SCOOP: Spider-Man 4 and 5 Might be Shot at the Same Time!
Filed under: Action, RumorMonger, Fandom, Comic/Superhero/Geek, Remakes and Sequels
.jpg)
Cinematical just received a tasty little scoop from one of our trusty top secret super delegate Hollywood insiders, and it's purty interesting (all you Spidey fans might want to listen up): Apparently, in the last few weeks, James Vanderbilt (Zodiac) has turned in a working draft of Spider-Man 4 to the studio. However, according to our source, "his story arc has encompassed two films, making Spider-Man 5 shootable at the same time. The studio saw dollar signs and is in the process of reworking his deal to snatch up the story arc." Don't expect anything immediately, though, since we've been told both sides are still trying to negotiate the deal.
Right now we have no word on what that arc is or where Vanderbilt is taking his script, but it's interesting to know that they're looking to spread the next Spidey storyline across two films, instead of shooting one more and taking it from there. Obviously Sony has wiped away the bad buzz from Spidey 3 and is interested in stretching this franchise as far as they can. After three flicks, I can't see Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst returning to shoot two Spider-Man films together (would be a lot to take on), but you never know. In the meantime, here's what we know: Looks like Vanderbilt is writing Spider-Man 4 and Spider-Man 5, and the studio might look to shoot both flicks at the same time. As of right now, the studio has no comment. We'll update this post should we hear more ...
Whaddya think?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
5-16-2008 @ 11:09AM
Paul Arnette said...
I'm not sure why exactly, but I always get a bad vibe when I hear a movie is going to be shot back-to-back with another one. I'm sure there are positive and negative examples of both, but it's just the feeling I get.
Anyway, I would be up for any Spider-man film that doesn't include:
1) A 'misunderstood' villian
2) Mary-Jane being held hostage and in danger at the end.
For God's sake, enough of that already, please!
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 11:14AM
YouFaceTheTick said...
Great 2 more films that shouldn't be made.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 11:16AM
indecks said...
Even though Im a huge Spidey-fanatic... 3 was a letdown for me, and I really think they should shelf Spidey for about 10 years and come back to it fresh.
Much later on. Spidey 1 and 2 were great. 3 was a turd and we don't need another.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 11:21AM
kevjohn said...
Works for me. Spidey 3 gets an unnecessarily bad rap in my book. Of course it was a huge letdown from the high of Spider-Man 2, but it was still an enjoyable film experience to me. The logistics of shooting 2 films at the same time can be tamed. The question is will they have a decent storyline for both. And will they get the casting right if the majoy playors decide not to return. In any case, too early to either panic or get hopeful yet.
That IS a shame about Mary Jane always being in peril during these films though. I mean that neeeever happens in the comic books that inspired the films.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 11:57AM
amazo said...
does marvel not own the movie rights to make spiderman like they do everything else? i wish they would start putting cameos in there like the other movies are so they can include spidey in the avengers.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 12:03PM
Cole said...
It's too lucrative for Columbia (Sony) to sell the right to Spiderman back to Marvel. They did this with Thor a few years back and in the wake of Iron Man I'm sure their really kicking themselves right now.
5-16-2008 @ 1:47PM
Eric H said...
I thought that Sony only had rights for 3 movies. Marvel really needs to make the next films.
5-16-2008 @ 6:29PM
Cole said...
When Columbia Pictures (Sony) acquired the sole rights to the character on a film medium they got carte blanche to all subsequent films, character spin offs etc.
That was from the original deal made by Marvel in the late 80's when the character first stepped into production hell.
The wiki page has a nice back story of how everything went down. Interesting read....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man_(film)
5-16-2008 @ 12:50PM
Jon said...
I just wish that for one movie the heroes stop letting everybody know who they are i mean the entire end of spiderman 3 everybody is maskless! What is the point of the secret identity??
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 1:06PM
stiletto said...
I enjoyed the spiderman movies so far, but there is just one thing fundamentally wrong with them... Tobey Maguire! He just isn't believable, I thought so on the first and still now.
I am not sure that 2 more films will be worth it but hey what do I know, I am sure I will watch them.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 1:27PM
John R said...
I'm with you 100%. I'm used to the Peter Parker from the '90s Fox kids cartoon. That Peter makes Tobey look like a cupcake.
5-16-2008 @ 2:39PM
madgamer said...
I agree as well. I don't think replacing most (or all) of that cast would be such a bad thing, and would look forward to a slightly different take on spiderman.
5-16-2008 @ 1:15PM
hunterart_2000 said...
I say leave it alone, I always say that. If a movie is continuing from where it left off, but has an entirely new cast and/or new director (ie: "batman forever", "batman and robin"), it's hard to buy that I'm actually whatching the same thing, or to even expect it to be good (losing two actors in matrix 2 and 3). I'm even disappointed that Rachel Dawes is recast in the new batman, even though Katie Holmes sux, it's still better than constantly changing actors. So, to have a new Spiderman with a new cast and new director is like having different people finish someone else's oil painting (Not that Spiderman is a masterpiece, but you get the idea). Let it die, or work it out so the original cast comes back for the final chapter, AND MOVE ON! Although, I did like it when they recast the girlfriend in Back to the future 2 and 3. Oh well.
Ok, so you're a big Spidey-fan and you want it to continue, fine. Start it all over again then. But for the love of God, give us some breathing room first, and give yourselves sometime to write a good script, don't just push something out there because there's a demand. We'll wait. Surprise us with something good when we least expect it.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 2:01PM
RP said...
Shooting 2 films back to back? Insta-no-thank-you.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 2:36PM
sam.hage said...
Zodiac is a masterpiece, they should have david fincher co-direct.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 5:47PM
brett said...
You know whats sad is spiderman isnt really spiderman in any of those movies, theres no wise cracks and one liners and who gives a crap about mary jane is was all about gwen stacey
Reply
7-09-2008 @ 12:58PM
steven said...
Amen to that man!!!
5-16-2008 @ 3:21PM
DAVID F said...
Joseph Gordon-Levitt IS Peter Parker!
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 4:43PM
Jake said...
Spiderman 3 effectively killed my interest in any more movies of the friendly neighborhood variety. I think I would rather see another Howard the Duck movie before they take another crack at the wall-crawler.
Reply
5-16-2008 @ 8:28PM
Riley Freeman said...
kirsten dunst is terrible as mary jane. anyone watch a spidey cartoon. shes hotttttttt. they need to change her.
next spider 3 was terrible but they can fix it. they NEED to fix it.
this could work in only one of the following 2 scenarios.
they combine and bring either superman and batman for some huge fight.
or they introduce carnage and venom and the hell they brought upon the city. carnage in every storyline has pretty much dominated for a long period of time that could take up 2 movies.
out of those options irather see carnage than another superhero since they have their own movies. carnage is the character everyone wants in a spiderman movie. just like everyone wants gambit in the xmen movies. so if its not carnage we have nother failed spiderman movie or 3
Reply