Dread Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Leboef would be an excellent choice. Dopey's the wrong way to go and he still looks young enough to do the high school thing for a couple movies. Great actor too. Criminally underused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxPower Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Ain't it Cool News is talking about 2 things. 1. James Cameron once expressed interest in Spiderman. Is this true? If it is, they are suggesting that Marvel/Sony should call him and ask him, what could it hurt. 2. Raimi next project will more than likely be his World of Warcraft movie, which could be interesting. Army of Darkness anyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadzilla Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Ain't it Cool News is talking about 2 things. 1. James Cameron once expressed interest in Spiderman. Is this true? If it is, they are suggesting that Marvel/Sony should call him and ask him, what could it hurt. Cameron had been developing a Spider-Man film back in the 90s, I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Ain't it Cool News is talking about 2 things. 1. James Cameron once expressed interest in Spiderman. Is this true? If it is, they are suggesting that Marvel/Sony should call him and ask him, what could it hurt. Cameron had been developing a Spider-Man film back in the 90s, I believe. Truth. Sandman and Electro were the villains, which is why Sandman never showed up in the 94 animated series, and Electro didn't show until the show's run was nearly complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annericelover Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Hollywood has already started the "Reboot" wagon. I for one hate it when they do this, they aren't getting the financial success that first few comic book based films gave them, so they give up and start over again. They did it to Batman, The Incredible Hulk, now Superman and Spider-Man. Lazy way for Hollywood to hide the fact they are running out of ideas(another origin film means they don't have to think of new stories). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Robinson Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 But Incredible Hulk and Superman Returns didn't retell their origin stories, and they didn't reboot everything either. Both picked up off of earlier movies, but changed certain details to suit the kind of story they wanted to tell, which is totally fine by me. That's probably what they'll do with Spiderman. I don’t think they’ll want to retell his origins, they’ll just take him back to high school and expect that you already know the basics. And are you honestly angry that they restarted Batman? I'm glad that they ignored the earlier films and just started fresh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I'm glad when they do reboots. Its like they recognise that they didn't do something justice the first time around, so they want to fulfil its potential. I can't think of a reboot or proposed reboot that I'm against, at least in comic book movies. I'd have been against it for Daredevil, but then Elektra came along and put me off continuing down that road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I think it depends on a case by case basis. Batman? Absolutely the right idea to reboot the franchise, and because no extensive focus was placed on how Bruce Wayne became Batman in the 89 film, the subject matter was ripe to be re-told some 16 years later. Hulk? If they hadn't shown Norton's Banner having his radiation accident (key word being shown - he could still refer to it) then I could by it as a sequel with a cast/tone overall. As it did show the accident, it's technically a requel, which I don't think shows as much respect to its flawed predecessor. Superman? Oh boy. Part requel, part clusterfuck. This franchise NEEDS rebooting. Fantastic 4 (as is being rumoured)? I thought the original cast could feasibly cap off their own trilogy of mildly inoffensive superhero action. I don't think the franchise needs a full-out origins reboot, but it could cope with a cast change, methinks. Spider-Man? It doesn't NEED a reboot, but it's getting one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 To be fair, rebooting comic movie heroes is in line with the comics, who tend to reboot characters every 7 years or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Fantastic Four is one of those things where I don't even think its worth coming back to it. Do it in ten years sure but I'd rather spend the money on another property with more of an upside. I certainly don't want a third installment, the first two were depressing enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I dunno, Michael Chiklis was a damn fine Ben, and Chris Evans was a bit rough in the first movie, but steadily improved. Plus you know, Doug Jones/Lawrence Fishburne as the Surfer. There have been way worse comic book movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I dunno, Michael Chiklis was a damn fine Ben, and Chris Evans was a bit rough in the first movie, but steadily improved. Plus you know, Doug Jones/Lawrence Fishburne as the Surfer. There have been way worse comic book movies. Agreed on the casting, but the direction was just dishwater, and the scripts just bleh. They were just relentlessly mediocre films. All the vision and imagination that went into Spider-man and the X-men films and building their surrounding universes and then there was this, which seemed to be placed in random movie-ville. Nothing about it felt special or unique at all, and if ever a film franchise had to feel larger than life and understanding it was the FF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 But, it's not nearly as dire as it's being painted. There is definitely potential for improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annericelover Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Batman Begins was a great reboot, it re-established the Batman character and told us a story we were only briefly told of in previous incarnations. The Incredible Hulk could have been bought in as a different toned sequel, but with the credit origin sequence it is obvious that its a reboot. The Incredible Hulk was an improvement over The Hulk, but not by much. When I say Superman being rebooted, I mean the reboot they are going for(which now has to be rushed by 2011). Superman Returns was not a reboot, it was a sequel. In my opinion it should have started over again anyway, because of the 19 year gap since the last film. Spider-Man should not rebooted, I mean Spider-Man 3 had a lot of problems with it, but it had established characters and had a story line being built up. Now I hate it when they make a sequel with a new set of actors, but in this case it would have been alright, if it meant we were continuing the story instead of restarting. Look at the The Punisher as another example of reboots gone crazy. The original Dolph Lundgren film was awesome, the remake with Thomas Jane was a lucky shot for them, but than we got The Punisher: War Zone, what the hell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Batman Begins was a great reboot Look at the The Punisher as another example of reboots gone crazy. The original Dolph Lundgren film was awesome, the remake with Thomas Jane was a lucky shot for them, but than we got The Punisher: War Zone, what the hell? These two do not compute. Calling BB "great" while calling the first Punisher film "awesome" does nothing but destroy the credibility of your opinion to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Who are you to question the power of Lundgren? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 He's the goddamn Reddick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Who are you to question the power of Lundgren? I'm the goddamn Reddick. He's the goddamn Reddick. See? Seriously though, the best thing that movie had is one quote spoken by Lundgren that I can listen to my favorite Biohazard song for anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I dunno, Michael Chiklis was a damn fine Ben, and Chris Evans was a bit rough in the first movie, but steadily improved. Plus you know, Doug Jones/Lawrence Fishburne as the Surfer. There have been way worse comic book movies. The first movie was a television pilot on steroids but RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER was light-years ahead of the first one. It was just so refreshing to see a superhero movie where the superheroes were having fun with their powers and being superheroes. Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis hit the perfect notes in the Ben/Johnny relationship. The only thing wrong with the story was plugging Doctor Doom into it. The writers shoulda had the general played by Andre Braugher steal The Surfer's power and go nutso. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 It was just so refreshing to see a superhero movie where the superheroes were having fun with their powers and being superheroes. You mean having Bachelor parties? And a Sue Storm that was nearly Smallville-Lana-Lang-level passive-aggressive? Yeah, that stuff sunk the film for me. Not a great superhero story, and a frustrating personal story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted January 14, 2010 Report Share Posted January 14, 2010 Slightly off topic, but if you want to see what James Cameron's Spider-Man was going to be like, go here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted January 14, 2010 Report Share Posted January 14, 2010 To be fair, Cameron's storyline is not a drastic reach from Sam Raimi's 2002 Spider-Man. But it is edgier. Cameron's Peter Parker steals, kills a criminal (albeit accidentally) and not only does he kiss love interest Mary Jane, he has sex with her. On top of the Brooklyn Bridge Isn't that the bridge Gwen Stacey died on in the comics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted January 14, 2010 Report Share Posted January 14, 2010 To be fair, Cameron's storyline is not a drastic reach from Sam Raimi's 2002 Spider-Man. But it is edgier. Cameron's Peter Parker steals, kills a criminal (albeit accidentally) and not only does he kiss love interest Mary Jane, he has sex with her. On top of the Brooklyn Bridge Isn't that the bridge Gwen Stacey died on in the comics? "Hey, wanna do it where your old girlfriend died?" "Sure." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted January 14, 2010 Report Share Posted January 14, 2010 To be fair, Cameron's storyline is not a drastic reach from Sam Raimi's 2002 Spider-Man. But it is edgier. Cameron's Peter Parker steals, kills a criminal (albeit accidentally) and not only does he kiss love interest Mary Jane, he has sex with her. On top of the Brooklyn Bridge If I remember correctly, that was in the first act also. I've got the script somewhere if anyone wants to read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tnr105 Posted January 14, 2010 Report Share Posted January 14, 2010 To be fair, Cameron's storyline is not a drastic reach from Sam Raimi's 2002 Spider-Man. But it is edgier. Cameron's Peter Parker steals, kills a criminal (albeit accidentally) and not only does he kiss love interest Mary Jane, he has sex with her. On top of the Brooklyn Bridge If I remember correctly, that was in the first act also. I've got the script somewhere if anyone wants to read it. To bad that didn't happen, Kirsten Dunst could have gotten cancer from his radioactive semen and killed off. 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.