Sequels New Raimi Interview

[UltimateJustin]

They simply won't make Spidey rated R.

*kisses Visionary's tears*

 

[GoldGoblin]

SM3 is as hot as the water is gonna get(which was lukewarm),prepare for the water to be alot more colder in SM4,not hotter.

 

[Spiderine]

Its a shame but you are probably right. Let the decline begin.

 

[Visionary]

T2 is a serious sci-fi movie and everyone bought that a super advanced T-1000 robot was in our world. Spiderman has cartoon ancillary characters like JJJ that make up his world. Would JJJ act the same silly way that is imperative to keeping him in character in your hard boiled R-rated epic?

No, JJJ wouldn't be acting like humorous moron, absolutely not, that's the point of the R-rating. He shouldn't be acting like that in a PG-13 film. Maybe the reason they bought the T-1000 robot, because it wasn't watered down to its very last compound for the kiddies.

You think MORE adults and children would flock to R-rated Spiderman movies? How many more people can they get, they all ready do about as well as any other movies out there. Even if the movies were twice as good as they are they wouldnt make twice as much money, theres only so much market and Spiderman has it "in his web" to put a phrase in quotes. And you are still forgetting that the 80's are gone.

Anything is possible, if you have a movie like Batman Begins (a PG-13 film) a worldwide icon, that made less money at the box office than 300 (a hardcore R-rated film) and an unknown comic book movie, the possibilities are good. If nothing else, even if it only made the same or a little bit less, as long as the quality increased a great deal, as a fourth comic book film, the numbers would still be beyond great.

Kids cant go see R-rated movies anymore unless they buy a ticket to another movie, and then Sony doesnt get to eat, things are not as lax as they used to be.

Kids can't go see R-rated films, are you freakin' nuts? There was kids in the theaters when I watched 300 (even in IMAX), The Matrix, Passion of the Christ and all three SAW films, multiple times. If you can't stop kids from buying R-rated video games, what chance do have you against movies?

The Spiderman movies get away with enough violence and killing to sufficiently depict the villain as threatening and any more would be unnecessary.

If you say so, now is this violence before or after the cute kids, the raindrop song or the dancing scenes? What I'm fighting for is how those scenes are written and depicted, which are watered down and rarely threatening and intense, and are usually followed by juvenile antics.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

As GoldGoblin said, Spidey3 is the hottest it's going to get and I really am glad that the hottest it's going to get. Thats the hottest it needs to get, over that is stupid and not right. I want these film's to be meant for people of all ages and advertised everywhere and have a huge fanbase. I truly feel an R-rating would not only ruin that, but it would also be the most stupid idea I pretty much have heard. Think about a TV Spot, "This Summer! prepare! go for the ultimate spin! Again! rated-R", that would be horrible. Also think of this, you walk into the theatre and ask for tickets for the film, the guy who works there says you need a parent with you to see the film. That right there is horrible as well.

I was looking around in Target tonight and they had Marvel Select collection of Spidey comic's in them such as Spider-Man Family, etc. the shelf had a sign saying "Ages 7-9". I thought about it and it really shows that Spidey is aimed towards kids as well. Spidey is meant to be PG-13. If we even thought about the rating before there was ever a Spidey film, we would have guessed it was PG-13.

R-rating is defenitley a no and it would never ever ever ever work IMO, nor do I want it to.

 

[Arcturus]

I heavily doubt we'll see an R-rated Spidey flick.

 

[Advanced Dark]

R Rated Spider-Man = Drunk Producer on acid with half a brain.

 

[Visionary]

PG-13 Spider-Man = Singing, Dancing, Raimi's kids, lack of intensity, childish antics, melodrama, crying and villains who are never truly bad.

 

[Mr Jide]

PG-13 Spider-Man = Singing, Dancing, Raimi's kids, lack of intensity, childish antics, melodrama, crying and villains who are never truly bad.

Bingo!

The funny thing is, spider-man can easily have elements of R-rated scenes in these movies and it can still be passed of as pg-13 but the people in charge lack the intelligence to execute and pull this off. It's simply a matter of manipulation really, yet sony is king when it comes to manipulating audiences with their marketing but the actual product? A complete and utter waste.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

PG-13 Spider-Man = Singing, Dancing, Raimi's kids, lack of intensity, childish antics, melodrama, crying and villains who are never truly bad.

Just because the first three Spider-Man movies had those things and were PG-13 does not mean that there is a causation between the two. To say that is only slightly more logical than saying "Including Rosemary Harris in the cast = Singing, Dancing, Raimi's kids, lack of intensity, childish antics, melodrama, crying and villains who are never truly bad."

It's not as if good, serious PG-13 films have never been made.

 

[Visionary]

Bingo!

The funny thing is, spider-man can easily have elements of R-rated scenes in these movies and it can still be passed of as pg-13 but the people in charge lack the intelligence to execute and pull this off. It's simply a matter of manipulation really, yet sony is king when it comes to manipulating audiences with their marketing but the actual product? A complete and utter waste.

It's not as if good, serious PG-13 films have never been made.

You're right, I actually thought that the latest BOURNE movie was R-rated. It's just a really strong, well written and intense PG-13. I hate to see what's going to happen once they release Spidey on Broadway, making the character even more family friendly, in turn, we'll probably get a PG or G-rating by 2010.

But Spidey's too deep into the kiddy stuff, that an R-rating is needed desperately so the mindset of the writers/producers/director's approach can change.

 

[IamProdigy]

Damn...if Spider-Man 3 is the hottest it's going to get...that's a shame, cuz it was...HORRIBLE.

 

[Spider-Fan]

We are still on this R-rated Spider-Man thing? Come on!

You want a more serious approach, than make it a more serious PG-13 movie, but an R-rating is not needed at all.

 

[Leenie]

I'm more or less convinced that Spider-Man 4 is going to be doomed no matter what it does.

If we get the Lizard as our villain, then we're most definitely going to get a villain who is not "truly evil," because the Lizard is one of the more sympathetic characters in the Marvel universe. From what I've been reading here, the people don't want that despite the high demand for the Lizard (which is a contradiction in itself, but whatever).

People either want to pick everything apart for the heck of it, or they don't know what they want to see in Spider-Man 4.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I'm more or less convinced that Spider-Man 4 is going to be doomed no matter what it does.

Spider-Man 4 isn't doomed when you have Sam Raimi, who, for the record has directed 3 amazing Spider-Man film's and is still full of idea's.

 

[Advanced Dark]

They shouldn't call it SM4. It should be The Amazing Spider-Man. Raimi should produce, we need a new director and cast anyways so why negotiate an expensive 1 film deal with Tobey when they can tie up an unknown for a 4 pic deal.

 

[MrSmith1114]

They shouldn't call it SM4. It should be The Amazing Spider-Man. Raimi should produce, we need a new director and cast anyways so why negotiate an expensive 1 film deal with Tobey when they can tie up an unknown for a 4 pic deal.

That's what they should have done for Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. Called the second movie The Amazing Spider-Man and called the third one something else such as The Sensational Spider-Man or The Spectacular Spider-Man. It's much more original than just numbering them.

However, the past is the past, and the movies are numbered now, so I see no reason to do anything but number them.

 

[IamProdigy]

I just don't wanna see a Raimi-directed Spider-Man movie ever again. He lost hope and his "vision" for the series after Spider-Man 2 for sure.

 

[Blader5489]

That's what they should have done for Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. Called the second movie The Amazing Spider-Man and called the third one something else such as The Sensational Spider-Man or The Spectacular Spider-Man. It's much more original than just numbering them.

However, the past is the past, and the movies are numbered now, so I see no reason to do anything but number them.

The original title for SM2 was "The Amazing Spider-Man" but they were forced to change it because it infringes on the comic book's title.

 

[chaseter]

That's what they should have done for Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. Called the second movie The Amazing Spider-Man and called the third one something else such as The Sensational Spider-Man or The Spectacular Spider-Man. It's much more original than just numbering them.

However, the past is the past, and the movies are numbered now, so I see no reason to do anything but number them.

Sensational

 

[UltimateJustin]

SM4 will suck because JJJ will be comic relief and not a realistic character.

 

[Visionary]

I expect them to start talking about SM4 soon after the writers' strike is over. I want someone to land an interview with the dude writing the script.

Big Hulk Smiley...

 

[antonydelfini]

Stan Lee absolutely LOVED, let me repeat that "ABSOLUTELY LOVED" James Cameron's R-RATED SPIDER-MAN scriptment. So, to say that he wouldn't be for it is completely asinine.

Actually, I'd like to see an R-rated Spidey, Bats, Supes and X-Men film. Because so far, on an intensity, dramatic and threatening level, these movies are *****.

Do you read Spidey, Bats, Supes, and X-men comic books? Even the best comic book stories from these characters you want R-Rated are very kid-friendly? Seriously if you think the movies are *****, you must also think that the comic books are *****. I can imagine you reading the Dark Phoenix saga or Batman: Year One and thinking why Jean Grey did not slash Scott's head off or why Frank Miller did not show Bruce Wayne having sex with a prostitute or why Superman never said s#!t and f*&k in All-star superman.

Doing R-Rated stuff on characters that are supposed to be for all ages is as stupid and as disrespectful as doing pg 13 stuff for R-Rated characters (punisher, john constantine, sin city). And I'm sorry to say you'll never see an R-Rated Spidey film until the day you die, because most people are not as crazy and as disrespectful to these characters as you are.

 

[Visionary]

I love it that no matter what Spider-Man fans think, I have the creator of Spider-Man on my side, who agreed with the R-rated elements in a Spidey film...and that's good enough for me.

And please, don't be sorry to say. I'm finding out a lot about fanboys, and why we should prepare ourselves for songs like THREE BLIND MICE or LONDON BRIDGE IS FALLING DOWN, as we watch Peter Parker never grow up like Peter Pan. Yeah, let's keep our mentality set to a 4th grade level as the next film rolls around. If nothing else, at least we'll have another plush toy, from another Spidey movie to rival that of Elmo's toys.

 

[Advanced Dark]

So you're saying Spider-Man's creator thought it was a good idea to make a 100-200+ million dollar Spider-Man movie that was rated R and that he would approve of the franchise going in that direction? LOL All I know is Stan Lee was a great creator back in the day but uh he did NOTHING to expand his characters and pretty much his decisions led Marvel into bankruptcy as well as 2 of his other ventures. Pow will likely follow.

It's more likely he just liked the script. However maybe you can prove me wrong. Link? I'm sure it's a great script. Why is this rated R argument going on in this thread. Let it go.