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

[Godzilla2014]

Hence "for the most part". When Batman received his first comic line, Alfred was there much earlier, relatively than MJ, Harry or Gwen for that matter. You're taking things too literally man.

No he came later relative to Batman's debut than Harry Osborn, Mary Jane, and Gwen did. Alfred came four years later, as opposed to two or three for Mary Jane, Harry, and Gwen. And he was a comic relief detective at first. So Alfred as we know him didn't appear for even longer.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

The thing is, Batman Begins isn't a part of the comparison, because it doesn't change the fact that The Dark Knight shares elements and characters with Batman. Being a sequel doesn't change those elements being present in both films.

Batman Begins is the comparison because THAT was the reboot, NOT TDK.

Nolan purposefully stayed clear of The Joker or Harvey Dent and even created a brand new love interest for his first film.

Why didn't Nolan use The Joker, Harvey Dent or Selina Kyle in Batman Begins?

 

[Godzilla2014]

Batman Begins is the comparison because THAT was the reboot, NOT TDK.

Nolan purposefully stayed clear of The Joker or Harvey Dent and even created a brand new love interest for his first film.

Why didn't Nolan use The Joker, Harvey Dent or Selina Kyle in Batman Begins?

I don't care which film was the reboot as far as this comparison goes. It only matters which film had the most similarities to Batman, which was The Dark Knight, and in spite of those similarities, it's a very different film from Batman. I'm not talking about terms of reboots, I'm talking film vs film. Got it?

 

[Curmudgeon]

I was saying if I had to choose between Mary Jane & Harry and Gwen & Cpt. Stacy, I would choose the former. Gwen's presence doesn't require Cpt. Stacy to be here, just as Mary Jane's presence wouldn't require Harry's presence.



Can't we just give the audience credit and let them fill in the blanks? After all, didn't The Spectacular Spider-Man skip the origin and do a fine job?
Even if it is a different Peter, going over the origin again, unless it can top its predecessor, is a pointless and boring waste of time as the audience waits for the story to get started.



I'll take Harry and Norman Osborn, personally.

I think it would be odd if you had Gwen in the entire film, but never saw her father since he was a prominent character in the comics.

Why couldn't they give the audience credit with the first film then? SSM didn't start with the origin, but they still had an origin episode of sorts. Who is to say it can't top the first movie's origin? I think it wouldn't be that hard to do and I think it is essential to the story, not an obstacle.

Like I said, Gwen and her father haven't had the attention they deserve, but Harry and Norman have. I can wait for the sequel to see them again.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Personally, I don't care much for Gwen, and not nearly as much as Mary Jane and Harry. The most important thing Gwen ever did was die, and that's all she's remembered for. She's practically become a martyr for that reason.

Again, the core of ASM is Peter's journey of discovering who he is. Of searching for his father and finding himself in the process. The "LONER/DIY" aspect will seemingly be emphasised. This makes the weight of his burdens even more dramatic. The only one he will share most of these burdens with intimately will probably be Gwen near the end of the film. Adding MJ and Harry to the mix just convolutes the story that Webb is trying to tell in ASM. They would just dilute the time he has to focus on Peter, which is what he want's to do from everything I've read. Flesh out Peter Parker in a way that hasn't been done. More characters in the mix just makes it more difficult to do so, especially ones as important as Harry and MJ, who deserve to be more then just token cardboard cut-outs.

Adding Harry and MJ in the second film would actually give them a more deserving intro into the series. Having really lived in Peter's shoes during the first film, Webb would now be freer to spread some the focus onto the supporting characters in his life. So simple yet so logical.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I don't care which film was the reboot as far as this comparison goes. It only matters which film had the most similarities to Batman, which was The Dark Knight, and in spite of those similarities, it's a very different film from Batman. I'm not talking about terms of reboots, I'm talking film vs film. Got it?

It does matter and the comparison is flawed for reasons I've already stated ad nauseum.

At least address this for me. If the similarities were irrelevant, why didn't they start out with The Joker and Dent. Why did they wait, instead of using them right off the bat?

Am I making sense to anyone else? I'm going in circles with Godzilla, here...

 

[Godzilla2014]

I think it would be odd if you had Gwen in the entire film, but never saw her father since he was a prominent character in the comics.

He could just be in the background, like Mary Jane's parents are in Spider-Man 3, or just have a cameo.

Why couldn't they give the audience credit with the first film then? SSM didn't start with the origin, but they still had an origin episode of sorts. Who is to say it can't top the first movie's origin? I think it wouldn't be that hard to do and I think it is essential to the story, not an obstacle.

They could have given the audience credit, but it chose not to. I've heard Spider-Man receive flack for insisting upon telling the origin story. I didn't mind it because it was the first Spider-Man film. The thing is that it has only been 10 years, people still remember Spider-Man. If it had been 20, 30, or 40 since the origin was shown on the big screen, then it would be a lot less of an issue, but it's only been 10.
I'm not saying that The Amazing Spider-Man can't top Spider-Man in terms of presenting the origin, I'm saying has to, or the audience's time will have been wasted.

Like I said, Gwen and her father haven't had the attention they deserve, but Harry and Norman have. I can wait for the sequel to see them again.

Gwen gets far more attention than she deserves in the comics, and I'm honestly sick of hearing about her and how great she is. She's practically been a canonized saint in the eyes of fans because of her death.

 

[Curmudgeon]

He could just be in the background, like Mary Jane's parents are in Spider-Man 3, or just have a cameo.



They could have given the audience credit, but it chose not to. I've heard Spider-Man receive flack for insisting upon telling the origin story. I didn't mind it because it was the first Spider-Man film. The thing is that it has only been 10 years, people still remember Spider-Man. If it had been 20, 30, or 40 since the origin was shown on the big screen, then it would be a lot less of an issue, but it's only been 10.
I'm not saying that The Amazing Spider-Man can't top Spider-Man in terms of presenting the origin, I'm saying has to, or the audience's time will have been wasted.



Gwen gets far more attention than she deserves in the comics, and I'm honestly sick of hearing about her and how great she is. She's practically been a canonized saint in the eyes of fans because of her death.

Captain Stacy is more important than MJ's parents and deserves more than a cameo.

Only ten years? When did a decade become a short amount of time? I love watching origins for any character even if I already know the story inside and out. I just find them fascinating and seeing the character growth is always satisfying. I don't think it will be hard for TASM's origin to top SM's origin. I feel like it was glossed over a bit.

We're not talking comics though. We're talking how much attention she has had in the movies which is not enough and her character was treated unjustly in my opinion. I get it now though. You don't like Gwen so you don't want to see her and would rather see MJ.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I'm not saying that The Amazing Spider-Man can't top Spider-Man in terms of presenting the origin, I'm saying has to, or the audience's time will have been wasted.

I'm pretty sure Webb's origin will make Raimi's feel like a quick fly by...

Gwen gets far more attention than she deserves in the comics, and I'm honestly sick of hearing about her and how great she is. She's practically been a canonized saint in the eyes of fans because of her death.

Well that is certainly your opinion and you obviously like MJ. But there are three films with her in it. Forgive me if I don't feel sorry for you that Gwen will be more of the focus in this new series.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Again, the core of ASM is Peter's journey of discovering who he is. Of searching for his father and finding himself in the process. The "LONER/DIY" aspect will seemingly be emphasised. This makes the weight of his burdens even more dramatic. The only one he will share most of these burdens with intimately will probably be Gwen near the end of the film. Adding MJ and Harry to the mix just convolutes the story that Webb is trying to tell in ASM. They would just dilute the time he has to focus on Peter, which is what he want's to do from everything I've read. Flesh out Peter Parker in a way that hasn't been done. More characters in the mix just makes it more difficult to do so, especially ones as important as Harry and MJ, who deserve to be more then just token cardboard cut-outs.

Adding Harry and MJ in the second film would actually give them a more deserving intro into the series. Having really lived in Peter's shoes during the first film, Webb would now be freer to spread some the focus onto the supporting characters in his life. So simple yet so logical.

My problem is partially due to the fact that I hate Gwen, because she is a total failure as what she was originally intended for. She was meant to be the one for Peter Parker, but she was so boring that fans preferred Mary Jane, the party girl. So Gerry Conway killed her off because he had nowhere else for Gwen to go as a character.
Now I'll have to put up with a character whose sole purpose is to die later, without either Mary Jane Watson or Harry Osborn, who I actually care about.

It does matter and the comparison is flawed for reasons I've already stated ad nauseum.

At least address this for me. If the similarities were irrelevant, why didn't they start out with The Joker and Dent. Why did they wait, instead of using them right off the bat?

Am I making sense to anyone else? I'm going in circles with Godzilla, here...

Actually, they did want to use Dent in Batman Begins but decided against it for some reason of which I am not sure. As far as why each chose to do what they did with Joker, it's a simple difference in philosophy.
Back in the 1980s, there wasn't so much of a guarantee of sequels like there is now. Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, et cetera were all only signed on for one film. They thought of what they were making as one single film. Thus, the Joker was the best choice to put in that film.
In the 2000s, Christopher Nolan and David Goyer conceived of a whole series of films to tell their story. So they decided to save Joker for the sequel to build up anticipation.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Captain Stacy is more important than MJ's parents and deserves more than a cameo.

Only ten years? When did a decade become a short amount of time? I love watching origins for any character even if I already know the story inside and out. I just find them fascinating and seeing the character growth is always satisfying. I don't think it will be hard for TASM's origin to top SM's origin. I feel like it was glossed over a bit.

We're not talking comics though. We're talking how much attention she has had in the movies which is not enough and her character was treated unjustly in my opinion. I get it now though. You don't like Gwen so you don't want to see her and would rather see MJ.

I wouldn't mind Gwen as much if Mary Jane and/or Harry were present, but why should the latter be excluded to make room for a retelling of the origin I saw only 10 years ago? Gwen is a character whose sole reason for being here is to die later on, so why rely on her and Cpt. Deadmeat Stacy for the supporting cast?
My problem is that it really drains my excitement for the reboot, and makes me I had Spider-Man 4 instead.

I'm pretty sure Webb's origin will make Raimi's feel like a quick fly by...

That's what I'm afraid of.

Well that is certainly your opinion and you obviously like MJ. But there are three films with her in it. Forgive me if I don't feel sorry for you that Gwen will be more of the focus in this new series.

Gwen is a horrible character who is only here to die, and she'll be the only major supporting character that's actually the same age as Peter. Why should I care?

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Actually, they did want to use Dent in Batman Begins but decided against it for some reason of which I am not sure.

Dent was never going to be used in BB. They're was a reference to him in the 1st draft and even that was removed.

As far as why each chose to do what they did with Joker, it's a simple difference in philosophy.
Back in the 1980s, there wasn't so much of a guarantee of sequels like there is now. Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, et cetera were all only signed on for one film. They thought of what they were making as one single film. Thus, the Joker was the best choice to put in that film.
In the 2000s, Christopher Nolan and David Goyer conceived of a whole series of films to tell their story. So they decided to save Joker for the sequel to build up anticipation.

Which is exactly what Webb is trying to do with his reboot and what I have been trying to explain to you. As you said, they decided to save a character, to build anticipation.

How did they build that anticipation?

With Batman Begins. The film that purposely steered clear of what was already done and used new characters to tell it's story.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

My problem is partially due to the fact that I hate Gwen, because she is a total failure as what she was originally intended for. She was meant to be the one for Peter Parker, but she was so boring that fans preferred Mary Jane, the party girl. So Gerry Conway killed her off because he had nowhere else for Gwen to go as a character.
Now I'll have to put up with a character whose sole purpose is to die later, without either Mary Jane Watson or Harry Osborn, who I actually care about.

Well again, this is your opinion. I understand where you are coming from, you don't like Gwen, you've made that clear. I know the history of the comics, but I don't understand the logic when it comes to the film Gwen. She will be inspired from the comics, but I bet she'll also be different. I'm sure she'll be fleshed out more and updated for more contemporary times. And Emma has said she'll give her own spin to it. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference to you because it's only MJ or bust. That being said, I'm sure she will be in the series anyway. And I think it's definitely better (now that Gwen is the main focus in Peter's life) that she appear in the second film. It just works better all the way around, especially when you take into consideration Webb's goal for the first film.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

That's what I'm afraid of.

You shouldn't be afraid of that, you should embrace it.

Why should I care?

Well wait until the film comes out and you may get your answer.

 

[Curmudgeon]

I wouldn't mind Gwen as much if Mary Jane and/or Harry were present, but why should the latter be excluded to make room for a retelling of the origin I saw only 10 years ago? Gwen is a character whose sole reason for being here is to die later on, so why rely on her and Cpt. Deadmeat Stacy for the supporting cast?
My problem is that it really drains my excitement for the reboot, and makes me I had Spider-Man 4 instead.

Because it's a reboot and they need to retell the origin. It's a new timeline and a new Peter so we need to see how he came to be. Just because we know the basics of the story (gets bit by spider, uncle dies, fights crime) doesn't mean it's not worth the time to see again, but in a new light. Classic stories are retold time and again because people love them. Ten years is a long time, why are you downplaying a decade like it's nothing? Because the tragedy of their deaths is great drama and great story-telling. A character being destined to die doesn't make them useless or pointless. Look at Uncle Ben, he is arguably the most important character in Spider-Man comics other than Peter himself.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Dent was never going to be used in BB. They're was a reference to him in the 1st draft and even that was removed.



Which is exactly what Webb is trying to do with his reboot and what I have been trying to explain to you. As you said, they decided to save a character, to build anticipation.

How did they build that anticipation?

With Batman Begins. The film that purposely steered clear of what was already done and used new characters to tell it's story.

That was the reason why I said, "Pretend that you hadn't seen Batman Begins" prior to The Dark Knight, so that you wouldn't have seen the buildup.
They decided to build anticipation for Batman's archenemy. That would be equivalent to saving Green Goblin for a sequel. That's it.
What makes Gwen any more important and worth including than Mary Jane and Harry? Gwen's significance is tied directly to the Spider-Man/Green Goblin rivalry in the comics, so why exclude Harry or Norman? Why not save Gwen for a sequel?
I'm not saying you have to use Green Goblin now, but why not use Harry? After all, in the original comics, he did actually go to the same high school. I think that Harry's inclusion with Gwen would add to the anticipation of Gwen's demise at his father's hands.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

She was unconscious before she was thrown. How would she die of shock when she couldn't even register it. I understand that Goblin said she died before he even caught her, but I believe that was a mistake on the writer's behalf. Hell, in the issue in which she died the writers themselves wrote that it was Spidey's fault that she died. That's why it was so revolutionary and groundbreaking and heartbreaking, really; Not only did the hero fail, but she died at his hands.

well.. we all know no matter what happened, peter still blamed himself, and thought it was his fault. So his opinion on it really doesn't change how she could have actually died.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

That was the reason why I said, "Pretend that you hadn't seen Batman Begins" prior to The Dark Knight, so that you wouldn't have seen the buildup.
They decided to build anticipation for Batman's archenemy. That would be equivalent to saving Green Goblin for a sequel. That's it.

Joker wasn't the only one they held off on. They held off on using Harvey Dent and Selina Kyle. One being a close friend of the main character who eventually falls to the dark side and the other being arguably the hero's definitive love interest.

What makes Gwen any more important and worth including than Mary Jane and Harry? Gwen's significance is tied directly to the Spider-Man/Green Goblin rivalry in the comics, so why exclude Harry or Norman? Why not save Gwen for a sequel?

They're both important. The difference between the two is one was the focus of the previous entire trilogy and the other was a throwaway character in one of the films. That's why they decided to focus on Gwen this time around.

I even prefer MJ. I love the character and her relationship with Peter is what I grew up with. Trust me, if anything, I'm biased towards MJ but completely understand why they would bring Gwen into the spotlight this time around and hold off on MJ.

I'm not saying you have to use Green Goblin now, but why not use Harry? After all, in the original comics, he did actually go to the same high school. I think that Harry's inclusion with Gwen would add to the anticipation of Gwen's demise at his father's hands.

They could but there is already so much ground they need to cover, they're better off holding off on Harry and Norman until the next film. They're setting up OsCorp as the basis for mostly everything that happens in ASM. You know they've got big plans for the Osborn's.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Well again, this is your opinion. I understand where you are coming from, you don't like Gwen, you've made that clear. I know the history of the comics, but I don't understand the logic when it comes to the film Gwen. She will be inspired from the comics, but I bet she'll also be different. I'm sure she'll be fleshed out more and updated for more contemporary times. And Emma has said she'll give her own spin to it. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference to you because it's only MJ or bust. That being said, I'm sure she will be in the series anyway. And I think it's definitely better (now that Gwen is the main focus in Peter's life) that she appear in the second film. It just works better all the way around, especially when you take into consideration Webb's goal for the first film.

I'm not saying Mary Jane or bust, but we already saw Gwen in the last trilogy, albeit under the name "Mary Jane Watson". Truth be told, I'd be excited about Gwen's inclusion alongside Mary Jane so that we could have a proper MJ-Peter-Gwen love triangle. And plus, I think Harry should be here to build up Norman and his murdering Gwen. They went to the same high school in the comics. It just represents a missed opportunity in my opinion.

Because it's a reboot and they need to retell the origin. It's a new timeline and a new Peter so we need to see how he came to be. Just because we know the basics of the story (gets bit by spider, uncle dies, fights crime) doesn't mean it's not worth the time to see again, but in a new light. Classic stories are retold time and again because people love them. Ten years is a long time, why are you downplaying a decade like it's nothing? Because the tragedy of their deaths is great drama and great story-telling. A character being destined to die doesn't make them useless or pointless. Look at Uncle Ben, he is arguably the most important character in Spider-Man comics other than Peter himself.

So if we didn't see the origin, we couldn't assume that Peter received his powers from a genetically modified spider? That's incredibly stupid. We already know the origin story. Don't waste my time and move on.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I don't think holding off on an arch enemy for just single film is ever "the best way to make them appear as the arch enemy"... I think having them pulling strings, and at least slightly being included in all of the films does that. (or returning after being away for a movie or 2)

This is why Dr. Doom (though he sucked), Lex Luthor, Magneto, etc... all come off as the top villains to there respective heroes... because they appear multiple times, and always wreak havok.

if they want to do the goblin right, it's more interesting to have him appear in AMZ#2, kill gwen... then have there battle end at the end of the movie. in AMZ#3 we have another villain, but something set in motion by osborn after his death... to still make him a threat even when he's "Dead"

 

[Curmudgeon]

So if we didn't see the origin, we couldn't assume that Peter received his powers from a genetically modified spider? That's incredibly stupid. We already know the origin story. Don't waste my time and move on.

I didn't say that. Obviously everyone knows the origin, but it is retold in every incarnation of the character since the original for a reason. It's important to who the character is.

Since you hate Gwen and you seem to hate the origin too (or at the very least think it's boring) you're just out of luck with this first movie.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I'd be excited about Gwen's inclusion alongside Mary Jane so that we could have a proper MJ-Peter-Gwen love triangle. And plus, I think Harry should be here to build up Norman and his murdering Gwen. They went to the same high school in the comics. It just represents a missed opportunity in my opinion.

I agree with everything you said here. And it will probably happen. Just not in ASM. It's much better to initiate this starting in the second film. I want the best of both worlds. I want a great origin and then the classic MJ-Peter-Gwen (and Harry) dynamic. Mixing those two elements into an origin just dilutes it if you want to do it all justice. Unless you do a three and a half hour film, which won't happen. Although I do expect a running time around 150.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Joker wasn't the only one they held off on. They held off on using Harvey Dent and Selina Kyle. One being a close friend of the main character who eventually falls to the dark side and the other being arguably the hero's definitive love interest.

I've heard people say that Harvey Dent should have been in Batman Begins to build him up as a character more before his fall in The Dark Knight.

They're both important. The difference between the two is one was the focus of the previous entire trilogy and the other was a throwaway character in one of the films. That's why they decided to focus on Gwen this time around.

I even prefer MJ. I love the character and her relationship with Peter is what I grew up with. Trust me, if anything, I'm biased towards MJ but completely understand why they would bring Gwen into the spotlight this time around and hold off on MJ.

I'm not saying that Mary Jane should be the love interest, but let her appear in the film as one of Peter's group of friends.
Harry definitely should be here, to enhance the anticipation for Gwen's death. In the original comics, they actually were friends in high school before they met Peter. That could add an interesting dimension to her death, in addition to his father being her killer.

They could but there is already so much ground they need to cover, they're better off holding off on Harry and Norman until the next film. They're setting up OsCorp as the basis for mostly everything that happens in ASM. You know they've got big plans for the Osborn's.

Still, I think that Harry Osborn's a bit more important than Arthur Stacy.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I didn't say that. Obviously everyone knows the origin, but it is retold in every incarnation of the character since the original for a reason. It's important to who the character is.

Since you hate Gwen and you seem to hate the origin too (or at the very least think it's boring) you're just out of luck with this first movie.

I don't hate the origin, but it's not something I'm looking forward to. I'm fine with Gwen, but I was hoping to also see a new Mary Jane, one who wasn't Gwen with the wrong name.

I agree with everything you said here. And it will probably happen. Just not in ASM. It's much better to initiate this starting in the second film. I want the best of both worlds. I want a great origin and then the classic MJ-Peter-Gwen (and Harry) dynamic. Mixing those two elements into an origin just dilutes it if you want to do it all justice. Unless you do a three and a half hour film, which won't happen. Although I do expect a running time around 150.

Personally, I don't think that the most interesting and important stuff starts until Peter goes to college in the original comics. That's why most modern retellings incorporate elements of his college years into his high school years, because that's where the stuff people care about happens.

 

[Curmudgeon]

I don't hate the origin, but it's not something I'm looking forward to. I'm fine with Gwen, but I was hoping to also see a new Mary Jane, one who wasn't Gwen with the wrong name.

I feel like we've arrived at the 'agree to disagree' point in this conversation. I am looking forward to the origin and I'm fine with waiting for MJ to show up in the sequel.