Spider-Man rebooted !

JayB said:
I agree. Sam Raimi always said his movies were based on the 60s version. I'm glad the new director is younger and knows the modern comics better.
Click to expand...

why would he have made a movie based on the 60s version???
that never made sense to me
 
monoxide_child said:
why would he have made a movie based on the 60s version???
that never made sense to me
Click to expand...

Because that's what he grew up with and that's what he liked. I can't believe Sony went along with it but whatever, at least they are trying to fix that mistake now. That's also why he didn't want Venom in the third one, since Venom wasn't in the 60's comics, but Sony insisted so he shoehorned him in and killed him off. Such bullshit.
 
JayB said:
Because that's what he grew up with and that's what he liked. I can't believe Sony went along with it but whatever, at least they are trying to fix that mistake now. That's also why he didn't want Venom in the third one, since Venom wasn't in the 60's comics, but Sony insisted so he shoehorned him in and killed him off. Such bullshit.
Click to expand...

Sandman was Raimi's idea
the one-armed guy that you see in the first 2 (peter parker's college proffessor) was going to try to grow his missing arm back and turn himself into the person-sized lizard in the 5th movie of sony's 6 picture deal, that's what sony wanted, that's the whole freaking reason the one armed guy is in the first 2 movies to begin with, and the one armed guy being pete's college proffessor was going to be used to explain why spiderman is the person who stops the lizard's rampage, as opposed to any other superpowered hero, when sony signed the 6-picture deal with marvel, they were going to limit themselves to just 1 supervillian per movie, with norman osborn being the first goblin in the 1st move, doctor octopus in the 2nd movie, harry becoming the second goblin for the 3rd movie, venom in the 4th movie, the one-armed guy turning into the lizard in the 5th movie and the last movie being carnage, when Marvel gave Sony permission to use multiple villians in one movie, they wrote the lizard into the 3rd movie instead of the 5th, with a big fight scene where the lizard and venom are trying to kill each other, Raimi changed the lizard into Sandman at the last possible second, Sony let him do it, cuz they still had 3 more movies they could fit lizard into, Sony then wrote a huge special effect, lengthy scene of Sandman and Venom trying to kill each other, but Raimi said he wouldn't film that, then Raimi inserted the whole Sandman's backstory into the movie, and that's why Sony fired him from the franchise, Sony's putting Lizard into this re-boot because they had already planned on having the lizard in a spiderman movie all the way back when they put the one armed guy in the background of the very first spiderman movie
 
From what I had heard, in Raimi's Spider-Man 4, it was going to be John Malkovich as the Vulture and Anne Hathaway as the Vulturess. No, I'm not kidding. I'm glad they took the franchise away from that guy, he obviously had no clue what he was doing anymore. And yeah, at least the lizard is finally in this one.
 
monoxide_child said:
Sandman was Raimi's idea
the one-armed guy that you see in the first 2 (peter parker's college proffessor) was going to try to grow his missing arm back and turn himself into the person-sized lizard in the 5th movie of sony's 6 picture deal, that's what sony wanted, that's the whole freaking reason the one armed guy is in the first 2 movies to begin with, and the one armed guy being pete's college proffessor was going to be used to explain why spiderman is the person who stops the lizard's rampage, as opposed to any other superpowered hero, when sony signed the 6-picture deal with marvel, they were going to limit themselves to just 1 supervillian per movie, with norman osborn being the first goblin in the 1st move, doctor octopus in the 2nd movie, harry becoming the second goblin for the 3rd movie, venom in the 4th movie, the one-armed guy turning into the lizard in the 5th movie and the last movie being carnage, when Marvel gave Sony permission to use multiple villians in one movie, they wrote the lizard into the 3rd movie instead of the 5th, with a big fight scene where the lizard and venom are trying to kill each other, Raimi changed the lizard into Sandman at the last possible second, Sony let him do it, cuz they still had 3 more movies they could fit lizard into, Sony then wrote a huge special effect, lengthy scene of Sandman and Venom trying to kill each other, but Raimi said he wouldn't film that, then Raimi inserted the whole Sandman's backstory into the movie, and that's why Sony fired him from the franchise, Sony's putting Lizard into this re-boot because they had already planned on having the lizard in a spiderman movie all the way back when they put the one armed guy in the background of the very first spiderman movie
Click to expand...

Holy run-on sentence Batman! Thanks for the info, but damn, throw a period in there man!
 
JayB said:
From what I had heard, in Raimi's Spider-Man 4, it was going to be John Malkovich as the Vulture and Anne Hathaway as the Vulturess. No, I'm not kidding. I'm glad they took the franchise away from that guy, he obviously had no clue what he was doing anymore. And yeah, at least the lizard is finally in this one.
Click to expand...

Sony wanted the 4th movie to have a "sexy female villian"
Raimi got himself fired, partially because Raimi and the studio argued over exactly who the female villian was going to be
at one point the sexy villian was going to be felicia hardy, the black cat

http://www.google.com/search?source...=1T4ADFA_enUS439US440&q=black+cat+spiderman+4
 
JayB said:
From what I had heard, in Raimi's Spider-Man 4, it was going to be John Malkovich as the Vulture and Anne Hathaway as the Vulturess. No, I'm not kidding. I'm glad they took the franchise away from that guy, he obviously had no clue what he was doing anymore. And yeah, at least the lizard is finally in this one.
Click to expand...

vulture and vulturess being on the big screen???
that would look stupid no matter what actor/actress/director was doing it
also
anne hathaway being any female supervillian in any superhero movie would suck
 
I'm never going to blame the Spider-Man movies on Sam Raimi. Did any of you see fucking Evil Dead 2? You do know you woudn't know Bruce Campbell if it wasn't for Evil Dead right? RITE?!

I'm totally convinced he got pushed around by the hollywood machine. My guess is that he WANTED to get fired so they would break the contract and he wouldn't face legal action.
 
First time I saw Evil Dead II I hadn't appreciated that it wasn't a "serious" film.
Was left very confused, thought it was just a case of BBC level sci-fi/horror fail.
 
Sloan said:
I'm never going to blame the Spider-Man movies on Sam Raimi. I'm totally convinced he got pushed around by the hollywood machine. My guess is that he WANTED to get fired so they would break the contract and he wouldn't face legal action.
Click to expand...

ignoring everything that i posted in THIS thread, this might make sense,
except
Raimi knew upfront that Sony's deal with Marvel was for 6 seperate spiderman movies, and Raimi was already friends with Toby Maguire before anyone was casted for the first film
Raimi didn't merely get fired from just 1 film, he lost the ability to direct 3 films!!!
why the fucking hell would he have purpously done that, doesn't it make more sense that Raimi accidently got himself fired and that someone other than Raimi decided that Sony should make a second triligy instead of a Six-Movie-Franchise???

THE FOLLOWING WAS ADDED AFTER I INITIALLY POSTED THIS^^^ 45 MIN AGO

the "avoiding legal action" thing doesn't really make sense
if Sony tried to sue Raimi, they wouldn't really have a leg to stand on, becase Raimi had directed the first 2 financially successful spiderman movies, if Sony had made 3 spiderman movies with 3 different directors and then the 3rd one made less than either of the first 2, then Sony could (and definately would) sue the director of the 3rd movie for making them have a crappy movie, but because Raimi directed the first 2 hugely financially successful movies, Raimi could acctually sue Sony for the 3rd one being crap, but only if he had officially quit the franchise as opposed to being fired from the franchise, and as someone working in the entertainment industry, i can't imagine Raimi quiting a project before having a new one lined up, what has Raimi done since spiderman 3? anything? i'm actually asking, has Raimi actually done anything since spiderman 3?
 
monoxide_child said:
what has Raimi done since spiderman 3? anything? i'm actually asking, has Raimi actually done anything since spiderman 3?
Click to expand...

Drag Me To Hell. A fucking GREAT black humour comedy with one of the best ending scenes ever filmed. You see right away that Raimi is much more confortable doing his shit with a small crew instead of a huge hollywood family blockbuster.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1
didn't realize that drag me to hell was Raimi
2
and really just from the first 2 alone, i would say Raimi shoudn't be the guy directing Spiderman movies
3
i think Raimi could do an really freaking awesome huge-budget-hollywood-movie, if it's NOT a superhero movie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JayB
The Amazing Spider-Man
Replies
29
Views
2K
Bar
JayB
J
crillemannen
Crane Song Spider Summing test
Replies
3
Views
2K
F.O.H.
Mikaël-ange
M
T
Someone else agrees Spiderman was overrated.....
Replies
248
Views
20K
Anthrax
monoxide_child
M
T
O/T: Aeroshit to do Spiderman theme! I think this sucks ....
Replies
2
Views
372
Anthrax
nafnikufesin
N
Odysseus
Spider Man 2
Replies
127
Views
11K
Symphony X (Unofficial)
monoxide_child
M
Top Bottom
Back