[Movie] The Amazing Spider-Man

http://movies.ign.com/articles/106/1060055p1.html

Spiderman 4 is cancelled. Sam Raimi no more as director. And Tobey Maguire's out. So the series is being rebooted, taking back Peter Parker to his teenage years in high school. Nothing more is told. Only that it will have a 2012 release.

As for my opinion, i think its a good thing for the series to be retold. Hopefully better than the first 3 movies that started it. The Spiderman movies were great overall, i was hoping for the same characters to return and star in Spidey 4. But this news was surprising. What are all your opinions?

It sounded like the project wasn't going anywhere anyways. Raimi wanted to finally do William H. Macy's Lizardman, but Sony told him no, they wanted a more human villain. And then they told him to throw in a Ravendude and a Raven chick or something ****ty like that.

Seeing how Raimi reacted to being forced to put Venom in 3, I think we were all spared an enormous storm of ****. It's been pretty sad to see how this all played out: I consider Spiderman 2 the GOAT of superhero movies.

As for a reboot: I'd rather they just put a bullet in the franchise already, the origin was told as well as it could have, sans a ****ty looking goblin.

Didn't maguire just put out a statement about It just being delayed?
EDIT: found it http://movies.ign.com/articles/105/1059421p1.html

^ Yep...just three days before the announcement that it was cancelled.

I think making a reboot now is premature, to be honest...it almost renders the original three movies a complete waste.

GOOD RAIMI RUINED VENOM.

And I'm still furious about it.

This has significance for WoW fans however. Sam Raimi was scheduled to direct the World of Warcraft movies which hasn't begun production yet. But now that Sam is free, and he has said he would work on it next, I guess production will soon begin.

Not a warcraft fan. Didn't like any of them, but I'll still give it shot.

Originally Posted by Astarael

^ Yep...just three days before the announcement that it was cancelled.

I think making a reboot now is premature, to be honest...it almost renders the original three movies a complete waste.

Same. Spider-Man 3 seemed to have an open ending just waiting for a sequel, and now we won't get one. And the Spider-Man films aren't even that old, so why reboot them? This isn't like the Incredible Hulk, which was a sort-of-reboot because the other Hulk film was considered bad.

I wish they wouldnt do a reboot. I wish they could leave it as is. I mean do we really need a new Spidey movie? at all?

It's not really all that surprising. There's been tension between Raimi and the studio since after the second movie, when they forced him to use Venom when he really didn't want to. Add to that all the reports and delays from this one and a collapse was kind of inevitable.

I think things will be fine. The first two movies are quite good, so they'll kind of live on in their own way. This reboot comes just as people are really starting to 'get' how to make comic book movies. Word is that the guy who is adapting The Loser's will also be writing the reboot, so at least he has the experience of working with comics-to-film. Though I wish they would just let someone like Bendis take a run at doing at least an outline or draft.

Ahhh man this means no more Bruce Campbell cameos in the movies

Originally Posted by Freedom G

Ahhh man this means no more Bruce Campbell cameos in the movies

But Bruce Campbell is awesome...

Darn, for Spider-Man 4 I honestly was hoping for Chameleon & Mysterio to be the villains (they could be working as a duo). With those two (and with Mysterio's holograms, microscopic technology, and robots) there could have been a scene in the movie that would have been very reminiscent to a Mysterio's Sinister Seven (just imagine seeing Goblin, Doc Ock, Sandman, Venom, New Goblin, Chameleon dressed up as someone from Parker's life, and Mysterio all fighting Spidey)...but that will never happen.

As for the re-boot...I hope it won't be a complete loss. I mean, I think the first two movies were great, I say this reboot should just happen as if #3 never existed (similar to Superman Returns and how people just forgot that the last few movies never existed...man were those horrible!). Well if we're going to focus on a younger Spider-man (and use villains we haven't seen yet) then believe it or not, I wouldn't mind seeing Rhino in a movie. He's all muscle and no brain, so it would make a rather "easy" first villain for a newbie Spider-man to go up against.

-BGS

Script already written for the the Boot of Re

With such big news hitting early in the week, outlets are already crawling around looking for tidbits of info, and there are a few useful things to know about Spider-Man v2.0 that we didn’t cover in our first report.

First up, while I thought the facts were implicit in Sony’s press release, let’s be explicit: the new script by James Vanderbilt has already been written.

Variety notes that Sony “has long had” Vanderbilt’s script ready as a contingency plan. In other words, when he was hired to write Spider-Man 5 and 6, which were mentioned as possible reboot fodder, what he was really doing was writing this fresh start on the character. Given that Sony doesn’t want to do anything that will potentially see Spider-Man go back to Marvel, the studio was smart. (See a note about being ’smart’ at the end of this piece.)

According to EW, the idea was to have the reboot ready to go as soon as Spidey 4 was done. But when discussions about that film went nowhere, Vanderbilt’s new take was given priority. Now they’re ready to go with a script.

We don’t know much about what that script entails, other than it will feature a younger teenage Peter Parker. EW calls the script “gritty, contemporary” and references Batman Begins, seemingly not only in the sense that Christopher Nolan reinvented Batman on film, but in the sense of tone. Which would be a shame. Let’s have anything but a gritty Spider-Man, please. Anyone with a shred of understanding of the character knows that, while the stories can be heavy, ‘gritty’ isn’t what makes Spider-Man universally appealing.

There’s speculation already (as by Devin at CHUD) that this is a grab for some of the Twilight tween energy and fanbase. But I just see this as a cheaper, easier move. Sam Raimi directed three films, so is it easier to bring a new director into his world, or create a new world altogether? The latter, as Anne Thompson suggests, and I think she’s right. This will definitely be cheaper, as Sony has just shed a couple of names with big dollar signs attached. Spider-Man 3 cost almost $300m, and the fourth film could easily have gone that high. Now can the studio make this reboot for $200m or less? One would hope so.

Read more: Spider-Man Reboot Already Written, Will Be ‘Gritty, Contemporary’ Take | /Film http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/11/...#ixzz0cRCCjcUs

My thoughts: I hate Sony castrating the series and I wouldn't mind seeing Spider-man go back to Marvel/Disney.

They could just sell the rights.

The script is already written? Sounds good. I hope it turns out really good. Im thinking that it will be about Peter Parker's adventure throughout his high school years. Since they said Peter will be dealing with superhero/ teenage and life problems.

Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager dealing with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.

If this makes Evil Dead 4 come out sooner, I'm very stoked.

Mark Webb (who directed (500) Days of Summer and countless music videos) has been officially announced as the new director, along with news that the budget is being reduced to $80 million.

It's also been revealed that the inspiration for the overall story will come from the more recent adaptation of the Spider-Man mythos, Ultimate Spider-Man, rather than the original comic books.

To me, this is all good news. Webb has an excellent visual sense because of all of his work with music videos, and already proved with (500) Days that he can do a movie that focuses on young people as the central characters. Add to that, Ultimate Spider-Man is a stellar re-telling and readaptation of the Spider-Man story that will probably translate better to film than any original Spider-Man story they might do.

All things considered, quite a good bit of news.

Originally Posted by Freedom G

Ahhh man this means no more Bruce Campbell cameos in the movies

Don't under estimate his power... You never know what Bruce will do.

Anyway, I think this is a great thing. The movies ran dry after the second one, the humor got way out of hand, and the plot was a piece of shnauz. Totally worth the wait for the reboot movie, they got better equipment now so they can make it look even better then it was. They defiantly can pick someone younger to play Peter, although I did like Tobey McGuire, I feel a younger actor will be nice. Lets hope it isn't Zac Efron. >_<

Casting updates and news!

I assume everybody knows that Andrew Garfield has been cast as Peter Parker/Spider-Man by now, since the news is a few months old. I haven't seen anything he's been in, so I can't say if I like him as a choice or not, but I am seeing The Social Network tomorrow. Most people who have seen that have reacted very positively to his casting, so that's a plus (he's also in Never Let Me Go, which is also in theatres right now).

It's also been reported that the role of Mary Jane Watson has been offered to Emma Stone, she of Superbad, Zombieland and most recently Easy A fame.

Finally, there are rumours swirling that the role of Gwen Stacy has been offered to Glee's Dianna Agron. I haven't been able to find any definitive word on if this is actually the case. It has also sparked speculation that Gwen will be the main love interest for Peter in the first movie, and MJ will then take over for the sequels.

Originally Posted by nolan

Casting updates and news!

I assume everybody knows that Andrew Garfield has been cast as Peter Parker/Spider-Man by now, since the news is a few months old. I haven't seen anything he's been in, so I can't say if I like him as a choice or not, but I am seeing The Social Network tomorrow. Most people who have seen that have reacted very positively to his casting, so that's a plus (he's also in Never Let Me Go, which is also in theatres right now).

It's also been reported that the role of Mary Jane Watson has been offered to Emma Stone, she of Superbad, Zombieland and most recently Easy A fame.

Finally, there are rumours swirling that the role of Gwen Stacy has been offered to Glee's Dianna Agron. I haven't been able to find any definitive word on if this is actually the case. It has also sparked speculation that Gwen will be the main love interest for Peter in the first movie, and MJ will then take over for the sequels.

Mmmmm... Diana Argon


But I am pretty excited for this reboot. Nolan brings good news about the director. I loved 500 Days of Summer, and I feel like he'd make a good transition into the spider-man series.
Andrew Garfield seems to resemble a young Peter Parker, good casting there.
I've only seen him in Dr. Parnassus, but he doesn't seem terrible.

Also, Emma Stone would make a good younger Mary Jane.

I'm quite impressed with the casting to say the least.

They should just continue on even though spider man three was the worst movie of all.just freaking continue on to 4 and pretend three never existed!