Spider-Man No More

[The Bandit]

Maybe it's the comic book snob in me, but everytime I see someone say Venom is their favorite spider-man villain I can't help but roll my eyes ;p... he's not even one of his interesting bad guys.

I don't get why a lot of people seem to dislike Venom. Is it backlash over the child-like impulse to think he's cool, and you want to distance yourself from that? Whatever, Venom isn't really my favorite villain, he's my favorite character, because after combining with Venom, Brock moved from cardboard cut-out to someone with depth (speaking of the animated series, here).

Anyway, glad to see someone else doesn't like the Ultimate series. They're hit and miss, but for me, they miss far too often. And any series where canon is thrown out the window because the new author felt it wasn't interesting, yeah...

: /

You'd rather have a universe with 60+ years of canon, endless contradictions, endless deaths, rebirths, etc. over trying to start from scratch and make things good? I think your fanboy is showing.

DC and Marvel should scrap both of their current universes and start over. DC does the same story line every ten years. Marvel is a little bit better, but not by much.

 

[The Bandit]

Spider-Man 3 NOT AS BAD?

Bob...I am shocked. Spidey 3 was HORRIBLE. After the pure awesomeness that was the second movie (or 2.1), 3 was total shit. Attempting to make Sandman a sympathetic villain, a-not-really-Hobgoblin-Hobgoblin, Spidey-dance, MJ being the world's biggest whore (she couldn't possibly let Peter in on the fact that Harry is forcing her to break-up with him?)


A butler that should have told Harry the truth BEFORE he took a grenade to the face, a lackluster Gwen Stacy who should not have existed due to MJ filling that role in the first movie, and Venom was done so piss poorly, that of COURSE they had to kill him in the end...put him out of his misery.


Yeah, blamn the studio, it IS their fault for forcing the decisions, but also blame how Raimi handled it. He made a shit movie to get back at the studio making him use Venom. There is NO other explaination other than he did it just to spite them and tell them to back-off of his creativity. And Fox handled it exactly how they should: He throws another tantrum...fire his ass.

I don't think any of the things you listed are actually why the movie is bad. Going against the established canon of characters is what makes a lot of good comic-book movies good (for example, giving Spiderman "organic" web instead of those ridiculous web shooters).

The first two movies were good because they were simple. They offer the story and characterization in a direct, coherent way. Can anyone really summarize the plot of Spider-Man 3? What was the single, overarching story? There wasn't one. That's why it sucked.

Oh. And the jazz scene. But I think we'd better just not talk about that.

 

[jpakaferrari]

As if Spiderman 3 wasn't emo enough they have to send us back to teen-angst spiderman? I wish they wouldn't even bother...

 

[BehattedWanderer]

So how do we plan on doing this? Teenie Spidey drops teenage villains, despite all of his adversaries with any kind of merit being notable scientists doing secret or illegal research? Are we to watch teenage shitheads fap about for a few years, casually setting up the enemies he will later face? And where the hell is Lizard? Scorpion? Electro? How about Vulture? And that's not even touching all the minor guys, or the Oscorp flunkies, or the Spider-Slayers, or the Clone Saga stuff. It is...perturbing, to say the least.

 

[QUINTIX]

I guess that there is only one narrative that took the whole socially awkward young teenager turned reluctant super hero angle and made something incredible.

Neon Genesis Evangelion.

 

[HardRockSamurai]

This is a particularly stupid move on Sony's part. I really hope it comes to bite them in the ass one day.

On the other hand, Sam Raimi now has some time to work on one of the following:

A: a Warcraft film.
B: Evil Dead 4
C: Evil Dead 4
D: both B and C

For my sake, I hope he picks option D. After seeing Drag Me To Hell, I really want to see some more of Raimi in the horror genre.

Regarding the Warcraft film, I have mixed feelings. There's nothing stopping Raimi from making a good movie out of the franchise, but it does have the "video game affiliation curse." However, I'm willing to forgive that if he casts Bruce Campbell as an orc...

 

[wallcrawler]

I'm glad Raimi is gone. My view is you can be on a franchise until you drop the ball. Spidey 3 he dropped the ball. Studio interference with the villian is ultimately on him, i'm sorry, he's the director. The song and dance routine in the third film I have a hard time believing the studio insisted on. There are a number of things I could go on about, but won't. The studio should go after who they wanted before Raimi, and that's david fincher. He could take the fanchise to the next level. As much as I liked (really liked) parts Of Raimi's vision, other parts made me cringe. I want a director who is true to the charater, but not one who cater's to the fanboys. The JJJ cartoon caricature, the over-sentimentality, etc. These do nothing more then undermine the emotional impact of the film. I knew when I heard Raimi announced as director that these elements would be there. You could say I was not jumping for joy. I want greater realism, that's what will take the series to another level. Not trying to recreate a comic book feel in the real world like Raimi. Amateur hour IMO. Another thing that few people ever discuss is the character of New York itself. Does anyone think Raimi captured the scale, the scope of New York in any of the first three films? I don't.

I understand the nervousness about a reboot, but find the cynicism about the motives of the studio by some people overkill, because it's just fervent specultion/paranoia. I guess it just comes down to me being happy with the decision. The third film killed the momentum of the first two films for the studio. Rather then drag on the same sensibilities with the same team, potentially killing the momentum even more, they rebooted. It's the right move. The studio wanted this all along. The writing was on the wall with Vanderbuilt writing his scripts on the side. I don't think they wanted Raimi's vision of the character anymore, and I think they got a pulse that alot of people didn't. The fanboys who love Raimi and who are up in arms about this are the minority. They seem like the majority because they are the ones constantly talking about it on the messageboards, etc. But the let down and disappointment after the third film is undeniable. When you factor in that the Batman franchise has risen from the scrap heap and is going in the other direction then what the Spidey franchise was because of #3, it even more legitimizes sony's decision.

They should go hard after fincher. If he declines, then go after an up and comming.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Well It's sad to see it go, but at least Tobey Maguire will get the ax and makes me happy. I have never seen that actor display a single emotion besides "neutral" in any convincing way. Here's hoping that they don't screw hero movies up again!

 

[RagnorakTres]

First I'd heard of this. Damn those Meddling Executives! [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ExecutiveMeddling]

 

[Sparrow]

I, myself, welcome the reboot. Besides the fact that Spider-Man 4 would have blown because of the way Sony made Raimi muck up Spidey 3, resulting in implications for the next film, Sony would have only made the film if Raimi agreed to their terms. Therefore, it would have been even MORE screwed over as a result.

...and, because apparently it's being styled on Ultimate Spider-Man, which kicked ass.

 

[MovieBob]

I want greater realism, that's what will take the series to another level. Not trying to recreate a comic book feel in the real world like Raimi.

Here's the problem with that, from where I sit: The "realistic" version of "Spider-Man" is about 10 to 15 minutes long, and ends shortly after Peter Parker dies on a hospital bed after being bitten by a radioactive anything

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

But we have that Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon (it's pretty good, actually, go try it) for the high-school Spider-Man angle...why do we need a film as well?

 

[The Philistine]

The Spectacular Spiderman series is a recent example that a teen Spiderman can work without being a completely whiny snot. But with Sony at the helm, I'm not holding my breath.

The Spiderman story has been retold so many times like a modern myth that it'll bear through many more retellings. I seriously doubt this heralds the end of Spiderman movies worth watching, even if Sony fumbles the ball on the next adaptation.

 

[RebelRising]

While I did not like the third installment, it is still pretty damn lame how it turned out. Spiderman 2 was pimp.

Anyways, here's hoping Warcraft is good.

 

[wallcrawler]

I want greater realism, that's what will take the series to another level. Not trying to recreate a comic book feel in the real world like Raimi.

Here's the problem with that, from where I sit: The "realistic" version of "Spider-Man" is about 10 to 15 minutes long, and ends shortly after Peter Parker dies on a hospital bed after being bitten by a radioactive anything

I get your point, but there is always a suspension of disbelief to any comicbook/fantasy film. Which is why the more you ground it in a realistic context, the more impactful the experience. Look at the difference between Schumacher's or Burton's Batman films to those of Nolan's. Schumacher never had any interest in achieving a vision that this character could be real, so he indulged in the character as a whimsical fantasy. Nolan's take was obviously the other side of the spectrum. You saw the results. Obviously a character like Batman could never exist, or if he did, would most likely be dead in a week or captured/tracked by the authorities. I'm not comparing Raimi's films to Schumachers, Raimi's are far superior, but Raimi didn't take the character as far into the realm of realism as I would have liked. He had no interest in that, clearly. I just didn't dig his style(overall) on Spider-Man.

 

[BlueberryFalacy]

This is a particularly stupid move on Sony's part. I really hope it comes to bite them in the ass one day.

On the other hand, Sam Raimi now has some time to work on one of the following:

A: a Warcraft film.
B: Evil Dead 4
C: Evil Dead 4
D: both B and C

For my sake, I hope he picks option D. After seeing Drag Me To Hell, I really want to see some more of Raimi in the horror genre.

Regarding the Warcraft film, I have mixed feelings. There's nothing stopping Raimi from making a good movie out of the franchise, but it does have the "video game affiliation curse." However, I'm willing to forgive that if he casts Bruce Campbell as an orc...

I doubt he'll ever make a Evil Dead 4 but yeah it would be great for some Raimi-esque horror to come our way as he seems to have that classic look that I never get tired of in that genre (Hell I even liked Bubba Ho-Tep)

If he does go through with the WoW film though you just know Bruce will be in it, hell he'd make an awesome evil character, especially if he was allowed to go all evil ash...-cambpell nerd droolgasm-

 

[ccesarano]

Spider-Man No More

MovieBob reflects on the sudden death of the Spider-Man movies.

Read Full Article

I'm on the side of "Raimi dropped the ball" when it comes to 3. After all, despite everyone's bitching about it, Alien 3 turned out to be an excellent film. While not the Earth-infested hive that was expected, the script was an excellent recipe for a film as a whole (in its completed form) and the director did a fantastic job with it. Yet anyone with any idea as to the history of the project knows that Fox was doing everything they could to fuck things up. Yet it's still a good movie, and actually my own personal favorite (even if it isn't the best in the franchise).

There was always the possibility that there wouldn't be a fourth film. Before #3 even entered production Raimi and MacGuire were saying they may not keep doing it. So are you really going to waste all of that away on a villain like Sandman, where people with a glancing interest in Spider-man don't even know about? It's anti-climactic, especially after doing the Green Goblin and Doc Oc. Why is Venom such a lame villain? Because most writers don't use the guy to his full potential. I love Venom because there is potential there for him. If Sam Raimi doesn't like how Venom is done in the comics, then this was his chance to make him an excellent villain.

Though in truth, I feel the studio and Raimi should have come to terms with each other. Spider-man 3 introduces the symbiote, but not Venom (except maybe as a sort of cliffhanger). Raimi is then off of the project and a new director that is an equal sort of fan but with a fondness for Venom is brought on for the fourth film. Chances are you can't get everyone from the original cast, but sometimes that shit happens.

Basically, the point is Raimi could have handled that clusterfuck of a script better, even if the studio was being a bag of dicks.

However, I'm still not convinced the first two films were all that great. I loved them when I first saw them in theaters, but I also loved the original Alien vs. Predator as well. Sure the plot was weak and terrible, but that didn't matter because holy shit, the Alien is fighting the fucking Predator!

Then it came out on DVD, and I rewatched it. I watched it again with friends, with family, and upon each viewing I started to see every single flaw of the film. The story, the directing, all of it. The action couldn't entertain me anymore like it once had, and it's hard to watch it again simply because I acknowledge it for the trash that it is.

This happens with the first two Spider-Man films now. They were great initially, but each time I watch them I start to see all the reasons Raimi was wrong for the project.

Which is interesting to say. Raimi was a double-edged sword. He filmed a weak-willed spineless Peter Parker and a completely off the mark Mary Jane. He brought his cheesy B-rated horror film stylings to the franchise as well. But at the same time, the spirit of it was still there. Spider-man looked like Spider-man, and the story played closely enough with the comics (whereas X-Men did so much wrong it hurt).

It did open the door for comic based films to not only be good, but accurate. Thus opening the door for Batman Begins, showing everyone that we can take these films seriously as well. And now we have Iron Man and the Hulk reboot, playing somewhere in between Spider-Man and Batman Begins.

So while we owe a lot to Sam Raimi, at the same time I can't say I'm sad to see him go. I just wish Sony wasn't so afraid to let go of the rights to Disney and Marvel, because this really is too soon for a reboot. However, considering Spider-Man was originally a teenager that was filled with angst, you can't expect me to say "that's terrible!". That's all in a day's work when it comes to doing Spider-Man. It just depends on how it's done, and I'm going to hope whoever is in charge of the project goes for a Iron Man or Hulk vibe rather than what Raimi had been going for.

 

[wallcrawler]

Spider-Man No More

MovieBob reflects on the sudden death of the Spider-Man movies.

Read Full Article

Which is interesting to say. Raimi was a double-edged sword. He filmed a weak-willed spineless Peter Parker and a completely off the mark Mary Jane. He brought his cheesy B-rated horror film stylings to the franchise as well. But at the same time, the spirit of it was still there. Spider-man looked like Spider-man, and the story played closely enough with the comics (whereas X-Men did so much wrong it hurt).

It did open the door for comic based films to not only be good, but accurate. Thus opening the door for Batman Begins, showing everyone that we can take these films seriously as well. And now we have Iron Man and the Hulk reboot, playing somewhere in between Spider-Man and Batman Begins.


So while we owe a lot to Sam Raimi, at the same time I can't say I'm sad to see him go. I just wish Sony wasn't so afraid to let go of the rights to Disney and Marvel, because this really is too soon for a reboot. However, considering Spider-Man was originally a teenager that was filled with angst, you can't expect me to say "that's terrible!". That's all in a day's work when it comes to doing Spider-Man. It just depends on how it's done, and I'm going to hope whoever is in charge of the project goes for a Iron Man or Hulk vibe rather than what Raimi had been going for.

Couldn't agree more.

"Why is Venom such a lame villain? Because most writers don't use the guy to his full potential."

I am always amazed how most fans who constantly criticize Venom's lack of depth, don't consider the fact that it's the writers lack of imagination, or the fact that a better writer could give him depth. He is Far from my favorite villian, but his potential is great.

 

[Dr. Wily III]

This just blows my mind on so many levels.. Well, in my little world there will be only Spiderman 2, anyway,.. (Yeah, 3 wasn't THAT bad, I agree,..)

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

I like how after one movie get's F'd up they can the franchise.