Xixax Film Forum

Church Will Try to Squash Hero in 'Spidey 3'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Thomas Haden Church, who was nominated for an Academy Award for best supporting actor in "Sideways," has been cast as Spidey's new archenemy in the next chapter of the "Spider-Man" franchise.

Director Sam Raimi made the announcement Monday along with producers Laura Ziskin and Marvel Studios' Avi Arad.

"Spider-Man 3," which is scheduled for release May 4, 2007, will reunite the team that was responsible for the first two blockbuster films, which combined to gross more than $1.5 billion in worldwide ticket sales.

The new film will again star Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, and Kirsten Dunst is expected to reprise her role as Mary Jane Watson. Production on "Spider-Man 3" is scheduled to begin early next year.

"In addition to the ongoing relationship between Peter Parker and M.J., these films are driven by the great actors who have brought our villains to life," Raimi said. "Thomas Haden Church will be a fantastic and challenging new nemesis, and we all look forward to working with him."

The filmmakers are not revealing the identity of the new villain.

Church is voicing one of the characters in the upcoming animated film "Charlotte's Web," and he recently appeared in Columbia Pictures' "Spanglish."

The actor's other credits include the films "George of the Jungle," "3000 Miles to Graceland," "Monkeybone" and "Tombstone." In 2003, he starred in, co-wrote and directed the comedy "Rolling Kansas." On the small screen, Church played Lowell Mather on the NBC series "Wings" from 1990-95 and starred on the 1995-97 Fox comedy "Ned and Stacey."

Quote from: MacGuffinChurch Will Try to Squash Hero in 'Spidey 3'

The filmmakers are not revealing the identity of the new villain.

he's got venom's mouf.

Isn't he missing some inbetween movies? You just don't go from finally getting acknowledgement as a serious actor straight into a comicbook film. The nerve of some people...

are they going to make three more spider-man's after the third? why don't they shoot all three at once instead of three years waiting inbetween movies. toby maguire will be 70 when part six is released.

Quote from: mogwaiare they going to make three more spider-man's after the third?

not that i know of, and certainly not with tobey. they are only contracted for the first three.

in the making of documentary on the Spider-Man 2 dvd they talk about why they couldn't make them all at once. and the benefits of not having done so.

Two Villains in Spider-Man 3?
Source: WhiteKnight April 15, 2005

It appears there could be a possibility that there will be more than one villain in Spider-Man 3, according to a new rumor at Latino Review:

A while back Ain't-It-Cool-News broke the story that Thomas Hayden Church will indeed be playing SANDMAN and that here's a ton of Sandman conceptual art all over the Spidey-offices.

Well today 'Anonymous' tells us the following: "Yes the Sandman will be in Spider-Man 3 but he's not the only villain. And no it isn't Black Cat like some people were suggesting. It will be SANDMAN AND HOBGOBLIN"

Take this with a grain of salt right now and stay tuned for more on the villain or villains.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i know its just a rumor, but take it from the Batman films, loading them up with villians to sell a few more action figures is the quickest way to ruin a franchise.   well, short of hiring Akiva Goldsman to write it anyways.

Quote from: Pubrick

Quote from: MacGuffinChurch Will Try to Squash Hero in 'Spidey 3'

The filmmakers are not revealing the identity of the new villain.

he's got venom's mouf.

I imagine somebody will end up making a Venom film if the character doesn't show up in a Spiderman film.

Three More Spideys Planned
Studio wants six films in all.
 
Spider-Man helmer Sam Raimi recently spoke with the SCI FI Wire website and revealed that Sony Pictures has plans to make a total of six films in the superhero franchise.  Raimi even dropped that he might be willing to direct them all. He says, "I've heard Amy Pascal [chairman of Sony's motion picture group] say she wants to make six Spider-Man pictures. ... So I think she's a woman of her word. And if she says there'll be six, there'll be six. ... If they were to ask me, and if I felt as passionate as I feel now about the character and had this great hunger and desire to tell the story, which I really do now, you couldn't keep me away from it."

Raimi is currently in preproduction on Spider-Man 3, which he says will partially deal with Peter's emotional journey as he deals with the death of Uncle Ben.  "The task that I had was to try and understand where he was when we last left him ... at the end of Spider-Man 2, trying to figure out what he lacked as a human being, as far as where he was immature and what he had not learned," Raimi said.

Sideways star Thomas Haden Church has joined the cast as the villain, but nobody's saying who that is yet.  Raimi added, "We had to choose a villain that represented a proper obstacle in the path of that growth. He says the identity of the bad guy is being withheld until Sony and Marvel can make a big presentation for the fans."

Spider-Man 3 is set for a May 4, 2007 release.  Production on the film is scheduled to begin early next year.

He's going to be the first one to make a franchise still watchable past three?

Sam, there are other superheroes.

That '70s "Spider-Man"!
Source: E! Online

Topher Grace is checking out of the basement and into the big time.

Coming on the heels of his last regular installment of That '70s Show, the actor has been tapped to join the cast of Spider-Man 3, Columbia Pictures announced Thursday.

Grace will join one of the biggest franchises in film, appearing alongside original Spider Man cast members Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco and recently announced addition Thomas Haden Church in the would-be blockbuster, due May 4, 2007.

Sam Raimi will return to direct the highly anticipated third installment, which starts shooting early next year.

"Topher Grace is an extraordinarily talented actor and will be perfect for the complexities of the role we are developing," Raimi said in a press release.

Of course, Raimi was mum on exactly what those "complexities" would be, leaving it up to the movie rumor sites to begin speculating on just which Marvel character Grace will essay.

Likewise, when Church was announced as Spidey's newest cinematic ne'er-do-well, Raimi was equally coy, saying the Oscar-nominated Sideways star "will be a fantastic and challenging new nemesis and we all look forward to working with him."

It's widely assumed that multiple villains will appear in Spider-Man 3, and Grace is already an odds-on favorite to be one of them.

Meanwhile, Chloë Sevingy, who who has openly campaigned for a slot in the film, hasn't yet made the cut.

The actress has suggested she would make a perfect Black Cat in Spider-Man 3, but, per fan Website GoblinJournals.com, an "anonymous source" close to the film says there will be no Black Cat role in the new film; instead, the two baddies will be Sandman and Hobgoblin.

Villain issues aside, Spider-Man 3 is about the closest thing there is to a box-office lock.

Spider-Man 2 smashed records when it opened last summer, becoming the third film ever to earn more than $40 million in a single day. The film went on the gross $373 million at the U.S. box office. The original Spider-Man grossed $403 million domestically during its 2002 run. So far, the webslinger franchise has grossed more than $1.5 billion in worldwide ticket sales.

This represents Grace's biggest movie role to date. The actor, who along with Ashton Kutcher, decided to leave That '70s Show to pursue movie roles (they will both be back as guest stars in a handful episodes next season), has racked up solid cinematic credits. He most recently starred in In Good Company and the indie flick P.S., and had smaller roles in Traffic, Ocean's Eleven and Ocean's Twelve.

I think Grace would make a good Doppleganger

Franco a Villain in Spidey 3?
IGN talks to the actor about the role!

For two movies now, James Franco has played the angst ridden Harry Osborne, son of genius and former supervillain Norman Osborne (otherwise known as the Green Goblin). Harry has never gotten over the death of his father and heavily blames Spider-Man for the death. In Spider-Man 2, the ending hinted heavily that Harry would soon follow in his father's villainous footsteps.

IGN FilmForce got the chance to speak with Franco this weekend. With the shoot for Spidey 3 only months away, we asked him about his thoughts on returning to the franchise. "Not until January. But they're gearing up. I mean, I've met with Sam Raimi a couple of times to discuss it. I think there will be a little shoot in September. On the past two Spider-Man movies, they really invent a lot of the techniques that go into it and they're coming up with new stuff on each of these films - so what they do is, they shoot a scene or two months out from the main production, so then the effects team can go in and start, you know, experimenting with how they're going to go about bringing these superheroes to life. So they'll be a little shoot in September and then everybody will get together in January to do the main shoot."

Raimi and just about everybody involved with the project are remaining extremely tight-lipped on which villains will be featured in Spider-Man 3. Although the casting of Topher Grace and Thomas Haden Church has been announced, there roles have not. "I don't know. I've never met [them]. I'm a fan. I thought Sideways was awesome, but I've never met them." There has also been no confirmation on whether Harry will become a villain. "Nobody has a script yet, so… Yeah, definitely something's hinted. But although, I think everybody's tried to be pretty loyal to the spirit of the comics and things. I don't think they want to be too obvious about what's going to happen… As far as my, what they've given me so far, in the last two movies - I feel like I have the most kind of tortured character in the movies and so, it's always great to play as an actor."

Franco says that he has been speaking with Raimi about his part in 3 ever since the premiere of 2. "He gets on this so early. I remember meeting with him right before the premiere of Spider-Man 2 and we discussed the outline of character and his arc. And then we met again. Just discussing - He has ideas [of] where he wants to character to go and he's very, he loves actor input. I remember, even on the first one, going in there with Willem Dafoe and Tobey and Kirsten and just discussing, you know, every scene. Anyways, so he'll come to me with the ideas and then we'll discuss them and we'll meet again three months later and he'll say, 'This is where it's going.' I guess he takes all that stuff and gives it to Alvin Sargeant, the writer, and then we get a script back. But, I think he's very, very conscious… He very much wants to, not just make an action superhero movie - I think the secret to Spider-Man is that the characters are so rich and one of the ways he does that is meeting with the actors and really discussing the scenes between them [such as] swinging through the buildings…"

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imdb.com%2FPhotos%2FSs%2F0316654%2FDF-4806_r.jpg&hash=50bbcbba8c275622650d3c039858da8d84a1239f)

I dont really have the time to look for all the pictures and post them, but if you look and get stills of every scene that this guy appears on Spider Man 2, he has that same expression in EVERY SCENE.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.efavata.com%2FCBM%2Fimages%2Fspidey2-pics-2_cbm.jpg&hash=904bf9aca46f72ea4eb43e65558336331d3453e9)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fescena.ya.com%2Fcinemerida%2FSPIDERMAN2%2Fjessfranco.jpg&hash=90bf03d38f9670e56e89aa0f0354ccb0e7ae1761)

:shock:

So I was working on a short film in LA.  I'm new to the state/city, so i'm not exactly sure where we were.  But I guess it was east la, at least east of the 'LA river.'

Anyhow, I was staging some gear and a bunch of guys walked out of a wharehouse across the street.  They headed towards me and asked what we were filmming.  I then noticed that about half of them were wearing crew shirts for various movies(godzilla, deep impact, and Fan4) so I asked them the same thing.

The answer given was, "oh this silly little movie called Spiderman 3."

I tried to get some info out of them, but alas I could not.  I gathered that they were working on costumes, but it seemed more related to practical effects, because one guy mentioned how stuff looks better when it's not completely CGI.  

Sadly they were not in need of a PA, they did at least laugh a little when I joked that i'd see them tomorrow anyways.

Dunst Blows Spidey 3 Villains
Actress spills the beans.

While doing press for her forthcoming release Elizabethtown, actress Kirsten Dunst may have finally let the proverbial cat out of the bag about the oft-speculated identities of the villains in Spider-Man 3.

Dunst is quoted at Zap2It as saying, "We have really great people though as the villains in this film, Thomas Haden Church and Topher Grace -- Venom and Sandman." She added, "Maybe I wasn't supposed to say that."

But when a journalist expressed disbelief that Sandman lookalike Church would be playing Venom, Dunst corrected her gaffe. "It's the other way around. You're right."

So just to be clear: according to Dunst, Thomas Haden Church is Sandman and Topher Grace is Venom.

Although she hasn't read the script yet for Spider-Man 3 , which begins filming in January, Dunst said, "I know the general story. ... There's a lot that they're trying to fit into this one."

Spider-Man 3 is slated for a May 4, 2007 release.

Quote from: MacGuffinDunst Blows Spidey 3 Villains

tee-hee hee...

they've gotten greedy.  2 villains will overcrowd the film and ruin it.  see: batman franchise.  i guess tobey and kirsten are only signed through 3 and they want to make sure they get as many action figures as possible on the market before their cash cow changes hands.  i'll be VERY surprised/impressed if they can pull this off.

Quote from: MacGuffinActress spills the beans.

tee-hee hee...

Seriously, though, those villians sound awesome.

Quote from: modagethey've gotten greedy.  2 villains will overcrowd the film and ruin it.  see: batman franchise.  i guess tobey and kirsten are only signed through 3 and they want to make sure they get as many action figures as possible on the market before their cash cow changes hands.  i'll be VERY surprised/impressed if they can pull this off.

But your favorite movie of the year is Batman Begins, which features two villians.  So it's do-able.  My guess is that Sandman won't feature as much as Venom.

Quote from: modagethey've gotten greedy.  2 villains will overcrowd the film and ruin it.  see: batman franchise.  i guess tobey and kirsten are only signed through 3 and they want to make sure they get as many action figures as possible on the market before their cash cow changes hands.  i'll be VERY surprised/impressed if they can pull this off.

two of the three good batman movies had two villians, and were great. batman forever and batman and robin would have sucked hard regardless

batman begins sucked some and it had two villains.

they tried to squeeze too much into batman begins and that was a complaint of mine.  they could've done without scarecrow or ras al ghul alltogether and left the focus more on batman/bruce wayne cleaning up gotham.  batman returns, though i love, the villains are shoehorned together a bit awkwardly/pointlessly.  it works, but it was the beginning of the end.  trying to squeeze too many villiains into a superhero film is one of the easiest ways to ruin it.  TRUST ME.  there is no way to advance the main character AND their relationship with whatever love interest AND have room to adequately fit two villains without something/most things getting shortchanged.  another way is to reveal your secret identity to everyone.

I loved the way they used the villians in Batman Begins. Not just another genre work of seeing how "cool" and "bad ass" each bad guy could be before succumbing to an ass kicking by Batman, the film actually tries to position them dramatically in relevance to the story of Batman. Not even the most entertaining and well done of super hero movies (Superman 1 & 2) accomplished that.

When I do see super hero movies that are build ups to a fight, I feel like I should be just playing a video game instead. Speaking of Spiderman, the original was so bad I skipped the second one. Kudos to Thomas Hayden Church for landing a role in a movie that will make money.

I just want to see how they continue the story overall... what happens with MJ's fiance (I'm not very familiar with the comic books but he was a villain after some failed Space Mission?), Peter's proffessor (also a villian in the comics) and Harry finding out about Green Goblin...

If they drop all that after setting it up in the 2nd one, its weird... so we'll see what the story is about

Quote from: modage2 villains will overcrowd the film and ruin it.

Don't forget, James Franco could be three.

and don't forget, sometimes growing up and facing real life can be spiderman's greatest enemy.  and don't forget about his past--that can be 5.

i don't think the batman franchize sucked because of two villans.  it sucked because shumacher (spelling?) didn't know what the fuck he was doing.

and i'm not a huge fan of the new one either.  it was alright, but burton found the good balance between comic book/dark/dramatic film.  raimi can pull it off, his sense of story stucture is amazing.  just look at a simple plan, very underated film.  one of the best.

-sl-

Topher's great...

i think if he pitted both bad characters against eachother and spiderman was caught in the middle of it.  like he's working to stop the destruction and how that would wreck carnage all over new york, that's a story i want to see.

i'm sick of the one bad guy teaming up with, or brainwashing, the other villian and they're both against the hero.  time to start something new.

-sl-

Quote from: socketleveli don't think the batman franchize sucked because of two villans.  it sucked because shumacher (spelling?) didn't know what the fuck he was doing.

obviously schumacher is to blame as well, but i think he is distracting from the point that even under burton (or ANYbody good's) direction the last two batman films still would've been okay/sucked.  don't take the blame away from the scripts.  akiva goldsman is just as much to blame for this as schumacher.  i'm TELLING YOU, TOO MANY CHARACTERS WILL RUIN THIS MOVIE.  mark those words.  it's going to be very difficult to make this work.  a 2 hour film only splits up so many ways.

Quote from: modagei'm TELLING YOU, TOO MANY CHARACTERS WILL RUIN THIS MOVIE.  mark those words.  it's going to be very difficult to make this work.  a 2 hour film only splits up so many ways.

Absolutely. It's interesting that both Spider-Man films so far started out with two villains - Green Goblin and Doc Ok in 1 and Doc Ok and Black Cat in 2 - but they got rid of them. I assume Raimi, who's obviously aware of the problems with multiple villains, knows what he's doing and will somehow make it work. Perhaps Sandman will bite the dust (no pun intended) in the first twenty minutes of the film or something. Or maybe Venom won't turn into Venom until the last five minutes. Who knows.

The thing with Venom, which could bode well for this story, is that he's not really a villain, per se.  He's more of a vigilante, Punisher-style crime-fighter (at the core of the character anyway... he's gone through many story arcs and character changes).  My guess as to how the story will play out is that Sandman is the "villain" of the film, but Venom is more the antagonist; maybe Venom starts stepping on Spider-man's toes and pissing people off right as Spidey's starting to win them over.  Of course, how Harry Osborne fits into all of this is anybody's guess.

Basically, I see this as more along the lines of "Batman Returns", with Penguin and Catwoman (Remember?  Two.  And we liked that one), as opposed to the third or fourth Batmans, which would have sucked with one, two, three, or fifteen villains.

SANDMAN
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fspiderman.sonypictures.com%2Fimages%2Ftchurch.jpg&hash=87a2bf1b296e084e71b69f53fe7401cada81bbeb)

Bryce Dallas Howard is Gwen Stacy

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22217

nothing like adding ANOTHER character to an already crowded roster!

Black Widow Joins Spider-Man 3
No, not Marvel's Black Widow.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, actress Theresa Russell has joined the ensemble cast of Columbia's Spider-Man 3. THR says Russell will portray "Mrs. Marko, the wife of Flint Marko, aka the Sandman (Thomas Haden Church). Plot details from Alvin Sargent's screenplay are scarce, though it is known that the villainous couple has a daughter."

Spider-Man 3 begins filming this month. In addition to Russell and Church, the cast includes Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, Bryce Dallas Howard and Topher Grace.

Russell is best known for her femme fatale turn in Black Widow. Her other credits include Kafka, Wild Things, Whore and HBO's Empire Falls.

Father's day for Cromwell in 'Spidey 3'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

James Cromwell is set to walk the beat in Columbia Pictures' "Spider-Man 3" as Captain Stacy, the father of Bryce Dallas Howard's character.

Sam Raimi is directing the movie, which is scheduled to roll this month.

In the "Amazing Spider-Man" comic books, Stacy dies a heroic death as he saves a child during a battle between Spider-Man and another supervillain. Peter Parker love interest Gwen Stacy (Howard) ends up blaming Spider-Man for her father's death.

Cromwell joins returning cast members Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst and James Franco as well as Topher Grace, Thomas Haden Church and Theresa Russell.

Cromwell is best known for starring in the "Babe" movies, the first of which earned him an Oscar nomination for best supporting actor, and as a villain in "L.A. Confidential." His recent role on "Six Feet Under" earned him an Emmy mention in 2003.

oh good.  more characters.  this film will be 6 hours.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fpics%2Fspidey3teaser.jpg&hash=96b9b1cb60a250159bf84b51eca4507575a6113a)

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22567

kewl.

cool, gargoyles the movie.  :yabbse-smiley:

seriously tho, that's cool. what's in his eye reflection?

Quote from: Pubrick on February 24, 2006, 08:40:23 AM

seriously tho, that's cool. what's in his eye reflection?

Looks like the face of a guy with 3-D glasses.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi7.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy251%2Ffbv%2Fspideyface.jpg&hash=b055b1c430a5400611243f914a99c798c83195ac)

dang i think it might just be his arm. oh i get it, spidey's worst enemy is himself, cue rain sequence.

really tho, once again, designing teaser posters/trailers is truly the haven of modern genii. can you imagine a world with only teasers and no "official" final trailers? my god, we would be as gods, and cumly lasses of virtue true would be at our beck and call. a man can dream..

end rain, cue sun breaking through the clouds.

the reflection looks like green goblin

i was thinking venom (clock your slightly left....)

Hobgoblin.  Just saying.  It makes sense.

i think it's lighting in the distance because they wouldn't give him ears that big.

It could be lightning, but if it is anybody, it's Hobgoblin.  Like Polka said, it makes sense.

also i don't think he would have a long beard.

New 'Spidey 3' Image Has Fans Tingling About Venom
Picture could confirm Topher Grace's supposed role as supervillain.
Source: MTV

With production finally under way on "Spider-Man 3," the web of rumors and gossip that has tied up message boards for months is finally beginning to unravel. Now, with the official release of a new image, Spidey fan senses are tingling over expectations of a story line as complicated as it is black-and-white.

"Spider-Man Is Wearing a Black Suit!" screams the Daily Bugle headline that was recently leaked quietly on Sony's official "Spider-Man 3" Web site. It's accompanied by an enormous photo of the blockbuster movie character perched atop a building ledge, looking downward in an apparently grim state of reflection. The page is notable for far greater reasons than J. Jonah Jameson giving better placement to Spidey's new threads than to a high school basketball game. Indeed, in the eyes of diehard fans, the release of this picture may confirm the third film's Venom story line, which has been the subject of heavy speculation.

For the benefit of those who don't sleep on Doctor Octopus bedsheets, Venom is the name of the deadly quasi-alien creature who has been menacing the comic-book version of Spider-Man for nearly 20 years. Originally a costume discovered on an alien planet during the spin-off series "Secret Wars," the suit eventually revealed itself as a sentient Symbiote attempting to permanently fuse with Peter Parker's body. Once the costume was removed, it attached itself to fellow Bugle reporter Eddie Brock, making him one of the webslinger's most feared supervillains.

Since his casting last year, rumors have circulated that Topher Grace will take on the Venom role opposite the similarly built (and named) Tobey Maguire. Although the complicated details of the acquisition of the suit and Eddie Brock's fall from grace are expected to be largely abridged for the film, fans continue to speculate that the black-suited menace will appear alongside Thomas Haden Church's Sandman and James Franco's Green Goblin as a trio of film villains. The film has already been slated for a May 4, 2007, release date.

Although many fan circles would undoubtedly be pleased by a cinematic Venom, the new image is already raising as many questions as it answers. If it is Venom, fans are asking, where are the white rings around the eyes and the slick spider logo on the chest? If the film does plan to avoid the complicated planet-hopping story line of "Secret Wars," how can it do justice to the unearthly creature? Finally, with Maguire facing his first fully-suited adversary, will director Sam Raimi give in to his "Evil Dead" tendencies and go wild with a computer-generated character? To paraphrase "Spider-Man" co-creator Stan Lee: Stay tuned, true believers.

'Spider-Man' Secretary Dishes On Hero's Hookups, Black Suit
Elizabeth Banks' character gets close with Peter Parker, but who wears mysterious dark costume?
Source: MTV

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mtv.com%2Fshared%2Fpromoimages%2Fmovies%2Fb%2Fbanks_elizabeth%2Fbettybrant%2F281x211.jpg&hash=a0f1388a3c6046ad456c34d5db104e0d15fbdfe5)

Elizabeth Banks knew it was coming, and the amiable, giggly "Slither" star was still willing to oblige. But she insisted that she has to maintain her limits.

"Honestly, you're killing me with these questions," Banks laughed. "I just don't want to be the one to give anything away 'cause Lord knows I don't want to anger anyone over at 'Spider-Man 3.' "

The 31-year-old actress, like series co-stars Topher Grace and Kirsten Dunst, has found herself caught up in a public tug-of-war with journalists and fans as they clamor for tiny tidbits on one of the most anticipated films in production. With more than a year remaining until fans see "Spider-Man 3," however, the Daily Bugle secretary was willing to break a little news.

"I do definitely sort of explore a little bit more of my relationship with Peter Parker," revealed Banks, who portrays J. Jonah Jameson employee Betty Brant in the movies. "I learned my lesson a long time ago that you never comment on how big your part is going to be in movies because you can always be cut out."

Still, Banks admitted, the groundwork is being laid for a Peter-Betty relationship much like the office romance they shared in the comics. Banks discussed a list of Peter Parker paramours that will also include Mary Jane Watson (Dunst) and Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard). "Peter Parker — he actually is Hugh Hefner.

"I think everyone knows he does end up with Mary Jane Watson," Banks said. "You'll just have to wait and see in 2007."

Banks' excitement does get the better of her, however, when talk turns to the recently leaked image of a mysterious figure in a black Spider-Man costume. "They're really exploring the dark side of power, the power a superhero has," Banks said. "Do you use it all for good? That's the question. That's the main theme of the movie."

Pressed for a bit more, Banks would only reveal that she did see the black-suited figure walking around the set. Asked if there was any kind of white logo or trimming (which could indicate the villainous Venom rather than a new suit for Spidey), Banks dropped the bombshell that the suit is all one color: "It's black."

Banks insisted that she doesn't mind being peppered with such questions and that she's appreciative of her role in one of the most high-profile series in movie history. "It is very cool; I'm really excited for people to see it," she said. "I worked not much longer in this movie than I did on the previous two movies, so that will be an indication of how big my role is, and then we'll see what they end up with in the actual movie."

Banks, who portrayed the party girl from hell in last year's "The 40-Year-Old Virgin," did admit to one question she is sick of answering: " 'Do you like to do it yourself?' " she quoted from the movie. "People associate that line with me."

Spidey 3 Spoilers?
Possible plot details now online.

Cinematical has posted what it claims are MAJOR SPOILERS about the plot of Spider-Man 3. Bear in mind that their scoop comes from The IMDB, which in turn cites Dark Horizons as the original source of the purported leak:

*SPOILER WARNING*


Spider-Spoilers: Plot Leak?

The news of the hour for geek movie fans is the sudden appearance of a plot synopsis for the third Spider-Man movie. You can read the full three paragraph summary here, but for now I'll break it down for you to hit the important bits.  Mostly, it's a list of confirmations of previous rumors - presuming, of course, this synopsis is legitimate.


*Gwen Stacy, daughter of the new police chief, will in fact develop a crush on Peter, causing some sort of love triangle as Pete and MJ are finally getting their relationship off the ground.
*Jameson will hire investigative journalist Eddie Brock to follow Peter around and figure out why MJ would leave Jameson's successful son for this loser kid.
*Sandman will come into being as an escaped prisoner hiding out on a remote beach is caught in a dreadful accident and finds himself turned into a shape-shifting sand creature.
*While investigating a crime scene Peter will find a "black substance" which merges with his costume to give him new powers. Hello, Venom.
*Harry finally snaps and becomes the new Goblin, teaming up with Sandman to fight Spider-Man.
*Lives of people "close to Peter" will be lost. This probably means MJ, since she isn't supposed to be alive currently anyway.
*Eddie Brock will become "distraught" for some reason. At this point, the "black substance" departs from Peter and joins up with Eddie to form sequel fuel.

Well... spoilers or not is really nothing we didnt know before... I'm afraid this movie wont be so good

It will be nothing but eye-candy. And Bruce Campbell's trademark cameo is always welcome.

it'll be out on my 20th birthday.

at this point, it looks fitting: a new episode hyped up but probably mediocre at best.

Thomas Haden Church Talks About Working with Director Sam Raimi
Source: About.com

Thomas Haden Church earned a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination for his role as Paul Giamatti's womanizing best friend in the critically acclaimed indie film, Sideways. Church is following up that attention-getting role with parts in bigger budgeted movies, including two animated family films and a major role as one of the main villains in Spider-Man 3.

Church plays one of Spider-Man's enemies ('Flint Marko/Sandman') in the third installment of the Spider-Man film franchise, directed by Sam Raimi and starring Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. Although the press rounds for Spider-Man 3 are a long way off, while on a press tour in support of the DreamWorks' animated comedy, Over the Hedge, Church answered a couple of my Spider-Man 3 questions and lavished praise on director Raimi.

Sam Raimi's Directorial Style: "It’s very choreographed because, not unlike an animated film, everything is animatically strategized.

They have the whole movie. I’ve seen the whole movie – I saw it last summer in animatics. I’ve seen everything and what Sam does is, and it’s what I’ve been doing since I started shooting in November, is you just get as close to what is animatically configured. You just get as close to that as you can in a live-action setting or stage.

You know Sam, despite all of the airs and graces of this being a hugely successful franchise and action movie and superhero movie, Sam is ultimately a brilliant actor’s director. I’ve described him in more than one interview as like Elia Kazan locked inside of Richard Donner. Even though I think Richard Donner is a great actor’s director, too... He’s just...he’s a very specific actor’s director. [Raimi’s] very specific when it comes to performances. He’s very specific and he pushes really hard, but it’s very rewarding.

I shot a scene in January that was a very emotional scene in the movie for my character. And I didn’t understand… We shot all the other coverage all day long, and I was actually starting to get kind of frustrated. I could feel it. I was starting to get a little irritable. And as they day progressed we broke for lunch and we hadn’t gotten any coverage on my side. I was like, ‘Well this is bulls**t man. I’m like working my a** off over here and Sam doesn’t seem to be in too big of a hurry.’

We continued building and building, and then we came back from lunch and we kept building and building. There was a lot of coverage, there was a lot of lighting changes because there’s a whole kind of thing where a window blows out and a storm blows in and there’s all these effects that had to be captured on camera. And I really felt myself becoming more and more physically aggressive. I kind of snapped at a couple of people – and I apologized. I felt myself becoming more emotionally aggressive. He then set two cameras on me and we went for a rehearsal. I slammed the stunt guy; I grabbed him and I slammed him really hard into the wall. Sam came over and goes, ‘You’re ready for your close-up.’ He knew exactly what he was doing. That just gave me goosebumps. He knew exactly what he was doing every step of the way all day long. I had like one rehearsal and he’s like, ‘You’re ready. We can get your close-up first,’ because he knew I was right there and that’s exactly how I had to be in the scene, which was, you know, super aggressive - almost homicidally aggressive."

Church continued. "He shot the close-up first and then he started backing the camera out and shooting the rest of the coverage. And really, I went up to him when we wrapped and I hugged him. I was like, ‘Wow, you taught me so much today that I really thought I knew, and I didn’t know.’ That’s what it was. It was unraveling the conventions of filmmaking as I’ve learned them and teaching me another way. Honestly, a very kind of improvisional way of doing it. Like watching the actor, really watching me and paying attention to all the elements, but watching me because I do drive the scene. But waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting until he saw me get to where I needed to be. And, hey, unbeknownst to me it took me all day to get there but once I was there, he captured it like that."

Strange As It Sounds, Over the Hedge and Spider-Man 3 Share Target Audiences: Thomas Haden Church really believes that both of his upcoming films are aimed at 12 through 15-year-olds. Church said, "Oh yeah. And even younger but I would say the main audience, the mean audience age is probably 12. I mean Sam - not to go off tangentially - but Sam Raimi’s whole philosophy behind directing is to constantly, constantly be feeding information. Children from like 8 and even up to the college age - Spider-Man appeals to a fairly broad demographic but, like I said, a mean age probably of 12 is a good mark - they process information so quickly and it’s not because of attention deficit or short attention span.

It’s just processing information and that they’re very hungry for information, very hungry.

That’s his whole philosophy behind the Spider-Man movies and clearly they’ve met with some success by virtue of his philosophy. It’s like, 'Gotta keep moving, gotta keep moving, gotta keep moving…,' because the audience is moving, you know? 'Don’t worry about letting the emotionally important moments land, keep moving forward.' It’s not to say that there isn’t an emotional impact, because there is. But, you know, it works because Tobey Maguire is a very accessible actor and person. It’s all by design because he wants to constantly be feeding new information to the audience.

GWEN STACY  :shock:  :bravo:  :yabbse-grin:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.xixax.com%2Fimages%2Fgwen.jpg&hash=31d86393862d125381abf59497011bf2f657e452)

many more pics: http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=11541

they were filming in midtown all weekend. yesterday i tried to get a sneak peak and some punk ass, skinny ass PA told me to mess off; "um, you need to keep walking sweetheart." i wanted to through him in front of the M11 buss. i really did.

Yeah, I saw some big production the other day and didn't know what it was, and then I checked AICN this morning and what do you know...

Quote from: ©brad on May 30, 2006, 10:14:48 PM
they were filming in midtown all weekend. yesterday i tried to get a sneak peak and some punk ass, skinny ass PA told me to mess off; "um, you need to keep walking sweetheart." i wanted to through him in front of the M11 buss. i really did.

what was he gonna do? you should've said 'hi' to him.

Big Spider-Man 3 Report and More Set Pics!
Source: Superhero Hype!

'Venom657' sent in this excellent report from the Spider-Man 3 set in New York. The scooper actually got a chance to briefly talk to director Sam Raimi who divulged a few details about the teaser trailer and Venom in the movie. There are some spoilers included, so only read ahead if you'd like to know certain things about the movie:

My brother was staying at the Hilton across the street from where they were filming, and I was a few blocks away. Knowing how big of a Spider-Man fan I am my brother immediately rushed to tell me what was going on when he found out what the men across the street were building around a fountain for. I freaked and ran down there myself at night and they told me to come back in the morning.

So when I got there, I saw Topher Grace and James Cromwell. I was stoked. The coolest thing though I noticed was the black and white Spider-Man 3 logo on the actors' chairs. They filmed a few scenes where "Captain Stacy" drives up to the wreckage scene and orders people around. Then "Eddie" drives up in a cab and starts snapping pictures, then Stacy yells at the cab to get away, and then they react to an explosion.

After they were done filming these scenes they moved the camera. (By the way I almost got my picture with Topher Grace, but this woman hopped in, then Topher walked away) Hence, me and my sister very sad.

But my dream came true when I saw Sam Raimi standing there not looking busy. I jumped in and immediately told him how much his movies meant to me, and I thanked him for doing these movies. He asked for my name and what I did. To which I replied I am ****** and I work at a coffee shop in California, in which we are all comic book fans, and all we do are discuss your movies, and I told him that I always defended his points. (Which I do) Then I started asking him the stuff you will be interested in. By the way while I was asking these questions a woman came up and a man and said, you aren't supposed to be talking about this. But I think Sam, seeing the excitement in me didn't want to turn me away.

First off, I asked him about the teaser trailer and I said, it's coming with Talladega Nights right? Before I finished asking the question, he said Superman. And I said what? Because you guys at Superhero Hype! said Talladega nights. Then Sam Raimi himself said Superman, and there was another man listening who confirmed that. But then Sam said well I don't know what "they're" doing but they told me Superman Returns. Keep a look out.

I had so many questions I don't know why I asked him these when I look back on it. Probably because Venom means so much to me. I first asked... and pointed to the chairs. Will Venom have a black suit with a "WHITE" logo, unlike black suit Spidey and he said yes. I think I said THANK YOU! Then I asked if Topher would be in a suit or if Venom would be CGI, to which he said he will be in a suit, and obviously the actors can only do so much with the heroes and so Venom will obviously have to have some CG. Then I said and he will be in the movie for the last ten minutes right? Then he hesitated, like he wasn't sure what to tell me then finally said "that's correct." Those weren't his exact words. But pretty close, this is all from memory. Then I thanked him again and walked away.

I went the next day too and you have most of the pictures. But I found on the street parked above where they were filming the broken taxi... just parked on the street and the Daily Bugle truck that you've already seen. I went back to the site and they had guys washing all the debri away. I sat and talked to one of the guys who built the set, and he told me the scene which they were filming and that I saw the previous couple days. He said, basically there is a crane on the corner roof of a building and it breaks taking the whole corner offices with it, and Gwen being in the office holds on to a telephone wire and it breaks then Spider-Man saves her. Meanwhile Eddie and Captain Stacy are there waching and what not.

What else can I tell you... Oh yeah, they said they will be filming starting Wednesday.. that's today, at Wall Street on a broken down construction set, where they will be filming a big fight sequence. My guess is that it's a cool place to battle Sandman.

Oh yeah, Sam also said that we will probably not see Venom in the teaser.

http://superherohype.com/cgi-bin/imageFolio.cgi?direct=Spider-Man/Spider-Man_3/On_Set

Four Spider-Man 3 Villains!
Source: ComingSoon.net June 1, 2006

Former Marvel Studios CEO Avi Arad may have let a big one out of the bag when talking to IFMagazine.com. He says there are four villains in Spider-Man 3!

iF: There are four villains this time, Venom, Sandman, and Green Goblin and when is the fourth going to be revealed?

ARAD: Right we have four villains. Pretty soon [we'll reveal the fourth villain] I believe. Maybe around Comic Con we'll reveal something and the madness will begin.

The full interview is available http://www.ifmagazine.com/new.asp?article=3028 . The third installment hits theaters on May 4, 2007. Stay tuned to Superhero Hype! for continued reports from the New York City sets.

I will bet one billion dollars it's the Lizard.

I hope it's the Lizard.

You know, I REALLY hoped Harry would be the Hobgoblin rather than Green Goblin (just because I assumed it would be more interesting for movie-goers who don't read the comics to see a new villian rather than Green Goblin again.) I guess really the main reason I want to see Hobgoblin over Green Goblin is because I made a bet on it. I think I'm gonig to lose, goddammit.

I'm hoping Green Goblin II and Lizard (If it is him) get minor roles while the focus is on Sandman with Venom providing a larger threat at the end. I recall in the comics Venom actually kills Sandman, perhaps that will come into play? But then again, they've deviated so much from the comics.

McfLy, I like your style.

Hehe.

You know, after reading all those little insider articles about this movie, I don't really care who's going to be in it. Apparently they're ready to go and do three more, so there's plenty of time, why squeeze everyone in now?

Spidey teaser at youtube, really low quality...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoE1JXeGFqE

Very High Quality Teaser Trailer here (http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/spider-man_3/) at Apple.

niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

i like the dark elements, i hope it will play a great part in the movie.

Good lord, the new Green Goblin costume; death to the person who conjured up that beast. CGI looks great tho.

yeah i liked it, but i don't think the teaser moniker is appropriate. that was a full-blown spoilerful trailer!

Even that brief glimpse of Topher Grace manages to remind me how much more I like Topher Grace than Tobey Maguire, and how they probably should have cast Grace as Peter Parker in the first place.  TOO FUCKIN' LATE NOW, I GUESS....

But I'm looking forward to it.  Definitely.  Also, Kirsten Dunst is not aging well.  Just from an aesthetic perspective, I'm having a hard time accepting her as someone worth risking your secret identity for.  But I guess if you're Tobey Maguire you just kind of take the best you can get.

I'm really glad I didn't make to this thread yesterday because being suprised by this in the theater was awesome. 
Realizing what it was for based on the shade and texture of the red was cool and even more cool was the ROAR of applause once the audience realized what was up.

yeah i'm really upset this was not attached to my superman.  it looks like the greatest movie ever, but like i have said it will be an absolute MIRACLE if raimi can pull it off. 

Quote from: modage on June 28, 2006, 05:41:11 PM
yeah i'm really upset this was not attached to my superman.  it looks like the greatest movie ever, but like i have said it will be an absolute MIRACLE if raimi can pull it off. 

it wasnt in my Superman either. they actually showed a trailer for the new movie with The Rock (not Southland...), and Barnyard and Ant Bully. What a dissapointment cause I was waiting to see it. Teaser looks terrific.

On-set, production photos and a MAJOR SPOILER WARNING!!!

http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryListing.asp?navtyp=gls====197373&nbc1=1

Thats brilliant. All I have to look forward to now is Venom, and laughing at the new Green Goblin costume.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinescape.com%2Fmultimedia%2FMaster_Site%2FMovies%2FMaster_SiteMovies298053.jpg&hash=e6c1984df335a6ef51c5c7a1a5e932f85fd4371f)

Pimp My Spider-Man?

Simmons on Spider-Man 3 & More Sequels

J.K. Simmons talked to TV Guide about returning as J. Jonah Jameson in Spider-Man 3 and possibly making more sequels. Simmons says he wrapped filming two or three weeks ago.

TVGuide.com: What's your feeling on 3? Judging by the trailers, it looks darker.
Simmons: I think it pulls in a lot of interesting directions. Of course we're a long ways from seeing a final version of it, but my stuff, we had a lot of fun doing. I probably had not as much to do as I did in the second one and maybe a little more than I had in the first one, but from what I saw the new bad-guy stuff is once again going to top its predecessor.

TVGuide.com: In 2, we met Jonah's son, who in Spider-Man lore evolves into a villain. But they're not playing that card yet?
Simmons: Not yet. Hopefully there are plenty of cards to play for [Parts] 4, 5, 6.... I'll do a Spider-Man for every two or three years for the next couple decades if they want. That'd be all right!

TVGuide.com: Was there any talk of Spider-Man 4 on the set?
Simmons: Yeah, it got mentioned. In fact, the last couple of days I shot was at the very end of the schedule — we were doing some night-action scenes in New York — and [director] Sam [Raimi] was talking about it. It's not a done deal because everybody's deals, including Sam Raimi's and all the actors', was for three pictures. But he's certainly open to doing more.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.usatoday.com%2Flife%2F_photos%2F2006%2F07%2F21%2Fspiderman-embargo-large.jpg&hash=52a91549f0349be07eef04fb6f0e11157a23ecdf)

A final spin for 'Spider-Man'?
Source: USA TODAY

As the superhero franchise, which has taken in more than $1.6 billion worldwide, returns to Comic-Con to promote next year's Spider-Man 3, some are wondering whether the series is making its final bow.

Including star Tobey Maguire.

"We've done an amazing job at keeping things fresh," Maguire tells USA TODAY. But, he adds, "it's hard to imagine continuously coming up with stories that deserve to be told. I'm not sure if there are more stories for this character that are interesting enough to be excited about doing more."

Sony Pictures, the distributor for the films, isn't saying either way. And superhero franchises, such as the Hulk, have been pronounced dead, only to resurface under a new director or production company.

But Spider-Man producers concede they haven't looked beyond this installment of the series, which they always viewed as a trilogy.

"We don't have a book we're adapting, like a Lord of the Rings," says Spider-Man producer Laura Ziskin. "It's open-ended. But this could be the last. We've never started on the next movie while we were working on the current one."

More than a dozen big-studio movies will be featured at the nation's largest comic-book convention this weekend, but none come shouldering more excitement or expectations than Spider-Man. It's due in theaters May 4.

Producers — and perhaps, they say, a star from the movie — will unveil some hastily gathered footage from the film Saturday as a goodwill gesture to the convention, which has been a taproot of the franchise's loyal following.

"This is a going-home kind of thing," producer Avi Arad says. "We brought the first one here and the fans have supported us and (director) Sam Raimi from the start. We wanted to say thank you."

Filmmakers are closely guarding plot points to the film, though it will feature a new villain, Sandman, played by Thomas Haden Church.

And Ziskin promises one foe will be Spidey himself.

"He'll have to battle villains within," she says. "I love what we've done with this character."

So does Maguire.

"This one, to me, has more interesting twists and turns" than the first two, he says. "It's been a fun ride."

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.xixax.com%2Fimages%2Fspidey3.jpg&hash=1abea5a6215c52f1a096743ef3235b2c9e494bad)

FUCK.

The audience in the Spidey 3 pannel at the CON got to see a shot of Venom from the film. Hoper some amateur footage shows up online. 

Spider-Man 3 Footage at Comic-Con Panel!

The entire cast of Spider-Man 3 appeared at the San Diego Comic-Con to present some new footage and answer questions from a very excited, jampacked crowd.

First, they introduced director Sam Raimi and producer Laura Ziskin who were a bit uncertain whether to show some new footage, since a lot of it was unfinished, but the crowd quickly convinced them to do so, and they ran an exclusive extended teaser.

It opens with Tobey Maguire looking into a mirror and opening his shirt to reveal a black costume, with a voice over from Aunt May, "Uncle Ben wouldn't want us living with revenge in our hearts, just like voices that take you over and turn us into something ugly." The daunting title card comes on saying "All Will Be Lost," and then the next scene shows Topher Grace as Eddie Brock walking through a church with a voice over of him asking someone "to do one thing for me. I want you to kill Peter Parker." (The movie sounds like it may be very dark, doesn't it?)

The rest of the teaser footage went by way too fast to describe in detail, but we did see Peter Parker in a black ninja-like suit, apparently carrying a sword (!), and there were extensive fight scenes between Spider-Man and Sandman, which weren't even close to being finished, but looked quite fantastic. There was also a little more footage of the new Harry Osborn/Goblin character, which Raimi explained later wouldn't be called either the "Green Goblin" or the "Hobgoblin," but it is Harry using his father's Goblin equipment to get revenge on Peter Parker. (So that's two people who don't like Peter Parker... not to mention the Sandman!)

The footage ended with Topher's Eddie Brock feeling something black and gooey hit his hand--obviously the symbiote--and it cuts to the very first image of the computerized Venom, who looks exactly like he does in the comic book if rendered in 3D, looking straight into the camera with his jaws wide open and drooling. If you're a fan of Venom, you're not likely to be disappointed.

Director Sam Raimi then introduced the entire cast of the movie, who showed up in San Diego unannounced in the program (though you read about it right here on ComingSoon.net/SuperheroHype.com). Kirsten Dunst (Mary Jane Watson), Bryce Dallas Howard (Gwen Stacy), Thomas Haden Church (Sandman), Topher Grace (Eddie Brock/Venom) and Tobey Maguire (duh) all came out to the type of rapturous applause reception that the Rolling Stones must experience at every show.

They immediately went to questions from the audience, with a lot of it focusing on Grace, who admitted to being a fan of the comics, particularly the Todd McFarlane ones, and he liked being able to play a darker version of the Peter Parker character.

Everyone on stage seemed to be having fun, Raimi and Tobey doing a bit of a schtick about how Tobey lied to Raimi about being a big fan of Spider-Man before getting the part, and one poor fan wearing a large "S" on his shirt was heckled a bit, before Raimi quipped that he liked the "new Spider-Man logo."

Before the end of the panel, they showed a few new images of all the characters new and old. Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane was surrounded by what looked like black webbing (though it could have been strands of the symbiote), Bryce Dallas Howard was simply sitting in a chair, Tobey Maguire had a very Superman-like pose with him ripping open the shirt to show the black costume. The two new villain shots were the most interesting, as Thomas Haden Church's Sandman had his back towards the camera with a small child holding a teddy bear standing behind him (which will probably be a big part of his story) and Topher Grace was in profile with the symbiote covering the back of his head and starting to spread over his face. (These pictures should be available soon to those who couldn't make it to the Comic-Con.)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi32.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd6%2Fdaveanator%2Fcon06-spidey2.jpg&hash=ad16d8a9ec5d84b2a5632ae9de44d006fac99db2)

Comic-Con 2006: Spider-Man 3 Interviews
Sam Raimi and the cast on making the film.

IGN FilmForce attended a roundtable interview Saturday at Comic-Con International in San Diego with Spider-Man 3 director Sam Raimi and cast members Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Topher Grace, Bryce Dallas Howard and Thomas Haden Church.

The interviews took place prior to Sony's presentation of exclusive new footage from the highly anticipated film. Here's what Raimi and his stars had to say about Spider-Man 3 and their characters.

Q: Are you making an announcement today?

Sam Raimi: I'm having a baby. [laughter] The big villain that we have been expecting will be my mother-in-law. [laughter]. It will be Venom. He'c coming to star across from Tobey in the picture, along with Thomas Haden Church, who plays The Sandman.

Kirsten Dunst: You guys are like, "We already knew that." ... I thought I let that out of the bag awhile ago?

Q: We've always heard you were more interested in the classic villains. What made you bring Venom into this movie?

Raimi: Well, Avi Arad – who really has the pulse of the Marvel fans, better than the head of any corporation has understood those people interested in the corporation's product – really knows what those kids want. And he said, you've had two Spider-Man pictures and there's so many kids, so many fans of Spider-Man, want to see Venom. Even though you didn't grow up with him, they want to see him. You've got the Sandman, he's one of your favorite villains, so why don't you bring Venom in also and make those kids, fans of Venom, happy. So I thought that's what we should do.

Q: But do you like him now?

Raimi: Now that I've seen Topher Grace perform him, and saw what Alvin Sargent did with the script – he created a great character, really filled out Eddie Brock into a very meaningful character. Ad Tobey has a great energy with him in the few scenes they play together as competitors and I really like him now.

Q: So which version of Venom will yours be based on?

Raimi: We studied all the different looks. So many different artists ... created different looks of Venom and we tried to take the ones that worked best for us but also the ones Avi felt were the most classic elements and base it on that. There's a lot of fantastic elements about Venom that you could say are in conflict with the realism that we wanted to have in the picture. But we just said to ourselves, 'Kirsten and Tobey, you'll just have to do the heavy-lifting here to bring it back down to earth because there's thid wild goof from outer space and you'll just have to connect us to the characters." [laughter]

Q: So Venom is from outer space?

Raimi: I never said that, sir. I don't know what you're talking about.

Q: How do you deal with juggling so many characters?

Raimi: Well, Spider-Man comic books had all these characters and successfully interwove their stories. A lot of what we're doing is not introducing elements, like if Harry Osborn does decide to seek vengeance upon Peter Parker for the death of his father, it's certainly something that's been set up in the first and then second picture. This is more the conclusion of that. So we have less work to do in that sense of not just introducing all of these new people. One of the other villains we've tried to weave the story into Peter Parker's personal life in as important of a way we could, in a way that will hopefully make more of the first two pictures [ad] give us insights into what we've seen before. Probably only with the Brock character is there a complete new introductions of elements into Peter's life. But that's okay because he can meet new people, too.

Q: So what's new for your characters this time? How have they grown?

Dunst: Well, for Mary Jane ... Basically, she's still an actress and you could see were it was heading towards in the last film with Peter. Emotionally it's much more adult, mature. There's a lot more at stake because of their relationship. They're together. Emotionally, there's a lot more at stake for all the characters, and I think that we've gone more into their relationship because their older and it's become more complicated. Emotionally, it's a much heavier film to me.

Q: And Tobey?

Tobey Maguire: Obviously, there's a continuity of character that we have to keep up. Peter Parker is Peter Parker so it's important to not just try to create new things for Peter just for the sake of that but I don't necessarily want to see the same scenes played out and see Peter go through the same kinds of things that he's gone through. So I think that Alvin and the other people who had input into Peter's story and what Peter's going through in this movie did a fantastic job because as an actor for me there was noting stale about it. I got to approach it and got to do brand new, really fun, interesting things for myself. And in terms of what the specifics of that are, you'll see when you check out the movie.

Q: Tobey, you seem to delve into the darker aspects of Peter Parker, at least judging by the trailer. Was it more rewarding for you as an actor to sink your teeth into the dark side of who this guy is or who he could become?

Maguire: We've gone into some new and different areas, it was fun for me without losing touch with who Peter is and so I really enjoyed the things I got to do in the movie.

Q: Whether there's another movie or not, does this movie bring the whole story to some closure?

Dunst: This is definitely a culmination but you'd have to have seen the first and second movies. This definitely ties up some storylines but if there are more stories to tell, if things are unresolved, then we will tell them. But I think it depends on if everyone's game and there's a story to tell. Because if there's a good story, I'll be there.

Q: What about the casting of Bryce Dallas Howard as Gwen Stacy?

Raimi: We just cast the best actress for the part. Tobey, our producer Laura Ziskin, myself, Grant Curtis. We just wanted to find the best actress for the role. Not someone who looked like Gwen Stacy of the comics, although once the actress would have been cast that would have been our immediate job. How do we make her look like the image that the kids have grown up with? But nevertheless in casting, we're just trying to find the right person who can make it real, who can take the dialogue and bring it to life. Read it in the most unexpected way, bring some life to it. Make it interesting, exciting for me who is watching it, for Tobey who is acting it, for Laura who was watching it with us. That's really what the casting is about. The moment came when Bryce read the scene, one particular scene, and it came to life for us suddenly, and we all looked to each other and felt energized. It was a different thing than with Kirsten and Tobey because we were after a different relationship there. But here we were looking for a great actress and that's what seemed to jump out at us.

Dunst: So you weren't looking for a great actress when you cast me? [laughter]

Q: Sam, can you talk about filming in L.A. and Cleveland? Was that just fir economics or does Spidey have to save Cleveland?

Raimi: Cleveland was wonderful to us. They really put the red carpet out for us and allowed us to do a tremendous amount of shooting there so we're very thankful to that city. What happened was that the soundstages were in Los Angeles ... all the stage work was done there or 90% of it. And New York has always been the city of Spider-Man so we went to New York to shoot all the location photography. There is a car action sequence but Manhattan couldn't give us ten straight blocks of city dedicated to our car chase but Cleveland could. So we sent a second unit there, under the direction of Dan Bradley, a great stunt coordinator and second unit director I've worked with before, to shoot these car action stunts there. So for ten days we were able to monopolize these streets so that's why we shot in Cleveland.

Q: What's the status of the Evil Dead remake?

Raimi: I've been so busy on Spider-Man that I haven't had time to think about it lately. But what we want to do with this company [Ghost House Pictures] is find the right director who can really reinvigorate that story and really spook the heck out of the audience. That's what we're waiting for.

Q: Is Bruce Campbell in Spider-Man 3?

Raimi: He plays a cameo, yeah. He's got a new character.

Q: The rumor is it's Mysterio.

Raimi: We can't say. [laughter]

Q: Can you talk about the special effects process this time?

Raimi: Well, what I think is different this time is there's new challenges. We had to bring about the Sandman and we've got a great special effects designer in Scott Stokdyk who did the first two Spider-Man pictures along with John Dykstra. Now he's got the job alone. We've got a lot of the same animators, we've replaced a lot of them. Others have moved on but the core team is there and we've tried to build upon it. So we've become better at working with animation. I've learned a lot over the last five years. ... But as far as the technical aspects and what the new hurdles are, it's really about bringing about the Sandman to the screen. How can we make it believable t the audience? Not just fantastic but believable that this fella could turn into sand and become this substance and still be a human being without feeling the hand of manipulation of the artist all the time. But just getting into the dream f it, getting sucked up in the story. ... We still aren't sure we can do it actually.

Q: What about Venom?

Raimi: Venom is less of a technical challenge and more of an artistic challenge in trying to capture the spirit of this very powerful, somewhat spider-ized, graceful but animal not Spider-Man style of movement. That's more of capturing a dance form on screen.

Q: Will this film use Danny Elfman's themes?

Raimi: I haven't yet spoken with Danny but I'm hoping that it will be Danny Elfman working in conjunction with Chris Young.

Q: Sam, you're bringing Gwen Stacy into this movie and she's a character famous for being killed. So are you killing her in this movie?

Raimi: I wouldn't dream of it, sir. The villains may have something else in mind, though.

Q: Are we ever going to see The Lizard as one of the villains?

Raimi: I'm not at liberty to say, sir.

Q: How faithful are you to the comics in terms of the visuals?

Raimi: In this story we're less specific but we did try and stay very true to the Venom comic books when they describe his birth. The creation of Venom. We did try and stay true to the writers and artists' ideas about how that happened.

[Raimi, Maguire and Dunst exit the interview, making way for cast members Topher Grace, Bryce Dallas Howard and Thomas Haden Church.]

Q: Topher, what's it like playing Venom?

Grace: He's a great character to play. Unlike most bad guys, he truly loves being evil. He really comes to grips with it and enjoys it so it was fun to play someone who finds their way to that place. It's a fun thing to play as an actor.

Q: Did any of you have any trepidation about taking on a comic book movie and becoming part of such a phenomenon?

Church: I wouldn't say there was trepidation but you have a tradition with the comic book that you have to honor and then you look at the requisite storytelling that went on with the first two movies, I just wanted to do my part. Get in the game, be in it for minute, not fumble the ball in the endzone. I just wanted to be able to do what was asked of me. Sam is a real actor's director. I've described him as Elia Kazan trapped inside this Motor City madman action picture director body. ... He just has a great specificity and I think that's part of the allure of the movies to create people that are very accessible and to hire actors that are very accessible and identifiable to the audience.

Q: Were any of you fans of the comics?

Grace: Yeah, I got into it when Todd McFarlane was illustrating the comic in the late '80s, which fortunately was right when my character was coming into existence. ... I was such a big fan, really of Peter Parker and a lot of work McFarlane had done. So I'm probably the geekiest guy ever to be cast in a geek film. The first day I was on the set I was in the Bugle, and just as a fan of the first two movies, you know like those theme parks that are like, "We'll put you in the movie." And the guy's there with the cigar. "Parker, get in here!" It was tough because I had to be angry but I was just smiling ear to ear.

Q: Is there supposed to be a dichotomy between Eddie Brock and Peter Parker?

Grace: There is. That's what I liked about the character the most. It's kind of a case study if someone had the same job and kind of the same taste in women and got the same powers but had a really bad upbringing. I used to stay on-set to Sam, "With great power comes great fun."

Q: Bryce, can you say anything about the love triangle involving your character, or if her fate is the same as what it was in the comic?

Bryce Dallas Howard: I can't really say anything about any of that. What I can say is, and I'm sure you guys and audiences know this, but the second film was twice as big as the first film. And the third film is three times as big as the entire franchise put together, and that's a testament to how much integrity and passion that everyone who's working on this truly has. They could just sit back and be like, "We got it. We've got the people who are in the seats opening weekend." They don't do that. They work so incredibly hard and they push themselves artistically ... What Sam brings into this is how moral are we going to make this for the kids seeing this. And bringing it back to Gwen Stacy, he's very reverent to everything people would expect and yet it's surprising.

Q: Thomas, how does it feel to have to train for months when all she had to do was dye her hair?

Church: It was physically daunting to show up last year with the physique of a fishwife and, weirdly, they said this won't work for us. You've got to be more built. But actually, Topher and I both trained –

Grace: – he saw slightly better results.

Church: Once again, you just try to tow the line and do what's asked of you. It's been a great discipline. I've probably worked out for about sixteen months and it's just a good discipline to add. It was very reinvigorating to reincorporate that.

Exclusive: Enter Sandman!

Probably one of the most exciting moments from the recent San Diego Comic-Con were the presentation and interviews for what's sure to be next summer's most exciting movie, Spider-Man 3.

For ComingSoon.net's Superhero Hype!, it felt like a true rock star moment, as the dozens of other journalists rushed out of the press room to catch the presentation, and we were asked to hold back to talk to one of the cast. Since SHH! started as one of the first Spider-Man movie fansites (as Spider-Man Hype!), it made sense that we'd be given a chance to talk to some of the cast, but my first and only pick was Thomas Haden Church, who I talked to a few times two years ago while he was doing the rounds for Alexander Payne's "Sideways," which brought Church a lot of attention and awards.

Back then, no one could possibly imagine that Church would be heading into one of the biggest movies of next year, and Sam Raimi could not have picked a better actor to play the part of Flint Marko AKA The Sandman. After the interview, I was snuck down a back elevator to the main presentation hall where we got to see a bit of rough footage of Church's CGI counterpart in action, and if there's anyone who might be able to overshadow the fan favorite Venom, it's Church.

Superhero Hype!: So how has it been for you going from the world of Alexander Payne to something as enormous as "Spider-Man 3"?
Thomas Haden Church: Sam was the one who brought me in. He and I came very close to working together a number of years ago on a movie called "The Gift"... I mean, very close. Sam really wanted me to do this role, and it just didn't work out for whatever reason. Thank God he didn't forget me. Because of "Sideways," they saw me accepting an award and called the next day and said, "Would you come in and talk to us about Spider-Man 3?" They had nothing. They had no script. They just knew the guy that [he] was going to be in the movie, and that's where it started. We just started talking about it, and I'm glad they asked me to be a part of it.

SHH!: You have a background in humor and we've known you for so long for that...
Church: Yeah, I know. The last couple times out there it's fairly humorless. There's not too much comedy in this TV thing I just had come out, "Broken Trail" [on AMC] and Sandman is nowhere near a barrel of monkeys. He's not a laugh-meister.

SHH!: Were you able to bring any of that humor to this part and did Sam want you to?
Church: No, it's a very dramatic character. He's definitely not the comic relief in "Spider-Man 3."

SHH!: Sandman is not the most fleshed-out character in the comics (no pun intended), but do we get more into the back story of the character and what makes him tick?
Church: Yeah, I think so. I can't be specific about what it is, but I will say that he's definitely a guy who has a purpose in the movie, and that purpose is absolutely in conflict with Spider-Man's better intentions. I wouldn't be a villain in the movie if it were otherwise.

SHH!: So it's not the typical "Sandman robs a bank and Spider-Man stops him" type thing?
Church: No. Like I said, there are some larger life issues at play. He's really got a lot of stuff to work out and like I said, it's not in Spider-Man's best interest.

SHH!: Is this your first real experience with CGI and green screen experience?
Church: I've done other movies. It's been a number of years ago now, but "George of the Jungle," we had some extensive blue screen/green screen work, but that really is probably the only one.

SHH!: What's involved with becoming The Sandman? Did they put you in the green suit or some sort of performance capture apparatus?
Church: No, no, no. You're just super-imposed. In the old days, it was all matte photography, but now it's how they incorporate you into the CG action. No, it's usually just me however I am.

SHH!: But they didn't throw a bucket of sand on you just for effect?
Church: (laughs) No, no, it wasn't that amateurish or deliberate.

SHH!: It's odd because you don't really think about when he's just in regular form in the comics that he's still made in sand, so do you at least have sand pasted onto your face to give that effect?
Church: No, it's a little more complicated than that. "Sand pasted to my face." That's funny.

SHH!: That would be the low budget version of the movie. I haven't talked to you since before "Sideways" came out, so how has this ride been since then?
Church: It's been terrific. It's been going on for awhile now because I did "Spider-Man" and I did "Broken Trail" and been involved in some animated pictures, and now that "Spider-Man" is, for the most part done, I'm looking for whatever the next thing is going to be. But it's been great. There's definitely a before and after scenario with "Sideways" in my professional life.

SHH!: I've noticed that a lot of actors after they get nominated for Oscars, they'll follow that up with a big budget genre flick. Is it just coincidence, or are you actively looking for more Alexander Payne-type stuff?
Church: Yeah, I'm always interested in that, but honestly, I just want to play characters. I want to play interesting, well-written, provocative guys. It's not really about, "Oh, I had to be in 'Spider-Man 3,'" it was the guy. Even in the midst of "Spider-Man," I did a miniseries for AMC, but it was the guy, and it was Robert Duvall and it was a Western. But it was really the guy in that movie and being able to act opposite Robert Duvall and work with Walter Hill. I don't get hung up on, "Oh, now I need to go do a Victorian, wintry, character-driven romance." It's not about that. It's just about whatever the guy is.

SHH!: What's coming your way now? Are more people trying to write more "Sideways"-like characters or movies for you, because Jack was a one-of-a-kind character.
Church: There's no uniformity to it. There's definitely been a scattershot of opportunity, but nobody's really like, "Oh, this guy is like Jack in 'Sideways,' let's get Church," it's not like that. Because I have tried to be fairly scrutinizing with the roles that I've chosen or the roles that have chosen me. Like I said, I just want it to be good. I want to be proud of it ten years from now.

Spider-Man 3 comes out on May 4, 2007...in case you didn't know.

Tangled Web: 'Spider-Man 3' Re-Shoots Planned, James Franco Reveals
Director Sam Raimi has put out call for 'more action,' actor says.
Source: MTV

LOS ANGELES — There are certain things that every good geek knows to be true, like the fact that Spider-Man's secret identity is Peter Parker, or that the "Spider-Man" movies have pulled in more dough than an army of overworked pizza makers, or that "Spider-Man 3" recently completed filming and is due to swing into theaters next summer.

Uh ... strike that last one.

"The next thing I'm shooting?" series star James Franco said over the weekend. "Re-shoots on 'Spider-Man.' "

Revealing that director Sam Raimi has put out the call for "more action," Franco said he's being called back to the set of the blockbuster. "Probably next month," he added.

Members of the flick's cast, including Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, along with franchise newcomers Thomas Haden Church (as beach-bashing baddie the Sandman), Topher Grace (as alien threat Venom) and Bryce Dallas Howard (as Parker paramour Gwen Stacy), recently arrived triumphant at San Diego's Comic-Con to screen footage for fans. Franco said he regretted being unable to make the trip along with his co-stars, and seemed shocked by much of what was revealed there.

Despite the widely downloaded teaser trailer that shows a black-and-green-suited Franco riding a glider, and Raimi's own admission that Franco's Harry Osbourn will be "somewhere between" the comic book characters of Green Goblin and Hobgoblin, the tight-lipped actor refused to admit that Harry's long-simmering angst turns him into a villain. "You saw me in a suit?" Franco asked, feigning incredulity. "I don't think that was me."

Franco also seemed surprised by Raimi's assertions that Harry's story line will conclude with the third film (the actor's contract expires after "Spider-Man 3"). "It's really news to me. It's actually breaking my heart to hear that my character is being rounded up in this movie," the 28-year-old Franco said, half-kidding. "God, I think I'm going to cry."

Insisting that Church and Grace "bring amazing acting and great talent" to the third installment of the franchise, Franco insisted that he's eager to see the finished product. "The journey is much different than the final product. So when we actually see the movies, it's so much different than how it felt making it. I'm sure I'll be very happy."

Revealing that he expects a new trailer to be on the way soon, Franco said the new flick will offer fans plenty of action, as well as an opportunity to see the young thespians stretch out their acting muscles. "It's not that there's less acting in [a 'Spider-Man'] movie. I mean, it has the same number of acting scenes as any other movie," Franco said. "It's just that the action takes so much longer, so it feels like it's all action. Really, in a way, it's two months worth of regular scenes, which is what a typical movie has, and then we had to do four months of action."

Now, like a superhero's tights after an all-you-can-eat buffet, it seems that Sam Raimi is going to stretch those four months into just a little more.

Deeper Details Of That Spider-Man 3 And Mysterio Story
Source: Film Ick

*READ AT OWN RISK*

Apparently, I'm now told by my very dependable source, the appearance of Bruce Campbell as Quentin Beck in Spider-Man 3 is to play out something a little like this:

Peter Parker finds out about a Spider-Man movie being made and goes to the set to check it out. Avi Arad and Sam Raimi have cameos as the producer and director. Quentin Beck is the movie's special FX guy. The fact that Peter and MJ are both in the public eye - though one can never reveal that he is - is milked for a little bit of fun too.

This brief cameo appearance by Beck is just about the full the breadth and depth of the "4th villain" mystery. That makes this a genuine spoiler, I suppose.

We saw all the pics of the Spideyfest and all of the merchandise and kids in Spidey costumes - and I presume this movie ties in with all of that Spidey-Mania.

The word is that this is from Sony Image Works, the people doing the cgi for the movie. If not, then its probably for the Spider-Man 3 game on PS3.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=P40U07CM2VY

Post waster to put the new trailer at the top of the next page.

New Trailer here (http://www.ifilm.com/presents/spiderman3) or here. (http://download.ifilm.com/s3_test/Spider-man_3_trailer_480p.mov)

Quote from: MacGuffin on November 09, 2006, 07:04:52 PM
New Trailer here. (http://www.ifilm.com/presents/spiderman3)

...one and a half hours from now.

Word.

My impression from the trailer: probably weaker script, but really beautiful images sometimes that say it all.  It's probably gonna be long and chock full of stuff, but I think I'll love it.  Can't beat 2, though.  I am a giant fan of that film.  Can't not beat 1.  That film sucked.

Anyway, the trailer did its job to make me really excited and I am eagerly anticipating this one.  W00t.

No venom or much Eddie Brock, which is kind of dissapointing. But I have an inkling that we'll get another trailer with more on that storyline. The sort of twist on Sandman is fairly interesting. But I'll bet he is probably just the first half or 2/3 of the film, then we see Venom. Jesus I really hope it's not the kind of deal that we see Venom in the very last few minutes and then boom: Deadman's Chest/Matrix Reloaded style cliffhanger. I hope to God not.

But it is a cool trailer, and the movie will probably be really good. Looks very operatic. But I agree with matt: can't be better than 2, but will definitley be better than 1.

Quote from: Derek237 on November 09, 2006, 09:27:26 PMJesus I really hope it's not the kind of deal that we see Venom in the very last few minutes and then boom: Deadman's Chest/Matrix Reloaded style cliffhanger. I hope to God not.

i fear this too. i'm afraid i have to lower my expectations about the amount of venom. also i was hoping the writing wouldn't be like 2 again but it sounds like it.. other than that i'm way more excited about sandman now. it's all LOOKING good.

that shit looks fake.

Quote from: matt35mm on November 09, 2006, 09:18:48 PM
My impression from the trailer: probably weaker script

There are like three lines of dialogue in the trailer... how can you assume this?

Quote from: matt35mm on November 09, 2006, 09:18:48 PMW00t.

oh

spider man 2 was trash.

Quote from: shnorff on November 10, 2006, 09:19:13 PM
spider man 2 was trash.

1 & 2 were trash. and this doesn't look any different.

i liked the teaser better.  this trailer makes me worried again about cramming too much into one film. 

Yeah, the teaser was a lot better. I'm sure I might change my mind when I see the film, but at the moment I HATE the whole link between Parker and Sandman...that's like Darth Vader building C-3PO. Ugh.

Have any of you seen the work-in-progress trailer that AICN posted? There's a closing beat involving the birth of Venom that totally (but not definitively) looks like the kind of thing that could be the final epilogue/cliffhanger to the film.

Quote from: Ghostboy on November 13, 2006, 11:24:05 PMHave any of you seen the work-in-progress trailer that AICN posted? There's a closing beat involving the birth of Venom that totally (but not definitively) looks like the kind of thing that could be the final epilogue/cliffhanger to the film.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7652314842931587140&q=spiderman+3+trailer&hl=en

link that will disappear.

Venom is not just presented as a cliff hanger, he is actually in the film.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F747%2F747167%2Fspider-man-3-20061121030739592.jpg&hash=c48b6f9ec8318b070d9b5a5fc1fb5334307673b4)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F747%2F747167%2Fspider-man-3-20061121030740592.jpg&hash=005fabbe4d5bbf9f824913207b630aac8cef9e90)

i like the one that hasn't been puked on.

Watch New Spider-Man 3 Clips!
Source: Sony Pictures

New Spider-Man 3 clips (including a glimpse at Venom) aired during the showing of Spider-Man 2 on Fox Thursday night, and you can watch them combined in QuickTime format here! (http://flash.sonypictures.com/video/movies/spiderman3/blog/sm3_sneak_peek.mov) The clips feature director Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Thomas Haden Church and Topher Grace talking about the highly-anticipated third installment.

Maguire Doubts More Spidey
Spider-Man actor may call it quits.

Could it be curtains for Spider-Man on the big screen -- at least in his current form? While Sony Pictures seems to have their minds set on three more films after the current trilogy, franchise star Tobey Maguire may have other ideas.

"This might be a good place to stop -- I am not tied contractually to anymore Spider-Man movies," Maguire is quoted as saying in a World Entertainment News Network report.

The star is still open to the possibility of another movie, but it would have to feel right. "I am not completely closed to the idea of another one if it made sense but I would say the odds were in favor of this being the last one," says Maguire.

Maguire's on-screen flame Kirsten Dunst has hinted that she's not too keen on the possibility of more Spider-Man films either. "I'm not the type of actress who does movie after movie." she's been recently quoted as saying.

Are the two stars genuinely tired of the Spidey franchise, or might they be jockeying for a big pay increase as new contract negotiations begin? Would Sony immediately recast the role if Maguire dropped out, or would they let the franchise lay low for a while?

just when i was finally starting to get excited about spider-man 5.

Just think of it as a second chance to cast correctly.

Quote from: polkablues on December 01, 2006, 06:39:58 PM
Just think of it as a second chance to cast correctly.

Agreed.

If Rocky 6 goes well... they could do a Spiderman from the future, when he is old, and decides to put the suit on once again. Jack Nicoholson would be good for this...

Quote from: kal on December 02, 2006, 11:24:53 PM
Jack Nicoholson would be good for this...

no way, that would be an insult to his iconic joker.

peter fonda would be a cool old spiderman. if he's still alive.

Dustin Hoffman.  The world needs a tiny, Jewish Spider-Man.

If he's busy, then Woody Allen.

New Spider-Man 3 TV Spot!
Source: ComingSoon

The first TV spot for Sony Pictures' Spider-Man 3 has appeared online at the official Japanese website for the anticipated film. The clip includes new footage.


Trailer here. (http://sonypictures.jp/previews/player/movies/spider-man3/clip-P7191882_main.html)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.premiere.com%2Fassets%2Fimage%2F2006%2FQ4%2F1219200614523.jpg&hash=2542d1b404be1d61d9e271fc19a56793645ab80d)


The Secrets of Spider-Man 3
In an exclusive excerpt from Premiere's January/February cover story, Premiere.com untangles some of the mysteries surrounding the webslinger's third adventure.

Director Sam Raimi on why Spidey will finally face off against Venom: "[Avi Arad, the former chairman and CEO of Marvel Studios] said the fans want to see Venom. I come from a different generation. I read the comic books in the '70s, where it was Green Goblin, Sandman, Electro, Mysterio, the Vulture. It was not until the late '80s that Venom came about. But Avi said, 'I'm telling you, they're waiting for him. Don't be selfish. Spider-Man is everyone's myth, not just yours.' "

On casting Peter Parker's new love interest Gwen Stacy: To realize his vision, Raimi drew from both likely and unlikely sources for the casting. "Gwen Stacy is this buxom blond, and I'm this red-headed character actress," says [Bryce Dallas] Howard (The Village, Lady in the Water).

"I was really, really shocked. Especially when I saw pictures of the character, I was like, 'What? Aren't there a million other women walking around in Los Angeles right now who actually already look like this?'" Says producer Laura Ziskin, "My joke is, I cast a blond as a famous redhead, and a redhead as a famous blond. There were a lot of hair issues."

On Peter Parker's "evil doppelgänger" Venom: Double Your Fun: Topher Grace plays Eddie Brock, a.k.a. Venom, "an evil doppelgänger of Peter," says Grace. "He dresses better, he's kind of good with the ladies, and we gave him a lot of hair gel."

Why Spider-Man 3 meant four times the stunts for star Tobey Maguire: For Spider-Man 3, Raimi says, Maguire multiplied his action scenes "by, like, four-fold." One extensive sequence has Harry fighting with Peter, who doesn't have his Spidey suit on. "It was more work for me, but it was fine," Maguire says of the maskless battle. "It's actually good when you've got the faces in there, because you get to feel for the characters and react more."
"It is cool for me and hard on Tobey," Raimi notes. "He's got to do everything he could possibly do as Spider-Man. Stuntmen can fill in for the wide shots, CG can fill in for the outrageous stuff. But he's had to do a tremendous amount of physical action, of rolling, tumbling, leaping, landing, punching, fighting, falling." It's a touchy subject, because Spider-Man 2 almost imploded when there was talk that Maguire couldn't return because of back problems. "We're always careful with him," Ziskin says. "I mean, he has chronic problems and he works on it and he has a chiropractor, and we're careful in terms of what we ask him to do."

On Raimi's blissful unawareness of his stars' personal lives: Raimi does seem quite attached to his cast; he's watched them grow up over the course of three installments. "Remember on the first movie, Tobey and Kirsten had a thing?" he asks. "I'm so dumb, because I met with them for dinner one night during the shooting to talk about the next day's scenes. And I go, 'Okay, well, that's it for the meeting.' And then I ask Kirsten, 'Can I drive you home?' And they look at each other and she goes, 'No, no, I'm going to play a game of Touch 10 with Tobey.' I don't know, it was some game. I thought, 'That's weird. She's got to work tomorrow.'

On the future of Spider-Man: "I'm sure they'll keep making Spider-Man pictures," says Raimi, who has signed up for each one individually. (Maguire was contracted for all three.)"Amy [Pascal, Sony cochairman] told me that she would. I love Spider-Man. And I love working with Kirsten, Tobey, James. I don't know if Thomas and Topher will be around in the next one, but probably Bryce will be. But I have to make sure that when I'm done with this picture I'm really still fascinated with the character. At this moment I'm fascinated with him. Whether or not I will be in six months when the movie's done I couldn't say. And I absolutely would not have anything to do with the picture unless I was hungry to tell the story."

Could Raimi imagine doing Spider-Man without Maguire?

"I'd rather not," he says, and then, "No, I couldn't imagine it."

New Xixax marquee: "Multiplied by, like, four-fold"

Columbia, Koepp talk 'Spider-Man'
Studio in talks with writer over fourth installment
Source: Variety

Shortly after getting their first look at "Spider-Man 3," Columbia Pictures execs have begun negotiating with David Koepp to pen the script for a fourth installment of the franchise.

Koepp, who most recently wrote the draft of a fourth "Indiana Jones" project that got George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford to reteam for Paramount, scripted the 2002 Spidey film that launched the studio's most lucrative franchise.

Alvin Sargent scripted the second and third installments; all the pics in the Marvel Comics franchise were directed by Sam Raimi.

"Spider-Man 3" bows on May 4, with Thomas Haden Church playing Sandman and Topher Grace as Venom. Laura Ziskin produces with Avi Arad and Grant Curtis.

Col is just beginning the process of development on the fourth Spidey pic -- a pricey exercise since new deals will have to be made with Tobey Maguire, Kirstin Dunst and James Franco, along with Raimi if he decides to return to direct a fourth film.

The studio would release the pic in 2009 or 2010.

The first two movies had a combined worldwide gross north of $1 billion.

That, sir, would be a mistake.

I dont think it will be a mistake... we have to see the third one... how it turns out as a movie and how good is for them as a business... it will be interesting because not only they will analyze how much money it makes, but also how much it makes in comparisson to Shrek 3 and Pirates 3, as the three movies open almost at the same time.

The mistake will also be making them if Raimi, Dunst and Tobey are not involved. Something tells me that they will ask for a combined salary of over 100 million... so it will be difficult.

Quote from: kal on January 21, 2007, 11:27:27 PM
I dont think it will be a mistake... we have to see the third one... how it turns out as a movie and how good is for them as a business... it will be interesting because not only they will analyze how much money it makes, but also how much it makes in comparisson to Shrek 3 and Pirates 3, as the three movies open almost at the same time.

The mistake will also be making them if Raimi, Dunst and Tobey are not involved. Something tells me that they will ask for a combined salary of over 100 million... so it will be difficult.

I meant the hiring of Koepp.

Exclusive: Lizard Leapin' Into Spidey 4?
Dylan Baker gives IGN some hints.

At the TCA (Television Critics Association) Press Tour this past weekend, actor Dylan Baker was on hand to promote his new FOX series Drive. Coincidentally, Baker will be reprising his role as scientist Dr. Curt Connors (who was previously introduced as Peter Parker's college professor) in Spider-Man 3 this May. In the comics, Connors is the alter-ego of Spidey villain The Lizard, and since Baker's introduction in Spider-Man 2, fans have wondered if and when we might see The Lizard on screen.

After the press conference with the cast of Drive, we spoke one-on-one with Baker. The actor gave us some info on Spider-Man 3, along with some intriguing tidbits on the possibility of seeing The Lizard in a future Spider-Man film.

IGN: You've got Spider-Man 3 coming up. Can you tell us how much you're in the movie and what part your character plays?

Dylan Baker: Well, I would say I'm still the guy that Peter Parker has to come to when he has questions -- scientific questions. And I try to help him out. And there's definitely a lot going on in this film, so he needs a lot of info. So we'll see. My wife is also in it; Becky Ann Baker plays the wife of James Cromwell, who's the police captain. And she plays the mother of Bryce Dallas Howard [Gwen Stacy], who is also in the film.

IGN: Obviously your character in the comics goes through a big change...

Baker: And we're hoping it's not too far down the line! I'll be trying to get on the Lizard costume when I'm 80. I just spent time with Alfred Molina [who played Doctor Octopus in Spider-Man 2], and we were both joking about that. But it's like these great characters, that are there in the comic books. And it's like, just open that door up... I'm ready to go!

IGN: Have they talked to you about becoming The Lizard in a future sequel?

Baker: Only Sam [Raimi]. Only Sam. And, of course, the whole thing is in his head. So as long as his brilliant ideas keep coming, I'll go with him.

IGN: When Sam hired you for Spider-Man 2, did he talk to you about the character in the comics and what happens to him?

Baker: Yeah, but only in broad strokes. We're getting a little more specific now, but it's still pretty broad.

IGN: So you'd be up for a lot of hours in the makeup chair to add the green skin and scales?

Baker: Absolutely!

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimages2007%2FSweetSpidey3Poster.jpg&hash=ffacfe0ba6790249914f3743694479f2bb7e52aa)

that's kinda old news after the other posters.

Spider-Man 3 Footage to Debut in QuickTime 7!
Source: Superhero Hype!

Are you ready to get hyped? We can guarantee that you'll be amazed at the new Spider-Man 3 footage that will air during NBC's "Heroes" tonight and the additional extended footage that will debut on NBC.com for 24 hours starting at 10pm ET.

Preview here. (http://flash.sonypictures.com/video/movies/spiderman3/Spiderman3_480p_4000kbps.mov) (Long download)



Plus, Venom:
http://jackie.ioberon.cz/sm-3-pre-3.jpg

I've only seen it on a computer screen, but the fx seem pretty weak.

I thought they were good... probably not finished yet... but I hope they explain how Harry became the fucking master of that skateboard and so fucking strong and stuff... he must have taken something or trained cause by finding the stuff doesnt make you a superhero.

Looks cool... I loved 2 so I really want to see this

Quote from: kal on March 06, 2007, 08:40:03 PM
I hope they explain how Harry became the fucking master of that skateboard and so fucking strong and stuff... he must have taken something or trained cause by finding the stuff doesnt make you a superhero.

Probably his daddy tells Harry to do what he did.  Get in that one machine and get all juiced up or whatever happened in the first movie.

But his daddy is dead... the thing on the last one was inside Harry's head but he wasnt really talking to him... so maybe he finds the machine or some bs

I've always found those s f/x to be not very convincing.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Fcolumbia_pictures%2Fspider_man_3%2Fspiderman3_windowposter.jpg&hash=1ec38044b1dd1af4955fddf64c7da5748617144c)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Fcolumbia_pictures%2Fspider_man_3%2F_group_photos%2Ftobey_maguire6.jpg&hash=68a4287591661f2cd28fc0ec72eb39fd3c223ade)


60-second spot here. (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1564936&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)

New Trailer here (http://www.comcast.net/providers/fan/popup.html?v=219583909&pl=222344731.xml&launchpoint=Cover&config=/config/fan/properties_spidey.xml) or here. (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=34903751)

(Windows Media)

New Final Trailer here. (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/movies/trailers/1808496334/qtspot/?http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1568872&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)

This is getting ridiculous.

"I didn't kill your father!"

"Everybody needs help...even SpiderMan"

"We have to forgive each other!"

Ahhhh.....

Quote from: RedVines on April 11, 2007, 04:32:05 PM
This is getting ridiculous.

"I didn't kill your father!"

What are you talking about?  This is the EXACT thing they say in comic books.  It's not GETTING ridiculous, it always has been... did you know there were two other Spiderman movies before this one?  That's what that 3 means.

Quote from: RegularKarate on April 11, 2007, 05:27:15 PM

Quote from: RedVines on April 11, 2007, 04:32:05 PM
This is getting ridiculous.

"I didn't kill your father!"

What are you talking about?  This is the EXACT thing they say in comic books.  It's not GETTING ridiculous, it always has been... did you know there were two other Spiderman movies before this one?  That's what that 3 means.

I don't remember the dialogue being this corny in the other 2. Well, the dialogue in 2 was worse than 1. So I guess it's getting worse.

If you didn't think the other two had corny dialogue, maybe you should watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0clxDuJsq_8).


Part 2 admittedly had way less cheesy lines.

That trailer was fucking awesome...it's such a shame that this movie will suck.

i thought that was the worst of all the trailers for showing the first chunk or most of the movie chronologically. i'm disappointed with venom being thin rather than a hulk/animal built from pure spidey hate and somehow having a spidey suit outline under the black..

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/cinema/2007/05/07/070507crci_cinema_lane (http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/cinema/2007/05/07/070507crci_cinema_lane)

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0718,lee,76503,20.html (http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0718,lee,76503,20.html)

ouch.

The worse this movie is, the more fun I'll have watching it drunk on Cinco de Mayo!  Can't wait!

I'm joining the crowds at midnight tonight. I haven't read the reviews yet, but I'm pretty much expecting this to be terrible.

I'm also going at midnight!
I can't wait to see the conor oberst spiderman  :bravo:
I fucking hated spiderman 2, yet i'm still so excited. I wish they only came out with really good trailers and just locked the movies away. That would be sweet.

This movie is re-goddamn-tarded. I expected it to be bad, but still, I couldn't believe what I was watching half the time. Neither could the rest of the theater, apparently, since everyone was laughing throughout at (and rarely at the intentionally funny stuff) and there was a loud round of booing at the end.

For the record, I think the second one is one of the best action movies ever. This one sets a few records, too, mainly for some of the worst screenwriting I've ever seen in my life.

hahaha wow. could you make a list of the worst/most ridiculous moments?

this one sounds full of em darth-vader-NOOOOO!-like moments. i can't believe i told a girl i was looking forward to it.. :oops:

Exactly what GB said... I really was laughing toward the end, it got so bad.  Maybe when I get time, I can list out the bad/ridiculous moments (like SPOILERS: where the butler shows up out of nowhere like he's been a major character the whole time and tells him he knows Spiderman didn't kill his father "I've seen a LOT of things in this house".)

Quote from: Pubrick on May 04, 2007, 06:57:07 AM
this one sounds full of em darth-vader-NOOOOO!-like moments.

While I was watching the movie, I kept thinking about how restrained that moment felt in comparison...

That scene RK mentions has to be seen to be believed. It's really astounding. Another one worth mentioning is Stan Lee's egregious cameo, showing up to tell Peter Parker some platitude about being a hero and having responsibility or something like that, and then actually saying "Nuff said!" and walking away while the camera holds to let Peter contemplate this. I think this was actually the first time I threw up in my mouth a little bit during the film..

Yeah saw it last night,
Let's get this out of the way: the action scenes were pretty fucking radical.
Spidey fighting Harry at the beginning was so so sweet (even though we saw it on the net).
Sandman = cool. I like Thomas Hayden Church.
Topher Grace was good AS Eddie Brock...not venom.
Bruce Cambell = funny stuff.

People were also laughing throughout the flick, loads of peopls even walked out ! It was hilarious.
Tobey Maguire is so bad that at parts I really felt embarrassed for him. And Emo spiderman is beyond gay.

Venom is such a choke I couldn't believe it. And what the fuck was everybody doing crying? I agree with Ghostboy - possible the worst script ever.

Oh, and Sam Raimi is on crack.



Also check out this review over at aintitcool...it's dead on.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32501

I've been looking forward to this a great deal and now I'm getting worried. My determination to enjoy this is less shaken than it would've been however, after reading an article inspired by Spiderman 3  entitled "the Curse of the Third installment". Three Colours Red was cited as a glowing example of a film that bucked the trend. This caused my eyes to roll out of their sockets.

spoilers/unstructured rambling

next time i kill a few people and steal lots of money i should remember to apologize to spider-man before escaping.

also it was really bizzarre how women were turned on and off by evil peter moment after moment in that montage.

and why the fuck didn't the butler just tell harry about his father before?

and how the shit did spider-man take a little piece of his suit off his suit to give to the professor? wasn't it supposed to be really hard to break apart/take off? the fact that there's no scene explaining this shows there's no explanation.

the stan lee cameo is the epitome of the funny carelessness that stains most of the movie.

sand man turning into sand and then a man was really nice. and the crane rescue..

they should've just forgotten the comics and made harry venom.. or done a better job of showing how much eddie hated spider-man. or not had venom at all. the cartoon did a way better job of that story.

"isn't that that guy from that prison break?" is getting into walker texas ranger territory of golden shit.

I just saw an ad with an Earl Dittman review. This movie must be fucking terrible.

SPOILER

Quote from: picolas on May 04, 2007, 06:06:07 PM
and the crane rescue..

That was another golden moment. Unless I missed something, the crane just completely disappears as soon as Spidey saves Gwen. Who cares about the ugly old crane operator? The hot girl's okay, and the crowd cheers!

Bryce Dallas Howard was the one great thing about the movie. She really shines in a nothing part (that should have been something).

Quote from: Ghostboy on May 04, 2007, 09:43:28 PM
SPOILER

Quote from: picolas on May 04, 2007, 06:06:07 PM
and the crane rescue..

That was another golden moment. Unless I missed something, the crane just completely disappears as soon as Spidey saves Gwen. Who cares about the ugly old crane operator? The hot girl's okay, and the crowd cheers!

Bryce Dallas Howard was the one great thing about the movie. She really shines in a nothing part (that should have been something).

come to think of it you're right. i'm surprised i forgot all that.. i just couldn't get over the moment spidey went through the center of the crane. edit: and upon further review, the lack of sound/falling through the air with all the rubble..

what a fucking mess. gb isn't kidding. this should go down as one of the worst screenplays in film history. they should actually use this in screenwriting 101 classes as a "here's what not to do" lesson. there are so many cringe-inducing, wtf moments your head will start to hurt. it really plays as a bad rough cut; so many awkward transitions, fight scenes that come out of nowhere with no build-up,  really sloppy editing, a nauseating score...

Quote from: Ghostboy on May 04, 2007, 09:43:28 PM
SPOILER

Quote from: picolas on May 04, 2007, 06:06:07 PM
and the crane rescue..

That was another golden moment. Unless I missed something, the crane just completely disappears as soon as Spidey saves Gwen. Who cares about the ugly old crane operator? The hot girl's okay, and the crowd cheers!

oh my god totally, and eddie brock's "and by the way i'm dating your daughter sir," giggling as they both watch this girl almost plummet to her death. the father doesn't even seem the least bit worried. it's ridiculous.

sandman was a retarded villian. it should've been about venom, who was the only mildly interesting one. but pickles is right - his whole motive to kill peter "b/c he humiliated me and got me fired" is lame. equally lame was that black whateverthefuck goo, which comes from outerspace and just happens to fall a convenient 3 yards away from peter in a park. and enough with these dying uncle flashbacks already.

several people walked out, one kid threw popcorn at the screen, everyone was laughing throughout the whole thing. i almost walked out when that news reporter was giving live commentary on the final battle scene: "this could be the end of spiderman as we know it.." if we were only so lucky.

Damn, I was lukewarm about this movie for the longest time, figured I probably would wait a couple of weeks to see it, but now I'm pumped!  Spectacular failure is the new success.

Quote from: ©brad on May 04, 2007, 11:01:07 PM
i almost walked out when that news reporter was giving live commentary on the final battle scene: "this could be the end of spiderman as we know it.." if we were only so lucky.

i just thought of this, what if raimi and the gang purposely made the worst film they could get away with, confident that the film would be a hit cos of the hype and fanbase, and said yes to every studio suggestion ("more random shit! the kids love random shit! family guy!") so they wouldn't hav to be doing Spider-man films for the rest of their lives.. a la mel brooks in Curb with the Producers.

or maybe they're just on crack.

Quote from: Pubrick on May 04, 2007, 11:35:05 PM

Quote from: ©brad on May 04, 2007, 11:01:07 PM
i almost walked out when that news reporter was giving live commentary on the final battle scene: "this could be the end of spiderman as we know it.." if we were only so lucky.

i just thought of this, what if raimi and the gang purposely made the worst film they could get away with, confident that the film would be a hit cos of the hype and fanbase, and said yes to every studio suggestion ("more random shit! the kids love random shit! family guy!") so they wouldn't hav to be doing Spider-man films for the rest of their lives.. a la mel brooks in Curb with the Producers.

or maybe they're just on crack.

I'm with P on this and hopefully that is the case.
Seeing it soon.

I have never followed the comics, so I don't know what makes sense and what doesn't in this movie, but overall, I would have to say that I liked it. Or rather, that it was not that bad. I think it's because I really didn't like Spiderman 1 at all, and I only saw Spiderman 2 a couple of days ago and I wasn't impressed, and that is because the special effects are awful. Spiderman looks like a video game character, and you go and see those movies for the action and effects, not for dialogue and acting.

Superhero movies are terrible. With the exception of (some of) the Batman franchise, the writing is awful and corny, and the emotion is overwrought and poorly executed, and they are just giant piles of cheese. But I and many others love them anyway, because there is something in being able to completely suspend expectations of greatness just for a couple of hours of raw, unadulterated entertainment. Spiderman has the misfortune of having a very good sequel, so anything after that would be disappointing. I mean, they got Michael Chabon on board, that makes instant quality.

I thought that Sandman, though his motives don't really make a ton of sense, was so well done. His animation was better than any of the other villains or protagonists, period. Venom absolutely needed his own movie, but we didn't actually see him die, so he'll probably come back. I've come to the conclusion that Tobey Maguire is the discount version of Jake Gyllenhaal, and can't emote to save his life. The middle part with his angry dark and twisty Spidey was horrific, it was a waste of the usually hilarious Topher Grace, and there were so many story lines and loose ends that were just slap-dash tied up in one sloppy fell swoop, but I really don't think it was the worst anything.

aw you're no fun.

Hey, at least it's no X-Men 3.

Quote from: Pubrick on May 04, 2007, 11:35:05 PM

Quote from: ©brad on May 04, 2007, 11:01:07 PM
i almost walked out when that news reporter was giving live commentary on the final battle scene: "this could be the end of spiderman as we know it.." if we were only so lucky.

i just thought of this, what if raimi and the gang purposely made the worst film they could get away with, confident that the film would be a hit cos of the hype and fanbase, and said yes to every studio suggestion ("more random shit! the kids love random shit! family guy!") so they wouldn't hav to be doing Spider-man films for the rest of their lives.. a la mel brooks in Curb with the Producers.

or maybe they're just on crack.

No, the former is the answer.

Raimi hates the Spiderman shit. He likes the money though.

Raimi pulled a that younger dude boinking John Mclaines ex.

Fucking brilliant. Now he can make The Gift 2 with Annette Bening.

I haven't seen Spidey 3 but I'll wait for the Venom parts to be uploaded.

Quote from: Pubrick on May 04, 2007, 11:35:05 PM

Quote from: ©brad on May 04, 2007, 11:01:07 PM
i almost walked out when that news reporter was giving live commentary on the final battle scene: "this could be the end of spiderman as we know it.." if we were only so lucky.

i just thought of this, what if raimi and the gang purposely made the worst film they could get away with, confident that the film would be a hit cos of the hype and fanbase, and said yes to every studio suggestion ("more random shit! the kids love random shit! family guy!") so they wouldn't hav to be doing Spider-man films for the rest of their lives.. a la mel brooks in Curb with the Producers.

Yeah, I actually really think Raimi is in on the joke.

biggest opening day ever... 59 mil

no bad spidey... everyone is negotiating their contracts for the next 3 movies at this exact moment.

I really enjoyed it.

The sandmans transformation was beautiful stuff. If they'd have dropped Venom/Brock and given more time to the sandman he could have been successful as Doc Ock. With more time to flesh out the remaining plot lines it would have also been a much more cohesive film.

As had always been feared - they packed way too much stuff in....but I can quite happily distill the good that's in it.

As a lover of the 90's cartoon, I think they completely and utterly dropped the ball on Venom. Not only to they sinfully underuse him, but Topher Grace has to be the miscast of the century, and he is about as menacing as Eric Forman on his period.

But all in all, it was good. I love Thomas Hayden Church. And I think the scenes with Peter acting all self-obsessed and turning "evil" from the suit are awkward, goofy, and cheesy brilliance.

Spider-Man Revolutions.  Fucking awful.

Yeah, this wasn't good.  I don't really understand how this could have happened.  I caught a bit of Spider-Man 2 on TV after I came back from this, and it was stunningly better in every aspect.

All three parts seem to have been made by a different creative team.  Even the visual effects were worse in this movie.  The acting wasn't particularly good, just generally goofy.  The screenplay, as mentioned, was not good.  It really does seem like no one cared.

The audience was laughing at unintentionally funny moments at my screening as well.  I can't quite wrap my head around the incredible inconsistancy of this trilogy.  Oh well, at least I feel like we got one great Spider-Man movie.

SPOILERS




Geez, you guys weren't kidding.  All your criticisms were spot-on.  Topher Grace as Venom?  It was as if someone jokingly threw out his name and next thing you know he's on the set ready to shoot.  He's Bland McBlandington.  And his motivation for wanting to kill Peter Parker was weak.

I wished the idea of revenge being a destructive force was explored more deeply.  It was treated in the most superficial way possible.  Peter's aunt says something about how Uncle Ben wouldn't want them to have revenge in their hearts and then at the end Peter says "I forgive you" to Flint after he explained why he murdered his uncle.  Even the scene at the jazz bar was pretty superficial.

*SOME SPOILERS*


So let me get this straight: The secret of the black ooze from outer space is that it turns you into a Nutty Professor version of Buddy Love?

I don't hold the first two films in such high regard as some around here, so my excitement for this film wasn't large. But I do recognize the sharp turn taken between 2 and 3. What I felt the problems were are that Sandman, while he had the best fx, is just not an engaging villian. You really could have taken him out and not done anything to the overall story. The connection to Uncle Ben's murder felt tacked on. Also, the relationship between Peter and MJ is just so shallow. They have no chemisty; that want to see them get together and feel the risk and danger when she is in peril is completely lacking. Lastly, what a missed opportunity to explore Spidey giving in to the dark side. The tone was completely off. It worked when he got angry, but it was played for laughs and the club scene felt right out of The Mask.

in addition to all these xixax reviews, everyone i know who's seen this movie has made me laugh really hard with their comments on it. i haven't seen it but i love it already for being so hilariously bad.

SPOILER








I didn't understand why MJ didn't just tell Peter that Harry threatened her into breaking up with Peter.  He's friggin' Spider-man!  Its not like he can't handle himself.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=3&id=41291

12:00 AM, 27-APRIL-07   

Producers Beefed Up Spidey 3

Sam Raimi, writer/director of Spider-Man 3, told SCI FI Wire that he had a smaller sequel in mind with fewer characters, until producers Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin suggested adding a key villain and a key love interest. "I had worked on the story with my brother, Ivan, and primarily it was a story that featured the Sandman [Thomas Haden Church]," Raimi said in a news conference in Beverly Hills, Calif., last week. "It was really about Peter, Mary Jane, Harry and that new character."

That's Peter Parker/Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire), Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) and Harry Osborn (James Franco). Then Ziskin suggested adding Gwen Stacy, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, a popular character in the Marvel comics, who was Peter Parker's first love interest before she perished and before Mary Jane Watson appeared.

"Well, my brother and I had written in the story about another woman that recognized Peter and knew who he was at this dinner and that Mary Jane got jealous of her," Raimi said. "But Laura Ziskin, my producer, said, 'Let's make it Gwen.' And I said, 'I don't think I should, because, ... really, Gwen was introduced before Mary Jane in the comic books, and now I'm introducing her later, and ... she's not even in high school anymore. She's in college. And I'm afraid if I introduce Gwen, the fans will have all these expectations, which we're not going to deliver in this picture.' And she said, 'Well, the fans would much rather have Gwen make an introduction now, and you can do what you need to do or someone can do what they need to do in the fourth picture with her, but at least you've introduced her, and they would appreciate that.'"

Raimi said he considered the suggestion. "After much soul-searching, I thought, 'Maybe it's true. I've already screwed up the order, and I've already started the Mary Jane [storyline] first,'" Raimi said. "'Whenever [Gwen's] introduced, she'll be introduced in the wrong order. I might as well give the fans the introduction to Gwen.' So I took her advice and named her Gwen Stacy and therefore connected her to a policeman who had been on the periphery of the scenes [and became her father, Capt. Stacy, played by James Cromwell]. Made a little stronger relationship between them but, not much, just enough to be true to the fact that she was his daughter. That's about all."

As he has discussed previously, Raimi added that it was Arad's idea to add the villain Venom to the mix. "Avi Arad, my partner and the former president of Marvel at the time, said to me, 'Sam, ... you're not paying attention to the fans enough,'" Raimi said. "'You need to think about them. You've made two movies now with your favorite villains, and now you're about to make another one with your favorite villains. The fans love Venom. He is the fan favorite. All Spider-Man readers love Venom, and even though you came from '70s Spider-Man, this is what the kids are thinking about. Please incorporate Venom. Listen to the fans now.' And so that's really where I realized, 'OK, maybe I don't have the whole Spider-Man universe in my head. I need to learn a little bit more about Spider-Man and maybe incorporate this villain to make some of the real die-hard fans of Spider-Man finally happy.'" Spider-Man 3 opens May 4. —Patrick Lee, News Editor 

Quote from: MacGuffin on May 06, 2007, 09:20:23 PM
*SOME SPOILERS*

The connection to Uncle Ben's murder felt tacked on.

MORE SPOILERS

Yeah, especially since he feels tremendous guilt at the end but apparently not enough to have bragged to someone about it in jail, which is how they found out he was involved in the first place.  Or are we supposed to assume that he was confessing to the guy who ended up squealing on him?

And was there even any resolution with his daughter?  Wasn't she dying or something?

Quote from: pete on May 07, 2007, 05:10:01 AM
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=3&id=41291

12:00 AM, 27-APRIL-07   

Producers Beefed Up Spidey 3

Thanks, Pete. In addition...

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=3&id=41341&type=0

Raimi added: "Avi said, 'You're not giving me what I asked you.' ... He said, 'They want Venom. Just give them Venom already!' So I said 'OK.' But, obviously, through the very nature of it, he's only going to be in half an act or one act [at the end of the film]. I'll just make it as thorough and the best that I can [and] deliver Venom in the most complete way that I understand the fans might want him. That was my desire. I was led there."


Knowing this stuff makes it that much more dissapointing.

it makes perfect sense when you consider the biggest complaints seem to be about the light venom story and the random introduction of gwen.  shave those elements off and you could've had a much tighter story.(a good film? who knows, but certainly improved)

The script was a complete mess. I mean, what is the fucking need to put all these things together? 3 villains. 2 girls. The police chief. The professor. etc etc. The wedding? Bad spidey? MJ's career? Harry and his butler? Sandman and the daughter? Jumping from one story to the other every 20 minutes.

What about the Super-hero idea of saving the world? This was ALL about him. His girl. His uncle. His alien-bullshit. His job. The bad guys are after him and they really dont threaten anything else, except for Sandman at the beginning but if he would have stolen enough money he would have disappeared also like he did at the end. Harry doesnt care that he is dying... why not? He is fucking rich and young and now he knows his best friend didnt kill his dad. He is also a fuckin superhero. He should want to live.

I dont know I have so many mixed impressions in my head. What the fuck is up with Tobey Maguire's hair when he becomes bad? Bad temper and bad hairdo?

Not only the fucking mysterious shit from the sky fell two feet away from Peter, but also decided to get stuck to him and not MJ. Also, decided to fall over this retard in the church. And if it wasnt coincidence enough that same guy lost his job and his girlfriend because of Peter. And none of that seemed to be connected at all. Its just coincidence! And then he just happens to find the Sandguy and they become friends. Also, he wanted to kill Parker before Venom. He fucked Peter first so why would he want to KILL him for getting him fired? He may want to kick his ass or something but KILLED?

Quote from: kal on May 07, 2007, 07:04:58 PMWhat the fuck is up with Tobey Maguire's hair when he becomes bad? Bad temper and bad hairdo?

I took it to mean emo-Parker was a huge 30 Seconds To Mars fan:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amny.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2006-08%2F25158011.jpg&hash=2b0fa739d271d725b58cac0fd33a719ca53b59ee)

Sony Plans Spidey's Future
And rumors swirl about who may replace the cast.

Saying that he was "really over the moon" about the record-breaking $382 million worldwide debut of Spider-Man 3, Sony Pictures chief executive Michael Lynton is already reportedly mapping out the franchise's future.

"Everybody has every intention of making a fourth, a fifth and a sixth and on and on," Lynton informed the BBC. He sees the series lasting for "as many as we can make good stories for."

"Everybody's been so busy trying to get this one out that that's been the focus," he added. "When everybody comes up for air, we can think about how to make the next one."

That would seem to include cast and crew, although that hasn't stopped the rumor mill from offering up a name about who might succeed Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson. According to CinemaBlend.com, Mandy Moore, Alexis Bledel and Camilla Belle are contenders for the role.

The site adds, "Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Jake Gyllenhall are the front runners as of now [to replace Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker] but word is that a third name might be thrown in the mix as well." They also suggest that a new director may be tapped as well since Raimi would want more control over Spidey 4.

CinemaBlend's scooper claims "those in Sony don't want to give Tobey or the returning cast that kind of money because they want to lock the cast down for the next three films instead of one and they want to do it cheaply, so they are looking at other actors to continue the franchise in a cheaper way and if the movie opens big and makes a boat load of cash, Tobey and the cast has a huge advantage in negotiations."

It's a no-brainer that Sony wants the Spidey gravy train to keep rolling. For example, of the $148 million that Spider-Man 3 earned in its stateside opening, a record-setting $4.8 million of that came from IMAX screenings. The picture also broke the record for IMAX's largest single day worldwide total at $2.2 million and posted a remarkable domestic opening weekend per screen average of $57,147.

I'm imagining a Spider-Man movie with Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Camilla Belle.  And... my brain just exploded.  Now I'm rolling around on the floor, saying "Does not compute..." over and over in a funny robot voice.

Quote from: MacGuffin on May 08, 2007, 01:32:43 AM

"Everybody has every intention of making a fourth, a fifth and a sixth and on and on," Lynton informed the BBC. He sees the series lasting for "as many as we can make good stories for."

TOO FUCKING LATE.

The correct quote would be:

"Everybody has every intention of making a fourth, a fifth and a sixth and on and on," Lynton informed the BBC. He sees the series lasting for "as many as we can make a shitload of money out of this crap."

Quote from: MacGuffin on May 07, 2007, 10:29:28 PM

Quote from: kal on May 07, 2007, 07:04:58 PMWhat the fuck is up with Tobey Maguire's hair when he becomes bad? Bad temper and bad hairdo?

I took it to mean emo-Parker was a huge 30 Seconds To Mars fan:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amny.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2006-08%2F25158011.jpg&hash=2b0fa739d271d725b58cac0fd33a719ca53b59ee)

HA!  During the movie, I made that same comparison.  But it was afterwards that I thought of a better one.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flambiek.net%2Fartists%2Fc%2Fcannon_max%2Fcannon_earl.gif&hash=48af402d2533c60b61dfcea35efdf13503be1d1f)

a girl dragged me to see it.  I didn't hate it.  there were quite a few goofy parts, but they were sincere enough (misguided?) that I could deal with them.  I hate extreme sports in action movies or any type of cynical attempts to relate to the youths, but this one didn't feel so cynical.  it felt truly misguided, in a good-spirited way.  that's why I like this way better than batman begins, which is hollow as a joke to me.  this one seems like an ernest dad ernest telling a story that is way over his head, that also happens to cost $100 million.

Quote from: pete on May 09, 2007, 01:12:45 AM
this one seems like an ernest dad ernest telling a story

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Fvarney01.jpg&hash=47aeabf44940472cff2725f2b97ac28a95295b67)?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi168.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fu189%2FGlockwork_Orange%2F1178746248169.gif&hash=ced5b5e320edda684a2d10ecd6d48e7ab11e6374)

George Lucas has joined the major newspaper critics in their negative appraisal of Spider-Man 3. In an interview with FoxNews.com's Roger Friedman, Lucas said, "It's a silly movie. ... There just isn't much there. Once you take it all apart, there's not much story, is there?" Over the weekend, Spider-Man 3 surged ahead of Lucas's Star Wars' episode Revenge of the Sith to take the record for the biggest weekend box-office record. Star Wars was also criticized as being "silly," Lucas noted. "But it wasn't." He also disclosed that he is working on at least two other Star Wars movies for television. "But they won't have members of the Skywalker family as characters. They will be other people of that milieu."


Great reasoning for why your movies aren't silly, George.....

This was the most wonderfully terrible movie I've seen in a long time.
Their was a lot of good ol fashiond Sam Raimi Evil Dead 2 Rediculousness.
Tobey's dancing....fucking brilliant.
The action was out of control awesome.

http://spidermansuicide.ytmnd.com/ (http://spidermansuicide.ytmnd.com/)

On top of this movie sucking the shit, I had some popcorn during the show last night and I feel a little sick... What an experience.

(I had free tickets to the show, which is the only reason I bothered to go see it)

how come this came up so badly after number 2???? the main problem is most people i know dont even notice the difference. "it's all right" they say, "that's just the way these movies are"...so for them, a  terrific popcorn movie like spider man 2 and a pretty bad one like 3 are the same shit...and on top of that, they go to see them out of habit.

depressing, of course.

Hollywood knows how stupid people are... thats why movies like this, Shrek 3 and Pirates 3 can be huge hits and break box office records and be total crap. I havent seen those other two yet, but I'm sure they are as crappy as Spidey 3.

Hopefully there will be some exceptions for sucky-sequels this summer... starting with Bourne Ultimatum, maybe Die Hard, and I think thats it.

Quote from: kal on May 29, 2007, 05:27:10 PM
Hollywood knows how stupid people are...

I'm not making a big deal out of this but I, for the record, don't believe most people are stupid. I think most people look at films as popcorn flicks to be enjoyed and summer movies like these fufill that. People who ignore quality films aren't automatically ignorant in general. The science crowd could make a case that I am ignorant for how bad and unconcerned about science I am. And I'd consider being an expert in science to be more useful than being an expert in film.

People aren't stupid because they don't care about fine movies. People are stupid because they go to and get satisfied with movies that they themselves find to be underwhelming. Just like the cases mentioned above. If Pirates, Spidey and Shrek aren't prime examples of a total and complete sheep herd mentality about what everyone's supposed to do next weekend, i don't know what is.

hey guys, who's up for ice cream next weekend!

me!! i want chocolate ice cream, they say is better than sex.

Quote from: Alexandro on May 29, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
People are stupid because they go to and get satisfied with movies that they themselves find to be underwhelming.

My argument isn't based on them liking these movies specifically, but liking the fact they are popcorn flicks. They are going to see super hero movies and comedies because there are other movies of the same genre that were satisfying. And since most art films or indie flicks are trying to appease on this level, they will go see these movies because it is the best chance for them to get a new classic in a favorite category.

But that is exactly my point... I like movies that some people here bash and hate just because for me they are good entertainment. Spider-Man 2 is an example of that. Its cheesy, predictable, etc but its very entertaining and a great way to spend a couple of hours. Spidey 3 is not. It was long, boring, confusing, tried to be dark but it was just silly.

I'm all in favor of huge summer blockbuster popcorn 300 million budget films. But the fact that you are making that film does not mean you have to completely ignore the script. The script for Pirates 1 was good, same as Matrix. Once they did that, they were after the dollars. They know that just by doing sequels and keeping the big stars, they can get that, so fuck the script. Bring me Johnny Depp and big fucking CGI monsters and explosions and you have a movie that will gross a billion.

exactly.  its not a problem having an appreciation for popcorn.  its that the public doesn't seem to discriminate whether its great or terrible. 

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on May 29, 2007, 08:32:43 PM

Quote from: Alexandro on May 29, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
People are stupid because they go to and get satisfied with movies that they themselves find to be underwhelming.

My argument isn't based on them liking these movies specifically, but liking the fact they are popcorn flicks. They are going to see super hero movies and comedies because there are other movies of the same genre that were satisfying. And since most art films or indie flicks are trying to appease on this level, they will go see these movies because it is the best chance for them to get a new classic in a favorite category.

No, I'm referring to people going to these movies with low expectations and being satisfied equally with one that is good (like spider man 2) and one that is mediocre (like spider man 3)...by satisfied equally i mean both positively satisfied and disatisfied....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_v2Q0-ai8

Michael Chabon on the whole "too many villains" thing.

Sam Raimi May Not Helm 'Spider-Man 4'; Wants Electro, Vulture As Villains If He Does
'I just don't know what [my] future holds yet,' director says.
Source: MTV

WESTWOOD, California — As of this week, "Spider-Man 3" is the 11th-highest-grossing film worldwide of all time — and like its web-headed hero, it's still climbing. The fans have spoken, the critics have been silenced and there's plenty more Peter Parker to come.

But in his first post-"Spidey 3" interview, series director Sam Raimi went out of his way to leave the door open for someone else to take the reins.

"Sony Pictures is going to be making many more 'Spider-Man' pictures," Raimi told MTV News Friday night. "I just don't know what [my] future holds yet."

In Los Angeles to honor young filmmakers whose Spidey spoofs won a contest sponsored by Target, Raimi admitted that the collection of eager-eyed directors reminded him of "better-looking, smarter versions of myself." With several of the winners' speeches referencing Raimi's '80s career of low-budget flicks like "Crimewave" and the "Evil Dead" movies, it was hard not to appreciate that Raimi had ascended to the opposite end of the spectrum.

But from what he told us after the ceremony, it sounds like the filmmaker is setting the stage to bow out while he's on top. "If I can't find the right story that would work for me and that I could tell really well, I would like someone else to tell that story," he said of the already-announced "Spider-Man 4."

Amending his statement, he added, "But if it's a great story and Sony will bring me back to the screen, I would love to."

Indeed, it might be Sony that ultimately chooses to end the partnership, which could be a result of Raimi's still-standing pact with Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst that either they all return or none of them does. "It would be really hard for me to make a movie without Tobey and Kirsten playing the two leads," he said. "I would seriously think about James [Franco] too, but he bit the dust in this last one."

Ultimately, if Sony considers the price tag too high for another Raimi/Maguire/Dunst collaboration, then the negotiations would turn to keeping Raimi onboard as a producer only. "I would still hope that Sony would offer it to me [to direct] first," he said. "But that is not my place to say; it would be more about if Sony decided not to go with me. If not, it would be really up to them to come to a solution [for me to still be involved as a producer]."

Either way, if this tangled web does still involve the filmmaker, Raimi has been busy brainstorming about the villains he'd like to get into the next flick. "I would love to see Electro, Vulture, maybe the Sinister Six as a team," he said.

Those three possibilities wouldn't necessarily cancel each other out. Since both were founding members of the Six, the Soviet supervillain and high-flying supergenius could appear in the next flick, be teamed with a returning Doctor Octopus and Sandman and form a supergroup to also introduce Mysterio and Kraven the Hunter.

Whether that story line works out or not, Raimi hopes to finally reward Dylan Baker's patience with a villainous payoff similar to what Franco enjoyed in "3." "I love Dylan Baker as a person, and I really like the character he is developing," the filmmaker said of Dr. Curt Connors, Parker's one-armed, screen-time-challenged professor in the first three flicks.

"The Lizard is probably one of my favorite characters," he said of the baddie Connors eventually became in the comics. (He joined the Sinister Six when they became the Sinister Twelve, by the way.) "But ['Spider-Man 4'] will probably have to start with the central journey of the main character to arrive at the proper villain."

Regardless of the future, the present "Spider-Man" universe is still being overseen by the affable filmmaker. Appearing at the Friday event with series producers Avi Arad and Grant Curtis to kick off this year's Los Angeles Film Festival, Raimi handed the top prize to boisterous Minnesota filmmaker Justin Marshall, who won with a stop-motion action-figure short called "Rise of the Super Venom, Part 1."

"These filmmakers show a tremendous amount of promise," said Raimi, who judged the contest alongside his "Spidey" producers. "They have a lot of craftsmanship skills that are very developed for their early ages. They have a good sense of presentation, camera angle, oftentimes good pace, and they know how to put a soundtrack together. I thought it was very impressive."

After the awards were handed out, Raimi spent a very generous amount of time posing for photos, signing autographs and having individual conversations with Marshall and the runners-up. As the winners milked him for advice, Raimi spoke to every single person who approached (and he didn't even realize that a reporter was watching from a few feet away!).

"It's great having the Los Angeles Film Festival as a meeting ground where young filmmakers can meet other artists and share their ideas and other resources," Raimi said, moments after posing for his umpteenth picture. "I don't think there was ever anything like this, especially when I was in the early years of my career."

I got this movie free when I bought my PS3 and I still have yet to ever watch the whole thing. I've watched sections and I just can't get through it.

If you left it sealed, you could have got $20 for it. It's a shame.

Anyway, about Sony and Venom... who are these people making these stupid decisions? It hurts my head. I blame them as much as I blame people that spend money and time on this garbage. BATMAN didn't make the money, NOLAN did. Fucking bunch of champaign socialists sitting at top thinking they're so clever. DIE ALREADY, DIE!

How Did This Get Made? (http://www.earwolf.com/episode/spiderman-3/) is covering Spidey 3 this week. You must listen.

Uh oh, guys. 4 years between the last post and this one. Chastise me for it.

On the contrary; thread necromancy is to be celebrated.

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on July 20, 2012, 06:43:33 PM
On the contrary; relevant thread necromancy is to be celebrated.

I feel this is an important line to draw.