Marc Webb's Spiderman Reboot

[Tahkyn]

I don't lnow about rebooting a franchise that's barely a year old. Andrew Garfield looks the part, and he's a good actor so I'm sure he'll do well. Still, the ink has barely dried on the Raimi franchise, I would have definately waited about 10-15 years before rebooting.

These films need something from the Raimi era, I can't quite put my finger on it, oh wait...

Spoiler:

Obligatory Bruce Camplbell Cameo, please.

[Bill]

I don't lnow about rebooting a franchise that's barely a year old. Andrew Garfield looks the part, and he's a good actor so I'm sure he'll do well. Still, the ink has barely dried on the Raimi franchise, I would have definately waited about 10-15 years before rebooting.

Its more than a year old. It debuted in 2002.

These films need something from the Raimi era, I can't quite put my finger on it, oh wait...

Not really, I want a completely fresh take on a old save the damsel formula the previous films. are were filled with.

Well, considering that was pretty much the *only* iconic truly memorable thing they came up with for that movie, to the point that even they ripped it off for the next two movies...

making a good movie would be a start.

I figure they could fill it with some better chemistry than in the previous films with Kirsten Dunst.

But we have to wait and see.

[Flux]

Bill I can't believe you're now arguing in favour of them rebooting the Spiderman franchise when you were so steadfastly believed that they will not (wait a while and then) reboot after Nolan leaves, but continue on with another director in Nolan's universe.

[Bill]

Bill I can't believe you're now arguing in favour of them rebooting the Spiderman franchise when you were so steadfastly believed that they will not (wait a while and then) reboot after Nolan leaves, but continue on with another director in Nolan's universe

Find one quote from that said I believed that they wouldn't. I was always in favor of doing a reboot for Spider-man.

You mixed up with my feelings with rebooting the Bat-films again with the current Spider-man reboot.

Firstly I didn't care for the Riami' s run on the Spider-man films. This reboot looks like it has a lot potential. I believe that this reboot will to Spider-man like Batman Begins would be to Batman, I really think Marc, unlike Riami will make a Spider-man film that capture the character fully, and will make a better movie than any of Riami's Spidey flicks, and that Garfield will make a great Peter Parker. In fact far superior to McGuire's boring performance, I'm eagerly await what he does with the character.
He's clearly more enthusiastic(see the previous page in the thread I posted a link about him) then Tobey ever was. Marc Webb said they picked him for his intelligence, wit, humor and humanity-- the ideal Peter Parker/Spider-man. I think Marc will surprise us, but I'm still worried about the script leak descriptions--"dark and gritty' still doesn't fit Spidey that well and I'm worried they might aim for a Dark Knight. Y'know with all the angst....I trust Marc and Garfield to deliver a film that matches the quality of what made the character so popular in the first place, while balancing the darkness, with the lit comedy, and great humor.

Its the same for the Burton/Schumacher films I didn't find them all that great and was eagerly anticipating a Bat-film that fully captured the heart of the character that I grew with and I got that with Begins; and I will suspect I will get that with this film. The reason why I argue against a reboot again for Batman is because I still find a lot of potential for the Nolan-verse(first reboot) and it might be the foundation for future Bat-films. Unlike the Schumacher/Burton films (which focused way too much on the villain, and barely had a plot to hold it together) Nolan Bat-films have been successful and have garnered praise why reboot it and start from scratch so soon. It's pointless, especially with how successful the movies are now. Its better for another director to continue it in the same verse with a fresher take on the character then Nolan did and continue the story of Batman in his "older years." The Bat-comics have done this with the main continuity so why not the films?

I'm not totally opposed to reboots, as you know Batman is a character with like a gazillion stories; with many unique interpretations and I would like to see an ambitious take on the character on film; just not right now. Granted I don't want to see Nolan's verse forever, it just has room to tell more Bat-stories in. The only reason they did the reboot in the first place was because y'know Schumacher failed to deliver with and Batman and Robin..the same with Riami and Spider-man 3. Robby has brought to light that the villains weren't the problem it was Raimi's sloppy use of them that made the film suck. That and they wanted to sell more toys, just like Schumacher wanted to do with Batman and Robin.

Now we just need a Daredevil film reboot with a great writer and director and I will be satisfied.

[Flux]

No I did not mix up your feelings on Batman and Spiderman; that is what I am addressing.
You can't just bold specific phrases in a sentence and ignore what the sentence actually says.

Read it properly; something that ends with 'continue on in Nolan's universe' is obviously talking about Batman.

[Bill]

Oh right. Sorry about that,

Now I want a Daredevil film reboot badly. Spiderman(is getting) and Batman got/gonna get reboots that/will get/got them right...Now its Daredevils turn!

[Flux]

Definitely, Daredevil deserves that. although I would be weary of that franchise coming to mainstream as it might end up detracting from the plus that Daredvil is sorta niche not being as 'big' as Batman, Superman etcetera.

EDIT: Sorry if I came off as a little harsh there; one of my pet hates is when people misconstrue what I say.

[Bill]

Its the internet. I don't take it that seriously, if I did. I wouldn't have no have life.

Shit looks like Daredevil is in development hell.

I'm sad

Oh Yeah to all those folks that say Riami was forced to put Venom in Spider-man 3

Immediately after Spider-Man 2 (2004) released, Ivan Raimi wrote a plot for the third film in two months. According to Sam Raimi, the film initially dealt with the concept of heroes with a dark side, and villains with a sympathetic side. As well as dealing with the "triangle" between Peter, Mary Jane and Harry, the Sandman was made the film's official "villain"; the screenwriters made his character, merely a petty criminal in the comics, the real killer of Ben Parker to further Peter's guilt over his uncle's death. Raimi wanted another villain in the film, and eventually settled on the popular villain Venom to please the fans. There was also the addition of a rival love interest, Gwen Stacy, to complicate personal matters. However, with all these additions, the story became so complex that Alvin Sargent considered cutting it into two films, before realizing he could not create a successful intermediate climax for the third film to lead into the fourth.

Riami also wanted to have three villains in the first Spider-man film as well so this means Spiderman 3 would have sucked with or without Venom like Robby said, he was right. Raimi, like Burton/Schumacher made the mistake of using villains for the sake of villains without properly balancing them The reason why the second film isn't bashed is because Raimi had a less control and listened to Chabon about too many villains and trying to sell toys. Chabon remarked about this in a video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_v2Q0-ai8

Its Return of the Jedi all over again.

[Bill]

http://io9.com/5735436/confirmed-the...c-web+shooters

And so mechanical web-shooters are confirmed. So they are hewing closer to the comics; I personally preferred the organic web-shooters instead of the mechanical ones: sure Spider-man in real-life would be shooting webs out of his ass instead of his risk, but they don't have to realistic. Didn't the comics give him organic ones as well? Only as an upgrade? So maybe when symbiote comes they might give him organic ones like Riami did. But I personally think its a good route to take further distinguish themselves from the previous Raimi films.

I wonder how they'll reinterpret Eddie Brock and Harry? Make them closer to their Ultimate counterparts? Marc Webb did say he was a fan of the Ultimate Spider-man line a while back
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/01/20...ider-man-movie

So maybe.

[Bill]

This is a triple post. I won't do this again I swear but..



http://screenrant.com/spiderman-set-...cy-benk-97076/


Andrew's full Spidey costume vaguely revealed. Its hard to make out the figure though, we can barley the see the mask.

[Kaiolino]

Good news for the people who don't want to see a different guy doing JJJ!

Hidden:

JJJ isn't in the movie.

[Cyan D. Funk]

This is a triple post. I won't do this again I swear but..

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content...set-photos.jpg

http://screenrant.com/spiderman-set-...cy-benk-97076/


Andrew's full Spidey costume vaguely revealed. Its hard to make out the figure though, we can barley the see the mask.

First thing that came to my mind: "Dammit Spidey you don't run from the scene of an accident, the insurance guys don't like it."

Good news for the people who don't want to see a different guy doing JJJ!

Hidden:

JJJ isn't in the movie.

What.

[Renegadesoul]

It wouldn't be an authentic Spiderman without JJJ. He is the man behind the wall crawler. :(

[Sniper King]

I wasn't gonna post on here but seeing the news...

NO JONAH?!
How?! He's like...Spiderman's ultimate enemy!
Okay, maybe not, but Jonah has always been my favorite Spiderman character...IN EVERYTHING.

[Insider2000]

This is a triple post. I won't do this again I swear but..

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content...set-photos.jpg

http://screenrant.com/spiderman-set-...cy-benk-97076/


Andrew's full Spidey costume vaguely revealed. Its hard to make out the figure though, we can barley the see the mask.

That image looks bizarrely fake. I know it's not, but all of them look like toys.

Good news for the people who don't want to see a different guy doing JJJ!

Hidden:

JJJ isn't in the movie.

Aww. That sucks.

Meh. Always the next one.

[Freddy G.]

Good news for the people who don't want to see a different guy doing JJJ!

Hidden:

JJJ isn't in the movie.

there better be a good explanation for this

[Insider2000]

If anything, this might be Peter still in high school, long before he becomes a photographer for the Daily Bugle.

If Peter doesn't have his job yet, there is no real reason for JJJ, as AWESOME as he is.


"What are you waiting for? Chinese New Year?"

[wolfwoof]

Unless it takes place before uncle Ben was murdered and their finances fell into the crapper there is no excuse for not having Peters photographer job in the story. But i suppose it could be an alternate universe take on it where the Parkers are rich. Either way a spidey story without Jameson and the bugle as an interaction spot is gonna suffer.

[Sniper King]

Unless it takes place before uncle Ben was murdered and their finances fell into the crapper there is no excuse for not having Peters photographer job in the story. But i suppose it could be an alternate universe take on it where the Parkers are rich. Either way a spidey story without Jameson and the bugle as an interaction spot is gonna suffer.

That's like...Marvel Batman...Nooo!!!
Jameson makes Spider-Man GOOD!!

[Green_vs_Red]

Are people really complaining about a recurring character with next to no importance in the Spider-Man franchise, (at least where the movies are concerned) not appearing in the next film?