Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Jan 15, 2010 17:38:00 GMT -5
Hey, I really liked Aunt May in the films. She ain't no Ultimate May, that's for damn sure. In fact, just scrap the film idea and do a television adaptation of Ultimate Spider-Man. Spider-Man is better suited to a serialized format. Imagine a TV show with this cast:
|
|
Kara
Bad Ass Wicca
boys boys boys
[Mo0:28]
Posts: 2,296
|
Post by Kara on Jan 15, 2010 17:58:54 GMT -5
This idea is so stupid. But Anton Yelchin would make a good spiderman I think.
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Jan 15, 2010 18:30:02 GMT -5
This idea is so stupid. But Anton Yelchin would make a good spiderman I think. Why? Why is everyone so reboot-phobic? Raimi's films left a lot to be desired and, frankly, Spider-Man is better in high school. Even if you love Raimi's films, they're not going to disappear just because of this new film.
|
|
watcher
Novice Witch
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 211
|
Post by watcher on Jan 15, 2010 23:56:14 GMT -5
There is a rumor that they are trying to get James Cameron to helm it so I'm definitely behind a reboot.
Especially since the last one was a steaming pile of poo.
|
|
Kara
Bad Ass Wicca
boys boys boys
[Mo0:28]
Posts: 2,296
|
Post by Kara on Jan 16, 2010 0:56:09 GMT -5
This idea is so stupid. But Anton Yelchin would make a good spiderman I think. Why? Why is everyone so reboot-phobic? Raimi's films left a lot to be desired and, frankly, Spider-Man is better in high school. Even if you love Raimi's films, they're not going to disappear just because of this new film. Well I don't know why other people are against the reboot but personally I didn't think there was anything wrong with the spiderman movies. It also seems way soon for a reboot.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Jan 16, 2010 1:47:41 GMT -5
www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20336967,00.html Here's Entertainment Weekly's top 19 choices to play Peter Parker in the new Spider-man movie. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing either Justin Long or David Henrie play Peter Parker. Just give it to Zac Efron, and it can be a musical version... like the film version of the Broadway production...
|
|
The Girl In Question
Ensouled Vampire
Lumpy Space Princess
"It eats you starting with your bottom."[Mo0:33]
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by The Girl In Question on Jan 16, 2010 4:41:37 GMT -5
Excuse my language, but this is booty. We don't need a remake of the first movie. If they want to make money on the franchise they should just make a fourth movie with a new story. Screw this, I'mma go watch the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. And wexina.
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Feb 9, 2010 19:47:25 GMT -5
I just thought I'd bump this to see what people think about the rumors that Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief) is going to play the new Peter Parker.
Personally, I don't know much about him, but I think I'd be ok with him being Spider-Man based on the fact that that kid is friggin' adorable.
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Feb 9, 2010 19:53:15 GMT -5
I truely don't care. The film would have to be mighty impressive to make me interested in it, otherwise I'd rather just watch the first film again. This idea is so stupid. But Anton Yelchin would make a good spiderman I think. Why? Why is everyone so reboot-phobic? Raimi's films left a lot to be desired and, frankly, Spider-Man is better in high school. Even if you love Raimi's films, they're not going to disappear just because of this new film. Because reboots aren't interesting, and because despite the occassional creative wish to fulfill something that was missed the first time around, reboots are often an excuse for a film company to release something that will make loads of money with minimal thought and cost. It'll probably suck, or at best, offer nothing significant over the originals. Batman sat in wait for years after the franchise was run into the ground. Spiderman has two very critically and finacially successful films and another blockbuster with mixed opinions. Everyone was onboard and excited for a 4th. Hardly cause for an overhaul. Sam Raimi was being difficult with the script (which is precisely why 3 had problems) and so the film disappears. Sony might really care, but the circumstances of the film's announcement aren't positive.
|
|
The Night Lord
Wise-cracking Sidekick
The Long Kiss Goodnight
There can be no love. Only pain exists[Mo0:1]
Posts: 2,654
|
Post by The Night Lord on Feb 13, 2010 5:24:03 GMT -5
Noooooo. I was actually looking forward to the fourth film! What the hell is with reboots?? Okay, personally, I liked the Hulk reboot, but Spider-Man doesn't need one! It's just...so upsetting...
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Feb 13, 2010 19:47:54 GMT -5
I truely don't care. The film would have to be mighty impressive to make me interested in it, otherwise I'd rather just watch the first film again. Why? Why is everyone so reboot-phobic? Raimi's films left a lot to be desired and, frankly, Spider-Man is better in high school. Even if you love Raimi's films, they're not going to disappear just because of this new film. Because reboots aren't interesting, and because despite the occassional creative wish to fulfill something that was missed the first time around, reboots are often an excuse for a film company to release something that will make loads of money with minimal thought and cost. It'll probably suck, or at best, offer nothing significant over the originals. Batman sat in wait for years after the franchise was run into the ground. Spiderman has two very critically and finacially successful films and another blockbuster with mixed opinions. Everyone was onboard and excited for a 4th. Hardly cause for an overhaul. Sam Raimi was being difficult with the script (which is precisely why 3 had problems) and so the film disappears. Sony might really care, but the circumstances of the film's announcement aren't positive. It's Spider-Man. It's a story that's been rebooted and retold dozens of times, in countless mediums, before it ever made to the big screen. Raimi's version was just the latest in a long line, so arguing that another remake will add nothing new to the mythos is a bit rich. The movie can skip the origin story, Incredible Hulk-style and just get on with telling a good story about Peter Parker in high school. Reboots are interesting. My favourite ever movie, Halloween, was remade/rebooted a few years ago. Was it a good movie? No, it was crap. Was it interesting? Yes, actually, it was cool to see a different interpretation of the story and character. Some people liked it more than the original, and I respect that. The Friday the 13th reboot was great because it took the series back to it's psycho-in-the-woods roots. Some of the most impressive films of this decade - Casino Royale, Batman Begins, Star Trek - are reboots. Yet every time another one gets anounced, the fans throw their toys out of the pram... Buffy being a prime example. I'd love to see a Buffy reboot. Fiction is cyclic. It's natural for us to repeat the stories we love in different ways. Look at fairy tales. Look at Shakespeare, Dracula, Sherlock Holmes. The modern equivalent is reboots. Is it a way for studios to make money? Yes, but so is everything. Doesn't mean the right writer and director can't make it work. Very often, reboots take a story back to what made it appealing in the first place, avoiding the clutter that's accumulated in the meantime. How often is the fourth entry in a film series any good? Face it, you were all going to hate Spider-Man 4 anyway. A reboot stands a chance of doing something fresh.
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Feb 13, 2010 21:26:55 GMT -5
i heard about this on the radio a few weeks ago. i didn't belive it at first but now i do. why would they ruin it by going back to when he wasnt spiderman? i mean what's so interesting about that? and plus it's not going to have any of the same actors in it like Toby or Kirsten. so i am totally against it.
|
|