slothian Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 I don't have much to offer up on where they should go for Spidey 4 (although I'd like a better Venom resolution, and Curt Conners has been not-Lizard for quite a while now) but in that Spider-Man films suffer the more characters they add, I dunno how many characters from outside the immediate Spidey universe they should bring in. Although maybe Mephisto could come in and erase the events of Spider-Man 3........ One guy I wouldn't count on showing up would be Michael Clarke Duncan's Kingpin, as a different studio to Sony still has the rights to DareDevil last time I checked (which admittedly wasn't recently). But if Dunst goes and MJ isn't recast, definitely keep a hold of Gwen Stacey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annericelover Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 One guy I wouldn't count on showing up would be Michael Clarke Duncan's Kingpin, as a different studio to Sony still has the rights to DareDevil last time I checked (which admittedly wasn't recently). The Incredible Hulk is owned by Universal and Iron Man is owned by Paramount, but because Marvel is a studio that combines with these studios, its possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragernok2002 Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 I would rather see a reboot at this stage. 3 was a trainwreck, Venom should have happened over 2 - 3 movies, Sandman was wasted and he isn't of one Spidey's A list bad guys and they completely wasted Harry's turn from the dark side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 I enjoyed Spider-Man 3, but what made it less than perfect(especially after how good part 2 was)was the fact that Sam Raimi and the writers had too many characters in the film. Gwen Stacey(who in retrospect should have been in part 1)had almost no time on the screen, Harry Osbourne should have been saved for his own film(or at least as a secondary villain, not third), Venom had very little screen time and wasn't handled well(especially considering the actual origin in the comics). Sandman was used to point out a lesson Spider-Man had to learn, I thought that was a horrible way to use a villain like Sandman. The actors themselves were pretty good in the roles. It's just that the film wasn't long enough and the characters weren't developed well. This was the same problem for X-Men: The Last Stand--Too many characters, too short of film. Now seeing that this is a Spidey 4 forum, here are my thoughts on how it should be handled if Raimi, MaGuire and Dunst return. First give us Maximum Carnage and The Lizard. Bring back Gwen Stacey and help develop her character more. Don't weigh the film on the realtionship between Peter and MJ, only go to it at times. Hey what about The Kingpin as a villain who attempts to use the anger Carnage has for Spider-Man(with Michael Clarke Duncan playing the part for a 3rd time)to use him for his advantage. Also since Marvel is now crossing characters over into other Marvel based films, have The Punisher show up at the end as a cliffhanger(most unlikely since The Punisher is too dark of a character to be in a Spidey film) or Tony Stark(in a way he did in The Incredible Hulk)to recruit Spider-Man for The Avengers. I like how your biggest problem with SM3 is about too many characters and then your suggestion for 4 is Venom, Carnage, Lizard, Kingpin, Gwen Stacy, Punisher and Tony Stark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annericelover Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 I like how your biggest problem with SM3 is about too many characters and then your suggestion for 4 is Venom, Carnage, Lizard, Kingpin, Gwen Stacy, Punisher and Tony Stark. Well we already know the stories of Gwen Stacey, Punisher like I said is almost no chance, Tony Stark would be a cameo. Venom was destroyed in 3, so Carnage would be the focus, with The Lizard being a secondary character(we already know Curt Connor, so it can go straight into his transformation). Kingpin was a suggestion. I would suggest it if they did put The Lizard and Carnage in the film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mull Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 At this stage Spiderman is the easiest bet for an Avengers film to be honest, he is the established name/face for fans for the film who fans dont need to be introduced to for them to understand and enjoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 At this stage Spiderman is the easiest bet for an Avengers film to be honest, he is the established name/face for fans for the film who fans dont need to be introduced to for them to understand and enjoy Except Sony won't let that happen. Maybe a cameo, but they won't let their biggest license go to another company. Marvel may own the copyright, but only Sony can put Spider-Man in a film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elnino14 Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 I think anything more than two villains is ludicrous. I felt Spider-man 3 was a decent movie and I actually really liked it but all the problems people have with it is there are way too many focuses. Theres a lot of good ideas, but Raimi would have been better served stretching these ideas over 2 movies than cramming everything in one film. A short rundown of ideas that were in Movie three: Introducing Gwen Stacy and Peter's love triangle Peter/MJ drama Symbiote Suit and Peter going Dark Eddie Brock and Venom's Origin (& Death) Green Goblin 2 (Harry Osborn) Sandman and whatever connection he had to Peter's father Now looking at that list, they're all great ideas. But the biggest problem was developing all of them coherently into one film. Now instead of developing them ALL coherently, Sam kind of made them side attractions to the Main Arc of the trilogy (the relationships of three friends Peter/MJ/Harry). People obviously didn't like this. I felt it was fine but certainly could have been a little more focused and a little less rushed. Eliminating one of the villains (either Venom or Sandman) would have made plenty of space to focus the film. As for Spidey 4, I don't think a reboot is necessarily in order where they erase everything that happened like the Incredible Hulk did. But certainly a new arc would be appropriate at this point in time. From rumors and the like, the most likely villain would be Lizard, but I've never been a fan of him or Carnage. Frankly, I'd love to see Kraven's Last Hunt adapted somewhere down the line but I wouldn't suggest it for this next film. I think Raimi has probably learned from the mistakes of the last film and will squeeze it back down to one villain (like the first two films) or maybe, just maybe, two but I hope he chooses the former rather than the latter. The less juggling the better in my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 That pretty much covers the reasons which pertained to me giving Spider-Man 3 a fairly good review. It was quite good for what it was, but the previous two films have been more than "quite good" and the content REALLY should have been stretched out over two films. Then again, I do wonder how much of it was Raimi's decision and how much belonged to the studio (Raimi had said no to Venom ever since he'd started the franchise) - much like comic writers often have to go along with editorial decisions, I get the impression the director was under substantial pressure for the third entry. That's not me being an apologist, but I have a feeling that Marvel Studios/Producers will be the focus of my next written CR. I'd say that Carnage would be hard to do for film 4, without a return of Venom. In any case, I want me more Eddie Brock, with or without Symbiote. Hopefully his experience at the end of the last film can truly bond the two together and have Venom say "we", to get the character back on track. Topher Grace was one of the best things going about that film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annericelover Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Oh, well don't get me wong as many complaints as I listed I still enjoyed the film. But just like with X-Men: The Last Stand you walked in the theater with high expectations(after seeing X2 and Spider-Man 2)and the 3rd film was not only the shortest of the trilogy but had too many things in one movie. Another user mentioned that the ideas that were laid out were good, but putting them all in one movie was the mistake. I agree with this. The acting in the film is as good as in any of the other Spider-Man films. So far, Spider-Man 3 is the only movie I have on Blu-Ray. I haven't read the comic origin of Sandman, but many fans hated the liberty the writers took with making him a man"Who just always ends up in thewrong place at the wrong time. " I think when the time comes The Avengers may be the first film to have multiple major studios investing in one film(besides the upcoming Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street remakes). Sony understands the importance and the big money maker an Avengers film would be making a horrible business decision. I just HOPE WITH EVERYTHING IN ME!!! That DC and WB's are watching Marvel and how they are getting the Avengers movie started and decide to wait for indivisual films to be made before a Justice League movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tglancy Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 This is irrational, and will never happen, but there are three characters that I think need to be in the next movie. They are the three characters that got me to break my ASM embargo a few weeks ago. Three of the longest tenured Spidey Villains out there, and three guys that would translate GREAT to film if done right. Montana Ox Fancy Dan That's right, the Enforcers. I have always loved these guys. Fancy Dan is this great fighter, Ox is crazy strong, and Montana is sadistic and a great leader. You could tweak it a little and give Ox super strength, or even turn Montana into Shocker like the cartoon, and make Dan Scorpion and Ox could be made into Rhino, or they could just be three bad ass criminals. Or, you bring Kingpin in and they are his muscle. JUST GIVE ME THE FUCKING ENFORCERS!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 I haven't read the comic origin of Sandman, but many fans hated the liberty the writers took with making him a man"Who just always ends up in thewrong place at the wrong time. " I think people just want to see a bad guy that we don't need to feel sorry for. Brock accidentally became Venom. Sandman was just a petty criminal in the wrong place at the wrong time. Green Goblin was a schizophrenic with dual personalities. Doc Ock became that way by accident. Magneto was a Nazi prisoner who's trying to do good the wrong way. This is why Carnage would be great. Too bad it won't happen unless they bring Venom back and then we have too many characters again. Venom/Spidey fight that leads to a team up against Carnage already happened with Harry/Spidey vs Sandman. If Spider-Man 4 didn't happen the way it did, they probably would do that story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 I haven't read the comic origin of Sandman, but many fans hated the liberty the writers took with making him a man"Who just always ends up in thewrong place at the wrong time. " I think people just want to see a bad guy that we don't need to feel sorry for. See: Stryker, William. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tglancy Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Or the Enforcers! No reason to feel sorry for the Enforcers!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 During a recent conference call to discuss their second quarter results, Marvel revealed that Sony has paid them an advance on 'Spider-Man 4', which may be taken as a sign of the studio's commitment to the next installment of the franchise. http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=35040 I guess that settles it. There will be a Spider-Man 4. During the conference call this was said: Okay, and I wonder if you could talk about the film slate. It sounds like Sony is targeting an early May 2011 release of Spider-man 4, and you guys have Captain America sitting on that first weekend of May -- just kind of talk about the opportunities, options you have there. Wow. If that's true I bet Marvel will be pissed. Spider-Man 4 the same weekend or a week later than Captain America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 I would rather see a reboot at this stage. 3 was a trainwreck, Venom should have happened over 2 - 3 movies, Sandman was wasted and he isn't of one Spidey's A list bad guys and they completely wasted Harry's turn from the dark side. What does it matter if Sandman isn't an A list villain? Scarecrow isn't an A-list Batman villain and he was great in Batman Begins. And I would geek out if The Enforcers were in 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 I would rather see a reboot at this stage. 3 was a trainwreck, Venom should have happened over 2 - 3 movies, Sandman was wasted and he isn't of one Spidey's A list bad guys and they completely wasted Harry's turn from the dark side. What does it matter if Sandman isn't an A list villain? Scarecrow isn't an A-list Batman villain and he was great in Batman Begins. And I would geek out if The Enforcers were in 4. How is Sandman not an A list villain? He's been around since the 60s, and is in every version made from cartoons to movies with the exception of the 70s tv show. What makes an A list villain? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightAngle04 Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Actually Sandman wasn't in the 90s cartoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Actually Sandman wasn't in the 90s cartoon. He was in the 60's Spider-Man cartoon, 70's Fantastic Four cartoon, 1981 Spider-Man cartoon, and Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Actually Sandman wasn't in the 90s cartoon. Only because he was slated to be in a Spider-Man movie at that time which was never made, which goes to show he isn't a B lister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted August 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Actually Sandman wasn't in the 90s cartoon. Only because he was slated to be in a Spider-Man movie at that time which was never made, which goes to show he isn't a B lister. Ah! Now I understand why they used Hydro-Man instead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 Back in May, Cinematical was the first to report that Sony Pictures might shoot Spider-Man 4 and Spider-Man 5 at the same time using James Vanderbilt's script that the site said spans two films. Now, Deadline Hollywood Daily has added on that director Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire have apparently signed on the dotted line for Spider-Man 4, which the studio is targeting for a May 2011 release. DHD adds that there's no deal for Kirsten Dunst to return as Mary Jane Watson yet, but the character will be featured and the studio would not recast her. As for the baddie in the fourth picture, the site says that principal photography doesn't start until the fall of 2009 and that once we find out who the villain we'll know who is playing it. Naturally, speculation would put Dylan Baker's character Dr. Curt Connors/The Lizard at the head of the line, but who knows? According to the site, "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.'" DHD also says that Sony has hired two screenwriters to pen the new script for the Spidey spin-off Venom. http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=48581 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 I hope it's not the Lizard. I think they missed the boat on that one. I really hope the rumors are true about Mysterio's connection to a certain reoccurring actor. Either way they need to stick with 1 villain. 2 at the most if they are together. That killed the 3rd movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightAngle04 Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 There's a lot of things that killed the third movie, but what's this about a Mysterio connection? I've never heard that before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 For some reason, there's was a rumor that Mysterio was going to be in the third movie, played by Bruce Campbell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.