Slashdot Mirror
Spider-Man 4 Scrapped, Franchise Reboot Planned
derGoldstein writes "Yesterday we discussed which sci-fi should get the reboot treatment next. If you consider Spider-Man as 'proper sci-fi,' then it would appear that's the answer. 'Sony Pictures decided today to reboot the Spider-Man franchise after Sam Raimi pulled out of Spider-Man 4 because he felt he couldn't make its summer release date and keep the film's creative integrity. This means that Raimi and the cast including star Tobey Maguire are out. There will be no Spider-Man 4. Instead, the studio will focus on a reboot script by Jamie Vanderbilt with a new director and a new cast.'"
Perhaps Raimi is too busy working on other projects.
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
I agree with your general point, but I'd like to point out that X-Men was 2 years ahead of Spiderman, and is more or less what started the superhero revival.
--Obyron
This has been explained many different ways in how Parker gets his web shooters. In some versions Parker is really smart and develops them him self, in others he not as smart but the spider bite leaves something in him that helps him develop them. In another version the shooters were developed by his father just before he died and Parkers new spider senses led him to modify them to shoot webs. Internalizing the web shooters was always explained as time saving sacrifice. It was just easier to spend 2 minuets having Parker discovering this ability and using it opposed to spending 20 minuets showing him designing and building web shooters and explaining why he decided to make them and how he even could. I've personally always enjoyed the physical aspect of the web shooters, either the drama of any empty shooter at the wrong time or watching spidey mixing a new formula to make his webs stronger or more elastic. A favorite is from the original cartoon when Spider-man adds asbestos to his webbing.I can't remember why but it was to either make it fire proof or electrically non conductive. Spider-man, giving the villains cancer one web at a time.
According to the plot of that film, Lois Lane lied to her husband, telling him that the kid was his when it wasn't, married him almost immediately after Superman departed and kept the fact from him that he had a child when he did come back. What a fucking cow. Meanwhile Superman abandoned her almost immediately after getting her knocked up for approximately five or six years without actually telling her where he was going or that he'd be away for some time. When he returns to Earth, his first act is to pick up his dogs favourite ball pretending to be about to throw it for him, then hurls the ball off into the stratosphere, leaving the dog looking mournfully after it. Pretty shortly after that, Superman starts trying to pick up where he left off with Lois (and lets also keep in mind that this is a woman he's willing to get pregnant but never tells her he's been stalking her in his day life for years). Lois obliges him, ditching her husband (a loving, supportive, father and husband who not only is rich, successful, but played by fucking James Marsden - I mean what a fucking ungrateful, unappreciative bitch she is). Meanwhile Superman uses his super powers to variously spy on them through their walls, listen to their private conversations and, by the end of the movie, let himself into their house to spend quality time with their kid without the parents knowing. Piece of shit! The only decent person in the film is Lois's husband who despite having no special powers at all, gets in a plane and fucking flies out to sea to rescue her from Lex Luthor whilst Superman know's she's there but is busy flying around the city being a hero. Yeah, points for ethical mathematics, Superman, but shouldn't Lois be more appreciative of the guy who put her first?
None of this would bother me if it weren't for the fact the film is utterly fucking oblivious to the reprehensibility of its main characters. The film takes the attitude of "Superman does it so it must be good" and presumes the audience goes along with them.
Man, I'd prefer my children to watch any amount of Heath Ledger murdering people with pencils but with the film's background message of "people can be good and you don't have to be corrupted by fighting evil", than half an hour of Superman smugly sneaking into people's houses and undermining marriages because he's "the good guy".
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.