variety.com



Columbia Pictures has pulled the plug on "Spider Man 4" and will instead make a younger, cheaper installment of the superhero franchise.
Star Tobey Maguire and helmer Sam Raimi, who were both set for big paydays for "Spider Man 4," will no longer be involved in the franchise as Col moves forward with a high school-aged Peter Parker pic, which will bow theatrically in summer 2012.

Last week, Columbia confirmed that "Spider Man 4," which was scheduled to begin lensing in February and be released in 2011, was on hold indefinitely due to script problems. Columbia needs to continue actively developing "Spider Man" films or else the property will revert back to Disney/Marvel.

The studio has long prepared for the contingency of "Spider Man 4" falling apart and already has a James Vanderbilt-penned script about a teenage Peter Parker ready to shoot. That film, which has no director or star attached, is now in preproduction. The new version will likely cost far less than a "Spider Man 4" given that Columbia, which has a mandate not to give away more than 25% of the gross, won't be paying the high salaries or gross points to returning talent.

The new untitled Spider Man film will center on the webslinging teen as he grapples with both contemporary human problems and amazing super-human crises. Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin are producing.

Studio co-chairman Amy Pascal said Col has "a rare opportunity to make history once again with this franchise." She added, "We're very excited about the creative possibilities that come from returning to Peter's roots."

Raimi, who disagreed with the studio about the direction "Spider Man 4" should move, has expressed no hard feelings. "While we were looking forward to doing a fourth one together, the studio and Marvel have a unique opportunity to take the franchise in a new direction, and I know they will do a terrific job," he said.

The studio plans to hire a new helmer and a star in the coming weeks

I think I would have liked to see Raimi do one more picture. After all he did make one of the best super-hero movies of all time. The studio meddled way to much with the third movie and it showed. This could be good, but who knows?

I hate actor roulette.  In my mind, Tobey Maguire is Spiderman.  I'll wait and see.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
I hate actor roulette.  In my mind, Tobey Maguire is Spiderman.  I'll wait and see.

I'm 100% with you on that one.

Quoting Vittra:

Quote:
I really enjoyed the first two Spidermans but after the most recent one, I have to wonder if this a good decision after all. Although I was anxiously waiting to see if Raimi and Co. could redeem themselves, I'll now just have to anxiously wait to see if this will be horrible or not.

I do hope that it isn't another origin story though. I think it's too recent to have another "how Peter Parker became Spiderman" story. Maybe treat it much like they did The Incredible Hulk (Edward Norton).

I'm all for seeing a good movie with Venom in it, so if this allows them to do that, I'm all for it! 

Quoting FilmAlba:

Quote:

Im voting for James Macavoy as Peter Parker 

That's actually not a bad idea, I think he'd fit pretty well! 

My first vote actually goes to Anton Yelchin. He would be more than perfect and even though he has only a couple of minor roles so far the way he brings characters to life is of a very high quality.

what a joke. just more proof that the studio execs are totally out of touch with the viewing public and fans, and concerned about one thing and one thing only - $$$ 

Word is Columbia wrecked Spider-Man 3 with their meddling and were all set to wreck this one, too. I'd say it's for the best, but whatever we eventually get will probably be no better.

Quoting Darxon:

Quote:
IIRC, the origins of how Peter Parker became Spiderman are included in the first movie, and about as extensive as they ever were in the comic books. So I don't see an actual need for a detailed recap of those events in a new movie.

Furthermore, regarding the storyline of Spiderman, there is really not much room between Peter getting bitten and the death of his uncle, especially with regards to fighting super villains. That all happened after his uncle's death and was also covered in the first movie.

I never really saw Peter Parker as something else than a college student who - while in college - got bitten by a radioactive spider.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but during high-school, Peter Parker was nothing but Peter Parker, so IMO this whole idea brought up by CP stinks and will do the franchise no good at all, as it involves massive story changes and steering away from the comic books.

Consider yourself corrected.

Peter was still in high school when he was bitten by the spider. And was actually in High School for quite a few years of the comic run. Additionally, while his uncle was killed by the person he let escape at the wrestling it wasn't until a few days later (and it was during a break in).

The first super villain he fought was actually the Chameleon, and that was while he was in high school.

Not to say they need to retell the origin, but there is plenty of story they can do with Peter in High School. That is also not to say that I agree with a reboot.

-Agrare