Spiderman Back To Marvel
Any truth in these rumours?
Feel gutted for Andrew Garfield personally.
http://screenrant.com/sony-spider-man-andrew-garfield-fired/
Feel gutted for Andrew Garfield personally.
http://screenrant.com/sony-spider-man-andrew-garfield-fired/
0
Comments
Strictly speaking you could argue that Garfield is too old and good looking to play Peter Parker but they would never cast a teenage nerd anyway. If anyone's at fault it's Sony for messing up Spiderman 3 causing Sam Raimi and Toby Maguire to quit and requiring a premature reboot to stop the rights reverting to Marvel.
Could there perhaps be two Spidermen with Garfield continuing for Sony and a different actor for the MCU?
Potentially!
Marvel want Spiderman in Civil War and they want a young actor to play that role.
I guess they could have two, but then if Marvel/Sony agree to share the rights of Spiderman, it could get confusing having two actors.
Either way, I hope Andrew Garfield stays!
Another rumour I've read is that Emma Stone is going to return alongside Tobey Maguire which I really hope doesn't happen. I think Andrew's portrayal has been much better.
Tobey and Emma! No way!
I guess they could technically do that by going back in time, but it'd be crazy!
Andrew is fantastic in the role and has been really well received.
There were a lot of things wrong with AM2, but Garfield wasn't one of them. Having
said that, if the rumours about Sony/Disney agreeing to share the rights to the
character turn out to be true, I suspect we'll see a new actor playing the
character.
Didn't Bryce Dallas Howard play Gwen in Spiderman 3? Presumably she would have had a bigger role in the following film had it been made.
It seems likely as I've seen it reported for a few months now in a few places I just think it's a really dumb move to replace one of the few things in a franchise that actually gets praised amongst bad reviews.
Id happily watch another Spiderman with Andrew in the role. As you say, for all of the wrong in AM2, Garfield isn't one of those. (I say that but I have enjoyed both films much more than I did Tobey's)
I've yet to see Spiderman (more so Peter Parker) done justice. I want a film to get both parts correct (Peter Parker & Spiderman) and marry them in the one film. Therefore, maybe moving in the direction (which apparently is an option) of making him an adult, is the best way to achieve that.
However I'm not happy about this idea because it would mean Garfield was out. I don't hate his performance and I do think he's a good actor. Its more that I really like the idea of Spiderman going back to Marvel. I want to see him in the MCU, where he can team up with the Avengers. I also have more faith in Marvel actually doing the character justice.
Let the Avengers/Marvel x-men and DC play out for the rest of the decade and then revive him some time early next decade (Like how Batman was given a rest when that franchise got muddled) when time away from Spiderman films would generate interest in a new fresh one.
The sad thing is if Sony had let Spiderman go after they had done their trilogy and Marvel had introduced him around now ish then there probably would of been great interest and excitement for a new take on Spiderman, especially as it would be Marvel doing it and would of course feed into their universe. But as Sony rebooted to soon and then messed it up, having another take on the character again feels wrong and more Sony Spiderman's are nothing to get excited about, it just all soured to the point of no wanting anymore for the time being.
Sony are bad for Spiderman plain and simple, they should let him go to Marvel and they should keep him for their future and concentrate on the plans they have.
I liked the first one even though I didn't like the costume and I was hyped to see the second one enough to pay a extra quid to rent it in HD
the second one I think suffers the same problem as the third tobey maguire film that it has too many villains and not enough time to see the development of their characters even though the third one is only introduced in the last five minutes of the film.
I believe that Marvel are not allowed to refer to them both as Mutants.
I think you're probably right. The strength of the Marvel franchise is that they have a visionary show runner in Kevin Feige who is clear about what he wants to do, and is pretty much in charge of how the Marvel Universe is to pan out.
However it remains to be seen if Disney will interfere too much or not in the future.
I can see how this approach has a significant advantage over the Sony films which appear to be coordinated by a committee. Too many cooks and all that.
When I was a kid reading the Spiderman comics for some reason I read much of Spiderman's dialogue as being internal. As if he was thinking what he was saying rather than actually saying it. Like there was a lot of internal narration going on as he was swinging down the streets. Like Peep Show I suppose. From panel to panel it felt like he was thinking to himself, and the wisecracking only started when he was fighting the villains like it was a front. The way it was written provided a sense of intimacy with the character, which I don't think any of the films have achieved.
I think the Sony films aren't bad, they fulfil the remit of providing blockbuster action films that tick the boxes and probably please most of the mainstream audience. But it's always felt to me like there was something missing. I think the Marvel films are better at getting inside of the character's head than the Sony films which follow a decent enough plot, tick the action set pieces boxes, certainly entertain on the spectacle level, but feel a little generic and lack a bit of soul. Generally speaking of course, because as I say they aren't bad, and do have their moments.
Yes I agree. I enjoyed all three Sam Raimi films, but I agree with your points. I think they did a decent enough job with the character of Harry Osbourne/Green Goblin when it focused on his character. Even though I still think the Goblin suit is crap.
I don't think anything they came up with in either could top the goblin costume and mask in the first tobey maguire film. I loved spider-man and the green goblin's costumes in both films then over the next two film they had to change spider-man's costume and make it worse I really liked the black rubber webbing on the suit and they had to change it to make it silver in the third film
Well when I was writing it I was thinking of the first Sam Raimi film. The helmet mask hides too much of the performance.
Have you seen the original animatronic/makeup tests they did for the Green Goblin?
Here's a video you might be interested in if you haven't....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEZBhL5lpqg
Cos' I'm not up on the story, what were the real causes of the problems here then? You got a feeling watching it that too many fingers were spoiling the pie, as if too many different people wanted it to be too many different things. Studio interference?