Doctor Strange 2
 

Not confirmed until now, Feige says it's happening:

https://www.comicbookmovie.com/docto...happen-a161752

Surprises nobody, though. :tgrin:

Hopefully Rachel McAdams will actually have something interesting to do in the sequel. She was criminally underused.

Agreed. I'm a big fan of hers.

I remember reading somewhere that Nightmare could potentially be the big bad for the sequel. Fingers crossed that it happens.

Scott Derrickson himself said that was what he would probably do for a sequel.

Scott Derrickson posted this on Instagram with a picture of Comic Strange

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4o17el..._state_control


scottderrickson“Not my will, but thine be done...” See you in September.

Sam Raimi is directing the Sequel

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/d...mi-1203475309/

HOLY ****. I hope Bruce Campbell gets a role in this

Whoa... that's huge.

Sorry to do this, but I need Tobey's Spider-Man in the multiverse.

I love Raimi btw. And he seems like such a sweet person.

Being a director on a Marvel movie is the most meaningless thing ever. It's not like their able to inject their own style into it. So yeah, I can't wait until Raimi becomes a Disney Yes-Man.

The world has seen enough of Tobey's "Constantly on the brink of tears" Spider-Man. Those movies are alright but they really whiffed on him and Dunst. Both just the f*cking worst. People only hold them up so high because they were The First and people subconsciously hold onto a bias in cases such as that.

Peter's a sad sack but hardly the pouty, lip-quivering loser he was in those movies. I have a very hard time watching those movies anymore because Peter and MJ were so horribly miscast and they're the bulk of what you see. Blech. Just blech.

I agree that Raimi's probably a nice guy, though. I care nothing about Dr. Strange so I doubt I'll see it, but at least he's getting work. Good for him.

Sam Raimi directing one would drag me to the theatre and see my first Marvel movie in a movie theatre after his Spider-man 3.

Eh, I'm the One Idiot holding out hope for a proper Evil Dead/Army Of Darkness big-screen finale. :lol:

There's a lot of guys I like but I'm not much of a "director fanboy". Like some people are Tim Burton fanatics and watch and fall in love with everything he does, or James Cameron, or whoever, and I'm generally not like that. I don't make it a point to see EVERYTHING a person does, be it an actor or director or whatever. I learned a long time ago that just because I like what someone did with X, that doesn't necessarily mean I'll like what they do with Y.

If that makes any sense. Like I like a lot of Raimi's stuff but that wouldn't be enough to make me drop coin on a MCU flick. As Cure said, it's highly unlikely it would be "his" movie; if anything they might do a fast-zoom "wheelbarrow camera" shot or two but that's all he'd be allowed to inject of himself into the project. I hate the MCU "formula" and don't care at all about the character, so it would take a lot to get me interested.

Thus, I'm just happy to see Sam get a paycheck in a post-Evil Dead world. Guy's gotta eat, after all.

I'm actually kind of annoyed because the more Dr. Strange movies they make only means we're farther away from ever getting a Dr. Fate movie. Fate >>> Strange, anyone who says otherwise is quite simply wrong.

I love Tobey's Spider-Man in Raimi's hands. He is able to present Tobey/Peter in a way that really makes me feel for the guy and root for him. It's for me to decide why I hold it in high regard and it isn't nostalgia. Although I am nostalgic as hell for those movies, let's not go down the "you only like it because..." route. Let people like what they like for their own reasons.

I'm not holding my breath but I'm pretty sure Kevin worked a bit on that trilogy so he might be for it.

What would really be interesting is if Raimi asks to take a crack at Tom Holland, who is due for an MCU guest appearance.

Go Dr. Strange though.

You're entitled to your opinion. I personally cannot stand a whiny pantywaist protagonist. Especially not for three movies in a row. I never rooted for him once, I just wanted him to stop the whining and get on with things. The action scenes were pretty good, though. Anything out-of-costume is a huge Hard Pass for me. Dude looks exactly like KD Lang in those movies. No Bueno.

Garfield was a much better Peter Parker in a regrettably half-baked series. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. :trazz:

I also didn't invent the situation of people developing a bias towards their first experience with something; I forget what it's called but it's a legitimate and commonly-cited psychological phenomenon. I first heard it described in reference to Peter Pan; "Whichever version of Peter Pan a person first sees, that's forever 'Their' Peter Pan no matter what". But it obviously happens with just about any fictional character, and you see it all the time. I don't invent these things, I just Observe And Report.

I'm also never surprised when people swear the phenomenon has nothing to do with them, though. That's another quirk people have; every individual swears that they're the outlier in something that commonly affects just about everyone, but if that were the case then psychology wouldn't even be a thing. You see it everywhere, like if you say, "Science says most people hate surprises," a statistically true and provable fact, but inevitably every single person in the room will jump to yell "NOT me!" whether it's true of them or not. People just really hate it when anyone points out how easy they are to figure out. But the truth is, most people are hardwired a certain way and aren't at all difficult to read. Everyone says they're the outlier but that simply can't be true in most cases.

To me, the only thing that makes sense about so many people still being fixated on a Spider-Man who even their kid sister could beat up, is that's the first Spider-Man movie they saw and are thus not going to grade the film or the actors objectively. People can like it if they want, though, that's their business. I personally can't see how Tobey gets on anyone's list for any other reason, though. And I can only call what I see.
----------------

It would be interesting to see Raimi direct Holland as Spider-Man, but mostly just for laughs. I can't stand Holland either. Dude looks like he's 10.

Alright Wait are you actually arguing that science proves that the first version you experience of something is the version you always like best? And that’s your reasoning for all modern Raimi Spider-Man fans?
That this is scientifically backed and you don’t understand people who disagree and pretend it’s not true?

But this doesn’t apply to you? You are outside of the phenomena and prefer Garfield or Holland..even though you saw Maguire/Raimi first..... like... millions of others?

You just said you don’t understand people who think they are outside of this sort of phenomenon, while at the same time saying you don’t fall under the Peter Pan bias phenomenon that draws people towards Raimi/Maguire... despite it being a proven truth.


That... doesn’t add up lol.

No, I'm saying that science says that's how MOST people are wired whether they want to be that way or not, that it's a very real thing that happens and every single person swears that it isn't Them who's being described by it. And that it perfectly explains why so many people swear Tobey was a great Spider-Man when in truth he really wasn't.

People can like his portrayal for their own reasons, but again, objectively, he wasn't very good. If not for the "First Version People See = Favorite Version" phenomenon, he simply wouldn't be so acclaimed. He neither portrayed the character in a way that was true to the comics, nor ever stopped being an impotent whiner in general. He was incredibly unlikable, although still light years ahead of Dunst. If those same movies came out today, people would be screaming about his lack of agency and how annoying he was.

Again, it happens all the time. People swear Chris Reeve IS Superman, even though those movies are mostly-terrible and at least two or three guys since then have done a much better job. People swear Keaton was the quintessential Batman even though aside from some very stiff fight scenes and an intense glare, he barely said or did anything of note and completely played second-fiddle to his villains. Nostalgia is a very powerful factor in these things.

"You never forget your first", as they say. BUT, just like the first time you have sex is objectively never the best sex you'll ever have, the first guy to play "______-Man" is almost never the best, he's just The Best to someone who first saw them through a child's eyes. Things evolve.

There's nothing wrong with it, by the way, I just prefer when people own their biases and I don't like when people dismiss it as a factor. It's absolutely a factor.

The only way I'm "different" is that I try very hard NOT to be biased and remain objective in all things. I can acknowledge that, at one time, I was just as prone to it as anyone else, but once I decided to actually view things through a neutral lens, it turned out that a lot of the things I loved unconditionally simply weren't THAT great, and I can admit that, whereas most people can't or choose not to. They think they're somehow betraying their fandom of the thing they like if they admit that someone else did a better job playing "____-Man" than the one they loved when they were 6.

It's just like any other kind of "programming" that all humans are inherently wired with. If a person really wants to, they can shake it off, but understanding that it is in fact A Thing is step one. We all have biases, but it's up to the individual whether they want to remain influenced by those biases or if they want to be an objective and critical thinker. I, personally, opt for the latter.

One and done. ;)

Don’t relegate people’s opinion to their specific wiring which you are, in rare manner,
exempt from, man. It’s not a good look.

You want to turn this into a lesson about bias, but I’m no stranger to the concept. I just like that version of Peter.

Try to accept that people will have different preferences and tastes that may not always line up with yours. It’s fair to disagree and I have no problem with that, but you also have to allow people to speak on their own behalf. Speak on what you dislike about it but don’t tell others what they do like about it based on some article you remember reading about phenomenons. Tacky.

"First to market" is a thing. It's not always 100%, but if you can be the first to do it, the arena is yours and the bias is usually yours to lose.

After the apparent "series finale" of Ash vs. Evil Dead I'm honeslty not even sure I want that anymore. I used to. But from where things were left? Eh. Too nutty.

Oh, sh*t, I totally forgot that I bought the series on Blu-ray and haven't watched past Season 1 yet! :teek: Good lookin' out, brah.

Season 1 wasn't the continuation I personally would have scripted, but it was alright. I'm kinda just a big mark for Ash. :lol:

Cylons was entertained, but then Cylons got bored.

So, as an argument against everyone being susceptible to nostalgia... how many forum-goers here had Fred Wolf TMNT as their first Ninja Turtles? And how many of those same forum-goers now despise Fred Wolf TMNT?

In case you couldn't see, gentlemen, I raised my hand both times.

I absolutely agree Nostalgia and First to Market are true things to reckon with. But it's not always going to hold up. I've always personally gone with the theory that people have a certain amount of Nostalgia Immunity once they grow up and move beyond some things (e.g. Fred Wolf TMNT), but that those same people ALSO can't kick their nostalgia for other things.



As far as Doctor Strange... Sam Raimi seems like an interesting choice. The first Doctor Strange movie bored me terribly except for the final 10 minutes or so, when time travel became a critical element. Everything before that was Magical Iron Man Redux.

All this said, I'm actually curious to know Aqua's reasons for liking the Raimi Spiderman movies.

I've not watched them (CinemaSins reviews don't count), but I feel like from what I've seen, Tobey does come off pretty uninspiring in a lot of places.

Thoughts, Aqua?

First, I respect your thoughts on Tobey. And to bring it back to center, the idea that excited me was the merging of Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire. I'm the type of person who thinks these products are definitely the sum of their parts.

So without Raimi, I might not love Tobey as Spider-Man or vice versa. But together, i think they craft a wonderful interpretation of Peter, that I don't get from the Garfield or Holland films.

The thing about the Raimi/Maguire team-up is that I actually feel deep sympathy for the character they've crafted. The first 30 minutes of Spider-Man 2 are glorious because it's our opportunity to walk a mile in Peter's shoes and my god are they covered in ****. It's written in the script of course, but it's the direction and the acting that sell it.
This guy is a sadsack and you believe it. I crave that contrast of Peter's crap life with his cathartic release as a superhero above the streets. People don't always give credit, but Tobey's demeanor as Spider-Man was certainly livelier than it was when he is simply Peter Parker. I love seeing that transition and contrast.
And I also just love his personality traits. He is earnest and shy. Until, again, he puts on the mask and begins to live a little. Enjoy himself. He starts cracking jokes that are corny and stupid, but it's not the content of the joke that matters, it's the fact that this shy dude is now feeling on top of the world. That's Spider-Man. To me, anyway.

Tom Holland is likeable, charming, but have I ever felt true sympathy for his version of the character? No. Not really. The last scene in Infinity War was pretty good actually, but not enough. Both Tom Holland and Andrew Garfield's versions are way too secure in their personal lives for my tastes. It robs me of that strong sense of sympathy or connection. Raimi/Tobey's Peter was an "everyman". Tom's Peter is an Avenger with a strong social circle from practically day 1. Where is the cathartic release?
Same with Andrew Garfield - where is the cathartic release? I think Garfield absolutely nails the wise-cracking Spider-Man, but it all means so much less, when he is just as cool and confident in his everyday life as Peter.

Look, all of this comes down to more than just "Tobey Maguire", which is what I've tried to emphasize by stating "Raimi/Maguire", because, again, these things are the sum of their parts, as we all know.

So, yeah, I'd love to see where that version of Peter ended up, if the multiverse were to touch on it. He's my favorite Spider-Man. For the record, SM3 is a stinker, imo. Same with SM1 to an extent.
Spider-Man 2 just nailed it for me though. If you're a fan of Spider-Man, you owe it to yourself to at least watch the train sequence from SM-2 (my favorite comicbook film scene ever). I'd say watch the whole damn movie, but obviously mileage will vary.

Thanks for asking.

I tried the Garfield Amazing Spiderman, and turned it off 20 minutes into it. Garfield was way too smug and self-assured to be Spiderman. I thought the whole point of Peter Parker was to be a nerd with few friends and zero cool.

I'll eventually give the Raimi Spidey films a try, if only because my kiddo likes Spiderman and will eventually beg me to watch them. Could be awhile though. :tlol:

Yeah, Garfield's Spider-Man and Peter Parker was an assh**e. Plus that first Amazing Spider-Man was pure drivel... wall to wall "let's set up other movies!" stuff. I didn't even bother seeing Amazing Spider-Man 2 but I wasn't the least bit surprised to hear it was more/worse bile.

The thing I hate the most about Amazing Spider-Man is that the guy who killed Uncle Ben is never really dealt with, as I recall. Sloppy, sloppy sh*t. They left so many things hanging for sequels, I was like, "I guess that'll come up again next time," but nope. Didn't he just keep beating up people he THOUGHT was the killer but never actually caught the right guy? Or am I misremembering? It's been like two years since I saw it.

Season 2 probably has flat out the grossest scene in a movie or TV show I've seen anywhere... ever, and I say that in the best possible way. I think it's like episode 2. That said, season 2's finale really sucked. Season 3 was a pretty good improvement... but I really hate that series finale. It's basically the alternate, crappier bad ending from Army of Darkness.

No thanks!

Pound for pound I think I liked the first season best, personally. It all becomes a lot more interesting once you become more attached to the supporting cast.

Many people are questioning why they would bring in an auteur directior like Raimi for a film this deep in production.

It’s a good question. I have a theory - Marvel has developed a routine of establishing relationships with their directors and trying to build somewhat of a brain trust among them. This may be their way of bringing Raimi into the fold before giving him control over something else they have in mind for him. As well as a bit of a “tit for tat” exchange. “Finish this movie for us and you’re in the club, baby.”

That could easily be Dr. Strange 3, but imagine if it’s something else. Marvel Zombies? Miles Morales? Ghost Rider?

Maguire's Spider-Man in Dr. Strange 2 would punch a ticket for me. I could not care less about Dr. Strange, but if my Spider-Man is given proper closure it would be great for an older storyline that got caught up in a web of production politics. The thing about it though is it would take away from the central character Dr. Strange as played by Benedict Cumberbatch and people like me while giving Disney my money for closing out something else I love I am not there to see the character the actual focus is on. I see it both ways.
https://www.ign.com/articles/how-sam...trange-2?amp=1

Say what you want about the new Star Wars trilogy, there is a thrill there to seeing beloved characters return after so long that I am envious of. That "Chewie, we're home" line must have been orgasmic for hardcore fans.

Seeing this version of Peter would probably strike that chord for me. I can't deny being nostalgic about the character. TMNT 1990 returning would probably be more comparable but I'd settle for this.

Maybe when I saw the trailer. In the movie it's mostly undercut by, "they're back to being f***king smugglers?"

Hmm, okay, maybe the creative decisions didn't pay off. I can't really speak to that. You're right that I'm mostly speaking to the trailer, which I found thrilling, as even a casual fan.

Same thing as when you see Old Spock doing the "live long and prosper" thing in the 2009 Star Trek trailer. Same result, too.

I'll be curious to see what Sam Raimi does with Dr Strange.

And in his Spider-Man 2, who noticed the Dr Strange reference?

A Tobey Maguire cameo would be fun.

New release date thanks to the Rona Nov. 5, 2021

https://variety.com/2020/film/box-of...us-1203550173/

That pesky Rona.

What reference? I'm scratching my head and can't recall this.

When Peter brings in photos of Dr. Octopus a sequence like with the Green Goblin in the first film occurred which has Jameson name the villain that will be accepted by the media and the villain himself.

Any chance of McQuire making an appearance or will this speculation just lead to a tease and let down like the Abrams Spider-Man mini-series?