Next 'Spider-Man' film will be a gritty, contemporary reboot of the franchise

[eledoremassis02]

The next Spider-Man film will be a reboot of the franchise, not a continuation of series Sam Raimi created back in 2002 — in a move similar to Batman Begins restarting the Batman franchise seven years after Batman and Robin underwhelmed fans and critics.

This time around, the series will place Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today’s issues. The decision to go with an origin story stemmed from Sony developing two Spidey projects simultaneously. According to studio insiders, Sony was working on both Raimi’s Spider-Man 4 and the new origin story from James Vanderbilt, who wrote Zodiac. The original plan was to keep the Spider-Man gang together for one last film in 2011 before rebooting the series in 2012. When it became clear that Raimi would not be able to make the summer 2011 release date planned for Spider-Man 4, the studio opted to scrap Spider-Man 4 altogether, and focus solely on the series reboot.

Who will helm the new film is anyone’s guess but with the studio interested in a more gritty, contemporary redo of the series, they are certainly focused on younger directors making waves in Hollywood. One name that has popped up is Marc Webb, the man behind (500) Day of Summer. He was previously in discussions with the studio to take over Moneyball, but that job went to Bennett Miller. Michael Bay has also previously expressed interest in taking over the Spider-Man franchise and Seabiscuit director Gary Ross worked on one of the drafts of Spider-Man 4 and is said to be a huge fan of the comic book series.

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/01/11/spider-man-reboot/

[bryanss3]

jeez Michael Bay is in the running we're fu**ed.

Also a more grittier teenage Spider-Man???? is flash going to beat the sh** out of him every day till he gets his powers? How does a grittier movie work for a fun character?

[Sam Fisher]

:facepalm: The last thing Spider-man needs to be is "dark and gritty".

[JustABill]

Entertainment Weekly = We talk out of our ass frequently.

I'm not believing it until we hear it from the babes mouths themselves. And Michael Bay will be too busy filming Transformers 3 when this is filming so we are safe from that disaster.

[ultimatefan]

If this turns out to be the studio misinterpreting the success of The Dark Knight and thinking all superhero movies have to be dark and gritty, it will be the ruin of the character.

And no origin story again please, the comics one was quite well told in the first Spidey movie. You can briefly mention it in the reboot, but not go all the way through it again.

[TheScarecrow]

You know, this is what I don't like. Why must everything be "gritty"? What this really is is just an attempt to copy what Nolan did. I know people do not like hearing that, but this is what they're trying to do.

It's like when WB announced they were going to make all of their properties "dark". What exactly will be "gritty" about a story about a teenage boy? What issues will he face? This is what I don't get. A high school setting stops the major issues of the world coming into play and limits the scope of Peter Parker's troubles to be that some guy is picking on him and the girl he likes doesn't like him back. There's nothing gritty, and the idea itself is a paradox IMO. Are we going to have a Peter Parker who experiments with drugs and sex? Is that what 'gritty' means?

It just makes no sense, and it really is just trying to copy Nolan's work in an attempt to make a successful franchise. It makes me feel a little ill to hear announcements like this - particularly when it was announced that a similar thing would be happening with Fantastic Four. I do not want a "gritty" Spider-man. I do not think Spider-man should be gritty and if I walked out of a Spider-man movie that was like The Dark Knight I would be dissapointed.

What's worse is that Sam had proven that something a bit lighter and fun could be MORE successful than a "dark" movie. I'm not saying that Spider-man doesn't have some mature themes in it, I'm saying that Spider-man is NOT 'gritty', nor should it ever be.

[JustABill]

Once again. Entertainment Weekly. They talk out of their ass all the time. One source. One source is saying it's going to be dark and gritty. One source known for talking out of it's ass.

[Man of Tomorrow]

This is GREAT news.

[baerrtt]

This is GREAT news.

Unless you're being sarcastic, how exactly is it GREAT news?

[Man of Tomorrow]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

[Lighthouse]

:wall:

If this ends up being true, I just lost interest in the reboot. I honestly can't believe they would want a darker, grittier Spider-Man.

[bapi]

God... please, Marc Webb! Please...

[KenK]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

Who are you referring to when you say "us". Since when do you speak for everyone on these boards?

[vasNormandy]

*sighs*

I've gone from optimistic to pessimistic in under an hour.

[Docker2.0]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

I agree about the past movies but not sure of a reboot at this point. The first 3 Spidey movies was not the Spidey/Pete from the comics becuase he wasn't witty at all, MJ was fugly, and honestly the writing/acting was bad. I could barely watch the Spidey movies again because of it. So while I am not totally against a reboot, I just feel it's to soon.

[baerrtt]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

Spider-Man isn't a 'dark' character no matter how many times Marvel attempted 'grit' in his books. And copying Nolan's Batverse, if this report is true, shows a complete lack of imagination on Sony's behalf.

[Dr. Bromwell]

Finally, Sony actually listened. There was zero hype around the original cast and director coming back for a 4th time...and this is from a fan that liked the first two films a lot.

It was time for a re-boot and the wait will be worth it since the bar has been set higher thanks to Batman and Iron Man films. It will be fun to speculate on a new cast and villain for Spidey this year now that the possibilities are wide open.

[Immortalfire]

:facepalm: The last thing Spider-man needs to be is "dark and gritty".

Agreed 10 million %. Dark/gritty is the farthest thing from Spidey.

[Lighthouse]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

A more grounded movie about a kid who get superpowers from a spiderbite, swings around New York on web streams, fights a guy with robot arms, a man who turns into a lizard, a psychotic who flies on a hoverboard with green rubber mask, a man made of sand, and a special effects man who wears a fish bowl on his head. Yes, I can see how that lends itself to a more grounded take.

[bryanss3]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.
Cause it's Spider-Man not Watchmen... Are we still saying Comics are for adults(not kids) and thinking a studios cater to comic fans not general audiences?

[TheSlag]

I'm not.

The Raimi films were ridiculously cartoony and kid-friendly in how they were done.


A more grounded Nolan-esque take on Spidey may actually be something comic fans and older fans would enjoy.


Less fluff, more quality. Mark my words, by 2012, everyone here will be loving this. This sounds like a take on Spider-man that's more suited towards us.

Totally Agree! :up:

[Man of Tomorrow]

A more grounded movie about a kid who get superpowers from a spiderbite, swings around New York on web streams, fights a guy with robot arms, a man who turns into a lizard, a psychotic who flies on a hoverboard with green rubber mask, a man made of sand, and a special effects man who wears a fish bowl on his head. Yes, I can see how that lends itself to a more grounded take.

As opposed to a guy who was demolecularized and rebuilt himself and a palace on mars? And a guy in an armored Batsuit driving around in a Hummer taking down cops and the feds?

It's ALL Hyper-realism. It's never going to be 100% realistic of course, but with less fluff, less of a cartoony approach... we can get something that requires less suspension of disbelief than the Raimi stuff.

[kguillou]

Whats everyone talking about? The REASON why the Raimi films were successful was because his films WERE grounded in reality. In the movies it felt like Spiderman actually existed in the real world. the New York setting they used was incredibly contemporary, it was almost like Ultimate Spiderman. If it wasn't grounded already, i dont think it would've become the hit franchise it was. They dont need to make it anymore realistic.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

If you read a spidey comic today and you compare it to Raimi's style, it is very very different. I guess the movies are a bit kid friendly and could be the equivalent of the original spidey run in comics.

When I saw the SM3 trailer at the end where peter is looking around for venom and gets pulled by the neck, the movie looked quite serious and I thought that would be a nice way to portray spiderman. Of course it ended up being the other way around with Jazz and disco numbers. If they mean a more serious portrayal of spidey I think that would be cool.

[Docker2.0]

I agree 8. That trailer for SM3 was false advertisement. Venom wasn't used properly. But it wasn't as bad as people make it to be. I like Spidey3 more than Spidey1.

[bryanss3]

Whats everyone talking about? The REASON why the Raimi films were successful was because his films WERE grounded in reality. In the movies it felt like Spiderman actually existed in the real world. the New York setting they used was incredibly contemporary, it was almost like Ultimate Spiderman. If it wasn't grounded already, i dont think it would've become the hit franchise it was. They dont need to make it anymore realistic.

Totally agree. I don't know what they mean by grounded. The Spidey movies were serious in serious moments and funny/fun at fun/comedic moments. That's called personality. Sorry that SM3 wasn't great I'm not gonna lie when I saw it in theaters I thought it was awesome. Then I saw it again not so much. There are a lot of great parts in that movie, but sadly all people remember is the dancing. But there's nothing we can do about it now really but sit back and see what comes of all this.

[©KAW]

I've always wanted a more complex and mature Spider-Man film. I too agree that Sam Raimi's movies were too cartoony, it didn't allow for three or four scenes in a row to remain serious or believable. Spider-Man lives in New York, trust me, this place has its share of grit. And by way of the villains, I don't mind my villains to be killing machines with complexity. I want grit in my villain, just not in my Spidey.

However, I do like Spider-Man with a freakin' personality, Spidey should be witty, thought provoking, humorous, highly intelligent and serious all in one film.

[kguillou]

edit. double

[kguillou]

I dont care what anyone says, the part in SM3 where he was fighting the giant Sandman and the the large crowd was watching and cheering him on gave me goosebumps. Thats what made those films feel real and authentic. It felt like a real New York city was reacting to a real battle in Time Square.

[Docker2.0]

Not knocking your point kguillou because like I stated earlier, I think SM3 is better than SM1, but it's just the freakin acting was robotic at times.

[kguillou]

I totally agree, the acting was very robotic at times. BUT i was just trying to say there were some strong redeeming qualities of that movie as well such as the Giant Sandman fight. I just think Raimi did an overall great job of making the films feel real while also injecting fictional aspects at the same time.

[Docker2.0]

I also think Raimi was being selfish when it came to Spiderman by only doing the villians he wanted and not what the fans/public wanted. Again, the handling of Venom was my main thing. Avi was right, he was being selfish becuase he personally hated Venom but he lead in every poll as the villian of choice for SM3 but becuase he personally hated the characted, he didn't want to do it. So when he did it, he f-ed it up on purpose as to say haha, I did it, happy now?! Again, I don't think he really tried with Venom becuase he never liked him but if the fans and studio wanted that villian, then roll with it and try to make it work. As far as Vulture, the only reason I feel Sony is going with Vultress is becuase they know Vulture as a stand alone villian won't work and I agree with them on that point. It's a horrible idea. I'd rather see Kraven or whoever else than Vulture.

[kguillou]

I dont think he was being selfish, i just think Sam had a specific story he wanted to tell since SM1 and he had a plan. When SM3 rolled around, Sony kinda ruined his plans by throwing in venom and Sam had another vision. Yeah, he knew the fans wanted venom but its not his fault he didnt like venom. He just didnt like venom, Sam was only gonna work with characters that he knew well and it just so happened venom wasn't one of them. If Sony had listened to him, then they wouldnt be in the predicament right now.

[Docker2.0]

Awful lot of "he" in your post when it comes to Raimi. Again, he made it all about himself and noone else. Spidey is beyond just a director. It's about the fans, the studio, story, not just him.

[eledoremassis02]

I thought he did Venom wrong because he didnt know the Charater *thus not wanting to do him* but producers and Sony pushed it on him and even cut his film into what we see *and evident from photos/video*

I honestly think, yes we can blame some stuff on Rami like the homages to his other films *though they make you chuckle* kinda ruin the scene. But face it, the power in Hollywood is the producers. And when a movie becomes really popular the producers give the directors less say with the threat of pulling out.
This is evident with foreign directors and actors who have come to work in hollywood. The can't stand the fact that the Producers have more power than the director. and it's sad but true.

[batman44]

I'm thinking the next movie will be more "serious", but still have alot of fun and wit known to Spider-Man.

[Kurosawa]

Well, my interest level in this reboot just went to zero. I think "realism" in comics and in comic based movies is inane. Spidey just needs to be himself. Hopefully they don't make a Dark Knight clone and make a real Spider-Man movie instead.

[Leenie]

Taking this with a grain of salt, because it's Entertainment Weekly.

Though I'm laughing right now because I just pictured Spider-Man with Christian Bale's Batman voice.

"Rawwwwrrr, I'm not wearing hockey pads."

[kedrell]

This film/take on Spidey is looking to the wrong franchise for inspiration if it's looking to Nolan's Batman. But there is another light to show the way.......:whatever:

I'm just not sure if I want to hope that this franchise gets saved at all right now.

[Daybreak_st]

The last thing spidey needs is grit. Spidey is the best example of a fun fantasy character. SP 1 and 2 handeled it well. Like in SM 2 when he sits down and tells aunt may what really happened to uncle ben. Now that was real, it was solid acting, everything. I can't see them doing anything better than that.

It's funny how everyone feels so certain the new films will be better when we don't know director, actors, or anything other than they want grit.

The perfect scenario would've been if marvel got control of the franchise then put spidey in the same universe as the other marvel characters, similar in tone as well.

I do believe Sam didnt' have anything more to add creatively to the spidey franchise, so i'm glad they're going in a new direction, just wish they were moving forward instead of re-treading old ground. You'd think you could tell better stories by just having him in college, established as spidey, recast everyone, send MJ away (to california to pursue acting). Then just do some quality stories, going back to the beginning adds nothing.

[terry78]

The thing that makes Spider-Man special and basically Marvel's flagship is because he is pretty much this everyman character thrust into dark and grim ****, in his own books and in other character's books. When he's dealing with other heroes or teaming up in other issues, he's always the one that's pretty much speaking for the reader like, "this **** is really happening?!" If they want to go gritty, fine, but keep him as he is.

[chaseter]

*sighs*

I've gone from optimistic to pessimistic in under an hour.
I have always been a Spidey optimist. When I heard Sony was once again ****ing around with Raimi like they did with SM3, I turned instantly pessimistic. I have no hope for SM1.2 like I do for any future X-Men movie. Sony is now Fox in regards to their superhero franchise. I will not get my hopes up for anything and Sony had better do a damn good job at impressing me when they put out this reboot or I'm out like I am with X-Men until Fox can start making good movies again.

[Matt]

1) Spider-Man ought not be gritty or dark.

2) What exactly isn't contemporary about 2002-2007?

[terry78]

1) Spider-Man ought not be gritty or dark.

2) What exactly isn't contemporary about 2002-2007?

No Windows 7. :o

[JustABill]

It's...entertainment...weekly...ENTERTAINMENT ''********" WEEKLY.

Take it with a grain of salt people.

[XSpidercideX]

As a long time fan of the comics I want a darker and grittier film. Not a darker Spider-man, Spider-man should be funny and confident (something Tobey failed at miserably), but when it comes down to it the best comics are always the ones where the **** hit the fan and hell broke loose.

I'm talking about psychological mind games that drove him nearly insane that some villains put down on him. Peter's life gets seriously ****ed by being Spider-man and it takes a serious and dark movie to portray the milestone stories of the comics correctly.

Raimi's Spiderman WAS too sunshiny and cartoon in comparison with the majority of the comics.

The comics were always darker and more adult than the Spider-man cartoons which were not allowed to have the serious **** that went on in the comics...Raimi's Spider-man felt like it was holding back in the same way.

[VenomVsSpidey]

I have always been a Spidey optimist. When I heard Sony was once again ****ing around with Raimi like they did with SM3, I turned instantly pessimistic. I have no hope for SM1.2 like I do for any future X-Men movie. Sony is now Fox in regards to their superhero franchise. I will not get my hopes up for anything and Sony had better do a damn good job at impressing me when they put out this reboot or I'm out like I am with X-Men until Fox can start making good movies again.

this.

[DAFOE!]

What if Marvel decides to use Spiderman to go after the 'Twilight' money?

What I mean is to re-shape the Spiderman mythos to fit the mythos and structure of the recent Twilight films in order to try and cash in on the success those films generate?

Example:

Mary Jane Watson is the new girl in high school. She becomes attracted to Peter Parker, a brooding, distant, loner who everyone says is weird. In trying to become closer to him, she discovers who he truly is - the masked vigilante Spiderman! Peter tries to explain that she shouldn't be with him, that he's dangerous to be around and the people he loves get hurt - or worse (flashback to Uncle Ben being shot). She falls in love with Peter and is drawn into his world of super powers and super villians as Peter tries to keep her safe.

In the sequel? She is injured during a fight with The Rhino and Peter leaves her in order to protect her, blaming himself and saying the life he chose does not allow for romance. With Peter gone? She begins to fall for Harry Osborn, who she doesn't even realize is a super villian.

What do you any of you think? Possible?

[Doctor Jones]

Jesus, don't give them ideas.

[Pythagoras]

What if Marvel decides to use Spiderman to go after the 'Twilight' money?

What I mean is to re-shape the Spiderman mythos to fit the mythos and structure of the recent Twilight films in order to try and cash in on the success those films generate?

Example:

Mary Jane Watson is the new girl in high school. She becomes attracted to Peter Parker, a brooding, distant, loner who everyone says is weird. In trying to become closer to him, she discovers who he truly is - the masked vigilante Spiderman! Peter tries to explain that she shouldn't be with him, that he's dangerous to be around and the people he loves get hurt - or worse (flashback to Uncle Ben being shot). She falls in love with Peter and is drawn into his world of super powers and super villians as Peter tries to keep her safe.

In the sequel? She is injured during a fight with The Rhino and Peter leaves her in order to protect her, blaming himself and saying the life he chose does not allow for romance. With Peter gone? She begins to fall for Harry Osborn, who she doesn't even realize is a super villian.

What do you any of you think? Possible?

Yeah if this happened even Schumaker would have the right to laugh at this...also if they even did this, the Spidey movie franchise should get the Superman treatment. No movies for long time.

[grand-I-am]

I'm glad they're scrapping the sam raimi led spiderman movies.
From casting tobey as parker to making the goblin look like a total power ranger, i'm glad sam is finally out. It's almost unbelievable that he was interested in having the freaking vulture in sm4...the freaking VULTURE!! :cmad::cmad:

On top of that he absolutely ruined venom . Seriously topher freaking grace? That little guy was the total opposite of what brock supposed to look like. :cmad:

In this upcoming reboot i hope they try to take some things from the spiderman: animated series. That spiderman cartoon from the 90's. I would be thrilled if they do.

[Kurosawa]

What if Marvel decides to use Spiderman to go after the 'Twilight' money?

What I mean is to re-shape the Spiderman mythos to fit the mythos and structure of the recent Twilight films in order to try and cash in on the success those films generate?

Example:

Mary Jane Watson is the new girl in high school. She becomes attracted to Peter Parker, a brooding, distant, loner who everyone says is weird. In trying to become closer to him, she discovers who he truly is - the masked vigilante Spiderman! Peter tries to explain that she shouldn't be with him, that he's dangerous to be around and the people he loves get hurt - or worse (flashback to Uncle Ben being shot). She falls in love with Peter and is drawn into his world of super powers and super villians as Peter tries to keep her safe.

In the sequel? She is injured during a fight with The Rhino and Peter leaves her in order to protect her, blaming himself and saying the life he chose does not allow for romance. With Peter gone? She begins to fall for Harry Osborn, who she doesn't even realize is a super villian.

What do you any of you think? Possible?

This has got to be a joke.

[Micah12345]

I wouldn't mind a spider-man twilight copy, as long as we get to see spidey eat a baby out of MJ at some point.

[Gotham22]

Spider-Man should be Spider-Man. Not a Batman wannabe.

[DACrowe]

If Michael Bay got the job like the article suggests, it would be tragic on the one hand that we would be moving further than ever from what makes Spidey work on the page (though not necessarily on screen). Yet, it would be ironically hilarious for all the fans wallowing in fanboy criticism glee at the moment.

[zeptron]

Gritty? GRITTY!

SPIDER-MAN IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE GRITTY! That worked for Batman because it's BATMAN. Spider-man is not Batman. Hell, he's not even DC. I don't see a dark Spider-man film as good move.

[DACMAN]

And no origin story again please, the comics one was quite well told in the first Spidey movie.

Agreed. Until he made the third movie and screwed his origin all up.

[CrypticOne]

jeez Michael Bay is in the running we're fu**ed.

Also a more grittier teenage Spider-Man???? is flash going to beat the sh** out of him every day till he gets his powers? How does a grittier movie work for a fun character?

Actually, you're probably not wrong.

Maybe the climax of this film is Peter Parker being bit by the radioactive spider.

And if it's done by Michael Bay, we'll get to see it in 10 different angles. :o

[DACMAN]

don't give them ideas.

HA:D Nice

[baerrtt]

If Sony considered Raimi nothing more than just a hired gun (and the proof of that is pretty much SM 3) whoever directs the next movie will be either similarly constrained or, assuming it's someone like Bay, will deliver the kind of paint by numbers flick that irrespective of tone draws money.

[DACMAN]

Actually, you're probably not wrong.

Maybe the climax of this film is Peter Parker being bit by the radioactive spider.

And if it's done by Michael Bay, we'll get to see it in 10 different angles. :o

And if it was done by Raimi he would just pretend none of that actually happened by the third film. He'd change the story around so he can connect every single villain to Peter. At least Michael Bay wouldn't actually go back and ruin a good movie he made with a new one.

[VenomVsSpidey]

And if it was done by Raimi he would just pretend none of that actually happened by the third film. He'd change the story around so he can connect every single villain to Peter. At least Michael Bay wouldn't actually go back and ruin a good movie he made with a new one.

no, he'd just make a buncha lame-ass sex jokes, megan fox, stoner jokes, and megan fox. All the while being played to a score by Jablonsky and having destruction in the background.

[Closerframe]

When they say Peter will be facing "today's issues", I hope he's not affected by the economy, Uncle Ben dies because he doesn't have health coverage, and Osborne is funding military convoys towards the war in the Middle East. :p

[SpideyTheBest]

Dark and gritty? Michael Bay INTERESTED?!?! :barf:

No, please, no, just no. :doh:

[LastSunrise1981]

I don't mind Spider-Man being dark and gritty to a degree. But it also depends on the villain as well. When I think of dark and gritty villains in the comics and in possible film adaptations I do think of The Lizard, Vermin, Venom, Carnage, and even Kingpin to an extent.

Although if a gritty approach is what they're going for then take a villain like the Lizard and create it like that. But don't try to make it dark and gritty because films like The Dark Knight was able to do it. Batman is a dark character to begin with and while Spidey has some dark stories, it's not dark to the point to where it NEEDS to be gritty and dark.

[Danalys]

the films do need to be darker than the comics are on average. the big events in his life have mostly been dark even in the early comics. ben's death, spider-man no more, harry on drug's, gwen's death. he was nearly always dealing with having to get aunt may some medicine or she'd die. and when he saved the day he'd be moping about something it cost him. and his most dangerous villians the ones films would be made about are no laughing matter in their defining moments either.

TDK rings all this grief for batman out of rachael's death. a character they had to make up for the movie. which beats spider-man to the punch of that level of serious consequence. which is annoying cos his book was the first to do that. and on top of that this leads to the creation of two face. where as in spider-man's comics you could say gwen's death lead to harry's break down aswell as the creation of the jackel.

[Mach2Infinity]

And if it's done by Michael Bay, we'll get to see it in 10 different angles. :o

10 angles or more of Mary Jane-Watson's cleavage, posterior and general trim physique. Lascivious beyond that man.

[DAFOE!]

If Michael Bay is interested, does that mean he'll be wearing "Radioactive F'n Spiders" t-shirts next?

[Doctor Jones]

And if it was done by Raimi he would just pretend none of that actually happened by the third film. He'd change the story around so he can connect every single villain to Peter. At least Michael Bay wouldn't actually go back and ruin a good movie he made with a new one.

Yes, because Bay ruined Transformers? How people just forgot about the Mission City incident in TF2? People don't remember giant alien robots battling eachother in a city with thousands of witnesses. :huh:

[p4poetic]

I'm glad they're scrapping the sam raimi led spiderman movies.
From casting tobey as parker to making the goblin look like a total power ranger, i'm glad sam is finally out. It's almost unbelievable that he was interested in having the freaking vulture in sm4...the freaking VULTURE!! :cmad::cmad:

On top of that he absolutely ruined venom . Seriously topher freaking grace? That little guy was the total opposite of what brock supposed to look like. :cmad:


What is this, the formula to a typical bash Raimi's Spider-Man post? Say the Goblin costume looked like a Power Ranger, he ruined Venom and cast someone not big enough, blah blah blah, etc. People aren't even original with their insults anymore :o

In this upcoming reboot i hope they try to take some things from the spiderman: animated series. That spiderman cartoon from the 90's. I would be thrilled if they do.

Funny, because the scene where Peter first gets the black suit, it is EXACTLY frame for frame like the animated series episode with Venom.

[Chris Wallace]

:facepalm: The last thing Spider-man needs to be is "dark and gritty".

Qft.

[The Bat-Man]

I totally agree that the film shouldn't be "dark and gritty". Spider-Man is not Batman. There can be some dark moments, sure, but the Spider-Man stories are supposed to be colorful and fun. Spider-Man cannot be exactly like Batman, or else this film will fail. Sony needs to be careful here. A faithful adaptation doesn't necessarily mean "as dark as you can make it".

[Reikowolf]

I'm glad they're scrapping the sam raimi led spiderman movies.
From casting tobey as parker to making the goblin look like a total power ranger, i'm glad sam is finally out. It's almost unbelievable that he was interested in having the freaking vulture in sm4...the freaking VULTURE!! :cmad::cmad:

On top of that he absolutely ruined venom . Seriously topher freaking grace? That little guy was the total opposite of what brock supposed to look like. :cmad:

In this upcoming reboot i hope they try to take some things from the spiderman: animated series. That spiderman cartoon from the 90's. I would be thrilled if they do.

down to every detail

- A cast that wears the same clothes every movie
- overly muscular 30 something looking males
- recap of recycled movie footage
- laser guns instead of bullets

:awesome:

I get what you're saying though, it will be interesting to see what direction they will take it. I'm inclined to think that they will lean towards the Spectacular Spider-Man Animated as the 90's Animated is outdated as it took place Pre-Ultimate universe.

I do strongly disagree with you on Venom though, not a good character, and I grew up at the height of his fame. Maximum Carnage was the Spider-Man story written for my generation of reader. I stopped reading in the middle of the Clone Saga and have just been keeping up with the story lines and history. Got to say, issues 40-200 (best writing in the entire series). A lot of what inspired Raimi was in those stories, which is why I love the Raimi trilogy so.

I hope Marc Webb can make the franchise proud. It should be okay if he is inspired by USM 1-100. Very good rehash of the early spidey arcs.

[The Slang]

down to every detail

- A cast that wears the same clothes every movie
- overly muscular 30 something looking males
- recap of recycled movie footage
- laser guns instead of bullets

:awesome:

.

Anyone notice that Raimi's movies reused footage or atleast cgi animations?

[El Payaso]

Anyone notice that Raimi's movies reused footage or atleast cgi animations?

I have. Awful. But very much in the vein of the 1970's TV series. :woot:

Oh, and in every movie Spidey has to rescue falling women and all those scenes look the same.