Spiderman 2012 - Reboot? Already??

Gothmog

Lieutenant of Morgul
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
12
Is it just me, or does it seem a little bit too early to reboot the Spiderman movies??

I mean, there was a seven year difference between the Burton-Schumacher Batman franchises (Batman & Robin) and the current one starting with Batman Begins.
 

Devil's Advocate

I lie. A lot. Honest!
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
716
Location
Here and there. Mostly there.
I think they desperately need a change, considering how terrible the last one was. In fact, initially, Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi had even gone on record as saying they were done with the franchise, and were looking forward to doing other things.

That was before they realised nobody gave a damn about them outside of the Spider-man universe.
 

TheBean

Science fiction fantasy
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
15
I think with The Dark Night the landscape just changed again. Spiderman seems tame compared to Heath ledgers amazing Joker performance. Oh, that and the fact that studios know it will make loads of money.
 

Starbeast

Benevolent Galaxy Being
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
5,031
Location
Illinois
Spiderman Rebooted and the way things are in real life.

I thought that the DARK KNIGHT film should have been rated "R", it bothered me that very young kids were watching this violent movie. It seems that people want more violent characters in films than a good script, that's why I didn't like the latest Batman movie. I do like the Spiderman series, but changes are always made in film series, and some actors only want to do things only once, like Val Kilmer as Batman or Liam Neeson as Darkman.

But at times even the producers of the movies want certain things added to the film because they like to show images that they feel strongly about, that's what ruined the second Fantastic Four film. Even Mel Gibson was asked by movie company bigshots to make a religous film and lie about events in history, then say to everyboby that it was 100% true! So he told them to go **** themselves and they told him that they would make sure that his career in movies is over, and those rotton movie executives succeeded, now Mr Gibson is going back to Australia.

Well anyway, hopefully the new Spiderman film will be good, sometimes change is good, but not when studio bigshots warp a movie to what they want you to see. They think we're all weak-minded people that will enjoy anything gross, sexy and violent without a well written script, it's all about money to them, cause that's all they really care about.
 

FeedMeTV

The Fifth Member of SG-1
Joined
Jan 22, 2001
Messages
919
I've just seen that Martin Sheen is joining the cast as Peter Parker's uncle and Sally Field could potentially be Aunt May.

The film is scheduled for release July 3rd 2012.

I agree that it seems really rather early for a remake of Spiderman but they did it for the Incredible Hulk and that worked out pretty well. I wonder how similar it will end up being? I'm not familiar with the comic or how closely the first Spiderman film stuck to the plot.
 

Allanon

High Druid
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
381
Location
Alnwick, England
Re: Spiderman Rebooted and the way things are in real life.

1. I do like the Spiderman series, but changes are always made in film series, and some actors only want to do things only once, like Val Kilmer as Batman or Liam Neeson as Darkman.

2. Even Mel Gibson was asked by movie company bigshots to make a religous film and lie about events in history, then say to everyboby that it was 100% true! So he told them to go **** themselves and they told him that they would make sure that his career in movies is over, and those rotton movie executives succeeded, now Mr Gibson is going back to Australia.
Star, can i pick up on a couple of points here:

1. Darkman? What film is this from? I don't have the best memory. Also I'm glad it was only one Batman film for Val Kilmer, he's rubbish!!

2. And Mel Gibson, as entertaining as he is, has basically made his whole career out of taking historical events, falsifying them and making them seem true! Braveheart, The Patriot, Passion Of Christ, Apocalypto etc....
Not that the films aren't entertaining ( Passion Of Christ being the exception) but that's what he did. Him having another mental breakdown is what caused him his career, not the studios.

Sorry Star, not trying to pick buddy. Dont take it to heart.

And for Spidey, I'd like to see a new one but a bit edgier. and maybe have him make the webbing as it does in the Comics to show how much of a genius he is.
 

Cayal

The Immortal Prince
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
1,945
Location
Tartarus
I think they desperately need a change, considering how terrible the last one was. In fact, initially, Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi had even gone on record as saying they were done with the franchise, and were looking forward to doing other things.

That was before they realised nobody gave a damn about them outside of the Spider-man universe.
Raimi had Spiderman 4 written and ready to go before Sony decided to reboot it.
 

THX-1138

Sith Lord
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
125
Do you guys think Andrew Garfield will make an appearance in Avengers? That'd be awesome. I doubt it though. He could have a starring role in Avengers two, when his Spiderman is a well-established character.
 

Jammill Khursheed

Smell your own dam finger
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
146
THX-1138 - I don't see that happening for a number of reasons, firstly because Spiderman was only ever in with the east-coast Avengers, and you couldn't just drop him in it without having Daredevil and at least some of the X-Men, and maybe even the fantastic four (and they already stole one of them to be Captain America, can't have Chris Evans being Captain America AND the Human Torch in the same film.)

Secondly, Spiderman isn't part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe or MCU (search for 'Marvel Cinematic Universe' on wikipedia for more info) and hasn't been wired into that set-up from the beginning like the others have.

Thirdly, and most importantly, Spiderman is made by SONY, not Marvel films, and all the films in the MCU (and the ones planned around other Avengers-centric characters that are being discussed) are made by Marvel films.

It would be super-cool though, no pun intended. Imagine them moving on from that and doing the civil-war with Hugh Jackman's wolverine staring down Robert Downey Jnr's Tony Stark over Captain America's grave at the end.

So wish it would happen, but to do that they would have to wait for the licenses to revert back to Marvel, re-boot spiderman AGAIN, and re-boot the X-Men, and god I hate re-boots almost as much as I hate re-makes.


Jammill
 

THX-1138

Sith Lord
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
125
A very late response to Jammill's post;
Well a crossover easter egg was approved;
http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/amazing-spider-man-almost-tied-into-avengers-and-now-venom/
And they did the whole credits scene thing.

My opinion on the movie;
I liked it more than the Raimi movies. It's like the old Burton series vs Nolan, you liked the first two, after that not so much, and then there was a reboot that took it more seriously and you realized what you were missing. A lot of people say this is ripping off Batman, and I say it's not really ripping off so much as following their good example. The newer, darker comic book movies do justice to the source material. More and more people have respect for comic book readers, and that's because of better movie adaptions. Before all they had were cheesey comic book movies. And this movie is really only like Batman Begins in that it has darker themes, but different dark themes. Spider-Man is more about personal drama. Also like Batman Begins, it seemed more realistic, and I say that's never a bad thing. This movie really had an uphill battle, it was retelling the same story we had just ten years ago, and overmarketing with several spoilers and bait-and-switches(stuff in the trailer but not the movie). That and some bad editing were the main problems(director's cut?). If this movie came out in place of original Raimi movie, I think it'd be considered one of the greatest superhero movies. I think they tried to hard in a few parts to be different from the old series(the suit). Most of the other differences were improvements, like the Gwen Stacy love interest. There were also a few cliches(not even close to as bad as the old series). Like the Lizard! His dialogue was just... blech. "There's a new species in New York, it can be aggressive." That was dumb. "Most lizards are at the top of their respective food chains." Just as obvious, and on top of that the opposite of the truth. There's nothing subtle about this villain. And I feel like making the science seem more realistic would have been easy. "He's curing himself!" Stupid dialogue with a dramatic score is still stupid dialogue. But let me stress that the cliche parts were few and far between, they didn't ruin the whole thing. I also think that the effects were better in the old series, in 2001 they had good cg but didn't rely on it solely. All but one swing scene is cg, and you can tell.

Ugh, I have so many criticisms. I really did love the movie. Everything important, the script, cast, director, was just better than before. Andrew Garfield is a better Peter Parker. More believable.
 
Last edited:

Cayal

The Immortal Prince
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
1,945
Location
Tartarus
THX-1138 - I don't see that happening for a number of reasons, firstly because Spiderman was only ever in with the east-coast Avengers, and you couldn't just drop him in it without having Daredevil and at least some of the X-Men, and maybe even the fantastic four (and they already stole one of them to be Captain America, can't have Chris Evans being Captain America AND the Human Torch in the same film.)

Secondly, Spiderman isn't part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe or MCU (search for 'Marvel Cinematic Universe' on wikipedia for more info) and hasn't been wired into that set-up from the beginning like the others have.

Thirdly, and most importantly, Spiderman is made by SONY, not Marvel films, and all the films in the MCU (and the ones planned around other Avengers-centric characters that are being discussed) are made by Marvel films.

It would be super-cool though, no pun intended. Imagine them moving on from that and doing the civil-war with Hugh Jackman's wolverine staring down Robert Downey Jnr's Tony Stark over Captain America's grave at the end.

So wish it would happen, but to do that they would have to wait for the licenses to revert back to Marvel, re-boot spiderman AGAIN, and re-boot the X-Men, and god I hate re-boots almost as much as I hate re-makes.


Jammill
Late reply:
Very true, though I believe either Marvel or Sony (or both) have gone on record as saying they would do it if it was profitable (or along those lines)

As for the movie, I'm seeing it Sunday.
 

barrett1987

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
558
I felt this movie was much better than the tobey ones. You have to get past the time though, they are way too soon but they ARE better. The second one comes soon and i hope the dark moody broody tone continues.

One thing though, this spiderman's peter parker is a hipster dream and with the current fads why the hell would he not be a popular guy. I mean all his hobbies shown in the movie are considered ''cool'' in schools now. Just a side not ei found funny.
 
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
16
The production team said that this reboot will not be a origin story, as we already have 2 of them. They will continue from the point in which our spidy is well know and recognized in the city. Cheers!
 
Top