Sunday, November 07, 2010

Legitimately interesting "Spider-Man" news

I am not biased against the idea of rebooting "Spider-Man." I'm biased against movies that sound like terrible ideas, or movies made for dubious reasons primarily by people for whom quality is waaaay down low on the list of priorities. That a remake of a movie that's not even ten years old, less than two years after it's most-recent sequel, which only exists in the first place because shortsighted producers screwed over a creative team twice, fits into that category is hardly something I have control over.

ALSO not my fault or problem: The fact that there hasn't been a shred of news since it was announced that hasn't ranged from bad to irrelevant - good talented being scooped up doesn't mean much when the film is being largely driven by people seemingly bound and determined to make a bad (but profitable movie.)

But NOW, finally, one piece of actually interesting, quasi-positive news. Buried in TheWrap's reporting about Martin Sheen and Sally Field being sought for Uncle Ben and Aunt May is a fairly big reveal: Who's playing Mary-Jane Watson? Nobody. She's not in it.

This isn't an indicator of anything, but it's significant for two reasons. Firstly, people who followed the development on the original films will recall that oldschool-Spidey purist Sam Raimi had wanted to use Gwen Stacy as the love-interest since the first one but was "encouraged" to use MJ because she was the more "known" character. Of course, that was before Marvel spent three years (and counting) of stories to get her largely OUT of the franchise, so... whatever.

More significantly, it calls into question what "form" the film is taking. It was an open secret, when the reboot was announced, that the new pitch was "Spider-Man by way of Twilight," with heavy focus on a teenage love-triangle as opposed to superheroics. It had been assumed (and reported) that that meant Gwen and MJ as Edward and Jacob, but if that's not the case then... who? People would've been all over it already if it were Felicia Hardy (The Black Cat) and if it was a "reimagined" teenaged Eddie Brock (Venom) people would've been all over it and annoyed already. So... Harry Osborn, maybe? Flash Thompson, probably?

13 comments:

Popcorn Dave said...

Are people still sure it's going to do this love triangle thing? And that it's actually going to be the main focus, as opposed to a corny sideplot like it was in the first film? I haven't been keeping up with this lately, but maybe they've moved on from the initial pitch after realising it wouldn't work so good.

untra said...

Pardon my ignorance, but isn't spiderman one of the avengers? Why is Marvel more concerned with a spiderman pandering towards tweens as opposed to getting him in the mix with iron man, captain america and thor?

Again, comic fans, pardon my ignorance.

Avikar said...

The reason being is that Sony still has the rights to Spiderman and not marvel studios.

But even if it was the case, Spidey was only an honorary member of the avengers and that happened well into the series. He tried to be recruited into the avengers and the fantastic four back early in his series run but it never came to be.

john said...

Squirrel Girl!

Jacob Beck said...

Responding to untra,

Sony Pictures owns the Spiderman movie license, not Marvel.

rob said...

Huh? Flash as the third part of the triangle? So modern gay Peter Porker?

ZAENGO said...

If this is happeneing, and theres no stopping it, i just hope at some point, Gwen dies. Not because i have a grudge against the character, its just that that was an important story for spiderman. I agree that this whole thing is stupid, but if they follow the comics that closely, it will be forgiven. at least by me.


Oh, and Bob? did you hear about the Spiderman broadway muical? with Bono and the Edge writing the music? I for one, think thats pretty fuckin cool. How bout you?

Demonic Angel said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dav3 said...

Was "Spiderman by way of Twilight" ever an actual rumor?

It occurs to me that the news of a reboot came out at exactly the same time that Twilight was raping the box offices and suddenly everybody just assumed "Spiderlight" would be the result.

Did anyone offically report that though? Or did the internet just leap to that conclusion out of fear?

If you ignore the "Spiderlight" aspect, then I have to agree with what several posters have said, the news has been all good so far.

On the other hand I, like any good nerd, CRAVE continuity, so rebooting a franchise always seems like a bad idea. I'm also sore that Sony told Raimi to get lost, especially after he gave them 3 blockbuster movies in 5 years.

G0kiza said...

Purest huh? Natural webbing, purposeless Doc Ock, Glider Goblin, choosing to use Mary Jane cause Gwen was unknown only to introduce Gwen in the last movie, Sandman killed Uncle Ben, Peter in total douchebag fashion helps to ruin a marriage...

Boy I could go on for days about raimi's clusterfuck films. I look forward to the more sensible remake, but Haters gonna hate I guess...

swingsetknight said...

This movie may be deeply, deeply awful. It may be a mawkish teenie flick with all the depth of High School Musical and it may be a box-office bomb. The villains could be pointless, the heroes could be lackluster and one note, and the scripting team could turn out to have signed Stephanie Meyer as a "creative advisor".

All of these horrible things might occur, and there will STILL be one thing this movie has going for it, as far as I'm concerned: Tobey Maguire is NOT IN IT.

*Cue Handel's Hallelujah*

Sophie said...

Okay... I am not THAT involved in the Marvel universe...not because I don`t care, I do actually, just because I lack time... but Spiderlight... well, when I was 8 I would have ranted on about that one for days as my favorite topic to avoid math or school work, ... Spiderman is NOT about teenage drama. If we want teenage drama intertwined with some immaturely handled superpowers... that is what we got the X-Men-boarding school for. And bag to MovieBobs point of why remaking a movie whose last sequel is less than 2 years old, while Raimi´s first spiderman is not even a decade old? ...and mixing it with twilight... okay... imagine this: Twilight came out years ago and Harry Potter would be the IT-THING now... would Sony be doing Spider-Pottery? I don´t get it.

Blowshimselfupdude said...

Why can't you leave this alone? No one anywhere ever in any interviews has ever said it's going to be Spider-man by twilight. It has been said it will focus more on the relationship aspect similar to ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN. You are the ONLY person saying its going to be Spider-light. And you seem to have a strange worship of the Rami movies. Spider-man 2 is a fantastic movie. But it's really not a very good SPIDER-MAN movie. Lacking pretty much anything that resembles Peter Parker or MJ from the comics. Hell even Doc Ock was literally nothing like his comic book counterpart. So it's really irritating that you keep saying "oh man this movie is going ot suck and end so many careers" when there has literally been no real news from which to judge it on. It has a solid cast and is going to be inspired/based on the hugely successful and long running Ultimate Spider-man. Where you one of the people who flipped shit cuz The Joker was wearing make up? Cuz that's really what your doing here "What Joker isn't permawhite this movie is going to be an abomination" "What they are taking Peter back to a younger more character driven type stories and using a villain the last series hinted at but clearly had no plans on ever actually using? It's obviously going to be dogshit". I mean come on you have yet to get any ACTUAL information on the film you you bash it like crazy. If you should be worried about anything you should be worried about the fact that the films script was compared to Batman Begins (not Twilight again your the only person ANYWHERE comparing it with Twilight). Which is a tone that really doesn't jive well with Spidey at all. This really all sounds like your just some whiny Rami fanboy bitching because his spidey movies which weren't really spider-man at all to begin with got canceled so they could try something new. You know what? I like the Hulk. More then that I REALLY like Peter David's Hulk. Ang Lee's Hulk was a film very strongly drawing from that run of the Hulk. And was a very ambitious movie that didn't completely work but really showed promise. It's intended sequel which was going to have the Joe Fixit Grey Hulk was scrapped in favor of The Incredible Hulk. Even though it wasn't exactly the Hulk film I wanted I still went in with an open mind and liked it well enough. I certainly didn't sit there a year before filming began and go "WHAT! highly qualified actors are playing the hero and villain! This pisses me off! WHAT! They're using a classic Hulk villain that the previous take never even brought up that's just bullshit! WHAT! There using Betty AND making her a scientist again! Why not just make the same damn movie?!?!" They have a solid cast a director with one damn good (and mature lacking really any teenyboppiness to it) relationship film. The only things that really are daunting is the reduced budget and the fact that it seems like it may be a "grim and gritty" Spider-man. Why don't you just wait for real information to judge on? I really like your videos your text content. But Christ you said like a bitchy fanboy with this. You did that video about how the world views geeks as the comic book guy from the Simpsons. YOU BEING HIM "Spider-man is going ot fight the lizard? The villain the last director kept teasing us with and fans have been asking for since the original spider-man? Worst movie ever!"