Sam Raimi Spider-Man Movies: An Obituary

By ScottyR37 Tuesday January 12, 2010

Its the end of an era, folks. Sam Raimi is no longer the man behind the Spider.

The days leading up to the 2002 film adaptation were filled with optimism that I would finally see my favorite super-hero come to life. I didn’t have much to worry about, considering that the man who made Evil Dead was gonna bring the Wall Crawler to life.

Sure, there was the Power Ranger style helmet for the Green Goblin, but Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborne was GOLD! Cliff Robertson as Uncle Ben was perfect. Rosemary Harris as Aunt May was better than I could have hoped for. JK Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson? The best. I had a fairly unhealthy crush on Kirsten Dunst at the time (sorry) and her Mary Jane was exactly how I wanted her to be. Then there was Tobey Maguire. I thought he pulled off Peter Parker as the science-nerd-turns-super-hero exactly as I had read in the comics. It was the comic book movie I was born to pay ten bucks for.

In 2004, on June 30th at 12:01 a.m. I dragged ten of my friends to see the midnight showing of Spider-Man 2 at the local multiplex. I could not have been more excited for that movie. Doctor Octopus had always been my favorite Spidey villain, and I wanted to share the epic battle between ol’ web head and Doc Ock with everyone that I knew. In hindsight, it is the second best comic book movie ever (the best being The Dark Knight, but at that time nothing could beat Spidey 2). Molina was better than I could ever had hoped for. James Franco finally had something awesome to do and, as many of my friends commented, he was the best-dressed villain ever. Mary Jane was even hotter, the special effects were amazing and it was even more reverent to the source material than the original. It is a ‘desert island’ movie for me. It is the best Marvel movie ever, followed shortly by Iron Man and X2. The bar had been set for sating the geek in me.

Sam Raimi had successfully directed two installments of the journey of Peter Parker from attaining his powers through to coming to terms with his great power and his great responsibility. Pete had gone from skinny teen to super-hero with a Broadway star girlfriend. The future was bright and ominous. Go get ‘em, Tiger.

Then came Spider-Man 3. Oh, Spider-Man 3. I was certain it would be awesome. I had only one misgiving: Venom.

Children, Venom is a visually dynamic and cool looking super villain—for a comic book. In a movie, he is a one-dimensional monster who has less of a character arc than Arnold in the first Terminator. Raimi didn’t like the character and Todd McFarlane, the co-creator of the Bizarro Spider-Man said that Venom would be a boring screen villain. But the studio wanted action figures, and attention-deficit-disorder teens wanted a super violent and malicious 90s bad guy to tangle with—in a Spider-Man movie franchise that embodied the 60s/70s comic book roots which paid more attention to the character of Peter Parker than the flash of super-hero life.

When Sandman was announced as a villain, it fit in the Raimi Spider-Man pantheon. Sandman is top 5 in terms of kick-ass Spidey villains. I don’t say that as a person who only knows 5 Spider-Man villains. Had they announced Shocker, I would have cried ‘LAME!’, but Sandman? Bring it. Raimi had announced Sandman as the villain in Spidey 3 and I was totally on board. Then came the kids. Then came the suits.

So, the movie came out and I saw it and I lost my job due to my excesses in the life of drink’n’geek. Do I blame losing a job on Spider-Man 3? Yes. Is that a valid reason to lose a job? No. However, I am no longer alone in losing a job because of Spider-Man 3.

Jan 11 2010. Spider-Man 4 No More. With John Malkovich in talks to play the Vulture, Dylan Baker to take the final steps towards becoming the Lizard, and Anne Hathaway to play Black Cat or some nonsense character called the Vultress, the franchise has come to a grinding halt. Sony has decided to ‘reboot’ it. The critical failure of Spider-Man 3 had Raimi re-think his role as director and the need to be true to Spider-Man as a character, as a continuing story, and as something more than an action figure. He has bowed out as director of the new Spider-Man movie. The familiar cast will also be absent from the new interpretation of the Spider-Man movie world.

I will gladly eat my words when another kick-ass Spider-Man movie hits the big screen. Just like James Bond before him, Spider-Man is not a character that is defined by the actor who plays him. The rub is that every Bond has been measured against Connery. The performance of Peter Parker will now be held up to Maguire and in terms of direction, Spider-Man had a custodian in Sam Raimi who was true to the origins of the character. It was the influence of a marketing juggernaut that derailed his vision in the third installment. A redemptive fourth episode was in the works and a return to form for the franchise could have been. From this day forward, it will only be a topic of speculation.

Story For Spider-Man Reboot Already Exists (screenrant.com)
Spidey 4 dead? Raimi and Maguire out? Studio going reboot route? Nikke Finke seems to think so. (aintitcool.com)
Spider-Man 4 Cancelled! [Updated] (screenrant.com)
Spider-Man loses Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire (guardian.co.uk)
Five Things We’ll Miss About Sam Raimi & Tobey Maguire’s ‘Spider-Man’ Franchise (splashpage.mtv.com)

Spread the Word:

Similar Geekitude

SHLOCKTOBLOGGER, Part 4
I remember the first time I watched “Slither.” It was before I’d really grasped how much fun horror movies can be, outside of a Sam Raimi m...
A Brief History of Comics – Bronze Age and Dark Age
Overview: Golden age (pre-1950s), Silver Age (50s-70s), Bronze Age (70s to 80s), Dark Age (late 80s early 90s). That leads us to the Modern ...
“Drag Me to Hell” Takes Me to Heaven
...Gory, Disgusting, Hilarious, Heaven. On a night when I was expecting to see one the most highly anticipated family movies of the year, U...

http://flimgeeks.com reznik360

For what it's worth, Spider-Man 2 is the *perfect* comic-book movie. That is all. ;)
Joelex100

Okay the Sandman is not a complex character. He is just a petty thug who becomes a sand monster, I am so sick of these snobby spiderman fans who act like everything from the sixties was fucking gold. Venom is as complex a character as doc ock if not more so in the comics doc ock is just a scientist who goes mad after an accident venom there is at least his desire to protect innocent people coupled with his hatred of spiderman that make him a complex character. You clearly have never read venom comics as you would know he was not just a snarling monster that was never the point of him. The only thing wrong with Venom was Brocks reason for hating spiderman thats it nothing else and really if raimi was such a good director he would have been able to change that. Instead he gave him an even less interesting reason for hating spidey and made him into nothing but a snarling monster this great director you go on about turned a character who in the comic books though wanting to kill spidey never hurt aunt may or mary jane because he could never bring himself to hurt an innocent into a character who literally say's “I like being bad it makes me happy” As for the first two films being great to be honest I thought they were lame. Filled with chessy garbage “aunt may is that an angel” Spidey 2 was even worse. I really don't know why everyone raves about doc ock in that film, he was boring. Talk about lack of humanity being a good guy who goes bad dosen't make you a really complex human character in fact its relatively simple he one minute was a nice guy then opps something goes wrong with his tenticles and the tenticles control him and make him into a supervillain. lazy boring actually less than other versions of doc ock like the 90's cartoons where we see him descend into madness on his own, without the tenticles. The rest of pidey 2 was boring just crap about mary jane being an actress I much preffered Tim Burtons Batman and Batman Returns. Again the Penquin in that film was complex but he wasn't a nice guy at all. I mean seriously you like the dark knight and you go on about Venom being an uncomplex character what would you call the joker in the dark knight who's origin is not even explained and just enjoys killing people. All of these spidey fans who look down on later spidey comics are just snobs they have decided as ridiculous as alot of 60's spiderman villains are just to think of them as these wonderful complex characters compared to the rest. I mean really this marvellous version of the joker in the dark knight I fail to see how he is any different from Carnage both are anarchists who want to kill people to prove that society should have no laws, I might add Carnage did that first though obviously The Joker as a charcter was first but in the comic books the joker never killed because he was an agent of chaos he just did it for his own reasons like in his first appearance he did to prove he was the greatest crook in town. Yet everyone loves the Joker in the Dark Knight and think of Carnage as the worst villain ever and as for these assholes who go on about the symbiote as being too ridiculous please a guy made of sand is more ridiculous. Seriously stop treating people who like venom and carnage as morons. I actually preffered Spidey 3 to the first two not because of venom but because I felt it did have a good story was more enjoyable and less up its on arse than the previous two and personally i Think people just decided to say it was bad because it was the third film. I mean really aren't you tired of just saying the same obvious crap all the time its always “first one great second one best third one bad” before its even out. Same with the X men film series X men three was a good film but all the critics just decided to hate it because it was the third one same with Blade and so many other franchises. Its just as well the audience at least dosen't always follow these stupid patterns.