Sony Wants Spider-Man 4 in 3-D? Say it Ain't So!

April 22, 2009
Source: Forbes


"Could be" is all that Sony's head Amy Pascal said in response when asked about if we'll see Spider-Man 4 in 3-D. So how did we get to this point? has posted a very interesting interview with Pascal and fellow studio head Michael Lynton. They discuss most of the business side of Sony Pictures, but near the end they get into the 3-D realm, starting with a question about Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Sony's upcoming fall animated release. From there, they continue into a question about live-action 3-D. Her answer to that question is not only very intriguing, but it leads directly into the Spider-Man 4 question.

First up, Pascal was asked what she thought about using 3-D in live action movies, and this is her answer.

"I think James Cameron's new movie [Avatar] could change the world. I think everyone is in anticipation thinking it's going to be like Star Wars. It's going to change the way you consume entertainment. I don't know that it will ever be the way you see dramas, but I can't say anymore that it won't be."

I hate to get all antsy, but if the head of another competing studio is already saying (eight months out) that Avatar could "change the world," I think that's a good sign that if it does live up to everyone's expectations, it's worthy of being called revolutionary right away. But that's a story for another day. Forbes followed up with the question about Spider-Man 4 and Pascal's response was only "could be." Then Lynton chimed in and added: "People are paying a premium to see movies in 3-D and that's a very big deal. It's never been done before that someone says you have to pay more to see Spider-Man than a romantic comedy."

It's too early to officially say that Spider-Man 4 is going to be in 3-D, especially when they're still working on casting anyway, but this is a good sign that Sony at least wants to pursue it. I also don't believe it's hasty of me to say that all of the major studios are anxiously awaiting Avatar's release, for many reasons, but most importantly to see how well a live-action 3-D movie plays on a large scale. If it is does incredibly well, then it'll be the first sign that live-action 3-D will actually be the future of filmmaking. So although we'll probably hear rumors about 3-D like this for a while, nothing will be confirmed until December 18th.

Find more posts: Movie News, Opinions, Rumors



HELLLLLL NO! And i thought the franchise couldnt get any worse

Al on Apr 22, 2009


I am not sure how to feel about this. I mean if done properly it could look cool. However with the slew of other 3d films that have come out recently, I cant imagine it would benefit the movie anymore. I know this one will be better than the 3rd, so heres hoping!

Movieraider321 on Apr 22, 2009


3D is such a gimmick! I walk around in 3D all day long. Why oh why would I want my movies to be in 3D? I wanted to watch Coraline, but every theater around me was only showing 3D versions... I still went, and the 3D was the worst part about the film. One month later I found a theater showing a regular 2D version and enjoyed it much more the second time around. Fun story eh?

JL on Apr 22, 2009


If any film has a concept that lends itself to 3D, Spiderman would probably be it though. Webslinging, wallcrawling, dodging stuff and zipping through buildings all in 3D would be undoubtedly immense done right.

Mister_Bubbles on Apr 22, 2009


Spider-Man 3 was a big wake up call for them. Raimi is saying all the right things in interviews (see the big one he did in Empire) and he's taken a good break, recharged his batteries by going back to basics with Drag Me To Hell, making the kind of movie we loved him for in the first place. (Unless you've always hated Raimi, of course...) I think they are going to take heed of all the criticism levelled at them for Spider-Man 3 while preparing the fourth one, and try to avoid the 'too many cooks' (both onscreen and behind the scenes) effect of part 3. I still have faith in Raimi. But 3D? I don't know. Just focus on getting the script right this time, worry about the format you're going to shoot in later...

Mathieu on Apr 22, 2009


hey why don't we put spider man in a pink suit while we are at it!! bad idea the fucked up venom and sm3 redeem yourselves you dooshbags

splinter on Apr 22, 2009


What? There's not hint or talk of Spider-Man 4 in 3-D, you guys made this up

James on Apr 22, 2009


I'd rather see a reboot without 3D, with Sam Raimi NOT attatched. he's killed spider-man for me.

Caleb on Apr 22, 2009


Nice even-tempered post there, Splinter. 😉

Mathieu on Apr 22, 2009


It's unfair to lay the blame entirely at Raimi's feet, I think. He made mistakes of his own, it's true, but in a recent interview he revealed that - despite what the onscreen credits might make you believe - he actually had LESS control on that picture than he did on the first two. He had too many executives to please and consequently ended up with a bit of a mess that pleased hardly anyone. If certain creative decisions weren't imposed upon him I think we still would have had a flawed film, but it would have been a good deal less clumsy and more satisfying than the one we ended up with. I still believe, taking his passion for the character and his previous work into account, he's earned another shot at it, and he seems confident now that he's had that all-important break.

Mathieu on Apr 22, 2009


Raimi has his reputation on the line this time around and I have a lot of faith that he'll make the right decisions. This is his second chance and he's not gonna blow that.

peloquin on Apr 22, 2009


Just if Avatar succeeds enormously doesn't MAKE 3D the future of filmmaking, all it really gurantees is that we'll see lots of 3D for a couple of years after which point, to be honest (although I want to believe Cameron will really use 3D well) it'll fade out of style again, and then probably come back when it's really worthwhile (which I do believe it will be one day.) I saw Monster's Vs. Aliens (which I liked) and the 3D just isn't there, it's leaps and bounds behind red and green glasses but it doesn't feel right, the depth perception or anything. Some of it was great, to be honest, but then you get the characters floating out of the screen and looking like one dimension decals sticking out of the screen, etc. etc. etc. It's just not that good, and I'm not sure how Avatar can really change that.

Timothy on Apr 22, 2009


3D would be the only way to make this franchise interesting to watch after 3 films of seeing Spidey fly around New York... the 3rd film was not that great, but I would be completely open to a 4th film, especially in 3D.

Chris G. on Apr 22, 2009


Raimi ruined Spider-man? The 1st 2 set standards on what people expect out of comic movies to a grander scale. Of course movies like Tim Burton's Batman was an anomely, and Blade which most people didn't even know was a comic character introduced a higher class of comic hero. The 1st 2 were awesome and the 3rd was god awful. Give the guy some credit.

L on Apr 22, 2009


Why not Spider-Man IV in 3-D? It could be fun.

Fisherr on Apr 22, 2009


BUT just because Avatar will be awesome in 3D doesn't mean all live action will right? I mean hes using some kinda new proprietary technology that makes it better then our usual 3D (live or no) movies, I don't think anyone will be able to adopt his technology especially as soon as 2011, what do you think?

Richard on Apr 22, 2009


WHY ARE YOU CARING SO MUCH ABOUT STARTING THE "REVOLUTIONARY" BANDWAGON FOR "AVATAR"? THAT SEEMS TO BE A REALLY BIG DEAL FOR YOU, THIS IS JUST A HYPE MACHINE. LETS WAIT FOR A TRAILER. DON'T JUMP THE GUN... Cameron has disappointed with "Titanic" and before that with "The Abyss". Truly his storytelling skill has always lacked realistic characters with the exception of the two Terminators...let's hope he knocks this one out of the park. It pay to be a cynic and not jump on bandwagons. This could always end up being the failure of failures. There is no proof yet that it isn't, only a cliche ridden screenplay.

LINKFX on Apr 22, 2009


#17 - Wow, calm down man! You're right, we are all hyping it up too much, there's no mistaking that, however, that comes from everything I've heard Cameron say about it and other people say about it. It's not like I'm just making up these claims on my own. Plus, as I said above in this very article, if the head of another studio as big as Sony is clearly stating that Avatar could change the world, that is a huge thing. If someone who determines which movies gets made really believes in the hype of Avatar, than at this point, even I'm not overhyping it!

Alex Billington on Apr 22, 2009


I died inside when I saw spidey 3. It destroyed everything good about spiderman, venom and the franchise. Making Spiderman 4 in 3-D couldn't make the franchise any worse cause it's already at rock bottom.

CLZ on Apr 22, 2009


Actually you are Alex. I You haven't seen anything about it therefore what you say is made up since there's nothing of it except a cheesy concept poster that I've seen a thousand times. I'm sorry but this movie is going to be horrid I bet and better be available without 3D. Not to mention, there has already been great 3D movies, like Terminator at Universal. That was actually quite cool and done rather well, without being who knows how long. It's a hype to make money but I can tell you no one will want to go see every movie in 3d as most will attempt now.

Hey Ya on Apr 22, 2009


I am so sick and tired of all the spider man 3 hate. Everywhere i go, there is someone saying, oh spider man 3 sucked. I mean i hated it too but i don't go around and keep repeating, Spider man 3 sucked. We KNOW It sucked but please get over it and move on. It is getting really fucking annoying.

Jay Selis on Apr 22, 2009


Dude! The Abyss was awesome! This spider-man series needs to stay in 2D... Maybe they can try when they re-boot it in 15 years when more directors are experience with this new 3D technology Camerons working on, but for now, I'd prefer 2D films!

The_Phantom on Apr 22, 2009


# 21...spider-man 3 sucked...i'll even say the 1st and 2nd sucked as well.

Caleb on Apr 22, 2009


I dont know what all the yelling is about!!!!!!!

Scott McHenry on Apr 22, 2009



Smiffy1 on Apr 22, 2009


Something is telling me that the 3-D tech and CGI Cameron has developed for Avatar is really impressing a lot of insiders. I don't think this trend is just due to current 3-D tech that many of us have seen in current films.

JimD on Apr 23, 2009


Yeah, Avatar could change the world... making the movie tickets even more expensive than today (vs. non-3D movies). Way to go, who cares about content, let's make even more money - that'$$ the executives motto and that's their aim. I'm with #5 (first get a good scritp, and that's why S3 sucked, and then the tecnology) and #15 (3d could be fun).

Fox on Apr 23, 2009


Okay, I just will never believe someone who makes all of their money out of marketing the shit out of crappy films just to fund their next mansion. That's just the way I look at it. Maybe you can view it from that perspective. Don't ever believe a studio head. 3d doesn't look that great in film, and it never has, there really is no argument against that. When I go to a movie, I am asking to be impressed. I have high expectations. I want to like 3d. But I still haven't seen a film that looks good in it. A lot of it has to do with how dim the image is. The lenses are slightly dark and it makes the whole image look bland. This is what happened with Beowulf and with MVA. So is Cameron going to give us all new projectors, new screens and new glasses to wear to enjoy his film? I don't like looking at an unnaturally dark image. The studios are all really pushing 3d right now to get people into theaters again. It's just a gimmick, they really need to sell it to me better, make the difference in image brightness zilch between seeing it in 2d and seeing it in 3d. I can't believe the hype when everything I have seen with my own eyes from 3d projectors wearing my 3d glasses informs me that the image quality is terrible and the execution of the 3d effects only serves "wowzers" moments where things come at you. I will never believe the hype on any film. I need to see it for myself, you know what I mean? That being said, bring on the trailer, IN 3D. I need to see what all these studio blowhards have been raving about.

LINKFX on Apr 23, 2009


spider-man in 3D that would be awesome

Trevor on Apr 23, 2009


seriously, 3d. cmon

mrmr on Apr 25, 2009


spiderman 3...big screwup, but making spiderman 4 3d???????? come on... either pascal is just teasing us, or he just cant get anymore stupid. making spiderman 4 in 3d....whats the matter with him?????? pendejo.....i agree with 22. they should try it in the future. spiderman 3 sucked...hahaha....sorry #21 i couldnt help it.

doorman09 on May 14, 2009


Hey!!! That seems pretty creative to me. After the poor performance of last spider man movie it was obvious for them to come with something new.There is also a risk involved in doing new things, may be it looks too ordinary when implementing something like 3-D.I think 3-D spider man want make a huge difference except the cost of the movie. Let us see what happens.

akku on Aug 28, 2009


Play Spiderman Games on the Net.

Spiderman Games on Sep 30, 2009

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram