• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

SPIDER-MAN 4 on "indefinite hold"

JacksonArcher

JacksonArcher

Vice Admiral
Admiral
With comic-book movie news sparkling last night (the appearance of the Iron Man 2 trailer, Bryan Singer confirming he's directing X-Men: First Class) apparently your friendly neighborhood webslinger cannot bask in the glory.

IESB reports that Sony Pictures has put Spider-Man 4 on "indefinite hold", citing creative differences with series director Sam Raimi. Apparently the script is incomplete, and with a shooting date drawing near (spring next year), and a release date locked in (May 2011), Sony and Raimi once again are butting heads. Last time, it was Venom, and this time it is The Vulture.

The studio does not agree with Raimi and his choice of villain: The Vulture. This is something Raimi wanted in Spider-Man 3 but instead upon the insistance of producers Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin the character was removed and replaced by Eddie Brock/aka Venom. Raimi is pushing hard for The Vulture but the studio isn't budging.

So the studio has halted production on the newest installment until a compromise can be made.

http://iesb.net/index.php?option=co...te-hold&catid=43:exclusive-features&Itemid=73

This has to be one of the few times where I actually agree with the studio. The Vulture is a lame villain. I can see him as a second tier type of bad guy but someone headlining the film? I don't think so. Especially since there are still much more interesting villains in the Spider-Man villain pantheon (Kraven The Hunter, Mysterio, Electro, The Kingpin, The Lizard... anyone other than The Vulture...). I hope Raimi & Sony can reach a mutual understanding, one that results in Raimi choosing another villain. At this point, if he won't budge, I wouldn't be too sad to see him go. I trust his judgment, and I am wholly supportive of him directing the film, but maybe it is time for some new creative blood.
 
The Lizard is such a no-brainer that I genuinely think the people involved with this movie are actual retards.
 
When I was a kid I loved the live-action show with Nicholas Hammond as Peter/Spidey.

The one thing I find I don't like about the new movies is how I don't get excited about seeing the costume on-screen, if you know what I mean. There's almost too much swinging and spinning and all that. Kind of like Transformers 2 where about 2 minutes into the movie you've got robots everywhere. Kids need to be teased a bit for the big reveal.
Of course this could all be a function of being 36, not 7!
 
Personally, I have enough faith in Rami that he can develop a good story around the Vulture. I can see him taking some creative liberties as he did with all the other villains to make him more interesting/complex as a character. Look at the Batman series. Ras Al Ghul was a bit of a lame 2nd tier villain, and look how well that turned out.
 
And keep in mind how Raimi's said he's approaching this. He didn't start with the villain and build a story around him. He started with Peter Parker, with deciding what the next story to tell about his journey and his growth as a person would be, and then chose a villain that would serve that story. So I assume he has reasons for using the Vulture.

And why assume that the film's Vulture would be no different from the comics' version? Look how different Doc Ock was. Not to mention that there have been several different Vultures in the comics.
 
An inside source working on the project tells IESB that there are some major issues director Sam Raimi is dealing with that include an incomplete script. And why is the script incomplete? Looks like Raimi and the studio heads at Sony Pictures can't agree upon a villain for the film.
Click to expand...

Here we go again.
 
^I have to disagree (with Torg). Ra's Al Ghul was never lame. In fact, other than the Joker, he was probably the most genuinely threatening villain that Batman's ever had.

As for this stupid movie, I don't get it. How hard is it to get a decent Spider-Man flick going? There are so many great storylines from the comics to choose from, with so many great villains.

They should have used the failure of 3 to reboot the whole thing, not necessarily with a new origin, but with new principle actors and a new creative team behind them.
 
I have no problem with the Vulture as the main baddie.
I have confidence that with some minor creative liberties Sam will have a great Vulture for the film.
Frankly, after the studio's meddling by forcing Venom into the third film I'm less inclined to trust their halting of this due to their own hubris.

Let Sam work damnit.
 
1. Exactly how is The Vulture anymore lame than the Lizard? I will never get comic book folks.

2. Ra's Al Ghul is probably the only Batman villain that actually makes sense. The Joker is a joke.

3. Imagine a movie about alien robots that actually has alien robots in it. Go figure.

4. I have no idea who to go with in this movie after they wasted 3 villains in the last one. I guess I would go with Kraven the Hunter or something, I would do Man-Wolf instead of Lizard.
 
Torg said:
Personally, I have enough faith in Rami that he can develop a good story around the Vulture. I can see him taking some creative liberties as he did with all the other villains to make him more interesting/complex as a character. Look at the Batman series. Ras Al Ghul was a bit of a lame 2nd tier villain, and look how well that turned out.
Click to expand...
I alway's hated the Vulture, not because he was a lame charachter, but because he was just a dispiciple person.I alway's felt like that about Ras Al Ghul too.For these reasons I alway's looked foward to them getting there asses kicked.Batman begins had 3 villians, I think Spiderman 4 could have the same thing with the Kingpin leading a behind the sceens effort to destroy Spiderman and the Vulture as the scarecrows role in Batman Begins and have the Lizard as an acidental villian. All the other villians I either felt sorry for or rooted for, I need a villian I just hate, who is a complete asshole, The Vulture is that guy.
 
I don't think Sony can use Kingpin because he's a Daredevil character as far as movie licensing rights are concerned, and thus is controlled by a different studio. That's why the Spectacular Spider-Man animated series had to turn Tombstone into a Kingpin surrogate.
 
Turns out it was all BS.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8930

Spider-Man 4 is NOT in Trouble!
Source:SuperHeroHype
December 17, 2009


This morning, IESB reported a rumor that Spider-Man 4 "has been been placed on indefinite hold."

The site continued by saying that "several department heads working on the SPIDER-M4N production were notified of the halt last Thursday. Spidey and friends have some issues that need to be dealt with before production can move forward once again."

Our studio source tells us this is not true. They are simply on hiatus for the holidays and production will resume in the new year. This is a very common practice on films, and not really surprising.

The fourth installment is scheduled for a release in conventional and IMAX theaters on May 5, 2011.
Click to expand...
 
Just let the movie maker do what he wants! He has made shitloads for Sony and Sony should just trust him.
 
Joy To The World said:
1. Exactly how is The Vulture anymore lame than the Lizard? I will never get comic book folks.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly! I am not too clear on how you use The Lizard as a main villain. Connors becomes a wild, mindless animal after he transforms, correct? The stuff of B-grade monster movies. I would think it would be better to showcase things more unique.

I want to see Spider-man face a foe with a genuine scheme. Which plays out over the course of the whole film. Opposed to occasional, random fight scenes surrounded by the lastest episodes in the Peter and MJ soap opera.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about these day, but originally The Lizard was not a wild, mindless animal. He retained his intelligence, albeit EVIL intelligence.

The Vulture is a good foe although I'd probably go with Mysterio as the villain myself, but then I'd also go with someone other than Rami to make the movie.

Oh, and Ra's al Ghul is in no way a lame 2nd tier villain. I'd probably put him 3rd behind Two-Face and The Joker as far as Bat-villains go.
 
With lame being within the eye of the beholder, those of you who claim that Ra's isn't a 2nd tier villain, was that your opinion before Batman Begins featured him?
 
Having read most of Denny O'Neil's and Mike Barr's comics stories involving Ra's and seen him featured in B:TAS, I would never have considered him anything other than a first-tier villain. He's basically Batman's equal in every way aside from being more global in his objectives and far more amoral. He's what Batman might have been if he weren't so ethical and so fixated on fighting crime in Gotham.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top