The Amazing Spider-Man Raimi talks of SM4

[Frodo]

I think he has:



Link: http://www.wjactv.com/atthemovies/21295978/detail.html

He knows SM-3 was a weak effort. He knows the majority of the fans disliked it. I bet even he doesn't care for it much himself. Even when watching SM-3, you can see it's missing the flair that the first two movies had. Raimi seemed to be just going thru the motions. His heart wasn't in it.

Well clearly SM3 had too many cooks. Maybe now that the last one was a mega hit, they'll be able to let him have more lee way in telling a good story instead of trying to fit every villan under the sun into the film. We just have to wait and see if the story he wants to tell is better then the last one.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Well clearly SM3 had too many cooks. Maybe now that the last one was a mega hit, they'll be able to let him have more lee way in telling a good story instead of trying to fit every villan under the sun into the film. We just have to wait and see if the story he wants to tell is better then the last one.

Thats one way of looking at it. The other is that the studio will say "Look at what a financial success SM3 was. You'll listen to us from now on." Hopefully, that wont happen. The DVD sales for SM3 were less than hoped for, so maybe Sony will have learned their lesson. Sam claims he has full creative power over SM4. Lets hope it stays that way.

 

[sauronthegreat]

If the DVD sales were not so great, then I'm really hoping for a new release before Spider-Man 4, and not just an extended cut, but a whole director's cut of the film.

 

[Smit84]

If the DVD sales were not so great, then I'm really hoping for a new release before Spider-Man 4, and not just an extended cut, but a whole director's cut of the film.

Sam Raimi said the theatrical cut is the director's cut. It was also true of the other Spider-man films.

 

[sauronthegreat]

Sam Raimi said the theatrical cut is the director's cut. It was also true of the other Spider-man films.

It wasn't for Spider-Man 2 and I think there is a lot of material that if put rightly could make part 3 a decent film.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I always knews Raimi wasn't that stupid to suddenly shift like that. I mean you look at all his films, he's a great filmmaker. And SM3 didn't seem like him at all. With the producers and studio interfering, his heart wasn't in it to tell a story he was passionate about.

I love that article. It's reasurring. Even better he agrees with the critisims. Not many filmmakers admit to that.

 

[chaseter]

It wasn't for Spider-Man 2 and I think there is a lot of material that if put rightly could make part 3 a decent film.

SM3 needs a lot of cuts and edits and replacements to make it a decent film. A lot of the stuff that we know that was filmed (Flint and his daughter at the park and Venom coming there to team up, Sandman's daughter asking him not to kill Spider-Man, and a longer birth of Sandman). But, it cannot make up for emo Peter, Harry with amnesia, Bernerd the Butler, and the overly painful emo Parker street song as well as the jazz club. It could help the movie, but it is still going to be pretty meh. SM2.1 was just more icing on an already delicious cake. Putting great icing on a crappy cake will help a little, but it is still going to be a meh cake.

And, I hate...HATE, the symbiote musical theme. The symbiote is menacing, it is suppose to represent a bad long term choice for a short term gain. The music there just did not fit and it was pretty weak imo.

 

[gar19rett]

spiderman 3 just needed to take out the venom plotline for a different movie

 

[Octoberist]

Bernard the Butler was the one that character in Spidey 3 that I was like "WHHHHAAAT"?

 

[Spider-Man Luvr28]

Back to basics for Spidey 4...

Sam Raimi has been interviewed quite a lot recently and earlier this week he was talking about possible villains for Spider-Man 4. Today Coventry Blog have a quote from him saying that he agrees that there were too many villains in Spider-Man 3, and that he learned ‘limitations’ while filming Drag Me To Hell which he hopes to bring to Spider-Man 4:

Asked about complaints that there were too many villains in Spider-Man 3, he said: “I think having so many villains detracted from the experience. I would agree with the criticism.”

Raimi added that he had learned some new lessons and storytelling tricks from his last film, Drag Me to Hell. “I think I’ve learned about the importance of getting to the point and the importance of having limitations, and I’m hoping to take that into a production where I’m actually allowed to explore with more of the tools to pull it off with a little more splendor.

“I hope I don’t lose that edge that I’ve just found. That would be my approach to ‘Spider-Man 4′: to get back to the basics.”

http://filmonic.com/sam-raimi-back-basics-spider-man-4-talks-5

 

[The Joker]

^^^ It is very reassuring to know that Raimi knows he messed up with SM-3, and wants to set things right with part 4.

 

[spider-neil]

there were three villians and by dropping one of the villians it would have made for a better movie. if they HAD to have venom in the movie then the bell tower should have been the FINAL sequence, venom is born - roll credits.

if venom hadn't appeared in the spidey movie then the venom movie would be much better because they could write origin and do what they want. I suspect they will ignore what happened in spidey 3 anyway meaning venom was in the SM3 movie for no reason other than to make it bloated mess.

 

[Oscorp]

^^^ It is very reassuring to know that Raimi knows he messed up with SM-3, and wants to set things right with part 4.

Agree! I have a good feeling about this

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Even though I loved S-M3, it's great to know Raimi is back on track.

 

[Ratcrawler]

It's not that part 3 had too many villains. It's that two of those villains were pretty outlandish, had NOTHING to do with each other and just sort of miraculously appeared in the same setting.

Personally, if I had to choose between Venom and Sandman in context of sPider-Man 3, I think Venom fit the story better. Harry's revenge and donning the Goblin title were being set up in the first two films and had to come into fruition here, and the whole theme of the movie was pretty much confronting and overcoming your dark side. Harry's was brought on by his need for revenge and Goblin formula and Peter's by the Black Suit and possibly fame. In the end, they both could have forgave each other and teamed up against a more powerful Venom who, in Sandman's absence, might have had more screen time to develop.

All Sandman really did was dredge up the past.

 

[Nightmare]

Even though I loved S-M3, it's great to know Raimi is back on track.

Wut?

 

[spider-neil]

another thing that was annoying about SM3 is if you looked at all the trailers they are very serious in tone but when you watch the movie the movie is played for laughs. its like false advertising.

 

[zeptron]

another thing that was annoying about SM3 is if you looked at all the trailers they are very serious in tone but when you watch the movie the movie is played for laughs. its like false advertising.

I have to agree. Ironically this was supposed to be the darkest movie, but it turned out to be the campiest.

Instead of making the black suit sub-plot into the much darker territory it deserved, they decided to turn Peter into a laughing stock. It had awful humor and it couldn't be taken seriously. Why did they have to put so much focus on what Peter was like with the black suit? We saw him fully clothed in the suit ONCE. ONE fight with the suit. We never saw him stop bad guys in an overly-aggressive way. There was cool Bugle photos and black Spidey doing some bad-ass stuff, WHY didn't we get a montague of black Spidey doings stuff like that across the city instead of some crappy montague about him dancing through the streets?

 

[spider-neil]

I have to agree. Ironically this was supposed to be the darkest movie, but it turned out to be the campiest.

Instead of making the black suit sub-plot into the much darker territory it deserved, they decided to turn Peter into a laughing stock. It had awful humor and it couldn't be taken seriously. Why did they have to put so much focus on what Peter was like with the black suit? We saw him fully clothed in the suit ONCE. ONE fight with the suit. We never saw him stop bad guys in an overly-aggressive way. There was cool Bugle photos and black Spidey doing some bad-ass stuff, WHY didn't we get a montague of black Spidey doings stuff like that across the city instead of some crappy montague about him dancing through the streets?

I'm really glad TDK cleaned up at the box office because SM3 is the most successful of the spidey trilogy so they may have that comedy is the way to go but TDK showed with a serious subject matter you can dominate the box office. the truth is I'm 100% certain if TDK had come out for SM3 you would have seen a different SM3. they would have embraced the darkness of the plotline rather ridiculing it.

 

[LightningFlash]

^^^ It is very reassuring to know that Raimi knows he messed up with SM-3, and wants to set things right with part 4.

Well he doesn't really need to set things right with part 4. Just have a better storyline; I mean, both Osborns are dead, and Peter and MJ are trying to get back on the right track. S-M 3 sucked, yes, but there isn't really anything that Raimi needs to do to "set things right". He just needs to go back to doing more story than anything. I would say work more on the Peter/MJ relationship, and perhaps bring May more into the main plot.

The only thing I can really think of is change Dr. Connors' career before he becomes Lizard, lol.

Wut?

Yah, it's strange hearing that. It's like hearing someone liked Catwoman.

 

[The Joker]

Well he doesn't really need to set things right with part 4. Just have a better storyline

That's what I mean by setting things right. Get the franchise back on track again.

Btw, I'd change your signature if I were you. Calling people here morons is a bannable offence.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

Yah, it's strange hearing that. It's like hearing someone liked Catwoman.

cool story bro.

 

[Spider-Man Luvr28]

I don't think this has been posted but Raimi confirmed Campbell will have "a good, meaty role."

When MTV News had a chance to talk to Raimi, of course we needed to know if Campbell was speaking the truth. After sneaking into cameos in the first three "Spider-Man" flicks, has the "Evil Dead" star really nabbed a major part in the fourth installment?

As soon as I asked Raimi this question, he burst into laughter, as you can hear if you click on the video in this post. "I promised him we would write something because I really love putting him in the pictures," he then said. "I promised him a good, meaty role."

Video/interview: http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/10/1...ampbell-will-have-meaty-role-in-spider-man-4/

I love watching Campbell in the Spidey movies so I'm always glad to see him in his roles in the franchise.

 

[Venom 1988]

The reporter also forgot to say that Raimi has no idea what role it could be yet. So hes not a villain that's for sure, (Thank you Jeebus)

 

[Grievous]

I think Venom should of been kept for 4. The bad guys are key in a movie and too many I think can be a bad thing.