In a web chat with
Empire Online readers, Willem Dafoe was asked for his thoughts on both
The Amazing Spider-Man and
John Carter. It seems a little unfair to accuse the former of telling the same story as Sam Raimi's
Spider-Man, especially when he hasn't actually seen the movie, although the actor can be forgiven for making such an assumption. As for
John Carter, Dafoe definitely has a point when it comes to how badly Disney handled the marketing, although that isn't exactly relevant to the poor critical reception it received.
Do you have any thoughts on the decision to re-imagine Spider-Man so soon after your work on the previous franchise?
I have lots of thoughts. Where do I start? I haven't seen it. I don't know what to say. I will say that I did see the preview and I was kind of shocked at how it's another version of exactly the same story. Surprising. I wish them well, but I think it's hard to beat the charm, the naive charm, of the first one. There's never really any possibility of going back.
I'm firmly in the 'Love John Carter' camp, and would love to see a sequel. How did you feel about the way it was marketed and its critical reception?
Disappointed by the reception, disappointed I guess by the marketing because before it was released there was a very spotty awareness of it. I can't explain why it wasn't touted as the next best thing since sliced bread. Seriously, I was looking forward to doing a sequel, particularly since the Carter / Tars Tarkas relationship really develops and becomes super interesting.
Do you agree with the actors comments? Which do you think best handled the origin story;
Spider-Man or
The Amazing Spider-Man? Sound off with your thoughts in the usual place.