I feel like Spider-Man is the Aquaman of the Marvel Universe. He's always made fun of by the general public as the scrub of the team, and then when he's featured, he's made a badass just to offset all of the hate (a la Aquaman being a beast in the game Injustice: Gods Among Us).
I feel like Spider-Man is the Aquaman of the Marvel Universe. He's always made fun of by the general public as the scrub of the team, and then when he's featured, he's made a badass just to offset all of the hate (a la Aquaman being a beast in the game Injustice: Gods Among Us).
I'd say that's more Luke Cage/Iron Fist/Daredevil
Maybe even Hawkeye with the Matt Fraction run making him a loser asshole, though not Kate Hawkeye, she's awesome.
Good. Marvel essentially gets back one of it's best and most beloved characters and Sony helps people forget about the shitfest that was Amazing Spiderman 2. Everybody wins.
Now the only question remains, which Spiderman do they go with? I'm tempted to say they just drop Peter Parker and go with Miles Morales...maybe played by Donald Glover?
I feel like Spider-Man is the Aquaman of the Marvel Universe. He's always made fun of by the general public as the scrub of the team, and then when he's featured, he's made a badass just to offset all of the hate (a la Aquaman being a beast in the game Injustice: Gods Among Us).
I'd say that you're not familiar enough with Spider-Man then.
I actually like that Marvel doesn't control every character, but I can get behind this news because Sony doesn't seem to know what the fuck they're doing with Spiderman. Even though I liked the Amazing Spiderman movies more than most people, I can't say that the future of that series looked promising after 2.
I hope they don't tell the origin story again. Recast the movie, and just do a cool adventure where he fights Dr. Octopus or some shit. Also they should just get J.K. Simmons to play J Jonah Jameson again cause fuck it.
@hurricaneivan29: Uh...Spider-Man is the number one selling Marvel property. He is also consistently one of the most well liked comic characters of all time. Like, up there with Superman and Batman.
Hell, he's also been pivotal in numerous Marvel comic arcs. From Avengers/New Avengers/Secret Avengers, to crossover events like Secret War, Civil War, Planet Hulk, etc. (I generally try not to think of Civil War, though. It was terrible. Good thing they're using it basically in name only for Captain America 3.)
@hurricaneivan29: Uh...Spider-Man is the number one selling Marvel property. He is also consistently one of the most well liked comic characters of all time. Like, up there with Superman and Batman.
@silver-streak: I think your thread title may be a bit misleading. From that article, it sounds more like Marvel is giving a bunch of cash to Sony to be able to use Spidey in some specific instances while Sony retains all of the IP rights they already have as well as new potential for bringing other Marvel-owned characters into their version of the Amazing Spider-Man franchise. Not so much Sony "letting them" use the character, but I guess that's kind of a semantic argument. ;)
@joshwent: I don't know man, I think if you compare the money a film like Avengers made compared to something like Amazing Spiderman 2 did I'd probably want in on that action. This is a by far a better step than the rumors going on late last year during the whole sony hack where they were mentioning rebooting the series for a third time.
@corevi: The first one wasn't that bad. On a scale from The Dark Knight to Fantastic Four 2: Rise of the Silver Surfer, I'd rate it about the same as Captain America: The First Avenger. The second one is almost as bad as Rise of the Silver Surfer. Actually, I think it's worse, simply because it had more talent and money behind it.
Sounds like good news to me. I haven't liked every Marvel film I've seen, but I'd have more faith in the next Spider-man film if they were involved.
Seeing Spidey chilling with the Avengers might be pretty fun. What I want to know is how they'll plug him into the Marvel universe. Both Sony franchises have tried to keep things grounded, at least for comics, with the plot essentially boiling down to "science gone wrong." But Marvel has no problem going into weird shit like fantasy space Vikings and talking raccoons. I guess comic Spidey is that weird anyway, but I wonder if that'll be a shock to general audiences.
@hurricaneivan29: Uh...Spider-Man is the number one selling Marvel property. He is also consistently one of the most well liked comic characters of all time. Like, up there with Superman and Batman.
Word.
Yep. In a cursory examination of the best and most thorough video game database in the world (and therefore utterly unreliable), Spider-Man has been in far more video games than any other major superhero. For a completely random overview:
The Flash - 3 games (okay GB, this is clearly wrong, but who am I to argue with the almighty wiki!)
Sony and Marvel have both been pretty open recently about how they'd both like the utilize Spider-Man better. Not shocked that Sony would hold onto the IP and it makes sense to essentially license Spider-Man out to the studio doing the best with comic book properties at the moment. And it is certainly in Marvel's best interest to make a great Spider-Man film that would help bolster their already existing films and potential new ones down the line.
I wonder how long before we start seeing Spider-Man hints in Marvel films and how long before any Spider-Man stories can begin to pop in and tie into the grander universe.
a new Spider-Man will first appear in a currently-unspecified Marvel film within the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Perfect.
The Amazing Spider-Man movies are ass garbage, and Andrew Garfield is a terrible Spider-Man. Granted, Tobey Maguire wasn't much of a Spider-Man either.
Can't wait to see what Marvel does with the character.
@hurricaneivan29: Uh...Spider-Man is the number one selling Marvel property. He is also consistently one of the most well liked comic characters of all time. Like, up there with Superman and Batman.
Word.
Superman - 32 games
Captain America - 41 games
Iron Man - 42 games
Batman - 56 games
Wolverine - 63 games
Spider-Man - 71 games
To be fair though part of the reason Spider Man has so many games is that his abilities translate well to them. Shooting webs, punching people, web swinging and climbing up walls are all mechanics that are easy to design for a video game, while something like Batman's overpreparedness or Superman's borderline invincibility is hard.
@finaldasa: Well, he's going to be in Civil War in 2016. That's for sure. I'm not sure if he'll play the same role he did in the comics, but that's the perfect chance for them to just throw in everybody they want. Other than that, I could possibly see him showing up in the after credits scene to Avengers 2 or Ant Man, but then again, it's impossible to predict what they'll do in those things.
@i_stay_puft: I totally agree with you. I think this move was completely based on Sony thinking, "Fuck. How can we get some of that Marvel kind of money 'cause we clearly can't make it on our own." And it just happens that they're in the enviably lucky legal situation of being able to call the shots.
And I'm not trying to imply that Sony is somehow "winning" or the opposite for Marvel. I'm sure Marvel's accountants are positive that whatever they're giving to Sony for the IP license they'll make back multiple times by using it in their own films.
In a weird, weird way, it's kind of a win-win-win situation. Overall, as a fan of how comics can give us multiple, simultaneous versions of a character through different creative teams, this news is pretty exciting. Peter Parker through the lens of two different filmmakers can only serve to at least be more interesting than one rigidly controlled one.
@babychoochoo: I don't think he'll show up that soon simply because those films, specifically Ant Man, are already done. I could see him popping up in Doctor Strange maybe, in prep for Infinity Wars. Or maybe he'll be separate for a bit like Guardians currently is, who knows.
To be fair though part of the reason Spider Man has so many games is that his abilities translate well to them. Shooting webs, punching people, web swinging and climbing up walls are all mechanics that are easy to design for a video game, while something like Batman's overpreparedness or Superman's borderline invincibility is hard.
Totally true. But that's also just a general argument for Spidey's overall appeal. And to be clear, I'm not even a fan. I find Peter Parker whiny and annoying and Spider-Man overly jokey. But those "mechanics" inherent to the character you mentioned are just kind of innately entertaining regardless of the media they're attached to.
Basically, no matter how much a game/film/whatever sucks, seeing a costumed person swinging around a city striking rad gymnast poses mid air will always be kind of awesome.
I like comic book characters just fine, and the movies are generally fun action movies and I go to see them, but it seems super strange that these movies are so insanely popular (and for nearly 15 years) given how far removed we are from the actual comic books being culturally relevant at all. I guess a whole generation grew up on cartoons and video games based on them, with a half understanding of some of the more famous storylines and characters.
But like, really, out of the billion or so people that apparently saw that first Avengers movie, how many of them actually thought "But it's not really a proper Avengers movie until they get Spider-Man in there"? How many people actually had any idea that he was missing? How many people actually give a shit that they included Hawkeye and Black Widow? They're fine movies, but at a certain point it just feels like they're preying on a hollow sense of half-formed nostalgia people feel like they should probably have for superheroes, even if they know basically nothing about any of them.
So I guess I'll be impressed when they just keep on making these movies to the point that they have to start really digging deep. I'll be the first in line at the theatres when they finally make a movie about Moon Knight, or Namor the Sub-mariner.
@bisonhero: For the record, I'd totally watch a Moon Knight movie because what would that even be. After Guardians of the Galaxy I'm convinced that Marvel could make an entertaining movie out of any given C-tier superhero from their roster and it would still make a bajillion dollars. Of course, I only know who Moon Knight is because he was in Marvel Ultimate Alliance.... and he seems almost D-tier material to me.
*ahem* I think Spider-Man should be in The Avengers because he's sorta Marvel's biggest superhero and stuff, but I think The Amazing Spider-Man sorta soured me on the character for the time being. I found that movie to be sorta lame, lame enough that I never saw the second one.
@arbitrarywater: I would also watch a Darkhawk movie. I would watch it because I had a bunch of superhero trading cards when I was young, and I thought this one was really cool:
Look at him, with his wings and cool helmet and some kind of red jewel thing in his chest, and his totally-not-Wolverine-claws. You now know the full extent of everything I knew about and thought was cool about Darkhawk.
At this point, I just want a badass Venom movie. If they do up another Spider-Man film, let's see it do something original. I'm tired of the Uncle Ben/early years bullshit.
@bisonhero: I don't care about comic books, but I like Spider-Man. Lots of other people like Spider-Man. Spider-Man being in more movies that don't suck is only a good thing. The end.
@arbitrarywater: I would also watch a Darkhawk movie. I would watch it because I had a bunch of superhero trading cards when I was young, and I thought this one was really cool:
Look at him, with his wings and cool helmet and some kind of red jewel thing in his chest, and his totally-not-Wolverine-claws. You now know the full extent of everything I knew about and thought was cool about Darkhawk.
It's like they ran out of ideas and just decided to mash together Superman, Iron Man, Wolverine and for some reason, no one knows why, just shut the fuck up and do it, the Vulture from Spiderman?
It's like they ran out of ideas and just decided to mash Super Man, Iron Man, Wolverine and for some reason, no one knows why, just shut the fuck up and do it, the Vulture from Spiderman?
Yep, that's basically every superhero created after about 1980, because it turns out they've already covered just about every interesting power a superhero could have that isn't stupidly specific.
I've reached this weird point where I actually prefer superhero characters that are unlicensed pastiches of Marvel and DC superheroes, because at least they wear their references on their sleeve, and they don't have all of the awkward baggage of the decades of ill-conceived storylines most mainstream characters have had. Sentinels of the Multiverse is a pretty rad card game that is basically a cooperative boss fight against a supervillain using Marvel and DC stand-ins, and I literally think that Freedom Force is the greatest superhero RPG ever made. It's the origin of my profile pic. Perhaps one of the greatest Ken Levine games ever.
EDIT: Poking around the Freedom Force page, holy shit, Dave Snider represent:
Man, I can't deal with Spider-Man anymore. Nothing ever works out for him, it's depressing.
Accelerated timeline movie, it's just 2 hours of Spiderman family and closest friends dying. At the end he gets cloned and his identity is stolen by said clone.
The only Spider-Man movie that would get my attention today concerns a middle-aged Spider-Man who realizes that the concept of Spider-Man is dumb, but in order to keep fighting crime he is forced to keep playing up this persona that he now richly regrets inventing. Maybe it opens with him awkwardly entertaining a child's birthday party like in Ghostbusters 2.
... and Andrew Garfield is a terrible Spider-Man ...
May I ask why? I though Garfield did a great job in the fist one and was sort of fucked over by the script of the second one.
Anytime a Spiderman movie comes out people think it's shit. I think those originals did O-K for the time and these new ones with Andrew Garfield are pretty alright as well. They certainly present him more as this wise-crackin' kid rather than some serious superhero which is great. People can shit all they want on Spiderman 3 and OMG DID U ZEE THE DANCIN OMG RUINED MOVIE but I think it had the best cast of villains ever and Sandman actually looked spot-on.
@humanity: Those first two spider-man movies seem pretty popular and well regarded. Personally I still think Spider-Man 2 is one of the best superhero movies out there.
And it wasn't the dancing that ruined 3, it was bad writing and poor character development. Sandman was probably the best thing about that movie. If they took out all the Venom related stuff it might have been an okay movie.
@zeik: I remember people hating Toby McGuire as Spiderman, and honestly I was never a huge fan myself but I still thought the movies did a good job. I never saw any problems that 3 had which the previous movies didn't, apart from shoehorning in too many villains at once. Then again, I rather have too many villains than not enough villains. In a genre already full of bad dialog and mediocre acting I prefer to fill in the allotted time with as little time speaking as possible.
@zeik: I remember people hating Toby McGuire as Spiderman, and honestly I was never a huge fan myself but I still thought the movies did a good job. I never saw any problems that 3 had which the previous movies didn't, apart from shoehorning in too many villains at once. Then again, I rather have too many villains than not enough villains. In a genre already full of bad dialog and mediocre acting I prefer to fill in the allotted time with as little time speaking as possible.
I don't know. Peter Parker seemed to be mischaracterized in the early part of that movie. That and Venom just bing awful.
... and Andrew Garfield is a terrible Spider-Man ...
May I ask why? I though Garfield did a great job in the fist one and was sort of fucked over by the script of the second one.
Charmless and awkward. He wasn't fun, he was just annoying. That goes double for his Peter Parker. Tobey Maguire didn't nail the Spider-Man side of things either, but his depiction was more safe than off-putting. An easy quip here and there, but mostly it was just down to business.
In fairness, the problem with the new movies wasn't just Garfield. There's the stuff they did with the origin story, the lame villains, the awful writing (assuming the scenes weren't all just ad libbed, because holy shit). The only good thing in those movies was that thing that happens near the end of the second one. It's pretty rough, but I thought they did a good job with it.
Spider-Man 2 still holds up as a great superhero movie (one of the best even), and Spider-Man 3 wasn't that bad when I rewatched it last year. Most of the symbiote shit is still fucking atrocious, but the rest is actually alright. All of the old ones are just all-around better movies than either of the new ones.
Log in to comment