Homecoming Was the 2012 reboot pointless?

[BatsDC]

In my scenario, where Sony made the deal with Marvel right then when they did the reboot, Marvel Studios would have handled The Amazing Spider-Man movies (sort of The Incredible Hulk deal) and they would have been better, we would already have Spider-Man in the MCU, no problems with Spidey being in Civil War, and Garfield would still be Spider-Man...

Oh what could have been

 

[Frodo]

It was as pointless as the Timothy Dalton Bond movies. You can't get it right every time out. For every good adaptation there are three bad ones. At this point, you need to minimize the damage going forward.

Look at Batman. They had to take a break from the solo films after the trilogy. Now teamups are trending. Don't expect to see a solo Batman film until at least two if not three ensemble films.

With Spidey, the solo films are out of trend. Nobody has a vested interest at this point. He needs to appear in a big crossover before more solo films. Instead of rebooting, they could have made an awful SM4 movie and we would still have the same net result (only exception being you'd still have the reboot card in the back pocket). So we are in a worse situation than Batman after 98' believe it or not. ASM 3 will not be a profitable film unless they drastically cut expenses.

In a sense Spiderman is in a worse situation then Batman was because there was never any question whether the property would stay at WB whether B&R was bad or not. WB was in a bit of turmoil during the late 90s but nothing compared to what Sony is going through. WB knew almost immediately that the next Batman film needed to be dark and go back to its roots whether it was a sequel or reboot. Sony is all over the place and they don't know what direction they want to go in, save canning Garfield. The biggest difference between 20 years ago and now is that now there are so many franchises that if Spiderman falls flat it doesn't reflect negatively on genre as a whole the way B&R did back then.

People felt ASM 2 stunk, but we also had CATWS, XMDOFP, GOTG, Arrow, Flash, and AOS going at the same time, so it wasn't like Spiderman was the only big game in town in 2014. If anything, the consensus seems to be , these guys did it right, why can't you Sony.

 

[Mr.M]

But the tone is not the problem. They cannot go any campier or darker than what they've already done at this point. The solo films have ran their course if Garfield is done with the franchise. Spidey solos are done unless they get ASM3 together with Garfield or they reinvigorate the character through the MCU or some other project involving multiple characters, like The Hulk. That's the only way to do it. Otherwise, Sony will do a female spinoff movie or comedy/spoof to buy themselves time for a more serious adaptation.

The deal 99% will happen unless Garfield is back, or it will be delayed but signed off on after the female or low budget spinoff flops. Either way, fans gain in the end.

 

[Frodo]

I was just using tone as an example of WB knowing how to improve after Batman and Robin, while Sony has no clue of what to do period regardless of the tone of the next film. WB knew that they had to go darker because that was what worked before and that was the character. With Spiderman, Sony is clueless as to whether he should be in highschool, an adult, part of team, fighting a team, fighting one villain, reviving Venom, etc. They have a much bigger challenge then WB did in terms of just a coherent vision let alone what tone they want the next film to be. I think the tonal issues the ASM series had were basically symptoms of Sony's inability in handling the franchise. The tone of the film is really more of a minor thing and is really dependent on the script at hand. Sony isn't even there yet .

 

[Mr.M]

What should they have done though? Based on the rumors of SM4 and considering where the franchise was at after SM3, that film was shaping up to be a disaster. Of course we would never know, but there is no way the Raimi series was going to keep growing in revenue and popularity. And how could they have made a deal with Marvel when Avengers hadn't even come out yet? Why cheapen the Spiderman brand by including him with Cap and Thor? Hindsight is 20/20. They were going to reboot either way. Now, repeating the origin. Death of Gwen Stacy and goblin again. These are questionable things. But the reboot had to happen. I don't think ASM2 ever had a realistic chance to gross like the OT movies did, regardless of how good it was.

 

[Nemeres]

Sorry guys, putting TASM2 on Schumacher levels is short-sighted hyperbole. Schumacher is villains whose personalized hideouts have their own logos everywhere. Or Two-Face's face looking like bubblegum rather than charred flesh, and on purpose. Or... you know what, watch those movies again. With a sharper eye this time. "Today's my b-day, time to light my candles" and Czokas's German accent are lame, but Schumacher level it's not. I would call that a fact.

Happy New Year everyone, btw. Who knows, maybe this time next year we'll be following active development on the next Spidey movie, whatever that is.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Sorry guys, putting TASM2 on Schumacher levels is short-sighted hyperbole. Schumacher is villains whose personalized hideouts have their own logos everywhere. Or Two-Face's face looking like bubblegum rather than charred flesh, and on purpose. Or... you know what, watch those movies again. With a sharper eye this time. "Today's my b-day, time to light my candles" and Czokas's German accent are lame, but Schumacher level it's not. I would call that a fact.

Disagreed. That is not fact or hyperbole. They are on Schumacher's levels. Camp comes in different forms but can be equally bad nemeres. TASM villains did not need personalized hideouts to be as camp as Schumacher. They already were in other ways like their personalities. Max Dillon and Rhino were as campy as any of the Schumacher villains. So was Dr. Kafka. Playing dub step in the final fight.

The plot was also similar of Schumacher's. Nerdy obsessed guy (Jim Carrey/Riddler) is obsessed with the hero of the movie. He falls into a vat of convenient villain-giving powers (Schwarzenegger Mr. Freeze) and he terrorizes the city. The hero stops him and then the B-villain (Thurman Poison Ivy) springs him from his campy prison cell with cartoonish jailors/psychiatrist to fight the hero. The villain then holds the whole city hostage when he takes over a convenient plot location.

That is real fact. Not what you said.

Also my answer for this thread is yes reboot was pointless because both movies were so bad.

 

[MrSpyder]

Most of the time it felt like much of the same from Raimi's films

 

[Frodo]

What should they have done though? Based on the rumors of SM4 and considering where the franchise was at after SM3, that film was shaping up to be a disaster. Of course we would never know, but there is no way the Raimi series was going to keep growing in revenue and popularity. And how could they have made a deal with Marvel when Avengers hadn't even come out yet? Why cheapen the Spiderman brand by including him with Cap and Thor? Hindsight is 20/20. They were going to reboot either way. Now, repeating the origin. Death of Gwen Stacy and goblin again. These are questionable things. But the reboot had to happen. I don't think ASM2 ever had a realistic chance to gross like the OT movies did, regardless of how good it was.

Well they could have done alot of things , but we'll never know. I always supported the idea of a reboot and a reboot would have happened eventually. I never thought the idea of a reboot was pointless, however Sony's execution of the reboot was flawed.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Most of the time it felt like much of the same from Raimi's films

Agreed. Only worse.

 

[harryoscop]

TASM2 wasn't even that bad..
Some even regard it as one of the worst CBMs..

 

[The Batman]

Was the reboot pointless? Yes, but it didn't have to be.

My problem with the ASM Franchise is the same one I have with Snyder's Superman (so far): Instead of actually treading new ground, the ASM franchise just follows the latest CBM fad. And when it did something different, it was usually bad, like the overfocus on Peter's parents, or the Osborn stuff.

ASM1 was in many ways, a watered down version of Batman Begins. Thing is, that tone doesn't entirely fit Spider Man, and it kind of showed. Add to that a weak story the regurgitates an origin film we've already seen, weak action scenes, etc, and you have a film that wasted its talent.

The Avengers comes out, and Sony obviously rethought its approach. Now its about universe building and a colorful palette....just like the MCU. ASM 2 ended up being worse than ASM1, and not even Garfield and Stone could save it.

And if there was any ray of sunlight in these films, it was Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. If this franchise isnt pointless, its only because Garfield and Stone, two people with great chemistry, fell in love with each other as a result of starring in these films together. In a way, its good that ASM3 might not happen, because I don't see how good it'd be without the Garfield/Stone combo.

This reboot franchise would've been worth it if it approached CBM genre in a fresh new way, and wasn't micromanaged by Sony.

Also, they should've brought someone in to do fight scenes, because there is not a single memorable fight in this series. Its even more apparent when every Raimi film had a memorable fight by comparison.

 

[Frodo]

Sorry guys, putting TASM2 on Schumacher levels is short-sighted hyperbole. Schumacher is villains whose personalized hideouts have their own logos everywhere. Or Two-Face's face looking like bubblegum rather than charred flesh, and on purpose. Or... you know what, watch those movies again. With a sharper eye this time. "Today's my b-day, time to light my candles" and Czokas's German accent are lame, but Schumacher level it's not. I would call that a fact.

I would say some of the characterizations were Schumacer-like though the real similarities between ASM 2 and B&R are the behind the scenes aftermath with the two studios and the future directions of the franchises. This is history repeating itself in alot of ways but alot of fans aren't old enough to remember what it was like back in the day. There are alot more parallels between the productions and aftermath of ASM 2 and B&R than alot of younger fans realize. However there are clear differences.

The biggest difference is B&R was universally consider bad and a public joke after its release because it was so hyped . ASM 2 was a disappoint of sorts but it hasn't become fodder in the media and in Hollywood. Fans and critics universally panned B&R , where as fans of ASM 2 were split down the middle on it. Critics felt that ASM 2 at least had some redeeming qualities where B&R really didn't have any. The actors in B&R it were embarrassed to be in it. ASM 2 doesn't have the actors in it embarrassed or have their cred as actors questioned.

So I would agree with you in the sense that ASM 2 is not near the level of badness that B&R was. However, The Spiderman franchise has a problem the Batman franchise didn't have , which is the potential for the property ownership to be influx, a studio beset by internet hacks and burned bridges with other people in the industry, and a studio team unsure of which direction to take one of their flagship properties in. In that sense Sony is in a far worse position than WB was in the late 90s.

 

[LizardMan07]

Disagreed. That is not fact or hyperbole. They are on Schumacher's levels. Camp comes in different forms but can be equally bad nemeres. TASM villains did not need personalized hideouts to be as camp as Schumacher. They already were in other ways like their personalities. Max Dillon and Rhino were as campy as any of the Schumacher villains. So was Dr. Kafka. Playing dub step in the final fight.

The plot was also similar of Schumacher's. Nerdy obsessed guy (Jim Carrey/Riddler) is obsessed with the hero of the movie. He falls into a vat of convenient villain-giving powers (Schwarzenegger Mr. Freeze) and he terrorizes the city. The hero stops him and then the B-villain (Thurman Poison Ivy) springs him from his campy prison cell with cartoonish jailors/psychiatrist to fight the hero. The villain then holds the whole city hostage when he takes over a convenient plot location.

That is real fact. Not what you said.

Also my answer for this thread is yes reboot was pointless because both movies were so bad.

You literally just called your opinion a fact

Holy wow...

 

[PeterBenParker]

You literally just called your opinion a fact

Holy wow...

Well, come on: He IS Doctor Octopus.

 

[HarryOsborn]

You literally just called your opinion a fact

Holy wow...

What he said wasn't really a matter of opinion. He said the plot points hit and the characterizations matched a lot of the same ones from Schumacher's film- while you were saying they weren't as campy because visually they were more practical. You might not think the villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 were as campy as Two-Face and the Riddler, but it's a fact that Jim Carrey's Edward Nigma and Jamie Foxx's Max Dillon share a lot in common.

 

[LizardMan07]

What he said wasn't really a matter of opinion. He said the plot points hit and the characterizations matched a lot of the same ones from Schumacher's film- while you were saying they weren't as campy because visually they were more practical. You might not think the villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 were as campy as Two-Face and the Riddler, but it's a fact that Jim Carrey's Edward Nigma and Jamie Foxx's Max Dillon share a lot in common.

It's also a fact that I havent had an opinion on the matter and you confused me with nemeres

I think the problem with that logic is we're inferring that because the two villians are structurally similar in terms of their arcs they're similarly campy, or even that the two films are equally as bad.

It's by no means an objective fact that one film is as campy as another. Similarity is intrinsically subjective regardless, unless it's 100%, there's a degree of uncertainty that's unquantifiable.

"These two things seem similar" is a weak fact in of itself. The rest of docs post (which you ignored, easier to make your point that way) is just a typical opinion, to try to present that as some irrefutable fact is pretty disingenuous.

Edit: plz ignore I'm too cranky <3 BRAB

 

[spiderman2]

AGREED! I cannot even bare to watch the Raimi films anymore

"You're the one whos out Gobby. Out of your mind!" HA
Yeah, someone was paid to write that line and then they paid another person to recite that line.

Everyone is saying the reboot is pointless BECAUSE of ASM2 for the most part it seems. The producers admitted they wanted to carry on after 3 BUT didn't know how. Harry is dead, alot of villains are used up and well dead. Meanwhile Peter & MJ are uh yeah together-ish again maybe, er maybe not. Yeah, the ending wasn't clear. Though it made them good money critically it was not in their favor.
I for one enjoy the reboot and was happy to see him in high school again and I enjoyed ASM2 very much. Better than that crap FOX puts out or Iron Man sequels, ugh.

Yeah even though I like all of the sm movies and still think sm2 is easily the best off the sm movies even sm2 punch me I blead is more chessy then any thing in asm2. SM3 peter dancing and eating cokies again is more chessy then any thing in asm2.

 

[Frodo]

ASM 2 wasn't nearly as bad as Batman and Robin. However, its just as big a mess plot and storywise as SM3. I'd say SM3 was more campy, but it was also a more coherent story than ASM 2. I think both films have decent moments in them and both films recreate some classic comic moments pretty well. Both films have elements which were present in the Schumacer and Burton films in terms of the characterizations of the villains and their relation to the hero. Neither of them , however are as bad as Batman and Robin. Not even close.

 

[degraves93]

I don't think the ASM series was pointless at all. I'm glad we got a much improved Peter Parker in Andrew Garfield, a much improved love interest in Emma Stone, and some interesting villains and supporting characters along the way. That said, I would have preferred that Sony would have just sucked it up and let the rights revert back in 2010.

 

[First Avenger]

TASM2 wasn't even that bad..
Some even regard it as one of the worst CBMs..

It is bad though,not the worst ever but bad nonetheless. There are like 3 good things in the whole movie while the rest is pretty much ****.

 

[harryoscop]

It is bad though,not the worst ever but bad nonetheless. There are like 3 good things in the whole movie while the rest is pretty much ****.

I agree, it wasn't a good movie, but it wasn't a horrible movie like some are making it out to be.
My only problems with the movie:
The cheese
The writing
The costume
And the inconsistent tone.
Yes the movie has problems like any movie, yes it's not exactly a Good movie, but it's not the God-forsaken abomination everyone is making it out to be.

 

[BatsDC]

I'd say Electro, Rhino, Goblin and everything do with with his Parents and Oscorp were pretty big problems too

so basically the story

 

[First Avenger]

Yeah it's not totally horrible but there are many bad parts. The things I like are:
-Spidey's costume and movement
-StoneField chemistry
-A handful of scene
The rest is pretty bleah starting with the story and screenplay.

 

[ironwez20]

It wasnt pointless at first but now that asm2 came out it sorta is. Nothing really memorable stands out much besides the amazing spiderman costume. Imo lizard wasnt done right, electro was ok and goblin and rhino where just awful. I was the one rooting for this series to blow everyones negativity away and pyched for asm2 but now I just really want the rights to go to marvel so they can give spidey the movie treatment he needs again.