Author Topic: DAMNIT, Sam Raimi You Failed Me (Read 5904 times)

Cheebs · « **on:** April 24, 2007, 09:47:36 AM »

He admits he bowed to studio pressure to put Venom in.

Quote

Question: Were you reticent about having so many characters to deal with, especially the villains?

Raimi: Well, I had, there's so many fears I have in the making of the movies, that that's just one of them, so I don't want to make it seem overblown in my vast array of things I'm terrified of that people won't like. But I had worked on the story with my brother Ivan, and primarily it was a story that featured the Sandman. It was really about Peter, Mary Jane, Harry, and that new character. But when we were done, Avi Arad, my partner and the former president of Marvel at the time, said to me, Sam, you're so, you're not paying attention to the fans enough. You need to think about them. You've made two movies now with your favorite villains, and now you're about to make another one with your favorite villains. The fans love Venom, he is the fan favorite. All Spiderman readers love Venom, and even though you came from 70s Spiderman, this is what the kids are thinking about. Please incorporate Venom, listen to the fans now. And so that's really where I, I realized okay, maybe I don't have the whole Spiderman universe in my head, I need to learn a little bit more about Spiderman and maybe incorporate this villain to make some of the real diehard fans of Spiderman finally happy.

The key problem with the movie I can gather from early reviews is that the film is rushed strongly due to the fact it has too many bad guys and the venom arc feels somewhat tacked on.

Despite Sandman being somewhat boring the film likely would have been SO MUCH better if he didn't throw so much into it due to studio pressure and had his own well paced film.

Sam why! :'(

Solo · « **Reply #1 on:** April 24, 2007, 09:53:43 AM »

I knew all along he bent over. Why else would he talk all throughout S-M and S-M2 about only loving the classic villains/hating Venom, only to do an abrupt turn?

Cheebs · « **Reply #2 on:** April 24, 2007, 09:56:13 AM »

It just doesn't feel right. I mean we all know the studio is going to do 4-forever when he runs off to play with the hobbit or whatever he plans to do, why not let him keep his style of 60's stan lee spider-man and do whatever they want in later films be it venom or carnage or whatever?

Every sign shows this movie being enjoyable but very rushed and not fleshed out. Sam Raimi bowed to studio pressure and for that the film has less of that soul that made spidey 2 so great it seems.

Oh and the same interview more or less confirms he is in deep talks to do the hobbit. He did weird little pr avoidance stuff that he likely wouldn't do if he wasn't heavily in talks:

Quote

Question: New Line has also rumored to approach you to do The Hobbit. Have they approached you to do The Hobbit? Was are the rumors, fact, fiction?

Raimi: Well, the truth is I just don't know what I'm going to do next, that's the most honest answer I can give you. And I can't honestly say, even though I have spoken to Bob Shay, that--I don't know that I could honestly say that anything's been offered to me until some time in the future, because, it just wouldn't be exactly right. Or true.

that sounds to me like he has been offered the film and hasn't said no

Solo · « **Reply #3 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:06:10 AM »

S-M2 will have tons more soul, and it will make a ton more too at the box office. Arad doesnt know shit.

S-M: $400M
S-M2: $375M

S-M3 prediction: $250M. Being the sequel to S-M and S-M2 will guarantee it breaks $200M, but I think critical word, and general moviegoer word of mouth is gonna hurt this one, and its not gonna get the repeat viewings that pushed the other ones over the top. Hell, I saw S-M2 in theatres like 4 times! I dont think Ill be seeing 3 more than once, and even then, Im not going until its been open for 2 weeks.

Cheebs · « **Reply #4 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:11:34 AM »

SM3 has a problem 2 and 1 never faced. Somewhat mediocre press reviews. Basically every review has "It's good...BUT" the first two never had that. If Sony and Marvel left Raimi to his devices it would have the soul that 2 had which made everyone fall in love with it. People didn't like spidey 2 because it had a badass bad guy. Hell most of the film was about Peter, not Spider-Man fighting.

Also it doesn't help it has pirates 3 and shrek 3 coming out very quickly after.

Solo · « **Reply #5 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:16:58 AM »

Exactly. S-M2 was more of an underdog story than anything else, and perhaps thats why I love it so much. Actually though, S-M got fairly mediocre reviews. I think it made so much just because we FINALLY got a S-M movie. S-M2 was the critical darling. I actually half think it ended up with the highest tomatoemeter rating of 2004.

S-M3 has mediocre reviews, 2 other blockbusters, and movies like Batman Begins still fresh in the public's mind.

Cheebs · « **Reply #6 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:21:32 AM »

Speaking of Batman Begins I do have one fear about the dark knight. The best parts of Begins are the parts of the film are those centered on Bruce Wayne, not Batman. With the pressure of the Joker in part 2 I hope nolan doesn't feel the need to focus on lots of action scenes of Batman vs. Joker throughout the whole film and have bruce pushed to the sidelines.

Candyflip · « **Reply #7 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:29:27 AM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 24, 2007, 10:21:32 AM

Speaking of Batman Begins I do have one fear about the dark knight. The best parts of Begins are the parts of the film are those centered on Bruce Wayne, not Batman. With the pressure of the Joker in part 2 I hope nolan doesn't feel the need to focus on lots of action scenes of Batman vs. Joker throughout the whole film and have bruce pushed to the sidelines.

I hope the cut the gravely voice shit. Christian Bale makes it wincingly bad.

Cheebs · « **Reply #8 on:** April 24, 2007, 10:52:31 AM »

Quote from: Mute on April 24, 2007, 10:29:27 AM

Quote from: Cheebs on April 24, 2007, 10:21:32 AM
Speaking of Batman Begins I do have one fear about the dark knight. The best parts of Begins are the parts of the film are those centered on Bruce Wayne, not Batman. With the pressure of the Joker in part 2 I hope nolan doesn't feel the need to focus on lots of action scenes of Batman vs. Joker throughout the whole film and have bruce pushed to the sidelines.
I hope the cut the gravely voice shit. Christian Bale makes it wincingly bad.

Batman always does that, just not to the extent of Bale. I don't mind it.

Cheebs · « **Reply #9 on:** April 24, 2007, 11:17:03 AM »

Variety's review:

Quote

The three main recurring characters get stuck in a rut and the same can be said of the film itself in "Spider-Man 3." After the significant improvement of the second installment over the first, new entry reps a roughly equivalent dip in quality and enjoyment, with Spidey now giving off the faint odor of running on fumes. This devaluation shouldn't hurt at the box office, at least at first, as the vast majority of the fans who turned the first two into $822 million and $784 million worldwide grossers, respectively, will cram multiplexes around the globe to see the first blockbuster of the summer.

A sense of strain envelops the proceedings this time around. One can feel the effort required to suit up one more time, come up with fresh variations on a winning formula and inject urgency into a format that basically needs to be repeated and, due to audience expectations, can't be toyed with or deepened very much.

Big problem with third Spideyis the script, the very same element that elevated the second yarn. Four years back, vet scenarist Alvin Sargent, with a story assist from Michael Chabon, enriched the premise from all angles -- emotion, humor and villainy. This time, the magic has eluded Sargent and the Raimi brothers, director Sam and co-writer Ivan, the result being a story that would have provenmore satisfactory for a late '60s cartoon-hero TV show than for a new-century blockbuster.

At the outset, everything is so hunky-dory that New York City looks like Pleasantville. Thanks to Spider-Man, crime is virtually non-existent, Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) is a burgeoning musical theater star, and Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), still studying science at college, is dorkier than ever.

But evil begins to reassert itself on several fronts. As Peter and Mary Jane gaze at the stars from their spider-web hammock overlooking the city, a modest "War of the Worlds"-like meteor crashes nearby and emits a gooey black silk that slithers and slides of its own accord.

A hard-outside/soft-inside criminal (Thomas Haden Church), who turns out to have been responsible for the murder of Peter's beloved Uncle Ben, escapes from prison and, through a process that defies comprehension but is undeniably eye-catching, turns into a shape-changer named Sandman who can blow through the caverns of Manhattan or become a giant hulk with fearsome pummeling power.

And then there is Harry Osborn (James Franco), who, still blaming Spider-Man for the death of his father, decides to emulate the great green one by engineering a new designer Goblin outfit and flying board and taking to the skies to avenge his old man.

Peter acquires yet another adversary in the person of Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), an aggressive street photographer who vies with Peter to capture the revelatory shot that will reveal Spider-Man for who he really is, a coup that will land the winner a full-time job from editor J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) at the Daily Bugle. The rivalry turns into outright war when Eddie morphs into one more Marvel supervillain, the fanged Venom, whose skills eerily match those of Spidey.

Early going is enlivened by a couple high-wire action sequences, a Goblin attack and especially a vertigo-inducing scene in which an out-of-control construction crane demolishes part of a nearby skyscraper, sending platinum blonde Gwen (Bryce Dallas Howard), a classmate of Peter's, heading toward the pavement, only to be saved at the last second by guess who.

But the dramatic temperature is brought way down by Mary Jane, who's become a real drag. Fired, in a poor scene, from her Broadway play, she pathetically begs for attention, becomes petulant when Spidey plants a public kiss on Gwen after saving her, then seeks solace from Harry.

In all his dealings with her, Peter still acts like the prim, naive high school kid he was when first seen in the series five years ago, as if he hadn't learned anything through all his subsequent trials. Scripting of the many domestic scenes between Peter and women, specifically Mary Jane and Rosemary Harris' Aunt May, is very dull and unimaginative.

Script's one big idea is to have Peter/Spidey explore his "dark side," a gambit of tiresome psychological value but with the obvious side benefits of temporarily suspending his goody two-shoes personality and giving him a new, black costume. All the ploy really amounts to is an interlude in which Peter struts around Gotham with a trendy new haircut ogling women and humiliating Mary Jane with some aggressive nightclub antics.

Given the setup, Spider-Man in the end has to contend with multiple villains in a gigantic action climax that, unfortunately, is too reminiscent of the first film's Roosevelt Island episode thanks to the similar imperilment of Mary Jane. Still, Sandman is a strange and visually interesting baddie endowed by Church with a melancholy undercurrent.

Grace, who could plausibly have played Spider-Man himself, provides a spark with something extra as Spidey's first major adversary his own age.

Technically, pic is fully on a par with the previous entries, which means the visual effects will have fans wide-eyed throughout.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #10 on:** April 24, 2007, 12:23:01 PM »

sounds like they shoulda just stuck with sandman. th "lowell" church rocks -- he was stellar in sideways.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #11 on:** April 24, 2007, 12:51:26 PM »

Isn't that what ruined Batman (besides Joel Shumacher)? That they had to put in more and more shit in each film, when your BATMAN film has all those extra characters, the gy everyone cares about gets the short shrift. No wonder Raimi wants to bail and do The Hobbit, he'll probably have more control.

and Arad knows squat about movies. It might not be fair to blame him for Elektra, The Punisher, Man-Thing, and every other shite Marvel film to come out in the last decade, but I sure as hell can blame him for whoring out the characters to the hacks that have directed most of the output.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #12 on:** April 24, 2007, 01:01:22 PM »

Doc Oc > Venom anyway. They didnt even do Venom right. Venom is supposed to be huge, I mean he fought toe to toe with the fukin Juggernaught.

Yeti · « **Reply #13 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:43:40 PM »

Yeah, this Venom is just like Black Spiderman with sharp teeth

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #14 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:45:03 PM »

Mysterio>Sandmana

Willco why you hatin?

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #15 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:47:59 PM »

Mysterio is a joke.

This has been known to anyone with half a brain from the get-go. The good thing is, the early reviews from actual critics (IGN has theirs up, Levy has his, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, etc.) and not AICN people seems to be pretty much entirely good, save for Variety. It's at 86% at Rotten Tomatoes, and I bet it ends up with 79 to 82% fresh. The reviews seem to say the same thing, this is surprisingly good considering the amount of subplots included, the action set pieces are top notch, the film serves as a fitting conclusion to the series (or at the very least, the Osborn arc) and that it rests between the original and Spidey 2. But it's no Spidey 2.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #16 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:49:34 PM »

Sounds like the Xmen trilogy situation. X1 was suprisingly good, X2 was OMG, X3 was meh but not horrible

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #17 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:52:21 PM »

Similar, but it's not crappy like the last one. If you liked Spider-Man, you will probably like this one. Some of the subplots are forced, but they all tie up for an entertaining adventure. There's just not enough depth given to certain elements of the movie.

Again, I liken Spidey 3 to Return of the Jedi, not X-Men 3, when talking about capping off a genre trilogy.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #18 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:56:44 PM »

Spider 3's emo antics make it revolting to me, unlike Jedi which at least had the cool space ship battle and better haircuts.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #19 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:56:53 PM »

I think walking in with low or negative expectations, as clearly Cheese is doing (

) is probably best. I know folks are harping on the film with that Variety review, but Hollywood Reporter and IGN were both very happy with the film. It's not going to be the critical darling that Spider-Man 2 was, but I think it's going to be a lot better than most people, myself included, expected it to be.

Quote from: MrAngryFace on April 24, 2007, 05:56:44 PM

Spider 3's emo antics make it revolting to me, unlike Jedi which at least had the cool space ship battle and better haircuts.

It's just another way of seeing this dark Peter, and it bends more to the Ultimate version of the character, which is what this film series is really based off of. You don't seem to care for the film material pulled from that version of the character so much, so I wouldn't expect you to like this either.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #20 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:57:32 PM »

I honestly cant re-watch the spiderman movies, I tried once, the second one, but there's so much boring stuff in between the cool.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #21 on:** April 24, 2007, 05:59:44 PM »

Again, I can understand your complaints. You're coming from an ASM angle for the character, which is more in line with the FOX animated cartoon. That's not what this series is about. Considering they want to do another trilogy after this one, they'll probably have to go to that series, as Peter is still a teenager in Ultimate Spider-Man.

Cheebs · « **Reply #22 on:** April 24, 2007, 06:02:13 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 24, 2007, 05:56:53 PM

I think walking in with low or negative expectations, as clearly Cheese is doing ()

Which is what I must do! Spider-Man 2 was my #1 film of 2004, I really don't want to be dissapointed.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #23 on:** April 24, 2007, 06:04:07 PM »

Yeah, holding it up to be as good or superior to Spidey 2 is probably not a good idea. It won't match that. I'm just saying, I don't think it'll be as bad as you think. IGN called it a fitting conclusion and everyone has raved about the action set pieces, so that's the bar for me. Just a fitting conclusion.

Cheebs · « **Reply #24 on:** April 24, 2007, 06:05:20 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 24, 2007, 06:04:07 PM

Yeah, holding it up to be as good or superior to Spidey 2 is probably not a good idea. It won't match that. I'm just saying, I don't think it'll be as bad as you think. IGN called it a fitting conclusion and everyone has raved about the action set pieces, so that's the bar for me. Just a fitting conclusion.

I know it won't but I don't want to get excited for it and ruin everything.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #25 on:** April 24, 2007, 06:13:49 PM »

I just want 2 hours of knock down drag out fighting where the last 5 minutes has spider staggering through the rubble of the city with half his guts hanging out while he drags the the torso of the defeated around.

Spiderman vs 300!

Seriously tho I dunno, it just seems like I have to see these Origin stories over and over again for shit I already know. I mean the 1st spiderman movie is all great power blah blah yeah I didnt have to read that 80 times in the comics. The result is a theme that comes off as kinda cheesy to me.

ANYWAY yeah, I liked X2 so much because most of the movie was actual superhero stuff and not people dressed as superheroes dealing with ordinary problems.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #26 on:** April 24, 2007, 06:54:03 PM »

Quote from: MrAngryFace on April 24, 2007, 05:56:44 PM

Spider 3's emo antics make it revolting to me, unlike Jedi which at least had the cool space ship battle and better haircuts.

that's a lie and you know it. Mark Hamil has never once had a good haircut in his entire life.

Solo · « **Reply #27 on:** April 25, 2007, 08:18:59 AM »

Im putting S-M2 (once again, my favorite comic book movie by leaps and bounds) firmly out of mind for S-M3. And I think that, like Willco, being down on S-M3 during its production may lead to us being, *gasp* pleasanty surprised. As long as its not sub-S-M1, Ill be happy.

Cheebs · « **Reply #28 on:** April 25, 2007, 08:31:21 AM »

Quote from: Solo on April 25, 2007, 08:18:59 AM

Im putting S-M2 (once again, my favorite comic book movie by leaps and bounds) firmly out of mind for S-M3. And I think that, like Willco, being down on S-M3 during its production may lead to us being, *gasp* pleasanty surprised. As long as its not sub-S-M1, Ill be happy.

Yeah. I think right now there is not a chance in the world this will be Spidey 2 quality. I'll be happy if it is SM1 quality.

It will regardless be better than the part 3 in every super hero franchise ever (Superman III, Batman Forever, X-Men 3)

Solo · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2007, 08:42:29 AM »

It is depressing though that studio meddling ruined what could have been the best superhero trilogy ever. Now it looks like BB/TDK/? will have no competition there, and WB seems to give Nolan freedom rather than force changes on him.

If I had my way, S-M3 would be no Venom, and no Sandman. Just a 2 hour movie (instead of the almost 3 its reported to be) with Harry as the villain, giving full closure to that arc.

Cheebs · « **Reply #30 on:** April 25, 2007, 08:49:01 AM »

I blame Arad for the Venom stuff. Marvel gets far too involved in this, DC seems to be very hands off for what goes on in the Superman and Batman films.

Solo · « **Reply #31 on:** April 25, 2007, 08:53:50 AM »

Yeah, exactly. I could have more precisely said Arad. What a meddler. Sad thing is, hes ALWAYS a producer on Marvel films, so he basically has the clout to force whatever he wants into a film, despite not knowing shit about filmmaking.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #32 on:** April 25, 2007, 09:28:34 AM »

to be fair, the WB/DC combo has an even worse batting average then Marvel does. The Dolph Lundgren Punisher film is superior to the following...

I would also include Superman Lifts Increasingly Heavy Objects (Superman Returns to most people) to the shit list. To their credit, Constantine was sorta good, and the Swamp Thing films are pretty awesome, but I think we're all going by recent history here.

so Arad has overseen a lot of crap, but it very well could be worse.

Cheebs · « **Reply #33 on:** April 25, 2007, 09:38:32 AM »

I am mainly talking about how modern day WB/DC is handling their film franchises (not the quality of past work) and they are letting the film makers more leeway. Marvel is too hands on with their movies.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #34 on:** April 25, 2007, 10:56:17 AM »

Man, catwoman...so bad

dsn2k · « **Reply #35 on:** April 25, 2007, 11:30:52 AM »

good, Harry looks laughable from the trailers alone and Sandman...ugh seriously Venom will save this movie.

Cheebs · « **Reply #36 on:** April 25, 2007, 11:34:23 AM »

Quote from: dsn2k on April 25, 2007, 11:30:52 AM

good, Harry looks laughable from the trailers alone and Sandman...ugh seriously Venom will save this movie.

Venom is tacked on and has all of 15 min of screen time

Stocky · « **Reply #37 on:** April 25, 2007, 11:43:39 AM »

Venom should've been the main villain, here. I don't think anyone would've minded if Harry just fell down some stairs in the beginning and died.

Solo · « **Reply #38 on:** April 25, 2007, 11:46:53 AM »

Youre the viewer Avi Arad is playing to.

Stocky · « **Reply #39 on:** April 25, 2007, 11:51:41 AM »

i KNOW

Cheebs · « **Reply #40 on:** April 25, 2007, 12:25:58 PM »

I like venon but he should NOT be in the movie. Sam Raimi and his brother wrote this third film and he directed it. Raimi hates Venom and he won't put out his highest quality work when he is forced to work with Venom. Rami's movies(well for 1 and 2) felt like the stan lee 60's-70's era Spider-Man and it should have remained that way for part 3.

Leave that to the new crew for 4-6.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #41 on:** April 25, 2007, 12:59:08 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 25, 2007, 11:34:23 AM

Venom is tacked on and has all of 15 min of screen time

Actually it's been confirmed than a bit more than that.

Venom should probably not be in that movie, but the early reviews are coming in and they're - gasp! - not awful. Most say that Venom is a neat character, probably because he's just an evolution of Brock, who you see downspiral the entire film. I think it's other subplots, like Gwen Stacy, that seemed forced.

Interesting thing is that my early sources were right and that Raimi and crew wanted to do 3 and 4 back-to-back with Venom as the story for 4, but that idea was shot down for whatever reason.

Cheebs · « **Reply #42 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:02:51 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 25, 2007, 12:59:08 PM

Quote from: Cheebs on April 25, 2007, 11:34:23 AM
Venom is tacked on and has all of 15 min of screen time

Actually it's been confirmed than a bit more than that.

Venom should probably not be in that movie, but the early reviews are coming in and they're - gasp! - not awful. Most say that Venom is a neat character, probably because he's just an evolution of Brock, who you see downspiral the entire film. I think it's other subplots, like Gwen Stacy, that seemed forced.

Interesting thing is that my early sources were right and that Raimi and crew wanted to do 3 and 4 back-to-back with Venom as the story for 4, but that idea was shot down for whatever reason.

The cast is only signed on for 3. It would likely be damn costly to get Tobey back. He has been wishy-washy about this entire franchise since he finished one.

He was asked at a Spidey 3 premiere what he thought of the movie and he said something like "It was ok I guess."

He is such a weirdo

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #43 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:05:13 PM »

I think that's what shot it down - was Maguire. Dunst would've came back and everyone else needs the job. You'll notice that a lot of crew were signed for Spider-Man 4 initially, including Alvin Sargent. And before shooting, several merchandising companies had listings for Spider-Man 4. It was in the works.

Cheebs · « **Reply #44 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:07:31 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 25, 2007, 01:05:13 PM

I think that's what shot it down - was Maguire. Dunst would've came back and everyone else needs the job. You'll notice that a lot of crew were signed for Spider-Man 4 initially, including Alvin Sargent. And before shooting, several merchandising companies had listings for Spider-Man 4. It was in the works.

Yep, yep. Kirsten was willing to continue all signs show if Raimi and Tobey did. Tobey looks to want to get out of Spider-Man as quickly as possible. His little "injury" pre-SM 2 made this obvious.

Stocky · « **Reply #45 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:12:21 PM »

Tobey is a fucking baby.

Solo · « **Reply #46 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:20:49 PM »

Its weird because you always heard that Dunst was the one who wanted out. Yet just yesterday I saw her interviewed (and she looked *gasp* showered, unstoned, and actually pretty, for once) and she said that she'd love to do another, if Tobey and Sam are also down. Even though it seemed like it would never happen say, a year ago, now Im starting to think 3 may not be the end. I mean, we know its not the end, since Sony wants 400 movies, but I mean of this cast and crew.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #47 on:** April 25, 2007, 01:33:56 PM »

Sony wants at least another trilogy, but I think Raimi & Co. are done for this one. Could be nice to wait a few years and start up with a new trilogy that just works from the continuity of this one with a new cast and crew. Kind of like how writer/illustrator team changes on comic book runs.

IGN threw Edgar Wright's (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) name in the ring as a good replacement for Raimi and that's the first suggestion I've heard other than my own that I really dig. I think Michel Gondry would be an inspired choice, personally... if they could get him.

Cheebs · « **Reply #48 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:15:18 PM »

Tobey would cost far too much to come back and the recent press ring of interviews for Raimi shows him shockingly being very wishy-washy in that pr hollywood way when asked if he is directing the hobbit acting like he can't talk about something which should signal he is in the middle of potentially signing something. I doubt if he is really getting to do the hobbit he would want back for 4.

And Willco, Edgar has said in the hot fuzz circuit that Ant Man is his next project. I doubt he would do another super hero film after that

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #49 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:19:02 PM »

Raimi sold out

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #50 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:20:38 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 25, 2007, 02:15:18 PM

And Willco, Edgar has said in the hot fuzz circuit that Ant Man is his next project. I doubt he would do another super hero film after that

Ever? I doubt that. We're talking years away here and Sony has a lot of money. Have you ever seen a briefcase with $3 million in it? THAT CHANGES PEOPLE.

Solo · « **Reply #51 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:22:55 PM »

Gondry doing a superhero movie? That would be all forms of wacky, but he might just be a good man for such a thing.

Cheebs · « **Reply #52 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:23:30 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 25, 2007, 02:20:38 PM

Quote from: Cheebs on April 25, 2007, 02:15:18 PM
And Willco, Edgar has said in the hot fuzz circuit that Ant Man is his next project. I doubt he would do another super hero film after that

Ever? I doubt that. We're talking years away here and Sony has a lot of money. Have you ever seen a briefcase with $3 million in it? THAT CHANGES PEOPLE.

I dont want edgar trapped in super hero land after ant man

He needs to do more comedy films

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #53 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:26:46 PM »

Quote from: Solo on April 25, 2007, 02:22:55 PM

Gondry doing a superhero movie? That would be all forms of wacky, but he might just be a good man for such a thing.

I think it would be whacky and awesome!

And Cheebs, we're years away from Spider-Man 4. Probably 5-8 years. That's a lot of time to do other projects.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #54 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:28:21 PM »

And I don't think Sam Raimi sold out as much as it was just ego that allowed him to believe he could juggle so many characters and make a good film. And for the most part, it sounds like he did that. The problem is, he has sacrificed the quality to the point where it won't meet the bar of Spidey 2.

Cheebs · « **Reply #55 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:34:28 PM »

Willco I am curious about your view on this. If the early talks(which Raimi has confirmed have happened) pan out and he directs The Hobbit, how do you feel he'll do? He doesn't sound like he wants to do LOTR-light. In a interview with dark horizons he said it would be appealing because it is much more lighter and kid friendly.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #56 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:40:48 PM »

Have you ever read The Hobbit? It is much more kid friendly and lighter. People often refer to it as the fun, charming story that serves as a great prequel or the calm before the storm. That was the first Tolkien book I read when I was a kid.

I think Sam Raimi would probably make a damn fine adaptation, but I also think he is treading dangerous territory. Tolkien is almost synonymous with P.J. in your average movie-goer's eyes and any Lord of the Rings related film will be scrutinized and compared to Peter Jackson's trilogy. I just think you have too many factors working against you to make it work, so I'd be happier if he wound up doing 30 Days of Night or something else.

Solo · « **Reply #57 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:43:04 PM »

30 Days has a director though, doesnt it? Hard Candy guy?

Cheebs · « **Reply #58 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:45:35 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 25, 2007, 02:40:48 PM

Have you ever read The Hobbit? It is much more kid friendly and lighter. People often refer to it as the fun, charming story that serves as a great prequel or the calm before the storm. That was the first Tolkien book I read when I was a kid.

I think Sam Raimi would probably make a damn fine adaptation, but I also think he is treading dangerous territory. Tolkien is almost synonymous with P.J. in your average movie-goer's eyes and any Lord of the Rings related film will be scrutinized and compared to Peter Jackson's trilogy. I just think you have too many factors working against you to make it work, so I'd be happier if he wound up doing 30 Days of Night or something else.

I read it of course but PJ wanted to make it LOTR light with Aragorn and stuff.

I agree about how it is tough terrority, a guy who is pretty well in the know over at home theater forum said the talks are farther along than one would expect and that Sony is treating Sam VERY well and playing nice to him in hopes of having Raimi pick SGI(their effects studio) over weta for it to put them over the map. So it sounds like he is getting pretty damn close to getting the project.

But I do wonder about the PJ backlash. Look at X-Men 3 and all the horrible backlash, not just relating to Singer but the project as a whole and it didn't hurt it one bit.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #59 on:** April 25, 2007, 02:45:58 PM »

Last I heard it was in development hell and Steve Niles was holding out hope Raimi would do it when he stepped off of Spidey projects. Cool news, if so.

Quote

But I do wonder about the PJ backlash. Look at X-Men 3 and all the horrible backlash, not just relating to Singer but the project as a whole and it didn't hurt it one bit.

It didn't hurt it the first weekend, but it was a critical dud and a commercial letdown. Very frontloaded pic that underperformed in the long run. Most people speculated that if Singer helmed the project, it would've made a lot more money.

News:

Author Topic: DAMNIT, Sam Raimi You Failed Me (Read 5904 times)