The Amazing Spider-Man When and how should Gwen Stacy die? - Part 1

I like to think gwen was drugged.... Because it actually makes more sense. She could have easily been drugged in a way where she remembered it and thought she chose it. Much like alcohol can cause you to make bad choices
 
I hear you guys' opinion/argument on how some films should be a trilogy, but gimme a break, honestly,

if book series such as harry potter, twilight, and the hunger games and countless other novels that are trendy atm can get 6 films why the freck can't a comic book character with FIFTY YEARS of comics get more than just 3 friggin films? it just irks me.

there are so many stories that can be told and yes actors get old but for this series it's perfect, the first trilogy can focus on Pete's early years as Spidey in high school before he graduates, he can graduate at the end of the third film, and the next trilogy can be him during his college years. after all, Andrew looks pretty young for his age and even NOW if the Raimi series was still going on Tobey doesn't really look his age.
 
I hear you guys' opinion/argument on how some films should be a trilogy, but gimme a break, honestly,

if book series such as harry potter, twilight, and the hunger games and countless other novels that are trendy atm can get 6 films why the freck can't a comic book character with FIFTY YEARS of comics get more than just 3 friggin films? it just irks me.

there are so many stories that can be told and yes actors get old but for this series it's perfect, the first trilogy can focus on Pete's early years as Spidey in high school before he graduates, he can graduate at the end of the third film, and the next trilogy can be him during his college years. after all, Andrew looks pretty young for his age and even NOW if the Raimi series was still going on Tobey doesn't really look his age.

It's easier to get more movies out of James Bond, Harry Potter, Twilight, because it's easier to adapt a single novel than a combined history. Not to mention with such an expansive history theres so many different views on the character. It's interesting to see different writers, actors, and directors interpretations of the character. Being forced to go on with 6 movies is kind of limiting especially when changing cast and crew.
 
but you could always make the first three a trilogy, but continue the story into a second arc that over reaches another trilogy, with different cast. (Ie. take Spida-man's idea, this one his younger years, the next one could skip ahead a couple of years, like his teaching years etc where getting someone older would be logical. Then the series after that could even be standalone to fill in the years inbetween the two, if that makes sense)
 
but you could always make the first three a trilogy, but continue the story into a second arc that over reaches another trilogy, with different cast. (Ie. take Spida-man's idea, this one his younger years, the next one could skip ahead a couple of years, like his teaching years etc where getting someone older would be logical. Then the series after that could even be standalone to fill in the years inbetween the two, if that makes sense)

But that puts so much constraint on the story telling. I think the best thing to do is plan on a trilogy then see where you stand once youre done, rather than plan to go for more.
 
I like to think gwen was drugged.... Because it actually makes more sense. She could have easily been drugged in a way where she remembered it and thought she chose it. Much like alcohol can cause you to make bad choices
Give it up. The ho did it on purpose, and it was consensual, and she wasn't drugged. Come on people.

I did read a timeline though that someone had put together where it claimed that the act in question was just BEFORE her and Peter had gotten together. In fact, according to this person's timeline it had happened at some point after Peter had physically assaulted her father when he under the mind control of the Kingpin, I think?

But I don't remember the full logistics of the "Gwen boffed the Goblin" storyline, so I can't really make any claim towards the timelines legitamacy.
 
@legendsassemble how does that mess up the story?

with so many years worth of comics that should make it EASIER for writers to say "hey lets adapt this and mold it and shape it into our own film"
 
@legendsassemble how does that mess up the story?

with so many years worth of comics that should make it EASIER for writers to say "hey lets adapt this and mold it and shape it into our own film"

Because the idea is that you can take all of those years of stories and try to tell one story that captures the heart and tone best. Plus you can't keep reusing villains and lessons, which comic books can get away with better. Books are easier to adapt because they have a set beginning and end. Plus having so many years of history you have different writers and different artists, so the directors maybe have a different vision entirely based off the spider-man they are familiar with. forcing that on someone saying, hey you're stuck with all of this continuity and threaded ground this cast already did, makes it harder.
 
Because the idea is that you can take all of those years of stories and try to tell one story that captures the heart and tone best. Plus you can't keep reusing villains and lessons, which comic books can get away with better. Books are easier to adapt because they have a set beginning and end. Plus having so many years of history you have different writers and different artists, so the directors maybe have a different vision entirely based off the spider-man they are familiar with. forcing that on someone saying, hey you're stuck with all of this continuity and threaded ground this cast already did, makes it harder.

i respectfully disagree i think with having so much material to go off of it's easier to pick certain story ideas and craft it/mold it into something unique and new
 
No I meant, that actually gives a valid point that could be argued with some reason to back it up.
Almost everyone has that. Of course, only a bully wouldn't see it that way.
Anyway, ending the movie on her death would be more of a disservice to the story than not ending it. You can have a tragic ending but the story isn't about Peter and Gwen, the story is about Peter and his parents. If anything the three films, should be paced like this:
Nobody gives two ****s about Peter's stupid parents and their stupid deaths. Hell, not even Peter himself or the narrative seem to care halfway into the movie. Gwen is a far more important story, by the very fact that this is actually something we've been *****ing at eachother about for over a month. Do you have ridiculously insane idiot matches with someone who is as ridiculous, idiotic, and insane as you, about Peter's parents? Didn't think so. And killing Gwen in film two turns her into a one off, a means to an end, a stepping stone to a conclusion, a Rachel Dawes, you're sad, maybe angry, but you don't really care, it doesn't change the face of superhero films, and leave an impression, because you know there's more to come, and Peter will be okay, he'll grow past it, maybe meet another girl, and not stay locked in his pit of depression, it's meaningless, and THAT IS an insult and disservice to the story, it makes it all pointless, where the source material REDEFINED THE COMIC GENRE, and actively MURDERED that age of comics, this would be cheap, disgusting, pathetic, shock value. There's no point in doing it AT ALL if it can't be given the credability it deserves. And ending a series on The Death Of Gwen Stacy does that.
1: Peter gets his powers searching for his parents, learns about responsibility from his uncle and makes a promise to a dying man to stay away from his daughter. Peter breaks the promise at the end. The theme of the movie being responsibility to others.

2. Peter stays with the girl in secret when the most dangerous person he's ever met appears, as he continues to search for the secrets of his parents. Peter finds the person who killed his uncle and he accidentally kills himself, he learns about the murders personal life and how much pain his death caused. Gwen is kidnapped and killed due to her affiliation with Peter. He goes to get revenge of the man who killed her but lets him live because he knows she wouldn't have wanted it and he learned from Bens killer. He finds something from his father saying he was left behind because his parents work put him in danger by association. Peter quits being Spider-Man. The themes being about responsibility and the effects your actions have on others.

3. Peter hasn't been Spider-Man for awhile and is still shaken by Gwens death. The thing that trashed Richards office in the beginning of AMS/Person in the shadows, comes back for Peter. Peter learns that some things are out of his control and he learns the full extent of his parents secrets. At the end he learns to be Spider-Man not because he's repenting for his Uncle or girlfriends murder, but because he chooses to do what's right. He is full adult Spider-Man from the comics and the story ends.
2. Peter struggles with his relationship with Gwen, and his NON-promise to Captain Stacy, cause he's all "Yeah, Peter, treat my daughter like she's an imcompetent pathetic little girl/damsel in distress, who can't possibly, and doesn't deserve to make her own choices in life, so therefore you should make them for, being the big strapping MAN that you are." Peter discovers his Parents were murdered by Oscorp, but can't prove it at the end, Norman develops his serum.

3. Peter confronts Norman, after discovering he's the Green Goblin, at the bridge, only to realize (GASP!) he has Gwen, blah blah blah, DEATH of Gwen, hahahahahahahahaha Peter! You suck as a superhero and as a human being! SUFFFFFFEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRR MEANINGLESSLY LIKE ALL THE FANBOYS WANT YOU TO, FOR ALLOWING A WOMAN TO HAVE FREE WILL AND CHOICE! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Goblin dies, and FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER, end a superhero film series in complete and utter horror and tragedy. The End.
 
Does anyone else think it would be a good idea to make the 3rd film into two parts like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? Assuming this will be a trilogy of course.
 
Does anyone else think it would be a good idea to make the 3rd film into two parts like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? Assuming this will be a trilogy of course.

If they do the Venom thing or save Gwens death for the third film, then yeah definitely.
 
Almost everyone has that. Of course, only a bully wouldn't see it that way.Nobody gives two ****s about Peter's stupid parents and their stupid deaths. Hell, not even Peter himself or the narrative seem to care halfway into the movie. Gwen is a far more important story, by the very fact that this is actually something we've been *****ing at eachother about for over a month. Do you have ridiculously insane idiot matches with someone who is as ridiculous, idiotic, and insane as you, about Peter's parents? Didn't think so. And killing Gwen in film two turns her into a one off, a means to an end, a stepping stone to a conclusion, a Rachel Dawes, you're sad, maybe angry, but you don't really care, it doesn't change the face of superhero films, and leave an impression, because you know there's more to come, and Peter will be okay, he'll grow past it, maybe meet another girl, and not stay locked in his pit of depression, it's meaningless, and THAT IS an insult and disservice to the story, it makes it all pointless, where the source material REDEFINED THE COMIC GENRE, and actively MURDERED that age of comics, this would be cheap, disgusting, pathetic, shock value. There's no point in doing it AT ALL if it can't be given the credability it deserves. And ending a series on The Death Of Gwen Stacy does that.

Okay so you're saying it shouldn't be about the shock value, when you're goal is to shock the audience by ending on tragedy. Might wanna put more thought into your ramblings in the future
 
Okay so you're saying it shouldn't be about the shock value, when you're goal is to shock the audience by ending on tragedy. Might wanna put more thought into your ramblings in the future
Shock value has nothing to do with anything I said, with the exception of how pathetic it is. And you knew that. You're nothing. Just a worthless bully. Shock value doesn't matter, which is the point, that it matters, that it means something. But someone like you, who can't argue their own point so they attempt to insult, will never understand that.
 
Shock value has nothing to do with anything I said, with the exception of how pathetic it is. And you knew that. You're nothing. Just a worthless bully. Shock value doesn't matter, which is the point, that it matters, that it means something. But someone like you, who can't argue their own point so they attempt to insult, will never understand that.

I can argue my own point, with you however, it's easier to just to point out when you contradict yourself. If anything you're the one resorting to name calling and insults, soooo who is the one unable to argue their point?
 
But someone like you, who can't argue their own point so they attempt to insult, will never understand that.

A moment earlier:
Dagenspear said:
You're nothing. Just a worthless bully.

It's not worth being so heavily condescending on an internet forum. Whether you think you're being condescending or not, there are people here who evidently think that you are. I'd advise keeping the behavior straight, if you want to keep a classy conversation going. Don't let people and their arguments get to you. Some of us just get really vehement in here.

Same goes for LegendAssemble.
 
I can argue my own point, with you however, it's easier to just to point out when you contradict yourself.
I didn't. You just deliberately ignore everything people say so you can excuse being nasty to them and attempt a petty attack, when you have no rebuttel. You've done this a lot.
If anything you're the one resorting to name calling and insults, soooo who is the one unable to argue their point?
A bully deserves to be called a bully. And the fact that you continue to ignore information proves my point and that I haven't done anything wrong.
 
I didn't. You just deliberately ignore everything people say so you can excuse being nasty to them and attempt a petty attack, when you have no rebuttel. You've done this a lot.A bully deserves to be called a bully. And the fact that you continue to ignore information proves my point and that I haven't done anything wrong.

If you think I've "bullied you" I sincerely apologize, but you're bringing any "bullying" on yourself with posts like this. I mean come on man this is pretty pathetic.
 
If you think I've "bullied you" I sincerely apologize, but you're bringing any "bullying" on yourself with posts like this. I mean come on man this is pretty pathetic.
I have EVERY RIGHT to defend myself from people like you. Like now. The only thing pathetic here is you backhandedly apologizing.
 
If I may reiterate my post for you two:

It's not worth being so heavily condescending on an internet forum. Whether you think you're being condescending or not, there are people here who evidently think that you are. I'd advise keeping the behavior straight, if you want to keep a classy conversation going. Don't let people and their arguments get to you. Some of us just get really vehement in here.

Same goes for LegendAssemble.
 
I have EVERY RIGHT to defend myself from people like you. Like now. The only thing pathetic here is you backhandedly apologizing.

I know how to pick my battles, this is pointless. No ones "bullying you", I'm sorry if you feel that way.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"