Could SM4 Be the End

[Hobgoblin-demon]

Has anybody else noticed, that when a series has an "ok" or "bad" 3rd film, the 4th one tends to be a lot worse, and ends up killing the Franchise for years to come.

Examples:

Alien: 1st 2 were some of the best movies ever made, 3rd one sucked, 4th one killed the series. (AVP does not count)

Superman: 1st 2 were great, 3rd one sucked, 4th one sucked a lot, franchise ends for nearly 20 years.

Batman: 1st 2 were great (not best), 3rd one was corny, but still ok (like Sm3), and 4th one killed it for about 8 years.

I could go on and on, but maybe they should just stop while they are ahead, and later on, if anybody wants to, start a reboot.

Just my opinion, what do you guys think?

[American_Hobo]

Maybe

[Spider-ManHero12]

Personally, I don't think that will happen with this film.

[GoldGoblin]

They might as well just give spidey nipples on his costume and make every thing in the scene have neon.

[FaT_tONle]

They might as well just give spidey nipples on his costume and make every thing in the scene have neon.

I concur... I am getting the Batman & Robin vibe... SM3 was only the tune-up...:csad:

[marvel001]

Great point, but correct me if I'm wrong, but in all of those series, there was more than one director doing the movies. That's not the case with spiderman, and I think Raimi will keep in mind the fan's reaction. I personally liked spiderman 3 and I can't wait for another one. To several fans he "ruined" 1 out of the 3 movies, so we should just wait and see how the 4th one is before any reboot talk.

[SpiderRock88]

^I agree this wont happen to the Spidey movies. The movie is in Sam's hands i know it will be good.

[webhead731]

Well, the way I see it is that Spider-Man 3 to me was not as bad as any of those. It was FAR superior.

Personally, I liked Alien 3. Alien and Aliens were better, but 3 was good. Resurrection was garbage.

I watched Batman Forever tonight actually lmao. It's a fun movie, taken as a comedy in my eyes. How Batman should be? God no. But it's not a BAD movie. Batman and Robin over did it by far, making it awful. Forever is entertaining to watch, fun to laugh at with only a few good things in it.

Spider-Man 3 can't be compared to that. I have no idea how anyone can do so, but that's just me. Sam Raimi is great, I think his fourth will be fantastic.

[Cagefighterkip]

Well, the way I see it is that Spider-Man 3 to me was not as bad as any of those. It was FAR superior.

Personally, I liked Alien 3. Alien and Aliens were better, but 3 was good. Resurrection was garbage.

i dig Spider-Man 3 a LOT. does it have problem areas? god yes. but is it still rly good, heck yah. i love Alien3. i think its as good as ALIEN and ALIENS, i see those three as the trilogy. and yes "Ressurection" is complete and utter garbage.

[Spider-Vader]

Spidey 3 was mediocre (I thought it was okay) because of too many story lines & Rami being pressured to use Venom when he didn't want to.

If they let Rami use villains he want & only have 3 storylines tops, it'll be fine.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Spider-Man 3 can't be compared to that. I have no idea how anyone can do so, but that's just me. Sam Raimi is great, I think his fourth will be fantastic. Very true! IMO, Spider-Man 3 is really superior to Batman Forever. I mean, if you think about it, Batman Forever had more flaws. However, it wasn't a bad film.

[venomvsspidey]

Well, the way I see it is that Spider-Man 3 to me was not as bad as any of those. It was FAR superior.

Personally, I liked Alien 3. Alien and Aliens were better, but 3 was good. Resurrection was garbage.

I watched Batman Forever tonight actually lmao. It's a fun movie, taken as a comedy in my eyes. How Batman should be? God no. But it's not a BAD movie. Batman and Robin over did it by far, making it awful. Forever is entertaining to watch, fun to laugh at with only a few good things in it.

Spider-Man 3 can't be compared to that. I have no idea how anyone can do so, but that's just me. Sam Raimi is great, I think his fourth will be fantastic.

I Repsectfully Agree.

[chaseter]

Here come the crazies that think SM3 was great. SM3 wasn't a total bomb but when compared to SM1 and SM2...yes it totally sucked. It is cheesy and contrived with bad acting, a stupid plot, 4 characters fighting for screen time with little to no development, and really convenient...the meteor lands right next to Peter:dry: The little kids in this movie are terrible...terrible. Harry's amnesia is about the stupidest plot device in existance. Bernard the butler was stupid, Mary Jane was whiny and lame, and of course Eddie Brock/Venom was a total let down. If SM4 is any way near that again...this franchise will fail.

X3 was better than this and that says a lot:o There were some bright spots but the glaring black holes sucked them in. I think SM3 could have been great and on par with the rest of the franchise if Venom were left out. Because he wasn't, Sandman and Venom both failed and THC barely got any screen time...it was a mess.

And nobody is comparing SM3 to a single movie like Batman and Robin, they are comparing the Spider-Man franchise with the old Batman franchise. A great origin movie at its time, a better, bigger sequel, and then a bad third movie that leads on to an even worse fourth movie. So yeah, I would say I am scared for this franchise as well and those concerns from others are not unfounded.

[NewYorkSpider]

Sam Raimi is NOT Joel Schumacher. :o

[JaD]

Here come the crazies that think SM3 was great. SM3 wasn't a total bomb but when compared to SM1 and SM2...yes it totally sucked.Opinion?If SM4 is any way near that again...this franchise will fail.This is more true than sticking a fork in an electrical outlet, it'll end up bad :csad:. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to remain optimistic. :O He did give us 1 & 2, was given less control over 3. I think the studio saw their mistake, and will at least give us a better movie than the third. That much I can hope, and look forward to, for now at least. :up:

Oh and I enjoyed 3 too, teeheeheehee

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b105/JAD51287/hype%20smilies/aheathosnap.png

[webhead731]

Here come the crazies that think SM3 was great. SM3 wasn't a total bomb but when compared to SM1 and SM2...yes it totally sucked. It is cheesy and contrived with bad acting, a stupid plot, 4 characters fighting for screen time with little to no development, and really convenient...the meteor lands right next to Peter:dry: The little kids in this movie are terrible...terrible. Harry's amnesia is about the stupidest plot device in existance. Bernard the butler was stupid, Mary Jane was whiny and lame, and of course Eddie Brock/Venom was a total let down. If SM4 is any way near that again...this franchise will fail.

X3 was better than this and that says a lot:o There were some bright spots but the glaring black holes sucked them in. I think SM3 could have been great and on par with the rest of the franchise if Venom were left out. Because he wasn't, Sandman and Venom both failed and THC barely got any screen time...it was a mess.

And nobody is comparing SM3 to a single movie like Batman and Robin, they are comparing the Spider-Man franchise with the old Batman franchise. A great origin movie at its time, a better, bigger sequel, and then a bad third movie that leads on to an even worse fourth movie. So yeah, I would say I am scared for this franchise as well and those concerns from others are not unfounded.

"Crazies" are the ones who like Spidey 3? O_o
If you want to play like that, I can say crazies are the ones who DON'T like it. :o

I thought this movie juggled its storylines very well. Venom didn't need much more, just needed to live. Sandman got enough screentime and was used perfectly, and one of the only characters where I like his movie version more than the comics. As for the conveniences, movies are made up of them. It's what makes it more interesting and ties it in better. How people can say that about Spider-Man 3, but ignore some of the just as ridiculous ones in Spider-Man 2 is beyond me. I don't give ass about a coincidence as long as it's not OVER done. Symbiote landing next to Peter saved hella time. No Secret Wars, no shuttle crash.

As for Batman, I don't think Batman Returns was as good as Batman. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone on that.

Raimi>Schumacher. It's that simple. Spider-Man 4 will bomb with fans if they nit pick it again I'll agree with that.

[FaT_tONle]

Here come the crazies that think SM3 was great.

It is going to get ugly here a year from now... almost as bad as Wolverine... can't wait.... all I can say is let people have their own personal opinions... no sense arguing about personal likes/dislikes.

Sam Raimi is NOT Joel Schumacher.

No... but Schumacher is not a terrible director by any stretch of the imagination. Neither is Raimi... but if he continues in the same direction as SM3 then the comparisons may become more validated.

[NewYorkSpider]

Raimi actually made 2 good superhero films, though. And some people did like SM3. Schumacher doesn't have that to go by. When you look at all three people who directed Batman, Schumacher's movies would get the thumbs down. The fact that he couldn't upgrade a Batman movie over Burton is dissappointing IMO.

[weezerspider]

It's just as ridiculous to declare sm4 won't kill the series as it is to declare sm4 will kill it. If you look at the facts there are pros and cons:

PRO:
-Same director
-Sm3 was not complete crap
-Same Actors

CON:
-Sm3 can't compare to the first two and is by far the worst of the series
-The last film (Sm3) already had signs of cheese
-They seem to want to keep packing as much villains in one movie

Personally, I'd say the film has about a 60% of failure and 40% of success which is a lot better chances that I would have given B&R , Alein 4 and Supes 4.

[Immortalfire]

Maybe. Maybe then you'll get the reboot that so many are hollering for.

[venomvsspidey]

And some people did like SM3. .

This Guy

[mjbull23]

I still admire Raimi's talents, inspite of SM3. The man did give us The Evil Dead, along with SM1 and 2. Look, SM3 was clearly not on par with the first two installments of the franchise, but the same mistakes will not be repeated again.

[Blader5489]

-The last film (Sm3) already had signs of cheese

Where have you been? All three films are cheesy.

[The Slang]

Personally, I liked Alien 3. Alien and Aliens were better, but 3 was good. Resurrection was garbage.
.

Im glad to see people feel the same way as I do. Alien 3 was decent, Ripley sacrificed herself and ended the trilogy. I have no idea why they brought her back in Ressurection, along with hybrids and clone monsters... The alien universe was interesting enough to survive without Ripley or any 'new' creatures. And Joss whedons 'sarcastic teenage girl' humour was alittle too strong.

On spidey, Tobeys screen test gave me the impression that Raimi origionally had a much different idea on how to shoot spider-man. It must have been the studios who told him to brighten it up and flatten the world for the kiddies. Spidey 4 could still be good.

[dancing_on_fire]

every director looses his chemistry with thier sequels when they have to do it over and over again. It was good he took the time off, but it doesn't promise any of us of a better sequel to third. I don't think it will be worse, probably on Par with it.

[Hectorminator]

The other thing to point out is that when the last two Batman films came out they didn't have any other comic book movie to compare with at the time. They didn't know how to make a good movie without worrying it wouldn't be mainstream.

The last year alone has given us Iron Man, The Dark Knight, The Incredible Hulk, even Watchmen.

If anybody involved with Spider-Man 4 needs to pay better attention it's the studios, it's Sony, it's the producers. And in these movies they have what a comic book movie is supposed to be.

So here's hoping they've been paying close attention.

(You just know Sam has and is itching to one-up some of these guys for the top spot)

[FaT_tONle]

I just don't see how there is anyway Raimi is going to recapture the magic of the first two films... almost no one ever does. I mean how is a 35 year old Tobey going to connect with the younger audience the same way? The whole hopeless romantic, nice guy getting the girl thing has played out. I don't think there is anything else they can do with that angle, and MJ is supppose to be the main love interest again? Throw in the fact that the best part of the series, the Osborn saga, is finished. And then you have the forced humor Raimi tries to slip in... from the apartment guy to Ursula... to Ted Raimi to the BRUTAL performance from the chick playing the Australian reporter at the end of SM3... to the dancing and emo Spidey... it's going to wear thin on people. There is only so much patience people can have with these wooden performances from the leads coupled with the stale, cheesy humor. Sure there will always be some redeeming aspects... but I think SM3 showed that the franchise is begging for a change, but Sony is too afraid to show any balls.

[venom892]

I was hoping for a change but alas...:csad:

[dark_b]

I just don't see how there is anyway Raimi is going to recapture the magic of the first two films... almost no one ever does. I mean how is a 35 year old Tobey going to connect with the younger audience the same way? The whole hopeless romantic, nice guy getting the girl thing has played out. I don't think there is anything else they can do with that angle, and MJ is supppose to be the main love interest again? Throw in the fact that the best part of the series, the Osborn saga, is finished. And then you have the forced humor Raimi tries to slip in... from the apartment guy to Ursula... to Ted Raimi to the BRUTAL performance from the chick playing the Australian reporter at the end of SM3... to the dancing and emo Spidey... it's going to wear thin on people. There is only so much patience people can have with these wooden performances from the leads coupled with the stale, cheesy humor. Sure there will always be some redeeming aspects... but I think SM3 showed that the franchise is begging for a change, but Sony is too afraid to show any balls.
ohhhhhhh there will be more.

more crying! dont make me post the ''worst crying in movie'' gif :o

[Spider-ManHero12]

And some people did like SM3. Exactly! I really don't understand why when someone says "Spider-Man 3 was good", that person gets asked questions like "How can you like such a bad film?", etc. It just gets me mad.

[RoboAmish]

I never really thought about it that way. I thought that surely the only way for the SM franchise from here was up. :o
I'd like to think Raimi has learned from his mistakes and won't be pushed around as easily this time around. He cant be blind to the backlash from the fanboy fanbase over his mishandling of the last film so hopefully he'll stand up and take some constructive criticisms on board

Of course, that's a largely positive way of looking at things; the fourth film could spiral off in the completely opposite direction too

[The Batman]

I just don't see how there is anyway Raimi is going to recapture the magic of the first two films... almost no one ever does. I mean how is a 35 year old Tobey going to connect with the younger audience the same way? The whole hopeless romantic, nice guy getting the girl thing has played out. I don't think there is anything else they can do with that angle, and MJ is supppose to be the main love interest again? Throw in the fact that the best part of the series, the Osborn saga, is finished. And then you have the forced humor Raimi tries to slip in... from the apartment guy to Ursula... to Ted Raimi to the BRUTAL performance from the chick playing the Australian reporter at the end of SM3... to the dancing and emo Spidey... it's going to wear thin on people. There is only so much patience people can have with these wooden performances from the leads coupled with the stale, cheesy humor. Sure there will always be some redeeming aspects... but I think SM3 showed that the franchise is begging for a change, but Sony is too afraid to show any balls.

QFT....fanboys often dont realize that directors can't always sustain quality...SM4 has a lot going against it with raimi and the old crew back at the helm, with peter and mj already being a couple, with 35 year old tobey, and with the osborn storyline over

[NewYorkSpider]

I'm willing to give Raimi another shot at this. I'm not going to be up in arms about this just because SM3 wasn't on par with the first two. If SM4 is a dissappointment, then they should look at something else. I think the next movie can be just as good as the first one.

[webhead731]

Exactly! I really don't understand why when someone says "Spider-Man 3 was good", that person gets asked questions like "How can you like such a bad film?", etc. It just gets me mad.

I know! It's just retarded. I don't mind their opinion on the film (unless their hate is based on something utterly stupid misguided BS), it's the fact no one can enjoy discussing it fully.

I say something positive about the movie online, someone has to hate. That's what pisses me off. You can't have a healthy discussion with out some ass intercepting your post. You hate the movie? Go away. It's that simple. There is absolutely no reason for trolling. SHH isn't so bad, Youtube is meh, but IMDB is just awful. That place is negative to the extreme. I've tried reasoning with the four trolls, but its no use. There are some good people there however.
In my life, all my friends liked it. So joyful happy discussions with them is great. I remember when Spider-Man 3 just came out, we'd be at the lunch table talking about it. Funny parts especially. lol. Even one time with my friend...she said something about how this food tasted fruity, and I imitated Harry with "strawberries!" and we laughed. Good times.

Can't do that online though huh! :rolleyes:

QFT....fanboys often dont realize that directors can't always sustain quality...SM4 has a lot going against it with raimi and the old crew back at the helm, with peter and mj already being a couple, with 35 year old tobey, and with the osborn storyline over

People should have known better than to have expected Spider-Man 3 to be BETTER than Spider-Man 2. I mean really. That's what pissed so many people off because it wasn't AS good. Not every movie can be AS good as something previous, let alone better. Mainly when we have a movie that is by many reguarded as the best superhero movie ever. How do you top that? Well, you make Spider-Man 2...again...only with a "3" on it. Fans can say "I hated this part and would have taken it out!" but the truth is you aren't in that position and you can't do it. No movie, ever in my life, has turned out EXACTLY how I wanted it. Not even the Spider-Man films. But I don't overreact at it.

Personally, I like all the Spidey movies the same, all in their own way. They are a big story but are also separated with their themes and characters.

[LightningFlash]

The only people that will say Spider-Man 4 WON'T be the end are pretty much Spidey fans that still want to see Spidey on the big screen.

I do think Spider-Man lost 75% of its "mojo" because of its third installment, but that's my opinion.

Instead of saying anything about it, which I've learned my lesson to not say my opinion because fanboys will flame you over it, I'm just saying I won't be watching it and that's it.

But I do wish Spidey goes back to Marvel. I would actually like to see a younger and more agile Spidey in a future Avenger-related film. Ala TSSM, THAT'S how Spidey should be, skinny and agile, and LOOKS like he's just a scrawny kid...but also, no fat, as Tobey was getting in the third one.

[Crook]

People should have known better than to have expected Spider-Man 3 to be BETTER than Spider-Man 2. I mean really. That's what pissed so many people off because it wasn't AS good. Not every movie can be AS good as something previous, let alone better.
I'd just like to chime in here, because I completely disagree with this statement. I went into SM3 expecting something good. The first 2 set a certain "standard", so yes, I do expect similar quality. But I didn't expect to witness a miracle of cinema. When I come out thinking it was a disappointment or confused about what I just saw, it has nothing to do with having overly high expectation.

Mainly when we have a movie that is by many reguarded as the best superhero movie ever. How do you top that?
Remember when Batman Begins came out? Then flash-forward 3 years and TDK came out?

Remember when Godfather came out? Then 2 years later when Godfather II came out?

Remember when Star Wars came out? Then 3 years later Empire Strikes Back came out?

It's more than possible to overthrow a genre-topping movie. Even if it doesn't manage to do it, at least be on par with the material released beforehand. Otherwise, what is the point of making that movie?

[Jack O Lantern]

We know nothing about this move. How can we even discuss what reaction it will have?

[LightningFlash]

Remember when Godfather came out? Then 2 years later when Godfather II came out?

Remember when Star Wars came out? Then 3 years later Empire Strikes Back came out?

Those aren't good examples, BECAUSE....such as Spider-Man 3, there happened to be a Godfather 3 and Return of the Jedi, which were not as good as Godfather 2 or Empire Strikes Back.

[Crook]

Those aren't good examples, BECAUSE....such as Spider-Man 3, there happened to be a Godfather 3 and Return of the Jedi, which were not as good as Godfather 2 or Empire Strikes Back.
The statement wasn't about 3rd films. It was about sequels to genre-defining movies. My examples are relevant to that notion.

[webhead731]

Those are all number 2's.

I see what you thought I meant. I'm aware that Spider-Man 2 was larger than Spider-Man, and Empire Strikes Back was larger than A New Hope. To the general public, Spider-Man doesn't seem to be "OMFG BEST MOVIE EVER", nor did Batman Begins. Their seconds topped their firsts. Doing that a third time is very difficult. Personally, I don't even think Batman Begins should be considered one of the best of all time, like it is by fans here. But that's just me. Also, on a side note, I never really heard of Empire Strikes Back being the best of the series. I always loved Return of the Jedi the best.

Anywho, as for the other part of your post, Crook, I didn't say EVERYBODY had ridiculously high expectations. But face it, alot of people did. It sounds like you went in there feeling the same way I did. I went in expecting a great movie, but I wasn't holding it to "it's going to be the best movie in history and perfect" or anything. I wasn't OVER the line with expectations. I wanted a good third installment.
We came out feeling differently, because I liked it alot.

[topdog1]

I personally liked spiderman 3 and I can't wait for another one. To several fans he "ruined" 1 out of the 3 movies, so we should just wait and see how the 4th one is before any reboot talk.

Yeah, Spider-Man 3 may have had some problems but it's still a better film then any Batman or Superman film prior to Batman Begins.

Spider-Man = 8/10
Spider-Man 2 = 10/10
Spider-Man 3 = 7/10

Raimi has delivered a great trilogy with SM2 standing as one of the greatest films of the genre. SM3 was a problem only because they forced Raimi to hammer Venom in to the story. They got too ambitious. He had already tapped Ben Kingsley as the Vulture. They scrapped the whole story to give us the symbiote and Venom. Clearly, that last minute jam job was too much to deliver. Still, some great action sequences helped save SM3.

The plot was sloppy because they needed to take shortcuts at every turn. Too many characters and too many storylines to deliver in a film under four hours long. Leave Raimi alone to direct/produce the next film and don't jam anything in last minute.

In any case, if Sony would ever be dumb enough to let the rights lapse, Marvel would make more Spider-Man films in a heartbeat. Spider-Man 10 will be here before you know it.

[LightningFlash]

The statement wasn't about 3rd films. It was about sequels to genre-defining movies. My examples are relevant to that notion.

But also, to the point that the third movie made Spider-Man go downhill is what I was stating. Every third movie does that; and it's hard to name ONE third movie that was as good or better than the second film. So, yes, Spider-Man 4 COULD have a chance to be better, because it seems that every third movie suffers disappointment.

I'm agreeing with you, that the fourth movie could end up being better, and it's not really a long-shot to be better than Spider-Man 3, lol.

[LightningFlash]

In any case, if Sony would ever be dumb enough to let the rights lapse, Marvel would make more Spider-Man films in a heartbeat. Spider-Man 10 will be here before you know it.

Honestly, I hope Marvel's own independent studios reboots Spider-Man. I want to see a younger Peter that's still in high school.

[Venom75]

It had it's flaws,but I really liked Spidey 3. It's like I've always said though,it was good but it's could've been so much better.

Anyway,sometimes as a series goes on with the same people,those people can lose their focus and get tired with the material,and become sloppy. Perhaps that's what happened with Spidey 3? I do worry about that with the 4th film. Maybe new blood coming into the franchise wouldn't be so bad? Although,I will say that Spider-man 3 did get alot of(unwanted)negative reaction and I'm betting Raimi and Sony noticed it,so I wouldn't bet against Spider-man 4 being an awesome film.

[storyteller]

Most movie sequels tend to not be a true sequel. The movie either has a new cast/director. Batman is a keen example. Forever and Batman and robin may as well be their own movies. Superman while it had reeves was just a mess in the directors department.

[JaD]

Spider-Man = 8/10
Spider-Man 2 = 10/10
Spider-Man 3 = 7/10

The plot was sloppy because they needed to take shortcuts at every turn. Too many characters and too many storylines to deliver in a film under four hours long. Leave Raimi alone to direct/produce the next film and don't jam anything in last minute.This is what it basically comes down to. I think the studio would be blind to not be able to see that the next film has the potential of being great if they do that. It's what I'm hoping for, and I think they're aware of their mistake. History ain't always gotta repeat itself (regarding the 4th film theory) :O

[Spider-ManHero12]

I know! It's just retarded. I don't mind their opinion on the film (unless their hate is based on something utterly stupid misguided BS), it's the fact no one can enjoy discussing it fully. Very true.

[Episode29]

I hope its a fitting end to the Raimi/Maguire series. Let the next films start something new.

I still remember walking out of SM3 shaking my head and muttering "That's how its gonna end?"

[venomvsspidey]

I know! It's just retarded. I don't mind their opinion on the film (unless their hate is based on something utterly stupid misguided BS), it's the fact no one can enjoy discussing it fully.

I say something positive about the movie online, someone has to hate. That's what pisses me off. You can't have a healthy discussion with out some ass intercepting your post. You hate the movie? Go away. It's that simple. There is absolutely no reason for trolling. SHH isn't so bad, Youtube is meh, but IMDB is just awful. That place is negative to the extreme. I've tried reasoning with the four trolls, but its no use. There are some good people there however.


im on there too, and i am endlessly defending S-M3. but..it's no use...

[webhead731]

Eh. Which name are you? I see four asses and a bunch of good people.

[venomvsspidey]

Eh. Which name are you? I see four asses and a bunch of good people.


Garnettzack.

Which Are You?

[webhead731]

Garnettzack.

Which Are You?

Ha, Webhead. I think that board is literally ran in hell. All I did was go there to answer a question when I saw mister "here's why I hate this film" and I read his post, which had a few misguided points. I figure I'll let him know it wasn't like this and he flips out. Last time I reason with someone there.

See that the one guy make a thread about me? What an ass. I was thinking about reporting abuse, but I went to the link and I get this big warning page, picky as hell, and very threatening to even the reporting user them self. I was like :eek:. Even the IMDB themselves know their boards suck so bad they don't want to help. God forbid if they make that a better place right? :rolleyes:

[The Black Goo]

When they start to film SM-4 I hope they drop all this HD stuff they picked up for the SM-3 and add more bloody battered Spidey like they did in SM-1. It's like the movies got softer throughout the sequels. I still watch the battle between Spidey and Gobby and am like wow... thats not as bad or pretty close to what Spidey should have looked like after Sandy and V-man pummeled him. I say abuse the hell out of the PG-13 rating.

sarcasm = Editing out Goblin Jr. slicing at and stabbing Peter and then later getting shanked himself probably would have left the movie with a nice G rating lol./sarcasm

[LightningFlash]

I see four asses.

http://cracklecdn-e7.simplecdn.net/img/gkworld/W225-H225-Bffffff/B/sb1143.gif

[venomvsspidey]

Ha, Webhead. I think that board is literally ran in hell. All I did was go there to answer a question when I saw mister "here's why I hate this film" and I read his post, which had a few misguided points. I figure I'll let him know it wasn't like this and he flips out. Last time I reason with someone there.

See that the one guy make a thread about me? What an ass. I was thinking about reporting abuse, but I went to the link and I get this big warning page, picky as hell, and very threatening to even the reporting user them self. I was like :eek:. Even the IMDB themselves know their boards suck so bad they don't want to help. God forbid if they make that a better place right? :rolleyes:

ha, i get bashed on the spider-man 3 and JP3 boards all the time..i know how you feel. it annoys me to the mak when people say it sucks and you're like well, not EVERYONE hates it.and then it's like you just set off an atomic bomb.and i know what you mean about IMDB not helping.there's this one little prick who starts something with literally EVERYONE, and i've reported him various times.guess what happened? nothing. and the thread that you mean is hey, webhead 1731?...that guy that started that sucks,and i just got him back. read my post - dcincarnite can you get a life please? thank you. lol.

[Pagrebo]

Has anybody else noticed, that when a series has an "ok" or "bad" 3rd film, the 4th one tends to be a lot worse, and ends up killing the Franchise for years to come.

Examples:

Alien: 1st 2 were some of the best movies ever made, 3rd one sucked, 4th one killed the series. (AVP does not count)

Superman: 1st 2 were great, 3rd one sucked, 4th one sucked a lot, franchise ends for nearly 20 years.

Batman: 1st 2 were great (not best), 3rd one was corny, but still ok (like Sm3), and 4th one killed it for about 8 years.

I could go on and on, but maybe they should just stop while they are ahead, and later on, if anybody wants to, start a reboot.

Just my opinion, what do you guys think?

It's theories like this that just have no basis in logic. Each film is independent of the others. If SM4 sucks, it will NOT be because it suffered from some "4th film curse". It will be because Sony, Raimi, & company didn't do their jobs. It's like arguing that the movie can't handle multiple villains because it didn't work in other movies. How many villains did the X-Men movies have? The bottom line is, these are highly paid professionals putting these movies together. Will they always get it right? Of course not. But just because something's never (or rarely) been done before successfully doesn't guarantee it's failure the next time it is tried.
One final note... while SM3 was a step down from the first two (IMO), I wouldn't lower it to the level of the third Superman or Batman films. It was far superior to either of those.

[webhead731]

ha, i get bashed on the spider-man 3 and JP3 boards all the time..i know how you feel. it annoys me to the mak when people say it sucks and you're like well, not EVERYONE hates it.and then it's like you just set off an atomic bomb.and i know what you mean about IMDB not helping.there's this one little prick who starts something with literally EVERYONE, and i've reported him various times.guess what happened? nothing. and the thread that you mean is hey, webhead 1731?...that guy that started that sucks,and i just got him back. read my post - dcincarnite can you get a life please? thank you. lol.

lmao And I thank you for that! I have people defending me which is great. I'm only logged in at my house, not my school computer so I'll have to wait to get him back again (he just posted something). He hates the movie, but he goes to the boards. That confuses me almost to the point I want to destroy the world. :doom:

He's like "I'm just tired of him ass kissing this movie. He thinks it's flawless!" when I've boldly stated it is NOT flawless. No movie is flawless. Even movies that are considered great by everybody. But Spider-Man 3 does have problems. Nothing is a HUGE issue with me though. It's just things like "yeah....wish they did that differently." but I still enjoy it. What's his name mean? Does that have anything to do with DC Comics? Why all this fanboy hate with Marvel and DC? I'll admit, I dislike all of DC's heroes except Batman, but I don't flame the others. They're comic companies, let people enjoy! -_- Whiney fan boys. :whatever: I love the comic books where Marvel and DC meet. I don't like Superman all that much, but I enjoyed seeing him and Spidey in the same comic. And I enjoyed seeing the classic Batman with the classic Hulk with Joker.

It's theories like this that just have no basis in logic. Each film is independent of the others. If SM4 sucks, it will NOT be because it suffered from some "4th film curse". It will be because Sony, Raimi, & company didn't do their jobs.

Exactly. There is no curse. I don't know where people pull this crap from.

[LightningFlash]

Exactly. There is no curse. I don't know where people pull this crap from.

No...the only curse is for the third movies.

And we've seen this already with Spidey.

Spider-Man 4 HAS a chance to be better, but the significance in the past only shows the fourth movie in a series getting worse.

Not a curse, just fact that's been proven time and time again.

I use to think Raimi wanted every movie to be brilliant, but even though he was ordered to do one thing, he did do a half-ass job, so maybe he has realized to not do that, or maybe his superiors has realized to let him do his own thing this time around.

[LightningFlash]

It was far superior to either of those.

See, I could be one and the only person that actually liked Batman Forever. Sure, Batman smiled and Robin was a retard, but I really enjoyed Jim Carrey's performance as the Riddler.

[venom892]

You mean his performance as the joker dressed as the Riddler?

[webhead731]

lmao! ^

Batman Forever is...well I like it enough to own it on DVD. It has its moments, but it does suck in alot of areas. It's fun to watch, Jim Carrey is not really a good Riddler, but he was funny. I like Jim, so that's what made me like Batman Forever for the most part. But I watched it on DVD the other night, it's just a funny movie. Not what Batman should be, but it's funny.

[Crook]

Those are all number 2's.

I see what you thought I meant. I'm aware that Spider-Man 2 was larger than Spider-Man, and Empire Strikes Back was larger than A New Hope. To the general public, Spider-Man doesn't seem to be "OMFG BEST MOVIE EVER", nor did Batman Begins.
At the time of Spider-Man, it was THE most popular comic book film with the crowd. Granted the craze didn't start yet, but it was no doubt the top king, especially with the critics and box office to back it up.

BB was also crowned the next best comic book film when it came out. Box office was so-so, but the general feelings across the board was that it raised the level of filmmaking. Just check out any of the reviews or "top 10 lists" when BB came out.

But also, to the point that the third movie made Spider-Man go downhill is what I was stating. Every third movie does that; and it's hard to name ONE third movie that was as good or better than the second film. So, yes, Spider-Man 4 COULD have a chance to be better, because it seems that every third movie suffers disappointment.
Never said it was easy. But people are focusing way too much attention on the film number. In my book, it's inconsequential. The numbers 3/4/5 don't inherently mean "lackluster" any more than 1 or 2 do. The reason why many sequels that get this far are so mundane compared to the earlier films, is because the production crew got lazy. Quality declined as a result of incompetence, not the years put into a franchise.

I hope its a fitting end to the Raimi/Maguire series. Let the next films start something new.

I still remember walking out of SM3 shaking my head and muttering "That's how its gonna end?"
To be honest, I feel the same way. As much as I hate how the series has "ended" (so far), there's just too many faults I find in the foundation to really like what they have in the future. It could be good, but if there's any leftovers from the 3rd film, it'll surely leave a bad taste in my mouth.

[Spider-ManHero12]

The reason why many sequels that get this far are so mundane compared to the earlier films, is because the production crew got lazy. Quality declined as a result of incompetence, not the years put into a franchise. A good amount of fiml franchises are like that. Though, look at the Die Hard, and Rocky films, Lethal Weapon films, etc. They are still loved by many people. Hell, Spider-Man 3 is loved by a good amount of people, including myself.

[webhead731]

Die Hard 3 is so underrated. That's my second favorite in that series. Rocky 3 and Lethal Weapon 3 are awesome too.

[dark_b]

i guess people will now start saying that raimi would do a better movie without Arad. or that he was forced into something.

dancing,hes kids,women reporter, acting(crying from Tobey,every scene of Kirsten). this is all 100% Raimi.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Die Hard 3 is so underrated. That's my second favorite in that series. Rocky 3 and Lethal Weapon 3 are awesome too. Die Hard 3 was fantastic, IMO. I loved how they kept moving from one section of NYC to another.

[webhead731]

i guess people will now start saying that raimi would do a better movie without Arad. or that he was forced into something.

dancing,hes kids,women reporter, acting(crying from Tobey,every scene of Kirsten). this is all 100% Raimi.

I wish people would let off on the crying. It doesn't happen THAT much, and it happens when needed. I don't know how you cry cool-like or anything. I never have a problem with crying in movies unless it's over dramatic.

[venomvsspidey]

I wish people would let off on the crying. It doesn't happen THAT much, and it happens when needed. I don't know how you cry cool-like or anything. I never have a problem with crying in movies unless it's over dramatic.

same here.

[venom892]

That was the problem it was over dramatic.:huh:

[SamuraiSon6]

i hope people will believe me when i say this and not think that i am just being being an apologist, but i think the real problem with the crying in spiderman 3 is that people dont handle emotions like crying well in a movie that they are not prepared for it. certain movies, you expect an amount of drama or events that make you cry, but the average person isnt prepared for that going into a spiderman movie. at least i can say that about the theaters i go to...

[LightningFlash]

You mean his performance as the joker dressed as the Riddler?

Yah...you got me; what was I thinking. Carrey's Riddler was acting exactly like the Joker...:whatever:

lmao! ^

Batman Forever is...well I like it enough to own it on DVD. It has its moments, but it does suck in alot of areas. It's fun to watch, Jim Carrey is not really a good Riddler, but he was funny. I like Jim, so that's what made me like Batman Forever for the most part. But I watched it on DVD the other night, it's just a funny movie. Not what Batman should be, but it's funny.

Batman Forever had a nice plot; it's just certain actors failed...and O'Donnell was NEVER a good Robin...sometimes I think what Bale's Robin would've been like, haha.

One big thing was that Tommy Lee Jones as Harvery Dent...so, I guess the acid that burned Dent's skin, also changed his dark-colored skin to white skin...yah...haha. Which then makes me wonder how Billy Dee Williams would've been as Two-Face.

The only person that I liked was Jim Carrey as the Riddler. And a far away second would be Kilmer as Batman...but that's a mile-long away second.

Never said it was easy. But people are focusing way too much attention on the film number. In my book, it's inconsequential. The numbers 3/4/5 don't inherently mean "lackluster" any more than 1 or 2 do. The reason why many sequels that get this far are so mundane compared to the earlier films, is because the production crew got lazy. Quality declined as a result of incompetence, not the years put into a franchise.

Exactly...seeing the producers, director and writer(s) get lazy when it comes to a comic-book adaptation is something that puts an awful taste to one's mouth, that becomes a fan of that certain superhero...seeing Spider-Man in the first movie was an amazing film to watch...the second one was okay, but some moments were too boring...and the third, well, as the first movie EVER to make me fall asleep...so yah; you kinda guess how bad it was to me, lol.

Die Hard 3 was fantastic, IMO. I loved how they kept moving from one section of NYC to another.

Bruce Willis is the first-ever BAMF, before Jack Bauer...that's why the Die Hard franchise is sick as heck.

That was the problem it was over dramatic.:huh:

Overdramatic is this:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3263/2571074917_39d8edef1f.jpg?v=0

There is good acting when it comes to crying...Jensen Ackles does a brilliant job with this in the TV series Supernatural, but there CAN be overdramatic acting with emotion, ala Maguire does a pathetic job with "crying", or whatever you call it and it's a plain example when he did cry once and they showed it in one of the first trailers; his face did not look so fake, lol. It looked real...why they replace it, I do not know. It's like, with all the changes Raimi did during editing, with all the GOOD scenes they filmed; it's like Raimi wanted a disaster of a movie.

[Crook]

I'm still not getting the big deal over the crying. There's "Hollywood" crying, and then there's the "real" crying. Maguire went for the latter. I'm no teardropper myself, but I've been around plenty of people who are, to know what it looks like. And it's not at all pretty. Their faces are scrunched up into all sorts of contorted expressions, and taken out of context...yes, it looks almost funny.

The film's failure is not getting the audience to sympathize with the scene or actor. That's why it was so easy to laugh. We really didn't take it that seriously. Your best friend could pull that face, but I doubt you'd be laughing if you knew they just experienced a horrible tragedy.

[webhead731]

When I say over-dramatic I mean like yelling and falling to your knees and screaming the name of the person who died etc.

[LightningFlash]

Well he DID keep saying "Harry, Harry, Harry"...wasn't yelling, but still...added more annoyance to the scene.

And I prefer the "Hollywood" crying for a movie anyways. Just some tears works...but a crunched-up face and everything...no, it doesn't work for me, hah.

[zeptron]

Peter crying at the break-up scene was a bit too much for me.

[NewYorkSpider]

Peter crying at the break-up scene was a bit too much for me.

I was hoping for a more shocked expression from Peter.

[venomvsspidey]

Peter crying at the break-up scene was a bit too much for me.

im ready to get bashed for this, but i'd be crying too if kirsten dumped me outta the blue.

[LightningFlash]

im ready to get bashed for this, but i'd be crying too if kirsten dumped me outta the blue.

Then, much like Harry was behind the tree, I would be behind the tree, and laughing for these two reasons:

that you actually dated her...which...isn't the greatest of great accomplishments, haha..

and that you're crying because Kirsten Dunst dumped you.

And then I will stop laughing to ponder which of the two is the worst.

[TheScarecrow]

Peter crying at the break-up scene was a bit too much for me.

People cry, get over it. Don't make out you've never done it.

I don't think Spider-man 4 will be bad. I think Raimi and co learnt their lesson from Spider-man 3. It wasn't like Spider-man 3 was that bad. It just wasn't very good.

[zeptron]

I could understand why he was crying. It was just like other people said a bit too over dramatic.

[Crook]

When I say over-dramatic I mean like yelling and falling to your knees and screaming the name of the person who died etc.
In context, was it really overdramatic? The term implies unnecessary emotional reaction. While shouting, crying, name-repetition and all that are "showy" by nature, it's perfectly within line in the wake of a tragedy.

Ever seen people COMPLETELY break down when they see a loved one, lying dead right in front of them? It's really not that much different, if at all.

Again, the failure is emotional attachment from the audience. We shouldn't be laughing nor thinking it was overdramatic in scenes such as that. But in terms of concept, I thought it was fine.


And I prefer the "Hollywood" crying for a movie anyways. Just some tears works...but a crunched-up face and everything...no, it doesn't work for me, hah.
Guess it's personal taste. Even in movies, I prefer showing real actions instead of the glorified stuff. Crying is the second worst offense in Hollywood, because it's close to nothing like how people react. Cuts/Bruises might be the worst though. I always laugh at how they're always conveniently placed on the actor to either make them look really cool (the notorious cut on the eye, with blood streaming down the side), or there's no damage to the face. Gotta keep the actors pretty. :o

[zeptron]

In context, was it really overdramatic? The term implies unnecessary emotional reaction. While shouting, crying, name-repetition and all that are "showy" by nature, it's perfectly within line in the wake of a tragedy.

Ever seen people COMPLETELY break down when they see a loved one, lying dead right in front of them? It's really not that much different, if at all.

Again, the failure is emotional attachment from the audience. We shouldn't be laughing nor thinking it was overdramatic in scenes such as that. But in terms of concept, I thought it was fine.


This I agree with. I mean his best friend was just killed. How would you react in a situation like that?

[venomvsspidey]

Then, much like Harry was behind the tree, I would be behind the tree, and laughing for these two reasons:

that you actually dated her...which...isn't the greatest of great accomplishments, haha..

and that you're crying because Kirsten Dunst dumped you.

And then I will stop laughing to ponder which of the two is the worst.


even though youre makin fun of me...i still got some laughs out of that haha

:hehe::hoboj::ikyn

[Immortalfire]

Then, much like Harry was behind the tree, I would be behind the tree, and laughing for these two reasons:

that you actually dated her...which...isn't the greatest of great accomplishments, haha..

and that you're crying because Kirsten Dunst dumped you.

And then I will stop laughing to ponder which of the two is the worst. LoL :woot:

[zeptron]

^Off topic. Who's that in your avatar?

[webhead731]

In context, was it really overdramatic? The term implies unnecessary emotional reaction. While shouting, crying, name-repetition and all that are "showy" by nature, it's perfectly within line in the wake of a tragedy.

Ever seen people COMPLETELY break down when they see a loved one, lying dead right in front of them? It's really not that much different, if at all.

No I mean BAD acting over dramatic. When it's not believable.

To me, any crying in Spider-Man 3 was something I felt for when they did it.

[DACrowe]

Here come the crazies that think SM3 was great. SM3 wasn't a total bomb but when compared to SM1 and SM2...yes it totally sucked. It is cheesy and contrived with bad acting, a stupid plot, 4 characters fighting for screen time with little to no development, and really convenient...the meteor lands right next to Peter:dry: The little kids in this movie are terrible...terrible. Harry's amnesia is about the stupidest plot device in existance. Bernard the butler was stupid, Mary Jane was whiny and lame, and of course Eddie Brock/Venom was a total let down. If SM4 is any way near that again...this franchise will fail.

X3 was better than this and that says a lot:o There were some bright spots but the glaring black holes sucked them in. I think SM3 could have been great and on par with the rest of the franchise if Venom were left out. Because he wasn't, Sandman and Venom both failed and THC barely got any screen time...it was a mess.

And nobody is comparing SM3 to a single movie like Batman and Robin, they are comparing the Spider-Man franchise with the old Batman franchise. A great origin movie at its time, a better, bigger sequel, and then a bad third movie that leads on to an even worse fourth movie. So yeah, I would say I am scared for this franchise as well and those concerns from others are not unfounded.

I was actually seeing your POV for a while until you said that. Anything bad about SM3 applies triple-fold to the film abortion known as X-Men: The Last Stand.

In any case, SM3 is not a very good movie, nor is it the terrible movie obsessive fanboys make it out to be. It is a very middle-of-the-road okay/mediocre movie that I could see some liking and some not. But the intense passion both sides display is just too much.

And I honestly do think Sam Raimi someone who does learn from his mistakes. He took a year off from making movies and then he did a small horror/comedy that I'm sure will clear his head out and get him away from the webs and goblins for a while. I do think he sees SM3's inherent problems and will come back to the fourth with a sense of trying to improve. So no, I do not think it will be B&R or Superman IV.

However, I will say that it may be the last because Raimi and Maguire are probably getting tired of the genre, Tobey is getting too old and Kirsten has been phoning it in since the second movie (though she should come back).

This probably will be the last one, because the series is showing its age. And if we do four films with the same actors, then yes the audiences will not give a crap about SM5 with someone else. This is probably the last Spider-Man movie for a long time (I'm sure Marvel will reboot in 10-15 years), so enjoy it and hopefully it will turn out more like SM2 and less like SM3.

[DACrowe]

P.S. And as bad (or in my mind, mediocre) as SM3 is, it still is a better film than most of the tripe that gets shoveled at us every summer. While I'm thankful we got Iron Man and TDK last summer, IJIV had SM3 syndrome and we also had Hancock, Wanted and TIH that summer and Transformers, POTC3, Shrek 3 and other tripe like that the summer before.

[venom892]

I thought Incredible hulk was better then Spider-man 3.I would certainly rank it higher on a comic book films list.About the crying I don't mind crying when a scene calls for it but the crying on the bridge was WAY too much.As someone said it wasn't believable.Here is a little parody that kinda explains how I feel about Spider-man 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJfY5IqgcOY

[FaT_tONle]

I wouldn't rule out Sony recasting the characters and bringing in a new director in a sequel to SM4 as soon as 2013 or 2014. Just like Kilmer and Clooney filled in... I could see them doing the same for SM5 and possibly SM6... probably visa versa the old Batman films... with the new set of films being more darker and brooding than the originals. I'd have prefered they just did 4/5 back to back as was originally reported... even if it meant a beyond crappy SM5.

[LightningFlash]

even though youre makin fun of me...i still got some laughs out of that haha

:hehe::hoboj::ikyn

LoL :woot:

Thank you, thank you, haha.

[weezerspider]

Where have you been? All three films are cheesy.

You've got me on that one, but 3 was a little more over the top with it. Kinda like the first steps in to B&R territory.

I'd say give Raimi one last chance and if 4 isn't on par with the first 2, get rid of him. He has made some good films, but he has made mistakes in all of the films. The biggest one would be making a Peter Parker series instead of a Spiderman. Yes, I realize Spiderman is one of the few superheroe stories which focuses more on the life behind the mask, but the bulk of Spiderman is still SPIDERMAN! Raimi got Peter Parker down good in 1 and perfected it in 2. Its time he keeps that in a film, but is also able to perfect his other identity, Spiderman.

[Immortalfire]

^Off topic. Who's that in your avatar?

Daisy Fuentes.

[Reikowolf]

Peter parker is a cryer

He cried when uncle ben died
he cried when gwen stacey died
he cried when he saw uncle ben's ghost
he cried when aunt may died (before reboot)
im pretty sure doc ock made him cry during their first encounter

i think people forget how even though he has all these powers, he still has the self esteem of the kid who was picked on in highschool

granted these are all deaths that made him cry but he's a pretty emotional guy

[Hectorminator]

Don't forget Captain America.

That one took a toll on ol' Petey.







But I almost cried myself on that one. =(

[Immortalfire]

Ursula: Sorry Pete, I'm out of chocolate cake.
Peter: :waa:

[Reikowolf]

Mr. Aziz: You're fired
Peter: :waa:

[LightningFlash]

MJ: You don't have testicles anymore Peter.
Peter: :waa:

*Enter Dr. Manhattan*

Dr. Manhattan: I'm sorry kid...I guess having no testicles only works for a guy like me.
Peter: :waa:
Dr. Manhattan: So, MJ...have you ever danced with a man with a pale blue penis?

[Reikowolf]

SM1. After the attack at times square.

Harry: Don't let the bed bugs.... bite
*slick*
Harry: What was that thing?
Peter:I... Don-n't kn-kn-know...b-b-b-but somebody's g-g-got to st-st-op it :waa:

[Spider-Fan]

I highly doubt SM4 is going to be a downgrade in quality. Yes, the series didn't pass the 3rd film hurdle, but it still made the best 3rd comic film ever to date. The last film suffered from Raimi not having enough control, and if Raimi is going to have control this time, then I think it can only really be better. SM1 or SM2 good? Who knows. But I expect an upgrade.

[LightningFlash]

Of course it will be an upgrade.

The Dark Knight had set a standard for comic-book adaptations, and others will try to raise the bar even higher; or so that's how it should happen at least.

And I like your signature, because I am sure a lot of people have a dream to direct or write for a movie or two; like me, I have a dream to do a Spider-Man reboot because I have had this six episodic-type films for the character for a while now.

[sPiDeRmAn2o29]

Wont happen, tobey got 50 mill for both films. So its def for spiderman 4 and 5. You have to realize that kids love spiderman. Heck even if you use barney as the villian for the 4th film kids with thier parents and other family members will ticket in to see it. They are the reason as to why the spiderman series made it so big.

[sPiDeRmAn2o29]

lmao! ^

Batman Forever is...well I like it enough to own it on DVD. It has its moments, but it does suck in alot of areas. It's fun to watch, Jim Carrey is not really a good Riddler, but he was funny. I like Jim, so that's what made me like Batman Forever for the most part. But I watched it on DVD the other night, it's just a funny movie. Not what Batman should be, but it's funny.

Love the I trust in sam raimi for spiderman 4 tag line. If you ever get to meet him you will realize that he really cares about the characters and the fans. Just wasnt his fault for the storyline flaws but, I am sure that everyone knows now that he has full creative control for the 4th film.

[webhead731]

I want to meet him really bad. xD

[Spider-Fan]

Of course it will be an upgrade.

The Dark Knight had set a standard for comic-book adaptations, and others will try to raise the bar even higher; or so that's how it should happen at least.

And I like your signature, because I am sure a lot of people have a dream to direct or write for a movie or two; like me, I have a dream to do a Spider-Man reboot because I have had this six episodic-type films for the character for a while now.

Thanks man :)

I think it is about having an idea for it. While Spider-Man is my favorite comic character of all-time, I would be hesitant to make a film for him. Cause I have no idea for one. FF and Superman are to franchises I feel I have great ideas for (I have a FF trilogy and 2 potential Superman trilogies plotted out on paper/my mind). Plus, I'm opting to go to film school in the fall, so perhaps one day, I'll be in position to try and get one of those made (if all goes well for me) :up:

[sPiDeRmAn2o29]

I want to meet him really bad. xD

Well, I told my agency that when the fourth film starts filming that I want in again. All I heard is that principal photography will be starting very soon or it probably did already. If I get a heads up of where it will be filming, I will let everyone know but, I cant inform anyone on anything that is being filmed cause sony and co do have people that come on boards to check to see who is saying what. Bad news is that I get informed of place and time a day or two before but, if you come around set look for a blue tent which is where sam raimi is with the directors chairs. He loves meeting the fans and when they take breaks he comes out to take pictures and stuff. If your also an actor as well make sure you bring your head shots and comp cards with you to give to him.

[sPiDeRmAn2o29]

Thanks man :)

I think it is about having an idea for it. While Spider-Man is my favorite comic character of all-time, I would be hesitant to make a film for him. Cause I have no idea for one. FF and Superman are to franchises I feel I have great ideas for (I have a FF trilogy and 2 potential Superman trilogies plotted out on paper/my mind). Plus, I'm opting to go to film school in the fall, so perhaps one day, I'll be in position to try and get one of those made (if all goes well for me) :up:

I see what you mean and good luck with the film school and def go for it, dont let anyone stop you !

I wish I could write scripts for hollywood but, I am only familiar with a few characters like spider-man and batman. If they were to ask me to write a script for a character that I didnt know of then I wouldnt want to cheat the fans. I would do what jon favereu did and interact with the fans about what they would want to see and wouldnt. I would try as best as I can to stay faithful to the comics as well and the costumes. So far raimi has done an excellent job in that area. The only things that I didnt like about his ideas, was that half of it was based off of james camersons script. In fact if you start reading it, you will see how alot of it is alike with the first film.

I would have stuck with the organic web shooters but at least built a web shooter to shoot different angles or length of strains from the web. The main reason as to why peter got a job at the bugle was to make money to buy chemicals to make web fluids. It also shows how smart peter is which we only got a glimpse of in the films. Whats also missing is his sarcastic remarks that drives the villians insane ! It never really happens in the films.

Sam really has the potential to make a great film and even admitting to the faults but it was more on the producers and sonys hands. When I saw on set for the first time that topher grace was wearing a daily bugle badge with eddie brock on it, I freaked up and the damn morons from Aint-it-cool-news.com stole my picture that I took offsite and gave credit to some quint person on there. In my mind I was thinking, Awesome ! Venom ! Sam can use his evil dead techniques and scare the crap out of us. Man, was I dissapointed. I was more happy with the evil dead reference doc ock scene which I think was really brutal. I know some kids that fast foward that scene because its too intense for them which I am very happy about because it means that it worked. If sam wanted to and was given the right moment, understanding, and time of the character then it would have been really frightening. I would be pissed too if I was done with a script and the producers told me to change the villian and bring a character into the story that makes no sense to begin with since it would confuse the fans. I just think that he isnt the type of director to get pissy with them and say I dont agree with this and I dont want to do it. Instead the poor guy got the blame from fans because the third film wasnt that great yet truth behold it now out officially from his mouth.

Even though things are screwed up with gwen in the mix, I think sam will continue the story with the classic villians. As much as some fans want venom and carnage, it wont happen especially since he has full creative control now. Maybe it will be saved for the spin off venom film but it will be with a different actor because I remember topher saying at the spider-man 3 premiere that he would return for a sequel but never a spin off. He did tease of the sinister six, then again it may be time for the lizard and that also means kraven the hunter. Since sony wanted mickey rourke to play a villian, he is the only actor that would be perfect for kraven. So I think that sony dropped the bomb on that one. We will soon find out and I will def trust in raimi for spiderman 4 and look foward to spiderman week in nyc if it happens again. Makes sense since the musical will be out in the same year. If you havent heard yet, carnage is one of the villians for the musical so at least we will see carnage somewhere lol.

[LightningFlash]

Thanks man :)

I think it is about having an idea for it. While Spider-Man is my favorite comic character of all-time, I would be hesitant to make a film for him. Cause I have no idea for one. FF and Superman are to franchises I feel I have great ideas for (I have a FF trilogy and 2 potential Superman trilogies plotted out on paper/my mind). Plus, I'm opting to go to film school in the fall, so perhaps one day, I'll be in position to try and get one of those made (if all goes well for me) :up:

Well all the best luck to you. To me, the "Hollywood" business is the hardest; I am writing a book and also in college taking courses for screenwriting and filming and would love to use my ideas for Spider-Man, but I would also wish my book to become a movie as well, because it also deals with my own created superhero.

But, if you don't mind, do you think you could PM me with some of your Superman ideas? Because I say you should work on the Superman idea first; we NEED a good Superman film; after Smallville and Superman Returns, we need to bring Supes back up to the #1 superhero rank after such horrible renditions.

[sPiDeRmAn2o29]

Well all the best luck to you. To me, the "Hollywood" business is the hardest; I am writing a book and also in college taking courses for screenwriting and filming and would love to use my ideas for Spider-Man, but I would also wish my book to become a movie as well, because it also deals with my own created superhero.

But, if you don't mind, do you think you could PM me with some of your Superman ideas? Because I say you should work on the Superman idea first; we NEED a good Superman film; after Smallville and Superman Returns, we need to bring Supes back up to the #1 superhero rank after such horrible renditions.

See the problem with the recent superman films is that you dont have a good villian to face superman. Its been lex luthor since the first film for the exception of the third film. You need a villian that will actually give a challenge to superman and we need to see superman use his super powers. Not the save the damsel in distress or people from danger routine.

You want superman to be popular again make a superman doomsday movie. Screw the origins because we have all seen it plenty of times and forget a remake. Start it off like punisher war zone did and give a brief glimpse of his past like as if superman has already exsisted. The death of superman plus a character like doomsday in the mix you know ALOT of fans will line up to see that one. The ratings for smallville's doomsday episode sky rocketed for a reason.:supes:

[Adrian89]

Has anybody else noticed, that when a series has an "ok" or "bad" 3rd film, the 4th one tends to be a lot worse, and ends up killing the Franchise for years to come.

Examples:

Alien: 1st 2 were some of the best movies ever made, 3rd one sucked, 4th one killed the series. (AVP does not count)

Superman: 1st 2 were great, 3rd one sucked, 4th one sucked a lot, franchise ends for nearly 20 years.

Batman: 1st 2 were great (not best), 3rd one was corny, but still ok (like Sm3), and 4th one killed it for about 8 years.

I could go on and on, but maybe they should just stop while they are ahead, and later on, if anybody wants to, start a reboot.

Just my opinion, what do you guys think?
Hmm.. I don't think it will be the case here, if the SM Crew learned from their mistakes.

But something tells me they will continue making the 5th and 6 no matter what. You know, it's all about the money..:whatever:

[LightningFlash]

One can only hope that people would start to make movies for the passion and not the fame BEFORE the world ends, haha.

[Troy_Parker]

No i dont want SM4 to be the end, i want 3127328913792173891273 Spider-Man movies.

[Spider-Man '92]

I say give them a shot, and if they screw up, atleast it gives me more time to get into Hollywood with my vision of a Spidey franchise, and get it to the screens. ;)

[Panthro]

Spider-Man 4 will only be the end if it is a box office flop of epic/biblical/Batman & Robin proportions. As it's all about the money, they'll keep churning out Spider-Man films as long as they turn in strong box office performances. If the next one doesn't do well, then they'll probably take a break from it for a few years then consider starting over.


On the Superman subject, even though that's off topic, it's funny, Superman is one of the best known characters out there, and yet he does not seem to be as outrightly popular as Batman, Spider-Man or Wolverine. I don't think that's solely because his films have primarily pit him against Lex Luthor, but more that he needs something that wows the audience instead of dividing the audience the way 'Returns' did.

[sauronthegreat]

I think the only problem Spider-Man franchise faces is the lack of one big villain. Spider-Man doesn't have his own Magneto, Megatron, Joker or even Mandarin (as he will be build to his appearance in the third, and maybe final film).
One of Spider-Man's greatest, or most notable/popular villains are already used and killed. Norman Osborn dead, Octopus dead for sure, Venom maybe not as dead as Octopus, but he cannot be Spider-Man's arch nemesis, as could Osborn. Even Octopus in the films wasn't that character he really is, the Master Planner, the criminal mastermind... so we'll pass on Octopus.
I think this franchise, if it is to continue, needs an arch nemesis, something like Tombstone is to 'Spectacular Spider-Man' or Green Goblin. All the more... the most popular characters are already used.. there are some interesting ones still, but do they posses a substance to even be compared to Green Goblin, Octopus or even Venom.

[snakeinthegear]

The problem with the spider-man movies is, that we're not really getting spider-man. Raimi keeps mentioning humanising the character but what he doesn't seem to understand is, spider-man has always been humanised. He is surrounded by circumstances that always have an impact to some extent on his own personal life. It would have been great to see an emphasis on spider-man being misunderstood. It would be great for Jameson to bring comic relief but balanced out to the point where you could believe he's that angr and bitter enough to create his own illain to take down spidey. Peter Parker needs to grow as a person. The social awkwardness he's been hindered with in all 3 movies is just ridiculous and there aren't any well placed smart retorts and quips, which the haracter is known for. Addditionally, spider-man's skills/powers need to be creatively explored and to realy wow the audience.

[Metal Spidey]

The problem with the spider-man movies is, that we're not really getting spider-man. Raimi keeps mentioning humanising the character but what he doesn't seem to understand is, spider-man has always been humanised. He is surrounded by circumstances that always have an impact to some extent on his own personal life. It would have been great to see an emphasis on spider-man being misunderstood. It would be great for Jameson to bring comic relief but balanced out to the point where you could believe he's that angr and bitter enough to create his own illain to take down spidey. Peter Parker needs to grow as a person. The social awkwardness he's been hindered with in all 3 movies is just ridiculous and there aren't any well placed smart retorts and quips, which the haracter is known for. Addditionally, spider-man's skills/powers need to be creatively explored and to realy wow the audience.

I agree with everything you just said albeit you made a few spelling errors. I want a Spider-Man that antagonizing his enemy and makes witty one-liners. I also want them to add some new moves to his inventory. Even if it's something Spidey has never done before.

[SpaceWay2009]

^Like impact webbing (web bullets/balls), "cocoon" webbing (sticky webs that wrap around enemies), or web nets. I don't know. Something new, refreshing, and creative web attacks.

[SpeterMan3]

No i dont want SM4 to be the end, i want 3127328913792173891273 Spider-Man movies.
Plus one.

[mjbull23]

SM4 won't be the end, and I couldn't be happier.

We'll be getting two more Spidey flicks. Part 6 is perhaps up in the air at this point, but I'm certain they will go four and then five on us.

[Spider-ManHero12]

One can only hope that people would start to make movies for the passion and not the fame BEFORE the world ends, haha. Sam's making these films for the passion. He's proven it already.

[bulletbillx]

Very true! IMO, Spider-Man 3 is really superior to Batman Forever. I mean, if you think about it, Batman Forever had more flaws. However, it wasn't a bad film.

Batman forever and spidey 3 are both flawed IMO and both need a directors/extended cut to bring out the hidden potential since there is a good movie underneath and the deleted and alternate scenes/reordering could make it even better.

[bulletbillx]

I agree with everything you just said albeit you made a few spelling errors. I want a Spider-Man that antagonizing his enemy and makes witty one-liners. I also want them to add some new moves to his inventory. Even if it's something Spidey has never done before.

I do as well. Even when Parker was an awkward nerd he got funny and quipped as spider-man as a defense mechanism so it should have been in the movies from day 1.

[Hectorminator]

^Like impact webbing (web bullets/balls), "cocoon" webbing (sticky webs that wrap around enemies), or web nets. I don't know. Something new, refreshing, and creative web attacks.

Impact webbing was in the second one, used against bank robbers, and the third one, used against "New Goblin" in the first fight of the movie.

And honestly, new webbing tricks are kinda dumb to me. It doesn't make sense that he has organic web, shooting only out of his wrists, but can somehow shape them into different stuff, or make it thicker or thinner. They tried to explain this gimmick in the comics by saying stuff like Peter would triple-tap his web-shooter button, or use a different web formula, or something. But how do you explain it in the movie universe where he makes the web already.

Impact webbing is enough. Spider-Man was never about the gadgets, leave that stuff to Batman and Ironman. Next people will want to see the "spider-signal" or "spider-tracers." Why not the "spider-mobile?" Lame.

[Hectorminator]

I think the only problem Spider-Man franchise faces is the lack of one big villain. Spider-Man doesn't have his own Magneto, Megatron, Joker or even Mandarin (as he will be build to his appearance in the third, and maybe final film).
One of Spider-Man's greatest, or most notable/popular villains are already used and killed. Norman Osborn dead, Octopus dead for sure, Venom maybe not as dead as Octopus, but he cannot be Spider-Man's arch nemesis, as could Osborn. Even Octopus in the films wasn't that character he really is, the Master Planner, the criminal mastermind... so we'll pass on Octopus.
I think this franchise, if it is to continue, needs an arch nemesis, something like Tombstone is to 'Spectacular Spider-Man' or Green Goblin. All the more... the most popular characters are already used.. there are some interesting ones still, but do they posses a substance to even be compared to Green Goblin, Octopus or even Venom.

Yep.

This is why they need to bring back Norman Osborn and say he faked his death and went underground in Europe for the past few years (just like he did in the comics, after he was impaled by his glider.) He needs to come back and be the master planner, the criminal mastermind, the reason everything has been going bad for Peter. He sabotaged Octavius' project, not to create "Doctor Octopus", but to make sure his son hit rock bottom and follow in his footsteps to become the Green Goblin. And Osborn could be the reason for even more conspiracy-type stuff.

Sony plans on doing at least three more Spider-Man movies, so what better way to set up the Sinister Six for Spider-Man 6 than to have Norman Osborn slowly put it all together as part of his plan? Which means he takes a back seat in the next two as a Lex Luthor-type of businessman. Then goes full-on Goblin in part six.

[SpeterMan3]

I want a Spider-Man that antagonizing his enemy and makes witty one-liners. I also want them to add some new moves to his inventory. Even if it's something Spidey has never done before.
:up::up::up:

[SpaceWay2009]

Impact webbing was in the second one, used against bank robbers, and the third one, used against "New Goblin" in the first fight of the movie.

And honestly, new webbing tricks are kinda dumb to me. It doesn't make sense that he has organic web, shooting only out of his wrists, but can somehow shape them into different stuff, or make it thicker or thinner. They tried to explain this gimmick in the comics by saying stuff like Peter would triple-tap his web-shooter button, or use a different web formula, or something. But how do you explain it in the movie universe where he makes the web already.

Impact webbing is enough. Spider-Man was never about the gadgets, leave that stuff to Batman and Ironman. Next people will want to see the "spider-signal" or "spider-tracers." Why not the "spider-mobile?" Lame.That's true. But in an attempt to explain how he can be creative with his organic webbing, it can be explained that Spider-Man can make any shapes/sizes just by the use of his mind. If he needs/wants to make a big spider net, he can do it. But anyway, I wouldn't mind seeing it or not. Just a thought.

[Crazy Flakes]

I don't know about it being the end, but I sure hope they're able to fix up the mess that was Spiderman 3.

[venomvsspidey]

I don't know about it being the end, but I sure hope they're able to fix up the mess that was Spiderman 3.


:facepalm

[LightningFlash]

Wow....you have that stupid picard because...what, you don't think they need to fix up the mess?

Because, yah, they do.

Spider-Man 3 SUCKED.

Raimi needs to do a movie that is 50 times better.

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ We all have our different opinions. Wasn't fact that Spider-Man 3 was bad, it was an opinion. I liked Spider-Man 3, and so did alot of other people.

[SpeterMan3]

^^ We all have our different opinions. Wasn't fact that Spider-Man 3 was bad, it was an opinion. I liked Spider-Man 3, and so did alot of other people.
Right. It was bad or It was good is an opinion. It was flawed is fact. Our opinions are dependent on how we accept and/ or react to that fact.

[LightningFlash]

And flaws make a movie terrible.

Thus, it sucked.

And a LOT of people think it sucked more than thinking it was good.

[venomvsspidey]

wow....you have that stupid picard because...what, you don't think they need to fix up the mess?

Because, yah, they do.

Spider-man 3 sucked.

Raimi needs to do a movie that is 50 times better.

o-p-i-n-i-o-n.

[LightningFlash]

So you don't think Raimi shouldn't try to make a movie ten times better to make up for Spider-Man 3?

Because, sure, it made money, a lot of it, but look at its ratings. Too many villains, silly plot, useless retcon, poor dialogue on most of the Peter/MJ scenes....

yes, those flaws made the movie suck. And I'll still say it.

One day you might have a standard for movies.

[webhead731]

LightningFlash, as far as I know you haven't even seen the whole film yet, so there's no way you can keep enforcing your opinion as fact. You are trolling, stop telling us you didn't like the movie just because someone else says they do. We all know you didn't like it, and frankly no one cares. You saying that flaws make a movie bad is just ridiculous. I have not seen one flawless movie in my life. Stop being immature.

And as for the "ratings", you make it like it's ALL bad. I see more good than bad, usually people think it's good but not AS good as the first two. Just because you hate it doesn't mean everyone does. :facepalm

[TheScarecrow]

Spider-man 3 isn't a disaster. There are some amazing sequences in parts of it...the whole product though, isn't up to scratch. It feel very short of expectations. A lot of it was very inventive and if Raimi had made a couple of better decisions, it could have been quite good. Raimi doesn't need to 'make up' for Spider-man 3 - he just needs to make the best movie possible.

[venomvsspidey]

So you don't think Raimi shouldn't try to make a movie ten times better to make up for Spider-Man 3?

Because, sure, it made money, a lot of it, but look at its ratings. Too many villains, silly plot, useless retcon, poor dialogue on most of the Peter/MJ scenes....

yes, those flaws made the movie suck. And I'll still say it.

One day you might have a standard for movies.

sure dont. In My Opinion, spider-man 3 = Dark Knight.
remember MY OPINION, NOT YOURS.

[SpeterMan3]

Spider-man 3 isn't a disaster. There are some amazing sequences in parts of it...the whole product though, isn't up to scratch. It feel very short of expectations. A lot of it was very inventive and if Raimi had made a couple of better decisions, it could have been quite good. Raimi doesn't need to 'make up' for Spider-man 3 - he just needs to make the best movie possible.
:applaud

[OcStat]

Damn, isn't this a forum for Spider-Man 4?

Who cares if you did or didn't like any of the last three movies, talk about that in the other forums...perhaps...oh I don't know, the ones designated for those films? It isn't like we haven't heard every single gripe about Spider-Man 3 a hundred times since May 4th, 2007.

Let's discuss the new movie. I know it might be hard to stick to it, considering we have next to no news yet, but it can be done folks.

[SpeterMan3]

You know, I didn't even know Tobey was pregnant. :huh:

Does that explain the mood swings? I thought it was just the symbiote...?

:whatever:

[SpeterMan3]

oops, wrong thread

[FaT_tONle]

Damn, isn't this a forum for Spider-Man 4?

Who cares if you did or didn't like any of the last three movies, talk about that in the other forums...perhaps...oh I don't know, the ones designated for those films? It isn't like we haven't heard every single gripe about Spider-Man 3 a hundred times since May 4th, 2007.

Let's discuss the new movie. I know it might be hard to stick to it, considering we have next to no news yet, but it can be done folks.

We still got two years? What else to talk about?

[Metal Spidey]

We still got two years? What else to talk about?

Agreed. It's not like we have too much to discuss about part 4 anyway.

[OcStat]

Well, it's been two years since Spider-Man 3, and I know there isn't much news to discuss yet, I think we can take the *****ing elsewhere.

[Spider-ManHero12]

And I'll still say it. I don't think anybody cares. I'll say Spider-Man 3 was awesome.

[SP1D3RxV3N0M]

I don't think anybody cares. I'll say Spider-Man 3 was awesome.
:up:

[NewYorkSpider]

So you don't think Raimi shouldn't try to make a movie ten times better to make up for Spider-Man 3?

Because, sure, it made money, a lot of it, but look at its ratings. Too many villains, silly plot, useless retcon, poor dialogue on most of the Peter/MJ scenes....

yes, those flaws made the movie suck. And I'll still say it.

One day you might have a standard for movies.

I kinda hope you keep this up. I find it entertaining. :funny:

[venom892]

As entertaining as it is I find it to be true.Spider-man 3 was mediocre at best.

[NewYorkSpider]

As entertaining as it is I find it to be true.Spider-man 3 was mediocre at best.

I agree. It wasn't bad or good. It was a mediocre movie. What I find funny from LighningFlash, is that he hasn't seen the whole movie(said he fell asleep in the movie theater). Now he's criticizing the movie.

[DX]

No i dont want SM4 to be the end, i want 3127328913792173891273 Spider-Man movies.
You wouldn't be alive to see them all, sadly. :o

[Metal Spidey]

There are 5 different people who've seen Spider-Man 3.

Satisfied - A person who saw the movie, actually liked it and will defend it.

Optimist - A person who saw the movie, liked it a little bit but not as much as the first two films and will defend it.

In denial - A person who's a big Spider-Man fan, saw the movie, hated it but will defend it just because he or she is a fan.

Jerk - A person who saw a small bit of the movie, didn't like it and will bash the film without having seen it all.

Not A Fan - A person who saw a small bit of the movie, hates Spider-Man, PROBABLY hates Marvel and is in favor DC and will bash the film simply because he or she doesn't like Spider-Man (or Marvel).

This is not directly targeted at any ONE person but instead all of us.

[Dark Knight90!]

The Sam Raimi vision has got to stumble sometime...

Now Spider-man 3 could have just been the calm before the storm (I.E Batman Forever)

...or...ummm...

or... lets just hope Raimi knows what he is doing and is able to identify flaws in his work!

[SpaceWay2009]

There are 5 different people who've seen Spider-Man 3.

Satisfied - A person who saw the movie, actually liked it and will defend it.

Optimist - A person who saw the movie, liked it a little bit but not as much as the first two films and will defend it.

In denial - A person who's a big Spider-Man fan, saw the movie, hated it but will defend it just because he or she is a fan.

Jerk - A person who saw a small bit of the movie, didn't like it and will bash the film without having seen it all.

Not A Fan - A person who saw a small bit of the movie, hates Spider-Man, PROBABLY hates Marvel and is in favor DC and will bash the film simply because he or she doesn't like Spider-Man (or Marvel).

This is not directly targeted at any ONE person but instead all of us.I think I fall under Optimist. :)