Dunst "Defenitly on board" Spider-man 4

[GreenScar]

Some rumors are circulating that Dunst might actually be a part of this project. WHY, WHY, WHHHHHHYYYYYYY!?!?

Speculation has been rife all over the net about what to expect from the latest "Spider-man" movie, slated for release on May 6, 2011. It's obviously still very early in development, but that didn't stop the New York Post from asking Sony producer Todd Black a few questions in order to clear up some of the rumors that have been circulating.

In the article, Black confirms that Kirsten Dunst is definitely on board, but that there are no plans to have a wedding between Peter Parker and Mary Jane in the forthcoming movie. He also squashed the rumors that Morbius the Living Vampire will be the villain in the movie, but that the villain will be very New York centric.

This is what he told the Post about the potential villain: "We're just coming up with who the villain's going to be now. We'll be shooting in New York again. Trust me, people will appreciate who we pick, because it'll be a big part of New York."

Oh and another thing no 100% news on thee villain.

Here's the article from the Post:

While picking producer Todd Black's brain about "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3," I asked a few questions about the upcoming "Spider-Man 4." Black was understandably cryptic, but here's what I did learn:

- Kirsten Dunst is definitely on board. Last month, director Sam Raimi was quoted as saying he didn't know if the actor was going to sign up to play Mary Jane again, but it appears that she has.

- Contrary to online rumors, it doesn't look like the script will feature a wedding between Mary Jane and Peter Parker. Black had no knowledge of that subplot.

- Also contrary to online rumors (but really, are there any other kind?), the villain will not be Morbius the vampire. Sure, vampires are hot, but Black squashed that rumor completely.

- As for who the villain will be, Black had this to say: "We're just coming up with who the villain's going to be now. We'll be shooting in New York again. Trust me, people will appreciate who we pick, because it'll be a big part of New York."

So who could it be? What Spidey villain has ties to New York City? Let's speculate after the jump.

Black also confirmed that the villain will be one of Spidey's foes from the comic, not a character invented for the film. And we can assume it'll be one of the hero's classic rogues. Just four movies in, the producers won't be resorting to B-listers. So with the help of this list, I have two guesses. And again, the key is that the villain has a more specific tie to New York City than just living there. That narrows the list considerably.

1. Kraven the Hunter. He's a former big-game hunter who captured and tormented Spider-Man in a famously dark story from the 1980s. But as far as his ties to New York? Not particularly strong, beyond being positioned as a man out of place, because he's a big-game hunter in an urban area.

2. That leaves the best guess: the Kingpin. He's the leader of organized crime in Gotham, and is about as New Yorky as a villain can get. The character already appeared in Fox's "Daredevil" a few years back, and it's unclear if that studio still owns the rights. But if Sony has worked out a deal, it seems Kingpin would be a solid choice.

[Batman1980]

How exciting...not. Will admit she ALMOST looks pretty in that picture though. I was still hoping they would re-cast the character and bring in someone with actual acting talent who actually looks nice, oh well.

[Ray O. Blu]

Great. I could care less about Spiderman movies if she wasn't in them. She's the only reason to even waste a minute watching those crap movies.

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by Ray O. Blu

Great. I could care less about Spiderman movies if she wasn't in them. She's the only reason to even waste a minute watching those crap movies.

You sir are one in a million.

[Darkhawk9587]

Dang, you beat me to posting this. Both good news and bad. The bad is that Dunst returns (IMO) and the good is that Morphius isn't the villain (IMO). I have a feeling it's going to be the Lizard and here's why: 1)they've been talking about it for a long time 2) Dylan Baker has played the doc in the three films already and 3) they say he's involved in New York and Doc Connors teaches at in a university there (NYU?).

[MyBlu-rayBrotherEd]

Bummer.

[silversnake]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

You sir are one in a million.

I agree with him... Dunst is all kinds of hawt.

[mikejet]

Originally Posted by silversnake

I agree with him... Dunst is all kinds of hawt.

[Diesel]

eh, no biggie to me
i could watch the film with or without her

as for the other things mentioned

no wedding - YES, i don't want to see that in this movie

villains - LIZARD LIZARD LIZARD LIZARD LIZARD

whats wrong with only having one villain in the movies


oh and 5points to GS for that picture (even though it is on the article)

[child of the sun]

Dunst would "get it"! I hope to everthing I know that its the Lizard. They should have had him in SM3 but we all know the abomination of a movie that turned out to be!

[dcowboy7]

Originally Posted by ed4246

Bummer.

Ditto.

[doctorD]

Well...I'm happy they are getting back the original cast. It appears that people have a problem with her, I'm assuming from the 3rd movie. Outside of the issues that people have with Spiderman 3, she was not the issue.

[KubrickFan]

Great. Now let's hope they won't throw in another 'Villain discovers Pete is Spidey and kidnaps his girlfriend' plot. Otherwise that would be the fourth time.

[dvd_mazter]

I'm glad she's coming back. I agree her performance left a lot to be desired in SP3 but she did a pretty decent job in the first two and as long as the script gives her some solid material, she is a great MJ.

Plus, I'm totally sick of re-casting especially three movies into the franchise. I'm putting my faith in Sam Raimi that he is able to re-create the magic of the Spider-man 2

Oh, and please make The Lizard the villian. They had a perfect set-up for him in Sp3 and I hope they follow through.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Sure she's on board. What else does she have to do?

[PS3-Playb3yond]

Finally! I'm just glad they're moving forward.

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by silversnake

I agree with him... Dunst is all kinds of hawt.

So you would've stayed completely away from Spider-man had it not been for Dunst?

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

So you would've stayed completely away from Spider-man had it not been for Dunst?

I just know she's not the actress I pictured for the role. They could go with -
Rachel Weisz
Isla Fisher
Danneel Harris
Danielle Panabaker
Or any other charming redhead who is not Kirsten Dunst.

[Groo The Perverted]

I actually like Dunst. Never understood the backlash against her. I think she's definitely cute. Definitely in the "can get it" category, as well.

[Batman1980]

Might have something to do with the fact that without makeup she's one of the ugliest women in Hollywood. Not the best face, horrible teeth, her only assets are her boobs, really. Just never been attracted to her.