Comic Book Resources

I hope not, because I think it's such a great series. Sam Raimi made a great run, maybe he should quit while he's ahead. Let somebody else srew up the franchise, that way it'll be easier to ignore later parts (Batman 3? Never heard of it, I though Burton only made 1 & 2).

I'm not doubting Raimi's ability to make more good movies, I just think money alone wouldn't be the best motivation to make one.

I think Raimi could well do a fourth--he doesn't sound so much bored as exhausted in interviews, he's practically admitted that he was coming up with ideas for 4 even while shooting 3...I think he just needs a break is all. (To do three big-budget special-effects-laden movies in five years is a much more grueling thing than it sounds.)

Hopefully Sony will be understanding, and not try to squeeze in a fourth while he's recuperating.

Do I think he's got enough ideas in the tank for a fourth? Sure. Plenty of places to go, even without bringing back anyone you've already used. Spider-Slayers, Vulture, Silvermane...heck, do a "big break-out" movie and toss in a gang of second-stringers banded together, like the Shocker, Beetle, Scorpion, and Rhino.

And, of course, if you get Raimi back I think the cast will follow suit.

And double of course, you have to get back the guy who plays Jameson. You can recast anyone else, even Peter, but Jameson is so letter-perfect in his role that I think he might be CGI.

Bear in mind too that, as a negotiating tactic, saying "Ah, I dunno, I'm ready to move on to other things" is better than saying "Man, I'd pay *you* if you let me make 3 more Spidey pictures!"

I suspect Raimi has more stories to tell, and will tell them, and will get a big pile of money for telling them.

After seeing how bored Tobey Mac and Kirsten Dunst seem to be with their biggest successes, it wouldn't bother me a bit to see them both replaced. I would much rather see the movies made by people who are as excited about making them as the fans are about watching them.

I dunno if Spidey will work as a Bondian franchise... but they certainly have enough material for such a thing if they want to do it that way.

Well after seeing it last night and all of us hating it my friends and I only half jokingly came up with some explanations why Spider-Man 3 was so bad. I think that maybe Rami got paid by the minute, a friend suggested that perhaps they made this one stink so bad that they wouldn't have to do another one, and another friend suggested that they made this one so bad so that people would stop talking about how bad the first Spider-Man was.

This one fell prey to the Batman sequal syndrom of having multiple villians. Multiple bad guys always stinks. I think that perhaps the moral of these movies is that Peter Parker is an ass. In every one he acts like a jerk the whole time only to learn exactly the same lesson in each one only to forget it by the next one.

Why was Gwen Stacy even in this? Why was the Sandman? While his transformation and the effects on him were the best parts of the film they were also the most unnecessary.

Could we please have more singing and dancing? Because I'm sure that's what all the people who went to see it were really wanted to see and not, you know, Spider-Man or anything...

"After seeing how bored Tobey Mac and Kirsten Dunst seem to be with their biggest successes, it wouldn’t bother me a bit to see them both replaced. I would much rather see the movies made by people who are as excited about making them as the fans are about watching them."

Here's the thing about big budget action adventure movies. They're not fun to make. Especially for actors. It's not like you're spending your day slinging webs, having light saber fights or hanging out dinosaurs. You stand around on a green screen stage, wait it in your trailer for hours either getting complicated makeup or costume fittings, wait for complicated camera setups to be finished. Not to mention getting strapped into harnesses and thrown around like a pinata.

Well, without spoiling anything, the problem I see with making a fourth Spider-Man movie with this cast and crew is that even though there's still a lot of things to do, as far as events and characters are concerned (the wedding, the Lizard, the Chameleon, Mysterio, possibly but probably not Carnage, and heaps more, obviously), there's pretty much nothing left to do thematically. I got a tremendous sense of closure from this one, and any Spidey movie after this would just be icing on the cake.

They could always go the Superman Returns route and give him a kid.

Consider how Spider-man movies follow the basic themes of the Superman movies

Part 1- Spider-man/ Superman's origin
Part 2- Spider-man/Superman lose/giveup their powers
Part 3- Spider-man/Superman encounter their dark side fight their evil twin

Yeah, I guess they could give him a kid- there's any number of things they could do- but as far as the themes of the story go, the series seems over. Spidey has achieved an emotional maturity that he's just never had in the comics, as far as I'm aware, and that the three films seemed to be building towards.

Of course, they might come up with totally new and equally compelling character developments to take us through three more movies, so who knows. The Superman comparison definitely has to stop, though, because if the next movie is about ridding the world of nukes and fighting clones, that would be the last straw!

Part 1- Spider-man/ Superman’s origin
Part 2- Spider-man/Superman lose/giveup their powers
Part 3- Spider-man/Superman encounter their dark side fight their evil twin

The next logical step from there is:

Part 4- Really really bad film made on a shoestring budget that no-one can remember because we've blotted it from our memories.

The kid comes along 20 years later when someone tries to make a film that follows on from the first two Spider-Man films ignoring the 3rd and 4th ones.

Will I still be accepted as a fellow geek if I admit that I really enjoyed this movie?

Spidey has achieved an emotional maturity that he’s just never had in the comics, as far as I’m aware, and that the three films seemed to be building towards.

This is what I liked best in this film - I felt like they had some logical character development that the comics never did. It fits in with everything we know about Peter Parker, but it breaks the storytelling engine. In a movie trilogy, you can get away with that. In a comic book series that goes for 40+ years, you can't.