Raimi: Six Spider-Man movies

Halfshell · Post by **Halfshell** » Fri May 06, 2005 8:41 am

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/inde ... 0&id=30954

"I've heard Amy Pascal [chairman of Sony's motion picture group] say she wants to make six Spider-Man pictures," Raimi said in an interview at the Saturn Awards in Los Angeles. "So I think she's a woman of her word. And if she says there'll be six, there'll be six. ... If they were to ask me, and if I felt as passionate as I feel now about the character and had this great hunger and desire to tell the story, which I really do now, you couldn't keep me away from it."

So keep that in mind the next time you go fanboy-drooling over why Venom absolutely has to be in the third film. There's no rush.

And we'll be pining for the halcyon days of Superman IV by the time we reach the end...

Axe · Post by **Axe** » Fri May 06, 2005 12:57 pm

Tangential remark-o-grenade (mine):

http://tfarchive3.com/community/showthr ... adid=30355

Sixswitch · Post by **Sixswitch** » Fri May 06, 2005 1:46 pm

Originally posted by Axe
Tangential remark-o-grenade (mine):

http://tfarchive3.com/community/showthr ... adid=30355

Ummm... What the hell does that have to do with anything?

-Ss

Axe · Post by **Axe** » Fri May 06, 2005 2:02 pm

For one thing, Toguro just went significantly higher than Venom in my book, and Venom used to be a topper (only seen Spiderman cartoons though :rolleyes: ).

malcos · Post by **malcos** » Fri May 06, 2005 3:07 pm

Originally posted by Axe
For one thing, Toguro just went significantly higher than Venom in my book, and Venom used to be a topper (only seen Spiderman cartoons though :rolleyes: ).

Huh?

Axe · Post by **Axe** » Fri May 06, 2005 3:42 pm

Originally posted by malcos
Huh?

Before I watched, say episode 51 and onward of YYH, Venom and Spiderman 3 were somewhat on my mind. Toguro and YYH fully took over.

DrSpengler · Post by **DrSpengler** » Fri May 06, 2005 3:42 pm

I'll go see em, whatever the quality is. I doubt Tobey will want to play the role for 3 more flicks. And isn't Spider-Man 3 slated for a 2007 release? Six movies is going to take a while...

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Fri May 06, 2005 3:50 pm

Six movies? Geesh. Hollywood will scrape the bottom of the barrel on anything if they even get a whiff of a few more dollars......

I really liked te first 2, and probably will like the third. But stretching it out to 6 is too much in my opinion.

Halfshell · Post by **Halfshell** » Fri May 06, 2005 3:58 pm

Originally posted by Kup1
Six movies? Geesh. Hollywood will scrape the bottom of the barrel on anything if they even get a whiff of a few more dollars......

I really liked te first 2, and probably will like the third. But stretching it out to 6 is too much in my opinion.

Yeah, because nobody in their right mind would like a franchise enough to bother seeing the sixth film.

Now excuse me whilst I go and wank over internet reports on the running time of Revenge of the Sith's end credits...

Post by **Hound** » Fri May 06, 2005 4:00 pm

I've seen all 11 Star Trek films

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Fri May 06, 2005 4:06 pm

Originally posted by The HeartBrend Kid
Yeah, because nobody in their right mind would like a franchise enough to bother seeing the sixth film.

Now excuse me whilst I go and wank over internet reports on the running time of Revenge of the Sith's end credits...

Ah, I stand corrected.

But, you know what I mean....

SW was originally designed to be in 6 parts, I'm sure the Spiderman 'saga' wasn't.

I think I remember Toby M saying that the series was going to be in three parts. But now that they see just how much its made, they're going to whore it out for as long as possible.

To me, it looks just like another attempt to wring every dollar out of it, just for the dollar's sake. Not for the movies.

And I'm also a ST fan, but it's time to let that franchise die in peace.

Gene Roddenberry is probably rolling in his grave.

Wildfire Herald · Post by **Wildfire Herald** » Fri May 06, 2005 4:19 pm

No, the Star Trek franchise died after the fifth movie, ever since it's just been shambling around as a zombie.

Sixswitch · Post by **Sixswitch** » Fri May 06, 2005 5:02 pm

Star Trek isn't a dead franchise. It's just that it needs to lay low for a while. DS9 was awesomely good. And it's still alive and kicking through the relaunch novels. Enterprise just seems to be recycling ideas. They need to do something different with the franchise (or make a DS9 film).

-Ss

Ozz · Post by **Ozz** » Fri May 06, 2005 5:51 pm

Originally posted by Hound
I've seen all 11 Star Trek films

That's really something, considering there's only ten of them.

I don't see a problem with that. As long as the sequels aren't Spider-Man equivalents of The Phantom Menace it's fine with me.

Zisteau · Post by **Zisteau** » Fri May 06, 2005 8:10 pm

I don't think the Spiderman flicks were ever intended as a Trilogy, although they have said 3 films before, just 3 episodic films. Its based on a comic-book, which is episodic by nature. They could theoretically make 30 or so, if the actors wouldn't grow old and die and the quality wouldn't eventually plummet. They've certainly got the source material to make at least 6.

Blitzwing · Post by **Blitzwing** » Sat May 07, 2005 9:44 pm

The first two Batman movies were great, and then Forever started to lag, and Batman & Robin turned out to be complete gargabe. But now the new Batman Begins movie looks like it'll be great.

I think with Spiderman, what they should do is make three movies with Tobey, Raimi, etc, and then maybe 5 or 10 years down the road, start making Spiderman movies again with new people and new film technology.

Cliffjumper · Post by **Cliffjumper** » Sat May 07, 2005 11:04 pm

Originally posted by Kup1

SW was originally designed to be in 6 parts, I'm sure the Spiderman 'saga' wasn't.

Erm, Albert Broccoli didn't sit down and imagine James Bond as being 20-odd films in 1961 or whatever. What the Hell has what one person designed a franchise as got to do with its' quality? Four of the five SW films so far have been pretty ropey anyway.

Besides which, I thought Lucas planned it as 9 films? With three set after That Crap With The Ewoks?

As others have said, Spider-Man's comic roots, and the standalone narratives of the films so far, lend it to being theoretically capable of running much longer. It doesn't have a toy salesman running it with a dictatorial grip either - it's always possible to bring in new directors, writers or actors. There are a fair handful of Spidey villains that have the potential for carrying a movie as the villain [as well as the Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus, there's the likes of Venom, Kraven etc, and that's if each is only used once...].

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Sun May 08, 2005 2:15 am

Originally posted by Cliffjumper

Besides which, I thought Lucas planned it as 9 films? With three set after That Crap With The Ewoks?

Yeah, the Ewoks were rubbish. And I believe he had originally considered 9 parts, but condensed it down to the six.

And as far as a DS9 movie.....I'm all for it!

I suppose if the Spiderman movies are well written, then more than three would be great.

But, Hollywood seems to take a good thing and then grind it into dust all to often.

Wildfire Herald · Post by **Wildfire Herald** » Sun May 08, 2005 3:55 am

Originally posted by Kup1
Yeah, the Ewoks were rubbish. And I believe he had originally considered 9 parts, but condensed it down to the six.

We'll see, I've heard Lucas wanted to go back to his indie routes after Episode III was finished, but just wait, Episode 7: Jar Jar's Day Out is right around the corner...

Baxter · Post by **Baxter** » Sun May 08, 2005 3:57 am

Originally posted by Cliffjumper
Four of the five SW films so far have been pretty ropey anyway.

I'd go with three of the five, but that's only my opinion.

It seems that with most franchises (Bond being a notable exception), after the first 2 they seem to go downhill.

Batman, Superman, Blade are three that quickly come to mind.

Star Trek is different that generally that every other one is decent to good.

X-Men and Spider-man both are coming upon their 3rd film, and in the X-Men's case its looking like things could come crashing down with the departure of writers and the director, but that remains to be seen.

As for Spidey, its still very early.

At least there's not another Hulk movie on the horizion...