It could be a non-comic character that's important to the plot though.
Tombstone is a good villain, maybe him?
He should play Ash again and team up with spidey and kill skeletons and witches and stuff, that'd be awesome.
My guess is he won't be any kind of supervillain or hero though, just a guy.
I think Mysterio and Shocker are both pretty good guesses. Whatever he is, I can't wait to see it.
Quote from: BWPS on September 17, 2009, 04:50:33 AM
He should play Ash again and team up with spidey and kill skeletons and witches and stuff, that'd be awesome.
See now this is a good idea :cool:
Quote from: BWPS on September 17, 2009, 04:50:33 AMMy guess is he won't be any kind of supervillain or hero though, just a guy.
No offense to everyone who immediately jumped to "what baddie he will be playing?", but I think that BWPS has a good point (aaargh! Even I can't dodge the bad pun...). Campbell could easily be playing someone who isn't super-powered who has a significant impact on the story. Studios have a hard time breaking free of their stereotypes, but the smartest role for BC may well be one in which he
isn't one of the legion of people who has an accident and gains super powers just in time to be a thorn in Spidey's side...
I'm not saying I would bank of any real originality from the studio; I'm just saying it's possible.
Point taken. He could be a non-super. But I doubt it.
As for who the villain(s) might be, they haven't even made it all the way through Spidey's "A-List" so any of Spidey's main dance partners still remaining are up for grabs.
There is one wrinkle I just thought of, though. Sony may have the movie rights to Spider-Man, but I doubt they've got infinite rights to all of the villains. And I don't think Marvel Entertainment/Disney is going to be giving up any they don't have to... not without a major infusion of cash, anyhow.
The good news there is, we probably aren't going to see another three-villain movie. The bad news is, don't count on seeing the Sinister Six during Sony's run.
He could be one of Spidey's minor villains (Kangaroo jack?) or he could have a major role like someone could be buying the bugle or a new guy trying to take Peter's job or.............
Spoiler
He could be the new Venom
(yes I think he could pull it off)
doesn't Bruce normally say these kinds of things? I remember while they were crafting Spider-Man 3, Bruce said something that made fans speculate about him being a villain. Him saying he'll be playing a major role, but he doesn't know what it is yet, kind of only confirms one thing : that he's in the movie. He's most likely not playing any villain, but instead just a normal guy that changes the story. Perhaps he becomes Aunt Mays love interest. It will most likely be something goofy, and after seeing Spider-Man 3, goofiness is the last thing the franchise needs.
if he IS playing a villain though, Mysterio is really the only thing that suits him, if only because Mysterio is a goofy villain that would only be played well by a goofy guy.
Yes, Mysterio is goofy-looking. No argument there. That doesn't mean he -ACTS- goofy.
My recollection of Mysterio is quite the opposite, though I haven't read anything with him in it in a long time.
He's got a major ego and prone to be dramatic, but he takes the "Mystery" in Mysterio seriously. Acting goofy would detract from and run counter to the image he tries to project of a mysterious being with the power to bend reality.
He is a Special Effects wizard, able to produce very believable illusions and perform seemingly impossible feats through technological means. He was even able to fool Spidey's spider sense (though I never knew if he developed that himself, or had help). If I recall correctly, he even posed as Spider-Man to frame him for some crime.
So, Bruce as Mysterio... still don't see it. Don't see him hiding his face, don't see him as being able to project an air of malevolent mystery. If they go the Mysterio-posing-as-Spidey route, his body type is too different from Maguire.
well, for me personally, I've never found Mysterio all that compelling of a villain. His looks AND "powers" come across as silly to me, and I think pulling him off in a movie as the lead villain would be very difficult, especially for a general audience that might not be familiar with the character. He fits in other mediums well, like comics and cartoons for example, but I just don't see him as a good movie villain.
of course, the special effects team could have a blast with him, virtually creating anything they wanted, lol.
Quote from: TheMarvell on September 19, 2009, 03:48:56 AM
well, for me personally, I've never found Mysterio all that compelling of a villain. His looks AND "powers" come across as silly to me, and I think pulling him off in a movie as the lead villain would be very difficult, especially for a general audience that might not be familiar with the character. He fits in other mediums well, like comics and cartoons for example, but I just don't see him as a good movie villain.
of course, the special effects team could have a blast with him, virtually creating anything they wanted, lol.
Yeah, I definitely have to agree
So many spidey threads around here, so I hope it's ok if bring this news up here.
Quote from: http://www.mania.com/spiderman-4-villain-revealed_article_118760.htmlMania.com has heard from reliable sources that Sam Raimi and company have begun the process of casting the villains and supporting players of 'Spider-Man 4'.
We can exclusively reveal that actress Rachel McAdams has met with the producers of the film for a major role. McAdams (of 'Wedding Crashers' and 'Sherlock Holmes' fame) is said to be a top contender for the role of Felicia Hardy, known to comic fans as The Black Cat.
Our sources tell us that the Black Cat's story fits well with Raimi's Spider-Man formula, which always finds the villains troubling not only the costumed hero, but also becoming entangled in Peter Parker's personal life as well.
More at the link.
Quote from: http://www.movieline.com/2009/12/exclusive-spider-man-4-circling-john-malkovich-anne-hathaway.php?page=all
(...) Now, though, Movieline has confirmed with sources close to the film that Raimi’s sequel is circling John Malkovich and Anne Hathaway to play Spider-Man’s adversaries, and neither evildoer is quite what you might have expected.
If negotiations proceed according to plan, [John] Malkovich will be playing Spider-Man’s nemesis the Vulture, who packs a punch despite his advanced age.
As for Hathaway, that’s where things get tricky.
The 27-year-old actress is currently the top choice for Felicia Hardy (...)
However, unlike in the comic books, this Felicia Hardy doesn’t transform into the Black Cat. Instead, Raimi’s Felicia will become a brand-new superpowered figure called the Vulturess.
... What?
I really hope not. That's all I'll say.
... if that is true, then that is quite possibly the dumbest thing since barakapool.
I hate fox. So very much.
I'm going to file the "Vulturess" news blurb under misinformation because Raimi couldn't possibly want to screw up the origin of the Black Cat after the backlash he got from Spider-Man 3 with the tweaking that was done with Sandman and Venom. Does he really want to prove to Marvel that after two good movies that he can't handle the franchise anymore? Now John Malkovich as The Vulture.. mmm..I could live with and Anne Hathaway could be interesting as Felicia Hardy. Maybe they want to steer away from another love triangle after bringing in Gwen Stacy in the last film but erasing her feline alias and making one up to avoid that storyline is just plain insulting to die hard fans.
Marvel already threatened Columbia Pictures after Disney bought them that they would very happily yank their contract if another film disaster occurred and reboot the Spider-Man films so they could merge them into the movieverse that Marvel Entertainment is developing. If this is the case then the suits at Columbia better start paying close attention to the scripts and artwork coming in and out of Raimi's office.
- CQ
Maybe they are afraid of people thinking about the Halle Berry Catwoman movie.
Quote from: Ares_God_of_War on December 09, 2009, 03:13:41 AM
Maybe they are afraid of people thinking about the Halle Berry Catwoman movie.
I really like the Black Cat character. But, really, Catwoman is a criminal turned antihero who wears black and has a crush on the masked hero who might be ugly. And she was introduced 30 years before. Hathaway as Felicia? Lame. Why don't they ever cast people who look like the characters.
But really, having a Vultress (as stupid as that sounds) leads me to believe the Vulture will be mostly revamped from the comics, which is definitely good. I like a lot of Spidey enemies but I really would like to see something cool that I haven't really seen before. Spider-Man 3 suffered from too much villains, but an old man with wings is really not even close to good enough for a fourth movie, even if they do try to clusterfrick with a bunch of others. I'm really excited to hear about it, I mean Spider-Man movies have always been extremely cool even when they're retarded.
It worked with Harley Quinn in Batman, but I don't think that would work with Spidey.
About the only thing that would interest me in an appearance by the Vulture would be some truly awesome aerial battles. Other than that, I'd rather see other more interesting and more powerful Spidey villains.
Is it just me, or does the news that's come out about this film so far really underwhelming?
Mysterio? Vulture? That's what we have to look forward to???
Now Hathaway as the Black Cat... I could see it. She's maybe not quite as (ahem) endowed as Felicia Hardy has been drawn in the comics. But she wouldn't necessarily be a bad choice, either, with her hair done in white.
the news I have heard is that it's going to be Electro instead of Mysterio.
i've also heard Lizard as well.
Either way... some sort of Sinister Six is being built up.
I'm pretty sure Lizard is a definite, considering the other films have laid some groundwork already. It'll be hard not to rehash the "Spiderman's mentor turns villain in scientific accident" theme we've already seen twice previously.
Quote from: Jakew on December 10, 2009, 06:36:51 AM
I'm pretty sure Lizard is a definite, considering the other films have laid some groundwork already. It'll be hard not to rehash the "Spiderman's mentor turns villain in scientific accident" theme we've already seen twice previously.
Well, that fits pretty well with Spidey's own origin, so I don't have a problem with that. Better than alien black goo.
(I just realized I'm comparing Venom with The Blob...)
So it is possible that they are building up for the Sinister Six and that means that Doc Ock could be making a comback...... :thumbup:
Bet you they'd never be able to get Alfred Molina back for another go...
Electro seems likely, as does the Lizard. I don't know about this Vulturess thing..seems fake.
at this point, would anyone here really be that surprised if the Vulturess rumor was actually true? Raimi's taken liberties with characters before, so why wouldn't he do the same here? He's more about making a cohesive story than being 100% faithful to the comic books. And for directing a movie, that's a good thing, as long as you don't butcher the story. Vuturess makes sense in that the two villains would be connected. But he doesn't have to make her Felicia Hardy, if true. Personally, I think Vulture is a pretty subpar choice for the next villain, and two of them doesn't make it any better. I don't like the idea at all, but at this point it seems like the most likely scenario.
I would have loved to see either Black Cat (Rachel McAdams) and Scorpion, or Lizard and Kraven (Mickey Rourke). But it does sound like they might gear up for a Sinister Six, which I don't really like since the movie wouldn't be able to keep up with all the characters. Oh well. I guess we'll find out the truth soon enough.
Recent reports are that the movie's been delayed and has already been replaced in the release schedule by Thor. The reason is that, just like the third movie, Raimi and the suits are fighting over what villains to feature. He wants The Vulture, who is apparently who he wanted with Sandman last time around. They don't want Vulture, they want more romantic stuff and Black Cat.
I'm quite dissapointed that they haven't learned from the Venom fiasco to just let Raimi do his thing and not try to force a character on him that he doesn't like. The results just aren't going to pretty.
The Spider-Man movies are still outside of Marvel's hands, right? You really would think that these people would learn from their mistakes, but they don't. Spiderman 3 still made tons of money, and these movies and these characters mean nothing to them but money.
I think Vulture could be sorta' cool. Hopefully he'd back him up with someone else.
Quote from: BentonGrey on January 09, 2010, 04:25:10 AM
The Spider-Man movies are still outside of Marvel's hands, right? You really would think that these people would learn from their mistakes, but they don't. Spiderman 3 still made tons of money, and these movies and these characters mean nothing to them but money.
I think Vulture could be sorta' cool. Hopefully he'd back him up with someone else.
you mean, like, Vulturess? :P
I don't know about this. If Raimi thinks he can make a better movie with Vulture, then let him do it. But to give the suits some credit (as much as I hate to) I really don't see Vulture being a very compelling villain to the broad, casual audience. An old man in a bird suit could be extremely difficult to pull off without looking silly. With the movie actually being delayed now, I really don't have high expectations.
Wellllll, I can do without more relationship drama involving a third/fourth party. At this point, MJ and Peter should be dealing with each other and the problems that come with that. We don't need a triangle in EVERY Spidey movie... that's not where his bad luck constantly plants itself. Also, it wouldn't hurt to give Peter a little more personality. Maybe have him actually joke around from time to time instead of being so serious and prone to emotional/dramatic scenes. Wishful thinking, I know.
It's official, Spiderman 4's been canceled. Raimi decided the suits just weren't going to listen and walked. Toby went with him, and the execs have decided to reboot the franchise with a new high school student Peter Parker.
I don't mind reboots sometimes, but this I don't like.
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/01/spider-man-film-gets-reboot-sam-raimi-tobey-maguire-out.html
Idiots. Well, that's it. I won't be watching whatever junk they produce without Raimi and Maguire. That's a shame, they could certainly have still made another great movie or two. I love the Spidey movies, and it's a shame that the films that made superheroes popular again are coming to an end.
At this point Sony might as well stick out their hand and become fast partners with Marvel Entertainment to bring Spider-Man into their Avengers franchise so they can pull some cameos into the reboot and tie it into the main storyline. Iron Man has been the best film to follow outside of Spider-Man 2 and with them tossing Raimi's vision they need ALL the help and big names they can get now.
I have no problems with a reboot if they can ditch the bad taste that Power Ranger Goblin and Spider-Venom gave me plus them finally finding the perfect actress for Mary Jane and she ended up playing Gwen Stacy. If they have to pull an Ultimate Spider-Man storyline just to fit Spidey into the combined universe that the Avengers films are kitting together then so be it. The quickest that Sony can regroup and then recast everyone would just push the limit to reach a 2011 release date anyway.. so why not join the bandwagon then use the cash machine that a deal with Disney/Marvel could stir up? Then work for a Winter 2012 release following Captain America and Avengers with Peter's new origin and then have him run into Iron Man or Captain America as a teaser for following his new storyline.
Let's just hold our collective breath and see what further reports unveil about happened.. and what they will do next.
I don't want no stinkin' reboot! Not yet! At least another 10 years down the pipeline or so. I loved this last 3 Spidey movies. 3 wasn't great but it wasn't total crap...and that's probably due in large part to good directing
Quote from: thalaw2 on January 12, 2010, 12:21:20 AM
I don't want no stinkin' reboot! Not yet! At least another 10 years down the pipeline or so. I loved this last 3 Spidey movies. 3 wasn't great but it wasn't total crap...and that's probably due in large part to good directing
Precisely, I actually enjoyed Spider-Man 3 a lot! It was a pretty flawed film, but it still captured something about Spider-Man.
I must admit, the one case in which I'd be okay with a reboot is if it meant Spiderman joined the current combined movieverse--but I don't see that happening, for an abundance of reasons.
Between this and my house getting broken into, this has been one crappy day.
Besides, rebooting means we have to sit through yet another origin story....
I swear if they make Flash a bare chested werewolf who is competing for MJ's affections -- cause you know the power of tween movie dollars and the success of Twilight had a big hand in this decision.
And for the record I have been one of the few openly admitted lovers of Evil Peter from part 3!
Aww man, sorry to hear that Goggles!
Cat, if they were to bring him in, in-so-much as sharing the same world, that would be cool....but as far as I'm concerned, Spidey simply doesn't belong in the Avengers.
Quote from: GogglesPizanno on January 12, 2010, 12:29:14 AM
Between this and my house getting broken into, this has been one crappy day.
Besides, rebooting means we have to sit through yet another origin story....
Exactly! The origin story in Spidey 1 was perfect. I don't need to live through it again. One thing I liked about the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon is that they didn't make the audience sit through yet another spider-man origin story.
I'm disappointed but not completely upset. I enjoyed the first two Spider-Man films, and at least parts of the third, but I didn't love them. I didn't like Maguire much, he was too wimpy and lacked a certain spark. Dunst I didn't like at all, and I found the Mary Jane scenes to be kind of painful. I can enjoy romantic stories but there's did little for me. Peter losing his mask all the time drove me nuts, and Peter needed to quip.
I did like Harry, Doc Oct was excellent, and Jameson was fun. Like I said I enjoyed the movies but there were parts I thought could have been better.
I'd prefer they used the 90's Fox cartoon as their model, or if they need to go high school then Spectacular Spider-Man. Both were great shows.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :angry: :angry: :angry: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: BAH
meh... As much as I'd enjoy it if they made all the right decisions and gave us a great reboot without Dunst, this is Fox we're talking about. We'll be lucky if the new directer knows who Flash Thompson is.
Oh, and so help me, if I have to endure ANOTHER "Mary Jane falls off bridge and lives" scene(which goes against the entire point Stan Lee was making), I will be ending people
Quote from: Tomato on January 12, 2010, 06:37:39 AM
meh... As much as I'd enjoy it if they made all the right decisions and gave us a great reboot without Dunst, this is Fox we're talking about. We'll be lucky if the new directer knows who Flash Thompson is.
Uhmm.. I think the ownership of which companies own what characters is getting kinda confusing here.
FOX has the rights to X-Men (and all mutant related spin-offs), Fantastic Four, and Daredevil. And outside of the first two X-Men movies with Singer they have had a horrible time understanding what a comic book really is besides a cash cow.
Columbia Pictures got the prize property of Spider-Man but Raimi started his battle with the suits in boardrooms from the start (the no-mask "face time" and their preference of the Goblin Ranger because it would be easier for toy makers to do was the tip of the iceberg) not to mension Danny Elfman ending his partnership with the director before Spider-Man 3 started. Columbia also picked up rights for Ghost Rider and The Punisher which didn't end up striking gold as much as their other franchise did.
Universal Pictures renewed their rights for Hulk but it took them two films before fans were happy with the results and they were smart in partnering up with Marvel Entertainment the second time around to work with Paramount Pictures on Iron Man and trying to merge all of the Avengers films together in one single universe.
Paramount/Marvel Productions has the ultimate deal with the Iron Man films leading the way followed by Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, and finally The Avengers which all serve as Marvel's flagship titles.. especially now that Spider-Man is rebooting.
Both Raimi and Singer tried to have cameo appearances in their films but were shot down because it would involve too much money and shared rights. Even the Peter Parker walk on appearance in Incredible Hulk was elimated before production started because Toby was not allowed to do it at the last minute. It's funny that each independent studio wants to hold tight onto each Marvel franchise they own the rights to but forget that the big appeal for fans is that that Universe is a large part of crossing over into each other.
- CQ
Raimi was good the first couple of times around the block, but let's not make him out to be more than he is. S-M3 was still a train wreck of a plot and he was the engineer at the wheel. Sure, the producers probably dictated that Venom had to be in it... (marketing, marketing, marketing...). But Raimi probably could have made a decent movie out of it if he'd tried to. Instead we get 'emo Peter' and three major villains when two would have been stretching it more than a little.
I had hoped that S-M4 would have gone back to basics, but that's shot to blazes now. It's too soon to reboot Spider-Man and they're going to have a really difficult time equaling the quality and sheer Spidey-ness of the first two movies Raimi did. Visually, Raimi was spot-on every time.
Ugh. It's like BND all over again.
Quote from: Tomato on January 12, 2010, 06:37:39 AM
meh... As much as I'd enjoy it if they made all the right decisions and gave us a great reboot without Dunst, this is Fox we're talking about. We'll be lucky if the new directer knows who Flash Thompson is.
Oh, and so help me, if I have to endure ANOTHER "Mary Jane falls off bridge and lives" scene(which goes against the entire point Stan Lee was making), I will be ending people
Just to be clear - Stan Lee didn't write Gwen Stacy's death, he wasn't the editor of Spider-man at the time, and neither was he editor in chief at Marvel at the time.
Quote from: Talavar on January 12, 2010, 03:09:19 PM
Quote from: Tomato on January 12, 2010, 06:37:39 AM
meh... As much as I'd enjoy it if they made all the right decisions and gave us a great reboot without Dunst, this is Fox we're talking about. We'll be lucky if the new directer knows who Flash Thompson is.
Oh, and so help me, if I have to endure ANOTHER "Mary Jane falls off bridge and lives" scene(which goes against the entire point Stan Lee was making), I will be ending people
Just to be clear - Stan Lee didn't write Gwen Stacy's death, he wasn't the editor of Spider-man at the time, and neither was he editor in chief at Marvel at the time.
Yeah, and it is one of the things that he regrets most about the history of Marvel.
I'm almost going to breathe a sigh of relief here. Well, a partial sigh at least. I'm glad Toby McGuire is off the project.
Yes, he was great in the first two Spider-man movies. He was okay in part three.
It doesn't change the fact that he is getting too old to be believable in the part. He's 34 now and would be 35 by time production got underway at this point. Yes, Spider-man aged in the comics a bit. We've yet to see a Spider-man in his forties though. And that's where it's heading with the amount of time it's taken to get a 4th film off the ground with a proposed 5th and 6th.
Having said that, I think Sony is making a huge mistake rushing a "reboot". They need to just do a new movie. No new origin story movie is needed. We had that and it works. I'd not mind seeing Sony drop Spiderman back to Marvel Films as well as Fox dropping Xmen back to them.
I apologize for not having encyclopedic knowledge of what every writer has done with Spiderman. I assumed Lee had written it because Lee wrote a huge chunk of early Spiderman.
That being said though, regardless of how you feel about Gwen's death (Personally, I'm fine with it as-is.) it's irrelevant to my point... The entire point of the story is that sometimes, even if you do everything you can to save someone, sometimes it is just not enough. The shock of that failure is what makes that story so famous/infamous, the shock of Gwen dying, not just because of the Goblin, but possibly even because of Spiderman's own well-intentioned actions. And quite frankly it irritates me to see the story replayed with Mary Jane getting saved (And to be fair, the movie was neither the first or last... the 90s show did it, as did the Ultimate books) because it's like "look at us, we're doing this hugely popular scene that all the fans know about" without grasping the reason WHY it is such a core part of Spiderman's life.
That's my main thing... either don't do it at all, or do it right. Don't do this half-way "We're doing a famous scene to appeal to fans but there's no way we can actually kill her and still get a kid-friendly rating." nonsense with me.
Money, money, money. Yeah I know its their job but god I hate movie execs. :thumbdown: Honestly they should just let the franchise be done with for now. Same with X-men. Just heading right into the ground.
If they must do an origin, I'd prefer we have a incredible hulk-esque one where it's over by the opening credits.
Quote from: Haljack on January 13, 2010, 08:06:03 PM
If they must do an origin, I'd prefer we have a incredible hulk-esque one where it's over by the opening credits.
Yeah I can't bear seeing the origin again.
while I would have loved to see where Raimi would go with a 4th installment, at this point I'm a bit torn. John Malkovich would have been a great Vulture, despite my low expectations on how well of a villain Vulture actually is. But then the "Vulturess" rumor was most likely true, and then Raimi would probably have been scolded by even more fans who didn't like Spider-Man 3. In the end, though, I think I'd rather have Raimi still.
This reboot crap really needs to slow the hell down. They're practically rebooting every franchise at this point. It started with Batman (which is the only franchise right now that really needed it), then Hulk, now the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. These are all movies being rebooted in less than 10 years. And high school Spider-Man? With people gossiping about the Twilight guy (forgot his name) in the role? It's really clear what demographic they're aiming for with this reboot. The Raimi movies weren't perfect, but already this reboot is starting out on a bad note.
At this rate, they might as well start over with X-Men, Daredevil, and Ghost Rider while they're at it. Hell, why not another Hulk reboot? (are they even making a sequel to the Norton one?)
Hulk my not get a full sequal, but they've said he'll be in the Avenger's movie.
Quote from: TheMarvell on January 14, 2010, 11:39:15 PM
This reboot crap really needs to slow the hell down. They're practically rebooting every franchise at this point. It started with Batman (which is the only franchise right now that really needed it), then Hulk, now the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man. These are all movies being rebooted in less than 10 years. And high school Spider-Man? With people gossiping about the Twilight guy (forgot his name) in the role? It's really clear what demographic they're aiming for with this reboot. The Raimi movies weren't perfect, but already this reboot is starting out on a bad note.
At this rate, they might as well start over with X-Men, Daredevil, and Ghost Rider while they're at it. Hell, why not another Hulk reboot? (are they even making a sequel to the Norton one?)
Emphasis mine.
HA! Yeah, Batman needed a reboot, but Hulk was pretty desperately in need too. In my opinion, you could add Superman to that list, but instead they are going to do their best to ruin it further. Fantastic Four...well...while I think they should take the Hulk angle, and simply gloss over the origin story, the second movie really was really weak, especially in their treatment of one of the greatest comic stories of all time. A lot of these franchises could do with a soft reboot, putting them solidly in Marvel's hands and simply moving on and ignoring stupid choices made in the past. I agree though, rebooting Spider-Man is a TERRIBLE idea. Especially if they go the teen flick direction they seem to be thinking about....urg....
You know, Norton's Hulk was so awesome, they REALLY do need to follow it up. Why in the world wouldn't they? That isn't rhetorical, by the way, I'm really curious why we haven't already heard about Hulk 2.
Quote from: TheMarvell on January 14, 2010, 11:39:15 PM
At this rate, they might as well start over with X-Men, Daredevil, and Ghost Rider while they're at it. Hell, why not another Hulk reboot? (are they even making a sequel to the Norton one?)
They already are rebooting X-men, sort of. They're doing prequels right now.
I did some checking on Hulk. It looks like they are planning a sequel, possibly several, but not until after the Avengers movie. 2012 or later. The guy who played the Leader was signed on for a sequal, but has since signed on for an additional 3 films.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on January 15, 2010, 12:22:42 AM
I did some checking on Hulk. It looks like they are planning a sequel, possibly several, but not until after the Avengers movie. 2012 or later. The guy who played the Leader was signed on for a sequal, but has since signed on for an additional 3 films.
That's the best news I've heard all day.
I'm thinking that the execs were kind of dissappointed with its takings, although it still did well, and are hoping to feature the character in the Avengers movie, which is sure to make a killing, then be able to spin off the character kind of in the next movies. Sounds like a potentially smart move, actually.
I don't know where to begin.
Yes, "Hulk" needed it (despite the fact that I liked both Hulk movies).
Batman? Only where rubbing out the 4th (and possibly 3rd) film(s) were concerned. On the other hand, Jim Carrey made a s-s-smokin' Riddler.
X-Men? I accepted the 3rd movie, but most of the mutant extras seemed as crammed in as they were in the Saban cartoon series. Using the Juggernaut without a single reference to the Professor? The Phoenix killing off Cyclops in spite of the fact that Scott kept her more grounded than Charles (and most definitely Logan)? Bad form! The cure (from Astonishing X-Men) was a good plot point, as was having Rogue look into it.
Spider-Man? Absolutely not. Even if you overlook "New Goblin" (aka the Rocket Racer), the use of both Sandman and Venom were wonderful. (They even solved the "how to introduce the black costume symbiote without bringing up Secret Wars" problem.)
Daredevil (and Elektra)? No. Both were handled nicely (although like with Dukes of Hazzard, it took me a while to get over the thinner Kingpin).
Ghost Rider? I like it the way it is. Leave GR alone or give it a sequel (which could possibly set up an intro for the 1990s GR).
Punisher? (The original wasn't bad; but War Zone was better.)
Fantastic Four... well, from what I've heard, it wasn't the Roger Corman screen test, but yes, I'd give the second movie a huge re-do. The first wasn't... superbad...
I hope the Avengers set up does its job. (and most importantly, give us the Big 3. Cap, Thor and IM. After that, they can go in several different directions... Cap's misfits (Wanda, Pietro, and Hawkeye), the other founders (Ant Man and Wasp, Hulk) Vision, Beast, Falcon or Tigra, or some of the "new" Avengers (Luke Cage/Power Man in particular).
I would personally be bitterly disappointed if they wasted film time on the New "Avengers." A sequel with the Quirky Quartet, though...that could be fun, as long as you threw Herc and some other guest stars in to liven it up. Basically, give me anyone from the 1970's rosters back, and I'm sold.
I expect they'll follow Ultimates in terms of general roster and costumes/looks. Plot will probably be a mix of the first Avengers story and a less edgy version of the Ultimates first volume. Which is exactly what I'm hoping for.
Benton I wouldn't worry about the New Avengers roster being in the movies anytime soon. Spider-Man and Wolverine are the big ones that they'd want and those properties aren't owned by Marvel Studios and I'm sure Sony and Fox will hold onto them as long as possible. And guys like Luke Cage, Spider-Woman, Sentry, Ronin etc are virtual unknowns to general audiences and probably won't be first priorities for the movie guys. I'd expect they'll target characters like Hank, Jan, Clint, Natasha, Rhodey, Pietro and Wanda - classic characters, characters from the movies and characters used during Miller's Ultimates.
Batman desperately needed a reboot (the fact that they made 4 Batman films and none of them were good is a triumph of the human spirit).
Superman needed a reboot, and sadly only got half of one.
X-men could use a reboot now, but only if the rights could be gotten away from Fox and back to Marvel.
Spider-man didn't need a reboot, the problems in 3 were potentially recoverable. I guess we'll never see that play out now. Too bad.
QuoteThey even solved the "how to introduce the black costume symbiote without bringing up Secret Wars" problem.
"It just landed right next to him" wasn't what I'd call solved. I was expecting them to go the animated series route and have young Jameson bring it back on the shuttle.
I don't want this to go into an argument about what movies needed a reboot and what didn't, but I have to really emphasize that Ang Lee's Hulk really doesn't get enough credit it deserves. It doesn't deserve nearly half the criticisms it gets. But despite all that, there was only one movie, and it could have easily "redeemed" itself in naysayers eyes fairly easily with an actual sequel. It was "salvageable," if you will, but because it didn't smash box office records like Spider-Man, they just had to reboot it. I love both movie versions, but still feel the Norton one wasn't necessary. But I digress...
I just think if studio execs think they have to reboot a franchise they think failed, then they should at least wait a while so they don't confuse audiences. God, before The Dark Knight came out, I knew several people (casual fans, nothing more) who thought Batman Begins was a prequel to the Burton movies. And that movie came out, what, 6 or 7 years later?
Spider-Man was a huge success, so I really don't get why they wouldn't want the guys who made it successful back. They didn't like the Vulture, but why wouldn't they give Raimi a chance? What villains did they wish to use?
and X-Men isn't getting rebooted...not yet anyways. Prequels don't count, especially when several of the same actors return. They aren't completely recasting the X-Men like they are Spider-Man, Hulk, Punisher, Fantastic Four, etc etc...
Hulk is actually the reason for this reboot trend we're seeing here. When the movie was coming out, they thought it would be doomed because it was too close behind the previous versions and audiences wouldn't accept it, but the movie proved that they could. That opened the floodgates to reboot just about anything.
Quote from: Podmark on January 15, 2010, 05:33:02 AM
I expect they'll follow Ultimates in terms of general roster and costumes/looks. Plot will probably be a mix of the first Avengers story and a less edgy version of the Ultimates first volume. Which is exactly what I'm hoping for.
Lord, I hope not! I hope they go with a more classic look. Obviously spandex doesn't work so well in real life, but they can at least do more than put them all in leather. I hope we can avoid the taint of the Ultimates on this one. You're right about sticking to classic characters though, Pod, as everything we've heard so far is about a classic Avengers lineup.
I read the novelization for the Ang Lee Hulk and I'd have to say that even if the action scenes and acting were great the plot itself stunk on ice, IMO. Just like with Spider-Man 3, the plot is what kept me out of the movie theater.
Norton's Hulk was totally right on the money in every way I can think of and a reboot was really needed to bring him in line with the rest of the movies Marvel intends to develop.
The chaos going on right now with X-Men, Spider-Man, and Fantastic Four is precisely due to the fact that these movie rights are held by corporations who aren't really tied to Marvel. They can do exactly what they want and I'd imagine there's very little creative control that Marvel can exercise if they wanted to. So we're possibly going to get a teeny-bopper Spidey because A) they can, B) they want to hold on to those movie rights for as long as they can.
The consolation is that if things get bad enough, I can see Disney possibly working to buy some of those movie rights back.
You'd think that DC projects would have an advantage in Warner, wouldn't you? Maybe that will play out eventually.
Are they serious:Possible Spidey (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20336907,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+people%2Fheadlines+%28PEOPLE.com%3A+Top+Headlines%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher)
Quote from: BlueBard on January 15, 2010, 01:50:30 PM
I read the novelization for the Ang Lee Hulk and I'd have to say that even if the action scenes and acting were great the plot itself stunk on ice, IMO. Just like with Spider-Man 3, the plot is what kept me out of the movie theater.
[...]
You'd think that DC projects would have an advantage in Warner, wouldn't you? Maybe that will play out eventually.
Emphasis mine. Ha!
Also, Warner has, in many ways, been even more crippling for DC than these other studios have been for Marvel. Sony actually managed to make some really fantastic films, while the suits at WB have been just as ridiculous in general as the current climate at Sony. Yeah, Batman: Begins was incredible, and people loved Dark Knight, but I've got three words for you. Giant. Mechanical. Spider. They see things in dollar signs much the same as these other execs, and DC has zero control over their properties. They're in pretty much the same boat. Thus, we got Superman the mopey, voyeur father of an illegitmate kid, and we'll eventually get Superman "the angry god," because "dark characters are so big right now."
I really do wish that Disney would buy back the rights to Spidey and X-Men, because Marvel's own studios have done a really fantastic job with Iron Man and Hulk.
Quote from: JeyNyce on January 15, 2010, 03:55:56 PM
Are they serious:Possible Spidey (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20336907,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+people%2Fheadlines+%28PEOPLE.com%3A+Top+Headlines%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher)
Yeah, I imagine whoever wrote that was serious. But remember this is basically the equivalent of a hollywood gossip columnist's speculation on who might take the role of Spider-Man -- In other words, I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in it.
Even the teen-age Spidey commentary is essentially just talk. There's no screenplay, no cast, and no director. It isn't so until they start shooting. Anything is possible at this point.
About the only things I am reasonably sure of are that the movie Peter Parker will not undergo a sex-change operation, is not going to be revealed as a homosexual, is not going to turn into a horrifying giant spider, will not become a zombie and eat Aunt May, and is not secretly Galactus. He will not team up with any other Marvel hero because they won't have the movie rights to pull it off. They will not cast Adam West or Barack Obama in the title role.
Quote from: BentonGrey on January 15, 2010, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: Podmark on January 15, 2010, 05:33:02 AM
I expect they'll follow Ultimates in terms of general roster and costumes/looks. Plot will probably be a mix of the first Avengers story and a less edgy version of the Ultimates first volume. Which is exactly what I'm hoping for.
Lord, I hope not! I hope they go with a more classic look. Obviously spandex doesn't work so well in real life, but they can at least do more than put them all in leather. I hope we can avoid the taint of the Ultimates on this one. You're right about sticking to classic characters though, Pod, as everything we've heard so far is about a classic Avengers lineup.
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they keep extremely close to Miller's Ultimates. I liked Ultimates so I wouldn't have a problem with that. But I can see them going with more classic-esque costumes, but it all depends if they can make them look good, and if they can't they can easily fall back on the Ultimates costumes.
But the cast, I'd bet money that the majority of it will be from these characters: Captain America, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Nick Fury, Hank Pym, Wasp, Hawkeye, Black Widow, War Machine, Scarlett Witch, and Quicksilver. Maybe Vision.
What I don't understand is why we need to reboot whenever they want to change actors. I can understand wanting to keep consistency, but it seems right now that it's an automatic necessity to reboot. I wouldn't mind if they always make 'sequels' per se, and rather just came out with a new, for example, Spider-Man movie that tells a story that isn't directedly connected with the previous movies. I hope you guys understand what I'm saying here. I might have to explain it better later.
Forget Quicksilver or Scarlett Witch. I'm pretty sure those two were included with the X-Men deals, so we aren't likely to see either of them.
like I said before, Ang Lee's Hulk really wasn't nearly as bad as people claim. I'll admit, I didn't know what to think at first, but it really grew on me, and I think a sequel could have fixed any problems it might have had. That's the problem I see with all these new reboots. If the first movie, or any entry in a given franchise of movies, doesn't meet the execs expectations, instead of learning from their mistakes and try to make an improved sequel, they are just "starting over" with this reboot crap and hoping it does better.
Prem, why do you insist on complicating the line-up? We know they are, or at least were planning on, movies for Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Ant-man(Which also includes Wasp) and Hulk. In other words, the founders. That's a hard bunch to juggle on it's own for one movie, I seriously doubt we'll see anyone else until Avengers 2.
And Benton, don't worry about the ultimate looks... if Iron Man is any indication, we'll be getting modernized version of classic looks... The only true "Ultimate" look I expect is the WW2 look for the Captain America movie.
Quote from: Tomato on January 16, 2010, 08:45:08 PM
Prem, why do you insist on complicating the line-up? We know they are, or at least were planning on, movies for Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Ant-man(Which also includes Wasp) and Hulk. In other words, the founders. That's a hard bunch to juggle on it's own for one movie, I seriously doubt we'll see anyone else until Avengers 2.
And Benton, don't worry about the ultimate looks... if Iron Man is any indication, we'll be getting modernized version of classic looks... The only true "Ultimate" look I expect is the WW2 look for the Captain America movie.
Whuh? I didn't even know I, nor my clone, was involved in this discussion. I needsa keep up.
Quote from: Previsionary on January 16, 2010, 09:19:28 PM
Quote from: Tomato on January 16, 2010, 08:45:08 PM
Prem, why do you insist on complicating the line-up? We know they are, or at least were planning on, movies for Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Ant-man(Which also includes Wasp) and Hulk. In other words, the founders. That's a hard bunch to juggle on it's own for one movie, I seriously doubt we'll see anyone else until Avengers 2.
And Benton, don't worry about the ultimate looks... if Iron Man is any indication, we'll be getting modernized version of classic looks... The only true "Ultimate" look I expect is the WW2 look for the Captain America movie.
Whuh? I didn't even know I, nor my clone, was involved in this discussion. I needsa keep up.
Liar, you know what you did....and you should be ashamed.
Yeah 'Mato, I imagine that's true...although, I wouldn't mind seeing Hawkeye added to the list, as unlikely as that would be.
I don't see any reason why they couldn't throw in one or two more heroes in there. As long as the others are introduced in previous movies, it's not that hard to introduce some minor heroes as well.
Hawkeye shouldn't be much of a problem since it was last reported that he had a cameo role in the Thor movie. I guess it depends on how they use him. Will he show up in his villain form, his heroic form, or just a fan-service role. *shrugs*
See that's the problem with posting before work: you mix up pod and prem. :wacko:
If I was in charge of Marvel, I would keep to already established characters the first movie, focusing more on establishing the team and relying on your existing fanbase from the other movies. Then after it's established, bring in characters like Hawkeye and phase out some of the more expensive actors and just use them for their respective films. It's a perfect plan, and the best part is, it's completely original. It's not at all like what Lee and Kirby did back when they made the team. :rolleyes:
Meh all I was doing was predicting who they would pull from for the cast, and those are the characters I think they'll pull from. But I expect it will be a small cast (which I think it the best way to go). You can pretty much lock Cap, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk and Nick Fury in (though I think I heard Hulk will be a villain) and they'll probably throw in Hank and Jan.
Where is the Ant-Man movie at anyway? Wasn't it supposed to have Scott Lang as the active Ant-Man and Hank his mentor?
The ending of Hulk was purposely set up to go two different ways, depending on if they came out with a sequal before Avengers or not. In that case, Tony would be showing up to recruit Hulk and Banner's ending means he had learned to control the Hulk. IF not, which would likely be the case now, Tony came to offer to use his new team to take down the Hulk and Banner's ending means he lost control completely to the Hulk. In the former case, Hulk would be a member of the Avengers, in the later, the first foe they fight.
well, Marc Webb is officially the new director signed on to the project. He directed (500) Days of Summer...and that's about it. I've never seen his one and only movie, but the fact that they're picking such a newcomer to the chair only further confirms that the studio will be in the most control of this project. Sam Raimi has plenty of success under his belt and therefore had more room push the studio aside.
I can see it now: "What's that Mr. Webb? You wanted to use Scorpion or Electro in the movie? Too bad. You're using Venom, Carnage, and Jackal. And that's that."
well (500) days of summer was pretty good actually. so i don't have too much of a problem... but there was no action in the movie...hmmm
Anyway, using Marc Webb may be an in to get Joseph Gordon Levitt as Peter Parker, and that wouldn't be bad at all!
Word is this is going to be made on the (relative) cheap: $80 million or thereabouts, and the cast will all be unknowns.
80 million is a lot of money, but it's less than any one of the previous Spider-man films, and that concerns me. It suggests there will be significantly less in way of action/FX work, because that was always the bulk of the previous budgets.
Quote from: detourne_me on January 20, 2010, 04:37:43 AM
well (500) days of summer was pretty good actually. so i don't have too much of a problem... but there was no action in the movie...hmmm
Anyway, using Marc Webb may be an in to get Joseph Gordon Levitt as Peter Parker, and that wouldn't be bad at all!
I hate him.
They obviously only hired this guy because his last name is Webb.
If they use an unknown for Spidey, maybe we'll see him more with the mask on then him taking off all the time like in Spidey 2 & 3
Quote from: Talavar on January 20, 2010, 04:41:43 AM
Word is this is going to be made on the (relative) cheap: $80 million or thereabouts, and the cast will all be unknowns.
80 million is a lot of money, but it's less than any one of the previous Spider-man films, and that concerns me. It suggests there will be significantly less in way of action/FX work, because that was always the bulk of the previous budgets.
There's no freaking way they can make a believable Spidey movie without stuntwork, CGI and effects.
Bright side, if they devalue the franchise Marvel can afford to buy it back.
Quote from: BlueBard on January 20, 2010, 02:11:50 PM
Quote from: Talavar on January 20, 2010, 04:41:43 AM
Word is this is going to be made on the (relative) cheap: $80 million or thereabouts, and the cast will all be unknowns.
80 million is a lot of money, but it's less than any one of the previous Spider-man films, and that concerns me. It suggests there will be significantly less in way of action/FX work, because that was always the bulk of the previous budgets.
There's no freaking way they can make a believable Spidey movie without stuntwork, CGI and effects.
Bright side, if they devalue the franchise Marvel can afford to buy it back.
That's actually what I'm hoping for...but I'm pretty disgusted with this whole thing.
Quote from: BlueBard on January 20, 2010, 02:11:50 PM
Quote from: Talavar on January 20, 2010, 04:41:43 AM
Word is this is going to be made on the (relative) cheap: $80 million or thereabouts, and the cast will all be unknowns.
80 million is a lot of money, but it's less than any one of the previous Spider-man films, and that concerns me. It suggests there will be significantly less in way of action/FX work, because that was always the bulk of the previous budgets.
There's no freaking way they can make a believable Spidey movie without stuntwork, CGI and effects.
Bright side, if they devalue the franchise Marvel can afford to buy it back.
I'm sure it will have
some stuntwork, CGI & effects, but at 80 million for a movie of this type, probably not a lot.
Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg6v1dgTcxw
Spoiler
Marvel/DC Parody of Spider-Man reboot, by JustSomeRandomGuy
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAFOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOE
i know your pain :(
It won't play for me.
Quote from: docdelorean88 on January 20, 2010, 09:22:57 PM
It won't play for me.
Play the HQ version.. RandomGuy said that an error occured with the regular version and will be fixed eventually (when YouTube gets around to it).
Extremely funny video btw... "Sony Presents Sony's Spider-Man by SONY!"
- CQ
My biggest concern now is that, with Sony pushing for more romance, and then hiring a director that's done nothing buy a moderately successful romantic comedy, we'll end up with 500 days of Mary Jane, a romantic comedy about the difficulties of a high school geek and the popular girl that he loves, made more difficult by the occasional and seemingly random appearance of some costumed villain that keeps a distance between them.
Quote from: BlueBard on January 20, 2010, 09:03:29 PM
Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg6v1dgTcxw
Spoiler
Marvel/DC Parody of Spider-Man reboot, by JustSomeRandomGuy
Haha, depressingly hilarious!
you know what the worst part about all this is?
No more Bruce Campbell. :(
Quote from: TheMarvell on January 21, 2010, 03:14:32 AM
you know what the worst part about all this is?
No more Bruce Campbell. :(
I seriously doubt THAT. As long as Raimi is still making any kind of movie and as long as Bruce Campbell is physically able to act, I suspect that there will be more appearances... just not in a Spider-Man movie.
Ooh, and I just thought of another bright spot. If Raimi isn't working for Sony, he's free to work for Marvel Studios. Just not on a Spider-Man movie.
Based on this, and other things, I wonder if the day and age for exclusive, open-ended licensing of movie rights should be over? Let the studios try to create their own superheroes if they want to own the rights indefinitely. (Hancock...
snigger.)
No offence Blue, but as much as I hate Fox, you can't really say that WB and Disney don't have more or less open-ended exclusive rights now. Granted, they've both proved a better handler then Fox (well... more or less. Hopefully Marvel Studios has given WB the kick in the pants it needed, it's been about as bad overall *cough*catwoman*cough*) but I sincerely doubt we'll see anyone else net movie rights during our lifetimes. At least with Fox there's the fact that if the mess up badly enough it'll get taken from them... we have that safety net at least. But if WB puts out Emo Superman, or Disney puts out Antman the wisecracking wonder? Best we can hope for is a 1 in 100 chance they'll reboot it properly the next time.
Quote from: BlueBard on January 21, 2010, 01:50:33 PM
Quote from: TheMarvell on January 21, 2010, 03:14:32 AM
you know what the worst part about all this is?
No more Bruce Campbell. :(
I seriously doubt THAT. As long as Raimi is still making any kind of movie and as long as Bruce Campbell is physically able to act, I suspect that there will be more appearances... just not in a Spider-Man movie.
Ooh, and I just thought of another bright spot. If Raimi isn't working for Sony, he's free to work for Marvel Studios. Just not on a Spider-Man movie.
Based on this, and other things, I wonder if the day and age for exclusive, open-ended licensing of movie rights should be over? Let the studios try to create their own superheroes if they want to own the rights indefinitely. (Hancock... snigger.)
:huh:
um, yeah, I didn't mean we'd never see Bruce again in another movie. Just that we wouldn't see him in another Spider-Man movie.
And this appears to be the no 1 candidate.
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/02/spider-man-reboot-logan-lerman-may-be-next-peter-parker.html
what is he 12, i know the character is meant to be in his mid teens but aren't actors that play that age usually around 20/21
Bah for this whole thing.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on February 10, 2010, 11:36:04 PM
And this appears to be the no 1 candidate.
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/02/spider-man-reboot-logan-lerman-may-be-next-peter-parker.html
Well, that officially proves that a more Ultimate take on Spider-Man during the reboot is one step closer..
- CQ
He's 18, although he obviously looks much younger.
I think he at least looks the appropriate age. I never could buy into Toby being a highschool student. I think this could be good...or very bad.
No clue whether this is a good pick or not. He might be able to pass for dork (which, face it, is what Parker was before he got bit by that spider).
I don't have anything against putting Peter back in High School. That's where he started, right? Spidey was a teenager in the comics for awhile, whereas the movie version rushed to put him into college and the adult world.
But if they follow the Ultimate version too closely I'm not really interested. And I really, really don't want a rehash of any of the Green Goblin or Doctor Octopus or Venom right off the bat. Because I'm sick of GG and Venom and Doc Ock was done too well in S-M2. Time to give some of Spidey's other rogues a chance for the big screen.
I like him. He's young enough, for sure. We'll see how this goes.
so what villain do you think the studio will use for this since they hate Vulture? I'm guessing Black Cat or Electro...or Venom again, even though they're making a spinoff movie about him.
Quote from: TheMarvell on February 13, 2010, 03:50:41 PM
so what villain do you think the studio will use for this since they hate Vulture? I'm guessing Black Cat or Electro...or Venom again, even though they're making a spinoff movie about him.
Since its likely a reboot taking place early in Spidey's career, Green Goblin is my guess. Maybe they'll get the costume right. But I doubt they'll get someone as cool as Willem DaFoe.
Or maybe if its terrible it'll be Carnage and I can have a brain aneurysm. Wow I can't believe I spelled that right on my first try.
if they're smart they'll got the joker route with the goblin and build him up for a second or third film.
is it true that the reason they went with the "power rangers reject" GG suit for the first film was because the toy line had an easier and cheaper time making it?
Personally, I hope they don't use GG yet. Wait until the third film of this new trilogy. I think Scorpion and Black Cat would be good choices, but that's just me.
Quote from: TheMarvell on February 14, 2010, 04:21:08 PM
is it true that the reason they went with the "power rangers reject" GG suit for the first film was because the toy line had an easier and cheaper time making it?
I hate to say it... but yeah that was what The Art Of Spider-Man book said. Raimi and his artists had tons of drawings that he brought to his production meetings and they kept wanting to keep the design "simple". Sam wanted a technological look meshed with a fantasy goblinish edge (think of Lord Of The Rings infected by circuitry and hi-tech weaponry) but each time Sony marketing people said it would be "too scary" and "keep it simple the toys shouldn't have too many parts". Each version slowly went from fantasy towards technology until they started approaching the Iron Man suit angle which kinda looked a scary goblin in the mask only. Explaining it away would also be easier in the script because the glider could work as prototype vehicle and the simple green body armor could be for military use.
It's also amusing that Raimi once had designs for Goblinettes (female goons in their own Goblin costumes and gliders) among those designs in that book which I'm hoping was either early concepts while he was looking for a direction to take his movie or goofy unserious designs he threw at the marketing people to make them wince and squirm in their chair.
Here is one such concept: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BQtOW7ZUlF8/Rf1aneNYfxI/AAAAAAAACLI/h7KYrA4sVQ4/s400/greengoblin_concepts_full.jpg (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BQtOW7ZUlF8/Rf1aneNYfxI/AAAAAAAACLI/h7KYrA4sVQ4/s400/greengoblin_concepts_full.jpg)
or a later technological updated version: http://photos.bravenet.com/369/789/440/4/552D3C73C7.jpg (http://photos.bravenet.com/369/789/440/4/552D3C73C7.jpg)
- CQ
That second design is like a much cooler version of what actually got made.
I didn't mind the strange goblin suit, i just thought that it needed to be (a) a little more intense, like the first design, and (b) it needed purple SOMEWHERE in it. I just hope the potentially new goblin isn't ultimate GG, i HATED THAT CHARACTER! But yes, i would develope normans character up to the end of 2 show him becoming the green goblin, and then the final fight sequence should be the death of gwen stacey, finally DONE RIGHT! :) Just my opinion of course.
Since they are going to reboot Spidey, they should go slow with it. Let Spidey fight thugs and stuff first and then maybe go up against the Kingpin. You can have Norman on the sidelines and build him up for the second or third movie.
Since Spider-Man 4 is "officially dead", maybe we can move reboot speculation into a separate thread?
Just a suggestion. Seems odd to be going on about a reboot in a Spider-Man 4 thread, especially one whose title suggests Bruce Campbell is involved.
Or I can change the title of the thread to reflect the new direction the thread has gone. :thumbup:
Quote from: JeyNyce on February 16, 2010, 04:58:26 PM
Since they are going to reboot Spidey, they should go slow with it. Let Spidey fight thugs and stuff first and then maybe go up against the Kingpin. You can have Norman on the sidelines and build him up for the second or third movie.
again kingpin can not be used. fox still owns him and like x-men as long as they make DD related movies they still will
Quote from: The Hitman on February 16, 2010, 07:19:58 PM
Or I can change the title of the thread to reflect the new direction the thread has gone. :thumbup:
WO!!1 RU A WIZARD??
Quote from: Cybertronian on January 15, 2010, 04:53:01 AM
Fantastic Four... well, from what I've heard, it wasn't the Roger Corman screen test, but yes, I'd give the second movie a huge re-do. The first wasn't... superbad...
I hope the Avengers set up does its job. (and most importantly, give us the Big 3. Cap, Thor and IM. After that, they can go in several different directions... Cap's misfits (Wanda, Pietro, and Hawkeye), the other founders (Ant Man and Wasp, Hulk) Vision, Beast, Falcon or Tigra, or some of the "new" Avengers (Luke Cage/Power Man in particular).
I know this thread is deader than
Boss Hogg doing disco, but looking back on my Fantastic Four comments, I'm actually starting to miss Ioan Griffoad (sp?) and Michael Chiklis's
Fan 4, whenever I see previews and commercials for the new one. Hollywood seems to forget that comics fans forgive
Fan 4 not having a diverse team because 3 out of 4 of them are
family. Blood family in the case of the Invisible Girl/Woman and the Human Torch II. And since they were written in 1961, it can almost be guaranteed that the college Richards and Grimm went to would not have been integrated, nor would their dorm (they were roommates, even before Reed met Victor von Doom). To me, this is as bad as
G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra changing white, red-headed HALO jumper
Ripcord into a Wayans brother, (and only slightly less bad than Galactus being a hand-shaped cloud in space).
As for the Avengers, both movies thus far have satisfied me, though I wish we got Hank Pym (Ant-Man I) as a founding member, I'm content with him and the Wasp being predecessors for the team.
-- Cybertronian :fflogo.
Quote from: Cybertronian on August 04, 2015, 04:21:51 AMAnd since they were written in 1961, it can almost be guaranteed that the college Richards and Grimm went to would not have been integrated, nor would their dorm (they were roommates, even before Reed met Victor von Doom).
As a minor point, that guarantee might represent more confidence than there is data to support. Reed Richards went to different educational institutions depending on what version of the origin story one looks at. I have seen MIT, Cal Tech, Harvard, and even a fictional university in New York mentioned. (Notably, none that I can recall were in the south.) So, it's hard to look up when the school he would have gone to was integrated.
But, mostly, I am not sure what would be the point of mentioning the state of university integration in the 1960s. That might be a point of curiosity if the movie were set 50 years ago. But, the characters in the 2015 FF movie would not have been in college until decades after every major U.S. university (science and engineering programs as well as dormitories) had been integrated. And, I am not sure how that issue impacts Ben Grimm and Reed Richards being roommates, one way or the other.
I guess the casting of Sue and Johnny Storm in the 2015 movie might raise some questions about how much their backstory has changed. However, the significant aspects of their history can survive pretty much completely intact if the new story is that they were raised as siblings in family situation that was mixed, adopted, foster, or whatever else.
Maybe it was mentioned before,but Sony has plans for an animated Spider-man movie in 2018.