The Official "I Loved Raimi's Spider-Man' Thread - Part 1 of 99 Luft - Part 10

[The Joker]

Yeah, and I remember hearing Raimi wanted to do the Lizard for SM-4, but Sony was against it, and then ironically the Lizard ends up being the villain for the reboot.

I'd have loved to have seen Dylan Baker tackle the role. He's a great actor.

 

[Doc Ock]

Yeah, and I remember hearing Raimi wanted to do the Lizard for SM-4, but Sony was against it, and then ironically the Lizard ends up being the villain for the reboot.

I'd have loved to have seen Dylan Baker tackle the role. He's a great actor.

Yeah, what could of been.

 

[Venom75]

Yeah, and I remember hearing Raimi wanted to do the Lizard for SM-4, but Sony was against it, and then ironically the Lizard ends up being the villain for the reboot.

I'd have loved to have seen Dylan Baker tackle the role. He's a great actor.

Ok,so one of the reasons Spider-man 3 was such a "disappointment" in many people's eyes is because of studio interference. So,for part 4 the studio interferes again??
Ugh.

 

[The Joker]

Exactly. I mean is it any wonder Raimi walked? He didn't want a history repeat of SM-3 again.

 

[Leenie]

And when all is said and done, I don't think Spider-Man 3 is the travesty that many people make it out to me. Don't get me wrong, it was certainly a disappointment and is nowhere near the quality of the first two movies ... But I don't think it's the worst thing ever made nor do I think there's nothing redeemable about it.

I firmly believe that Sam Raimi is the reason why Spider-Man 3 wasn't a huge disaster. Sure, his fingerprints are all over the infamous dancing beatnik Peter stuff, but his fingerprints were all over some of the best moments of the movie as well (birth of Sandman, anyone?). Spider-Man 3 is most certainly a clunky film, but Raimi gave it some heart, which pretty much saves it for me.

I think Sony is filled with a bunch of idiots for letting Raimi walk like that. Actually, they're idiots for trying to interfere with his visions in the first place. Sam Raimi had made what were once unanimously considered as the best super hero movies ever made with Spider-Man 1 and 2; let the man do his thing, Sony!

Oh well, it is what it is.

 

[The Joker]

I agree. I never give the faults of Spider-Man 3 a free pass like MJ's selfishness, the dancing, the Uncle Ben retcon etc. But the movie has got it's share of merits, too. A lot of great scenes and moments, and some great acting performances in there. Not to mention some stellar action scenes. Raimi even gave me a version of Venom I don't dislike and can actually buy hating Spider-Man and wanting him dead.

 

[spiderman2]

And when all is said and done, I don't think Spider-Man 3 is the travesty that many people make it out to me. Don't get me wrong, it was certainly a disappointment and is nowhere near the quality of the first two movies ... But I don't think it's the worst thing ever made nor do I think there's nothing redeemable about it.

I firmly believe that Sam Raimi is the reason why Spider-Man 3 wasn't a huge disaster. Sure, his fingerprints are all over the infamous dancing beatnik Peter stuff, but his fingerprints were all over some of the best moments of the movie as well (birth of Sandman, anyone?). Spider-Man 3 is most certainly a clunky film, but Raimi gave it some heart, which pretty much saves it for me.

I think Sony is filled with a bunch of idiots for letting Raimi walk like that. Actually, they're idiots for trying to interfere with his visions in the first place. Sam Raimi had made what were once unanimously considered as the best super hero movies ever made with Spider-Man 1 and 2; let the man do his thing, Sony!

Oh well, it is what it is.

Yeah after the success of sm 1 and 2 why would you interfear? Wouldn't you trust that he could make a great or really good movie again? Now if sm 1 and 2 sucked or something then yeah I could understand why they would interfear but they didn't so no reason to interfear.

 

[spiderman2]

ASM3? Have you traveled into the future and seen it? Rhetorical question. I don't want to start a TASM discussion here.

Spider-Man 3 is the only Spidey movie that would benefit from the existing deleted material we know is available. The bulk of it's issues would be solved by them (save for MJ, Sandman killing Uncle Ben). The others are like the Spider-Man 2 cut. Adding some material that doesn't change the overall quality of the movie.

Sorry I ment to say asm1 and 2 and sm3 not asm3 lol. But yeah sm 3 asm1 and asm2 would all benifeat and asm2 would beanifit the most. The bulk of asm2 issues would have been imporoved or not even a problem with a directors cut.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

Spider-Man 3 is filled with a lot of amazing scenes. The Church scene is just fantastic, Sandman's birth was great too, the action scenes were creative and fun, the score was awesome, etc. If the film was longer it would have been amazing. I don't understand why they didn't make it longer considering that all it wasn't even that long and it just needed was a few extra dialogue scenes.

 

[Spider-knight]

while sam was never really my favorite guy in this series(i prefer greg weisman and the guy who did the 90s animated seires) i can see where he was coming from and i really like some of his stuff from 2 and like some stuff from the first film but overall his stuff tone and take of peter parker just weren't for me and i think that raimi could've redeemed himself with the 4th film but it never happened. i mean 3 didn't really ruin anybody. though the sad thing is i see that oz the great and the powerful wasn't cearly well recieved and i think drag me to hell was just considered good but not great in many people's eyes.

 

[Spider-knight]

Spider-Man 3 is filled with a lot of amazing scenes. The Church scene is just fantastic, Sandman's birth was great too, the action scenes were creative and fun, the score was awesome, etc. If the film was longer it would have been amazing. I don't understand why they didn't make it longer considering that all it wasn't even that long and it just needed was a few extra dialogue scenes.

it felt longer when i saw it in cinema. i felt like i was watching it for like 4 or 5 hours

 

[The Joker]

Yeah after the success of sm 1 and 2 why would you interfear? Wouldn't you trust that he could make a great or really good movie again? Now if sm 1 and 2 sucked or something then yeah I could understand why they would interfear but they didn't so no reason to interfear.

Because Sony were being greedy and wanted to more money. They saw Venom and thought $$$$.

Spider-Man 3 is filled with a lot of amazing scenes. The Church scene is just fantastic, Sandman's birth was great too, the action scenes were creative and fun, the score was awesome, etc. If the film was longer it would have been amazing. I don't understand why they didn't make it longer considering that all it wasn't even that long and it just needed was a few extra dialogue scenes.

Exactly. That's why the director's cut would have been a huge improvement.

 

[Lantern Venom]

And when all is said and done, I don't think Spider-Man 3 is the travesty that many people make it out to me. Don't get me wrong, it was certainly a disappointment and is nowhere near the quality of the first two movies ... But I don't think it's the worst thing ever made nor do I think there's nothing redeemable about it.

Oh well, it is what it is.

It's not that bad. It was obvious that the bloated story came from Raimi's dislike and unfamiliarity with Venom. Take out the symbiote and VINO, and you're left with a solid story. As much as I loathe Blowpher and Sam's gutting of Venom, I still bought the DVD and I've enjoyed it several times.

 

[henzINNIT]

Yeah, and I remember hearing Raimi wanted to do the Lizard for SM-4, but Sony was against it, and then ironically the Lizard ends up being the villain for the reboot.

I'd have loved to have seen Dylan Baker tackle the role. He's a great actor.

I'd be surprised if this wasn't coincedence. The reboot was being written while SM4 was in development afterall. Lizard was probably off the table.

 

[Spider-knight]

Ah so they knew this would happen......... Man Sony are a bunch oh A-holes.

 

[OriginalMiles]

[YT]ib1LAo3_-Kk[/YT]

I love this scene so freaking much.

 

[The Joker]

I'd be surprised if this wasn't coincedence. The reboot was being written while SM4 was in development afterall. Lizard was probably off the table.

They were writing a reboot script while developing SM-4? Are you certain of that?

[YT]ib1LAo3_-Kk[/YT]

I love this scene so freaking much.

Yeah it's great. Dafoe owns the scene. I love the way he says "I could squash you like a bug right now". There's a real snarl in his voice when he says it.

 

[Spider-knight]

I wish Defoe was a voice actor

 

[The Joker]

He did a voice over in Finding Nemo. He was terrific in it.

 

[Nardz937]

They were writing a reboot script while developing SM-4? Are you certain of that?

Yes, because in an interview Raimi said that while he was working on Spider-Man 4 he found out that the studio was developing a reboot behind his back. So once he found out he pretty much politely told them to go ***** themselves and he quit. That's when SM4 was officially cancelled and the reboot happened.

http://www.slashfilm.com/sam-raimi-explains-his-departures-from-spider-man-4-and-world-of-warcraft/

It really was the most amicable and undramatic of breakups: It was simply that we had a deadline and I couldn’t get the story to work on a level that I wanted it to work. I was very unhappy with Spider-Man 3, and I wanted to make Spider-Man 4 to end on a very high note, the best Spider-Man of them all. But I couldn’t get the script together in time, due to my own failings, and I said to Sony, “I don’t want to make a movie that is less than great, so I think we shouldn’t make this picture. Go ahead with your reboot, which you’ve been planning anyway.” And [Sony co-chairman] Amy Pascal said, “Thank you. Thank you for not wasting the studio’s money, and I appreciate your candor.” So we left on the best of terms, both of us trying to do the best thing for fans, the good name of Spider-Man, and Sony Studios.

 

[Spider-knight]

Ugh, what a couple of *****. What kind of company goes behind people's backs and reboot the series if they don't follow!?! This is why their company is reduce to ****. If they actually want to **** themselves that badly then they are out of their god forsaken minds! If they do it again then spiderman and sony are more than just ****ed!

 

[The Joker]

Thanks for link, Nardz. They should have just let Raimi takes his time on the script, because a reboot would have to come out later than the deadline they set him anyway.

 

[LizardMan07]

Absolute disgrace and betrayal...

 

[Spider-knight]

I have no idea what is up with Sony's heads at the moment. I just can't see a company who wants to keep the rights to survive purposely keeps screwing up the franchise. I just don't see the point in ruining 2 movies that almost led you to success. If they do care much about the sinister six that much and hired someone like drew Goddard then the least they can do is ,again, let Goddard do his own work.

I may not be the biggest fan if Raimi's interpretation of Peter Parker and his tone but I really sympathize with what he went through.

Spidey should not be the only one who gets ****ed around while all of the other adaptations get all of the luck.

 

[Rorschach2012]

I agree that SM3 had a lot of great scenes. It had some really really terrible scenes as well though. Basically anything with Peter/Gwen or with Peter/MJ was bad. The whole Harry thing was bad too. Sandman and Venom were both pretty great for the most part, just mishandled, underutilized and underdeveloped