How to use this Page

While we’re surely in for months and months of speculation about the new Marvel/Sony partnership re: Spider-Man, The Hollywood Reporter, who initially broke the big news last night, revealed a few new details regarding what the future of Marvel’s premiere superhero looks like.

Here are the pertinent details of note:

– It’s not really a surprise, but Amazing Spider-Man series director Marc Webb is out, and Sony, who has final casting say over who gets to play Spider-Man, is looking for an actor that is “much younger” than the 31 year old Andrew Garfield. I liked Garfield fine, even if his Peter was a bit too “cool” for my taste, but Webb wasn’t a great fit for the franchise. Sadly, the results bore that out, and some really bad scripts didn’t help.

– The two studios exchanged no actual cash in the deal, but Sony will retain 60% of the ticket sales, while Marvel hangs onto its merchandising rights. The latter, according to an unnamed source, is cited as the motivating factor for this entire deal on Sony’s side.

– Avi Arad, long-time Spider-Man producer, along with Matt Tolmach have been bumped into Executive Producer roles and will have “no real say in the creative direction of the franchise”. I can hear your sighs of relief.

The report also goes on to speculate about how this is likely the first step of Marvel getting the character back fully, which is quite possible, and even that Disney may purchase Sony outright should it ever become available. I’d initially label that as speculation run a bit too rampant, but this is Disney we’re talking about. I’ll never doubt their purchasing power again.

There’s also no word about Drew Goddard‘s status, he who was supposed to direct Sinister Six and left Daredevil to do so. The Wall Street Journal (via ComingSoon) was reporting that Sinister Six will simply be delayed, but given the status quo shift and Kevin Feige‘s creative involvement in the new Spider-Man series, that seems unlikely.

The trailer for David Fincher’s The Social Network was genius. It featured a choir in the background, singing Radiohead’s song “Creep” over images of Facebook, the website. Without the song (and Jesse Eisenberg’s face), I would have groaned. A movie about social networking? Get real. But the trailer did have the song. It did feature Eisenberg (who I’ve loved since Zombieland). Plus, I knew it was directed by David Fincher (who I’ve loved since Fight Club). So what could go wrong?

Evidently, a lot.

I don’t mean to speak badly of the film. The Social Network, as an entity, was irrevocably interesting. It follows the evolution of Harvard sophomore Mark Zuckerberg, as he becomes the founder of Facebook and the youngest billionaire in history. It follows him through a bad breakup, a brilliant idea, lawsuit after lawsuit, and finally, regret over being an a$$hole. The film features those brilliant Fincher camera angles. It features outstanding performances from Eisenberg (who was nominated for the Best Actor Academy Award) and Andrew Garfield (who’s in line to be the next Peter Parker/Spiderman). And like I said, the story is excellent. The dialogue is awe-inspiring.

Jesse Eisengerg as Mark Zuckerberg.

There’s an expression, honed by screenwriter Blake Snyder. It’s known as a “save the cat” moment. Generally speaking, the “save the cat” moment is a moment early on in a movie, where the hero does something noble, making the audience like him and root for him for the rest of the story. It is a vital part of introducing a hero. Arguably, there are no “heroes” in The Social Network. I don’t have a problem with this. My problem is that scene one of The Social Network makes me physically and psychologically disgusted by the character of Mark Zuckerberg, and yet, we are expected to spend the next two hours with the guy. He comes off as egotistical, entitled, and chauvinistic. If I was the girl talking to him in scene one, I would have punched him in the face.

I have a similar complex regarding Evita. Evita, the musical and Madonna film, features beautiful music. However, Eva Peron is a person whose portrayal in the musical/movie offends me. She meant a lot to Argentina, but at her basest, she was a power-hungry, gold-digger. Why does she deserve to be immortalized?

"Best" friends ...?

There’s a new Spider-Man franchise underway and it stars young Brit actor Andrew Garfield as the webslinger. But who is this man and will he be able to fill the tights and heavy eyewear of Tobey Maguire and Nicholas Hammond before him?

Doing the rounds to promote his new film NEVER LET ME GO, he opened up for the first time about playing Peter Parker, and even if it’s just his press agent telling him what to say, as is so often the case these days, Garfield has sold it beautifully:

I have been waiting for this phone call for 24 years, for someone to call me up and say, “Hey, we want you to pretend to be a character that you’ve always wanted to be all your life, and we’re going to do it with cool cameras and cool effects and you’re going to feel like you’re swinging through New York City. Do you want to do that?” [laughs] “Let me just consult with my seven-year old self and see what he thinks…” So my seven-year-old self started screaming in my soul and saying, This is what we’ve been waiting for. Like every young boy who feels stronger on the inside than they look on the outside, any skinny boy basically who wishes their muscles matched their sense of injustice, God, it’s just the stuff that dreams are made of, for sure. It’s a true fucking honor to be part of this symbol that I actually think is a very important symbol and it’s meant a great deal to me, and it continues to mean something to people. So yeah, I feel like I’ve been preparing for it for a while. Ever since Halloween when I was four years old and I wore my first Spider-Man costume.