Sam Raimi Promised Creative Control for SPIDEY 4

[Sussudio]

Good news for Spider-Man fans (hopefully). After what appeared to be an overly studio controlled Spidey 3, Marvel looks like they're actually letting Raimi do his thing and in a Citizen Kane/Orson Welles fashion, granting him creative control over Spider-Man 4. Even if you enjoyed Spidey 3, this still seems like good news.

In an interview with Empire for this May’s issue, Raimi openly talked about some of the problems with Spider-Man 3 and confirmed some rumors we all heard about two summers ago when the movie was released.

“They really gave me a tremendous amount of control on the first two films, actually. But then there were different opinions on the third film and I didn’t really have creative control, so to speak.”

There were rumblings that Raimi wasn’t allowed to truly do his own story and that producers forced him to include the popular Venom character as one of the villains in the story. When asked about that, Raimi responded:

“I don’t even want to comment on Venom, because I know he’s a great character and all the fans love him. I never want to say anything bad about a much-beloved character because usually it turns out that I’m the one that doesn’t understand what makes it great.”

It sounds promising that the next movie will return to the quality we’ve come to expect from the first two films in the franchise. I’m glad that Raimi is back in the captain’s chair (for real this time) and that Tobey will be back as Peter Parker. We also know that Raimi really wants Kirsten Dunst back as Mary Jane but no deal has been made on that front as of yet.

Source: Screenrant


UPDATE
Raimi confirms he has been given FULL CREATIVE CONTROL over the 4th film, and that the script will be completed by summer...also another quote from Raimi:

He added that "The best way for me to move forward on films, is that I've got to be the singular voice that makes the creative choices on the film. I love Spider-Man so much that I'd like to continue telling Spider-Man stories. But only under those circumstances where I think I can honour him."

Source: ComingSoon.net

[Mike53421]

I just hope Mr. Raimi has found a computer since 2007 and noticed that nobody enjoyed dancing or crying... or singing. Spiderman 3 without those scenes would have actually been good, I maintain it's underrated but some scenes really needed retooling.

- How the butler randomly points out he knew Spiderman didn't kill his Dad.
- The very random picture of Willem Dafoe, it was just so goofy looking
- Harry/MJ dancing in the kitchen with his iPod
- Peter in the jazz club
- MJ singing... twice
- Sandman crying
- Venom

Okay, maybe three WAS bad but despite the growing list of complaints it really came down to a few potential changes to make it better.

[Darkhawk9587]

This is good news. Remember, it was MARVEL and Sony who pushed Raimi to put Venom in the third one, instead of waiting for a later installment. That is partially the reason that the third one wasn't as good in substance material as the previous two, IMO. It turned the story into a convoluted mess.

[dvd_mazter]

Originally Posted by Darkhawk9587

This is good news. Remember, it was MARVEL and Sony who pushed Raimi to put Venom in the third one, instead of waiting for a later installment. That is partially the reason that the third one wasn't as good in substance material as the previous two, IMO. It turned the story into a convoluted mess.

Pretty much what I was going to say.

Sony should just let Raimi do his thing. Look at Spider-man 2, the movie is pure gold because the studio didn't interfere and then SP3 came and while I still loved it, I can't help laughing at some of the dumb ideas put in (Emo Spidey )

[Sussudio]

update: story now online/posted in OP

[Monkey]

Spiderman needs a re-do in the same way the Hulk did. Dump Tobey M and Kirsten Dunst, dump the cheap looking CGI, new writers, new director, etc, etc.

[GreenScar]

Not sure this is official at all. Looks like if he's demanding full control, but I don't read anything saying he has it.

Hope he gets it though.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by jasonbird

Not sure this is official at all. Looks like if he's demanding full control, but I don't read anything saying he has it.

Hope he gets it though.

yea i wasn't sure about the "full control" thing or not. what it seems is that he'll be having much more creative control over 4 than he did 3, and that can only be a good thing i guess?

[MAPdead]

Good might be as good as the first too. I wonder if they have the villains picked yet.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Spiderman needs a re-do in the same way the Hulk did. Dump Tobey M and Kirsten Dunst, dump the cheap looking CGI, new writers, new director, etc, etc.

what is wrong with tobey and kristen? and the cgi is not cheap looking. that's been one of the selling points from day one. why do you even think that?

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

what is wrong with tobey and kristen? and the cgi is not cheap looking. that's been one of the selling points from day one. why do you even think that?

He probably doesn't realize that the first two are older movies so the CGI isn't as good as modern day standards. For it's time it was cutting edge.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by assydingo

He probably doesn't realize that the first two are older movies so the CGI isn't as good as modern day standards. For it's time it was cutting edge.

For it's time? Geez, they aren't that old now.

[matthieuxdetoux]

I just hope he includes a "cool" villain like Lizard or Mysterio, that would be awesome. Venom was good for the 2 minutes he was in the third film. They could really go all out with a Venom/Carnage story, but that wouldn't be kosher for general audiences.

[Batman1980]

Actually my main complaint with the first two was Maguire and Dunst. Maguire is a scrawny dork, Peter Parker looks more like Clark Kent when he's incognito. Not to mention Mary Jane Watson is supposed to be strikingly beautiful and that's simply not Kirsten Dunst...

[Variable]

I read the thread title and thought I didn't care but as I got through some of the posts, this actually got me a little excited.

Maybe it hit them that the movie will make money no matter what so why not let the guy do what he wants.

[Batman1980]

It could also be that a LOT of people(not me) really complained about Spider-Man 3 so they want to do what they can to go back to the first two films that people enjoyed so much.

[Variable]

I'd like to believe that.

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Downhere

For it's time? Geez, they aren't that old now.

Back then special effects were starting to look good but were still not realistic. Today we have special effects that are almost entirely believable.

I'm not saying the movies are bad.

Spider Man 3 wasn't that bad but it's still good he gets to do what he wants.

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by Downhere

For it's time? Geez, they aren't that old now.

Originally Posted by assydingo

Back then special effects were starting to look good but were still not realistic. Today we have special effects that are almost entirely believable.

Half of the reasons VFX looks bad or not realistic is the time period in which the movie was made. The other half is cost, that is the film's budget can't afford it.

A recent case in point : Benjamin Button vs Dr. Manhattan. Some may argue (Snider included) that Dr. Manhattan's not so uncanny valley lip-sync issues were intended to show his disconnect with humanity. Regardless, Button's animation technique is more cutting edge than Manhattan. For Watchmen, they had to track the dots on Crudup to match his movements, with facial movements for closeups. For Button, all they had to do was track the head to replace it with an older version of Pitt.

Timing the animation is everything as Hong Kong and WiFu demonstrate. If your characters move just a tad faster, the audience can still buy it. But if they move too fast, you really don't as evidenced in some shots of the Spidey trilogy. That's just on animating the walking/running and choreography.

The big trick is still the face because people look at human characters and expect the same actor to be in it. What Digital Domain did with Button is the best thing that could happen to CGI. If Imageworks had the e-motion capture to do Doc Oc, or Square Enix with all of their characters, or John Gaeta with Neo and Agent Smith, Spidey 2, Final Fantasy and the latter 2 Matrix movies would have REALLY looked spectacular. Like I said, time period and cost. Hopefully Raimi will deliver aces for Spidey 4.


fuad

[Ernest Rister]

Not sure if I buy the whole "the studio made me do it" b.s. Spider-Man 3 is no more or less eccentric than either of the first two movies. That Butler scene is just as lame as the moment in Spider-Man where the Green Goblin forces Aunt May to finish the Lord's Prayer. All three movies are cheeseball, don't know why exactly SM3 magnified fanboy ranting. I think the problem was that Peter and Mary showed their dark sides in this film, and this made them unattractive and unlikable for a spell, but I thought that was the whole point.