Spider-man 3 - On Going Developments (1 Viewer)

[Scott Weinberg]

...and will we ever get to see Dr. Connors become LIZARD?

Lemme know when Dylan Baker's involvement in SM3 is confirmed.

 

[JoSAN]

.

 

[JoSAN]

.

 

[Chris Farmer]

Good post JoSAN, except that it assumes strict fidelity to the comics as far as story-lines and characterizations go. We haven't seen that yet in the movies, Raimi sticks to the basic and essential ideas, but he's not at all afraid to give the material his own spin and direction. Organic web-shooters, a more sympathetic Dr. Octopus (compared to what I heard the comic book version was), and things of that nature. So you could easily take any of your above villains and give them a new origin and plot line and use them there. Just because the comics haven't used a villain a certain way doesn't mean the movies won't.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Raimi has earned my trust based on the first two installments.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

1) Raimi has certainly earned my trust...even well before Spidey I and II. Like JoSAN, I have ZERO desire to see Venom. Frankly, the comic character had ONE good storyline in him, and it was spent on his first major appearance. I only stuck around to see three or four encores in a few short years, and all were caricatures of the character from the beginning. It got worse and worse, because there is NOTHING there beyond the first story. He couldn't sustain a second appearance. I doubt he has the longevity for a movie. With good artists, Venom is certainly appealing visually (again, this too became a caricature rather quickly - like his third appearance).

Let's stick with the classics, shall we?

If Raimi uses Venom, I'll be interested to see how...because it won't be like the comic. Raimi is simply too wise to do that.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Jean D]

He completely dodged the question. Sounds like Raimi knows all about Venom but wants to throw people off course. He basically dumbed up his answer to the interviewer. Raimi is too involved in the movies to not know about Spiderman's foes and their origin and relationship to him. Besides, doesnt Stan Lee hang around the set when they film? Wouldnt he talk to Raimi about all this stuff between takes and whatnot. I just find it hard to believe Raimi doesnt know much about Venom. Venom was too much of a popular nemesis to not know much about him. Especially if people are talking about it, wouldnt that spark some curiosity in you if you were him? Wouldnt you call Stan up and be like "Hey, Stan, whats this Venom guy all about? Think he'd make a good nemesis on the big screen?"

 

[FredK]

the comic character had ONE good storyline in him, and it was spent on his first major appearance.

That's the thing I wish could really be captured - there was a time where Venom was a great addition to Spidey's world.

The movie is a new slate, I'm more concerned that the villian is done right than the comic baggage that comes along with the character. If it is Venom, he can be done well.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Fred,
That time was three issues, two of which had one shadowed panel of the guy being menacing. It had a married Parker as well, and used MJ well. It was followed by years of awful, awful storylines. Venom is a posterboy of the early 90's road to destruction (too many limited series, die-cut, silver covers, countless issue #1's). He rode the wave. That said, I could tolerate a reinvention, if done right, but Venom has WAY TOO MUCH baggage to overcome.

As for Raimi not knowing Venom...that's easy to believe. Raimi was raised on Spidey. Venom is only 16 years old (how scary is that?), appearing in late 1988. Venom isn't exactly a classic.

I think Mysterio is a great choice, and Haden Church would be fine for such a role.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Jason Seaver]

Nah, they need to cast Bruce Campbell as Mysterio at some point. It would be a hilariously circular reference.

 

[JoSAN]

.

 

[JonZ]

Theres no way the villians in the next movie are ManWolf and Venom.I dont care what that guy said.

no
way

 

[Paul_Scott]

given the quote attributed to Raimi that the next villian would provide visual opportunities audiences haven't seen yet (or something to that effect) it got me thinking that Mysterio would provide the most potential in this area.
electric rays and sand-morphing, imo, really wouldn't seem that 'new' (although i'm sure they could be fun),
also, the idea of illusion/not being able to tell what is real, etc seems to me could be tied in thematically with Parkers domestic life in some way that wouldn't seem unnatural or forced.


all just conjecture of course.

 

[Magnus T]

Good.

 

[GuruAskew]

Venom can't do anything visually that Spider-Man and the T-1000 haven't already done, so I really hope that rules him out.

 

[steve_jk]

Sony doesn't own Spiderman. If they don't make a movie within X amount of time then MVL can simply license him to another studio. All of MVL's contracts with studios have terms like that in them.

 

[Robert Ringwald]

I just hope the movie turns out okay. I thought the original was lacking in a certain aspect and the sequel really blew me away. I hope 3 holds up just as well if not better.

 

[Don_Limey]

IMDB is reporting today that Thomas Haden Church will play Eddie Brock AKA VENOM & Daniel Gillies will reprise his role as John Jameson who will become Manwolf.

Here is that link.

THC as Venom

 

[Lou Sytsma]

I really dislike the multiple villian approach.

 

[JonZ]

"if internet gossip is to be believed"

We've seen plenty of internet rumors turn out to be nothing close to the truth.

Its a smokescreen I tell you.