Sam Raimi Opens Up About Spider-Man, Past and Present

[AristotleP]

Writer/director Sam Raimi is traveling the world right now (he'll be in Cannes tomorrow), talking to press about his newest throwback to classic horror, Drag Me to Hell. But of course, most of the press are going to focus on Spider-Man 4, of which he has no major updates on. While there is some news on it, like that it will start shooting in February of 2010, the most interesting story from Raimi this week comes from Hero Complex. LA Times' Geoff Boucher talks with Raimi about Spider-Man, but focuses more on the past than the future, with Raimi reflecting a bit on how he could improve and why he made the choices he did.

"I love Peter Parker. I've always loved the Spider-Man comics, and I feel like I still know more about the character that I think I can bring to the screen - and perhaps make it great if I do it right," Raimi says. "It's the same reason I keep reading the Spider-Man comic books. I'm really enamored with the character and now I feel like I have a history with him." Raimi did dedicate six years of his life - from 2001 to 2007 - bringing the beloved web slinger to the big screen. We all thought that not only was Raimi done directing Spider-Man, but the franchise was finished too after Spider-Man 3, but that's obviously not the case.

I know that a lot of people really didn't like Spider-Man 3, so if given the chance to go back and change it, what would he change? "What would I have done differently? I would have done everything differently, every single shot. I think in every picture that I've ever made. Everything that I've done torments me. I really would like another chance except I'd be too embarrassed to ever really try to do them again and no one would want to see the same movie just done differently." Well, he did do that with Evil Dead II didn't he? But anyway, I think that's a standard response for any director, but still interesting to hear from Raimi.

So why come back for Spider-Man 4? Why spend so many more years with a franchise that he's already explored thoroughly? "I'd like to really make a great picture with him and bring the character to life at a level of detail that I've never realized before. It's almost like I have a desire to do something I've been trying to do right and haven't yet been able to," Raimi admits. So essentially, he's trying again until he gets it right. "I want to make the best [Spider-Man movie] of the bunch and I've always been touched by Peter Parker in a way that I've never been able to describe on film, even though I've got a great actor performing it."

[Sheridan Passell]

Vague. "I want to make it better." Sounds like he's out of ideas to me. He was tired making Spider-Man 3. Must want the money for another swimming pool.

[David Hawk]

Yeah he doesn't sound particularly enthusiastic about it, i want to hear the Raimi of Spidey1 talking and that picture makes him look like he hasn't slept in 5 years.

[T.ROSS]

Yeah he doest seem very excited to me either..maybe a little worried. I hope they spend some time on the plot, Spiderman 3 was just cramed, honestly that guy for the 70s show as venom....lame decision, they didnt put too much thought into picking an actor to play the role..

[Sheridan Passell]

Nice to see you back T.Ross.
Crammed is the right word. I still quite enjoyed it and thought the first action scene with the new Goblin zipping through alleyways was awesome. Also liked their fight in the Goblin mansion, it was well staged. I can see what they were trying to do with the guy from That 70's Show, he was supposed to mirror Parker in the same way Venom is a lot like Spider-Man, so he's a weedy kid, but the part was soo underwritten and ridiculous (Praying in church? Come on...). They took two interesting villains that could easily have spanned two movies, and used them up, so now they're left with the poor cousins of the villain world (Vulture, Rhino etc) and that's why names like Morbius are coming up.

Personally I'd like to see Mysterio played by Bruce Campbell. He deserves it.

[Eilis Mernagh]

Bruce Campbell would be great. The third movie had about four villains if I remember right - Venom, Sandman, Harry as The Green Goblin and Spiderman's inner psyche or something like that!

The most criminal thing in the movie, though, was Tobey Maguire's attempts at dancing. I was watching through my fingers and I still shudder at it now...

[Sheridan Passell]

I was disappointed walking into The Dark Knight that there wasn't one song and dance number, and Luke didn't even tapdance when he met the Emperor in Return Of The Jedi. Give the fans what they want.

[T.ROSS]

...nice to be back...


Yeah Bruce Campbell deserves a larger role in one of these Spiderman movies, he was the usher in one the films...maybe the 2nd one?

[Sheridan Passell]

Bruce Campbell has been in all the Spider-Man movies. He was the wrestling announcer in the first one, the usher in the second one, and the French restaurant manager in the third.

[T.ROSS]

I remember now....thanks for reminding me...I think Bruce Campbell is awesome!

[dnwilliams]

um, dancing genre characters are the shiz. i can't be the only one who enjoyed this:



as for bruce campbell, he named spider-man, defeated spider-man and teamed up with spider-man. that's the most significant role in the franchise this side of uncle ben!

spidey 3 isn't half as bad as people make out. it didn't do venom justice and had a nonsensical ending for sandman (peter let's him go?!) but otherwise i liked it. that eddie brock church scene was straight out of the comics, so no complaints there from me.

i think it's safe to place bets on morbius and the lizard for the next movie. maybe the black cat.