Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Maguire Reveals True Story Behind Spider-Man 2 Delays

This is topic Maguire Reveals True Story Behind Spider-Man 2 Delays in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002066

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 05-13-2003, 03:54 PM:

Admits he was fired from sequel...

Tobey Maguire has admitted that he was fired from Spider-Man 2 for what was labled "inappropriate behavior" before being brought back to the film.

"I feel like I learned a lesson," he tells the Los Angeles Times. "The movie is the most important thing."

Maguire got in trouble when he started to make demands about the Spider-Man 2 production schedule due to pains in his back (which came from an injury he suffered while filming Seabiscuit). Instead of giving in to demands, Columbia simply dropped Maguire from the movie. Producer Laura Ziskin and director Sam Raimi also grew upset about Maguire not coming to them with his problems.

"A lot of this problem comes from me not having gone to them personally and trying to resolve it," he says. "I'm glad I got to look these people in the face and say, 'I'm really sorry. I'm going to do whatever it takes.'"

Columbia was ready to go forward and hire actor Jake Gyllenhaal to take over Maguire's role until Maguire's girlfriend, Jennifer Meyer, got involved and talked her father, Universal chief, Ron Meyer, into getting involved. He pulled a few strings and got Maguire back into the film.

Maguire's contract was changed though. It included clauses that stated he stay in shape and pass a physical, as well as potential financial cuts if he failed to complete his obligations on time.

"I'm just glad it worked out," Maguire says. "I'm glad I got to look these people in the face and say, 'I'm really sorry. I'm going to do whatever it takes.' "

Spider-Man 2 is now set to be released on July 2, 2004. Two months after it's original May 7, 2004 date.

Credit: Zap2It, LA Times

Somehow I think that there is more to this story than he is letting on. Studios do not fire actors for being premadonnas(sp) or very few of them would be working. Martin Lawrance gets "dehydrated" (read stoned) and wonders the streets shouting obscenities and wasn't fired. So I wonder what Toby actually did? It's funny just how many stories there were about how he was so "down to earth" and normal when the first Spiderman came out.

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 05-13-2003, 04:24 PM:

quote:
Tobey Maguire has admitted that he was fired from Spider-Man 2 for what was labled "inappropriate behavior" before being brought back to the film.

I'd really love to know all the details about the type of "inappropriate behaviour" that went on. I've got some ideas of my own.... [sex]

Danny

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 05-13-2003, 04:47 PM:

This LA Times Article goes into some detail. It's a long article and I'm not going to cut and paste it all. And the link may disappear in the future. Anyway, it basically says Tobey has this back problem; his "representatives" came to Spidey-2 planning meetings asking all kinds of questions about the physical demands of the role and demanding things be scaled back; Maguire didn't get along with Charlize Theron in "Cider House Rules" (although that was so long ago I don't know why it would matter now); and the topper may have been Maguire was a no-show for an important Spidey-2 motion capture shoot. Basically everyone told Maguire he was nuts and to start kissing some ass to get back into the movie, which he has apparently done. He had to pass a complete physical and do some harness-flying work to prove he could do it. Maguire was considered expendable for this role, easily replaceable, which is probably true.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 05-18-2003, 11:15 AM:

Just thought I would mention that Spidey-II crews were shooting background plates on Chicago's L trains a few months ago.

...in 65mm.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-18-2003, 11:18 AM:

They are probably doing that so it will blow up better for the IMAX version. There is no way that they or anyone else would ever consider doing a standard 5/70 release, sadly.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 05-18-2003, 11:38 AM:

It's not uncommon to shoot effects in a larger format (VistaVision or 65mm) so that the final composited effects can be intercut with the rest of the film without looking degraded by the additional generations the effects footage went through. Starting with a larger format allows the image to withstand this since there was greater resolution to start with. It's less common now with digital effects production but it does still get done. VistaVision was more or less the house standard at ILM. 65mm was commonplace at the now-defunct Boss Film.