Monday 23 April 2007
Monday
Tobey Maguire says he will happily do another Spider-man movie. This is, of course, great. He is very good at the role, and the casting of him in the first film transformed the whole notion of 'action' hero, virtually ending the careers of men like Schwarzenegger and Stallone (although they were already on their way out). But is it good for Maguire? Before Spider-man I think he was on a really interesting career path. Since then, what has he done? Sea Biscuit and The Good German. Seriously, that's it. The more Spider-man films he does the less chance he has of escaping that role, despite him being a very versatile actor. Anyway, did you know Spider-man 3 (could've done better with that title) was part-written by Sam Raimi's older brother? Ah, I love nepotism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I did think that Spiderman 2 could have been an opportunity for a great title, it could have been Spidermen. This title suddenly points at a film where Toby Maguire realises that he isn't the only one with this power, and he must fight the bad Spiderman - oh wait isn't that the plot of Spiderman 3?
So you would have had Spiderman, Spidermen and then where would you go?
I think there is only one logical choice: Spiderlady. Kirsten Dundst turns out to be a Spiderlady, and they are faced with the ultimate dilemma, which one of them is left holding the baby when the other is out crime-fighting. Should they knock the whole thing on the head so that their spiderchild doesn't grow up with the incredible burden of being a spider person, etc. There's a great comic scene when junior throws it's first web and...
or maybe not.
Web-spinning babies aside, the only thing I could think of was that they go very comic book. The first one should've been 'Spider-man and the Green Goblin', then 'Spider-man and Doc Ock', and now 'Spider-man and the Sandman'. Or, in fact, the second one was also sometimes called 'Spider-man No More' which is quite good.
Post a Comment