Spider-Man 3: No Way Home

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Arad and Columbia execs insisted on Venom for the Raimi part 3.

Listen, fans need to stop making a fuss about Avi Arad forcing Venom on to Raimi.

Comic Critics.jpg

https://comiccritics.com/2010/01/31/...day-joke-here/

On paper, the idea of putting Spider-Man's third biggest supervillain (at the time) in the third film does make a lot more sense than...well having Sandman be Uncle Ben's killer, which was entirely Sam Raimi's idea.

Spider-Man 3 was a mess of a poor collaboration. And nobody is blameless there. Spider-Man 3 is the only time Sam Raimi has screenwriting credit on these films and I think people need to square with the reality that Raimi bears some responsibility and blame for the film being the mess it is, and also tarnishing the first two movies by association. Since thanks to Raimi's presence, the movies are obviously a continuation of the story even if it doesn't really cohere with what was established before.

Fundamentally, Sam Raimi should have walked away with Spider-Man 2 and allowed Sony Pictures to make 3 without him. Like how Tim Burton walked away with BATMAN RETURNS. The resulting film might not have been good but at the very least it wouldn't have been a compromise that pleased no one. And we can at least discuss Spider-Man 1 and Spider-Man 2 as a singular whole without reference to the sequels the way we do with the Burton films.

[HypnoHustler]

Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan - some wise person


Spider-Man 3 was a steaming pile of you-know-what and I think it would’ve been only marginally better if Raimi had greater control, but it did recoup its value in timeless memes at least.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Spider-Man 3 was a steaming pile of you-know-what and I think it would’ve been only marginally better if Raimi had greater control, but it did recoup its value in timeless memes at least.

It's important to understand that Raimi never really started any of these films with a set story or concept. He didn't go in thinking he had this saga and story, or with a specific ending or stopping point in mind.

Which is to say, that it's not a guarantee that Raimi's Spider-Man 3 with him having freedom would have resembled the movie we got, i.e. we'd have a Spider-Man 3 with Sandman and Harry as the main villains, let's say.

[primenumber101]

it's november. time for a new trailer. help us out, Sony.

From what I heard, the trailer got delayed because of the disagreement between Sony and Marvel (Disney). Sony apparently wants to go all out and show Tobey and Andrew's Peter at trailer, while Marvel doesnt want to do that and wanted to hide them till the movie came out.

It alao probably because Marvel doesnt want NWH to take the spotlight away from the Eternals, which has recently released.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

It alao probably because Marvel doesnt want NWH to take the spotlight away from the Eternals, which has recently released.

I can also see Sony not wanting NWH to take the spotlight away from the new Ghosbusters.

I would be surprised if we don't get the second trailer with Ghosbusters: Afterlife at the latest. Especially since that film is doing a similar thing to NWH (bringing the original Ghostbusters back) so a lot of the people seeing it would have interest in NWH for the same reason.

[Ursalink]

Any idea if this month will come out the second trailer?

[HypnoHustler]

From what I heard, the trailer got delayed because of the disagreement between Sony and Marvel (Disney). Sony apparently wants to go all out and show Tobey and Andrew's Peter at trailer, while Marvel doesnt want to do that and wanted to hide them till the movie came out.

It alao probably because Marvel doesnt want NWH to take the spotlight away from the Eternals, which has recently released.

Marvel is making a mistake. Confirmation of Tobey and Andrew (let’s be honest, more Tobey) will get butts in the seats on opening weekend. It is THE selling point. I’m still not 100% sure they’re even in the film, and I think if Marvel doesn’t show them until the movie is out that doubt will remain for a lot of moviegoers… and by the time word-of-mouth confirms they are in it, maybe people will have moved on to the next shiny object coming out. I bet Marvel is playing favorites and doesn’t want to detract too much from their boy Tom, and perhaps even a bit resentful of the fact they’re being pushed to incorporate the Sonyverse (which they probably view as inferior) into the MCU.

[ZeroBG82]

Marvel is making a mistake.

Not really. For starters, nothing says they aren't going to show it before the film releases. Just that they don't want to NOW. Which is principally about Eternals. Marvel, and this goes for Star Wars as well, doesn't like to cannibalize the hype between multiple projects. It's why Shang-Chi marketing didn't kick off in earnest until after BW, Eternals after SC, etc. With Eternals opening this weekend, the door is now open for Spidey.

But as another poster mentioned, Sony also has considerations. They don't want to rob the hype from their other releases either.

I expect Ghostbusters is the most likely to be holding up things from Sony's end. So we're almost there.

The bigger issue for Marvel is the WandaVision Quicksilver dilemma. Rumors abound, and if Tobey and Andrew AREN'T in the film in some meaningful capacity, Marvel really needs to tell everyone, as explicitly as possible, RIGHT THE F#$! now. Or it's going to make the disappointment with WandaVision's reveal look like a paradise by comparison. At this point, we've reached a place where every day that passes where Marvel isn't explicitly killing the guest star rumors either promises they are in the film, or dooms the entire enterprise.

[Jman27]

People still mad about wandavision quicksilver? When did fans started to have this entitlement for how a story goes? Like really? How is Marvel at fault if they don't confirm Tobey or Garfield? They didn't leak their involvement in the film.

[Arsenal]

You know, it's kinda crazy that the movie is a little over a month away and still doesn't have an official poster yet.

[Jman27]

You know, it's kinda crazy that the movie is a little over a month away and still doesn't have an official poster yet.

A poster got revealed a couple of days ago

[Frontier]

I think there was a poster on a bus too.

[fin5]

Please by now Everybody knows that tobey and Andrew are in the movie.Well Doctor Octopes is in so that means Tobey is in. Marvel doesnt want to show another trailer because of Tobey and Andrew But we know now they are in it

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think there's one major difference between Peters' Quicksilver and at least one of the Spider-Man actors (Tobey). Feige worked on the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films and probably has some emotional attachment to that version in a way no one at Marvel did to Peters' Quicksilver.

Honestly, it's possible that everyone at Marvel is out-of-touch to how popular that version of Quicksilver was. Anytime a higher-up talks about the success of the Fox X-Men characters, they mostly bring up Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and maybe Mystique. They probably thought they can bring Evan Peters back with no backlash whatsoever.

By comparison, at least Tobey's Spider-Man is a bit of a sacred cow to both Feige and the audience, and I think the studios know on some level that Tobey is a sacred cow to the audience and wouldn't want to see him tarnished any more than they wanted to see Downey get tarnished.

I can see Marvel maybe going for a Ralph Bohner joke again if only Andrew's Spider-Man was in this, but if they're both in it, or even if just Tobey is in it, I become more skeptical of that happening.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I think there's one major difference between Peters' Quicksilver and at least one of the Spider-Man actors (Tobey). Feige worked on the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films and probably has some emotional attachment to that version in a way no one at Marvel did to Peters' Quicksilver.

Honestly, it's possible that everyone at Marvel is out-of-touch to how popular that version of Quicksilver was. Anytime a higher-up talks about the success of the Fox X-Men characters, they mostly bring up Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and maybe Mistique. They probably thought they can bring Evan Peters back with no backlash whatsoever.

By comparison, at least Tobey's Spider-Man is a bit of a sacred cow to both Feige and the audience, and I think the studios know on some level that Tobey is a sacred cow to the audience and wouldn't want to see him tarnished any more than they wanted to see Downey get tarnished.

I can see Marvel maybe going for a Ralph Bohner joke again if only Andrew's Spider-Man was in this, but if they're both in it, or even if just Tobey is in it, I become more skeptical of that happening.

There's also agents to consider. Evan Peters is a low-profile actor who likely didn't have pull or power in terms of his character was presented on screen but Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield would have some pull, as would their agents. Maguire's rich enough that he doesn't have to work for a living anymore and can select his projects as he desires. Garfield is a bit different but he's also established himself as a name actor on some independent projects. Both actors would likely raise objections if their roles were small or meant as a joke at the expense of movies that made them big. And they'd be able to walk away if it was just some cheap gag so whatever it is, it would have to engage them somehow.