JackFetch Posted September 6, 2008 Report Share Posted September 6, 2008 That Bruce Campbell has been Mysterio in all the movies gathering info on him, and that he would show up in a future movie as the main villain. It would be awesome, but they aren't smart enough to think of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted September 7, 2008 Report Share Posted September 7, 2008 Campbell without Rami is like cereal without milk. Dry and sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 An article in UK's Times Online delves into the details of Tobey Maguire's deal to return for back-to-back 'Spider-Man' sequels. According to the report the actor stands to bank $50 million to film parts 4 and 5 of the franchise. The article actually states that the $50 million figure is part salary and part profit sharing. 'Spider-Man 3' proved that the movies don't have to be good to make money, so Tobey is likely to rake in the full amount on the two films. However, key to the deal was the allocation of "family time" to Maguire, who has a young daughter. Word is that shooting back-to-back films is a grueling process that takes its toll on the leading man . Keanu Reeves is cited in the article as being drained by the 'Matrix' movies. The 'Spider Man 4 and 5' shoot is set for a six month period in 2009. Tobey will have "early mornings and evenings" off, according to the report. The article also suggests that the Kirsten Dunst question will be settled this week. http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=35597 To me, it's not worth giving him so much to keep Toby Maguire. They could get anyone in Hollywood to play that part for less money and time off. The movies would still make money without him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 An article in UK's Times Online delves into the details of Tobey Maguire's deal to return for back-to-back 'Spider-Man' sequels. According to the report the actor stands to bank $50 million to film parts 4 and 5 of the franchise. The article actually states that the $50 million figure is part salary and part profit sharing. 'Spider-Man 3' proved that the movies don't have to be good to make money, so Tobey is likely to rake in the full amount on the two films. However, key to the deal was the allocation of "family time" to Maguire, who has a young daughter. Word is that shooting back-to-back films is a grueling process that takes its toll on the leading man . Keanu Reeves is cited in the article as being drained by the 'Matrix' movies. The 'Spider Man 4 and 5' shoot is set for a six month period in 2009. Tobey will have "early mornings and evenings" off, according to the report. The article also suggests that the Kirsten Dunst question will be settled this week. http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=35597 To me, it's not worth giving him so much to keep Tony Maguire. They could get anyone in Hollywood to play that part for less money and time off. The movies would still make money without him. No kidding. I would have done it for half that amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 Let's hope the answer to the Kirsten Dunst question is "fuck no". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 Let's hope the answer to the Kirsten Dunst question is "fuck no". Just a random question, but how can she be a star in Hollywood making millions and not fix that snaggletooth? Don't get me wrong. She is hot(usually). It just doesn't make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 The Tobey Maguire hating upsets me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DCAUFan1051 Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 OK at first when Marvel decided to do the movies I was very skeptical on any of the actors playing the parts the only 2 I really was psyched for was Stewart -Proffesor X Mckellen- Magneto I was kinda on the fence about all the others BUT then I saw the movie and I believe no one else can play those characters. Just as I balked at the idea of Tobey Maguire Mr. Pleasentville, Cats & Dogs could pull off Peter Parker and Spidey BUT again once I saw it (to borrow a Stan Lee phrase) I became a true believer The same thing happened with: Daredevil Iron Man The Punisher (2004) Yes I liked it I'm not thrilled with the NEW one that's coming out. Hulk (2003) I never cared for it's basically Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon with marvel characters DAMN YOU ang lee (just my opinion) The Incredible Hulk I haven't seen yet so I'm reserving judgement I'm psyched for X-Men Origins: Wolverine although I thought they should have brought Brian Cox back as Stryker my point to all this is the actors that play the main marvel heroes and villans in my opinion ARE THE ONLY ONES who should play them just like my opinion of the DCAU voices are whomever originated the voice THAT is the character (exception is Tim Daly and George Newbern) I never noticed a difference in their voices Yeah I know they're different but it sounded the same to me. anyways that's my offering to the the topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 Campbell without Rami is like cereal without milk. Dry and sad. Burn Notice is a great great show and I don't think Raimi has anything to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 I think Maguire is a great Peter Parker. I just think he's a horrible Spider-Man. He has no comedic timing, and the lisp kills it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 The Tobey Maguire hating upsets me. I might be biased in that I have not liked any of the Spiderman movies so far, but I would really like to see some new blood brought into these movies. Writing, directing, and acting. Maguire is not painful to watch, but he is not all that great either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightAngle04 Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 An article in UK's Times Online delves into the details of Tobey Maguire's deal to return for back-to-back 'Spider-Man' sequels. According to the report the actor stands to bank $50 million to film parts 4 and 5 of the franchise. The article actually states that the $50 million figure is part salary and part profit sharing. 'Spider-Man 3' proved that the movies don't have to be good to make money, so Tobey is likely to rake in the full amount on the two films. However, key to the deal was the allocation of "family time" to Maguire, who has a young daughter. Word is that shooting back-to-back films is a grueling process that takes its toll on the leading man . Keanu Reeves is cited in the article as being drained by the 'Matrix' movies. The 'Spider Man 4 and 5' shoot is set for a six month period in 2009. Tobey will have "early mornings and evenings" off, according to the report. The article also suggests that the Kirsten Dunst question will be settled this week. http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=35597 To me, it's not worth giving him so much to keep Toby Maguire. They could get anyone in Hollywood to play that part for less money and time off. The movies would still make money without him. What does it matter? Maguire should've fleeced them for more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Feral One Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 The best thing to do is to reboot the franchise. But they won't do that just like they don't have any interest in getting anything right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 They don't need to reboot the franchise. Not ever issue can be solved by scribbling out the last three movies. Hell, that's one of the things Superman Returns did right. Honestly, the franchise, storylinewise is in a great place. Harry is dead, so there's no more of the Goblin crap. MJ and Peter are together, but in a rocky place. They can either bring them closer, via a supervillain getting their hands on her, or that could drive them apart, either by Peter saying that "It's too dangerous for you" or MJ actually dying. Fuck, they could even kill off Aunt May like Joey Q was too big of a pussy to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Feral One Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 This Spider-Man franchise is in need of a reboot badly just as some other the others are. I would suggest the same thing for the current Batman franchise as well, and I know there are some who would frown upon that idea. I really don't want to see any of the characters that they decide to bring into the next film get the watered down treatment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Robinson Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 I'd like to see how the series goes with a whole new cast, but with it still technically continuing on after Spiderman 3. It could be absofuckinglutely horrible, but at least it would be something fresh. I was so let down by the last movie that I want to see part 4 go in a whole new direction. I want to see what they can do with a new cast and director, but I don't want them to retread ground that they've already covered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 How in the world does the Nolan Batman need a reboot? Does Iron Man need a reboot, too? Hulk might as well start over again, too, while we're at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted September 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 This Spider-Man franchise is in need of a reboot badly just as some other the others are. I would suggest the same thing for the current Batman franchise as well, and I know there are some who would frown upon that idea. Why would you reboot the current Batman franchise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 And if they use Lizard in Four, I can't see him getting a watered down treatment at all, they've been building him for three movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Feral One Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 How in the world does the Nolan Batman need a reboot? Does Iron Man need a reboot, too? Hulk might as well start over again, too, while we're at it. See, thats just the thing. The way you phrased it, Nolan's Batman. I would have such great respect for a film crew who would translate the source material accurately to film instead of a director putting his stamp on it and material getting watered down. 'Cause that's what happens. I liked 'Batman Begins' a hell of a lot, but it shouldn't be hold in such high regard as a highly respectably made Batman film. Scarecrow would not have been my choice for the first movie's villain. It should have been The Penguin since he fits with a organized crime story better than The Scarecrow. The rendition of The Scarecrow pretty muched sucked anyways. And it would be real nice not to have a love interest attached to every Batman film. There's no way in hell they would listen to the option of a reboot, especially one with the first installment detailing the Batman's origin accurately. A shame that they couldn't get more right than they did from the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Robinson Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 I honestly don't want them to get it anymore "right". Whenever we see a new superhero movie, we get an origin story. It's fun every now and again, but I'm getting bored of it at this stage. If they ever decide to reboot Batman, I'd want them to skip the origin story entirely. People already have a pretty good idea of how Batman's story begins, I don't think they need to see it again with a few more details changed. Personally, after TDK I want the next couple of Batmen movies to stick with Nolan's spin on the universe. For me, it's just right in terms of realism and grittiness, and I don’t really care that much about the finer details. Accuracy is nice and all, but I’m more than happy for things to get changed if it helps to create a better film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Feral One Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 What? Nolan's vision is realistic? Are you sure about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 And it would be real nice not to have a love interest attached to every Batman film. For some reason Hollywood thinks every movie needs a love interest, especially hero action movies. It's my biggest gripe about films. I can't wait to see The Punisher fall in love and her get killed cause you know it'll happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Feral One Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 And it would be real nice not to have a love interest attached to every Batman film. For some reason Hollywood thinks every movie needs a love interest, especially hero action movies. It's my biggest gripe about films. I can't wait to see The Punisher fall in love and her get killed cause you know it'll happen It is a formula that needs to be dropped from superhero films. It probably won't be though because it's part of how Hollywood tries to make these characters more relatable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted September 24, 2008 Report Share Posted September 24, 2008 It's impossible to get a 100% accurate movie translation. Hell, I'd like to see a Bruce Wayne: Fugitive animated movie, but even if that ever happened, there's no way it would ever be 100% accurate because there is too much to cover. 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.