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

[Dagenspear]

actually by that logic they might as well kill off Peter and bring in Miles Morales. Itd still be Spider-Man cuz we have our title character right? -_-

Or Peter could die and we could just end the series right there with some balls.

 

[Dagenspear]

Ending the trilogy on the note of Gwens death is one of those ideas that sounds better on paper than in practice. Not to mention the most interesting of the films will be the one he copes with the shock of having killed his girlfriend, feeling like he failed Uncle Ben and her father, and wondering if his powers doom him to be alone.

No. It isn't. I don't care, nor do I have any interest in spending a whole film watching Peter deal with it, besides it's nothing that a 5 to 10 minute sequence after the death itself couldn't easily deal with. The end. Not ending the series on her death is a tremendous diservice to the story itself. Destroy everyone and their expectations by ending a superhero series in complete and utter horrific tragedy. It would be perfect.

 

[Dagenspear]

I still think she should die but at least you're the first anti death poster to have a decent point.

And by decent you mean one that doesn't make you feel like you're wrong. Which you are.

 

[LegendAssemble]

And by decent you mean one that doesn't make you feel like you're wrong. Which you are.

No I meant, that actually gives a valid point that could be argued with some reason to back it up. 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:

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.

 

[©KAW]

The Death of Gwen Stacy in ASMIII. The sequel would be too soon, let the audience get to know the character well, before she's killed. It makes for good character development. Although I wouldn't mind them including MJ at the very end of ASMII.

 

[LegendAssemble]

The Death of Gwen Stacy in ASMIII. The sequel would be too soon, let the audience get to know the character well, before she's killed. It makes for good character development. Although I wouldn't mind them including MJ at the very end of ASMII.

that would take the focus away from the parents though, and you can easily develop a character to the point for sympathizing for their death in a short matter of time. You don't need three, let own even one full film to accomplish this.

 

[©KAW]

But you can develop her more over the course of 2 and half movies. His parents are not as important as Gwen Stacy. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they were introduced, but if it were up to me, I'd let Peter find out that they were murdered, clues point to Oscorp, but it can't be proven by law because there is no solid evidence of Norman/Oscorp involvement.

In other words, don't give us everything neatly wrapped in a cute little package, with a cute little bow.

 

[Venom'sDad]

In other words, don't give us everything neatly wrapped in a cute little package, with a cute little bow.

Exactly, been saying that for a year now They can't be predictable with Gwen death...reason I suggest creating a mystery/intrigue, and don't follow the comics script. Be inventive and think outside the box...put a new spin on it, still staying true to the original.

 

[Rogue Kira]

Well, a couple of things worth noting... I was reading Spider-man comics when this story line came out in the early 70's. And I have to tell you, there was a huge outcry from fans. No one liked the taste that death left in their mouth, even though Norman was killed in the process. The poetic justice did not leave anyone feeling particularly rewarded. And for years following, fans demanded that she be resurrected from this fate. Of course decades after it's initial release, I think it has been homogenized as just another story-line in Spider-man's history. And for those of us who read it new, many are repulsed by this idea that Marvel decided to spare Norman Osborn later on and make Gwen even more of a victim by having him rape her too. So, in many ways, killing her AGAIN would be very bad form in retrospect to the whole history of the character. To me, this is a chance to right certain wrongs. Spare Gwen and let Norman die. And for the general public who knows nothing about this character's history, I would say it would be risky to kill her off since she was one of the most-liked characters in the retelling. That would be depressing for a summer film and turn people away to additional viewings.

Gwen was never raped by Norman Osborn

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Gwen was never raped by Norman Osborn

rule 34

 

[SpideyFan866]

Gwen was never raped by Norman Osborn

Yeah. He didn't rape her.

That was mutual. She had sex with him cause she wanted to and she felt guilty about it afterwards cause she was still with Peter at the time. This tryst also caused her pregnancy, which caused her to go to Paris for a while where she had twins.

When she came back, Norman was pissed when she didn't reciprocate his feelings and THUS, threw her off a bridge.

Also, MJ knew about all of this cause Gwen confided in her and asked her not to tell Peter.

 

[LegendAssemble]

Yeah. He didn't rape her.

That was mutual. She had sex with him cause she wanted to and she felt guilty about it afterwards cause she was still with Peter at the time. This tryst also caused her pregnancy, which caused her to go to Paris for a while where she had twins.

When she came back, Norman was pissed when she didn't reciprocate his feelings and THUS, threw her off a bridge.

Also, MJ knew about all of this cause Gwen confided in her and asked her not to tell Peter.

I think its safe to say no one wants to see this in the movie.

 

[Rogue Kira]

I think its safe to say no one wants to see this in the movie.

I agree no reason for this this to turn into a soap .

 

[Rogue Kira]

rule 34

rule 34 ?

 

[SpeterMan3]

I'm with ©KAW.



That felt strange to say.

 

[LegendAssemble]

Theres just so much more to the story of Spider-Man, Gwens death is just footnote. Imo it shouldn't be the conclusion, nor should Goblin be his final enemy. The Green Goblin and Spider-Man are unique arch enemies, compared to other superheroes. Usually the arch nemesis is more or less a perversion of the hero or his ideals (ie. Batman/The Joker, X-Men/Magneto, Superman/Lex Luthor, Cap/Red Skull, Thor/Loki, etc.)

If you look in that aspect if anything Doctor Octopus fits the bill for Spidey much better, and actually comes into conflict with Spidey much more often. However the Green Goblin delivered the greatest blow to Peter and was more of just a bad nightmare. He was gone from the comics for almost two decades but his presence was still very much there.

Not to mention people lose loved ones all the time in real life, I don't know if I like what the franchise ending right after her death is saying about that, I mean life goes on. Not to mention, I know this is not going to sway KAW, but look at Coulson in the Avengers. He wasn't a big part of any of the other films, he wasn't even that likable in Thor, but just by making him a humorous character they managed to give weight to his death even everything else going on. Given that her death has already been foreshadowed, and the audience is familiar with her now, it wouldn't be a stretch at all to develop her further before death in the next film.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Theres just so much more to the story of Spider-Man, Gwens death is just footnote.

I wouldn't say it is just a footnote. Its pretty significant, though obviously not the end of his story.

 

[LegendAssemble]

I agree no reason for this this to turn into a soap .

Exactly, I've never been a fan of that story. Not a part of my personal Spider-Man canon lol.

 

[LegendAssemble]

I wouldn't say it is just a footnote. Its pretty significant, though obviously not the end of his story.

footnote was a poor choice of words agreed.

 

[Shikamaru]

rule 34 ?

Rule 34 - If it exists either in real life or in fiction, there is porn of it.

 

[Shikamaru]

rule 34 ?

Rule 34 - If it exists either in real life or in fiction, there is porn of it.

 

[spida-man]

Gwen should die in part 3 ending the trilogy. THEN if Marvel and Sony were SMART, they'd give us a part 2 to the story giving us another trilogy and in this trilogy we see Spidey trying to move on after gwens death and eventually getting with MJ.

Honestly who says a super hero film series HAS TO END with a TRILOGY? It's annoying as all freck.

just once I'd like to see a GOOD super hero franchise get a film series that doesn't end with just a trilogy. also X-Men doesn't count cause none of the movies AFTER 3 take lace after the Last Stand...

and since it was reported that Raimi's series was suppose to be 6 films I'd like to see this one go that far

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Thinking practically, it'd be an uphill battle to achieve more than three films. Back-to-back filming exists, but you really can't count on that possibility too much.

Making more just to make more serves no purpose than to provide more content. As much as I'd love to see Andrew Garfield don the unitard again, I'd rather he do that in three good movies that fulfill an arc and tell a fulfilling Spider-Man story, than telling six stories that don't tie together.

 

[LegendAssemble]

Gwen should die in part 3 ending the trilogy. THEN if Marvel and Sony were SMART, they'd give us a part 2 to the story giving us another trilogy and in this trilogy we see Spidey trying to move on after gwens death and eventually getting with MJ.

Honestly who says a super hero film series HAS TO END with a TRILOGY? It's annoying as all freck.

just once I'd like to see a GOOD super hero franchise get a film series that doesn't end with just a trilogy. also X-Men doesn't count cause none of the movies AFTER 3 take lace after the Last Stand...

and since it was reported that Raimi's series was suppose to be 6 films I'd like to see this one go that far

It's just unrealistic to ask for more than 3 films. The reason trilogies are so common is because that alone is hard to accomplish. The directors have other projects to work on, the actors get older, peoples lives change, and eventually it just gets old for the cast and the audience. Not to mention most fourth+ films are just not very good.

It'd be better to have an open ended trilogy that they could continue with if they were able to than to plan on having two parts.

 

[Webhead38]

Gwen was never raped by Norman Osborn

Thanks for the correction. I think I clung to that thought because at the time, I felt like they were raping her memory, so it stuck. I couldn't see her ever doing that after being a daddy's girl her whole life. Any suggestion she would seek an older man to substitute as a father figure (after her dad's death) didn't speak to how that character was written. Plus it seem to cheapen her in a way that would suggest her death was less relevant since she wasn't the wholesome girl Pete thought she was. I just thought it spat on the character's grave, so I don't like to recognize it as a probable story in the Spider-man universe. But because it does exist, one has to hope it's completely abandoned in the scripting process for the films. I have no doubt it will. But I digress...

Some additional reasons why I think the death plot should be abandoned is it traps the series in a tone that (I think) does not serve the best interests of this character. And while Spider-man has had more than his share of tragedies that are note worthy, I'm not sure they all deserve to be leading stories for a rebooted franchise still trying to grow it's audience. That is really pinning the character in a dark world that applies the philosophical lessons a bit thick, without letting the hero exist beyond a heavy handed message at every turn. Spider-man needs a little room to breath here as a hero and not just be a poster child for hard knocks.