Spiderman 4 villin hinted at....

[Kerrin]

I heard on the radio today that they were talking about a prequel. Huh? How the hell is that supposed to work? The enthralling story of Peter Parker before he got bitten by a radioactive spider. Box office gold.

[Professor Bear]

A reboot sounds fine.  The Raimi films had gone their course and there's nothing wrong with a different generation of films for a different generation of fans - and in ten years, the 8 year-old boys who flocked to the first film may have moved on a little and not be overly-juiced at the prospect of part 4.
Plus I never really warmed to Maguire or Dunst in their roles.  New faces would be most welcome.

[Jared Katooie]

Right, here's my choices for the new cast.

Peter Parker: Christopher Charles Mintz-Plasse




Mary Jane: Lindsay Lohan




Flash Thompson: Taylor Lautner




Dr. Curt Connors: Kanye West




...and the master to direct.

[SamuelAWilkinson]

"Lindsay, you did great and I'ma let you finish, but Kirsten Dunst had one of the best racks of all time!"

[Goaty]

I hear they would doing it like teen Peter Parker, a FUCKING "Twilight" Spider-man!

[Roger Godpleton]

Maybe they want to do "One More Day - THE FUCKCUNTING MOVIE".

[JOE SOAP]

A reboot sounds fine.  The Raimi films had gone their course and there's nothing wrong with a different generation of films for a different generation of fans - and in ten years, the 8 year-old boys who flocked to the first film may have moved on a little and not be overly-juiced at the prospect of part 4.
Plus I never really warmed to Maguire or Dunst in their roles.  New faces would be most welcome.

"a different generation"?, you know that a generation is around 20-30 years not 7 (counting from the first Spidey film in 2002) and considering the Spidey films were for an age group from 7 to about 35 that's generation enough for me.

We don't need another "set" of Spidey films, if they want to make more films just stick with the current series and be inventive there's no need to reboot.

[Mardroid]

I hear they would doing it like teen Peter Parker, a FUCKING "Twilight" Spider-man!

Actually Peter Parker does start off a teenager in the comics and the first Spiderman film. (Not that I agree with the reboot.)

A reboot sounds fine.  The Raimi films had gone their course and there's nothing wrong with a different generation of films for a different generation of fans - and in ten years, the 8 year-old boys who flocked to the first film may have moved on a little and not be overly-juiced at the prospect of part 4.
Plus I never really warmed to Maguire or Dunst in their roles.  New faces would be most welcome.

"a different generation"?, you know that a generation is around 20-30 years not 7 (counting from the first Spidey film in 2002) and considering the Spidey films were for an age group from 7 to about 35 that's generation enough for me.

We don't need another "set" of Spidey films, if they want to make more films just stick with the current series and be inventive there's no need to reboot.

I totally agree. It's not as if there are any references which date the film anyway. Probably because 7 years really isn't all that long.

And then there's this which provides more news on the reboot. In short... apparently it is another origins story, yes. Sigh. About "Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today's issues." apparently. Grrrr!

[JOE SOAP]

... apparently it is another origins story, yes. Sigh. About "Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today's issues." apparently. Grrrr!

Today's issues? you mean like War, Hunger, Economic & Social Breakdown, 2012...

[Mardroid]

... apparently it is another origins story, yes. Sigh. About "Peter Parker in a more contemporary setting, as a teenager battling today's issues." apparently. Grrrr!

Today's issues? you mean like War, Hunger, Economic & Social Breakdown, 2012...

I'm not sure what they mean. I doubt they'll be very different from the issues the kid in the first film faced though.

[Colin YNWA]

I'm open minded about how it goes we'll see but do agree with Grant they need to avoid retreading his origin again. They're a bit of a yolk on superhero movies generally as most of them however re-imagined are bound by 60s silliness.

The other problem I foresee is the need to continue to out do previous films. That was the problem with 3 it just threw too much in to try to make it bigger and better. In my mind (i.e. with my wild imagination based on no information at all) Raimi wanted to reduce the scale of the film and hence use the Vulture as a creepy frightening horror type villian, which he's perfect for and not have so many blockbuster set pieces and buildings being stomped. That's defo the way I'd prefer the movies to go.

[dracula1]

Thats the Disney take over for you!... (unless the frozen headed Walt gets Cameron on board to direct a 3D version of Spiderman).

[Richmond Clements]

Thats the Disney take over for you!... (unless the frozen headed Walt gets Cameron on board to direct a 3D version of Spiderman).

I believe that Sony have the movie rights for Spidey- as they aquired them from MArvel before the buy out.

See, I dunno what the fuss is about- my reading of this is just another Spidey movie with a younger cast. I see no need for them to go through the origin again as some folks seem to assume they are. But we'll see...

[Van Dom]

I dont mind the change of cast, as others have said, I never got on with Maguire or Dunst, they were - to me- both incredibly boring in their roles and had zero chemistry together (IMHO). They need a couple of more charismatic players.

Also glad Sam Raimi is moving on - he needs to make more films in his own unique style like Drag Me To Hell. That was very refreshing after the three Spidey films in which his style was basically buried under all the CGI trickery.

[Professor Bear]

"a different generation"?, you know that a generation is around 20-30 years not 7 (counting from the first Spidey film in 2002) and considering the Spidey films were for an age group from 7 to about 35 that's generation enough for me.

We don't need another "set" of Spidey films, if they want to make more films just stick with the current series and be inventive there's no need to reboot.

You're confusing actual biology with consumer cycles.  Look at how quickly some properties are redeveloped on television, like the four different Batmen shows we've had in the last ten years (TAS, Beyond, The Batman, BatB, and then the movies, animated and live-action), or the different Spider-Man shows (TAS, CGI, Unlimited, Spectacular), X-Men (TAS, Evolution, Wolverine and), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (animated, live-action, movies, TMNT, CGI, Forever, Fast Forward) - new product needs to be tailored to new audiences, and new audiences can come along every 5-10 years as they don't have to be physically conceived, birthed and matured because they're already there, waiting to hit the right age to become consumers of the next generation of product.

As a more solid Spidey analogy, Ultimate Spider-Man has been an evergreen seller for the last ten years at Marvel to the point that the main books have been retconned to emulate it, causing long-time fans to gripe (and fair enough, One More Day was a hog's bollocks of a story) but sales to bolster for the first time in nearly a decade.  New readers came onto the title (or came back), just as new audiences flocked to Batman Begins even though Batman and Robin (made a mere 7 years before) was a monstrous failure.