When Marc Webb picked up the Spider-Man franchise and announced a new movie with actor Andrew Garfield leading the role, I like many felt it was too soon, considering Sam Raimi’s trilogy ended in 2007, only a mere 5 years before the theatrical release of the first Amazing Spiderman movie.
I was glad to say Amazing Spider-Man was an excellent movie and I enjoyed every bit of it – although really, the movie met with mixed reviews and some couldn’t shake the embedded image of Tobey Maguire who donned the webbed costume for so long only a few years prior to this film. Still, Amazing Spiderman was a success and the sequel was already being penned.
The follow-up movie, Amazing Spider-Man 2 was in all respects, a success as well. While it did throw us into an assortment of confusing plot points, all suggesting spin-off sequels like the Sinister Six, and a possible Venom solo movie.
Alas, with the acquisition of the Spider-Man brand from Sony and now placing him into the same Marvel cinematic universe as the Avengers, one would think this would be good news, wouldn’t one?
Well… it is good news… to a degree. Unless you’ve lived under a rock the past few years, you know that Marvel has been knocking it out of the park with their Captain America’s, their Thor’s, their Iron Man’s… and well, not so much the Hulk, but everything else has been excellent and top notch! Then to bring them all together in one jam-packed movie like The Avengers and The Avengers: Age of Ultron… it’s easy to get excited about possibly seeing Spider-Man cross over into one of those films – in fact, at this point it’s all but confirmed!
The problem is this… we JUST has a Spider-Man movie… a sequel movie to a recent reboot only 3 years ago… The sequel came out just last year for crying out loud… and now they want to REBOOT Spider-Man… AGAIN with a new movie in 2017.
Accepting Andrew Garfield as the new Peter Parker after only 5 years was pretty tough for Sony to do and by chance, it worked out in their favor. In fact, ask any critic and they will tell you the best part of the Amazing Spider-Man series is the character portrayals by Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone (as Gwen Stacey). The life and chemistry they brought to the films easily surpassed any shortcomings or confusion in missing plot points.
Now they’re going to CHANGE it all – AGAIN?!
W-why?? Couldn’t they create some legal transition of contract of Andrew Garfield over to Marvel? Couldn’t they at least finish up the Amazing Spider-Man trilogy??
No… and you’ll never guess why Marvel is insisting on finding a new Peter Parker…
“After all, it is being planned that the Marvel Cinematic Universe version of the webslinger will be very young, and the Amazing Spider-Man star will be turning 32 this year. If the idea is to have the wall-crawling superhero’s age be a sharp contrast to the likes of Captain America and Thor, it would be helpful to get an actor who is not only one year younger than Chris Evans and almost exactly the same age as Chris Hemsworth.”
-Source: Cinema Blend
They want a younger actor because Andrew Garfield is 32?!
Um, let’s do a little math here… the first Amazing Spider-Man came out in 2012, which would mean Andrew Garfield was 29…
Last I checked, The Amazing Spider-Man movie took place with Peter Parker as a teen in HIGH-SCHOOL! I don’t know many high school kids who are TWENTY-NINE!!
In fact, it’s actually very common in Hollywood for older actors to play younger roles! If you can look the part, it doesn’t matter what your REAL age is! This happens all the time but suddenly, Andrew Garfield turning 32 makes it unbelievable for him to look younger than the buffed up and brawny Chris Hemsworth or Chris Evans as Thor and Captain America respectively? What, is there no more make-up or other special affects that could aid in distinguishing an age difference between the three actors???
I call B.S on this one. I call total B.S. I’ve read that in addition, Andrew Garfield had a fall-out with Kaz Hirai, chief of Sony which is the supposed real reason there wasn’t going to be an Amazing Spider-man 3 to begin with… but, doesn’t contracts sorta prevent mishaps like this from causing an entire film from being cancelled? You have a tiff with your superior… so? That’s enough to warrant the cancellation of an entire third movie in a trilogy? And they say because of this problem between Andrew and Kaz, it made negotiations between Sony and Marvel a lot easier.
If that’s true then dang… Andrew must have been one heck of a jerk, don’t you think?
Seriously though… there is definitely some B.S. going on here. It can’t be this basic.
OH, another supposed reason for the cancellation of the 3rd Amazing Spider-Man is because Amazing Spider-Man 2 only grossed $708 million instead of the “required” 1 billion.
… Dang. Talk about a bomb at the box office.
Rebooting Spider-Man only 2 years after the last film makes about as much sense as Batman being rebooted only 4 years after The Dark Knight Rises… and anyone who knows me knows I’m not a fan of the Batfleck either.
Oh and rumors are going strong about who the next candidate would be for the new Spider-Man… And yes, he does seem to look “age-appropriate” for what they’re going for… Wanna see who it is?
What do you think of the potentially new Spider-Man and his upcoming reboot? Is this good for the Marvel cinematic universe or are they dooming themselves to failure with this? Let me know in the comments below!