You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Spiderman 4 - No Sam Raimi? Maguire? Dunst?

Posted: Thu, 26th Apr 2007, 10:43pm

Post 1 of 36

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Story

LOS ANGELES - Don't worry about Spider-Man. The web-slinger will be back on the big screen after "Spider-Man 3," his Hollywood handlers say.

The question is whether director Sam Raimi and stars Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst will go on another adventure.

Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios, the film branch of the comic-book empire that owns Stan Lee's superhero creation, plan to move ahead with "Spider-Man 4," though the actors and filmmaker are noncommittal about their own participation.

"I know there'll be a `Spider-Man 4, 5 and 6,'" said writer-director Raimi, the filmmaker behind the first three. "I just won't be the guy that'll probably write the story, because I've got to step away from it to clear my head."

"My hope is that Sam and Tobey and Kirsten will want to come back for more," said Amy Pascal, Sony co-chairwoman. "They can make as many `Spider-Man' movies with me as they want to."

If Raimi, Maguire and Dunst decided against it, "then I'll be making `Spider-Man' movies," Pascal said, with other actors and filmmakers. "We will continue to make them at the studio."

Since 2002's blockbuster "Spider-Man," Raimi said he had known precisely what he wanted to do with each succeeding chapter. With "Spider-Man 3" wrapping up key conflicts from the first two films, Raimi said he has no story in mind to continue the saga of young Peter Parker and his superhero alter ego.

That could be left to another writer, with Raimi potentially directing again if someone hit on the right story.

"If there was something within the character, Peter Parker where we last left him, that told us where he next had to go, what he next had to learn as a human being to become a fuller person, and somebody could fashion a story around that idea that was intriguing, engaging, interesting — you couldn't keep me from it," Raimi said.

"I just can't think about that right now. That's really the truth of it."

Raimi's "Spider-Man 4" prospects are further blurred by speculation that he could be in line to direct "The Hobbit," the prequel to J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" fantasy.

Peter Jackson, the filmmaker who turned "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy into one of Hollywood's biggest successes ever, is at odds with New Line Cinema, the studio that made the films and is developing "The Hobbit."

Jackson, who is suing New Line over profits on "The Lord of the Rings," and New Line boss Bob Shaye have traded bitter words indicating they would not be working together again.

New Line executives declined to comment, but Hollywood is notorious for blood feuds that end in hugs, kisses and reconciliation, so the company and Jackson still might patch things up. Yet their quarrel certainly could open a door for Raimi should he not return to "Spider-Man."

Raimi's a proven hand at the mix of action, spectacle and human intimacy Jackson brought to "Lord of the Rings," so he would be an obvious choice to take on "The Hobbit."

"I don't feel it's appropriate for me to say even, because really, that's Peter Jackson's, Bob Shaye's picture. They'd have to come to terms about what direction they're going to go first," Raimi said. "Then it would have to be offered to me. If that were to happen, Peter would have to be OK with it, and I'm not even sure it's the picture for me next. I think it might be premature for me to guess."

Maguire, who plays the steadfast Peter and the daring Spider-Man, and Dunst, who co-stars as the love of his life, Mary Jane, also are uncertain about their future with the franchise.

Both say it would take a new approach — and probably Raimi's return — to get them to come back for more "Spider-Man" films.

"Sam really is the heart of these movies. So I can't imagine it without him. We have a fantastic shorthand and a great relationship. To me, he is these movies," Maguire said. "A lot of people contribute a lot of great things, but to me, Sam is the core of it. The character of the stories lives in his gut."

For Dunst, the future of Spider-Man hinges on "Sam and Tobey and me and a good script and a different kind of direction. Something fresh that's different for all of us," she said. "We resolve a lot of things in this film, and so it's really an end to this trilogy. It feels like an end."

Maguire said he expects it will be as long as two years before a script might be ready, at which point he would think about returning.

"We could all get together and make a fourth one, they could make a fourth one that's a continuing story and just kind of have all new people, they could reconceive the whole thing and approach it from a different angle. I just don't know," Maguire said. "They're going to squeeze everything out of these things that they can."

"Spider-Man" producer Laura Ziskin said the caretakers of the franchise would sit down with Sony executives in mid-May, once the film opens, to discuss what to do next. It would take a minimum of three years to get another film ready, she said.

"We'd love to have Sam, we'd love to have Tobey, we'd love to have Kirsten. We'd like to keep the team. But Spider-Man is bigger than all of us," said Avi Arad, a producer on the "Spider-Man" films who until last year also headed Marvel Studios.

"It's early to say, but you can totally assume that Spider-Man will endure and thrive and will continue," Arad said. "There's so many stories to tell. Over 40 years of stories. We only told three."

Raimi agreed that with or without him, Maguire and Dunst, Spider-Man should live on in future films.

"There are so many stories that Stan Lee wrote that are great stories, and so many new characters to be introduced and so many events that have yet to take place in Peter Parker's life," Raimi said. "Plus the character is rich in that he is a young man learning the lessons of life, so there's so many lovely parables to tell."
Posted: Thu, 26th Apr 2007, 11:11pm

Post 2 of 36

Plainly

Force: 1537 | Joined: 27th Dec 2006 | Posts: 767

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks, Garrison! tick+1tick

I certainly hope Sam, Tobey and Kirsten come back for the next movies. Especially Sam and Tobey; Kirsten I wouldn't mind as much since she her character isn't as important as PParker in the movies, but still, it would be great if she'd come back.

If they make a movie of "The Hobbit" (Great book by the way, waaay better [and shorter] than the LotR trilogy), I guess I'd like Peter Jackson or Sam Raimi to direct it. Preferably Peter Jackson.
Posted: Thu, 26th Apr 2007, 11:27pm

Post 3 of 36

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rumor already has it that Maguire has a $20 million offer on the table already. He was paid $16 million for S3.

If I were him, I'd ride that cash cow for as long as I can.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 2:11am

Post 4 of 36

Plainly

Force: 1537 | Joined: 27th Dec 2006 | Posts: 767

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Garrison wrote:

Rumor already has it that Maguire has a $20 million offer on the table already. He was paid $16 million for S3.

If I were him, I'd ride that cash cow for as long as I can.
$20 million!?! American!?! Wow. You're right, Spider is a (cash) Cow.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 2:15am

Post 5 of 36

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Personally I think its a great idea to stop after 3 and do something new. Its a shame that studios always feel the need to milk an idea for all its worth till they've destroyed a brand. Some things lend themselves to more films and others don't. Why not go out on a high?
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 2:25am

Post 6 of 36

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

God. Normally I'm a fan of sequel and the defender of the 'franchise', as I think movies in trilogies seem epic.

But, 4 movies makes the cash SEEM just like a cash cow, to the point where it's almost embarrassing to hear the words "Spiderman 4". It's just cheapening and cheapening the thrills of a movie.

1, 2, 3 movies in a series are okay with me. 4 hits Rocky territory.

Spiderman, since the first one came out, always felt like a set of three would tell the whole story, since 1 and 2 were left open-ended. Whereas, from the likes of it, 3 draws to a close.

Like having an X-Men 4. Not only would it not make sense, better it would almost anger me that they would butcher something already ended by reimagining a new ending and another movie.

I love franchises, but they've got to end somewhere.

The year of threes.
Shrek 3
Bourne 3
Ocean 3
Spiderman 3
Pirates 3

Ridiculous number of threes this summer.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 3:57am

Post 7 of 36

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Don't forget Rush Hour 3... (No joke, and I am uber-pumped.)
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 4:20am

Post 8 of 36

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

1, 2, 3 movies in a series are okay with me. 4 hits Rocky territory.
Hey there... Rocky IV is incredible. Rocky V is the horrid one.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 4:36am

Post 9 of 36

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Kid wrote:

Personally I think its a great idea to stop after 3 and do something new. Its a shame that studios always feel the need to milk an idea for all its worth till they've destroyed a brand. Some things lend themselves to more films and others don't. Why not go out on a high?
And why not let these people take a damn break from Spiderman? It'd be nice to see Raimi do something else for a change, especially... The only projects he's done since 2000 have been Spiderman movies. I'm sure he is getting to the point where he wants to do something else.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 5:47am

Post 10 of 36

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Actually he does fit other movies in between the Spiderman fliks.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 7:14am

Post 11 of 36

rogolo

Force: 5436 | Joined: 29th May 2005 | Posts: 1513

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 4 User MacOS User

Gold Member

CX3 wrote:

Actually he does fit other movies in between the Spiderman fliks.
I think Aculag means directing-wise.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000600/
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 10:21am

Post 12 of 36

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Atom wrote:

Like having an X-Men 4. Not only would it not make sense, better it would almost anger me that they would butcher something already ended by reimagining a new ending and another movie.
Some would say that X-Men 3 already took care of butchering the franchise/story. smile

Otherwise I agree with you. The best thing they could do would be to leave the franchise for a decade-or-so, then maybe do some more once they've got fresh ideas. Could even bring back the same team and show Peter Parker at a later stage in his life, and how that affects things.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 1:13pm

Post 13 of 36

TimmyD

Force: 2646 | Joined: 18th Feb 2004 | Posts: 2507

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

This could kinda end up being a bit like the James Bond franchise. Sean Connery obviously hasn't played Bond in every single Bond movie...
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 5:54pm

Post 14 of 36

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

TimmyD wrote:

This could kinda end up being a bit like the James Bond franchise. Sean Connery obviously hasn't played Bond in every single Bond movie...
Not to be argumentative here, but I think that the Spiderman franchise will go the way of Batman and Robin if they start using other "Peter Parkers" and such. They put Val Kilmer, Geroge Clooney, etc. but they didn't work.

Taking a break from the franchise and coming with Batman Begins was refreshing.

Bond is definitely the exception.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 6:32pm

Post 15 of 36

Multiwagon

Force: 1513 | Joined: 2nd Jul 2006 | Posts: 494

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I read an interview with Tobey Maguire in my brothers Nickelodeon magazine the other day. He said that if Spider man 4 was made he was 100% on board, as was Kirsten Dunst.
Posted: Fri, 27th Apr 2007, 7:01pm

Post 16 of 36

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

That was probably before Raimi decided to leave.
Posted: Sat, 28th Apr 2007, 4:25pm

Post 17 of 36

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Also, I kinda don't think Nickelodeon magazine is the best source for any kind of news...
Posted: Sun, 29th Apr 2007, 3:02am

Post 18 of 36

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Zing!
Posted: Sun, 29th Apr 2007, 5:10am

Post 19 of 36

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Some would say that X-Men 3 already took care of butchering the franchise/story. smile
Well I quite like X3, I think the only reason that it was a bit of a let down was because there was such a build up to the phoenix thing in x2. Xmen could be one of those franchises that went on forever if they took the time to explore the other characters rather than fixating on wolverine all the time.

Garrison wrote:

TimmyD wrote:

This could kinda end up being a bit like the James Bond franchise. Sean Connery obviously hasn't played Bond in every single Bond movie...
Not to be argumentative here, but I think that the Spiderman franchise will go the way of Batman and Robin if they start using other "Peter Parkers" and such. They put Val Kilmer, Geroge Clooney, etc. but they didn't work.

Bond is definitely the exception.
You know personally I think Val Kilmer could have been the best batman had the rest of the film been upto scratch and George clooney was at least good casting if he could act as anyone but himself. Both of those films were poor because of other things really.

I think the main difference between spidey and bond is that in spidey we explore peter parker and once the issues he is facing are dealt with its really stretching it. The action is an aside to that character exploration.

In bond its the otherway round, he is a constant and we are really seeing what makes the bad guys so crazy. Bond doesn't have any superpowers, his skill really comes down to experience and luck and the audience can identify with him much more. In all the good bonds he is always struggling to figure out the bad guy and beat him like you or I might. With spidey the actual fight is just a fight and the depth is in his personal struggle.
Posted: Sun, 29th Apr 2007, 11:31pm

Post 20 of 36

TimmyD

Force: 2646 | Joined: 18th Feb 2004 | Posts: 2507

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Oooh Kid, how deep.
Posted: Wed, 2nd May 2007, 9:16pm

Post 21 of 36

Nutbar

Force: 530 | Joined: 13th Aug 2006 | Posts: 373

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

On the subject of the possibility of xmen 4 i was quite saddened to hear of the next film focusing on wolverine. Surely after making 3 films revolving mainly around him they could give someone else a chance.
Posted: Wed, 2nd May 2007, 10:04pm

Post 22 of 36

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

Tarn wrote:

The best thing they could do would be to leave the franchise for a decade-or-so, then maybe do some more once they've got fresh ideas. Could even bring back the same team and show Peter Parker at a later stage in his life, and how that affects things.
Exactly, like how there doing an Indiana Jones 4, and showing how he is 20 years after his last adventure.

Man I cant wait for Indy 4... 2008!
Posted: Wed, 2nd May 2007, 11:26pm

Post 23 of 36

jmax

Force: 260 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 671

MacOS User

Member

While we're following revived franchises, how about Indy 4? As a huge fan of the first 3, I'm psyched. Of course, if they manage to butcher one of the greatest (if not the greatest) trilogies ever, I'll be really unhappy. So I look forward to a good film, but dread a bad one at the same time. (I guess that could go for any upcoming movie. wink )
Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 1:07am

Post 24 of 36

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Tobey McGuire has always come off as an ass to me.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=823547852

3 is where it should end. Everyone I've talked to seems to agree with me and most said they probably wouldn't see a 4th one, especially if the usual crew isn't in it. And especially since Spidey 3 seems to have mixed reviews (most of which pointing to its either bad or not nearly as good as spidey 2), they should stop while they're relatively ahead.
Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 3:35am

Post 25 of 36

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Besides, isn't the 4th movie in a series always terrible?
Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 6:01am

Post 26 of 36

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Aculag wrote:

Besides, isn't the 4th movie in a series always terrible?
Wrong... Like I said before: Rocky IV.

Though that's probably the only one.
Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 8:24am

Post 27 of 36

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

BackOfTheHearse wrote:

Aculag wrote:

Besides, isn't the 4th movie in a series always terrible?
Wrong... Like I said before: Rocky IV.

Though that's probably the only one.
Don't forget Star Wars: Episode 4.
Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 12:14pm

Post 28 of 36

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Or Star Trek IV

Posted: Thu, 3rd May 2007, 6:27pm

Post 29 of 36

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

BackOfTheHearse wrote:

Aculag wrote:

Besides, isn't the 4th movie in a series always terrible?
Wrong... Like I said before: Rocky IV.

Though that's probably the only one.
Don't forget Star Wars: Episode 4.
I don't think that counts...

But looking at the film that was created 4th... it lives up to the "rule".
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 2:59am

Post 30 of 36

jrg2134

Force: 2491 | Joined: 11th Oct 2003 | Posts: 288

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

After watching Spidey-3 it does not look like they"ll make a 4th movie athough it would be really cool.
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 3:01am

Post 31 of 36

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

BackOfTheHearse wrote:

I don't think that counts...

But looking at the film that was created 4th... it lives up to the "rule".
Yeah, Episode 4 does not count, because it's technically the first movie.
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 3:39am

Post 32 of 36

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

jrg2134 wrote:

After watching Spidey-3 it does not look like they"ll make a 4th movie athough it would be really cool.
They just made $59 million in one day on it.



They most definitely WILL make spiderman 4. No matter what. Courtesy of the "If it sells, we'll make it, no matter what" rule they live by.
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 4:38am

Post 33 of 36

MacnaDX

Force: 20 | Joined: 2nd Oct 2006 | Posts: 9

Windows User MacOS User

Member

i thought # 3 was going to be the last one, im glad the epic series will continue
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 6:57am

Post 34 of 36

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

MacnaDX wrote:

i thought # 3 was going to be the last one, im glad the epic series will continue
Really? There's a good franchise that lasts forever, ergo LOTR and (I'll go ahead and give it, minus 5 and plus 6) Rocky, and then there's the cash cow. While the latter may have been the case from the beginning, there's gotta be a point where the viewer/customer realizes they are being given the same thing for more money, and feel cheapened.

Whoring-out is a phrase that comes to mind. Sure, why not make more money on a selling product? But you know what beats that for me: Why ruin a perfectly good set of solid, A-rated movies that tell a beginning, middle, and end of a story?

They want to write around the intended ending to the series to push more money out, count me out for a ticket.

Let's see some Daredevil 2 before Spiderman 4. (not to be sarcastic, actually. I genuinely liked most of DD- Colin Farrel's part aside- smile)
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 9:37am

Post 35 of 36

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Aculag wrote:

BackOfTheHearse wrote:

I don't think that counts...

But looking at the film that was created 4th... it lives up to the "rule".
Yeah, Episode 4 does not count, because it's technically the first movie.
It was a joke.
Posted: Sun, 6th May 2007, 6:30pm

Post 36 of 36

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Riiiiiiight, sure Tarn. Whatever you say, man. wink