Sony Rebooting Spider-Man for 2012!!!

[sauronthegreat]

I would only exclude Aunt May as the strongest character from the trilogy. Then Molina and Dafoe. For JJJ I am waiting to see him as a multidimensional character, and not just comic relief.

[omid17]

some of the cg looked bad in SM3 so im hoping they'll go with a different company

[Nathan]

I found the cg in the first movie to be rather bad in certain parts. And don't get me started about the first teaser trailers cg.......

The good thing about this re-boot is that the cg technology is far superior now to when it was back in 2002. Hell, it's probably better than when SM3 was made....

...my question now is, will Sony continue to use the same F/X company; or possibly go with another one..?

Even if the CGI wasn't the most outstanding, the swinging still looked badass. That's what I'll remember. Unless it lookes even more badass in the reboot, then I'll have to make room for new memories.

[NinjaCarm]

Can everyone who is against the reboot simply realize it's happening and stop crying over Sam Raimi. Geeesh....

Give ideas for improvement instead of whining about how much you loved JK Simmons or Chocolate Cake Girl.

[omid17]

if anything the cg will look better

[S_H_F_4839]

I know when Disney bought Marvel, Disneys CEO said that they would allow marvel to honor its current agreements with Fox and Sony, but when those deals expired, Disney would reevaluate

I think it was just polite industry talk for once those deals are over, we will be taking over and setting up new deals

yeah wouldnt doubt that but one can hope right.

[Spider-ManHero12]

I won't forget Dafoe's, Molina's and, well, probably even Simmon's performance. And of course all the CGi Spider-Man moments. But that's pretty much it. *sigh*

To each his own, I guess. I'll remember EVERYTHING.

[Pythagoras]

I'm hoping for David Fincher to be the director.

He is a great director. Think udner him the movie will be better then Rami's 3 films.

[Ace of Knaves]

Even...

"Now dig on thissss..."

:funny:

[omid17]

Can everyone who is against the reboot simply realize it's happening and stop crying over Sam Raimi. Geeesh....

Give ideas for improvement instead of whining about how much you loved JK Simmons or Chocolate Cake Girl.i hope spider-man has more balls when he's against 2 or more villains, i didn't like how Sandman and Venom were whipping his ass the whole time, i want him to pull an OP and take them all on

[Pythagoras]

Micheal Bay directing Spiderman would not end good. It would just be all action and nothing esle.

[Crook]

I found the cg in the first movie to be rather bad in certain parts. And don't get me started about the first teaser trailers cg.......
Whhaaa... ? Man, I remember the entire board going nuts over the teaser trailer. CGI doesn't stand up nowadays, but it got people pumped back in the day because it was unlike anything they've seen.

The good thing about this re-boot is that the cg technology is far superior now to when it was back in 2002. Hell, it's probably better than when SM3 was made....

...my question now is, will Sony continue to use the same F/X company; or possibly go with another one..?
If Sony is hired once again, I can guarantee the effects will be subpar. It's unfortunate, because they're always playing catch-up sfx-wise. WETA and ILM are always the ones pushing the envelope.

[NinjaCarm]

*sigh*

To each his own, I guess. I'll remember EVERYTHING.

That's cool. You'll remember the poor and drill characterization of Peter Parker, whiny Mary Jane, everything is about Mary Jane plots, Goblin Ranger, Venom-lite, rehashed music swinging scenes, cheese and camp galore, paint by numbers acting and plots, Spider-Man demasking to everyone, good bad villains, the constant crying, emo-dancing parker, the butler knew it all, Paint Ball Goblin, Doc "I'm a physiciast not a biologist" Connors, Stay Puft Sandman, Raimi's annoying kids, the British Reporter, black haired Flash Thompson.

That's cool.:whatever:

[Ace of Knaves]

HAHA yea! Why was Flash a rocker and not a jock?

[omid17]

how can you forget this :hehe:

http://i48.tinypic.com/34rgn5t.gif

[Solidus]

Spidey at time did have some lackluster CGI, even to me for "it's day" but for the most part it was amazing. Ock looked beyond incredible. They did amazing work with him. The swinging always did look good, and I hope for more awesome web-slinging which I'm sure we will get.

[Pythagoras]

how can you forget this :hehe:

http://i48.tinypic.com/34rgn5t.gif

Spiderman Muscial.

[sauronthegreat]

That's cool. You'll remember the poor and drill characterization of Peter Parker, whiny Mary Jane, everything is about Mary Jane plots, Goblin Ranger, Venom-lite, rehashed music swinging scenes, cheese and camp galore, paint by numbers acting and plots, Spider-Man demasking to everyone, good bad villains, the constant crying, emo-dancing parker, the butler knew it all, Paint Ball Goblin, Doc "I'm a physiciast not a biologist" Connors, Stay Puft Sandman, Raimi's annoying kids, the British Reporter, black haired Flash Thompson.

That's cool.:whatever:

Haha you summed it all up so nicely

[Project862006]

What is so funny is the pro reboot posters are acting like this film is gonna be amazing and the second coming of Christ. When they have nothing but Sony themselves saying oh we got a good script.You know the same company that made the previous 3 Spiderman films that they somehow hate.

You do know they made million and millions of dollars the way they made the SM films what makes you think it is gonna change it so you can have the spiderman films more accurate to the comics.The same company that thought of the Vultress character that everyone hated.

[Spider-ManHero12]

That's cool. You'll remember the poor and drill characterization of Peter Parker, whiny Mary Jane, everything is about Mary Jane plots, Goblin Ranger, Venom-lite, rehashed music swinging scenes, cheese and camp galore, paint by numbers acting and plots, Spider-Man demasking to everyone, good bad villains, the constant crying, emo-dancing parker, the butler knew it all, Paint Ball Goblin, Doc "I'm a physiciast not a biologist" Connors, Stay Puft Sandman, Raimi's annoying kids, the British Reporter, black haired Flash Thompson.

That's cool.:whatever: Some of those are YOUR nit picks. I wouldn't be talking, bud. I'm not the one spamming EVERY pro Raimi thread saying "The reboot will rule".

[BlackLantern]

it's not that, just i'm open to the fact that seeing someone elses vision of Spider-Man could be a good thing

[Spider-ManHero12]

I can't have the mindset right now. Sony f***** with us a couple of months before filming. Then we have the bashers gonig "OMG!!!!!!!! Best day ever!!!!! Yess yess!!!!!!!!!" When they know nothing about the reboot. I'm sorry, but that's not my mindset right now, BlackLantern. I'm not over it.

As i said, I would have been...more satisfied if we had a 4th film, and then had a reboot years later. Atleast then I'd know we had finished this great franchise.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well as a Spidey fan you should just look forward to a new interpretation.

There has been many different writers of the comics over the years, this is the same thing. It's just a new creative team coming on board.

And seriously, I've noticed some of you guys hoping the new films are crap. What sort of ****ing Spider-Man fans would hope for a film about him to be crap?

[Nathan]

Then we have the bashers gonig "OMG!!!!!!!! Best day ever!!!!! Yess yess!!!!!!!!!" When they know nothing about the reboot.

Can you really blame people for that? Even I went...

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/4201/wootcopy.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/i/wootcopy.jpg/)

...at the thought never to have to endure Tobey and Kirstin and their nonexistent chemistry again.

Sure, the reboot could be worse, but it could also be better. A funny Spider-Man, none of the crying, Mary Jane not getting kidnapped 3 times in a row.

[spider-neil]

Can you really blame people for that? Even I went...

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/4201/wootcopy.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/i/wootcopy.jpg/)

...at the thought never to have to endure Tobey and Kirstin and their nonexistent chemistry again.

Sure, the reboot could be worse, but it could also be better. A funny Spider-Man, none of the crying, Mary Jane not getting kidnapped 3 times in a row.


you want to say tobey was bland, fine.
you want to say kirsten was ugly, fine.
but no one is going to tell me they had no chemistry. I'm sorry but that's bull****.

[Project862006]

It is just we know better not to get so excited for a reboot and is'nt most of the posters here at SHH actively against reboots/remakes/adaptations/etc.Yet are so open to this reboot as if it will be amazing and put the previous trilogy to shame.I personally prefer good movies over comic accurate the same is with X men there characters weren't really like the comic counterparts but they were good films and that is all that mattered in the end.Not to mention it is the same damn studio who were fine with making the SM films as they were.They were so fine with the trilogy they green lit SM4 with Raimi and Company.Being more comic book accurate trust me is not a priority on the List of Sony's Reboot concerns.

[Nathan]

Sorry, I just saw a puppy and a b**ch together and didn't feel it.

[sauronthegreat]

I can't have the mindset right now. Sony f***** with us a couple of months before filming. Then we have the bashers gonig "OMG!!!!!!!! Best day ever!!!!! Yess yess!!!!!!!!!" When they know nothing about the reboot. I'm sorry, but that's not my mindset right now, BlackLantern. I'm not over it.

As i said, I would have been...more satisfied if we had a 4th film, and then had a reboot years later. Atleast then I'd know we had finished this great franchise.

Why bashers? We are not bashing Spider-Man. We just want to see a truthful interpretation of charcaters we grew to love over all these years. Too bad for you if you are a fan and you're satisfied with Raimi's vision which is far from truthful.

[NinjaCarm]

Some of those are YOUR nit picks. I wouldn't be talking, bud. I'm not the one spamming EVERY pro Raimi thread saying "The reboot will rule".

What a poor arugument and comeback. I have many times on here I'm worried about the reboot but all for it and excited. Also, those are not just my nitpicks, those are A LOT of peoples nitpicks, get that right.

Oh, and by the way, I'm so glad Raimi is gone.:cwink:

[Venom'sDad]

Why bashers? We are not bashing Spider-Man. We just want to see a truthful interpretation of charcaters we grew to love over all these years. Too bad for you if you are a fan and you're satisfied with Raimi's vision which is far from truthful.

Amen :up::up::up: Well Said...nuff said.

[NinjaCarm]

Amen :up::up::up: Well Said...nuff said.

Agreed.

[S_H_F_4839]

I have been doing some thinking over the last couple of days, and I am hoping for the best with this but until we get some information about cast and crew and script other than its back in high school I am on the fence about it, I liked the first two spiderman films, but I just did not enjoy the third one, sorry to all the raimi fans, I'm not saying he is a bad director but he gave up too much power, when he saw how the studio was acting he should have walked away before it went where it did, venom is one of my favorite characters and to see him treated so poorly irritated me. I understand raimi didnt want to use him but when he saw he had not choice in the matter he should have just walked away then imo.

[Project862006]

What a poor arugument and comeback. I have many times on here I'm worried about the reboot but all for it and excited. Also, those are not just my nitpicks, those are A LOT of peoples nitpicks, get that right.

Oh, and by the way, I'm so glad Raimi is gone.:cwink:

:dry:Yet are somehow fine having the same studio stay for this reboot who were fine being as accurate as they were throughout the whole trilogy. Which made them millions so what makes you think they are gonna change how accurate they were.

[Timstuff]

you want to say tobey was bland, fine.
you want to say kirsten was ugly, fine.
but no one is going to tell me they had no chemistry. I'm sorry but that's bull****.

I agree. The reason why I was OK with Dunst as MJ was because she and Maguire had chemistry. They looked like two people who would be a couple, and if MJ had been played by someone who looked like Megan Fox I would not have bought it. IMO it was more important to cast someone who had chemistry with Maguire than it was to cast someone who was "supermodel hot."

Also, I find it ironic that so many people are praising the reboot because "it will be funnier than Raimi's movies" even though Sony has already said that it will be darker and more serious. The reasons that people are praising the reboot are the exact opposite of what Sony wants to do with it. :doh:

[El Payaso]

I found the cg in the first movie to be rather bad in certain parts. And don't get me started about the first teaser trailers cg.......

The good thing about this re-boot is that the cg technology is far superior now to when it was back in 2002. Hell, it's probably better than when SM3 was made....

...my question now is, will Sony continue to use the same F/X company; or possibly go with another one..?

I also remember how poor much of the SM1 CGI was. In many shots he looked like a plastic figure. And some of the SM3 CGI wasn't much better. Faces during the Peter-Harry first fight and the final confrontation looked cartoony. The best CGI was for sure in SM2.

But for 2002 it was the first time we were watching a Spiderman movie so it was somehow forgivable.

[Golgo-13]

Spidey at time did have some lackluster CGI, even to me for "it's day" but for the most part it was amazing. Ock looked beyond incredible. They did amazing work with him. The swinging always did look good, and I hope for more awesome web-slinging which I'm sure we will get.

I personally want way more 'wall crawling'. That's something they under used in the Raimi trilogy.

[BlackLantern]

I agree. The reason why I was OK with Dunst as MJ was because she and Maguire had chemistry. They looked like two people who would be a couple, and if MJ had been played by someone who looked like Megan Fox I would not have bought it. IMO it was more important to cast someone who had chemistry with Maguire than it was to cast someone who was "supermodel hot."

Also, I find it ironic that so many people are praising the reboot because "it will be funnier than Raimi's movies" even though Sony has already said that it will be darker and more serious. The reasons that people are praising the reboot are the exact opposite of what Sony wants to do with it. :doh:

I didn't feel that...they felt more like friends to me than anything else...I couldn't imagine MJ allowing Peter to climb on top of her and give 'er the ol' hows your father in that ****** apartment of his

[[A]]

I personally want way more 'wall crawling'. That's something they under used in the Raimi trilogy.is that Gianna Michaels..? (in one of the frames) I think it is :oldrazz:

[Solidus]

I personally want way more 'wall crawling'. That's something they under used in the Raimi trilogy.

Yea for sure, there was very little wall climbing in the trilogy and I would like to see much more wall crawling as well.

[Timstuff]

you want to say tobey was bland, fine.
you want to say kirsten was ugly, fine.
but no one is going to tell me they had no chemistry. I'm sorry but that's bull****.

I agree. The reason why I was OK with Dunst as MJ was because she and Maguire had chemistry. They looked like two people who would be a couple, and if MJ had been played by someone who looked like Megan Fox I would not have bought it. IMO it was more important to cast someone who had chemistry with Maguire than it was to cast someone who was "supermodel hot."

Also, I find it ironic that so many people are praising the reboot because "it will be funnier than Raimi's movies" even though Sony has already said that it will be darker and more serious. The reasons that people are praising the reboot are the exact opposite of what Sony wants to do with it. :doh:

[Nathan]

Also, I find it ironic that so many people are praising the reboot because "it will be funnier than Raimi's movies" even though Sony has already said that it will be darker and more serious. The reasons that people are praising the reboot are the exact opposite of what Sony wants to do with it. :doh:

I think some of you worry too much, when the Studio mentions TDK. Let's just look at the only fact we know so far. Spider-Man will be back in high school and will have a younger cast.

With Peter Parker being in high school, I very much doubt it would make any sense to make it a dark movie. You'd portray how a high school kid would handle being Spider-Man. You'd show him swinging between buildings and shouting "Wohoo!" because he has freaking super powers. You show him deal with classmates and typical high school situations, which could have hilarious results.

What I believe is that the world around Peter will simply be less humorous. We probably won't have a Bugle that serves at nothing but comic relief, no Cookie girl, no Peter smiling like a doofus, walking down the street with cheesy music in the background, no evil dork if he should ever be influenced by the symbiote again. In short, they'll cut the Raimi cheese.

[Project862006]

raimi's comedy is what made it fun

[NinjaCarm]

True Spider-Man fans reaction to the reboot
http://www.silvamethodclass.com/Man_Jump_for_Joy.jpg

versus

The Raimi groupies
http://mimg.ugo.com/200709/2745/bigtrouble_screenshot.jpg

[NinjaCarm]

:dry:Yet are somehow fine having the same studio stay for this reboot who were fine being as accurate as they were throughout the whole trilogy. Which made them millions so what makes you think they are gonna change how accurate they were.

I couldn't be more happy that Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are gone. Thank you Sony for rebooting.

Where's the confusion?

[Nathan]

raimi's comedy is what made it fun

I prefer to laugh at Spidey's witty banter and not laugh about how goofy he looks or that he always looks like a deer caught in headlights when talking with Jonah. Tobey's Peter was a bland character living in a cheese filled world.

[JP]

"I think I know who's directing it, which is exciting and fun."
-Tobey at the Golden Globes

[Pac-Master]

"I think I know who's directing it, which is exciting and fun."
-Tobey at the Golden Globes

Was just about to post this. So apparently, they already have a director on board but haven't announced him/her yet.

[batman11]

Director Update:

Tobey was just interviewed on the red carpet for the Golden Globes, and he said that he knows the director that Sony wants to go with, and that "it's pretty exciting." Straight from his mouth.

[batman11]

LOL at the double posting from everyone. I bet well did the same thing -- mad rush to the Hype to type it. :woot:

[sauronthegreat]

I think some of you worry too much, when the Studio mentions TDK. Let's just look at the only fact we know so far. Spider-Man will be back in high school and will have a younger cast.

With Peter Parker being in high school, I very much doubt it would make any sense to make it a dark movie. You'd portray how a high school kid would handle being Spider-Man. You'd show him swinging between buildings and shouting "Wohoo!" because he has freaking super powers. You show him deal with classmates and typical high school situations, which could have hilarious results.

What I believe is that the world around Peter will simply be less humorous. We probably won't have a Bugle that serves at nothing but comic relief, no Cookie girl, no Peter smiling like a doofus, walking down the street with cheesy music in the background, no evil dork if he should ever be influenced by the symbiote again. In short, they'll cut the Raimi cheese.

Wouldn't that be a great setting for a change. A teenager granted with such power, dealing with school problems, but at the same time finding the true meaning of maturity and passing through all the horrors of urban life, and findning the courage to face the evils that threaten his city.

[BlackLantern]

wouldn't watch the Golden Globes if you paid me...**** NBC, **** 'em right in the ear

[Sawyer]

If Tobey's out... how would he know this info?

[BlackLantern]

he still has a relationship with Sony and Im sure he knows people on the decision side

[omid17]

Director Update:

Tobey was just interviewed on the red carpet for the Golden Globes, and he said that he knows the director that Sony wants to go with, and that "it's pretty exciting." Straight from his mouth.
:up:

[JustABill]

So will people shut up now that their precious Tobey has said that? I'm pretty sure he's not going to help Sony sell a movie he wouldn't get behind. ESPECIALLY since he's not the main star anymore.

[Deaths Head II]

Sounds promising.

A good director won't seal the deal for me (see X-Men Origins: Wolverine), but it will make me a bit more optimistic depending on who it is.

[JP]

So will people shut up now that their precious Tobey has said that? I'm pretty sure he's not going to help Sony sell a movie he wouldn't get behind. ESPECIALLY since he's not the main star anymore.
Sweet Jesus. :whatever:

[Batspider77]

Could be someone Tobey was working with in the past(maybe the Guy who did seabiscuit)?.......or a big Name like P.Jackson,Fincher,Spielberg....CAMERON:wow:

[PsiWolfe]

Thank goodness the Spiderman franchise should be rebooted. Sam Raimi's vision was awful. There were some good things , but overall the movies are garbage. Here's what ruined the spiderman movies.
1. Spiderman 1 - Macy Gray, pro New Yorkers throwing things at the green goblin, awful green goblin costume, Toby Maguire saying p*sy quotes, costume without webshooters , oh and did I mention a horrible green goblin costume ?
2. Spiderman 2- too much love drama. Way to much. Kirsten Dunst is annoying and Toby is a wimp.
3. Spiderman 3- the worst. Too much stuff going on, Peter Parker with eye shadow dancing on chairs, Venom got screwed by getting barely any screen time and got killed off , more love drame, sandman turning into king kong and again a sh** green goblin costume !!!

[NinjaCarm]

Thank goodness the Spiderman franchise should be rebooted. Sam Raimi's vision was awful. There were some good things , but overall the movies are garbage. Here's what ruined the spiderman movies.
1. Spiderman 1 - Macy Gray, pro New Yorkers throwing things at the green goblin, awful green goblin costume, Toby Maguire saying p*sy quotes, costume without webshooters , oh and did I mention a horrible green goblin costume ?
2. Spiderman 2- too much love drama. Way to much. Kirsten Dunst is annoying and Toby is a wimp.
3. Spiderman 3- the worst. Too much stuff going on, Peter Parker with eye shadow dancing on chairs, Venom got screwed by getting barely any screen time and got killed off , more love drame, sandman turning into king kong and again a sh** green goblin costume !!!

Very well said.

[VenomVsSpidey]

raimi's comedy is what made it fun

Agreed.

[sdc10]

Could be someone Tobey was working with in the past(maybe the Guy who did seabiscuit)?.......or a big Name like P.Jackson,Fincher,Spielberg....CAMERON:wow:

already confirmed that Cameron has no interest in it

[Project862006]

i bet it is the Seabiscuit director who was actually one of the writers for the now dead SM4 and is writing Venom and tobey worked with him on 2 films

[NinjaCarm]

I think some of you worry too much, when the Studio mentions TDK. Let's just look at the only fact we know so far. Spider-Man will be back in high school and will have a younger cast.

With Peter Parker being in high school, I very much doubt it would make any sense to make it a dark movie. You'd portray how a high school kid would handle being Spider-Man. You'd show him swinging between buildings and shouting "Wohoo!" because he has freaking super powers. You show him deal with classmates and typical high school situations, which could have hilarious results.

What I believe is that the world around Peter will simply be less humorous. We probably won't have a Bugle that serves at nothing but comic relief, no Cookie girl, no Peter smiling like a doofus, walking down the street with cheesy music in the background, no evil dork if he should ever be influenced by the symbiote again. In short, they'll cut the Raimi cheese.

Good post Nathan. That's what I've been saying as well. Everyone gets up in arms when they mention Dark Knight gritty and dark just support their own justification that their great Raimi is gone.

With him gone, the cheese and camp, are gone.

[Project862006]

and so goes the heart and spirit

[Project862006]

edit

[craigdbfan]

Director Update:

Tobey was just interviewed on the red carpet for the Golden Globes, and he said that he knows the director that Sony wants to go with, and that "it's pretty exciting." Straight from his mouth.


Great!

Keeping my finger crossed that Matthew Vaughn is picked.

On a side note, holy smokes does Helen Mirren look hot at the Golden Globes.

[NinjaCarm]

and so goes the heart and spirit

I'll take a gamble on that with the fact that there are plenty other directors out that there that convey "heart and spirit" into a film.:whatever:

[Gabe99]

From Screen Rant:
Marc Webb To Direct Spider-Man Reboot? [Updated] (http://screenrant.com/marc-webb-direct-spiderman-reboot-rob-41387/)

UPDATE:
A couple of days ago Drew McWeeny of HitFix reported that he spoke with Kick-Ass director Matthew Vaughn, who stated that he is “desperate” to direct a Spider-Man movie. While not on the short list above, we’ve gotten word that while there are higher-ups at Sony that want Webb for the reasons mentioned above, there is also a group who wants Vaughn for the reboot due to how well Kick-Ass has been testing and because that film also deals with teens. Remember that Marvel initially wanted Vaughn to direct Thor, so he’s already on their radar and they obviously have confidence in him already. We don’t know whether Webb or Vaughn will win out, but there would be no convincing required by Sony to get Vaughn to come on board – so Vaughn would be a slam dunk.

[Project862006]

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/01/17/exclusive-rumored-spider-man-director-marc-webb-loves-the-ultimate-stuff/

[TheComicbookKid]

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/01/17/exclusive-rumored-spider-man-director-marc-webb-loves-the-ultimate-stuff/


Lol.Did Webb name drop the Ultimate Spiderman?

[conan69]

"you want to say kirsten was ugly, fine.
but no one is going to tell me they had no chemistry. I'm sorry but that's bull****."

"I agree. The reason why I was OK with Dunst as MJ was because she and Maguire had chemistry. They looked like two people who would be a couple, and if MJ had been played by someone who looked like Megan Fox I would not have bought it. IMO it was more important to cast someone who had chemistry with Maguire than it was to cast someone who was "supermodel hot.""

No that doesnt matter.

All that matters is that MJ is hot. And Catwoman is hot. And Black Cat is hot. And Rogue is hot...... and so on. :rolleyes:


"We just want to see a truthful interpretation of charcaters we grew to love over all these years. Too bad for you if you are a fan and you're satisfied with Raimi's vision which is far from truthful."

Ok Ill repeat this for the 1000th time. Because people on these boards need to understand this. The interpretaion of these characters, which is decades old, will vary from person to person depending on when you read the comics. So... that means..... that the people who read the comics and watched the cartoon in 70s, and havent read anything in 20 years, might have a very different idea of Spiderman from the people who are reading the stupid braindead issues now or that juvenile Spectacular cartoon that seems like it was made for toddlers.

SM1 & 2 DO faithfully adapt the character I remember.

And for the record I dislike SM3 just about as much as anyone here.

[JustABill]

It's POSSIBLE to have both.

[Crook]

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/01/17/exclusive-rumored-spider-man-director-marc-webb-loves-the-ultimate-stuff/
Hrm, coupled with Tobey's comments and Webb's coy nature...it seems like he's the one that got the job. Anyone else get that feeling?

[conan69]

"It's POSSIBLY to have both."



Apparently not.

Because someone will always find something to complain about. Come here and tell everyone who has a difference of opinion that theyre not real fans or their memory of the character is the "way he should be" or some other crap.

Spidey doesnt joke enough (while fighting for his life BTW), MJ isnt hot enough, Johans moustaphe isnt the same as the comic,etc and the list goes on and on.

[JP]

I'm 90% sure it's Webb.

[omid17]

Hrm, coupled with Tobey's comments and Webb's coy nature...it seems like he's the one that got the job. Anyone else get that feeling?yup

[Spidey0]

Not sure if the rumors were mentioned here on SHH yet but I do not want Robert Pattinson to play Peter Parker.

http://news.google.com/news/story?q=spider-man&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ncl=dKgjj9RPezTkXGM&hl=en&ei=3gNUS9GgJIfMsQOu28T8Bw&sa=X&oi=news_result&ct=more-results&resnum=3&ved=0CBEQqgIwAg

[Venom 1988]

Yes and Sony already debunked the rumors.

[JustABill]

Yep. It's gotta be Marc Webb that's got the job.

[Spidey_62]

I'd be down for Webb directing. For one, his name fits perfect. :awesome:

[VenomVsSpidey]

And for the record I dislike SM3 just about as much as anyone here.

but..I love SM3.....

[Wolvieboy17]

Megan Fox for MJ :p

[Cuyan]

Didn't we just suffer through a talentless MJ?

[Wolvieboy17]

How about Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton then? :whatever:

[Ace of Knaves]

What you rolling your eyes for? You telling me you're gonna defend Dunst's performances? That's eye roll worthy.

[Wolvieboy17]

Yes I am, I thought she was great casting, because to me she summed up that type of character, the girl next door, the childhood sweet heart. It's meant to be all about unrequited love, not some supermodel with big tits for Spidey to go 'Cooooor' at.

I think Tobey and Kirsten are great actors, the fault was clearly in the writing, as they were given virtually nothing new or interesting to do. They didn't develop at all, so it got old fast.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well Dunst's heart was definitely not in it from the first one onwards. She felt the movies were beneath her. I dunno how you can defend that kind of attitude.

And no, MJ is super model material. Not "snaggle tooth" material. :funny:

[Wolvieboy17]

Well Dunst's heart was definitely not in it from the first one onwards. She felt the movies were beneath her. I dunno how you can defend that kind of attitude.
Did she tell you that in person?

Super Model material? right. You should right a book called "How to make superhero movies the 90's way".

[Ace of Knaves]

No.... that is MJ's actual job in the comics. She was a model and a tv star. That was a big thing about it, a geeky kid managing to snag a hot girl because of his personality.

But whatever, Dunst was crap in the role.

[The Chris]

Well Dunst's heart was definitely not in it from the first one onwards. She felt the movies were beneath her. I dunno how you can defend that kind of attitude.

And no, MJ is super model material. Not "snaggle tooth" material. :funny:

I love these movies, but I know I sure won't defend her. It's funny, because looking at her resume, the Spider-Man movies are her best movies,those and eternal sunshine and Interview with the Vampire. I don't like actors who think they're better than this kind of material, especially lately with Jason Patric saying "Let's face it, the geeks have inherited the world, and if you want to be a player in this system, you have to be willing to do some of this." when making the losers. Too many fine actors are making these movies and loving it, and believing in the material, I mean look who has been in these movies lately. Look who's making them. There's no excuse for that attitude. Not in this day and age.

[Ace of Knaves]

Exactly.

If guys like Gary ****ing Oldman can take this **** seriously, some little girl who won't get any other big roles should take it seriously.

[Wolvieboy17]

But where are you getting the idea that she thought she was better than those films? Did she actually say that, or are you just speculating based on her performance?

[Ace of Knaves]

No from interviews and that. She even basically called SM3 crap before it came out instead of promoting it.

It is obvious that she feels these movies are below her.

[Gabe99]

From Jim Hill Media:
Why For did Sony Pictures decide not to go forward with production of “Spider-Man 4” ? (http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2010/01/15/why-for-did-sony-pictures-decide-not-to-go-forward-with-production-of-spider-man-4.aspx)


Though -- from what I hear -- one of the main reasons that Sony moved so quickly to announce their reboot of this film franchise after Sam Raimi said that “Spider-Man 4” couldn’t possibly make its previously-locked-in May 5th, 2011 release date was this Studio’s very real fear that – if they dawdled – Disney’s lawyers might then find some loophole in Sony's original licensing agreement with Marvel that Mickey could then exploit. Which would then allow the Mouse House to reclaim the motion picture rights for this particular superhero from Sony / Columbia Pictures prematurely.

As a Sony Pictures insider explained this situation to me earlier this week:

For over 10 years now, we’ve had a good working relationship with Marvel. But now that the Mouse owns Marvel, no one’s entirely sure how aggressive The Walt Disney Company is going to be when it comes to regaining the rights to these characters. Which is why management here felt that it was crucial that this film franchise maintain forward momentum. So that Disney’s attorneys would have as few opportunities as possible to probe for weakness in our licensing agreement with Marvel.

Which is why – come the Summer of 2012 – Peter Parker is headed back to high school. This Spider-Man reboot will be written by James Vanderbilt (Who – oddly enough – was one of the first very writers that Sony Pictures hired to work with Sam Raimi on Spider-Man 4). As for who will direct & star in this 2012 tentpole … Studio officials promise that all of this information will be revealed in the coming months.

As expected, Disney’s attorneys will spend the next few years reviewing all of the licensing deals that Marvel Entertainment, Inc. has signed over the years. And – just as Sony officials feared – they will continually review these contracts, making sure that every single previously-agreed-upon term & condition is being met and/or honored. And if not … Well, you can bet that Mickey’s lawyers will then move at warp speed to sever these arrangements. Which would then allow control of the Marvel characters in question to revert back to The Walt Disney Company.

Long story short: This is going to be a long, involved process that will probably include a couple of lawsuits. But by 2017, Disney hopes to regain control of most if not all of Marvel Entertainment, Inc. characters. And that’s when the real fun (read that as “serious profit taking”) begins.

[Cuyan]

She even basically called SM3 crap before it came out instead of promoting it.
I did the same.

I am better than that film.

[Batspider77]

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/01/17/exclusive-rumored-spider-man-director-marc-webb-loves-the-ultimate-stuff/

I hope that dosen´t mean that we will get a Mutant Green Goblin....

[spider-neil]

I think I'd rather vaughan to webb. going by webb's past movies you may get movies that have a similar tone to raimi's movies i.e 'all about the girl'

[©KAW]

I"m glad Disney is going to be on Sony's ass, now, Sony will have to make the movies as much like the comics as possible. That could very well be the loophole they need. Creating a movie that isn't like the source material, reinventing the wheel, and misusing the Trademark/Copyrights Spider-Man.

GO GET' EM DISNEY!

That's Right In Disney I Trust!

[Wolvieboy17]

From Jim Hill Media:
Why For did Sony Pictures decide not to go forward with production of “Spider-Man 4” ? (http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2010/01/15/why-for-did-sony-pictures-decide-not-to-go-forward-with-production-of-spider-man-4.aspx)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Hill
Though -- from what I hear -- one of the main reasons that Sony moved so quickly to announce their reboot of this film franchise after Sam Raimi said that “Spider-Man 4” couldn’t possibly make its previously-locked-in May 5th, 2011 release date was this Studio’s very real fear that – if they dawdled – Disney’s lawyers might then find some loophole in Sony's original licensing agreement with Marvel that Mickey could then exploit. Which would then allow the Mouse House to reclaim the motion picture rights for this particular superhero from Sony / Columbia Pictures prematurely.

As a Sony Pictures insider explained this situation to me earlier this week:

Quote:
For over 10 years now, we’ve had a good working relationship with Marvel. But now that the Mouse owns Marvel, no one’s entirely sure how aggressive The Walt Disney Company is going to be when it comes to regaining the rights to these characters. Which is why management here felt that it was crucial that this film franchise maintain forward momentum. So that Disney’s attorneys would have as few opportunities as possible to probe for weakness in our licensing agreement with Marvel.
Which is why – come the Summer of 2012 – Peter Parker is headed back to high school. This Spider-Man reboot will be written by James Vanderbilt (Who – oddly enough – was one of the first very writers that Sony Pictures hired to work with Sam Raimi on Spider-Man 4). As for who will direct & star in this 2012 tentpole … Studio officials promise that all of this information will be revealed in the coming months.

As expected, Disney’s attorneys will spend the next few years reviewing all of the licensing deals that Marvel Entertainment, Inc. has signed over the years. And – just as Sony officials feared – they will continually review these contracts, making sure that every single previously-agreed-upon term & condition is being met and/or honored. And if not … Well, you can bet that Mickey’s lawyers will then move at warp speed to sever these arrangements. Which would then allow control of the Marvel characters in question to revert back to The Walt Disney Company.

Long story short: This is going to be a long, involved process that will probably include a couple of lawsuits. But by 2017, Disney hopes to regain control of most if not all of Marvel Entertainment, Inc. characters. And that’s when the real fun (read that as “serious profit taking”) begins.


So that means instead of a crappy sony reboot, we could have had a proper Marvel owned reboot? Laaaaaaaaaame.

I'm gonna try and not pay too much attention to this film, because if Marvel does end up reclaiming the rights, they're only gonna reboot it again to keep it inline with the other properties...

If sony was really smart, they'd strike some kind of deal with Disney, so they could line Spidey up with the other Marvel movies... What marvel has done with IM, Hulk, Thor etc is so smart, both creatively and commercially... They've essentially created one massive, Marvel franchise snowball that's just gonna get bigger as they add more characters.

[El Payaso]

raimi's comedy is what made it fun

Raimi's... what? All those pointless unfunny "jokes" were anything but comedy. Comedy works when it's good only. If anything, Raimi's action made it fun.

With him gone, the cheese and camp, are gone.

This alone makes me happy for that ruined big part of the fun for me.

I love these movies, but I know I sure won't defend her. It's funny, because looking at her resume, the Spider-Man movies are her best movies,those and eternal sunshine and Interview with the Vampire. I don't like actors who think they're better than this kind of material, especially lately with Jason Patric saying "Let's face it, the geeks have inherited the world, and if you want to be a player in this system, you have to be willing to do some of this." when making the losers. Too many fine actors are making these movies and loving it, and believing in the material, I mean look who has been in these movies lately. Look who's making them. There's no excuse for that attitude. Not in this day and age.

This is why I'll always defend Ledger's job as the Joker but I won't forget how he said that he didn't like superhero movies and Nolan was the only reason why he accepted the role.

[spider-neil]

This is why I'll always defend Ledger's job as the Joker but I won't forget how he said that he didn't like superhero movies and Nolan was the only reason why he accepted the role.


this is isn't directed at you el payaso but it ****'s me off when there is a snooty attitude to the superhero genre, 'oh, TDK transends the SH genre' as if the superhero genre NEEDS to be transended. **** that I LIKE, larger than life characters, I LIKE bright colours, I LIKE moustache twirling villians. I loved the heck out of the SM movies because they EMBRACE the genre they don't try and distance themselves from it.

[Wolvieboy17]

I think SM needs a really strong character director. Gritty and realistic is not the right direction.

[Ace of Knaves]

this is isn't directed at you el payaso but it ****'s me off when there is a snooty attitude to the superhero genre, 'oh, TDK transends the SH genre' as if the superhero genre NEEDS to be transended. **** that I LIKE, larger than life characters, I LIKE bright colours, I LIKE moustache twirling villians. I loved the heck out of the SM movies because they EMBRACE the genre they don't they and distance themselves from it.

He isn't talking about that.

He is saying that Ledger and the rest of the cast took the super hero genre seriously. They didn't think a movie about a guy in a ridiculous costume was beneath them.

And a nobody like Dunst didn't take it seriously and thought it was beneath her.

[Wolvieboy17]

Well Ledger wouldn't have taken Spidey as seriously as he did TDK anyway... they're two very different things...

I loved the heck out of the SM movies because they EMBRACE the genre they don't try and distance themselves from it.

Yeah, thats what worked about them. Raimi was great with that kind of vibe, and corniness of Spider-man. Thats why I think they shouldn't have used Venom. Raimi was better with characters like doc ock, or vulture or rhino, rather than a darker, more serious villain. To me, spider-man should be the opposite of Batman, tonewise.

[El Payaso]

I was talking about Ledger - and only him - despising the genre.

I can't care anyless if TDK transcended anything. I'm just saying that Ledger, before even trying the genre, was despising it.

[spider-neil]

seriously if SM tries to copy the dark and gritty nature of TDK that will be a crying shame and in a small way it will be 'selling out'.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well Ledger wouldn't have taken Spidey as seriously as he did TDK anyway... they're two very different things...



Yeah, thats what worked about them. Raimi was great with that kind of vibe, and corniness of Spider-man. Thats why I think they shouldn't have used Venom. Raimi was better with characters like doc ock, or vulture or rhino, rather than a darker, more serious villain. To me, spider-man should be the opposite of Batman, tonewise.

No it shouldn't.

Spidey himself is lighthearted and a wise cracker. But the world he is in isn't cheesy, corny crap.

I take you have never read the likes of Kravens Last Hunt or Death of Gwen Stacey then.

Even the current storyline right now "The Gauntlet" isn't cheesy or corny. It's very grown up. The story with Electro was even about the economy problems.

[Golgo-13]

;17959699']is that Gianna Michaels..? (in one of the frames) I think it is :oldrazz:

Yep, that's her.

[Ipodman]

I would love a Ultimate version of Live action Spider-Man...

[Chris Wallace]

As far as this talk about going "dark" is concerned, I could live with -MAYBE-the villains being darker. But I really hope these people don't forget that Spider-Man is not Batman.

[Chris Wallace]

As far as this talk about going "dark" is concerned, I could live with -MAYBE-the villains being darker. But I really hope these people don't forget that Spider-Man is not Batman.

[spider-neil]

As far as this talk about going "dark" is concerned, I could live with -MAYBE-the villains being darker. But I really hope these people don't forget that Spider-Man is not Batman.

I'm been in arguements where people have said TDK is better than SM because is dark and gritty and realistic. that's not better, that's different. do I think TDK is better than SM2, yes, but not because it is dark and gritty. dark and gritty doesn't work for spidey (although there have been dark and gritty plotlines) any more than bright and colourful works for batman (although there have been bright and colourful plotlines).

[Chris Wallace]

See, I actually enjoy Spidey 1, 2 and even 3 more than TDK. Not that I'm knocking the latter, but it wasn't as much fun for me as the Spider-Man movies. And it's true-Spidey may have had a dark plotline here & there but those moments are not what define the character, any more than (contrary to popular belief) the bright, goofy moments in Batman's career define him.

[BlackLantern]

Spider-Man is supposed to be fun, I think that's a core element...TDK is an emotional film, but it ain't fun

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea but the fun comes from the actual Spider-Man character. Not necessarily the stories and certainly not the villains. Well, the good villains anyway.

I've been reading The Gauntlet and it's brilliant. The first part was against Electro where he whips the people of New York into a frenzy about the economic troubles and millionaires getting bailouts and that.

The second story was about Sandman where he kidnaps a girl who is a fan of him and treats her like his daughter. He doesn't intend to harm her, he treats her like a princess. But Spidey rescues her with the intention of giving her back to her Grandmother but when Spidey brings her back she gets taken into foster care because the Grandmother isn't fit enough to look after her.

See these are real grown up stories with real emotional and topical themes. But because Spidey is a fun character they are still fun stories.

Raimi's stories were just about the girl all the time.

[JustABill]

I think there was more to that Sandman story honestly. I think she was actually his daughter and we'll come to find it out later.

I liked the new Rhino issue. Maybe just because of the development revolving around the old Rhino and how he's fallen in love.

[Crook]

I love these movies, but I know I sure won't defend her. It's funny, because looking at her resume, the Spider-Man movies are her best movies,those and eternal sunshine and Interview with the Vampire. I don't like actors who think they're better than this kind of material, especially lately with Jason Patric saying "Let's face it, the geeks have inherited the world, and if you want to be a player in this system, you have to be willing to do some of this." when making the losers. Too many fine actors are making these movies and loving it, and believing in the material, I mean look who has been in these movies lately. Look who's making them. There's no excuse for that attitude. Not in this day and age.
Link? There's some merit in these type of statements since most of the genre is substandard, but this dude doesn't even have clout to be talking about quality. :funny:

[Ace of Knaves]

Really? I dunno bout that.

But yea even the Rhino issues were great. Showing him turning over a new leaf and falling in love. Great characterization for him.

But it was still a fun Spidey story. But it definitely wasn't corny or kiddified.

[Wolvieboy17]

No it shouldn't.

Spidey himself is lighthearted and a wise cracker. But the world he is in isn't cheesy, corny crap.

I take you have never read the likes of Kravens Last Hunt or Death of Gwen Stacey then.

Even the current storyline right now "The Gauntlet" isn't cheesy or corny. It's very grown up. The story with Electro was even about the economy problems.

Yes, I have read them Ace, and to be honest, you're constant assumptions are starting to irritate me.

I never suggested we indulge in cheesy, corny, crap. Obviously, I would want there to be depth to it. But the main essence of the Spidey comics is an innate sense of fun, which is very different to the Batman comics, which has a much darker, psychological tone, in exploring Bruce Waynes motivations and fears and whatnot. Gritty and real shouldn't be applied to to Spidey. Especially considering this one will be set in high school. If they try to make it too seriously, it will just come off as teen angst, as another high school drama ala Twilight, rather than the fun adventure it should be.

Think of Deadpool. I know you're a massive fan Ace, as am I. The comics get pretty dark, especially with Wade's past, and when it comes to his morality, and there is plenty of quality and depth to the stories, as far as Wade trying to be the good guy, and struggling with that, but at the heart of it, its fun. Thats what makes Deadpool work so well. Deadpool and Spidey are very similar, as far as tone goes.

EDIT: After I finished writing and posting this, I notice you addressed similar issues, so disregard the talk of fun. I agree about more adult themes story wise, but again, thats more of a script issue than a directorial issue.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yes, I have read them Ace, and to be honest, you're constant assumptions are starting to irritate me.

I never suggested we indulge in cheesy, corny, crap. Obviously, I would want there to be depth to it. But the main essence of the Spidey comics is an innate sense of fun, which is very different to the Batman comics, which has a much darker, psychological tone, in exploring Bruce Waynes motivations and fears and whatnot. Gritty and real shouldn't be applied to to Spidey. Especially considering this one will be set in high school. If they try to make it too seriously, it will just come off as teen angst, as another high school drama ala Twilight, rather than the fun adventure it should be.

Think of Deadpool. I know you're a massive fan Ace, as am I. The comics get pretty dark, especially with Wade's past, and when it comes to his morality, and there is plenty of quality and depth to the stories, as far as Wade trying to be the good guy, and struggling with that, but at the heart of it, its fun. Thats what makes Deadpool work so well. Deadpool and Spidey are very similar, as far as tone goes.

Well I apologize.

And you are right.

What I'm saying is, the Spidey stories don't always just have to be about a ****ing girl. You know what I'm saying?

So many people hate BND. And I agree with the hate, to an extent.

But the Spidey comics now can be more free. He isn't shackled to MJ anymore. They can just be great stories about Spidey and his villains without having to fall into relationship melodrama.

That is what I wanted with SM4 and it was clear we weren't gonna get it. So I hope the new movies don't just become "stories about a girl" again.

[JustABill]

I'd much rather see Deadpool as a fun gritty, edgy dark comedy piece that's rated R. That's a tone you can't do with Spidey. Tone wise IMO they are very different even though they are both notorious funny guys.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea well with Deadpool it is more "insane", violent and more morbid kind of humour. I mean the guys a schizo cancer sufferer at the end of the day.

But I get what he is saying. Both DP and Spidey are mainly known for their humour. But that doesn't mean they are necessarily just for kids or are involved in light hearted stories.

[NinjaCarm]

All this talk about not wanting Spider-Man dark. I don't want that either, but I do not want anymore CAMP and CHEESE. Yes, having Marc Webb supposdly would bring in a good character actor and yes we need that, I want genuine acting for a change.

But I also want some URGENCY, some real life urgency, lives at stake, villains that are extreme threats when they are on screen you don't think "good bad guys".

The Joker was so great in TDK because he was unpredictable. The audience wasn't sitting there saying "oh I know what he's going to do next" in this predictable good buy vs bad guy scene.

I want gritty, real life situations when it comes to the fights and people involved. And I want real non-wooden acting with actual humorous moments as opposed to contrived ones.

[BlackLantern]

Yea but the fun comes from the actual Spider-Man character. Not necessarily the stories and certainly not the villains. Well, the good villains anyway.

I've been reading The Gauntlet and it's brilliant. The first part was against Electro where he whips the people of New York into a frenzy about the economic troubles and millionaires getting bailouts and that.

The second story was about Sandman where he kidnaps a girl who is a fan of him and treats her like his daughter. He doesn't intend to harm her, he treats her like a princess. But Spidey rescues her with the intention of giving her back to her Grandmother but when Spidey brings her back she gets taken into foster care because the Grandmother isn't fit enough to look after her.

See these are real grown up stories with real emotional and topical themes. But because Spidey is a fun character they are still fun stories.

Raimi's stories were just about the girl all the time.

Ive liked the Gauntlet a lot more than I expected to....too bad the art is ****

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea the art is a bit inconsistent. But I liked it in the Sandman story and the new Rhino story has some pretty cool art.

I HATE the way Spidey was drawn in the Electro story though.

[BlackLantern]

the chinky eyes...I ****ing hate that....

[Eggyman]

It shouldn't be all one way or the other as far as I can see. Spidey should be a fun character, and the world around him should be as real and as serious as possible. Terrible things happen in the world Spidey inhabits, and he deals with it using humour. The Spidey world is based on reality but with fictional wonders added on. We believe this reality we are presented with because of the real-to-life foundations it is built on. Verismilitude, I believe, is the word.

[Ace of Knaves]

Spot on Eggy.

Spideys world definitely isn't all fun and games. It's the way Spidey deals with the things his world throws at him that makes it fun.

[JustABill]

As Peter Parker his love life should be a disaster he's trying to hold together by a thread, same with his friendships, he has to worry about Aunt May, her health, her hardships trying to keep them afloat, and while on top of that he has worry about other common ever day things most people do, a job, and since he'll be in high school here, his grades and homework.

As Spider-Man he faces down danger every night in the form of common crooks and thugs, and he also faces dangerous supervillains, some psychopaths, others with limitless power, and some both! The world around him should be dangerous, scary, and realistic, but he should cope with it all with his humor. Otherwise Peter Parker/Spider-Man would break down on a maximum level.

[NinjaCarm]

As Peter Parker his love life should be a disaster he's trying to hold together by a thread, same with his friendships, he has to worry about Aunt May, her health, her hardships trying to keep them afloat, and while on top of that he has worry about other common ever day things most people do, a job, and since he'll be in high school here, his grades and homework.

As Spider-Man he faces down danger every night in the form of common crooks and thugs, and he also faces dangerous supervillains, some psychopaths, others with limitless power, and some both! The world around him should be dangerous, scary, and realistic, but he should cope with it all with his humor. Otherwise Peter Parker/Spider-Man would break down on a maximum level.

The humor, something I hope James Vanderbuilt understands since he wrote the script. I can only imagine what the script entails. He have better had nailed it.

Also, yes JustABill, Logan Lerman for Spider-Man.

[HughJackFan420]

this time around they should buy out the rights to Daredevil and Kingpin. they should continue with the Daredevil reboot but Sony should take the rights to that and make a killer Daredevil movie and leave a cliffhanger teaming up with Spider-Man to take on the Kingpin. but at this point no one has even talked about starting on production for a Daredevil movie so they should do the Spidey reboot with a Daredevil cameo or fight side by side with Spidey in later installment. the first Spidey flick would be too early to bring DD in it. also no green Power Ranger Green Goblin i would love for them to use a latex mask to represent the comic like version of the Green Goblin. and if they do use Venom they need to make him Hulk as far as size goes. u know they used CGI for Venom in Spider-Man 3 don't understand why they couldn't have made him significantly bigger

[conan69]

"No.... that is MJ's actual job in the comics. She was a model and a tv star."

You mean.... like Kirsten is?

Great logic there pal.

Looks are subjective. For 10 years everyone has been telling me how fugly Anna Paquin is, now all of a sudden she's blonde, wears tight clothes on a tv show and has shown some skin... and suddenly "she's hot".

[spider-neil]

personally I love when cheese is done 'right'

SM2 - walking down the street, raindrops keep falling. the weight of the world has been lifted from peter's shoulders. frankly I thought it was a WONDERFUL montage.

SM3 - walking down the street point at women. oh sam why? WHY?!! :doh:

I still blame sony for that.
a) no venom
b) no symbiote
c) no black costume
d) no dancing down the street

sure it was idiotic for sam to make pete do that but if there was no venom he WOULDN'T have been able to do that.

[NinjaCarm]

Personally, I hate the cheese. It dilutes credibility. And I, for one thing, want credibility and genuiness with this new film.

And no, not to where it drowns out the fun. You don't need cheese and camp for that.

[spider-neil]

Personally, I hate the cheese. It dilutes credibility. And I, for one thing, want credibility and genuiness with this new film.

And no, not to where it drowns out the fun. You don't need cheese and camp for that.

well SM2 is my second favorite superhero movie, so obviously I don't mind cheese so much but there was too much cheese in SM3

[Doctor Jones]

There was always cheese in he 60's comics though.

Again Spider-Man defeating Sandman using a freaking vacuum cleaner doesn't get anymore cheesy.

[NinjaCarm]

What no one talks about on here is why certain people want this reboot is because there are two kinds of people in this life:

1. Those that simply settle

and

2. Those who strive and don't

The Raimi films, as evident by lazy let's satisy the audiences and stay safe with simply Mary Jane centric plots, i.e. the man chasing the girl, is all he can think about?

And let's not forget the villains always being connected to Peter. If that's not some of the laziest crap I ever heard I don't know what else is. Simply lazy and again, let's satisy the stupid audience so we can sell toys to the dumb kids.

This is why I hate Raimi. For a guy who goes on his pedastal screaming I love Spider-Man and know Spider-Man, what a way to not incorporate all of the myhthos and characters and complexity of it all.

You see why Chris Nolan was successfull? Because he doesn't settle. He doesn't settle for medicority.

People are starving for so much more for Spider-Man because they feel they were robbed with nothing more than a polished simple paint by numbers chase the ONE girl plot.

[Ace of Knaves]

There was always cheese in he 60's comics though.

Again Spider-Man defeating Sandman using a freaking vacuum cleaner doesn't get anymore cheesy.

You don't get cheesier than the Batman comics from the 60s.

Doesn't mean I wanna see a cheesy Batman.

[sauronthegreat]

What no one talks about on here is why certain people want this reboot is because there are two kinds of people in this life:

1. Those that simply settle

and

2. Those who strive and don't

The Raimi films, as evident by lazy let's satisy the audiences and stay safe with simply Mary Jane centric plots, i.e. the man chasing the girl, is all he can think about?

And let's not forget the villains always being connected to Peter. If that's not some of the laziest crap I ever heard I don't know what else is. Simply lazy and again, let's satisy the stupid audience so we can sell toys to the dumb kids.

This is why I hate Raimi. For a guy who goes on his pedastal screaming I love Spider-Man and know Spider-Man, what a way to not incorporate all of the myhthos and characters and complexity of it all.

You see why Chris Nolan was successfull? Because he doesn't settle. He doesn't settle for medicority.

People are starving for so much more for Spider-Man because they feel they were robbed with nothing more than a polished simple paint by numbers chase the ONE girl plot.

Couldn't agree more :up:

[Doctor Jones]

You don't get cheesier than the Batman comics from the 60s.

Doesn't mean I wanna see a cheesy Batman.

That is true, but to be fair, in terms of it's own nature, Spider-Man and Peter has had cheese from the beginning when Lee wrote them. That's apart of the comics. I'm not saying you have to love them, but the cheese worked in Raimi's films because Peter is a dorky guy, he's always been. Cheese comes from that humor. The whole Raindrops montage in SM2 was perfect. So many bad things have happened to him, and now he can be himself and the whole song fits into Peter's geeky and dorky ways. Him tripping and then walking like a dweeb fit the song.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I thought the raindrops montage was pretty charming.

And that's another reason why I HATE the stupid dancing montage in SM3. It was just a straight up rehash of the Raindrops montage.

[conan69]

When saw that in the theater,when Tobey tripped during that montage, my G/F (whos never read a spiderman comic book in her life) laughed and said "what a geek/dork" or something like that.

I agree with you, that worked.

I can understand people not liking Tobey, thats fine. I dont like R Downeys portrayal of Tony Stark. I think he sucks in the part.

I just disagree. I thought Tobey did a great job in SM1&2.

[Ace of Knaves]

You don't like RDJ as Stark? Why?

You do realize Stark is supposed to be a douche right? All RDJ has done is make him more charismatic. Because honestly, comic book Stark is a stiff, he's boring.

[Deaths Head II]

You don't get cheesier than the Batman comics from the 60s.

Doesn't mean I wanna see a cheesy Batman.

Batman didn't start in the 1960s. He started decades prior as a way darker character. And even by the 60s the comics were trying to bring the character back to his darker roots.

Spidey having cheese is going back to his roots. Batman having cheese is straying from the roots.

[conan69]

But by your logic, and the way youve been complaining about Raimis take, if Stark is a stiff in the books, in order to make a FAITHFUL adaptation, he should be a stiff in the movies no?

That is his character.

If you change it, hes no longer Tony Stark, he becomes someone else. ;)



Lets have some consistency please.

[Ace of Knaves]

What?

I've never expected 100% faithful comic adaptations. Because you'll NEVER get that.

Movie Stark is a more charismatic character because if they transferred comic Stark into a movie he wouldn't be as appealing to non comic book fans, simple as that.

I don't complain about Raimi's take because it isn't 100% comic book accurate. I complain about it because some of the decisions he has made are ****ing stupid.

When you make changes from the comics to movies they should be GOOD changes. Not crap changes.

[Spider-ManHero12]

And that's another reason why I HATE the stupid dancing montage in SM3. It was just a straight up rehash of the Raindrops montage. How was it a rehash? It was to show how the Symbiote has changed Peter.

[Project862006]

plenty of the spidey cartoons are very cheesy and comedic especially the ones out now

and i agree ace you keep making assumptions and push them over as facts when they are not

[Ace of Knaves]

What assumptions as facts?

[Ace of Knaves]

How was it a rehash? It was to show how the Symbiote has changed Peter.

How wasn't it?

They couldn't show the symbiote effecting Peter another way? Say... beating the crap out of a purse snatcher or something?

No... they had to do ANOTHER musical montage which was ****ing cringe worthy.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Didn't Peter dance like twice in Spider-Man 3? Followed by MJ and Harry dancing in the kitchen...Hell, that film was kinda like a musical if you think about it.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea and it was pathetic.

There is a difference between natural humour and forced cheese. SM3 was chock full of forced cheese.

[Eggyman]

How wasn't it?

They couldn't show the symbiote effecting Peter another way? Say... beating the crap out of a purse snatcher or something?

No... they had to do ANOTHER musical montage which was ****ing cringe worthy.

I'm with you on this. We get a a split second shot of Spidey being a bastard - in photos, no less - and get dance numbers rammed down our throats. Why couldn't we have 5 minutes of Spidey beating the sh** out of people and a split second photograph shot of him dancing on a rooftop?!

It was completely arse backwards.

[Lunar_Wolf]

The bad thing about this cheese was, it was mixed with very serious moments, which didn't mash together at all. The cheese was so over the top. I liked parts where Peter was sitting in JJJ seat and was sucking the sweat. That I didn't mind, but the ****ed up dancing outside the clothes store...Yikes!

[Deaths Head II]

I still find it funny that they had a completely dark scene right after the Jazz dance sequence.

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm with you on this. We get a a split second shot of Spidey being a bastard - in photos, no less - and get dance numbers rammed down our throats. Why couldn't we have 5 minutes of Spidey beating the sh** out of people and a split second photograph shot of him dancing on a rooftop?!

It was completely arse backwards.

Exactly.

I've been saying this for ages, but we should of had a scene where Spidey goes ape **** on a petty criminal, like a purse snatcher or something, not just supervillains. Show that he is actually changing.

But no... just some cheesy dancing that makes him look like a nob head rather than makes him look more aggressive and reckless.

The bad thing about this cheese was, it was mixed with very serious moments, which didn't mash together at all. The cheese was so over the top. I liked parts where Peter was sitting in JJJ seat and was sucking the sweat. That I didn't mind, but the ****ed up dancing outside the clothes store...Yikes!

Yea I agree. The part where he was giving it the biggun to JJ was great! But then yea... more cheesy dancing.

[Lunar_Wolf]

I still find it funny that they had a completely dark scene right after the Jazz dance sequence.

What came after the jazz scene?


One moment in that film I'll never forget....It's where we see Venom crawling along the wall stalking Sandman and Sandman thinks it's Spider-man and grabs him. Venom screams and Sandman flings him back off the wall and walks away and just shrugs what he just saw off:doh:

Sandmans reaction should of been '''The hell is that thing?''

[Project862006]

if Webb gets to direct i think it is too big of a gamble to hand over a reboot franchise of SM to a guy with 1 film under his belt that is nothing like Spiderman

[Deaths Head II]

What came after the jazz scene?

Peter beating up a bunch of jazz club guards and then hurting Mary Jane.


One moment in that film I'll never forget....It's where we see Venom crawling along the wall stalking Sandman and Sandman thinks it's Spider-man and grabs him. Venom screams and Sandman flings him back off the wall and walks away and just shrugs what he just saw off:doh:

Sandmans reaction should of been '''The hell is that thing?''I agree. It was just like "Hey, it's Spider-Man! I've been waiting for this--Oh wait, never mind. Just a guy who looks Spider-Man with a giant monster mouth. See you later."

I wonder why everyone immediately assumed Venom wasn't Spidey either. He could have easily been Spider-Man mutated or something. That's more plausible then a guy who has the exact same powers but just happens to look uglier.

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed. I thought the dancing was funny, but it should not have been in a SM film. I think it was just Rami trying to do soemthing that appealed to him in a concept he didn't like (the whole symbiote plot) so the dancing thing wasn't the best choice.

And yeah, beating the **** out of a purse snatcher could have been a great scene. Tobey can pull that off. I thought the subway scene was pretty good, showing off his thirst for revenge. Though the subway action scene was ****ing short! I thought it was going to be this intricate scene but it was like two minutes.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Peter beating up a bunch of jazz club guards and then hurting Mary Jane.


I agree. It was just like "Hey, it's Spider-Man! I've been waiting for this--Oh wait, never mind. Just a guy who looks Spider-Man with a giant monster mouth. See you later."

I was like ''HIT HER AGAIN'':awesome:

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed. I thought the dancing was funny, but it should not have been in a SM film. I think it was just Rami trying to do soemthing that appealed to him in a concept he didn't like (the whole symbiote plot) so the dancing thing wasn't the best choice.

And yeah, beating the **** out of a purse snatcher could have been a great scene. Tobey can pull that off. I thought the subway scene was pretty good, showing off his thirst for revenge. Though the subway action scene was ****ing short! I thought it was going to be this intricate scene but it was like two minutes.

[JustABill]

if Webb gets to direct i think it is too big of a gamble to hand over a reboot franchise of SM to a guy with 1 film under his belt that is nothing like Spiderman
Raimi's films were nothing like Spider-Man before this and he gave us two good films. So wrong, try again.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Agreed. I thought the dancing was funny, but it should not have been in a SM film. I think it was just Rami trying to do soemthing that appealed to him in a concept he didn't like (the whole symbiote plot) so the dancing thing wasn't the best choice.

And yeah, beating the **** out of a purse snatcher could have been a great scene. Tobey can pull that off. I thought the subway scene was pretty good, showing off his thirst for revenge. Though the subway action scene was ****ing short! I thought it was going to be this intricate scene but it was like two minutes.

Yeah, I liked that scene, also when he broke Brock's camera. When Spider-Man was dark and silent, it was good.

[Project862006]

Raimi's films were nothing like Spider-Man before this and he gave us two good films. So wrong, try again.

sorry did 500 days of summer have action and cgi like raimi's previous films :dry:

the last director we had who was strictly indie and was highly touted with no action or cgi background was Gavin Hood how did that turn out

[Ace of Knaves]

sorry did 500 days of summer have action and cgi like raimi's previous films
:dry:

No but what it did have was great characterization for young characters. And a great coming of age tale that didn't descend into sappy melodrama.

[Deaths Head II]

Yeah, I liked that scene, also when he broke Brock's camera. When Spider-Man was dark and silent, it was good.

I think even Tobey's angry acting under the mask was good in the subway scene though.

"Remember Ben Parker?"

"What does it matter to you anyway?"

"EVERYTHING!"

and

"Good riddance."

[Project862006]

No but what it did have was great characterization for young characters. And a great coming of age tale that didn't descend into sappy melodrama.

so the answer is no he has no cgi or action background

most people complaints was there was too much romance

thank you

[JustABill]

sorry did 500 days of summer have action and cgi like raimi's previous films :dry:

the last director we had who was strictly indie and was highly touted with no action or cgi background was Gavin Hood how did that turn out
Singer's films didn't have action and CGI in them before X-Men and X2. Those are good movies as well. Try again.

[Project862006]

Singer's films didn't have action and CGI in them before X-Men and X2. Those are good movies as well. Try again.

singer was a phenomenal director before x men 500 days of summer is just a romance love story try again.

it is so funny that you defend this guys resume and are so damn confident that he is gonna impress

singer and raimi had more than 1 film under there belt btw

oh btw x men films did'nt have alot of cgi anyway

[JustABill]

Marc Webb must have done something right as he's a shoe in for a nomination for Best Director. Bad director's just don't get those nominations you know?

Try again.

Also did you watch the same X-Men films? There was alot of CGI and sfx involved in those films.

[Ace of Knaves]

singer was a phenomenal director before x men 500 days of summer is just a romance love story try again.

it is so funny that you defend this guys resume and are so damn confident that he is gonna impress

singer and raimi had more than 1 film under there belt btw

oh btw x men films did'nt have alot of cgi anyway

Seriously man, you haven't got a ****ing clue.

500 Days of Summer is critically acclaimed by pretty much EVERYBODY worth paying attention to. It isn't just some romance love story. It's a coming of age story where it's young characters are treated seriously and the dialogue and plot doesn't turn into cheesy soap opera melodrama.

And there is a lot of talk about Webb getting a Oscar nod.

[Project862006]

Also i am just dying to know your answer to this

What makes you so damn confident in Marc Webb with 1 Comedy/romance film under his belt and cont compare him to Raimi or Singer .Sorry Darkman/Evil Dead Trilogy/Usual Suspects/apt pupil/ trump 500 days of summer any day of the week.So what makes you so confident in a guy with 1 romance film under his belt to helm an epic aaction/adventure/fantasy/franchise like SM?

[Project862006]

Seriously man, you haven't got a ****ing clue.

500 Days of Summer is critically acclaimed by pretty much EVERYBODY worth paying attention to. It isn't just some romance love story. It's a coming of age story where it's young characters are treated seriously and the dialogue and plot doesn't turn into cheesy soap opera melodrama.

And there is a lot of talk about Webb getting a Oscar nod.


critically acclaimed really ?

Gavin hood won an Oscar for Tsosi but look how Wolverine turned out:whatever:

[JustABill]

Because 500 Days of Summer was a master-stroke work into the minds of young people. The film features a teenage Spider-Man. If any man can work with young people right now and get great performances out of them like he did JGL and Deschanel in 500 Days of Summer, then it's Webb.

The man for christ sakes is this close to an Oscar Nom something neither Singer nor Raimi has had before.

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea but Wolverine was micromanaged by Fox execs. Gavin Hood didn't get to make the movie he wanted to make, and the script was the main fault with Wolverine, not the directing. And no, Sony are not as bad as Fox.

But anyway, my top choice is Vaughn.

[JustABill]

critically acclaimed really ?

Gavin hood won an Oscar for Tsosi but look how Wolverine turned out:whatever:
Wolverine was at Fox under the thrall of the notorious Tom Rothman. Tom's stank was all over that film.

[conan69]

"It isn't just some romance love story. It's a coming of age story where it's young characters are treated seriously and the dialogue and plot doesn't turn into cheesy soap opera melodrama."

You should go onto the imdb boards and see how many people have issues with some of his dialogue, mostly...

" Hi Im Autumn"
...which some are calling possibly the worst ending dialogue in film history.

And as annoying as Mary Jane was in SM2, she doesnt come close to Webbs Summer (But I really did enjoy the movie. ALOT.)

[Project862006]

Vaughn is my top choice too see i am not trying to argue i just don't understand how people can be so damn confident in Webb to deliver a franchise as good if better Than Sam's when Sam had a wealth of experiance before Spiderman.

Not say Webb is a bad director i bet 500 days of summer is a fantastic film

[Lunar_Wolf]

Also i am just dying to know your answer to this

What makes you so damn confident in Marc Webb with 1 Comedy/romance film under his belt and cont compare him to Raimi or Singer .Sorry Darkman/Evil Dead Trilogy/Usual Suspects/apt pupil/ trump 500 days of summer any day of the week.So what makes you so confident in a guy with 1 romance film under his belt to helm an epic aaction/adventure/fantasy/franchise like SM?

Being the right director for Spider-Man doesn't mean you have to have a whole list of films under your belt like Raimi and Singer. Being the right director takes more than directing action. The guy has shown he can direct with 500 days, which was a great film. Webb also has tons of music videos under his belt which gives him the experience.

[JustABill]

All of his music videos are also brilliantly direct vibrant pieces of work. Not Brett Ratner style Jessica Simpson/Mariah Carey videos. Actually really nicely shot music videos.

[conan69]

Double. Damn this forum is SLOW

[Blackman]

[QUOTE=conan69;17962302]"It isn't just some romance love story. It's a coming of age story where it's young characters are treated seriously and the dialogue and plot doesn't turn into cheesy soap opera melodrama."

You should go onto the imdb boards and see how many people have issues with some of his dialogue, mostly...

" Hi Im Autumn"
...which some are calling possibly the worst ending dialogue in film history./QUOTE]
To be fair IMDB is just a bunch of pretentious wanna be film makers/critics

[BlackLantern]

Also i am just dying to know your answer to this

What makes you so damn confident in Marc Webb with 1 Comedy/romance film under his belt and cont compare him to Raimi or Singer .Sorry Darkman/Evil Dead Trilogy/Usual Suspects/apt pupil/ trump 500 days of summer any day of the week.So what makes you so confident in a guy with 1 romance film under his belt to helm an epic aaction/adventure/fantasy/franchise like SM?

well Peter Jackson hadn't directed much of anything (The Frighteners was the most expensive movie he had directed) prior to Lord of the Rings and he managed just fine

[conan69]

By the way, has anyone else picked up on that the guy everyone wants to reboot Spiderman had a dance number in his film

I hated the one in SM3 and liked the one in 500 Days of Summer. Just pointing out the irony;)

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea but I bet it wasn't random and pointless like the one in SM3.

And as for being a music video director? Err... David Fincher started out as a music video director. Nuff said.

[Blackman]

But the dance number in 500 Days of Summer worked

Spiderman who is supposed to be aggressive and evil is strutting down the street dancing. Its just stupid

[[A]]

Yeah, you said it 3 posts ago..

edit: in reply to conan69

[conan69]

"To be fair IMDB is just a bunch of pretentious wanna be film makers/critics"

Yes most people there are idiots, but it doesnt change the fact Im trying to make.

That good dialogue, what sounds cheesy or what may or may not work is a matter of opinion.

[spider-neil]

I'd rather have vaughan who by all accounts has nailed his super hero movie than someone who has nailed a movie about teenagers coming of age.

[Ace of Knaves]

But with Spider-Man you need to combine those two factors.

[spider-neil]

But with Spider-Man you need to combine those two factors.

I need to watch both movies. haven't seen any of webb's stuff but I thought vaughan's stardust was fantastic

[Solidus]

Ah the Internet is cyclical. LOL. I remember on these boards when many were thinking Nolan would never be able to do Batman any justice.

To me either Webb or Vaughn would be a good choice. But for both of them we will never know until they make it. All I'm doing is hoping for the best.

[Project862006]

Don't bring up PJ/Singer/Raimi/ this is about Marc Webb hell Zach Snyder did Music Videos too and did superhero films should we suggest him.All i am saying is how come alot of you guys are so confident in leaving the reboot franchise up to a guy with 1 film and possibly being an Oscar contender dont mean anything.Hell Ang Le and Gavin hood both won Oscars for there respective films.

Now i am not trying to stir stuff up he is probably a solid director i just want to know why you are so quick to throw Raimi's previous trilogy under the bus and except Webb in open arms what makes you so confident of him.

[spider-neil]

Ah the Internet is cyclical. LOL. I remember on these boards when many were thinking Nolan would never be able to do Batman any justice.

To me either Webb or Vaughn would be a good choice. But for both of them we will never know until they make it. All I'm doing is hoping for the best.

the difference (for me) is I'd seen nolan's memento and absolutely loved it. I love vaughan's stardust. I need to see 500 days but I can't see myself watching it anytime soon. so the fate of my favorite superhero is in the hands of a director of whom haven't seen any of his work.
anyway it isn't official I have my fingers crossed for vaughan

[Solidus]

I like Vaughn too, I like both of them so yea all we can do is hope for the best.

[Artistsean]

In the early comics, Peter had a love triangle with Betty Brant and Liz Allen. Peter liked Betty, Betty liked Peter, but Liz liked Peter and Betty was always jealous of that. To add to that Betty liked Peter because he seemed sort of boring, and hated Spider-Man.

Later Peter dated Gwen, and I hear there was a love triangle there.

In the Raimi movie Peter always loved MJ, Gwen didn't fit into the picture at all really. And Betty was sort of there, she and Peter flirted but thats all.

In the 90s cartoon Peter and Mj were together, Gwen wasn't there and neither was Betty.
in the new cartoon of Spectacular Spider-Man Peter asked out Betty, but after a talk with Aunt May she called it off because she was too old.
Gwen and Peter were friends, who had a crush on one another.
MJ and Peter went on a blind date, but are sort of just friends at the moment.
Liz Allen developed a crush on Peter, they dated.

In fact in the comics, until he graduated, Peter had no friends. He knew Flash and Liz and Betty. Then he graduated, met Gwen, and Harry, and later MJ.

In the 90s cartoon Flash was sort of there, but not much. Harry and Mj were shown to be Peter's old friends.
in Spectacular Spider-Man Peter is friends with Harry and Gwen all through High School. Flash is a jerk. And there are other school kids like Robby's son.

In the Raimi's movies Peter and Harry were friends in High school, Peter started dating MJ after high school and him and Harry ended up not hanging out anymore.

How would you like to see Peter and his various relationships portrayed in this reboot?
She he know Gwen, Harry, Flash, MJ and everyone from the get go? Should MJ not be in this reboot? She he have a triangle with Liz Allen and Betty?

How do you want to see things

[Pythagoras]

Ah the Internet is cyclical. LOL. I remember on these boards when many were thinking Nolan would never be able to do Batman any justice.

To me either Webb or Vaughn would be a good choice. But for both of them we will never know until they make it. All I'm doing is hoping for the best.

I agree people should just sit back and see what is gonna happen.

[Son of Coul]

What no one talks about on here is why certain people want this reboot is because there are two kinds of people in this life:

1. Those that simply settle

and

2. Those who strive and don't

The Raimi films, as evident by lazy let's satisy the audiences and stay safe with simply Mary Jane centric plots, i.e. the man chasing the girl, is all he can think about?

And let's not forget the villains always being connected to Peter. If that's not some of the laziest crap I ever heard I don't know what else is. Simply lazy and again, let's satisy the stupid audience so we can sell toys to the dumb kids.

This is why I hate Raimi. For a guy who goes on his pedastal screaming I love Spider-Man and know Spider-Man, what a way to not incorporate all of the myhthos and characters and complexity of it all.

You see why Chris Nolan was successfull? Because he doesn't settle. He doesn't settle for medicority.

People are starving for so much more for Spider-Man because they feel they were robbed with nothing more than a polished simple paint by numbers chase the ONE girl plot.

You're really telling us what kind of a person you are based off whether you want a reboot or not? Get off your high horse, guy.

[NinjaCarm]

You're really telling us what kind of a person you are based off whether you want a reboot or not? Get off your high horse, guy.

That's the difference between me and you I guess. You can settle for medicore films, and I don't.:oldrazz:

[Son of Coul]

Actually, I'm glad it's gettin' a reboot bro. :woot:

[Son of Coul]

hell yeah, finally got an avatar.

[NinjaCarm]

Actually, I'm glad it's gettin' a reboot bro. :woot:

Nice, thanks for confusing me:awesome:

Well, what would you like from the reboot? I seriously would like something close to Spectacular Spider-Man, as in the action, if they are going young then go this route, the villains, the whole mob angle with Norman Osbon help create villains, etc, etc. I just think it's a great mixture of everything Spidey.

[Son of Coul]

Hell I dunno, I'm not that well-versed in Spider-Man series and and comic runs other than reading some comics, watching some cartoons, and having this Spider-Man encyclopedia as a kid. I, like many, hope it's truer to the books.

Though I do still like the Raimi movies to an extent. Seeing the first movie was certainly a big part of my childhood (I was ten) as well as all my friends'.

[Cuyan]

As long as the reboot stays away from clones, I think I'll be happy.

[Blackman]

I've been watching spectacular Spiderman eps on youtube (all of them are on youtube)
and I still think this is by far the best way to go for inspiration.
The quips
The characterization of Norman Osborn
The internal monologues
The foreshadowing to future villains
The relationships between characters

Although... since they want it more dark so they'll probably look at Ultimate Spiderman

[NinjaCarm]

Hell I dunno, I'm not that well-versed in Spider-Man series and and comic runs other than reading some comics, watching some cartoons, and having this Spider-Man encyclopedia as a kid. I, like many, hope it's truer to the books.

Though I do still like the Raimi movies to an extent. Seeing the first movie was certainly a big part of my childhood (I was ten) as well as all my friends'.

I can understand that. I'm so passionate about Spider-Man, after I saw the first one, I had this empty feeling of "what...? that's it?" Seriously, I liked it, but couldn't stomach what I just saw sort of.

Again, for me it was so simplistic, the loss of potential. I just want the best out of the new remake.

[Blackman]

I can understand that. I'm so passionate about Spider-Man, after I saw the first one, I had this empty feeling of "what...? that's it?" Seriously, I liked it, but couldn't stomach what I just saw sort of.

Again, for me it was so simplistic, the loss of potential. I just want the best out of the new remake.
I liked the first 2 Raimi films, but the 3rd was bad

and even though I hate the phrase...I think every "true fan" of Spidey wants to see the character be successful

[conan69]

Artistsean,
I think it was a mistake to start the first film with Peter and MJ. It should have been Gwen Stacy. If Gwen was killed at the end, it would ended the movie on a downer, but been more powerful.

This would have allowed Peter to have the same issues in SM2 with the whole "dont I deserve to be happy" stuff and having Peter want to give up Spiderman to be with Mary Jane.

It would have gotten rid of alot of the redundancy that people complain about with Parker and MJ in the 3 films, and would have had Peter hooking up with MJ at the same time - the end of movie 2.

Having said that though, I do love the last shot of SM2 with MJ looking on not knowing what the future brings. Last last scene has a real sense of looming tragedy... which is what makes SM3 all the more disappointing. It never delivered on what that final scene in SM2 forshadowed.




So.... now we're going back to the beginning.

[spider-neil]

I don't blame sam for going with mj first as MJ was extremely prominent in the comics and the 90's cartoon with gwen no where to be seen, since, however gwen has had a bit of a renaissance in the comics with the BND retcon and SSM.

[JP]

Everyone is calling 500 Days of Summer a love story, and it's not. Heck, the opening line of the film states "This is not a love story".

:cmad:
:p

[Artistsean]

Yes, but is it any good?

I don't blame sam for going with mj first as MJ was extremely prominent in the comics and the 90's cartoon with gwen no where to be seen, since, however gwen has had a bit of a renaissance in the comics with the BND retcon and SSM.
True, in the 90s cartoon they never used Gwen because its audiance was young kids. They werent about to kill anyone on that show, let alone Peter's girlfriend. So she was out, plus MJ was in the comics and Gwen was just a memory that was brought up once in a while.
That was sort of what I thought the movie did too. Also they, I think, were simplifying the story. They probably thought, at most, they would end up with 3 movies, and who knows maybe they thought they might only get one. So They started it with MJ right off the bat.



The reason i asked earlier, about Peter's relationships, like should Peter know Flash, Liz, Gwen, Harry, and MJ, from the get go? Should he have a triangle with Liz and Betty? Because in the cartoon they changed things. In the 90s Peter never knew Gwen. In Spectacular he is friends with Gwen and Harry. In the movies Flash is barely there, he is friends with Harry, and MJ later, and Gwen isn't there. In the comics he had no friends till he went to college, and even then it was slow going.
So what should it be like? Should Peter have no friends in the first film? Should he just be going to school, no friends, saving the day as Spider-man, going home and spending time with Aunt May? Should he be dating Betty Brant? Should Peter have at least one or two friends? Should Flash be a bigger character?
What would you like to see Peter's circle of friends, family, and people he knows, be like?

Personally I can see how he needs to have some friends. So I would go with Harry and Gwen. I would have MJ come in later, as the blind date, and I would have Flash be a bigger part (he has to be Spidey's biggest fan), Liz Allen too, and maybe even have Peter ask out Betty Brant.




Something else just hit me. To make the movie gritty, they don't have to Ultimize it. In the original comics Peter had no fiends and was constantly picked on and bullied. Even once he got powers, it was brought up a few times that he might one day snap. Once he got his powers it became, what if he snapped and became a super bad guy? So that could be the gritty angle.
I still hope its not, Spider-man should be fun, but its just an idea.

[The Bat-Man]

Haven't had the chance to voice my opinion about this whole situation just yet, so I figured I'd put in my two cents.

First of all, I would like to make it clear that I was a fan of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films. In fact, Raimi's first Spider-Man film was really my first introduction into the world of Spider-Man. I had known of him, of course, but until I saw the movie, I was never really a fan of the web-slinging superhero. The very moment the credits started rolling, I considered myself a Spider-Man fan. I really enjoyed the film and I enjoyed many repeat viewings after that. After that, I basically just waited for Spider-Man 2, but I did do a little bit of dabbing in the comic books, just to see how things went from the beginning. For all of their cheese, I found all of the comics to be very enjoyable. After reading them, I did become a bit less of a fan of the first Spider-Man film. I didn't start hating it, it's just that the comics gave me a new perspective on the character and I didn't feel that things were being done the correct way in the film universe. However, when Spider-Man 2 came out, I was totally on board with the direction of the films. I was still upset with the fact that the films weren't taking a direction that was more like the comics, but Spider-Man 2 was, and is, such an incredible film and I said to myself "Yeah, they may not be doing the story correctly, but if the filmmakers can keep putting out films like this, I really don't care all that much". I kept reading some of the earlier comics in anticipation of Spider-Man 3 and I was content with the film universe doing it's own thing. I trusted that Raimi and Sony would put out another good sequel. Unfortunately, that did not happen. While I won't sit here and say that Spider-Man 3 is the worst film I've ever seen, it was definitely very disappointing to me after how great Spider-Man 2 was. I felt that the film didn't have any focus on a really good story and that there were too many characters and villains. Not to mention the cheesy dance sequence, the awful continuity and the depiction of the villains. In all honesty, I can still watch Spider-Man 3 and semi-enjoy it, but I think that most of that is due to how much I like the cast. It's certainly not one of my most played films, but it's "eh" to me.

As disappointed as I was with Spider-Man 3, I understood that it seemed that Raimi was pressured by the studio to include Venom and that he didn't have as much power as he would have liked, so I had faith that he could still deliver a great fourth film if Sony didn't interfere as much. I was still anticipating the fourth film with a lot of enthusiasm. When I read that Sony was pulling the plug on Spider-Man 4 and going with a reboot instead, I wasn't upset at all. Not because I hated Raimi's films, but I felt that he had said his piece on Spider-Man and I was content with that series being over. Also, after reading the rumors of what Sony had planned for the fourth film, I decided that this series looked to be heading into "Batman & Robin bad" territory. From what I've read, and who am I to say if those rumors are true, but from what I've read, the story just didn't appeal to me at all and the idea of The Vulture and Vultress, a character that has never appeared in the comics before, was sickening. I don't see how this film could have turned out to be good at all and it is my opinion that it was headed towards certain disaster.

A reboot of the Spider-Man film franchise is something I have always hoped for at some point in the future. I didn't think it would be this early at all, but nonetheless I am very excited to see what will happen with this. I think Sony is making the right move by just starting over because the previous series of films were really popular and doing a sequel without Maguire, Dunst or Raimi onboard may have been quite underwhelming and may have been met with a lot of backlash. Not only that, but I think Sony has a chance to go back to the beginning and do what WB did with Batman and that's make a faithful adaptation of the character. WB made the same mistakes with Batman that Sony was about to start making with Spider-Man. The two Batman films directed by Joel Schumacher were lacking a good story and were crammed with way too many characters and villains just to sell more toys. As bad as Spider-Man 3 is, I'm glad it didn't go that far down the road, or otherwise we may have seen a failure similar to Batman & Robin that would have put Spider-Man on the shelf for a very long time. They've decided to start over before things got too bad and they may be able to save the franchise.

Now, everyone has their own opinions on the direction the reboot should take and I am no different. I'd like to make it clear that by no means am I a Spider-Man expert. I have read some of the comics and I have learned a lot, but I don't claim to have the absolute best way to put a great Spider-Man film on the screen. That said, I do think Sony is making the right decision by putting Peter Parker back in high school. The Spider-Man story is interesting when Parker is an adult, but it's always been at it's best, in my opinion, when you have a teenage Parker dealing with all of the issues most kids deal with in high school, along with all of the issues that come from being Spider-Man. Not only that, but the high school and college years are really where the great romances in Parker's life take place and in my opinion, that's what the Spider-Man story is all about. It's a coming of age story of a young man, but it's also about all of his struggles in his love life and it's about the women that surround him. The opening lines in the first Spider-Man film in 2002 did sort of get it right. Yes, it is all about a girl, but it's not just about one girl. We all know that Mary Jane ends up being Parker's main girl when they're adults, but I feel that Betty Brant, Gwen Stacy and maybe even Liz Allen should all be major characters in the reboot. I'm aware that Peter doesn't meet Gwen in high school in the comics, but in the film universe, everything will have to be sped up a bit and Gwen Stacy is such a major character in the Spider-Man mythos that I think it would be silly to not introduce her as a main character from the start. Maybe she doesn't have to be a serious girlfriend for Parker in the first film, but the seeds should definitely be planted as Peter gets involved in some sort of love triangle with Betty and Liz. Mary Jane could be in the film, I'd say, but I think she should take more of a backseat to the other girls. As in she could be a character, she could be someone that Peter knows, but she shouldn't be girl number one like in previous films.

Flash Thompson should definitely play a bigger role, much bigger than he played in Raimi's first Spider-Man film, and I think that Harry Osborn should be in high school with Peter as well. Like Gwen, I know Peter didn't really know Harry until college in the comics, but I feel that he is such an important character in the future that leaving him out for the first film would be a huge mistake. The one thing that I think most film franchises lack is a sense of planning. Let's face it, Spider-Man is a franchise character and this reboot will almost certainly spawn some sequels, so I hope Sony does the smart thing and gives themselves a bit of an outline to go one for the next few films. You don't need a script, but you should definitely have some sort of idea of what direction you'll be taking. I personally believe that this is something that the first series of films lacked when it came time to make the third film. You have to have a strong story outline to stick to or else you'll end up getting a bit lost and putting out a lackluster film, which is exactly what happened. I think you put Gwen Stacy and Harry Osborn in from the beginning, knowing exactly what you will do with them in future installments.

And that brings me to the villains. First of all, the Green Goblin should not be the villain in the first film. He is Spider-Man's most dangerous and personal foe, like The Joker is to Batman, and I think he should be saved for the second or third film. That doesn't mean, however, that he can't be introduced in the first film. In fact, if you're going to introduce Harry Osborn, you should definitely introduce Norman, even if it's very brief. Also, Dr. Connors should most certainly be a character, but make plans to turn him into The Lizard and use that villain in another film because he is also a very personal enemy to Spider-Man. There are a few great villains that you can use in this new series of films, villains that are very personal foes for Spider-Man, and you can find ways to use the other members of the Rogues Gallery in ways that make sense, but I wouldn't suggest doing too much to the characters to make them way more personal to Peter (like Sandman in Spider-Man 3). Just make sure you stay true to the roots of the characters and put them in stories that will make sense, and there shouldn't be any worries. Overcrowding them has shown to be a very bad idea. That's not to say you can't have one or two main villains or a main villain with a side-villain. Villains like Electro, Rhino, Shocker, Vulture and Mysterio are examples of villains that can be used in supporting roles. The Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus, The Lizard and The Enforcers, in my opinion, are the ones that I think would be the best choices for main villains. In fact, I'd like to see The Enforcers be the main villains in this reboot. They're not supervillains, but they can be tied to the mob and they're enough of a threat to Spider-Man to be important.

One thing that does have me concerned is the rumor that Sony is looking to make this reboot "dark and gritty" like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. If this is true, it is a huge mistake. I understand that Sony would see how well those films have turned out and think "maybe that's the direction that we should take", but what they're not realizing is that that is not the correct direction for the character of Spider-Man. He is similar to Batman, in the way that he is fighting crime in an attempt to make up for the one that he didn't stop, the one that changed his life forever. He's out to avenge something, like Batman. However, that is where their similarities end. Spider-Man actually has superpowers, unlike Batman, and the story as a whole is much more colorful and fun than the Batman stories. Those two worlds that those characters inhabit are nothing alike whatsoever. Of course, it is just a rumor and who knows if Sony is actually considering such a film, but if it's true, I would implore Sony to reconsider. They have to get this right. They've made a big statement by cancelling a very popular series and restarting and they can't just reboot everytime the screw up. I say they should stay faithful from the beginning and give Spider-Man a film that fits him, not Batman. This is a risky move and now is not the time to try and get extremely creative. You have years and years of comics to look back on. Make sure to pay attention to what Spider-Man is really all about and use what has kept him so popular all this time. Some would argue that Batman is the true identity and that Bruce Wayne is the mask, but for Spider-Man, that is not the case. Peter Parker IS the boy/man and he is using Spider-Man to do good things. The catch is, when he puts on that mask, he becomes a different person. That costume makes him more confident and powerful. There's never a doubt that it's Parker under the mask, of course, but Spider-Man is the guy that Peter doesn't get to be when he's not in the mask. Oh, and more quips! Not cheesy ones, mind you, but let's see some actual smart-ass comments and wit from Spider-Man.

The last thing I want to touch on is the cast and crew for this film. When it comes to crew, I think the best move is to stay away from any big-time directors like Michael Bay or James Cameron. In fact, that's the last they need right now. What they really need is a young director with a little but of experience under his belt. Someone who understands the character and is devoted to bringing an accurate depiction of the character to the screen and not someone like Bay or Cameron, two guys who would likely try to push a really awkward and drastic vision of their own onto the audience. I've read rumors of Marc Webb, and I'd say that's a good choice. I have yet to see (500) Days of Summer, but I've heard really good things about it. It seems like it is a well-told love story and that's more of what Sony should be looking for. Yes, of course you have to have your action and special effects, but you have to have a good story as well. If Sony wants something as successful as The Dark Knight, be as faithful and entertaining as that film is. DON'T make it dark like TDK, but by all means use it as something to look at to see how action and storytelling is mixed perfectly to make a superb film. I know the big talk has been about who will be cast as Peter Parker/Spider-Man and the other probable characters, and just like everyone else I have my favorites for the role, but I definitely hope Sony is not seriously considering a very popular teen star for the role. I've read rumors of Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Zac Efron and even Michael Cera. Of course, these rumors probably aren't true, but if they are, I think Sony needs to watch themselves here. This is the most important role in the film and using someone just because they're popular with the tweens is a huge mistake. You need a young actor that you can build the franchise around, someone who will be in it for the long haul. Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect that Pattinson and Lautner's fifteen minutes will be up when Twilight is no longer around. Efron has a reputation of being a Disney channel star, which is something you don't need, and Cera is too awkward an actor to convincingly pull off Parker. I liked Maguire, but I always thought that he was a bit too much of a weaker version or Parker for my tastes. To me, he was never able to get out of geek mode. The actor that takes on the role in the reboot should be able to pull off the geek/nerd role, but also be able to be convincingly tough when it's time to be Spider-Man.

I rambled way too much and I doubt anyone will even read this, but I am very passionate about Spider-Man and I feel that Sony has a really good chance to do something fantastic here. I'm excited for the reboot.

[JustABill]

Everyone is calling 500 Days of Summer a love story, and it's not. Heck, the opening line of the film states "This is not a love story".

:cmad:
:p
It's a failed love story. It's not that big of a difference. There's still romantic stuff involved. It just doesn't end up being a successful love story.

[Ace of Knaves]

I don't think anyone should worry about the "more like TDK" comments.

Seriously, Spider-Man is a character worth MILLIONS mainly due to his personality. It wouldn't make business sense to completely change that. And these studio's care about the $$$ obviously.

I think they just mean make the stories serious and grown up. They don't mean actually change Spidey's personality.

[spider-neil]

I think its extremely condescending to say if you like the OT you are 'settling', talk about overblown perspective of your own opinion. you don't like the OT, FINE! but don't presume to tell me what I should think. I KNOW the character of spidey backwards and I was extremely pleased with the first two movies and what more I think the first two movies are WAY better than batman begins and only a little behind the TDK. that's my opinion but I don't try and shove that opinion down people throat.

[Ace of Knaves]

What's the OT? And who are you talking about?

[JustABill]

Neil's snapped. He's off his hinges. :(

[spider-neil]

What's the OT? And who are you talking about?

original trilogy. I was reacting angrily with the suggestion if you liked sam raimi's spider-man you were settling.

[The Slang]

In the 90s cartoon Peter and Mj were together, Gwen wasn't there and neither was Betty...

In the 90s cartoon Flash was sort of there, but not much. Harry and Mj were shown to be Peter's old friends...


I noticed these two mistakes regarding the 90s series. Betty Brant was in the show. They made her an african american. She seemed older than Peter and they never had any romantic interaction.

At the beginning of the show Harry was Flash's friend. He showed no objection to one of Flash's pranks aimed towards Peter, indicating that they weren't really friends. Parker only met Mary Jane for the first time at about the 4th episode. It was a blind date, and MJ's first line was 'Face it tiger, you just hit the jackpot."

[Cuyan]

Also, Peter was built like a linebacker.

[JustABill]

That was Glory Grant, another secretary of Jonah's from the comics in the 90's TAS.

[Chris Wallace]

Peter was FAR from a linebacker's build. But he was supposed to be a veteran superhero, so it would make sense for him not to be a stick.

[spider-neil]

Peter was FAR from a linebacker's build. But he was supposed to be a veteran superhero, so it would make sense for him not to be a stick.


he was pretty big though. I always imagined the 15-18 year old spidey to be skinny and the 19-21 year old spidey to have the buld of a quarter back

[Chris Wallace]

he was pretty big though. I always imagined the 15-18 year old spidey to be skinny and the 19-21 year old spidey to have the buld of a quarter back

But in the 90's show, were we not looking at the 19-21 year-old?
And he wasn't as big as some of you are making him out to be.
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f98/webs828/Spider-Man/Concept-art-spider-man-animated-ser.jpg
Still significantly smaller than Flash or John.

[BlackLantern]

but the Peter in the 90's series was pretty solid

[ultimatefan]

I don´t buy this excuse that Peter is a veteran superhero, wasn´t he still living with Aunt May when the series started?

I don´t like it that he kinda looks like a 12 year-old in SSM but I prefer that to the big Pete from the nineties show.

The nineties show had a pretty solid first season, but it quickly degenerated. I wouldn´t trade the whole series for the two seasons of SSM.

[spider-neil]

I don´t buy this excuse that Peter is a veteran superhero, wasn´t he still living with Aunt May when the series started?

I don´t like it that he kinda looks like a 12 year-old in SSM but I prefer that to the big Pete from the nineties show.

The nineties show had a pretty solid first season, but it quickly degenerated. I wouldn´t trade the whole series for the two seasons of SSM.

I don't know why but I've always loved the idea of a super strong skinny hero. someone who looks a 130 pounds but could knock out a 225 pound guy with one punch.

you look at batman and superman they look like they can kick some arse but villians would under estimate spidey and he would use that to his advantage.

[ultimatefan]

I don't know why but I've always loved the idea of a super strong skinny hero. someone who looks a 130 pounds but could knock out a 225 pound guy with one punch.

you look at batman and superman they look like they can kick some arse but villians would under estimate spidey and he would use that to his advantage.

Yeah, Spidey isn´t supposed to be a particularly buff superhero, he´s more lean and agile.

[spider-neil]

Yeah, Spidey isn´t supposed to be a particularly buff superhero, he´s more lean and agile.


that's why I have no problem with logan lerman being slender.

[Reikowolf]

exactly.

As the character was designed, Peter remains about the same size after he gets his powers. The idea was for young adolescence to identify with Peter. He does not need to be big.

From 1970, moving forward, peter has become progressively more and more cut and lean. This has also occurred with all the other heroes.

The logistics of it being that his metabolism keeps very little fat on his body but Peter doesn't need to be built as his proportionate strength allows him to be stronger than most muscle bound enemies.

[spider-neil]

exactly.

As the character was designed, Peter remains about the same size after he gets his powers. The idea was for young adolescence to identify with Peter. He does not need to be big.

From 1970, moving forward, peter has become progressively more and more cut and lean. This has also occurred with all the other heroes.

The logistics of it being that his metabolism keeps very little fat on his body but Peter doesn't need to be built as his proportionate strength allows him to be stronger than most muscle bound enemies.

ditko drew spidey/pete skinny and spinderly it was romita snr that made pete look buff, that why I always perferred ditko's spidey even thought some claim romita's spidey is the bench mark

[Spider-ManHero12]

he was pretty big though. I always imagined the 15-18 year old spidey to be skinny and the 19-21 year old spidey to have the buld of a quarter back A SPidey that's sort of big is the way to go with the films, if you ask me. That's the way Tobey was. It's as I said, a skinny peter may be a little unbelievable on film.

[Eggyman]

A SPidey that's srot of big is the way to with the films, if you ask me. That's they way Tobey was. It's as I said, a skinny peter may be a little unbelievable on film.

I respectfully disagree. If people can believe that Spidey does what he does, they should be able to believe he does what he does at any size. And 'That's the way Tobey was' means absolutely nothing because this is a reboot.

[Spider-ManHero12]

I respectfully disagree. If people can believe that Spidey does what he does, they should be able to believe he does what he does at any size. But people would probably think of Spidey as a p*****. That's what most ignorant people would think. I'm not against him being a bit skinnier, I'm just saying that some people wouldn't find him all that tough looking when he's fighting.

And 'That's the way Tobey was' means absolutely nothing because this is a reboot.[/ I know, I was just saying.

[JustABill]

A SPidey that's sort of big is the way to go with the films, if you ask me. That's the way Tobey was. It's as I said, a skinny peter may be a little unbelievable on film.
Oh please. We have had plenty of skinny/lean heroes (mostly female though, I'll admit) that have had superstrength or commited agile impressive feats. And NO ONE is having trouble believing they are able to commit such feats, the same should be said for Spider-Man.

Personally, I had trouble believing Tobey could be so strong. He looks like a weak little geek in the face.

[X Knight]

spidey should be lean, muscular, and "wirey." His body type should be more like a gymnast or dancer, and not big and bulky like a a football player or pro wrestler.

Spidey's body should be built for agility and flexiblity, which fit with his character.

Height-wise, Spidey shouldn't be that tall either. I liked Tobey because he wasn't the typical tall male lead. He proved that us shorter guys can get the spotlight, too....lol

I think 5'10 ( comic Spidey's height ) should be the max.

After all, Peter/Spidey is SUPPOSED to represent the "average guy".....the geek or nerd.......

[Eggyman]

But people would probably think of Spidey as a p*****. That's what most ignorant people would think. I'm not against him being a bit skinnier, I'm just saying that some people wouldn't find him all that tough looking when he's fighting.

I know, I was just saying.


I understand, but then seeing him do what he does will wake them from their ignorance - just like it does to villains twice his size when he hands them their arses. That's always been a thing I've loved about Spidey: a lot in a little package. He shouldn't be any bigger than Tobey was, I'd say. Maybe a bit less meat on him, but certainly no bigger.

[Ace of Knaves]

I think a young teenage Pete/Spidey should be about 10 stone/140 pounds. Ripped and wirey though.

[Chris Wallace]

But keep in mind that this is very much a VISUAL medium. Spidey has to LOOK good in the tights as well. There has to be some appearance of athleticism. He can't just have a Michael Jackson build or audiences will never buy it. I see no reason why he can't have some muscle & still plausibly look like a relatively average teenager.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i283/ghostofjealousy/panther2/1c5173de.jpg
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i283/ghostofjealousy/panther2/Robin2.jpg

[Spider-ManHero12]

He looks like a weak little geek in the face. I hve to disagree. And even if he does, it showed that big things come in small packages. Tobey was great. :up:

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea and that's why he should be ripped and have like, 0% body fat.

People have also gotta remember that comics are comics. The way characters are drawn in comics is fantasy, it's not very realistic most of the time. There has to be compromises in the physique area.

Like some people complain that Hemsworth isn't big enough for Thor etc. I just gotta laugh at those idiots. What do they want? A ****ing wrestler? lol

[JustABill]

Tobey's true blob like nature in between films shows in his face, the fact that he's short also makes me believe that he couldn't possibly be such a kickass superhero.

[Ace of Knaves]

To be fair Spidey is only supposed to be about 5.9 anyway.

[Frodo]

I think a young teenage Pete/Spidey should be about 10 stone/140 pounds. Ripped and wirey though.

That's what I think as well. Now if the films go on and he gets to college he can bulk up even more but if he's suppose to be 15 or 16 in the first one , he should be more wirey. More of the Pilates look then a solid guy.

[Eggyman]

We put way too much thought into all of this.

[Frodo]

Lol. This is a fanboy messageboard . Next thread will be about what he eats for Breakfast.

[Reikowolf]

wheatcakes

[Ace of Knaves]

That's easy! Wheat cakes!