Holy Cows Spiderman 4 Canned, Raimi/Maguire Quit

BreakABone · 01-11-2010, 01:35 PM

So latest word is that Raimi has quit directorial duties on Spiderman 4 since he could not film a movie in the time that Sony wanted so now Maguire and the cast is out, and Sony will focus on a reboot in 2012.

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/ur...eboot-planned/

Quote:

Mike Fleming and I have just confirmed that Sony Pictures decided today to reboot the Spider-Man franchise after franchise director Sam Raimi pulled out of Spider-Man 4 because he felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity. This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out. There will be no Spider-Man 4. Instead, Mike Fleming is told, the studio will focus on a Summer 2012 reboot from a script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast. All this took place today at meeting on the lot today.

Vampyr · 01-11-2010, 04:12 PM

Sweet.

BreakABone · 01-12-2010, 11:43 AM

Here's some details on what Spiderman 4 would have been and what let's call it the Amazing SPiderman will be.

Quote:

Spider-Man 4:
-Peter and MJ have a baby
-The villains would have been the Vulture (apparently the new editor of the Daily Bugle?), the Black Cat (later retooled into the "Vulturess" at the studio's request), and possibly a third villain
-Script was even worse than Spider-Man 3's
-Anne Hathaway was gone from the project late last year (which is probably what spurned Sony into changing Black Cat into Vulturess)

I don't know if ever posted news on the Vulturess on the forum, but I thought that was a terrible idea when it was leaked a couple of months ago. I never get the need to create characters (Especially major ones) in a series that has so many villains, secondary characters to pull from.

The baby didn't help Superman Returns and it wouldn't have helped this movie.

Quote:

Reboot:
-Apparently much better than the SM4 script
-Already finished, completed at the same time as SM4 as a contingency plan in case Raimi walked
-Described as more TDK than Spider-Man, with none of the "fluff" (whatever that may mean)
-The reboot is the first part in a new trilogy

No one is going to say the movie they are currently filming is much worse than the one they canned so that's just dumb.

And I REALLY REALLY hope people get the essence of Spider-man this is like the 3rd reference I've seen to it being darker, and I just don't like it. Spiderman isn't dark, hell the guy wears red and blue, don't turn him into Batman because it did so well.

Also on a slightly related note, some of you may have known that James Cameron originally had a treatment for Spiderman way back in the early 90s before the series got tangled in legal mess, I'm not sure what ever happened to it, but I know that some of it was absolved into the Raimi films such as organic webbing.

Teuthida · 01-12-2010, 11:59 AM

Darker? No fluff? Spider-man is basically a young Woody Allen with spider powers.

I don't get it. Every time a studio executive makes changes the movie suffers. They never learn.

Bube · 01-12-2010, 03:01 PM

Gamespot says that this frees up the director for Warcraft movie.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6245223.html

Swan · 01-12-2010, 11:21 PM

I heard the script Cameron had for Spider-man was ridiculous. Though he had wanted Arnold to play Doc Ock

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_s...s-cameron.html

Angrist · 01-14-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bube

Gamespot says that this frees up the director for Warcraft movie.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6245223.html

Ehm, is that a good thing?

They're using real actors instead of going CGI.

The Germanator · 01-14-2010, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angrist

Ehm, is that a good thing?

They're using real actors instead of going CGI.

That's the best thing I've heard in a while. Though I am very anti-CGI in general.

Bube · 01-15-2010, 08:13 AM

Actually, I'd prefer CGI as well. If they made it anything like the intro videos for the Warcraft games..ohhhh..

The Germanator · 01-15-2010, 09:25 AM

Well, I guess i should clarify. I'm in favor of "tasteful" CGI. I guess the technology is getting better, so this should be easier to do, but so many times CGI is overused when a puppet or something could have been more interesting.

Vampyr · 01-18-2010, 04:18 PM

So apparently Robert Pattinson (Edward Cullen from Twilight) is our new Spiderman.

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0730373/

Fox 6 · 01-18-2010, 06:53 PM

So spidey is going to sparkle in the sun?

EDIT: Wait, wait, wait. look at the date. Are you telling me you fell for an almost year old April Fools joke?

The Germanator · 01-18-2010, 07:02 PM

That is an old article, but that rumor still holds true apparently.

http://www.starpulse.com/news/index....ay_spider_man_

TheSlyMoogle · 01-19-2010, 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Germanator

That is an old article, but that rumor still holds true apparently.

http://www.starpulse.com/news/index....ay_spider_man_

Yeah that's because a lot of media outlets were playing off that article.

Lol.

Fuck though, if any one of those twilight pussies makes it into spiderman I wont go see it.

I'm hoping for an entirely new cast, hoping some young actor starts his career off this movie or something. Maybe a new actress for Mary Jane. Hopefully later on, some nice beefy dude to play venom, you know someone who isn't fucking topher grace? Amirite?

BreakABone · 01-19-2010, 12:21 PM

http://blog.seattlepi.com/people/archives/191446.asp

So seems like the top two choices so far are Pattinson or Efron, and both would be terrible choices IMO.

So it seems like sony is willing to take a gamble and get the female population to see their movie, but at the same time alienate the huge male audience that saw the first three movies.