Sony rebooting Spider-Man in 2012
Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios announced today they are moving forward with a film based on a script by James Vanderbilt that focuses on a teenager grappling with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises.
The new chapter in the Spider-Man franchise produced by Columbia, Marvel Studios and Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin, will have a new cast and filmmaking team. Spider-Man 4 was to have been released in 2011, but had not yet gone into production.
"A decade ago we set out on this journey with Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire and together we made three Spider-Man films that set a new bar for the genre. When we began, no one ever imagined that we would make history at the box-office and now we have a rare opportunity to make history once again with this franchise. Peter Parker as an ordinary young adult grappling with extraordinary powers has always been the foundation that has made this character so timeless and compelling for generations of fans. We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots and we look forward to working once again with Marvel Studios, Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin on this new beginning," said Amy Pascal, co-chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment.
"Working on the Spider-Man movies was the experience of a lifetime for me. While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction, and I know they will do a terrific job," said Sam Raimi.
"We have had a once-in-a-lifetime collaboration and friendship with Sam and Tobey and they have given us their best for the better part of the last decade. This is a bittersweet moment for us because while it is hard to imagine Spider-Man in anyone else's hands, I know that this was a day that was inevitable," said Matt Tolmach, president of Columbia Pictures, who has served as the studio's chief production executive since the beginning of the franchise. "Now everything begins anew, and that's got us all tremendously excited about what comes next. Under the continuing supervision of Avi and Laura, we have a clear vision for the future of Spider-Man and can't wait to share this exciting new direction with audiences in 2012."
"Spider-Man will always be an important franchise for Sony Pictures and a fresh start like this is a responsibility that we all take very seriously," said Michael Lynton, Chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures. "We have always believed that story comes first and story guides the direction of these films and as we move onto the next chapter, we will stay true to that principle and will do so with the highest respect for the source material and the fans and moviegoers who deserve nothing but the best when it comes to bringing these stories and characters to life on the big screen."
We'll be sure to keep you posted on any and all updates on this new venture as soon as we have more information.
Spider-man 4 is in development .
The Amazing Spider-Man comes to theaters July 3rd, 2012 and stars Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen, Denis Leary, Chris Zylka, Irrfan Khan, C. Thomas Howell. The film is directed by Marc Webb.
Comments (154)
To leave a comment, please sign in or use
Facebook or Twitter
Illuminati
Parkwilliams, EXCELLENT example! (Similar to HULK)The idea was perfect! Even the story arc, though it was forced between SUPERMAN 2&3, worked well. BUT the PLOT & Villian was a bad combo & a total bore! I disliked the film, but the theory was smart a good attempt.
Josh, Good examples on the comics. i personally didn't like the current main cast of SPIDERMAN series. I also found it too campy, SO i've been dying to see new talent take up the mantle/franchise. But i'm in complete agreement with you on the redundancy of the Origin story, they SHOULD'NT do it again! SUPERMAN RETURNS/HULK theory would be better.
BTW - THIS is what i call HEALTHY DEBATE, thank you gentlemen ;)
2 years agoby @illuminatiFlag
Josh
Yeah, you're right on most of those points, Illuminati. My problem is not with their continuing the series without the previous cast and crew, it's their starting it over from scratch rather than focusing on where the character have come thus far. Would it be such a bad idea to recast the roles and pick up with Parker and MJ married a few years after Spider-Man 3? I don't think so. This just seems so pointless.
Oh yeah, in that list, don't forget Superman: Red Son, Superman: True Brit, and Marvel 1602.
2 years agoby @shuabertFlag
ParkWilliams
Here's some fuel for the proverbial fire, simply because I enjoy watching this little debate unfold:
Let's take a look at Superman Returns, ignoring the cast and crew changes for obvious reasons, Superman Returns was set in the same timeline with the same characters and even the same basic plot as that of the original series and yet it remained just as strong as the early Superman films. Is that not proof that a franchise can continue without a reboot even when it is supposedly finished?
2 years agoby @azadorFlag
Illuminati
Josh, i agree with you on John Mclane & Indy. I too wouldn't want to see anyone else take up that mantle. But there is 1 fundamental difference of Indy/Mclane and Spidey(or any superhero for that matter);
Bruce Willis birthed John Mclane, Harrison Ford birthed Indiana Jones(concieved by Lucas, lol). They NEVER existed before these actors put on these roles. Spidey has been around before Tobey!
SPIDERMAN (and other superheroes) have been retold in many versions in the comics. in 2004 there was even SPIDERMAN:INDIA; here spidey Pavitr Prabhakar from calcutta , SUPERMAN's New Suit(white&blue), BATMAN: KNIGHTFALL; Jean Paul Valley was Batman, BATMAN:THE BLUE, THE GREY, THE BAT; he's a cowboy in the wild west. These are examples where the regular rules changed a bit. Whether these was bad stories or not isn't the argument, but merely that this CAN and SHOULD be allowed.
Longevity of a character is NOT that he stays the same, but he changes with the times and stays RELEVANT.
Mclane IS Bruce, Indy IS Ford, Spiderman IS NOT Tobey! To continue these series it WITHOUT bruce or ford would be a bad move,...but the torch can easily be 'passed' down to next of kin. In the case of INDY this is exactly what is happening.This can't be done with SPIDERMAN! hence time to recast and set up for the next decade or so.
Sounds like you guys enjoyed the series so much you're having a hard time letting go. I understand as this is what i feel about the current BATMAN. Nolan & Bale had a great run, probably the BEST we'll ever see. But reality is it's time to close the curtain on the Nolanesque Batverse with one more grand finale. And brace ourselves at the mercy of WB to see where they go next.
SAME goes for Spidey series, and i for one am thrilled that this has come to an end
2 years agoby @illuminatiFlag
Josh
I call bullsh*t on that, illuminati. I'll use the recent Indiana Jones and Die Hard sequels as proof that you can keep a series going rather than reboot it even its arguable "old age" and still have it work. Both of those films were critically and commercially successful, and I would argue far more so than had they recast John McClane and Indy as younger versions of themselves.
Even if they had to sit on Spiderman 4 for another five or six years, I would rather see that than what they're doing here.
2 years agoby @shuabertFlag
ParkWilliams
@ Illuminati: Okay, now we're almost arguing the same points so I'm just gonna let this go. New directions are good, agreed. Spiderman reboot is iffy. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, and I'm not saying it's a good idea. I'll let them choose a director and start casting before I make any assumptions.
You comment about Spiderman and the relationships toward his villains is...pretty much the exact point I was getting at in my last comment, so...nothing to add there.
I know it's not overly likely for Nolan and Bale to do more than three or maybe four Batman films, that was more wishful thinking and for the sake of argument. Though I'm sure whatever they move on to will be just as good. I disagree on one point, they don't NEED to move on, and keeping on for more films is a good things as long as they don't run out of good ideas. They COULD keep it going for a long time. My point was hypothetical, I don't expect them to continue for more than three or four total. I want them to, but I doubt they will.
Okay, so maybe you're right, the Bond franchise wasn't the greatest to argue with, but you can find the odd series that can keep up the momentum for quite awhile.
2 years agoby @azadorFlag
Illuminati
PARKw;this direction was INEVITABLE, the production team & actors eventually will stop doing the same continuous series. And when it does it should take a NEW direction for the next phase and give us something COMPELETLY new. Trust me, this is the best thing that could happen to the SPIDEY series.
The villians are there play of different characteristics/weakness of the protagonist. Spiderman IS more insecure than most lead superheroes, and exploited so differently by his villians. This is what makes his rouges gallery interesting, inturn his journey diverse & progressive to his character. Mix this with a great source story; you can get a classic like SPIDERMAN 2.
You hope that NOLAN & BALE 'might' come back for more BAT films??? They WON'T bro! They are method actors/directors. BATMAN is my #1 comic and BALE is one of my Fav actors, and this TDK was near perfect! BUT they need to move on after 3 films, and they WILL.
BOND doesn't count as they are a film anomaly!!! NO FILM has ever had 23 SEQUELS! So it's formula is completely UNIQUE and cannot be compared to a superhero series.
"All things change" and rightfully so they SHOULD...
2 years agoby @illuminatiFlag
Rock
hoooray no more wimpy tobey has spidey , about f*cking time
2 years agoby @elrochoFlag
ParkWilliams
@ Josh: "Spider-Man's origin is more in the death of his uncle than in his being bit by the Spider"
Yeah, I suppose that's true.
2 years agoby @azadorFlag
CBF
@The Fallen: I'm sorry I don't follow Dark Reign or any other Spidey book post-Civil War, actually more like post-The Other. But I have read 2 issues against my better judgment that were made in the post-CW era, and they were ASM #606 and ASM #607, supposedly to be titled "Back in Black Cat," but mysteriously switched out for "Long Term Arrangement." The only real reason I read them was because of the long-overdue 'return of Black Cat,' who hadn't been seen since the Civil War's "Heroes For Hire" except for a recent 4-issue miniseries called "Marvel Divas" that was a Marvel rip-off of Sex & The City. In which revealed she only did those books because she needed the money. So to see her return was a delight, until I realized that after One More Day, even Felicia Hardy forgot who Spidey was. Which totally doesn't make sense with some of the other books in continuity, but anyways...I might catch up on some of the current ASM books because of Cat's involvement. I would not cast Tommy Lee as Norman Osborn. And I am not good with casting choices, so I don't know who I would cast, but it would not be Tommy Lee Jones. ANother reason he is the arch-nemesis is because he goes out of his way to get around Spidey's "spider-sense" and find out his identity, and not by some measley scratch on his arm. An yes I agree, kill Gwen with GG.
@ManOfTomorrow: I see what you're saying but just because "Spectacular Spider-Man" is popular with the kids doesn't mean it is the best animated Spidey interpretation. The fact is, I was only pointing out that the most true-to-source animated show is Spider-Man TAS. It follows the comics closely, Spectacular doesn't. Spider-Man TAS is the best representation. ANd if they were to do a story based on the ACTUAL story of Spider-Man, they would need to be true to the overall source material, and therefore it would be more like a Spider-Man TAS than Spectacular Spider-Man in any shape, form or fashion.
2 years agoby @comicbookfanFlag
Josh
Spider-Man's origin is more in the death of his uncle than in his being bit by the Spider, IMO. He already had powers and decided not to use them until Ben died, which is what spurred him to accept responsibility. The first Spider-Man film portrays this transition and the general theme of accepting adult responsibility so well, I just hate to see them going back to rewrite it.
And I don't buy any argument that uses The Incredible Hulk film as an example of a proper reboot. They didn't tell his origin story in it but they also removed any of what made the character interesting in the process. The 2003 HULK went the route that can really make him an interesting character and that's exploring the Frankenstein/Jekyll & Hyde aspect of how he is feared and out of control.
2 years agoby @shuabertFlag
MAN OF TOMORROW
I agree with you Park & CBF,& Fallen,@Jimmy,I agree with you on certain points,but here is what it all comes down 2,1st spidey,great,2nd great 3rd 1 bad,so bad that its hardly talked about & mentioned in utter disgust,just like the xmen movies,the 1st & 2nd were ok,the 3rd made us wanna hate the director,there not just rebooting because of the director,there rebooting because they want to tell a different yet true origin as well as something for the fans.And as far as the campy part CBF,yes I agree it was extremely campy,& it could have been made better.Jimmy,RIAMI IS NOT SPIDERMAN,he's a fan & did his interpretation of it,simple as that.They want to take it from the beginning & the reason why I said they might do it the Spectacular Spiderman's way is because it tells a huge story in itself & also CBF,I disagree on 1 thing,The animated series was good dont get me wrong.But the new one takes the cake,everything about the new show is better in every way,so what if it was made for kids.Do you know how big that thing has gotten
?if it was gonna suck they wouldve axed it by now,but it hasnt,reason being,is because its a great show.All I want is for this reboot to be done right,kinda like how they're rebooting the Xmen series & starting with Xmen First Class with the original X-men
2 years agoby @cassanova88Flag
Mutant
It's all about greed and the idea of having Spiderman being dark all ready has been done and look how it turned out.
2 years agoby @zenderFlag
ParkWilliams
@ Illuminati: I see what you mean, but notice in my last comment I said "unless" they do a complete overhaul, meaning they could. I too love the new Batman series and TDK is one of my favourite movies hands down, but Batman's origin is not in the villains at all, the heart of Batman's origin is the death of his parents, whether they're killed by Joker's alter ego or by a random thug, it doesn't really matter. In the same way, Spiderman's origin is centered around him being bit by a radioactive spider. What I meant was, if they were able to bring a new story that centered a new villain while keeping the same origin like Nolan did with Batman, fine, but I just doubt they will or if they do that they will do it right. And like I said, Spiderman is characterized by the villains that surround him, like the Green Goblin and Venom. Batman is simply characterized by his desire for justice and usually ends up the least interesting character in whatever he's in.
As far as Joker having a 20 year absence: only in film. The character has been on the small screen in the animated series voiced by Mark Hamill for years.
As for the new Hulk movie, yes they gave his origin in the opening credits, but look how much character development and plot elements that left out. It made the opening mildly confusing and less sophisticated than if they did something like Daredevil and explained it in an opening scene. Not saying that Hulk was bad or that Daredevil was good, just pointing out some pros and cons.
As far as rebooting the Batman series in another 4/5 years after the next one, I really dislike that idea. There is enough content in the Batman series to keep going for quite awhile, so long as Nolan and Bail are still on board. I mean, look at the Bond series, its had 22 movies already and the only real flaw in the series is Quantum of Solace and a few minor hiccups along the way. Rebooting a series every four or five years doesn't work unless the first try sucked (like Fantastic Four or Ghost Rider) and the new Batman does not suck.
2 years agoby @azadorFlag
ed_wood
I've officially lost interest in these movies.
2 years agoby @ed-woodFlag
Jimmy440
Spider-Man 2 was 'one of the best movies of 2004'. Comparing to Kill Bill Vol. 2 and Eternal Sunshine... It's a real honor for a comic book movie. What a shame only 8 years later it'll be completely forgotten and rebooted... What a shame.
2 years agoby @jimmy440Flag
Jimmy440
The ONLY reason the franchise is being remade is because the studio did NOT wanna wait for Sam Raimi to pick a GREAT story! Sam Raimi IS Spider-Man! This is the worst decision in a franchise I've heard in awhile. This is pure studio greed. Just because the director doesn't agree with a script does not mean to scrap the whole franchise and start over. Sam Raimi made two great movies Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2 being one of the best superhero movies ever made. This reboot is pure studio greed, and nothing more. Forget Raimi's creativity, Sony doesn't care. This is bullsh*t and nothing more. Thanks Sony, for throwing out creativity, and only caring about money. Have fun watching this movie starting over and making no money. The story is still fresh in all our minds! It's not something to reboot like Batman. Spider-Man is nothing like Batman. Completely different.
I will not watch this reboot with out Tobey or Raimi. It's not a Spider-Man movie without them. This is the worst news I've heard in Hollywood in awhile... Corporate greed will dominate... And it's such a shame.
2 years agoby @jimmy440Flag
The Narrator: The Better Man
Lol don't apologize drewski. I was joking around. And yeah if I'm ever wrong I want you dudes (meaning the ones who think before they type) to correct me... preferably in a human way not, "You're an ass hole poser who doesn't know sh*t!"
And CBF I actually enjoyed the second A Lot, but thats me. However it was indeed very camp; the first one that is, though enjoyable, and the third was wack. But I am trumped in true spidey fandom to you so I trust you that it wasn't interpreted fully correctly, although they're... guilty pleasures I guess one could say.
And do you think, if they had Osborn in it, Tommy Lee or someone of the type would be a good choice. I mean post civil war and especially Dark Reign (not sure if you follow them due to your post below "Pre-Civil War") he really fits the part and even is drawn to slightly mimic him... Reason I bring it up is I need him and only him to kill Gwen. That really completes it for us, Gobbie being the main nemesis in a way. Like Samuel L. jackson said in Unbreakable, the villains are the exact opposite of the hero in most cases.
2 years agoby @narratorFlag
Chad Vital
I think Fallen was just kinda pointing out what you said in a funny question type of way, not to deliberately attack you. Ya just got to watch what you say on here or at least get info on things before you say stuff or you could easily get ripped to shreds on here haha. Most people are *ssholes, like I can be if somebody says something really dumb, but in the end, we are all on here for movies
2 years agoby @chad-vitalFlag
Drewski37
ya sorry fallen i just relized fox had nothing to do with spiderman...my bad....always thought marvel studios needed to get the rights to spiderman and the xmen to do them the right way....
2 years agoby @drewski37Flag
Chad Vital
I concur CBF, I concur. :)
2 years agoby @chad-vitalFlag
CBF
Thanks Fallen. I am the same way. I know everything about Spidey pre-Civil War and feel that is his real history. So when I went to see the first movie, I thought the CGI was cool but the story was a slap in my face and I felt betrayed by it. There's only one Spider-Man. I know there's Ultimate and whatnot but they drew from ASM not USM. So to see a movie about a character with a totally different history was not accurate and disrespectful to the source material. And each one got worse. Spider-Man 2 was okay but it wasn't the most classic comic book movie of all time. I definitely like Margot Kidder as Lois Lane better than Kirsten Dunst as MJ, and Dunst is one of my favorite actresses. All I know is, the Spidey films were not Spidey from the comics. They were a different character envisioned by Sam Raimi, who took a very popular hero and offered his "spin" on him. I would like to see the character I grew up with on the silver screen. Not some fake CGI and cheezy dialog and humor and gay battle sequences that are just aiming for kids and their moms. I want a true ASM story. Just as every True Believer does. Like you said, one where Gwen Stacy is Parker's high school girl and breaks her neck off the GW Bridge and never learns that he's Spidey. If they can shoot Uncle Ben, they can kill Gwen Stacy. One where Parker gets thrown into meeting MJ, and she's not a bad actress who's lived next door to him all their lives. Between Tobey Maguire's not taking the role seriously enough and Sam Raimi's cheesy camera transitions and poor story choices and too much humor, the Raimi Spidey films are just too campy for my taste. Although I did like Doc Ock.
2 years agoby @comicbookfanFlag
spynet315
I'm all for this as long as they finally do Venom right. They should set up Eddy Brock from the beginning, and he shouldn't be a skinny and whiny little punk. I wanna see the original buff Eddie Brock who hated spiderman but still had a heart of gold.
2 years agoby @spynet315Flag
The Narrator: The Better Man
CBF too well said. Thats a huge thing for me. I don't care if fans will see it coming or whatnot, but we need to see Gwen die, and preferable breaking her neck on the George Washington Bridge.
And Josh, some villains of spiderman are quite notorious even if they are just henchmen etc, and believe in ultra violence (like Bullseye to DD). Not saying they will put that in the movie but simply saying Spiderman is not a kiddy piece of crap. The movies seriously watered his troubles down. Spiderman 2 being the exception, because that movie is a comic book classic to me.
So they can have some adult themes here. I think maybe unemployment will once again be problems, or the current economy killing his neighborhood forcing foreclosures, maybe even (and hopefully) 911. And how it affected Parker. So on and so forth.
2 years agoby @narratorFlag
CBF
I disagree. I don't think Hollywood should EVER do remakes. But since they can't come up with original ideas anymore, every damn movie and its' inspirations are getting remade. I call them rehashes. Whatever.
@Josh. You see what I was saying. I didn't necesaarily point out those factors to say that a new film will be made with those themes, no, I was making a point that a lot of Spidey books are not popcorn kiddie material. Of course they'll keep it PG.
@Slysnide. Exactly. I feel the same way. If they read the source material this time and try to stay true to them, unlike what Raimi did and make up his own stories just about, I think they'll have a successful run with the fans this time. Or should I say successful swing?
2 years agoby @comicbookfanFlag
Illuminati
park williams, i think you answered a few of your questions;
BATMAN BEGINS made an origin story withOUT a classic villian(RA'S is known by only the comic fans). As for DARK KNIGHT, NOLAN used JOKER after a 20 year absence, i tnink that's acceptable.
As for making a reboot withOUT an origin story; did u see HULK'08? The orign was told in the opening credits, BRILLIANT.
These are tips the producers SHOULD learn from. I only really enjoyed SPIDEY 2, the rest were popcorn. Either way i will give credit to the series as entertaining, and certainly a foot in the door for more comic films.
NOW it's time to move on. I think all these comic characters are timeless but they've each been retold in different reincarnations. THIS IS GOOD. it keeps things new and improving withthe times...JUST LIKE THE COMICS did.
And frankly, i loved everything about the new batman series, but once Nolan is done with the 3rd film even that franchise should come to a neat end. They should do ANOTHER complete overhauling in about 4/5 years :)
2 years agoby @illuminatiFlag
deepsky926
WTF!!!.i go away for the 2 days and this happens. i personally loved the 3 films that sam did(even the third 1 although it could have been better)...but come on the first spiderman film was awesome and to go and reboot the franchise, is like spiting in its face...im jus pissed off right now!...i think they want to redo the franchise then should jus redo spiderman3 or mayb even spiderman2 and go from there.. but then again hollywood is jus about making $ and plus i think they jus dont know where to go from the last film, seeing as most people hated it. And to go with an NEW cast is gona be hard seeing as they literally had the same cast for 3 films, espeacially parker! i thought toby did great. its also true that he is getting old haha...well idk im iffy but im a spiderman fan so ima go with the flow : I
2 years agoby @deepsky926Flag
ParkWilliams
@ Illuminati: How do you expect them to make a new origin movie without the original villain, or to continue the franchise from there without characters like Venom, who is Spidey's brooding anti-hero nemesis? Unless they do a Christopher Nolan style complete overhaul like the new Batman movies there is no chance they can do this without at least the Green Goblin and Venom. These villains are great characters and pivotal in the events that characterize Spiderman himself. So don't complain about reusing characters they've used before, it's like complaining that Christopher Nolan used the Joker in the Dark Knight, utterly ridiculous
2 years agoby @azadorFlag
slysnide
They want a real source, so they're probably gonna be reviewing the very original comics, like Nolan & Goyer did for the Joker in TDK; they went back to the source material before he'd been turned into some kiddie lunatic. Spidey's got some good early source material to rely on too.
2 years agoby @slysnideFlag
Josh
I guarantee Sony ain't aiming to make a highschool Spiderman film about rape. They're still going to keep it PG.
2 years agoby @shuabertFlag