Sam Raimi's Spider-Man

Sam Raimi revealed in an interview for vulture.com why Spider-Man 4 never happened.

I have heard from people that the reason why Spider-Man 3 was so bad was because Raimi didn’t want to use Venom as the villain, and the studio made him. Therefore, he wasn’t very motivated to make a good film.

After Spider-Man 3, I was not sure if I would see another Spider-Man film from Raimi again and I’m curious if anybody thought the same.

At the time i didn't mind Spider-Man 3 but as i have gone back and re watched it a few times i am let down. I will always watch a super hero movie regardless. I knew Green Lantern would be bad but i watched it non the less.

I'll be honest, I am not a fan of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films at all. I disliked one and two and Spider-Man three was like a final validation of the movies I didn't like. I wouldn't be surprised if he was put under an editorial mandate like that with Venom and I sympathize, but the stuff he did with Sandman was arguably worse. Sandman killed Uncle Ben? By accident? And Raimi continued the irritating fashion of making his villain all redeemable, this time with a sick daughter or something.

I don't think the first Spider-Man movies did any of the characters justice. Peter Parker was portrayed as goofy and gormless instead of tragic, quick-witted and intelligent and Mary-Jane was nothing but a screaming damsel as opposed to her too-cool-for-school, competent comic book counterpart.

I know this post will get me banned from life in general, but I honestly found Spider-Man 3 to be the better of the trilogy. The humanity displayed, no matter the negativity surrounding the acting, I thought was honest for a Spider-Man story. Sure it doesn't feel like 616 Spider-Man but it was an adaption, which I thought worked.

On that note, I much preferred the mislabed Amazing Spider-Man (since it takes its cues from the Ultimate universe.) over Ramis trilogy, and am excited for any more that team produces.

Back to the original topic however, as I enjoyed the third, I honestly assumed they were going to do a fourth with Rami and would have loved to have seen his Vulture.

Carn Reynolds wrote:I know this post will get me banned from life in general, but I honestly found Spider-Man 3 to be the better of the trilogy. The humanity displayed, no matter the negativity surrounding the acting, I thought was honest for a Spider-Man story. Sure it doesn't feel like 616 Spider-Man but it was an adaption, which I thought worked.

On that note, I much preferred the mislabed Amazing Spider-Man (since it takes its cues from the Ultimate universe.) over Ramis trilogy, and am excited for any more that team produces.

Back to the original topic however, as I enjoyed the third, I honestly assumed they were going to do a fourth with Rami and would have loved to have seen his Vulture.

BANNED FROM LIFE!
Not really. I obviously disliked Spider-Man 3 (because I feel it offended the characters) but you raise an interesting point. As an adaptation, it's not so bad, but I think because everyone viewed it as THE spider-man story it gets a harsher judgement. I suppose superhero movies are judged by a different yardstick than random comic books are.

And for the record I'm a big fan of the Amazing Spider-man, despite it's flaws, can't wait for the sequel next May.