Seems that Spiderman will be put on hold for his fourth installment as the studio is sitting on an unfinished script and seems to have hit a wall with the direction.
And by direction I mean Director. And in this case (if its accurate) I am siding with the Director.
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.
I can see the relevance of using a character that is selling the books. Not that the comics are in direct line with the books, but there is certainly an overlap. Walk into a comic shop near the release of a big screen adaptation of that character and try to spot that book… the place will be flooded with it – and all related merchandise.
But what villian is big in the Spidey books right now? Will that character still be big by the time Spidey 4 hits the screens?
What’s wrong with Sony having a sit down with the Marvel peeps and saying “Look, we want to release Spiderman 4 in 2012… any chance you can have a storyline that involves the Vulture in it around then? Raimi really wants to use him and it would tie in well for sales and marketing.”
I think the Vulture would be a great villain to use. And if the rumoured John Malkovich plays him? Even better! And I am still clinging to the hope that the “Vultress” thing was just a red herring to play away from a very obvious Anne Hathaway/Black Cat casting rumour.
This just reeks of how Sony stuck their corporate noses in Raimi’s Sandman story and forced him to rush into a sloppy Venom.
This is taking way too long for another movie.
Man this studio intevention will cause problems like the last one. Raimi is great at slick, goofy fun films, you can tell he likes the jack Kirby era of Spidey, and the more campy villians. Venom had no place is that sphere really.
Ive said it many times. this should be the story.
Lizard is born. Destroys New York. Kraven Hears about it. Moves to New York to hunt Lizard. Spiderman has to save Conners not only from the mutation but also from Kraven. Kraven Finds Spiderman a more worthy Hunt… I’ll let Raimi decide the Ending.
I am hoping that this is all blown out of proportion. (Sounds like it is) It also would not surprise me in the least if this was made up or exaggerated to make the filmmakers look bad.
I can’t really buy the idea that Sony (and/or Marvel) would want the film to include a villain that is currently popular/recent in the books. It does not matter if it is Vulture, Black Cat or Smythe’s Spider Slayers. Whoever it will be will be a player in related media tie-ins to the film’s release. Let’s say for example the bad guy happens to be Vulture. If there is a video game connected to the film, who will be in it? That’s right. Vulture.
Animated film? That’s right. Vulture.
Toys? Vulture.
Comic book? The movie adapt will, yes, be the Vulture. If the movie is decent? Who is back in rotation? That’s right. Vulture.
But is the script being worked on? I’m sure some rewrites are possible, but it won’t hold up production. How do I know that, you ask? Two words: common sense.
They want to start shooting in a few months, right? That’s plenty of time to get the script as good as they can get it. When filming, some script changes are still possible.
And the flipside to the rumor? That’s far worse.
Let’s say it’s true. Would it be better to work on things to make them better than to go off blindfolded into the void? No, of course not.
As to current villains? Menace, (another offshoot of Green Goblin) is the only one that comes to mind. Oh yea.
Luckily, this entire nonsense has been debunked by Sony.
If Sony or Rami have even half a brain between them (and in this case i give the bulk of that credit to Rami) they wouldn’t even consider using anything that is in continuity with the books because they are terrible. Marvel never should have taken Straczynski off of the Spider-Man books.
Superherohype and now MTV’s Splash Page have already debunked this rumor by actually talking to people from the studio. Imagine that, following up a story to see if it’s true??? Journalism 101.
Studio said the film crew is on holiday hiatus which is the norm for the industry for the most part.
Thanks for illustrating that my post repeatedly says “seems to” as well as phrases like “if this is accurate” and BLOGS about the news story that many JOURNALISTS have been reporting on. You were keen to take note of my alleged transgression while overlooking the speculation I BLOGGED about. I talked about how the JOURNALISTS are saying this is what is happening and even stated it was possible it wasn’t accurate.
Even journalists do that, but its a good thing I have you to overlook logic and put me in line with your assumptions. What would I do without you?
This is a blog. Your first hint might have been the name of the website THE MOVIE BLOG where we blog about stuff. You might have noticed that if you bothered to follow up on that bookmark you clicked on to verify the title.
When a JOURNALIST follows up on the story to see if its true, then I will BLOG about it.
Thanks for coming out. As usual you make presumptions and fail.
Well put Rodney!
Your defensiveness turns it ugly head yet again. In this post, never pointed the finger at you but merely stating a overall problem with the so called “Internet” reports. But then again if you were true blogger or journalist you would have contact the studio to confirm this rumor right? Oh yea, I forget, this is just a movie blog. You guys crack me up, whenver you post inaccurate things, you go back to this is jsut a blog and were not reporters. Do you guys get press passes to things are any time?
Funny that when you are proven wrong then I am the one getting defensive?
There is nothing wrong with my post, or anything I said in it. There was nothing inaccurate saying “this is the rumour that is going around” – because it was. Its not the “so called internet” its the REAL ACTUAL internet. And it was out there and commented on it.
Do I have to get your permission?
I am not Variety magazine and I do not have Sony’s PR deptartment on my speed dial. I blogged about a rumour. It doesn’t matter if its true, because I already said it was supposedly what was happening and IF it was accurate, this is what I think.
Because you want to pretend that is somehow wrong, is YOUR problem. Not mine.
The third installment was CRAPY! mostly because of the forced Venom storyline…I thinks it’s important that the studios respect the director’s opinion and choices….besides it was proved that even with Venom the movie sucked!
So…studios…get your f*ckn’ $$ hands out of it!
Goddamit. We need Rhino…..less talking and more action. Fuck yeah.
Swearing aside, I agree with you. He could just smash everything!
Hehe, sorry man.
I think the Vulture could be cool. Sony should be very careful with what it wants. They might be walking a fine line between another Spider-man 3 or a Spider-man 1 or 2. Another villain could work, but like Rodney asks which villain will be popular now and still on top by the movie’s release?
I’d prefer the have The Lizard as the main villain since they already introduced the Dr. Connors character. I think Mysterio would also be a great villain to see onscreen.
I think sony is trying to get Lizard in it but Raimi doesnt want to.
I think Sony should fucking fire Raimi, terminate the contract
Why should they fire him? He directed two of the most financially successful and loved superhero films of all time, and one despite it being mostly disliked still made a ton of cash (more than the first two)
There is no reason for Sony to can him with his track record on this property. He has more good than bad, and even the bad can only partly be blamed on him.
I see no reason not to trust him with this franchise.
He shouldn’t be fired, but he should step down as director. The last film showed the he has run out of gas, and the series needs a new vision.
Why? Because he made one poor Spiderman film out of 3?
The first two were great, and that gives me enough faith to think he could do it again. No director is flawless. Eventually circumstance hands you a bad hand and you get a bad film.
There was a lot more wrong with Spiderman 3 and most of it wasn’t Raimi.
Because he went from “Spider-Man 2”, which is regarded as one of the greatest comic book films to “Spider-Man 3” one of the worst comic book films.
Not only that, but there are some that have lost all interest in the series because that film was such a piece of shit.
Its time we see another director’s take on the character. No, I’m not saying it should be rebooted, just given a new director.
You’d think after Sony caused the disaster that was Spider-Man 3 they would leave Raimi alone to make 4. Let Raimi use Vulture and have him introduce the villain they want for the next one (as they should’ve done with Venom)
Sony would have admit that was their fault. Even though Raimi has successfully diverted the blame of Venom to studio interference, Sony would have to admit they dropped the ball.
That they allegedly are interfering again suggests that they have not learned that lesson.
The Vulture is such a lame villain, they can’t go with any other Spider-Man villain?
I’m not holding out for this. It already looks like it’s destined for failure, especially after the third.
Doc Octopus was a lame villian too and they managed to make him pretty damned cool.
I respectfully disagree, Doc Oc was always awesome.
And so was the Volture.
Doc Ock was lame in name only.
I think the vulture is a great villain too. It seems like Sony should give Raimi the final cut privilege after the success of the films. I guess that’s never going to happen though. Still waiting for the Lizard though.
This already has FAIL written all over it. Why would they go forward with this movie having SONY’s mits all in it. Sony needs to see poeple are very pleased with the Job Marvel Studios is doing they should allow this team to consult with them.
Im still pissed Black Cat will be in it.
That means itll have more romance and lame fight scenes.
I mean, what threat can Black Cat pose to a guy with super strength, super speed, agility, spider senses, and webbing???
All she does is acrobatics.
100% agreed.
And all Vulture does is fly. And all Goblin did was fly and throw bombs and he is considered to be among Spideys most notable foes.
Depending on how pure they go with Hardy (if they do at all) Black Cat now has psionic ability to affect probability fields, (bad luck ability connected to her stress) and more recently was magically augmented to have proportional strength and agility of a cat allowing her to leap unrealistic distances and react with superhuman speed. While not as strong as Spiderman she does have super agility which could make her hard to catch.
And maybe the biggest weapon of all.. Spiderman might try to stop her without hurting her.
I am SORRY, but the Green Goblin has the edge over SpiderMan ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.
In the movies or comic books, Spidey was NEVER a better fighter then Gobby, and he always won ecause of LUCK.
Gobby is stronger, smarter (way smarter) is insane so he has no limits, and he has more weaponry then Tony Stark. He could blow spiderman into a million pieces n one move (of course Marvel never allows that to happen)
Volture also threw grenades and has razor sharp swords coming out of the WINGS he has. And he has claws and talons. Spiderman is still better but the Volture has some good technology and like most spidrman villains, is extremely resourceful.
Black Cat never helped, all she did was try to help and then she got almost killed. So spidey had to chose between saving her or MJ… therefore wasting his time. Like that one time Moonknight thrusted a moon stick through her spine, or when Rhyno stabbed her on the back
The only edge black cat may have, is perhaps she can threaten MJ, or hurt spiderman but spidey cant hurt her back (like you mentioned)
Sorry James. One superstrength punch to the rocket glider and Goblin is out. Spidey can dodge the bombs and razors.
The point is that you can over analyze ANY character to the point of defeat. Can Batman beat Superman? No. But he did. Couple times.
Its all about the writing and making the story worthwhile. Just like taking a chubby labcoat wearing scientist with mechanical stilt legs was suddenly a very real and effective threat, as well as a badass respectable villain.
I always kinda found that the Goblin had to either stab himself or shoot himself (after killng harry) or accidently make himself blow up to lose to spiderman. He always kicked his ass.
Gobby beat him without his board plenty of times (only to end up blowing himself up, which pissed me off)
Well, you can. Unfortunately comic book writters have that horrible habit of making mistakes like the Superman/Batman one you just mentioned. If superman was real, Luther/batman would never be able to do anything. Period.
I think that the Black Cats, Rorschachs, and Batmans… should never be in the same comic books or movies as the Supermans and Phenixs
And some characters you just cant overanalize… Superman vs Luther… if they where to fight 100 times… i woud say that supes wins roughly around… 100 of those fights. (without stupid DC writers involved)
But what’s the point in reading a book where the Hero can’t lose?
There is a strong dynamic and strong storytelling that makes it even worth picking up the book when you consider that Superman can’t be beat, but is constantly stuggling to accomplish his goals.
Which is exactly why they should never mix these characters.
I’m sure that I will be stepping in this one up to my eyeballs, but I have agree with Rodney. You need that inequality to create a strong dynamic. True Goblin has gadgets galore, like bats, and chemically enhanced strength to boot, but Spider-Man has a myriad of abilities that allow him to be successful, the least of which is that fact that Osborn’s psychotic behavior (a side effect of the Goblin Formula) forces him to think irrationally when in the heat of the moment. True, Spider-Man may get by on luck, but he is a brilliant scientist and inventor as well. In the original comics, his webbing is a mechanism, not the biologic side-effect the movie turned it into. Goblin is simply more conniving and willing to sacrifice others for his own gain (a theme that Marvel is highlighting very well by placing Osborn in charge of pretty much everything). Spider-Man is able to win out not just because of luck, but because he values life and that becomes his advantage. Besides, gadgets do you no good if they are broken, which as Rodney pointed out, happens frequently to any techno-hero whether they are good or bad.
Sure, Spider-Man gets the crap kicked out of him; he has even dies at the hands of Morbius, but he keeps coming back because that is what the Hero does. If you wanted realism watch the news … oh wait nevermind … just walk around your neighborhood ghetto. Comic books and their characters, like all fiction, are meant for escape. Isn’t that why you go to the movies or read the books in the first place? Not because it gives you an accurate history lesson (which is still just fiction as it comes from recollection and biased opinion … but that is a whole other discussion).
As for the Supes/Bats dichotomy, it has been shown time and again that Batman is very capable of kicking the crap out of Superman. If you want a really excellent example of how methodical/neurotic Batman is read the JLA book titled Tower of Babel. In it Bruce neutralizes EVERY member of the JLA and puts Supes out of commission to the point where he cannot do ANYTHING. Sure, you can argue that Clark could simply pull off Batman’s arms, or throw him into the darkest reaches of space, but that is not his character. it is like arguing that an orange could become an apple. It isn’t going to happen, not unless we are talking about one of the other multiverse Superman (say prime for example).
Anyway, the point is these characters each have strengths and weaknesses (no matter how powerful or perfect) and their interactions are what make the stories so fascinating. Read Marvels by Kurt Busiek and drawn by Alex Ross to experience a really good example of why these worlds have to exist together.
Cheers,
Price
James, I’m assuming you never read Marvel Knights Spider-man in which Black Cat tears Vulture apart when he tries to kill a comatose Peter. Read that and you know exactly what she’s capable of.
I know its supposed to be an escape, and fiction.
But as much as its sci-fi… it must always hold a sense of logic. As in “Okay, superheroes are real… now we must follow a logic to it, NOT make it too unbelievable” hollywood and the writers of Marvel comics have never possessed this logic every human being was endowed with at birth
No. No matter how sinister and genius Luther or Batman’s plan is… they can never beat superman.
If superman can fly around the world 56 times in one second, then Batman should not even KNOW he exists. And superman can just accidentally fly through Bats by lap # 38 and turn him into dust.
And even if batman knows superman and has 1,000000 guns pointing at him with Kryptonite, and the guns fires… Superman can just fly to the moon, go back t Krypton to update his Twitter, fly back and tear bats a new asshole.
And i know “superman doesnt kill other heroes” but if Batman is trying to kill HIM, Superman WILL react.
I simply think that they should kinda make it more believable. And I know its fiction… but look at what Watchmen did… Dr Manhattan and Rorschach are 2 completely different characters. But not ONCE did I doubt or question the fact that they are in the same movie, because they handled it so well.
NERD RAGE!!!