The Amazing Spider-Man How do you view andrew Garfield's Peter Parker

[W/ Great Power]

I'm sure we'll see Peter still trying to cope with Gwen's death but I hope they don't introduce a love interest in TASM3 unless it's Black Cat. MJ would be best left out IMO.

I see where you're coming from, but that just doesn't leave enough room in the series for MJ to develop as a character.

Yeah, they rushed Harry, but MJ is in a league of her own in regards to Peter's significant love interests.

I have mixed feelings about her being a love interest, or even a fling for that matter, in TASM3. However, I still think she has to at least be introduced to plant a seed in the audience's mind that she exists.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I mean Ultimate Spider-Man the comics. I don't like them because of how they messed up so many characters in it. But I even like that Spider-Man better than TASM movies one because he's not as annoying and unfunny.

Oh. My mistake. Sorry 'bout that.

 

[GuestStar2004]

I'd still like to see them not bring in MJ yet and have it be about black cat, even though it could be seen as being like the dark knight rises but it would be something different

I ain't in a rush to see MJ again like a lot of people are

 

[sl500jazz]

^ Just out of curiosity, why don't you want to see MJ?

 

[LizardMan07]

Might be a bit weird to jump straight from Gwen to MJ, having BC as a "fling" might help soften the blow of Gwen's replacement to some.

Just my guess

 

[sl500jazz]

^Fair enough, but she doesn't need to be used in as a "love interest" in TASM3. That could (and should) develop later.

Personally, I'm in no rush to see MJ because I have almost no faith in Sony's ability to effectively utilize the character in the TASM franchise. I'm not interested in seeing another crappy live action rendition. Being perhaps one of the best female supporting characters in comics and the second most well-developed character of the Spider-man mythology, she deserves better.

 

[LizardMan07]

They did Gwen pretty well I thought, MJ could be the same.

At the very least as long as she's not ditching people at the alter again than all will be well

 

[Oscorp]

A little overrated. Many people say that he's perfect cast, up there with RDJ's Iron Man etc. I just don't see it. He's often overacting and to me not very likeable as Peter. Maguire isn't much better though. Andrew and Maguire are like at the opposite ends of the extreme.

 

[GuestStar2004]

^ Just out of curiosity, why don't you want to see MJ?

I think she is abit of an overrated love interest, it probably doesn't help that she was unlikable in the last portrayal of her character, and while I know they could do better this time I'd like to see something different

But I am pretty certain MJ will be in the next one though

 

[sl500jazz]

I think she's a bit underrated as a character (notice I say "character" because she's far more than just your prototypical "love interest", she's a complex character) mostly because of Raimi's adaptation. That's the version that a lot of people use to inform their opinions and knowledge of the character. Funnily enough, Raimi's version mixed elements of several love interests including Gwen Stacy. She was practically a creation of his own. As far as I'm concerned, we haven't gotten a true adaptation of MJ yet.

That being said, I am interested in seeing more of Felicia. Though I'm not sure we'll be seeing her with Peter in the TASM franchise.

Btw, I agree with Oscorp about Andrew and Tobey being on complete opposite ends of the spectrum. The next live action portrayal (however far away that may be) needs to find a middle ground between those two.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

They did Gwen pretty well I thought, MJ could be the same.

At the very least as long as she's not ditching people at the alter again than all will be well

Without doubt. Best LI in both medias.

I don't see how MJ will be ruined since it's one of Marc biggest strengths and he even said before that he's fan of the character.

 

[sl500jazz]

IMO TASM Gwen was a pretty flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own. A beautiful science genius from a wealthy well-respected and supportive family becoming valedictorian of her class and getting a scholarship to Oxford. Just another perfect token love interest. Their adaptation of 'The Night Gwen Stacy Died' (easily one of the best stories in Spidey history) was mediocre ( although the actual death scene was pretty well-acted). The "strength" and "independence" that they attempted to give to the character was deeply undermined by the circumstances surrounding her death. To sum it all up, I'm almost certain what makes Gwen fun to watch (her moxie and chemistry with Peter) has everything to do with Emma Stone and little to do with Webb, Sony, or the writers, especially when considering a lot of the other poor characterizations. Most of the cast is great, but I do not have faith that the current people in charge fully grasp the mythology. I'm hoping that TASM3 and the spin-offs prove me wrong.

 

[The Joker]

IMO TASM Gwen was a pretty flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own. A beautiful science genius from a wealthy well-respected and supportive family becoming valedictorian of her class and getting a scholarship to Oxford. Just another perfect token love interest. The "strength" and "independence" that they attempted to give to the character was deeply undermined by the circumstances surrounding her death. To sum it all up, I'm almost certain what makes Gwen fun to watch (her moxie and chemistry with Peter) has everything to do with Emma Stone and little to do with Webb, Sony, or the writers, especially when considering a lot of the other poor characterizations. Most of the cast is great, but I do not have faith that the current people in charge fully grasp the mythology. I'm hoping that TASM3 and the spin-offs prove me wrong.

I couldn't agree more

 

[Andrew Lucas]

IMO TASM Gwen was a pretty flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own. A beautiful science genius from a wealthy well-respected and supportive family becoming valedictorian of her class and getting a scholarship to Oxford. Just another perfect token love interest. Their adaptation of 'The Night Gwen Stacy Died' (easily one of the best stories in Spidey history) was mediocre ( although the actual death scene was pretty well-acted). The "strength" and "independence" that they attempted to give to the character was deeply undermined by the circumstances surrounding her death. To sum it all up, I'm almost certain what makes Gwen fun to watch (her moxie and chemistry with Peter) has everything to do with Emma Stone and little to do with Webb, Sony, or the writers, especially when considering a lot of the other poor characterizations. Most of the cast is great, but I do not have faith that the current people in charge fully grasp the mythology. I'm hoping that TASM3 and the spin-offs prove me wrong.

Nope. Gwen is just that great and it isn't just me that states that.

The rest? Meh. It's your opinion though and deserves to be respected.

 

[sl500jazz]

To each their own.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

IMO TASM Gwen was a pretty flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own. A beautiful science genius from a wealthy well-respected and supportive family becoming valedictorian of her class and getting a scholarship to Oxford. Just another perfect token love interest. Their adaptation of 'The Night Gwen Stacy Died' (easily one of the best stories in Spidey history) was mediocre ( although the actual death scene was pretty well-acted). The "strength" and "independence" that they attempted to give to the character was deeply undermined by the circumstances surrounding her death. To sum it all up, I'm almost certain what makes Gwen fun to watch (her moxie and chemistry with Peter) has everything to do with Emma Stone and little to do with Webb, Sony, or the writers, especially when considering a lot of the other poor characterizations. Most of the cast is great, but I do not have faith that the current people in charge fully grasp the mythology. I'm hoping that TASM3 and the spin-offs prove me wrong.

Agreed. And it isn't just you who states that.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

IMO TASM Gwen was a pretty flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own. A beautiful science genius from a wealthy well-respected and supportive family becoming valedictorian of her class and getting a scholarship to Oxford. Just another perfect token love interest. Their adaptation of 'The Night Gwen Stacy Died' (easily one of the best stories in Spidey history) was mediocre ( although the actual death scene was pretty well-acted). The "strength" and "independence" that they attempted to give to the character was deeply undermined by the circumstances surrounding her death. To sum it all up, I'm almost certain what makes Gwen fun to watch (her moxie and chemistry with Peter) has everything to do with Emma Stone and little to do with Webb, Sony, or the writers, especially when considering a lot of the other poor characterizations. Most of the cast is great, but I do not have faith that the current people in charge fully grasp the mythology. I'm hoping that TASM3 and the spin-offs prove me wrong.

Excellent post.

 

[LizardMan07]

No struggles of her own.

Except the whole

"My father was impaled by the lizard's claws" thing.

Really, I'd love to hear some Love interests in superhero movies who had legitmate problems that in some way weren't related to the superhero. ie (MJ is sad in SM2 because Peter didn't show up to her performance, Rachael is sad in the Dark Knight because she's dead)

I think the "strength and independance" thing comes from, just off the top of my head;

• Her saving Peter a couple of times
• Havings interests outside of Peter (Job, Friends, School, Scholarships)
• Actively being involved in aiding Spider-Man, not acting as a damsel in distress every single fight. (Lizard in Oscorp, Electro in Power Plant.) Also, I get that Harry in the end made her a damsel in distress, but even then, there was none of that incessant screaming stuff, the heeeeelp me stuff, that you get from other love interests.
• Working independently of Peter. (Finding out who Max Dillion was)
• Not taking Peter's constant ***

I think its disengenious to say, "other than her relationship with Peter and the actress who played her, the character was bad".

The fact of the matter is that the relationship is a major factor for the love interest. Unless you want another spin-off movie, you were only going to get snippets of Gwen's life. You can always go the SM1-3 way and have the love interest get with every major male character in the series and sing in broadway to prove their independance, or go the Thor 1-2 way and be like, "oh she's a scientist, she's pretty AND she's got "extremis ex machina" flowing through her!"

The chemistry between the two leads (in terms of romance) is paramount. This is what set Gwen in the TASM series apart from other similar love interests, is that the chemistry was real, and what followed from that was an actual push to care about the relationship itself. The directors sometimes said the Stone and Garfield, "Just go for it". That in of itself is good directing, to be able to put the actors/tresses in positions that facilitate their best performances.

Its like saying, "other than the wheels, engine, set, ect. of the car, the car drove poorly."

 

[GuestStar2004]

It's pretty funny actually since I have heard people say she is boring character in the comics and that the movies actually had to make her more interesting

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

It's pretty funny actually since I have heard people say she is boring character in the comics and that the movies actually had to make her more interesting

She is. They didn't.

Now Spectacular Spider-Man, there she was more interesting.

 

[The Joker]

They never show Gwen struggling over her father's death. Peter thinks more about Captain Stacy than his daughter does lol. We don't get any proper glimpses into any of her extracurricular activities except the Oxford thing, and that's only because it was an obstacle in the romance with Peter.

Gwen of the comics was more interesting by far than Stone's Gwen. The best thing about Stone's Gwen is that she's played by Emma Stone. The actress has to carry the bland material with her own talent and charisma. But the character itself is as bland and generic as they come. sl500jazz nailed why. She's a flat character with little to no development. Without her relationship with Peter she has practically no story or struggles of her own.

That makes her one of the weakest love interest characters of the CBMs. The best ones usually have their own personal struggles. It helps sets them apart as their own characters instead of just being token love interests, which TASM Gwen is through and through.

I also concur with Kahran, Spectacular's version of Gwen was great, even though it wasn't very comic book accurate in they way they made her more shy and nerdy, but they didn't bastardize her or make her less interesting.

 

[sl500jazz]

No struggles of her own.

Except the whole

"My father was impaled by the lizard's claws" thing.

Really, I'd love to hear some Love interests in superhero movies who had legitmate problems that in some way weren't related to the superhero. ie (MJ is sad in SM2 because Peter didn't show up to her performance, Rachael is sad in the Dark Knight because she's dead)

I think the "strength and independance" thing comes from, just off the top of my head;

• Her saving Peter a couple of times
• Havings interests outside of Peter (Job, Friends, School, Scholarships)
• Actively being involved in aiding Spider-Man, not acting as a damsel in distress every single fight. (Lizard in Oscorp, Electro in Power Plant.) Also, I get that Harry in the end made her a damsel in distress, but even then, there was none of that incessant screaming stuff, the heeeeelp me stuff, that you get from other love interests.
• Working independently of Peter. (Finding out who Max Dillion was)
• Not taking Peter's constant ***

I think its disengenious to say, "other than her relationship with Peter and the actress who played her, the character was bad".

The fact of the matter is that the relationship is a major factor for the love interest. Unless you want another spin-off movie, you were only going to get snippets of Gwen's life. You can always go the SM1-3 way and have the love interest get with every major male character in the series and sing in broadway to prove their independance, or go the Thor 1-2 way and be like, "oh she's a scientist, she's pretty AND she's got "extremis ex machina" flowing through her!"

The chemistry between the two leads (in terms of romance) is paramount. This is what set Gwen in the TASM series apart from other similar love interests, is that the chemistry was real, and what followed from that was an actual push to care about the relationship itself. The directors sometimes said the Stone and Garfield, "Just go for it". That in of itself is good directing, to be able to put the actors/tresses in positions that facilitate their best performances.

Its like saying, "other than the wheels, engine, set, ect. of the car, the car drove poorly."

IMO, great supporting characters (whether it be "love interest" or "best friend" ) are characters that can stand on their own two feet. They shouldn't compete with the protagonist for screen/story time, but they should be relevant, interesting, complex, flawed in their own way. They should also have some relevance to the story that transcends their relationship with the protagonist, and they should be allowed to grow and develop as the story progresses: like real human beings. A great example of this really is MJ and Peter’s relationship in the comics. When two real people meet and engage in some type of deep relationship (whether it be romantic or platonic) worlds collide and both of those individuals change for better or worse.

In the TASM franchise, there is very little exploration into Gwen’s “world”. Most of what happens to/for Gwen is explored in terms of what Peter feels and thinks. That isn’t innately bad. Peter is, after all, the main character and the spotlight should be on him. The problem arises when every single glimpse into Gwen’s “world” paints her as a modern-day Mary Sue. An exceptionally good looking, exceptionally intelligent “fiercely independent” beloved young woman with heroic impulses to boot. There’s really not much else to the character than that. She isn’t a “damsel in distress”, I’ll give you that. Instead, she’s the other female trope that’s used quite often in comic books. She’s perfection personified. Someone real women should aspire to be more like.

Then, she bites the dust. They did absolutely everything to clearly show the deaf-blind people in the audience that Gwen isn’t a damsel. That she is “in charge of her own destiny, makes her own decisions, and doesn’t listen to Peter…Girl Power! Rah! Rah!” Then, she dies as a result of disobeying Peter. What kind of screwed up message does that send? I’m sure that they had good intentions. I’m sure that the producers listened to fan complaints about Dunst’s MJ being too much of a damsel, but…seriously? Many female supporting characters in live action cbms (including Ms. Stacy) still leave a lot to be desired.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Funny when the movie is centered around Gwen

 

[Andrew Lucas]

No struggles of her own.

Except the whole

"My father was impaled by the lizard's claws" thing.

Really, I'd love to hear some Love interests in superhero movies who had legitmate problems that in some way weren't related to the superhero. ie (MJ is sad in SM2 because Peter didn't show up to her performance, Rachael is sad in the Dark Knight because she's dead)

I think the "strength and independance" thing comes from, just off the top of my head;

• Her saving Peter a couple of times
• Havings interests outside of Peter (Job, Friends, School, Scholarships)
• Actively being involved in aiding Spider-Man, not acting as a damsel in distress every single fight. (Lizard in Oscorp, Electro in Power Plant.) Also, I get that Harry in the end made her a damsel in distress, but even then, there was none of that incessant screaming stuff, the heeeeelp me stuff, that you get from other love interests.
• Working independently of Peter. (Finding out who Max Dillion was)
• Not taking Peter's constant ***

I think its disengenious to say, "other than her relationship with Peter and the actress who played her, the character was bad".

The fact of the matter is that the relationship is a major factor for the love interest. Unless you want another spin-off movie, you were only going to get snippets of Gwen's life. You can always go the SM1-3 way and have the love interest get with every major male character in the series and sing in broadway to prove their independance, or go the Thor 1-2 way and be like, "oh she's a scientist, she's pretty AND she's got "extremis ex machina" flowing through her!"

The chemistry between the two leads (in terms of romance) is paramount. This is what set Gwen in the TASM series apart from other similar love interests, is that the chemistry was real, and what followed from that was an actual push to care about the relationship itself. The directors sometimes said the Stone and Garfield, "Just go for it". That in of itself is good directing, to be able to put the actors/tresses in positions that facilitate their best performances.

Its like saying, "other than the wheels, engine, set, ect. of the car, the car drove poorly."

Nailed

 

[The Joker]

IMO, great supporting characters (whether it be "love interest" or "best friend" ) are characters that can stand on their own two feet. They shouldn't compete with the protagonist for screen/story time, but they should be relevant, interesting, complex, flawed in their own way. They should also have some relevance to the story that transcends their relationship with the protagonist, and they should be allowed to grow and develop as the story progresses: like real human beings. A great example of this really is MJ and Peter’s relationship in the comics. When two real people meet and engage in some type of deep relationship (whether it be romantic or platonic) worlds collide and both of those individuals change for better or worse.

In the TASM franchise, there is very little exploration into Gwen’s “world”. Most of what happens to/for Gwen is explored in terms of what Peter feels and thinks. That isn’t innately bad. Peter is, after all, the main character and the spotlight should be on him. The problem arises when every single glimpse into Gwen’s “world” paints her as a modern-day Mary Sue. An exceptionally good looking, exceptionally intelligent “fiercely independent” beloved young woman with heroic impulses to boot. There’s really not much else to the character than that. She isn’t a “damsel in distress”, I’ll give you that. Instead, she’s the other female trope that’s used quite often in comic books. She’s perfection personified. Someone real women should aspire to be more like.

Then, she bites the dust. They did absolutely everything to clearly show the deaf-blind people in the audience that Gwen isn’t a damsel. That she is “in charge of her own destiny, makes her own decisions, and doesn’t listen to Peter…Girl Power! Rah! Rah!” Then, she dies as a result of disobeying Peter. What kind of screwed up message does that send? I’m sure that they had good intentions. I’m sure that the producers listened to fan complaints about Dunst’s MJ being too much of a damsel, but…seriously? Many female supporting characters in live action cbms (including Ms. Stacy) still leave a lot to be desired.

I couldn't agree