Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire drop out of Spiderman 4

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...1&ref=vertfilm

I'm glad to see Maguire gone, especially after Spiderman 3.

Three was so terrible. A big let down because one and two were not bad. Although I was never really a fan of Tobey Maguire in any movie, least of all as Peter Parker. I don't know wtf that crap was with Emo Peter. And of course casting Topher Grace as Venom was absolutely ruinous. I wonder who they'll get to replace him.

Honestly, I never got that into all three of them. I used to think I liked the first one, but that's probably because I was so young. Not really sad to see this series go.

edit; Wait - essentially, they're remaking the first one? What the hell?

The first one was pretty good, the second one was average, and the third one was a below average picture... the fourth may end up being better than the third, if it comes to that, but it may be little different to the second's ratings.

They don't need a fourth one. I refused to see the third because I heard it was so bad and the first two weren't that great either, especially the second. However, the movies made so much money that Sony just wants to make more of the same, just like every other film production company, so they can make more $$$.

I have a feeling that Raimi, if he was going to direct the fourth, wanted to get back to basics and make a truly good film. I really liked Drag Me To Hell and thought that would give him confidence in taking on another movie. But I think Sony just wanted him to pump out a new movie quick without thinking too much about it and Raimi didn't like it and said goodbye.

The new movie will probably be terrible. I mean, we already saw Spiderman in high school...so...

And seriously, how do you screw up Spiderman and Venom? Venom is one of the most badass villains of all time and, from what I hear, the third movie was terrible. If Sony really wants to make a new movie then they should have Spiderman fighting crime and not necessarily a super-villain. I think having Kingpin would work. ...Hmm... I could really see Sony trying to catch onto this whole vampire thing and have Morbius in the new one... SUCK!

Originally Posted by Lord Rahl

They don't need a fourth one. I refused to see the third because I heard it was so bad and the first two weren't that great either, especially the second. However, the movies made so much money that Sony just wants to make more of the same, just like every other film production company, so they can make more $$$.

I have a feeling that Raimi, if he was going to direct the fourth, wanted to get back to basics and make a truly good film. I really liked Drag Me To Hell and thought that would give him confidence in taking on another movie. But I think Sony just wanted him to pump out a new movie quick without thinking too much about it and Raimi didn't like it and said goodbye.

The new movie will probably be terrible. I mean, we already saw Spiderman in high school...so...

And seriously, how do you screw up Spiderman and Venom? Venom is one of the most badass villains of all time and, from what I hear, the third movie was terrible. If Sony really wants to make a new movie then they should have Spiderman fighting crime and not necessarily a super-villain. I think having Kingpin would work. ...Hmm... I could really see Sony trying to catch onto this whole vampire thing and have Morbius in the new one... SUCK!

Well the thing is the plot's aren't bad considering there coming from comics but the casting is what made it bad as they say. Moreover I think I prefer batman because spiderman doesn't really have great motive for fighting crime or any pressure to uphold it. The whole his dad was shot is copying batman anyway.

Hurrah Hurrah! Just shows "STOP" with the super hero movies. They are boring. I switch channels every time I find one on.

Originally Posted by D.B. Cooper

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...1&ref=vertfilm

I'm glad to see Maguire gone, especially after Spiderman 3.

I think given what he had, Maguire was the perfect Spider-Man. Good acting can only cover up a poor script and directing so much. So I give him credit for that. But in the end, I'm not sad to see a (at least temporary) end to the SM saga.

Originally Posted by Darth Ravenous

Moreover I think I prefer batman because spiderman doesn't really have great motive for fighting crime or any pressure to uphold it. The whole his dad was shot is copying batman anyway.
Power to the Uchiha

His uncle actually...

Whatever it's still a copy off batman

Originally Posted by Darth Ravenous

Whatever it's still a copy off batman

Which is a copy of Zorro.

Originally Posted by molonthegreat

Which is a copy of Zorro.

No Zorro can kill Batman doesn't and Zorro doesn't have all the bad guys and plots of Batman Zorro's not a superhero.

Originally Posted by Darth Ravenous

No Zorro can kill Batman doesn't and Zorro doesn't have all the bad guys and plots of Batman Zorro's not a superhero.

Well there are some differences but the characters aren't that different just think about it both are rich guys who decides to assume a secret identity and fight crime.

Originally Posted by Darth Ravenous

No Zorro can kill Batman doesn't and Zorro doesn't have all the bad guys and plots of Batman Zorro's not a superhero.

Lol, you can just call Spiderman a copy of Batman but get all technical when someone does the same for Batman and Zorro?

Just to quote the cracked.com article:

Zorro was first at being a millionaire playboy-slash-dark costumed evil face puncher. Zorro had a secret cave under his mansion where he kept his horse and Zorro stuff, not unlike a certain caped crusader. The big difference being that Zorro didn't call it the Zorrocave or the Zorrohorse.

Zorro was also the first hero with a butler, his trusty servant Bernardo. But Alfred is probably more useful since Bernardo was deaf and mute. With Alfred you just have to yell "Hey, go make me a hotdog." With Bernard you have to mimic putting a sausage in your mouth, rub your tummy and then hope he doesn't think you want him to fellate you.

And last, Zorro also hid his secret costumed persona by pretending to be a complete foppish rich douche long before Bruce Wayne. Although, to be fair, the Scarlet Pimpernel invented this one in 1903, but nobody counts him since he committed the crime of having a superhero name that was lame despite having the word "pimp" in it.

The connections are so obvious DC comics doesn't bother to deny them. In fact, the movie lil' Bruce Wayne goes to see with his parents the night they're shot is The Mark of Zorro.
http://www.cracked.com/article_17299...p-offs_p2.html


Also, whether you call Batman a superhero or not is completely irrelevant since his only "superpower" is being filthy rich.

this thread. Maguire is Spiderman and Raimi is the director!

The director of the Spiderman movies is going to direct the World of Warcraft movie.

Raimi is the only reason they were any good.

I heard they've tapped Robert Pattinson to be the new Peter Parker. Dunno if its reliable info or not, just heard it from a friend.

:|

Well thats just an overused story plot. Iron man did the same thing

Hence, you can't call a common trope found through out all media to be a rip off. A father or mentor figure dying is often a common motivator in the characters actions to pursue a certain goal.