In Case you Care about Kirsten Dunst’s Opinions on the Spidey Reboot, Here it is

Read between the lines and I think you can sense that Kirsten Dunst is not the least bit pleased that they’re rebooting the “Spider-Man” franchise a scant, what, decade after she, Tobey Maguire, and Sam Raimi started it with the first one? After all, hasn’t it only been three years since they did the last one? Now the studio is rebooting it with an all-new cast, returning the characters to their high school roots (something that only took up the first act of the first movie), and no one from the original has been even offered a chance to come back even if they wanted to. That’s gotta be like getting slapped in the face, especially after all the years you put into it.

Speaking to Hero Complex while out promoting a movie that no one will see called something or rather, Dunst gave some thoughts about the impending reboot. On not coming back for a fourth time:

I mean, everyone was coming back, and they were casting a villain, I knew it wasn’t ready to go, but I knew they were working on it. And they decided not to, so — you know what, it was only sad because we didn’t know the last one was going to be our last. So we didn’t have that extra little ‘This is the last time, guys.’ We didn’t get to have that grieving. It was a little like, ‘Oh, we’re not doing it, bummer.’

On the new cast of Andrew Garfield (Spider-Man) and Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy):

They have a lot to live up to. I do really like Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield. I know that Emma’s playing Gwen Stacy, but I wonder what story they’re gonna tell, because it wasn’t that long ago — we’re not, like, old people. That’s why I’d be nervous. They’re gonna tell the story, I guess, from the beginning again — but in a different way. But it wasn’t that long ago that we told that story. So the pressure’s on again a little bit in that way. Yeah, they’re in a funny position. But, hey, I’m sure they’re gonna work it out.

Honestly, I don’t know what she’s talking about. Is there really all that much pressure on Marc Webb’s Spidey reboot? After Raimi’s bloated, meandering, repetitive third movie, I’m not sure there’s a whole lot of places the franchise can go but up.

Oh well, Kirsten. We’ll always have the rain-soaked kiss.



About Nix

View all Posts

Editor/Writer at BeyondHollywood.com. Likes: long walks on the beach and Kevin Costner post-apocalyptic movies. Dislikes: 3D, shaky cam, and shaky cam in 3D. Got a site issue? Wanna submit Movie/TV news? Or to email me in regards to anything on the site, you can do so at nix (at) beyondhollywood.com.

Cool Stories From Zergnet

  • The Strongest There Is

    I think the pressure is on. Basically, its restarting a comic book film. If you start at the beginning and everything that came before is null and void, then you do have to prove that you can do the spider man movie Again. If it comes out and its absolute crap, they will have to reboot again, because you cant go back to what you already put in the trash. Now it has to be a hit instead of residual fans and more money on top of an already successful franchise. Oh, ande Raimi didn’t botch the 3rd film. The fans did. He never wanted to do Venom but everyone kept crying about venom and the studio heads and producers made him cram too much into the movie. We can all sit on our high horse and judge him saying ” I wouldn’t of given in” but we all know, only 3 or 5 directors have the clout to shut the big wigs up. Chris Nolan, Spielberg and lucas (basically because they are the producers at this point), and James Cameron. Everyone else gets told what to do.

    • http://www.beyondhollywood.com/ Nix

      I don’t buy the “they forced me to put Venom in it” defense. If that was the case, he should have gotten rid of either Sandman or the Green Goblin. Instead, he just decided to cram everyone in there. Way too many villains in one movie. And he essentially repeated himself with Shemping/Emo Peter Parker. That was just embarrassing.

      On the topic of pressure for the reboot, the film is being made WELL below the budget of what Raimi was asking for the fourth movie. So from a financial/commercial standpoint, there is no real pressure to blow up at the box office from the first week out. Creatively? That’s another story.

    • http://www.beyondhollywood.com/ Nix

      I don’t buy the “they forced me to put Venom in it” defense. If that was the case, he should have gotten rid of either Sandman or the Green Goblin. Instead, he just decided to cram everyone in there. Way too many villains in one movie. And he essentially repeated himself with Shemping/Emo Peter Parker. That was just embarrassing.

      On the topic of pressure for the reboot, the film is being made WELL below the budget of what Raimi was asking for the fourth movie. So from a financial/commercial standpoint, there is no real pressure to blow up at the box office from the first week out. Creatively? That’s another story.

  • blackfox

    No matter how your feelings on the third one are, there still is the off chance that a reboot could still under perform similar to the Hulk reboot. Sometimes “we” the fans can sense a reboot as a sad attempt to replay our disbelief over the first. So hopefully the budget is low low and can recoup and exceed unlike the Hulk.

    • Arthur

      Hulk’s (2003) domestic box office results is $132,177,234 and The Incredible Hulk’s (2008) domestic box office results are $134,806,913. “Hulk” cost $137 million to make and “The Incredible Hulk” cost $150 million to make. “The Incredible Hulk” made more money but it also cost more to make. Both films should really be considered failures by domestic box office results but when you factor in world wide sales, they both were successful. Personally, I love the scene in “Hulk” when he battles the military and tears the tanks to shreds. But as far as the “Spider-man” reboot, I think it is much too soon for it, but then again Marvel films do sell; look at Iron Man and X-Men sales. Superhero films in general sell. But when is enough enough with Batman 3, another Superman film, Thor, Avengers, the Spider-man reboot, the X-Men reboot and the talked about Fantastic Four reboot all coming down the pipe. What’s next; a Blade reboot? Or maybe a Plastic Man trilogy. Geez. Personally, I want to see very well done Herculoids and Space Ghost films. Time for something different.

      • http://www.beyondhollywood.com/ Nix

        Actually, if you adjust both films’ box office take to consider inflation, Ang Lee’s version comes out on top every time in terms of box office.

    • Arthur

      Sick thing is that the Fantastic Four films were more successful domestically than the Hulk films were via making more money than they cost to make. And the Fantastic Four films suck. Something to think about.

    • Arthur

      Sick thing is that the Fantastic Four films were more successful domestically than the Hulk films were via making more money than they cost to make. And the Fantastic Four films suck. Something to think about.

  • OK Records

    It’s too soon for a reboot. If you don’t have a strong cast to do a fourth film, and can’t get a script good enough to continue what you’ve already built on, then leave it alone and move on. We didn’ need a fourth Spider-Man film, and we certainly don’t need a reboot so soon.

    The problem with Hollywood these days is that when they make a crappy film, they simply take a step back and reboot it. This is a horrible approach. For starters, it’s a slap in the face of the fans who did actually enjoy your initial movie, and it’s an insult to the intelligence of everyone else. You can’t just screw up a movie beyond repair and simply start over. It doesn’t work that way.

    Right now the studio hopes you’ll see this movie because it’s called Spider-Man. They don’t have a strong cast, and they must be out of ideas, because they’re starting over.

  • The Strongest There Is

    Your points are definitely valid Nix but from what i understand of the whole situation. The film was already 75 percent done before he was forced to make the changes. Which is why I have this stance on Raimi and 3. It explains everything. How and why venom looked like he was part of a reshoot and cut into the movie with the end being the only cohesive part of the film. (Cohesive being used lightly). I will forever be the only person to like the Jazz scene in Spidey 3. I thought it was excellent. It was a very toned down way of showing the extreme of how the suit was affecting his mental state and overly aggressive mood swings. Anyway, As I said, very good points. I just remember the press release that Raimi did when he was first told to put venom in the movie and he was very unhappy about it.

  • Brian

    I really dislike everything about this reboot…except MAYBE John Slattery playing JJ if that happens. I think the pressure thing is on, more than people will admit to because if they even have one scene that’s remotely similar to one of the original Spidey films then shit will hit the fan, people will rage and call it the same movie with different people and blah blah.
    I enjoyed Raimi’s Spiderman, the third maybe not quite as much, and the second still being my favorite one. I have a lot of good memories linked to his vision of Spiderman.

    The thing is, I think I speak for a lot of people when I say move on! Comic book movies are so overdone so cheesy, hardly any of them are worth seeing, especially Marvel’s catalog. I think Sony are idiots for starting this movie. While I agree with why Raimi walked, I don’t think they should have said “Ok let’s find someone else to do the exact same thing”. Sony needs creative ideas, actually everyone in Hollywood needs creative ideas. Reboots, remakes, comic book movies, just aren’t the way to go. Has anyone read what Billy Bob Thornton said about gamers being the cause for such crap coming out of Hollywood? I totally agree with him.

    Given what this reboot has going for it, I don’t see it doing too well, I certainly won’t be supporting them by paying to see it.

  • Hela

    The Toby Maguire films where a different arc, I believe that this Spiderman film is the Ultimate Spiderman arc. not a Reboot as per say.

  • Ulik

    I said it before and I’ll say it again 3 villains was NOT the problem in Spider Man 3. It’s all about how the characters are balanced,multiple villains can be done right and has been done before.The problem is that Venom’s portrayal was forced and therefore was anti-climatic also he should have been introduced as a cliffhanger.

    • http://www.beyondhollywood.com/ Nix

      I think you’re contradicting yourself. You say 3 villains weren’t the problem, but then you complain about character “balance”. There wouldn’t be an issue with character balance if there weren’t too MANY characters (in particular, each villain with their own pathos — Sandman alone had what, an entire 30 minute back history?) to have to devote time to.

      • Ulik

        Look it’s the same as when you have a CBM with multiple super heroes, there has to be a balance to that too. Or do you believe that you can’t have a comic book movie with multiple heroes? Of course there should be a limit to characters but even in The Dark Knight there were multiple villains and it worked it’s all about how it’s balanced out. Sam Raimi or the screenwriter just didn’t have the vision to do it right. I’m not saying I can do better but I just don’t believe that 3 villains are too many or that’s entirely why the movie was bad.

        • http://www.beyondhollywood.com/ Nix

          I wouldn’t really say TDK had multiple villains. It had one major villain and Two Face showed up in Act 3. In any case, I agree with you, too many villains weren’t THE problem of the film, but it was A problem, in that Raimi and company couldn’t figure out how to properly work them into the movie, and simply refused to cut anything else as a result. Of course, after two movies, it really seemed like Raimi had run out of ideas anyway, thus the Peter Parker shemping it up as Emo Parker bit, which was both hilarious and cringe-inducing.

  • Ulik

    I said it before and I’ll say it again 3 villains was NOT the problem in Spider Man 3. It’s all about how the characters are balanced,multiple villains can be done right and has been done before.The problem is that Venom’s portrayal was forced and therefore was anti-climatic also he should have been introduced as a cliffhanger.

  • Dan

    Emma Stone is playing Gwen Stacey? I thought she will be playing MJ with her red hair and all she would of been a perfect MJ. Anyway I thought Gwen Stacey is suppose to be blond are they going to dye her hair like Kristen did? Why can’t they just cast people with the right hair color for the role.

    • B-Flash

      They did she’s really a blond, but she liked the red hair after dying it for superbad that she decided to keep it.

      • Ulik

        Oh,ok.

    • Ulik

      I know,that confused me too,they’re already messing up. Granted she could wear a wig or dye her hair but she actually looks like MJ too.