Rumor: Andrew Garfield Already "Fired" From Spider-Man

Czann

New member
Jan 22, 2014
317
0
0
Good for him. Starring another train wreck of a movie would probably screw his career.

Shame though. He was a good Spiderman. Maybe Marvel would be willing to have him as Spidey a last time?
 

Toadfish1

New member
May 28, 2013
204
0
0
Will someone put a goddamn moratorium on Bob talking about Spider-Man? This is getting ridiculous - in his lust for badmouthing those movies, he will jump on any rumor, no matter how spurious, and present it like it was an official announcement.

I could announce in this comments section that Sony intend to make a movie out of Spider-Ham, and not only would he make an article out of it, he would work use it as proof why Sony shouldn't have the liscence.
 

darthdenim

New member
Jul 10, 2014
47
0
0
You're loving this aren't you, Bob? This must be the best week of your life.

This news must be almost erotic to you.
 

blackrave

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,020
0
0
MrHide-Patten said:
Really feeling that Sony should just axe all their other divisions so that they're just a games publisher/developer/piece of toast. Been working for Nintendo, all they have to do us wank their franchises into oblivion and release collectible figures, equals profit and acclaim.
Wait, didn't Sony also manufactured hardware?
Or was my life directed by M.N.Shyamalan and it all was just a dream?


Zachary Amaranth said:
Armadox said:
I actually really liked Andrew Garfield as spider-man. Sure they revamped the character's Peter Parker to be a bit off as they used more of a hipster ideal, but can you blame them?
I honestly don't get the "hipster" claims. Parker in the movies struck me as basically "boilerplate millennial."

Anyway, I'm beginning to think Joe Quesada was right. People seem to have a very specific image of Peter Parker that dates back mostly to the very earliest days of the book. It only took eight issues of Amazing Spider-Man for Peter to fight Flash, after which Flash quickly backed off bullying Peter and a lot of the "nerd" stuff people expect started to get downplayed. The book had been out for a decade when Gwen Stacy died, at which point Peter had had multiple love interests and even juggled a couple. He stops wearing glasses, stops being so much an outcast, etc.

I think I agree with this gist of your comment, though. 60s Peter wouldn't translate well into a modern character.
True.
To be honest nowadays to be smart and ostracized you need to put effort into it
Hell, even 10y ago I was outcast only because I was embodiment of this

Only without the internet
Whenever someone was factually wrong I was arguing with that person to the death.
Students, teachers, school staff, parents, siblings, random people, anyone.
If I would be a bit smaller and weaker I most probably would have been bullied
On the other hand someone smart and cute can still be bullied out of jealousy
But I admit this happens rarely today.
 

immortalfrieza

Elite Member
Legacy
May 12, 2011
2,234
195
68
Country
USA
Zachary Amaranth said:
Anyway, I'm beginning to think Joe Quesada was right. People seem to have a very specific image of Peter Parker that dates back mostly to the very earliest days of the book. It only took eight issues of Amazing Spider-Man for Peter to fight Flash, after which Flash quickly backed off bullying Peter and a lot of the "nerd" stuff people expect started to get downplayed. The book had been out for a decade when Gwen Stacy died, at which point Peter had had multiple love interests and even juggled a couple. He stops wearing glasses, stops being so much an outcast, etc.

I think I agree with this gist of your comment, though. 60s Peter wouldn't translate well into a modern character.
Peter Parker being a stereotypical nerd is like with how the public consciousness has gotten this idea that Superman never kills ever no matter what and thus so many whined incessantly when in Man of Steel he kills Zod, despite the fact that Superman refusing to kill under any circumstances hasn't been true in anything he's ever been in especially the comics for a VERY long time.

People just get so obsessed with a particular image of a character they'll rage against anything that even slightly deviates from that image despite that image's complete lack of accuracy and Spider-Man is no exception. Then people complain about the fact that long lasting characters in anything especially comics never make any notable changes or takes on any lasting character development to the point that it extends to the entire fictional universe itself and wonder why this happens.
 

AetherWolf

New member
Jan 1, 2011
671
0
0
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
The man has an agenda.
Uh-oh. I can hear the ludicrous conspiracy theories being written already. Is MovieBob out to overrun online journalism over his opinions on comic book movies?! What if he's actually an undercover spy working for Marvel Studios who's primary job is to give rival studios a bad rep?! What about *gasp* the journalistic integrity?!
 

Gone Rampant

New member
Feb 12, 2012
422
0
0
Trivun said:
I'm calling it now - Miles Morales. I know it's extremely unlikely, but I can see it working, even if Ultimates and Civil War are in two different comic continuities (well, universes, but still...). Introduce Morales through Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, then bring him into Civil War in the same sort of role that Peter Parker would have filled. I can definitely see it working, and it fits with the 'partial' control that Sony Japan apparently want to give back to Marvel, while also staying relatively true to the whole Ultimates inspiration that the Cinematic Universe has taken, and gives a reasonable excuse to cast a new actor in the role.
Hang on, do Sony even own Mile's cinematic rights? If I recall, he was created after the Sony deal.
 

RedEyesBlackGamer

The Killjoy Detective returns!
Jan 23, 2011
4,701
0
0
AetherWolf said:
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
The man has an agenda.
Uh-oh. I can hear the ludicrous conspiracy theories being written already. Is MovieBob out to overrun online journalism over his opinions on comic book movies?! What if he's actually an undercover spy working for Marvel Studios who's primary job is to give rival studios a bad rep?! What about *gasp* the journalistic integrity?!
What? I meant he is a nerd with an ax to grind. So, maybe, don't jump to conclusions?

Edit: Me being accused of being a GG member? I know someone who doesn't frequent R&P.
 

Scarecrow1001

New member
Jun 27, 2011
172
0
0
Trivun said:
I'm calling it now - Miles Morales.
God I hope so! Only if they cast Donald Glover though. Because then, not only does it honour source material, but also, Glover is finally Spiderman!
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Scarecrow1001 said:
Trivun said:
I'm calling it now - Miles Morales.
God I hope so! Only if they cast Donald Glover though. Because then, not only does it honour source material, but also, Glover is finally Spiderman!
I was prepared to argue this point, but no.. ok, I can see it, as long as they try really hard to get his mannerisms to match the age that Miles is, as he'd make a good spider-man, but that doesn't mean he'd make a good Miles. Honestly this choice in casting will be harder then casting Peter Parker, as to screw it up would be a much bigger issue. Peter has had enough continuity to be able to cast a lot of actors and have it fit, but Miles would need to feel like Miles.
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
I Just hope this ends the Sony deal because I'm just tired of having to deal with my friends that have poor tastes insisting that the ugly mess that is those two movies are as good as any Spider Man movie has ever been.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Trivun said:
I'm calling it now - Miles Morales.
I dunno, there's a lot of peeps out there who don't know who he is. I think they could have him as a side character but I'm placing my money on a already established Peter Parker, post uncle Ben death.

OT: I'm very much with the Nostalgia Critic on this one, he was a better Parker then Maguire. I always saw Spidey as more of a snarky, hipster then a whiney, wet blanket.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
JimB said:
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Oh look, a MovieBob hate boner over The Amazing Spider-Man movies. Must be that time of day.
I am very confused. How is this article a "hate boner?" Like, what did he say to make you think that?
The guy loves throwing in jabs at this movie franchise any chance he gets. He posted two articles in the past week that were based on rumors from a sketchy news site. The same news site that Sony laughed at after the first rumor. The man has an agenda.
To bash on movies he considers bad? I never would have guessed given his profession.

Butt cereal, he can go a little over board sometimes but this was probably the most level article he's ever written about the franchise.
 

LordMonty

Badgerlord
Jul 2, 2008
570
0
0
Real problem for marvel at the moment is Fox with both Star wars and Xmen, seems like Spiderman may still join the greater club but it is still bleak for the ever desired full Marvel mash up.
 

Spaceman Spiff

New member
Sep 23, 2013
604
0
0
SerBrittanicus said:
If I was Marvel I wouldn't be agreeing to any kind of deal with Sony. I would just let them continue to run the character into the ground until they stop making movies and full control reverts back to Marvel anyway.
I agree. Either one company or the other. If they get joint custody and Sony keeps making Spider-man movies, it's just going to drag the MCU down. I'd rather not have Marvel's cuisines tainted with Sony's shit.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Spaceman Spiff said:
SerBrittanicus said:
If I was Marvel I wouldn't be agreeing to any kind of deal with Sony. I would just let them continue to run the character into the ground until they stop making movies and full control reverts back to Marvel anyway.
I agree. Either one company or the other. If they get joint custody and Sony keeps making Spider-man movies, it's just going to drag the MCU down. I'd rather not have Marvel's cuisines tainted with Sony's shit.
I have to completely disagree. You can't piss on Sony without denying them the Sam Raimi movies. And just because they don't know what to do about this now, doesn't mean they didn't buy the right fair and square. There is nothing gained for having less art, which is what you're implying.

No, with Marvel to help pull from and using a good script and director they can make a good movie. If all rights go back to Marvel and Marvel decides to not utilize them then they're lost. That's the problem with putting all your eggs in one basket. They can't make all the movies every year, no one has a budget for that. And with Spider-man being an iffy franchise right now compared to other A-Listers it's just as likely Marvel could drop them to the back to focus on other characters and we could have a new Spider-man movie in.. what 2017.. 2018? What's the end of the movies already planned?

620,000 people'd die before Marvel'd have time to get Spider-man on the table..
 

Jake Martinez

New member
Apr 2, 2010
590
0
0
Armadox said:
I actually really liked Andrew Garfield as spider-man. Sure they revamped the character's Peter Parker to be a bit off as they used more of a hipster ideal, but can you blame them?

Nerd in today's ideology isn't the same as it'd be in the 60s. Using the 60s concept of nerd looks very out of place in modern stories. Science smart people aren't seen as outcasts as much anymore, with even the most jock people I know talking about stuff like Cosmos. Once we figured out how to market science to the masses in fun, entertaining ways with impressive visual effects it became mainstream.

Mainstream is the antithesis of the nerd. So what would you have had them do? Otaku Peter Parker? Furry Peter Parker? (Goth Peter Parker didn't do Toby much good.)
I think you're fixating on the "thing", rather than the behavior. Also, I disagree with you that "Nerd" is an acceptable or mainstream type of self identification these days. It's not in any sense of the word still. Science nerds are still made fun of and there is a still a huge component of anti-intellectualism in mainstream society and culture. Anyway, that doesn't really matter in particular when contrasting the portrayals of Peter Parker between the two film series.

All that being said, the behavior is the thing that is really off. It's no so much what Peter Parker does in so much as the way that he goes about it - he's completely earnest and non-ironic. I mean, c'mon, this is a guy who earnestly believes in "With great power comes great responsibility". He's typical in the way that a lot of those early super heroes were, like Superman or Captain America - he just doesn't do cynicism well.
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
Toadfish1 said:
Will someone put a goddamn moratorium on Bob talking about Spider-Man? This is getting ridiculous; in his lust for badmouthing those movies, he will jump on any rumor, no matter how spurious, and present it like it was an official announcement.
Before looking to the mote in thy neighbor's eye, attend to the beam in thy own. Your accusations of him having an agenda come off a bit suspect when you say he's presenting this as an official announcement when the very first word of the article's title is "rumor."

RedEyesBlackGamer said:
What? I meant he is a nerd with an ax to grind. So, maybe, don't jump to conclusions?

Edit: Me being accused of being a GG member? I know someone who doesn't frequent R&P.
If you don't want to answer, then that's fine, but I seriously would like to know what jabs you think Mr. Chipman took at the franchise in this article.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Jake Martinez said:
Armadox said:
I actually really liked Andrew Garfield as spider-man. Sure they revamped the character's Peter Parker to be a bit off as they used more of a hipster ideal, but can you blame them?

Nerd in today's ideology isn't the same as it'd be in the 60s. Using the 60s concept of nerd looks very out of place in modern stories. Science smart people aren't seen as outcasts as much anymore, with even the most jock people I know talking about stuff like Cosmos. Once we figured out how to market science to the masses in fun, entertaining ways with impressive visual effects it became mainstream.

Mainstream is the antithesis of the nerd. So what would you have had them do? Otaku Peter Parker? Furry Peter Parker? (Goth Peter Parker didn't do Toby much good.)
I think you're fixating on the "thing", rather than the behavior. Also, I disagree with you that "Nerd" is an acceptable or mainstream type of self identification these days. It's not in any sense of the word still. Science nerds are still made fun of and there is a still a huge component of anti-intellectualism in mainstream society and culture. Anyway, that doesn't really matter in particular when contrasting the portrayals of Peter Parker between the two film series.

All that being said, the behavior is the thing that is really off. It's no so much what Peter Parker does in so much as the way that he goes about it - he's completely earnest and non-ironic. I mean, c'mon, this is a guy who earnestly believes in "With great power comes great responsibility". He's typical in the way that a lot of those early super heroes were, like Superman or Captain America - he just doesn't do cynicism well.
I.. am not sure if we are from the same type of community, but I live in a fairly large town and the nerds won. Fashion stores are selling Dr. Who stuff as well as super hero fashion, you can find nerd culture seeped into everything from Hot Topic to Forever 21. Fandoms are commonplace, and you see more iconography now for shows and franchises that wouldn't have had the same traction any time before.

Science, science fiction, fantasy and the ilk are more common in society now then they have ever been, so yes Nerd has been acceptable for as long as Starbucks has been everywhere. It's no longer counter culture. With things like you-tube delivering science a thousand different ways for a thousand different crowds it's sticking.

And you're starting to see it pop up in odd ways, like the fact that a lot more movies and stuff are doing the research over raw technobabble, I mean it's still there but you're seeing it a little less ( as angering as the show is, Big Bang Theory does actually have accurate science written into it's backgrounds regularly).

Also, Peter Parker is very cynical, he just jokes around to make up for the fact that when the chips are down his life could ruin the lives of everything around him. This is a character that realizes he's the punchline and runs with it, because otherwise he couldn't do the things he does. He's not the Flash, where his good nature allows him to bare the burden of his rogues. Peter Parker has been jealous, spiteful, angry, and depressed. He's lost and gained everything he's cared about at least once, without reboots. Sometimes his crisis of faith has lead him to toss away the mask, and sometimes he's telling "yo mamma" jokes with Deadpool because it's Tuesday and that's just what he had planned.

With great power comes great responsibility has been the backbone of his ideals, but his execution can very a lot depending on what type of Peter Parker you're looking at. Toby took a more early 90s approach ( Being Spider-man allows me to keep my city safe, but I have to keep my secret hidden at the cost of my self) where Andrew was closer to an early 2000s Peter Parker ( I'm smart and roll with the punches, I am spider-man because I can be.) neither is wrong, just different.

Personally, I'd like to see I've been married for a decade and work in a science lab Parker.