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

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I think there's so much going on in this film with the origin, Gwen, Captain Stacy, Connors/Lizard, and Peter's parents that it would be difficult to do MJ and Harry justice. It seems like they would get swept to the side and largely ignored. I don't want them to be there just to be there.

Well said. I love common sense

Quite frankly, Mary Jane and Harry are more important than those things.

Say's who? As much as we'd all like to, none of us are telling this particular story. We have no idea what roles the parents will play in this film, or even the series as a whole. It's an aspect of Peter's life that hasn't really been explored before and I am excited to see it. Mary Jane and Harry will no doubt be introduced in sequels, probably the second film. And more attention could be given to developing them properly. Much of ASM will seemingly be about the loner Peter Parker's journey in finding himself. I'm sure it will be detailed very thouroughly.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Spidey's origin is my favorite origin of all time and I wouldn't mind seeing it in every reboot. There are so many different ways it can be handled. I love it.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

No, I'd definitely scrap telling the origin again. Start with Peter already in college, and have Mary Jane Watson, Harry Osborn, and Gwen Stacy, with Norman in there as well. Just because you use the same characters doesn't mean you have to do the same things with them. After all, Batman and The Dark Knight werevery different movies, despite having many of the same characters.

The Dark Knight was a sequel though, not the initial first film, like ASM is.

They didn't start right off the bat with the Joker, they built up to him. David Goyer even publicly stated at the time, that when he choose the villains for Batman Begins, he wanted to choose characters that hadn't previously been used and then re-introduce the classic villains in any potential sequels.

I agree, MJ and Harry are vital but they're better left saved for future films because A) There is already enough going in the first film to deal with and B) They were both major players in the previous films and are best left for future films, where they can be done right.

Trust me, I adore MJ and I desperately want to see them get her right this time.

I like the fact that they're focusing on things in this first film, that weren't dealt with or were glanced over in the previous series, such as Peter's relationship with Gwen and her father, Curt Connors taking center stage as the villain, the use of webshooters, etc.

If they get it right, there's tremendous sequel potential with MJ, Norman & Harry, JJJ, etc.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Well said. I love common sense



Say's who? As much as we'd all like to, none of us are telling this particular story. We have no idea what roles the parents will play in this film, or even the series as a whole. It's an aspect of Peter's life that hasn't really been explored before and I am excited to see it. Mary Jane and Harry will no doubt be introduced in sequels, probably the second film. And more attention could be given to developing them properly. Much of ASM will seemingly be about the loner Peter Parker's journey in finding himself. I'm sure it will be detailed very thouroughly.

The writers of the comics, that's who. Harry Osborn is Peter's best friend, and the lynchpin in his arch-rivalry with Norman Osborn. Without Harry, Peter and Norman's rivalry loses the personal connection that is the core of their archrivalry as Spider-Man and Green Goblin that gives it depth, and Peter Parker and Norman Osborn are just dudes dressed up as a spider and a goblin, respectively.

Mary Jane Watson is the woman he married. He decided to share his life with her.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Green Goblin isn't even in this film, why are you worried about that right now? And Gwen is Peter's love interest, not Mary Jane.

 

[Godzilla2014]

The Dark Knight was a sequel though, not the initial first film, like ASM is.

They didn't start right off the bat with the Joker, they built up to him. David Goyer even publicly stated at the time, that when he choose the villains for Batman Begins, he wanted to choose characters that hadn't previously been used and then re-introduce the classic villains in any potential sequels.

I agree, MJ and Harry are vital but they're better left saved for future films because A) There is already enough going in the first film to deal with and B) They were both major players in the previous films and are best left for future films, where they can be done right.

Trust me, I adore MJ and I desperately want to see them get her right this time.

I like the fact that they're focusing on things in this first film, that weren't dealt with or were glanced over in the previous series, such as Peter's relationship with Gwen and her father, Curt Connors taking center stage as the villain, the use of webshooters, etc.

If they get it right, there's tremendous sequel potential with MJ, Norman & Harry, JJJ, etc.

My point is that Batman (1989) and The Dark Knight have a similar set of elements and characters, but they are still very different films. Similarly, you could use Mary Jane, Harry, and Norman again without retreading the Raimi films.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Spidey's origin is my favorite origin of all time and I wouldn't mind seeing it in every reboot. There are so many different ways it can be handled. I love it.

I agree. Raimi's origin didn't have near enough bite for me, it just lacked an overall emotional complexity and nuance. He just dipped his toes in the water. This film is really built around character development. Just read Andrew Garfield interviews about how he prepared and you know that they are giving attention to the smallest details.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

My point is that Batman (1989) and The Dark Knight have a similar set of elements and characters, but they are still very different films. Similarly, you could use Mary Jane, Harry, and Norman again without retreading the Raimi films.

Right and The Dark Knight was Nolan's second film, NOT his first. So by that logic, it's best left to hold off those characters for the sequel (like The Dark Knight), NOT the initial first film/reboot (like Batman Begins).

 

[Godzilla2014]

Green Goblin isn't even in this film, why are you worried about that right now? And Gwen is Peter's love interest, not Mary Jane.

Because Green Goblin is going to be in this series at some point. There is such a thing as foresight. Mary Jane is the better character, in my opinion.

 

[Spiderman6592]

If the Goblin is in film 3, it matters little if Harry is in the first film. Not to mention the fact that they seem to be focusing more on the Peter's parents/Norman angle than the Harry/Norman angle. Harry will be introduced in the series no doubt, but I don't get the complaints about him not being in this film when he wasn't even in the comics until 2 years after it started. Mary Jane didn't appear until after Harry.

Fans are a fickle bunch. You complain now that Mary Jane and Harry aren't in the film, but if they were, we'd be hearing even more complaints that this film is too similar to the original...

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

The writers of the comics, that's who

As far as I know James Vanderbuilt and Steve Kloves wrote the script. Inspired from the comics. Everything you said I agree with, just not the fact that it has to happen in the first film. I guess you should consider that they may actually have a plan on how they want to do things, or have a reason why they are doing things the way they are. I am certain they know the history of Peter, MJ and Harry and Norman.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Right and The Dark Knight was Nolan's second film, NOT his first. So by that logic, it's best left to hold off those characters for the sequel (like The Dark Knight), NOT the initial first film/reboot (like Batman Begins).

I was talking about Batman and The Dark Knight independently of anything else. Since neither Batman nor The Dark Knight cover the origin of Batman, any prior films (or lack thereof) is completely inconsequential to the fact that, despite containing similar elements, the tow films are still very different.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I was talking about Batman and The Dark Knight independently of anything else. Since neither Batman nor The Dark Knight cover the origin of Batman, any prior films (or lack thereof) is completely inconsequential to the fact that, despite containing similar elements, the tow films are still very different.

Again, The Dark Knight is a sequel. They built up to it's story and characters with Batman Begins. Nolan didn't start the new franchise with The Dark Knight, so it's irrelevant.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Yeah Godzilla, your points don't really make sense.

 

[Godzilla2014]

If the Goblin is in film 3, it matters little if Harry is in the first film. Not to mention the fact that they seem to be focusing more on the Peter's parents/Norman angle than the Harry/Norman angle. Harry will be introduced in the series no doubt, but I don't get the complaints about him not being in this film when he wasn't even in the comics until 2 years after it started. Mary Jane didn't appear until after Harry.

There is a difference made by introducing Harry now and introducing him in the next film if Green Goblin is in film 3. Introduce him now, and we (the audience) will have known him for two films. Introduce him later, and we will have known him for only one film.

Furthermore, Gwen debuted in the same issue as Harry, so the "Harry didn't appear until two years after the comic started" crap doesn't fly.

Fans are a fickle bunch. You complain now that Mary Jane and Harry aren't in the film, but if they were, we'd be hearing even more complaints that this film is too similar to the original...

You assume I would, and you are assuming incorrectly. I thought that placing Harry Osborn and Mary Jane Watson in Sam Raimi's first Spider-Man was a great move, regardless of whether or not they were present at that point in the comics. Someone else might have a problem with that, but that's not me.

As far as I know James Vanderbuilt and Steve Kloves wrote the script. Inspired from the comics. Everything you said I agree with, just not the fact that it has to happen in the first film. I guess you should consider that they may actually have a plan on how they want to do things, or have a reason why are doing things the way they are. I am certain they know the history of Peter, MJ and Harry and Norman.

I know that the film isn't beholden to reenact the comics on-screen exactly as it happened, and believe me, I kind of prefer it that way. Many of my favorite comic book films mix-and-match stories from the comics to capture the spirit of the character, but still tell its own story. It's more interesting that way, and the possibilities are endless.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Again, The Dark Knight is a sequel. They built up to it's story and characters with Batman Begins. Nolan didn't start the new franchise with The Dark Knight, so it's irrelevant.

Yeah Godzilla, your points don't really make sense.

What I'm saying is, just pretend that you had not seen Batman Begins before you saw The Dark Knight, and you were to compare it to Batman. There are similar elements and characters in both films, like Batman, Alfred, Gordon, Joker, Harvey Dent, et cetera. These characters, though they are present in both films, are very different within them in terms of characterization, their roles in the story and plot, et cetera. Similarly, you could use Harry, Mary Jane, and Norman in this reboot, without simply repeating Spider-Man.

 

[Spiderman6592]

There is a difference made by introducing Harry now and introducing him in the next film if Green Goblin is in film 3. Introduce him now, and we (the audience) will have known him for two films. Introduce him later, and we will have known him for only one film.

Furthermore, Gwen debuted in the same issue as Harry, so the "Harry didn't appear until two years after the comic started" crap doesn't fly.

Fair enough. Although introducing him now and introducing him in the second film really doesn't make a difference. Why introduce Harry when Norman isn't even going to be in the film?

You assume I would, and you are assuming incorrectly. I thought that placing Harry Osborn and Mary Jane Watson in Sam Raimi's first Spider-Man was a great move, regardless of whether or not they were present at that point in the comics. Someone else might have a problem with that, but that's not me.

That doesn't even coherently respond to what I was saying.

 

[Troy_Parker]

The only way I see Gwen's death working in the second film is if the second film ended with Peter holding Gwen in his arms and third picking up right where that left off.

That'd work.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Fair enough. Although introducing him now and introducing him in the second film really doesn't make a difference. Why introduce Harry when Norman isn't even going to be in the film?

My point is that it sounds like half of the characters I find important to the Spider-Man mythos are absent. I was looking forward to seeing what they would be like in the reboot, but they are completely absent. It's kind of like if a Batman reboot excluded Alfred and Gordon.

That doesn't even coherently respond to what I was saying.

I was saying that I wouldn't be complaining. Sorry, I thought you said that I would be complaining that we already saw that in the Raimi films. I apologize for the confusion.

 

[Spiderman6592]

My point is that it sounds like half of the characters I find important to the Spider-Man mythos are absent. I was looking forward to seeing what they would be like in the reboot, but they are completely absent. It's kind of like if a Batman reboot excluded Alfred and Gordon.

But it's the first film in the series and unlike Alfred, and Gordon for the most part, MJ and Harry weren't there from the very beginning. Neither was Gwen, true, but Peter needs a love interest. I address why MJ and Harry were likely left out after the next quote.

was saying that I wouldn't be complaining. Sorry, I thought you said that I would be complaining that we already saw that in the Raimi films. I apologize for the confusion.

No I wasn't saying you would complain, I'm saying people and other fans in general would, which is likely the reason why they left MJ and Harry out in exchange for Gwen. I apologize if it sounded like I was accusing you of doing so.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

What I'm saying is, just pretend that you had not seen Batman Begins before you saw The Dark Knight, and you were to compare it to Batman. There are similar elements and characters in both films, like Batman, Alfred, Gordon, Joker, Harvey Dent, et cetera. These characters, though they are present in both films, are very different within them in terms of characterization, their roles in the story and plot, et cetera. Similarly, you could use Harry, Mary Jane, and Norman in this reboot, without simply repeating Spider-Man.

The TDK comparison is flawed because it wasn't a reboot, it was a sequel. You can't pretend Batman Begins doesn't exist. Nolan purposely stayed clear of what Burton did, in the reboot and waited until the sequel to go back and re-interpret what we had already seen.

 

[Curmudgeon]

Mary Jane and Harry are each as important as Gwen Stacy, and since there are two of them and one Gwen, they would take precedent. Also, you don't have to have Captain Stacy if you have Gwen.

People know the goddamn origin already, we already saw done well in Spider-Man, so there's no need to tell it again.

I'll take Harry Osborn and Mary Jane over Gwen Stacy and Cpt. Stacy any day.

Your logic baffles me. You act like if MJ or Harry were in the film then you would definitely have the other there as well. And yet, you can have Gwen, but not her father?

People knew the origin before the first movie too. They could do more with the origin and even do some things differently. And it is necessary because this is a different story, different Peter.

In this case, I'll take Gwen and Captain Stacy because they haven't yet received the attention they should.

 

[Godzilla2014]

But it's the first film in the series and unlike Alfred, and Gordon for the most part, MJ and Harry weren't there from the very beginning. Neither was Gwen, true, but Peter needs a love interest. I address why MJ and Harry were likely left out after the next quote.

But Alfred wasn't there from the beginning. He didn't appear until Batman #16 in April/May 1943, a full four years after Batman's debut in Detective Comics #27 in May 1939. I guess, by your logic, his place in the Batman reboot should be even less of a guarantee than Harry Osborn or Mary Jane's place in this movie.
If you want a love interest, why not Betty Brant? She was Peter's first girlfriend in the comics, and this was before Gwen.
Bottom line, I see no reason that something should be left out solely because it wasn't "there from the beginning". That's one of the biggest benefits of an adaptation: You can decide what will be there from the beginning and what won't.

No I wasn't saying you would complain, I'm saying people and other fans in general would, which is likely the reason why they left MJ and Harry out in exchange for Gwen. I apologize if it sounded like I was accusing you of doing so.

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.

 

[Spiderman6592]

But Alfred wasn't there from the beginning. He didn't appear until Batman #16 in April/May 1943, a full four years after Batman's debut in Detective Comics #27 in May 1939. I guess, by your logic, his place in the Batman reboot should be even less of a guarantee than Harry Osborn or Mary Jane's place in this movie.
If you want a love interest, why not Betty Brant? She was Peter's first girlfriend in the comics, and this was before Gwen.
Bottom line, I see no reason that something should be left out solely because it wasn't "there from the beginning". That's one of the biggest benefits of an adaptation: You can decide what will be there from the beginning and what won't.

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.

 

[Godzilla2014]

The TDK comparison is flawed because it wasn't a reboot, it was a sequel. You can't pretend Batman Begins doesn't exist. Nolan purposely stayed clear of what Burton did, in the reboot and waited until the sequel to go back and re-interpret what we had already seen.

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.

Your logic baffles me. You act like if MJ or Harry were in the film then you would definitely have the other there as well. And yet, you can have Gwen, but not her father?

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.

People knew the origin before the first movie too. They could do more with the origin and even do some things differently. And it is necessary because this is a different story, different Peter.

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.

In this case, I'll take Gwen and Captain Stacy because they haven't yet received the attention they should.

I'll take Harry and Norman Osborn, personally.