Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Spider-Man Has Back Problems

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the suck-it-up-and-take-a-hy-dro-co dept.

Movies 472

skantman writes "Potentially sad news for Spiderfans. Tobey Maguire has back problems and may have to pull out of the Spider-Man sequel." Since the film was apparently slated to pay him 11M GBP, sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part. CT Updated, thats 11M pounds, not USD.

cancel ×

472 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Spidy Sense (-1, Troll)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536880)

My spidy-sense is tingling... must be a FP!

Hehe... sorry, but it was me or an AC.

LOOKING FOR A JOB, BUDDY? (-1, Offtopic)

YOU ARE SO FIRED! (635925) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537021)

That was an excellent FP, Mr. Knox. Why don't you step into my office and we'll discuss how long we'll keep you on until I fire you? Come on in, I've got doughnuts and coffee (the secretary bought 'em... heh heh heh).

Re:Spidy Sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537114)

Congrats on the FP... I have bookmarked this historic event!!! FK's FP!!!

Welcome to the C.L.I.T.

I can't believe it!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536881)

The World War III will begin in less than 48 hours and we are talking about Superman back problems!!

hell!! WE ARE COMPLETELY NUTS!!

Re:I can't believe it!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536925)

Well, perhaps if could read you wouldn't have your superheroes muddled up....

World War III? (-1, Offtopic)

nlinecomputers (602059) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536951)

Oh please. Get a grip! No one really cares about Iraq. Iraq didn't do anything last time we slapped them around. They fired 100 scuds and only 2 or 3 hit anything? It will last 10 days, most of the Iraq's military will surrender, and Saddam will suddenly show up in UAE unharmed.

Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (4, Funny)

juanfe (466699) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536883)

Sounds like a winning lifestyle endorsement to me...

Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (4, Informative)

Mr Guy (547690) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536977)

His latest movie is Seabiscuit [imdb.com] in which he plays a jockey. Riding a horse, even just for a movie with a stuntman doing the real work, is dangerous and painful without years of practice.

Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (1)

Zarquon (1778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537084)

Hey.. it's often dangerous and painful _with_ years of practice.. :)

Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (3, Funny)

l810c (551591) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536985)

Meat and lack of yoga are good for the back.

Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537119)

The ability to recognize the benefits of lifestyles
other than your own is good for the body and mind.
I bet you voted for Bush, ignorant savage!

Re:Doesn't he do yoga and eat vegetarian? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537035)

Did you clean that observation with soap and water after pulling it out of your ass?

That's 11m pounds (4, Informative)

WD_40 (156877) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536887)

Not dollars.

Re:That's 11m pounds (5, Funny)

Michael_Burton (608237) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537014)

Hey, I'd probably sprain my back, carrying around a wallet that heavy.

Re:That's 11m pounds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537101)

"If I had a hammer, your head would look like a nail."

first post! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536889)

first post!

owww, my back!

correction (1, Redundant)

Evanrude (21624) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536891)

That is actually £11 million. Sucks for him if he's not up to it.

Re:correction (1)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536952)

No wonder his back is sore, carrying all that loot!

Re:correction (3, Insightful)

lubricated (49106) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537089)

It doesn't suck to be him. It sucks to be me. I would love to be him. So he doesn't get 11 million pounds today, big fucking deal. I won't get 11 million pounds ever.

Please say it ain't so!! (0, Flamebait)

Noryungi (70322) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536892)


Spider Man was probably the first, the last and the only movie I have ever seen that was actually faithful to a comic -- and Maguire was such a great Spider Man it's impossible to imagine a sequel without him!!

Re:Please say it ain't so!! (5, Funny)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536939)

*cough*organicwebshootersnotincomic*cough*

Re:Please say it ain't so!! (2, Interesting)

samhalliday (653858) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537057)

and was it not a nuclear power plant he went to in the comic, and got bitten by a nuked-spider; in the film the class went to a superspider-making factory

which leaves wide-open the possibility of new spidermen since not only did the spider run away... but they also know how to make the same spider again

other than that, i agree... it was pretty true to the cominc, relatively speaking of course (cartoon example: He-Man... uuughh!)

Re:Please say it ain't so!! (4, Interesting)

operagost (62405) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537081)

I didn't understand that change myself. It killed his geek factor. The fact that he built his own webshooter in the comics showed he was smart and creative instead of just nerdily unpopular.

last post. so there. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536893)

pounds not dollars you dumbass.

Health and safety (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536897)

You shouldn't be pulling if you have a back problem!

Pay attention... (0, Redundant)

ElGuapoGolf (600734) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536898)

From the article:

Last month, Maguire's agents renegotiated a record £11 million deal for the sequel.
That's not $11 million dollars. It's considerably more. Come on guys, wake up when you're posting this stuff!

£ NE $ (1)

spookymonster (238226) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536900)

The article states "Last month, Maguire's agents renegotiated a record £11 million deal for the sequel."

What's that come to, $22M?

Re:£ NE $ (2, Informative)

jmauro (32523) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536929)

$17.2 million. In US currency.

Re:£ NE $ (2, Informative)

SScorpio (595836) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537001)

Currently ~$17,191,872.77 USD The current exchange rate is 1 GBP = 1.56290 USD. Odd that the Canandian Dollar recently rose in value to 1.48 CND = 1 USD. I was 1.54-1.56 = 1 for a long time.

Isn't that...... (1, Offtopic)

tbob419 (629290) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536903)

what stunt doubles are for?

Re:Isn't that...... (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536954)

what stunt doubles are for?

Isn't that what CGI is for?

uh oh...series syndrome (3, Insightful)

VinniTheGeek (565982) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536910)

Like Batman with multiple stars, we now get a chance at Spiderman. For the love of any god out there man, I hope his back heals soon.

Re:uh oh...series syndrome The part is bigger... (1)

Montgomery Burns III (642155) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536987)


Other examples:
James Bond

The part is really more important than the specific character.

$17 million (2, Informative)

wuchang (524603) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536911)

That figure is wrong.....If he makes the film, he'll be making $17 million not $11 million

No Big Deal (5, Interesting)

Drunken Coward (574991) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536912)

The linked article says Jake Gyllenhaal [imdb.com] has been lined-up as a possible replacement. While he was previously typecast into creepy character roles (Donnie Darko and The Good Girl), he proved in Moonlight Mile that he is a thousand times the actor of Tobey Maguire. Not that I wish any suffering on Maguire, but I do believe the sequel would be better off without him.

Re:No Big Deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536979)

what it comes down to is jake capable of cracking his voice?

Re:No Big Deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537025)

have you SEEN cider house rules?

Re:No Big Deal (2, Informative)

mariox19 (632969) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537032)

He played the lead in October Sky, didn't he? If that's the case, he would make an excellent replacement, though I still feel sorry for Tobey.

Re:No Big Deal (1)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537037)

Shows that change the actor of the progananist often flop. Has anyone bothered to see like the last two Batman movies?

I predict if Maguire can't do it, only more wet shirt shots of Dunst will save the movie.

Re:No Big Deal (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537092)

Like MASH. Like Bewitched. Like Bond. It can work if you replace the original with a better actor. Batman is a bad example because Michael Keaton just is Batman. It is not possible to get better. I don't get the sense that Tobey just is Spiderman. I thought he was only mediocre.

Re:No Big Deal (3, Funny)

donpardo (128815) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537104)

There were 2 other Batman movies?

Re:No Big Deal (2, Interesting)

RazzleFrog (537054) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537067)

I totally agree. Jake Gyllenhaal is ten times the actor of Tobey Maguire. When my girlfriend and I watched Spiderman the first time it was right after watching the Good Girl and we immediately said that he would have been a better casting. I think having a slighlty darker Spiderman would improve the series.

Re:No Big Deal (2, Interesting)

Jens_UK (615572) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537102)

As Wes Bentley [imdb.com] was up for the role originally [upcomingmovies.com] , this may be his shot. Based on his performance in American Beauty [imdb.com] , it could be a darker, less happy-go-lucky Spiderman, which I would enjoy.

The Resignation Speech of Robin Cook (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536913)

The Resignation Speech of Robin Cook (British Member of Parliament)

17 March 2003 9.44 pm

Mr. Robin Cook (Livingston): This is the first time for 20 years that I have addressed the House from the Back Benches. I must confess that I had forgotten how much better the view is from here. None of those 20 years were more enjoyable or more rewarding than the past two, in which I have had the immense privilege of serving this House as Leader of the House, which were made all the more enjoyable, Mr. Speaker, by the opportunity of working closely with you.

It was frequently the necessity for me as Leader of the House to talk my way out of accusations that a statement had been preceded by a press interview. On this occasion I can say with complete confidence that no press interview has been given before this statement. I have chosen to address the House first on why I cannot support a war without international agreement or domestic support.

The present Prime Minister is the most successful leader of the Labour party in my lifetime. I hope that he will continue to be the leader of our party, and I hope that he will continue to be successful. I have no sympathy with, and I will give no comfort to, those who want to use this crisis to displace him.

I applaud the heroic efforts that the Prime Minister has made in trying to secure a second resolution. I do not think that anybody could have done better than the Foreign Secretary in working to get support for a second resolution within the Security Council. But the very intensity of those attempts underlines how important it was to succeed. Now that those attempts have failed, we cannot pretend that getting a second resolution was of no importance.

France has been at the receiving end of bucketloads of commentary in recent days. It is not France alone that wants more time for inspections. Germany wants more time for inspections; Russia wants more time for inspections; indeed, at no time have we signed up even the minimum necessary to carry a second resolution. We delude ourselves if we think that the degree of international hostility is all the result of President Chirac. The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the international bodies of which we are a leading partner-not NATO, not the European Union and, now, not the Security Council.

To end up in such diplomatic weakness is a serious reverse. Only a year ago, we and the United States were part of a coalition against terrorism that was wider and more diverse than I would ever have imagined possible. History will be astonished at the diplomatic miscalculations that led so quickly to the disintegration of that powerful coalition. The US can afford to go it alone, but Britain is not a superpower. Our interests are best protected not by unilateral action but by multilateral agreement and a world order governed by rules. Yet tonight the international partnerships most important to us are weakened: the European Union is divided; the Security Council is in stalemate. Those are heavy casualties of a war in which a shot has yet to be fired.

I have heard some parallels between military action in these circumstances and the military action that we took in Kosovo. There was no doubt about the multilateral support that we had for the action that we took in Kosovo. It was supported by NATO; it was supported by the European Union; it was supported by every single one of the seven neighbours in the region. France and Germany were our active allies. It is precisely because we have none of that support in this case that it was all the more important to get agreement in the Security Council as the last hope of demonstrating international agreement.

The legal basis for our action in Kosovo was the need to respond to an urgent and compelling humanitarian crisis. Our difficulty in getting support this time is that neither the international community nor the British public is persuaded that there is an urgent and compelling reason for this military action in Iraq.

The threshold for war should always be high. None of us can predict the death toll of civilians from the forthcoming bombardment of Iraq, but the US warning of a bombing campaign that will "shock and awe" makes it likely that casualties will be numbered at least in the thousands. I am confident that British servicemen and women will acquit themselves with professionalism and with courage. I hope that they all come back. I hope that Saddam, even now, will quit Baghdad and avert war, but it is false to argue that only those who support war support our troops. It is entirely legitimate to support our troops while seeking an alternative to the conflict that will put those troops at risk.

Nor is it fair to accuse those of us who want longer for inspections of not having an alternative strategy. For four years as Foreign Secretary I was partly responsible for the western strategy of containment. Over the past decade that strategy destroyed more weapons than in the Gulf war, dismantled Iraq's nuclear weapons programme and halted Saddam's medium and long-range missiles programmes. Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.

Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralised and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days. We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.

Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term-namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target. It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories. Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create? Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?

Only a couple of weeks ago, Hans Blix told the Security Council that the key remaining disarmament tasks could be completed within months. I have heard it said that Iraq has had not months but 12 years in which to complete disarmament, and that our patience is exhausted. Yet it is more than 30 years since resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories. We do not express the same impatience with the persistent refusal of Israel to comply. I welcome the strong personal commitment that the Prime Minister has given to middle east peace, but Britain's positive role in the middle east does not redress the strong sense of injustice throughout the Muslim world at what it sees as one rule for the allies of the US and another rule for the rest.

Nor is our credibility helped by the appearance that our partners in Washington are less interested in disarmament than they are in regime change in Iraq. That explains why any evidence that inspections may be showing progress is greeted in Washington not with satisfaction but with consternation: it reduces the case for war.

What has come to trouble me most over past weeks is the suspicion that if the hanging chads in Florida had gone the other way and Al Gore had been elected, we would not now be about to commit British troops.

The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people. On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain. They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own. Above all, they are uneasy at Britain going out on a limb on a military adventure without a broader international coalition and against the hostility of many of our traditional allies.

From the start of the present crisis, I have insisted, as Leader of the House, on the right of this place to vote on whether Britain should go to war. It has been a favourite theme of commentators that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics. Nothing could better demonstrate that they are wrong than for this House to stop the commitment of troops in a war that has neither international agreement nor domestic support. I intend to join those tomorrow night who will vote against military action now. It is for that reason, and for that reason alone, and with a heavy heart, that I resign from the Government. [Applause.]

86137c339792de9ff1f77dd67059fc90

Re:The Resignation Speech of Robin Cook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537013)

I have been looking all over for this! Hmm. Not sure if Slashdot's the right place for it, though.

Re:The Resignation Speech of Robin Cook (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537106)

How much time is enough?

It's been over 9 years already and they are just now trying to get their act together?

Say you let them just slide going ok you've started disarming. What's to stop them from stopping the disarming movement and delay until they are at the brink of war again?

Threats only go so far, until the threatens are no longer worried because they feel nothing will happen. Unless the US does something, any madman can do anything they want in the world without fear of retaliation.

Yes war is terrible, yes people die. But if those who are able do not standup against growing threats until they are in your face, threatening the live of you and your children. Then they have won. Petty squables will never be solved. Diplomacy will never bring about peace, that is the world you live in. Sure you can demand peaceful solutions, but this cannot work when the other party will not coroporarte.

I read $17 for Maguire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536915)

The number listed here [cnn.com] reads $17 million, not $11 million.

why pull out? (1)

peripatetic_bum (211859) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536916)

Its all CGI, anyway.
Yes, he may want to do some of the stuntsm on principle, but the real action in the movie (the fights) never had a real huuman in it.

really? (3, Insightful)

Lxy (80823) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536918)

This part confused me:
"Tobey has experienced mild discomfort in his back, which is in the final stages of healing"

So, what's the problem? I know his back needs to be fully healed, but if it's in the final stages of healing, why not delay production until it's healed? All too often sequels have alternate actors playing the main characters, and I refuse to see such movies. If Tobey's not in the sequel, I probably won't see it.

Re:really? (1)

l810c (551591) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536956)

Batman was, of course, the worse. I actually think Keaton was the best. They should have kept him.

Re:really? (1)

lowmagnet (646428) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537024)

Three words: Inspector Gadget Two.

French stewart as IG? Egads, why! (oh yeah, it's Disney)

Re:really? (1)

Treebeard the Ent (638978) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537086)

Keaton was the best. They should have kept him.

Don't think that they didn't try... but he didn't want to start being type cast because of his role in Batman... Now look at him. I say better to be type cast than not cast...

Damn. (4, Funny)

Yoda2 (522522) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536922)

I have back problems too so I suppose I'm out of the running for his slot.

Re:Damn. (1)

lylum (659581) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537002)

I'm surprised... many people on /. probably have back problems but that's more a result of physical inactivity and the attempt to compensate it with mental activity. But if an actor gets back problems because oif his role in a movie I ask myself if that's not going too far. Not enough that athletes use drugs to boost their energy, now actors will start doing the same, huh?

Re:Damn. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537073)

Tobey (and everyone else) should go and read the information at these websites:

Summary of Dr Sarno's theory on TMS [harvard.edu]

Back Pain and Tension Myositis Syndrome (TMS) [premierhealthonline.com]

And read this book:
The MindBody Prescription by John E. Sarno, M.D.

This book (as well as some of Sarno's other books) is probably available at a local library if you don't want to buy it.

Anyone who has back pain, repetitive strain injury, or any kind of pain at all should go and read all this. Read it even if you don't have pain. It completely changed my life and many other people have benefited from this.

That's pounds, not dollars. (1)

GrievousAngel (220826) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536923)

http://www.cynicalnation.com

spidey (1)

black mariah (654971) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536927)

That does, in fact, suck. I didn't really like the first Spidey movie, but I thought he was pretty good in it. I really hope this doesn't turn into a Batman type situation where the actor changes every movie.

11million pounds, actually (-1, Redundant)

The Evil Couch (621105) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536930)

there's a bit of a difference between 11 million dollars and 11 million pounds. even if he isn't up to doing the stunts, I hope they keep him in. he fit the role of spiderman almost perfectly.

CGI to the rescue? (5, Funny)

Greedo (304385) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536931)

Almost all of the cool Spidey stuff in the first movie was CGI anyway, so what is it exactly that Mr. Macguire can't do? Pose?

Do you really need that much back muscle to kiss a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst?

Re:CGI to the rescue? (3, Funny)

merlin_jim (302773) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537046)

Do you really need that much back muscle to kiss a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst?

I don't think it's the back muscle that is strained by kissing a dripping wet Kirsten Dunst.

And I do think I could suck up a little back pain for the opportunity.

Re:CGI to the rescue? (5, Funny)

larien (5608) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537053)

Dripping wet Kirsten Dunst... MMmmmmmm

Oops, wrong muscle...

Re:CGI to the rescue? (0, Flamebait)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537093)

Almost all of the cool Spidey stuff in the first movie was CGI anyway, so what is it exactly that Mr. Macguire can't do?

Indeed. Anyway, Daredevil was a much better movie. Spiderman wakes up one day, sees he has super powers and starts giggling and posing in front of the mirror - Daredevil thinks he's going insane and has to work hard to turn his "powers" into something useful. Spiderman droned on about responsibility coming with power, Daredevil handled it much more subtly, when he kicks the ass of a villain without realising that that his son was watching. Spiderman's girlfriend was a passive, chronic victim, whereas Elektra was an ass-kicker in her own right. Kingpin was a much more interesting villain than the Goblin, who was basically just a cackling idiot. And the special effects in Daredevil were superior despite a lower budget. So my reaction to a second Spiderman movie being in doubt is so what, the money would better be spent on Daredevil 2 anyway.

ALL YOUR BACK ARE BELONG TO US (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536934)

This isn't funny.

Yeah that does stink (2, Funny)

Gerrioholic99 (309014) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536935)

Let's see I think 11 Million Pounds should be enough to cover my docotr bill for my back problems.... wait, no 11 millions pounds and I still have back problems -- stinks to be TM

Slight problem with scale (1)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536936)

sucks to be him just as much as us

No, I'd say that it sucks 2357142 times more (He loses $16.5 mil vs $7 for a movie ticket).

ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him (2, Funny)

caveat (26803) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536937)

Since the film was apparently slated to pay him 11M, sucks to be him just as much as us if he doesn't play the part.

Yeah, I'm sure he's *completely* broke after the first Spider-Man...I don't recall it doing hrribly well or anything :P

Re:ah, doesn't suck so bad to be him (2)

91degrees (207121) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536969)

Didn't it officially make a loss? Most films do, after all.

Ananova? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536940)

This is a new low for the /. home page. Ananova is just as bad as the tabloid rags in the checkout at the supermarket.

Don't trust anything you read on Ananova unless you've seen it some place else or it's a AP/Reuters feed.

Film at 11 (0)

arvindn (542080) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536944)

Spiderman pulls out of film. Film at 11.

Not Entirely Out (5, Insightful)

Grip3n (470031) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536950)

Note that the article states Toby might not be up to performing "difficult" stunts - which is just fine. We're not going to be able to tell if that's Toby or someone else under that suite with the mask on. Realistically, his back problems, which by the way are in "in the final stages of healing" according to the article, should not pose such a threat as to completely disabling him from acting altogether. If you want to make a bet, Toby is going to be in the sequel.

Who said he's wearing a suit? (2, Insightful)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537000)

From my memory of the first one, he wasn't wearing the suit for all of the stunts. I don't know what they consider to be 'difficult', but it's entirely possible that there might be parts of the movie in which the character Peter Parker would have to use his abilities when he's not wearing the disguise.

Get it right CmdrTaco (-1, Redundant)

merlin_jim (302773) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536960)

From the story...

Last month, Maguire's agents renegotiated a record £11 million deal for the sequel...

£11M is NOT $11M... its approximately $17.6M... quite a difference.

And quite a lot more money to be losing because your back hurts...

What next? (5, Funny)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536961)

Aqua Man drowning in his tub?

Re:What next? (1)

WetCat (558132) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537070)

Ikhtiandr?

Replacement (3, Interesting)

brood (126904) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536963)

The guy they've got up to replace him is Kirsten Dunst's current boyfriend [imdb.com] . You might know him as the star of that movie Bubble Boy [imdb.com] .

Re:Replacement (1)

13Echo (209846) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537058)

He was also the star of Donnie Darko, also listed on his IMDB profile.

If you haven't seen Donnie Darko, *go out and rent it today*! It is probably one of the best films of 2002. He does a superb job in it, and it is probably one of the most intellectually stimulating small/med. budget films that you'll see of late. The storyline is superb, even with the occasional bit of teenage-grade humor that reflects growing up in the '80s.

Re:Replacement - Donnie Darko and October Sky (1)

RoundSparrow (341175) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537103)

Donnie Darko is a great film. Worthy of watching multiple times.
I also suggest October Sky he did an awesome job in this film. Also a great geek story about making it in high school.

Re:Replacement (1)

mcj (21934) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537069)

He was great in Donnie Darko [imdb.com] .

Super-heroes and Back Problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536971)

First Superman (Christopher Reeve), now Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire)? You'd think that powers like being invulnerable and spider-sense would be able to keep these actors/super-heroes out of trouble. Could it be that our childhood idols aren't as indestructable as we were led to believe?

[ Reply to This ] [slashdot.org]

Materialist scum (4, Insightful)

psicE (126646) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536972)

How about, sucks to be him not because he's going to lose $11 million in potential earnings, but because he has back problems, and loses an opportunity to do what he likes best? He already got paid a shitload of money for the first movie. Spider-Man 2 or not, he's still one of the richest people in the country. And as soon as his back heals, he'll be right back on the silver screen, doing stunts and earning money galore.

God. I feel bad for him because as an actor, he undoubtedly loves his work, and it's unfair that he loses such a great opportunity to use his talent. I don't feel bad for him because he's only a multi-millionaire instead of a multi-multi-millionaire.

this sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536984)

i NEVER see a sequel if it doesnt have the original actors. and hey! didnt keanu reeves do the matrix WHILE having to have some sort of neck surgry? (Matrix Revisited). Tobey Maguire better shape up or this is another sequel i will not be able to watch.

So does he get his back fixed by... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5536988)

...a chiropractor or an arachnologist?

Mild discomfort (2, Informative)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 11 years ago | (#5536990)

The article says Maguire is experiencing a mild discomfort in his back after doing two physically intensive movies. Really - if I were him, mild discomfort wouldn't stop me from doing the movie. :)

Replacement AHHH! (3, Funny)

quantaman (517394) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537005)

According to Variety.com [variety.com] , The Good Girl star Jake Gyllenhaal has been lined-up as a possible reserve.

So I figurred I'm already there I might as well click the link see if I recognize the replacement actor. Behold my suprise whent the page loaded and I saw George Bush staring back at me!

Re:Replacement AHHH! - Jake Gyllenhaal (1)

RoundSparrow (341175) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537071)

If you haven't seen his films, I recommend seeing October Sky - any geek would love this film. It is about rocks, not a love story :)

Donnie Darko is also good SiFi.

Re:Replacement AHHH! (1)

psylent (638032) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537113)

no, thats the Lone Ranger movie.

What the big deal? (3, Interesting)

srboneidle (648298) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537008)

I quite like it when they change the actor in series of movies - it adds a bit of variety. It doesn't detract from the movie itself (if the actors chosen are up to the challenge of course).

Take James Bond - does it really matter that Sean Connery doesn't play the lead in all of them? Some of the 'James Bonds' have been better than others, but still fun nonetheless.

Having said that though, I wouldn't want to lose £11 million either...

Re:What the big deal? (2, Insightful)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537043)

Of course, it could fail miserably as well.

Hell, just look at Batman after Michael Keaton! I believe I have proven my point (though the departure of Tim Burton from the series also contributed to the downfall of the Batman movie franchise).

we need a couple more pounds not dollars posts! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537011)

There are 12 posts and counting... maybe we should use are spidey-like powers to read before posting!

Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man (5, Funny)

joel8x (324102) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537018)

"Tobey Maguire may pull out of Spider-Man" - Thats the title of the linked article. Am I the only one who thinks that sounds funny?

I gotta grow up.

he doesn't have to do his own stunts (5, Insightful)

Xpilot (117961) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537019)

Doesn't Spider-Man wear a MASK? A stunt double doesn't even need to look like him! What's the problem here?

Tobey is a pussy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537020)

Orlando Bloom broke his back but still went on to play Legolas. I say get Orlando to play Spidey!

I think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537028)

Tobey (and everyone else) should go and read the information at these websites:

Summary of Dr Sarno's theory on TMS [harvard.edu]
Back Pain and Tension Myositis Syndrome (TMS) [premierhealthonline.com]

And read this book:
The MindBody Prescription by John E. Sarno, M.D.

This book (as well as some of Sarno's other books) is probably available at a local library if you don't want to buy it.

Anyone who has back pain, repetitive strain injury, or any kind of pain at all should go and read all this. Read it even if you don't have pain. It completely changed my life and many other people have benefited from this.

DareDevil to the rescue??? (1)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537049)

Gee, what about Ben Affleck???

/me ducks

Not dollars... pounds (0, Redundant)

FurryFeet (562847) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537050)

Check the article. That's 11M POUNDS. Around 17-18M dollars.
So, I guess it sucks about 50% more to be him...

Publicity stunt...? (5, Interesting)

Glove d'OJ (227281) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537060)

I wonder if this is actual "news" or simply a poorly-disguised press release. If it is the latter, then I think that they succeded at generating a "buzz" around the upcoming Spiderman movie.

(fly-pun not intended, but I am claiming it.)

USD (0, Redundant)

Jakyll (94797) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537072)

Thats 17M USD for 11M Pounds

not compared to superman he doesnt (-1, Troll)

joss (1346) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537074)

That may be bad taste but I'm tired of all those stories about how brave Christopher Reeve is for being crippled. As far as I know he doesnt have any choice in the matter.

No career in sports medicine for Spidey (1)

BoyHowdyAAF (659522) | more than 11 years ago | (#5537094)

So the webbing can't double as an Ace bandage, huh? It'd be handy if he could just web himself up if he sprained something.

Tobey MacGuire Last Summer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5537124)

Last summer, my younger brother was working at this summer camp for rich kids up in the Poconos. They always have some celebrity come up to start off war week (or whatever it is) where the two halves of the camp compete in events. This year was Tobey MacGuire.

Apparently he showed up with a full unkempt beard. My brother said that you could barely even tell who he was and that some of the kids didn't know he was Spiderman.

I wonder if the two are related.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?