Thursday, January 14, 2010

Spider-Man reboot thought of the day (again)

Everyone and their uncle is reporting that Marc Webb, a music video mainstay turned feature director with last year's "Mopey Guy Pursues Manic Pixie Dream-Girl Indie Rom-Com #472" (released in some markets as "500 Days of Summer,") is Sony's go-to guy for "Spider-Man: The New Class."

Webb had a lot of heat on him, even prior to "Summer," but he's new enough to not have precisely a ton of clout. Make no mistake - the only people they're looking to hire for this are people who're already in-sync with the pre-mandated approach OR people who can be pushed around INTO the pre-mandated approach.

The important detail to take away from all this is how fast it's been: Unless someone at Sony is blowing smoke, they had a script the DAY they announced #4 was canceled and now they may have already nabbed a somewhat-sought-after new talent for director. In other words, it looks more and more like they'd decided on this course of action faaaaaar in advance, and that all the stonewalling of Sam Raimi over the villain was quite possibly a manuver to get him to leave "voluntarily" so this reboot could proceed. Not at all an unheard of move in the business.

"Spider-Man: Breaking Eclipse" is currently slated for 2012.

11 comments:

JoGr said...

I thought 500 Days of Summer was great, but whatever.

It's not like setting the films in high school is some kind of cynical distortion of the character; Ultimate Spider-Man is fantastic, and the recent cartoon series which features a similar 'Spidey/ Saved By The Bell' concept is one of the best adaptations of the character, well, ever. He's had some of his best stories in that format.

Sit down, make yourself a cup of tea, and listen to one of those CDs you can buy with just sounds of the ocean or something. You'll probably feel a lot better.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, who cares anymore about Spider-man now that the entire Avengers movie series (Iron Man, Thor, etc) is currently being worked on?

I think it's time to move from this weird fantasy obsession our culture has with needing to relate to its heroes and just get immersed in some larger than life world saving stories.

Josh said...

You know what? I care about Spiderman! I care about Spiderman VERY VERY MUCH. He's second only to Batman in my book, because when I was a kid, he helped me believe that being a nerd was okay (in fact, the only reason Batman is #1 is because he did a better job: He was just a normal smart guy without any superpowers, kicking constant ass).

I hated the Iron Man movie because I can't relate to Robert Downey Jr's Tony Stark (or for that matter, to Robert Downey Jr). My parents hated Watchmen because it didn't have characters they could relate to (I on the other hand loved it because I love the graphic novel, and because I can relate to most of the characters in some way).

If you make your characters complete idiotic, unlikable jackasses who happen to do something important, you know what you get? You get Youngblood.

Characters that can't get by on their badass or cute factor (i.e., the guys who aren't Wolverine, or Kirby respectively) survive because their fans connect with them.

I mean, look at Gordon Freeman! The guy is one of the most popular characters in games, but it's not just because Half-Life and Half-Life 2 are fun to play. The mere fact that Valve claims he's a physicist and gave him nerd glasses endured him to gamers long enough to wait for Half-Life 2. That, and the fact that he (like most of the more popular FPS protagonists, except for the inexplicably beloved Masterchief) is silent, and therefore has only the personality that the individual gamer gives him. You can't get more relatable than that!

Josh said...

I am somewhat disturbed that someone else named Josh comments on this blog. What are the odds?

As per MovieBob:
The only good thing that can come of this is if Sam Raimi gets to go back to making absolutely brilliant horror films.

Rubbav1 said...

You're going to do an "Intermission" about this, aren't you?

Anyway to reply to the first comment I think you're missing the point. The "Ultimate Spider-man" series, while being great, will most likely not be the inspiration for the reboot because there is no way that Sony will let their series go out of their hands again by being trapped in 90's nostalgia rather than 60's nostalgia. This isn't about simply updating the series but making it more "relevant".

Have you seen the shit they play on the Disney Channel nowadays? Because it's probably going to be a little more like that then, isn't it. Why because the only reason why they would update it and take it away from the fan-loved auteur is to turn it mainstream and not the good type of mainstream. The Transformers, At World's End, and Star Trek mainstream where they'll only do what they have to do to get box office and fuck off the fans. The only hope for the series now is that Webb is both a strong director and a fan of the 90's serial.

But there is a very slim chance at that.

Smashmatt202 said...

This is all speculation, right? I feel like I want to believe you, but I know no one else will.

tyra menendez said...

josh,

given how many people in the us are named such, i'm surprised it hasn't happened sooner, actually.

Anonymous said...

This is what I've been told. They intended 4 to be the end and it would come out in 2011. Then at the same time they'd make the reboot. So obviously if Spider-man 4 was not able ot meet 2011 it'd all be fucked up.

So yeah as I understand it it's always been intended to put a reboot out.

On a slightly different note. If 4 WAS intended to eb the last I'm REALLY pissed that Rami wouldn't just instantly do Lizard. I mean baring that Vultre is easily one of the worst Spidey villains. He's been hinting at Lizard since 1. That he knew he was doing his last Spidey film and he wouldn't instantly do Lizard annoys me.

Christopher Everett said...

Sir,
Unable to contact your person by other means I am afraid I have been forced to resort to commenting on a recent article in order to correct you on some misinformation printed in your article on the escapist 'Blue (Skin) State'.
Contrary to common belief, The statistics you garnered about the US voting turnout in the 2008 election are in fact from the variant 'Persons of Voting Age'. This system ignores overseas voters whilst including felons and others who may not vote (including immigrants, I believe). The following website includes a rather neat little article explaining the actual voter turnout (calculated in the same fashion as most European countries). This shows the turnout at 62%- something a lot closer to countries such as the UK. http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm
Secondly, in response to your conviction of the public abscence of political thought, I wish to inform you of my ideas on this. It is my firm belief that politics is either everything or it is nothing. Politics is what news you watch in the morning, it is how you greet the postal worker, whether you travel in a bus or an SUV and what you eat. Politics is involved consciously and sub consciously in all these decisions for everyone, whether they know it or not, or it is involved in no desicions, and is just a by word to excuse what would otherwise be described as 'power hungry instinct'. Therefore politics is everything or it is nothing.
I hope you take in mind the ammendment provided in the first paragraph.

Yours Sincerely, Christopher Everett

Jonathan said...

Breaking Eclipse...

That sounds like... a name of yet another Twilight movie. So not only is this going to be "retooled" to appeal to tweenage boys, but tweenage girls too?

What hath Sony wrought!!!???

Foxed said...

That's just Bob's little joke, Jonathan.