Xixax Film Forum

Col hands Vanderbilt pen for 'Spidey 4'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

James Vanderbilt has been brought on board to pen the screenplay for "Spider-Man 4" for Columbia.

Laura Ziskin is returning as producer of the billion-dollar franchise, though no deals have been made to bring back series director Sam Raimi or stars Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Plot points are being closely guarded by the studio, though the intent is to scale back the story to include only two villains instead of repeating the "Spider-Man 3" model. The third installment, which grossed $336.5 million domestically this year, saw Spidey battle a busy triumvirate of evildoers in the forms of Venom, Sandman and Goblin and was widely reckoned as overly cumbersome with one too many plot lines.

Several writers were being considered for the fourth installment, and Vanderbilt, who wrote the thoughtful if dark "Zodiac," apparently was chosen by Sony brass for his character-driven approach to the story rather than a focus on special effects.

David Koepp, who worked on the first two installments, returned to write a previous draft of "Spider-Man 4."

Vanderbilt, repped by Endeavor and Fuse, quickly has been scaling his way to the upper echelon of screenwriters. He is working on a project based on another Marvel character, Gavin Hood's "Wolverine," for 20th Century Fox.

Raimi Updates Spider-Man 4
Source: SciFi Wire

Spider-Man director Sam Raimi told reporters that he's waiting on a script for a fourth installment from writer James Vanderbilt (Zodiac, The Rundown) before deciding whether to helm it, though he'd like to.

"Right now James Vanderbilt is writing the script, and he's working on it, and I'm excited to read it," Raimi said in a group interview in Century City, Calif., on June 5. "I think it's going to be done in a few months. I'm hoping it's as great as our discussions were about it and hoping it feels right for me, because I love Spider-Man, and I'm hoping I'm well-enough rested to, like, really embrace it and hoping that Sony wants me at that time to direct it. So if all those things come together, I would love, love to do it. But this is a lot of unknowns about the future."

Asked whether he'd recast the roles of Peter Parker or Mary Jane Watson--who have each moved on to other projects--Raimi demurred. "Well, I hate to recast anybody in the picture," he said. "I couldn't imagine that. It's like the new Darren [who was recast during the run of the 1960s TV series Bewitched]. Whenever that happened. So I don't know. I can't imagine that."

Raimi also offered a brief update on other projects, including a proposed remake of his Evil Dead films. "We never actually pursued it," Raimi said of his Ghost House Pictures partners. "We said we were going to do it, and then we got so busy with other projects we never actually pursued it. So we still want to do it. We still think it's worth trying, and ... I've not done a single thing about it."

As for a feature-film sequel to the vampire movie 30 Days of Night, which Ghost House produced, Raimi said none was in the works. But he praised FEARnet's upcoming Web miniseries 30 Days of Night: Dust to Dust, which features his brother, Ted Raimi.

"It looks really good, and I don't know when FEARnet is releasing it, who their financiers [are], but ... I highly recommend it. It's a blast," Sam Raimi said.

EXCLUSIVE: Sony Locks In Sam Raimi & Tobey Maguire in 'Spider-Man 4'; Studio May Shoot '4' and '5' At The Same Time
Source: Deadline Hollywood

It's time to end once and for all the rampant speculation. Sony doesn't want any info to leak but I'm told that both star Tobey Maguire and director Sam Raimi will be returning to make Zodiac screenwriter Jamie Vanderbilt's script of Spider-Man 4. Sources tell me that Sony has recently locked in both veterans of Spider-Man 1 through 3. And I do mean recently because just a few weeks ago sources told me that Sony Pictures co-chairman Amy Pascal was openly discussing Tobey's potential replacements with various Hollywood agents because Tobey was hanging tough about a deal. "She was looking around to cover herself because Sony wanted him badly and Tobey wasn't sure he wanted to do it," an insider explained to me. There's no deal yet for Kirsten Dunst but Mary Jane Watson will be in the movie again. I'm told Sony "would never recast her" despite her rehab problems. But expect another gal part, too.

Gone is the black costume from Spidey 3, even though "dark" is all the rage in superhero movies right now given the enormous success of The Dark Knight. But I'm told the filmmakers won't be borrowing from the latest Batman installment because "Spider-Man is its own thing," one insider tells me. "Sam Raimi made the first serious superhero movie, and others followed. The difference between Spider-Man and Batman is that Batman is duelling with a dark side of himself, and that's not what Peter Parker's struggle is. Peter Parker has no dark side himself. In Spider-Man 3 it was the black costume. Peter Parker's struggle is about sacrifice."

Sony is taking its time officially hiring the movie's villain since principal photography doesn't start on Spider-Man 4 until next fall because of the recently postponed May 2011 release. I am told, however, that "once you find out who the villain is, you'll know who's playing it." That should lead to speculation that Dylan Baker's character of Dr. Curt Connors will ultimately turn into The Lizard as he did in the comic books. There's one other character that's been set up but is a real longshot -- Daniel Gillies, who plays John Jameson, the astronaut fiance of Mary Jane in Spider-Man 2. In the comics he becomes the villain Man-Wolf. Raimi has said in the past that he wants the best actors to play the villains in the movie, not necessarily the most famous.

I'm also told that, right now, the studio is trying to figure out if it can feasibly shoot Spider-Man 4 and 5 at the same time because doing that is so cost effective and "it wasn't so easy to get everybody back together".

Meanwhile, Sony is moving forward on its Spider-Man Broadway musical with music and lyrics by Bono and The Edge of U2 to be directed by Julie Taymor, the Tony Award-winning director of The Lion King. I'm still in a state of shock that Amy Pascal and Julie Taymor are working together again after the knock-down, drag-out fights they had over Sony/Revolution's Across The Universe.  This is one of those showbiz moments when the Hollywood maxim, "I'll never work with you again until I need you", comes true.

And Sony has hired a pair of screenwriters to get going on the Spider-Man 3 spinoff movie Venom. Given that comic book artist/writer and action figure maker, Todd McFarlane, who is one of the creators of the Marvel villain, doesn't think a Venom movie could do well with a villain as the central character, my sources think Sony should let Topher Grace, even though he was blown up at the end of Spider-Man 3 (yet a portion of the Venom costume survived), stay in the role because the likeable actor could be a a sympathetic evildoer.

Oh how I yearn for the days when I used to respect Sam Raimi.

Julie Taymor is directing a Broadway musical of Spider-Man with music by Bono and The Edge??

W.                T.                  F.?

yeah, someone really needs to stop her.

I really don't care for Spiderman. Never have. Never will.

Me too, I really tried to like to like the movies but I just did not like them. I sold my spiderman dvd's.

Sam Raimi Talks 'Spider-Man' Sequel Double-Shoot, Futures of Kirsten Dunst & The Lizard
Source: MTV

Although things weren't looking too good for awhile, "Spider-Man" has overcome adversities tougher than a Green Goblin-Doc Ock team-up, and now once again has Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi in his corner. But what about Kirsten Dunst?

"Kirsten, I'd love to work with her again," Raimi explained to us this week, making it sound as if current plans to include Dunst for "Spider-Man 4" and "Spider-Man 5" are still up in the air, despite recent statements that she wants to remain with the franchise. "I hope she'll be written into it. I couldn't imagine making one without her, and I think she's an important part of the movies."

Nevertheless, Raimi admitted that the very nature of an episodic series requires that characters come and go. "I wish I could work with James Franco again," said the man who directed the first three hit movies. "But his character died in the last one; same with Uncle Ben. Fortunately, we've been able to bring back all the dead characters [like Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn or Cliff Robertson as Ben Parker]. I can't let them go, in each and every picture; but it gets harder and harder."

Now things are about to get hard yet again for Raimi, as he's making plans to continue the cinematic tale of Peter Parker. "I'm really excited about Spider-Man, and I'm hoping to direct it," he cautioned. "I don't have a script yet, but production would start probably by March of 2010, I'm guessing. It sounds like a long time away, but we need a script first, and a lot of pre-production has to take place."

The filmmaking legend also revealed to us that there is a lot of truth behind rumors that he might shoot the next two "Spider-Man" films at the same time. "That had been talked about," he said, deferring to the head of his studio. "It's Amy Pascal's decision. I don't think it has been decided yet, and she's the one that's really going to make that decision; I'm really curious myself."

By his own admission, "Spider-Man 3" was an exhaustive film to shoot, but Raimi is confident he can handle the double duty. "It would be a real endurance test, probably only Peter Jackson knows how hard something like that would be," he marveled, hinting that "4" and "5" would be very closely linked in storyline. "If Tobey and me, and all the producers, like the story for two pictures and Amy wanted to do it, then we would do it. It just hasn't been written yet."

Finally, Raimi offered comment on the wishes of fans (and yours truly) to finally let Dylan Baker's storyline come to fruition. "He's a great actor, and I think one day The Lizard's story will be told," he teased, referring to Baker's Curt Connors character. "I don't know if it will be this one or not. I just don't know. I'm definitely hoping to work with Dylan in the picture. I just don't know who the villain is yet."

'Spider-Man 4' lands Pulitzer pen
Playwright David Lindsay-Abaire swings to sequel
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright David Lindsay-Abaire got out of a rabbit hole, only to be ensnared by a spider's web.

Lindsay-Abaire, who won a Pulitzer in 2007 for his drama "Rabbit Hole," is in final negotiations to write "Spider-Man 4" for Columbia.

Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are back as director and star, respectively, as are series producers Laura Ziskin and Avi Arad. Kirsten Dunst also is expected to return for the latest movie featuring the Marvel Comics character.

Plot details are under lock and key.

Columbia always has gone off the beaten path during the development process when hiring writers for the "Spider-Man" movies. Alvin Sargent, a veteran scribe best known for 1973's "Paper Moon" and 1980's "Ordinary People," served as a writer on the second and third films. Michael Chabon, another Pulitzer winner, also worked on "Spider-Man 2."

James Vanderbilt previously wrote a draft of "Spider-Man 4."

Lindsay-Abaire's "Rabbit Hole," which starred Cynthia Nixon and Tyne Daly, hit the Broadway stage in 2006 and won four Tonys, including best play. The writer also is known for the play "Fuddy Meers."

Lindsay-Abaire has said in interviews that his plays tend to be "peopled with outsiders in search of clarity," which would put his work on sympathetic terms with Peter Parker, who in his classic incarnation is the perpetual outsider.

The choice of scribe also signals that that filmmakers are intent to focus on character, something that critics said got lost in the third installment.

Gersh-repped Lindsay-Abaire, now writing the book and lyrics for the Broadway musical adaptation of "Shrek," has dipped his toe in Tinseltown before, with his adaptation of "Inkheart" due in January. He is also adapting "Rabbit" for 20th Century Fox and Nicole Kidman.

Columbia had no comment.

EXCLUSIVE: 'Spider-Man 4' To Begin Shooting In 2010, Says Bugle Chief
Source: MTV

The fourth film in the blockbuster "Spider-Man" franchise will begin shooting in 2010, actor J.K. Simmons told MTV News at Sundance, revealing that he'll continue in the role of Daily Bugle publisher J. Jonah Jameson. "I saw Sam [Raimi] at his Christmas party."

The news appears to confirm earlier reports that Sony was looking towards a May 2011 release.

Both Sam Raimi and Tobey Mcguire are expected to return, but have yet to formally commit. Kirsten Dunst is also up in the air, although the actress has voiced her willingness to continue as Peter Parker's love interest.

Given the blowhard, fast-talking nature of his character, you'd think Simmons would be lobbying for more screen time, but according to the actor, the status quo is fine with him.

"We've definitely brainstormed ideas for Triple-J, but I have no desire to make Triple-J more of the focus of those movies," he said. "The amount that I did in 1, 2 and 3, is just exactly right. Like be the wolf. Come in, blow in, do a week, blow out, be the comic relief, and hit the road. And let Tobey and everybody else do the heavy lifting."

Marvel sets date for 'Spider-Man 4'
'Avengers,' 'Thor' pushed back on slate
Source: Variety

Sony and Marvel Entertainment will open "Spider-Man 4" on May 6, 2011.

Opening date was announced as Marvel made a number of adjustments to its release calendar.

"The Avengers" is being pushed back from July 15, 2011 to May 4, 2012.

In a build-up to "Avengers," Marvel is moving back the release of "The First Avenger: Captain America" from May 6, 2011 to July 22, 2011.

"Thor" is likewise moving, from July 16, 2010 to July 17, 2011.

"Iron Man 2's" release date of May 7, 2010 remains unchanged.

Anyone else sick of superhero movies now?

Quote from: Sleepless on March 12, 2009, 02:16:02 PM
Anyone else sick of superhero movies now?

I was just thinking the same thing. Anything they can make, they make. It's getting a bit ridiculous. Now it's to the point where they're getting overrated, too. Iron Man wasn't that good.

EXCLUSIVE: Sam Raimi 'Can't Imagine' Doing 'Spider-Man 4' Without Kirsten Dunst, Only Working On Fourth Film
Source: MTV

With the recent announcement of the "Spider-Man 4" release date (May 6, 2011), what once just seemed to be a great pie-in-the-sky idea that might never happen is now even more a tangible reality.

Director Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are locked in, the story is being fleshed out and so fans are dying to know: where will the Peter Parker story take us next and what will be the villains that he has to face?

For those answers we'll have to keep waiting a little while longer. Raimi is keeping it all very close to the vest, but did reveal to us that the ideas and concepts are only looking forward to the fourth "Spider-Man" film and right now, a larger roadmap for the fifth film is not being charted out. He also said fans should expect to see the stories take place firmly within the Marvel Universe created by Stan Lee and not any inventions outside the familiar comic book storylines.

"The writers, producers and I are working out what the story will be, but we haven't been talking in terms of Part 4 and 5." Raimi told MTV News. "I've read that [about 'Spider-Man 5'] also, but right now we're just working on the story for 'Spider-Man 4,' just that one film.

"We're definitely talking about working from all the material in the comic books and nothing [invented] outside of that, "Raimi continued. "All the characters or villains or villains, whatever we decide to do will be from Stan Lee's creations or those that came after him."

Note that twice in our interview Raimi said "villain or villains" plural and said, "I do have a pretty good idea, but I'm just not a liberty to say yet," adding that Sony wants to carefully plan out when they announce the antagonist or antagonists to the fans.

While both Raimi and Kirsten Dunst have both expressed interest in her returning as Peter Parker's unattainable girlfriend Mary Jane Watson, the filmmaker says he's currently unsure of her participation status and he's not privy to those negotiations.

Asked whether the story could be written for another love interest in the "Spider-Man" comics if Dunst didn't sign for whatever reason, Raimi seemed to be dismayed at the very notion.

"I can't imagine making a 'Spider-Man' movie without Kirsten," he said, seemingly contemplating the idea in his head with a long pause. "Of course it can be done because Spider Man has existed without the character of Mary-Jane but she's one of my favorite parts and it would be a shame not to have her in the picture. I'm hoping she'll be in it and I'm planning on having a story with her in it."

Scribe tapped for 'Spider-Man 4'
Gary Ross will draft rewrite on Columbia film
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Gary Ross has been brought on board to do a rewrite on Columbia's "Spider-Man 4."

Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are back as director and star, respectively, as are series producers Laura Ziskin and Avi Arad.

Ross now joins James Vanderbilt ("Zodiac") and Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright David Lindsay-Abaire on the list of high-profile writers who have been working on the project.

The move also puts Ross back to work with Maguire, with whom he worked on his directorial vehicles "Pleasantville" and "Seabiscuit." The two were also working on "Tokyo Suckerpunch," a drama set up at Columbia; that project is now on hold as Ross tackles another writing project, Columbia's Lance Armstrong biopic.

Sony sets writer to spin 'Spider-Man'
James Vanderbilt to pen upcoming sequels
Source: Variety

As Sony Pictures Entertainment preps a fourth installment of "Spider-Man" to begin production early next year, the studio has quietly engaged screenwriter James Vanderbilt to pen "Spider-Man 5" and "Spider-Man 6."

Vanderbilt was the first writer on "Spider-Man 4." Director Sam Raimi brought on "Rabbit Hole" playwright David Lindsay-Abaire to rewrite him, and Gary Ross is now rewriting that script. The studio is enthusiastic about where it stands as the picture begins prepping for an early 2010 production start for a May 2011 release.

Raimi didn't embrace all of Vanderbilt's ideas, but execs at Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios have. Vanderbilt has been hired to pen the fifth and sixth movies, which have an interconnected storyline. That's what was originally discussed when Vanderbilt signed on to write "Spider-Man 4," but the idea of shooting a fourth and fifth film back to back with the original cast was scrapped.

Sources said it was unclear whether Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst will be back. If they aren't, Vanderbilt's script would be the blueprint for a franchise reboot. After committing to his fourth "Spider-Man" film, Raimi signed on to direct a new franchise based on the massively multiplayer role-playing online computer game "World of Warcraft" for Legendary Pictures and Warner Bros. Maguire and Dunst were locked into the first three pictures and made a new deal for "Spider-Man 4." It's unclear how long they want to continue with the series.

Then again, Raimi was initially doubtful for "Spider-Man 4" because he expected to direct "The Hobbit," but returned after Guillermo del Toro got the job.

Why is Vanderbilt writing when so many variables are undecided?

The most important thing is for Sony to prime the "Spider-Man" pump more frequently. The lapse between films has grown with each blockbuster. The second film came only two years after the first, but it took three years for a third installment, and four years will have passed when "Spider-Man 4" opens in summer 2011.

Sony Pictures toppers Amy Pascal and Michael Lynton may well have a new franchise following last weekend's strong opening of "District 9." And after "Angels and Demons" grossed some $500 million worldwide, they will certainly move forward and extend the "Da Vinci Code" franchise with an adaptation of Dan Brown's fall publishing release, "The Lost Symbol." But "Spider-Man" remains the studio's most important film franchise, and Sony doesn't want to wait half a decade for the next outing.

While the "Spider-Man" movie business is booming, Sony has widenedits footprint on the franchise and become one of the investors in the Broadway musical version of the webslinger; the "Spider-Man, Turn off the Dark" tuner recently experienced a funding hiccup on the way to a planned March premiere.

Although there's been speculation that the show, which will cost upward of $35 million to produce, may not get off the ground, the project is too important to the "Spider-Man" partners to be tabled, sources said. The musical has "The Lion King" director Julie Taymor and songs by U2's Bono and the Edge.

Vanderbilt's most recent script credits are the Sylvain White-directed "The Losers" for Warner Bros. and David Fincher's "Zodiac."

Sam Raimi admits Spidey 3 mistakes, what he plans for 4
Source: SciFi Wire

Spider-Man director Sam Raimi is now admitting what the rest of us have known for a while: That the third movie wasn't that terrific and that he needs to get back to basics for the upcoming Spider-Man 4.

Oh, Raimi doesn't say outright that 3 sucked, but he does acknowledge that "I think having so many villains detracted from the experience. I would agree with the criticism," according to an interview in the Coventry Telegraph.

It's not Raimi's fault that Spidey 3 tried to juggle so many bad guys: He originally wanted to focus solely on Sandman. But Marvel wanted to insert Venom, because the kids like him, and Raimi was forced to figure out a way to shoehorn the character in among the other plot threads, which also included Harry Osborn's new Goblin character. The result, of course, was kind of a mess.

At the time, Raimi tried to make the best of it, saying he thought it worked out. But now, he's clearly acknowledging that he needs to simplify.

Fortunately, we have the example of Raimi's own Drag Me to Hell, this year's horror film that is now out on DVD/Blu-ray, which allowed Raimi to get back to the streamlined, muscly storytelling he's best at.

"I think I've learned about the importance of getting to the point and the importance of having limitations, and I'm hoping to take that into a production where I'm actually allowed to explore with more of the tools to pull it off with a little more splendor," Raimi said. "I hope I don't lose that edge that I've just found. That would be my approach to Spider-Man 4: to get back to the basics."

A New Female Lead for Spider-Man 4?
Source: ComingSoon.net

Early last month, director Sam Raimi said that they were about to start casting for Spider-Man 4, but we have yet to hear any official announcements of new talent coming on board. We knew Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst were going to be back, and since then, Dylan Baker revealed that he'll return as Dr. Curt Connors.

Now, according to Mania, actresses are auditioning for the role of villain Felicia Hardy/Black Cat, and the site says that Rachel McAdams (upcoming Sherlock Holmes) is a frontrunner for the role. Mania adds that they are also casting for a male villain, which would mean we're looking at two villains for the fourth installment. None of this is confirmed, of course.

In the meantime, fans pointed us to The Observer where actress Romola Garai (Atonement) has a column in which she wrote the following:

"Love is at the root of everything good that has ever happened and will happen." This phrase swam into focus as I moved up the escalator at Oxford Circus tube on Tuesday morning on my way to put myself "on tape" for a part in Spider-Man 4. This is the acting equivalent of the London Marathon in that it's important to try your best as long as you understand that you aren't going to win.

Might she also be going for the Felicia Hardy role? We won't know for sure until we start hearing official casting news from Sony.

Spider-Man 4 is coming to theaters on May 5, 2011.

'Spider-Man 4' Update: John Malkovich to Play The Vulture!?
by Erik Davis; Cinematical

With all the awards campaigning and holiday shopping, I bet you almost forgot that Sam Raimi and Co. were still trying to cast Spider-Man 4. Well things are beginning to heat up today as Movieline reports that the studio "is circling" John Malkovich and Anne Hathaway for roles in the fourth installment. But before we get to Hathaway (whose name has already been tossed around in relation to this film), if he signs on Malkovich (who'd make a terrific villain by the way) would play The Vulture, aka Adrian Toomes, a businessman who creates a special harness that not only allows him to fly, but also gives him enhanced strength. He's been described as a strong fighter and a remorseless killer.

Meanwhile, Hathaway is a whole different can of worms. While she'd definitely be playing Felicia Hardy (as previously rumored), this particular version of Hardy wouldn't be Black Cat. Instead, according to Movieline, they've created an entirely different character for her called The Vulturess, perhaps to get away from all the Catwoman comparisons. We have no idea what The Vultress does, but we imagine she'd team up and help out The Vulture in some capacity.

As far as Dylan Baker's Lizard goes, sadly producers don't seem to want to go that route -- either because the villain is too "odd-looking" for the studio (as Movieline reports) or because Baker isn't a big enough name to throw on the marquee (which is what some have suggested in the past) ... or both. It's important to note that all of this is speculation and rumor until it's officially confirmed. Spider-Man 4 hits theaters on May 6, 2011.

IESB Exclusive: SPIDER-MAN 4 Production on Indefinite Hold 
Written by IESB Staff           

Looks like everyone's friendly neighborhood web slinger has been been placed on indefinite hold said an inside source exclusively to the IESB today.

Apparently, several department heads working on the SPIDER-M4N production were notified of the halt last Thursday. Spidey and friends have some issues that need to be dealt with before production can move forward once again. Oh, and the film is known as SPIDER-M4N within the production offices so take note! Who wants to be the first to start the trending topic on Twitter #SPIDER-M4N?

An inside source working on the project tells IESB that there are some major issues director Sam Raimi is dealing with that include an incomplete script. And why is the script incomplete? Looks like Raimi and the studio heads at Sony Pictures can't agree upon a villain for the film.

Raimi is pushing hard for the Vulture to be the big baddie, something he also pushed for in the third film to star alongside the Sandman but didn't get and we all know how that one turned out. Vulture was to do his evil deeds alongside the new Goblin and Sandman. A single concept art sketch can be seen in "The Art of Spider-Man 3" book. Vulture and Flint Marko would have been cellmates who escaped together, with Vulture pressuring the more passive Marko into committing crimes.

On the flip side, who does the studio want to be the villain? Our source says they seem to only be interested in featuring which ever character is selling books right now but basically they have no idea, just not the Vulture.

So, production on SPIDER-M4N grinded to a halt this past Thursday and isn't budging until some compromises are made. Sony is in a bit of a dilemna though because they are insistent upon getting a film shooting as soon as possible. Our source also said these issues aren't being handled in the most friendliest of fashions. There is apparently some definite anger within the production with several people very "pissed off".

Perhaps they will use the time over the holidays to calm down in order to make some compromises to decide which way the film will be headed as the new year begins in January.

We will have to wait and see!

John Malkovich Confirms Vulture in 'Spider-Man 4'
by Elisabeth Rappe; Cinematical

With all the bad rumors plaguing Spider-Man 4, it's time for a little good news, don't you think? And some very good news has come from the mouth of John Malkovich himself. In an appearance on Italian sports show Quelli Che il Calcio, Malkovich confirmed that he had been asked to play Vulture in Spider-Man 4. Movieline first broke that rumor last month, along with the rumor that Anne Hathaway might show up as Black Cat.

BadTaste.it transcribed the conversation (if you're Italian is good, you can read it there) and reports that Malkovich didn't declare he was taking the role, but that he was waiting on the final script. He's definitely interested, though, and hopes that shooting will get back on track.

Of course, this all depends as to whether Vulture can hang onto the villain status. That's who Sam Raimi wants for #4, but Sony reportedly wants Carnage. The debate over who Spidey will battle is what has continued to hold up the film, and could become so drastic as to see a change-up in the director's chair. Tobey Maguire didn't give any indication as to which way the battle was heading when he spoke to The Envelope on Thursday. "Like anything, it's a process. We're just in the midst of the process. We have a lot of great stuff in terms of story and script. We're just trying to dial it in and get it ready as quickly as possible. Of course, these movies are a very big undertaking and take a lot more time than a drama or something more straightforward ... Not only do I have specific ideas, but the ideas are evolving on the page." Will that evolution include Vulture and Malkovich? Let's hope Sony's spidey senses tingle in the right way, and let Raimi have the villain he wants.

EXCLUSIVE: 'SPIDER-MAN 4' SCRAPPED; SAM RAIMI & TOBEY MAGUIRE & CAST OUT; FRANCHISE REBOOT FOR 2012
By Mike Fleming; Deadline Hollywood
   
UPDATES EXCLUSIVE: 'Spider-Man 4' Officially Has No Start Date As Of Today Because Of Script Problems; Sony "Unlikely" To Make Scheduled May 5, 2011, Release Date

BREAKING NEWS! UPDATE: Mike Fleming and I have just confirmed that Sony Pictures decided today to reboot the Spider-Man franchise after franchise director Sam Raimi pulled out of Spider-Man 4 because he felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity. This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out. There will be no Spider-Man 4. Instead, Mike Fleming is told, the studio will focus on a Summer 2012 reboot from a script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast. All this took place today at meeting on the lot today. An official Sony Pictures news release about it is expected out now (see below).

My sources tell me that Raimi told Sony Pictures: "I can't make your date. I can't go forward creatively." And, so, once he said "That's it", Sony Pictures co-chairman Pascal and Columbia Pictures' Matt Tolmach decided they didn't want to replace him and instead chose to reboot the franchise. Insiders also tell me that Tobey Maguire heard the news in a phone call with Amy today. I'm told Tobey wasn't upset. "He's made 3 great Spider-Man movies. He's done really well. But he's the kind of guy who, if Sam wanted to go forward, would have been there for Sam and the studio. Absolutely."

Mike Fleming has heard that, from Spidey, Raimi could move to World Of Warcraft, or to The Given Day, that terrific novel by Dennis Lehane, author of Shutter Island and Mystic River. Both are worthy projects, but World Of Warcraft is a huge franchise.

Fortunately for the studio, Sony was not yet "pay or play" on some of the talent negotiations which were still only at the tail end. Raimi was insisting that John Malkovich play the villain, and the studio was looking to cast Anne Hathaway. "I'm not so sure we're going in that direction," an insider told me on January 5th. Sony had been hot for her until bigwigs realized she'd cost too much and they probably don't need "such a big star" for the pic, I was told. (See my previous, Anne Hathaway Wanted For 'Spider-Man 4'.)

As for those repeated rumors that Spider-Man 4 might shoot in 3D, I've learned it would have added at least 6 months to the production schedule and "no one on the pic has any idea how to do that," a source confided. You've got to figure 3D now is uppermost on Sony minds given the post-Avatar climate, and Summer 2012 is more than enough time to make the reboot with new technology. Back in April, Sony Pictures' co-chairmen Amy Pascal and Michael Lynton told Forbes magazine: "People are paying a premium to see movies in 3-D and that's a very big deal. It's never been done before that someone says you have to pay more to see Spider-Man than a romantic comedy."

The events that led to today's shocking decision to scrap Spider-Man 4 can be traced to mid-December when I saw a December 11th email alerting the pic's special effects crew that the fourquel would not be starting as planned "but Sam Raimi has story issues [that] need to be resolved before we are ready to shoot". At that point, it wasn't well known that the Spider-Man franchise director helming the 4th installment had huge problems with the script that has run through screenwriters Jamie Vanderbilt, David Lindsay-Abaire, and Gary Ross. I was told Sam Raimi had been very vocal inside Sony that he "hated" it. I broke this story on January 5th, and reported that Raimi and Sony were anxiously waiting for still another version from screenwriter Alvin Sargent, who wrote Spidey 2 & 3 and is married to Spidey franchise producer Laura Ziskind. "It is unlikely that May 11, 2011, date will be made," a Sony insider told me that day. "It depends on how quickly the script can get in." However, agents told clients in the movie to already expect the film to be pushed back.

My sources said Sony still intends to release that summer, even if the new date is July 2011. But Spider-Man has always owned that coveted early May date. Even as far back as September 2008 when I reported my exclusive that Sony Locks Sam Raimi/Tobey Maguire For 'Spider-Man 4'.

What a giant opportunity for other studios planning their 2011 schedules to grab this big opening. And they did. Paramount and Marvel Entertainment pushed up the release of Thor by two weeks to May 6, 2011. Thor was set to have opened May 20, 2011, a slot which Disney grabbed for Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides.

Spider-Man 4 was supposed to start filming in February, which Tobey Maguire echoed repeatedly in publicity appearances for Brothers. Then it pushed to March. Then late March/early April. And by January 5th there was no date at all, according to my Sony insiders who emailed me: "Some decisions have been made over the holiday about Spider-Man 4. We will be extending the production hiatus on the film. The studio is firmly committed to this franchise but, for us, the script must come first. We intend to notify members of the crew immediately. As you know, Alvin Sargent is currently working on the screenplay. When we have more news, we will keep you posted."

Pascal and Tolmach, who have shepherded the Spider-Man franchise from Day One, have been wrestling with this script problem for months. "I'm going to do everything I can to make May," she has repeatedly told Hollywood types involved with the movie. "But I'm not going to start a movie where the script isn't right yet. Not unless I want my career to be over."

Here is the Sony press release:

Culver City, CA (January 11, 2010) -- Peter Parker is going back to high school when the next Spider-Man hits theaters in the summer of 2012. Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.

The new chapter in the Spider-Man franchise produced by Columbia, Marvel Studios and Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin, will have a new cast and filmmaking team. Spider-Man 4 was to have been released in 2011, but had not yet gone into production.

"A decade ago we set out on this journey with Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire and together we made three Spider-Man films that set a new bar for the genre. When we began, no one ever imagined that we would make history at the box-office and now we have a rare opportunity to make history once again with this franchise. Peter Parker as an ordinary young adult grappling with extraordinary powers has always been the foundation that has made this character so timeless and compelling for generations of fans. We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots and we look forward to working once again with Marvel Studios, Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin on this new beginning," said Amy Pascal, co-chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment.

"Working on the Spider-Man movies was the experience of a lifetime for me. While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction, and I know they will do a terrific job," said Sam Raimi.

"We have had a once-in-a-lifetime collaboration and friendship with Sam and Tobey and they have given us their best for the better part of the last decade.This is a bittersweet moment for us because while it is hard to imagine Spider-Man in anyone else's hands, I know that this was a day that was inevitable," said Matt Tolmach, president of Columbia Pictures, who has served as the studio's chief production executive since the beginning of the franchise. "Now everything begins anew, and that's got us all tremendously excited about what comes next. Under the continuing supervision of Avi and Laura, we have a clear vision for the future of Spider-Man and can't wait to share this exciting new direction with audiences in 2012."

"Spider-Man will always be an important franchise for Sony Pictures and a fresh start like this is a responsibility that we all take very seriously," said Michael Lynton, Chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures. "We have always believed that story comes first and story guides the direction of these films and as we move onto the next chapter, we will stay true to that principle and will do so with the highest respect for the source material and the fans and moviegoers who deserve nothing but the best when it comes to bringing these stories and characters to life on the big screen."

The studio will have more news about Spider-Man in 2012 in the coming weeks as it prepares for production of the film.

Yay?

JESUS CHRIST! lets just remake fuckin avatar while were at it, move on assholes! Is everyone just too afriad to make anything new, even if it is just a new super hero movie, just any original idea, please someone!

I was just listening to Patton Oswalt, so maybe im overacting, but its pretty fuckin ridiculous, right? to just restart the whole franchise that started all this shit? where does it fuckin end!?

Oooh, an Avatar remake.  One where they could finally "get it right". 

this is great news.

More Spider-Man news: A Dark Knight reboot?
Source: SciFi Wire

With yesterday's shocking news that Sony was pulling the plug on Spider-Man 4, now come more details about that high-school-based reboot, which Zodiac's James Vanderbilt is reportedly already writing.

The New York Times says that script focuses on Peter Parker in high school and would debut in the summer of 2012 with a new cast and filmmaking team.

Meanwhile, Spider-Man director Sam Raimi issued a gracious statement about the news:

"Working on the 'Spider-Man' movies was the experience of a lifetime for me. While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction, and I know they will do a terrific job."

The Los Angeles Times reported that Raimi and Sony parted ways in part over budget: The studio wanted to spend $230 million for the fourth installment, quite a bit less than the earlier films, and Raimi felt this was inadequate.

Entertainment Weekly, meanwhile, said the studio is seeking a more Dark Knight approach to the franchise, which it had been developing in secret:

The next Spider-Man film will be a reboot of the franchise, not a continuation of series Sam Raimi created back in 2002—in a move similar to Batman Begins restarting the Batman franchise seven years after Batman and Robin underwhelmed fans and critics.

This time around, the series will place Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today's issues. The decision to go with an origin story stemmed from Sony developing two Spidey projects simultaneously. According to studio insiders, Sony was working on both Raimi's Spider-Man 4 and the new origin story from James Vanderbilt, who wrote Zodiac. The original plan was to keep the Spider-Man gang together for one last film in 2011 before rebooting the series in 2012. When it became clear that Raimi would not be able to make the summer 2011 release date planned for Spider-Man 4, the studio opted to scrap Spider-Man 4 altogether, and focus solely on the series reboot.

I like the idea because Spiderman is a good character but the movies were really shitty so maybe they can improve on that.

The notion of reboot and comic books should not anger anyone as the comic book industry have been ''rebooting" their characters every now and then since day 1.

It's dumb to reboot. Sony needs to protect the Spiderman series because it's no longer the super hero movie, but one of many. Today you can't turn around without seeing a super hero movie in some form. Reboots are meant for bad or older franchises. Since the Spiderman movies are new and popular, they can't be doing shit like this. The super hero craze has turned into an epidemic and is asking for a backlash.

I think its going to be tough to find a good director interested in starting over a franchise launched in the last decade.

Quote from: Derek on January 12, 2010, 04:32:20 PM
I think its going to be tough to find a good director interested in starting over a franchise launched in the last decade.

there is no shortage of directors willing to make a buck.

it's no different than what Leterrier did with Incredible Hulk, and in fact maybe this is a superior position to be in since common sense should hav told us that no one wanted to see that franchise continue , reinvention or no reinvention, and at least you know there are millions of chumps ready to go see  4th of anything that has made hundreds of millions: Pirates, Indy.

I was thinking about how silly these reboots are before I realized that the comicbooks do them all the time.

Quote from: pete on January 12, 2010, 10:09:47 PM
I was thinking about how silly these reboots are before I realized that the comicbooks do them all the time.

It's an accepted norm in the comic book world. And besides, when a new comic will rehash an old series, they usually do it for the point of schewing the original template and obscuring the norm (for better or worse) of the said comic series. The film reboots are new to Hollywood lore, but each attempt represents a new ploy by Hollywood to find what will appeal to every American. With a few exceptions, the only way to make logical sense of each rebooted franchise is to try to understand how each update appeals more to everyday people than the original. You have to find marketing and business fascinating to give a shit.

I wish we wouldn't say reboot and legitimize that word.  It just makes me think about how these movies are not computers.  Instead, I propose the term "dick with," or "fucking back to life," as one might try to do with a corpse.  These movies are more like corpses than computers, anyway.

Quote from: matt35mm on January 12, 2010, 11:32:31 PM
I wish we wouldn't say reboot and legitimize that word.  It just makes me think about how these movies are not computers.  Instead, I propose the term "dick with," or "fucking back to life," as one might try to do with a corpse.  These movies are more like corpses than computers, anyway.

How 'bout "de-Emo-ize?"

Fuck comic book movies. The best ones have already been done so now they're just going to do them over. Hilarious.

Quote from: matt35mm on January 12, 2010, 11:32:31 PM
Instead, I propose the term "dick with," or "fucking back to life," as one might try to do with a corpse.

"Fuckstart"

 :yabbse-thumbup:  That's the one.

Will Sony Spin Spidey Reboot With Webb?
Source: Deadline Hollywood

Marc Webb, the (500) Days Of Summer director, has climbed to the top of the Sony Pictures' list to rebirth the Spider-Man franchise. While the studio has a wish list of star directors like James Cameron, David Fincher, and Wes Anderson, the emergence of Webb as director comes as a huge surprise. But Mike Fleming's sources tell him Webb met about the Spidey reboot with the pic's producers and executives looking to get the picture into production later this year for a Summer 2012 release. Why will the pic take so long? Because it's likely to be shot in 3-D, and Sony Pictures plans to make an announcement about that "at the appropriate time".

Though he has the perfect name for the job, Webb has no prior superhero experience. (Hey, I saw Darkman and that was more of a science experiment that a superhero.) Then again, neither did Sam Raimi. And Chris Nolan was the director of Memento when he signed on for Batman Begins. Webb is also a newbie if Sony greenlights 3-D. But among directors, almost all would be.  

What has Sony execs excited is the fact that (500) Days of Summer introduced a director with a grasp of how to depict the way young people think and feel. This is critical because the Jamie Vanderbilt script covers the formative years of a high school-aged Peter Parker, and that POV is as important as the action sequences. Especially after Sony and Sam Raimi retired the original Spidey franchise because they realized the film would have been same old/same old at a huge budget. Injecting new blood with an up-and-coming director is a bold stroke. Too bad Webb's (500) Days star Joseph Gordon-Levitt is too old to play the high school-aged wall crawler. He'd be perfect.

Wes Anderson's Spider-Man!! have they seen a Wes Anderson film? that would be amazing though.

i will root for Webb.

Vulture Exclusive: Sony Offers (500) Days of Summer Director Marc Webb the Next Three Spider-Mans

Vulture can report that Sony will imminently announce a deal with (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb to direct not one, but three Spider-Man movies in a rebooted franchise that will focus far more on the private life of Peter Parker.

Webb, whose (500) Days scored a Golden Globe nomination and whose name seems to have predestined him for this job, has long been a favorite of Columbia chairman Amy Pascal. We're told that last year she very nearly hired him to direct the adaptation of Michael Lewis's Moneyball after she pulled the plug on Steven Soderbergh three days before shooting. She ultimately chose Bennett Miller (Capote), thinking that Moneyball might be hurt by Webb's whimsical style, but she views him as a latter-day Cameron Crowe for the economically and socially angsty Generation Y, and thinks he'd be perfect to explore the conflict within Parker.

Webb's other big appeal? He's much cheaper than the old Spider-Man crew. The deal just now being sewn up calls for Webb to be paid roughly $10 million for the first film, with substantial bonuses built in if the picture reaches certain box-office milestones. (Coincidentally, Webb's deal is being hammered out by the Gersh Agency, the feisty boutique which first put Tobey Maguire into the webslinger's suit a decade ago.) This is a big savings from how his predecessor Sam Raimi was compensated. Unlike the now-departed Raimi, Webb won't be getting paid a percentage of the films' grosses. Compare that to Spider-Man 4, for which Raimi and star Tobey Maguire were expected to claim more than 25 percent of the gross.

It's not just a case of Hollywood exploiting a young director; it's a matter of survival. The ground has shifted dramatically as of late. With the recent dramatic collapse of the DVD market (sales were down 17 percent in the last three months, compared with the same time last year), Sony had become genuinely worried that with a high-price cast and director, the Spider-Man franchise wouldn't make the studio any money at all in theaters. In fact, we're told that only longtime producer Laura Ziskin and former Marvel Entertainment CEO Avi Arad are getting gross participation on the new films, and then only because their contracts stipulated as much.

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/01/marc_webb_new_director_of_spid.html#ixzz0d6NHSM9r

He's directed some of the worst music videos in history.

Whatever he does with this opportunity, it wont be worse than Spider-Man 3. 

It could be close. Emo Peter Parker is only a tad worse than Good Charlotte/pop-punk Peter Parker.

I'm just so happy Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst won't be near this thing.  Even though I liked Spider-Man 2, I never liked Tobey as Peter Parker.  And Kirsten Dunst is just awful.  Even if it ends up being Zac Efron and Vanessa Hudgens, it'll be an improvement.

I'm sick of trilogies. For something like Star Wars or obviously Lord of the Rings, okay. But enough already.

Quote from: modage on January 19, 2010, 04:57:21 PM
Vulture Exclusive: Sony Offers (500) Days of Summer Director Marc Webb the Next Three Spider-Mans

the above is what is really odd, i mean, wouldnt be wiser if they wait to see how he does one??? then you can offer him whatever amount of sickuels you want.

oh, i know they can pull a conan-heres-thetonightshow-for-years-ohwait-maybe-not thing.....thinking about it, the suits probably are covering themselves money wise in case webb brings huge cash.

Sickuels. Haha.

The article makes sense for why the change has happened. I can understand studio fears of a ballooning series, but the economic change should not make the studios also start over with the story. A full reboot would look bad. The only thing worth starting over on would be the Venom story, but the studio needs to accept if the series is going to stay ongoing, change of cast and directors will happen, but that doesn't mean a full recircling everytime.

P.S. I actually would like Zac Efron replacing Tobey Maguire. He's a staple of kiddie entertainment, but he's talented and has promise. Him in this role would get me to care about the series. Maguire is better in other roles, but he could never make the role very exciting. He got the mild manner part correct, but he's dour as exciting and charismatic when playing Spiderman. It's stiffness all around.

More Spider-Man Reboot Details?
Source: Risky Business

Yesterday, Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios confirmed that (500) Days of Summer helmer Marc Webb is going to direct the Spider-Man reboot. In reporting on the news, the Risky Business blog has some possible more details on the project:

Webb, who has options on two sequels, will now tackle a Jamie Vanderbilt script that sees a "Spider-Man" movie that will look and feel very different from the big movies that went before it.

The plan for the movie is to be in the $80 million range and feature a cast of relative unknowns (so you can quash those Rob Pattinson or Gordon-Levitt rumors at this point). And the story will be pared down to center on a high school kid who is dealing with the knowledge that his uncle died even though the teen had the power to stop it.

The touchstone for the new movie will not be the 1960s comics, which were the inspiration behind the movies by Raimi, who grew on up on them, but rather this past decade's "Ultimate Spider-Man" comics by Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley where the villain-fighting took a back seat to the high school angst.

Please keep in mind that none of this is confirmed and we may not know for sure until closer to release. Stay tuned for more announcements as they come in...

They picked Webb exclusively because of his last name.

Fuck it, I like Webb's style, I liked Bendis' "Ultimate Spiderman," so if they cast this well, I'll probably go and see it, which is more than I can say for Spider-Man 3.

80 MILLION DOLLARS??! what kind of an asshole do they take me for??

tickets better be half price.

I don't know how anyone could possibly make any movie for only 80 million dollars.

Relatively unknown actor may take over as Spider-Man
Source: SciFi Wire

Logan Lerman, the 18-year-old actor who stars in the upcoming Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief as a teen who discovers he's the descendant of a Greek god, may soon discover himself to be the next friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.

According to Latino Review, Lerman is in talks to be Peter Parker in Sony's Spidey reboot.

"Conversations are starting," said Lerman. "It's a long process with the studio and the producers and everything. But it's definitely a project that I'm really interested in, of course. I'd love to focus on the human element a little bit more. It'd be such a fun experience."

Lerman also revealed that he's been a longtime Spider-Man fan.

"It's one of my favorite characters ever, and I'm a huge fan of the series," he continued. "I'd love to have more conversations about it. I'm definitely very interested in it."

Alternate headline: Relatively unknown actor employs publicist

The rest of the story would stay the same.

'Spider-Man' reboot will be in 3D
Sony also sets 2012 release date for film
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Spidey has his new release date and a firm plan to enter the third dimension.

Sony said Wednesday that it will release a fourth movie based on Marvel Comics' Spider-Man character in 3D on July 3, 2012. But in a broad hint that the studio will take a reboot approach to the movie, the studio abandoned the one-time title of "Spider-Man IV" and said the project is now "untitled."

Sony previously said it would recast the next Spidey pic and replace Tobey Maguire in the title role. Helmer Sam Raimi also is being replaced, with "(500) Days of Summer" director Marc Webb set to lens a screenplay being penned by James Vanderbilt ("Zodiac").

Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin will produce for Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios.

"Spider-Man is one of the most popular characters in the world, and we know audiences are eager and excited to discover Marc's fantastic vision," Sony worldwide marketing & distribution chairman Jeff Blake said.

Donald Glover 4 Spiderman. (http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/06/01/donald-glover-spider-man/)  Never gonna happen, but I would be so much more inclined to see the movie if it did.

Johnson Caught In Spidey Rumour Web
Anton Yelchin also a possibility
Source: LA Times

Welcome back to the casting thunderdome that is choosing a superhero lead. The current race to don a Lycra costume and run around combating evil is focused around who will play Peter Parker/Spider-Man in Sony's new reboot of its billion-dollar franchise. And while the list is already fairly extensive, two new names have just been added as possible suit-fillers: Kick-Ass' Aaron Johnson and Star Trek's Anton Yelchin.

Johnson, of course, has had more experience as a "super" hero, having strutted the streets as Dave Lizewski, the Daredevil/ Spidey wannabe who suffers more punishment that he dishes out before finding his groove in Kick-Ass. And the actor showed there that he can handle a callow youth in a crime-fighting costume, even if his thunder was somewhat stolen by Chloe Moretz' Hit-Girl.

While he's suitable for the role, there also the question of scheduling, since he's rumoured to be attached to – albeit not confirmed for yet – Kick-Ass director Matthew Vaughn's next job, making X-Men: First Class for Fox.

Joining him on what's described by the LA Times as "the shortlist" (which seems quite long right now), is Yelchin, who had a solid summer last year with his part as Chekov in Star Trek and a role as one of the good things in Terminator Salvation, Kyle Reese.

Yelchin's also an adept young actor, and certainly Chekov showed that he can mix gauche boyish charm and physical comedy, though he's tended towards quirkier fare until his blockbuster entries last year.

And as of right now, it's all so much speculation, since director Marc Webb is considering just about every young male face in the Big Book Of Possible Superheroes before moving on to the screen testing phase. Followed, of course, by the Studio Insider "Leak" stage, the Confirmation Announcement and, liberally sprinkled between all of those, the 'net-supplied Outright Rage At Whoever Gets The Job Because They're Clearly Wrong For It And Also Rubbish And Stupid.


----

Fuck yeah for Anton Yelchin! He would be perfect.

Aaron Johnson is already a superhero, making two is kind of awkward (like the guy who's the Human Torch and Captain America, that's just confusing.) Also, we must not forget, Aaron Johnson is a mad cunt.

Sony has officially announced (http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/soni-pictures-selects-new-spider-man/) that Andrew Garfield  is "Spider-Man."

the internet has officially announced "who the fuck is that?"

It's the scarf-wearing fancy lad from the Mark Romanek movie!

He was the robot in Spike Jonze short.  And the dude in Red Riding Trilogy: Part 1.  I like him, I just wish he wasn't screaming in that trailer.

'Spider-Man' Reboot Is 'Risky,' Says David Fincher
Source: MTV

Earlier this year, director David Fincher was reportedly on Sony's shortlist to direct the "Spider-Man" reboot, alongside fellow filmmakers Wes Anderson ("Rushmore"), and Marc Webb ("500 Days of Summer"), who eventually got the job.

Even though he won't be directing the newest cinematic adventures of Peter Parker onscreen, Fincher told MTV News that while he feels that the reboot is exciting, it also carries some drawbacks as well.

"It's risky," offered Fincher. "They're taking some risks. It's not like they're [getting] a conventional director. They're going at it in a different way... They're rolling the dice. I think that's always exciting."

Back in 2009, Fincher revealed that he had been under consideration to direct the first "Spider-Man" film, but ultimately passed because he didn't connect with the material.

"I took a meeting and I easily got myself out of that one," related Fincher. "I've never been interested in [superhero movies]. I just could not imagine someone getting bit by a radioactive spider."

Despite Fincher's attempt to divorce himself from superhero movies, Andrew Garfield — the latest actor to portray Spider-Man — is also starring in Fincher's upcoming film "The Social Network."

"I can't imagine [Garfield] in spandex, I can't imagine him being comfortable," said Fincher. "He's a wonderful actor, he's incredibly skilled and empathic and a lovely guy. So it's nice to see that."

Fincher is also attached to produce Eric Powell's "The Goon" as an animated feature.

Emma Stone is Gwen Stacy in 'Spider-Man' Reboot
By Christopher Campbell; Cinematical

It was an easy mistake, yesterday's report that Emma Stone was being offered the part of Mary Jane Watson in the 'Spider-Man' reboot. The actress is a (dyed) redhead, "MJ" is a redhead. We can't fault anyone, let alone Deadline for getting it wrong. But now the truth is out, by way of Sony themselves, and while Stone is indeed going to be in the superhero movie, she'll be playing the part of another Peter Parker/Spider-Man girlfriend, Gwen Stacy.

Yes, the blond one. But it all makes perfect sense. In 'Spider-Man 3,' Stacy was portrayed by Bryce Dallas Howard, a natural redhead. And in the same franchise Kirsten Dunst, normally a blond, filled the role of Watson. So don't be surprised if a typically blond actress -- perhaps Mia Wasikowski -- is soon cast as that later love interest (assuming the rebooted series is, as rumored, going with a faithful Spidey chronology). Wait, though, does this mean she's going to be killed off in the next installment and not stay the course of the reworked series as we happily thought?

Can you picture Stone with bleached locks? The best we can find for how she might look is the above photo from our 'The Rocker' set visit, but her hair is still technically red in the comedy, only a lighter shade than we're now used to seeing her with. Regardless, she's sure to look great however they do her, dyed or wigged. And we're still super excited to see her breaking further forth into stardom and curious about how well she'll do opposite Andrew Garfield as the costumed webslinger.

Fiveheads in?

I say yes to fiveheads nation. She'll be perfect. This might turn out pretty good after all. Can't be worst than the Spiderman sequels really.

See, the thing for me is, this comic book movie fad has been going on for too long. Usually fads die out, lay dormant, then rear their faddy head years later. Not comic book movies. They've been in for 10 years. The market is so over-saturated with them, yet it doesn't die. When the fad dies, then is reborn, the films are usually dubbed remakes, but this fad hasn't died out and they're already remaking the films from 4 years ago only they're dubbing them reboots because they know not enough time has passed for a remake. I mean think about that. XMen, Spiderman, Superman, these aren't being remade. They're being rebooted because they were just made a few years ago.

Comic book movies have given Hollywood the perfect way to make movies that appeal to American sensibilities, without actually appealing to them. Hollywood wants to make and audiences want to see movies where the good guys and bad guys are spelled out for you so you don't get confused which side is which, they want to see explosions and cool shit happening, they want to see movies where dudes get to be awesome and badass and women dress skimpy and sexy/provocative, but they don't want to admit it because it makes them seem simple and dumb because that's like the most basic level of entertainment. No thought is needed when watching most comic book films. With comic book movies it gives people the out of not feeling guilty for watching something so basic because, hey, nerds read comics and they also do math and solve puzzles and shit. "And the characters are wearing costumes! I don't take this seriously! It's just a good time, bro."

With most fads, they get played out because everyone starts following them and they don't seem cool anymore so they die out and a new fad is born, but comic book movies seem to be the first time where studios and audiences are in agreement and as long as Hollywood keeps churning out these movies about good guys vs bad guys with explosions and sexy dressed women, the audiences will continue to support them. Wait, what? Out of ideas? No more comic book characters to make? Fuck it. REBOOT!

Master post.

I agree with what you say. But, as I said earlier (and pete said like 5 posts later as if it was his idea) comic books have been rebooting since forever! So maybe it's what you said, or maybe it's just that comic books are basically made to be reimagined and rebooted.

it's a little bit of both: studios, more than ever, are looking for safe bets as their tentpoles and have found that in comicbooks - the whole "same, only different" mantra has become a dogma, and the comicbook people are saying "well, check out this thing that we do all the time in our industry."
also it sounds like a few nerds have ascended pretty close to the throne in this multi-billion dollar industry and aren't willing to lose their relevance.
so we don't have original characters like the die hard dude or the lethal weapon dude.  fuck.

Rhys Ifans Will Play Villain In 'Spider-Man' Reboot
Source: The Playlist

The Hollywood career of Welsh actor Rhys Ifans has been somewhat stop-start since his break-out role in "Notting Hill" --despite turning in solid work in British flicks like "Enduring Love" and "Elizabeth: The Golden Age," his adventures across the pond have mostly consisted of the underwhelming likes of "Little Nicky" and "The Shipping News." But coming off the back of an excellent supporting role in Noah Baumbach's "Greenberg," and with Roland Emmerich's "Anonymous" and a role in the final "Harry Potter" films on the way, Ifans looks set to book a role that'll prove to be easily the most high profile of his career. According to Mike Fleming at Deadline, Ifans has been offered the role of the villain of Marc Webb's reboot of the studio's golden goose "Spider-Man." Ifans would join Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, who've already been cast as, respectively, Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy. There's no firm word on who the actor would play if he takes the role (and we can't imagine why he wouldn't): The Lizard has been rumored to be the villain in the picture, but recent reports have pegged Venom as making a possible reappearance. Michael Fassbender, Christoph Waltz and, more recently, Philip Seymour Hoffman have all been linked to the role, but it looks like Ifans has landed it --we imagine that Hoffman turned the project down, if it even reached that stage. Whoever Ifans ends up playing, it's another interesting, and somewhat offbeat, addition to a very strong cast for a project that few held hopes for when it was announced. Update: A press release has gone out confirming that Ifans has signed on. Columbia Pictures president Matt Tolmach commented that "We have been very fortunate to attract some of the best actors working today to play the villains in the Spider-Man movies, and it is exciting to see that trend continue with Rhys Ifans. After seeing his performance in our upcoming film "Anonymous," we're in awe of his talent and think he's the perfect choice to take on this role," while director Webb added "What sets the Spider-Man villains apart is the complexity of their relationships with Peter Parker. Rhys' incredible ability to embody both warmth and rage makes him the ideal choice for this character." While there's still no word of who Ifans will be playing, Webb's statement sounds like it could be hinting towards The Lizard --the 'complex' relationship and mix of 'warmth and rage' certainly sound about right. We're sure it'll be made clear down the line.

Rhys Ifans Will Be.... The Lizard?
by Edward Douglas; THR

According to TheWrap, they've figured out who the villain in Marc Webb's Untitled Spider-Man Reboot will be, as played by the recently-announced Rhys Ifans, and it's a villain that's been discussed to be in the fourth movie even back when Sam Raimi was still going to direct it... The Lizard!

In the previous trilogy, The Lizard's alter-ego Dr. Curt Connors was played by actor Dylan Baker, who had originally assumed he would be returning for Raimi's fourth movie, saying that the Lizard would indeed be next, but when it was decided to reboot the franchise and Marc Webb was brought on board, it was thought that maybe those plans had changed.

Who knows if and when Sony Pictures will make their own announcement confirming this (or not) or we find out who leaked this information? (Andrew Garfield was in London for the premiere of his new film Never Let Me Go tonight, so maybe that's where it came from? TheWrap ain't sayin'.)

Either way, as fans who have been waiting for nearly ten months to find out more about what will happen with this reboot, let us know what you think of this choice.

Sally Field, Martin Sheen look to join 'Spider-Man'
Actors in talks to join the cast of Sony's upcoming reboot
Source: Variety

Sally Field and Martin Sheen look to join the cast of Sony's upcoming "Spider-Man" project.

Field has been offered the role of Aunt May, the matriarch of character Peter Parker's family while Sheen is in final talks to play Uncle Ben.

Sony wouldn't comment on either casting.

If cast, Field and Sheen would join Andrew Garfield as Spidey and Emma Stone, who is set to play Gwen Stacy, in the Marc Webb-helmed pic. Rhys Ifans will play the pic's villain.

Thursday's news comes days after former Col prexy Matt Tolmach ankled to form his own production company. "Spider-Man 4" is Tolmach's next producing credit, alongside Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin.

The "Spider-Man" pic is set to go into production in December and will be released in 3D on July 3, 2012.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbadassness.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2Ffirstspidey-568x780.jpg&hash=dcb236020c28e36083d5845b0b48dd79c0b79c9b)

Quote from: RegularKarate on January 13, 2011, 02:37:33 PM
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbadassness.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2Ffirstspidey-568x780.jpg&hash=dcb236020c28e36083d5845b0b48dd79c0b79c9b)

Looks good.  I didn't realize how different it was until I saw the old one again:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foi53.tinypic.com%2F2v1q4k7.jpg&hash=827b91648aec567b5b7fd29492b47af0ad123650)

Tobey looks like a total fat-ass.

...is that a nipple?

If I'm paying money to see this, it damn well better be.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.nymag.com%2Fimages%2F2%2Fdaily%2F2011%2F02%2F14_spiderman-wide_560x830.jpg&hash=61a704733bbd9ce92fd6ee3c1aa93f1d49d30d6d)

http://www.theamazingspiderman-movie.com/
July 3, 2012

http://collider.com/amazing-spider-man-images-trailer-news/102421/

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi54.tinypic.com%2F15eblzq.jpg&hash=5b61616b2d83611a02b1fc9e5f78a10b9f94e81a)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi54.tinypic.com%2F98vdr4.jpg&hash=425fd093b5cdcec5a504a1de221b4685a23242ea)

Why is she not a red head?

Because she's not playing Mary Jane.

I hope they have a scene in the movie where he makes the suit out of old basketballs.

Quote from: polkablues on July 14, 2011, 01:50:04 PM
Because she's not playing Mary Jane.

fair enough then.

I hope this bombs so they stop making fanboy nerd movies for awhile.

Don't be silly. Green Lantern's going to lose 100 million dollars, and they've already greenlighted the sequel.

Quote from: polkablues on July 14, 2011, 05:15:31 PM
Don't be silly. Green Lantern's going to lose 100 million dollars, and they've already greenlighted the sequel.

I guarantee that will NEVER be made.

Quote from: S.R. on July 14, 2011, 05:35:17 PM

Quote from: polkablues on July 14, 2011, 05:15:31 PM
Don't be silly. Green Lantern's going to lose 100 million dollars, and they've already greenlighted the sequel.

I guarantee that will NEVER be made.

Can we just take a moment and recognize the possibly inadvertent pun Polka made?  :bravo: bravo my friend

Oh, okay. We can still be friends after all.

Quote from: S.R. on July 14, 2011, 05:35:17 PM
guarantee that will NEVER be made.

Preserving these words for when you have to eat them.

There is a trailer up at this link now: http://www.theamazingspiderman-movie.com/ (http://www.theamazingspiderman-movie.com/)

i thought they were going to skip the spider biting part.
cos even ten year olds remember that, when they saw the movie less than ten years ago.
mirror's edge wasn't as fun as it looked like it was going to be.

I had a whole rant written out but basically this just looks like a very bad movie that I don't wanna see....
lifeless....almost like a spoof? especially note the spider biting part
but these new superhero deals have never really been my thing...?
maybe I just think Spider-Man is a dumb story or something like that.
or I don't wanna look at Andrew Garfield looking into space while that chick from Superbad? pines after him and
at the end of the movie when they're wrapping it up they'll get it on....a lay up for part two of this shit and credits = $
my friends call me an old man, I guess I am (that turned into a rant anyway)

finally: SOMEBODY PLEASE DEFEND THAT TRAILER!

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are better than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. And Mirror's Edge actually was pretty fun. That's about the best I can do.

Quote from: polkablues on July 20, 2011, 10:43:59 PM
Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are better than Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Is it bad that I don't like any of them?

Andrew Garfield's hair is distractingly large. It makes his head look like an inverted pear.

Granted, Andrew Garfield looks like a hipster llama, but he's a good actor, and he doesn't have that obnoxious voice that Maguire has. And Emma Stone is a national treasure.

Looks like the same type of corny fanboy comic book movie Hollywood has been churning out for 10 + years now. It's not even a new character. It's one we've seen a lot the last 10 years. Only difference is it has new actors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=653OdfJXOWA

I've been fed up of comic book/superhero movies for years now too. Dark Knight took me by surprise and I'm looking forward to DKR, but otherwise I've had enough. As much as I loved the first 2 X Men films, I wasn't expecting much from that recent reboot and was surprised at all the good word it's been getting. But no, as much as I love Emma Stone and admire Andrew Garfield, I have no desire to see this. The trailer looks like a piece of shit. The POV shots over the city streets are awful. Plus it looks like a Nickelodeon movie. I will be so glad once this Avengers movie is said and done too. Maybe the superhero movies will die off then. It's 2011 already, time to find a new genre to dominate this decade.

Quote from: Sleepless on July 21, 2011, 08:39:29 PM
I've been fed up of comic book/superhero movies for years now too. Dark Knight took me by surprise and I'm looking forward to DKR, but otherwise I've had enough. As much as I loved the first 2 X Men films, I wasn't expecting much from that recent reboot and was surprised at all the good word it's been getting. But no, as much as I love Emma Stone and admire Andrew Garfield, I have no desire to see this. The trailer looks like a piece of shit. The POV shots over the city streets are awful. Plus it looks like a Nickelodeon movie. I will be so glad once this Avengers movie is said and done too. Maybe the superhero movies will die off then. It's 2011 already, time to find a new genre to dominate this decade.

I feel the exact same way. Right down to being sick of every comic book movie around, but anticipating the Dark Knight Rises.

Welcome to the club. Current members, Stefen and Sleepless.

If any of you other nerds wanna join, come on, man up.

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on July 20, 2011, 10:47:49 PMAndrew Garfield's hair is distractingly large. It makes his head look like an inverted pear.

Quote from: polkablues on July 20, 2011, 11:41:48 PM
Granted, Andrew Garfield looks like a hipster llama...

:yabbse-grin:

Quote from: S.R. on July 21, 2011, 08:45:41 PM

Quote from: Sleepless on July 21, 2011, 08:39:29 PM
I've been fed up of comic book/superhero movies for years now too. Dark Knight took me by surprise and I'm looking forward to DKR, but otherwise I've had enough. As much as I loved the first 2 X Men films, I wasn't expecting much from that recent reboot and was surprised at all the good word it's been getting. But no, as much as I love Emma Stone and admire Andrew Garfield, I have no desire to see this. The trailer looks like a piece of shit. The POV shots over the city streets are awful. Plus it looks like a Nickelodeon movie. I will be so glad once this Avengers movie is said and done too. Maybe the superhero movies will die off then. It's 2011 already, time to find a new genre to dominate this decade.

I feel the exact same way. Right down to being sick of every comic book movie around, but anticipating the Dark Knight Rises.

Welcome to the club. Current members, Stefen and Sleepless.

If any of you other nerds wanna join, come on, man up.

I want in I want in.

Quote from: ©brad on July 21, 2011, 09:03:52 PM

Quote from: S.R. on July 21, 2011, 08:45:41 PM

Quote from: Sleepless on July 21, 2011, 08:39:29 PM
I've been fed up of comic book/superhero movies for years now too. Dark Knight took me by surprise and I'm looking forward to DKR, but otherwise I've had enough. As much as I loved the first 2 X Men films, I wasn't expecting much from that recent reboot and was surprised at all the good word it's been getting. But no, as much as I love Emma Stone and admire Andrew Garfield, I have no desire to see this. The trailer looks like a piece of shit. The POV shots over the city streets are awful. Plus it looks like a Nickelodeon movie. I will be so glad once this Avengers movie is said and done too. Maybe the superhero movies will die off then. It's 2011 already, time to find a new genre to dominate this decade.

I feel the exact same way. Right down to being sick of every comic book movie around, but anticipating the Dark Knight Rises.

Welcome to the club. Current members, Stefen and Sleepless.

If any of you other nerds wanna join, come on, man up.

I want in I want in.

You're fucking in.

The whole Avengers thing is what's putting it over the top for me. It took a fun character (Iron Man) and made him a bit player in his own story. The new X-Men movie was a great time, and I think there's potential there for those characters, and I agree DKR should boot a bookend to that great series, but other than that I'm through. To be honest, I cringed at the X-Men First Class trailer, but that turned out to be rather good, so we'll see. I'm always happy to be proved wrong.

So are you saying you're in or you're not in? I can't tell.

I'm in but giving myself the chance to renig if this is any good.

Quote from: ddiggler on July 22, 2011, 06:03:14 PM
I'm in but giving myself the chance to renig if this is any good.

Hmm, okay, fair enough, I'll allow it, but you only get one renig.

Quote from: S.R. on July 22, 2011, 06:14:51 PM

Quote from: ddiggler on July 22, 2011, 06:03:14 PM
I'm in but giving myself the chance to renig if this is any good.

Hmm, okay, fair enough, I'll allow it, but you only get one renig.

are you kidding me? this place is renig central

The word is renege.

It can be either.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/renig

Yours looks less racist.

"Renig" is not, has not been, and never will be an actual word.  Please stop using it posthaste, for the good of the language.

Renig is a common misspelling of renege. Even reneg, without the final E, is more acceptable, as it retains at the very least the same pronunciation. Renig is a completely bastardized version that doesn't even sound like the original. It would be like saying pig when you mean peg.

It's interesting that you say my spelling looks less racist, it suggests that you have not only been misspelling but mispronouncing it too. The word renege rhymes with EGG. So the noun reneger neither looks nor sounds particularly racist. It's not a matter of tomAYto tomAHto because that word is spelled the same way to both speakers, it's more like the way so many people now say simetic instead of semitic. There is a difference.

The only way you could be excused in writing renig would be if you can't tell the difference between the way peg and pig sound, that is if your accent legitimately does not distinguish between the two vowel sounds. People who talk like that are called New Zealanders.

Niggas please.

You're really nitpicking now.

...or as I like to say, netpecking.

<cringe at myself>
nigpicking

Once again, the movie will be less entertaining than this thread.

Quote from: Tictacbk on July 20, 2011, 02:42:20 PM
There is a trailer up at this link now: http://www.theamazingspiderman-movie.com/ (http://www.theamazingspiderman-movie.com/)

Sweet That looks like a great videogame.

Quote from: S.R. on August 08, 2011, 12:37:38 AM
Niggas please.

...married with your avatar is genius

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fspinoff.comicbookresources.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2Famazing-spider-man-poster.jpg&hash=eeed312e4237f7f52d7d44223214391347993b59)

"The Untold Story"? They really want to go there?

That photo is clearly photoshopped. How does a four-limbed individual otherwise cast a shadow of an eight-limbed creature. It's a FAKE. That's right, I'm calling it before RK.

dude, ur totally right, look at his face! it's not even toby!

New Trailer here.  (http://youtu.be/-tnxzJ0SSOw)

Quote from: Pubrick on August 07, 2011, 09:32:05 PM
Renig is a common misspelling of renege. Even reneg, without the final E, is more acceptable, as it retains at the very least the same pronunciation. Renig is a completely bastardized version that doesn't even sound like the original. It would be like saying pig when you mean peg.

It's interesting that you say my spelling looks less racist, it suggests that you have not only been misspelling but mispronouncing it too. The word renege rhymes with EGG. So the noun reneger neither looks nor sounds particularly racist. It's not a matter of tomAYto tomAHto because that word is spelled the same way to both speakers, it's more like the way so many people now say simetic instead of semitic. There is a difference.

The only way you could be excused in writing renig would be if you can't tell the difference between the way peg and pig sound, that is if your accent legitimately does not distinguish between the two vowel sounds. People who talk like that are called New Zealanders.

Easily one of the most informative posts i've ever read.

thanks p.

International Trailer

Four Minute Preview

man that looked faker than the 2002 version.

Quote from: pete on May 15, 2012, 12:54:52 AM
man that looked faker than the 2002 version.

Could it just be the 3D?

I don't know if it looked faker than usual fakeness but the whole thing, even the non CGI stuff, looked extremely crisp and heavily outlined. Like they had brushed along the  edge of every face/car/building.

Doesn't look like this film will have any iconic set piece, or maybe they just haven't animated it yet. Andrew Garfield's neck is really distracting. He should have played Stork-man.

Quote from: Pubrick on June 05, 2012, 10:03:44 AM

Quote from: pete on May 15, 2012, 12:54:52 AM
man that looked faker than the 2002 version.

Could it just be the 3D?

I don't know if it looked faker than usual fakeness but the whole thing, even the non CGI stuff, looked extremely crisp and heavily outlined. Like they had brushed along the  edge of every face/car/building.

I didn't see it in 3d, I just thought those cars looked cartoony as fuck.
the "outline" effect is very popular in photography ("clarity slider" as it's commonly known in photo editing) and I think it's done via pushing for contrast in a narrow range of midtones.

Quote from: Pubrick on June 05, 2012, 10:03:44 AMAndrew Garfield's neck is really distracting. He should have played Stork-man.

I find his big hair more distracting.

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on June 05, 2012, 09:44:17 PM

Quote from: Pubrick on June 05, 2012, 10:03:44 AMAndrew Garfield's neck is really distracting. He should have played Stork-man.

I find his big hair more distracting.

What are you guys talking about? Garfield is probably the only reason why I'm seeing this.

nitpicking Garfield's appearance is more distracting than anything else

Yeah he's not bad, he just needs a haircut. Maybe he has a really nasty scalp.

Bad news. This movie is not amazing.

News?

Did no one see this?

I did. It stinks, but there are some good things in it:

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone are really good in this. If they had a better movie to be in, I would have applauded this thing for focusing on the characters over action sequences.

I feel like a second movie might actually be good. Half of this dumb thing was retreading the origin story we saw not that long ago (that was only slightly changed for what seems like setting up the events of the sequel). With some better writing and CG, I could see the second one being really entertaining (let's face facts, they are going to make a sequel).

The rest is pretty awful though. Terrible villain and the worst third act I've seen in a long time.

Man I can't remember the last movie with so many conflicting reviews all from people I trust! A good buddy of mine just raved about it and he's one of us.

Meh, I'll just see Savages this weekend instead.

Skip both!

See 'Beasts' or "Magic Mike."

Good call! Dying to see both.

Was Savages not good either?

Nope. Baaad script. Benicio is fun/nuts though.

skip modage!

see RK!

Not only was this better than the Raimi Spider-mans, it was SO MUCH better than them in every conceivable way that whereas I was mildly indifferent to Raimi's films in the past, I now actively dislike them, having a direct comparison to show me everything they did wrong.  Not that this one is a perfect movie, or even a great movie, or at times even a very good movie, but I don't remember how I planned on ending this sentence.

To recap: too drunk to review, but I liked it.  Garfield/Stone > Maguire/Dunst. 

Quote from: polkablues on July 13, 2012, 01:36:03 AM
Garfield/Stone > Maguire/Dunst.

This part may be true but not in this film, it's not.

My ramblings here (http://modage.tumblr.com/post/26835110067/the-amazing-spider-man-review) but FilmCritHulk says it better (http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/06/film-crit-hulk-smash-the-amazing-spider-man-has-99-problems-but-an-uncle-be/) than I could have. And then there's this... (http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/)

You see! Two people I know and trust have completely opposite opinions. I'm almost afraid to see this now.

I gotta hop on board with Mod's negativity this time.
Polka has lost his mind. I'm going to assume he saw it drunk and further got confused because of his Emma Stone induced pants tightening.

and Spiderman 2 was good, guys.

Quote from: ©brad on July 13, 2012, 09:00:17 AM
You see! Two people I know and trust have completely opposite opinions. I'm almost afraid to see this now.

haha yes, I was already belittling the movie without seeing it, right now im a ship lost at sea.

To clarify, I got drunk AFTER seeing the movie. Maybe it's a byproduct of lowered expectations, but I spent the whole movie thinking, "why on earth do some people hate this so much?"

Quote from: polkablues on July 13, 2012, 11:50:25 AM
"why on earth do some people hate this so much?"

Read that filmcrithulk review that Mod linked to. It really does nail why the movie doesn't work for me.

See, and I can read that and get it. He lays out his case, and I can totally understand how all of those issues are problems. But none of it was enough to make me dislike the movie. All those critiques and more can be leveled at the Raimi films as well.

I think this one really does boil down to personal preference. If the movie hooked you, you can look past all those problems. If it didn't, you can't.