Sam Raimi on Spider-Man 3 and Spider-Man 4

News Simon Brew 6 Mar 2013 - 06:40
Sam Raimi

Sam Raimi had Anne Hathaway in mind for his aborted Spider-Man 4, it's been revealed...

This weekend, Sam Raimi has a brand new blockbuster in cinemas, and predictions are that Oz The Great And Powerful will be a sizeable hit. If history had turned out a bit differently though, he may still have been working on the Spider-Man movies.

Raimi, of course, was all set to make Spider-Man 4, before the project was canned and Sony opted for a full reboot, with what became The Amazing Spider-Man. Raimi, in an interview with Vulture, has insisted though that it was all pretty friendly.

"It really was the most amicable and undramatic of breakups", Raimi said. "It was simply that we had a deadline and I couldn't get the story to work on a level that I wanted it to work. I was very unhappy with Spider-Man 3, and I wanted to make Spider-Man 4 to end on a very high note, the best Spider-Man of them all".

When Raimi realised he couldn't hit the deadline - Spider-Man 4 had been announced for a 2011 release, after all - he went to Sony and suggested the studio pressed ahead with its reboot instead. "So we left on the best of terms, both of us trying to do the best thing for fans, the good name of Spider-Man, and Sony Studios", said Raimi.

But he did have one more tease for Spider-Man, confirming that he had Anne Hathway in mind for the role of Black Cat/Felicia Hardy. "I didn't see Batman yet", Raimi told Vulture, "but I hear she's great in it. I'm not surprised. I loved what she was doing with the auditions for Spider-Man 4".

Our own interview with Sam Raimi will be live tomorrow. You can read his chat with Vulture right here.

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

I think Sam Raimi regrets bowing to pressure from Marvel and producers to add both Gwen Stacy and Venom to 'Spider-Man 3' when he wanted the villains to be only Sandman and Harry Osborne... and it turned out his first instincts were correct, less would have been more in that instance, although in saying that, I actually really like that film, yes there's too many characters and too much plot going on, but shut my mouth if it isn't a really good film that is pretty mature for a big summer CBM, and although I think it was a darn good way to end the trilogy, having Mary Jane be held captive in the climax for the THIRD film in a row was probably the biggest blunder, but other than that, I'm cool with it... just a pity Sam Raimi doesn't think so.

The rest of the entire audience who saw the film didn't think so either. You're on your own here mate...

Sandman should NEVER have been in that film. It did not need it.

Venom should have stayed as the main character. They needed to have more depth to it, all seemed very rushed. That was the issue with the film.

Lets bung all these characters in quick and hope no one notices how bad the film is.

Hathaway? I'm now glad we didn't get Spidey 4.

Raimi's SM4 would've been even more tragic and awful than the 3rd installment. Let's face it, SM3 is the one of the biggest comic book movie turds out there next to Catwoman, Batman & Robin, and Superman 4.

Raimi can direct, but he is seriously lacking as writer, at least so far as the last 20 years go. Nothing he could've done would've washed the taste of SM3 away, it was Phantom Menace bad.

The 1st spider man movie was actually good but that's about it although the 2nd had some highs

Is it just me or are there more bad comic book movies than good?
Not counting the old low budgets like ff and captain America and Spider-Man.
Anyway you're right, cuz from what I remember Vulture was next. If there are 2 villains that died way too easily it's green goblin and venom. No sandman. Or topher grace. A good venom would have been I don't know, benicio del toro? Then upon defeat a leg less iraqi veteran flash Thompson, joe manglianello from Spider-Man 1, could've donned he now the gay symbiote, this having legs before Sam Worthington can say "blue tentacle fetish"

It's the ongoing problem with escalation that comic book movies seemed to have for a while there (also see Batman and Robin). The Avengers experience has hopefully taught Hollywood that you need time for the characters to breathe indepently, rather than straight away shoving them into the same film...

I love your comments. You can never be sure where they'll end up... :-D

"both of us trying to do the best thing for fans" yeah, and my name is Buck Rogers.

Fine, don't care about majority opinion, I like 'Spider-Man 3' flawed though it is and I'll argue it's merits to anyone... because a film doesn't match the giddy heights of it's predecessors doesn't make it a total write-off, some audience members have become too nit-picking, downright anal, and just too opinionated for their own good, they're only movies after all, just relax...

If I was any more relaxed, I'd be dead. I'm not nitpicking I just think it was a terrible film - even as a standalone film and not part of a series it was shockingly bad and just cringe worthy at times. I really didn't enjoy it. Raimi's better than this movie as he has repeatedly shown with a great back catalogue of work.

Sandman was in before Venom. Grant Curtis has a great book on the making of Spidey 3, and it goes right back to story concept and casting. Venom was shoehorned in

Hehe if only the cool kids at school thought so. I have hairy sticky palms, so why can't I climb walls? Se la vd

Lol, bet you love all those shitty Marvel films Disney's been putting out.

Sponsored Links