Sequels Sony is thinking May 2011 for Spidey 4

[Kirk Langstrom]

What makes this franchise so bad? Sam made some changes because it's his film and he still satisfied alot of us, including me. No comic film will have 110% of the material from books put into the film. As I have said, this is still my #1 favorite superhero franchise and I'm sticking by it.

Exactly. How many comic book movies before and AFTER Sam's Spidey films followed the comic's storylines faithfully? The Crow, and to some extent, Donner's Superman....other than that, i can't think of any. Even Burton and Nolan's excellent Batman movies took considerable liberties.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Don't pity it too much, they've made a fortune off it. How, because most movie-goers don't give a crap about the details that fanboys do. If only MARVEL cared about their characters, especially their flagship character...but they do not. Just give them a check, and you're free to do what you like with the characters. Good Ol' Marvel.

Incorrect. Marvel has only made two movies; Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, both of which had lots of "geek candy" for the fans....

You can't fault Marvel today for farming their properties out to movie studios 15 and even 20 years ago. That was the way things were done back then, Marvel in no way was able to get their own movies off the ground in those days. That, and the guy who was in charge back then isn't even WITH Marvel anymore.

There's a couple of books i can reccomend for you if you're interested that talk in great length about what was going on at the company at that time. You really should research it a bit more before you go spouting off un-informed nonsense about a company you obviously know very little about.

 

[Visionary]

I think the movie needs new creative control (director/producers). But no one wants to let go of this cash cow. We all know Sam Raimi's style and direction all too well, his style is like a finger print, it doesn't change. That's what Spider-Man 4 needs the most, something new and better in style, storytelling, acting, action, direction, dialogue, special effects, etc. We need to see a film with complexity and maturity, where as we can't guess exactly what's coming next based on previous films.

 

[Visionary]

Incorrect. Marvel has only made two movies; Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, both of which had lots of "geek candy" for the fans....

You can't fault Marvel today for farming their properties out to movie studios 15 and even 20 years ago. That was the way things were done back then, Marvel in no way was able to get their own movies off the ground in those days. That, and the guy who was in charge back then isn't even WITH Marvel anymore.

There's a couple of books i can reccomend for you if you're interested that talk in great length about what was going on at the company at that time. You really should research it a bit more before you go spouting off un-informed nonsense about a company you obviously know very little about.

You talk like a crazed man. Of course Marvel has a freakin' say in the making of Spider-Man, their deal with Sony. The Spider-Man script has to get Marvel's okay, before they start filming it.

Marvel just simply doesn't give a damn about what they do with Spider-Man. Pretty much like them not caring about what's being done to him in the comics. I suppose that you're going to tell me that Marvel, doesn't have any control over the content of the comic books either, that why their such crap, eh? They just don't care.

Marvel could have easily put their foot down and said. "Sorry (Raimi/Sony), but we do not want Sandman being Uncle Ben's killer, it deviates too much from the source material, and we won't stand for it". Sony/Raimi would have simply got rid of that storyline, period, it's that simple, 'IF' they gave a damn.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

You talk like a crazed man. Of course Marvel has a freakin' say in the making of Spider-Man, their deal with Sony. The Spider-Man script has to get Marvel's okay, before they start filming it.

Marvel just simply doesn't give a damn about what they do with Spider-Man. Pretty much like them not caring about what's being done to him in the comics. I suppose that you're going to tell me that Marvel, doesn't have any control over the content of the comic books either, that why their such crap, eh? They just don't care.

Marvel could have easily put their foot down and said. "Sorry (Raimi/Sony), but we do not want Sandman being Uncle Ben's killer, it deviates too much from the source material, and we won't stand for it". Sony/Raimi would have simply got rid of that storyline, period, it's that simple, 'IF' they gave a damn.

Sony has the legal rights to bring the Spider-Man character to the big screen.

Marvel today has no more say it what was done with Sandman, or Uncle Ben or whoEVER Sony decides to use in THEIR movie, than you or i do.

So again; stop making uneducated comments about a company and their situation that you obviously have no clue whatsoever about.

And as far as the comics being "crap", that's really a matter of opinion.


"THE SPIDER-MAN SCRIPT HAS TO GET MARVEL'S OK BEFORE THEY START FILMING IT" Not according to Marvel's EIC. He has said in many interviews that he has no control on what happens in the movies and cartoons...

 

[TheSlag]

Hey, thanks for the re-cap, professor.

Any time Old Man. I realize you have those senile moments.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Any time Old Man. I realize you have those senile moments.

yes, because obviouly if there's an "old man" in someone's avatar, then the poster must be one as well.

 

[TheSlag]

What makes this franchise so bad? Sam made some changes because it's his film and he still satisfied alot of us, including me. No comic film will have 110% of the material from books put into the film. As I have said, this is still my #1 favorite superhero franchise and I'm sticking by it.

It's not that this franchise is so bad well at least SM1 and SM2 were good. SM3, yeap definitely not that good.

And Spider-Man is "not" his (Raimi's) film. That is the problem when the director thinks he is above the subject matter. When he thinks he can write script/stories better than the source. Better than the professionals that do it for a living.

And for the record, Spider-Man is my favorite too.

The basic point is, and remains, it could of been "GREAT" had they stuck closer to the source material. PERIOD.

 

[TheSlag]

yes, because obviouly if there's an "old man" in someone's avatar, then the poster must be one as well.

Nawh, trust me, I do not give you the respect I give the character you try to mimic. It's just senile is "Senile", regardless of age. Or when one cannot follow the thread that had progressed to discussing the addition of Gwen Stacy.

oh... before I foget...

 

[TheSlag]

Sam Raimi and company have the ability to make a good Spider-Man movie. They showed that when they made Spider-Man 2. The franchise has been decent in my book. Not spectacular and not horrible, but decent.

Agreed. But you will note that they took the Spider-Man no more story line from the comics. Always a good start. And they took one of Spidey's greatest villains (Doc Ock)... even though they did "mess him up some" in character/motivation.

But, even with that, when you have Ock and Spidey battling on subway cars, and wall battles, it is hard to mess that up.

 

[TheSlag]

I think the movie needs new creative control (director/producers). But no one wants to let go of this cash cow. We all know Sam Raimi's style and direction all too well, his style is like a finger print, it doesn't change. That's what Spider-Man 4 needs the most, something new and better in style, storytelling, acting, action, direction, dialogue, special effects, etc. We need to see a film with complexity and maturity, where as we can't guess exactly what's coming next based on previous films.

Agreed.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Nawh, trust me, I do not give you the respect I give the character

Oh, im sorry; did i some how give you the impression i give a **** what you do or don't "respect"? My bad.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

What makes this franchise so bad? Sam made some changes because it's his film and he still satisfied alot of us, including me. No comic film will have 110% of the material from books put into the film. As I have said, this is still my #1 favorite superhero franchise and I'm sticking by it.

Exactly. How many comic book movies before and AFTER Sam's Spidey films followed the comic's storylines faithfully? The Crow, and to some extent, Donner's Superman....other than that, i can't think of any. Even Burton and Nolan's excellent Batman movies took considerable liberties.

Yes Raimi does have the right to maybe interpret characters a little different in his vision. But it doesn't give him a excuse to completely butcher the characters. He might as well of just created his own ones from scratch.

Spiderman 1 was perfect, apart from power ranger goblin, the others, not so much. Why make Ock a sympathetic villain?!?! And why make all of Spideys villains linked to him on a personal level? It works with some of them, but not every single frickin one!! Sandman uncle Ben's killer? Do me a favour.

Then he does and makes Peter Parker a whinging little prick, Harry was a much better character than him. And don't get me started on MJ, but that may be Dunst's fault really.

The guy (Raimi) thinks he is being clever by reinventing these characters, but he is just making them crap. He doesn't need to reinvent them, they are already written for him. Little tweaks here and there? No problem. But when you start making your lead a unlikeable prick and decide to make every single frickin villain personally attached to Spidey you are a idiot.

Now I love Spidey, I want to see him get the right treatment. But unless Raimi and co stop thinking they are cleverer than the original comic writers it isn't going to happen.

 

[Visionary]

Why would he stop? The films have made 2.5 billion off of doing so. And most importantly, he has no one (MARVEL) to stop him.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Because of his respect to fans and the original writers who created these characters? Maybe that's asking too much though.

 

[Visionary]

I would want that respect from MARVEL first. This way, it wouldn't matter who directed Spider-Man, you know that you're gonna get the goods.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well yea, I'm firmly behind Marvel studios trying to get all their characters back so they can make a MU in film form. But I doubt that will happen, at least for a while, there is just too much money these other studios can make out of them.

 

[Visionary]

Sure, that would be all well and good. But Marvel still has the right to enforce their power over the content of the script, to pulling it closer to the comics. They themselves should already have a vision for what they want, even before a director is hired. There are just changes that Marvel should NOT allow directors to make with their characters.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

And Spider-Man is "not" his (Raimi's) film. That is the problem when the director thinks he is above the subject matter. When he thinks he can write script/stories better than the source. Better than the professionals that do it for a living.

He's a fan, just like us. He doesn't think that 0he's brtter than thesource material, he's just combining the lee/Ditko/Romita days of the comics and combining them with his own ideas. That's not a bad thing, IMO.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Where the hell are people getting off that they think Raimi think he's better than us?

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think the movie needs new creative control (director/producers). But no one wants to let go of this cash cow. We all know Sam Raimi's style and direction all too well, his style is like a finger print, it doesn't change. That's what Spider-Man 4 needs the most, something new and better in style, storytelling, acting, action, direction, dialogue, special effects, etc. We need to see a film with complexity and maturity, where as we can't guess exactly what's coming next based on previous films.

Exactly how mature can Spider-Man go? And don't give me "I want a hard boiled crime story." Becuause that's not it at all. That's Batman. I remember someone saying that to give it a more mature edge. Whihc is incorrect. Spider-Man is Spider-Man. I don't want to see dank shadows and constant rain. Is that the kind of stuff that means a mature take to you? What makes a story mature is the writing and its themes.

 

[Shiaruki]

Exactly how mature can Spider-Man go? And don't give me "I want a hard boiled crime story." Becuause that's not it at all. That's Batman. I remember someone saying that to give it a more mature edge. Whihc is incorrect. Spider-Man is Spider-Man. I don't want to see dank shadows and constant rain. Is that the kind of stuff that means a mature take to you? What makes a story mature is the writing and its themes.

Agreed, I mean... Christ, there are too many people who want an overly mature Spider-Man film. It would be immoral to turn a Spidey movie into a Batman movie, which it seems, is the direction of which several people here seem to want the franchise to go. Spider-Man isn't meant to be particularly mature. Please give it more consideration people.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Exactly how mature can Spider-Man go? And don't give me "I want a hard boiled crime story." Becuause that's not it at all. That's Batman. I remember someone saying that to give it a more mature edge. Whihc is incorrect. Spider-Man is Spider-Man. I don't want to see dank shadows and constant rain. Is that the kind of stuff that means a mature take to you? What makes a story mature is the writing and its themes.

No, he thinks showing The Lizard tear someone to pieces on screen makes the movie "mature", lol...

 

[The Joker]

No, he thinks showing The Lizard tear someone to pieces on screen makes the movie "mature", lol...

Never going to see anything like that. I reckon Doc Ock's hospital massacre is as violent as it can get. And that was awesome.

Not a good scene for anyone who has a thing about fingernails

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Never going to see anything like that. I reckon Doc Ock's hospital massacre is as violent as it can get. And that was awesome.

Not a good scene for anyone who has a thing about fingernails

Agreed!