Sony Officially Signs Director and Star for Spider-Man 4… and 5?

Posted by Rob Hunter (rob@filmschoolrejects.com) on September 8, 2008

Spider-Man

After the critical debacle that was Spider-Man 3 and the eye-opening masterpiece that is The Dark Knight, does anyone really care to see a fourth Spider-Man movie with the same creative team behind it? How about a fifth?

Deadline Hollywood has confirmed that Sony has signed both Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire to direct and star in Spider-Man 4. They already have a script from Zodiac scribe Jamie Vanderbilt, and a principal photography start date of fall 2009. What they don’t have is a non-fiscally related reason to make a fourth film in the franchise. (But this is not a rant about how abysmally bad Spider-Man 3 was…)

A continuation of the series was a no-brainer as Spider-Man 3 was the highest grossing of the three films (although the lowest grossing domestically.) What was up in the air however was the involvement of Raimi and Maguire, both of whom played it coy and non-committal in recent months. Maguire has stated his desire to step away from the role, but his Spider-Man paychecks and residuals are understandably tempting. Since the series started in 2002 Maguire has only made two non-Spidey movies, which is a shame because if you’ve seen Wonder Boys, The Ice Storm, or even Pleasantville, then you know he has a lot more talent and range than the Peter Parker role affords him.

The inside source says Sony is seriously considering filming parts four and five simultaneously, a la Back to the Future 2/3 and The Matrix 2/3. The reasoning is financially based (like most decisions with this franchise) although future scheduling concerns are sure to play a part as well. The Shrill Snaggletooth (aka Kirsten Dunst) has not yet signed on, but expect that to change by next fall. The villain (or villains…) has not yet been announced, although the source says “once you find out who the villain is, you’ll know who’s playing it.” That quote leads most people to think Dylan Baker’s Dr. Curt Connors will be growing a tail to play The Lizard for the sequel.

One guarantee is that part four will not feature the Venom character played by Topher Grace in the last installment. Sony has screenwriters hard at work on a stand alone Venom film, even though creator Todd McFarlane thinks it’s a bad idea. “I don’t know if you can have a movie about a guy who goes out there and maims everybody and wins all the time,” he said. “I don’t know what their mindset is and how they can get there other than adding too much niceness to him, but we’ll see.” That desire to make the character somewhat sympathetic is the main argument for keeping Grace in the role going forward, even they his portrayal met with stiff criticism from fans.

Should Sony give the Spider-Man series a rest? Or should they bring in fresh talent and give Raimi and Maguire a rest? Does anyone actually find Kirsten Dunst attractive in any way, shape, or form?


Read more articles by Rob Hunter

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • Surfer Sam
    Tobey Mcquire plays the same character in EVERY movie!
    His acting ability goes from A - A.
  • You know, honestly, I'll go see another Spider-Man film with Rami directing and Maguire starring. I didn't think SM3 was all that good, and I hated Venom in it, but I'll see a fourth film.

    As for Dunst, someone just keep her the hell away from the franchise, she is so damn annoying and I just cannot stand her at all.
  • Spider-Man 3 makes me wonder a few things...

    but most prominent on that list of wonderings is "How can someone make a film as huge
    and expensive as this and not know that it was going to be fucking horrible?"

    The filmmakers spent so much time and energy on everything else in that movie-- and no
    one thought to write another draft of the script that avoided all the plot-holes, bad
    dialogue, awkward introduction of one-off characters, etc.??

    it just grinds my gears.
  • Trace
    Spider-Man 3 had too much of what a superhero movie doesn't need.

    Character interactions - are essential, but not when everyone's crying their little eyes out or disco-dancing. Ooh, an alien symbiote that makes me stronger and faster? I think I'll join America's Best Dance Crew!

    Topher Grace as Eddie Brock? I knew going in I was going to be pissed. You can thank the awesome animated series for instilling in me that Eddie Brock is a hulk, a smart-ass and an intimidating guy by himself. Give him the symbiote and he's supposed to be killing shit, not making alliances with Sandman, a (as Conrad puts it) one-off character that didn't belong anyway! "Oh, I did some bad shit and I know I almost killed you and everything, but, um, hey - I'm sorry. Now I'm gonna float away."

    I'm blown away that the greatness that Spider-Man 2 was was eclipsed by the shit that Spider-Man 3 is. I say let it die. Just leave it be. A Venom spin-off is - say it with me now - dumb.

    And I'd hit Dunst - with a brick. Anything to shut her up.
  • Harold
    I agree with all that was said above me. I think Sony blew their chances. They'll
    definitely make money, but honestly, I don't know how much you can expect out of
    another two sequels. Also, I'm getting pretty tired of seeing sequels to the same old
    shit. Yeah I'll go see it because I loved the original work (for the most part) but it
    seems like Hollywood's trying to say "yeah we're unoriginal as fuck" in failing
    produce much more original material.
  • Aleric
    Sorry but I didn't waste my money on the last one and I sure won't waste it on any up and coming sequels.

    Hollywood still hasn't gotten it. When you put more than two villans in a movie all you have is a 10 minute showcase of the villians and not eveough time to develop thier personalities. But that has never stopped them before and I doubt it will change.

    So they don't get my hard earned dollars and movies like Iron Man will.
  • Bergo
    Spider-Man has really had its time. A 4:th and 5:th installment can only be worse than what we've already seen.

    Give us something new! Give us PREACHER, SANDMAN or maybe even a live-action BONE feature!
  • HempKnight757
    conrad dude it grinds my gears too
  • Meep
    I think they should replace both Tobey and Kirsten. Obviously neither of them give a shit anymore and just show up for the paychecks. Maybe then we'll have a good Spiderman movie. (Well an improvement from the 3rd I mean, the first two were awesome.)
  • David
    Theres not much to "SpiderMan" in the first place. Everything about him was said and done in the sequel. The third was just an excuse for Sony to get some $$ and they lost money there. Now theyre trying to bring it back because the first two movies did so well. But THOSE WERE GOOD MOVIES, SONY!!! Give it up and shoot that franchise in the head like an old horse!

    Apologies to all agriculturalists and FFA members everywhere...
blog comments powered by Disqus