Its fine if they go for an indie teen feel for spidey in high school but I really hope it doesnt fall behind on the action aspect of the movie.
And it isn't Spider-Man. Remember everyone thinking Gavin Hood, acclaimed director of Tsotsi, would do great with Wolverine?
Yeah, but that's Fox, it's expected with them LOL. Plus the script was obviously already ****. No good director can polish a turd.
I would have said the same thing before Sony messed with Raimi during SM3 and again with SM4. Sony has become Fox it seems.
And Sony ala Arad pushed Venom into the mix and they tried the same thing with SM4.Well, if you want to compare Spider-Man 3 to Wolverine yeah. But then again, Sam and his brother Ivan did write the script for 3.
And Sony ala Arad pushed Venom into the mix and they tried the same thing with SM4.
Now, Sony hires a fresh, naive director to push around like Fox did. I would rather have a huge fan of the character, Raimi, running the show than someone who will film only what is written without caring about anything more...ala Gavin Hood.
Seriously, it seems like people forgot that SAM RAIMI wrote Spider-man 3! He's not much of a writer, he's a much better director, which isn't anything to be ashamed for, because writing is very hard, when you have to be original. But Spider-man 3 was all Raimi's responsibility, just stop with the Sony stuff. Just stop. There is no excuse, and Sam Raimi admits it. So should you.
And Sony & Raimi were just giving what the world was screaming for.
raimi wrote a script that went from a to b to c, sony enter the mix and sam has to rewrite the script so it goes for a to b to d and back to c. almost certainly the movie would have been better if they had just left the sam the hell alone. evidence?
SM2 - sam left alone (as far as I'm aware)
SM3 - sony interference
drag me to hell - sam left alone
it wouldn't have been so bad if the villian forced on sam was someone like rhino, someone with little or no back story, but sony KNOWING the GG2 storyline would need closer added venom into the mix a character with a HUGE (yet dull, hate the frigging character) backstory.
so you have;
harry, who wants peter dead
peter and MJ, who are going to need screen time
the symbiote costume
EBJ and events that make him hate peter
peter taking off the costume
end fight sequence
all because sony and arid (*****!) 'THINK' that what the fans want. 'I'M' a fan and I wanted venom no where NEAR the franchise
Well I'm sure it would have been a much better film if they did leave Sam alone. You're missing the point. You among others want to put the blame ONLY on Sony. It's NOT JUST their fault. It takes more than one person to make a film good or bad or mediocre. Maybe the script was brilliant before Sony interfered, maybe it wasn't. So Sam can't still write a great script just because he had to switch out one character for another? He got lazy cause of that? Well that's no excuse regardless. You are in a minority of fans that don't want Venom cause face it, Venom sells. He is the main reason Spider-Man 3 did as well as it did, why it had as much hype as it did, why it had legs, and why it made the most money out of all three. And it's not just Sam that made the first two good. Everyone involved, cause it's a group effort in making a film, were the cause of how and why they turned out well. It's funny how when a director directs two good films him and the rest of the cast and crew only get praise, but when it's a bad film they're also involved in it's just the studios fault.
the reason I put the blame on sony is because of sam's track record with the previous two movies, if THAT doesn't buy you creative freedom, what does?
interesting fact; SM3 made more money that TDK in the forgien market 554m compared to 465m, domestically however TDK made more that 200m more than SM3
Tyler Perry get complete creative control of his films. As does Uwe Boll.
The sad thing is, when a Director decides to make a film, they take it upon themselves the consequences of the movie, good or bad. Film making is a team effort, but the Director is the coach, and he's responsible for getting the team to work together and win. We really don't know much about the drama behind the scenes of a lot of these films, but just because movie turns out well, doesn't mean Sony didn't interfere a lot, that's what a studio does, because it's their money, and they want to make sure it's working right. Sony takes responsibility as well whenever they release a bad film, but more specifically Sam Raimi and all Director's accept the responsibility for their specific movie.
What does Spider-Man 3 making more than TDK in the foreign market have to do with who's fault it was for why Spider-Man 3 wasn't as good as the first two. Are you saying other countries saw Spider-Man 3 mainly cause of Venom? It doesn't matter if TDK did better domestically. Spider-Man 3 still had a lot of hype cause of the symbiote and Venom. He's more marketable, sorry. Sandman and the Vulture, while there might have been a better story told, aren't as marketable. Plus, how do we know Sony didn't interfere at all with the first two at all? You think they let him do whatever without saying anything at all? They never gave him complete creative control. He didn't really do anything they disagreed until the third one. Studios aren't flawless no, but neither are directors, no matter how great they are, even Sam Raimi. Sam did a really good job with the first two, but he doesn't deserve all the praise.
And it isn't Spider-Man. Remember everyone thinking Gavin Hood, acclaimed director of Tsotsi, would do great with Wolverine?