The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU)

Andrew Garfield is a likeable actor, but he wasn't Peter Parker to me..the whole 'reimagined’ elements of the last 2 films (Peter’s Parents, 'troll doll’ Green Goblin), along with the angsty romance Peter as a skater kid were, on the whole, terrible. Very much looking forward to a Marvel-studios approved Spidey.
It's a shame Andrew and Emma were wasted. I know the latest film will now have the Marvel seal of approval but I don't think I've seen a film rebooted twice in such quick succession.The last of the original trilogy was in 2007, the reboot in 2012, the sequel in 2014 and now another reboot by 2017. That's three incarnations within 10 years so I'll be interested to see how much the audience is here for it. They surely can't do another origins...
Last edited:
This is awful. Not only because Spiderman's so huge that he'll probably mess with the ensemble thing that the MCU has going, but because it's far too soon to reboot with a third Spiderman origin story, so to anyone who watches just the MCU, you've got a new main character appearing literally out of nowhere, unless they canonise the Amazing Spider-Man movies.

Imagine The Avengers if there was no Iron Man and Iron Man 2.

I know everyone knows Spiderman and his origin anyway, but I still think you should be able to sit down and watch all the MCU movies from start to finish and have it be a complete story.
I'm a bit torn here.

They COULD continue with The Amazing Spiderman 3 and just have a different actor and introduce Mary-Jane. They don't have to call it The Amazing Spiderman 3 but still have those 2 movies as canon.

I am not here for another origins story.
Well they actually could do another origin story but have it intertwined with other MCU movies. Supposedly the new MCU Spider Man will first appear in Captain America: Civil War.
Well they actually could do another origin story but have it intertwined with other MCU movies. Supposedly the new MCU Spider Man will first appear in Captain America: Civil War.

It's not confirmed that it's that but most likely will be. Either that or post-credits Avengers.
Hopefully, this means the end of the Sinister Six, Venom (urgh) and Aunt May solo movies.

I imagine it will take them a while to recast the role etc. so wouldn't expect a Marvel Spidey until the third Cap movie next year
Last edited:
They should just carry on with Garfield and some of the other supporting players like Sally Field. Keep them all in the same roles but neither confirm or deny that the previous movies have happened. Everyone knows who Spider-Man is, we do not need yet another origin story.

I'd be more excited if he was with the X-Men to be honest. I'm suffering from Avengers fatigue.

I wouldn't mind more Emma Stone though, so if they could bring Gwen back from the dead I wouldn't complain.
Last edited:
I just really really really don't get the benefit with another recast. Like it's not as if he's desperately unpopular? I truly think the audience would much much rather have him than another/I] recast.
Doesn't Civil War feature Spider-Man being unmasked to the world? Surely that will have zero impact if it's a recast? I love Andrew as Peter Parker, I hope they can work it out and get him on board. Apparently, he's blown it by pissing off some big wigs at Sony.

If all else fails, get Logan Lerman on board, he's a great choice for a younger Spidey. I remember liking the idea of him in the role when he was first rumoured during the ASM casting.
I trust Marvel with Spiderman more than Sony, so I'm confident they'll get it right. I'm a bit concerned this will disrupt the plans they've laid out, which seem incredible, and they'll shoehorn him awkwardly. But again, I trust they know what they're doing.
I really don't like the idea of this. I know there were a lot of things people didn't like about the reboot, but another Recast is just ridiculous. Andrew was great in the role.

I for one really enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man movies, in spite of their cheesiness, there was a stronger since of connectivity and a proper movie universe then in the original trilogy, and i was looking forward to that continuing.
FOX won't be relinquishing those rights until the films start underperforming and even then, because the series has maintained the same continuity all this time, they still have the reboot ace up their sleeve, and so many characters they could make solo films for and keep their contract ticking over.

It's only Sony's desperation and diminishing returns that have led to this. Plus Spidey is Marvel's poster-boy so I can see them eager to get him back in a way I don't think they'll be quite as quick to bargain for conditional returns for the X-Men.
I wish Andrew Garfield has gotten one more movie just to close out his trilogy. Were the movies great? No, but they were very good and Andrew and Emma Stone were incredible.
The five Spider-Man films to date have all been massively flawed because they all went down the worst possible avenues with their direction.

Raimi's films were overly sentimental and wholesome, like eating a big slice of sickly-sweet, luke-warm apple pie. Maguire's Peter Parker was too soft and emotional; I was never convinced that he was any way assertive or powerful, or that anyone should have much reason to fear him or be in awe of him. He was just an annoying, whiney imbecile. The trilogy was a horrendous clusterfuck. Willem Dafoe's Goblin might have been amazing were it not for that horrendous plastic bodysuit they put him in.

Webb's films go for an equally horrific 'goofy cartoonish sci-fi' aesthetic similar to those heinous Ultimate Spider-Man comics so they're pretty much doomed before any of the characters even open their mouths. Garfield, Stone and Field are all wonderful but their roles aren't wonderfully written; the chemistry between Garfield and Stone was naturally good but at complete odds with where their characters were supposed to be emotionally (why are they cracking cutesy jokes and making chit chat when ten minutes ago they were angsty and upset about the problems in their relationship?). It felt like you were watching the actors - not the characters. All of the villains were dealt with disgustingly by Webb.

I really don't know what the fucking issue is when it comes to making a decent Spider-Man film when there's so much compelling material at their fingertips and they go for common denominator clichés and schmaltzy ten-a-penny crap instead. And so being absorbed into Marvel is the worst thing that could happen because that's exactly what all their films strive for. This guarantees we won't be seeing anything we haven't seen before. I suppose my tastes are biased because of what I read as a child, but I really don't differentiate between the quality of the five Spider-Man films and the ones based around The Avengers.

In this day and age, Spider-Man thrives in a much grittier, 'darker' setting. When I was younger I read the Marvel Knights Spider-Man series which really hit the nail on the head in terms of modernising the universe without abandoning the vibrancy. There was another arc I read which expanded the mythos of Spider-Man by having Peter meet another Spider-Man named Ezekiel and there was all this great thematic stuff about the African legend of Anansi and how Peter is natural whereas his enemies are artificial ... or of course there's Madame Web ready and waiting to be used and abused - there's so much breathing space to do something truly interesting, things that would be unique to this franchise and instead they just return to the boring well-trodden paths of a thousand films.

There's a really excellent film to be made out of this IP, if only someone would strap on a pair and just do it.
Darker, grittier Spider-Man.. no thanks. The Marvel Knights Spider and JMS's Ezekial Spider arc are just the worst. Spider-Man is neither dark nor gritty - he should be fun, colourful and down-to-earth... more Guardians of the Galaxy than Man of Steel or Dark Knight Rises.