Sequels Should there even be a Fourth movie?

[Venom 1988]

why does there have to be more than one villian in the next one isnt that what whent wrong in the batman francise to many villians and joel shumacher.

No thats not what went wrong, it has nothing to do with the amount of villains(i.e. Batman Returns, Batman Begins, etc...) What went wrong with the Batman franchise was the campy direction and the script.

Hopefully Vanderbilt has some clean ass ideas, though, featuring one villian.

Its already been confirmed that there having two villains, so your out of luck.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Everyone stop blaming the multi-villains system for the downfall of these movies. Fact is multiple villains can work, IF THE STORY IS PROPERLY PACED!!! That has been the problem. Schumacher's Batman movies didn't just suck cause of the villain system...they sucked cause the direction sucked. Same for every failed superhero movie. When the direction and story are good, movie is good. Regardless of villains count.

 

[Venom 1988]

Everyone stop blaming the multi-villains system for the downfall of these movies. Fact is multiple villains can work, IF THE STORY IS PROPERLY PACED!!! That has been the problem. Schumacher's Batman movies didn't just suck cause of the villain system...they sucked cause the direction sucked. Same for every failed superhero movie. When the direction and story are good, movie is good. Regardless of villains count.

Thank you

 

[sauronthegreat]

I totally agree. The number of villains is not the problem, the direction is. And maybe it's time that Spider-Man should face a not sympathetic villain, but a group of cold-blooded killers and terrorists The Sinister Six. A group that would first frame Spider-Man and then attack the city. I think that it would be a right path after the third film, if ever this franchise continues. In my opinion The Six should be: Mysterio, Scorpion, Electro, Vulture, Kraven, and Chameleon.

 

[comic_book_guy]

There has to be atleast 3 more and as for people saying their isnt any stories left...are you joking!? lol. and some people are saying that they want to see different actors/director in the next movies how would you be able to sit and watch a sequal to 3 movies with a complete different style of filming and completly different actors/actresses?? the director is perfect and the actors/acrtreses are perfect! anyway i thought SM4 had already been confirmed from IMDB.com :P lol

 

[UltimateJustin]

No, I don't care if there are two villians, I'm just saying I dont see what the obsession with having two is all about. I prefer each movie to be "Spiderman faces off against ____" and every major villian gets his own film. It worked with Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus. Its just the classier way to go about things.

Yeah, there are tons of STORIES left to tell, in that "Spiderman stops a criminal from doing harm" is a story. Any going back to the problems with MJ well will be forced, played out and embarrassing. It works in the comics (or worked) because comics are a continuous story, but even the it got repetitive. In a movie it will seem like recycling. I'm not worried about two villians because James Vanderbilt handled several villians nicely in The Rundown, the great movie of 2003.

 

[The Joker_1000]

Everyone stop blaming the multi-villains system for the downfall of these movies. Fact is multiple villains can work, IF THE STORY IS PROPERLY PACED!!! That has been the problem. Schumacher's Batman movies didn't just suck cause of the villain system...they sucked cause the direction sucked. Same for every failed superhero movie. When the direction and story are good, movie is good. Regardless of villains count.

I feel that movies like Batman Returns, Batman Forever & Spider-Man 3 did a pretty good job of using more than one villain.

 

[Jick]

Batman Returns and Forever yeah...but SM3 no, imo.
they were too worried with Peter and MJ's relationship to care about the villains.

 

[Frodo]

As long as we don't get Memphisto and the One More Day storyline , I think there are more stories to tellt:.

 

[NewYorkSpider]

Batman Returns and Forever yeah...but SM3 no, imo.
they were too worried with Peter and MJ's relationship to care about the villains.

To much MJ in the movie. She had more scene's than Flint and Eddie combined.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

As long as we don't get Memphisto and the One More Day storyline , I think there are more stories to tellt:.

I completely agree, but that would never happen. OMD and Mephisto should be barred from the whole Spidey universe, so I am really glad OMD is over and done with, but that's for another thread.

Anyway, I think a story they could tell in a later film is maybe The Death of Captain Stacy. I mean, that death was very sad. This is just an idea that popped into my head, but I just thought it would be cool to see that adapted in the 6th or 7th film.

 

[The Joker_1000]

I want to see the Lizard, he's long overdue to be in this franchise.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I want to see the Lizard, he's long overdue to be in this franchise.

Yeah, almost everybody if not everybody wants to see him. Since James Vanderbilt is such a big fan of the films, I think he will feel the same as everybody does and that it's time to introduce the Lizard into this show.

 

[Jick]

To much MJ in the movie. She had more scene's than Flint and Eddie combined.

that's what ruined it.
they wanted to develop a developed character and let the new ones aside.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I feel that movies like Batman Returns, Batman Forever & Spider-Man 3 did a pretty good job of using more than one villain.

BR and SM3 I agree...I hated BF, so I have to disagree on that.

 

[Visionary]

I liked SM3 slightly more than SM1. I also liked X3 slightly more than X1.

Should there even be a Fourth movie?

F--- yeah, and there will be, I've got 2.4 Billion reasons why!

 

[shop_S-mart]

i just hate when the directors/writers try to up the anti from the previous films and end up throwin way to much **** into it like what happened in sm3 and x3 each of those movies could have easilly been two movies and could have been awesome but ratner was trying to hard and i think that raimi is just kinda burned out on sm and we ended up with-imo-two very mediocre moves which on their worst day are far better than batman and robin.

 

[Hulkfan2008!]

my personal response i loved the trilogy i dont want a 4th movie but if it does happen lizard and kraven need to be villians those stories could intertwine perfectly.

 

[Visionary]

THE LIZARD is a must. we'll see.

 

[Visionary]

No, I don't care if there are two villians, I'm just saying I dont see what the obsession with having two is all about. I prefer each movie to be "Spiderman faces off against ____" and every major villian gets his own film. It worked with Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus. Its just the classier way to go about things.

It doesn't matter, these people would have found a way to still b:tch, they did it with SM1/SM2, it makes no difference to them. Whether it's 1 villain or 100.

 

[Dr. Fate]

It'll be interesting to see if general audiences start showing signs of "spider-fatigue" after #3, thus resulting in a not quite earth shattering box office return for Spider-Man 4 (just as the Superman and Batman frachises of yester-decades burned out at their 4th entries), or if the Spider-Man franchise will keep moving along breaking box office records, business as usual...

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

What needs to happen is to break the tradition of "the villains have to serve Peter's story."

I'm not advocating a break from characterization, but just because Raimi decided to focus so closely on Peter does not mean it's the only possible course of action.

The movies should still be about Peter, but they should be more about his responsibility towards the city, not just in his personal problems that just happen to be tied to some sort of wider-scale peril. The movies should start focusing on his role as a hero - that is enough to put him at odds against a villain; there needn't be some sort of personal connection (and this is the only reason why I would actually not want to see the Lizard next).

I have no problem with the last 3 movies; I loved them all. But I think they need to remain an isolated trilogy - the "coming of age" trilogy. Any further movies just need to move on. He should get married, start teaching, and just be an adult. And just a straight-up hero.

 

[StanLee Wannabe]

I agree in part with that, but for the most part I believe people want to see amazing powers done realistically in battle. We've done so much hand-holding with Peter's backstory and emotions - let's get on with the ACTION!

But do it intelligently and with even better production values. Scorpion, Shocker, ... the list goes on and on.

 

[Blader5489]

Everyone stop blaming the multi-villains system for the downfall of these movies. Fact is multiple villains can work, IF THE STORY IS PROPERLY PACED!!! That has been the problem. Schumacher's Batman movies didn't just suck cause of the villain system...they sucked cause the direction sucked. Same for every failed superhero movie. When the direction and story are good, movie is good. Regardless of villains count.

That's not necessarily true. Regardless of director or writer, any superhero movie with multiple villains, where each one has a full character arc, is going to feel crowded. Look at movies like X-Men or Batman Begins--Magneto and Ra's al Ghul are fully fleshed out, but Toad and Falcone were caricatures at best.

 

[Halloween]

Sorry, but Mary Jane must die. Their love triangle bullcrap is so old now.