Sony Exec Talks Spider-Man Reboot

Published 5 years ago by , Updated February 10th, 2012 at 10:14 am,

spider man 3d Sony Exec Talks Spider Man Reboot

Marvel may have a steady line-up of obscure comic-book character film adaptations in the pipeline but that doesn’t mean the studio has forgotten about their original bread and butter – Spider-Man.

On Wednesday, Matt Tolmach, president of Columbia Pictures, was featured in an article over at The Hollywood Reporter – discussing the direction of the upcoming Spider-Man reboot as well as the responsibility filmmakers should have to good storytelling:

“Moviemakers are in “a golden moment of technology,” with 3D and various other digital techniques at their disposal. “With great power comes great responsibility, and we have to always fall back on great storytelling,” he said.

Tolmach also said he’s excited but nervous about his company’s upcoming Spider-man reboot, which he described as “Peter Parker told differently.” He promised it will look, feel and smell different from the three films starring Tobey Maguire.

“We’re humbled by it,” he said.”

It’s reassuring to hear that Sony understands the responsibility they have in regards to rebooting the franchise – especially when the statements are sprinkled with canonical Spider-Man wisdom. Knowing that Sony is taking the film seriously, instead of just scrambling for a cash grab, makes it easier to accept that a reboot is the best venue for another Spider-Man story.

There’s no doubt that most of us enjoyed Raimi’s take on Spidey but every franchise can benefit from new views and ideas. It keeps everything fresh – and let’s face it, Spider-Man 3 was a retread of many ideas already explored in the first two films. Whether or not the fault belonged to Raimi or Columbia Pictures is up for debate but, either way, Spider-Man would have suffered the most had the fourth film failed to inject new energy into the franchise.

ultimate spider man poster Sony Exec Talks Spider Man Reboot

Tomach didn’t offer any details on the script or potential villains – so, maybe John Malkovich can still climb into some Vulture tights? So long as those Vulture tights are on par with Spidey’s.

In addition to Tolmach, Producer Avi Arad , as well as Thomas Tull, CEO of Legendary Pictures, were also featured in the article – speaking about the strength of video games as a source material for films, the evolution of animation as a storytelling platform, and the difficulty of marketing American superheroes to Japan audiences.

What would you like to see in the Spider-Man reboot? How do you feel about Tomach’s comments?

The Spider-Man reboot is scheduled for a tentative July 3, 2012 release.

Source: THR

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I'd like to make it painfully clear that I did not enjoy Sam Raimi's take on Spiderman. This is one reboot I am 100% behind.

  2. It would be great if they recast the leads, kept in-continuity with Raimi's first two Spider-Man films and retconned Spider-Man 3 into oblivion. In other words, make an alternative sequel to Spider-Man 2 which doesn't suck, and has better casting.

    I really believe that that would be the best way for this series to proceed, but sadly casual audiences are probably too stupid to understand such a semi-reboot…

  3. Not an origin story. Most people know how he gets his powers even in the ultimate spiderman comics. So do a brief intro showing how this version of spidey gets his powers and move on. Also give us a villain we havnt seen yet like the lizard or electro. Not a different on take on the green goblin please!!!!

  4. I liked the first two movies, but I agree with you on the reboot.

  5. I welcome the reboot … for now … but please, please, bring back Spidey's wit, sarcasm and bad guy, rage-inducing banter. It was sorely missing in the Raimi films.

  6. I am a huge Spider-Man fanboy, (which as my avatar shows is more literal than I would perfer) I am very hesitant to welcome this reboot with open arms. I am excited that certain things can be redone in the correct way (cough Gwen Stacy death Bridge scene) And I am excited to have a new look at the Green goblin and other fan favorites… Stan Lee help me if they try And Tackle Venom any time soon.
    But I fear that the recent trend of selling to the “Twi-hard generation” (Twilght Hard core fans) will lead to a convoluted story involving an ill begotten romance with Morbious (Shudder) or perish the thought John Jamesons “Man-wolf” and Felisha Hardy…

  7. I completely agree, I think Electro would be a fantastic villain, I would like to see Lizard but I think they will avoid that character due to the three film subtext with Doc Connor…

  8. Dr.Sam

    you would rather have a spiderman movie series that resembles Twilight without vampires? oh wait, if morbius is in it then it will be Twilight.

  9. Twilight Spider-Man… that's the route they're taking. They're trying to make Spider-Man for cheap and charge twice as much for 3D. It's not going to work.

  10. Not if it's a cheap reboot which is what they're going for. $80 million. That's like a tv movie.

  11. we can write all we want, but there is only one agenda here and that one is sony's.

  12. Hellboy 2 was 80 million and District 9 even less. Regardless of budget, I'm seeing it because I think a reboot is very proper since they completely destroyed Venom and screwed up a good closing movie (Matrix all over again). Plus it's base is going to be based on my favorite Spider-Man stories of the Ultimates.

  13. Electro could be a good side villain Spider-Man takes down easy then in a later movie he's busted out so he and the other villains can finally form the Sinister Six (not Sinister Five while making Spider-Man the sixth in the Ultimates). Someone like Venom or Ock should go first. (So later they can finally make the Venom movie off this movie.)

  14. I've posted a number of times why I didn't like Sam Raimi's Spiderman. IMHO, he achieved a great aesthetic for those films, a great supporting cast, but that's it.

    Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst were proportionately miscast and acted nothing like their comic book counterparts.

    Tobey Maguire had never even read a Spiderman comic book nor was he interested in them as a kid, and it really showed in his wooden mediocre performance.

    He was merely acting to a script with no real knowledge of the character at all. The Green Goblin Power Ranger was simply just CRAP!

    Spiderman 2 for me was probably the only redeemable film in the franchise.

    Overall I felt the films lacked real dramatic substance and weren't as realistic, as mature, or as entertaining as the books.

    And yes for all my criticisms I realize adaptations are going to be somewhat different but Sam Raimi's version of Spiderman had many flaws and was more of a big budget cartoon. It did not leave a lasting impression at all.

    I too at first welcomed a reboot until it became obviously clear it was going down the “Ultimate” / “Twilight” Spider-Teen route.

    Sony are only in it for the money and just like Fox have no integrity, creativity or respect for the original mainstream source material when handling MARVEL property. They are blatantly targeting the teen market.

    If Sony executives had any semblance of etiquette, humbleness or decency, they would initiate talks with MARVEL and offer them the opportunity to buy back the film rights to Spiderman.

    Only then in the hands of MARVEL STUDIOS will we eventually get to see a FAITHFUL and ACCURATE film about Peter Parker the MAN and his alter ego The Amazing Spider-MAN.

  15. Budget is completely irelevant. District 9 was made for $30 million, and if you look towards TV, look at the production values on somehting like 24, it looks better than most movies and they make 24 episodes for a fraction of this proposed Spiderman budget.

  16. Absolutely, Spidey's sarcastic nature is a huge part of the comics, and the 90's animated series which I love. It being missing from the first 3 films showed me that Raimi just didnt get the character at all.

  17. @ Dr SamBeckett
    @ INK

    You're both 100% spot on.

    Anyone who reads the original and best Spiderman comic book series “The Amazing Spiderman” knows that Spidey's sarcastic nature is integral to the character and truly embedded within his persona.

    I've just read issues #618 & 619. Very entertaining. Mysterio, Silvermane, The Maggia, & Mr Negative. And of course Peter's wit and sarcasm is very much intact.

    Far better than the sap Sam Raimi brought to the screen.

  18. You could also add “Sin City” which I believe was made on a budget of $40 million. It can certainly be done. I”m just not at all keen on the “Ultimate” Spider-teen approach.

  19. The problem with reusing Doc Ock or Venom or even Goblin that they will all be hailed as retreads and the studio is unlikely to take that risk.

  20. personally i liked all the spider-man films except 3. he should've kept spiderman sarcacism but he still did good. tobey maguire seemed good for the part it just wouldn't be the same getting somebody else to play spider-man. if your going to do a reboot don't make it cartoonish. i think they should use either shocker or vulture.

  21. I disagree. If they put Venom in another Spider-Man movie, he deserves to be the only villain. And that movie has to be real scary and frightening, like the comics used to be…

  22. Why do we think it is going the “Twilight” route? just because they are casting teens to play the part of <gasp> teens?

    It works in Spectacular (TV) and it works/worked, only read the first series, in the Ultimate Universe. It can work on film without being Twilightish.

    I dont know the “deal” Sony has. However did you ever think Marvel has leaned on them a little saying you need to go in this direction to keep in line with what we are doing with all of our other characters. Which from all appearances leans toward the Ultimate Universe.

    If Marvel had the rights I would almost guess they would be doing the same thing. As Spiderman is tied to Captain America as they are tied to Nick Fury etc. That is if you have read the books.

    While I love the real universe the Ultimate Universe… if I dare say is more believable and probably translates to the screen better. It runs parallel with the mainstream Universe so to non comic fans doesnt seem that far off.

    I think it can and will work using teenage Parker, Esp if Bendis still sneaks around giving adivce.

    ***Sorry Mike didnt mean to reply to you… ****

  23. Aknot,

    It feels like, imo, that they are going the Twilight route. Not because they are teens, but because Twilight made a ton of money, this is Sony and Fox were talking about, and because the studio has disappointed us in the past. I could be totally wrong of course.

  24. Well (and no I havent seen or read them) I am trying to figure out (besides the “teens”) what everyone is relating to.

    Are you saying it will be “sappy” and dumbed down? Corny? Im trying to understand Spiderman as Twilightish while only knowing about twilight from clips and write ups.

    I mean I dont care if Spidey is chasing two skirts and having acne problems…. Actually that is the core of Spiderman he has real issues. He doesnt fit in, picked on, etc yet his alter ego is the fan of millions (cept the police and JJJ)

  25. Going the “Twilight” route, to me at least, means getting actors who get kids and teens to the theater because of their looks and not their acting chops. If they get some kid to be Peter Parker who can't act but is good looking then you know they are going in the “Twilight” direction.

  26. Hi Aknot,

    I guess you were replying to me. :-) Look I know I rant and rave about certain opinions I have and maybe I tend to over analyze things, but I can't help but have a preference for the original “Amazing Spiderman” comic book series.

    I've been reading MARVEL comics since I was a kid in the mid seventies and I have almost acquired the entire run of “Amazing Spiderman” as well as building up on many other titles. It bemuses me that so many people are taken with the “Ultimate” universe.

    I mean I've purchased the “Ultimate” series as well and yeah it's good, but I don't think it's that great or better than the original MARVEL universe. As far as being more believable and translating better on screen? I disagree.

    There's plenty of realism, action, seriousness, maturity, sophistication, fun and adventure in the original MARVEL universe and especially in “Amazing Spiderman”. If a screenplay is well written, directed and acted, it will translate as believable on screen regardless of which universe it comes from.

    I really do hope this reboot works, and then moves on to Peter in college and into adulthood, but I have my doubts because of Sony's involvement.

    At the end of the day, I realize I'm probably in the minority, but I simply want to see a mature film about Peter Parker the MAN and his alter ego Spider-MAN. I don't think it's too much to hope for. :-)

  27. We are probably about the same age then as I was reading at about the same time and my run was pretty complete until the need to sell them came about… :(

    Anyho.. 😀

    I guess im not saying YES do Ultimate. However it appears they have already made that decision so instead of speaking out against it I have embraced it. The unique side “we” have as comic lovers is we can envision the Spiderman they are eluding to.

    Now had they said we are going back to Lee/Ditko I wouldny have minded either. Now if the first villian was GG then I would start to groan. As that has been done before.

    There are many ways to tell the story of Spiderman. His “story” is not so convoluted that Ultimate wouldnt work, a “girl” wouldnt work, an African American etc.

    I just wish and hope when the final credits roll they created a movie worthy of the Spiderman mythos.

    As for the definition of “Twilightish”. Yes if they get no name “pretty” actors that cant act then I will be upset. If they get pretty actors that can act with a good/great story I wont care at all. As long as it all comes togehter at the end.

    Maybe I should watch Twilight. My wife has it and I hink I have teased her long enough about it, that maybe I should suffer through it so I can make more fun of it?

  28. gah cant edit for some reason typos abound and I didnt address my realism comment.

    Let me rephrase that. The public that goes to see it will believe it to be more real instead of rehashing the same story over again OR trying to tie into the Universe that was created by Raimi.

    I think if you attempt to start from the same mold (Lee/Ditko) of Raimi I think you will get more “been there done thats” then if you take it off on a different (Ultimates) path.

    Try explaining Ultimates and Lee/Ditko to the people that only know THE Spiderman. While similar there is enough diffference to pique curiosity ESPECIALLY if you are using no names in your flagship vehicle. Granted im sure there will be one or two big names to grace this but I beleive they will be a small reoccruing spot or a build up for a big villian reveal.

  29. If this reboot franchise does get off the ground and it turns out to be decent, I hope they introduce the Green Goblin and Doc Ock without showing their origins, and just assume that the audience is familiar with them. That way they could use old villains in entirely new storylines and it could hardly be called a 'retread'.