Spider-Man 4 (2011) - Sam Raimi

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » May 6th, 2007, 7:46 pm

Não me parece que passe de um simples rumor mas adiante:
http://www.freezedriedmovies.com/blog/i ... eady!.html

Exclusive: Spider-Man 4 Villains Revealed... Already?!

When Spider-Man 3 was being prepped Sam Raimi and Columbia Pictures tried to hold the announcement of Venom for as long as they possibly could... confirming the news just before Comic Con in July of 2006. But here we are, the day Spider-Man 3 hits theaters, and your good pal here has the skinny on who you will see in Spider-Man 4 - with or without Sam Raimi (hater of all things symbiotic).

Before I hit you with the news, let me make it clear that we got this news from a 100% reliable source working on the film. He's the one who told us Venom was the villain in Spidey 3 and nobody believed us. So here you have it, the biggest announcement of 2008... NOW!

Our regular scooper tells FreezeDriedMovies that plans are underway for Spider-Man 4, which were (obviously) set up in the third film. In the third entry, Dr. Curt Connors (played by Dylan Baker) looks at a piece of symbiote with Peter Parker. The movie then travels along it's path without another mention of that "piece" of symbiote. This is the set up for Spider-Man 4 where that small piece of alien symbiote becomes CARNAGE. Yes Cletus Kasady is coming to the big screen, one of Spider-Man most horrifying and evil villains. Not only with Parker have to deal with the red lean mean killing machine, but Connors is set to become the long awaited LIZARD! these two villains have all been CONFIRMED for Spider-Man 4. There is talk of the Black Cat making her first appearance, but that's all but official.

So there you have it. Spider-Man, The Lizard, Carnage... and hopefully NO Sam Raimi. Avi Arad, please find someone who CARES what the fans think!

Duas coisas: espero que com o backlash que se está a verificar a Sony caia em si e não repita no erro de voltar a usar vilões a mais só porque sim (yeah, right). Depois, não concordo de todo com a frase final. Claro que sendo o Raimi o realizador tem a sua quota parte de culpa no que se passou mas se houver uma única pessoa a responsabilizar será sem dúvida o Avi Arad. O que vale é que ele está para sair da MP.
Isto não obstante alguns excessos cometidos independentemente desse factor.

jgeiras · Post by **jgeiras** » May 6th, 2007, 9:18 pm

outra vez 3 vilões!!!?

eles querem mesmo arruinar a saga, querem.
antes do Sam Raimi preferia ver era o Avi Arad a desligar-se da saga

Tojal City · Post by **Tojal City** » May 6th, 2007, 9:35 pm

Porra, detesto o Carnage, é um rip-of do Venon. É um daqueles vilões modernos sem a mínima criatividade e interesse que surgiu já nos anos 90, numa fase onde o Spider-man andava criativamente quase morto.
Li algumas ideias bem mais interessantes, o Lizzard e o Kraven que surgiria na cidade para caçar o lagarto. Sinceramente seria muito melhor, além de que o Kraven é um dos vilões preferidos dos fãs pois continua muito associado a uma das melhores histórias de sempre do Spider-man. Mas pelos vistos o Kraven significa poucos efeitos especiais e um menor orçamento e isto pelos vistos não vende.

Argaroth01 · Post by **Argaroth01** » May 6th, 2007, 9:39 pm

Eu propunha o Viggo Mortensen para fazer de Kraven.

Ou muito me engano ou um 4º filme vai ser o mesmo espalhafato do 3º, tendo em conta a loucura no box-office que parece estar a gerar.

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » May 6th, 2007, 9:47 pm

Quero acreditar que com a saída do Avi Arad de cena as coisas podem mudar para melhor.
Por outro lado não me parece que a Sony vá esperar muito tempo pelo Raimi. O Alvin Sargent já saíu de cena e rumores recentes dizem que a Sony já contactou o David Koepp (co-argumentista do 1º filme) para escrever um novo guião.

Tojal City · Post by **Tojal City** » May 6th, 2007, 10:24 pm

Propunha o Neil Marshall como novo realizador.

Strangelove · Post by **Strangelove** » May 6th, 2007, 10:35 pm

It's the end of Spider-Man as we know it!

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » May 6th, 2007, 11:27 pm

Tojal City wrote:Propunha o Neil Marshall como novo realizador.

Hmm? Alguma razão em especial...?

Já agora, encontei este artigo:
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.ph ... 3&id=41341

Spidey 3's Raimi Talks Venom

Spider-Man 3 writer/director Sam Raimi told SCI FI Wire that he thought about introducing the new villain Venom in this sequel and continuing the story in a possible fourth film, but ultimately decided the entire story should be told in one movie. "I thought it would be unfair to [the fans]," he said of breaking the storyline up. The consequence of that decision is that fans may have to wait a bit to see the full-fledged supervillain in all his glory in Spider-Man 3.

The Venom storyline is one of only three main stories in the third installment of the webslinger franchise. In it, Peter Parker becomes affected by an alien symbiote, which turns his suit black, before it is rejected and migrates to Peter's romantic and professional rival, Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who then transforms into Venom.

"So the very nature of that story demands that you either do it [as] two [parts], if you want to spend more time with Venom, which I didn't think was fair to the audience, to the fans of Spider-Man," or that you do it all at once and introduce Venom fairly late, Raimi said in a news conference. "I thought about it, I really did. And I kept reading the fans' e-mails that [producer] Avi [Arad] would send me—'They'd better not just introduce him to tease us!' ... I felt that the fans didn't want that, from the thousands of e-mails that were sent me."

Raimi added: "Avi said, 'You're not giving me what I asked you.' ... He said, 'They want Venom. Just give them Venom already!' So I said 'OK.' But, obviously, through the very nature of it, he's only going to be in half an act or one act [at the end of the film]. I'll just make it as thorough and the best that I can [and] deliver Venom in the most complete way that I understand the fans might want him. That was my desire. I was led there." Spider-Man 3 opens May 4 in conventional theaters and in IMAX.

Tirem as vossas próprias conclusões.

Tojal City · Post by **Tojal City** » May 7th, 2007, 12:27 am

Bem, porque é barato e mostra ter algum talento. Nesta fase, e para este tipo de filmes é sempre necessário um realizador que esteja pronto a comprometer-se durante alguns anos. E de certeza que seria muito bom ter um Steven Spielberg, um Ridley Scott, um Peter Jackson, um Christopher Nolan (um pouco difícil visto que ele se encontra nos Batmans) neste filme, mas são realizadores que, para além de cobrarem os olhos da cara para este tipo de filmes, querem nesta fase da vida coisas mais diversificadas.
E lembrei-me deste porque tal como o Sam Raimi são originários do mesmo tipo de filmes. Filmes de terror independentes.
Claro que há outras boas hipóteses, se estivessem dispostas, o Alfonso Cuarón, Matthew Vaughn, Edgar Wright, entre outros.

Tojal City · Post by **Tojal City** » May 7th, 2007, 12:29 am

Conclusões o Avi Arad é um camelo e os fãs são umas bestas.

bisard · Post by **bisard** » May 7th, 2007, 12:50 am

Eu penso que os fans queriam o Venom mas queriam um filme apenas com o Venom... este acabou por ser um teaser à mesma e sem a esperança de mais Venom para o próximo filme!

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » May 7th, 2007, 12:46 pm

Na altura em que a Sony andava à procura de um realizador para o 1º filme falou-se muito no David Fincher... penso que seria uma escolha interessante mas duvido que se fosse meter num franchise onde não tivesse total liberdade creativa. A última experiência nesse campo foi muito traumatizante para ele.

Tojal City, a mimo que me parece é que o Arad retorceu a mensagem para poder "chantagear" o Raimi. Os fãs queriam o Venom mas de certeza que preferiam que a estória fosse contada a história em 2 filmes ou algo do género. Pelo menos a maioria, penso eu.

Joe-Fagundes · Post by **Joe-Fagundes** » May 7th, 2007, 10:55 pm

The success of Spider-Man 3 brought promises of additional episodes of Spidey and his enemies. "There'll be a fourth and a fifth and sixth and a seventh," Sony Pictures Entertainment co-chairman Amy Pascal told Daily Variety. "As many stories as Peter Parker has to tell, we'll do sequels." Her colleague, Michael Lynton, told the BBC that there would be "as many as we can make good stories for. ... Everybody's been so busy trying to get this one out that that's been the focus. ... When everybody comes up for air, we can think about how to make the next one." Lynton added that, although the critics by and large drubbed the film, "the exit polls show that the audience really loved the movie, and that's what counts." Sony distribution chief Jeff Blake told the New York Times that the box-office count "justifies the expense of a franchise picture like this. And I think it's a great sign for the summer." Several analysts predicted that the film will exceed the revenue produced by the previous two Spider-Man installments, which grossed $821 million and $783 million respectively worldwide -- although they expressed doubt that it could overtake the all-time box office champ Titanic, which took in $1.85 billion.

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » May 15th, 2007, 5:17 pm

James Cromwell speaks... potenciais spoliers:
http://tinyurl.com/2lrlps

Is the story for “Spider-Man 4” already planned? With the well-received appearance of Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard) in “Spider-Man 3,” comic purists once again bemoaned what they felt was missed opportunity, railing against the filmmakers for replacing Spidey’s first real love with Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). But never fear comic fans, the Stacy family will have a much bigger role to play in future installments, veteran actor James Cromwell told MTV News. Asked if his character, Captain George Stacy, meets the same grisly end in “Spider-Man 3” that he does in the comics, Cromwell playfully replied, “They haven’t shot that [scene] yet. That’s the next one.”

Is Cromwell to be believed? In “The Amazing Spider-Man” #90, Captain Stacy is crushed and killed by falling debris during a fight between Spider-Man and Doc Ock. While Captain Stacy’s death might not have the same resonance in the films as it does in the comics, it does make some sense from a story perspective. His end could serve to both re-introduce Gwen into Spider-Man’s life and provide yet another turning point in Peter’s ultimate journey – galvanizing the superhero with a failure of real consequence.

Edward Brock · Post by **Edward Brock** » July 12th, 2007, 5:39 pm

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 866c828796

At some point within the next two weeks, producer Laura Ziskin and the top brass of Sony Pictures Entertainment will sit down together for the first time since "Spider-Man 3" opened May 4 to discuss the franchise's future.

It's a crucial meeting, all the more so because director Sam Raimi will be there. And Raimi, who has sent contradictory messages about his future plans, might at last indicate whether he'll helm the next installment.

"It would be great to have everybody back," Ziskin says. "But no one is going to sign on the dotted line until we have a script. These are the questions being discussed now. The one thing we have answered definitively is: There will be more 'Spider-Man' movies. We just haven't answered what shape they will come in and (Sony) hasn't given us a release date."

The upcoming meeting "will be the first step in a process," Ziskin adds. "'Spider-Man' will continue; I can't tell you every person who will be involved."

The clock is ticking...