Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › Spider-Man 4: July 3rd, 2012
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spider-Man 4: July 3rd, 2012 - Page 9

post #241 of 515
1/11/10 at 3:54pm
On the plus side, Raimi seemed to be getting some weird ideas (Felicia Hardy as the Vulturette?) and Maguire and Dunst were never the best Peter and MJ.  Not that the meddling studio will likely pull out a win.
Reply
post #242 of 515
1/11/10 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR View Post

People seem really hung up on the term 'reboot'. Reboot just means that they're getting a new actor and creative team in the role. There's no way that they'll be dumb enough to basically retell the first movie over again.


"...they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises."

Sounds like a reboot to me.  That is the first film basically.
Reply
post #243 of 515
1/11/10 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer View Post

"...they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises."

Sounds like a reboot to me.  That is the first film basically.


It also sounds like the second and third movies too (except that you'd have to replace 'teenager' with 'very young adult').
Reply
post #244 of 515
1/11/10 at 4:13pm
Let's starting re-casting Peter Parker/Spider-man:

Scott Wolf
Michael J. Fox
Ben Foster
Aaron Paul
Tom Cruise
Verne Troyer
Reply
post #245 of 515
1/11/10 at 4:15pm
ok, I have to say this......

WHAT THE FUCK?????


Will someone please tell me how this makes any sense?
Reply
post #246 of 515
1/11/10 at 4:20pm
Personally, I'm no fan of the first film at all but it's only been eight years.  Spider-Man does NOT need another origin story this time.  This isn't Batman where he didn't have a proper origin story on film.  As much as I dislike the first film, it's still a proper origin story.

This is just a bad idea.
Reply
post #247 of 515
1/11/10 at 5:17pm
I absolutely love how the parties involved are portrayed in the press release as stumbling all over each other with the lavish mutual praise. Maybe Sony envisions the "reboot" as a straight comedy? I say bring on Monty Python!!! Eric Idle as Peter Parker/Spider-Man! John Cleese as the Green Goblin! Terry Gilliam directs! Special guest appearance by Heath Ledger!

"We apologize for the fault in the previous Spider-Man films. Those responsible have been sacked."
Reply
post #248 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:04pm
Upon reflection, it occurs to me that the superhero-cinema wave might officially have broken here.  With the failure and abandonment of Superman at Warners, Fox dumbing down all its Marvel properties, and now this mess...what does that leave?  Batman, Iron Man, and the few potential Avengers films Marvel is working on.  And I guess Green Lantern.

Seriously, how did all of these projects get to be so difficult?  Audiences are still hungry for these things, so why can't these studios just trust a proven director and let them get on with it?  I will say at least Warners seems to be leaving their filmmakers alone to do their job (although that didn't do much good in Superman's case).
Reply
post #249 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:05pm
A reboot? PASS! Thanks for saving me some money Sony. No way I'm paying to see Spider-Man: The Teenage Years starring one of the Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus.
Reply
post #250 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:24pm
"We apologize for the fault in the previous Spider-Man films. Those responsible have been sacked."




"Upon reflection, it occurs to me that the superhero-cinema wave might officially have broken here "

We now have Fantastic Four, Daredevil and now Spiderman reboots. So if the new films suck, we'll have reboots for the reboots?

Seriously this BS needs to end.

Batman needed a reboot, Spiderman doesnt.

The thing is Spidermans major villians have already been tackled, so where do u go now? Is Sony gonna give the new director creative freedom? Why not just give it to Raimi.

Or do they just want a yesman - then we'll get another SM3.

Makes no sense at all. 
Reply
post #251 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpippel View Post

I absolutely love how the parties involved are portrayed in the press release as stumbling all over each other with the lavish mutual praise.

And it seems alot more likely that both sides are probably thinking "You dirty mother f***ers!" about each other.


Once again, I still think people are freaking out over the use of the word 'reboot' but whatever.
Reply
post #252 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:34pm
Quote:

Raimi, a fan of the wall-crawling super-hero since the character's 1960s debut, wanted to use classic villain Vulture in addition to Sandman, another classic creation, for that movie. The studio pushed him to use Venom, a character that was introduced in the late 1980s, because it thought that character, with its slick alien-symbiote origin, would lend itself to more effective marketing material and a way to attract "the kids."


 

There's the problem, right there. SONY isn't interested in making a good movie. All they give a shit about is that the material provides viable products to attract fast food franchises and toy companies. "The kids", whoever they are, come third on the list.
Reply
post #253 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:39pm
They'll probably give the roles to the "it" boy and girl du jour and then add some vampires as the villains and make it 3D.
Reply
post #254 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:44pm
Wow, what a disappointing announcement. Yes, part 3 was a wretched mess, but the franchise was totally recoverable. I guess this frees up Raimi to work on the Warcraft movie.
Reply
post #255 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR View Post

People seem really hung up on the term 'reboot'. Reboot just means that they're getting a new actor and creative team in the role. There's no way that they'll be dumb enough to basically retell the first movie over again.

It's nice to see that Raimi and Maguire didn't just take the millions being offered to them and churn out whatever the studio wanted.


http://www.seattlepi.com/movies/414102_tvgmovies11.html

"The film franchise is getting a reboot to focus on Peter Parker's teenage years, Columbia Pictures and Marvel Pictures announced Monday."

Sure sounds like they're starting over to me.
Reply
post #256 of 515
1/11/10 at 7:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Kettell View Post

http://www.seattlepi.com/movies/414102_tvgmovies11.html

"The film franchise is getting a reboot to focus on Peter Parker's teenage years, Columbia Pictures and Marvel Pictures announced Monday."

Sure sounds like they're starting over to me.
 


Like I said before, except for the slight age difference, that same summary can applied to all three Raimi movies. If they 'de-age' the character by about 5 years and make him a teenager, it's much more in line with the original Spidey stories anyway. If they spend half of the movie retelling his origin, it's stupid and pointless but changing his age to be more in line with the Stan Lee-era stories is not where this movie is going to live or die.
Reply
post #257 of 515
1/12/10 at 12:05am
Comic Book Guy's "Worst. Idea. Ever." never rang so true as it does now.
Reply
post #258 of 515
1/12/10 at 2:09am
Thread Starter 
hardly surprising although this could have been done years ago
Reply
post #259 of 515
1/12/10 at 4:35am
Terrible idea. Just the other day we saw comments from Raimi in which he said he couldn't imagine anyone else taking the reigns of the movies. Those "comments" from Raimi and Maguire are very clearly written by PR folks and issued with their names attached.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/11/spider-man-4-off-spider-m_n_419264.html
Reply
post #260 of 515
1/12/10 at 4:49am
Hopefully,  this time the angst can be toned down a little.

In the comics, even when things were bleak for Peter, Spider-man had fun.  Something I sorely missed in the Raimi films.

Reply
post #261 of 515
1/12/10 at 7:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Sheffield View Post

Hopefully,  this time the angst can be toned down a little.

In the comics, even when things were bleak for Peter, Spider-man had fun.  Something I sorely missed in the Raimi films.


If the rumors are true that this reboot is a response to the Twilight fad, my guess is you're going to get a whole lot more angst, not less.
Reply
post #262 of 515
1/12/10 at 7:02am
Basically, it appears we are getting the first movie, all over again, with new special effects and filmed for 3D.  That's at least the thought.

And I agree with the above: Worst. Idea. Ever.
Reply
post #263 of 515
1/12/10 at 7:40am
Maybe this time the Goblin will not look like a power ranger.
Reply
post #264 of 515
1/12/10 at 8:48am
At least it makes for a good stand alone trilogy, the story arcs for the main characters, including James Franco comes to a reasonably satisfying close in the 3rd. If there was a 4th and 5th it would be more of the same, the same template for each one, a new love interest for Peter Parker or Mary Jane, jealousy, heartbreak and on and on. I don't think I could stand any more lingering shots of Tobey Maguire looking like he's been sucking on a lemon. And the villains were far too sympathetic, lets have a really hissworthy baddie in the reboot.
Reply
post #265 of 515
1/12/10 at 9:01am
I'm disappointed by this news.  I'm sick of origin stories period.  Spider-Man had a perfectly fine one.  I was hoping to finally get a Spider-Man film where Peter Parker is happy in his relationship, feels confident and is out to beat some bad guys.  It happens in the comics from time to time, I guess we'll never see it on the big screen.

If I wanted to watch some guy freak out over his relationship for 2 hours, I can go to a Hugh Grant film.  I don't need the superhero genre to explore relationships in a one dimensional way. 

The other problem is, KICK ASS is going to beat the living shit out of whatever they make Spider-Man 4 to be as far as "dweeby teenager struggles with being a superhero" movies go. 
Reply
post #266 of 515
1/12/10 at 9:39am
"Hopefully,  this time the angst can be toned down a little."

Nope, based on a statement I saw this morning, more TDK inspired.
Reply
post #267 of 515
1/12/10 at 10:32am
Just read the news, so much for rushing out to a movie theater when this film gets released.  It's going to be interesting to see how the general public reacts to it without the director and two stars from the previous films.  IMO, I don't think the reaction will be positive, but you never know.





Crawdaddy
Reply
post #268 of 515
1/12/10 at 10:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonZ View Post

"Hopefully,  this time the angst can be toned down a little."

Nope, based on a statement I saw this morning, more TDK inspired.

 


Ugh, now that's a terrible idea. Dark and brooding works fine for Batman but not Spider-Man.

Having said that, they must not have a complete script so it's just as premature to worry about the tone as it is to jump to the conclusion that they're going to retell the origin because of a one sentence summary in a press release.
Reply
post #269 of 515
1/12/10 at 11:19am
Well I guess I am one of the few that thinks this is a good idea. I would love to see a Gwen Stacey story and a movie that does not involve MJ. I never liked Kristen Dunst and she looks nothing like the MJ in the comic books. I would like to see a happy go lucky Spiderman and a younger Spiderman that has school problems would be interesting. Toby has needed to go since the second movie and he can take his bad back with him.
Reply
post #270 of 515
1/12/10 at 12:28pm
I won't immediately rule out seeing the movie, but it seems a bit early to start a re-boot.  But, SM3 was bad because Raimi caved to the studio so props to him for walking away knowing a gimmicky villain won't make a good story.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › Spider-Man 4: July 3rd, 2012