Just listened to the Gary Foster commentary track. It was enlightening and he's not a bore like some soloists, but every so often he'd say something that irked me. Sometimes, he's dead-on with his take on the character and subject, but sometimes he's way off.
I applaud his strong support of certain artistic decisions that the studio wasn't happy with. I guess as a producer he walks in both worlds (the director's and the studio's) and he's just trying to make everyone happy and produce a successful film. Clearly not an easy job.
I can't tell you how angry and disappointed I was to hear about Sony's criticism and insistence on changing the most trivial things: Peter Fonda's coats, Wes Bentley's chest hair, highlights in Nic's hair. Give me a break! Do they really think people aren't going to buy a ticket because Fonda's collar is too high? That's completely asinine and childish, not to mention hugely insulting to the cinema-going public.
I've always defended this film right through its production by stating that Sony is not like Fox (who warped Daredevil) and are actually very supportive. That's what Avi Arad and Sam Raimi's comments led me to believe. Now I find out they're just as bad.
In the end I felt like saying, "OK, you want a movie that will appeal to everyone and not leave them depressed with its tone. Got it. But don't use Spider-Man as the template, use Batman Begins. It had the same certificate, yet managed to keep a (mostly) dark, serious tone, protected the integrity of the character, entertained everyone and made a truckload of money."
Maybe I should write a letter to Sony!
t:
