The "I am SO SICK of all this talk about recasts/reboots/revamps/re-whatever!" thread

[spider-neil]

I think less the budget means less the risk, which means less studio interference. But I was surprised it was 80 million. I expected at least a hundred million.

And Chris, you pose a good question. One that I have been asking myself for a week now. Actually more than that. Why did they interfere with Raimi on SM3 when he gave them two successful films commercially and critically? How much control will they give Webb?

webb - 'and, ACTION!'
sony exec - *cough*
webb - what?'
sony exec - 'don't you think a tilt and pan would be better than a track in?'
webb - 'really? okay, if you're sure'
sony exec ' 'we're sure'

 

[roach]

Webb: So who is the supervillain going to be...Doc Ock, Goblin?
Sony Exec: A broken heart
Webb:Is that a new villain...im not reading the new stuff
Sony: No we decided we want to focus on Peter instead of hero vs villain stuff.
Webb:Really no supervillain in Spider-man 4
Sony:Actually we want to call the movie Peter Parker
Webb:What did I get into

 

[MadVillainy]

You know the only thing that ticks me off about the superhero reboot/-vamp/etc.

Is that recently theyve all said "we want to make it more dark"

I mean Spiderman is the only reboot happening soon that I can see what they mean by "dark", but there are so many characters out there who are actually meant to be dark that aren't getting any attention

Moon Knight
Daredevil
Hulk (I liked TIH but the theatrical didn't touch on the darkness of the Hulk character that much)
The Punisher who is one of the darkest characters ever, who gets limited promotion and crappy talent behind it
Wolverine (just like TIH, the movie didn't touch on the darkness of Logan's origins that much)
Blade
Hellblazer
Green Arrow

If these studios want dark how come these characters are getting the shaft so hard

I think less the budget means less the risk, which means less studio interference. But I was surprised it was 80 million. I expected at least a hundred million.

And Chris, you pose a good question. One that I have been asking myself for a week now. Actually more than that. Why did they interfere with Raimi on SM3 when he gave them two successful films commercially and critically? How much control will they give Webb?

I heard a weird rumor, that Raimi didnt have that much control over SM1 or SM2, after those they tried to cut him loose and he came with VUltre and Sandman and then they tried to control him again which resulted in the mess called Spiderman 3, but then again its just a rumor

 

[roach]

I heard the opposite

 

[MadVillainy]

everyone hears different things. Thats why there are rumors

 

[roach]

what I heard is thatneither could agree on the villains and Raimi said it was his way or the highway and Sony showed him the door....the cast in a show of loyalty walked with him....but thats what i heard

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

I love SM3, but let me just say this to all those who want it to be dark : remember the last time they tried to make it dark, it kinda backfired on them...

 

[BestGirl]

I think less the budget means less the risk, which means less studio interference. But I was surprised it was 80 million. I expected at least a hundred million.

And Chris, you pose a good question. One that I have been asking myself for a week now. Actually more than that. Why did they interfere with Raimi on SM3 when he gave them two successful films commercially and critically? How much control will they give Webb?

I figured Webb was brought on because he'd be easy to control.

 

[roach]

I figured Webb was brought on because he'd be easy to control.

I agree

 

[Chris Wallace]

I figured Webb was brought on because he'd be easy to control.

And you base this conclusion on what? The fact that they beat down a director who had delivered successful films to them in the past? Or the fact that they would rather scrap a hit franchise & start over than work with the guy who had previously delivered?

 

[roach]

yes and yes

 

[The Overlord]

I think we should discuss which franchises need a reboot and which ones don't:

Its pretty clear that Batman and Iron Man don't need a reboot at this point.

I also think its clear that the Superman and Fantastic four movies do need a reboot, Superman has way too much baggage from the last film and frankly the FF movies were never good, they screwed up several key points.

I don't think the X-Men movies need a reboot, because they can focus on prequels instead of sequels. I'm also not sure the Spider-Man movies need a reboot. It may be a good idea to reboot Daredevil.

I wouldn't mind seeing a sequel to the last Hulk movie, since it was already rebooted, it doesn't need another reboot.

And frankly I don't care if they reboot Ghost Rider or not.

 

[roach]

im pretty sure this thread is about not talking about reboots

 

[Chris Wallace]

Or at least not pushing for them.

 

[The Overlord]

im pretty sure this thread is about not talking about reboots

How can we talk about whether one is sick of reboots, when a reboot is necessary for some franchises?

 

[roach]

I actually dont think a reboot is needed for some franchises

 

[Cuyan]

I actually think a reboot is needed for some franchises

 

[Chris Wallace]

The problem is it's quickly becoming a virus where people think it's necessary across the board.

 

[roach]

agreed...Spider-man didnt need a reboot...regardless of what you thought of SM3...the franchise was still viable....I can't imagine anyone else playing JJJ or Aunt May

 

[The Overlord]

I actually dont think a reboot is needed for some franchises

So do you want to see more adventures of dead beat dad/stalker Superman? I would rather have a reboot to get rid of all that see a sequel try to deal with that mess.

Also why doesn't the Fantastic Four movies need a reboot? They ruined two of the greatest super villains in Marvel comics, Dr. Doom and Galactus, not to mention almost none of the actors were any good. These movies simply don't reflect the Fantastic Four in any way.

I think you can argue against a reboot for almost any franchise, except those two cases.

 

[Mrh7448]

agreed...Spider-man didnt need a reboot...regardless of what you thought of SM3...the franchise was still viable....I can't imagine anyone else playing JJJ or Aunt May

Agreed, there really wasn't a need to actually reboot Spiderman. If they didn't want Raimi they could still continue with another director in his place, actors can be recast and it can be successful.

Superman could you use one. There is a lot of baggage, from the original series of Superman movies 1-4 and the Returns. There isn't anywhere you can go unless you reboot it. If you try to continue it you have to deal with all the baggage that comes with the kid and Lois. Personally a reboot would be better. In this case IMO.

 

[Chris Wallace]

As much as I hated "Superman Returns", I wouldn't even push for a reboot of that franchise at this point. I'd rather they just left Supes alone like they had been doing for 20 years than see yet another reboot. I am just sick of the mentality.

 

[spider-neil]

As much as I hated "Superman Returns", I wouldn't even push for a reboot of that franchise at this point. I'd rather they just left Supes alone like they had been doing for 20 years than see yet another reboot. I am just sick of the mentality.

I actually want to see a reboot of superman. there is a good superman story waiting to be told, its just a pity singer wasn't the one to tell it.

 

[Cuyan]

Plus, since they changed his powers in the 50's, Superman has been one of the least interesting characters in comic history. Well, at least until Wolverine came along.

 

[The Overlord]

As much as I hated "Superman Returns", I wouldn't even push for a reboot of that franchise at this point. I'd rather they just left Supes alone like they had been doing for 20 years than see yet another reboot. I am just sick of the mentality.

I think you are in the minority in that opinion, I don't want to see the Superman franchise lay fallow for 20 years, that's what they did last time and by the time they made a new movie, it was Superman returns.

I want to see a good modern post crisis Superman movie and I don't want to wait till I'm middle aged to see it, so if that involves a reboot so be it.

Just because you don't like reboots doesn't mean they aren't warranted in certain cases, those cases being Superman and the Fantastic Four.