I honestly can say I didn't see this coming.
According to
Heat Vision, Columbia is parting ways with Sam Raimi AND Tobey Maguire AND Kirsten Dunst. Their endgame? Yeah, a reboot.
The new film will take Peter Parker back to high school (explaining how they'll be able to get away without Maguire reprising the role) and will be produced by Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin. Columbia of course feels that they can get away with this because it's built into the character.
"Peter Parker as an ordinary young adult grappling with extraordinary powers has always been the foundation that has made this character so timeless and compelling for generations of fans. We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots and we look forward to working once again with Marvel Studios, Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin on this new beginning," Sony Pictures co-chairman Amy Pascal said in a statement.
I think it bears repeating but this really came out of left field. I mean, I know there were script discrepancies but it was just last week that rumors were swirling about John Malkovich playing the role of the Vulture. Sony had other plans of course and didn't want Vulture in the film, which for someone like Raimi could be a big sticking point. The script was rewritten upwards of four times I believe, with a different writer each time. What's even more insane is getting rid of Raimi as well.
Dunst and Maguire I get. As I mentioned earlier, going back to high school with the character will be a little tough for those two. But Raimi too? And high school? The franchise clearly didn't need a reboot and I think that there might even be some fan revolt if this is really the path that Columbia Pictures takes. Sure, I mean, lots of people will still see the movie (it is Spider-man afterall). But I think a lot of us loved what Raimi/Maguire/Dunst were doing with the characters and the universe that was being created. Sure, Spider-man 3 wasn't the best it could've been, but at the least it continued the universe that the films created.
What's even more intriguing is Marvel. I guess since this is one of the properties that Marvel doesn't "own" when it comes to movies. I think Sony has something like a seven picture deal, and it looks like they can really do whatever the hell they want with the movies (to an extent). What's really pathetic about this is that not only are Hollywood studios content with meddling in non-property based films. They're perfectly content with completely ruining the creative process in property based films. Sony crammed Venom in, and apparently wanted to go with a bigger name villain in the fourth film which doesn't really jive with Raimi's directorial style. Can't they leave well enough alone?
I think the bigger picture with this move is probably the saddest of them all: no more Bruce Campbell cameos. And probably no more J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson. Sad really. If fans really want to make a statement, I'd say it would start with a boycott of the next film.
I honestly can say I didn't see this coming.
According to Heat Vision, Columbia is parting ways with Sam Raimi AND Tobey Maguire AND Kirsten Dunst. Their endgame? Yeah, a reboot.
The new film will take Peter Parker back to high school (explaining how they'll be able to get away without Maguire reprising the role) and will be produced by Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin. Columbia of course feels that they can get away with this because it's built into the character.
"Peter Parker as an ordinary young adult grappling with extraordinary powers has always been the foundation that has made this character so timeless and compelling for generations of fans. We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots and we look forward to working once again with Marvel Studios, Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin on this new beginning," Sony Pictures co-chairman Amy Pascal said in a statement.
I think it bears repeating but this really came out of left field. I mean, I know there were script discrepancies but it was just last week that rumors were swirling about John Malkovich playing the role of the Vulture. Sony had other plans of course and didn't want Vulture in the film, which for someone like Raimi could be a big sticking point. The script was rewritten upwards of four times I believe, with a different writer each time. What's even more insane is getting rid of Raimi as well.
Dunst and Maguire I get. As I mentioned earlier, going back to high school with the character will be a little tough for those two. But Raimi too? And high school? The franchise clearly didn't need a reboot and I think that there might even be some fan revolt if this is really the path that Columbia Pictures takes. Sure, I mean, lots of people will still see the movie (it is Spider-man afterall). But I think a lot of us loved what Raimi/Maguire/Dunst were doing with the characters and the universe that was being created. Sure, Spider-man 3 wasn't the best it could've been, but at the least it continued the universe that the films created.
What's even more intriguing is Marvel. I guess since this is one of the properties that Marvel doesn't "own" when it comes to movies. I think Sony has something like a seven picture deal, and it looks like they can really do whatever the hell they want with the movies (to an extent). What's really pathetic about this is that not only are Hollywood studios content with meddling in non-property based films. They're perfectly content with completely ruining the creative process in property based films. Sony crammed Venom in, and apparently wanted to go with a bigger name villain in the fourth film which doesn't really jive with Raimi's directorial style. Can't they leave well enough alone?
I think the bigger picture with this move is probably the saddest of them all: no more Bruce Campbell cameos. And probably no more J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson. Sad really. If fans really want to make a statement, I'd say it would start with a boycott of the next film.
WIth a few notable exceptions film is an actor driven medium these days and I suspect that a couple of things were at play here despite the usual studio PR BS
ReplyDeleteOne is that Tobey is almost 35 years old (not a "young adult" anymore) and Spider Man is a kid superhero-Dunst is pushing 30 and Sam Rami has done everything he can with this franchise-
In other words here is the bottom line, if these actors/filmmakers had wanted to do Spidey 4 then there would be a Spidey 4-All the studio cares about is $$$ and this group has done nothing but print money for Marvel/Columbia-Why would the studio take a chance on a new Spider Man, Mary Jane and director if they didn't have to? They wouldn't - It takes too much thought and is too much of a gamble-Hence my thought that the main players here bowed out behind a curtain of "creative differences"
Also, Rami, Tobey and Kirsten don't want their obituaries to start out by saying "Tobey starred as Spider Man in 7 films, the last when he was well past his peak at 42." Tobey doesn't want to be Adam West
Rami is a great director who constantly elevates bad material to something close to folk art, but lets face it what is left for him to accomplish here?
I think this just looks like a case of "Let's quit while we are ahead"-Don't forget, Tobey almost bowed out after Spider Man One! So, let me introduce you to the new Spider Man: Zac Efron! (It's not a joke!)
All very true. Raimi, Maguire and Dunst were all seemingly reluctant to sign on for the fourth movie for the reasons you stated above (being eternally tied to those roles).
ReplyDeleteI think that when Sony realized that Raimi wasn't going to budge on Malkovich as the Vulture that the two of them would part ways. Once Raimi was out, Sony realized that they should reboot the franchise, meaning that Maguire and Dunst would be out. I honestly think Maguire and Dunst could've gone either way with the fourth film and, had they done it, would've been their last film in those roles.
My bigger problem is that you're right, it does boil down to creative differences. What's sad is that the trio clearly had a track record of producing big bucks with the films, yet Sony felt they knew better. It's almost as if they (and not Raimi/Maguire/Dunst) felt responsible for the films' success.
Marvel must regret giving Sony that seven picture deal when it did. Granted, I know they've been involved in this whole process the entire way and clearly signed off on it. And this deal was made before Spider-Man, Iron Man and The Dark Knight et al. proved that superhero films printed money. You've got to wonder though if they were producing it would they have let Raimi do his story? Or would the three of them have been out after the first film due to Marvel's notoriety for underpaying their stars?
And the only only thing not nearly as funny as Zac Efron as high school Peter Parker is a Jonas Brother.
ReplyDeleteComments! I want to play!
ReplyDeleteTo me it just feels silly to "reboot" a series that had barely booted. If they were that concerned with the ages, they should have picked younger actors to begin with. It is easy to make an actor look older or younger then they are.
Batman was easy to reboot, the most recent movies were terrible and the last good one was a loooong time ago. People are going to struggle to suddenly get slapped in the face with a brand new cast of characters. I hope I'm wrong though and they they do something similar to how Hulk turned out with Edward Norton. I didn't love the movie at first...but it was grown on my every time I see it.
Bottom line, as sad as it is to say, put Spider Man in the title and the dollars will flow. The later X-Men movies weren't exactly praised for being good and they still made pretty good bank.