The Spiderman Franchise

Einstein

Just a question guys...

Just watched Spiderman 3 on dvd, and it's starting to remind me of the way the old batman movies started to go...overly colorful etc, lil bit silly...

I personally would love to see spiderman that little bit darker...how bout you guys?

Kinda like the way Chris Nolan did with the Batman franchise, darkened it, brought it back to its roots...

Any thoughts?:)

ztoical

I would loved to have seen James Cameron's Spiderman......*sigh*

Not a fan of any of the spiderman movies mainly down to the casting Maguire just isn't peter paker and Dunest is definitely not MJ - she is written more like Gwen Stacy [which would have been great cus then they could have killed her in the first one] Gwen Stacy shows up in 3 and acts more like MJ from the comics.

2 drives me up the wall - where the hell is that subway train meant to be going?

As for going darker - spiderman isn't really a dark comics unless they want to get into the whole clone sage and trust me no one wants to see that. You couldn't really make it dark like Batman. Spiderman as a character is always meant to be the more positive up beat of the Marvel superheros - he has is guilt over his uncle but its not the angst you get with Batman.

K!LL!@N

It's definitely in need of a reboot.

You're completely right in your comparison to the way the original Batman movies went.

I doesn't necessarily have to be as dark as Nolan's Batman but it doesn't need to be as childish as it's become either.

I'm afraid though that it's being marketed more towards kids, it's still raking in the money and the amount of merchandising they sell means they'll probably stick with the formula.

What shocked me most was that Sam Raimi could look at the final cut and say he was happy with it.
Shocking!
I wanted to walk out of 3.

Killian

johnny_ultimate

I think for mindless Hollywood entertainment the first two Spiderman films are actually very enjoyable, the second one in particular. Unfortunately, Spiderman 3 decided to go all emo and emerged as somewhat of a joke, which was a shame as it promised to be a big, multi-villain epic. Shame Raimi played if for comedy instead of darkness.

FunkZ

Aye it'd be good if it were darker. I hate Raimi 'cause I know he's going to **** up Wizards First Rule.

Tusky

The spiderman story is about as dark as my skin tone....which is typical pale Irish skin.

I dont think it should be made darker but something needs to be done. Spiderman 2 was just watchable. 3 was shocking.

My name is Todd

I thought the second film was better than the first. I honestly couldn't believe what I was seeing in the third one - the bits where Peter Parker turns nasty were so pathetic and unbelievable that I began to completely lose my faith in the franchise.

I would never have thought Raimi was capable of ballsing it up that much. Not enough Venom either.

monkeyfudge

I rewatched the trilogy there recently on BluRay.

I think I like the first one the best. I really like William Defoe's performance and over all the film feels more solid than the others.

The second one is really let down by ropey CGI... the fights with Doc Ock look particularly horrible when viewed in HD.

The effects in the 3rd one look fantastic though... the highlight being the out of control crane that smashes into the side of the building... of course a lot of this was actually model work as opposed to CGI. Spider-man 3 would have been a much better film if they hadn't shoehorned in the whole Venom plot because the character is popular with children. The Sandman looked great and I've always liked James Franco's performances. So just having the two of them has the plot lines would have made for a far better film.

And yes... they got Mary Jane and Gwen Stacy the wrong way around. And of course Kirstin Dunst is a blonde and Bryce Dallas Howard is a red head... madness.

projectmayhem

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Spider-man 3 would have been a much better film if they hadn't shoehorned in the whole Venom plot because the character is popular with children.

the problem with venom is a "venom film" would bring a lot of pressure. he's the most popular enemy of spiderman... and would open up the only real opportunity to turn spiderman dark a-la batman.

so, raimi decided to offset the character with sandman, to add padding to a potentially disastrous fanboy baiting if they stuck with venom on his own. on top of this, the main actors said they wouldn't do another spidey film, which forced the studio to move on venom to make the money. then after the success of the film everyone signed up again.

there is talk of a venom stand-alone film though... bah!

Fysh

I'm not sure how well a "dark" spiderman story would work, given that the comics have overall been a lot more soap-opera than Batman (Batman has had its fair share of soap opera moments, but there are distinct chunks of it like Dark Knight Returns or Year One which are much darker versions of the vigilante mindset than Peter Parker).

It'll be interesting to see what Marvel do with the franchise once the rights to it revert to Marvel Studios; I doubt they'll change them entirely but I can't imagine they'd sanction something as dire as Spiderman 3 if they had in-house control over scripts & storylines.

That being said, a Spiderman film without Tobey Maguire will automatically be better than Spiderman 3 just on principle...

Also, I can see the Venom standalone movie going the way of the Wolverine movie (and that's not a good thing).

faceman

The first movie is fine, but im not really a fan of them. 2 and 3 were just awful.

Spiderman is just, er, kooky to me.

monkeyfudge

Seriously people... it's Spider-man not Spiderman.

The hyphen is important. Stan Lee would be rolling in his grave if he was dead.

Fysh

Heh, hardcore internet nerds would tell you Lee's probably more concerned about the nonsensical Mephisto-powered "Marriage? What marriage?" retcon that Joe Quesada just forced through than about whether people use the correct trademarked form of the name. But I'm not one of them, so I won't.

Oh, wait...

monkeyfudge

I think it was down to the fact that when it's written as Spiderman it looks a bit too close to Superman.

MisterAnarchy

The first film was average,the second was basically a remake of the first and the third was an abomination.
I agree the casting of Peter Parker and Mary Jane is horribly inappropriate.
The nineties cartoon series is an excellent series ,far better than the films,bit dark too ,which I like.

Creature

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Seriously people... it's Spider-man not Spiderman.

The hyphen is important. Stan Lee would be rolling in his grave if he was dead.

Stan Lee will never die, he can't. Sure where do you think they got the idea of Marvel Zombies from?


As the posters before me siad, a 'dark' Spider-Man wouldn't really work (or at least as someone who used to read the comics obsessively I can't see it working). Anyway a darker Spidey isn't what's needed, a new director is. That and scrapping Tobey Maguire.

FunkZ

Fysh wrote: »

Heh, hardcore internet nerds would tell you Lee's probably more concerned about the nonsensical Mephisto-powered "Marriage? What marriage?" retcon that Joe Quesada just forced through than about whether people use the correct trademarked form of the name. But I'm not one of them, so I won't.

Oh, wait...

Say whaaa?

faceman

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Seriously people... it's Spider-man not Spiderman.

The hyphen is important. Stan Lee would be rolling in his grave if he was dead.

I never noticed the hyphen until now!

Fysh wrote: »

Heh, hardcore internet nerds would tell you Lee's probably more concerned about the nonsensical Mephisto-powered "Marriage? What marriage?" retcon that Joe Quesada just forced through than about whether people use the correct trademarked form of the name. But I'm not one of them, so I won't.

Oh, wait...

Wasnt mephisto the bad guy in x-men???

Wacker

faceman wrote: »

I never noticed the hyphen until now!



Wasnt mephisto the bad guy in x-men???

No, that's Magneto! Keep up, would you?!?

constitutionus

after the second one i had high hopes for the third but unfortunetly raimi just shoved in all his fanwanks before he left the series

there was just too many badies. you can do a big ensemble cast of bad guys but fact is there was no reason for them all to be in the one film. honestly what was the points of the sandman in this? if it was just to show how "bad" peter had become thanks to the symbiots influence you couldve just had him smack mary jane around the place

spidey 3 wouldve worked much better if it was just goblin and venom. in fact it probably wouldve worked out better to do just goblin to finish the arc and feature venom in the next one.

ive no problem with the cast, i think it was the directors fault here.

still for all its faults, its NO batman and robin

Kur4mA

I don't know if it needs to be made darker, but they need to do something to rescue the franchise after the turd movie. LAWL, GET IT? Srsly though, it really was a steaming turd.

Galvasean

Spidey3 was just a mess. BLERGH!

grames_bond

Galvasean wrote: »

Spidey3 was just a mess. BLERGH!

emo spidey=sh!t movie!!

Vic Vinegar

That part of the film when he was strutting round thinking he was cool was soooooooooooooooooooooooo bad!

Not The Real Scarecrow

apparently the new one is going in a darker direction a la Dark Knight and is going to have multiple villians.Really disappointed with the direction the "turd" one went.Raimi really ****ed it up although saying that the first one was crap as well and all 3 of the movies have dated terribly already.

Einstein

Meatwad wrote: »

apparently the new one is going in a darker direction a la Dark Knight and is going to have multiple villians.

source?

Pigman II

I think all 3 Spider-man movies in the Raimi series are worthy and coherent. You can't just keep doing the same thing over and over or the series will get stale. Look at the Indy movies as a perfect example of how to do it right. All 3 of them have a different tone yet are still a coherent whol that is true to the characters.

So I don't mind if Spidey went goth for a little while there. I also won't mind if Spidey-4 is different to what went before as that's why I go to the movies, to be surpised!

Musical perhaps?

Not The Real Scarecrow

I read it a while ago on coming soon.net, just had a quick look through the site and the link to it is gone.It was in an interview with Rami who was talking about the next director and the angle that the studio's were looking in taking the franchise.