Homecoming Was the 2012 reboot pointless?

[Spider-Aziz]

In a word; maybe.
It did make some cash.

 

[degraves93]

I think a lot of people would argue that while SM3 had its flaws, it wasn't bad enough to warrant a reboot.

I have to disagree with that. And, considering that SM4 was looking to be twice as bad, a fresh start seemed necessary. Selling the rights would have been a better option, but 2010 was four years before the hacks....

 

[schereZada]

I think a lot of people would argue that while SM3 had its flaws, it wasn't bad enough to warrant a reboot.

Hi there, W/ Great Power. I'm not on that list. Spider-man 3 made me want to kick Raimi out of anything Spider-man. A reboot sounded a great idea, or at least another director. Although if they had skipped the detailed origin plot (maybe have it as a flashback), it would have worked better.

 

[Frodo]

I think a lot of people would argue that while SM3 had its flaws, it wasn't bad enough to warrant a reboot.

People were saying that at the time , though I felt that they had pretty much played out the main arcs which were the Osborn saga, Peter's Guilt, The Peter/MJ relationship, Peter's own growth from kid to man, etc. While the ending wasn't satisfactory, I did feel that you could basically call it a trilogy and end it there. The cast was also getting too old and the best villains had been used imo. Yes there was Lizard, Vulture, Electro, Kraven etc, but at that point it was time to move on. Though I think its fair to say the GA didn't feel that version of the series ended on as bad a note as fans did.

That said, when they did reboot it , they basically decided to cover much of the same ground Raimi did all over again yet fashioning it as Gritty and updated. The problem with the ASM is that they started on a weak foundation and wrote themselves into a corner after just two films.

 

[Silver Surfer]

People overreacted to SM3, it wasn't a very good movie but it wasn't the disaster people made it out to be at the time.

 

[schereZada]

People overreacted to SM3, it wasn't a very good movie but it wasn't the disaster people made it out to be at the time.

It was horrible enough to make me want to see no more of that world. It did good money though, so I was scared they would keep going that way.

 

[degraves93]

People overreacted to SM3, it wasn't a very good movie but it wasn't the disaster people made it out to be at the time.

Eh. I was bitterly disappointed walking out of theater, probably because SM2 had set such a high bar, and SM3 didn't come close to meeting it. I dislike it more on repeated viewings. TASM2, however, I enjoyed, because my expectations were tempered and I didn't watch a single online clip or spoil myself.

 

[Frodo]

People overreacted to SM3, it wasn't a very good movie but it wasn't the disaster people made it out to be at the time.

Well creatively it was a mess imo. They basically took away Peter's guilt by retconning Ben's death and making it an accident, and they basically destroyed the Peter/MJ relationship once he smacked her. So you had two of the main pillars which built that version of the franchise ruined, and you couldn't take it back. Of course you had some unfortunate sequences and too many characters trying to take center stage, which now in hindsight, was the beginning of the Sony meddling. Plus at a certain point, you gotta know when to leave the stage and pass the torch. The Bond model doesn't work with every franchise.

It wasn't Batman and Robin , but it was very much Superman 3. By the same token the film was a big hit and the fans and film critics had much more of an issue with it than the audience did so in that sense it really wasn't a disaster. It was the biggest money maker of all the films and audiences would have been willing to see another one by the same team.

 

[degraves93]

Well creatively it was a mess imo. They basically took away Peter's guilt by retconning Ben's death and making it an accident, and they basically destroyed the Peter/MJ relationship once he smacked her. So you had two of the main pillars which built that version of the franchise ruined, and you couldn't take it back. Of course you had some unfortunate sequences and too many characters trying to take center stage, which now in hindsight, was the beginning of the Sony meddling. Plus at a certain point, you gotta know when to leave the stage and pass the torch. The Bond model doesn't work with every franchise.

It wasn't Batman and Robin , but it was very much Superman 3. By the same token the film was a big hit and the fans and film critics had much more of an issue with it than the audience did so in that sense it really wasn't a disaster. It was the biggest money maker of all the films and audiences would have been willing to see another one by the same team.

It's still the weakest Spidey film to me.

 

[Mace Dolex]

It was pointless and they really just shouldn't have done a straight reboot.

Just cast new actors. Have the characters sort of established already, loose continuity of the originals.

Should've gone the James Bond route.

Agreed.

The same thing happened with Batman when Michael Keaton stepped down and Val Kilmer donned the cape, there were little bits of references without having to reboot the series entirely.

 

[Mace Dolex]

I wonder if Spidey's younger fans are even aware of all these shenanigans happening right now with the Sony hack or how they've mishandled Spider-Man over the years, do you think little 1st graders are having school ground fist fights over this? I mean sure little kids love the movies right now but when they grow up and become more savvy with the internal movie politics of movie making I'm sure they'll be discussing this same very crap.

 

[degraves93]

I wonder if Spidey's younger fans are even aware of all these shenanigans happening right now with the Sony hack or how they've mishandled Spider-Man over the years, do you think little 1st graders are having school ground fist fights over this? I mean sure little kids love the movies right now but when they grow up and become more savvy with the internal movie politics of movie making I'm sure they'll be discussing this same very crap.

The first two movies came out when I was still in elementary school, so I definitely wasn't aware of the behind the scenes politics. I was in 8th grade when SM3 came out, so I became a bit more jaded after that, as well as more aware of Sony's meddling on the final product. Hopefully, that stage doesn't come until way later for them.

 

[Stormz96]

I wonder if Spidey's younger fans are even aware of all these shenanigans happening right now with the Sony hack or how they've mishandled Spider-Man over the years, do you think little 1st graders are having school ground fist fights over this? I mean sure little kids love the movies right now but when they grow up and become more savvy with the internal movie politics of movie making I'm sure they'll be discussing this same very crap.

I loved Batman and Robin as a child. I had no idea it was the equivalent of a toy commercial

Ignorance is bliss

 

[ayylmao]

Ayyyyy I loved the reboot. TASM 2 is my favorite Spider-Man movie. Don't get the hate.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I have to disagree with that. And, considering that SM4 was looking to be twice as bad, a fresh start seemed necessary. Selling the rights would have been a better option, but 2010 was four years before the hacks....

If Skyfall can successfully follow through QOS, so could SM4 have followed SM3 without rebooting.

And don't be a jokestar, SM4 looked horrible? It never left the script stage. There was nothing to look at, much less your fantasy assessment of it.

 

[OriginalMiles]

QOS wasn't SM3 level bad.

 

[Tymminator]

Shame Fine wasn't as prophetic with regards to IM2, IM3 and Thor TDW. Maybe Marvel didn't show him those scripts.

I have to say, I notice that with most subjects I usually agree with you, but I have to go against you in this one.

They probably did consult Fine and the fact is all 3 of those movies were still better received critically, by the public and made more profit both by tickets sales and DVD/Blu-Ray.

They also were not so bad that they caused the progress on a attempted mega-franchise to halt and be reevaluated, not to mention stop their own individual franchises.

IE they were NOT Franchise killers.

ASM2 effectively killed their Spider-verse Cinematic Universe (a stupid idea anyway) and the Amazing Spider-man series as we know it.

Speaking for myself, they were not perfect and I would have done some things different, but re: IM2, IMS or T:TDW I enjoyed them enough.


It’s fine not to like IM2, IMS or T:TDW, but no way in hell one can equate them as bad and equal to damage done by ASM2 except in one’s own personal opinion.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

TASM and TASM 2 are the worst Spider-Man movies so the reboot was pointless.

 

[OriginalMiles]

It wasn't pointless at all, because there was a reason for doing it. They just ****ed up with the sequel.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Uhh, yah it was...especially considering is was almost the exact same film as the one that came 10 year prior to it.

 

[degraves93]

If Skyfall can successfully follow through QOS, so could SM4 have followed SM3 without rebooting.

And don't be a jokestar, SM4 looked horrible? It never left the script stage. There was nothing to look at, much less your fantasy assessment of it.

If the reports of Raimi hating every single script that was given to him were true, then that doesn't speak to the film being any better than SM3. I'm not trying to make waves, that's just what I've heard.

 

[allthingsuper]

I still prefer TASM2 to SM#, even though they both suck.

 

[allthingsuper]

SM3. Typo.

 

[degraves93]

SM3. Typo.

TASM2 gets better to me with repeated viewings. SM3 gets worse. That being said, I don't think the reboot was pointless, per se. I just think they didn't learn their lesson from beforehand. Both ASM movies were improvements over SM3, but they could have been better if they just relaxed and let Webb have more of a say.

 

[TMC1982]

It wasn't pointless at all, because there was a reason for doing it. They just ****ed up with the sequel.

One of the problems with both Amazing Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3 is that they left the character in a poor place for sequels. Raimi killed off the top three villains, as well as Peter Parker's best friend. Webb killed off the only person Peter Parker hung out with, and didn't allow Norman Osborn to become a villain. These lead to limitations on sequels that make relaunches more appealing, even if those are problematic for other reasons.