Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Sam Raimi to Direct Spiderman Film 188

Posted by CmdrTaco from the good-bad-I'm-the-guy-with-the-webs dept.
livewirevoodoo submitted a story that I read yesterday but didn't initially think of posting here. On second thought, I think that Sam Raimi is directing Spiderman in a feature movie. The Evil Dead series is pretty dang awesome, and since I'm a junkie about seeing comic super heros on the big screen (I loved Burton's Batman, and am watching out for the upcoming X-Men flick). There is also about a Bruce Campbell Peter Parker. Not sure about that one.. I always thought Parker was well, more geeky then the uber macho Campbell. But anyway, not the standard Slashdot-fare, but I thought a lot of you might like it anyway.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sam Raimi to Direct Spiderman Film More

Sam Raimi to Direct Spiderman Film

Comments Filter:

  • . . . and all poor Taco can think of to do about it is to post nonsense about imaginary comic-book characters. Yes, you pathetic liberals, you heard me right: SPIDERMAN IS NOT REAL. There is no Biblical basis for belief in Spiderman. It's just a story. Get over it.

    In fact, the posting of this dumb story is a case in point, which perfectly illustrates the Slashdot creeping socialism issue. If all stories must be treated equally, then all most be posted, even the gay or atheistic stories. This disgusts me. I must retreat to the Batcave. FOAD, you left-wing losers.


  • Sorry, the X Movie is already in shooting and it's not Glenn Danzig as Wolverine. Hugh Jackman (I've never heard of him either) is playing Logan.

    I don't expect anyone outside of Australia is likely to have heard of him! He's done a couple of movies here, seems quite a decent actor. Hopefully X-fans will enjoy his Logan.

  • Bruce Campbell *is* uber macho. He is the coolest person in the entire world.

    Betcher ass! Check this out [wisc.edu]. Meeting Bruce was one of the coolest things in my life (so far.) A group on the UW-Madison campus that shows films arranged for him to attend and hold a question and answer session after a showing of Army of Darkness. He is completely personable and doesn't have an ounce of star attitude. Anyone not knowing who he was would think is just some ordinary Joe. He spent about 1-2 hours after the movie answering questions and telling stories (some hilarious ones about Sam Raimi) and then another 2-3 hours signing autographs and talking to people in the autograph line. I wish I had had a video camera with me.

  • > And then again, the only Marvel character that got a decent film was Blade.

    Actually, the Dr. Strange movie was pretty good. I'd never seen it until recently, when it was on TV and the TV reviewer gave it three stars (out of a possible four), which suprised me, but when I watched it, I had to agree.

    I suspect that the main reason that nobody ever saw the Dr. Strange movie is that all the attention went to another movie released the same year -- a little number you might have heard of called Star Wars. :)

    But a Sam Raimi Spiderman certainly has the potential to be the best Marvel-character-based movie yet!
  • It's "Joxter the Mighty" to you. . .

    I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".
  • I don't know, we're talking Marvel here. If you want non-camp, the origin of the material can't have been anywhere near Stan Lee.

    Marvel always stretched my suspension of disbelief a bit too thin. Despite Superman's limitless powers, I always found it a bit more realistic than anything out of Marvel.

    By the way, what do they mean by "X-Men"? did they have sex-change operations, or what?

    I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".
  • Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun!

    First you wanna kill me, now you wanna kiss me... BLOW.

  • I'm a grown adult, and I can't believe I watch it every Sat. I used to be (and still am!) a major fan of the original Transformers. I think Beast Machines has been a faithful and worthly Successor to the Series. It almost feals like the CG art is how they (BM) were always supposed to be portraid. I love it!

    My only wish is if Mainframe would redo the Original series.
  • Typos? Poor grammar? Nah, it's just that new hipster bee-bop lingo that's so popular these days.

    You darn kids, with your TV games, your fancy sneakers, and your Braun hand blenders.
  • Sam Raimi did not direct the Flintstones. He had a cameo role in it, as he has in many movies, but sometimes he gets confused with his brother Ted, an actor

    Ah, you are right. I saw him listed [imdb.com] as being part of The Flinstones and assumed he had directed it. Upon closer inspection [imdb.com], though, I realized what becomes of one who assumes! :)

    Thanks for the heads up!

  • Ah, who could forget his finest hour of directing. The year is 1994; the move... The Flinstones. Ah, Sam, you are a master. :)

    But seriously, he has done some good stuff. The Evil Dead movies were funny as hell, and he did show that he was a good director with A Simple Plan. I think his style will work well for the Spiderman movie...

  • You know, you can disable Katz's articles entirely. I haven't read a Katz post in months. If he'd stopped posting, I wouldn't know!
    --

  • Huh? (Score:1)

    by heller ( 4484 )
    On second thought, I think that Sam Raimi is directing Spiderman in a feature movie.


    There is also about a Bruce Campbell Peter Parker.


    Huh? Was this written in old english?


    And on top of that. . .Bruce Campbel as "uber macho". . .WOW! How did that ever happen!

    ** Martin

  • By then he'll be the only one not to have played Batman... ;-)
  • >Tim Burton did this excellently with the first
    >Batman movie, using Batman's long-time foe The
    >Joker, but Spiderman really doesn't have an >equivalent equal -- all his enemies like Green
    >Goblin, Dr Oct, and Venom, are just foes, but not
    >a constant one. I don't see how you can pick one
    >foe and still have a good Spiderman movie.
    Hmm... maybe that's why the last two Batman movies
    have sucked major ass. They should have stopped
    after the second one. Tim Burton's version
    of Batman is much more of a dark knight than the
    cheesy TV show could ever hope to portray.

    I always thought that Spiderman was cool for being
    able to think quick and outsmart his opponents,
    rather than brute-forcing his way through every
    situation like some other boring superheroes that
    I won't name. *ahem*Superman*ahem*. Plus, I
    always wanted a pair of those webshooters...
  • I had discussed this with my friends, and we all agreed that Michael J Fox could pull it off quite well. I don't know that he's muscular necessarily, but he never appears "flabby" or anything. If he was a few years younger it might help too...


    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
  • While I don't think there's much validity to the Bruce Campbell statement, and I don't think he quite has the right looks (Spidey's supposed to be a little tall and gangly) I could see Bruce delivering the right attitude to the roll in the form of witty/funny one-liners in a battle. Other people I've heard mentioned for the role included Johnny Dep (right look; not very comical though) and Tom Cruise (completely wrong in both areas). I almost think they'd have to pick an unknown to get it right. I think Christian Slater has the right attitude for Spidey, and his looks are close. But I dunno. Anyone?
  • ...On second thought, I think that Sam Raimi is directing Spiderman in a feature movie.
    [...]
    There is also about a Bruce Campbell Peter Parker.

    CmdrTaco, I'm begging you here, PREVIEW BEFORE POSTING. Read the article aloud or something. These two lines made no sense at all.

    As for Sam Raimi directing Spiderman, while I adore Raimi's work, I'm convinced at this point that nothing good can ever come of a Marvel comic adapted for film. Has anyone here ever seen The Punisher or Captain America? Live action Spidey is a no-win situation -- if you play him straight, the inherent ridiculousness of a guy in tights whose powers come from a radioactive spider bite is almost insurmountable. If you play it campy, you've got an unwatchable, embarassing farce, and you alienate all the comic geeks.

    Personally, I stopped caring about Marvel comics when they broke up the Defenders and started mass-producing Wise-Cracking Superheroes(TM) by the truckload. I hope that Raimi proves me wrong (if he actually takes the job), but I just don't think that Spiderman, or any of his Marvelous ilk, have the depth of character to actually sustain a film.

    --
    perl -e '$_="06fde129ae54c1b4c8152374c00";
    s/(.)/printf "%c",(10,32,65,67,69,72,
  • I don't buy the "recently Hollywood has been too derivative" argument. Hollywood has *always* been that way. Name some classic movies (say Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wind), and more likely than not they have been adapted from novels. Nowadays, of course, there are many other media (comicbooks, TV shows, and old movies) to derive movies from. It's just that in looking back, you more often think of the movie when you mention these titles, not the book that preceded them.

    Hollywood has always wanted a safe bet. That's why they have seldom produced complete original art. Fortunately, some directors manage to bring these stories to the screen in a way that adds something beyond a rote interpretation of the original or, worse, a pale imitation. Perhaps, if anything, that is what Hollywood has been lacking lately.
  • That sure as heck got my attention. Made my eyes cross.

    Mine too, since Sir Ian McKellan is playing Magneto in the X-Men movie, [xmenthemovie.com] not Spider-Man.

    Jay (=
  • BTW, does Men [in] Black count as a sucessfull movie of a marvel character?

    No, since the original comic came out from Aircel Comics and is creator-owned. The only "MIB" comic Marvel put out was a half-baked "prequel"; it followed the comic continuity (which had MIB chasing down the supernatural, not just aliens) more than the movie continuity.

    Jay (=
  • Wasn't MIB a Malibu Comic before Marvel got it?

    *doh* I checked, and we're both right; I forgot that Aircel was an imprint under Malibu. That explains how Marvel got the book, then -- they purchased Malibu back in the early 90's (and then proceeded to evicerate the company, but that's even more off-topic...).

    Jay (=
  • Ooops. Who can keep these villains straight?
    (Yeah, yeah: YOU can.)

    Yes, well, it's my job; I run a comic and gaming store.

    I could probably rattle off most all 150 Pokemon, if you get me drunk enough... :)

    Jay (=
  • Heck, i think the original evil dead was a film project when the two of them were in college together. either that or it was just a low buget horror movie, either way....


    "I'LL SWALLOW YOUR SOUL I'll SWALLOW YOUR SOUL...."
    "Swallow this"
  • WTF?!?! Who gives a damn if reading comic books is cool? Who cares if anything is `COOL'? If you like it, do it!

    Take that biotch!

    Bad Mojo
  • King Aelfred war meine hlafward!
  • I don't know about his height, but his muscularity and attitude would have made him the perfect Logan.

    LK
  • I didn't like Damon in Good Will Hunting
    (I don't think he played a believable geek).
    I think the guy from Starship Troopers would
    be a good Parker

    My pick for J. Jonah Jameson: Martin Sheen
    Doc Octopus: Christopher Walkin

  • What I want to know is will spidey have his very own Spidey Boom-Stick?

    P.S.
    you guys brought the aicn server load to 7 with this link! good job!
  • not only that, but it's also the hardest to type url I've ever encountered!
  • That is the main reason I'm waiting for the X-Men movie, too. :)
    I remember reading somewhere that Glenn said he'd play the part only if the script was good. That was like 2-3 years ago...X-Men has been 'in the making' for awhile..
  • all his enemies like Green Goblin, Dr Oct, and Venom, are just foes, but not a constant one.
    Isn't a sentient suit (Venom) that used to live on the moon enough for you?
    Anyway, Raimi is a fine director, I don't care much for Xena or Hercules, but he does a damn good job at the helm of both.
    nb, I especially like the fact that Xena's weapon isn't a phallic symbol, but a instead.
  • I think Bruce Campbell has done a terrific job in the past. However, if this is true, then I believe someone like Chris O'Donnel (Robin from the last 2 Batman movies) would make a much better Peter Parker.
  • Dr. Strange was a failed pilot for a TV series. I saw it when it originally aired in the 70's and then hadn't seen it again until recemtly when they aired it on Sci-Fi (I think). It shows it's age, but it's still the best Marvel TV thing IMHO.

  • See, Blade and MIB are Marvel comics (eg, comic books published by a particular nigh bankrupt publishing giant.) But they are not Marvel Universe (eg, comics or books set in the fictional world containing the Fantastic Four, X-MEN, Avengers, etc.)

    Um, Blade in the comics is actually very much a part of the Marvel Universe.
  • I'm surprised no one in this thread has mentioned Raimi's film A Simple Plan yet... definitely one of the most gripping, tragic, and powerful movies I've seen in the last few years. If you haven't seen it, see it. It's like Fargo except much bleaker. I think Raimi could do a creditable job directing just about anything, and I'd love to see him helming a Spidey flick!
  • After thinking about it for a bit, I can see a Spiderman movie with a Raimi atmosphere being a Really Good Thing (TM). Raimi's TV productions have had just the right mix of light drama and outright zaniness for a Spidey movie. Besides, he can't do worse than Marvel group has been doing with their modern attempts at either animated or live action productions (anyone remember the Fantasitc Four movie that never even made it beyond the trailer? How about the Generation X abortion? And have you tried to watch any of the animated children's series? They are completely unwatchable: Even when you know what the plotlines are supposed to be, the cartoons are impossible to follow!)

    DC has at least done reasonably well with their animated series, though the Batman movies went from acceptable to complete dreck. I'm very disappointed that Marvel has been squandering their best characters and plotlines in a frenzy of cheap marketing, obtuse media productions and rediculous revisionism.
  • Thank God Peter Parker wasn't bit by a radioactive dung beetle.. Imagine what his super powers would be then...
  • Well, I guess not anymore....
    ---
  • Things like Spiderman movie announcments USED TO BE standard /.-fare. Now all we get is the latest spewings from posers like Katz.
    ---
  • Actually, when I was a kid I thought I was gonna grow up to be Spiderman. And I really beleived it !

    Don't laugh !!!!!
  • They definately cast this preaty well.

    I'm looking forward to seeing how the film comes out. It could finally break the Marvel curse (either the film is terrible, or its stuck in pre-production hell forever).

    In another interesting rumor I've heard, there will be a new X-men animated series based on the movie, debuting on... the WB network(major shocker if its true) and produced in part by Harold Ramis, who also brought us such great animated adaptations as, all of the Ghostbuster series (on which Raimi wrote :) as well as the Godzilla and Men In Black series. This man puts together some very nice work, maintaining both production value, and story/continuity that is remarkable in an age where Saban (the e-bola of Childrens Programing) holds such control.

    Here's to good things (hopefully).


    Colleen:Its a black-hole.
    Hunter:Is that a good thing?
    C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
    H:Oh.. coooool.
  • For Peter Parker? Hell no. I personally would like to see either Charlie Sheen or John Cusak.
    BTW, does Men is Black count as a sucessfull movie of a marvel character?

  • Let [Campbell] play Flash Thompson (jock who harassed Peter in high school) as an adult, or maybe let him play Eddie Brock before he becomes Venom (or even as Venom -- Campbell can act pretty crazed when he wants to).

    Venom, hell -- Campbell should play J. Jonah Jameson. That'd be a Spider-Man movie I'd actually watch.

  • By God, you're right! Anyone who's seen the Evil Dead trilogy knows that BC is the man when it comes to whipping out pop-culture wisdom. And he's definitely got the chin for it...

    The next logical question... who's gonna play Arthur? And would Dustin Hoffman play Sewer Urchin?

  • Yeah baby! It doesn't get any better than this. Unless someone can Natalie Portman's petrified leg out of my ass.
  • Wow. Bruce Cambell / Sam Raimi's Evil dead stuff was absolutely superb. I couldn't believe the end to EDII when I first saw it!

    Darkman was also fantastic. Who can forget the explosion scene? The toy bird strikes light to the gas, the iris contracts, the explosion spreads in slow motion. Incredible inventiveness and attention to detail.

    Sam Raimi is definately on topic for this forum! I await the film!
  • is a very creepy guy. Definitely a good choice for a villain!

    Did you see him in Sleepy Hollow? wierd!
  • Well, I dunno, Bruce Campbell just isn't the kind of actor to have in a big hollywood blockbuster release. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan, but it seems like he fits so perfectly in the "B" Movie arena. As well as the Hercules and Xena shows, I mean, they're so bad, they're perfect for him. Not having Bruce in them would be downright insane. I especially agree with the other poster who said his perfect role would be as "The Tick".
  • I'm definitely stoked to see this story on /. I don't want it to take over, but it's of interest to some of us here and is a nice change of pace.
  • They had this rumored on Coming Attractions a few days ago. The article on Aint it cool just sounds like another rumor. There's no confirmation of any kind. Sam Rami is one of TWO directors that is has been narrowed down to, but he's already directing another movie!!
    Check out the Spider-man rumors on Coming Attractions at http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/spiderman.ht ml
  • Well, since Ben Edlund is currently working on a pilot of a new live-action Tick series on Fox, maybe there's a chance. But the name I keep hearing thrown around is Patrick Warburton, "Puddy" from Seinfeld, as the live action Tick (all rumors and wishes, of course, but a good idea :) ). Supposedly someone had asked him before about playing The Tick and he said he'd love to do it. Bruce would probably, IMO, be better as Die Fledermaus . :)
  • As die-hard evil dead fan I cannot wait for this to come out! I love bruce. Whether as a beaten and bloody ash, or as smart and witty Atolicus, King of Theives, he is just so smooth! Now he gets to be everybody's friendly neighborhood spiderman! Can you just see him as the wall crawler? AHHHHHH!! Oh yeah.. Sam Remi is pretty cool too. Love you Bruce. Love you Sam!
  • I dunno. I haven't been too impressed with superheroes on the big screen.


    The superman movies weren't all that great, and the Quest for Peace was just awful. I wasn't too impressed with the latter half of the batman movies(then again, nobody was impressed with Arnie's entry as Mr. Freeze), and don't get me started with The Punisher or that awful remake of Captain America. Hmm, bad guy can still kick ass after 50 years? He must have found the fountain of youth somewhere in Italy.
  • Yep. And Marvel's financial difficulties are largely over. They got actual talent to work on most of the books and dropped a lot of crap entirely. (Of course, the last year or so, they've been having trouble getting the talent to stay put, so who knows?)
  • Cusack's too old. Parker needs to be High School / Early College age. Norton, otoh sounds great.
  • Marvel hasn't had noticable camp since the early 70's. Same as every one else. It hasn't always been great (or even good), but it hasn't made you want to hurt someone after you read it.
  • No. But Blade does.
  • That's Raimi's work? Damn. Very good movie. Like Fargo, but with better story and characters, and no accents!
  • The Dr. Strange movie was only a made-for-TV, which is another reason it's obscure. I agree that it's surprisingly good.
  • i did dump her ass, by the way :) No one can take my Aunt May away from me !!!

  • Well, if you like Matt Damon, take in a viewing of "The Talented Mr. Ripley."
    It was...well, interesting.

    Personally, I feel it would be a rather big stretch for Damon to get the mannerisms of Peter Parker down. I think there are better choices out there.
    As far as the whole being well built part: In comics virtually everyone is well built unless their appearance as something else sends a message about the feelings of the character. How many SO's of superheroes are average looking? I mean average looking for the real people you see every day, not average looking for a supermodel/hunk of the month.

    So, it may be a little disenheartening to see a *wimpish* biochemistry geek (who has a job as a photographer to help pay the bills) fill the role but the other option is to either make the pre or post-accident Parker CG modified. Which may not be such a bad idea anyway as long as there is a definite plot there and Spiderman can move faster than Jackie Chan.
    Jackie has the physical attributes/techniques down pat for Spider-man. Its Peter Parker he'd have trouble with.

    Bummer about Brandon though...talk about typecasting. :)

    As far as the other characters...I'd like to see a well done comic based movie (with plot) that didn't look like a Hollywood cameo gallery. Some lesser known actors or unknown (but good) ones to fill all the gaps. Anything else would just be an extension of the campy old Batman sitcom with guest villains.

    Ok, that's my 2sense.

    -Vel
  • I'm not sure that I would like to see a dark, serious take on Spiderman. He has always been this geeky kid who had trouble paying the rent. When he fights super-villians, he is constantly making wisecracks. Todd McFarlane made a darker, serious Spiderman book for a year and a half, and it did reinvigorate the series. But I still like my Spiderman old-school. He is not the gloomy Dark Knight of Gotham. He is the wisecracking kid with real life problems. I wouldn't mind more fun and less angst, and I think something more along the lines of Evil Dead III would be great.
  • Movies that haven't gone in front of the cameras are ephemeral as mayflies (and some of the ones that do make it that far die too), but one hard fact is that the Spiderman movie has moved along far enough to have signed Ian McKellan to play Magneto. That sure as heck got my attention. Made my eyes cross.
  • Ooops. Who can keep these villains straight?
    (Yeah, yeah: YOU can.)
  • That fisherman isn't Raimi... http://www.bruce-campbell.com - check out the rumour section. Bruce demystifies the idea.
  • Leave me alone, leave me alone. Politics, Politics. It was actually a typo g r aphical error. Somehow the 'w' got separated.
  • If Bruce Campbell gets this part, it will probably turn out to be my favorite movie. The campiness that oozes out of him will do the role justice. I just can't imagine Leo doing it (as was rumoured early on.) He's one of the most underrated actors in Holly v v ood, and he really deserves to play what will probably become the next big francise. Anyway, if Bruce doesn't do it... I will.
  • Don't get you wrong? I have to get you wrong. Chrissy O'Donnell would not be a better Peter Parker than Bruce Campbell. Besides, I can't totally speak for Sam Raimi, but I'd say that he would rather work with Campbell.
  • YM "Lower ASCII". HTH.
  • 2970 out of 2989 web sites indexed by Google agree - it's "Joxer the Mighty" to me.
  • I am all about John Cusack as Peter Parker. The part where he has the right look goes great with the part where he can act.
  • And for those who are too lazy to cut/paste, click here [corona.bc.ca]. The most recent news is at the bottom of the page; the old stuff is interesting, though.

    BTW, Coming Attractions is a much better site for movie rumors/news than AICN, IMHO. It's better organized and usually more informative, with (slightly) more accurate spelling. CA also tells you how much faith to put in certain rumors. Here's the main page framed [corona.bc.ca] or not framed [corona.bc.ca], and the current "X-Men" movie page is here [corona.bc.ca]. Enjoy!

  • Bah! It's news for nerds, and nerds like cult flicks! I love the evil dead movies, as I'm sure do a lot of you other nonconformists.

    "This is my BOOM STICK!"
  • Well, to be true, I don't think Stewart really has a British accent.

    In ST:TNG, his accent was supposed to be pseudo-French (Jean-Luc Picard). I've seen him in other features where he had no accent at all (or, as some refer to it, a Hollywood accent). Any good actor can drop whatever accent that they want to, if they try.

    Oh, and BTW, I've never watched ST, so don't label me as a Trekkie.

    Brad Johnson
    Webmaster
    http://mrpenguin.org
    johnsonb@ryobi.com

  • Sorry, the X Movie is already in shooting and it's not Glenn Danzig as Wolverine. Hugh Jackman (I've never heard of him either) is playing Logan.

    We actually have X-Men movie posters in the movie theater by my house, I believe the big release date is July 16th 2000.
  • The point of AICN is to post rumors. Nobody ever said anything different. He might not post his list of sources for stories to your liking but he does get a lot of scoops that turn out to be true because he has "inside sources." I think Harry (the guy who runs AICN for those who don't know) would probably be the first to tell you that he doesn't pretend to be a news source, he's a fanboy like the rest of us and posts stories that fanboys in higher places send him.
  • I'll agree that HW will generally adapt rather than originate. But the source they adapt from has changed considerable.

    Look at Jurassic Park. Before JP, Michael Cricton was a practical nobody; maybe among geek circles, books like Andromeida Strain were popular, but nowhere near the popularity today. Spielberg saw JP as a movie, and it happened, and suddenly Cricton is HUGE. Bigger than big. We suddenly have remakes of his old books and books that are written for what seems like screenplay. I'd be hard pressed to say that this may have happened earlier than 1985 for any book (but this is my impression, it may not be fact). Generally, pre 1980 adaptions of books were merely taking something that was well written and adapting to the screen; the original author if alive rarely got an ego boost, and sequels were not important. At least, some movies today can still keep that (Contact, for example).

    Another interesting example: The Man in the Iron Mask. I rented this during Christmas, and it was ok; then later that week, browsing the classic movie channels, I happened upon "The Fifth Musketeer", the same story but made in the 50s or 60s (forget the date). You had the same people die, the same resolution and all that, but there was something fundamentally better about the 50s version than the 90s one. The 90s version was flashier, and played down some of the interactions to make the movie more watchable for today's short attention span audience. The 50s version, on the other hand, keep me watching as some of the plot elements weren't fully explained. Sure, some of the sets looked poor, and it didn't have glitz, but it was a better movie overall, IMO.

    Maybe this lack or originallity extends from filmmakers wanted to redo a story with *just* a bit of tweak here or there to fit how their idea of a film should be. This can make movies great, as in Contact, or terrible, as in Johnny Mnemonic. Let's hope that future book-based films like Ender's Game or Neuromancer or Hitchhiker's Guide don't fall into these problems.

  • #1) IMO, AICN is the worst bunch of geeky-ass fanboys ever to try to run a web site. Their feedbacks are a disgrace, nothing but insults and "my director is better than your director" oneupmanship.
    #2) Having said that, here's an idea: Remember Ralph Bakshi's Spiderman cartoons of the 60's and 70's? Dig this: have Actor#1 play Peter and Spidey, but like the cartoon, have Bruce overdub the internal monologue that Spidey always had running (it was a different voice than Peter).
    That would by cool.
    I still love the old Spidey cartoons, despite their low-budget cheesiness. It's a damn sight better than Marvel's foray into CGI backgrounds. Ugh!

    Pope
  • Actually, I rather thought it was Bruce's more recent involvement in the Hercules/Xena series that would have put him in association with Sam Raimi for this flick, not *just* his Evil Dead involvement. Bruce's been playing a somewhat geeky (and not really all that hunky-looking) King of Thieves, Autolyclus on both series. And given that Sam Raimi produces (or is is executive produces) and his brother Ted (I assume at least) plays Joxter in the series, these factors have kept Bruce in touch with Sam Ramimi recently enough for him to be considered seriously for Peter Parker.

    As for how good a Peter Parker he'd be - I think he'd play it well, but somehow I don't see Peter Parker using the kind of sardonic humor Bruce Campbell seems known for. However, it *does* seem rather Spiderman-ish! But the voice... I don't know if I could get used to his voice as Spiderman *or* Peter Parker. (I used to watch Spiderfriends when I was a geeky kid, and I *adored* Peter Parker, partly because of his dreamy-nerdy voice!)
  • I wouldn't hold much hope out for the X-Men movie either. The comic itself has gone way downhill in the past year or so, both writing wise and art wise. I can't imagine the feature length film, beig advised by the same clowns, could be anything more than WildWildWest shlock for public consumption.
  • Peter Parker is the geek hero. A brainy kid endowed with super powers. How many of us have dreamed about that ? I used to love reading Spider Man comics, until my gf told me it wasn't cool :(

  • With a subject line like this, I'm surprised no one has linked to Bruce Campbell's website [bruce-campbell.com] - it's quite entertaining, lots of content written by Bruce himself, not a hollow celeb.com site. I particularly like his Babblings from the Brink [bruce-campbell.com] essays.
  • If you are looking for someone to *ahem* pull off the geek, I must again suggest John Cusack [imdb.com]. Whether as John Kelso [imdb.com], Himself [imdb.com], Narrator [imdb.com], Martin Q. Blank [imdb.com], Himself [imdb.com], or Scary Man [imdb.com], Cusack cannot be said to fail to pull off the geek.
    Alternatively, might I suggest another fine Narrator [imdb.com]/Himself [imdb.com], Edward Norton [imdb.com].
  • Evil dead I-III (Army of Darkness aka Evil dead III) are my absolute all time favorite movies. Way back in the 70's when Raimi made the first one, (recently re-released btw), It was amazing how scary it was with the limitation of the medium at the time (Effects-wise)... Now that he's been given this script in an age where effects make up most of the movies out there I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what he can do with such a deeply rooted pop-idol as spidey. To the comment of Bruce Campbell not being that nerdy? You probably haven't caught him on Xena as the 'king of thieves' or on the x-files when he played a demon who wanted a human baby. I can definitely see Mr. Campbell as Peter Parker... Oh, on a side note, if you don't know what Raimi looks like, rent Evil Dead I... He's one of the fishermen guys on the side of the road that they honk at after the truck... Oh well, back to work.
  • Even though the article says it's true, I can't help but believe that this might just be another rumor. People have been talking about a major Spiderman motion picture since the '70's (I've got an old issue of Amazing where Stan Lee gives a list of cast members already signed), but we haven't seen anything yet. And then again, the only Marvel character that got a decent film was Blade.

    I'm going to keep waiting, but I won't be surprised if this turns out to be a dead end for the film industry. Buton did a helluva job on Batman, but the ones that followed sucked! My hope is that this Spiderman, and hopefully the upcoming X-Men will give a renewed vigor to the comics-to-big screen drive that we once knew. Personally, I think that the Hulk should make a silver-screen debut.

    One more word on The X-Men: they did a damn good job of choosing Professor X! I couldn't think of anyone better than Patrick Stewart!

    Brad Johnson
    Webmaster
    http://mrpenguin.org
    johnsonb@ryobi.com

  • What geek hasn't picked up a comic in their lifetime?

    Anyway, I'm glad to finally see Spidey on the big screen. I watched the old and new cartoons, and the short-lived live series (in the 70's?) when it was running on SciFi. Although I'll admit the comic took a dive after McFarlane left, Spidey is second to none in my book.

    BTW-Danzig is not playing Wolverine, I saw that mentioned somewhere awhile back...that's too bad though.

  • sam raimi's kind of a nerdy guy (i mean that as a compliment), and spiderman is dear to the heart of nerds everywhere. i don't see what this *doesn't* have to do with slashdot! huzzah!
  • Raimi started out with the Evil Dead series who had, while not being a great cinematographic success, a hardcore cult following, and frankly, nobody did those quirky horror flicks better than he did.

    Some people might think that Spiderman might be up another alley entirely, and that such a project would require a better established director, used to big-budget action flicks, à la Cameron or De Bont.

    On the contrary. Raimi showed us he has a myriad of talents, and a true gift with the camera. Just watch "A Simple Plan" again (if you haven't checked that movie out, what's wrong with you? A great flick). Genius filmwork, showing a wealth of talent, and some great acting (Paxton and Thornton primarely). I think he would be a great choice, and give us another look at the superhero genre. (Remember the effect Burton had with his first Batman. I expect the same thing with Raimi).


  • Jack Nicholson as Wolverine

    Rent a copy of Wolf(I know it sucked) and watch the feral side of Jack come alive.
  • Bruce Campbell *is* uber macho. He is the coolest person in the entire world. I can't believe you sniveling bastards are whining about a post concerning the GOD OF DIRECTORS Sam Raimi creating a Spiderman movie. I used to dress as Spiderman when I was a little kid (it didn't even have to be Halloween), and I still think he's cooler than most real people (except Bruce). I LOVE Xena/Hercules, Evil Dead/Army of Darkness!
  • Although I cannot claim originality for the concept, it is worth noting that there was a definite progression of "Ashes" in the Evil Dead saga.

    In the first movie, E.D.1, "Ashley" is clearly (as someone else stated) a whipping boy. He is a far cry from "Ash, Housewares" of Army of Darkness fame. He does significantly less ass-kicking, and is clearly more on the receiving end of the abuse [the exception to this being the "Full-body-bitchslap" that he delivers to Linda while she is ... err... undead/possessed].

    In the second movie, E.D.2, "Ash" has started to define his role as somewhat macho with the occasional one-liner, and the fact that he not only takes abuse, but really dishes it out as well [...Groovy...].

    But clearly in Army of Darkness, in the regular theatrical release, "Ash, Housewares" is the "uber-macho" that was aforementioned as he shows "essentially" no fear [with notable exceptions]. There is no doubting that "Ash, Housewares" is the buccaneering hero that we are all used to seeing, and most of us generally think of. What is interesting though, is that the director's cut portrays Ash quite a bit more like "Ash" from ED2, showing a truly terrified side in several shots.

    Patiently awaiting the arrival of my copy of the Limited edition Army of Darkness DVD (still available at www.cduniverse.com).

  • Maybe not? (Score:3)

    by TrentC ( 11023 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:50AM (#1385767) Homepage
    When looking for info on Campbell's new show Jack of All Trades, I stumbled accross this piece at The Daily Buzz [mania.com], a comic and entertainment site I frequent.


    Raimi Directs Spider-Man?

    Columbia/Sony Pictures apparently wants Sam (Evil Dead, Darkman) Raimi to direct its big-budget Spider-Man feature. Raimi, a professed Spidey fanatic, appears very interested in the job. Everything should be set, right?

    Wrong.

    Raimi will begin principal photography on The Gift within the next few weeks. In order for Spider-Man to make its summer 2001 release date (like Columbia/Sony wants), filming would have to begin late this spring or early this summer. That means that an accomodation has to be hammered out between Columbia/Sony and Paramount and The Gift's production company Tom Rosenberg's Lakeshore Entertainment, before Raimi can sign-on as the director for Spider-Man.

    Jay (=

  • Raimi did more than just Evil Dead... (Score:3)

    by TrentC ( 11023 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:44AM (#1385768) Homepage
    Sam Raimi also is one of the producers of "Hercules: the Legendary Journeys" (the Kevin Sorbo show) as well as the vastly more popular spinoff "Xena: Warrior Princess" (both of which, as any good Bruce Campbell fans know, regularly features Campbell as "Autolycus, the King of Thieves").

    He's also exec-producing Campbell's new show Jack of All Trades [bruce-campbell.com]. In Campbell's own words: "The show centers on my character, Jack Stiles, an American spy, adventurer, and rogue dispatched to an island in the East Indies by President Jefferson to thwart Napoleon's advances in the region. Jack isn't at all happy about the remote assignment, especially since he's supposed to serve as personal attaché to a wealthy British widow and secret agent for the Crown named Emilia Rothschild (Angela Dotchin). Disguised as the Daring Dragoon, Jack teams with Emilia on numerous covert missions to stop Napoleon's imperialism in the East Indies." Yeah, sounds cheesy, but that's never stopped me from watching Army of Darkness over and over again...

    I think Raimi might be able to do a good Spider-Man film (though I have to wonder about the potential chesse factor) but Campbell should NOT, NOT, NOT be allowed to play Peter Parker! That would be a casting error on par with Nicholas Cage as Superman.

    Let him play Flash Thompson (jock who harassed Peter in high school) as an adult, or maybe let him play Eddie Brock before he becomes Venom (or even as Venom -- Campbell can act pretty crazed when he wants to).

    Jay (=

  • We can hope. (Score:3)

    by A Big Gnu Thrush ( 12795 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:39AM (#1385769)
    Let's hope Spider Man is more like A Simple Plan than Darkman.

    I like camp as much as the next guy, but after a while it would be nice for comic books to be taken seriously. Look at what Burton did for Batman. A legitimate look at an interesting character. True to the source material, dignified, and novel. If Raimi goes camp witht his one, then why not just get Jim Carrey to talk with his ass cheeks while battling Billy Zane in a Doc Octopus costume.

  • Peter Parker (Score:3)

    by _blueboy ( 88578 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:37AM (#1385770) Homepage
    I have been hearing about this upcoming Spiderman movie for years now, and I have had numerous debates with my friends about who would play what characters. We generally agreed that Peter must be played by someone who is somewhat small, yet very muscular. And someone who could conceivably been a geek in high school, although this is pretty easy since I think every movie star was a geek in high school. Anyways we thought long and hard about it and decided that Brandon Lee would have been perfect, if he were still alive today (so what if he's not white!).

    I would like to put the question to /.ers: who would play the classic Spiderman characters, such as Peter, Mary Jane (Julia Roberts?), Flash, Gwen Stacy, Aunt May, etc., or the villians, such as Doc Oc, Vulture, Rhino, Electro, Mysterio?

    Personally I wouldn't mind Matt Damon as Peter Parker. He pulled off the geek in Good Will Hunting, and we all know he is TOUGH! Any other suggestions?

  • Hollywood : Lack of original ideas (Score:4)

    by Masem ( 1171 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:37AM (#1385771)
    Sure, by far, not a majority of movies that comes out of Hollywood is a remake of something prior, but it seems to me that there's much much more of these than in the 70s and early 80s. Remakes of comics, books, and previous movies have yet to give anything that is really worth remembering (Only a few come to mind: Maverick and Contact), and most are doomed to failure (Wild Wild West, Dudley Do-Right, Inspector Gadget)

    Maybe it's because baby boomers who lived on these shows want more of them, and since they have a good amount of control in Hollywood, they have the ability to get these movies produced. They might be trying to revitalize a show, but often than naught, they want a last hurrah for the show

    At least there have been films that have realized that such revitalizations are out there and they saturize on them, "Galaxy Quest" and "Mystery Men" come to mind). But personally, I'd rather see uniqueness in the theater with new characters and situations then trying to adopt something meant for the small screen to the large screen and failing miserably.

    Now, as to Spiderman, I'm not sure about this; Marvel's about to tank, and the Spiderman cartoon as shown on FOX is (from what others have told me) rather out of character for Spiderman in general. I'm sure that this will end up as a typical summer blockbuster with lots of action scenes and the like -- but what about a plot? What aspect of Spiderman can they focus on in 2hrs and produce a good movie? Tim Burton did this excellently with the first Batman movie, using Batman's long-time foe The Joker, but Spiderman really doesn't have an equivalent equal -- all his enemies like Green Goblin, Dr Oct, and Venom, are just foes, but not a constant one. I don't see how you can pick one foe and still have a good Spiderman movie.

    (However, this at least beats the rumors than Leo DeCaprio was going to play Parker/Spider, and with James Cameron directing).

  • This is News for Nerds! (Score:4)

    by GeorgeH ( 5469 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:34AM (#1385772) Homepage Journal
    I'm glad Rob posted this one. I imagine a good portion of us read comic books (the nice thing about the word 'read' is that its past- and present-tenses are spelled the same). Spiderman is well documented as a breakaway success because Parker was a average-joe, with girl problems, school problems, etc. He was someone comic book readers could connect with.

    This is news for nerds, and I hope more stuff like this gets posted. The fact that this almost wasn't posted is yet another reason to clamor for a open and moderated submission queue.
    --

  • Harry Knowles' site declines on a weekly basis as he continues to focus on how he can make money off his notoriety. He only has one real scooper anymore, and the scoop was confirmed in Daily Variety today - with a huge disclaimer.

    Raimi has been offered the Spiderman project. The problem is, he's all set to direct a Billy Bob Thornton script called The Gift with Keanu Reeves and Cate Blanchett. It's ready to roll. In order for Spiderman to happen, Paramount will have to let Raimi go as soon as photography wraps on the Gift to go shoot Spiderman, and then he'll edit them together - Sony has to have Spiderman out for summer 2001 for some arcane contractural reasons that have kept the project stalled for years. Read about it here [yahoo.com].

    Raimi is a perfect fit - imagine Darkman with a huge budget, and James Cameron worships the guy - and Cameron wrote the treatment for Spiderman that would be the greatest comic book adaptation ever made - and probably the best nerd movie ever made. Well Sony bought the Cameron treatment, and have since moved on to multiple drafts by different writers, but hopefully Raimi will stick to the Cameron one, which you can read here [prohosting.com]. And for anyone who hates Cameron vis a vis his success with Titanic, just read the damn thing. It's incredible.

    I find this is Slashdot worthy news - news for Nerds. Raimi is a huge nerd, with a huge nerd audience, and why does every bowel movement George Lucas make get reported here, especially when he just seems obsessed with crapping on the heads of his loyal audience?

  • Bruce Campbell will NOT be in the movie. (Score:5)

    by Skratch ( 39859 ) on Monday January 10, 2000 @08:39AM (#1385774) Homepage
    Taken straight off of www.bruce-campbell.com:

    Q: IS IT TRUE YOU'RE CAST AS THE LEAD IN THE "DOOM" AND "SPIDERMAN" AND "QUAKE" AND "SUPERMAN" AND "BATMAN" MOVIES?

    A: NO, BY GOLLY, I AM NOT "CAST AS THE LEAD" OR INVOLVED WITH EITHER THE "DOOM" OR "SPIDERMAN" OR "QUAKE" OR "SUPERMAN" OR "BATMAN" FLICKS. APPARENTLY, THE PRODUCERS CALLED ME, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE CALL WAITING...

    Hope this clears things up a bit.... Bruce Campbell rules.

Slashdot Top Deals

Parts that positively cannot be assembled in improper order will be.

Close