It's all over the internet that Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are coming back for Spider-Man 4 and 5.
I really like Spider-Man 1, and I loved Spider-Man 2, but I couldn't bring myself to spend money on Spider-Man 3. There were just too many villains, too much melodrama, and too much well.... too much. They seemed to have lost interest in the story and the characters and were just going to cram in as much as they
could cram in to please everyone, but ended up pleasing almost no one.
As usual there are reports, rumours, and running stories. Some are theorizing that Dr. Curt Connors (Dylan Baker) will be turning into The Lizard, and others are speculating that Gerard Butler could come in as Kraven the Hunter. Peter Parker's scientific mentor turns into a sewer dwelling monster, terrorizes the city, Kraven comes in to hunt the Lizard, but also sets his sights on Spider-Man, and on jumping Mary Jane's bones. The script practically writes itself.
But that's just speculating.
Now one of the more concrete reports is that they will shoot 4 & 5 back to back. I support that idea. It'll save money, and more importantly time. Tobey Maguire's getting a little long in the tooth to play the early 20something Peter Parker, and it's getting harder to accept that blank look on his face as wide-eyed innocence than it used to be.
Plus it will give the writer the bigger canvas to work with. Instead of cramming in villains and sub-plots like there was no tomorrow, or no sequel, he can segue more smoothly between villains. Spider-Man 3 probably would have worked better narratively if they had held out on Venom until Spider-Man 4.
They should have had Peter Parker dealing with Sandman, the Harry Osborne problem, and the "symbiote" suit only, without Venom. At least not until the very end, when Peter breaks free from the symbiote, only for it to be found by Eddie Brock who then becomes Venom as the film fades to black. Then you have the Venom origin done with, and #4 can jump right into the action, and the fanboys would have been drooling in anticipation.
But that's just my inner know it all speaking.
I wish them luck, and I hope that with a two-pic deal in place, they aim more for the quality that made the first two films so memorable, and wrap up this iteration of the franchise with a bang.
What do you think?
I really like Spider-Man 1, and I loved Spider-Man 2, but I couldn't bring myself to spend money on Spider-Man 3. There were just too many villains, too much melodrama, and too much well.... too much. They seemed to have lost interest in the story and the characters and were just going to cram in as much as they
could cram in to please everyone, but ended up pleasing almost no one.As usual there are reports, rumours, and running stories. Some are theorizing that Dr. Curt Connors (Dylan Baker) will be turning into The Lizard, and others are speculating that Gerard Butler could come in as Kraven the Hunter. Peter Parker's scientific mentor turns into a sewer dwelling monster, terrorizes the city, Kraven comes in to hunt the Lizard, but also sets his sights on Spider-Man, and on jumping Mary Jane's bones. The script practically writes itself.
But that's just speculating.
Now one of the more concrete reports is that they will shoot 4 & 5 back to back. I support that idea. It'll save money, and more importantly time. Tobey Maguire's getting a little long in the tooth to play the early 20something Peter Parker, and it's getting harder to accept that blank look on his face as wide-eyed innocence than it used to be.
Plus it will give the writer the bigger canvas to work with. Instead of cramming in villains and sub-plots like there was no tomorrow, or no sequel, he can segue more smoothly between villains. Spider-Man 3 probably would have worked better narratively if they had held out on Venom until Spider-Man 4.
They should have had Peter Parker dealing with Sandman, the Harry Osborne problem, and the "symbiote" suit only, without Venom. At least not until the very end, when Peter breaks free from the symbiote, only for it to be found by Eddie Brock who then becomes Venom as the film fades to black. Then you have the Venom origin done with, and #4 can jump right into the action, and the fanboys would have been drooling in anticipation.
But that's just my inner know it all speaking.
I wish them luck, and I hope that with a two-pic deal in place, they aim more for the quality that made the first two films so memorable, and wrap up this iteration of the franchise with a bang.
What do you think?
I remember hearing at some point that putting Venom in was a decision made by the higher-ups at Sony, or some such thing, that Raimi disagreed with. Dunno if it's true or not, but if so, it shows in the movie. I wanted to like it, but it was just all over the place.
ReplyDeleteHopefully, restraint would be shown in future releases. Unlike many geeks I know, I'm not jumping off Raimi's fanwagon just because of one 'okay' movie in his pretty damn good career.
'The Dark Knight' has become the benchmark for All comic book movies to reach now for me. And as much as I like Zack Synder for doing '300' and was looking forward to the soon to be released 'Watchmen'.. if 20th gets it's house in order. I'll always be comparing it to the majesty of TDK.
ReplyDeleteSpider-Man too will fall under my consideration for a Adult movie, rather than the fan boyish and children audience it'll try to reach.
I expect to be disappointed.