Slashdot Mirror


Spider-Man Has Back Problems

skantman writes "Potentially sad news for Spiderfans. Tobey Maguire has back problems and may have to pull out of the Spider-Man sequel." Since the film was apparently slated to pay him 11M GBP, sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part. CT Updated, thats 11M pounds, not USD.

309 of 460 comments (clear)

  1. Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by juanfe · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sounds like a winning lifestyle endorsement to me...

    --
    ***Foucault is watching you..***
    1. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Mr+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      His latest movie is Seabiscuit in which he plays a jockey. Riding a horse, even just for a movie with a stuntman doing the real work, is dangerous and painful without years of practice.

    2. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by l810c · · Score: 3, Funny

      Meat and lack of yoga are good for the back.

    3. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Zarquon · · Score: 1

      Hey.. it's often dangerous and painful _with_ years of practice.. :)

      --
      "'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
    4. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Karpe · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah? And what about hanging from those buildings in spiderman? I bet that fucked up his back! :)

    5. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by djrogers · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dang it, havent they learned anything yet? Superheroes should STAY AWAY from horses!

      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
    6. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Uart · · Score: 1

      Or, rather than doing yoga, he could just not do yoga, and thereby squelch the risk of screwing his back up whilst in one of those crazy yoga contortions. ;-)

      --

      Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
    7. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by billybob2001 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Could be the arachnoid mater explained under Spinal Meninges & Spinal Cord

      arachnoid mater is a thin membrane which is pressed against the inner surface of the dura mater by cerebrospinal fluid pressure; (Greek, arachnoids = spider ), the space deep to this layer (subarachnoid space) has a spider web-like appearance

      --

      I heard that there would be a live bush show on tv yesterday, but all I could find was a bad western.

    8. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Tribbin · · Score: 3, Funny

      With great power comes great backpains...

      --
      If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    9. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by henele · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is also the issue of how he bulked up for the Spidey role... He put on quite a bit of wieght for the part and if you rush that kind of development it can be bad for you...

    10. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by wjvdt · · Score: 1

      with a healthy lifestyle like that, his sweat won't stink and attract the ladies ;-)

      --
      "If I were punished for every pun I shed, there would not be left a puny shed of my punnish head." - Samuel Johnson
    11. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      This wouldn't happen to Superman. Oh, wait.

    12. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

      I ate a vegetarian who did yoga once...
      She loved it!

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
    13. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by Enraged_jawa · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, he's a *Spider*, he eats *insects* and some small vertibrates like the other Arachnids. (Although, as a kid in the 70's I had a friend that had a Tarantula that would drink beer from a bottlecap and walk sideways at times.)

    14. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by 56ksucks · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Not to mention the fact that that lack of meat results in a condition called Vaginitus in which the victum starts sprouting little vaginas all over his body until he becomes one big pussy!

      --

      ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

    15. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by sclatter · · Score: 1

      Riding a horse, even just for a movie with a stuntman doing the real work, is dangerous and painful without years of practice.

      Like most activities, if your horseback riding is either painful or dangerous you are most likely doing it wrong. It would not surprise me if in the rush of a movie production schedule the actor was insufficiently conditioned for the requisite amount of speed work that was required. An appropriate training program for a rider will be both safe and no more painful than an average trip to the gym, however.

      (Yeah, I ride. Click my link if you want.)

      Since Macguire is playing Pollard, I assume he had to get reeeaally skinny for the role. (The self-destructive habits of jockeys in order to maintain weight is one of the themes of the book.) I have to wonder if that might have something to do with any theoretical health issues.

      I'm also wondering if they included that scene from the book where the prostitute blows smoke rings from her you-know-what. (!)

    16. Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? by unitron · · Score: 1
      "That's what he deserves for perpetuating a movie actually entitled 'Seabiscuit'"

      Yes, any movie about practically the most famous race horse of all time should definitely have some other title, like say, "Beetlebaum".

      When you don't recognize a reference, go ask a grownup before giving us the benefit of your "thinking".

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  2. That's 11m pounds by WD_40 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not dollars.

    --

    "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." -- RFC 1925

    1. Re:That's 11m pounds by Michael_Burton · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey, I'd probably sprain my back, carrying around a wallet that heavy.

      --
      When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
    2. Re:That's 11m pounds by Westley · · Score: 1

      Where are you getting your exchange rates from? According to the currency converter I usually use it's just over 17 million USD...

    3. Re:That's 11m pounds by Snover · · Score: 1

      Where the hell are you getting YOUR conversion rates? The current rate is ~$1.56 per £1. That's $17,171,085.77.

      --

      [insert witty comment here]
    4. Re:That's 11m pounds by fobbman · · Score: 1

      Eleven Million Pounds??? Damn, no wonder his back hurts! That's a lotta fat to get into that Spandex.

    5. Re:That's 11m pounds by tie_guy_matt · · Score: 1

      11m pounds, 11m dollars who cares? Instead of an insane amount of money -- with current exchange rates he is making an insane amount of money and then some. I would do the money for 11m pounds, dollars, or euros. Heck I'd do the movie for 11m pesos but that is just me.

    6. Re:That's 11m pounds by TheAngryArmadillo · · Score: 1
      Heck I'd do the movie for 11m pesos but that is just me.

      That's just over $1M US. Not a lot for a lead movie role in this day and age.

    7. Re:That's 11m pounds by Ian+Wolf · · Score: 1

      No, but it sure is a lot for the average Slashdot poster.

      --
      "The words of the prophets are written on the Slashdot walls."
    8. Re:That's 11m pounds by cemysce · · Score: 1

      For those of you who are too lazy to check, that's 17,199,884.43 USD.

    9. Re:That's 11m pounds by coke_dite · · Score: 1
      Reuters announced this morning that he had reportedly signed on for $17m, almost four times what he got for Spiderman.

      --
      Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
    10. Re:That's 11m pounds by L.+VeGas · · Score: 1

      Too lazy? Too LAZY?
      Vocabulary lesson:
      Being so ungodly nerdy, even for slashdot, that you actually took the time to look that up is not the same as "lazy".

      The word you're looking for is "normal".

    11. Re:That's 11m pounds by netsharc · · Score: 1

      He probably confused Pounds with Euros, heh probably an American.

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    12. Re:That's 11m pounds by Blackneto · · Score: 1

      For that much money he could buy a new back.

      --
      Ursula Andress, Catherine Deneuve, and Charo, twice...
    13. Re:That's 11m pounds by welthqa · · Score: 1

      I thought it was 11 Ga Billion Pesos. which i think comes out to like 100 bucks or something.

      --


      100% Pure Evil With The Look And Feel Of Wholesome Goodness
  3. correction by Evanrude · · Score: 1, Redundant

    That is actually £11 million. Sucks for him if he's not up to it.

    --

    ~.Evanrude
    1. Re:correction by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      No wonder his back is sore, carrying all that loot!

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    2. Re:correction by lubricated · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesn't suck to be him. It sucks to be me. I would love to be him. So he doesn't get 11 million pounds today, big fucking deal. I won't get 11 million pounds ever.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
  4. � NE $ by spookymonster · · Score: 1

    The article states "Last month, Maguire's agents renegotiated a record £11 million deal for the sequel."

    What's that come to, $22M?

    --
    - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
    1. Re:� NE $ by jmauro · · Score: 2, Informative

      $17.2 million. In US currency.

    2. Re:� NE $ by SScorpio · · Score: 2, Informative

      Currently ~$17,191,872.77 USD The current exchange rate is 1 GBP = 1.56290 USD. Odd that the Canandian Dollar recently rose in value to 1.48 CND = 1 USD. I was 1.54-1.56 = 1 for a long time.

    3. Re:� NE $ by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      The dollar has been weakening for a few months now. Foreigners are incrementally more nervous with Iraq, and the dismal performance in the US markets aren't stimulating investment.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    4. Re:� NE $ by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Odd that the Canandian Dollar recently rose in value to 1.48 CND = 1 USD

      Not really. Canada:
      1. Is running a budget surplus,
      2. Has the strongest economy in the G8, and
      3. Isn't going to war with Iraq.

    5. Re:� NE $ by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Going to war generally boosts an economy, at least in the short term (for instance, the DOW just gained 600 points in three days).

      On the other hand, the war is rather stupid ... shouldn't they be dealing with real threats, like North Korea?

      disclaimer: I am Canadian. My views are not representative of all individuals in this country. And gas is gorram expensive - stupid war.

    6. Re:� NE $ by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Going to war may boost the stock markets; but it is generally not good news for the currency when you have people wondering if the government is going to devalue its currency in order to pay for the war.

    7. Re:� NE $ by wrenkin · · Score: 1

      True, but on the other hand:

      1. Canada is small.
      2. Canada is seen by currency traders as heavily reliant on natural resource related industries.

      Given everything is in terms of $US, it's probably better to think in terms of how the $US is doing. The dollar has been falling recently what with all the war worries. It has rebounded in the past few days now that war is innevetable (certainty of outcome is more important than the outcome).

      Canadian dollar fluctuations rarely have much to do with Canada. Unless we raise our interest rates, like we've been doing (spurring foreign investment eager to get that higher interest rate relative to the US).

      --
      -- "Is this death or is this Ohio?"
    8. Re:� NE $ by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      North Korea isn't a real threat. They'll scream and holler, but they are dumb enough to push the button. Even GWB knows this.

    9. Re:� NE $ by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      ...are NOT... Miss one word, change the whole meaning.

    10. Re:� NE $ by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not ... but are they dumb enough to invade South Korea again?

      I mean, we are talking about insane commie bastards here! heheh ...

      (Naw, I agree, they're probably not stupid enough to let it get out of control. Unlike Bush. But that might just be my opinion.)

    11. Re:� NE $ by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Of course it's not a good idea to pick on someone your own size. It wouldn't be safe to do that. Bullies pick on little people because they want to feel safe. It doesn't really MAKE them safe - in fact, sometimes, it has quite the opposite effect.

      In this case, they're going to attack Iraq and turn 25 million people into Anti-American terrorists. Sounds fun, right?

      The US is bullying the international community, and ignoring the true world threats they so passionately speak against, in favour of creating a media stir that will result in future ramifications that they don't appear to be aware of. The goal, of course, is to make the American people feel safe. Do you think it will work?

  5. Isn't that...... by tbob419 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    what stunt doubles are for?

    1. Re:Isn't that...... by rmadmin · · Score: 1

      what stunt doubles are for?

      Isn't that what CGI is for?

    2. Re:Isn't that...... by Dman33 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Right, but who gets to kiss Kirsten then????

      Time to find that old "Stunt Doubling for Dummies" book...

    3. Re:Isn't that...... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      a spokesman for the actor said he was experiencing problems with his back and may not be up to performing difficult stunts.

      Pray tell, what "difficult stunts" do A-list stars do these days? Even Jacky Chan uses stunt doubles now. Since in virtually all the "stunts" he's in a full body suit and mask, I didn't think it was him at all in any of the action scenes. Not to mention the rather clunky CGI web-swinging (impressive, yes; convincingly human, no).

      Either he's negotiating for a bigger cut, or ... actually, I have no "or". He's negotiating for a bigger cut.

    4. Re:Isn't that...... by mbbac · · Score: 1

      No, see any recent Star Wars movie for the reason why.

      --

      mbbac

    5. Re:Isn't that...... by Slime-dogg · · Score: 1

      Time to find that old "Stunt Doubling for Dummies" book...

      Nice double entendre'.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    6. Re:Isn't that...... by Dman33 · · Score: 1

      I was wondering if anybody else would pick up on that! :)

    7. Re:Isn't that...... by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      More than likely as a serious actor, he's above the role. I got that impression when he was making the interview tour for the first movie. I bet my friends that he wouldn't appear in any more Spidy movie beyond the first one. Looks like I might cash in.

    8. Re:Isn't that...... by DroppedPacket · · Score: 2, Informative
      Even Jacky [sic] Chan uses stunt doubles now.

      I hear Jackie Chan say he only uses the stunt doubles for some scenes in his American movies because the insurance underwriters demand it. No insurance (for movie completion) no movie. The Hong Kong movies are still him. (Last I heard at least.)

      --
      I am not a resource! I am a free man!
    9. Re:Isn't that...... by Konowl · · Score: 1

      Why was the parent modded as offtopic?! I thought it was perfectly on topic and something I even thought of myself.

    10. Re:Isn't that...... by tbob419 · · Score: 1

      I guess a viable question on slashdot is considered offtopic. -=sigh=-

    11. Re:Isn't that...... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      I hear Jackie Chan say [sic] he only uses the stunt doubles for some scenes...

      The word in Hong Kong (where I live) is that he uses them a lot now -- he's almost 49 after all. But part of his image is doing his own stunts, so this is not acknowledged (like using body doubles with nicer T&A for actresses). Of course, he still does much more action than any Hollywood star would.

    12. Re:Isn't that...... by Konowl · · Score: 1

      Well, the topic was how Toby couldn't play spiderman because of his back... isn't the comment "isn't that was stunt doubles are for" an on topic response?

      They'll give mod points to anyone these days.

  6. uh oh...series syndrome by VinniTheGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like Batman with multiple stars, we now get a chance at Spiderman. For the love of any god out there man, I hope his back heals soon.

    1. Re:uh oh...series syndrome by Gefiltefish11 · · Score: 1


      Let's hope they don't get George Clooney to stick us with the ultra-generic superhero...

      "I'm Dr. Doug Ross.. whoops, no.. I meant to say, 'I'm Spiderman'"

    2. Re:uh oh...series syndrome by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

      with any luck, they'll get George Clooney to play spiderman, and arnold to play green goblin!

      man that would be great.

      And by Great, I mean 'shut down the franchise'.

      I joke.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:uh oh...series syndrome by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Can't they get him to do the voice and face movements then stick them onto someone elses body? it worked in gladiator.

    4. Re:uh oh...series syndrome by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 1

      I had back surgery when I was 19... badly herniated disk. It hurt bad, I could barely tie my shoes in the morning!

      And the article stated this as mild discomfort. Let's hope it's just your every-day "my back hurts" whining, and not the "DAMN DISK!" whining.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
  7. $17 million by wuchang · · Score: 2, Informative

    That figure is wrong.....If he makes the film, he'll be making $17 million not $11 million

    1. Re:$17 million by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      After the first ten million, who really cares?

    2. Re:$17 million by BoomerSooner · · Score: 1

      I'm going to do that for my next job.

      I'd like 60 thousand per year (cough)gbp(cough).

  8. No Big Deal by Drunken+Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The linked article says Jake Gyllenhaal has been lined-up as a possible replacement. While he was previously typecast into creepy character roles (Donnie Darko and The Good Girl), he proved in Moonlight Mile that he is a thousand times the actor of Tobey Maguire. Not that I wish any suffering on Maguire, but I do believe the sequel would be better off without him.

    --
    Have you been stalked by Seth today?
    1. Re:No Big Deal by mariox19 · · Score: 2, Informative

      He played the lead in October Sky, didn't he? If that's the case, he would make an excellent replacement, though I still feel sorry for Tobey.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    2. Re:No Big Deal by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      Shows that change the actor of the progananist often flop. Has anyone bothered to see like the last two Batman movies?

      I predict if Maguire can't do it, only more wet shirt shots of Dunst will save the movie.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    3. Re:No Big Deal by RazzleFrog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I totally agree. Jake Gyllenhaal is ten times the actor of Tobey Maguire. When my girlfriend and I watched Spiderman the first time it was right after watching the Good Girl and we immediately said that he would have been a better casting. I think having a slighlty darker Spiderman would improve the series.

    4. Re:No Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Like MASH. Like Bewitched. Like Bond. It can work if you replace the original with a better actor. Batman is a bad example because Michael Keaton just is Batman. It is not possible to get better. I don't get the sense that Tobey just is Spiderman. I thought he was only mediocre.

    5. Re:No Big Deal by Jens_UK · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As Wes Bentley was up for the role originally, this may be his shot. Based on his performance in American Beauty, it could be a darker, less happy-go-lucky Spiderman, which I would enjoy.

    6. Re:No Big Deal by donpardo · · Score: 3, Funny

      There were 2 other Batman movies?

      --
      Nothing to see here. Move along.
    7. Re:No Big Deal by gotroot801 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Two words that might cost Jake Gyllenhaal points: Bubble Boy.

    8. Re:No Big Deal by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Jake was said to be doing a cameo as Cletus Cassidy (sp?) in the movie, as a setup to possible Venom and Carnage action in #3.

      I wonder what Brian Bosworth (Stone Cold, Blackout) is doing these days. He'd be the right age to play Eddie Brock and, if he's still in shape, the right build as well.

    9. Re:No Big Deal by mobets · · Score: 1

      I think the problem w/ batman had more to do with the fact that they changed their target audiance and less to do with the change in actors.

      --

      It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
    10. Re:No Big Deal by steeef · · Score: 1

      two words that have redeemed him: donnie darko

    11. Re:No Big Deal by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      yeah, and he actually looks so much like mcguire that a lot of people might not realize the switch.

      I wonder who they're lining up for the new bad guy, it's got to be either
      1) kraven
      2) doc ock
      3) green goblin or hobgoblin again
      4) no way it's venom

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    12. Re:No Big Deal by mcmonkey · · Score: 1

      Batman is a bad example because Michael Keaton just is Mr. Mom.

      Have you ever read an actual Batman comic book? Batman is one seriously screwed in the head guy. When DC made a role playing game, the #1 rule was heroes don't kill, or even allow a bad guy to die through in action. The ONLY exception was Batman.

      He just doesn't give a dam. He's so obsessed with the whole vigilante thing, he doesn't even get worked up over innocent bystanders (greater good and all that).

      Mr. Mom just didn't carry the weight of that psychosis for me.

    13. Re:No Big Deal by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      Michael Keaton just is Batman... NOT!
      Adam West IS Batman - Michael Keaton is Beetlejuice (the only role he's excelled in, IMHO).

    14. Re:No Big Deal by Samus · · Score: 1

      I would argue that Keaton could easily play the psycho batman. Go rent Pacific Heights. Its from 1990 and he plays a tenant who rents part of a house in San Francisco. He gets very crazy in that movie and I'm not talking about Beetleguice crazy.

      --
      In Republican America phones tap you.
    15. Re:No Big Deal by revery · · Score: 1

      Jake was excellent in both Moonlight Mile and October Sky, but to say he is a thousand times the actor of Maguire suggests that maybe you haven't seen Ride with the Devil, The Cider House Rules, The Wonder Boys, and Pleasantville. Especially in Wonder Boys and Ride with the Devil, Maguire shows that the difference between Jake and himself is much narrower than you suggest.

      --

      Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
      or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.

    16. Re:No Big Deal by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Hrm ... never followed the comic book, but didn't Venom tag along on a crash-landed space shuttle mission? I can see why they wouldn't want that in the movie. heheh ...

    17. Re:No Big Deal by Destoo · · Score: 1

      2).

      Multi armed menace!!

      Alfred Molina .... Doc Ock

      Of course, you're going to say "WHO??"

      AICNews resumed him to one line...
      "Throw me the idol and I'll throw you the whip!!"

      --
      Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
    18. Re:No Big Deal by FatalTourist · · Score: 1

      I hope the parent wasn't modded up because the moderators thought Bubble Boy was a funny movie!

      --


      Escape Pod Films: Sketch Comedy and Web Series
    19. Re:No Big Deal by ZaMoose · · Score: 1

      Technically, yes. It traveled back with Spidey from the Secret Wars as his costume.

      Peter Parker later finds out that this "costume" is actually a symbiotic life form. After he rids himself of the costume, it glomms on to Eddie Brock to form Venom.

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    20. Re:No Big Deal by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      When they changed from Alec Baldwin to Harrison Ford for the Clancy/Jack Ryan films, they certainly didn't flop. Of course, time will tell with the Ben Affleck/Sum of All Fears change.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    21. Re:No Big Deal by coke_dite · · Score: 1

      M*A*S*H never replaced an actor - they replaced CHARACTERS (often with just-as-lovable, just-as-amusing characters). That's a big difference. Bewitched, however, was just wrong. Ole Durwood should have stayed put.

      --
      Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
    22. Re:No Big Deal by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      In the M*A*S*H movie, Alan Alda did not appear as Hawkeye, but someone else did. He took over the role when the series started, and I think that is what he meant.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    23. Re:No Big Deal by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Yes, but compared to George "Buffoonery" Clooney and Val "I'm too pretty for this movie" Kilmer, he Michael Keaton made a Damn Fine Batman.
      And Oh GOD?! Alicia Silverstone? Puh-LEASE!!!!

      Granted, I think Jack Nicholson could have done a better job, but he was probably getting a bit too old for the part...

      -Chris

    24. Re:No Big Deal by Astin · · Score: 1

      Has anyone who's bashing Bubble Boy actually seen it? I too thought it would be an incredibly stupid, unfunny movie. I was only half right. It was incredibly stupid, but 'twas damn funny. Then again, I liked Dude, Where's My Car, and never saw what all the hoopla over There's Something About Mary was. Could just be I like stupid comedy.

      BUT, having seen Bubble Boy, The Good Girl and Donnie Darko (and 5 minutes of an episode of Walker, Texas Ranger Jake was in before I realized what it was I watching), I have to say that JG has shown a pretty broad acting range for someone who has been come pretty close to being cast as the "creppy, brooding guy". I have no doubt he'd make an excellent Spidey, complete with witty repartee and wisecracks. And I can't think of too many other actors out there who could replace/better Tobey in the role if the need to is there.

      --
      - In hell, treason is the work of angels.
    25. Re:No Big Deal by boy_afraid · · Score: 1

      Yep, you are stupid. I can laugh at almost anything, but not at Bubble Boy. I laughed my ass of at Dude and There's Something About Mary. I agress that JG was excellent in Donnie Darko and that he would make an excellent Spider-Man.

      Alot of times I get the two actors mixed up because they look a little a like.

    26. Re:No Big Deal by pizzaman100 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Like Bewitched.

      Both of those actors were dicks.

    27. Re:No Big Deal by PeeweeJD · · Score: 1

      bubble boy was funny as hell... :P

    28. Re:No Big Deal by Moskie · · Score: 1

      Technically, yes. It traveled back with Spidey from the Secret Wars [toymania.com] as his costume.

      Not quite the truth anymore... kinda. The venom story is being retold in Ultimate Spider-Man. It looks as if the Venom stuff was invented by the fathers of Peter and Eddie as a prototype of a cure for cancer. No spaceship/alien symbiote has been mentioned or hinted at yet, but I guess that could change (but I doubt it).

      My guess is that if the story of Venom were to ever make it to the big screen, it would be based on this stroyline in Ultimate.

    29. Re:No Big Deal by IndependentVik · · Score: 1

      Have you ever read an actual Batman comic book? Batman is one seriously screwed in the head guy. When DC made a role playing game, the #1 rule was heroes don't kill, or even allow a bad guy to die through in action. The ONLY exception was Batman.

      I've never played the RPG, but I remember ole' Bats stating quite clearly in the comics that he would never kill anyone, that would be crossing the line. Why do you think he's never offed the Joker? The exception to this rule would be Frank Miller's possible future Batman. That guy, he really doesn't give a damn.

      --
      I'd suggest you don't use Slashdot as your only news source, or you will suffer permanent brain damage.
    30. Re:No Big Deal by ashitaka · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The series (other than character names) had nothing to do with the movie.

      He's referring to the mid-series replacement of:

      Colonel Blake with Colonel Potter
      Trapper John with BJ Hunnicut (sp?)
      Frank Burns with Charles Emerson Winchester III

      --
      If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
    31. Re:No Big Deal by oogoliegoogolie · · Score: 1

      Michael Keaton is batman?? He was a good batman because ANYONE can play batman! Get any guy with a chin and once they put on the suit they look like batman; the next movie they should consider Jay leno or Brian Mulroney. Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne sucked and was a hunge casting mistake. At least get someone who at least looks like they can punch their way out of a wet paper bag. That's why Val & Gorge were so much better as Bruce Wayne.

      Don Knotts as Bruce Wayne would not have been any less believable.

    32. Re:No Big Deal by pi+radians · · Score: 1

      You can't be redemed by previous works.

      Lucas fans seem to think so.

      --

      sin(6cos(r)+5A)
    33. Re:No Big Deal by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 1

      And Radar! Radar was in both the movie and the series, same actor.

    34. Re:No Big Deal by Lachrymite · · Score: 1

      As a side note on that, he's already kind of starred in a superhero movie... if you listen to the director's commentary track on the Donnie Darko DVD (The first one with the director and Gyllenhaal himself), they discuss a lot of how Donnie Darko is kind of a superhero movie. I didn't pick up on it until it was explained through the commentary, but once it was, it made a lot of sense.

    35. Re:No Big Deal by chrae · · Score: 1
      Two words that might cost Jake Gyllenhaal points: Bubble Boy.

      Hey, if Tobey Maguire can bounce back from playing the hitchhiker-who-is-about-to-pee-his-pants in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas then Jake Gyllenhaal can bounce back from playing bubbleboy.

    36. Re:No Big Deal by AndrewCox · · Score: 1

      Oh man! I had to check that out on IMDB - I have actually always thought that was Toby McGuire in October Sky!

      I was like, "well, he sucked in Cider House Rules, but October Sky was really good so I guess he's hit or miss". Now I have no reason to like him - Spiderman was good despite Toby McGuire, not because of.

      --
      The Red Pill ... all I'm o
    37. Re:No Big Deal by bluesangria · · Score: 1
    38. Re:No Big Deal by dorsey · · Score: 1

      The casting change in The Sum of All Fears was the lease of it's problems... The biggest problem was that they had to drastically rewrite the story and the characters in order for it to make any sense at all as a stand alone movie.

      --
      hinderfreude ('hin-dur-"froi-d&), n. The feeling of joy derived from being in the way.
    39. Re:No Big Deal by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      And here I thought they were both the same person. Damn kids. All the rugrats look the same.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    40. Re:No Big Deal by Thorkytel+Ant-Head · · Score: 1
      The exception to this rule would be Frank Miller's possible future Batman. That guy, he really doesn't give a damn.

      Have you guys actually ever read The Dark Knight Returns? Batman never, ever killed a single person in that book. That was the whole point! Even the Joker said (paraphrasing), "Broken back huh? You still couldn't bring yourself to kill me, could you?" Sure, Batman wounds a lot of people pretty badly, but he doesn't kill anyone, even in Frank Miller's Batman.

    41. Re:No Big Deal by IndependentVik · · Score: 1

      Yes, I've read it. Multiple times. The general who brokered the arms deal with the street gangs was killed by Batman. It's intimated that Batman forced him to commit suicide. Still, it has been a few years . . . if you think my interpretation of that event is off, I'd appreciate a reply.

      --
      I'd suggest you don't use Slashdot as your only news source, or you will suffer permanent brain damage.
  9. why pull out? by peripatetic_bum · · Score: 1

    Its all CGI, anyway.
    Yes, he may want to do some of the stuntsm on principle, but the real action in the movie (the fights) never had a real huuman in it.

    --

    Sigs are dangerous coy things

  10. really? by Lxy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This part confused me:
    "Tobey has experienced mild discomfort in his back, which is in the final stages of healing"

    So, what's the problem? I know his back needs to be fully healed, but if it's in the final stages of healing, why not delay production until it's healed? All too often sequels have alternate actors playing the main characters, and I refuse to see such movies. If Tobey's not in the sequel, I probably won't see it.

    --

    There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
    :wq
    1. Re:really? by l810c · · Score: 1

      Batman was, of course, the worse. I actually think Keaton was the best. They should have kept him.

    2. Re:really? by lowmagnet · · Score: 1

      Three words: Inspector Gadget Two.

      French stewart as IG? Egads, why! (oh yeah, it's Disney)

      --
      Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
    3. Re:really? by Treebeard+the+Ent · · Score: 1

      Keaton was the best. They should have kept him.

      Don't think that they didn't try... but he didn't want to start being type cast because of his role in Batman... Now look at him. I say better to be type cast than not cast...

      --
      Never argue with an idiot. They will just bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
    4. Re:really? by MCZapf · · Score: 1
      Why is typecasting bad? I think they should do it more. Actually, I think the studios should limit the number of major motion pictures a given actor is in. After too much exposure, and actor just isn't believable in any role. At least for me, that's true. I become aware that it's just an actor acting; I start to see the actor instead of the charactor he's portraying. It makes the movie less real to me.

      The above applies to actresses as well.

    5. Re:really? by cgenman · · Score: 1

      So, what's the problem? I know his back needs to be fully healed, but if it's in the final stages of healing, why not delay production until it's healed?

      Because then nobody else will be available for at least another year, probably two to get everyone from Rami, to Kierstun, to the cinematographer, to the musicians, etc, etc, etc. You would have to re-rent studio time, orchestrations, catering, gaffe, grip, assistants, transportation, post-production, promotion...

      Waiting until the star is healed is not really an option. And Tobey in a wheelchair for the rest of his life isn't a good option either. And cutting the production schedule from 8 weeks to 4 won't cut it...

      Best to hope for the best with the new actor. He's very good. And unlike batman, nobody else will have changed.

    6. Re:really? by coke_dite · · Score: 1
      Their excuse is because the movie is slated to come out in May 2004. They have one year to put this puppy together, and they want to get cracking.

      --
      Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
    7. Re:really? by coke_dite · · Score: 1

      Julia Roberts - nuff said.

      --
      Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
    8. Re:really? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I totally agree. I want to see Spiderman 2 as soon as possible, but I'd be willing to wait a year or two to see it with Toby.

      Of course, there might be scheduling issues with other cast members then. But I'm sure they could reassemble the cast within a couple years.

    9. Re:really? by charlequin · · Score: 1

      Not that I have anything more than negative interest in the franchise, but I think French Stewart is actually a much better piece of casting, honestly. He actually sounds (the voice is pretty much dead-on) and acts (vapid and oblivious) like the cartoon character he's supposed to be portraying. The movie will still rot, but at least it's not Matthew Broderick playing the character all weird and nebbishy.

  11. Damn. by Yoda2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have back problems too so I suppose I'm out of the running for his slot.

    1. Re:Damn. by lylum · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised... many people on /. probably have back problems but that's more a result of physical inactivity and the attempt to compensate it with mental activity. But if an actor gets back problems because oif his role in a movie I ask myself if that's not going too far. Not enough that athletes use drugs to boost their energy, now actors will start doing the same, huh?

    2. Re:Damn. by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that guy didn't find the cure for cancer in his work. Man... emotional problems are causing EVERYTHING... from gastrointestinal disorders to asthma and whiplash. Wow. I don't think I've EVER gotten whiplash because I cried too hard.

      As a sufferer of carpal tunnel, I call foul. I can easily see the difference between working at a computer properly, and not.

      But Zen-monks and other belief systems have long held the belief that since pain is just mental signals, we can train the mind to avoid them and ignore them. Yet guess what? Pain is a highly developed system to tell us that "some shit is broken or breaking".

      Snippet from .DOC linked above:
      The incidence of back and joint pain has skyrocketed over the past 50 years, probably because the public has been led to believe that the back and joints are very delicate and easily injured. The legitimization of these pain syndromes as structural - and therefore the very opposite of emotional - has made back pain and RSI into excellent hiding places for emotional distress, perfect distractions from emotional issues.

      I contend that the increasing incident of backpain experienced by the majority of America is caused by two correlating factors:
      1. Better reporting (we never used to care about this sort of statistic before the Insurance industry started constructing it's actuarial tables)
      2. More and more American's are sitting on their asses for more and more of their life-spans. And then those fools go and try and lift a car or some 300# object, and wonder why they get hurt.

      I think your Doctor is a quack. But that's just my opinion, and you don't need to agree with me.
      Have a NICE day!
      -Chris

    3. Re:Damn. by Opie812 · · Score: 1

      300#
      300 sharp? Wha?
      Ha! I kill me.

      --
      I'm not a nerd. Nerds are smart.
  12. That's pounds, not dollars. by GrievousAngel · · Score: 1

    http://www.cynicalnation.com

    --


    "Extremism in defense of liberty is more fun."
  13. spidey by black+mariah · · Score: 1

    That does, in fact, suck. I didn't really like the first Spidey movie, but I thought he was pretty good in it. I really hope this doesn't turn into a Batman type situation where the actor changes every movie.

    --
    'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
  14. CGI to the rescue? by Greedo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Almost all of the cool Spidey stuff in the first movie was CGI anyway, so what is it exactly that Mr. Macguire can't do? Pose?

    Do you really need that much back muscle to kiss a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst?

    --
    Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    1. Re:CGI to the rescue? by merlin_jim · · Score: 3, Funny

      Do you really need that much back muscle to kiss a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst?

      I don't think it's the back muscle that is strained by kissing a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst.

      And I do think I could suck up a little back pain for the opportunity.

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    2. Re:CGI to the rescue? by larien · · Score: 5, Funny
      Dripping wet Kirsten Dunst... MMmmmmmm

      Oops, wrong muscle...

    3. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Columbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      After having seen Kirsten Dunst wet, I believe it is _HER_ that needs the back muscles. :)

      Columbo

    4. Re:CGI to the rescue? by operagost · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sounds like you pulled it all right ...

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:CGI to the rescue? by lastninja · · Score: 1

      special effects better in Daredevil???
      Are you referring to the flickering-light-that-hides-actors-bad-martial-art s special effects??? please enlighten us.

      --
      John Carmack fan, browsing at +5 since 1999.
    6. Re:CGI to the rescue? by legLess · · Score: 1
      Those are interesting comparisons, but you're basically arguing about chocolate and vanilla. Spidey and Daredevil are very, very different characters. A young boy growing up on the East Side won't relate very well to a rich lawyer with an ass-kicking girlfriend, but he will relate to Spidey: too tortured to have a girlfriend, the only super-hero who goes to a landromat.
      Kingpin was a much more interesting villain than the Goblin, who was basically just a cackling idiot.
      I can't argue with that, though. I'm sad they used Goblin as the villain, and I can only guess that they were saving one of the weakest villains for the first of what they hoped would be a long franchise.
      --
      This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
    7. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Sabalon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Spiderman droned on about responsibility coming with power

      Wasn't that part of the whole basis of spider man?

      He decided one night not to stop a theif even though he had the power to, and that guy ended up killing his uncle.

    8. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Kingpin was a much more interesting villain than the Goblin, who was basically just a cackling idiot.

      That was kind of the point, actually. Crazy, super-strength self-righteous villian.

      I can't argue with that, though. I'm sad they used Goblin as the villain, and I can only guess that they were saving one of the weakest villains for the first of what they hoped would be a long franchise.

      Actually, the Goblin's a pivotal Spidey villian--and the only one who had a real relationship to Peter Parker. He's a logical choice to go first.

      Thankfully, we can look for a whole gamunt of baddies--Hobgoblin, Venom, Carnage, Green Goblin Jr., etc.

    9. Re:CGI to the rescue? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      A young boy growing up on the East Side won't relate very well to a rich lawyer with an ass-kicking girlfriend

      They were both born poor, tho'. Daredevil's father was a dockworker, then a small-time crook, then a boxer, then killed by a gang. He wasn't even a particularly wealthy lawyer when he grew up, he partner complains that their clients pay them in fish or sporting goods rather than cash!

    10. Re:CGI to the rescue? by pherris · · Score: 2, Funny

      Jeeze, with the quality of CGI today they could get Christopher Reeves to fill couldn't they?

      --
      "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
    11. Re:CGI to the rescue? by knighthawk817 · · Score: 1

      Please tell me this was a joke. While I'd be willing to wax long on a comparision of DD and Spidey comic books. The movies don't even come close. Spider Man was well done with good acting. DareDevil was a low budget very bad effects mistake .

    12. Re:CGI to the rescue? by sunwukong · · Score: 1

      Actually (having not seen the movie) I thought they were going to do the plot where one of Peter's girlfriends gets killed during a Spiderman rescue from the Green Goblin.

      It could've been powerfully done and made a good jumping off point for the whole power/responsibility thing.

    13. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      Uh-huh. And what's your opinion on the whole Kirk vs. Picard question? ;-)

      --

      I write in my journal
    14. Re:CGI to the rescue? by SimplyCosmic · · Score: 1

      Apparently so ...

      It was a stuntman, and not Macquire, hanging upside down in the Spidey costume in the raining kiss scene.

    15. Re:CGI to the rescue? by kscguru · · Score: 1

      Not a stuntman, actually him. There was an interview or two when the movie came out - try searching on Google. Apparently "Spiderman" was trying really hard to not pass out from hanging up-side down for so long and had to breath out of the side of his mouth you DIDN'T see... Kirsten Dunst did all the kissing there. I feel kinda bad - all that effort and he didn't even get to enjoy the one kiss everyone else talks about?

      --

      A witty [sig] proves nothing. --Voltaire

    16. Re:CGI to the rescue? by ashitaka · · Score: 1

      Not to mention water running up your nose.

      --
      If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
    17. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Schik · · Score: 1

      Jurassic Park?? Huh? You must have her confused with Ariana Richards

    18. Re:CGI to the rescue? by MeepMeep · · Score: 1

      That's not your back muscle...more of a 'front' muscle...

    19. Re:CGI to the rescue? by pi_rules · · Score: 1


      Wasn't that part of the whole basis of spider man?

      He decided one night not to stop a theif even though he had the power to, and that guy ended up killing his uncle.


      ?!?!? Gaahh! You gave away the whole movie you insensitive clod! My life is ruined!

    20. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Sabalon · · Score: 2, Funny

      How could I? I haven't seen the movie yet. :)

      Besides, Spidey started in what - 1963 - what's the statute of limitations on spoiler warnings :)

    21. Re:CGI to the rescue? by unitron · · Score: 1

      Daredevil has a son? Did they use anything from the original comic besides the name?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    22. Re:CGI to the rescue? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Daredevil has a son? Did they use anything from the original comic besides the name?

      Sorry, I should have been clearer: Daredevil beats the crap out of the bad guy, then realizes that the bad guy's son was watching all along. Then the kid says "please don't hurt me" and Daredevil replies "I'm not the bad guy here" but all the kid can see is someone beating the crap out of his father.

    23. Re:CGI to the rescue? by Columbo · · Score: 1

      My sincere apologies for not maintaining the high standards set forth by the rest of the slashdot community. If it helps, I don't write anything important without at least pretending to know the english language.

      Columbo

  15. ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by caveat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Since the film was apparently slated to pay him 11M, sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part.

    Yeah, I'm sure he's *completely* broke after the first Spider-Man...I don't recall it doing hrribly well or anything :P

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by 91degrees · · Score: 2

      Didn't it officially make a loss? Most films do, after all.

    2. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by mgs1000 · · Score: 1

      That's just what they tell the writers who earn a percentage of the profits.

    3. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

      It made money. And that is before video game and DVD sales.

    4. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      It made money, but not "profits" as defined by the studio lawyers.

      Essentially, it's a tax dosge and a way to get out of paying creators. ref from BBC news

    5. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

      That is a contract dispute between a silly old man and a smart corporation. The "profits" defined in the contract were different from the normal definition of profit. Stan Lee should have negotiated for a percentage of earnings. He also never should have sold off the rights to begin with. It has become apparent in the last 10 years or so that the only reason Stan Lee is still interested in Spider-Man again is because of its return to marketability.

    6. Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him by antis0c · · Score: 1

      He only got paid 2 million for a movie that grossed over 800M during its run. Sure, 2 million is a lot, but the movie made 800 million. 800 million! Meanwhile each cast member of friends gets paid a million for a 20 minute long episode...

      --

      ..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
  16. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Funny

    *cough*organicwebshootersnotincomic*cough*

  17. Not Entirely Out by Grip3n · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Note that the article states Toby might not be up to performing "difficult" stunts - which is just fine. We're not going to be able to tell if that's Toby or someone else under that suite with the mask on. Realistically, his back problems, which by the way are in "in the final stages of healing" according to the article, should not pose such a threat as to completely disabling him from acting altogether. If you want to make a bet, Toby is going to be in the sequel.

    --
    To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
  18. What next? by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Aqua Man drowning in his tub?

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    1. Re:What next? by WetCat · · Score: 1

      Ikhtiandr?

    2. Re:What next? by unicron · · Score: 1

      The Hulk got gout.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    3. Re:What next? by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1

      Shock and amazement:

      A white man stealing credit from a black man.

      And I'm just teasing Hektor. Not only do I not know you're a white man, but you also aren't exactly stealing credit.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  19. Replacement by brood · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The guy they've got up to replace him is Kirsten Dunst's current boyfriend. You might know him as the star of that movie Bubble Boy.

    1. Re:Replacement by 13Echo · · Score: 1

      He was also the star of Donnie Darko, also listed on his IMDB profile.

      If you haven't seen Donnie Darko, *go out and rent it today*! It is probably one of the best films of 2002. He does a superb job in it, and it is probably one of the most intellectually stimulating small/med. budget films that you'll see of late. The storyline is superb, even with the occasional bit of teenage-grade humor that reflects growing up in the '80s.

    2. Re:Replacement by mcj · · Score: 1

      He was great in Donnie Darko.

  20. Materialist scum by psicE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about, sucks to be him not because he's going to lose $11 million in potential earnings, but because he has back problems, and loses an opportunity to do what he likes best? He already got paid a shitload of money for the first movie. Spider-Man 2 or not, he's still one of the richest people in the country. And as soon as his back heals, he'll be right back on the silver screen, doing stunts and earning money galore.

    God. I feel bad for him because as an actor, he undoubtedly loves his work, and it's unfair that he loses such a great opportunity to use his talent. I don't feel bad for him because he's only a multi-millionaire instead of a multi-multi-millionaire.

    1. Re:Materialist scum by AttillaTheNun · · Score: 1

      Actually, the article quotes 11 million pounds, not dollars. So he stands to lose about $20 million. Feel bad for him now?

  21. Re:uh oh...series syndrome The part is bigger... by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 1

    Other examples:
    James Bond
    The part is really more important than the specific character.
    --

    'ta
  22. Mild discomfort by Jarlsberg · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article says Maguire is experiencing a mild discomfort in his back after doing two physically intensive movies. Really - if I were him, mild discomfort wouldn't stop me from doing the movie. :)

  23. Who said he's wearing a suit? by oneiros27 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From my memory of the first one, he wasn't wearing the suit for all of the stunts. I don't know what they consider to be 'difficult', but it's entirely possible that there might be parts of the movie in which the character Peter Parker would have to use his abilities when he's not wearing the disguise.

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:Who said he's wearing a suit? by EReidJ · · Score: 1

      Like when he's coming down the stairs after his evening of severe "sickness"? When he goes almost horizontal, planting his feet high up on the wall and swinging over the railing? A very tough stunt to do, even with wires, when you have a bad back.

  24. Replacement AHHH! by quantaman · · Score: 3, Funny

    According to Variety.com, The Good Girl star Jake Gyllenhaal has been lined-up as a possible reserve.

    So I figurred I'm already there I might as well click the link see if I recognize the replacement actor. Behold my suprise whent the page loaded and I saw George Bush staring back at me!

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:Replacement AHHH! by psylent · · Score: 1

      no, thats the Lone Ranger movie.

    2. Re:Replacement AHHH! by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1

      Actually GW wouldn't be that bad of an idea. You see, Monkeys grow up doing that kind of stunts, grabbing vines and swinging, etc.

    3. Re:Replacement AHHH! by Michael_Burton · · Score: 1

      George Bush?

      With great power comes great responsibility. I don't think George has seen Spider-Man.

      --
      When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
  25. What the big deal? by srboneidle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I quite like it when they change the actor in series of movies - it adds a bit of variety. It doesn't detract from the movie itself (if the actors chosen are up to the challenge of course).

    Take James Bond - does it really matter that Sean Connery doesn't play the lead in all of them? Some of the 'James Bonds' have been better than others, but still fun nonetheless.

    Having said that though, I wouldn't want to lose £11 million either...

    1. Re:What the big deal? by TrollBridge · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Of course, it could fail miserably as well.

      Hell, just look at Batman after Michael Keaton! I believe I have proven my point (though the departure of Tim Burton from the series also contributed to the downfall of the Batman movie franchise).

      --
      There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
    2. Re:What the big deal? by davmct · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But this freakish casting is exactly what killed the Batman series...

    3. Re:What the big deal? by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wish people would stop saying that.

      Has anyone even watched what the director did to the colors, the theme, the riddler? Batman went from a deep, dark, brooding near killer to a vehicle to sell breakfast cereal and toys due to pressure from Kenner and parents groups. Keaton left, but so did Burton, Elfman, and a host of other talents who contributed greatly to the overall feel of the first two movies.

      Batman was too popular to not get sunk by special interests. Keaton jumping ship didn't really matter: Clooney played a wonderful batman in "From Dusk till Dawn," and Kilmer fit the strong silent persona rather well. But the movie they were starring in, and in fact the role they were written, had intentionally lost the edge which made the series popular in the first place... Companies didn't like parents having to explain to children why catwoman was electrocuting the bad guy with a tazer while putting her tongue down his throat on the cover of batman cereal.

      Star Wars suffered the same fate. What made it great was the collaboration of people working to it's strengths, but once it became legend external considerations (such as enormous egos) got in the way of quality filmmaking.

    4. Re:What the big deal? by jms258 · · Score: 1

      "Companies didn't like parents having to explain to children why catwoman was electrocuting the bad guy with a tazer while putting her tongue down his throat on the cover of batman cereal." yea i can definitely see that ... it's too bad really ... hopefully the new batman movie will come out soon .. i've heard that the guy who played the main character of memento will be batman, and the director of memento will also direct the new film ... supposedly scarecrow will be the main villain. batman is a DARK superhero. really, he is basically borderline insane, obsessive, and, in some capacity (though not through murder), vengeful. movie companies should get with this idea if they are going to make batman movies. -jms258

    5. Re:What the big deal? by Shads · · Score: 1

      actually batman in the comics isn't adverse to a bit of murder here and there... big on the greatest good theory.

      --
      Shadus
    6. Re:What the big deal? by funkmastermike · · Score: 1

      The whole batman deal is known to the execs above.
      this page talks slightly about how batman is going to be reborn by my favorite director

  26. Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man by joel8x · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man" - Thats the title of the linked article. Am I the only one who thinks that sounds funny?

    I gotta grow up.

    --
    Sound waves should be free!
    1. Re:Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man by sharkey · · Score: 1
      Am I the only one who thinks that sounds funny?

      Sounds like an Eddie Murphy bit: "Your Friendly Neighborhood Corn-Holer".

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man by Cutriss · · Score: 1

      Ohhh...is THAT why "Spider-Man Has Back Problems"?

      --
      "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
    3. Re:Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man by praedor · · Score: 1

      Just "pulling out" wont stop pregnancy (nor in this case, transmission of STDs). Retromission doesn't work. Use a condom and stay IN spiderman. In any case, I don't want to hear any more about his sexual practices.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  27. he doesn't have to do his own stunts by Xpilot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't Spider-Man wear a MASK? A stunt double doesn't even need to look like him! What's the problem here?

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
    1. Re:he doesn't have to do his own stunts by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Did you see the first movie? For that matter, have you ever read the comic book, preferrably the old one, for any length of time? Petey's always getting caught without his suit and busting one or two amazing spider-moves in order to get out of some situation without anyone knowing he's spider-man.

      It's endlessly amusing to me how comic books went from portraying super people dealing with mundanes, to super people having super-ultra-mega-power battles with one another. Power cosmic, ho!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  28. DareDevil to the rescue??? by TopShelf · · Score: 1
    Gee, what about Ben Affleck???

    /me ducks

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    1. Re:DareDevil to the rescue??? by ThogScully · · Score: 1

      Ben Affleck was the bomb in Phantom!

      --
      I've nothing to say here...
    2. Re:DareDevil to the rescue??? by ZaMoose · · Score: 1

      No, that was Billy Zane.

      Or did you mean Phantoms?

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    3. Re:DareDevil to the rescue??? by mu_wtfo · · Score: 1

      +1, obscure Kevin Smith reference. :)

      "Hey, is that Ben Affleck?" "Yo, you were the bomb in Phantoms!"

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
    4. Re:DareDevil to the rescue??? by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Tobey must have thrown his back out humping your mom last night.

  29. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by samhalliday · · Score: 2, Interesting
    and was it not a nuclear power plant he went to in the comic, and got bitten by a nuked-spider; in the film the class went to a superspider-making factory

    which leaves wide-open the possibility of new spidermen since not only did the spider run away... but they also know how to make the same spider again

    other than that, i agree... it was pretty true to the cominc, relatively speaking of course (cartoon example: He-Man... uuughh!)

  30. Publicity stunt...? by Glove+d'OJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if this is actual "news" or simply a poorly-disguised press release. If it is the latter, then I think that they succeded at generating a "buzz" around the upcoming Spiderman movie.

    (fly-pun not intended, but I am claiming it.)

    1. Re:Publicity stunt...? by Sanga · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you are right on the money.

      Am I the only one that does not like Mr. Macguire? I found him wanting in SpiderMan and in Cider House Rules -- there was something missing, dunno what. John Irving's Homer was a boy who grew into a man: I did not see that in the movie. Even with a naked Charlize Theron on the bed, he could not convince me that he was passionate about her.

    2. Re:Publicity stunt...? by KilerCris · · Score: 1

      Yeah that must be it because they really need to let people know that there is a sequal coming.

  31. Re:Replacement AHHH! - Jake Gyllenhaal by RoundSparrow · · Score: 1

    If you haven't seen his films, I recommend seeing October Sky - any geek would love this film. It is about rocks, not a love story :)

    Donnie Darko is also good SiFi.

  32. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by operagost · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I didn't understand that change myself. It killed his geek factor. The fact that he built his own webshooter in the comics showed he was smart and creative instead of just nerdily unpopular.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  33. No career in sports medicine for Spidey by BoyHowdyAAF · · Score: 1

    So the webbing can't double as an Ace bandage, huh? It'd be handy if he could just web himself up if he sprained something.

  34. Re:Replacement - Donnie Darko and October Sky by RoundSparrow · · Score: 1

    Donnie Darko is a great film. Worthy of watching multiple times.
    I also suggest October Sky he did an awesome job in this film. Also a great geek story about making it in high school.

  35. Congratulations! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    You're the third post pointing this out! You win 11 million Flainian Pobble Beads!

    Actually, I wonder why they don't just slap his digitized face onto some CGI character. Most of the action scenes in the movie were CGI, and could use some tweeking, at that, as they looked toy-like.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Congratulations! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      If they slapped a digitized face on a CGI character, why would they need the actor at all? Eventually they could just generate faces. And the actors union wouldn't be very happy about that.

      If they paid him his 11 million pounds, I'm sure the union would be left hemming and hawing.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Congratulations! by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if they were just using his face, who's to say they wouldn't want to pay him less?

      Or what if they created a virtual character, which is what I thought I said in the first place, that exists only as a CGI creation. Who gets paid?

      It's like that horrible movie that dealt with a virtual actress that came out last year. Or something.

    3. Re:Congratulations! by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      If they slapped a digitized face on a CGI character, why would they need the actor at all? Eventually they could just generate faces. And the actors union wouldn't be very happy about that.

      There are tens (hundreds?) of thousands of human actors, 99% of whom would work for scale. Having a believable simulation of a face is a long way from creating a compelling performance. Not to mention, who is David Letterman going to interview -- this is not a joke, actors now spend as much time on the road promoting a movie as shooting it.

  36. Batman sucked by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

    Batman Forever and Batman & Robin didn't just change the actor--they changed the whole style of the movie from dark comic-like to cheesy TV-like.

  37. Corrections (Reuters, Hollywood Reporter, AICN) by iRobogeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    First off, it's $17M. ;-) And there's updated info and clarification at Yahoo/Reuters, AICN, and Yahoo/Hollywood Reporter. Don't panic or freak out. This looks like a rumor that got out of control, and is now being actively denied by the powers-that-be.

    --
    I think, therefore I am. (I think.)
    1. Re:Corrections (Reuters, Hollywood Reporter, AICN) by PMuse · · Score: 1

      From the Ananova article, "Last month, Maguire's agents renegotiated a record £11 million deal for the sequel."

      £11 MM= $17 MM. No biggie, it's not like rocket science where using the wrong system of measurement makes an actual difference. ;)

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
  38. Jake Gyllenhaal Creepy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion

  39. Perhaps... by KoolDude · · Score: 2, Funny


    ...he was bitten by a black widow spider. :)

    From the site:

    Symptoms...
    ...
    Muscle pain and cramps, especially of the shoulders, back, thighs, abdomen, or chest
    ...

    --
    getSexySig(); /* returns sexy signature */
  40. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by HouseOfMisterE · · Score: 2, Funny

    The movie may have conveyed (to you) the tone of the comic, but it was far from faithful.

    The biggest variance from established continuity is the organic web shooters. Peter Parker was a science whiz and created mechanical web shooters in the comic. I read that Sam Raimi (the director) didn't think that the movie viewers would buy the fact that Parker could be smart enough to make mechanical web shooters. Nevermind the fact that the movie viewers were expected to buy the fact that an irradiated spider could bite you and give you spider powers. Oh, and shouldn't the bite have resulted in Parker shooting webs from his ass? Spiders don't even have arms.

    E.

  41. not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    11,000,000.00 GBP
    United Kingdom Pounds

    = 17,172,207.58 USD
    United States Dollars

    http://www.xe.com/ucc/

  42. Correction by cmburns69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now that I looked at the right place, the USD value of 11m GBP is $17,406,247.58.

    His negotiated salary is probably about $17.5m when it was signed.

    Now it REALLY sucks to be him if his back goes out.

    An online Starcraft RPG? Only at

    --
    Online Starcraft RPG? At
    Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!
  43. "Mr. Maguire has mild back problems" by jayhawk88 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Translation from Hollywood-ese: "We know we just stuck it to you for $11 large, but our client has his $10,000 a day Fabrege Egg habit to support, so we thought we'd try and up the price by another $3 million. OK?"

  44. Of all the submissions slashdot receives... by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 2, Informative
    ...this is selected? It's not even news (he "may" pull out but he hasn't...whoopee...it's vapor news) but even more so, why is this slashdot newsworthy?

    Well, since we're all here anyway, as a service to slashdot's heterosexual male readers I present Mary Jane (safe for work):

    one

    two

    three

  45. And what was with that ending? by paiute · · Score: 1

    I mean, come on - any half-decent supervillian is going to know they are friends and kidnap her anyway. So he might as well be banging her four times (once per set of legs) to Sunday. You know, keep your friends close and your beautiful supermodel nemesis even closer.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  46. Re:not compared to superman he doesnt by RLiegh · · Score: 2

    That may be bad taste but I'm tired of all those stories about how brave Christopher Reeve is for being crippled. As far as I know he doesnt have any choice in the matter.

    Reeve doesn't get publicity for being handi-capable. He gets publicity for doing something, instead of sitting in the corner whinging.

    And that he does have a choice in.
  47. How many times do I have to tell you kids?!! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Gross, not net!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  48. Yeah, but.... by EHUDs_Rhino · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have back problems. I injured my back about a year ago carrying something heavy. It hurts a lot.

    But if you think I'd let that come between me and Kirsten Dunst, you're an idiot.

    --
    "I think you guys with quotes in your signatures should go have an original thought." -- Dan Miller
  49. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by withak53 · · Score: 1

    A major point of the movie was Peter discovering his powers.

    I don't think I really want to see Tobey discover he can shoot webs out his ass.

    What is he going to do? Wake up with his underwear sticky?

  50. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Straif · · Score: 1

    Not to be too picky but the reason I didn't love Spiderman like so many others was due to the differences in the story from the comics.

    Genetically engineered spider vs radioactive one. This is just jumping on the genetic bandwagon (admittedly like everything prior to the nineties was blamed on radioactivity) and just opens the door to the someone creating hundred of "spidermen" instead of only having the original because the situation that created him is easily duplicated.

    Organic web shooters vs man-made. Come on! That was the whole reason Peter Parker was such a great hero. While he had special powers, he also had the scientific know how to make up different webbing formulas to fight specific foes. This Peter Parker has it all handed to him.

    Of course the Toby internal monologues also had some affect on me not loving the movie, but thats a discussion for another post.

    You can blame all my prior rantings on this damn flu I've had for the past week and the fact I'm just trying to kill time at work.

    --
    Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  51. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by rworne · · Score: 4, Funny

    And now there's no reason for the "low on web fluid" plots.

    All he has to do now is massage his spidey-prostate and he's good to go.

    --
    I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  52. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

    Aside from a 2 second mention of "how good Peter is at science," with no followup or demonstration of how, I don't think they played up his intellect at all.

  53. Digital Stunt double -- what's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    With all the digital stunt doubles used in Spider-man and Daredevil -- just what exactly will Tobey being doing in the movies??

    And his face is totally covered with the Spidey costume... get a real human double for other action scenes.

    Wheel out Tobey for the Peter Parker scene and all will be fine.

  54. Poor baby! by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part.

    Yeah, it's not like he doesn't have 10+ million in the bank right now...oh, wait, he does. Never mind.

  55. Painkillers by forged · · Score: 4, Funny

    For 11 million pounds (or even dollars) I would stuff myself with painkillers, keep my mouth shut about the pain and pocket the money ! What's the big deal ? =)

    1. Re:Painkillers by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      If you already *have* 11 million (he's got more, I'm sure), that extra 11 million might not be worth risking a more serious and permanent injury.

      Hell, if someone offered me 11 million (and I *don't* have that much already; at least not after my last paycheck), but I knew it'd come at the cost of never being able to walk again, I'd tell them to keep their money.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    2. Re:Painkillers by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he doesn't need or want the money?

      I, and a lot of people that I know could happily pass up 11,000,000 GBP*, but passing up the opportunity to snog Kirsten Dunst is a crime of the highest magnitude, and one which deserves Mr. Maguire to be given a prostate examination by Dr. Octopus. With all eight arms.

      * NOTE: This is a total lie.

    3. Re:Painkillers by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      I could buy a nice ass wheel chair with 11 Million.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
  56. curse of spiderman by poil11 · · Score: 1

    i guess we can star calling this the spiderman curse.

  57. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think they were trying to move away from the "this is completely unplausible" factor. I mean the movie already requires a gigantic suspension of disbelief, now we have to believe that this kid is going to whip up a neat little gadget the military would just pop a fucking boner over so high-pressure that it would detonate in their metaphorical pants. And he does this what, in a week or two in his bedroom? My asssssss. That seemed goofy to me even when I was a kid.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  58. Tobey you bastard by Winterblink · · Score: 4, Funny

    Some people will do anything to get a backrub by Kirsten Dunst

    --
    "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
    -Hoban Washburn
  59. Wouldn't the actor be wearing a mask anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So why pull out? Anyone would be doing the hard moves in the mask, he would be acting the easy part without the mas.

  60. so you want by sirshannon · · Score: 1

    more horror movies, less spider-man?

  61. Back Problem Cause? by syntap · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maybe Spider Man is getting more out of Mary Jane than the movie let on ;)

  62. Re:Doesn't he do yoga (OT sig comment) by Anixamander · · Score: 1

    ***Foucault is watching you..***

    Great sig...I assume its a panopticon reference. If only more people would read about it...

    --
    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
  63. Too Bad! by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2, Funny

    Firstly: For 17 Million bucks, he can suck it up and take one for the team...

    Secondly: Good thing spiderman wears a mask... Hey Tobey, if you read Slashdot... they're called "stunt doubles"

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  64. Re:Technology is Politics by timeOday · · Score: 1

    Exactly. I interpret "mild back discomfort" as: "Now that I'm a bigshot I'd prefer to make serious movies, so if you want me you'll have to pay through the nose."

  65. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I believe that Stan Lee originally wanted to give spiderman organic web shooters in the comic but that idea was rejected because it was "unbelievable". I believe that Stan Lee wanted to correct that point in the movie, I recall an interview somewhere but it escapes me.

  66. Oh, come on. by dmorin · · Score: 4, Funny
    Brandon Lee was frickin *dead* and he still finished The Crow.

    Christopher Reeve walked in that commercial.

    Sounds like CGI time to me. That is, where a regular stuntman won't serve the same purpose.

  67. /. Hypocricy by rudy_wayne · · Score: 1

    Afer all the complaining about how evil the MPAA is (and they are) -- why are you worrying about this anyway? Screw Spiderman. Boycott the MPAA.

  68. There's something else going on... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

    No one turns down 11 million bucks due to "mild discomfort in his back"!!! He probably wants more money or wants it delayed. But I seriously doubt he wants out.

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  69. It's actually $17 million by suckass · · Score: 1

    According to CNN it's 17 million dollars. The posted link is in England so that's 11 million pounds.

    --
    blah, blah, blah
  70. 11 million pounds not dollars by Inferno666 · · Score: 1

    The article said 11 million pounds not dollars. That comes out to over 20 million dollars i think.

    --

    At least my name's not Jerry.

  71. Darn it... Now they have to find an actor... by Peterus7 · · Score: 1

    An actor who can pull off being a nerd as well as Toby... Hmm. Rick Morrannis? (sp.) Or maybe this is high time Bill Gates got his career in film started before he starts running for public office.

  72. First Superman, now Spiderman... by L0stb0Y · · Score: 1

    Ok, you better not tell me that Batman has cancer or anything...

    It seems all of the childhood superheroes are starting to show that they are mortal...how sad for young kids today....back to the comic books I guess (at least there the only way they get back problems is if the writers or animators go on strike or something)~

    LosT

    --
    "We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams."
    1. Re:First Superman, now Spiderman... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok, you better not tell me that Batman has cancer or anything...

      Holy inflamed prostate, Batman!!!

  73. Holy cow! by NerveGas · · Score: 1


    For $11 million, not only would I shoot the movie in spite of back problems, I'd let the producer whack me in the spine with a baseball bat whenever he felt like it!

    steve

    --
    Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
  74. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by hazem · · Score: 4, Informative

    Stan Lee (Spiderman Creator) was interviewed last year on NPR's Fresh Air.

    I don't remember the details, but Terri Gross asked him about changes in the movie, and this was one he brought up. I think in the end, he decided it didn't bother him very much. He figured that it would take up too much screen-time to go through the whole process of him inventing his web-shooters.

    The interview can be heard at:
    http://freshair.npr.org/guest_info_fa.jhtml?name=2 002/stanlee

    (I see a space in the "2002" of the URL above when I preview this - is this a slashdot problem?)

  75. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Then they come out with The Hulk. True, the web shooters were dropped because they weren't plausible during this time and age. But the parent/parent was talking about "true to comics" in which Peter made the shooters.

    They chose to steer away from the shooters not thinking about anotomy (spider's that is). They should have made him shoot webs from his ass... then he would have been stuck wearing those red ass-flap long johns.

  76. couple of notes by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1)this is an article for variety, not /.
    2)You can't use CGI for close ups.
    3)In the first movie he was upside down for some shots. try that with back pain.
    4)some shots can take hours. Imagine walking into the same room, over and over again, all day long. Now add sharp back pains. now you have back spasms.
    5)Would you really want to put more strain on your back then you haad to if it meant you may not be able to do what you love doing for the rest of your life?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:couple of notes by RedWolves2 · · Score: 1

      Actually it is a story for MediaGab.

    2. Re:couple of notes by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      2)You can't use CGI for close ups.

      yes you can -- more precisely, you cut from the CGI to the actor in closeup, who could be seated comforatbly in front of a blue-screen.

      3)In the first movie he was upside down for some shots. try that with back pain.

      Being upside-down reduces back strain. Some people hang from frames to help their back pain.

      Anyway, they could delay any "difficult" shots till late in the shoot, months down the track. Unless he's got really severe problems, he'd be able to cope with a few days' work then. The CGI will take the best part of a year anyway.

    3. Re:couple of notes by Havokmon · · Score: 1
      5)Would you really want to put more strain on your back then you haad to if it meant you may not be able to do what you love doing for the rest of your life?

      You forgot:
      6) Kissing Kirsten Dunst again is worth it all!

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    4. Re:couple of notes by pi_rules · · Score: 1

      3)In the first movie he was upside down for some shots. try that with back pain.

      I don't care what kind of back pain I'm in. String me upside down in the rain and give me an on screen kiss with Kirsten Dunst and I'm there. Oh poor pitiful me! The agony!

      For the record, when in back pain I prefer being suspended or upside down. I've had periods where I couldn't actually walk and I'd grab ahold of something taller than I and pick my feet up, and just hang there for 20 minutes. It doesn't help long term a whole lot, but sure as snot makes your back feel better while you're suspended. If my arms could have held out for 4 hours or so I'd have probably achived some sort of rehabilitation. Laying on a the floor with your feet on a coffee table and legs (knee to hip to back) at a 90 degree angle helps too.

      I still say having a red-headed woman smooching you while in suspension is the best cure though. It does wonders.

    5. Re:couple of notes by bluesangria · · Score: 1

      2)You can't use CGI for close ups.

      yes you can -- more precisely, you cut from the CGI to the actor in closeup, who could be seated comforatbly in front of a blue-screen.


      Close-ups and CGI - hello?
      Gollum, LOTR: Two Towers
      'Nuff said.

      blue

    6. Re:couple of notes by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Close-ups and CGI - hello?
      Gollum, LOTR: Two Towers

      Impressive as that was, they still can't do a convincing human face in CGI. But they can use real actors for that, as I said.

  77. Get Bubble Boy! by yelloh99 · · Score: 1

    I've been saying for that last couple of years that if you can't get Toby McGuire then you should hire Bubble Boy. I was just joking, but now it's true.

  78. Counter Materialist scum Argument by ramzak2k · · Score: 1

    How about, sucks to be him not because he's going to lose $11 million in potential earnings, but because he has back problems, and loses an opportunity to do what he likes best?

    Whats wrong in stressing on the 11 million?

    He might have a lot of opportunity in the future to do what he likes best - That would be acting, if anything. If you are talking of the chance to be the spiderman,i would say that he has already done that with his first movie.

    Think what you may, the money - 11 million pounds would be the biggest loss if he cant be there for the sequel and was rightly mentioned to be so.

    --

    Siggy Say, Siggy Do
  79. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by John+Harrison · · Score: 1
    In Spiderman 2099 when the new Spidey discovers his organic webshooters he mentions that he is thankful that he isn't more spider-like because then he would have "silk spewing out my butt" or something to that effect.

    I am all in favor of organic webshooters. Hopefully this will do away with all the "I have run out of web cartridges, what do I do now?" plots.

  80. Rumour debunked? by Markgor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apparently, Harry Knowles of Ain't It Cool "reports" that the rumour is simply a rumour.

  81. 11 million pounds, not dollars by FuzzyFurB · · Score: 1

    According to the article it's 11 million POUNDS, not dollars.

    --
    Will Stokes Album Shaper http://albumshaper.sf.net
  82. We should all be so lucky by tmark · · Score: 1

    Since the film was apparently slated to pay him $11M, sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part.

    I'd be happy to ever be in the position where a bad back was the only thing keeping me from starring in a $11M Hollywood blockbuster.

  83. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by bonius_rex · · Score: 1
    IIRC, Marvel came out with this line of "Ultimate" versions of the comics, where they re-booted all the story lines and made them more modern. I think the movie was based on this newer version of the story. In the "Ultimate" story line, for instance, Aunt May is still alive.

    I think genetic DNA stuff is more spookey or whatever nowadays. Radioactiviy is not as horrific as it once was.

  84. This makes me appreciate the Matrix folks! by Zathras11 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    During training for the first film, Hugo
    Weaving was discovered to have some kind
    of tumor in his hip (I believe) which
    required surgery. In addition, Keanu
    Reeves was coming off of neck surgery.
    Come on Tobey, suck it up dude!

  85. Same thing happenned to Barry Gibb by mikosullivan · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you ever wondered why the Bee Gees never went on tour in the 90's and 00's, even though they were wildly popular, it's because Barry Gibb has terrible back problems. He simply can't stand up to perform for long periods of time. All the money they have and all the money they could have made from touring made no difference: he just couldn't do it.

    --
    Miko O'Sullivan
    1. Re:Same thing happenned to Barry Gibb by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I saw BB King recently, a killer concert, but he sat all the way through. He can walk, just can't stand for extended periods of time.

    2. Re:Same thing happenned to Barry Gibb by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      If you ever wondered why the Bee Gees never went on tour in the 90's and 00's, even though they were wildly popular,

      The BeeGees? Define "wildly popular". In the words of Inego Montoya ... "I do not think it means what you think it means".

      --

      Enigma

    3. Re:Same thing happenned to Barry Gibb by mu_wtfo · · Score: 2, Funny

      BB King - Love that man. It's true, he sits on a stool the entire show, with Lucille on his lap. Let me tell ya - that makes things *really* easy for the guys who run the followspots. Set it and forget it! Willie Nelson, too, although I suspect that in his case, it's because he's too stoned to safely move, so he just stands still.
      (note to mods - this is only a little offtopic - it still deals with how physical infirmity can affect a performance)

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  86. Probably not true... by paranoia2k · · Score: 1

    Look here for news debunking this rumor. Yahoo has it too. Wonder if Jake Gyllenhaal dating Kirstin Dunst has anything to do with these rumors.

  87. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by filth+grinder · · Score: 1

    They did do a "reboot" soo to speak of spider-man with the Ultimate line, but the movie is not based on these books. In these books, he still does not have organic web shooters. In the Ultimate books he completes work that his father was orginally doing before he died. Thus he's a smart kid to be able to figure out the piece of the puzzle his dad was already working on.

  88. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by srvivn21 · · Score: 1

    (I see a space in the "2002" of the URL above when I preview this - is this a slashdot problem?)


    Yes. It's there to prevent "page widening posts". Imagine this without spaces. You'd be scrolling sideways for ages.
  89. worse then we thought! by ethanms · · Score: 1

    the article states that it's 11M UK pounds... which is over $17M US!

  90. Me me me! by retro128 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll take his place for $5M. I know it's a sacrifice, but what a deal for the studio! *ahem* "With great power comes great responsibility"

    Thank you, thank you very much.

    --
    -R
  91. well i can replace him.... by hatrisc · · Score: 1

    with his bad acting skills and stunning good looks, i'm most definatly a candidate!

    --
    I write code.
  92. Taco can't do math... by stygar · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since when did the rate of exchange for Pounds Sterling drop to one for one with (preseumably) US dollars? £11 million is worth more like $17 million (USD).

  93. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Piquan · · Score: 1

    Did nobody here go through the special features on the DVD?

    The organic web shooters are the only thing remaining from a 15-year old script that evolved into today's movie. The decision (and Stan Lee seems to agree) was made that it makes no sense for this 16 year-old kid to be able to invent a congealing adhesive that 3M couldn't.

    In some variants of the "Peter invented the web" stories, he suspects that the spider passed on some genetic knowledge of the enzymes he uses. While not terribly plausable, neither is the whole "yellow sun" Superman theory we've all accepted. We, the audience, suspend disbelief when it's necessary to posit the story.

    Personally, I like the homemade webshooters and Peter's other inventions (like Spidey-tracers), for the same reasons as operagost cites.

  94. Just a rumor by bonch · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to this, Tobey is fine and the sequel is a go. This was just a rumor going around. Why is Slashdot posting movie rumors? If we're gonna do that, at least keep up with the current Superman fiasco at Warner Bros....

  95. STAY AWAY from horses? by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    it would kinda SuCk then, to be
    Centaur Man!tm

    or Superman, in this situation
    http://www.centaursite.com/2050.jpg

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  96. Tim Burton was producer of "Batman Forever" by bonch · · Score: 1

    ...so he doesn't escape blame for the series' downfall.

  97. Damn by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2, Funny

    What has happened to all our "Super Heroes"?

    First Superman gets paralyzed - now Spidey throws a disc!!!

    Whats next - Wonder Woman gets Breast Cancer!?!?

  98. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by DroppedPacket · · Score: 1
    In some variants of the "Peter invented the web" stories

    Hey! We all know Al Gore invented the web... :-)

    --
    I am not a resource! I am a free man!
  99. Batman has only killed once by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

    In the entire run of the comic book (since about 1940), Batman has only intentionally killed once (not counting alternate universes and speculative futures). I read that in a book about Batman, could someone that collects the series fill in more detail please?

  100. Re:this sucks by coke_dite · · Score: 1

    Didn't Arnold Schwarzenegger do Batman (whichever one he was in) VERY shortly after recovering from heart surgery? Minor back pain? Gimme a break. Either they're mincing on how badly hurt he was, or he's a wuss. Take your pick.

    --
    Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
  101. How about CleverNickName? by Xandar01 · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't he be a great Spidey? It would more than make up for being cut from Nemesis.

    --
    Life moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it. -FB
  102. Those aren't back problems by Niomosy · · Score: 1

    That's his damn spider sense tingling!

  103. fixin' the franchise, friend by Herr_Nightingale · · Score: 1

    Maguire was a wimpy Peter Parker, TOTALLY UNLIKE the original comic book guy.. he made Spidey look like a vacillating wimp without any of the snappy wit present in the comics. Anybody watch the cartoon show? The (voice) actors are better than the (live) actors in the movie. Oh, except for J. Jonah Jameson :D
    I view this as a chance to redeem the franchise. Hope they cast somebody a little more lively, who doesn't look like he's half-asleep all the time.

  104. If he used a bank his back feel better... by Dareth · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean gee whiz, not even Spiderman should be carrying around 11 million pounds in cash!!!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  105. Bah! by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're one of those people who said "for twenty-two-million, *I'd* get into the ring with Mike Tyson." The fact is, nobody would be willing to pay $22M to see you or me box with Mike Tyson, or even whatever greatly reduced sum his opponents are drawing these days.

    Same goes for someone like Toby McGwire. I would be happy to do a movie for $11M pounds. I'd go through back pains, and possibly even severe risk to my future health, for that kind of money. But a big time actor knows what kind of money he or she can draw, and $11M for a movie (especially one that could knock McGwire out of three or four others) might not be the best use of his time.

    I thought he did a terrific job in the first movie, and I hope he can swing the sequel. *ducks*

    --

    You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  106. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by mark-t · · Score: 1
    This is getting more and more off topic, but I personally preferred the "radioactivity" excuse. It may not be plausible, but then neither is a human being having spider-powers in the first place.

    My biggest beef with the genetically engineered spider situation was that it was "reproduceable". The cool thing about the story in the comics was that it was a one-in-a-trillion longshot that couldn't be duplicated if you tried (my second oldest son has a spider-man comic in which someone found out how Spidey got his powers and *did* try to duplicate it, but it ended up leading to tragic consequences). Also, of course, the irradiated spider died shortly after biting Peter on account of the radiation -- what's to stop this spider from biting someone else later?

    I can see that there's a reasonable argument for having the spiders be genetically engineered, but the aspect of radioactivity throws a wild-card into the mix that science still cannot precisely duplicate (otherwise we could always *CURE* cancer with radiation therapy instead of sometimes killing them faster). It's not an issue of radioactivity not being "spookey" anymore, it simply comes down to the fact that radioactivity is still largely unpredictable, and that unpredictability, at least to me, carries more plausibility of creating a superhuman than anything that science could have deliberately designed.

    I didn't care for the fact that he had organic webshooters either, but I can respect that they probably only changed it to keep the complexity of the movie down. At any rate it didn't bother me as much as the radioactive spider bite change did.

  107. Tobey needs to learn Kung Fu by teko_teko · · Score: 1

    Like keanu and lawrence fishburne ;)

  108. Time for me! by NetNinja · · Score: 1

    Well I guess I'll play Spider Man!!

  109. Superman's Curse by TaraByte · · Score: 1

    Hopefully Spider-Man won't end up with the same curse as Superman

    --
    Security is inversely proportional to the commitment of one desiring to circumvent it.
  110. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by cuyler · · Score: 1

    (I see a space in the "2002" of the URL above when I preview this - is this a slashdot problem?)

    Yes, yes it is. You aren't supposed to preview your posting.

  111. Wha?? by pctainto · · Score: 1

    Football players love what they do and play injured. Does that stop us from complaining about their millions of dollars.

    The only argument you can put forth here is that "he already has millions, why get more."

    --
    I think my principles are reachin' an all time low
  112. OT Re:Please say it ain't so!! by bonius_rex · · Score: 1

    I understand what you're saying, but I think the organic web-shooters make a more 'realistic' story for modern audiences.

    There is much noise made in the news lately about cloning, stem cell research, genetically-engineered food, etc. So this is a technology that scares people today (much as I'm sure cold war era children were scared of radiation)

    <comic_book_guy_mode>
    If you accept that a random shot of radiation causes the mutations required for spider-powers, then it seems to me MORE plausable that the genetically engineered spider would have this effect.

    Also, mavel has a book (SpiderGirl, IIRC) that deals with Peter's Daughter (who also has spider-powers). In order for this to be believable, the original spder-bite would have had to cause a germ-level mutation in peter, otherwise his Spidey powers would not be a heritable trait. I think the sequence in the film showing the recombinant DNA strands makes this a bit more plausible (highly subjective, I know)
    </comic_book_guy_mode>

    <Star_Trek_geek_mode>
    I think it's like star trek, where if you suspend disbelief of something absurd (warp speed travel), then it makes another absurdity (lots of different races of aliens within close proximity of earth) more believable.
    Without the aliens, the story would be lame, so we accept that Faster_than_light travel is possible in this world.
    </star_trek_geek_mode>

    Comic book aged kids today know better than to think a random mutation could cause spiderman, but they just might believe in genetics.

    Of course, I'm almost 30, and I still read comic books, so nobody should put much stock in what I have to say ;-)

    1. Re:OT Re:Please say it ain't so!! by mark-t · · Score: 1
      If you accept that a random shot of radiation causes the mutations required for spider-powers, then it seems to me MORE plausable that the genetically engineered spider would have this effect.

      Actually, I didn't mind the genetically engineered aspect at all... It was a cool update to the story that, I agree, does help with the overall plausiblity of the concept. I just had a beef with radiation not being a factor. As I said, the radiation throws an unpredictable wildcard into the mix that makes what happens to Peter, however incredulous, all the more spectacular and wonderous. At the very least, you come away from it with the thought that it was just good fortune, or maybe even destiny itself, that created Spider-Man, and not something that was practically an inevitable consequence of a man-made experiment.

      But you know... (one of my kids that is a MAJOR spidey fan has pointed this out to me) the spider *had* escaped from its cage, nobody's saying it couldn't have got a dose of radiation from somewhere else on the premises before biting Peter. University research facilities are known to have places where radiation is used, after all. But hey, that's probably just reaching. :)

      BTW, I'm almost 40, and I still read comic books. Don't sweat it.

  113. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by hazem · · Score: 1

    I recently quit a job as a systems administrator to pursue an MBA degree. If I'm not careful, and keep making mistakes like previewing my messages, they'll revoke my geek license all-together!

  114. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by Guignol · · Score: 1

    Uh ? this guy was very bad, everytime I hear him saying "Okay" it reminds me of Abe's Odissey.
    Oh well, now that he has this back problem, maybe he'll get an oscar for the best mudukon interpretation....

  115. This looks like a job for ... by bryanp · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... stunt doubles, CGI and demerol.

    What? You were expecting Superman?

    --
    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
  116. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by nyquil · · Score: 1

    my biggest question was "Where did he get the costume? Costumes R Us?"

  117. Well i dont know about anyone else by L0k11 · · Score: 1
    But I found Toby maguire absolutely infuriating.

    His voice annoyed the hell out of me.


    I almost broke my friends gamecube because he was playing the spiderman game and it kept repeating the same voice snippets over and over again.


    GAAAA



    I'll be more likely to watch a sequel if he is replaced by an actor with a less annoying voice.

    --
    "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything" -- Josef Stalin
  118. 11 Million Pounds!!! by RealRav · · Score: 1

    For 11 million pounds he could buy a bionic back or an exoskeleton and be a real superhero!

  119. Whatever... by Goonie · · Score: 1
    I know that this was meant in jest, but I'd have to say that the whole "kissing Kirsten Dunst" thing would have to be overrated.

    Kirsten Dunst is really attractive, on film, and is probably pretty cute in the flesh as well. Movie sets, however, are most certainly not sexy places. You've got hot, bright lights blasting at you, a whopping great camera in your face, all manner of crew staring at you, both your partners happen to be visiting the set that day, it's getting late, it's the twentieth run-through of the same damn scene, the director's getting on everybody's nerves. Not to mention that for all we know, Ms. Dunst is just as likely to be a bitchy egomaniac or a complete dimwit as a pleasant person to be around.

    I'd also imagine that Tobey McGuire has no shortage of gorgeous, intelligent, and interesting women who'd like to spend quality time with him anyway, so the relative drool factor for him is almost certainly lower than for the rest of us :/

    However, if they're still scratching around to cast somebody, I'm happy to take some leave and give it a try :)

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  120. Re:Please say it ain't so!! by unitron · · Score: 1
    'my biggest question was "Where did he get the costume? Costumes R Us?" '

    Martha Kent is supporting herself in her widowhood with a little work from home thing she started years ago.

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  121. Re:Great point . But they also added a stupid love by unitron · · Score: 1

    In the original (early to mid 60s) Spiderman comics there was a continuing subplot about his relationship with Mary Jane whatshername (typical teenage angst aggravated by having to put on the costume and go save the world instead of making time with her), so it's only unfaithful if the course of "true love" does run smooth.

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  122. Canada by technix4beos · · Score: 1
    I'll quote from the CIA World Fact Book:

    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print /ca.html

    "...Area - comparative: somewhat larger than the US..."

    In fact, Canada is the second largest country in the world, with Russia being in first place.

    Yeah, it really sucks that Canada is so reliant on the following natural resources:

    iron ore, nickel, zinc, copper, gold, lead, molybdenum, potash, silver, fish, timber, wildlife, coal, petroleum, natural gas, hydropower

    </sarcasm>

    The only real problem Canada has right now is immigration, and revitalizing it's healthcare and education systems. Oh, of course, Quebec, but that's a whole other issue. ;)

    --
    user@host$ diff /dev/urandom /dev/uspto
  123. The rumour mill is working well by spot35 · · Score: 1

    According to this on USA Today The rumours of Tobey's non appearance in the second Spidey film are greatly exaggerated.