Second Helping Here's the scoop on ''Spider-Man 2.'' ''Spider-Man'' made a gazillion bucks in its first weekend, so of course the sequel is already well on the way. Here are the details by Brian Hiatt Maybe Sony executives have a spider-sense of their own. Last month, before anyone could guess that ''Spider-Man'' would snare the biggest opening of all time (more than $114 million), Sony's Columbia Pictures managed to re-sign director Sam Raimi, costar Kirsten Dunst, and producer Laura Ziskin for ''Spider-Man 2'' -- and they had star Tobey Maguire locked in from the beginning. Surrounded by the shards of broken box office records, Sony announced Monday that the Spidey-sequel -- to be co-written by ''Smallville'' creators Alfred Gough and Miles Millar -- will hit theaters May 7, 2004, with production starting early next year. ''It's sort of a thrilling and daunting task to do the sequel,'' Gough tells EW.com. ''They've really hit one out of the park in the first movie, which is great, because it leaves you a lot of areas to explore in the sequel.'' Some films tie up so many loose ends that a follow-up seems superfluous, he says. But given Harry Osborn's vow of revenge on Spider-Man (he blames him for the death of his father, Norman, a.k.a. the Green Goblin), Aunt May's precarious health, and Mary-Jane's possible discovery of Spidey's secret identity, there's plenty of story webs left to be spun in this franchise. ''You sort of go, hey, we can only do so much in the second movie,'' Gough laughs. Gough, who's still laying out the movie's story with Millar, declines to reveal what bad guys they're considering for the movie. ''I can't really talk about it -- [Marvel Studios chief] Avi Arad will send the X-Men out to kill me,'' he says. ''But quite frankly, there are a lot of fun villains [in the Spider-Man mythos].'' Dunst, meanwhile, told Entertainment Weekly that as far as she knows, the movie will use two villains from the comic books: the metal-armed Dr. Octopus and the scientist-turned-scaly-human-reptile the Lizard (or at least that's what we think Dunst meant when she referred to a ''lizard thing''). But another possibility suggested by the first film's conclusion is the introduction of the Hobgoblin, a Green Goblin-like character who, in the comic books, turns out to be Norman Osborn's son, Harry. Goblin portrayer Willem Dafoe, who might seem locked out of a sequel, tells EW.com that he has an idea of how Raimi could use him despite his character's death: ''Haven't you heard of flashbacks? Or he could be sort of an Obi-Wan Kenobi voice guiding his son through the paces: 'Avenge me.''' Villains aside, Gough predicts that the second movie should be able to explore Spider-Man's world even more deeply than the first, which had the burden of starting the story from scratch. ''Sam Raimi told us you almost have to look at each movie as a season of television,'' says Gough. ''In the first season you have the origin story, which, is in a way, the easiest story and the most difficult as well, because you always want to put a fresh spin on it. The challenge is always, what's the next story after that.''
Man, Spider-Man was such a great movie, wasn't it?? Anywho. It was obvious @ the end of Spider-Man that there would be a sequal. Me, being ignorant to the comic itself, assumed the next villan would be Venom. I may be wrong, but I thought that that was the villan that Harry became, wasn't it?
Harry didn't become Venom, Eddie Brock did. Eddie Brock was a former reporter who blames spiderman for ruining his life....yada yada yada.
Yea, I'm a dorkus. So, did Harry becoem the Hobgoblin then? Becsaue Rocketsin2040 doesnt seem to think so.
No. Harry became either the third or second Green Goblin(his shrink became whichever other one that he wasn't).
And on Venom- in one of the Bugle scenes, someone says that even Eddie couldn't get shots of Spider-Man. In the animated series, Eddie Brock was a photographer instead of a reporter so this could be him. I'd love to see Peter have a human rival like he did with Lance Bannon in the comics and Eddie Brock(with some minor tweaking)could easily fill a similar role. Have Pete cost him his job somehow, and voila, instant disgruntled future Venom.
Why do comic book movies insist on having two villians most of the time? It's damn near impossible to develop two new characters in these movies in two hours. Especially villians -- they're scariest when we understand why they're crazy ... Has there been a single comic book movies with multiple villains since Superman II that was any good? X-Men, I guess. But all the Batman movies after the first one sucked...
I thought some guy named Ned (who was the husband of Peter Parker's first girlfriend - Betty?) was the Hobgoblin.
I 'am not sure that Harry is the Hobgoblin in the comicbook, but in the animated series they made Harry the Hobgoblin.
subtomic; ned was believed to be the hobgoblin but he was brainwashed by roderick kingsley. harry was the 2nd green goblin but died saving peter in spectacular spidey #200 (i know... i'm a spidey geek). from what i've heard kirsten dunst say about it, spidey 2 will have the lizard and doc ock. (she said a lizard like creature and doctor octopus in an article)
The Rhino guy was always interesting to me, but the best villain would be, by far, the blackwidow. Throwing in another hot chick always works. And I too agree, two villains will take away from the one thing that spiderman has going for it, interesting character and plot development. This movie should keep spiderman in the forefront. He should be the focus of the movie. The actual interest is in his character and Toby plays it perfectly.
