The Amazing Spider-Man Raimi on past and present

[E.Brock]

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/05/19/sam-raimi-opens-up-about-spider-man-past-and-present/

 

[Dragon]

Interesting interview but the interviewer was also a bit of a jerk. Who thought the Spidey franchise was finished? Spidey 3 may not have been great, but it wasn't disasterously bad. All the bad stuff really came from one element, which was the relationship with Peter and MJ. Venom fans may have been unhappy that the movie wasn't about him, but the bases were covered with the character. He even had a more solid motivation than in the comics for wanting Peter dead.

But MJ simply came off as a total ***** and iy just made Peter seem like an idiot for pursuing her at all.

But back to the interview, it's funny that it's thus far escaped Sam that while he really believes he understands Peeter, so little of that is shown onscreen. That Peter has been throughout the franchise presented as this near-austistic dullard who can't see beyond a childhood crush. I really hope we see more of who Peter really is in this new film.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Wow, interesting interview. I don't like how the interviewer was automatically assuming S-M3 was bad though. ALot of people (including me) thought S-M3 was awesome.

 

[SpeterMan3]

I think there should be a Raimi interview thread with all the others merged. There's gonna be a lot of interviews, and we don't need a thread about every one, right? Btw, here's another one. http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8347

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ Another great interview!

 

[Venom 1988]

Wow, interesting interview. I don't like how the interviewer was automatically assuming S-M3 was bad though.

Because it was

 

[DACrowe]

Can I then say that interviewers should ask Michael Bay, "So how will Transformers 2 not suck like the last one?"

 

[LightningFlash]

Wow, interesting interview. I don't like how the interviewer was automatically assuming S-M3 was bad though. ALot of people (including me) thought S-M3 was awesome.

And a LOT more people thought it was a horrible movie.

That's why the interviewer said what he said.

Can I then say that interviewers should ask Michael Bay, "So how will Transformers 2 not suck like the last one?"

Yeah, if you want.

But look at how many critics and fans enjoyed Transformers more.

 

[Immortalfire]

"What would I have done differently? I would have done everything differently, every single shot. "

A strategic way of saying "I'd have done it without Avi Arad hanging over my head", perhaps?

 

[bryanss3]

yeah the interview seems like he really doesn't like Raimi at all

I know that a lot of people really didn't like Spider-Man 3, so if given the chance to go back and change it, what would he change? "What would I have done differently? I would have done everything differently, every single shot. I think in every picture that I've ever made. Everything that I've done torments me. I really would like another chance except I'd be too embarrassed to ever really try to do them again and no one would want to see the same movie just done differently." Well, he did do that with Evil Dead II didn't he? But anyway, I think that's a standard response for any director, but still interesting to hear from Raimi.

I don't think that is the standard response I think the standard response would be "everyone has opinions but I'm proud of it" or if he tried to defend it in some way. He said he himself didn't like it and he wishes he could have done it better. thats honest not standard.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

And a LOT more people thought it was a horrible movie.

That's why the interviewer said what he said.

Anyobdy who didn't like it doesn't think it's horrible. They were probably just dissappointed with it.

 

[LightningFlash]

No...a lot of people did call it horrible. And it was because of its many flaws and ridiculous retcon.

Fanboys call it disappointing, because it was such a letdown from the first two installments. Other people, and most critics, stated that it was horrible and I call it a tremendous fail.

 

[mjbull23]

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/05/19/sam-raimi-opens-up-about-spider-man-past-and-present/

I enjoyed the interview, allthough brief, it conveyed some of Rami's dissapointment wth the last film. He sincerely cares, and he want's to take the character to a new level of depth that hasn't been seen onscreen yet.


I like Sam alot, I am rooting for him. Evil Dead 1 and 2 and SM 1 and 2 are enough reason to garner my admiration for his skills and talents as a film maker.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

No...a lot of people did call it horrible. And it was because of its many flaws and ridiculous retcon.

The people who call it horrible (specifically, ignorant people that only see comic movies because they feel like it an have no understanding of the character) are the ones who are ignorant to film making. For example, some kid in my school once said that he was pissed that Rocky lost the match in ROcky Balboa, which is why he thought it sucked. ROcky didn't win, but he whent the distance, which is all that matters. Basically, people like that won't say "oh this film was meh. It was dissapointing." They will say "oh this is the most horrible thing on earth."

 

[Ethermatic]

I've got nothing against Sam Raimi, but the more I watch his three Spider-Man films, the more I just wonder why they messed with so much. I can understand when things are changed when adapting a book to film. But a lot of characters, scenarios and stories were changed and when I see that he ended up bringing Gwen Stacy into 3, I wonder why it was at all necessary to change so much.

Truth be told, I think the second film is the only one I can stand anymore. I really, really wish they would've just rebooted the series and followed the comics a bit more. So many classic stories to mesh and tell.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Can I then say that interviewers should ask Michael Bay, "So how will Transformers 2 not suck like the last one?"

For it's source material, Transformers was fine. If you were expecting an emotionally gripping and very intelligent story from a movie based off a cartoon that only existed to promote a toy line...then you were only fooling yourself.

 

[SpeterMan3]

When i first heard about Transformers I thought it was going to be about little kids playing with toys.

 

[TheCardPlayer]

Can I then say that interviewers should ask Michael Bay, "So how will Transformers 2 not suck like the last one?"

Transformers was closer to the source material than any Raimi Spider-Man films, ever were.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Transformers was closer to the source material than any Raimi Spider-Man films, ever were.

Megatron being on earth for centuries, the all-spark, the complete overhaul of Spike, no Ark.. VS Peter meeting MJ first and being perpetually creepy. They are about equal.

 

[LightningFlash]

The people who call it horrible (specifically, ignorant people that only see comic movies because they feel like it an have no understanding of the character) are the ones who are ignorant to film making. For example, some kid in my school once said that he was pissed that Rocky lost the match in ROcky Balboa, which is why he thought it sucked. ROcky didn't win, but he whent the distance, which is all that matters. Basically, people like that won't say "oh this film was meh. It was dissapointing." They will say "oh this is the most horrible thing on earth."

And fanboys are ignorant for the fact that they can say Spider-Man 3 is such a great film, but yet Raimi did NOT do justice to Venom, Sandman, the symbiote, it ruined Uncle Ben's death, and above all, ALL three movies made Spider-Man into a *****.

What the d-bag said about Rocky Balboa, yah, that was idiotic, but at least Rocky Balboa made the Rocky series enjoyable, instead of having it end with Rocky V, which WAS a horrible mess. Spider-Man 3, the premise at the beginning made the movie awesome, and it was supposed to be spectacular with all its hype, but a total letdown and joined the ranks of other superhero adaptation third movies such as Batman Forever, Superman III, X3...

Sam Raimi might have understood the characters of Norman Osborn and changed up Otto Octavius to fit him in Spider-Man 2(which still bothers me how Doc Ock was sympathetic, a lesson Raimi should've learned beforehand, but you can't teach old dogs new tricks I suppose), but Sammy did God-awful changes for Sandy and Venom, which weren't even close as the comics, except for Marko's clothing, and Eddie Brock was more like Ultimate Eddie Brock.

I would know what is a good movie and what's not, and I'm not ignorant to film making, as I am majoring in motion pictures and television at Academy of Art University.

Perhaps Sam Raimi learned from his mistakes, perhaps Arad won't give in his two cents over who should be in the film, but then again, Raimi helped write the story, Raimi is the one who cut the better scenes and put in pointless scenes, Raimi is the one who decided to make the symbiote turn Peter into Gerald Way, or that *****e from Green Day.

That is why Spider-Man 3 was horrible. Certain scenes such as the birth of Sandman and the bell tower were amazing to watch, but having to sit through dance routines and boring-ass Kirsten Dunst only dumbs down the movie. Maguire, to me, was never a great Peter, Dunst is a terrible actress, and the only bright side of the movies were James Franco, and now he won't be in the fourth film.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Perhaps Sam Raimi learned from his mistakes, perhaps Arad won't give in his two cents over who should be in the film, but then again, Raimi helped write the story, Raimi is the one who cut the better scenes and put in pointless scenes, Raimi is the one who decided to make the symbiote turn Peter into Gerald Way, or that *****e from Green Day.

As muc has I didn't mind any of that, and I liked it, Sam wasn't the one who was going to put the Symbiote story in from the start. Avi was.

 

[UltimateJustin]

As muc has I didn't mind any of that, and I liked it, Sam wasn't the one who was going to put the Symbiote story in from the start. Avi was.

Avi Arad butting in and ruining the movie by forcing Venom into the script was awful, but Raimi was still responsible for the retconning of Uncle Ben's death, and worse of all, allowing the Sandman story to conclude without reason. There needed to be a reason why Sandman would go from beating Spider-Man to death in one scene, and then apologizing in the next. Also, there it would probably have felt like there was more resolution if Peter forgave Sandman and meant it, but in the same breath did something to bring the character to justice (like trap him in concrete a la Spectacular SM). I mean after all he broke a ****-ton of laws and killed some cops probably.

He just flies away.. man, still...

SM-3 is still good though, in the top ten superhero movies.

 

[The Joker]

SM-3 is still good though, in the top ten superhero movies.

Not in my top ten, it wouldn't.

It's an awful movie.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Really, I think SM3 is pretty much exactly in the middle of the two groups of fanboys we have who comment on it most (haters and lovers).

It's not great, but not horrible. I'd put it in league with Batman Forever, Daredevil, and X3. Solid movies, pretty much straight average.

However, that said, I still lay a lot of blame on Raimi for the way SM3 turned out. Yes, Arad forced Venom in there, but (and I've been saying this a lot lately) Raimi was the one who handled him poorly. And yes, I get that Raimi didn't like Venom, but instead of giving him a crappy treatment, CHANGE HIM! I mean, Raimi had no problem doing that with any of the other villains in the series! So why not change Brock into an interesting character?

Not only that, but Raimi needed to swallow his pride and realize that the movie just wasn't going to work with three villains. He should have cut Sandman, and given most of Sandman's arc to Brock. You could still deal with the forgiveness theme with Brock. Make brock a struggling Dad who can't get meds for his sick kid because he gambles too much. He steals some of pete's photos. Pete, under black suit influence, gets Brock fired, and this gives Brock the approriate rage at Peter and Spider-man when he gets the suit. He's also plays up the angle of the person who couldn't forgive, and is thus destroyed by it. Not only that, but now you have more time to develop the black suit and Harry.

It would have tightened the narrative, and made for a better story.

Now, I'm willing to give Raimi a shot at the next two movies, but to be completely honest, I just don't like the style he does Spider-man in. The only movie I really enjoyed was SM1. I don't think he truly understands the character of Peter/Spider-man, nor MJ, and I'm not a fan of the overly campy humor. I appreciate what Raimi did for the character and the superhero film genre, but I would really rather he move on and we get someone new.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

but I would really rather he move on and we get someone new.

That won't happen for a while .Well, not with this franchise, anway, and I'm very happy about that. I trust in Sam Raimi, and honestly, I think he'll do a fantastic job on this one.