1. Well let's face it, even blooming 'McG' could have done the 3rd installment better, so I can't say I'm all that bothered about Raimi returning.

Could do with a fresh cast as well anyway, those three films continually retred a lot of ground so hopefully a new cast would inspire a completely fresh approach.

Posted at 12:15PM on Mar 19th 2008 by RP

2. interesting. I'm not among the Raimi-o-philes out there (SO glad he's not doing the Hobbit) so I'd be fine with seeing him go. I liked the first 2 spidey films (and nobody can argue the financial success) but Spidey 3 was pure garbage. A fresh director is exactly what is NEEDED I think to keep Spidey's future intact. Of course...the director would have to be decent. If we're talking Michael Bay or something all bets are off.

Your point about the cast leaving if Raimi left is well-taken, however. I don't recall where they are contractually, but I seem to remember that they had signed on for 3...so things are probably up in the air.

So I guess I'll vote "yes" there is a successful future for Spidey...or there could be. Given the financial success of the first 3 years, I would expect that Marvel will figure out a way to make it happen. If they make a movie, even a bad one, it will be financially successful. Creatively? Who knows, there is too much up in the air to tell.

random aside: I giggled a little at your characterization of the Superman sequel as a "sequel they really can't f*ck up." Based on what? Many filmgoers felt that Returns was pretty f*cked up so, while I'm hopeful that Singer will return to form now that the characters are well-established, the Superman sequel is hardly a lock.

Posted at 12:27PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Moo

3. I took the "f*ck up" comment to mean that they can't mess it up or else that franchise is dead, so they have to hit a home run with that sequel or else thats it.

As for the cast not returning...WHO CARES? Kirsten Dunst was mediocre at best, and Tobey Maguire spent the majority of all three movies either grinning like an idiot or crying like a baby. Spoiler- James Franco's character is dead, so that pretty much leaves Aunt May as a returning character. So if they have to totally redo the cast I would have no problem with that. And I think that everyone can agree that after the train wreck that was Spidey-3 that they definitely need to get some fresh blood behind the camera as well.

Posted at 12:51PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Kevin

4. I say they go the way of The Hulk - remake the third film completely and forget the first take ever happened.

Posted at 12:51PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Nathaniel

5. Kevin- ok that makes sense then.

Nathaniel- if it will purge the memory of Spidy 3 from my brain, I absolutely agree!

Posted at 12:57PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Moo

6. In terms of there being a "future" for Spider-Man? Absolutely. At least for the next film. No matter who directs it or stars in it, this is a franchise that will still make $250+ million. The real question is can they make another good movie? If they bring out another Spider-Man 3 debacle, I feel that moviegoers will stop paying.

Posted at 12:59PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Adam

7. I would like to see it be set aside for a few years so everyone can wash the taste of 3 out of their mouths, then give it to a new team to come up with a different take on the character. Somewhat like WB did with Batman, though it doesn't necessarily have to mean a "more realistic" take; just a different one.

Posted at 1:19PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Sam G.

8. I could definitely get behind that idea, Sam.

Posted at 1:34PM on Mar 19th 2008 by Moo

9. I'll agree with that as well. Wait until I'm in Hollywood then hand the franchise to me =P

Here's what the new franchise would need though:
- new cast
- new director
- slightly darker tone, as little camp as possible

I'd love to see them take the Gwen Stacy story from the comics and put that on film. Her: *snap* Me: *nice*

Posted at 3:05PM on Mar 19th 2008 by The Addict

10. The first one was good. The second one was great. The third one was awful.

It can have a future, but Raimi need not be a part of it. I wouldn't mind giving him another chance, but after 3 I wouldn't mind him leaving, either.

The cast can be nixed. Kirsten Dunst was absolutely terrible (I could never figure out why so many men were fighting over her.) Toby isn't terrible, but he's limited. He does innocent and naive well. Spiderman, by 4, should no longer be either of those. I still think bringing in Jake Ghyllenhal would work well to show a slightly darker, more sarcastic Spiderman, but honestly, do we need actor continuity? Only Aunt May seemed to genuinely own the character, the rest seemed to be renting them.

Posted at 8:42AM on Mar 20th 2008 by MosquitoControl

11. I thought that if you eliminated the John Travolta "stroll" and the humorless/useless piano playing, then the rest was actually reasonably good. If you want to continue, then replace Toby and Kirsten and the director with someone else. So that they appear more mature, someone suggest that Kirsten Dunst be replaced by Maggie Gyllenhall.She is a really good actress to play the role.

Posted at 1:52PM on Mar 27th 2008 by stephen martin