[Update: E! Online's Ted Casablanca reports that all talk on Spider-Man 4, as well as 5, is "jumping the gun" according to his sources. He adds that Tobey Maguire has not signed on to return calling the earlier claims "premature." Although it appears Maguire will probably return. - Jamie.]
Despite the fact that it made $900 million, I’ve yet to meet a single person who actually liked Spider-Man 3. Hell, the audience I saw it with went full-on MST3K resulting in huge laughter during the midnight screening.
But since its release, there have been countless rumors regarding the future of the Spider-Man franchise. “Is Tobey Maguire going to stop playing Webhead?” and “What will Sam Raimi’s involvement be… if any?” were among the many questions asked by fanboys across the internet.
Now it looks like plans are under-way to get Webhead’s fourth cinematic outing to the silver screen ASAP.
|
|
According to Nikki Finke over at Deadline Hollywood Daily, Sony has hammered out new deals for director Sam Raimi and star Tobey Maguire to return for Spider-Man 4 among other things.
Even though most people would prefer her non-participation, Sony supposedly “would never recast” Kirsten Dunst as Spidey’s main-squeeze Mary Jane Watson. Although Finke was quick to point out no deal is in place for her yet – this despite the fact that her character will return.
“Once you find out who the villain is, you’ll know who’s playing it” says their source(s) regarding the identity of the next Spider villain. Um, okay. I would assume then they’re referring to Dylan Baker’s Dr. Conners. That’s the Lizard for all of you non-comic book readers out there!
And what about those rumors at the start of the summer of Spider-Man 4 and 5 being filmed concurrently? Apparently, Sony is considering it. While those God-awful Pirates of the Caribbean and Matrix sequels are not the best example of this, it did work for the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
Honestly, I find it hard to believe Sony is willing to fork all that money to Raimi and Maguire considering the reception of 3. I’m sorry, but this franchise needs new blood behind the camera. On the other hand, Jamie Vanderbilt is writing the script – the same guy who penned the most excellent Zodiac, which starred Robert Downey Jr.
Not to mention, Tobey’s getting on up there in years. He’ll be 36 years-old when its released in May 2011. You think he can still effectively play a character whose in his early-20s by then?
And what’s with the sudden “sacred cow” of keeping Kirsten Dunst around when damn-near nobody wants her (or her character) to come back?
I’m pretty iffy about this news, folks. Personally, I’d take it with a grain of salt until we hear something official from Sony.
Spider-Man 4 is currently aiming for a May 2011 release.
Source: Deadline Hollywood Daily
Loading ...
115 Comments
I must apologize or starting this “Glands vs Tech” mess.
your right he just seems a bit smart not very exceptional at all and it would be good to see the intelligent side of peter.
Lol, NeoFcon,,,
Good thread.
@ de ron assis
F.Y.I. he doesn’t make them before he is bitten, he makes them after. He is able to ‘instinctively’ combine the chemical compound after the bite. I like that, Spider-Man having the instinct of a spider, I think it’s awesome!
to each and there own i guess but i just thought somewhere in that long explanation it said he was making this web like material as a young boy maybe not kinda went on a bit so maybe i just maid that up in my head lol
I allways felt they didn’t dwell on the web material because the story was allways bigger,,,
Using some type of technology would ultimately look like a web-gun that would just be another gimmick.
Mutation is Parkers blessing and curse.
(IMO)
exactly
I like the glands idea that the movie took for where his webs come from.I hate the idea that Parker is so brilliant he can invent such stuff,that’s a Batman thing…Batman,no superhero powers…how will he defeat his enemy…just invent a thing that’ll save the day!!!Yeh,very good!!!
No Spidey has to live in the real world..sort of…
Yeah Brave heart has a point. Though I don’t recall moments where batman just whipped something up to beat his enemies in a rematch, nor spiderman.
In a lot of ways, Peter Parker was made as a character who can relate to teens, and I doubt anyone out there is a scientific genius capable of creating adhesive chemicals.
@Neofcon
I take it you’ve never been to a high school science fair.
Vic
Well if you want to approach the subject with science check this article. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/01/0114_050114_tv_spider.html
Or this older article..
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0117_020117TVspidermammals.html
You know it’s interesting to note comparing Spider man stories from the 70’s to todays stories, you have an abundance of stories about genetic engineering. Back then all I can remember is the lizard. Well one thing about the organ plot point is that you don’t get bogged down with showing all the work he would put into it. Additionally it’s been shown his body doesn’t hold an unlimited supply. So as a suspense angle it hasn’t lost anything. In fact it has more potential, because a tech & chemical problem is a matter of money, while a biological problem isn’t so easy to fix. I can think of other excuses to have web shooters and that is to modify the silk in a way his body can’t. Making it more fire retardant for example.
Vic
Most science fairs I have been to only have people who don’t really care about making anything unique and just do it for a grade and nothing more. Thats what i’ve been shown of the realistic aspect of a teenager in high school. they don’t care so their projects show.
Wow, I thought I was cynical.
Vic
I believe Raimi and Sony believed at one point that they were only making 3 spiderman movies. As a result, they were left with too much story & characters to cram into it. I think they would have really been slammed by fans if they had never done venom and it really had been the last film. Even though I’m not a goblin fan, I felt that was the best part of the movie. If they had just stuck with the Peter/Harry/MJ thread, it might have been a lot better. Maybe the only reason they’re pushing for a fourth is because The Dark Knight kicked the crap out of everyone.
Plus who would get such great powers and then think they’re not enough u have to have more different powers,why not then build web bombs and shields it would go on forever and even if you’re a scientist you would be amazed at the fact of something you never thought cool happen has happened.
just imagine incredible hulk in and iron man suit lol
@vic
You have no idea
@Wes
They’ve been planning a fourth way before TDK came out.
Actually, I heard way back that Spiderman was meant to be 5 movies long with Venom being in the last one. But I guess something changed along the way.
Loved Spider-Man 3.
I personally think Spidey 3 was bad compared to 1 & 2 but it was better then alot of crap movies that come out these days.
As for 4&5, im glad there coming out.The first 2 were great.3 was “eh”.Thats only one mess up.If all three were crap, then it would be different.I think Tobey still plays the role good, they just need less mopiness and less of those stupid dancing scenes.As for Kirsten, i dont care for her.Change her or keep her.doesnt matter to me.
And im not sure what 2 villains should be in it.But it better NOT be more then 2.
Oh and in response to the people talking wayy above this comment about TDK having as much mistakes a S-M3…It definitly didnt.The only “mistake” you guys said is that Two-Face was a wasted character…Uh not really.Two-Face was in the movie for at least the last 40 minutes.Venom was in the movie for the last 10 minutes.and he showed for like 5 minutes in the those 10 minutes.Also, i think they fit Two-Face nicely into TDK.If you ask me, he isnt interesting enough to be the villain for a whole movie…Venom should have been saved for Spider-Man 4.He had no reason to appear in 3.
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!