Spider-Man 4

[El Rooto]

IMDb claims 2009...but since when has IMDb been reliable for upcoming films?

I hope Carnage isn't in 4, but only because Jeans threatened us.

[CosmoBubba]

You know, I think it'd be a good idea for them to recast Peter and Mary Jane in the event of a fourth Spidey movie. Watching all the promotional interviews Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst did for Spidey 3 made it look like they didn't want to do the movie in the first place, and I got the same feeling from their performances. I'd rather have the roles be played by new people that want to be there, instead of people who are only there because Sony threw a few million dollars in their directions.

And I'm still bummed at how they just lumped Venom into Spidey 3 simply to shut Avi Arad up. I had no problem with New Goblin and Sandman being in the movie together, but using Venom as the sole villain would have made for a great movie. But instead, it felt like they treated Venom just a tiny bit better than how Bane was treated in Batman & Robin.

[El Rooto]

I didn't notice the performances being any better or worse than they were in 2.

I thought Venom was handled reasonably well...or maybe I just plain old like 3.

[CanadianFonzie]

I liked part 3, but the first 3 are all so so, I mean I can watch them once and I'm good for about 5 or 6 years, so though I can't wait for part 4, I know it's gonna end up the same

however I may like it more if they (as I hear) cast the Lizard as a bad guy and get Tobey some acting lessons, both times I saw Spiderman 3 in theatres, people were laughing at his pathetic attempts at being dramatic

[Just Jeans]

I hope Carnage isn't in 4, but only because Jeans threatened us.

:shock: Did I? Must have forgotten that bit.

Anyhoo, Carnage for '09! :)

[El Rooto]

:shock: Did I? Must have forgotten that bit.


That's right, you said if Carnage appeared, that we'd never hear the end of your "I-told-you-so tirade".

[CanadianFonzie]

I wouldn't want Carnage to be in it unless Venom was in it too

[El Rooto]

There have been rumors that one of the cast members would return after a grandiose "death" scene in 3...

[Rich]

I doubt I will be seeing any future Spider-Man movie after the crappy Spider-Man 3. They sh*t all over Venom so much in that movie that I hope Carnage is never ever in a movie.

[El Rooto]

How'd they "shit all over Venom"?

[Rich]

By having him in like two seconds of the movie never even mentioning his name and having him do nothing but blow up in the end.

They made a dvd called Spider-Man The Venom Saga which is the old Fox Spidey cartoon with four or five of episodes of Venom's origin in sequence. If they made a live action version of that it would have been awesome, but the movie they made was complete dog dump.

[Just Jeans]

That's right, you said if Carnage appeared, that we'd never hear the end of your "I-told-you-so tirade".

Oh, I remember that. But that wasn't a threat.

It was a promise. :)

[Deathscythe]

By having him in like two seconds of the movie never even mentioning his name and having him do nothing but blow up in the end.

I think Spiderman 3 Venom was nothing more than an introduction, he'll be back if you ask me.

Not nearly as good as Spiderman 2, but I enjoy Spiderman 3.

Spidey / Goblin Jr. Tag team for the win.

[Just Jeans]

I think Spiderman 3 Venom was nothing more than an introduction...

No, Spider-Man 3 Venom was a shoehorned plot device to appease Avi Arad. Sam Raimi didn't want to introduce Venom in Spider-Man 3. Venom was utilized because Avi Arad said he had to be.

I'd like to see Venom back in a future film, but the reasons for his actual introduction have little to do with setting him up for a future appearance, although I suppose he might. Shame about how they completely wasted Eddie Brock, though. If Venom does come back, I expect it'll be sans Eddie.

[Melanie Jarvis]

I liked Spiderman 3 but they could have done more with it. I agree with perhaps recasting Mary Jane because from what I hear, Kirsten Dunst tried to break her contract and not do Spiderman 3, but they wouldn't let her out of it. I don't know about Tobey Maguire's feelings towards the films, but what I understand is that Tobey and Kirsten dated while making the first film, broke up, and they haven't gotten along ever since.

[The Dark Vampire]

I hear different rumours about Tobey

Some say he loves been Spiderman and has already verbally agreed to make up to 6 movies.

Some say he wants out now he's had enough and doesn't want to get type cast as Spiderman (which IMO it's to late no matter what he does no he'll always be known as Spiderman)

And others say he may do Spiderman 4 but wants to wait until he finds out who else is involved and the plot/script before he makes a decision either way.
ADDED:
Also I don't see why either Tobey or Dunst would want to quit.

They should face facts they are hardly banging out blockbuster after blockbuster and are unlikely to ever appear in anything bigger than a Spiderman movie.

Have either made anything else what has hit even close to the level of popularity as Spiderman has?

They both should ride the gravy train for as long as it wants to take them.

[Rich]

Dark Vampire has some good points. I think it would be a stupid business decision for either actor to back out of Spider-Man just yet.

If they are both bound by contracts the smartest thing they can do it honor their contracts because to breach a contract they would probably be sued. Being sued means you have to pay money. Doing the Spidey work means you make money. You do the math.

Despite my feelings for these piece of sh*t movies, it would be just plain bad business for either actor to stop now. The thing is still popular.

[Just Jeans]

Both of them were only contracted through three films. Whether or not they've signed for another three (I assume the studio would like to snare them for another three picture deal) is still up in the air. I've heard Tobey has voiced an interest in doing three more, but there's still no solid proof of this.

[Alex DeLarge]

Mysterio, Mysterio, Mysterio! Master of Illusions!

[El Rooto]

What backstory could you give to an F/X-powered loser?

[The Dark Vampire]

What backstory could you give to an F/X-powered loser?

Have a dig at DC say he worked on Catwoman and then was forced to watch it.

[The Dream Master]

As far as I know, none of the principals are contractually obligated for a fourth film. This includes Raimi, Dunst, and McGuire.

[Just Jeans]

Sure, Mysterio... but only if they allow James Arnold Taylor to play him. He did the voice for Mysterio in the Spider-Man game that was released on PS2 when the first film came out, and I really enjoyed his portrayal.

Oh, and Spider-Man should be forced to make mention of Mysterio's hijinks involving the Statue of Liberty. Yeah, I realize the events in the game aren't canon -- and rightly so -- but I liked some of those events very much (especially Pete's relationship with Black Cat). :D

[FreddyKR]

I hated Black Cat. If they have Mysterio, I do think they should have the burning theatre. That was pretty sweet. Also, Spiderman should face humiliation in this one.

[Deathscythe]

Sorry to go off topic, but nice avater J. Thomas Jeans. Segata Sanshiro right?

[Jason's Storm]

I believe Tobey and Kristen have been signed to at least the next one. What I would like to see is a Spidey/ Davedevil team up, against the King Pin. Not for the next film, but for the one after that. Also for the King pin being referanced in the next one.

~JS

[Just Jeans]

What I would like to see is a Spidey/ Davedevil team up, against the King Pin. Not for the next film, but for the one after that. Also for the King pin being referanced in the next one.

That probably won't happen. The rights to the film versions of Daredevil and Kingpin are currently held by 20th Century Fox. Sony Pictures would have to wait for Fox's license to lapse and then pay Marvel for use of the characters. That's one way that DC is better off than Marvel -- all DC films are handled by Warner Brothers, so they can mix franchises to their heart's content.

Sorry to go off topic, but nice avater J. Thomas Jeans. Segata Sanshiro right?

To be honest, I've got no clue. I picked it up online and thought that it was hilarious, so I made an avatar out of it. :X

[Deathscythe]

It was for a Sega Saturn commercial in Japan.

Heres the commercial. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V65dtKOk2Y&mode=related&search=)

[Just Jeans]

That. Is. Awesome. It's a commercial for one of the Bomber Man games. Now it makes sense. :lol:

I wonder if I can find it in MPEG or AVI format. *scuttles off*

[Jigsaw]

I want to see Carnage so bad in SM4, and Lizard as well if they can squeeze him in. It would be awesome if they could find a way to have Venom survive SM3 and be in SM4 too.

I hated the first Spider-Man film, but I enjoyed the sequels, with SM2 being the best of the series to date IMO.

[Matt Mosley]

MY SPIDER-MAN 4 (Act One - with Act Two set-up)

ACT ONE

• Open on PETER PARKER in class. The bell rings and everyone but Peter leaves. Peter sticks around to talk to DR. CONNERS about his latest project. Conners tells Peter he's at a very exciting stage on something that if proved possible will make him a household name, even amougnst the jockeyist of jocks. Peter wishes him luck and leaves.

• Peter arrives at the 'Dailey Bungle' for work and has a quick chat with BETTY BRANT - they talk about the date they went on at the weekend and seem to be about to arrange another when J.JONAH JAMESON spots Peter and BANGS on the glass wall for him to enter. He does.

• J.J orders Peter downtown to take pictures of a "Great New York Hope" - a Hunter by the name of KRAVEN is promising to "kill" Spiderman and for no fee but the pleasure of the kill.

• Peter attends the Hunters press conference and takes the required photographs. He listens as the press question why he thinks Spiderman is a threat - at the same time, two groups of 'pro' and 'anti' Spiderman groups clash - "proving" Kravens point that he's bad for the city.


• NIGHTFALLS and the criminal elements of the city begin to appear as a group of masked men heavily armed climb out of a bullet proof van around the back of a jewlrey store.

• Dr. Conners sets up things at his lab.

• Spiderman spots the would be theives and enters the building right behind them quietly.

• The leader of of masked gang attempts to steal everything in sight stuffing them into a huge bag. A fight starts and Spidy enters and saves the day by webbing all the bad guys up. He turns to return the diamonds back to their rightful places in the store, only to see the BLACK CAT taking them for herself. He calls after her and she escapes through and window - Spidy webs after her with great speed.

• Spidy CHASES Black Cat across the night skies - it's buildings and rooftops - she teases him as he struggles to keep up with her. After a while she STOPS on a rooftop and talks to him - she teases him in a promisious way - then drops over the side of the skyscraping appartment blocks and out of complete sight.

• Dr. Conners takes his new formula and mutates into THE LIZARD. His clothing RIPS over his body leaving only his torn white lab coat attached to him. He JUMPS through the window and out onto the unsuspecting public below to begin a rampage through the city.

• Spidy/Peter returns home for the night.


ACT TWO

• The Nexy Day - Peter arrives at work to a frantic office. Betty shows Peter to J.J's office - he's mad.

• J.J asks Peter for the pictures but he doesn't know what he's talking about. J.J goes off on a rant about about punk kid photographers not knowing how to do their job and having to be everywhere all the time to get the pictures for the scoop. J.J mentions that some jewels where also stolen and Spiderman was seen webbing out of the building with an accomplice.

• Peter exits the office. Betty fills him on on 'The Lizard'.

• Dr. Conner wakes up by the sea in his tattered lab coat. With barely anything to cover himself and a headache he heads home.

• Peter attends the spot where the Lizard was last seen. He begins to take pictures when suddenly he HEARS a cry for help. He changes into Spiderman and swings into action.

• Spidy sees a skinny woman is being mugged by a skinny man. He helps her with the mugger and his Spider senses TINGLE - he turns around and sees KRAVEN with his whip - he ducks an attack and the skinny man and woman run off - TOGETHER. Junkies. Kraven talks smack to Spidy and attacks. Spidy under estemates the Hunter and is hit a few times. They fight for a minute and Spidy wins. He webs off leaving Kraven talking to himself "It's not over web head, not until your skull is above my desk".


• Peter hands in his photographs and heads to school.

• Dr. Conners doesn't arrive for class. Pete worries.

• Peter visits Dr. Conners at his home. Reluctently Conners lets him in and shares his secret with him.

• After a few failed attepts at killing Spiderman, Kraven announces that HE will kill the Lizard BEFORE Spiderman can, thereby "Proving" that 'He' is the susperior being and not the "Bug-Man".

(add more story/action)

ACT THREE

FINAL ACT = Spidy tries to help Lizard with an attidote as Black Cat fights with Kraven who is trying to kill Lizard. Kraven is eventually beaten and shoots himself.

(NOTE: We never find out the identity of The Black Cat nor is Felicia Hardy introduced as a character. We meet Felicia Hardy in Spiderman 5 - where we discover that she lives in the building that Spiderman first lost her over the side and out of sight.)

Any thoughts!?

[Autobotsdie]

I hope Shocker or at least Kingpin is in the next one.

[CosmoBubba]

I don't think Kingpin is going to be in a Spider-Man movie; at least, not for a while. Unless the rights have reverted back to Marvel, he belongs to 20th Century Fox thanks to the Daredevil movie.

[jayTL]

But does kinkpin belong to Fox, or did Fox just use him?

[CosmoBubba]

I'm not sure about how exactly it works, so don't quote me on this, but I believe that Fox had to buy each of the major characters - Daredevil, Elektra, Bullseye, Kingpin, Foggy Nelson, and Karen Page - and thus own the rights to do movies featuring them until their contract with Marvel expires. Upon the contract's expiration, all the rights go back to Marvel and any other studio would have to strike a new deal for them.

Jeans was correct earlier in saying that this sort of thing is why DC is better off than Marvel, since the media conglomerate that owns them also owns a studio, so all their movies and cartoons and TV shows are released by them. With Marvel, you've got all the characters spread out over different studios. There's the X-Men, Daredevil, Fantastic Four, and the Silver Surfer over at Fox, Spider-Man and Ghost Rider at Sony, Punisher and Man-Thing at Lions Gate, the Incredible Hulk at Universal, and Iron Man, Captain America, and a few others at Paramount. It makes it kind of hard to have a shared cinematic universe when no one particular studio owns all the rights. Though while I don't remember where I heard it, but I do recall hearing something about a live-action Avengers movie in the works, once all the core members get their own solo movies.

[El Rooto]

Cletus Kassidy...I hope that's who Raimi was thinking of when he said "uninteresting due to lack of humanity". I didn't cry when the Sentry tore him in two.

...or was that just the symbiote?

[Autobotsdie]

Who owns the rights to the movie Wolverine? The reason I ask is because it would be interesting if Wolverine showed up in the next Spiderman movie.

[The Dream Master]

Fox owns Wolverine and the other X-Men characters, so they won't be appearing with Spidey anytime soon.

[Just Jeans]

But does kinkpin belong to Fox, or did Fox just use him?

The film version of Kingpin belongs to FOX until their option on the character expires and reverts to Marvel. At that point in time, one of three things will happen: FOX will repurchase a license to the character; Fox won't repurchase the license and it'll be sold to another studio; Marvel will refuse to sell a license to any studio and keep the character for themselves (they're making films in-house now, I believe).

This is why Lionsgate is rushing The Punisher 2 into production. Their license on the character expires soon, and if they don't start now, they may never get the chance.

[Autobotsdie]

Damn and I was hoping.

[The Dream Master]

Jeans, all new Marvel films are in-house productions now, with the exception of any sequels. I'm guessing that means they can get any characters they farmed out back into their possession at some point. I don't know how that works exactly, though--I'm guessing Sony/Columbia will be able to hold on to Spider-man for as long as they want.

[Just Jeans]

I think it basically means that any of the characters that have been turned into films thus far may end up with new, separate franchises once the rights revert to Marvel. I wouldn't be shocked if they try to take the Spider-Man franchise from Sony when the rights on the property revert to Marvel.

[The Dream Master]

I've been reading a bit about the production history of the first Spider-Man film, and there was always a clause in the contract that said the rights to the character would revert to Marvel if a film wasn't made by a certain date. This is probably true of every Marvel property, and it's the reason the Roger Corman Fantastic Four was made.

Anyway, I'm guessing Sony got the same deal, which means they should be able to hold onto the character as long as films keep getting made. Therefore, it's entirely possible that Marvel won't ever get the character back.

Also, a side note: at one point, Tobe Hooper was lined up to direct Spider-man, but he stepped aside and was replaced by Joseph Zito (of Friday 4 fame).

[Just Jeans]

There's a clause like that in the contract for all licensed concepts. The rights to do a Doctor Who film sat in the hands of various companies for ages, and those drifting rights played a part in the series staying off TV between 1989 and 2005. When the rights reverted back to the BBC in 2003, the new series went into production.

The rights won't remain with Sony until the films stop getting made. If it worked like that, big studios could hold on to a character license forever, so long as they produce a film every so often. That more or less allows a studio to steal the character from Marvel and never give it back.

Eventually the rights will lapse, and Sony will either have to pay Marvel a huge amount of money, or Marvel will start producing Spider-Man films in-house.

[El Rooto]

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH DOCTOR WHO AGAIN AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH

I bet Sony opts to hold onto the rights.

[Steve]

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH DOCTOR WHO AGAIN AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH


Ah yes, and I just watched "Genesis of the Daleks" last night. :)

[El Rooto]

I wish I had a dollar for every time Jeans used Doctor Who to illustrate a point.

Oh, and I still want the Spot as the villian.

[Just Jeans]

I wish I had a dollar for every time Jeans used Doctor Who to illustrate a point...

So do I. I'd have been able to afford that pesky back surgery ages back. :shy:

[Alex DeLarge]

I wish I had a dollar for every time Jeans used Doctor Who to illustrate a point.

You should see me in real life...

"So yeah, I love this guy but I don't know what to do, because he barely even notices me."

"Well, when that happened to the companion, Martha Jones, she..."

"Wait, is this Doctor Who again?"

"*cough*"

:p

[Just Jeans]

"Wait, is this Doctor Who again?"

That about sums me up as well. :shifty::side:

[The Dark Vampire]

That about sums me up as well. :shifty::side:

I'm the same but except with wrestling whatever the situation I usually find a way to relate it to pro wrestling somehow.

[El Rooto]

I hope for a villian nobody would expect.

[Cody]

James Vanderbilt Writing Spider-Man 4 (http://www.superherohype.com/news.php?id=6469)

James Vanderbilt has been brought on board to write the screenplay for Spider-Man 4 for Sony Pictures.

Vanderbilt most recently penned David Fincher's Zodiac, polished up the X-Men Origins: Wolverine script, and has written The Rundown, Basic and Darkness Falls.

Laura Ziskin is returning as producer of the billion-dollar franchise, though no deals have been made to bring back series director Sam Raimi or stars Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Plot points are being closely guarded by the studio, though the intent is to scale back the story to include only two villains instead of repeating the Spider-Man 3 model.

Several writers were being considered for the fourth installment, and Vanderbilt apparently was chosen by Sony executives for his character-driven approach to the story rather than a focus on special effects.

[El Rooto]

NEWS!

Maybe I can hibernate until all the movies I want to see are out and they reveal the villians for this one.

[Just Jeans]

...Vanderbilt apparently was chosen by Sony executives for his character-driven approach to the story rather than a focus on special effects.

AKA, "Let's do this one on the cheap, fellas!"

I watched Spider-Man 3 last night for the first time. It's surprising that a film which felt so long had precious little character development. The entire cast felt wasted.

[El Rooto]

There was a shitload cut out in the end.

[DRE]

It'd be nice to go back to the days of one villain per film (I don't count Superman Returns because I don't remember there being a bad guy in the film, just a mad real estate developer.)

Did Batman Returns start this trend?

[The Dark Vampire]

The thing is Spiderman has such a huge rouges gallery (One of the biggest in all comic books Marvel DC or any other) that if they want to fit them in even if they just use the more common ones they have to double up or they could never do it.

[JVY2K]

It'd be nice to go back to the days of one villain per film (I don't count Superman Returns because I don't remember there being a bad guy in the film, just a mad real estate developer.)

Did Batman Returns start this trend?

Batman Forever I believe. Catwoman was on the fence between villain and somewhat hero. She wasn't outright against Batman. And Shrek doesn't really count either. He was a villain but he wasn't over the top or anything. The movie was Batman vs. The Penguin all around.

Forever though was Batman vs. Two Face & The Riddler. Kinda cheapened the whole thing, even though I did enjoy the movie.

Venom deserved a role as the main villain against Spidey. He's way better than Sandman. No way Sandman deserved a main villain role. He wasn't even that important of a villain in the comics. He was a bit part villain. My opinion is they went with him just to have the over the top special effects.

[DRE]

Batman Forever I believe. Catwoman was on the fence between villain and somewhat hero. She wasn't outright against Batman. And Shrek doesn't really count either. He was a villain but he wasn't over the top or anything. The movie was Batman vs. The Penguin all around.

Forever though was Batman vs. Two Face & The Riddler. Kinda cheapened the whole thing, even though I did enjoy the movie.

Venom deserved a role as the main villain against Spidey. He's way better than Sandman. No way Sandman deserved a main villain role. He wasn't even that important of a villain in the comics. He was a bit part villain. My opinion is they went with him just to have the over the top special effects.

Agreed. Watch, The Vulture will have the top spot and Carnage will be the secondary if Sam Rami directs the fourth.

[JVY2K]

Agreed. Watch, The Vulture will have the top spot and Carnage will be the secondary if Sam Rami directs the fourth.

Even The Vulture played a more prominent role as a Spidey villain than the fuckin' Sandman. It'd be more like making Molten Man the main villain ;)...

Personally, I'd like to see The Chameleon enter the films. He'd make a great main villain.

[Deathscythe]

I'd liked The Lizard to be the villain. I did make a topic on who the villain in this film should be in the Other Polls section.

[JVY2K]

Also, here's hoping they don't decide to bring Norman Osborn back and make him responsible for every problem Peter's ever faced in his life...

I hate how in the comics, they brought him back and linked him to EVERYTHING from the past. And then brought Aunt May back as well. The Spidey comics are so fuckin' stupid now...

[El Rooto]

I definitely agree there.

[NW77]

Agreed. Watch, The Vulture will have the top spot and Carnage will be the secondary if Sam Rami directs the fourth.


Heh! Thankfully we won't see that if he return. Many have said Lizard & Kraven are very possible choice to be in the sequel. And knowing that Raimi prefer the classic villians from the 60s from Stan Lee instead of the 80s like Venom, I'm sure Raimi would make it better than part 3. I'm all up for that. Raimi can make Lizard very scary. They should get Rick Baker or Stan Winston to design Lizard. :)

[The Dream Master]

Also, here's hoping they don't decide to bring Norman Osborn back and make him responsible for every problem Peter's ever faced in his life...

I hate how in the comics, they brought him back and linked him to EVERYTHING from the past. And then brought Aunt May back as well. The Spidey comics are so fuckin' stupid now...

Quoted for truth.

You know, I wouldn't be wholly opposed to Sony letting Spider-Man sit on a shelf for five to ten years before bringing it back with an entirely new cast and crew. The inevitable problem with super-hero films is the fact that the same cast can't be around forever, and it's always weird when new people come on board. I think this problem can be alleviated by just waiting a while so that there's a clean break from the films that are already out there. I guess Sony wants to strike while the iron is hot, though.

[The Dark Vampire]

Like I have said before I would love to see Ben Riley/The Scarlet Spider on the big screen as part of this franchise but I think The Clone Saga is just to hard to do let's face it even Marvel themselves couldn't do it right

If they could bring it in somehow though I would love to see it

[Just Jeans]

Agreed. Watch, The Vulture will have the top spot and Carnage will be the secondary if Sam Rami directs the fourth.

Raimi didn't even want Venom though, did he? It was forced on him by Avi Arad. It would have ended up being Sandman and Harry (who has a role more complex than simply being a villain) had Avi not insisted on Venom.

[Cody]

Raimi had Sandman, Vulture, and Harry. Venom and Gwen Stacy were producer suggestions.

According (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_v2Q0-ai8) to Michael Chabon, Spidey 2 was almost a cluster o' characters as well. When he came on to do a new draft, the existing script had Doc Ock, Black Cat, The Lizard, and Harry going Goblin.

[The Dream Master]

Good lord, that would have been a mess.

[NW77]

Good lord, that would have been a mess.

Yep. Thankfully, we only got Doc Ock. & SM2 is one of the best Spidey film ever made. In fact, I would consider SM2 one of the top 10 best comic book movie. :)

[The Dream Master]

I'll go one further, NW: I think Spider-Man 2 is among the top five.

[JVY2K]

Like I have said before I would love to see Ben Riley/The Scarlet Spider on the big screen as part of this franchise but I think The Clone Saga is just to hard to do let's face it even Marvel themselves couldn't do it right

If they could bring it in somehow though I would love to see it

I loved the clone saga. I felt though it should have ended when they killed off The Jackal at the end of Maximum Cloneage. It was cool that Ben took over for awhile but keeping up the whole thing that Ben was the real Peter was a let down to long time fans who'd read the books from the beginning all of a sudden being robbed of their Peter. Basically making it so the Peter they read about up to the original clone story turned out to be Ben (the real Peter) and the Peter following the original clone story was just a clone. People felt cheated and they dragged it on too long. It would have made a nice neat little package had they done the reveal thing of Ben being the real Parker and kept it up only till the end of the Maximum Cloneage story and then revealed Peter was still the original. Instead of dragging it on almost two years that Ben was the real Peter.

Thus if they did the clone story, the first half of the clone story would be the better one to address. The adventures of Ben Reiley after he took over were too over the top, with all those cyber robots n' shit. Also, I'd want them to keep Mile Warren/Jackal as the mastermind instead of the way they revealed Norman Osborn to have been responsible. That was the beginning of the lazy uncreative writing that has haunted the Spidey comics ever since.

[Deathscythe]

I'll go one further, NW: I think Spider-Man 2 is among the top five.

Spidey 2 is my 2nd favorite comic book film, only 2nd to The Crow.

[The Taff]

From what I understand of it, Avi Arad did force Venom on Raimi, however Raimi also had the idea for displaying Peter's dark side of pride before that happened. So Sam was mor einterested in using the symbiote as a catalyst for releasing that trait than using Venom, hence, why Venom was under used.

I can understand Raimi stance here. I'm disappointed at how Venom was underused (Especially since I loved Topher as Brock), but that's what happened when you force thing son a filmaker. I blame Arad more than Raimi.

[The Dark Vampire]

They should of had the symbiote suit in part 3 but not feature Venom until part 4 (almost) the final scene in 3 should of been Brock turning into Venom in the clock tower

[hack slash]

and Venom jumping towards the camera should of been the final shot of the film, then just make 4 Spidey vs Venom, would have been so much better

[Alex DeLarge]

But... I just don't see how that would work. Venom, especially in the movie context, is an insane psychopath, who would terrorize Mary Jane and Aunt May to get at Peter. I know I sound like Bubba Sawyer here, but he was right. Venom for a whole movie would leave no time for emotional scenes or any subplots.

[Chex]

Also, here's hoping they don't decide to bring Norman Osborn back and make him responsible for every problem Peter's ever faced in his life...

I hate how in the comics, they brought him back and linked him to EVERYTHING from the past. And then brought Aunt May back as well. The Spidey comics are so fuckin' stupid now...

Oh god, that stuff was horrible. Spoilers for anything to deal with this:

Norman never died, he was just in Europe recovering. Oh, and he knocked up Gwen Stacy so she could give out twins before she died.

[El Rooto]

But... I just don't see how that would work. Venom, especially in the movie context, is an insane psychopath, who would terrorize Mary Jane and Aunt May to get at Peter. I know I sound like Bubba Sawyer here, but he was right. Venom for a whole movie would leave no time for emotional scenes or any subplots.
I agree.

I feel the same way about Carnage being the main villian in 4--he's just a fucking nutcase.

[CosmoBubba]

Sometimes I'm not really in the mood for emotional scenes or subplots. Sometims I just want to see a superhero and a supervillain kick the everloving shit out of each other for two hours. There's nothing wrong with a little shallow entertainment every once in a while.

[Rich]

You know what, they have a dvd called Spider-Man The Venom Saga, if they made a live action version of that scene for scene that would be one of the greatest super hero comic book movies ever made. Instead Sam made a piece of crap that totally disrespected Venom. Spider 3 was a movie that would rise and fall on Venom, and it fell because of how he treated one of the most popular bad guys in comic history.

[El Rooto]

Yes, you've told us all about that already.

Handling him like they did on that show would've been fucking stupid, IMO.
3 was not about Venom. It wasn't intended to be.

[Deathscythe]

You know, I never got the love for Venom. My favorite Spiderman villain has always been Kingpin, but I think Fox still owns the rights for him.

[Just Jeans]

You know, I never got the love for Venom. My favorite Spiderman villain has always been Kingpin, but I think Fox still owns the rights for him.

Marvel may have reclaimed them by now. I'm not sure.

[DouglasJ]

Marvel may have reclaimed them by now. I'm not sure.

I'm pretty sure Fox still owns them as part of the Daredevil rights package (I think making Elektra allowed them to hold onto the rights for longer than they would have otherwise)

[Cody]

Unconfirmed rumor along the grapevine is that a script was recently commissioned for a solo Venom movie.

[hack slash]

Instead Sam made a piece of crap that totally disrespected Venom. Spider 3 was a movie that would rise and fall on Venom, and it fell because of how he treated one of the most popular bad guys in comic history.

Spidey 3 is what happens when someone(Sam Raimi) is forced to re-Write the script to inculde a character

[The Taff]

An entire Spider-Man movie of Venom would leave very little room for Peter to grow as a person, which is the primary appeal of Spider-Man. It isn't the action and the antics, it's Peter's life.

Venom leaves no breathing room even in the comics for Peter's life. WHenever Venom is around, Peter is working full time to all time trying to protect himself.

No, Spider-Man 3 had just the right amount of Venom for me.

[Cody]

A solo Venom spin-off isn't as unconfirmed as I thought, Avi Arad himself said (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/aviarad.php) back in July, "I'm making Venom" and that it was coming along "Awesome"ly.

[The Taff]

I sincerely hope Topher will still play Brock.

The guy did an out-fucking-standing job. His scenes as Venom gave me goosebumps in the awesome factor.

If anything, they could have Brock leaving New York to lick his wounds and regroup before getting another crack at Peter, only he meets Ann Weying (Instead of being divorced to her)

Then the symbiote can reproduce and bond to Kasady. While I think he would make a horrible villain in a Spider-Man film, a Venom film has more potential to be brutal.

[El Rooto]

I agree. I loved Topher's performance.

His portrayal really reminded me of Ultimate Eddie Brock in some ways.

[The Taff]

The scene with Eddie surprising MJ in the cab was fucking fantastic. Forming his alliance with Sandman was an amazingly effective scene too...

[Darth Sinister]

Topher Grace really relished playing the bad guy after seven seasons and a few films, playing the good guy. So a solo Venom film with him would work. But we'll have to see how they get around his death, since we clearly see Eddie's burnt skeleton. Unless they use Mac Gargan, aka the Scorpion.

[The Dark Vampire]

I think they could be able to work away around it.

[Deathscythe]

If Loomis could survive a flaming room blowing up in H2, I think Eddie Brock could survive as well.

[Scarecrow]

Certainly you could do some sort of explanation with the symbiote saving him. Been ages since I saw it but is it possible the skeleton was more an x-ray effect caused by the explosion? :p Rectonning is fun!


- Scarecrow

[The Taff]

Here's what I've been peicing together in my head...

The symbiote takes the brunt of the explosion to save Brocka nd ge thte hell out of there in its weakened state, so Brock ducks out to San Fransisco to lick his wounds. Out there, while the symbiote recoups, it has less effect on Brock's state of mind.

Brock meets Ann Weying (His ex-wife int he comics) falls for her, even going as far as to protect her from a weak looking mugger/serial killer (Kasady). WHen the Symbiote recoups, it gives birth to the Carnage symbiote, and sinc eBrock has someone to defend now, he takes the role of the Lethal Protector.

I'm no writer, but it cna be done.

[Just Jeans]

Sam Raimi Says Goodbye To Spidey (http://www.syfyportal.com/news424429.html)

"Spider-Man 3" may have been shot down by critics, but that didn’t stop it from becoming a box office success during the summer and thereby paving the way for more sequels in the future.

However, despite popular reports, director Sam Raimi has confirmed that he won’t be sticking around for more web slinging adventures with Spider-Man and that he is definitely finished with the Marvel hero.

"I'm just as excited about the character," he said. "Although the physical energy level between how I felt before I started shooting versus what was left of me on the last day of photography, I was so exhausted at the end of 'Spider-Man 3' I can't tell you. My love for the characters and my passion for the stories are the same, but I was just a shell of the person that I was after all of those movies."

So if Raimi is out, that means if "Spider-Man 4" does come to fruition the franchise will need someone new to take control. Will Raimi have a say on who gets to take the helm? Apparently not as the directed insisted that he doesn’t want that responsibility.

"I don’t want to pick someone," Raimi said. "I don’t know if I’ll be directing the picture or not, but I’d like to say that it would be somebody that was the best gift I could give to Spider-Man — someone who understands him and loves him and could bring his passion and love to the character. A character director probably; no one else."

In 2002, "Spider-Man" made his presence known at the box office when his web snagged approximagtely $39 million in its opening day. That figure was then bested two years layer by "Spider-Man 2," which managed $40.4 million. Both movies were then blown out of the water earlier this year when "Spider-Man 3" pulled in an estimated $59 million in its opening day, breaking the record for biggest opening day of any movie.

He says he won't be directing, then says he's not sure if he'll be directing. Maybe he meant "producing" there? :confused:

Anyhoo, I hope he does leave Spder-Man 4 to someone else. Maybe then he'll work on Evil Dead 4.

[The Dream Master]

Two things:

First, I think this is a good move. As I said earlier in this thread, I think the Spider-Man franchise needs to go in a completely new direction: new actors, new creative team, the whole deal so as to represent a clean break from Raimi's trilogy.

And, secondly, I wonder if this means Raimi is going to move on to do "The Hobbit."

[Just Jeans]

Evil. Dead. 4.

Please. :misery:

[The Dark Vampire]

I wonder if Tobey Maguire & Kirsten Dunst will return or not as last I heard they said they were waiting to see if Sam Raimi was back before they made any decisions.

Either way Spiderman 4 will obviously happen with or without any of them I'm hoping Tobey returns (but if not I'll still watch it) but couldn't care less if Kirsten returned or not.

[The Dream Master]

Evil. Dead. 4.

Please. :misery:

That'd be nice, but alas, I don't think it's ever meant to be.

[Just Jeans]

That'd be nice, but alas, I don't think it's ever meant to be.

Nor do I. But at least the remake seems to have been mooted as well.

[Just Jeans]

Has anyone else seen rumors about the villains in this film? Someone on another forum said they'd read an article about the next film having three villains, but I can't find anything that isn't old.

[Jigsaw]

I have no idea on the latest news regarding Spider-Man 4. I'm curious about it, myself. I'd imagine by 2010 we'll probably get SM4.

[Jack Bauer]

I'm thinking they could be referring to how The Lizard will be one of them along with The Vulture. I'm really hoping to see Kraven the Hunter as well. Carnage not so much because he would work wonders in the spin off film.

[Jigsaw]

If Venom is really getting his own spin-off film, I say save Carnage for that instead, but if not, make Carnage the new villain for SM4. I hope Carnage and Lizard will both be in SM4.

[Jack Bauer]

Well, I think Spidey should at least face all of the villains one by one instead of doing a three on one match. Also they really dropped the ball on Venom, so I worry about how Carnage would be portrayed.

[Cody]

Has anyone else seen rumors about the villains in this film? Someone on another forum said they'd read an article about the next film having three villains, but I can't find anything that isn't old.

There hasn't been any villain news, all we know for sure is that James Vanderbilt is writing the script. Beyond that, nothing - including director and stars - is confirmed.

I hope they throw us something, soon, though. I'm craving some Spidey news.

I don't want Carnage in the Spidey series, but I do agree that he should be the villain in the Venom movie.

[Monkey]

There hasn't been any villain news, all we know for sure is that James Vanderbilt is writing the script. Beyond that, nothing - including director and stars - is confirmed.

I hope they throw us something, soon, though. I'm craving some Spidey news.

I don't want Carnage in the Spidey series, but I do agree that he should be the villain in the Venom movie.

Okay, I've been living under a rock. A Venom movie? Is Topher Grace confirmed?

I thought they were finished making spider-man movies for now, judging by the attitude of the stars. It seemed like nobody was interested. Of course, Spider-man movies make tons of ca$h...

Anyways, I hope they get Tobey back; he's done well as Spidey. They can kick Dunst's ass to the curb, though. They could get the redhead from Wedding Crashers... or any natural redhead to play MJ. I'm just not a big Kirsten Dunst fan.

Spider-man has so many enemies in the comics, they could keep this series going for quite sometime & keep it fresh. Hopefully they don't resort to rebooting it anytime soon (as they're already doing for The Hulk).

Added: I thought they dropped the ball on Venom as well. He seemed to be an afterthought, much like Bane in Batman & Robin. They could've developed that story quite a bit... it seemed like Venom was on a villian checklist, and they had to get him out of the way before Spidey fights Kraven or the Vulture, etc. etc.

[Cody]

Okay, I've been living under a rock. A Venom movie? Is Topher Grace confirmed?

It's the same situation as Spidey 4 - all that we know is that a script is being written. Nothing else confirmed. I don't think the writer has even been announced.

I thought they dropped the ball on Venom as well. He seemed to be an afterthought, much like Bane in Batman & Robin. They could've developed that story quite a bit... it seemed like Venom was on a villian checklist, and they had to get him out of the way before Spidey fights Kraven or the Vulture, etc. etc.

That's pretty much the way it was. Raimi's story had Sandman and The Vulture as the villains. The black suit, Eddie Brock, and Venom were put in at the insistence of the producers late in development.

[Scarecrow]

Which is insane. At the very least they should have maybe set up the black suit for a sequel but preferably left it to another film. So many villains who could easily hold a film of their own... there's a fear these days of giving villains big schemes.m It coems across corny, apparently, and at odds with the films "realism" so most superhero films, the villains sole aim is to destroy the hero.

Spiderman 2 just about hinted at Doc Ock wanting to build his device, Batman Begins worked pretty well but so many others simple make the film hero vs villain. Villains really used to DREAM you know, let's have some insane plots!


- Scarecrow

[TheShowstoppa]

They're really pushing for this movie since Iron Man did so well at the Box Office and rumor has it that a few other people might make cameos in this flick. Note: Don't read if you don't want to be spoiled about Iron Man or The Incredible Hulk.Especially since we're seeing Robert Downey Jr. in The Incredible Hulk as Tony Stark recruiting Hulk for The Avengers - Just like the Nick Fury cameo in Iron Man. This movie will be one of two final stepping stones for that movie - the final one of course being Captain America.

[Cody]

I haven't heard anything about Spidey being involved with the Avengers movie. From Marvel's announcement it looks like the Avengers line-up will be Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, and Ant-Man.

[Darth Sinister]

Essentially the founding fathers, minus Wasp.

[The Dream Master]

Wasp could be a possibility, considering there is an Ant-Man film in the works.

[DouglasJ]

The thing is, the only way Spidey could be involved with an Avengers movie is if it is released by Sony. They own the cinematic rights to Spidey outright, where as the characters they're talking about for the Avengers movie are owned outright by Marvel's movie production studio. They seem to have a deal with Paramount Pictures concerning distribution on ALL their upcoming features (except Incredible Hulk, due to a pre-existing deal with Universal).

Avengers will be distributed by Paramount, so Spider-Man CANNOT play a part.

However, there is nothing to stop any of The Avengers appearing in a future Spider-Man film, given that Marvel own those characters.

[TheShowstoppa]

I do believe that Marvel Studios is trying to regain the rights to Spidey. Didn't Sony only have contractual rights to the first 3 pictures (since it was meant to be a trilogy) and then They would see what happened?

[Lammert]

This time they should do Carnage and the return of Green Goblin, and spend less time on the love story...

[The Dream Master]

I do believe that Marvel Studios is trying to regain the rights to Spidey. Didn't Sony only have contractual rights to the first 3 pictures (since it was meant to be a trilogy) and then They would see what happened?

Nah, pretty sure Sony has it for as long as they want provided they actually do something with the franchise. Sony is definitely going to be the one releasing Spider-Man 4.

[Darth Sinister]

Wasp could be a possibility, considering there is an Ant-Man film in the works.

Only Hank Pym and Scott Lang have been confirmed for the Ant-Man film. Wasp could appear, but nothing has been said about her. Besides, she would have to be in an Ant-Man film over a solo film.

If a Venom film is in the works, I can see them getting around Eddie's death. He is named Eddie Brock Jr., in the third film. Why not have Eddie Sr., as the new Venom with the Symbiote that Curt Conners had in his lab?

[TheShowstoppa]

In the Ultimate series/continuity, Eddie Brock Sr. and Peter's dad both worked at the same lab that developed the symbiote suit. They both died which is why they became friends. I know some of Eddie's characteristics and size and everything is based off of that character with most of his background coming from the original mythology.

[Scarecrow]

I'm sure there's some way Eddie could be shown to have survived, just takes a bit of a stretch and a lot of imagination. :D


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

Here's my explanation: it's a comic book flick, and no one associated with comics ever stays dead except for Bucky and Jason Todd. Oh, wait...

[TheShowstoppa]

I was like... Hang on - They brought JT back. Fuckin' comic writers. How the hell are we supposed have any validity in their works if no one stays dead? Especially someone who was VOTED TO DIE?!?!?!

[Darth Sinister]

Jason Todd had a body to bring back to life, using cosmic means. Bucky's death was designed as such that you never saw his body being blown to bits. That's how he was brought back to life. We see Eddie Brock's charred skeleton when the Pumpkin Bomb detonates. And unlike with comics where you can get away with that shit, these movies tend to be more realistic in their approach.

[Scarecrow]

Comics never got away with it. :P The death of any character can never really be taken seriously because it never lasts. Also, anyone screen cap this skeleton as I still haven't noticed it...


- Scarecrow

[Cody]

The "back-to-back sequels shot at the same time" rumor lives again (http://www.cinematical.com/2008/05/16/scoop-spider-man-4-and-5-might-be-shot-at-the-same-time/)

Cinematical just received a tasty little scoop from one of our trusty top secret super delegate Hollywood insiders, and it's purty interesting (all you Spidey fans might want to listen up):

Apparently, in the last few weeks, James Vanderbilt (Zodiac) has turned in a working draft of Spider-Man 4 to the studio. However, according to our source, "his story arc has encompassed two films, making Spider-Man 5 shootable at the same time. The studio saw dollar signs and is in the process of reworking his deal to snatch up the story arc." Don't expect anything immediately, though, since we've been told both sides are still trying to negotiate the deal.

Right now we have no word on what that arc is or where Vanderbilt is taking his script, but it's interesting to know that they're looking to spread the next Spidey storyline across two films, instead of shooting one more and taking it from there. Obviously Sony has wiped away the bad buzz from Spidey 3 and is interested in stretching this franchise as far as they can. After three flicks, I can't see Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst returning to shoot two Spider-Man films together (would be a lot to take on), but you never know. In the meantime, here's what we know: Looks like Vanderbilt is writing Spider-Man 4 and Spider-Man 5, and the studio might look to shoot both flicks at the same time.

[Darth Sinister]

Comics never got away with it. :P The death of any character can never really be taken seriously because it never lasts.

Which is why they've gotten away with it. Comics is one medium. Movies and television are another.

Also, anyone screen cap this skeleton as I still haven't noticed it...


- Scarecrow

Sorry, I don't have it to try and screencap. Just go frame by frame if you can, when the Pumpkin Bomb detonates.

As to a back-to-back sequel, they were going to try that with the third film, but couldn't make it work or didn't want to try. So I doubt that'll happen here. They'll have to pay the three of them big bucks to do so.

[Skye]

They'll have to pay the three of them big bucks to do so.

Unless they start from scratch with a new director & cast.

[Darth Reaper]

I'm sure there's some way Eddie could be shown to have survived, just takes a bit of a stretch and a lot of imagination.- Scarecrow

It's the easiest thing in the world to do. Simply start a new movie that involves Venom with the scene where he's supposed to die in SPIDER-MAN 3. Reshoot the scene and omit the charred skeleton so that there's no body to testify that he's dead. Then, add new footage that shows how Eddie and the symbiote survive. Presto, problem solved.

It's kind of like what they did at the beginning of HALLOWEEN 5. They showed the ind of HALLOWEEN 4, then added new material to show how Michael gets out of the mine shaft.

It's called retconning history. They do it all the time in many different forms of media and it can work here too.

[Jigsaw]

I agree. Going that route can easily have Eddie/Venom survive, they could also retcon it so that the skeleton seen in Spider-Man 3 was just the effect of the bomb and it didn't actually kill him.

[DRE]

Tobey is a great Peter Parker, but I would like to see the series with a new director and new actors. I wouldn't mind Tobey staying, but Dunst has to go.

[Jigsaw]

I agree. I think Tobey improved greatly as Peter over the course of SM2 and SM3, but I could live without Kirsten and it's obvious Sam Raimi has gotten tired of the series. I'd welcome a new director.

[Scarecrow]

I guess the bomb could cause the X-Ray like effect. I suppose a way I'd go about it is show that the symbiote used its last moments to sheild Eddie from the explosion. The X-ray effect was seen but Eddie was quickly thrown from the explosion somehow, with the majority /a ll the symbiote destroyed. It saved him knowing he'd eventually discover the surviving portion owned by Connors and, hey presto, you got Venom back. Or something.


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

I think Raimi got tired of Arad and the other producers forcing him to add characters and elements just so they could push action figures more than anything. I would have loved to see Raimi do the Spider-Man 3 he always envisioned. I mean, the film we got isn't that bad, but it's definitely weak in a lot of areas.

[Just Jeans]

I've never been against the idea of recasting the lead in comic book films, I guess because I'm so used to rotating leads over in the Batman franchise, so if there's a new Peter Parker in Spider-Man 4, I won't complain. I just hope they can get some of the regular supporting cast back -- J. K. Simmons is the perfect Jameson and I'd hate to lose him.

[Jack Bauer]

I agree because J. K. Simmons is JJ Jameson, no one but him can play him. Also over on the Hype! Spider-Man board, a lot of people want Kirsten to be gone after three films, so Mary Jane Watson could be re-casted as Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

[CosmoBubba]

My problem with Spidey 3 was that the whole thing felt half-assed. The script seemed really muddled (what with the shitty "Sandman killed Uncle Ben" retcon, Gwen Stacy having thirty total seconds of screen time, and Venom being thrown in there at the last minute to shut Avi Arad up), and I got the impression that the only reason Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst bothered showing up at all was because Sony offered a mighty, mighty fuckload of cash.

Maybe Raimi, Maguire, and Dunst were all burned out? Whether that's the case or not, I'd have absolutely no problem with Sony hiring a bunch of new faces if it meant that we'd get the best movie possible out of it.

[Jigsaw]

I liked Spider-Man 3, but I agree that it definitely tried to do way too much with it's plot and basically tried to squeeze the plots of two or three other movies into one and it didn't quite gel well.

As long as J.K. Simmons remains, I have no problems at all with a recast for the next film and a new director.

[The Dream Master]

The strength of the first two films was that each was very tightly focused, while Spider-Man 3 was trying to shoe-horn too many things in. There's a fantastic theme of revenge and forgiveness that's buried under all of that somewhere, but it's all handled pretty poorly. All the juvenile shit with Peter, Harry, and Mary Jane felt like it came from a soap opera, and Peter's decision to forgive the Sandman sounds nice on the surface, but it's cheap, sentimental bullshit that flies in the face of everything Spider-Man stands for. Each time I watch part 3 now, it begins to crumble more and more under this type of scrutiny. Still has some good bits, though--I won't deny that.

[Scarecrow]

The Sandman retcon didn't bother me so much as it's made pretty clear that it's still the other guy who caused the death. Parker letting him go still led to Uncle Ben's detah so it doens't change anything in a major way.


- Scarecrow

[Jigsaw]

I thought the Sandman retcon was done pretty decently. I think SM3 was a pretty entertaining movie, but storywise there were parts that left a lot to be desired, and it simply tried to do too much for it's own good.

[Just Jeans]

Was the Sandman bit a retcon, though? I sort of got the impression that Raimi had always intended for that to be revealed in Spider-Man 3, but given how muffled the final product was, it's hard to tell what was meant to be there from the beginning and what was added much later.

[Jigsaw]

I don't know, maybe it's explained on the SM3 commentary. I don't own the DVD yet, and haven't seen SM3 since it's theatrical release (hard to believe it's been a year already).

[The Dream Master]

I do believe that was something Raimi had always planned to do.

[Darth Sinister]

The only difference in the villains is the rumor that the Vulture was replaced by Venom. I think the story was pretty much going to be three villains at once. I don't mind it in three, because the previous film was lacking. You have Doc Ock, but because Peter's not Spider-Man for a good portion of the film, Ock's practically wasted until he takes MJ.

As to forgiving Sandman, it is reasonable since it was an accident and not intentional. Besides, it was in keeping with his character prior to the late 90's retcons. Where Sandman made an effort to give up being a badguy and become a hero. Becoming a reserve Avenger and then part of the Outlaws. However, changing it from the burgler to Sandman is just goofy. I can understand the story arc that Raimi was going for, but still, that's just change for the sake of change.

[The Dream Master]

I don't think forgiving the Sandman was reasonable within the context of the films. It's clear that Sandman broke the law several times, and even tried to kill Mary Jane minutes earlier. Then, Spider-Man just lets him go to commit more crimes, all because he gives a sob story? Weak. Some might wonder how Spider-Man could have stopped him, but, damnit, there had to be a vacuum cleaner around there somewhere. :D

[Jigsaw]

I really need to see Spider-Man 3 again. I remember when I saw it theatrically thinking it was entertaining but with a lot of story flaws and trying to have a plot that was too ambitious and crammed for it's own good, but I need to see how well the film has held up for me a whole year later.

[DRE]

I have to watch it again myself, I have it on DVD, I just hadn't watched it yet (I do that a lot, buy the movies but don't watch them until I REALLY need to see it.)

[Jigsaw]

I used to be an avid DVD watcher, but lately haven't watched a lot of them for a long time. I've had The Mist and Becker Season 1 for more than a whole month and I still haven't watched them.

[The Dream Master]

Psh, I've got flicks that have been laying around for years...still in the shrink-wrap. :X

[Just Jeans]

I'm the same way, Brett. I've owned The Second Coming (starring Christopher Eccleston) on DVD for over a year now and still haven't watched it. :X

[Jigsaw]

Since working out daily, getting my own computer and being an avid online role-playing gamer, my DVD watching has really been put on the backburner lately.

[Darth Reaper]

One thing that I'd like to see them do with Spider-Man in the next film is let him be a bit funnier. In the comics Spider-Man is a total smart-ass who has a one-liner or quick quip for just about every occation. He's always making fun of his enemies while he's fighting them as a way of throwing them off their game. But, in the movies he doesn't do that very much.

Also, it might be good to show Spider-Man making more of an effort to find the bad guys and bring them in before they do something bad again. In the movies it seemed like Spidey would encounter the bad guys, fight with them awhile, they'd get away, and then he'd continue on with his life and wait for them to show up again. Very rarely does he go out and try to find the bad guys so that he can prevent them from causing any more trouble. The closest we get to that is when he's listening to a police radio, waiting to hear when The Sandman shows himself again.

And, it does seem wrong for Spider-Man to just let The Sandman go at the end of the movie. Maybe he is remorseful, but he's still commited multiple crimes, endangered the lives of many people, and may have even aided in the deaths of others (how many of those cops do you suppose survived once Venom got his hands on them during the climaxe). It doesn't matter why he did these things, what matters is that he did them and he has to take responsibility for that. Isn't that what Spider-Man is all about, responsibility?

[Jigsaw]

One thing that I'd like to see them do with Spider-Man in the next film is let him be a bit funnier. In the comics Spider-Man is a total smart-ass who has a one-liner or quick quip for just about every occation. He's always making fun of his enemies while he's fighting them as a way of throwing them off their game. But, in the movies he doesn't do that very much.

I actually like how Spider-Man is more serious in the movies and doesn't throw around so many punchlines. I'm not a fan of one-liners, but I suppose I wouldn't object to a more humorous Spider-Man in the next film as long as his humor wasn't lame and didn't detract from the serious aspects of his character. If they can pull it off right I'd be cool with it.

[WesReviews]

They'll have to really do a LOT of work to get me interested in the series again. Spider-Man 3 was a mess of epic proportions. Easily, the "Batman & Robin" of the series. The action was bad, the story was bad, and I'll be the 1,476,892nd person to say that they completely dropped the ball on Venom. Everything in Spider-Man 3 felt rushed, like they were cramming everything into one film, in case it was the last.

If a similar problem plagues 4, I don't think I'll bother seeing it in theaters. I'll simply wait for video, or best yet...a free viewing on TV.

[Darth Sinister]

I don't think forgiving the Sandman was reasonable within the context of the films. It's clear that Sandman broke the law several times, and even tried to kill Mary Jane minutes earlier. Then, Spider-Man just lets him go to commit more crimes, all because he gives a sob story? Weak. Some might wonder how Spider-Man could have stopped him, but, damnit, there had to be a vacuum cleaner around there somewhere. :D

To be fair, Peter attacked Sandman first and had nearly killed him. That's why he agreed to team up with Venom to kidnap MJ. Peter realizes that he needs to forgive himself as well as Marko for what happened to Ben. Marko even says that he's done. He's done fighting and done being a problem. A scene that was cut explains why Marko quits. His daughter shows up after Harry took him down and tells Flint to stop being a bad guy. That she has accepted her fate and that he needs to as well. But because the film was running too long, it got cut.

[The Dream Master]

Too bad that cut that because without it there, it doesn't count. As the scene is, it's terrible and rings completely hollow.

[Darth Sinister]

Well, as I said, the story is about forgiveness. MJ has to forgive Peter for using the Symbiote and for his kissing Gwen. Peter has to forgive MJ for what Harry did. Harry forgives Peter for what happened with Norman and their subsequent fights. Peter forgives Harry for all that he did to try and kill him. Peter has to forgive Flint for accidently killing Ben. Peter has to forgive himself for his ego and for the Symbiote. MJ has to forgive herself for not telling Peter about the play.

[The Dream Master]

There's a difference between forgiveness and justice, however. Peter could have forgiven Sandman at a personal level, yet still brought him to justice. This is why the whole "forgiveness" aspect falls flat because it's treated as the be-all, end-all of the film, and it's justified because forgiveness seems to be the theme of the film. What about the bigger, overarching theme of responsibility? For Peter to play vigilante and let a known fugitive to go just because he forgives him surely means he's falling short in this responsibility to the public even if he does fulfill his own personal needs.

[Darth Sinister]

That's why Spider-Man is a flawed character and why he's so well liked. He doesn't do what Superman or Captain America would do. Even in the comics, there was a time when he and the Human Torch let Sandman go, which in turn lead to his rehabiltation. Sure, justice says that Marko should go back to prison. But no prison can hold him. And he has paid for his crimes emotionally. Peter can never come forward in his defense. Nor can Marko afford a new lawyer to give him that defense. The best thing to do was to forgive him and let Marko go.

[The Dream Master]

How do we know he's paid for his crimes emotionally? Because he gives a sob story? There's nothing there that indicates that Sandman won't just go out and continue his crime spree. If he had truly felt he had paid for his crimes, Sandman would have let Spider-Man take him into custody. That would show that he had accepted responsibility for what he had done, and it would have been a more satisfying outcome.

[Jigsaw]

Maybe Sandman figured he could make up for his crimes by helping people in the city and helping Spider-Man if he ever needed it. Hasn't it been hinted that in the next film, Sandman might be a possible ally?

[The Dream Master]

It's not hinted at all in that scene right there, which is all that matters.

[Jigsaw]

I haven't seen Spider-Man 3 since seeing it theatrically last year, but from what I remember, Sandman seemed genuinely remorseful for his past actions, and I got the impression maybe he wanted to make amends for his past by helping Spider-Man fight crime in the city.

[The Dream Master]

I don't see that at all. According to Sinister, there was a lot more that went into making Sandman seem remorseful, but it never showed up in the end. Besides that, who cares about how remorseful he seemed? Surely he still deserved justice? The whole scene just plays out so Peter can get personal satisfaction and closure from the whole ordeal, which flies in the face of the series' values up until that point.

[Jigsaw]

I have to see SM3 again to verify that, but I viewed it differently upon my first viewing. I don't know how well the movie or it's theme hold up on repeat viewings.

[The Dream Master]

That part bugged me the first time I saw it, and it just gets worse with each viewing. Of course, I've only seen it....twice since the first time I saw it, so...

[Jigsaw]

Sounds like the movie doesn't hold up very well with repeat viewings :| My initial impression when I saw it theatrically was that it was very entertaining despite it's flaws (namely the crammed storyline that tried to do too much at once, not enough Venom and the triangle between Peter, MJ and Gwen felt very forced and rushed), but I'll see for myself when I eventually get the DVD.

[Just Jeans]

I thought Sandman vaporized himself at the end... mind you, I've only seen the film once and I was only semi-conscious by that point, but I certainly remember particles of Sandman floating on the breeze. I assumed he was dead.

Jeez, I really need to watch it again.

[Jigsaw]

Me, too. Can't believe it's already been a year since I saw it in theaters during it's second week of release.

[NW77]

I thought Sandman vaporized himself at the end... mind you, I've only seen the film once and I was only semi-conscious by that point, but I certainly remember particles of Sandman floating on the breeze. I assumed he was dead.

Jeez, I really need to watch it again.

He didn't vaporized himself. The way I see, it more like of his form that is flying away. If I remeber, it look many dust of him seem to be flying in the sky.

[Scarecrow]

Yeah, pretty sure that previously we see him do the same trick.


- Scarecrow

[Darth Sinister]

Marko just leaves. He wasn't killing himself. He was just leaving. Whether he leaves town or what not is not important right now. His story could be followed up in the next film, for all we know. The point is that at the end, when Marko tells Peter what happened, he believed him. He realized what he said was true. And he believed him in his word that he was done. The fact that he talked to Peter calmly, rather than attacking him, was proof enough for Peter that he was no longer a threat. Norman was insane. Otto's tenticles were responsible. Eddie had gone mad on his own and the Symbiote influenced him. Harry had emotional issues. And if he started again, Peter would just have to deal with him when the time comes.

[The Dream Master]

If they have the Sandman return and causing havoc in the next one, then I think it'll make the end of the third work better, I think. I just think the end is far too ambiguous for my liking. I mean, the way it's presented, we know that Marko's daughter is still sick, so, for all we know, he's just heading off to commit more crimes for her.

[Cody]

Who Might Be The Next Spider-Man? (http://www.latinoreview.com/news/who-might-be-the-next-spider-man-4726)

El Mayimbe here with a HUGE SCOOP to start off the week.

It seems like Spider Man 4 and 5 is going full steam ahead.

Over the Holiday weekend, Kellvin got a tip from a trusted source as to whom may be the next Peter Parker/Spider Man in the upcoming films. Because my batting average has been pretty good lately, Kelvin and I decided to sit on it until Hollywood went back to work today and I can get more concrete info. This morning, I made some calls to my guys, fished around and here is what I managed to find out.

Laura Ziskin and Grant Curtis are tossing names around. NO OFFERS HAVE BEEN YET. That being said, the name at the top of their list to replace Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker/Spiderman is…

…PATRICK FUGIT.

You may recognize Patrick from SPUN, WRISTCUTTERS and his breakout performance in ALMOST FAMOUS.

My personal thoughts? Fugit looks like Peter Parker to me.

I also managed to find out that if Fugit doesn’t work out, the Spiderman producers ARE EVEN WILLING TO GO YOUNGER.

Who is the name on that list?

MICHAEL ANGARANO

Michael actually played a superhero in SKY HIGH and was most recently seen FORBIDDEN KINGDOM. Michael even auditioned for the postponed Justice League film.

You know that Fugit and Angarano played the same character in ALMOST FAMOUS? Angarano played the younger version of William in ALMOST FAMOUS while Fugit played the older version.

So what do guys think?

I'd most like to have Maguire back. But if he opts out, I do like the idea of Fugit as replacement.

[Deathscythe]

Shia LaBeof for next Spider-man!

[Cody]

CHUD (http://chud.com/articles/articles/14905/1/PATRICK-FUGIT-IS-NOT-WEBBED-UP/Page1.html) confirms that there's definitely not any deals in the works here - Fugit hasn't heard anything about being on the Spidey list.

[Jigsaw]

Both Michael and Patrick are good choices for the new Spider-Man, I'd be pleased with either in the role.

[Scarecrow]

And the mad rumours begin. :D


- Scarecrow

[Cody]

Sony told IESB (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4971&Itemid=99) that

"No one is being considered for the role but Tobey. Period."

Which is a good public stance to take even if they are throwing names around in private, so that when they do approach Maguire he doesn't just tell them "Fug off with your Fugit."

Sam Raimi Talks (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=45727)

ComingSoon.net/Superhero Hype! talked to "Spider-Man" franchise director Sam Raimi this week and got his thoughts on making more sequels.

"James Vanderbilt is writing the script and I'm excited to read it. I think it's going to be done in a few months," Raimi told us, adding, "I'm hoping it's as great as our discussions were about it and I'm hoping it feels right for me because I love Spider-Man. I'm hoping I'm well rested enough to embrace it and I'm hoping Sony wants me to do it. If all of those things come together, I would love to do it. There are a lot of unknowns about the future."

And how does he feel about re-casting key players if needed? "I'd hate to re-cast anybody in the future, I can't imagine that."

[Just Jeans]

Thinking about it, I hope Raimi does stay. I'd like for the franchise to have a uniform visual style, and I don't think a lot of the problems that plagued Spider-Man 3 were entirely his fault.

[Cody]

And JK Simmons (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5025&Itemid=99)

IESB: So we know that James Vanderbilt just turned in a script for Spiderman 4 have they reached out to you yet or anything?

JK: We sort of check in once in a while, they say, y’know, we want JK to do it. We don’t know where. We don’t know when. We don’t know who. We don’t know anything. They signed all of us for the first three films. Sam, Tobey, all the way down the line to me and, we’ll see where it goes. I also, I mean, it's all conjecture and you guys probably know more than I do at this point. There was talk of doing four and five concurrently and I don’t know if they’re still considering that or not and I spoke to Tobey in, I guess it was February…sort of awards season time and he’s certainly amenable to doing some more and hopefully we’ll be able to get everybody back and make another good one.

IESB: Or a couple of them?

JK: Couple, three, four, five! Whatever, you know, I could buy a bigger house.

IESB: What if Sam decides not to come back as a director but stays as a producer, would you guys still be-

JK: Well-

IESB: Would you and the rest of the gang still come back?

JK: Well, I can only speak for myself, but, if Sam were not the director but was, still had a hand in it then I would certainly have a reasonable amount of faith in it. Obviously if he’s the director I’m there 100%. If he’s not involved at all, which I think is VERY unlikely, then it would be a situation that I would have to think about. But if he’s involved, hopefully directing or at least as a producer then I’m pretty confident that it would be something that I want to do. Plus they pay money.

[El Rooto]

I'd be more concerned if they replaced Simmons than if they replaced Maguire.

[Jigsaw]

I think JK Simmons is the only truly irreplacable cast member of the series IMO. Tobey Maquire has been good as Spider-Man, but he's getting up there in years.

[Jack Bauer]

JK Simmons is great in all three films, but Tobey and Kristen have got to go. We need new blood for Parker and Mary Jane. I wouldn't mind seeing Mary Elizabeth Winstead as the new Mary Jane, but I can't think who could replace Tobey since he has done a bang up job as Peter Parker. I think it has to do with the script rather then actors. Weak script equals crappy film, but with the right actors, it be good. I think that's why a lot of people hated Spider-Man 3 was because of the script and Peter's dance.

[Jigsaw]

I think Stacey Farber or Evan Rachel Wood would be good for the new Mary Jane. for the new Peter/Spider-Man, I think Thomas Dekker would be great in the role.

[Cody]

I'm rooting for the return of Maguire and Dunst.

But the rumor has cemented Patrick Fugit as the top Parker replacement choice for me. As for MJ, MEW and Farber are good choices. I can't see ERW anymore without being plagued by disturbing visions of her nightly bonings from Marilyn Manson, I don't need that distraction.

[Jack Bauer]

Who the heck is Stacey Farber?

[The Dream Master]

I hope Maguire and Dunst too because I hate when series recast roles after such a short period of time. If they gave the series a long break, I would welcome a re-casting, but a few years between films doesn't warrant it.

[Jigsaw]

Who the heck is Stacey Farber?


She's on Degrassi. Very underrated actress.

[NW77]

I hope Maguire and Dunst too because I hate when series recast roles after such a short period of time. If they gave the series a long break, I would welcome a re-casting, but a few years between films doesn't warrant it.


Same here. Maguire still look young, so let him continue to play the role. If they recast him & Dunst, it would look silly that only Simmons return. It just make it look like "Batman" all over again. I'm just not a fan of recasting almost everyone expect one person.

[The One and Only]

Stacey Farber ? The lead chick from the Sci-Fi Original/Fright Night ripoff, Never Cry Werewolf ? Although I do like Mary Elizabeth Winstead suggestion.

[Cody]

Stacey Farber ? The lead chick from the Sci-Fi Original/Fright Night ripoff, Never Cry Werewolf ?

No, different Degrasser.

[The One and Only]

^Damn, I just saw that flick last night. I thought she could do better.

[DedKid]

Man, FUCK Carnage. Hobgoblin dammit!! That's been my hope since Spiderman 2 was announced. If not him, then either Lizard, Shocker, Sin Eater, Carrion, Mysterio, or Scorpion would be cool.

[Scarecrow]

Lizard! With an actual evil plot that seems lacking from so many superhero films these days! Have him want to spread a mutating virus or something, I love these films but miss the days when supervillains really knew how to dream.


- Scarecrow

[skuppy]

I hope they recast both Maguire and Dunst. Their "comments" about the series while they were promoting S3 seemed like they didn't want to stay in the franchise. I'd be more than happy if they didn't come back or Raimi for that matter. I'm a fan of Raimi, but he needs to let someone else take over, maybe then we'll finally get a great Spidey film (yeah, I'm not a fan of the 3 films).

[Jigsaw]

I'm not a fan of the current series either although I did like Spider-Man 2 a lot and found Spider-Man 3 entertaining despite some serious flaws. Sam Raimi did feel like he was getting burned out and tired from the three films, and I'm all for a new director. I think Jon Favreau could make an excellent Spider-Man film, as Iron Man showed how he is with superhero/comic book films, but he'll probably be too busy doing Iron Man 2 to be involved with SM4 (not that I'm complaining, I hope they take their time with IM2, I absolutely adored the original IM).

[The Dream Master]

I still think Raimi would just be pissed about being forced to put in storylines and characters (like Venom and the Symbiote) because the producers wanted him to. I'd like to see him get another shot to do what he wants to do.

[Jigsaw]

The problem with Raimi is what he wants and what the fans want, and much of the time neither gel with each other. I as a fan would've much rather had SM3 focus on Venom as the lead villain with Scorpion as a supporting villain, and Sam obviously didn't want Venom and I don't see him having any interest in Scorpion, either. Movies can't always ben fan services, but at the same time they have to cater to the fans to a solid degree, since the fans make up the overwhelming majority of the base that sees the films and accepts them.

[The Dream Master]

That's just unrealistic because you're not going to please everyone. For everyone like you that likes Venom, there's another person out there that doesn't care for the character and prefers someone like Lizard or Kraven instead. Raimi just happens to side with those that don't like Venom, so that's just how the cookie crumbles for those fans. Look no further than Spider-Man 3 for evidence of this. During production, I saw an equal amount of criticism for including Venom and for not focusing on him enough.

[Jigsaw]

One thing about Raimi's direction for all three Spider-Man films that I didn't like (and this includes both sequels which I enjoyed) is the overblown feeling they all have. For some reason they just all feel very bloated and overblown to me. I'd like for the fourth film not to feel this way. I can't quite put my finger on it, but to me, all three films feel very overblown and bloated, and like Raimi tried too hard to give them an epic feeling.

[Just Jeans]

The problem with Raimi is what he wants and what the fans want, and much of the time neither gel with each other.

I seem to recall most of my Spider-Man buddies being pretty pleased with Raimi's vision when the original film came out. But then there's the rub -- some people will enjoy it, some won't. The filmmakers will never be able to please everyone, no matter what they do.

[Cody]

I'd be happy with Raimi back behind the camera.

I didn't want Venom in Spidey 3. I can understand how those that did want a lot of Venom were disappointed, but it worked out fine for me. The Eddie Brock build-up is a bit lacking (like most elements in the movie), but I'm mainly just glad that Venom is done and out of the way and apparently off to his own movie where hopefully he'll handle Carnage so Spidey doesn't have to. Overall I like Spidey 3 despite its many faults, which Venom is the least of for me. My main problem is probably Bernard the CSI Butler and the information he gives Harry in the third act. It brings to mind the Wedding Singer quote, "Once again, things that could've been brought to my attention YESTERDAY!" Or, y'know, at some point before Harry spent years wallowing in obsessive hate. And given what happens later, Norman "was killed by his own glider" isn't enough to make Spidey clearly innocent - Harry is killed by his own glider, but I'm pretty sure Venom is still guilty of the crime.

But whatever, bring on 4.

One thing I'd still like to see happen in the series at some point is a scene somewhere in a movie where Spidey runs into a lesser villain. The villain doesn't have to be aligned with the main villain or even have a story to be in the movie, just put in a sequence where, instead of regular bank robbers, Spidey has to stop a heist being perpetrated by Shocker or Rhino or etc.

Also, get Ben Kingsley re-attached as The Vulture and give me my Electro.

[Just Jeans]

Exposition Butler is my biggest problem with the third film. And generally speaking I don't mind a bit of retconning, but only when it's handled well. Exposition Butler was not handled well. Not in the slightest.

[Darth Reaper]

I as a fan would've much rather had SM3 focus on Venom as the lead villain with Scorpion as a supporting villain- Jigsaw

I don't think Venom needs a supporting villain. I'd rather see a movie that focuses on Spider-Man and Venom, the conflict between them, and maybe compares the lives that they've lead. Why did Spider-Man become a hero while Venom became a villain? There could be a good story there.

Personally, I hope they make Venom look more like Venom in his movie. I want them to go back to the basic black look with a white spider on the front and back. I want the suit to look organic rather than looking like the material of Spider-Man's suit. And, I want him to be tall and muscular, like he is in the comics.

[cropsy]

I only want to see Maquire as Peter and Jk of course through all the films and Sam rami stay, as far as kirsten I could care less but keep the others for sure.

[Jack Bauer]

I think Spider-Man 4 would work if they do the Brand New Day arc. That alone would be something to see since Ghost Rider was done by the same company as Spider-Man and with Marvel's crossoverness for Hulk and Iron Man, we may see Peter Fonda return as Mephisto.

[Darth Sinister]

Ugh. No "Brand New Day". Man, that's crap thinking all around. The film would totally jump the shark and no one would want anything more to do with the films. It'd be a far worse disaster than "Batman & Robin".

[El Rooto]

I think Spider-Man 4 would work if they do the Brand New Day arc.

DEAR GOD, NO.

[Jigsaw]

What's so bad about Brand New Day? :confused:

[El Rooto]

It killed the Peter/MJ marriage, causing the timeline to go into fucked-up mode because they were never married, which somehow brought Harry Osborn back from the dead. And it all started because Peter Parker made a fucking DEAL WITH THE DEVIL to stop Aunt May from dying of a gunshot. And THAT all started because of some bullshit about his marriage somehow unnecessarily aging his character.

Ugh.

[Jigsaw]

Wow, that sounds awful, like some bad fan fiction you'd find on the internet :X Hopefully they'll never use that for the films. That sounds like it would be worse than Batman & Robin if such a thing is possible.

[El Rooto]

And to think I was believing not too long ago that Gwen Stacy having Norman Osborn's illegitimate children was the bottom of the barrel.

[Jigsaw]

That's not much better than BND :X

[The Dream Master]

MM, you beat me to it. To say that this is one of the worst Spider-Man stories ever is really saying something, what, with the Clone Saga, Normie Osborn, etc.

[El Rooto]

You can say that again...

This conversation is hilariously sad.


"So what does Mephisto do?" I ask.

"He makes everybody forget Peter's Spider-Man."

"Uh, huh. So Aunt May's still in the hospital --"

"No, he saves Aunt May."

"But if all he does is save her life and make everybody forget he's Spidey, she still has a scar on her midsection."

"No, he makes that go away too."

"Okay..."

"Then he wakes up in her house."

"The house that was burned down?"

"Right."

"But how --"

"Mephisto undoes that as well."

"Okay. And the guys who shot at Peter and May and were killed, they're alive too? Mephisto can bring guys back from the dead?"

"It's all part of the spell."

"And Doc Strange can't tell?"

"No,"

"And the newspaper articles? News footage?"

"Joe, it's been forgotten."

"I'm just asking is that stuff there or not there?"

"Not there. And Peter's web shooters are back."

"Is this the same spell or a different spell?"

"Same spell."

"How does making people forget he's Spidey bring back his web shooters?"

"It's magic, okay?"

"I see. And Harry's back."

"Right."

"And Mephisto does this too."

"Yep."

"So is Harry back from the dead, or has he been alive? If they ask him, hey Harry, what did you do last summer, will he remember? And the year before? And the year before? If he says they all went on a picnic two years ago, will they remember it?"

"It's --"

"Because if he now has a life he remembers, if he's not back from the dead, then you've changed the continuity you said you didn't want to change. Those are your only options: he was brought back from the dead, and there's a grave, and people remember him dying --"

"Mephisto changes THEIR memories too."

"-- or he's effectively been alive as far as our characters know, so he's been alive all along, so either way as far as our characters are concerned, continuity's been violated going back to 1971.

How do you explain that?"

"It's magic, we don't have to explain it."

[Jigsaw]

What the Hell? :twitch:

[Cody]

Joe Quesada couldn't stand the fact that Spidey was married. He bitched about it for years, and finally got it wiped out in a monumentally lame-ass way.

I hope that Spidey 4 ends with Peter and MJ getting married, followed by a couple sequels wherein the character functions just fine as a married man. And when the series ends, Peter and MJ live happily ever after. Eat it, Quesada.

[El Rooto]

Joe Quesada couldn't stand the fact that Spidey was married. He bitched about it for years, and finally got it wiped out in a monumentally lame-ass way.

I hope that Spidey 4 ends with Peter and MJ getting married, followed by a couple sequels wherein the character functions just fine as a married man. And when the series ends, Peter and MJ live happily ever after. Eat it, Quesada.
Somebody needs to give Joey Q. a great big kick in the balls.

[Jack Bauer]

Damm, so I was wrong on many levels. I just learn what I see on wikipedia. :(

[The Dream Master]

Hey, just because everyone else thinks it sucks doesn't mean you wouldn't like it if it were adapted to a movie. :)

[Jack Bauer]

True, and I would think it would have worked to make everything new again. Hell, Spider-Man never killed his rouge gallery. Only Frank does that because he has good reason.

[NW77]

Personally, I always though Spidey should be single. I'm not fan of some superheroes getting married. And the BND can be use in the movie. It doesn't have to be 100% like the story. I guess you can say if they don't use MJ in the sequel, then that somewhat an adaption of BND. :p

[Alex DeLarge]

Personally, I always though Spidey should be single. I'm not fan of some superheroes getting married. And the BND can be use in the movie. It doesn't have to be 100% like the story. I guess you can say if they don't use MJ in the sequel, then that somewhat an adaption of BND. :p

OMD is ridiculous. Fan of marriages or not, the way you end it is with a mature divorce that strengthens the character. Ages him? I don't care. That's better than having him do a deal with THE DEVIL and retcon the past 20 years of comics (and slips in some more eays retcons, like Spidey's identity and Harry Osborn; just... cause). That's the easy way out.

Though on the past couple pages, I saw some people mix up OMD and BND. One More Day is the story that does that. Brand New Day is the first story to feature the "new universe."

[Darth Sinister]

"Brand New Day" is about how a single Peter Parker tries to get a new apartment, the Daily Bugle is bought by an upstart after Jonah has a heart attack and turned into a tabloid paper and Peter has a host of new villains to fight. That's really it. It's not a story arc specifically. It's just a title that Marvel put up to show that this is a new era.

True, and I would think it would have worked to make everything new again. Hell, Spider-Man never killed his rouge gallery. Only Frank does that because he has good reason.

And he didn't in the films. Norman died pretty much the same way, back in 1973. Doc Ock was killed, but not the same manner that he was in the film. That was his choice there, whereas in the comics, it was Kaine who did it. And Peter wasn't intending for Eddie to die. Just the Symbiote. Harry's death is different, but it had happened. Note that Sandman is still alive at the end of the film.

What had happened is that Stan Lee wanted Peter to get married in the comic strip to MJ. Jim Shooter, the Editor In Cheif at the time, said yes. But he opted to have it happen in the comics. Shooter lost his job not long afterwards and was replaced by Tom DeFalco. After the wedding, Marvel debated about the future. In 1994, when the Clone Saga was being discussed, one of the principle ideas was to use it to end the marriage. The problem was that Marvel couldn't pull the trigger. Bob Budinsky replaced Danny Fingeroth as editor of the Spider-Man books. Bob wasn't enthused with the project, much less how to undo the marriage. Hence the story went on longer than it should've and became a convoulted mess. Marvel tried it again with the post "Chapter One" reboot era, but that didn't last and MJ was brought back. Quesada made it his mission to fix all Marvel characters, including Spider-Man. Hence we have "One More Day" leading into "Brand New Day".

[Jack Bauer]

Ahh, I see now. Thanks, DS. Both Marvel and DC have screwy canons and yet they could fix 'em.

[Darth Sinister]

And they have. But usually, when it's done, it works. Spider-Man's issue is that Quesada didn't want them to divorce, because it would age him. Same with killing MJ. So instead of doing a Crisis story, they used Mephisto.

[Cody]

Personally, I always though Spidey should be single. I'm not fan of some superheroes getting married.

I don't get what the problem is. That Peter had married life with MJ to go home to after his Spidey shenanigans was a good part of the character IMO. It's how I know him - being born at the end of '83, I doubt I picked up many Spidey comics before the '87 marriage - it's how I like it. There are plenty of other single playboy superheroes out there.

Like I said, I feel that the marriage should happen in the film series. The story of his life is "all about a girl ... Mary Jane Watson" according to the first's opening voiceover. And when it happens, I think it'd be cool if one of the movie's posters is inspired by the wedding cover (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Asmannual21.jpg).

[Just Jeans]

Off topic, I know, but has Clark Kent married Lois Lane yet?

Peter and Clark are pretty much the only two super heroes that I'm keen on seeing in happy married lives.

[CosmoBubba]

Off topic, I know, but has Clark Kent married Lois Lane yet?

Peter and Clark are pretty much the only two super heroes that I'm keen on seeing in happy married lives.

Yep, they got married back in 1996. I think they even have an adopted son, too.

[Alex DeLarge]

Yep, they got married back in 1996. I think they even have an adopted son, too.

They had Chris Kent, who turned out to be the son of Zod.:eek:

Oops.:p

[Darth Sinister]

http://s54.photobucket.com/albums/g92/darth-sinister/Avatars/9517580a.gif

http://www.comicbookdb.com/graphics/comic_graphics/1/114/60731_20060829233931_large.jpg

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/marvel_dc/images/thumb/1/1a/SupesWeddingBeyond0021.jpg/435px-SupesWeddingBeyond0021.jpg

Yes, they adopted a young Kryptonian boy who turned out to be General Zod and Ursa's son, Lor-Zod. Unfortunately, the boy had to return to the Phantom Zone in order to close it. Lar Gand is currently looking for him as he did not return to Fort Rozz where Zod, Ursa, Non, Jax-Ur and the rest went to.

[Cody]

We've got a while yet.

'Spider-Man 4' aiming for May 2011 release (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2008/06/spider-man-4-ai.html)

Peter Parker is swinging back into the muliplex—but not for a while.

“Spider-Man” producer Laura Ziskin said the fourth installment in the web-slinging superhero series is tentatively scheduled to arrive in May 2011.

In remarks Thursday to theater owners from California and Nevada, Ziskin said there was no finished screenplay, but that she and Sony Pictures were hopeful “Spider-Man 4” could be ready in three years’ time.

The first three movies comprise one of the most successful franchises in modern Hollywood history, grossing a combined $2.5 billion worldwide. Neither star Tobey Maguire nor director Sam Raimi is yet committed to work on the next installment. But Sony has paid Marvel to renew its rights.

Before she tackles the next “Spider-Man,” Ziskin is producing a one-hour fundraiser for cancer research that will be shown commercial-free on ABC, NBC and CBS on Sept. 5.

Ziskin, a cancer survivor, showed the several hundred exhibitors a new theatrical public service announcement directed by David Fincher (“Fight Club”) that promotes Ziskin’s cancer cause, Stand Up to Cancer (http://www.standup2cancer.org/).

[The Dream Master]

Man, if all this comes true, 2011 will truly be the summer of Marvel.

[TheShowstoppa]

I'm absolutely more than positive that Marvel is going to own the comic movie industry because of this and everything else they're doing. I keep saying it over and over, but DC needs to get on the ball because they're lacking HUGELY!

[The One and Only]

The problem is that since DC is owned by Werner Bros., that the studio refuses to let anyone else, including New Line Cinema, a studio they own, work with they're characters. Also from what I read recently from comic writer Chuck Dixon, in a rant about those that run DC ,and the Time-Werner. Is that the higher-ups in the company basically don't know that they own the comic publisher. Much less the wealth of characters they own. I honestly though that this little bugaboo was over ,and done with, when I saw the DC Comics logo pop up right before Batman Begins. And even the logo for it's sister company, Vertigo, show up before the titles of Constantine and V For Vendetta. Honestly, there should be a division to the film industry side of Time-Werner working on this. And make sure it's someone who actually knows the DCU, and it's characters damnit. No ex-hairdressers turned producers, get Bruce Timm on it for God's sake. When I was a watching Supeman/Doomsday last year, I felt like finding Bryan Singer, dragging him back to my house, and smooshing his face into my TV, and screaming in his ear, THIS IS HOW YOU MAKE A SUPERMAN MOVIE JABRONI !!! . And then give him the Clockwork Orange treatment , and make him watch the entire run of the TImm/Dini Superman animated series to emphasize the point.

[Jigsaw]

If Spider-Man 4 won't be released until 2011, it's possible Sam Raimi could return, given that he could easily do one movie before that.

[Scarecrow]

But I guess equally possible with so much time passed the cast and crew won't feel like returning. We shall see.


- Scarecrow

[Just Jeans]

Toby isn't aging very well -- he doesn't look anywhere near as young in Spider-Man 3 as he looked in Spider-Man -- so it's a little hard trying to imagine him as Spider-Man three years down the road.

[Jigsaw]

Tobey will be pushing 40 by 2011, so SM4 will more than likely be his swansong for the series.

[Just Jeans]

Jesus, seriously? I thought he was in his mid-late 20s when he played Peter in the first film.

I've just gone and had a search for Tobey's birthday -- he'll be 34 in May 2011, so he'll probably be 33 whilst filming Spider-Man 4.

Unless the films move away from Peter's college career, I reckon he'll look too old to play the part again in 2014 or 2015.

[DRE]

Outside of Carnage and possibly Electro, I think the rest of Spider-Man's rogues gallery is pretty boring. I mean, wow, Vulture, that's really exciting, yawn. Unless they decide to do Hobgoblin (Which they totally missed the boat on having Harry Osbourne be him.)

[Jigsaw]

Tobey was born on June 27th, 1975, so he'll be 36 years old by the time SM4 is released. If he returns for SM4, it'll definitely be his last performance as Spider-Man, unless two more sequels are possibly filmed back-to-back. Either that, or producers won't mind having a forty-ish Spider-Man for the rest of the series.

[Just Jeans]

Yeah, got my math on Tobey's birthday a little wrong. Guess that's what I get for trying to do addition after having been awake for two days. D'oh! :X

[Jigsaw]

Tobey's aged well, but he definitely can't pass for a high school age person anymore. He looks mid-20ish at most nowadays.

[Just Jeans]

I thought he looked tired and old in Spider-Man 3, particularly in close up. He looks like he's in his late-30s.