Spider-Man 4 Delayed?

Published 5 years ago by , Updated August 4th, 2013 at 7:45 pm,

Yesterday was quite a day in the world of comic book movies with more viral marketing for Iron Man 2, the Iron Man 2 trailer premiere(!), Bryan Singer revealing that he’s directing X-Men: First Class, Tobey Maguire keeping tight-lipped about the Vulture/Vulturess being the villains of Spider-Man 4, etc.

Now insert this news item: production on Spider-Man 4 is apparently being halted!

Our friends at IESB have the exclusive on the startling news that there are issues behind the scene involving a dispute over what villain(s) should appear in the film and an incomplete script because of it.

Here’s a snippet from IESB’s report:

An inside source working on the project tells IESB that there are some major issues director Sam Raimi is dealing with that include an incomplete script. And why is the script incomplete? Looks like Raimi and the studio heads at Sony Pictures can’t agree upon a villain for the film.

Can’t agree on a villain? what?! That screams studio interference and you know what that means. It’s not like you can just change the name of what’s on paper, the origin, story, dialogue, character interaction all changes if the villain does. Different characters = different movie.

Apparently, Raimi really wants to include Vulture as the main villain, a character he wanted introduced in the last Spidey adventure where he was instead told to (mis)use Venom. Sony, on the other hand, isn’t interested in having that character involved at all. The source says that Sony instead wants to use whatever character is selling best in the books.

After the studio interference helped ruin what we know as Spider-Man 3 with its messy script and forced inclusion of the misused fan-favorite character of Venom, I am very concerned that Spider-Man 4 may be on track to be doomed, not to be overly dramatic.

If the inside source reporting this update is sharing accurate information, I guess when Raimi promised the world that he’d have “full control” over Spider-Man 4, he meant he wasn’t going to have full control over Spider-Man 4.

We’ve gone through rumors of nearly every major Spider-Man villain being a part of the next movie but now, with principal photography planned for a March start, and a release date already set, Sony wants this film to get moving quickly.

IESB also says that there are people involved that are very upset over this so they better sort this out quick and fix the script properly. I’m worried that with the rushed schedule, anger of some involved and the last movie being not good, we may get a very disappointing film again.

I hope that isn’t the case. Spidey deserves better.

What do you think about this?

Spider-Man 4 is scheduled to hit theaters May 5, 2011.

Source: IESB

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


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com 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. Good news. Cancel the whole thing for now.

    Get rid of the god awful cast, remove the used to be talented director, and sort this mess of a franchise out!!!!

  2. Well I wouldn’t be surprised if they go ahead and pick the most popular villain, they did it for Spider-Man 3 and although the quality of the film suffered they probably couldn’t care less because their genius marketing for the movie(I hope their marketing team got promoted) was able to pull out record breaking box office numbers even though it was highly agreeable that the film was sub-par.

    Since it’s the 4th movie I’m surprised that they can’t just let Raimi and everyone else working on the film do their thing while only being picky about the stuff a studio should be concerned and involved in, budgets and pretty much all financial issues. Didn’t Warner Brothers give Christopher Nolan a (reported) $200 million dollar budget and a lot of leeway for his upcoming(and fantastic looking) film Inception after he brought them the great success of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight? I guess Sony doesn’t have the same faith in Sam Raimi which worries me.

  3. Is this really all that surprising though. Especially with the way rumors have gone lately. While i don’t believe studios really read the comments on sites like this one, I am sure they find ways to get the pulse of the fanbase. Why wouldn’t they worry following the last set of rumors. Many were down right pissed about the Vulturess idea and not exactly thrilled about the vulture idea (although most would at least accept him, though not a top choice). I don’t blame the Sony forcing Venom into SM3, they were trying to make the fans happy by including one of, if not the, most popular Spiderman villains. Honestly, from where I sit, if Rami doesn’t want to use the villain that is the choice of Sony, find another director or this will probably be a mess again.

  4. It’s spidey 3 all over again.

  5. i dont care for vulture, but i think it could work. i can only imagine sony wants carnage. i want him too, BUT after venom i dont. i wasnt too worried for a bit, but i am getting more worried with every story now

  6. Stephen

    the marketing team didn’t do anything special for spidey 3. It’s a movie that mostly attracts families with kids are there are billions of them. Kids movies about comic book characters bring in the most money.

  7. Vulture SHOULD have been the villain the past movie. No questions. They coudl have had the whole aging thing going on and had Topher Grace and Thomas Haden Church play the younger/older vulture. It could have been great. Nevertheless I still Vulture is a good candidate for a villain for SPidey 4

  8. This is a very lame problem, if you ask me. As soon as you realize which villains not to use, thinking gets easier. Any villains that are just humans in costumes should be avoided!
    This means stay away from Vulture, Shocker, Mysterio etc. Put more thought into baddies like the Lizard, Electro, Morbius etc.

    And deffinitely use 2 villains! Anyone who thinks having more than one villain is what ruined Spider-man 3 is wrong! That movie suffered for poor writing!

    And please don’t go along with this “Vultress” crap! It’s a horrible idea!

  9. BUD

    Shocker is just Electro-Lite..there really is no difference between the two..they both shock people…

  10. And this is excatley what Raimi meant when he said he didnt have full control of Spidey 3. This is rediculious does Sony not trust Raimi? Didhe not do a good job in Spiderman 1 and 2? Why cant they just give him full control of the film and let him go by what he thinks would work..So what if the Vulture will be the main villian..Guys when Spiderman 1 was being film did any of you have a dispute as to which villian should be in the film? what about when Spiderman 2 was filming was there a dispute there? Not that I remember and thats why the movies came out great..Now about the script..Yes I could understand why the movie would be delayed because Even Sony is disputing over a villain just like we are here..and because of that thats why the script is incomplete because no villian is involved yet in the script.

  11. Come on Sony..dont make the same mistake you made for us fans in Spidey 3 just because you decided to go with a famous comic book villian character. Or just because you thought “a Famous Comic book character means the movie will make bank LETS ADD VENOM in the film”..Please Dont ruin Spidey 4 for us fans just because you decided to go by your own greeds when it comes to ” Now lets see..Hum!.. Now which comic Book villian for Spiderman do we think will make Bank for us at. Sony Productions” Wrong! it doesnt work that way.

  12. I dont think you can build a film around the Vulture and the Vultress sounds even worse. Black Cat and Lizard sound like no brainers. Having said that, Sony should either fire Raimi or get out of the way.

  13. Morbius…Morbius…Morbius…

    Thats all I have to say…

  14. Curt Conners has been in the last two films, so it’s time for that Lizard subplot to bear fruit. Throw in Kraven or even Black Cat and you’re set.

    Screw this Vulture and Vulturess crap.

    Marvel needs to get the Spidey rights back from Sony and start over.

  15. idk M-Cat

    If you take into account the last couple of years, the number of movies that had great trailers but turned out sour are pretty high in volume. But, I think Spider-Man 3 kinda started that trend, at least IMO.

  16. Ditto to Luke and Leia’s Love Child
    Totally what I was going to say. Please sell the rights back to Marvel and let them do it the right way.

  17. How do we even know all this is true? Remember Latino Review saying Tobey Maguire was Bilbo Baggins, remember all the hours of debate, fanboys banging their heads on their keyboards, only to find out the story was a total invention, by someone somewhere, and hey Latino Review gets linked all over the net and shoots up the blogs table. Wowza. But Spider-Man brings in the hits I guess. Do people still believe EVERYTHING they read online?

  18. Agree with you 100% Manowar,

    Yes Morbius and Lizard would make an Awsome combination…Morbius and Lizard Morbius and Lizard all the way.

  19. You’re not gonna get Morbius, enough vampires on film and TV as it is. Sadly, Morbius will be seen as a cash-in and i say that as a fan of the character.

  20. I wish studios would give more freedom to make each sequel to a comic book movie unique. So far none of the Spider-Man movies have even come close to the original (which I didn’t like all that much). I’d rather they make an all-new villain, at least to avoid alot of complaints about how different the character is from the comics.

  21. @David B

    Latino Review has a very long track record of being on the money long before anyone else (including Variety) gets the info.


  22. IF this is true, this doesn’t bode well for SM4. Doesn’t Sony realize that all they really need to do is let Raimi make the movie that he envisions and all they have to do is back up the damn armored car for all the cash that will be flowing towards them. A classic villain almost HAS to be used, whether it’s Vulture, Kraven, Lizard, Electro, etc. To simply use whatever is the most popular villain in the comics NOW is a bad idea. Yeah, you’re trying to make the fanboys happy, but there are PLENTY of people (myself included) that haven’t picked up a comic book in YEARS but still love the characters they remember reading as kids. I bet there are MORE people in that category than there are comic book readers. By sticking with the classics, you have a broader base of fans because even the current readers of the comic books will go see the film. I think Raimi should tell Sony it’s either his way or the highway. IF they blind, then Sony can bring in Bret Ratner to do their bidding and destroy yet another comic franchise. Sony should learn from WB and TDK…let the director do his vision and the money and fans will be there. Give us another SM3 and you’ll never get the fans back.

  23. @ Vic

    Then how do you explain the Maguire/Bilbo fiction? It doesn’t take much to make people wary…

  24. @Manowar, yeah what happened with Morbius?
    Some may see it as a way of tying into the whole “Vampire” craze at the moment but Raimi can make a really gothic film with Morbius and Spider-man.
    Something which was touched upon for a few scenes in part 3.

  25. @ David B,

    We don’t know how valid this is nor how accurate the reasons given are, so we look at it as questions for discussion considering overabundance of villain rumors surrounding the project and the issues Spider-Man 3 was subjected to.

    That being said, the folks at IESB and Latino Review we trust the most.

  26. According to SuperheroHype’s front page, the story isn’t true. Staff are just on hiatus for the holidays.

    I hate to say ‘I told you so’…. but I did….

    That lovely internet, land of truth and reality!

  27. I dont understand what the problem is the studio may have wanted venom in spiderman 3 but it was the way sam raimi used him that ruined that film.These movies are ment to make money we all know that,with a lead villain like the vulture this movie is sure to tank cause hes not as popular so im on the studio’s side here, I dont want a lame ass villain bring the lizard and maybe volure, but please dont let vulture be the only villain,and im sure Raimi was offered full control but im sure with the exception that the he use marketable characters.

  28. @greenknight333 i disagree sir.

    shocker uses a pair of gauntlets he designed with vibro-shock units known as “vibro-smashers”. said Gauntlets projects concentrated vibrational air blasts.
    where as electro does in fact shock people.

  29. @David B

    Sorry, if I wasn’t clear – a long track record of being on the money doesn’t necessarily mean they’re completely right 100% of the time. Over all they are, but sometimes things change behind the scenes.