Latest Entertainment News Headlines

Marvel's Joe Quesada says getting Spider-Man right starts with Peter Parker

03.23.2015

Spider-Man

Even with their flaws I've enjoyed at least parts of all of the Spidey movies (yes that includes SPIDER-MAN 3; the Sandman transformation scene was awesome), but like many fans, I would love to see Marvel and Sony get the character right for his upcoming big screen adventures.

Over the weekend a fan on Tumblr asked Marvel's Chief Creative Officer Joe Quesada what he believes the studios need to do to make the best Spider-Man film possible, and I think most of you will be happy with his response.

The trick to making any incarnation of Spider-Man great, whether comics, animation or film is Peter Parker. Get Peter’s character right and the rest falls into place.

While most fans loved Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker, some thought he made a weak Spider-Man, and many have said the exact opposite about Andrew Garfield's take on the character. What do you think is the key to getting Peter Parker/Spider-Man right?

The new web-slinger will be introduced in CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR on May 6, 2016, and Marvel/Sony's solo Spider-Man movie (possibly titled THE SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN) is set to open on July 28, 2017.

CLICK IMAGE TO OPEN GALLERY & SEE MORE PICS...

Source: Tumblr

RECOMMENDED MOVIE NEWS

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

3:31AM on 03/25/2015
They had better not go through all that origin crap again. And find somebody that is both a good actor and is funny as well. The first two were serious actors just trying to be funny. They should find a perfect balance between Peter Parker being a down to earth, really wimpy-looking but endearingly funny guy and his Spider-Man persona being a fast-talking, smart mouthed mixture of John McClane, Deadpool and Jacky Chan. And get an acrobat to do the web slinging and stunts. It's really getting
They had better not go through all that origin crap again. And find somebody that is both a good actor and is funny as well. The first two were serious actors just trying to be funny. They should find a perfect balance between Peter Parker being a down to earth, really wimpy-looking but endearingly funny guy and his Spider-Man persona being a fast-talking, smart mouthed mixture of John McClane, Deadpool and Jacky Chan. And get an acrobat to do the web slinging and stunts. It's really getting old with all these CG stuff.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:12AM on 03/24/2015
It does indeed start with Peter Parker, while Maguire's seemed more of a wimp & a nerd, his Spider-Man was very bland. With Garfield his Peter Parker was an emo douchebag I just didn't like, but his Spider-Man was pretty spot on like in the comics. With the newer version you need someone that can bring justice to both Peter & Spider-Man. I just never understood how after 5 movies, it's been so difficult to get the balance right, hopefully Marvel can change that given there track record so far.
It does indeed start with Peter Parker, while Maguire's seemed more of a wimp & a nerd, his Spider-Man was very bland. With Garfield his Peter Parker was an emo douchebag I just didn't like, but his Spider-Man was pretty spot on like in the comics. With the newer version you need someone that can bring justice to both Peter & Spider-Man. I just never understood how after 5 movies, it's been so difficult to get the balance right, hopefully Marvel can change that given there track record so far.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:18PM on 03/23/2015
I saw Amazing Spider-Man 2 on HBO for the first time. I was really looking forward to it: the only reason I didn't see it in the theater was because people said it wasn't very good. Well, it was terrible. I was bored by the whole subplot with Peter's parents: it felt like I was watching an episode of Hawaii Five O. And then the movie just ended. I didn't feel there was a resolution.

The movie should have focused on one villain, Harry Osborn. Harry realizes that Spider-Man was bitten by a
I saw Amazing Spider-Man 2 on HBO for the first time. I was really looking forward to it: the only reason I didn't see it in the theater was because people said it wasn't very good. Well, it was terrible. I was bored by the whole subplot with Peter's parents: it felt like I was watching an episode of Hawaii Five O. And then the movie just ended. I didn't feel there was a resolution.

The movie should have focused on one villain, Harry Osborn. Harry realizes that Spider-Man was bitten by a spider at Oscorp and he wants a sample of his blood. Peter refuses because he doesn't want to be responsible for another Lizard in New York. Harry flips out. Meanwhile, he discovers that Oscorp has been experimenting on people, giving then wings and artificial limbs, etc. He assembles a team consisting of Kraven, the Shocker, the Vulture, Doctor Octopus and the Scorpion. They capture Spider-Man but don't kill him because they want his blood. Harry extracts blood from Peter. Then Peter escapes. The villains go after him and he manages to defeat them all. Meanwhile, Harry injects himself with Peter's blood and he becomes super strong so the last villain Peter has to face is Harry himself. There. Done. All in one movie. No need for any romantic subplot. No need for any crap about Peter's parents. If the movie did well then people would have wanted more: you don't have to spend a whole movie teasing the Sinister Six.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:20PM on 03/23/2015
I could argue that the coolest thing about Garfield is that even though his Peter is less of a nerd, he totally gets Spider-Man to a tee. Maguire on the other hand totally gets being Peter Parker, but his Spider-Man is really bland. Most of the time it seems like we only see the stunt guy or the CGI jumping around, and we don't see a lot body language that tells us 'oh he's Peter Parker in a suit'.
I could argue that the coolest thing about Garfield is that even though his Peter is less of a nerd, he totally gets Spider-Man to a tee. Maguire on the other hand totally gets being Peter Parker, but his Spider-Man is really bland. Most of the time it seems like we only see the stunt guy or the CGI jumping around, and we don't see a lot body language that tells us 'oh he's Peter Parker in a suit'.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:56PM on 03/23/2015
The key with making a good Spiderman is having him in High School. Thats the main difference between Spiderman and other Superheros. Batman, Superman, Iron Man, The Hulk, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Flash, Wolverine, etc etc, are all adults. They are fun toread about and look up to, but for the audience of kids and teenagers, it is spiderman who they relate to most. Spiderman main theme are balancing crime-fighting with school work. His whole comic series is a coming of age story. Having
The key with making a good Spiderman is having him in High School. Thats the main difference between Spiderman and other Superheros. Batman, Superman, Iron Man, The Hulk, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Flash, Wolverine, etc etc, are all adults. They are fun toread about and look up to, but for the audience of kids and teenagers, it is spiderman who they relate to most. Spiderman main theme are balancing crime-fighting with school work. His whole comic series is a coming of age story. Having Spiderman as an adult doesnt work the same way. So far none of the movies have really touched on that. Andrew Garfield's roles came closest. But very little of his movies had him in high school interacting with other students other than Qwen Stacy.

White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, it doesnt matter. Race doesnt define Spiderman, or even Peter Parker for that matter. Age does.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:17PM on 03/23/2015
Just not true. Unless your 50 you probably never read Spiderman in high school stories. What makes Spidey, Spidey is that he's Peter Parker first. He has real life problems dating problems, family issues, no money, self esteem issues. He's a regular guy who just happens to be a superhero. People relate to him because he's relatable. Not a legend or a millionaire or a monster or a psychopath or an alien. He's us.
Just not true. Unless your 50 you probably never read Spiderman in high school stories. What makes Spidey, Spidey is that he's Peter Parker first. He has real life problems dating problems, family issues, no money, self esteem issues. He's a regular guy who just happens to be a superhero. People relate to him because he's relatable. Not a legend or a millionaire or a monster or a psychopath or an alien. He's us.
12:52AM on 03/25/2015
I still prefer my comic book Spider-Man to be married.
I still prefer my comic book Spider-Man to be married.
4:15PM on 03/23/2015
Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker was a hipster and not Peter Parker. He wasn't nerdy or an outcast. He seem to fit right into high school.
Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker was a hipster and not Peter Parker. He wasn't nerdy or an outcast. He seem to fit right into high school.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:09PM on 03/23/2015
The key to making Spider-Man great, Joe Q, is NOT HAVING HIM ERASE HIS ENTIRE HISTORY BY MAKING A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL, you ass.
The key to making Spider-Man great, Joe Q, is NOT HAVING HIM ERASE HIS ENTIRE HISTORY BY MAKING A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL, you ass.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:00PM on 03/23/2015
This. Oh, how fuckin this.
This. Oh, how fuckin this.
10:16AM on 03/24/2015
Is this what's happening in the current comics storyline? I still read comics but its been a while since I picked up a Spider-Man book. This sounds terrible.
Is this what's happening in the current comics storyline? I still read comics but its been a while since I picked up a Spider-Man book. This sounds terrible.
12:37PM on 03/24/2015
"Is this what's happening in the current comics storyline?"

It happened several years ago - and it was the storyline that made me stop buying ASM after 30+ years.

Basically, during the Marvel 'Civil War' storyline, Spider-Man unmasked himself to the world. With his secret identity out in the open, it wasn't long before an old enemy - the Kingpin - sent a hitman to kill Aunt May. She was fatally wounded and... Spidey made a deal with Mephisto to save her life. Mephisto's price for this
"Is this what's happening in the current comics storyline?"

It happened several years ago - and it was the storyline that made me stop buying ASM after 30+ years.

Basically, during the Marvel 'Civil War' storyline, Spider-Man unmasked himself to the world. With his secret identity out in the open, it wasn't long before an old enemy - the Kingpin - sent a hitman to kill Aunt May. She was fatally wounded and... Spidey made a deal with Mephisto to save her life. Mephisto's price for this favour was to erase Peter and Mary Jane's marriage from existence, so that he could feast on Peter's anguish or whatever.

From that point on, Spidey's adventures took place in an altered timeline where he never married, a reality where the world remembered that he had unmasked himself but nobody could quite remember what the face beneath the mask looked like. Except Doctor Strange, I think?

Something like that, anyway.
3:17PM on 03/23/2015
I hope Parker is a skinny bumbling youth, in awe of the famous grown-up Avengers.
I hope Parker is a skinny bumbling youth, in awe of the famous grown-up Avengers.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:11PM on 03/23/2015
I still don't know why Joe Q. thinks any Spider-man fan really gives a damn about his opinion? He's infamous for 'one more day', why remind people "Hey, I know a thing or two about Peter Parker, he ain't married..."
I still don't know why Joe Q. thinks any Spider-man fan really gives a damn about his opinion? He's infamous for 'one more day', why remind people "Hey, I know a thing or two about Peter Parker, he ain't married..."
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:18PM on 03/23/2015
Maybe this will finally put those Miles Morales rumors to bed because that character sucks. The assuring thing is it will be Peter. I for one did not care for Garfield's take on it, he seemed to never connect with the audience. I preferred Maguire in the role, his more humble approach as Peter having difficulty talking to Mary Jane and getting bullied felt more genuine compared to Garfield who never struggled talking to the hottest girl in school. Therefore they need someone who can be the
Maybe this will finally put those Miles Morales rumors to bed because that character sucks. The assuring thing is it will be Peter. I for one did not care for Garfield's take on it, he seemed to never connect with the audience. I preferred Maguire in the role, his more humble approach as Peter having difficulty talking to Mary Jane and getting bullied felt more genuine compared to Garfield who never struggled talking to the hottest girl in school. Therefore they need someone who can be the dorky insecure Peter, while also being a wisecracking Spider-Man.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:10PM on 03/23/2015
Agree wholeheartedly. Maguire did a great job of making Peter human. So when it came to caring for him when he was Spider Man, you did. Unlike Garfield.
Agree wholeheartedly. Maguire did a great job of making Peter human. So when it came to caring for him when he was Spider Man, you did. Unlike Garfield.
7:19PM on 03/23/2015
Miles is a good character, but Pete is Spiderman.
Miles is a good character, but Pete is Spiderman.
2:09PM on 03/23/2015
What the hell would Joe Quesada know about getting Peter Parker or Spider-Man right? The man took a giant crap on 30 years of character- and story-development.
What the hell would Joe Quesada know about getting Peter Parker or Spider-Man right? The man took a giant crap on 30 years of character- and story-development.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+3
1:49PM on 03/23/2015
ughhh. Can anyone tell me why there's so much hate for spider man 3? Yes, it was disappointing and has tons of flaws and really feels like 2 different movies. That said, it's really not a terrible movie. There's definitely good stuff in it. I don't think the last 2 were much, if any, better. And compared to other (bad) superhero and blockbuster/ genre films, it's really not that bad. I'm not exactly recommending it, but it gets an unfair amount of harsh criticism when there's waaaaay
ughhh. Can anyone tell me why there's so much hate for spider man 3? Yes, it was disappointing and has tons of flaws and really feels like 2 different movies. That said, it's really not a terrible movie. There's definitely good stuff in it. I don't think the last 2 were much, if any, better. And compared to other (bad) superhero and blockbuster/ genre films, it's really not that bad. I'm not exactly recommending it, but it gets an unfair amount of harsh criticism when there's waaaaay worse superhero flicks. Is it bc #2 was so good and the potential of venom and such was such a letdown?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:14PM on 03/23/2015
Spider Man 3 definitely had some great moments (Sandman origin transformation, the ending battle scene between Spider Man, Harry, Sandman, Venom).
Spider Man 3 definitely had some great moments (Sandman origin transformation, the ending battle scene between Spider Man, Harry, Sandman, Venom).
2:22PM on 03/23/2015
I think you hit the nail on the head and answered your own question. I think because 2 was so well received that all of 3's flaws were just that much more noticeable to fans. Personally, I don't much care for 3 for more reasons than JUST Venom being a let down (which he was a huge one)- but I didn't care for their Gwen Stacy, Toby made some really weird acting choices that I'm surprised Rani rolled with, and you can feel Rami's lack of drive with this story in most of the scenes. It is most
I think you hit the nail on the head and answered your own question. I think because 2 was so well received that all of 3's flaws were just that much more noticeable to fans. Personally, I don't much care for 3 for more reasons than JUST Venom being a let down (which he was a huge one)- but I didn't care for their Gwen Stacy, Toby made some really weird acting choices that I'm surprised Rani rolled with, and you can feel Rami's lack of drive with this story in most of the scenes. It is most definitely the worst of all 5 films in my opinion, closely followed by ASM2 (Emma Stone helps in that regard... As does the awesome Death of Gwen bit.) But I'm also a minority here in that I don't hate or like the ASM series any more than I liked Rami's trilogy.
3:09PM on 03/23/2015
AS2 has to be the worst Spider Man film in my opinion, which is tough because I hated the first rebooted film and thought how could they do worse.
AS2 has to be the worst Spider Man film in my opinion, which is tough because I hated the first rebooted film and thought how could they do worse.
11:46AM on 03/23/2015
And what I also wanted to add was that the original trilogy did a fantastic job in bringing the villains to life (which a hero is only as good and/or memorable because of the villain). And at least they all didn't originate from Oscorp.
And what I also wanted to add was that the original trilogy did a fantastic job in bringing the villains to life (which a hero is only as good and/or memorable because of the villain). And at least they all didn't originate from Oscorp.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:34PM on 03/23/2015
True. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was a bit overkill in terms of villains.
True. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was a bit overkill in terms of villains.
4:15PM on 03/23/2015
I for one want to know all the hate that ASPM2 gets all the hate it does?, Garfield did a good job portrayin Parker and SpiderMan,spideys interactions with citizens, villains and his wit is perfect with the comics all it needed was a better creative team behind it but Garfield still deserves to be Spider-Man if not then who?Logan legman?cmon man you know it to
I for one want to know all the hate that ASPM2 gets all the hate it does?, Garfield did a good job portrayin Parker and SpiderMan,spideys interactions with citizens, villains and his wit is perfect with the comics all it needed was a better creative team behind it but Garfield still deserves to be Spider-Man if not then who?Logan legman?cmon man you know it to
11:42AM on 03/23/2015
The key to getting this right is to get both Parker and Spidey aspects right, not just one or the other.
The key to getting this right is to get both Parker and Spidey aspects right, not just one or the other.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:38AM on 03/23/2015
"What do you think is the key to getting Peter Parker/Spider-Man right?"

I just want this new Spider Man to have 'heart' and to be someone we can root for. I felt that the entire time while watching the original trilogy (and the fact that they were really well made films and that Raimi actually understood the character, the world of Spider Man didn't hurt either).

With the two new films, all of that was just gone. Just rushed, forced storylines with no 'heart' and a Peter Parker/Spider
"What do you think is the key to getting Peter Parker/Spider-Man right?"

I just want this new Spider Man to have 'heart' and to be someone we can root for. I felt that the entire time while watching the original trilogy (and the fact that they were really well made films and that Raimi actually understood the character, the world of Spider Man didn't hurt either).

With the two new films, all of that was just gone. Just rushed, forced storylines with no 'heart' and a Peter Parker/Spider Man I just couldn't root for which is essential for any comic book film (hell even the villains as well).
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:40PM on 03/23/2015
Agreed 100% man...I know it's probably not going to happen but I'm still hoping Tobey comes back LOL Until they cast someone else I'll still be hoping.

Plus if the rumors are true about J.K. Simmons you never know LOL We'll see.
Agreed 100% man...I know it's probably not going to happen but I'm still hoping Tobey comes back LOL Until they cast someone else I'll still be hoping.

Plus if the rumors are true about J.K. Simmons you never know LOL We'll see.
3:10PM on 03/23/2015
Agree wholeheartedly. Maguire did a great job of making Peter human. So when it came to caring for him when he was Spider Man, you did. Unlike Garfield.
Agree wholeheartedly. Maguire did a great job of making Peter human. So when it came to caring for him when he was Spider Man, you did. Unlike Garfield.
10:06AM on 03/24/2015
Exactly
Exactly
11:36AM on 03/23/2015
The statement itself is pretty obvious for making a decent Spiderman movie. I think they were pretty close with Andrew Garfield's take on the character, but changing his background to make him a kid who has pent up issues about his parents leaving him kind of took away from the character. It added a dynamic that's never really focused on in that depth in the comics.

Hopefully they get it right with this new incarnation, especially since they'll have Marvel's help directly with crafting the
The statement itself is pretty obvious for making a decent Spiderman movie. I think they were pretty close with Andrew Garfield's take on the character, but changing his background to make him a kid who has pent up issues about his parents leaving him kind of took away from the character. It added a dynamic that's never really focused on in that depth in the comics.

Hopefully they get it right with this new incarnation, especially since they'll have Marvel's help directly with crafting the character. But who know, Sony has a way of fucking these things up. In another couple of years they'll want to cross Spiderman over with Men in Black or something.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:35AM on 03/23/2015
Maguire was more regular 616 Spidey, while Garfield was closer to Ultimate Spidey. He MCU being kind if a mix of both, it's unfortunate but logical to get rid of both actors/storylines.
Maguire was more regular 616 Spidey, while Garfield was closer to Ultimate Spidey. He MCU being kind if a mix of both, it's unfortunate but logical to get rid of both actors/storylines.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:35AM on 03/23/2015
I think we can just skip the origin part. Just establish Peter Parker as Spider-Man. No more back story - just get him into action.
I think we can just skip the origin part. Just establish Peter Parker as Spider-Man. No more back story - just get him into action.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:23AM on 03/23/2015
I hope they get Spiderman right someday. Maybe it will need 3, 6 or 24 new reboots, but someday they will get it right.
I hope they get Spiderman right someday. Maybe it will need 3, 6 or 24 new reboots, but someday they will get it right.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
11:16AM on 03/23/2015

Agreed....

If you watch what they've done with him in the new animated series (other than the lame SHIELD connections), his character is fresh and interesting to watch. He's basically a fanboy who gets powers, but has a really tough time learning to use them correctly. The crossovers with The Avengers in the show is just great (especially with Rodgers).
If you watch what they've done with him in the new animated series (other than the lame SHIELD connections), his character is fresh and interesting to watch. He's basically a fanboy who gets powers, but has a really tough time learning to use them correctly. The crossovers with The Avengers in the show is just great (especially with Rodgers).
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:10AM on 03/23/2015

I preferred Andrew Garfield

even though he was obviously too old for the role (for that matter, so was Emma Stone). I think they need to avoid another origins tale for Spider-Man; we've already seen two within the last 15 years, we know how it happens. Let's start with an established Peter Parker and take it from there.
even though he was obviously too old for the role (for that matter, so was Emma Stone). I think they need to avoid another origins tale for Spider-Man; we've already seen two within the last 15 years, we know how it happens. Let's start with an established Peter Parker and take it from there.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:05AM on 03/23/2015
Whoever they end up casting as Parker, be it a known actor or a newcomer, they need someone that can stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Downey Jr., Evans and Hemsworth etc...

When Sony rebooted the franchise after Spider-Man 3 I was dead against it. I even wrote to a few magazines to rant (Total Film told me to calm down, lol)... My view was, sure '3' Wasnt the best, but surely the answer was to make '4' a better film?

Still, when I did see the first 'Amazing' film I did find
Whoever they end up casting as Parker, be it a known actor or a newcomer, they need someone that can stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Downey Jr., Evans and Hemsworth etc...

When Sony rebooted the franchise after Spider-Man 3 I was dead against it. I even wrote to a few magazines to rant (Total Film told me to calm down, lol)... My view was, sure '3' Wasnt the best, but surely the answer was to make '4' a better film?

Still, when I did see the first 'Amazing' film I did find they Garfield was a much better casting. And his chemistry with Emma Stone as Gwen was a highlight over both films.

I'm sort of nervous about another reboot but have faith Marvel will bring the character home in style. I love the MCU and am looking forward to Spidey's inclusion.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:14AM on 03/23/2015
Have to disagree with "they need someone that can stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Downey Jr., Evans and Hemsworth etc...". While I don't want Parker saying "oh gee", "oh golly gosh" or even "oh boy", I do want an actor who can play a Parker that is in awe of "established" heroes just as he is in the comics (or was when I was reading them). Parker/Spider-Man always underestimated his value to everything and I liked that about him (not to mention his tendency to always be the loser
Have to disagree with "they need someone that can stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Downey Jr., Evans and Hemsworth etc...". While I don't want Parker saying "oh gee", "oh golly gosh" or even "oh boy", I do want an actor who can play a Parker that is in awe of "established" heroes just as he is in the comics (or was when I was reading them). Parker/Spider-Man always underestimated his value to everything and I liked that about him (not to mention his tendency to always be the loser when winning). With that in mind, you might just need an actor who would actually know what it feels like to be acting with established stars.
11:31AM on 03/23/2015
@Riz-man. I agree with you. That's the best part of Spider-man's interactions in the Marvel universe. He's awkward and lacks confidence, and tries to make up for it by talking too much and being a wiseass. When teamed up with the Avengers it's like putting a kid from little league on the Yankees, at least in Peter Parker's mind. It's often really funny.
@Riz-man. I agree with you. That's the best part of Spider-man's interactions in the Marvel universe. He's awkward and lacks confidence, and tries to make up for it by talking too much and being a wiseass. When teamed up with the Avengers it's like putting a kid from little league on the Yankees, at least in Peter Parker's mind. It's often really funny.
11:34AM on 03/23/2015
Riz-man- That's a fair comment, but I meant 'shoulder to shoulder' more in a sense of talent.

I feel Marvel have been very good at making their films about their lead characters rather than about the villains.

That only really works if - regardless of how well it's written or directed - the actor fits the part and brings their A-game.

Downey jr, Evans and Hemsworth all lead their respective multiple films and remain one, if not THE most watchable element.

That makes it all the
Riz-man- That's a fair comment, but I meant 'shoulder to shoulder' more in a sense of talent.

I feel Marvel have been very good at making their films about their lead characters rather than about the villains.

That only really works if - regardless of how well it's written or directed - the actor fits the part and brings their A-game.

Downey jr, Evans and Hemsworth all lead their respective multiple films and remain one, if not THE most watchable element.

That makes it all the cooler when they're brought together in one film (Avengers).

I was talking calibre of actor - if that makes sense.

You certainly wouldn't want an Avengers film where you're thankful Spidey's not in a scene because he's not quite up to scratch
12:05PM on 03/23/2015
Fair enough but you'd hope Marvel always try to get talented people who could hold their own against others just as talented given their whole cross movie setup. So far, everyone holds their own fantastically well....whether that's talent chops or screen presence. Johansson seems to get the most criticism from some but I'm more than happy with how she's done and thought she was great in TWS. Whoever plays Parker, I'd be happy for them to be lacking in screen presence if they can pull off
Fair enough but you'd hope Marvel always try to get talented people who could hold their own against others just as talented given their whole cross movie setup. So far, everyone holds their own fantastically well....whether that's talent chops or screen presence. Johansson seems to get the most criticism from some but I'm more than happy with how she's done and thought she was great in TWS. Whoever plays Parker, I'd be happy for them to be lacking in screen presence if they can pull off awkwardness and a lack of confidence (as Beaker puts it) well. Whilst I'm happy for us to get a Spider-Man who's already established that only has to mean, he's already on the scene...and not someone who's several years in to the hero business - I've said it on several occasions below, but if they use the animated Spectacular Spider-Man series as a blueprint, I think they'll do very well.
-1
11:05AM on 03/23/2015

Garfield was good

My question is: Why are they so hellbent on getting rid of Andrew Garfield? He's a good actor. A much, much better actor than Tobey Maguire, who seems comatose half the time. What has Garfield done that makes them want rid of him so badly?

I know people haven't been crazy about the Amazing Spider-man franchise, even though it has made a billion at the box office, but that has been about the quality of the films and not any real problems with Garfield's Spider-man. Marc Webb has been the
My question is: Why are they so hellbent on getting rid of Andrew Garfield? He's a good actor. A much, much better actor than Tobey Maguire, who seems comatose half the time. What has Garfield done that makes them want rid of him so badly?

I know people haven't been crazy about the Amazing Spider-man franchise, even though it has made a billion at the box office, but that has been about the quality of the films and not any real problems with Garfield's Spider-man. Marc Webb has been the problem with the films. I thought Garfield made a pretty great, modern Spider-man. If he doesn't want to do it anymore then whatever, but otherwise why boot him and start all over AGAIN?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:09AM on 03/23/2015
Because they want Spider-Man to be a high school kid, and Garfield is in his 30s. He also starred in two movies that underwhelmed at the box office, and ruined major villains for future use.

Also he was kind of a douche. Peter Parker has never been what Garfield was in the role. Not saying it was an unpleasant take on the character, but it wasn't in line with who he's been in the comics.
Because they want Spider-Man to be a high school kid, and Garfield is in his 30s. He also starred in two movies that underwhelmed at the box office, and ruined major villains for future use.

Also he was kind of a douche. Peter Parker has never been what Garfield was in the role. Not saying it was an unpleasant take on the character, but it wasn't in line with who he's been in the comics.
11:18AM on 03/23/2015
I loved Garfield as Spidey and thought his take on Parker was inspired, especially for this day and age. However, Marvel and probably sony sees him as poison to the character now because he was connected to 2 movies that did not perform up to par according to those studios. The average moviegoer will probably see him and equate him to those movies. It's unfortunate and I hated the idea of rebooting spidey when Rami left. However, now, with Marvel's involvement, I am looking forward to a
I loved Garfield as Spidey and thought his take on Parker was inspired, especially for this day and age. However, Marvel and probably sony sees him as poison to the character now because he was connected to 2 movies that did not perform up to par according to those studios. The average moviegoer will probably see him and equate him to those movies. It's unfortunate and I hated the idea of rebooting spidey when Rami left. However, now, with Marvel's involvement, I am looking forward to a clean slate. A beginning to the perfect version of the character that will last longer than Tobey's and Andrews combined.
11:22AM on 03/23/2015
If they just want to go younger then I can understand that to a point. But that's the only reason that makes sense.

In the comics Peter Parker hasn't been a high school kid in a long time. In fact, in the Civil War storyline he wasn't a teenager, and really couldn't have been given his character's arc. It required an adult.

Also, to say the Garfield Spider-man movies underwhelmed at the box office might be a stretch. They grossed $758 and $709 million worldwide, respectively. That's
If they just want to go younger then I can understand that to a point. But that's the only reason that makes sense.

In the comics Peter Parker hasn't been a high school kid in a long time. In fact, in the Civil War storyline he wasn't a teenager, and really couldn't have been given his character's arc. It required an adult.

Also, to say the Garfield Spider-man movies underwhelmed at the box office might be a stretch. They grossed $758 and $709 million worldwide, respectively. That's more than any of the pre-Avenger Marvel films made by a pretty hefty amount. It's also more than any of the Raimi Spider-man movies made until Spider-Man 3 (which is odd considering its widely considered the worst SM film to date). Garfield's SM films were hardly a catastrophe.

If they want to reboot it with a younger kid I get it, but it seems like they wanted rid of Garfield as soon as they cast him. I'm just curious as to why?
11:26AM on 03/23/2015
"Underwhelmed" according to Sony. If they were satisfied with those movies business, they wouldn't have felt the need to reboot the character yet again.
"Underwhelmed" according to Sony. If they were satisfied with those movies business, they wouldn't have felt the need to reboot the character yet again.
11:38AM on 03/23/2015
They must have had some pretty outsized expectations if those returns were considered disappointing.

But I get it. Even though I thought Garfield made a good Spider-Man the films as a whole aren't all that great. The villains are terrible. The Lizard was utterly forgettable and Jamie Foxx made a fucking terrible Electro. I think Dane DeHaan is a really good actor, but even that version of the Green Goblin sucked. I think Marc Webb was just a bad choice to build that universe.

Hopefully
They must have had some pretty outsized expectations if those returns were considered disappointing.

But I get it. Even though I thought Garfield made a good Spider-Man the films as a whole aren't all that great. The villains are terrible. The Lizard was utterly forgettable and Jamie Foxx made a fucking terrible Electro. I think Dane DeHaan is a really good actor, but even that version of the Green Goblin sucked. I think Marc Webb was just a bad choice to build that universe.

Hopefully rebooting the character in the MCU will allow some of their Midas touch to rub off on the character.
10:53AM on 03/23/2015
Consistency would be a great start. Rebooting it the first time was ridiculous seeing as how Toby Maguire and Sam Raimi both were slated to do two additional films, and now they are doing it again without even finishing the current incarnation off.
Consistency would be a great start. Rebooting it the first time was ridiculous seeing as how Toby Maguire and Sam Raimi both were slated to do two additional films, and now they are doing it again without even finishing the current incarnation off.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:04AM on 03/23/2015
I didn't wanna see anymore of the second run. Personally got no problem with it being left hanging. They dug themselves a pretty decent hole with Amazing Spider-Man 2 (stayed away at the cinema), and with the plans they announced, they only seemed to be making that hole wider and deeper. I eventually saw the car crash, and am not really interested in watching the pile up that was to follow. Can happily erase it from my memory now.
I didn't wanna see anymore of the second run. Personally got no problem with it being left hanging. They dug themselves a pretty decent hole with Amazing Spider-Man 2 (stayed away at the cinema), and with the plans they announced, they only seemed to be making that hole wider and deeper. I eventually saw the car crash, and am not really interested in watching the pile up that was to follow. Can happily erase it from my memory now.
10:53AM on 03/23/2015
At the time Spider-Man came out i was digging it. But when Amazing Spider-Man came out I though Garfield was a MUCH better Peter Parker/Spider-man. He was the character in so many ways that it often made up for some other flaws in the movies. Tobey Maguire seemed a bit too dopey for Peter Parker.
At the time Spider-Man came out i was digging it. But when Amazing Spider-Man came out I though Garfield was a MUCH better Peter Parker/Spider-man. He was the character in so many ways that it often made up for some other flaws in the movies. Tobey Maguire seemed a bit too dopey for Peter Parker.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:14AM on 03/23/2015
Garfield played Parker as a cocky, Emo douchebag. It was a bold take on the character, but didn't sit well with a lot of people (including Marvel). Also, if you're going to talk dopey.....Garfield played Parker like a guy with a mid-level IQ, but then assured us he was actually really smart (despite offering no evidence to support it). He was funnier as Spiderman, and had great chemistry with Stone (who they immediately killed off), but there was nothing else appealing about his portrayal to
Garfield played Parker as a cocky, Emo douchebag. It was a bold take on the character, but didn't sit well with a lot of people (including Marvel). Also, if you're going to talk dopey.....Garfield played Parker like a guy with a mid-level IQ, but then assured us he was actually really smart (despite offering no evidence to support it). He was funnier as Spiderman, and had great chemistry with Stone (who they immediately killed off), but there was nothing else appealing about his portrayal to me.
11:32AM on 03/23/2015
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
11:33AM on 03/23/2015
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
11:36AM on 03/23/2015
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
I prefer my Parker to be the geeky genius who can't get the girl in high school. Basically the opposite of how Garfield did it
11:41AM on 03/23/2015
Agree with Ocelot_Snake.

I thought Maguire was much better in his portrayal because he made Peter more mature in his personality, life, and actions.
Agree with Ocelot_Snake.

I thought Maguire was much better in his portrayal because he made Peter more mature in his personality, life, and actions.
1:51PM on 03/23/2015
How did the immediately kill off Stone?
How did the immediately kill off Stone?
11:12PM on 03/23/2015
In the comics they had years to establish Gwen and Peter and Spider-Man and the Green Goblin. In the movie Harry IMMEDIATELY kills Gwen after becoming the Green Goblin.

I think Dane Dehaan was the best thing about ASM 2 and I wish they had spent more time on him and saved Electro for another movie.
In the comics they had years to establish Gwen and Peter and Spider-Man and the Green Goblin. In the movie Harry IMMEDIATELY kills Gwen after becoming the Green Goblin.

I think Dane Dehaan was the best thing about ASM 2 and I wish they had spent more time on him and saved Electro for another movie.
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...

Featured Youtube Videos

Views and Counting