A Sticky Situation

This is Asteroid G’s regular column documenting the rise of superhero films in Hollywood. For the complete story, make sure to read the previous parts:

• Part 1: Batman '66
• Part 2: Superman '78
• Part 3: Wonder Woman '75 and the Incredible Hulk '78
• Part 4: Batman '89
• Part 5: Batman & Robin
• Part 6: Blade
• Part 7: X-Men

As we established back in our discussion of Blade, we know what film launched the modern superhero genre. Blade upgraded us from the more kid-friendly, toyetic style of DC’s films, from the Superman movies and Batman & Robin (although with hideous also-rans like Supergirl and Steel) into a more mature, more interesting world where Marvel’s heroes become the dominant superhero entertainers. But launching the genre and dominating it are two different things. Blade was great, but it wasn’t a culture smash that made everyone and their mother (along with the horses they rode in on) want to go to the theater to see the film. We got closer with X-Men, a much more successful four-quadrant superhero film that learned many lessons from Blade, but it wasn’t until Sony got in the game with their own hero they licensed from Marvel that the superhero genre took its next big jump forward.

Sorry, Fox, but no one cares about the Fantastic Four. Go away, Universal, and take your filthy, green Hulk with you. No, the next big hero is on the scene, and his name is SpidermanSure, DC Comics has Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman, but among the most popular superheroes stands a guy from Marvel Comics, a younger hero dressed in red and blue who shoots webs and sticks to walls. Introduced in the 1960s, Spider-Man has been a constant presence in comics and more, featured in movies regularly since his big screen debut in 2002..

Web-slinging In

Like with Fox’s X-Men film, Sony’s Spider-man had a long development process. Many production teams and studios had been attached. From Roger Corman in the early 1980s to the Cannon Film group, and then Columbia Pictures. James Cameron was attached to write and direct at one point, working on the film in the early 1990s before finally stepping away over creative differences. And then, when Batman & Robin bombed incredibly and explosively, everyone took a step back from superheroes and the long gestating Spider-man film was put on ice. But the one-two punch of Blade into X-Men convinced studios that Marvel heroes could headline films, and suddenly Spider-man was back on the table.

Via a circuitous route, the rights ended up with Sony. Scripts were worked on, with Cameron’s treatments serving as the basis for the film to come. By 2000, Sam Raimi was attached, and more than any other person involved, it was Raimi’s influence that helped to craft and guide the film to fruition. Raimi Was an inspired choice to direct the film, having worked on a variety of projects before this, most notably the Evil DeadStarted as a horror cheapie to get the foot in the door for three aspiring filmmakers -- Raimi, Tappert, and Campbell -- Evil Dead grew to have a life of its own, as well as launching the "splatstick" genre of horror-comedy. series, which he created. He brought his unique aesthetic, as well as his love for the hero, to Sony’s film, and it created movie magic.

The Spider-Man for a Generation

Raimi’s Spider-man works because it both learned from the Marvel films before but was willing to reject many lessons that didn’t work in context. 2002’s Spider-man treats the character seriously, playing him as a real character going through very difficult moments in his life – his transformation, the death of his uncle, his rise as a superhero, all while trying to balance his personal life – without ever getting dark or wallowing. It knows that comic book readers love the character and want him treated properly, not as a campy vessel to dish out toys. Spider-man isn’t just a long commercial for Spider-man merchandise.

And yet, unlike Blade and the X-Men, the film doesn’t feel a great need to shy away from the brighter and more colorful aspects of the character. Where those films dressed their heroes in all black, ignoring the vibrant costumes the characters were known for in the comics, Spider-man goes all in on the bright red-and-blue costume the hero is known for. It does help, of course, that in the comics Spidey had a black costume, and it meant something very specific (the VenomSpun out from a "What If?" story in Marvel Comics, this black suit variant of Spider-man became his own character, and eventually became almost as popular as the web-head himself. symbiote), so the film couldn’t just go that route, especially not this early.

But really, it was Raimi’s influence that helped to direct the film into the shape it was meant to be. The early sequences are silly and charming, letting you get to know the nerdy Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and his popular lady love, Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). You get to watch his origin story, his attempts to use his new powers to help himself before the death of his uncle redirects his efforts outwards towards the greater good. And it taps into his hopefulness, his enduring spirit, his need to be good. It makes him into a kind of beacon of hope, not unlike Superman, bringing out a joyful spirit even as he’s knocking down bad guys.

Raimi’s Spider-man is fun, a light and enjoyable experience with plenty of great superhero action. Raimi, of course, knew his way around comedy and action and balancing all those moments together. He has a love for slapstick as well as superheroes, and he found ways to bring that balance to his superhero film. Heck, you can even see threads from his work in the Evil Dead series, his control of the camera and the goofy moments that defined those movies reflected in this film. People might have questioned at the time what the Evil Dead guy was doing touching a superhero film, but Raimi proved he was the man for the job.

Audiences loved it, too. Upon its release, Spider-man went on to make $831.2 Mil against its $131 Mil budget, a massive jump over Fox’s X-Men, and at least six Blade films combined worth of .Box Office magic. It naturally led Sony to make two more main Spider-man films, and then the studio has kept their hold on the rights to the character ever since, only sharing them with Marvel for Marvel Cinematic UniverseWhen it first began in 2008 with a little film called Iron Man no one suspected the empire that would follow. Superhero movies in the past, especially those not featuring either Batman or Superman, were usually terrible. And yet, Iron Man would lead to a long series of successful films, launching the most successful cinema brand in history: the Marvel Cinematic Universe. productions much later on. Spider-man was a cultural moment, and people still go back and praise it as one of the greatest superhero films ever made.

Lessons Not Well Learned

But if we go back to one point for a second: Sony put many more Spider-man films into production, but that doesn’t mean they treated the franchise well. Raimi’s first sequel, Spider-man 2 is another masterwork, a film that at least equals, if not surpasses, the first film. It’s got all the hallmarks of Raimi’s storytelling, with more action, more thrills, and another villain in Doc Oc to rival the Green Goblin from the first movie. Raimi knew what he was doing, and he knew where he wanted the series to go for a third film… and maybe beyond.

But Sony had to start meddling with their golden goose. They wanted more villains in the third film so they could sell more merch and make spin-offs. They demanded he put Venom into Spider-man 3 even though Raimi didn’t like the character and had no interest in putting him in the film. Sony wanted their Sinister Six film (a movie that, even now, has yet to get made) and so they wanted Venom and other villains they could use. Raimi wanted to focus on the Vulture, but Sony thought that character was “too old” and “not interesting” (amusing when you consider Vulture was the villain for Spider-man: Homecoming and he was perfect in that film). Raimi was overruled, hated his time on the third film, and demanded to know what was going to happen with a fourth so he could decide whether to stick around or walk.

As it happened, Sony was already plotting to remove him from the franchise and reboot anyway, so his wanting to walk suited them just fine. They put a reboot into production, kicking it off five years after Spider-man 3 was released, introducing the The Amazing Spider-man, and again Sony hoped to be able to create a grand crossover set of films, from Spider-man to Venom to the Sinister Six, but after just one sequel this series fizzled out as well because people were not impressed with how Sony was treating their character.

In fact, it wasn’t until the MCU that Sony got another smash hit Spider-man film, and then they were able to make a trilogy of them with Marvel, as well as two fantastic animated Spider-man: Into the Spider-Verse films. But those still aren’t good enough for the studio and they’ve continued desperately trying to milk money out of the franchise in ways audiences simply do not like, with films like Morbius and Madame Web. Instead of realizing that a visionary director, given control of the character, can make a fantastic movie, the studio has meddled and meddled and meddled. They just can’t understand what to do.

Marvel learned, though, and they’ve made fantastic Spider-man films. So at least someone learned some lessons.

How Did It Redefine Superheroes

Well, the biggest lesson wasn’t for Sony but for Marvel. They watched as their characters – Blade, the X-Men, Spider-man – were used by other studios to make more and more and more money and they really wanted a piece of that pie. They didn’t have their biggest characters, though, the ones that comic fans associated with the brand and bought issues for every month. Spider-man was their Triple-A hero, the one that could rival SupermanThe first big superhero from DC Comics, Superman has survived any number of pretenders to the throne, besting not only other comic titans but even Wolrd War II to remain one of only three comics to continue publishing since the 1940s. and BatmanOne of the longest running, consistently in-print superheroes ever (matched only by Superman and Wonder Woman), Batman has been a force in entertainment for nearly as long as there's been an entertainment industry. It only makes sense, then that he is also the most regularly adapted, and consistently successful, superhero to grace the Silver Screen.. The X-MenLaunched in 1963 and written by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, the X-Men featured heroes distinctly different from those featured in the pages of DC Comics. Mutants who didn't ask for their powers (and very often didn't want them), these heroes, who constantly fought against humans who didn't want "muties" around, served as metaphors for oppression and racism. Their powerful stories would form this group into one of the most recognizable superhero teams in comics (and a successful series of movies as well). were the most popular superhero team at the time. Marvel didn’t have access to any of them, they just had the B-listers no one else wanted to buy up.

So Marvel took their B-Listers and put together a plan to turn them into cinematic gold. The money was there, and audiences were clearly hungry for more superheroes. All Marvel had to do was get the right project going at the right time and they could make their own massive superhero hit. That was, at least, the theory, so with backing from Paramount (for many of their heroes) and Universal (for Hulk), Marvel began their movie making project all to create their own team of superhero films.

Someone was paying attention to what was going on. It just wasn’t Sony.

Next Time On…

With the only heroes they had available, Marvel gets a B-lister out into the spotlight and created movie magic that went on to define ten years of superhero dominance. We’re talking, of course, about Iron Man.