Spider-man 3.1 finally?!

[henzINNIT]

Could it be that 3.1 - being a special feature and all - doesn't have closing credits? That'd be a few minutes saved, lol.

I agree with Doc, the film is long but every scene serves a purpose. Difficult to crop.

 

[henzINNIT]

The camera scene is hilarious, but IMO takes some tension out of the final battle.

I'd keep it, but cut it waaaay down. It stops for so many punchlines when it could just stop at "Hey kid, you want a job?"

[edit - oops, double post]

 

[DocLathropBrown]

I really doubt with the (seeming) limited amount they added back in they have time to add in Brock/Gwen.

As for the jazz club dance -- it can be trimmed sure, but cut entirely I don't think so.

This really begs the question who did this alternate cut. Raimi loved all that "silly" stuff -- did someone convince him to cut stuff he likes?
If someone else cut without his input -- it's basically a fan cut. Maybe by a pro -- but still a fan cut.

Since 2.1 was 95% extension and only the elevator scene alternate-- it was just a case of adding stuff back.

Cutting stuff out and adding other stuff back in to the tune of negative 2 minutes has the earmarks of an actual director's cut -- but that would imply Raimi had stuff in there that he didn't like.

This, if true, will be fascinating as hell to see.

Agree on the reporters -- awful and every second a waste of time. Sadly the female reporter actress passed away and it would seem ruthless to cut out her scenes though. Unless this cut was made in 2006-07 before she died.

Unless the added scenes are really short or they tear out large chunks of theatrical footage -- how can all the scenes you folks are talking about fit in? That would be like Raimi saying "yeah, we did a terrible editing job -- we left in 10 minutes of bad stuff and left out 8 minutes of better stuff."

That would be a strange admission/scenario.

Thing is, often times a director does not have final say-so when it comes to the editing process--not that the director gets shut out of the editing (though that does sometimes happen), but studios and folks who put up the money have final say. Sam didn't want to adapt Venom, but he's sure in there anyway. So there might be material that was in there that was put in under orders, you never know. On big budget studio movies, only the biggest names have total control over their films. Even Sam isn't Spielberg--Sam still has to do what Sony says.

I really get the feeling with the tonality of 3 that Sam perhaps wasn't entirely comfortable with taking Peter down such a dark road and felt the need to add more comedy than usual/make Peter a 'nerdy' sort-of dark to offset it.

But coming back to the film to adjust it (whenever he did), Sam may have changed his mind and been willing to let go of some humor--or even radically alter the film because it's a companion version to the theatrical, so why not be as different as possible?

 

[Krystal]

I wish that was the case but so many people say that the humor is pure Raimi and the idea of all that stuff being put in against his wishes seems weird.
But for myself, that's exactly what I'd hope for -- a lot of serious stuff put in and most all the lighter moments taken out.
That's my preferred cut.

 

[spiderman2]

Its been about 2 weeks sinces this rumor started. Sure wish Sony would come out and say it is happing if it is. Also side thing but does any one know if Spider-Man 1 had any thing really cut or not? I know most movies have cut stuff but I never really heard any thing about Spider-Man 1 having stuff cut.

 

[Krystal]

Never saw or heard a thing about deleted stuff from 1.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Its been about 2 weeks sinces this rumor started. Sure wish Sony would come out and say it is happing if it is. Also side thing but does any one know if Spider-Man 1 had any thing really cut or not? I know most movies have cut stuff but I never really heard any thing about Spider-Man 1 having stuff cut.

Well, it isn't really a rumor. Rumors are usually started with hearsay and no evidence. This was started by an official product description/press release for the upcoming set, albeit a foreign one. Sony obviously isn't going to make a big deal about it, but all of the specs we have currently for our set matches the Japanese set that includes 3.1 (same # of discs, total film(s) runtime of 660 minutes--accounting for the trilogy and both alternate cuts of 2 and 3).

When the US specs get detailed, we'll get the confirmation.

 

[Spidey_62]

Never saw or heard a thing about deleted stuff from 1.

The only thing I heard was really deleted was toning down the already brutal final battle to delete a segment where the Goblin unleashes a bunch of razor bats on Spider-Man that slice him up bad, because if you notice when he winds up in the warehouse he gets a bunch of scrapes in his suit in the next shot we see the suit. Think it's right when he gets in there before the bomb to the face. That was taken out because it was pushing the PG-13 rating, and Spidey getting punched in the face and spit coming out of his mouth was originally blood coming out of his mouth.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Stan Lee had a different cameo, and two kids see Peter saving the Man and Woman, and he gives a "Shhh!" face.

 

[Nardz937]

Stan Lee had a different cameo, and two kids see Peter saving the Man and Woman, and he gives a "Shhh!" face.

This scene was in one of the TV Spots or trailers. I know I've seen it somewhere, it was in the parade scene.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Yep. I saw it on a HBO commercial, and thinking "that wasn't in the movie..."

At 2min 40sec:
[YT]O0uwj3IcDTg[/YT]

 

[Nardz937]

There it is. Thanks!

 

[PeterBenParker]

Peter also had web-shooters early in the film's lifespan, IIRC. Why they decided to go completely organic is still confusing to me.

 

[hbenthow]

Peter also had web-shooters early in the film's lifespan, IIRC. Why they decided to go completely organic is still confusing to me.

"The main reason was, it was an idea that James Cameron came up with in the treatment. It really is just a subtle riff on Stan Lee's original concept anyway as to whether he shoots webbing mechanically or organically. Finally, in a nutshell, the strength of the movie was always going to be for us as it was in Stan Lee's comic that Peter Parker is one of us. It's what made Spider-Man a unique story, and unique super hero -- he's a kid like us and we soar with him when he becomes this hero. We decided to do everything that we could to keep that concept alive and real and potent to the audience, we wanted him to be someone we really identified with. So that when it came time to talk about the story aspect where he could create the webshooters and have the technological ability to create such a mechanical device in his little Queens bedroom and have the ability of a chemical engineer to the degree that he could create this incredible substance that doesn't really even exist in our world -- we felt, that Cameron's idea was better for the movie. I'm not saying for the comics, I love Stan Lee's idea for the comics, but for the movie to make him a real person and stick with that theme and be true to it throughout the course of the picture we felt that was a change we had to make. " - Sam Raimi

Sam Raimi 05/05/02 Los Angeles Comic Book and Science Fiction Interview

 

[Krystal]

And then he shows the Goblin tech which did not and does not exist in the real world.

 

[PeterBenParker]

"The main reason was, it was an idea that James Cameron came up with in the treatment. It really is just a subtle riff on Stan Lee's original concept anyway as to whether he shoots webbing mechanically or organically. Finally, in a nutshell, the strength of the movie was always going to be for us as it was in Stan Lee's comic that Peter Parker is one of us. It's what made Spider-Man a unique story, and unique super hero -- he's a kid like us and we soar with him when he becomes this hero. We decided to do everything that we could to keep that concept alive and real and potent to the audience, we wanted him to be someone we really identified with. So that when it came time to talk about the story aspect where he could create the webshooters and have the technological ability to create such a mechanical device in his little Queens bedroom and have the ability of a chemical engineer to the degree that he could create this incredible substance that doesn't really even exist in our world -- we felt, that Cameron's idea was better for the movie. I'm not saying for the comics, I love Stan Lee's idea for the comics, but for the movie to make him a real person and stick with that theme and be true to it throughout the course of the picture we felt that was a change we had to make. " - Sam Raimi

Sam Raimi 05/05/02 Los Angeles Comic Book and Science Fiction Interview

Hm, not a fan of that to be honest. People relate to him being an every man, with his relationships and how he deals with things like every other human would. Giving him organic web-shooters as a way to identify with him is silly.

And then he shows the Goblin tech which did not and does not exist in the real world.

Yep, weird all around.

 

[hbenthow]

Hm, not a fan of that to be honest. People relate to him being an every man, with his relationships and how he deals with things like every other human would. Giving him organic web-shooters as a way to identify with him is silly.

Sam Raimi's point was that making Pater such a genius that he could invent the webshooters and web fluid on his own makes him less relatable. That's fine for someone like Tony Stark, but Spider-Man has always been a sort of everyman - a "what if it happened you?" type of character. If he's merely smart (ie, gets good grades, is knowledgeable enough in scientific matters to hobnob with Otto Octavius, etc), that's one thing. But beyond that, the more of a genius you make him, the less relatable he becomes. (Personally, I felt that effect in the Marc Webb movies - Peter Parker's genius was emphasized so much that he ceased to be an everyman character in my view).

Making the webshooters organic causes them to be just another of the powers that were thrust upon him by the spider bite. That again plays into the "what if it happened to you/it could happen to anyone" appeal of the character.

In the organic webshooters scenario, if you or I happened to have been bitten by the spider, we could get Spider-Man's exact set of skills and powers. You or I could be Spider-Man if only we had been bitten by the spider instead of Peter.

But in the mechanical webshooters scenario, if you or I happened to have been bitten by the spider, we would only be able to climb well, jump high, lift heavy weights, give and take hard punches, and have spider-sense. But we couldn't be Spider-Man as we know him, because neither of us (unless you're hiding a big secret) are next-level geniuses that could invent a liquid that can be squirted out into cables that are stronger than steel and dissolve into air after an hour. So we couldn't swing from skyscrapers or web criminals to walls.

Thus, the organic webshooters make Peter more relatable.

If I recall right, there's also a Sam Raimi quote somewhere (although I can't find it now) where he said something to the effect that if Peter was able to invent the webshooters and web fluid, he could patent them and become rich, and the fact that he doesn't do so makes suspension of disbelief harder than with the organic webshooter.

After all, think of all the applications of such technology. The police, fire department, etc, could come up with many great uses for it. It would sell like hotcakes.

 

[Krystal]

Never mind.

 

[ngh2b]

If and I do mean IF this is actually happening, one deleted scene that bothered me (among so many) was when Sandman was getting hosed down in the sewer and, while the trailer showed a really good looking breakdown of his form, the actual scene was ugly and rushed. I was surprised when I saw it in IMAX on release since so much of the other CGI was remarkably well-done. I always wondered why they changed that scene like that and hoped for that alternative (trailer) shot in 3.1.

But alas, all this hope is in vain if we do not get some uplifting news soon.

 

[TheVileOne]

The explanation 15 years ago for organic webshooters was not about making him more relatable. Raimi and co. just didn't think it made sense that Peter could make such a substance that 3M corporation could not, plus where would he get the funds and resources to make his web shooters.

I'm not saying I agree, but that was the excuse they were making the original films. Originally, Peter was going to have organic webs, but they would still be controlled through mechanical spinners he would wear. They were edited out of the final cut. Production photos of them exist, and also a still of Peter using them in his home. They were digitally removed from the final cut.

 

[PeterBenParker]

That's a shame.

 

[carpenter82]

This guy says he's confirmed that this release will in fact come with 3.1.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i6_cSCJvB-8

 

[Krystal]

That looks like the Amazon person in Japan simply went to the page that has been up for 2 weeks+ and read what everyone else read and confirmed what we read (thru translation) -- all along.

We kinda, sorta, need SONY to confirm this.

 

[henzINNIT]

I often forget about the webshooter situation. Genuinely don't care about that detail, it doesn't matter ultimately.

This guy says he's confirmed that this release will in fact come with 3.1.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i6_cSCJvB-8

Ehh, it appears to be a tiny step toward legitimacy. As mentioned, the Amazaon rep who seemingly confirmed 3.1 was only re-reading the description we already saw. Still hopeful, but still waiting for something more solid. Weird to hear myself in the video though haha.

 

[Symbiotic]

For what this is worth, a member on Blu-ray.com pointed out that the official website for TV Guide has a listing for something called "Spider-Man 3: Editor's Cut".