The issue of whether or not to reboot the series is made interesting by the first trilogy’s relative youth. The first movie was released in 2002 to enormous success both financially and critically. The second film followed two years later in 2004, and the final part of the trilogy was released just over two years ago. To add to the intrigue, had it not been for Raimi’s inability to rush out the fourth installment of the franchise, we would have seen it next year.

Sources have said that the reason Raimi couldn’t get the fourth installment of the movie out in time for it’s scheduled 2011 release was due to problems that he had with the script. Apparently those problems could not be worked through in a time frame that pleased both Raimi and Sony. As a result, Raimi and his Spider-Man cast have been removed from the future of the franchise.

All that has led us to the point where we get a reboot of the series instead of a continuation. But that still doesn’t really answer the initial question of whether or not a reboot is too soon. The problem is that the question has two sides to it. First, there is a question as to whether or not the franchise can financially support a reboot. Let’s be honest here, Hollywood would be tripping over itself to reboot every money making franchise it could if it could get away with what will ultimately become a ten year (the new Spider-Man is due out in 2012) turn around. But perhaps what is really important to us (unless you lay awake at night worrying about Sony’s head honchos and how they are going to make their next millions) is the second question. Does a series reboot offer anything new to the audience?

The Financial Issue

Indulge me for a moment while I address the first issue. Can the franchise support a reboot of the series? It’s quite easy to see that the franchise has been an overwhelming success for Sony. Domestically, the first three films ring currently ring in at #9, #13, and #18 on the All Time gross charts. Putting aside inflation for a moment, that means that only Spider-Man and Star Wars have three movies from the same franchise in the top 20. If you expand it out to the top 30, you also let the Lord of the Rings trilogy into the party. That’s pretty impressive company.

Obviously, additional movies worked out pretty well for the Star Wars franchise. Not only were all three of the prequel movies in the top 30 domestically, but they all ended up in the top 100 when adjusted for ticket inflation. I doubt many people would consider the choice to make more Star Wars movies a failure financially.

But when we speak about the Spider-Man movie for 2012, we aren’t talking about a prequel or a sequel. This makes it a lot harder to judge the potential success for the next set of movies. And we are also talking about a gap of only five years between the end of one incarnation, and the beginning of another. The closest comparison that I can come up with in this situation is Batman, which saw an eight year gap between the destruction and rebirth of the franchise. It’s pretty safe to say that everything worked out pretty well in that case.

Ultimately I think Batman offers the best lesson in rebooting a franchise. Fitting that it should also belong in the “comics on film” category. The answer to the financial success of the franchise lies in that lesson. The lesson involves the direction, integrity, and entertainment of the franchise. Ultimately, if Batman was relaunched and maintained the same feeling and direction, it would have flopped. But it was given a breath of fresh air that helped it not only survive, but reach incredible new heights.

So the best answer to the financial issue is this: If Sony can find an entertaining take that heads in a new direction for the series, it will continue to succeed financially. If they fail to accomplish that, then the Spider-Man franchise may be dead well before it reaches it’s sixth movie. With the hire of Marc Webb, it’s obvious that the franchise is headed in a different direction. However, it will be important to see how tight of a leash Sony keeps on Webb and Spider-Man. If Warner had limited Nolan’s vision of Batman Begins, where would that franchise be today?

What Does a Reboot Offer Us?

It’s interesting that the question of financial feasibility ultimately comes down to the direction of the new product. Because that’s exactly the issue that has the most effect on the audience. Stick too closely to the original movies and viewers will get a sense of “Been there, Done that”. Stray too far, and you have the risk of turning off your established fanbase.

Before I get too far into asking what the new movies have to offer those of us that are likely reading this article, I do have to point out one advantage that this franchise has with a reboot happening so quickly. Spider-Man is a movie franchise that has succeeded almost entirely because of it’s appeal to younger viewers in addition to the older viewers. The younger viewers are what give the franchise a unique opportunity to succeed with a franchise reboot. It will have been 10 years between the beginnings of the Spider-Man stories. That’s an entire new batch of kids to rope into the adventures of a wise crackin’, web slingin’, young super hero. And if children these days are anything like I was as a child, (I have my doubts, thanks to “quality” entertainment available in this age) then they will not care about the time between movies. They will just be completely excited about new stories. And for some of them, this time it will be completely new.

But obviously, it’s not the children that we are interested in for this article. What can these movies offer us, the readers, that a sequel could not have given us? Or perhaps, what can it offer us that makes me care that the franchise wasn’t just killed off?

First, it’s important to remember that Spider-Man is a comic book. Reboots and different takes are built into it’s very nature. And when you choose to look at it from that direction, (and choose to completely ignore the dollar signs in the eyes of the people making that decision) I believe that it makes the decision a bit more exciting.

Secondly, we have to take a look at the direction that the original trilogy was headed in. From the beginning, it was clear that Raimi’s take was a borderline slapstick action take on the franchise. Which was fine, and it obviously worked out well for everyone involved. However, that style of movie always runs the risk of turning people off. The first two movies garnered solid critical response. They fetched a 90% and 94% freshness rating from Rotten Tomatoes, which judges the average score from reviewers. Meanwhile, the third movie’s rating plummeted to 63%. While that’s still not a terrible score by RT’s standards, it was a far cry from the first two scores.

I would say that the third Spider-Man movie was still a far cry from a complete failure. It had a long way to go to get to the level of something like Batman & Robin. But it was certainly headed in that direction, with the numerous villains included, and the forever increasing number of people aware of Spider-Man’s identity.

With a reboot, what we are offered is a different direction. Given the decision to hire Marc Webb, I hope that Sony has made the decision to allow a more character-centric approach on the story. Less cheese, more drama, similar action. Get the balance just right, and what we are given could easily surpass the original trilogy.

It’s already been mentioned several times around the internet that the new-look Peter Parker could be centered around his High School life. High School was almost an afterthought in the original movie. As if the writers said, “Alright look, we are just going to have to address this issue, so let’s get it over with quickly”.  Arguably, that’s the exact opposite of what Spider-Man should be like. It’s quite possible that with the new reboot, that could be rectified.

Another issue that Marc Webb’s Spider-Man has the opportunity to “fix” deals with casting choices. I ultimately had very little to complain about in the casting of the characters in Sam Raimi’s take. However, the choices weren’t exactly all that inspiring, either. The casting in Webb’s big movie, 500 Days of Summer, was pretty much fantastic and spot on. If that is what we can get from Spider-Man, everyone should be pretty pleased with the end result. However, some of the choices may seem odd to begin with. I for one would love to see less big names, and more pure talent.

To go along with a better take on the characters, the other thing that I hope we can get from a reboot is better pacing. I already mentioned the original trilogy’s take on High School. But they continued to fast forward through the shining moments of the Spider-Man story. The relationship and eventual marriage to Mary Jane. Peter’s growth as a hero. It’s all presented on fast forward in the original movies. A reboot has the luxury of slowing things down, and exploring them better.

In Conclusion

If I had my choice, this movie would be centered primarily around Peter Parker’s world, and his growth as a character. Mary Jane may not even make an appearance in the first movie. I wouldn’t have Peter leave high school until at least the third movie. Everything in the movies would be focused solely around character moments. Even the villains would be grounded better in reality ala Nolan’s Batman villains.

That’s the gift that the reboot offers us. The idea of a different trip through the same world. If that is the direction the new trilogy takes, then we are in for a treat. If Sony insists on repeating the tried formula, then it may be harder to find a reason to enjoy the movies. But even so, it isn’t as if each new comic series re-invents the formula. Sometimes you just have to enjoy the story for what it is.

What would it take for you to enjoy a Spider-Man reboot? A re-definition? More of the same? Or something that hasn’t been mentioned?

Questions will now be raised as to how this will effect the future of all Marvel comics, movies, and video games, amongst other potential properties such as television shows. This now makes Marvel part of one of the biggest media conglomerations around, competing on a similar level to the Warner Bros. owned DC Comics. There is no doubt that this comes with some inherent bonuses. The ability for product placement in movies and TV shows could be a huge advertisement stream for the comic giant, for instant.

However, it’s clear that the DC Comics/Warner Bros. merger of the past hasn’t always worked out in the favor of DC Comics. Being restricted to only having your movies produced by Warner Bros. has in recent years led the DC movies to be of a lower quality level than the Marvel properties. For every Batman Begins and The Dark Knight that the company has released, there have been equally troubling decisions such as Catwoman and the Joel Schumacher Batman films. In addition, it has been at times puzzling as to why Warner Bros. has failed to take advantage of the Super Hero movie boom of sorts that we had been witnessing in recent years.

However, for better or worse, this move is the future of Marvel Comics. You certainly have to give credit to Disney for recognizing good opertunities to grow their company. In 1995, Disney picked up a majority stake in ABC and ESPN. Disney followed up in 2006 with the purchase of Pixar Studios. Amongst a handful of other properties, Disney is certainly creating a strong family of companies to compete in the modern media market. Time will tell which of the two parties, if not both, will benefit from this arrangement. But it’s needless to say that the game has changed.

From IGN:

A new film version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer could be set to hit the big screen, in a reboot of the franchise for a new generation.

However, chances are that character creator Joss Whedon won’t be involved, with the new film having no connection to the 1992 film or 1997 TV show of the same name aside from the fact that it revolves around a young vampire slayer.

Check the article out.

In additon, they are reporting that Universal has picked up the movie rights to the late Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time series. The series ran for 12 books, of which Jordan wrote 11 of them himself. He ended up passing away before finishing the 12th book. However, his wife picked someone to finish the series, who then used recorded notes from Robert to finish the story. The movie deal allows Universal to pull from all 12 books. NBC previously held the rights to create a mini-series on the first book.

Click Here to read their full article. Oh, and they passed along this piece of conceptual art that Latino Review got their hands on from the movie. Turns out this scene from the book actually made it into the current version of the script.

He smiled and said that he’d love to play the character and that Captain America has always been his favorite comic book superhero. But, notion did not seem to take him by surprise and he ended up admitting there had been discussions with his agents and meetings on that very issue.

The First Avenger: Captain America is currently scheduled for a May 6, 2011 release.

Keep reading for a spoiler-filled review

 A SPOILER FILLED Movie Review By Freak_Zombie

  
When the movie Batman Begins ended with a little hint of what was to come. Nobody knew how much better the sequel would be, though. I am now curious as to how the rest of the year will end, since nothing will be able to top it.

The first movie was very dark and realistic, yet it seemed to me that it lacked something. There were two villains, yet it was mostly a story about Bruce Wayne coming into the role of Batman. Most of the plot revolved around his past and not much time was spent on the villains. When the movie wrapped up with the Joker’s card, everyone was excited to see what could possibly be done to top this one.

When it was announced that Heath Ledger was cast to play The Joker, the first thing that came to most people’s minds were if he could live up to Jack Nicholson’s performance. Until last night, I was convinced that nobody but Jack could ever be The Joker. The first scene with Heath Ledger totally made me take that back. He was not playing a role in a movie, he was The Joker. Watch any other movie with him in it and you will agree with me that this was not Heath Ledger, it was a totally different person. During filming, he kept a journal as the character so he could play it better. I would be scared to read this journal just for how creepy and crazy he was.

We got to see more back story on the villains this time around and the story was much more rich because of it. The Joker’s story keeps coming up, yet we are not given the whole story all at once, just a little at a time. Just when you thought he was going to do something, we were thrown for a loop. There were a lot of scenes where everyone in the audience reacted because we didn’t see something coming.

The humor in this movie was very dark and at times, a little bit “oh my god.” There was not a single time when The Joker laughed that I, myself, didn’t at least chuckle. There are a few times when everyone in the theater couldn’t help but laugh when they knew they shouldn’t. This was how I imagined The Joker should be.

It was surprising that half the movie was all about Harvey Dent: White Knight. We were promised that Batman could retire as Harvey Dent was cleaning up the city. For anyone completely out of the loop, or the earth for that matter, it was no surprise that he was going to turn bad. I thought he was just going to ride this movie out and be the villain in the next movie. I didn’t see it coming when he actually became Two Face, and then was killed in the end. This was just a side story I felt that led to Batman not being able to ever stop.

I won’t lie, there were a few times during the movie that I shed a tear. Aaron Eckhart could not have played the scene when Rachel died any better. I still get a little choked up just thinking about it. The writing here was so good that I totally bought his reasoning to become a villain.

Hairs on the back of my neck stood at attention a quite a few points last night. I can’t imagine another movie this year topping this one. My only lingering question has to do with the death of Heath Ledger. If he had lived, was he going to be in the next movie? I can’t help but feel robbed after watching this movie. Had he lived on, his career would only go up from here. Nobody can ever top his performance as The Joker and frankly, I hope nobody ever tries again.

I personally hope that all actors get the deals that they deserve. But work stoppage hurts everyone involved. So I am glad to see that this happened in order to make the liklihood a little smaller. The SAG can still call for a strike vote, but losing the support of a majority of it’s AFTRA members could be a barometer for how things would turn out in that regard. Continue reading this post for more details.

Actors union ratifies deal with Hollywood studios

By RYAN NAKASHIMA

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists said Tuesday its members ratified a three-year contract with Hollywood studios, but a rival actors union that campaigned against the deal said it wasn’t ready to settle.

AFTRA said 62 percent of voting members approved its prime-time TV contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, a deal that will go in effect retroactive to July 1.

Federation President Roberta Reardon blamed the larger Screen Actors Guild for confusing its members with an "unprecedented disinformation campaign" that jeopardized the deal. A previous AFTRA contract covering soaps and talk shows received 93 percent support.

The guild claimed that approval for the deal would undermine its own talks, which are ongoing.

SAG leaders "must be held accountable for this ridiculous waste of members’ dues money, including my own, in attacking another union’s contract," Reardon told reporters Tuesday. "In the face of that kind of attack, the percentage we ratified this by is really good."

Read the entire article here

It’s 8.58am right now, my guys at CAA get into the office in about seven hours and my call will be waiting for them to talk about this. I want to revamp Superman like Hillary wants thin ankles. Revamping this franchise is what I as given fingers for and so, invited or not, I’m putting my plan together now. I’ve been asked to work on half a dozen screenplays lately, but this is the only one I have ever truly wanted.

Anyway, my treatment is being polished as we type. Wish me luck. I want to do that Superman movie we all want to see.

A few days later, Warner Bros. expressed that they had no interest in hiring a Marvel comic exclusive writer for a DC film, especially one based on such a well known DC character.

Now, Millar has told the Daily Record that he is taking his quest to be involved in a Superman relaunch a step farther:

But Mark’s big dream is making a Superman movie.

"But fingers crossed it could work out, that would be my lifetime’s dream."

Millar clarified on his messageboard later:

"That Superman news is interesting, isn’t it? In the interests of clarity (because I’m sure this will be picked up somewhere) a very well known American action director heard about my love of Superman, approached my and asked me to team up with he and his producer to make a pitch for this. We’ve been talking for several weeks now and, if this is going to happen, we’ll know by Christmas. He has huge pull at WB so fingers crossed. But this is nothing more than a huge US name pulling me into his fold and making me part of a package."

Well Mark, I’m rooting for you. Here’s hoping…

Wanted, the film loosely based on the graphic novel by Mark Millar and JG Jones, opened this weekend. What did you guys think? Let us know in the comments section below.

Pixar’s newest film WALL-E opened in theaters this weekend. What did you guys think? Let us know in the comments section below.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not the biggest fan of the novels. While I believe the story is a classic and very gripping, the author’s writing style has annoyed me from the very beginning. So with the movies, I anticipated a wonderful movie centering around the engaging story with none of the problems I had from the novels.

I can now say that without a doubt, that I have forgotten about all the problems of the books. I found a beautiful world with interesting characters, and even more beautiful locations and scenes. Unfortunately, I also found a whole new slew of new problems. Which experience was more fulfilling? I’m not quite sure that is a simple answer.

My problems from the novels generally consisted of weak characters and even weaker dialog. Pullman has this weird fascination of describing dialog, rather than just writing it. As a result, if it is not concerning a main character, there is usually very little depth to the characters. Finally, there is an obsession writing about stuff, and saving the explanation for much later in the books. Know what a daemon is? You won’t, for quite some time. Dust? You should know by about book 3 what the deal is.

The movies do away with most of these problems. Daemon’s are described immediately, as is the presence of multiple worlds. Dialog is pretty solid, and the characters make the transition to the screen wonderfully. Lyra’s Dakota Blue Richards is magnificent in the role of the spirited young girl. I was a bit worried about this, given how much spunk the girl has in the novels. But she pulls it off with a bit of a flare that I have to applaud, given her complete lack of acting experience.

Daemons are animal companions that every human in Lyra’s world has. To give a personality and believability to talking animals is not an easy task. However, this movie does it magnificently. Most of the animals (Excluding the bizarre and creepy golden monkey) are all so well done, that it’s hard to notice they aren’t real. Even while they talk, you could find yourself amazed at how believable they are.

So, where is it that the movie’s problems come in at? The major issue comes from pacing. All novel based movies must face the problem when they transition to the big screen. Harry Potter handled it by cutting several scenes out, and by occasionally changing a scene. The Lord of the Rings handled it by trimming scenes, and sticking the nearly full versions into special edition DVDs.

The Golden Compass decided that it wanted to take nearly all the scenes from the book, and put them in the movie. Except, they decided to re-arrange them, tweak the details, and compact them so densely together, that it’s impossible to see scene transitions. Time does not pass in this movie. The movie could have literally taken place during the period of an hour.

The movie is so insistent on making sure every event in the novel takes place in the movie, that they never have time to stop and take a breath. In several instances, the movie flows immediately into a circumstance in which there needed to be time between. Maybe a reaction to an event, for instance that could not have been instant. Because of this, fans of the books are left complaining while the people that haven’t read the books are left confused.

The other half of the pacing issue, is the re-arranging of scenes. Imagine the scenes of the books cut out, put on a table, and mixed up. Obviously the director felt there was a reason for each change that was made. But I can’t for the life of me figure them out. But the real problem here, is that things never really seem to fit together the same afterwards. Threads hang loose, pacing feels even more rushed, and the whole thing comes across looking messy and even more confusing.

Finally, the other big issue with the movie comes from the controversial content. Apparently, they decided they were fine with the material when they licensed the books. But somewhere in between, they got scared. Every instance of the presence of a church in the story has been removed. The "bad guy" in the movie has been made into a corporation of sorts. Again, it isn’t exactly the fact that the movie was changed from the book. It is just the fact that it doesn’t feel like it works. The new explanation isn’t as fleshed out as the true story.

About an hour into the movie, the events become grander in scheme. You are no longer learning about the story, and you start seeing it instead. Since the events are so much larger in scale, there is less of a transition between scenes. At this point, I was able to begin enjoying the movie much more. I could finally enjoy the beauty, the cast, and the story.

However, just as you start to get engrossed in the movie, its over. Early. Yes, they completely altered the point at which the movie ends. And for what reason? Because it feels better? No way, it feels horrible. Totally forced. There is absolutely no reason that I can think of to end the movie when they did. The audience misses the big reveal, they get no pay off, and is left in this horrible cliff hanger that didn’t previously exist. The first words from my mouth as the credits began rolling was, "how random". And that, in essence describes the majority of the movie. Random, and yes, once again confusing.

There is a lot to love in this movie. It has quite possibly the most beautifully designed sets and props I have ever seen. Lyra is pulled off wonderfully. And when its all said and done, the shadow of the story still exists. But I think that in order for this movie to be really enjoyed, everyone needs to have read the book as well. It seems a bit odd to say that, since the changes are a bit cringe worthy. But the truth is, the value of this movie lies in seeing it in visual form. That is what makes things worth while for fans of the books.

All in all, I give the movie a 7/10. It’s not a bad movie, it’s just a bad translation. Its a mess that alienates fans and non-fans alike. Its magnificently beautiful mess, but a mess none the less. Do you agree? Disagree? Share your opinions with us by commenting below.