Hello. I hope its okay with the mods I post this here and not fan fiction bc I think its more appropriate here.
In the late 90's Marvel was going bankrupt. To try to make money, they sold their properties to movie studios. This decision is still seen today as multiple Marvel properties are spread out to various studios. It wasn't until the 'Avengers' properties started and went back to Marvel (which Disney now owns) from Paramount (Iron Man, Capt America, Thor) & Universal (Incredible Hulk). In 1998, the first big screen legit Marvel comic book movie opened up called 'Blade' starring Wesley Snipes. It was a B-List comic book character with an A-List star (Wesley Snipes). The movie was a hit that lead Fox to get moving on 'X-Men' , directed by Bryan Singer. X-Men was mediocre success that lead to Sony finally gaining the rights to make a Spider-Man movie. After much legal problems getting the project off the ground since 1993, Sony finally had the rights and went forward with making it. James Cameron was even attached in the mid-90's with plans of Electro & Sandman as the main villains (which is why those two were never used in the 1994 animated series). Sam Raimi was a successful director that made Evil Dead films, never a big studio director - fought to become the director. He was a Spider-Man fan ever since childhood and a likely candidate. He took the project to new heights. Spider-Man opened up in summer of 2002 and was a huge success, one of the highest weekend openings of all time. It was perfect timing. This was not even a year after 9-11 and America needed a hero. Toward the end of the 90's, it was a movement of the anti-hero, where bad is now good. Spider-Man was a classic tale of good guy versus bad guy and I believe after 9/11 , America wanted that. Sam Raimi made a perfect blend of action, adventure, comedy, drama, and romance. It was a perfect comic book film at the time. It lead to all the studios jumping on the bandwagon and using their Marvel properties. The concept of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man was also used to make the Avenger films which are the popular summer blockbusters we see these days. In 2003, Daredevil & Hulk openend. Terrible films, but box office draw indeed. More and more comic book films were made in the 2000 decade. V for Vendetta, Sin City, 300, Watchmen, X-Men 2, X-Men 3, Wolverine, X-Men First Class, The Wolverine, Fantastic Four 1 and 2, Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Thor 2, Avengers, Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3 - just to name a few! DC had successful Batman and Superman properties that were created into films in the 70's, 80's and 90's - and they rebooted both franchses with great success. But Marvel has a more broad list of iconic characters that translate well into film.
Spider-Man 2
Sam Raimi and the crew returned for a sequel to Spider-Man only two years after the first one. The film was even BETTER than the first one, which is SO unbelievably rare to have a great successful film and have the sequel being actually better. It was rare, but it worked. The character of Peter Parker continued and the audience wasn't just seeing Spider-Man versus a villain of the week , they actually got a character arc of Peter Parker and the villain was just being used to enhance Peter's story. It had more emotion than the first and the film was another major success, only losing to Shrek 2 in the box office draw of 2004. Turns out the cast had a three picture deal in the contract, so a third one was inevitable.
Spider-Man 3
The trailer for Spider-Man 3 debuted in 2006. The teaser was one of the most incredible trailers ever made. It had a teaser for black suit Spider-Man, we saw a bit of the new villain , the SANDMAN and Harry was flying. This meant, the audience would get the black suited symbiote storyline which is very famous in the comic book world of Spider-Man, Harry becoming a second Green Goblin which also happened in the comics and of course a brand new villain, the Sandman. The movie would also be directed by Sam Raimi once again and have the same actors return. This was the most promoising film. Successful formula intact, a great teaser trailer, awesome classic storylines being adapted into the film. After I saw the film, years later - I bought the official CD, the noval, and the Making & Art of Spider-Man 3. But the kicker was........ The film was absolutely horrible beyond belief. And I mean, HORRIBLE...
So why would I want any merchandise from that piece of *beep* film ? Why would I watch the third Spider-Man anymore than I had to ? I considered Spider-Man 3 one of the biggest cinematic disappointments of all time (right next to good ole Star Wars Prequels starring Jar Jar Binks). The truth is I study film. Every film geek studies great films and learns from them, but I'm very interested in learning off of bad films. I've Spider-Man 3 so many times and it just gets worse and worse, but I am one to learn from one's mistakes. So each viewing or reading the history of the film, I learn something - because the idea is I want to make a better Spider-Man 3 and not stop there but continue the Sam Raimi series of Spider-Man.
Amazing Spider-Man
When Marc Webb's "Amazing Spider-Man" was announced, I was kinda happy because I thought Sam Raimi disappointed me so bad, it was time for a new director to have his shot. I loved Social Network and like Andrew Garfield, so this new reboot was exciting to a certain degree. I still loved Spider-Man 1 and 2 so much, but the third one, I wouldn't trust Raimi to do another one. Raimi and Tobey said they were going to go forward with a fourth one, and Raimi already spoke with John Malkovich to play the Vulture and Anne Hatahawy for the Black Cat / or Vultress character. But the studio wouldnt' agree with Raimi on a release date, so they parted ways and Marc Webb stepped in. I saw Amazing Spider-Man and the movie absolutely had no soul. I wouldn't call it a bad film like I do with Spider-Man 3, but it's such an obvious producer's film - rather than a director's film. Raimi had a vision and made a great comic book movie. Marc Webb was a pawn of the studio, hired to make a Spider-Man movie to obtain the rights and make as much money as they could. The movie was a reboot of a movie only ten years old and it didn't need to be made. The movie had absolutely no point. What was different that made this one better than the 2002 version ? Nothing... There was no heart, no soul, no comedy like Raimi's. It flat out sucked. Now as Amazing Spider-Man 2 is near, I can't help but continue to wonder what would happen if they got Spider-Man 3 CORRECT ?
The MAIN Problem of Spider-Man 3
There is a major debate on what went wrong. There are people that blame Avi Arad that forced Venom into the story. People claim if Raimi did what he wanted, it would have been a good movie. There are people that say the blame is put on Raimi himself that Venom only made the horrible story bareable because at least they got a little bit of Venom in the film. In my opinion, forcing Raimi to do Venom (a character that he didnt like) into Spider-Man 3 was just pissing on *beep* It was already going to suck. After reading the Making of Spider-Man 3, the problem came from the very beginning. Each screen play for a film contains a central 'theme' of the script. This theme is injected into a two page treatment sent to the studio for their approval. The theme Sam Raimi and his brother came up with ? "Forgiveness". The original concept was Sandman would be Ben's killer and Peter would ultimately forgive him so he can move on with his life. The second villain would have been the Vulture, a character Sam Raimi loved and wanted to put in the second film. Ben Kingsley had a meeting with Sam Raimi and agreed to do the movie and they were already arranging costume fittings for Ben Kingsley. The idea was Vulture would be put to jail because Spider-Man stopped an evil scheme and Sandman would break Vulture out of jail, Vulture seeking revenge and not forgiving - ultimately to pay the price of death. Vulture was dropped because the studio (Avi Arad) wanted Venom as the secondary character and Sam Raimi agreed because he was making a film for his fans.
Here is the main problem and something I've been obsessing with fixing. The third film should NOT have been about forgiveness!! This is the MAIN problem. The script was bad to begin with. Forgiveness is a great theme for a Spider-Man movie, I suppose, but not in this one. Hear me out on this subject matter.
First Movie: The Theme was "Responsibility"...Hence the main quote from the film "With great power, comes great responsibility". He became Spider-Man and learned a harsh lesson when Ben died, that he must be responsible for helping people with his powers instead of trying to buy a car to impress Mary Jane. It was a fantastic theme for the origin story. Goblin was a great villain because he too got super powers, but went the opposite way where he used his power for himself.
Second Movie: The Theme was "Identity".... The whole posters had Peter with mask off, or Peter struggling with Spider-Man. The idea was now that he had these powers, who was Peter Parker. Was he Spider-Man ? Or was he Peter Parker who used Spider-Man to save people. Would these powers now dictate his life ? The normality of an everyday college student was now in jepordy. He couldn't get MJ because he had to do Spider-Man things. Peter was then losing his powers because his head was so messed up and he couldn't figure out who he was. He had NO ONE to talk to because no one can understand him, he's the only Spider-Man in the world. He had no one. So he had to deal with this problem head on, even giving up Spider-Man at one point to try to live a normal life, but it didn't work. Doc Ock also played on this theme because his identity was taken over by the mechanical arms. They were Doc Ock at this point and at the end of the film, he realized he was Doctor Otto Octavious and these arms would not control his life and Peter realized that he is Spider-Man and it is who he is , weather he likes it or not - and must give up the life of Peter Parker and watch Mary Jane get married to someone else. This is his sacrafice because it is who he is... Luckliy, Mary Jane has a change of character and realizes she must stand by Peter because she loves him.
Third movie - Forgiveness ?? Why ?? Look at the first two. Responsibility, then Identity....You dont need Forgiveness... In the second movie, there is NO indication that Peter is vengenceful and angry. It appears that he took responsibility for his actions and he is moving on. It is up to Aunt May to forgive Peter , which she does in the second movie. Forgiveness should be directed toward Aunt May & Harry Osbourne. Not Peter. Bringing up Sandman as Ben's killer is a silly way to connect Peter to Sandman and it just came off as a complete re-hash of the first film. That ship has sailed. Ben's killer died and Peter moved on. We dont need to go back to that point. Like the second movie, we need to continue Peter's story. You have an amazing set up - Harry knows Peter is Spider-Man. MJ is now with Peter. You have a wonderful cast of characters from the comic you can choose. Spider-Man 3 is like getting a date with a super model and wrecking your car at a *beep* stop sign.
There is a ton of other errors about Spider-Man 3 that I could do another thread on (which I did a year ago, lol). I mean, everything from too many sub plots, two love triangles, stupid kids yelling wicked cool, 8 minutes of Venom screen time, another *beep* Mary Jane in trouble at the end of the movie, rehashing MJ / Harry romance, MJ being a complete *beep* it just goes on forever....But as most geeks *****, rarely they offer a solution. I love to write films in my head. So here's my pitch and please feel free to comment on it and criticize the hell out of it, I dont care...
In the late 90's Marvel was going bankrupt. To try to make money, they sold their properties to movie studios. This decision is still seen today as multiple Marvel properties are spread out to various studios. It wasn't until the 'Avengers' properties started and went back to Marvel (which Disney now owns) from Paramount (Iron Man, Capt America, Thor) & Universal (Incredible Hulk). In 1998, the first big screen legit Marvel comic book movie opened up called 'Blade' starring Wesley Snipes. It was a B-List comic book character with an A-List star (Wesley Snipes). The movie was a hit that lead Fox to get moving on 'X-Men' , directed by Bryan Singer. X-Men was mediocre success that lead to Sony finally gaining the rights to make a Spider-Man movie. After much legal problems getting the project off the ground since 1993, Sony finally had the rights and went forward with making it. James Cameron was even attached in the mid-90's with plans of Electro & Sandman as the main villains (which is why those two were never used in the 1994 animated series). Sam Raimi was a successful director that made Evil Dead films, never a big studio director - fought to become the director. He was a Spider-Man fan ever since childhood and a likely candidate. He took the project to new heights. Spider-Man opened up in summer of 2002 and was a huge success, one of the highest weekend openings of all time. It was perfect timing. This was not even a year after 9-11 and America needed a hero. Toward the end of the 90's, it was a movement of the anti-hero, where bad is now good. Spider-Man was a classic tale of good guy versus bad guy and I believe after 9/11 , America wanted that. Sam Raimi made a perfect blend of action, adventure, comedy, drama, and romance. It was a perfect comic book film at the time. It lead to all the studios jumping on the bandwagon and using their Marvel properties. The concept of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man was also used to make the Avenger films which are the popular summer blockbusters we see these days. In 2003, Daredevil & Hulk openend. Terrible films, but box office draw indeed. More and more comic book films were made in the 2000 decade. V for Vendetta, Sin City, 300, Watchmen, X-Men 2, X-Men 3, Wolverine, X-Men First Class, The Wolverine, Fantastic Four 1 and 2, Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Thor 2, Avengers, Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3 - just to name a few! DC had successful Batman and Superman properties that were created into films in the 70's, 80's and 90's - and they rebooted both franchses with great success. But Marvel has a more broad list of iconic characters that translate well into film.
Spider-Man 2
Sam Raimi and the crew returned for a sequel to Spider-Man only two years after the first one. The film was even BETTER than the first one, which is SO unbelievably rare to have a great successful film and have the sequel being actually better. It was rare, but it worked. The character of Peter Parker continued and the audience wasn't just seeing Spider-Man versus a villain of the week , they actually got a character arc of Peter Parker and the villain was just being used to enhance Peter's story. It had more emotion than the first and the film was another major success, only losing to Shrek 2 in the box office draw of 2004. Turns out the cast had a three picture deal in the contract, so a third one was inevitable.
Spider-Man 3
The trailer for Spider-Man 3 debuted in 2006. The teaser was one of the most incredible trailers ever made. It had a teaser for black suit Spider-Man, we saw a bit of the new villain , the SANDMAN and Harry was flying. This meant, the audience would get the black suited symbiote storyline which is very famous in the comic book world of Spider-Man, Harry becoming a second Green Goblin which also happened in the comics and of course a brand new villain, the Sandman. The movie would also be directed by Sam Raimi once again and have the same actors return. This was the most promoising film. Successful formula intact, a great teaser trailer, awesome classic storylines being adapted into the film. After I saw the film, years later - I bought the official CD, the noval, and the Making & Art of Spider-Man 3. But the kicker was........ The film was absolutely horrible beyond belief. And I mean, HORRIBLE...
So why would I want any merchandise from that piece of *beep* film ? Why would I watch the third Spider-Man anymore than I had to ? I considered Spider-Man 3 one of the biggest cinematic disappointments of all time (right next to good ole Star Wars Prequels starring Jar Jar Binks). The truth is I study film. Every film geek studies great films and learns from them, but I'm very interested in learning off of bad films. I've Spider-Man 3 so many times and it just gets worse and worse, but I am one to learn from one's mistakes. So each viewing or reading the history of the film, I learn something - because the idea is I want to make a better Spider-Man 3 and not stop there but continue the Sam Raimi series of Spider-Man.
Amazing Spider-Man
When Marc Webb's "Amazing Spider-Man" was announced, I was kinda happy because I thought Sam Raimi disappointed me so bad, it was time for a new director to have his shot. I loved Social Network and like Andrew Garfield, so this new reboot was exciting to a certain degree. I still loved Spider-Man 1 and 2 so much, but the third one, I wouldn't trust Raimi to do another one. Raimi and Tobey said they were going to go forward with a fourth one, and Raimi already spoke with John Malkovich to play the Vulture and Anne Hatahawy for the Black Cat / or Vultress character. But the studio wouldnt' agree with Raimi on a release date, so they parted ways and Marc Webb stepped in. I saw Amazing Spider-Man and the movie absolutely had no soul. I wouldn't call it a bad film like I do with Spider-Man 3, but it's such an obvious producer's film - rather than a director's film. Raimi had a vision and made a great comic book movie. Marc Webb was a pawn of the studio, hired to make a Spider-Man movie to obtain the rights and make as much money as they could. The movie was a reboot of a movie only ten years old and it didn't need to be made. The movie had absolutely no point. What was different that made this one better than the 2002 version ? Nothing... There was no heart, no soul, no comedy like Raimi's. It flat out sucked. Now as Amazing Spider-Man 2 is near, I can't help but continue to wonder what would happen if they got Spider-Man 3 CORRECT ?
The MAIN Problem of Spider-Man 3
There is a major debate on what went wrong. There are people that blame Avi Arad that forced Venom into the story. People claim if Raimi did what he wanted, it would have been a good movie. There are people that say the blame is put on Raimi himself that Venom only made the horrible story bareable because at least they got a little bit of Venom in the film. In my opinion, forcing Raimi to do Venom (a character that he didnt like) into Spider-Man 3 was just pissing on *beep* It was already going to suck. After reading the Making of Spider-Man 3, the problem came from the very beginning. Each screen play for a film contains a central 'theme' of the script. This theme is injected into a two page treatment sent to the studio for their approval. The theme Sam Raimi and his brother came up with ? "Forgiveness". The original concept was Sandman would be Ben's killer and Peter would ultimately forgive him so he can move on with his life. The second villain would have been the Vulture, a character Sam Raimi loved and wanted to put in the second film. Ben Kingsley had a meeting with Sam Raimi and agreed to do the movie and they were already arranging costume fittings for Ben Kingsley. The idea was Vulture would be put to jail because Spider-Man stopped an evil scheme and Sandman would break Vulture out of jail, Vulture seeking revenge and not forgiving - ultimately to pay the price of death. Vulture was dropped because the studio (Avi Arad) wanted Venom as the secondary character and Sam Raimi agreed because he was making a film for his fans.
Here is the main problem and something I've been obsessing with fixing. The third film should NOT have been about forgiveness!! This is the MAIN problem. The script was bad to begin with. Forgiveness is a great theme for a Spider-Man movie, I suppose, but not in this one. Hear me out on this subject matter.
First Movie: The Theme was "Responsibility"...Hence the main quote from the film "With great power, comes great responsibility". He became Spider-Man and learned a harsh lesson when Ben died, that he must be responsible for helping people with his powers instead of trying to buy a car to impress Mary Jane. It was a fantastic theme for the origin story. Goblin was a great villain because he too got super powers, but went the opposite way where he used his power for himself.
Second Movie: The Theme was "Identity".... The whole posters had Peter with mask off, or Peter struggling with Spider-Man. The idea was now that he had these powers, who was Peter Parker. Was he Spider-Man ? Or was he Peter Parker who used Spider-Man to save people. Would these powers now dictate his life ? The normality of an everyday college student was now in jepordy. He couldn't get MJ because he had to do Spider-Man things. Peter was then losing his powers because his head was so messed up and he couldn't figure out who he was. He had NO ONE to talk to because no one can understand him, he's the only Spider-Man in the world. He had no one. So he had to deal with this problem head on, even giving up Spider-Man at one point to try to live a normal life, but it didn't work. Doc Ock also played on this theme because his identity was taken over by the mechanical arms. They were Doc Ock at this point and at the end of the film, he realized he was Doctor Otto Octavious and these arms would not control his life and Peter realized that he is Spider-Man and it is who he is , weather he likes it or not - and must give up the life of Peter Parker and watch Mary Jane get married to someone else. This is his sacrafice because it is who he is... Luckliy, Mary Jane has a change of character and realizes she must stand by Peter because she loves him.
Third movie - Forgiveness ?? Why ?? Look at the first two. Responsibility, then Identity....You dont need Forgiveness... In the second movie, there is NO indication that Peter is vengenceful and angry. It appears that he took responsibility for his actions and he is moving on. It is up to Aunt May to forgive Peter , which she does in the second movie. Forgiveness should be directed toward Aunt May & Harry Osbourne. Not Peter. Bringing up Sandman as Ben's killer is a silly way to connect Peter to Sandman and it just came off as a complete re-hash of the first film. That ship has sailed. Ben's killer died and Peter moved on. We dont need to go back to that point. Like the second movie, we need to continue Peter's story. You have an amazing set up - Harry knows Peter is Spider-Man. MJ is now with Peter. You have a wonderful cast of characters from the comic you can choose. Spider-Man 3 is like getting a date with a super model and wrecking your car at a *beep* stop sign.
There is a ton of other errors about Spider-Man 3 that I could do another thread on (which I did a year ago, lol). I mean, everything from too many sub plots, two love triangles, stupid kids yelling wicked cool, 8 minutes of Venom screen time, another *beep* Mary Jane in trouble at the end of the movie, rehashing MJ / Harry romance, MJ being a complete *beep* it just goes on forever....But as most geeks *****, rarely they offer a solution. I love to write films in my head. So here's my pitch and please feel free to comment on it and criticize the hell out of it, I dont care...
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire